IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 "^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 A 
 
 // 
 
 ^ 
 
 .^4 
 
 %> 
 
 
 v. 
 
 ^ 
 
 U 
 ^ 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 '-IIM 
 
 t IZ 12.0 
 
 2.5 
 2.2 
 
 IL25 i 1.4 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sdences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 <;, 
 
 
 i/± 
 
 CIHM 
 Microfiche 
 Series 
 (l\/lonographs) 
 
 ICIVIH 
 
 Collection de 
 microfiches 
 (monographies) 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 ^ 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original 
 copy available for filming. Features of this copy which 
 may be bibtiographicaliy unique, which may alter any 
 of the images In the reproduction, or which may 
 significantly change the usual method of filming, are 
 checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 n Cover title 
 Le titre 6t 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurie et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 missing/ 
 couverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes g6ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 n 
 
 □ Bound with : 
 Reli? avec d' 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 other materiol/ 
 autres documents 
 
 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serrte peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge interieure 
 
 □ Blank leaves added during restoration may appear 
 within the text. Whenever possible, these have 
 been omitted ftom filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouttes 
 lors d'une r^stauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'oiit 
 pas M f ilm^s. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il 
 lui a ixk possible de sp procurer. Les details de cet 
 exemplaire qui sont peut-£tre uniques du point de vue 
 bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image 
 reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification 
 dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiou^s 
 ci-dessous. 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag6es 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages rest;;ur6es et/ou pelliculies 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages decolor^es, tacheties ou piquees 
 
 □ Pages detached/ 
 Pages detachies 
 
 0Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 D 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Qualite inigale de I'impressiO: 
 
 I I Continuous pagination/ 
 
 
 
 Pagination continue 
 
 Includes index(es)/ 
 Comprend un (des) index 
 
 Title on header taken from:/ 
 Le titre de I'en-tite provient. 
 
 I I Title page of issue/ 
 
 Page de titre de la livraison 
 
 I I Caption of issue/ 
 
 n 
 
 Titre de depart de la livraison 
 
 Masthead/ 
 
 Generique (periodiques) de la livraison 
 
 x/ 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimentaires: 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure 
 the best possible image. Various pagings. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est f ilmi au taux de rMuction indiqui ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 
 
 ZJX 
 
 26 X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 1 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24 X 
 
 28 X 
 
 32 X 
 
vue 
 
 >n 
 
 med to ensure 
 
 J 
 
 32 X 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back caver when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reprodiiit grace i la 
 g^ndrosit^ de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 Les image? suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet^ de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim^e sont film6s en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soif par la 
 dernidre page qui oonipoite une empreinte 
 d'impression ou o rllustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparai'tra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole •— »► signifie "A SUIVRE ", ly 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent §tre 
 filmds A des taux de reduction diff6rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et oe haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
( 
 
 18-22 i 
 20-26 ( 
 14-16 I 
 
 AND ( 
 
 TAB 
 
 J. F. 
 
THE 
 
 ONTARIO DIGEST 
 
 1891-1895 
 
 or 
 
 THE OASES REPORTED IN VOLUMES 
 
 18-22 APPEAL REPORTS. 
 20-26 ONTARIO REPORTS. 
 14-16 PRACTICE REPORTS. 
 
 18-24 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA 
 
 REPORTS. 
 1-3 EXCHEQUER COURT OF CANADA 
 
 REPORTS. 
 
 AND OF THE CANADIAN CASLS DECIDED BY THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF 
 THE PRIVY COUNCIL REPORTED IN [1891-1895] APPEAL CASES, 
 
 WITH 
 
 TABLES OF CASES CONTAINED IN THE DIGEST, THOSE 
 
 AFFILMED, REVERSED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED, 
 
 AND OF THE STATUTES REFERRED TO. 
 
 COMPILED BY ORDER OF THE LAW SOCIETY 
 OF UPPER CANADA. 
 
 BY 
 
 J. F. IsMITH, Q. C, E. B. BROWN, and R. S. CASSI ^.S, 
 
 ' BARRISTERa-AT-LAW. 
 
 TORONTO : 
 
 ROWSELL & HUTCHISON. 
 
 1896- 
 
V 
 
 
 ''t \ 
 
 '" the office of the Minister of AgriouUure "^^^ '"■ ^'■''^'^ ^^''^^^' 
 
 KOWSBLL & HUTOUISON, PRINTERS, TORONTO. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 year of our Li.itl 
 LJpi'KB Canada, 
 
 In the compilation of this Digest the main features of the Digests 
 published in this Province have been followed, the principal alterations 
 being the arrangement of the sub-titles and sub-divisions of sub-titles 
 in alphabetical order, and the introduction of he?d-lines which have been 
 re-written. The first word of the head-lines in each case will also be 
 found in alphabetical order with reference tu the sub-title or sub-division 
 in which it may be. This, it is hoped, will increase facility of reference. 
 The Roman numerals following a cro.ss-reference, refer to the sub-titles : 
 the figures following a cro.'-s-reference to a case, to the column of the 
 Digest. 
 
 Tables of cases contained in the volume, and of cases affirmed, 
 reversed or specially considered, as also of the statutes specially referred 
 to, are prefixed to the Digest. 
 
H 
 
 H( 
 
 Hoj 
 
€Uit( Jjustices »nA i^uA%t» 
 
 OK THK 
 
 SUPREME AND EXCHEQUER COURTS OF CANADA 
 
 AND OP THE 
 
 SUPERIOR COURTS OF ONTARIO 
 
 DURING THE PERIOD OP THIS DIGEOT. 
 
 (JHIEF JUSTIOKS. 
 
 Hon. Sir William Johnstone Ritchie . Appointed Ilth January, 1«79. 
 
 " Sir Samuel Henry Strong « 134,, December, 1892. 
 
 JUDGES. 
 
 Hon. Samuel Henrv Strong Appointed 8th October, 1875 
 
 " T-il-ESPHORE FoURMER .. g,^ ^^^^^^^^ j^^^ 
 
 " "'•'"' ^^^^'^" Taschehkav .. 7th October, 1878. 
 
 " ^"'"^ Wellington Gwvnke « 14^,, January, 1879 
 
 " ^'"'''' ^^^^^^^y^^OK „ 18th February, 1893. 
 
 " George Edwin King » 9i„f «. , < , o,^., 
 
 -iAst September, 1893. 
 
 " Desire Girouard ,. <,a*u q . , 
 
 28th September, 1895. 
 
 (Bx(kt(iueii (Rami of €mU». 
 
 JUDGE. 
 
 Hon. George Wheelock Burbidge .... Appointed Ist October, 1887, 
 
The Court of Appeal for Ontario. 
 
 t'HIKF JUiSTICE. 
 
 «0N. John Hawkins HA(iAHTv » 
 
 Appointed Gtl. May, ifts., 
 
 JUDGES. 
 
 Hon. GEonnK Willia.m Buhton a • , 
 
 .. p. _ ^ Ap,,oi.ite.> ;«)th May, 1874 
 
 ^EATHEHSTON O.SLEK . „ J'. ""*• 
 
 " JamksMac,ennan..... ," '^*'' November, I88a. 
 
 " ^7tli October, 1888. 
 
 The High Court of Justice for Ontario. 
 
 [Queen's Bench Division.] 
 
 CHIEF JUSTICE. 
 Hon. John Dololas Ahmouk . . 
 
 Appointed 15th November, 1887. 
 
 JUD(iES. 
 
 " w,.u.„ p„Hv,« Roc,,™., s™™,. ' ' :: 3^; ''"™:"^'' '»»'■ 
 
 CHIEF JUSTICES. 
 Hon. Sik Thomas Galt 
 
 5th October, 1894. 
 
 JUDGES. 
 Hon. John Ebwakd Kose 
 
 " Huuh MacMahon ...'.' .' .■ .' .■ .■; ; ' ■ ''^"^'"^ '''' ^^'^^"''^-•' 1««3- 
 
 30th November, 1887. 
 
 [C/micery Division.] 
 
 CHANCELLO'.t. 
 Hon. John Alexander Boyd 
 
 Appointed 3rd May, 1881. 
 
 JUDGES. 
 How. Thomas Fekouson 
 " Thoma« RoBEHTsoN ^PPo-ted 24th May, 1881. 
 
 " RIOHAKD MARXiN MeHEDITH l ^^ ''''""^' '''' ' 
 
 1st October, 1890. 
 
I'ly, 1884. 
 
 ay, 1874. 
 ovember, 1883. 
 tober, 1888. 
 
 Ministers of ^lustlcf anrt l^tfonieys ^cnfrftl 
 
 roil 
 
 THE DOMINION OF CANADA. 
 
 Hon. Siu John David Spaukow Thompson, 
 
 K.C.M.G., Q.C Ai.pointcd 25th Serten.bcr, 1 890. 
 
 " SiK Chakles IIibbbrt Tuppeh, 
 
 K.C.M.G., Q.C. 
 
 2l8t December, 1894. 
 
 ember, 1887. 
 
 ember, 1887. 
 
 liber, 1887. 
 er, 1894. 
 
 ilttcnuM-^Snural 
 
 KOK 
 
 THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO, 
 
 Hon. Sib Oliver Mowat, Q.C Appointed .3lst October, 1872. 
 
 iber, 1883. 
 iber, 1887. 
 
 !81. 
 
 -ff*- 
 
 81. 
 
 ', 1887. 
 
 1890. 
 
 -m 
 
Abb-^ 
 
 Aliliott 
 
 Al)iuli;i 
 
 ^Xrcider 
 
 Acfidt'ii 
 
 Acciilfii 
 
 Actiir S 
 
 AditiliM 
 
 AdatiiM 
 
 AdaiiiH, 
 
 Adiwns, 
 
 AditniM, 
 
 Adaiimi) 
 
 AdaiiiHo 
 
 Advcnli 
 
 .Inu 
 
 .Ktiiii Id 
 .Ktii.i III 
 .Etna l.i 
 Allic, lii 
 Agficidt 
 Aiith, C 
 Aitliuii, 
 Aldoiis V 
 Aldriuh 1 
 
 Alox.iiidi 
 Alexinidi 
 Al(,'Xiiii(l< 
 AluxiiiicU 
 Aloxiuidr 
 Altunl, (J 
 Alger aiK 
 
 Algi<i V. ( 
 Allan V. ( 
 Allen V. i 
 Allen V. 1 
 Allcu V. 1 
 Allen V. 
 
 AHl)e^ 
 
 Allen, Jol 
 Allci^, Mo 
 
 Allenby ai 
 Allin, lie 
 
 Allison V. 
 
 A 1 ward, fi 
 Amaranth 
 American 
 Ancient Oi 
 Ancient Ui 
 Ancient Oi 
 Anderdon, 
 
INDEX 
 
 OK 
 
 THE NAMES OF CASES. 
 
 ( ii>Ks-,ijernifix air nut iiir/wleil. 
 
 Abb- And] \a.mk of Cask. 
 
 Viir.l MK AND I'AdK, 
 
 Aliljott anil Modciilf, Hv 
 AhM \. M.iriiHdii . 
 
 A))iiili.itii V. Aliriihiiin 
 
 A.oi.lwit In.C, of \..itl,;\M>uiica,Cai,iwcll v. 
 AccuWul MH.C ,..of N, ,,1, ,v„.„,ie,. V. Al..La,l,lun 
 
 A. im. Silver (o. v. ,Sl,or> llanlware O, ^ 
 Adiinis V. AndiiHon 
 Ailanis V. Aiinett . . 
 
 Adams, Caimroii v, ' .. " J 
 
 AdariiM, (,'roHi> v. . . [[ ' ' ' ' 'I 
 Admiisoii V. koj,rors i 
 
 Ada.MsoM V. Town.ship ot kiohicokf ' 
 
 Adv,.nl„r,.,s of Kuj-lMud, (' p,,„y i.f 
 
 •loiiiirictU! 
 
 • Ktiia Ins. (•„., Ardiil'v! '.'. 
 
 -lUiia l.ilo luH. {•„,, i{„j„ ^. 
 
 Allh;, Ku Cowan v. . 
 
 Agiindtuial Ills. C,, y, siilwiit ' ' 
 
 Alrth, Cairns V, 
 
 Aitken, Manli (,t Hamilton' v. 
 
 Alduiis V. Hiiks 
 
 Aldricli V. Aldricli 
 
 C-'ol.l MN (IK 1)h;EsT. 
 
 il-t I'. K. u'K) |.>,j ' ' 
 
 IllO. K. •.'.-)(!, |,s A. K. 4;j(i iifi! tS7. 
 -M.S. (-'. 11. MH . . XT ,\H 
 
 •-•"'.S. C. H. L'Sd .. '-.Pi 
 
 -'I <». I!, .'(il 'kyJ" 
 
 '«'''fi>7 ::;;7i;: 
 
 Hi I'. l{. ;),-.(; 
 
 Hi I'. I!. !-.(( 
 
 -Ti (). i; ■.'•'(I 
 •-'IS. c. H. M-> .. 
 
 •J2A. |{. tl5, -.'(iS. C.U, l.-,!)!.|i»8. 
 
 "<'•«■••** I ..|.i!ii,..:i:i 
 
 43. 
 
 I7N, 40'2, .SIO. 
 
 4;io, i(ii>7. 
 
 4:i"), t!l(i, !Sh7. 
 
 ''I i'i3S. C. |{. II.- 
 
 22 0. K. f.-J!), •..(. A. I!. (10.-, 
 
 Scottish Canadian 
 
 Alu.\andcr, Lewis v. 
 
 Alexander, Norllieinier v. 
 
 A .xan.ler v, ViUage of FfuntHville 
 
 .■vie.xaniler v. Watson 
 
 Ale\anilre v. liraa^iard 
 
 •ulord, Usttom v. . . 
 
 Alger and Sarnia Oil Co., Re 
 
 Algie V, Caledon 
 
 Allan V. Cityof Montreal ! 
 
 Allen V. Allen 
 
 Allen V. Kairfa.x Cliecse Co! 
 
 Alien V. l<'iiriie.sH 
 
 Allen V. JIanaon -Ko 
 
 Asbestos ()t). 
 Allen, .lolinson v. / 
 Allti^, MoLoan V. 
 
 Allcnby and Weir, Ke 
 Allin, lie Lilley and '.', 
 
 Allison V. McDonald 
 
 Ahvard, Rogina v. 
 
 Amaranth, Township of, Island v' 
 
 American Exi.ress Co. , Kennedy v 
 
 Anclellt nf''"\ ';r-^'^'^^''^ ^""1 C.^tner: Kc 
 AiRie f n't'*' H'"'*-''' Work„,en, Dodds v 
 Ancient Order of United Workmen Mearns v 
 Anderdon, Townsiiip of, Banks v. 
 
 X S. C. R. 707 
 -OU. K, (i, 21 O. R. -iiw" 
 . -24(1 I!, .3.JM 
 .jHi 1'. K. ;)!)7 
 
 iKi I". K. 100 
 .'-'OA. K. (116 
 .,-'1 O. R. !),-, 
 . -M O. i;. H7 
 
 ■f'V .'^••■'"^. -'4 0.R. 124 
 
 •-! A. k.)ii;j,24S.C.R..-,r.l 
 
 Ills. C. R. 218 
 . -'I O, R. (1(1,-, 
 ■ 23S, C. R 070 
 
 [I •*<!»">] A. C. .SOI 
 
 -MO. I!. ;«).-, 
 
 •-•10. R. m, HI A. R. 410 
 
 i2.{ o. R. .-,,s;i 
 
 illl A. R. (i!( 
 
 |-'3 «. C. R. :iil() 
 
 !lo I'. R. 4-)S 
 
 -'I O. R, 598 
 
 -'0 A. i{. -M 
 
 18 S. C. R. 007 
 
 , .,4(l!». 
 .-,14. 
 
 •26 O. R. 550 
 
 14 P. R. 84 
 
 14 l\ R. 291 
 
 14 P. R. 227 
 
 210. R. 424, 19 A.' R. 101 
 
 i23 0. R. 288, 20 A. R. I 
 , I 69.-,, 23 S. C. R. 0.35 
 .25 0. K. 519 ' 
 
 .!l6P. R. 3 
 .|22A. R. 278 
 . |I4 P. R. 47 • • • 
 
 25 O. R. 570 
 
 .■,15. 
 
 .'•,.3(». 
 
 .3<i.H, 39.-,, 97.-.. 
 
 231, 437, 9.-,9. 
 
 ."■Hi-), 814. 
 
 1,427. 
 
 tiOO, 823. 
 
 .399, 480, 
 
 305, .-,08, ,-,09. 
 
 120, 70.3, 7.30. 
 
 452, 7.30, 
 
 53, 092, 
 
 474. 
 
 752. 
 
 1037, 
 
 \')H, 88(1. 
 
 2.->2, .329. 
 
 719, 
 
 30, 
 
 4S.3, 815. 
 
 248, 
 
 430, 505, 992, 1024. 
 
 148, 103, 400. 
 
 760. 
 
 -'(•7, 428, 431. 
 
 430. 
 
 213, 907. 
 
 645, 701. 
 
 90- 1.15, 777, S22. 
 
 .|22 0. K. 34 
 . i20 0. K. 296 
 
 -)54. 
 211. 
 
 123, 325. 
 219, 544. 
 . 444, 501, 528. 
 
 ..525. 
 ..834. 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 Anderson, Adiims v. 
 
 AnderHon, Barry v. 
 
 Andorson, I'^idler v 
 
 Anderson, Re Loag* Point Co. v ' 
 
 Andorson v. Quebec Fire Ins. Co. 
 
 Anderson, .Segsworth v. . . 
 
 Andorson v. Vanstono, Re 
 
 Anderson v. Wilson 
 
 Andrews v. Koefor, Re " 
 
 Ang o.C«„adian Music Publishing ' 
 
 (Limited), Lancefield v 
 Anglo.Coiitinental Guano Works, e' 
 
 1 llosphate Co. v 
 Angus V. Union Gas and Gil Stove Co 
 Amiable, Hollis'or v ^"ve<-o. 
 
 Annapolis Election Case 
 Annett Adams v. , 
 Antigoniah Election Case " 
 Appelbe, Winnett v. 
 Archer v. Unjuhart 
 Archer, Ward v. 
 -Aiohibald V. Hubley 
 Archibald, Hi-mphrey v. 
 Archibald, Kelly v. . . 
 
 Archibald v. McLaren 
 Archiliald v. The (>)u(;en 
 
 of Col- 
 
 } 
 
 21 O. R. 476 
 
 Ass'n 
 Imeiald 
 
 16 P. 
 .ISA 
 . ,20 O. 
 . 1!»0. 
 .15 P. 
 
 2;iO. 
 
 I 24 
 
 . lOP 
 
 •■ir, o. 
 
 22 0. 
 
 R. ir,i 
 
 E. 247 
 R. 424 
 
 R-487, l8A.'R.40r 
 R. VA-2 
 
 R- 57.3, 21 A. R. 242 ) 
 «• C. I{. 699 . 
 
 R. 243 ' 
 
 R. 91 
 
 R. 672 
 
 26 O. R. 457 
 
 j 21 ,S. C. R. 422 
 
 ■•|24S. C. K. 104 
 
 ■ I4i>. R. 11. 
 
 • 20 ,S. C. R. 169 
 
 ■ Iti I'. H. .•i56 
 
 ■ 2(KS. C. R. 169 
 . 16 P. K. r.7 
 
 • 23 0. R. 214 
 24 O. K. 650 
 
 •;J««. C. R. 116 
 
 174,480. 
 _«^5S3, 640, 971. 
 
 478. 
 
 •105, 410,884. 
 
 757, 758. 
 
 43. 
 
 757, 758. 
 .347, 410. 
 '386, 10.39. 
 1132, 4.34, 922. 
 (105, 436. 
 
 Ardi 1 V. ,Et„a I„a. Co. .' ' 
 
 Ardill, Bowey v.-ReKowev " 
 
 ArdiJl V. Citizens' Ins. Co. ^ ' 
 
 Argentei il Election Case 
 
 Argles V, McMath . . " 
 
 Armour, (Jiant v. . 
 Armstrong V. Auger 
 Armstrong, Gordon v. 
 Armstrong v. Ilemstreet 
 
 Armstrong, McClelland v. . '( 
 
 Armstrong, Nason v. 
 
 Armstrong, Nesbitt v. 
 
 "& r: ^^r':^^r ''-' ^-hmond' Hiin 
 
 Armstrong v. Toronto R. W. Co.! ' ' ' 
 
 Armstrong, Wright v. . . f 
 
 Arnold v. Playter ^ 
 ^"S"&-^''*-- «"«'ne Works V 
 
 Arnold v. Toronto R. W Co " " -' 
 
 Arnold!, Rcgina v ' ' ' 
 
 Arpin V. Merchants' Bank' of Canada '. .' 
 Arthur V. Grand Trunk R. W. Co. 
 Arthnr Trustees of Roman Catholic .Separate 
 .ohool .Section No. 10 of, v. TowS'p'o? 
 
 Arthur Village of. Re Burton and 
 A.shbridgc V. Ashbridge 
 Ashbridge, Hill v. . . 
 Ashdown v. Defoe 
 
 aSSVe^S?!^^^'*^^^--'^- •■ : 
 
 Aspden, Kinnear V. , ■ '_' 
 
 :210. R.;i53,20A.R.267 399;404; 
 .26 0. R. 608, 22 A. R. .-,22i|**' ^^> 581, 640, 641 
 .I21S.C. R. 588 ,. , ;,Ji..'27- 
 r3Ex. C. R. 251, 23 sV 
 Li C. R. 147 I 303. 
 
 ■ 2 Ex. C. R. .•174 ■ -'!,.- 
 
 .;-O.R.^,,0A.R.605J54. 
 
 !i[;'^-H^-',23A.R. 44fe55. 
 210.- £■,;,■; •• • go. 4«5. 
 
 *~ ''• rt. •wo . uo -a,. 
 
 22 o. R. 54..,, ..I'x Kvr^' '^•'• 
 
 m, 25 ,s. d R. 26:i 
 
 220 R,. -,42, 21 A. R 
 ! IS.3, 25 ,S. C. K, 263 
 |I4P. R. 366 
 
 15 P. R. 449 
 15 P. R. 208 
 22 0. R. .-,40 21 A. rV, 
 
 404, 306. 
 
 872. 
 
 /|{« «, ,,:,, »„, 
 
 ■ 1493,576. 
 
 ••i794, 803. 
 
 (399, 936. 
 
 14 P. R. 39(') 
 22 O. R. 60S 
 
 16 P. R. 394 
 
 23 O. R. 001 
 
 24 S. C. R. 140 
 
 J5 0. R. 37, 22 A. R. 89. 
 
 980. 
 
 272. 
 
 27, 948. 
 
 r326, 508, 745, 1003, 
 
 I 1008. 
 
 21 0. R. 60 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 . . 1835. 
 
 |2SoR-S •■ 1/20.222,695. 
 
 20" A. S; If ;• •g-'^'^- 
 
 .^'^'*.l,'-5«9. 21A. R.4C6 66.' 
 HORiQ<; •• •■12,331,345. 
 
 ~i U. K. JSJa JOB inrA 
 
 II9A.R.468 ;; ylm 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 'E. Column of Dkjkst. 
 
 713. 
 
 573. 
 
 675. 
 
 1026. 
 !369, 828. 
 1217. 
 
 I Its, 7()2. 
 
 174, 480. 
 
 |42 583, 640, 971. 
 ■jd2. 
 
 Aap-Bal] Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Paoe. 
 
 . . 20.'). 
 
 9r)5. 
 
 478. 
 
 405, 410, 884. 
 7.')7, 758. 
 43. 
 
 ,757, 7.';8. 
 -.347, 410. 
 ..'38(f, 10.39. 
 •1132, 4;J4, 922 
 • 110.5, 4;j6. 
 I«7 399, 404. 
 
 ,22|/S. 41, 581, 640, 641, 
 ;\ 727. 
 jC42. 
 
 .30,3. 
 
 }, 
 
 ,187. 
 WSlt. 
 .102.3. 
 15 514. 
 
 .757. 
 ■1 «7, 4.55. 
 3.30,485. 
 
 ■ 57, 879. 
 •222,764. 
 • j«2, 786. 
 
 ■ 384. 
 
 208, .384, 878, 918 
 1020. 
 493, ,576. 
 
 j794, 803. 
 
 ]399, 936. 
 
 J384. 
 
 404, 506. 
 
 872. 
 
 980. 
 
 272. 
 
 27, 948. 
 
 [326, .508, 745, 1003, 
 
 I 1008. 
 
 135. 
 
 20, 222, 695. 
 
 S5, 1021. 
 
 30. 
 
 15. 
 
 ?, 331, 345. 
 
 is, 1054. 
 
 )4. 
 
 A.S|)lio<lel. Re Tniatoes of .Scliool Section No. 
 
 ."> of the Township of, ami Huinphries 
 Aeselstinu, Hlair v. . . 
 
 Jo. I 
 
 AHsignincnts and Preferences Act, Ho 
 
 24 O. R. 682 
 •115 P. R. 211 
 /j20 A. R. 489, [1894] A. 
 Atkin.son, .Stewart v. ., . loo u (i r> '.ji- 
 
 Atlantic and N. W. R. \V. (•„., ik-nninK v "loj) S (' \i' i-- ' ' 
 Atlantic an.l North-West R. W. {;o.,(;aHgrain v'.'flsoji a C "'Jo ' ' 
 Atlantic anil North-Wost R. W. (,'(). V. . I iidali "3 S (" 'r'o^'i' " 
 Atlantic and NortliWest R. W. Co. v. Wood ,'["18951 A C " >" ' ' 
 Attorncylicneral for Canada v. Attorney. 1 20 O R '"•>> Wa 'r li ' 
 
 General for Ontario . . ^ j 4 S c'r 4-8 
 
 AttorMey-Ocneral for Canada, Attorney-(!en. t 20 A. R. 489 [KS941 A 
 
 1 C. 189 , .' . 
 
 CoLir.MN OF Digest. 
 
 ral for Ontario v. 
 
 Attoniey-Ceneral for Canada v. (,'ity of 
 
 Toronti) . . 
 Attornfy.(;encral for Canada, Dominion Sal- ,' 
 
 v.age and Wrecking Co. v. . . , . ( 
 
 Attorney-General for Canada v. Ontario and 1 
 
 Western Lumber Co. . . . . . . r 
 
 Attorney-General for Manitoi ropliy v. \ 
 
 Attorney-(ieneral for Nova .Scotia, -Munici- 1 
 
 pality of Lunenburg v. . . . . | 
 
 Altorncy-General for Ontiirio, .-Etna Ins! Co. v. 
 Attorney-General for Ontario, Attorney-Gen- 1 
 
 eral for Canada v. f 
 
 Attorney-(Jeneral forOntario v. Attorney ■( ien ■ \ 
 
 eral for Canada . . ^ 
 
 Attorney-General for Ontario v. Brunsden— 
 
 Re Stavely 
 Attorney-(;eneraI for Ontario v. Niagar.i Falls 
 
 Wesley I'aik, and Clifton Tramway Co ' 
 Attorney-(Jencral for Ontario v. Vaughan Road\ 
 
 . . 8.34, 966. 
 
 . • 4,32, 576, 881. 
 
 }|162. 
 
 . . i876. 
 . . '30. 
 
 ()3, 8,)6. 
 
 851. 
 
 850. 
 
 161, 165, 169, 170. 
 
 162. 
 
 54, 731. 
 
 63, 146. 
 
 802. 
 
 174. 
 
 Co. 
 
 Attrill, Huntington v 
 
 Attwood, llcgina v. 
 
 At wood V. At wood. . . . . " 
 
 Aubert-CJallion, Townsiiip of, v. Roy 
 
 Auger, Armstrong v. 
 
 Aurora, The, Reigman v. , . 
 
 -A.uston, Village of Brighton v. 
 
 Ayer (J. C.) Co., Tiie Queeii v. . . 
 
 Ayerst v, McC/'lean . . 
 
 Ayr American Plougli Co. v. Waliace 
 
 B. 
 
 Baby V. Ross 
 Badcock v. Fi-eeman 
 Badgerow, Bellamy v. ,', [\ 
 Bagot KIcction Case 
 B.ailey v. Bank of Hamilton 
 Bailey v. Ocean Mutual Marine Ins 
 Bam V. .Ktna Life Ins. Co. 
 Bain and Leslie, Re 
 Bajus, Re . . . _' ' 
 
 Baker v. McLellaud .'. "' 
 
 Baker v. .Soeietc <le Construction M.i 
 Baldwin v. Canadian Pacific R. W. 
 
 Baldwin v. King.stone 
 
 Baldwin v. McGuire 
 
 -'0 O. R. 19, 18 A. R.i 
 622, 23 S. C. R. 514 / 
 
 21 S. C. R. 72 .. 
 16 P. R. 2,35 
 
 22 .S. C. R. 577, [1895]\ 
 A. C. 202 . ) 
 
 20 S. C. R. .596 , . . . 694. 
 
 18.S. C. R. 707 ., ,.!.515. 
 20 O. R. 222, 19 A R ^ 
 
 31, 23 S. C. R. 4.58 " } ISl. 165. 169, 170. 
 20A.R489,[1894]A.j|,,. 
 
 24 0. R. .324 
 
 . . |94, 420. 
 
 19 0. R. 624, 18 A. R. 453 
 
 14 P. R. 516 
 
 21 0. R. 507, 19 A. R. 
 2.34, 21 S. C. R. 631 
 
 17 O. R. 245, 18 A. R. 
 136, 20 A. R. App'x 
 L. [1893] A. C. 150 
 
 20 O. R. .574 
 
 15 P. R. 425, 16 P. R. 
 
 21 S. C. R. 456 . . 
 210. R. 98,. 
 3 Ex. C. R. 228 . . 
 19 A. R. .305 
 1 E.\. C, R, 2.32 
 14P. R. 15 
 21 «. C. R. 256 , , 
 
 } 
 
 ,50 
 
 63, 304, 940. 
 63, 764, 792, 
 1018. 
 
 460, 543, 787. 
 
 261, 269. 
 
 487, 
 .|118, 967, 
 .57, 879. 
 . 892, 929. 
 
 1117, 691. 
 . 867. 
 • ,492, 674. 
 
 102. 
 
 Co. 
 
 tropolitaine 
 Co,. 
 
 14 P. 
 21 A, 
 .'4 0, 
 
 21 S. 
 
 21 A. 
 
 19 S. 
 
 20 0. 
 25 O. 
 24 0. 
 24 !S. 
 
 22 .S, 
 22 o'. 
 16 0. 
 
 63, 
 
 15 P. 
 
 16 P. 
 
 R. 440 
 R. 633 
 R. 278 
 C. R. 28 
 R. 156 
 C. R. 13.3 
 R. 6, 21 0. 
 R. 136 
 R. 397 
 C. R. 416 
 C. R, ,304 
 R. 612 
 R. .341, 18 
 and App'x 
 R. 305 
 R. 248 
 
 R. 2,33. 
 
 A. R, 
 
 249, 253, 466, 578. 
 
 651. 
 
 .3S8, 377. 
 
 754, 947. 
 
 ()9. 
 
 ■)33. 
 
 5.30. 
 
 .388, 626, 627, 1035. 
 
 96, 784, 992. 
 
 338, (!60. 
 
 625, 790. 
 
 594. 
 
 386,451,589,6.30,1041. 
 
 977. 
 
 227, 230, 235, 908, 
 
xll 
 
 TABLE or OASES. 
 
 Baldwin V. Quiiin . . 
 Baldwin v. WixUh 
 
 Baldwin V. Wanzer" 
 
 Half(nir,(;ildcisk.cve V. " 
 Ualfi-ur, Maodon.dll v 
 Halfour, Wiliiiinis v 
 Ball V. l!oIl, Re 
 Ball V. A/cCaDivy 
 
 Hall, O'Shaii^linrssy'v. 
 Hall V. Tninant, 
 Hanficl.l, Woesu v 
 
 Hank of Hntisl, \o,th America v.(iibson 
 ;:;; ! " ''t'^'' North An>..,ioa ■ X 
 Bank „f Jfanulton V. Aitkcn ^ 
 
 Hank of Hamilton, Hailev v 
 Hank .;f ITaniilton v. Kssei'v" 
 Hank of Hamilton v.Ooorgo 
 Hank ,.f Hamilton, Henderson v. 
 
 Hank of tia.niit,^rsh^h;;;;r~ 
 
 Bank ,^ Liverpool, Ke-lFor.svthe v 
 
 of Nova Scotia. 
 Hank of Montreal, Coleman V. " 
 Hank otMo„,,eal, The (.•neon V.' 
 B ank of New Hrunswiek, Scott v. 
 
 Bank of Nova ScotiT^j; 
 
 ■o;'l.^::;,::,?'--^-^-^'--Re-Bank 
 
 HankofOltawa V. \Vade,'Re " 
 Hank of i onmto, liol.erts v 
 Lanksv. Township of AndJnlon" 
 Hannanv. City of Toronto, 
 iauiiennan, Kmer.son v 
 Bamierman, Hamelin v " 
 
 Banque d'Hochelaga V. Jo,loin .' ' ^ ' 
 
 I anijue , Hoelielaya v. Murray . ' ' " 
 
 Hanque du I'euple, Hryant v. 
 
 la^^r^"-■- f^--. '^-i«i.aw V. : 
 
 i5arber v. Clark 
 
 Barber, Re ( lark v. 
 
 Barber, (Jilihins v. . . 
 
 liarnard, Molaon v 
 
 Barnes^v. Uon.inion (Grange Mutual Fire Ins. ' 
 
 Barnes, Reid v. 
 Barnior v. Harnicr 
 
 Barrett v. City of Winnipeg 
 
 Harrie, (.'asselniai, v. 
 
 Barrie, Town of, v. Weaymouth." 
 
 Harrington v. SeottLsh Union an.i N 
 
 Ins. (. o. . . 
 Barry v. .Anderson. . 
 Barry v. Hartley 
 Barry v. Keefer, Re 
 Harry v. Ross 
 Barry, The Queen v.' 
 
 Barsalou, N,.rth American Glass Co. v ' 
 Harter v. Smith , , "^o- ».. 
 
 itional 
 
 Barthel, Scotten v. 
 Barton, Kelly v 
 
 pi O. R. .<8(i 
 
 !-'-5 (). l;. 1!)4, t>l A. R 
 
 ,'.20(). R. oj,(j 
 
 ^^ (). R. 27-1 
 ,19 'S. C. R. I 
 
 [I.S951A. (;. 2:i- ■■ 
 
 M«9'"']A. C. GlL' ;." 
 ••"' A pp. Cas. 414 
 (l'^!)-'i].A. (;. 170 ,' 
 •-"^«. <'. R. ;i;-)" 
 ■-'1 -S. (J. R. 42.-, " 
 ,-'3«. ('. R. ,S7 ■■ 
 •-'^ S. C. R. ;j5, • 
 Hi 1'. R. l,-,6 
 -'OO. R. .-,22, l.SA.'7{. 
 1^';^ O. l;. o-,;{^ o^■ ,) ,j 
 n».S. C. R. 2(14 
 18 .S. C. R. (i22 
 25 (). R. 10(», 22 '{ I 
 
 •IS. 2^S. C. R. loi 
 •-'u O. R. 22.S 
 ;iO. R. 280 
 li' «. C. R. 374, [189: 
 
 A. C. 44,') 
 14 1'. R. .'507 
 I') l\ R. M 
 
 I« .S. C. R. Gl.-i 
 
 . R. 247 
 
 n. -.m 
 
 R. 072 
 C. R. .SfiO 
 
 c. R. a:i:i 
 
 C. R. 490 
 ('. R. 4.V, 
 R. 509, 24 S. C. i 
 
 '^7, 2.30, 2.S.5, 908. 
 ■1/. 
 594. 
 
 •■^'J- 704, 772. 
 <is. -'.•^(i, 777. 
 4S(). 6(>4. 
 .■i72. 
 
 19, .'JDO, 042 
 |«6,S. 
 
 *i7, 08, 777. 
 '.S4. 
 .'iO, .390. 
 Hi, SI 2. 
 
 427. 
 |li9. 
 ">79. 
 H'O, 797. 
 
 ) |'59, 482, 080. 
 
 414191, 212, .329. 780 
 
 H!». 
 
 ir,.3. 
 
 -'1.S, 400. 
 so, 104. 
 741. 
 •|401, 819. 
 !98. 
 
 • •J9;i i.-,,3. 
 
 1.370. 
 (>29|7-), 4,3.3, 008. 
 8,34. 
 . . 722. 
 .. lO-j. 
 .. 1(K)0. 
 ■ 101,820. 
 ..145. 
 
 •101,819,820. 
 
 • 1117, 691. 
 . . 1 952. 
 
 ■ 1034. 
 ..741. 
 
 ■ 1 178, 402, sio. 
 43-.j.-,4.3, 061, loao. 
 47)371. 
 ■!56, 102, 100. 
 952. 
 
 ] ol7, 518. 
 
 .,j 
 
 "■} 
 
 655, 
 
 38.3. 
 
 172. 
 
 1 574. 
 
 •24.3,705,900. 
 .951. 
 
 • 675. 
 
 229,231,80.3. 
 |362. 
 
 190. 
 ^279. 
 1 188. 
 
 ,412, 7S(», 781. 
 ^■35, 3,30. 
 
 Hell 
 
 R. (iOS, 22 A. R, 522 I '^'i.l' ^Sl, 040, 641, 
 
TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 xiU 
 
 GOL' 
 
 I 
 
 / 
 
 tl4 
 
 227, 230, 235, 908. 
 
 [■1/. 
 
 rm. 
 
 '•'^'J, 7()4, 772. 
 
 <!«. -'.•{(!, 777. 
 
 4S(t. 6(;4. 
 
 372. 
 
 |l!», 300, 942. 
 I.S63. 
 <i7, OS. 777. 
 
 130, 3!10. 
 Ki, SI 2. 
 1, 427. 
 
 ■>7!). 
 I<»0, 707. 
 
 ■ISO, 4S2, 080. 
 
 ■". 212, 320, 780. 
 Sit. 
 
 .. 03, l-,.3. 
 
 ••218,400. 
 ••SO, 104. 
 
 • •741. 
 
 • MOI, S19. 
 . . OS. 
 
 ■ ■m, 15.3. 
 
 .. •370. 
 
 20 75, 4,33, 008. 
 
 . . S34. 
 
 ■ . 722. 
 
 ..105. 
 
 . . 1(K)0. 
 
 • 101, 820. 
 .145. 
 
 '01, 819, 820. 
 
 • ill7, 001. 
 . 1 052. 
 .11034. 
 .!741. 
 
 1 178, 402, sio. 
 ">r'>-i''h 001, 10,30. 
 7|371. 
 
 r"i<>, 102, 100. 
 
 952. 
 
 518. 
 747. 
 
 517, 
 
 055, 
 383. 
 
 172. 
 
 l574. 
 
 243, 705, 900. 
 
 051. 
 
 075. 
 
 220,231,80.3. 
 
 i02. 
 
 100. 
 
 !79. 
 
 ,ss, 
 
 ^12, 780, 781. 
 
 35, 330. 
 
 Bar-Ber] 
 
 Namk of Caxk. 
 
 Volume and Paok, 
 
 8-4^581, 040,041, 
 
 Barton, McMillan v. 
 
 Barton Stoney ('reek Consolidated Komi Co 
 W'ebu V. ... 
 
 liarlon, Township of. City of Hamilton v. 
 ]iiirtniin, Village of London \\\\nl y 
 Hartniin v. Village of London West 
 
 Ma.slieiville V. City of Ottawa .. .', 
 
 liaskerville v. Vose 
 
 Hate V. Canadian Pacific R. VV. (,'0, 
 
 K.ixtcr V. Contial Hank Re Central Hank 
 
 Baxter v. I'liilliiM . 
 
 Hay of Qiiinte Bridge Co., Cilmour v. 
 
 Heal. .Siiiitli V. 
 
 Beam V. \i(.'iun 
 
 Beard, Summers v. . . . | 
 
 Heaton v. (;1oI)g Printing Co. 
 
 iieaton V. Intelligeneer Printing and Piiblisli. 
 
 '"a t'o 
 
 Heatti' V. Davis 
 
 Beatty v. Fitzaimmons 
 
 Heatty, O'Donohoe v. . . ,] 
 
 Heatty v. Hiwnhle . . 
 
 Heaty v. Haekett . . . . [[ '' [ 
 
 ]Jeauclieniin, Oligny v. . . ,] 
 
 Beaver v. Grand Trunk R. \V. Co. 
 
 Becker, Regiua v. , . 
 
 Hedell, Owens v. . . . ' ' [ 
 
 Hedere, Regina v. . . . . [' 
 
 Begg V. Kllison . . ,[ 
 
 19 A. R. 602, 20 s. C. 
 404 
 
 20 O. R. 343 
 
 R. 
 
 18 0. R. 199, 
 .340, 20, S. C 
 200. 1;. KJi 
 24 S. C. 
 20 A. R, 
 P. R. 
 
 17 A. R. 
 R. 173 
 
 05 
 
 OS 
 22 
 
 14 O. R. 025, 
 388, 18 S. C. 
 -'OO. R. 214 
 -'3.S. (;. R. .-J 17 
 20 A. R. -28 1 
 ) O. R. .3(i,s 
 R. 189 
 R 
 U. 
 
 A. 
 
 ()07 
 
 R. ) 
 
 Column- ok Digest, 
 
 201, 403, 818, 9SS. 
 0.35, 1017. 
 
 20. 
 
 121, 728. 
 057. 
 089. 
 10. 
 
 24 O. 
 24 O. 
 15 P. 
 
 041 
 
 473, 
 
 10 I'. R. 281 
 
 A. R. 97 
 
 373 
 245 
 
 V. .Johnson's Co. 
 V. City of Quebec 
 Klectrie Despatch Co. v. 
 Toronto Telephone .Mfg. 
 
 Helangcr v. liMaMKer 
 Bell, Re Ifcll v. 
 Hell, Re Fraser and . . 
 Bell, Houghton v. . . 
 Hell, Regina v. 
 Bell V. Villeneuve . . 
 Bell, Wrigiit V. . . 
 
 Bell V. Wright 
 
 Pieir.s Asbestos Co 
 Hell Telephone (,'0, 
 Hell Telephone Co. 
 Hell Telephone Co. 
 
 Co. V. . . 
 Hell Telephone Co., Wright v 
 
 Bellamy v. Hadgerow . . 
 
 Hellaniy v. Connolly 
 Bellecluisse Election Case . . 
 
 B..'l.sluiw, Cook V. . . 
 
 Benjamin, Ostroni v. . . \\ ' ' 
 
 Bennett v. Coatswortli -Re' Ferguson '.'. '.'. 
 
 ti ennett v ^bnii)ire Printing an,l Publisliing Co. 
 
 Bennewei.s, Kntner v. 
 Benning v. Atlantic and N. VV R W Co 
 Benning v. Thil)audeau ' ' 
 
 Benton, Smith v. . . ' 
 
 Bergin, Purcell v. . . 
 
 25, 23 S. C. R. 
 335^ 24 S.' C. R. 
 
 Bergman v. The Aurora ' ' 
 Berlin Piano Co. v. Truaisch 
 Berlin, Town of, Schmidt v. 
 
 20 O. R. 
 23 O. R. 
 H) .S. (\ R, .s-,(i ,. 
 
 21 O. R. IS4 
 14 P. R. 305 
 Hi P. R. 508 
 
 22 O. R. (ir,7, 20 A. R. 
 470, 22 S. C. R. 498 
 
 ;^0 O. R. 070 
 
 10 .S. C. R. |;i7 .. 
 
 21 O. R. 1S9 
 
 14 P. R. 207 
 
 14 P. R. 384 
 
 24 S. C. R. 078 . . 
 200. R. 12.3, (iOl .. 
 21 (). R. 4.55 
 
 23 S. (;. R. 40,s . 
 
 25 O. R. 272 
 16 P. R. 413 
 18 A. R. 
 
 408 
 16 P. R. 
 
 (i50 
 
 33 S. C. R. 225 
 20 S. C. R. 230 
 20 S. C. H. 83 
 
 2 Ex. C. H. 495, ,-,24 
 
 2 Kx. C. R, 552 . . 
 
 24 O. R. 278 
 l.'5P. R. 87.. 
 
 ■20 S. (■;, R. 181 . , 
 
 23 O. R. 545 
 
 20 A. R. 330 
 
 21 A. R. 467 
 
 25 0. R. .501 
 1.') P. R. 4.30 
 16 P. R. 03 
 
 24 O. R. 407 
 20 s. C. R. 177 
 
 20 ,S. C. R. 110 .. 
 200. R. .344 
 
 20 A. R. 535, 23 S, C. R 1 
 101 . ■ I 
 16 P. R, .301 . . 
 3 Ex. C. R. 22s . . 
 15 P. R. 68 
 20 0. R. 54 
 
 [120, 842. 
 
 1.5(i, .509. 
 
 82, 029, 770. 
 
 738. 
 
 08, 2.30. 
 
 .520. 
 
 (>I6. 
 
 :U0, 403. 
 
 •3.30, 341. 
 
 409, 1004. 
 477, 00.5. 
 002, 948. 
 358, (i43. 
 58, 02. 
 484, 817. 
 
 120, 842. 
 
 241, 201, 587, 884. 
 
 030. 
 
 260. 
 
 254, 700. 
 
 767, OIS. 
 
 100, 048. 
 
 372. 
 
 385, 1022. 
 
 508, (i24, 1021. 
 
 120, 273, 832. 
 
 179, 816. 
 
 .508, 024, 1021. 
 
 441, 800, 910, 
 
 :^34, 789. 
 058. 
 105, 063. 
 
 42.5, 7S0, 7S1, 782. 
 
 770. 
 
 .338, 377. 
 10, 009. 
 411, 756. 
 012. 
 
 241, 748, 900. 
 246. 
 1025. 
 24, 803. 
 220, 351. 
 883. 
 30. 
 80. 
 179, 530. 
 
 10.32, 1034, 
 
 230, 443. 
 892, 020. 
 082. 
 716. 
 
 10.39. 
 
siv 
 
 TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 Herliu, Town of, Sohn.i.lt v. 
 
 Heiry v. Donovan 
 
 'iiTtrand v. The (,»neen " 
 Jiickfiton V. Dakin 
 
 >K'kfonl V. Cameron 
 lOKfor.l V. Hiiwkins 
 HieKil, Mackvy V 
 Wetto, He Klliolt V." 
 Hingliuni, 'I'iiiiiing v 
 
 Mkett, Regina ex rel. xMoGuire v' 
 
 Hittle, Rcgiiiii, V. ■ ■ 
 Bliulifonl V. (;ic!en 
 
 Blaeliford V. Mcliain 
 
 BWk, MeLi,,.^ V. 
 
 f^liifk, Mmiay v. . . 
 
 Hlaukey, lioiiglas V. ' 
 
 Hlackley v. Keiiney 
 lil.iin, Henderson v 
 Blair, Re . . 
 Blair V. Asselatine . 
 Bhur, Cranston y 
 Blight V. Rav 
 Blongv. Fitzgerald,. ■ 
 Rloonilield V. Hellyer 
 Boeek V. Jioock 
 
 Bollorl, Gilhird v. . . 
 
 Bonanza A'ickel Miiiiiur r^ ui ' ' 
 
 Bon.l y. Toronto Rn^ ^f ■''^""''' ' 
 
 Bonness, St. Stepiien'.s Hank v 
 
 Booth and McLean, Re 
 
 foLUMN OF Digest. 
 
 16 P. H. 242 
 
 i!>s. c. K.rm 
 
 21 S. C. R. 409 
 21 A, R. 14 
 2 i:x. C. R. 28.') 
 
 20 O. R, 192,095 
 
 21 S. ('. R. ;i7!, 
 '9 8. (;. R. .S(i2 
 16 I'. R. MS 
 21 (). i;. .'-,<)-, 
 16 1'. R. no 
 21 O. R. I (JO 
 IS P. H. 28.'} 
 21 O. R. (i05 
 14 P. R. 424 
 
 20^.^''7f-"«-^-«-2«9 
 
 :i72 
 
 504 
 135 
 308 
 
 Booth V. Ratte 
 
 Booth, Ratte v. 
 
 Boscowitz, (Iiittiths'v 
 Boss(5, Paradis v. 
 Ro.stwick, Hurd V. " 
 Bouchard, Couture v 
 Boulton, Porter v 
 Boulton V. Shea 
 Bourget v. 'J'ho Queen 
 
 RowP' ^^r'^o^^y V. Ardill 
 
 mwker V. Laumei.ster 
 
 Boyd, AIcNair v. 
 
 Boyd V. Rohinson 
 
 Boyd V. 'I'lie Queen . . 
 
 Boyd, Vansiekle v " ' 
 
 Brahant v. Lalonde 
 Bradlnirn, Carton v 
 Braden, Meriden Britannia Co. v. 
 
 Rrady V. Hie Queen 
 
 liraudon. In' unn v " ' 
 
 Brandon Mfg. Co., Tavlorv. 
 
 Brassard, Alexandre v 
 Brax.ill V. John.s, Ru 
 Bready v. Robertson 
 
 21 (). R, 
 14 P. R. 
 18 A. R, 
 
 14 P. R 
 
 14 P. R. 220 
 I') P. R. 211 
 13 P. R. Ifi7 
 23 (). R. 415 
 IT) P. R. 467 
 22 A. R. 232 
 16 P. R. 313 
 26 O. R. 191 
 21 A. R. 663 
 |24 O. R. 147 
 25 O. R. 305 
 
 24 8. C. R. 710 
 |21 O. R. 452 
 14 A. R. 419, 
 , Cas. 188 . . 
 |21 S. C. P^. 637 
 16 P. R. 185 
 18S. C. R. 718 
 '21 S. C. R. 419 
 . 121 
 R. 281 
 . 318 
 R. 742 
 R. 1 
 361 
 R. ]7:, 
 
 410,"i7 P. 
 
 25 S. C. R. 154 
 
 2 Ex. C. R. 273 
 
 24 O. R. 375 
 
 |21 A. R. .361 
 
 ,21 O. R. 065 
 
 |18A. H. 415, 19S. C R 
 
 , 336 
 
 |[iS95]A.C. '301 
 24 O. R. 209 
 114 P. K. 7 . . 
 
 lOOG. 
 
 l«,2o4, 320,420,808. 
 
 •^19, 807, 981. 
 
 745. 
 
 241, 908. 
 
 207, 794, 981. 
 
 929, 943. 
 
 407. 
 
 599. 
 
 286, 1010. 
 
 1023. 
 )987. 
 |210. 
 
 ,115, 784, 825. 
 |324. 
 
 i;<,39, 43. 
 ^76, 1026. 
 |211. 
 4, 113. 
 
 234. 
 
 1741. 
 |518. 
 
 1752. 
 373, 828. 
 1219, 582. 
 
TABLE OF OASES 
 
 XV 
 
 f'oL0MN OF DI0B8T. I Bre-Bul] Name of Case. 
 
 .(404. 
 
 144, JO"), ma, 027. 
 
 747. 
 
 177. 
 ■ -'X4, 302, 391. 
 
 610, (ii: 
 'i»08, 951. 
 !2;i. 
 704. 
 
 •'?')!», CM), 829. 
 7(J3. 
 
 ,11'S, 701, 805. 
 ■ ((378. 
 104. 
 
 |345, 409. 
 9|955. 
 
 4, 624. 
 041. 
 
 li;j, 225, 777. 
 
 |S22. 
 
 154, 403. 
 504. 
 
 I4.S2, 576, 881. 
 231, 43S. 
 lOl.S. 
 
 |403, 674. 
 no, 6'66. 
 4;«, 487, 810. 
 |433, 446, 800, 997. 
 
 113.' 
 
 144, 190. 
 
 ()54, 930. 
 
 98. 
 
 540, 997. 
 
 1006. 
 
 ;«,2o4, 320, 420,808. 
 
 il9, 807, 981. 
 
 45. 
 
 41, 908. 
 
 07, 794, 981. 
 
 29, 943. 
 
 07. 
 
 99. 
 
 ^6, 1010. 
 
 )23. 
 
 i7. 
 
 0. 
 
 5, 784, 825. 
 4. 
 
 . 39, 43. 
 
 6, 1026. 
 1. 
 
 113. 
 
 I. 
 
 .744. 
 
 828. 
 582. 
 
 Murphy 
 
 Breithaiipt v. Marr. . 
 Brennaii, Uiiger v. ,', [ 
 
 liresso V. (Jrillitli . . ,', 
 
 Krosse, OHont v. 
 Brethour v. I'.rooko . '. 
 
 Brickcr v. Ciinpljoll '.'. 
 
 Jirickor, Knair v. . . 
 
 Kriclgowator (,.. cse Factory Co. 
 
 Bridgmau, Ke 
 
 Brigliouse, City of \ow Westminster v. 
 
 Brighton, Village of, v. Auston 
 
 Brisbin, Flick v. . , 
 
 Bristol and U'l'st of Kngland Lanrl Co. v. Taylor! 
 
 Bristol and West (,f laigland Loan Co. v. Taylor. 
 
 Britisli .America As3. Co. v. Law 
 
 British Canadian Loan Co. v. Tear . . .'. 
 
 British Canadian Liimher Co., Grant v . 
 
 British Coliinihia, County Courts of. Re 
 
 Biitish Coluinhia .Mills Co. v. .Scott 
 
 Brittou V. .Milsoin 
 
 Broadhead, Brook v, 
 
 Broadhe.ad, I'cnnian .\Ii.'. Co. v 
 
 Brockville, Town ot, 
 and Grcn\ illc v. 
 Broddy, Crawford v, 
 Brook V. Hi'oadhuad 
 Brooke, Bretliour v. 
 
 Uniii'd Counties of Leeds ^ 
 J" 
 
 VoLiME AM) Page. 
 
 COLD.MN OK DkIKST. 
 
 20 A. R. 689 
 
 14 P. R. 294 
 24 O. H. 492 
 16 f. I!. ;i.-}2 
 
 15 \\ H. 205 
 
 23 (). K. (558, 21 A. R. 144 
 
 21 O. R. 204 
 Ki V. R. 363 
 
 2li (). R. 327, 23 A. R. 66, 
 10 P. R. 232 
 
 20 S. C. R. ,520 
 19 A. R. .305 
 2(j (). R. 423 
 24(). K. 286 
 15 P. I!. 31(» 
 -'1 S. C. K. 325 ,. 
 
 23 0. l;. 064 
 
 18 S. C. K. 708 . . 
 1 S. C. R. 446 . . 
 
 24 .S. C. R. 702 , . 
 
 19 A. R. 96 
 ■2 Ex. C. R. 502 . . 
 
 21 S. 0. R. 713 . 
 
 427. 
 982. 
 
 774. 
 
 178, 815. 
 983. 
 ()7S. 
 353. 
 810. 
 
 102, 141. 
 243, 913. 
 1725. 
 
 ••i 
 
 117 
 
 164 
 
 476, 
 .976. 
 . 1533. 
 
 |477, 064 
 .21. 
 
 .164,267 
 .650. 
 .1104. 
 . 779. 
 . 1203. 
 
 691. 
 2M. 
 541, 823. 
 
 I7(). R. 261, 18 A. R. 548!.548. 
 
 Brooke v. Toronto Holt Line R. W. Co. 
 
 Brooke, Wheeler v. 
 
 Brooktield v. Brown 
 
 Brooks V. Georgian Bay Saw-log Salvage Co. '. '. 
 
 Brophy v. Attorney-General for Manitoba [ 
 
 Brossard v. Dupras 
 
 Broughton v. 'I'ownsliip of Grey ' 
 
 Broun v. Biishey 
 
 Brown, Brooktield v. 
 
 Brown v. Defoe 
 
 Brown, Dominion Salvage and Wrecking Co. v. 
 
 Brown V. Hose 
 
 Brown v. Leelerc 
 
 Brown V. Lennox 
 
 Brown, Miles v. . . 
 
 Brown v. Moyer 
 
 Brown, Murray v. , . 
 
 Brown, Smith v. . . 
 
 Brown v. The (.Jueen 
 
 Brown v. Town of Kdmonton 
 
 Brown v. Trustees of Toronto General Hospital. 
 
 Brown, Re Wansley and 
 
 Bruce, McKay '-. . , 
 
 Bruce, McLean v. . . 
 
 Bruli', Poirier v. . . 
 
 Brunker v. Township of Mariposa 
 
 Brunsden, Attorney-General v. — Re Stavely . . 
 
 Bryant v. Banque du Peu])le 
 
 Bryant v. Quebec Bank 
 
 Bryce v. Kinnee , 
 
 Bryce v. Loutit 
 
 Buchaunan, Eraser v 
 
 Buchannan, Seldon v 
 
 Buck v. Knowlton . . 
 
 Bucke, Ross v. . . 
 
 Bull, Imperial Fire Ins. Co. v 
 
 B'llmer v. The Queen | 
 
 25(). 
 
 2 Kx. 
 
 15 P. 
 
 23 O. 
 
 21 O. 
 26 O. 
 
 22 S. C. 
 
 16 P. R 
 22 S. C 
 
 A. C. 
 
 19 S. C. 
 26 O. R. 
 25 O. R. 
 
 22 s. c;. 
 
 24 G. R. 
 
 20 S. C. 
 
 14 P. R. 
 22 S. C. 
 
 22 A, R. 
 
 15 P. R. 
 
 23 O. R. 
 
 16 P. R. 
 
 20 O. H. 
 
 3 Ex. C. 
 23 S. C. 
 
 23 0. R. 
 
 21 O. R. 
 20 O. R. 
 14 P. R. 
 20 S. C. 
 
 22 0. R. 
 
 24 O. R. 
 [1893] A 
 [189.3] A, 
 14 P. R. 
 
 . (>35, 22 A 
 
 R. 502 . 
 , 2(J5 
 
 6.58, 21 A 
 . 401 
 , 96 
 
 R. 398 
 
 511 
 '. K. .577, 
 202 
 
 R. 531 . 
 
 (;94 
 
 612 
 
 R. 398 . 
 
 569, 21 A 
 
 R. 203 . 
 
 3 .. 
 
 R. 53 
 
 442 
 
 375 
 
 222, 20 A. 
 
 125 
 
 165 
 
 R. 79 . 
 R. 308 
 
 .599 
 
 34 
 
 709 
 
 190 
 R. 97 
 
 120 
 
 324 
 
 . C. 170 . 
 , C. 170. . 
 
 509 
 
 H. 307 1384, 102(t. 1024. 
 
 . . i779. 
 
 . , 983. 
 
 .. R. 144 678. 
 
 8.53. 
 
 682. 
 
 683, 970. 
 407, 808. 
 
 174. 
 
 [1895]! 
 
 21 A R. 100 
 
 25 O. 
 24 O. 
 21 S 
 14 P. 
 21 0. 
 18 S. C. 
 3 Ex. C. 
 R. 488 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 ('. 
 R. 
 
 r. 
 
 I . 
 
 349 
 
 K. 371 .. 
 
 63.. 
 
 692 
 
 R. 697 . . 
 
 R. 184, 23 
 
 83, 632. 
 
 708. 
 
 685, 1009. 
 
 683, 970. 
 R. 466 60. 
 
 954. 
 
 214. 
 
 738. 
 
 593. 
 
 238, 444, 677. 
 R. 509 344. 
 
 404, 409, 489. 
 
 12, 67.5. 
 
 302. 
 
 101.3. 
 
 60O. 
 
 134. 
 
 380. 
 
 60, 61, 429,440. 
 
 333, 994. 
 
 120, .5,58- 
 
 94, 420. 
 
 101, 810, 820. 
 
 101, 810, 820. 
 
 .546. 
 38, 213, 255, 749, 
 1005. 
 
 ,361, 805. 
 
 605. 
 6. 
 
 793. 
 
 349. 
 519,671. 
 
 S. C. 
 
 } 316, 317, 950. 
 
xvi 
 
 TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 Bunnell v. Gordon 
 Bunnell, Pratt v 
 Buntin V. Williams ' 
 iiurfoot V. Dumoulin 
 Jiurfodi, Jtiinidiiiiii v 
 
 Burke, Uvgma. v. ' 
 Jjurnliani, Ko 
 
 Bunihiun, Hiiiies v. ' 
 Burns v. DuvidHon . 
 Burns, Johnston v. 
 Burns, Turner v. ' 
 Burrili, Kolierlson v 
 
 Artluw, Re 
 
 Burroughs V. The (,)ucen 
 
 Burton V. The (^i,,,,.,. 
 Burton and \'il|a ,^. ,^ 
 Bury V. .\Iur|)|,y "" 
 Hury, Murphy v. 
 Bury V. Murray 
 Bush V. MeCoi'niaek ' 
 
 Butlei', The (^ueen v 
 
 ButterHeld, Re 
 
 Butterfield, Re 
 
 Byrne, Daley v. 
 
 Byron Trerice, The -Colorado andi Charlton v. ; 
 
 0. 
 
 ""• M^^'C'"' ^'""'^-» ^-'«c Naviga. > 
 Cahan, Re , . ' ' ' • • ( 
 
 Cahoon, Parks v. . 
 Cairns v. Airtli 
 
 "^'""iwf v"""*"'*^ ''' ^"''' ^'"»« ''« Q"ebee,V 
 
 """^R-Smr"*^*^^""^^ '^--'e Quel.ee. { 
 
 S!a,\i;^5'r'^"^'^'"^^-"'A.nerieI 
 
 Caldwell V. Mills 
 
 Caldwell, Moon v. 
 
 Caledon, Algie v. , , 
 
 Caledon, Ward v. 
 
 Camden, Township of, fjibb v ' ' 
 
 Cameron v. Adams. '"'"'"■■■ 
 
 Cameron, Hiokford V. 
 Came-oE, Grant v. 
 Cameron v. Harper 
 Cameron v. Heighs 
 
 Camoron^e-Maj^mv. C'ameron' :; 
 
 Cameron, MeDougall v^ 
 Cameron, Ryan v ' ' 
 
 Campbell, Re 
 Campbell, Bricker v 
 Campbell, Clark v. * 
 Campbell v. Dunn " 
 Campbell v. Klgie 
 Campbell V. Hally " 
 Campbell, Hespelerv 
 
 SS!l;:Sa-"«^"'Roadco. 
 
 ^'0 O. R. 281 
 -'I C. R. 1 
 '•ii'. H. 43 
 
 -'1 '). R. rm 
 
 2^«- C. R. 120 
 2r>0. R. 270 
 
 2i> (>. II. (in:i 
 -^■to. Fi, ir.ii 
 
 -'-lO. K. (i4 
 R. 40 
 
 i;. ;)<»(» 
 
 R. -.28, 
 R. 547 
 R. I-!), 
 R. L'S 
 H. H->(i 
 
 C. R. 2!«, 20 ,S. C, 
 
 22 A 
 Hi 1'. 
 2(> O. 
 
 21 (). 
 •2,i I ». 
 24 O. 
 
 22 A. 
 2 Ex. 
 
 R. 420 
 I Kx. C. 
 Hi i'. R. 
 
 ■^■t «• c. K. im 
 
 C. R. 77 
 R. 497 
 * '. R. .'.57 
 R. 012 
 H. 402 
 R. 14!) 
 
 R. 507 
 
 R. 4 
 
 C. R. 203 
 
 -';< A. R. 
 
 >S2 . , 
 
 R. H7 
 100 
 
 24 S. 
 20 O, 
 2 Kx 
 
 25 O, 
 22 O. 
 14 P. 
 
 14 1'. 
 
 15 P. 
 3 Ex. 
 
 k Ex. C. R. 332 
 
 21 S. 
 23 S. 
 10 P. 
 
 C. R. 1(K) 
 C. R. 92 
 R. 100 
 
 '9S. C. R. ns 
 
 1^4 «. C. R. 405 . . 
 «• C. R. 203 
 
 A. R. 110, 24S.C 
 U. R. 402 
 
 R. R. 159 
 
 A. R. (!9 
 
 ^. R. 09 
 
 I'. R. 310 
 
 ). R. 229 
 
 >• C. R. 37!) 
 
 >■ C. R. 716 
 
 i. C. R. 273 . ■ 
 
 '. R. 50 
 
 •• R. 034 
 
 '• R. 272 
 
 • C. R. 379 ; ■ 
 
 . R. 235 
 
 . R. 421 
 
 . R. 204 
 R. 338 
 R. 98 
 '. R. 440 
 ^. R. 217 
 '. R. 18 
 
 •R.2S0,2OS.C'. R. 
 • K- 646, 21 S, C. R. 
 
 500, 
 377, 6m. 
 
 •|1. 
 
 27. 
 
 334. 
 I'-". 714, 1012. 
 
 • I'i'i, 482. 
 
 • -'73, 831. 
 . 1208. 
 
 11007. 
 210. 
 !»l»,IO, ,348.413 
 i;"'!', •»C7, 48L'. 
 
 7;7, .•{27. 74(i. 
 
 } l«I,29.-,,;{o;{,,v,o,588 
 
 . 282. 
 
 !'-'<»■ 222,09.-.. 
 
 778. 
 
 '-•W, 795. 
 
 Ilif^;;.^/'-', ■.02, 885, 
 
 908. 
 
 <>K5, 1009. 
 
 '22, 722. 
 
 902 
 
 !»07. 
 1797. 
 889. 
 
 -5.36, 890. 
 
 899, 950, 959 
 
 627. 
 
 565, 814. 
 
 92, 989. 
 
 ■ • 76, 90. 
 
 „ • m 418, 
 R. 6991335, 423, 789. 
 • 650, 1011. 
 
 • 208, 443. 
 
 ,,719. 
 
 ..719. 
 
 ■ 244, 768. 
 ••!•■«', 1027. 
 
 ••908, 951 
 132, (;32.' 
 •920. I ((.32. 
 240, 49.3, 538. 575. 
 
 12, 441. 
 908, 951. 
 
 802. 
 
 637, 785. 
 '353. 
 
 176, 400. 
 '"''», 528. 
 • ;218, 811. 
 . . !78. 
 
 ■;{26, 255, 090. 
 605 1017. 
 645J7O. 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 '•). 
 
 • ■ |377, 6«6. 
 1. 
 27. 
 
 '-". "M, lOli.'. 
 27.'J, ,s;fi. 
 
 .'(18. 
 1007. 
 .121(5. 
 
 00 10, .-US, ti;) 
 •*■>!', IG7, 4h':. 
 70. 
 
 ^.;7, .•J27, 74(i. 
 •*4(i, (i.S2. 
 
 /|"".-'0-',W;),.V.O,58,S. 
 282. 
 li-'O, 222, (i!»,v 
 
 778. 
 
 i;w, 7!i.'i. 
 
 !l(i8. 
 • !•>'''•">. I00!». 
 
 122, 722. 
 
 tl)2. 
 "07. 
 ;97. 
 SH'X 
 
 •">•■<(), 8<»(i. 
 
 1809, 
 
 «09, <}.^o, f),^!) 
 
 [5()5, 814. 
 '02, !)8!». 
 
 7(i, 00. 
 
 3;i0, 418. 
 '3-'i-">> 42;<, 789. 
 •>•">«, 101 1. 
 •-'08, 44,3. 
 710. 
 719. 
 
 -'44, 7(18. 
 <■■«', 1027. 
 '08, (),'-, 1. 
 
 '^^, 032. 
 
 0-'(i, 1(I.S2 
 
 ;jO, 4!);i, .5.S8, r,7-,. 
 
 2, 441. 
 OS, (lol. 
 112. 
 37, 78.5. 
 
 y.i. 
 
 id, 4(»(i. 
 
 >.'}, r)28. 
 
 8, 81 J. 
 
 '- 25,'), 99(5. 
 17. 
 
 Z7ll 
 
 Cam-Car] 
 
 Vamk i)f (.'.vsi;. 
 
 Vol.f.MK AND l'A(iK. 
 
 ('(W.i-Mv UK Hkikst. 
 
 ('ampl](;ll V. Ilocliu 
 
 ('iini|iliolI V, Scdit 
 
 ';"''I'|"'1I .111,1 Villai-',. of LanaiU.'i:,! 
 ( .iiM|)l)ell, \\ i|y,,|| V. 
 
 CiUia.Ui, .Airiil.Mit Ast.. Co./KastiiViiio v'.'. 
 Cuimd.'i Atluutic I;. \V, Ci 
 
 irnnliiiau v. j 
 
 (Jiiiiiiilii Atliiiiti(: .^.S. Co., Voik V 
 CiU.iulH ll.uik \„tu C'o. V.' Toronto R. \v'. Co ' 
 (unada l)(„mMioi, of, v. IVuvin^s of Ontario 'l 
 
 and (,)n(lji;(; 
 
 Gmadu Invistnient au.l Ag;.ncyCo.', Mcfirecor v, 
 Caninia Lan.ka and Xational Investment Co. 1 
 
 ) 
 
 ix.A.i;.(ii(;,2i.s.c. i;.(54r)'7o. 
 
 . ,' '■• ''■ -"■•< • • . .'MfS, 402. 
 
 7? ;V ••'<■- • • 110, noi. 
 
 i;;i:ir.iS2.s.o.R.oiHS'"'''''^'- 
 
 -■"I <». K. -joo, 22 A It 1 
 21)2, 2,-. S. C. I!. 205 ' 
 
 •22 S. 
 ■2-2 A 
 
 C. R. 107 
 H. 4(52 
 
 24 .S. 
 
 (". R. 4!IS 
 
 21 ,S. 
 
 C. R. 499 
 
 22 A. 
 
 R. ;i77 
 
 24 0. 
 
 1!. (!07 
 
 849. 
 
 ■.|10S. C. R. 204 ; 
 
 ( '.'4 ( I. R. 42(1, 25 (3. R. \ 
 
 i' 071, 2;5 A. R. 
 -'2 A. R. 515 
 
 •-'2 0. R. 41 
 •2\ A 
 
 } 
 
 . 2i7, 24 S. C. ■> 
 
 ' .. .. / 
 
 .'5 Kv.j'. R. 157, 24 S. C. \ 
 
 \ R. ;50!i 
 
 V. iSliavor 
 Ciuiada r.ifu As.s. Co., (irahani v 
 (.'auiiiUi N. W. L,„„i Co., Lyiioh v. 
 
 Canada IVnnanont L. k ,S. Co., Pierce v. 
 
 Cana.ja Reini;uieiit L. &. H. Co. v. Todd 
 
 ( anada Sldppin.t,- Co.'s Case-Re Central Bank: 2? ()" R 5|-, 
 
 Canada Sou l.ernR, W. Co., City of Windsor v 'V. A R iSS 
 
 Falls ^^'- ^"' ''■ ''"^v-n of Niagara! 
 
 Canada .Southern K. W. Co., 'W'eallean.s v. ' 
 
 Canadian Aurienllniv.l Cal and Colonization 
 
 ( o. V. llu.' (itneen 
 ([anadian H.-ink of CoMinieree, .Moody v" 
 
 anadian Rank of C,,nin.eroe, Steveiison'v 
 Canadicn jJank of ( 'ominerce v. Tinnio" 
 
 anadjan .Mutnal Aid Ass'n, Rednion,!";-. 
 ' ana.lian I'aeilie .Navigation C. v. Tlie C 
 
 !•. Siu'geiit 
 Canadian I'aeili,; I;. W. Co.', Raid win v'. ' 
 Canadian I'aeific R. U'. Co., Bale v. 
 
 Canadian I'a.ilieR. W. Co. v. Cl,aIifoux 
 ;u.a, .an ao,l,e R. W. Co., Ci.yof Vancouver y 
 anadan I'aeilic 1!. W. Co. v. Col.I.an 
 Canadian IVillc R. \V. Co., Cohhau v . .' ', 
 
 Canadian I'.aciHe 1!. \V. Co., D^aney v. . 
 ('anadian I'aeilic R. \V. Co., \)nncan v 
 C uia, lan Pacilic I!. W. C„. v. Fk.,„i„,,. ' 
 anadian I'aeilic R. W. C,,., Ilollinger v. 
 ( ana, lan I'aeilic R. \V. ( •„., M,.rrotv v 
 Cana, han I'aeilic R. W. Co., Municipality of 'l 
 
 • .'<-'-', 7;54, 7.'}9, 74.'?. 
 . 2(i(J. 
 
 .J 71, 5.38. 
 
 H02S. 
 I 
 jC6(5. 
 
 r>-2r,. 
 
 56, 1(52, IGG. 
 
 51(5 
 
 I 
 
 R. 71.3 
 U I". R. 258 
 -'••< .S. C. R. .-,;iO 
 15 P. R. 4(»1 
 1 18 A. R. ;!.3.5 
 
 ''■^ Kn. C. I!. .■5.32 
 
 / 
 
 081, 860. 
 
 \-2, 107, 110. 
 
 88, 458. 
 ,50, 52, 7.32. 
 
 |389, C2.3, 857. 
 jl44, CI 9, 858. 
 308, 659. 
 
 Canadian I'acifio R. \V. Co. and Na'tional C'lui,, Re 2t O. R 20; 
 Canailian Pacific R. W. Co.' v. Rol.in.son ' '^'-^ ^- <^^- "•<•' 
 
 .'-'•-' O. R. (jpj 
 yjl4 0. R. (52,5, 1.5 A. R 
 I 3S8, 18 S. C. R. (ii)7 
 ■.^•-' -*. C. R. 721 .. 
 •-'3 ,S. C. R. I 
 '•-'-' .S. C. R. 1.32 
 ••i<> l>. R. 7;;2, 23 A. R 
 ,•-'1 O. R. 11 
 
 [•-'I O. R. .355 
 
 -'-'S. C. R. ;53 
 
 ^'1 O. R. 705, 20 A. R. 244 847." 
 
 21 A. R. 149 .. ..!4,2; 
 
 S. C, R. 702 . 
 
 ..79. 
 71. 
 
 4()4, 576. 
 |.521. 
 
 J5;?6, 896. 
 
 ,591. 
 
 jP-'O, S42. 
 
 12(1, 848. 
 
 108, 313, 851. 
 .. 741, 9,52. 
 115 125, 841. 
 1,^:^2. .5.39, 626, 
 \ (578, (584. 
 . . 843. 
 
 8. 845, 949, 976. 
 
 671, 
 
 738. 
 
 '5') 
 
 Cana,lian Pacific R. W. Co., Tolton v. 
 Cana,han I'aeilic R. W. Co. v. Town,ship of '/ 
 ( nathani . '■ [■ 
 
 Cana,li u. Pacilic R. W. Co^ wJli.onrne v. ' 
 Canadim Packing (V)., Pauley v 
 C ana,i,laigua Lodges <;raliaiii 'v. ' . 
 
 Caiic, Hewitt V 
 
 Canii v. Knott '.'. 
 
 < ;aiiiiiir an,l City of Torouto, Forsvtli v 
 
 Cannon, Ke— Oat^s v. Cannon 
 
 19 S. C. R. 292, [1892 
 
 A. C. 48 1 
 22 O. R. 204 .; 
 
 •-5 O. R. .1(55, 22 A. R 
 
 .•!30, 25 S. C. R. COS 
 16 P. R. 343 
 '-'I A. l;. 11!) 
 !-'4 (). R, 2.55 
 -'<>(). R. l;53 
 lOO. R. 422, 20(). R. 294 4,3 
 
 • . j355, 446, 603. 
 j ;320, 855, 923. 
 
 ..j326,.381, 508, 861, 1003. 
 j j7l;5. 
 
 •■1128,403,796. 
 •192,876. 
 .14,59, 10,39. 
 •:397, 421, 6i2. 
 
 •-0 (). R. 478 
 14 P. l;. -.02 
 
 (I ,i — -^■.. .. i.tLiiiiiiii . . ! I ^i \» i» r,i\.i 
 
 jl«S. C. R,(139 
 
 Cape P.reton, County of, v. Mclvav 
 
 C.^poiiv. City of Toronto.. .' . io,; n ,> ,-. 
 
 t a'-;td,iC, i'ownsiiip of, v. T-nvn.ship of \r„t..aIf.V."l (> > 'in;- 
 
 <;u-iy!e,R.3R,.sbaoha„d;; :; ;; ••li^S:!?:^' •■ • 
 
 C umicliael, Rogers v. 
 
 
 . 1-2 10. R. 65S 
 
 ■:048, 727. 
 . '80S. 
 . 53. 856. 
 •ii'31, 932. 
 . |48. 
 . ;706. 
 ■ loss, 828. 
 
 227, 229, 230. 
 
 |44, 644. 
 
 ..11019. 
 
xvlU 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Cuir V. CorHi'ld 
 
 Can-JLT . 'I'he (^upen v. ', ' 
 
 Ourroll V. Frounian 
 ''iin-oll, Mcliii,],' V. ' 
 
 <>nS,:;i.s!''Ma:;:it;'!..^"^'"-''' '-'-■'•'•• 
 
 (ar.sc-.illi.i), Kiiipcy V. 
 
 Caisoii, CoatMu-oitli v. 
 
 Car«oM, Miirtlny v. . . 
 
 ('arsiiii V, SiiiipHoii 
 
 C'artiir v. Clark.soii . ,' 
 
 Cnrtor v. Stone 
 
 Carter & Co. v. Hamilton .' .' 
 Carter. Maey, I (Jo. v. Tl.o (,)ucon 
 Carton v. liVadburn 
 
 Casey, ilortoii v, 
 
 Casey v. Alonlcn 
 
 20 (). K. 
 
 • 12 Kx. O. 
 
 • |2 Kx. C. 
 
 .•-'.') (». i; 
 •I1-* I', li, 
 
 • III! I', it 
 •!-'•■•(). li 
 ■'-'4 0. 1(, 
 
 24 (). I; 
 -'0 S. (;, 
 !.") (). i; 
 
 '•"' I'. H. :m 
 '-'<» (). I!. :m 
 
 ,,-'••* '^^ C.I!. 17l' ' 
 I 2Kx.(.'. U. 12(i, 18 
 
 } I ';. "o(i . . 
 
 ir> 1". R. 147 
 -'2 S. C. H. 739 
 If) r. R. 107 
 
 UiS 
 It. .•{(! 
 II. 101 
 
 •_'s;{ 
 
 70.. 
 
 -.IS 
 
 •J7!» 
 
 , tins 
 
 . IS5 
 I!. (W4 
 .'iS.1 
 
 N. C. 
 
 ~ — --J ••*'* WHICH . . '-■'''■ ^- l\. /«! 
 
 Casgniin v. Atlantic ami Nortl.-UV.f K w /V '.'' ''• K. I'-'7 
 Cassady, Fisher v. , ' '^- ^^ • ' "• if ' «!'•'' I A. C. og 
 
 Casseltnan V. iWrie " " " • • |I4 I' R. -)77 
 
 Cassidy, Von v. 
 Ca.sUenian (Jruene and Son's (V, \- 
 
 c;::[o:;vi:ir'' '''■■'- ''^'^'''----^ 
 c=it,K"K;,^"^'--^-'^" •■ 
 
 CentranSanlv V. (larland " 
 
 Central liank, Re--Ho„,o Saving" ^I.li 
 
 14 I 
 
 ISS. C. 
 
 ,25 (). R 
 14 1'. 1; 
 
 '14 P. li, 
 
 I'^O O. 1; 
 
 '2(1 A. R. 
 
 20 0. 
 
 •-'"O. ... 
 ■ « <-'ase,21 O. I;. ,5 
 Loan ' 
 
 .107 
 
 R. 71."? 
 
 113 
 l;.47.. 
 li. 222 
 1;. ();i2 
 K. .'Kit 
 !>'. 142, 
 R. 214 
 
 15 
 
 IX A. R. 4;jS 
 
 Co. 'a Case ° """" Ul<j \ r> il.,> 
 
 gntralRank.Re V,aU,,,;. •• n'«A.R.4M, 
 
 Centra lank, 1:,. U'at.son-.s Case " 
 Central Counties R. W (',, i.„ .> ., • , 
 
 Ch.lifoux,0.,adianl.ae!t:^^'^,l 7 -■;""' 
 Cianil.erland v. Fo.tier '• 
 
 Ciand.er.s v. Kitchen 
 
 J lanihers an.l Toun.sliip of Ruriord I',". ' 
 
 Chamhers Townsldpof'Rnrforlv. ■''' 
 l.'liandlar, Martni v ' ' 
 
 Chandler Kleetrio Co. V. Fuller ■ ■ 
 
 C laphn, Hathauav v " ' " ' ' "' '^^ C^- «• ;W7 
 
 J-iapIin, Ontario li,,nk V ' " •' • 'I- '«.('. R. 2;{ 
 
 ( liapnum v. darvi.s 
 
 Cliapnian v. Xewell 
 
 Cl.a.^iu.,1 V. The gneen 
 
 CharleboLs, Delap v. 
 
 ■ '22 O. R 
 ■15 P. R 
 
 ■Hi P. R, 
 . '22 S. C. 
 .-'.•iS. ('. 
 .'KiP. R. 
 ■ (25 0. R. 
 !25 0. R. 
 !2(iO. R. 
 
 . 24 
 
 42 
 
 Hi 
 R. 721 
 R. .S7I 
 2 111 
 27(i 
 
 (;(!.•{ 
 
 SI 
 
 Hi I'. I!. 
 
 17 P. R. 
 
 Charlel,ois v. (ireat Xorth-WestR \X 
 Charles, Regina V. 'csni. \\ , 
 
 Charles Stark Co., i'o '' 
 
 Co. 
 
 CJiarlotte, County of, Town of *^h ' yf„ i " 
 
 Charlt.mv.The(^olokd:a;.:i',t.nS'::;^: 
 ^'iiase, iSnnpaon V. m-uce 
 
 Clutfiuld v. Cunningham ' 
 
 cM:"''^ftio„alRankv:^r,K;.;n '' 
 
 CIutlun^^lo.vnsh,p of, Canadian PaeilieR. 
 
 Chiek, Roginaex- rel., v 
 Chdlnian, Re 
 Chisholmand Logic,' Re 
 Chisholni V. Robinson 
 Chown, Fowell v. 
 
 ■Smith 
 
 •-'0 'S. C. R. 152 . 
 
 )'-2(). 1;. u 
 
 MM'. R. 208 
 I I'.'v. C. R. 291 
 15 1'. R. 45 
 15 P. Ji. 142 
 15 P. R. .•)25 
 l'"'!'. n. 10.. 
 24 O. R. 4;)2 
 ir)!'. li. 471 
 R. 451 
 C. 1{. .•J29 
 C. 1:. 203 , . 
 R. 2H0 
 R. 15.S 
 • • '•-' f S. (' R. 34S ' ■ 
 I j25 (». 1;. 4(j-,, 02 A R 
 
 S I -■«". 25 S. C. R. GOS ■ 
 V. 21 S. C. R. :?o,-, 
 
 •-,-'<' .^. C. R. 174 ■ 
 
 ■•,220. R. 279 
 
 •■125 0. R. 2(iS 
 
 ■•|"iR 1;. !(i2 
 •|21S. C. R. 704 " 
 •i2oO. R. 71, 22 A. R. 2G8 
 
 15 P. 
 
 124 S. 
 3 Kx. 
 !l4 P. 
 23 O. 
 
 '407, 990. 
 
 -'7(;, 2SI, 283. 
 I.'io. 
 
 73(i. 
 '('70, 97s. 
 
 •")II9, SI I. 
 
 20(», 9(i4. 
 
 ^43, 974. 
 1102.5. 
 
 1002. 
 
 1 434, 454. 
 W^'i, <i74, 7fi7. 
 "7, 4;«, 6S5. 
 7s;). 
 
 Isos. 
 
 211. 
 
 (i22. 
 .'io. 
 
 03, S5G. 
 !'7, SI.-,. 
 
 574. 
 
 flS. 
 
 107, 1.39. 
 219, .544. 
 .34S, 41(». 
 700. 
 
 01, 799. 
 89, i;i(i. 
 150, 509. 
 S.S, 458. 
 
 !»3, 150. 
 
 |!)3, I.-,4. 
 
 .5.S0. 
 
 20, ^\. 
 
 120, 848. 
 
 ('54, 1014. 
 
 433,438, 8S1. 
 1120, 7M, 1012. 
 3;!, 482. 
 11024. 
 735. 
 419. 
 
 f I, 153, 15.-,, 957. 
 SI, 107. 
 -'41, 77S. 
 279, 282. 
 
 . I24^ 400. 
 
 . 578." 
 . .551. 
 .159,914. 
 . 1!», 2.54. 
 , 1548. 
 
 11^302, 303, 307, 
 
 l-!i), 1.5S. 
 |7I.S'. 
 
 II. 
 
 Ki. 
 702. 
 01. 
 '903. 
 313, 
 782, 783. 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Coi.r.Ms OK DtuKsT. 
 
 407, OOfl. 
 
 T.'iC. 
 
 <»7(i, !)7S. 
 'iOil, Sll. 
 -'(Ml, >)IH, 
 
 »■•), !)74. 
 
 IO()i>. 
 
 '<■">.■;, <!74, 7fi7. 
 '>7, rXi, G,s5. 
 'Ki. 
 
 |sus. 
 
 211. 
 
 (I'L'l.'. 
 
 L';i(i. 
 
 ..|(';), s,i(j. 
 
 1!'7, SI,-.. 
 ."4. 
 flS. 
 
 107, I.-?!), 
 -'lit, ,111. 
 .|.'«S, .lUK 
 
 I'm, 
 |0I, 7!)!). 
 
 i.Ti, noo. 
 
 SS, -JoS. 
 
 !»;}, I.-.O. 
 
 !).•?, 1,54. 
 
 VSO. 
 -'(i, .■^I. 
 12(i, S4S. 
 !».')4, 101 t. 
 4.'i.'i, i;w, SSI. 
 I-'O, 7M, 101-2. 
 
 I(CJ4. 
 7.S.I. 
 411). 
 
 01, I -).•), 
 ^1. J07. 
 -'41, 77.S. 
 ^70, '2S-2. 
 
 I.V), !)J7. 
 
 !4, 4(J(). 
 
 !2,j. 
 
 7S. 
 
 ,51. 
 
 ")!), 014. 
 
 'I, •-•.">4. 
 
 W. 
 
 <0. 
 
 ». .S(ii', ;«;;{, ,^07, 
 
 10. 
 
 0, I.5S. 
 
 :, 788. 
 
 CliriMtiuii V. Thu .St. Joseph 
 • 'liiJMtio, City of ,S|. .loliii V, 
 Cliiisti,. V. City of Toioiito ' 
 
 ClinsHoMn.l Town of Toronto .Jnni'tion, Uc 
 rinircli V. City of dttawii.. 
 Chiiivh V. Linton . . 
 CInnvli, (^)nifk v. 
 
 I'hnivlnll V \lc.Kay Ko Tl.c (,)ncl,oo .[ 
 
 ( mioM, lltgiiiii V, . . 
 
 (^iti/cns' In.s. Co., Anlill v.' [' 
 
 (.'itiz(!n.s' Jns. Co., (irinn v. .' 
 
 Citizens' Ins. Co. v. .Saltoiio 
 
 City .Mutual Fiio Ins. Co 
 
 City Mutual Ins. C 
 
 SOi}, 
 0, 7l'(I. 
 .■>(». 
 
 71 IN. 
 
 •■< Kx. C. 1;. ;ut .. 
 ••>'IS. C. I!. I 
 •■ -'•">! ». R. .|ii.-,, ()(„i.. 
 ■■ I-' I'. 1;. 41.5 
 \ -i 0. H. 44;i, •_'•_' .A 1' y 
 ( ! -'I, '.',5 S. C. 1;. .-,,-,1 ■ •'*'•. •■)•-'■ .'IS, 4I!I, OSS. 
 
 • -•'< •». 1;. -jii'j ' ■ Tss' 
 
 •-"■^•C. H. 17--' ;.■ .".s-'o'.Kii 
 ■ -';i ,S. c. 1;. <iL' .. i,v) • 
 
 l*<S. C. K. .•(;)*< _.j- 
 
 L'Ui'licn V, . 
 lit' -Stuifolnieyei 
 
 (. ity ot I'uchlii, llie 
 
 "s ( 
 
 (/'lancey v. \'onn'' . . 
 ••lark, Ito ., 
 Clark, Darlicr v. 
 Clark V. Harbor, Ku ' 
 ('lark V. Campbell . . 
 Clark V. Ilai,'ar 
 < 'lark V. Me( ;iellan .' .' 
 Clark, McLean v. . . 
 Clark, Tlie (,)ueen v. 
 Clarke v. Cooper 
 
 Clttrko V. Cicighton 
 
 Claike and Holmes, Ke 
 CUrke V. Maedonell 
 f'larko, Regina v. . . 
 Clarke, .Seanimell v. 
 Clarke V, The (,lneen 
 
 •• -'••is. C. |{. i,v, 
 ■ ISA. I!. 44(J 
 
 "X"- -'4 (). I!. 100 
 
 • ■ •-'•■! S. C. H. ;;:> 
 
 ■ • •'< I'-t. C. K. ■_'(! 
 
 ■•,1"> I'. R. 2 IS 
 
 ••14 1'. R. ;!7() 
 
 115 •■:■ -"is ■■''*■ -'^^ ■*^-i''*"'- 
 
 ->>■(■ R. ..10 .. I170, (i(is. 
 
 Clark.son, Carter v. 
 C'Jarkson v. Dnpre . , ,[ 
 
 CLarkson v. McMaster 
 
 Clark.son, Thompson v. 
 Clarris, Dislier v. . . 
 
 Claxton, (,)ueen'.s CoiWe V 
 
 Cleary v. I'nrcell . . 
 
 Clemens, Kllis v. . . 
 
 Clemow, Mc-CuUou-h v. ' 
 
 Cleveland, Lunb v. •• . . . 
 
 C|levelan(l Press v. Klemin-' 
 
 ( linch V. I'ernctte . ° • • . . 
 
 C;lo.se V. 'JV.wu of Woodstock ' ' 
 
 Llouse V. Coleman . " ' " • 
 
 (.oatsworth, Bennett ^■._i;■e Ferguson ' ' 
 
 Coatsworth v. Carson 'o»«"" .. 
 
 Cobban, Canadian 1-aellie R.W (■•;,. . '• 
 -obban V. Canadian IViiie \l.\y Co ' ' 
 < Di'kburn v. (j>uinn.. « . <-o. . . 
 
 Codd V. Delap . . ' ' 
 
 Codd, Keen v. ,[ 
 
 Coe V. (,'oe. Re 
 
 ( 'olley, Seano v. 
 
 Coiley V. Seane . . [' 
 
 '■;o!lln V. Xorth American Land ''•■, 
 I olehester Xortli, Townshiu < ' T " , • ' ' 
 
 of Anderdon and ^ J <nvnah.p ) 
 
 Colchester South, Township of, v. Valad ' 
 
 .. 51.5. 
 . . ;514. 
 .. .52a, i,:n. 
 
 .. -.14. 
 . . SSi). 
 ..2.5(., .547. 
 
 . . '(i;i7 
 
 .'•-'|().I!.(;s;!,-joa;i;. ,,io: 
 
 14 1'. R. 
 
 n, lod . 
 
 Hi I', 
 
 OJ 
 
 ••'l-"> I'. R. 10.5 
 ••'•') p. R. ■_'()!(, 
 ••;-'0(). R. .5(i4 
 ••;-'0(). R. (iJ2 
 ••l^.'KS. C, R. ;i((7 
 ••I K.v. C R. is^.' 
 ••2 Kx. C. n. 141 
 fl'i I'^x. V,. R. 1 
 1 1 It. (1.5(J .. 
 • • l.T I'. R. .•{70 
 ••|1() P. R. -.21 
 {PA.R.„S,25S:C.R.| 
 
 ••i-1 •». H. 421 ■ 
 
 •••-'.">(). R. 4();i 
 
 ■•'-'•■><). R. 2S2 
 ■ l-'.'J.'^^. C. R. 101 
 
 -'I S. V.'\ 
 J 
 
 ;,'!!• f:- 7:1' --'»•':• ^iiii()()7, 
 
 (i.5. 
 
 .•!02, 77(i. 
 
 '.^•■>, 2(i, 42(1, i)(iO. 
 
 Hi, -.(i;{, (i7(i, Hi;}. 
 
 ;i4, IS, -JO, e;ii, 2;i2, 
 
 I 4;U, !)I0. 
 
 2:i(i, ■j4;f. 
 
 2;i2, 1)04. 
 
 :.50;i, (i2,S. 
 
 .5.57. 
 
 74)i. 
 .•112. 
 1S7, 417. 
 
 ;2.5, 2(i, 42(1, mo. 
 
 S.55, (i74, 7(i7. 
 :"7. 4S4, 817. 
 
 74, 112. 
 
 75, 70. 
 
 4f;;}, <)i)j. 
 
 (!S2. 
 
 H):i;{, 10.-J4, io;i(j. 
 
 .i^iiO. R, .107 
 •ilOS. C. R. 7S 
 ■\-2iO. R. .•i.T. 
 
 -'4 S. (;. R. ;w.-, 
 
 -'•■i O. R. !»!) 
 
 I'i ]'. H. 4!)(i, 341 
 
 2-5 O. R. .-,!)I 
 
 -'4(). R. ls,5 
 
 i-'-'S. C. R. l;{2 
 
 •-^(iO. R. 7;y, 
 
 •■iOO. R. -,|!, 
 
 ir' 1'. R. .•!74 
 
 14 P. R. 1,S2 
 ;-'l <). R. 10!) 
 
 I-") I'. R. 112 
 pO. R.--'-.', 22A.1;. 
 ilii P. R. .•J07 
 -'1 <). R. SO 
 
 -'10... .70 
 
 •■24 S. C. R. C22 . . 
 
 r>42. 
 
 •-'07, ;i(iO, 407, 9;il 
 
 .•iOO. 
 
 (iOO. 
 
 7:10. 
 
 ,4o;i. 
 . 102.5. 
 
 ..402,5. 
 ..741,9,52. 
 A. R. 1|-. 12.5, S41. 
 . . 04. ,-.i)0. 
 
 I7S, 210. 
 
 . .•{.->(>, .500, 07:1. 
 . . ;})(!). 
 . . 40, 200. 
 •209 40, 41,639. 
 . . 224. 
 . . 022, 
 
 ..|713. 
 
 ..!2G, 810. 
 
zz 
 
 TABLE or OASES. 
 
 ("M«oll, I'liMiiincr V 
 ''oil! V. IliiM.lo 
 <'l'll', .McAlliHttT V. " 
 
 ('(lie V. I'orti.'oiiH 
 CdIu, He 'I'ijiliii' V 
 t'olenwinv. Il»nl „f Monimtl 
 toleinan v. City „t 'l'„n,nto 
 
 <'')lemiiii, CliiiiNij v. ■• .. 
 « 'oilier V, \\ri>,-|it ..' 
 
 ■ l.'l'. R. IH 
 
 • -"•». i;. i.'7'» 
 I'f I'. II. Id,-, 
 
 ■ I!' A. li. Ill 
 
 ■ -'I ". U. -'ji 
 I" I'. K. I,-,!) 
 
 /-'■•J O. |{, ;(.,,-, 
 ''■■• I'. It. I'J,-, 
 '" I'. H. I!l(i, .')4I.' 
 
 -'1.5, '2lH. 
 
 «. I.-., ss;). 
 
 las.-,. 
 
 ,"•'<• >*•-'. »l (, !);)L'. 
 ;<7(>. 
 
 ,-'IS, 400. 
 07.'). 
 I-JO,-,. 
 
 < !"^'«o o I. Town of. i:„ M„|„,,,, ^ 
 _o i„s V. CiniMin-liaiu ^ 
 
 < "llillN, .M,||,.,.,],y" 
 
 ;;;;|;;;;};i-na,iyronTren.e,TI.;C'l,a.:ito„v: 
 
 Colville, TitiLs V. . . ■ • • • J 
 
 t'olviii V. Colviii , . 
 
 Coiifeiloration Life Ass'n v 'l-,t,- ,V -r " . 
 
 )-'0O. H. 
 
 •'lO, ;i!)(). 
 
 I.ifo An.s'ii 
 
 (''iiiifeilciation 
 
 Ilowaid 
 ConnicL' V. Wcidinun 
 
 conncii V. Tow':,;/'?:,.,';::,;,- '^'"■-"«'' 
 
 Connelly, Ilanilin v 
 
 Conncly, (;„anli„n I.is. C,',' v " 
 
 ConiK.lly, Ijella.ny v. 
 
 f.oniiolIy V. .Miincll 
 Connolly, l;..gi„a V. 
 Connolly, 'I'lie (^(,„,e„ ^._ ' ' 
 Connor v. Vroou 
 
 'J'own.sl,i,. ofiP'"- "■'''■' 
 .. il-^''0.lt.]<j7 
 
 ■ -•'• "• H. It'.-, |.,,.- 
 
 • ^iN.c. i;. i;i!) ;; ••:!/;;• 
 
 -•fio. II. 10, ;• 'g'' 
 
 ,;-^-'^-^" ■• :fc49a 
 
 «■''«■ p. R. 700 .. 
 
 '■i-' <'. R. 142 ••b;,- 
 
 -fO. K. (,,;), 22 A. R. J(i(i4.,, .t5. 
 
 700. 
 
 
 
 C'ook V. Ikl.'iliaw 
 
 Cook V. Shaw 
 
 Cook V. Tato 
 
 Coonoy, Fenst (3r v 
 C'oopur, (,'larko v. 
 Coopir, M.i.son v. . 
 Coojifr, MoLsona liank v. 
 
 Cooper, Re Sliepl,i^nuii,l ' ' 
 Cope V. O.po 
 CorlicM, Can- v. 
 Cf>i'iiiack, Rc.^<iii,i v! ' 
 Coi'nell V. Nniith 
 
 Cornwall, Town .,f, Derochic v. . 
 Cornwallis, Mnniripality of v 
 
 Corndan V. Wilkinson 
 
 Corse V. 'I'liu (jiiecn 
 
 Cosby, Regina y. 
 
 Cosmopolitan ( '/usual ty Ass'n Re ' 
 
 Co.SM.opolitanLifeAs^n.Ro''^'- '■ 
 
 Cossette v. Dim 
 
 Costa Rica, 'J'he 
 
 Cotton, Shaver v. " 
 
 Couette V. The Queen .' ' 
 
 Cougblin, Oray v 
 CouLson, He IliinnaV- 
 Conlson, Regina v. 
 Coulthard, U'isnor v' 
 
 Con:^f^S^°?"''«"^«'-nbia,Re:: 
 
 f*. I!. 207 
 20 S. { '. K. •_>os 
 I."' 1'. R. X- 
 '"'• K. 187,270" 
 
 --' O. R. -JO 
 
 ;-»'^. c. i;. 70J :: 
 
 Canadian 
 
 I 
 
 -'••i<>. i{. r,i,. 
 
 -•>'». R. 124 
 -'" O. Ji. 40.') 
 ■ I'. R. 290 
 
 I'. R. ,'-,4 
 '•"' I'. R. 4IS 
 "i I'. K. 1!),-, 
 
 R. r,7.5, 
 . -'74 
 ,-') O. i;. 441 
 -"(). R. 2I,S 
 -' ". R. 2i;! 
 'lH'. i;. 27,-, 
 -'•■i (). R. .•!-„-,, 
 -70, 2tS. (', 
 
 R>S. c. Ji. 702 
 
 , !."iO, 90.1. 
 
 I.-) Mi. 
 
 (10, 909. 
 
 |.'^!»9, 402. 
 
 '•-'<!'). ;202, 207. 
 
 i-<i-'. -.m, 04-5. 
 
 994. 
 
 4.'). 
 
 |0I2. 
 
 2.-,7. 
 
 4,^2. 
 
 22;{. ;)-,2. 
 
 10, ,-i(i;v, 070, SI.-}. 
 J^'H,.771. 
 
 23 A. 1!. I40!)o,''i:}(;_ 
 
 L'f04. 
 
 21 A. R, 
 R. .-iOl 
 
 -OA. R. ist 
 ■'< J'-v. C. R. l.'{ 
 -I <>. R. .Wl 
 !■> 1'. R. KS.-i 
 15 1'. R. 1,S.-, 
 IS S. (j. H. •'•>•> 
 •'^ l'-\-. C. R. 2,'r ' 
 KJ I'. R. 27S 
 •'< '-'x. 0. R. .S2 
 '««. O. K. .-.,-,;{ ■ 
 '-'•'JO. R. 4();{, 21 \ 
 l-'f (). R. 240 
 , !S. C. R. !7s •• 
 ■2IS. C.R. 440 ■■ 
 
 '.S49. 
 ,'04, 20.-i 
 42;(, 7S9. 
 I"><i, 244. 
 I •"•'», 244. 
 '■■i21, .'C.'^, 944. 
 •■>•■«, 89.-,, 998. 
 I4:{. 
 
 I''J».'5, .'■).•{.■;, 890. 
 ,'^77, 007. 
 •i9-V'i02, .•!07, .•)71. 
 . . !2;i7, .-,,S4, o.-.s. 
 ..I7.S2. 
 '(i4, 207. 
 
 120 0. R, rw- .V-o-n ,«i' r--«' 
 
 iOA. R. 203 :: ;.ia4.^'^"- 
 
 D. A. 
 
 I'agen: 
 
 Dakin, 
 
 Daley ' 
 
 Dalryn 
 
 Dame \ 
 
 I >aneey 
 
 Daniel, 
 
 I )anseri 
 
 Uavelu; 
 
 C'oi 
 
 Davidsc 
 
 Davidac 
 
 Davidsc 
 
 Davie, ( 
 
TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 <'"MMN ,„,• |),„E,s,-. 
 
 xti 
 
 -.21.1, '.MM. 
 
 . . m.-,. 
 • ■•■». **•-•, 411, m'2. 
 
 ■ ■ .'iTo. 
 •■ f-'lN, 40(J. 
 . . 07.1. 
 . . 40.'5. 
 
 . . ma. 
 
 NJ-J-JO, 890, 9,S0. 
 I')0, .■)9(). 
 ■Mi-,. 
 
 (f7;{. 
 
 . rs,s!i. 
 r.ii. 
 
 |.'l'l-', -199. 
 
 w:i.\ 
 
 l>|t ». 43. 
 'ill-', 70(1. 
 
 :o, ,•{.-(). 
 
 |.S'-'7. 
 ■|7."{9. 
 
 |-';to, 90,1. 
 I.">l(i. 
 1 10, 909. 
 i."i99, Ufj. 
 '•-'(iO, U'(i:.>, •.>(i7 
 -'I-, :i'.m, (i),-, 
 
 994. 
 4.".. 
 II I L'. 
 -',-.7. 
 t,-iL>. 
 
 .'L',s. ;{-)L'. 
 
 li, '>(i:i, (i7(>, S1.S. 
 i|.'s.*771. 
 
 '7.V 
 
 0, i;jo. 
 
 (U. 
 
 74, (iL';j. 
 
 'i7, 999. 
 
 ro. 
 
 M. 
 
 
 
 i, 7S9 
 
 
 i. L'44 
 
 
 , 244 
 
 
 , :ir>H, 
 
 944 
 
 , 89.-!, 
 
 998. 
 
 .'■..•i.-,, 
 
 S9(5. 
 
 li()7. 
 
 
 .•ili7. 
 
 .'^71. 
 
 .".S4, 
 
 (i.")S. 
 
 :.'(i7. 
 
 
 SM, 
 
 S.S"). 
 
 Sll. 
 
 
 Oou-Dat] 
 
 Na.mk ok Vaxk, 
 
 Cousiiicivu V. I'ark . . 
 (.'.);itlH Ko . . 
 C'outtH V. Molds 
 CoHlim! V. liouclmni 
 Covciitty V. .\k'l.c:iii 
 Cowiiii V. .\llii', Ko. . 
 Couaii, iMoitoii V. , , 
 
 ('(IWCII V. KvilllH 
 
 it fS. Co. V. 
 
 CowieHon, .Midliuia L. 
 {-'ox, llogiilioom V. . . 
 Craliho v. llick;<oti . . 
 ( 'raig V. Saimifl 
 ('rain v. K'upplu 
 Ciaiii V. Hviiu 
 <'iMiio V. Hunt 
 Cranston v. Hlair. . 
 Cratinton. .Sklitz.sky v. 
 Crawford v. lirodify 
 
 Creighloa, Clarku v. 
 
 Cruighton V. Halifax lianlii'iiKCo'.' 
 ('roighton, K,.id v. . . 
 ( 'rowson, La»l)y v. . . 
 
 Oibbiii and City of Toronto, Ko" 
 
 Croc'kiT, (Jridltli v. 
 
 Cnxker, .\lcliityru v. .. 
 
 Crojl V. liuHsoll , . ,] ' ' 
 
 (..'rombio v. Vonng . . 
 
 Crooks, Ki.nwi.k v. -R,. ulinvick' 
 
 Crooks V. 'I'own.sliii, „f Klliuu 
 
 Crothura, Re 
 
 Crowf V. Ad.uii.H . . ' " [' 
 
 Crozier, 'rnrniT v. . . 
 
 Ondney v. (iivus . . 
 
 Cullurton v. Miilor. . 
 
 -aiuU',1 Mankin^' and Loan Co. 
 
 CuMiiiiiug V. 
 
 (•ununings and County of Cailcton, Ro 
 Cummings, .McDonald v. , . 
 Ciinurty, Regina v. 
 l>inninglian), Cliatfii'ld V. . ." 
 Cnnningliani, Collin.s v. ' " 
 
 <|nntiingliani v. Dryndale '.'. 
 Ciirrio v. vJurriu 
 
 Ciit(:li,Tho,KH,j„imJtandNanaimo R. \V C, 
 CuthbtTt V. North American Life A.ssum„ce 
 
 D. 
 
 IJ. A. Jones Co. , Re 
 
 Dagonais v. Town of Tronton !* 
 
 Dakm, Bickcrton v. 
 
 Daley v. Byrne . . 
 
 Dalryinple V. .Suott.. 
 
 Damo V. .Slater . . 
 
 Daneey v. Grand Trunk R.' \V. Co 
 Daniel, Re . • • . 
 I'iinsereau v. .St. f.ouis 
 
 Davcluy ^ociOte Canadienne-Fr'ancais; 
 Construction de Montreal v 
 
 Davidson, Burns v., 
 
 Davidson v. (Uird . .' 
 
 Davidson v. Taylor . . 
 
 Davie, Orrv. „ "" " 
 
 Vim I MK AM. I'.VOl,:. 
 
 Col.l MS ,,!•• DllJKST, 
 
 1.1 1'. R. ;J7.. 
 
 ..il.1l'. R. Hi-2 
 
 • Hi I'. I!. •J7;i 
 
 ■ •-'! S. C. R. •JSI 
 
 ■i '-'•-•<). it. I.L'l A. 
 
 . . -'4 0. I{. x;h. 
 
 '•'■') '». R. :<-2\). 
 
 •■i'-iS. V. R. -.i-JH 
 
 -'•-'.S. (,'. R. ;i;(| 
 
 -'DO. R. .w;i 
 
 li) I'. R. '.'.•I, li.'7 
 
 14 P. R. 4-.' 
 
 •-'4 S. C. R. 27S ;.■ 
 
 -'-'<». R. .-.19, L'O A. R. •J()i 
 
 -'4 (). I{. ,-,00, L',-, (». R. ,-,'i 
 
 -'Ul». R. (ill 
 
 !■-• !'. R. 107 
 
 -'•JO. R. rm 
 
 -J". R. o;i.-), l>2 A. R, 
 
 'l-t R. R. ;u, 100 .. 
 
 'l.> I'. R. 10.-. 
 IS.S. C. R. 140 
 1^4 ,S. C. R. 09 
 -'!(). R. !i;i. 
 -'I I). R. •_'.-.,-. 
 •-'I i». R. ;(•.'.-. 
 
 .•!7i» 
 
 .■i(i9 
 
 IS,-, 
 
 1!I4 
 
 :i(;i 
 
 R. 
 
 , ISA 
 
 ,•-'.'! O, R 
 
 . 14 1'. l; 
 
 i'(it). R 
 
 14 I'. R 
 
 '.".'11, '-"29, •.'.•lli. 
 44.-,, .-,0J. 
 ■JIJ. 
 . . ')-.'9, 94."). 
 I{. 170.. U7, r.9S, 91,-,. 
 ■'I:W, .'19,-,, 07.-.. 
 147, 4;i0. 
 94t;. 
 
 U.'fO, 9U. 
 107. 
 
 <l»-', 410, 990. 
 Ul. OlS. 
 
 >>;i, loo. 
 
 IIS. 
 
 '■-.'i, i.vi, 7,i;f, loot. 
 
 .'11' ), .■|,"i9. 
 •2-M, i-M. 
 
 •-'l.'i. •J;t9, 7.S9, IDII 
 •'!07 .iSI, lOL'O, lOJI 
 
 14, IS, -JO, •j;ii 
 l.'U, 910. 
 
 •2,'to, •_'(;). 
 I«7, 99, 774. 
 174, lUO. 
 
 I0i'4, lo.'i.-.. 
 
 199. 
 
 119, 7l'S, I) 10. 
 
 ii;;, 7S0. 
 
 .'174. 
 9SL'. 
 
 .'IJ. 
 
 { 
 
 n I-. n. .ii.i 
 
 -'OA. R. •.'•.>,■,, 2:{,S.c'.R. ^•»] 
 
 iii I'. R. .-..-.;j ;. ; 
 
 4, 407, 084. 
 
 !.■. 1'. R. 9:.' 
 •■ii .^. C. R.;il 
 14 P. R. 272 
 
 •20 (). R. 500 
 20 O. It. ;tO 
 19(). 
 1 9 A. 
 
 .... ;to 
 
 19(). R. 42i!.20O. K. ;!s» 1 
 tl7,-2.'.S.C R.24d; 
 ><>. It. 007,20 (). R. I 
 
 707, 7u9, 71 
 
 •24 S. C. i{. 3-21 
 
 20 0. R. .-,1 
 •2.'10. R. l.-,;t 
 -M .S. C. l; 
 
 21 ,S. C. R 
 21 .S. C. I! 
 l.'i Kx. C. R. 
 
 >, V ^^ 
 
 Co.J24 0. r! ,-,11 
 
 712 
 
 ;i02 
 
 p.) A. R. (» 
 
 de 1 
 
 24 O. 
 
 R. 
 
 .'U,-! 
 
 '20 0. 
 
 R. 
 
 192 
 
 15 P. 
 
 R. 
 
 4 
 
 19 A. 
 
 R. 
 
 477 
 
 21 O. 
 
 R. 
 
 :i7.-. 
 
 20 0. 
 
 R, 
 
 00,'^, 
 
 10 P. 
 
 R. 
 
 304 
 
 09.-. 
 
 19 A. R. 604 
 
 I8.S. C. R. 587 
 •20 .S. G. R. 1 49 
 
 21 0. R. 547 
 
 '< P. R. li] 
 14 P. R. 78 
 ..l'22 0. R. 430 
 
 O.i, 
 2.'f8. 
 227, 9o;{. 
 l.'!5, too, 887. 
 SS7. 
 
 ;il9. 910. 
 -., I9.S, 1004. 
 
 141,442,447,508,989, 
 992. 
 
 liSS, S2S. 
 
 S2, 408. 
 
 ■)55. 
 
 ('09. 
 
 mx 
 
 Ii7.'t, 
 
 705, lu.-jl. 
 890. 
 17, 529. 
 
 154, 155, 248, 230. 
 
 Ii44, 1001. 
 
 lilO, 017. 
 
 797. 
 
 190. 
 
 24;^, 494, 918. 
 
 ■ '7, 3-22, 842. 
 
 419, 525. 
 
 99, 701. 
 
 0, I, "58, fKiO, 942, 
 
 4.59, 407, 4S2. 
 i74. 
 
 i8, 302, 303, 910. 
 14, 017. 
 
TABLE or CASES. 
 
 j>"vi.-N V. (;iiln,,j 
 l'>^is, /ii'iitty \ 
 
 l^;:;^^""'tiity"'f Toronto; uo • 
 
 ItaviM, StLVUIIHOIl v.. 
 
 l)ttws,m V. l),„„o„t,. 
 
 J't'iitlj, .Moore V 
 
 I'oIol', A,slitlottn V. . 
 
 l>efoL', Hiowa V 
 
 Defof, I'ago V. 
 
 Ih'h-ii-H, Kf-iim V. .'.' 
 
 !>'-• KuypiT v. Van Dnikon 
 
 l^flauoy V. t,'aua,liH„ I'a.ilio K. W. (.,, 
 Uvlap V. Chiiilebois 
 
 l>«la|), Codil V, 
 
 Domers V. Tlie Queen 
 
 Denison, (;()n!oii v . 
 
 pfiiisoii V. Miiitluii,! 
 
 Deniaon, Ke--\VaMie V. /icnisou ' ^ 
 
 IJeroohiev. TownofConiHMii 
 
 Ik'smarteaii, HiirtiilM«c v 
 
 }M...^Jte,i,.exrel.Thon,tonv; ;; 
 
 l>uunoM,l(;]a«.sCo.,.Slmle V ' 
 
 'iclu'iisoii, .MclJoPaM V 
 ^'lokoiit, Ke^'ina v. . 
 iJickaoii, Walker \. 
 
 l>itlint)ii, Liiudor v. . 
 Hingmaii v. Harris . ." 
 i^iiiiiick, Morris v 
 
 JJin ' 
 
 ••^;:ii ,';<>.i!'A.n. .30':,. 
 
 •■^'<»0. li. ;,;,., 
 
 • •iKii'. 1;. in; 
 
 ••r'-'«». i(.(i,-,j 
 
 -I <>. I«. (il-J 
 
 l!» A. I!. 
 
 .,0(1(1. 
 
 «)!•, loni, 
 
 -'lU. (i!l,-|, 7.10 
 
 ^'1-', 7!».l. " ■ 
 
 Mi, (,S|. 
 
 P '^^ • '. I!. 70il 
 -«<». 1:. L'(l!» 
 • '-' "• '-'• .'(SO 
 -"". 1;. .-,.■(!( 
 "1 I'. I!. L'!l(i 
 ••['■'<!'>IA. C. (iio , 
 
 -I <». K. ,-,(;<), o| ... .,• j '^ 
 
 ; ■'(i,!.i7. 
 
 ■•I<*''l-', !N)0, !M.- 
 
 . ■•117. 
 . '■ «(i:t. 
 ■M'". 70'', 7!)t. 
 ii->7, )«i(i. 
 
 !».Jb. 
 
 -'I A. 1; 
 
 (ill. 
 
 •-'I'.", -MU, IS I, 
 
 I'-'d, !/(is, <)(;>), 
 
 •■'•■•-. •"•••*!', <)•-'(;, (i7 
 US t. 
 
 I7H, I'Ki. 
 
 Ili7, -MU. 
 
 -•■'<». I!, (i),-, 
 
 ' '■•"'.^fs.r.'i'Vu 
 
 •■ -'lO. K. II 
 
 • I"' I'. K. 4r, 
 • l"> f. I!. Ml' 
 ••'•"' I'. K. r.2r, 
 .. I;>l'. M. ;(74 
 ' •' '•'■>;. C'. 1;. oicj :,., s; 
 
 t (-'. R. 4SL' " 
 
 1 1 • ' 
 
 ■ • m O. H. .-,7(;, 02 ^ ,, .j, . I ..>();t, -,,s;{, (jj., - 
 
 ■•!-^0. K. I!I7 ■ •■|'.'.''^' 
 
 /!-•••' O. K. ;i.-M, 01 'a Kit 
 
 ■■!-'0A. If. 2^1) ■ 
 ••(-">0. K. Hi 
 
 ■ •l-<i<». li. .-,ll> 
 
 l,(>7s, 
 
 il.s. 
 
 i'7-', 
 
 -'4(». K, LV,o 
 '4 1'. K. .•u;{ 
 l-'O A. K. |),i 
 Hi I", k. 74 
 ,-'<i O. H. ,S4 
 -'>0. K. ooi 
 il«N. C R. 705 
 ^•t «. C. R. 451 
 
 litTV. Clarris , ' • •• /""'"• "• ' ■ 
 
 r^isher v. ('larris 
 
 K:;:.\i.;t;:S';::'«-'-"f'i^>.itodu'o.:kn.on 
 
 Dole., V. Aletropolitan LifoJns ('•; 
 
 om.n.o,, JJank, Hovvlan.lv ' ' 
 
 Nonunion Baiik v. \Vi,-c,i„., " 
 Don.jruon Orange xMutual Fire in. 
 'Iwnes V. ' 
 
 I-'-"' 0. R. .J.«< 
 ■|I«.S. C. R. 704 
 •14 1'. R. 40.-, 
 ;-'•"> O. R. r,7o 
 I Hi I'. R. o;3 
 \M O. R. ,i7 
 
 'i^4, '2-2, 040. 
 
 !'7.S. 
 
 ■J77, (iUo, 074. 
 
 «7(J. 
 
 -<'4, 492. 
 
 I><7, Wl. 
 
 I.T, 
 
 4(i,S, 9!),-,. 
 
 '-" 
 .401. 
 
 ■1-14, 501, 5-'8. 
 
 *"tS^±''^--P---f Ontario (C ^ -h" 
 
 '""= I-» «-vo,ent;a„.. ,..,0.,. j; ^^ ^^ ^; /^^ " ' • ■ '71, 538. 
 
 Attornoy-General for Ca,w,U "° ":';• "^-jlai S. C. R. 72 .. .U,^/ 
 
 f 
 
V 
 
 I 
 
 TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 ZXill 
 
 •'"'■' ^IN I.I.' 1)1,, fsr, 
 
 132 7». 
 
 .M<1!», lOOl 
 •-'I-', 7!«l. 
 
 • •;-'<H, ».si. 
 
 )p 11,1(17. 
 
 JWf f»"0, !•)-. !,;5,. 
 
 ..|.'II7. 
 i, WX 
 +'». 7«1'. 7()t. 
 
 • ■I'^7, !)(l(i. 
 
 i(jj(ifi. 
 . P'M, L'(i((, ISI, 
 
 (p'*;jj^f'.«^<i.<i71..7s. 
 l-'f, 40(1. 
 
 ■j-2r,, 
 
 I<)7, 310. 
 
 •-'<!•■<, ■'■.s;*, (JO, ;,,f< ,,-., 
 !»7.'J. ' '"• 
 
 717. 
 
 S7(. 
 io. 
 
 •'*», -'7l', (i((i. 
 
 7s. 
 
 77, m:,, 07 1. 
 
 70. 
 
 II, 4!)L>. 
 
 <7, Siil. 
 
 I.'!. 
 
 '(I, 7.S,S. 
 
 3, 99,3. 
 
 7. 
 
 \. 501, 5l'8. 
 
 ^.;^2. 
 
 .S1.1. 
 
 , .■.IS. 
 
 i6l, oil. 
 40. 
 
 Dom-Eat] Kami, i<t Camk. 
 
 I'uiniriiriii .'^iilviigr niiil Wrecking (n. 
 
 Doiiiiiiiii' V. .liiliiiMton 
 
 lli'iicih'l' V. (Jilli'M|)iii 
 
 I'l.iiciliHc V. Mull 
 
 Doiii'van, lleny v. . . 
 
 l>i)ru)Viiii, l)iiliy V. . . 
 
 l>iiiiovaii V. llaliliiiH' 
 
 DoiMsaii, I'cpIk'i tn V. 
 
 I)<.|.p, Kandiili V. . . 
 
 lloniti V. 'I'drmito .Suspt'iulor Co. . 
 
 Dni Inn \. hniioii 
 
 hiiilaii'l, Ivitou V. . . 
 
 l>iity, lli'L,'iiia \ . 
 
 Di.i.'-jjiiity, OUaia v 
 
 l'ollj,'la.-i V. lllu(;Ucy 
 
 Doii^laM, ( iagf V. . , 
 
 Doiigl.is, Kij KiiiMcy V. Koiiglns. . 
 
 l)oiill \ . I\ii|iiiiaii . . 
 
 Dow, IJaimis V. . . . . . 
 
 I)i.\vi(' V. I'ai tlo 
 
 Doyl.' V. .Mui'lK.o 
 
 Kiaj.cr V. Kailijiihiir.it 
 
 Vol, I Ml-: AMJ I'.M.t. 
 
 Col.l M.N UK Dll.KNT. 
 
 V, ISlow 11. ''.'O S. I!, II, tWt 
 
 I'H I'. If. 47ii 
 pM A It. •J!l_» 
 '-'I S. (', |{, OS,-) 
 •-M A. li. H 
 14 I*. |{. |,V» 
 11. llHj 
 
 |{. .•.;(,-> 
 it. 4.-.n 
 K. I-."-' 
 i!. io;j 
 -■•ts. c. It. rM) 
 I.-. 1'. i;. i:t,. 
 |{. ;m-' 
 
 14 I'. 
 
 •.'I n. 
 
 fl 1'. 
 
 L'-' ( >. 
 
 14 I'. 
 
 '2\ A. U. 14 
 
 J.") ( » 
 ■S) < » 
 
 ill I', 
 111'. 
 ■Jd < I. 
 
 IJrew, Hi! Walker iind 
 l)niiy iViclifl Co., iU' 
 I'lyidalu, ('iiiiiiiiigliaiu v. 
 Dubu V. 'i'lio yUL'lill 
 
 U-' .\. I! 
 
 .•U7 
 l-'li 
 
 417 
 I!. L'MI 
 
 It. ;)i:i 
 c. It. «.-, 
 
 (7(1 
 711 
 
 Dubois V. (.'orporatiou nl ,Sti'. IJohu 
 Dutlus, lliiyal liiM. Co. V. .. 
 Dully \. Donovan . . 
 Dufrt'ismr V. i'n.foiitaino .. 
 Dultoii V. Iloniiny . . 
 
 Duygau V. i,<iii(lon ami Canadian I,, it A. Co. 
 
 Diiggaii, Miller v, . . 
 
 Duniont, DawNiiii v. 
 
 Diiinoiiliii, liuifoot V 
 
 Duiiioulin V. Hurl'ool [ 
 
 Dun, Cosaette v. . . . . . . . ' [ 
 
 Duncan v. Canailian I'acilic 1!.\\'. Co. . 
 
 I.-. I' 
 •_*4 S 
 
 14 1'. U 
 
 •-'I .^. C. I!. 
 
 -•:.'<>. i;. :);) 
 
 H) 1'. It. :,-2 
 
 I .s. c. 
 Ia. C. 
 
 :< i:.x. c. 
 •J I .s. c. 
 is.s. c. 
 
 14 1'. It. 
 •-'I .s. c. 
 
 !(> ( ». It. 
 
 K. I.'iii 
 
 i;. .ISI 
 i:. U7 
 
 K. (m 
 K. 711 
 I.V.i 
 
 I!. (i07 
 •-'.V2 
 
 Duucan, Itogcra v. . . 
 
 DuDKaiinou Agricnltural Driving I'ark Asa'ii 
 
 Lane V, . . 
 DunKip, Itu . . . . . . ' [ ' ' 
 
 Dunlop V. Usbonie and Hibbert Farmors'l 
 
 Mutual Kire In.s. Co. . , . . i 
 
 Dunn, Canii.buU v. 
 
 Dunn, I'atoison v. . . ,\ '[ 
 
 Duniict V. Harris . . ' , ' 
 
 Dunsford v. iMiohigau Central It. W. Co! 
 Dupras, HiONsard v. 
 
 Dupiv, Clarkwon v. . . ' . ' 
 
 Dutard, Tlie fanny, The Zambesi and '.'. 
 Dutliiu V. Kssery 
 
 Dwy. r and Town of Port Arthurj Re .'. 
 
 Dwyvr V. Town of Port Arthur . . 
 
 Dyer \ . Town of r ronton .. ]] 
 
 Dyer, 'I'own of Trenton v. 
 
 Dysart, Township of, McNab v, ., ,', ', ] 
 
 1. 
 
 East .and West Wawanosh Union School Sec-1 
 tion, lie . , . . f 
 
 Eastniure v. Canada Accident Assurance Co. . 
 Eaton, Re . . 
 
 litO. K. o7^», |,s 
 
 ;«).■., •_'(( s. ('. I, 
 Lis!K)| A.c. r.oii. 
 
 •-'I S. C. It. ;t;{ . 
 
 -'O.S. C. K. 7,)<( , 
 ■il (). It. .-,s;! 
 
 s. C. It. |-_'0 . 
 IS ,s. C. It ■>...> 
 
 IO. It. :tr,r'" '. 
 
 I5(). K. (i!)i), 10 A 
 IH S. V. It. 710 
 1-2 O. It. L'U4 
 -2-2(1 rt. 1.'2 
 22 A. It. ;i04 
 
 .'!.'(). It. !)8 
 
 14 P. It. 4(1 
 
 14 P. It. 4.S7 
 
 .JO A. It. r,77 
 
 I!)1S. C. Jt. ,j;n .. 
 
 Hi P. It. .-.21 
 
 3i:x. C. It. 07 .. 
 
 •-'2 A. It. lill 
 
 '21 O. R. 17". 
 
 19 A. R. ,■),■),■), 22 8. C 
 
 -'4 O. R. tio;} 
 
 -MA.R. :i7!),24S.C. 
 22 A. R. o08 
 
 •iC O. R. 463 
 
 22A.R.408, 25S.C. 
 23 O. R. 593 
 
 ..9.-. I, 
 
 . . |;i99. 
 . H7, S20. 
 •<9, 401, 
 177. 
 
 I!l, 210, 
 2«), 
 177. 
 
 i7<j, 4S0, mr,. 
 
 40M. 
 .-.40. 
 
 1.39, 1042. 
 .■>I1.S, .-,S9. 
 273. 
 . 421, on. 
 n3, 22.-., 777. 
 77. 
 I02S. 
 9. 
 . . .3.-.(l, 07.3. 
 
 . . 9s;f. 
 . . :a-,. 
 
 . , '9;^s. 
 
 . . I99i5. 
 
 ..':)s.-., 1022. 
 
 .|l.-.S, 2»,-.. 
 . . |(i73. 
 . 109. 
 |l2.->, 290, U2. 
 
 . lo.vj. 
 
 ,j2S. 
 
 .19, 210. 
 
 . (iOS. 
 
 . 'ill9, 012, 017. 
 A. it. I 
 :. 4S1, :i7, 9!)1. 
 
 .. .7S, SOI. 
 
 . . 0.32, 9(J(l, 94.-,, |).-,s. 
 
 i;. 3, 1 
 
 / 
 
 ti4. 
 
 32I,.3,-.:i, 911. 
 
 84." 
 
 •3S lO'O. 
 
 130. 
 .502. 
 513. 
 
 503, .'28. 
 
 347, 410. 
 
 572. 
 
 844. 
 
 8.3, 03-.' . 
 
 77, 484 SI 7. 
 
 ")3.-), 89 , 890, 897. 
 
 102. 
 ..|49. 
 R. 241 122, 2;!4 92.5. 
 
 . . '.50. 
 R. 474.51, 920. 
 
 727. 
 
 . . 833. 
 
 R. 691,048. 
 . . !526. 
 
xxiv 
 
 TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 i-'iitoii V. Doilaii,! 
 
 Katon, S.■^nfe^stt.l• v. " " " ' ' ' 'j 1.'/? f} «• '•J^' 
 
 &\X '''r '■'"•"'= ^'^-" ''oa,..i V. ■ .^Ei^i'^i-. *s'^'^^ " '"' f^"' ^^^' ■^«- 
 ^'" ■St;- ^'-""^"" j'--ient .„, •,.„,„;)- '"• '■■ ' -'' ■ • -U 
 
 Mmomk V. Tiorna.V ' ' ' ' • • J l''' '^- "• '•". '^ .\. /;. ;;,,7';e,, -,^ .„„ -„^ ,,._ 
 
 I'^ilwanl.s, Ke-iiwk v. 
 
 Edwards, Ross v. . . 
 
 Et'ile, 'i'Jioiii.soii V 
 
 Wbuniu, Kugina v. " 
 
 J';; ectno Despatch Co v lipii T„i ' i ' ' 
 
 Elgio, Ca.iipbell v " " Teleplico Co. 
 
 _^^ UnmtyoU^f Wikon a,ui 
 
 ^;^ Township of,7>^,;i^~ 
 
 Elliee, Tom iisliip of, Hik's^r .' .' 
 
 Kiliott V. HietuTKo ' ' 
 
 W holt V. Kiliott 
 J'^Ilictt, I'ec-is V 
 
 ''-Ilis, CVmtralJJankv. 
 Wlis V. eieiMciis 
 
 Wlis, Weld) V. • • • • • . 
 
 Ellison, IJfgg V. , 
 
 ( 
 
 17). 
 
 io;i;{. 
 
 I (JO. 
 II, OT). 
 
 -' C. L'dL 
 •■ pO. l;. 4«!) 
 ■■1!)A. R. 70U 
 
 '"^ I'- ';• ■>-';), 15 r a > 
 
 ::fe!^!;-S' ■■ ■■-^"" 
 
 •.Fill^:R.-:;vr'^''-"-«';<'^'. 707, 700,710 
 
 •n!p:R.Sr^^-''-'^-'^''^<S707,7o.,7,.> 
 
 Ehnsley, Hayes v. 
 
 -'OO. K I'u •■ •:3''9- '■'-10, ,S29, 
 
 1-1'^. C.i! 1-) ■• ■ i'*f«. '"iOo. 
 
 !-'0A. R. .s,u •■ •■ ^v-\7;;fi, 7!.->. 
 
 -'2.S C K 7 "" -'(',1007. 
 
 ■|22A. R. o,;,,-, •• ■ !IT4, «U7, 9,-,0. 
 
 '4P. R. 2U7 •• -i. ■-?•-,. 
 
 Emerson v. Banne,„,an ' ' ' ' ' ' * -■ '"'• "■ -*- 
 
 J^nieison V. Huniphiies " ' •' •JO.S. C.R l 
 
 Knioiy, Foster v. ■' '■ •• . Ij P. |{ ,si 
 
 Jinipey V. Carscailen ' ' ' ■ • ' t P. R. i 
 
 ^::^:V^^[^intu^ana l-nhli;,,., Co. . n„, , J^ «■ 'j- g' 
 
 Entner v. Jiennewct ^ '' ''^' '^'^"'""^ ""'' • • i^'o o! R ^ 
 
 fr^^!iif!±!^^^ uhe.,e v.::|lt J- «-o^, 
 
 Eidnian v. Town of \^•alkerton " ' I?* «• C K 593 
 
 •■ ■• •l-tP. R. 1C7 
 
 ■ •• •■I5P. R. pj 
 
 iK'A'i"''^' 20 A. R.|t'-^*' 
 120 O. i;,. -Mj 
 
 Ernst, Kendellv. 
 Ersl<ine, Gould v. 
 
 I'Mli. 
 
 7-l.S, !(7.t. 
 '224, 80.W. 
 1220, ;«i. 
 408. 
 
 ,1-1,120, 700, 713. 
 
 |S«,-i. 
 
 mr,. 
 
 l-ll, 531. 
 307. 
 720, 7(;u. 
 
 Escjuunalt an.l Nanainu, 'r. \v ' Co ' H \ ^ "• "■ •^■*7 ' ' ,iL^«o' 
 
 Esq.nnuUt and Nanaimo R. U-; <,, , ; .,„^ J A. C. .,20. ''''■ ^'''^^J) 308. 
 Esfjuimalt and Xanainu, R. W Co u- , ' '' '''"'■ ^^ '^^ •^'^- ■ • • S90. 
 
 Esaery, Bank of Haniilton- v ' ' " " / A.C. 42.V ""'' ^'^'*^ \lmH. 
 
 i-'^«''<, 801,812, 984 
 
 Evai 
 
 i Fifild V. H 
 Eield V. li; 
 Eielder, R, 
 l''ili<in, Th( 
 I'indhty, ]:; 
 u 
 
TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 fi2J, ] 
 
 <ili. 
 
 ''"LIMN- OK Dl(,K> 
 
 '"''kS mi 
 
 /v"iil<i, 7.'i7, 738. 
 
 • i(i, ia'!o. 
 /'j '•">', '.'it'. 
 
 •. I'vS, lo.-.i. 
 
 .i7.SI. 
 "'^V^--'-^"'' 539, 66!), 07 1 
 
 ..j(jjr.. 
 
 ■.|1()I3. 
 . ri74. 
 
 .. io;w. 
 
 .100. 
 '■)|11, (io. 
 •I'!.'!), l'-j:. 
 
 i;!!i;.-Mi. 
 
 ■•;l!i.'), m:i. 
 
 •■ -'l'«, .SI I. 
 
 •■ IS, 17.S. 
 
 .. Wl. 
 
 0(i s;;,-,. 
 
 -!'7(i--i, 7o7, 7,jo_ 7JO 
 
 . . -.'J.S. 
 
 -!»7(;--t, 707, 70!l, 71.J. 
 
 • •'(i9, 040, 829. 
 
 ■ -*•■>■}, 7;;(i, 7f."). 
 
 ■i''l, 7iJ!). 
 
 li;l(K)7. 
 
 I '74, <U7, 9-,o, 
 .,l;!9. 
 j-'^-t, 766. 
 707, 918. 
 
 jWl, 917. 
 |955. 
 
 ])o,-.. 
 
 <""«!, .',-17, 07.1 
 ;ilJ(i. 
 
 7-t:i, !)7(. 
 -'•-'4, ,so;i 
 
 -'20, ,•),-, I. 
 
 iON. 
 
 ',V2p, 709, 713. 
 
 •4,5. 
 ■^I, 531. 
 
 97. 
 
 -'0, 7(;9. 
 
 96. 
 
 «. SOI, 812, 984. 
 '•>, 92i). 
 
 18. 
 0. 
 
 Eas-Fin] 
 
 Nami: ok Ca.si;. 
 
 VoMMK AND Pa( 
 
 COM'MX 
 
 XXV 
 
 111' DlllKsT. 
 
 Esaeiy, Duthic v 
 
 Esscry V. (Jraiiil 'I'nink It. \V. ( 
 E.ssux Ci;iltl-f .Mfi,'. Co., Ri; 
 E.^sux Liui.l ,111.1 L'imbor Co., Ro 
 Es.-iiiU v. Mcdrugor 
 Etol,icoke, 'Jown.sliip of, Adauisoii v 
 Eviitis, C'owL'ii V. 
 
 •-•-'A. I!. 191 
 
 ..!2I(». 
 
 ,,. •; ■ |1!»A, 
 
 4 rout 8 Casc,|2l (». 
 
 20 S." 
 
 22 (). 
 
 22 S. 
 .'2 ,S. 
 
 23 (). 
 
 Evans V. King 
 
 Evaii.s, Shfi'k V 
 
 Ewcirl, .(oliiistoii V. . . . , 
 
 Ewing V. Toiouto R. W. Co. 
 Exci.'ll, Rc^'ina v. . , 
 Exchiuit-e ilaiik \ . Flotcher 
 Exluy V. Dey 
 
 Fairbanks, Fraser v. 
 Faii'liaiiks v. Tlie (^tueon .' .' 
 Eairohild v I'Vrgiison 
 Faii-olotli, Linco v. . 
 Fairf.ix ( iifuso Co. , A lien v. 
 
 Fail-grieve, ,'<anuicl v 
 
 Faiiweatlu..- y. Owen Sound Stone ()u:my Co 
 
 Fanny l)utar,l, Tlie, The Zambesi' a,id " 
 I'.iruwell V. h'arcuell 
 Farewell, Re Rogers and '.'. 
 Jarmer v. (Jrand 'IVuiik R. \V. Co 
 l^arqiiliar v. City of Hamilton 
 ^aninhar v. City of Toronto 
 
 F;:n'eil:tg;!;:;';;r;!'^«"-:.^^'^'-«-p'""sc^- 
 
 Farwell, (Ontario Car and Foundry Co. V. 
 
 Farwell v. Tlio (.tuceii 
 
 Farwell, Wallbridge v. 
 
 Fastnet The The Heather'Belle'an,! ' ' 
 
 J'.iiiliert, .Melntyre v. . 
 
 Faidkner v. Faulkner '.'. 
 
 Fearnian, Regina v. , 
 
 I'V.ister V. ( 'ooiiex- . , 
 
 Keegan, MeKiblion v. 
 
 Fellowes V. The (,)Me(m 
 
 Ferdais, Maedonald v 
 
 Ferguson, He- Mennett v.\\,atswortli " 
 ■erguson v. City of Toroiil,, 
 J'erguson v. County of Kl„i„ 
 Ferguson, Faireliild v. " 
 FVrgusou V. Colding 
 Ferguson, Herod v . . ,[ 
 
 Ferguson, luiies v. 
 
 iS;i;;::ri^ia;w:-""!'''^''-"^''''™'/-^i^';'i"'' 
 
 Ferrier v. Trepaiinier 
 
 l;;ew.ster v'l\,„ „«}„•,, of Raleigh . . 
 
 I't(.ulkes, Hollender V. . 
 
 .>.) 
 
 I!. 22 1 
 R. 12.-, 
 li. 307 
 <■. R. 170 
 l{. 341 
 C. R. 32,S 
 C. I!. .331 
 R. -104, 21 
 •'■'19, 24S. C. R, 
 !42 
 
 •r'HJ. R. iKi 
 •:•-'<<>. R. (;;h 
 .20 0. R. (i,3;{ 
 9.S. C. R. 27,S 
 "> 1*. R. 3.)3, 405 
 
 . . |-'3 S. C. R. 7}) 
 ■:24S. C. R. 711 
 ■•,-• S. <'. R. 4H4 
 
 ■ 1-t P. R. 2.->3 
 
 ■ 21 O. R. .-,i)s 
 ./ -'t O. K. .tS6, ; 
 » 4 IS, 24 S. C, 
 . 20 (). R. ,J04 
 
 - i;x. C!. It. 82 
 • .'i Kx. C. R. 07 
 ..22 0. R. .573 
 ..'14 1'. K. -AH 
 
 21 O. R. 299 
 . . 20 A. R. SO 
 . . |2t> (). R. 3.-,0 
 . 22 (). I!. ,-,7 
 . . 123 (). R, 4''-> 
 . .|18S. C. R, 1 . 
 /|3 Fx. C. R. L'7i 
 li C. R. .-).-,3 
 .'18.S. C. R. I 
 . 3 Kx. C, R. 40 
 . 20 O, I!. 107 
 . 23 O. R. 2.->2 
 . 22 (). R. 4,-)(J 
 .15 1>. R. L'90 
 . 21 A. R. S7 
 . !2 Fx. C. R. 428 
 ■^ .S. ( !. R. 260 
 R. .-)91 
 R. ;).-,s 
 R. 399 
 ^'I S. C. 1;. 484 
 15 R R, 43 
 -'5 (). R. 505 
 
 A. R 
 3,-)6 
 
 A. R. 1 
 
 278. / 
 
 ..102. 
 
 ..ii,-.o. 
 
 . . |S9, 1 
 
 . . 9S. 
 
 ..^091, 
 
 . . 1940. 
 
 . . 9.30, 
 
 1 .,0. 
 yj.-fS/, 
 
 ..1251, 
 
 .;.354. 
 
 . . :937. 
 
 . . !200, 
 
 . . i8.S. 
 00. 
 
 . . 477, 663. 
 279. 
 102. 
 •114, ,-,70. 
 248. 
 
 8,54. 
 
 150, 084. 
 933. 
 
 944. 
 
 1022. 
 255. 
 
 Fif>l(l V. Hai! 
 t'iiiW V. Uice, Re 
 Fielder, Re O'Connor and ' ' 
 rilioii. The Qnceii v. 
 Fiiidlay, ]:dward8 v. 
 
 1 A.R. .32,3, 24,S 
 
 15 P. R. ,300 
 •I S. C. R. 32 
 
 •-'4 S. C. R. 8G 
 
 14 P. R. 429 
 10 P. R. 175 
 
 16 P. R, 22,5, 315, 
 1200. R, rii 
 
 122 A. R. 449 
 |20(). R. .309 
 25 O. R. 508 
 24 .S. C. R. 4S2 
 l2o O. R. 489 
 
 83, 100. 
 019. 
 
 -70, 277, 281, 2S3 
 .. 53,->, 891, 890, 897. 
 ..10,34, 103,S. 
 ..,l8(», 2.30, 904. 
 . . i;<-'9, 0,50, 849. 
 ..■•W, 1S,5. 
 ..Il3l. 
 ..i 1,50, 408. 
 ..1.55 1. 
 . i457, .839. 
 ••22 .S. II 101, 310, ,394, .1-2,5, 420. 
 I I 508, 804. 
 , . j-157, S39. 
 ,.891. 
 
 ■ ■ «2, ,S80, 887. 
 ■ 250, 991. 
 ..201, 5.5^2. 
 . 223, 352. 
 . . 444, 520, ,570. 
 . . ;30. 
 
 .127, .38-2, 949, 1014. 
 ..10-25. 
 
 479, 512, 709. 
 
 IH, 178, 
 
 102. 
 
 250, 804, 985. 
 
 203. 
 
 379, 023. 
 
 410, 5-23. 
 
 940. 
 
 14, 27, 445, 735, 812, 
 949, 988. 
 
 808. 
 
 539, 572. 
 2-25, 803. 
 
 570, 793. 
 
 109, 432, 544, 
 371, 828. 
 34. 
 
 295, 048, 
 1033. 
 
 C. R. 703 
 
 \ 
 
zxvi 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Fiiidloy V. Fire Iiis. Ci>. uf Xortli AiiU'iii-a 
 
 Kiiikle V. Lut/. 
 
 Kiiiliiy V. Mi.sc:iiii|)l)L'll 
 
 Vive Ins. Co. of North Amciica, I'imlh'y v 
 
 Fisli, ]5:ink of Xov.i Sjotia V 
 
 Fisher v. C.'issiuly . . 
 Fisher, Tlie I.Jiiecii v. 
 Fisher, Vaiighaii Koail t'o. v. 
 
 Fit/geitiM, ISIoiig V. 
 
 Fitzgerald v. City of Ottawa 
 Kit/.gciaia, Craiiil 'l'ninl< U. W. Co. v. . . 
 
 Kitzsimiiion.", liialty v. 
 
 Fhuiiigan, .\liil<lK;toii V 
 
 Klatl V. Fci'lau',1 
 
 FLitt and Uiiiteil Couutie.'* of I'lcsec.tt i 
 liiissell, Ke 
 
 I'leuiiiig, Caiiailiaii Paoitie R.W. Co. v. 
 
 Fleming v. City of 'I'oronto 
 
 Flenung, Cleveland Press v 
 
 Fleming, Kegina ex i-el. Mangan v. 
 
 Fleming v. Pyan . . 
 
 Fleming, Wilson v 
 
 F'letcher, Flxehangc; Hank v. 
 
 Fletcher's Estate, J!e 
 
 Flott V. Way 
 
 J 
 
 _>.->(). U. 
 14 P. P. 
 •M <). l\. 
 2.5 (). I{, 
 ■2i S. C. 
 14 P. 1!. 
 2 Kk. C. 
 
 14 P. K. 
 
 15 P. P. 
 J (). K. 
 
 10 S. C. 
 •J.SO. P. 
 (). R. 
 •21 S. C. 
 
 411) 
 •2ii 
 .->1.-) 
 P. 70!) 
 
 r)77 
 II. ;^(i,") 
 :mo 
 4(17 
 (i,")S, •2-2 
 
 P. :!.■)!) 
 
 24.". 
 417 
 I! :^'7 
 
 A. P. 
 
 i2(). 
 
 i.ss, at 14. 
 
 !0. 
 
 da. 
 
 197, HP-). 
 
 KiS, :t04, .'n4, 425. 
 . . M)2. 
 . .'4!i:i, (174. 
 297: to:'.. 
 . S51. 
 477, 6()5. 
 190, 417. 
 94(j. 
 
 Flick V. Rrisljin 
 Flynn, Popham v. . . 
 Flynn, Itegina v. , . 
 
 Fogarty v. Fogarty 
 
 F'oley, Webster v 
 
 Forun V. Handley . . . . . . ^ 
 
 Forbes v. Jlichigaii Central R.W. Co., 
 Ford V. Mason 
 
 Re 
 
 Ford V. Rice, Re . , . . . . • • , ' 
 
 Foresters, Ancient Order of. and Castner, He. 
 
 Forget V. Ostigny 
 
 Forsyth v. Cannilt' and VAty of Toronto. . 
 
 For.syth, Hechler v. .... 
 
 Forsythe v. Bank of Xova Scotia -Pie Bank 
 
 of Liverpool . . . . • • • • ' 
 
 Fort William School ]5nard, Smith v 
 
 Fort William, 'J'own of, Standard Drain Pii)e\ 
 
 Co. of St. John's, P.O., V J 
 
 Fortier, Chamberland v. . . 
 
 Forwood V. City of Torontn 
 
 Foster v. Emory 
 
 Fournier v. Hogarth 
 
 Fowell V. ("hown . . 
 Fowler, 'l"homp.son v. 
 Fox V. U'illianison . . 
 
 Frank v. Sun Life Ass. Co, . . . . -! 
 
 Francis, Sullivan v. 
 
 Fraser and P.ell, Re 
 Fraser v. Buchannan 
 Fraser v. Fairbanks 
 
 Frawley, Regina v. 
 
 Frawlcy, Weckes v. 
 
 Frederick, Toothe v. 
 
 Fredericks, Peterson v. . . 
 
 Freeljoru v. Vandusen 
 
 Freeman, Badcock v. 
 
 F're.cman, Carroll v. 
 
 Freeman, Cenge v. 
 
 French v. Lake Superior Mineral Co. . . 
 
 French River Tui' Co., Kerr Engine Co. v. 
 
 Friml, Standard Bank of Canada v. 
 
 22 S. 
 
 20 0. 
 24 ( ). 
 14 P. 
 
 21 A. 
 2 to. 
 19 S. 
 21) O. 
 14 P. 
 14 1'. 
 2t>0. 
 
 . 15 P. 
 .20 O. 
 , '22 S. 
 J21 S. 
 . 124 S. 
 
 22 ( >. 
 ,15 P. 
 .llOP. 
 . 20 O. 
 . 14 P. 
 . [t89.-i 
 .20 O. 
 . 22 S. 
 
 1 18 S. 
 
 .s;5 
 
 c 
 
 R. .-547, 
 1!. :iS5 
 R. 45S 
 
 i;. :!9 
 K. :«.s 
 C. p. 27S 
 R. 499 
 R. 12;5 
 
 R. ;{i2 
 
 K. 42S 
 1!. 2S0 
 R. CMS 
 
 R. io:i 
 
 R. 580 
 R. 700 
 
 51)8, 20 
 
 18 A. R. 1 096. 
 
 18, 845, 949, 970. 
 19 A. P. :)I8 20, 47, 207, 72-4. 
 . . .S09. 
 
 702, 
 10. 
 
 C. 
 
 c. 
 c. 
 
 R. 
 
 701 
 
 i74, 
 
 01)4. 
 
 8S. 
 
 :!57, 502. 
 
 51)4, 807. 
 
 215, 2;iH, 911. 
 
 104. 204. 
 
 2.S9, 579. 
 
 200, 5.")2. 
 
 1040. 
 
 049. 
 
 A. I!, 
 
 R. H92 
 R. 25 
 R. .-lOO 
 R. 47 
 
 ] A. c. ;n8 
 
 P. 478 
 C. R. 489 
 
 C. R. 707 
 
 9o0. 
 584 ;?70. 
 i)09. 
 
 oo;?, 
 
 828. 
 
 905. 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 , R. 
 R. 
 
 24 0. R. 
 
 10 P. R. 
 
 2;J S. C. 
 22 (). R 
 114 P 
 ,15 V 
 
 25 O 
 '2;i O. 
 20 A. 
 20 A 
 I 152)t 
 ;i8 A. R. 
 121 O. R. 
 
 R. 
 
 C. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 U. 
 
 366 
 
 404 
 
 R. 371 
 351 
 1 .. 
 
 72 
 
 71, 22 
 1)44 
 010 
 564, 23 
 
 A. R. 
 
 s.'c. 
 
 208 
 
 371, 
 
 219. 
 
 1 19, 208, 471. 
 
 648, 727. 
 
 j76, 873. 
 
 93, 153. 
 
 8.32. 
 
 984. 
 
 954, 1014. 
 
 936. 
 
 366. 
 
 217. 
 
 782, 783. 
 
 188, 4S5, 891. 
 
 250, 321, SS6. 
 
 522. 
 
 1 25 O. 
 23 S. 
 25 O. 
 23 O. 
 
 14 P. 
 
 15 P. 
 15 P. 
 21 A. 
 23 O. 
 14 P. 
 14 P. 
 
 .21 A. R, 
 ,15 P. H 
 
 121 
 455 
 1 .. 
 R. 79 
 431 
 235 
 2S7 
 361 
 264 
 633 
 283 
 33(» 
 .141 
 
 160,24S.C.R.703 
 438 
 
 ,367, 434, 461. 
 385, 1022. 
 .301, 805. 
 477, 665. 
 
 69. 
 429. 
 38. 
 
 (i7. 
 809, 987. 
 651. 
 
 36. 
 02,434, 438, 888, 911. 
 887. 
 324. 
 577, 772. 
 
)K l)i<;K,sT. 
 
 {14, 4-J5. 
 
 TABLE or CASES. 
 
 xxvii 
 
 HI, !I70. 
 7, 7-M. 
 
 Ull. 
 
 !>05. 
 471. 
 
 H94. 
 S80. 
 
 401. 
 
 438, SSS, 911. 
 
 Fri-aor] 
 
 X.V.MK UK CA^il-: 
 
 <if Canudii v. 
 ftysop 
 
 Friml & Co., Stainhinl Man 
 Frontenao I.. & I. Society v 
 I'Vothingliaiii v. Is))ister . . 
 Fuller V. Aiuk-isoii 
 Fuller, Chauiller Electric Co. v. . , 
 Furuess, Allen v 
 
 0. 
 
 G., Re 
 
 <iage V. Douglas 
 
 <iale Mfg. Co., McCIolierty'v. .'.' 
 
 (fallow, 'I'eiuiaut v. 
 
 ( iarbutt. He \[ 
 
 (iarbuttaiid Kountree, Re 
 
 Garlielil a-. City of Toronto '.' ,' 
 
 (iarlaiul, Central Hank v 
 
 Carson and Tomu of North liay.Re 
 
 (iault V. .Murray . . . . ' . . 
 
 Celdert, .Municii)ality of I'ietou v. .' 
 
 Ceuiley, Low v. 
 
 (iennnill v. \i;lligan . . ,', 
 
 (ieneral ICleetrie Co. v. \'ictoria IClcetric LiL'ht 
 
 Co. of Lindsay . . , . 
 
 (Jengo V. Freeman' . . 
 (ieorge, Bank of Hamilton V. .'. 
 Georgetown, Village of, v. iStimson 
 Georgian Bay Saw-log .Salvage Co., Brooks v. '. 
 (.eorgian Bay Sliip Canal Co. v. World News- 
 paper Co. 
 Certh, Stephens v. — Kc Ontario Express 
 
 and i ransportation Co. 
 Giblj V. Township of Canulen '.'. 
 Gibbina v. Barber . . 
 (iibl)ons V. McDonald .[ ., ' ' 
 
 Gibbons v. Tomlinson 
 I Jibson, Bank of British Nortli America v. 
 (iibson, Moot v. 
 ( Jioson V. Township of North I';as'tlioMe ' 
 
 • iilclirist V. The (^)ueen 
 Cildersleeve V. Balfour .. .'. 
 Giles, Ucgina v. . . 
 Cillard v. Bollert . . .', \\ _' 
 
 • ullard, Davies v. . . . . ' 
 Cillespie and City of Toronto, Uc 
 
 • lillespie, Donogh v. , ' ' 
 <iilles|)ie, Regina \-. , . [ , 
 I 'illies, Hogabooin V. 
 
 14 1-. 1!. .S55 
 121 (). U. ,-,77 
 {14 P. R 
 -'OO. R 
 ■2\ S. C. 
 •-'0 A. R 
 
 112 
 
 424 
 R. ;!37 
 34 
 
 21 (). R. lOi) 
 14 I'. I!. 12IJ 
 1(1 A. R. 117 
 2.")0. R. 5(i 
 
 21 O. R. 170, 4(J5 . 
 21! O. R. (i2.) ' 
 
 22 A. K. 128 
 
 20 0. R. 142, 18 A. R. 4.38 80. 'l.% 
 !"> I'. R. 179 
 l21 O. R. 4,-,8 
 
 fl8|);ij A. C. .".24 .. 
 
 18 s. c;. R. 08-; . . 
 
 20 (). 1!. ao7 
 
 10 p. R. 470, .-,29 .. 
 
 14 P. R. :m 
 
 10 p. R. 418 
 2.3 O. R. .3.3 
 10 P. R. .-,11 
 
 10 P. R. ;i20 
 
 24 S. C. R. 710 . . 
 
 48;-,, 77 J 
 
 000. 
 
 7.'>, 402 
 
 1020. 
 
 7.3.-,. 
 
 4.30, .JO.J, 992, 1024. 
 
 414, 591. 
 77. 
 
 0.>L 
 l40.'>. 
 
 :4;^o. 
 
 102.3. 
 .331, 729. 
 
 37. 
 
 330, .'509, 80S. 
 
 (i9.3. 
 
 442, 819. 
 
 377, 007. 
 
 :7C0, 792. 
 
 '02, 434, 438, 888, 911. 
 
 ilOO, 797. 
 
 ;097. 
 
 407, 808. 
 
 221, .350. 
 940. 
 
 i^ilmor V. McPiiail . . 
 
 Cilmour v. Bay of Quinto Bridge Co. 
 
 tlilniour V. Magee , . 
 
 I iing, Re 
 
 I'ives, Cudney v. . . 
 I ^U'ason, Catton v. , . 
 lUengarry Klect ion Case , 
 I denitl'cr, 'j'he 
 
 lUobe Printing Co., Beaton v. 
 idobo Pi-intingCo., Gramme v. 
 I Hulson V. City of Toronto 
 • lodson, .lones v. . . 
 iHildii^r^ Ferguson V. 
 liooderhani v. City (,f Toronto 
 fioodeve v. Wiiito . . 
 'iiirdon V. Armstrong 
 liordon, Bunnell v 
 
 (liirdon V. Denison 
 
 10 P. 
 
 19 S. 
 
 IS A. 
 21 O. 
 21 (). 
 21 O. 
 21 A. 
 2 Kn. 
 l.-> P. 
 
 20 O. 
 24 G. 
 
 21 O. 
 
 19 A. 
 21 A. 
 10 P. 
 10 P. 
 10 P. 
 10 P. 
 
 20 A. 
 14 P. 
 18 S. 
 20 O. 
 20 O. 
 
 .114 P. 
 . 20 S. 
 
 '3 Ex. 
 
 1,-, P. 
 
 14 P. 
 
 18 S. 
 
 2,5 O. 
 .15 P. 
 
 21 0. 
 '1.5 P. 
 
 R. 310 
 
 C. R. 204 . . 
 
 R. 1.59,20S.C. R.uS7 
 
 R. 489 
 
 R. 013 
 
 J<. -48 
 
 R. .504, 24S.C. R. 707i.39I 
 
 K 
 R. 5 
 
 R. 300 
 293 
 5S0 
 147 
 
 431, 19 A. 
 713 
 292 
 155 
 9li, 
 402 
 151 
 281 
 120 
 K. i: 
 I . 
 50 J 
 
 244, 708. 
 50, 102, IGO. 
 "3. 
 '400. 
 130, 
 250. 
 39 
 i297 
 139 
 ■>' 
 
 390. 
 
 714. 
 
 704, 
 471. 
 
 R. 432 ' 
 
 , 929. 
 
 201 
 
 •9 
 
 .;io R 
 
 20 0. 
 
 C. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 C. R. .38 
 
 C. R. 57 . 
 
 R. 47.3, 10 P. 
 
 R. 72.. 
 
 C. R. 30 
 
 R. 444, 23 A. 
 
 R. 43 
 
 R. 120, 19 A. 
 
 R. 433 
 
 R. 432 
 
 H. 281 
 
 210.R, 570,22A.R. 31 
 
 1 1. 
 113. 
 71. 
 . . 47, 722, 
 . . 87, 820. 
 . . 203. 
 . . 540. 
 
 ..11,544,802. 
 . . 250. 
 , . 738. 
 . . 81.3. 
 . . 595. 
 .. 119,2.37. 
 . . 919, 940. 
 . . 348, 410. 
 . . 755, 758. 
 . . :530, 895. 
 R. 2811340, 403. 
 ..221, .351. 
 . . ;820. 
 R. 34. 34. 
 
 . . 250, 804, 985. 
 R. 0419.30, 1011. 
 ..580. 
 222, 704. 
 500. 
 5 f 203. 583, 044, 798, 972, 
 I. 973. 
 
xxviii 
 
 TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 Gor-Ore] 
 
 Nami; ok C'ani:. 
 
 N'OIIMK AMI I'AdK. 
 
 Gordon, Mamifacturers' Life Ins. Co. v. 
 (ioiilon V. I'lMotor 
 
 (ioi'ili)ii V. liuinl)lo . . . . ' ] 
 
 (iordon, Stoplieiis v, . . , , [ 
 
 (ioriloii, StiMtlnril (i,is Co. V. .. .. ,, 
 
 (i(wliuia, Ontiiric, Natunil Oils Co. V. .'. .'. 
 
 lioatiold .Norlli, rowiialiip of, .vnd Township of ) 
 
 Kochcsti'i', lie . . . , / 
 
 (iosnell V. 't'onmto ):. W. Co. .. 
 Gould V. I'.i'skiiio . , . " 
 
 Gould V. flopc', Rl^. . 
 
 Gnome v. (iloln. I'rintiny Co [\ 
 
 (Jialhim V. ('inailii Life Assurance Co. . . 
 
 (h-aliam V. ( 'anandaigua Lodge . 
 
 (ira)iani, Keating v. , . , . . . [ . 
 
 (iraliani, I'routor v. 
 
 Gialuun, Ha Heid v. . . . . [] 
 
 (iraluim v. 'reniperance and Ceneral Life Ass.) 
 
 Co. of Noi'th Anierioa . . , . / 
 
 Grand Trunk I!. \V. Co. , Arthur V 
 
 Grand Trunk K. \V. Co., IJeaver v. ,, ' 
 
 COMMN (IF Dl(ii:ST. 
 
 '-'0 A. IL SO!) . . . . ,-,-22, rm 
 
 -'" O. R. .-.;{ . . . lH87, -1(14. 
 
 '!»A. R. 440 .. . . Ls-i'.', .TkS, (!4:i, 740. 
 
 IDA. R. 17(i, 'i-'S. C, i;. (il Ml.-), '.104, 101.".. 
 
 14 I'. R. 407 . 7!)7. 
 
 I.S A. R. m> .. ..000, 71,-). 
 
 ■22 A. R. 110 .. ..708, 710. 
 
 21 A. U. .-,.-..•?, 2-t S.C.R. 58'J O.'iS. 
 •-'0 0. I!. .•)47 .. . KS:!, !I2,>. 
 
 1 i>. R. 02L 20 A. K. 347 431, .-.4.-.. 
 
 Grand Trunk R, W. Co., Hunter v. 
 Grand Trunk R. W. (Jo., .lolinson v. 
 Grand Trunk R. \V. Co., ,Jonea v. 
 Grand Trunk R. \V. Co., McGill v. 
 Grand Trunk R. W. Co., Milloy v. 
 Grand Trunk R. W. Co., Nixon v. 
 Grand Trunk 1!. \V. Co., Oldright v. . 
 Grand Trunk It. W. Co., Piatt v. 
 
 Grand Trunk K. W. Co., Robertson v. 
 
 Grand Trunk R. \V. Co., Sibbald v. . 
 
 Grand Trunk R. W. Co., Tlie Queen v. 
 Grand Trunk R. W. Co., 'I'honipson v. 
 
 Grand Trunk R. W. (,'0., Treniayne v. 
 
 Grand Trunk I!. \V. Co. v. Wcegar 
 (irand Trunk R. W. Co., Weegar v. 
 Grand Trunk I!. W. Co., Zimnier v. 
 Grant, Ue 
 (irant v. Armour 
 
 (irant v. Rritish Canadian Lumber Co. . 
 (irant v. Cameron . 
 Grant, Hope v. 
 
 Grant v. MaeLareu 
 
 Grant v. Northern I'aeific R. \V. Co. . 
 
 (irant. People's Loan and IJeposit Co. v. 
 (irant V. Tlie (Jucen .. .. 
 
 (iravel v. L'Union .St. Tliomas. . '.'. 
 
 Gray, Re 
 
 Gray v. Coughlin 
 
 Gray v. Richmond . . 
 Graydon and Hanimill, Re 
 Graydoii, HotNibnom v. 
 
 Great J'^astern \i. \V. Co. 
 
 1,1 
 
 Great North-\Ve.st R. \V. Co., Charleboi 
 Great North-Westt 
 treal Telograpli Co 
 
 Grand Trunk It. \V. Co., County of Halton v 
 (irand Trunk 1!. W, Co., Dancey v. 
 Grand Trunk K. ^V. Co., Jilssery v. 
 (irand Trunk R. \V. Co., Farmer v. 
 Grand Trunk R. V\ Co. v. Fitzgerald .. 
 Grand Trunk J!. W. Co., Haist v. 
 
 14 P. 1!. 
 ■24 (). 1!. 007 
 •24 ( ). R. 2,5.1 
 20 O. R. ;i(il 
 24 U. R. 007 
 
 . . 221, .•i.-.l. 
 . . .V2.-.. 
 . . 4r.O, 10,39. 
 . '402, 504, S7.3. 
 io2o. 
 
 25 O. R. .-.7.3, 20 O. R. 120>«)7, .371, 772, 828. 
 
 10 P. R. rm 
 
 no, 97U. 
 
 r> O. R. .37, 22 A. R. 89. . ij'"'''',''"**' ^43, 1003, 
 
 •|l 
 
 22 O. R. 007, 20 A. R. V ,,. ^,,„ 
 470, 22 s. C. R. 49S I '■-''• ^^2. 
 19 A. K. 2.-)2, 21 S.C. K. 710; 1 10, 32,3 
 
 20 (). R. 003, 19 A. R. 004 
 
 21 O. R. 224 
 .210. R. 299 
 . .'19S. C. I!. .359 .. 
 
 .120 O. R. 19, 22 A. R. .-.04 
 10 P. R. 448 
 10 P. R. 385 
 
 25 O. 1!. 04, 21 A. R. 408 
 16 A. a. .37, IS.S. C. R. 090 
 19 A. R. 245 
 23 O. K. 454, 21 A. U. 404 
 •r.U). R. 124 
 
 22 A. R. 280 
 10 A. 1!. 403 
 
 127, 322, 842. 
 
 S53, 854. 
 
 329, 050, S49. 
 
 851. 
 
 2, 815, 9S0. 
 
 980. 
 
 399. 
 
 840, 803, 979. 
 
 S4S. 
 
 124, .325, 821, 839. 
 
 125, 839. 
 843. 
 848. 
 2,50, 327 
 
 24 0. R. 75,21 A. R.204,V,o- «,, 
 24S. C. R. Oil ');12i), 841. 
 
 19 O. R. 104, 18 A. R.V„,,. 
 
 184, 20 s. C. R. 2,59 f ***''• 
 
 2Kx. C. R. 1.32 .. .,'4.58,5,37. 
 
 22 A. R. 453 . , . . 843. 
 19 O. R. 104, IS A. R. )L,,. 
 
 184, 20 S. (;. R. 2.59. / ^^"• 
 
 23 ,S. C. R. 422 23, 850. 
 
 10 P. 1!. ,371 .. ..887. 
 
 21 (). R.028, 19 A. U. 093. 8,5.5. 
 200. R. 120,485 .. ..527. 
 
 25 O. R. 7 |3,30, 485. 
 
 18 S. C. R. 708 .. ..'21. 
 18,S. C. R. 710 ., ..132,6.32. 
 200. R. 023 ,. .7.3,468. 
 
 r 24, 394, 4.39,827,950, 
 
 23 S. C. R. 310 
 
 IS V. 
 
 stern Telegraph Co. v. Mon- ) 
 
 J 
 
 22 O. R. 645, 21 A. R. 1 
 322, 24 S. C. R. 546. / 
 18 S. C. R. 202 . . 
 |20 ,S. C. R. 297 .. 
 
 24 O. 1!. 1 
 
 26 O. R. 355 
 
 18 S. C. R, ,5,53 . . 
 
 22 O. R. 250 
 
 20 O. R. 199 . . . 
 
 20 0. R. 298 
 
 21 ,S. C. R. 431 . . 
 15 P. R. 10 
 
 20 ,S. C. R.'UO , , 
 
 986, 993. 
 
 I '24, .840. 
 
 539, 072. 
 .300,318, 811. 
 95, 529. 
 380, 502. 
 377, 0()7. 
 1029. 
 
 57, 878, 998. 
 109, 191. 
 798, 854, 862. 
 578. 
 
 004, 962. 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 ii.iMN (ir 
 
 DlllKST. 
 
 , 531. 
 , 4(i4. 
 , 3.kS, (;43, 
 , 1)04, 101. 
 
 740. 
 
 , 71.'). 
 710. 
 
 
 !)-J,>. 
 
 ri4.-.. 
 
 3,-)l. 
 
 
 1039. 
 5(i4, 873. 
 
 
 371, 77-i, 
 
 828. 
 
 !J7'J. 
 
 
 0, 50,S, 74 
 lOOS. 
 
 5, 1003, 
 
 842. 
 
 
 3-_';!. 
 
 322, S42. 
 
 S.")4. 
 (!50, S49. 
 
 
 nix 
 
 Ore-Hal] Namk ok Case. 
 
 VOLI-.MK A.NI) I'AlK. 
 
 leeii, Blacliford v. 
 
 leua V. Cilizuns' Ins. Co! . 
 
 reeti v. Mimics , . . . '] 
 
 I'liuii, Sti'utheis V. . . '' '/ 
 
 reeu v. Toioiito R, W. Co. 
 
 rceiie luul .Soii« Co. v. Castiemaii' 
 
 Iregory, O'UuU v 
 
 regoi-y, Stovel v. . . ,' ' [' 
 
 rey. County of, Re Town of Thornlmi 
 ray, 1 ownsliii) "f. ]5roiighton v. 
 
 ntfith, Rre.sse v 
 
 ritHth V. Crocker . . , , [[ 
 
 riffitlis V. Boacovvitz 
 
 y and 
 
 Griiisted v. Toronto It. \\\ Co. 
 
 Groos))eck, Hamilton v. 
 (iroti' V. Snow Drift Bakinj. 
 ( irotlie V, I'earco . . 
 
 IH'. R, 424 
 H,S. C. R. .(38 
 i'2 0. R. 177 
 14 P. R. 4HU 
 -'liO. R. 310 
 2.3 0. R. 113 
 24 S. C. R. 6CI 
 ■21 A. R. 137 
 I'' I'. R. 192. 
 2(! (). R. (i94 
 •• 2KJ. It. 492 
 • 18 .V. It. 370 
 •■ I«S. C. R. 718 
 / -'t (). i;. (i,s,3, 21 
 I ' 578, 24 S. C. ]!. 
 
 C()U;.M.\ OK Dl(iE.ST. 
 
 345, 409. 
 >7. 
 354. 
 
 Powder Co. 
 
 (Jiout, McDermott v. 
 (Jroiit, Stevens v. . . 
 
 (Jrover, lieu'ina v 
 
 (i rover, Steele v 
 
 firundy, Ilogaboom v. 
 
 Cuarantoe t'o. of Xortli America, Harbour 1 
 
 Commissioners of Montreal v. 
 (iuanlian Kiro and Life Assurance Co.,' Vine 
 
 oerg v. . . 
 
 (iuardian Ins. Co, V. Connely 
 
 (Juay V. Toe Queen 
 (iuilljaull V. Modreevy 
 
 (iuiiKine V. Sunuyside'Boatin 
 (iuliy, Regiiia v.' , . 
 Ourd, Davidson v. . . 
 <iui-r, Regina v. 
 
 IS A. 
 2 Ex. 
 15 1'. 
 15 I'. 
 
 ho 1'. 
 
 1 10 I'. 
 
 !23(). 
 t2()(l. 
 110 1'. 
 
 437 
 
 R. .508 
 
 195 
 
 4.32 
 
 215 
 
 210 
 
 92 
 
 92 
 
 47 
 
 A. R. 
 
 570. 
 
 J |22 S. C. R. 542 
 
 19 A. R. 293 
 
 214, 
 
 252. 
 
 938. 
 
 
 107, 
 
 139. 
 
 954. 
 
 
 (131. 
 
 
 34. 
 
 
 708. 
 
 
 774. 
 
 
 413, 
 
 786. 
 
 745. 
 
 
 328, 
 
 937. 
 
 052. 
 
 
 909. 
 
 
 25.3. 
 
 
 239, 
 
 544. 
 
 974. 
 
 
 974. 
 
 
 241, 
 
 749, 8S5 
 
 1020 
 
 1038. 
 
 544, 
 
 804. 
 
 c. 
 c. 
 
 iig Co. of Toronto, 
 
 H. 
 
 llackett, Beaty v 
 
 Hagar, Clark v. . . ' ' 
 
 Hagar, Seatli v 
 
 Hager v. Jackson , . 
 
 Hager v. O'Neil 
 
 HaggertBros. Mfg. Co., Re 
 
 llaggert ]5ros. .\lfg. Co., Ro-Peak 
 
 Bunions Case . . 
 Haig V. Haig . , . ' 
 
 Haight v, Wortman and \Vard 
 Haist V. tJrand 'I'runk R. W. C 
 
 20 S 
 2 Ex 
 
 18 S. C, 
 
 n A. R 
 
 21 0. It. 219 
 15 P. R. 31 
 21 (). R. 499 
 
 R. 208 
 I!. 18 
 
 R. 009 
 49 
 
 478, 824. 
 
 32, 51.S. 
 
 516. 
 283. 
 ISl. 
 
 134, 420. 
 5ii0, 798. 
 574. 
 123, 722. 
 
 Mfg. 
 o. 
 
 ilicr and ) 
 / 
 
 t'reightoii v. 
 
 , Xova Scotia Central 
 
 Haldane, Donovan v 
 H:de, I'orter v. 
 Iliiiilax IJauking Co. 
 Halifax Hanking (% 
 
 It W. Co. V 
 
 Halifax Hanking Co. v. Smith 
 Halifax, City of, v. Lordly 
 Halifax, City of, v. Reeves ' 
 Halifax City R. W. Co. v. The Queen 
 Halifax Str.^ot R. \V. Co. v. .foyeo 
 Hall V. Mali 
 Hall V. Koiu 
 
 14 P. R. 395 
 22 S. C. R. 510 
 
 18 .S. C. R. 715 
 16 P. R. 485 
 
 21 O. R. 27, 20 
 198, 22 S. C. R 
 29 A. R. 597 
 
 19 A. R 582 
 
 A. R. 
 
 510 
 
 20 O. R. 
 24 (). R, 
 20 0. 1!. 
 10 P. R. 
 14 P. l;. 
 23 S. C. 
 18 S. C. 
 
 61 
 61S 
 19, 22 
 448 
 106 
 
 R. 265 
 R. 140 
 
 1 s. c. R. .-,m 
 
 18; 
 
 R. 
 
 . 20 S. C. R. 
 . 23 S. C. R. 
 . 2 Kx. C. R. 
 ■ 2.'.S. C. R. 
 
 710 
 505 
 310 
 433 
 
 258 
 
 : Plall, Simpson v. 
 I Hull V. The Queen 
 
 20 0. R. 16S, OS I, 19 A. 
 
 15. 292 
 20 O. l;. 13 
 
 lUP. R. 45 
 
 14 P. R. 310 
 
 3 Ex. C. R. 373 . . 
 
 58, 62. 
 179, 608, 
 84, 950. 
 13, 247. 
 
 179, 607, 608. 
 
 148, 
 
 146, 152. 
 
 (i29. 
 
 . . |(i.)4. 
 504. 2, 845, 980. 
 
 . . liiso. 
 
 . . |20. 
 
 15. 422, 590, 920. 
 S7, 99, 7V4. 
 
 838. 
 
 ;397. 
 1718. 
 
 .9(-l, 1014. 
 ,294, 300. 
 :935. 
 
 473, 
 
 615. 
 
 (215, 240, 611 
 
 .1293. 
 
 614. 
 
 013, 
 
XXX 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Hal-Har] 
 
 NAMii Of Case. 
 
 Hall V. The Seaward 
 Hiilliday, Iioi,'ina v. 
 Ilalliday v. 'ro\viislii[) 
 llaily, CaniplicU \-. . . 
 
 Jfaltci-, MolscjiiM IJaiik 
 
 if St'Uiley 
 
 Voi.iMi; AN!> I'.uii:. 
 
 Halton, County of, v. (;raii(l Tniiik 11. W. Co. 
 
 TfahDii Mluctidu Case 
 Haiiielui V. JiaiiiiL'iriKui 
 Hamilton, CartiT & Co. v. 
 iraiiiilton V. Cousinoaii 
 Hamilton v. Groesbeck 
 Hamilton, Liggett v. 
 
 Hamilton Bridge Co., O'Connor v. 
 
 Hamilton, City of, Farijnhai v. , . 
 
 Hamilton, City of, v. Township of Barton 
 
 Hamilton Cotton Co. , Iloilgors v, 
 
 Hamilton Provident and l.oan .'society, Kd- 1 
 
 ISS. C. 1!. 
 •-'1 .S. C. I!, 
 
 .'1 Kx. C. 1{. -.'(IS 
 
 -MA. H. 4-2 
 
 lU V. H. 4!);{ 
 
 ■2-2 A. I!. 017 
 
 Hi A. I!. ;(:>;! 
 8S . , 
 I HI A. R. L'.-)L' 
 I 71(i / 
 
 iin.s. C. !!. .V>7 .. 
 . flSil.-.l A. C. L';',7 .. 
 
 . -'.'i.s. c. n. iT'j .. 
 
 . lit A. n. -.'(i;) 
 
 . ISA. H. m 
 
 ■ 21 .s. c. i:. (i(i,-, , . 
 
 I L'.-)(). H. vjr2iA. i;..-)0(i, I 
 
 I '-US. C. K. -)9,S.. I 
 
 . '20 A. I!. 8(i 
 
 I ISO. K. 1<)9, 17 A. It. I 
 
 t ;uo, L'o .s. c. u. i:;t i 
 
 •"" O. R. 4-_'.-) 
 
 Col.l'MN (II- l)UiK.sT. 
 
 ■i'.».->, 4'2(i, Sl.'i, ,S!);t. 
 I(i(), M>2. 
 
 <.m. 
 
 7S. 
 
 iKi, .'{•.';!. 
 
 7")."). 
 KlOli. 
 
 7s:i. 
 (il-_'. 
 ().")•_'. 
 
 |77i). 
 !;(•_', IS.-). 
 
 V-'il. 
 
 nionds v. 
 Hamilton Provident and 
 
 ^leyois V. 
 Hamilton Street R.AV. Co. v. Moran 
 Hamiltiin Wliip Co., \Vakeiicld K'attai 
 Hamlin v. Connelly. . 
 Handiii, McKee v. . . 
 Hanimill, McLaughlin V. .. 
 Hammill, Re (iraydcm and 
 Hampson, Winelierg v. . . 
 Haneoik In.spiralor Co., Mitchell v. 
 Handley, Foran v. . . 
 Handy v. Carrulhers 
 Hanes v. Unridiam . . 
 Hanley v. Canadia.i Packing Co . . 
 Ilanua v. Coulson, He 
 Hannan, IJoss v. . . 
 Han.S(ni, Allen v. -lie Scottish 
 
 Aslje.sto.4 Co. 
 Hanson, J. P. lin.sh Mfg. Co. v. .. 
 Harljonr Comnii.ssioni'rs of .Montreal v 
 
 antee Co. of Xorth .America. . 
 Harding v. Knust . . 
 Hardman v. Pntnam 
 Hare, Southwick v. 
 
 I 
 
 Loan Society, | 
 
 J 
 
 Co. 
 
 Canadian \ 
 I 
 
 1!»0. P. G77, ISA. R. .-{47 
 ir. P. R. ;j!) 
 
 ■-'4S. C. R. 717 .. 
 24 O. R. 107 
 Hi P. R. •J07 
 1(1 I'. R. J()7 
 •-'•-> o. i;. nc! 
 
 ■-'OO. K. 1!)!) 
 IDS. C. R. :w.) .. 
 '2 Ex. C. R. .-),•!!) . , 
 
 2^ s. {;. li. 71)1) . . 
 
 ■2r> <}. R. ;27i) 
 
 •2(iO. R. 5l>S, 2;JA. R. !)U 
 
 •-'l A. R. I III 
 
 •->3 0. R. 4i(:{, -2] A. R. (i!):.' 
 
 1!) S. C. R. -221 . 
 
 (inar- 
 
 ISS. C. 
 !Kx. C, 
 12 S. CV 
 
 R. 0(17 
 R. ,■.,-.7 
 R. .-i4l'. 
 
 Harper, lie , . 
 Hariier, Cameron v. 
 Hariis, Dingnian v. 
 Harris, Dunnct v. . . 
 Harris, Roliinson v. 
 
 Harrison v. Harrison 
 Hart, Field v. 
 Hart, llegina v. 
 
 in p. R. ,si) 
 
 ISS. C. R. 714 
 jli) P. R. 222 
 1.") P. I!. 2,S!», ;5;!1 
 24 (). R. -.28 
 2,'H>. R. (>;{ 
 21 S. C. R. 278 .. 
 
 20 0. R. 84 
 14 P. R. 4.S7 
 14 P. R. 37;{ 
 
 21 O. R. 4;i, li) A. 
 1.S4, 21 S. C. R. ;U)0 
 14 P. R. 4:!(l 
 
 22 A, R. -14!) 
 20O. R.Gil 
 
 1^ ) 
 
 Harte and Ontario E.vpress and Transporta- V ti / > ,> ,.,^ 
 tionCo., Re j:--0. R. 610 
 
 Harte v. Ontario Kxprcss and Transportation \|„, ,, 
 
 Co.— Kirk and Marling's Case ., / ;" 
 
 Harto V. Ontario Express and Transportation \ 
 
 Co. — Molsons Bank Claim 
 Hartley, Barry v. . . 
 Hartlev, Reaina v. , . 
 
 J\ 
 
 O. 
 
 R. .S4() 
 
 R. 247 
 U. ;!7(! 
 
 Hii 
 H 
 
 md Raleigh, Ro 'J'ownships of 
 
 arwieli, Township of, and Township of ) 
 Raleigh, lie j 
 
 1 15 P, 
 
 20 O. R. 4Sl 
 
 20 O. R. l.-)i 
 
 21 A. R. 677 
 
 (I.-.4. 
 
 );i22, r.iii, r.;ti), ooii, 
 
 1. (i71. 
 
 ,-.70. 
 740, !);?s. 
 
 81, 148. 
 
 2:io, i)().-,. 
 
 2:10, iH).-i. 
 
 .■>4.-.. 
 
 57, 878, i)08. 
 
 ,!).-.L 
 
 i77!», 7S2. 
 
 |i).->(). 
 
 2(10, !M!4. 
 
 10, .'MS, 4I:J. 
 
 Iil2, 87(1. 
 
 ;!(i2, .■i(i7, .'!71. 
 
 200. S77. 
 
 1 48, l(i;i, Mio. 
 
 !)()8. 
 
 478, 824. 
 
 20!l. 
 
 74,-), !)4!), i)80. 
 
 210, r.sL'. 
 177. 
 
 42, .■127, i»7l. 
 
 480. 
 
 I02(i, lO.'lJ. 
 
 204, 4i)2. 
 
 .■)72. 
 
 225, 4.S7, !)59. 
 
 915, 920, !t21. 
 
 485, 777. 
 Km, 4;i2, .544. 
 2()1, ,584. 
 
 157, 400, (;()4. 
 
 147. 
 
 1,57. 
 
 229, 2;ii, so;t. 
 
 555. 
 
 70:5. 
 
 10. 
 
 Hess Mfg, 
 
 He.ssin v. 
 Hrtt V. ,J; 
 Rett V. Pi 
 lleward v, 
 llewish, .\ 
 Hewitt V. 
 Hewitt, P 
 HiMiard, ] 
 ilicker.son 
 Hi.kev V. 
 Hieks; All 
 HirUson, C 
 Higgins, S 
 Hiles V. T, 
 
TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 XXXI 
 
 ('(il.l'MN 111' |)|liKST. 
 
 Kioi;. 
 
 
 Ts.'i. 
 
 
 (i.")-'. 
 
 
 779. 
 
 
 )•_', I.s,->. 
 
 
 ,-.'l». 
 
 
 ).•!•-••-', ,-,l!l, r,;i(). 
 
 tlOO, 
 
 1, Ii71. 
 
 
 .70. 
 
 
 '40, !i;{,s. 
 
 
 >i, us. 
 
 
 .'.so, iio.-.. 
 
 
 I'M), !)0."i. 
 
 
 •.4."i. 
 
 
 )7, S7S, DOS. 
 
 
 ).".4. 
 
 
 ■7!t, 7S'_'. 
 
 
 ).".(!. 
 
 
 !()(), OO-I. 
 
 
 0, .-MS, .U.S. 
 
 
 O-J, S7(). 
 
 
 I)'-', ■>(),, .,, 1. 
 00, .S77. 
 
 
 4S, i(i;i, Hio. 
 
 
 (iS. 
 
 
 7S, S'.M. 
 
 
 00. 
 
 
 45, 040, 9S0. 
 
 
 10, 5SJ. 
 
 t 1 • 
 
 
 •J, .•)L>7, 071. 
 
 SO. 
 
 
 (!•_'(), lO.TJ. 
 
 
 04, 40-'. 
 
 
 7-2. 
 
 
 •25, 437, 0,59. 
 
 
 15, 920, 021. 
 
 
 .!'>, III. 
 00, 4;{2, ,544. 
 
 
 Gl, 584. 
 
 
 57, 4(10, (;()4. 
 
 
 17. 
 
 
 20, 2;{i, 8o;!. 
 
 
 o;!. 
 
 
 10. 
 
 
 Has-Hog] Na.mk of Ca.se. 
 
 Husson V. Wood 
 
 HiUllolil, ,St. .John Cii.s Light Co.' 'v. 
 
 H.vthaway v. (^Iiaplin 
 
 ll.uiliiiei- V. Martin. . 
 
 Hawkins, lie; 
 
 lliiwkiiis, Midi fold V. . . 
 
 Hay, Ke Tlioniiison v. .. [[ 
 
 H.aycH V. EInisloy . , 
 
 Hazcn, lU'gina v. . . 
 Headford v. McCliiry Mfg. (;,.. 
 Hcasiip V. Henslip . . 
 
 Hcatli V. Meyor.s . . . ' 
 
 Hiatlier Belie, Tlu-, and 'iVie Fas'tnct 
 
 Hci'lilor V. Forsytli. . 
 
 Hi'ij,'l}s, C'aineroii v. 
 
 Iffilif,', Molsons Hank \ . ] . \[ 
 
 Hi'int/.iiian, Weiser v. '[ 
 
 Heisuy, Koch v. . 
 
 Helleiiis V. City of ,St. Catharines 
 
 H('l|is JOstate, P.o . . 
 
 Hcllyei-, Bloonilield v. , , \[ 
 
 Ifi'instrect, Annstioiig v. . , , . 
 
 Hunilei'sliott, Hegina \'. 
 
 IfcMdciMon V. Bank of ifandlton 
 
 Henderson v. lilain , , '/ 
 
 Hendcrsoii, Oshmiie v. . 
 HiMiilrrson V. Itogors . . [[ 
 
 Hendrie v. Toronld, Hamilton, anil Buff 
 
 \\ . Co. . . 
 Henry, Regiiia v. . . . , [' 
 
 Herl)ert, Tliiliauch^au v. 
 Hereford K'. \V. Co. v. The Queen 
 Herod V. Ferguson . 
 Herriiigton, Howard v. 
 Hes|ieler v. Caini)l.ell 
 Hess Alfg. Co., ke- Kdgai- v. Sloan 
 Hess Mfg. Co., Re-Sloan's Case 
 
 He.ssin V. Uoyd— H,. \,„.th I'ertli 
 
 Hett v. .lanzcn 
 
 Hett V. I'uu I'ong . . '.[ 
 
 He ward v. O'Donohoe .', [' 
 
 Hewish, Moorhouse \ . 
 
 Hewitt V. Cane 
 
 Hewitt, Poll V. 
 
 Hil.l.ard, Ke ][ '[ 
 
 Hieker.son V. I'ariiiigton 
 Hiekey v. Hiekey .'. , [ 
 
 Hieks, Aldous v. . . 
 Hickson, (Jrahbe v. . . 
 Higgins, ,St. Denis v. .'. 
 
 Hiles V. Townsliip of Ellioe 
 
 Hill V. Aslibridge . . 
 Hineliinl.rooke,' I'ownship of, MeKav v 
 Hohhs V. Ontario L. & I). Co. . ' 
 Holison V. ShauMon 
 Hodge, Hegina v. . . 
 Ho.lgins and City of Toronto, Re ' 
 lodL'iMs V. City of Toronto 
 Hogaliiioiu V. Cox 
 Hogaliooni V. Ciliies 
 
 Hogabooin /. firaydon 
 I Hogaboom v. Grundy 
 
 Voi.r.MK AM) Paok. 
 
 Cor.tM.N OK DiOK.ST. 
 
 22 0. R. 66 
 
 ,-';} S. C. R. Ifi4 . 
 
 •21 S. C. R. 2;i . 
 
 •22 A. R, .(lis 
 
 Hi 1'. R. i;iii 
 
 10 S. C. It. ;{(« .. 
 
 •22 (). R. 5S;i, 20 A. R. .'!70 .•(72. ;r;{ S-'S 
 
 :iM>. n.^502,.,0A. R. i,^,;,,, "• 
 
 . . 7.'?.S. 
 . . (i40. 
 .,1410. 
 . 1 100. 
 . . 244. 
 
 } 
 
 I 201, -.'.'{S. C. U. 02:{.. / 
 
 • . •2.{ ( ». R. ;<s7, 20 A. R. (j:j;{ 
 ),-•;< O. i:. ;«.-,, 21 A. R, 
 / I 104, -24 S. C. K. 201 
 
 14 1'. R. 21, 105 .. 
 
 15 1>. R. .'Wl 
 •■i Fx. C. I{. 40 . . 
 ■.^2 ,S. C. R. 4S9 . 
 14 1'. l:. rM 
 
 •2.'i7,2li5,5.-);!, ,551, ,5S,5. 
 21!, (;55, 950. 
 
 :2(), 2;)5. 
 4s;{, siu, S17. 
 
 'sol. 
 
 7(i, S7.'?. 
 
 210, 49:!, .5:{S, ,575, 
 
 iilo R. 
 
 ■f>0 It. 50;i, 20 0. R. 270:91, 187, K2(t. 
 .! lo .R.2o8,407.. . . ':M0, ;i47, ;!0H, 40^, ,00. 
 
 i-r^X' i, ' ■■ ■■ •^'^' "'•■<i- 
 
 12.) (). R. 5S;{ . iT-.u 
 
 i^^i^-H.?.. .. ::!9so: 
 
 i^;;V ;•-•*- •• ..!iio,(!oo. 
 ""•'^•••«'i .. ..;.s-2, -so 
 
 2(10. K. (178 .. . , 200, •20:'. 
 
 -'••H). 1!. ;{27, -20 .-V. U.\ , '" 
 
 I 04(i, 2;-; ,s. c'. R 71(1 I -*•'•'. ■*«-. <wo. 
 
 jl!|i;-|M:,^''--^^''-^'-t "1.212,829,786. 
 • jlSS. C. I!. (iOS .. 77.) 
 
 ■|'''I'-I'-2-H .. . /•24S; 2.M, 765. 
 
 I 26 0. R. (1(17,27 0. R. 40.'s52. 
 .21 O. R. J1.3 
 .;1(1 P. l;. 420 
 . 24 .■•<. C. R. I 
 . •2.; O. R. 505 
 .i20 A. I!. 175 
 .!14 1>. R. 18 
 .'•2:!S. C. R. (U4 . 
 
 ;2;iO. H. lS-2,21 A. R. (iO,) 
 
 I 2;iS. (J. I!. OH ,. '( 
 . 21 O. R. .-,;!S 
 .'22 0. R. 414 
 
 IHS. C. R. 290 
 
 . . 270, 464. 
 ..i2I(). 
 
 142, .•J0(), 027. 
 
 20;{. 
 
 10, 51, 251, 985. 
 
 20, 2.55, 900. 
 
 151, 002. 
 
 ISA. l!..-,29, I9.S.(''.R. .•U ]■()•») 
 
 151, 902. 
 
 165, 482, 761. 
 .■)0;}, 001. 
 9i;?, 914. 
 
 22 A. R. 172 
 2(1 O. R. 18;{ 
 
 •2:1 (). i;. (110 
 
 14 P. II. 177 
 
 ISA. R, (;:j5 
 
 •20 O. R. ;i7i 
 '21 O. II. 95 
 !l4P. R. 42 
 ;24 O. R. 2;!() 
 120 A. It. 225, 2 
 
 16 P. R. .-..58 
 20 A. R. 44 
 24 ,S. C. R. 55 
 
 lis s. c. R. is:! . 
 1-20 0. R. 554. 27 O. Pv. ]]'i^ii:). 
 2:|(). R. 4.50 ..501. 
 
 2!. O. It. 480, 2;! A. R. 80 
 10 A. R. 5:57 
 
 15 I'. R, 2;!, !27 
 
 16 P. It. 96, •20!( 
 16 P. It. 402 
 •26 0. R. 298 
 10 P. R. 47 ■ • • 
 
 , 642 
 
 ..:921. 
 ..;:W7, 421, 
 . . I649. 
 ...501. 
 . . 69, 467. 
 ..,10:i.5. 
 . . 4166. S2.'i. 
 ..411,64S. 
 . . 424, 020. 
 
 S.C.R.429. 70;i, 707, 709,71 
 . . 2;is. 
 
 . . 080. 
 
 20, 207, 056. 
 006. 
 
 725. 
 
 005. 
 
 40-2, 416, 000. 
 ,546. 
 
 11, 544, 802. 
 1109, 491. 
 |o44, 804. 
 
zzxii 
 
 TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 Hog-Hun] 
 
 Na.mk (IK Case. 
 
 X'OLIMIH AMI 1'a(, 
 
 llogiiljoom V. Liiiit . . 
 HugalMMiin V. M(.'l)(mal(l 
 
 Ildgaii, lloUid.iy v. . 
 
 lliiLjai'lh, Kouniicr v. 
 Ilogiirth, Rugiua v. . 
 Jldgi,', Hall V. 
 
 Ildg^'iiii V. Ksiiuimalt ami Xaiuiimo I!. \V. Co, | 
 
 Hollaiul V. I!(is8 
 Hollciider V. l'"f<mlkes 
 
 20 A. R. ) 
 K. 47I». J 
 
 K. 2.r>, [ISiU] I 
 
 -lit 
 
 llollulay V. Hogan 
 
 HdUiday v. Jackson 
 
 Holliiiger v. Caiiailiaii I'auific R. \V. Co. 
 
 HolliHtur V. Aiiiialjlo 
 
 Hulmes, He ('1 uke and 
 
 Holt V. Towiisliii) (if Mt'donte 
 
 Honiu Saviiiga and Loan (Jo. '.s Case 
 
 Central Hank of Canada 
 Hoof.slettoi- V. Rooker , , 
 Hopt; V. ( iiMnt 
 Hopo, Ko Could V. 
 Hojikins, Leu v. . . 
 H irkin.s, Malioney v. 
 Hdi'iie, M(!oiiiani v. 
 Horning, Diifton v. 
 Hiirsfall V. Boissean 
 Ildi'tiii, 'I'ninilik' v. 
 Hditoii v. Casey 
 Horton v. Hunipliri(.'s 
 HosL", Brown v. 
 Houghton V. Bell . . 
 Houston, .Siiiitli v. 
 Houston, He Wilson and . . 
 Howard, Connnis.sioncr.sfor the 'Jneen Victoria ( 
 
 Niagara Fidls I'ark v. ... / 
 
 Howard v. Herriiiglon 
 Howard, Townshij) of, (.'onfccU^ration Li{c\ 
 
 .'UP. U. 4H0 
 
 .ill I'. R. -WO 
 12-2 (». II. 2;,'.,, 
 2il,S, 22 S. C 
 .|l.il>. R. 72 
 .:2lO. l;. 00 
 . 2(»(). R. i;{ 
 
 14 !'. R. 4.-. 
 
 20 S. (J 
 A. C. 42!) 
 
 10 .'■'. C. R. .".(ii; . . 
 
 If) I'. H. 17.-, 
 
 BiP. R. 22.-I, 315.. 
 
 20 U. n. 01 
 22 O. H. 2:)r), 20 A. I!. ) 
 
 2!,,., 22 ,S. C. R..170. j 
 22 .S. C. U.4-'.) .. 
 
 21 (). R. 705, 20 A. R. 244. 
 14 P. it. II 
 
 il.-> P. H. 200, l(i P. [{. 04. 
 
 22 O. U. .302 
 
 18 A. K. 4S0 
 
 Cm. I MN OK 1)|(1I-.ST. 
 
 078. 
 |07H. 
 
 ■BIO, l;f7, H24. 
 
 '217. 
 580. 
 (il,".. 
 215,240,01l,(ii;{, (il4. 
 
 now. 
 
 .;22A.U. 175,20 8. C.H. 41. 
 
 .|2!J O. K. (i'_';{ 
 
 .121 (). l;.024,20A. It. :i47. 
 
 .120 0. i:. oiio 
 
 ■il4 P. R. 117 
 .i20O. R. i.'07 
 
 120 O. 
 
 121 A. 
 
 Ii. '_'.)■_' 
 
 R. eoit 
 
 !22 A. K. 51. 
 '22 S. C. R. 7.S0 
 122 S. C. H. TM) 
 1 14 P. R. -.i 
 2.3 S. C R. 498 
 
 115 P. 
 
 |20 O. 
 
 IS 
 5;{2 
 
 / 
 
 07 
 40(i. 
 
 R. 
 -'.3 O. R. 
 
 20 A. H. 
 
 25 O. 1!. 
 
 IS A. R. 
 2,3 (). R. .3!M) 
 24 O. R. .-i(il 
 
 21 A. i; 
 15 
 10 
 
 10 P. Ii 
 -'OO. Ii 
 18 S. C 
 14 P. R 
 
 1 , 2;! A. R. 35 
 
 4M 
 R. .50, •.'2 ,S. C. R. 1,30 
 R. 514 
 R. 37S 
 R. 270 
 
 R. 110 .. 
 
 215 
 
 36 
 
 Ass'n v 
 Howard and Oiford, Ru Towuship.s of 
 lldwarth V. .Moliiigan 
 ilowarth, Rogina v. 
 Ilowdon V. Lako .Simcou Ice Co. . . 
 IBuvlaud V. Dominion Bank 
 Howlaud V. Ins. Co. of North America 
 Howson, Thompson v. 
 
 Hidililo, Cole V 
 
 Hulilcy, Archiliald v. 
 
 Hudson and Runscy, Langnian v. . . ^.. 
 
 Hulfman, Br.intfoi-d, Waterloo, and Lake Kriel ,, . , 
 
 R. W. Co. V , . . . ) i ' « A. R. 415, H) ,S.{;. R. 3 
 
 Hughe.s, Bank of British North America v. 
 Hughes, llegina v. 
 Hull, Donohoe v. . . 
 Huui[)hrey v. Archibald . . 
 
 Humphrey v. The (,>iieen 
 
 Humphries, Kmeraon v. , . 
 Iium|ihries, Horton v. . . 
 Humphries, Be Trustees o' School .Section iL.Z " , 
 
 Nd. 5 of the Township of Asphodel and /i*-* "• ^' *^''- 
 Hunt, Cranfl V, .. .. .. !20 0. R. 041 
 
 Hunt, Morgan v lop, ()! Ii. 50S 
 
 Hunt V. .Shaver . . . . . . . J22 A. R. 202 
 
 10 P. B. 
 
 20 O. R. 4S0 
 24 S. C. R. 0S3 .. 
 
 21 (). R. 553, 20 A. R. 207 
 ffi Kx. C. R. 3S0, 20 S. \ 
 11 C. R. 501 .. / 
 
 .!15P. R. 84 
 122 S. C. R. 7.39 . . 
 
 Hunt V. Taplin 
 
 !1 S. C. R. .30 
 
 311. 
 
 5.30, 572. 
 225, 803. 
 570, 793. 
 
 100, 137,824. 
 
 100, 137, 824. 
 
 .S47. 
 
 405, 410, 884. 
 
 2,32, 904. 
 
 S,33. 
 
 03, 150. 
 
 1 1 3, 0(1,3, 802. 
 !73, 40S, 
 431, 515. 
 497, 703. 
 577, 077. 
 550. 
 01 10, 012, 017. 
 110. 
 
 27, 741. 
 022. 
 022. 
 211. 
 
 iOS, 024, 1021. 
 S()9. 
 i7, 998. 
 
 .309. 
 
 0, 51,251, 985. 
 
 002, 700. 
 
 710. 
 
 V17, 741. 
 
 273, 05S. 
 
 7.37. 
 
 21, 8M. 
 
 4S1, 801. 
 
 791,793, 078, 996. 
 
 S, 15, 8.S3. 
 
 105, 430. 
 
 770. 
 
 114. 
 
 lie, 812. 
 141, ,587, 857. 
 |.'>9, 491. 
 |399, 404. 
 
 201,. 304, 394. 
 
 500, 547, 073. 
 022. 
 
 834, 900. 
 
 320, 559. 
 00, ,528. 
 581, 709. 
 190, 340, 944. 
 
 I 
 
TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 C'oi.r.MN ()i- Dkikst 
 
 t7S. 
 )7s. 
 
 ;it(), 1,17, H'.'f. 
 
 !17. 
 
 iS(i. ■ 
 ilT). 
 
 iir>,'J4o,(iii,(ii;i, (;i4. 
 
 !()S. 
 111. 
 
 .'(i), ")72. 
 •J.-), 803. 
 70, 793. 
 
 00, i;t7, S2J. 
 
 00, l:!7, S24. 
 
 47. 
 
 0."), 410, 884. 
 
 .•(•2, !l(»4. 
 
 Xi. 
 
 ■,i, IDO. 
 
 :!, (ilili, 8(i2. 
 :i, 4(is. 
 fl, ."il.-). 
 17, 7(i;{. 
 1 1, 0(7. 
 ■,o. 
 
 i!», (ilL', 017. 
 10. 
 
 r, 741. 
 
 4. 
 
 )S, (i24, 1 02 1. 
 
 »!>. 
 
 ', 098. 
 
 19. 
 
 I, 51, 251, 085. 
 
 ■2, 700. 
 
 0. 
 
 7, 741. 
 
 ;f, o,')S. 
 
 ,"h14. 
 
 t, 801. 
 
 1 . 79:i, 078, 990. 
 
 I."), 8s;j. 
 
 5, 43(). 
 
 0. 
 
 1. 
 
 , SI 2. 
 , 587, 857. 
 , 491. 
 ), 404. 
 
 1, 304,394. 
 
 J, 547, 073. 
 >_ 
 
 1, 900. 
 
 ), 559. 
 
 528. 
 
 , 790. 
 
 t, 340, 94K 
 
 xzziii 
 
 Hun-Jen] Namk dk Casu. 
 
 V'oI.CMK AND 1'a<IK. 
 
 I 
 
 Ifiintcr'n I.icon.st', Ro 
 lliiiitci- V. Ciiind 'i'niiik U. \V. (V). 
 lliiMlur V. raltcrsoii, Kit . . 
 lluMtiiiadim, Viihi','c of. Moil' v, ! ! '.', 
 
 IIiiiitiM;;toii V. Attiill 
 
 Ifuntsvillu, Village of, Ale.vaii(lt>r v. 
 Iliuil V. Itu.itwick . . 
 
 Iliinliimii V. Canada Atluntiu K. \V. Co. 
 
 Huron, County of. Township of Morris v 
 iliirtfau, RosH v. . . 
 Ifiirtuhiso V. Dusmartfau . . ,. [[ 
 
 Una V. School ('onirninsioni'rH fm' (ho Miinici 
 
 pahty of tliu Parish of .Sto. Victoiru 
 Tluson anil Township of South Norwich Ru 
 iruhou V. Townsliip of .South Norwich ' 
 Hutchinson, Martin v. . . 
 Hiitson V. \'allicr.s , . . ' 
 
 Hntton, ill! Wilson v. 
 Hyatt V. .Mills 
 Hysop, Frontcuac L. & I. Society v. [ '. 
 
 Imperial liank, IViichcn v. 
 hnpcrial Fire Ins. Co. V. Hull 
 Ingersoll, Town of. Ho Wilson and 
 
 I nncs V. Ferguson / 
 
 Ins. Co. of Xorth America, llowland v 
 
 Intelligencer I'rinting Co., Beaton V 
 
 International Coal Co. v. County of CapcBret-ln 
 
 Inverness Kleelion Case .. .. 
 
 hclanil, Sanvidge v. . . ' . 
 
 Irvine v. Maeaulay. . 
 
 Irvine, Mel'hersoii v. . . ' ' 
 
 Irvine, Williams v . . 
 
 Irwin V. Turner . . , . [ 
 
 Irwin, Victoria Harbour Lumber Co. v" 
 
 labister, Frothingluun v 
 
 Isbistcr, Ray v. 
 
 Cof.UM.N OK Dkikst. 
 
 •-'to, R. |.-,;j, 522.. 
 
 1 01'. i;. .'ts.-, 
 
 22(). |{, .-,71 
 
 19 S. ('. H. ;i(;;{ . 
 
 jl7 (). II. 245, 18 A. U.] 
 130, '.'0 A. R. App-x i., I 
 1 1893] A. C. 1.10 j 
 
 24(). R. (;(),-, ' 
 
 10 I'. R. 121 
 
 25(). I!, -joo, •2-2 ,\. R. \ 
 292, 25 S. C. R, 'J0,5 ) 
 
 2(i(). R. (i89, 27 U. R. .341 
 
 l«S. C. R. 713 ., 
 
 19 S. C. R. ,-,02 . . 
 
 I9.S. C. R. 477 .. 
 
 9A. I!. ;m,21S.C.R, 609 
 ••^4 S. C. R. 14.-, 
 
 ■-'I <). R. .388 
 
 19 A. R. I.-,4 
 
 23 0. R. -JO 
 
 502. 
 399. 
 980. 
 -'0, 20(1, 948. 
 
 400, 543, 787. 
 
 53, 092. 
 
 207, 794, 981. 
 
 S19. 
 
 090, 931. 
 874. 
 929, 942. 
 
 834. 
 
 121, 558, 698. 
 
 lOli. 
 
 2li9, 359, 642. 
 
 247,249, .30.-,, 009, 012. 
 ..371. 
 
 20O. R.^^,, ,,,A.H,329 54,:i;5,312.33C,337 
 -1 <». K. ,,,7 ,, ,jyg 
 
 20 (). I!. 325 
 
 |lf<S. C. R. 097 
 25 (). R. 439 
 
 -'lA.R. 32,3,24 8. C.R.'V 
 
 Island V. Township of Amaranth. 
 Israel v. Leith 
 
 J. 
 
 J. C. Ayer Co. , The Queen v. . 
 
 •J. P. Hush Mfg. Co. V. Hanson . . 
 .lackson, Hager v. . . 
 
 Jackson, Hoiliday v. . . ' ' 
 
 Jackson, Moore v. . . 
 
 Jackson, Mylius v 
 
 Jackson v. the Queon . .' ,', 
 
 Jackson, Whidden v. 
 
 Jacobs V. Robinson. 
 
 James, Kerry v. . . ,[ 
 
 Janes v. O'Keefe . . 
 
 Janzen, Hett v. . . \[ 
 
 Jarvis, Chapman v. 
 
 Jarvis V. City of Toronto! .' [] 
 
 Jarvis, Ornisby v. . . 
 
 -fonkius, Re MoIJmurray and 
 
 Jenkins and Township of ICnniskiUeu, R- 
 
 E 
 
 70.3 
 10 I'. R. ,-,14 
 22 A. R. i)7 
 22 .S. ('. R. 30.-, .; 
 20 S. C. R. WJ .. 
 14 1'. R. 29 
 10 R R. 181 
 2(i(). R. 4,38 
 
 • 22 .S. C. R. I OS . 
 
 • I Hi P. R. .349 
 
 24S. c. R. (i07 ;; 
 
 14 P. I!. 112 
 
 24(). R. 497, 22 A. R. 
 
 12, 2(i S. C. R. 79 
 10 P. R. 3 . . 
 20O. R. .301 ■ 
 
 1 E.x. C. R. 2.32 
 '^ Kx. C. R. ,-,57 
 P. R. 48") 
 22 S. C. R. 479 
 20 O. i;. 0.52. 19 
 
 89, 877, 973. 
 "'19, 071. 
 121, .559, 696. 
 
 379, 02.3. 
 
 4S4, 801. 
 
 3.30, .341. 
 
 5,3, 8,-,0. 
 
 757, 7.58. 
 
 10, 908. 
 
 38.3, 882. 
 
 440, 483, 962. 
 
 930, 943. 
 
 791, 978. 
 ..192, 904. 
 . . 175, 402. 
 
 \ 7, 392, 394, 775, 770, 
 / 804. 
 
 211. 
 
 379. 
 
 A. R. 
 
 .S83, 22 S. C. R. 210 
 
 494. 
 
 23 S. C. R. 485 
 I Kk. C. R. 144 
 ISA. R. 4,39 
 Hi P. R. 1 .. 
 
 21 A. R. 338 
 
 20 O. R. 489, 23 A. R. 129 
 
 22 (). R. 414 
 22 O. R, 1 1 
 
 21 A.R...39.-,, 25.S.C.R.237 
 
 22 0. R. 1 1 
 22 A. R. 398 
 
 '■'> 0. R. 399 
 
 867. 
 908. 
 
 213, 247. 
 100, 137, 
 
 824. 
 
 495. 
 ■95. 
 
 28, ■ 
 288. 
 73, 246. 
 208, 617. 
 '4, 10,5, 112. 
 50, 597. 
 593, 601. 
 Si, 107. 
 379, 860. 
 81, 107. 
 788. 
 44, 120, 709, 713, 
 
xzxiv 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Jen-Ken] 
 
 Namk ok Ca:ik. 
 
 Ji'miiiiK'* V. WilliH 
 
 Je.f.'tie Stowiiit, 'I'lio 
 
 Joiviiiifttr, ('(iiiip.iiiy of Ailvonturei 
 
 land V. . , 
 .Io(l(jiii, liiiiKiiic il' Ilofliulaya V, . . 
 .lolins, Ko Jlra/.ill v. 
 Jolirifion V. Allen 
 
 .Iiihnson V. (iiiuid 'rrmik it. \V. Co. 
 .((ilins.in V. .liMius 
 JolmsDU V. .Miiitiu . . 
 Jdlinson V. MiKciizic 
 Jolin.s^m, i'ciiiilc's Munk of Halifax v 
 Johu-son's (!o. , HiiJH .\sl)esl(i.s(*o. v. 
 ■IcihnstiiM V. llurnM 
 .lolinHtou V. City of TorontD 
 ili'lmston, UoMiiliuo V. 
 Jdlmston V. Kwait . . 
 JcilinstoM, .Mason v. 
 .Jones (I). A.) (;,,., i;,. .. \[ 
 JoneH V. (ioil.son 
 Jones V. (iraml Trnnk It. \\ 
 Jone.s, tJoiiiison v. . 
 Jones V. Kelland I 
 JonuN V. Maediin.ilil 
 
 iif Ki)g 
 
 (_•(: 
 
 Parsons 
 
 tlonea, MoKcan v. 
 Jonus V. Millci 
 
 Jones, Moodie \ . . . 
 
 Jones V. I 'a \ ton . . . , . . ' 
 
 Joselin, Wood v. . . 
 
 .Foi'.itial I'riotin;,' Co. v. Mael.ean 
 
 J..yee, Halifa.\ Street R. \V. Co. v. 
 
 Jndali, Atlantio and Xoith-W'est K. \V. Co. 
 
 Judge V. S|)Iaiin 
 
 Jury v. Jury. . 
 
 Juatiii, Ilegina v. . , 
 
 K. 
 
 Kane, iMooro v. 
 
 Kavanagli, Connecticut Fire Ins. {'o. v 
 
 Kavariagli v. f^cMnon 
 
 Keacliic V. City of Toronto 
 
 Kearney v. Oakcs . 
 
 Kearney v. 'I'lic (,)uccn 
 
 Keating V. (Jraliani. . 
 
 Keen v. Codd 
 
 Kecfer, lie Andrews v. 
 
 Keefer, l{e liarry v. 
 
 Keefer, Re IVrras v. 
 
 Kelland, Jones v. — lie Parsons .. 
 
 Kelly V. Arohiliaid 
 
 Kelly V. 15arton . . 
 
 Kelly, lie Sims v. 
 
 Kelly V. Wiido . . . . ',[ 
 
 Kendell v. L'rnst . . 
 
 Kennedy v. American E.xpross Co. 
 
 Kennedy v. I'igott 
 
 Kennedy v. Protestant Orphans' Home. 
 
 Kennedy, Wilkes v. 
 
 Kenney, Rluckley v. . . . . ' , 
 
 Kenney v. The t^nccn , , 
 
 Kennin V. .Macdoiiald 
 
 Kenny v. Caldwell . . , . .' ' 
 
 _ 
 
 N'or.lMK .\NI) p 
 
 \i'K. CoLl'MN OK IJIOKST. 
 
 
 •2-2 (>. U. 4m 
 
 1 
 
 . til4. 
 
 • .-tKx. ( . H. VM . 
 
 . . 4'-'.-., H9M. 
 
 ^■j •-';i,S. C, R. 41;-) 
 
 , . 409. 
 
 .. flN!).-)] A. C. (!12 . 
 
 .. Ktl, 8'JO. 
 
 • i-'t <». R. o(i<( 
 
 . . |;J7.'), .S:i«. 
 
 .. -'(iO. R. .-,.-.() 
 
 . .i7(i". 
 
 ■ • '.'.■><». R. (M, 21 ,\, 
 
 U. 408 S4(), so:), 979. 
 
 .. -'(i (). R. 1(19 
 
 ..j.-ioo, io;m. 
 
 ■ •IP.) A. R. ,-.!»•_> 
 
 ..100. 
 
 •■'•-'(H). R. l.'d 
 
 . . '447. 
 
 ••;-'"S. C. R. ,-,tl .. 
 
 ..lit, ISO. 
 
 • . ;-'••! S. ( '. R oo-, . 
 
 . . ;i;i4, 7S9. 
 
 • .iL';to. li. 170, r.M'i.. 
 
 . . 79. 
 
 • .•-•")<). R. ;r-_' 
 
 .. 7;io. 
 
 • •'UP. R. I7(i 
 
 . ^ ;i9:). 
 
 • '-MO. R. 11(1 
 
 .. :ioi. 
 
 • •:-'() A. It. \l-2 
 
 . . .t, .■)(i9, (i;t;{. 
 
 ■ 19 A. R. (I.'i 
 
 .. l.'i!, I.M, JIS, 2."0. 
 
 ■-'•■> i>. 1^ HI, 'Jii A 
 
 It. :u;m. 
 
 ■ • Hi A.R. ;!7, iss, c 
 
 R. (!9(i S4S. 
 
 • • •-'() O. H. 109 
 
 .. •"lOO, io;!4. 
 
 .. 14 P. li. Ill 
 
 .. tl."), ",oi, 7,s,"». 
 
 •■ 11 P. R. 109 
 
 . . ,.'iso. 
 
 .. 14 p. li.. ->;(,-. 
 
 , 2*!, 221, •_'.">;!. 
 
 .. \r, p. li. iii.-, 
 
 . . 1 7."), 07S. 
 
 •■ 19. S. C. li. 4S9 .. 
 
 .. 1 •'!-'. 7(i;t. 
 
 •■ -M (). p. L'dS 
 
 . . i4,'i, 7(i;i. 
 
 ■ . It! 1'. li. 9'.' 
 
 . . ■_';is. 
 
 • • 19 s. c. R. m; .: 
 
 .. -i, ist, (;.S4. 
 
 19 A. It. IDS 
 
 . . iitiS. 
 
 . . >S A. li. .-,9 
 
 • . <'7, .'!(il. 
 
 :."'». R. -,09, -2:1 A. 1 
 
 \. .^'.M ;i.i:f. 
 
 • -Ji.S. C. R. '.'.TS 
 
 ,. 9;r.. 
 
 V- -'.^S C. li. o;}[ . 
 
 .. Sol. 
 
 . -'-'(). R. 409 
 
 .. I0-27. 
 
 . Pi P. R. -Air, 
 
 . . r.i. 
 
 . 2 
 
 1 0. R. ;«- 
 
 ..'07, 711, lOPJ. 
 
 • i-'K). R. .111 
 
 . [IS9'_>| A. C.47:! 
 . l(i p. R. -229 
 
 • •-'•_' A. R. :!71 
 
 
 . . (!00, 749. 
 . . v.'7. 
 
 .. 4.VJ, .-,01, 7S.-). 
 .. 71(i. 
 
 • ;18 S. C. R. 14H 
 
 • •-' Kx. C. R. •_>! 
 i'(i(). It. iilil 
 14 P. li. IS-J 
 22 ( I. R. (i7-_> 
 
 
 . . '.'SO, ;ior), 970. 
 
 . . L'SO, '.'S.'j. 
 
 . . k;-.', .■.04, S7:?. 
 
 . ii.'iti, 500, 07.'!. 
 
 . :!0'_'. 
 
 •-'•_'(). R. (i7-_' 
 ■J-' ( 1. R. (i7-2 
 14 P. R. 144 
 
 •• 
 
 . . !;)o-_'. 
 
 ..Il4.">, ."lOl, 7S,-.. 
 
 2(1 0. R. (lOS, •.'•_' 
 
 A. R. 
 
 r,.Jl>i, 41, ,-,SI, 040, 041 
 
 ""l 1 727 
 
 •20 0. It. nos, -i^ 
 
 A. It. 
 
 ■>22''''^'i'.;'''''^'' ''-*"• •'^1 
 
 20 0. R. -291 
 14 P. R. l;j, 00 
 
 ■• 
 
 . . :m, ,s2.s, 9-'->. 
 . . .">(i7. 
 
 10 T. R. 107 
 •i-' A. R. L'7S 
 ISS. C. It. 099 
 
 
 .. .'W.S, ,S01, 812. 9S4. 
 
 . . pj:{, :^2.\ 
 
 . . .'iO. 
 
 •-•.".(). R. 2Hr, 
 10 P. R. i.'Ot 
 
 
 ..i44S, S09, !0;)1. 
 
 . . ir)7.'i, ri9.>. 
 
 IS A. K. \:u; 
 
 
 . . SL''.'. 
 
 1 Ex. C. R. tiS 
 22 0. R. 4S-I 
 
 
 .. I.SO, .-i-Jti, 41, S. 
 ..;.•!.'! 1, .'^OO, 911. 
 
 Labcr 
 
 i21 A. R. 110, 24S.C.R. G99;!3.-., 4-J;i, 7S9. 
 
 S. Landed B 
 
4r 
 
 Cot.U.MN OF DkiKHT. 
 
 U. 
 
 -V), N!)s. 
 
 lit). 
 
 (I, 8-JO. 
 
 III. 
 
 tii, hi;;!, iirg, 
 
 )(), io;m. 
 
 17. 
 
 t, ISO. 
 i», 7s(t. 
 I. 
 
 '.'). 
 I. 
 
 ■i, l.V), '.'IS, 2".0. 
 
 s. 
 
 i», i(»;u. 
 
 I'l, Ml, 7.s,">. 
 
 I). 
 
 , -'-'I, ■ra 
 
 ■i, ."i7S. 
 
 -'. 7(i;f. 
 
 I St, 034. 
 .■1(11. 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 XXXV 
 
 711, lOl'.'. 
 
 . 719 
 
 
 
 Ml 
 
 , 7S.-). 
 
 
 •.iory 
 •js:t 
 
 .jOO 
 
 970. 
 
 S73. 
 073. 
 
 
 .".01, 7S.-.. 
 ■41, nsi, MO, 
 727. 
 
 41. 5S|, (UO, 
 7:^7. 
 
 s;iS, f»2-). 
 
 04 
 04 
 
 801, 
 
 SI 2. 084 
 
 
 ,S(1!), 
 f)92. 
 
 1031. 
 
 
 .•iL>(i, 
 
 I-.';!, 
 
 41,>r 
 
 oil. 
 
 780. 
 
 
 Ken-Lan] N.^uk ok Ct^K. 
 
 liiuit.t' lliiiik of Caiiiul.i v! 
 
 IiIm'II 
 
 V. 
 
 !u .Stcpjic'iison 
 lie hougliiH. , 
 
 Kent V. KriiL 
 
 Kcrfoof, V. Villii;^c i.f Wilt fold 
 
 Kcii' V. .Siiiilli, l<c 
 
 K.ir KngiiK' Co, V. I'i<.|i.li Itivcr 
 
 Ki'iiy V. .laiiicit 
 
 Ki'trlmiii, .Mci( 
 
 Kidil V. IVrry 
 
 KiiiL,', KviuiH V. 
 
 Kiiij,', Si'etnii V. 
 
 l\iiif,'liorii V. I.aiiif 
 
 Kiii«'h (.\.,S.) Kk'iuicjii Ciisii 
 
 l\iiif,'ston iiiul l!;i(li Toiiil (•,,_ Cj,', 
 
 Kiiij^ston, City of, O.slioriiu v. 
 
 Kiiij,'Htoiip, Miildwin 
 
 Kiniii'iir v. Aspilcn 
 Kiiiiifiii', .McUc'iii V. 
 Kililii'c, lii'yct! V. 
 KiliMPc V. .M;illoy--| 
 Kiiiscy V. DoiiyliiH — 
 Kiiisfy V. Kiii.sry . . 
 Kiik uiid Mi.rliiiy's Ciisir^Ifarln 
 I'ixiiri'Mu luid Triuispoitatioii ( 
 Kiik, 'I'owiiMliiixjf r.oyau v. 
 Kirkl.iiid, McNuinani'v. . .' \[ 
 
 Mtilicii, ClianilicrH v. 
 Kittrodgf, 'I'ootlwj v. | 
 
 Klcjcpftr V. Waiiiook. 
 
 Klot.:, l!o Village of IVcstoii uiid 
 N iiai r V. iirickur 
 
 Kniokorliofker Co. v. Uatz ,, 
 
 Kiii<,'lit V. 'I'own of Ridgetowii . . 
 Knott, ('ami v. . . . . ' 
 
 Kiiowlfs, l!i! 
 Kiiinvltiin, IJiick v. 
 Kiiust, llariliiii,' v. . . [] [' 
 
 Kocli V. HuiHoy . . . ' '' 
 
 Kofli and Widc'iiiaii, I!u . . ' 
 
 Kopinaii, Doiill v. , . 
 Kiuli V. .Moses 
 
 L. 
 
 Lab crgc v. Equitable Life As.s. Society. 
 
 Labrador Co. v. Tlie Queen '. ' 
 
 Ldcostu V. Wilson . . 
 
 I.aidlaw V. O'Connor 
 
 I-udlaw, Patten v. . , ,' " ,' 
 
 L.ikefield Lumber Co. v. Shairn 
 Lake .Sinieoe Ice Co., liowdeu v 
 Lake .Siipen.,,- .Mineral Co., French v. 
 Liilonde, llraljant v. . 
 Lamb v. Cleveland . . .', 
 
 Lamb, Morse v. 
 
 VoMMK AM. I'a.,1.;. Col.fMV „K DnuiST. 
 
 ■ . '.MM ). I!. |,-,s, 14,-,, lUA. lt.:i,-.L''4!Mt. C,->H 
 
 •■-»<>• It. -'.'».-. .. ..:;o,-.. " ■ 
 
 •-<'•'!. 473 . . ;io,-., SOO. 
 
 • ■ -'I A. It. 100, '.H. S.C.I!. 7(»;i;f't 
 
 ■ 7'. ^ ,"• •■'•''^ ■ :i, M>.-., II'-'. 
 
 ■ 111 I'. I.'. liOii Kii 
 • Lt I'. It. ,')0» 40,1 
 
 f '-'••I <». \{. .|,H, o| ^^ ,{ . ' 
 
 I ••■il). '.MS. C. I!. ;i,-,,; ■«'. lO-'-'. 
 
 ■ IS ,S. C. 1;. 712 .1., 
 
 ■■•f-'S. C. I{. 347 . TllO, 
 
 ■ '9S. C. K. .-,j(| .. ;-,^' 
 
 • • IS A.I!. '-NO. •JOS.C.K. (;o,-. 1017. 
 
 • Mo. I!. ;i,s2 
 
 l<!o. 1;. ;ui, ISA. It. o;m' .'tsi'l] .4.-,! .-.so 
 , »'"• App'x .. / 1041. 
 
 !• A. i. Ids . . . ,;o4. 
 
 0.10, 
 
 V. Ontario 
 
 •-'3 0. I!. ;i|3 
 
 14 1'. It. ,-,0!) 
 
 24 O. H. ;i!i.-, 
 
 220. I!. ,V,3 
 
 •j'-'OO. I!. 00 
 
 j,-M O. It. .'ilO 
 
 14 I', i!. |;io 
 
 S .\. K. 271 
 
 04. 
 
 .|l!l."., ;i23, OlM, 014. 
 . '.".40. 
 
 .\ur,. 
 
 .II02S. 
 
 io;io. 
 
 147. 
 
 •220,231. 
 . .24,"., 01,-., OIU. 
 
 .•<'-'t, iss. c. it. 701 'ji"'J- 
 
 Ifi I'. R. 31S . Iq.) on 
 
 loiM!. .m't .. ;::8iV 
 
 11) 1'. I!. .30, lO; . !o.j.j „n. 
 
 14 1'. 1!. HI .. •d;;'-^^' 
 
 }0O. R. 422,20 0. R. 294143'r. 
 913. 
 0. 
 
 200. 
 
 370, 1031. 
 3.-)7, 440. 
 70. 
 •■)2,-,, 103.3. 
 
 10 I'. R. 408 
 lil S. C. R. 371 
 I "> 1'. R. SO 
 200. I!. 87 
 • |2.". (). R. 2(i2 
 22 A. R. 447 
 -'2 O. it. .307 
 
 Lambe, (ireal Eastern It. W. Co v 
 Lanark, X'illage (,f, Re Campbell ami 
 Lancaster v. liyckmaii 
 LaneeHel.l v. Anglo-Canadian Mu.^ie 
 
 ing Ass'n (Limited) . . 
 i.and Security Co. v. \Vil.soii 
 
 Publi 
 
 Landed Banking and Loan Co. 
 
 Cm 
 
 liming V. 
 
 24 .S. C. R. iJO 
 |'24 .S. C. R. 59,". . 
 [l.S9;}J A. C. 104 .. 
 
 20 .S. C. R. 218 . 
 230. R. 000 
 
 •200. It. ISO ,; 
 
 7 A. R. 322, 19 S. C 1 
 R. (i.-.7 
 
 21 A. R. 414 
 14 1'. R. .-.11 
 
 -li o. It. 370 
 
 19.S. C. R. 7S .' 
 
 L">1'. R. 9.. 
 23 (). R. 107, 008 . 
 |2I S. C. 1!. 431 .. 
 !'20 A. R. 372 
 
 L'il'. R. I!)0 .. [[ 
 
 •20 O. R. 4.".7 
 
 •22A. R. l.-,|,20S.C.R. 140 
 19 0. It. 420, 20 O. R. ) 
 .■iS2, 10 A. R. 447, •22' 
 S. C. It. 240 . . \, 
 
 94.5. 
 
 141, fi31. 
 |fi22, 024. 
 [473, SOU. 
 3, 131, 012. 
 240, on, 014, 784. 
 3 IS. 
 
 737. 
 
 887. 
 
 370, 1020. 
 
 207, 300, 497, 931. 
 
 ")70, 077. 
 
 S(i2. 
 
 708, S.-.4, SC^J. 
 
 110, 001. 
 
 2^23, -302. 
 
 2(r.. 
 
 823. 
 
 441,442,447.508,989. 
 902. ' 
 
ZZZTi 
 
 TABLE OF OASES 
 
 Lan-Loc] N,\mi; of Cask, 
 
 Vol.l MK AMI r.AIIK. ( lll.IMN UK DIUHST. 
 
 pOUl'l 
 
 Unt' V. Diii.giumon Agriculturol Driviiiu I'nik | 
 Ahh'ii . , . . . . , 1 
 
 I.aiij^ V. 'I'lioinpHoii . , 
 
 (-aiiK, Tow II (it Mi'afoid v. . . , ' . 
 
 I.iiiiu'fviii V. (a's C'oiiiiniHHiirii's il'Kcol 
 In Mimii'ipuliti' Av St. Mure . . 
 
 Liiiignmii V. llinlHon mul UamHey 
 
 Laii'-Htull V. Mcliuij 
 
 I.iiiiktii'c, 'I'liiiiMo V. 
 
 Lapifnc, l.'odiir v. . . . . ,[ 
 
 Lai)iiiiiio lllictiiiii Cist) 
 
 Liiiivi.ru V. S(h(j()l < 'oiiiiiiiaNioncrH for 
 
 Itivcrs 
 Liinit;, Kiiij,'lu)rn v. . . , . ' 
 
 Liisliy V. CrcwHoii . , . , \\ 
 
 •J-.M). K. •.'(ii 
 .'ilti 
 
 w, r.4i 
 
 IMS. C. K. :.!)!) 
 
 Hi I', U. 
 •JOO. II. 
 
 'I'hreul 
 
 III'. U, 
 22 < t. |{. 
 2.-)(). K. 
 21 S. ('. 
 20 S. ( '. 
 
 (iN2 
 2 1, I 
 7H 
 10!) 
 Ii. II!) 
 R. 1H5 
 
 23 S. C. It. 72;) 
 
 L'As.sonijjtidii Klection Chho . , . , ] 
 Liitliaiu, l;i7,'iiia v. . . 
 
 r-aiiilur V. Oiilinon . . . . ,', ' \ \ 
 
 Liuiiiiois'tfr, MowkiM' v. , , . . . ' \ 
 I.avoii' V. Till' (.liu'cii 
 
 l.ii\v, liritlMJi Aiiierioa Ash. Co. v. ' 
 
 l-aw .Society of Cpjicr Cuiiada, .Maciloii^^ail v. . 
 I.awri'iuc, Trcimuai' v. . , 
 
 LawHon V. Mt(H'oi'li . . ' [ 
 
 I.awsoii, WilliHloM v. . . , . . \ 
 Li'dfru, Urowii Vi .. 
 
 Leu V. Hopliiiis , . " 
 
 Lfcv. Miiiiico Itoal Kstito Co. .', ,', 
 Leeds anil (Inuville, United Counties J)f, v. | 
 
 Town (if lirooliville . . . . / 
 
 Lofelivre v. The (,)iieeii , . , , [] 
 
 Lcfeiintiin V, Vironncau .. .. ,, ' 
 
 Leitli, Israid v. . . . , _] 
 
 Ltiiiiiy, -McKac V. , . , . , , ' _ 
 
 Lemesiirier v. .Maoatilay . , . \] /_ 
 
 Lemoine V. City of Moiitreul .' 
 
 Leiinon, Kavana','li v " " " 
 
 Lenno.x, Mrown v. . . 
 
 Lennox v. Star IViiiting and rullli.shing Co. '. ' 
 
 Leonard, Royal Kleotriu Co. v 
 
 Leonard, Williams v. . . . . ]] '_[ 
 
 Leslie, lie . . . . . . ] . ' " 
 
 Leslie, He 15ain and , . . . [[ 
 
 Leslie V. Poulton . , . . [[ 
 
 Lesperance, Lanylois v. . . . . ][ 
 
 Levinger, Keyina v . , . . . ]\ 
 
 Levis, Town of, v. The Queen . . 
 
 Lewis V. Alexander. . 
 
 . 22 S. ( '. 
 . 21 (». K 
 .,21 (). I! 
 
 .21 S. C. 
 
 . 21 (). i; 
 
 .iiii I*, i; 
 . 20S. c. 
 , .'I Kx. c 
 
 21 .S. C. 
 . I.'. A.I!, 
 . 20 0. I!, 
 
 , 22(), i;. 
 ililS. c. 
 
 22 S. ( '. 
 20(). I!, 
 
 i:. P. u. 
 
 IT (». I!. 
 
 1 Mx. C. 
 22 S. C. 
 '.!0 (). K. 
 1 1(1 A. I!. 
 22 (). 1! 
 
 j2;} s. ( '. 
 
 ,10 1'. R 
 22 A. 1! 
 10 I'. I!. 
 
 2;i,s. c. 
 
 10 I 
 
 H. ;it7 
 !»;< 
 
 lao. 
 
 14, 772, SI2. 
 •''I, 111, S25. 
 
 1)^7. 
 
 ;«7. 
 
 '70. 
 
 ■;t"i, 1005. 
 
 I It! I, HHC. 
 
 !».•.;(. 
 
 75!). 
 
 mrt. 
 
 1140. 
 
 1024, io;)o. 
 4!l!l. 
 
 7.')4, 017. 
 140, 721. 
 07(1. 
 1)87. 
 2!) I. 
 
 ■.;t;t. 
 
 .■I!l.'t, 012. 
 010. 
 
 ■_'.).> 
 
 R. 29 
 
 010 
 
 74 
 
 R. 17.') .. 
 
 I!. !)0 
 
 It. .■(2.-. . , 
 
 100, Ls.s.c. R.20;i: 
 . i;f7 
 
 • 74. 20 A. I!. 4()4.!(iO, 7;|, .H4. 
 ''• ""•i . -'01. !»10 
 
 i:. •"'.■{ .. ., ;;ts, 
 
 •i<><' 407, 7tW. 
 
 ■ 2.'SS ,. ..'•.'i;!. Mil. 
 
 201, IS A. R, -,4S. ,-,4S. 
 
 v'.m-l ■• •■-'".2"7,2.HO,4,HI007 
 
 •■f'il ...T!). 
 
 .'MS, 1,SS.C. R.2S0, •).-,. 
 •■tlO, 20 A. l{. 421 ;f,s;), 8.S2. 
 
 ;2;n». R 
 mo. i; 
 
 17 P. R. 7;! 
 
 Leys, Mule(-lm v. . . 
 
 Leys, Ontario Investment Ass'n v. '. .' 
 
 Leys V. Toronto (Jenoral Trusts Co. 
 
 Liggett V. Hamilton 
 
 Lilley and AUin, Re . . .. ,[ 
 
 Linjuges, Mills v. , . . . . _ \] 
 
 Lince v. Kaireloth . . . . ,', ' " 
 
 Lincoln, County of, v. City of St. Catharines 
 
 LmuI, Re 
 
 Lindsay, Town of, MuGillivray v. '. [ 
 
 Linton, Church v. . 
 
 Lisgar Klection (use . . ,'. 
 
 Lister, Mitchell v ', 
 
 Livingstone v. Sihbald 
 
 Lloyd, Jioisin V. - Re Nortii Pertl'i 
 
 L<ic;d ()pti(m Act, Pie 
 
 Lockhait, Union School Section v. 
 
 ( 
 
 1.) P. 
 
 22 O. 
 
 22 O. 
 
 21 ,S. 
 
 21 A. 
 -).-)l 
 
 15 P. R, 
 
 2.S(). R 
 >22(). R 
 ■24.S. C. 
 j21 O R. 
 ;22 s, c. 
 il4 P. R. 
 
 21 A. R, 
 !l4P 
 
 Ik; p 
 
 2,-. O 
 
 20 S. 
 
 21 O 
 21 O. R. 
 
 .-. P. 1!. 
 
 I O. R. 
 IS A. R. 
 20 0. R. 
 
 . R. 
 . R. 
 . R. 
 
 C. 
 
 R. 
 
 J!ll) 
 , 220 
 . 442 
 
 4SS 
 
 R. 2!),S 
 
 ,-.44, 
 
 14;i 
 
 I. -10 
 
 ;i;i2 
 
 082 
 000 
 
 It. .'n ., '.' 
 
 013, 24S. C.R. \ 
 
 /•> 
 
 400 
 
 ('03 
 
 P.. 005 . . 
 
 424, 10 A. R. loi 
 
 R. .TM . . 
 
 2.-.;{ 
 
 370 
 
 421 
 
 II 
 
 131 
 
 1^. 1 
 22 
 
 •MS '.] 
 
 315 
 
 i")3,S 
 
 ''-■^ -., 
 
 <;02, 27 0. R. .345 8,33. 
 
 ;io. 
 
 45!l, .-.01, 7S5. 
 
 '5! 13. 
 
 222, 352. 
 
 108. 
 
 15, 700. 
 . , .-.no, 07!). 
 ..i3S8, 0-J(i, 027, 1035. 
 
 ,.!3,37. 
 
 ,.1105, 
 
 30. 
 
 120 
 
 703, 730 
 
 214 
 
 247. 
 
 153. 
 
 
 375. 
 
 
 779. 
 
 
 045, 
 
 701. 
 
 o;i(), 
 
 !M4. 
 
 444, 
 
 570. 
 
 715, 
 
 101.3. 
 
 Ii37, 
 
 785. 
 
 ;'i;^ 
 
 
 205. 
 
 
 /•>.). 
 
 
 770, 
 
 859. 
 
 241, 
 
 778. 
 
 4.84. 
 
 810. 
 
 Km, 
 
 48-.', 701. 
 
 120, 
 
 100. 
 
 I 
 
 Lyncli 
 
(iPl.l \|N iiK DlllKsT. 
 
 ltd. 
 
 I. 77'-', MI'J. 
 
 ir.7. 
 
 I.ST. 
 7<». 
 .•1.'., KK).".. 
 
 Oil, SHIi. 
 
 .•..1. 
 59. 
 
 411. 
 
 ()-'4, KKJo. 
 
 1M». 
 
 '.4, 017. 
 
 to, 7'.' I. 
 
 ro. 
 
 ""7. 
 »l. 
 t;t, 
 i.'t. 111-.', 
 
 10. 
 
 I, 7.t, 414. 
 
 II. 010, 
 
 IS. 
 
 17, 7t>;t. 
 .■I, HI I. 
 
 ■s. 
 
 tl,277,--'s(l, 4.^1,1007 
 H, 0.">.>. 
 
 0. 
 
 il, .V)^ ;,s.-). 
 .'{. 
 
 ■J, 3.-.L'. 
 
 8. 
 
 , 700. 
 
 I), (170. 
 
 S, ()J(), (i'J7, 10.3J. 
 
 TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 XXXTlI 
 
 ), 70.3, 730. 
 I, L>47. 
 
 I. 
 
 i, 701. 
 
 I, 044. 
 
 , .'>7(i. 
 
 i, i()i;i. 
 
 , 7s.-). 
 
 . S!(i. 
 
 , 4,S-J, 7(11. 
 
 , l(i(). 
 
 Loc-Mac] 
 
 N.XMK OF ('ami;. 
 
 I,iicklp, (Hivor V. . . 
 l-<>;,'.iii, City .if Winnipeg v. ' , [] 
 
 Liixaii, Town.shi|i of, V. Kirk .. ,] 
 
 Logic, Ko C.'liiHholm nml . . 
 
 l,.m.loii anil ('aiuiliim I,. ,V A. Co., Diiygan 
 
 N'oi.i Ml \Mi I'm.i:. 
 
 Cm, IMS (iK Diiii.--r. 
 
 >■■! 
 
 l.ciihldM and ('aii,i(li,i,n [„. S: A. Co,, Kural | 
 Miiiiiri|iality of .MorriH V, ( 
 
 f.iiidijii anil LancaNJiirt' Kiro In.i, Co,, StotI \ 
 
 l-onilon, City of, .MrKrIviii V [' 
 
 Londiiii, (,'ity of, lii-ily v, . , 
 
 l.iiinlon. City of. Watt v. , . ,. '[ 
 
 LiiniliiM Ciinraatc.' and Accidint Co,, VillauoV 
 
 of London Wi st v } 
 
 London .Mntnal Viio \i\n. Co. v. .McKaiinnf, He 
 Lniidiiii W'liHt, VillHj;i. .,f, V. jiartiuni 
 London West, Village of, liaitrain v. . . 
 London Wont, Village of, v. London CniirunV 
 
 2'1". It'JH . . ;17S, ItHi.-. 
 
 flMO'.'J A. C, 44.-. . .. i;..', 
 
 1 4 I'. I!, Ltd . . ooi) .!•(( 
 
 Kl I". I{. Iti:.' . . !io;t' " ■ 
 
 10(1. I!. •.'TO IM A. K. 1 
 
 ••10.-., '.'O s. c. n. 4H1, . |;i7, 001. 
 
 [lHO;t|/\. C. .-,()(! ) 
 
 lO.s, C. K, 4;)4 .. 
 
 04S, O.Vt 
 
 •VJI. 
 
 .•f.'H, 
 
 to:). 
 
 .'(I. 
 
 \ 
 
 ti'o and .AcL'idunt Co. 
 Loncy V. Oliver 
 LoM^' Point Co. V. Anderson, Ro " , [ 
 
 LonHii.ili', Koln.'rt,>ion v, . , 
 Lord, rin'l|w v. 
 Lordly, City of Halifax V,. 
 Lorscli, (;ity of Toronto V, , ' 
 
 lortii', '.inolii'u Ountral H. W. Co. v. . . ', 
 
 Lontit, lirycu v. 
 
 Lovu V. WoLstur . , . , [ 
 
 Lovett, I'aliiior V, . 
 Low V, (iendey , , [[ 
 
 Lucas, Merchants' liaiik of Canada v. . . | 
 
 Lucas V. 'I'lie (^nicn 
 
 Lncknow, Village of, Ron v. . . ,[ ' ' 
 
 Lunily V. Linidy 
 
 Lundy, .McKinnon v S 
 
 Lnncnhurg Kliction Case 
 
 Luiienl)urg, .Muidei|)ality of, v. Attorney- V 
 • lencral for jN'ova .Scotia .. . 1 
 
 Lunt, Hoi'ahnoin v. 
 
 Lut/,. Kinklc v \\ 
 
 Lye'.s Claim -Re Cent r.al ISank 
 
 Lynch v. Canada X. W. Laud Co. ." . " . 
 
 Lynch, McMylor v. 
 
 Lynch, Uogina v 
 
 Lynn, Ru Lynn v. Toronto Gencrftl Trusts Co. 
 
 M. 
 
 -MaoArthur V. MacDowall 
 
 -Macaiday, Irvine V. .. ", 
 
 .Macaulay, Ler.icsnrii'r v. , . 
 Macdonald et al., Re " 
 
 •Micdonald v. Balfour 
 .\Lacdonald v. Ferdais 
 Macdonald, Jones v. 
 
 •-I <>. R. ;(|o 
 
 -".'II. R. 70 
 
 14 I', K. 171 
 
 lOA, It. (J7.-1, '-"JS.C. R.;iO0 44. 
 
 •-•0 O. R, .-en) .47li, r.-'l. 
 
 •-'''•"• l{. 1.-. ., ..;),i7. 
 
 'JtiO, R, KM , |..| -.,^ 
 
 •-•4S. C. U, 70,-, . ._,.,-,;; 
 
 •-'(lo. n. ,-,20 
 
 '-'I '», R, ,S!) 
 
 MM), R, w:, IS A, R. tOL.'trijV S'.'S 
 
 '-'I <). It. lillO ' 
 
 'J') < I. R. •J.-.O , . I 
 
 47(i, 
 3'.>4. 
 
 ids. C, R, .-,0.-, ., 
 
 ^'4(), R. •_'L'7 
 
 ±>.S. C. R. ;{;((', ,, 
 
 •->! A, R. 100 
 
 '20(1. K. |,-,;i 
 
 14 R. R. 41.-. 
 
 INS. C. R, OS.-. .. 
 
 lao. R, .-,J0, I.-. A. R. 
 
 .-.7:J, ISS. C. R, 704 
 3 K-x. c. j;. i>;{s .. 
 
 I A. R. I , . 
 •-'4 S. ( '. R. (i,-,o . , 
 •-'4(1. R. i;«, o| A. R. 
 
 ■.(iO, L'4 S, (j. R. (i,-,o 
 •20 .S, C. R. I«» .. 
 
 lio .s. c. R. rm . . 
 
 14 p. R. 4S0 
 
 14 I'. R. 440 
 
 2-2 (). R. l'47 
 
 19 S. C. R. '204 . . 
 
 •24 (). R. (i32 
 
 10 A. R, 70(i 
 •20 (). R. 47.-. 
 
 10.3. 470. 
 . .|l():ili. 
 
 ..,'7ls. 
 . .^■.(io, 71.-., 
 
 . .is4l 
 
 . .!;is, -jis.^. 
 
 . .V,, <.r2(i. 
 
 ..101, i;'2, -21 
 
 . .'44'2, SIO. 
 
 j '30'2. 
 
 . . !7(iO. 
 . . 7:!0, 
 lO-JO, III! 
 
 |I0'2(), 104 
 
 '(i04. 
 
 97S. 
 
 .-.88, 804. 
 93, L')4. 
 ■>0, 102, I 
 24L .14'.', 
 
 (I4'2. 
 Hid. 
 -)-2(i. 
 
 101.3. 
 
 V>, 740, KM).-), 
 0. 
 
 I. 
 
 (10. 
 
 ui;;o, io.'i7, 
 
 .Macdonald, Kcnuin v. 
 Macdonidd, Millar v. .. [, 
 
 Macdonald, .Murray V. 
 Macdonald, Radford v. .'. ]', 
 
 Macdonald and Sullivan, Re 
 Macdonald V. World Newspaper Co. 
 Maodonell, Clarke v. 
 
 23 S. 
 Ki P. 
 22 (). 
 Hi P. 
 2oA. 
 •22 S. 
 UP. 
 UP. 
 l.l P. 
 22(). 
 14 !'. 
 '22 0. 
 18 A. 
 UP. 
 16 P. 
 20 0. 
 
 R. .'57 
 ISl 
 31(>, •. 
 408 
 404 
 R. 20( 
 100 
 .-..■f.-, 
 34.-. 
 4,84 
 400 
 .-..-.7 
 107 
 00 
 324 
 504 
 
 1 ., 
 id A.' 
 
 R. 421 
 
 lOd. 
 
 .383, 88-_'. 
 i83, 88-_'. 
 003. 
 
 08, '230, 777. 
 il, 382, 949, 1(J14. 
 )S0. 
 
 •20, 224, 233. 
 175, .-.78. 
 331, 300, Oil. 
 230, 570. 
 ")25. 
 400. 
 391. 
 
 •221, .350. 
 503, 628. 
 
xxxviii 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Mac-Mar] -\a.mk oi- Cask. 
 
 Maciloncll v. I'lnctll 
 MacDoiiell, Tlif (,»iieon v. '.[ ',' 
 klacdonufll, MuXnb v. ', , 
 
 Wac.lougall V. L:w Society c,f UpptT Canada 
 
 MacDowall, MaeArtlnii- v. 
 
 Mack V. DoLiu 
 
 Mack V. Mack 
 
 Mackcloaii, .Mc«lnirn v. .' . ,', 
 
 Mackenzie v. Rosa , , 
 
 Mackey v. Hiorcl . , '.', 
 
 Maciarcn, l!e 
 
 MacLaren, Grant V. 
 
 MacLean, Journal I'rinting Co. v. 
 Mac|)lierson and City of Toronto, Re 
 
 Macrae v. Newa Printing Co. 
 
 Mader v. McKiimon 
 
 Magann v. The (.)ueen 
 Magee, (iilniour \' 
 
 Magee, Martin v. . . . ' ][ 
 
 Magee v. Tlie (,)ueen 
 
 Malioney v. Horkiiis 
 
 Mail Printing Co., Murray v. 
 
 Mail Printing Co., Swain V, 
 
 Maitland, Dcnison v. . . ,[ 
 
 Malcolm v. Leys 
 
 Malcolm v. Pace 
 
 Malcolm, The (^ueen v. . . 
 
 Malloy, Kinnec v. -Re Stephenson 
 
 Alanes, Reggin v, . . 
 
 Maiigan, Itegina ex rel., v. Fleming 
 
 Mangan v. Town of Windsor . . ' 
 
 Manitoba, Re Certain Statutes of tiic Provinec 
 of, relating to K(lMcati(ni 
 
 Manitolia Free Press (^o., Aslid.iwn v 
 
 Manitoba Free I'ress Co. v. Martin 
 Manning, McDonald v. . . 
 Manufacturers' Accident [ns. Co., Wythe v 
 Mauutacturers' Life Ins. (,'o. v. Cordon 
 Mariposa, Township of, P.ruiiktr v 
 Maritime Bank of (.'anada, Li.iuidatois of, v. 
 
 Receiver-Ceiieral of New Brunswick 
 xMaritime Bunk of Canada v. Stewart 
 Mark v. Dobic 
 
 Markliani, Village of, Vanzant v.' 
 Marr, Brcitliaupt v. . . 
 
 Marriott V. McKay. , 
 Marsh V. Webb . . 
 
 V.n.iMK AM. pA.ii:. C,),.r,iN ok l)i„K-r. 
 
 100, KS S. C. 
 
 IIO.'),-! 
 
 si;;. 
 
 WM, I ().•!(! 
 
 •_'30 
 
 ".."is 
 
 'lOl'. Jt 
 '■2() (). i; 
 IC. p. U. -Ml 
 ISA. R. 04(1 
 
 04.5 
 
 Kx. C. 
 
 i A. I!. ;{24 
 
 ;•■!!);!, DP.'. 
 
 I ion. 
 ;4iii. 
 
 i!)!C.. 
 
 !iir., slv.. 
 
 '■'iCAi. 
 
 -704. 
 
 ;447, iJCl. 
 
 f(-M,;m.4.S9.827,9u(), 
 
 I !'iii, !»si), ma. 
 .'■i.'),s. 
 
 ^1 S. C. p.) I. 
 
 14 1 
 KSS. 
 19 0. 
 :i Kx. 
 14 
 
 P. P 
 
 P. i; 
 
 p. R. 
 
 K, 
 
 14 I 
 
 . Hi P 
 
 . -'2 
 !!;■) P. H 
 Hi P. R 
 2i:x. C 
 •24 O. I! 
 •22 0. R 
 14 P. R 
 -M < ». R. 
 ■22 S. ( '. 
 
 ( A. C;. 20-2 
 
 H. 04 
 . (•20 
 1!. 079 
 > 705. IS A. 
 
 i:.;io4 ., 
 117 
 
 . 40.-. 
 !.'« 
 100 
 "■"i 
 
 ;i:f0 
 
 K. ;ir.7 , . 
 
 ;i!),-. 
 
 44;^ 
 
 ■ir.8 
 07.-. 
 "'77, 
 
 / 
 
 m, -108. 
 I'.'ii, r.;«, 090. 
 
 97ii. 
 70. 
 
 R. 
 
 . . 1867. 
 ..!8i;!. 
 . . r.n,-,. 
 
 .')S4::!,-)7. 
 
 ..{.■:99, 
 
 . . .■)77, 
 
 214, 
 
 404. 
 
 •*7-2, 
 077. 
 
 404. 
 
 ;!."". 1. 
 
 871, 912. 
 
 il, 977. 
 
 1.1 
 
 [1895] 
 
 20 S. C. 
 
 21 S. C. 
 
 4;i 
 
 518 
 
 !!'«. C. R. 112 
 
 1.5H 
 
 1-20 
 
 If. 095, [1892]') 
 
 Maraiiall, McUae v. 
 Marthinson v. Patterson . . 
 
 Martial v. The Queen 
 
 Martin, Re . . 
 
 Martin v. Chandlar 
 
 Martin and County of Simcoe, Re 
 
 Martin, Haubner v. 
 
 Martin v. Hutchinson .'. . . 
 
 Martin, .Johnson v. . . 
 
 Martin v. Magee . . 
 
 M.-vrtin, Manitoba Free Press Co. v. 
 
 Martin v, Moove 
 
 Martin, Re McKay v. . . ', [ 
 
 Martin v. McMulleu 
 
 20 O. 1;. 
 
 . 2(1 A. K. 
 
 •220. R 
 
 20 S. ( '. 
 
 A. C. 4;j7 
 •20 s. ('.. U. 105 
 14 P. n. 405 
 I.". ]'. I!. 412 
 •20 A. R. 089 
 22 O. R. ;i20 
 1 O. R. 281, 19 
 504, 22 S. C. R. 
 ..|l.> P. R. 04 
 .. 19 S. C. R. 10 
 t 200. R. 125,720, 
 \ R. 188 .. 
 
 . . •■{ i:x. (;. R. 1 IS . 
 
 . . •20 O. R. 405 
 
 20 (). H. 81 
 25 O. R. 411 
 22 A. R. 408 
 
 21 O. R. ;i,S8 
 19 A. 1;. ,592 
 
 . 19 0. R. 705. 18 
 '21 S. C. K. 518 
 IS S. C. R. 034 
 21 (). n. 101 
 19 O. R. 2.'iO, 20 6 
 '2u7, 18 A. R. 559 
 
 247 
 
 791 
 
 •279, •290, .-nil. 
 I4(i. 
 
 014. 
 . 701, 70^2. 
 . lO.'i, 1050. 
 
 174. 
 
 12. 3;!1, ;{4.5. 
 |342, 343, 742. 
 
 ^203. 
 1X9, 
 
 I •20, 
 
 A. n. ) 
 
 ^80, : 
 
 . 948, 
 
 .401. 
 
 . -227. 
 
 427. 
 
 375. 
 
 5I'>. 
 .531. 
 
 558. 
 
 01, ,30.S. 
 952. 
 
 43: 
 
 f\ 
 
 19 A. \ 
 
 A, R. 
 
 R. 
 
 1-29, 380, 389, 939. 
 
 223. 
 
 193, 047. 
 
 105, 108, 109, 458. 
 
 . . ;wo. 
 . . 357, 447. 
 
 .. 10^24. 
 . . :833. 
 ..1199. 
 
 . . I'209, 359, 042. 
 .. 100. 
 384 357. 
 . . 342, 343, 74^2. 
 . . :953. 
 240, 251. 
 
 i81, 475. 
 
 1 
 
 Mel 
 
 McC 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 XXXIX 
 
 C()i.r>i\ oi- l)i(ii:s 
 
 ■>''r. 
 
 Mar-McD] Namk ok Casi;. 
 
 I."!.'!, I0.'?4, 10;i(i. 
 
 is. 
 
 1 
 
 ).", '.l\'2. 
 
 -1 
 
 0. 
 1. 
 
 1 
 
 .-., SL'.-,. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 ,^ 
 
 7, !)l!l. 
 
 
 'l,;i;)4.43fl,8L'7,95(), 
 
 !"'■!, !tS(), im. 
 > 
 
 
 ■lOK 
 
 - 
 
 r);<s, (liio. 
 
 
 ', 47-', .S71. 012. 
 , («77. 
 , 404. 
 , :!."■> 1. 
 
 '. 247. 
 
 . 7!»1, 077. 
 
 I -.200, aoi. 
 
 (il4. 
 
 702. 
 
 iori(). 
 
 i.n, .•«.-,. 
 :m, 742. 
 
 .■)!•?. 
 ;"),•} 1. 
 5.">8. 
 
 (il, 303. 
 
 or.2. 
 
 !s(i, 389, 930. 
 
 )47. 
 
 108, 109, 438. 
 
 147. 
 
 39, 642. 
 
 ^■^, 742. 
 ")1. 
 
 Martin, Regina v. . . 
 
 Martin v. Tiiu C^luefn 
 
 Mai'tiudale v. Rowers 
 
 Marlk'V V. Carson . . 
 
 Mas(in V. Canii;roii — Re Cameron 
 
 Mason v. Cooper 
 Mason, Ford v. 
 
 :uul Cluul 
 
 nti'al R. \V, Co 
 
 Mason v. .lolui.'itoii . . 
 
 Mason V. Town of Peterborough, 
 
 Mason V. \"an( 'amp 
 
 Massey, Taylor v. . . 
 
 Massey- Harris Co., Mercer Co. v 
 
 Mastin v. Mastin 
 
 Ma.suret v. Stewart. 
 
 Matliieu, Qiiebee, Montmorency, 
 
 voix It. W. C'o. V. 
 May V. McDougall . . 
 
 Mayes v. The (,»noen 
 
 McAllister v. Cole . . 
 McArthnr v. Michigan ( 
 McArthur, Stephens v. 
 McArtliu. Bro.'i. Co. v. Deaua 
 
 .McHain, Blachford v. • . . 
 
 Mclkan V. Kinnear 
 Mclhide V. Carroll . . 
 Mcliride, Regina v. . 
 
 Mct^iffrey, Hall v 
 
 McCallVey V. McCaflVev 
 
 McCalhnn v. Riddell " 
 
 Mcl'iinn, Waterous Hng-uc Works Co. v. 
 Mc(,'arthy v. Township of \'es|)ra 
 Mi;('artliy, I'cpler, and McCarthy, Ro . , 
 Mi'Carlney, Ryan v. 
 McCanglum, ^icClellan v. . . 
 
 .Md'aulcy, Milcliell v 
 
 McC.iusland v. (i>nel)cc l''ire Ins. Co. 
 
 McCay, Regina v. . . 
 
 McClary v. I'lunkett 
 
 MeCliiryMfg. Co., Heudford v. 
 
 Mc(^lean, Ayersl v. 
 
 McClellan, Clark v. 
 
 McL'lellan v. McCaughan 
 
 .Mc'i'lellanil V. Armstrong 
 
 McCloheily v. <;ale Mfg. (Jo 
 
 McCoU and City of Toronto, Re . 
 
 MitConl, McCraney v. 
 
 .Mc('ords Case — lie Union Fire Ins, Co. 
 
 McCormack, Hush v. 
 
 Mcl'orniiok v. T'ownship of I'elee 
 
 McCraney v. McCool 
 
 McCuUough V. Cleniow 
 
 McCurdy, The t^ueen v 
 
 McDormott V. firout 
 
 .McDcrniott, Mnskoka .Mill and laimhcr Co. 
 
 McUormott V. Trachsel .. 
 
 McDfin.ild, Allison V 
 
 McDonald v. Ciimmings . . 
 McDonald V. IJickcnaon .. 
 McDonald, (iibbona V. 
 McDonald, Hogaboom v. 
 
 \0l,l.MK .\N1) 
 
 l'.\<a:. 
 
 Coi.UM.N (11.- iMcKST. 
 
 . -21 A. R. 14.-I 
 
 
 :.360. 
 
 ( 2Kx. C. R. .328, 20S. C) 
 I R. 240 . . . . J 
 
 29(i, 620, 928. 
 
 . 23 S. C. R. ,-.07 
 
 
 3, 13,3, 493 793. 
 
 . 20 S. C. R. ti,34 
 
 . . 
 
 1002. 
 
 .21 O. K. 034 
 
 
 327. 
 
 . I.">1>. R. 272 
 
 
 12, .t4l. 
 
 . !.■> !'. R. 418 
 
 
 428, 771. 
 
 .:!.■) 1>. R. 302 
 
 . . 
 
 909. 
 
 .!l(i ]■. R. 2.-. 
 
 
 227, 903, 905. 
 
 . 20 A, R. 412 
 
 • . , 
 
 3, 369, 633. 
 
 . 20 A. R. (183 
 
 
 319, 448, 738, 882. 
 
 .14 1>. R. 200 
 
 
 !410, 884. 
 
 .20 O. R. 429 
 
 . . 
 
 342, 422. 
 
 .It! V. R. 171 
 
 
 210, 08,3, 
 
 l.-) 1'. R. 177 
 
 
 493, 637. 
 
 . -'2 0. R. 200 
 
 . . 
 
 4i;3. 
 
 10 S. C. R. 426 
 
 
 33, i)U. 
 
 18 S. C. R. 700 
 
 
 191, 875. 
 
 ' 2 Kx. C. R. 403, 2 
 , R. 4,-.4 .. 
 
 j's. C.\ 
 
 1 
 
 186, 292. 
 
 16 1'. R. 103 
 
 
 983. 
 
 13 !'. K. 77 
 
 
 983. 
 
 lOS. C. R. 440 
 
 
 73. 
 
 21 0. R. 380 
 
 
 317. 
 
 19 S. C. !!. 42, 20 
 R. 2(iO . , 
 
 S. C. ') 
 
 933. 
 
 23 (1. R. 313 
 
 
 193, '123, 610, 614. 
 
 |14 !'. |{. 70 
 
 
 976, 978. 
 
 i2() 0. R. 1)3!) 
 
 
 262. 
 
 20 S, C. R. 319 
 
 
 19, .'i90. 942. 
 
 18 A. R. ,309 
 
 466, 491. 996. 
 
 23 (). R. .337 
 
 
 1020. 
 
 21 .\. R. 480 
 
 . 
 
 670. 
 
 16 I'. R. 416 
 
 
 9, 726, 797. 
 
 1.3 P. R. ;i61 
 
 
 806, 904. 
 
 19 .A. R. 42;! 
 
 
 368. 
 
 23 (). R. (170 
 
 
 S20. 
 
 20 A. R. 272 
 
 
 603. 
 
 '23 0. R. .330 
 
 
 20, 207, 316. 
 
 23 0. R. 442 
 
 ' ' 
 
 331. 
 
 16 1'. R. 310 
 
 
 229, 401. 
 
 23 0. R. 333, 21 
 
 '\. R. V 
 
 23, 633, 930. 
 
 164, 24 S. C. R. 
 
 291 \ 
 
 14 ]'. R. 13 
 
 
 492, 674. 
 
 23 O. R. 4(i3 
 
 
 63. 
 
 23 O. U. 679 
 
 
 820. 
 
 22 (). R. .342, 21 
 
 A. R.'\ 
 263 j 
 
 384. 
 
 183, 23 S. C. R, 
 
 19 A, R. 117 
 
 
 551. 
 
 21 A. R. 236 
 
 , 
 
 590. 
 
 19 0. R. 470, 18 A 
 
 .' R. 2i7 
 
 773. 
 
 210. R. 264 
 
 
 1.32. 
 
 20 0. R. 497 
 
 
 Ml, 973. 
 
 20 ( ». R. 2SS 
 
 
 71.3. 
 
 19 0. R. 470, ISA 
 
 R. 2i7 
 
 773. 
 
 26 O. R. 467 
 
 
 342. 
 
 2Kx. C. R. 311 . 
 
 
 Iir>, 131, 273, 289, 
 \ 304, 412, 659. 
 
 16 P. R. 213 
 
 
 •74. 
 
 21 A. R. 129 
 
 '. .' '. 
 
 ?18. 
 
 26 0. i;. 218 
 
 
 30. 
 
 23 (). R, 288, 30 
 695, 23 8. C. R. 
 
 A. n.'\ 
 
 633 ] 
 
 19, 133, 777, 822. 
 
 24 S. C. R, ,321 . 
 
 
 S2, 408. 
 
 23 O. R. -13, 21 A 
 
 R. 483 
 
 1. 726. 
 
 18A.R. 1.39,20S.( 
 
 '.R. 387 
 
 73. 
 
 14 P. R. 480 
 
 . t . 
 
 )78. 
 
xl 
 
 TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 McDonald v. Maiininc 
 
 McDonald V. McDonald 
 
 McDonell v. xMcDoncll 
 
 McDonell, McOill v 
 
 jucijougalil, iMorrow v. 
 McDougall V. Cameron 
 McDougall, May v 
 
 Mcliirlane, Raphael V. 
 
 MSl?;^5,^:!:'-^^"^-irireL.:co.v, 
 
 McGeachie v. North A.nerican Life Ass. Co. 
 McGeoch, Lawson v 
 
 McGhee, Phu.nixlns. Co.\'. 
 
 McGiv. Grand Trunk 1!.\V. Co 
 
 MS;;fe^:,f'°'"'"--"-sof]i;.;.„tfor, 
 
 McGdlivray v. To»a of Lin.lsav " 
 
 McGoIrick'v.Ryall','Re '.'. " ' 
 
 McGowan, Regiiia v. 
 
 MoGr5^;i,S:;t^'"^-^"''"^"''^"''^^«--3'Co, 
 
 McGregor, Regina v. ' ' ' ' ' 
 
 McGreevy, Giiilbaultv. 
 
 McGreevy, The Queen v. 
 
 McGreevy v. 'I'he (^i,ee,i . 
 
 Mc(,iigan, ilowartli v. , . 
 
 McGugan v. McGugan . / 
 
 McGugan, Smith v. ^ 
 
 McGuire, JJakhvin v. 
 
 jlO.S. C. R. 112 
 •21 S. C. It. 201 
 
 ■ -'4 O, K", 4(;s 
 
 ■ H 1'. H. 4S3 
 
 • -'-• o. i;. 4;w 
 
 ■ Hi 1'. l;. 12!) 
 
 • ii s. c. R. :i:u 
 
 .|I.SS, c. 
 |t'2 0. R. 
 2(; O. R. 
 
 i-ss. c. 
 20 o. 
 
 24 0. R. 52 
 22 U. R. l,-.l, 2()' 
 187, 2,-? S. C. R 
 
 R. 700 
 
 r.03 
 
 510 
 
 j;. is.s 
 1,-1 
 
 A. R I 
 148 ( 
 
 . . ^20.3. 
 . :(i2."), 003 
 . I02,S. 
 
 • !>77, 070, 
 ">■*-', 10,30. 
 
 • JdS. 
 
 • i'lLS, 0,51. 
 
 • Id 1,875. 
 . iKW. 
 
 ■ !»-'0, 1000. 
 1504, 000. 
 
 1501. 
 
 ii:V/:-,!"1;,-'^-^''^ -^"^^73 
 
 18 S. C. R. 01 
 li' A. R. 245 
 21 O. R. (io.-i 
 14 1'. 1!. 4,s;i 
 10 R. R. II 
 
 ISA. It. .510 
 
 McGuire, Regina ex reI.,v;Hi,.kett " 
 McI nnirray and Jenkins, Jte 
 Mcllroy v. Mcllroy 
 Mcllwain, I'arker v. 
 Mcintosh V. Moynihan 
 Mcintosh V. The (,)ueen 
 Mclntyre v. Crocker 
 Mclntyre v. Faubert 
 
 McKay v. Bruce 
 
 McKay. Churchill v.-Ihe Quebec ' ' 
 
 M^"^' ^-."""'y °f Cape Rreton v. 
 McKay, Marriott v. 
 McKay v. Martin, Re 
 
 McKee v. Hamlin 
 
 McKeen Chatham National ]5ank v ' ' 
 
 AIcKelvin ^ . City of London . 
 
 McKenzie, Re • 
 
 McKenzio, Johnson v 
 
 ^f^Ken^ie, The Queen v. .' .' 
 
 McKibbou V. Feegan 
 
 McKibbon, Palmatier v " 
 
 McKim, Township of, Vivian v. ' .' 
 
 McKinnon v. Lundy 
 
 McKinnon, Mader v. 
 
 McKinnon v. Roche 
 
 McKinnon, Re Williams and 
 
 McLach an, Acci.icnt Ins. Co. of North Americ 
 
 I'. It. ,S4 
 
 II V, 
 
 R. 435 
 i;. 407 
 21 S. C. R. 400 
 
 2«>.s. (\ R. 170 ;; 
 
 20 O. R. II.-, 
 18N. C. R. 000 
 «.'^. G. I!. 371 ." 
 li'S. C. R. ISO 
 23 O. Jt. .'iOO 
 21 O. P.. 2H0, 10 \ 
 ">0, 21 ,S. C. R. 207 
 
 21A R.o42,2l,S.C.R 
 
 ■) R. R 305 
 10 I', li. 24,S 
 
 1 O. R. 102 
 
 22 A. R. .'ios 
 14 P. R. 204 
 
 P. R. ,-.,-,.5, 1 
 « A. R. 237 
 
 23 S. C. R. 180 
 23 0. R. :m 
 20 O. R. 427 
 
 |20 O. It. 709 
 
 20 S. C. R. 472 ' 
 18N. C. R. (;;w " 
 
 '22 O. R. ;^20 
 
 21 O. R. 104 
 24 8. C. R. ,-,.-, ' ■ 
 19S. C. R. 489 ' 
 10 1'. R. 207 
 24 S. C. R. -MS ' ' 
 
 22 O. R. 70 
 14 P. R. 421 
 
 20 O. R. 131 
 Kx. C. R. 108 " 
 
 21 A. R. S7 ■ ■ 
 21 A, R. 441 
 
 23 O. R. oOl 
 
 24 O. l;. 1.32, 21 A. R. \ 
 "00 24 ,s. C. Ji. (550 I 
 
 ^A.I|.040,21S.C.R.04' 
 I -^A l.040,2l,S.C.It.OI5l70. 
 
 18 8. c. R. 027 ., ••.ri 
 
 23.S. C. R. 143 .. 77.- 
 19A. R. 490 . ■■4/,- 
 
 14. 
 
 821, S39. 
 
 •"00, 308, 372. 
 
 557, 587. 
 
 ^,^|«!.251,005,947, 
 
 230, 235, 0(J8. 
 701, 805. 
 
 168, 
 '88. 
 977. 
 (iO. 
 
 199, 879. 
 
 2o8, 204, 272, 947. 
 .1/4. 
 
 82, 880. 887. 
 380. 
 
 S20, 961. 
 831,9,32. 
 375. 
 
 240, 251. 
 20, 207, 956. 
 I3L', 70.3. 
 230, 905. 
 140, 1,58. 
 3'28, 720. 
 037, 785. 
 447. 
 
 284, 922. 
 ^44, ,526, 576. 
 1009. 
 43. 
 
 020, 1041. 
 0. 
 
 dcMillii 
 
TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 Column ok Dkikst, 
 
 xli 
 
 McL-Mea] Xamm ok cask. 
 
 )3. 
 ?•"), urn. 
 
 7, 070. 
 -', io,m 
 
 s. 
 
 S, 951. 
 i, 67"). 
 S. 
 
 >, lOuo. 
 t, 000. 
 
 - •'«•■">,«-' 1,839. 
 
 979. 
 
 "Mi, ;iu8, ;572. 
 
 ■>''U, .m7, ,-,,s7 
 
 7H. 
 
 -'^*i,2,-,I,!)05,947, 
 (, 0.-)l. 
 
 IMC. 
 
 .'30, 23.-,, 908. 
 
 roi, St).-,. 
 
 79. 
 
 W, 272, 947. 
 
 0. 887. 
 
 j]. 
 J2. 
 
 il. 
 
 ', 956. 
 13. 
 
 8^: 
 
 0. 
 5. 
 
 h 576. 
 
 I4J. 
 
 I 
 
 ^ McLircn, ArchibaKl v. 
 
 ^ McLaren, Merchants' Kank of Gi'na<?i v' 
 MlI iron, Joroiito Dental .Mfe Co v ' 
 McLu-en V. Whiting . , • • • . 
 
 McLiuyhlin V. Hamniill '.'. 
 
 MtTaughlin, M(; Vicar V. . . 
 \h Laiiglilin, (Jlivor v. 
 
 "^ MtLtan v. Allen . . [\ 
 
 , McLean, Re liooth and 
 * McLean v. Hrucu . . 
 
 AlcLtan v. City of .St. Thomas 
 
 !M< Lean v. Claik . , 
 
 McLean, Coventry v. 
 
 McLean, Patterson v. 
 
 Mclx.in, Smith v. . . 
 |M.Ldlan, North Hritish and Mercantile 
 
 ^ JcLtlland, Baker v. , ' 
 
 Jlcleod, Re. . 
 
 J\ULun\ V. McNalj . . [[ 
 
 Jlcl cod V. 'J'he (,)ueen 
 
 JlcLeod V. Wadland 
 
 JKLine v. Black . , 
 
 lU \l uiamy, City of Sherbrooke V. 
 
 M' M istcr, Clarkson v 
 
 Ale Mister V. Radford 
 llcM itli, Arqles v. 
 lIcMnhael V. Wilkio 
 JJc.Mu ken V. Ontario l!ank 
 JJcMillan v. Hartoii 
 
 ilc.Mnllen, .Martin v. 
 
 McMullen V. Vannatto 
 MoMurrich, Mitchell V. 
 McMylor v. Lynch , 
 
 McXab V. Macdonnell 
 
 McNab, McLeod v 
 
 lIcNab, Mehr v. ' 
 
 McXab V. Township of Dysart .' .' 
 
 Mc.Nair V. Boyd 
 
 McVamara v. Kirkland ." 
 
 McNaniara, licgina v. 
 
 McA-unara v. Skain 
 
 McXamec V. City of Toronto " 
 
 Mc.Nce, Metcalf V. . 
 
 McNcc, Tiffany v. . . 
 
 Mcl'hail, Gilnior v . .' 
 
 Mcl'hee, Doyle v. 
 
 Mcl'hee, ReMcPhersonv' 
 Mcl'herson V. Irvine 
 
 Mcl'herson V. McPhee, lie 
 
 Mc herson v. The Queen . 
 Mctaie, Langstaffv. 
 
 McRao V. Leniay . . 
 
 McKae V. Marshall 
 
 Mc"^loy V. .Smith 
 
 McT,i-^ra,t, Millar v! "' 
 
 ■«^>;'ar V. McLaughlin .. 
 
 Mo\ i,.ir V. Town „f p„,,t A,tl,ur ' 
 
 Mo\\ dliam, Sullivan v 
 
 Meaford, Town of, v. Lantj' 
 
 Mearns v. Ancient Order o1 Uuited VVorkmeu! 
 
 Ins. ^ 
 J 
 
 Coi,|-.MN (IK Dkjj.jst. 
 
 (i42. 
 
 773. 
 
 5()3, (j,-,0. 
 
 770, 850. 
 
 .■545. 
 
 -'00, 540, 507. 
 
 4(J4, 793. 
 
 207, 428, 431. 
 
 430. 
 
 540, 997. 
 
 <iO, CI, 429, 440. 
 
 3.34, 1015. 
 
 392, 776. 
 
 417, 508, 91,). 
 
 Ii()4, 988. 
 
 ^0(i. 
 
 I 
 
 21 S. C. R. 288 . . 
 
 24 .S. C. R. 416 . . 
 10 P. R. 261 
 llSOl] A. c;. 471 
 2 Kx. V. l;. 106 . 
 25(). R. 118 
 20 0. I!. 70 
 '«S. C. R. 594 
 
 22A.R. 138, 25S.C. R.90 
 6 P. R. 20 
 
 26 O. R. 224, 23 A. R. 44 
 IS A. R. 464 
 
 20 S. C. R. -,4s : ■ 
 
 19 A. R. 602,20 8. C. ]{.'} 
 
 ■104 1" 
 
 24 O. R. 181 ' ^ 
 
 pO. R. 351,21 aVr.. 343 
 19 0. R. 230, 20 O. R.i 
 
 IN9, 517. 
 
 338, 660. 
 
 440, 062. 
 
 1(»32. 
 
 208, 275. 
 
 682, 039. 
 
 314, 024. 
 . 060. 
 
 74, 112. 
 
 28, 4.37, 563, 565, 806, 
 
 827. 
 67, 455. 
 
 ■124, 476, 494, 665. 
 338. 
 
 201, 463, 818, 988. 
 
 257, 18 A. R rm 
 24 O. R. (i25 
 22 0. R. 7J2 
 
 24 O. R. 632 
 
 15 P. R. U . 
 
 [1891] A. C. 471 
 24 O. R. (i-,3 
 
 22 A. R. 508 
 14 P. R. 132 
 IH A. R. 271 
 20 0. R. 489 
 
 23 0. R. 103 
 
 24 O. a. 313 
 24 0. R. 551 
 24 O. R. 551 
 10 P. R. 151 
 24 S. C. R. 65 
 
 21 0. R. 280«.,411 
 [26 0. R. 438 
 
 21 0. R. 280«.,4li 
 I Kx. C. R. 53 
 
 22 O. R. 78 
 
 Hi A. R. 348, 18 S. C. R, 
 
 10 S. C. R. 10 '■ 
 |20 O. R. 508 
 20 0. i;. 617 
 16 P. I!. 450 
 26 O. R. ;i[)] 
 20 A. n. 627 
 20 O. R. 42, 541 
 22 0. R. 34., 
 
 / 
 
 355, 685. 
 681. 
 
 «1, 47,5. 
 
 382, 599. 
 
 7, 639, 013. 
 
 244, 542, 10,30, IO.S7, 
 
 1042. 
 813. 
 1032. 
 
 5, 593, 601. 
 727. 
 210. 
 
 24.5, 615, 616. 
 2(iO. 
 
 198, 323, 792, 1054. 
 
 •32, 18,5. 
 
 743, 974. 
 
 "43, 974. 
 .2.5(1. 
 .!3,35. 
 . 370. 
 
 • 440, 483, 962. 
 . 370. 
 
 • ,276, 278, 279, 924 
 .{73,5, 1005. 
 
 i.35. 
 
 } 
 
 19.3, 647. 
 . . !359. 
 
 ■•1270, 4(i,5, 787. 
 ••200,540,567. 
 . . 1728. 
 ..1737. 
 
 ■•|51, 114,825. 
 . 1525. 
 
zlti 
 
 TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 Mec-Miml Nami; (h- (Iask. 
 
 \'<ir.rMi: and I'aiii;. 
 
 Mc'cliiam v. Horiic , 
 
 Mcdcalf, lie AMiott 
 Mcillaiul, He 'I'nists 
 Mudimte, Towusliiii 
 Melir V. .M.Xal, 
 }ilni\; Owen ^diiiid I 
 Meirer Co. v. Mass; 
 MeroiT Co., Mills v. 
 Meruliaiits' liaiiU of 
 Merclianta' Uank of 
 
 iiiiil . . 
 
 Coi'ljoratiou of Ontario 
 
 of, Tlolt V 
 
 ). &. S. Society V. . . 
 ■j'-Jlai'!'is Co. 
 
 Canada, .Vrpin v. . . 
 Canada v. Kotclium 
 
 Merchants' J5ank of Canada v. Lucas 
 
 Merchants' 15anU of 
 Mercliants' IJank of 
 Mevcliants' i?ank of 
 Merchants' Hank of 
 Merchants' Hank of 
 Mercliants' Xationa 
 Mercier, I'rice v. . . 
 Meriden Hritannia (,'o. v. Hraden . . 
 
 Cana<la v. McLaehlan 
 Can.uhi v. McLaren 
 Canada, Slicrratt v. 
 Canada v. 'I'lie (i>(iecn 
 Halifax V. Wliiddcn 
 1 Bank v. Ontario Coal 
 
 Merritt V. (.'ity of Toronto 
 
 Mersea, 'rownship of, and Township of Koch- | 
 
 ester, Kc .... , i 
 
 Mctcalf V. McNee 
 
 Mctcalf V. Roliorls , . . . . . . . ' 
 
 Metcalft;, Township of, 'i'ownsliip of Caradoc v. . 
 
 Metropolitan Life Ins. (,'o., Dolen v. 
 
 Mewbnrn v. .Mackckan 
 
 Meyer Kublier Co. v. Kioh 
 
 Meyers v. Hamilton Provident and Loan So- / 
 
 cioty ^ 
 
 Meyers, Heath v. . . 
 
 Meyers, .Sears v. . . 
 
 Micliigan ( Neutral ll.W. Co., Dnnsford v. '. '. 
 
 Michij,'an Central K.W. Co., Re Forlies v. 
 
 .Mic^liigaii Central K.W. Co., Me.\rtluir v. 
 
 Micliigan Central R. \V. Co., Misener v. 
 
 Michigan Central Jl.W. Co., Re .\Iuipliy v. '. . 
 
 Mieliigaii Central R. \V. Co. v. Wealle.uis 
 
 Middlesex, County of, v. Smallnian 
 
 Middleton v. Flanagan 
 
 Midland L. & S. Co. v. Cowieson 
 
 Midland R .W. Co., Young v ' 
 
 Miles V. Brown 
 
 Milford, Regina v. . , 
 
 Millar v. Macdoiiald . . . . ',' 
 
 Millar v. Mc Taggart 
 
 Millar v. I'luinnier . . . . . . . [ . 
 
 Miller, Cnllertdii v. , . ..." . 
 
 Miller V. JJnggan . . ' ' 
 
 Miller, Jones v. 
 
 . . !-'() O. R. L'l;; 
 . •-'() O. H. •_'!)!) 
 :iw\-22 O. n. .-.;!S 
 . . ■2'> O. K. :U)-2 
 .. :?K). i;. (i,-;;! 
 .. -'I O. R. |IH( 
 .. Ki 1'. R. IT! 
 .. lol'. I!. L>7G, 281 
 ..,-'4 S. C. i;. Ml' 
 ..|l(i R. 11. ;i()(i 
 fllSO. R. .V2(l, I.-. 
 I ."IJ, IS.S. (_!. R. 
 
 .i-';{.s. c. n. 143 .. 
 . ;'2;js. c. R. 143 .. 
 
 . . \-l\ A. R. 473 
 . . 1 Ex. C. R. I 
 .. lilS. C. i!. .■)3 
 Co. Ki P. R. 87 
 
 I8S. C. R. 303 .. 
 
 21 A. R. 3.VJ 
 Ki R. K. 34(), 410, I 
 
 R. 77 . . 
 25 O. R. L'Sfi, 22 A. I 
 
 22 A. R. 1 10 
 
 ( 'ol.lMV OF JJrcK-- 
 
 o.-iO. 
 
 43.'-), ()7."). 
 43.-), !l'.)7. 
 
 . ..,,S3,3.. 
 
 ..I.'i, .->!)3, (101. 
 
 ..11 4.-), .').-'.•!. 
 
 ..210, 'JS;{. 
 
 ..t;i;i8, 402, 810. 
 
 . . 27, 91S. 
 
 ,.|401. 
 A. R. ] !.,,,., 
 704 ( l'^"-- 
 
 773. 
 
 473, 400. 
 
 112, 30."), 809, 007. 
 
 8,->, 810. 
 
 07, .■>74. 
 
 021. 
 
 4, 113. 
 
 2;!4. 
 
 1'.) 
 
 / 
 . 20,'i (i4 
 
 Miller, Re McFarlano v 
 
 .Miller v. Rycrson . . . . 
 
 Miller, T'rinil)le v. , . 
 
 Milloy V. (iraiiil Trunk R. W. Co. 
 
 Mills, Caldwell v 
 
 Mills, Hyatt v \\ 
 
 Mills V. Limoges 
 Mills V. Mercer Co. 
 Millson V. Smale 
 Milne v. M.iore 
 Milsoin, liritton v. . . 
 Mimico Real Fstate ( 'o., Lee \ . . . 
 Mimico Sewer Pipe and Urick Mfg. Co -Pear- 
 sou's Ca.se 
 
 24 O. R. -Ml 
 23 0. R. i;i(» 
 21 O. R. ,300 
 20 (J. R. 07 
 10 A. R. 729 
 14 P. R. 243 
 
 l.j P. R. 39 
 
 ir. P. R. 381 
 l.'i P. R. 381, 456. 
 20 A. R. .-)77 
 .22 O. R. .■508,20 A 
 . 15 P. K. 77 
 . 21 O. R. 411 
 , 22 O. R. .-,08, 2(1 A 
 . 24 S. ( '. R. 300 . 
 , llOO. R. 319, 20 O 
 
 l2.-)0. R. 417 
 
 i20O. R. .->83 
 
 il9 A. R. 20,-|, 22S. 
 
 I 190 
 
 !lo P. II. 375 
 
 |20 0. K. 300 
 
 1 14 I'. R. 490 
 
 :20O. I!. 017 
 
 122 S. C. R. 253 . . 
 !26 t). R. 30 
 !21 S. C. R. 33 
 124 O. R. 208 
 
 lie P. R.'02 
 1 20 (J. R. ,-)10 
 22 O. R. 309 
 '22 0. R. .-)(i() 
 
 123 O. R. 4.-,4, 21 A. R. 
 j24 0. R. 102 
 
 120 O. i;. 3.-)l, 19 A. R. 
 
 :•'•'■ ■: C. R. 331 . . 
 
 R. 270. 281 .. 
 
 I!. I 14 
 
 It. 4.-)0 
 
 I!. 90 
 
 R. 288 
 
 21. 
 
 708, 710. 
 
 743, 974. 
 
 4S9. 
 
 70(i. 
 
 27. 532. 
 
 115,825. 
 
 41. 
 
 570. 
 
 483,810, 817. 
 
 48,3, 484, 810, 817. 
 
 814. 
 
 R. 5S4 370. 
 
 . . 98.'!. 
 
 .849. 
 
 .-)84:37(». 
 
 .'144, 85S. 
 487 115, 803. 
 ..jl90, 417. 
 107. 
 
 C. I!. I 
 
 852, 8.-)4. 
 
 il5P. 
 i25 O. 
 '24 O. 
 
 19 A. 
 
 15 P. 
 
 •20 0. a. 289 
 
 . . 23S, 444, 077. 
 .. 2()l, 270. 
 . . '239, 579. 
 ..1270,405, 787. 
 
 , jos. 
 
 .. .327, 498, 100 1. 
 ..:578, 801. 
 ..1143, 703. 
 . . J238. 
 ..;92(i, 1000. 
 . . 1500, 033, 057. 
 
 ..iioi, 309, nm. 
 
 404 125, 8;W. 
 
 .. (i5(), 1011. 
 329 54. 55, 312, 330, 3:i; 
 
 . . 930, 944. 
 
 ..'398, 402, 810. 
 
 . , 1.50.-.. r,S8. 
 
 ..;i3, 440, 457. 544. 
 
 ..'lOl. 
 
 ..|213, 811. 
 
 ..1149,238, 90S. 
 
 Min-M 
 
 i Mines, ' 
 *; Mingeai 
 ; .Minnie, 
 .: Miiiiies, 
 ... .Miscani] 
 Ji Misener 
 ■t Mitohell 
 •" .Mitchell 
 
 '': Mitcliell 
 
 ■ .Mitchell 
 
 .Mitchell, 
 
 .Mitchell 
 
 .Mitchell 
 
 ■;M..herly 
 
 rMnir V. \ 
 
 -, MuLson V 
 
 ^Mulsoiis 
 
 press 
 
 ^IcisdMM I 
 
 .Molsdii.. I 
 
 vMnlsdllS 1 
 
 :M<il.soiis 1 
 
 ^Montreal i 
 
 & V. Th 
 
 SflPJlontreal, 
 
 """Montrt^al, 
 
 Jloiitrcd, 
 
 jjT»i,intrcal f 
 
 Montreal 
 
 eni Tt 
 Moodie V. 
 oody V, ( 
 ol'ion V. Ci 
 Ikloore V. 1 
 
 Moure V. .1 
 
 Moore V. I' 
 Moiii'e, Ala 
 Moore, .Mil 
 Moorn, kcf 
 Moore, Tov 
 M.iore, Tov 
 
 Mnuiv, Re ' 
 
 Mnoi-house 
 Mont V. (;ii 
 M<iiMii, Ifai 
 
 "rilen, Ca; 
 
 ordcn. Mi; 
 Morgan v. f 
 liorin V. Th 
 
 Morris v. Di 
 Morris v. Tl: 
 Worris, Rur, 
 j» ( 'audadi 
 lorris. Tow 
 lorrison, Ai 
 Jorrisou v, 
 lorrow V. C 
 JOITOW V. M 
 |oise V. Laii 
 
 orse V. Phi 
 
 Drton V. Co 
 OSes, Kreh 
 Dtt, Stuart 
 Byei, Hrowi 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 I 'cil.lMN (IK HlCKSr. 
 
 .■),-.o. 
 
 4;!'>, (57."). 
 4.'!."), !l!)7. 
 s;«. . 
 ."i, .")!);?, (101. 
 
 1+.-), ;!."..•!. 
 .'10, «js;i. 
 
 i'.W, 4(11.', 810. 
 •-'7, 91S, 
 ■101. 
 
 .S!l-_>. 
 
 / !■■>. 
 
 77.S. 
 
 47:?, 4!in. 
 
 1-', 30.-), 869, f)G7. 
 
 |S.-), 81)). 
 !I7, .■)74. 
 021. 
 4, 113. 
 
 ■2U. 
 
 04, 721. 
 
 70S, 
 
 0. 
 
 74;{, 074. 
 ISO. 
 7<>(>. 
 
 :i7, .-).S2. 
 11."), H->o. 
 41. 
 
 )70. 
 
 48.S, 8l(i, 817. 
 483, 484, 810, 817. 
 84 1. 
 'i70. 
 
 i)8:{. 
 
 840. 
 t;:!7o. 
 , il44. 8,-)8. 
 ; li.">, 8(i;i. 
 
 ;iOO, 417. 
 
 107. 
 
 Sry2, 8.-)4. 
 
 ■•i3S, 444, 077. 
 •-'01, 270. 
 I'.Sll, .-,70. 
 270, 40,'>, 787. 
 108. 
 
 327, 408, 10U4. 
 578, 801. 
 1143, 703. 
 1238. 
 
 020, 1000. 
 .")00, 033, (;57. 
 101, 3ii!), 830. 
 12.-), 830. 
 0.-)0, 1011. 
 .J4. 5,-,, 312, 330, 3;!: 
 030, 044. 
 .308, 402, 810. 
 .-iO.->, .-iSS. 
 13, 440, 4,-)7, .-)I4. 
 101. 
 !213, 811. 
 
 1 149, 238, 90S. 
 
 Min-Moy] Same or Cask. 
 
 zliii 
 
 \'(ir.r.MK AM) I'ai 
 
 (-'di.IM.n ok T)ii;kst. 
 
 .Miiics, Kt';,'iiiii y. . , 
 Mingoiuiil V. I'lickur 
 Minnie, The, v. Tlio (,)iic,ii 
 -Miniif!^, (Ji'iiuii V. , , 
 Miso.iinpbcll, I'Miiliiy V. 
 Mi.sener v. Michigan Cuiitnil K. ][. Vo. ' 
 Mitelii!!! V. H.moook Inspirator Co. 
 : MiU'hell V. Li.ster . . 
 
 '-';■) O, R. .-,77 
 21 (>. R. 207, 
 
 23 S. ('. II. 478 
 22(). K. 177 
 20 (). I!. •)!) 
 24(). II. 411 
 '-' Kx. ('. R. -,39 
 -'1 O. R. L'S 
 
 21 O. K. 318 
 
 20 .A. K. 272 
 
 22 0. H. 71 o 
 
 21 A. R. 433 
 20 0. K. 17 
 
 '2.8. C. R. ,331 
 2.")0. i;. ( ;•_),-, 
 HIS. C, K. ;io:) 
 '« >*• C. R. 022 
 
 . . 208, .-,8,-,. 
 10 A. R. 200 .->2 1. 
 
 Mitclic'li V. McG'aiilfjy 
 IMitihell V. McMurrich 
 
 MittJK'll, KolieitH V. 
 
 \huhtll V. Sfi'ihner, Ro .'. ' ' 
 
 Mill hull V. 'I'lvnliolmo 
 ^ M 1 erly v. Tiiwn of (J.illiii!,'noo(i, Ro 
 , Moll V. \ ilhiw of Huntingdon 
 4 M ll^<)n V. liaruaril . , 
 Mol-,„is Bank Claim-Harto v. Ontario Kx-lT""' '^" ''' ' 
 1 l)re.-is and Transportation Co. ' / |2.-) (). R, 247 
 
 piolsons Hank V. Cooper ., " li,-i> ,, ,„. 
 
 f. '■ •• 't)i. K. 10,, 
 
 .Molvjns Hank v. ll.iltur '.'. fll V' ,'f V?'' -'' ^- ''• l^"' 
 
 :,?.M..ls(m,s Bank v. HciliL' I '!.' :\- ^- •^'-■^> ''^ ■"*• C. R. 88 
 
 SM"!son« Bank, Simpson y" " ' ' n^J^ '\ ^"^- -" '>• ><■ 270. 
 
 ,f?Montreal and Kui-o.H.an Short Lino 1! \V Co V ' "'*^ •• 
 
 1, \- '1'1«; *.»iieen , . .. , ' ' ^2 lOx. C. R. 150 
 
 #Iontre.-il, City of, Allan V. ' '.,.. y ,, „ „ 
 
 J\l.mtreal, City of, Dechene V. ™/^^-.^™' 
 
 :f o,>treal. City of, Lanoine v. . ' ' ' ' l^iy's^l^'.^-. ' f 
 
 ^5 ontreal St™.t R. \V^ Co. v. City of Montreal ^3 s" C R ^ vl 
 .Alontrea elegraph Co., (ireat North- West- V 
 
 , era lelegrapli Co. V i*- 20 S. C. R. 170 
 
 ipldodie V. Jones 
 
 iln.idy V (^uiadian Bank of Comnieroe ' ' 
 
 Al'ion V. ( iddwell 
 
 ■J^cMjre V. Death 
 
 413, 421, 80S. 
 
 3,54. 
 
 ().-)3. 
 
 840. 
 
 770, 782. 
 
 770, S.->0. 
 
 241,778. 
 
 003. 
 
 7, (;30, 013. 
 
 735. 
 
 303. 
 
 930, 944. 
 
 30.",. 
 
 20, 200, 048. 
 
 [0,-)2. 
 
 l.")7. 
 
 )/.j. 
 00, 1 
 
 30. 
 
 ||lo()re V. .lackson . . 
 iMooro V. Kan(> 
 iloure, Alartin v. . . 
 idoore, .Mi hie v. '] 
 
 Moore, Regiiia ex rei., v. Nngl,. " 
 .Woore, Township of. He Stepnens'aiid ' ' 
 ,-P""re, ownship of. Township of .Sonil.i'a v. 
 ^•"ore, Rf \ aiisiekle and . . 
 
 I'lrhdiise V. Hewisii 
 ,loi)t V. (lihson 
 
 jf'i'itn, Hamilton Street R. \V. (V) v 
 Jiirden, Casey v. . , 
 
 lorden. Municipality of South DutTeri.i v 
 
 lorgaii V. Hunt 
 
 (oriu V, The Queen .' ' ]] 
 
 torris v. Dinniok 
 
 lorris V. 'I'liarla . , ' ' 
 
 iloM-is, Rural Miinieipalft v of 
 
 • 'audadiau L. & A Co 
 lorris, TowiLship of, v. County of Huron 
 lorrison, Ahell v. . . 
 lorrison v. Watts . , 
 
 lorrow V. Canadian Pacitic R. \V Co ' 
 Jorrow V. MoDougah' . ■ ^"- ■ ■ 
 
 foi so V. Lamb 
 
 ••il'JS. C. R. 266 
 
 ■ • 14 1'. R. 258 
 
 •• 15 1'. R. l.-,0 
 
 •■ 11) 1'. R. 200 
 
 I 20 O. R. (i52, 10 A R \ 
 
 \l ;m,22,S. C. R. 210. ' 
 ■•,24 0. U. .-,41 
 
 •■ISS. C. It. 034 
 24(). l;. 4.-,(j 
 
 01, 137, 826. 
 
 02, 000. 
 
 289. 
 
 30. 
 
 087, 000. 
 
 .30. 
 
 40, 933. 
 
 604, 962. 
 
 84, 034. 
 
 13, 1 
 J70. 
 
 1208, 44.3, 
 i470. 700, 793. 
 
 :404, 40,",. 
 
 i6(;o, 740. 
 
 ;0.-)3. 
 3, 4!0. 4.->7, 
 
 -• ''. i\. 't'H) w'l iif\ i~~ -II 
 
 :^f;;.H.oo7,2oo.R.249:i82'8;;> '*• 
 
 lOA. R. 144 ■■\^>M.Oi,,>U. 
 
 .)., /, I, ..... • • . . i)-U. 
 
 London and ) 
 
 -'2 (). ];. ,-,(!(» 
 •-'2 A. R. 172 
 21 O. R. 248 
 •-'IS. c, R.7I7 
 "i 1'. R. 127 
 "•■S. ('. R, 204 
 !-'<) (). R. .-)6S 
 1«S. c. R. 407 
 f-'O.S. C. R. 515 
 23 O. R. 201 
 •,-'4 0. R. 1.50 
 
 }|I!'S. C. R. 4.34 
 
 . ;o8s. 
 
 .|021. 
 l2.-)6. 
 
 . 1740, 938. 
 . 1230. 
 
 • |.")0, 102, 100. 
 . too, .-,28. 
 . 1207. 
 .,204. 
 .187,821. 
 ,010. 
 
 048, 0.-)3. 
 
 ■•|f^O.R.680,27O.R.34l|000,031. 
 I 111 * .... ., • • ■ 1-0. 
 
 Mill V V. Phinney 
 Morton V. Cowan 
 Moses, Kreh v. 
 MoU, Stuart v. 
 Moyei, Brown v 
 
 |1!)A. R. 022 
 
 • •{2! A. R. 140 
 
 ••!lCP. R. 120 
 
 ■•jsao. R 107,G0S:,' 
 •• li'P. R. 
 
 • • 22 S. C. R. .503 
 ■ • 2.") O. R, 529 
 ••|22 0. F{. .307 
 
 ■■'23S. C. R. .384 
 
 ■•i23 0. R, 222, 20A. R. 509 
 
 176, 70, 993. 
 
 i412, 738. 
 
 ,'40,S. 
 
 j802. 
 
 '•"'70, 077. 
 
 106. 
 
 1 17, 4,36. 
 
 ")25, 1033. 
 
 199,39.3,060,865,879. 
 
xliv 
 
 TABLE OP CASES. 
 
 Moy-Nor] Xamk or cask. 
 
 Vnl.l.MK AMI I'. 
 
 ■ \r.K. 
 
 Ciil.lMN OK DicivST. 
 
 He 
 
 Moyle V. Kdmundfi . 
 Moyniliiiii, Moliitosh V. .. 
 Mulcahy v, Collins. . 
 Mulholiaml, Oildl v. 
 iMulligiiii V. 'riioiniwon 
 Muiiro V. I'ikc 
 iMuidncli V. West ] 
 
 Murjihy, He . . 
 
 Alurphy, Hn.Igow.iter Clieoso Factory Ct 
 
 -Murphy, Hiiry v. . , '^ 
 
 Murpliy V. Bury 
 
 Murphy V. Micliit,MM Central li. Vv. Co 
 
 Ahirpliy V. The (.Mieen 
 
 iMurniy, Hantjue d' HoclielaL'a v. 
 
 Murray v. IJlack .. . 
 
 .Murray v. ISrown . . 
 
 Murray, Murv v. . . 
 
 Murray, (JauU v. . . 
 
 Murray v. Mucdonald 
 
 Murray V. Mail Printing Co. 
 
 Murray, Sylvester v. . ' ' ' 
 
 Murrell, Connolly v. 
 
 Muskoka Mill .and Lumhe>' Co. v.' McDermott.' 
 iViuter, U.sler v. 
 
 ^luttlebnry v. Taylor . . 
 
 Myers, Trevelyi.'.n'v. 
 
 Mylius V. Jackson ' 
 
 N. 
 
 ■24 O. H. 47!t 
 ISA. K. '.'.ST 
 •-'■to. l;. 441, 
 UP. R. IHO 
 '2:U). K. .-,4 
 
 .'•■"> O. R. 241 
 
 iril'. 1! 
 •24 ,S. C. 
 |-2() O. H 
 •-'0 (). R. 
 •2-.'S. C. 
 24 S. C. 
 •22 (). I!. 
 .< Kx-. C. 
 
 5 Ap)). 
 21 (). K. 
 Hi F. j;. 
 •24 ,S. C. 
 21 (>. R. 
 
 22 O. R. -,,-,7 
 
 1(14 
 
 1!. -Au:, . 
 
 UV.i, 22 A. 
 
 .T27, 23 A. 
 K. W .. 
 R. (i(J8 
 
 ■')(i.S, 20 A. 
 
 ii. 7.-) . , 
 Oas. 414 .. 
 
 •■<72 
 
 1'2."> 
 R. 77 
 458 
 
 R. .S.S(i 
 R. (Hi. 
 
 R. .-.84 
 
 Naglc, Regina ex rel. Moore v. 
 Nason V. Armstrong 
 
 UP. 
 
 R. 
 
 40r, 
 
 2<i I). 
 
 R. 
 
 rm, 7()5 
 
 14 P. 
 
 R. 
 
 187,270 
 
 21 A. 
 
 R 
 
 P20 
 
 1!) A. 
 
 R. 
 
 94 
 
 22 0. 
 
 R. 
 
 ;{i2 
 
 20 (). 
 
 R. 
 
 4;^o 
 
 Hi H. 
 
 C. 
 
 R. 485 
 
 Nation.al Assurance Co. of Ireland, Davis v. 
 National Club, Ite Canadian Pacific R. W Co V 
 
 Naylor, Wr.aytou v! .' .' ' .' ' ^ 
 
 Neelon v. Town of Thorold 
 
 Neil, Teskey v. 
 
 Neilson V 'I'rusts Corporation of Ontario ' 
 
 NoUigan, Geniniill v. . . 
 
 Nelligan v. Nelligan 
 
 >fesbitt V. Armstrong 
 
 Neville, Sweetland v. 
 
 Neville, Union Bank v. 
 
 New Hamburg, Village of, v! ' County of; 
 
 Waterloo . •' 
 
 New Westminster, City of, v. Brighousc 
 Newell, Chapman v. 
 
 News Printing Co., .Macrae V. 
 
 Niagara Falls, Town of, Canada Southern') 
 
 H. W. Co. V. . . I 
 
 Niagjira l-alls, Wesley Park, and Clifton 
 
 tramway Co., Attorney-General v ( 
 
 Niagara N.ivigation Co., Scott v ' 
 
 Nixon V. Grand Trunk R. W. Co 
 
 Nixon V. Queen Ins. Co. . , 
 
 Nordheimer v. Alexander. . 
 
 Norris v. (;ity of Toronto . . 
 
 North American Glass Co. v. Barsalou ' " 
 ^orth American Land Co., Col'in v 
 North American Life Ass. Ce., Cuthbei't v. .' .' 
 North American Life Ass. Co. , McGcachie v. / 
 
 24 O. R. 507, 26 O. R. 2 
 22 O. K. ,-,12, 21 A. i;. 
 
 188, 25 .S. C. R. 203 
 [lOP. R. 110 
 
 24 (). R. 205, 
 
 24 8. C. R. 295 
 
 •20O. R. 8(!, ISA. R.O.-,S,' 
 
 22 S. C. R. 390 . . 
 15 P. R. 244 
 24 0. R. 517 
 20 O. J{. ,307 
 
 20 O. R. 8 . . 
 14 P. R. 360 
 
 21 O. R. 412 
 
 21 O. R. 152 
 
 22 0. R.193, -. A.'r. 1,1 
 22 S. C. I!, 290 . . 
 
 20 S. C. R. 520 
 14 P. R, 208 
 16 P. R. 364 
 
 474. 
 
 I!«>, 879. 
 
 495. 
 
 981. 
 
 4^10, 884. 
 
 )39, 571. 
 
 203. 
 
 450, 451. 
 
 102, 111. 
 
 77S. 
 
 13;!, 795. 
 
 370. 
 
 •SI 1,751. 
 
 14.-). 
 
 1041. 
 
 404. 409, 489. 
 
 S, 338, 410, 4(i2, 885. 
 
 330, 509, 808. 
 
 525. 
 
 340, 404. 
 
 0, I8;{. 
 
 399, 402. 
 
 318. 
 
 431. 
 
 082. 
 
 570. 
 
 28, 
 
 95. 
 
 22 O. R. 41 
 
 19 O. R. 024, ISA. R. 4 
 
 53. 
 
 Nor! ^ ;'*i«'V^>"l-\I«>';''!'tiloIns.Co. v. McLelh 
 Noi h Dufforin, Municipality of, Bernardin 
 
 15 P. R. 409, 455 
 23 O. R. 124 
 
 23 S. C. R. 26 
 19 S. C. R. 248 
 
 24 O. R. 297 
 24 ,S. C. R. 490 
 21 O. R. 80 
 •21 O. R. 511 
 •22 (). R. l.-,i, 
 
 187, 2;i .S. C. 
 10 P. I!. 179 
 21 «. O. R 288 
 19 S. C. R. 581 
 
 20 A. K. 
 I!. 148. 
 
 482, 830. 
 
 208, .•i84, 878, 918, 
 10^20. 
 12, 790. 
 
 S55, 440, 003. 
 
 879. 
 
 43. 
 
 210, 249. 
 
 524. 
 
 377, (i07. 
 
 487. 
 
 493, 570. 
 
 473, 490, 906. 
 
 I(i3. 
 
 1094. 
 
 7-25. 
 
 241, 778. 
 976. 
 
 389,623,857. 
 63, 304, 940. 
 
 218, 507. 
 843. 
 520. 
 
 452, 736. 
 ■)0. 
 188. 
 0'22. 
 17, 529. 
 
 522. 
 
 37. 
 
 189, 517. 
 
 144, 195, 699, 927. 
 
 O'Co 
 
k ^ 
 
 TABLE OF CASES 
 
 <'llMM\ OK DiCKST. 
 
 474. 
 
 I!'!l, S7i). 
 4f).-). 
 IIS I. 
 
 4<l(), SS4. 
 .-..SI), ,-.71. 
 
 ■2():i. 
 
 4")(i, 4.".1. 
 
 1(1-', 141. 
 
 77S. 
 
 I. •!.•!, 7!).-.. 
 
 :mo. 
 
 >SII,7--.I. 
 
 14.".. 
 
 1041. 
 
 404. 40!), 4,S0. 
 
 S, XiH, 410, 4(i2, ,SS.-.. 
 
 '■i'M, .500, 80,S. 
 
 .■.:.',■). 
 
 :i4t>, 404. 
 
 li, i.s;{. 
 
 'i'M, 402. 
 
 ilS. 
 
 V.U. 
 
 ;sl'. 
 
 >7(». 
 28, 70.-.. 
 
 H'2 
 
 m\. 
 
 08 
 
 •■W4, 878. 01 S 
 
 1020. 
 
 1'-', 
 
 79(5. 
 
 J5, 
 
 440, 0'0;{. 
 
 79. 
 
 
 l.S. 
 
 
 10, 
 
 240. 
 
 24. 
 
 
 i , 
 
 007. 
 
 SV. 
 
 
 ).-{, 
 
 ,57(i. 
 
 ■3, 
 
 400, 900. 
 
 4. 
 
 
 5. 
 
 
 I, 
 
 778. 
 
 6. 
 
 
 9, (m, 857. 
 , 304, 940. 
 
 8, r,07. 
 •.i. 
 
 0. 
 
 2, 736. 
 
 529. 
 
 ), 517. 
 
 i, 195, 699, 927. 
 
 .;-JIA.H.;504,24S.C.R.707 
 
 ■i-'O'S. ('. It. ;wi 
 •i-i (>. u. .-.;<8 
 •|l">i'. K. 171 
 l'-^-' ><. ( '. I{. 740 
 
 N>rtli Rastliope, Town.shi[, of, (;il,,son v 
 Noitli reith l.lcotioii CJii.su 
 
 North l'e.thKu-Jlc.s.si„v.Lloy.i 
 •Noi'tlicotu, Vij^eoii V. 
 .\(jillicote V. Vigooii 
 
 Xonhen. I'acifio 1!. W. Co. v. Grant . .' | -'-' 0. It. 045,'"21 A. It ) 
 
 Xc.ith-We.st 'i'lansportiition Co Pee,- K •„ ' i, .'^r'-' ~^ ^- *-'• 1^- 540 
 .Nova .Scotia Contral H. W Co v H.l f Vi'^ '• '^- ■^''^' • 
 
 Nova Scotia Marino Co. v. Stevenson ' ' * !.". ^^ , ,. ;'; , ' ' • 
 
 Xiinn V. ISraudon ' " ' ••!'(> 1'. R. 254 
 
 • ■|2-K). R. ,375 :: 
 i ^' 
 
 I Oakes, Kcarnoy v. . . 
 
 s Oalcs V. Cannon— Ho Cannon 
 
 f> Oliernicr v. Rol.ortson 
 
 I o'liiicn V. Sanfonl . " ' ' ' ' 
 
 : <;:;™'M"t«alMa.inolns;Co., Bailoyv; 
 . (•( oiMiur and Fioldcr, Re. . ,, 
 
 ; OC'oniior v. Hamilton Bridge Co. 
 
 ' (»'l'onii(ir, Laidlavv v 
 
 <»;(;oMnor y. Nova Scotia Telephone Co,': 
 oa O.janolndustrialL. &I. Co v 
 
 (I Del! V. (;rc;L!ory 
 
 (Mull V. Mulholland' 
 
 Odi'ttc, I'aikcr V. ., 
 
 O'Doniicll, \Va;,'ner v 
 
 O'Donolioc, Ro 
 
 .391, 
 754. 
 
 714. 
 
 105 
 
 482, 
 
 701 
 
 25;{, 
 
 43(i. 
 
 
 ().>.) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 124, 
 
 840. 
 
 
 082. 
 
 
 
 838. 
 
 
 
 534. 
 
 
 
 024, 
 
 905. 
 
 
 782. 
 
 
 
 400, 
 
 78.S. 
 
 
 802. 
 
 
 
 34.3, 
 
 744. 
 
 
 I (n)oiiohou V. Beatty ,[ 
 
 ', OlldMolioo, Howard v 
 
 'o;.lS':.^'HSf '':'''^^''^"""™■^^f^■'<^"• 
 ;»'<yu■av. Union Bank of Canada' 
 
 (> Hani v. Dougherty 
 
 <» Keofc, .lanes v. ,'. 
 
 •'j'.l'ife'ht V (iraiid 'I'mnk R. \V. Co ' ' 
 
 Oligiiy V. Huaucheniin '• 
 
 Oliver V. Loekio . 
 
 Ohvor, Loney v. . 
 
 'Hivor V. MeLaugldin 
 
 < »lvcr and City of Ottawa, Re ' ' 
 
 "'Xeil, Hagor v. 
 
 •• ''^^-C. R. 148 .. 
 • 14 1'. It. .-,02 
 •• l-tP. R. .-,,-..s 
 •■r-'(». K. l;j(i 
 •■l'!"X, C. R. 1.-,;! 
 •■l-'5(). R. .-iijs 
 / j-"> O. R. lo_ ._,[ \ 1^ ■ • 
 I 590, 24 S. ( '. li .-,o,s ■ 
 
 ••i-'-'s. 0. R. 270 :: 
 
 . . |22 A. R. -.iw 
 • -'!>*. C. R. (i(ii 
 
 • 14 1". R. ISO 
 ■• Kil'. R. (iO 
 
 ■14 1'. I!. 254 
 
 • 14P. r.:h7. ios.c. r sm 
 
 •• 1-H'- R. 571, 1,-, R. I!. (,;{ 
 ■• 19S. C. R. ;}.5(i ; ''••"■ 
 •• '8A. K. -,o|), ins.C. R ;{4i 
 
 ■ ■'n'u- 'I; ''"•'■• -•^■^•^''■'^■<!« 
 
 ••|l(> K R. ;«2 
 
 • ■ •-'-' S. C. R. 404 .' ■ 
 •• -'5 0. It. ;U7 
 
 ■■ fiO. R. 480, 23A.R. 120 
 •• -2 A. It. 280 
 Ki I'. R. r,os 
 
 • • -'0 O. R. L'S 
 ■• -'lO. R. 80 
 ••1^4 0. R. 41 
 ■ ■ i20 A. R. -.20 
 
 053. 
 
 '""'of rm£'?'°' P''°^'"'^«« of. '^omiiiion 
 -".a.;io^_a.;,.;c^;.ohecR:w. Cio., Cityof 
 
 ''"'S.SS?S,l;r-^-^"-ey. 
 ■ Ontario Hank v. Chaplin 
 'I'tario Hank, MoMickon V. 
 •'"I'U-io Hank, Roger-s v 
 (hitarioCarand Foundry Co 
 
 ; "tar,oCo,dCo.,Morol4.».',,,,t,ona 
 ;> anoC,.tl Co.. Western A.«. Co V 
 ..ntaru. Express and Transportafm. ' Co., 
 
 / -1 O. R. 27 "0 A R ■>■ 
 
 ! n)8.22^'c.l'^io^-} 
 
 -'4 S. C. R. 498 . . 
 
 / 
 
 }:22 0. R. 344 
 
 } 1 1(5 P. R.235 
 
 V. Farwell 
 National Baidi 
 
 <»..tario Express and' Tran^portaiion Co Re 
 -'lo Dnwtors' Case ' ^^ 
 
 On. ano Express an.l Tra.isportation Co Ro 
 -btophena V. Gerth ' >-o., ko 
 
 ■'••20S. C. R. l,-,2 
 ■l-'OS. (!. R. .-j.js ■■ 
 
 •210. R. 41(i 
 •■il8 S. C. R. 1 
 v-iHil'. R. S7 
 
 ■•'21 s. c. R. :k:j " 
 
 124 O. R. 210, 21 A. R. \ 
 (i46, 24 S. C. R. 71(i 
 
 179, 667, mS. 
 171, ,->38. 
 
 )i 
 
 25 O. R. ,-,87 
 24S. C. R. 710 
 
 '16, 837. 
 802. 
 
 91, 153, 15.5, 957. 
 
 !3,3S. 
 
 450. 
 
 457, 8;j9. 
 
 97, 574. 
 
 y,y.). 
 
 119, 150, 940. 
 
 140. 
 
 940. 
 
n 
 
 xlvi 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Ont-?ar] 
 
 >iA.ME OK CanK. 
 
 M 
 
 Cnl.rM.N (ir DlllKSr. 
 
 Ontnrio KxprusH iiiiil 'rninHportalioii ( n., 
 
 Harto and 
 (.)iitiii'io Expiraa uiid 'rraiisportatioii ( 
 
 Haitc V. — Kirk mid Mailinj,''.s (';imi; 
 Oiitiiri" I'ixprosw mid 'I'liuiapoitiitiont'o., Hi 
 
 v.--.\liilsoiin llaiilv Claim 
 Ontario l'"i)rui' and liolt ( o , Hu . . 
 Ontario Indiisliial L. &, I. Co, v. O'Dua 
 Oiitai'io Iiivi'titua-nt Ass'u V. l.nyn 
 • Intario InvL'^lnR'Ht Ass'n v. !Si])pi 
 Ontario Loan and I >i'liciilufi; Co. , HoIiIih v 
 Ontario i^o.iii and l)(lHiitlire Co., i'nrdoin 
 Ontario Natural (ias Co. v. (losti<'lil 
 Ontario Power and I'dat Co., Scaitli v. 
 Ontario Silver Co. V. 'I'a.skei' 
 Ontario .Supply Co. , Watson V. .. 
 Orford anil Howard, IJd Towiisliip.s of .. 
 Oi'V'an \. City of Toronta . . 
 ( liiiisliy V. .larvia . . 
 Orr V. David 
 Orr, l!<is.s v. 
 
 Oslioriic V. City of Kingston 
 Osliorni' V. lK'ii<lfr,s<in 
 
 ■o., I 
 
 ) 
 
 irto ( 
 J 
 
 (». I! 510 
 •-•I o. l;. iMo 
 
 LV)(). I 
 
 Oscar and llattit', Tlio, 
 
 v. 'riie t.hieen 
 
 Osgoode, Towiisliii) of, 
 
 ^■(.l■k V. 
 
 ()'Slian;,'lim.'.s.sy v. IS.dl 
 O.sliM' v. MutuV 
 Ostigny, Kort,'(.'t v, . . 
 Ootroni v. Aliord 
 ( istroiii V. Benjamin 
 
 .. 
 
 J47 
 
 H. M)- 
 R. .•)4!( 
 K. AW, 
 
 ■t40 
 
 i;. 4S,'{ 
 
 .1!)7 
 
 ()'.'(> 
 
 4Ki 
 l.SO 
 
 •h; 
 a'm; 
 ;)is 
 II 
 
 A'M 
 ,■)!)."• 
 .•)S2 
 U. (1!)8 
 IR -241,: 
 
 Ottawa. City of, Ua.'^kerville v. . . 
 Ottawa, C'ity of, ('luin-li v. 
 
 Ottawa, City of, l'"ilz>;eiald v 
 
 Ottawa, City of, l!e()lverand .. 
 
 Ottawa .Mnnieipal l'',leetioii. Re . . 
 
 Owen Sound B. & .S. Society v. Mcir 
 
 Owen .Sounil i)ry Dock SliipbuiKling and Xavi- 1 ! 
 
 gation Co. , Re . , 
 Owen Sound Stone t^Hiarry Co., Fairweatlier 
 Owens V. Bedell 
 
 122 A. 
 
 \-2:i o. 
 L'oo. I! 
 is ,s. c. 
 
 •J2 0. R 
 
 jis A. i; 
 
 '24 0. 1!. 
 1! 
 
 14 I 
 
 15 A. 
 24 ( ). 
 22 ( ). 
 22 ( ). 
 .'.". ( ). 
 
 ;2;io. R. 
 
 !l8S. C. 
 li Kx. 0. 
 
 I R. :m 
 
 '24 O. R. 12,21 A 
 24 S. C. R. 2S: 
 
 21 S. C. R. 415 
 
 1!) A. R. i)4 
 
 [IS'.),-)] A. C. -MS 
 
 24 O. U. 3(»ri 
 R. .T!!) 
 R. 4(17 
 I!. Ki.S 
 R. 2'.IS, 22 
 1!. (!."iS, 22 
 R. ri2!t 
 R. RIG 
 R. 100 
 
 1")7, 4(iO, 001. 
 147. 
 
 I.". ■ 
 
 14S. 
 fiO"). 
 
 \:>x 
 
 MO, 1 17, 020. 
 
 000. 
 
 M, 147. 
 OOO, 7l."i. 
 4.-,->. 
 
 . 2;fii, 1-4.-., SS7. 
 
 ..1402, .-.70. 
 
 . .|7lo. 
 
 ...">, 001, 710. 
 
 SI, 107. 
 14, 017. 
 
 •S. ('.\! 
 
 R. 108, 
 
 41,S, S07. 
 
 :iooi. 
 
 20 A 
 
 21 A. 
 20 A. 
 2-> O. 
 25 O. 
 20 A. 
 2(iO. 
 24 (). 
 
 21 O. R. ,S40 
 
 1^0 O. R, 004 
 10 S. C. R. 1.37 
 
 . . 18011. 
 
 ..i4:!i. 
 
 ..illO, 2II,S, 471. 
 
 ..iio;i7. 
 
 211, 7-18, 000. 
 240. 
 080. 
 
 R. .•i48|322, 742. 
 Pv. 207 7o:j. 
 . . (i07. 
 . . |702. 
 
 145, .'ij;?. 
 \r>o. 
 
 040. 
 
 o;so. 
 
 Packer, Mingeaud v. 
 Page V. Defoe 
 
 Paint V. The ti)ueen 
 
 Pa.i.sley v. Wills 
 
 Palinatier v. .Midvibbon 
 
 I'almer v. Lovett . . 
 
 Palmerston, Town of. Re McDowell and 
 
 Palmerston,To\vn of, Waterons Engine Woi 
 
 Co. V 
 
 Paradis v. Rosso 
 
 Paradis v. The Queen 
 
 Parcells, Scribncr v. 
 Pare v. Pare. . 
 Park, Cousineau V. . . 
 
 Park V. W hite 
 
 Parker v. Mcllwaiii 
 
 Pavkor v. Odette .... 
 
 Parker, Re — Parker v, Parker 
 
 .. 21 <). It. 207, 10 A. 1!. 200 
 . . 24 O. R. ,500, 21 A. R. 40( 
 ( 2 Kx. C. R. 140, 18 S. C. \ 
 \i R. 718 .. ) 
 
 ..il9 0. R. •M;, 18 a. R. 210 
 ..121 A. R. 441 
 ..!I4 P. 1!. 415 
 . . 22 O. R. .-|0;{ 
 k.s( 20O. It. 411. 10 A. R. 47,^ 
 \t 21 S. C. R. .550 .. j 
 
 . . 21 S. C. R. 419 .. 
 
 Parkea v. 'I'rusta Corporation of Ontario 
 
 .. 1 Ex. C. R. 191 .. 
 
 . . 20 O. 1!. .554 
 
 .. 23S. C. R. 21.'! .. 
 
 ..d5P. R. :i: 
 
 ..,2:5(). R. Oil 
 
 ..:10P. R. .55.5, 17 P. R. 
 
 ..'10 P. It. 00 
 
 . . '24 o. R. :;:;{ 
 
 .10 ]'. R. ;i02 
 . . 2(5 O. R. 404 
 
 .24. 
 00. 
 
 277, 2S2. 
 
 021. 
 
 ItlOO. 
 
 01, 02,210. 
 
 OS. 
 
 009. 
 
 24 1, 908. 
 (•275, 270, 
 \ 282, 537 
 
 242, 809. 
 412, 03,5. 
 
 . . 1220, 229, 23 
 . . 5, 750. 
 84]0(). 
 
 ..1.540, 071. 
 ..217. J.il. 
 ..11023. 
 
 , 924. 
 
 ilerce v. Cat 
 
 itt, Kenn 
 
 c, Munro 
 
 latt V. (trail 
 
 layter, Ariic 
 
 (ayter. Arm 
 
 Co. '.s Cla: 
 
 fowiiiaii, Ro 
 "w«, Regini 
 
 ^uiiiiner v. C 
 linnnier. Mi; 
 iinikett, Mo( 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Column di' Dicinsr. 
 
 xlvil 
 
 137, 
 
 4(i(), 
 
 (iOt. 
 
 147. 
 
 
 
 I.-.7, 
 
 
 
 14S. 
 
 
 
 tiO'i. 
 
 
 
 \.yx 
 
 
 
 1 Ml, 
 
 147, 
 
 il'JC). 
 
 (i(l(i. 
 
 
 
 IK, 
 
 147. 
 
 
 tiflO, 
 
 71.-). 
 
 
 4.-.-,, 
 
 
 
 ;-';iii, -.1.-), SS7. 
 
 '4'.l'.>, ,"iTi). 
 |71(». 
 
 ."-. (W)i. :i<). 
 
 ;S1, i(»7. 
 il4, (il7. 
 ,4S1. 
 ,71.-1. 
 
 j77.-. 
 
 1001. 
 
 .S(i:i. 
 
 4.'! I. 
 
 ll'.l, l-'OS, 171. 
 
 l(i;i7. 
 
 •-'II, 74S, 000. 
 
 •_'-n;. 
 
 t;s',). 
 
 •Sl"-', 711.'. 
 7(>:i. 
 (;<)7. 
 7<t2. 
 14.-), ."io.'j. 
 
 l."0. 
 
 f!4!). 
 M9. 
 
 i rar-Plu] 
 
 ■>l'4. 
 
 
 
 it). 
 
 
 
 >77, -'S3. 
 
 
 
 fil. 
 
 
 
 (10!). 
 
 
 
 )1, 02, 216. 
 
 
 
 (iS. 
 
 
 
 99. 
 
 
 
 4i, 908. 
 
 
 
 f27.->, 270, 
 
 277, 
 
 2S0 
 
 2,S2, 537 
 
 ,924. 
 
 
 42, Kl)9. 
 
 
 
 12, O.V). 
 
 
 
 20, 229, 23 
 
 ) 
 
 
 , 7;J(i. 
 
 
 
 0. 
 
 
 
 8. 
 
 
 
 40, 071. 
 
 
 
 17. ■M4. 
 
 
 
 023. 
 
 
 
 !'-irksi V, Calioou 
 
 l'..iiiiigtoii, Hickereiiii 
 I i'..i'.s(iii.s, lie- tJ(,nt's v. 
 
 I'arlio, Donic v. 
 
 I';itjisiiii V. Dmiiu . . 
 \ r.Utc!! V. l.iiidliuv 
 
 I'nttersMii, Caiiiphell v. 
 
 I'iitleisoii, Ko Hunter v. 
 
 'r.ittei'soii, iliirtliiiisoii v, 
 
 I'littdwm V, AfcfA'aii 
 i'attiT.sDii, l!e;,'iii;v v. 
 
 Jl'attuvsoii V. .Siiiitli. . 
 
 aPalter.scjii v. 'I'iiimi.T 
 
 .0]'attt'l'S()liaii(l llro, Co., 
 
 i|p'aul V. liiitliilgo . . 
 
 'ffl'aiil, Tliiliauilfiui V. 
 
 '■^'axtiin, -loiius V. 
 
 jfl'i-alicr anil Itmiioii.s' 
 liio.i. Mf^. Co. . . 
 rearcL', (irotliu v. . , 
 
 Kolland 
 
 144 
 
 40 
 I Si) 
 •140, 21 ,S 
 
 N'oxoii Bros. .MiV. Co. 
 
 <'•■"<•- Itu IFa 
 
 ") 
 
 •• 2.1,S. C. R. ()._) 
 ••,IX.-\. R. 0.3,-) 
 •• !4 I", i; 
 •. I.-) I'. It 
 .. 14 P. I! 
 ■• 20 0, R 
 / ISA. H 
 I 04.) 
 
 ■• 22(>. R. ,-,71 
 ( 20(). i;. |..),-, 
 I K. ISS . 
 221 
 li. O.'iO 
 
 li. r,r,s 
 
 H. 304 
 K. .K) 
 I!. 140 
 H. 3S.-. 
 K. 103 
 
 . 027. 
 Of). 407. 
 ..(44,"), .-)01, 78.-). 
 
 . . o«;i. 
 
 ■■'■'147, 410. 
 ■!24(), (!ll,014, 7S4. 
 
 720, 1!) A. 
 
 . 21 (). 
 . 20 (». 
 
 I I 
 
 22(). 
 . 10 I' 
 
 10 I' 
 
 20 (). 
 
 IDA. 
 
 Miinioo Sower I'ip 
 
 t) 
 
 KIIHil'.S 
 
 Miet: V. .Sliep]iaril 
 '.irNim's Case- Re 
 '\ Hiiel; Mfg. Co. 
 Pci-'k, \\'()itliiiiL;toii V. 
 
 jl'f-^ V. StalT 
 
 vl'ci.e, 'IV,wiishi|i of, ir<-C(.niiiek v 
 
 ieiiiiian Mf^'. Co. V. liroaiUiea.l 
 
 |-|,le s l',at,k„f Halifax- V. ,Iol,„soi> " 
 Pen|,f, LitelMs, (,'„., Tioniaii v 
 f.'oliK^.s l.oiii aii.l Deposit Co. v. (Jriuit ' 
 i^ere.v, Ke„'ii,aex pel., v. W,„tl,. 
 reiiiettc, Cliucli V . . 
 iffrias V. Reefer, R(. 
 
 f/feiiy, Kiilil V. . . \ 
 
 elerlionaigli, 'I'owii of, M'a.s„„ y' 
 eteis V. City of .St. .lolin 
 Peter.. V. Quel.ec Harbour Comnii.ssi, 
 .fetei'soii V. I'reJericks 
 Petcrtoii V. Tlie Queen 
 Peine, Regina v. . . 
 
 "(iuebc'"'"' '^"'''^"""'"'« '^e Xotre Dan.e do 
 
 Peurlien V. (;ity .Mutual P^'ii'o Ins 
 
 Peuclieii V. Imperial Bank 
 
 Phelps V. Lord 
 
 ^liiHips, Baxter v. . . 
 
 PliJnney, Morse v. 
 
 Ili'eilix Ins. Co. V. MeOJico 
 
 Plekcring v. Toronto R. W. Co ' ' 
 
 Betoii Kleeliiiii Case 
 
 lictou, Muuieipality of, v. (ieldert 
 
 Berce v. Gan.ada Ponnaneiit L. & ,S. Co. 
 
 Igott, Kennedy v. . . 
 
 ike, Muiu'o v." 
 ^i'ft V, (IiaudTfunk ]{. \\. Co" 
 Pl^'vler, Arnold V. 
 
 Pl^'vrer, Arnold v.- Watcrous Kngino W 
 I o. .s Claim . . c, '- >> 
 
 Pl"\viiiaii, Rcgiiia v. " ' ' ^ 
 
 Plinv^. Re-i„;i V. 
 
 Phiiumer V. Coldweli 
 Plummer, Millar v. 
 Plii'ikett, McClary v 
 
 nd 
 
 19 A. 
 
 l.-> P. 
 il.-)l'. 
 24(). 
 
 20 ( ). 
 
 K. ,-)S2 
 
 K. 19,-) 
 H. 4.32 
 It. 107 
 
 1!. 2';;) 
 
 24 ( (. 
 ,14 I'. 
 21 .S. 
 2.3 ( ». 
 2(1 (). R 
 •21 S. C. 
 
 Co. 
 
 20 S. 
 20 ( ) 
 l,s s. 
 
 23 () 
 
 24 S. 
 22(). 
 14 P. 
 
 20 A, 
 
 21 S. 
 19,S. 
 l.-)P. 
 2 Kx. 
 20 O. 
 
 19.S. 
 
 R 
 C. 
 
 ISA. 1! 
 
 20 ( ). R. 
 
 25 ( ). R, 
 
 23 .s. C. 
 
 22 .S. (;. 
 
 18 S. C. 
 
 Hi P. R. 
 
 .'0 S. C. 
 |[ 189,3] A, 
 1210. H. 
 07 
 
 18 .S, 
 15 P 
 
 19 A 
 
 I!. .-.35 
 
 K. ;;si 
 c. n. 19 
 
 U. .S3 
 
 288 
 
 H. 713 ,. 
 
 i;. 541 . 
 
 •'90, 23 A. 
 
 !!. 202 
 
 088 
 
 P. 385 . . 
 
 072 
 
 .304 
 
 083 
 
 v.. R. 074 . . 
 r. R. (iS5 . 
 R. .301 
 
 ('. R. 07 ..' 
 317 
 
 ( '. 
 K. 
 C. 
 
 i:. 
 
 c 
 
 I 
 
 r 
 
 I 
 
 R. 713 
 440 
 
 orks I .., 
 
 14 P. R. 3 
 
 .>-.) 
 259 
 R. 317 
 li. 503 
 R. 01 
 144 
 
 R. !09 
 ■ V. 524 
 42(1, 2.j 
 
 , 23 A. R. ; 
 
 C. R. 099 
 
 R. 10 4 
 
 It. 403 
 !)9 
 
 O. 
 
 -) '». 
 120 O. 
 15 P. 
 
 R. 008 
 
 R. 050 
 R. 339 
 R. 144 
 
 •-'2 S. (J. R. 253 
 K; p. R. 310 
 
 |,I0.-), 108, 109, 4.-.8. 
 
 . . 0(i4, 088. 
 . '2()9. 
 . . 79,-). 
 ■ ■ ;070. 
 . ■ ;409. 78.3. 
 . . 249. 
 . . 74. ] 10. 
 . . 308. 
 
 .. 140, 152. 
 
 . 25,3. 
 2.39, 544. 
 l-'l, 485, 7.33, 
 149, 2.38, 908. 
 
 204, 820. 
 
 . . :9s2. 
 
 • . [453, 7.30, 745. 
 . . ,300. 
 ..!715. 
 203. 
 
 ■ III, 1,M). 
 342 NO, r,2->. 
 
 ■ ■ •->.39, (i72. 
 
 ■ ■ i700, 701. 
 
 . . ;ooo. 
 
 ..302. 
 . . {4(l(i. 
 
 •• .'!I9, 448, 7.38,882. 
 
 • . 45. 
 
 .. 1.S2, .5.38. 
 
 . . 707. 
 
 ■ 305, .311, 688. 
 .. 201, 2(14. 
 
 . ■ 92, 989. 
 
 ..i51.t. 
 
 •■,«9. 877,97.3. 
 
 ..il0,3(i. 
 
 . ■ i82, 029, 770. 
 
 . jlOO. 
 
 . . '23, 534. 
 
 ..!254. 
 
 ■ . i757, 758. 
 
 . . (;93. 
 
 I ;<i8i, SCO. 
 
 . . !3(i. 
 
 ..|.-)39, .-,71. 
 . . 2.-,0, .327. 
 ..404, 500. 
 
 ..J872. 
 
 . il04, 209. 
 . '409, 580. 
 ..121.5, 2-IS. 
 
 98, 
 .I-229, 401. 
 
 n 
 
xlvlii 
 
 TABLE OF CASEU. 
 
 Poi-Que] 
 
 N ami: (IK ('.\MH. 
 
 Point Olairc 'riiini>ilu! Itoiul Co., Villngo of St. ) 
 
 NDl.lMK A.NI) I'Alin, 
 
 loiichim lU^ la I'oiiitu ( 'liiiiii 
 I'oirior v. liiiilc 
 I'oll V. IKiwitt 
 
 IV.IIiiid V. WriLilit 
 
 I'lilloLk and C'ty of 'roidiiio, lie 
 
 I'cil.Slin, KuiltLMM V. . . 
 
 I'ontiau Klcotion (Jiwi; 
 
 I'ooK', 'I'alliol V 
 
 / 
 
 .'I S. C. R 4S0 
 
 CcH.IMN III' iJllilM 
 
 iind . 
 'Kl.y. 
 
 I'(i[pliain V. Flynii 
 I'oi.pluwcll, l!t';,'iMa V. 
 I'iM'i Artliur, Town of, Dwyer v. 
 I'ort Artliur, Town nf, Itu hwyai 
 I'oit .Aitlinr, Town of, .McNMc'ir 
 I'ort KIgin Public Sciiodl lioaiil ' 
 I'ortfoiis, Cole V. . . 
 Porter v. lioulton 
 
 Portur V. H.ilc '' 
 
 Portland, City of, Williani.sv 
 
 I'ottia' and Central ( 'onntics R. W. Co., !;,■ . . 
 
 Potter, Kcgina v. . . 
 
 Potts V. Teni|i('ranic Nifo Aasui'tvnod Co. 
 
 Poidiot V. Tlie (^)ueel-. 
 
 I'liidiot, Tlie (,)iioeii V. 
 
 Poulton, Leslie v. . . 
 
 Pounder and \'ill:iL',e of Wineliescer, 1,'e 
 
 Powers, MarliudaJe v. 
 
 Pratt V. Hunnill 
 
 Pr<'fontaiue, Itufresncv. .. 
 Prefoutaine, \'allec v. . . 
 Preseolt and Russell, United Counties of. Re) 
 
 L'O S. 
 ■S.i ( ». 
 
 P.. !»7 
 ii!!> 
 Ki P. R. .")(),-) 
 
 I.-) P. R. ;)-),-. 
 
 •-'.-.( ), R. .'Wl 
 
 20 S. C. R. ll'.'O ., 
 
 l."> P. R. <l!l 
 
 IT) P. R. 074 
 
 !.•> I'. R. '-'Sll 
 
 •-•()(). 1;. ;)().•{ 
 
 Il> A.R. a;"), 2-iS.C 
 
 •-•1 (). R. 175 
 
 •2(1 (). R. ;t!M 
 
 •JO ( ). R. 7;{ 
 
 ID A. I!. Ill 
 
 If) P. R. -MS 
 
 •2:1 S. C. R. 2(15 . . 
 
 I!) S. C. R. ID!) ,. 
 
 1(1 P. R. Ki 
 
 ■20 A. R. r>Ui 
 
 2:i(». R. 73 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. Ml;i .. 
 
 C. I!. W 
 
 R. •M-2 
 
 R, (IS4 
 
 C. R. o!)7 .. 
 
 I!. I 
 
 2 i;.\- 
 
 1.-) P, 
 1 A 
 
 2:, s, 
 
 21 (>. 
 
 Flatt au( 
 PrescottKloulionCa.se 
 Pre.seott, Town of, Connell v. 
 Preston, \'ill;i^;e of, and Klotz, Re 
 Price V. MerciiM' 
 Price V. Wade 
 I'rince County Idcetiun Case 
 Pringle, Sawyer v. . . 
 Prittie aiul City of TciiMUto, Re . . 
 Priltie, Seottisli Auierican Investment Co, v. 
 Proctor, (lordcn v. . . 
 i'roetor v. (Iraliani . . 
 Protestant Orphans" Home, Kennedy v. 
 
 Prott, Re Uuilt a\id 
 
 Provinces of Ontario and (jueliec. Dominion 
 
 of ( 'anada v. . . 
 Provincial Jurisdiction to Pass Prohil)ito;-y 
 
 Liquor Laws, Re 
 Provincial Xatural (ias Co., Carroll v. . . 
 Provinci.il Provident Inst'*^ution, Ferguson v. 
 Pryce and City of Toronto, Re .. 
 PueUla, Tile City of 
 Pun Ponj,', Hett v. , . 
 Purcell V. Hergin . . 
 
 Purccll, Cleary v. . . 
 Purcell, Macdonel! v. 
 Purdoni v. Ontario L. & D. Co. 
 
 Purdy, Sparks v. . . 
 
 Putnam, Hardinan v. 
 
 Quebec, The 
 
 Quehec, 'I'liu, Re— Churchill v. McKay 
 Quc'ec Rank, Hryant v. . . 
 Quebec Central K. W. Co. v. Lortie 
 
 21 .S. C. I!. 007 .. 
 21 S. C. R. (i()7 .. 
 
 IS A. R. I 
 
 20 s. C. R. I!)(i .. 
 20 A. R. ti), 22S.C. 
 Ki P. R. .SIS 
 IfS S. C. R. ;io;! ,. 
 U P. R. ;!,-)l 
 20 s. C. I!. 20 
 200. R. Ill, ISA. 
 10 A. R. .-iO.'i 
 20 A. P. liOS 
 200. U. ,->:{ 
 24 O. 1;. 007 
 2". O. R. 2;j,-) 
 r,iO. I!. 7.S 
 
 24 S. C. I!. 49S . . 
 
 24 S. C. R. 170 . 
 
 10 P. R. 518 
 
 15 P. K. .SOI) 
 
 20 A. 1;. 10 
 
 3 Ex. C. R. 2(5 . . 
 
 ISS. a. R. 290 .. 
 
 20 A. R. 5S5, 23 S. C. 
 
 16P. R. .SOI 
 
 23 S. C. R. 101 .. 
 
 23 S. C. R. 101 . . 
 
 22 0. R. 597 
 
 15 P. R. 1 . . 
 
 18 S. C. R. 714 .. 
 
 3 Ex. C. P, ,S3 
 .'OS. C. R. 472 
 KSO.SI A. C. 170 
 12 S. C. R. 330 
 
 .. 1)30, 10 IS. 
 
 I 
 . . 333, !)il4. 
 ..lit!). 
 .. !ISL 
 . . '.S5, 230. 
 ..!l5;t. 
 
 . . 423, 752, 75!). 
 . .215, .S(U, ,-)!l(i. 
 ..22(;, 22s, •.';K),2.S5, 3(17, 
 . . 23!), 579. 
 , . [273. 
 R. 2411122, 234, M3. 
 . 40. 
 . . 72s. 
 ..jI14, S25. 
 ..[73, S2, 414, !),S2. 
 . . 407. 
 
 . 15, 422, 590, 920. 
 . 710. 
 .. 2(i, 31. 
 . . 51)1. 
 . . i4(i2, 532. 
 ..'33, ,S7, 279, 41!). 
 ..197, 2113, .SO 1,701, !!-'>• 
 . . ,575. 
 
 . .122, ,-),-i!l, (',97. 
 . .I5. l.S.S, 4!l.-), 7!)5. 
 . . 377, (KiO. 
 
 liOS. 
 
 008. 
 
 ()!)(). 
 
 75(i. 
 R. I47|73!l. 
 
 .. .S3, 213. 
 
 . 021. 
 
 . 432, 509, 0;!3. 
 
 . 1 757, 75S. 
 R. 21s S72. 
 
 . 37, OSS. 
 
 . . 07!), '•~:)2. 
 
 . . 3S7, 404. 
 
 . . 525. 
 
 .. 44S, 809, 1031. 
 
 . . 07, 94. 
 
 .. 171, 538. 
 
 ..jiod 
 
 ..509, 811. 
 ..,410, 523. 
 . , 725. 
 . . SS9. 
 ..91.3, 914. 
 R. 101 I0.S2, 1034, 1039. 
 
 239, 443. 
 
 1033, 1034, 10.(0. 
 
 1033, 1034, 1030. 
 
 144, 147. 
 (228, 230, 240, 506, 6;i| 
 \ SI2. 
 
 ■45, 949, 980. 
 
 535, 895. 
 820, 901. 
 101, SI 9, S20, 
 
 844. 
 
TABLE OF OASES 
 
 zUx 
 
 (mm \IN iiK DliiKST, 
 
 ;t:i.'t, <.m. 
 
 !IS|. 
 
 ;).■), •j;tii. 
 i.-):t. 
 
 vr.i, 7.VJ, :m). 
 •ji."), ;iiii, .-><)(). 
 
 •i'Jii, •-'•JS, •2-M, •-';)■), 3(iT. 
 
 \-2-2, •.'.•U, 025. 
 
 411. 
 
 7iS. 
 
 ill4, S-.M. 
 
 ,-a, H2, H4, !);w. 
 
 407. 
 
 1.'., 4l>-_>, 590, 020. 
 
 7l(i. 
 
 •JO, :il. 
 
 Id'.', na-j. 
 
 ]Xi. ;!7, •J7!>, 4 lit. 
 
 |i!t7, •-•!i;i,;ioi,7Ul,i»L's.^ 
 
 ii>7.'>. 
 
 1 1-.':;, .-).->!), (;o7. 
 
 I.-), 1 ;).-!, 4!l.-), 7!)."). 
 
 :<77, (iiii;. 
 i;o,s. 
 
 (iOH. 
 
 Que-Beej 
 
 N'.v.Mi. OK C.v.-iK, 
 
 (^urhuo, (,'ity of, licll Tt;li'|)lioiio (,'i), V. 
 t^iiflicL', City of, V. 'I'liti (jtiuieii 
 
 \'ol.r.MK AM> TahK. 
 
 (Ail.l'.MN OK l)|ilK.>iT. 
 
 (.iiuliLC, City of, (,)ml)(i> Hhh (',,. v. 
 (,1111'la'o i-'iit' Ins. Co,, AiuliTHoii V. '. , 
 
 (^Uflifi! Kiru lii.H. Co., MrCaual.iiul v. .. 
 (.iiiilifc (ias Co. V. (.'ity ol (,iii(4iec ! , 
 
 (.iiii'liuc Hiirlioiw Coiiiiiiis.sioiu'iH, IVtcis v, 
 giiiOioc, Moiitiiionjiicy, luiil Clmilfvoix K.'w 
 
 Co. V. Matliifii 
 Quebec Skatiiij,' (iiib v. The Qiicou 
 Qiiueii las. Co., N'ixoii v. . . '/ 
 
 (iiicuii of tlio Isles, 'I'hu, lieido v. . " 
 
 QuciMi X'ictoria VLi^ium Fulls Park, Cninmia- 
 
 HioneiH for, v. ( '<ilt 
 giift-ri Vii'toriii NiaKuia Falls I'ark, Con'iiiiis- 
 
 sioiHTH foi-, V. llowar.l 
 Qiu'on'd Collfgu V. ( 'la.\loii 
 Quii'ii's C!oinity Klcctiun Caso '.'. ,] 
 (.liiiiU V. Cliuroli 
 ()uiii, Toronto (iciipral Trusts Co. v. 
 
 guinn, HalcUvin v . . ' '.' 
 
 Qiiinii, ('oL'kl)urii v. . , . . [ 
 
 Quirk, Tlioiiison v. , , 
 
 (}uirl V. Tlic (^tiiccu . . \] 
 
 R. 
 
 Race, Maleolin v. , . 
 Rafleiihurst, Draper v. , . " 
 
 HavlforJ V. Macdoiiald 
 
 Ftadfurd, McMaattir v 
 
 Raleigh and Harwich, Re Townships of 
 Raleigh, Corpor.ition of, v. Williams 
 Raleigh, TowuHJup of, Fowster v. . 
 Haleigli, Township of, Re Township of Har- 
 
 wieh and 
 Raleigh, Townshi]) of, Williams v! . ', 
 Ramsey, Langman v. Hudson and '. 
 
 Ramus V. Dow 
 
 Randall v. Dopp . . . , [ 
 
 Raphael v. Mc;Farlauo .'. 
 
 Rapple, Grain v ] 
 
 Rathhono and Wldte, Re . . ,', \[ 
 
 Rattf^, Booth V. 
 
 R.atte V. Booth . . ,', [' 
 
 Ratz, Knickerbocker Co, v. .. 
 
 Raw.son; Regina v, . . 
 Ray, Blight V. 
 
 Ray V. Isbister 
 
 Ray, Regina v 
 
 Reaume, Regina ex rcl. St. Louis v 
 
 Rebiirn, Scott v. , 
 
 Receiver-Ceneral of Now lirunswick, Liouida- 
 tors of Maritime Bank of Canada v 
 i Reddick V. Traders' Bank of Canada 
 ' Kedforn v. Poison 
 
 Redmond v. Oanadia; 
 Redmond, Regina v. 
 JJeed V. Wilson, Re 
 Reesor, \Vood v. 
 o 
 
 Mutual Aid Ass'n 
 
 iOH.V. R. '.MO .. 
 -•K.v. C. It. 4.-.() .. 
 2 i:.x. C. 1!, •.>.-.•_',;( Kx. (;. 
 I!. lilJ, •-U.S. C, U. 420. 
 20 .s, (;. K. ...;to . . 
 
 lo P, l{. i;<2 
 2")0. R. ;t,((l 
 20 S. C. l;. -s.n .. 
 !» S. C. R. OM,-, . , 
 
 !!• S. C. R. 42(1 .. 
 
 ."< I'lx. C. R. H87 . . 
 23 S. C. R. 2(J . . 
 ;•'< i:x. C. R. 238 . 
 
 j22A. R. 1 
 
 2.1 (). I!. I, .2:\ji. H.no-K 
 
 25 ( >. R. OS-.' 
 
 20.S. C. j;. o(i .; 
 
 2.'<(», i;. 2(12 
 
 2.'i ( ». R. -j.-io 
 
 10 P. R, 24.S 
 
 20 0. R. r.jil 
 
 ISS. C, R. 0!|-| ,. 
 
 loss. C. R, -,I0 .. 
 
 10 P. R. :?:io 
 
 1 i H. R. .S7(i 
 
 21 s. (;. R. 714 . 
 
 1>< A. R. 107 
 
 10 P. R. 20 
 
 20 0. R. ir)4 
 
 21 S. C. R. 10,% [1893)' 
 
 mn. 
 
 A . C. 540 
 14 P. R. 429 
 
 / 
 
 21 .\. R. 077 
 
 14 P. R. CO .. ..801 
 
 14P. R. L'15 .. ..770. 
 
 •I'-^l'- K. 219 .. . . ,1.-.(i, 67.3. 
 
 .122 0. R. 422 .. ..468. 
 
 . ISS. C. R. 183 ., ,. 504,990. 
 
 .22 0. R. 519, 20 A. R. 29I;9I8. 
 
 22 O. R. r>Mi 
 419, 15 App 
 
 J 297, 298, 299. 
 
 . 9.">8. 
 .217. 
 
 . 20, 207, 810. 
 . '9.'i8. 
 182, ,').38. 
 
 .T., !)44. 
 
 293, 300, .310, 750. 
 
 520. 
 
 H93. 
 
 302, 499. 
 
 309. 
 
 (!82. 
 757, 75S, 
 
 488. 
 
 .355, 37(i. 
 
 227, 230, 2.35, 908. 
 
 (i4, 590. 
 
 lO'.l, III. 
 
 52, l(i3. 
 
 4(M, 791, 977. 
 
 958. 
 
 99,"). 
 
 400. 
 
 2S, 437, 503, 505, 800, 
 
 827. 
 703. 
 
 712. 
 
 SOS. 
 0. 
 
 998. 
 1000. 
 
 / 14 A. R. 
 
 \ Cas. 188 
 
 21 S. C. R. 037 . . 
 10 P. R. 185 
 10 P. R. .30, 191 .. 
 
 22 O. R. 407 
 
 23 0. R. 415 
 f|2l(). R. 497, 22 A. R 
 \! 12, 20 S. C. R. 79 
 . .20 0. K. 212 
 . . i2(i O. R. 4(i0 
 . .l25 0. R. 4.50 
 
 20^C.^R.095,tlS92JJ,;^;,^,_3^3 
 
 22 O. R. 449 ' 
 
 25 O. l:. 321 
 IS A. R. 335 
 
 24 ( ). R. 331 
 
 il8, 2,54, 320, 420, 808. 
 
 1319,807,981. 
 
 '233, 2.34. 
 
 |04, 77, 721. 
 
 i«13. 
 
 :7, 392, 394, 775, 770, 
 
 804. 
 25S, 492. 
 702. 
 8, 041. 
 
 23 0. R. 
 22 A. R. 
 
 552 
 57 
 
 :4(i. 
 ,.|I53. 
 ..J52I. 
 . . 273, 831. 
 ..'313. 685, 861. 
 . . 14, 27, 78. 
 
TABLE OF OASES 
 
 Ree-Reg] 
 
 \a.mi. ok Case, 
 
 N'lii.iMK AMI 1'ai;i;. 
 
 liiKivcH, City of Itiilifux V 
 
 IU%'iiia V. Alwiiid . . 
 Kr;;ilill, AlcliJliuliI V. 
 
 liffiiiia V, Arnolili , , 
 lii'j^'ina V. Att«cirnl . 
 |{tj.'iiiii V. Itank of Moiitrunl 
 llt^'iiia V. liacry 
 riigina V. Ik'i-kLT . , 
 lli'jiira V, Ikdi'it.' 
 lU'giiia V. Ikll 
 llfgiiia, Btitiaiul V, 
 
 H(giiia V. liiikott 
 
 Kcj^'iiia V. I'.ittli; 
 Kt'gina, lioniuut v, . . 
 Rt'giiia, lloyd V. 
 Ri'giiia, liiady v. . . 
 Kt'giim, Hro.vii v. . 
 
 Kc'gina, liulmer v. . , 
 
 Regiiia v. Hurk 
 lit'gina V. JJi.rku 
 
 Regina, Burroughs v. . . . . . , j 
 
 Regina, Burton v. . . 
 Regina v. HutlcT . . 
 
 liL'ginii. Cuiailian Agriuiiltural Coal ami Col- / 
 onizalioii Co. v. . . i 
 
 Regina v. Carrier . . 
 
 Ri'gina, Carter, Maey, &. Co. v. 
 
 Regina, Cliarlantl v. 
 Regina v. {.'liarles . . 
 Regina v. Cinion 
 
 Regina, City of Qnehcc v. 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Clark 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Clarke . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 Clarke v. . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Connnlly . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Corniack . , 
 
 Regina 
 
 Corse V. 
 
 Regina v. Cosby 
 
 Regina 
 
 Couotte V. . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Coulwin . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Coiirsey . . 
 
 liegina 
 
 V. Cvuurty . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Uavi.s 
 
 Regina 
 
 \'. 1 lav 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Defries ., 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Deniera . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Diekout . . 
 
 Regina, 
 
 Dionne v. . . 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Doty 
 
 Regina, 
 
 Uube V 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Eilwariia.. 
 
 Reaiiia 
 
 V. Klborne . . 
 
 Regina, 
 
 I'JllS V 
 
 Regina 
 
 V. Kxcell . . 
 
 Regina. 
 
 Fairbanks v. 
 
 •2:iS. c. R. ;tto 
 ■-"JO. R. ii:» 
 wo. i: 
 
 r.iit 
 R. ;i74 
 R. •-'."> I, 
 *; 
 
 2 Kx, ( 
 .'1 Kx. ( 
 C. R. 
 ■-';»0. li 
 •2(»0. I!, r.74 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. l.-,4 
 •2 Kx. C. R. XV.i 
 •JOO. R. tiTti 
 
 •-'I O. R. I, sit 
 ''2oO. R. >>••} 
 
 2 Kx. C. R. -JH,^. 
 •_M (). R. KIJ 
 
 •J I O. R. (ior. 
 '2 Kx. {;. R. 1 
 1 Kx. C. R. 18(i 
 •-> Kx. C. R. '2-:\ 
 .S Kx. (;. R. 70 
 
 '23 S. \ 
 ( 
 
 Coi.rMN dl' DlUKST. 
 
 9(11, 1014. 
 (II'J, (il4. 
 
 IM7. 
 m).'l. 
 
 'i(il, 'J(i!t. 
 
 S<t, 104. 
 
 27!t. 
 
 •241, I'll 
 
 20(1. 
 
 1'20, •27;i, S,'t2. 
 
 2S4, ;iO-_', .•)'.! 1. 
 
 Ids, 7(11, SOf). 
 
 I(i4. 
 
 2S(i, 1010. 
 
 .324. 
 
 300. 
 
 .302. 
 
 r.SKx. C.R. IS4,2;)S. C. IL,,. ..,. ,,.,, 
 
 24 o. R..s;n 
 
 '•2A (). it. 04 
 
 1273, H-M. 
 208. 
 
 2Kx.C^R.293,20S.C.jl,„2,,,,o3,5n0.58S. 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. 87 
 '22 O. R. .1(12 
 '3 Kx. C. R. I.-.7,24S. C. ) 
 
 1!. 713 ., 
 
 2 Kx. C. R. 3(1 . . 
 2 Kx. C. R. 101 ., 
 
 2 Kx. C. R. 12(!, ISS. C. ) 
 1{. 700 , , \ 
 
 I Kx. C. R. 201 . . 
 24 O. R. 4;f2 
 
 23 S. C. R. 02 . . 
 
 ) |2Kx,C.R.'j.-)2,3Kx.C.R. \ 
 ( 104.24,S. C. U. 420 / 
 . 2 Kx. C. R. 4r)0 . . 
 
 .i3Ex. C.R.I, 21 S.C.R.OoO 
 .2(H). R. (142 
 \ 3Kx. C. R. 1,21 S.C. R. 
 ' ().■)(> 
 
 I Kx. C. R. 182 
 
 2Kx. C. R. 141 . 
 
 22 O. R. 220 
 
 ■2r,(). R. i.-,i 
 
 21 U. R. 213 
 
 3Kx. C. U. 13 .. 
 
 21 O. R. .Wl 
 
 3 Kx. C. R. 82 . . 
 
 24 O. R. 240 
 
 282. 
 
 122, 722. 
 
 3U8, (;,-ifl. 
 
 270,281,28.3. 
 ,30. 
 
 S(iS. 
 
 279, 282. 
 rml. 
 I S3. 
 
 297, 298, 299. 
 
 ■)2. 
 
 '2r>, 20, 426, 900. 
 ."i.">7. 
 
 2.-), 20, 426, 960. 
 
 . 312. 
 . 187, 417. 
 . 202, 39(i, 04.-). 
 . 2(i0, 202, 2(i7. 
 . 1270. 
 . (i4, 29.->. 
 . '423, 7S9. 
 . 303, o3.-), 896. 
 37, r)S4, (m8. 
 
 26 O. R. 68,-), 27 O. R. 181 2(i4, 831, 88,-) 
 
 20O. R. ,'il .. . ,-,,-,,-). 
 
 22 0. R. 0,-)2 .. ..1264,481. 
 
 20 O. R. 209 . . . .i201. 
 
 2.-) O. R. (it.-) . . , . iofi.-), 2(i9, 481 
 
 3Kx.C.R.29.3,22S.C.R.482 107, 310. 
 
 24 (). R. 2.-)0 
 
 24 S. C. R. 4,51 . 
 
 2.) O, R, 362 
 
 2 Kx. C. R. .381 . 
 
 3 Ex. C. R. 147 . 
 
 19 A. R. 700 
 
 21 O. R. rm. !9 A. 
 
 22 S. C. R. 7 
 
 20 O. R. 633 
 
 24 S. C. R. 711 . 
 
 .. 134. 272, 04(). 
 . . 30(i, 788. 
 . . 273. 
 . . 409. 
 
 . . 1 2.'), 290, 412. 
 .. 100. 
 R. 439,-)-il, 
 
 .. 174, 947, 9.-)0. 
 . . 200, -)-)2. 
 
I 
 
 Coi.iMN or Ukikst. 
 
 14, 4S1. 
 
 .">, 
 
 2(1!), 
 
 4.S1 
 
 7. 
 
 •SIO. 
 
 
 4. 
 
 -'7-', 
 
 1)4(1 
 
 (), 
 
 7s,s. 
 
 
 3. 
 
 
 
 9. 
 
 
 
 ■% 
 
 29<i, 
 
 411.' 
 
 0. 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 4, 
 
 947. 
 
 0.)0. 
 
 0, 
 
 .■).V2. 
 
 
 I). 
 
 
 
 TABLE OF 0ASB8. 
 
 Reg] 
 
 Nam I, or ('asi:. 
 
 )(>l. Kill. 
 
 
 Itrgiiia, l'"uli;i)iier v. 
 
 ilJ, (il». 
 
 
 I!.':,'iiia V. Kiinull . 
 
 >r,i. 
 
 
 
 S7. 
 
 
 Il.j^ina, l''iiru(.|| v. 
 
 (J.'{. 
 
 
 Ii('„'iiia V. I'oai'inaii . , 
 llcgiiia, I'Vllowos \, 
 
 '71.', 
 
 
 KtXiua V. Kilion 
 
 (11, l.'(i!t. 
 
 
 IU';,'iiia V. Ki«liei' .. 
 
 (1, 104, 
 79. 
 
 
 Kcgina v. Klyiiu 
 Kigiini V. Krawluy , . 
 
 41, I'd J, 
 
 
 liegina, (iilclirist v. 
 
 «(». 
 
 
 lUgiiia V. (iili's 
 
 20, 27;i, s;(2. 
 
 
 Kigiiia V. (iill'.'spio, 
 
 S4, ;i02, .S9I. 
 
 
 Itigiiia V. (iiaii.l 'riiiiik 
 
 (l.H. 701, SOS. 
 
 
 lli'giii.i, Grant v. 
 
 04. 
 
 I'rgina V. (i rover , . 
 
 so, 101 0. 
 
 Kcgina, (iuay v. 
 
 24. 
 
 Kigiii:i V. ( liilly 
 
 00. ! 
 
 Ki.-giria V. (I'lirr 
 
 02. 
 
 \ 
 
 lU'giiia, Halifax City U 
 
 10, :ii7, it.'iO. 
 
 
 Krgina, Hall v. 
 
 7.'?, .s;{i, 
 
 
 Kigina V, Ifalliilay. . 
 lagini v. Hart 
 
 08. 
 
 
 llcgiiia V. Hartley . . 
 
 (11,29.-), :)03,,-.i-0,58.s. 
 
 
 Kigiua V. Hazcn 
 liigiiia V. llcndcraliott 
 
 
 
 S2. 
 
 
 lUu'ina v. Hfurv . , 
 Krgina, lUnvfonl R. \V 
 
 22, 722. 
 
 
 O.S, (i.-)9. 
 
 
 K'gina V. Hoilgo . . 
 
 
 i;i.'gina V, Hogai'th . . 
 
 70, 2S 1,28.1. 
 
 
 lli'j.'iMa V. Ilowartli. . 
 
 0. 
 
 
 lii'gina V. Hughes .. 
 
 18. 
 
 
 Kigin.i, Hiin)[ilir(!y v. 
 
 79, 282. 
 
 
 lUigina V. J. C. .Vyr ' 
 
 ■.1. 
 
 
 Ki.'giiia, .Jackson v, 
 
 s;{. 
 
 iti'gina V. .Justin 
 
 J7, 298, 299. 
 
 ilegiiia, Kearn. ^ 
 
 
 Kejiiiia, Kenney v. , . 
 
 ) 
 
 liegina, Laliruiior Co. v. 
 
 ■), 2(3, 420, 900. 
 
 Kegina v, Latham . . 
 
 )7. 
 
 Kt'giiia, Lav. lie v. . . 
 
 J, 20, 426, 960. 
 
 
 liegina, Lefehvro v. 
 liegin 1 V. Loviiiger. . 
 
 
 
 2. 
 
 
 liegi, ueas V. .. 
 
 -)■ 
 
 
 Itegin.i Lynch 
 
 12, ;590, 04.-.. 
 
 
 1.' ina ' .MacDonell 
 
 id, 202, 207. 
 
 
 l;>'.-;ina, Magaiin v. , . 
 
 0. 
 
 
 'iigiii.'i, Magee v. 
 
 I, 29.->. 
 
 
 liigiiia V. Malcolm . . 
 
 '.S, 7.S9. 
 
 I^giiia, Martial v. .. 
 
 >:<, -.;},-), ,s96. 
 
 liegina v. Martin . . 
 
 7, "iSI, (I.-.H. 
 4, 8;il, 88,-.. 
 
 
 liegina, Martin v. . . 
 
 K. W. Co. 
 
 W. Co 
 
 Co. 
 
 I legina, Mayes v. . . 
 
 liegina V. MoHride .. 
 liegina V. MeCay .. 
 
 :;igina v. McCurdy 
 liegina V. McGarry 
 liegina V. .McGowau 
 Kegina v. McGreevj 
 Kegina, MoGreevy v. 
 Uegina V. McGregor 
 liegina, Molntosh v. 
 
 ''"gina, Molntosh v. 
 gina V. MoKenzie 
 liegina, McJ,eo«l v. 
 liegina V. MoXamara 
 
 Vol.l .IK AMI I'AOK. 
 
 u 
 
 <'ol.lMN UK |)|(H;.Yr. 
 
 -' Mv. C. I{. 82 . 
 
 '2;i (). II. .|j..» 
 
 •'I H.\. C. It. 271. 22 H. 
 
 / li. r,.v.\ 
 
 c. 
 
 22<». II 
 2 Kx. C 
 24 ,S. ( '. 
 2 i:.v. < '. 
 
 20(1. n. 
 
 2.")(). I!. 
 
 2i:x. c. 
 
 20 O. li. 
 10 1'. K. 
 
 2 i':.vc. (;. 
 
 20 S. ( '. 
 2;iO. 1!. 
 2 l\. C. 
 
 4.-.0 
 . H. 428 
 K, 482 
 
 IL ;to,'. 
 
 (iit8 
 I.TI 
 H. iiOO 
 
 .->so 
 
 I,-).-. 
 
 It. i;i2 
 
 It. 297 
 92 
 li. IN 
 
 ''01 
 480 
 
 '<• .^SO, 20 ,S. C. 
 I ■• 
 It. 2.'i2 ,. 
 It. 144 .. 
 
 <». It. 219 
 
 21 <>. li. 499 
 
 2Kx. C. It. m .. 
 
 .'•Kx. C. It. ;i7;i ,. 
 
 21 A. It. 42 
 
 :0(). li. (ill 
 
 20 0. It. As\ 
 
 •WO. l;. ;is7, 20A. R. Oii 
 
 .'OO. li. (;7S 
 
 -'I (). li. Hit ;; 
 
 -'4 .S. ('. K. I 
 2;J(t. R. 4.'-.0 
 
 I (). li. 00 
 
 . .|24(). R. 
 . . 20 (). H, 
 I 2 Kx. C. 
 L R. .-.9 
 I Kx. C. 
 
 1 Kx. C. 
 24(). I{. ;«7 
 
 2 Kx. C. R. 21 
 
 I Kx. C. R. (is 
 
 f!89;i]A. C. 104 
 
 24 O. R. (ii6 
 
 ■■J Kx. C. li. 90 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. 121 
 
 22 (). It. (i!)0 
 
 3 Ex. C. li. 238 
 19 A. R, 700 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. 99 
 2Kx. C. R. (11 
 •■< Kx. C. R, :UH 
 
 2 Ex. C 
 
 3 Kx. C, 
 21 A. R. 
 2 Kx. C, 
 
 R. 240 
 2 Kx. C. It. 403. "3 K C 
 
 It. 4-)4 , . 
 20(». It, 639 
 
 23 O. R. 442 
 
 • .i270, 277, 281, 2.83. 
 , . .-).-) I . 
 
 » 'Ol,3lo,;)94,423,420, 
 
 / ."lOS. ,S(U, 
 
 ..201, .;:,•>. 
 . ;to. 
 
 . . 29,-1, (its. 
 
 • jlOS, ;i(it, 314, 12,j. 
 . . '200, r)-y>. 
 
 . . J209. 
 . . 297. 
 
 • 1271. 471. 
 . , 1203. 
 
 . , ;4.-.s, ,-,;i7. 
 
 . . .'too, 3I,S, SI I. 
 
 • • 21 1 , 749, .ss.-). 
 ..2s:t. 
 
 . .i.)(10, 798. 
 ..123, 722. 
 . . 291, .'(OO. 
 , . 29it. 
 . . I0(), 502. 
 
 .201, ,-,,84. 
 
 . '.-).-|.-). 
 
 t. 2:i7,2(i.-),,V..3, 554,,-8.1. 
 . 200, 202. 
 
 270, 404. 
 
 142, iiOO, 927, 
 
 oOl. 
 
 .-)S(i. 
 
 273, (l.-)S. 
 
 41, .-.87, 8,57. 
 
 2"i, .30 f, ;«)). 
 
 It. 357 . , 
 
 R. 118 .. 
 
 145 
 
 R. 328, 20 S. C. 
 
 807. 
 . . '2ss. 
 
 • 97, 714, 1012. 
 . . 2S(», 2S3. 
 ■ • IMO, .320, 418. 
 . (122, 924. 
 . . 449, 721. 
 .. 291. 
 
 .270,277,280,454,1007 
 . . il65. 
 
 . . 760. 
 
 .. 100- 
 
 . . 868. 
 
 . . 807. 
 
 .. 399, 472, .S71, 912. 
 
 ..279, 290,391. 
 
 . . .300. 
 
 . . '560. 
 
 1 i^j 
 
 296, 620, 928. 
 
 K.x. C. R. 311 
 
 24 O. II. 52 
 22 0. R. 497 
 18 .S. C. R. .371 
 I9.S. C. R. 180 
 20 O, R. l!5 
 123 IS. C. R. ISO 
 2 Ex. C. R. 198 
 12 Kx. C. R. 106 
 ;20 O. R. 489 
 
 186, 292. , 
 
 262. 
 
 .'551. 
 
 r 75, 131, 275,289, 304. 
 \ 412, (w9. 
 
 561. 
 
 .'i(i0. 
 81. 
 
 . . |;^o. 
 
 ■ . [497, .-J,-, 537, 587. 
 . . 258, 204, 272, 947. 
 . . 284, 922. 
 . . 208, 275. 
 . . ;2U0. 
 
lil 
 
 TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 Reg] 
 
 Xa.mk, "k Cask. 
 
 Vdlu.mk and I'ace. 
 
 Col.IM.N OK DlUEST, 
 
 Hfgiiiii, Mcl'licisoii V. 
 
 Rejiina, MLicliiints' Jiiiiik of Caiiiulii v. . . 
 
 R(!giiiii V. Milfoid . . 
 
 Kcgina v. Minea .... 
 
 Jiogina, Montmil iiiul Kmopuaii Short Line 
 
 U. W. Co. V 
 
 Regiiia, Morin v. . . 
 
 Regiiia, Miiri)liy v. 
 Regina v. Naglu 
 
 Regina, Paint v. . . , . . . ... 
 
 Regina, Pamdis v. . . 
 
 Regina v. Patterson 
 
 Regina, Pc'tersf)n v. 
 
 Regina v. Petrie 
 
 Regina v. Plowman 
 
 Regina v. Plows 
 
 Hegina v. Popplewell 
 
 Regina v. I'otter 
 
 Regina, Ponliot v. . . 
 
 Regina v. Pouliot . . 
 
 Regina, Quul)ec Skating Chib v. 
 
 Regina, Quirt v. 
 
 Regina v. Rawson , . 
 
 Regina v. Kay 
 
 Regina v. Uedinoud 
 
 Regina v. Rhodes , , 
 
 Regina v. Riehurdson 
 
 Regina, Hioux v. . . 
 
 Regina v. Rohinet . 
 
 Hegina v. Kyan 
 
 iiegina, Samson v... . 
 
 Regina v. Scott 
 Regina v. Sigsworth 
 Regina, Simonean v. 
 Regina v. Slattery . , 
 Regina v. Sloan 
 Regina v. Smiley 
 Regina, Smith v. . . 
 Regina v. Sonier.s . . 
 Regina v. Southwiek 
 
 Regina, St. Catharines Milling and Lumber 
 Co. V 
 
 Regina, St. John Water Commissioners v. 
 
 Regina v. Stapleton 
 
 Regina, Starrs v. . . 
 
 Regina v. Steele 
 
 Regina v. Stone 
 
 Regina, Straits of Canseau Marine R.W. Co. 
 
 Regina V. T,ind)lyn. . 
 
 Regina, The Minnie v. 
 
 Regina, The Oscar and Hattie v. 
 
 Regina v. Thomas . . 
 
 liegina v. 'I'oland ' \ 
 
 Regina, Town of Levis v. . . . . . . \ 
 
 Regina, Vacnum Oil Co. v. 
 
 Regina v. Van Dulkcn . . . . ] 
 
 Jiegina v. Verral , . 
 
 Regina, Vezina v. . . 
 
 Regina v. Westgate . . , . \ 
 
 Regina v. Weathike . , . . ' ' \ 
 
 Regina v. W'ettnuin . . . . ] , \ 
 
 Regina v. \\"hitaker . . . . ' ' " 
 
 Regina v. Whitehead . . '. . \[ [ 
 
 ')3 
 
 1 Kx. C. R. 
 1 Kx C. R. I 
 20 0. R. 30G 
 25 O. R. 577 
 
 : Kx. C. R. l,-)9 
 
 18 S. C. 
 20 S. C. 
 
 :i Kx. c. 
 
 24 O. R, 
 2 Kx. C. 
 
 R. 7 18 
 
 R. 407 
 
 R. 515 . . 
 
 ]{. 75 . . 
 
 507, 26 O. R. 24!) 
 
 R. 149, 18 S. CI 
 
 1 Kx. ('. H. 191 
 
 :() o. 
 2 Ex. 
 20 O. 
 25 O. 
 '.'(> ( t. 
 20 C). 
 20 A. 
 
 1 Ex. 
 
 2 Ex. 
 :HEx. 
 
 9S. 
 22 O. 
 t20 (). 
 i24 O. 
 22 O. 
 
 20 0. 
 i2 Kx. 
 |l(i V. 
 [24 0. 
 |2 Kx. 
 2 Kx. 
 J20 O. 
 2 Ex. 
 |2 Kx. 
 !2(!0. 
 USA. 
 
 ;22 ( ). 
 
 12 Kx. 
 24 ( ). 
 
 21 O. 
 
 2 Kx. C. 1!. 202 
 
 R. (55(! 
 C. R. 07 
 R. :U7 
 R. 650 
 R. .139 
 R. 303 
 H. 51(> 
 C. R. 313 
 C. R. 49 
 C. R. 387 
 C. R. 510 
 R. 467 
 R. 212 
 I!. 331 
 R. 480 
 R. 514 
 C. R. 91 
 R. 49 
 R. 331 
 C. R. 30 
 C. R. 94 
 R. 646 
 C. R. 194 
 C. K. 391 
 R. 148 
 R. 482 
 n. 6,86 
 C. R. 417 
 R. 244 
 R. 070 
 
 2 Ex. 
 H. 
 
 1 O. 
 
 Kx. 
 
 26 O. 
 
 23 O. 
 : Kx. 
 '5 O, 
 '3 S. 
 
 3 Kx. 
 I!. 
 Kx. 
 
 22 O. 
 21 S. 
 2 Kx. 
 2 lOx. 
 16 P. 
 Kx. 
 
 1 O. 
 
 1 O. 
 25 O. 
 
 24 O. 
 1 Ex. 
 
 C. R. 78, 19 S. C 
 
 125 . . 
 
 R. 679 
 
 C. K. .301 . . 
 
 U. 540 
 
 R. 4() 
 
 ('. R. 113 .. 
 
 R. i:>ir> 
 
 ('. li. 478 .. 
 C. 15. 241,23 8. C. 
 39() . . 
 ( '. R. 246 . . 
 R. 505 
 C. H. 31 
 C. R. 234 . . 
 C. R, 304 . . 
 R. 444, 17 P. R 
 v.. R. 11 
 R. 621 
 R. 619 
 R. 459 
 R. 4:!7 
 C. R. 134 .. 
 
 61 
 
 271), 278, 279, 924. 
 112, 305, 869, 907. 
 261, 270. 
 2()S, 585. 
 
 289. 
 
 2(i7. 
 294. 
 
 31 •, 751. 
 4S2, 8.36. 
 
 277, 282. 
 
 275, 276, 277, 280, 
 
 282, 537, 924 
 269. 
 
 30.5, 311, 588. 
 261,264. 
 164. 269. 
 469, 586. 
 273. 
 561. 
 
 33, 37, 279, 419. 
 
 197, 293, ;;:)4, 761,928 
 293, 300, 310, 750. 
 52, 163. 
 64, 77, 721. 
 258, 492. 
 73, 831. 
 262. 
 55(i. 
 
 34, 427. 
 :8, 266. 
 
 273, 831. 
 169, 19(!, 281, 
 30, 289. 
 !60, 553. 
 288. 
 
 277, 293. 
 140, 551. 
 560. 
 
 1, 470. 
 209, 8H9. 
 123, 237, 940. 
 554. 
 
 315. 
 
 285, .301, 302. 
 
 284. 
 
 96, 511. 
 
 
 183, 292. 
 
 
 237, 584. 
 
 
 119, 162, 
 
 584. 
 
 275, 278, 
 
 452. 
 
 265, 269, 
 
 481. 
 
 413, 421, 
 
 898. 
 
 iV.i, 897. 
 
 
 312. 
 
 
 16,5. 
 
 
 30. 
 
 
 (120, 866. 
 
 
 425, 968. 
 
 
 263, 408, 
 
 
 278, 281. 
 
 
 119,2,37. 
 
 
 2.37, 555. 
 
 
 271, 470. 
 
 
 128, 209. 
 
 
 307. 
 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 c 
 
 H.fMN OK 
 
 Dili 
 
 EST. 
 
 7( 
 
 , -'78 
 
 ,279 
 
 924 
 
 
 I'J 
 
 , .'iO,-) 
 
 , 869 
 
 907 
 
 
 U 
 
 , '.'70 
 
 
 
 
 iS 
 
 , 585 
 
 
 
 
 S9 
 
 
 
 
 
 i" 
 
 
 
 
 
 •4 
 
 r 
 
 ! 751 
 
 
 
 
 ^2 
 
 , s;w 
 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 ,282 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 ir^, 2 
 
 76, ;: 
 
 77, 
 
 280, 
 
 
 282, 
 
 537, 
 
 924. 
 
 
 i9 
 
 
 
 
 
 il 
 
 311, 
 264. 
 
 588. 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 20!). 
 
 
 
 
 )!) 
 
 oSG. 
 
 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 
 
 !, 
 
 37, 2 
 
 79, 419. 
 
 
 •7 
 
 29:), 
 
 ;:j4, 
 
 761, 
 
 928, 
 
 ;) 
 
 ;too, 
 
 310, 
 
 750. 
 
 
 ) 
 
 1(33. 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 77, 7 
 
 21. 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 492. 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 831. 
 
 427. 
 2(1(3. 
 8.S1. 
 
 
 
 
 !', 
 
 19(i, 
 
 281, 
 
 284. 
 
 
 
 289. 
 
 
 
 
 (). 
 
 553. 
 
 
 
 
 >s. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 293. 
 
 
 
 
 0, 
 
 551. 
 
 
 
 
 0. 
 
 
 
 
 
 1, 
 
 470. 
 
 
 
 
 0, 
 
 8(39. 
 
 
 
 
 3, 
 
 237, 
 
 940. 
 
 
 
 ^. 
 
 
 
 
 
 '>< 
 
 .301, 
 
 302. 
 
 
 
 511. 
 
 
 
 
 i, 
 
 292. 
 
 
 
 
 7. 
 ), 
 
 584. 
 1(>2, 
 
 584. 
 
 
 
 "), 
 
 278, 
 
 452. 
 
 
 
 '. 
 
 2(i9, 
 
 481. 
 
 
 
 t, 
 
 421, 
 
 897. 
 
 898. 
 
 
 
 Uii 
 
 ), 8(i(). 
 "., 968. 
 ?, 408, 
 3, 281. 
 ), 2,37. 
 ', ,"),i5. 
 , 470. 
 i, 269. 
 
 Reg-Rod] N.\Mi; ()}•■ Cash. 
 
 Hfgiiia V. Woi'tli 
 
 llcgiiia ex ri>l. ( 'avaiiii^'h v. Smith 
 
 Rfgina ex rel. Cliick v. .Siiiith 
 
 Ki';,'iiia ex rel. Maiigan v. Fleming 
 
 l^egiiia ex rel. .Me(iuire v. Hirkett 
 
 l.'egiiia ex rel. .Moore v. Naglu . . 
 
 Regiiia ex rel. Percy v. Worth . 
 
 liegiiia (!X rel. ,St l.oiiis v. Reaiime 
 
 Hegiiia ex rel. 'I'horuton v. Dewar 
 
 Regis, Taylor v. . . 
 
 Keiil V. Harjie.s 
 
 lieid V. ('reightou . . 
 
 rteiil V, Crahain, Re 
 
 l!ei(l, .Stark v 
 
 Iteide V. The Ijueen of the Isle.s , . 
 
 Rtilly, Scripture v. . . 
 Reily V. (!ity of London 
 
 Reiinie, Utteraoii Lumber Co. v. 
 
 Ken wick. He -Kenwiek v. frcndis 
 
 Rhodes, Regiria v. . . 
 
 Rice, Re Field v. . . 
 
 Rice, Re Fonl v. . . 
 
 Rich, Meyer RuliUer Co. v. 
 
 Riclianls, Williams v. 
 
 Ilichardson, liegiiia v. 
 
 Ricliardson, Vaughan v. . 
 
 Richelieu Flection Case 
 
 Richelieu Navigation Co., Dixon v. 
 
 Richmond, (iray v. 
 
 Riddcll, .McCalium v. [[ .' ' 
 
 Ridgetouii; Town of. Knight v. . . 
 
 Rioux V. The t^'ueen 
 
 Ritchie, 1,'iooesan Synod of Nova Scoti 
 
 Roach V. McLaehlan 
 
 Roll!) V. Robli 
 
 Rolicrts V. Hank of Toronto 
 
 Roberts V. Donovan 
 
 Robei'ts, Metcalf v. 
 
 Rolierts V, Mitchell . . . . ' 
 
 Robertson, Hready v. 
 
 Robertson v. '3urrill [[ 
 
 Robertson v. (jirand Trunk R. W, Co. 
 
 Robertson v. Lonsdale 
 
 Robertson, Obernicr v. 
 
 Robinet, Regina v. . , 
 
 Robins V. lOmpire I'rinting and I'ublisiiing 
 
 Rol)inson, Re 
 
 Robinson, IJoyd v. . . 
 
 Robin.son, Canadian Pacific R. W. Co. v. 
 Robinson, Chisliolni v, . . 
 Robinson and City of S(. Thomas, Re . '. 
 Robinson v. Harris 
 
 Vol.l-.MK AMI I'.Vlii:. Coi.r.MN OK DiGKST. 
 
 23(». R. (1,S8 
 -'6 (». R. 632 
 22 O. R. 279 
 14 I'. R, ^,-,s 
 21 (). R. Ki'i 
 24(). R. .-)(»7, 26 0. 
 23(). R. 6,ss 
 ■Ml), i;. .|(io 
 26(). R. -,I2 
 2(3 0. R. 483 
 25(). R. 223 
 24H. C. R. (i9 
 25 ( ). R. -,7;}, 26 O. 
 2(3 ( ). R. 257 
 
 R. 258 . . 
 
 249 
 
 171 
 
 I. 
 
 701. 
 
 3 Fx 
 14 I'. 
 14 I', 
 
 21 S. 
 114 1'. 
 |22 ( ). 
 120 O. 
 20 O. 
 14 1 
 
 18 
 
 R 
 (' 
 R. 
 R, 
 C. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R 
 R. 
 R. 
 23 0. R. 651 
 
 20 O. R. -,I4 
 
 21 S. C, 
 21 .S. C, 
 18 S. C. 
 22(). R 
 23 O. R 
 14 1'. R 
 2 Fx. C, 
 
 18 S. C. R. 705 
 
 19 A. R. 49(3 
 
 20 0. R. 591 
 -'5(). R. 194, 21 A 
 
 K. 
 
 .361 
 4 SO 
 309 
 .309 
 M3 
 
 , R. 359 
 R. 1(38 
 R. 704 
 
 . 25(3 
 
 . 537 
 81 
 R. 91 
 
 371, 772, 828. 
 (i83. 
 
 768. 
 
 74S. 
 
 535, 
 4.5(i 
 . 1.30 
 . 43.3 
 
 21 A. R. 
 
 A. R. 
 611 
 
 17 P. R. 137 
 292, '[1892]') 
 
 Robinson, .Jaeohs v. . . . . [ " 
 
 Robin.son, Ro— McDonell v. Robinson . '. 
 
 Roblin, Carlisle v 
 
 Roche, Campbell v. . . [[ ' ' 
 
 Roche, McKinnon v. . . ' .' ' 
 
 Roche V. Ry.ui . , . . . ' 
 
 Rochester, Township of. Re Town'shipof ( 
 
 Kehl North and 
 Rochester, 'i'ownship of. Re Township 
 
 Mersea and 
 Rodgers v. Hamilton Cottoii Co. .'. '.' 
 Rodier v. Lapierre 
 
 OS- 1 
 of 
 
 .'21 O. R 
 . 16 P. R 
 . 23 O. R 
 . 21 A. R 
 .14 I'. R. 7 
 . 22 A. R. 3,-)(i 
 
 24 (). R. 7;-), 
 
 I 204, 24 S. c;. 
 
 1210 R. 600 
 .;!4 P, R. 5,53 
 
 II6I'. R. 49 
 . 14 P, R. 48S 
 
 16 P. R. 423, 
 
 20 O. R. 404 
 
 19 S. (J. R. 
 A. C. 481 
 |24 S. C. R. 704 . . 
 123 O. R. 489 
 
 '210. R. 43, 19 A, R. 1.34, ) 
 I 21 S. C. R. 390.. 
 
 I4P. R. ,373 
 
 KiP. R 1 ., 
 
 22 0. R. 438 
 
 16 P. R. .328 
 
 18A.R. 64(3,21 ,S,C.R. 645 
 
 18A.R.64(i,21S.C. R. (345 
 220. R 107 
 
 22 A. R. no 
 
 22 A. R. 110 
 
 23 O. R. 425 
 21 S. C. R. (59 
 
 14, 700, 
 . . 700. 
 ..702. 
 .701, 702. 
 ..1(38, 701, 805 
 R. 24!t 482, 830. 
 ..14, 700, 701. 
 . !702. 
 . .|700. 
 . . 1400. 
 
 . . art'}, 747. 
 
 . . '74, 10(3. 
 2(3 ,3(57, 
 . ,209, 
 . 893. 
 . , ,59(3, 
 ..J40.3. 
 . , |339 
 
 ■)05. 
 
 .'(32. 
 
 .371,828. 
 
 .371, 828. 
 
 41. 
 
 1O08. 
 
 "),5(). 
 
 479, 894. 
 5(3. 
 
 029. 
 1020. 
 979. 
 34, 427. 
 133. 
 427. 
 
 422, 492, 646. 
 43.3, 608. 
 14 177. 
 
 . 176, 480, 5(35. 
 . 489. 
 .,7.35. 
 ..219, .582. 
 i44(3, 632. 
 
 R. 629 
 
 ,12.5, ,S41. 
 
 ,103, 47(3. 
 j8, 345. 
 1128, 2(i(i. 
 '408. 
 
 228, 903, 900. 
 
 1 15, 784, 82.5. 
 
 320, S.55, 923. 
 
 313. 
 
 093, 9(32. 
 
 915, !)20, 921. 
 
 225, 437, 959. 
 208, 017. 
 .542, 1030. 
 227, 229, 230. 
 ^0. 
 '0. 
 789, lOU. 
 
 '08, 710. 
 
 708, 710. 
 
 654. 
 953. 
 
liv 
 
 TABLE or CASES. 
 
 Roe-Sam] Name ok Cask. 
 
 Vol.U.MK AND PaoK. 
 
 Roe V. Village of I.iioknow 
 
 Rogers, Adiun.son v, 
 
 Rogers and Farewell, Re . . ! ! .. [ 
 
 Rogers V. Carmichael 
 
 Rogers V. Devitt ' 
 
 Rogers V. Diinean 
 
 Rogers, Henderson v 
 
 Rogers V. (Ontario ISank , . .'. .'. 
 
 Holland v. Cais.se d'Eeonomio de Notre Dame 
 
 do Qnebec 
 Roniney and Tilbury West, Re Townships ot . 
 Romney, Township of, Re Suskey and. . 
 
 Riioker, HoofsteUer v 
 
 Ro3l)aeh and Carlyle, Re . . 
 Ross, Baby v. " , . , . . , '[ 
 
 Ross, Barry v. . . . [[ 
 
 Ross V. Bneke 
 
 Ross, Cameron, and Mallon, Re . . 
 
 Ross V. Edwards . . 
 
 Ross V. Hannan 
 Ross, Holland v. , , 
 
 Ross V. Hiirteau 
 
 Ross, Mackenzie v, . . 
 
 Ross V. Orr . . 
 
 Ross V. Uoss. . 
 
 Ross and Stobic, Re 
 
 Roimtree, Re (iarl)utt and 
 
 Rourke v. Union Ina. Co. . . 
 
 Rouville Election Case 
 
 Row.som, Stewart v. 
 
 Roy, Township of Aubert-dallion v. 
 
 Royal Electric Co. v. City of Tlirce Riv 
 
 Royal Electric Co. v. Leonard 
 
 Royal Electric C.^o, of Canada v, ImHsoii 
 
 trie Light Co. . 
 Royal Ins. Co. v. Duirns .. ['. ', 
 
 Royal Templars of 'I'emperaiice, Devins 
 Rudolph, Truman v. 
 Rumble, Reatty v. . . . . . . ' 
 
 Rumble, (iordon v. . . 
 
 Russell, ('roil v. . , 
 
 Rutlidge, Paul v. . . 
 
 Ruttan, .Strachan v. 
 
 Ryall, Re Mcuolrick V. . .. [ 
 
 Ryan v. Cameron , . 
 
 Ryan, Cram v. 
 
 Ryan, Fleming v. . . 
 
 Ryan V. McCartney 
 
 Ryan, Regina v. , , 
 
 Ryan, Roclie v. 
 
 Ryan, Whelan v. . . 
 
 Ryckman, Lancaster v. . . 
 
 Ryerson, Miller v '_ 
 
 s. 
 
 Sage V. Township of West Oxford 
 
 Sage, White v. 
 
 Sager, Wait v. 
 
 Salterio, Citizens' Ins. Co. v. 
 
 Salterio v. City of London Fire Ins. Co 
 
 Samson v. The (jueen 
 
 ■ers 
 I'^lec 
 
 Samuel, Craig v, 
 Samuel v. Fairgrieve 
 
 •21 A. R. 1 . . 
 •2->A. R. 4|->, 2()S 
 MP. R. ;iS 
 •21 (). R. (i,-,S 
 '2."> (). R. 84 
 1') O. R. 'i!l!l, l(i A 
 l.SS. C. R. 710 
 1") P. R. 2.11 
 •21 O. R. 410 
 
 •24 S. ( '. R. 405 . 
 
 IS A. R. 477 
 22 O. R. (ili4 
 •22 A. R. 17.">, 2()S. 
 R. -M 
 
 Column' of Dicest 
 
 . . !7.'?(i. 
 C. R.15»|4!IS. 
 
 . . 80, -rMi, !)04. 
 
 ..:ioi!). 
 
 874. 
 
 R. 3, 
 
 .■^Sl, lOIG. 
 
 248, J,-),-,, 70.5. 
 4,56. 
 
 70, 90. 
 
 •_>.3(). 
 14 P. 
 19.S. 
 21 O. 
 14 P. 
 10 P. 
 14 P. 
 
 C. 
 
 440 
 R. ."^00 
 R. 092 
 Pv. 03 
 R. 4S2 
 R. .■.•2.3, 15 
 l.")0, 11 R. [Dec. 
 19S. C. R. 227 
 R. oOO 
 R. 713 
 :99 
 
 • . 704, 708. 
 ..'704. 
 C. R. 41 13. 01)3, 862. 
 ..!44,0M. 
 . . ]249, •J.-.3, 400, 578. 
 
 ..poo. 
 
 . . 349. 
 
 . . 793. 
 )I4. 
 
 P. R. 1 ,, ... 
 10 ill. ''O. 
 
 9 
 
 .,19 .S. C. 
 
 ..Iiss. c. 
 
 .14 p. R 
 . . 25 (). R 
 . ;'23 (). R, 
 ..|14P. 
 ..20 0. 
 . . '-23 S. 
 ..{21 .S. 
 
 . . !21 s. 
 , . 23 S 
 . . I -23 S 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 595 
 
 43 
 
 241 
 
 (i25 
 C. R. 344 
 C. R. 28 
 R. 533 
 
 !!. 4.50 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 . C. 
 C. 
 C. 
 
 •289 
 298 
 
 2 Ex, 
 
 570 
 
 18 S, C. R. 7 
 •20 A. R. -259 
 22 A 
 21 O, 
 
 19 A, 
 
 14 P. 
 Mi P. 
 
 15 P. 
 
 20 O. R, 
 
 16 P. R, 
 
 II 
 
 . R 
 . R. 
 , R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 iO 
 184 
 440 
 185 
 140 
 109 
 435 
 235 
 
 24(). R. .500, 25,0. R. 524 
 21 A. R. 39 
 
 423 
 
 331 
 
 107 
 
 R. 05 . . 
 99 
 
 309 
 
 19 A, R 
 24(). R. 
 •22 
 
 20 S. 
 15 P 
 22 
 
 R. 
 C. 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 J 
 
 . . :^200, 877. 
 
 .311. 
 . . S74. 
 . . '560. 
 ..j481. 
 . . !459, 4,S2. 
 .. •239, .591. 
 . . I02;j. 
 
 . . 204, 53-2, 89;{. 
 . 7.54, 917. 
 . (i70. 
 . . lis, 907. 
 . . 1S4. 
 . . 198. 
 
 781. 
 
 28. 
 
 90. 
 
 054. 
 
 358, 043. 
 
 322, 358, 043, 740. 
 
 982. 
 
 249. 
 
 2;!0, 237, 243, 977. 
 
 305, 300, 308, 372. 
 
 «02. 
 
 J53, 454, 733, 1004. 
 
 74, no. 
 
 308. 
 
 273, S31. 
 
 789, 1011. 
 
 54. 
 
 22;i, 352. 
 
 506, 033, 657. 
 
 22 O. 
 19 A. R. 
 14 P. R. 
 
 23 S. C. 
 
 23 S, ( '. 
 2 Ex. C. 
 2 Ex. C. R. 94 
 
 24 S. C. R. 278 
 24 O. R. 4S6, 21 
 
 678 
 i;!5 
 347 
 R. 1.55 
 R. 32 
 R. 30 
 
 A. R. 
 
 418, 24 S. C. a. 278 ) 
 
 707. 
 
 461. 
 
 428. 
 
 515. 
 
 511. 
 
 169, 196, 281, 284 
 
 30, 289. 
 
 83, 100. 
 
 S3, 100. 
 
TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Iv 
 
 '0LU5IX OF DiCEST 
 
 23(>, 904. 
 !l. 
 
 I. 
 
 , 1010. 
 I, 'J~M, 705. 
 
 !)0. 
 , 70S. 
 
 (ii;3, 802. 
 
 0t4. 
 
 , --'.".3, 400, 578. 
 
 65. 
 
 , 877. 
 
 4S-2. 
 51)1. 
 
 53-_', S93. 
 ;il7. 
 
 !)07. 
 
 San-Sha] 
 
 Namk ok Case. 
 
 043. 
 358, 043, 
 
 740. 
 
 -'.37, 243, 
 30(i, .308, 
 
 077. 
 372. 
 
 454, 73.3, 
 10. 
 
 1004 
 
 831. 
 1011. 
 
 
 352. 
 033, 057. 
 
 
 no, 
 
 281, 
 
 284 
 
 'M 
 
 «). 
 
 
 
 ,M[ 
 
 )0. 
 
 
 
 wi 
 
 Vdt.I'MK .\NI) P.vci:. 
 
 Sauford, O'Hi'iou v . . 
 Saiigster v. Iviloii . . 
 
 Saiitaudarino, Tho . . 
 
 Sanviilgo v. Irolaiul 
 
 Sargent, Agricultural Ins. ('o. v.. 
 
 Sargent, The C. F., Canadian Pacific Jyaviga- 
 
 tidii (;o. V. 
 Sarnia Oil Co. , Ro .. 
 
 Sarnia Oil Co., Ro Alger and 
 
 Sawyer v. I'ringle . . 
 Sawyer v. Tliomas . . 
 Say lor, Vouni; v. . . 
 Scammell v. Clarke. . 
 Scaue V. Coti'ey 
 Soane, Coli'ey v. 
 
 22 0. R. 130 
 
 25 O. l^ 78, 21 A. R 
 
 024, 24 S. C. R. 708 
 3 Kx. (;. R. 378, 23 S. C, 
 
 145 . 
 
 R. 29 
 
 R. 397 
 
 R. 
 14 P. 
 16 P. 
 
 3 Kx. C. R. 332 
 
 Scanlon v. fSeanlon . . 
 
 Scarlett v. Biriiey , . 
 
 Scartli V. Ontario Power and Flat Co. 
 
 Schmidt . . Town of Berlin 
 
 '. ,> ■ ienski v. Vincberg. . 
 S .(■;,• • , Bank of New Brunswick 
 
 .:i4 I 
 15 1 
 15 I 
 
 21 O. R 
 23 O. I! 
 20 O. 
 18 A. 
 23 O. 
 
 23 S. 
 15 P, 
 25 O, 
 10 P. 
 
 22 O. R. 91 
 15 I'. I!. 283 
 
 24 O. 1!. 440 
 10 P. R. 242 
 2() O. R. 54 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 i;. 
 
 C. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 I!. 
 
 335 
 
 182 
 
 .347 
 
 440, 19 A. 
 
 583 
 
 111, ISA, 
 
 129 
 
 513, 20 A. 
 
 R. 307 . 
 
 1 !2 
 
 22, 22 A. 
 
 307 
 
 Coi.flMS OK I)Ii;KST. 
 
 031. 
 r.0(). 
 
 737, 7.38. 
 
 ,9 1 
 
 »U. 
 
 Scott, H"itish Columbia Mills Co. v. 
 
 Scott, Campbell v. . . 
 
 Scott, Dalryniple v . , 
 
 Scott V. Niagara Navigation Co. . . 
 
 Scott V. Reburn 
 
 Scott, Regina v. 
 
 Scott V. Scott 
 
 Scott V. Supple 
 
 Scott, NVettlauferv. 
 
 Scotten V. Barthel . . 
 
 Scottish American Investment Co. v. Prittie 
 
 Scottish American Investment Co. v. Sexton . . 
 
 Soottisli Canadian Asbestos Co., Re — Allen / 
 
 V. Hanson . ( 
 
 Scottish Ontario and Manitoba Land Co. , Re . . 
 Scottish Union and National Ins. Co., Bariing- \ 
 
 ton V. , . . . . . . . j 
 
 Scribner, Re Mitcliell V. .. 
 Scribner v. Paroells 
 Scripture v. lieilly . . 
 Scully V. Tracy — Re Tracy 
 Scultliorp, Stewart v. 
 Sear and Woods, Re 
 Sears v. City of St. John . . 
 Sears v. Meyers 
 Seatli V. Hagar 
 Seaward, Tlie, Hall v. 
 Secord v. Trumm , . 
 Seeton v. King 
 
 Segsworth v. Anderson 
 
 Seldou V, Buehannan 
 Senior, Tyrrell v. . . 
 
 Sexton, Scottish American Investment Co. v. 
 Shairp, Laketicld Lumber Co. v. . . 
 Siiiuinon, Hol)go!i v. 
 
 Shaver, Canada Landed and National Invest- 
 ment Co. v. 
 
 Shaver V. Cotton .jlO P. 
 
 Shaver, Hunt v 22 A. 
 
 R. 243 
 R. 30 
 K. 277 
 R. 702 
 203 
 477 
 
 R. 409, 45, 
 
 R. 450 
 040 
 313 
 
 23 S. 
 
 24 S. 
 
 14 P. 
 
 19 A. 
 
 15 P. 
 
 25 O. 
 
 20 O. R 
 
 20 o. n. 
 
 23 O. R, 393 
 20 A. R. 052 
 
 . 21 A.R. 509, 24S.C.R.307 
 . '20 A. R. .398 
 
 20 O. R. 77 
 
 18 S. C;. R. 007 
 
 21 O. It. 070 
 
 18 S. C. R. 015 
 
 20 O. I!. 17 
 20 O. R. .554 
 14 !^ I!. 249 
 
 K. 454 
 
 R. 544 
 
 R 
 
 891. 
 
 10, 908. 
 231, 437, 959. 
 
 530, 800. 
 
 155, 223. 
 
 154. 
 
 155, 810. 
 R. 440 1,58, ,S80. 
 
 252, .329. 
 R. 218 872. 
 
 04, 780, 872. 
 R. 045 177, 580. 
 ..l74(i. 
 ..MO, 209. 
 R. 209;40, 41, 039. 
 
 224. 
 
 1021. 
 
 078. 
 
 455. 
 
 404. 
 
 710. 
 
 23, 418. 
 
 741. 
 
 401, 819. 
 
 (i.')0. 
 
 340, 402. 
 
 19(i. 
 
 21:-!, .-.07. 
 
 8, 641. 
 
 ■-'(iO, 553. 
 
 503, 5.'(i. 
 
 .358, 1041. 
 
 872. 
 
 .335, 33(i. 
 
 079, 852. 
 
 450. 
 
 148, !(i3, 400. 
 (i02. 
 »51. 
 
 21 A 
 25 O 
 23 O 
 18 S. C. 
 ll5P. 1! 
 
 liss. c. 
 
 1 3 Kx. C 
 20 O. I! 
 
 18 S. C. 
 
 474 
 
 U. 702 . . 
 
 .381, 456 .. 
 
 R. 715 . . 
 
 R. 208 . . 
 
 174 
 
 R. 712 .. 
 r|23 0. R. .57.3, 21 A. H 
 ,1 242, 2., S. C. R. 099 
 . 24 0. R. .349 
 .20 A. It. 1,50 
 .■2lH). R. 77 
 ,17 A.R. ,322, 19S.C.R. 
 ,;20 O. U. 551, 27 O. R. 
 
 ■22 A, li. 377 
 
 R. 278 
 R. 202 
 
 303. 
 
 .'42, S99. 
 
 59(i, 70S. 
 
 075, 90 L 
 
 05, 328, 3 19. 
 
 014, 015. 
 
 003. 
 
 183, 484, 810, 817. 
 
 84, 95(1. 
 
 425, 42(), 813, 89.3. 
 
 247, 308, 017. 
 
 22. 
 
 78, 702. 
 
 005. 
 
 1035, 10.37. 
 
 45(). 
 
 318. 
 
 6.)7 
 115.303. 
 
 (iOO. 
 
 143. 
 581, 799. 
 
Ivl 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Sha-Smi] Namk ok Case. 
 
 Vdl.l'ME 
 
 AMI I'aOK. 
 
 Sliaw, f,'()(il.: V. 
 
 Slica, lioiiltoii V 
 
 Slitlliuriie KIcctioii (Aiso 
 .Shepliunl, IJiink (if llaiiiiltoii v. .. 
 
 iopliei (1 and Cooper, i-!e 
 
 ;• .leppanl v. Hoiiaiiza Nickel Mining Co 
 Sliepjianl, i'uaice v. 
 .Sherbrooke, City of, v. McMananiy 
 .Sherbrooke, City of, Webster v. . . 
 
 Siieik V. Evans 
 
 Shell att V. Merciiants Bank of Canada 
 (Shore v. Shore 
 Shrunim, Zunistein v. 
 
 Sibbald v. Grand Trunk R, W. Co. 
 
 Sibbald, Livingstone v. 
 
 .SiL'swoith, The Queen V 
 
 Silverthorne, Smith v. 
 
 Sinicoe, County of, Re Martin and 
 
 Simmons v. Simmons 
 
 Si :onds v. Cliesley . . 
 
 Simonean v. The Queen . . 
 
 Simjison, Carson v. . . 
 
 Simpson v. Chase 
 
 Simpson v. Hall 
 
 Simpson v. Molsons Bank . . 
 
 Sims V. Kelly, l{e 
 
 Sippi, Ontario Investment Ass'n v. 
 Skain, MoNamara v. 
 
 Skain, Wallis v 
 
 Sklitzsky v. Cranston 
 
 Slater, Dame v. 
 
 Slattery, Regina v 
 
 Sloan's Case— Ko Hess Mfg. Co. . . 
 
 Sloan, Edgar v.— Re Hess Mfg. Co. 
 
 Sloan, Regina v. 
 
 Slosson, Re . , 
 
 Smale, Millson v. . . 
 
 Smalhnan, County of Middlesex v. 
 
 Smart v. Smart 
 
 Smart, Tallman v. . . 
 
 Smiley, Regina v 
 
 Smith, Barter v 
 
 Smith V. ]5eal . . . . [ [ 
 
 Smith V. Benton 
 
 Smitli V. Brown 
 
 Smith, Cornell v. , . 
 
 Smith V. County of Wentworth . . 
 Smith, County of Wentworth v. , 
 Smitli V. Fort William School Board 
 Smith, Halifax Banking Co. v. 
 Smith V. Houston , 
 
 Smith, Re Kerr v ' ' 
 
 Smith, Mason v. Cooper and 
 
 Smith v. Mc(iugau . . 
 
 Smith v. McLean . , 
 
 Smith, McSloy v. . . 
 
 Smith, Patterson v.. 
 
 Smith, Regina ex rel. Cavanagh v. 
 
 Smith, Reg:.ia ex rel. Chick r. . . 
 
 Smith ■'. SilverMiorne 
 
 Smith V . Spears 
 
 Smith v. Tennant . . 
 
 Smith V, The Queen . . [', 
 
 Smith, Thompson v. 
 
 Smith's Falls, Corporation of, Sweeny 
 
 Smith's Falls, Corporation of, Vernon v 
 
 '-V. O. |{. 124 
 -'-' S. C. R. 742 
 
 L'O S, 
 '21 A. 
 •2r>(). 
 I-',-. (). 
 •-'4 ( ». 
 
 IS s. c;, 
 
 -'4S. C, 
 24 S. 
 22 A. 
 
 1 A. 
 
 1 •). 
 22 A. 
 1!)(). 
 
 ('. k 
 
 I!. 
 R. 
 
 i:. 
 
 R. 
 
 C. 
 
 1,-1(1 
 274 
 .Mil.-) 
 I(i7 
 
 n. rm 
 
 H. 52 
 I!. 2(i,S 
 R. 242 
 H. 47:? 
 R. .54 
 R.2():j 
 R. 164, 
 1.S4, 20 S. C. 
 1.1 1'. R. .'Uo 
 ■' '•■- C. ii. 104 
 R. Ht7 
 1!. 411 
 R. (i()2 
 C. 1!. 174 
 C. R. ,391 
 K. 3S5 
 R. 2,S0 
 
 R. ;iio 
 
 Cor.r.-M.v OK DinKsr. 
 
 2,". 
 
 7.57, 7.J8. 
 S!). 
 
 :m. 
 
 144, Ii»(i. 
 V.i. 4,S.-., 73.S. 
 !H10. 
 938. 
 
 IS A. 
 R. 25 
 
 2 Kx. 
 
 Iiri 1'. 
 
 '25 O. 
 J21 (). 
 -'0 S. 
 2 Ex. 
 25 O. 
 !14 I'. 
 1 14 R 
 ;[1S95) A 
 20 O. R. 
 ■-'0 (). R. 
 2,3 (). R 
 
 48. 
 251,2 
 
 hh 
 
 C. 270 
 291 
 440 
 
 Km 
 
 21 (>. R. 5,32 
 
 22 
 21 (). 
 2(i (). 
 
 23 (). 
 (i(), 
 
 2.3 S. 
 18 A. 
 15 P. 
 25 O. 
 19(). 
 [18921 A 
 25 O. 
 22(). 
 2 lOx. 
 25 O. 
 20 O, 
 20 O 
 
 14 P, 
 
 20 O, 
 
 15 P. 
 24 0. 
 18 S 
 15 P. 
 24 0. 
 15 P. 
 
 21 A. 
 
 i;. 590 
 1!. 375 
 R. I4S 
 R. 182, 
 23 S. C. 
 C. 
 R, 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 21 A. 
 
 R. ()44 
 R. 044 , . 
 4S2 
 1.50 
 144 
 349, 20 0. R 
 
 487 
 
 C. 42o .. 
 H. 001 
 
 liSO 
 
 li. 4,-)5 . , 
 
 308 
 
 344 
 
 105 
 
 275 
 
 209 
 
 372 
 
 300 
 
 I!. 710 
 
 18 
 
 473 
 R. 418 
 
 R. 542, 21 S. C. R. 203 
 21 S. C. n. .355 . . 
 20 0. R. 508 
 I!. 558 
 R. 632 
 R. 279 
 R. 197 
 
 C. 
 
 R. 
 , R. 
 , R. 
 
 1!. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 . C. 
 
 I! 
 
 R. 
 
 14 P 
 
 20 O 
 22 
 
 15 P 
 22 0, 
 20 O, 
 2 Ex 
 
 R. 
 
 280 
 180 
 
 C. R. 417 
 
 25 O. R, (i52, 23 A. 
 22 A, R. 429 
 21 O. R. 331 
 
 R. 29, 
 
 473, 490. 
 1039. 
 0, 737. 
 84(i. 
 
 484, 810. 
 
 2S8, 
 
 222. 
 
 8,33! 
 
 94, 524, 
 
 74(). 
 
 ^77, 293, 
 
 434, 454. 
 
 59, 302, 303, 307, 
 
 |817, 
 
 92, 990, 
 
 ,3(i!), 82S, 925. 
 
 14(i, 147, 920, 
 
 198, 323, 792, 1054, 
 
 213, (i09, 
 
 213, 2,39, 789, 1011. 
 
 243, 494, 9 IS. 
 
 140, ,-.51. 
 
 151, 992. 
 
 151, 992. 
 
 500. 
 
 502, 980, 
 
 505, ,588. 
 
 ll,->, 863. 
 
 .lOl. 
 
 75, 112. 
 71, 470. 
 
 412, 780, 781. 
 
 OS, 230. 
 
 179, 5.-1O. 
 
 12, 075. 
 704. 
 
 1016. 
 
 58. 
 
 832. 
 
 397. 
 
 809, 
 
 305, 800. 
 
 771, 
 
 -'02, 916, 
 
 100, 
 
 359. 
 
 795. 
 
 00. 
 702, 
 
 22. 
 424, 076, 
 197, 325, 659. 
 209, 869. 
 1025. 
 
 46, 723, 927. 
 160, 727. 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 Ivii 
 
 DMMN' OF DlOEST. 
 
 2!m 
 
 
 
 454 
 
 
 
 ili'J, 
 
 ■m, 
 
 mi. 
 
 mi 
 
 
 
 S-2H, 
 
 n-2.-, 
 
 
 147, 
 
 9'2() 
 
 
 .•<'-'3, 
 
 792 
 
 1054 
 
 (iOi). 
 
 
 
 ■2XK 
 
 7S9, 
 
 1011 
 
 4!(4, 
 
 !M,S. 
 
 
 .Ml. 
 
 
 
 !)!)!.'. 
 
 
 
 992. 
 
 
 
 'IS(i. 
 
 
 
 j«H. 
 
 
 
 863. 
 
 
 
 12. 
 
 
 
 470. 
 
 
 
 ".SO, 
 
 781. 
 
 
 Hi. 
 
 
 
 ).-iO. 
 
 
 
 '5. 
 
 
 
 Smy-Sta] Namr ok Casr. 
 
 VoLl'MK AND PaOK. 
 
 Smyth, Weir v. 
 
 Snow Drift Bakint; I'owdor Co., Groft v. 
 
 Sdoii'ti' <'anii(lii.niu;-Kr,iiicaise de CoiiHtruc- 
 
 tion (if! .Moiitroal v, Davoliiy 
 ,S(]i;i(5te(le t'oiiatniotion Mi'tn)|)()litaino, iJakci- v 
 .Sdliiu's V. Statl'ord . . 
 
 ■Sdiiihi-a, Tovvusliip ,,f, V. Townsliip of Cliatliaiii 
 Smnhra, lowiisliip of, v. 'rowiiship of Moor. 
 SoinerH, Regiiia v. . . 
 
 South DuUerin, Municipality of, v. Jlordoii 
 S,nitli Norwich, Township of, He Hu.sou and 
 Soiitli Norwich, Towusliip of, Husoii v 
 Soutliwick V. Haie . , 
 
 Southwick, Regina v. 
 
 Sparks v. Piirdy 
 
 Spoars, Smith v. 
 
 Spears, Webb v. . . . . ' ' 
 
 Sphiiin, Judge v. . . 
 
 Springer, Tillic v. . . 
 
 Sproule V. Wilson , . 
 
 St. Catharines, City of. County of Lincoin v 
 
 St. Catharines, City of, Hellems v. 
 
 St. (Jatiiarines Milling and Lumber Co. v. The 
 Queen 
 
 St. Denis v. Higgins 
 
 St. Joachim de la Pointe Claire, Village of v 
 
 I'ointe Claire Turnpike Road Co. ' 
 
 St. John, City of, v. Cliriatie 
 St. Joini, City of, I'etera v. .[ 
 
 St. John, City of. Sears v. 
 ■St. .Fohn, City of, Timmernian v. . . [ 
 
 St. Jolin (ias Light Co. v. Hatfield 
 
 St .John Water Commissioners v. The Queen 
 
 St. Joseph, The, Christian v. . . 
 
 .St. Leger, Welsbach Incandescent Gaslight Co. i 
 
 St. Louis, Dansereau v. 
 
 8U Louis, Hegina ex rel., V. Reaumo 
 
 St. Marc, Les Commissaries d'Ecole pour la 
 Municipahtu de, Langevin v. i 
 
 St. Stephen 'I'owii of, y. County of Charlotte. 
 
 St. Steplicns Bank V. IJoniiess 
 
 St. Thomas, City of, McLean v. 
 
 St. Thomas, City of, Re Robinson and " 
 
 St. I liumas, City of, v. Yoarsley 
 St. Thdinas, L'ljiuon, Gravel v. . 
 Ste. Rose, Corporation of, Dubois V. 
 Ste. Victoire, Sciiool Commissioners for 
 Miimcipality of the Pi rish of, Hu.s v. 
 Stacoy Hardware (Jo., Acme Silver Co. v. 
 Staebler, Re-Staebler v. Zimmerman 
 Staltord, Solnies v. . . 
 Standard Bank of Canada v. Frind 
 Standard Bank of Canada v. Frind & Co' 
 Standard Drain I'ipe Co. of St. John's, P O 
 
 V. Town of i''ort William .. 
 Stftnley, Township of, Halliday v. 
 Stanstcad IClection Case 
 St;ipletoii, Regina v. 
 
 .star I'mjting and Publishing Co.',' Lennox v. 
 •Stark (Charles) Co., Re 
 
 19 A. R. 4.SS 
 
 ,2 Kx. C R. -m 
 
 |20 S. C. R. 449 . 
 
 R. .S()4 . 
 7S, 2(J4 . . 
 !. .m") ., 
 144 
 244 
 
 R. 204 . . 
 9A.R.;u;^,21S.C. 
 24 S. C. R. 145 . . 
 I.') 1". K. 222 
 l.'> 1'. R. 2S9, 331 
 24(). R. 528 
 21 O. it. 670 
 
 15 P. R. 1 
 
 Coi.rMN OP DlOKST. 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 286 
 232 
 409 
 585 
 .349 
 
 22 0. 
 
 15 P. 
 
 22 O. 
 
 21 O. 
 
 15 P 
 
 21 A. R. .S70 
 
 25 0. R. r,83 
 
 2 ]<:x. C. It. 202 
 
 24 O. R. 2,30 
 
 !4 .S. C. R. 486 
 
 the) 
 
 Stark V. Reid . . [[ 
 
 Starr, Pegg v. 
 
 Starrs v. The Queen ['. 
 
 Stavely, Re— Attorney-General v.' Bruiiaden. 
 
 H 
 
 21 S. C. R 
 21 S. C. K. 
 18 S. C. R, 
 21 S. C. R. 
 
 23 S. C. R. 
 
 2 Kx. C. R 
 R. 125 
 
 3 Kx. C. 1{, 
 16 P. R. .382 
 
 18 S. C. R. 587 
 26 O. R. 460 
 
 18 S. C. R. 599 
 
 24 S. C. R. .329 
 24 S. (;. R. 710 
 23 0. R. 114 
 
 23 O. R. 489 
 22 A. R. 310 
 
 24 O. R. 1 
 
 21 S. C. R. 65 
 
 19 S, C. R. 477 
 
 21 O. R. 261 
 •-I A. R. 26(i 
 16 P. R. 78, 264 
 5 P. R. 438 
 14 P. R, 355 
 
 1 16 P. R. 404 
 
 16 P. R. 493 
 20 S. C. R. 12 
 
 R. 679 
 
 R. 488 
 
 R 
 
 R, 
 
 R 
 
 1 
 
 674 . . 
 
 702 .. 
 
 691 . . 
 
 164 .. 
 78, 19 S. 
 
 344 '. '. 
 
 . . 587. 
 . . |969. 
 
 ..!l9, 138, 900, 942. 
 
 . . '625, 790. 
 .. 1-5.38, .571, .572. 
 ..711. 
 ..720. 
 
 ..1123,2.37,940. 
 ..!56, 162, 166. 
 R. 669 121, ,-..58, 698. 
 ., 166. 
 . 219, 582. 
 .. 177. 
 
 . . 42, 327, 971. 
 . .V,4, 
 
 228, 230, 240, 506, 678, 
 \ 812. 
 . . 424, 676. 
 . . 583, 640. 
 . . 1027. 
 .. 81,448. 
 . 215, 542. 
 
 715, 1013. 
 
 728. 
 
 315. 
 
 424, 920. 
 930, 1018. 
 9, 726. 
 
 21 O 
 16 P. 
 15 P, 
 15 P. 
 26 O. 
 
 23 0. 
 1 Ex, 
 
 24 0. 
 
 451 
 
 471 
 
 257 
 
 83 
 
 R. .301 
 
 324 
 
 C. 
 
 45. 
 603. 
 49. 
 649. 
 
 285, .''01,302. 
 
 892. 
 218. 
 99, 761. 
 702. . 
 
 . 957. 
 
 548. 
 
 98. 
 
 3.34, 1015. 
 
 693, 962. 
 
 115, .378. 
 
 95, 529. 
 
 956. 
 
 834. 
 
 352. 
 
 ■100, 1037. 
 538, 571, 572. 
 577, 772. 
 43.5, 771. 
 
 984. 
 
 984. 
 
 39.3, 411, 756, 961. 
 
 96,511. 
 
 222, 352. 
 
 19. 254. 
 
 159,914. 
 
 •209, 683. 
 
 360. 
 .1183,292. 
 l94, 420. 
 
Ivlii 
 
 TABLE or OASES. 
 
 Ste-Tap] 
 
 Na.mk ok Cask. 
 
 VonTMK ANn PAr;i;. 
 
 on 
 
 Steule V, (i rover 
 
 Steclu, Rt'gina v. . . 
 
 Stoifoliiiuyta''s (Jivsie — lie (Uty Mutual Ins. Co 
 
 JSteplien, 'I'ownsliip of, v. Towiialiii) of Mu- 
 
 (Jillivray 
 Stephens v. (icith — He Ontario Kxpress and 
 
 Transportiition Co. 
 Stephens v. (ionlou 
 Stephens v. MeArthur 
 Stephens and Townsliip of Moore, Re . , 
 Steplienson, Re — Kiunue v. Malloy 
 Stevens v. Grout 
 Stevenson v. Canadian Bank of Commerce 
 
 Stevenson v. Davis 
 
 Stevenson, Xova Scotia Marine Co. v. . . 
 Stevenson, Trust and Loan Co. v. 
 Stewart v. Atkinson 
 Stewart, Maritime Bank of the Dominion 
 
 Canada v. 
 Stewart, Masuret v. 
 Stewart v. Rowsoui 
 Stewart v. Scultliorp 
 Stewart, The .fessie 
 Stewart v. Whituey 
 Stewart v. Woohnan 
 Stilliway v. City of Toronto 
 Stimson, Village of Georgetown v. 
 Stobie, Re Itoss and 
 Stone, Carter v. 
 Stone, Regina v, . , 
 
 Stott V. London and Lancashire Fire Ins. Co 
 Stovel V. (iregory . . 
 Straohau v. Ruttan 
 Straits of Caiiseau Marine R. W. Co. v. The Queen 
 Stratford Gas Co. v. Gordon 
 Stride V. Diamond Glass Co. 
 Stringer, Wood v. . . 
 Struthers v. (Jreen . 
 Stuart V. Mott 
 Stuart V. Thomson . . 
 Sullivan v. Francis . . 
 Sullivan, Re Macilonald and 
 Sullivan v. McVVilliani . . : 
 
 Summers v. Board 
 Sun Life Assurance Co. , Frank v. 
 Sun Lithographing Co., Re 
 SuuLitliographingCo., Re— Farqulur's Claim. . 
 Sunnyside Boating Co. of Toronto, Guinane v. 
 Supple, Scott V. 
 
 Suskey and 'I'ownship of Romney, Re . . 
 Sutlierland v. \Vel)ster 
 Swain v. Mail Printing Co. 
 Sweeny v. Corporation of Smith's Falls . . 
 Sweetland v. Neville 
 
 Sydney and Louisburg Coal and R. W. Co. v. Sword 
 Sylvester v. Murray 
 
 2(J O. R. 92 
 •-'() O. I!. r>M) 
 •24(). R. lOU 
 
 \H A. R. JKi 
 •24 S. C. R. 716 
 
 19 A. 
 19 S. 
 2.5 O. 
 24 0. 
 Hi P. 
 2.i S. 
 21 O, 
 091 
 .'.'! S. 
 
 21 O. 
 
 22 S. 
 
 176, 22S.C. R. (il 
 R. 416 .. 
 600 
 
 :i'.)r, 
 
 210 
 
 1!. ry.io .. 
 
 642, 19 A. R. \ 
 3 S. C. R. 629 ] 
 R. i:i7 . , 
 r)71, 20 A. R. 66. 
 R. 315 . . 
 
 20 S. C. R. 10.) 
 
 R. 290 
 R. 533 
 R. 544 
 C. R, 132 
 H. 147 
 It. 714 
 R. 98 
 K. 33 
 R. 241 
 H. 340 
 U. 46 
 R. 312 
 R. 137 
 l.T P. R. 109 
 2 Ex. C. R. n:'i 
 14 P. R. 407 
 26 O. R. 270 
 20 O. R. 148 
 14 P. R. 486 
 23 S. C. R. 384 
 II. 503 
 R. 121 
 R. 60 
 K. 627. 
 R. (Ul 
 
 •22 O. 
 
 22 O. 
 125 0. 
 3 Ex. 
 114 P. 
 i26 O. 
 •20 O. 
 |23 O. 
 114 P. 
 '20 O. 
 
 23 O. 
 21 O. 
 21 A. 
 
 CoMMN OK DlliKST. 
 
 23 O. 
 18 A. 
 14 P. 
 20 A. 
 
 24 (). 
 
 20A.R.564,23S.C.R. 152« 
 
 10-26, 1038. 
 •-•37, 584. 
 .V23, 531. 
 
 709. 
 
 946. 
 
 79.'), 964, 1015. 
 
 73. 
 
 695, 706, 713. 
 
 4*6. 
 
 974. 
 
 n. 
 
 ")41, 917. 
 
 534. 
 
 84, 62{), 675. 
 
 s76. 
 
 948, 952. 
 
 4()5. 
 
 676. 
 
 65, 328, .349. 
 
 425, 898. 
 
 445, 501, 785. 
 ..|74;i. 
 ..!15, 718, 973. 
 . . 697. 
 
 ..2;;;,, 591. 
 
 . 67, 433, 685. 
 ..1 1 19, 162, 584. 
 ..!521. 
 ..631. 
 
 ..12.30,237,243, 977. 
 .. 275, '278, 45^2. 
 ..|797. 
 ../.)56, 101-2. 
 .. I84,.S'25,610,611,61;!. 
 ..214, 'i-yZ. 
 
 ,.; 199, .•193, 660, 865,879. 
 . . '466, 188. 
 ..1367, 434, 461. 
 ..1591. 
 ..|737. 
 616. 
 
 24 O, 
 122 O. 
 .21 A. 
 23 O. 
 22 O. 
 21 A. 
 16 P. 
 •22 A. 
 21 O. R, 
 21 S. C. 
 26 O. R, 
 
 T. 
 
 Taillifer \'. Taillifer 
 Talbot's Bail, Re 
 Talljot V. Poole 
 
 Tallman v. Smart . . 
 Taniblyn, Regina v. 
 Tanner, Patterson v. 
 Taplin, Hunt v. 
 
 R. 200 
 R. 57 
 R. 49 
 R. 393 
 R. 664 
 K. 2^28 
 R. 132 
 It. 429 
 
 412 
 
 R. 152 . 
 
 599, 765 . 
 
 21 O 
 •23 O 
 
 R. 337 
 
 R. 05 
 
 15 P. R. 99 
 
 15 P. R. -274 
 
 R. 661 
 
 R. 645 
 
 R. 364 
 
 •25 (). 
 25 O. 
 22 O. 
 
 •24 S. C. R. 36 
 
 149, 157. 
 156, 468. 
 134, 4^20. 
 35S, 1041. 
 704. 
 
 6, 131, 475, 775, 
 221, 351. 
 46, 723, 927. 
 473, 496, 966. 
 167, 309, 388. 
 6, 183. 
 
 199,457,488,748,821. 
 
 2ii6. 
 
 215, ;164, 5'tO. 
 
 t2i\, •2^28, -230, 235, 367. 
 
 75, 1 12. 
 
 265, •269, 481. 
 
 676. 
 
 190, 340, 944. 
 
!()I.rMN (IK DuiKST. 
 
 TABLE OF CASES. 
 
 Ik 
 
 Hi, um. 
 
 7, .■)«». 
 
 "), !KU, 1015. 
 
 '>, TOO, 713. 
 
 i. 
 
 t. 
 
 I, 017. 
 
 I. 
 
 ()■-'(), 075. 
 i. 
 
 <, !)52. 
 
 ). 
 ). 
 
 .S2S, M9. 
 ), 808. 
 "), .')01, 785. 
 i. 
 
 718,973. 
 
 ',', m. 
 4:t;), (>s,->. 
 », 102, ,-).st. 
 
 ), 237, 243, 077. 
 >, 27.S, 4,-)2. 
 
 >, 1012. 
 
 t, .32.'), 010, 611,01,",. 
 
 ■, 2.-)2. 
 
 I, 303, (iOO, SG.J, H70. 
 
 i, t,s,s. 
 
 ■, 4.34, 4()1. 
 
 , l.-)7. 
 
 
 , 46S. 
 
 
 , 420. 
 
 
 , HUl. 
 
 
 131,475, 7 
 
 75 
 
 , 351. 
 
 
 723, 027. 
 
 
 , 400, 000. 
 
 
 , 300, 388 
 
 
 183. 
 
 
 1,457,488,748,821. 
 
 ', 304, rviC. 
 
 , 22K, 23.J, 235, 307. 
 
 112. 
 
 , 200, 481. 
 
 ', 340, 944. 
 
 TasTor] Namk of Ca.se. 
 
 ^'on .MK A.M) Pack 
 
 Cor.r.MN OF Dkiest. 
 
 Tiinker, Oiitaiio Silver Co. v. 
 Tiitc, C'dok V. 
 
 laylor V. liriiiiildi) .Mfg. Co 
 
 jay lor, lin.stol .■u,.l West of Knglaiu! \muI Co. ;•: 
 
 . ly I '■. Hnstol .m,! \\ esl of Knglan.l Loan Co. v 
 
 la> I', Davidson v. . , ^ 
 
 I .III' V. Massey . . 
 
 I.iylor, Muttk'biiry V. .. [[ 
 
 T lylor V. Regis . . , ,' ' " 
 
 Taylor v. Wood 
 
 iVar, British Canadian Loan Co. v 
 
 Te.nperauce and (iencral Life Assurance of' 
 
 -North .America, (irahani v. 
 IV'iiiperance Life .Assurance Co!,'potts v 
 Uiinant, Ball v. , . , , ' ' 
 
 'I'l-'Uiiant V. (Jallow . . , | 
 
 i'ltnnant, .Smith v. , . 
 Tuiinant v. Union 15ank of Canada 
 I'onnant, Wilson v, 
 
 I'cMute V. Walsh 
 
 I'eskey v. Neil 
 
 Tliarle, Morris v. . . 
 
 'J'hibaudeau, IJenuing v. . 
 
 Tliiliaudeau v. Herberf . . ' . 
 
 Thibaudeau \-. I'aul . . ' ' 
 
 Tlioinas's License, Re 
 
 Thonias, lawyer v. 
 
 TlKjiJias, Tlie Queen v. . , ] _ 
 
 Tii(inui.s, Williams v. 
 
 Thoiniisoii .-. t'lark.son 
 
 'riiDinpson V. Fowlei' 
 
 Tiiompson v. Grand Trunk R. W. Co 
 
 Tlionipson V. Hay, Re 
 
 Thompson v. Kowson 
 
 Thompson, Lang v. . . [[ 
 
 'I'hunipson, Mulligan v. . 
 
 Tliompson v. .Sinitli , . [\ 
 
 Tiiompson v. Warwick . . ' ' 
 
 Thompson v. Williamson . . .. 
 
 Thompson v. Wright . , [] 
 
 Tlidmson v. Eede . . 
 
 Tliomson v. Quirk. . . [ 
 
 Thomson, Stuart v. 
 
 'I'liornbury Town of, and County of Grey, Re 
 
 Ihornton, Hegina ex rel, , v. Dewar 
 
 15 I'. R. INO 
 2;; (). It. 403 
 
 21 A. I!. ;ii;i 
 24 0. K. L'80 
 1 1') 1'. R. 310 
 
 14 1'. K. 7fS 
 20 O R. 429 
 
 22 O. R. .31 2 
 20 (). II. 4S3 
 14 1'. n. 440 
 23(>. R. mi 
 
 Hi P. It. 530 
 
 Tiiorold, Town of, Xeelon v. 
 
 Tliree Rivers, City of, v. Ranque .lu Peuple 
 
 H-ee Itivers, (.'ity of. Royal Electric Co v. ' 
 I lirec Rivers, .^cliool Comm'rs for, Lariviere v. ' 
 liernan, Ldmonds v. . . 
 
 Tieruan v. People's Life liia. Co. 
 
 Tiflaiiy v. McNee . . 
 
 Tilbury West and Romney,' Re Townships of' 
 
 uilie V. Springer . . . ^ ' 
 
 Tiinmermau v. City of St. John 
 
 Tinning v. liingham . . 
 
 Tinning, Canadian Bank of Commerce v' 
 iipling V. Cole, Re . . 
 
 Titus V. Colville . , ' " 
 
 To(M, Canada Permanent L. & S 
 
 Tolaud, Regina v 
 
 Toltdu V. Canadian Pacific R. W 
 Tomliiison, Gibbons v. . , 
 Toothe V. Frederick .', 
 
 Toothc V. Kittredge .', 
 
 Toronto and Richmond Hill Street R. W Co ' 
 Armstrong v ■ •> 
 
 Co. 
 
 Co. 
 
 23 C. R. 73 
 
 25 O. R. 50, 21 A. R. OOii 
 
 25 O. R. 50 
 
 120 O. R. 180 
 
 llOA.R. I, [1894] A. C. 31 
 
 25 (). R. 339 
 
 24 (). R. 300 
 
 15 P. R. 244 
 
 24 0. R. 159 
 20 S. C. R. 110 .. 
 It) P. R. 420 
 20 O. R. 385 
 
 20 O. R. 448 
 18 A. R. 129 
 2 Kx. C. R. 240 . . 
 
 25 O. R. 530 
 
 21 O. R. 421 
 23 0. R. 044 
 
 22 A. R. 453 
 
 22 O. R. 5.S3, 20 A. R. 379 
 10 P. R. 378 
 16 P. R. 516 
 
 23 O. R. 54 
 25 O. R. 052, 23 A. R. 29 
 
 21 A. 1!. 037 
 10 P. It. 368 
 
 22 O. It. 127 
 j22 A. R. 105 
 ilSS. C. R. 695 .. 
 ,23 O. R. 503 
 ;15P. R. 1!I2 
 |20 O. R. 512 
 :20 O. R. 80, 18 A. R 
 
 <!58, 22 S. C. R. 390. 
 '22 S. C. R. 352 . . 
 
 23 S. C. R. 289 . , 
 
 23 S. C, R. 723 . . 
 
 j21 S. C. R. 406 . . 
 
 |26 O, R. 590, 23 A. R. 342 
 
 '24 O. R. 551 
 
 jlSA. R. 477 
 
 121 O. R. 585 
 
 |21 S. C. R. 691 . . 
 
 !16P. R. 110 
 
 115 P. R. 401 
 
 j21 O. R. 276 
 
 18S. C. R. 709 .. 
 
 22 A. R. 515 
 
 22 O. R. 505 
 
 22 (). R. 204 
 
 21 (). R. 489 
 
 14 P. R. 287 
 
 24 S. C. R. 287 . . 
 
 . . 230, 545, S87. 
 . . 452. 
 
 ..|78;i. 
 
 .. 47(i, ,-)41, 82,3. 
 . , 076. 
 
 . . 58, 362, .363, 910. 
 . . 342, 422. 
 
 082. 
 
 400. 
 
 212, 507, 001. 
 . 477, 664. 
 
 416, 979. 
 
 4()2, 532. 
 67, 68, 777. 
 405. 
 
 197, 325, 059. 
 01, 102. 
 043, 075. 
 209, 356, 424, 446, 
 016, 918. 
 210, 240. 
 610. 
 80. 
 216. 
 74, 110. 
 500. 
 
 104, 780. 
 312. 
 
 205, 350. 
 78. 70. 
 
 188, 485, 8; 4. 
 843. 
 
 372, 373, 828. 
 791, 793,978, 900. 
 14. 772,, 812. 
 400, 884. 
 1025. 
 682. 
 
 210, 582. 
 652, 
 
 100, 247. 
 100, 111. 
 460, 488. 
 34. 
 70(J. 
 
 143. 
 
 U'i 
 
 15 P. R. 449 
 
 117, 091. 
 
 184. 
 
 955. 
 
 615. 
 
 140, 522. 
 
 743, 974. 
 
 704, 708. 
 
 81, 448. 
 
 49. 
 
 763. 
 
 464, 576. 
 
 370. 
 
 22. 
 
 12, 107, 110. 
 
 165. 
 
 326,381,308,861,100,3, 
 
 466. 
 
 38. 
 
 415,590, 634. 
 
 794, 803, 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 Tor] 
 
 Nami; ok Cask. 
 
 ■I'DiDiitd licit Line H. W. Co., Ho 
 I'diMiito I5ili l.iiR. K. W. Co., Hiocikc 
 
 \'0M-MK A.SI) I'Alii:. 
 
 CoHM.S OK OlIlliST. 
 
 ;(!(). 
 
 n.s 
 
 21 (). K, 101 
 
 liiiniito. Clt.v i)f, AUoiMfy.(ifiicraI for ■> !'J() (I. K. Ml, IS A. K. ( 
 
 <-'iiiii'''i^ V. j G-j-j, '2,S .S. V. It. r)14 / 
 
 I'cii'diilii, C'ity of, Itaiiiiiin v. . . . . 
 
 Toiiiiito, City of, C(i]i(m v. 
 
 Toi'iiiito, City of, (Jliiistio v. 
 
 Toronto, City of, Cliri.stio v. 
 
 oroiit(p, Citv of, CoUmiiiiii v. 
 
 1 
 
 Toronto, City of, Coliiimi 
 
 Toronto, City of, Confederation Life Ass'ii v.. . 
 
 'J'oronto, City III, C(jnsiiniers'(ia8Ci).of Tonnitov. 
 
 Toronto, City of, Ho ('ril)l)in and 
 
 Toronto, City of, Ite Davis and 
 
 'i'oronto. City of, Faniuliar v. 
 Toronto, (Jity of, Fcrj^juson v. 
 Toronto, City of, Mtniiiig v. 
 Toronto, City of, Forsyth v. CamiifFaiul 
 Toronto, ('ity of, F'orwood v. 
 Toronto, City of, (JaiHt'ld v. 
 Toronto, City of, Re Cilluspie and 
 Toronto, City of, (iodson V. 
 Toronto, City of, Uooderham V. ,. 
 'I'oronto, City of, Hodgins v. 
 Toronto, City of, lie Hodgins and 
 Toronto, City of, Jarvis v. 
 
 Toronto, City of, .lohnston v 
 
 Toronto, City of, Keachie v 
 
 Toronto, City of, v. Lorscli 
 
 'Joronto, City of, l!e Macplierson and . 
 
 •22 O. R. 274 
 
 •-•()(). R. I7« 
 
 25 O. R. 4-2r>, vm 
 
 15 1'. R. 415 
 
 2.3 (). I!. .•«5 
 
 15 P. H. 125 
 
 24 0. R. (U.'l, 22 A. R. 1(!C 
 
 ■-'(i 1 ). R. 722 
 
 21 U. H. ;<25 
 
 21 (). R. 243 
 20 (). H. .■}.-,(! 
 14 1'. R. .'WS 
 20 0. R. .-)47, 19 A. R 
 
 20 0. R. 478 
 .'2 O. R. .SSI 
 
 22 A. R. 128 
 IDA. I!. 713 
 18S. C. R. .TO 
 
 21 O. I!. 120, 19 A. R. (i4 
 
 19 A. R. 537 
 
 20 O. R. 480, 23 A 
 
 079, 8,52. 
 85;t. 
 
 54, 731. 
 
 ro8. 
 
 /i). 
 
 405. 
 
 44, 45. 
 ..'4,-,. 
 
 ..'119, 728,940. 
 . . 209, 095, 729. 
 ..131. 
 
 . . 479, 512, 709. 
 318 20, 47, 207, 72 
 . . 048, 727. 
 . . 9,S6. 
 
 331, 729. 
 
 47, 722, 929. 
 
 829. 
 
 930, 1011. 
 
 905. 
 
 725. 
 
 1{. 80, 
 j21 A. R. .395, 25 «. C. R. 237 379, 8()0. 
 
 Toronto, City of, Ro MoCull and 
 
 Toronto, City of, McNamee v 
 
 Toronto, City of, Merritt v 
 
 Toronto, City of, Norria v. 
 
 Toronto, City of, v. Ontario and Quel)ec R. W.Co. 
 
 Toronto, City of. Organ v. 
 
 Toronto, City of, Re Pollock and 
 
 Toronto, City of. Re Prittio and 
 
 Toronto, City of, Ke Pryoe and 
 
 Toronto, City of, .Stilliway v. . . 
 Toronto, City of, Toronto R. W. Co. v. 
 Toronto, City of, and Toronto Street R. W. ) 
 
 Co., Re' / 
 
 Toronto, City of, v. Tovonto Street R. W. Co . , 
 
 25 0. R. 312 
 22 A. R. .371 
 24 O. R. 227 
 16 P. R. 230 
 
 20 O. K. 558 
 
 21 A. K. 250 
 24 0. R. 313 
 
 Toronto, City of, Re Virgo and . . . . j 
 
 Toronto, City of, Webster v. 
 
 Toronto Dental Mfg. Co. v. McLaren . . 
 
 Toronto Drop F"'orge Co. (Ltd.), Re 
 
 Toronto (General Honpital, Trustees of. Brown v. 
 
 Toronto General Trusts Co., Leys v. 
 
 Toronto (ieneral Trusts Co., Lynn v.— Re Lynn 
 
 Toronto (ieneral Trusts Co. v. Quin 
 
 Toronto General 'J'rusta Co. v. Wilson . . 
 
 Toronto, Hamilton, and Bufifalo R. W. Co., ) 
 
 Hendrie v. . . , . , . . . \ 
 
 Toronto Incandescent Electric Light Co., Re / 
 
 U'ilson and . . . . . . . . ( 
 
 Toronto Junction, Town of. Re Christie and J 
 
 Toronto R. 
 Toronto R. 
 
 25 O. 
 24 0. 
 22 O. 
 24 O. 
 15 P. 
 
 19 A. 
 
 20 A. 
 20 O. 
 24 S. 
 22 O. 
 
 ■30. 
 ..710. 
 ...500, 715 
 . . '33, 408. 
 ,.|3I, 538,090. 
 ..090. 
 '32, 18.-.. 
 
 1013. 
 
 R. 2,50, 22 A. R. 205 64, 721. 
 
 R. 297 
 
 R. 344 
 
 R. 318 
 
 R. 355 
 
 R. .503 
 
 R. 10 
 
 R. 98 
 
 C. R. 589 . 
 
 n. 374, 20 A. R. ■> 
 125, [1893 J A. C. 511 I 
 23 S. C. R. 198 .. 
 I - P. R. 358 
 
 20 A. R. 4.35, 22 S. C. R. 1 
 447, [189,5] A. C, 88 ( 
 I5P. R. 21 
 
 R, 89 
 
 K. 191 
 
 R. 599 
 
 R. 603 
 
 R. 475 
 
 R. 250 
 
 R. 071 
 
 14 P. 
 
 24 0. 
 23 O. 
 22 O, 
 20 O. 
 
 25 O. 
 20 O. 
 
 W. Co., Armstrong v. 
 W. Co., Arnold v. . . 
 
 Toronto R. W. Co.! Boiid 
 
 Toronto R. W. Co., Canada Bank Note Co. v. . -22 A. R. 402 
 
 26 O. R. 607, 27 0. R. 46. 
 
 20 O. R. 397 
 
 i24 O. R. 443, 22 A. R. 
 
 : 21, 25 ,S. C. K. 551 
 
 !!5P. R. 208 
 
 10 P. H. .394 
 
 22 A.R. JS, 24S. C. R, 715 
 
 Toronto R. W. Co. v. City of Toronto 
 
 Toronto R. W. Co., E' 
 Toronto R. W. Co., fJosnell v. 
 
 'jwirig 
 
 i24 S C. R. 589 . . 
 
 124 0, R. 694 
 
 |21A. R. 553,24S.C.R.582 
 
 50. 
 
 116, S,37. 
 
 5, 001, 719. 
 
 35, 230. 
 
 37, 688. 
 
 725. 
 
 15, 718, 97.3. 
 
 23, 937. 
 
 934. 
 
 49, 194, 935. 
 29, 780. 
 
 721. 
 
 405. 
 
 563, 659. 
 
 618. 
 
 000. 
 
 375. 
 
 520. 
 
 355, 
 
 10,38. 
 
 852. 
 
 376. 
 
 3,50, 497. 
 
 30, 32, .38, 419, 088. 
 
 399, 936. 
 
 980. 
 
 054, 936. 
 
 200. 
 
 23, 937. 
 
 9,37. 
 
 938. 
 
TABLE OF OASES. 
 
 Izi 
 
 l.IMN OK UldKsr. 
 
 Tir 
 
 , 101 
 
 108. 
 )38, 
 
 (ii)0. 
 
 83. 
 •21. 
 
 
 .S.3T 
 )1, ■ 
 
 )88. 
 
 ■19. 
 
 18, 
 >87. 
 
 973. 
 
 04, 
 
 8(J. 
 
 935. 
 
 « 
 
 Tor-Val] Nami; ok Cask. 
 
 Tdionto R, \V. Co., Green V 
 
 Toronto K. \V. Co., firin.stoil v 
 
 Toronto K. W. Co., Piukcring v. 
 Toronto .Street H. W. Co., Ko City of 
 Toronto and 
 
 \'oLiMi: AND pAia:. 
 
 CoI.I'MN OK DifJEHT. 
 
 'i'oronto Street R. W. Co., (,'ity of Toronto v. . '2;t S.' 
 
 ,'2li(). R. ,110 
 24(». R. (i,H3, '21 A. n. 
 I 57.S, -24 S. C. R. 570 
 16 P. 1!. \U 
 22 (). H. .•i74, -20 A. R. 
 12,-), [189.1 J A. (!. 511 
 
 Toronto SiiHpcnder Co., Doriiii v. 
 
 Toronto 'J'eleplione Mfg. Co. v, Bell T'elepV'oneCo 
 
 Tottt'ii V. Totteii 
 
 Traclisel, MoDerniott v. . . 
 
 Tniuy, Re— Scully v. Tracy 
 
 Triuters' Bunk of Canada, Uedditk v. 
 
 Trcbilcock, WaJHli v. 
 
 Tremayne v. (irand Trunk R. \V. Co. . ' 
 
 Trend)lay v. Bernior 
 
 TruMieear v. Lawrence , , . , ' ' 
 
 Trenholnie, Mit(;liell v. . . '[ 
 
 Trent Valley Woollen Mfg. Co., Oelriolis v. '. 
 Trenton, Town of, Dagenais V. 
 Trenton, Town of, Uyer v, . . [[ 
 
 Trenton, Town of, v. Dyer . . ,, \] 
 
 Tn^paniiior, Ferrier v. 
 
 Trevelyan v. Myers 
 
 Trimble v. Lanktree . . . . ' ' 
 
 TriniMe v. Miller . . 
 
 Trout's Case -lie Essex Land and Tind)or Co! 
 
 'rruiiiseh, Berlin Piano Co. v 
 
 Truman v. Rudolph 
 
 Trundile v. Hortin 
 
 Trumm, Secord v. . . 
 
 'I'ruat and Loan Co. v. Stevenson , . '[ 
 
 Trusts Corporation of Ontario and Boehnier, Re 
 
 Trusts Corporation of Ontario and Medl,in<l, Re 
 
 Trusts Corporation of Ontario, Neilson v. 
 
 Trusts Co ; oration of Ontario, Parkea v. 
 
 Turner v. Burns 
 
 'I urner v. Crozier 
 
 'I'urner, Irwin v. . . . . . . ' 
 
 'J'yrrell v. Senior . . ,', 
 
 \\:> P. 
 
 '\4 P. 
 2 Kx. 
 •20 0. 
 2(i O. 
 
 21 A. 
 
 22 O. 
 21 A. 
 19 O. 
 
 C. 
 
 K. 
 
 R. 
 
 ('. 
 
 R. 
 
 U. 
 
 R. 
 
 H. 
 
 R. ; 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 198 
 ;i58 
 10,1 
 U. 19-), 
 
 .■>o:. 
 
 •218 
 454 
 449 
 
 r)5, 21 S 
 Iti4, 18 A. R 
 181, '20 S. C. R. 2,->9 
 
 21 S. C. R. (Of) , . 
 20 0. R. 117 
 
 22 S. C. R. Ill .. 
 
 •JOA.R. 071,^2.1S. C. R.C82 
 
 24 O. R. ;«3 
 
 •24 O. R. 303 
 
 2IA.R. :179,24.S. C. R.474 
 
 9.17 
 
 935. 
 
 5'24 
 
 C. R. 
 
 093 
 / 
 
 938. 
 
 3'2S, 
 
 •254. 
 
 034. 
 
 49, 194, 
 
 29, 780. 
 
 .■i4(i. 
 
 42,->, 780, 781, 
 
 1019. 
 
 50. 
 
 073, 901. 
 
 •24(>. 
 
 470. 
 
 S40. 
 
 782 
 
 u. 
 
 Ulirig V. Uhrig 
 
 Unger v. Brennun . , 
 
 Union Assurance (.'o. , Re , . 
 
 Union Bank v. Neville 
 
 Union Baidi of Caiuula, OXJara v. '. [ 
 
 Union Bank of Canada, Tennant v. 
 
 Union l'"ire Ins. Co., I!c— McCord's Case 
 
 Union Tias and Oil Stove Co., Angus v. 
 
 Union Ins. Co., Rourke v. 
 
 Union School Section v. Lockhart 
 
 Union School Section Kast and West \Vawa- / 
 
 nosh. Re ... . ( 
 
 Unitt and Prott, Re . '.'. 
 
 Urquliart, Archer v. 
 Usliorue and Hibbert Farmers' Alutual Fire) 
 
 Ins. Co., Dunlop v i 
 
 Utterson Lumber Co. v. Rennie . . .'. 
 
 V. 
 
 Vacuum Oil Co. v. The Queen . . 
 Valad, Township of Colchester South v. 
 \ allee v. Pr^fontaine ... 
 
 24 S. C. R. 8(5 
 
 ,20 O. R. 4,10 
 
 '25 O. R. 
 "•' O. R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 J{. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 R. 
 
 K. 494 
 
 R. 28 
 14 P. R. 272 
 10 ]'. R. ;W9 
 20 A. R. 150 
 
 121 O. 
 15 P. 
 '22 A. 
 22 A. 
 i'20 ().' 
 
 21 O. 
 20 O. 
 
 22 O. 
 24 O. 
 •20 O. 
 '24 O. 
 
 109 
 
 500 
 
 3()7 
 
 08 
 
 250 
 
 51 
 
 174 
 
 571,20 A. 
 
 191 
 
 538 
 
 747. 
 
 910. 
 
 9;i0, 944, 
 
 415, 870. 
 
 044, 1001. 
 
 .)0. 
 
 51, 02(;. 
 j 14, 27. 445, 735, 812, 
 (J 949, 988. 
 
 570. 
 
 199, 880. 
 
 101, 309, 8.10. 
 
 89, 150, 084. 
 
 98-2. 
 
 0,54. 
 ..27. 741. 
 
 ■247, 308, 017. 
 R. 00. 84. 020, 075. 
 
 .1433, 4J(i, 800, 997. 
 
 435, 997. 
 
 .524. 
 
 1023. 
 
 '257, 327, 740. 
 
 887. 
 
 791,978. 
 
 1035, 10.17. 
 
 15 P. R. .-,3 
 14 P. R. 294 
 23 O. R. 027 
 
 21 O. R. 152 
 .|22.S. C. R, 404 .. 
 fllOA. R, 1, [1894] A. C ) 
 
 1 1 31 (■ 
 
 . 21 O. R. 204 
 ■|24S. C. R. 104 .. 
 
 23 S. C. R. 344 . . 
 
 20 O. R. 002, 27 O. R. 345 
 
 '26 O. R. 403 
 
 23 O. R. 78 
 
 23 O. R. 214 . ; '.[ 
 
 22 A. R. 304 
 
 21 S. C. R, 218 . . 
 
 2 R.x. C. R. 234 
 2'S. C. R. 022 
 21 S. C. R. 607 
 
 170, 580. 
 982. 
 
 519, 0(;9. 
 03. 
 822. 
 
 91, 102. 
 
 il52. 
 478. 
 
 204, 532, 
 833. 
 
 833. 
 
 07, 94. 
 380, 1039, 
 
 513. 
 
 339, 748. 
 
 620, 860. 
 26, 810. 
 008. 
 
 893. 
 
Izli 
 
 TABLE OF CASES 
 
 Val-Wal] 
 
 Xa.mi; 111' C.\si;, 
 
 VttllieiH, Hutson v. 
 
 Villi Ciiinii, Mason \ . 
 
 V'iuicouver, Citv of, v. CuiukUiui I'auitic R. VV. 
 Co 
 
 Van Diilkeii, Dc Kiiyiiur v. 
 
 Van Dulkt'ii, The (^iiuimi v. 
 
 Vaiicliisen, I'"i('i Ikhii v 
 
 Vanni'tto, MoMulluii v. . . 
 
 Vanairklo v. Uoyd . . 
 
 Vansicklo and Mnorc, l!o . , 
 
 A'anstiinc, Ite Anik'iHoii v . . 
 
 Vanzant v. Vill.igo of Marklmiii 
 
 Vaniincs, \'illai,'t' of, County of \'orc'liures v. . 
 
 VaiulicMiil Elfution Caeu . . 
 
 Vunghan v. Riohardsou . . 
 
 Vaughan v. AVood . . 
 
 Vaughan l!oad Co., Attoniey-Gcncial v. 
 
 Van Julian Itoad Co. v. I''iBher 
 
 Verclu'res, Comity of, v. Villa„'c of ',\'ai'unnc's. 
 
 Vernon v. (.'oiporatiou of Siiiitira lulls. . 
 
 Vtironnoaii, Lcfuiintiin v. . . 
 
 Venal, Rogina v. , . 
 
 Vcspia, Towiisliip of, McCarthy V. 
 
 Vtzina v. 'I'lit! (jiiieuii 
 
 Victoria I'Jecti ic Light Co. of Lindsay, (Icn- 
 
 eral Klectric Co. v. . . 
 Victoria ?farl)oiir Liniiljer C'o. v. Irwin.. 
 Vigcoii V. Noi thcoto 
 Vigeon, Xortlicotu v. 
 
 \'ilicnenvo, Ikll v 
 
 Vinchcrg v. (iuardiau Kirc and Life As.surance 
 
 Co. . . , . . . , . . I 
 
 Vincbcig, .Schwersenski v, 
 
 Virgo and City of Toronto, Re . . . . ] 
 
 Virtue, Ue Wallace v. 
 
 Vivian V. 'I'owuHhip of McKini , . 
 
 Vose, Ba.Hkerville v. 
 
 Vrooni, Connor v. . 
 
 I!) A. R. I -)» 
 14 1'. R. -J'M) 
 L'3 S. V. R. I 
 
 \ 
 
 ;i Kx. C. ii. S.S, 4 
 
 i;.v. c. 
 
 1 
 
 K. 71. 24 S. C. 
 
 i. 114 
 
 
 •-» E.x. C. K. .•104 
 
 
 
 !.■> 1'. R. '2M 
 
 
 . . -'■»(). R. (iL'."> 
 
 . 
 
 .. 14 1'. R. 401) 
 
 
 . ■-»•.>(). I!, .'-.(id 
 
 
 . .iKi P. R. -jr.i 
 
 
 .:i.-,l'. 1!. 41'i 
 
 
 
 19 S. C. R. :i6.-i 
 
 
 
 '2'2 S. C. R. 1 
 
 
 
 lM S. C. R. :!.-)!) 
 
 
 
 ISS. C. R. 703 
 
 
 
 14 1'. H. .-.l(i 
 
 
 \ 
 
 21 <). R. .-)07, 111 
 
 A. R. 
 
 i 
 
 -';i4, 21 S. C. 11. 
 
 o;ti 
 
 
 14 1'. i; ;!40 
 
 
 
 lo.s. c. R. ;i(i,-> . 
 
 
 
 21 (). R. :t;?i 
 
 
 
 22 ,'^. C. R. 20:5 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 KiP. R. 444, 17 P. 
 
 R. 01 
 
 . 
 
 K! P. R. 41(j 
 
 
 
 2 Ex. C. I!. 11 , 
 
 , , 
 
 |1 
 
 • { 
 
 1 
 
 lU P. R. 470, -j20. 
 
 24 S. C. R. (i07 
 1.5 P. R. 171 
 22 ,S. C. K. 740 . 
 10 P. R. 4i;i 
 
 IDA. R. 2U:i 
 
 
 j 247, 249, 305, 009, 
 I 012. 
 410, HSl. 
 
 I11.S, 313, 851. 
 
 w, 
 
 Waddingtoii v. Kaiiuimalt and Nanaiiiio R, 
 
 \V. Co 
 
 Wade, Re Hank of Ottawa 
 
 Wade, Kelly v. 
 
 Wade, Price v. 
 
 \A'aillan<l, Mel.eod V. 
 
 Wagner V. O'Doiiiall 
 
 Wait V. Sagi.T 
 
 Wakefield Rattan Co. v. Hamilton Whip Co. 
 
 Waldie v. Denison — Re Deniaon . . 
 
 Walker V. Dickson.. 
 
 I!).S. C. R. 24;{ .. 
 20 A. R. 4;r., 22 S C. 1{.) 
 447, [1S!).-.J A. C. >SS J 
 24 U. li. 558 
 
 23 O. 1!. 501 
 15 P. R. 122 
 
 24 S. C. R. 701 . . 
 
 20.S,C. R. 235, [18941A. 
 C. 420 .. 
 
 120. 
 
 908, 900. 
 
 425, 
 
 908. 
 
 SCO, 
 
 9S7. 
 
 3IS2, 
 
 590. 
 
 13, 
 
 19, 43. 
 
 OSS. 
 
 
 174, 
 
 4S(». 
 
 227. 
 
 
 957. 
 
 
 700, 
 
 947. 
 
 470, 
 
 S94. 
 
 (;3, 7(it, 792. 
 
 101b 
 
 
 S02. 
 
 
 1110, 
 
 727. 
 
 MS.S, 
 
 !I5.",. 
 
 2o:!, 
 
 lOS. 
 
 )/; "O- 
 
 27S, 
 
 281. 
 
 700, 
 
 702. 
 
 192, 
 
 904. 
 
 253, 
 
 i;;o. 
 
 922. 
 
 
 179, 
 
 810. 
 
 32, : 
 
 13 . 
 
 23, 418. 
 
 721. 
 
 
 3()4. 
 
 
 43. 
 
 
 210. 
 
 
 .194. 
 
 
 I 
 
 308. 
 
 Walker and Drew, Re 
 Walkerton, Town of, Erdman v. 
 
 Wallace, Ayr American Plough Co. v. 
 Wallace v. Virtue, Re 
 Wallbi idgi; V. Farweli 
 
 Wallis V. Skain 
 
 Walsh, Baldwin v. . . 
 
 
 21 (). R. 480 
 
 
 
 370. 
 
 
 14 P. R. 13, 00 
 
 
 
 507. 
 
 
 14 P. R. 351 
 
 
 
 432, 509, 033 
 
 
 25 0. R. 118 
 
 
 
 082, 039. 
 
 
 14 P. R. 254 
 
 
 
 017. 
 
 
 14 P. R. 347 
 
 
 
 428. 
 
 
 24 0. R. 107 
 
 
 
 81, 148. 
 
 
 24(). R. 197 
 
 
 
 50. 
 
 
 14 P. H. 343 
 
 
 
 978. 
 
 
 20 A. R. !)0 
 
 
 
 477, (i05, 074 
 
 
 22 0. R. 332 
 
 
 
 385, 1022. 
 
 
 14 P. R. 407 
 
 
 
 397. 
 
 . . 
 
 15 P. R. 12 
 
 
 
 720, 709. 
 
 ( 
 
 22 O. R. 093, 20 A. R. 
 
 I 
 
 390. 
 
 1 
 
 444, 23 S. C. R. 
 
 352 
 
 
 21 S. C. It. 250 
 
 
 
 102. 
 
 
 24 0. R. 558 
 
 
 
 304. 
 
 
 18 ,S. C. ii 1 
 
 
 
 457, 839. 
 
 
 21 0. R. 532 
 
 
 
 213, 009. 
 
 
 20 0. R. 511 
 
 
 ■■ 
 
 37. 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 IziU 
 
 l.l'MN OK DlllKST. 
 
 Wal-Wes] Nami; OF Cask. 
 
 VoLIMK AM) Pa(1K. 
 
 C'OLIMN OK UlliKST. 
 
 WalHli, 'IVniito V 
 
 W'alsli V. 'ricl.ilfock 
 
 Wiuislijy iiiul Hrown, Re . . [', 
 
 Wiinzcf, Biililwiii V. 
 
 NV'ard V. Archer ,, 
 
 Wuril V, (;aleil(ni [] \[ 
 
 Wurnock, Kloupfer V. .... / 
 
 VVartruen, Ro ^ 
 
 Warwick, Thompson v. . . 
 \Va.shiiif,'ton, Ku . . [' 
 
 Waterloo, County of, ViHafe'c of 'Now'llam-'r 
 liiirg V. . . 
 
 W.terous Kngino Works Co/h ciaiiu-Aniold \ 
 V. rlayter ... > 
 
 Waterous I'liigi.ie Works Co. v. McCatm' 
 
 Waterous Kngino Works Co. v. Town of I'.l / 
 iiierston ..... - 
 
 Wntfoni, Vill:i.,'e of, Iverfoot v. .'. 
 
 W'at»(iii, Alexander V. .. \\ 
 
 Wataoii V. Ontario ISiipply Co 
 
 Watsou'H raHc^-Re Central Bank of Canada ,' ' 
 
 ■ m < >, !■;. 30!i 
 
 ai A. It.5,-., '.'3 8. C.R. 695 
 
 i-'l O. R. ,S4 
 
 22(1. R. ((12 
 
 •-'■lO. H. (i,W 
 
 I!) A. R. (i!) 
 
 Uo. R. 2.SS, 1.-. A. K. i 
 
 -m, 18 S. C. R. 701 
 .iV-'O. R. (101 
 21 A. R. (i;<7 
 
 |2.'{ (). i!. iimi 
 
 2-'(). !■ I!);j, 20 A.R, 1,'V 
 I 22 S. C. R. 2!)ti.. / 
 
 |22(). R, 60S 
 
 ( 209. :m. 424, 4-»6, 
 
 I !»l(l, !tlS. 
 470. 
 1.M4, 
 .")i»l. 
 
 l;<2, 4.14, 922. 
 '.I. 
 
 Hi). 
 
 7«."., 102!) 
 
 (i.H2. 
 
 (m7. 
 
 004. 
 
 Walt V. (.."ity of London . . 
 
 Watts, Morrison v. 
 
 Way, Flett v. .' ,' '[ 
 
 Wealleans v. Canada Southern R. VV. Co. 
 
 WcalUan.s, Micliigaii (.('ntral R. R. Co v 
 W caynioutli, 'I'own of liarrie v. 
 Weill) V. r.arton Stoney C're 
 Road Co. 
 
 872. 
 670. 
 ()91l. 
 
 7or,. 
 
 474. 
 4!»2, ,-)79. 
 
 Webb, Mar.sh v. 
 
 Con.solidated ) 
 J 
 
 21 A. R. 48(i 
 
 -IM). R. 411, 1!J A. R. / 
 47, 21 S. C. R. -,,-,(! 
 
 24 ( ), R. 2;j,-> 
 
 2H.S. C. RG70 . 
 
 14 I'. R. i)(J 
 
 '•"> I'. R. 427, 16 V. R. .-,,-, ->}<(7 
 
 21 O. R. 528 |S8.-) 
 
 19A. K. 67.-),22.S. C. R. h , , " 
 I ."WO . . t^- 
 
 II9A.R. (122 .. ..|7(1, 79,99;i. 
 
 !'*!• I<:il2 .. ..l21.-) 2:1; Oil 
 
 21 A.R. 207,24 8. C.R.) ' 
 
 309 
 24 S. C. R. 309 . '. 
 l.")l'. R.9,)., 
 
 Webli V. Spears 
 
 Webster v. City of Sherbi-ooke 
 
 Webster v. City of Toronto ', '. 
 
 Weh.ster v. Foley , , . . [' 
 
 AVel)ster, Love \'. . ,', " ' 
 
 Webster, Sutherland v. . . 
 
 WeiMell's Case-Rc Collingwood Dry 'Dock 
 Slap Co. . 
 
 W^eegar, (irand Trunk R. W. Co. v. 
 
 Weegar v. (iiand Trunk R. W. Co 
 
 W^eekes v. Frawley 
 
 Weese v. Hanlield . . 
 Weiihnau, Conniee v. 
 
 Weir, Re Alleiiby and .'. 
 
 \Veirv. Smyth .. 
 
 Weiser v. Heiiitzman .', 
 
 Welbouruc v. Canadian Pacifiu R.W. Co 
 
 \\ elch V. Ellis .... ' ' 
 
 Wellaud Klcetion Case .'. ' , 
 
 Welsb.ioh Incandescent (JaHlight Co. v St' 
 
 ,,. ''Cger • • 
 
 \\ eutworth. County of, Smith v 
 \\ entworth. County of, v. Smith . 
 West, Muruoch v 
 
 West {).\ford, Township of, ,Sa<'ev 
 
 Wealbrook V. Wheeler .. ° ' 
 
 Western A,S3. Co. v. (Jutario Coal Co 
 
 W eatorn JJank of Canada v. Courtemanche ' 
 
 W estgate, Regiiia v. 
 
 Westlake, Regina v. . . [[ 
 
 26 O. R. 343 
 
 j21 O. R 2N1, 19 A. R.I 
 [ 564, 22. S. C. R. 437 / 
 
 15P. R. 64.. 
 
 !■") P. R. 2;i2 
 ■ 24 S. C. R. .^2 ." 
 . 24S. C. R. 2(J8 .. 
 •h'JP. R. 21.. 
 ■i-M .S. C. R. 580 .. 
 .26 0. R. 4.-)3 
 
 21 A. R. 228 
 
 I 20 0. R. 107 
 
 . 2.S S. C. R. 422 . . 
 • If! P. i;. ;!71 
 . 23 (). R. 2.S.-) 
 
 22 A. R. 489 
 111 !'. R. 239 
 
 14 P. R. 227 
 
 19 A. R. 4.33 
 
 15 P. R. 258, 407 
 
 16 P. R. 343 
 22 A. R. 255 
 
 20 S. {;. R. 37(; . . 
 
 144, 519, 858. 
 
 144, 85S. 
 243, 765, 900. 
 
 16 P. R. .382 
 
 26 (). R. 209 
 l.'> P. R. .372 
 24 S. (;. R. 305 
 22 (). R. 678 
 !25 O. R. .'-,.-,!) 
 21 S. C. R. 383 
 16 P. R. 513 
 21 0. R. 621 
 21 0. R. 619 
 
 6.35, 1017. 
 
 129,380,389, 039. 
 
 22.<. 
 
 583, 640. 
 
 958. 
 
 48. 
 
 405. 
 
 649. 
 
 55. 920. 
 
 0. 131,475, 775. 
 
 150, .390. 
 
 23, 850. 
 
 |S87. 
 
 1429. 
 
 84. 
 
 220, 350. 
 
 213, 907. 
 
 .587. 
 
 346, 347, 398, 405, 400. 
 
 128, 403, 796. 
 
 1.39. 
 
 753. 
 
 . . 218. 
 
 .. 1016. 
 . . 58. 
 . . 203. 
 . 1707. 
 . . 773. 
 !533. 
 
 ■ ■ rm, 811. 
 .119,2.37. 
 
 ■ .,237, 55a. 
 
 1! 
 
 i ; 
 
Ixiv 
 
 TABLE OF OASES 
 
 Wet-Wis] 
 
 Namk dv Vauk, 
 
 Nl 
 
 Weltlaiifur V. ScMitt 
 
 Wettniim, Rc({iiiii v. 
 
 WliccliT V, lirciiiku. . 
 
 Wlici'lor V. \Vi><tl>rii()k 
 
 Wlicliui V. liyiin 
 
 WliidiliMi V. ■IiicUvoii 
 
 AVIiiildcn, Mt!i'<'liiiiit>< ItiiiiU of llalifnx v. 
 
 Wliitiikcr, l!t'j,iim v. 
 
 White, <>(m(levu v. , 
 
 White, Turk v 
 
 White, Ke Ratlilxiiu' anil . . 
 White V. Sauu 
 Whiti'heail, The (^ueen v , . 
 Whiting, Meliiiieii v. 
 Wliitiiey, .Stewart v. 
 WiileiiKin, lie Koch and . . 
 Wi;;^inH, Dominion liank v. 
 Wiulo V. Wiih.iuiH . . 
 WilkeM V. Kennedy.. 
 
 Wiiki.-, MoMichael v 
 
 Wilkinsfin, ('orridan V. 
 WilkinKoM V. WiJMon 
 WillianiH, Re 
 Williania v. Malfoiir 
 Wilhanis, Huntin v. 
 Williania v. City of Portland 
 
 Williams, Corporation of Raleigh v. 
 
 WillianiH v. Irvine , . 
 
 Williams v. Leonard 
 
 Wiliiain.'i and MeKiunon, Re 
 
 WillianiH v. Hiclianl.s 
 
 Williams v. 'j'lionias 
 
 WilliiiniH V. Township of Raleigh . 
 
 Williams, Wiyle v . . 
 
 Williamson, Fox v. . 
 
 Williamson, Thoinpson v. . . 
 
 Willi.s, Jennings v. . . 
 
 Williston V. Lawson 
 
 Wills, I'aisley v. . . 
 
 Wilson, Re . . 
 
 Wilson, Anderson v. 
 
 Wilson V. Camphell 
 
 Wilson and County of Klgin, Re. . 
 
 Wilson V. Fleming . . 
 
 Wilson and Houston, Re . . 
 
 Wilson V. Huttoii, Re 
 
 Wilson, Lacoste v. . . 
 
 Wilson, Land Seeurity Co, v. . . 
 
 Wilson, Re Reed v. 
 
 Wilson, Sproule v. . . 
 
 Wilson V. Teiiiiant . 
 
 Wilson, Toronto (ienoral Trusts Co. v. . . 
 
 Wilson and Toronto Incandescent Klcctric 
 
 Light ('o., lie . . 
 Wilson and Town of Ingersoll, Re 
 Wilson, Wilkinson v. 
 Winchester, Village of, Re Pounder and 
 Windsor, City of, v. Canada Southern R.W.C 
 Windsor, Town of, Mangan v. . , 
 Winelierg v. Hampson 
 Winnett v. Appellie 
 
 ^^'illnipeg, CAty of, Barrett v 
 
 Winnipeg, '"ity of, V. Logan 
 Winnipeg -Street R. \V. Co. v. Winnipeg Elec- 
 tric Street R. W. Co. . . 
 Wisner v. Coulthard 
 
 VoLfMK ,\.Nll i'.vllK. 
 
 CoI,l MN UK DiUfcS'l'. 
 
 •-•II .\. R. llfl'i 
 ■.'.-. O. R. 4.-)!» 
 •iff ( >. R. m 
 •.'.■)(). R. .".!! 
 '20 H. C. R ti.-. 
 IS A. R. 4;!1) 
 
 lit s. c. R. ra 
 
 L'4 0. K. 4,'t7 
 !.•> P. R. 4.'i;i 
 L'.SO. |{. (ill 
 
 li'j ( >. R. r>M 
 
 lit A. R. ).').-. 
 I Kx. C. It. I,-J4 
 Ki P. I!. M-J 
 
 14 P. If. 147 
 ''_'.•) (). R. 2(;'2 
 21 A. R. 'JT,! 
 'J4S. C. 1{. 71.1 
 1(1 P. R. '.'(M 
 
 15 A. R. II 1 
 -MA. R. 184 
 •J(l<). R. -Jl.-t 
 •_'L' A. R. l!t(i 
 IS .S. C. R. 47'J 
 l(i P. R. 4;i 
 1!»S, ('. R. 1,-,!) 
 ■21 S. ('. R. io;{, 
 
 A. c. rm 
 
 •->•_' S. C. R. 108 
 Id p. R. .'514, 17 
 
 14 P. R. :m 
 •_';u). li. (i,-,i 
 L».") ( ). R. r,:ui 
 
 14 I'. R. oO., 
 •J4S. C. R. 7I.S 
 •_'0 A. R. (ilO 
 Hi P. R. atiS 
 2-J ( ». R. 4;i!t 
 1!)S. ('. R. ()7;j 
 I9(). R. HO.'l, 18 
 
 14 P. R. 2H) 
 '2r> (). I!, Ill 
 
 15 P. R. L',-)4 
 l(i P. R. l.-.O 
 
 21 A. R. ,-)«-), 24 S 
 .'4 O. R. ;188 
 20 O. R. .'-..•12 
 
 .'to. R. 2!t 
 2(1 S. C. R. 218 
 
 22 A. R. ir)l,2(iS 
 2.S < I. R. .-).-)2 
 15 P. R. .•11!) 
 25(1. R. :VM) 
 2(i O. R. (171 
 
 20 O. R. 397 
 
 25 0. R. 4:i!l 
 . .i2(J (I. li. 2l;) 
 . .ilOA. R. (i84 
 'o.i20 A. R. .S88 
 ..124(1. I!. (i75 
 . . I!).S. C. 1!. 369 
 
 . .|i(i P. R. r>- 
 
 J 19.S. C. R. .S74, 
 ( A. C. 445 
 [1S92] A. {;. 445 
 
 [1891] A. C. 015 
 
 22 S. C. R. 178 
 
 [ISiU] 
 
 . 872. 
 ..'271, 470. 
 . . (1H2. 
 . . 77.t 
 . 54. 
 . . 7.'l, 21(1. 
 . , S5, 8 111. 
 
 . 128, ;;(i9. 
 , . 580. 
 . . 5. 7.50. 
 . . JIttS. 
 . , 4(il. 
 
 , . ;t07. 
 
 . , 77», 8.59. 
 .. 44.->, 501, 785. 
 . ;i57. 440. 
 .. 101. 
 . . 770. 
 . . 57;<, .592. 
 .1424,470,494,003. 
 
 :)4!t. 
 
 .•i;t7, .184, 751. 
 
 2;i8, 44:i, 980. 
 
 480, 004, 
 
 I. 
 
 710. 
 
 P. I!. 7:t . 
 
 l.C, It. 
 
 / 1-'. 
 
 9;iO, 943. 
 15, 790. 
 440. 
 
 008. 
 
 205, 359. 
 
 801. 
 
 770. 
 
 250, .'VJ I, 886. 
 
 219, 582. 
 
 014. 
 
 201, 910. 
 A. R. 210921. 
 ..501. 
 
 . .;42, .583, 040, 971. 
 ..|198, 255, 00.3. 
 ..481. 
 ■00 835. 
 . . 004. 
 . . .57, 998. 
 . . 371. 
 . . 473, 800. 
 I. C. R.149 82.S. 
 
 313, 085, 801. 
 
 215, M2. 
 
 043, 975. 
 
 10,38. 
 
 350, 497. 
 
 121, 5,59, 090. 
 337, 3S4, 751. 
 12J, .5.59, 097. 
 50, i" -', 732. 
 193, 10,56. 
 954. 
 347, 410. 
 
 172. 
 
 172. 
 
 092, 935. 
 
 l78i 
 
 [1892] 
 
TABLE OP OASES. 
 
 .1 MN OK DuikMl, 
 
 (T<». 
 
 Hi. 
 111. 
 
 ■(01, 7H5. 
 
 >lli. 
 
 ■)»J. 
 
 7(i, 194, (l(J"i. 
 
 m, ::,\. 
 i4:t, iiMO. 
 
 i(i4. 
 
 i4;t. 
 
 10. 
 
 .-)1». 
 
 •21,880. 
 
 IS). 
 
 ;i, (i40, 971. 
 ->->, (it)3. 
 
 s. 
 
 tiO. 
 
 8;-), ,S(il. 
 42. 
 
 WooZum] \.A.MK „v Ca 
 
 »H. 
 
 V'oi.r.MK AM. I'AdK. 
 
 vv. c, 
 
 VV(m(l, Atlantic aii.l North West R 
 
 " "<"i, FIllMSOIl V. 
 NVo'mI v. .llJ,S4.|itl 
 
 WcmhI v. l!i ii-iir ' ] 
 
 Wood V. .Stiiiigor 
 
 WoimI, I'liyloi- V. .', 
 
 W,m,], \'iiiij<)i 111 V. . . 
 
 \yo(iilfl, |{,, ,S.,iiai,cl 
 
 W '><iil.slin.U, 'I'.iwii i,f, 
 
 VVutplirinn, Stuwait v. 
 World .\|.HH|)a|i(.|. ( 
 
 ('.mill Co. V. 
 \V<,.1.I Now.s,,,.i,H,rCo.. Macdonal.i v. 
 Uoil ,, Hfj-ina e.x i-til. IVrcy v. 
 Uorthiiigton V, iVck 
 \Voitinaiiii!Hl \Vtt,.,i Mf^.'oe 
 Wniytou V. .Vuyl„|. " 
 
 U'liylit V. Aniislr.,ii« 
 
 WiiKlil V. I!.. II 
 Wright V. Hell 
 
 \Vrightv. HollT..k.phom,'('v. 
 
 Wright, Cilli,.,. V. 
 
 Wright, I'olJar.l v. , 
 
 Wriglit, Tlioiii|)H((ii V. 
 
 Wyth.. V. Maiiiifacturtr.s' Aooi.lent Ins.' Co 
 
 Ixv 
 
 Col.lM.S OK |)1()K.^T. 
 
 o. V. 
 
 (■'logo V. , . 
 
 '., <Juorgiim Uuy'shiii") 
 
 il'llgllt V 
 
 fiw.iiA. r. •j.'i7 
 ;.J'-'o. It. lift 
 
 !IH A. |{. 
 •-•2 A. It. 
 -OO. I; 
 1 1 I'. It 
 
 IH ,S. (■ 
 •-'.'f < t. It. 
 
 i;n». H. 
 
 .V.) 
 
 ■'>' 
 
 118 
 . 449 
 l{. 70.T 
 474 
 911 
 
 •-'"'t. K. 714 
 Iti I', i;. ,T.>0 
 
 Year.sh.y (;ity..f.st. ThoimiH v. . 
 
 U)ii V, (iistsidv 
 
 \drk V. CiimJii Atj.uitir .S.S. V.n 
 
 llUI' 
 
 \'i:u> 
 
 !24 (), 
 
 In <), 
 
 24 ,S. 
 
 L'-.> ( ). 
 
 18. 
 
 18 A. 
 Kil'. 
 2 Kx 
 
 19 A 
 l« I' 
 22 0. 
 2H O, 
 
 H. ;»24 
 
 K. (is.s 
 H. r,:tr, 
 
 I!. (II.S 
 
 ('. k. -JO.-. . 
 
 •"'^-', 21 A. M. i' 
 ■"> .'^. C. It. !.'((;{ / 
 
 25, •.';», S.( J. K. 4!w 
 
 •■I.'t.), 2 IS. (;,H. ((,-.(! 
 
 K. .V)2 
 
 29S, i>4,s.C'. K. 714 
 oo,-. 
 
 127 
 
 . 850. 
 . , IXi. 
 .. 67, .Wl. 
 . . 4, 27, 78. 
 
 . . iN4",:i2.\'«io,()n,(,i.i. 
 
 .j242, .'■.07,IKI|. 
 
 • .«14, (ilS, 
 . . 1730. 
 
 ,.|743. 
 
 221, ;<J0. 
 
 n. 
 :f, •,' 
 
 . K. 
 
 I!. 
 . ('. 
 R 
 
 I, 
 
 K. 
 
 R. 
 
 221, .•i.'iO. 
 14. 7(M), 701, 
 204, 820. 
 ti.'>4. 
 879. 
 
 .■)84. 
 
 508, (i24, 1021 
 -»41, N09, 910. 
 
 22 A. R. 340 
 
 .. 18 .S. C. H. 713 
 VI.... .228. ('. K. 107 
 
 >ork V. |„w„shi|)(.f ()sg„o,|,. M24 (). |(, pi .)|\ j^' 
 
 Young, A.cidc„, In. O.. of Nor, I, Ain^.i,. J. 20^^^^^^'^- '''' ' » 
 
 •• '■ ■ 'i4i'. It. :m 
 
 779. 
 
 420, 8!)0, 080, 
 
 984. 
 
 0.^2. 
 
 189, 512. 
 
 Young, Chinuoy v. . . 
 Young, Croinhic v. . . 
 Young V. .Mi,ll,uul n. W. '(V 
 Young, Ndye.s V. . . ' ' 
 
 Youdg V. Snyli.r , , 
 
 z. 
 
 Zamhe.si, Thf, and Tlu, Kunnv Dutard , 
 
 /^iinin.r v. Gran.l Tnink R. W. Co 
 /•innKrnmn, ,Sta(,l.lor v.-Re .Staebler 
 /iimstein v. .Shruinni 
 
 1") P. R. •_>4N 
 20 0. R. |!)4 
 
 I9A. l;.-.>6,-., •.'2,S.C.R. 190 
 
 Hi 1*. R. 254 
 
 23 O, R. .513, 20 A. R. 045 
 
 1 15, .378. 
 
 98. 
 
 •"<22, 734, 730, 743. 
 
 looi.; 
 
 .■.i;). 
 08. j;)o. 
 
 2.10. ,147. 
 4, 407, 084. 
 85'J, .S.J4. 
 802. 
 177, 586. 
 
 "", 
 
 ■•2IO.R.02S. 19 aVr. 093,8.55 
 ■■22AK-^rn •' • • K 1037. 
 
 97. 
 
 ,">!», f)9fi. 
 84, 7.". I. 
 v.), 097. 
 , 732. 
 D.')0. 
 
 10. 
 
 15. 
 
A] 
 
 Abe-A 
 
 Alxll ^ 
 
 A h( III fill 
 
 C 
 
 Aliraha; 
 
 a: 
 A hrnfh 
 
 \i 
 
 A djala, 
 M 
 
 Adamsoi 
 
 .Klna In 
 
 1, 
 
 1)C1 
 
 A Idriih V 
 Atcxande 
 
 n. 
 
 Ami 
 
 2r. 
 
 Alijer and 
 afli 
 
 Allen V. /' 
 ni : 
 
 ^'1 l/enhy a 
 allli 
 
 Allison V. 
 vols 
 
 «;{,-) 
 
 A nitr V. A' 
 
 Lou 
 
 Anufden v, 
 
 rccl,( 
 
 Triis 
 
 Aiider.'iuu v 
 
 301, 
 
 ( 'dill 
 
 R. 4i 
 
 Aiulrewx, I 
 
 RoSl 
 
 AppletoH V. 
 
 .1. f:ii 
 
 liel.I, 
 
 Archibald v. 
 lowei 
 
 K. 5«; 
 
CASES 
 
 AFFIRMED, REVERSED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 Abe-Arc] 
 
 COLn.MN, 
 
 AUII V. Moniy 10 o. R. 6(5,, ,, 
 
 ' <;«•> 
 
 • . <i82, 939 
 
 Af>o„!affv. ()/>peiilieimn; Kio jj I) .)n-"' '" 
 o'K' """'''"'«'■'• l''f<"'lk<'«72<i 
 
 Alirah 
 
 ■ahum V. Ahmhrtm, 19 () n o-.^ 
 
 """•'ucl: ISA. It. 4:!(; .[. % ^„ 
 
 Adja/a, Township of, v. .l/<'/v7,o//, !) ()' k' 
 i)SO s|,cci,illy (.■(,n,si,|,.rt.,r: Town .,f 
 Moafonl r. Lai,;,., L'o (). k. -,n..r,i, 114^ 
 
 Adam.o, V. A'.;/,>.,s., -i A. I;, iir,, allir„„.,l 498 
 .hlna liimnmri Co. v. /;,-o,//, .-, s c p 
 1, followtMl : SdiWL.r.seii.ski ,•' v'in," 
 Ix'i!.^ 19 S. (;. K. o.4;j ""'' 
 
 Arc-Attl 
 
 Archibald V. The Queen, 3 Ex. C H ^M 
 
 iilfif . ed : 23 S. U. R. 147 '.."'., .' ;)03 
 
 A rdil! v. JClna Inn. Co. , 22 O R -,00 
 
 aflirniod : 20 A. R. (ior, .'...""' r,,^ 
 
 Ardill V. Ci/i:ins Ins. Co., 22 R 5->i) 
 
 ainrincl : 20 A. R. (iO.5... . ' "' ' 514 
 
 An,/e..v .V.M 26 (). R. 224, airirm.Mr: 
 
 "i A. K. 44 (jy 4,-g 
 
 --Im,. V. /lo.vrr// (UK S. 1.13, ,3 -.2, 4,TO,' 
 Icillowcd : \(iiiMs '•■ •Saylor, 23 0. R 
 
 . /"''■'* '-..ll-;, 58(i 
 
 ArnMtrnini v. Ihirlimj, (i ('. L. T. 214; 22 
 * ; h\ ■'■ l"*^' "'^'e'TiiJed : In 1^ Town 
 
 418 
 "), r)69 
 
 ..Mhond,,,,^.,,nd County of (irey, 
 
 irmslroni, v. Ihmstrcet, 22 O I! 3'j(j 
 overruled : Davidson r. Fra.scr! ''23 
 
 A. R. 
 
 Arni.in 
 
 34 
 
 780 
 3, 881 
 
 -'"'^'■''■5;-^;f'J;^;^;*<>H.374,a(Mn,;;,i; 
 
 Alrxandn-v Township of fl,,„r.,rd, n"() 
 K. 22, followed ; (J.iiifo.lci-alion Mf,'. 
 
 .>r'Trp''"rn-'- '''"''■"''''■"•'■ """'■■"■'1.' 
 
 ,, -;*■,''•.'!'' (i(i2, 7n(i 
 
 A/;;f,- and .Sarnm OU Co., Re, 21 O It 4 Hi 
 
 ■illinned: 19 A. R. 4 Hi . ' ' ' j-y 
 
 .4//e«v. /.Wv, 20A. R. 34,di.stingui..h'- ' n , tt ..,.,-—': 
 
 ed : Camoron ,-. Adirns, 2.') (). R. """■"'"l ''■ neiTnij,'ton, 20 A. R. 17.-, 51, 
 
 Allenhy and Wdr, /,V. 13 I' R to') ' " \^^''"""''''- C'^'n'id Tmnk R. ]]'. Co •>,-> O ' 
 
 atlinned : 14 r. R. 227 •'V-' 90" ' '^' "^7, alliinied : 22 A. R. 89. 3'^6 508 
 
 ■'"■■ " '^ '• - 'a,,-, . 745, 1003,' 1008 
 
 AMnd.,' V. Ashhrhlje, 22 0. R. I4fi, not 
 toIlo^^ ed .. Nagon v. Arniatrong, 22 
 
 *'• '^-'W ^ lOQO 
 
 Ashdown V. Ihfor, 24 (). R. rm : sec this 
 
 ca.sc Ml .ippcal, 21 A. |{. 4(i(; . «« 
 
 >--<ony tinnlh 40 Ch. I). 507, .H.stin 
 giiialied : (lianil.cra i\ Kitehen, Hi I', 
 
 !*'• —1,1 A*y 
 
 Arnold V. Toronto It W. Co., l(i 1>" R .394 
 dist,ngui.slK)d : If, list r. (i, -and Trunk 
 H. U. Co., 10 1'. R. 448.... gjjo 
 
 Arscoll y. Llll<,, 14 A. R. 283, distiu- 
 guislied : Ro Pollock and City of 
 i oronto, 1,5 p. R. :i-,r^ ^ .^.^ ^36 
 
 — a])j)lie<l ; 
 
 Allison 
 
 •n V. McDannhl, 23 (). 1{ 288 .•<. 
 veisi'd : 20 A. I!. (!<),'•; 23 ,S. c' |{ 
 ()3.') 00 ?•)-' --'. 
 
 !'!', 13,-., 770, S22 
 .l<»«»-v. /;„,/,„, 31 (^ ).. 19.5, o.,naid<.,e,l; 
 
 Lee r. Hopkm.s, 20 O. II. 0(i(i. . . . k,;^ -^3 
 Amiidm v. Kiilr, 9 O \\ ,t „ .111 . ' ' 1 , , 
 
 Iru.'ital o. 220. K. 003 .-j;,-, 
 
 And(irsoHv.yorth,rnR.]V.Go.,2rii:.\ 
 
 301, distinguislicd and .ju'cstionod '• 
 ( nniicll ,■. Town of Preseott, 20 A. 
 iv. 4*1 
 
 ^^1'^, II", n p. R. 199, not followed • 
 
 Ke hloason, 15 P. R. 156 502 
 
 Appleton V. Cha/id Ton-n Paper Co., 45 L 
 ',!• /:''•.-'!'• 'iot lollowed : Ro Rutter- 
 
 739 
 
 ^oUowe.l : Rfgina )■. Naglo, 24 (). R 
 
 . . ' ' 482,836 
 
 A.^sirpwienh and Pr<fn:nren Art, In r, 20 
 A 1!. 489, ieveise.1 : | IS94| A.' U. 
 189 sxd, nom. Attoiney-( Je„e,al of 
 
 field, 14 P. R. 507. 
 Archibald v. Htddey, 18 S. C. R. 1 
 
 lowed ; Mor 
 K. 503 
 
 se ('. Phi 
 
 luey, 
 
 16, fol- 
 -'S. C. 
 
 907 
 
 106 
 
 Attorney -O 
 
 Ontano r. Att..rney-(Jeneral for the 
 UiMnmion of Canada 
 
 ■nfy-aena;d v. deffmi, 10 Or. 273, 
 
 Attormy-Ucneralv. Ni, 
 Park and Clifti 
 
 162 
 
 1.34 
 
 'ijara Palli Wedey 
 '"raviiray Co., 19 
 
 0. R. 624, affirmed: 18 A. R, 453'.',63, 304 
 
 940 
 
IxviU 
 Att-Bar] 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 cdLi-MN. I Bar-Ber] 
 
 S3 
 
 054 
 
 AUorney-Uminti v. Vain/hau lioiui (Jo., 
 
 21 (). R. 507, roversiMl : ii) A. K. 
 
 2;«, rustoied : 21 S. C. H. (i.'U lOlS 
 
 Altonuy-ddwral of />', iti^h Cidumhia v. 
 AUuriuii-dtheral of Citiiailii, 14 App. 
 Cas. 2!I5, coiMincnted on aiul di.s- 
 tinguished : Fjuwcll c. The Queen, 
 
 22 S. C. K. 553 394,864 
 
 Attorneythneral if Canada v. Altormy- 
 
 (li'Urral of Ontario, 20 0. It. 222, 
 i.llinned : 19 A. H. 31 : 23 S. C 1!. 
 45H |(j9 
 
 AUorueii-ilnuml of Canada v. Citii of 
 Toronto, 20 U. R. 19 ; 18 A. R.'622, 
 
 reversed : 23 S. C. R. 514 54, 731 
 
 Attorney-Cmcrahf Victoria v. Ellrr-'luvik, 
 U R. 6 P. C. 354, leferrod t(. : 
 Peter.son r. The (ilueeii, 2 Jlx. (!. R. 
 
 t»7 305,588 
 
 A/mood V. Atii-ood, 15 P, I!. 425, allirined • 
 
 10 P. U. 50 487 
 
 A wthi V. Gordon, 32 U. C. R. ()21 , ohserved 
 upon : Samuel /•. KaiiL'rieve, 21 A. 
 
 R. 418 
 
 Bndddty v. Earl Oranrilh', 19 Q. R. I). 
 423, followed : Rodgers i:. Hamilton 
 
 Cotton Co., 23 U. K. 425 
 
 Bailey v. Xeal, 5 Times L. R. 20, eoiii- 
 niented on and distinL".iishcd : Sang- 
 
 ster i\ Katon, 25 U. \{. 78 500, 737 
 
 Bailey v. Porter, 14 M. & W. 44, lefened 
 to : The (^ueen i\ Bank of Montreal, 
 
 1 Ex. C. I!. 154 H6, 104 
 
 Bailey v. Williamson, L. R. 8 Q. H. 118, 
 followed : Re Ciibbin and City of 
 
 Toronto, 21 O. i!. 325 72! 
 
 Bain v. .Etna Life Ins. Co., 20 O. R. 0, 
 
 atiirined : 2"l O. 1!. 233 ' 
 
 Bain v. Fothi-njill, L. R. 7 H. L. 158, re- 
 ferred to : Huliner v. The Queen, 3 
 
 Ex. C. R. 184 
 
 Baird, In rt, 13 C. L. T. 277, reconsidered : 
 
 In re Martin, 20 O. R. 405 357, 447 
 
 Baldwin v. Kinijslom, 10 O. U, 341, 
 atlirmod in part, and rever3e(l in 
 
 part : 18 A. R. 03 451, 589, 630, 
 
 1041 
 Ball V. Bill, Be, 20 0. R. 123, reversed : 
 
 26 0. R i;01 ;(72 
 
 Ballv. McCiUJi.y, 20 S. C. R. 319: see 
 O'.Shaughnessy v. Ball, 21 S. C. R. 
 
 4i'5 390, SOS 
 
 Ball V. Tennanl, 25 O. R. 50, rever.'ied in 
 
 part ! 21 A. R. 602 67, 777 
 
 Baher v. Oo.sfiild, 17 O. R. 700, followed : 
 McKelvin v. City cf London, 22 O. 
 R. 70 
 
 Banque Jacqne.i Cartier v. Banqm 
 D'Eparjni, 13 App. Cas. 118, fol- 
 lowed ; Merchants Bank of Canada 
 V. Lucas, 18 S. C. R. 704 
 
 Barber v. Clark; 20 0. H. 52-', affirmed 
 18 A. R. 435 o4a, 
 
 Barku-orth, Ex parte, 2 DeU. & J. 194, 
 referred to : The Queen v. Bank of 
 Montreal, 1 Ex. C. K. 164 86, 103 
 
 940 
 53(J 
 
 315 
 
 Barm s v. Dominion (Iranijc. Mutual Firt Inn. 
 
 A.-c.iocialiou, 25 O." R. 100, allirmod : 
 
 22 A . R. 08 ; 25 S. C. U. 154 518 
 
 Barrett v. City of IVInnipn/, 19 S. C. R, 
 
 374, reversed : [ 1892) A. C. 445. . . . 172 
 Barton v. London and Xorlh Wii'ern I\. 
 
 II'. Co., Times L. R. 70, followed: 
 
 Merchants Bank of Canada r. Lucas, 
 
 18S. C. R. 701 .392 
 
 Barton, Tun-nship of, v. City of IlawHtun, 
 
 18 O. l;. 199, alKrniud': 17 A. R. 
 
 340 ; 20 S. C. R. 173 729 
 
 Barton.s/iill Coal Co. v. Btid, 3 Macij. 2(i(), 
 
 followed : (.'ram v. Ryan, 25 O. R. 
 
 ■">24 453 
 
 Ball V. Canadian J'ari/lc II. IT. Co., 14 '). 
 
 R. 025; ISA. R. .38S, reversed: 18 
 
 S. C. R. 097 126, 842 
 
 distinguislicd : 
 
 Robertson r. (irand Trunk H, \X. 
 
 Co., 24 S. C. R. 611 125,841 
 
 Bathurst Com , 4 App. Cas. 250, distin- 
 guished : Pictou r. (ieldert, [189.3] 
 A. C. 524 093 
 
 BiMia V. liiiim, 24 (). R. 189, approved ; 
 
 McKibbon r. Fcegan, 21 A. R. 87. 
 
 526 
 
 Beaton v. (Ilulie J'rintin;/ Co., 15 P. R. 473, 
 
 reversed : 10 P. K 281 346, 403 
 
 Beatty v. O'Connor, 5 U. R. 731, 737, not 
 followed : Re Wilson and County 
 
 of Elgin, 10 P. It. 150 481 
 
 Bealty v. Rumble, 21 O. ]!. 184, distin- 
 guished : Coi'don r. I'aimble, 19 A. 
 
 It. 440 ;r)8, 043 
 
 lieancham)) v. Winn, L. R. H. L. 223, 
 considered and followed : Baldwin 
 
 r. Kingstoue, 18 A. R. 03 589 
 
 Bearer \\ Criinil Trunk R. W. Co., 22 0. 
 R. 0()7 ; 20 A. R. 470, reversed : 22 
 
 ^. C. R. 498 P20, 842 
 
 Becktii V. Midland H. W. Co., L. ii. 3 C. 
 P. 82, referre<l to : The Queen r. 
 
 Malcohn, 2 Ex. C. R. 357 279, 289 
 
 Beckett v. Stile.t, 5 Times L. 1{. 88, follow- 
 ed : McNair r. Boyd, 14 P. R. 1.32. 210 
 Beddow v. Beddon; 9 Ch. D. 89, followed : 
 Township of Burford r. Chaud)ers, 
 
 25 0. R. 063 ;j3, 482 
 
 Beemer v. Oliir.r, 10 A. R. 0,56, referred 
 
 to : Wood V. Reesor, 22 A. U. 57 . ,4, 78 
 Beer v. Stroud, 19 O. R. 10, ccmsidcred : 
 Arthur r. Crand Trunk R. W. Co., 
 2r.O. R. 37 74,-i, 1008 
 
 and Williams v. 
 
 Richards, 23 0. R. 651 lOQs 
 
 7-'0 
 
 392 
 1030 
 
 .'53 
 
 Beenwinij, Thi; 10 P. D. 18, distinguished : 
 Pickering v. Toronto R. W. Co., 16 
 P. R. 144 
 
 Belmonte v. Aynard, 4 C. P. I). 221, .352, 
 distinguished : Re Ancient Order of 
 Foresters and Castner, 14 P. P. 47.218, 544 
 
 Bernardin v. Muniripalilii of North 
 JJuffiriu, 19 .S. C, K. .581, distin- 
 guished : Waterous Engine Works 
 Co. r. Town of Palmerston, 21 S, C. 
 "• "'56 699 
 
COLUMN. 
 
 :tal F'trt Inn. 
 \, alliniit'il : 
 
 , ir)4 r)lS 
 
 9 S. C. R. 
 C. 445.... 172 
 Wtu'erii 11. 
 , followeil : 
 la c. Lucas, 
 
 ,S92 
 
 ' Ilnmiltiiii, 
 
 17 A. H. 
 
 729 
 
 Mac(|. 2(i(i. 
 1, 2,j O. K. 
 
 45;i 
 
 Co., 14 :). 
 versed ; IS 
 
 126, 842 
 
 nguisliud : 
 Ilk H. W. 
 
 125, S41 
 
 j(), distill- 
 Jrt, [LS9.S] 
 
 (i9.S 
 
 approved : 
 
 k. K. 87 . . 526 
 
 1'. 1!. 47.S, 
 
 o4ti, 40.S 
 
 I, 7''{7, not 
 d County 
 
 481 
 
 4, distill- 
 ble, 19 A. 
 
 ;^")8, 643 
 
 [. L. 22.3, 
 : Baldwin 
 
 589 
 
 h., 22 O. 
 Bi-sed : 22 
 
 126, 842 
 
 . 1!. 3 C. 
 Queeu i\ 
 
 279, 289 
 
 8, follow- 
 '. R. 132. 210 
 followed ; 
 ^hainherM, 
 33, 482 
 
 referred 
 
 K. 57 ..4, 78 
 isidered : 
 
 \V. Co., 
 
 745, 1008 
 
 illianis i'. 
 
 1008 
 
 guished : 
 . Co., 16 
 
 253 
 
 221, 352, 
 Order of 
 R. 47.218, 544 
 
 North 
 , <listin- 
 3 Works 
 
 21 S. C. 
 609 
 
 Ber-Bro] 
 
 Benianliii 
 
 "£t.J!„/ki:"R.^J"""'"" "^ 
 
 Bidd/e v. Jloiid, (i |j, i^ s. •>• 
 Ross ( 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 Bro-Can] 
 
 Izlx 
 
 roniMK, 
 Munmpalil,/ of Xorth 
 
 713 
 
 Bird and liav 
 
 ,, , , ■ —'5, followed : 
 Kdwards, 11 R.(D(:e.)9,. 
 
 ami Hamard's Conlnicl, /,V ji) f T 
 
 Pl' '''■,f""';\'''''»«"'«"ieil : Martin v. 
 Chandlar, 2() (>. Ii. ,si 
 
 Bismmllr V. Lnay,„f, |5 Rev! ' Le'c^" 44' 
 
 X'PsT''.; ^ofeuntun r. VCn'onneau,' 
 
 BIwhford V. Mclinhi, 1!) S. c" R i.i " ' '<,„ 
 
 «. c. 20 s. (;. k.-m .... 
 
 BInihli-y v. Eastoii, 9 U C I I •'■? 
 speeially referred t., : Ak-rcer 'co."V 
 Mas.sey-riarnsCo., \{i }> 1; 17) 
 
 liol.;v(yi^, -A A. n. 167, followed': 
 
 .Mason (^ Jolmstou, 'JO A. R. 4I>.'. .,569 6.33 
 
 754 
 65 
 
 1024 
 
 888 
 955 
 
 983 
 
 >y V. M.l,a,,, 41 U. C. R. JOO, dis- 
 
 fio/w/ 
 
 89 
 936 
 
 tinguisjied : Regina r. Coslw, -J! 
 
 ",;''^'''„ .423, 7i 
 
 V. loronfo Railway Co., 22 A R 7s 
 
 affirmed : 24 S. 0. R. 715 . /. . .■.ri54, 92 
 Boom Co. V. Pdthr^on, 98 U. S. 403 fol. ' 
 
 lowed : Re Maepherson and City of 
 loronto, 26 O. R. ,-,j8 ... -ji (.go 
 
 Booth V /?n,sro<:, 2 Q. H. |). 49(i, f„lloweil .■ ' 
 
 Ko ]5utterheld, 14 V. R. 567 907 
 
 Boiiitictd and Wayn-k-k, y,V, .> o. 1! 488 
 
 specially referred to; i),-. ner Slater' 
 
 „ , -''<JR.375 243,,,,, 
 
 iJo//,/ V /?o »;<«,;,, 20 O. R. 404, approved : 
 
 Mewl)urM c. Maekelean, Ii) A I; 
 
 729 ■ 11'. (^,,. 
 
 Iir„d,/ y Walls, 17 Or. 699^ specially " "' 
 referred to: Dame /•. .Slater -'1 O 
 
 ^^••"S !.".-M3,9IS 
 
 liranljord, WhI,;-Ioo and l.ak,- Eric R W 
 Co. V. Hiillmaii, 18 A. 1! 
 affirmed : 1 9 S. C. R. ;{;j«i 
 
 COLUMN'. 
 
 Brodmcl: v. Broateh, 13 P. R. 15(51 _ (jjg. 
 tinguished: Mcllro- c. Mcllro'v 14 
 I'-H.264 .•*.',.* 9-7 
 
 Brown v. Commisnioncr for Bai/u-nvs 15 
 Ai)p. Cas. 240, referred t : 'I'he 
 Queen r. MeCurdy, 2 Ex. C. R. 311.. 275, 
 
 411,659 
 Brown v. D.foe, 24 O. R. 569. .SV. this 
 
 case in appeal, 21 A. R. 466 (j(j 
 
 Broicn v. London and Korth WenUm R W 
 Co., 4 H & S. 326, referred to : The 
 <^ieen v. Rank of Montreal, 1 K,x 
 
 ^■- '^- 1'"'* 86, 104 
 
 hrown w. McLean, 18 0. R. 533, distin- 
 gtnshed : McLeod ,, Wadland, 25 
 
 "• ''■ ^'^ 682, 939 
 
 lirown V. Moyer, 23 (). R. 222, reversed • 
 
 20 A. R. 509 ' 
 
 Rrownv. Orerbnnj, Ii Ex. 715, followed: 
 
 Ross r. Orr, 25 O. R. 595 
 Broim V. Toivn of Eamoaton, N wT 
 Reps. pt. 4, p. 39, affirmed: 2.' .s' 
 C. R. 308 
 
 Bnccl(urh,pnl; of y. Metropolitan Board 
 of tVorl:., L. R. 5 Ex. 221 ; L. R 5 
 H. L. 418, referred to : Puradis r. 
 Ihe (,liieen, 1 Ex. C. R. 191 
 
 and Straits of 
 
 344 
 481 
 
 1013 
 276 
 
 41.5, 
 
 114 
 
 Bn'wlyy. Robertson, I41'.R. 7,consi<lere.l ■ 
 
 1' easier r. Cooney, 15 P. R. 2I»() •'•>3 ■{.-)•• 
 
 Hnlhonr v. liroohe,, 23 O. R. 658, allirme,l" " ' " 
 21 A. R. 144 ,j-vj 
 
 lircton's Estate, /»V, 17 Ch. D. 416, com- 
 mented on : Kent /•. Kent, 20 1! 
 445 4s.) 
 
 Rridcnf V. Duncan. 7 Times L. R 51 1 re- 
 ferred to : Peer &{■(.. r. iVorth-\Ve.,t 
 Irausportatiou Co., 14 P. R. ,381 i)S'> 
 
 liridi,man,Rc, 16 P. Ii. 232, distinguished • 
 Re Ross, Cameron and Mallon Hi 
 I'. R. 482. 
 
 Ilrid,j,'water(%cs, F.iclory Co. v. Miirplw, 
 26 (). Ii. ,327, affirmed : 23 A. R. 66. i02, 
 
 Brisi'liois V. The Ihier-t, 1 -> si <' IJ 1.11 
 
 Canseau Marine R. W. Co. c The 
 (Vueen, 2 Kx. C. R. 1 13 278 
 
 Bu/l V. Imperial Fire Ins. Co., 14 0. R 
 322, affirmed : 15 A. R. 42! • 18 .S 
 C. R. 697 '... 5i9_67j 
 
 Bullock y. Downes, 9 H. L. C. 1, followecl ; ' 
 
 Rrahant v. Lalondo, 26 O. R. 379. ;,37fi, 1026 
 
 Bulmcr V. 7'hi Qncen, 3 Ex C R 184 ' 
 
 SaS. C. 23,S. C. R. 488. ■....'.. . ' -mG 
 
 Buutin.jy. Marriott, 19 Reav. I(i3, follow- 
 ed : Ostrom r. Alford, 24 O. R. 305 1037 
 
 Burgess y 'fully, 24 C. P. 549. distin- 
 guishei! : ,lones v. Paxton, 19 A 
 
 „ ^'''''^ '.: 368 
 
 Burroughs v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C R 293 
 
 affirmed : 20 S. C. R. 420. . 161, 303, 55« 
 Bn.sh, AV 14 A. R. 73, followed : Fellowes 
 ! '•. Ihe (.)ueen, 2 Kx. C. R. 42H 3Q 
 
 Caldwell, lie, 5 P. R. 217, followed : Re 
 
 Garbutt, 21 O. R 465 450 
 
 Camenm y. fr,V/fe, 24 Or. 8, approved: 
 i oung V. Midland R. \V. Co., 19 A 
 
 i>- 265 l^.;, j^g^ 
 
 Gamphell v. Holyland, 7 Ch. D. 166, fol-"' 
 lowed : SearletL v. Biniey, 15 P. R. 
 
 Campb II y Kinr,st„n and Rath Road Co ' 
 . . ■ '■"• -**•'> i'liifnied : 20 S. C. R. 
 
 ehois v. The tjueen, 15 S. C. H. 421 
 referre<l to : .Morin r. (Jueen, is's.' 
 
 C. R. 407 
 Brockville and Ottawa R. W, Co. v. Canada 
 Central R. W. Co., 7 P. R. 37-' 
 approved and followed : Weeyar r 
 (Jrand Trunk R, W,Co.,16 I'. H.371.' 5 
 
 fl-^i 605 
 
 Can,pl,ell v. Roche, 18 A. R. 646. ;?« this 
 case ni Supreme Court, 21 S C R 
 645, suh nom. Campl.ell r. Patterson! 
 
 141 
 
 267 
 
 887 
 
 Canada Central R. W, Co. v. The Qne.n 
 
 MM "^"J^ '-'•'• ''''''"■•■«'l to ; Peterson r. 
 ihe Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 67 
 
 Canada Cotton Co. y. Parmalee, 13 P r' 
 
 .. ■'. ill"'^'''^ ■ ''"■'■ker <'. Odette 16 
 1 . u, 69 
 
 1017 
 
 311 
 
 58 
 
Izz 
 
 Can-Cit] COLUMN-. 
 
 Canadian A,irkullui\il Coal and Cohni-.a- 
 lion 0(1. V. '/'/it (^iiiin, :i K.V. C. I!. 
 157, aliinned : 24 (S. C. R. 71.S. . .808, {),-)9 
 
 Canadian I'aci/ic/,'. W. Co. v. JMiinnon, 19 
 S. ('. H. -JIW, reversed : [ISOli] A 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC, 
 
 Oit-Ooo] COLUMN. 
 
 Cily Hank v. /larrou; 5 App. Cas. 004, 
 rcfcrivil to ; I'liriidia r. 'I'lu! Uiu'iin, 
 
 I i:x. <'. K. m uTr), 924 
 
 C/ai-lc V. /larhn; A',-, 25 O. R. 253, roversuil : 
 
 -'liO. R. 47 371 
 
 itJ .1. t. K. ()0(), d!stiiif(Ui.slicd ; City r/,„-l- .. ii i,. /> i. ,-,. ., , 
 
 of Halifax V. l!tMHesr2;{ S. C II ^'"''' V, //"'•'''.". J (' <>. R. h,!), c.Msidercd i 
 
 .340 ■ .i,ii li'i'iy r. Aiidc'isoii, IS A. I{. 247 .. 075 
 
 Canadian Pacijic /,'. IV. Co. v. Tnwux/up 
 ofC/iniham, i:> O. R. 405 ; 22 A. R. 
 ;W0, reversed : 25 S. C. R. 008 "l.'J 
 
 Cann v. /{noil, 10 (). R. 422, ;iffirmod : 20 
 
 O. R. 204 4;{| 
 
 Carter v. Ora-'ictl, 14 A. It., at pp. 700, 710, 
 dis.sunted from : I.srael c. Leitli, 20 
 (). 1!. ;i01 ;j7i) 
 
 Carter v. Hamilton, .S Kx. f. R. ;5ol, 
 
 afiiriDed; 23 S. C. R. 172 7S3 
 
 Carter V. Stul,lis, (,». R 1). 1 l(i, followed • 
 
 llollendur r. Ffoulke.s, Hi P. R. 
 
 --'•"' 224,380 
 
 Carter, .\/ary ,[■ Co. v. Tin: Qnii:n,1 Ex. 
 
 C. R. 120, affirmed : 18 .S. C. R. 
 
 "0'' 808 
 
 Carrer v. /licliardx,'!! Buav. 488, foIlow..cl : 
 
 (Jhattield r. Cunniiigiiain, 23 O. R. 
 
 '53 GOS 
 
 Cea.'tar v. Cartii'ri<i)il, 12 U. O, R. .341, 
 
 commented on : Mefiill r. l.icenHe 
 
 Commissioners of Braiitford, 21 (). 
 
 1^- '"'i"' 500 
 
 Central Hank v. (/orlmiil, -20 O. R. 142, 
 
 aliirnied : 18 A. R. 43S si), 1 30 
 
 Central Jliiu/cofCaHadu, /,'< , li'nf.ion's ( Vtw, 
 
 15 R, R. 427, allirmed ; Hi I'. R. ,-).-,! jJSC 
 Certain Sta/nlc.'i ofl/ic /'rorinn- of .\/anit,ilta 
 
 relal'uKj to Ednratiun, In re, 22 S. C. 
 
 R. 577, reversed : [1895] A. '!. 202, 
 
 sni) num. ISrophy r. Attoriiey- 
 
 tJencral of Manitoba 171 
 
 Cfiaf/non v. Normand, 10 S. C. R. (ilU, 
 
 referred to : Lariviere r. Sehool 
 
 Commissioners for Three Riveis ''3 
 
 «. C. R. 723 ". 95-, 
 
 Chalnicr.'i v. Virlurx. 18 L. T. N. ,S. 481, 
 followed : Moyle c. Kdniuiids, 24 
 O. R. 479 474 
 
 C/iambcr.'iv.Kilchui, 10 P. R.219,a(Hrmed- 
 
 17R. R.3 S8I 
 
 Chaimian v. Ni-.inll, 14 P. R. 20S, f(jllowed : 
 
 Mitehell r. Lister, 21 O. R. 318 241 
 
 Cherry v. T/wmmin, L. R, 7 Q. R. -,73, 
 followed : (Jlford c. Rresse, 1 P. r' 
 •'■^- 178,815 
 
 Clirislir V. City (if Turanhi, 25 (). R. 425 
 
 allirmed : 25 O. R. 000 .". .' .fjo 
 
 Chridii' and Toronto Ju-iction, /i'l:, 24 
 R. 443, allirmed ; 22 A. R. 21 ; •>.-, 
 ^- <'-H. .551 .30, ^S 088 
 
 Church V. ('iti/ of Ottawa, 25 O. R. 298 
 
 allirmed' : 22 A. R. 318 ' 322 
 
 Citizens In.s. Co. v. /\ir-<»!i:^, 7. App. Cas. 
 90, followed : Findley u. Fire Insur 
 
 Clar/c ini-l Toim-fhip «f //award, A'c, 10 A. 
 R. 72, f(,llowe(i : (Jonfederation Life 
 Ass. .elation r. Townsliipof Howard, 
 iJ"'<>- H- 1!»7 002,700 
 
 Clar/;\. Cniijhton, 14 P. R.34, reversed in 
 
 part : 14 P. R. !(,(» 232, 910 
 
 Clarice and llolmis, /,V, 15 P. 1!. 209, 
 
 allirmed : 10 P. I!. 94 232, 904 
 
 Clarb V. A/anhnuall, 20 O. R. 504, not 
 followed : Kent c. Kent, 20 0. R. 
 
 445 
 
 1)28 
 
 anee Company of Aortli Anieriea. 
 25 0. R. 515 r,.. 
 
 520 
 
 Clarb- V. The Qn<ni, 1 Kx. C. R. 1 82, re- 
 ferreil to : Peterson r. The (,»ueen, 2 
 
 Kx. C. R. 07 311 
 
 Clark-Kon v. M<-.ya.sli:r, 22 A. It. 138, re- 
 
 verse<l : 25 .S. C;. R. 90 4, 74, 1 12 
 
 Cleaar v. MnlnnI AV.sove Fwal /Jfi A.^.so- 
 ciatio,,, [1892] I (,). R. 147, dis- 
 tinguislied : .MeKinnon i\ Limdv. 
 
 21 A. R. 500 :\ 1041 
 
 CWc'v. [ktnl.i,, 12.\L & \V. ,-,1, referred 
 to : Tlie Queen r. Bank of Montreal, 
 
 • J"^^-*^ '!■ 151 80, 104 
 
 Chns, V. C.'man, 10 P. R. 490, hnive to 
 
 appep .(.'•■iscd : 10 P. R, ,')41 403 
 
 Cuat.sirorth^ ■-'('/■«,», 24 <). R. 185. ,SV,' Re 
 Feri,'ii ,11, Rennett r. Coatsworth, 
 
 25 0. R. 591 ; 1025 
 
 Colihun V. Canadian />ai:i/l<- /!. ]V. To , 20 
 
 (). I:. 7.32, allirireii: 23 A. R. 1 IT)." . . 125, 
 
 841 
 Cojjey V. ^inuir, 25 (). R, 22, allirmed : 22 
 
 ^^' '^' '-'•'!• 41, 0,39 
 
 Cok V. /'ortnim, 19 A. R. HI, distin- 
 guislied : Lawson r. Me(ieoeh, 20 
 
 A.K. 404 ...7.3,414 
 
 Colt-man v. City of Toronto, 15 I'. R. 27, 
 allirmed on other grounds : 15 P r' 
 
 '25 ; 405 
 
 Colonial /lan/co/ Au.itralasla v. iVillan L 
 R. 5 1". C. 417, foRowcd : Rofrina ,■ 
 
 C'lnerty, 20 U. R. 51 ,-,-,-, 
 
 Cummi.rcial /kmk v. ll',7.so«, 3 1'). it A. 257, 
 eonsidered : "an 'lell c. I'attersou! 
 21 ,S. C. I 
 
 Cumniimoner.1 lor <k' (Jiictn Victoria 
 Xiwjaru "ull.-< '•, v. J /award, 23 
 l>. R. I, ilIiiniLd : 23 A. R. .3,-),-.. . . . ,309 
 
 Confikration /J,, A-i-sociallon v. CIti/ of 
 Toronto, -M O. R. 0.13, allirmed- 22 
 '^- '■'• Hi<i 44,45 
 
 Conntil V. Tuwn of /'rrscaii, 20 A R 49 
 
 allirmed : 22 S. C. R. 147 ......'...' .' 739 
 
 Connoth! v. Mirrr,-!l, \ 1 P. p,. |,S7, .-liiirnied : 
 
 I* ''••<• 270 3y,j 
 
 70 
 
 Cooper v. /Hxoii, 10 A. R. .-)(), .iistinguished : 
 Ball c. Teunaut, 25 U. R. 50 
 
 08 
 
CASES APFIKMBD, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 Cas, CM, 
 
 UT^, 924 
 
 ■evorsuil : 
 
 371 
 
 nlloWfd : 
 
 L'...7, .m, 770 
 isidercd : 
 t. 247 . . (i75 
 h'c, KiA. 
 tion Life 
 Ilowiiid, 
 
 U()2, 706 
 
 i'crsed in 
 
 2M2, 010 
 
 . 2(i!), 
 
 2;i2, !)04 
 
 504, not 
 O. \i. 
 400, 02.S 
 
 IS2, I't". 
 li>ucun, 2 
 
 :m 
 
 138, rc- 
 ....4,74, 112 
 
 iff. Akso- 
 
 47, dis- 
 Luudy, 
 
 1041 
 
 referred 
 (intreal, 
 
 .S(i, 104 
 
 leiivu to 
 
 I 40;5 
 
 Sec Ke 
 ;.s\vortli, 
 
 102,-) 
 
 Co., 20 
 
 . iir)....i2,'), 
 
 841 
 iicd : 22 
 
 41, o;i9 
 
 distin- 
 )cli, 20 
 
 7;{, 414 
 
 I!. 27, 
 
 r, V. R. 
 
 4or) 
 
 '/,iii, I,. 
 
 ■yiiia r. 
 
 O'}') 
 
 A. 2.-)7, 
 tenson, 
 
 70 
 
 '^ictoria 
 ird, 2;{ 
 .■).■).... ,",00 
 Uih/ of 
 ed : 22 
 
 44, 45 
 
 R. 40, 
 
 7.S0 
 
 riiied : 
 
 .'iOO 
 
 islied : 
 08 
 
 Ooo-Ore] columx. i Oro-Dek] 
 
 Cooper V PhM.., L. Ii. 2 H. L. 148, cou- 
 H-jluied and followed : JJaldwin ,. 
 Kiiigdtoiie, IH A. R. (i;{ 
 
 Gorham V. Kin,,..!,,,. 17 O. R. 432," eon- 
 •siUoied : hdni,.ndH r. Hamilton Pro- 
 vident and Loan Society, IS A. K. 
 ' .•i22, ,-.4;}, 609 
 
 Ixzl 
 
 COLUMN, 
 
 589 
 
 , TTT ";~ «|>e(!ially n.'ferred 
 
 to : l.url.cr /■. ( 'lark, 20 (). |{. .-,2^', . 54,'?, 
 n , „ 001, 103(1 
 
 Conuackv. /i.,4y,:i IMJ. & ,|. ,-,7, cih- 
 
 cussed: l<ord ,■. Mason, 15 1' R 34-> 
 OoniUh, /A, (i ,). It. ...,-,,,_ „„j f„,i,,^^^,^, ^ -; 
 
 re ,^ear and Wooil.s, 23 O. R. 471, . . 
 
 909 
 014 
 
 OornUh 
 
 lieggiu 
 
 ,7 followed : 
 
 Manes, 22 (). R. 443 
 
 234 
 
 226 
 
 VMsA V. Clark; L, R. I4 Kq. 184. dis- 
 tinguishe,! : Tennant -•. (iailow, 25 
 
 O. R. 50 
 
 ConiwiiUi.f 
 
 Co 
 
 014 
 
 405 
 
 ,732 
 
 235 
 
 ^yy. J ham':.-< Ironworks Co., L. H. .'J Q. 
 li. 131, considered:, Stewart c. ,Seul- 
 
 *'.orp, 25 O. R. 544 05 S^S 
 
 Cow.inemiv. Git,/ of London Fire Ins. "co ' 
 ]~ \^-''^-^' Mlowed : Heaslip,;: 
 Hea.sliiJ, 14 P. R. 21 
 
 Couture v. nourlvml, 21 S. C. r! 'I'sLfol'- 
 
 lowed : Williams v. Irvine, 22 S. C. 
 
 ^- '0*5 ' '.g.)9 943 
 
 Coventry V. MrLean.-22 0. R. 1, approved • ' 
 
 Coventry v. McLean, 21 A. R. 170.. 417, 598 
 Cowan y. /ies.erer, 5 (). R. (j24, followed • 
 
 0.7A 'i> ,"'?,"'" ^-J'^nernd Trusts Co., 
 
 Cowper K,,«,: y. Local IS, [^'fhrArton, 
 14 App. Cas. 1.1-,, referred to: 
 Straits of Canseau Marine R. \V 
 Co. r. The (,)ueen, 2 K.\. C. R.'li;}' 
 
 Coxhead y.A>k/,ard..,-2 C. R. ,-,(i9, followed' 
 Ross V. Bucke, 21 O. R. 092 
 
 Cradockv. Pip,-r, 1 Macn. & (i. (i(J4 fol" 
 lowed : lie Mimico Sewer Pipe and 
 J riok Manufacturing Co., Pearson's 
 Case, 20 0. R -'89 149, 238 908 
 
 ~~ TTT: ^id Strachaii u. 
 
 Kuttan, 1.) P. R. 109 -137 243 
 
 Grainy /{apple, 22 O. R. 519, reversed: ' 
 20 A. R. 201 
 
 I Cro/l ami Peterborough, In re, 17 A. R. 
 I 21, applied: In re Pounder and 
 
 Village of Winchester, 19 A. 1!. 
 
 "^^ 122, 5,19, 697 
 
 Crooks V. Towmhip of hUlire, 20 A |{ ""5 
 
 See S. C. 23 ,S. C. R. 420. . .'. . .'."oV, 710 
 Cro,<keui, U,., lOO. R. 207, dissented from • ' 
 
 Pratt ,: Riumell, 210. R. 1 . . . .377, 006 
 Croicther v. Eli/ooil, .'M Cli. 1). 091, fol 
 
 lowed : Kniekerhocker Co. v. Ratz 
 
 10 P. R. 101 _; 
 
 Guerrier y. White, 12 P. R. -,71, diatin- 
 guished : Cousineau v. Park, 15 P. 
 R. 37 
 
 Cumberland v. Ke...n.s, 18 O. R. 151 ; 17 
 A. R. 281, cinmented on and dis- 
 tinguished : Ro Graydon and Ham- 
 mill, 20 O. R. 190 .-,7, ,S73^ ggjj 
 
 Gumming v. Landed Bankin,/ and Loan ' 
 Co., 10 O. R. 420, affirmed: 20 O 
 R. .382; reversed: 10 A. R. 447- re- 
 stored : 22 S. C. R. 240 ... .441, 989, 992 
 
 Cumming.^ and County of Carleton, Re, 25 
 
 O. R. 607, . -Msed :26U. R. 1..'.688 828 
 
 Curtis y. Sheffield, 20 Ch. D. 308, followed : ' 
 
 (hanbers v. Kitchen, 10 P. R. 219 4.33, 
 
 Cushing v. Dupuy, 5 App. (Jas. 400, fol- 
 lowed : .Seath /•. Hagar, 18 S. C. R. 
 
 ''" 84,956 
 
 .. ~. ~ and Tennant v. 
 
 Union Rank of Canada, [1804] A. 
 
 340 
 
 Gram v. Ilyan 24 0. R. .JOO, affirmed in 
 part and reversed in part : 25 0. K. 
 
 918 
 
 .■)24. 
 
 453, 733, 1003 
 
 Crawconry. Salter, 18 Ch. D. ,30, followed: 
 ^\l»«eo I'. The (^uccn, 3 E.x. C. R, 
 
 304 
 
 .309, 912 
 
 C. 31 . 
 
 Darner y. Bushy, 5 P. R. 350, foVlowed ■ 
 beane v. Cofl'ey, 15 P. R. 112. . . 
 
 nanaher y. Little, 13 P. R. 301, followed : 
 i-lett V. Way, 14 P. R. 312 
 
 Dancey v. Gra7id Trunk II. IP. Co., 20 i) 
 R. 00,3, varied : 19 A. R. 604.' . . . pi 
 
 Daniels v. Burford, 10 U. C. R. 478, com" 
 mented on : McUiU v. License Com- 
 missioners of Brantford, 21 R 
 005 
 
 Darby v. Crowland, 38 U. C. R. 338, eoii". 
 sidered: Williams v. Richards, 23 
 O. R. 651 
 
 Davenport v. The Queen, 3 App. Cas. 115 
 j-eferred to : Peterson v. The Queen, 
 3 h,x. C. R. 67 305, -,88 
 
 Dareyy. Lewis, 18 U. C. R., at p. 30, fol- 
 lowed : Scarth v. (>ntario Power and 
 ilatOo., 24 0. R. ye... 
 
 Dai'ies v. 
 19 
 
 162 
 39 
 
 215 
 27, 842 
 
 560 
 
 Crawford v. liroddy, 25 O. R. 035, reversed 
 
 m part : 22 A. R. 307. . . .384, 1020, 1024 
 
 Crawford v. Trotter, 4 Madd. ,^(il, dia- 
 tinguishe.l : Fuller r. Anderson, 20 
 
 0. R. 42! 
 
 1020 
 
 Crewson v. Grand Trunk N. (F. Co., 27 U. 
 C. R. 68, considered ; Williams r. 
 Richards, 23 O. R. 651 1008 
 
 . r'lard, 21 0. R. 431, reverse,; 
 
 I A. U. 432 ..., 
 
 Daries y. Mann, 10 M. & W.' 546," applied 
 and_ followed : Cram r. Kyan, 24 O. 
 li. t)U(J 
 
 Dayy Day, 17 A. R. IST.'spe'cially 're'- 
 If red to: Gibbons -■, Tomlinson, 21 
 
 1008 
 
 454 
 
 O. R. 489. 
 
 Day y. Me Lea, 22 Q. B. D. 010, applied": 
 Mason c. . Johnston, 20 A R 412 '■ 
 
 Dean y. Mar Dowel I, SCh. D. 345, followed:" 
 Mitchell V. Lister, 21 0. R. 318. . 
 
 DeKuyper v. Van Dulken, 4 Ex. C R 7l' 
 alfirra«d: 24 8. C. R, 114 ' ' ' 
 
 71 
 
 453 
 
 466 
 
 :, 5G9 
 
 778 
 
 969 
 
 ^^m 
 i ^ij 
 
Izxfi 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 COLUiMN. 
 
 xJerocliii-^v. Toiiv. of Cornwall, 53 (). K. 
 .V)5, attirnied : 21 A. R "JV't • "'4 S 
 C. W. ;{01 '."...■ 
 
 D'Uormnsriev v. </ny, 10 S}. B. I). 13, fol- 
 lowfiil : Smith /■. SJlvortliorne, 15 
 
 Dick 
 
 t". I!. 197 ... 
 
 EU-Foo] 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 EUk V //opper, 3 H. * N, 7(!8, fi.llowod ■ 
 
 RosM r. On; 2."j 0. K. .59." 
 
 h'lsn.s V. ll'ill, 
 
 m 
 
 17f: iJOo 
 
 V. Hill,nnM, r>i L, J. Oli. .'MO, fcl- 
 lowed: Holiortw r. Donoviu,. 10 P |; 
 
 4r,(5 • ,.; 
 
 Flemi„,;,-ityofVon'n'to ll A.i: ll'/'is; ""' "^ ""■''""■'' '' '''■ ''- . 
 
 31''^ >)n 0(17 ., ,, ■ , •' 
 
 ■■•. /.iirwill, ;MJiH'.41(t,diHliiigiiiHl;,M|- 
 
 (.>hv(M' (•. L,kUU', '_',i (). i;. -JS ,,S7)S, 100,-, 
 
 Ihxon V. nalhmon awl />,>/owar I!. II'. (',)., I 
 
 I .Miickcy 7fS, refci red tu : 'I'lio (^iiuol! 
 '•. MuCuidy, '2 K\. C. li. .-.'ll 
 
 Dixon V. lUchdi, I, A'ani/ii/ioii Co., I ') A. R 
 fi47, iilliiiiiud : 18 S. C. R. 7o.l . . . .' 
 
 ;is<j : 
 
 mi 
 
 151 
 
 935 
 
 Doe. (I. Andir-imi. v. Todd, 2 U. ('. I!. 82, 
 
 coiisidt'icd : Mticdoiioll r. I'n.'eir' 
 
 (bleary v. Ruivvll, 23 S. C. R. |ol . .' 1030 
 
 Doe d. Devliie v. WlUi,,,., 10 Moo. I'. C. .Wi 
 
 sipiM^iMilyrefuridlti.: Hyaft/'. .Mills' 
 
 , -""-IJ-.-Wl 312,330 
 
 ^.-^r V :in,d !0 P. R. |,r, f„ll„wo<l : 
 
 J IjiKinuleai, r Herlici t, J i I'. R. 420 210 
 Donndh/, li.., 2(1 (-. p. „jr,^ followed 
 
 Kogu; ,. ■. oul^on, 1:4 (». R. 240 . . 5S3, 0-),S 
 Dono'uny H,?d,m,: 14 P li. 100, .listiii- 
 truislKsJ: ReSimiiaOilCo., 15 P. R, 
 
 J O^ 
 
 Du/rmte. v. />;,«,», kj s. C. R. ,-)<)0,"f()l- 
 lowed ; Lefouiituii 1: VOronneau "•' 
 i^. C. R. 203 • " 
 
 Dmiyanv. LomlonandCanmUan Loan and 
 ^r/';'"'/ Co., 19 (). R. 272, levurscd: 
 18 A. R. .305; restored: 20 S (' R 
 481 ; reversed : 1 181)3] A, C. 500.'. 1.S7, 991 
 
 Duncan vRoiier., 15 (». R. (J9(,, reversed : 
 10 A. R. 3; restored: 18 S. (;. R 
 
 „ ^'^,; :«i, 1010 
 
 Dunn V Dunn, 1 C. L. J. 239, specially 
 referred to : McVica.^ r. M<,> Laugh] ill, 
 
 ^ 16P. R. 450 :...; 567 
 
 Dunmtv Harrix, 14 P. R. 437, followed: 
 
 Adams I). Anderson, 10 P. R. 157, 573 
 
 Dwyerv. Town of Port Arthnr, 19 A K 
 
 o55, reversed : 22 S. V. E. 241 . . 122 234 
 
 DyHon,]le, 65 L. T. N. S. 488, followed : 
 
 Hogabooni i\ (Jillies, 16 P. R. 402. 11 
 
 544 S02 
 
 Ebe.Hs V. Broolf., Ih, 10 P. \\. 257- 11 ' 
 P. R. 290, referred to and followed • 
 Aldneh v. Aldrich, 23 (). R. ,374. ..305 56s 
 
 Ebrardv. (laHxhr, 2S Ch. I). 232, followed : ' 
 Anderson r. Quehee Fire Ins. Co., 
 
 hrdmuHw Town nf WaJhrlon, 22 (». R 
 I 093, aihrnied : 20 A. R 144 • ■'•( s 
 
 C. I!. 352 ' "■ ' 
 
 1-7 I /,V(V/(.so« V. liriDid, 14 A. R. Oi t, iijg. 
 ' .■igllislK",; :('oll'ey ,•. Se.uie 'V> O 
 
 '"• ^- 40, (I3S 
 
 Kftixund Jl'hiu .lev, A't,.|2lJ. < ;. R. :,23 
 '/nest ■-.lied : li. ■■(. TownHliilw ',',( 
 i;i'niniy and 'I'ilf.nry West 18 A 
 
 ^'■^^' 704 
 
 /v'V,/,v N. Ktwj, 23 O. R. 404, reversed : 21 
 
 A. R. 519, 24 .S. ('. R, ;i50 387, lO"" 
 
 l-:mnxv Wall, 2 (). R. I(i0, consiilere,! ; 
 MulIiL n r. 'I'lioiupsoii, 23 (). R, 
 ■'*"* 400, 884 
 
 Ewanv. <lo,,>„„, 13 (Jr. 40, diseii.ssed ■ 
 Ciiniiiiiiiy r. Landed Ranking and 
 Loan ( ., 22 S. ('. R. 240 .... .441, 989 
 
 Exlvy V. I),.y, i , P. H. ;^,-;3. g,i<: Exley r. ' 
 
 00 
 
 Dey(No. 2!, 15 P. R. 405 
 
 Fairlmirn and S,nidn-lch MasI, J!,, 32 V 
 C. R. 573, (iistinguislied : Regina r. 
 Cosl.y, 21 (), R. 591 . . ,423, 789 
 
 Faiiimji'v and Murriitlmni, III , lOO. R. 722 
 distinguished : Sweeny r. 'fown"of 
 Sndth'.s Fall.^, 22 A. R. 429 40, 723 
 
 Farwrll V. ThtQni'in, 3 IC.x. (J. R •>7i ' 
 
 allirined : 22 S. C. R. 553 '...'. ,",3!)4, 804 
 
 Ftndon Fall.-< v. Vivloria It. W. C<).,'l\\V,r. ' 
 
 4, followed : City of 'I'oiouto ,• 
 
 Lorseh, 24 (). R. 227 560,715, 1013 
 
 Ferguson v. Carman, 20 U. C. R. 20 s|,eei 
 ally^referred to : Beaty r. Haekett, 
 
 Finch x.Cihay, 10 A. R. 484, followed- 
 Cotlin V. Nortii American Land Co 
 21 O. R. 80 
 
 Finkh 
 
 02 
 
 021 
 
 589 
 
 !;"> P. R. 1.32 
 
 217 
 
 Ecchmt.sliqne.^ ,le Si. Sulpice. de Montreal "v 
 ttUi of Montreal, 10 X. C R 400 
 distinguislied: Armstrong „. Auger,' 
 
 ■•21 tj. K. <),S gy g_g 
 
 Edmonds y. HcimUlon :;-or:d.nl ami Loan ' 
 'loritly \0 ';. 077, varied: 18 
 
 P,,. '^•f'-"7 .S22, 669 
 
 Mt.s V. C/«„.„., 2, o. R. 227, atTirn.e<l : 
 
 '""• '^' 2"' .... 1007 
 
 El^'i V. K 
 
 mvinvwl, 1 Kx. D. 15 
 
 dered : Mart 
 R. 559 
 
 )/, consi- 
 
 in i\ McMullen, 18 A. 
 
 I'lnkk V. Lut:, 14 P. R. 446, distinguished • 
 
 Laton ('. norland, 15 ]'. R. 138. .508, 58! 
 
 Fisknn V. Chandjerlain, 9 P. R. 283, fol- ' 
 lowed: Canipliell t'. Scott, 141'. R. 
 
 „. , -"'"^ • .340,402 
 
 Insken v. G/iandiirlain, 9 P. R. 283, hiuI 
 cases foUo'ving it over-ruled :' Bea- 
 ton r. (ilo; ■ intingCo., 10 P. R. 
 
 -**' 340, 402 
 
 J-dztjeraldwCi' , i- awn, 25 O. R 058 
 
 iiWrmed . A. R. 297 ' 70;} 
 
 Fleming \ Ci'n (,.' Toronto, -MO R -,47 
 
 aflii^i«ed : I'j A. R. 318.. 20, 47, 207, 724 
 Flureau v. Thomlnll, 2 Win. Rl 107s 
 
 referni 1,: Hulmor r. The'Queen! 
 
 3 h:,. C. r. H4 .,,r 
 
 Footuer v. / 
 
 Hl< 
 
 .HI, 475 
 
 Bradsliaw 
 Hoard, 2-; 
 
 Min. 319, followed ; 
 ptist Foreign Mi.ssion 
 R. 351 
 
 Fullit 
 
 741 
 
COLUMN. 
 
 iillowod ; 
 481 
 
 :m, f.:t- 
 
 , KiP. I,. 
 
 . . . . i/t r>ij.j 
 
 :i Ex. a. 
 
 «15 
 
 ;;iiitil:oii : 
 
 S ..,S7«, 100.-) 
 
 '2 (). I!. 
 
 \ ; •-';( s. 
 
 .■!'.i() 
 
 i 1. (lis- 
 ■, 2,-) O. 
 
 40, MH 
 
 if, -CM. 
 liiiw (.■) 
 , IM A. 
 
 704 
 
 w,\ : '21 
 ...HHT, lO-.'i! 
 (loi'i'd ■ 
 (». It, 
 
 4(10, S,S4 
 
 :ilH.sc(l : 
 lig iind 
 ....441, 989 
 xley (1. 
 
 00 
 
 :V2 V. 
 «in:i ,'. 
 ... 42,S, 7S9 
 i. 7-.'2, 
 iwii ot 
 .... 40, 72U 
 . 271, 
 ....'t94, H04 
 29 (Jr. 
 ito r. 
 li, 715, l()i;{ 
 
 spool - 
 ukott, 
 
 )wo(i : 
 ilCo., 
 
 (i2 
 
 aliod : 
 
 < ■ ■ i'XiS, .'j,S9 
 I, fol- 
 I'. K. 
 
 ...■{4(i, 402 
 , and 
 
 lioa- 
 l'. H. 
 ■ '■iW, 402 
 
 (iSH, 
 
 .... 70.S 
 
 r,4-;, 
 
 , -'07, 724 
 
 078, 
 leeii, 
 
 .... :U5 
 vcd : 
 isioii 
 .... 741 
 
 For-Oil] 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED. ETO. 
 roLiTMN. j Qil-Ora] 
 
 Miou.d :>,.,<;.;: ,r^,;:!;!;;;;VV,:;;;;' 
 
 ;e...-odt .. d,,.j,,,;Qj:;; 
 
 ,,, ^•H-247 :.:.vr:::::::.: 675 
 
 (nhsv IWI:ins,\) Ka.st 12, rofer.vd to: 
 I he Quceii -•. B.ank of Montreal, 1 
 
 ""'•^'■"' '54 :,so, io;{ 
 
 . . . r..s7 
 
 .'j(i4, atliiMicil • .., 
 
 M..K,., !, li ■,.^'"\ ''«ti'i.i,'iiislKid : 
 
 SSnoV.'i""2;;i '^:'::':" '• ^-, .,„ 
 
 Fninhaufy. r.V-.sr.,„>,-, 8 Times L. |; V,,"i ' ' ' 
 followed: Davidson,..,,,,,,,, j',^ V': 
 
 /'mfton* V. V'nd,i.„-M, 1,-, 1'. I;" 204" .„,' "'"'" 
 
 of Colohestor ,Soi,ti, r. V„|,„l ^J s 
 *.>■ M, ()22 
 
 Freehold, Luiiii do. v Ihuil- „f c 
 
 1 J , - *' followoi ; Ci-oene 
 .u,d,So„,sC... r.Castloman,2r,(Mt 
 
 I ()- 
 
 /V/A'c V. Ali..mniler,.rt L T X S ii^ 
 
 l>.iiik /■. Ontario C,,.,} (•„,, |,, ,, j,^ 
 
 </:.7«e.s V. /;o««o,- .-i;} \V.i;.',u; foUowod"-^' ^'^ 
 Damo r. .Slater, 21 (). K. .-i;.,.. 04;, „,. 
 
 Uarlmit AV, 21 (). I{. 179,a(Krn,ed : 2l'o ' ' ^ 
 ti. 4b.'5 ' ..., 
 
 Uiiuirax V. DesllHs, Cassels' Di.. 117 
 (Wis' Dig., 2nd ed., 212."'follow! 
 e<i : Lossutte (\ Dunn, 18 S. C. |;. 
 
 "^ ;w 
 
 '.'tnltcs/one v. (.'mm, 1 ('I,. ('|, .)12 eon 
 sidored ; Scarlett ,-. liirney, I.", F 
 
 U. 28;j 
 
 ;WI, 944 
 
 078 
 
 810 
 
 07, l;« 
 
 '.■Uss V r,V«,</ 12 1'. K. 480, approved • 
 .MratfonK.as Co. /■. (Jordon, 14 I' 
 Iv. 4(17 ■ -o- 
 
 irh 
 
 Hynie, !.-> P. R. 4 f ;i,; 
 
 '.'oddard V. OoHhoii, 10 A. li. I, followed • 
 
 In re Sear and Wood.s, 2;i (). I!. 474 (il4 
 (lodmnand Cihi of Tnronto, /V, 16 \ R 
 
 402, affirmed : 18 S. C. K. .•}(!.. .■...' s29 
 
 ,71 TT- followed: In re 
 
 I liomas s 1-ieense, 26 (). \\. 448 500 
 
 (lold Ore. liul,ieH„„ Co. v. J'an; riS92| 
 
 Pike, loP. R. 164 -.jj, .,j 
 
 (.'ooda/U: 'lurro,r., 7 fj,-. 449, eonsi.Iered :' 
 
 Scarlett /■. Miriiey, |,-, p. R. .,si;j ^.-^ 
 
 dooderham y Cily of Toronto. 21 O. R.' 
 
 I-'O, afhrmed; 19 A. R. 0H....9.TO, Kill 
 
 -TTT^Tj i^.TT ^■'i""^^'"' • *^''""erton 
 '.Miller, 2(,0, li. .-jo ;«7, 498, 1004 
 
 - ;; ; and m City of To- 
 
 lonto /•. Lorscb, 24 (). R. 227. . ,.566, 71,5, 
 
 'l(»i;! 
 
 ^r^JOordo,,^ V. DmUon, 24 O. R, 570, affirmed 
 
 (lardne^ v. Oraer, 1 ^^ & F. ;io9, appro^■od ': ' U' ^^^' --^"'l "''^ver^e^l i"' I.art : 22 A 
 
 •Sangster .. Katon, 2.", (). r! '78 . rm, 7.S7 ,. , ^^^ ■"■' -"■•^^ •'«•% (i44. 798, 97" 
 
 7'W '""''"« V. O'lirkn, Re, U P R ou- 
 f/«Wcs and WlUon, lie, 2 Ch. CI,. 447 " P/^V'^'l and fodowed : 'Rc Cla^k ■" 
 
 'i|>proved and foll<,we,l : McKo,. ,.' 
 "'""'" : Hamlin ,•. {Jonnidlv, l(i p' 
 
 ,, , ,, '...L';w, 9or>. 
 
 (.eiidroii V. McD.mnall, Cas.sels' Dia '^-n,! 
 
 ed., 429 followed: Kinglufrn , 
 
 Larue, 22, S. (!. U. .•U7.... <,45 
 
 (hhhomv McDonnid, 18 A. R. 159, allirm- 
 
 eil : lO .S. (_'. IJ. ;'87 -., 
 
 Oilma V. Ton',ul,;,> of North Kastho,n.^2\ 
 
 A. R. ,5()4,aflirmed:24.S. (■. R.707 714 
 (hlhert V. aUman, 16 S. (!, [{, ,jj,, . 
 
 followed : J),, 
 
 »54 
 
 nuijion 
 
 Salvage and Wreck imkCo. r. Pnr.v,, 
 '-!0S. (,'. R. 20,S : • j,-^ 
 
 u I , -— '■'■ferredto: Lariviere 
 '•. .>oliool (.ommi,ssioner,s for 'J'hroe 
 Kivers, 2:1s 'J. \\. 72;j 
 
 955 
 
 Barber, 26 O. \\, 47 
 r/crdoav. Phiini,s,n P. R.';;40.' foHowe,! \ "' 
 Campl.ell ,•. Soott, 14 P. R. 20;?. . . . ;?4,j 
 
 Core DutrirUMFire L,.. Co. v. Samo, '"■ 
 - S. U R. 411 applied : Dunloi) „. 
 L.sl.orne ami Ifibbert Farmers' 
 Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 22 A. R."m -,Vi 
 
 Re Butterlield, 14 P. R. ,'567 90- 
 
 Gosnell V. Toronto A'. ,r. r>o o] a p' ' ' 
 
 ')0.1, .•vftirmed : 24 .S. C. R.7,82 ' '' tw« 
 
 ^o»Wv. ffope lure, 21 0. R. 624," Ve' ' 
 
 ver,,ed : 20 A. R. .347 ' 4^, .,- 
 
 Oourley y. Pnm.o//, L. R. S O, P s^io ' 
 
 gW..= Re^...l„,.p,.,^ 
 
 ''''"'"::!.:i-^^:!!:'''^^":.R-4i5;appro;;d'' 
 
 andf<dlow..:Mina;rMS;ald: 
 
 14 1'. li. 499 
 
 579 
 
Ixxlv 
 
 Qra-Ham] column. 
 
 (Imml Trunk /{. W. Co. v. Romihenier, 
 !IS. C. I!, .-ill, followed: Siblalll r. 
 <ir;iii(l Tniiik R. VV. Vak. Trfinayiif 
 '•. tiraiid 'IViiiik K. W. Cci., is A. 
 K. 1H4, 20 S. C. I!, 2,-.i» S4(i 
 
 (I mat /ft, -M (). f!. |>_'0: ,S',,. S. O.. L'li O. 
 
 •i- 4.S.-, .-,.,; 
 
 (//•«/,/ V. k'n-i/du, \:H). li. I). M02, folio we. 1 : 
 
 Solliies r. Stiitronl, |(i P. R, 7,S .".70 
 
 (Irant v. Xorlhn-n Prirl/ir Jmirtion /{. ir. 
 r'o., '22 (). H. (14,-,, aitinned: L'l A. 
 R. ;{22, 24 S. C. R. ,-,4(i i._.:}, S40 
 
 Grant v. /'<o/)I,'.h Loan ami HeiHiiil Co., 
 17 A. I!, 8.">, iitfiniied : 18 S. (". K. 
 202 .-y.V.), (i-2 
 
 Qraydoii, and llamniill, /,'r, 20 O. R. 190, 
 followed : Annstroiit; v. Aucer, 21 
 •^•^^•"■^ ....57,87S 
 
 (••vwi V. T/ionilon, 9 C. L. T. i;i!», diatin- 
 guished: (ieiienil Klectrie Co. ,•. 
 Victor!,'! Klecti-ie Lijr|,( Co. of Lind- 
 say, 10 1'. R. 47(i, r.2!J 70(5,701 
 
 Ofiffin V. hlniis/on and I'nuliroh: /,'. ||'. 
 C'o., 17 0. R.,at p. 005, dissented 
 fi-oiii : Churcl! -■. Lintou, 25 O. R. 
 
 <lnndi,!iy. JllnL-te, 19 X. S. Rep. 27. an'- 
 proved and followed: Miller !• Du'r- 
 «a«, 21 S. C. R. ;« 57S, 8.J1 
 
 i^i-uUcd V. Toronto II. 11". To., 24 |{ 
 08.% adinned : 21 A. It. 578 ; 24 s! 
 (j. li. 570 328 0;^7 
 
 Om-m:ii v. .Small, [1891] 2 Q. IJ. 584, fid- 
 [owed : .Solmes c. Stailord, 10 1'. R. 
 -**•-«■* 571 
 
 (linj V. Cjty of .Uonlrral, 25 L. ( '. J. l;j2, 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 Ham-Hea] 
 
 Ilanidton v. (.'roi-xhrrk, 19 0. R. 70 
 
 .S'. U. IS A. R. 437 
 
 //ami/ton V. Ilarr'non. 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 Set 
 
 052 
 
 13 
 
 205 
 
 referred to : Ro!ir{rct r. Tlio (,)ueei7, 
 
 - i'-X. C. R. I Ovj,; 
 
 1010 
 
 lfad,l,y V. Iluxendalfi, 9 Kxch. ;iH, con- 
 sidered : .Stewart c. .Sculthoi-p, 25 
 „ '*• '^- "'^t 05,328 
 
 lUvm-y 0'X,;i, •2\ o. R. 07, alliimcl : 
 20 A, R. 198; 22 .S. C. R. 510, .v»ft 
 «o«. Uark/.. Hajrar 179, 007 
 
 Hwiue,li,, 14 (). R. ueo, dissented from : 
 
 Irattr. ]5iinnell, 21 O. R. 1 ....377, 000 
 
 HaU V. (Iraiid Trunk A'. W. (Jo., 20 P. 
 
 10, reversed : 22 A. R. 504 . . 2,' 845, 980 
 
 Hall V. Hall 20 O. R. 108, in part afKrn,- 
 ed anil in ])art reversed : 20 K 
 084; li) A. K. 292 ' 
 
 IMlv. Prdti,', 17 A. R. 300', followed': 
 Lane v. I)!in,,Mnnon Agrieultuial 
 Drning Park Association, 22 O. R. 
 264 
 
 Unit V. Tho Quern, 3 Ex. ('. R. 373,' re' 
 
 ferred to : Quebec Skiiting Club r. 
 
 I ne (Jueen, 3 Kx. U. R. 387 
 IfalloH, Count;/ of, v. drawl Trunk A', ir 
 
 t{o. 19 A. R. 2.52, aHlrined: 21 S. 
 
 *^- ^' ""' 110, .■J2;i 
 
 Hamerv. Gi'.M, 11 Cb. 1). 942, followe.l : 
 
 Chapman )\ Newell, 14 P.R. 208.. 240, 778 
 //ami'.lv. lAlky, a Times L. R. 540; ,10 ' 
 
 L. 'J'. N. ,S. 020, followed : .\laish r. 
 
 Webb, 15 P. R. U4 . .2-)3 
 
 473 
 
 l.SO 
 
 293 
 
 . 10 U. C. K. 127, 
 iM.nsideied : Miirtliin.son r. I'attei'- 
 Hon. 200. R. 720; 19 A. R. 188 .. 108 
 
 //ami/ton v. Widke.r, [1892| 2 Q. IJ. 25, re- 
 ferred to : Rogiiia r. Ffazen, 23 (). 
 I!-W ;V.3 
 
 llamli/ns-. II, it, I, y, (,). I!. I). 03, follow- 
 ed : Ifogabooni r. (iilHcs, 10 P. K. 
 ^•^- 11, 544, 802 
 
 llant.^ V. Ilurnhani, 20 0. R. 528, affiimed: 
 
 •■^•■<A. R. 90 10, ;j4,s, 4 
 
 Hunnav. Conhon, In re, 23 O. I!. 493 
 
 aflirnied : 21 A. R. 092 .....302, 307, 371 
 
 llannon v. McLean, 3 S. C. R. 700, fol- 
 lowed ; Crowe r. Adams, 2 1 S. C. 
 '^•■■<42 43.-,, 490 
 
 Hanrahan v. Ifanrnhan, 19 O. R..390, fol- 
 lowed : Re Piirsons, Jones v. Kel- 
 land, 14 P. R. 144 44,5, .501, 785 
 
 liar,' V. Cairilu-op,; II p. U. .s-,;{, f.dlowed; 
 
 Malcolm r. Race, 10 P. R. .3,30 . ,791, 977 
 
 iliatinf,'uislied : 
 
 Irwin /'. Turnei-, 10 P. R. 349 . . 791, 977 
 
 Harrison v. MarquU 0/ Ahin/avenny, 57 
 L. T. N. S. .300, iliscuss'eil : Patter- 
 son r. Smith, 14 P. R. 558 795 
 
 Hart V. W'iml^or, 12 M. & W. 85, consider- 
 ed : Buhner r. Tho Queen, 3 Kx, C. 
 C. R. 1,S4 ;n:, 
 
 Harrey v. Murrai/, 130 Mass. .377, ap- 
 proved : (irant r. Armour, 25 O, R. 
 7 330, 485 
 
 Haru-wh and lialeh/h, Townxliips of, 11, 
 20 (). R. 1,54, approved: "in re' 
 Township.s of Romney and Tilbury 
 West, ISA. R. 477 704 
 
 H^lily V. Af/rc/iants' I) .<r,nli-h Co., 12 A. 
 R. 040, applied ; nd followed : Cof- 
 fey '•. Scane, l(i P. R. ,307 224 
 
 lla.uhn.fr v. Martin, 22 A. R. 408, atlirmed 
 
 by tho Supreme Court 199 
 
 Hay V. Johnxton, 12 P. R. 590, followed : 
 Mackenzie c. Ross, 14 P. E. 299 
 
 listinguished 
 
 Casselman /■. Barrie, 14 P. U. 507., 
 
 not followoil : 
 
 Hollender (;. Ffoulkes, 16 P. R. 
 
 '75 5.39, 
 
 overndod : Sol- 
 
 500 
 574 
 
 572 
 
 808 
 
 mes r. Staflford, 10 P. R. 204 572 
 
 //«(/(,,< V. h:imst,-y, 21 O. R. ,502, 19 A. R. 
 
 291, atlirmed : 23 S. C. R. 023. .541, 917 
 Hayivard v. Mutual Ihxerre Amocialion, 
 [1891] 2 Q. 15. 230, followed: Brooks 
 ('. <ieoigian Bay Saw Log Salvace 
 Co., 10 P. R. 511 407, 
 
 Ihadfordv. M, Clary Mfii. Co., 23 O. R. 
 335, affirmed : 21 A. R. 104 : 24 S 
 t"-R.291 055 
 
 llea.tUp V. Heaslip, 14 P. R. 21, alHrmed : 
 
 '•H'- i'- !«'"' 220,2.35 
 
 Heathy. Meyers, 15 P. R. 381 : ,Vee Sears 
 
 V. Meyers, 15 P, R. 456 ., . .483, 816, 817 
 
 llolle, 
 
Hen -Hoi] 
 
 S7'J 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC 
 
 coLiMx. I Hol-Hur] 
 
 mwkrmn v. Hank of //nmil/ou, 23 (). 1!. 
 ji-y. icvo,h.,mI : •_>() A. I!. CM ; L'M S. 
 ■ ''■'"' 4.->!», M-2, (180 
 
 Izzv 
 
 COLUMN-. 
 
 ,Tr , ■ 2-1 (). R, (ill, 
 
 I'liiiiifd a,s toooMtH : 22 A. K. 414 
 
 „ , i»l, 212, 78(; 
 
 Hendtr.,.,, y. /,-;,/,,^^ 1 1 o. K. |;{7, 17 a. 
 K. 4.,(,, icvur.ft.,1 : Is S. (" |t (i'KS 
 •""' uuni. Oslmriiu r. llcMidorHon . . . .' 77", 
 
 Ihndr,,-. ,-. lornnn,, /f,n„;/l,M,, mid lh,t 
 
 y.. 270. It. 46 H.V2 
 
 He,, ^l;u„,,a,■,,r;,,,, rv,., /„ ,.,', S/nau's 
 
 £'.'"' '..rV' "• I '^-'. reversed: 21 A. 
 
 6';2;iS. ,Mt. 014 ,5,,i,9:> 
 
 Unnird v. O'Donokur, Is A W G"'! 
 
 alhrmod: 1!) S. (' R, ;j41 ..■....":.' (;.>j) 
 H,!i woods-, /'id; mm, L. K. !) (3. H 4o,s 
 
 ref-ne,l to : Tlu, (,)„..„,■. |!a„k of 
 
 Monu-ed, I Kx. C. K.1.54 8(!, 10;t 
 
 //"■-{vyv. ,sv,n;., IK). K. IO.i, not foliow- 
 
 eil: Kent -•. Kent, 20 0. K. 445 . .490, 02« 
 
 ,rT7~7 TT"" f"""^^'''>l : Clarke 
 
 '• • '■•i<-''lo.H.ll, 20 O. 1:. m 503, G2S 
 
 V A,.,./,o;V, r/,.., /,'. ir. ^,.,.,4 I!. & S. 
 4'l.) («. .lisli„n„is|,L.,l: Fa,n,cr v. 
 J-HKul InmU li. W. Co.,21 O. R. 
 
 „.. ,•;, o2!), 0.-,0, 849 
 
 Hil,:.i V. Tnini-shii, of AV/,Vv , o„ ^\ „ .„,- 
 
 .s'« .y. c, 2;i's. (;. H. 42f) .; . • -7,;7 .,., 
 
 //'//v.^Va.y, l,S(,nk m.cxpl.uncaan.r 
 
 lislm^MMsl„.,l:l'„its,.. TcMiporanoo 
 l.ife Assuian.eCo., •_':{(), k. 7;{ jy.j^ -.j.j 
 
 Ihndl.y PolliU, a M. .^ w. 50,,, f„„„,^.^,,, . 
 
 iMliott /■. Mli,,tt, 2(1 (>. H. 1:14 V)5 
 
 //"'ovv. A,,,.-,,., I!. 754, follow.,1 : WiV- 
 
 li.-iina r. 1 lionias, 2,-) O. R. 530 205 3.VJ 
 //oWk, /»,.«, ;}(i('|,. I). .v,3, follow..,!: K,.Mt 
 
 V. Kent, 2(1 (). K. 445 .... 4<)(» (j'>S 
 
 //oW» V .VA,,;,„„» ,.(; o. R. .-,54, „|,i,,,„^,,, ^ ' 
 
 -' "• K. "5 ;)(;;{ 
 
 //o-/;/;«.v V. Coi,„ll<,s ,/ fn,ro,> a„d IWme 3 
 
 K. &A. l(i!),f„|low.„l: .McCarthy',, 
 
 lov/nshipof Vcspiu, 10 I'. R. 4I(J 
 
 ,. , . , „. 9, 720, 797 
 
 Hod,iin.sai,d Gilxj „f ToronU,, lure, '>0 
 
 R. 4SI». ailii-Mie<l : 23 A. 11. 80 ' 7.1,-, 
 
 //ofAso/^ V. />V,a,^,., I-;. 1!. .t K. SS4 fol' 
 lowed : Solnies 1: Stallonl, 10 P R 
 7S ■ ■ --0 
 
 Ifoerlerv /la,.cm; ,lr., 11 o,/.., 'lO Tin",es 
 I-.. K. 22, refiTicl to : Bell „. Villu- 
 neuve, 10 1'. R. 413 179, siQ 
 
 Hor/ahoom v. Cox, 15 1'. R. 23, reversed in 
 
 part: 15 1'. R. l-Jj 402,416,996 
 
 Ho;i,..',.>r,'y. Gd/ies, 10 I', R. 90 : ,V. r 5" f 
 
 ■ • .4'!>eal, 10 I'. R. 200 [ 5.10 
 
 //o;/:,.i„ V. KsquiiiiaU and y<niaim<, I! W 
 Co., 20,S. (J. R. 235, alliirned : llsnii 
 
 A-^'-«9 ... m 
 
 Holiiidn-x. Ffoult,,, 10 \\ R. 225, varied : 
 
 '«*-^-;^!-' 225,803 
 
 lliilkdauv. [foijan, 22 0. R. 235, roverHe<l • 
 
 20 A. R. 29H: 22 S. ( '. R. 479, w; 
 num.; Kolliday r. .JarliMon. . I0(», 137,824 
 
 [loUin'jir r. (JdiKvllan />iirl/ir /,'. ||' c, 
 
 21 (). R. 705, alliriiied : 20 A. R.' 
 
 -^■* S4" 
 
 //o/li.f,',- V. Aiiimldr, 14 I'. R. 1 1, approved ': 
 .Ma.s(in -•. Van ( 'ami), '♦ I'- H. 290. 
 
 410, 884 
 
 llolmniiK. fr'nrn, ,S. (!. R. 707, ..fcrred 
 to : Saniaon /•. The Queen, 2 K.v. (;. 
 J'. 30 |(J9 281 
 
 I/o/m< V. <.'„/>/,!/, 3 M. ?c. W. 3S7, f,>llowed •' 
 Kerr Kngine Co. r. French River 
 lug Co., 21 A. R. 100 ;(._,4 
 
 J/ohw.sv. Mun-ati, 13 (J. R. 750, distin'- 
 Mui.'ihud : Piircell 1: Bergiii "0 A 
 
 „ , '^- '■^■^'' .■ 1032 
 
 Hollbyy. Hodu^uu, 24 (J. 15. 1). 103, fol- 
 lowed : Davidson v. Taylor, 14 P. 
 
 „ . ^^'^ "••• ' 58, 302 
 
 IIooJ.4,n<r V. lioohr, 22 A. R. 175, aOlr.n- 
 od liy tho Supremo Coiiit, 26 S. {;. 
 
 "*' 13, 003, 862 
 
 IJoptijii V. /Min-/.s„)i,-2:i Q. J!. I). ]._)()„ 
 
 d[stin;,'iii.she<l : Cranston r. Tjlairi 
 
 1«J P. R. I(>7 00 j A'iu 
 
 fforiii'rk V. Romiiri/, II C. L. T. .329 fol- ' 
 
 lowed : Harding y, Knu.st, 15 P. R, 
 
 ^^ '. 209 
 
 Hovui y. Whdhiij, 14 S. (;. R. 515, fol- 
 lowed : Thompson 1: Quii'., ' ' S. 
 C, R. 695 ' |(,(i 
 
 //oinardv. Hrrriiiijlnu.-H) A. R l,,", dis" 
 Imgui.she.l ; Re Pollock and City of 
 Toronto, 15 P. R. 355 ; 35^ ._,.^,. 
 
 Howtaiid V. Dumhiion lianh, 15 P. R 56 
 
 afliruieil : 22 «. C. R. 1.30 ' 814 
 
 llafmau v l),„n;; 12 P. R. 492, followed- 
 
 Mackenzie r. Ro.ss, 14 P. R. 299 . . 5(i6 
 eoniniented on 
 
 ;— — , 10 P. R. 175, ap- 
 proved : Solnies />. .StaO'ord, 16 P. R 
 
 2*^-* ." 572 
 
 Nolnies ,: Stafiord, 10 P. R. 2(i4 57-> 
 
 llwjius V. M,,rjh 2 H. & C. 744, eomnient'- 
 ed on and distinguished: SanL'.ster 
 '•. Iviton, 25 (). R. 78 ^ 500, 737 
 
 Jfnmphny v. Arddhidd, L'l O R ,553 re 
 
 versed : 20 A. R. 2(;- ',;J9!)_ 404 
 
 Ihwiphrnj V. Th Quten, :? v.x. C R 'WO 
 
 aihrnied : 20 S. C. R. 59} _' 3„4 
 
 Ilaimin'jn v. Wd/iaiii.-<oii, 10 Q. R ]) 4-,9' 
 followed : Malcolm (.. Race, lo'p. R. 
 *^ 404 
 
 Hnnkrv Cvnd, 11 ,S. C. R. 30O, refer- 
 red to : \\ isncr /•. Conlthanl, 2' ,S 
 
 c. R. 178 ;__ • -^.^ 
 
 llunlo-'ii Licvme, In rt, 24 0. R, 153 re- 
 versed : 24 O. R. 522 '. . . . .-.go 
 
 IhuUiimton V. Atlrill, 17 O. R. 245 ■ IS V 
 
 .1!; V^*^;.''"''"''"'''' = f'«93] A. c. i,-,o; 
 
 -0 A. K., appen.lix 4OO, 543, 787 
 
 Iltirdman v. Canada Allanik I! \y Co 
 
 29-- -4 ?\ ''!^r' ■■ " ^- ^- 
 
 Hurtulme v. Dexmarttan , 19 «. C R 56-> 
 followed : Couture (,. Houchard, 2"! 
 '^- ^- ^*- -^'*1 929,942 
 
I 
 
 IZXTl 
 
 HUH-Joh] COLUMN. 
 
 Ifwioii and Tmmi.'ifii/, .ff!miHi Xnririrh, /« 
 '■<•, 19 A. R. ;n,i, iidirm.-l • •_>! S. V. 
 
 '-fifio "M . r.r.H, 698 
 
 J /yam v. FreniwH, ' . . ' ■ i. \>i'(l : 
 
 Kxicy r. |),.. i\,,. '.;,. ,, ; . j{. 4(15 (ki 
 
 Jlyiii V. MilU. JO O. i;. ;{,-)!, tTvorHc<J : 19 
 
 A. H. Mj .V,, Ml'-', ;m 
 
 /HrfiV/0 Co. V ()«///,?/, (isni) '.» rii. ,11, 
 
 specially Tcfcricil to : Simpson i\ 
 
 Hall, 141'. \{.:m SI7 
 
 /«"(■< V. r,,uii,.,„i, •.>! A. R. .S2.'l, aliirniuil : 
 
 •-'4S. ('. R. 7o;i ;i7<i <>:: 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETO. 
 
 //•"•/« V. Ilnwii, 12 P. H, (!;t!l, overrule .1 : 
 
 Irwin r. Turner, 1(! I'. R. ;!J9 . .791, 977. 
 
 Ishiiiitx. T(iiri,t/ii/,,,fAninn,ii/li,\6 V. 1!.;?. 
 (-•onsidcrod : Modilllvray r. Town 
 of Lindsiiy, l(i I'. R. II 21'2 
 
 aj)prove(l : Ccmtto 
 1: Dodils, |(i p. R. 27,f '212 
 
 /(■ < V. Ililrlirwk. Di'ap. R. 247. I'lMnirnntod 
 
 on : McSldy r. Smith, 2li () K. r)(»8 ;{.-.9 
 Jaei'sim v. Gaxiiihi, 2 O. R. ,521, fe.llowed • 
 
 Kxley /•. l)(.y, I.-, I'. K, ;i-,,s .' (JQ 
 
 Jnffrny V. /Miinsiiii, f!. A. (unreported) 
 Ronsidcrnd : Martliiuaon c. Patter- 
 son, I!) A. R. ISS 109 
 
 Jamen V. Oiiidrio awt <,hie!ier U ||' ('„ 
 120. R. (124; 1.-. A. R. 1, spe.ially 
 referred to: R,. Mac|iliorsoi. anil 
 (^ity of Toronto, 2(> (). R. .'j.'iS 31, 0S9 
 
 Janixy. (Th'trf'', 2ii (). R. 4S9. Serthin 
 
 easi in appeal, 23 A, R. 129 fM, r>97 
 
 Jonnanx EmkIp. f„ ,-(, Acft/vra v. Claylnii, 
 .S Ch. I). .-.MJ, (listinL'uislied :' To- 
 ronto General Trusts ( :o. r. Wilson, 
 200. R. 071 IO.S,S 
 
 Jiirvix V. Cilji nf Ti.i-miti,. 21 A. R 3!).5, 
 
 allirnied : 2.") S. C. R. 2.S7 379, 860 
 
 Jarns v. (Inat WtstPrn I!. W. Co.. M (;. p. 
 2S0, uonsidi'red : Meridon liritannia 
 Co. 1: P.rade' . Mi P. I;. •^\^■^, 410: 
 17 1'. R. 7" : i, 
 
 Jay V. .Tohn.it,m. fl,S!l.<] 1 Q. p.. isn, >on- 
 sidered ; Mason r. .Tolinstor, 20 A. 
 R--H2 .■;69, 633 
 
 Johnxonv. Ulaml, 2 Bnr- , ^o p, 1083, fol- 
 lowed: Solmes r. Stafford, 16 P. R. 
 'S 53s, 570 
 
 •Tohmim v. Or<m(l Trntik /,'. ]\\ Co., 2') 
 
 O. R. 64, allirnied : 21 A. R. 408*. 84 
 
 Jon-Kln] nor,uM>f. 
 
 ■fnwx, III re. ,16 Ch. F). 10.', discussed : Ito 
 
 Maedonald, Hi P. \\. 49H !M),'l 
 
 Juiiij y. Co'hrrk; H Ves. 3S, approved and 
 speeially referred to : Thompson c. 
 Smith, 2,') (). U. tJ.V2 102,1 
 
 JiDifs V. nalliiii, !) p. R. o)(,i followed ; 
 
 Weiser r. Heintznian, I.T P. R. 407. ;,»;, 
 
 .'198. 405 
 
 ./o»('.» V. (lodxdii, 2."> (). R. 444. .S'fc ,S'. T., 
 
 in appeal, 23 A. R. .34 '....' 34 
 
 ■fonex V. Omiitl Trunk II. W. Co., 1(1 A R 
 
 .37, aHirnied : 18 S. C. R. 606 84S 
 
 ./oi«-.v V. A',, ,. , 2 Moo. & R. ,348, dlBtin- 
 t'llished : Potts 1: Teniperaneo Life 
 AsHuranui! (^o., 23 (). R. 73 462, 5.32 
 
 JoniK V. Thi' Qiii'in, 7 S. ('.. R. ."o, consi- 
 dered ; The Queen .•. Medreevv, IS 
 ■S.C. R, .371 180 
 
 ■lums V. fltiiw, (IH941 A. C. 124, followed : 
 
 NVilkese. Kennedy, 16 P.R.204. ..')73,592 
 
 Journal I'rintimi Co. v. Mwf.Ktr,, 25 <). R. 
 500, distinguished: (Icornian Ray 
 Shii>(';inal('o. v. World Newspaper 
 Co., Mi P. R. ,320 220 
 
 ___ approved. .S'l e 
 
 S. C..23 A. R. .324 3,-,3 
 
 ■fiilih V. mill Dork Co., Q. li. 443, re- 
 ferred to : Paradis 1: 'I'he (Jneen, 1 
 Kx-. C. R. 191 .J7(j 
 
 Kcini v.Coild, 14 P. R. ISJ, lUstinsuished : 
 Emerson r. Humphries, 15 P. R. 84. 
 
 ■^IIO, 547, 673 
 
 Ki'Piuui V. Pnn;ik, 28 I,. R. Ir. 135, f.. {low- 
 ed : Murray v. Brown, 16 P. R. 125. 
 
 409, 489 
 
 Killy V. Arrlnhnhl, 26 0. R. 608, allirnied : 
 
 22 A. I!. r,22 8, 41, .581,641 
 
 Kelly V. nartoii, 26 (). R. 608, attirmed : 22 
 
 \. ft-'i'-^-' 8,41, 581,611 
 
 Kelly V. Imperial Loan Co., 10 P. R. 499, 
 eommented on : Agricidtiir.al Ins. 
 Co. w ,Sarj<eut, 16P. R. 397. .231, 437, 0.-)9 
 
 KeMy V. Imperial Loan Co., II A. R ,'6; 
 11 8. C. R. 516, followed : OhatHeld 
 r. CunniuLjliani, 23 (). R. 153 668 
 
 KeJhjx. \V, ■. 14 P. R. 13. Sii Kelly r. 
 
 Wade (No. 2), 14 P. R. 66 .507 
 
 Kelly V. Waile. (No. •') 14 P. 1,. 66, ,ii,stin- 
 guished : Eatou r. Dorland, 15 P. R. 
 138 ,568, 589 
 
 63, 979 Kenny v. Caldwell, 21 A. R. I 10, affirmed . 
 distinguished: ' 24 S. C. R. i^'i'l 33.', 423 789 
 
 R Vo'!'o!, T"p''-^^ ^^'- ^■°- •" '''">" ^- /»'^"A 20 O. u. 158, in part .affirmed ' 
 
 '•"^- •^- '^- ''^^ " .ind ill part 1 - versed : 20 O. II. 445 - 
 
 Johnmm V. Kenijnn 13 P. R. 24, di;,un- 
 jini.shed : Plummcr /■. Coldwell 15 
 I'. R. 114 !215, 248 
 
 Johnxtonv. />'»>•«<, 23 ( ). R. 179, affinned • 
 
 23 O. R. 5S2 ' 7,, 
 
 ■lolimtoii V. Cline. 16 (). ]{. pjt), ijis.seuted 
 from : (iililjons 1: Tondiu.sou, 21 O. 
 K--*«9 406 
 
 JohtixtoM \\ Siilfon, ] T. R. 517. eonsid- 
 
 red 
 
 distil 
 
 eiiiiaul, 25 O. R. 33<( 
 
 i«iiished : Wilson 
 
 .643, 97,' 
 
 19 A. R. .3.52 49(1,028 
 
 Kerr- Enijine Co. v. nrh Hirer Tiiq Co 
 21 A. R. KiO, allirm-d: 24 S.'c. R 
 703 ..5.24 
 
 Kerxlerinau v. MrLellan, 10 P. R. 122, fol- 
 lowed : Scane r. Coffey, 15 P. R. 1 12. 39 
 
 Kiiiiiaird v. Trollo/tp, 39 Ch. D. 636, fol- 
 lowed : Queen's ColloKe *'. Claxton, 
 25 (). P.. 282 
 
 26 0. R. 257 
 
 and in Stark ?■, Reid, 
 
 682 
 
 683 
 
 Lev 
 
AtiT 
 
 .•!2t 
 .•i'J 
 
 t)»2 
 
 Klo-Luwl 
 
 A7.,W„. y.. -8 C;i.. I). 17.-,, follrmx,! : Milno 
 
 '■■ .Mi">ru, -.Mu. It. iM |;t ,„, 
 
 '^'<"/'l'y.J/r,otn;.Krnh'. »', rv,., (i (' I' ' 
 
 »''^"^H.\\.L„.,-j(..u.::()4.;<sl,,s(j|,iooo 
 A„tcl:erh,>ri-,r Vo. v. /{ur. Hi |> R •)(. 
 
 rovoiwd: Hi I'. |{. |i)| ' ,_,_.j,j 
 
 Kniijlii, III, risic'i •» CI, 'ii'v 1 1 
 
 > I';''-) -i < ii. .ii(,s, (liHCMu-iod : 
 I'onI '■. MiiHoii, l,-| I'. II, ;)()., 
 
 ^"'"" :,: W'"""': '"'"" ">"l ^'trin<M On., 
 ^ 'U(. K. llt,t.x,,laiMe.l.•■|!l,H„n. 
 I Almoin I 
 
 0AIEti ATriRMED, REVERSED, ETC 
 LU-McO] 
 
 lxz?ii 
 
 < "LU.VIN. 
 
 "'/v. />an,//, !, <^, 15. l(,;(0,..iM.,iallv 
 
 ilO'.l 
 
 U(ili 
 
 x7l' 
 
 /.<(»f/ Sinirily Co. V, 1)'//,,,/,, •_'•.> a K iVi 
 iitlinnuil ' ' 
 
 hanuniy Taw- '.'4 (Jl,. |j. .5.jo_ j^,',,,;^;,- j ; 
 Colonial! ».. Hiiiikof Montical, lli I' 
 
 follow.. ^^,a-i,....M.,,.,,,,,,,^_ 
 
 Lavma^ M,U,o,h 22 O. R. .,7.1, ailini.^l : 
 -" ^' "■ -1''^ ^i^ 
 
 Uader Thr I,. R. ... a,|. & !•;,■. m J f„l.' 
 lowH_: |'a,kor ,■, M.llwai.,, lli |' 
 K. ;)j,j 
 
 L\n,y iili'l All,,,, III ,;, 21 (), R 4').( ,y^^ 
 
 .V. <7. IDA. R. 101 ■..,tlW.7til 
 
 Li,/ni,/,il<„H nf ih, MarUiiut Hank 1,1 Van- 
 add V. Hi.f.n'H.-a.wral uf A'.,/. 
 /ln,„.-<w„i; 20 S. C. K, tiUo, ul'liriiit'.l : 
 11HII2JA. t'. 4:i7 Kil.au.i 
 
 /.fter \ l',r,ymnn, L. |{. 4 {(, [, .-,.)i 
 I'ollowf.l: .\icliili;il(l ,■. \i |,ai"„' 
 
 21 .s. c. li. ;,m • ,.^., 
 
 Lull, V. IIUImnH, 27 (ir. '.K>A, <iiHtinyui.,|ie,|" 
 ( li^LWlord -•. Hioddy, 2.j C). R. 
 
 "•^''' .•W4, 1020 
 
 — followi'd : NiiHoii ,.. 
 
 Lii; I 
 
 AriiLstiong, 02 (j_ R -,^._, 
 
 1020 
 
 hmU and (Jr,;,nll,; U„il,,l. V,„u,i„. „f ,. 
 
 reveiHcl : l,s A. It. -,4s . '. . ' ' 
 l.iijary V. I'itvh 
 
 (id 
 
 .)4,S 
 
 '•. 10 (). R. (jo„ ,11 
 tii.gui.slu,d : Howard .. Henington, 
 
 ■)l, 2r,l, <»a,-, 
 
 20 A. R. 170 
 
 Leohx J/,;rif,, 4 Kasl I.Vl, followod • 'l%i. "" 
 
 '-^,''- W;.l-.l'. K.Oii....2l5,;W4,,-,90 
 Leith V. Freeliui,/, -24 U. C. R i-{2 ,1;. 
 tinguishe,! : Suthwland ,-. \V.Uter, 
 -I A. Ix, 22s 1; I'll ,-. -,- 
 
 U 
 
 •''■' 131, 47',, 775 
 Umi:.i,irltr v. Marau/ay, 22 O. R. •JIO 
 
 atlinufd : 20 A. 1!. 421 
 
 U'Mie V J>o>dl<,„ 15 V. R. ;{.S2, Cdlowcd 
 
 ■ • . .•iS2, 8S2 
 
 /■/'O'*/, /y<(„/; (,/, /„, ,7 , 22 \. S. Rup 
 
 !»7, ullirmod : IS S. f. K. 707 .. . .u',{, 1,-,;} 
 /-/"//'<! V. A'. //^ 5 l)„wl. 12.-., fi.llow.il : Cniii. ' 
 
 stoii ,'. IJluir, I,-, 1'. l;. Kj; 2:il, 4;i,s 
 
 /.ii,-al Ojitm, A,-i, l„ ,, , l,s A. R. .-,7;j, (",|. ' 
 
 lowed : lUunkfi '■. r.jwnsliiu „f 
 
 iliin|i().sa, 22 U. R. I2f) 
 
 ,7 ' '""1 >" Hiison V. 
 
 1 owii,slii|) i,f South .Noiwiili, 24 ,S 
 C. K. 14.-,, and 111 lu I'roviuciiii 
 .)iins,liri/„i, lo I'.tsH I'rohiliitorv 
 
 Lkiikii- Uws, 24 .S. C. K. 170 
 
 /.(..vt'v /Vr., 1. R. I (J. P. 441, .otcrmi 
 to : Huluier -■. Thu t^tucoii, ;{ |^x. (.'. 
 K. JS4 
 
 I^orlci, V. Tmuuid :> (). R. .-,2, ai.pruvcd: 
 
 Walker o. In,:k.s„i., 20 \. R, ij(i, .477 ,1,;-, 
 Lo/Uuni.,. It,, 2!) Ch. |j. !)...], ,„ii„w„i . ' 
 
 KU Colltts, 1,-, p. R. I(i2 4.jg^ .,jj 
 
 Loi,d,m, tti:, Jiank v. (J/aunn-l,/, \lm''\ I ' ' 
 Cj. li. <WI., followed: Al.Vk.'.r ,' 
 MoUugldin, 10 I'. R. 450 540, 566 
 
 London, Uluill„un, and Doic- J{ \y q^ y 
 
 C. 120; [H93J A. C. 420, followed: 
 -NJct.uUiinylw.Cifiiiow, 26 0. H. 467. 
 London Sjiiu/cir I'l-iiilhnj Co., In re 16 a" 
 i!. o0«, roll(,we<i; la ri; ilag.-eri 
 l>ro.s. Maiiulacauriiig Co., I'eaker 
 lid l.uiiioiis Caau, 19 A. R. 5^^' 
 
 058 
 
 UiU 
 .115 
 
 d42 
 
 Aloisons Rauk v. Cooper, 16 1'. R. 105. 575 ''"'"■' ''"' ^'"- ^ ■ • ' >"ti:r.on. In ,-e l<t , , 
 LKxptraiw, v. Unal WeMtrn li. W. Qo *^' ^S", '""v-i -.ud : 1« A. R. 401" ;{6y «• 
 
 V.O., ._ u. K. 204 .WI.SOl. 1(«)2 ■*^> .!(«■,.•.> 
 
 , . „ , -l,S61,10()2 
 
 Lunw l{e,,l V, .S C. R. 4,S2. followed: 
 
 Cossette /■. Uun, 18 .S. C. K 222. .321, 944 
 
 ,' : ,, ,T7~, iiud //((/ytrr/e V. 
 
 tqmlalile LiJ,-. Ammuirc Socklu •''4 
 S. C. R. 59. ... "' 
 
 Lewis, Rk, Jiickso 
 
 945 
 
 ,!;.;^°'M'.';:'i;.">7, 
 
 , ,. , ■49<J, 628 
 
 Lynn, li., i^mny. Toronto Uencrul Tru.U 
 
 <^o.>'ZiiO.K.41-,, followed: Beam 
 
 i>. Heani, 24 (>. R. jso 
 
 followed : AleGill r. McDoneil, 14 
 1 . R. 48.'} 
 
 7, -'ipproved : McKibbon 
 
 «. beegau, 21 A. R. 87 
 
 M,Aiday^ v. All,,,, 20 C. R 4|'7, i-on' 
 
 526 
 
 526 
 
 Lei 
 
 iO 
 
 visv Alexundtr, 21 A. R. 6 1 3, affirmed: 
 24,S. C. K. 551 -03_ -.; 
 
 Leivix V. O'(v-o< ire.-,'- /vt A'. )('. Co. ,;i(} R 
 
 E- }^%^°}IT'''''^ '• J"''"soii t'. Allen! 
 
 26 O. R. ooO . , . ' .,.,, 
 
 -. ,60 
 
 Lems V Talhol ^tr,;a Gnuvl Road V„ 10 
 
 1'. K. 15, approved and followed : 
 
 Boeek (.. Boeck, 16 V. K. 313.. 433, 487, 810 
 
 sidercd : Mereiuuus Hank of C,.,.ida 
 ,7- i V. llie Queen, 1 Ex. U. R. 1 jjj 
 
 McCaU V. Wolj), y.i ,S. C. R. 130," dis- 
 
 tinguished : Tlionison ,-. Quirk 18 
 
 S. C. R. mo 
 
 McCawjhty and HaMi, Re, 3. U. R 405 
 
 lollowed : k« Rohs Cinmr ~ 1 
 
 .. ,1 ,,.,," """»> »^'iniere'n and 
 Alallon, Ui 1'. R. 482 
 McClelland v Ai 
 
 A. R. 183, reversed : 2, 
 263 
 
 OH,j, 22 O. R. 54-.' . 21 
 
 109 
 913 
 
 !o S. C. R. 
 
 .384, 1020 
 
 # #t» 
 
*i 
 
 IZXTIU 
 
 McO-McK] roI-UMN. 
 
 McCliihifty V. <,((// Mniiiijnrliniiiii Co., ||) 
 A. It. 1 17, <'iin\iiii'iit('cl Of : l!ciilj,'«rs 
 '■. Hiiiriiltori (Jiittod (.'u.. 'iH O. 1{. 
 
 «-''» h:a 
 
 AtrColliim V. /><iris, S U. ('. It, ITill. 
 ■<|HMially icfiTiiil to : Stewiiit i: 
 .^iultlioi|), !.»,")(*. K. .")44 «■>, H-JH 
 
 MiDiimiit V. MiDmi il, l'» A, K. 'JS', 
 HiHiciiilly ri'fcn, .1 toiiiid coiisiilcriiil : 
 In ru Walliii r c. Niituc, '21 t). |{ 
 
 o'')'** m-i 
 
 Mi Uermolf v. f.'cHi//, 10 I', I!. 'i\:i. ,sVt 
 
 .Stiivi'iis <•. finmt, 1(1 1'. R. '.'Id <J7i 
 
 MrlHiiKitd V Dawmii, II Q. L, R. |81, tnl 
 Inwecl : l)iiWHuii I'. hiiiiKinl, -.'OS. (', 
 K. -,m oa-i 
 
 M< Donald V, Diikni^oii, 2")»). R, .t.'i, iillii iii- 
 
 o<l ; 21 A. R. 4M.-. 0, 7'iO 
 
 McDonidd V. Ml Donald, 17 A. R. I!)'i, 
 
 allinniMl : 21 S. C. R. -iOl . (J24 
 
 McDonalilv. Mnrnty, II A. li. lOJ.dis- 
 tiiiyiiislujil : Arnislroiii' /•, Aiiifcr, 21 
 O. R.y.S • 57.S70 
 
 McDondl V. I'lovinclal lux. Co., 5 U. ('. L. 
 .1. 1«6, Hiieuiiiily rcfc'irnd tc, ; Mci 
 cer Co. ('. Miisscy- Harris Co., 16 I', 
 li. 171 mi 
 
 McUeachie v. North American Li/eAnmir- 
 tvin f,'o,,2(l A. R. 187, tidirined : 2U 
 «•<;■ li. US 522 
 
 ■ iipplicd uiid fol 
 
 lowed: MiiriufiKJluiert- l.ifo Ins. Co, 
 
 V. (iordoii, 20 A. R. 309 o-2'2 
 
 and Flunk r. 
 
 Sini Life Assurance Co., 20 A. K. 
 
 564 r,'22 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 McKMacj 
 
 C'ULVMNi 
 
 ."JdO 
 
 McOi/l V. Lkeiim Comininxioner.^ of Itrunt- 
 ford, 21 O. R. (ie.'i, followed': Rcgina 
 IK Kiiiiell, 2.S O. R. 422 
 
 McUiUivray v. llii.at Wculini U. W. Co., 
 25 U. C. R. (jy, ilislinguishc<l : 
 Arthur I'. Crand Trunk R. W. Co., 
 2r)0. R 37 326, i003 
 
 McQUlivray v. MiUiii,-*,' U. C. R. (i2, con- 
 sidered : Williitnis ('. Ricliiirds, 23 
 O.K. 651 1008 
 
 McOreevy v. Tht (Jiicen, I K.\. C. R. 321, 
 
 reversed : IS S. (J. JI. 371 ISO 
 
 MtUwjan v. Mrdiiijtin, 21 O. R. 289, re- 
 verKed : 19 A. R. 56 ; ,ind «» ,V. C, 
 218. C. R. 267 220, 905 
 
 MrGwjaii v. .Smith, 21 S. C. R. 263, fol- 
 lowed : iMurdofh r. West, 24 ,S. C, 
 R. 305 .203 
 
 McKay y. Cn/skr, 3 S. C. R. 4.36, followed : 
 Wheliin r. Ryan, 20 S. C. R. 65 . . . 
 
 McKay V. Martin, He, 21 O. R. 104, eon- 
 sidered : Sherk i\ Kvaiis, 22 A. R. 
 242 
 
 McKiiiiion \\J.i,,tdy,-24 {>. R, 1.32, revorncd 
 
 in imil : 21 .V. R, 5fio, reslored : 24 
 
 S. C. It. O.">0, »«/< iiom. ; Ijundy c. 
 
 l-i""ly 102<», 1041 
 
 MrKiiiiiim v. Iti>,l„, ISA. It. 616. Sit this 
 
 liiMi; in lheSii|innii l'ouil,21 S.C. R. 
 645. •iulniom. ; Miidcr r. .McKinnon "ii 
 .)/• Li'un V. Jtiirliir, 13 I', R. i'KJO, foll.rw.d : 
 
 Cani|)l«ll r .SiotI, 14 1'. R, 203. ..346, 402 
 MrLraii V. Ctiiii. 21(). li. 6,S3, reviiMed in 
 
 pari : 20 A. R. 660 392, 776 
 
 Ml- Lean v. llimiiiin, 3 S. f. |!. 700, f,,]. 
 
 lowed ! Crowo «■, Adams, 21 S. C. R. 
 
 312 
 
 Mil.rilii V. Mr/.ii,d,.;\'. R. 467, toljowcd : 
 Hol.HoM i\ Slianni.n, 20 (), R, 5.'i4. . 
 
 Mil.vaii V. Shi, Ids, 9 (). R. 699, (list in- 
 j^nished : Solnies ,-. Statlord, Hi I', 
 R. 78 
 
 MrMichiirl v. t.'raiid Trunk li. W. Co., 12 
 (J. R. 547, approved : Uiiiisford c. 
 Midiigim O^ntral R. \V. Co., 20 A. 
 R. 577 
 
 McMirlutd V. Wilkiv, 19 (). R. 7;iU, re- 
 versed : 18 A. R. U14....424, 491, 605 
 McMillans-. /lartoit, IDA. R. 602, allirnied: 
 
 20 S. C. R. 404 20(1, 403, 818, 987 
 
 McMillan V. McMillmi, 21 (Jr. 5!)4, distin- 
 Hui.shed : (Jray r. Rieliniond, 22 (). 
 R. 2.56 I ( )•«) 
 
 McMillan v. MiMdIaii, 23 ^). R, .351, af- 
 
 lirined : 21 A. R. ,343 6,sl 
 
 McMidli'H V. Fni, 13 (). K. 57, di»tin 
 guished : Stewart c. Seidtluirp, 25 
 0. It. .J44 ()."., .32N 
 
 McXair V. Hoyil, | | \\ |i. |:{2, f„|l„„,.,l ; 
 
 R.-iskirvillc i\ Vose, 15 I'. R. 122.. 2lo 
 
 S80 
 363 
 
 .")7i' 
 844 
 
 -and Carton c. Rradbiirn, 
 
 54 
 
 McKecn and Toinisliip of l^ontli Cower, lie, 
 12 P. R. ,5,)3, followed ; Re Pollock 
 and City of Toronto, 15 P. R. 355. . 
 
 251 
 
 34, 
 230 
 
 MtKtn-M V. McNamjhlon, 3 P. R. '.ib, .spe- 
 cially referred to; McVicnr v. Mc- 
 Laughlin, 10 P. R. 450 567 
 
 15 P. R. 147 -Jii 
 
 Mr/'/icrmu v. Mrl'kii., lie, 21 (). It, 280 
 
 (n.), atlirnied: 21 O. R. 411 370 
 
 McVean v. Tiffin, 13 A. R. 1, considered : 
 McNainara -•. Kirkland, 18 A. R. 
 -71 245, 610 
 
 Macalpinc v. Caldir, (1 893] 1 Q. R. 545, fol- 
 lowed : Rrooks r. (ieorgiiiu I'.ay Saw 
 Log S:dvagiCo., 10 P. R. 511 . .407, 808 
 
 Macdonald v. Tacijuali Cold MincH Co., 13 
 q. li. 1). 535, followed : Parker r. 
 Odette, l(i P. R. (i9 58 
 
 Macdonyalt, hi ,■<■, 13 t). R. 201 ; 15 A. R. 
 1,50, reversed : 18 .S. C. R. 203, mh 
 nom. Ma(Mlougall i\ L.aw Society of 
 Upper Canada 393, 912 
 
 Mackenzie, v. Roxx, 14 P. R. 299, com- 
 mented ou : SoliucK r. Statlord, 16 
 P. R. 261 
 
 distinguished : 
 
 572 
 574 
 
 Casselnian r. Barrie, 14 I'. R. .507 . 
 
 Macki' ■■< and Xiai.iara Fall.s Park, Re, 14 
 R. 20, followed : Fellowes r. The 
 tjueen, 2 Ex. C. R. 428 30 
 
 MacLcan v. Dunn, 4 Bing. 722, specially 
 referred to : Sawyer r. Pringle, 20 
 O. R. Ill 872 
 
C'ULUMNi 
 
 Mac-Marl 
 
 ' IOL0MN. 
 
 i/a-/.„„„„ ,. ,/,..y, ,„ A. H. 224, r..vo™,,l: 
 
 1'.^ . IIHJIA.C, Ul. ,oll„w..,l : 
 lUrjUu ,: I'luwmiiu, LT) (), I!. (i-,(i 1,(4^ 
 
 Madden,,!,, ;), l'. ,•, k. ;m, t„||..„...,l : '"" 
 loKinu,.. HckcT, aO(., I!. .i7(i •.'.!, ,S84 
 
 _c..nH.,l.r..,l: Tl„. y„„,„ ,. i'.,,,,',;,,,; 
 KU,Hh,„| : .sproul.. ,: WilHon. 15 I'. 
 
 -iw, V /;„,<,./„■,,. , ('L'rh'.'itMV-l'Vh. ' ' 
 
 Malm.^,;ryl! (^ Co. v. /W,// .V,:,, ,;. " 
 
 I.U..ll..w,.,l:T„„„shi,,„f l!,„.for,| 
 '. Clri.„l„.i-8, '.'5 0. K. (li;;! ;,;, 4^2 
 
 .»/a«7a» V. Alhu-lou, » H. .\ ('. :W8 ,o,n- ' 
 memo,! on a.,.i <liHling,„Hhe,l : SanL' 
 HU..'.,hat„„,.25u. H.78 tw, :^ 
 
 Mumy,u,unrsLi,v /,, a,,, v. Hordon, 2(1 . 
 A. K .JO!), appli,,,! ; Frank /■. ,Su.i 
 Liite A^mininc! Co., •.>() A. |{. .')fi4. . .v>2 
 
 Mdrndi-.n v. Laiimshhy, ,>(c, /,' |c /r '7 
 
 H'n '!.*!«'•, f"""^vx-i; Cult.'. 
 iJodds, Hi 1>. li. 273 2I'> 
 
 Marsh V. rultou CoiiM,^, m \V,"ilV ' i;-",;' 
 specially roffire.ll,,; r,.nlV,l,T;il ioil 
 Liti- A.s.s.,umlioii r. 'lownsliii) of 
 HowanL-H). H. 1.|7 002,700 
 
 Mnrshx \\M, 21 (), R, 2S1, adirnmd : 
 
 "i'A. It. ,,0-1; 2L'.S. C. |{. «7 .... 12!(, 
 
 Marshall v. J/rA'ar, 10 (). R. 4ito ; I7 A 
 
 R. 139, rovcrscd : 19 S. ('. R, '10, . 192, 047 
 
 Marlhin-soii v. J'nfttrton, 20 O R l->5 
 reversed: 20 O. K. 720, r.'.stored : 
 
 „ '"^^- ^- '«S 105, 108,458 
 
 Marlin v Ma;,c., n, o. i;. 705, .listin- 
 guisi.ed: Re Wilson and Toronto 
 Ineandcsocnt i;i.Mtric Lijrht Co o(j 
 
 **■ ^- ^'*' '.M6, 497 
 
 -reversed: ISA 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED. ETC. 
 
 Izxlz 
 
 COMMN. 
 
 Mas-Meu] 
 
 Maxnn V. Ato!irid;i<. 8 Times L. It. 80.'. dig 
 titiKniHlicd : U„g ,.. ThoMijiMon, lo 
 
 ., ' 'V/'"' It. 772, 812 
 
 Ma..,yy. //.,,,,. .Ji if n_ |)„,a,,,.. ;|;,4, 
 
 '.''. T''.'"' >' "'''•'•'■'■'J to : SinipHoi. 
 '. Mall, 14 I', R, ,(10 ' ^,,j 
 
 Mn.^u,,l V, ,s7,,r,,,7, 22 (). R. 290, diHtin' 
 Kumlied : Iciiiiunl r. (fallow, 25 () 
 K. 50 ' jj.. 
 
 Mulht,-, w, IhlltH'iH, 10 (ii. 172 diHtin 
 j HuisliDd : AldouH r. Hi.kH, 21 (». R. 
 
 I "•' o(i(i 8->,"? 
 
 May,, y '!%■ Qm,i,, -j Kx. C. R. '4();< ' 
 
 affirmed : 2;i .S. ('. R. 4.r,4 ,j^'j, ,„j., 
 
 Mayur v Col/in'. 24 g. |{. |). ;iO| . ,|,.,ti„. 
 k'UlHlied : Arnold r. I'lavt.r 14 I' 
 
 K. ;(99 y ' <* I. 
 
 ,,,.,„. •"4, 500 
 
 Menjord, loin, „j, v. y,a«</, 20 I). R i-' 
 
 ttllirme.l ; 20 (>. R. ^41 .-,|, m, ^.,.-, 
 
 Meijan/iv A'/irtiu,, d^t, ,s ,s c |. |,;,, 
 
 .liHimHSed: HlaiLstead Kloetion Ca.se,' 
 
 -0 ■>. ( . R. 12 411 --,. 
 
 Me,ccr v \;,,,l,,. 4 U C. |,. .|. 47, «neeially 
 
 referred to ;Mere,.r Co, -■. ilas.se/ 
 
 9h;< 
 
 .'102 
 
 773 
 
 R. 384 '• ,._ 
 
 , . OU/ 
 
 jl/aiVjn V. McMulIni, 1') (> R 030 ^e 
 
 verse.! : 20 (J. R. 257, r. stored': 18 
 
 „ /^- '^••'•'" 81,475 
 
 Martin V. Tlu Queen, 2 Kx. C. R 3"8 
 
 reversed : 20 S. C. R. 240;. . .'. .'.290, 928 
 Martin V. Treacher, 10 q. B. |). noi, fol- ' 
 
 lowed: Malcolm /•. K.ice, l(i 1'. R. 
 
 •itjU , 
 
 Marthidn/f v, C/arhon, 6 A. R. 1 con- 
 sidered : Pratt /•. Bunnell, 2i 0. R. 
 ' 377, 666 
 
 Mar-Mli V. IViUiam.i, 1 H. & Ad. 415, dis- 
 
 tinguisheil : Henderson r. Bank of 1 
 
 Hftinilton, 25 U. R. 041 ... . 91, 329, 786 I 
 
 Harris Co., 10 f. |;. 171 
 
 Merchant Shu,,,in,, (',, v. .hv/^Vavc' L. r'. 
 !» Q. I!. 99, followed : .MeCullouS 
 '. tieinow, 2(i(). R. (07 . 54.> 
 
 Mtrchmijx Hank- v. CiimpUU, 32 (,' i' 
 170, followed ; French r. Luke 
 •Superior Mineral Co., M f. R. 541 ^^- 
 
 Mcrchmits liauh v. Siilrr. 24 (Jr. .T.O fol- 
 lowed, Ihoiigl) not approved:' Re 
 Central |{;ink. Canada Shipnin,, 
 Company s Case, 21 t). R. ,r,|.-,. . .,s8, 4-,n 
 
 Mtrchantx Hank of Canada v. /,,„■«., i;i ' 
 '). R. .-)20, r(!ver.sed : 1.5 A. R. .'573'. 
 
 ins. C. It. 794 . 
 
 Merchants Rank of r„nada v. McLachJan, 
 Jf R. 2 d. B. 431, reversed: 23 ,S 
 C. R. |.13 
 
 Merchants n,nd- of Vanuda v. McLaren 
 (f R.2Q. n. 431. reversed: 23 .s! 
 '- . iv. 1 4.> •-,, 
 
 Merchants Bank of Halifax v. Uitle^^ie^ io 
 ■•^. C. R. 312, distinguished : Allen 
 '■■ Han.son In re .Scottish Canadian 
 Asl,e.slosCo., 18,S. O. R. 007. .. 148, 460 
 
 Meriden Britannia Co. v. Jlraden, 10 P R 
 346, reversed ; 16 P. R, 410- 17 p' 
 "• "7 • 2;j4 
 
 Mcrnlt V. Oily of Toronto, 25 () |; 250 
 
 allirmed: 22 A. It. 205 .' . ;04, 7-1 
 
 Metrojmlitan Hoard of Works y. McCarthn 
 L R. 7 H L. 24,3, f.dlowed : Me-' 
 I hersou r. 'I ho Queen, 1 K.x. C. R. .-,;j ■.7;, 
 
 Metroj,olitan L d: S. Co. y. Mara, 8 P. 
 lv.3o:., followed: Watson v. Ontario 
 f^'i'Pply Co., 14 P. R. 96 4<,2, ,579 
 
 ,/j. ri-j ^■•■■> ■-• 1 . IV. ;m 4 
 
 Metropolitan Saloon OmnihuK Co \ Hay 
 
 1 ^■"',^' f. "• & -^'- '^T, commented on 
 
 fififi! «nd distinguished : .Journal Print- 
 
 066 j „,g Co. V. .Mae Lean, 25 U. K. 509. . 353 
 
 "e«,r v-^"co/«, L. R. 7 H. L., at pp. 490, 
 
 491, followe.1: Scarth v. Vjntario 
 
 Power and Flat ( 'o. , iW 0. £, 446 . . 4.54 
 
 h 
 
|i ! 
 
 Ixzx 
 Mew-Moo] 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 'OLiMN. Moo-New] 
 
 Mudnmt v. Markdraii, 10 A. K. 72!l, (lis- 
 tinguislit'il : Suthi'i'liiiiil r. Wchstor, 
 
 ^1 A. K. •-'•-'S (I, i;jl,475, 770 
 
 Miyiit V. />(//ie.s 4 Kx. D. 170, followed : 
 
 Coiitts c. Doilds, It) 1>. K. 27;! 212 
 
 Michk V. Jt'i i/iiol(/s, 24 L'. V. li. .S(i;i, dis- 
 liiigu'slicd ; iM(tCidl(jiigli r. Clciiiow, 
 
 •2() (). H. 4(J7 .-)42 
 
 Middlcxij-, County oj, \. Smaltmaii, 19 O. 
 
 K. ;{4'J, alliiMied ; 20 (). U. 4S7. .115, HCW 
 Millard v. Ikiddiliy, [ISS4] W. N. 9S, di.s- 
 tiiiguisliiid : McicliiUits Niition.'d 
 liiiiik r. Unliiiio ( 'oiil Co., Mi 1'. It, 
 
 «" 97, .")74 
 
 Mitklt V. iJaity, ;U lii'iiv. 470, aiiplicd : 
 
 Brulhour 1: IJiijokf, 2;i O. K. OoS. . (;7S 
 MiUoy V. (I'raiiU Tninh II. W. Cii.,'l'.^ (). 
 
 U. 454, roveiscd ; 21 A. U. 4(14. . 125, 8;19 
 Milh V. .!/( /•(■(■;■, 15 1'. li. 2.S1, i^\>\^\\^.•^\ and 
 followed: liailjer c. Adaiiin, 10 I'. 
 
 H. 150 178, 402, 810 
 
 Miiiiitiiiid V. J'arbr, 21 (). K. 207, af- 
 
 liniied: 19 A. K. 29(1 524 
 
 followed: Neil- 
 
 roi.tMN. 
 
 ■sou r. Trusts Corponitioii of On- 
 tario, 24 O. 1{. 517 524 
 
 MoffntI \. Ooulsuii, 19 U. C. R. .'Wl, coii- 
 sideied : Mai'tliiiisoii r. rallersoii, 
 20 0. K. 120; 19 A. U. 188 108 
 
 Moir V. VHUkji- (}/ J/iiiifiiKjdoH, in S. C. R. 
 3U;i, followed : MeKay i\ 'JNjwii- 
 sliij) of Uiiicliiiilnooke, 24 S. (,'. R. 
 55 20, 2(J7, 950 
 
 Mulnons Bank v. Cooper, 20 O. R. 575, re- 
 versed : 23 A. R. 140 90, I Mi 
 
 MohoH.1 hank v. llaller, 1 A. R. .•i2.'{, af - 
 
 Hrmed : 18 S. C. K. 88 72 
 
 followed. Hiek- 
 
 erson r. Pairington, 18 A. R. 0;{5. . . 09, 
 
 467 
 
 followed : Davies 
 
 ('. (iillaid, 2! O. R. LSI 71 
 
 ajipioved and 
 
 followed : Steplieii.s c. MeAi'thur, 
 
 19 8. C. R. 440 72 
 
 bons 1: McJJuuald, 20 S. 0. R. 587. T,\ 
 
 MoUom Hank- v. llcAinj, 25 <.». R. 503, 
 
 nioditied ; 20 O. R. 270 91, 137, 820 
 
 Mowlte V. Lcjebcrc, 10 .S. O. R. 387, fol- 
 lowed ; Cowen 1: Evens; Mileliell 
 V. Treuholnie ; Mills r. Limoges, 22 
 S. C. R. 331 944 
 
 Monteith, li'i^, 11 F. R. 301, distinguished: 
 
 Hcaslip 1: Heaslip, 14 P. R. 21 226 
 
 Montreal, Mayor of, v. Brown, 2 A pp. 
 Cas. IHH, followed: Arpin (,. Mer- 
 chants Haiik of Canada, 24 S. C. i{. 
 l-iS 27,948 
 
 fehvre /■. The Queen, 1 Ex. C. R. 
 
 1^1 277,280 
 
 Moore v. JacLiou, 2(1 0. li. 6.V2, reversed : 
 19 A. R. 383 ; restored : 22 S. C. 
 R. ^10 495 
 
 Moon V. MiUish, 3 O. li. 174, distin- 
 guished: (iiay ('. Riehnicnd, 22 O. 
 11. 2.50 i((2() 
 
 Morin v. Tlif Qwcn, 2 E.v, V. R. HBO, af- 
 firmed : 20 S. C. 1!. 515 293 
 
 Mor/iy V. Attcidi<inini//i, 3 Kx. ,500, <om- 
 mented on and distinguished : I'cui- 
 elien r. Imperial Rank, 20 O. R. 32. 589, 
 
 S77 
 Morri.^, ToH-nshiji of, v. C'onnly if llin-tm, 
 
 20 O. R. 089, varied : 27 O. R. .341 ..090, 931 
 A/orri-ionv. Tai/hr, 9 I". R, 390, ;ipproved 
 and followed : Wi'egar c. (Jrand 
 Trunk R. W. (.'o., 10 1'. K. 371 .... 887 
 Mio:^.f v. Lamtit, 23 O. R. 107, rt^versed : 
 
 23 O. R. 0(ts 862 
 
 Morlimiirc v. Mor/imori', 4 App. Cas. 448, 
 followed : l!ral)ant r. Lalonde, 20 
 
 O. R. 379 -.m, 1026 
 
 MoKlyii V. H'cx/ Jlox/yn Coal and Iron On., 
 I C. I'. I). 1,52, considered : liulnier 
 r. The Queen, 3 Kx. V,. R. 184 .... 315 
 Mntra/iy v. Co/Zi'/f.s, 24 O. R. 441, allirnied : 
 
 25 O. R. 241 495 
 
 Mulrnliy v The (Jwin, 1. R. 1 C. L. 12, 
 follo\\ed : Regina ('. Coiuiollv, 25 O. 
 R. 151 ; 0.59 
 
 Jlanru v. /'ib, 15 I'. [{. 164, approved: 
 
 Solmes -■. .Stallord, 10 i'. R. 204. .572 
 
 Murphy, He, 20 O. R. 103, adirmed : 22 A. 
 
 R. 386 (,-,1 
 
 Murphy v. Mi'hifjan ('enfral Jl. W. Co., 
 In re, 22 O. R. 568, adirmed : 20 A. 
 Iv- "'S-t 370 
 
 Mnrniy v. Canada Central 1{. W. Co., ~ 
 A. R. 640, followed : Trumhle r. 
 Hortin, 22 A. R. 51 27, 741 
 
 Murray V. /hiuMon, 17 ('. P. .588, distin- 
 guished : N'oik V. Township of Os- 
 goodo, 24 O. R. 12 iiKH.i 
 
 Murray v. McSwincy, I. R. 9 C. L. 545, 
 distinguished : Haues r. Rurnhaui, 
 20 O. R. 528 u,, -Mi. 
 
 Mybl V. Doyle, 45 U. C. R. 65, followed : 
 
 -WeKay v. Rruee, 20 O. R. 709 380 
 
 Myrnnd, v. Lei/are, 6 Q. L. R. 120, re- 
 ferred to : Bourgel r. 'I'Ur (Jueen, 
 2 Ex. C. R. 1 286, lOlO 
 
 My.sore We.-tt Uold Minimj Co., Re, 1X1 W . 
 R. 794, distinguished : Re Macpher- 
 soii and City of Toronto, 10 P. R. 
 2;W 33, 4tl8 
 
 Nation V. Armnlrunij, 22 0. R. 542; 21 A. R. 
 
 18.S, reversed ; 25 S. C. R. 263. .384, 878 
 
 1020 
 
 Ne.Ul V. Carroll, 28 i'n: 339, explained and 
 followed : .Summers /■. IJeard, 24 
 O.R.641 616 
 
 NelwH, Be, 13 P. R.30, followed : Heaslip 
 
 r. Heaslip, 14 P. R. 21 226 
 
 Newcovien v. Lynch, Ir. R. 9 C. L. 1 • Ir 
 R. 10 C. L. 248, followed : Ross v. 
 Orr, 25 O. R. 595 431 
 
 New Hambur//h, Vdlaye of, v. County of 
 Waterloo, 22 O. R. 193, 20 A. R. 1, 
 reversed : 22 ti. C. R. 296 694 
 
ronMN. 
 
 1(»2!» 
 
 ■293 
 
 Nic-Pai] 
 
 COLUMN 
 
 In ..; Vr "•''•■♦-'• <listlligiii.sli(i(l : 
 Ii 10 H;.yg,,rt lh;m. Ahuiufacturing 
 y>, I u.ikcr iind llimioiiH' Cnw V) 
 ^^- K. i>S'> ' ' 
 
 '^'"^m■iH'''^''•'"•^"^•W'y'- 
 ^tue.lto: Uyiittr. Mills, 2tM). R. 
 
 Norman, /,V, kj (> n I) IrVV'ii'"",'""'''^*' 
 He iiuUeWiJu/u'i'llr-.S "'"'' = 
 
 itttlz, Id I'. \\_ jjji 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 Par-Pra] 
 
 I'arkdule, Oorpora/ion nj\ v. ||V,/, l-j An,, 
 
 '•onto, Hamilton and IJiiffidd I! W 
 
 Co., SOU. U. (i(i7 .... *■ 
 
 Z'nHw y^, 1!) o. H, (Ji:.., fo.lowcd'-Re 
 
 „ . '•'"'•'"•210.K. 179,405.. ..:.449,4o0 
 / arX«M_. M^nu:,u^, 10 ]-. R. 555, reversed : 
 
 Parker.. Parker,^2 'c^V. m, ;^^;„^,,, ; 
 
 Radford r. Macdonald, IS A. li. id; , 
 Partriihj,: v. r/)-t«/ ire,s/,,» Ji )y q^ ^ 
 
 MeCurdy, 2 K.x. C. R. .■j,i / '• 
 
 I.W 
 
 09 
 
 Ixxxi 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 652 
 
 902 
 2;j3 
 
 60 
 100 
 
 : '^"«-''<ley f. jiveiiiiey, IS A. 
 
 R. 
 
 Nottawamija, Puh/ir Sr/,o, 
 Tun: ' ■ ■ ■■ 
 
 , . . , ol. Tni.'<lerH of. v. 
 
 Sl(. T,'^'-'A"""''-"'-^'"-'"'' '5A.R. 
 
 "'""''to •'I'lr' '«^ <■■'"•' '!»7:';eferrcd 
 to . hllKs r. lhc(,liu:en, 22 S. (;. R, 
 
 ' I ". 
 
 O'nriuy: Co;,sn„/, 17 S. ( '.' R.' 420" fol 
 j^«^l:\VI,olan,.. Ryan, 20 k C. 
 
 .S22 
 
 371 
 
 174, 947 
 
 ,/' y; llnmillou Hrhlij, 6'o.,25 0. 
 
 O'Donohoc, 
 
 O'Conno, 
 
 lohor, y.v, 14 1'. l{';m."'.Sees'.o' 
 
 O'llara v. C'ii//i/„rf 
 
 54 
 
 653 
 
 ,. 289 
 
 V. (cimidiau raeilic R. W. (^ o.> 
 
 Jalton V. J/<,n7(, 16 L. C. R. 207 11. 
 proved : Me(;regor .. (Jan.ad/i ill 
 
 Km '^''"""'■■^' *"'"•' -' ■''■ ''■ 
 
 /'a»/.y,/o./, 27 i::,:'Kx;.I,::is;j; referred'""' 
 
 1 I'X. I,, ii. 1,)4 SO 1(U 
 
 ''"'''^•^''f:f/''''<''\^140.conun;nu.l' 
 on: (.ilnior r. .Md'hail, 10 1>. R 
 
 lt)l 
 
 Paxtonx. Baird, [1S93] I (,>. RlVo'foV 
 loM'od: .Soln.es I,. Statn.rd.lo'l'.R. 
 
 902 
 
 78,204.... 
 
 P. R 42.! '"•■'"' '•• K^'-'^^'t. Iti 
 
 lowed : .S.nitI, .. |5enton, 20 6. R. 
 
 179, 550 
 
 250 
 571 
 216 
 
 344 
 
 9S6 
 876 
 
 lowcl : Ke Helps lOslateVlsTv/'?' 
 0«/nc^ V. 7V,,M7,//,,, WoollaiMj],. C,,'., 
 2<|^A. I>. |„.J, allirmed : 23 ,S. C. R. 
 
 0./ano ZMV.V., >u., Jnnt^^^Mn Co.', 
 P'"t : 21 A. k. (U,; ; 24 «. C. R. 
 
 ,.„. , ;■;; iw, 940 
 
 Oijord and Hcmrd, In r,; 18 A H 4<)0 
 
 eonsidered : In re'l'ownsliii, of Har- 
 
 Y ,' ™'' '''""H.ship of RaleiL'li, 21 
 
 A. ii.Ut I -... 
 
 0\S/iaai//ui,:-i.<y v. /,'„//, u'l S. U R 415* 
 *(■ Ball r. .MeCalliev, 2o',S C iV 
 319 :.: y^J3 
 
 0-Shca v. OS/,.,,, 15 P. I). ,59, followed': 
 
 l'^ll'«"llie<,)«een,2:.'fS.(;.R.7..174,947 
 I acqurltr /,:■. || 1-. R. .to;i, followed: lie 
 
 ^oung, M 1'. U, ;m os •>3G 
 
 i^(;/e v.Iiw'k^pyrf, (i4 Maine 51, followed • ' " 
 
 MeKelvni c. (Jity of Umlon, 22 <)' 
 
 ^'- '0 ■ g., 
 
 /•aj/e V. i>^/o,', 24 0. R. 5o9. ,>Vp,V C i,' 
 
 appeal, 21 A. R. 406 '.,[' ' ^■Q 
 
 Paint V. Thf. (Jnem, 2 Ex. o. It Ht) „V 
 firmed : 18 S. C. R. 718 . . 
 
 Pechivrrlu, P'' J^illoz, Si, 5, |S5,' 'n,V \.> ' ' 
 
 7'c«i V. CW^ 4 Dr. & War. I'-rnVfoV. "'^' 
 lowed : Ro|,orts >, Donovan, 10 1' 
 
 L\. 40U l-i* r •- 
 
 P<Wv.JA/,«,llR,r,77,approveda:''''''' 
 1. K. 381, followed: Merlin I'iano 
 
 o- '•. liiuuHch, 15 1'. 1!. OS 
 
 / emnPailn'ay,C'o.,Pe, L. R. 2 Ch. 6I7'. 
 followed: Merchants Nati<,nal Hank 
 '•• Ontario Coal Co., 10 1'. R. S7 97 574 
 
 Phinp.~<y Fox H V R. 51, referred to:' 
 
 iilair r. Asselstiao, 15 1'. R. 21 1. .430 S81 
 
 J'irrct V. Canada l\ 
 
 rnianinf Loan and 
 
 Paisley v. Willn, 19 0. R. 
 
 18 A. R. 210 
 
 303, attirmed : 
 
 282 
 
 9211 
 
 I? n;V^-'--t,!,\H.*26, reversed: 
 
 2oO. R.t„,;0.5A.R.516 ,181,860 
 
 Power V. Moore, 5 Times L. R. 5S0, re- 
 
 UW^t'"-' ^'"'^ ^^"- '•• North, 
 ucst I ransportation Co., 14 R. ij 
 
 QUO 
 
 Pratt y Biamdl, 2 1 (). R. 1 , „„t followed • 
 
 <ieium,ll ,.. Nelli«an,26 0. 1 1. 30?." 377. 
 
 Pratt V. Citi/ ,:/ H/ra/ford, 14 O. 
 
 16 A. R. 5, followed : ReCumn 
 County of Carloton 
 
 R. 260: 
 
 667 
 
 and 
 
 lings 
 
 t>07 ; 26 0. R. 1 . 
 
 O. 
 
 688 
 
Ixzzii 
 
 Pri-Que] 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 COLUMN, 
 
 I'ridiMux V. Criddk, L. R. 4 Q. J}. 455, 
 i-cfenud to : '1 liu (jueou /•. IJunk of 
 Montreal, I Kx. C. It. 154 80, 1(13 
 
 Prinijk v. Corporation of Xnpante, 43 U. 
 C. R. 285, foUtjwuil : Kiiisey i). 
 Kinsey, :2G 0. R. 99 1036 
 
 Pritlie and Crawford, /I'c, 9 C. L, T. 45, 
 declared to have been iuudveilently 
 deeided or reported : Ward r. 
 Archer, 24 O. R. 050 132, 434, 922 
 
 Proctor V. Bayley, 42 Ch. D. 390, distin- 
 guished : Knickerbocker Co. r. 
 Ratz, 16 P. R. 191 234 
 
 Pryce and City of Toronto, In re, 16 0. R. 
 726, affirmed : 20 A. R. 10 
 
 Purcell V. Ihryin, 20 A. R. 535, reversed : 
 23 S. U. R. 101, mbnom., Alacdonell 
 c. Purcell 
 
 Purser v. Bradlmrm, 7 P. R. IS, com- 
 mented on : Talbot v. Poole, 15 P. 
 R. yj 214, 304, 596 
 
 (iuebec, CUy of, v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 
 252, referred to : Martin c. The 
 (iueen, 2 Ex. C. R. 328 290 
 
 and (Jilchrist r. The 
 
 Queen, 2 Ex. (J. R. 300 297 
 
 Que-Reg] 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 vi;o 
 
 1032 
 
 293 
 
 -And sec iS. a,3Ex. C. R. 
 
 298 
 
 298 
 
 104 ; 24 S. C. R. 420 
 
 Quebec, City of, v. The Queen, 3 Ex. C. R 
 
 164, affirmed : 24 S. C. R. 420 .... 
 
 Quebec, The Ship, 3 Ex. C. R. 33, affirmed : 
 
 20 8. C. R. 472, unh nom. Churchill 
 
 ?;. McKay 820 
 
 Quebec Street Ji. iV. Co. v. City of Quebec, 
 10 y. L. R. 205, referred to: 
 Royal Electric Co. r. City of Three 
 
 Rivers, 23 S. C. R. 289 184 
 
 Quten, The, v. Bank of Xora Scotia, 11 ,S. 
 C. R. 1, followed : Li.juidatora of 
 the Maritime Bank of Canada v. 
 Receiver* ;eueral of New Rruns- 
 
 wiek, 20 S. C. R. 095 101, 303 
 
 Queen, The, v. Demers, 3 lOx. C. R. 293, 
 
 afHrmcd : 22 S. C. R. 482 
 
 Queen, The, v. Farweil, 14 8. C. R. 392, 
 commented on and distinguished : 
 Farwoll v. The Queen, 22 '.S. C. R. 
 
 553 .394, 804 
 
 Queen, The, v. Lacombe, 13 L. C. Jur. 259, 
 overruled : Morin v. The Queen, 18 
 
 S. C. R. 407 
 
 Queen, The, v. McFarlane, 7 S. C. It. 210, 
 distinguished : Lavoie v. 'i'he Queen, 
 
 3 Ex. C. R. 90 
 
 Queen, Tht,\. MrUud, 8 S. C. R. 1, dis- 
 tinguished : Lavoie v. The Queen, 3 
 Ex. C. R. 96 
 
 Queen, The, v. Si. Water Commimioner.t, 
 referred to : (,luel>cc SkaUng Cl'ib i\ 
 
 The Queen, 3 Ex. C. R. oS7 
 
 Quilttr V. Muj>k>»m, 47 L. T. N. S. 561, 
 referred lo : In re (Ji'lespie and 
 City of Toronto, 19 A. R. 713 47, 929 
 
 Quimby^, Be, Qnimby v. Quiml^y, 5 0. R. 
 744, distinguished : Leys v. Toronto 
 General Trusts Co., 22 U. R. 0a3 . . .375 
 
 Bace V. Anderson, 14 A. R. 213, followed : 
 Vineberg v. Guardian Fiie and Life 
 As,snrci Vi Co., 19 A. R. 293 32, 513 
 
 Ram Coomar v. Chunder, 2 App. Caa. , at 
 p. 210, speei.ally referred to : Wel- 
 bourne r. Canadian Pacific R. \V. 
 Co., 10 P. R. 343 128, 403 
 
 Bateliffe v. Evan^, [1892] 2 Q. 15. 524, 
 applied anil followed : Turner r. 
 Burns, 24 O. R. 28 257, 327 
 
 Ratte V. Booth, (4 A. R. 419, affirmed : 15 
 
 App. Cas. 188 1000 
 
 Bay V. IsbiMer, 24 0. K. 497, reversed in 
 
 part : 22 A. R. 12, 20 S. C. R. 79. . 7, 
 392, 394, 775, 804 
 
 Raymond v. Little, 13 P. R. 304, not fol- 
 lowed : Freeborn v. Vandusen, 15 
 P. R. 264 
 
 Beburn V. Sfe. Anne, 15 S. C. R. 92, dis- 
 tinguished : Dubois )'. Corporation 
 of Ste. Rose, 21 S. C. R. 05 
 
 Reddiek v. Sanijeen Muttial Fire Inn. Co., 
 15 A. R. 303, followed : Findley i\ 
 Fire Insurance Company of NortJi 
 America, 25 O. R. 515 
 
 Bedondo v. Chaytor, 4 (»>. 15. 1). 453, com- 
 mented on : Founder y. Hogiutli, 
 15 P. R. 72 
 
 809 
 
 956 
 
 520 
 
 followed: Aud- 
 
 Quebec Fire Ins. Co., 15 P. 
 
 10] 
 
 207 
 
 290 
 
 Beed 
 
 B 
 
 erson ( 
 R. 132 
 
 V. I'aylur, 4 Taunt. 616, followed 
 \Vils(m V. Tennant, 25U._R. 339.. 
 
 21/ 
 
 217 
 
 043, 
 975 
 
 290 
 
 Queen, The, v. RoberLton, S. C. R. 52, 
 referred to : Bulmer v. The Queen, 
 3 Ex. C. R. 184 315 
 
 Queen, The, v. Ship "Oscar and Hattie," 
 3 Ex. C. R. 241, in part afHrmcd and 
 in part reversed : 23 S. C. R. 396.. 413, 897 
 
 Queen, The, v. St. John Wat-r Commis 
 ■vonerg, 2 Ex. 0. R. 78, affirmed : 
 19 S. C. R. r26 285, 301 
 
 Be, 10 P. R. 425, overruled : Palmer 
 r. Lovett, 14 P. R. 415 62, 216 
 
 Beijina v. Belmont, 35 U. C, R. 298, (pies- 
 tioued ; liegina i: Martin, 21 A. R. 
 I'lo 560 
 
 Begina v. liirchall, 19 O. R. 697, con- 
 sidered : Regina c. Davis, 22 O. R. 
 <J5i2 204, 481 
 
 Reyina v. Bishop of Huron, 8 C. P. 253, 
 specially referred to : Hyiitt v. 
 Mills, 20 O. R. 351 .312, 33(i 
 
 Beijina v. Brady, 12 O. R. 358, considered : 
 
 Regina c. Hartley, 20 U. R. 48 1 555 
 
 Begina v. Iiro\rn, 24 (,». R. D. 357, fol- 
 lowed : Regina /•. Farrell, 23 O. R. 
 I'-^-i 550 
 
 Begina v. Brown and Street, 13 C. P. 350, 
 specially referred to : County of 
 Lincoln v. City of !St. Catharines, 
 21 A. K. 370 714, 1012 
 
 Rq/ina v. Charlca, 21 0. R. 432, distiu- 
 Buislied : Regina v. Slattery, 26 0. 
 K. 148 140, 651 
 
COLUMN. 
 
 '.1.S!(;J(e/'.s, 
 
 ! Club r. 
 
 f 293 
 
 S. 561, 
 pie aiul 
 13... 47, 029 
 
 5 0. R. 
 Toi'drito 
 I. ()03 . . 375 
 lUowecl : 
 iiid Life 
 i .....32, 513 
 Cus. , at 
 >: Wei- 
 : K. W. 
 
 128, 403 
 
 B. 524, 
 iner v. 
 
 257, 327 
 
 led : 15 
 
 lOOG 
 
 irsed ill 
 H. 79.. 7, 
 3!I4, 775, 804 
 not fol- 
 sen, 15 
 
 809 
 
 J2, dia- 
 oriitiou 
 
 956 
 
 >!», Co., 
 
 dley ('. 
 
 KortJi 
 
 520 
 
 3, com- 
 
 DgiUtil, 
 
 217 
 
 : And- 
 , 15 P. 
 
 217 
 
 lowed ; 
 
 339... G43, 
 975 
 I'alincr 
 
 62, 216 
 
 , quos- 
 
 A. R. 
 
 560 
 
 ', coii- 
 I O. R. 
 ....264, 481 
 :'. 253, 
 itt V. 
 
 ...312, 336 
 lered : 
 
 SI .'ioo 
 
 7, fol- 
 
 O. R. 
 550 
 
 '. 356, 
 ity of 
 nines, 
 ..714, 1012 
 
 .iicitiu- 
 26 0. 
 . . . 140, 551 
 
 
 COLUMN'. 
 
 658 
 
 Reg] 
 
 ^c»'»f' V. fb„/..o„, .,4 o. R. 246. See 
 Koginu i\ Cnlwm, 27 O. R. 59.... 
 
 4-l,aliinMed: 19 S. C. R. 510, mb 
 
 '""". , vjmrt r. The Queen fe 103 
 
 t{e,jinayCo,n:n,, 26 O. R. 685, reversed : ' 
 
 ,. . ■"■'^' •«' ...264,831,885 
 
 %/"-. V, JUlon 10 I>. R. .s,V2, overruled: 
 ^\\ alsl, ,. I'rebilcock, 23 H. C. R. 
 
 CASES AFFlRMEIi, REVERSED, ETC. 
 Reg-Rob] 
 
 Ixzziii 
 
 COLUMN. 
 
 Il'ijina y. 
 
 Smith, 46 U. C. R. 442, ap- 
 proved : Kegiim /•. Hazen, 2(1 A. R. 
 
 ,, . " ;, 265, 554, 585 
 
 hrumax. .Somcr^, 24 (). R. 244, followed ■ 
 Regina c. Coulson, 24 '). H. 24() 
 
 n . „ -:^". 583, 658 
 
 l^moav. Span,, 18 (). R. -.m, followed : 
 
 iiegiiia ,•. Lriilson, 24 O. R. 246. . 583, 658 
 ^.ci/i«o V. rmW, 16 P. R. 444, affirmed : 
 
 408 
 
 658 
 
 17 P. R. 61 
 
 /»!7'mv OWo», 23 Q. J!. I). .•j,-;4, con- 
 sidere,! : Regina r. Hnvk., 24 O. R. 
 
 l^ni'tia \: lln,ifrm<n,, 15 (). R r.ns'foV. 
 
 lowed : Re (;a.,),nU, 21 O. R. .|(ir, 
 /.','/'"« V. //„,,.o (). r;.,i,l, followed': 
 
 Kegma r. lieekor, 20 (). R. 076 
 
 '"""^•^t!''!'>iv^^- \<- 4«1, approved' 
 
 268 
 450 
 261 
 
 Rnr,i.,„ tV '• ^"'^' "Ppiovea : 
 
 Regina ,: Hazen, 20 A. R. 633 .... 265, 
 
 554,7-85 
 
 ,. V ^. ~ ^ followed : Regina 
 
 '• ^-ntlnv.ck, 21(.. R. (i70,,.,° . 554 
 
 ,, . , 556, 687 
 
 Mill. V. (,raham /Jmi., In. re, 25 0.11. 57.S 
 
 reversed in part: 26 () R. 126...".' 367 
 
 D. ■ „ •^''' ''7'. S28 
 
 Rtnauu Lx part,:, 1 ]>„ga. (N. ]j,) 273 
 distingni.slied ; IJarrett v. City of 
 \\ mnipeg, 1!) ,S. C. R. 374 .... 172 
 
 Burke, 24 t). R. (fi ° 
 
 /.■%.v y Dare Valky li. W. C'o!,'irR 
 hi{. 93, followed : Re Maciihen 
 
 He. 
 
 268 
 
 19 
 
 ,-. ,,.^ , ,„ ■ -— --acplieraon 
 iml City of 'loionto, 26 (). R, 553. 
 
 1'icl.u.d.ou, 20 U. R.- 5l!l ""T:. ': ,.. Man.,. ,,ate. In re, P„UU,. v. Ho, ..f" ^' 
 
 [ISSi] W N. 173, distinguished! 
 loionto (.eneral Trusts Co, v VVil 
 son, 26 0. R. 071 ' j^gg 
 
 Ripley V. Grmt yoiihrrn li. W Co L R 
 10 Ch. 435 followed : Re Maep'lui'son 
 and City of 1 oronto, 26 O. R. 55 . . 831 689 
 
 Huxr Sta,r. Co. v. Sill, 12 O. R. -,57, fol- 
 
 Her/ina V. Ila-.vn ''3 (i P yu- , 
 
 "OA I iVi" '*■ -^M-e versed ; 
 
 ^'•''""-V '{'""r' l«'o. R/l48;■eon- 
 R 48 'i ■ °'"''' ''■ "■■*'■"«>'' -0 <>. 
 
 -ff^'j/ina V. J/„!,,j!,,., 1 1 ,S95] 1 '(][ ' ]i. ' i^os 
 fo lowed. Regina r. Steele, 26 O.r! 
 
 He^ina v. ^^„./o„, 3s' 'n! "a R^ '546,'f,;i" 
 lowed : Kogjiia /•. Somers, 21 (). R. 
 
 Pegimi 
 
 244. 
 
 ' "-■ i'W,,if„r,l, I,-, 0. R, .-,2 .,1, 
 proved : liogina ,-. Steele, 26 I). R. 
 
 584 
 
 237 
 
 lowed I Mai tlunson v. Patterson, 20 
 O. R. 720; 19 A. R. 188 lo""; 
 
 458 
 
 Heijina 
 
 \)-- /foil ao,;rnn,ent Bonnl, IOO 
 1>. ])., at p. 231, followed: In re 
 1 nomas ,s License, 2(( (). R. 443 
 
 584 
 
 560 
 
 Hoaeh v. MeLarhlan, 19 A. K. 496, applied 
 
 Bieithaupt r. Marr, 20 A. R. 689 407 
 
 liohh y. Murray, 16 A. R. 503, eonsiderod : 
 
 Ostroni c. Benjamin, 21 A. R. 467. . 246 
 
 M~i7 7, — ^ followed: Re 
 
 iMcKay v. Martin, 21 O. R. 104. .246, 251 
 
 • 7-— followed : Plum- 
 
 mer /■. Coldwell, 15 P. R. 144. . .215, 248 
 
 — ; ~— specially refer- 
 
 ledtoand considered: In re Wal- 
 lace ?•. \'irtue, 24 O. R. 55S 
 
 'oronto, 2o O. R. 194^ 
 
 /.V;/;«« V r.o„lh 13 C. p. 615, .specially \nohe.rt.sy. lUnk of Toronio -, u R VU 
 
 referred to : (Jounty of Lincoln I allirnied ; 21 A. R e''^ 7- row 
 
 (/ity of ,St. CathariiiP« oi \ W ... /o. 608 
 
 ;i7(). ..:"'•. -' ^'-7 i" ,op, ^'"^"-'^ - f?~". 2. O, R. 535. affirmed 
 
 liewna v. Marti. 5 O R I, .V/ 1 on other grounds : 21 A. R. I4 ,v»6 
 
 timr,,wl,„i 'j/ A, , • •'*' ''"'■ »o'«., Berry r. Donovan .. . \'^^ 
 
 tinguislied : Re Murnhv ■'() () R n^i , , ''' 
 
 163 '; •^l -" "• '^- .„ ^'O'"'*'' V. Jone>:, [1891] 2 Q. ]:. 194, fol- 
 
 i^..^««.v. j/c^.,,„,, H, c. P. 69, dis: """ ^^:^i^'^TT''''^- 
 
 tinguished : Regina v Cosbv '21 n u / , ,, - •<-• 1 . i\. / / 
 
 R^ 591 ^.. ... ^^P' ^' 4% -.„ liohtm^u ffe, 22 Gr. 449. distinguished : 
 
 n V /'/„,„.„.„ on ,T .: .: ' •.;■ •^-*' '''^l Ross V. Ross, 23 O. R. 43 . 
 
 Roberlnon v. Du,nar(,f(i, 2 Moo. P. 
 referred 
 
 proved ; 
 
 983 
 
 4.59, 482 
 
 Justin, 
 
 •97, 714, 1012 
 
 Queeu, 3 Ex. C. R. 184 
 
 Buhner v. The 
 
 315 
 
Ixzziv 
 
 CASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 Rob-Rya] 
 
 CdLl'MN. 
 
 liuberlxon v. CouUoit, 9 P. R. 10, observed 
 upon : Toothe r. Frederick, 14 1'. 
 R. 287 .is 
 
 approved and 
 
 followed : CoUey r. iSeaue, '2j (). R. 
 
 22 40, U38 
 
 Hobtrlsuu V. Urand Trunk li. W. Co., 24 
 O. R. 75, affirmed : 21 A. R. 204, 24 
 S. C. R. (ill 125, S41 
 
 Kobiy V. SnaeftU Miniiiy Co., 20 y. li. 1). 
 152, referred to ; Rell r. \ illeueuve 
 16 P. R. 413 171», 810 
 
 Itobimou, lie, 10 P. li. 423. tiee H. C, 17 
 
 P. R. 137 -'28, yoo 
 
 HobimoiL V. Uarrin, 21 O. R. 43. SeeH. C, 
 
 19 A. R. 134, 21 S. (J. R. 3U0, . .'J20, 921 
 KobilDiiiii V. Pateraun, 18 U. C R. 55. con- 
 sidered : Marthiii.SDii r. Puttoi'sou, 
 
 20 0. R. 720, 19 A. R. 188 108 
 
 liobion V, Jardint, 22 dr. 420, followed : 
 
 (iray v. Riehmoud, 22 O. R. L50. . . 1029 
 
 Robaon v. Ktmp, 5 Ksp. 52, followed : 
 Magee v. The Queen, 3 Ex. C. R. 
 304 399, 912 
 
 Hodijtrs V. Richard'f, [1892J 1 Q' R- 555, 
 not followed : Regiua c. llazeu, 23 
 O. R. 387 553 
 
 Rodway v. Luciu, 10 Kx. 007, follo\ved : 
 
 McVioar v. McLaughlin, 10 P. R. 450 560 
 
 So'jerti V. HiiiU, 10 Ex. 474, specially re- 
 ferred to : MoVicar c. MoLaughliu, 
 16 P. R. 450 567 
 
 Boger-i v. Iiujhain, 3 Ch. D. 351, consid- 
 ered and followed : Baldwin r. 
 Kiugstoue, 1 8 A. R. 03 589 
 
 Rogers v. Knowks, 14 P, R. 290»., distin- 
 guished : Vansickle c. Jloyd, 14 P. 
 R. 409 39 
 
 Rolin V. aUiciu-a, 14 C. li. 594, distin- 
 guished : Hentlerson r. Bank of 
 Hamilton, 25 O. It. 041 91, 329, 786 
 
 Rosmhtrijcr \. Grand Trunk J!. W. On., 8 
 A. K. 482; 9 S. C. R. 311, consid- 
 ered : iSibbald r. Grand Trunk R. VV. 
 Co.,Tremayuo l<. Grand Trunk li. 
 W. Co., IS A. R. 184, 20 S. C. R. 259. 845 
 
 Rons V. Edwai-d.i, 14 P. R. 523, reversed : 
 
 15 P. R. 150 11 
 
 Ross V. a rand Trunk K. IK. Co., 10 0. R. 
 447, followed : Essery v. Grand 
 Trunk R. \V. Co., 21 O. R. 224. .853,854 
 
 Ross V. Torrant-v, 2 Legal News IhO, over- 
 ruled : Lynch o. Canada N. \V. 
 Land Co., South Dull'erin v. Mor- 
 ilen, Gibbius c. Barber, 19 .S. C. R. 
 204 50, 102,166 
 
 Royal Ai/iiarium Sudtty v. Parkinson, 
 1 1892] 1 g. B. 431, followed: 
 Hanes v. Burnhani, 20 U. R. 528 ; 
 23 A. R. 90 10, 348 
 
 Ryan v. Ryan, 5 t>. (J. R. 4^)7, followed : 
 He ward r. U'Uouohoe, IS A. R. 
 529:19 8. C. R. 341 
 
 Ryl-Sha] iolu.mn. 
 
 liy/ey r. Ma.iltr, [I892J 1 g. B. 674, dis- 
 tinguished : McVicar r. McLaugh- 
 lin, 10 P. li. 450 540, 500 
 
 Hakimaii, la re, [I894J2 Ch. 201, discuss- 
 ed : Re Macdonald, 10 P. R. 49S, . 903 
 
 Saniud v. t'oiil/i r, 28 C. P. 240, consider- 
 ed : Merchant*' Bank of Canatla r. 
 The t^ieen, 1 Ex. C. R. 1 Ill 
 
 tiamutl V. Fairijritie, 24 U. R. 480, re- 
 versed: 21 A. R. 418, restoreel: 24 
 8. C. R. 278, lub noiii., Craig c. 
 Samuel 83, 100 
 
 Sanynkr v. Eaton, 25 O. R. 78, ailirmed : 
 
 21 A. R. 024; 24 S. C. R. 70S . .506, 737 
 
 Sanitary Cunintifsiontr.s of (iibrallar v. 
 Orjila, 15 App. Cas. 400, referred 
 to : City of Quebec v. The gueen, 3 
 Ex. C. R. 104 298 
 
 followed : Pictuu 
 
 c. (Jeklert, [ 1893J A. C. 524 093 
 
 Santandi-rinu, The, 3 Ex. C. R. 378, utiirm- 
 
 ed : 23 S. C. R. 145 891 
 
 Halo v. llabburd, A. R. .540, distinguish- 
 ed : Henderson '•. Rogers, 15 P. R. 
 -'41 248, 705 
 
 Hawytr \. /'lim/k, 20 0. R. HI : .Ve; S.V., 
 
 18 A. R. 218 872 
 
 — followed : Arnold c. 
 
 Playtei -\\ aterous Engine Works 
 
 Co. s Claim, 22 O. R. 008 872 
 
 ScaninuU v. Clarke, 31 N. B. Rep. 250, 305, 
 
 ailirmed : 23 8. C. R. 3U7 740 
 
 Scant v. CoJ<:y, 15 P. R. 112 : Set CoUej 
 
 c. Scane, 25 U. R. 22 ; 22 A. R. 209 40, 
 
 038 
 Schneider v. Batl, 8 g. B. D. 701, followed : 
 
 Scripture t: Reilly, 14 P. R. 249 . . 708 
 Scotl V. Corporation of Tilioubunj, 13 A. 
 
 R. 233, applieil : In re Campljell 
 
 and Vdlage of Lanark, 20 A. R. 
 
 372 110,091 
 
 Scott v. Niaijara Nacijatioa Co., 15 1'. R. 
 
 409, ailirmed ; 15 P. R. 455 218, 507 
 
 Scotttn V. Bartkel, 21 A. R. 509, reversed : 
 
 24 8. C. R. 307 335 
 
 Stars V. City of St. John, 28 N. B. R. 1, 
 
 allirmea ; IS 8. C. R. 702 002 
 
 Stara v. Mtytrx, 15 P. R. 381. Set S. C. 15 
 
 P. R. 450 483, 810, 817 
 
 Secord v. Trmnm, 20 O. R. 174, followed : 
 
 Jacobs 0. Kobiiisou, 10 P. R. I.... 017 
 
 Segsworth \. Anderson, 23 O. R. 573, re- 
 versed : 21 A. R. 242, rtstoretl : 24 
 8. C. R. 099 78 
 
 Seroka v. Kattenbury, 17 g. B. D. 177, 
 considered : Lee ". Hopkins, 20 O. 
 R. 606 497, 763 
 
 Severn v. 'The IJuten, 2 8. C. R. 70, con- 
 sidered : Regiua u. Halliday, 21 A 
 R. 42 
 
 Ryan v. Simonton, he, 13 P. R. 299, com- 
 mented on : Jones v. Macdonald, 
 14 P. R, 109 , 
 
 629 
 
 580 
 
 Shairji v. Luke/ield Lumber Co., 17 A. R. 
 322- iiUirmed : 19 8. C. R. 657 .... 
 
 100 
 317 
 
 Shatv and Birminyham, In rt,'i"i Ch. i». 614, 
 foUoived : Re Macphersou and City 
 of Toronto, 20 U. K. 558 3i, 538, 689 
 
COLUMN. 
 
 ShaSmu] 
 
 •%««■ V. ,sv. LoniM, 8 S. C. R. 385, fol- 
 ^"'Cfl : Baptist r. Baptist, 21 S. C. 
 "■ 42") .... 
 
 OASES APPIRMED. REVERSED. ETC. 
 oor,r>fx. SnI-Ste] 
 
 Izzxv 
 
 COLtJM.V. 
 
 952 
 
 I I'^f-'l 1 Q. 15. 674, followed: Solme.s 
 
 '■• Maffnr.l, !« P. R. "S, 0^4 . 57,^ --o 
 
 J.; K. .-,(U, followed : 75p1I Telephone 
 Lo. ". City of Qiiehec, Quebet Gas 
 ,,.?• ''• '^''^y ff <.>iiel)ee, 20 8. C. R. 
 
 2:i(i 
 
 958 
 
 f^nider v. S'n ?/;«•, 11 P. R. 140, referred to • 
 
 Mackey v. Rierei, 16 P. R. 148 794 
 
 FSolmen v. Staford, 16 P. R. 78, in part." 
 atfiriiied and in part reverHed • 16 
 T'.Tl. 264 '..oo «-, 
 
 Hollender 
 
 538, 572 
 followed ; 
 
 distini,'uishcd : 
 
 City of Sherbrooke, 24 
 
 \Vel)stpr /• 
 
 S. C. R. 50 
 
 Shwkrv. M,i.r., M \\ . R. 261. referred 
 to: Pee.- ,t C!o. ,.. Xorth-West 
 I ranspoi-tation Co., 14 P. R. 381.. 082 
 
 >^!hhald V. (h;,nd Tt-md- R. W. Co., 18 a'. 
 R. 184. .ilfinned : 20 S. C. pi.' 259. . 
 
 Shnmnn^nnd nnlton. J{f, 12 0. R. ."JOS, not 
 fol owed: He North T'cTtli, He8;in 
 '•• r.Ioy.l, 21 O. R, 5.38 .... 165, 482, 761 
 
 Shivtii V. a>rpor,tlioi, of On//!a, 36 U C 
 I.. 150, followed : Ri^niiker ,.. Town- 
 ship of Maripo.sa, 22 O. R.5120 
 
 ■Smart v .V/ar/rira cnid Deh-nit Rh'frs R. 
 
 X ■r^'i,' ^-P- ''■ -'"4- <'''«tin«i,ished: 
 -MeCiilloiijh /'. Cleinow, 26 O. R 
 4()7 
 
 58 
 
 846 
 
 558 
 
 Ffoulkcs 16 P. R. 17,'-,. -,30, 
 „ , 572 
 
 Somhra. Tn}nix/,i/,of,v. r<wn»htp of Cha'- 
 hnm, 18 A. R. 252 aflinned in part 
 •ind reversed in part : 21 S C R 
 ■^"•^ ' ■ ■ -11 
 
 542 
 
 SmUh X /.'«/•,,, nsoi] A. C. .325, applied: 
 Hurdmnn /•. Canada Atlantic R. W 
 ( <i. , 22 A. R. 202 
 
 Smilh y.On/dir, S. C. R.' 46", referred to- 
 VVisnov r. Coulthard, 22 S. C. R. 
 1 78 
 
 Sm-ith V f.'mham. 2 TT. C. R. 268, "follow^ 
 eilj Clark,! r. Creigliton, 15 P. R. 
 '^'* .2,36, 243 
 
 849 
 
 782 
 
 65 
 
 353 
 
 „,' , ■ distiiicfuished : 
 
 Ntiachan /•. Rnttan, I.T P. R. jno 
 
 ?37, 
 243 
 
 Smith y.Or^,, i C. P. I). 02, distini;i,ish- 
 ecl : htewart r. Sculthorp, 25 0. R. 
 
 „ .„ 1- fi5, 328 
 
 Smith V. Cmy, 1(1 P. R. ,5;5,, eommenled 
 on : Kol,ii:s ,•. Kinpjre Printing and 
 Pnl)li.shing(\,., 14 P. R. 488 ... 
 
 — explained : Morrow 
 
 407 
 408 
 
 '•. MeDoULtald, Hi P. R. 120 
 Smith V. Hm/hfs, 1„ It. (J Q ij .507, "fol. 
 
 lowed ; l^.tts r. Temperance Life 
 
 A.ssuranee Co., 23 O. R. 73 462, .')3'> 
 
 Smith V. MrO,;imi, 21 A. R. 542, affirmed "' 
 
 -l^-'- f^- ■''-•« 202,916 
 
 SmHhy. M<-!.,mn.-Si S. C. R. 355, distin- 
 
 ftui,sl-2d : Mni-.so r. Phiiuiey, "2 S 
 C. I!. -RS 
 
 Smith V. Miih-Llij Ch)n-rh,]r,0. R 100 
 approved: 'I'yrrell /•. Senior, 20 A.' 
 R. 15(i 
 
 Smurthiraitev. Hnnnaii, [1S04] A. C. jit p 
 .'■01, spe(Hiilly refe-red to . MoViear 
 V. McLan.i^Iili.'i, 16 P. R. 4,-)() 
 
 Smnrthinti'c v. ffninin;,', 10 Times L. R. 640, 
 
 106 
 
 10,37 
 
 Sonth Av.itra!inn Tna. On. v. Ratiditl/ L 
 R. 3 P. C. 101, distingnished : Clark 
 1: McClellan, 23 0. R. 465 
 
 South Hetton Coal Co. v. North EnstPrn 
 Ncir.i Amtriation, [18941 1 Q. B. 
 133, followed : .Tonrnal Printing Co 
 '•. Mac Lean, 25 O. R, .500 .... 
 
 Sonthunck v. Hare. 15 P. R. 230, affirmed'- 
 
 15 P. R. .331 ■ 1- 
 
 „ , \ ^ i 
 
 /ioveir-ii/n hi.i. Co. v. Prtn-n, 12.S. C. R. .33, 
 
 di.itinguislied : Citizens Ins. Co ' V 
 
 Salterio, 23 S. (,'. R. 1;", _' 5,5 
 
 Spartali v. Coiixtniitlnldi, 20 \\ . R. 823 
 considered : McCuliough v. Cleniow' 
 26 0. R. 467 ; 542 
 
 St. CnlhariHf.1 Road P,,. v. Gardner, 21 C. 
 P. 190, specially referred to : Coiinty 
 of Lincoln r. City of St. Catharines, 
 21A. R. .370 714,1012 
 
 St. John V. Ri/l-m, 10 S. C. R. 278 fol- 
 lowed : People's Loan and Deposit 
 Co. r. Grant, 18 S. C. R. 262 .... .5.39, 672 
 St. Louin V. O'Cfd/rn/haii. ]3 p. R_ .■52" 
 followed : Oilmour c. Macee 14 1p' 
 
 R. 120 ....!.'.' 
 
 Staik'ev V. Diiiiirin'i, 15 O. R. .342, fol- 
 lowed : Turner v. Burns, 24 6. R 
 
 Standard Rank v. Frlnd, 14 P R 35-i 
 *« 15 P. R. 438 ■...,.■ 
 
 Stavstead EleHion Canp., 20 S. C. R. 12 
 followed : Rellechaise Rlectio'ii 
 Case,20S. C.R.I 81 411,756 
 
 Stehlnwi V. .Vftronlit,,,, Board of Works L 
 R. e Q. B. .37, followed : Paint r. 
 J he Queen, 2 Kx. C. R. 149 276, 282 
 
 Stephen v. MrGilUrray. 18 A. R. 516 dis- ' " " 
 tingitished : Hiles r. Townshiii of 
 
 no ;r^.^''""''' ''• Township of Ellice, 
 23S. C. R. 429 
 
 Stephens V Gordon, 19 A. R. 176, affirmed": 
 -2S-C. R. 61 19.5,964, 
 
 Stephe}i.<: V. Mr Arthur, 19 S. C. R. 446, 
 followed : Cihbon.s r. McDonald, 20 
 
 .S. (.!, R. .587 
 
 813 
 
 327 
 
 772 
 
 709 
 015 
 
 R. 587 '.., 73 
 
 Stevens v. Grout, 16 P. 210. .SVp McDer- 
 
 mott r. Grout, 16 P. R. 215 
 
 Stf.vtnwn V. Cilji of Kinqxtou, 31 C P 3,33 
 j considered : Moriden Britannia Co! 
 '-.fi- ' i; '^'■•^'len, 16 P. R. 346. 410 ; 17 P. 
 •'»' i Pu 77 
 
 distinguished : Xo^c^TV^unglnl I "^'""T -^i^"'''^' "i ^- ^' '^^ ' "^ '^■ 
 
 P. K. 254 ^ sno ^- ^^'' ••evfrsed : 23 S. C, 1!. 629. . 
 
 97 » 
 
 234 
 
 8021 
 
 5tl, 
 917 
 
Ixzzvi 
 Ste-Tho] 
 
 OASES APFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 COLUMN, 
 
 Stewart/ V. AWth Metnpolilan Tramways 
 Cii., 16 Q. 15. 1). ")"i(), applied and 
 followeil : Williams v. Loimarc], 16 
 P. 1?. ■)44 14, 790 
 
 Slicbirm V. Mahhinnp, 30 Vermont 738, 
 .-■. illovitfl : McKulvin )'. Citv of Lon- 
 don, 22 (). R. 70 '. .S2S 
 
 Stobhart v. OiKird/inii.ie, ~ (). R. 231), dis- 
 tin^uishixl : Martin ?•. Cliandlar, 26 
 
 O. J!. SI IOL'4 
 
 Stokoe V. Cowan, 29 lieav. (i37, doubted : 
 
 U'eokes /•. Friwk'v, 23 (». R, 23."., . 42it 
 Stratford v. Sli(rirnn<l, '> (). S. Kii), at pp. 
 17<>, 171, foUowi'd : Island )'. Town- 
 
 .>thip of Amaranth, 16 I'. R. 3 211 
 
 Stri-et V. dorej; 2 (.). !'.. 1). 49,S, followeil : 
 Oenor.al Kloctric Co. r. Vii'toria 
 p;iiMtnr Lii;htCo. of Lindsay, 16 1'. 
 
 R. 476, ".2!) : . . . . 766, 791 
 
 Stuart V. Bill, riS91]2Q. 1!. 341, followed: 
 
 Rfws /'. Bmke, 21 O. 1!. 692 349 
 
 Swuiu V. Mail I'rhitiiiii Co., 16 1'. R. 132, 
 distinj,'ni.slic>d : Lennox r. Stai' I'rint- 
 iim and Publishing Co., 16 1'. R. 
 
 4.SS 222,352 
 
 Swain v. Stoddard, 12 1'. R. 'yOO, apj.roved 
 and followed : lio Ancient Order of 
 Foresters and (,'astner, 14 I'. R. 47, 
 
 218,544 
 
 SwaiKif V. Swanzy, 4 K. & ,1. 237, followed : 
 
 Fourin'er!). Hogarth, l."> I'.R. 72 .. 217 
 Sweeny \. I'xiiik of Montreal, 12 S. C. R. 
 661 : 12 App. ('as. 617. referred to 
 and followed : Raiihael r. MeFai'- 
 
 lane, 1,S ,S. (,'. R, I.S3 504, 990 
 
 Switzer v. MrMi/lan, 23 (i. R. 53.S, not 
 followed : Clarke r. Maedonell, 20 
 
 O. R. 564 rm, (j2S 
 
 Sylvester v. Murray, 26 (), R, ,",99, af- 
 firmed : 26 O, R. 765 6, 183 
 
 Tanner v. BUtrl/,'21 U. C. R. 5,''.3, distin- 
 guished : Regina (•. Cosby, 21 O. R. 
 
 591 42,3, 789 
 
 Tate V. Glolie Printimj Co., 11 P. R. 251, 
 and ea.ses following it, specn'ally re- 
 fer) ed to : lieaton v. (ilobe Printing 
 
 Co., 16 P. R. 281 3-46, 4<i3 
 
 Taylor v. Caldwell, 3 15. & S. 826. fol- 
 lowed : Grant v. Armour, 25 0. R. 
 
 7 .330,485 
 
 Teevan v. Smith, 20 Cli. IJ. 724, distin- 
 guished : Queen's College v. Cla\- 
 
 ton, 25 0. R. 282 6,S2 
 
 Tennanl v. Manliard, 12 P. R. 619, over- 
 ruled : Standard Rank r. Frind, 14 
 
 P. H.:5">'> 435,771 
 
 Teiiiiaiil V. Union Bank of Canada, 19 A. 
 
 R. 1, atlirmed: [IS94] A. C. 31 ,.91, 162 
 Thin, He, 10 P. R. 490, followed : Re Slo.s- 
 
 Hon, 15 P. R. 156 002, 980 
 
 Thoinan v. Grand Trunk li. W. Co., 12 C 
 L. T. 42, foll(,wed : Webster /•. City 
 
 Tho-Tre] column. 
 
 'Ihoman V. Owen, 20 Q. B. 1). 225, fol- 
 lowed: Seripturo v. Reilly, 14 P. 
 
 R. 249 .596,768 
 
 ThoniHon v, Qnirk, I N. W, T. Rep. No. 1, 
 
 p. 88, aflirnierl : 18 S. C. 1!. 695 . . 10!) 
 Thovipmi V. /fay. Be, 22 O, R. 583, af- 
 firmed : 20 A. R. 379 373, 828 
 
 T/iompmn v. Kniij/itK, 7 .lur. N. S. 704, 
 foUowiid : Knickerbocker Co. r. 
 
 Rat/, 16 P. R. 191 .i;)') 
 
 Thoiilit.son V. Smith, 25 O. I!. 6.V.>, re 
 
 versed : 23 A. R. 2!) ' liy,', 
 
 Thornton v. Ca.p.-<ti,ek, 9 P. R. 535, ap. 
 proved: Wiinietl c, Appelljc, 16 P. 
 
 1^. •''>7 .•{47, 41(1 
 
 Thorotd, Town of y. Anion, 20 O. H. 
 .86, ri-veried : 18 A. 1!, 6.">8 ; re- 
 
 Htoied : 22 .S. C. R. 39(» | (3 
 
 Tiirnan. v. /^eoph^ /.\fc /),,<. (/„., •_>(! (>, 
 
 R. .596, allirnud ': 23 A. U. 'XVl. . Mt), r,22 
 Tljilini/ v. Cole, /// ri . 21 O. 1!. 276, ap- 
 proved : 111 i<.. Korbes /•. Michigan 
 Central II.W. Co.; In re.Muiphy r. 
 .Michigan Central R.W. Co., 2(i A. 
 
 ^•■W4 :t70 
 
 Tlsdale V. Dalla.s, 1 1 (;. P. -vj.s, distin- 
 guished : Armstrong r. Anuer, 21 
 
 0-P>.9S r ^.... 57, 879 
 
 To/ce V. Andr,w.'<, 8 (). li. 1). 428. followed : 
 
 iMeNaniara /■. Skain, 23 O. R. 103, .'523, 
 
 792, I0,",4 
 Tomkins v. Jone.i, 22 (,'. P.. 1). .",99, spi^- 
 eially referred to : Flett r. Way, II 
 
 P. R. 312 .".... 215 
 
 Toms awl Moore, Be, 3 Ch. Cli. 41, fol- 
 lowed : Re lioss Cameron and .Mai- 
 
 Ion, 16 P. It. 4.82 
 
 Toothn V. Frederick, 14 P. R. 287, dlstin- 
 guisluul : Vansiekle v. Royd, M p. 
 
 It. 4(i9 ; 
 
 — — — — connuented on 
 
 and not followed : CoU'ey r. .Seane, 
 
 913 
 39 
 
 of 'I'orniiti 
 
 P, R, 2! 
 
 ■105 
 
 T/loman V. Hamilton, 17 Q. B. l).,atp. 
 .597, .specially referred to : Simpson 
 
 V. Hall, 14 P. R. 310 si7 
 
 25 0. R. '22 4„, liiis 
 
 Toronto, /lank of, v. /^e Cure, ete., d, Ste. 
 
 i'i'ir/e, 12, S. 0. R. 25, referred to: 
 
 Larivicre i: .School ("omnn'ssioners 
 
 for Three Pi vers, 23 ,S. C. H. 723. . 955 
 Toronto, Bank of , v. MeDowjall, 15(!. P. 
 
 475, distinguished: (Jrecne .and Sons 
 
 Co. r. Castleman, 250. It. 113 . , 1()7, l,'i9 
 Toronto, Bank of, v. Perkin.s, S S. C. R. 
 
 903, distinguished : Rolland r. 
 
 Caisse d'Kconomic do (lUiebec, 24 ,S. 
 
 <-'• !<■ -105 70, 90 
 
 Toronto, City of, v. Lorsrh, 24 ( ). R. 229, 
 
 followed : Cullerton r. Miller, 2(i O. 
 
 I^. '"W 327,498, 1004 
 
 Toronto, City of, and Toronto Street B. ir. 
 
 Co., In re, 22 O. 1!. 374, aflirmed : 
 
 '20 A. R. 1 Tt ; [ 1 893 1 .\. t:. 5 1 1 . . . . 93 1 
 Totten, In re, 27 U. C. R, 449, discussed : 
 
 Re MaiMlonald, 16 P. R, 498 yo3 
 
 Trcbilcoekv. WaMi, 21 A. U 
 
 23 .S. C. R. 095 
 
 • >.), ieverseil 
 
 470 
 
 Upper 
 
 Tremayni v. Craml Trunk B.W. Co., |,S 
 
 A, It, 184, aliirmed : 20 S, C, R, '259 840 
 
COLUMN. 
 
 >I5 
 
 ill 3 
 
 :!9 
 
 Tre-Ves] 
 T 
 
 J'-'-nion romio/, V. n!,,r, 21 A. R. 379. 
 ;^''^''^"' ■■ -'^ «• C. R. 474 'Jl, 926 
 
 OASES APPIRMED. EEVERSED. ETO, 
 Vin-Web] 
 
 Ixxxvil 
 
 COLITMN. 
 
 R. km"''"'"''' ''''"■ Q"«en, 1 Kx. O 
 
 924 
 
 lenilor 
 
 ,,, "•''•• I'foiilki's, 20 0. R. 61 
 
 r! i')(. ■'"' '■• '^'"'•■'' 
 
 590 
 
 721 
 
 14 !• 
 
 ™ 61 loq 
 
 yrnv^ „»,; ,^onn Co. v. fi,e„emon, 21 R ' " 
 J- 1 , rov.^rsed : 20 A. R. 06 . . 84.' 026, 67,-. 
 
 iia 
 
 IllWlM 
 
 .410, 884 
 40, f„l. 
 
 '•«. 14 I'. R. II ^, 
 
 '•'i-'inf, 4 C. P. 1) 
 J','»;i'ji^: CliamlKTH w. Kitchen, 16 1', 
 
 «iM . K,„^st,„u., 18 A. R. O;?. ..-JHO, 1041 
 t^«-.»/yn.».v .V„,//.,2I0. R, ,.-Oov.,. 
 •.lorl:Atton„,v.Go,H.n.l of Ontario 
 • '"^';niny.(;ener,aIf„rcl,eI)oniin. 
 •"""fC.in.i,!;., fl8941A. C. 189 
 t/nmn Srho,,/ Ser/Jou v. Lorhhar/, 20 0. R 
 
 062, varied : 27 O. R. .•J45 
 Union School fi„.,i,m East ami m^i Wa- 
 "■a,,o.h L, re, 2<i O. R. m, „ot 
 follmvo,! : Union .Sdiool Section ° 
 Lockhiirt, 20 O. R. 062 
 United Sra/,'. v. Sanhorn, 1.35 S 'ot'i' 
 spocdly .vforrod to: T!arl.;r ■' 
 
 rrpp..'^!!:':^: :''!:'':'-' 5«, 661. 1030 
 
 163 
 
 833 
 
 833 
 
 OOLUMV. 
 
 Virieberg v. Guardian Fire and Life ^,v». 
 ranre Co., 19 A. R. 29.^ distin- 
 KUishcd : Re Christie and Town of 
 1 oronto Junction, 24 0. R, 443 32 
 
 uZiZa 'WC •'"•""wed : Township of 
 
 Uurford r. Ch.imhers, 2,-) 0. R. 663 S3 
 
 Vrnjo and City of Toronto, In re. '>0 A 
 K, 43o, reversed ; 22 .S, C R 447 i 
 [18961A. C. 88 ..; **^' 
 
 Virtue V //„,/.,, 16 S. c. R. 72'L'distin' 
 i^'g'-g^jf^'^yf Halifax ..'r2^;^, 
 
 Vogel V. Grand Trunk R. W. Co 11 s C 
 012, distinguished : Robertson' r. 
 (Trand Trunk li. W. Co., 24 .S C 
 
 f^- 611 'l'>5 841 
 
 Voejt y.RoyU, 9 P. R. 249, distinguished^ ' 
 
 Brown r. Hose, 14 P. R, 3 0(4 
 
 Waddimton y. E..,uhna!t and Xanainw 
 If- W. Co., 20 S. C. R "•jr, , . 
 
 finned:[1894]A. C. 420.' "" ' 308 
 
 ^^«i^-'Y-/one,, L. R. 1 P. c. 50, applied '• 
 
 Alhson-.. McDonald, 20 A. r095.- 135 
 Wanrrv. Murray, 5 O. R. 038. followed • 
 ()''''yj o--" ^''^"•'"xl'i'gu'i Lodge, 24 
 Wall .^tM, sVch: d! 703: folhni'f' '"'' 
 
 K™t''-Kent,20O.R.445....49O,628 
 Wallace, y Grand Trunk R. W. Co., 16 U. 
 
 C.madian Pacific R. VV. Co.. 22 O 
 
 „. ,, , 381, 86l', 1002 
 
 tmton y. Apjohn, 5 0. R. 05 .list!., 
 Ku.shed : Johnson v. Allen, 26 O 
 
 961 
 
 507 
 
 Queen, 2 Kx-. C, R. 417 
 
 ed : Hollnn.ler /■. Ffoulke.s, 20 0. R, 
 
 VanDulkrn v 1), Kn,,p,r,AY^. C. R ' 71" 
 aflirmcd : 24 S. C. R. 114 ... ' 
 
 Vanduwn v. Malni[ni,AC L T-ii'l 
 
 R.'T48*"'' '^^''"''''^ '■■ ^''''■°''' '«1^' 
 Verchtre.,, Couul.i of, y, Viiia.,',' ',',r ' y^_ 
 
 'T^-r- '!• ^- C. R. 305, followed ? 
 
 21 .s"c''' p '"■'."''''""" °*' S'e. Rose, 
 
 868 
 
 Wa)islny v. Smafhvood, 11 A r' 439 foV 
 10 r'r ^Jlji'^'^^'-'^o^ker Co. r. 'iutz, 
 
 Warinc/ v. IVard 7 Vpo "rto i • i ' 
 
 Rpr,ff„ „ Fitzsinimona, 23 0. R. 
 
 760 
 
 234 
 
 Beatty 
 245 ... 
 
 IVan 
 
 • •..477,665 
 
 570 
 
 969 
 
 794 
 
 )56 
 
 and Rell 
 
 lelephone Co. v. City of Quebec ; 
 ,»nebi'c; (,,as Co. r. City of (Jiinb,,,. 
 !0 S. C. R. 230 '.iui-bec. 
 
 20! 
 
 guishcc 
 brooko 
 
 !30 
 \\r~i ^7. — distill- 
 
 V'-rnony Tou'n of .Smith's Fall.,, 2\ O. r! 
 
 958 
 
 958 
 
 331, foil, 
 West r. Hartr 
 
 Vill, 
 
 ^g« of London 
 
 •nock y. Kloepfir, 14 0. R. 288, affirm- 
 ed : lo A. R. 324, 18 S. C. R. 701 
 Waterou^Euuine Worl: Co. v. ToxonofPat- 
 
 m6...o» 200. R, 411. affirmed: "9 
 A. R. 4,,2I.S. C. R. .556 ... 
 
 WaUon y Wool ver ton. In ,v, 9 C. L T'" 
 rHay"2"&"'S3*^'^'r'>°-P-» 
 
 '^""' T^eVo^t'^b-^^^^*^' ''•efeired'to; 
 Ine Costa Rica, 3 Ex. C. R. 23 
 
 Walt y. City of London, 19 A. R. 675 
 
 affirmed: 22 S. C. R. 300 
 irmW«,«.v V. C-.m^a Southern Kw'. Co.] 
 
 21 A. R. 297, reversed : 24 S. (J. R 
 
 \v'rf " vu- ''ii'«''*g'"' (^'entral R. 
 
 W.Co... U'calleans 144,519,858 
 
 " ebO V. Coninmsioner.. of Ihrne Hay, L 
 S:,^..H-,"' ?«. 'listinguished : Con! 
 
 69 
 
 69S 
 
 3T2 
 
 536, 
 895 
 
 44 
 
 f'-dGratiuu Life A 
 
 urn, 200. R, 101 ..121,70s 
 
 sti 
 
 .ssouiatioa r. Towii- 
 
 t^pray. Coo^-, 2li C. P. 185, dist 
 
 eJ : McKol 
 0. R. 70 
 
 '"giiish- 
 m ('. ( ity of Louilun, 22 
 
 7'iO 
 
 Wehstei 
 
 ip of How aril, 25 0. R. 1!) 
 
 _ ,'• ,('''.'/ ¥ Shcrtn-noke, 24 S. C 
 •'r; 'I'^tn^'uished : McKay .. Town 
 slup of Hinchiubrooke, 24 SCR 
 
 062, 7<M) 
 R. 
 
 1 Vl 
 
 20, 956 
 
tljli 
 
 Izzzviii 
 Wee-Wll] 
 
 OASES AFFIRMED, REVERSED, ETC. 
 
 (oiAiMN. i Wil-Zim] 
 
 Wee()ar v. Omnd Trunk R. W. Co., 23 O. 
 R. 436, alHrmed; 20 A. R. 528, 2,S 
 
 S. C. R. 422 S-)0 
 
 Weir V. Caiindian Panfir R. W. Co., IG A. 
 R. 100, (jx]>laino(l : Mnirnw r. Can- 
 adian l'acili(' K. W. C, 21 A. K. 
 
 149 412,738 
 
 WcUbi'v. Ilehilzman, 15 P. R. 2,)S, nindi- 
 
 ficd : S. C, l.-> P. II. 407 . .347, 398, 4().j 
 Wellhantt v. Conur,; 12 P. R. 3.-)4. referred 
 
 to: Hlaii- c. Aesclstini', 1,') P. R. 211 881 
 Weth V. Pomr, 3 Scdtt 1 U, followed: 
 
 Regiiia V. Sniiloy, 22 U. 1!. (iSli .271, 470 
 M'entvorlh, Cniinfi/ of, v. Smifh, 15 P. R, 
 372, (list inniii.siuul : I 'arker i\ ( )ilelto, 
 
 l(i P. R. {i9 58 
 
 Werileniinii v. Socie/e Oetieral,' D'K/i'cfri- 
 cite., 19 Ch. I). 240, followed: Car- 
 ter ('. Clarkson, 15 P. R. .S79..355,()73,707 
 )(V,v^ V. Ilowihtim, 4C. P. D. 197. disliii- 
 guished : Faulkner v. Faulkner, 23 
 
 <>• 1!. 252 25G, 991 
 
 Wes/hi-ook V. Aiiiitndiiiii, ifr, Nnrhpition 
 Co., 23 L. .r. (J. P. .12, disliniriiislieil : 
 
 Noyes i\ Young, Hi I', R. 254 802 
 
 Wextern Axiuiwiri' Cn. v. On/ni-ht Coal Co., 
 19 (>. U. 4(;2, afKrnied : 20 (). R. 
 295 ; 19 A. R. 41 ; 21 S. C. R. 383. . 5.33 
 WeMern Coiaitif.i Mainire. Co. v. /Aiires 
 Che.tnicnl Manure Co., L. R. 9 Rx. 
 218, followed : Aeme SiK'er Co. v. 
 .Stacey Hardware Co., 21 (). It. 2(il. .352 
 Wheeler v. /1/acl.; 14 S. C. R. 242, refcired 
 to ; Wineherg r. Hampson, 19 S. ( ', 
 
 R. 309 954 
 
 Whithy, Corpora/ion of, v. Lliamh\ 23 
 Or. 1, con.sidered : Macdoiiell /•. 
 Puroell ; Cleary v. Purceil, 23 S. C. 
 
 R. 101 ■ 1030 
 
 White/}/ V. Ailaiii.1, 15 C. R. N. S. 392, 
 followed : Ross v. Bueke, 21 (). R. 
 fi!12 349 
 
 Widdtr V. IhifTido and Lalce /furo]i J,'. W. 
 Co., 27 U. C. R, 425, followed : lie 
 Maeplier.soii and City of Toronto, 
 20 O. R. :-,.-.8 3I,CS9 
 
 Wd/e,/\: amUXorlhini I!. W. Co., [18911 
 2Q. K. 194, followed: MeArtlmr 
 c. Miehigau Central H. W. Co., 15 
 V. R.77 9S3 
 
 WUksy. Wood, [18921 1 Q. B. 684, distin- 
 gui.shed : MoVicar r. McLaughlin, 10 
 ?'• R. 450 540, 500 
 
 ■ , followed : Solmes 
 
 (-•. Stafford, 10 P. R. 78; Hi P R. 204 571 
 
 and Casselman v. liar- 
 
 COLnMN. 
 
 WilUamnv. Roy, 9 O. R, 5.34, diatin- 
 guished : Freeborn v. VanduBon, 
 15 P. R. 204 
 
 WlUifims V. TowiiMhii) ofltnhhih, 21 S. C. R. 
 103, varied: | 1893] A'. C. 540... 
 
 considered : Sage e. 
 
 Townshij) of West Oxford, 221), U. 
 678 
 
 ; , 14 P. 1!. .50, 
 
 distinguished : Mnyes i: Youul;, 16 
 P. R. 254 .... 
 
 987 
 712 
 
 707 
 
 802 
 
 n'(7/,<v. Carman, 17 O. It. 223; 14 A. R. 
 056, considered: Bush c. McCor- 
 
 maek,20U. R. 497 ,341,973 
 
 and 
 
 irown c. 
 Moycr, 20 A. R. 509 344 
 
 — -, specially referred 
 
 to : Stevens /•. (irout, 16 P. R. 210 974 
 Wi/soii II,; 14 P. R. 2(il, distinguished : Re 
 
 Coutts, 15 P. R. 102 445, 504 
 
 WiUon, and Coitidi/ of E/c/in, In re, 21 A. 
 
 R. .585, aflirnied : 24 S. C. R. 706. S35 
 Wilxon V. MrOiih-f, A',', 2 (). R. 118, fol- 
 lowed : Hegiua /'. Birkett, 21 O. , 
 
 1(>2 108,701, 805 
 
 Windxri/v. Hdiiipson, 19 S. C. R. 309, dis- 
 tinguisheil: Cluunbcrland v. Fortier, 
 
 23 ,S. C. R. .371 954 
 
 Wood V. The (,>iie,'n, 7 S. C. R. 631, I'ofer- 
 red to: (,1ue!)0c Skating Chih r. The 
 
 (i)ueen, 3 Kx. C. R. 387 293 
 
 Woodrnfv. McLmiian, 14 A. R. 2-12, not 
 followed : Hollendcr r. Kfoulkes, 2(i 
 
 O. R. 01 ,-,70 
 
 Woodirardv. Sarxnns, L. It. IOC. P. 733, 
 considered: In re Poiinder and \'il- 
 lage of WiiieliestiT, 19 A. R. 084 . . 122, 
 
 559, 097 
 Wormiin \ . /Iradi/, 12 P. It. 013, followed : 
 
 Flett -■. Way, 14 P. R. 312 215 
 
 Wriijh/, V. Arnixtronii, -I'lO. R. 542, aliirni- 
 
 cd: 21 A. It.' 183 ; 25 S. C. R. 2(i,3. ,384 
 Wn;/hf.\'. Hell, 18 A. R. 25, ;illirnicd : 23 
 S. C. R. 498, mh noni. ; Houghton r. 
 
 Rtill 508, 024, 1021 
 
 ^ Ifj |>. R_ ;j;j5^ reversed: 
 
 i 24 S. C. R. 650 9„9 
 
 j U'i//son V. /)nnn, 31 Ch. 1). 5(iil, not f(d- 
 
 ric, 14 P. It. .507 574 
 
 Il7«iii»i.f V. Ihirrell, 1 C. B. 402, referred 
 to : liulmor /•. The Queen, 3 Ex. C. 
 R. 184 .S1.5 
 
 WiUiamx v. /jv-'iV, 22 S. C. It. 108, follow- 
 ed : Cowon v. Kvans ; Mitchell r. 
 Tronholmc; Mills /■. Limoges, 22 S. 
 t-J- R- 331 : 930,944 
 
 Williams v. Leonard, 16 P. R. 544, aflinn- 
 
 t'd : 17 P. R. 73 15, 790 
 
 low<ul : ,St. Denis r. Higgius, 21 O. 
 
 R.-'30 42-1,920 
 
 York V. Town.Mp of O-iijoode. 240. R. 12, 
 revcrs;ed : 21 A.R. 168 ; 24 S. C. R 
 -'S2 i„oi 
 
 Voiinij V. Midland R. W. Co., 19 A. R. 2b'5, 
 
 affirmed : 22 S. C. R. 190 852, 854 
 
 Yoiimi V. Sanhir, 23 O. R. 51.3, affirmed : 
 
 20 A. R. 045 177, .r.go 
 
 Zadok, The, 9 P. 1). 114, referred to : The 
 Hcatlicr Bell ami The Fastnet, 3 
 Ex. C. R. 40 S91 
 
 Zierenhrrn v. Lahonrliere, [1S93] 2 (^ R. 
 1S3, followed: Beaton r. Clohe 
 Printing Co., 16 P. R. 281 .340, 403 
 
 Zimmtr \. (Ira.nd Trunk /.'. W. Co., 21 <_), 
 
 R. 628, affirmed : 19 A. R. 093. . . 855 
 
 
OOLtTMN. 
 
 987 
 712 
 
 ■STATUTES SPECIALLY RKFERRED TO- 
 
 707 
 S02 
 
 
 .4, 82, 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 ■■)-' lf.!ii. VIII. ch. 9, 
 
 l.'lKliz. oh. 5 
 
 !•'< Kliz. oil. ;■), sec. .3 
 
 ■-'-•& !.',■{ Car. II. ch. 10 .■;■■;■ 
 
 -'!' Cur. II. cli. ;< 199, 200, 201, 
 
 29 Car. H. ch. 3, sec. •2r, ............ 
 
 2 Will. & .\|., Hcs.i. I, ch. 5, sec. 5 
 
 9* II) Win. III. cli. 1.5, sec. 2 
 
 8 .Vniic ch. 14 . 
 
 9(ico. 11. ch. .-. .;..■.;'.'; 
 
 9 <;<•(). II. ch. 3(i 
 
 11 <ico. II. ch. 19 ; 
 
 2()(leo. HI. ch. 11, sec. 14 (N. k). .."."! 
 20 (;c... III. oil. II, sec. 17 (N. B.). 
 
 Wdim. III. ch. 1 (U. C.) 
 
 9(icn. IV. . 
 
 " & 2 Vict. 
 
 h. 2, .sec. 1 (U. C.) 
 ^h. llOiInip.) 
 
 7 Vict. ch. 11 (C.) 
 
 7 Vict. ch. II, sec. 29 (C.) . ". 
 
 8 &. 9 Vict. ch. IS (Iiiii).) 
 
 rf & 9 Vict. ch. 18, sec. CS (Imp.) . ..' 
 8&9 Vict. ch.20, (Imp.)........... 
 
 8 it 9 Vict. ch. IO(), sec. ;{ (0.) 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. ch. 109, sec. 18 (Imp.) 
 
 9 Vict. ch. 42 (C.) '■■■ 
 
 14 & I.-) Vict. ch. ()(C.) 
 
 17 & 18 Vict. ch. 104, sec. 55 (Inip.)' 
 
 18 Vict. ch. .-{(C.) 
 
 18 Viet. ell. 100, sec. 41, sub-s. 9 (C.) " 
 18 Vict. ch. 202, (C) 
 
 18 Vict. ch. 202, sec. ;i(i (C. ) 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. ch. 120, sec. 2 (Imp.) 
 
 Con. .Stat, (,'aii. cii. 28 
 
 Con. .Stat. ( 'an. cli. U(i, sec. II ...., 
 
 Con. Stat. Upper Can. ch. 27 .'.'.,', 
 
 Con. Stat. Upper Can. ch. 27, sec. 22 
 (.'on. Stat. Upper Can. ch. 7,S . 
 
 2.S Vict. ch. 2 (C.) 
 
 23 ^'ict. ell. 2, sec. 20 (C. ) .......... 
 
 Con. Stat. Lower Can., ch. 15, sec. 25 '.'. 
 Con. Stat. Lower Can., eh. 15, see. (i8 . '. 
 Con. St.at. Lower tan., ch. U5 
 
 24 Vict. cii. 17, sec. 1 (U.) 
 
 25 Vict. ch. Hi, sec. 84 (\. B.) 
 29 Vict. ch. 18, sec. 19 (C.) . . . 
 
 29 & m Vict. ch. (), sec. 1 1 (C. ) .'.'.'.' 
 
 Civil C'ode of Lower Can., Art. 14 ! " . , ! . 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 181 .... 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 297, 29!j, 
 
 COLl'U.V. 
 
 128 
 464, 405 
 . . 270 
 . . 300 
 404, 488 
 
 3()0 
 ,. 204 
 .37 (A/,.) 
 
 000 
 
 200 
 . 103() 
 
 209 
 . 300 
 
 300 
 . 1009 
 . 134 
 38 
 . 309 
 . 870 
 
 STATUTDS-CoiiMniifJ. Couns. 
 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1155, sec. 
 
 Civil Coilc of 
 Civil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 
 939 
 
 Civil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 ('ivil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 t.'ivil Code of 
 Civil Code of 
 
 I. 
 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 
 Can. , 
 ('an.. 
 Can , 
 Can., 
 (Jan. , 
 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 Lower 
 
 Can., 
 Can. , 
 (.'an.. 
 Can. , 
 (Jan., 
 Can., 
 Can., 
 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 
 xVrt. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 Art. 
 
 419 
 710 
 
 800 
 831 
 931, 
 
 989,' 
 
 992 
 
 1040 
 
 1047, 
 
 lOMi 
 
 1073 
 
 1092 
 
 938, 
 990. 
 
 278 
 
 275 
 
 00() 
 
 118 
 
 870 
 
 380 
 
 89,S 
 
 924 
 
 1010 
 
 91 
 
 92 
 
 S85 
 
 809 
 
 8.")2 
 
 382 
 
 882 
 
 495 
 
 751 
 
 751 
 
 834 
 
 954 
 
 418 
 
 852 
 
 725 
 
 84 
 
 800 
 
 620 
 
 820 
 
 990 
 798 
 770 
 800 
 1034 
 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1 109, 1171 
 
 (Jivil Code of Lower Can., Art. 12.'(4 
 
 Civil Coile of Lower (Jan., Art. 1235 . . . ." 
 (jivil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1245 . . .'. 
 ('ivil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1473 . . . . 
 (Jivd Code of Lower Can., Art. 1484 . . .. 
 ('n'\\ Code of Lower (Jan., Art. 14.85,1583 
 
 (Mvil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1507 
 
 Civil Code of Lower (,'an.. Art. 1592 .... 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1024 .'.'.'! 
 
 (jivil Code of Lower (Jan., Art. IS,35 
 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1927 
 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 1972 
 
 Vi^ i' S'"''^ "^ Lower Can., Art. 1977 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 
 (■ivil Code of Lower Can., Art. _ , 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 20 
 Civil Cddc (,f Lower Can., Art. 2094 . . 
 (jivil Code of Lower (^an., Art. 2187 . . 
 Civil ('(ide of Lower (Jan., Art. 2188 
 (jivil Code of Lower Can., Art. 2210 . . 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 2227 . . 
 (Jhil (!(jile of Lowei' Can., Art. 2242 
 (jivil Code of Lower (Jan., Art. 2251 '. . 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 22()0. . 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 2202. . 
 
 (jivil ('ode of Lower Can., Art. 22()4 
 Civil Code of Lower Can., Art. 221)5 
 (Jivil Code of Lower Can., Art. 2207 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 3 (|{.N..\.A.), (Imp.).; 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 3 (K.N. A. A.), sec. 
 
 !013 
 2015 
 
 939 
 635 
 338 
 877 
 625 
 876 
 1042 
 620 
 ... 876 
 800 
 955 
 . . 339 
 118 
 .. 854 
 . . 798 
 . . 008 
 798 
 838 
 . . 798 
 . . 021 
 855 
 . . 021 
 300 
 . . 021 
 . . 025 
 635 
 184, 
 020, «55 
 
 o:i5 
 
 621 
 620, 855 
 . . 537 
 91 
 
 (I'"P') 162 160 
 
 30-31 Viet. ch. 3 (B.N.A.A.), sec. 91, 
 
 sul)-H. 15 (Imp.) jyo 
 
 30-31 Vi_ct. ch. 3 (I5.N. A.A.) sec. 91,' .siib- 
 
 sec. 92. 
 
 92. 
 
 989 
 620 
 318 
 6.i2 
 989 
 855 
 876 
 604 
 
 s. 2/ (Imp.) 
 .3031 Vict. .;h. 3 (U.N.A.A 
 
 sul)-s. 1 (Imp.) 
 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 3 (H.N.A.A.), .sec 
 
 siil)-.s. 14 (Imp.) 
 
 -'50-31 Vict. ch. 3 (B.N. A. A.), sec. 
 
 subs. 3 (Imp.) 
 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 3 (B.N.A.A.),'sec.'i09 
 
 (Imp.) 
 30-31 Vict 
 
 (Imp.) 
 30-31 Vict 
 
 (Imp.) 
 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 3 (B.N.A.A.), sec."'ii4 
 
 (Imp.) 
 
 ch. 3 (B.N. A. A.), sec. lio 
 
 104 
 
 170, 172 
 
 93, 
 
 ch. 3 (B.N.A.'A.),"sec.'iil 
 cii. 3'(H"N.A.A;ii,'secrii2 
 
 163, I6,j 
 
 30 
 
 I Vict. 
 
 (Imp.) 
 30-31 Vict. 
 
 (Imp.) 
 30-31 Vict. 
 
 (Imp.) 
 
 30-31 Vict. ch. 131 (Imp.).'. [Z 
 
 31 Vict. eh. 12 {\)j gyy 
 
 31 Vict. eh. 12, sec. 34 (D.) . 07(5 077 
 
 31 Viet. ch. 12, sec. 40 (D. ) ■..■..■.. ' .>;« 
 
 eh. 3 (B.N. A. A.), "see;'! is 
 ch. 3 '(B.N.'A!A.),"iJec!'i26 
 
 173 
 161 
 537 
 537 
 537 
 537 
 537 
 161 
 
zo 
 
 STATUTES SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 BTATVTBB-Contlmieil. Coli'MK. 
 
 31 Vict. r|,. 12, seo. 71 (D.) sOfi 
 
 31 Vii't. ch. in, sec. U (I).). : 204 
 
 31 Vict. ch. I.'l, HOC. 18 (I). Iho 
 
 31 Vict. <li. 17(1).) Kin 
 
 ("•ode of Civil Procciluro, Art. S (iS7 
 
 ("'mil! ijf (,'ivil IVdcciliire, .Art. 144 VX) 
 
 (Vxlo of Civil I'loccdurc, .Alt. I.")l ., ... (i2(( 
 
 (loilu (if Civil I'roccdmi', .\it. IS8 9-(,s 
 
 Code of Civil I'roccdiuv, Aif. 3l>2 (iOS 
 
 (■odu of Civil rniccduic, Air. |;« ij-jo 
 
 (^)d(! of Civil IVoci'iIni'o, Art. iHV2, 003. '. HHH 
 
 ('odo of Civil IVori'diirc, Alt. 711 1028 
 
 Code of Civil I'roocdiiic, Art ,S.J7, ,S,S7. '. !>.") 
 
 Code of {'ivil I'loccduic, Art. !)'2(» lofj 
 
 (Jodoof CMvil I'roci'diiic, Ait. !l!)7, ilOS.. 
 Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 1034, lil.'l,-) 
 Code of Civil i'nuediiic, Alt. 1I7,S, 1I7S 
 
 («) 
 
 Code of (;ivil I'rocoiliiro, Art. 1340*. . . 
 
 32 Vict. cli. 0, Kco. 4 (() ) 
 
 3'-' Vict. cli. II, Ht'c. IS ((,),) ... 
 
 33 \'ict. ch. 3, Hcc. IS (I).).. 
 
 STATUTES— CiiiKiyiKcd. Coli'mk. 
 
 44 Vict. ch. 2.-5(D.) 276, 1010 
 
 44 Vict. ch. 'J5, sec .T, Bub-s. S (D.) |()|o 
 
 44 Vict. ch. -2.-1, Hc , 43 ' D.) ;t(i 
 
 44 Vict. ch. '_'.'), s< ... 4!> ^l>.) 1010 
 
 44 Vict. ch. LT), aeo. IIS ( !).) 21)2 
 
 44 Vict. ch. '_'r», HOC. 109 (D.) 305 
 
 44 Vict. ch. 01 (I).) 145 
 
 44 k 4."> V'ict. (di. 10, hec. fl (Q.) .'182 
 
 44 fi. 4.-. A'ict. ch. 10, .sec. (Q.) 3H'2 
 
 44* I.'. Vict. oh. 43 |(^) 
 
 44 & 4."i Vict. ch. 90, .sec. 3 H),) 
 
 4." Vict. ell. l(i, Hcc. 7 (.Man.) . . 
 
 O.'l 
 14.-. 
 
 cli. n, HCC 
 
 cii. 40(1). 
 
 ih. 4. sec. l.S(l', 
 
 •li. 11 (X.l!.)... 
 
 32, »ul)-H. 
 K.' 
 
 171, 
 
 3 (I).). 172, 17.3 
 4(1).) .... 
 
 I.) 
 
 ..716, 
 
 33 Vict. ch. 3. sec. 22, .siili-.s, 
 3:i Virt. 
 
 33 \-ict. 
 
 34 Vict. 
 34 Vict. 
 3.-, Vict. 
 ;!."> Vict. 
 .3.-. \'ict. 
 .3.-) Vict. 
 
 R. S. Nova Scotiiv, 4 ser. , cli 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 4 sor. , cli 
 R. S. Nova y->,,i\->, 4 fier. 
 
 3.""), .'!.")7 |.j.) 
 
 30 Vict. ch. ;;0<l>.) " ■ ■ T^; 
 
 30 Vict. ch. S' iQ.) .3()o sti,-} 
 
 3, \ let, m, <;, „,,.. I (N. ,S.) ,s;il 
 
 .37 Vict. c!(. '.>. «iM,>i. 100, 122 (D.) !)2S 
 
 ....'.'. ISO 
 
 20, sec. 28(1).) 779,781 
 
 •'1 (D.) 
 
 "!'(<).) 
 
 79, .sec. 12(0.) 
 
 29 
 
 29, sec. 
 l:1i. 94, 
 
 943 
 30 
 240 
 311 
 172 
 
 ,174 
 312 
 103 
 288 
 72.-) 
 
 (/>i.s) 
 S7 
 730 
 731 
 8.10 
 831 
 
 4.% Vict. ch. (it (N.R) 
 
 h. Il 
 
 sees. 0,S, 09 (D.) 
 
 .sees. 102, 198, 207 (D. 
 
 I. 
 
 sees. 
 
 4.'>6 
 
 907 
 
 54 
 
 I.". Vict. ch. 2:1 (D.) !)54 
 
 710 
 
 807 
 800 
 310 
 310 
 300 
 090 
 730 
 fi.W 
 094 
 850 
 
 sr>r, 
 
 S,-)5 
 
 40 Vict. 
 40 Vict. 
 40 Vict. 
 40 Vict, ch 
 4(i Vict, ch 
 4(i Vict, cli 
 4(i Vict, ch 
 40 Vict, ch 
 \i 
 
 n 
 
 17, .sec. 49(1).) .. 
 17, sec. .-JOd).) . 
 
 17, sec. ()0(l).) 
 
 18, sec. 393(0.) 
 
 18, sec. ."0 (O.) 
 
 .30, sec. 0(1).) 
 
 S. Nova .Scotia, "1 scr., ch. 20, sec. 1 . 
 .S. Nova Hcotiu, 5 .ser., ch. o.'t, part 2 
 
 31 
 
 i>, 
 
 53, sec. 9, 
 
 779, 
 
 sec. 21 
 
 .37 Vict. ch. 15;!).) 
 
 .37 Vict. ch. 79, hues. 11, 12 (().) 
 
 38 Vict. ch. 7, sec. 20(i ((,).) .... 
 .38 Vict. ch. 14, sec. 2 (!).).. 
 .38 Vict. ch. ,'52. sec. 1 (D.) .... 
 New York St. Laws, IS7.'i, ch. lit 
 
 Con. Stat. New Brim. ch. 72 ' 
 
 Con. Stat. New Briiu. ch. 100, .sec. CO 
 
 39 Vict. ch. 27, SCO. 7 (D.) .... 
 
 40 Vict. oh. 10, sec. 12 (D.) '. 
 
 40 Vict. oh. 10, sec. 12, sub ss. 1, 2 (D ) . 
 40 Vict. oh. 10, sees. 100, 101, 1 19, 120(1).) 
 40 Vict. ch. 22, sec. 1 1 ((.) 
 40 V'ict. ch. 41, sec. 28 (U 
 
 731 
 701 
 781 
 312 
 543 
 30(1 
 
 49 
 30.-) 
 807 
 807 
 808 
 834 
 
 84 
 
 R. S. Noviv Scotia, 5 ser., ch. 511, sci'. 1 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser., (th. 5,S. sec. 4. 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 sor. , ch. .')3, sec. I 
 
 snl)-M. 15 
 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser., ch. 53, sec 
 
 snb-s. .33 
 
 1!. S. Nova Scotia, '> ser,, ch 
 
 siihs. .30 
 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser., ch. 53, sec. 99, 
 
 sul)-8s. 1, 4, 5.33 
 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser., idi "I 
 
 U. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser., ch. 84, socs. 18 
 
 and 25 
 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5ser. , ch. 84, sec. 21. 
 R. S. Nova Scotia, 5 sor. , ch. 92, sec. 4 . 
 
 855 
 
 855 
 
 855 
 
 52 
 490 
 
 000 
 
 577 
 
 i05(/);,f), 
 
 100 {hh) 
 
 ch. 92, sec. 5. . 100 
 
 oil. 92, SCO. 10. 105 
 
 ch. 92, sec. 11. 100 
 
 538 
 
 107 
 
 1, sec. Ill (Man.) 927 
 
 UiH.C.) 107 
 
 14, sec. 7 (0.) 801 
 
 1!»(0.) 47.3,495 
 
 19, sec, 5 (O.) 494 
 
 19, .sec. 22(0.) 494 
 
 SMQ.) 900 
 
 U. S. Nova Scotia, ") ser. 
 1!. S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser. 
 K. .S. Nova Scotia, 5 ser. 
 
 47 Vict. ch. 4 (D.) 
 
 47 Vict. oh. () (D.) 
 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 47 Vict. ch. 
 
 sec. 23 
 sec. 3 . 
 
 41 Vict. ch. 8. sec. 18 (O.) r^o^ 
 
 41 Vict. ch. 41, aeo. 3 (O.) 7^1 
 
 41 Vict. ch. 41, .SCO. IS (0.) 7;?o 
 
 10.30 
 509 
 495 
 494 
 495 
 393 
 423 
 523 
 932 
 293 
 144 
 (i87 
 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 R. 
 
 R. S. O. IS77, ch. 35 
 
 S. O. 1877, ch. IOS 
 
 S. O. 1877, ch. 125 
 
 S. O. 1877, ch. 125 
 
 S. O. 1877, oh. 127 
 
 S. O. 1877. ch. HO 
 
 H. O 1S77, ch. 140, sees. 34, .35, .-Hi, .37. 
 
 R. «. O. 1877, ch. 107 .. 
 
 42 Vict. ch. I, sec. 07 (N.S.I 
 
 42 Vict. ch. 7, sec. 11 (D.) .... 
 
 42 Vict. ch. 9 '.'.'.'..'.'. 
 
 42 it 43 Vict. ch. .53, sec. 12 ((,).) 
 
 43 Vict. ch. 8(1).) 29:f (/,..,, 
 
 43 it 44 Vict. ell. 49 (t^. ) ,s;i;s 
 
 44 Vict. oh. I, sec. IS (I).) iJjs 
 
 44 Vict. ch. II, sec. 10 (U.) s67 
 
 44 Vict. ch. 24 (D.) '.■.■278, 279 
 
 47 Vict. ch. 88, sec. 0(0.) 
 
 48 Vict. ch. 13, .see. II (O.) .... 
 
 48 Vict. ch. 20, sec. 2(0.) 
 
 49 Vict. ch. 11 (N. S.) 
 
 49 Vict. ch. ,32, sec. 213 (15. C.) 
 
 49 Vict. ch. 45(N. S.) 
 
 49 Vict. ch. 45, sec. 2 (Man.) . . 
 
 1037 
 439 
 
 09 
 094 
 851 
 850 
 
 72 
 
 49 Vict. oh. 40, sees. 22, 24 (O. ) 8.34 
 
 49 Vict. ch. 40, sec. 08 (O. ) 835 
 
 49 Vict. 
 49 Vict. 
 49 Vict. 
 R. S. C. 
 R. S. C. 
 U. S. C. 
 R. S. C. 
 R. S. C. 
 
 ch. 48 (I).) 
 
 ch. 00, S(^c. 1, sul)-s. (0.) 
 
 ch, 145, sec. I (N.S.) 
 
 ch. 1, SCO. 7, cl. 40 
 
 ch. .5, sec. 19 
 
 ch. 5, SCO. 32 
 
 ch. 5, .sec. 33 
 
 h. 7 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 8, sees. 41, 57, 05 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 9, sec. 8 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 9, sec. 9 (c), (;/) 
 
 548 
 090 
 850 
 928 
 645 
 750 
 045 
 760 
 756 
 757 
 757 
 
 R. S.C. ch. 9, sec. 9(/) 757 
 
STATUTES SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 xcl 
 
 1010 
 '2W2 
 805 
 145 
 382 
 3H'i 
 456 
 907 
 54 
 054 
 716 
 N67 
 SOB 
 310 
 ,316 
 306 
 690 
 730 
 550 
 694 
 «50 
 8-).) 
 855 
 
 855 
 
 853 
 
 855 
 
 52 
 490 
 
 000 
 577 
 
 0. 1(15 
 
 1. 10(i 
 538 
 
 .. 167 
 
 027 
 
 . . 107 
 
 801 
 
 473, 495 
 
 494 
 
 494 
 
 900 
 
 . 1037 
 
 . 439 
 
 69 
 
 . 694 
 
 . Sol 
 
 850 
 
 72 
 
 . 834 
 
 . 835 
 
 . 548 
 
 090 
 
 850 
 
 928 
 
 645 
 
 750 
 
 045 
 
 700 
 
 750 
 
 . 757 
 
 . 757 
 
 . 757 
 
 STATUTHS-Co,./,',,.,,-,/. 
 5' '^^^ <'. 'h. II, Hce. 10 .... 
 "• •'^. ('■ ^h. 9, sec. 30 ... 
 "• ''^- t". .h. 9, Hccs. 31,33 
 "■ '^ < . t'll. 9, s.ic. 32 . . . , 
 J- «. V. cli. i», Hcu. 43 
 
 Com MN. 
 
 ..757, 758 C'm) 
 700 
 
 759 
 7.'.!l 
 
 <■'• cli. 9. sec. 50 <l'47 
 
 k. 
 
 1!. 
 
 i;. 
 If. 
 li. 
 
 , Ht'cs. 44, 5(1 , 
 
 . . . 759 
 755 
 
 . . . 753 
 
 , . . 293 
 
 80,S 
 S(iS 
 
 2!):i 
 
 02(1 
 .203, 290 
 
 18 
 21 
 
 R- H. C. till, i), HLu. 50 {/,) 
 «• «• ('. ch. 9, scf. 03 .... 
 g''S. ('. ,.||. <l, .,„, SHI 
 
 "• '**• ('• '.-u. u, Hi^c.m) •••■ 
 
 It. .S. C. cl,. 22, ....c, 4 
 
 "• •"^. ( , 'li. ;i2, .HCL'.s. 58, 59 
 't- i^- ('. ell. ;i3, sue. 10.,,. 
 K- N. (!. ,.|i. ;j7, ,„v. 11 .... 
 K. S. V. rli. ;iH . 
 !;• •'<• ( '. 'li. 38, auc. 2;i 
 »• .S. C. ,1,. ;w 
 
 X. ( '. .li, 39 
 
 ■'<• •'. ill. ;i<i, MUCH, (i, 11 .. 
 
 N, 0, cli. 10, sfc. 15 
 
 «• < '. di. 43 
 
 •'^. ('. cli. i;i, .sue. 20 
 
 '<■ S. ('. ,.|i. ,-,,-,, SHI'S. 4, 5 
 
 K. S. C. oil. Ill, sn;. 28 
 
 I!. S. (;. cli. lil, sue. 37 
 
 H. iS. (J. cli. (il, sec. 40 
 
 K. f^. ('. cli. (i2, sou. 33 
 
 R. S. {.'. ch. ();{, suo, 12 
 
 R. ^. ( '. cli. 75, sec. 34 
 
 H. «. C. ell. 70, Art,. 1(), .sec. 2 
 
 R. «■ V. ch. 7<j, Ai-t. IS 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 79, sec. 2, Alt 
 K. S. C, ch. 7i), sec. 2, Art 
 R. S. U. ch. 79, sec. 10 . . 
 
 R. >S. ('. ch. 79, sec. 12 
 
 K. S. C. ch. loi; 
 
 R. >S. C. cii. 10(;, sec. 2 
 
 R. S. C. ch. loii, sec. 107 
 11. S. C. ch. 120 . . 
 R. S. C. ch. 120, scc.'-is' .'.'.'. 
 120, sec 53, sul)-s 
 120, sec. 79 .... 
 
 122, sec. 20 .... 
 
 123, sees. 12, 14 
 
 124, .sees. 43, 49 
 127, .sec. 7 
 
 - - 129 
 
 R. S. C. cli. 12!), .see. 3 
 
 R. .S. C. ch. r"i, sec. 9 , . 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 129, SCO. 31 
 
 R. S. C. cli. 129, sec. 34 ....'..'" 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 129, sec. .-)4, suiisa. ',%'■; 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 129, sec. 50 . . 
 
 R. .S. C. oh. 129, sec. 02 
 
 R. .S. U. ch. 129, SCO. 74 
 
 R. S. (;. ch. 129, sec. 76 .... 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 129, ace. 77 '.'.'. 
 
 R. !S. C. cli. 129, .sec. 77, siib-s. 2 . .' 
 
 H. .S. ('. oh. 13,-), .sees, 2-28 ., 
 
 H. S. C. ch. 135, sec. 24 (,j) . .951, 9.-)(i, 9,57 («! 
 
 M s: (- 1 ,.j- ., 95S(^«-.s), 9(iO 
 
 R. N. C. ch. 13i., .sec. 24 'US 
 
 R. S. ( '. ch. 135, soos. 24, 28 ...'.] .)-,•' 
 
 R. S. U. ch. l;«, sec. 28 ' i^^ 
 
 R. 8.C, ch. l;i5,seo. 27.. . , . .■.■.94S (M 
 
 I.. N. C. oh. 1,J5, sec. 29. .944 (/yi,s), 945, 940, 9.-.7, 
 
 K. !b. L. ch. I.Jo, sec. 29 {I,} 
 
 R. S. V. cii. 
 R. S. C. ch. 
 R. S. 0. ch. 
 R. S. C. ch, 
 R. S. C. ch. 
 R. S. C. ch, 
 R. S, C. ch. 
 
 27<i 
 
 499 
 
 4!Ml 
 
 29;i 
 
 779 
 
 779 (/-;<), 781 
 
 783 
 
 205 
 
 -125 
 
 S9S 
 
 890 
 
 889 
 
 .S!) I 
 
 891 
 
 SlIO 
 
 891 
 
 ...179, 548 {his) 
 
 518 
 
 549 
 
 9I,,S77 
 
 8il 
 
 4 s,s 
 
 8(; 
 
 7.-1 
 
 lOo 
 
 510 
 
 540 
 
 ...148, l.jo, 156 
 
 148 
 
 lt,S 
 
 i.-.o 
 
 150, l.-,s 
 
 . l.-,7 
 
 STATUTBS-C")i(im(C(/. 
 
 R. .^. <'. ch. 135, sec. 47(e) 
 
 It. S. C. eh. i;i5, HOC. 48 
 
 R. .S. C. ch. 135, HOC. 01 
 
 It. .*<. ('. ch. l.Sij, 800. 08 
 
 I!. .S. C. eh. 142 
 
 R. S. C. ch. 142. .SCO. 0, subs. 2 
 
 I!. .S. ('. ch. 142, sec. 9 
 
 R. S. ('. ch. 142, fioc. 11 
 
 R. .S. C. eh. 145 
 
 It- .^. r. ch. 147, sec. 7 
 
 It. S. ('. ch. 157, sec. 3 
 
 R. S. (;. eh. 1.50, SCO. 9 
 
 It. S. C. c(- 102, »(!C. i;i4 
 
 R. S. {'., ,li. 1()4, see. 50 
 
 R. .S. C. ch. 164, .sec. 05 
 
 '■ !^. ('. ch. 104, .sec. 78 
 
 -*. ('. ch. 104, .sees. 8:), 85 
 
 ('. oh, 104, sec. 50 
 
 lO.-), sees. 28-31 
 
 105, sees. 40, 47, 50 
 
 1 7.'i, sec. ,3 
 
 173, wc. 28 
 
 174 
 
 1 7 1, sec. 25 
 
 174, scc'. 57 
 
 R. .S. ('. eh. 174, see. 58 
 
 R. .S. ('. ch. 174, Hcc. (i2 .... 
 
 It. -S. C. eh. 174, sec. 70 .' 
 
 It. .s. ('. ch. 171, .SCO. 143 ;; 
 
 R. .">- ('. ch. I7.f, sees. 1()4, 2,-)0, 200 . 
 
 ch. 174, .sec. 218 
 
 ch. 174, see. 259 
 
 ch. 175 ;. 
 
 ch. 170, sec. .S 
 
 eh. 178, sec. 20 ' 
 
 ch. 178, sec. 28 '" 
 
 ch. 178, sec. 53 
 
 ch. 178, HOC. .58 
 
 R. .'^. ('. eh. 178, see. 02 .' 
 
 R. S. ( !, ch. 178, sec. 07 
 
 It. S. ('. ch. 178, sees. SO, 88 
 
 R. S. ('. ch. 1 78, .SCO. 84 ... 
 
 R. S. ('. ch. 178, see. S7 
 
 R. S, C, ch. 179, sees. 10, 11 
 
 50 Vict. ch. 22, sec. 11 (Mun.).. . 
 
 50 Vict. ch. 22, sec. 13 (.Man.). 
 
 .50 Vict. eh. 23 (N..S.) ... 
 
 .-)(» Viet. eh. 23 (Man. ) '...'.'.'.." 
 
 ■50 \ i<t. ch. 23, sees. 1, 2, li (.\i,-iii.) 
 
 .V. .S, C, ol.. 
 R. S, C. oh. 
 R. S. C. eh. 
 It. .S. r. ch. 
 I!. S. ('. ,;h. 
 R. S. {'. ch. 
 
 R. S. c. ch. 
 
 R. .S. (;. 
 R. .S. C. 
 R. .s. c. 
 R. S. ( '. 
 K. S. I '. 
 H. ,^. r. 
 I!, .s. ('. 
 R. .s. V. 
 
 004 
 153 
 154 
 1.55 
 155 
 150 
 952 
 
 (D.) ,290, 290, 300 
 
 10, se<-. 13 (I).) ' 
 
 10, scr 10(1).).. 295, 297 
 300, 
 
 10, SCO. 2() (I).) 
 
 10, sec. 31 (I).) 
 
 10, sec. 51 (D.) 
 
 10, sec. 58 (U.).. . 
 
 R. .S. C. ch. 1,35, sec. 30 
 R. S. C. oh. 135, SCO. 41 
 R. 8. C. ch. 135, .sec. 46 
 
 953 (/,,j-,s), 05-1, 955 
 i'/uat), 950 (//(,v) 
 
 951 
 
 958 
 
 959 {Ur) 
 
 .50-51 Vict. ch. 
 .50 51 Viet. ch. 
 50 51 \ict. ch. 
 
 .50-51 Vict. oh. 
 
 5051 Vict. oh. 
 
 50-51 Viet. eh. 
 
 .50-51 Vict. oh. ..,_„_. 
 
 .50-51 Viet. eh. 17 (D.) 
 
 50-51 Vict. ch. 27,800. 1 (D.) .! 
 
 50-51 Vict. oh. ,50, .sec. 5 (D.) . 
 
 I!. S. O. ch. 1, SCO. 8 (13) 
 
 R. S. O. .jh. 1, SCO. 8, siib-s. 43 
 
 It. S. (). oh. .5, sec. 1 
 
 R. .^ O. ch. 25 ','.', 
 
 R. .S. (). oh. 25, sees. ;{, 10, 1 i 
 
 It. H. (). oh. 41, sees. 2, 3,4,5 
 
 K. S. O. oh. 44, sec. 29 
 
 1!. S. O. ch. 44, sc. . ,52, Kii!i-K. i", 
 
 It. ;i. O. ch. 44, sec. 53, siih-s. 5 
 R. .S. O. th. 44, sec. 53, suh-s. 7 
 R. S. O. ch. 44, sec. 05 . . . 
 
 R. S. (), ch. 44, sec. 71 
 
 R. 8. O, ch. 44, sec. 77 , 
 
 COLIMK, 
 
 959 (hU) 
 
 437 
 
 . . 951 
 
 .. 047 
 
 450 (/<m) 
 449 
 449 
 449 
 . 470 
 071 
 . 273 
 ■170 {his) 
 . 501 
 . 358 
 271 
 . 208 
 . 271 
 358 
 105 
 . 270 
 . . . 273 
 ..404, 405 
 798 
 .358 
 . . . 449 
 . . . 449 
 . . . 972 
 449 
 . . . 208 
 . . . 207 
 . . 202 
 . . . 264 
 ... 421 
 . . . 586 
 ... 553 
 , . . 553 
 553 
 . . .587 
 5.52 
 .. 551 
 . . .553 
 884 
 .5.52, 553 
 . . 200 
 . . 344 
 . . 344 
 005 
 12 
 . . 344 
 420, 020 
 282 
 {ins), 298 
 302 {hi.s) 
 . . 426 
 -270, 277 
 . . 426 
 . . 298 
 .. 274 
 288 
 S51 
 .009, 090 
 931 
 5.52 
 431 
 . . 317 
 430 
 . 487 
 5fi5 
 . . 78-t 
 . . 569 
 20 
 437, 996 
 977 (his) 
 
# 
 
 
 a> 
 
 o. 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 fe 
 
 /. 
 
 
 
 V. 
 
 l/j 
 
 {/. 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 ■- lilM 
 
 |50 '""^^ 
 
 I!f 1^ ^ 
 
 P ii£ IIIIIM 
 
 M 
 
 2.2 
 
 IL25 i 1.4 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 (V 
 
 ■O' 
 
 v> 
 
 ^^^ ^\ WriS 
 
 '^?^'"Q 
 
 ^^'^>.1* 
 €^\ •* 
 
zcli 
 
 STATUTES SPECIALLY REFERRED T. 
 
 BTATXJTEB-CoixHmifil. 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 44, 
 
 Cni.rMM. 
 
 see. 7« (2) 970 (hi>,) 
 
 m 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 44, see. HO 
 
 R. S. O. cli. 44, 80C. 84 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 44, soc. S5 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 44, set;. 8(i 
 
 R. S. O. oil. 44, HOC. 86, sub-8. I 
 R. S. (). ch. 44, sec. SS 
 
 !»;0 {his) 
 .. 974 
 538, 542 
 . . r.HS 
 
 R. S. (». ch. 44, 
 R. S. C). ch. 
 
 sec. 101. . ,25, .S19, 80S, 809 (/,m) 
 407 
 
 \\. 44, sec. 102 
 
 R. S. O. (^h. 44, sec. 110 r)47 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 47, sec. 19 21,'?, 24(i 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 47, SCO. 19, 3ul)-s. 2 •>4(J 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 47, sec. .MS ;. ir)! 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 47, sec. 42 '_'49, 7(i5 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 47, sec. i2, siiU-s. 2 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 47, sec. 4(i (his), !il 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 50, .sec. .SI 
 
 R. S. (». ch. 51, sec. 09, suh-ss. 2, ;} . 
 
 R. S. O. eh. 51, see. (19, siili-s. 4 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 51, see. 70, siil>-s. (,';) . . . 
 R. !S. (). ch. 51, see. 70, sul)-s. (r) . . . 
 
 I!. S. (), ch. 51, sec. 77 \r,\, .372 
 
 1!. S. (). ch. 51, see. 87 Tr^ 
 
 K. S. (). eh. 51. sec. li;i 
 
 K. S. O. eh. 51, sec. 144 
 
 R. S. (>. ch. 51, sec. I4S 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 51, sec. 149 .... 
 
 R. S. (>. ch. 51, see. l.U 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 51, sec. 178 
 
 R. S. (). eh. 51, sec. 182 
 
 R. S. O. ell. 51, sec. 185, .siil)-s. ^ 
 K. S. O, ch. 51, sec. 188, .suh-s. 2 
 
 I!. S. O. ch. 51, sec. 197 
 
 1!. S. (). ch. 51, see. 22.'? ... 
 
 R. X. O. ch. 51, sec. 2,'{5 
 
 R. JS. O. ch. 51, sec. I'lO, suh-.s. 4 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 51, sec. 21)2 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 51, see. •_'(;(; 
 
 R. S. (). ch. .52, see. 110 
 
 R S. O. ell. 53 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 5.3, sec. •_'5 
 
 R. S. (). (th. 53, sec. 29 
 
 R. IS. (). ch. ,53, sec'. 37 
 
 R. S. O. ch. ,-)3, sec. 49 
 
 R. .S. (). eh. ,55, see. 4 
 
 K. S. 0. eh. ."i(). sec. 7 
 
 R. S. (). ch. .5(), .see. 12, siih-s. 3. 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 57, sec. ,5, sub-s. 2 
 
 R. S. 0. ell. 57, sec. 9 220,' 22 
 
 R. S. (). eh. 57, sec. 9, subs. 1 (n) ..'.'. . ~ ' .350 
 
 925 
 
 Ci33(/./N) 
 
 398 
 
 404 
 
 398 
 
 l'!4 
 
 4O0 
 
 43(i 
 
 .. 427(1'')-), ■i'2S(/rr) 
 
 4--'8 
 
 247 
 
 1 
 
 .... 38 
 
 177 
 
 402 
 
 .... 480 
 
 2(i5 
 
 205 
 
 4,S0 
 
 r.s7 
 
 560 
 
 249 
 •>49 
 440 
 .365 
 364 
 3(;5 
 363 
 
 69 
 .370 (frr) 
 
 ;i6(i 
 
 367 
 
 . . 31)7 
 
 59 
 
 31)3 
 
 . . 3(i3 
 
 . . 363 
 
 . 3(i2, 363 
 
 3()8 
 
 .3(i2, 371 
 
 . 371 
 
 363 
 
 366 
 
 742 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 37 
 
 408 
 
 985 
 
 374 
 
 374 
 
 .220, 345 
 
 STATUTES— C"»'i'nncif. 
 R. S. O. ch. 73, sec. 12 . 
 R. S. (). ell. 73, sec. 15 . 
 R. ,S. O. ch 74, sec. 2 . 
 R. S. O. eh. ,6, sec. 1 . 
 
 COIPMH. 
 
 . 582 
 
 . 985 
 
 552 
 
 ( /, see. 
 
 R. .S. (). eh. 
 
 K. S. '). ch. 88, sees. 7, 8 . 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 91 
 
 I!. S. O. eh. KM), sec. H 
 
 37 
 
 581 
 
 581 
 266 
 361 
 30C 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 100, see. .30 499 
 
 R. S. O, ch. 100, SCO. .30 675 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 102, sec. 2 209, 682 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 102, sec. 15 1029 
 
 R. S. O. uh. '04, sec. 70 .5,57 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 105 ,S26 
 
 M. S. (). ch. 106 4,55, 596 
 
 K. S. O. oh. 107 424, 4.35, 519, 675, 678 
 
 R. S. 0. ch. 107, sec. 16, sclied. ?, (UiS 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 108. . . .355 {his), 3.56 {ter), 357 (Aw), 
 
 439, 445, 448 
 
 R. .S. O. ch. 108, sec. 4 .355, 3,58 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 108, seo. 6 ,35fi 
 
 R. .S. O. eh. 108, seo. 9 356 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 109 10.33 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 109, sec. 24 10.32 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 109, seo. .30 ;W5 
 
 H. S. (). ch. 109, sec. .32 | ()•>;} 
 
 R. S. O. oh. 1 10, sec. 4 986 
 
 R. 0. O. ch. 110, soc. 8 10"9 
 
 R. S. <). eh. 1 10, seo. 22 |029 
 
 R. S. O. oh. 110, sec. 36 l-> 
 
 R. S. (). eh. Ill 629 (Im), 630, 631, 6.32 
 
 R. S. <). ch, 111, sec. 5, sub-s. 4 631 
 
 R. S. O. eh. Ill, .sc(\ 17 ' 5,39 
 
 R. S. O. eh. Ill, sec. 23 ,569 
 
 R. S. (). ch. Ill, sec. 25 374 
 
 R. S. O. ell. Ill, sec. 35 378, .380, 389 
 
 R. .S. (,). ch. HI, sec. 37 3,S0 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 112 134, 388 
 
 R. S, O. ch. 113 ,590 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 114 379 {hit), 380 
 
 862 
 862 
 802 
 414 
 573 
 590 
 591 
 
 R. S. O. ch. .58 
 R. S. (). ch. 60, sec. 1. 
 R. S. O. eh. 01, sec. 5 
 R. S. 0. eh. 61, sec. 7 
 R. S. O. ch. 61, sec. 8 
 R. S. O. ('h. 61, see. 9 
 R. S. O. ch. (il, see. 10 
 R. S. O. oh. 64, sec. 16 
 
 R. S. (). eh. 65 
 
 R. fS. O. ch. 65, se(,'. 4, sub-s. 3 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 65, see. 10 
 
 R. S. O. ell. 60, see. 26 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 67, sec. 1 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 67, sec. (i 
 
 R. iS. O. ch. 67, iicc, 7 
 
 K. S. O. cli. 70, see. 1 
 
 R. S. O. eh. 70, see. 4 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 70, sec. 5 
 
 R. .S. 0. ch. 70, sec, 6 
 
 R. 8. O. ell. 71, sec, 9 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 72, 
 R. 8. O. ch. 73 
 R. 8. (' 
 
 18 
 
 1. 73, sec. 1, subs. 2 
 
 .")0, 581, 726 (/-As) 
 972 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 114, see. SO 
 
 R. S. n. eh. 114, sec. 9,5, sub-ss. 2, 4. 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 114, schcd. A 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 1 16, sec. 23, sub-s. 5 . . . 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 116, sec. 29 
 
 R. S. 0. eh. 116, see. 61 
 
 R. S. O. eh. 116, sees. 62, 63 
 
 R, 8. (). ch. 116, sees. 74, 137 591 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 118 r.9 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 119 1007 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 119, sees, 16, 18 215 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 121, sec. 5 7.^5 
 
 R. S. 0. ch. 122 91 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 122, sees, 2, 3, 4 1,35 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 122, seo. 7 3 
 
 R. 8. (). eh. 124. .00, 67, 69, 74 (/-/,9), 77, 79, 82, 
 
 •447, 762, 932 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 124, sec. 1 09 
 
 R. 8. (). eh. 124, soc. 2 69, 468 
 
 R. 8. (). cli. 124, sec. 2, sub-s. 2 {a), {!/).. 414 
 
 R. 8. (). oh. 124, se<;. 3, sub-g. 1 786 
 
 R. 8. (). oh. l24, seo. 4 777 
 
 R. 8. (). ell. 124, sec. 5 777 
 
 R. .S, (). eh. 12*. sec. 6 (i8 
 
 R. 8. O. oh. 124, SCO. 7, sub-.ss. 1,2 ... .77 [hl.i 
 R. 8. O. ch. 124, see. 7, subs. 2 
 R. 8. O. ch. 124, see. 9 
 
 78 
 . 162, 487 
 
 R. 8. (). ch. 124, sec. 20, subs. 4 . . . 447 
 
 R. S. {). ch. 124, sec. 20, sub-s. 5 
 R. 8. O. ch. 124, sec. 2.3 
 
 79 
 
 79 
 
 ,10.-), 110 
 
 R. 8. 0. ch. 125 . 
 
 R. 8. O. eh. 125, seo. 1 107' 11,3 
 
 R. 8. 0. ch. 125, sec. 4 108 
 
COH'MX. 
 
 r,H2 
 
 985 
 
 552 
 
 581 
 
 581 
 
 '26G 
 
 3(51 
 
 300 
 
 499 
 
 075 
 
 209, (;S2 
 
 1029 
 
 557 
 
 326 
 
 455, 506 
 
 519, 075, 678 
 
 663 
 
 ter), ;)57 {>,!.■<), 
 439, 445, 448 
 
 355, 358 
 
 356 
 
 356 
 
 1033 
 
 1032 
 
 3S5 
 
 1023 
 
 !l8(i 
 
 1029 
 
 1029 
 
 12 
 
 630,631, 632 
 
 631 
 
 539 
 
 569 
 
 374 
 
 378, 380, 389 
 
 380 
 
 .... 134, 388 
 
 590 
 
 379 {hi.,), 380 
 
 862 
 
 4.... 862 
 
 862 
 
 414 
 
 573 
 
 590 
 
 591 
 
 591 
 
 69 
 
 1007 
 
 215 
 
 735 
 
 91 
 
 135 
 
 3 
 
 ), 77, 79, 82, 
 47, 762, 932 
 
 69 
 
 69, 468 
 
 ,('-).. 414 
 
 786 
 
 777 
 
 777 
 
 _ 68 
 
 ... .77 [lii.i) 
 
 78 
 
 ... 162, 487 
 
 447 
 
 79 
 
 79 
 
 ...105, 110 
 ...107, 113 
 108 
 
 STATUTES SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 STATUTES-C'™(t/iHc</. Couts. , 
 
 {!• ^- ;;• ^''- '^5, .sec. 5 107, 1 13 I 
 
 {J- ^■ U. ch. 125, .sec. 6 107 ' 
 
 !<• «. O. cli. 126, sec. 2, subs. 3 612, 613 
 
 «■ h. O. cli. i2t), sec. 5, subs. 3 612 (U,) 
 
 K.^.U. ch. 126, sees. 7.9 \il4 
 
 «• N U. on. 126, sec. 9, sub-s. 3 (iu 
 
 K. «. O. ch. 126, sec. 10 614 
 
 }:-^-^''-'- •-'«. sec. 11 C13 
 
 K. ^. (>. ch. 126, sec. 16 609 (/«s), 6 
 
 K. .S. O. ch. 126, sec. 19 ..... 
 K. .S. O. cii. 126, sec. 21 . 
 
 K. .S. O. d,. 126, sec, 23 
 
 14. S. 0. ch. 127, sec. 3 
 
 It. S. (). ch. i31, sec. 1 . 
 
 it. S.U. ch. 132 '■■.■. 
 
 H. S. U. ch. 132, sec. 4, siilj-s. 5 
 
 H. S, O. ch. 132, sec. ; 
 
 K. S. O. ch. 133, sees. 5, 6 , 
 
 R. «. O. ch. 134, sec. 3 
 
 K. .S. 0. ch. 135 i.js, 396 {his], 855 
 
 K. b. O. ch. i;i6..95,503,52;i,524,526(^,;.),527 
 K. h. O. ch. 136, sec. 5. .429, 523, 525, r,:>{j {t,-r) 
 K. h. U. ch. 136, sec. 6 523, 525, 527 {his) 
 
 PS n"'- ^•'""■ '' 444, 503, .-.26 
 
 ii. !5. O. cii. 13li, Hec. 12 
 
 li. .S. O ch. 136, sec. 13 
 
 K. .S. (). ch. 137 
 
 R .S. O. ch. 137, secV.f 
 
 K. .S. (). ,;li. 1;j9, sec. 15 
 
 609 
 
 615 
 
 245, 247 
 
 427 
 
 646 
 
 473, 488, 575 
 
 494 
 
 494 
 
 377 
 
 494 
 
 STATUTma-Cmitiiiued. 
 I K. S. O. ch. 184, sec. 54 
 
 H. S. O. ch. 184, sec. 73 ' 
 
 K. S. (». ch. 18J, sec. 188. . 
 
 U. S. U. cli. 184, sec. 212. ...'...' 
 
 K. S. it. ch. 184, sec. 282 
 
 K. .s. (). ch. IS4, sec. 285 
 
 li. S. O. ch. 184, sec. 293 
 
 I!. S. O. ch. IS4, sec. ;i40 
 
 1!. S. (). ch. 1,S4, sec. .344 
 
 l;. S. (». ch. IS4, sec. .351 
 
 U. S. t). ch. 184, sec. 3.54 
 
 If. .^. O. ch. 184, sec. .3.-.7. . 
 
 K. S. (). (li. IS4, xec. ;i')i>, 
 
 li. S. O. ch. 184, sec. .366. '.'."" 
 
 It. S. U. ch. 1S4, sec. 389 
 
 K. N. (). ch. 184, sec. 427.;:;;;;; ,..» 
 
 . ^ ?: '•'I'' \^:^' ""'' • ■*•■".'• ■ ■ • '--> '"A 721 (M 
 
 xclii 
 
 t'OHM.V. 
 
 52 
 702 
 701 
 
 .. 701 
 699 
 722 
 697 
 696 
 697 
 
 696, 723 
 696 
 6V7 
 697 
 (i92 
 
 703, 704 
 551 
 
 419, 444, 502, 50;< 
 
 503 
 
 .376, 386 
 
 .">0I 
 
 368 
 
 U. h. O. ch. 41 . . . .652 {his), 653, 654 {his), ia:, 
 
 R. «. O. ch. 141,' .sec. 3 .... '. 
 
 R. .S. U. c!i. 141, sec. .3. sub-s. 1 ; 
 
 K. b. 0. ch. 143, sees. 2, 5 ... 
 
 R. .S. U. cli. 14,3, sec. 11, subs. 1 
 
 R. .^. 0. ch. 14,3, sec. 12 
 
 R. s. o. ch. 143, sec. 13 ;;;;;;; 
 
 U. !S. O. ch. 143, sees. 17-22 
 
 R. s. u. ch. 144, see. 6 ....;;;;;;;;'; ' 
 
 R. S. U. c li. 147, sees. 32, 42 
 
 R. .S. (). ch. 147, sec. 34 :. 
 
 R. S. O. ell. 147, sec. 42 
 
 K. fS. (). c'l. 147, sec. 51 . . ; 
 
 R. S. O. c.i. 148, sec. 34 
 
 R. S. (). eh. 148, see. 37 . 
 
 K. S. 0. ch. 148, .sec. 40 ' 
 
 11. .S. U. ch. 143, sec. 45 
 R. S. 0. ch. 151 
 
 R. «. 0. ch. 152 ... ;" 
 
 R. !S. O. ch. 1,J2, sec. 62 
 
 R. .8. O. ch. 157 
 
 R. tj. 0. ch. 157, see, 38 
 R. S, U. ch. 157, see. 44 
 li. .S. 0. ch. 1,>7, sec. 45 
 R. S. O. ch. 157, see. 52 
 K. S. O. ch. 157, sec. 68 
 
 R, S. O.cli. 167 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 167, sec, 114 ^., 
 
 11. S. 0. ch. 167, sec. 114 (16) 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 167, sec. 114 (19) 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 169, sees. 47, 49 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 170, sec. 10, subs. 7 
 
 R. (S. U. ch. 170. .see. 13 
 
 (1) 
 
 653 
 65(; 
 17 
 382 
 593 
 
 593 
 
 COS 
 
 602 
 
 902 
 
 902 
 
 226 
 
 905 
 
 657 
 
 657 
 
 506 
 
 583, 658 (///*) 
 
 658 
 
 789 
 
 .. .. 789, 9:'0 
 390, 435, ;.51 
 
 147 
 
 146 
 
 147 
 
 147 
 
 139 
 
 95 
 
 520 
 
 513 
 
 517 
 
 119 
 853 
 678 
 
 H. ''^. (». ch. 184, .sec. 445 
 R. 8. U. ch. 184, sec. 477.;" . ' 
 R. 8. (>. ch. 1S4, sec. 479, su'b-s. 15 
 K. .^. U. ch. 184, sec. 479 ('20) 
 
 R. S. O. di. 1S4, sec. 4S0 
 
 R. S. I>. uh. 1S4, sec. 483 
 
 R. !S. O. ch. 184, sec. 492, siil.-s. 2 ' 
 
 l;. 8. O. ch. 184, .sec. 495, sub-s, 2 
 
 K. -S. O. ch. 1S4, sec. 495 (3) 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 184, sec. 504.. ..;;■■ ■ 
 
 R. 8. U. ch. 184, sec. ,->04, aub-s. 10 
 
 It. .8. O. ch. 1S4, sec. .-.05 
 
 R. .8. O. ch. 184, see. ,331 ... 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 181, see. 531,sub'-.s. -i 
 
 160 
 829 
 729 
 
 964 
 
 699 
 
 725 
 
 729 
 
 .. . 721 
 
 .... 721 
 
 122 
 
 .... 940 
 
 122 
 
 601 
 
 15,689, 719 
 
 {his), 720 
 
 693 
 
 R. 8. O. eh. 184, .sec. 5.32 
 
 R. S. O. cli. 1S4, see. 534 .;;;;;' (J93 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 184, sec. ,-.65 " (j^o 
 
 R. .8. O. ch. 1S4, see. 569 . 71') 
 
 K. S. O. ch. 184, sec. .572 71^ 
 
 li. .8. O. ch. 184, .sec. 576 ; ; ; ' " 708 
 
 R. S. (). ch. 184. sec. r.83 ; ; ; ' 711 
 
 R. S. O. ch. lS-1, sec. 58,3, sub-s. 2 ; 711 
 
 li. ft. O. ch. 184, see. 5S5 712 
 
 R. S. (>. ch. 184, sec. 5S6 . . ; 711 
 
 R. S. U. ch. 184, Hcc. .590 ; ; ; " 703 709 
 
 R. S. O, ch. 170, sec. 20, sub^s". 25; ; ; ; ; ; 679 
 
 R. S. 0. eh. 170, sec. 20, sub-sa. 1,2 ; 
 R. S. U. cli. 171 .... 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 172 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 172, ace. 11 
 R. S. U. ch. 183 ... 
 R, 
 
 R. S. U. eh. 181, sec. 591 
 
 i;. S. U. ch. 184, sec, 59S , '" " 
 
 R. S. O. ch. isi, sec. 612,suL-s. l" (n) 
 
 R. S. O. ell. 190 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 1!I0, sec. 17,'sub-V.4';;' 
 
 K. «. O. ch. 192, sees. 19 and 28 . 
 
 1:. S. O. ch. 192, sec. 29 
 
 R. S. O. eh. 193, see. .52 
 
 R. S. 0. oh. 193, sec. 65 
 
 R. s. o. ch. 193, sec. 191 ..,;;;;■" „^ ^^ 
 
 R. 8. O. ch. 194. . . ,260, 261, 551, 552, 560 (his) 
 R. S. O. ell. 194, see. 4 . . . 559 
 
 711 
 712 
 
 47 
 
 728 
 
 728 
 
 731 
 
 333 
 
 49 
 
 44 
 
 54, 55 
 
 sec. 2.3, sub-s. 17. 
 sec. 34 
 
 «. U. ch. 18,3, 
 R. b. O. ch. 183, 
 R. S. O. ch. 184 
 R. S. 0. ch. 184, aec, 9; 
 R. 8. 0. ch. 184, sec. 22. 
 
 R. «. O. oh. 194, sec. 21 
 R. .S. O. ch. 194, sec. 32 
 R. «. O. eh. 194, see. 37 
 R. S. O. eh. 194, see. ,->o. . . 
 R. S. O. eh. 194, sec. 51 (2) 
 R. S. O. oh. 194, see. ,-.2 
 R. «. O. eh. 194, sec. 54 
 R. S. O. ch. 194, sec. 58 ., 
 R. S. O. eh. 194, see. 60, . . 
 R. IS. O. ch. 194, sec, 61 
 R. S. O. ch. 194. sec. 70 
 
 853 
 940 
 523 
 66 
 154 
 166 
 156 
 789 R. S. 0. eh. 194,' sej; 95 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 194, 
 R. S. 0. ch. 194, 
 
 265 
 
 560 
 
 559 
 
 773 
 
 140,551 (iw), 556 
 
 166 
 
 551 
 
 554,559 
 
 554 
 
 552, 557 
 
 .......... 562 
 
 , 554 (6(d), S56, 557 
 552 
 
 695 I R. S. 0. ch. 194, 
 
 52 j R. S. 0. ch. 194, sou. 08 
 
 sec. 73 
 
 s'i'^. 91 561, 562 
 
 554 
 553 
 66U 
 
 sec. 96, sub-8. 2 
 
 '•••••••'« 
 
xciv 
 
 STATUTBS-C..(i(i-iH«/. 
 
 STATUTES SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 K. «. O 
 K. K. O, 
 K. S. U, 
 R. S. O, 
 K. S. 0, 
 H. S. O. 
 K. S. (). 
 R. S. O. cli 
 
 104, sec. 10.j 
 191, soc. U'J 
 1!I4, sue. 
 1!M, sfo. 
 1!M, sec . 
 ch. l!)t, see. 
 1. 201, .sec. 
 
 112, 
 122 
 l.'iO 
 131 
 
 aul)-s 2 
 
 R. S. (). 
 R. S. O. 
 R. «. O. 
 R. S. O. 
 R. S. O. 
 
 ell 
 eh. 
 ch, 
 cli, 
 ch, 
 
 2112 
 20,% 
 20.-) 
 20.-), 
 •2{r,, 
 
 ;o8 
 
 sec. 1 
 
 sec. 37 
 sec. Ill 
 
 R. .S. 0. ch. 208, sec 
 R. fS. O. cli. 208, sec 
 R. .S. O. oh. 214, sec 
 R. .S. O 
 R. S. O 
 
 R. tS. O. ch. 219, see 
 R. S. 0. ch. 220 . . 
 R. K. O. ch 
 R. S. O. cli 
 
 15 
 
 15, sub-8. 1 . . 
 
 15 
 
 ch. 215, sees. 2, S, C, 20, 2! 
 ch. 219 
 
 3 '..'.'.'.'.' 
 
 COI'-MS, 
 
 .553, 5.-.G 
 5()0 
 555 
 
 320 
 
 560 (l,u) 
 
 5(il {his) 
 
 904 
 
 715 
 
 940 
 
 273 
 
 MS 
 
 831 
 
 051, 052 {frr), 053 
 
 BTATVrHia-Cmitinveil. 
 Vict. ch. 20, se( 
 ch 
 ch 
 ch 
 
 51 Viet. 
 51 Vict. 
 51 Viet. 
 51 Vict. 
 Con. Stat. I!, c"., ch. 25, sec.' 14 '. 
 
 20, 
 20, 
 42, 
 
 sec 
 .see, 
 sec. 
 
 2(>2, sill) s. 
 271 (D.).., 
 283(1).) . 
 IOO(i?.t:.) 
 
 (I).)... 840 
 
 843 (hh) 
 
 587 
 
 •^I'-ITII).) ]63 
 
 ..051! 
 
 1-52 \'ict. eh. 01, sec. >)({).) 
 .52 \'ict. ch. 9, sec. 4 (I)). ... 
 52 X'ict. ch. 12, HOC. 5 ((),), 
 
 .52 Viet. eh. 12, .see. 24 (().) 
 
 52 Vict. eh. 13, sec. 4 (D, ) [\[\[ 
 
 52 Viet. ell. 1,3, .siiI).ks. 2, 4 .and V> {lis) ((').') 
 
 ,372 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 
 
 220, .sec. 
 220, sec. 
 225, sec. 
 
 R. S. 0. cli. 227, se 
 
 S. O. ch. 234, .sec. 7 . 
 
 (rt), (/)) 
 
 07 
 
 .'8. sub-s. 
 
 11 
 
 1, 2, .3.. 
 
 R , ,__. 
 
 R. !S. 0. ch. 237, sec. 14, suh-ss. 
 R. S. O. ch. 245, sec. 1 , subs. 2 
 R. S. (). cli. 245, sees. 48, 49 . 
 R. S. O. ch. 245, sec. 01 . 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 425 
 
 R. S. Q. Alt. 583 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 070 ... . 
 R. S. Q. Art. 077 . . 
 R. S. y. Art. 083 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 085 
 
 R. S. il Art. 088 
 
 R. fS. Q. Art. 690 .. . 
 R. S. Q. Art. 927 . 
 
 R. «. Q. Art. 1718 
 
 R. S. Q, Art. 1803, 1804 . . 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 3380 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. .3871 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 4155 
 
 R. >S. Q. Art. 4389 
 
 R. S. Q. Art. 5104 .... 
 
 R. S. q. Title ix. ch 
 51 Vict. ch. 2, see. 4 
 51 Vict. ch. 5(0.) 
 51 Vict. ch. 5, sec. 2 (O.) 
 51 Vict. ch. 9 (0.) . 
 51 Vict. eh. 19(0.) .. 
 
 51 Vict. cli. 22 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 22, sec 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 22, sec. 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 23, .sec. 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 23, sec. ll" (O.) . . 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 27, see. 58 (M.-in.). . ' 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 28, s«c. 9/0.) 
 
 51 Vict. eh. 29 (D.). , .'. . 
 
 5: Vict. cli. 29, see. 12 . . .'.'.'. 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 29, sec. 00, sub-s. (/tj (D.);.'i(')03(k'i 
 
 51 Viet. ch. 29, sees. 12,3, 144, 145, 140, 
 
 147 (I). ) j()03 
 
 51 Viet. eh. 29, sec. 101 (I).) " oq 
 
 f Viet. ch. 29, see. 170 (R) ...\..'.... 850 
 
 51 Vict. ch. 29, sec. 172 (D.) . sji 
 
 61 Vict. eh. 29, see. 220 (!).)... " 1'J4 
 
 51 Vict. cli. 29, sec. 240 (D.) 124 125 
 
 61 Vice. ch. 29, sec. 246 (3), (D.) '. . ' 841 
 
 61 Vict, ch. 29, Bee. 21S (D.) . 840 
 
 fil Vict. ch. 29, sec. 266 (D.) . 847 
 
 61 Vict. oil. 29, sec. 260 (D.) ' ' ' §47 
 
 1 ... 
 
 (O.)., 
 
 (O.) 
 3 (O.). 
 'MO.) 
 
 (;53 
 
 654 
 880 
 358 
 452 
 452 
 1001 
 044 
 1000 
 835 
 835 
 114 
 134 
 ()37 
 
 637 
 
 037 
 
 99 
 
 788 
 
 788 
 
 788 
 
 788 
 
 788 
 
 788 
 
 . . . 788 {bis) 
 
 48 
 
 1014 
 
 834 
 
 752 
 
 747 
 
 789 
 
 95.'< 
 
 S.J 
 
 751 
 
 .....34,701 
 ...100, 170 
 
 170 
 
 447 
 
 . ..872(68.v) 
 
 ...523, .524 
 
 ,527 
 
 52 Vict. 
 ' 52 Vict. 
 52 Viet. 
 52 Viet. 
 52 Vict. 
 52 Vict. 
 52 Vict. 
 52 Viet. 
 52 Vict. 
 .5« Vict. 
 .52 Vict. 
 .52 V i(>t. 
 r..> 
 
 1, aub-G. 3 (O. 
 
 5(0.) 
 
 7(0.) 
 
 ••<(<).) 
 
 7(0.) 
 
 .1.55 
 
 . 527 {(lis) 
 . . 309 
 . . 368 
 54 
 .. 702 
 , 306, 851 
 850 
 
 ")2 Vict. ch. 14, sii 
 
 ch. 15, sec 
 
 ch. 20, see 
 
 ch. 23, se(; 
 
 cli. 23, sec, 
 
 ch. 27 (O.) 
 
 eh. 27, se<:. 125(N.B.j 
 
 ch. ,32, .sec. 3 (I).) ... 
 
 ch. .32, .«ec. 4 (O,) ... 
 
 eh. 32, sec. 20 ( IJ. ) . . 
 
 eh. .38, .see. 3 (I).) 
 
 ell, 41, sec. 1 (r) (D.) . 
 
 ch. 43(]),) 
 
 ■)2 Viet. ch. -.,3, M'c. 1 {]).)... 
 .52 Vict. ch. 4.3, .sec. 2 ((,».) 
 .52 Vict. ch. ■• 
 
 52 Vict. ch. 7.3, sec. 11 (()'.) 
 
 53 Viet. ch. 4, ;,e(^ 85(N.H.) 
 53 Viet, ch. 8, sec. 9 (15. C.) . . 
 
 .53 Vict. eh. 14n,\) 
 
 53 Viet. eh. 14 (O.) ... 
 .53 Vict. ch. 1,8, sec. 2(0.) 
 
 .53 Viet. ch. 19 (O.) ' 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 23 (O.) 
 
 53 Vict. di. 23, sec. 2 (O.) ...."." ' 
 
 53 Vict. cli. 28, sec. 2 (I>.) ... 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 31, sec. .53 (D.) ."..'..". ' 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 31, sec. 75 (J).) 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 33, .sec. ,30, sub-s. 4 (D.) 
 
 1.53 Vict. ch. 33, .sec. 56 (D.).... 
 '■ '-"t. ch. 33, sec. {".2 (I).).. . 
 
 ■3t. ch. .33, sec. 88 (D.) 
 
 i-c. ch. 35, sec. 1 (D.) .. 
 
 r>:i Vict. ch. 37 (I).) 
 
 53 Viet. ch. 37 (O.) 
 53 Vict. ch. 37, sec. 
 .53 Vict. ch. 37, sec. 
 .53 Vict. eh. 37. see. 
 .53 Vict, ch, 37, sec. 
 .53 Vict. ch. 37, sec 
 53 Vict, ch, 37, sec 
 .53 Vict. ch. 38 (Man 
 
 63 Vict. eh. 38(0.) 
 
 53 Vict. ch. .39(0.) r,<w 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 39, sec. 4(0.) .... '■■■ r,53 
 .53 Viet. eh. 39, sec. 5(0.) . '" ,r,94 
 
 53 Vict. ch. 39, sec. 6 (O.) .524, 527 (I'Jx) 
 
 .53 Viet. ch. 42(0.) 1017 
 
 .53 Vict. ch. .50, sec. 35(0.) ... 713 
 
 53 Viet, ch, 50, see, 38 (0. ) ,57 
 
 53 Viet. ch. 50, sec. 1 (0.) .56V, 562 {his) 
 
 ro }''S^,';^• "'^' «'■■'-■• 1« (0.) 166 {Ur), 558 
 
 .53 & o4 Vict. ch. 27 (Imp.) ggo 
 
 ,54Vict. eh. 11(0.) 403 (M 
 
 t't^ict. ch. 4(0.) 251 (^.r 
 
 o4 Vict. ch. 18 (O. ) 3,57 
 
 54 Vict. ch. 18, sec. 1 (0.) .' 355 
 
 54 Vict. ch. 18, sec. 2 (0.) .350, 357 (7>(^) 
 
 54 Vict. ch. 20 (0.) .....; , ,4i4 5,-^ 
 
 64 Vict. ch. 20 sec. 2, sub-s. (a) 69 
 
 64 Vict, ch, 20, sec. 3 (0.) 81 
 
 103 
 
 142 
 700 
 
 {bis) 
 
 308 
 302 
 37 
 
 ..352 (W.v) 
 160 
 788 
 
 .051, 053 
 051 
 
 .. 1010 
 
 ...45. 48 
 148 
 
 . . 527 
 408 
 281 
 397 
 119 
 119 
 
 0.30 
 
 -i'-K ><cr. 2 {().) ,i44 
 
 729 
 
 ., 741 
 
 103 
 
 . . 425 
 
 885 
 
 105 {his) 
 
 . . 307 
 
 219 
 
 .. 219 
 
 843 {Ins) 
 
 80 
 
 80 
 
 100 
 
 102 
 
 369 
 
 102 
 
 24 
 
 553 
 
 .14, 012, 017 (^e^-) 
 
 247 
 
 017 
 
 3(0.) .... 617 
 
 017 
 
 551, .5.52 
 
 617 
 
 172, 173 
 
 614 
 
 1 (O.) 
 ■ 2(0.) 
 . 5, sub-s 
 13 (().), 
 27 (D.) 
 35(0,). 
 
 r 
 
.372 
 
 Col.tMf. 
 
 (I).)... .S4<) 
 S4.3 (his) 
 
 ").S7 
 
 72-? 
 
 ]()3 
 
 I(i3 
 
 142 
 
 76(» 
 {bis) 
 
 368 
 
 30-2 
 
 (M(<>.) 37 
 ).)■... 352 (I'/j.v) 
 
 UiO 
 
 78S 
 
 051, 653 
 
 651 
 
 1016 
 
 45. 48 
 
 148 
 
 527 
 
 155, 468 
 
 281 
 
 397 
 
 11!) 
 
 119 
 
 930 
 
 644 
 
 729 
 
 741 
 
 163 
 
 425 
 
 885 
 
 165 (his) 
 
 367 
 
 219 
 
 219 
 
 843 (lii^) 
 
 86 
 
 89 
 
 ).).... 100 
 
 102 
 
 369 
 
 102 
 
 24 
 
 553 
 
 012, 617 {ter) 
 
 247 
 
 617 
 
 ) .... 617 
 617 
 552 
 617 
 173 
 
 614 
 
 .527 
 
 .... 503 
 
 524 
 
 )24, 527 ('""•') 
 
 1017 
 
 713 
 
 57 
 
 m,m2{im) 
 
 66 (It)-), 658 
 
 892 
 
 . ..403(6w) 
 ...251 (ter) 
 
 357 
 
 356 
 
 56, 367 (bis) 
 
 ...414 (6J8) 
 
 69 
 
 81 
 
 .551, 
 .'172, 
 
 
 STATUTES --o„/,«„^d 
 
 ;'] Via. uli. 20, see. 5(0.) .. 
 
 •^^ ^ ic. ch. 46, sec. 1(0.)... 
 
 5-t Vict. ch. 51 (O.) 
 
 i_>j \ let. cli. r,l, Hcc. 9(0.) .. 
 M Vict. oh. 51, sec. 11(0.) ., 
 t>-l Vict. ch. 01, sec. 19 (U.).. 
 •« V itt. oh. 51, sec. 24, sub-s. 
 J4 \|cl. cli. 5.-), sec. 81, sub-,s. 
 
 r* .M*^'' <-•''• 55, sees. 87-88 (O.) . . 
 
 54 V^' "['• r5' ^^°- '^7. s»l>s. I (OV) 
 54 V let. ch. 55, sec. 96 (O.) 
 
 i.'f \ict. ch. 55, sec. 116(0.) 
 
 54 Viet. ch. 57, sec. 6(0.) 
 
 54 Vict. ch. .57, sec. 11 (O.) . 
 
 *)4 Viet. ch. 78(0.) 
 
 54 Vict. ch. 82, sec. 14 '(o'.i '. 
 
 54 Vict. ch. 96(Q.) 
 
 *}f^y:y'^t''^li-l».sec. I,Vuii-V 
 .)4 & i);i Vici. eh. 25 (D.). 
 
 STATtTTfiS SPECIALLY REPEERED TO. 
 
 ... .KiO, 
 . 70(), 707, 
 
 .(Wv 
 
 54 & 
 
 55 7,et. ch. 25, 
 
 COMMN. 
 
 . 657 
 . O.SO 
 
 9;]:i 
 
 55,^ 
 
 70il 
 
 707 
 
 707 
 
 ■ . 707 
 
 . . 238 
 
 . . 900 
 
 • . 83;i 
 
 S.S2 
 
 . . 833 I 
 
 . . 8:)3 
 . . 83;i 
 
 833 (/,is) 
 
 832 
 
 8;!5 
 
 .S35 
 
 924 
 
 928 
 
 95;j 
 
 (Iini..) 413 
 
 04, 173 
 
 535 (O.) .. 
 5.iO, siili-s, ( 
 509(0,).... 
 571 (2)(0.) 
 573 (O.) .. 
 579(0.) ... 
 580(0.) 
 
 (O.) 
 
 si^y. 3 ..912, 94.3, 944,' 915 
 
 54 & 5o Vict. ch. 20 (I).) ^ ■' , ,;! 
 
 54 & 55 Vict, eh 2Qn)( '*"" 
 
 54 & 55 Vict! eh.- 35 i^; '^»^'. '•« 
 
 ^*^ie^!^'-'^''f>-.--^(o.r.v..-.vi4o,H9 
 
 ■4, 
 
 ■33(0.) .■.'.'.■.■.'. 
 33, auh-s. 2 (O.) 
 33, snl)-s. 3 (O. > 
 
 . 54, sub-ss. 5, 7 
 
 155 (O. 
 
 00 Vict. eh. 3, ice. 180(0.) 
 5o Vict. ch. 10, sec. 19 (0 \ 
 5o Vict. ch. 10, .sec. 2.-^ (.)') 
 55 Viet. eh. 10, see. 20(0) 
 55 Vict. eh. 25 (O.) 
 
 55 Vict. ch. 20 (O. ) . . 
 
 55 V^iet. ch. 2(), .sec. 2 (6 ') ' 
 
 5.> Viet. ch. 20, sec. 3 (O) ' 
 
 5o , let. ch. 2(;, .sec. 4 (O ) 
 
 65 V- let. ch. .30, sec. 3 (O". 
 
 55Viet. ch. .30, sec. .3, sub-s.i'(b.) 
 
 00 Vict. ch. .30, sec. 0, sub-s. 3 O 
 
 .50 Vict. ch. 39(0.) ' 
 
 55 V ;t. ch. 39, .see 
 
 5<) Vict. eh. 39, sec. 
 
 55 Vict. cli. 39, sec! 
 
 55 Vict. ch. 39, sec 
 
 55 Viot. eh. 42 (O. ) 
 
 55 V^iet. cii. 42, sec. ,„„ .„ , 
 
 o,_) Vict. eh. 42, sec. 175 (O.) 
 
 ijo V^ict. ch. 42, sec. 187(0.) 
 
 o._j V let. ch. 42, sec. 191 (O.) 
 
 .),) Vic*;, ch. 42, sec. 209-213 (0 V 
 
 aa Vict. ch. 42, sec. 279 (O ) 
 
 5.^) Vict. ch. 42, .sec. 286 (O. ' 
 
 o5 Vict. ch. 42, se<;. 3,32 (O " ' 
 
 55 Viet. ch. 42, sec. 373 (()") ' ' ' 
 
 .55 Vict. ch. 42, sec. 385 (O.' '" 
 
 oo Vict. ell. 42, sec. 391 (O ) ' ' " 
 
 5o Vict. eh. 42, sec. 399 (O ) " " 
 
 oSVict. ch. 42, sec. 401 (O.) ■" 
 
 55 Viet. ch. 42, see. 404 (O.) . ' ' „„. ,.,„, 
 
 5o Vict. ch. 42, sec. 427 O '' ^?, 
 
 55 Vict. eh. 42. sec. 483 O. :. ^ 
 
 o5 Viet. ch. 42, sec. 487 0. .. rU^H 
 
 55 Vict. eh. 42. sec. 489, sub-s. 25 (oV)' " ' 2 
 
 5,_.V^,ct.ch. 42, see. 530(0.) ... '■ JL 
 5o Vict. ch. i2, sec. 531 (0. -, « 
 
 SSVict, ch.42.scc.531,suL:5(0)'" 
 
 / tiO 
 
 409 
 
 409 
 
 4(i9 
 
 73 
 
 107, 109, 11(1 
 
 '■i(lns), li;{ 
 
 112 
 
 ....74, 113 
 
 . . . 054, 05(i 
 
 .... 1011 
 
 .... 054 
 
 104 
 
 . . 520, 521 
 
 .410, 521 
 
 1 410 
 
 (O.).. 157 
 
 4,3,700 
 
 702 
 
 702 
 
 701 
 
 702 
 
 699 
 
 727 
 
 .... 093 
 .... 095 
 700 
 .... 213 
 .... 688 
 .... 213 
 . . . . 687 
 . 687, 090 
 
 STATUTBS-CoH(i»«fd. 
 
 55 Vict. ch. 42. see. .533 (a) (O.) 
 
 •>■> Vict. ch. 42. «e<.. -- ■ ' 
 
 ■<'< Vict. ch. 1;,;, sec. 
 
 •'■"' \'ict. eh, J>, see 
 
 *)•> Vict. ch. 42, .sec 
 
 .55 Vict, eh, .J2, sec 
 
 •j5 Vict. ch. 42, sec, 
 
 5.5 Vict. ch. 42, see. „ou (w. 
 
 • 10 \ let. ch. 42, sec. 585 (O.)' 
 
 •_'■_' V let. eh. 42, sec. 580 (2) (O ) 
 
 ■'•> Vict. ch. 42, .sec. ,590(0.) 
 
 42, sec. 591 (O.) 
 
 42, .sec, (i23(//), (O,),"" 
 
 48(0.) ......;;::; 
 
 -- V . , '*^' ^'^''- -• •■*"''•«• '0 (O.) 
 00 V let. ell. 48, .sec. 34 (() ) 
 
 •>5 Vict. eh. 48, ,=ec. 52 (O ) 
 
 5o Vict. ch. 48, sec. (!4, sub.ss.'4, 7, 9(0.) 
 ooVul. eh. 48, sees. 119, 120(0) 
 
 fii. 48, sec. 121 (O.) 
 
 oh. 48, .sec. 12.3, siib-s. 2 (()' ) ' 
 
 fh. 48, sec. 124 (O.) 
 
 <li. 48, sees. 141, 142(0) 
 
 ch. 81, sec. 7((),) 
 
 ch. 90 (O.) ' 
 
 <;h. 90, sec. 6 (I >.)..', 
 
 (;h. 29, sec. 13(1).)."' 
 
 ch. 29, sec. ION (I).) 
 
 55 Via. ch 
 ''■> Vict, ch 
 55 Viit. ch, 
 55 Vict, ell 
 
 XCV 
 
 CuI.CMN, 
 
 . . 690 
 
 68S 
 085 
 
 ■ 705, 70s 
 706 
 704 
 708 
 708 
 
 708, 713 
 705 
 710 
 
 (his) 
 
 70: 
 
 ")5 Vict 
 )5 Vict, 
 
 55 Vict. 
 
 55 Vict, 
 
 .55 Vict. 
 
 55 Vict. 
 
 .V) Vict. 
 
 55 ,'>() V'iet, 
 
 55-50 Vict, 
 
 (l>.) 
 (D.) 
 
 55 Vict. ch. 42: sec. 532(a).'!': .'.!.!. ' fils ^^ ^'o^- "h- isio!) 
 
 oo-.^b V let. ch. 29, .sees. 1 9'/, ||,'N (1) )" ' 
 .>.)-oO V ict. ch. 29, .see. 275 (1) ) 
 
 -'•'-.>0 Vict. ch. 29, .sec. .394 (I) ) 
 
 .>o-,50 Vict. oh. 29, see. 421 (|/) 
 
 ..O-50 Vict. eh. 29, .see. ,559 (I)!) 
 
 5.)-.)6 V let. ch. 29, sec. 584 (l> 
 
 00-50 Vict. cli. 29, .sec. 041 (D) 
 
 M-.^ Vict. ch. 29, sec. 083 (In 
 
 5o-ofa V let. eh. 29, see. 084 (I) ) 
 
 5.)-56 Vict. ch. 29, sec. 7.V2 (I)' 
 
 .5o-oO Vict. ch. 29, sec. 843 (IJ) 
 
 oo-uO Vict. ch. 29, sec. 8(5(1) ) 
 00 06 Vict. ch. 29, sec. 845 (3) (D 
 .>)-.^)6 Vict. ch. 29, .see. 847(1)) 
 00-56 Vict. eh. 29, .sec. 8.50(0 ' 
 .)o-.)0 Vict. ch. 29, SCO. 857 (1)' ' 
 55-,j6 Vict, eh, 29, sees. 805, SOO 
 ._)._)-o(, Viet. ch. 29, sees. 879, 881 
 ._)0-oO V let. ch, 29, see. 889 (D ) 
 oo-of) Vict. ch. 51, sec. 55 (Q.) 
 ■i6 Vict. eh. 20(0.),.. ' 
 
 50 Vict, ch, 20, see. 2 (O. ) 
 
 50 Vict, ch, 24, sec. 1 1 (O ) 
 
 .50 Vict. ch. 26(0.),.. 
 
 06 Vict. ch. 29 (h) (1 )'.")'. 
 
 56 V'iet. ch. 29, sec. 1 (L) j 
 
 50 Vict. ch. 31 (U.) ". 
 
 •56 Viet. ch. 31 , sec. 2 ( D.) 
 
 50 Viot. ch. 31, sec. 5 (D.) 
 
 .56 Vict. ch. .32, see. 7(0) 
 
 56-57 Viet. ch. 23 (Imp.) 
 
 57 Viet. oh. 32(0.) ....;.' ' 
 57 Viet, eh, ,32, sec. 3 (6 ) 
 
 57 Vict. ch. .34(0.) .... 
 
 ._)7 V let. eh. 50, see. 8 (6. ) 
 
 07 \ ict, ch. .50, sec. 14 (O.) 
 57 Vict, ch. 55, sec. 22, siib-s 
 
 57 Vict, ch, 58, sec. 1 (0 ) 
 
 58 Vict. ch. 13, sec. 21 (o ) ' 
 58 Vict. ch. 34, sec. 12 (o'l ' ' 
 
 08 Vict, ch, fi8(0) ■■ 
 
 ■ 6 (0,), 
 
 . 72o 
 44 
 45 
 45 
 49 
 43 
 50 
 55 
 50 
 50 (bis) 
 .55 
 .551 
 47 
 928 
 497 
 268 
 271 
 164 
 ... 481 
 . . . 450 
 .550 
 • . . 203 
 209 
 . . . 203 
 . . . 262 
 265 
 .203, 556 
 205 
 • . . 553 
 . . . 265 
 .557 
 . . 205 
 .. 104 
 . . 203 
 .550 
 48 
 .. 447 
 447 
 . . 009 
 655 
 953, 954 
 . . 954 
 2(i2, 347 
 . . 398 
 405 (bin) 
 419 
 420 
 383 
 812 
 . 800 
 . 721 
 . 690 
 . 926 
 . 835 
 984 
 . 527 
 . 852 
 . 527 
 
1l 
 
ABBREVIATJOXS. 
 
 pr: p\ ^^PPe"l Reports (Ontario). 
 
 ^^•^•> British Columbia. 
 
 ;. ■ , Province of Cuniida. 
 
 P p p ^- '■• ^' ^' • • ^*^" ^"-'^ (^^'-^•-•). 
 
 C p'":'"^: ■ : S*;r;?' «'7t '• HepoHs (Uppir CanaclH anU OntaHo), 
 
 C I J A^''''^' ^'"""'" Conimon Pleas Reports. 
 
 ^■j- ■ ■ Canada Law Journal. 
 
 (-.■ J- ■ ■ -^ Canada Law Times. 
 
 c" 8 ■ C ■ ^' ?"''''" ^^"'^ ^''"'' Occasional Notes. 
 
 a S.' b! Consohdated Statutes of Canada (Province). 
 
 C. S. L C t^onsohdated Statutes of British Colun.bia. 
 
 C. S. N B Consohdated Statutes of Lower Canada. 
 
 C. S. U C Conso .dated Statutes of New Brunswick. 
 
 (D ) Consolidated Statutes of Upper Canada. 
 
 ^ "^ * Dominion of Canada. 
 
 Ex. C E ?'^,"" ^'""'''^ ^^'■'•"'' ""^' ^PPe<'^l Reports. 
 
 Gr i-xchequer Court of Canada Reports. 
 
 (Imp.)' : : ; ^r*-. ^'';'";'->' ^'^P-'^^ (upper Canada and Ontario). 
 
 I J, \ Imperial Statute. ' 
 
 Z;:^' ;•"'■ Lower Canada Jurist. 
 
 Jj "•'' Province of Manitoba. 
 
 ^" „ ■ „ ^'l' ^'ew Brunswick Reports. 
 
 ^'XV?V Nova Scotia Reports. 
 
 fo ) ^P North-West Territories Reports. 
 
 q'l; Province of Ontario. 
 
 p" ■ ■ Ontario Reports. 
 
 p" ^ Prince Edward Island. 
 
 o"f '-R ^'"gsley, New Brunswick Reports. 
 
 p Quebec Law Reports. 
 
 •o' 't Practice Reports (OntarioV 
 
 JKev, Lef T> T , , „ 
 
 j^ g p " Revue Legale (Quebec). 
 
 r" s' N S ■ Vfl" ■«■■■■ ?''?'''^ ^'''*"*"* °^ ^''^"'■^^'^ (Dominion). 
 R S N S ' tf f '■• ■ ■ ^"■•"^' ■^*^*"*^^ "^ ^^'-^ '^'^olia, 4th s ries 
 
 pj g !;• ^^" Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1877. 
 
 ^ ^' Q Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1887. 
 
 g ■ P, ■ jT Revised Statutes of Quebec. 
 
 U C R Supreme Court of Canada Reports. 
 
 U" c' l't T^^''^'" ^'"""'* ^"^^"'^ R«"«li Reports. 
 
 u' s ■ ^ ^PP^'' C'"i«da Law Journal. 
 
 '^ ^'"^'^'^ St'^tes Supreme Court Reports. 
 
 Ill 
 
 t i. 
 
i» 
 
 A DIGEST 
 
 or 
 
 THE REPORTED CASES 
 
 18-22 APPEAL REPORTS 
 20-26 ONTARIO REPORTS. 
 
 CO.NTAI.NED I.V VOLUMES 
 
 ia-24 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA 
 REPORTS. ^^«.a.uA 
 
 ADDENDUM AND ERRATA. 
 
 Column 125 
 
 (( 
 
 162 
 
 (( 
 
 232 
 
 tt 
 
 299 
 
 (( 
 
 364. 
 
 K 
 
 368. 
 
 (i 
 
 4G0. 
 
 (( 
 
 504. 
 
 II 
 
 522. 
 
 tt 
 
 543.. 
 
 II 
 
 647.. 
 
 <l 
 
 685.. 
 
 II 
 
 912... 
 
 ' • • J^ohertson v. O. T. R, for 21 A. R. <■ 264 " read " -^04 " 
 
 • ■ ^""'^""^ ^- ^'"»«« J^^^^k, for sec. .' 19 » read sec '« 91 '" 
 
 . . Clarke v. Creighton, for 14 P. R. « 31 " read 14 P R « 34 " 
 
 ..C^ty ofQu..lec v. The Queen, for 50-51 Vict. ch. « 10 " read cb " IG " 
 
 • . In re I? allace v. Virtue, for " 7 " R. S. O. read " 70 " R S o' ' 
 
 ■"z If ^r "''° ^" ^'^ ^^^^ " """"^ " - '^' '^- ^-' ^ot. 
 
 ■ Huntington v. .I«ri7/, for 17 O. R. « 295" reml '■ 245 " 
 .Re Wilson, for 14 P. R. « 260 " read '< 9fii " , 
 
 Case, p. l.i., fo, II 21c .. 1 r;;! „ -^'' '""' -- -- - Table of 
 
 .^ank V. ^.„ Z^/-. Ass. ^ ,„ at foot of column add " 23 S. C. R. ,52« " 
 •T e reference to H^,.,,,, ,, .utrill, should be to « 20 A R 
 (Appendix.)" ■^- "• 
 
 McRae v. Marshall, for 17 A R '< '^O " .. j it a t. 
 
 ' "' ^' ^- It. rfy read 17 A. R. " 139 " 
 
 ,, , • ^- w. It. oaj, should be " 23 O R 552 " 
 
 . ..W«,j.« V. Z,» ,^U.,. Beterenoe .,.o.„ ,„ ,. ,3 0. R. 204, ,5 
 
 I 
 
 ABUSE OP PROOIDUEE. 
 
 Sef. AcTioy, V, 
 
 l-^~r;,-;f?,/rsrs-«%£— 
 
 expressly accepted bvf,^"'""r* *'"^^^"^' »- 
 tion. Where therPfnrn!.^'''^^'^'"' '" satisfac- 
 
 forwarded ^thesol l^ofth'"'^^'"*^^'^'''^ 
 tor a bank draft! pSable to th.^^r'^r^f*^''-^^ 
 
 the^drXnd obtSned";: :,''^«°""^r endorse d' 
 
 to the judgment credt",' °^''" "'°'"-''" 
 
 accept^hf mS"\n^MV'1t refusing to 
 
 credftor was'allowed to "oce i for thi^'f '"* 
 
 Day V. AIcLea. 22 Q. k ."eiO apptd ""'^ 
 
p 
 
 " 
 
A DIGKST 
 
 or 
 
 THE KEPOllTEl) OASES 
 
 18-22 APPEAL REPORTS 
 20-26 ONTARIO REPORTS. 
 14-16 PRACTICE REPORTS. 
 
 CONTAINfU, l.v VllUMKS 
 
 1-8 EXCHEQUER COURT REPORTS 
 
 Sin m*._ * 
 
 AND ALSO OF OANADIAK r a.^.. . "■XCHB«nBK OOUET REPORTS. 
 
 PR.W -S5.1-?.''r^S?2S^^^™^-7--^^^^ 0- ™^ 
 
 ABATEMENT OP ACTION. 
 
 A'ee NEOLloii.Ni.fi, IJ, 
 
 ABSCONDING DEBTOR. 
 
 claim i; CO, nun.l-"'^'"'""*;.''"' ""''''"it " 
 
 l»ve conun encll " ^^ '""^ '''"' proceedings 
 
 i. !l::£t:p:;:;ci.;!iT^';^'!f "- ""'''-it 
 
 fMtht..sttpr e the", "l^ ''■'''^''•,'""' 'f "'« 
 
 ffiS--ii:s=ft:^==.'E 
 
 not .still ■■ omnVmL^ I • '^1 ^'•. '^''- *^«' "'"St 
 reversed ka."'/ I?"""*/ *-""'* "f .Sin.coe 
 
 ACCELERATION. 
 
 See Lanlloud and Tkvant \rv nf 
 
 ACCESSORY. 
 
 ■Sec C'jiijii.SAi. Law, I. 
 
 ACCIDENT INSURANCE. 
 
 Hit LNSUIiA.Nfl-, ]1. 
 
 ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. 
 
 an^:^^«-^r>S.,;:>,ap-o.. injured ,,,. 
 0.'R!^"lT*r:;eSd^"^^"^«--»' Division. .,i 
 
 i««cd «gai„sr£";;ro, !.;' "■' ""'"^'""enthas 
 debtor, an m er m.^C ^ "^ "" "''«'-o"dii.« 
 son for .leiiverv to tL^l «*' '^"'" " *'"■•'' P" 
 
 hands for collectio,. L..f • '". ""''^ "> his 
 
 the property of tlelpf." Pronnssoiy notes, 
 not clenj t rfact sul • """ ''"^ ^""^'*"'' ''^'^ 
 
 Arrest of Absconding Debtors. -5ee Arrest. 
 
 ABUSE OF PROCEDURE. 
 
 See AcTio.v, V. 
 
 .nust!'r^bf -i^^rx^tirT' °^ » i""«-nt 
 expressly accepted bvf,!^'""f°^ ">'"-«"f' '"■ 
 tion. Where thLf "'!;,'^'''<'d'to'- in satisfuc- 
 
 fon^arded to\e sol S "; of t'l/"' 'T ^"^ ''*"^'- 
 tor a bank draft mvn i * *i J"''gnientcredi- 
 
 as payment .Mn%^lf"iultl "v '■''"'''' "'''"'^ 
 the draft and obta iml'n! ^''V'f hcitorendorst.l 
 
 to the judgmPnt cre^iL?i ,P^"^°''^'■ ^^^ "'ont'V" 
 
 accept^hf^paynS"''^. '^. ,V° h "'f"^'^** 
 creditor was allowed to nl. „ i f H J'J-^^n'ent 
 
 II 
 
3 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 If 
 
 ill 
 
 Stv. M, Niil,.«ce. 7. Jii.Iii'aturu Ait, ixh to i>art 
 l.tit.,rin«„oo of un ol>li«utu,n in HatiWuct'.,.,, 
 
 Cdlixiclfl-Ol.. 
 
 Onlur ut tlif C..uiity 
 ulliniiuil. J/ttwH V, J 
 
 OvAUorCImm ,„„l.,- Sjo.] A cmlitor 
 foranam.mnl uudur S40 caiui.il attack a coi.. 
 ilv ( •,„■,.* .f u- II ^ vi'yaiice of |aii<l ax volimt.irv or fiaiiiliil.Mf 
 
 V. iJtuiiK, 'JO (). K. iV'tit. 
 
 ■iiiuiiH 
 
 »Tn. XtTliax 
 
 ACKNOWLEDOMENT OP TITLE. 
 
 'Vtf I.IMIIATION (iK ArllONs 
 
 ACT OP PARLIAMENT. 
 ACT OF LEQISLATURE. 
 
 Hi, CoNNTiTiiioNAL Law— .Statl'tes. 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 I. 15V AM) ACAINST WHOM MaINTAINAULE, 3, 
 
 II. I'oK \MHT Maistainaiue, 6. 
 ill. XciTK !•: or An Ion, 8. 
 IV. .SiiriLK.MKNi' (IK Action, lo. 
 
 \'. .SiAVixii Action, 10. 
 
 1. Hv AM) AdAixsT WHOM Maintainable. 
 
 ABBlgnraent -Moiieyi Entrusted for I>,iv<t. 
 111,1,/.-- li-uiisj,,- — i;H,;,„m.] — Monuv was 
 e..tn.«tc.jl to Al for tl.e imrposo of l.euig ii.ve.stc.l 
 111 a land .siiuoiilation, Imt was uot 8o uneil, ami 
 a claim aj,'anist M. theiLtor was tiaiislorred mui 
 .-u„:/j,n,r to .1. who brought ivu action for the i 
 aiiiiniiits Ko cntnistcci :— ! 
 
 Held, th.it it appearing tliat the transfer wiis ' 
 .-eiitij imiv liad hccn admitted by M, tjic trans 
 tcrcc, even ii c(,nsidcr..,l a /w/eiwm, l,ad a sufH- 
 <.;icnt Icga interest to bring the action. Moodie 
 \. Juiu.1, W ,s. C. K. L'UO. 
 
 ,.r.?nn""'^~ ''''''""' '""-l-" V-'i.l ng against 
 
 creditors, III section J ol 55 Vi,t. ch 'Jli (() ) 
 
 whirl, extends the proviMons „f the Act lospect- 
 
 ing Mortgages and Sides ot IVrsonal I'lopertv 
 
 to Miiiph. .■ontraet creditors suing on belialf of 
 
 themselves and other creditors, must ho read 
 
 voniablc as against cr.ditors," mid a sale of 
 
 ^ he mortgaged g.M.d,, bv tlie mort;;agec. hotore 
 
 : an ehetion is made by tho simple contraiit credi- 
 
 tors commencing proceeiiings t,, attacii thu r.,,rt- 
 
 gagi! cannot be iinpeuehed. 
 
 Wlietlier sncli an action can bo brouKat bv a 
 Bimplo contract iMeditor whoso debt ia not duo 
 i/it<fre. 
 
 .Iiidgnumt of Armour, C.J., reversed. Meii- 
 ilui liiihnnna Cii. v. Ilnideii, L'l A. |{. ,')-)'> 
 
 Hut see as to the construction of tliis s'eotion 
 and as to tho right of an assignee for tho l)enoHt 
 ot ere, itors to bring such an action, Clarknon 
 
 A. il iS '"' ^' '^' ^" ""• '"'•'"■"'"K ^a 
 
 Creditor - FniuduUiii Coiircynuce — Mort- 
 '/(';/'.] -Mortgagees of land are not, nieroly by 
 reason of their position as sucli, creditors of the 
 mortgagor ^yitllill l;j Kliz. ch. 5, nor is the 
 mortgage debt a debt witiiin tiiat statute, unlcsii 
 litis shewn tliat tile mortgage security at the 
 I time of the alleged rrauilulent conveyance was 
 of less v.duo than the amount ot the hian. 
 [ \\ here, therefore, shortly afti'r the niakinc of 
 , a mortgage, tho mortgagor, otherwise financi- 
 ally able to do so, made a voluntary settlement 
 on Ins wife of certain [iroperty, the value of the 
 mortgaged property at the time being greatly 
 ill excess of tho amount of the loan, and (Teemed 
 by all parties to be ample security, and no inten- 
 tloii t(j de rand being shewn, the settlement was 
 upheld, although, from the stagnation in real 
 estate when the mortgage matured, a sale of 
 the property for the amount of the indebtedness 
 thereon c.uhl not be ellected. Crombk v. Yoimg, 
 
 AssienraBnt- ^e,Jti,|tm^e.]~ A claim by a 
 client lor iicg igence against a lirm of solicitors 
 111 dnvcting the distriDution of moneys in the 
 si.eiill s hands was assigned by him to another, 
 and by the latter to tho plaintill' •— 
 
 Per Armour, C.J., at the trial. The claim 
 Uid not by virtue of R. S. O. ch l"'-' sec 7 
 pass to the plaintitfsoas to enable him to main! 
 tain an action thorefor in his own name, but iu 
 nny event no negligence was proved 
 
 On appeal to the Divisional Court tho judc- 
 nient was atlirmed on the ground of the absence 
 of any jiroof ot negligence, but 
 
 I'er MacMahon, J., if negligence had been 
 proved the plaintiff conld properly have mat 
 tallied tiio action in his own name. Laidtmo v 
 Coimur, 23 O. K. (39(j. 
 
 Covenant- Acliun hy Stmihjtr lo Enjorce.X- 
 &.t Moot V Gibson, 21 O. K. 248, ami fuM. 
 ner v. Faulkner, 230. B. 252,;;o.^ Coven a^. 
 
 OreA\tov~Iwon»uifninemedieH. ]— A creditor 
 cannot take the benefit of tlie coiisi,leiati(jn for 
 a transfer of goods and ut the same tiino attack 
 tlie traustcr as fraudulent. 
 
 An assignee for tlie benefit of creditors has no 
 niglier right n\ this respect. 
 
 A creditor suing in the name of the assignee 
 obtained judgment against third jieisoiis, for the 
 payment to him as part of the debtor's estate 
 ot the proceeds of pnjinissory notes given to the 
 
 ;latt(3r for part of jthe purchase money of his 
 
 ! stock-in-trade : — 
 
 I Held, that it was then too late for him to 
 
 I attack the sale as fraudulent. 
 
 I lieemery. Ulirer, 10 A. R. (m, referred to. 
 (I ood V. lieeaoi; 22 A, Ii. 57. 
 
 i 
 
 \ ^J^^f'^^S^B-''^fra>i;ier.]-A lessee covenanted 
 
 I with the e.,snr to keep the premises in repair. 
 
 and his daughter, living with him at the time 
 
 ot the accident, was injured by the fall of a 
 
 : verandah attached to the building •— 
 
I^'.l - A eruditor 
 Kil attack a coii- 
 (^ <H- fi'ikiiilulerit, 
 litioii liy liriiiuing 
 I'tiilitiirH. ZUUax 
 
 " \int\ nu (igninnt 
 Viet. oil. 'J»i (().), 
 
 f tllU Act lOMIHIUt- 
 
 I'lMDiKil ri'i>|iL'rty 
 iiig oil lii'liiilf of 
 
 'H, lllllMt llU I'ua<l 
 
 ii" ami a talu uf 
 ii()rt;;ai{L'i! bolore 
 lu c(iiitiii<a crtili. 
 attack tho r..irt- 
 
 1)0 hroiiglit hy a 
 liobt Ih not duo 
 
 ■liVoisL'd. Mti-i- 
 A. K. ;<-)'.>. 
 I (if tliJH Huotion 
 <-' for the lionutit 
 iictiuii, Clarknon 
 i. luvorHJiig 22 
 
 fi/rnire — Afort- 
 < not, iiifrolv hy 
 cruditors of the 
 
 5, nor ia the 
 t Htatiitu, unlGSH 
 Hfcurity at the 
 L'onveyance was 
 
 the loan. 
 1' the making of 
 icrwiau tinanci- 
 tiiry Nettleniont 
 ;hi; valuu of the 
 ' '"-''iig greatly 
 "1, iinil (Teemed 
 , and no intcn- 
 Kettlenient was 
 ^nation in real 
 ii<mI, a sale of 
 le inilehtcdness 
 •mbii: V. Young, 
 
 •I.]— A creditor 
 
 isiilemtion for 
 lie time attack 
 
 'editors has no 
 
 f the assignee 
 eisons, for the 
 lehtoi's estate 
 is given to the 
 money of his 
 
 to for him to 
 
 , referred to. 
 
 5 covenanted 
 'PS iu I'cpair, 
 11 at the time 
 the fall of a 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 Hehl, that th« daiiKhter had no right of action 
 for . ama«..H on acoo.iiit of the a.cin.Mit a^. .m 
 
 *''" ''■^';'"- r '•">'l(l hIu, I„. .■(.Md.lcr m i^Ht ,T 
 
 \^,^:i] J' •-'*' • " "tranger. M.hr I: J^'n^ 
 
 tt\\ in fl ' .""''l|""'y'"'^'l'"<''II'V the plain- 
 
 .. M t. ",„?i'" '?' '''•^■'"'■-""" i-'.-Misilk.. "l 
 
 II I , r/'< '•^' «l'^-'j""y 'It'nicd l.y tin. 
 
 ia,.'^hin\£'m:.:i;:,'-j:;'"'-7.'-yi' 
 
 '■"/•J Inai acti.,11 against a city munici .alifv 
 I". « Imd. tho plaintiir recncrcd , la « « , • 
 "J..n.«HUsta,ned l,y i,,, «lip,Mng o ! .^^ WiM 
 
 tlic lo«,i ,,i,,e from the roof of an adiaceiit 
 I'.Mldi.ig. which waH allowed to (low vcr I . 
 «id(,walk and tree/e, there being no mode f 
 eonveying .t to the gutter. tl,o^,wlK. f 1 1, 
 biiildiiig and the tenant thereof we e t lui 
 
 instance of the municipality, mad. d f^i „ " 
 
 .f nnocciipicd the owner, to remove ice fr m the' 
 o.l, lul.lc ,„•„, to tho ,m,„io||„Uty f„t ,1,;. ,1 ; ' 
 
 tinuous and permanent. (-"-aiiy con- 
 
 Theownerot the adjoining l.ind, althoueh also 
 occupied by tenanta, ia liable for th ,. 
 
 caused by them if th; pit. :':;„: on ti'lu!:? 
 theconstaM use of them will neceaaa ily e,u' 
 
 Sierrihirririre^-vrrrr'r^'"'"''"'" 
 
 II. Fob wuat Maintainable. 
 
 vessel the(' /r,',,ri ' "'"'""« *'> ''isure his 
 -t»uce brier, w^'tro::^^^ " " "",'"' "^ '"«"'- 
 
 ?e„tit by acie;kr,:ti^^^ ;::;.:'•:;; ;-'-"->i 
 
 insurance comn in v f H L 'i '*=" '"■''''"'« 
 -sel was value Fat ^2 5 ^ Vm"-''"'"" ^'"^ ^•^■^- 
 mium waafixelH ll pc' K ,' ,'! '1^/'^ •"- 
 
 -i!;oX=^didC;'^/;^;ri:;ariricf;^l'i 
 
 out an application with tl, 1 l- '^- ""'-''' 
 
 a.KU„,c,£r;rto;!i'.£,rir«:v'Es! 
 
 m lioill.le We have te euianli...! v..,. I r ■ 
 
 r'< but had j.rewousi/;;:ft,; ,^; tT 3 
 
 dec , lie riHk ami return policy." j,,., p^, j,!;"^ 
 (I. ivnl by K. ,„.xt day and ntiirn.d at on™: 
 l.e d.d not Hhew it to the br.iker..' ,,''"';" ' 
 ..yonn them of its receipt. I, an a t in b'v 
 .iK"ii.,st K. to recover damagcM for n,xd'.,.t . V„; 
 forwarding the application proi,, .^ w i""' 
 c.u.n,n trover for c.u.veiH,,UM,,,V,'\\.,.v'._! 
 Held afhrming the judgment of t „. (L- 
 '■l-'«. thataa K. was ntver anfli. Jr I'J 
 v^^iM to f.,rward the appli,,,,,,.,. ".hhl 
 'M forward, namely, that ,, whi. I, tlu 'x.hso^ 
 "■:.H vaued at §;i,0(X,, „,„l |,„i refuse c.,f"r 
 ward the only applicathm autho, U^ t^"^ 
 
 brokers lui be la f of |{ tl,,. 1.,,, „ ,,•' . 
 
 tui.M.oa(.i.u.f..ui,iJ'o„'!;::,l^:;;:,:;'::'-''"-- 
 
 Held, lurtlier. that as the property in th„ 
 P""'>',V l're|,ared at the head otiice and s.^.t t,> K 
 
 n;i7.f^mo''T"'''""'''''''^''^--'''"'-^^h; 
 St no no. fhan an escrow In the hand.sof K 
 
 H.e agent, u„ver wouhl not lie against K f r it,! 
 
 conversion. Jiuck v. A',w.'/U>n. I'l ,S. (ru. .^y'l" 
 
 •.ad°aken;:^,^^r^|^:;|-:)"7 "^«""^'*""'- 
 tl i- II 1'"*''-^- I'll lilt' Huo of ji r.iriM jif ^<» trin 
 
 nse;"':"":;^ J-"--' -- «i«Me,rby1,^*'i^: 
 
 are able'' :— '^^ " ' ''*' **""" "■>* wo 
 
 Helil. that tho lirovi.siim as fr, tl,,. o-nn 
 
 Afhrmed by the Divisional Court ... Vo.'h. S 
 Damages -J (•('(•o«0»,Vi 77,,,,., 1 i-,. 
 
 WHtiea,contrac.:;^ .^C"nt7"rH'''^■'"• 
 
 "o cause of a,,.tioM accn es . ' '"■'"' 
 
 for whii'h (-ll.. Ii... ^'"""^ """ 'he damages 
 reaponlJble """ '"">■ ''^^ "'timately held 
 
 O 771?" Lands.] -.9.6 B,r,>. v. />,„./,/,o„. 21 
 "• It. ,14/ ; /.oss V. /{OKK, 2."? O It 4"*. f/r I 
 
 High Court of Justice. ' '^'' 
 
ACTION. 
 
 /r.^r^^f^^ ^^^ wife- y| /;,„„//„„ 0/ Ih„. 
 
 It. Zhi, post. Hut, HAN I. AND WjKE. 
 
 Husband o.navnie-E,ilicmqttWttv Wife 1- 
 
 AL^n,?*'/°"^f^ Commencing Civil Action.]- 
 
 alLr . ""'"*^'''' "^'"»'«t solicitors for, as 
 
 alleged in the .statement of claim, "wron^fnl Iv 
 
 rctun':';'--'""^' -■■"-•* -y instrSnf o^ 
 nl. ; <V • f''^ '■• ''•■" "f summons .-.gainst the 
 pla.nt,tfn. the name of the third party I, y rc^ 
 son of which the plaintiff .vas injured i^Ws 
 occpafon as a builder, and suffered « L 
 credit and reputation and was hindered n t le 
 
 w e l;v,.\n'F'f •■ '."'•^"^^ *^"" •>" ^""''1 other' ' 
 wise have had to do, and other creditors wero 
 
 mduced to sue him whose accounts le had to 
 compromise .nnd settle at great loss :- '" 
 
 wnn. V"" ''""",'■•■'■'>•. that neither m.ilice and 
 «a«t o reasonable and probable cause nor 
 apecial damage, both of which are necessar J7n 
 such an act on. were sufficiently alleged "^ 
 
 t.,: ? '''■ '}-^^ •■"' '^"•-'g'^tion that ify reason of 
 the proceedings complained of the plaintiff wl 
 put into insolvency or bankrupLy f su,h a 
 thjng were possible in this country^ mLh be a 
 bulhcicnt al egation of special damage. AlUMI 
 V. JucMvmdi, 22 O. R. 712. ■^"'■hki 
 
 S^"! K R? 27a "^""*' ''" "'"• ^"'^ - 
 
 In'^n^u.?^^^''*''**«* °^ °°«'« 0^° Wrong. 1- 
 
 rlJ T ?l' ^".•■e'^o^'"- an amount received by the 
 
 mnVV 1. . i**"*^ '^''t'«"» was premature, inas- 
 
 much as he had got the money rregularlV rom 
 
 he treasurer of the Province of Quebec on^ 
 
 I XI "^ •I'^^r'^Htion of the prothonoLry before 
 
 'heb?''th'a??hi"*'',*';'' J"''K'"'^"t of the Court 
 otiow that this defence was not open to the 
 defendant, as it would be giving him the benefit 
 of his own improper and illegal proceeding 
 Jiury v. Ji/vrruy, 24 S. C. R. 77. '"""^"'"fis- 
 
 Taking Advantage of Ones Own Wronjr 1 
 will. Zttwt/j, V. Lmidi/, 24 S. C. R. 6£o. 
 •See, also, High Court of Justice. 
 
 III. NoTit'K OF Action. 
 
 defendant was sued by the san.e plaintiffs in a 
 and judgment w'as entered in his favour upon 
 
 makers of the notes, along with the other part- j 
 
 bv^ho'' ''""^ *'"r r'"'"tiffs weie not debarred ■ 
 uersnip iioni briiij£inL' an .Titirin i,r>, .. «i • i ' 
 
 £'«"*, V ^r"'"' '• ^- ^5- l^- S-'iS, followed 
 eleTKTr ^t^Tot';^ ""^^ the' plaintiShad 
 
 pro^.dtheirclaimwi^handSri:^bS 
 f the partnership from the assignee thereof 
 nder an assignment for the benefit^of cretoors 
 
 in which ,t was rected that the other w."s the I 
 
 ...o,.n,.l ,„,,„ .„,„■ ii„, .."»?„;: ,!!»'*" 
 
 act as If such an election l^ad Len^i i' V" 
 497. " ' '■^''"«"'« "1 Pait 24 0. R 
 
 eo,?.fnn^%^T^^ ''"'■'-' '■" "" '^^tion against o, 
 
 nf lil r"V"' •'''■*'^'' "' tlie honest lilief 
 an, i ^'*V'""'""'^"'^' '''« ''"ty as a ccnslal e 
 an( was not actuated by any impr<,ner mot k!' 
 
 ; t^tlH^l r "r^'ff oLetio."'i^;&rr ^ 
 
 o the ;, f °V'^' "r *""^ "f tilt' ccnmnssion 
 or tJie act c( mplained of, but that it «.,« ,l, „! 
 I maliciously. s\ott v. Ihi^^^^O. r/Veo 
 
 Constable.]- The object of tlie "Act tc. 
 
 \?. r "^"'I'".' °^ *•'« J"^'-^'^'-' and otheis ror^ 
 \ exatious Actons" I; s n i -o ■ r . 
 
 Fotection of l^^ iJ^^^ ^^!Z^'^ 
 
 action f,'',^' '"' '■■'■' "'o"-^ly, ami notice o^ 
 act on m sucl, case must allege that the acts 
 
 lani ., 'i"n'""'''"'"^'y '""' ^itl'out rea on^be 
 I and prol able cause ; but where a person ent led 
 : to he benefit of the A<:t voiuntai.ly do "some 
 
 ll^^^puwl"",Pr"' °'l''"" "' the discha,;rof 
 I any public duty, such notice is not ruiuiied 
 
 i w 26 o^r 'e'os ""■ ^ ''' \ ''■'"'■> '■ ^ '"^- 
 
 A. E. S22 ^ftimed m ajpeal, 22 
 
 I V oX™??s"*.''f"7f/ Act.]-&., Kearney 
 I V. ucihL!,, J8 i>. c. K. 148, loxt 2SC. 
 
 ■coK^tr^i!"' «*"*«""^"t of -'aim nn.st be 
 notW n? • '"""'■''" complained of in the 
 , notice. Oi,r)/it,- y. Jfobert.oi,' 14 P. R. 553. 
 
 
 i Municipal Corporation.] -In an ■xtim 
 
 ;fnv d' 1 "^ ,T"'riP"J corporation for inlur^" 
 
 , ea used by the defective state of a si.U w.X the 
 
 11 
 
Iier will. Cole 
 
 t 
 
 V. 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 3'sOwnVtrrong.i— 
 
 uiit received by tlie 
 (ieftiulaiit pleaded 
 .8 premature, inas- 
 y irregularly from 
 e of Quebec on a 
 "otlionotary before 
 port of. collocation 
 
 ent of the Court 
 
 not open to the 
 
 i« him the benefit 
 
 ^Ha\ proceedinga. 
 
 s Own Wrong. J 
 
 ot take under the 
 
 -"■ R. est). 
 
 t' Jt'sricE, 
 
 rioN. 
 
 [iction against a. 
 mid by the jury 
 le honist lielief 
 Kas a cons! able, 
 iproper motive, 
 and such notice 
 tlie ccniniitsion 
 liat it was dtne 
 i 0. E. 450. 
 
 tlie "Act to 
 id others from 
 1. 7.'), is for the 
 blic duty, even 
 reof tiiey may 
 and notice of 
 
 that (he acta 
 uiit rcatonablfr 
 person entitled 
 ily dots Konie- 
 e discliarge of 
 
 not riquired. 
 ^dly V. A rchi- 
 i" appeal, 22 
 
 -Ste Kearney 
 
 lini must be 
 K'd of ill the 
 f. R. 553. 
 
 1 an actirn 
 for injuries 
 .sidewalk the 
 citor Was re- 
 i: "As it is 
 images f ri m 
 n(itice thata 
 lues may be 
 ". Christie is 
 
 >ng, J., that 
 a sufficient 
 
 Per Ritchie, C.J. -If notice of action w.is 
 necessary the want of it eouhl not be relied .m 
 as a defence without being pleaded 
 
 By 25 Vict. cli. 10, sec.H4(N. 
 
 Acts,;eiati;:;t:;i.;;h;;iy:x-'v-'ip-jn3 
 
 of o, ds are declared t,. be vested in the council of 
 the town of I'orthuid. IJy another Act .,, 
 action could be broug.it agai^ist a c Iniit , l 
 of ro.ids unless notice thereof was given Tl i 
 
 tne city of St. .John and an action was brought 
 W nijunes caused by a broken plank on a de 
 walk u. what was formerly tlie town of Port- 
 
 H.id, per Strong, J. -One of the " inimuni- 
 t es vested ,n the council was that of not b ing 
 subject to an action witliout prior notice ^ 
 
 ler laschereau,G Wynne, ami l'atterson,,TJ _ 
 police was not necessary; the liability did not 
 depeii.l on sec, 84 of -.'S Vict. cli. 10, bnt h 
 •statutory duty of the council to keep t e s "ee 
 in repair ; the only " privilege or inimunity " to 
 the commissioner was exemption from perform- 
 
 10 
 
 iS'fiTg^llJt'- «'^"'''"""^^"'^'"-"f«-<>n 
 
 noSft;^jili;;rJS-.;^--eS:JtS 
 IZSKSs'dSr^'''^'"^-''^--^ 
 
 Miu-my V. M,-S,rli,nj, I. R. 9 c. L .MS din 
 tingui.shed. • "'^" 
 
 •Vm/,/, also, that the statutes rc,,uiring 
 notice of action cannot be invoked where the 
 
 utte cr':'';r" "" '•'^'•'"'-'••■•y -l l.ave been 
 
 uttetcd with express malice. Hawx y n„rn 
 
 , W.-iOo. K.rr>H. Affirmed in appeal, 2,3 It 
 
 d J.o'' "^""ector.J-A tax collecter sued for 
 
 exSon'''f''r-^''f' "^'"^** ''""'^ ''y '"'" in thi 
 execution of his duty ,s entitled t,. the benefit 
 
 A. R. 17-i" ^ ^Io,rard v. lhrri„,,lon, 20 
 
 Municipa' -'Poration.J-A municipal cor- 
 poration IS not eiitiile.1 to notice of action under 
 the Act to protect Justices of the Peace m 
 others from Vexatious Actions, R S O eh "•< 
 
 ^Munisv Cou>,f!es of Hnro,, and 'ih-iu:, Ve' 
 ft A. 1()9, followed. ' 
 
 Defence of want of such notice struck out 
 upon summary application. McCarlh!, ^.ToZ- 
 i-hi/> of Ve-'ipra, 10 I'. R. 416. 
 
 Municipal Councillors- Pa/AmrT.,^r i-Two 
 of t„e dctendants, members of a township cou " 
 cil, were appointed by resolution of the counc 1 ' 
 a comnnttee to rebuild a cnlvert, and tlicy per 
 sonally supennten.led the work, and werc^paTd 
 for doing ,t, but there was no by-law authoriS 
 the,,, appointment or payment' The otlier de^ 
 I k Tr"'i ^'"'!>i."y'-"' ''.V them and .lid the 
 wo k. Ihe plaintitt met with an acoi.lent on the 
 highway near the culvert owing, as she alWed 
 to the negligence of the .lefendants in obstruct-' 
 ing the roa. with their building materials "ml 
 
 jwf-i " '""°" ^"' '''""•■'«'^« f""- ''«>• in- 
 Held, that tiie defendants were not fulfilling 
 
 a public .luty and were not entitled to notice of 
 
 action under R. .S. O. cii 7,3 •— """'-e ot 
 
 Held, also, that the statute is applicable only 
 
 to officers am persons fulfilling a p„l,Iip dutv 
 for any hing done by them in thepe ftnia *e 
 of It, when It may be properly averred that the 
 act was done maliciously and without Ho, a ^ 
 an.l probable cause, and therefore not to ac o « 
 for negligence in the doing of the act :- 
 
 Hel.l lastly, that one of the .lefendants who 
 was pathmaster for the beat in which the culvert 
 was situated di.l not come within the pro?ec io, 
 of the statute as pathmaster, becau e 1 e was 
 Hot employed as such in doing this work but as 
 a da^ labourer. McDo.nM ^Z />H.vi o^5^ 
 K. 4.). Affirmed m appeal, 21 A. R. 485. I 
 
 I IV. SErri.KMKNT OF Action. 
 
 ' roW,?"*'^i''^»^°"°'*°'' *° Parties - Costs - 
 
 Terve tion f '^*"'f.'-'° "'^' l^'^'''''^'' ^^'t''""* '!»« 
 the ,,l. t- V 'r ^''''^'t'''-^. i" onler to entitle 
 tlie plwntil s solicitor to enforce his lien for 
 costs upon the fruits of the litigation by me^a 
 
 b ;hewn"' "';;"' "" *''^'''"'''"'"' -""Bion S 
 
 ; ec' ?l 1 ; V '":* ^"'"I'laiucl of must have 
 
 plai'iin^' '^*"' ""'"^'^ ^'•"'" f'-'^olicitor com- 
 
 mise an.l the plaintih s s.dicitor gave notice to 
 
 b oi p~it ^f'n"" ''^"'''- '•'^' 't-eemeurb^ 
 Hehl^ H f H • *'"-* '"°"'y ''Stf-'ed upon :_ 
 Hel.l, that this was sufficient notice San 
 
 i-idiie V. Jrditnd, 14 P. R, 29. 
 
 Notice by Solicitor to Parties - Co,ts~ 
 Colluy,.] It is competent for a client to settle 
 1' s action beliind the back of his solicitor nri! 
 withstanding that the solicitor Is 'ivennotke 
 
 Upon such a settlement, unless where col 
 
 S" Si ll*:" ^'? J""^'^« '" '''^f-'-'i ^he p£: 
 
 ,' f ^"'"^'t' r of his costs is clearlv shewn a. 
 defendant will not be or.lere.) to mV t tie c°o8l^ 
 of t '.e^phuntiir 's solicitor. HAlaJy I ColrZy, 
 
 Sfc, also, CosT.'i, V. 
 
 V. Stavixr Actio.n. 
 
 Slander— /',j/>/'jc OfH<-er 1— The n1i!nt;ff *i 
 
11 
 
 monoy, .,.,1 ,,u,,|„,,, t,,„ ,„„_,,, 
 
 t«lt « t.. staler ln,H„a,lv,i,K.o „f iiw.ir.v m., H . 
 
 <len>,::il",i;;i^,;:^'';^"^:"-;-'l the testator 
 
 thop,..^,,..,,::'ul.^t., : ,''i'sr ''^ 
 
 the liiinl,..,- Ih, I, , " '"' ^""v^TsioM „f 
 •'*'•'•• .>.,{. ,'icc the next case. 
 
 AFFIDAVIT. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 18 
 
 Comu 14 ' '. "r;:,-/' "> "^ '■-H-l. Divisional 
 
 Onta (i";.tte 'r. r ' '.'''''^■'"'"" "' the 
 
 i V. Cmcro,,, 15 p. -R 'iTlJ.' ^""'""". ^^'a^on 
 
 |ti«Sr^£':,Xfr'''"'--l-A„ .h-er- 
 , l-oceclin,. " in «,,!: ,o of Vsl'S. ., "',S'.'''''«^ 
 
 ;-./Wiu:!nir'i:!rf;;:r^?„r's,^f 
 
 AFFIDAVIT. 
 
 cJ,?inT'?''''''r !««"«■ I An interplea.ler .no. 
 ,, I I '.» "I MUciiilcadcr is.siicH 
 
 ^-.i.,.,./'';^:';^-,;;,;^,;^,^;.^^. an../;. 
 
 but, V ,,.''''''''"•"''''''' '"' the i.s,s„o. 
 uui,om_\ ,,n tik' tonn« ot ans«e-'!i.' all r.mtJ 
 
 ACQUIESCENCE. 
 
 S(f LAciiiis. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION. 
 
 Se,- L-XliclTOKS AM, Al.JlINI.s-,KATOK,S. 
 
 ADMISSIONS. 
 
 See fJviDENcii. 
 
 ADVERSE POSSESSION. 
 
 Sc Limitation (,k Actions, II. 
 
 ;i!; ' ;fi?i^F'-"=i^" 
 Si:;t;::;v;:!ir|:':;^r-«i--tio„,if. 
 
 IS an option oltl.,.i. i„ •mtitoi timt tlnTo 
 
 ei>nnniNsionei- jiis antlioi-itv wJl 1 * 
 
 K 4-i ^"<"'i'o/>a J< ,■>■<■ /VtM (.■o.,'.>0,S C 
 
 Affidavit of BonaPidBH /)„ ,• ,• 
 
 f^ 
 
 
 
IS 
 
 13 
 
 HENT. 
 
 AMENDMENT. 
 
 .BtratorB —Adrer- 
 i'iil)liciiti()n in tho 
 
 tisfllU'llt fill- <:ix'(li. 
 
 "<', Ni^o. 36, is not 
 ■« Sioin liul)ility for 
 'iV Cumtion, Manun 
 
 ovtr.]^An fldvcr- 
 I 'I " inoccciling" 
 lords "„„ fiii-tiior 
 •"*• (). di. \0'>. 
 ilKintlioiiiortf^iigor 
 t of tho iiioitf;u;,'o 
 ;s« luiyineiit well) 
 tlio servifi', the 
 «11, im injunction 
 
 IllOltj;,ifrei, fi-om 
 
 "ly ol tho month, 
 of tltf niortL'nteil 
 O. li. 105. 
 
 — Presvmption of 
 Hi.i'k'Vs Smi],les. J 
 ■■sinMnnitolia(CO 
 loivson shall print 
 nil affidavit or 
 ttcr diieoted, is 
 >y of the Court 
 rmation may b» 
 isiontr : — 
 affirmation, if a 
 mnvspa[ier, may 
 ■tor ; that tliero 
 ii'iirni and the 
 to niomliers of 
 lis li.ivin;/ K'lig- 
 hivitorafiiniia- 
 iki'ii l)i'foro a 
 1 bo jncMiincd. 
 w Co., '20 .S. C. 
 
 <in<ition ofCinn- 
 h' Affiil,n;l.\-^ 
 ittol niortij.ige 
 1 f.-ict a cipin- 
 idavits in ,ind 
 aces after liia 
 ■ds" A Conir., 
 
 ■ide before a 
 of the niort- 
 
 iiit of York 
 n ami Haiingit 
 
 — Nvir.h, _ 
 
 defeinhiiit to- 
 fin action for 
 ihiintiff' s affi- 
 1 was headed 
 occcded, '■ I, 
 ed plaintiff,"- 
 nsickle, and 
 
 Hehl, tlint the atlidavit wiis not ,%, nnlbty, bnt 
 the niiHtaite therein was merely an irreLul.iritv 
 and tlie objection tlier.to shoidd have been 
 expressly taken in the notice „f motion. Van- 
 Kickli V. Ildijil, 14 I'. 1!. M\\). 
 
 ResrlBtry Act.]~IVr Maclennaii, J. A.-- An 
 alhdavit (,f ex, cntion for tlie jmrpose of retix- 
 tration may be made by a |.e,.soii who in fa.t 
 witn<.ssc8 tnc siKiiatiire, but who writes his 
 name, not as a witness but as the person to 
 whom a letter is addressed. 
 
 . I'er Osl.'r, and Macleniian, .l.T. A.-Where an 
 iiistnimeul IS in fact le.istered, .section SO of i 
 the Kc;,'istry Act cures any irreguhirity in the I 
 proof f„r rcgistiation. ^ \ 
 
 Jiidgnicntof theChauccry Division rever.se( 
 
 u 
 
 AMENDMENT. 
 
 n„„fil,ll,ry. lto„ker, --l-^ A. K. IT.',. 
 I)y the .'siiprinic ( ourt. 
 
 Set Hii.i.s OK Sai.k, II. 
 
 Atlirmed 
 
 AGISTMENT. 
 
 Horses.l- The pIai„iiH's maie, whilo in 
 charge ot the defendant under a cntract of sum- 
 mer ngi.stment. was kilb.d by falling through tho 
 plank covering of a well in the d, f, ndant'.s yard 
 the existence of which was known to the d'eien' 
 dant but not to the plnintili; and to which yard 
 the mare, with other liorses of the .lefen.lant 
 ha(l access from a liehl in which they were at 
 pasture :— •' '" 
 
 Hel(l (Meredith, J., di.mntiiig), that the plain- 
 tiff had ,,n pro,, of the.se facts, given sullicient 
 primd Jan. evidence of neglig.nce to cast the 
 onus on the detcmlant (.f shewing that iva.soii- 
 ttble care which an agisti-r is bound t,) exercise • 
 and a nonsuit was set asiile. ' 
 
 Per Hoyd, C'.-'Iho test in sucii ca.ses i.s' not 
 necessarily the care which the agister may exer- 
 cise as to his ,,wn animals. It i.s, in general, not 
 what any particular man does, bnt what men as 
 aciasswoul.l.lo with similar property as a cla-s 
 . Per Meredith, ,J. - The agister is not an, 
 insurer. 1 he onus of proof of neglect of his; 
 du y IS on the plaintilf, an,l had not been satis- ' 
 bed 111 this case. Puira- v. Slupinnt, 24 0. R. 
 
 ALIEN. 
 
 Domestic ana Foreign Creditors. ]-In the 
 administration of the ( hit.rio est.ite of a deceased 
 domiciled a),roa.l, foreign creditors are entitled 
 to divi,lends/,an /,„....„ with Ontario creditors. 
 
 Be AM>,- 28 Ch. I). 17.5, followed. 
 
 th«nl' \ -''' "■'""'' "'''"'' '"t« force Since 
 the above decision, nn,l which relates to service 
 of iiutia ory process out of the jurisdiction, if 
 applicable at all to such a case, merely relates 
 
 nE'^"n'r'^ '^"1' ""* "«-^ '^ procee/Ung 
 n wh ch all tho j.arties have attorned to the 
 
 O. R 4I6!" "^ "'' ^'°"'''- ^^'''"^ y Moore.% 
 
 ALIMONY. 
 
 'S"e HU.SI!AND AKD WlKR, I. 
 
 Mechanics' Lien. | The Master or Odici.il 
 Keteree 111 a proeeclmg umler r,:i Vict. ch. .S? 
 (( _), 'An Act to simplify the I'roccluie for 
 onb.rcmg Mechanics' l.iens," sh„ul,l be ju,li,i. 
 |i<lly Katislied that t\w facts statcl betor.. hiu, 
 "icsulhei.nl to manilVst a vali,l claim- but if 
 iiiiy oiM' element isondttcl he hasg,.n,r,d p„w, 1 
 ,01 permitting an anieiiilnieiit if the facts and 
 |Cir,nmstaiMes warr.mt it, ,.,/., as >ii this ea.s,- 
 t,. permit an anundm.iit of th,. .■laim shewin- 
 When the woi k w.is .lone or materials lurnislie,r 
 Oir V. JJniir, -22 .(). K. 4;)0. 
 
 Notice of Motion /;/, rHoii. ] 'Ihe notice of 
 i""lion ,li,l iH,| shew any interest in the relator 
 iis re,|nire,l by .s.c. bsT of the Act ; bnt it hav' 
 liig laen shewn by .-dlidavit lile.l in support ,.l 
 It that the lelator «as a can,lid,ite, an amen,! 
 mciit of the motion wonhl, if mvi'.s.sary have 
 been alloueil umler Con. liule 144. A',,iii,„. 
 V. 1),,,//,, 2,'f (). R. OSS. ■' 
 
 Style of Cause. 1- The action was in tho 
 Queens l!en,h Division; '.ut the plaintilV, in 
 iipjilyiiig with respect to the costs of writs ,if 
 ./'. ./,'. and a .setoir of costs, entitlcl bis pro- 
 cecings m theChan.ery Division ami " in the 
 matter of ,■, I lain ,)i,leiH ina.le in the action":-- 
 
 1IH,1, that this was f,)rmally w rong ; but an 
 amemlment N^as all„«e,| on payment of cost.s. 
 Citirkt v. trvKjhtoii, 14 {'. R. ;u. 
 
 Style of Cause.]- A pei.son carrying on busi- 
 iKss alone, in a name ,leii,.ting a partnership, 
 
 i cannot bring an acti,m in that name. Where 
 liowevei, seel, name consisl,.,l of his surname, 
 
 , I>ieta,'..l by the initials of bis ( hristian names. 
 
 ( and f,ill,.we,l by the wonis " an,l Co." : — 
 
 I Held, that these wonis in the stylo of cause in 
 Hii uution were mere surpbi.sage, or, if not, they 
 
 «honl,l be struck ,mt;an,l. as the mi.stak; was 
 trilling, an,l no ,me was mi»le,l or atlecte,! by it 
 :in ameiulment at the trial shouhl have b.;tn 
 granted as ,if course. 
 
 Mason y. Mu.,n,t,i., 8 Times f,. R. SO,"), dis- 
 ; tiiignished. ' 
 
 1' .Imlgmeiit of tin. lOtli Division Court of 
 i ork reverse.l. Lamj v. T/wnijww, Hi 1'. I!. Olu. 
 
 Summoning Party In Different Capacity 1 
 
 -W iK.re parties are before the Curt ,p„1 exec 
 
 tors an,l the .same parties shonhl als., be sum- 
 
 .0 led ,/„r triLstecs an amemlment to thatelfect 
 
 IS suthcient ami a new writ of summons is not 
 
 necessary. /.,•;;,,. y. Trrj>a,>,nrr, '24 S.C.R. 86 
 
 Trial --Z.'///., „/' Sn!,' .4,7.1 -Umler Rule 441 
 an amemlment shonhl be allowe.l at any stag- 
 ot the proceedings, if it can be ma.le without 
 injustice to the other .side; and there is n,. 
 
 by'cS'' "" '""■"• ''"•'^ '^'"' ''' -"•P-'-t"l 
 .SV.,m.,/y ,y„,,/, Jf,:i,,,^,o!if,„^ Trumvay, Co., 
 1() (.>.!.. D. r)i)(,, applied and followe,!, not with 
 standing the .lill'erence in the Knglish Rule 
 
 shouM not govern the question of i/rautin.r or 
 rctuiiiig an amendment. " ~ 
 
 of l'el.nVf'T''';i"' "" "'^'i"" to recover possession 
 net.t An. /'/';'' "''-'f^"••""t«. «1"> were sub.se- 
 iient /'O'h) /ale purchasers for value without. 
 
 notice of the plaintiff's purchase, were at the 
 
 
 1, 
 
 m 
 
15 
 
 AtMrnie,! in ai,,,eul, 17 I' R 73.'' ''' ^ " ^^ ■'**■ 
 
 ANNUITY. 
 
 le 
 
 '-•'».«e of actio,,, <u'<"ali; ; S nV-t"^'"^^^ ' 
 occunei , it was tli.-n>,„i, ,1*' "''",'' ""y ncci.Ieiit 
 
 At the t,.'ial r ,y '£ , r tff O* "' "">'''^- 
 the accident, and travp . „ . ^•, "^'^sioned 
 
 ■n.e Plaintit sXf ap.J a r ° "" l''""'"»'- 
 
 •■•gainst 0„ which lea^e waiVi] '*'' '""•'-'l'^ 
 ■'>t.„t ,va8 entered against Ofo^'i'' "",'' J"''«- 
 awarded :— *■ "•' '""^ *''" damages 
 
 •i"t!;l:t''Sr'i:«ve';''''"^'''vf^^-^^''''o». 
 ^^l^i^df?'ii~ 
 
 - long as no suK , S "i, '.r,?;"' V","°"' •"''' ' 
 *acts at the close ,ffl l'''-'^''"'K« to the i 
 ^''^!/ 0/ Toronto, 20 6 r\''''- ■'''"'"■"« v. 
 
 ment now give, I,y R„|es 444 and TNrt fl, 
 
 of summons and a 1 Hnl.s(.„„n7,f '^";.tne writ 
 
 >'e an.en.le,l after jl.S'",!;"-'" l"-°°'^'^<l,ngs may 
 
 f'-"'ii>:'d::cH;:;i!;!::^''i:j;v'-''Jh "'"'"«• 
 
 8un,mo,,sinamortr' :.r ' '" *'"-' """t of 
 
 in the mortfeC a, ord r*' " P'*''^''-'' "'^'''■'led 
 
 j"<l«.nent„n!l h n'al ord ■ ''•;'f IT l'""''*^' ""«' 
 
 '"« the final o.der, ,l°,eeti,u fr '""?• '■'"=*^- 
 
 ' tlie writ and all „ , .t^., *> '" "^'"e'l'lment of 
 
 I "«'v day of re, en, tir "'*'''' .'""^ '^"""'"8 " 
 
 brancer^ho .lid n '"„it tl'. \T""-'",' '"^•''"■ 
 
 'n default the .,s„al order „ f . T '"■'''"" = ™'' 
 
 I V. Coop,-,-, 15 P. H Vr ^'"■''''•ose. tVarie 
 
 -v™1;;:^''r;s^-j::.--«o„forentici,.g 
 
 l''""titr-s .la„g, fr he .i,h°;^''^''«''' °^ the 
 at the close of t e cise to' , . ^''''' ^""^^e'' 
 
 a« an alter,,a,ive ersVof~ /Th"""''l« "P' 
 '^»ay of tl,e .laughter a° d havi ' """■"«'' 
 
 ^Vitl. her l.y fo,.eea,„l agah.st her w.t '■°"!"^^'"°'' 
 -1 licit loss of service ^Vn !,. f- J- ' ""*' ''""«e- 
 
 obtained an order sho.temW /,''%l'''""tiff« 
 appearance tn ton 1 ^""'tenmg the tnne for 
 
 "delusive or exchLiSf H." ?'"'^/'"S ^-'''-''''er 
 
 ame„,led the w "Zl" th S?^'''-'''^'?- »"d 
 
 stituting " ten .lave "for '.><^ ''^' ",""''''>' s"b- 
 
 writ as t-nended ^L s rved at T^^S' '''''« 
 
 : Jt, on the 27th Janua, y 0,.^ i h"K l"'' '"''^ 
 following udi/nif.nf ,. • , "^" ' i='>ruarv 
 
 ; appea,a,fci :!^""" ""' ''^'"^'^ f"'' ''^--fnult of 
 
 ' tl,c"w,'.!; "'"* ^'''^ JU'lg.nent was irregular • f„r 
 
 iSro;;L;:^:;ici£'"r^'''-'"-"-^' 
 
 ( according to " ts ten, f , •"""' *'"'^^''" = "'"1 
 4:4.thei,. .ays CJ ';Z''^/T'''','" ''"'« 
 ivelv of the d.v of lo n • ['-"'rkone,' exclua- 
 
 ha,rthe whc;ie'of the , rVebr,,'''" <Iefen,Iants 
 Bank or Ilriluh \mih 1 * ^'.'"""-y to appear. 
 P. R. 6 J. ' Ama-ica v. //„,/aV', 16 
 
 ANCILLARY PROBATE. 
 
 '%e Surrogate Cornr. 
 
 ANIMALS. 
 
 'onnancc of an 5,' l-men bv.h ' " '■'^'''''- P'^'- 
 ""■!"r a will to cCeyTt to 1. ',!:'"}"''' ?'''"'«' 
 ^■"title.l to a deei-e,. i, flf " '''■"'"ed to be 
 ■"■■^'le I'V his bi f Jh,/" ' "i"^'^"' "f, the case 
 «ai.l will was . ot rSe e, ':r'"r'' ""^^ "'« 
 'egistry laws of ^^eX 's« 1 "',"' '"^ "? ''''' 
 f"'e void as against hi,n a, ^,f ', ' ''"* ""^''e- 
 ^'"'1 r. ha,l a,, i,,terest h/t ,^1 '"','V'^^P"'■"'''*«e^ 
 to sell to l,i,„ as.^, heir" law "f J,'" had agreed 
 
 Held, that on -vUn m ■ ■ "^ """ '^'^tate :_ 
 -ill, P.'could t hi '; ^^ «"« "r'*^'- '•'« 
 osition that the same w 11 wL v ■' °" ''' P"-"?" 
 -"• no an.endment"':oS\^;'^;jS,^«;j"-t hi,„. 
 
 a caso not only at variinnB „ -^i , '° '"''^^'^ 
 "-■•ificto, that set out rthe WI "' '"'^",fag■ 
 f"ob amendment was ot isk. '/'P''"'*"^ ''^ 
 hearing. J^orla- ..Hal^stc. R^tt ""' 
 
 I. hoi-.a—Sce Docs. 
 
 II. Inmcrv to Horses or Catt. k ..v d 
 
 WAVs-6'ee Railways, VHi!''- ^^"'■ 
 
 III. Sheep— ,?efi Sheep. 
 
 AJTNUITY. 
 
 ^s;:S[n:f,£^stw^-^.g 
 
 r^iCf=':ftSari?^i:"°rf^'2.o(K, 
 
 they by an instru.ne, „' writ „ '"'"''?*«• 
 Payhini SI, 800 everv v«.. ^ '.'"«• "gree.l to 
 life, in e,jual ,M,r,terfv^?. ''"""L' his natural 
 The tenn^ " po'i cy ' L'':?'"""^^ " §450 each. 
 
 both used in 'the Xcr nt its" if Lt' • T?' '^ 
 of Its nature. 'J-he consf iBrft ''escriptive 
 
 I be not only tl,e ^ 000 bf,/ °h '"■"' '^""^^^ ^ 
 for this policy an r'thest.^i."r application 
 ment., therein comn.i,.J 1 f "''^ "'•'"ts and .agree- 
 ti.is contrac " ^i d " w t"'f ^' 'T\' '^ P''^' «f 
 certain conditions ;;\,:L;;:;;^:;;lt<J-^^^.pon 
 
 'm 
 
 i 
 
18 
 
 44 and 780, the writ 
 flit proceedings may 
 
 I'y niiHtiike omitted 
 "Ids in the writ of 
 >", a parcel included 
 , "as .nude, after 
 foreclosure, vacat- 
 ion uniendnient of 
 {8. and allowing a 
 siibsejjuent incum- 
 ti> the order ; and 
 foreclose. Clarke 
 
 /orAppeafdiin.] — 
 • service out of the 
 wiiance thereto to 
 eks after service, 
 *. The pliiintiffs 
 "g the time for 
 pecifying whether 
 ay of service, and 
 ler by merely sub- 
 ;ht weeks." The 
 nd the order with 
 lie (itii February 
 -'1 for default of 
 
 '8 irregular; for 
 accordance with 
 St govern ; and 
 legard to Rule 
 leckonec' cxclus- 
 ' the defendants 
 uary to ajipear. 
 « V. // Ill/hex, 16 
 
 ATE. 
 
 17 
 
 IXK I!V R^iL. 
 
 'on of $12,000 
 defendants, 
 i> iigreed to 
 ' his natural 
 >f §450 each, 
 bond " were 
 i tlescriptive 
 'as stated W) 
 application 
 
 •"•.nd 
 
 agree - 
 
 c'e a part of 
 d that upon 
 Je void" : — 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 18 
 
 _ Held, in an action by his executors, that the 
 »n8trument was not a policy of assurance within 
 the exception in R. S. (). eh. 14;{, sec. 5, but an 
 "■"""'t.V '><>nd ; and that the money payable by 
 the defendants under it was apportionable 
 within section 2; and tliei-fore the plaintiffs 
 were entitled to recover a part of a quarterly 
 liiHtidment in proportion to the period oetweeii 
 tue l;^t quarter day and the death of the testa- 
 •vor. CM/,frt V North Amerkan Life Axmraua- 
 \jO., 24 U. K. nil. 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 I. Appeal Generally, 17. 
 II. Abaxdonmknt and Waiver, 19. 
 
 III. As TO Costs, 20. 
 
 IV. Intkkfkhixc with FiNDiN-ds OF Fact, 
 
 V. I.NTERFKRINCi WITH JUDICIAL DISCRETION, 
 
 VI. !.KAVE TO Appeal and Time to Appeal, 
 
 VII. Practice and Prooediire, 20. 
 
 "VIII. Rkjiit to Take New Grounds oe Put 
 IN Fi^kther Evidence, 27. 
 
 IX. Stayinc. Prooeedincs, 28. 
 
 X. In- Particular Matters and from and 
 to Particular Courts. 
 
 1. As to nammjes—See, Damages. 
 
 " From A irardx—See Arbitration and 
 
 [ whore the amount involved is less than .«40 
 Clarki; v. Urcii/htoii, 14 P. K. M). 
 
 Oontempt—Arotiou to Qaaxh -l/v)';;?.]— The 
 fact tUat a party to an action is in coMtempt is 
 no bar to bis proceeding with the action in the 
 ordinary way ; the contempt is only a bar to bis 
 asking the Court for an indulgence. 
 
 And M-liere the defendants received certain 
 mcmeys in disol)edience toan interim injunction, 
 wlucli was made perpetual by tlie judgment at 
 the trial, a motion l)y the plaintilf to (piash the 
 defendants' appeal from the judgment was re- 
 fused. FerijUHonw County of L't</i,t, 1.") P. 1!. ;(99. 
 
 Judgment of Court Appealed Prom Crfili- 
 
 Mity of irjVm'.s.-(.-.v.]-Tlie Court of Appeal for 
 
 Ontario, comi-osed of four .Judges, pronounced 
 
 I Jiidgment in an appeal before tln^ Court, two of 
 
 tlieir Lordsiiips being in favour of dismissing 
 
 land tlie other two pronouncing no judgment. 
 
 I On an appeal from the judgment disniissi'ng the 
 
 [appeal it was objected that there was no decision 
 
 I arrived at : — 
 
 i ^ Held, that the Appellate Court should not go 
 .)ehind tlie formal judgment which stated that 
 the appeal w.is dismissed ; further, the i)osition 
 was the same as if tlie four .Judgt^s had been 
 equally divided in opinion, in wbi.di case the 
 appeal would have been properly dismissed •— 
 Hehl, also, tluit the Ma.ster was the final judge 
 of the credibility of witnessps examined before 
 ium, and that his report should not be sent back 
 because some irrelevant evidence may liave been 
 given of a character not likely to have affected 
 Ina judgment, especially as n.' appeal was taken 
 
 oiT I"* d"''"S "" *''*^ 'evidence. lioclh v. ]{tUl4, 
 ^l o. C Rp. G37« 
 
 if 
 
 Award. 
 
 3. From the County Court—See County 
 Court. 
 
 From Courts of derision- 
 
 MENT AND TaXE.S. 
 
 -See Assess- 
 
 <J. Frmn the Division Court—See Divi- 
 sion Court. 
 
 7. From Taxation— See Costs. 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 Withdrawal from Jury-Iieferevceto Court.] 
 
 I —On the trial of an action against a r.ailwav 
 
 ! company for injuries alleged to have been caused 
 
 I Uy negligence of the servants of the company in 
 
 not giving proper notice of tlie ajjproach of a 
 
 tram at a crossing whereby plaintitl was struck 
 
 by the engine and hurt the case was withdrawn 
 
 from the jury by consent of counsel for both 
 
 parties and referred to the full Court with 
 
 power to draw inferences of fact, and on the law 
 
 r. >,■• ,1. r>- , • ^ I '^."? "cts either to assess damages to the Dlain- 
 
 ,.. J-rom thc.D,4nct Co«r<_.?ee]DiSTRiCT I ^'S or enter a judgment of non suit. On aS 
 
 '-'"'"^- jf'-om tl'« tlecision of the full Court assessing 
 
 " " ■ - damages to plaintiff :— * 
 
 Held Gwynne and Patterson. JJ., dissentinj?. 
 that as by the practice in the Supreme Court of 
 Aew I runs wick all matters of fact must be 
 decided by the jury, and can only be entertained 
 by the Court by consent of parties, the full 
 l^ourt in considering the case pursuant to the 
 agreement at the trial acted as a quasi-arbltrator 
 anil Its decision was not open to review on 
 appeal as it would have been if the judgment 
 had been given in the regular course of judi.iial 
 procedure in the Court :— 
 
 Held further, that if the merits of the case 
 could be entertained on appeal the judgment 
 appealed from should be affirmed :— 
 
 Held, per (iwynne and Patterson, .JJ., that 
 the case was properly before the Court, and a.- 
 the evidence shewed that the servants of the 
 company had complied with the statutory 
 requirement as to giving notice of the apr,ro;ich 
 ot the train the company was not liable. Cana- 
 
 ■8. From Winding-np Orders 
 
 PANY. 
 
 To the Court of Appeal- 
 OF Appeal. 
 
 —See CoM- 
 -See Court 
 
 To tlie Privy 
 Council. 
 
 Council — See Privy 
 
 11. To the Supreme Court of Canada-See 
 ^upheme Court of Canada. 
 
 I. Appeal Generally. 
 ^i.^nrTi"7fA"«?-]-If - not beneath 
 
 the 
 
 •dignity of the Court to determine .an nntmoi /• —-"•:'■■'■■■'=, >-"'"i""'y was nomaoie. Cana- 
 ^ ermine an appeal dimi Panfc P. ir. Co. v. Flemiwj. 22 S. C. K. .30. 
 
 n 
 
19 
 
 U. 
 
 ^OASVUSMKST AN,, WAIVER. 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 20> 
 
 .„t?'^«le8cence In Judgment I t l*''^^''''f°"°tters'''il,olivT '''". "''f""'* '" re- 
 
 "' tl,o other. Chrievr'T" '" "■^l"-''-' 
 
 •>ey.(J,„i,v.l of tl,e I', vi ■"""" ""-■ >^"-"- 
 ;:«"^<l,an,I the fn «n e 7^ <'f <.»....l,ec inter- 
 
 «PI-a]e,ftoVe ,n 7;T:''''^;^''^'f^'''''''' 
 
 »PP«;alto the .Snpr, •""/' ; ^" •' ^"•U.er 
 
 tho I.r,M..,,,.l actio t, 1 '* ^'^■'•■" « '•'■•'^■1' i" 
 
 P He',1. that the a, t , .V''['.'''' '-^^-'ewe.l :- 
 Bench fro,,, the julj; ,,'■/■ '^"-^ "!' '^''"•''■■'^ 
 ?n the -Mtervent on ha , 1, ' '" ■^."I"^;""- t'onrt 
 
 --t:^S^-roi?„^:'^^y?-*]rBya,j„.„. 
 
 Boc.oty was or,iere 1 tliv ',""'' "'« ''"^^'-'lant 
 ^/of its sha,e.s upon : J ''';•■"-■«•*'":" '••■■"- 
 Before the time f,. ra.w.e H , "'.''^'■■'■tain sum, 
 "ey <'d lit,,, ror the' ; r'?'^' f'"-' ■■itt.,r. 
 shares to the plaint rs'i' ''^'''^'^'-'-''J the 
 
 would not .mpea iV . """''"«>• an.I .stated e 
 amount -lir'Ae, , "'j-'l^-'^'/'-o pai.l Z 
 
 8ubae,pu.ntly taken he ore .ho l^'' "'''"^''^ ""« 
 ney coMiphV 1 with the ^ho phiintilfs attor- 
 """f'!'" to ,uasi he ' :,:''.''f "' "'f ""•^''■- On a 
 •'-(-"-ceo.einthej,, 'St''" '''*^ «'■"""<> of 
 
 £^raS:e,';''::;''f'if"-'''"^o- 
 
 has no a.itl,ority to i,in,n';'' "!'. ''^""'•"oy ad Hhm 
 by an agreen.e^t w ' ! ^'"^■" '.'"' t" appea 
 that "" appeal WonI ,e !>"''P"'""fe' attorney 
 
 "f SlSn^ftT Z",^''''^^'- 1- ^^ i-'Kn,e„t 
 taking h^^ ho a ,,•;*;"•' """""'^■''"" ''■"!' r 
 
 «tM.ve,lnotioef\. '',';', '":""''•' <i'-i ana 
 I costs:- iii'iial l,on,l f„r security for 
 
 y'^HU'';^S'::f*'---;^.-ovo.,o,,tof 
 
 Appeal ; tl,e notice ,,,, A" ""^^ ^ ''"'f "f 
 
 I ''.i-ing still seize 1 of the e^s,' V •"'-'' ^ "'"'t. 
 
 i VM-tneof its inherent ^-.^.t '•?•"'•' ""«'-f'"'. I'y 
 
 ' -Hie. Dono..:Tji!:i£::\^]^. %. rd,; """ 
 
 in. As TO Costs. 
 
 of H..nti„g,lonf t : In. 'fin' "' "i^ ^-""^^ 
 ^Pea|.h_0„ appeal t^til^slir^Xrr:? 
 
 th^Sti^t^in' trs;5/"^p';''^ '^^'— 
 
 t'o.ntwonianotciLrtaint le, ''" V^ 'c"'*^- *''« 
 an.I Excheoner fWs A P ''''"'■'''■ •'^"I"emo 
 
 r^-":^rfS^!;.f;-tese.] Co„,pli.nce 
 procee.linl,i,/,,;j';^*^?^t_^«/^ under protest, and 
 
 -'c^iirofi'-j's^r'^"';''^ -''•■'-- 
 
 -O^jTy V. Oo„ora«, hi" ^i'.; "/.';; '-'fe'l't of appeal. I 
 
 who desires to T^.y' tt '' I ^^ "■"' "^ ^I'P-^ 
 ■f "Jft, is in the 8.in,/po itir', 'n""'f ", '•^P!^'^'-''^'' 
 •PPelJant, and whateve oul . '^ ''" ''■''^'' ••"' 
 lus contention if he had 1, n V "^ *?" '''"«" ^r to 
 •PPeal would also e ■ "Z';* '^'^ '"''^'Pendent \ 
 contention when urced w^f'^" *" ""= s«'ne ' 
 And where, hefore ,.„" ",^„;^ "''oss-appeal. 
 
 therespondentmoved nC,^, ^ "V""' "I'Pe''''. 
 
 •Uow.ng ),i,„ to enfoce r '''''''"'' "'■•''■r 
 
 •«»•"« without prej, Hee to ,1 '"'''"' "P'^^'-^'e'' 
 Held, that it was^ ot f.,; '"W^^-'^PPeal :- 
 
 *»«, in advance oft * J"''«^ '" (^'hani- 
 
 Wion M'hieh ndih 'a .; ":?';/° ''^''^''"'"-e a 
 ^^•. whether the B„f '"e appeal itself 
 
 ;Tr'5' '^^ - an vert'tir"* '' ""^ "^ , 
 
 , the action, \mtToCt£\fv ^f"'''^- ""= '''«'« "^ 
 J<'<lgn,ent. an ^vXoLfC-'F'''' ''^ ^^^^ 
 
 , -JL' appeal for costs wit dn he ' J'"'""'^'"* is not 
 f > O. J. Act. A h. W en "r""'^' "f «'^«''°n 
 
 ''""t to pay the w'h t ; , ,f th"*'' ' " ''^'f^'"" 
 
 f-i!^?r:s:''--'^i^^-^^"-iti«. 
 
 j ^/"«"'r/ V. City of 7<,;o;/o:" J'a R 'svf' '"'"'• 
 
 ^HS^r^rc^o^uftir/'tt^-t" 7p^'^' '-t- 
 
 "•l>o has awarded eo.^tJ '' "^ ''' t''"*' '''"'ge 
 
 330. ^'"'^' ^^'^ ^"x- Co., 25 O. R. 
 
 ^ASr?,d° urtTsl£'v7 ^'^^^^ ^'""'''"'•-<' 
 
 - ''e ^^et asid; i th ica e had*'!."'" 7'! ■''""«''* '<^ 
 gated and not ■in- eJefl J I''™ ''"'-^ ''oniolo- 
 , provided in Ar^P' 06 mT)' ir'"'l" ""^ '''''•^y 
 ^ <l>3P>.te between the nartietl! ""'^' "'■•'"^'- ^^ 
 "f <^"sts, and tleVeC the r ■■"?'"*"'"''«"'»> 
 entertain the apnea ulv.-r''' '^''"''' "«» 
 
 Shrrh-ooi; 24 8 r P ' -o ',°"''''' ' '>"'''•-'"• v 
 
 ^.v. ,w„.,^^^-.;|-t.n^.h.g.^^ 
 
20< 
 
 lieiu two aiiponla in 
 
 81 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 ly se| 
 
 22 
 
 ■■ order 
 
 'auite «,ul diatiuct 
 
 ">g't appeal from the 
 •o.tl.o appeals, Hhilo 
 It dtcision ia resjifft 
 ^- trufj/itvn, 14 i>; R 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 A 
 
 judgment 
 
 l<L'toi;(,iil,e(|„,| iiiidtr- 
 't t" .-ililKiil tlwiefnim ; 
 
 'it- pluintifr lilcl aiui 
 '""■■/'"urtof ^pp,„,, 
 
 '"'iiil for seciiiily for 
 
 as not removed out of 
 '^■^ into the Court of 
 
 "d were irregular and 
 ^,an,ltlu.ni„|,(„||,,t 
 "■- I'onld iiiterfeie, by 
 3'1'ction, to set tlam 
 >"', 14 1'. 11. 10(;. 
 
 OSTS, 
 
 otlon Repealed. ]— 
 
 L' jiidgnjent l,y the 
 etiiHing to (piiisl, a 
 :ition of the village 
 ■ '" fjiiestion 
 
 IV in 
 
 was 
 
 - iSuprenie Court of 
 
 ill 'lispute between 
 ehtion of costs, the 
 "ippeal. Supreme 
 
 .*t''^ 24. ^J„ 
 
 •'■ R. .SC3. 
 
 liiir V. 
 
 'ay all Costs.]— 
 to pay the costs of 
 of IS given l.y the 
 -■ judgment is not 
 iieaning of section 
 •dcriug the defen- 
 'f the action ean- 
 iiintiir is entitled 
 
 followed. 
 R. /547, aflirnied. 
 V. R. 318. 
 
 appeal lies to a 
 ' 'if .1 trial Judge 
 vrong principle. 
 • Co., 25 O. R. 
 
 I'ft Com/ilained 
 '1 roll sought to 
 n duly homolo- 
 ithin the delay 
 
 only matter in 
 I merefjuestion 
 iirt would not 
 rinfo/Hiititing. 
 
 ; Wfltsftr y 
 guished. Mc, 
 
 &. 24 s. c. a 
 
 IV. l.VTKRFEKINIi WITH Fl.VDlMJ.S OF FacT. 
 
 Expropriation Proceedings — /iitir/triini 
 with Aiiiviint Airurdui.]—.Si:c AltlilTU.VTloN .x.vi) 
 AWAKII, I. 
 
 Findings of Fact.]— G. was the manager 
 for the Ottawa l»i.->tnct of a lunilier ccniiiany 
 whoso headMpiart.iM were in Kdird.ur.di ,iiid 
 whoso heai! ollic'c f,,r Canada wa.s in Toidiito. 
 J he company having gone into linuidatioii 
 an order was , detained troni tli.^ Court of 
 Sessions m Kdinhurgh for the deli\ery of ith 
 bo<jks by the manager to the li(iuidat(>r, or to 
 some person app„inled l)y him. ■|'his oidir not 
 having been obeyed, an action was la<)U;.lit liy 
 tho coinpany to recover possession of the bi.oUs 
 from G., who .set up tliu defence that iie liad 
 already given them up, an, I al.so tliat the com- i 
 pany had no /oru.i .^/andi to maintain the action, i 
 Ihe uvu'ience given on the hearing shewed that ' 
 after the proceedings in liquidation were com- 
 menced (i. was ilisud.ssed from his emiiloyment 
 as inanagcr, Mhercupon he demanded an" audit 
 of tho l)ooks whicli was commenced lait never 
 completed, and (J, swore tiiat after handing over 
 the l)ook3 to the auditors he had never lia.l pos- 
 session of them. He also swore that they h.id 
 never lieeii in his control, having been kept in a 
 safe of which a clerk of the company and li.e 
 new manager alone had the coud)iiiation. Jt 
 was shewn by the plaintiQ's, however, that some 
 time after the audit, an agent of the li(iuidator 
 went to Ottawa to get the botdjs and sawG., 
 who first agreed but .■cfterwards refused to deliver 
 them up, giving as tiie ground of his refu.sal that 
 he was liable for tlie rent of the otlice, ami for 
 other (lebts of the company, and that ho wished i 
 to retain what j.ropertv of the company he had 
 to protect himself. 'I'lie agent, with the assist- 
 ance of G's. landlord, then obtained access to 
 the othce where he .saw some books which ho 
 took to lielong to the company, and a safe in 
 whicli he believed there were otliers, but (;. 
 coming in refused to allow him to remove them 
 and ejecteil huu from the otlice. On tliis evi- 
 dence t lie trial .luilge made an order against G. 
 directing him to deliver to tlie liquidator all tho 
 books and papers of tho company in his pos.ses- 
 Bion or under his control. This decision was 
 affirmed by the l)ivi.,ional Court and the Court 
 of Appeal On appeal by G. to the Supremo 
 Court ot ('anada:— 
 
 Held, that tho books having been shewn to 
 have been in the possession of G. at the date of 
 the visit of the li.|Hi,!ator'sagent to Ottawa, and ' 
 the .lefeiidant not h.iving attempted to shew 
 what l)ecanie (f tlicm after that date, and his 
 testimony that he did not know what had become 
 ot them having been discredited by the trial 
 Judge, there was no reason for interfering with 
 the oroer appealed from. Grant v. nHfhh 
 tamiduiii LiimUr Co., 18 S. C. H. 708. 
 
 election petition by lescdulioii passed at a meet- 
 ing of the association, and that in conseipienco 
 of such resolution he acted as such solicitor in 
 ! the conduct of the petition. The defence to the 
 . action was that no sucii .ipp(]intmenl was m.ade, 
 or if it «as, that tlie plaiiitiif agreed to render 
 ) Ills services gratuitously, and the evidence given 
 for the deleiidants was that the plainti,:' oliered 
 his servict.:, fiee of charge, and that it was 
 decided to protest the election in conseipience of 
 such oiler. The trial .Judge held that no retainer 
 of the plaiulill' was proved, an<l diami!,.sed the 
 ■letioii. Ilisdecis^on w;is ro\ened by the '.Hieen's 
 lleiich l>ivi.sioii, and their decision in its turn 
 w,is leveised by tlie (.'ouit of Appeal and the 
 judgment of the trial .liidgi; lestored. On 
 appeal by the plaintill' to the .Supreme Court of 
 Canada : — 
 
 Held, .■iliirmiug the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, that the ipiestion being ])urelv one of 
 fact which the trial ,ludge was the perM)n most 
 competent to deterniiiie from seeing and Ik aring 
 the witnesses, and it not being clear beyond all 
 reasonable doubt that his ilecisioii was errone- 
 ous, but, on the contrary, the weight of evidence 
 being in Its tavour, his jiidgineiil should not be 
 intcriend with on appeal. Tilu.-i v. ColriUe. 18 
 S. C. 1!. 70!). 
 
 Findings of Pact. ]-T., a solicitor, brought 
 an action against tlie olHcers of the Libcal- 
 Conservative Association of the East Uiding 
 of Northumberlan 1 for services alleged to 
 have been rendered as their solicitor and 
 counsel in the matter of an election petition 
 against the return of the member for the 
 A?l'!,= '".'^'« ff«islative Assembly of Ontario. 
 At the trial of the action the plaintiffswore that 
 he was duly appointed solicitor to carry on the I 
 
 Plndlng.g of Fact.]-In a suitforanaceount 
 of the earnings oi a steamer transferi.,1 to 
 the detendants by the pl.iintitf, the case had 
 j been heard and judgment given when defen- 
 dants made aiiplication to be allowed to put 
 III newly discovered evidence, which was 
 refused by the Court below, but allowcl by 
 the .Supreme Cnirt of Canada, which latter 
 Court also gave leave to both parties to 
 amend their pleadings. The original answer of 
 the defendants to the action alleged that the 
 transfer of the steamer was made by the rlain- 
 titl as security for all advances made or to be 
 made, while phiintill' claimed that it was only 
 as security for a fixed amount. After the order 
 of tho .Supremo Court of Canada defendants set 
 up a new case, namely, that the transfer was 
 j aljsolute in consideration of an annuity of SI 000 
 I to be paid to phiintifi' during his life. This 
 j defence was raised in accordance with the newly 
 ■ discovered evidence, which consisted of an agree- 
 ment purporting to be ex. cuted by plaintdr to 
 transfer to defendants said steamer and all power 
 and control over the same in consideration of 
 such annuity, and to execute an absolute bill of 
 sale thereof to defendant. Pursuant to the or.ler 
 ot the .Supreme Court evidence was taken of the 
 execution of this agreement and resulted in a 
 judgment by the Judge in equity, who heard the 
 case, declaring that it did not contain the true 
 I agreement between the parties, that it was exe- 
 cjited by plaintiff while intoxicated and incap- 
 able of transacting business, and that the only 
 I consideration for the transfer to defendant was 
 the hxed sum stated by plaintiff; and he ordered 
 an account to be taken as to the state of the 
 general accounts between the parties. This 
 judgment having been affirmed by the full 
 
 Hold, that under the evidence and consider- 
 ing the nature oi the transaction an.t all the cir- 
 cumstances attending it the Courts below could 
 not have found otherwise than they did, and 
 their decision should be allirmed. Seeton v 
 A(H</, 18 .S. C. R. 712. 
 
23 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 Findings of Pact 7_ti,-> .• i- 8* 
 
 Courts on a .■iiesC.r.t f ?!',"« "f *»■" I Discretion /' 
 
 ftT..,l witi, by he swt/r^^^^^ T"; '" '"'«'•• \V)>erfw"H"«7H ;o:iT''"''''" "^ "'"'««..]_ 
 V- I V../>.n,/,9 N. r.'' "24 , ■'*• '^^■/'-^-"-« wit),i„ tiieSi^t: '':;«"•'; <'f ""tario coLe 
 
 t" their homes , n7,l.? ■ "'""" '" '•<'""•» 
 
 "l»-i, theeviden.eHHi.omIrmfrf fV''^'''r*°7 ''• ^^*" "ot l.t ™, i V ''''■" ''f'""i"^'<l "'xler 
 not interfere with tl>em (Zm t^^TV."']]'^ \i=hmaut eane o error . ■''''"')' ,""''^^'^'' '^ ''^^ 
 
 •I'f'ioe i„ a miit to ren e evl,,, '"'i' "' * 
 toes, which report -lis w,.^l •"""■" '""' f-""" 
 
 "ot reeon«i,ier the items m /"■'';*- Vvill 
 
 Courts havinK previ ommT" ''•''", ""•'- two 
 
 .lis,.r,>fi "fe !','•- ^""isl> exercised a indicia! 
 
 Ift'l to the iiirv ,« tl,.. ;„T" ''•"I'^'/.v "nve heen 
 
 (•«-i with.' /;;,//;;/.' . aS;;';" ;f '%''"^"^- 
 
 Findings or Pact. 1-An action wa . , I ^'''"'•ts 1.!; ^ , evi!:;::;^ '" ''^'^'<; -''■: tZ 
 
 ag.i.nst ti„. city .,f T. ront n J "^ "-""gilt '.liscretion as to 1 1 e ./i? ^ '••xercised a jndicial 
 
 JP" Pil-i on the side Tthest;.cI.t;''"''''f:-''^'^-^'I<. 310. '"'"'"''■ ^'^'"•'"'•««. 
 
 '"g. the jnry might reason d^v 1' 1^"''^°'"- 'fe'^nte.l a,,d the orde^ "PpLeation was 
 
 tliat if it had „tt beeno J. 'f, °/, "I^^^ 
 
 accident would not at" hat,^^"!' "'T J'"^ '" Chand,, st^,;'| •'/''' V'PPV'^' ''y '^ Judge 
 t. is was the sole cause of ?heSw' ""^^ ^'''■'M ■'^PociaUeave t," '?! f :;, l"^'r".»':^' ('"Tt. 
 ,'. n- n. ,. ,....,. J— dent. ^~'niWsionalConrr':!::'^;X:l'1.Jr'^i^!^ 
 
 A'. >r. 
 
 .080. 
 
 Co. V. 
 
 ^"y oj Joroii/o, 24 ,S. Q. R 
 
 20 .«. f. R. i7>,Vv, ;i*^ri f ««;^-«'- V- Xa„„„./,/,.,., 
 »r«y, 23S. C. k: ui ^^"^•^^>"«"dar;„o v. r<r„- 
 
 Pri..eipU j d , c t 1 , r' " '." '''^"^•'"•'^d the 
 
 ''-Ln'risdiS' r^evi-'ifis""' "'? ^'''«*«'- 
 plaintiffs had not shew, .;^'" "'■'''''' ' *'"'* 
 KuIe2;W(rtl fo ovtoni gf"Tl. reasons, under 
 
 proved l,v a "^,1" , ;, .r^'''','''''' '''■^^'"g l'«en ap- 
 
 '^11 tl.etril,nnal/;:;,^r^ I. :"'!'-'.""' ?''y that 
 
 Stronger An anneT. ^T^'^ ~ "«'''• P^r ^''""•^ th'eVwf" A .?,'.'''''" '',";' "^ '^'^''^'""^ 
 fnnctits in dealiZ ' -th '"''"'''''' '"^'^'■''"t '^» ''"otrihunaslelow en „?'''''•""' f'^ *hat 
 
 •n iury eases. I"^H^!::l. ^l^^--'-' I ,^Hejd that f. t,.^ 
 
 ^in:ourtn,Sra.^,te^!riS-K^ 
 
 T 1 . ,' "'-■•""ig witli a case 
 
 ,VI. r,K.u-K TO ArPKAL .^xn T.mk to Apph.j. 
 
 
 m^ 
 
S4 
 
 in/ioti of WkmMeH.S— 
 ig "lit of Ontario come 
 ni<l ai(! ulxmt to return 
 i- >n;.y l,o made for their 
 tlHir (leimrliire. 
 liscrctionary one, and, 
 I' iiei'n oxaminod under 
 '" .ipptjal unless a very 
 tars. JJelapy.Charle- 
 
 •" nn<l Trn.tf,fn ~ Ac. 
 'lilt of r'anada, on an- 
 "iiiiig tlie report of » 
 •' L'Xiontors and trus- 
 sed items in uocounts 
 
 ■ J rolcite Court, will 
 ' so <lealt witli, two 
 
 fxereised a judicial 
 
 Its and no ijueation of 
 
 ('■'■<'«/ V. Marlaren, 
 
 fTimrforAppeaU-. 
 
 ■ R. 210, po.it 26. 
 
 \-^:^<; Scott ^- Bank 
 «;_.<0; and rnimhle 
 
 Exfnivon of Timr to 
 f'oHie.iter South v. 
 
 /■ IIV,7.]_A writ 
 "It of Justice for 
 
 renewed Ijy order 
 lite times, the; lust 
 "0. In May, 1891, 
 t«, who thereupon 
 ye the service and 
 ■I' iipplieatinn was 
 i aside said service 
 appeal hy a Judge 
 jhvisKmal Court. 
 tlie decision of the 
 '1 hy the Court of 
 
 tlie order of the 
 '•lio delivered the 
 
 tluit the Master 
 *own order; that 
 "1 reasons, under 
 
 time for service; 
 
 having ),een ap- 
 sand a Divisional 
 >iil<l not say that 
 "iigmso lioldinc. 
 lit of Canada .•— 
 iven by Mr. Jug. 
 -al the appeal to 
 lissed with costs 
 ■ «■ C. R. 1.30. 
 
 MR TO Appeal. 
 
 ifficient grounds 
 toiii)peal from 
 t'ourt of Can- 
 
 'I'he P:xcliequer 
 
 ict. cii. .S5, aec. 
 
 prescribed time 
 
 as 
 
 has expired. 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 2ft 
 
 id be 
 
 made Wlu^n tluec%S'«S"tlie fxnirvTf Tr" }""•'>',"?}-'»'".'« ^"^""' "'" "Pl-al could ... 
 
 thirty .lays within^ iTcrln^aHtrSl'l: d^'lf P.V in id L^'T. '^^Tl''t";'''. 'h ""'">'^"'. ''^ 
 
 been taken. I ,•_».) The fact that a solicit, r who 'vf/, I I'l " '''"'X '' = '""' ' "" t'"' retu.sal to 
 has reeeive.1 instructions to a S has fa '.71^ I . r. f , t'";,""'f ,«,"««" ^■'^e.eiHe of ju.lieial .lis- 
 
 before carrying out such instrS.mX.L f '/"''''' «.'"^l'. <-•"« < ourt w.,uld not inter- 
 
 «u(hcienti.ou*;uluponwln"r:neSs,.'5:'l^^ c'r'?''' ""^ CW.Ae.^. .Vo,W. v. r.laU. 
 bo allowe.1 after the time for leave to appeal 
 
 ^<^^i:'ii^^£i:iu::^^^^ t.. 
 
 tation between the Att..rn .v-Gt3 or Can h. r i ' ■' "","''''""; '" ''o j.isti. e in 
 adaand his s.,lieitor within thepl'scr be.l tin e ' 1 i ' ''" "m '"''' '" "^""'^ "" """'■ ^on.-.hier. 
 for leave to ap[,..al is sutlieu. reason „r an ■ '■ ' '""' "'V '■•M"'-'««'"" " »'"-■ J'l^tieo ..f the 
 
 P,f..n.;,... ....:..!.' ?,,.','•"' '.'-»?"" for an case' means the justice of the case ui..,n the 
 
 unilisjiutcl facts .if it. 
 
 An. I will re tli.> plaintilf .lesirinj,' to app.al t.> 
 
 tlu'C.)urt of Appeal from tint iii.l^'ment of the 
 
 t hanoery lhvi.si.inal C.mrt, l!H). R. (|(ii» was 
 
 t«.> months an. I twelve .lays lutein tiling lii.s 
 
 'peal bon.l. an. I olleied ii.> .siilli.'i.nt exiUMfoi 
 
 liiit aske.l to have l\w time extiiiili.l 
 
 extension being grante.l, although the appliea- 
 tion therefor may not be made until after tlie 
 expiry of such preseribe.l time. (7,i,iv v. 77/. 
 Queen, A tx. C. R. 1. .Vtc the next case. 
 
 ^BxtendlngTlme. 1— On the trial 
 
 in the 
 
 1,'v. 1, ,?•".•' "■" '■"^ HI"' 111 tlie apD.^a ). 
 
 the C lown for breach .,f contract to purchase 
 paper fi(,m the supj^liant, n., .lefence was 
 oriere.l, and the case was sent to referees t.) 
 ascertain the .h.mages. In |8!»1 the report of 
 the referees was br..ught bef.,re the C.nirt, ami 
 JiKlgment was ^;iven again.st the Crown f.,r 
 the ani.iunt thereby foiin.l .hie. The (V.)wn 
 appea e.l t.i the .Supreme C.nirt, having obtaine.l 
 
 _ Hel.l, (; Wynne and Patterson, JJ., .lissent 
 ing, that the appeal must be restricte.l to the 
 nnal judgment iM-.monnee.l in l.S'Jj ; that an 
 appeal from the jn.lgment given in 18«7 e.uil.l 
 only be brought within thirty days thereafter 
 unless the time was exten.le.l as provide.l by 
 he statute and the extension of time granted 
 l)y the hxche.juer Court on its face mdv re- 
 fene.l t., an appeal from the judgment pro- 
 nounced 111 ]8!)1 :— ° ^ 
 
 Held, per Cwynno and Patterson J J., that 
 the judgment given in 1891 was the only judt; 
 
 a.s an in.iulgenee, an.l it appeare.l that if the 
 plaintill were t.. siue.'..l in his e.jilenti.m in 
 tlie case, he woul.l .,l,t,iin an.l h„ve at the 
 expiii.se of the .l.femlaiit more than he could 
 liav.' Iiail un.l.'r his ontract ; — 
 
 Held, that the iusti.je ..f the .■use was a-ainst 
 Oie plaintill; an.! th.it an .,rder .,f the Master 
 111 Uiambers exten.ling the time f.ir appealiiiLf, 
 though a .Iiscrethmary or.ler, was s.) el. ally 
 
 A/nl/ V. 
 
 Extending Tlme-/.o»./ Vnralhn.]-^ Cp.M. 
 
 he true e.M.rtnictior .,f |!„le 4S4, the peri.,,1 of 
 
 lonj,' va.uti.m .. not to be reek.me.l in the time 
 
 alowL.l by scet.anTi of the Jiulicature A.^t for 
 
 ofA'riiab -""*'' '""'"'' "'' "'''"■''' '" ^'"■' ^'""■■'^ 
 •SVwW., also that under the eirctimHtunces 
 ot this eu.s.., if the notice ha.I b... n hit.- the 
 timettoul.I have been exten.le.l under Rule' 485 
 Jh/<ptter V. Camijbdt, 14 P. R. IS. 
 
 rn^^X}^-:^:;::^:]^^]::^^^ lirr°^^^f ^^r^^^'-'^-^eave to ap.. 
 m issue by the uleadinLrs. ..owl o., „„„„„i ?..i " i 1 '^"' "''^ r'-fn^C'l on the merits, an.l als.i as a 
 
 }rnm "nil •'■ ^ f P''^'"'i"g«. a'"! on appeal there 
 %Zn '"''";';' 1" '"""*' '"•'' necessarily open. 
 Uhe Queen v. C/arke, '21 S. C. R. 656. 
 
 Extending Tlme,]-In an action by V 
 against a municipality for damages from injury 
 to i^roperty by the negligent construction if a 
 
 refe,'.''f •■''''■'"' T''^''^'' ^^ ^^ "^'-'ial 
 sect on 10. f ""'"''■>;. '""l '■'^P«''t P"iBUant to 
 section m of the Ju.lieature Act and Rule 552 
 of the High Court of Justice." The referee 
 reporte.1 that the diain was improperly cm. 
 structed, am that V. was entitle.l to^ §^0 
 damages The municipality appeale.l to t e 
 
 ?ehr't°hat !?"■* '"■""] ''" -port, an.l the Cour 
 lieKl that the appeal was too late, no notice 
 having been given within the time e.aiii id by 
 Consolidated Rule 848, and refused to e.x e„,^ 
 the nne for appealing. A motion for ju.lginent 
 on the report was also made by V. to Ihe Court 
 on which ,t w,|s claime.l on behalf of 1 1. e m m,^ 
 cipahty that the whole case should be g „" o 
 upon_the evidence, which the Court i4sed to 
 
 Helrl, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that the appeal not having been brought 
 wittm one month f ,n the date "of the repor 
 us required by ( , .Jated Rule 848? i'^ ts 
 
 too late ; that the ..^ort had to be filed by che 
 
 ",..(., c ,. ■. " ""-'it.>, and als.i as 
 
 matter of di.'.cretion, where the [irop.iHed ap.ieal 
 was upon an ,nterlocut.,ry pr.icee.lii.g in 'the 
 u'p' P°r.'i,"-°'^^'' "PP^''''' -^^'"-^ V. Jlucdonald. 
 
 Railway Act.]- An appeal under .section 161 
 of the Railway Act, 51 \ict. ch. 29(1)), from 
 an awar.l nee. not be brought ..„ lo'r hea i^ 
 vv th .1 a month from notice of the aw.u-.l ; an 
 
 within the month, is suliicient. /,V Potter and 
 ftntial Counties R. W. Co. 16 P. R. 16. 
 
 VII. Practice and Proceuure. 
 
 n„^''*.*'"iS*-'7^ judgment of the Court of 
 Q en s Bench for Lower Canada (appeal side 
 held that a vendttmn eupona, i,,uli by the 
 Superior Court of Montreal, to which Court 
 tlie record in a contestation of an opposition, 
 had been removed from the Superior Court of 
 the district of Iberville under Arti.le ISS C C 
 
 Jourrof sr:;-'"' "'''"'' *° "'° «"^— 
 
 i'il 
 
27 
 
 APPEAL. 
 
 Ill 
 
 Hf(l t .at ..n a qnostioi, of practice h.icIi a« 
 tlilM lie ( „uit «„„l,l „„| inhTfcTP. M„„or „f 
 M<„ilr,„l V Hr,.ir„, ii .A|.|). Chh. 1N4, f„l|„we.l. 
 ^>V'i// V. M'trhniilM Jirtid- nj Canwli,, i>4 S. ('. 
 K, 1 4«. 
 
 28 
 
 not 
 
 Practice.]— Tlu' .Siijncmc Court will 
 .nt,T .■,•,. ,m a riucstioM of imiotic.. an<l pniccliiro. 
 MnnluiKilil V. lufihiix, 'JL' S. C. li. '.'00. 
 
 ProoecJure.]-I)ccisions of provincini ConrtH 
 rcstiMg „,„„i iiuMv .|iu.Mti.,iis of i.n.fo.tnre will 
 imt Ik. iiitorlon.,! with on app,.,,! to tlio Supre.uu 
 U.iut ot Canada except „n,ler speeial circuni. 
 stiineeH. tcrrm- v. Tnj.aiiiii,); L'4 S. C. U. 
 
 Taxation Of Costs.] -S,. O'Donnhoe v. 
 
 VIII. l;„aiT TO TAKi: Nkw fJHOrxi.s ok I'CT 
 
 IN Imuthkk Kvidknce. 
 
 New Evidence -:\V». 7 rM-Dl^n-Hio,,.]- 
 All„u,Mi;a new trial on the gr.Hin.l of the iIIh- 
 coveryot new evi,len.-e i.s a matter of lej-al fliH- 
 fretion, and where the siil.ject matter Of the 
 actum was of a trilling nature an,! a DiviHional 
 Court onlere.l a new trial „n allhlavits .shewiuL' 
 in.rely the' di-seovery of further evhionee corro- 
 Ixirative of the evi,lenee (,f the trial, the onler 
 waa set aside. Min;;,// v. Canada Cnlral /,' 
 II • '}'■' ' '\}<- li-Ki. followed. Ju.lgment of 
 the ( omnion I'leas Division reversed. Tnu„hh 
 
 \ i''"''"'\^^,:\}''- '"'•• ^'^ "'"O lloirarth v. 
 MH.iiijnn, 'ZZ (). li. 3!)(!. 
 
 allege.l to Imvc been l.urnt. Tlio evidrn.',. wm 
 rejected l.y the tlial Judge for the reason that 
 there ^yaH no defence phaded that the hr.. wa« 
 
 :■";;•'"'!;"•>•• 'v' '•>' "Pi-«ai t,, the fnii court 
 
 '< ow , was for the tirnt time urged that it waH 
 
 U " fr" *-• "r, *•'"""« ""■ '-<"-•« 'u.d extent Z 
 the fir, in the vi.imty. The verdict for the 
 . plaintiirs waH HUHtained hy the full Court. On 
 I apnea! t.. the Supreme Co,,rt of (•ana.la :- 
 
 , 'l<'ld (.Wynne, .I.,,li«.,.,iting, that tlio dec!- 
 
 Hl.m of the Court l,eh,„Hl,nnMI,eallirmed. 
 
 I erltitehn.C.I that though the amount of 
 
 he .lamagcH foun.l ,n the case was not Hatin- 
 
 fa ory ..„ I „,,^,,t „.„„ ,„,^,,. ,,^,^,^ ,„,„„i^„,, ^ 
 
 V. .-^'l'^ '""'."'^■^■•^ '";■" "«i'|>iestion iiroperfor 
 their . ..terminat.on he would not di.ssent from 
 the judgment di.MmisHing the appeal. An to thn 
 other ground, the evidete wa's'rightly nj ;tS! 
 Uhen evidence i.s ten.lercd the Judge an. 
 opposing counsel are entitle,! to know the 
 ground on which it i., offered and none can 1« 
 
 a Ui'ltrid'''"/ *'';",'""'' '"" '«••'"' imt forwanl 
 •S C K 71 1 " '"-^"'(uk; Co. v. l)„£\i,^ IB 
 
 tiency of tl.e traverse to a declaration will not 
 .ee„ ertained when taken for the lirst time on 
 "lipfal, the ,8.sue having heen tried on the 
 assumptmn that the traver.se was suHicient! 
 '^fljlnix V. Jackmn, i.'3 S. c. li. 485. 
 
 IX. StaVINO riiOCKKIJINCW. 
 
 New Evidence. ]-0n the argument of an 
 appe.U evnlence ai to a prior action was adniit- 
 . ted, and on tins evidence and objection then 
 taUen the judgment l.elnw was reverrsed, with- 
 out costs. (I Olid V. lltiaof, 22 A. R. ST. 
 
 New Bvidence.]-()n the argument of an 
 apijcal to the Divisional (Vuirt from the trial 
 Judge where a l.y-law of the city of Toronto 
 had heen proved at the trial. !.ut evidence was 
 not given of the registration .,f the same, evi- 
 <lenc(, was tendereil on the argument of the 
 appeal sliewing the fact and date of the registra- 
 tion ot the hy-law :— * 
 
 Held, that the evidence should properly lie 
 admitted. Biirfout v. DiiMoidin, 21 O. R. 58.S. 
 
 New Evidence. ]-Evi<lence by atHdavit of 
 the loss of a ixdicy received by the Divisional 
 Coii.t under Con. Rule iiSJ. JJoien v. MHio- 
 politan Life Insnraiu-e Co., 26 O. R. 67. 
 
 New Grounds.] — In an action on a policy 
 ot lu.suraiice against tire on a stock of goo.ls 
 the verdict for the plaintitf was moved against 
 "". \T ,K'-"."'-'1s of its heing against the 
 w_eig!it of evidence and of improper e.'cclusi.ai 
 ot evidence. The first gronnd was mainly 
 urged 111 regard to the amc mt of dama-es. 
 As to the second ground the evidence ten- 
 dereil ivlatod to the fact that a quantity of 
 unburnt matches and shavings had been found 
 near the part of the iiremises in which the lire 
 occurred where the bulk of the goods were 
 
 Execution., -Where the plaintitls were ap- 
 pealingr to the I'rivy Council from a jmb-meiit 
 of the Court of Appeal dismissing with ..rsts an 
 appeal from the judgment ot the (.)ueens Honch 
 
 .vision ,n favour of the detendants with costs, 
 
 ::ic^5';iiL^o":r^; :!''''''"• '^^'•^•i'"^«'i'" 
 
 Held, that the order of a Judge of the Court 
 
 ot Appeal un.lersectio.i .-,, allowing tie security 
 
 Hliould not have stayed the l.rocct,iii,gs in the 
 
 ; action, and so much of the order as related to 
 
 the stay shcmhl be rescinded — 
 
 Held, also, that the plaintills not having 
 
 ^ given secnritj' to st.ay execution lor the costs in 
 
 the Courts below, and the stay being re.i.oved, 
 
 if they now desircl to have execution for such 
 
 j costs stayed, they should give .security therefor 
 
 as provnled by liule 804, which is made applic' 
 
 ; able by section 4 of the .Act •— ' ^ 
 
 Held also, that if an ,uder for payment out of 
 
 the High Court ..f m.mey therein, awaiting the 
 
 result of the litigation, was " execution " within 
 
 t ,. meaning of section .^ it was stas e<l by the 
 
 allowance o the .security, and re,|uired no order ; 
 
 ! If It was not execution, a Judge of the ('ourt of 
 
 , Appeal ha.l no juris.licti.m to stay ,.roceeding8 
 
 n the Court below ; and it was for the High 
 
 Court to determme whether smh an order w-as 
 
 execution, and if not, whether the money 
 
 ' vioQ P''"'^ °"'- ^^'-^Vasicr V. A'ad/ord, 16 
 
 Money in Court. ]-?,y th,. terms of a rnnsent 
 
 |o.-,ici, a sum oi money wa.s to be retained in 
 
 1 ourt to abide the result of such pn.^eedings 
 
 as the plaintiffs might be advised to take to 
 
 I assert and enforce their rights and remedies 
 
lilt. TIk! cvidptico WM 
 il(.'«' f'irtlii' riiinoii that 
 ■ikIiiI tliiit till. llr.. was 
 'iiil to the full ('(Mirt 
 tiiiii' iirgiMl tliiit It wax 
 IV. nature iiml oxtcnt of 
 'I'liu v«rilii;t for tha 
 • ■y >l'i' full Court. On 
 'lilt (pf Cmmdii ;— 
 Tilting, that tho (Icci- 
 liiiuiil lie ullirniwl. 
 t tlniu>;li the .•muMiiit of 
 hv lll«(. WilH ll<)t Niitis- 
 live l.ctii Miiliuiitted to 
 H a i|iUHtion proper for 
 "Mill not dissent from 
 tlic'iippeal. As to the 
 ;e w.iN rightly rejected, 
 leied the Judge and 
 iititled to know the 
 iered and iioni^ eiui he 
 not lieen put forward 
 aiief Co. V. IhijJ'iut, 18 
 
 olijeetion to the suffi- 
 i deelanition will not 
 I for the first time on 
 been tried on the 
 verse was .sufficient. 
 v.. J!. 4,S.). 
 
 (OCEKMVftS. 
 
 lu- piaintifl's were ap- 
 leil from a judgment 
 missing with costs an 
 of tile (,)ueen's Iteiich 
 el'eiidants with costs, 
 ;''i,0()0, as required in 
 
 I Judge of tlie Court 
 lillowingtle security 
 le pi-oeee.liiigs in the 
 ■ order as related to 
 d — 
 
 laintitls not having 
 ;ition lor the costs in 
 .stay heing removed, 
 e exeeution for such 
 ive s<eurity therefor 
 liieh i,s made applic- 
 
 T for payment out of 
 li( rein, aw.iiting the 
 " execution " within 
 t wa.s stayed hy the 
 il ie(juired no order ; 
 iilge of the Court of 
 to stay liroceedings 
 was for tlie High 
 r such an order was 
 whether the money 
 Mer V. Radford, 16 
 
 e terms of a oonsent 
 s to be retained in 
 >f .such pri, feedings 
 advised to take to 
 gilts and remedies 
 
 S9 
 
 ARBITRATION AND AWARD. 
 
 with rospnct to a claim made hy tlieni, and such 
 proeecdiiigH were to he conimuiiced within four 
 monthit. Substantially the sum of money wau 
 to reprenent that which the plaintillH claimed, 
 and tliey wero to have it if their claim pro.'ed a 
 valid one. The plaintitTs brought this action to 
 enforce their claim, an<t carried it to the Court 
 of Appeal, where it was dismissed. They then 
 commenced an appeal to tho Supremo Court of 
 I aimda ; — 
 
 Held, that this appeal wag one of the pro- 
 ccedings, or part of such proceedings, as the 
 piRintiirs were at liberty to take under the order. 
 "iKt until Its determination, the money should 
 '',';' ''", '"^i".' "'"• 'y.'/ of Tnvonlo V. V'o<-oH/o 
 
 80 
 
 I. AlTKAT. FROM AwARIi. 
 
 APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEES. 
 
 See TRi;.>tTs and Tkpstkkh, III. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT. 
 
 AN.Ni'FTy.-.SV^ Culhhnt v. Xorlh Amn-iran 
 lAfe Amirame Co., 24 O. R. 511, ante. US. 
 
 I'J A. R. JOa, j>unt 110. 
 Damaoem.— 5ee Damaoe,s. 
 Insurance.— ,S'ee In.surance. 
 Rknt. — iS'cft La.nuuird and Tenant, XIX. 
 
 APPROPRIATION OF PAYMENTS. 
 
 Hxproprlatlon.l-Ina matter of expropria- 
 tion the. ecsion of a majority of arbitrators, men 
 ot more than ordinary busiuesH experience, upim a 
 (piestlon merely of value should not be interfered 
 with on appeal l.nmmir v. Cit,, ,/ Mmi/miL 
 Allna V. lity oj Muntnal, Z\ S. C. K. 31)0. 
 
 Expropriation.)- Whore an award of the 
 
 omeial arliitratois in an expropriation matter was 
 not exceHSivo in vi.,w of the evidence b..fore them 
 the t oiirt declined to >nterfere with it 7V 
 QufHi V. Cnrriei; 2 Ex. C. R. 101. 
 
 Expropriation. ]- Where the ollieial arbitra- 
 tors in making their award have not proceeded 
 <||";m a wrong principle, nor arrived at an esti- 
 mate of value not warrante.l by the evi.lenee. 
 tli(^ ( ourt ought not to disturb such award, /{e 
 Morkhm mid y;,„iara Falh /'ark, 14 A. U. •>{} 
 
 V. /Ac Qu,u,, '1 Kx. C. R. .p.>8. 
 
 r'.?^'^''*''?T'*V°" - -fiKl'.nnful of Exchequer 
 CO /^]-l he .Supremo Court will not interfere 
 with amount.,! av.ar.l wh.Tc the liu.ling is n..t 
 clearly er^..ne.ms. To.;t of Let-i. v. Th. (^,„:en, 
 
 See Payment, III. 
 
 ARBITRATION AND AWARD. 
 
 I. Appeal from Award, 30. 
 II. Arbitrator. 
 
 1. Jiiiqnalificationof, 3\. 
 
 2. flowers of, 33. 
 
 3. ProceediiKjn hi fore, 33. 
 
 III. Award, 3.3. 
 
 IV. Costs and Fee.s, ,34. 
 
 V. Settinu Aside Award, 35. 
 
 VI. SUBMIS.SION, 38. 
 
 ^^Dr.unaor AcT.-&e MtJNiciPAL Corpora- 
 
 KxPROPRIATION.-.S'geCROWN-RAILWAVS. 
 Tl.JIr"'"''''' ^'^—^'<' MirNlCIPAL ConrORA- 
 
 Railway Act.— See Railways. 
 Schools.— ,S>e Public Schools. 
 
 Increaslna: Award- -/i'eiV/rH.r.l-.Hel.l. ner 
 Hagarty, C.I.O., a.i.l .Maclennan,^J.A. In'lr 
 r^nr !'T ^''hi" .««''tions 401 an.l 404 of the 
 C.isohda ed Municipal Act, .-J,-, Vict. cli. 42 
 
 1 10 award cannot, merely ..„ his .,wn un.ler- 
 Ntamhng .,f the evi.lenee ami .,n a view ..f the 
 premises, increase the amount awar.le.l. 
 
 e,.l with the awar.l on the merits, and ca 
 increase or re.luce the amount or vary the ,le 
 cision as to costs. '' 
 
 In the result tho ju.lgment of Rose, J., 21 
 u. li. 44.1, Was afiirmed. 
 
 o/" '•'' /-'/"•'•-•'i«i oiid Toronto J, motion, 22 A. R 
 -'1. Afhrmed by the Supreme Court. 
 
 Oflaclal Arbitrators. ]-The Court will not 
 nterfere with an award of the official arbit a 
 tors where there is evidence to support theh- 
 'I'l'lmg, an.l such liu.ling is not clearly ermn" 
 ous. .Samson v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 94. 
 
 Railway Act-. I, «o«H/. 1-1 n a case ot an 
 awaid in expropriation proceedings under the 
 Railway Act, R. S. C. clJ. 109, it was held I v 
 
 ,r ^YV-M '^''\ *'"' 'i^Wf.;tors h u aetS 
 ■n g.iod faith an.l fairness in considerin.' the 
 value of the property before the , Ulway 
 passed through it, an.l its value after the raib 
 way la.l been cmistructed, and that the sum 
 
 in J:^f :""''' r' T ^'•"^"•y "■"• «-an.lalously 
 inade(,uato as to shoc^ one's sense of justic/ 
 On appea to the Supreme Court of Camula - 
 f„. 1 'il ^ *t J'V'8"'C"t shoul.l not be inter- 
 
 Sr. co.:\^ot'c:'R."77^''"'" """ ''• "■ 
 
 tion 161 of the Railway Act, 51 Vict. eh. 29 (D ) 
 
 ^"IhiTmrf """"= >."'>u«l'ton for hearing 
 Mith n a m.) nth from notice of the award, an 
 
 uthnTh'"'"'^r^'''^P"^''«'^'^" ■" g""'l f'it' 
 uithm the ni.mth, IS .sufficient. 
 
31 
 
 f[ii 
 
 m 
 
 III 
 
 ; i 
 
 JS.:::':^i31;;:!':!,^;;l'r::fr'n'V''-' 
 
 ARBITRATION AND AWARD. 
 
 /■.'iiiliiire~/'„ 
 I'orpurii 
 
 View of PronUio.) (),., 
 
 I UK .s II iir iiilvli' ill,, 1 I ■■"."•'•' Kll llthl'l 
 
 --.Ji:;a;;;':.i';i;:;'i;--- '" 
 
 view, th,,, C.urt si ,1, ,,,r '■''' "''"" '''^ 
 
 nnl;;.;tf,:!::;.::i::^,:;;7,t!';;;:,:;;,t;:;;:.';v.- 
 
 38 
 
 Contract S„/„ ,-!„fn„/r„/ „f |IV,W- 1 n. 
 <'"iitiM(i ,(■(«,.,,„ ,,i,i„iiii- I •>'"*. J-Hy II 
 
 i'::::',;r'^:i '''■'■'''■''■'-''• ''-11'-";.. 
 
 Illlil, tluit (lie i:\ct (if il I I 
 
 tiio 
 < riiiiii,'!- 
 
 L'r.iiM.i'sant will, tliu Mil,,,. „t- I I I "■■"'"« 
 
 ;:/i:;;;l,,t;;;i-«"'»"-«™.-5»;iv^i;/;;:, 
 
 t^- Tiiat the arbitrator liad iuris,ll,.Hn ' 
 
 'I'l-'CUIltl 
 
 iM.th,..!;,;;:;.;;: '''rt;■,*^;''?"''•^r'•-'■ 
 L''M-|,i)ratiuii or f,,,. tl,,. s,,li,.if,„. f/ V '"' tl'o 
 
 ;;;;-.. conn....;, -vS^,iS':;;;x":;^ 
 
 -\lhn„e,l in upiioal, 2-> A l^%i i • , 
 
 ■Swine.,,0. Court, --, ,S. C~ itwi. ' '""' '" *''" 
 
 ™s«.:i;s^z;:j'=r?s ;;;.?3 
 
 n. .\ljmT(!,\T(iK. 
 1. Biiqlltt/ijicmioil if. 
 
 t ,ict . ,„| H)c.m ligations sh.iUhe linil -, ,i 
 vario„scla,sos t he,, . ■'"'''^'^""' "^ ''"> 
 
 /.fKv V. Aiiihn:^uii, 14 A R -.rj f„n , 
 Vinthn;, v. Oiinr,/:.,, /.'■ ,,.: '*''I"H<'<I : 
 
 Co.. 19A. H. 293. " ' "'"' ^■'•^' '■'■^^■«'<"<'" 
 
32 
 
 'I i I !<•'•. ill 111.. iilmcnt-B .^ 
 /""" 'l''''i'liii« whrth,.,- 
 It ixtiM «,.ik nil. I il.icx i,r 
 •I'lmmnii.l >.|,.Tili..,,ti<)ii,,. 
 
 'I'' 'll;.'"!'.'!- ill t;iv,„ir of 
 """"''••'» "I'.VllilM JHlM.t 
 
 '""■ •lii'lKiiM.|it„f |!„,,„, 
 'iiiiiN. /'iirijuhiirv, t'ily 
 
 I'll ">Hl ,1 ,.,ty „„,„(,.,•,,. 
 
 iiiprdvciiichfs ti. its MVM. 
 wan |„,,v„i„,l thiitaU 
 I Iki r. (fired to tho 
 "l.Hu.l iiiml .iw.ni.iim. 
 tiiilfiil in .■|iu,.,^„. ,„ t|,„ 
 
 S3 
 
 If. Ih'MV. HIIcI, H,|,H.,.i„. 
 
 I'y liilii tliiiii actiii,, ,n 
 
 IVIlll'llfC tllllt IM> CallNO 
 tllllll lUniTidin^r ^j-itll 
 
 ' V Cilii !•/ T„nml„, lit 
 
 "tion to set nHiil,. ,vii 
 ■f(! .ii-liitriitdiH, it „.ii8 
 «o, a(^ii,ch'„c,,iiiiMel, 
 I' "I i'ltriVNt. It up. 
 i'^ pncrto tliiMiiliitili. 
 I I'll" "•■^■■l aHfli.iinliL.,. 
 •'>lii'it..r ot ,-i Ldi|),,r,i. 
 ' (111; iirliitnitiim, an, I 
 "ct to iimttoiMallfit- 
 I'l not aipcar that h,, 
 
 till' ttic 
 
 i;<"p(iratioii, 
 
 tiM-sam-ftiii- tlicooi- 
 lvHcl oi-a.tcd fortlio 
 itoraftoi- Ilia appi, int. 
 ;liiit then) was imv 
 I'll him iiiul thu (•Id'. 
 
 null I'cliitioii lii'tHecii 
 \ nu'^Ut five n,iii to 
 ii-'li Houl.l iiivaliilati) 
 
 '•"//(/ f^i/c As.v(ranre 
 
 iiisliiMl. /.V a/tri,/!^ 
 
 '■I'oii, 'it (). It. .14;,_ 
 
 H. 21, and in tho 
 
 i)5l. 
 
 * nnd-r 1!. S. 0. ,.|,. 
 !Ltl-tai(iiiient of thu 
 'iif policy, are |,ro- 
 arhiti-ation and not 
 
 lent, and nn awanl 
 whom Mas at tim 
 I'oraii a;.'untof th,. 
 fiMcu risks, thiiiij;h 
 I'lily a vury siiiajl 
 gniunt (if l!<jK(., ,J., 
 '.J., ill tho bivis- 
 
 H. 2l;{, folloufd ; 
 ltd Life A.-'siu-uHc': 
 
 •nrt has power to 
 '■•■itor from acliiii; 
 ■■'Ward is niaihC 
 nwau is to ajijily 
 
 •rmcrtttor Ih.. not .^iilMttitutvd 
 
 cm i«fl l.rthe hiMhand „n u.i indiotm. iil an.l 
 
 .yl "';;;i;"'[r f^'i "" ^'""«*"' •''«'-»y ^''''i- '- 
 
 writ . n , r .! " l""l'^''''y. ""■' who hud 
 
 n 1 ii'iJ' '"'"'"'"'"■"' ""■^'- "''" ".Htruined 
 
 between tfwf "'^'}^'''^"' '" '"' -rbilrution 
 
 /rwhicl tl ' h ^hu "'" "'""*''P'*1 ^•"■•poration 
 lu wniui lilt! liighwiiy wus sitiiatf. 
 
 AABnu^ilOU AND AWARD. 
 
 3t 
 
 I till! uwuid thiroiindir -hull \,« i.,.i,l,. 1,. .i 
 |-bl..,Uop.t:u.u..rd,.,SVZltt^ S 
 
 Report byTwoof the Official Arbitrators i 
 
 Hy anile of Court made on Mur, h 7tb. Ish" Tt 
 « - o„K,r...l that, u,,lc«H it wa,o,heru .. , ' iai y 
 ordj-red. any nuitter ..ending M.., t>,e ,,|| J 
 
 ri?':r^;:;''"'''^';^'''''i"-^'-''t^^".SS 
 
 beard o, purt ly Ivurd l.y Mueh nrbitratoi. ,., il 
 be conhnued before then, as otlleial r'f.,;. ' 
 
 I ^' urt in like manner as if siuh matter had I.. 
 
 Bt'Ollon of the uniil A..» li_: _ i .1 ' 
 
 tJ. /'oiii i-K nf, 
 
 ■euioii.lN.i ,/,„y. „f thuMnn e pulAet 1H<)-' It,,, 
 arlutrutor.. made their award and , Je'eil tli 
 the tiwt.s .sh,iii il I.U iiai.i 1,,. ,1, i^":"-" •■""' 
 
 i...t .,,.; ,„„ ,i,v „„. »r;,,'t, ' ;,-',7;n 
 
 M« 01 
 
 the. 
 
 llietnl 
 
 Tbi.s 
 'K'Mnl 
 
 port 
 
 3. Proceedhujs Utt'orv. 
 ewX le. le '""\" •-■"'l'"«^''C'l to take oral 
 
 J-orelfirn Commission.] _ A Judi/R of *K„ 
 
 under section 487 (H of H,„ If • -, ^ *'""• 
 Vict. oh. 42 (O.). Muuiciiial Act, 55 
 
 8e(^^ti(,n of the «aid Act. Prior to' tho p 
 
 I Al lister of Huilways and Oiials to t|, 
 ;«rbirutor« for inveHtigation ,,,! awni, 
 , claim, howe%er, wan proceed, with an, 
 befme two of «„cli lub'itrators , .dy and a , port 
 . -on -I. tavonr of the claimanlwaB n auoTv 
 
 jmiMiieiit on such report :— 
 
 t lie , nca arbitrut.,r« was not a hearing wif 
 tho,,,an,nKof the rule, and thu S, 
 umld .,tbe entere,! on the repo.t. ^ nt. 
 
 IV'. Costs a.nij Fki 
 
 Bjcoessi ve Charge for Arbitrator's Fee» i 
 
 Tbe liabili, in,,.,,,,, „„ arldtrat,,i I /"Sn'-Ji. 
 
 of K. S. (). , I 
 
 I to jiay tvehl 
 
 , I)aid, is peii^ 
 
 where a peri 
 
 has vohintai 
 
 Rule 566, wo Id a Tinl "'f*'!f ""^'""""g °f 
 
 £s;'iS3 ;;j*n.^ ~~rhS 
 
 " matter " /.'„ \i„ i' ' ''^' "• '» "ot such a 
 16 PR. 230 ^'"'P^'"'"' «'"' CUy of Toronto, 
 
 III. Award. 
 
 Award by Two out of Three Arh) f™ ♦ 
 
 ^herea^tbrnissiontoarbiStorp^rSs^^^^^^^ 
 
 '.i III CISC ot an over. Iiarce of fees 
 llie amount of the f.,,s charged oi' 
 '" ''*:,,"'Vt"'-t'. and does not anVc 
 ncnitle,! to take up the awanl 
 
 Ja.xutionof le fe,.u ;„ ,, ', ,. . 
 
 in the Court of - ppeal, 2.3 A r. ^t ' ''''"*" 
 
 Feesof Arblt ^tora-Bav', Sil/i,i„ 1 r-„ 
 char^te as ees fo,: "!'""^^ :'.''•■ ""fc entitled to 
 
 i'-yo^aiixiii. S;.n'i^;^^;K-^-'« 
 
 j—nt fixed by th.schedt^L'i'^iS'S"^ 
 
 'Iw:'lSprJ;I^^Ssii;:,^;;4f^. 
 Kd:ti=i£'£«/ fin: 
 
 must be t.iken to be repealed. ' '"" ^ <"''' 
 
35 
 
 AEBITRATION AND AWARD. 
 
 36 
 
 HoiiHird V. IftrriiKiloti "0 A I' i-- i 
 
 '-V'l\ '-'"V':'^ 4- R- "i^^^i. ■.li^ni;;;];":;' ! S " J":fr- ,:'''- -'li^^to,. ).y tl.eir award. 
 
 At / y^/ocX.' ami Cili) ot Torunto, ],> 1'. K. ;i,-)j. 
 
 .jifter reciting tli.; mat tors in" cun'trovt"rav 
 .ctwocn the larties, f.„nM t),at tl,o (iovorn^ 
 
 ;nen oi the 1 r,.-,nc.c. of (.,,„.l,,c. was in.lol.tcd to 
 I J. Md.. .ntlu. snn, ot .s|47,47:f, .-unl annexed 
 itlieieto a.i alinlavit stating they ha,l in<|uired 
 
 Award Made Final by Submission. ]-A„ i Smt Z^^J^t Seller, Ts!?'"'''- '" 
 award >v,l not be set aside on the g.oun, t) ! This anun,n 1, 'i ' „e ,,1 h '' t .'",',?"""; 
 
 -nenu, fim„sl,ed hy the arhitrator lo the los- olain.ed hv T. Mcfi 1 e i :;Ta i t n , • if 
 ang party alte,. us pnl,hcation,sheued that the I -king tlu.t the awalV 1:^ sjr alld^ on'*^ 
 
 lele.red to the arlntraturs in tlie sub.nission. 
 
 Ihe.Snpenortonrtior the District <,f (,)ueboe 
 
 set aside the award, and on aj.peal to tl,e Court 
 
 : of (neen s lieneh for Lower ( anada (appeal si e) 
 
 i hat onrt revcsed the jn.lgn.ent of th'e'su .^Ho/ 
 
 I t-onrt and dismissed the petiti.,n of right On 
 
 1 appeal to the Supreme Cnnt of Cana.fa :_ 
 
 j Held, athrimng the judgment of the Court of 
 
 , Queens l.ench for ...wer Cana.la (apj.eal si,le) 
 
 ! that the object of the submission «as to nscer- 
 
 tain what amount the contractor 'I'. .\Ic(i. was 
 
 ^'. Sia-TiXC ASIDB AWAUIJ. 
 
 accounts betueeu the parties were adjustci 
 U|MM. a wrong principle, the defect, if any, not 
 
 being u iiiist-il;.. iMi tl,., c, c <.!. y' . 
 
 some 
 
 with, {he award, and there b,,ng no a.lndssion 
 h>tliea,b,trat<n-lnniself that he liad made amis- 
 take, •'udgmeiitot tiieCourtof Aiipeal lUA I' 
 .MSaflirmed. .U<:/!aev. Icmny, Is S C R •>,su' 
 
 a mistahe on the face of the award "or in 
 l.ai.er lormint; part of, and incorporated ; 
 
 Expropriation. ]^In a railway exi)roi,riation 
 case the respoiulent, in naming his arbitrator 
 tleclareil that he only appointed him to watcli 
 
 ^■onipaii 
 
 over the arbitrator of the 
 
 company recogid/.ed him oflicial'h- and subse 
 
 n-c^ntly an award of .^i,.J74.'-'5 damages and 
 
 Alt. ..Ib4 H. ,s. Q, '||,(. (lemaud for exproori 
 ati.m, as tonnulatedin their n.itice to arbitrate 
 by the app, Ihmis, was f.u- the width of their 
 track, but tlie award granted <lama-es for three 
 teet outside ol the fences on eacli .side as bcim.- 
 va uoless. In au action to set aside the award •- 
 Held, alhiniing tiie judgment of the Courts 
 below, that the appointment of respondent's 
 arbitra .,r was valid under the statute and 
 hound both parties, an,l that in awarding dam- 
 ages for three f,.et of land injuriously .-.'irected 
 on each side of the track the arbitrators had not 
 exceeded their jniisdiction. Qurhcc, Mont- 
 To S^"cf '^;\^""'^''"'-' '^- " • Co. V. Mathku, 
 
 • ■ v., ...iLcii - ..,.., ,v,...,i,,iL iiie contractor I. .\lc(i was 
 
 ly, but the j t." ■■L'ceive from the ( bivernment, and tiie sneci 
 ami subse. I hcation ot the several matters referred to in the 
 j submission was merely to .secure that in dotor- 
 ininiiig the amount the mediators should fully 
 consider all these matters, and tliat all matters 
 having been so considered the awanl was valid, 
 strong and lasdiereau, JJ.. dissentinc. 
 
 'er !''ournier, J. — Mediators (fii,iiai,/e.^ 
 
 com- 
 
 '''("?'';:r;:l^r^;"'t «"''.i^'^t t" the provisions of 
 
 I Art. 1. 4t, C. I>. C. and their awar.l can only be 
 f^et aside by iea.son of fraud or collusion if .riven 
 on the matters referred to them. Mdu-etrv v 
 
 Public 'VroT^s — Sul,;-(jntnid ~n,-snsi^ion — 
 Qvmilum Monnl.]^V. was a c.mtract.ir with 
 the Government of Canada for Iniihiing a post 
 olhce and K. was sub-cntraulor to do the 
 mason and brick work t.u' a lump sum, the sub- 
 contract con.sisting simply of an (.ll'er to give 
 the work for the sum named and an acceptance 
 i'v K. I., being dis.satislied with tlie work 
 Petition of Right. ]-T. Mc(i., whoeldmn,! n i If' ■■'. ' '""'' ^'"-' ^■;""''"^' <"": "f 1''^ luinds 
 hu-gesnm of money front the ov ern .T^n' C h'" ,™^ 
 
 the Province of (,.uebeo under a coiit ac " ,° ' ^ '"-''/ '"'"""'I't,'!" '^^'t"'" f'-' the value of the 
 . . '•o-'tiaet he liad i work done by him and on reference by the 
 
 C ourt to arbitration an award was made in K 's 
 favour. The Court of Ajipeal set aside the 
 awanl .and remitted the ca.se to the arbitrator 
 tor further consideration, holding that though 
 tiie contract dnl not autliorize 1'. to take over 
 
 Nova Scotia Mines Act.]— Ac /'„/,„.„,.„ 
 
 iinta Minu„<:. V. -i/.d/,v/««,iisy..] A'ftoa 
 
 f ,, '. -" "'"'"-i It cuniracc lie liai 
 
 tor the construction of a portion of the North 
 Shore Hailw,->y agrecl to submit to three inedi- 
 ators <.r n;/,„,W„. compo4le„r.^ all controversies 
 and dilhcn ties existing between the (iovcrn 
 >'Hmt and hiniselt, and the submission stated 
 
 that these inedi.itors should iiioiiir-e i.>t,> ;. / " ^ ^. , ,'.'"■ 
 
 «//«, the extent of the obligati!: oahet;.^:t i iZi^^^ "if '"r"' '' "* ,'V^ ^^l'^"^*^" '""^ '^^ 
 passed between the Covernnient of (,Xc am i ''''■'^'''■'-' '''?''""'' ^" '''•'"-'■' '^>' *'>« 
 
 thesai.l T. Met;, ; tlie alterati,ms a i 1^^^^^^^^^^ completing the 
 
 o.:.tions made in the plans, particulars a us eei ' , r i' co">^ulerably m excess of the contract 
 
 hcatnms ineutioned in the said contract • wb.t ' ' w i 7 
 
 mlluence the said alterations ami moditiJa I ,', i A. ' TY'^^'M ''"' J"'li,"neiit of the Court of 
 
 .nay have li,id on the obligations JX^:;^aT t1. 1? H ' * 'i^ V"." "J'';,""''"' , ^''""' *''« --'-»™'^« 
 Mc(i. and on those of the <iovern, ent the nn^ ^ the matter 
 
 delays caused by reasons iiTelevanttT helaoi^ o„ "' , "" '."*"'-"'='tiou that could be 
 
 of the cmtractor : the ,,ecuniary value vleth, . ' "'" ,""'''""'' '""' "^ "" »"P'"l"'iety 
 
 tor more .n- tor less, of the alterati mC <^^^ . "^ '.^ ' ' 7'' ^'"''^ ''^'-'» ^■''"'■"itted 
 
 increase n the ^^ orks ; and linally 1 thin 4 ' ^^Tu !' I f'""'' "'"'' ''"'"'' ^'""' ^''"'""fe' "'« 
 connected witli the matter and the executi hf ^ f <^i ,*;'' *'"' ''':'^"»«i'l''i-atioii, and the .leeree 
 the said contra,.t, and with eUrd to 1^ i A' '; ^'"'n' "' '""^'^'""^ '''''' ""' J"«titied. 
 charges and obligations of both the' iovernnie t '^^ ^ "'^ ^ '''""' " '^^ "^^ ^'^ "''■'• 
 
 itnd the said eoutractor aoeordi.ur . ", "'"'™t | 
 
 ot the sai.l contract. The submits .malso'riro' i v" '?'"'*Vfi'?''"^ ^1 '•'""•«'«'■•>■• ]-Under the pro- 
 
 vi.led that the .award was to be ex u£ ^\ l^Z t * r^ '"V t' -^' ''': ^'^ "'■»' '"> '^W'^"" 
 
 6nal and conclusive judgment of the 1 Zst ' !x^^.l f'fi^"';^' .'';'' ''V '"■'^'•''' '" •'''•'' "^''le an 
 
 fa tno liigiiesti award of the ofhcial arbitrators must bo made 
 
86 
 
 L'diatois ))y tlieir award, 
 liters ill controversy 
 niml tliiit tlio (Jovorn- 
 '.'iicbc'c^uas iiiilcbtcd to 
 ■]>147,47;{, jiiid iiiiiiexed 
 ii)« they hail iii(|uired 
 thuiilties Hiihiiiitted to 
 le ih'ed ot' .suluiiission. 
 1 less than the amount 
 liled a j)etitioii of right, 
 
 he set aside on the 
 )t cover the matters 
 irs in the sid)mission. 
 lie District of Quebec 
 on ajipeal to the Court 
 erCanaila (appeal side) 
 d;,'nient of the Superior 
 'ctition of right. On 
 lurt of Canada: — 
 gnient of the Court of 
 
 Canada (appeal siile) 
 nuission v as to asccr- 
 iitraetor T. MM. ^as 
 ument, and tlie speci- 
 ters referred to in the 
 seeure that in deter- 
 ediators should fully 
 
 ■■ind tliat all matters 
 
 the award was valid. 
 T., dissenting, 
 iatois {niiiia/i/fs com- 
 
 to the provisions of 
 lir award can only be 
 I or collusion if given 
 
 them. Mcdrcery v. 
 
 iintract — Hfurlnsion 
 
 •s a contractor with 
 I for building a post 
 ntraetor to do the 
 I hini)) Kuui, the sub- 
 of an o/I'er to give 
 d and an acceptance 
 ilicd with the work 
 act out of his hands 
 d linished it himself, 
 or the value of the 
 in reference by the 
 rd was made in K.'a 
 )peal set aside the 
 ie to the arbitrator 
 lolding that though 
 ize 1'. to take over 
 s expense, and the 
 to recover on the 
 t of completing the 
 cess of the contract 
 
 lent of the Court of 
 from the evidence 
 lerstood the matter 
 ion that could be 
 y as no impropriety 
 •e lieen committed 
 It from sending the 
 on, and the decree 
 ivas not justified, 
 t. G9!J. 
 
 .] — Under the pro- 
 i'i { l>. ) , an apjilica- 
 .'r to set aside an 
 )rs must be made 
 
 37 
 
 ARREST. 
 
 within three months after the p.irty apnlvinc 
 has had notice of the making of the award, but 
 the order need not be granted within that IC'A 
 period. P,.<,hot v. The (Jnnn, 1 Kx. C. 11 
 
 Tln.e.]-In the Province of Ontaiio the uov- 
 erniiig statute as to the time for applvinu t./set 
 aside an anard which has been made luider a 
 rule ot (.ourt, or to remit it to tlie arliitrators 
 lor reconsideration and redetermination, is H 
 
 rh-lfl "■' '^'-'■ ''V •■'"'' '"^ '■' "otrei,uired 
 that the appbcatlon shouhl be made before the 
 iast, day of the term next after the making of 
 the awanl as provnled by & ]() W,,,. JH e], 
 i;». sec. 2. (iwynne, J., dissenting. 
 
 An award ni.ay be remitted to arbitrators for 
 reconsideration and redetermination under the 
 Ontario statute though the result of the recon- 
 sueralion may be to have the award virtually 
 set aside by a diflere.nt, or even contrarv, deci- 
 sion ot the arbitrators. - 
 
 ■rhe Court is justilled in remitting an award 
 to the aibitr.ito.s ,f fraud or fraudulent con- 
 c-e ImcMtouthe part of the persons in whose 
 f.uin,r,i,.made,s established, or if nesv evi- 
 It '.''/''^.'"•^^'■^■'l ^vhiel,, by the cvercise of 
 re, sonube diligence, eoul.l not have been dis- 
 CO eieil before the award wns made, ilrtm v 
 Ciiizm^ Ins. Co., IS .S. C. R. ;!,•«. 
 
 38 
 
 rintv 
 
 Witness. 1-Examinati<m of arbitrator as wit- 
 ness on motion to set aside award. ,S,TlZte 
 (iiHt Joruiito .Jwictint), 22 A. Iv. 21. 
 
 VI. SUII.MISSION. 
 
 , Appolntmentof Arbitrator. ]~Tho nrovi- 
 
 s.ons ot a submission to arbitration in S- 
 oiiee to the .appointment of a third arbitrator 
 must be strictly followed. Where, tl J lefore 
 a snimuss.on provided that the third arbi- 
 tator should be appointed by writing endorsed 
 thereon umler the hands of the ,arb,t atora 
 therein named and the appointment was not so 
 .■Mdorsed the award was held invalid. Ijly 
 /,o»/iC, 21 A. 1!. 100. -"'.'/tev. 
 
 Time.] -Section 4 of -)2 Vict. ch. i;3 (() ) 
 which re.p.ires motions to set aside awards of a 
 speeilic kind to be made within fourteen .lavs 
 from the tiling thereof; and section (i of the 
 «ame Act wliieh allows motions to .set a.sile 
 awards ot another kind to be made within 
 t , e f"T f'-'"" tl'« making and publication 
 thereiit, do not apply lo arbitrations under the 
 i uuieipal Ac andamotion made on tlie lOth 
 <i I'ebruary, KSi)l, t„ set aside an award made 
 
 the"'il': rr,'" ""^''' ''"•■ -''""'-l-' Act on 
 the .il„t of December, ISiW, and tiled on the 
 
 lOlo.January lS!.l,wasl,elil tobein time. 
 
 of h, '"?'; '" '"?"'",=' "^ ^'"-^ «'=^'«''^' ^'^^ti^'is 
 
 ARREST. 
 
 I. Caise i-uii Akkkst, ,SS. 
 II. D.\M.\(!i;s, 42. 
 III. iSeitin.; Aside Okhkr, 42. 
 
 I. C'au.se for Ahkest. 
 
 ■L r fT'^~"'^ ''"'" '" ^ct aside an award under 
 a reteience by consent was made within four- 
 teen days of the hling, but more than four 
 months alter the making thereof :_ 
 ^^^^Helil, too late. Baldwin v. WuUh, 20 0. K. 
 
 Time. ]-A notice of motion to set aside an 
 award made on 24tli July, 18!);!, of whic the 
 ^vppl.cants had notice on 7th .An just, 18^8 was 
 served on the 2'Jth March, 18U4 f- ' 
 
 Held, too late. 
 
 Theniothm if made under 9 k 10 Wm. Ill 
 ch. 1.,, shouhl have been ma.le before the hist 
 day of what was formerly Tiinity Te^in an 
 
 Vic dr"';V(;'» Tv /" "''"•'' i'^'^'""" ^ "f ^ 
 con d not have been made after the exi.iration 
 of^three months Iron, the making and IniE 
 
 The provision of section 2 of the latter Act as 
 
 iimilea by either enactment from runnin.' /,V 
 <^n ami Town of Xorth Bay, iTv. R. 
 
 Absconding Debtor.] An application under 
 J uie iu.)l to discliarge from custody is an 
 oi.gii.al proceeding, independent of the order to 
 an;os, and the Judge to whom it is n- iL is 
 invested with a very large discret ion. ^ 
 
 I the appellate Court has doubt as to the 
 proper result ot all the ovnlenee, that doubt 
 should lean in favour of ,,ersnnal lilH.rtv 
 
 Dur statute 22 Vict. ch. W (now U. S. ch 
 
 Aet 1 & 2 Vict. ch. 110, and w;is eviiresslv 
 enacted so as to retrain the freedom of those 
 only who were believed to be contemplating 
 fiaud as against their creditors; under it ^ 
 cannot be said that a person inde btei wi hot^t 
 ibstance, who contemplates removin" rom 
 ^anoo better his condition, is leaving w?^ 
 I'lteut to defraud creditors; two thin. 's must 
 
 or'Z ;■'"'" 'Y ^'^'"'^^ -'perates-the:;uiU S 
 creditors. • ""'' '" ""^'"' ^'^^''^''-^ *" '''^f''''"^ 
 
 upo'if '■'""' ''■''^^°"^''^"' " I'- K. 18, observed 
 Upon the evidence in this case, the Omrt wa» 
 ..otsatisliedthat the dcfendan, 1 a ,„ "" .tT 
 tio I to llee the country at the time of his a rl^fc 
 or that tliere was such dealing with hi. r ertv 
 as was w.thm the mischief of the statute and 
 
 inwXu!"f debtor. ]-The jdaintiff stated 
 inhei a hilu t, on which the order of arrest wa^ 
 muic, that the defendant, taking advantage of 
 tlieir engagement, had seduced her, a n 1 •?« 
 soon as he diseovereil that she was witl c Inl 
 went to the United .States, but su se ue^t v 
 .■cturncd to attend his fathers f.ine tl ,1 'as 
 then about to ,,uit Ontario with i it e t ^ 
 
 
38 
 
 ABREST. 
 
 defruii.1 her, etc. Tlie plaintiffs father also 
 swore to the intent ; while the defendant, 
 thoiigh liJmg an iUlLhuit, ninde no reference to 
 nis hnancial conditicm : — 
 
 Hehl, tliiit the alleged intent was sufficiently 
 disclosed. ^ 
 
 Toolhr V. Fndfrkh, 14 1'. R. 2H7, and lh,qa-H 
 V. kncre.. il,. L>}1(), „., distinguished. Van- 
 ■fickle V. Buyd, 14 1'. R. 4G(l 
 
 40> 
 
 'or the same reason the defendant was en- 
 titled to the costs of his application to be dis- 
 tliarged from custody. Scaiif v. Cojlei/, 1,5 P, 
 R. 1 12. Hee the next two cases. 
 
 Absconding Debtor.]- An or.ler for the arrest 
 ot the deleiiilant was made on Kith March, 1,S9" 
 opon an iUfidavit of the plaintiff, in which 
 lie alleged that the defendant in March, ]8!)1 
 absconded frimi this Province for the purpose of 
 tiefraudiiig his creditors, and tliat, having lately 
 returmd to the Province, he was about to leave 
 It again with a like jmrpose. The defendant 
 applied, upon new material, to the Judge who 
 made the order to set it aside and to be dis- 
 charged from custody :— 
 
 Held, that the affidavit of the plaintiff was, if 
 true, a sniticieiit foundation for the order. 
 
 Ker.slermni, v. Mc Lilian, 10 1'. R. 122, fol- 
 lowed, i 
 
 And the order could not be set aside by the ' 
 Judge upon the new material contradicting the i 
 case made by the plaintiff". 
 
 nawcr v. Ihist.y, 5 P. R. SoG, and Oilbtrt v. ' 
 Shlex, 13 P. R. J2I, followed. 
 
 The departure of the defendant from this i 
 l^rovince in March, 1S91, was open and public ; - 
 lie announce.l it at a j.ublie meeting to six or 
 seven hundred pusons along with the fact that 
 le uitended to sell his household etlects before 
 his mttndtd departure ; the news]uii)ei\s in the 
 place wher.- he lived announced that he was 
 going to Chicago, U.S., with his family to take 
 a situation tluie which he had obtained ; and 
 his fellow townsmen gave him a public dinner, 
 at winch several of his creditors were present 
 before he left. He departed for Chicago, takiiiu 
 no property with him. The <,nlv piece of piop- 
 erty which he possessed in Ontario was an un- 
 saleable and heavily mortgaged house and lot 
 which, a year before he lelt, he had transferred 
 to a creditor as .security for a debt. He had a 
 perni.anent situation ai.d residence in Chicago 
 with his wife ard family, and in March, 1S92 I 
 returiud to this Province for a merely temporarv I 
 purp,;.se. ] luring the yuir he ^pellt in Chicago \ 
 lie lemittul considerable sums earned by him to 
 his creditors in t'litario :— 
 
 Held, that, under tlitse circumstances, the 
 detdidant could not be said to have left Ontario 
 Willi intent to defiaud his creditors, and that 
 he should be discharged from custody under the 
 order for arrest. i 
 
 It is within the power of the Court or ai 
 Judge, upon an a] jilication to discharge a defeii- I 
 (lant from custody, to impose upon him the I 
 term that he shall bring no action against the I 
 plaintiff ; but It should only l,e imposed where I 
 the plaintiff is shewn to have bet n entirely I 
 ftank and opui in his a].plication for the order 
 for arrest, and to have had reasonable grounds 
 for the statements he has laid before tlie Judge 
 Ihe circumstances of this ease did not warrant 
 such a term being imposed; for th. plaintiff 
 was aware of the circumstances and thepubli-i 
 city of the defendant's dejiartuie in 1891, and I 
 conveyed a false impression wnen he swore that i 
 the defendant then "abacouded fiom this I 
 Province." 
 
 Absconding Debtor.] — Ill an action for 
 damages for arrest under the order made in the 
 
 ? -.?n-w^""'r*'"'' l'''^'"tiff recovered a verdict 
 torifl.OOa Upon niotir.n to set it aside, made 
 hetore a Divisional Court composed of Armour. 
 C.J., and Jalconbridge, J. :_ 
 
 Held, per Armour, C.J., that so long as the 
 
 order for arrest stood, an action for maliciously 
 
 and without reasonable and probable cause 
 
 arresting the plaintiff could not be maintained. 
 
 ( hrick^on v. Brand, 14 A. R. (il4, distin- 
 
 I guishcd. 
 
 I 2 Where a creditor, by affidavit, satisfies the 
 
 I .Judge that there is good and probable cause for 
 
 i believing that his debtor, unless he be forthwith 
 
 apprehended, is about to quit Ontario, the infer- 
 
 i ence is raised that he is about to do so with 
 
 I intent to defraud ; for he is removing his body, 
 
 i which IS subject to the jurisdiction of the Courts 
 
 o. Ontario, and liable to be taken in execution, 
 
 beyond the jurusdiction of such Courts 
 
 Toolh,' V Fnderiri; 14 P. R. 287, commented 
 on and not followed. 
 
 Jioherhun y. Co,-.'. ■,, 9 P. R. 16, approved' 
 and followed. ^^ 
 
 3. The facts that tlxj plaintiff', being a resident 
 ot Ontario and having numerous creditors 
 tlieieiii, including the defendant, left the Prov- 
 ince without paying them, and went to reside 
 pmnancntly in the Unite! States, whether he 
 left oienly or secretly, and whether lie rn- 
 nounced his departure and intentions LeforchamJ 
 
 : or concealed them, and that he came back to 
 Oiitaiio for a temporary purpose, intending to 
 
 , return to the United States, afforded reasonable 
 and jirobable cause for and justified his arrest. 
 
 4. Considering the action as one for imposing 
 upon the Judge by s( me false statcmint in the 
 i ffidavit to hold to bail, and thereby inducing 
 
 j liini to giant the order forariest, the fact fa'sely 
 j suggested or suppressed must be a material one 
 I tor the Judge to consider in prr.ntirg the older 
 
 i ri"'liu'' ':'"i''''" '^ "•""' <''^ plaintiff of shewing 
 tliat the Judge was imposed upon. 
 
 ,5. The word "absconded" trulv described 
 the going away of the plaintiff, whether he went 
 away secTetly or openly, and he was pioperly 
 described as an abscondirg debtor. . 
 
 Falconbridge, J., adhering to the views ex- 
 pressed in Smne v. Coffy, lo P. R. 112, ■was of 
 opinion that the plaintiff had a cause of action, 
 hut thought there should be a new trial <n the 
 grounds of excessive damages and misdirtction : 
 and concurred pro forvul in the decision of Ar- 
 mour, C.J. Cojjhj v. Same, 25 O. R. 22. See 
 the next case. 
 
 Absconding Debtor. ]~Where a man, hav- 
 ing numeious creditois in Ontaiio, leaves the 
 Province openly to reside in the I'nited States 
 alter jiublicly announcing his intention so to 
 do, with(.ut paying his creditois, and after 
 his departure it is found that statements made 
 by him as to property available to jay lii.H 
 debts are false and that nothing is in fact 
 nyaihible for that purpose, his arrest upon 
 civil process upon his return to Ontario for a 
 temporary purpose, intending to return to the. 
 United States, is justifiable. 
 
40' 
 
 e defendant was cn- 
 application to he dis- 
 'ccuii' V. Cojji'!/, ]5 P. 
 cases. 
 
 — Ill an action for 
 lit" order made in tlio 
 recovered a verdict 
 to set it aside, made 
 ouiposed of Armour, 
 
 , tliat so long as the 
 iction for maliciously 
 and proljaljle cause 
 1 not be maintained. 
 A. It. 014, distin- 
 
 iffidavit, satisfies the 
 d probable cause for 
 ilesH lie be fortliwith 
 it Ontario, the infer- 
 bout to do so with 
 
 removing his body, 
 diction of the Courts 
 
 taken in execution, 
 .icii CVjurts. 
 
 R. 287, commented 
 
 f. R. 16, approved 
 
 tiff, being a resident 
 luimeious creditors 
 lant, left the Prov- 
 and went to reside 
 
 .Stales, whether he 
 id whether lie rn- 
 tentions beforehand 
 it he came l)ack to 
 rpose, intending to 
 afforded reasonable 
 justified his arrest. 
 as one for imposing 
 •e statement in the 
 [1 thereby inducing 
 lest, the fact fii'sely 
 it be a material one 
 piantirg the older, 
 'laintiff of shewing 
 upon. 
 
 " truly described 
 ff, whether he went 
 1 he was pioperly 
 ebtor. 
 
 ; to the views ex- 
 JP. R. 112, was of 
 I a cause of action, 
 
 a new trial < n the 
 
 and misdiitction ; 
 tilt decision of Ar- 
 
 25 O. R. 22. {iee 
 
 here a man, hav- 
 ntaiio, leaves the 
 the I'nited States 
 8 intention so to 
 ditoie, and after 
 t statements ir.ade 
 iable to jay hi.s 
 •thing is in fact 
 hia arrest upon 
 to Ontario for a 
 to return to the 
 
 41 
 
 ARREST. 
 
 42 
 
 Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division, 2,j 
 O. R. 22, affirmed. Oojfeu v. Scane, 22 A 1! 
 2ti!). 
 
 Absconding- Debtor.] -The defendants left 
 the State of Pennsylvania and came to Ontario, 
 with the intent of defrauding; tlidr creditors! 
 They stayed some time in London, Ontario, and' 
 left there witli their wives, by train, booked for 
 Toronto. One of their creditors left London liy 
 the same train, and while on tlic train, between 
 London and Hamilton, he lieard one of tlie 
 wives say to lier husband that slie wondered 
 wliat time they should reacli .Montreal. While 
 waiting at Hamilton for tlie Toronto train, the 
 creditor obtal.icd an ordjr for tlie defeudants' 
 arrest and they were arrested : — 
 
 Hchl, ujioii tlie evidence, thai the <lefcndant.s 
 intended to leave Ontario with the intent of 
 defrauding tiieir creditors. ! 
 
 I'er Armour, ('.,!., and Falconbridge, .J., that 
 the defendants having come into Ontario with 
 til ■ intent of defrauding their creditors, ami 
 their intention being to pass through it, they 
 rnnst be held to liave been quitting Ontario witli 
 intent to defraud their creditors. 
 
 Per Street, .).. tliafc the mere fact of the 
 ♦Icfendants having absconded to this Province to 
 defraud their creditors elsewhere did not afford 
 a,nv evidence of an intention to aljscond from 
 this Province to defraud the same creditors, so ' 
 as to justify an onler for their arrest upon their 
 arrival here ; but the circumstances of llie case 
 lo 1 to the conclusion tliat the defendants were 
 About to leave the Province Meiier Huhhei- 
 Co. V. IlMt, U P. R. 21,3. 
 
 lemiimitted for trial by a warrant rcriting the 
 
 I offence in like terms. The plaintill' was tried 
 
 for forging and uttering the note, ami was ao- 
 
 Held, that the information sutliciently im- 
 I ported tln.f the plaintiir had utt.n-ed the forued 
 not^e, kno^ r j, t„ be forged, to give the magis- 
 trate juris, ction, and tlierefore tiie warrant 
 was not void, and an action of trespass ^vas not 
 I maintainable against the defendant, even upon 
 ^ eVKlenec of his mterterence with the arrest 
 ; ,.SV«Wr, that if the otrence were not suffi. 
 cientiy laid in the information to >riv,. the 
 magistrate juris.lictioii, mid the warrant were 
 I void, an action for malicious prosecution would 
 I nevertheless lie. Aiid^-r.wn v. H'I/so,, , 2-'> O. R. 
 
 \ Witnesses- A'/,//,/ /o Arre.l for Default in 
 \Attjndam;:.'-S,:,: (lordoii v. Deiiis,,,/, 22 A R. 
 Mi), /)o</ 21)3. ■ 
 
 11. 1).\mA(:ks. 
 
 Breach of By-law.] — A breach of a city 
 bydaw for driving an omnibus without the 
 license rei|uired thereby, does not justify the 
 snniiniry arrest of the (jffender, even thou'di 
 thjotlicer arresting may have believed that Tie 
 was acting legally and in tlie discharge of his 
 official duty. Kf!/// v. Bartan, 26 O. 1! 608; 
 Kclhi V. Archibald, 26 0. R. 608. Affirmeil in 
 appeal, 22 A. R. iS22. 
 
 Trespass — A'«i7«w/.] — Section 283 of the 
 Radway Act of Canada, 51 Vict. eh. 29, enablin" 
 a justice of the peace for any county to deal with 
 cases of persons found trespassing upon railway 
 tracks, applies only where the constable arrests I 
 an ollendcr and takes him before the just-'ce. I 
 
 A summary conviction of the defenda it by a 
 justice for the county of York, for walkM'g uiion 
 a railway track in the city of Toronto, was 
 quasMcd where the defendant was not arrested 
 imt merely summoned. Rpijina v. Jftojhes 26 
 O. R. 4S6. ' ' " 
 
 Arrest before Endorsement of Warrant- 
 
 .lMfe,^,onAft,',-l-A warrant for the arrest of 
 the plaintitl, wim had made default in paying a 
 hue on c.mviction for an infraction of the'li.mor 
 license law was sent from .in outlying county 
 to a city, lictoiv it was indorsed by a maais- 
 rat^e m the city the plaintitr was arrested tlfere 
 by two of the <lefendants, the chief constable 
 ami a detective, and confined. .Some hours after 
 the arrest the warrant was properly indorsed 
 and the detention of the plaiiilit}' was continued 
 until payment of the fine :- 
 
 Held, tli.u the only dani.-vgo3 recoverable by 
 the plaintiff were for the trespass up to the time 
 
 ot Hacking the warrant : 
 
 Held also, that the plai:-ff being illegally 
 111 custody under a criminal charge, his subse- 
 quent detention on a similar charge under a 
 proper warrant was lawful. 
 
 _Uistine(i„n between subsequent civil and 
 criniinal pr.iccedmgs in such oases pointed out. 
 ^Soiil/iicir/: V. J/iin; 24 O. R. 528. 
 
 Trespass — .4 n-cs't Bc/ore Eiidorxomimt of 
 \\aimal—Detenthm Af/eriranlx—Damai/e.i 1— 
 Se>' Soiilhwlck V. Hare, 24 O. R. 528, ;)o.v/42'. 
 
 Uttering Porged Note. J -The .lefendant 
 laid an iiiforni.ition charging that the plaintiff 
 
 came to my house and sold me a promissory 
 note tor the amount of ninety dollars, purport- 
 ing to ],e made against J. M. in favour ot T A 
 ■ and 1 find nut t!ie said note to be a foi-c'ry '' 
 Upon this a warrant was issued recitiirg tlie 
 offence in the same words, and the plaintiff was 
 under It apprehended and brought before the 
 justice of the peace who issued it, and by him 
 
 I III. Skttinr Asiok OKDEI!. 
 
 Affidavit — MU/ah in Phhitiir\ Name— 
 Indor.sunait oj Claim. Jhr Lira on L„nd. ]~On a 
 motion by the defendant to set aside an order 
 for his arrest in an action for breach of promise 
 of marriage, the plaintitrs alliduvii on which 
 the order was base.l was headcl in the proper 
 style of cause and proceeded, "I. Alberta .Ce 
 ;Z','a.i i''"7'^' "';'.''«'• Pl^iiiitifi,' her name 
 eig Alberta Jane \ ansickle, an.l was signed 
 HertaJ. V ansickle": — 
 
 Held, that the affidavit was not a nullity. 
 mt the mistake therein was merelv an irregu- 
 auty, and the olijection thereto sliouhl have 
 been expressly taken in the notice of motion 
 
 llie writ()f summons was indorsed with a 
 c-laim for a hen on certain land in ( lutario Tho 
 delendant did not state in his alfidavit that he 
 owned any laii.l ; while the idaintiffs counsel 
 statsd that, notwithstan.ling the indorsement, 
 in '';;;|,;j"_^"""'^'''«« "f the defendants owning 
 
43 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 H 
 
 Helfl, tlial tlii.s was no ground for settinL' 
 usidu the arrest. Vai/.^icUr v. Horn/, U 1'. li 
 4G9. 
 
 i 
 
 Costs -7V)v/(.t. I— Wlierc the duffmlant in liia I 
 
 notico of motion to set aniilo an order for liis 
 
 arrest and for his (liMeliarj,'e, n.slvcd for costs, 1 
 
 and an order was made in liis favour willi 
 
 costs : --- ' : 
 
 Held, tliat tlie Judge nuiliint; tlie order iiad : 
 
 power to nnpose tlie term tlia't tlie defendant i 
 
 should )h' restrained from l)ringinj,' any aetion. : 
 
 Review of tlie Knulish authorities. Ailams^ 
 
 V. Aimrti, 10 1'. R. ;}56'. I 
 
 Jurisdiction.]— Itule :;;!(; docs not apply to ' 
 cases of (_x iiartii order.s for arrest, wliieli are ! 
 specially provided for hy Rule 10,51 ; and a ' 
 County Court .ludge ha.s no jurisdiction to set 
 a.side his own order for arrest. ' 
 
 W'herr in order for arrest lias been acted on 
 by the .-lierill. it should not he disturl.ed. Jurii 
 V. Jnrij, 10 P. R. ;)7-). •' 
 
 Arrest for Contempt of Court— 5'.e Con- 
 tempt of CoUHT. 
 
 ARTIZAN'S LIEN. 
 
 obliged to hear counsel in support of an n|>pcal 
 against an assessment of property under that 
 
 A mandamus for such pur|.osc was refu.setl. 
 /le Ixoxhavh ami Car/ijli; "i.'J ( ). R. ,"57. 
 
 ! Finality of Assessment.]— The phiintills 
 , having heen illegally a.ssessed at L., and liavimr 
 paid the taxes under protest, were held entitled 
 to maintain an action to recover them hack. 
 Jiulgnient of Armour, C. .J., reversed. WnU 
 V. Cihjoi London, 10 A. R. UTo. Affirmed hy 
 the .Supreme Court, i'l N. C. R. ;!00. 
 
 Finality of Asss.ssment.l-Thu decisi,,n of 
 the .ludge of a County Court on a ouestion of 
 assessment is final, when he is dealing with 
 projjerty that is assessable at all. 
 
 Judgment^ of Ferguson, J., -.'4 0, R. 043, 
 ainrnied. Cwi/n/m-Mion. Life A.n.'^ocia/lt.n v. 
 City of rorvnto, 22 A. R. 100. 
 
 Finality of As.sessment.] — ,SVr Jau.s v. 
 OKi^Je, 20 O. R. 489; i.'3 A. R. l-.'9, po^l 50. 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 I. Ai'i'EAi.s AND Actions, 43. 
 II. Assessment, 44. 
 III. CoLLEt'TioN OK Rati;.s, 50. 
 IV. C'oi.LKcvroRs, 5(>. 
 
 V. E.XK.MI'TIONS, 51. 
 
 VI. 8ai.i.; of Land for Taxes, 54. 
 VII. Miscellaneous Cases, 55. 
 
 I. Ai'i EALs AND Actions. 
 
 _ Court of Revision— ^'(//iVe of Sittini/—Fiiia/- 
 t<y of As.<,.'<.'<>n,n/.]^^A person appealing against 
 his own assessment to a Court of Revision is not 
 entitled to a peismud notice of the time and place 
 of the sitting ofthe Court under sub-section 9 of 
 section 04 <it the Consolidated Assessment Act 
 
 He IS suliicicntly notified by the publicatioi'i 
 ot the advertisement re(iuircd by sub-section 7 
 and by the posting of the list under sub- 
 section 4. 
 
 Where there is juns<liction to assess, any 
 appeal from a Court of Revision must be to the 
 County Judge or stipendiary magistrate, as the 
 «^emay be. I7i'!a« v. Toirn.Mi, of McKim, 
 *o U. 1\. 00 1 . 
 
 Court of Revision — I^i.jht of Coruml to 
 Appear.] — Cani-ti of Revision created under 
 the Consolidated Assessment Act, 1892, arc not 
 
 II. ASSESS.MENT. 
 
 Business Carried on in Two Municlpall- 
 
 fp ■J^;'.''''' /'"' "^ ""^ Ontario Assessment Act 
 ^(\,- y- ^'''' "*•'> ''"''s not enable the ('(mrt 
 ot Kevision to make valid an assessment which 
 the statute docs not authorize. .Section 1 5 oi the 
 Act provides that "where any business is ear- 
 ned on by a per.soii in a municipality in which 
 he does not resi.le, or in two or more muiiici. 
 palities, the personal prop-erty belonging to 
 such persons shall be assessed in the inuni- 
 eipality in which such personal property is 
 situa ed. W residing ami doing Ini.siness in 
 Rrantford, had certain merchandise in London 
 stored 111 a public warehouse used by other per- 
 sons as well as W. He kept no clerk or a^ent 
 in charge of s„ch merchan.lise, but when sales 
 were niade a .lelivery order was given upon 
 which the v^arehousc keeper acted. Once a 
 week a commercial traveller for W., residing in 
 London, attended there to take orders for 
 goods, including the kind so stored, but the 
 I sales of stock in the warehouse were not con- 
 I u 1 . '•'''"'**''^'t'"'i« entered into at London •— 
 j Held, .atKrining the decision of the Court of 
 j Appeal, 19 A. 1!. 075, that W. di,l not carrv on 
 , business in London within the meaning of" the 
 j section and that his merchandise in the vvare- 
 : house was not liable to be assessed at London. 
 ; tily oj Londun v. Watt, 22 ,S. C. R. 300. 
 
 Description of Land. ]-~In describing lands 
 tor assessment, "the north-east part," even 
 witli the addition of the acreage, is an ainl.ig- 
 uous description ; and qmire as to the eflfect 
 upon the validity of a by-law. lir Jaikin. 
 loiriLship of tuid-ihilhn, 25 U. R. 399. 
 
 ■ and 
 
 Gas Company— J/ft/^fN ami /'i/„s laid under 
 .Street.'! ] -The mains and pipes of the Toronto 
 jas Company laid under the i)ublic streets are 
 asses.sal,l,. „uder the Consolidated Assessment 
 Act 1892, 55 Vict. eh. 48 (().), as appurtenant 
 to the land owned by the coniijauy for the pur- 
 poses of its business. 
 
a 
 
 in support of an appeal 
 of jnopcity uiulcT tiiat 
 
 •li piii|)oso was refused. 
 •-'3 ( ). It. 37. 
 
 ment.]— Tliu pl.iii.titla 
 ifsstd lit L., luul Imviiig 
 )t(.sl, wore lit'ld cnlitloil 
 to recover tlieni liaek. 
 ('. J., reverseil. H'litt 
 . R. 07o. Atlirnu'il Ijy 
 ::!. C. U. ,SUO. 
 
 lent.]— The deei.sion of 
 L'onrt on a (piestion of 
 •n lie is dcalini' with 
 le at all. 
 
 n, J., 'M O. li. 043, 
 t /-i'/e As.fociatidii. V. 
 . l(i(j. 
 
 aent.] — Sec Jamsv, 
 -'3 A. It. 129, j,o^/ 56. 
 
 <S.MENT. 
 
 In Two Munlclpall- 
 
 liitario Assessment Act 
 
 not enable the ( ourt 
 il an assessment which 
 irize. .Section 1 ,"> of the 
 re any business is ear- 
 nuuiicipality in w liich 
 
 two or more nuinici- 
 loperty belonging to 
 issesscil in the inuni- 
 
 Iicrsonal property ia 
 and doing business in 
 erciiaiidise in i.ondon 
 use u.sed by other per- 
 tept no clerk or aijent 
 iiidise, but when sales 
 irder was yiven upon 
 eper acted. Once a 
 ler for W., residin.; in 
 
 to take orders for 
 d so stored, but the 
 ehouse were not con- 
 ■ed into at London : — 
 ision of the Court of 
 t W. did not carry on 
 n the meaning of" the 
 •liandise in tlie ware- 
 assessed at London. 
 12 S. C. It. 300. 
 
 — In describint; lands 
 'rth-ea.st part," even 
 acreage, is an aml.ig- 
 i')-e as to the effect 
 law. A'i> Jmkiiis and 
 ) U. R. .S99. 
 
 mid Pipes laid under 
 [lipes of the Toronto 
 lie public streets are 
 ;<>lid:ited Aaaessmcnt 
 (().), as appurtenant 
 .'onipany for the pur- 
 
 45 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 46 
 
 SevM, that the piojier mode of assessment 
 in a eity divided into wards would lie to value 
 the conuern as a whole aii<l then appurtioii rate- 
 ulily to the wards so miieji of tlie value as rails 
 to that jmrt of the concern territori illy situate 
 in eiich loc.ility. Cuti.iniiici:^' (!ii^ Co. of Tviutdn 
 V. Villi III' Toriiiilii, -Jti (). l;. 7l'-J. 
 
 Insurance Company A' /■ l'ioill.<—l!i.iiri-e 
 Fitii'l. I --'('lie auioiint deposited by 'an insurance 
 company with the !)(;miiiion ( o'lvernmeiil for 
 protection of [lolieydiolders mav properly be 
 deuucted trom the l.'ru^^s income of the company 
 in a.scertainiiig the iieL profits liable to tiixaticm 
 under the as.sessment law of the city of St 
 John, ,,•_> Vict, ch, •!-, sec. Ii-M\.r..).-Tlie Act 
 requires the ageiil or ninna,i;er of such company 
 to tiiriiish the iissessors eacli v<ar w ith a state- 
 nient under oath, in a jirescriiied form, shewing' 
 the iivo^a income for the year precediie' and 
 the amount of certain specified deduction;^, the 
 ditlerence to bo the net income, and if such 
 statement is not I'uinished the assessors may 
 assess according,' to their best iudyment. \V. 
 furnisliod a statement in which, in place of the ■ 
 deductions of one class specified, he inserted, 
 an amount ecpial to sevyiitv-five i>er cent, of 
 the preiniums received, as deposited with the 
 pominion <;overiiment for security to policy- 
 holders. The assessors disrej^'ariled this state- 
 inent ,ind ass.ssed the company in an amount 
 fixed l,y tliemselves, and on application for 
 cejtwmn u, qiia>h such an a.ssessment, it was 
 shewn by atii.hivit that the dejiosit of the com- 
 pany was e(|ual to about seventy-five per cent, of 
 the premiunis :— 
 
 Held, reversiiif,' the decision of the Court 
 below, lounuer and Ta.schei-cau. .Jyf., dissent- 
 ing, that the a},'eiit was justified in departinir 
 froin the form ]iivscribed to shew the true state 
 of the company's business; tliat the deposit' 
 was properly dedaeted ; and tliat the ai^sessors 
 had no light to disregard the statement and 
 arbitrardy assess the comiiany as they saw lit 
 fHtfs V. Vily o/" ,sy. Join,, lil ,s. C. 1! ■(J74 ' ! 
 
 law an a.ssessment is made of the lan.ls bene- 
 fited and chargeable with the cost of tlie 
 improvement, and lamls having a specified 
 street frontage are thereafter charged with a 
 specihc ainoiint of the cost of tlie improve- 
 ment which is entered on the as>essment and 
 collectr.rs' rolls, and sueli lands are Hubse- 
 .|Ueiitly subdivided, the wlude rate cannot 
 legally be charged against a portion of the lands 
 so MUidivided. 
 
 'I'he duty of the clerk of the municipality i^^ 
 to bracket mi the roll the diflerent sabdivisioiis 
 with the name of th(' ijcrsons assessed for each 
 parcel .and the annual sum charged a,>'ain.^t 
 the (.riginal jiarcel as thiit for which the" sub- 
 lot.s and persons assessed for them arc liab'e 
 under the special rate. ( ■aiion v. City „/■ Turunn. 
 
 Insurance Company — /,',.«, c,.- /',/,„/.l_i 
 
 ^^ here the County Ciurt Judge had decided on ! 
 appeal from the Court of llcvisiou, that the plain- ' 
 
 and j^ec. 
 
 , sub- 
 
 tifls were liable under sec. M, ..,.. ..,,. ,, «„„. 
 sec 10 of the Consolidate,! A.ssessment Act, S.", 
 Vict. ch. 48 (O.), to be assessed upon the interest 
 arising upon investments of their reserve fund, 
 although such interest was always addcl to the 
 reserve fund and reinvested as part of it, and 
 the plaintilTs now brought this action to have 
 the assessment declared illegal :— 
 
 Held, that, although the plaintills were bound 
 oy law to keep up the reserve fund uimn a : 
 certain scale, the anumnt .a--ying according to ^ 
 the values of the lives insure.l by them? as 
 ixed by actuaries tables, yet they were not 
 bound to apply the income .rising from the ; 
 investments of the fund in keeping ^he fund at ' 
 Its proper level, but might make the necessary • 
 increase with any money whatever, and the 
 Judge of the County Court had full jurisdiction, t 
 and the matter was, therefore, v., judicata. \ 
 Con/<.,/.,Y,/|o« L,laA..i<ncialion v. City of Toroido, I 
 M O. R. (,4.^. Athrmed in appeal, -2 A. R. luo! \ 
 
 \ 
 
 Local Improvement -/>V/-/ow-Z),V/.s/o» of. 
 I.oU.\-^,^U^:t^i under a local improvement by - j 
 
 Local Improvement — Hk-Iiiii- — Hmiishn 
 Uuii.\ In constructing local ' improvements, .1 
 munui|)al corporation must either make an 
 assessment of the i>iol,able cost, giving the rate- 
 payers an opportunity of appealing, and then, if 
 
 ■ iiecosary, make a further assessment to be coii- 
 tirnied by the Court of Hevisioii in the same 
 
 maiiner as the first, or they must defer the 
 actual afsessmeiit until after the completion of 
 the work, the ratepayers then having the ri^ht 
 to appeal. They cannot proceed partly in one 
 way and iiartly in another without giv'in" any 
 oppoiluiiity of appealing from a definite assess- 
 ment. 
 
 j A municijial corporation, umler the provisions 
 
 :ot a general bylaw respecting local improve- 
 
 I inents, determined to construct a sewer, and 
 
 i proceeded to assess the estimated cost on the 
 
 ; property benefited. This a.ssessment was eon- 
 
 \ hrmed by tlu.. Court of Revision. The council 
 
 then jiassed a by-law authorizing the ccmstruc- 
 
 tun of the sewer to be proceeded with, and on 
 
 Its completion passed another by-law by which 
 
 the actual cost, which was niuc'h greater than 
 
 the amount of the assessment, was"imiiosed and 
 
 n.ssessed upon the property. The cnuiieil .mo- 
 
 tica^Xv'.X to enlorco this a.sscssnn nt without havin" 
 
 brought It before the Ceurt of Revi.sion :__ 
 
 Hehl, that the a.ssessment was invalid and 
 could not be supported as a mere alteration of 
 : the estimated cost, or as a supplementarv 
 assessment. '' 
 
 I The provisions of section .•i.-)! of tlie Muni- 
 : cipal Act li .S. U. ch. 184, are imperative and 
 not nierely directory, and if a local imi.rove- 
 uieiit by-law is not registered within two weeks 
 .after Its hnal iia.ssing, a ratepayer may shew 
 that It IS invaliil and successfujly resi.st pay- 
 ment of ihe local iniproveiiicnt tax. 
 
 AV Fa.rVnujtr and Morrinliurq, 10 () R 70.> 
 istlliguisluMl. 
 
 Judgment of iMacJlahon, J. , reversed, .-^inrn u 
 V. lonui of Smith' li FHUx,-l-i,^..\x. \'2.S\. 
 
 Local Improvement— .Sv-Zaw— r,„w//rr 
 
 hiliri'ui Notice and /lydiur.]~ln carrying out a 
 local improvement the council may either ascer- 
 tain and provide for the cost of the work before 
 It IS actually c(.nimence.l by iniiiosing and con- 
 hrining the assessment necessary for that pur- 
 pose, or they may do the work lirst and n'ake 
 tht' special assessment after its completion. 
 
 A by-law imposing assessments for local 
 improvements initiated by the city was oun.^h.d 
 where the work done and the times of paynunt 
 
 !.Hm 
 
 i!! 
 
47 
 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 (c'«"'<c'- V. Mapkson, 47 L.T N S ICI ,.,.f„ i i ''*" ''"^ """^ exceed ihc 
 to. ••'^•'^- ''i>J. ifterred i was (/(/)■,( /v/t.v, tlit 
 
 Judgment of .Gait, C'.J., .ever.s.d 
 (.^Ursine and Cdy cf Toronto, 1!) A. R. " 
 
 hi 
 
 i.voN was 
 
 ^itivc, and as the specal 
 
 ■sum of .v-.'oO, tlie l.y.law 
 
 proviso at tlie end .;f sub- 
 
 Ti,e eonncU o?a ^rS^V^^-S^^^iSl^L I ^^^f-^?: -o-Panles, -M, ,, Viet 
 
 til 
 
 H.e^r:'.!'''^^''-'^'^^-'"'''^:""^ '-'^ ^^■'^•'- " 
 
 ^7. 
 
 ^"-SES^^^ 
 
 ve^-i 
 
 P^^^^EB^m:^^!^^ 
 
 
 "pinion (,f tlie council to 
 
 lie tlia 
 
 iiring the 
 
 ^uie assessors niilrn,^ £"l!;;''' ^^'^^-'-^t 
 la-onlingtot^ieiHj;';.,^;^^ -,~«er 
 
 bo no apiica from such i -i?,. 'Pi, , ■ ^" 
 
 ;*',?■'"■ "' "» i limtic is,sr" 'it 
 
 lesolution was' tVTo ''iMettni'f^ """''.''•'^''^•■"■y, the' "^ meiit, luiV'rated the"su-;,.,.inr" V": ""•>' ''''"^«- 
 l'^' gathered witl il^r ai itv ''.Jf' '* '","''' ""' ' """•""* ■•'« '•'«"'« received Tl ."s"" "" ''}'''&'' 
 
 -47, Afhnned .„ appeal, 19 A. R. .sis'" ^^ ^- i 3'Z,rVo" ''"""" ''^""' *'« '--inelsln s' 
 
 I Joiin liable to assessment ; that the superin- 
 
48 
 
 a.ws.]_ny virtue of the 
 l«'<«';ilmi.lfr-)5,t-)(iViot. 
 i*>li'l.itiii^' tlic. fliaiter of 
 . tlu,' iippulLiiit WM taxed 
 I' <i" tlio animal value of 
 lii^ cMiiicii fill lijs ocoupa- 
 puituous liijui IS, ami in 
 ■ '•liiuse till fo of the siiine 
 i^wal tax of two liundred 
 e oucuiiation. ,Sec. .jj of 
 "• •>! (V.), emimurates in 
 ^ J tlie kiiiils of taxes 
 il, sul). section (//) aiitlior- 
 I " l)UNiMe.ss tax on all 
 I.'., lm,se.l on the annual 
 iiiiil .siili-scetioii {,/} pro- 
 "■N"ii.s, aiiioiiy others, of 
 In'titioiHT. At tlie end 
 I'lllortiiin;: '• the «ho!e, 
 the provisions (jf tlie 
 I he (,>utl>ec License Act 
 nuts tlie powers of tax- 
 t!<iiHicil ot ii city to.*200 
 
 imlginent of the Court 
 granted by X; & 5g 
 ise the several taxes was 
 tive, and us the special 
 im of ccL'UO, the Ijy-law 
 ISO at the end of sub- 
 to the whole section. 
 "I-', Jd., disseiitintf. 
 'o/", -24 S. C. n. 2(;s. 
 
 J-IJy o2 ■S'iet. eh. 27, 
 lit or niiinager of any 
 orporation established 
 J'rovinee, who has an 
 'hn for such eonipuny 
 isessed upon the gross 
 nueipals with certain 
 •etroni, and to enable 
 coinpany or corpora- 
 ls ic(piired, on May 
 *h them with a state- 
 ■in prescribed by the 
 ;onic for the year pre- 
 >t the deduetions ; in 
 irnish said statement 
 i'c agent or iiiunaL'er 
 Jiiiiiut, and there shall 
 e._ The general sup- 
 itic JJivision of the 
 the eonijiany in 8t. 
 • the assessors with a 
 111 of the statement 
 orm recjuired him to 
 -•onie received for his 
 I'lg 3'«ir, as to which 
 le had been received, 
 his amount has not 
 iiy h)sses,"etc. ; the 
 11- lliis was hiuided 
 emeiit requiied and 
 
 furnish any state- 
 iiitcndent on a large 
 
 'i'he Supreme Court 
 to '(iiash the assess- 
 
 isioii of the Court 
 Clean, JJ.. di.'wnt- 
 y shewn that the 
 
 1 its business in St. 
 that the superin- 
 
 49 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 tendent was justitied in departing from the pre- 
 serd)ed form in o .ijcr to shew the true state .,f 
 the ••ompaiiy's business ; and that the assessors 
 had MO authority to disregard the statement 
 nirnislird ami arbitrarily assess the superintend- 
 ent in any sum they chose without niakiu" 
 iiMpiiry into the business of the comi.anv as the 
 statute authorizes : — 
 
 Hchl, further, that the provision that there 
 nil .11 oe no appeal from an assessment where no 
 .stat.'iiient IS furnished only applies to an apiieal 
 against overvaluation umler C. S X. U eh 
 IOf|. sec. ()(», and not to an appeal against the 
 right to assess at all :— " 
 
 Held per Gwynne, J., that see. I2,-i of ,V> 
 Vict. ch. 27 (N.15.), does not apply to railway 
 oomiiana^s. ^Jim„„n„an v. Cih, of .SI. John, 
 
 i 
 Street Railway. ] -A street railway company 
 m J(,ronto was to be assessed in respect of' 
 repairs to the roadway traversed by the railway 
 as for local iniproveiiients which, by the .Muni- : 
 ei)).il Act. constitute a lieu upcm the property' 
 assessed, but not a [.ersonal liability upoii owners 
 or occupiers after they have ceased to be such ■ — 
 Held, that after the tennination or its fran- 
 chise the company was not liable for these rates 
 f^'IH ol I oroiili, \. Toronto .StrcH R W Co ■>•! 
 
 «. c. j;. IDS. ' -' 
 
 50 
 
 Dyer 
 
 for such following year may be levied 
 V. lown of'J'reutuii, L'4 O. li. ;j();i. 
 
 Windsor Water-works.J-The d.fen.lantB 
 were the owners ol vacant land in the city of 
 Windsor, abutting on streets in which mains 
 and hydrants of the plaintitls had been placed. 
 I he defendants had a water-woiks system of 
 their own, and did not use that of the plaintilfH, 
 though they cmild have done so ha.l they wished. 
 1 he commissioners imposed a water r.ite "for 
 water supplird, or ready to be supplied," u„on 
 all lands m the .'ity liased upon their assessed 
 value irrespective of the user or nouusc'r of 
 water : — 
 
 Hehl, that this rate was, under :!7 Vii^t ch 
 70, .sees. 11, !•_> (O.), validly iinp,.,sed. CVy of 
 U uuUur V. Caniii/a .Sonlln:rn Jt. W. ('<).,i>6A. 
 
 III. CoLI.KC'TIOX OK IIatKS. 
 
 Street Railway. 1-By a l.y-law of the city of 
 Aloiitr.al a tax of ^i.m was imp.ised upon each 
 working horse in the city, liy section l(i of the 
 appellants charter it is stipulated that each car 
 emjihiyed by the company shall be licensed and 
 numbered, etc., for which the company shall 
 
 ''f^ooT"" '"{'' •'''""■*' '^" """-'•■ taxes, the sum 
 ol t«-0 for each two-horse ear, and SI for each 
 one-horse ear " ; — 
 
 Held, aHirming the ju.Igment of the Court 
 helow, that the coinpany was liable for the tax 
 
 mI':,' ,Z '"i''!>''',V-' '■'■•-'''^'' "'"-" "^ itshoises. 
 
 „/'^*,'?.? '1°'' '"taking Assessment —" J/„v 
 
 R S o^^ ^^i.e;'"T •'- ?' ^'"-^ Assessment Act! 
 K. .S. (). ch. J!U, where the assessment in cities 
 towns etc., is made by virtue of a by law 
 pa-ssed under that section, in the latter part of 
 t he year, such assessment mmi be adopted bv 
 the council of the following year ._''-"°l*^*-" '^^ 
 Held, that "may," as° used here, is ner- 
 missive only, and that the council of the follow- 
 asfessment'' ^'''"' ^'"^ "P''"' "^ Laving a new 
 Overwhelmingly strong reasons of conveni- 
 ence ,,, favour ot having one assessment instead 
 of t.(o might justify the Court in giving to 
 'may the force of "must.^' y.V iMnj^^^nd 
 Juvn of Port Arthur, 21 0. R. 17.-,. '^ 
 
 Absence of By-law -/>»,««,? of Payment.l- 
 llie mere .lehvcry t<, a r.itepayer, in pi ,ces oth^ 
 than cities and towns, of the statement of taxes 
 <lue, IS not .-ufficicnt evhleuce ot the demand 
 re,|uired to be made for the payment thereof, 
 unless a by. law has been passed under the Con- 
 solidated Assessment Act, IHDJ, sec l";i sub 
 see. 2, empowering the collector to take' that 
 course. Mcbtrnwtl y. Trach.H, 2(i C). 1!. 218. 
 
 , Goods of Stranger. ]-l>remises in a eitv 
 nuiiucipality were occupied, as tenants, by 
 a hrm of auctioneers, who, however, were not 
 
 tm lett with the auctioneers to be sold by auc- 
 tion were distiaine.l by the defendants for the 
 taxes payai.le upon the premises for the current 
 i GUI' : — 
 
 Held that the distress was valid under section 
 J.-l ot the Consolidated Asse.ssment Act, 1892 
 
 24 O.' R. 297.'' "'• '■ ^^ "'■'■" '■ ^''^ "' '''"•"«'°' 
 
 Goods Subject to Distress- Oc.(vw»c».]_ 
 
 55 Vict m''^,",'; V°r"''''"''-"' Assessinent Ait. 
 So \ iLt. eh. 4S (0.),does not authorize a distress 
 for non-payment of taxes of the goods of stnuiS 
 on the prennses, unless such goods are i \h1 
 , possession of the person who ought to pay thl 
 ^ixes or ot a legal occupant of" he piVerty! 
 
 . Afhrmed by the Divisional Court, 25 O. R. 606." 
 
 IV. Collectors. 
 
 Time for Making Assessment - ,Vo, (■,>,/ 
 Jroriswn.Jor rak-ln.j A....sm,nl mAntHnn\~ 
 Iho "special provisions " in reference to m,,i. 
 cipal assessment eontaine.l in sec. .V2 of the 
 Co„.sohdated Assessment Act, 1S92. o5 vS' 
 cft. 4,S (O.), do not permit .such .assessment 
 to be levied lor the current year, but the 
 assessment so taken at the end of' the yea may 
 
 be adopted by the council of the follovW ve?r ..„,fi.; 1° , *T. ^'^'" ='""' '"-"v*-''- the roll 
 as the assessment on which the rate of"a!jaC ' Wo '^^'^1!: "^^ ']^h. H> ''- -'"-tor on S 
 4 
 
 11,?%.^^''?; "*■ ^°" *° Collector. l-Ry section 
 119 of the Ontario Assessment Act ru> Vi't oh 
 ■IS, provision isiua.le for the prej-u-atior eyenl 
 
 Hor ^' "!r-V''^''V'^ ^''^'l' "".iiieipaiity of ^'oZ 
 eotor s roll containing a statement of all assess 
 
 ments to be ma.le for municipal purpose n the 
 
 year, and section 120 provides for .-^ siinik' ,*^° 
 VI h rosjiect to taxes payable to the treasLr of 
 he Irovince. At the en.l of section 120is the 
 
 following: "The clerk shall deliver tie roll 
 
 ii-.' 
 
 ' 1 c 1< ■■■'■ '"■- '"■i"M, u> cue 
 before the first day of October." 
 
 k. 
 
a 
 
 Hcl.I, ullirming tht- (lei;i.si„ii „f tl„. r,mit 
 
 t. .V s„,t .-..^.MMst the collector tor f„ih„c. to .■ 
 icoc tlif taxes ; — 
 
 Hc.I.l, also that «,K.h .U.Iiv..ry was nccTssa 
 .. theca.uottl,oroafornu,,,ici,,,a taxes,, 
 V e,l for ,„ tlR. i-revious ..■..■lion' as well «l 
 
 Official Boncl-A'o«.,/M,/o.,»,v..l- [„ „n ac tim, 
 to t e l.M„l.sof a ,lelau!ti^,^' .olleetor of tax.> 
 
 aiul ISS,, t a|,|.eMre,l tliat tin re l,a,l Ui vat 
 
 ax,tyo„,K,.plaintiirs'partJn,ttl.asi;Mtfv ,e' 
 forc.tl,ecolectoral,seo>„le,l, i„ Ksss. a maiuritv 
 
 o t, e,M..,n.... of ,l,e corporation l,a,leonli^U-. 
 
 sought iitorniation from the pl.iir^ls as to 
 the_wayheluulperfor„K.ahi./|„,i...i;HWnH, 
 
 to tlie <leten,]aii(.s of a motion liavin- l,eVn mnio 
 notreturnea l,y the next n.eetin,', an em, rv 
 
 £^"o,* of ! "'"^'^'''^r^ •'•■''«e ^lu^adZ-l 
 inf/fl '-csolution ni Anuust, ISS,",, instnu't- 
 
 ing the treasurer to take procee.iin.s a.'ains e 
 collemor an,l h,.s .sureties for the ImlaiR. 1 ,. , 
 the kSS4 roll unless fully settled befo e Se te 
 
 femlants trom lialnlity on their homls 
 
 J owns/,,,, o; A,/Ja/a v. J/rEh-oy, () R -,s(, 
 
 specially c(jnsulcrea. ''' "^ ' 
 
 Decision of Mac.Mahon, J., 20 O R so 
 
 affirmed. 'ro„:n of MeaforU v. Z„„ ""^O O. 'n. 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 52 
 
 IfcM, «tlirmin« the jmlgment of the fourt 
 '"•l'>w. that lands which "the co„,p ny | ,' 
 
 . .t ha\e not heen fnllille,!, are not lamU 
 
 ^'>ld under thi.s charter ■ — 
 
 IKdd further that the e.vemption attache, 
 to lands aUotted to the conipany before . 
 
 "I c in the .N,;rth U est Territories whcnallotte.l 
 
 '■^''^^■'" '■^V .lia not lose tlu.ir exe, p ;, , : 
 
 U;;S'''',7^""'.S'^''''Vt"'tlMUV,!vinc.of 
 
 'I'd,, l',i,;i„- n. IP. r,,., Iii.s. c, R. 7„2. 
 
 Crown. |-The(n,wn ia n„t lial.lc for muniei 
 al „xes a.sscsse.l upon real property heloiiKin- 
 
 Crown~/km/,n,, I /,,,,,.,,, ;„ L„ml.\ I'ro- 
 
 H'lty ot a hank became vested in the Dominion 
 
 .nveri.ment and a i.icce of land ineludcl therein 
 
 monee /h' " "r"'.-'"fe"^ "'"'"' f<"' tbe purchase 
 
 xe • ' \' ';""■"-''■'-';■• -"venantin« to' pay the 
 
 r.ixos. ^ot huviny done so, the land wa.s .>.„l.l 
 
 tax sftic •-"'"''■ '" "" "'^'"" '" ""' ""'''^' *'"■ 
 
 Held ,,Hin,,ing the i-MlKinent of the Court 
 
 " \, S,.'^- '" ■*-'- •'"''• '"^'«- Jl"in<ay 
 
 <^<>'»l!,o, (l,7/,.vA-», that th.. Crown h.ivi,,. a 
 
 ■Hiehci.-d int.rest in the land it wa,, exenTpt 
 
 liom taxation as (.Vownhimls, R. s ,, (,|, ,,/.j 
 
 ^ec. , suh-stc. 1. (juh-t V. 77„. (.;„,,v(,' 1!) s 'r' 
 
 respect ot act.s done hy hmi n the exeeutfon of 
 h.s duty IS entitled to the henelit of R. ^' O ' . f 
 
 against hiin fJr'^e^tvil^'ol^Zi ^^::n-£; 
 and for damages for malicious seizure n,?.s X, 
 
 Si3t.::pS:t:;xx''^'-'--^--"^ 
 
 o^SdSSS^^!^- -,r- "" "- 
 |=v.^;;£'.Tj;i;S;----ed. 
 
 V. KXK.MI'TIDNS. 
 
 Canadian Pacific R. W. Co.l-Bv the char 
 terof the Canadian Paeilie li. W". Co^ e la u h 
 Of the c(,mparv n the Xorth-West TerrUor os 
 
 untdtheyareeithersoldoroceupie.l,aroexe ,H 
 from DouHnion. provin.-ial or municipal taxat , 
 
 SUwifZ'-"" '''''' *''^ ^"-'^ tL.reof fro,;; 
 
 Extension of Limits. J- The lands owned hy 
 the defc^idanls were originally part of the town 
 ship of .Sandwich \\est, and hy a by-law ot that 
 township conlirme,! by special legislation. ,vere 
 cNcmp ed from tax.Uioi, tor ten years from the 
 Is ot January l,S,s;{ ]„ ]8,ss Uie limits of the 
 I lien) ,,wnof W in.l.sor wci'e under the nrovi- 
 MOMS ol l;. S O eh. IS4, .see. 22, extended''!; as 
 
 lo cmhraee the lands in ipiestion : 
 
 Held, that assuming that the'water rate ii, 
 .luestion was a species of taxation, the ede. t of 
 Iv. >. (>. eh. 1S4, sec. .-,4, was to put an end to the 
 exemption. 
 
 M„„„ujmUty ofCo);,„;,IIU v. CnntuViau Pa.ufi,- 
 /.'. II. Co., 1!)S\ C. R 702, .listinguishcl. ' 
 
 .Judgment of County Court of Essex athr.ned. 
 \'l!i"f II »,ihor V. Ccuim/ii Soiil/„rn 11. ]V Co 
 ■20 A. R. ;W8. 
 
 _ Nova Scotia Railway Act. ]-RyR S K S 
 
 o ser.. ch -,;^, see. 0!), s,ib-see. 30, the road-bcd! 
 ote., ot all railway eompanics in the I'l'ovince is 
 »;xempt from local taxation. By section I the 
 lirst part ot the Act, fioni sections 5 to S.S im-hi 
 sive, apiihesto every railway constructed and in 
 opei-ation, or thereafter to be constiaicted, under 
 the author, ty of any Act of the l.egislatu.e, a,id' 
 l-y section 4 part two applies to all railways con! 
 stMioted under authority of any special Act, and 
 to ail companies incorporated for their construe, 
 tion and working. By section .5, sub-section lr. 
 tile expression "the company" in the Act 
 means the company or party authorize.l bv the 
 special Act to construct the railway :— 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Supreme 
 foiirt ot Xova Scotia. Gwvnne, .f., di^.^enu"' 
 iliat part one of this Act applies to all railways 
 constructed under provincial statutes, and is not 
 cxcluMve of those mentioned in part two ; that 
 
 .»*"■ 
 
6? 
 
 !<• jiiilgniciit nf thf; f'diirt 
 wIikIi tlic (.■(Jii.paiiy liavt- 
 1 to uliiili tliu c()ii(li'ti(]ii« of 
 '1 liillill(.(i, aro ui)t IiukIh 
 
 .■irtcf : 
 
 It tin; cxciiiiitioii attaulu'P 
 ' the cdinpaiiy licfun^ tin; 
 tlic ('louii, LiiinlrH wliicli 
 stTiriitmics wliiunlidtti'd 
 ot Idki.' tlicir cxc'iiiiitiDii (i|. 
 .it P'H.t of tin; I'loviiiie (.f 
 liljl (if ('i,niiru//l.i V. ('(tnit- 
 • > Ills. ('. l{. 7(12. 
 
 wi] JH iK.t liaMi; fdi- iiiiiiiici 
 'II I'Ciil propeity liiiloiigiii;; 
 'iiimd.i. City tifUii,!,,:,' y 
 
 !. a:m. 
 
 Ill/f.)(s/ III I,, Dill. I I'.-,, 
 
 lu VL'stciI ill the DniHiiiidii 
 fedniiiKliiifliiiled llu i.in 
 ge talu'ii for the piiixliaNc 
 !■ covt'iiaiiliii;,r to |)ay tlio 
 
 -• so, tlu! land wa.s sold 
 
 iiii action to set aside the 
 
 i''d{,'Mient of the Conrt 
 4'JI, snh, num. Ji'n/iiia v. 
 :lKit the Crown haxiiii,' a 
 the laud it was exein|i| 
 iliuids. K. s. (). eh. 1!I,S, 
 'rl V. 'J'/iv (Jiieni^ ISI.S. (•' 
 
 ;s. )— The lands owned hy 
 igiiially part of the town- 
 , and hya by-law ot that 
 
 speeial legislation, were 
 II for ten years from the 
 In ]8,SS the limits of the 
 • were under the jjrovi- 
 , sec. 22, extended t^o as 
 
 (|iieHtion : — 
 
 that the water rate in 
 if taxation, the elleet of 
 was to put anenil to tlu; 
 
 h//;.s' v. Canadian /'arific 
 702, distinguished, 
 -'onrt of Kssex ntiirnied. 
 i(/ii Soutliim 11. (r. (V)., 
 
 yAct.]-HyR.8.K. S., 
 l)-see. 30, the road-hed, 
 aides in the Provinee is 
 tion. By seetion I the 
 n seetionsu to.'J.'j iiielii- 
 wny eonati'ucted and in 
 be eonsti'ucted, under 
 3f the Legislature, and, 
 dies to all railways eon- 
 of any special Act, and 
 ■ated for their construe- 
 -•tion 3, sub-section IT), 
 )mpaiiy " in the Act 
 iirty authorized by the 
 he railway : — 
 cision of the Supreme 
 v.-ynne, .1,, difsentiiife', 
 applies to all lailways 
 dal statutes, and is not 
 ined in jjurt tw o ; that 
 
 flS 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 54 
 
 a company incorporated by an Act of the Lej^is. 
 lature as a nnnmg eompanv with power "to 
 construct and make sucii r.iilroails and bramdi 
 tracks as might be nceosary for the tran^iiorta- 
 tion ol cofti Irom the mines to the place of yhip. 
 mont, and all other business necessary and usn- 
 »lly pej'tormcd on luilroads," and with other 
 JX)Weis connerte.l uitli the woiking of mines 
 "and ovieratioii of lailwiys," and empou. ■]■(,! bv 
 another Act f l;) Virl. ch. -J.". (N.S,,J, to lml,l and 
 work theradway '-for general trallic ami the 
 conveyance of i,as.«..ngcri and frei.dit for hire, 
 as Well as for all pni'po.^i.s and operations con- 
 nected with said mines ui aeeonlaiice with, and 
 aubjecttothc iirovisions of part second of eh. 
 0,1, K. ,S. N. .S. ,-).ser., entitled 'Of iailw;\ys.' " 
 W a 'adw-ay company within the meaning o'f the 
 Act; and that the reference in -1!) \'ict. eh. H."), 
 sec. I (N.S.). to part two does not prevent saiii 
 railway tiom coming umler the operation of the 
 hrst iiart of tlie Act. Ldv.vi.alhmal Coal Co. v 
 Cuuii'!/f,/Caj>i/in'/oii,-2'2S.C li ;j()."i 
 
 rc-anls such exception. Patterson, .1. dissent- 
 ing. I'ecisionsof the Courts below, 20 () l| |<l 
 and IS A. K. (122, reversed. Af/o,;i, y-^', ]i, rnl '„} 
 (Aiiiailii V. Cihj (,/ Toronto, '2',iS. ('. K. ,-,|.(. 
 
 ^ I. Sam: ok I,am> kh; T.wks. 
 
 Irregularities— r((//,/((///(7. 1, ■/.<)- I.anils in 
 -Manitoba assessed for the years 1,SS(».,SI, were 
 sol, in |S,H2 for uiipai.l taxes. The statute 
 aiithon/ii,- the as.scssinent rei|iiired the muni- 
 cipal council, after the final revision of the 
 assessment roll in each year, to pass a bydaw 
 tor Icvyin- a rat.^ on all iv d and personal 'prop- 
 city inentioiie,! in .said roll, but no such bylaw 
 \vaa pa.s.-ed 111 cither of the years bSSO or "iSSI 
 I lie lands so assessed and sold were fornieily 
 
 )oinini.,n lanus which were s(d,l and pai.l for il, 
 ss'/' '".lj;'''^'l''"'"t '"'l "<'t issue niilil .\pril. 
 
 had been purchased and .-i mannfaetorv erectc.l 
 was pa.sscMl by a municipal council, under sec- 
 tion .-((.(i of the .Municipal Act, K. S. {). eh KSI 
 by which the property was .•xenipted from all 
 taxation, etc., for a period of ten years from the 
 date at «hich the by-hiw came into etrect. 
 
 Jhe conned snl,se(,uently, within the jieriod 
 
 who sought to have the tax sale set aside as 
 "ivalid. 4., \ iet. ch. 10, sec. 7 (.Man.), provides 
 tnat every deed made pursuant to a sale t.,r 
 ta.vcs shall be valid, notwithstanding anv infor- 
 'iiality m or preceding the sale, indcs's ,,„es. 
 tioncd withrn one year from its executi.,n, and 
 .>! \iet. ch. 27, .sec. -),S(.Man.), provides that 
 all assessments heretofore made and rates 
 
 - —•;••-•' ■"■■.^^M'""">. "lumi tne iierioi "ii assessments heretofore ne, 
 of exemption, on the alleged ground that It was struck by the munh'ipa u's e herebv e , 
 ''expedient and necessary to promote the inter- i tinned ami .leelared 'a am ml ' oon'- I 
 eats of the ratepayers, pa.s.scl aiiotlur by-law I Pfi's,.ns and corporations af 1 the vl v '' 
 repe .in« th.; exempting bylaw. The (',nrt. Held, allirmi ig the lul' uent tle\'.;o^ 
 being of opinion, on the f.acts as set out ,n the l^^low, l^ltte.■son°.r. kCi tZ; th I 1 1, .,s 
 case that the rej.caling bydaw was passed in I mc^nts for the vca J ISSO "^„^^ n ,^TT- 
 
 E;:;:;;."iyii"'5r ;is^;£t5:j i-s^r s~S? K^ 
 
 council was that the applicant lia.l erected more as was the .leed C •- ' """' ' """"y 
 
 than two dwelling.hou.ses en the exempted ' Hehl, per (hvynne J Pitte^n,. T 
 
 but ll,r.u,sl,,i,,„lv„i„„=„. ,„,„',,.i„f. ■n;,c4.,nk. 17 s CK iJi' 'i ,, u " '• 
 
 S.";;a:,;:?£r::! «>■ -— • "» ! ;z,",' t :??■ ''■■ '«■,"' ^ ■^--""^ 
 
 up as a breach of the by-law. 
 u^f""'''!''.. •''" ,"■"'■''" "manufacturing estab- 
 and an . "' h'" ^^^■'"P'"'« ''y-'aw included 
 v! ; ^^''^'''V't' necessary for the business. 
 itmWe also, the period of exemption was 
 within the statute. Ahxander v. K,, o/ 
 -ff UHCsnWc, 24 O. R. (JC5. > niayt oj 
 
 m assessing, 
 to the sale. 
 05. 
 
 and levying the taxes' which led 
 II hilait V. llyan, 20 S. C. U. 
 
 £-ImitatIon of Tlme.]-At the time of the 
 
 u l'7'V"''*'' K *''f l'l'""t'«"« predeee,ss.u- in title 
 and to himself the defen.lant was in a.lverse 
 occupation of lan.ls sold for arrears of tuxes! 
 
 ' ;i> 
 
 ^ 
 
55 
 
 ASSESSMENT AND TAXES. 
 
 Right to Attack.] -A parcel of land was ,lo- 
 icnlpud ill till! patent and in the books of tin- 
 connty troaHurer an " the north part of lot num- 
 ber tl.irtiuin . . . .ontaining Hixty acivs of 
 liUKi, Ik.' I he sami! nioro or Iomm. " Tli,. jtincl uon- 
 tainod in fact figlity-tuo iicreH. In ISiiN thero 
 wcru .sold for taxfs fifty iicrca deacrihcd tliuH • - 
 " ( nniniiMicinK 'it thi' north-east angle of said 
 north jMirl at the limit between said nortli part 
 of lot niiiMher thirteen and lot imiidier fourteen 
 thence ah.ngHai.l limit t.ikinga prop.irtion of the 
 width eorreiponding in (|uantity with the propor- 
 tion ot the said norlli part of lot nmnlper thirteen 
 111 r«'«ard to its length and breadth siillieieiit to 
 mi.ku tifty aereH <;; laud." Then in ISTl there 
 was sol, for ta.ve.s a ),areel de.scrdmd tliUH : I 
 
 Jhe whole of «aid southerly part of the north 
 halt of said lot number thirteen . . . con- 
 taiiiing ten aeres, and being part not sold for 
 taxes ill ISdS " : — 
 
 H.'ld, that the sale of 1871 eould not be lim- 
 ited to ten aeres to be located by the Court "in 
 «ueh manner as is best for the owner," l>ut wis 
 the taxes being properly ehargealde again.st the 
 whole ol the unsold portion, a sale of the wliol" 
 of ihit unsold portion and eoiild not, in eons"- 
 ipieiice of the provisions of H. S. () oh Ih'i 
 see. ini, be attacked by the plaintiff, a iilir' 
 chaser from the owner after tli ; time of the tax 
 sale who then had a mere riglit <if entry 
 
 Apiilieation and eflect of tliis section con- 
 sidered. 
 
 .ludgnientof the Queen's Hencli Division, 20 
 O. K. ;{.")!, reversed. J/i/a/l v. J/,V/.s, Ut A. K. 
 
 56 
 
 cent, added on March 1st was only an addi. 
 tional rate of tax imposed as a penalty for non- 
 payment, which the local Legislaturc^iuder its 
 uthority t.. legislate with respect to municipal 
 institutnuis, had power to impose, and it was 
 
 I'jro'f'thrifv"'^''"' '''%:"^'^"""K "f «eotion 
 !M Of the 15. N. A. j.et. AVm., v. Torrance " 
 U.gal News IH() overruled. Lynch v. CanaU'a 
 N n. Land Co., Suntk Ihiffcrin v. Morden, 
 
 Covenant to PnyT&xeB-In/creMt in Land.] 
 
 _-A les.see covenanted, pursuant to the Short 
 
 I'orni of U'ases Act, to p.iy all taxes " to be 
 
 I charge, mmii the sai,l ,lemis,.,l premises or upon 
 
 [the.saul lessor cm a,'c,Hiiit tliereof." rUr iir,. 
 
 I mises c,msiste,l of a buihling with a laue to thn 
 
 I rear .le.scribed as being " north of the premises 
 
 heiel.v .lemised,' over whicli the lease provide,' 
 
 ittheles""" !.•■ ..L »• I 
 
 Setting Aside.]- The pro isions of section 
 J-l ,il the Cmsolidatcl As.se. ; Jimt Act as to 
 enteniigon the mil, by the clerk of the municipal- 
 ity, opposite to each let or parcel, all the rates or 
 charges with which the same is chargeable in 
 separate columns for each rate is imperative 
 and non-complianco therewith ren,lers -iucli roll 
 a nullity. And where the amount of such rates 
 or taxes for one year was entered on the mil in 
 one .sum, and the roll was so transmitted to the 
 treasurer of the county, a tax sale founded 
 thereon was held invalid. 
 
 'I'he provision of section 141 of the soid Act, 
 winch requires a true copy of the lists rcturiie.l 
 liy the assessors to the clerk to be furnished to 
 the county treasurer certificl to by the clerk 
 under the seal of the corporation, ami that of 
 section 142 which reijuires an assessor's cer- 
 tificate to each list, are also imperative. 
 
 The principle of the decision in Town of 
 Jr'„/o„v. Ihjer, 21 A. K. T,\\ 24 S. C. R. 474, 
 lollowed. Lore v. Wthster, 2G O. K. 4,"),S. 
 
 I that the lessee might at any time erect a biiil,, 
 I ing or extension provide.l the same was alwavR 
 
 t !!.':"1" '"f. i''T ,""■ «'""'"'' '""' '" a^'cordanc,. 
 Altli Which the lane was l)uilt over. The leimc 
 .Iso provi,le,l tliat if the lo.>is,.rs elected not to 
 '•enew, they were to pay a fair v.duatioii for the 
 buddiiigs winch shoiihl at that time be erect..,! 
 on the amis ami picmi.es hereby ,lcmis..,l 
 an, 1 over the sai,l laue :— 
 
 llehl, that the wonls "demised premises" 
 in the covenant referrcl only to the building 
 lot Itself, aii,l not to tlie interest in the Ian,, 
 which passed by the lease. 
 
 ScnM, where a tenant agrees to pay taxes 
 on the land denii.scl to him, the omission of the 
 assessor to enter his n.ine ,u, the assessment 
 roll, or that of the lau,lior,l to resort to Uie 
 t ourt of Reviswn to linvo the omission rectified 
 wouli not relieve him from his obligation •- 
 
 field, also that the interest of the defen- 
 <laiit in th.! lane was cle.nrly an interest in lan,I 
 An,l .,f,«We, even if it were not separately 
 assessable, this wouhl imt excuse the defendant 
 ti-om repaying the less,)r what he ha,l to iiav for 
 taxes in respect to it. Jnnt.t v. O' Kccfc'ii 
 K jMi .See this case in appeal, 23 A. 'R 129 
 
 R. 48!). 
 
 Remainderman.]- As between a tenant for 
 lite in pos.sessimi and a remaimlerman of nro- 
 p..rty, part of ^vhich is i)ro,liictivo and part un- 
 productive, the life tenant will not be permitted 
 to receive rents from part of the property while 
 he allows taxes to accumulate on the vacant 
 portion. 
 
 Order ma,Ie for a receiver of the estate of the 
 tenant for life t,j pay the arrears of t.axes out of 
 the reii s_. Re iJemson, U ah/ie v. Deni.on, 24 
 
 VII. Mi.scELi..\NEou.s Cases. 
 
 Constitutional X.a.-^-P malty for not Pai/inn 
 y„.,ftv.]-J he Municipal Act of Manitoba pro- 
 vnles that persons paying taxes before Decem- 
 ber 1st in cities ami December ."Jlst in rural 
 municipalities shall be allowe.l 10 per ix-nt dis- 
 count; that from that date until March 1st the 
 taxes shall be payable at par ; and after March 
 Jst 10 percent, on the original amount of th«> 
 ta.\ sh.ill lie added : — 
 
 Hehl, reversing the judgment of the Court 
 below, (.Wynne, J., dissenting, that the 10 per 
 
 -y-endor and Purchaser - Local Improremnl 
 Vi-nte,.]!,, a contract for sale and exchange of 
 certain lamls free from incumbrances, it wm 
 provided that "unearncl fire insurancepremium, 
 interest, taxes and rental " should be ''iironor' 
 8 I'le" ■-!!" """'"'"^ *° ''""^^ "f eompletioii ol 
 
 Held, notwitlistanding, that special frontice 
 rates imposed for local improvements and con- 
 struction of sewers by by-law passe.l prior to the 
 contract, the period for payment of which had 
 not expiree were incumbrances to be discharge*! 
 !)y tlip vendors respectively :— 
 
 Held also that the vendors were likewise 
 bound to discharge a special frontage rate im- 
 posed by a by-law passed subsequently both to 
 
66 
 
 vrch l«t wng only an nddj. 
 ii|i'>HU(l itH IV penalty for non- 
 ! Iiioiil U'KiNlatiiit,', uuilv.r itn 
 tc witli rcNiicct ti. iiHitiififml 
 ^ivvfi- t(i iiiipoHc, nnd it wiin 
 Inn till' iiKMiiiiig of Noctioii 
 j.et. Jtmi V. Torrdiicf, " 
 ornilo.l. /.,„„■/, V. Canailn 
 South Diiir^rin v. MunUi, 
 US. C. I!. OQi. 
 
 y Taxes -/«/«)•«« wt A«h,/. | 
 t.il, iMiiNiiiint to the .Short 
 t, til liay all tiixcH "to hv 
 ill (Iciui.siMl pruiiiim'H or upon 
 (■count tliiMX'of." 'I'll,, pr,.. 
 luiililing with a lant! to thi' 
 Mng "nortli of the premises 
 er which the Icusu jiroviiled 
 t at any time trout a liuihl 
 viiU'cl the same was always 
 Krimnd, ami in aecordanoe 
 was Imilt over. 'I'he lease 
 
 the lessors electcil not to 
 pay a fair v.dnation for the 
 nl(i at that time he erected 
 
 Iticinises herehy deiniaed 
 le : — 
 
 ords "demised premises" 
 rred only to the Iniildinj,' 
 J the interest in the lane 
 lease. 
 
 -nant agrees to pay taxes 
 to him, tlK,' onnasion of the 
 I n.'ine on th(! assessment 
 
 land.ord to resort to i\w 
 h.TVc the omi.ssion rectified, 
 I from his ohligation : - 
 he interest of the defcn- 
 cleiirlyan interest in land, 
 if it were not separately 
 
 not excnse the defendant 
 
 sor what he had to pay for 
 
 Jani:i V. O'Keeffi, 2'(i 0. 
 
 in appeal, 23 A. R. 129. 
 
 -As between a, tenant for 
 a remainderman of pro- 
 -s productive and part un- 
 iiant will not be permitted 
 lart of the property while 
 L'ciunulate on the vacant 
 
 ceiver of the estate of the 
 he arrears of t.axea ont of 
 >i, l\ a/die v. Deni.tov, 24 
 
 Bser - Loral /mprovemenl 
 for sale and exchange of 
 m incinnbranccs, it was 
 Bil fire insurancepremiiim, 
 tal " should he "jiropor- 
 o date of completion of 
 
 iig, that special frontage 
 improvements and con- 
 jy-law jjassed prior to the 
 ■ payment of which had 
 id)rances to be discharged 
 vcly :— 
 
 3 vendors were likewise 
 pecial frontage rate im- 
 ed subsequently both to 
 
 «7 
 
 >«■ date of the contract and the d.ite tixe,l for 
 '"••■"7Pl;tnM,oftlesale,i„.s, ha. the work 
 
 "H»..„a||y,|o„ea„d t he evpenditnre , ctm 1 v 
 !""lf before Ih, eo„l,,„l. ,| .. ,„„„„|| ,,„'•, 
 
 J;-^ I'^O t.,r It (MMler n-A Vu'i. eh. .",(1, „..,, lis 
 
 The.„!«t.,nlid rhaigeas „ „ h.de e;,me into 
 .■x.teneeniH,,, thelin,..,i„gofthework 
 
 /v/v :,' '^^"""vr"^''' "" »i"i di-tioL'iiish.d 
 
 Vendor and Purolmaei. /.„„/ /,„,,,„,, ,„,.,, 
 
 :;;-;^n:;iSirof;::;;:i^,,:i.';;:;:!.-;| 
 r.^;;^,rtt;r-:,''-.-i-^^ 
 
 coXm;'- "'""'"■"""• """"'""^"'—"l-- the 
 
 hv^mmi *!',"', 'r'l '"■'"■"^■'•"'••'■'t vuU'H in.posed 
 "i iminieipal hv- -nvs alter tin. « L- t, ■ 
 
 '-"d..nche^,..;,,hedat'"^ ".: t'we::; 
 nicmnbrance. to be .li.seh.ir.'ed bv th v .'„ 
 
 i;iir;;:;;;r;::' '''■«. «£;Kt;,: 
 
 lltiiniiidon ,ii,d lluminUI, '.'O () i; H).) f„l 
 lowed. ■ ' ""• 
 
 the .vi. ''"• l'.'"-^'l'^'«''' "iis entitle.1 to shew 
 the existence of iiienmbran.'es us an eonit.l. . 
 .rm„,d o, relief, and, the time b>r .m £ 
 
 iiicii-ii oi in> piiieliase iiKjnev ;ih iniuKf 
 [.e necessary to protecl him ag,unstVi,:S' I 
 
 ATTACHMENT OF DEBTS. 
 
 58 
 
 I ATTACHMENT OF DEBTS. 
 
 1 What mvv mi.; Att\(iiki., .Is. 
 11. Who mav ArrAt'ii, (il. 
 
 III. riiACriCK, (il, 
 
 .•.:^^.^''^^^^.;;:,o!'v;:r,.;.; '"'^ "— 
 
 I. UlUT 
 
 ■M.*^ UK .\ri\( (III.. 
 
 -Amount • Aetuall.v Due.| .\ ,. a, nisl.ee 
 '.-•der binds only M.M„„.h„) tla-deht: „ ; 
 
 ■ ;.•'';•', '■•;". a third p,u,y as the debto ''ca 
 honestly , leal with at, the time the garnishe 
 order »,.„ is .,l,iained an.| served '-"'^"'•''"k 
 
 beeni's'I'l' '"";' ;"''''' f'"' I"'.V'ruMit over has 
 Itu, issued and i altv.rwnrds appe.irs that the 
 debt was assigned before the at .lehinL' ord r 
 ,wa.s moved tor, the linal order sh ml I 1 
 i'e«cin<led. Ii,anj v. Iln,l.:,t, U R I; ;ilK. 
 
 Damages. | -The judgment of tlie .Imlgo who 
 
 msmms 
 
 l-arohe ,„',.' """■tJ.'-'ge was taken for 
 
 ■f "o objection wL:i^'s;.:''"r^''''''^ 
 
 llic veiHlor's title wis I i '''''','"'° ''""e ; 
 
 -deiedacceilt^ed "v lJ''i,S,f''''""'l'^'-- 
 
 ^^"1:vfl;eVe:z'''7''/,^.;''-'''-'"-■''lbe 
 
 ■-•OO. R. 0;)2. °" ""'^ Hi,„slo,i. 
 
 Foreign Corporation l>,i,t i,,„. ,^ y, 
 
 i S^n.-.fisz.irssjx-^- 
 uuE. ""'''r"""""";'""""i """Boi 
 
 p.'ocess n.ider timt Knie '''"' '" «^"'"-'^'""-nt 
 
 fodow:"' '""""'"-•/'"'•'""'". i;nM<.30H. 
 
 distinguished. •> • ■ K. aiz, 
 
 A debt due to a j.ldgmeiic debtor jointlv with 
 iino her person cannot be att.che.l ^ 
 
 Foreign Corporation Dohm llnsin-s, i„ 
 
 :-^...rii. by ■'.:;;• ;;„e:ntr'iz!:;n:::i''?^ 
 -uh,nuntai;o^.;:-h:ntt::™';7S: 
 
 .... .in.I moneys ,leiM,siled « ill, then, at braneC 
 
 ^fc^d;:;r;hrV'^^^';*'"''^''"'''-'^h^ 
 J'h^. SM,i"iirr 37i- ''"'""' '-'' "^■ 
 
 ASSIGNMENT OF MOETGAGE. 
 
 See MoKTii.vcjE, AVJII. 
 
 I ir^"'-''K"t,^o V ,^7^^--^:"'-'-^«'^« 0/ Luna by 
 
 -L). having entere,! into an aureemenrf:/ 
 I purchase land hi, I fl„. , "fe'tement to 
 
 1,1 
 
 I' 
 
 il: 
 
p 
 
 •II hlH lnt..r..Ht ,y,W.1. .s|„. H..I.I .1,. Imi.l t, 
 in«*t of tl... ,,„„.1,„H. „;,.„..v, which tL^fl I 
 
 oal«c,f |,tl,. .►SI,.,! ii, l„v„nr.,f M,, th<n,,,li ,1 . 
 ■oHciforH «.,,. „Ik„ .„li,it,„« „f ,,. ,«i, iX. 
 Been <.l,tainr|l „„ li„.jr .Irl.ts th.^ |,uKli«8e 
 
 h..ulH\.r\r"' T"'''. "■"' ''«•-■'-'!.. Tl 
 naiKiH (if M. 1111,1 „„ ,v„,„. „„H ,li,,.i,f,,,i ,,. 
 
 D. to ,k. ..rnuiu. tl,o title t„ tho ,„„„,v nn.l.. 
 the nmni^l,,.,. „n1n, ,u„l tl„. nu.mv «rH 1 v 
 
 irr"''i ;,,',;''■' ;;''''*''•'''• '"- j-Uwrt":;. 
 
 trZ. ". ." ";'""■>,'".' ""•K'"'".,l that the 
 »n. > "';■'»";• t" I>.V "iff v,.H voluntary 
 
 an.l yml mi.l.r tl„. .t,,,,,,^. ,,f VA\yuhv,h ami 
 
 thatBhe,hu-.f,,n.|,ehlthehn.)an;;;i, ?' 
 Hchl, ;|v.;.M-. K the .I<.t.iNi,,n of the Siiprtnu. 
 
 ATTACHMENT OF DEBTS. 
 
 ..I.., ...v.isii^' the (l(CH„nof thi'SnnrH,,,,. i,„. i V r'»^'"^- '"i "mu-iiiij; tli.. h,, , ,r t< 
 
 Conrt o the North- Went TnTitorie tha ." ^t Tj'T, -Tv"Jl^' ''"'**"""' ^■'-"'<"' 
 
 V""", whether the ni.Hitnci- of the iu.lumnil: 
 
 , won .1 J„ ..ntitle,! to a,|,ni.Vi.ttati„„ J""'''""" 
 
 I he «H.,g„ee of a i,„lKim„t uitointe.l reoeiver 
 
 '■\ «"> of e,,nitftMe .x,.„th,i toreeeivoMhnt- 
 
 ■WM .n err.t the jii.lKnient .lehtor niiKht Imvo 
 
 u ii)o'.iv"'V' *""*"' '^'''■'"" ''• "'"''' '•* ^• 
 
 , PrcmlMoryNcte.l-.'Ihe .nlnr^.,,1 provis. 
 
 » ta.hment of .I..|„„,„ ,|,„,,„,„f ,„,„«' 
 hie on neL-otmhl,. M.n.itieH: the elaii,, 'ota 
 n,l;..«„.nt ,lel,lor to le ,mi,l the anionnt of a 
 .,.m.H.ory note ,« not ..ptn.hut on the .loe 
 
 tniuH of > ,|uital)Ie exeeiition. 
 ./m/,.,,/, V. r«.M-,/y, ... ,), ,{, r.2,^ f„l|„we,l. 
 
 itKef I,'," n " *^"'"i''""l '■« ""t the note 
 
 . .f,,;. . ' ,""""'^ ■•'■■'>"'''^' '•"■'•'■•"■"I'- ; 
 
 he.efo, . the maker ,t the nrt... an.l not th. 
 
 l.m.n hohl,n;r ,t for the j.„lK.n.nt ,k.|,tor 
 
 Kmhihen.a.le garnishee; an.l there is „ov„. 
 
 Mt in the,,ract„.e for o„leri.,K the hohler t,. 
 
 ii:";l■'7>:';;^^■y^■,."''^■i-'*^-■■"--•itor. 
 
 tranHfer to the ,vif.. of I), ^u^. ho,n) M. 'that 
 *«»(rt/,/, th.. Si,,,r, n,.. Court of the Territories 
 
 cinjr- fP '"■''•^' '■^"■'■i^"' "'"1 IK.sseHse.l l,v 
 Courts of K.,u,t.y, couhl not, i„ these statntorv 
 
 K^ oh'tllfn' ,'-'•""* '!'^' '""'f *'"'* ^■°"''J '"^ V^- 
 »een obtained in a .suit m ei|uity : 
 
 Promissory No e.]- .After th.. .li.eharKe of 
 
 . atta.lnng „roer the plaintitT, two .lays 
 hefo... the maturity of the i,r<.niiK8ory note in 
 M lestion .,l,t„ine.l a new o,',ler attaehing tit 
 H»..M.,l..ht, nmk,n«thehul,lerof ti... note an,) 
 the inakerH garni.shecH. 
 
 V\u n a motion for iiavnif nt over hv the L'ar- 
 "ishees or for alterna'ti;,. relief, u„ lr\tT,, 
 mn.le n,>point.nK the ,,lai„till receiver of all 
 
 iieys ,liie or iiecriiiiiK <lii,. m.-.n »i . 
 
 Hel.l, furth.r, alM, .eve sing the jn.Iement " "/'r"''"'K the ,,lai„ti,l receiver of all 
 appealed Iron., that even if the pr 3 ' , ' '■> « 'l''^; ''•' ■■Hcn,,,,g .Ine np(,n the note, to 
 were not io,„) /,/. the «arni\.lu.e r cee.l ^^^^^^ "M'l.v on the ju.l^ment, ar.,1 restraining he- 
 Were not properly take,,; tha th' u 1 1 «:.'"«''^'^%f">n lav n« over the moneys .rHie, 
 money WflH to have l„.,.„„..;,ii...\t.',"".V'"'*- ^^•■''f. "ml fr< ni iiartinu with the not,/ it 
 
 money wflH to have heen paid hyM.'on deHv.e';,': 
 of deed of ti^n.fer, an.l tfie vendor ne er n le? 
 
 • debt ,t was not one which 1)., the ju.k-ment 
 debtor as against whom the j,'ar dshee^ Scee 
 
 fe. ...,=„..■.,,, „, paying over the moneys otlier- 
 wi.«p, and fr.n. i.arting with the note. Ihmm 
 y. tr.n,wu, .•!-, Sol. J. S7. followe.l. IM^T 
 />'!/(No. •-'), 15 I>. R. 40,-,. /-a(fy\. 
 
 Rents 1-The plaintifT, having an unnitis- 
 hed ju.gnunt ngnirst the def.ndant in tlip 
 High Cant, obtained from the Master in 
 Ihambeis. ,,■ /erf,, two oi.lei.M, under Rid, 
 
 rC. r ']' ""' '"' "''" exclusive benefit • (in ml./.s """""" neni ti,e .M„ster in 
 
 that D 8 wife wa.s n,.t prcehnlcd. by 1, .in.; <.|r: . I'o', ,' ^ "•';•. '^v" ""Ifi-S under Rubs 
 
 assented to the issue an,l to the m, a-y In k f i f"' ' ""'^^'""^ ••"' ''^I'ts ,lue to the 
 
 paid into Conrt, In m ,lainung,hat i^ ^ul lo't he "l.H 1 " "'" i'"'''' '"'"'^ ''^' '"'^ t^"-'"'**' 
 
 H»«ttaehe,l in the.e proceedings; a ,1 at 1. b fof r''''';' "r''' ^""""r"'"^' "'f'" to appear 
 
 inly relief {.oi-Bible was by an ind ei rin.Vf ! 1 , " ^"""t.v <'oiirt Judge toshew ,ause wl,v 
 
 ^onohoe V. //„// o. v r\ > '»' .'>'"q'endent suit, such rents should not be oai,! ovnr *„ .ti ^,'' .^ 
 
 K 
 
 .^«i,a ne.i ui tncK' proceedings: and that th. f..f„, r' 7 /' >'""i'"'"""^' '"em to appear 
 only relief {.oi-Bible was by an ind ei rin.Vf ! 1 , " ^"""t.v <'ourt Judge toshew ,ausewl,v 
 
 ^ tiff. Lpon the api'lieation of a company, mort- 
 
 £S^<^xUel:;;::-r;7^hiJhrs'S^ 
 
 .51 ; and Con. Rule iW.T does not Tp, I y 'to Dht' ' „f ^.f ' "'"' '^ "'^ garnishees, upon the return- 
 ion Courts. "^i'^i '" '^i^is-,of the summons, neglected to sugge,«t to the 
 
 „ „f7''''.- «7'> if it «li^l, that such a claim could ' Rule -ul h'"" "' "l7""'l'""y. as provide,! U 
 
 And, therefore, the company was not a 
 party affeete.r by the <a- parU or.lers, wi hi 
 the meaniiiL' of Rn H .'i.'^fi , "iuiin 
 
 --- ......,..^,,,,, .,,, ,„,|g „g {j^g insurance i-om 
 
 pa*y '8 nght to haye the fnoney ajiplicl h reb i Id- 
 mg was open, bmp.o,, v. ClJ.f, 14 P. R. 280. 
 
 Legacy.]— An order may be n,„l,. ,..♦., u- ., i""''^' ""'^^t*"'" '-y the <a,-;)ar 
 he amount, if an c ^iuL 1 V ^'"^ the meaning of Rule 530. 
 
 ^ovgh it is undeteLint:r whelS" n tl !• "I^^Li!" "'l»>f«--K t'' 
 
 the 
 debt 
 
 uu« i« a juogment debtor as residuary legatee ' }' 'iV 7 . , 
 
«1 
 
 ATTORNEY. 
 
 f the juilgmmt 
 
 oinJcd it'ccivcr 
 t> M( livn Mlmt- 
 t'lr iiiixlit hiivf 
 V. //((/-■,, U I'. 
 
 liiij.'((l provi.i- 
 <1 till' riglit (,f 
 if tiiniiyH |my 
 111' tliiiiii iit"n 
 u iiiiKilint iif 11 
 i>t I'll tlic doc 
 
 , f.pllriwtll, 
 
 not tlio tidti- 
 tlicrtutidir ; 
 
 I iind nut tlii; 
 
 ;iiuiit dtlitoi, 
 
 i< re JH iKi Mar- 
 the iMildcr f(, 
 
 Hint riiditor. 
 
 the next case. 
 
 disclmrjro (jf 
 ff, two dnjN 
 fsdiy n(jte in 
 ittdchiiig tli( 
 tlif ndte and 
 
 r liy tlie f,'ur- 
 111 order wey. 
 ceivtr of all 
 the note, to 
 itriiiiiing the 
 loiiejs other- 
 lote. Ill/am 
 d. Kxtfi/ y. 
 
 III! uii.sitis- 
 iliint ill (liM 
 
 Mni-tir ill 
 under Riih . 
 due to the 
 Ills tenants. 
 Ill to aiijienr 
 rt- (■!Ui!>e M-hy 
 :o the jilnin- 
 pany, niorf- 
 I liail served 
 
 the rent to 
 ieinding the 
 
 I the return 
 gest to the 
 irovided In 
 eeted by iiii 
 
 i, followed. 
 n'Bsi not 11 
 ers, -Hithin 
 
 ;tised ujion 
 ster of the 
 parnishees 
 for hearing 
 )iirt Judge. 
 Reverjicd 
 
 nt debtor, 
 he time cf 
 
 ■cmo« of th« iittaeliinK order, but « hi>l, n,„v 
 thereafter l.ee,„„n .1,,,.. e.u.not be atliuhrd t'o 
 unH^e^the |„,|j.-„Hnf ,|..|,t , „„,, „,.. , „|„ ,J,, 
 
 III tlilH n'»|ieit j 
 
 llieKiduiy nf a iM.licM. ni.igiMtrate npp.dlite.l 
 'y the (i„wn but paid byu„„ii,i,.,,,a!iiv. .an. 
 .i..t. on KrnliiMU of piibli,. ,„l„.y, be attaelml; 
 
 point. ( ■e„tr„/ l:„„)c y. AV/m, •.'() A. 11. mI 
 
 Sale of Lan.la lnln;sto/ Tnm„l hull,- (;<,- 
 frv/-.h-t,..„ t> S.> Ash/, rrnmlul,,,! Tnin^D r.\ 
 -A JudKiii.iit delitur, haviiiy a sui.piMed inlii- 
 eit .i^ tenuit by the eMHe«y iu ..cTtain land. 
 wbirh uius not and never had been elaimed 
 >>• iiiMi jollied in u eMiiveyanee tlieient bv 
 hl-s dan. Iter lo a piin.ha.ser, in which it u,,'. 
 recited that he \va« .•iitUkd to that estate \ 
 iud«n,e,.t ereditur of hi., theivni.un attennled 
 
 togaiinNh l|„. ,Miieha«e ..y in the Imnls „f 
 
 theKolieitur ,vl,„ acted f.,r tlie daii^hte,., tiie 
 latter e alinii,.- tlie ^^ hole of the pmvlia.se inunev. 
 while the jiidKiaent .lebtor nuw expies-lv di'-i 
 claimed any mten ,st therein, |,.. I,,,; i,,,, ;„„„:,i 
 iiitliL-eonveyaiieeat tlie instance of tliColicitur 
 for tlio [.ureliaser, win. «a« aino tlie s,,|i, it,,r f,,r 
 the judgiiu'iit creditor : — 
 
 Held, that the money in ||„. b.md.s ,,t t!„. 
 dailgl, er.s snbctor co.ijd iw.t be ^^Mriuslicd bv 
 the jiidyiinnt cteilitor 
 
 I'er \rm„iir. C.l. -.Assuming that the imb- 
 llelit debtor was tenant by the eurtesv oj the 
 land ho!,], upon it.i .-ale he became entit'lci mdv 
 to a life use ol the pnivliase money, uiul this 
 ;i«o could i,nt be readied by garnishee process 
 jn the inamier attempted. ' 
 
 Per Street ,1.- Theie was no debt due from 
 the solicitor to the ,|.id^;meut debtor, iior could 
 It be .s.aid tliat the moneys in th,. bands „| the 
 former were .subject to any trust ii, favour of 
 the alter, nor that •■■iiy claim „„ lu.s part aireet- 
 iiif,' them existed. It ho had an interest in the 
 I.uids, he, 111 ellcct released it to hi.s daughter 
 without any eonsider.iiion, and the money was 
 hers unless the release t,. her should be set' aside 
 as voluntary and a fraud upon his creditors! 
 J\dm<r V. J.uvctt, 14 1'. K. 415. 
 
 62 
 
 ereditor obtain, mi order attaching debt^ due to 
 hejidgnie,,, debtor, not.ce of tlVe appli..uion 
 otahna older for pay, nei.t over bVleiar 
 
 tvferred to. It.anj y. //,„/,,/, 14 I' 1{ '.'JC 
 
 Juclgmoiu Debt - /;..,,■./,„„ so/:ntor'. 
 /-'".j -A ,lniills return to a writ of «' ,„ 
 goods set loitl, th.at he was m.tilied that the 
 
 ;';;;;.";t or thejiidgnieiit to be eveei.t ..n . 
 
 iM'eil ttache, by a jiidg,m.„t creditor of t „ 
 c'xe.utlou creditor and tli.a theexecutm . , .|,t„r 
 (the gariiis|„.e, had thereapon satislied the ela [ 
 "t the g,iriii.,hor. In fact there was on y „ 
 ">'l"'- " "ttaeh ..,„,1 a snnimons to pay o • .''Ca 
 no order absolute :— ' ^ ' '"■ 
 
 Held, that tne return «a» insutlicienl ni sub- 
 stance, because It shewed that the writ rem lim 1 
 .mexecued uitlioiit legal excuse; a 'a ,"1" 
 Older ab,oh,te wouhl have operated as' „ ' y „" 
 execiitlon, but not so the attaeiiiie, or.ieVCj 
 HU.nmons .. the duty of the gainisl,ec"was . Z 
 he sherilt. advisnig him at the same time o? 
 the cx.steuce of the atta,.|^„^, or,h.,, SumI 
 
 rrS'"'^-^' "-i"i-'-tt,^apaymr-i;:^ 
 
 It appeared t hat the solicitor for the execution 
 •.editor had a lieii for his costs up,,,, the I? 
 
 mn obtained by his client, audi .^O^. 
 
 ment ot t 10 judgUMut, whereof the e,,r,,i±,' 
 Hlld ganii>.hee hoth ha.l notice • --- -■" '"«hor 
 
 lot h.ue>ettl,.,| theam.aiul -arnishcl between 
 theiuselve. ; aiel that the solicitor slio„|,| have 
 
 l'> disclosing the a.ssigniiieiit to himself of thn 
 debt attached. (,V,,v. v. Ju;.;,uu,, 14 P. u" 
 
 II. \Viiii M.vv Attai'Ii. 
 
 Jiulgmont for Costs only-A^fihimeofJ,,,/,,. 
 """/.J-Uuder l!ule !»35 an order to attach 
 ^M.ts may bo founded on a judgment for costs 
 
 T>-oi,n,<,u, V. FUtn, 13 P. R. i,-j;{, .ij,. 
 tiiiguished. ' 
 
 Under the .same Rule an assignee of a iiid,- 
 »ne,it, though not a party to the action, uku- 
 . ipply to eiitorcc the judgment by attachment. 
 McLean V. Jinict, 14 P. R. 190. 
 
 III. Pii.VOTICE. 
 
 Appeal from County Court. l—,«?er //,,(,/,.,. 
 ^'ell, lo P- R. 2U,po.t, County Coi-RT. ^ 
 
 Pinal Order for Payment by Garnlshee- 
 
 Jfotzct to Jad.jmmt y>.i/or.J-\Vhere a judgment 
 
 Security for Costs.]-The judgmentereditor 
 
 b ri^'d'5M'''''^'''''"'"'''^''^"--tiil:!;^: 
 
 h> the local .ludgo who gr.mtcd it ; the imlff- 
 ueiit creditor tlien appealed to a .lud^e in ('la m- 
 bers unsueeesstally, and had eiven 7,otice la 
 
 urtherappealtoaDivisionarCourt. le, lis 
 proceedings were stayed by an order of t ,0 
 blaster ,1. Cliainbers ,e,,ui,iiig hi, , to g ve 
 security tor eo.st.s, „„ the ground that he wis 
 ii^olvent and was proceeding for the benefit '? 
 
 sustained :llH.iu.lgmcnt creditor was not pro- 
 eeeding either by action or petiti.m ; ami theie 
 wa^, 10 aiuhority for orderii/g. security. 
 
 Stay of Ercecutlon-.SV.,ovVy (!{,-„> on An- 
 pra/~yo n,,il,n..i„t, AtlarhJnf /'ro.«.,/,wf] 
 -VtuujH. y. \„r/hcutt, 13 P. p. 171, ,f^,y 
 
 E.VECfTIO.V, V. ' ' ' 
 
 .9«', also, EXKllTION, II. 
 
 ATTORNEY. 
 
 *'-' SoLICITOK. 
 
ii 
 
 63 
 
 ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 
 
 BAILMENT. 
 
 Damages Against Rel&tors-PleaUim/.l- 
 In an actum l,r<„ij,0,t in tl.e name „f tlie Attoiuiv 
 Oenunil u|k.ii tlie reliitioii of certain iiersons to 
 restrain the ,lcfcn.lant. from collccti.f^to L .r 
 keeping their toll-gates closed upon tlidr roa.ls 
 tU ileleiulan.s allege.l, by ,vny of .le.ei.co oer 
 tain wrongful acts of the relators, and hv wav 
 of coiintere kin. asked .ia.uages a^-ainst them :- 
 Held, hy W inchestcr. Official liefeiee, that the 
 relators were not in any sense plaiiititTs ; and 
 the allegations against them must be struck out 
 An appeal to (ialt, C. J., was dismissed.' 
 At/o)„,ij-<.nicr,il v. \ aiujltun liomt Co U P 
 R. ;)lb. 6V, tliis case, 21 O. R. f.OT. Ii) A i\ 
 2S4, as to the right of the Attorney-General to 
 maintain such an action. 
 
 r,i'*^^f"'^"°."r^°''' "-'' ^'"''' P>-ocedure, Art 
 -Article 997 of the Civil Procedure VoA^v^;J, 
 on Its true construction, not to every ille.'al act 
 done by an association therein mentioned, but 
 only to sueii acts as are professedly or maiiifestlv I 
 ck.ne in the assertion of some special power fm? 
 chise, or privilege not conferred upon it hy law. 
 niiere an information under that Article 
 alleged that the respoiulent . (rmpany ha.l closed 
 H pubhe lane under the pretext that they had 
 acquired pnvate interests therein which entitled 
 hem so to do held that thi. did not amount t 
 a. allegation that they closed it in the exercise 
 
 me"min'f "f'il' f'""'^.'t'' "'' I"'i"l'^a« within the 
 meaning of the Article : — 
 
 Held also, that the Court has jurisdiction 
 under Article 998 to ja-ohibit the issue of a wt°" 
 of infonnation under Article 997 ; but that after 
 issue tlie Attorney-CJeneral is doi„iinu-< iilu, and 
 can discontinue proceedings or control their 
 conduct and settlement imlependently of anv 
 private relator. Ca.s;fraiH v. Allaiuic and 
 North- W,si Ii. ir. Co.; 1805] A. C.™ 
 
 64 
 
 4!A"of-''r''M "'"'^■'- «"''«ection 2 of .sectioi. 
 49..' of the .Municipal Act, I!. S. O. eh 1S4 
 ^..acte.l that it shoul.l not be law^ 1 for anv 
 person or persons to act as auctioneers or to 
 sell or put uj. for sale any goods, etc " 1, v 
 public auction," unless duly ifeensed :- ' ^ 
 
 «eid, that the agent of an assignee of an 
 
 toeStrT '"^f '*'""•«, ^^'"'""^ --^ license the 
 stoek-in-tradc of an insolvent who had carried 
 
 o" i''breb"V r "i""?^' ""« '-^''t'y comi'ci: 
 
 Ota bleach of the hy-law, although it was the 
 y occasion he had so acted in'the num - 
 palitj. heijina v liairson, 22 O. R. 4G7. 
 
 Lease of Premises as Dwelling and 
 Gents- Purnlshlng Store " - Jiu/ht fo C v 
 
 Au,t,o,, ■Sa/e.s. ] By a lease under seal the e 
 endaiit rente.l from the l-laintiireertain premise* 
 
 i tt uT'- '■'"-' '"'''''■ -"tained'a CO -e" 
 at that the lessee was not to use the ..remises 
 
 nV"'S''";,"' -T "■"'"'■ '^ private llweZg 
 ami gents furnishing sto.-e" ;— ** 
 
 Held, that the carrying on bv the Ipmcpp nf 
 
 "'bre^drof^r' ''" ^'"''^' °" t'- l'-»iS" a"; 
 in J n^'" ^'"vc'iant restiainatle by in unc- 
 tion. Coclburn v. Qulnn, 20 O. R. 519. ^ 
 
 Injunction -Breach of Charter. ]— The defen- 
 
 th« l^^'^rD "'."'■J""''''*'''' '^y l'^"'^'-« Pat*-'"t under 
 the .Street Railway Act, R. 8. O. eh. 171, which 
 authonze.l then, to construct and opcrkte on 
 all days except Sundays) a street railway :- 
 Hekl, -Maclcnnan, .1. A., dissenting, that an 
 
 the defendants trom operating the road on Sun- 
 <lay the restriction against their doing so being 
 
 hlv t .,'"' '";',''"'' ""'^' •■^'"1 "° «"bsrantial in^ 
 jury to the pub he or any interference with pro- 
 prietary rights being shewn. Judgment of '^he , 
 Common 1 leas Division, 19 0. H. (fe-l, affirmed ' 
 Attm-neji-aeneraly. Nia./ara Fall.,, «>,/,„ p,,,/. 
 a7ui Cbjtou Ii. W. Co., 18 A. R. 453. ^ 
 
 -/■or^W/!'" 1^ Company-/)o«u» ion Charter I 
 
 tnartti ot a company incorporated b" Act of 
 the Dominion I'arliament may be taken ty the 
 ifa«7'^v;T' °[.t:anada. DomUnonl'^ 
 
 ««,«.]--Secti.m49o, subsection 2 of th Muni 
 cipalAct, R. S. O. ch. 184, wiiie). '. ]\yZ 
 "y city, etc., to pass by-laws for the ""iC ! 
 
 c' 'iS?v'fo';.';r"'^'""''"'"f °f -"'^tioneer",'- 
 etc IS only for the purpose of raising a revenue 
 
 fol'sThr* '","•'"• ;'"^ "«^* "' P-iiifbuirs: 
 
 longas the applicant is willing to nay the sum 
 
 r^/r; 'v' '*'^^'"-7- ^Vhere,^herefil,e acVy 
 .efu t.l to license the plaintiff as an auc ionee^ 
 on the g.ound that he was a person of a not', 
 nously bad cliaracter and ill-repute, a m.C 1 
 HIS was grantcl, compelling the i sue oT he 
 
 -V« now -7 n^'''f -A" '■'^'P"'''' "2 A. R. 205. 
 oee now oi \ let. ch. oO, sec. 8 (0.). 
 
 AVERAGE. 
 
 See I.\si-K.\.\cE, VI. 
 
 AWARD. 
 
 See Arbitration and Award, III. 
 
 BAIL. 
 
 See Crimin.vl Law, III. 
 
 BAILIFF. 
 
 See Distress. 
 
 AUCTION AND AUCTIONEER. 
 
 Assignee of Insolvent.— .S-eWHr/AVr/Z^n/-/-,, l„„„i I.T-' ,. "'"^ "' ^ '"wn 
 
 '^Ivent l.yAuction.i-A by-law of^i^::^?,^: | ff^S's^l'crt'l^ "l^^ 
 
 BAILMENT. 
 
 Crown ]--Liability of Crown as bailee for- 
 lods stolen frni.. ,.„i,f„,.,„ 1 "<*iiee lor 
 
 I 
 
 II 
 
 65 
 
 ouse. 
 2f94. 
 
 Corse 
 
j 
 
 6<r 
 
 eotion 2 of section 
 i:. S. O. cb. 184, 
 lit) lawful for any 
 auctioneers, or to 
 goods, etc., "by 
 
 licensed : — 
 iin assignee of un 
 
 liout a license tlie 
 who had carried 
 
 s rightly convicted 
 
 Ithough it was the 
 
 ed in the munici- 
 
 2 0. R. 4(>7. 
 
 Dwelling and 
 
 — JH'/hf to haw 
 Huler seal the de- 
 tfoertain premises 
 :oiitaiiied a coven- 
 I use the jiremises 
 I private dwelling 
 
 > by the lessee of 
 he premises, was 
 linable hy injuno- 
 ». It. 519. 
 
 'iijht to Inmc Li- 
 >n 2 of t|i Muni- 
 H'hich t;...^ jwers 
 for the "'licens- 
 of auctioneers," 
 raising a revenue 
 )f proliibitiou so 
 ; to i)ay tlie sum 
 therefore, a cily 
 as an auctioneer 
 person of a noto- 
 pute, a manda- 
 the issue of the 
 / o/ Toronto, 25 
 I 22 A. R. 205. 
 X). 
 
 *KD, III. 
 
 [I. 
 
 IS bailee for 
 se. Corse v. 
 
 65 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 '«tly helieving it to J.V .'..'„ T'''"','*^'' "''»^t ^ 
 
 be dean, t., be " *^;,, '1'^''''^ '''^ i«ving it to 
 the produce there "o be .n*; >"^ ""-' '''"'-''•■ 
 
 .t a'ti.xe.l price p r bu he heT' '""' '^'"'^ ^"'' 
 haihnent and n.It a sle '/'''''''''-'*'''".'« '^ 
 from other innocuous seJd 1 ,""1^"' '"''^"'« 
 therewith, and o, t.rvV.f '^' '■'"''" ""■'^^''' 
 scatters on t le ^ .J ,' ;,', '^' '•"'"*'' '^'•■'••°""-' 
 lowing year on t u . „' ""T'"*^ "1' ""-' ^"l- 
 not witi.h' the rule iJr;' '"''• ^Tr ''"'°^'-'' "^"'l 
 
 ".■oH-/Co., L R •! Q. R bsT^ '• ^'"""" '^'•'»'- 
 
 Oreen, 1 C. P. D 9>> H Ih,', '^•."> ^n^l '^W(7A v. 
 Ti 1 ■ . '^-' "'stnicuislied 
 
 Sir; •!;?«=--"-&=! " 
 
 McColtum V. Z'aris S IT P w 1 -n 
 referred to. Steu-artv svL/W ' ;'?' ^P^cially 
 oienmt v. bcnlt/iorj,, 25 O. R. 544. 
 
 ^ -:-•- ■^"■'niieu intact. 
 
 •SVe, also, Cakriers. 
 
 BALLOT. 
 
 See Municipal CoR..oRATIo^3, VIII. 
 
 redeliver to his bd ,, 1 ^ '• ' '.""'ertakes to 
 paran.ount he s not 'n, '« «"«*?'! ''y title 
 ooutract or he s ? ^ ' ^^''"' '** '■' special 
 
 loss, responl'l 't he bail":!*"- '•''""*-' f'"' *''« 
 by the Lter. h^^Z v'/y .7 g''bTs"^-' 
 followed. Judanientof fl,n r < i^'.* '^- ~-^' 
 0"tarioaffirn.e.b':^:::^S^;;-:^^;Ai;P^;°;' 
 
 Storage of Wheat-' M/ o»v,„.N «;,;.•• 
 
 received in store "-,<■ n,.., ' • f ..""""^ "■''^s i 
 theplaintiff , as ent I. ' '-'K "'"' ""^^ I 
 
 ".arLet price" ihen'f '" , ,"1::':^,; .^f 7"?'* 
 nionev. I'he wlie-it f,. f i ."'' ';;ilJe<l for his: 
 was .nixed wi I wliit f ?"""'"'' l<"°^^I'-''lge j 
 ground into flou . The ,. 1 w?tb" l!^^'""'" ""'^ 
 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 
 I. AsM.XMK..SKOR„,EBKNKmo.CRH,„. 
 
 1. Comtrnction and Effect of, m. 
 
 2. Coats, GS. 
 
 Partnership and Separate Estate, 68. 
 Preferences, 68. 
 Proof of Claims, 7.?. 
 
 6. ifeyi^s a«fi! Liabilities. 
 
 (a) OfA.^si^nce, 7.3, 
 
 (b) Of Creditors, 77. 
 
 (c) 0/" /uspectors, 79. 
 
 7. ^e^(;//; 79, 
 Valuintj Security, 80. 
 
 Miscellaneous Cases, 81. 
 CoMPOsmo.V AciREEME.NT. 82. 
 
 Insolvent Acts, 84. 
 
 I. ^KSIGNMKNTS K„H .„, Beneht OK Ch.CI 
 TOK.S. 
 
 1. Cow../r»c?/(>H and Effect of 
 
 8. 
 9. 
 
 Held, that the receinfc m,! ti,„ f . ■ 
 nection therewith c^.ns itn' • "'^' '" ^""• 
 
 wheat and not a sale '''"'"'""* "^ ^he 
 
 ! cr«l!lrX -ot";!-«7ent for *he benefit of 
 : ^«hanu 18 A. R. 426, ..ffiSg &: c'S'a ll: 
 
 25tTU',S7.*"'"^-^'^^ ^«'' '■ ''---'"' 
 
 estltVor^thT'Cfif /;^" ''^''f"^ ^" '"" 
 R. S. 0. ch "4 •' „ 'i* '"' '^••editors un.ltr 
 
 the sen;; ni'it' s^^H^^^l.rl^"--* "" 
 
 — -«v,.. i,7i ttiH.iiit nine ninnfhci « I al ' '-^"""'-^ iur 
 
67 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 ilfhtor is ciititUil in tlu' fund of a sooiuty pro- 
 pci'ly inc()r|>oiatf(l undei- tliat Act, A'e U'litl 
 and Prvll, L','! 0. R. 7S. 
 
 Bills of Sale Acts— .Voca Scotiit. |^As to 
 Jissi^'nniiMit liL'ini,' within. .SVe Archihald v, 
 Jliihleij, J 8 S. (J. U. IK), jioxt 10."). 
 
 Covenant of Indemnity.] -The hcnulit of a 
 <;ovciiiuit hy .1 third iicrson to inileninil'v tlio 
 assl^nol■ .-I'/ainst .-i iiiortgiige niadi' l.y him" does 
 not pass to his ,issls,'nf(! muU r an us>ii;nMH'nt for 
 tlio ,uonural henclit of civditois, at all events 
 not where there liar, heen no hreaeh of the cov- 
 enant hefor.; the making of tlio assiL'iiinent. 
 
 I'er Ma.lennan, .1. A. -I'.ven if tlie covenant 
 lia,ssed, the assignee wouI<l liohl it as hare tru.s- i 
 tee tor the assinnor, or for tlie mortgagees if; 
 suhs.Mpiently assigneil to them hv tlie assignor. ' 
 
 .Indgment of the (Jueeti's Jieneh Division, L'j 
 <). Iv. ."lO, reversed on this point. Hall \ Ten- 
 ■mil/, L'l A, R, im. 
 
 68 
 
 Cooper V, J);,„ii, 10 A. R, CO, distinguished. 
 
 Judgment of Rolicit.son, J., varied. Jiall v. 
 linimiiil, 2.-)(). R ,-,(). |{everscd in ap|)eal on 
 another grouuil, 121 A. R. (i()2. 
 
 Creditors' Relief Act. 1—.SV« Uonch v Mc- 
 l.whhiii, lit A. l;. m;, ami /in ;/ /lain,/ v. j/,„T 
 
 •-'OA. n. ()Si), //js7, KXKCITION, I. 
 
 Division Court (;<n'iii.'</ii)hii/. \--An assign- 
 inent tor the lienelit of creditors hv a primary 
 <lehtor after a garnishing snminniis ha.s been 
 duly served upon him and the Lrai nishee. and 
 judgment hiis been obtained tliereuM a"ainst the 
 <lebtor, <l()e» not intercei)t or take prrJedence of 
 the attaehm.uit of the delit, and tlie primary 
 creditor may obtain judgment .i-ainst, and 
 t-nforce payment thereof by, the "garnishee. 
 )) ood V. Jontliii, 18 A. R. 5!) 
 
 2. Coi/.i. 
 
 j Assignees Liability.] -An assignee for the 
 lioneht of creditors may be ordefed to pay the 
 costs of the action personally as any other un- 
 successful litigant nuiy he. 
 
 ; Judgment of the "Common l'lea.s Division 
 aihnned. Mardoiia/d v. Ilalfuiir, '20 A. R. 404. 
 
 I Disputed Claim. ] -An assignee for the bene- 
 fit ot creditors, (,n instructions of the insiiectors, 
 contested tlie lilaintiirs claim, who then brought 
 an action, winch was disniis.sed with costs, but 
 on appeal to the Divisional Court, this decision 
 was reversed, with costs to be paid by the 
 defemhvnt, the assii;nee. The creditors, after 
 taking counsers opiiroii, rescdved to appeal to 
 the ( ourt of Appeal, hut the appeal to that 
 Court was dismissed with costs. The assignee 
 charged against the estate the total sum he had to 
 pay 111 respectof the costs of these proceedings :— 
 
 Held, that he was entitled so to do. 
 
 Decision of iiobertson, .1., alliriiied Smith v. 
 Ikal, •_>.-) 0. li. ;j(;s. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant— /''ofy; //»;•,;,]__ Tlie 
 provisions of .section II of R. S. (.). ch. 143. do 
 not extend to a forfeiture of the term under a 
 stipulation in the lease that if the lessees siiould 
 make any assigmneiit for the henetitof creditors 
 the term shcml.l imniedi.itely become forfeited 
 and such forfeiture is therefore enforceable 
 without notice served upon the lessees. -{rahi 
 X. JU-.)Iatli, '.'(j U. U. -I-IA. Aliirnied in appeal, 
 -i A. R. 44. 1 1 > 
 
 Priority over Execution— /'(ov/m.sv Money 
 
 c/Liiml Sold Uwl, r Moiiija,!,'. \ - Where, after a 
 Kale of mortgaged premises in an aetinii for that 
 purpose, the mm'tgagor made an assignment for 
 the beiielit of his creditors under li. S. (). ch. 
 12), before certain prior execiiti.)ii creditors had 
 est.iblished their claims in the Master's Difice 
 to the balance of purchase money, after satis- 
 lying the amount of the mortgage :— 
 
 Held, that the assignee for creditors was 
 entitled to such balance freed from any liability 
 to satisfy the executions out of it. ' Ckirltr v 
 Stone, 20 O. R. 340. 
 
 Several Property of Partners— .l.s.sf),< of 
 <^n'ditor/i.]—An assignment under R. .S. ch" 
 ]'-4 for the general benefit of creditors, made 
 liy the members of a trading partnership, in 
 the words mentioned in sectien 4, vests in the 
 assignee all the properties of each of the part- 
 ners, several as well as joint. 
 
 Where sucli an ,a.o..ignmrnt !u..a been .acted 
 upon by the creditors, it is not open to tiie 
 olijection, even if ma.le by an execution credi- 
 tor, that no creditor executed it. 
 
 ; Removal of Assignee. ]- Where a Judge of 
 ■aC(mnty Court, acting under R. ,S, O. eh 124 
 .sec. (), orders the i-emoval of an assignee, he 
 'exercises a statutory jurisdiction as pcrxona 
 j diMijnala, and has no jiower to order payment 
 { ot costs. "^ 
 
 'I'he proceedings in such a case are not in any 
 : Court : and liule 1 1 TO (a) does n,.t apply to theni. 
 i l.i- Paciiict/,', n i>. K. 4(i;i, followed. 
 , I.\ roiinu, 14 P. R. 30;i. Si:e now TiU Vict. 
 ! ch. 13 (U.). 
 
 Solicitor and Client — Ta.ra/ioii.]~See Re 
 Iio!j,:r.-< niai Fnixirdl, 14 P. ]i. 3S, pod 79. 
 
 3. /'artiici:-i!up and Svparate Edate. 
 
 Former Joints Debts.]— Where an assign- 
 ment for the bcnelit of creditors is made 
 by an assignor carrying on business by him- 
 self creditors having claims against him for 
 goods sold to a linn in which lie was formerly 
 a partner are entitled to rank against his estate 
 rateably with crediiors having claims for goods 
 sold to the assignor alone. 
 
 (Section o of R. ,S. (). di. 124, does not apply 
 to such a case, but only to the case of an 
 assignor who has both separate estate and joint 
 estate. Macdonald v. lia/fmu; 20 A. R. 404. 
 
 See. Ball v. Tenwmt, 2.5 0. R. 50; 21 A. 
 R. (.02 ante 07 ; and Ontario Bank v. Chaplin. 
 20 .S. C. i;. 152, po.'it 153. 
 
 4. Preferences, 
 
 Antecedent Agreement. |— A cliattel mort- 
 gage given in pursuance of a previous agreement 
 
 69 
 
1 
 
 I 
 
 68 
 
 .'iO, distinguished. 
 I., varied, /iail v. 
 'isod ill iiiipoal on 
 
 69 
 
 ,n assignee for the 
 ordiiVd to jj.iy the 
 y as any otlier un- 
 
 11 I'loas Division 
 t'»i,; 20 A. R. 404. 
 
 igiioo f(ir tho lieiie- 
 i of tho iiisjiectora, 
 , who then lirought 
 d with costs, but, 
 )urt, tliis decision 
 > 1)0 paid hy the 
 10 creditors, after 
 Ived to apjieal to 
 10 appeal to thut 
 ^ts. I'lie assignee 
 (ital sum he had to 
 ;se proceedings : — 
 so to do. 
 tiiniied. S7nith v. 
 
 ^Vhere a Judge of 
 R. .S. O. eh. 124, 
 
 an assignee, he 
 cliou as ptrsona 
 to order payment 
 
 ise are not in any 
 lotajjply tothem. 
 folliiwod. 
 Si.e now uU Vict. 
 
 i.ialiou.] — See Re 
 3S, po,ft 79. 
 
 rafe Entate. 
 
 /here an assign- 
 iditoi's is made 
 usiness liy him- 
 ag.iiiist him for 
 ho was formerly 
 igaiiist liis estate 
 claims for goods 
 
 , does not apply 
 the case of an 
 estate and joint 
 20 A. R. 404. 
 
 R. SO; 21 A. 
 
 iunk V. Chaplin, 
 
 ■A chattel mort- 
 vious agreement 
 
 therefor to cover an antecedent debt and a,l 
 yanco made at tho time of the atfroeuu.nt h , 
 the mortgagor ami mortgagee ^Loevng , 
 former to ho solvent when the mortgage was 
 actually made, was impeached within tht six v 
 
 fe !:h'-j;wu^''^T" -;«•■'-- '-''^^^^ 
 
 J , , * ■*' ■■""i^'iding R. S. () oh l->4 •_ 
 Held, that the mortgage was valici ' ' ' 
 Lnw.-ioii V. Mrtliodi. 2' () \i ill \iv > 
 in ai,peal, 20 A. K. 464. ^ Ailirmed 
 
 Book Debts -W,T„n/.i_,)„e n. owed 
 t ':"; in'f;:,l""' " 'r""^y.^-l"'^l' l.o was umU^e 
 
 al 1 shook iT " "'''«"^'' ^" •''-'f^'xl.'Mts 
 an II .s Ijook debts and accounts, the assi.'nmont 
 providing that the hook debts sh.iuld 1 L"pl ce 
 >n the hands of a firm of tiiiancial a.'oiits f co 
 octmu, who should account to tl f lofe ants 
 for the proceeds, le.s the commission, and w li t 
 ever amount remai.iod in .lofeiulants' ha L 
 after their debts wore pai.l shouM be paid ver 
 to N. I'laint.Hs, judgment ere,iitors of N 
 hrought an action to sot aside this assignment 
 as having ho ellbct of hindering, delay n"i, 
 defoatiiig them m the recover/of tluir t'l 
 and giving .lefem ants a preference ove „ lor 
 
 Divisional Court, 14 O. R. 288, (Jwvn, o J 
 dissenting, that N. being unable to meet' ho 
 demands o, us cre,litors%r payment must o 
 
 Act , tl at book debts are a species of pronertv 
 inchrlo, ,11 the provisions ot' 48 Vict.'^oir'/.f 
 sec. 2 0., and that the assignment by N i.t'io 
 
 Confession of Judgment.] -A witlidrawal : 
 
 of judgment or. .o,;:|://t.^,;: •Vi^;; n;;- 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 Knowledge by Grantee of Insolvency - 
 
 AclmU IntuH to nefnMd.]~Th^ fact ThTt H, . 
 i'rautors in a deo.l were to the know edge o 
 grantee insolvent at the time of makii,r/ U ' 
 deed, ,s m itself iiisulliciont to cause tie deed o 
 R S 0"lV",-U fr;r'"'-'^"* preference undr 
 
 actual intent to de^^m^;!.^ t;: i;^:;^'T'th:! 
 grantor ,s necessary to have the deed dec are! 
 void under the statute of U Elizabeth el - 
 Judgn,ent of the Common I'leas Divi ion" 
 ahnmng the ju.lgment of Armour, aj.."": 
 veiled, Ihcker^on v. Parriwjton, 18 A. r! 6.S5. j 
 
 eh^m^ wmT°*'*7°^'^-?°'="°" ~ °f R' S- 0. I 
 etc bv' ',"•■''''' '°"' a transfer of goods, ' 
 
 etc., by an insolvent with intent to, or iKvinJ ' 
 
 ^" cSo^' '''"''^""«' ''^''^^"'^ - '^^ 
 a nr?.f °' 8"'"'« ""'^ <"• '""re creditors 
 
 a preference over the others, does not n v 
 
 * an :'T] T'l^^^^ given 'in conside Zn 
 of an actual bond tide advance by the u ort 
 
 70 
 
 S^o moHi!!'?'" ■^"r''^''*?'^ "f the insolvency of 
 defe ''I "■ ' '"; "' ;"'y ""<'"ti'>" "11 his part to 
 
 f(;;;'^^/-A.advallce\.;:d :.;;'::^ -:«;;«';-,^ 
 
 rt ■'^''"'^^'-' ^■"''' ''"^ "«'^"'-f' creditors the 
 "III' ii'iin. C<ii,ii,,rll V l.',^,l, \r /■• '^- o-*o, 
 
 Pledge — IIVm-/,o„,,. /,',,•,,>/— 4,./. jn^r 
 /"•W, Ihl'j C.V.}~\V V ].-' --i""- JOSS, 
 
 , business, liotl, linns i f 1. of , l ' '" '"' 
 
 with tho Hank .V ' m ' r e' 'H o V'T'"!'*' 
 i counted for W. K /■ ,,A V. , ''^'"V''' 'l'"" 
 ' departure for Kn. 'l u,, ,,» H""r '""■" *^'« 
 
 I of V),087 ,10 ,li le ' , 1 f '■' "■ ""''' 
 
 ahsonce a warehouse receipt f-H' 2 )■■ a !^^? 
 ol, and the discount was eiedite.lt Ki| V/ 
 K.nlayson .V Co. „n and about ,1/ "' 
 
 oitdlt.:; ;/h '■' ■^"'■^'•"l">"t'y, on ,lu. !,th .UiJ, .^t' 
 
 K I.' „•, • " ,' V J^'" '^ '"., hilled, and W 
 
 f'^l7 00o"H''wbr ''"''''••- ^'''l--te^^ 
 
 agent for W. K. | !ft ;' ,;' '^ ' "'';'>>^o", as 
 lateialsecniity l^;nst \V K l"" ''''!''; "'V"'- 
 
 :,Kniott,irin^.r^J:;-;;:i,;,,;;:i <f':tofu. 
 
 Kllw.ff t. ^ ■-'''"'••'•>. wore signoil by John 
 Mnott it Co., and on tin. Icii? 1 ^ """" 
 
 |veplae..byt;onotoni^;::,!:;';,;,I^:^;'l^,;-^ 
 
 ci^';;;,n;:i!.;;:^'''^;:^t:^';;;';:-l«,^'f«'i^f^ 
 
 , pledge of, ,oK:r^,:':^S'r'tKs 
 
 i^rf£if--tSirr;o£r 
 kimwk[:;::of'\^;''v;si";''^. ^"i^^ ^'- '-x r/d 
 or abourth mh o ^;„','r':;:rr'';•''''"r- 
 tl.ey had received ^,^1 le t' >;S2^'^ 
 
 M\\ 
 
 'H 
 
71' 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 fc 
 
 receiving VV. E. K.'s ciiatDinuis' notes ami the 
 200 banelH uS oil, luit the Couit of Appeal, 
 reversing in pint tlie juilgnient of the Snpeiior 
 Court, hehl tliat tlie pleil,!,'in;.' of tlie "JOO Ijarrcls 
 of oil hy Klliott, Finlayson & Co. on the lOth 
 August wii« not a fiamlulent pieferenee. On an 
 appeal and erossa|)])eal to the Supreme Court :— 
 Held, 1st, that the finding of the Courts below 
 of the faet that the bank's knowledge of \V. K. 
 Elliott's iiisolveney dated from the l.Sth Jidy, 
 was sustained by evidenee in the ease, and t.here 
 had therefore been a fraudulent preference given 
 to the blink by the insolvent in tiansferring over 
 to it all his eutsoniers' paper not yet due. Art. 
 1036 C.C. Gwynne, J., dissenting. '_'nd, that 
 the additional security given to the bank on the 
 loth of August of r)4 barrels of oil for the substi- 
 tuted notes (if Elliott, Finlayson & Co. was 
 iilso a fr.uidulent preference. Art. lO.S") C.C. 
 Owynne, J., dissenting. 3rd, reversing the judg- 
 ment of the Court of Queen's Bench and restor- 
 ing tlu^ judgment of the Superior Court, that 
 the legal ( Hect of the transaction of the 10th 
 August «as to release the pledged H(j barrels 
 of oil, and that they became immediately the 
 property of the insolvent's creditors, and coulil 
 not i)e held by the bank as collateral security for 
 Elliott, Finlayson & Co.'s substituted notes 
 Arts. 1 Kif) and lo.'i,-) C.C. Owynne and Patter- 
 son, J,l., dissenting. S/miuiun v. Caiiadiaii < 
 Bank of C(iiiimiir(, 23 S. C. 1!. 530. 
 
 Pre8Sure~('ol/H'<ioii.]~ lu an action to have a 
 chattel mortgage made by a debtor to oertain 
 creditors declared fraudulent and void as against 
 other creditors, it was found at the trial that at 
 and before the time of the execution of the 
 mortgage, the <lebtor was in in.solvent circum- 
 stances and unable to pay his debts in full, as 
 he well knew : that the mortgagees were well 
 aware of the fact and took the mortgage with 
 full knowledge of it ; that their object in taking 
 the mortgage was to obtain security for their 
 debt ; that the necessary etlcct was to defeat, 
 delay, and prejudice the creditors of tlie moit- 
 gagor. r.nd to give the mortgagees a i)reference 
 over the other creditors ; and that the mortga- 
 gees at and before the execution of the mortgage 
 knew that it woidd have such effect. It also 
 appeared that the iiroperty covered by the chat- 
 tel mortgage was all that the debtor had, and 
 that he knew that he had many creditors who 
 could not be |)aid : — 
 
 Held, per Armour, C..T., at the trial, follow- 
 ing Mol.^ov.t Bank v. J/a/ler, 18 S. C. R. 88, 
 that the mortgage was not a.ssailable under K.' 
 S. <). ch. 124, sec. 2, notwithstanding the 
 findings of fact, because the mortgagees had 
 requested the debtor to give them the security. 
 The judgment was reversed in the Divisional 
 Court. 
 
 Per Falcor bridge, J.— It follows from the 
 findings of fact tliat the jjressnre was merely a 
 sham pressure— a j)iece of collu.sion. 
 
 Per Street, J.— There was hoiiil fide pressure, 
 but the doctrine of pressure does not ajiplv 
 where the debtor has transferred the whole o"f 
 his pioperty. Daviex v. Gillard, 21 O. R t31. 
 Reversed in appeal, 19 A. R. 432. 
 
 72> 
 
 or i)rejiidice his creditors, or to give to any one 
 or more of them a preference over his other 
 creditors or over any one or nu)re of them, or 
 which has such effect " :— 
 
 Held. atKrming the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, 10 A. R. 323, Fournier and Patterson, 
 JJ., dissenting, that the words "or which has 
 ^ such effect " in this section apply only to the 
 case of "giving any one o:- more of (his credi- 
 tors) a preference over his other creditors or 
 over any one or more of them ";-^ 
 ; Held, further, that the preference provided 
 against in the statute is a voluntary preference 
 and a conveyance obtained by pressure from 
 the grantee would not be within its terms. 
 
 W. having become insolvent, and wisiiing to 
 secure to an estate of which he was an executor 
 ! moneys which he had used for his own puiiiosca, 
 ; gave his co-executors a mortgage on his property 
 , for the purpose, and proceedings were taken by 
 a creditor to set asi<le this mortgage un<ler the 
 , above section ; — 
 
 Held, Fournier and Patterson, JJ., dissent- 
 : ing, that the mortgage was not void under the 
 statute : — 
 
 Held, per Strong, Tasehereau, and Gwynne, 
 J J., that ihere was no preference under the 
 statute, as the persons for whose bcnelit the 
 security was given were not creditors of the 
 grantor, Init they stood in the relation of trustee 
 and •■(■•itiii que Irii.tt ; — 
 
 Held, also, per Strong and Tasehereau, JJ., 
 that the grantor, being criminally responsible 
 for misaiipropriating the money of the estate of 
 which he was executor, the fear of penal conse- 
 ijuences was sufficient pressure on him to tak<- 
 from the mortgage the character of a voli, .lary 
 preference. Molsoii-f Bunk v. Hatter, IS S. C. 
 R. 88. 
 
 73 
 
 Pressure — C//«( *'/«(/ LiaiUily.] — R. j^. o. 
 ch. 124, sec. 2, makes voi<l any conveyance 
 of property by a person in insolvent cir- 
 cumstances made " with intent to defeat, delay 
 
 Pressure-/»;,«^]-15y the Manitoba Act, 
 49 \ let. ch. 45, sec. 2, " Every gift, conveyance, 
 etc., ot goods, chattels or effects . . . made by 
 a person at a time when he is in insolvent cir 
 eumstaneea . . . with intent to defeat, delay or 
 prejudice his creditors, or to give to any one or 
 more of them a preferenct over his other cred- 
 itors or over any one or more of them, or which 
 has such effect, shall as against them be utterly 
 void " : — ' 
 
 Held, Patterson, J., dissenting, that the word 
 
 ' preference " in this Act imports a voluntary 
 
 preference, and doss not apply to a case where 
 
 the transfer has been induced by the pressure of 
 
 the creditor : — 
 
 Held, further, that a mere demand by the 
 creditor, without even a threat of legal proceed 
 ings, IS sufficient pressure to rebut the presump- 
 tion of a preference. The words " or which has 
 such effect" in the Act apply only to a case 
 where that has been done indirectly which, if 
 It had been done directly, would have been a 
 preference within the statute. The preference 
 mentioned in the Act being a voluntary prefer- 
 ence, the instruments to bo avoided as having 
 the effect of a preference are only those which 
 a re the spontaneous acts of the debtor. Motm}, ■< 
 Bank V. Halter, 18 S. C. R. 88, approved and 
 followed. 
 
 Held, per P.itterson, J., that .any transfer l.v 
 -.11 insolvent debtor which has the effect of giv- 
 ing one creditor a priority over the others in 
 payment of his debt, or which is given with the 
 intent that it shall so operate, is void under the- 
 
• to give to any (niq 
 icu ovor liis otlier 
 
 iiKire of tlitni, or 
 
 ;iit of the Court of 
 i(T and Piittcison, 
 [•(Is "or whioh liaa 
 apply only to the 
 noro of (his cruiti- 
 othor ori'ilitorn or 
 
 leferfnoe provided 
 luntary prefertnee 
 by piTssure from 
 lin its terms, 
 it, and wishing to 
 le was an executor 
 
 • his own finrposcs, 
 go on his propel ty 
 ngs were taken l)y 
 ortgage under t ho 
 
 ■son, JJ., dissent- 
 ut void under the 
 
 •au, and Gwyiine, 
 tri'iice under the 
 vho.se beiielit the 
 creditors of the 
 relation of trustee 
 
 Taschereau, JJ., 
 iiially responsible 
 y of the estate of 
 ir of penal conse- 
 e on him to take 
 er of a voh, aary 
 Ilaller, IS «. C. 
 
 ! Manitoba Act, 
 gift, conveyance, 
 ts . . . made by 
 in insolvent cir 
 ^ defeat, delay or 
 ivo to any one or 
 r his other ered- 
 f them, or which 
 ; them be utterly 
 
 ig, that tke word 
 orte a voluntary 
 ' to a case where 
 y the pressure of 
 
 demand by the 
 of legal piocee(b 
 lilt the prcsump- 
 s " or which has 
 
 only to a case 
 rectly which, if 
 uld have been a 
 
 The preference 
 oluntary prefer- 
 Didcd as having 
 nly those which 
 ebtor. Mo/.soii^ 
 , approved and 
 
 .any transfer by 
 he effect of giv- 
 jr the otheis in 
 I given with the 
 
 void under the- 
 
 73 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 J 
 
 4 
 
 statute, whether or not it is the voluntary act 
 of the debtor or given as the result of orcssure 
 J^ili/ihois V. McArfhiir, I!) S. C. 1!. 4t(J. 
 
 Pressure -Nu k'u,j)n/e,l;,t of Inxnlm-nry. 1- 
 A mortgage given by a debtor who kiioU 
 Uial he is unable to pay all his debts in full 
 IS not void a.s a preference to the inort.'a.'ee 
 over other creditors if given as a result of 
 pressure and for a hon,) lid.- debt and if the 
 mortgagee is not aw.ue of the debtor bein.' in 
 insolvent circumstances. Mohoiii Hank- v. Hiifur 
 l^nv MV***!'n"'' ■)"''''"'"■' "■'■ ■'^rrArfhm; 19 
 -i» ■> C. b. Ob,, alhrming 18 A. K. 159. 
 
 Presumption ] -^Where an instrument made 
 by a person in insolvent ciroumstanoes has the 
 e lect of giving one creditor a preference over 
 others and the instrument is attacked within 
 Bi.vty days after it is made, there is under the 
 amended enactment, 34 Vict. eh. L'O (O ) an 
 ineoutrovertil.le statutory preauuiption that the 
 instrument has been nia.le with intent to uive 
 an unjust Jireference and it is void, t'oli v 
 /'iir/eoiis, 1!) A. R. 111. 
 
 ft 
 
 an oral agreement, of whi.Oi he lias notice, hv 
 tlie assignor to give to an <mdor,ser a rhattoi 
 mortgage to secure him against liahihty. will 
 oe enforced, hi'i-ri/ v. JamrH, 21 A H. ;{;(«. 
 
 Book Debts.)- .\„ assignee for ere.litors 
 
 i;;';'''i;.S..n. Hi. 121,a„d,amendment.s.isnot 
 
 n the position ot a purchaser for value without 
 
 "otiee, and takes no higher rights ,,nder the 
 
 assigmueiit tli.iii his as.signor liad. 
 
 Where, therefore, certain liook debtors were 
 not.tied by the awignee tor creditors under the 
 Act, ofrhea-signinent to him, before iiotiHca- 
 tion by certain creditors to whom s„eh debts had 
 been previously assigned, it was In-M that he 
 (del not gam priority thereby. 
 
 Chattel Mortgage. 1-Aii assignee for the 
 'Uitia beuclitof credil(u-s is, by virtue of 55 
 \ let. ch. -JO, sec, l.'{0.), entitled to take ad van- 
 
 Presumption --0-,».s ,./ P,oo/-.1-Held, per 
 Hagarty, C.J.O. (luiuit,,.,,!,-.), nxvl Hurton, J.A - 
 1 lie pre.sumption spoken of in sub-sections •> (a) 
 and 2 U,) of section 2 of k. S, (). eh P>4 "An 
 Act resiieiiting Assignments and Preferences by 
 Insolvent Persons,- as amended by ,-,4 Vict, ch 
 -.»((».) IS a rebuttable one. the onus of proof 
 being s iift.;d m cases within the sub-sections. 
 
 ler Maolennan, J.A.-The presumption is 
 limited to cases ot pressure, and as to that is 
 irrebuttable. 
 
 IVr Osier, •I- A -The presumption is general 
 
 and ,s irrebuttabl,, ; but the security in .piestion 
 
 IS supportable under tin. previous promise 
 
 Co/.. V. lw-teo>i., 1!)A. l;. Ill, distinguished. 
 
 J idgin(3nt of the fominon Pleas Division, 22 
 
 I '■ 5. ' "'*""'e'l. L'i>r.Hon V. Mr<!,o,-h, 20 
 A. 1;. 464. 
 
 tage of irregularities or defects in a chattel mort- 
 gage made by the assignor to the same extent as 
 an execution creditor where such mortgage i.s bv 
 reason ot such defect " void against emtitors " 
 A«'c/// V. Jamis, 21 A. H. 3.SS. 
 
 Chattel Mortgage— /'o.s,sM.s;o/i.J —N exe 
 cuted ,a chattel mortgage of hi.s clleots, and 
 s Ik, rtly afterwards made an assignment to one 
 ot t I., mortgagees, in trust for the benefit of his 
 erclitors. 1 he assignee took possession under 
 the assignment : — 
 
 Ifeld, afhrming the decision of the Supreme 
 (..urt of Nova .Scotia, that there was ik. deli- 
 very to the mortgagees under i i.e m.utgage. 
 whR^h transferred to them the possession o1 the 
 goods, n.td V. Gr,i,ilUo,i, 24 s! C i; «(» 
 
 Surety.J-To a\-oi(l a transfer as a fraudulent 
 preference under R. ,S. (). ch. 124, sec. 2, the 
 person to whom it is made must he a creditor in 
 respect of the transaction attacked; and a 
 miicty for an insolvent who has not paid the 
 
 -U (». R. 62.3. .S.e i,5 Vict. ch. 25 (0.), and 
 A./vi- V. Jame.^, 21 A. K. .3.38, poHt 7.3. 
 
 .?«e also Fraudulent CowEYANfH. ! 
 
 5. Proof of Claims. 
 
 Action to Prove 0\B.ira-JurUdicnon.]-An 
 aetion asking for a declaration of right to 
 
 n dr.'J,'"' "'f'''^^,"* «st^'te is not witliinthe 
 juus.liction of the County (Jourt 
 Judgment of the County Court of Huron 
 
 C. RiijItU ami Liahilifies. 
 {^) Of Amijnee. 
 
 Agreement to Give Security— A'oitte 1— As 
 
 -sgaiast an assignee for the beneHt of ere.litors, 
 
 Chattel Mortgage- Po*vc.«/o;t. ]-The credi- 
 tors a,-ainst whom, by sec. 4 of ',:, Vict. ch. 26 
 (U.) taking possession under a defective chattel 
 : mortgage, is declared to be of no avail, are cre- 
 [ (litors having executi(uis in the sheriH-s han(3s 
 at the time possession is taken, .,r simple con- 
 tract (jreditora who, at that time, have com- 
 menced proceedings on behalf of themselves 
 and other creditors to set aside the inortaaee 
 or an iissignee for the general benefit of crecfit- 
 ors who, however, stands in no lietter rxwition • 
 and possession taken I>efore the assi^mment 
 oures all formal defects. Judgment of Mac 
 
 ing. t/ni-hoi! V. MrMa.tt,',\ 22 A R 13« 
 Reversed by the Sujireine ( 'ourt, 2.") S. C. R. 96* 
 
 Chattel Mortgage-/.V/,^».a/.J_An assignee 
 , for the beneht, of creditors, under a gener^ 
 I assigMiment made and registered pursuant to 
 the Assignments and Preferences Act, R ,S 
 ^h. 124, iniiy renew a ch:>.ttel mortgage made in 
 avour of his assignor, without tlie exJcutioa 
 and r,;giatrati(m of a specific assigument of that 
 mortgage. A renewal statement, in itself in 
 proper form, alleging title through the assign- 
 ment foi the bc^netit of creditors, is sufficient! 
 
 'amn.'T% •"" *'?;""y ''""'•'"'■ •^''"""e 
 lailumed Fl,muwj v. Ryan, 21 A. R. .39 See 
 
 j now .-, \ let. ch. .37, sec. IS (0. ). 
 
 : „*^^■^"®?*'°.'■,*«a«e-/ff»c„•«/.]_,Secti.,;l2 of 
 i for the general benefit of creditors to .luestion 
 
75 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 7ff 
 
 the validity <if the renewiil of a iliattel miirt- 
 gagt'. Ta/hniiii v. SuKui, LT) (). R. Otil. 
 
 Costs. ]—.S\t Miictldiinlfl V. H,i'/oiir, 20 A. K. 
 401, fiiil< (is ; Smi//i V. /;»»/, -jr. (>. 1!. .MOs] 
 aiih (is ; and /,'c Jt'oi/ris uiiil Farivll, 14 p' 
 1{. as, III).-,! 7!). 
 
 Crown— r/i(w i» /I (V/OH.J- Willie a eliosc in 
 aetioii was assigned, iiidr a/id, tor tlie {;ciieiiil 
 lienelit of irrditois, all tlic paities interest ed 
 being l.efore the Coiut, and the (.'mwii making I 
 III) ohjrction, the t'ourt gave etl'ect to siieh i 
 asHignnient. | 
 
 Qumr, In the ahsence of ae(|uiesecnec in 
 sueh an asMigniiient, are the assignee's rights ' 
 thereunder cajiable (jf enforeenieiit against the I 
 Crown V y/ir lji„;,i V. MiCiinli/, •_' Kx. C. R. I 
 
 Discovery.]— In an aetion l>y creditors of a 
 hrni to estal.lish the liahility of the defendant; 
 as a partner therein, it appeared that the asaig- ' 
 nee of the lii ni t..r the benefit of creditors (who 
 had received all the papers of the firm) was in- 
 terested in the siu-eess of the action, !iad insti- 
 gated its being brought, and was providing 
 material in the way ol doninantH, etc. to the 
 plaintills for its eHicieiit prosecution : — 
 
 Held, that although the assignee might have 
 no direct lienelicial interest in the result, he 
 was to be regarded for the purposes of discovery 
 as a f/wt.s/-plaintiir, and the defendant was enti- 
 tled to have production of all doeunients in the 
 possession of the iissignee, and to examine him 
 for the i)urpose of such production. Frotliitni- 
 ham\. hi lister, 14 J". R. 1 1'2. 
 
 Lien. J— The plaintitf was emphiyod to manu- 
 facture bricUs for another ill a brickyard beloin'- 
 iiig to the latter, of which, however, the plain- 
 titl held possession f(M- the purpose of his con- 
 tract, and remained and was in ])iis.session of 
 the bricks at the time of their seizure ly the 
 sheritl iiiider an execution against tlh' owner oi 
 the brickyiird, who, immedi'.iteiy .ifter such 
 seizure, made an assignment for the benefit of 
 creditors :— | 
 
 Held, that the plaintitt' was entitled to a lien ■ 
 upon the bncks in priority to the execution and 
 assignment for the heneht of creilitors, and also i 
 in priority to the claim of a chattel mortgagee. ' 
 though his mortgage covered brick in course of ; 
 manufacture during its eontinunnce. JMert.i v I 
 Bank .;/' Ton.nto. :>.-) l». R. 194. Atiirmed in! 
 appeal, 21 A. R. (129. 
 
 Pledge— /i'»//(C (./■ Ciiratvr til Impwiii. Tram- 
 action. \—\.. borrowed a sum of money from a 
 savings bank wnich he agreed to repay with 
 interest, transferring in pledge, as collaterr.l 
 security, letters of credit on the government 
 of Quebec. L. having become insolvent, the 
 bank hied its claim for the amount of the loan, 
 with interest, with the curator of the estate' 
 and on ajipeal the appellants, as creditors of 
 L., contested on the ground that the said secu- 
 rities were not of the cla.ss mentioned in the 
 Act relating to savings banks (R. .S. C. ch. 122, 
 sec. 20), and the bank's act in making said loan 
 was ultra vhr^ und illegal :— 
 
 Held, that L., having received good and valid 
 consideration for his proniioe to repay the loan, 
 could not, nor could the appellants, his credi- 
 
 j tors, who had no other rights than the debtor 
 liimself had, impugn the contract of loan, or bo 
 
 j admitted to a.ssail the pledge of the securities. 
 
 I Assuming that the act of the bank in lending 
 
 I the money, on the ple.lge of such securities was 
 n/lra rirr.H, although thi.s might atlect the pledge 
 as regards third parties interested in the secni'i- 
 ties, it was not, of itself and i/i.io fai-tu, a radii al 
 nullity of imblic order of such a"eharacter as to 
 disentitle the bank under Articles iWil and !.:)() 
 (. . C, trom claiming back the money with inter- 
 est. Hunk- of Toronto v. PrrkiiiH, H ,S. c. |;. 
 i)0;{, distinguished. Jtollaiiil v. Ciumie il't'-o- 
 nomit ill- (Juelifi; 24 S. C. R. 405. 
 
 Pledge of Shares— /I'/r/A^ of Curator.]— .-^ir 
 ^ocntr Camii/ii'iinf Fraiirauf dp Montmil v 
 Dari/iii/, 20 S. ('. R. 440, /ml 138. 
 
 Purchasing Goods.] -A., doing business 
 under the name of J. A. & Sons, assicn( d all 
 his projierty and eflcets to H. for benclit of 
 creditors. H., by power of attorney, anthor- 
 i/ed A. to collect all numeys due his estate, etc., 
 and to carry on the business if expedient. A. 
 continued the business as before, and in the 
 course of it purchased goods from F., to whom, 
 I on some occasions, he gave notes signed "J. A. 
 i.'v: Sons, H. trustee per A." All the goods .so 
 I purchased from F. were eliarged in his books to 
 J. A. & Sons, and the dealings between thcin 
 after the assignment continued for five years. 
 Finally A. being unable to pay what was due 
 to !•. the latter brought an action against if. 
 on notes signed as above, and for the price of 
 goods so Sold to A. : — 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Supreme 
 Court of Xova Scijtia, Taschereau, .I.,disseiitir", 
 that the evidence at the trial of the action 
 clearly shewed that the credit for the goods 
 sold was given to A. and not to H. ; that A. did 
 not carry on the business after the assignment 
 at the instance or as the agent of H., norlor the 
 benetit of his estate; tliat A. was not author- 
 ized to sign H.'s name to notes as ho did : and 
 that H. was not liable either as the person to 
 wlioni credit was given, or as an undisclosed 
 principal :— 
 
 Held, further, that if H. was guilty of a 
 breach or trust in allowing A. full control over 
 the estate, that wouhljiot make him liable to F 
 in this actiim. Iltchkr v. For.iiitli, 22 S. C. R. 
 4' ' '. 
 
 Purchase of Trust Property.]— A purchase 
 by the assignee for the benetit of creditors of 
 the assets of the estate, made by him at the 
 request of the inspectors of the estate after 
 futile edorts to sell at auction and by private 
 tender, and after a circular letter had been sent 
 by the inspectors to each creditor stating that 
 the sale would be made unless objection were 
 taken, was set aside, there being evidence that 
 at the time of the purchase the assignee knew 
 of and was negotiating with, a possible pur- 
 chaser to whom he afterwards resold at a largo ' 
 profit, and had not disclosed this information to 
 the inspectors. Morrison v. ir((^/.v, 19 A R. ' 
 022. 
 
 Selling Estate of Insolvent by Auction.]- 
 
 A by-law of a county municipality passed 
 under sub-section 2 of section 495 of the 
 Municipal Act, R. S. O. eh. 184, enacted, that 
 
 77 
 
78^ 
 
 ts timii tlie (U'htor 
 tnicl (if Idiin, (ir be 
 (1 of tlio Hi'ciiiitii's. 
 lie liaiik ill Iciidiiig 
 Hiit'li st'curitirH was 
 litiitlect thf |ilf(lf,'o 
 usted ill tilt! scciiii- 
 i/iso/ado, H radidil 
 -li a cli.'inictL'r .-is to 
 rticlvs !)«!» .iiiil lillO 
 ! inoiH'y witli iiitiT- 
 'n■^■ill.^, MS. ('. i;. 
 '/ V. Cuinne il'h <i- 
 405. 
 
 of Curator. |— .Nre 
 If dp Movlnal V. 
 ■t 138. 
 
 ., doing liiisiiusB 
 SoiiH, assigned all 
 >f. for lionclit, of 
 attorney, imthor- 
 luo his estate, etc., 
 if oxpudicnt. A. 
 eforc, and in the 
 from P., to whom, 
 tes signed "J. A. 
 All the gooila so 
 ,'ed in his oooks to 
 igs between tlietn 
 led for five years, 
 pay what was duo 
 action against Jf. 
 d for the prioe of 
 
 n of the Sujireme 
 L^au, . I., dissenting, 
 ial of the action 
 lit for the goods 
 o H. ; that A. did 
 ■r the assignment 
 of H. , nor lor the 
 was not autlior- 
 ;s as ho did : and 
 as tlie jterson to 
 IS an undisclosed 
 
 was guilt)- of a 
 full control over 
 
 e him liable to F. 
 
 r^jilh, 22 S. C. K. 
 
 ty. 1 — A purchase 
 tit of creditorF of 
 e by him at the 
 
 the estate after 
 II and by private 
 tor had been sent 
 litor stating that 
 IS objection were 
 ng evidence that 
 le assignee knew 
 
 a possible pur- 
 
 rescld at a largo 
 lis information to 
 
 )y<ilt.<, 19 A. K. 
 
 t by Auction.]— 
 
 licipality passed 
 ion 495 of the 
 i4, enacted, that 
 
 n 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 
 It should not be lawful for any person „r per- 
 sons to iict as auctioneers, „r l„.sell or put up 
 for sale any goo.'.s etc., '-by p„l,li,,. auction" 
 unless duly licensed :-- 
 
 Held, that the agent of an a.ssignee of an 
 inso vent e.Mtaf. selling «itl,.,ut a license the 
 stdek-iu tnide >,t »n insnlveut wli„ ha.l carried 
 on business ,n the county, was riglitlv convicted 
 of a bie.'ich ol the |,v-law, aitliougli 'it was the 
 only ..ccasion he had so acted in the muMicipal- 
 ity. luijtiia V. /,'(urx,,n, 22 O. H. .|i;7. 
 
 78 
 
 .»ud;,„„.i,i „f the (..uecn's Heiicli Division 
 '<\ersc,l, Maclennau. .)..\., dis.scnting. Ciw/.- 
 
 'x// V. J//,//,i, 22 A. l;'. 217. 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction - 
 
 1 rai,-f,r of <l,m,l...\ ,\ii a,li„ii by 
 
 under K. S. O. eh. 124 against i.cr.so,,. ., ,„|inK 
 mt.ie IVovuue of (.)uebec to set aside a transfer 
 of Koo'is. "fleeted in this IVovinee, as a fraudu- 
 
 ent prctercnce, which goo.ls have afterwards 
 been reinove.l t„ (,iuebec, is foundefl on a " tort 
 comuMtle,! within the jurisdiction,- ,ui|,in the 
 
 l.iO'J. tltiih-ioii V. J)ii/,rr, Hi 1'. l;. .vji. 
 
 Election of Remedies /m-o„ v./, „f Ihw- 
 
 .'.miii 1 , .'■'■'■''y'''' ^■•"'""' "^'^^' ""^ '"■■"•'it "f the 
 •'On.si.leintiou for a transfer of g„o,ls and at the 
 haine tune attack the transfer as fraudulent 
 
 All a-ssi-nce for the benelit of creditors l.a.s 
 no liiyiier iiglit in this respect. 
 
 A creditor suing in the name of the a.ssignee 
 l'r<r,rnir,uh,\ J'">«'>i^'"t against third pci.sons, f„r 
 
 .-"'^ est teot theprocec.lsof Proini.ssory notes given 
 o the latter tor ,, art of tile purchase nioiiTy of 
 Ills stuck-in-tradi! : — ' 
 
 Held that it was tlien tno lat,.. for him t.> 
 m » il /.-'"''^ "^ fiaiidulent. H.,m<:r v. (y/,>. ,■ 
 V I. I- ''••''' '■'■''•'■'■'■'1 to. Wood v. l!,,,.or, 2" 
 
 Status of As.olgneo. |— .S'. 
 
 der-y •2.\ i). |;. .-,7;), ,.,.,, -^ . ro,/,--/ /y„»/,- ' '"''''■''''V"'' ^^"'"'"t tin 
 
 V. 0„rA,W 20 O. 1!, M2. 1,S A. I;, 4:{S, «,„/'"""''' ' '- ' 
 
 lao- Cam,,h,//y. i,„,ui, ..M A. K. 217, ;,av/77: 
 HW/ V. y^ ,,,„,, 22 A. ,;. r>7, „„., 7S ; ami I>M 
 
 Vlark.1011 V. Mi'Ma^i, r, 2,'> .S. ( '. j; jkj 
 
 Purchase of Assets. ]-.SV „,/,/,, per Armour. 
 I..)., tiial a i.rivate .sale by an assignee to any 
 1 . , .'^■""^^■'it of the <,ther.s, 
 
 "onld I, e open to objection. Tiwmnsui, y 
 Cl'irl-siiii, 21 O. R, .pil ' 
 
 (/') ()/■ Cn'dit,,, 
 
 I Purchase of Insolvent Estate— /./>,/,//,/,, /„ 
 
 Acro,nif.j~ An in.solvciit trader having made ,•,„ 
 j "««'f.'i.mcnt of all his estate for the benefit of his 
 ere. itors, under K. S. (). ch. 124, his stock-in- 
 tlade was luircha.se.l by his wife from the 
 assignee ; the defendants, who were credit.irs of 
 
 Action by Creditors to Set Aside Fraudu- [ ^^^^'^:::^::nan;i::;,Z,^t Sllf^^tL^I 'ut 
 
 A^.'^njum, nl lor JUi„„i 'f (,W,/,for.s. \^An action j arrangement made beh.relnnd n , , v n, 
 
 begun by cre.litor.s of an insolvent to set aside ity from the wife upo the L oods mi e, l' l"'" 
 
 cr n , t To'X 'm ":;; 'r'""' '' I ^T' 7!--''l«. •>"t also tor the fulf milo! n 
 
 cuted l,vf .;,. 1. f. '-■'•'■an ''t'prose-"* their elanus as creditors of the husband 
 
 been n V :;''''''■' ''^''■'' ="' ''■■^'^'.^''''"'■■'t Iw^ ^" ''=' '^'^tiou by another crelitcH- ;. .,„ 
 
 been ni.'ule: for the a,ssigiinient has not the fcllect account- "* nt.litoif,,, ,•„, 
 
 under fectu.n ,, sub-section (I), of transferrin- 
 the existing eau.se of action to the assi-nee 
 
 .Section 7, sub-secti.m (2), may be read so as 
 to apply to pending litigation instituted by the 
 assignee or into which he has been introduced • 
 and an onler was made umler that enactment 
 in an action begun by creditors before an 
 assignment, ni which the assignee was after the 
 assignment added a.s a co-plaintili; authorizin.' 
 the original plaintiffs and other creditors to 
 continue the action as constituted for their own 
 beneht, upon indemnity to the assignee. <,'a„e 
 V. Dowjlux, 14 P. K. 126 ' 
 
 ; Held, that the estate was entitled to the 
 j enetit of whatever advantage the defendant., 
 jfluned from the transaction, and that thcv 
 : should account to the assignee for the dillerence 
 I between the amount of their claims and the 
 : amount they would have received by way of 
 
 dividend from the estate : - ^ .> 
 
 HeM, al.so. that the assignee w-as a necessary 
 
 oo'lVi^"--!," ''''''""■ '^"./""■orlk V. A„d,rs,„:, 
 
 . Upon appeil to the Court of Appeal thi.H 
 judgment was reveised, 21 A. R. 242, but upon 
 turther appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada 
 the plamtills were liehl entitled to relief and the 
 dctciidants were (,rdere<l to account for the 
 profit. It any, derived by them from the trans- 
 24 S. C. R. (iOO. 
 
 Compromise by Assignee-/! ,-/»,„ hu ( ■>■„/!. 
 vOr.v.J-\\ liere a creditor obtains an order under 
 
 Si^£e^jfS';^:i.t^;;:i^Cho^f""" 
 
 ^nl'th^^etE-:^ C.SJmSst't Sr;:l,„^"'^^°-'^ Assets-y...„.,]-A creditor 
 justified by the scope of ?he order i T\\ "." f«'^'«"""-'"t f'"" the benefit of 
 
 A creditor suing in the name of the assignee '. « .-.-'^-' '""l^^ft*^"' tj'e «-'xec«tion by him and 
 under this sub-section cannot attack the toiia 
 JiaK.s of a compromise entereil into before his 
 
 s»i:=:;r™ft''^'»-fv'f»=..:"=n:': 
 
 tK^ 1 f T :• "o"" "^''" '■'=•' iHc ussiirnee ami 
 the defendant, when the defendant cannot be 
 restored to his original position. 
 _ Whether sub-section 2 is not confined to cases 
 in which an exclusive right of suing is given to 
 the assignee by sub-section 1 : qv^Pc 
 
 the other creditors of the assignor of a relea.se 
 01 tlieir debts in consideration of payment of a 
 composition, bring an action in the assignee's 
 
 goods fraudulently concealed 
 
 , .. . o " 'm.iiviuiLiitiy coiiceait 
 
 by the assignor at the time of the assignment 
 
 ^uch an action may be brought with the 
 assignees consent in his name without any 
 onler under sub-section 2 of section 7 of ;lie 
 Assignments Act, but without such an order 
 
 r-W 
 
 u 
 
 !( H 
 
79 
 
 li 
 
 J'Kigincnt of tl.o County Court 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 '1 
 
 (<-•) 0/ Impectom, 
 
 
 tli» I Ami «1„:,,, >„li,i,„„ r„„|„,.,| ,,. „„, „, 
 
 m^Af^,^f^^V! Estate.] -An inspector of an 
 'iiuti K. •>. O. cl). I:i4, \vlio acts towank tl„. 
 
 ., ,, y^ ••.a a oivuieid upon t 
 
 J{" liofi^rH and F,,,;,,;//, u f. i{| ;,^_ 
 
 S. Vahiiiiti SKiirUj/. 
 
 Oollateral Security ~Colhr„i;„„--j„„it and. 
 
 ment of the Court l.olow. ti.ut a "Tu.I tor' w fo 
 I'V way of security for his debt liol Is a ort on 
 "f the assets of his .lehtor, c<,ns,stiu« . 'certo^n 
 
 7. Set-off. 
 
 realized upon tlie goods. ^ "'^*' 
 
 the "noti"'''! '^■' '"«^''"l"'K- "" tlic groun.l that 
 , ""-,.1 '''■'\"'« ''^'^^" '"'l"'-se(l over to the 
 
 1 J^'l^^eats.] -After recovery of iudL-nient f /"","" "''''''•""•^' '^t'curity, all the n.rties 
 l.y the defendants against the ,,la n i^C a .'T''' "T''' J"'''".v .nd seterally lial iTand 
 deht and costs the plaintiff recovered "hr nent »"->'>'• /l.e connnon law the cre.litor, joint 
 
 • umages tor malicious prosecution and costs f "^'^*- «* «i«i' <>f Ins co-debtors for the full 
 Letore the verdict for damages was ct'nl]^ ?»""". "^ Ins clu.m unt.l he has l.eeu , id 
 ^''ve„, the plaintiff executed an assi^mnient to a ""'""" '"-'"'« "'''*«'^'' to .leduct the cf rom 
 
 trustee for the benefit of his ere C of t^ TVV"'"" !''^"'^^"'' *''"" ''"^ -states of the "o 
 Hmount of any verdict which he migl t recove ' ''t' :'' J"'"' >' '^'"' •^'■^•^■''"'y HaLle the ef r. 
 
 i*i^p&ir^LrteS!irir!i-"?- 
 
 hc.d that at the time the assignment was de ^'''"""^'•y "^«i«>.n.ent, to collocate' the appeT 
 In ered the claim to damages had1,ecome nt- hf f,"';;"' ')f ^^'.'"''^ "^ t'l^.i'- ^'--n as seciJ^Tby 
 debt.and_fls«n..l, „ .i„i,- ..., . . . J.'.fc tlie deed. Beiinw!, \. Thi/miideau, 20 S. C. H. 
 
 iii,.„f , j; u.unages naci Decome a judc- 
 
 n tnt debt, and, as such, a debt which should ?e 
 set oil under the principle of section 2:^ of R S O 
 ^n. Ui ; and upon the application of the defei. 
 •l.ints, an oner <lir..nf,„„ „ „..* ' uie atiui 
 
 110. 
 
 the goo.l,s sold by you on credit to M., "ml of 
 Saleof Debts-.4,^W%Aov/»,v«-_sV/,,?' f"^ "'^'v'" ^'"""'^ '^"'''^•'' J"" '»ay sell to M 
 
 .^uI>.sec.o, which provides that wheie rdaim u" 'I ll,^^ ''''■''''^' "^ 
 
 apiinstthe estate is contested by the assS ,' r I 1 . ,""' '" '"^V''"^ ^>' s»cli goods so sold 
 the saine shall be for ever barred of anv f b? n '" '"''' ' l"°^i>''^<l 1 sl'.Ul not be called on 
 
 ."••;;";,»'--'" if '«' action is nit^^^^S P> ^^ '""'''' '" P''^' '^ «'''-'=^''''' -"ount tha 
 against the ..ssignee to establish the claim within ' M n.n 1 
 
 a Innitcl time, only applies to the right to rink I crpiiV f "" ''«?' «"»'e'it for the benefit of his 
 on the estate, and does not affect the rkd.rto °'^'\'.l"''' "^"'fe' tl'<^'' n.debte.l to the guaranteed 
 set-of^ the claim so ),arred in an action £ „«t ' t let 7 ' " * '.' 'T "^ ^'^^>^-^3. They H ed 
 the claimant by tlie assignee of the estate or , .ff "i"" "'.''''-'^'"' ""'' ^'^ assignee and 
 
 any one claiming through him. /o 'S ^.' *l^,f,^^^^^ received from the plaintiff the ? 
 ^"'■'<^,^S OR. 1T». Affirmed by t e DhV I ""C* r-'T;' ''^ t''^t*«t'^tor•s guarantee, 
 sional Court, 23 O. R. 58'> j-'ht- i llie ulaiiitiff ,.,,.. k..,,i...i ii.-x i° 
 
 Solicitor and Client- ra.m^;ow "/ iJ/« of 
 
 Co^hn Ax.v,jm'e for Creditor, of odu.f-Thc. 
 
 Tl,„ .1 • V-i- -^ ''"«,"'«'-i"oi' 8 guarantee. 
 tnT it' ""5 '^""t'-"<l''<l that ife was entitled 
 to rank upon the estate for so much of the debt 
 as had been thus paid by him — 
 
 tpiw'i' "''*"■' .•^■.^•' 'lissenting, that the cuaran- 
 ^i^ ".r ".l!'r ,"'':!''; .''«''ti-«V-T, or to 
 
 personally l.ble to pay the costs of ta.ati^ ^ I S AiSteS^ ^ti^ .Sa^'^^ 'SelJetb 
 
 81 
 
 ^M\l^ 
 
iimI to I 111! iiHHit-neo 
 >r HCTvir.'M to che 
 iixi'.l tlic liill and 
 Diui-Hixtli :- - 
 ,'lit fitjiHoiially to 
 ■ costs of tho tax- 
 i' iiosotoff.igai.mt 
 olicitoiH from tJic 
 videiKl iinoii their 
 . H I". 1{. :\H. 
 
 ■If,/. 
 
 ■'•(ii:,,n~Joiitf and 
 iniiiig tin; jndg. 
 t a uiuJitiir \vho 
 't linlds a jiortion 
 Nistiiig of oortftin 
 .'iidor.sod over to 
 ;,' a pledge of the 
 '■ collocated upon 
 uidiitiiiii under a 
 dl amount of his 
 let any sum of 
 om other parties 
 ii lie may have 
 
 the grniin.I that 
 ed over to the 
 , all the p.irties 
 Lrally liable and 
 creditor of joint 
 to rank on the 
 >i's for the full 
 IS heeii ])aid in 
 duct therefrom 
 ates of the co- 
 i)le therefor, 
 le giound that 
 • in force the 
 construction of 
 ities, viz., the 
 ate the appel- 
 n as secured by 
 ni', 20 S. C. R. 
 
 — Ultimate Bal- 
 ive a guarantee 
 iiisideration of 
 to M., and of 
 ay sell to M. 
 Helve months 
 guarantee you 
 goods so sold 
 )t lie called on 
 amount than 
 
 benefit of his 
 lie guaranteed 
 '• 'J'hey filed 
 assignee and 
 intiti the full 
 ;uarantee. 
 ; -vvas entitled 
 h of the debt 
 
 ittheguaran- 
 curred, or to 
 le liability to 
 (ilaintiff waB 
 the secured 
 
 f 
 
 81 
 
 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. 
 
 certain .Icbts due fioin tlio .-WHlguor to other 
 per.o„. amounting m tli,. ag^r^.^at. to the sum 
 I J whu.li his debt was exeee.le,?. The personH 
 
 HO to be pud „v,v not parties to nor n i 1 in 
 
 tne (ifiMl oi aMsigiiment : — 
 
 oreditoraorei.titleil to receive the dividemls in 
 resiieot of tJi«t part r.f the debt which he hu. 
 j)aid oil under t!ie 'erantee. 
 
 I'.M- Osier, J..\ , ne gniuantee was a contin- 
 uing gilaranteo, limited in auiouiil, to secure a 
 
 Jhutiiig balance, ami so a gu;irantee of nart of If ii ""^ ':"" ;~ 
 
 th.. debt only, the dividends on whiel t is Co .'•''/' v"''""^ "'•' t''''"" "^ '!"> •Supreme 
 ety having paid it, he was entitled t!, receive In,' ,i . ^'l^' ^^' ','"'• '''■•^--•l'"'-"'"., ,1., dissent- 
 
 AV/-. v. Eminniuirl, \ |.;x. I), i,-,;, considered. ' ' 
 
 Judgment of the (Queen's Henri, Division 0(» 
 <;. I,. -'.),, rever.sed, and that of [Street .1 ' at 
 
 McalitUen, 18 A. I!. .Oag. 
 
 Bight of Retainer.] -Under their father's 
 will, two of his sous were to receive a share of 
 the proceeds of certain land to be sold on the 
 death of his widow, who was still alive 'J'hev 
 also o\ved the testator a certain debt, which bv 
 the w. I, was to be payable in Hve yearly insuf- 
 «nents Irom the time of his death. 
 
 About two years Hubse(|Uent thereto the sons 
 ma( e an assignment for the beueh't of their 
 ereilitois under R. .S. O. ch. 12-1 : — 
 
 Held, (1) that the effect of the aasbqmient 
 W.1S by virtue of sec. 20, sub-see. 4, of that Act 
 to accelerate payment of the debt du- to thJ 
 estate. (2) That the e.xeeutor.s being al.Ho trus- 
 tees ot the land of which the sons were to 
 receive shares when sold under the will held 
 security for their claim within the .neanin.' of 
 that Act having (because of the Devolution of 
 Estates Act) the right to impound the sons' 
 shires under the will as against their debt to 
 the estate. Ilns security the executors and 
 trustees should value pursuant to Ii S O ch 
 r.'l. TUlk V. .ipniiip'r, 21 O. U. 5H5 ' ' 
 
 ii«, thai ,is the creditors to be paid l.v the nre- 
 lerred ered.tor eoul 1 not enforce payment from 
 li -> '.r Irom the assignor who h ,d |,,rted with 
 all his property, they woiihl b. hindered and 
 delayed m the ie,M,very of their debts .and the 
 deed was, therefor-, void under the .Statute of 
 Kl /abeth. M,-l),,i,nl,t v. C„minin;/H, 24 S. C. R. 
 
 Interpleader Issue.) -An ii.ter|.leadcr issue 
 
 to , etennine the rights of a claim uit under a 
 
 chattel inortgiige and an e.xe<mti,)ii cre.litor is a 
 
 IKoceeding i^ken to impe.ich the mortgage. 
 
 Oij'i' v. /'oi-teout, 1!)A. It. 111. * 
 
 Payment of Money to a Creditov - Tramfer 
 oj 0W/,<,. J The^ handing by a .lebtor to his 
 creditor of the clu.pie of a third person upon a 
 bank in the place where the creditor live,, the 
 maker of the checpie having funds there to meet 
 It, IS a ' p lyment of mouey to a creditor " 
 witliin the meaning of U. S. (). oh. 124 sec 3 
 sidi-sec. 1. Arnutronii v. /I,',u>itivH, i'l O. K. 
 
 See, also, C(jli..\tkr.4l Skcuritv. 
 
 9. M'tMceUaneoK'i ( 'ixiei. 
 
 _ Application of Act. ]-.-,4 Vict. ch. 20, the 
 Act t,. amen.l the Act respecting Assignments 
 and I references by Insolvent l'er.smis " R ,S O 
 ch. 124, is not retrospective, and does not ap' 
 I.ly to any gift trausler, etc., made before the 
 passing thereof, and no inference that the Legis- 
 lature intended it to be retrospective is to be 
 drawn from the language of section 3, providing 
 . that nothing therein should atfect any action 
 
 r:'3^aR^ir-'^^-^''-^^-^i-'-'j 
 
 Company--.l.,.,,V/„„,e«iI fi.v.l-Sectiou 9 of the ' 
 Donunion Winding-up Act gives a wide disere. i 
 tionary power t<. the Court to grant or refuse a i 
 winding-up order; and where, upon an applica- ■ 
 tion for such an order it appeared that the com- 
 paiiy had prexnously made a voluntary assign- 
 ":" ,,1"', *''^' 'T.f "f -'-e^litors, and that t 
 a the desire of the great majority in number 
 and V alue of the creditors that li-juidation should 
 be proceeded with under the assignment, the 
 application wa.s refused. Wakefield L'attan Ch. 
 v. Hamdion Whip Co., 24 O. R. 107. 
 
 r.fl^H^T^ff'^^^ Delayintj Oreditors-,«a^«;fi 
 ^Afu«y;eM. J -In an assignment for the benefit of 
 
 nearly $.300 more than was <lue him from the i 
 ■asBignor on an understanding that he would pay 
 
 Retralt Suooesaoral—S'.,/,' I,y Cm-a'or h'thr^ 
 larlili„„.]-\\h^n a co-heir has assigne.l' his 
 share in a succession before partition any other 
 co-heir may claim su,.-li share ujion reimbursin-' 
 the purch.aser tlieivof the price of such us.sign'^ 
 I meiit and such claim is imprescriptible so lone 
 i OS the i)artition has not taken place. Article 710 
 IC. C.- Asale by a curator of the assets of an 
 I nisolveut, even though authorized by a .Judge 
 I which inchules an undivi.led share of a succes- 
 sion ot winch there has been no partitifui does 
 not deprive the other co-heirs of their right to 
 exercise by direct action against the purchaser 
 thereof the relmit >i,rcM.vmil oi such undivided 
 hereditary rights. The heir exercisin-r the 
 retmil ,<urce><s„rn! is <mly bound to reinfburse 
 till! price pai.l by the original purchaser and not 
 bound in his action t.. tender the moneys paid 
 by the purchaser. lia.vV^r v. I'lidlip,, 23 .S. C. 
 K. All. 
 
 Bbevin -Skit Hie of Fmnd^.]-A sheriff, sell- 
 ing lands as assignee for creditors, under H ,S 
 U. ch 124, cannot, as when selling under an 
 execution, sign a memorandum which will bind 
 a purchaser under the Statute of Frauds, for he 
 18 not, as in the Latter case, agent for both 
 ''6 R^lr^""""'''''"""' ''^"-■^"'^'■'^ ^'- faubert. 
 
 II. COMPOSITIO.S- A(iRF,l;MENT. 
 
 Loan to Effect Payment -.V-'oe< Auree- 
 ""'«'■ ]-<J" tl'e -'0th December, 1SS3, the credi- 
 tors of one L. resolved to accept a composition 
 payable by his promissory notes at 4, 8 and 12 
 months. At the time L. was indebted to the 
 Exchange Bank (in liquidation), who did not 
 sign the composition dee.l, in a sum of «14,000 
 a. et at., the appellants, were at that time 
 
88 
 
 BANKS 
 
 "M 
 
 l»(JOonuii.Mlali.,n ,i„l„rM(.rH f<,|. *; ,j|.-, „f tliit 
 
 the mi, >,.pi,,„i„.,, ,„,s,_ „„ ,_.^ ,,,,7 ,„,at,. 
 
 ilit I.Miik hinni- n^n.1,1 |„ ,„.,,,.,,, ss ooo c,i,|i 
 
 Sm-v :";'"'' •'•;'•""" '" '- "■"' ^""^ ^"^ i '■•'- 
 
 new ,•„„,,,„.(,„„ as not n,!.lc. lu-.Mwn to I 
 
 L.. t„. .l.l,|,„, l,„vi„u fail,,! to p,^v Uk Hcco n^i 
 
 .ro„,-l,t ,„, ,„,i„„ to huv.. tlM^ . ; 
 
 mo tj-.ij,,, ,K,, 1,, „„| ,„, j,^^^ ,^^^^^ 
 
 bewSirn.'''"''''''''''*'''"':'-^ "*' ♦'"■ <■""•■'« 
 
 with till. ,,|,,„.|l,,nt.s«nH vaiici, the .Irhtor h;v 
 
 aLTst i 'h;:';''' ""■ i'''^;":^!'* -f ■- i<m„ „„.,k. t , 
 
 Ch. f . ,s tu.; a,„ T,,.clH.rc.an. .).,' .lis..„ti„g 
 i.ei l-„ innci, .1 --The inortLMu.; havii,.. I,,...- 
 
 84 
 
 .lii.l«„i,.,,t of ihe Cotintv Court of Vork 
 
 in. Insoi,\k\i' Acts 
 
 Release of Debt ~ Promise t„ /•„„ i »„ 
 
 wnoi.t. debt has Ihhm rcleasuil hy a coiiiDositio, 
 
 givtii In that ,k.|,t(,r and his partner to the 
 creditor for part of the released deht 
 
 A consi.lc ration is necessary to siii>i)ort a 
 
 ol a (ielt ^^h,^.•h has been released I.y the credi- 
 
 upon!'"'" ''■ '•"''''°"' ■^- U- <^'- R- 621, observe,! 
 
 Ju.lgtnent of the Common Pleas Division. 24 
 
 A. K. 418. I.ever.se,l m the Supreme Court on 
 
 S. C R.P278.'' ■'"'' '"""■ "•'"''' ^•- *"«»^^ 24 
 
 te^T^^lf'Tr' '^"''.'■'«'»^^<1 •>>' c-etlitors at a meet- 
 
 nine3tu-,.Iv ' f^'' •\«''"Iement at si.v, 
 
 five crt3*r', e l"n'"'?' ''' ^^1 ''"^^ °f *««''ty 
 uve cents in the dollar in ciua tiayments with 
 
 out interest •' does not, in itself/.J-at" as s.t 
 
 SeSlh'its'r'' '''"""• ^''^.v-'t in'a'con: 
 ance witli its terms is essential 
 
 In« '"'".^'l"'' \^''" "^«ents to and sign-s the reso 
 
 Sn with tlfTT^'-i^^" "'•■'•'^■^ ' «--"b-. 
 
 luiuu IS not ,l<l)arred from suinu the ,l,.l)tn,. 
 
 £;. e^itTSe ""'«''^-/.-- nXti^ln 
 payment ot the composition .ncordin-- tr tl,- 
 
 feet released or otlierwise ,lischarged ; Hag-,ny 
 C.J.O., dissenting on this point. ""S'i"j, 
 
 Insolvent Act of 1806. j Th,3 n«sl.Mi,.e in 
 ■M-v..n,;v ,,ndertliejMs,dvJnt Act% 1, i^ ." 
 the plamtillH iiiortu-aHor, In l,S(i<) .,„>v, l • 
 
 "11 eithei s„l,., th,^ mortuiL;,.,! property to a s„l. 
 e,|.u.,,t mortKag,.,., who oad vali.,.,1 hL. ■ ,H y 
 
 •■eital. I lie sul,,sn|uent mortgagee shortlv.fter 
 war,ls .OMveye,! the property t,. a th r 1 , rVo, 
 
 -nt notwuhstaiMling this eoi^v.-va, ee . „ , , ' ', 
 
 • ray ...Urest to the plalntitls' till wit li 
 je..rs of this tor, closure action :_ ' 
 
 Hehl, on a lase stated in the action f„r th,. 
 
 Pnn,... ot the Court, with liherty t. 1, w 
 
 mici that the iirovisions of section 1<I , f th„ 
 Insolvent Act of 1,S,m had l,,..,, co, pi 1 ith 
 
 M gee taking over his security would he ,„imar 
 2d St" hi?. r'^' .""■ "" '■''"'■ ■-'•""l.'ni, "; 
 
 .hulgment of the Chancery Division, 21 () R 
 
 ^i/^'S-v^fcitbSti: ^^-' 
 
 ppea s,,l,,.), ,,po„ a elain, of a cre.lit./^,^i^l^S 
 
 venMeton'^-"'" "^ "" '•"^tate under the Insol 
 
 Co •; of P " i '" ":;' 'WP^alal.le to the Supreme 
 
 I uut of (ttuada, the right of apj.eal having 
 
 een taken away hy 40 "vi,t. ch 4 .s,.c "s 
 
 followed. ,SV«/A V. /.'4,; 18S^ [''l 'tV, "• 
 
 See CoNsTiTCTioN.Ai, Law. 
 
 BANKS. 
 
 I. Af!E.\T,s, Mana(;eks and Officer.s, 84. 
 
 n. BILL.S, ClIE(n?KS AND NoTES, 85. 
 
 III. Collateral Seciritv, 87. 
 
 IV. Deposits, 91. 
 v. Trusts, 91. 
 
 VI. Winding-up, 92. 
 
 I. AiiEXTs, Managers and Offtckrs. 
 Agent— Excem of Authorily—DtaUud loith 
 bank and also a member of a business firm! 
 
85 
 
 BANKS. 
 
 Ii« _ gfiicral (loctrino 
 
 IK " apJlIit'M to Ik I'llHO 
 
 is no lornittl rtlenae 
 
 ty f'oiirt of \'.)rk 
 li««i'ntiiig, }t'n-,rv. 
 
 Acrx, 
 
 I riiij nsHitincn in 
 L'lit Aft oi ist(-), „i 
 ISliil jdiivfvcil ill 
 ^»itli(mt lovriLiiits 
 piopurty to ,1 .Hiil> 
 iiilmvl liiss( iirity, 
 <<i refoiicd to In n 
 s'liK^'u shortly iiftor 
 to u tliiid I (.|>oii, 
 ^■eyiiiico coiitimifii 
 Hm till witliiu tti, 
 ri : — 
 
 lie action for tlio 
 lilierty to ilraw 
 tt it Hiis i)ri ijcr to 
 section 1!) of tho 
 " coniplit'il with ; 
 sulisciiucnt mort- 
 wdiiM 1j(. i.iiiimr- 
 iir liiciiinhr.inces ; 
 ts kept jilivc the 
 
 division, 21 (). jj. 
 issciitiiig. 'J'riitl 
 A. R. (J(;. 
 
 \ filial jmlgnicnt 
 or LoHcrCiuiailii 
 f a croilitor filed 
 under the hisol- 
 letotheSiipioino 
 >f aiijieal having 
 ell. 41, SIC. 28 
 Api). Ca.f. 409, 
 ■S. V. I!. 71.-.. 
 
 L.vw. 
 
 FFICKK.S, S4. 
 i, 85. 
 
 Ofpiokks. 
 
 procured accommodation draft.>t from a ciiHt.,n..r 
 
 of the hank, which he disconntcd a,- Kn.haL'ent 
 
 an.l, wilh.Mil iM.lorHinK tlie drafts, nned the pro' 
 
 ceeds, m violation of his ii,.,triictioM>< from the 
 
 he.ld .jlhce, II, the l.iiHinesH of |,i„ linn. Jl,,. 
 
 hrni, having l„.r,,iMe Jn.solvci,l, exeenled an 
 
 liHHigniiHiil m trust of ,dl their pn.pcrtv hv 
 
 which tlic tinstee «„.s to pav "all del.t.s l.v tl,;. 
 
 a.sMiKn.,r.i or either of th.^m dne ,,i,d o«in.. .,r 
 
 accriiiiiK or lieeoming di.e and .ming" to the 
 
 .SHld l.ankaHlii.st piefeired creditor ,uid to th.3 
 
 niaker.s of iIk- a.vonnnodation paper, among 
 
 otheiH, aH sc'cond pi,f,.| ivd .reditor.s. The 
 
 CHtatu notiin.ving s„(|i, in,l to pay the hank in 
 
 fnll a drspiite aro.e a.s i„ the .■iccinniodation 
 
 (IrattH the hank .lainiing the right to di.^avow 
 
 the action of the agent in di.srouii! ing th.iii and 
 
 appropriating the proceed.s in Ipreach of his duty 
 
 a« creating a del.t dne to it from his (inn, the 
 
 makeiH claiming that they were ..ally dehtH 
 
 dne to the lunk trom the insolvents. I„ a Huit 
 
 to enforce the carrying ,.ut of ih.' tiiist.s created 
 
 by the asNignineiit :— : 
 
 Held, allirming the judgment of the (,'onrl 
 below, (.Wynne, ,1. . dissenting, tlial the drafts 
 were ,lel,ts due and owing" fn.n, the iiiHol- 
 veiitH to the l.aiik and within the lirst inefer- 
 enee created hy the lU.eil. 
 
 Per "itchie, <'.d.-K. proenied the accon,. 
 modation paper for the sole purpose „f |,„it„w 
 ing the money of the Lank for hi.s firm and 
 when the lirm leceived that money they became 
 debtors to the l.aiik tor the anionnt 
 
 Per Strong and Patter.soii, .JJ.'^The agent 
 bcmg hound to .iccount t.. tho hank for the 
 funds placed at his disposal, he became a debtor 
 to tho bank, on hi.s authority being revoked, for 
 tho amount of these drafts a.s money for which 
 he faded to acc.M.nt. Whether or not the bank 
 had !i ri-.it to elert to treat the act of the agent 
 as a tort was not important a.s in any ca.se there 
 was u debt due. 
 
 J'u- \''Vi'T'\ •'■~,'^'''*' ^■^■''lence docs not' 
 establish that these drafts were anything el.se I 
 than ,m],er discounted in the ordinary coulse of ' 
 banking biusiiie.s.s, us to which the bank had its 
 recourF-e against all per.son.s whose names 
 
 86 
 
 appeared .m the face of the paper and were not 
 obliged to look to any ' 
 
 Merchants' ISduk of 
 C. R. 53. 
 
 . other for payment. 
 Hatifnx V. WIndikn, 19 S. 
 
 II. Bills, Chkquks a.nd Notks. 
 
 CheciueB - lU./h/H ,,/ Payee Emlor.n,,,/for Col- 
 ««(o«.J-llie Dominion Government 'liavinc a 
 deposit account of public moneys with the Jiank 
 of Prmco Kdwanl Island upon which they were 
 entitled to draw at any time, the Deputy Minis- 
 
 foP^-l.nVm '"•■'. ■''>■"': "" ,""''•■'■"' -'"^^'lue thereon 
 fors;.10,00(), which, together with a number of 
 other clR.,ues, he .sent to the branch of the 
 ^nk of Montreal at Ottawa, at which branch 
 bank the Government had also a deposit account. 
 Ihe said branch bank thereupon place.l the 
 amount of the cheque to the cre.lit of tlie Doni- 
 inion Government on the books of the bank the 
 manager thereof endorsing the same in blank 
 and forwarding It to the head ofiice of his bank 
 at Montreal J he chcpie was then' sent for- 
 ward by mail from the head office of the Bank 
 of Montreal to th.e Bank of Prince Edwa cl 
 Island for collection, but was not paid by the 
 
 I'tter lank, which, «ub.,e,|uei.tly to the present- 
 ment (,f the che(|ue, suspended ■payment geiier- 
 
 I " " .\ I ' -- 
 
 Hehl, (I). That Ihe P.ank of .\!oiitie,il were 
 mere agents f„r the eolhrthi, of this eheoii,.. 
 and lh;it. altlmugh the pnuicds of the che'iuo 
 bad been credited to the (oAernmeiit upon tho 
 liorijis (,t the bank, it never was the intention .if 
 (he hank to treat the cliei|iie us having be. ii 
 discounted by til. in ; coiiscpieiitly, as tli,. bank 
 ilid not mi|iiiie properly in tlie ,hei|iie, ami 
 "ere ni^ver holders of it f.ir \iilu.., they wero 
 entitled on theilishonoiirof tlieeh.ipie to reverse 
 the entr,\ in tli. ir books ami charge the am.mnt 
 thi.r.'of ayainst the ( ioM riinieiit. i;i/iiv J',,- 
 h-iii-', >.\ Ivisl 12: /■;.)■ /,./,/, /liir!;,r,,r//i, 2 l'»e G 
 it J. 1!M, ri'lerreil to. 
 
 (2j, That the nio.l.' of pres. ntiiig a che.iue oii 
 
 a bank by transmitting it to the iliaw..e l.v mail, 
 
 is a leg.il ami ciistoinary nioih- ..f pic.seii'tment' 
 
 /ffi/irooi/ v. rivhiiiiiii, L. I!, !i (^. I;, .j.jj^ ". 
 
 I'riilinii.i- V. Crii/il'r.' I,. R. 4 <). I!. |,V,, 'x-' 
 
 ferred to. 
 
 i (.')). That althoii..;h a ei.Ili<tiiig bunk laiinot 
 
 j enlarge the time for preseiiliii..iit by ciieiihitiiig 
 
 la bill or che(|iie aiiion<;.-t its lir.iiiehcs, y.t, if it 
 
 j has been en.loiseil to and transmitted' ihroiigh 
 
 them for cdlection, the iljlbivnt branehes or 
 
 ;ig(Mici.;s are t.i be rcgar.le.l as separat.' ami 
 
 iiidepen.leiit en.lorsers tor the pur|iose of giving 
 
 I notice of .lishoiiour. (/i,<U. v. lUtyleii, Pj'aI. & 
 
 ! W. 51 ; Hi-iiirii v. Loiiiliiii ,(. X. M'. '/,' If' Co 
 
 I 4 B. & S. .S2(!, referred to. ' 
 
 (4). That the defendants, whether .■oiisi.lered 
 
 as mere agents for .•ollecli or as h..hh.|.s, 
 
 I of the ehe<|ue for value, w.'ie, us regar.ls tli('> 
 ilrawer, only c' M.-.l np.m to sh.w that there was 
 i no unreasonable delay in iirc.sentm.'nl and in 
 giving notice of iion-paymint : ami, no such 
 delay having occurred, the Crown was not 
 j reheveil from liability us druwer of the eliei|iie. 
 (5). In a letter from tho m.inager of tlii. llaiik 
 of Montreal, at Ottawa, to the Deputv Minister 
 of Finance, which the .iefeiidants juit in evi- 
 deuce us a notice to tiie Crown -the ilrawer— of 
 the dishonor of the clie|ue by the ilrawees- the 
 Bank of Piineo Kdward.lsluiul, the fact of non- 
 payinent was .stated a.s follows:—"! am n.iw 
 a.lvised that it has not yet been covered by 
 Bank of Prince Edward Islan.l. In case of it 
 being returned here again unjiaid I .lecin it 
 proper to notify you ..f the circumstances, as I 
 will bo rcjuired in tl, it event to rever.so the 
 entry and return it to the Department " :~ 
 _ Held, that the words "not covered,' us u.sed 
 m this letter, were oiiuivalont to "not paid" 
 or to "unpaid:" and, being so construed, the 
 letter was a sufficient legal notice of dishonour 
 naijei/:: Porter, 14 M. .^ W. 44 ; Paul v. Joel, 
 2/ L. J. Exch. 383, referred to. The (Jueen v. 
 liaitk of Montreal, 1 Ex. C. R. 154. 
 
 Lien on AsBets—Priority of Note IJohlers.]— 
 
 Under section 79 of the Bank x\ct, R. S. C. ch. 
 
 120, the note holders have the first lien on the 
 I assets of an insolvent bank in priority to the 
 
 Crown. Strong and Tascheieaii, ,I.J. , dissenting. 
 I But see the present Bank Act, 53 Vict. ch. 31. sec. 
 I i^A (1).), p,a.s.=.ed Mnce this decision. Liquidators 
 
 oj the Manfiine Bank v. Jieceiver-Ocnercd of 
 I m-ir BrioLtirick, 20 .S. C. R. 695. 
 
 I Partnership— /')-a!(r/ Ariain.-<l Partners.]— E. 
 j was a member of the firm of S. C. & Co., and 
 
87 
 
 BANKS 
 
 i»l".ia iii.mlur of Hk' firm of R. a ( •„ ,i,„i i„ 
 "i.l.'r to miHf money for the iih.. of K \ (•„ i,,. 
 ni.i.l.'u i.n.miHHoiy.iot.. « |,i,li h,. Hiun,.! with 
 
 '■ """Me otl. .V Co. l,„.l it,hMeo,n,te.|. The 
 ImTh ■'" '""^"''"•l"li"<"unte.l the.uo 
 
 l'"Mk Imd ha<l hv,|ii,.„i .leuhiiKH. I,, an a et , .. 
 
 'W.iM.l thenmk.rHot ,he not7. ( '. e e ,,/ 
 
 ;'"aHn,a.h.hy|.;. i„ frnu.l ol h,H /h , , 
 lH•Jm■yto„„a.halS.(^.^,^UMulno a,t , 
 
 .^.■'l.h,.,nal<n,Kof the .M.te lu.t .ImI not a ,h • ,• 
 
 ;i"'r'"'l"* «"'""!"• ««- the I «le,lKenf he 
 
 ''■■iiiU ol want of mithoiily : 
 
 llehl reveiMnu' (he jii,|>{i ,t „f the ( 'omiI 
 
 1';m«. that the note wan nm.le hy lO. in f , 
 .'MM.S |.„tne,H umJ that Iho ^ ...1; I a.r„X^^^^^^^^^^ 
 knowiecKc that 1,.. wan usinK hin „a, ,,'■ 
 "»■"- f..r h,. own ,,„,■,,.«..« to pnt 'o. 
 
 !i..|"."y "H toanthority. Not having nia.le n.,o 
 "Ml'Mrytho Imnk eonhl nor reeo.,,. „.', nst C 
 
 89 
 
 wiii( 
 
 [••WnreN thai |,rohihitivf l«Wi import 
 It, '.>7H. 
 
 III. COLLATERAF, SEOUKITV. 
 
 . Bank Stock. I -The i:,xohange Hank in a.lvan 
 c.n« M.oney to K. on the seenrity of \ ere k^ ", 
 
 ;mk .hares cause, i the nhares to be anZu.Tto 
 th, r Mianaging .lire, -or.an.l an entry to it nn.le 
 
 Later on the ,na,.a.Mng ,lireetar ,,leUv t.o ■ 
 
 ni, c to h.,n the lOxehange Bank was I'oun 1 " ' 
 eturn t he shares or ,,ay their value. The pro" 
 Mh.t.on o a.lva„ee upon security of s are^^'^f 
 
 Per Patterson, J. Assuming that tlie sub 
 «e.iuent au.en.hnent of I he general Hani^iL Ac 
 f"rl>a.le the taking of such security by any Ijunk 
 the amen.hnent .h.l n,.t alter the charter o he 
 -bvxohange Bank, Xy \ et I'h -,i (n i i 
 
 which tfu. Kxclulnge B^,',; hai, " LS'l, "S^ 
 the shares ,„ question in ,ts corporate name as 
 collateral security. To take snch security mv 
 
 pn.,si.ab,e fron. th.r^^;;,,,;;;!^"''li-: 
 
 meanonr and sub ect to „ pe,.uniary pe aTtv 
 hut It was not .,/tm nn-x. Article 14 (J £ ) 
 
 .Ml I ty has no application to hucI. a ca«, 
 
 Bill of Lnmnif. I .\ bank in ihi» I'mvinco 
 
 '";;■• "n ag,..en.ent with a e„Ht,.„,er n.lcilci 
 
 Hie, a. anee.! money to him t„ enable him to 
 
 Imy cattle „, this I'rovime, whieh, nn.le th 
 
 agreement, when puieli.vM,! wer.. to b.. for 
 
 uanle.l by rail by |,in, to Montr.Mil, an.l to Ik- 
 
 »b.ppe.l by Hte,m,ship themr to Liverpool, the 
 
 bank having no eontiol over the eat le intjl 
 
 theyreaebe,! .he vessel, when they Weretoh' 
 
 .veeive-l by the steamshio for the bank, and th • 
 
 enHtomer « po.s.essi„n an.f control over tlun. woh 
 
 '- 'I'd :, bills ot iM.bng therefor in favour of tho 
 
 hank being then signe.l The cattle were p„r 
 
 chased ami sent to .Montreal as agree.l on On 
 
 amymg at the st.amship, and before the bill., 
 
 of adnighad been ma ut, a ere.litor of the 
 
 -ustomer attached the cattle nmler a writ of 
 .•.r,/.,r.„m/, but the steamship owners, .Hb- 
 regarding the writ, signed the bills of la,li„„ 
 
 I h. c.editorsuhse,,nently recovered a jn.lgment 
 for he value ot the cattle, in the I'l-ovinc o 
 
 be I .h". ,."*i""'" ""■ ';t''"""'''*I' o^vnerH, w hich 
 the ..tt.r having p„ j. .sought to prove on the 
 estate of the bank u, wimlin 
 It the claim was ilis.dlowed by , 
 On appeal from him it was: — 
 Held that, apart from the Ranking Act, R 
 
 if .1 'f'*',''>' ^''t'"-' "f the agreement 
 
 between the bank and iis ,.„stomer the posse" 
 sion and ,i spccia |,roperty in the gon.ls passed 
 to the banK, ot which the steamship owners were 
 a-v.jie, and having assented thereto m-on receipt 
 of t he cattle before any process was served must 
 be taken to have held the cattle for the banT 
 
 lr,nrH.'^f*'"'?T""* ''r"'« .''^■<^^" '" ide, and the 
 
 I parties to It being domiciled in this Province, 
 
 the rights ot the parties to it must be determine* 
 
 by the laws of this Province and not tlioso' 
 
 Qiiebec. which, however, were not shewn to be 
 
 Held, also, that the rights of the parties were 
 entirely govcrncl by the provisions of the 
 Bankiii- Act and following, though not alto- 
 gether ;,|, proving, .l/oY/KHt/s /{„id' V. Si(f,'r 24 
 (»r. .|..t., that under section ,'",.•{, sub-section 4 of 
 
 mliHo.V ;" '"'"'S''^'''- ""''^''- tl"-' agreement 
 and the tacts proved, an cjuitable lien upon the 
 cattle from the time of the making of tile a-ree- 
 immt winch prevailed over the attachmcnt":- 
 Held, lastly, that the bank " acouircd " the 
 bills ot ladmg within the moaning of the Bank 
 ing Act as soon as the .•attic were receive,! by 
 the steamship a though it di.l not at that time 
 actually ' hold " the bills. The a|,peal wa^ 
 therefore dismisscl. He C'ntm.l BaA-, L'amdn 
 ■•^hippuKi Compaiin s (hie, -21 O. U. 5l,j. 
 
 Principal and Agent -Jii/Zs „/ ICx.Imn,,,- 
 
 |{aiik..rs are s„bj....t i,, th./p, in..ipl,.s J],^. 
 
 gov..rn,ngor.linary agents, ami, thercf.,,-,., bank- th.' latter, having u, l' sought 't.V'nrr' "".';!' 
 
 h' ''■■tting otr th.. am.mntof the bill of exch'',l 
 agmist a balance .Ine by them t,. the ace. fr 
 • ...iKmont of the County (Vurt 1 ' k 
 nfhniic.l. J>om>:,h v. fWe.vyvV, -21 A. R. SO'J 
 
 ^.W,al»o,B„.,.soKKN..MN.KAN,.Pu„M,sM,.KV 
 
 Bill Of Lad ng-/'Wff,_,S'a/e.]_The plain- 
 tiffs sued a hank to recover the price pai.l i;he 
 bank tm. certain goods which, owing to a W- 
 toms seizure an.l forfeiture, the plaintiflFs never 
 receiveil. ' "c«oi 
 
 The bank was never in actual iwssession of 
 the goods, but a lull of lading was endorsed to 
 them as security f.)r advances, ami H'i" >"i! of 
 lading w.ts endorse.1 an.t .lelivered by the bank 
 directly to the plaintiffs. 
 
 The jury found that it was the bank which 
 sold the goods t.. the plaintiffs ; that they pro- 
 
BANKS 
 
 ■itivf Uw« Impart 
 ti> Hiic-h a cue. 
 [>N. C. It. 278. 
 
 k ill lliiH I'lnvirico, 
 
 iiHtimiiM, cidiiiicilwl 
 
 n to <'iialili' him to 
 
 wliii-li, iiiidrr the 
 
 well' to (,,. for 
 
 iiiitri'ul, niKl ti) Jk- 
 
 ti) Livtr'iiiKil, the 
 
 !• tllc I'Jlttlo until 
 II t hi'V Mire to hv 
 till' iMiik, 1111(1 thf 
 
 tiol OVIT tin 111 waH 
 
 >r in favour of the 
 ».' I'littlr were pur- 
 lis iiKifi'il (III. (Jn 
 (1 licfoif the hills 
 , II creditor of the 
 
 under a writ of 
 ii|) owiieiH, dig. 
 10 liillH of lading 
 
 iieir dcNtiiiation. 
 verod a judgment 
 I tliu I'roviiK^e of 
 p owner.i, wliich 
 ■ to prove oil the 
 ,'■111) proccidiiigg, 
 y the .Master. 
 
 Rankijig Aet, R. 
 the aHreernont 
 oilier the posses- 
 :lie gimdn panged 
 ihi|) ovueiH were 
 reto upon reoeipf 
 wan served, must 
 ! for the bank, 
 nude, and the 
 I this Province, 
 It he detenninofl 
 nd not tlioao of 
 not .'(hewn to be 
 
 he parties were 
 ivi.sions of the 
 ough not alto- 
 iiik V. Siller, 24 
 3iil)-Huction 4 of 
 the agreomenl 
 c lien iiiion tlic 
 ig of the agree- 
 ttaelimont : — 
 aeiiiiired" the 
 s,' or the Bank 
 'vc received by 
 )t at tint time 
 le ajipcal was 
 /iaii/:, Canadd 
 ;. -ilf). 
 
 • ]— The plain - 
 )rioe paid the 
 ing to a ?us- 
 ilaiatiffs never 
 
 imssession of 
 IS endorsed to 
 i'l this bill of 
 I by the bank 
 
 bank which 
 hat they pro- 
 
 fiued to iiell with » g<w)d title J that thuy li.id 
 not a good tith^; and that the pluintitlH .■ould 
 ""''')"".> diiiKeiicu huNc ohlam.il Ih.^ gooilH ■ 
 
 Held, that upon thine liii(lii,g„ ,u,d the cvi- 
 .len(|e, and having regard t.. the pi(,viH,on« „| 
 the Hunk Aet, li. S, C. .h. IL'O, the lian«aeti.,„ 
 liliiMt be regarded u.s a «al« bv the bank aM 
 ple.lgeeM \wth tli.> eoneiunnie uf the pleduor 
 and not as a nitre tl■all^lVr of the ini.r.it ol th.' 
 hunk under the bdl of lading; „i.d that the 
 plainlillH were entithd to reeover the price tiH 
 uiiou an iniphed wuiinntyol title and a fuilur.. 
 lit coMMideration. 
 
 ,IA,W.// V. Atl, i,hon,„„h, 3 Kx. Mm, eoninitnted 
 on ami diMtnigiiiNlicd : 
 Ko, per 
 1 witliin 
 the jury back to leeoiwidi r their hli(ling» after 
 pointing out their ircoiiMiHtencv ; I'l luh, n v 
 /iii/itrid/ /laid\ '20 (). I{. .•(lT). 
 
 80 
 
 Hold, alKo. i.er ItolierlHon, J., that the triai 
 .ludj^o was w^ithin his right and duty in Ncnding 
 
 Oontemporaneoua Advance- ILina-nl 
 .yihMlitnliw, oj S,r„riti,s.\--.\ rcnew.ii of a note 
 iH not a negotiation of it within tiie nicaiiiiu' oi 
 .section 7') of the liaiik Act. .-j.'t Vict, ch .•)! ( I) ) 
 .so as to support a .seem ity taken at the time of 
 the renewal in «iibstitution for a pivvioiislv 
 (ixiHtiiig security. 
 
 Jiulgniciit of Armour, ('..I., allir d. />•,(„/■ 
 
 of HumUtuii V. ii/iejiluid,-n A. It. l.Ki. 
 
 -y defendailM with plaintinH ,.• cidlateral to 
 , t le defeiidanlH own iiot.H. T.a.Ho ..•oIlateittlH 
 
 at niatiirity were dealt uith by defcndanlH. and 
 wticn pai, th.. |,ro. (cIs ucnt lo their credit and 
 ttcr,. ,vt (li,.,r disposal. The defendants failed 
 ■iiid plaintids r.-covcrcd |ii.lgn,.,nt« against them 
 <'ii the .ailur maturing notcH of the .h:fendant», 
 oth belore and iiller such judgnuntH the plain- 
 tills had ...llccted on the collaterals large iiinis. 
 considerably l.-ss than the wliide claim, which 
 tliey carried |o a Huspeiise account, and relnsed 
 to ..(.,, t any part on their jiidguants. An i^siie 
 as ,|„cct.,| on the appli.ation of dcfeiidiintH 
 
 t" try whet i.r plaint ills had n ,vcd any p,-,y- 
 
 IM.lits which they sh.Mihl have credited .„, tl'i,. 
 Jiidgmeii.s, and jii,lgnu.iit tl.cicin was given „, 
 be Mlamtills favour. Subse,,iiently the p|,v,n 
 t lis biouKht this action for the balance of their 
 'liii'ii .md refused to credit the eollate.al sus 
 pelis(> account : 
 
 Jl'ld, tliat the (hcision in the issue iilthoiigh 
 ''•V'''/,'''''' was n.>t c.m.lusivo in this aeti.,1,, ami 
 HiHl the plaintills eour.e in tli„.Me proceedings 
 
 .tmoimt,.,! to ail election to apply th,. ..„„„„„t r,f 
 ,l.'.'bt",'r'r,'r '";^"""","I"'M thatporti,,.. of the 
 iel'tm, then due and that they were bound to 
 Mdil the aiiiounlof the suspeii.se account in 
 thi_.s action. M„/..o„. Il,u,h V. <■„„,„,; -.'(i () H 
 .',;>. bevcLsed in appeal, ■_';( A. I!. |.|(i. ' ' 
 
 Discount of Promissory Notes /I (■(■(«,„„ 
 >>enmhfs.\-^\ tradesman sohl goods to custom. 
 CIS taking promissory notes fo, the price and 
 al.so hire receipts by which the property re- 
 imiined m him till full pavmeiit was niade. 
 Ihc notes were dis.-ounted through the medium 
 of a third pel-,,,, |,y the plaintills, who were 
 made aw.-„. wh, u the line of di.scoiint was 
 ')|Jcn.. 'ho course of dealing, and of the 
 
 securities held. They were not, however, put 
 m letmil po.s8essioi. of the .securities, and there 
 w.u no express contract in regard to tlicni. 
 
 In an action to recover the securities, or their ! 
 l.roceeds from the assignee for creditors of the 
 tradesman : — 
 
 llchi that the securities were accessory to 
 the debt ; that in e.,uity the transfer of the 
 notes was a transfer of the securities ; that the 
 delendunt was in no higher positi(„i thai, his 
 as.siguor, and could not resist the claim t„ have 
 tlie rcceiiits aecimipany the notes; and that it 
 
 was not materiul that the relation „f a.s.si 
 
 ami assignee did not immediatclv . xist between 
 the tradesman and the plaintills." C. ntnil linuk 
 
 Mortgage of Real Estate.]- A mortgage 
 -11)011 land given to secure eiidorsatioiis upon 
 legotiabe paper to be made by the mortgagee for 
 
 men '".."' """l """'K'^K"'- '"''^"■'"^x q'^-ativc 
 "lily upon the endorsements being made ' and an 
 
 't\u.f,T'^ "I ?r'' """•*><"«'■ t" '^ l-a-k before 
 tie making of the endorsements is not a vif.la- 
 t ion of sectmn 4fl of the I5anking Act, K. S. C. 
 
 vv .' r. •''^'' t""^ ^-"-"d and Thnhtr Co. 
 troiUx Cute, 21 O. R. ao7. 
 
 Payments oa-Cra/Zt or, Pn>,cipalD,ht.]~ 
 
 .rpdi/.<'."*'i"' ^"''^ ,*!"= 'lefondants a line of 
 credit to be secured by collections deposited," 
 
 cust^or"""'" °f ^l"---'' notes of defendants- 
 customers were from time to time deposited 
 
 ; Pledge /,■,;,/,/ of Cum' ,■ f,. /,„,.,„,„. \ | 
 
 borrowed a sum of money ,,„m a savings b.-mk 
 
 vhich he agived to repay with interest: trans 
 
 terriiig m pledge .is collateral security letteis ..f 
 
 eredii on the government of (,i,„ bee. I, haviiiL' 
 
 . l.ccome insolvent the b.nk Mhd its claim for the 
 .uiiount ot th. !„un, with iiiti rest, with the cura 
 
 i . .r/i "V ;"-■' "'"' "" "I'l"'''' ""• "Pl'li.unts, as 
 
 the sin ''■.v.^''""^«'"'' "" <1"^ «-..ii.l tlia,t 
 I he said securities wcr... not, „( fh,t cla.ss i,,,.,,. 
 tinned III th.. Act .(dating to savings banks, |l. 
 ■S. t. ch. 122, .sec. 20, and the bank's act in 
 making sun „a.i was u//n, )•/„ , and illegal ; -- 
 H.. Id, that 1 having received good ami vali.j 
 M.iisi.lcration for his promise to rep,,y the loan 
 couh not, nor couM the api,li,ant„, his creditors' 
 Who had no other rights than the debtor him- 
 selt lia.l impugn the contract of loan, or be 
 adniitte.1 to a,ssail the pledge of the securities. 
 Assuming that the act of the bank in leiidi,,.. 
 the money, on the pledge (,f such s,.c„rities, uas 
 "V)VMV)V.. although this might air.ct the plcb-e 
 as regards tluni parties interested ,n the .icMu". 
 ties It was not, of itself •■tn.l i/,.o/„rfo, a radical 
 mill.ty ol public onlcr of such a character as to 
 disiMititle the bank un.Ier Articles !)H!) aii.l 000 (' 
 C. froiiie aiming back the money with interest! 
 liaiik- ol tiii-oiito \\ /'•■rkhi.s, S S () R i)()S ,!■>, 
 tinguishcl IM/cui,/ V ra!s.,,l'Ero„omi,^Xotr^ 
 i jMime lit- (^11,/icc, 24 ,S. C. K. 40.'). 
 
 Release of Security- /,',V//l^^ of S„r,ii, 1- 
 Ihe plaintiffs, who hehl a number of promissdrv 
 note.- of a customer, endorsed by various parties 
 and also a mortgage f,om the customer on cer- 
 tain liiiids t., s(jc,n.- his general in.lebtedness, 
 sued the detendaiiL as endorser of one of the 
 notes. Hefore action brought, they had released 
 tert.iin o he mort.-aged land., without the 
 consent of the defendant : - 
 
 Held, that the plaintifls were entitled to judL'- 
 nient against the defendant for the amount of 
 the note, but without preju.Iicc to the right of 
 the latter to make them account for theii deal 
 
91 
 
 BANKS. 
 
 i 
 
 m 
 
 ings with the nioitgaged property wlioii the 
 security hu,l ajiswiT.-.l its purpc^e, or the .leht 
 Im.l been ,,;„,! l,y tlie sureties, or wlieii i„ „„v 
 other ..vent t),e appHeatioii ,.f the moneys from 
 the security eouM l,e properly ase..rtaiiie.l. 
 
 Deeisioiiof Rohertsu,, .J L'.-,(). I!. .-,(,;<, ,„o,]i. 
 liecl. JluU/i.i JiiiiiL V. //.-(//,/, 20 (). K. 2-(i, 
 
 Warehouse Recelpts.J-Althoiigh warehouse 
 receipts grunte,! to itself I.y a firm which has 
 not the custody of any goo.k but its own are 
 not ne.'otiahle instruments within the meanin.' 
 ]'.» ' '^^'^'■'-'■"'''''-' Amendment Act, 1{. S. U. eh! 
 
 Held, that; the Dominion Bank Act, R S C 
 chl;>q(U.), while il was in force dispensed with 
 that limitation validated .such receipts, and 
 transferred to the endorsees thereof the property 
 comprised therein. '1\ ,n,„i,t v. Uniou Hank of 
 tamtda, [JSW] A. C. 31 ; aHinning ly A. R. 1. 
 
 .SVc •Itmn.ion y. Canadian Bank of Com- 
 >ntr<:e, 23 8. C. R. 530, aiile 70. 
 
 Sec, also, Coi.i.ATKiiAi, Skctkitv. 
 
 93 
 
 IV. DkI'OSITS. 
 
 Attachment of Deposits. ]-.?<'£ Coimt,/ of 
 II riittrorlh V. Smilli, l,", 1'. J<. ,-{72, ani'i 08. I 
 
 I 
 Deposit After Suspension.] -A person who i 
 nialus a deposit witii a hank after its suspen- ' 
 sion the deposit consisting of eheipies of third 
 partie.s drawn on an,l accepted I.y the hank in 
 Muestion, is not entitled to he paid hy i,rivile.'e 
 t^ie ainoniit of such deposit. OnUuio- Jiank^. 
 Chaphn, 20 .S. C. R. 152. 
 
 Special Deposit- Il'ro^v/,,; J>yiim/ lo P,u, 
 0»/-/;„,;„„„,,| ■Pile damages recoverable by 
 il non-tra.liug .lepositor in the savings bank 
 departinent ot a bank who li.is made his deposit 
 subject to special terms, on the wrongful refusal 
 of the bank to pay it to hini personally, are 
 limited to tlie interest on the money 
 
 f<rz,'in V. Il7//;„,„.v, 1 n. .t Ad. 415; and 
 holai y.Stai-aal, U V. ]!. ,-,i)4, distinguished. 
 
 A bank having received a .leposit subject to 
 certain notice of withdrawal, if rcpiircd, can- 
 not set up as a defence to an action for the ' 
 deposit the al.seiice of such notice, unless the 
 r^.f'^^ *" P^^' "'i** lj''si-''l on tliat ground. 
 X he defendants having paid into Court twenty 
 cents ess than the c.rrect ,-unouiit due by them 
 the plaintUl was held entitled to full costs. 
 Jlemlnr..oii v. Hank oj llamilloii, 25 O. R OH 
 Appeak.,his to the .luestion of csts and allirmed', 
 
 Transfer of Deposit by Husband to Wife 1 
 
 -.S.c Sl„n;m V. M,rdui„U Hank 0/ Canada, 
 .1 A. K. 4i.i, ;,„,</, Husband and Wife, IV. 
 
 ^'. Trusts. 
 
 _ Execution of Trust -AV.wV,.r,^-o„ „f Trana 
 J.'' Hi .Shuns --\„f>cr of 7V».sy.]- Where the 
 ^e^polldollt l)ank (meorporateil by IS Vict ch 
 
 h eh had been execute,! by trustees and exec- 
 utors under a will to one ot the resi.luary lega- 
 tees regardless ,,f a provision in the will direct- 
 
 i "'« tl"^ «"l;--'titution of the legatees' lawful issue 
 at his death, and the tran.sferee .lispose.l of the 
 shai-es so as to defeat the rights of the issue :- 
 
 ! .„./n .1 I V i"""''. '•';gist''ation, unless with 
 actual kiowleige of a breach of trust, was not 
 
 I wrongful, having regard to secti.m 30 of the 
 
 ; to see to the execulioi, of .-uiy trusts express. 
 ..npl.e.l, or constructive, to which any of ts 
 shares may be subject. 
 
 Xotice that the shares were held by the 
 triLstees and executors in trust; pos-session by 
 the bank of a copy of the will ; the facts that 
 transfers of other of its shares by the same 
 tuistees to other residuary legatees con- 
 tained m.tiee of substitution, that tiie president 
 M„d N, '"m T" "''" '""' ^■"•^'^'-t'"' "f tl'ewill. 
 lAW agent ot the executors : — 
 wiHr'n. >*'l '"^ insullicient to affect the bank 
 s m ht To ^r^'^f^^ ;" t''? particular trusts 
 
 Shares m Trust.]. -The curator to the sub- 
 stitution of W. Retry paid to the respondents 
 the .sum of .^8.(i;j2, to ledeeni .S4 shares of the 
 cap, al stock of the Rank of Montreal entered 
 in l^iie books of the bank in the name of W G 
 1 . in trust, ami which the said W. (1. P. "one 
 o the ;/r, rr. ,iiid manager of the estate had 
 pledged to respoii.lcnts for a,lvances made to 
 him personally. J. H. 1>. cl «/., appellants 
 representing the substitution, by their action 
 de.uanded to be refunde.l the ^noney tlToh 
 they alleged H. J. P.. one of them, liaci paid by 
 error as curator to redeem shares belonging to 
 the substitution. The shares in .luestimi were 
 not mentioue.l in the will of William Retry, and 
 there was ,10 inventory to shew they formed 
 [part of the estate, and no ar/. ,/■ ,n,/doi or 
 tunphn to shew that they were acquired with 
 the assets of the estate : — 
 
 Hehl, per Ritchie, ('.,!., and Fournier and 
 lasciereau, J, ., ,g i,.nii„g the judgment of the 
 Court behnv, that the debt of W. ti. R having 
 been paid by the curator with full knoule.lge 
 A..h ''V, ';'_t'''^,/n'Ptdlants could not recover. 
 Articles 104/, 104S C.C. 
 
 Rer .Strong and Fournier, JJ.-Tliat bank 
 stock cannot be held as regards third parties in 
 good huth to form part of substituted property 
 on the grouml that it has been purchased with 
 the moneys belonging to the substitution with- 
 out an act of investment in the name of the 
 substitutioii an,l a due registration thereof 
 Articles 03 038, 930 C.C. U'atterson, .[., dis! 
 stilting ) htn, y. Caixse d'Enaamie ,e Notrt- 
 Bame de Quthw, R) ,s. C. R. 713. 
 
 ='«'■'-"" -"'"-=s:A=.,i^:;r'£ri:^?,;:'^is,j;;s£Si;:l;:S 
 
 VI. WlNDINO-UP. 
 
 Appointment of Liquidators — Riaht to 
 A/.pomt Anolhu- /.■««/•.] -The Wimling-up Act 
 provi.les that the sharehohlers and crc"litors of 
 a company m h.pii.iatioii .,hall severally meet 
 and nominate persons who are to be ajipointed 
 -luxlators, and the Judge having the 'appoint- 
 
92 
 
 y trustees and exec- 
 tlie residnary lega- 
 >ii in the wilhliiect- 
 L.'giitei!.s' lawful i.ssue 
 ;ree disposed of the 
 i,dits of the issue : — 
 iitiou, unless with 
 h of trust, was not 
 ' section S(J of the 
 hank is not bound 
 my trusts express, 
 ) whieli any of its 
 
 vvere held by the 
 rust ; possession by 
 iill ; the faets that 
 liares by tlie same 
 '■y legatees con- 
 , tliat the president 
 ecutoi' of the will, 
 the bank was also 
 
 « aflfcet the bank 
 ; partioulai' trusts 
 nijmu V. Molsum 
 
 curator to the sub- 
 ^o the resj)ondents 
 1 M shares of the 
 
 Montreal entered 
 le name of W. U. 
 (aid W. (I. p. one 
 if the estate had 
 olvanees made to 
 t aJ., ,ip|iellants, 
 I, by tlieir action 
 he money which 
 them, had pai<l by 
 ares lielonging to 
 
 in (|Mestion were 
 i'iUiam Petry, and 
 lew tliey formed 
 'trie (/' (1)1 plot or 
 ^re ac(juired with 
 
 nd Fournier and 
 juilgniunt of the 
 W. <;. 1". having 
 1 full knowledge 
 >ulil not recover. 
 
 JJ.-'I'hat l)ank 
 ■1 third parties in 
 itituted property 
 purchased with 
 iilistitution with- 
 the name of the 
 itration tliereof. 
 'atterson, J., dis- 
 oiiomie ite. Notre- 
 3. 
 
 ore — Uiijht to 
 iVinding-up Act 
 :»nd creditors of 
 severally meet 
 to be ai)i)ointed 
 ing the appoint- 
 )rs from amoug 
 
 93 
 
 BENEVOLENT SOCIETIES. 
 
 94 
 
 C.uada allege! that .S. had ,dvvays been reputed 
 to be Illegitimate, an,l had been left by his 
 •other on the parish, and that he \v.J>,Z 
 
 • in un '" T'lf "^*''^''' ''^'" ''"■•^' ■'' <'i"«'-cnt 
 suiname. Another witness >talcd that S. had 
 
 : told him that one H. was his father, and Cat 
 h. on his return from a visit to Knglaiul said he 
 
 , >ad seen the place where his mother met with 
 
 i lier misfortune :— 
 
 : Held, sufiicient evidence of iUegilimacy to 
 displace the claim o heirship. I„r, Suudy, 
 Altoritty-i.aitral v. liruu.sdti,, 114 t). li. 324. 
 
 such nominees. In the case of the Bank of 
 Liverpool the Judge appointe.l liqui.lators from 
 among the nomuiees of the creditors, one of 
 them being the defendant liank •— 
 
 H<.ld, athrming the judgment of the Court 
 below, -22 N.S.liep. 97, that there is nothing' 
 m the Act rcpuring both creditors and share- 
 holders to be represented on the board of liuui- 
 dators; thatabank may be appointed li,,uida- 
 tor ; and that if any appeal lies from the deci- 
 sion of the Judge m exercising his judgment as 
 to the appointment, such discretion was wisely 
 exercised 111 tins case. For.snthe v. Ikink of Xom 
 kcoUa. In rr Btiiik of Liverpool, 1 S ,S. C. R. 707. 
 
 Co-ntnb\xtovif,a—SharM—Trmi>ifers. 1— After I 
 a w.nding-up or.ler has been made, it is too late ' 
 for holders of shares, entered as such in the i 
 books of the bank, to escai.e liability by shew- 
 nig irregularities in transfers to more or less I 
 remote pre'lecessors in title. I 
 
 A loan eupany which advances money on 
 the security of shares, ,,hich are transferre,l to I 
 It, and accepted by it, in tlie ordinary absolute I 
 form, cannot escape liability on tlie gi-^und that I 
 It IS merely a trustee for tlie lioiiou-io' a , 
 
 Judgmefit of Robertson J. 'a .,;i /, ,, i.^TsfTn"") '°^ *^^ ^""^«' °*' Ci-edltors- 
 C.tral JJcud- of Canwin //o, . h 'Jk// , , ? a b?or of m'^'^^ '" ^: "'"'•] -^n assignment by 
 LoauCo.,au,f.ra.., 18 A. 1!. 489 """* eiS^s mi " 'jr f f ':.^'- ''r' ^-'^'^ "^ hi^ 
 
 BENEFICIAL INTEREST. 
 
 'See Covenant. 
 
 BENEVOLENT SOCIETIES. 
 
 Liquidators' Commission on Set-off 1— In 
 *xiiig tne Injuidators' commission or compensa- 
 tion in the winding-up proceedings of an insol- 
 vent bank, It IS ,,roper to take into consider- 
 ation amounts adjusted or set-otf, but not actu- 
 ally received by the li<juidators ; and in this 
 <;ase a commission of two and a-.piarter per , 
 cent, having been allowed on the gross amount 
 of moneys actually collected, a furtlier commis- perly incorporate 
 ^ " )n"" '"' -^ ;!-'l'>^"-te.- l.er cent, on a sum of : Prol, 23 O 78 
 § J.! 1,000, consisting of amounts adjusted or set- • 
 oti was allowed. i _. 
 
 So far as possible, the amount allowed as com • co^^M^.u^ J°^ Beneflclary.] -.\n endowment 
 pensatioiitolicpiidatorsinsuchw3,iupp"o:iso.rtTtoaZ^ '" T' ''^ '' '-enevolent 
 
 e. editors un.ler I!. S. (). eh. 124, is a voluntar"; 
 assignment m the sense that it is optional wi the 
 debtor whether he makes it or no ; b„t the or m 
 m which It 1.S made and the ellect of , ih rm 
 not being optional with him, m tl.is >emse t s 
 "ot voluntary ; and having re:;ard to tl e pro 
 m.oiM,t^ec.,onl..^thel5enevolentSo:iPl^ 
 Act, K. S. O cii. 1,2, such an assignment does 
 not pass to the assignee the benelit U, whicl he 
 debtor IS entitled in the fund of a .society pro 
 K!*?; "l^T^^^ ""^'- that Act. //. ^t& 
 
 period ol the liipiidation, so as to ensure vigi- 
 lance and expedition at all stages of the li,|uida- 
 tion, as well as a proper distribution among the 
 iKluidators when more tiian one. lu re Central 
 Jiaid; Lye's Claim, 22 0. R. 247 
 
 pvN^'^Vnf"'^^ of Oomp! nles.] — &e 
 
 CO.M- 
 
 BARGAIN AND SALE. 
 
 See 8.\LE OF Goods— Sale of Land. 
 
 BARRISTER-AT-LAW. 
 
 See Costs, VI.— Solicitor. 
 
 BASTARD. 
 
 i* c«scd]-I„ answer to a claim of heir- 
 ship to one S., a witness, who had known 
 
 , . , • 'I'ld half to Ins 
 
 cha!S'in;^.i;mr:;f'S!;S^!:\^lr'^^^ 
 
 «houhn.en,Hilied,.idann";ei.r S 
 made on the cert.licate. The member subse 
 
 luen ly married, when he infornie I hi-fwife 
 that he won ,1 lave the certilicate c.-haiu^e, as 
 he intended ,t for her, giving her the certTi eate 
 which she deposited in a trunk used by lot" irl 
 common he continuing to pay the premium :- 
 Held, that this was not suliieieiit to displace 
 the ternis of the contract, as manUested on the 
 face 01 the certiHcate ; a„,l, f„,.t|,er, .so f"r ^ 
 
 hemother was concerned, she was /imply pr'^ 
 tected, o3 Vict. ch. .S9, sec. o (U , ' which 
 
 sstt,"iLr""*= -"""-'-Si. 
 
 moiis V. iiiimwms, 24 O. K. 002. 
 
 Expulsion of Member.]-Tlie plaintiff as 
 executor of his deceased son, siie.l t e efen 
 dants, an incorporated benelit society, to recover 
 the money benetit accruing' upon tin. d^ath nfl 
 
 pa sd a resolution removing the son from the 
 list of members, on the ground that he had 
 given untruthful answers t,? questions a to ht 
 state of health put to liini uiJou h.^ admission! 
 
 u 
 
 lUi 
 
 ' 
 
98 
 
 BETTING. 
 
 w 
 
 Ji! ■ 
 
 
 Tho complaints agninst him liud been reftned 
 to the coiniijittie of management, who had 
 reported m ].,s favour, but tlie society at a 
 ineetinj,' refused to a.lojit tl>e report, and, in the 
 absence of the decease.!, nithont any notice to 
 him or op, .irtunity of ap|)tnring, accepted an 
 
 «t C'' '":*^'""'^ }Tt }'y '' "'^"">l".''- present 
 at the meeting, which had not been l)efo,e the 
 committee, and acted upon it by fortliwitli 
 passing the resolution referred to. By tlie 
 rules of the society it was piovided that if it 
 should be established that a new member had 
 not answered truthfully, he should ,>o fac/o 
 be exclmled r.ni the society ; and also thlt if 
 It was pr<)ve<l :,lter his admission that he had 
 not answered truthfully, he should, by reason 
 thcieof, be struck off the list of members. The 
 eoiumittee of nianagtment was the body ap- 
 
 an.i hnd the (acts, tlieir report being subject to 
 coiihrmation (,r rejection by the society :-- 
 
 JJeld, tliat upon the principles governing sucii 
 nil iiHiuiiy the person accused sh<udd not be 
 co.KUmned without a fair chance of lieariiiL; the 
 evKleiice ngaiiKst him, and of 1 eiiig heard in his 
 (.wn defence : that the action of the <lefendants 
 «as cenfraiy to tiiese principles and to their 
 own niles; an.l, .hcrcU.re, the expulsion was not 
 lega J accomplished, Mid tlie plaintiff was 
 
 "Si, 24 (^ r b- ^'■""^ ''■ ^'^"'"' ^'• 
 
 m 
 
 2rr 
 
 Foreign Benevolent SociBty-Iivlex of Soci- 
 flu.]— A piliey upon the life (,f the plaintifl's 
 deceased husban.l was issued before his marriage 
 by a foreign benevolent society not inc(,rpo.nted 
 or leKiste.cHl uiu!er any Act of this p/ovince 
 payable to his mother, who predeceased him, or 
 his executor... By one of the by-laws of the 
 
 ma ried after the date of the ,:oli,y, it h,,o 
 Jac/o became payable to the wblowf " unless 
 otherwise ordered alter ,late of such marriage. ' 
 Under another by-law the policy could be nmde 
 pp.. ile only to a ^,lfe, an artiaiiced wife, a 
 blo<,d relation, or a pei>oii de],endent tn the 
 assured, and vas not to be willed or transferred 
 to any other ] CIS, ,1. By his vill the dcccasLd 
 puipcattdtogivetohis widow the amount of 
 this and another insurance, aibjcct, however to 
 thepayn.eiitofhisd.bts:- ■ "f™'-^ ti, to I 
 
 ..o?f^:''i'i V";' ""■■ V-"'.'''>' ''■"*' ^■•'r»'^''e of being 
 controlled by conditions not set out upon its 
 race, liecause section 4 of r)2 \'ict eh 32 (O 1 
 aniemling the Ontario Insurance Act,'R S O 
 ch. Uu, ai)],lies (,nly to the companies to which 
 the after Act applies, and as the insnrai ice 
 an the rights ot the parties under it did not 
 depend npcn anything contaiiu din the Act to 
 secure to wives „nd cliil.heii the benefit of life 
 nsiirance, MX. (). eh. m, it vas notnecessaiy 
 toctnsidervhetherit was brorght within the 
 scope 01 that Act by its an.e.H'mu.t by 5 V e 
 
 teims of the cntiact Mere to 1 c fonnd uvon itt 
 uce and in the rules of the society, whhl, formed 
 part ot tlic centrnct ;— 
 
 thf^'^i''' •"!'"' "'"t ""<'iT t»'e teims upon which 
 the society agreed to pay this money, the 
 itiMired hn.l no power to bequeath any part of 
 It to his exccutois or his creditors, and the 
 «oc-iety hau the right to say tliat their contract 
 Mtts to pay the money only within a certain 
 clafs ; that the insured liad no right to substi- 
 
 I tute a beneheiary outside that class : and there- 
 fr,?.. f."* •V?"'^^:- '"'°"8^'' t° f'e >'•"'»«' free 
 sjiiitr, zu u. K. 000. 
 
 Initiation — Cndifwn Prend,„t. ] — \V here 
 the constitution of a benevolent society provides 
 t at benel^ciaiy certiheatcs may be gntnted to 
 e sons who take a certain degi'.e, al? the s,:eps 
 lad down ,1, the constitution in connection 
 Dl e wm, \ f*'' °^ *'"'*, ''^eree must be ,ov^,. 
 
 can Ll 1, '5^'""'' ,"">' '''^^"'-'"'■■"■•■y certificates 
 can he legally issued. 
 
 fl,^?'f™' <';?"-'f?"^' the holder of a certificate, 
 
 : ; ^^tpted as a member of the degree in question, 
 e before ac ually going through the c'eremony 
 of initiation, t e ceitificate is nSt enforceable. 
 
 /.W^/'^'"*/^ ^^r^^' '^•' "ffi>'n«l. Devi,,, V. 
 Jxoyal Itmplarx of Ttmimam-e, 20 A. R. 259. 
 
 Insurance Act.]- The defendant, with the 
 
 c lf;i t?''J>.^ T "/ '''"^'"t' '-' l^^'--"^'' ^^ ^ society, 
 c.died the 'International Fraternal Alliance " 
 
 ihOe^-n^r'"]. '^^'^'^ '" "'" United X^i^,, 
 lvi„ f ' .^''"^■'"'-•'^ ""li'^ed a number of 
 Fhnv! w "''' "^Wl'^ation for membership 
 
 entitt *", '"■^'"" ""''g^'^ «°^'"1 ''"'«fit-^ 
 
 one 1"'"/'"' °'.' '''Ppli''''ition therefor, and 
 cii p..>uient of certain fees, to pecuniary b ■ 
 hts, namely, a certificate entitling the me> , . 
 to a weekly payment in case of sickn. ■« r,, 
 accident and cerUiiii other sums in case ot iv.t,' 
 
 th, n'r ''':*''' I"''°''- '^''»-' 'l^f">'i'"'t gave 
 the applicants a receipt acknowledginu the 
 
 nSf f- "" *^ ^'"•' «« ^t"*''*'- the 'purpose 
 n ., P Iv . "f" '"' "S"^""tnt written thereunder, 
 namely, to foi ward to the head < ffice the applica! 
 
 return" ''«""^"'" *'','^'"'J' '"""l '^ ''^■«'"'t'l to 
 letuin amount paid; but, if accepted, the 
 
 FoVbp f" n"i"""!"*"'/' """>'''^'' «t^'-. "'title.! 
 al, l''>>^hts of all social, etc. advant- 
 
 ages; am thereafter might secure all the 
 pecuniary benchts on aj.plieation therefor :- 
 
 Held, that the defendant was carrying on the 
 obt r'l l'^^""'^"* i"«u>..nce without liaving 
 obt^ued the necessary license therefor con 
 tiary to section 49 of the Insuiance Act, R. 8. 
 
 IwlnV- .■o""' ''?"* "" protection was afforded 
 by section 43, relating to fraternal, etc. . societies, 
 the scheme not being an insurance of the lives 
 of the me-mbers exclusively ; and the convic- 
 tion therefor of the defendant for carryrng on 
 such Inisiness was therefore afliimed. E^jha 
 \. t>laiMoii, 21 O. R. 679. 
 
 Payment Into Court. J-On an application 
 by a benevolent so. lety for leave to pilv irsur- 
 
 JarTie™'' '"^" '^'''""' '''"■"'*'' ¥ different 
 
 Held, that sub-sectitn 5 of section M of tli.> 
 
 '/ortbt 'r f^'*-'^*^'"'^ the benefit of the Act 
 foi the relief of tiustces to such cases, and that 
 the society was entitled to pay the money in. 
 
 <Ste I^,'•^•I^A^cE, V, 
 
 BETTING. 
 
 Sr.e Gasiino. 
 
9ff 
 
 at class : and there- 
 to the widow fief 
 debts. Morijan v. 
 
 lent society pi-ovidci-- 
 may be Kiaiited t(. 
 degree, all the Slep^ 
 tion in connection 
 L'gree' must be com- 
 ieticii:ry certificaten 
 
 der of a certificate, 
 s duly (jiiaiitied ami 
 I degree in question, 
 rough the ceremony 
 is not enforceable, 
 tfiuned. Deviiiii v. 
 'ice, 20 A. R. 259. 
 
 efendant, with the 
 (ranch of a society, 
 raternal Alliance," 
 he United States, 
 uced a liuniber oi 
 n for membership 
 ig fee of ^o, wliich 
 !ed social benefits 
 ition therefor, and 
 to pecuniary b 
 itiing the me . 
 lae of sickn' 
 ms in case of .;.,,r,i. 
 le dtfemiunt gave 
 .'knoMlcdgiiig the 
 ited, the purposes 
 ritten thereunder, 
 1 < ffieetheupplica- 
 id if decliiicd to 
 
 if accepted, the 
 iber, etc., entitlul 
 cial, etc., udvant- 
 t secure all the 
 ion therefor : — 
 18 carrying on the 
 5 without having 
 ise therefor con- 
 Jiance Act, R. 8. 
 :tion was afforded 
 lal, etc., societies, 
 ranee of the lives 
 
 and the convie- 
 t for carrying on 
 iflinncd. Bajh a 
 
 1 an application 
 ive to pay irsur- 
 lied by difTertnt 
 
 section flS of the 
 iiiefit of the Alt 
 h cases, and thai 
 the money in. 
 leversed. y.V 
 
 V. 
 
 97 
 
 BILLS OP EXCHANGE AND PROMISI.ORY NOTES. 
 
 BICYCLE. 
 
 9a 
 
 Riding on sidewalk. ]-A bicycle is a 
 vehicle -and ri, ling it on the sidewalk is 
 
 o rh'secth.n''. 7*'f ''T' "'*'"" "-'iraning 
 / 1 M I °f ^'''''^'°n 496 of the Consoli 
 
 
 BIGAMY. 
 
 See CoNSTiTUTioN-.u. Law_Cr,m,.nal Law. 
 
 BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMIS- 
 SORY NOTES. 
 
 I. Defences to Action.s, 97. 
 
 II. Form, lOO. 
 
 III. Parties Liable, 101. 
 
 IV. Pkesentment .^ND Notice OF L.,.,tonoue. 
 
 L Defencks to Actions. 
 
 01 one ot their directors 'I'lio,. ,i; i i. , " 
 that the plaintiffs were°not luld rs r';:;^u1 i^ 
 due course without notice ; while tlie ,il ndffs 
 swore that the note was .liscou ted lefofe i 
 
 not founded upon any known facts, hut was 
 
 ^r .'« ,""'■* '"^ substantial portion of thfi 
 plain iflsc aim as a con.lition of being a owed 
 to defend, the motion should he granted 
 
 1 he presumption that value has been L-ivPn 
 may be done away with in thn , ... t ^ . " 
 
 .tprn.i'.''"""^ '""" '" "»' •i»".T„r'& ' 
 
 JSJe"""" "'""•»• '^'- ■■■ «■ 2Ch. 617, 
 
 '■rsivKr^'""-"' *■■'■ '■«"'«* 
 
 7 
 
 I Bad Palth Of Holder - r„„..,,irar,, 1 I- 
 I'laKci, wlioilid not pay it at inatinDv l.„f i 
 
 itli the garnishee process, and f,.rl,i,l,l,.„ f 
 pay more tlia.i the balance' at\er ie c £ of 
 the amount of the iud"iii..nt •,,„i '^'""^"°'> "' 
 
 off.»iii,i..„,„,„r';:''; \rL;'"?;,r;,'° 
 ^Ss/si^::,,"^ -'«^«::t 
 
 note was indorsed l)v P for tlu .. c '"' 
 
 "oto neve, |,„,„„| ",„ |"' ,£;, I .-'» » I '« 
 
 e.ititle.1 to recover it Ii.ck J// .' v ,'/ ' ' ""'"^ 
 
 SiaL'e of *H() (ion ,,„, i • . '^ ^*'^^ a mort- 
 
 .i»...tiy c. t.u,,i. ,„„i V ; „, 2 ,*'!?"■ 
 
 nad never been iimji..l 'i i . ^""^ 
 
 i quently gave " d sd L t" T''^''^'''. «"^'^«- 
 
 j v. Ca,My, 18 S. C. R. 71;). ' ""'■ ^"" 
 
 I 
 
 I Consideration — /',„r/(«,«. M„„„, „f ,. 
 
 01^ 
 
 'II 
 
99 
 
 BILLS OP EXCHANGE AND PKOMISSORY NOTES. 
 
 100 
 
 ill 
 
 ! 
 
 Election Law— ''/ffyu///;/.] — S. (;i]ipfll:im's 
 Inisband), l)ioiij,'lit an iu'tion :iL;aiiist St. I,. Urns. 
 on a promissory noto for C''4,C(I0, ii reiicwul of a 
 nf)te for the saiiiu ainouiit niadu l;y S., uiidcirsoil 
 by liiiii ami lianilfcl to St. J,. Bms., allcgin;,' 
 that the original note hail licen made and dia" 
 nomited for the neconmiodatiou of iSt. L. The 
 evidence shewed that tlie proceeds of the note 
 were paid (.ver to one ])., as agent for S., to he 
 \ised as a portion of a provincial (dcction fund 
 controlled liy S. : — 
 
 }leld, allirniing the judgment of the Court 
 lielow,_ that tlie plaintiff Cfmld not recover, even 
 assiiiuing a promise to pay on the [lart of .St. L. 
 Bros., the transaction being illegal under ."iS 
 Vict. eh. 7, sec. '_'(J(! (I'.(.). ), now H. S. Q., Article 
 42"), which makes void any contract, ijromise or 
 undertaking, in any way relating to an election 
 under the said .Act. Damcreaa v, SI. Loiiiif 
 JS S. C. K. flS7. 
 
 Mortgage— C'o//(i/f,-a^ SccurlUj—Dl-schanje. ] 
 —A. and J5., ])artners in business, borrowed 
 money from C, giving him as s(!eurity their 
 joint and several promissory note and a mort- 
 gag(^ on partnership property. 'I'lie partnership 
 having been(lissolved, A. assumed all the liabili- 
 ties of the lirni, and continued to carry on the 
 bti.Mne.S3 alone. After the dissolution C. gave A. 
 a disi'harge of tiie mortgage, but without receiv- I 
 ing payment of his debt, and afterwards brought 
 an action against K. on tlie promissory note" — 
 
 Held, athrming the decision of the Court of 
 •\ppcal, 'JO A. U. ()!).-). that tlie note having 
 been given for the mortgage debt ('. could not 
 recover without being iirepared, upon pavmeut, 
 to convey to 15. the mortgaged lauds wliich he 
 had iiic.ajiaeitated Idmself from doing : — ; 
 
 Held, also, that l)y the terms of the di.ssolu- i 
 tioii of ])artiiership the relations between A. 
 and 15. were changed to those of principal and 
 surety, and it having been found at tlie trial 
 that C. had notice of sucli change, hi.s release 
 of the priiicii)al. A., discharged ]}., the surety, 
 from the iialiility for the debt. AUisvn v. Mc- 
 Donald, a.S .S. C. R. 635. 
 
 Kxebange Act, ISOO, the con.sideration o' which 
 was the purchase money of a patent right with- 
 out having th.! Mdids "given for ,• patent 
 right ' written or printed acnjss its face when 
 taken by the payee, or when transferred bv him 
 as rcijuired by K. ,s. C. eh. iL'.S, sees. 12, 14, 
 was held void in tlic hands of an eiulorse'e for 
 value, with notice ni the consideration. 
 
 .hidginent of the County Onirt of Lennox and 
 Addington reversed. ./nhmu:i v. Jftirti)/, 19 A. 
 I K. .")S(2. 
 
 Patent Right.]— Where part of the consider- 
 ation for the transfer of a patent right from one 
 liartner to another was the giving, at the plaiii- 
 titis' suggestion, of the notes of the lirm for the 
 individual debt of the transferor to the plain- 
 tills : — 
 
 I Held, that under sub-section 4 of section 30 
 of the liills of Exchange Act, ."iS Vict. eh. 33 
 (I).), the words "given for a patent right" 
 should have been written across the notes so 
 
 ; given : and in the absence thereof the plaintiH's 
 could not recover. Sniiiml v. Faiyiiri''ri' "4 O 
 
 ' K. 4S(i. ./ . 
 
 This decision was reversed by the Court of 
 I Appeal, 21 A. I;. 41S, but was restored by the 
 Sujireine Court, unit iidm. Crttii/ v. Samii(/ 24 
 !S. C. R. 278. 
 
 Striking Out Cefence.]- Ujion a summary 
 application under Itule 1322 (3.S7), to strike out 
 detences on the ground that they disclose "no 
 reasonable answer," the Court 'is not to look 
 upon the matter with the .same strictness as 
 upon demm-rer; a Jiarty should not be lightly 
 deprived of a ground pf substantial defence by 
 the summary process of a judgment in Chambers. 
 
 Anil ill an action ujioii a promissory note, 
 alleged by defemlants to have been taken by 
 plaintitls after maturitj-, defences of pavment, 
 estopjiel by conduct, aiid a claim for e^iiitible 
 protection arising out of agreeinent, were allowed 
 to remain on the record. Jlan/; of I/amiltoii v. 
 Cconje, Hi P. R, 418. 
 
 Partnership— f-'sc of Finn A7(me.]— E. was 
 a member of the firm of S. C. & Co., ami also a 
 menilier of tlie Hnn of E. Sc Co., and in order to 
 raise money for the use of E. & Co. he made a 
 promissory note which he signed with the name 
 of the other firm, and indorsing it in the name 
 of M & Co. had it discounted. The ollicers of 
 the b.uik which discounted the note knew the 
 handwriting of E., with whom the bank had 
 hail frequent dealings. In an actiim against the 
 'uakers of the note C. pleaded that it was made 
 by E. in fraud of his prrtnera, and the jury found 
 that S. C. & Co. had not authorized the making 
 of the note, but did not answer (piestious sul> 
 mitted as to the knowledge of the bank of want 
 of authority : — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court 
 below, that the note was made by E. in fraud of 
 Ilia partners, and that the bank had sufficient 
 knowledge that he was using his partners' names 
 for his own purjioses to put them on incjuiry as 
 to authority. N(jt having made such inquiry 
 the Bank could not recover against C. Cnii/h- 
 ton. V Halifax Baiikiwj Co., 18 S. C. I!. 140 ' 
 
 I Surety— Z>(V/(nfr;/e of Mnl-er.]— Where the 
 , holder of a promissory note had agreed to accept 
 i a third party as his debtor in lieu of the maker :— 
 I Held, ailirming the judgment of the Court of 
 j Appeal, 20 A. R. 298, .itih mm llolliday v, 
 J Hoijan, that, as according to the evidence, there 
 , was a complete novation of the maker's delit 
 i secured by the note, an<l a release of the maker 
 ; in respect thereof, the indorsers on the note 
 were also released, llvtlida.y v. Jachoii. 22 S 
 I C. R. 479. 
 
 Transfer After Maturity— Etiniti/ Attach 
 1H(/.J-An agreeinent between the iiiaker and 
 payee of a promissory note that it shall only be 
 used for a particular purpose, constitutes an 
 equity which, if the note is used in violation of 
 that agreement, attaches to it in the hands of a 
 
 i hovAfble holder for value who takes it .after dis- 
 honour. Strong, C.J. and Taschereau, J,, dis- 
 
 ! sen ting. MacArthur v. MacDowall, 23 S. C. R. 
 
 1571. 
 
 II. Form. 
 
 ^f^'^^^^^ ^^B^^-'i-^ yromisBory note, made Lien Note.]- An instrument in the form of .t 
 before the coming into force of the Bills of promissory note, given for part of the price of 
 
S. 100 
 
 iiclcratiou o' whinh 
 l):itiMit liglil, witli- 
 ivL'ii fru' ,', patent 
 niws its faoo when 
 laiisfei 10(1 l)v him, 
 l-J'A, sees. 12, 14, 
 ■>f' an endorsee for 
 iteration, 
 mit ot' Lennox and 
 I V. Murl'm, 19 A. 
 
 irt iif tlic eonsidcr- 
 L'nt I'iglit from one 
 villi,', at the plain- 
 )f tiie lirm for the 
 ui'or to the phiin- 
 
 on 4 of section 30 
 t, 53 Vict. eh. 33 
 • a patent riglit" 
 ;i'oss tlie note.s so 
 .'i-eof tlie plaintiH's 
 Fairijrierc, 24 O. 
 
 by the Court of 
 IS restored hy the 
 ■aiij V. SumiKf, 24 
 
 Ujioii a summary 
 3^7), to .strike ont 
 hey <liseIo.se "no 
 rt i.s not to look 
 ame strietne.ss as 
 1(1 not be lightly 
 Laiitial defence by 
 (lent in (.'hambers. 
 proiiii.ssiiry note, 
 e been taken by 
 iice.s of ])ayment, 
 aim for e^uitible 
 lent, were allowed 
 Ik of Hamillou v. 
 
 en]— Where the 
 1 agreed to accept 
 u of tlie maker : — 
 ,t of the ( 'oiirt of 
 iwm llolliday v, 
 le evidence, there 
 he maker's delit 
 ase of tlie maker 
 ■er.s on tiie note 
 V. Jac/ctioii, 22 S. 
 
 —Equitij Attach 
 the maker and 
 t it sliall only be 
 , constitutes an 
 d in violation of 
 n tlie iiands of a 
 akes it after dis- 
 eliereau, J., dis- 
 wall, 23 S. C. R. 
 
 in the form of a 
 of the price ol 
 
 101 
 
 BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES. 
 
 an .irticle, with tlK.- added condition "that the 
 rovensed. DonMoa Bank v. \Vi,juin'r/l R. 
 
 102 
 
 the,iefeii,.c(nd!r;o".i^;.Suhol/7r'''=^ 
 t be note were entitled to recover r ru "^ 
 t'<ru„.-<„a, 21 .S. C. R. 4S4 t'tuxluld y. 
 
 Undertakins.] -.ludgnient was recovered in 
 a Division Court for.SI0,S.03 iioiii.' ><in i i 
 due and .'^S (i3 in-n,.,.„V i ^ '^'"^ balance 
 
 m.le,.taketopay\heexeoutoriofri^r^ 
 i>. v., the sum of .>!375 on a inortLM.ru ti, ' L i 
 
 a,a„.st the Royal Hotel prope tv" Stie ?svi 1 e^ 
 
 thereby reducing the amount to .^2,000'' !^ ' 
 
 Held, that the document, even if a' note 
 
 vice. (.11. .«().), which was < ouhtful (idv.. 
 emircltothe benefit of the executors nS 
 to <.. I. i and tlierefore the action bciit , crZ 
 for breach of coiitraef Hi,. ;„ i = "iLitly 
 
 excess of the ju,"^it^„''^,S«;ri; lir? r 
 
 «IOOJ.uttliatpi.ohib,ti,.nw.,ul,o,y',rf 't,: 
 excess. TnmbI,'. v. Miller, 22 O. H. 5oa 
 
 in. I'ARTIJiS LlAULF.. 
 
 Asont~Kalo,:.tm'.Hl "/,,,;• pro. "1 - Where 
 m agent accepts or endorses " per pro ■' tl c 
 
 ^ C;; i' o i,'"' ""'° "^ --Pte!lor':.mor " 
 IS oounil to iiKpiire as to the extent nf ti, 
 a,'..ufs authority, and where a i^t" n L su h 
 autiiority, Ins abuse of it does not-alfe . / ", 
 /III: holder tor va ue. Iin/(i,i< v li , . 
 P^^pk. Bnianl V. <^(..f'Z;^:[,te t 
 
 Attorney- fluslHiml cnid ir//;-, 1- Where bv 
 a dociiine.it in, orsed "procurai^oi geni, de e^ 
 
 .^a^,bn.sofexcli-;-dlan:^r, 
 
 Held, that the wife's liability extended to all ' 
 promissory notes granted by the husband an : 
 was not limited by Article 181 of theCi " Co c ' 
 to such notes as were re„uired for the , > rix es ' 
 
 o.^T:'^^s^£r^-rf^^/^«.;.]^ 
 pnvK,a.r-T:;^.;rsir''^^''^'^ 
 
 l'-<I-l "S., president ,f! C ee^ e ( ■o;;',".'"'"^.'. 
 "I"-' which he drew from time t, ''"'^' 
 ;=he,,u,..s sig„ed "s., presi( Cn ' r '""" ^y 
 
 ;eni,,..ci?lrawn,theEKi,,i trS' 
 
 seal of til, c,, ,m nv at; ."l ITi"'""' "■'"' '''« 
 the kiiowl^d^e^; ^.l^Sv of H^'r''" "''"'""'^ 
 
 £'";.s::.?itril^'---'^'-^:w«^ 
 
 s t '' ; j'::;;^;,;[:;:r:^--'-'i-i-i oitt 
 
 I time S^ was a ,11^, L,'? ";""!""'>'. At this 
 i larger am..ml^;l:ur£^^^^''^i:^^''>• to. 
 
 while ,ifter two rciicw.k H / *'" ""^''"- 
 
 "P by the defei., a Its f t 'c' • ! ' T ^■''i""*'"^'^ 
 consent of S. but 4l ( ut the ^ l',; A:!"'; '^ 
 
 -c.,uiitinhLl;rnam^,i%'::!:L!;'^!:''^ 
 
 TJie conipinv n ,'; s 'led o r""'''''"^:> ^'■^''''"^«- 
 
 ;LS^^::;Ti^-BT^?''^"-no^ 
 
 accounted:- ''"'°'^' ""-■>' ''^'1 f"Hy 
 
 :or!Sirl;rthe ;£'■';'''"?'■''''''''"•' ^'-t"-™ 
 
 Uecision of Street / rr.,- . i /, • , 
 
 luAuu/ Lu. V. Mm 1,11/, 20 {) R Qo? 
 Afhrnied in appeal, 2." A. 1{. (io. "*"'• 
 
 Endorsement by Stranger I— Wl„ .., 
 
 \ >'H«.sory note payable to a mui?M ' ' v, .. , P'"," 
 
 l>y another per. on bef,u'e 1 I v . ' ' f ' ""'""'-■'' 
 tl'e payee, the forme s VrlhCl 'i '"-* ""^« '" 
 '"'I'lcr in due cou^ by wte,^" '"'?''' '"-'^ 
 ftiidSSof the Hills of l.-vV si-'ctnms oti 
 
 eh. ,33 (D ) i-xohange Act, r,3 Vict. 
 
 nu'i signed K,, manager (». U I'o '' In .... 
 action against the individual members o tl e 
 company the defence was that R a one SZ 
 Idileon the note and that the Words ' ' „ a ! 
 nlss' - ' "■"■" "'"'"^^ clescriptive of his bus!. 
 
 lo liR t' .r '^' "^''t"'^'^ established t lia 
 otii R and the payees of the note intended to 
 . uike the company liable ; and as R. had author 
 ^ly, as manager, to make a note on whh.". t e 
 
 j , Maker or nnAovBer—Inlentioii 1 \V i, 
 ;i;g agreed to become security .Vi'^T,,- ^''V 
 bis name upon the biok ,f "^ ■' '^™*<' 
 
 which a nonsuit was entered wif , '' °f 
 
 to plaintitts to ,,,,,,^ f' '-''." r''"'^^'*-' reserved 
 
 fav<n.r, if Uieix w" mv ev/l ''^''""''' ''^ **»'^*'' 
 JU'-y as to W.'s lubilfty.r '''''"^•" ^" «o to the 
 
 j".ythat W. intend V to le''.™riink^"''? ^Il^ 
 "ote, and plaintitTs were riVh' 1 "^'H^ 
 
 • lil 
 
 I- 1 
 
lOS 
 
 BILLS OF SALE. 
 
 lor 
 
 Maker or Endorser— /j(/(7(^'/ ».]— A jirom- 
 
 issory iidte, f(ir viiliic itciivnl, at three iiiontliB, 
 
 WHS made liy one of tLe (]el« lulants to tlio oider 
 
 of the testiitor oi the pliiiiitifl's. ,S(.i)ie yenis 
 
 afterwiiid.s the iiiiiker ci.nveytd l.ia farm to liis 
 
 son, tlie oilier defendant, on a verbal nndei- 
 
 standing, nnhnown to the payee, that the son 
 
 was to jiay the father's debts, inehiding tlie 
 
 note. After tlie conveyanee, the payee having 
 
 pressed the father for seeurity, the Fon, with- 
 out any c iidortenuiit of the note liy tiie payee, 
 
 wrote his name on the haek of it, all ]iarties 
 
 supposing that he had ■■ ' ' 
 
 liable as endoiscr 
 
 payment on aeeount to the payee. 
 
 Ill an aeti, n against father and son :- j Bank of 1'. E. I., the 'faet of "non-pnymeiU wal 
 
 Held, that no liability attaehed to the son, I stated as follows :— " I am now advi.^cd that it. 
 
 either as endorser or guarantor, or as trustee < has not yet been coverel by Hviik of V F 
 
 of the property conveyed to him. llohirtxoH v. \ Island. In case of it being returned here again 
 
 i unpaid I deem it proper to notify you of tho 
 
 tlode V. Hayley, 12 M. & V\'. 51 ; Drotm v. London 
 d- A', jr. Hy. Co., 4 B. &S. 32(), referred to. 
 (4.) Ihat the defendants, wiiether consi<lered 
 as mere agents for the colkcticn, or as holders, 
 of the cheque for value, were, as regards the 
 drawer, (i:ly called upon to shew that there 
 was no unreasonable (lelay in presentment and 
 m giving notice of non-payment ; and, no such 
 delay having occurred, the Crown wa.s not re- 
 lieved from liability as drawer of. the cheque. 
 (S.) In a letter from the manager of tlie liank of 
 
 he back of it, all jiaities | Montreal, at Ottawa, to the Deputy Minister . , 
 thereby rendered himself i Finance, which the defendants put in eviden. e 
 Subse(|uently he made a J as a notice to the Crown— the drawer— of the 
 ' dishonour of the cheque by the drawees— tLe 
 
 Lonsdale, 21 O. 1!. COO. 
 
 Partntrs.]- 
 R. 713. 
 
 ■.?(«' WUjk V. Willkms, 24 S. C. 
 
 IV. Presentment and Notice of Di.shonoub. 
 
 circumstances, as I will be tquired in that 
 event to reverse the entry and return it to the 
 Department " : — 
 
 Held, that the words "not covered," as used 
 in this letter, were e(juivalent to "not paid," or 
 to "unpaid;" and, being so construed, the letter 
 
 was a sufficient legal notice of dishonour. Boilfy 
 , V. Pur/n; 14 M. & W. 44 ; Paid v Joel 27 L 
 CbeqMe8-Prexe7itatiovljijPoKt—Svfficieiia,o/^J. Ex. 383, referred to. The Queen \ Ban /c 
 
 Notice of I)i'<hovcm:]—1'he Dominion Govern- 
 ment having a deposit account of public moneys 
 with the Bank ot P. E. I. upon which they were 
 entitled to dm - - -.. . 
 
 of Montreal, 1 F.\. C. B. 154. 
 
 Cheque of Third Ferson— Delay 
 
 ni ijivnuj 
 
 aw at any time, the Deputy Mini- Nutke of l)Uhoiiow.]-V;\wvc the eheciue of 
 Bter drew an official che(|- ■ thereon for .?.-iO,OCO third person is .eceived from a debto- •■" 
 
 which, together with ami dierof other cheques 
 he sent to the branch of the Bank of Montreal at 
 0., at which liancli biuik the (ioveriiment had 
 a'.oadep(sit account. The said branih bank 
 tht r^njjon placed the amount of the che(]Ue to the 
 credit of the I'c minion Government on the looks 
 
 ditional payment of an antecedent debt, the. 
 creditor must without undue delay inesent tho 
 clit(jue for payment, and if it is dishonoured 
 notify the debtor of the fact and claim recourse 
 against him on the original indebtcdiict s. Unless 
 ,.,,,,, , „ , . , : ''lis is done the creditor will be taken to havo 
 
 of the bank, he maiiagcr thcie( f endorsing the ; accepted the cheque in payment of the debt and 
 
 saiiie in l.Jauk and foiwarding it to the head i the debtor is discharged 
 
 office of his bank at Montreal. The cheque was : Judgment (,f the Fiist Divisiui Court of Went 
 
 Jien sent f'-rwaid by mail fr( m the head office ; vorth affirmed. Sau-yer v. 'Ihcma^, 18 A R 
 
 of the Bank ot ^lontieal to the Bank of P. E. I. j 129. 
 
 for collection, but was not paid by the latter | 
 
 bank which, subsequently to the jiresentment of i 
 
 the cheque, suspended payment gmerally : — 
 Held, (1). That the Bank of Montreal were 
 
 mere agents 1( i the collection of this chique 
 
 and that, altlu u<.'h the proceeds of the cheque 
 
 /Waiver.]— A statement by the endorser of a 
 dishonoured note to the holder that he would 
 see the maker about it, and bis subsequent 
 statement that he had seen the maker who pio- 
 miscd to pay as soon as he could, with a request 
 
 r , , ' ,.; '; \ :, i""""""" >" ""- ^''>'i">= miscu lo pay as soon as ne could, witli a re(|uesf 
 had been credited to the Government upon the not to "crowd the note," are not in themselvt? 
 books of the biuik, It river was the intention of j sufficient evidence of waiver of notice of dis^ 
 tlie lank to tnat the duque as having been honour-. 
 
 discour.Ud by tlitm ; consequently, as the bank 
 did not ac(|uiie property in the cheque, and were 
 never holdeis of it for value, they were entitled 
 on the dishonour of the cheque to reverse the 
 entry in their books and charge the amount 
 thereof against the Government. OiltK v. Per- 
 IhiK, 9 East 12 ; Ex parte Barhnrth, 2 De G. 
 & J. 194, referitd to. (2.) That the -node of 
 presenting a cheque on a bank by transmitting 
 it to the draw ee by mail, is a legal and custom- 
 ary mode of presentment. Ileijvood v. Pickning, 
 L. R. 9 Q. B. 428 ; Prideavx v. Criddle, L. R. 
 4 Q. B. 455, referred to. (3.) That although 
 a collecting bank cannot enlarge the time for 
 presentment by circulating a lull or cheque 
 amongst its branches, yet, if it has b>een endorsed 
 to and transmitted through them for collection, 
 the difi'eitnt branches or agencies arc to be re- 
 garded as separate and independent endorsers 
 for the purpose of giving notice of dishonour. 
 
 AA'hat is sufficient evidence of such waiver 
 discussed. Britlon v. Milxim, 19 A. R. CO. 
 
 BILLS OF LADING. 
 
 See In re Central Bank if Canada ; Canada- 
 Shippbuj Company's Case, 21 O. R. 515, and 
 Pemlien v. Imperial Bank, 20 0. R. 325, ante 88, 
 
 I. 
 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 BILLS OF SALE. 
 
 Generally, 105. 
 
 Affidavit of Bona Fides, 105. 
 
 Change of Possession, 107. 
 
10# 
 
 ; Bronm v. London 
 32(!, referred to. 
 iietlier coiiHiderttl 
 ii 11, or an lidlderH, 
 e, as regards the 
 shew tlmt there 
 presentment and 
 !nt ; and, no such 
 lown was ndt re- 
 :t of, the ohe(]iic. 
 gerof t!ie liniik i 
 •eputy Ministit 
 ;s put in cvidt im o 
 e drawer— ot the 
 the drawees — tlie 
 nonpayment was 
 w advised that it. 
 f Bank of V. E. 
 turned liere .igaiii 
 notify you of the 
 '.(juired in tliat 
 i return it to the 
 
 covered," as used 
 ;o "not paid," or 
 strued, the letter 
 ishononr. Bailfij 
 III/ V. Joe/, 27 L. 
 e Queen v. Baiih 
 
 Di'lny in ijii'ivij 
 tlic eliecjue of a 
 a debtor as eon- 
 cdent debt, the. 
 lelay jiresent the 
 t is dishonoured 
 id elaini recourse 
 jtidiKh.s. Unless 
 JO taken to have 
 t of the debt and 
 
 11 Court of Went 
 licmax, 18 A. R. 
 
 he endorser of a 
 3r that lie would 
 his Bubse(juent 
 maker who pio 
 J, with a request 
 lot in theniselvts 
 if notice of dis- 
 
 of fcuch waiver 
 19 A. R. 06. 
 
 an alia : Caiuida 
 0. R. 515, and 
 R. 325, ante 88. 
 
 .105 
 
 IV. Drscription of Good.s, 109. 
 
 V. Pkopkrty Pas.sin(;, 109. 
 VI, Renewal, 110. 
 
 V'll. liKilirTO PosSKSSION, HI. 
 
 VIII. Who May I:mi'k.u'h, 112. 
 
 I. 'Jknkrai.lv. 
 
 Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors I 
 
 --.Vn a8.signtnent of personal property in tru.st 
 t„ .s.ll lie saine and apply the proeee.ls to t ho 
 payment of debts .lue oert.dn named creditors 
 o he assignor is a bill of sale witliin sietion 4 
 of U.e N,.va .Scotia Bills of 8ale Act, R S N 
 
 the general beneht of creditors and so excepted 
 froM, thy operation of the Act by section 10 
 ^Irrlulia/il V. IliihUy, 18 ,S. C. 1{. 116. 
 
 Consideration Not Truly Stated. 1- .SV, 
 
 720, 19 A. U. 188, po..f. 107. ' ^" "• ^^• 
 
 Porelgj Contract as to Chattels in On- 
 
 12 ( . 1.. .j,.7, tliat goods which wore in O. t.wio 
 at the tune of the execution of a .loc me t ^ 
 hyil.thecat.on of them «ere subjcc to the 
 provisions of R. S. u. ch. 12.",, although t Ic 
 i^rties tliereto were at the time domicired i a 
 
 ar72ori9l:A?^''^°"^-^^-'^'--.2" 
 
 Time for Payment.]- Where a chattel 
 mortgage is taken to secure a debt, the time 
 for p.iymc.nt may be extended beyond a year 
 A-//7/ V. Jam".-<, 21 A. R. .33S. ^ 
 
 BILLS OF SALE. 
 
 II. Affidavit of Rona Fides. 
 
 Adherence to Statutory Form. ]— The omis 
 sioii of the date and the words "before me" 
 from the jurat of an atfidivit accompanying, a 
 lull ot sale under section 4 of tlie Nova Sootia 
 Act makes such affidavit void and the defect 
 cannot lie supplied by parol evidence in iiro- 
 ceednig.s by a creditor of the assignor aga nst 
 the mortgaged goods. An-hibatd v. HiihL, 18 
 o. '.. K. lid. ^' 
 
 Adherence to Statutory Form.!- Where 
 
 au affidavit of bona, fid.., to a bill of sale stated 
 Uiat the sale was not made for the purpose of hold- 
 ing or enabling the bargainee to hold tlie goods 
 mentioned therein against the creditors of the ■ 
 bargainor, while the form given in the statute I 
 uses the words "against any creditors of tl e ^ 
 bargainor such violation <li,l not avoM the! 
 bill ot sale as against execution creditors, the ' 
 two .-xpressions leing substantially the same, j 
 Owy line, J., dissenting. I 
 
 The statufj re(piires the afhdavit to be made I 
 by. witnoHs to the execution of the bill of "ale 
 but as attestation is not essential to the validity 
 ot llio instrument its execution can be proved bv 
 ^ny:,.,npete„t witness. Eni,rsou v. liLierrnun, 
 
 108 
 
 Adherence to Statutory Form.] -The Act 
 
 m force in Nova .Sctia relating to bills of sale. 
 R. jS N. ,S. .,th ser. eh. 92, icpiires by section 
 4 that every such iiHlriiment shall bo accom- 
 panie, by an athdavit by the grantor, ,ui<l sec 
 tion 11 provides that the affidavit shall bo as 
 nearly as may be, u. the form given in schedules 
 
 lows- "I 4 k' nf''" P'-^"*-'''"."'! I'^^«i"» '^« fol- 
 lows . 1, A. B ot ,„ 11,^, County of 
 
 . . . . .. .(occupition), make oath and say." An 
 
 nm!r'',.''"^"!"'V">''"« " '"" "f H^^l/ having 
 omitted to stite the occupation of the grantor •_ 
 ^ Held, per Strong (Jwynue an,l fatteraon, 
 j.IJ., tliat as the affidavit referre,! in terms to 
 [the.nstrum..nt itself, u. which the occupation 
 of the dopoucnt was stated, the statute was 
 complied with. ^ 
 
 I'er Taschoreau, .J.-Tho onus was upon the 
 persons attacking the bill of sale to prove by 
 .lirect evidence tliat the grantor had an o'col 
 pation, which they had failed to do. The iudg- 
 ment of the Supreme Court of Nova ScotifwM 
 reversed. Smith v. McLean, 21 S. C. R. 355, 
 
 Adherence to Statutory Form -Hv R ".^ 
 
 N. S. .-,th ser. eh. 92, sec. 4, every elia'l^i 
 mortgage must be accoinpaiiie.l by an alfi.lavit 
 of borne Mri, "as nearly as may be" i„ the 
 form given :n a schedule to tho Act. The form 
 of the jurat to sncli alli.lavit in the schedule is • 
 
 •> worn to at in the county of 
 
 th.s....dayof........ A.D. ...f R^foreme 
 
 .a commissioner, etc. • 
 
 Held reversing tlio judgment of the Supreme 
 
 that where the jurat to an atfi.lavit was "sworn 
 toatMiddletonthisfithdayof July A D '801 
 etc., without iiami.,g the county, the mortgage 
 was void notwithstanding the afh,lavit wm 
 headed "m the county of Annapolis." Are/X 
 bnld V. llHbky, 18 S. O. R. 116, followed. 
 Sinrth V. .UcL.an, 21 .S. C. R. 355 S' 
 guished. Morw v. Phiiiney, 22 S. C. R. 563. 
 
 Adherence to Statutory Porm.l-The BUls 
 o Nvle Act, Nova Sootia, R. ,S. N. .S. 5lh ser 
 ell. 92, by section 4 requires a mortgage given 
 to secure au existing indebtedness to l,e accom- 
 panied by an affidavit in the form prescribed in 
 a schedule to the Act, and by section 5, if the 
 niortgage is to secure a debt not matured the 
 .athdayit must follow another form. By section 
 1 either affidavit must be, " as nea. ly^L may 
 be, in the forms prescribed. A mortgage w^^ 
 given to secure both a present and futurt indebt- 
 edness, and was accompanie.l by a single affidavit 
 combining the main features of both forms ■— 
 
 Held attirniing the <lecisi,)n of the Court 
 below, .Wynne, J ,lissentiiig, that this affidavit 
 was not 'as nearly as may be " in the form pre- 
 scribed ; that there would have been no (fiffi 
 culty in complying strictly with the require- 
 ments of the Act ; and though the legal Effect 
 might have been the same the mortgage wm 
 you for want of such compliance. /Md 7 
 Crni/hton, 24 S. C. R. 69. 
 
 Designation of Commissioner - Solicitor's 
 Power to tr^keA>iui^nt.]^Xn affidavit of bona 
 .Arfr.s 111 a chattel mortgage sworn before a per- 
 son wlio IS in fact a commissioner authorized to 
 Uke affidavits in and for the High Court, but 
 who places after his signature in the jurat only 
 the words "A Comr., etc.," is good ' 
 
 iiii! 
 
 : I 
 
107 
 
 BILLS or SALE. 
 
 lOS 
 
 Hudi an afTiiIiivit may Iw iiiiule lic'fore a adlici- 
 t«r .MMi.lcycil ill thu .itlici' (,f tho moitgagifs' 
 i<olicit(irK. Caiiwlii Pirinane.til /.onii iiiiil ,Siir- 
 tnijs Co. V. T(,(/,l, '2-2 A. K. f)!.-.. 
 
 Incorporated Company— Oi/ir, ,—J,/n,t— 
 Aii/hori/,/. I -WliLT.' tliu allidiivii'of hoiia //</,.■< „f 
 a cliattrl imirtga;,'e to an iiicoi|.(.iati.il tnuliny 
 coniiiaiiy w.itt mad.' I.y tlu^ societaiy-trcusnior, 
 wlin was nlso a .sliaiulidldrr in tlic r<ini])aiiy and 
 had an iin|i(iit;iiit sliuiu in tliu niaiiai,'onieut of 
 itMatlaiiH, tlici,: luting, Iiowuvlt, a incsidfiit and 
 vict,'-prcsiilciit : — 
 
 Held, that the aHiant won to ho leju-anlcd not 
 as one of the nioitgaKces. I)iit as an agcit, and, 
 aH no written aiithciritv to him was rtM'iMcn.iI 
 as ii'.iuiied hy H. S.'o. eh. V2.\ sicC 1, tho 
 niortgaj^c was invalid aa af,'ain.st cic-ilitorti. 
 
 Bniik iif Toniiilov. McDoiK/a//, !,")('. 1'. 475 
 uiHtiiii;iii,s|i<.(l, ■ ' 
 
 F)-,,l,,,l(l Loan Co. \ lUnik of Comiucn-t, 44 
 IJ. ( . H, •J,S4, followed. (I, -nil,- and .Sons Co. 
 V. Cii.-thiiifiii, '_'."> (). R. 113. 
 
 \\ liiio the fnll amount mentioned in a chattel 
 nioitgaKu 18 not i"tnal!y advance.! at tlie date 
 at w Imh It 1.S given, it should, nevertliel. hm, in 
 till- ahsenec of tiaiiiluhnt intent (Ji- l)ad faitli, 
 Ntand a« .igainat a .sulisi ((iinit niortgagec as a 
 secniity for the amount actually advan.cd at, 
 the time when tIiehul)Me(iuent inoitL'aL'ec'M rhdil.s 
 accrued. ° " 
 
 Miifthinxon v. I'uttn-M,)i, •_'() O. R. 12ri. Sie. 
 the next two chsch. 
 
 OinLsslon of Statement of Indebtedness.!- 
 
 A mortgagee under a chattel mortgage to secure 
 an exi.stiiig indehtoduess made the allidavit of 
 honti Jif/i.t i((|nired liy the sixth Keetion of R. 
 .S. (). oh. l-.T), for a niortgario to secure future 
 A«lvance.s instead of the affidavit re(|iiired by 
 the second section : — 
 
 Held, that the attidnvil was defective in not 
 stating "that the n rtgagor was justly 
 truly indi'hted to the mortgagtte." and that 
 mortgage cindd not be looked at to aid tlie alli- 
 davit in this reiiuirement. .Milloiid Loan and 
 Savivi/-^ Co. V. Cov'ii',1011, 20 (). R. M'.i. 
 
 am 
 tlu 
 
 Statement of Consideration. J— 'i'ho aiiidavit 
 of homijtdis .,n a hill of sale, which the evidence 
 sheweil was t.ilien in satisfaction of a ijrevious 
 loan from the hargainee to the bargainor, stated 
 that the sale was hoiii't ri,li' and for good consid- 
 eration, namely, ^KM) (« Inch was tlio consider- 
 ation expressed in tho bill of sale), advanced l)y 
 the bargainee by way of a loan : — 
 
 Hehl, Street, ,J., dissenting, that tjio atfidavit 
 snbstantirdly comiilied witli section 5 of R. S. 
 O. ch. I'.',-), and that tho addition of the words 
 "advanced, etc., by way of a loan," did not 
 render the affidavit defective. Orituhy v. Jarri^, 
 Chapman v. Jarrii, 22 0. R. H. 
 
 III. C'liANdE OK Possession. 
 
 Assignee for the Benefit of Creditors— 
 
 Ejffertoj Taking l'os.^,:s.-<;oti.]~ Sep. Uddv. Creiiih- 
 ton, 21 8. ('. R. 60, ati/e 74; and .w, also.'w. 
 Vict. ch. 26 (O.), and Clarkson v. Mc Master, 25 
 S. C. It. 96. 
 
 Defect-.S'»6.sevHc«/ Morhjmje - Con salt rat iun ] 
 —A defect in a chattel mortgage is not cured as 
 against a subsequent mortgagee, l)y taking pos- 
 session of the chattels, where the subsequent 
 mortgage w as made before such possession, al- 
 though at the. time, of the .seizure there was no 
 default under tho subsequent mortgage, and the 
 mortgagor was by the terms of it entitled to 
 retain possession until default. 
 
 Oerect-Sidm'fimntMoi-t;/a;ic'--Coii.iid,nitl(ij, I 
 — Hehl, that the i)laintifr ccailil not under hi.s 
 prior chattel mortgage, by taking possession of 
 the mortgaged chattels, after the execution ami 
 ..ling of a .sulwe.juent chattel mortgage to the 
 def.'ii.lant, although i)efore tlie time at which I he 
 defeii.lant c.nihl have taken iio.sscssion, h.il.l the 
 inortgage.l goods against the .lefou.lant, wlieio 
 the plaiiitill s mortgage .li.l not comply with 
 the Act, if the .lefen.lanfs mortgage ha.l com- 
 phed therewith. 
 
 Juilgmentof Street, J,, 20 0. R. 125, athrmed 
 on tlie.se p.iints. 
 
 Hut where the amount of the consideration for 
 the defendant's mortgage was less than the 
 amount expressed therein and sworn to by the 
 defendant in his aiiidavit of hona fides as tho 
 true amount ; — 
 
 Held, that the defendant's mortgage did n..t 
 comply with tho Act, and the plaintitf, by 
 rea.s()n.)f taking possession as before mentioned, 
 couhl hol.l the goo.ls against the .lefendant 
 
 Jlohinsoi, V. Pat<i:.oi,, IH U. ( '. R. 55, f..ll.,wcd 
 
 Iliimdton V. HarrUun, 46 U. C. R. 127, not 
 followeil. 
 
 .hi.lgment of Street, J., reversed on this 
 point ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the "subsequent pwrchaseia 
 or mortgagees " lefeircl to in section 4 of K. S. 
 O. oh. 125, are those whose purchases or mort- 
 gages are accjiniianied by an immc.liate delivery 
 ami t.dh.weil by an actual aii.l contiuue.l chau'o 
 .)f posse.s.>ion, or who have ..■oiiijilied with the 
 pnivisions of the Act ; and as neither the plain- 
 tifl nor tlie ilefendaut came within the wor.ls. 
 the piaintiir, being prior in point .if time ha.l 
 pri.irity ; but if tho defeii.lant could bo treated 
 as a subso.juent mortgagee, ho was not a subsc- 
 (pient m.irtgagee in good faith, by reason of the 
 falsity of his mortgage : — 
 
 Hold, lastly, doubting, but following Jfo/fhtt 
 V. Con/son, 19 U. C. R. .341, that notice of the 
 plaintiff s mortgage when he took his own was 
 not a reason for depriving the .lefeiidaiit of 
 the status of a snbsc.juenl mortgagee in gooil 
 faith. MorUiimoH v. Paltcr.ioii, 20 O. R. 7'J(» 
 See the next case. 
 
 Oeiect-fiulmquentMortt/ai/e—Considcrallov 1 
 — I akiiig possessi.m of the mortgaged chattels 
 .loos n.)t make good a defective chattel mortga.'c 
 as against a subsc.juent validly registered bond 
 fide chattel mortgage existing at the time such 
 possession is taken. 
 
 Per Hurton and -Maclennan, JJ.A. — It is ini- 
 material whether the subseijucnt mortgage has 
 been validly legistere.l or not, or whether there 
 has or has not been notice of tlie prior inort.'aBe 
 
 Per Hagarty, C. J .O.-lf neither mortpacff. ha= 
 been vali.ily registered, that which is pnor in 
 date will prevail. 
 
 Per Hagarty, C.J.O., Osier and Maclennan, 
 J.I. A. —A niis.statpnient of the consideration in 
 
109 
 
 BILLS OF SALE. 
 
 I I). R. i2r.. s, 
 
 R. 12"), allirmtd 
 
 evei'Hecl on tliis 
 
 a chuttel inortK.i-c is not , in tlie al,.st.ncf of Uul 
 faith, ,/..oJ.,Ho a hiUl ,l,.tfct. It iH .n.r.lv .in 
 ekiiant to l,o ...,nHi,l,..c.,l in .IfuliuK " ith' the 
 
 JfiiniU/,.,, V. //arris:,,. -l(i L'. ('. |! |.>7 ,.,,,i 
 
 f"-/''-;-" ;■• /■"'""-". <'-A., Kith S.;,t..mh.r, 
 JM,."! (not icpoptnl), (.'onHlcliTud 
 
 .lud^mcntof th.. (.in,...n-.s IVn. Ii Division, •_'() 
 O. I. rJK rcvwNcI, ,ui.l thut of Sirctt, .(., at 
 
 V. /'allarmi,,. !!) A. H. I.S'S. 
 
 Transfer from Husband to Wife. |- A sale 
 ot diattrl«, c<,Msi.slin-ol hoiL-sfliohl fnniitui-t. in 
 
 then- .■esidcncx.. haw. n a umv,M w, inuiwl 
 
 her nisi. and li\ my aii.l contiiniiii.' to livo 
 tojiethor, without a .luly fegisteied l.ill .,f snlu 
 iHvoid an ;>t;ai„st cmlilors, fo,. in such u cas,' 
 tlieif cannot liu said to W- an actual an.l con- 
 timial Chang,; of |,o,ssc.ssion oipcii and icasonaldv 
 sutiiccnt to allord ,Hil,lic notice tliccof as 
 mjuiivd l,y the !dls of Sale Act. //u,/,.l,„om v. 
 
 . ■lu.iKincnt of MacMahon. .T.. atlirnicd 
 ./'(// V. lU,;«st,t,i, 21 A K. 01).'!. 
 
 
 IV 
 
 DksCIIII'TION of (oKjD.s. 
 
 Description.] -^Section (i of the Xorth-We.st 
 Iciiitorics Ordinanro pioviihs tliat • •■ All tlie 
 limtrmnenls mentioned in tid.i ( ),,lina,u..e whether 
 tor tlie niortya^eor sale of nood> and chattels 
 shall contain «uch sutlicient and full ,le»cription 
 theieot th.a the same may he readily and Jasily 
 known and diHtieguLshcd." The dt^scription iii 
 a chattel mortgage was as follows: "AH an.l 
 singida, the goods, chattels, stoek-in-tia,lo, 
 fixtures and store hudding of the mortgagors 
 use,l m or iiertannng to tiieir husincss as genera ! 
 merchants, said stock-in-tra.le consisting of a 
 f dl .stock of general n,erchandi«e now l,eii,g in 
 the store of ,sa,d niortgagor.s on the north-half 
 of section ..i.x, town>h,i. nineteen, range twenty- i 
 o,ght west ot the tonrth principal mendian- :- 
 
 Hehl, allirnnng the decision of the Court \ 
 l-elow, UN, U.T. iep. No. I, p. 88, that the ! 
 description was sutiicient. M,-c„ll y WfJir \-i 
 S^C.K. 130 distinguished. //.,•,-/ v. ll^i.I; ! 
 
 (hattl .Mortgage Act, R. S. (). eh. P.T,. and 
 I^MH.MdiMg Act, C,r, Vict. eh. 2(1, ami a transfer 
 ot 111. Ill ,i,,es not riMpiire registration. 
 
 v.a::^ 2;; O.K.* '■•"''''■'•''■''• ''''"'"'" 
 
 Crops.]- A mortgagor after ,Iefai,lt is, as far 
 as crops giowing upon the mortgaged land .are 
 toncrned, m the po.-itio,, of a tenant at snller- 
 |Uice,and cannot l.y giving a eliattel mortgage 
 
 in the crop.s confer a title thereto upoiftho 
 c u ttel mortgagee to the piejudie,. of the mort- 
 
 hinrul ?'' ',"•' ''">■ '""' ^li'iN.ing Ul,d,T 
 
 am, »1 has entered into po.s.se.ssion of ihe l.md 
 liefoiv the crop is harvested. 
 
 r. ■';'"",'', )'■ ""'«>''" /'""" ai„ISarii„,sCo., 4(i IT 
 t. I>. 114, e.vplained. 
 
 I Ji.dgmcnt of the County Court of Ihant 
 j loveised. liluoiiijirld v. HiUijir, 22 A. I!. 2;!2 
 
 I Future Crops. )- C'r.,ps to he grown ni.-iy he 
 
 icoveud l,y a chattel mortgage ami a chattel 
 
 l.oitgageot '■crop., which may he sown during 
 
 tie cMrreney of tins mortgage,- covers crop^ 
 
 nnpaid ; Osier, ^.^., ,lis.senting. 
 
 .Iiidu'ineiit of the County Court of Voik 
 ■Uinne. . «ua,la l',.,;„„„„„ /.on,, ami Sai-i,„,K 
 to. V. / 0/1 /,•_'■_' A. 11, .")1,). 
 
 Description. ]- " One piano, Dominion make I 
 
 bill'of"i "''' ■'" '^'"'^•'''"' ''^^'^"Ptioninal 
 
 Jmlgment of the County Court of Ontario ^ 
 afhrnied. Fidil v. Jl,irt, 22 A. 1!. 449. i 
 
 V. TuofKliTV Rv.ssiNi:. 
 
 ..^'^^1'' Acquired Goods. ]-A de.scription in a 
 
 thattel inoitgage ot after acjuircl t'oods as 
 all other ready-made clothiiig, tweeds, trim- 
 mings, gents furnishings, furniture ami lixtures 
 andpei^onal property, which shall at any time 
 during the currency of this mortgage be bro.xdit 
 .n or upon the said ,.reinises or iifor upon any 
 other premises m which the said mortgagor niav 
 be carryinKon l.-rsinesa," i., ,„ffi^ie,.,t,°uul binds 
 goods „ the kinds mentionea in premises to 
 which the mor gagor moves after making the 
 mortgage, and the aineiiding Act 55 Viet. eh. 2b 
 VJ.), has not made any difterenoe '"u this respect. 
 
 VI. Rk.nkwai.. 
 
 Assignee for the Benefit of Creditors. ]- 
 
 An assignee tor the henclit of creditors umler 
 a general assignment mule and registered i.iir- 
 suant to tile Assignments ami I'referenees Act 
 1>. .V O. ch. 124, may renew a chattel mortgage 
 made in favour ot his assignor, without thet^xe- 
 cution and registration of a .si.eeilic assignment 
 ot that mortgage. A renewal statement, hi it.self 
 m proper form, alleging title throughthe assign- 
 ment tor the heneht ot creditors, is sufhcient 
 
 .Uidgment of the County Court of Simcoo 
 <ininne<l. J-/,.,,,,,,,, y, /,•,/„„_ 21 A. K. .-J!) .s,v 
 Ui Vict. eh. .ST, see. 1,S (O.J. 
 
 One Year from Date of Piling. ]-'rhe 01 di- 
 
 nanc^. ot the North-West Territories relating to 
 
 chattel mortgages, Or.linance of l.SSl Xo 5 
 
 pjoyidcs l,y section !l that "every inortga.'e 
 
 hied m pursuanee of this ordinance shall cease 
 
 to he valid as against the creditor:, of the oer- 
 
 son making the same after the expiration of 
 
 J one year from the filing thereof, unless a state- 
 
 Inient, etc., is again Hied within thirty days 
 
 next piecediiig the expiration of the said tenu 
 
 : A ""^'n;''; , --^ '•''"^"^■1 "HTtgage was tiled on 
 
 i August 2th, 1S8G, an.l registered at 4.10 p.m. 
 
 of tliat day. A renewal of taid mortgage was 
 
 registered at 1 1.49 a.m. on August 12tli? 1SS7.— 
 
 nel.l afhrniing the decision of the Court 
 
 Uelow, that the renewal was filed within ..ne 
 
 year from the date of the hlling of the origi.ial 
 
 mortgage as provided by the or.linance. 
 
 ler laaer-son, J. -hi computing the timo 
 nentione.l in this section the .lay of the original 
 filing should be excluded and the iuortg;i..ett 
 
HI 
 
 BILLS OF SALE. 
 
 m 
 
 w 
 
 ]H 
 
 112 
 
 I tlic.r H„I,! hoiKdt, until thu iMo|„.,ty hli„ul,| »h, 
 Hol. oi- tlioy wtiv pai.l their claim. (•.> ) Ah 
 
 I siK'li agent S. must l,u lui.l to luiv,, had wiffi. 
 clL.it authority t„ l,in,l thu euppIiautH l.y his 
 UKm.mc.nt witl> the < M,v..,n.ntnt, «hich under 
 all the iiicuniHtaiu.M, w«h a luftHoniil.le and 
 propir one and made in I lie interest of the 
 suppliants. (.•{.) liut wlu^her S. wan. or wa« 
 
 VII. Hl.JUT K) I'ossKSWIoN, 
 
 Absence of Iledemlso Clause.] S., who 
 
 WaH ..ugaged in the liimher iMminess. l»,<-ni. 
 
 '"g Mulehte,! to the suppliaoLs in a huw sum r,T"'Tl"' • 'f' ''"V*'"'^'"''' "^^ '"'»' "^ wa« 
 
 "< """.'"y. ■ tyag-.t'/o them l.y t ^, se '''^'^l]''''''''^^''']''^^^^ 
 
 ;uae instruments . ertnin Innihe.: logs, lid lied m, '.' ' "'," -""l-pliants adopted, rati- 
 
 tuMl-er as seeunt.v for the repayn. .nt of s"e , ' In'l l'"'''' "" "«"-«'"^'"t V "cting 
 
 ""I'l-ttduess. The tiist mortKige was execute . , I ^ »<lv^.nein^' moneys to pay the (iov- 
 
 <'". th.. ISth DeeemlM.,-, ISTO, L\ t e seeon , ' '"'"-;"t >n <Kxor.lanee with its terms after they 
 
 tl." IKl, .May, KS77. 'uy'-. e dlateml a, 1^ ^TJ'" ''" '' '" '""■^^'""• "'1' knowledge of th^ 
 
 n-:nt.;,:dJ':^%i^^;iuj^ih^sr;^^^^^ 
 
 I proviso eontaine, n H,.> i sutcii, j i,x. I,. K, |. 
 
 L'Xe.^uted, and h a proviso eontaine.l in the 
 econd ludenture, S. was all,, wed to remain in 
 I s essnm t„ ,tt,,,„, ,„ ■ 
 
 " '""faeture and sale for th<' henetit of the sun- 
 
 I soKei t, hut prior (., Mieh iimolveney the sup- 
 pliants had taken poss.sMion of the lund.er, |o I, 
 
 tlu ,th.I„n,. ,,s77 „.|,i,, s. ,y:,, i„ ,5:,,„ession 
 f th e property in the manner ala.ve mentioned, 
 by a letter addresse.l to the Minister of Inland 
 Kevenue. he odered and agree.l to pay the (io 
 cniment the sum of ,^,. ^,,, i.o,,,,' rf. ,,„.°„ 
 nil lunilier to he ship| ' " ' ' 
 the then 
 
 I VIII. \Vlli> MAY iMfKACH. 
 
 Aaslgnee.]— Section 2 of 5r> Viet, eh •'() (O ) 
 
 I eneht ot creditors to ipiestion the vahdity of 
 the renewal ot a eh.ittel mortgage. T(,//,„„u v 
 iSmaif, 25 O. R. (itil. 
 
 Assignee.]— An as.siguee for the ireneral 
 l.eneht of creditors is, hy^irtue of iO^X^^^ 
 
 agreement was a.te.l upon hv S d mii,' tin ""'*'"""'. '''"'^'' - >'^'^t •' voi.l against creditors." 
 
 ing 
 tini(' 
 
 IS , wherehy the mortgagor might have 
 St in •" I'"-'<«'ss>on until .lefault, the .J.ul^e, 
 
 fc ttiiig ,u he ( oiirl of Kxehequer, not J a 
 ourt o, Appeal, hut in an Onta io case to 
 administer the law of Ontario, was hound In 
 the decisions u McA„ln>/ v. .U/m, •>0 C 1' 
 41/, ami .S,niiii</ v. Coiil/,-,; -28 C. I'. 240' 
 
 ,7.;. !'.,'*' "'';'" *''° "'-■^•'tion of such inort! , .nuigment ot MacM 
 fe.itre, the suppliants were entitled to imnie- ty C J » d 1 , 't^,, 
 
 "r''.r.L.,.\\l'''''iiL*''°.."'"V'«''«°^'« ".t^'ivention! Creditors.]- Where 
 
 „„„ . . , , ~ ' ■•■mil.-) ill. llie tlllK' 
 
 wZ'aTtl' 't ■''"'"', '"■ '^'"'1'''' ^■"""■"'^' creditors 
 m ; Vf f ti'""'- '';''■*■' """.""-'"^•'-''l proceedings 
 let,.! .. tl'cn.selves and other creditors to 
 set aside the nioi tgagc, or an assignee for the 
 general bene.it of cre.lilors who, however, stands 
 
 iforetl, •^""""1"= "'"' I'"^-^'-'«si"" taken 
 Detoie tlie assignment, cures all f.,rmal defects 
 
 .Judgment of Mac.Mahuii, J., reve.sed, Hagar 
 
 • L. .).<>- .I.««....t Chot.oii V. Mrifa^ter, 
 
 -.nd to whom upon sales it shouldi;e;;;i,;ig,;ed' i havinrsol'd them"t''°''''''"V "^ "'«,Soods, and 
 ^:^^^f^^^:^:^:^^^^^ the goods were 
 
 113 
 
m 
 
 it in carrying; on thii 
 r i)n)|HMty, luid for 
 )io|i(ity hIioiiIiI Ih) 
 ir tliiirn. (•.'.) Ah 
 to Imvf Imd Htiffi- 
 
 HnppliiintK Ipy his 
 uiit, «)] it'll undor 
 (V it'iiMoimlile and 
 e iiitert'st of the 
 •r S, wuH, or was 
 II" (ixrt'Pini'nt with 
 Ills adopted, iiiti- 
 ^(.•nieiit \)y iictinj{ 
 
 H to pay the Oov- 
 s tcrnm iifte;- they 
 knowlt'dgo of the 
 '■iT/iiiii/t /IdiiJc nf 
 '. H. I. 
 
 IPKACII. 
 
 Vict. oil. --'(((O.), 
 
 for the ;;eneral 
 
 n the validity of 
 
 ife'c. TulhiKia V. 
 
 113 
 
 BOND 
 
 U4 
 
 reditors against 
 1- '-^13(0.) talking 
 ttel mortgage is 
 leditora liaving 
 Is at the time 
 Uract creditors 
 .ed proceedings 
 icr creditors to 
 issignee for the 
 lowevei', stands 
 is.sesaion taken 
 formal defects. 
 veised, }Iagar- 
 i V. JIiMd.sfer, 
 the .Supreme 
 
 "openandrensonably guf^iei.nt tontlord puhlic ISH.S ur.,.-. „ . i ,■ , 
 
 ....tree thereof." has nference only to' tltoeluw^'' I' "T "T"'''"*'r'''^'''''' ''•''•'»'''«'» 
 
 Thr words "persons who lurome c-(Mlit.>i«' o"''''"*i""' ,.'.'^ MucMuhon. J., •.>() (). 1;. 42. 
 
 iM.c.iae execution , reditorn as providr.l for in I ' 
 
 '■ I "" P""^''l"'l '>" ./'»»<,»,/ of all m.meys received 
 
 . tion •_' ot 50 \ let. ch. '.'(! (().), which extends And wl„.. . / """I'I'I I" rnade on hini. 
 
 c provisions oC the Act re«J.tin v^'.'.'' .ij, •'.,," ^'Vf^ principal lo a l,ond .so eon- 
 
 pcisoiially m.uleon him, a dcmaiH on hi.s |,cr- 
 
 'he provisions ot the Act respecting .M, itgages 
 .Md Sales of IVrsonal IVoperty to nimple'^c^,, 
 tract .re.htors suing on l.ehalf of themselves 
 and other creditors, must he read " voi.lalile 
 as against cre,litor.s," and a h de of the nu,r.. 
 gaged -omis.y the mortgagee before an election 
 i.s mad- j.y the simi.le contract eiclitors com- 
 nancmu ,,roceedings to attack the mortcaKe 
 eaim. t he iiniieadied. ** *= 
 
 Whether such an action can he hrought I.y a 
 simpij contract creditor whose deht is not due 
 tjiiiiff. ' 
 
 Jiidgmciit of Armour, CI., reversed. Meri- 
 Wn lintanuia Co. v. Braden, 21 A. R. 352. 
 
 as to setting asi.le Bills of Sale as Piefer- 
 
 I'ANKKCI'TCV, I. 
 
 dices, 
 
 BOND. 
 
 Affidavit of Justification- tVo,s„.,..„ „„•,,„. 
 /.o/,.J-A surety on a hon.l, who is a member of 
 <i nicc.-iiitie partnership, l,i,t justifies <m liis 
 own m.hvulual property, not on his share in the 
 partnership, is not cmpellahle, upon cross- 
 exatmnatioi, m, his aihdavit „f justilieati.m, to 
 disclose the liabilities of the partncrsl ii, 
 
 Jhl'ilUlH v. lilwke,!, 14 p. K. r,y4 ' "IClslllp. 
 
 Collector of Taxes ^y.VVta..^ of S>nr./ie, i_ 
 In an action by a iiuinicipal corporation against 
 he Mirctics to the bonds of a defaultiir„- c. ! 
 lector ot taxes for the due pertormanee o"f his 
 - lu K.s for lS8.i and 887, it appearcl that there 
 i.ul been great laxity on the plaintiffs' pvrt, 
 hu that shortly before the collec'tor absconded 
 m IShs, a majority ol the nienibcrs of the cor- 
 pora i„n had confidence in his hoi„ stv ■ while 
 the dctendants ha.l not sought informat'ion from 
 he phuntiffs as to the way he had perfornie 
 his duties ill former years :— ^ "omitii 
 
 HcM, that the non-disclosure by theph.intiffs 
 to the detcndants ot a motion having been 
 made 111 council in 1S85 that if the roll for 1SS4 
 wa. „ot returned by the next meeting, an 
 
 he'^"s'r-ca1°'" ''" ^:'"""'y(/'-t Judge ^to„l 
 
 he asked for; or ot a resolution in August 
 
 1SS5, mstructuig the treasurer to take proceed^ 
 
 jngs against the collector and his sureties fr 
 
 lie balance ,lue on the 1SS4 roll unless Ly 
 
 Bettlcl before .September K.th, next, which it 
 
 was; or ot another like resolution in 1886 in 
 
 reference to the taxes of l8,So, which weie after 
 
 wards, in 1888, paid over in full by him, and of 
 
 the non-return by him of the 18So roll untH 
 
 S 
 
 «omd representatives is insuilicient to clu rge 
 
 I V A-";,7o o. n.rl "^''"" ''"''"- ''"""^' ^^"«^^ 
 
 coi?s*?r,f\V°" f ■^^''!""'"!/-Hll. teiidere.1 for the 
 mlve^H " ?V''""' "' ''"'^^''y P«"-«"ant to an 
 1 ti 1, lly accepted. At the same time H. 
 execute.l a bond reciting the fact of the tender 
 and conditioned, within four ,lavs, to p "i iT 
 IZ »7;^I'table sureties an.l de'po'sit lil'. per 
 
 Montreal, and also tr, execute all necessarv 
 agreements for the commenceme and 3 
 pletion of the work by spccitied dates, ami the 
 prosecution thereof until completed These 
 conditions were not performed and the contract 
 wa.s eventually given to other persons. In an 
 action agaiiLst H. „n the bond :- 
 A,^„ 1 ?L"?'V>' *'"^^ J'x'gnient of the Court of 
 bv' Tit i,, r^- ^^- '"^' '^"' "■-•■'K'-'-'e>"t"t made 
 by the 1.011,1 was unilateral; that the railway 
 
 sm",Ti:?«"" T^"' "°"''li«'^ti">' to accept the 
 tl b , T,°'''°«'^''= "• ""^ '-■"••tract that 
 the b<,nd and theagreement for the construction 
 of he work were to he contemporaneous acts? 
 and as no sueli agreement was entered into H 
 
 aitun on ,i bond executed by d. to secure an 
 ...lebte.iiess of L. to plaintiff bank, theevT 
 deuce shewed that I.., who ha.l married an 
 adopte,! daughter of d., was agent o tl e Unk 
 and having embezzled the baifk funds he 1.^ 
 
 tr;St:\~^^'"*"''--''«'^^^^^^ 
 
 below'^ih^fth""^ *'■ ;■ J"'.'«'nent of the Court 
 le?. I'a, d r '^""^'l''^,':'^t>,°" for said boiul was 
 Illegal , nd J was not liable thereon. Ptonle'x 
 Hank oj Halijax v. Johnson, ■>() S. C. R. 54L 
 
 Duress -//%a%.]- A bond to secure the 
 
 Sr^°^ "?'='"' of maintaini,g a* an 
 ■•"lostnal school a boy under fourteen years o^ 
 
 clneTaidn'H'''''"'^"'^' '""^ -"« o^hXi^e' 
 c mc Mthin the rcpiirements of section 7 of 
 the Act respecting Industri.^l Sei.ool-, „iv4r. in 
 
 defm^t'H'ri"*' "" ;';",'^'*^'^ ^tateuient°that in 
 tietau It the boy would be sent to the reforma- 
 tory, ,.s void, this being i„ law .hiress' 
 
 ler Osier, J. A. -The bond was also ilWal 
 ami void on the ground that not being re^uS 
 
 ■ C 
 
UB 
 
 BONUS. 
 
 116 
 
 j)y law, It «iiM Hi»(.ii in nr.lcr tliat tlii' law might 
 Im) |)iit in f(,. ,• Hhiili c.iiyM, to lmv<! Iinii pm in 
 lone mill iicliil ii|iiiii willioiit it. 
 
 .linlKiiniit lit tilt, t iMiiity Ciiiiit III' Klfrjn 
 ruvi'idcil, lliiKiiily, ('. .1. o./disMniiiiK. ri/i,.,/' 
 •SV. '/'/iiiiiiiiH v. )'ii/ «/(■//,•.'•.' A. I!. ;ui>. 
 
 Inilomnlty I'.nimn,!.] 'I'll., ilcfniiliiiits, 
 IimmIi.ui.I iuiiI Hiif, cxiriiloil in favmir m the 
 |iluiutiir, till' IhhIi.iuiI'h ntinnj^ |iiirtin i. ii ImiihI 
 cii»iililinii,.,| I,, |„. viii.l if til.' liiiNJianil xliiinlil 
 Biivo, lirl.'iiil ^111,1 |4..,.|, lnuiiilcKH ami Hilly iii.l.'Mi 
 liify ill.' |>l;iini|l| tn.iii all lim.s, .■i.mI.-i, ■.•liiir„,..M, 
 (linm.jit'H, iinil ••\|H.|iNi'H wlii.li |ii> Miijr|,t at any 
 time wnHtniii, III MiliiT, i.r |„. put to fur nr l.y 
 rooMiin III mm iiuvnicnt li.v the ImsUaml of the 
 llolfilili.s of 111.' Ilrni an th.' name li.'cam.i ilnc, 
 it lioin;,' llic iiilriilion ami the plaintilf Han 
 thi'icliy " iml.'miiilli'il oi- iiit.iiilfil m.. to lir froni ! 
 All ami iv. IV iiiiliility .if irvniy nature ami kin.l 
 liouvfr of till' .s;iiil linn." | 
 
 .Jmlj,'m.niN «,.!,. n.,.,,viri'il liv rr.ililniMof dm I 
 nnn a|;;iiiisl ilii'in ,iml th.' jiliiintill in.w hii.iI tim 
 dofcmlantd to ncov.r lli.' amount to imv tlicNU 
 JUtlginnits, alllioii.yli Im hail not him>. ! oaiil 
 them : - ' 
 
 Hild, tliat 111' was ..nlithil |,i liavi' th.. jmlj,'- 
 numt.s ami oohIm p.ii.l ami th.. amonnt.s iii.i-i.hkuv 
 wcfo lor thai |mrpiw onh'i.'d t.) !>.■ paiil into 
 Cimrt liy tlu' .Irliii.ianls. 
 
 Decision of Ainionr, (',.!., ivvn s.d. //,„,,/ v 
 Uotnii.-tnt, •.'(! (». l;, KM. 
 
 Indemnity- I'tuimiiit—Voudilhw /'n,;;/, „/. ] 
 — Umlir .1 honil lomlitioncil to ho voi.l if tim \nv- 
 son ..11 who.'... li.'halfitisf,'ivcn " xhallimli'iimify 
 an. .savf Iminii.'.s.s (tho <il.lij,'c..) from payment of 
 nil lialiilityoi every mitiiie ami Uiml h hatsoever," 
 aright of a.'lion a^aiimt the siiictieM aii^oN in 
 favour ot the oliliyee a.s soon as jiiil;;meiil is 
 rnoovet-eil nyaiiiMt him on a claim eoming wiihiii 
 the H.eiirily. rayment of such elaim hy him 
 18 ii.it a eomlitioii preeeileiit. 
 
 Jioi/./ v. /;<)/,i»«.H, -JO (». H, -104, approvi'il. 
 
 JiLlgment of Aniionr, ('.,)., allirine.l. Mfw- 
 burn v. M,u-k,/,;t)i, 1!K\. K. T'iH. 
 
 I any maniif.ulm.', an.l what it eanimt .lodire. tly 
 it will jiot he allowe.l to ill) imiiruttly or hy 
 miht.ifuue, 
 
 'I'her.h.re a liy-law, vall.l on IIh fiue, pur- 
 jiiirthii; to imiihan' a water privilege tor i le.: 
 trie li;;hliiii; piiip.iHi,.., hut Hli.wn to he i.ally a 
 hyl.iw to aiil thinumr of the water pliviU.uii 
 III rehiiihliiig a mill, wa.s .pia.diL'.l. 
 
 Sciitt V. CoriHiivliiiii III' 'J'i/.ii)iil,iini, |;t .\ |i 
 -•;i.'l, aiipli...l. l„ rr ( .1,111,1,, n anil VUU„i, „/ 
 l.<,„a,-l:. •.'!• A. It. .•IT-J, •^ 
 
 Condition li,-in,-l, Chnmje of Ci,;;,,,, 
 ^lini,;.-.\ A railway ennipaiiy liaviiiK ohtaim.l 
 a hoiiiis hem III,. plaiiitillH upon ..omlil inn that 
 ' l>« muihiiie Mmpn should he •' loealed ami maii; 
 t tamed " w uhin the eily limJtM, ili,l so ere. t ami 
 maintain them for miim- years, until aiilhoi i/i .1 
 li.y Imislatimi it aiiialgamaleil with ami Instils 
 liU'iitity ill another .•..•npaiiv, all the eii:.agi. 
 meiilsaml agieeineiitaof the ainalganiatili).' ..■om 
 pain. H heiiig pieMtv.-.l. 'I'h,. amalgiinmte.l e. m- 
 |iany was afterwai.ls lease.l in perp.liiitv to a 
 
 iiimh larger lailway e pany, wliii removed ih, 
 
 shoj's onlsiih: till, eily limilH ;-- 
 
 111 III, th.'lt although .-dl t h.' eng.igeim iits ,-iim1 
 
 agi(em..|itw m.i.le hy the original i ipanv «ii,. 
 
 lire.-eivi.l, the amalgamatiim ami lea.sing In 
 I.TiKtiiity hy the l.ii-, r e.m.panv of the smaller 
 iimler th.' authority of rarliamenl impiKe.l lew 
 i.'lations upon the amalgamateil roa.l whiih 
 worked a rh.iiige in the policy as to the site and 
 •Hi/e of thr ii.ai'hin.. shops, ami that the <iigagc. 
 meiit ha. I li.eii satislie.i hy the maiiit.'iiaiie.. of 
 thesii.l .sh.ips hy the original .■ompaiiy iliiriiii; 
 Its, iiiile[jemlent existeiiee. Ci/,/ o/' Tui;.„hi \ 
 Oii'diio a,id Qiirhic II. W. ('„., 'j'i (). K. m4 
 
 Interest— /'.(//(fr.vr,.) in lAni of I„l,:,-tsl.]~Sie 
 111, (jKu II V. (.'iniiii Ti-iiiik A', ir. lo., •_> Kx, C. 
 
 R. I,S-J, yJOs/, J.NTKKKST. 
 
 Penalty. J-A Imml without a penalty may he 
 good as a eoveiiant or agreement. Murlntn, y 
 JUcu-ie/caii, lil A. It. T'.'ii. 
 
 Registrars — /,a/('/i7iV// o/' S,ireti,:t.]—HeU\ 
 that the sureties to a hoiid, d.ite.l ,Sth .lanuarv' 
 I8S(), given m aeL-or.laneo with .Schedule A. of the 
 Registry An, K. .s. o. ^h. 114, for the perfor- 
 mance .It the .hities, etc., of the registrar, heing 
 the form ot l.ond prcscrihe.l hy the Act in f.irce 
 prior to the intro.luctuui of tin' provisions giving 
 the nuinicipaluies a share in the fees, were not 
 liahle tor the imii payment o\ er of si:cli share 
 
 Decision of Street, J., 1<J O. R. :«!», alhrmed. ' 
 bounty ,ij Mtihl/esex v. Sma/lmnii, MO O. K. 48". ' 
 
 Replevin— /■oc(;i of liomL]~S,e Kniniii v ! 
 Ma<;/o,ia/,/,->-20. R.4i>4, post, Divi.siox CofUT.Il'. ! 
 
 BONUS. 
 
 By.Law-AVf7.sm,( ()/^,/.]--A municiiial cor- 
 poration cannot uowgruut a homis for proinotin.' 
 
 Condition lUrucI,.^ /^i'/iiii/,ifi,l J>iiiiiii,/i .i.\-. 
 Ill 1.S7I the (uunty of Haltmi gave to the' Ifam. 
 iltoii ami .Vorlh. Western llailuay Con, pany i 
 honiis of .«-li,-,,(mo to ho usc.l in "the eoiisln,,.. 
 tlon ot the railway, up.m the condition that 
 the comiiany should i.tnain " imlepomhnt " for 
 
 v'"'.'^»'"'' ^''■"'"'''- '" ''*^'*-'^ ""' Ifi"'iilt<'" ■•iial 
 .North Western Railway Comp.inv hecaine (as 
 «ason the facts hehl) in eirect inergeil in tlio 
 (iiaml Trunk l{ailway t'ompany, ami etase.l tii 
 he an imlepend.nt liii.' : - 
 
 Held, allirming the judgment of the ('..inmni, 
 ^ I leas Division, and of Itolicrtson, ■!., at the tn.il, 
 I that there had hoeii a hivacli of the eouditidii 
 entitling the plaintitl's to recover the wh,.],. 
 uiminnt of the honus as li,|ui.lated damaecs 
 \(oiuily of llallmi v. di-iiiid Ti-iiiik J,'. IW t'o 
 ' .1? d'!'y n"'"- .^^"'''""^'' '■>■ t'"-' Supremo lourt,' 
 
 Condition — Jlrcach — Repayment. ] — 'Jhc 
 lihiiiitills agrecil to give to the defemlants a h.imis 
 ot Sl.OOO in fivo e.pial con.socutive annual iiistal- 
 iiieiits of S'Zm each, in consi.leration of tlioir 
 ostahlishiiig a factory an.l working it hir ten 
 years. The lefomlants covenanted to cany on 
 the factory, n.l to employ therein continuously 
 not less than twenty persons during th.' term. 
 I he agreement provided thai the annual pav 
 liients were to cease if the .Icfeiuhmta etase.l to 
 cany on hnsiness within five years, hut there 
 was n.nhing in the agreement as to return of 
 any part ot the homis in case of cesser after 
 that time. The defendants were paid the full 
 amount of the honus, carried on husincss for 
 SIX years, and then closc.l tlieir factory. The 
 
IIG 
 
 117 
 
 it I'lioniit 
 
 loiii 
 
 re.tiv 1 
 
 ilii iiiiliri' 
 
 -tly 
 
 ..r 1,) 1 
 
 ill en ilH 
 
 fa..., 
 
 pur 
 
 !• piivilcg 
 
 • I'lif 
 
 .I.T 
 
 sImWM Io 
 
 n: ir 
 
 illy . 
 
 till' Wulf 
 
 ■ (MlVllll^i 
 
 l.ilitid. 
 
 
 
 "ilniiiihiiril. 
 
 l.-l 
 
 \ k 
 
 phi 11 ami 
 
 Wtlu 
 
 !/• <'J 
 
 BROKER. 
 
 118 
 
 ''hiiiHii- of Cii-niin 
 iiy linviii>< i)l,tiviii(il 
 
 ll|IOII ('Ollclilllrll tliia 
 
 " liM'uti'il mill iiinin 
 t.M, iliil Nil t'i'i'i t aiiil 
 iix, until Hiithorii'i il 
 ■il with luiil lust lis 
 ly, all till! iir.iij;i. 
 ' iiiiial^'iuiiatiiij.' i.'iiiii 
 I' aiiiiil^'ainutcil ri m. 
 
 ill 111 r|i(liiily to .1 
 y, wild roniiivcd tin 
 
 II' t'lina^rciiii iiti« an, I 
 
 .,'mhI 10III|111I1\ Will. 
 
 Ill mill IrUHiii;; in 
 ipaiiy iif tlic .viiiallci- 
 aiiirlit iinpi.Kdl i.vv, 
 lll.ltcij loHil whirl, 
 
 y a.s to tli(! (-itc :uii| 
 ml that tin; iiij^agi.. 
 till' liiaiiitotimirr iif 
 ml cimijiany iluriiii; 
 ('<'!/ "J Tiii;,i,li, V. 
 ..,1!2 0. R. ;)^4. 
 
 idllllll DilllKI'li s, j 
 
 I Ki'\'" til thr H.iiii- 
 ;iil»iiy ( '(iii.paiiy ,i 
 il in till,' ('diislriir. 
 ilu! cfUHlitidii thiu 
 ' iiiilcpoiiili.iii ■' fi,|. 
 till' Itaniiltdii .-uul 
 mpiiiiy liL'f.inu (;i.s 
 fi'L-t merged in tliu 
 iny, ami ctastil to 
 
 .'lit df tliu Cdiiiiiiiiii 
 
 il I-, at till' trial, 
 
 li of the cuiiilitioii 
 ■fi'dViT till; whiilf 
 liiiilati'il ilaiiiagL's. 
 Trunk /.'. ir. Co, 
 le Supri'inu ( uiiit, 
 
 epnymeiit. ] — 'Jhe 
 ili'fcmlmitsa hdiuis 
 tivL' aiinuul iiiHtal- 
 idtiatidu of their 
 
 orkiiig it fdi' ten 
 laiitud to cany on 
 eieiii cdntiminusly 
 
 during tlio tt'rm. 
 I the aiimial pay- 
 fcndaiits ci'ai-fd to 
 ; years, but there 
 it as to ri'tiu'ii of 
 ae of cesser after 
 vere paid the full 
 I on l>iisiiie,ss for 
 eir faetdiy. The 
 
 piiivn liny npiicilii.! 
 
 plaiiitifT'M were iinaMi 
 ■uhHtaiitiiil daiiiiv;,'!' : 
 
 Held, that the ilmii.n,'i'N idiild nut ht! iiMMeH-uiiI 
 on the piiik'iple i,f appMrfidiiing thi' lionii.i willi 
 refi'i-cii. I III the ti'Mii mill till, pi rind Ini whuh 
 till liii.'iiiu'hs had III I II lanieil on : 
 
 Held, alMi, that till' plaiiitillH win. .ntith .| t.. 
 iiniiiiiial daiii.iyi'H at leiHt, and, under the eii 
 ^unl«taul■e^ the difiiidaiitH h.ivin,' ih'lili.. lately 
 hrokeii Iheireiiv.ii.iiit, In tlieeosl . iif the net inn, 
 .ludKliuiit of .Sir riiiiiiiiiM (ialt, ('..I., v.ilied! 
 Maeleiiiiaii, .I.A.. disMeiitini;. Viilini. ,,/' Itrh/h- 
 dm V. Aiixtoii, II) A. I!. ;|(l.">. 
 
 BRIDGE. 
 
 Oonditlon I'uinljiioiiiil Mmiiiiniv.]- \\y a 
 by lawpasHidliy Iheiity of Tin ■ e' IliveiMon the 
 3rd Mar.'li, iKStl, ;;imiliu;,'a hoi, us of .'k'.'d.tlllli i,, 
 a firm hu- eNlalilishin^' a savi mill and a \<>t\ la,.. 
 tory within ihe -<•■■ liiuitM, and a liinrtpi;.'!' (or 
 a like aniiiiiiil .•.!,,, )0 granted hy the tiriu to 
 theeorporatl 11 the i'(„I| of No\ eiidn r, IH.SIl. it 
 wax provide, thiit the ei- Ire eNtaliliMhiu.nt of a 
 Vftlu iMiiiiva enf. lo imt k-. than .i<7r),(l(iO should 
 hh kept ill Miei.iMi I for : ,■ spjn.,. „f foni' eon- 
 Bceutive years ''.i ei tliu \' .iniiinj- of .said opera- 
 tion and that |.- .,.,,,M^ at l.'.ist .should he kept 
 cniplnved dlinii;. espaeeot live months of each 
 of the fi.iir years. The null wiis in op. ration in 
 June, l,S,S(;,aii,l the hox faitmy on the Jn.l Nov- 
 •iiiiher, IS.sti. They \miv kept in uperation, witli 
 interruptions, until Oitoher, Is.s!), and at least 
 600 men were eniployed in liotli cstahlishnieiits 
 durini,' that lime, (in a eoiitestatioii hy siih- 
 ■eqiient hypotheearv ilaimaiits of an oppositioii 
 ajin lie loim, n'n-, lihd liy the eorpoi atioii for the 
 amoiintof their eouditioual mortKugeon the pro- 
 ceeds of sale of till- piiiperty : 
 
 Held, reversing' the jndLjmeiil ,,f the Courts 
 below, that .veil if the words " four eonseeiitive 
 years' meant four edn.':eeutive season.s, there 
 was ami.le evid, n.i' that the whole estaldish- 
 mentwasnot in operation as le.iuirtd until Nov- 
 cniher IS.Sd, when the inortKage was granted, 
 the mill only heiiig eompleted and in operation 
 during that season, ami therefore tlieri' h.id heeii 
 ahreaehdt the ediiditions. Foiiruier, ,)., dissent- 
 
 22 S. C. K. 3.32. ' ' 
 
 .Vec AssEs.s >i K.\T .\Ni. 'I'axh.s, V. 
 
 BOOK DEBTS. 
 
 8te Bankrii'toy and In.solvency, I.— Bili,.>< of 
 
 ■""iALE, V. 
 
 Toll-BrldKo l\., I!,„l.j, I liydHflViet. 
 (1 .'.••) .Il, )Mt, see. ;t, Kiantiiiy to lespomhiil a 
 slHtutni V |,rivilegr to loimti ii. t a toll I, ridge 
 aeross till' Chaudiire river in i he parish of si 
 •■eorwe, it iMemieti I that "so.-o,,,, as the liridgo 
 sh.i Mil' open to the iiMi' of the pii lilie as iif.ire- 
 said during thirty years no iieison sh.illeieet, or 
 i-anse to he ereetid, any liridge or l.iidg.sor 
 works, or line or eau-so to I.e used any ineaiis 
 ol piipige for the eoiivejanee ol any per.suus, 
 Miiivles or rattle for lllere or i/.iili, aer.'Ns ihl- 
 Haul river, within the distaii.e of on,, h ,_,„. 
 aliove and one league helow the hridge, whuh 
 shall he iiieaMirid .il.mg the liaiiks ot tie- river 
 and loll,, wing its m inding', ; and any person or 
 person.! «hd shall Imild or cause ti. he limit a 
 toll liiiii.e or tcill liiidgcH, drwh.i shall use or 
 '.iiise to I.e used, lor liiiieor gain, anv other 
 means of pa.ssage aero.ss ihe said river 'lor the 
 eonveyaiiee ol persons, vehicles or cattle, uitliin 
 Hiicli liniils, shall pav lo the ...aid iJavi.l Hoy 
 three times th,; amount of the tolls impi-. d hy 
 the iHcsint A' I, lor the |Hr.sdn.s, lattl.Mu v. hicles 
 v\ hieh shall t huH pasi over such In idge or hridges ; 
 and If any person or persons shall, at any time, 
 tor lucre or 'Min, coniev anoss the river any 
 person or persons, cattle or- vehicles wiHiin the 
 ahovciiiiiilioiicd limits, smhollindcr sh.ill 111. iir 
 a penalty not exceeding ten dolliirs for e.i.h per- 
 .son, animal or vehi.h. \ihi,.h shall have thus 
 passed the said livcr; provided always, that 
 m, thing cdiitaiiied in the present Act shall he of 
 a nature to prevent any persons, cattle, vehicles 
 or hiailsfrom cro.ssing siidi riv.r within the said 
 limits liyaford or in a <miioi. or other ves.i. 1 
 without charge." After the hridge had heen 
 u.scil tor several years the appellant liiiinicipality 
 pa.sseil a hy-law to erei^t a tree hridge a.ioss the 
 < h.uiiliere river in close pro.xiniity l.i ihe toil- 
 bridge in exi.steiice; the respondent tliei.upon 
 ly petition lor injuiietion praye.l that the appel 
 laiit municipality he restrained from proceeding 
 to (he erection of a free hridge : — 
 
 Held, ;iHirmiiig the judgiuent df the Court 
 lelow, that the erection of the tree hridge would 
 he nil infringement of the respondent's lianehiso 
 of a toll hridge, and the injunction should hu 
 granted. Tou-n.hij. of AiihirlCallioi, v. //nv, 
 'il .S. C. R. 4.1(i. •' 
 
 Sie MU.MOII'AI. (/OUPOIIATIO.NS. 
 
 BOTTOMRY BOND. 
 
 Ste Sllll-, III. 
 
 BOUNDARY. 
 
 .See J)EKli, II. 
 
 BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT, 1867. 
 i'ee CoNsTrriTioNAi, Law, II. 
 
 BRIBERY. 
 
 See Parliamentarv Elections, I. 
 
 BROKER. 
 
 ,,.°f'«'*"af Contracts.]— Article 19^7 of the 
 . o 1^-° ''"^* "ft diller -suhstantiallv from 8 
 & Vict, ch 109, sec. IS (Imp.), ami renders 
 mill and void all contracts hy way of gaming 
 and T. aiierniL'. ■/ a a 
 
 A hroker was employed to make actual con- 
 tracts of purchase and sale, in each case com. 
 pleted by delivery and payment, on behalf of a 
 pnnoipal who,.ie object wa« not investment but 
 speculation : — 
 
 ill' 
 
 ri! 
 
 ! :i 1 
 
 \\\ 
 
119 
 
 BY-LAWS. 
 
 i 
 
 1 fiB'S 
 
 Held that these were not gaming contracts 
 ithin the meaning of the Code. Fonjel v. 
 
 ■<>l.v^V/«y, [1895J A. 0. 318. 
 
 BUILDING SOCIETIES. 
 
 Moneys Deposited upon Savings Bank 
 
 Account ~rHUion-~('oxt..\-\ person died in 
 the United States of America having moneys to 
 his_cre.ht deposits upon savings bunk account 
 Mith two huiMmg societies .loing business in 
 Untario, nicorporatcd under i{. !S. O. ch 169 
 An adniniistrator aiiiiointed l)y a Court in the 
 foreign country applied to the building societies 
 to have the moneys transferred to him, but the 
 societies, entertaining doubts whether the words 
 of sec ion 4/ of R S. O. ch. 169, "share, bond, i 
 debenture, or obligati.m." applied to a .savings 
 bank account, petitioned the Court under sec- I 
 
 tU)ll 4;i ; — j 
 
 th/.^ h-'il •I'f'''* ^l'\y^""^ ."obligation" covered! 
 
 the liability of the petitioners to repay the '' 
 
 amount deposited with them :— i 
 
 Held, also that the .loubts of the petitioners I 
 
 BUTTER FACTORIES. 
 
 Act to Prevent Frauds against Cheenn 
 Factories. ]-A conviction under seetion 1 of 
 52 Vict, ch 43 'D.). for supplying to a cheese 
 factory milk from which the' creL had been 
 removed, was quashed, as neither in the evidence 
 or in the conviction was any olfence against the 
 Act shewn, it not having been proved that the 
 milk was supplied to be niaiiufaotured ; but 
 witiiout costs. Regina v. Wtstijate, 21 (.). R. 
 
 Act to Prevent Frauds against Cheese I 
 Factories. ]-The Act .-.2 Vict. ch. 43 fu ) an ' 
 Act to provide against frauds in the supplying | 
 of milk to cheese factories, etc., is intra virt\ 
 23 or"™"" 1 •'''•I""'"'"*- Ji^'jina v. Stone, ' 
 
 BY-LAWS. 
 
 I. Of Corporations GENEEALLV-5ee Com- 
 
 i ' NY. 
 
 ]|. Ok Municipal Corporations— .Set Muni- 
 cipal Corporations. 
 
 III. RKLATIN(i to the SaLE OF LlQUOR— .^f-c 
 
 iNTOXICATINC; LlQUORS. 
 
 IV . Rklatinoto Schools— 5eePuBi,ic Schools. 
 
 Ambiguity. ]-A by-law against preaching 
 public parks IS not void for uncertainty as to 
 
 120 
 
 Ambiguity. ]-In describing lands for assess- 
 n .'• *]'':;n'"'th-east part," even with the 
 addition of the acreage, is an ambiguous descrip- 
 tion : and 7«„r,. as to the effect upon tfie 
 validity of a by-law. /,',. /,,„/,•„, aM Torm- 
 xhip of EnimkiRrii, 25 (). R. 3!i9. 
 
 Connection with TtvB.ln~Per,,ms;on of En 
 
 I Vintcr—Rexohitiou o/Co««a7.]-\Vhere a by-law 
 i provided that no connection should be made 
 j with a sewer, except by permission of the citv 
 , engineer, a resolution of the city ooiMcil grant 
 , ing an application for such connection on terms 
 which were complied with, and the connection 
 made, was a sufficient compliance with said by 
 ] law. Lewis v. Ali'xmutn; 24 S. C. R. ool. 
 
 j Construction — Puhlie Morals — Bii-law 
 a,/aiu.itSweuri,ig in SircH or PMic P/afc—Pri. 
 
 I rate Office in Custom Hoiisc.]-A city by-law en- 
 acted that no person should make use of any pro- 
 tane swearing, obscene, blasphemous or grossly 
 insulting language, or be guilty of any other 
 immorality or indecency in any street or public 
 place : — ^ 
 
 Held, that the oliject of il,e by-law was to 
 prevent an injury to public morals, and applied 
 to a street or a public place ejusdem qenerix with 
 a street, and not to a private office in the cus- 
 tom house, lieiiina v. AV//, 2") O. R. 272. 
 
 I Description of Ix&nA— Clerical Error— Publi- 
 I cation-Semi-month/!/ yeirspaprr. ]-A municipal 
 j by-law establishing a public highway is not void 
 I tor uncertainty when the boundaries of the land 
 ISO declared are describe<l in the by-law with 
 I sufhcient pi-ecision to enable them to be traced 
 j upon the ground, and if so pr..perly described 
 I It IS not necessary when i)rivate ground has' 
 I lieen taken to distinguish it as such. 
 I The fact that one of two parallel courses in a 
 I description has by obvious clerical error been 
 incorrectly given in the puldished notice is not 
 a valid objection to such a by-law. 
 
 Where there is no paper published m the 
 township weekly or ofteiier, it is not obligatory 
 to publish the required statutory notice of the 
 by-law in a paper issued therein semi-monthly 
 hethamher.s and Tonnship of liurford, 25 0. k! 
 
 _ Motion to Quash— 7iVco;/M/:aji<r.]— A condi- 
 tion precedent to the entertaining of a motion 
 to quash a municipal by-law is the entering 
 into, allowance, and filing of a recognizance, in 
 tlie manner provided by section 332 of the 
 Municipal Act .'55 Vict. ch. 42 (0.) ; and a bond, 
 even though allowed by a County Court Judge 
 cannot be effectively substituted for a recogl 
 uizimce Re B.n-toi, and Vi//a;/c of Arthur, l(i 
 
 Penalty. ]- A by-law omitting to provide any , 
 penalty for its violation is not necessarily bad * ' 
 In re Local Option A<-t, 18 A. 1!. .")72. 
 
 Publication.] Two of the days of publica- 
 tion of a by-law were Christmas and New 
 Years : — 
 
 Held, that he fact of pnlilication on the days 
 named did not vr.u,],-,- t)ie r.r,l>lie:itiou invalid ; 
 
 the day of the week iiittiided bv reason nt flm i ^„i,i- 4.- \i ■ .-'^ r;'""'-."-iuii mvaiiu ; 
 
 use of tiK, term " Sabbath-day.'' irS^L^,/ l^'l ''^\7 "I-' '""^' ^J"''i''V^' ^''i^" »8 to pre- 
 Citu of Toronto, 21 O. R 325 ^'^ <-"'""»'""« vent pubhcatioii on those days. Brunt 
 
 ^ " ownnhip of Mariposa, 22 O. R. 120. 
 
 m 
 
 Two-Thir 
 
 the proceedii 
 
 every by-law 
 
 that no by-la 
 
 a tendency t( 
 
 should be fini 
 
 was introduc 
 
 the whole cot 
 
 A by-law ti 
 
 and which, tl 
 
 vote, was re 
 
 and was deck 
 
 receive the ie< 
 
 meeting of ci 
 
 lowing eveni: 
 
 read a third 
 
 thirds' vote :- 
 
 Held, that 
 
 been defeated 
 
 of not having 
 
 not validated 
 
 at the subset 
 
 Town oflmjer 
 
120 
 
 bing lands for assess- 
 irt," even with the 
 II aml)igHous descrip- 
 le effect upon the 
 Jenkins and Town- 
 . 3(19. 
 
 1 — PermiHxion of En 
 '.J— Wliere a by-law 
 on should be inadf 
 rniission of the city 
 B city 001' iicil grant 
 ;oiinection on terms 
 and the connection 
 lianoe with said by 
 ■t S. C. R. 5.51. 
 
 Morals — By-law 
 Pii/itic Place— Pri- 
 —A city l)y-law en- 
 riakeuseof any pro- 
 ipiiemous or grossly 
 uilty of any other 
 my street or public 
 
 tlie by-law was to 
 iiorals, and applied 
 iusdem ijenerU with 
 te office in the cus- 
 25 O. R. 272. 
 
 rkal Error— Publi- 
 /)p/-.]— A municipal 
 lighway is not void 
 ndaries of the land 
 I the by-law with 
 
 t hem to be traced 
 )n iperly described, 
 ■ivate ground has 
 ..s such. 
 
 iraliel courses in a 
 lerical error been 
 ished notice is not 
 law. 
 
 published m the 
 t is not obligatory 
 tory notice of the 
 :iu semi-monthly. 
 Harford, 25 O. K. 
 
 121 
 
 CABS. 
 
 zance.] — A condi- 
 ning of a motion 
 is tlie entering 
 I recognizance, in 
 ;tion ;W2 of the 
 O.) ; and a bond, 
 ity ( ,'ourt Judge, 
 ted for a recog- 
 'je of Arthur, li; 
 
 ig to provide any 
 ; necessarily bad. 
 !. 572. 
 
 [lays of pnblica- 
 stnias and New 
 
 tion on the days 
 !ie;ition invalid ; 
 act so as to pro- 
 's. Brimker v. 
 120. 
 
 Publication - /^W»,/ y/ar,.,..]- Notice of 
 intention to submit a local option by-law to the 
 votes of the township electors w as given in pro- 
 per form and for the reciuisito number of times 
 in iL naiK'r onhltKliprl in ...-. ;...^,.. a. i -n 
 
 122 
 
 Validating Act. ]-Thc corporation of tlie 
 "Tbv" Lff """''",'• '"^'"^'' - '^y'aw entitled 
 dlr,;^P!'P^^!V!''!''':''|t'>-ize the issue of 
 
 in a paper published in ^urii^.^poi;^ d viM ^r '^Z^^::^''' r - . • , -- -- "■ 
 
 the bounds of which ,lid not actually touc^^ h'tt" ' ^ ''"''*"'' '"'^'- "''"• 
 
 though they came close to those of the townshin mm.nL ,^f ^^'^^ff^'^y */' '■'"^«' «'■'"• «"'» for the 
 
 , 1 ,u , "^ •n;i.iiiuiy coucn 
 
 though they came close to those of the townshin 
 in (|Uestion. ]'his paper was tlie nearest paper • 
 It had a large circulation in the townsliip and 
 was that in whieli tlie township council had 
 been in the habit of publishing tlieir notices and 
 hy-Iaws. No paper was published iu the town- 
 ship in question. 
 
 One of the polling places was described merelv 
 as being " at or near " u certain village. It was 
 shewn that this village «as a very small one", 
 and that the description was the same as that 
 used in the by-laws appointing the places ■..■• 
 lolding municipal elections. 1 1 was also shew n 
 tliat tlie poll was lield in a house close to the 
 house n, which the poll had l.een held in the ^ Ainnu 
 next preceding municipal election, that house ' as mvi;,„ 1 
 Itself having been moved away - u *' "^™ '-"mpbt 
 
 A - A>- "• - •'• nt'ld, reveisin;.' the 
 
 impose of building, etc., a street railwaycoVi- 
 acting the municipality of Neebing witli the 
 business centre of Port Arthur. At that li ne ■! 
 
 St eet railway l,eyond its lenitorial limits. The 
 
 passed hut '"'"^ "'"'" !'^' ■''■'' ■•'Vtepayersaiul 
 passed la t none was submitted orderinL' the 
 -mstruction of the work S„h.se,,nentlv u, ct 
 «as passed by the Legislature of On tar oh. 
 ■•espect to t:,e sai,l by-law which enact; V 
 
 ?'"''''^«"' '"""'""'"'« '"'the town . . . and 
 fo a 1 p„rpo.ses etc., relating to or afFcctin.' the 
 t' ; !'y'r; '^"'l '^"y »"'' all^nien.lmcnts ,1 c 
 Mnnicipal Act . . . shall he deemed and taken 
 
 1 with " :_ 
 
 lecision (if the Court of 
 
 Another polling place was specifically de- I Aiineir !<) A P — t . 
 scribed by place lot and concession, but there ' bi ' 1 1, [t th^;J f l"';''' ,:^--'^'-"'. •'■- «Hsse„t. 
 was an error in the iuiml,er of the conces,- .,. reuuirp,!, f= / ■!•''"' ""' '''«K'"***-' "ith the 
 
 It was shewn that all the proceedings lad ' W in ci d Aet ''•*■"'" f\ ^""' ''"'' "^ the 
 been taken in good faith, that the poll was | cSr /cln ' ^^^^ 
 
 very arge.nm it di.l not appear that\»,y me oXeonHv^^^^ '"^ ""'"'^'jy *" '*« Pa'^-^t-d, but 
 had b^en misled by any of these infoS I mSey Jlj law : 1 ""' ""^' ''''' '"^^^^'^ '« ''^ 
 Held, therefore, reversin.' the indf'men r,f I .,„'^'''fi "1*^"' ,"''''* '"' t'Toneous recital in the 
 Sir Thomas (ialt, C.J., that'the Co tn^ght, | ""'^ l'^' ^^' *'f i*'"" ,*°"" -""-' '>- 
 
 !i!!t!^'!!^."^.'^'^-«^---y po«- -' o dj; I {h^'^pJe^tirtrr ZiS'^'ytt;:. t:: z 
 
 refuse to (piasli the by-law in (,nestion. I„ re 
 Husvu and 1 mm ship of South Nortnch, 19 
 «'^'i, con '^'■""-'''^y t'"' «upieme Court, 21 
 
 j 
 
 Removal of Clerk -Seed. ]-Tlie removal of a 
 clerk ot a muiiici)ial corporation may be by a 
 resolution, it nr.t being essential that a by-kw 
 should be passed for such a purpose 
 
 Vtrnon v. Tovmof Smith's Falls, 21 O. R 3.31 
 followed. ' ' 
 
 When the seal of a municipal corporation is 
 wrongfully detained by the clerk of the council 
 a by-law removing him from office may be .sealed 
 with another seal pro /we rice. Villwic of Lon- 
 don W est V. Barlram, 'Hi O. R, 161. ' 
 
 Two-Thirds' Vote.]- A by-law to regulate 
 the proceedings of a town .'ouncil reeniired that 
 every by-law should receive three readings, and 
 that no by-law for raising money, or which ha.l , 
 a tendency to increase the burdens of the people, 
 should be finally passed on the day on w'hicli it I 
 was introduced, except by a two-thirds' vote of 
 the whole council. 
 
 A by-liiw to fix the number of tavern licenses, 
 and which, therefore, required such two-thirds' 
 vote, was read three :imes on the same day, 
 and was declared passed. It <lid not, however 
 receive the required two-thirds' vote. A special 
 iiieeting of council was then called for the fol- 
 owmg evening, when the by-law was merely 
 thirds' Ste-^'"^' '■'^'="'■"'8 '''<= ''equired two- 
 
 hpp^n'Vv *^*i *''? ''y-?'""''' "■■■'" ''••"'• ^or having 
 beendefoHted when brst introduced by reason 
 of not having received a two-thinls' vote, it w^as 
 not validated by merely reading it a third time 
 
 town of Inijersoll, 25 O. 1!. 439. 
 
 Port Arthur, 212 .S. C. R. -.^i. 
 
 vote of seventy-one to liftcen was quashed where 
 ■t appeared that the returning ollicer had 
 re used o accept the u.tes „f t'enant "ote s 
 se\enty-tourot whom «tre on the list and l,,d 
 the right to vote, though it was not shew n t iu 
 more than a very small number of these vot, 
 had made any attcMpt to vole or had expres^d 
 any intention o voting, or had liear.l o be 
 returning o;hccr\s refusal. 
 
 iior'be ?'7*';"'/l°'^t7'"-' t'';'t irregularities should 
 
 cb sid ""^^''''f ''PP'y ^^■'"-■'■•-' a class is disfran- 
 cliised in a by law contest. 
 
 In re. Croft and P,terl>uroii,jh, 17 A. R •>! 
 applieil. Wdiidwnrdw Sarsons, L, R 1() ('■ "p' 
 i'.iS, considered, " 
 
 Judgment of Gait C,J., reverse.l, Maclcnnan, 
 J. A„ dissenting, /« re Ponnder and Vllhme of 
 11 inrhe.,fer, 1!) A, R, 084, '^ •' 
 
 CABS, 
 
 ■ '^}<=ense OmH/6«.>,.]_Sec. 4;16 of the Muni- 
 cipal Act, 1!. S. O. ch. 184, empowers the pXo 
 
 tlie'ow,^!.°;"-'''r'^ "f''^ '" *■'•■«"'''''-' '^■Hl license 
 the owners ()f omnibuses, etc. The commis- 
 sioners of a city passed a by-law enacting that 
 no person or persons should diive or own any 
 omnibus without being licensed t„ do so •- 
 
 Held, that the authority conferred on the 
 commissioners was to license owners, and not 
 drivers ; and therefore a conviction of a driver 
 for driving wit lout a license was bad, and must 
 be quashed. Heyina v. liutkr, 22 O. R. 4G2. 
 
123 
 
 CARRIERS. 
 
 I 
 
 
 f,r 
 
 Livery stable Keeper.) -A person licenced 
 
 uiuil:?'A r^ .^tiiMc. at a iKirticuIar locality 
 tiii.lc, a l,y.l,uv iMiulu liy tlic boanl of police 
 conn,u..s„„K;rs fo,- a city, ,,„,„,ant to .s .ct,o.: 
 4.?0ottheM-,.n,c.pal Act, Imt not having a cal, 
 licence for which iiinlcra soi.aralc hy-lau- other 
 ami larger fees were payable i.s „„tal lihertv to 
 «a.,uw.th h... cal,.s a„,l .solicit p.asscn.e.s a | 
 places lhu„«h owncl l,y hi,,,, other thanlhan at 
 
 '^'•^;;vi^;:';if';;;;;;' -'■-'---• j^'^oi.uJ, 
 
 Lord's Day Act.] - A cab-driver is not i 
 With.,, any of the elapses of persons enn.nerata | 
 jn section 1 of the l.onls Day Act, R. S. O ch I 
 
 mi,.'?' i"'"-'" '" 'i'''f"">' '■■"'•^•iot'.-'l there: ' 
 under for di'iv.ng a cab on .Sunday. A'emiia v 
 
 124 
 
 CARRIERS. 
 
 I. (i(ioi)s ,\Ni) Ani.m.m..--, P2.'{, 
 
 II. ]'A.S.SEN(JlilW AND Lri:(iAi;K, 1-25. 
 
 I. (JooDS A.Ni) A.NI.MAL.S. 
 
 Animals -KuoHnl.,, of S/x-ci,, 
 W Here doL;s wei-e delivered to an 
 p:uiy to he can'ied to a city for 
 made kno\,-n to the conipany, of be 
 at a dog show, and wee not deli 
 address given until ten hou,'s after 
 in the city, and \s-er<: t!,iis too late 
 tlKir owner w;,s held entitled 
 against the company, includin.T 
 profits. " 
 
 dudgnieiit of the C'onntv Court o 
 revei'sed. K,',inedy v. Aimrkan 
 -- A. 1\. 1:/S, 
 
 express coni- 
 
 th(! purpose, 
 
 ing exhibited 
 
 vered at the 
 
 their arrival 
 
 to compete, 
 
 to damages 
 
 .anticipated 
 
 f Wentworth 
 
 Exjircis Co. , 
 
 Connecting Lines -/(»^/,,,.nVy of A<|ellf^- 
 I'-, m .nti.h (\,himbia, licing about to pui-dmsp 
 goods f,-o,n (i., ,n ,)„ta,.io, signe,], on r ecn.e t of 
 the f.e.ght a..e,,t of the Xorthcrn Paci.ic Railway 
 ( <Miii;any luKnt.sh Colund.ia, aletter toCi ask 
 i.i,g inm to shipgoo.ls rl, C-and Trunk Railwv 
 and rh.cago .t N. ^V. n. W. Co., care Xo ^er^ 
 laeihc b'adway at ,St. Paul. This letter was 
 
 t to ■ .: ' ''^' "'"'',■'.">■ '-'^ ''^"■■""l"' "-l^" sent 
 It to (,. am. wrote to h,n, " I enclose you card 
 
 joii make the shipment .send it to me, I will 
 
 deli^'rvV''"''"'^' *'''■"' '!^''''''«'''^'''>'''"^-i«^vouo 
 <lob\ciy to con.signee." (,■. .shipped the coods 
 as suggested in this letter delivei'able to hiso , 
 order in iiritisli t'olnmbia : — 
 
 l,,/^'''''^'.,?"'*''"',"" *^'"- ''^^''i^^'oi's of the Courts 
 below, •_' A. R 'l-'') •^•> II i> ,..- 4., . 
 
 Columbia an.l to ev„edite such carriage ; that 
 
 S^' Paul? ''.'•''' "" "/""'' «'""P^Vfnm 
 
 '■ , "i,^' '-"^'t'"" ' '"■' 'liii : that the frei.dit 
 
 «gent,atToro,. h.id ,,■ i.ority so to bind the 
 
 con.p:.ny : .,„,! ,!, , „,o company „,,, ]i "| , ' .'^ 
 
 *red to I., at Rntish Columbia without au order 
 
 I II . Co. v. Urani, 24 .S. C. R. ,-)4(j. 
 
 : Contract-0«,«„,/,.,] _\Vhere the only evi- 
 dence ol the contract to carry was that the 
 I oreman of the freight .lepartmc^it at one of t e 
 detendans stations agreed to have certain tree.s 
 ;.nvarded to a .station not on the defendants' 
 was':-" "" '""' '■""'"-'^■''"« therewith, it 
 ! Held, th.at this was evi.lence to be sul)mitted 
 t a jury of a contr.jct to that effect bin.ling 
 tlie deten,lants, and that a nonsuit was wron^ 
 
 he measure of damages against carriers for 
 non-delivery of trees eonsidereil 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of Middlesex 
 reversed Hagarty, C.J.O., di.ssenting. ,l/c6'i« 
 V. Craml Trunk R. W. Co., ]<) A. R. 2-4r,! 
 
 V. llui (Jmm, .i Kk. L. R. !Ki, po.^/ 290. 
 
 Reduced Rate - /M.n.r of Compuny.] - 
 
 egd.gence ,n an actio,, against a railv.^vy com- 
 pany for damage to goods were base.l on mere 
 conjecture, the verdict for the plaintiffs was 
 set aside, bnt as it could not be said that there 
 
 L , ert'"-' 1 V "^■«';t'^'"^''-' "■' other gronnda, 
 
 <i new trial was directed. 
 
 I'er .Mac.Malii>ii, ,J., .li.ssentiiig. A nresumi, 
 ■on ot negligence arose from t*l,e non'dS; 
 
 sT" ' ''"''. tl'^'i'lamtiH-s were not bound 
 to shew any par icul;,r acts of negligence. 
 
 10 phaintills ageut sliipped a^piantity of 
 plate glass by dctemlants' railway, sigiiin.r „„ 
 agreement that in consideration of the defj 
 Jlants receiving the goods at a reduce,! rate of 
 twenty.tl„.ee cents per 10,') pou,i,ls they .shouM 
 not be respon.sible for any\lainage aris g 
 t e course ,,f the transit, including ne.di.'ence 
 llie ,leleiidants ha,l two rates, l.aine " the 
 
 unten.CI were in accor.lance with the Can- 
 1, .an Joint l-,. eight Clas.siMcation, a,loptc.d y 
 the n ami approvcl by the (Governor in [■oun ed 
 under secti.m 220 of 51 N'ict. ch. 2!l (IX) '■ T he 
 
 ha "tlT. '■ r^'i '!"■ ""'' '■'''-i'>--on stating 
 tliat the th.r. class rate applie.l where tli? 
 goo,lswere "shippcl at owners' risk-shipp r 
 sgning special plate glass release form." The 
 P ..MitiUs agent was aware of the two rates' 
 ami sigi,e,l the agreement assenting to the lower 
 
 ate, iind,, the belie that the def^n.lants coul. 
 
 1 't, mi.ler section 2t(i, tike a,lvai,tage of the 
 
 P -ovision absolving them from li.vbilfty whe e 
 
 the ,lan,age was occasioiicl by negligence. A',. 
 
 V licirtb'''"''"''."^' "^ thecompany^ Uriff under 
 
 mv. 1 T ''"t^'f,"'-''-^ ^■l'^"«'-'l Ind been ap- 
 
 ^eisS;i;i::i'^"^«^'^-"-'-^""-«J^ 
 
 Ilehl, per Meredith, C.J.. that notwithstand- 
 "ig the payment of the lower rate, and the 
 agreement signed by their agent, the d'efenda , a 
 •oiil.l n,,t nn.ler section 240, relieve themselves 
 "■om Lability when negligence was proved 
 
 cr bose, J.- I he thir.l cla.ss rate was the 
 "".V. rate •' awfullv payable." If ,, !y ,* e 
 rate IS n.xed the provision in the freight classih! 
 catum as to release was ullrnvh-e., as contrary to 
 the provisions of section 240. ^ 
 
 125 
 
124 
 
 Northern Pacfiic It. 
 
 R. r.4(i. 
 
 -W liore tlio only evi- 
 (•any was tbiit the 
 
 iiitinunt iit one of the 
 to have certain trees 
 on the dufenilants' 
 
 Lting tlierewith, it 
 
 ence to !)e submitted 
 ' tliat effect bindinjj 
 nonsuit was wrong. ° 
 against carriers tor 
 lereil, 
 
 Court of Middlesex 
 dissenting. McOiU 
 HI A. R. 245. 
 
 irrier.J-.S'ee Lavoie 
 'ti, po.</ iQO. 
 
 '"' of ('omj-1'.iny.} — 
 ry as to tile giounds 
 ainst a railway com- 
 •ere liased on mere 
 
 • the plaintiffs was 
 ■ Ijc said tiiat there 
 :e on other grounds, 
 
 iting. A presumi). 
 "1 the non-delivery 
 lis Here not bound 
 if negligence, 
 'pcil a ((uantity of 
 ailway, signing an 
 tion of the defen- 
 
 a reduced rate of 
 -ounds tliey should 
 damage arising in 
 hiding negligence, 
 ites, namely, the 
 
 class rate, and a 
 
 cents, which they 
 ce with tile Can- 
 ■ation, adopted by 
 overnor in Council 
 cb. '-'il (!_).), "The 
 ssifie:\iion stating 
 pplied where tlie 
 ers' risk — sbijiper 
 case form." The 
 if the two rates, || 
 iiting to the lower 
 
 defendants could M 
 advantage of the 
 11 liability where 
 
 • negligence. A'o 
 any s taritF under 
 Kd hid Ijeen aji- 
 -'otmcil, altliough 
 of sixty-si.x cents 
 nts had inter alia 
 
 at notwithstand- 
 •r rate, and the 
 t, the defenilanta 
 dieve themselvcH 
 .vas proved. 
 ss rate was the 
 If only one 
 3 freight classiti- 
 e.v as contrary to 
 
 125 
 
 CARRIERS. 
 
 i'er MacMalion, J.— \o liydnw fixing the rate 
 at sixty cents having been approved of by the 
 <!ovornor in Council, tlui-c was no fiei dit " law 
 fully payalilc," without whicli there'" c<mld' be 
 no ahernative rate, and the release which 
 woul.l otherwise liave been valid, was iiioj.er- 
 ative. C(,lih„ii V. Caimdid.,! rariiic /.' \y (\, 
 20 (>. R. 7.'«2. Athrmed in appeal,' -j;} A. I!.' 11,-)' 
 
 Special Contract -/,!»)i7f('/o» „f /^iahi'ili/ ^ 
 -^l!y section •.'4(i (.•)) ot the Railway Act I 
 ihh^. .-51 \.ct. eh. 20 (1).), "every -per-son 
 ag-rievcdbyany neglect or refusal in the ore- 
 niiscs shall liave an action therefor against the 
 company, from which action the eomji.-nv shall 
 not^ he relieved by any notice, coilditi.u. or 
 declaration, it the damage arises from any iie.r. 
 ligeiiue or omission of the company or of i?s 
 servants : — '' 
 
 Held, that this ju-ovision does not disable 
 a railw.ay conii.any lr,.m >.nteriiig into a special 
 e^.iitract lor the carriage of goo.ls and limiting 
 Its liability as to amount of damages to be 
 recovered lor loss ,„■ injury to such goods aris- 
 mgtrom negligence IV,,,-/ v, (;ra,„l Tnnd- i 
 
 dmn l„nl,r /,'. ,| . To., 1.", A. It. .3s,S, .lis- 
 tniL'Uished. ' 
 
 The (iran.l Trunk Railway Co. received from \ 
 K. a I- _rse to be carried over its line, and the 
 agent of the company and K. signed a c.mtract 
 bir such carriage w inch containe.l this iirovision • 
 J he conijiany shall in no case be responsible 
 for any aniouiit exceeding one hundred dollars 
 to" each and anv horse," etc. :— 
 
 HeM, that the words "shall in no case be 
 responsible wer.i snilicicntly general to cover 
 all cases of loss however cause.l, and the horse 
 having been b .'..d by negligence of servants of ■ 
 the company 1 : could not recover more than : 
 $11)0, though the value of the horse largely i 
 eXL.,ic.ded thai amount. .lu.lgment of the Coui t 
 o Appeal, L'l A, R. L'(i4, and of the Common 
 has Uivision, 2t O. R. 7"., athrmed. Roh,rt.on ; 
 V. Orand Trunk Jl. 11'. Co., 24 .S. C. R. (jll. \ 
 
 128 
 
 skill upon the part of the railway company i„ 
 h scKction, te.s„ng. l,,ying and use of IJ, 
 i.ul, lliec'onipany is not liable ind ima.'e.s to a 
 P-sscnger ui, ured by ,he derailmem otttrlin 
 through the ..•caking of «uch rail. 
 
 ..it the accident was caused by a l.itent Ilefect 
 >" flic rail, ami that a railwav company is 
 .•c.siio„s,b e, under the code, for injuries r'esnlting 
 
 I to. \. '■/in/ii,„ix, 22 S. ('. I;, 721 
 
 Production of Ticket. | The contract 
 tuceiia person buying a r.dlw.iy ticket and 
 he company on who.se line it i. intended to 
 1 '•■ used iinplie.. that such ticket shall be pro 
 
 <luced ami delivered up to the co„dn..,or of 'the 
 tram m. winch such person travels, and if he 
 '■■ I'lit oti a (ram f<,r refusing or being unable .so 
 :<i liroihice ami deliver it up, the company is 
 "<• lijd.le to an action for such ejectment ^ 
 
 .Judgment ot the (.„„rt.,f Appeal, 2(1 A. K 
 4,0, and of the gueeiis IVn.-l, |>iv,.^ion, 2-0 
 
 t,^!:v 22 ;^'(' ■ 'ii. 4uh:"' '''"'"' "■ '' ■ ^'"- - 
 
 Warehousemen.!- When a shipper stores 
 .t'o-ls from time to time in a railway warehouse, 
 loading a car when a cardoad is ready, the 
 
 of such of the goods as have not i.ieen specdlie 
 ally set apart for shipment is not that of ear- 
 ners but of warehousemen, ami in ease of their 
 accidental .lestruction by tire, the shipper has 
 no remedy against the company. ^^ ' 
 
 •Imk-mentof the Cmiimm Pleas Division, 2.3 ' 
 
 v.. H. Co., 21 A. R. 404. j 
 
 II. Passengers and Luggage. 
 
 Crown.]- Crown's liability for injuries to 
 p:..ssengers on Government railway. -6ee Duh,: 
 V. TItc (Jueen, 3 Ex. C. R. 147, jJt 295. 
 
 m,M,f Th*^^^ ^•^-"^'''' '■'^^■^■•«'"« the judg- 
 ment of the Superior Conrt and Court of 
 t^ieeus liench for Lower Canada tappe.-il «i,le) 
 nar wh., t,, breaking of a rail il'shewn" to 
 
 iiuldenly great variations of the degrees of 
 temperature, and not to any want of^care or 
 
 Special Contract- /,',,/,„•,,/ /.>„•- | -- Tbp 
 ; I'laii.till purchased n-oni a,i agent of tlu defend 
 '"It company at OttaM'a what was called a la 
 seekers ticket, the only kind of ret,, ,£ 
 
 ■ ':;";';';::' '''^'■v''''^'t'''--i'--«.Mowinnij^ 
 ;u:e;itio'fai:^::jir;v:;;/'''^^^'Si;:;';;^:;4 
 
 tiWerableandl^dpiintcioniti^mX': 
 conditions, one of which bmilcl the liability 
 ot the company f,.r baggage to Heari,,.. an„a -Id 
 Tiot exceeding ,sl()J ^,„ %,,,„„_ J\- ;\ ''"^J 
 .equired tjie signature of the passen'/er f th" 
 
 F;n><-;ofidenti.ieationandt,lprev^:a .,uS 
 fcr. I he agent obtained the plaiulilf.s si-na- 
 tnre to tne ticket explaining that it was [Z^Z 
 pir.o.seof identi.ication but did not read nor 
 exj.lain to her any of the conditions, and hay^ 
 J ig .sore eye^^at the time she was unable to rZl 
 then. her.self. ()„ the trip to W im.ipe. ' 
 accident happeiicl to the tr.aiii and plaiirtill's 
 I baggage valued at over ,s|,(),m, ,,,,i,„.|, t.^^'^ 
 iwas.estroyed. In an aethm for daniaj-'s for 
 such lass the jury lound for the ,,la,iitiff for the 
 i ainount of the alleged value of I lie ba,.-,ra,re •_ 
 I Held, reversing the judgment of The^Courf 
 of Apiieal, 15 A. R. Uss: and of the Div s- 
 l""al Court, 14 0. R. (12,-,, (Iwynne, d. li sent 
 .ng. ha there was sullicient cvidence'thirt e 
 OSS of the baggage ^as cans.al by ,lcfemlaits' 
 "K'gligeuee and the special conditions printed 
 on the ticket not having been bromdit he 
 
 .•■otice ot plaintilishe was^,or„boniid by the i and 
 CMUild recover her loss from the company. X' 
 \. Cu„(t,/ia,i I'aclir II. ]]\ r,,., IS ,s;. f.K. u,";_ 
 
 Special Contract -a;,,.,., y,/;o. ,/>,„. /.,>,,„•/. 
 
 o Untaiio, by written agreement with the 
 defendant coiii,,aiiy, obtained b,r its members 
 
 "■llmrrr;! " '^"^^^I-^'l-nvilcgesintr^ 
 
 :\^lling by the company 's boats, oife of the 
 
 terms of the agreement being tliat the members 
 
 duri' r IS^r. b ' ,'^«''^''"'^'"t ^v.'^ cmtinned 
 Uur ng lh,% by verbal agreement between the 
 manager of the company and the secretary and 
 
 ! ;i 
 
u 
 
 CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE. 
 
 187 
 
 128 
 
 STL^a^r^: S-^r'-^lrl^'-^'- 
 
 abm t .. „,o(.a Tl,e t.u„ks were cLeckc,! ,n 
 the usual way a.ul no intimation ,.as given by 
 D to any of tl.e „fhcials on the hoat as to thciV 
 contents. On tl.e jmssagc tl,e contents of tli 
 trunks Mere .laniagcl l,y the negligence of he 
 
 hfnn r. f n" "","J"'"'y ■■""' •"" 'Action «.a« 
 
 brought hy D. and his employers to recover 
 
 damages for such injury :— i > •'-'-om.i 
 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court 
 
 lLt^'^"i{ ^'l '^- ^- "■*"■ t''''t the agreeme t 
 between the Asscoiation and the cmmnv was 
 m force ,n I8,SC ; that the term " Lgg^Lgc " 
 m the agreement meant not merely personal 
 baggage such as every passenger is allowed to 
 &r"u?r -Vf •'^"/'T' •"" -n.m:reial 
 caff- ^»;.l th t '"'; ""•■'"''" ?'"' '-^"tht in this 
 case, anc that in the expression " must be at 
 
 'Cain'st'aH '"^'''Z' "'.'■ f-^'^i-." tl.e word 
 against all casualties " do not limit, control or 
 
 thtr < he * f '■'''"'"■ ^"'"ja"'"'. tl.e 'protection 
 which the former words " at owners risk " 
 afforded the .lefendants. ni^■on s^J^ideL 
 Naviijntion Co., 18 ,s. C. I!. 704. ■"«-«"'«« 
 
 Recognizance.]- Where the affidavit accom- 
 ■n e\ Z^- 'I '■'■'^"«;"^'"'^« «''-'l "•' a motion for a 
 
 . f 't '''"'!■■'"'' '^ W'"viction did not negative 
 the fact of the sureties being sureties in anv 
 other matter and omitted to state tl a the" 
 were worth .? 100 over an.l above any a moum 
 
 was held iiisulhcient. 
 
 The rule in force as to reeognizan. os prior to 
 the passing of the Criminal Code is still m ore 
 Ilc<jiiia V. llobintt, IC P. I!. 49. 
 
 Street Ca.v~Eximtshm of Pasmujtr-Dam- 
 R. bhA ; 21 A. I!. 578 ; 24 «. C. R. 570, post 327. 
 
 Hio^et- Condition- VIA Direct Liue.l-A 
 comhtion 11, ,n railway ieket as to travdling 
 
 V a direct hue" was rejected as meaningless 
 each of three possible routes being cirJXus 
 
 tM^r "" ^''"'■*"' "' p-"'°f "-i-S't^r.: 
 
 Stmh/e, in this country it is not the law N 
 
 CHALLENGE. 
 
 •See Tkial, I. 
 
 CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE 
 
 Discovery. 1- Discovery was not enforceable 
 in cputy m cases of champerty and mainte 
 nance nor should it be uiuler the eriuWarent 
 remedies given by the Judicature Ac ; and 
 plantifF should not be compelled on e^am na- 
 [ t on to answer o.uestions touching an alleged 
 champertous agreement. '"'tgeu 
 
 Scwhh', that the rigorous rules which obtaine.l 
 ..earlier days in England are not to be importe 
 into her dependencies without some moditicat o 
 
 /.</?/( (oomar v. Chuiidtv, 2 Apn. Cas it „ 
 210, specially referred to. ^' ' ''• 
 
 To an action under Lord Campbeirs Act the 
 
 ;= 1, 1 i. --0—-—V >.'u.n.iiiijg upon nis t 
 
 IS Douncl to pay fare wrongfully demandec or ,>.n;.,f ■ i '-—,-" "■'"' •" »a» oroiigiit and 
 to leave the train on the oonductor's or er n '"fl"''^'""' •","',"" "" '^'lanipertous agreement 
 the peril of not being able to S;? l^^^'^ I "■'iV:^/''!^"^^?'^ the plaiiiti/r to sue -.t ''""'' 
 
 the peril of not being able to Veiom' ikmaces 
 
 force" Tir"\' """"""-1 '" ^■^PoUing him "by 
 force, llie Amen.an cases on the subject con- 
 sidered and not followed. Ju.lgment of the 
 Queen s IJench Division, 20 O. K. 003 varied 
 Baixcey v. avand Trunk H. W. Co., 19 A. R 664 
 
 See Railways. 
 
 TT , , :; , . '"^ I'luiiitiii lo sue : — 
 
 onf.T^'n. ''' "".V'*-'^"""/ ''"'"''^ ""' 'Je struck 
 out • if proved, it was for tlie Court to sav 
 
 what c^flect should follow. W,lbourne v Cal 
 
 cuhan Pacific R. W. Co., 16 P. R. 343 
 
 CATTLE, 
 
 See Distress— Railway? 
 
 VIII. 
 
 CAUTION. 
 
 See Devolution op Estates Act-Land Title 
 Act. 
 
 CERTIORARI. 
 
 ol.Wf"''* ,f Application.] -A preliminary 
 objection, that the m.igistratc had not six full 
 days notice of the .application for the writ of ml 
 certiorari taken on the return of the motion to ' ad 
 
 Right of Entry— /'o.Me.s.siOH.]— The plaintifls 
 M-ere heirs-at-law of M. A. M., a miHed wo 
 n.an, to whom in 1849, her husband, S M 
 joining in the deed, one G. conveyed five kcits 
 of lan.l, part of a lot of 100 acTes conveyed 
 to him in 1841 by the patentee under 
 Crown grant of the year 1828! G. S. M was i 
 possession of four acres of the five acres 
 question for some time before 18.3.5, when he 
 .named, and then he and his wife remrine , 
 possession of the four acres till 1849, and tlien 
 ,of th. 'our acres and the additional one acre 
 
 * >vife's death in 1864 :— 
 
 • , ' affi'ining the judgment of th^ Queen's 
 I Bene division, 21 O. IE. 281. Burton J A 
 
 d-s .,...g, that the deeds from the patentee t'/) 
 
 '-^. and from G. to M. A. M. might L upheld 
 
 .otwithsundmg^the Statute of MainteLicc.' 
 
 Per Hagarty, C. J. O., and Osier, J. A.-Tlie 
 statute applies only to eases of adverse per 
 session, and there being no evidence one w.-.y or 
 tae other, the Court was not bound to draw tlie 
 '"•-ence that the possession of G. S AI w 1^ 
 rse to the patentee. Jf it did apply and (V.' 
 
128 
 
 '«■ to quash the con 
 tlio ground tliat the 
 ipeaiing ju the case, 
 take tho objection. 
 R. 437. 
 
 ;the affidavit acconi 
 d on a motion for a 
 on did not ucgati\( 
 ^^ing sureties in any 
 to state that tliey 
 aliove any amount 
 iable as sureties, it 
 
 oognizan( c» prior to 
 L'ode is still in force 
 49. 
 
 GE. 
 I. 
 
 AINIENANCE 
 
 I'as not enforceable 
 perty and inainte 
 ler the c(|uivalent 
 :ature Act ; and a 
 elled on examina- 
 iiehiug an alleged 
 
 les which obtained 
 
 not tobeimporteil 
 
 some modification. 
 
 App. C'asi., at \i. 
 
 'amphell's Act the 
 was brought and 
 ertous agreement 
 
 to sue : — 
 uld not be struck 
 he Court to say 
 Vilbviirne v. Can- 
 
 R. 343. 
 
 '.]— Theplaintifls 
 [., a married wo- 
 sband, G. S. M., 
 iveyed five acres 
 ' acres conveyeil 
 itentee under a 
 G. tS. M. was in 
 he five acres in 
 3 1835, when lie 
 vife remained in 
 _ 1849, and then 
 itional one acre 
 
 it of the Queen s 
 Burton, J. A., 
 the patentee to 
 igiit be upheld, 
 )f Maintenance. 
 
 iler, J. A.— The 
 jf adverse po«- 
 ence ono way ;■- 
 ind to draw'tlie 
 f G. S. M. Wi..: 
 id apply and (; 
 
 129 
 
 had only a preteneed title '.till thnf „, . 
 
 Mar.h V. ireii, 1 a" K 564 % PosBcssioi,. 
 case. '^"^- ''<^« tlie ne.xt 
 
 CHOSE IN ACTION. 
 
 CHOSE IN ACTION. 
 
 ISO 
 
 statute of MalntenBice — TorHm,. n 
 MO). 1 T„ looe ,„.i f"^ ;"-" J 01 noun Hosneii- 
 
 It tori, In J841.(;. eonveSd totfe^rof'iT 
 Ztv ;i^"'"T'' "" -."-'^-anee tho^^r of a 
 
 set up the statute of limitations, alkStlit 
 Ml ad been in possession twenty j4ar"Vl "n 
 
 ia poLssion. ^^SZ^T'^SiZ 
 
 r::sr?849:i^- '■'"'' ^'--^-^-ti^g^ 
 
 Held, that it was not orovpi) n.^t- it 
 session of M. began be wi The gS f om ^the 
 Crown, but assuming that it di,l vr . i ! 
 avail himself of the stat f, Vf ' \ "'"''^ "°* 
 
 he would have r-^Itlb^I^'SrorC' 
 patentee, as the org a ^ ^ " ^.T"'' ."'^' 
 
 SiSrrTt^Er^r^ 
 
 grantor. Wehb.. &k%tcllll"''''\ 
 
 Contract- AV«'V«W,. As.i,jn,„a,t-EMovvH 1 
 indel eUo'lV-'^r' f"'' '^"''''"'a a church 't' 
 
 Kale him lh.!UE!^Sr^ryS1/''V^'"' 
 who were the building, t,Ttee u, 'IT''","-*!' 
 
 CHATTEL MORTGAGfE. 
 
 See Bills of Sale. 
 
 CHEESE FACTORIES. 
 
 See BoTfER Factories. 
 
 CHEQUE. 
 
 See Bank.s-Bil.,s of Exchange 
 9 
 
 sum of a_, and oblige (sbniecU T F tt " 
 
 tractor "•_ ° >»'o"«U l. f. H., con- 
 
 sue, ana iiiese persons exnoftm) tr, ,,„(. i 
 whieh were to be paid out nf h, >®*'' °''''*"'* 
 
 an.l n,.>f ♦!. I- ' '"' °' '■he contract nrice • 
 
 Armour, C J., agreed in the result. La„r v 
 ^mi/annon Arricullural P.. ,„, Pari- aT 
 (ion, 22 0. R. 2')4 Associa- 
 
 dants and the plaintitTs assignor fo. h n ■"" 
 uAtTf\'''?' 1-ov.dr th/t"t ; Form^' 
 
 assigned to the plaintiff a! -monrv- ?.''''''^''^'^ 
 
 i; 
 
 m 
 
 ' i 
 
 jii 
 
131 
 
 CHOSE IN ACTION. 
 
 HeM tliiit they liad a right so to ,1,., tlie 
 J.liuntiH s iiHsigninent being iieiossanly aul.ioct 
 to the provisions of tlie original contract. />„■- 
 </ii/iar V. Ci/y of Toronto, 26 O. R. 35() 
 
 132 
 
 Crown.] — n here a chose in action was 
 assigieo. wtnr alia, for the general licncit of 
 treihtors, all the parties interested being bel..,„ 
 theCo„,t an.l the Crown making no olijcctioM, 
 the Court gave effect to such assignment 
 
 Qmcr, In the absence of acquiescence in 
 8uoh an assignment, are i ne assitiiee's ritti-i, 
 t^iereunocr capable of enforcement ..gainst tin 
 Crown? r I,.- Queen y. Mi.'Junly, -2 V.x. C R 
 
 Timet. ] — Upon" a 
 I tiier to iiulenniify 
 
 Damages Action Qi'l 
 covenant b\ ;,:i incomini' j 
 
 111,. I o.,,., 1 I O. ' "" "" miiuilllli 
 
 I" 1 .sue harmless a retiring partner -j^ainst (-a 
 JiabiUties. c-.,;:tracts and agre( i ..,„t3 ,; the (irp, 
 no cause of act. „ accrues tu .he oven..nteo 
 I U'.ely because an action to recover ui.liqiMial^d 
 < an.ages for an alleged breach of agreeme.t has 
 Ijo-n brought against the (irm. 
 
 Meirbid-n v. M,u-kc!ra,i, 19 A. R. 709. „,.a 
 L,^. FrHand, LM U.C.R. 132, distii'igui'shJd 
 
 .■5UC1J u i.iveiiant is not assignable bv the 
 
 euai.U; hiin to join tlie covenantor as a .!"fen- 
 <.ant M the action to recover against hiin the 
 danwscs lor which the lirm may be nltim :teW 
 held iv.-poiisible. •' 
 
 .rudginent of Gait, C.J., affi.-ined. Suih;- 
 land V. WehMer, 21 A. R. 228. 
 
 bv^f'^H^^T'^"''"'-?.'-^"'''''''"'""-]-^ «''">" 
 ii> .a client for negligence against a firm 01 
 
 s o! citor-s in directing the distribution of moneys 
 
 mt eshentts h.u.ds was a.ssigned by him to 
 
 another, and by the latter to the plaintiff — i 
 
 er Armour, C.J., at the trial. -The claim 
 
 did not by virtue of U. ,S. O. ch ]•->•> sec " 
 
 (<»._), pass to the plaintiff so as to enaUe liin/to 
 
 maintain an action therefor in his own name! 
 
 I.ut ,n .any event no negligence was proved. 
 
 On appeal to the Divisional Court the iu.br- 
 ment was affirmed on the ground of the absence 
 of any jiroof of negligence, but 
 
 ler MacMahon, J., if negligence had been 
 
 Insurance Moneys.] -C. by instrument 
 under seal assigned to defendant, as secudty 
 for moneys due, his interest in certain po ie^ 
 o insurance on which he had actions pending ' 
 C afterwards g.ave to B. & Co. an order 0, 
 defendant for the balance of the insurance 
 money that would remain after paying heb? 
 to defendant. B. & Co. endorsed tlie?rdcra. 
 delivered it to plaintiff by whom it was pre- 
 sented to the defendant, who wrote his nam 
 across its face B. & Co. afterwards delim" 
 to plaintiff a document signed by them atatii 
 that having been informed that the endor'. "' 
 ov.;. was not negotiable by endor , , n<- ■ 
 p>— .-v plaintiff's title and enable him t( '.,,,[,,•• 
 tl;-: .'u -ley in defemiant's hands, they :v-H'e;.6d 
 ;in; Transferred their interest therein \vJk^. 
 liointed plaintiff their attorney, in their n: J, 
 but for !n^ own use and beuelit, to coll . • H^i 
 mme. The defendant having receive.! t , ■ 
 amountB due C. on the insurance pel cies in 
 
 fornie 1 plaintiff, on his demau.ling an account. 
 
 that there were prior claims th.it would absorb 
 
 It all. Plaintiff then likd a bill i„ ..quity for 
 
 : an account and payment of the amount found 
 
 : .tuc nun to Wioch defendant de ried for want 
 
 oJ parties ..H.-iiing tl.ut the or.ler, though abso- 
 
 lut.. on Its ;i.ee, w.:,.s, in tact, only .'iven .ag 
 
 ,sc..u„ty, a„,i that :„, .■ .ount betweiMi IJ. & Co 
 
 ; «iMl C. Ijciii)^ iieccs- ,1 ^ '„ protect C. 's riuhts c" 
 
 I was a 11 ocessary pa , v to tlie suit. The demur' 
 
 ;r.ry.,.sov,..,,ik.l , .;, the judgment overruling 
 
 t not appealed fro,,., ;vud the same defence of 
 
 w antjjf parties waa set up in the answer to the 
 
 Held affirming the judgment of tlio Court 
 be ow .Strong an, Patteis.m, J.]., dissenting, 
 ■ hat the question of ^vau^ of ,,arties was /■(.• uu/T- 
 n-'u by th<. ,xu:^u tnt on t,ie demurrer and conhl 
 not be ra. .c. ..j;,;,,, by tlie answer. Even if it 
 could the jiidgi.ieiit W-1.S riglit as C. was not a 
 necessary jvirty. A., between plaintiff and dcfen- 
 (buit t.ic ord ,-r wa« ay absolute transfer of the 
 fu!;,. to be received In defendant, an,l was treate.l 
 )J lui the parties a,s a negotiable instrument. 
 , Defendant lia.l nothing to ,lo with tlie equities 
 
 and plaintiff but was bound to account topl.ain^ 
 tiffinaccoroancewilh his UM.Iertaking as indi- 
 cated by the acceptance of the order. McKcau 
 V. Jones, 19 .S. C. R. 489. "^I'l;* 
 
 nmla- Contmct.]- Ihi: equitable interest of an 
 assignee from the purchaser of a contract for 
 the sale of lands, is exigible under a writ of 
 
 and the purchaser at a sheriffs sale of such 
 
 r^o^Ll^t!"^'"^^' '" ''''''' p^'-^-— "f 
 
 y.V /'rifti,- and Cran-ford, 9 C I> T 4") 
 doclarcl to have been inadvertently decided or 
 reported. ]yanl v. Arrh<.,; 2-t 0. R. (ioO. 
 
 133 
 
 Sf^nt f °v A«!l»n.'»ent. ] - The Revise.l 
 
 Statutes of .Nova .Seotia, 4 ser. ch. 94, sec. .Tv 
 authorizes the assignee .,f a chose in action \n 
 cert.iin cases to sue thereon in the .Supreme 
 Court as his as.signor might have done, and siction 
 35, provides tliat before such action is In'oux-i 
 a notice m writing, signed by the assignee, ^liis 
 agent or a torney, stating ihe right^ of t « 
 assignee and specifying his .leniand thereunder 
 shall be served on the party to be sued. ]'ur' 
 
 senod the followingnotice :-l'iet,m, Xov. 21st 
 lS/8. AlcY (Jraiit, Ksq. : Admin. Kstate of 
 Alexander McDonald, deceased. Dear ,Sir - 
 You are hereby notified in accordance with ch 
 
 ,lllf 1 I !r'1 •'^'"f't". sec. 357, that the 
 debt due by the above estate to Findlay Thomo- 
 «on has been assigned by him to Alexaiuler I. 
 
 '< !M"lTl''l'Vr ''T.*-'^^' "''""'■'^ I'.iyment of twelve 
 mdied do hirs, the amount of the said debt so 
 •gned to him. 8. H. Holmes, Atty. of Alex 
 ameron : — "^ "k-a. 
 
 K.dd affirming the judgment of the Court 
 
 ultb V \ ! f ""'if '''^' ''"tficient cmipliance 
 with the statute. Grant v. Cameron, IS kc R 
 
 Notice of Transfer - Onvdifion Prr-^mi 
 'o yu o/^o^;o».]-The sig„iHelti;;"'of a 
 h-.-i:.sfer or sale of a debt or right of action is a 
 
 .idition precedent to the right of action of the 
 
133 
 
 COLLATERAL SECURITY. 
 
 transfui-fce or purclmser arainst thf. ,l«l,f, . > 
 
 the necessity of ,u.k .iguti^tUn^ . .t J', /ov"' '' T^'^ "" ^ *° — «"o the n to C 
 
 transfer or sale. The want o}'Zu'r'""'-r" .""' 
 
 ^,|utini«..ei.ya,.:/.r:,:^^;;:i3!;r-' 
 
 and b. enteieil into a sneoi litio,, tX 1\ ■ 
 the ,n>rch,ise of real osje he .. f'*''*;''- ','' 
 
 tlie vcMulor aga list ]i and tl,,. i , ^^ 
 
 8u.h .suits aa well as tt obLatio, f f m'"'« '" 
 iiiatal.uent were transfer, ed^toV l '■':,'"'"' 
 any signification in e ther e. e S ,' '""'"f 
 hy a formal aet of resil don H ^nd ""'"",',*'^' 
 the transfer of the half i, terl '/y- '"'""""' 
 
 -de.,.atoM.andi^;^;,:S"S:;.^r^^^^ 
 
 ther ohllL'at, nn no „., .-: . '^^<-'IM. Ot 
 
 IM 
 
 to Christian bodicB. 
 
 '^ '-•ongriga i;n wh d' ,, 'r' «'"•-■ Wng trustee of 
 
 lo"';.'''''-o°'!ri"K ^«<"-«c//.r/e«.,.a/ V. Jefnu 
 end:-!"'^' ''^''' "'° *••"«' '"^'1 "ot come to i^ 
 
 Held, also, that the sanction of the ..1 i 
 
 e annrovalof tho ,l„...i i. 7, ,. ''"" «'"'^ and 
 
 ti.e approval of the VreJ.TT.v Tl' "!-'"" ''"'^ <""' 
 
 .nicieuti,,ii.„;.f";r:Vv«-r<^-i'».8uT»- 
 
 I'S provided .„. ,,. ,^ .J „ 
 
 S'^c-. .'{, is sMdicieut in lieu .'.f ir;i!',"''^- '■*' «"^*- 
 
 I'.V sub-scos. 1 and o ._ "' '''" *'"'t is re(,uired 
 
 so"t''^u^u;1£'rn''*«»«eo.IV.ch.2. 
 ■ » i3<t\e n) tiiQ trnatpoy " f iw. * 
 
 )iit:,. ,.»•„ • .'."s'l-i-s tlie corporate 
 
 .„ w, .„. iuia lorniaJly re ievi 
 all further obligation as proprLtor ,,,■ /»,//,.7. ";r--,'\«"l" '" the t 
 fnr further advances toward Hi,. 1...1 ""'' i> attribute of succession " „,. i -I'^raMs 
 
 '" .t,,;;?:; : olandeshne kmoval or goods 
 
 of li. «as a vir 
 
 ■•■•,' '" eiiecieii into 
 •tual_ abandonment on 
 
 M-ofallpreWo i v:Z~nnd/f^ 
 the property or in the elai" 'of" o t f a''"' '? 
 that property of which he niay hwe tl. 
 transfers. ^Inr./^, ,. Bur,, 2^. c'l S^"" 
 
 SuccesBloti— Acceptation of I,,, j/,',,,,,. c„;, 
 mjio'id to Ar/io,i.]~The accent 'L./f " 
 session .snl^sequent to action and , 1 '] T' 
 on behalf of L minor as i veiilZ' f /''' 
 a retroactive operation. j"a.^f«,'„ Jf ^'r'' ''*'' 
 23 .S. C. 11. 597, ^"■'■riiiuuuc \. J otccrg, 
 
 CHURCH. 
 
 See Criminal Law, IV. 
 
 CLOSING OF HIGHWAY. 
 
 'Vte Way, i. 
 
 CLUB. 
 
 s.>^etv"orNo':.rstiiT isr, "^tt^ f''»-''. 
 
 bntion'arnong the C ' i.'St.t ."''i' °'' '"^^'i- 
 of tlie Province, ami one o tfe "''^'">''"'-'» 
 Itsdistributhniistharn^^cS^;;;;-^--!;:;,, 
 
 Hnaiy jnrl^S^ nS;'a"i:^ir'"« '"fP' 
 that 'Sany memlier./iJU,' t "y-';^" providing 
 
 part of the ^h^^:"^ ^^ ^^J^'T^^'^J- 
 ■"formally sw.n.a «tateni ' of me'^^V^!' *■»« 
 sons concerne,! in the tr„,„s,„?/;, ""- "^ *'"^ P^"-' 
 
 ^ i-f- oFll^O^: ;- ,S:n=3-;];eoeivin2 | i^fc^inaUrs^.n^st^t^ni^^nt" f ^^ 
 na.e.l_so..rces shall be ^^^iS/ to"S^;: ' ^l^iJ^-ri^^Jl.^rir^'"*'^- , , ^" 
 
 beE:'^rstie;iortr^ -^ ^'.ecourtiS^zJri'^i.!:':}^;:^^ S/'rniit 
 
 ?',"0O.liis iiidividri ;fr!i*!!!..„^:^",' «""; "f '-^gf-'fralst-.teineiris sumcie t '^''''^''°" = 
 
 V. /e</<-/u-e, 18 S. a R 705 '^ °''" '^^"'''« 
 
 .a^:^KCc^!^TrSt^;,7;^.V- 
 
 -n:L;:iY'j«S-,;'-".i-t:l';v';^:„^;:^ 
 
 W.US .pushed. '^^ solemnuing a marriage 
 
 ariSl"'', ''°'''^' °f *''« statute "church 
 •■""1 .el.gious denomination " should not be co„ 
 
 „ --.... .....^v-M.tiii, IS suinciei 
 
 Judgment of Armour (' I ..<k i ^ . 
 
 See Intoxicating Liquors. 
 
 COLLATERAL SECURITY. 
 
 I. To Banks— 5'ee Banks, riL 
 
 "• ''""SvTv'Ar^" "-^ shakes -^« 
 
 I 
 
1 
 
 185 
 
 COLLATERAL SECURITY. 
 
 
 ill 
 
 Discharge.]— A. and B., i)iirtiier,s in Inisiness, 
 borrowtil money from C, Kiving hini as secur- 
 ity tlieir joint and Hcveral pioniissory note, and 
 a mortgagi' on iiartntiship property. 'Die part- 
 nersliin having lucii di.ssoived, A. assumed all 
 the lial.iliticH of the finn, and continued to carry 
 on the business alone. After the dissolution ('. 
 gave A. a discharge of the mortgage, Imt with- 
 out receiving payment of his (leht, and after- 
 wards brought an action against H. on the pro- 
 missory note : — 
 
 Held, aiHrming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, 20 A. R. 69.1, that the note having 
 been given for the mortgage debt C. could not 
 recover without being prepared, upon payment, 
 to convoy to I{. the mortgaged lands which he 
 had incapacitated himself from so doing :— 
 
 Held, also, that by the terms of the dissolu- 
 tion of partnership, the relations between A. 
 and B. were changed to those of principal and 
 surety, and it having been found at the trial 
 that (J. had notice of such change, his release of 
 the principal. A., .lischarged B., the surety, 
 from the liability for the debt. Alli.wu v. Mr- 
 Donald, 2.3 S. C. K. 635. See the next two 
 cases. 
 
 Dlacharge.]— A creditor of a partnership held 
 a note of the firm with a mortgage as collateral 
 security, on projierty of the iirm, anii.ly suffi- 
 cient to secure his claim. Subsequently, witli 
 knowledge of the dissolution of the firm, at the 
 request of one j.artner who had assumed the lia- 
 bilities, and without tlie consent of or notice to 
 the other, he discharge! the mortgage, without 
 payment of the note, in such a way as to vest 
 the whole interest in the property, freed from 
 the mortgage, in the continuing partner :— 
 
 Held, that he could not afterwards sue the 
 retiring partner on the note. 
 
 Waller V. Jones, L. R. 1. P. C. oO, applied. 
 Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division, 23 
 O. K. 288, reversed, Macknnan, J.A., dissent- 
 ing. Alaxon v. McDouakl, '20 A. R. 695 See 
 the next case. 
 
 Discharge.]— When a partner retires from a 
 farm although the relationship of principal and 
 surety may have been created thereby between 
 himself and the remaining partners, such ar- 
 rangement, whether known to a creditor of the 
 farm or not, does not affect his rights against 
 the members of the firm .ns joint debtors, unless 
 he has accepted the liability of the remaining 
 partners m satisfaction and discharge of the 
 liability of the retiring partner. 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 122, sees. 2, 3 and 4, does not 
 cast any duty upon such a creditor, without 
 notice of the relationship of principal and surety 
 having been created, to preserve collateral 
 security taken for the debt, for the benefit of 
 23 V^r''288^ partners. Allisci v. McDonald, I 
 
 Discount of Promissory Notea—Rinhf to 
 Accessory Securities.]- A tradesman sold goods 
 to customers, taking promissory notes for the 
 price, and also hire receipts, by which the pro- 
 perty remained in him till full payment was 
 made. Ihe notes were discounted through the 
 medium of a thud person by the plaintiffs, who 
 were inaac aware when the line of discount was 
 
 ^^fr'l°n '^-^r*""^ °^ '^"'''"'g' ''"fl °f tl»e secu- 
 rities held. They were not, however, put in 
 
 13ff 
 
 ^ actual possession of the securities, .-ind there 
 WHS no ex]ircss contract in regard to tliiiii. 
 In an action to recover the securities, or their 
 I proceeds, from the assignee for creditors (,f tlio 
 I tradesman : — 
 
 '^^''l' *'"'' *'"'' sfciirities were aeccsfory to 
 ;the debt: that in equity the transfer oi" tlio 
 : notes was a transfer of the securities ; that tho 
 I defendant was m no higher position than his 
 j assignor, and could not resist tlic chiiin to have 
 the receipts accompany the notes ; and tliat it 
 was not material that the relation of assig- 
 nor and assignee did not immediately exist 
 between the tradcsniiin and the plaintiffs. Cen- 
 tral Bank V. lliirhwd, 20 O. 1!. 142. Affirmed 
 j in appeal, 18 A. R. 438. 
 
 . Payments on— Credit on Principal Dihi 1— 
 i 1 he plaintiffs gave the defendants a line of .le.lit 
 , to be secured liy collections deposited," in lur- 
 suance of which notes of defendants' customer? 
 were from time to time deposited by dcUndant'-- 
 with jilaintifts as collateral to the defendants' 
 own notes. These collaterals at niatmity were 
 dealt with by defendants, and when imid tho 
 proceeds went to their credit and were at their 
 disposal. The defendants failed and plaintiffs 
 ; recovered judgment against them on the earlier 
 •maturing notes of the defendants. I5oth before 
 } and alter such judgments the ))laiiitiffs had col- 
 I ccted on the collaterals large sums, coiisidcrid.ly 
 less than their own claim, wliidi they carried to 
 a suspense .account, and lelu.sed to credit iiiiv 
 , part on their judgments. An issue was directed 
 \ on the application of defendiuits to try whether 
 j plaintiffs hail received any p.iynients which tliey 
 should have credited on the judgments, and 
 judgment therein was given in the plaintiffs* 
 tavour. Subsequently the plaintiff's brought this 
 action for the balance of their claim and refused 
 to credit the collateral susjiciise account :— 
 
 Held, that the decision in the issue althoiu'h 
 res judicata was not conclusive in this actiim, 
 and that the plaintiffs' course in these procced- 
 li-.p.s amounted to an electiim to apply the amount 
 ci the suspense account upon that portion of the 
 debt not then due and that they were bound to 
 credit the amount of the suspense account in this 
 action. Mohons Bank v. Cooper, 26 0. R. 57.j 
 Reversed in appeal, 23 A. R. 146. 
 
 'P}^^BO-Trawfers ''In 7V«»/".]_The pkin- 
 till olitained from a loan company an advance on 
 the security of certain shares in a joint stock 
 comjiany not numbered or capable of identifica- 
 tion, which were transferred by him to tlie 
 managers of the loan company "in trust." The 
 managers were also brokers, and were as brokcis 
 carrying on stock speculations for the plaiiititr 
 and he transferred to them as security for the 
 payment of " margins " certain other shares in 
 the same company, the transfer being in the tamo 
 form "in trust." Subsequently the loan com- 
 pwiy were paid ofT by the brokers .it the plain- 
 tiff s request, and the brokers continued to hold 
 the first shares as well as the others as security 
 Upon all the shares tho brokers then obtaiiuci 
 advances from a bank, transferring them to the 
 cashier "in trust," and from time to time diall- 
 ed the loan to other banks and financial institu- 
 tions each tr.in9fer being made from and to the 
 manager thereof "in trust." An allotment of 
 new shares was taken up by the then holders of 
 the pledged shares at the request of the brokers 
 
m 
 
 L'uiities, iind tliero 
 t'Knid to tht'iii. 
 3 securities, or tlieir 
 for creditors (jf tlio 
 
 were acccBfory to 
 the triiimfer ot" tlio 
 icciirities ; tiuit tho 
 • i)ositi(iii tliiiii Ills 
 t tile claim to liavo 
 
 notes ; !iiid tliat it 
 
 relation of nssig. 
 
 immediately exiat 
 he plaintiH's. Cm- 
 1!. 142. Atliriiied 
 
 PrincijMil Jhlil ]_ 
 ants a lineof ( reiiit 
 deposited," in ]iiir- 
 endants' enstomepR 
 itfcd by dell ndiinlK 
 to the detendants' 
 I at maturity \iero 
 ul when )iaid tho 
 and were at their 
 iled and plaiiititta 
 hem on the earlier 
 ints, lioth lieforo 
 jilaintitFs had eol- 
 jiims, eonsidenihly 
 eh they carried to 
 sed to eiedit iiliy 
 issue was directed 
 its to try whether 
 nients which they 
 judgments, and 
 in the plaintiriV 
 ntiffsliroughtthia 
 claim and refused 
 e aoconnt : — 
 lie issue although 
 e in this action, 
 n these proceed- 
 apply the amount 
 liat portion of the 
 By were bound to 
 ise account in this 
 ler, 26 O. R. 57.'). 
 46. 
 
 »<".]— The plain- 
 ny an advance on 
 in a joint atcck 
 ble of identifica- 
 by him to tiie 
 "intrust." Tiio 
 I were as brokei.s 
 for the plaintiir, 
 security for tlio 
 other shares in 
 oeing in the saiiiu 
 y the loan coin- '; 
 ers .It the plain- J 
 )ntinued to hold 
 hers as security. 
 s then obtaini'd 
 •ing them to tho 
 e to time chang- 
 inancial institu- 
 from and to tho 
 An allotment of 
 then holders of 
 t of the brokers. 
 
 137 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 138 
 
 .S.ibseiiuently the brokers on tho security of the debt 'n, u , • 
 
 old au.l now shares obtained a loan fn.u, t ,. ,, „ J, *'^'"''-''' '>«">« worth more than the 
 
 .U^f-d.ntsof a^much larger amoun" than tt lTr^.''!'.l.*°.'l'.^'''"'^.'h« -"'--'tor to tho^n 
 
 , ,, ■;; v,..,.„j, ,,.1 Liie nm amount bu.livi-a. 
 
 a.h .mce,l by them to the brokers ; and that tl le i I . """ ■ , 
 words "n, trust" in the fansfer meant that 1 e I Ouee, •; 1?^'."^'" *"' J"''«"'«"t °f ^'^ Court of 
 various transferees were hohliug the shares "in 1 ,, T ' '*'^"'''' f','"" ^''"^'''' f'"''i'la ('^Ppenl side) 
 tnist -for their respccttve institutions. "X,,;!; I Sr^^hia lie trirl^^-^^i^^'L^^-^P?^ 
 
 Release Without Consent of Surety, i- 
 
 1 lie iilaintifFs, who iwi.i .. i ^ • •* ' 
 
 I .M 1 7 I. ""■ \^^V^'^^ "f these shares as P.'him- 
 
 _, ,_ ^5 r, "•;' '''''•'-'" ''" """''' *•"-' 'Abandonment of hTs 
 
 . . IK. Held a nuniber of prumissorv ' ^f,"'^^' Vf *" ««' ^he shares upon payment 
 
 no es of a customer, endorse.l by vari.Ius parties ' , , t' "."'e'^'edness to (ho society, kurnler 
 and also a mortgage from the customer on .S: ' T^ ^"^V'»'''-'-''^»> '^J- • cii««enting. lociMCa^. 
 huids to secure his general in.Iebtednes;, sue ! t/^:7-^''ri"^^ ''^ '^'''"^^^ 
 the clefendant as emiorser of one of the notes ^"'•'!/"" ':"' « '' ^ <■ •<> 
 1 elore action bn-ught they had released certain 
 of the mortgaged lands, without the consent o 
 the defendant : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintiffs were entitled to iudc- 
 ment against the defen.lant for the amount of 
 t le note, but without prejudice to the right of 
 the latter to make them account for their ,leal- 
 mgs with the mortgaged property when that 
 «eeunty had answei-ed its purpose' or the debt 
 had been paid by the sureties, or when in any 
 other event the application of the moneys from 
 the security could be projierly ascertained. 
 
 decision of Kobeitson, , J., i>.5 O R '\m mn.U 
 fied. Motmu. Bank v. Heili:,, 26 a if 27^ 
 
 COLLISION. 
 
 'S'ee .Ship, I, 
 
 Satisfaction of Principal Debt -llehaw of 
 .Vovv,/.] A creditor may by express reservation 
 preserve Ins rights against a surety notwith 
 st.iulmg the release of the principal flebtor the 
 transaction in such a case amounting in effect to 
 an agreement not to sue, but if the effect of the 
 transaction between tho creditor an,l the pri„. 
 oipal debtor is to satisfy and discharge an 1 
 ac ual ly extinguish the debt, there is nothing"n 
 respect of which the creditor can reserve Si v ' 
 rights against the surety. "^ I 
 
 .hKlgment of the Chancery Division, 22 R I 
 2..,., reversed //o///*,^ v. Ho,,a„, 20 A.' r! i 
 
 ihr /•^"'""^•l 'y ^^^ Supreme Court, snh nom. 
 JJ')llidaii V. Jarhion, 22 S. C. R. 479. 
 
 Transfer of Shares-/«,/e?>^.rf„,,„. of Trans- 
 A .,-]-A_bydaw of a building society (appe- 
 ■ tl^ri,n?-' *n' ^«'"'>•'^holder shouhl have 
 Mtis led all his obigations to the society before 
 
 One P"a dir f ^''■''''' '" ^'-«''-'r Lis^hares 
 uiie t-. a director, m contravention of the bv 
 
 tnnsf'r on'' f' '''"''ry *" -">'ter^g,7a 
 transfe, of his shares to the Baiupie Ville .Marie 
 
 '1 tioin the bank, and it w.is not till P 's aban- 
 loniiient or assignment for the benefit of hs 
 CTchtors that the other director, knew of the i 
 
 COMMISSION. 
 
 See Company, VIII. 
 
 COMMISSION TO lAKB EVIDENCE. 
 
 See Evidence, VI. 
 
 COMMON EMPLOYMENT. 
 
 See Crown, II. -Master and Servant, III., 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 I. Corpora' .•<:a;-h:nce, 139. 
 II. D1RECT0R.S AND Officers, 139. 
 
 "^- ^ TORs'Y42?' ^«^'*^""''''««« TO Crh,,. 
 
 t..g.^ti.bank:au.^;^::;i^ 
 
 S{71n'a^;„r^f'^;1:^\|^JJ-„;^PP^"ant 
 iiniL.r f),o I. 1 ■ -'j./-*t, lo! nnicii amount 
 ", the bydaw his shares were charged as 
 bet veen P. and the society. The society im 
 .nediately paid the bank thi amount XeVp 
 ■and took an assignment of the shares and of P/^ 
 
 I IV. Po\ver.s, 144. 
 
 V. Proceedinos by, 145. 
 VI. Proceedings against, 145. 
 VII. Stock, 146. 
 VIII. Winding-up Acts. 
 
 2. Carrying on Businens, 148. 
 
 3. Gompromise of Claims, 148. 
 
 f 
 
 \ 
 i 
 
 \ 
 
 .' ( 
 
 f|) 
 
 iii 
 
 «f«% 
 
COMPANY. 
 
 
 If! 
 
 4. Coiilrihutoriix, I4(). 
 
 5. Dixlrihiilion o/Ai.H(:I.s, 153. 
 
 6. Liiiuklalori, l.'i.'J. 
 7 '^ractire. 
 
 ( '. 'IiiucUh, 1u4. 
 1 ,1 CoHtt, 155. 
 
 (c) /'oii'irx of J,if/<je.H fiiKlMaMlfrx, \5-i, 
 
 8. iia/t iif A.inet.'t, ICtJ. 
 
 9. Solid for, 108. 
 
 I. CoKlOiiArt iiXlSTE.NCE. 
 
 Nominal Corporation -C'orwojvr/or.v - Pdr^- 
 «-r. -r-o«^.a,.^_y„;., /./„A,7,7y.j_i„ tho case i 
 of 11 Dotiiiiml .„rporati()ii wliicli Iips no k^'al 
 stHtu.s a« SM,. , tl„. ..stensil.le c,.riK,mt<.is ure 
 par n.,H ; h„, ,|,,,r Iial,ility uh partuer.s ,m the 
 
 Z',t« n'l ■ 'i'-'-Vf^jy '^ '^ J""t- '»"» "Ota 
 
 S<^l5 K Krl;.3l"'"''^- ''''''^'■^'^''■^ - 
 
 140 
 
 II. 
 
 DrRKaToKs AM) Ofkickh.s. 
 
 Bills of aa\e>~A,ti;,lcirit of /i,.„n Fide.s.]- 
 Where tl.u aih.lavit .,f /,o»a jhles of a chattel 
 jnortgage to an inc., ,,orate,l t.a.ling company 
 
 also a sliirelioMer ,n the oonipany and ha.l an 
 important share in the n.anag.n.tnt of its affiiir.s 
 sident -'*''' ''""■'■"■''' '' r'-^'«''l'-»t and vice-prel 
 
 Held that the athant wa.s to be legarded not 
 as one of the n.ortgagoes, l,nt an an agent, and 
 as no written authority to hin, wa.s n^i., ered 
 as required l,y R. S. O. ch. I'.M, «„ i ,| ' 
 mortgage «;a8 i,. valid as against creditors. 
 distinguished. , 1.' ^. 1. i(0, 
 
 /'^e/ioW ioa« Co. ■ Bank of Commerce, 44 
 
 n}^- -^^' ^?.""" ''• ^'«««« ■'• 'S'"»« Co 
 V. Castltmin, 25 0. ] 113. 
 
 tliein l.y the li,,ui,Iator of thr company is vhU.L 
 Mum yolumai bank v. J/.A-,./,, '.4 S. ( ' hT 
 
 DlrootorH-.S'ff/ftfiV,/ OjUch - ninhi i,, He. 
 """".'•"""". ]-Whero an Act of Ii n rp, nthm 
 |.n>v>de.H that n., I.y-law for the paymc ,f 
 presid.nt or any director, shall hV alidor acte.l 
 on until the same ha.s 1„.,.„ continued at u l en 
 er.d meeting of the ...ndiolder,, tins app ie.s 
 <'»ly to payment tor the .services of a .liiector 
 <?"« d„.,,.t„r and for the services of the pel' 
 dent .'.H presiding ntlicer of the hoard 
 
 \\herea company appoints the directors to 
 vuinous salaried olliccs without a hy-law Hxii ^ 
 theaumum of the salaries as r..,,uircd 1, Ho 
 Act of Incorporation, and such app.uMfn cuts 
 are afterwards conrinned l,y legislation, they a e 
 entitled to prove in the winding-up f„r a .nmn. 
 'urn m.no, for services icKleitl.' y,V oJf!nL 
 
 i_/t(>if^, -*> yj, Ki. Off/. 
 
 Director .Vo//,vyor-/.',V//,< to Co./h.]- .sv-. AV 
 Jfnmco .S„rn- Pipo oml Brick Ma,n„\nt,.vin,, 
 Co. , Pmrwn x Case, 2tj O. I!. 289, poxt' 1 40. 
 
 Manager- /'«//Hif,(^ of Prf,„:,m.]--i;v an 
 application for life insurance, the interim receipt 
 and the i..lic.v , it was provided that no p.olicv was 
 to be in force until actual payment of the first 
 premium to an authorized agent and the deliverv 
 of the necessary receipt signe.l by the general 
 nana,., r ot the company. '1 ... j,eneral nutnager 
 «lio ,, - paid by commissio., made an agree! 
 mentwithan applicant for n v,licy that work 
 
 wo.dl •[ *''\"l'I'!"-'-'>"t f"r 1' ■■ If personally 
 ^^oul,l be taken in payment o. .'.e first pre- 
 miuni, and gave lini a receipt for it without 
 however, paying the company •_ '''""""':. 
 
 Held, that the company wa> t boun.l. 
 
 •i-nW' -o/'T^' ^i' J><s„ra,. ,, Compar'. 
 -'0 U. U. .)0(). AHirinecl in appeal, 23 A. R. 
 
 Director — Ptr.wnal Liahilily fur Waae^ 1- - 
 A person employed as foreman of works, who 
 hireB n-d dismisses men, niake^ out ]■ -rolls 
 rPwv'e;, and paj-s out ', oney tor wagJ-s, ami 
 does ^o manual labour, ami in ad.lition to riceiv- 
 ing pay for Ins own .services at tlic rate of 85 a 
 day payabe fortnightly, i. ■ -M for the use of 
 maehmery belonging to ,,, . and .,f horses hired 
 
 St hln''f/,!."'" "^'' "T' ^' '■^•'"'t or apprentice 
 witiiin tlie mear of "" - ■ 
 
 Stock Companies tei 
 
 ch. 157, and cai. rec 
 ton' personally. 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of 
 amrmed. ]\ eirh v. EUi.^^ oo a. R. 255. 
 
 ■ on 68 of the Join* 
 
 vtent Act, R. S. O. 
 
 against the diiec- 
 
 Brant 
 
 Directors- r,nr/,a*r b>, Director of /nsol- 
 vmt Company-Fiduciary Be/a/iou.s/njKUVpon 
 the appointment of a liquidator for a company 
 being wound up un.ler K. S. C. ch. 129 (Thi 
 Winding-up Act), if the powers of the directors 
 th^ "Ot continued as pro\idcd by section 34 o 
 the Ac their hduc.ary relations to the company 
 or Its shareholders are at an end, and a sale to 
 
 Manager of Club~A.>.;,,„,/ Lienor for .Sal, 
 !>ection o(» of the l.i.juor l,ic..n,se Act, R. .S.' 
 O. ch. 1!)4, which forbi.ls the keeping or liavin.r 
 in any house, etc., any liquors for the j.u .post, 
 of selling by ap.v person unless duly licensed 
 thereto under >,.,■ provisions of the Act, does 
 not justify a conviction of the manager of a club 
 incorporated under the Ontario Joint Stock Com 
 pan.es Letters Patent Act who has the char-o 
 or control of the liquor merely in his capacity 
 o ,mu.a,'.r, the act of keeping, etc., being that 
 jf the club and not of the mana<'er 
 
 lieui'^'i y.Ckarks, 24 U. R. 432" distinguished 
 Reyma v, Slntt,ry, 26 O. R. 148. b"'s"'-ii- 
 
 ' Medical Examiner-.^ uthorily of A w-nt I- 
 r.e me.hcal statf of the Equitable Life' As; ir- 
 ance .Society ;,. .Montreal consists of a medical 
 referee a chiet medical examiner and two 'tr 
 
 "le alternate medical examiners, Li ISS8 I 
 
 uas a-.p-unted an alternate examiner in pursul 
 
 ance ,t a suggestion to the manager by local 
 
 agents that it was advisable to have a French 
 
 waslTiH"'/ /'".h"'""-. -J'^ ' - commission L 
 « as entitled to the privilege such examina- 
 tions as should be assigne.l to him by, or 
 required during the absence, di.sability „/ „,a. 
 vaiiabUity of, the chief exan.u.er. Aftlr L had 
 served for four years it was found that hid 
 •nethods in hokfing examinations were no 
 
140 
 
 m 
 
 
 ren — niijhl li, He, 
 't of Iiic'iii'ponitiiin 
 lie imyriKiit of |||c 
 ill lie Viilidui- aoteil 
 'iiiliiiiicd at a gen 
 >Mii»i, this ap()lii,s 
 liti's (pf a (Ijiotior 
 vi'i'g of the presi- 
 e iHiaril. 
 
 tH tho ili rectors to 
 lit a liylaw fixing' 
 H rii|uire(l l,y tliu 
 iiu.li ajipointiiKiits 
 ■gislatidii, they nre 
 og-iip for a 7«((;(. 
 ered. /,V Ohlmio 
 
 to rw,,.].. .sy, /f, 
 
 f'^' Mltllllfnrtl.rilVI 
 
 2Hd,po>in4ti. 
 
 •'(i'i'H})i.]—]',y ail 
 he interim receipt 
 that no policy was 
 ■iiient of the tiist 
 t and the delivery 
 ;d l>y tlie general 
 general manager, 
 made an agree- 
 p 'licy that work 
 oi -If personally 
 oj olie first pre- 
 t for H. without, 
 
 KaH not bound. 
 irni,re Compav" 
 fal, 23 A. R. 
 
 Liijiiorfor Scili . 
 jense Act, R. N.' 
 eeping or liaving 
 
 for the jiiirposu 
 3S duly licensed 
 f the Act, ddCH 
 lanager of a cluh 
 oiiit (Stock Com- 
 I has the cliar;,'o 
 
 ill his capacity 
 otc, hcing that 
 ger. 
 i, distinguished. 
 
 ily of Aiji-Ht.] - 
 l)le Life Assur- 
 ts of a medicnl 
 er and two or 
 i-s. In ISHS L. 
 niner in pursu- 
 uiager l>y local 
 have a French 
 commission I,, 
 such examina- 
 :o him by, or 
 a!-.ility „r una 
 . After L. had 
 ound that hi ^ 
 ons were not 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 •cceptiil.le ln„ppli,,,„tH ,„„| I 
 
 toresi.,,. whnh h. ref„.,.d to do. an, . o |, l ;''' "" '"''' '" ""•'""■'l •'■fore, aide «g„i„,(, 
 
 French ( anadian «a. :.,,po,nted a.'a d t .. ,:.'"." ,''>' P^'"";i" "\ ''«'"• ''''"O "P^Hu H 
 
 ut.rnateexanm.er, .„hI most of the ani, lica N , i^ < "iop««">;, nlleged l,y , etition of ridil. 
 
 thereafter went to the latfer. L. I e " ' . J'^ ^ !'' I"-' "' •"''.'""' ^'-' Vict. eh. !»!, YL 
 
 thereafter «ent to the latter. I., then" hronght 
 ana,ionaga,n.MllH. ..unpany f„r damages hy 
 losHof the laismes, „nd inju.y ,o his pn.f.ssion.ll 
 reputation l,y Mtnsal to en,p!oy him. claimi ,, 
 that on his ap,,o>ntn,.nt the general nianaget 
 hadpn.nns.MlhiMiall the examinations ot K.,.,? i 
 
 *"""''i"" "I'Pli.ants lor i s,^ ^ '' "'-"'l "i.-l o'.' V'iJt' 
 
 alleged that he had h.en indue!;" 'in.s e ' .'rt It.'';! "''"'"'" '" •"» f"'-" ^t-. to co ni 
 ■"'V-'>- on the nnderstami .g ^ .V' U i "li^''^ r" ."'"'''^'V'.^'" *""""'•- 
 
 toLu 4 (>;;■'''''';'; * ',""'^" «"" ••'"thori.d 
 f t I '. ; p'v^ '"'"' '."■'' ""''• '"'••■«' '"'I'-'H 
 
 ilv wi '" '/^'-gi'M. 1H,S,S, the land M.h- 
 
 SI > was converted ,nt.. a n>om y suhsidy, the 
 i'th seetn.n of said el IH. "• ' ■ * ' 
 
 money snhsidy, the 
 . iil ami ;■)'.> Vict., 
 
 own life with tl !„., 
 
 that the evaminatidu fe. 
 
 -.iiu.,d to pay „„ ,„„,„„„- ; . '.rak::; ";K-r::''''7'''--'"-v^7-'-'-''- 
 
 tor repaynient ot amount, pai.l ;,v him for sue Vh eh .1 n' /l'''' '"''•"'" -^'■' "'' "'"'•'!* 
 m.-,manee;-- • «'"=" A 't of ■;,,' 1 - ,' '•': 1"";'"""'« "' H''^ RaiU^ay 
 
 Held, afhrmmg the ,lcei>ion „f the Court ,.f ' u\ i ,"' '''.^ '^■'- '''■ -"• •""• ''">• clain ed 
 
 Queen's Meneh. that l,y the eontrac, made vi o,', .iV'*""-' '" * V.V^"'" '" ■^"'■«""- ''al"..ce' „ 
 L. the eon.pany were only to .,„d I , uelg .n '■;;;:'' f "." '''""" ''"""■•'■^'' "" "- 
 cases as they saw lit, an,l .-onld di>M,iss him or a, • » ' "''i'""' "■"" I'>^^'''nissivo only, 
 
 appomt other exaniiner.s at their,,!, asnre, ''J '•^■'Ption ple.uie.l inhv aUa,t\n,t ih, 
 
 L. tor any en,p , „„,,t other than thatsnecite '^l-.u^l^:'.!^^"' ""'k >'ee. s.ary for the eon- 
 
 ^hi^f ^.Son r:;;;v;i!::t'i[!:h: '";; ^S'3:^;:';:[;^ ' '•■- t'"M...sident i.d 
 
 1 ;!;ttr,:""' «'«'-' '—1 .oi'd^/udai:.!: 
 
 o;;''"'itiono, h,H en,ph,y„;.nt that he shot, 1 
 UMue his life, »n,l there heing no connection 
 hetueen the eontiact for inM,ran,-e ai nVthat fo 
 employment. /.«/,.,;/' v i:^,„iiuUr U,; il,"'.. 
 
 President — /' 
 
 ■"■y .\olf~lJisconnt.]— 
 
 'twI^u"''?''- r"'""* "f*""' tirst subsidy: 
 1 he petition of right was dismissed :_ ^ 
 
 Hehl, that the statute and do. nnunts relied 
 
 oil did not create a liability on th,= p, it , , 
 
 Crown to pay the money vo'ted to the .ippellat 
 
 company enforceable by petition of" 
 
 Ones. piesKlent ami liea^uier of a eheVse'com I T.'.'s'.'h'? '•"'"'^^■"'"•^ 'T 1" tition of Vight ; 
 paiiy, k.pt an a. count with the de7,^ubu is I ■ ' ''r '^'':'«"'"'^ 
 private bankers, or l.ehalr of tL e, o v' ' ^ '"""' '""^ ^^'^ipt sign 
 
 flooded "S president of H. Cliee e O a .?• Ke t'h" r'"" 1 ""■' """''■'">• '"'' """''« 
 upon which he .Irew fro,,, time to t e bv tl, iTl, e 7" ^""" '*"^'' "''"ia^^tion to pay 
 che-pies signed " .S„ p,,,side,it." The aciou,^ ' , ';'•'; ■•"",' r-"""'"' ''>' tlio ( 'row,, of tho 
 being oveid,.aw,i, the ,lefe,i,lai,ts, in goo If U ' w it^ i 'l'"'' "'''"" ""'''^ '''^ «"l'«i'ly money, 
 atthercpiest of S., ,liseount,..l \, note n lei,' I m ''.'^ ^«:<"'«' nt oi the company, was a 
 
 own tavour sigm.l -.s., i,,esidei,t '' urn! IV I > V'''"!''!'';''*''' '^f *'" subsi.lv. Jl ri-fonl li 
 seal of tlie .,11^.1,- uttad,^:nb;lnl,;iS,S^ I " " '"'■ '■ ""' '^"-"' -' ^- ^' ' ^'- '• 
 tlie liiiowledge or aiitlioritv of tl„. ,Ii,.,.„f 1... I 
 
 tl L luiou ledge or authority of the ilirectors bv 
 whom with the pieM.lent •u,„ler the by laws o^f 
 the company Its atlairs we,-e to be inana-ed 
 ami place, the proeee.ls to the cre.lit Ke 
 acanint, winch were afterwanls clie,,ue.l o.t l,y 
 .S. to p,-,y cre.htors of the eonipany. Al this 
 tmie.S. was a .lefaulter to the 'cm „,a, y to ^ 
 largei amount thai, the note. In the ,'neanwhii; 
 afet,o renewals the note was cha,ge,l up bv 
 
 III. Ll.XntMTV OF ,SHARK,(OLI,KKS TO Cun.!- 
 
 ■10 KS. 
 
 Paid-up Stock-.l/o,,.,/^ "jCompa,,,! in Ilamh 
 
 stock i"" ''^*''-'tl'^-<l^fw„i.,nts agn ,1 to take 
 . ,Kk ,n . ,oi,,pany about to be incorporate,!, 
 ^md ,ir. ,a,., 1 that their interest in cert tin Ian 
 
 or ihsatfirm tl,,. tran.saction altogether and cot ' 1 ' v' .■ ,• —on 
 
 not rt.pud,ate the liability upon the „.'t" and at to n,,U H 5'VT""'""^ '^''' company seeking 
 the same time take the bene'fit of i,. ""'f'^^ ""^ <l^fendants liable upon thc-ir sharel 
 
 l>ec,s,on of M,eet, J., reversed. ^S.;,/,..„„/.. : ^°';-^''^'"!'°""l "".I""'' ^'•'-■■•"""- 
 Lliti-xt t rfory V 
 Atli, ,i,ed in appea 
 
 Presment - Railway Snf,,uhi - I?eceint hu i d J.nV'f""^'^'""*^'',* ''''" ^° 'r^ovev from tho 
 
 ■' ■ '''''.^'''''^'^^''''■"'t^ •"""«>'« shewn to be in their haiKk 
 
 .X'*r>T. I |.i,f, 11 i>4l . ,',1 
 
 eal, 23 A, r' G6 ^^ ^"^ I J, ° e^l-t t\ ".V<'.'.^''-"1 P-'ior to the Cm- 
 
 I P°'V, -■^ct' '^0 & 31 ^ let. eh. LSI, 
 
 . • /.'(uVrtw/ .S'«^.v,Wv - neceint hu ' del,? 1 ''''^""^'^ """«'',* also to lecover from tho 
 
 Pn.>,knl.]~\Vhev^ .uoney i.s g4nte 1 rthf vhh b we ""rV''"''" *° '^« "' their haiuls 
 Legislature and its applicatiot, ,s p.escr ib^ed ,^ "'^V;' ;^'^'^'':''f b' the property of the company. — 
 «uchawayas to oo.^^ a disc-eti^n S^rU^ ! m "f Ig^lll^lll/SS^- -^'"^^^ *^ -^K- 
 
 payttent to 
 
143 
 
 if: 
 
 «n of su.h money.; l,„t thn r.-mpinv were 
 «'nt to IjoiMg „,l,|,.,| „, plaii.f (iH „ ' hav I; 
 
 «i.-.Miji I,.. a,M...i aH,i..f.,.,f„,,;!L'*-* '''->• ^'"y 
 
 c';....,.an,v, us tl... ,l..,V,HlantH alr..u,ly 1." or" t e 
 ".1. .jrs ,n tl>t. company. Jo,.. V. J/,' ^ . "ii'V 
 
 hol.ler of a ,,ul«,.y .o.npany, HKre. t., kna 
 thu company sm.m), (ukl, l- an , L .i, ' 
 ««c-nntu.M for the lour l,is s| ^rc. f 1 ' ' T 
 
 Hlnr h wen. t(.l,opa„l np. 15 nv,,., sHh?,. ' 
 on winch he Inol'pai,! 'an Amount ',, ml" "40 
 
 ent^;:::,;:'ih;'..s''i';.rc:;;;;an?'1,rt 
 
 a V H i'"' 'Y "'^l"-"l"-i'^ti"" "f the nu njy 
 
 nil:Cw,^sr'«:irof'':i.!:;:t;:L''rT'i"''"^ 
 
 t , ,', fl. ''• ''.'"^^'''' l'''"l o" the 7.-, .shares an.l 
 
 S" ±i.anr uk-L!!:' '^V;;i-, -^-f ^- 
 
 at.on hy he . Mcctor.s of the money pa , l.v 1 
 
 So;;^;:l:;\/:i--^^'^^-'^-!,K^ 
 
 .\ppcl;!' \7T1^ t'lVyi'S-^^nt of the Court of ! 
 ^>P1»-". i» ^. K. (ioS, (.Wynne, J., ((i.s.sentinLr 
 ha the co„,pany having got the l.^nefit of "^e 
 loan by ^., were estoppel from .lispntini; tic 
 appi.cafonof the nmne^y pai,l l,y H.'^ „ no a 
 "ay as to con.stitnte K. the hohle • of H . -r 
 
 a el .iu ; hT ; '■" '"" having hcen pre ju.licc 
 aic Dounn \\\ the ."amc wav • nn.l ti,,. J 
 
 tion l-eing binding l,et,^erB '.n Itl """'"'■ 
 
 ^n.l not ol>,e..tionabIe a.s regards ere. it X -S'' 
 
 eoul.l accept ^he T.", shares in lie, ,.f e 'l^S I 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 144 
 
 145 
 
 W. PoWKRS. 
 
 ' - v'""//°f "^"'"^r*" *"^ PromisMry Notes 1 
 <)<!, «//<r 141, 
 
 2<i (>. R. .T.'T. '.".S A. H. 
 
 which .in,ni!lV:!vefc:;,:;'i;;:iL'>,r'*'"''""y 
 
 '!::?.^£i:i:i^' F,-^=■"'- 
 ^s;f-::=i-,:;»•"««";'«:^s:.rs 
 
 In an action by way of ,sr/. /„. a-ai, st a si r, 7 
 
 p mnnssory notes which the plaintiff Jrocx" 
 the cn.pany to nnke to him, without consi le. 
 a .on. when insolyont to his know cC at 
 the notes were made in frau.l of the creditors 
 .and c.ntnbntories, and were vUra •"■,^0/^1 
 company ; an.I that the company h,- d a „, ,hI 
 Icfence to the action on the notes, 1. .f allowe 
 the p huntjff to take judgment by ,ie It !- 
 
 „i 1 • it- "'" ''°^'on, and were not avail. 
 
 lSa;9^-r;h£x>;:fi;^ 
 
 the.,, and b;.^ii; ;t,^;inri^:^,:^;'in^ 
 
 i!^ts\^r;;tm:;^'rth'"'"'''^''''^^ 
 ! working of it:vid:;'y';^i';--{;~:::; 
 
 Appeal, ^w,/, „o ;, „ ,^/ ,. ,^,^^^^^ ^^ 
 enter into"...: '^^ -■'7' ""^^ authority to 
 
 tion^*^ H^Se'o;'.'""'"''— ' ''"'f ""• 3-A corpora- 
 ate s^af ; . ! Thr.t,?''"''"' "■"''^'- ''« «<"P'^- 
 
 Annulm 
 
 — Iii/uniiat 
 
 »",'/«.']-'l'he 
 
 incorporatic 
 
 izwl to can 
 
 its capital s 
 
 ptr cent, pii 
 
 the passing 
 
 eral ot ( 'aui 
 
 Sf)0,500 had 
 
 tho commeii 
 
 pany, the bii 
 
 0- ill IrtiKt. 
 
 portion of it 
 
 per cent. ha. 
 
 thereon, sou, 
 
 proceedings 
 
 Canada to hf 
 
 and declare(l 
 
 Held, atfii 
 
 ■below: I. ']'! 
 
 charter proce 
 
 taken by the 
 
 That such p: 
 
 10 
 
144 
 
 145 
 
 Ks, 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 'romlHDory Notes i 
 
 l'i(i}ih, lln/,i„t V. 
 
 TO, lint, loi'; J,',„r. 
 
 H. 184, am, 101 ; 
 
 lit, 141. -^ 
 
 Till! f'oiirt will not 
 II iiLt liy II cdtriimny 
 ticiiieii |,y a m.ijdr 
 I! tin; ai't Was ilctnfi, 
 ^(■rniu.lH ol.tiiined. 
 ' JMivilinv Co., 22 
 
 iii/'-.\ri/iiMHnu of 
 I'lirrfi/txi Money— 
 ■I') 'I iMiiiipany haK 
 
 If IMIrpOBl'M ,,i itu 
 
 'I' to give a niort 
 ,• covtiKiiit to pay 
 
 mt exists, ft p,>r. 
 mpaiiy need not 
 'iiiiialitiis (if oxe. 
 ien ciiinplicil with 
 'liito seal. Shep- 
 '".'/ f Vi., 25 0. R. 
 
 r;th /■'oni'/uCom- 
 ! ^i/' i'lnrs ]— The 
 pany, liyitsohar- 
 luib uiitliority to 
 my otluT railway 
 
 airangemunts or 
 Iway or any part 
 
 Kailw ay Aot of 
 to tralhc arrange- 
 inaniigenient and 
 iiy other railway 
 ere, for a period 
 
 of the Court of 
 'anaila Soiifhrru 
 at aiitliority to 
 ' the " use and 
 id working " of 
 iiipany a larger 
 rwarding agree- 
 iwers : that the 
 . portion of its 
 traiLsfer to the 
 28 in respeet to 
 nipany in such 
 hility for injury 
 ?gligence in its 
 •same extent a.s 
 inijiany is itself 
 n\ Co. V. Wml. 
 
 ■ ]— A corpora 
 iitract for the 
 li purposes for 
 it has adopted 
 benelit though 
 der its coipor- 
 'ioipal as Well 
 (., and .Strong, 
 /nmcipa/i/i/ of 
 
 V. I'RorKRDiNdH nv. 
 
 146 
 
 '"\':'"'\ "■ " C ',V'"m/,o». |_T1,,, defendant 
 
 ' ''^'"•'' "', ,"'-, I'iri'ctor. of' the plain is , 
 
 ;■ -M-mted iMiilding Hoeiety. in a newspaper 
 
 '■ ■•"•.■ stating, amongst other matters, that 
 
 'er am persons representing tliemselveH to he 
 
 |l:r«e orsof the «„e,ety had been self.app„jnte I 
 
 l.y the mo«t ,les|,ieal.le, foul and fraud lent 
 
 ■ ■ leilli.v them .IS wholly ,i„,i entirely eon- 
 '™,7/," "•'«« «"■' f'^^K"l'ttions and law " -.I 
 
 Helil, that the paragraph w.is eapahle of the 
 -Muuinigattnliuted to it, namely, tl at the l.us 
 
 I 1(1 as such it was defam itorv of the nlaintiirw 
 
 lOeneral of Canada under Artiele. 097 ./ ..7. 
 
 a;tn.ie ■' J!!„':':./''"'i ""fi'-i-a i,y tho.;^ 
 
 ., -KltO 
 
 valjil though errono- 
 pleadings as a «•(>,• tadnn. 
 
 Libel.]— S'fe Joimuil /'rintiii,/ Vo,,,,,,,,,,, n- 
 
 artieles, are Miitheiint and 
 
 -i" "ft'ilrl 1'"'/"' V' *'';■ •''",'"""«^ '"^ " "•"•'• '■'"•'■"-■ 
 
 •«. Mat the l„„„i ,„l, suhs.ription „f .^lou.tKM) 
 « h.iis.x niontlH from date U the pa^si^ig c^ 
 
 |t Aet of inenrporation, and the payment of 
 the ,h„,y p,,, eent. thereon, Were ..'nd Ion, 
 
 , .-•eeedeut to the legal organization ol ^hi eom 
 m..y with power to .arry on l.usiness. and a« 
 lu^o eonditions had not lieeu /,.„i,; „•,/; and in 
 Utorrjtr' "■".'' V'"'"' ''"^'' ^'^ •'■"■■'t he 
 uue the company M .diarter .ieehued forfeited. 
 
 <.) y me. ,J dissenting l>o,„un.,n .Sah;,.,,. ,„( 
 
 21 S a R. 72. ''■ ^"'"•'"'^•'•""■'•"/ ';/• rLaiU,, 
 
 Information by the Attorney-General. I - 
 ^•o»"„*)*T"S ^?^*"*,* Company-A',m«„-»a. 
 
 DkHTOK. 10, /,o.v^ ,JlTl)(l.M|£NT 
 
 V'l. PKOCKEDINdS A<iAIN,ST. 
 
 Annulment of Charter - Fraud - Writ „t\ 
 
 *n. e, and a writ of ,Wr,. /ac,V fw s isn ,, ""-' . «f b '^' ,"-''^ Y '^'^"^vanls nia.le upon 
 intoniiation I.y the Attorn e <''•' '"M , ^'"^'"^ «"'''■'' ■" the charter to he hehl l.v 
 the ("mpany.^ts LiiJa ."''Vl'l ,'r'' "«■""''' ','••'"•. ■""' "," f'"-ther act of the director, i^ 
 c.edUor.'to^ew .^^'^^^ ^^J^]"^^ alS^lit Is t ,Sy:"' «'^"'= ^'""" ""'- "^ 
 
 -r,w" /'«„^""''o« ■y/""/<r />W«^-»,/ Co., 16 A. R. 
 
 tunn,j Co. Peaker and Jiunions' Case, 1!) A. R. 
 
 Court of t^een^ Hi;,;;:: ;/uu'ti;rr:;jY 'I"^ ismni^'^l>^"''^'' T'^"V"'>' -i'->^"-^ta«ces there 
 entirely annulled, and that he n,/' f '. '" ,m r"'' '^ '"'"^ ^■'" *''''"''-'^ "»'*' '^ ^''" *« "'ade. 
 prayer were wide'en.lh '^ a ,„ " "..° .. ''^ ;';':' 'l^^'^^'-'^lf^'-" ^I' ^'^ ll-eholder. and 
 
 creditor, to ;iew c us „. "' f I / 'i; J""K»>fnt 
 
 «ho,.,dnothedecia.^;rf,.,::n^£.;: r:^„rt;r 
 
 at least in so tar as the hili,! .I'f, „ 1 ^ ' 
 
 foiir, rried " •_ "" '^"'- «"•'!' iletendants were 
 
 Held under the C. C. P. Km and 10.3.5, that 
 the C.o,le does no, authorize a partial annu n ent 
 of letters patent as had I.ee 1 direc e .y , "e 
 
 1.1 AjJ^Jw 4lf "'"" ''^/-■'-%" V. .V»n«,, 
 
 Annulment of Oliarter 'Aff„r,„;,.Gemral 
 
 "'.'/-.J-Ihe appellant compniiv hv its Act of 
 
 A.l to cirry on husiness provided .SI()0,(K)0 of 
 >ts capi al stock were subscVibcd for and tlihtv 
 percent, paid thereon, within six n, 1 s . fe^ 
 ■d'mT'lf " '^° ■'"''.'"''^ the Attorney, fn'. 
 *TO 00 1 n" '"r"'^' ^'^'-'" '"f'"'"'«<' tf"'t only 
 the'on, '" 'r"'>''^ subscribed prior to 
 
 mnv le 1'"?"''' f '"-' "I'^''-'^tions of the com? 
 r T, n, '; ""l" ''•'1'"'' ''^■"" «"l«^nbed for by 
 porti no V, ,/" ^"''*"^'l"«"tly surrendered a 
 
 n r ee t 1, 1 '" r'"'""'*"' '»"'• *'"^t the thirty 
 P(.r (.ent. had not been truly .and in fact o, ,1 
 thereon, sought at the instance of relator v 
 e'nd;' tlfh '" *';" ""'"''•'"^ Court for Lowe'r 
 
 tcl"w''l''ThTt'fT-^i'"-''"''«V''^''^ "' ^^^ Court i 
 
 charge; , ;onr "1."""*'' " '^""""ion statutory 
 
 tri.,, 1 ''"'.'^eediugs to set it aside were prooerlv y^-ithii^^C ;.""°'""'' '"" '"^"^'^' transferred it 
 
 That such^ proceedings taken '-y the Atton-ey! I t\';rnsK^o"p\rat:\^rsV;r;;Ser !!:!"'''*"« ''"' 
 
 „,.t:i *i i. .-• ^. »• "" "" '■"^ .loarenouier, ana 
 ntil that time the .Statute of Limitations does 
 not begin to run against the company. There- 
 tore persons name.T in the charter issued in IHSO 
 as shareholders were in ISilJ hehl liable to pay 
 the amount of their shares, no formal call having 
 in tlie meantime been made 
 
 .ilhimed. Jn r,- Hamrrt Bros. MnnufwMirinij 
 t-o. I eab'.r and Knnioun' CViw, 19 A. 1!. 582. 
 
 v,!f,°t"f.'-'~'^ "•"", \'I'"" *''"''"«^ "'"'e'- the Joint 
 
 a call made by the directors in pursuance of the 
 powers given to them by section 44 of that Act. 
 R 440° ''""'''"'*"' ^''W''>"'0*( V. Sippi, 20 O. 
 
 Pledge. 
 
 SEcuKiry. 
 
 ]-See B..\NK.s, III. -Collateral 
 
 Surrender. ]_By 54 & 55 Vict. cli. 110, sec. 
 4 -».), power was given to any shareholder of 
 tlie comjiany to snrreiidcr his .^^tock by notice in 
 writing within a certain time. A shareholder 
 : ■•:i,7.''« u'" 5"'-'-«V'''^'' '■- «tock, transferred it 
 
V. Ontario 
 Kirk and 
 
 147 
 
 Held, a valid surrender. Harte 
 £.j.'pr,y.sam/ Travspi,rt<,/;oii Company 
 JUarhwj,-, Cum, 24 O. li. 340. 
 
 Transfer. ]--.An otlie.wisc vali.l transfer of 
 slKires all„t.e.l t.. (he transferor uj on « I ■, he 
 
 made at the time „t tran.slVr, is not nnalid 
 
 directed by seetn.n -)i, of tlie Act to he "eailed 
 in and made ,jayal.!e witliin one year from the 
 »Kori,ora,um of the eo.npany " L not beJn 
 
 O J^w'"'/ '"'■"t'''"'-''' f^^iion is directory merely. 
 R 440" ^'"''""""" '■i'<'~oda/!on v. Sippi, 20 U. 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 148 
 
 I r/^of.'."":/'''.""^' "/""'ifa--- V. Oilhxpk, 10 S C 
 \^^'ol'ixh taimdmii AsUs/o, Co., 18 S. C. li. 
 
 vaiV.e nf 'Jr '":"":"'^'' "^signnient or pledge for 
 >alue of shans m ti,e eaintal stock of a oonmanv 
 ncorvorated um\,v R. 's. (). ,],. 167 is ad 
 Ween the assignor and the assignee notwUh 
 trn If ^- '^ '"'.'""y «f <;»-■ assignment or 
 transfer js made in the hooks of the companv • 
 and, as only the debtors interest in , , J iv' 
 seized can be sold under execution, the gl^^s f 
 ^bom)pt.- assignee cannot be ei t out b tl e 
 
 S'mi"' ''"•■ "^ ^'-^l""'^-. "■"I'^i'c-.xec'uth^ 
 again..t the assignor, alter the assigninent. 
 
 struetl '■ '■"' '""'' ""' '=°"*''''"'-''l '""• "-on- 
 
 untb^.-nv/''r* ""•''"'«, f'-'sscs by such a sale 
 un 1(1 execution: for the ,.ords "goo.ls and 
 diattels m secti„n IC of the Execution Act 
 
 .^n'n/ \\ ^■*' ''° "°' '"'-''"''" -^'"I'-es in an 
 m«,, orated company so as to authorize the 
 
 il/or/1 T"^' ^^i;'-'' f "Ption in such shares. , 
 Vict. ch. 13, sec 327o.).' ''" ""^^' "^^ 
 
 of TheT)7f f "'''■'{"■'"'• ^T^^"/!"- tl'e 38th section 
 Pat nt A t R° s<",':* ■^,tof.j:.'ompa"y's Letters 
 
 mav V, l"f '" 7^V "^ *'"^ shareholders" who 
 "n7o ,fn ' '" ''^'•''"'' ("'tl'O'-izing the borrow. 
 Panv a e vT' "';•,' "" f'"^ '""P^-'y «f the com- 
 a cnll n 1 ' t"";''^ I'as been no default after 
 a call, to be computed upon the face value of 
 
 amoJInf ^"-■'''?^ '^' ''^'"^" '"^'''' """1 "°' "I-^th 
 amount pud upon such shares. Purdom v 
 Untarto Loan and Dthtnturt Co., 2" 0. 1{. 597] ' 
 
 Voluntary Asslgrment- IlW/fx of Cndi- 
 ;/o,w.]- .Section !) of the li..ininiou Wimiing-u > 
 
 J^^t K'ves a wide discretiona.y power to the Court 
 ,to grant or .efuse a winding-up order; and 
 
 Miieie, up<,n an ai.pHcation for such an order it 
 
 'nnr'ri ,'■'':' ''"^ "■'"•"■"'>■ 1>-' I'-vlouLly 
 
 j c e htors, and th.Mt it was the desire of the great 
 
 'STi^'-T ,■•"'"'."•■ ;'!"'V''1"'^ of the credit,,,, 
 I that liipudation sho.dd beprocee.led with un,ler 
 
 '1llhTlfT':> "^' "H^'i-'''">' ^vas refnsc'i 
 24 0.-R 107 '■• ^^"'"'■'"'« "■/"> fo., 
 
 (iatioH— 1)0,,,,, /;„,„„..., i„, Canada. "i-'n^:,,- 
 IS no clashing between section 3 of the AVin.l 
 .n«-..pAct,K.S.C. ch. 129, and section 3:, 
 tlic \\ indmg-up Amendment Act, 52 Vict ch 
 A- ; the hitter Act provides for the volui.'tai v 
 win.lmg-upof the 'ompanies falling within its 
 provisions, and not for their compulsory li , „ 
 datioii, which IS provided for by the i„r,Ly ' 
 , A company incorporated under an Act of'tl,,- 
 
 ■tli^ ; ■ ''""]« '■"S"'^'ss in Canada- 
 
 V, 1,11, )>e^ meaning of section 3 of the original 
 {Act. lu- Ontario lvr,je and Bolt Co., 25 O I! 
 
 Winding-up OrCer- Procealin;/ aftervard 
 ^ntko,,t Lcu,>.-.i>W Kcatinrj y. Graham. 20 ( 
 K. ,ibl ; iio.-t, JUDOMKNT, I. 
 
 y/.« f 
 
 VIII, WixijixG-up Acts. 
 1. AppU,ation of Act., and MaJ;l„,j of Order. 
 
 Foreign Corporations. ]-Sectioii 3 of "The 
 S"±'«-"'' f ^t-" R'vised Statutes of Canada! 
 til. 12n,_ which provides that the Act applies to 
 b,,;,-,," ""^"7;"'-''t'-''l trading con.panics doing 
 business in Canada, wheresoever incorporated 
 i« rnt^-a vm.. the Parliament of Cani.la.-i' 
 M,n , 1"°""'/ ""''-■'■ ''y '' C'anadian Court in 
 
 Canada nn!"]^'"'"^ ^'^'^' ''""'« '"'«'"««« "• 
 inc.;:.].? il .'■'''*'',■''''"'' '^"'^ "^"'S ^•'^bts 
 
 2. Carrijin,/ on Bit-ilne.-,.". 
 
 ■ nl fnjar'o Winding-up Act.]-The pa, amount 
 I object of the Ontario Winding-up Act is th, 
 I l.visionof thecompany s assets among its ,.re, i 
 I tors and members with aU r. as.mable speed. 
 I ll.e power to carry on U.^ business after 
 «inding.u]) proceedings have been commenced 
 and thus to postpone the linal winding-u,,, i; 
 one which IS not to be exercised unless a str, , J 
 case of necessity for doing so exists. ^ 
 
 J hat the mortgagees of the company's works, 
 \N ho have foreclosed th.cir mortgage, will I,e 
 enabled to dispose of the vorks to fr^atcr a 1 
 vantage, ami that by atlor.ling facilities f pi - 
 ^ curing rciwirs to the purchasers of ihe machiu- 
 
 I or^dr^i" "''"'"' ^'y ""-' """P'^'y. the chances 
 
 I of obtaining payment of outstanding purcliaso 
 
 notes will be improved, are not%\i«icie 
 
 businS. " '''''''' ""-' '="'•'■>■»'« °" ^'f the 
 .hulgment of the County Court (,f I'eel 1... 
 
 3. Con,promUe of Claims. 
 
 Elssentient minority— r.iq„;dnir.r\< .!;,;,..„ 
 
 m. aT/ 'If "-J' ,"" ,'"'"''• fe''^^-'" '^y the Win.ling. 
 Act, U.S. C. ch. 129, to enforce a compro- 
 mise upon dissentient minorities of creditors 
 
 149 
 
 Semb 
 consent 
 compro: 
 may he 
 Jie A'uH 
 
 Dlrec 
 
 -Wlien 
 
 company 
 
 tors aiui 
 
 Held, 
 
 entitled 
 
 Court coi 
 
 pany, bu 
 
 Court, ai 
 
 of such e 
 
 as a sliar( 
 
 Oecisio 
 
 Crailoc. 
 
 lit Mimic 
 
 Co., P,<t, 
 
 Ill"^«al 
 
 Act.]—\\i 
 
 shares in \ 
 
 >| shares by 
 
 i holders tl 
 
 proviso in 
 
 by-law foi 
 
 greater di> 
 
 authorized 
 
 enougii to 
 
 sncli a disi 
 
 subscribed 
 
 An Act ( 
 
 had been 
 
 operations, 
 
 declaring t 
 
 company " 
 
 ! business, d. 
 
 illegal incr 
 
 make lioldi 
 
 stock liabl 
 
 proceedings 
 
 Judgmen 
 
 points, rev( 
 
 Tran.yioi-tiii 
 
 All appca 
 
 the Suprem 
 
 next case. 
 
 Increase 
 
 .SViart.s.J— Tl 
 
 that tlie cap! 
 
 n'hcii tlie ori 
 
 When twem 
 
 i:itter, a by-] 
 
 per cent, wa 
 
 increasing tl 
 
 Act, 54 it 55 
 
 tttiou " of tl 
 
 company, "; 
 
 capable of do 
 
 Held, in w: 
 
 Hie issue of t 
 
 and illegal, ^, 
 
 Vaiiilatcd it, ; 
 
 Were liable as 
 
 'Section 4 of 
 
 •harehohler 111 
 
149 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 Semhh a liqm.Jator cainu.t l.e coinpellea to 
 consent t.. a compromise, a.ul even when a 
 conipionnse is reoomniendea l,y a li,,ui,Iato ■ it 
 may be frustrate,! l.y an op.u.in? , " ty 
 lie. Sun LitliojraphitKj Ok, 24 (>. j;. 200. ^' 
 
 4. Co)ili-ihi(tor(p>!. 
 
 - W liere a .lirector, vj.o « a. also presi.lent of ■ 
 con.pany was appointed l,y ihe \Lvd of li.JJ 
 to,^ and aote,| as solicitor for the eompany-l 
 Held „. win.hnu.up proceedings that he u-.^ 
 entitled to profit costV in .'espe^t !,. es 1 
 Court oon,ha.te.l by him as solictor for 1 e eon 
 ixiny but not „, respeet of busiiiess done out 
 Court an.l was entitled to set oil' the am , t 
 
 :;:t.Sdr'^^^''^ -"-'■■' ^f'-'i^n:;^ 
 
 I>ec,sion of the Master in Ordinary reversed 
 CM V P.per, 1 Maen. .t fi. m, ollowe 1 
 
 150 
 
 Sl'mM i,::!^'" '■"'"'">■ '■" ■•-P'^'^t thereof 
 
 whotI;wi„r'"'^"'*'"\''' irV'"'''''"«-^' t'"^t those 
 10 had thus surrendered tlieir shares were not 
 ble as eontribntories even to the e.xtent of o 
 
 at he time of snbscr.,,tion. but had not. /, 
 ^^ ( n,,n.,o Lxpns. and Tran.yMjrlalicu Co., 24 
 
 in.<.«al Increase of Capital- ralidntim, 
 ^«^J-Jo attempt to make partially mil in 
 
 holders .^ie..ofl";:!^/,:v;'-5-j'>:; 
 
 provLsoin the Act of Incornoritim, ' 'ti ! 
 l-y-law for the allotment ideooek.f "" 
 
 enough to impliodly authorize the a lo „ V S 
 such a discount on shares whi,.|, ,.•,../ ".■"."-'^„"' 
 subscribed for attheirhdnllmu^n^,:^:''"^"^ 
 
 ! Issue of Shares at a Discount. 1-A joint 
 
 <.ck,n,,tod liability oon,pany being indS 
 
 I .1 small amount, winch was afterwar.ls paid 
 
 < h and having at the time as.sets worth inore 
 
 an double the amount of ii« i.ssued .stock d 
 .' I other habi ities, allotted a number of slur's 
 
 Its sha, eho„ler.s, at a discount. .Snb.semi.n ly 
 the company was freshly incorporated w th tl le 
 shares .so issued treated as fn ly paid n , ■in 1 
 j-iterwards falling into difficulties, Vis ut 
 li'imdation under K. S. V. ch 1"') •-_ 
 
 [ Hehl, that these shareholders "we're not liable 
 , as eontribiit„r,e.s. In re V,rr„ Sound //, ,/ Xi 
 \SJni.hmldu., and Savn/ation Co., 21 ' . K 
 
 hai 
 
 Petition for Incorporation -- K./o,,,,,./ ]-_ 
 
 inat an all.ged contributory joined in Mm 
 .petition for incorporation, where n it \v 's in 
 
 ..■«yst,.tedtliathehadt:ik,n250slL: ^ e 
 capital stock, whereas the shares he bel.l bad 
 after incorporation, been voted to him Kv ! 
 resoluti.m of the directors as paid ip t .1 \r 
 :™y^-"-«->' -'th thi formitioi;!:f z 
 
 .d"lS°^S'^^''""^''?'?a"^ '''^ provisions of the 
 
 .-pc.t^.^, at the least, the number of sh^r^^ 
 
 .Stw/Vf. Ho was liable for the full number of 
 ^shares mentione.1 i„ the petition. /,' o ■ , 
 redd P'r"'^ ■;:('!> i'^"<'i"iJ ""'^ Foundry <i 
 
 operations, and "had been " reoi-'aniymV- , 
 
 declaring that the charter i.st^E'i,,,! The 
 company "as now orcmi-zu,! '• iV I \ '® 
 
 busiLs^ does o -dS htive^n 'V'^ '''''"^ 
 illegal incr,...se of° the c^ ,U 'l ,:f'l'''°" ^" '"' 
 -kc hol.h.rs of sha!^ o;"£ ^^ ^^ 
 ^J-aKleas contributories m ^vi,^, ^I 
 Juilgment of Boyd, C. 24 I! oip. ,„ ., 
 
 next case. ' ''"• '''«« 'lie . 
 
 that thi cap italsto k ,n ,d b'"'"'"'"^ in^^-iA<^d 
 
 Act, 01 .V oo Vic^'c 110 ,1,\ . '^' .f"''^«'luont 
 ation"oftlleeoli,!"i^^^.S •■<^-«^ 
 company, "as now orWni/,.d •' u „ f \ 'V 
 cap^ible of doing business :" ' '^ "' '^'"^"''''^ 
 
 ti~of^7he'i^:!Slu':k«^'"^"^ *'-"«■' 
 
 and illegal, yet the ^^t'li^t f^^^./'To^S^ 
 
 Seti:^-tSbSSr^ ^''^"-^--^ 
 .^SS:i^i;i;tSe£.c^Ss-^.n' 
 
 Pledgee- Tran><,hy. ]_After a winding-up 
 Older has be.n made it is too late for holders of 
 shares, entered as such in the books of he t .k 
 to escape liability by shewing irregularities i, 
 transfers to more or less remote pre^'decessois In 
 
 \ A loan comp my which advances money on 
 
 ' uid ".;:'■' f fr^' ."■'''^'' "'•'-' tnuisfer c'l to 
 
 ' f,.' ■ '"' '"^^epte,! by ,t in the ordinary absolute 
 
 oim, cannot escape liability on the ground ta? 
 
 It IS merely a trustee for the borrower h 
 
 , men o Robertson, J., affirmed. Tri ( fe 
 
 company may be paid for in moneyC money's 
 
 oith and It paid for by a transfer of proSy 
 
 lie.v must be treated as fully paid up / ■J\'Z 
 
 ccedmgs niulcr the Winding up Aet the AlXv 
 
 .as no authority to iiir.nirelnto tt nd..'nt'cv ,,' 
 
 the consideration with a view to placin.f tie 
 
 holder on the list of eontriluitories. ' " 
 
 I licij IS a distinction lietween a trust for a com 
 
 "aids sold to the company and the fiduciary 
 
 ■Ms 
 
 m- 
 
161 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 relationship engendered by the promoters, be- 
 
 tween theniselvcH an.l the company, which exists 
 
 as soon as the latter is formed. 
 
 _ A promoter wlio purchases property with the 
 
 intention of selling it to a company to he formed 
 
 does not necessarily hoM such property in trust 
 
 tor the prospective company, but he stands in a 
 
 relation to the latter and if he sells to them iiduci- 
 
 ary must not violate any of the duties devolving 
 
 upon him 111 respect to such relationship. If he 
 
 sells for mstance, through the medium of a 
 
 board ot directors who are not in.Iependent of 
 
 him the contract may he rescinded, provided 
 
 the property remains in su,:h a, po,it;on that the 
 
 parties may he restored to their original status. 
 
 J here may he cases in which the property may 
 
 be regarded as being bound by a trust either nl, 
 
 imlw or in conseciuence of ex po.t f.tcto events • 
 
 It a promoter purchases property from a vendor 
 
 who is to be paid by the coinpanv when formed, 
 
 and by a secret arrangement with the vendor a 
 
 imrt ot the price, when the agreenieiil is carried 
 
 out, c.mies into the hands of the promoter, that 
 
 IS a secret prolit which he cannot retiin ; and if 
 
 any part of such secret profit consists of paid-uij 
 
 snares ot the company issued as part of the 
 
 purchase price of the property such sluires niav 
 
 m winding-up proceedings, be treated, if helil 
 
 by the promoter, ai- unpaid shares for which the 
 
 152 
 
 the company, held a fiduciary position towards 
 the company which precluded him from makin« 
 a proht on his dealings with the company, ami 
 that he was liable as a contributory in respect 
 to the 12b shares still held l,v him, but not in 
 respect of the shares transferred, the same hav 
 ing been taken by him as trustee for those tf. 
 » ™J"^ afterwards transferred them. In r.- 
 //M.V Mam/act iiriniy Co. S/oan's Caw, 2.3 O. R. 
 
 153 
 
 IJecis 
 d reverse! 
 f Ley.'^, 2: 
 
 priMiioter may he made a contributory. /« re 
 Hes. Manutacturiw, Co. Ed-jar v. S/,.a>i, 2.S S 
 t . K. ()44. tiee the next two cases. 
 
 Promoter- Trmt.]-To make an alleged pro- 
 moter of a company liable for the amount of 
 paid-up shares allotted to him in consideration 
 of the transfer by him to the company of pro- 
 perty standing in his name, it must be shewn 
 that at the tune of its acquisition by him he 
 stood in siich a relation to the intended com- 
 pai.y that he could, not claim to have bought 
 the property for himself, and, therefore, that 
 tliere was no consideration for the allotment : 
 and the Court [Hagarty, C..J.O., dissenting], 
 h.uii g, on the evidence, come to the conclusion 
 that this was not shewn, reversed the judgment 
 of Meredith, J., 2,3 (). R. 182. Jn re He.... 
 M<niHjactnru,ii <". S/oan'.i Case, 21 A. R 66 
 oc- the next case. 
 
 Promoter-Ja^.^o C..mpa„,j~P„{d.„jy Sfod: ] ! 
 — I le appellant, intending to promote a joint' 
 stock company tor manufacturing furniture, ,„o- ' 
 cured the conveyance to himself of certain lands, 
 liee ot chM'ge, in consideration of the factory 
 being erecte.l upon them, which was .lone, he 
 contributing S, ,,300 for that purpose, 87,000 of 
 this he repai.l himself by mortgaging thi land. 
 
 llie company was incorporated under R. S 
 U- cii. \ot, the appellant being one of the 
 tlirectors and appearing as a subscriber for 
 l.)0 shares. At a shareholders- meeting, after 
 he ha.l ceased to be a direct.ir, but at which he 
 was present by agent, it was agree.l that the 
 company .should purchase the lan.l and factory 
 
 S°'th >'"7 nnn^""'T' '^"^'^''^ ''^ *''« assumption 
 «-w nno-^'°°^ .mortgage, an,l the issue to him. of 
 *..-i,u..U o, paic i,p shares, which were accord- 
 ingly a ott(Ml to liim. Subsequently he trans- 
 ferred 2.34 of the 360 shares so allotted. A 
 
 ,c''!.!,"'f''")''-l'' '''^'''''''"*'' '""-'"'"■"'e under R. ,S. 
 Held, aflirming the decision (,f the Master in 
 
 •Ordinary, tiiat the appellant, as a promoter of 
 
 Repudiation of Shares. 1-After the issue of 
 letters patent in J 880 incorporating the company 
 and naming certain persons as siiareholders, 
 these persons stated to certain of the directors 
 ot the company that iliey would not accept 
 their stock, and would liave nothing more to do 
 with the company, hut no proceedings were 
 taken by them to relieve themselves fnim lia- 
 hility ; and no procee.lings were taken against 
 I'sm"-— " ^^fii'Pany was wound up in 
 
 Held, distinguishing Xko/:. Ci.it, 29 Ch. 1) 
 421 that as these persons had not a mere 
 inchoate right to receive shares, but were aotu- 
 jilly shareholders and members of the company 
 by virtue of the charter, mere statements of 
 this kind and the lapse of time, an.l the failure 
 ot the directors to enforce payment of the 
 shares, dnl not relieve them from their liability 
 as shareholders. ■' 
 
 In re Ilam/ir/ Ihw. Mminfaeturimj Co. Peaker 
 and Ji'uiiiom' Ca.e, I'J .A. R. ,J82, 
 
 Subscription— .Vo//.;)n2//«(/-/ at Time of 
 AUotme>U.l~See In rr Central Bank, Xa.imltl/, 
 Cll 209 Affirmed in appeal, JH 
 
 I Transfer of Shares for a Particular Pur- 
 
 I P°sf--^ ''.'/''■'•' loJ{,-fr<m^fer.]-Th(i defen.lant, 
 at the request of the president of the plain,iff 
 association, accepte.l from liim a crausfer of 
 shares, partly paid-up, in the association, for 
 tlie purpose of attending a meeting of share- 
 Holders an.l forming a quorum, and give ilic 
 president a power of attorney to re-transfer the 
 shares after the meeting. No re-transfer was 
 made and the defen.lant rem,ai„rd in igiiurance 
 that; the shares stood in his name until thoas.w- 
 ciatioii became financially em harrassed :— 
 Held, that he was liable as a coiitribiitor>. 
 
 ^ 
 
 Purchase by Company of Its Own Shares 
 
 .-Imn..Jerto '• Mai,a,/.r in Trn../ • -Lialnlity 
 ^qt Jfwmyeras Contribulory.]-Thc manager of 
 I an insurance company, authorized by the direc- 
 tors, with the moneys of the comiiauy, pur- 
 chased from the holder thercf, who was ignor- 
 ant of the object intended, a number of partly 
 paid-up snares of the company on which calls 
 were in arrear, for the purpose of cancellation, 
 taking the transfer to himself as " m.anager in 
 trust, Ihe company had no power to deal in 
 its own stock. Ihe shares were ne^•er cancelled, 
 the dividends thereon being credited to the 
 company : — 
 
 Held, in liquidation proceedings, that in the 
 absence of knowledge by the transferor that the 
 purchase was for an illegal purpose, the man- 
 ager was properly j)laced on tlie list of coutrib- 
 
 / 
 
152 
 
 fy position towards 
 111 hiiu from making 
 the company, and 
 tril)utory in respect 
 ')y liiiii, lint not in 
 ricil, tliu siune hav 
 :rustee for tiiose to 
 irred them. In r,- 
 lan's Ca-ii; 23 O. R. 
 
 f Its O-wn Shares 
 
 'J'ni.it ' — Liahility 
 1 — Tlie manager of 
 rized hy tlie direc- 
 lie company, pur- 
 of, wlio was ignor- 
 L nunihei- of partly 
 ny on which calls 
 S6 of cancellation. 
 If as " manager in 
 3 power to deal in 
 re never cancelled, 
 ; credited to the 
 
 'dings, that in the 
 ;ransferor that the 
 Hirpose, the man- 
 he list of contrib- 
 '. t'o. McOord'n 
 
 -After tlie issue of 
 
 I ting the company 
 as sharcliolders, 
 
 II of the directors 
 rould n(jt accept 
 'tiling more to do 
 proceiidingd were 
 nselves from lia- 
 !re taken against 
 s wound up in 
 
 Cant, 29 Ch. D. 
 lad not a mere 
 <, hut were actu- 
 
 of the company 
 •e statements of 
 I, and the failure 
 payment of the 
 )m their liability 
 
 irinyCo. Peaker 
 
 ■if at Time of 
 'Ian/,; Xaninllh'H 
 1 in appeal, ),S 
 
 articular Pur- 
 
 Tlie defendant, 
 of the plain, iff 
 1 a transfer of 
 association, for 
 jeting of share- 
 , and give the 
 re-transfer the 
 re-transfer was 
 ed in igitoraiifc 
 -' until theabso 
 •rassed : — 
 ontributory. 
 
 153 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 Decision of MacMahon, J., at the trial 
 reversed. Ontario Jnventment Association v 
 Leys, 23 O. R. 4<J(J, 
 
 Transfer of Shares.]— The shareholders of 
 a company sold and transferred part of their 
 property, and also contracted tliat they would 
 within a year, transfer their charter by assiuii- 
 mg all their stock to the purchaser's nomine- 
 Part of the purchase money was paid at once 
 but the purchaser did not nominate a person to 
 whom the shares should be trausferreil. After 
 an order for the winding-up of the company had 
 been made, the li,|uidato-s brought this action 
 for the balance of tht iiurchase money ;— 
 Held, tliat they were entitled to recover 
 Decision of MaeMiihon, J., affirmed. J!t,l- 
 fern v. Poison, 2j 0. K. 321. 
 
 154 
 
 I position of an adverse litigant to the iiurty 
 
 , re((uiru)g the discovery. ' ' 
 
 ^yhel■e certain shareholders of an insolvent 
 
 bank were suing the ilirectois for negligence 
 
 and misfeasance, an,l hail made the bank defen- 
 
 ilants tor conformity without asking any relief 
 
 against them an application by the plaintifls 
 
 ■niler Rule oo(. for leave to examine one of the 
 
 liiiuidators for discovery liefore statement of 
 
 ,,"''.!l^^'^^'"^ "-'fuseJ- H'-ndn-sm v. Btain, 14 P. 
 
 It. .iOo. 
 
 5. DistrilnUion of Assists. 
 
 Joint and Several Debtor.s.J — Held, per 
 Kitchio, t .J., ami laschereau, J., ciliinning the 
 judgment of the Court below. Strong and Four- 
 nier, JJ. , contra, that a creditor is not entitled to 
 rank for the fidl amount of his claim upon the 
 separate estates of insolvent debtors jointly and 
 severally liable for the amount of the debt but 
 IS obliged to deduct from his claim the amount 
 previously received from the estates of the other 
 parties jointly and severally liable therefor — 
 PerGwynaeand Patterson, .JJ., that a person 
 who has realized a portion of his debt upon 
 the insolvent estate of his uo-debtors cannot be 
 allowed to rank upon the estate (in liquidation 
 under the Winding up Act) of his other co- 
 debtors jointly and severally liable without iirst 
 deducting the amount he iias previously received 
 from the estate of his other co-debtor 1! S C 
 ch. 129, sec. (52, The Winding-up Act. Ontario 
 Bank v Chaplin, 20 .S. C. 1!. 152. 
 
 Liquidators' Commission — ^//„!m»/v „f 
 (- omunsswn on S.l.„jj\ 1-|„ tixi„y the Ii,|uidator;' 
 eommi.'s.sion or comi.ensatioii in the windin.'-uD 
 proceedings of an insolvent bank, it is ,,ioner 
 I t" take into consideration amounts adjusted or 
 |Set.otf, but not actually received by the liqui- 
 dators ; and in this case a commission of two 
 I and a-quarter per cent, having been allowed on 
 ; the gross amount of moneys actually colivcted. 
 a turtlier commi.ssion of one and :i-quarter ,)er 
 cent, on a sum of .s23l ,{IOO, consisting of amounts 
 adjusted or set-otl, was allowed. 
 
 So far as possible, the amount allowed as com- 
 pen.sation to liquidators in such winding-up i.io- 
 ceedings shouhl be evenly spread over the whole 
 period of ihe liquidation, .so as to ensure viiril. 
 ance and expedition at all stages of the liiniida- 
 tion. as well as a proper distribution among the 
 liquidators when more than one /„ re C.ntrat 
 Bank; Lijts (:iuim, 22 O. I!. 247. 
 
 7. Prn 'ice. 
 
 (a) Ajipitih 
 
 6. Li'iuidalors. 
 
 Insolvent Bank-i?,V/A</o Appoint Another 
 Hank ]—l he W inding-up Act provides that the 
 shareholders and crediti>rs of a company in 
 liquidation shall severally meet and nominate ! 
 persons who are to be appointed liipiidators and ' 
 the Judge having the appointment shall choose 
 the liquidators from among such nominees In 
 the o.-ise of the Bank of Liverpool the Judge 
 appomted iquidators from among the nominees 
 01 the creditors, one of them being the defen- 
 uant bank : — i 
 
 Held attirming the judgment of the Court | 
 below, 22 N. 8. Hep. 97, that there is nothing ' 
 111 the Act requiring both creditors and share 
 holders to be represented on the board of lioui- 
 dators ; that a bank may be appointed liqui- 
 dator ; and that if any appeal lies from the 
 decision of the Judge in exercising his judgment 
 as to the appointment such discretion was wisely 
 exercised 111 this case. Fom, 'he v. Ba:,k of Norn 
 bcotia. In re Bank of Liverpool, IS S. C. R. 707. 
 
 I,lquidator— A'.(a;/in,a?!o» hrfore Ulatemmt of 
 Vlunn.]-Aii oflicial liquidatoi> cannot as aii 
 ohcer of the Court be called uiion to make 
 aiscovery unless he ia representatively in the 
 
 j Divisional Court. ]-Tlie Divisional Courts 
 lare not constituted appellate Courts for ihe 
 purposes i,( Dominion JudiciUure under the 
 U iniling-np Act and an appeal does not be to a 
 Ihvisional Court from an order of a .luib'e in 
 Chambers in a proceeding under that Act. " 
 ! ^ J lie Afaster in ( 'hambers, or other subordinate 
 judicial o'hcer, h.-.s no jurisdiction, unless by 
 
 iii^^'^^:^ Zt''''''' ''''"''''' ^'^ ^ ^''^^^^'^i 
 Where a notice of appeal to the Court of 
 Appeal from an order of a Judge in such a pro- 
 ceeding has been given, but leave to appeal has 
 not been obtained, it is not necessary to have 
 the notice .set aside. 
 
 I)ow,ran v Ifa/daup, 14 P. R. ]0C, dis- 
 tinguished. Bf Sarnia Oil Co., 15 P. R. 182. 
 
 Final Order. ]-An order of the County Court 
 under the Ontario Winding-up Act approv ig 
 of the .sale of the assets is a " final order," at 
 nothing further remains to be done under it and 
 therefore is the subject of appeal. /« re D A 
 Jones Co., 19 A. R. (;3, 
 
 Leave to Appeal-.S'«rrr.sw;(r^/m^;,Y,^/„„,,.i 
 U here an application for leave to appeal to the 
 
 uiidei the Uniding-up Act, R. S. C. ch. 129 
 has been m..do ,„„ier section 71, and refused bJ 
 a Judge, a frc.;sh application will not be euter- 
 tainei! by another .Judge. 
 
 The cases in which successive applications to 
 successive Judges have been favoured, are not 
 
 : ii 1 
 
 i 'I 
 
 m-v 
 
 '\ ) 
 
165 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 pertinent to a case where tlie right to appeal, 
 upon leave, is sought under a special statute 
 lie Sarmi Oil Co., 15 P. 1!. 347 
 
 Leave to Appeal -Tim'-ExteiKM n/'In-Armi- 
 TOP«^]-After a c-,.se un,!.-r the Winding-up Act 
 was argued tlie appelhint, with tlie consent of 
 the respondent, ohtained from a Judge of the 
 (. ourt lielow an order to extend the time for 
 Imiignig the appeal, and suiisequently before tlie 
 time expired lie g„t an order from tlie l{ei.'istrar 
 of the Supreme ('ourt,sitting as a Judge inChani. 
 bers, giving hini leave t . appeal in accordance 
 witli section ,(. of the Winding-up Act, and the 
 order declared that all i)roceedmgaliad upon the 
 appeal should be considered as taken suljsequent 
 to tlie order granting leave to ai.peal. Ontario 
 Bank V. Cliapliii, 20 S. ('. R 15') 
 
 156 
 
 157 
 
 (b) C'o.sV.s. 
 
 Security torCosta-Intm-emnu Shan-ho/dfr 
 o,,t oj lk,:,hn->s,l.r„on.]-Ax^ onler was made by 
 the Court delegating the po« crs exercisable by 
 the t ourt tor the purpose of winding-up a coin 
 pany, to a referee, pursuant to R. S"(; ch 1-t) 
 setW/^as amended by 52 Vict. ch. 32, sec. "26 
 
 Held, that power was .lelegated to tlie referee 
 to onler security for costs an.l to stay proceediii<rs 
 t. I security should bo given i,y a shnreholder 
 lesident out of the jurisdiction, who inter- 
 vened : — 
 
 Held, also, that the liquidator and others 
 opposing the applicath.ns made by the inter- 
 vening shareholder wei'e not barred of tiieir 
 right to security by not applying' till after the 
 original applications of the shareholder had been 
 dismissed and appeals taken; but that the 
 security should be limited to the costs of the 
 appeals. Re Saniia Oil Co., 14 P R 335 
 
 (c) Powrrx ofJiul!/e.<i and .Maulers. 
 
 County Court. ]-Thc liqui,Iator of a company 
 whu^h was being voluntarily wound uj, under the 
 On arioW inding.up Act, .sold the assets tliercf 
 en bloc, without the sanction of the contribu- 
 tories to .a private individual, and then obtained 
 from the County Court an .,rder approving of 
 the sale, and making certain provisions for the 
 dispo.sitionot the purchase nione\-s 
 
 On appeal, it was held that the order was 
 m.ide without authority, and thai it was a 
 nullity. In re J). A. Junt. Co., V.) A. R. C3. 
 
 County Conrt— Pergonal Onkr ,i,,ain.'<t Linui. 
 dator jor Cost.,]--.\n order was nia.le by a 
 County ( ourt, under R ,s. O. ch. LS3, for the 
 wimling up of the companies, and a liouid.ator 
 was appointed, who brought in a list of coiitri- 
 intones. Ihe contributories: sheuc.l cause to 
 their names be.iig settled upon the list, and 
 the Loun made an order in the ease of 
 each of them, reciting that it appeared there 
 was no lurisdictioi, to make the wir.ding-np 
 onler. and that all pvoceedine. wore in J,hl? 
 or null, and ordering that each contributory , 
 
 I Held, that if there was jurisdiction to make 
 the windiug-up order, the contributories couhl 
 
 ; not deleiKl themselves by shewing that it was 
 
 I imgular or erroneous ; and if there was no 
 .lurisdiction all the proceedings were rnram nou 
 jn</n;., and there was no jinisdiction, the Court 
 
 , 'eing an interior one, to order the liqui.lator or 
 
 ; the companies to p.ay the costs. 
 
 ; And even if there was jurisdiction, in the 
 circumstances of this case, it should not have 
 
 : lieen exerci.sed against the liipiidator. 
 
 : „„V'''l, '-fv- 1'.*^ ""t "I'l'ly to proceedings 
 under the U luding-up Act, either by virtue of 
 section .« of the Act or otherwise. AV C'o.smo- 
 podm, LiJ,: A,.,„-;atmn-tli CvxmopoliUin Casit- 
 ulty A.^.ioantwn,\:y\\}X. \s-y. 
 
 Poreclosure or Sale by Petition. ]-0n a 
 
 petition by a mortgagee in the winding-up pro- 
 ceedingsotacoinpanv.underR..S C ch l-'c) -'sk 
 ing for the conveyance to him by tlie liquidator 
 ot the company s equity of re.leiiiption, the 
 Court has ,iui. diction to make the usual order 
 tor foreclosure or sale. 
 
 it is a matter of discretion with the Court 
 whether an action will be directed or sumniary 
 proceedings sanctioned. 7,V Esse.,: Umd and 
 Jinilwr Co., Trout. f Ca.'it, 21 O. R. 3(i7. 
 
 to^<i -■.>■»/.•. I -sub-section 17 of section 23 of II 
 
 S. U. cli. IS', which provides for summary pro' 
 
 oeeding,s 111 the course of winding-up a company 
 
 , ag.ains (hrc.aors ami other otliccrs i'l, respect o^ 
 
 • aUege.l mis casance or breach of t.u.st, is not 
 
 I wnle enough to authorize the setting aside as a 
 
 I breach of trust, on the sumniary application of 
 
 i the Ii(|Uidator, ot a sale of lands by the com 
 
 paiiy to a director, especially whei-; the lands 
 
 have, at the director's request, been coiiveyc.l 
 
 by the company to the director's wife 
 
 'I he scope of the iub-sectioii considered /« 
 IT £,.v.se.(; Centre Manufaelnriiin Co., I!) A. R. 12,-,. 
 
 Injunction to Restrain Proceedings in 
 Quebec Court.]- Injunctions grantc.l In vl 
 strain proceedings in a -Montreal Courtagainst a 
 bank in process of being woun,l uj. in Ontario 
 under the )omiinoi. Winding-up Act, and abo 
 
 sucliproccediiigsagainsttlieliqui,latov.s,.,p,,oint<,l 
 111 the winding-up lor things done in their ojiicial 
 capacity, and from attacking the validity of 
 heir appoininent R Ont.al Hank, UaJrv. 
 C<^ntr(it Jhn/:,^{)0. li, '214. 
 
 Ma,sterinOr&ina,ry~FrandHl,nl Prefer, no-. I 
 — In the coui.se of a reference made to the Ma«' 
 ter in Ordinary in wiiidiii--up proceedincs 
 "'Hi- 1 . S. a ch. 12!», sec.^77:snlsi^n 
 nmended by o2 ^ ict. ch, .'{2, .sec 20 (!) ) ■-, d'li , 
 was made for rent, and the liquidator contemln'i 
 that the conveyance under which the claimant 
 assumed to be owner of the demised premi.s.s 
 
 was afraudulent preference, and further that the 
 alleged lease was never executed • - 
 
 Held, that the Master had no jurisdiction to 
 
 fc 1 iT'" w' '^""'^■"fi"" ; "nd the iiqui- 
 dator shmil.l be left to proceed under R. s'c 
 eh 120. sec. .Jl by way of action. In r: iuii 
 Lifho./rap/nny Co., Farqnhar'^ ('!„im, 22 0. 
 
 ;si,«,-.-i"4', 14- 
 
156 
 
 iniisiliction to iiinkc 
 L'oiitiibutories coiilcl 
 liewiiig tliat it was 
 111 if tliero was no 
 ngs were rnram iicin 
 isdictioii, tlie Court 
 fr tlie liquidator or 
 its. 
 
 iiiristlictioii, in tlie 
 it .sJHHiliI not Iiavu 
 ijuidator. 
 
 dy to proceedings 
 -■itlier by virtue of 
 erwise. lie. Vosmo- 
 Cunmopolilan Cam- 
 
 Petition. ]_0n a 
 
 lie winiling-up pro- 
 R.S. Cell. 1 •_'!•, a.sli- 
 I liy tlie li(juidator 
 ^ redemption, tliu 
 ke the usual order 
 
 n with the Court 
 ■eted or summary 
 />--c.i' Land and 
 O. K. .3(i7. 
 
 iiiiiir;/ A/)j,/loif!on 
 of section l'3 of l;. 
 
 for sunnnai-y pro- 
 ing-up a company 
 icirs ill respect of 
 1 of trust, i.s not 
 settiiii,' aside as a 
 ary applii^ation ,]f 
 mds by the com- 
 
 where tlie lands 
 St, been conveyed 
 r's wife. 
 
 I considered. /« 
 Co., 10 A. R. 12.-.. 
 
 Proceedings in 
 
 grail teil to re- 
 al Court against a 
 "il lip ill Ontario, 
 ;ip Act, and al.so 
 idatorsappointed 
 lie in their oiticiid 
 
 the validity of 
 ' /kuik, liaxtir y. 
 
 ii/eii/ Prrfordic: | 
 iiadu to thi! .Mas 
 ■up ))rocecdiijgs 
 7, siili-sec. 2, as 
 ; 2()(D.),aelai„, 
 idatorcoiitendtii 
 ieli the claimant 
 jiniscil pr(!iiiisis 
 1 further tiiat the 
 1:- 
 
 3 .jurisdiction to 
 
 ; and tlie liijiii- 
 
 nnder R. .s. r;, 
 
 ion. Ill r J,, , 
 
 I diiim, 22 O. 
 
 'llfi'.lif Tmtixfi'r. ] 
 otlier ofiieei' of 
 
 157 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 the Court, to whom its powers ma,- be <lele 
 gated, is not a eoinpetent tribunarto decide 
 <,uestions of fraudulent tran.s'er arising in tlie 
 ^.-oiirse of a reference in winding-up proceedings, 
 under the Dominion Winding-up Act and 
 amenJing Acts. //,„,, v. Ontan.} lir^rL , 
 n-fni^Mtatwn ro., Mo/.o,>, lianh Cluhn, '-'5 O. 
 
 master- 1 ,isumurr AH 0/ Ontnno.]~A Mas- 
 ter of tlie High Court has no author tv, under 
 
 Tt ^lS>^7nV^ /'"■ ^":'"'-''"^'^ <V,r,;o'ration 
 Act, )S!)2, to direct security to be given by an 
 
 othcerof a company being wound ui^ in place o 
 
 an msuftcient security already gilen l!y ,s„e 
 
 ofhcer .Secfon „4, snb-.sections .".'and 7, nier d- 
 
 provKle for the giving of security as interim 
 
 receiver, wh.eh may be made a condition 
 
 retention in that ofHce, but .lefanlt in giving 
 
 wlrcli caiiiio be punished l,y inip,.i.sonmc,it f , r 
 
 contempt. J{. no,„„n,„> Pron,l.;,t, Henu-ouJ 
 
 will hmlowmtitt A'<s„cu,tio„, 24 (). i;. 410. 
 
 Master -/«,v„m»c,> Art nf 0/,/«Wo.]- Tlie 
 Master has power under that Act to sett e 
 schedules o credito,s, wliieli implies pow ' ■ 
 to adjudicate upon the claims of'olK.iils .ff 
 
 fhevTl'l'^' '■ '"""'"■' *" ■■'^^•'-■■■tain whether 
 thej shall appear as creditors in the scliclules 
 but he cannot a.ljudieat.. upon the n-us ion' 
 
 h t 1'" "^ *'""' "«'" *" ^■'^'■'" "« ^■'■'•■'litors. 
 1 has also pouer to settle schedules of coii- 
 tnhutor.es but cannot adju.licate upon the 
 qi^'stion whether olK.ials of the company have 
 hccM gui ty of sucli a breach of duty as to , he 
 then, liable for any lo... by ,ea.so„ tjiereof. Such 
 n alters can on y be determined by action. J l 
 J)o,nw.,on Prondm', ll.;i,vokut, and EndoiJent 
 
 158 
 
 tion 111 the Court under .special and urk-ent 
 
 nirs^rnot.^^'"""^^ ''^y ^'-" ^-- ^'-"t 
 
 A sale by tender (not saying that the pronertv 
 nil be sold to the highest fiidder) is' a mere 
 a tompt to ascertain whether an .'tier ca be 
 
 Si;nr;:aS^."^'''^*'''"^^"-'''-«"-^« 
 
 In winding-up proceedings of a joint stock 
 
 :;;';'r;7't ■""'"" ""■'." -'^''"^-i >"■■ the n.,. 
 
 chase of tne company's property, to be reee ved 
 
 I'y a certain time when the sale was to be"' er 
 
 emptonh- closed." At the time tixed '^ne 
 
 tender only had been received, ami the eferee 
 
 enlarged the time for the arrival o a I'n 
 
 liuh was ate. Tv,-., more ten.lers were 
 
 eceived by tluit train ; one on behalf of the 
 
 argest benet,ci,ary nn.ler the mortgage to e,^ 
 
 force which the sale was being heldranl tie 
 
 other by a stranger, which wa.s'a litt e 1 Hier 
 
 han that ol the beneficiary. The latte tlie,^ 
 
 b.V his agent handed in a niucli liigl e fn c'r 
 
 last ten.ler t. be given to il„, other tenderers 
 
 ami on a sub.se.pient .lay accepte.l t lie ast 
 
 which w.as the highest ten.ler :- ^ 
 
 Hehl, that lie was justiHe.l in so .loin''. /?« 
 
 Minority- /.,Vy»/.A,/or'.v.-1/v»v.,nn_There is 
 .op..ver given Ly, the Wiitling-ii Act? l" 
 li.l.'nt '■ *". "'""'C'e a c.mipromise upon 
 
 dis.sentient minorities of eie.litor.s ^ 
 
 'Sf/«Wfi, a Ihjuidator cannot l,e compellcl to 
 ^oiisent o a compromise, ami even when a con, 
 promise IS recommendeu by a li.jni.l afr. it n v 
 k fru,strated by an op,K,si,ig' n.inori v ^ 
 «!>«« UthoijrajiliDKj Co., 24 (>. p" 200. 
 
 Quebec Law. ]--There is nothing in section 5(5 
 o , L.f'?""'^'-''i^^ i'"''»-^'->t' Act'which al te s 
 
 oLcof a:h::i.r'' *'" "'^ '"•' '•"''''•''^■'''-■' *'- 
 
 vii)l'"J<>l''r'' "^ l''''nierty situate in the Pro- 
 >iii'eot Quebec, ami entered into there con- 
 
 fs" r''?i!r''; "" V"-' '"•'^"'^■^"''•y of the 
 w :a%,':^± ^""'' "' t '*' '''-^■i-'«'. Civil 
 
 vo ., A'.ic' 10112, or. sucl, in.s"lvency the rent 
 
 "; .^l"';^"'f •• 'V''' ''"•■•"■^- '"■ tlielease, 7:^! 
 ^" .s so a claim tor the wh.dc rent, taves 
 
 v^o. o ' Ui^'V "' "" '^'•■" '"''^' -> '^^ ■^'' - 
 S, b, m'*^^ eompany. allowe.l to the 
 
 on iiion i'T'^'f '"" !;;"-■-'■"«• <""ler the 
 < oiuinion Act Ju re llartr and the Ontario 
 '■^ri.rt,, and, Trumpurtntion Co., 22 U. I!, na 
 
 ■cluc.ary relations to the cmpany .,r its el li^ 
 hoi, ers a,-e at an end an.l a sal. to the n In 1^« 
 liquidator of the company is va Id /, // 
 National Bank v. J/,A " 04 ,S C l! jjs "'" 
 
 8. !^a!<'. of A suets. 
 
 ^'-fut^y "'? Court.] -The wor.Is - per- 
 ..nptoiy or "peremptorily" do not ahvaj-s 
 
 9. So/iri/or. 
 Creditors' Solicitor. ]-Up„ii a reference for 
 
 a.rected ami th it their co,,ts, as bet veei solid 
 
 Meld chat this class of ..nler ami liabilitv 
 
 was no favoured by the Courts, and iii 1. ''K 
 
 yohe.l and attendance thereunder h.ul only 
 
 hen there was any special .p.estion on whil'h 
 
 the appearance ot some .,ne to rep.x.sent the 
 
 except wUere coiitenn.oi-aneously aimi-ovnd ,f 
 hy the referee ; ami it was not or, e ra h1 
 to extend this at the close of tin/ '.n e, n'gfl ! 
 olitaining a certiHcate f,-,,,,, hi,,/ tiiat, ad e 
 been applied to from time to time, he ,' t 
 hju-e provided for other attendance's and ^ir- 
 
 Order of Meredith, C' .1 \-iri..d 
 Xick-elOo., 16 P. R. :vr, 
 
 A'e Drtmj 
 
 Liquidators Solloltor. ] -L, a procee.liiur f„r 
 hewimling-upof a company, a s/li.it.'r ft 
 
 tested by the li4Uidator,s, cannot obtain the 
 
 'i ! ; 
 
158 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 160 
 
 sanction of the Court to his acting also as solici- 
 tor for the lii]uirlatoia. Nor will the Court 
 sanction the appointment of a special solicitor 
 to act for tlie licpiidatDra in the matter of the 
 contested cluini. 'l"he winding-up must he 
 prosecuted by one disinterested solicitor, whose 
 services will not )je divided by the assertion of 
 antagonistic claims. Ite Charkti .Stark Co., 15 
 P. R. 471. 
 
 CONSTABLE. 
 
 COMPENSATION. 
 
 See Railways, X.— Trusts and Trustees, IV. 
 
 COMPOSITION AGREEMENT. 
 
 See Bankruptcy and Insolvenc-). 11. 
 
 CONDITIONAL FEE. 
 
 Hee Estate, 
 
 CONDITIONAL SALE. 
 
 ^>e ISale Of Goods. 
 
 CONDITIONS. 
 
 See Deed— Insurance. 
 
 CONFESSION OF JUDGMENT. 
 
 See Bankruptcy and Insolvency, I. 
 
 CONSIDERATION. 
 
 See Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes 
 I.— Bills of Sale— Contract. 
 
 CONSOLIDATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 See Practice, II. 
 
 CONSOLIDATION OF MORTGAGES. 
 
 See Mortgage, XVIII. 
 
 CONSPIRACY. 
 
 See Criminal Law, IV. 
 
 t Notice of Action.]— .SVc Scolt v. Helmrii, 2j () 
 U. 4i)0 ; and Kelhi v. Archihald, Ke/lu v. Bar- 
 to,,, '2(5 O. R. (iOS, 22 A. R. 522, anh: 8. 
 
 Tenure of Office.]— Under R. S. 0. ch. 1S4 
 sec. 445, tlie chief constable for the muniii' 
 pahty can only hold ofHce during the pleasure 
 of the council, and this altliougli he may have 
 been appointed for one year by a by-law passed 
 by the council. Ve,;,on v. Town of Smith'.-, 
 Falh, 21 O. U. 3.S1. 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 1. Generally, 100. 
 
 II. British North America Act, 1867. 
 
 1. Generally, 161. 
 
 2. Adulteration of Food, 161. 
 
 3. Atne-fsmeiit a,ul Taxes, 162. 
 
 4. Banking, 162. 
 
 5. Banb-uptcy and Windinij-up Acts, 102. 
 
 6. Courts and Judgeit, 163. 
 
 7. Criminal Lata and Procedwe, 164. 
 
 8. Elections, 165. 
 
 9. Interest, 165. 
 
 10. Intoxicating Liquors, 166. 
 
 11. Lands, 166. 
 
 12. Municipal Elections, 168. 
 
 13. Narigable Waters and Harbours, 108. 
 
 14. Pardoning Power, 169. 
 
 15. Provincial Subsidies, 170. 
 
 III. Manitoba Act, 1870— Manitoba Schools 
 
 Act, 1890, 171. 
 
 IV. Prerogative of the Crown— 5ee Crow.v, 
 
 I. Generally. 
 
 Case Stated Under 62 Vict. ch. 16, sec. 5 
 
 (O.).]— A case can be stated by a Justice of tlie 
 Peace under 52 Viet. ch. 15, *i;c. 5 (0.), for the 
 judgment of the Court of Appeal, only when 
 the constitutional validity of the statute under 
 which he has acted is called in question, and 
 not when the constitutio.ial validity of son - 
 other statute, such as a statute regulating m,^. 
 cedure or evidence, is collaterally attacki.l 
 Beijmay. Edwards, Regi,ta\. Lynch, 19 A. l;. 
 J 06. 
 
 Case Stated by Governor-ln-Councll.]- &e 
 
 In re County Courts of British Columbia, 21 S. C 
 R. 446, post 163. 
 
 Governor-ln-Council- 5^((;;(^o)-y Poiwr o/ 
 Apjn-ui-al by Governorin-Council— Position of r. 
 JlunstiroJ Ihi' Crown irUh Bi-sftic.tio the Ej<r- 
 
160 
 
 LE. 
 
 ?o» v.Belmr)!, 25 0. 
 'laltl, Killy V. Bar' 
 5-li, aniti 8. 
 
 r R. S. O. ch. 1S4. 
 le for the munici 
 luring the pleasure 
 lougli he may have 
 by a by-law passed 
 Town of Umit/i'i 
 
 .L LAW. 
 
 I Act, 1867. 
 
 , 161. 
 », 162. 
 
 lv\<l-vp Acts, U)'2. 
 
 )3. 
 
 •ocedure, 164. 
 
 166. 
 
 68. 
 
 I Harbours, IDS. 
 
 3. 
 
 70. 
 
 L.NiTOBA Schools 
 rt-N— See Ckow.v. 
 
 It. ch. 16, sec. 5 
 a- Justice of the 
 -'. 5 (O.), for the 
 leal, only when 
 !ie statute under 
 in question, nml 
 alidity of son- 
 regulating piv- 
 rally attaeluil. 
 Lynch, 19 A. 11. 
 
 •Council.]— itie 
 
 Imnbia, 21 S. ( ', 
 
 toi-y Power o/ 
 I — Position of r 
 ii.l to Ike Ej< I- 
 
 
 161 
 
 me of.nc/, Pow,r.-i-ny the sixth seetion of the 
 Liquor Lieense Act, 188.% the Hoards of License 
 Comn..s.s.oners for the various license districH 
 in the ])onnn,r,n, were empowered to Hx the 
 salaries of hcenso in.spcetoVs, subject to the 
 approval of tlie (iovernor-in-Council :_ 
 Held, that such a],proval could „ot be civen 
 
 .Supreme Court, 20 S. C R. 420. ^' ^^' 
 
 Lleutenant-Governor-/,'cp,-e,,^nto<av of the 
 
 ant.(,overnor of a Province is as much tl e r 
 ureaentiith'f. nf H,.„ ai..: ,.,""'-''""- '^« 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 162 
 
 Je^...ninion lSitS-'4;;;,:V^C^'^ 
 
 presentativeof Her Majesty the Queen for 
 all purposes of provincial Oovernmeni as the 
 Governor-( eneral hiniself is for all purposes of 
 the Dominion (iovernment. Att,nLyTeZral 
 c( rI'S' ''■ ^'"°'"'^-''""'-«' o/Ontaiior'SS. 
 
 AH^iA^'^^e^'P ^- "^^^'^^ ^orth 
 
 Territorial Rl«hts--r.V.„, Seal~E.:che,uer 
 h .r7h to !?"• '" '''^''!'"f *'"> Dominion, 
 
 ^^d^ fl^ift^ri'^ ': ^Sl-t-j I 0. of the K K I'Act. . 
 
 • ■ — Legal . News 186. overruled 
 
 '"'" I'l.iKing use ot a provinei'il "' "' ^"^ 
 
 grant ma way to eml,arrass the Dominio ! Legal Xc, 
 
 the exeicise of its territorial rights. TheXhts ' ^^- ^^- '' 
 of the Crown territorial or prerogative' are to ^''**'«« v. 
 
 vested the r*" f ' '"■''y '^'^>' '" ^'-'"ch is 
 
 vested the benehcial interest therein The 
 Parliament of Canada has the ri.d.t to en ct 
 that all actions and suits of a civil natuie li 
 
 right of the Dominion, i.s plaintiff or petit oner 
 22 S. C.' K.' 553. '""'"• ^ «""'" ^- ^'^^ "^^^n. 
 
 .3. Assemnent and Taxes. 
 
 •Ta.Kat\on-Pe„allf,/or Not Payim, Taxes 1- 
 The .Municipal Act ,;f Jlanitoba provi, ks t'l ,t 
 persons raying taxes before Decl inbe Is io 
 
 be payable at par ; and after March 1st tt,, 
 cent o^the original amount of tlie'tix shal/h:: 
 
 bew'owvn'ff "?' J"''«'"'^'" "f the Couit 
 
 ■■*■ Jioss v. Ti/rranri, ■> 
 I.yiieh V. CaiKK/a 
 
 ■avd Co., South' Duji^rin 
 Barber, 19 S. C. R. 204. 
 
 MuriUn, 
 
 Banking. 
 
 If. British Noktu Amekica Act, 1867. 
 1. Oenerally. 
 
 Warehouse Receipts. ] — The ISmk Ant ;» 
 
 liori:,"'" r' "" '^"■""''"" I'^'Hi- e t t" 
 
 ■u_ uiL legitimate Ijusiness of a bank,..- ..r>f 
 withstanding that the exercise of ch po^\: 
 interferes with property and ci^■il rigl s f,r he 
 I rovince and confers upon a ba.di ,riv I et 
 
 recognize. The legislation of the Domini<.n 
 
 and legislative, uiibbe T,rr,„„.%^.. „., i J' -'-"■•'ve ^j^ („,,_._ '^r -r, ""''/ ^- .V''/'''^- •' App. C;,s, 
 
 ^n,i 1, -1 ;■ •-■'1"-"''' "' ""^ powers, executive 
 
 st^Se'r'i.rH''-'P^°P"'>-. •■''"' '-•--" 
 r^.,l^,t n " """" ''espectively. In par 
 
 t icukr, all property and revenues reserved to 
 
 I £"Mai::tv^ '''^""'" ?°" T' '-« -•'-' -^ 
 
 tine, TJ ^^y '« sovereign head of each Pro- 
 lisJ.J-A. C. 4.3/. *e the next case. 
 
 .■ac'irp,ri,?'' ^^e^l'^^f •]-!■''« Government of 
 nVh„"'^''"^.V '■""»"''' represents the Queen 
 er !»"!•""" ?^ '^"' prerogative as to all mat 
 
 ters attecting the rights of the Province T/f, 
 
 I'lT" V ^'/""^ ''■^^°'" ^'otia, use R 
 
 2 'S^ij'TV- '^-^"''^a.^'<^r;z 
 
 aaa Lihj4J A. C . .^1, atiirming .V. r., 19 A 7; 1 
 
 5. Bankruptcy and Wimlvuj-iip Ads. 
 
 mmmm 
 
 2. Adidteratlon of Food. 
 
 i ! 
 
168 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 tub mm. In re A.mpnmeiil.1 (ml /'riferi-iirejt 
 Act, and overruling' f ^uo?j nai(k v. Si'rit/,, 21 
 
 Right of L-egiBlatioti—IidnkiixiniH/ f,irnri,o. 
 ratio,, oj l{„„l:s—lia„bui,tni ai,d liiml,-t„,;,.\~- 
 In ISOb thu Mank of Upper Canada liecanit- insol- 
 vent and asnigned all its iiroiicrty and assets to 
 trustees. Hy 'M Viet. eh. 17, the'DoniiiMon Par- 
 liament nieorporated said triistee.s giviii.r tliem 
 aullionty to carry on the hu-tiness ot the hank so 
 if .JO ,^5'-'** "'■^'"**'i""y for wiiKlinu-,,), the same. 
 Jiy .« \ let. eh. 40, ni: the property <.f the bank 
 vested lu the trustees was transferred to the 
 i'ommion ( ;.,vernnient who became seized of all 
 tlie powers of the trustees :— 
 
 Held, allirmin.,' the judgment of the Court of 
 •^Pl'';'';.'' -■^- '^- ■^•i\,'<nh„om.. l!„,i,ia v. Vo„„tu 
 <;/ I .//,«,,/„«, that these Acts were bilra ,-m, 
 the l.>oNiinion Parliament. 
 
 Per Kitciiie, C.J.— That the letrislativo auth- 
 ority of Parliament over "bankin^iand tiie incor- 
 poration of banks " and over " liankrui.tey and 
 insolvency emi.owered it to pass t he said Acts, 
 t er .Strong, Tasehereau ami Patterson, .1.1.— 
 llie authority to pass the said Acts cannot be 
 reterred to the legislative jurisdielion of Par- 
 liament " over banking and the incorporation of 
 oanks l,ut to that over " b.uikniptcy and 
 insolvency^ „uly. ij,u,-t v. Th, lj„tt„, 19 S. 0. 
 ii. «J 10, 
 
 IM 
 
 I baving. by force of the provincial law regulat- 
 
 I iiig the constitution and organization of Countv 
 
 I Courts, jurisdiction in the particular locality in 
 
 which he may hold a "speedy trial." The 
 
 statute would not authorize a County Court 
 
 .Imlge to h,,l,l a "speedy trial" beyond the 
 
 ilimita of his territorial juri.idietion without 
 
 [ authority from the provincial legislature so to 
 
 Hel.l, per Tasehereau, J.-lt is doubtful if 
 I'arliainent had powt^r to j.ass those sections of 
 the Act .)4 k r,r, Vict. ch. :>,-,. which empower 
 the (.overnor-(.enural in Council to refer certain 
 nmtters to this Court for an oi)iiiion. In re 
 tuH„t,j Court.i of Urituh Co/iimhia, '21 S. C. R 
 [ 44(). 
 
 ! Insurance Act of Ontario— /'oicn-.s of Mcu- 
 I ter.i- 1 he Ontario Legislature has power'to eon- 
 j ter upon the .Master the powers given by " 'J'he 
 I Jnsuranee Corporations Act of 18<)2 " J,',' Do 
 
 m„„u,i I'rovkieM, lhi,.-,'„knl, ami Lmlowmml 
 
 A.'ixocKiliini, 2.) O. U. (il9. 
 
 WincUnff-up Act- Forck/n Co,-/,,„;,/ion.^.-]- 
 Sect.un ;{ of "The Winding-up Act" R. S C 
 cii. I2i), which provides that the Act applies to 
 • . . incorporated trading companies doing 
 business in Canada wheresoever incorporated is 
 t,U,-a ,;,v, the Parliament of Canada. Allen 
 V. "'''"^oii 1,1 re. Scotliih Ca„a,lia,i Ashe.',to>* 
 Cy., IS S. C. l\. (167. 
 
 6. Courts and Jiuhjeii. 
 
 Administration of Justice -.?//£, Wy T,kd.'< 
 ./IcV. J- J he power given to the provhicial (;ov- 
 ernments by the B. N. A. Act, sec. 9l', sub-sec. 
 14, to legislate regarding the constitution, main- 
 tenance and organization of |jrovineial Courts 
 inc udes the power to detine the jurisdiction of 
 such Courts territorially as \\ell as in other 
 resi)ects, and also to .lehne the juri.sdiction of 
 tlie .ludges who constitute such Courts 
 r- i''?,^';''^'',°f *'"-' •'■■gi'l'iturc of British Columbia, 
 \. S. 15.C. ch. 2,), sec. 14, authorizing any County , 
 Court .Judge to act as such in certain cases in a I 
 .listrict other than that for which he is appoiut- 
 ed, and 5.} \ let. ch. S, sec. 9, which provides! 
 tli.'.t until a County Court .Judge of Kooteuay is I 
 appointed the Judge of the County Court of ' 
 Vale shall act as and perform the duties of the 
 County Court Judge of Kooteuay, are hUra ,-ires 
 " ■ A ?,""i.l«^SisJ'iture under the above section 
 ot the B. Js. A. Act. 
 
 The Speedy Trials Act, 51 Vict. cli. 47 (D ) 
 IS not a statute conferring jurisdiction but is an 
 exercise of the power of Parliament to regulate 
 criminal procedure. ^ 
 
 BythisActjuiisdictionisgivento "anyJudce 
 of a County Court," to try certain criminal 
 
 oiicneea ■ 
 
 Held, that the expression " any Judge of a 
 County Court, in smch Act, means any Judge 
 
 7. Criitihial Law and Proretlnre. 
 
 j Assault and Battery- /Ja ,■ of (_ 'irU llemedy. ^ 
 
 -Sections |S(i,-,^ and hOd „f the' Criminal Co(le 
 
 I 1S9_', whereby it i.s enacted that a person who 
 
 , has ob amed a cerliticate of tlie justice who 
 
 [tried the case, that a cliarge against him of 
 
 j assault and iMttery has been (lisnii..sed, or who 
 
 I lias paid the penalty or sutlercd the imprison- 
 
 ment awarded shall be released from all further 
 
 proceedings, civil or erimimd, for the same 
 
 cause, -.n'ti intra vi,;x the Dominion Parliament. 
 
 I lick V. Broibtii, 26 o. K. 423. 
 
 ■BiBa.ray-Ojh„ce Committed in Fo,-ei,in 
 Co,/«/,-y.]_ Conviction for bigamy (niaslied 
 where the second marri.ige took idace in a 
 foreign country, and there was evidence that 
 the defendant, who was a British subject 
 resident in Canada, left there with the intent t(; 
 commit the olleiice. 
 
 The provisions of section 275 of the Criminal 
 
 Code making such a marriage an oirence arc 
 
 utt,-a virex the J'arliameut of ( 'anada 
 
 ■ iiw'""'?,'l„Vi i^f(»-"<'!t-Ce„e,-at fo,- Xew South 
 
 I nA.., [ISUl] A C. 455. followed. J{e^i„a v. 
 
 Ploicman, 25 O. R. 056. 
 
 I Evidence.]— Notwithstanding the reserva- 
 { tiou of criminal procedure to the Domini.m 
 I 1 arliament m sub-section 27 of section 91 „f 
 I the ' BritLsh North America Act," a provincial 
 legislature has power to regulate and provide 
 tor the course of trial and adjudication of 
 oliences against its lawful enactments, in this 
 ca.se a breach of "The Lirpior License Act," 
 even though such offences may be termed 
 crimes ; and therefore to regulate the givini; of 
 evidence by defen.lants in such cases, which 
 they have done by R. S. O. ch. 61, sec. 9, pro- 
 viding that where the proceeding is a crime 
 under the provincial law, the defendant is 
 neither a competent nor compellable witness 
 Jiegma v. liUtte, 21 O. R. 605. 
 
 Forgery.J-Procedure in criminal matters, 
 which by the B. N. A. Act, sec. 91, sub-seo. 27 
 is assigned exclusively to the Parliament of 
 
164 
 
 ineinl law regulut- 
 niziitiou of t'ounty 
 rticiiliir locality in 
 •eily triiil." The 
 a f'oiiiity Court 
 rial" liuyoiid the 
 ■isdiution without 
 1 It'gislaturu ho to 
 
 -It IS doubtful if 
 i those sections of 
 ), whicli empower 
 cil to refer ceitain 
 1 oiiiiiion. Ill re 
 inhiu, 21 S. C. R. 
 
 — /'oKvr.H- of MoH- 
 has jjower to con- 
 's f,'iveii ))y " The 
 f l.S<)-.>." Jl,. Do- 
 ami Endowment 
 
 Procedure. 
 
 ofCinl Ih'mcdii. ] 
 e Ciiminal Code, 
 at a person wlio 
 tlie justice wlio 
 i against liiin of 
 isnii.ssed, or who 
 <i the iniprison- 
 from all further 
 I _ for the same 
 lion Parliament. 
 
 d ill Foriii/it 
 iyaniy <juashed 
 )ok place in a 
 < evidence that 
 iritish subject, 
 ith the intent to 
 
 ■jf the Criminal 
 an olFence are 
 11 ad a. 
 
 for Xi'w SottlK 
 'ed. Jhijiiia v. 
 
 J the reserva- 
 the Dominion 
 f section iU of 
 t," a provincial 
 tc and provide 
 rdjudication of 
 tments, in this 
 License Act," 
 ly be termed 
 e tile giving of 
 1 cases, which 
 31, sec. 9, pro- 
 ig is a crime 
 defendant is 
 lable witness. 
 
 linal matters, 
 1, sub-sec. 27, 
 'arliament of 
 
 165 
 
 Canada, includes the trial and punishment of 
 the odender ; and therefore section 2 of .-,;) Vict 
 oh IS ((>.), winch authorise. p„lie. ma.dstratcs 
 to try a„.> .nv.ct persons charge.l witl^ forgery 
 
 Forgery. 1 -The power granted by the British 
 North .Vinerica Act, sec. >)>, sub sec. 14, to the 
 proviacal legislatures to constitute Courts of 
 o.vd and ot criminal jurisdiction, necessarily 
 in Mil. s the power of giving jurisdiction to 
 th,H. Courts, and impliedly includes the po.ver 
 «. .•nlargmg. aUeiing amending, and diminish' 
 Jng the jurisdiction of such Courts 
 
 The .\et 5:j Vict. ch. IS, sec. ■> (().), so far as 
 •''f';':;'7'!f.'''''f'j« Courts of .Jencrai .Sess io 
 of the Peace sha 1 have jurisdiction to try any 
 person for any o fence under .any of tlie pro vis 
 imn of sections -S to. SI of It. ,S. C ch 1( 5 a^, 
 Ac; respecting forgery, is within the pow.n's o 
 the Legislature of Ontario, as boin.' in rel tim 
 to the constitution of a provnichd "our 
 criminal jurisdiction, and does not in any wav 
 trcidi upon the exclusive authority gi^vu to 
 the Par lament of Canada by sectior-.l, u 
 section 2.. to mill.. I,,.... ;.. _i,i! ■.■■»u]i 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 168 
 
 !»I of the 15. N. A. Act. /?o., v. T„rmnr. 2 
 Legd New.s l.S.i, overruled. /,„..A y.'^ZX^ 
 
 OMi/Liv. Jiiirhrr, 10. S. C. R. 204. '""'<*«>*. 
 
 10. I atoxkatiiiij Li(/iiorii. 
 
 : I „^*''^.?^.^'°«"3e Act-/.oort/0/,/.'o«. ]-.Section 
 
 Sof,,,{\,ot. eh. oli(0.), ,uio«M.,g, under, 'r 
 
 ta a conditions, municipalities to pass y I awa 
 
 ict.iil. 1,1 n: t.ocal 0,jHoii Art, 18 A. R. oTl'. 
 
 to mike laws HI relatum to criminal 
 
 1.,.- -,-•'.-.■■*,'"'•'"■"»'" relation to crim nal 
 
 Provincial Penal Legislation. J -The local 
 
 egidatures have the right and power to 
 
 imi-ose punishments by Hue and imprison nent 
 
 enact. H. N A. Act, sec. 92, sub-sec. 15. A/- 
 
 8. Election/:. 
 
 Electoral Franchise Act.] -There is no 
 jurudictioii intheHighCourt of Justice oi^n^a 
 
 p.l Inm to.- b.tam from " i)eriorming any dutv 
 under the Klectoial Frairdiise Act '• ^ ^ 
 
 1 lie legislation in regard to such matters does 
 no„ trench upon, nor is the ijuestioii one of 
 "Ijroperty and civil rights in the Province " 
 
 U". .Sunn ,:,..■, and D.ilton, 12 O. R -,<)-. nn^ 
 
 9. Iii/creil. 
 
 Taxation ~P,„nlt:,j),r not Pmjinn Taxo, 1- 
 'le -Municipal Act of -Manitoba pro vi,U.T that 
 P.irsnus paying taxes bef.,re iJeJembe 1st in 
 C.CK.S, and December .Slst in rural i , i idl 
 
 ^aitn H;^""T^'^V' P!^ ^'^"*- '''«-'.i:;V that 
 
 roiu that date until March 1st the taxes shall be 
 
 P^'yahle at par; and after .March Is o'er 
 
 cent., ni^he original amount of tlie tax shal/b^ 
 
 :r-:'t^:mS";f:;:'5v;rf'"-^' 
 
 '-t •interest ' within the inclining of sectioii i 
 
 Liquor License Act. ]-.Secti,jn.-,l (2) of the 
 Li<iuor License Act, R. .S () ,.1, Ki. , ,° 
 
 -luircsl.rewersl,ccnsc,lbyt|Lcov;'^;,,So{ 
 Oanula to take out licenses under tl a Ac t 
 M,n -7,v.v provincial legislation. ' ' 
 
 inetlect overruled by inore recent V ''■' '''"", 
 i the .liniieial Committ^.e '""' '•'^"'«'"n« of 
 
 Judgment of the County .ruilfc of W ir 
 ton reversed. lie.ina y. /lUi^rlf ^^f'^S] 
 
 t^^f .: iic!.!;ii£r;::«pi:r^- ;:-7.;'S- 
 
 lVl>'ting the sale of spirituous li,,u, ', " ; ^^ 
 
 wre. the Ontario Legislature, as is Is, sec on 
 
 of o4 \ ict. ch. 40 (5.), which cxpl i "tt 
 
 rctad. /u rf. Lo.;a 0/,t;,jn Art, Ijs a H -,7/ 
 approve,!. (Jwyiine an,l .Scb^cwick fl ",i;7 
 
 -t C>. l_. K. 140. ,^,g(; l|,y ii^.^j. ^g^g^ . 
 
 prohibition -Loca/ ()/,/, -on. ]~l. A nrovin..i.,l 
 egislatnre has not jurisdiction to pr h ili 'the 
 ale. either by wholesale or retail, 'wi the 
 
 if-rovmce, of spirituous, fcrni.nte.l, , , otlier 
 I intoxicating liquors. ^'^ 
 
 ! Per the Chief Justice ami Fournicr I 
 ; . hssentmg : A provincial legislature ^^n,:^: 
 ' ction to p,.„l,,Ut the sale' within the W 
 uce of such liquors by retail, but m,t Tv 
 wholesale; ami if any statutory .lelinition ff 
 he terms wholesale and retail be rcju 1 ?",is 
 H .on f„, «^„ , ,,„,p,,^^, .^ ^,^^^^^^ 11/the , min 
 um^i. l...ta,ning to the regulation of tra.le";;;::! 
 
 tu?,: ^ P'''":ir''',' "'-^'i*^' 't"re has not jurisilic- 
 t on to prohibit the manufacture of sn,=l li ,u r^ 
 
 • tLc 'i , r'' ■"{'«':^f' "" i"^'^ the Prov'incr 
 ■■i. Ihetbitario Legislature had mit inrisilic 
 t on to enact the ISth section of the Act -SVi, ? 
 ch .. (O.), as explained by .34 \-iit. e '-^ .m' 
 rue Chief Justice and Kournier, ,1., ,lissont ncr' 
 /''; re Promncial JnriHMon t> Pa. PrMo^ 
 Liquor Law., 24 S. C. R. 170. """««0'-y 
 
 11. LaiuU. 
 
 Foreshore of Harbour-r;,-a»< from Local 
 Oor.rnm..,t_.} -After the Rritish NoHh AmerS 
 Act came into torce the Government .if Nova 
 ■Sot^ia granted to ,S. a part of the fore nfre o? 
 the harbour of Sydney, C.B. S. conveye.l this 
 
 |i 
 
107 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 m 
 
 lot, through the I,'. F{. Coal Co., to the S. & I,. 
 
 I oiil <,o. S, 1, living (li(Ml, hk widow brought nn 
 uctioii forihrncr in Hivi.l l„t to which tiie con' 
 puny liloiulud thiit the ;;iant to S. wuM void, t) u 
 property liciiig visttd in the dominion (iovt" i- 
 ment : — 
 
 Hel.I, Hfliiining tho judgnifnt of tho Court 
 helow, StionK mid Cwyiino, .IJ., dissiiitiiiL', 
 that tlie idiiipany having ohtniiied title to tho 
 property from S., they were estoiiped from Hav- 
 ing thi.t the title of M. was defe. live. 
 
 Per StronjL' and ( ; wynne, ,),]. , disBentint'. The 
 conveyance by S. to the C. 15. Coal Co. w.i.m an 
 innocent conveyance by which .S. hiniNelf woidd 
 not have been estopped, and as estoppel must 
 bo niutnal lii.s L'lantee.H would not. There were \ 
 no recitals in the deed that would estoi) them | 
 and e.stoppel could not be created by the cov- ' 
 enantH. i 
 
 After the conveyance to tho defendant com- | 
 pauy an Act wn.s | as.sed by the Legislature of 
 JVova.Votni rati!;,;ng and conhruiing the title 
 ot tbe defendant company to all property of the 
 I., n. Coal Co. : — 
 
 Held, that it' the legislature could by statute 
 aliect the title to this property which was vested 
 in the .'>oniinioii (Jovernment. it had not done 
 .so by this Act in v liich the Crown is not 
 e.\pressly named. Abireover the statute should 
 have lieen pleaded by the defendants, Sydmy 
 nvif^ LowHhin-ii Coal mid 1!. W. Co. v. Sirorrl, 
 21 S. C Iv. 15-. 
 
 168 
 
 109 
 
 or without ('onipen- 
 
 I within the I'rovince with 
 satiori. 
 
 Laml whirl, had been clcdicated bv itn owner 
 
 b r a public burying ground was used f„i many 
 
 ,y..vr8 for such [.urpose. The municipalitv i,, 
 
 I winch the ground was situate procuicd an' Act 
 
 I of the Ontario Legislature authorizing the elos. 
 
 ingot I he burial ground, and the removal of th,- 
 
 •lead, thereattcr vesting the. land in the c crpora- 
 
 lion; the Act providing for compensation |„r 
 
 ill! parties likely to l,e affected bv the can v iiw 
 
 on ot Its provisicjns, and for payment of" the 
 
 value of the hit to the dedicator or those claim. 
 
 iiig under him to be Mxed by arbitiaticm :— 
 
 Held that the Act was within the c'ompetcn,!. 
 o the legislature. N^ McDowell itwi Toirn of 
 I'ohiier.-'tou, 22 O. R. 583. 
 
 12. Mnnlciiml Election. 
 
 . Master in Chambers. ]-Held, by the IHvi. 
 
 sional Court, foUowing the principh,. of tlit 
 decision ill II.- Wilson v. il/.-6'»m, 2 <). li. lis 
 that the provincial legislature had power tc') 
 invest the Master with authority to try con 
 tioverted municipal election cases. Itaiinn v 
 Jiirkdt, 21 O. K. 162. 
 
 Lands In Railway Belt In British Colum- 
 bia.]-- On 10th Sci.tcmbcT, ISSa ]). ,t „/. cb- 
 if'.'!'. , ";,'^,«''t''i'-'"t'' "f pre-emption under the 
 British (olunibia Land Act, 1S7^^, and Land 
 Ameiic nieiit Ac^t, 1879, of (i40 acres of uosur 
 veyed lands within the 20mile belt south of the 
 C. 1 . H., reserved on the 29th November, 1SS3 
 under an agreement between the two Govtrn- 
 
 d''.V.*W. , ' '^""''"'"" '"'"' "f f'e I'rovince of 
 llritish Columbia, and which was ratilied by 47 
 Viet. ch. 14 (RC). On 29tli August, IcS.S.-,, this 
 certihcatc was cancelled, and on the same clay 
 a like certificate was issued to respondents, and 
 on the .jlst July, 18S9, letters patent under the 
 Great Seal of liritish Columbia were issued to 
 respondents. By the agreement ratified by 47 
 Vict, c 1. IMD.) it was also agreed that three 
 and a half million additional acres in Peace 
 Kiver District should be conveyed to the Do- 
 minion (iovernment in satisfaction of the right 
 of the Dominion under tho terms of union to 
 have made good to it, from public lands con- 
 tiguous to the railway belt, the cjuantity of land 
 that might at the date of the conveyance be 
 held under pre-emptioi. right or bv Crown grant 
 On an iiitormation by the Attoiney-Generai 
 tor Canada to recover possession of the 640 
 acres : — 
 
 Heltl, affirming the judgment of the Exchequer 
 Court (3 tx. C. R. 293), that the land in ques- 
 tion was exempt from the statutory conveyance 
 to the Dominion (iovernment, and that upon 
 the pre-emption right granted to D. et al. being 
 subsequently abandoned or cancelled, the lantl 
 became the property of the Crown in right of 
 the Province, and not in right of tho Dondnion. 
 JAe Qunn v. Dtmtrs, 22 S. C. R. 482. 
 
 l;i. Xaviijdhlii Waters and IJarhoiD-y. 
 
 Foreshore of Harbour. ] -The Dominin,, 
 statute,^ I \ let. ch. 1, sec. IS, gave the ( anadiau 
 1 acihc Railway Company the right to take and 
 use the land l,elow high water mark in any 
 stieam, lake, etc., so far as recjuired Icrlhe imi ■ 
 posesof theraihiay :— 
 
 Held, that the right of the publij to have 
 access to a harbour, the foreshore of which had 
 been taken by the company under this Act, wa.i 
 subordinate to the rights given to the company 
 thereby, and the latter could prevent by injui,, - 
 tion an interference with the use of the fore- 
 shore so taken. Cify of Vanrounr v. Canadian 
 Pdcijic n. ]]. Co., 23 S. C. R, 1. 
 
 Ownership of Lan^.J-So far as abstract 
 competence is concerned the Ontario Legislature 
 has power to change the ownership of land 
 
 Interference with Navigation.— An infor- 
 mation at the suit of the Attorney-General to 
 obtain an injunction to restrain defendant from 
 doing acts that interfere with and tend to 
 destroy the navigation of a public harbour is a 
 civil and not a criminal proceeding, and the- 
 Lxchcquer Court has concurrent original jui is- 
 diction over the same under ,50 51 Vict, ch ll' 
 soc. 17 (d). (2.) A grant from the Crown which 
 cierogates from a public right of navigation is to 
 that extent void unless the interference with 
 such navigation is authorized by Act ot I'arlia- 
 ment. (3.) The provincial legislatures since 
 the union of the Provinces cannot authorize suoli 
 an interference. (4.) Wherever by an Act of i 
 provincial legislature passed before the uni..ii 
 authority is given to the Crown to permi' aa 
 interference with the public right of navigation 
 such authority is exercisable by the Governoi' 
 General and not by the Lieutenant-Governor ct 
 the 1 rovince. The Queen v. Fuhtr, 2 Ex. ( '. R 
 36.5, 
 
 Water Lots Granted by Crown Prior to 
 
 Confederation.]- Claimants' titletoa water-lut 
 
 
 *W*!i^:^ 
 
168 
 
 r withdiit oonipuii. 
 
 Cftted by itN owiut 
 n'an usL-d for many 
 e iniiiiiii|iiility in 
 L' [ii-ociikmI un Act 
 thori/iiij; tlif clds. 
 the itiiioviil (if tlu! 
 iml ill tile 1 (Pipora- 
 (.'iiinpfii»iiti(iii for 
 !il liy till' c'arryin;^ 
 r iiayiiifiit vi' Utv 
 ■HI or tiiiLsi! claim- 
 irliitiation :— 
 in tlie cDnipetc'iice 
 well anil Town of 
 
 UioiM. 
 
 [.'Ill, l)y till! hivi- 
 I)i'iiici)ik' <if tlif 
 »"•''■ '-' (». 1!. IIM, 
 e liad povvec to 
 ii'ity to tvy con 
 ases. litijiwi, V. 
 
 I Ilitrlioiirx. 
 
 -Till' Dniiuiijiiii 
 avo till' ('aiiu<liiiii 
 ■iglil to tal;c ami 
 IT iiinik ill any 
 lireil loi-iliepur 
 
 ! l>iil)lij to iiavi> 
 ire of wliicli liml 
 !ei' this Act, wan 
 to tlu' company 
 event hy iiijunc. 
 use of the forc- 
 wer V. Canadian 
 1. 
 
 Ion, — An infoi- 
 nicy-(;ciieral to 
 ilcfcndant from 
 i_ and fend to 
 lie harbour is a 
 eding, and tlic 
 t original jiiiis- 
 51 Vict. ch. Ill, 
 le Crown ■which 
 navigation is to 
 ;erfcrciice witli 
 'Act of Farlia- 
 ;islature.s sinec 
 ; an.thorize snoh 
 by an Act of a 
 Fore the nniiiU 
 !i to permi'. an 
 t of navigation, 
 the Governor 
 ut-Governor of 
 er, 2 Ex. (;. K, 
 
 jwn Prior to 
 
 e to a. water-lot 
 
 169 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 at LevJs, in tho harbour of Quebec, wa.s based 
 on ft grant from the Lieutenant-Governor of 
 <,>iiel)ec prior to Confederation. The xraiit eon- 
 tamed, iiihralia, a piovi.sion that, upon K'iviii;/ 
 the grantee twelve months' notice, and tmyiii^ 
 liim a reasonable sum a.^ iii.lemiiity for improve 
 nieiits.tho Crown niiglit resume possession of 
 the said water-lot for the purpose of public 
 improvement : — 
 
 Held, tho [iroperty beiiij,' situated in a public 
 harbour, this power of resuming po.isession for 
 the purno.se of public improvement would be 
 exercisable by the Crmvn an represented by the 
 <;overnment of Canada. Holman v. <!rt>ni () 
 S C._ R. 707, referred to. i±) Inasmuch' as 
 the ( rown had not e.verci.sed this power, but 
 Iiid |iroceeded under tho expropiiatio. ' ui.ses 
 of Tile Government Railways Act, t! mtg 
 
 were entitled to recover the fair val „. lot 
 
 nt the date of e.xpropriation. 'I'hat \ how 
 
 ever, should be .letermiiKMl with rufereiieo to 
 the nature of the title. S„mxun v. Th. (Juen, 
 2 \'^\. C. R. ,30. ' 
 
 14. PiirddiiiiKj I'oircr. 
 
 PardonlnK Power of Lieutenant-Gover- 
 nor -/ /-on/fca/ I'l^Hitl lA-iUlatioii.] -'nw loc'd 
 legi.Mlature.s have the right and power to impose 
 puinshinents by hue and imprisonment as sanc- 
 tion f,.r laws which they have j.ower to enact 
 b. -N. A Act, sec !)2, sub-.sec. l,',. The Lieu- 
 tciiaiit-Govemor of a Province is as much the 
 representative of Her xMajesty the (,»iiecii for all 
 purposes of provincial government as the Gover- 
 nor-(;eneral himself is for all purposes o' the 
 Donimion Government. Inasmuch as tho Act 
 iil ^lct. eh. .5(0.), declares that in matters irUlmi 
 thrjurmUctiOH of the legii.lature of the Province 
 a 1 iiowers, etc., which were vested in or exercis- 
 able by the Governors or Lieuteiiant-(;overnors 
 o Me sovera Provinces before Confederation 
 sImH be vested in and excivi,s,ible by the Lieu- 
 t>.iiant-Governor of that Province, if there is m, ' 
 pi-occeding in dispute which li.is been attempted 
 to lie justified iiii<ler .-il Vict. cli. o (G ) it is 
 mipos.sible to say that the powers to ho. exercised 
 by th said Act by the LieutenantGovernor are 
 maoa,.t.tutional. y„,.,.,> .• Is the power of con ■ 
 ferring by legislnuon upon the representative of 
 the C rown, such as Colonial Governor, the pre- 
 rogative of pardoning in the Imperial Parliament 
 on y or, if not, in what legislature does it reside' 
 ., v7""*=,' J- 'l'f«^-"tiiig, w;ascf opinion that 
 •il .\ict. ch. 5(0.), IS ultm i-irtH the provincial 
 Ic^'i.slatura Attorneij.a.neml of Canada v. 
 Allvniey-General ot Ontario, 2,T S C 1! 4-)S 
 atliniiing ,S'. C. 19 A. K. .SI ; and 20 6, R -V 
 *' ■ the next two ea.ses. ' ' 
 
 170 
 
 vinee. or offences over which tho legisUtivo 
 authority of the Province extends, wl.ieh by 
 the terms of the Act, is iiiclu.led in the powora 
 above meiitione.l, doe.s not affect odenc.s against 
 enminal laws which are the subject of Dominion 
 egislatioii but ref..rs only to otleiiees within 
 the puHilictioii of the provincial legislature, 
 ami in th.it sense this enactment is intra mr/n 
 the provincial legislature. 
 
 ^^^•Iitdgnieiit of the Chancery Divisiim, 20 O. R. 
 '■-■., alhnned. Allornvii.llrniral (or Canada v 
 'lll<jrnf;/t,,'ii,'ralfor (Jnliirio, 1!) A. R ;il ,\W 
 tlie next case. " 
 
 Powersof Lieutenant-Governor. 1 -The Act 
 fil ,ct oh. 5 (U. ), which declares that in matter 
 within the jurisdiction of the legishiture of the 
 Province all powers, etc., which were vested in 
 orcxerciHable by the Governors or Lieutenant- 
 <.overiiors of the several Provinces before Con- 
 fe.lcration shall be vested in and exercisable by 
 the laeutenant-Governor of this Province is 
 -d„i and within the power of the provincial 
 Icgi.slature to enact. 
 
 ■■ Tlie power of commuting and remitting sen- 
 tences for offences against the laws of this Pro- 
 
 Lieutenant-Governor - /'rorincial. Penal 
 /.;;.7!.-/<i//o/i.J-Hehl, that the tbitario StatutcSl 
 \ let. ch,.). entitled " An Act respecting the exe- 
 cutive ailministration of the Laws of this Pro- 
 vince," whereby the jiardoning powers in certain 
 ease.s, and other executive functions, are vested 
 in the l.ieuteiiaiit-{;overnor, is intra rircs tho 
 provincial legislature. 
 
 An enactment couched in gener.d language, is 
 not to be held invalid by reason (if any ainbigiiitv 
 as to what is covered, arising therefrom. Lan- 
 guage, large or loose, is to be shaped by pre- 
 suming an intention to act with candour and 
 within the bounds of constitutional competence 
 Ihe intention of section !)2, sub-section I, of 
 the K.A. A. Act, IS to keep intact tho he.idship 
 ot the pr(|)vincial government, forming as ft 
 <lees the link of federal power; no essential 
 change is possible in the constitutional positioa 
 or functions of this chief ofhcer, but that does 
 not inhibit a statutory increase of duties cer- 
 mane to tho office. * 
 
 Though there may exist no direct or imme- 
 diately re))reseiitative coordinalion of Queen 
 and people m the Provincial Assembly, yet 
 sovereign power is a unity, and though (lis- 
 tributed in difTereiit channels and under different 
 names, it must be politically and organicallv 
 Identical throughout the Kmpirn. 
 
 The Act in (jiiestion may be classified as one 
 made in relation to the imposition of punish- 
 ment ; or from another point of approach, it 
 may be covered by the provisions for the " ad- 
 ministration of justice in the Province " :— 
 
 Held, also, that section 2 of the Act in (lues- 
 tKin properly construed, refers to offences under 
 existing laws enacted by the Province, or f>o 
 laws operating therein passed by the old Pro- 
 vince of Canada or (Jreat Britain, in regard to 
 matters which fall within those assigned to 
 provincial legislation by the H. N. A Act 
 Attorns ll-dtm' ml of Canada v. Altorneu-Oenerat 
 0/ Ontario, 20 O. R. 222. 
 
 15. Procincial Snhxidii.i. 
 
 Interest.] — Hy section 111 of the British 
 iNorth America Act Canada is made liable for 
 tlie debt of ca. h Province existing at tho union. 
 By section 112. Ontario and Quebec .are jointly 
 hable to Canada for any excess of the debt of the 
 ceo^- 'i?'^ "^ Canada at the time of the union over 
 ^02,o00,0((0 and chargeable with five percent 
 intc-iest thereon. Sections 114 and 115 make a 
 like provision for the debts of Nova Scotia and 
 JNew Brunswick exceeding eight and seven mil- 
 lions respectively, and by section 110, if the 
 debts of those Provinces should be less than said 
 
 .li'l 
 
^% 
 
 ^.\n^ 
 
 w 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 m 
 
 /, 
 
 {./ 
 
 
 
 &?^ 
 
 / 
 
 % 
 % 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 11.25 
 
 if li£ 12.0 
 
 ills 
 
 \± 11 1.6 
 
 % 
 
 <^ 
 
 /^ 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 V^ .1». 
 
 >" 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 V 
 
 "q 
 
 L17 
 
 "v^ 
 
 f^^,, ^\ Wr<\ 
 
 ». ^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 .1^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 4^^ 
 
7 
 
 
 t/u 
 
171 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 I ii 
 
 Hi; 
 
 •mounts they are entitled to receive, by half- 
 yearly pnynients in iulvanoe, interest nt the rate 
 of hve j)cr cent, on the (liHorenoe. Section 118 
 
 after providiiigfor annual piiynu-nts of tixed sums 
 to the several Provinces for hij port of their uov- 
 ernments, and an additional sum per head of the 
 population, enacts that "such grants shall be 
 'Ji settlen.ent t,f all future dinuinds on Canada 
 and shall be paul half-yearly in advance to each 
 Province, bnt the (iovernn.ent of Cansda shall 
 deduct from such grants, as against any Pro- 
 vince all sums chargeable as interest on the 
 pub.ic debt of that Province in axcecs of the 
 several amounts stipulated in this Act." The 
 debt of the Province of Canada at the union 
 exceeded the sum mentioned in section 112, and 
 on appeal from the award of ar:)itrators appoint- 
 ed to adjust tne accounts between the Dominion 
 and the Provinces of (Intario aiid Quebec :— 
 
 Held affirming said award, that the subsidy 
 of the 1 rovinces under section 118 vas payable 
 from the. 1st of July, 1SG7, but interest on the 
 excess of <kbt .vhoukl not bo deducted until 1st 
 January, ISCS ; that unless expressly provided 
 interest is never to 1 e paid before it accrues 
 
 *u^ 'b"'1- }lr *'""■''" '■'* "" express provision in 
 the Uritisli North America Act that interest 
 Bhall be deducted in advance on the excess of 
 debt under section 1 18. 
 
 By 36 Vict. ch. 30 (D.), passed in 187.-?, ii 
 was declared that the debt of the Pix.vince 
 ot Canada at the union was then ascertained 
 to be ^.3,00(>,t88.84, and that the subsi.lies 
 should thereafter be paid according to such 
 amount }iy 47 Vict. ch. 4, in 1,^84. it was 
 provided that the accounts between the Do- 
 million and the Provinces should be calculated 
 as If the last mentioned Acts had directed 
 that such increase should be allowed from the 
 coming ,n force of the P.ritish .\orth America i 
 c jj""} ',*.*'"" l""^''lf'l that the total amount , 
 pt the half-yearly payments which woidd have i 
 been made on account of such increase from ' 
 July 1st, 186/, to January 1st, 1873, with inter- 
 est at hve per cent, from the day on which it 
 woul.l lave been so paid to July 1st, 1S84, 
 should be deeineil capital owing to the respec- 
 tive 1 rovinces bearing interest, at Kvo per cent. 
 and payable after July 1st, 1884, as part of the 
 yearly subsidies :— 
 
 Held, affirming the said award, Gwynne, J 
 diBsenting, that the last mentioned Acts did not 
 authorize the Dominion to deduct interest in 
 advance from the sub.sidies payable to the Pro- 
 vinces half-yeaily but leaves such deduction as 
 It was under the British Js'orth America Act 
 ^onumopoj Camuto v. Provinces o/Outario mul 
 Qvehf.c, 24 S. C. K. 498. 
 
 172 
 
 the only deviation from, the terms of section 92 
 sub-section 1, of the B. N. A. Act, under which 
 the Is ew Brunswick Publi; .School Act was 
 upheld Prior . the union the Roman Cath.^- 
 lies ot JNIanitoba nad no schools established by 
 law but there were schools under the control 
 o he (.hurch for the education of Catholic 
 ciiildrtn. In IS'JOthe legislature o^' Manitob.i 
 passed an Act relating to schools, 53 Vict, ch 
 38, by winch the control of all matters relatintr 
 to education and schools was vested in a de 
 partment of education consisting of a committee 
 ot the Executive Council and advisory boards 
 established a , provi.led by the Act ; the schools 
 o. the Province were to be frte and non sec 
 tarian, and no religious exercises were to be had 
 except as prescril-ed by the advisory boai ds ; and 
 the ratepayers of each municipality \,tre to be 
 indiscriminately taxed for their support. A 
 Catholic ratepayer moved to quash a oy-law (,f 
 the city of ^^ minpeg f(,r collecting the^'^ school 
 rates, shewing by affidavit the position of 
 Caiolic schools before the union, the practice 
 of the Church to control and regulate the edu- 
 cation of Catholics and to hav. the doctrines of 
 ' ,M'!1'' C^'urel' taught in the schools, ai.d that 
 
 ht. '*. ^^''f r " T"''}"^ "°'^ ^^ ^"""'e^l to 
 attend the Public schools :— 
 
 Held, reversing the judj;ment of the Court 
 below, that this Act, 53 Vict. ch. 38, by .le- 
 piiying Catholics of the right to have their 
 
 ' children taught according to the rules of their 
 Church, and by compelling them to contribute, 
 to the support of schools to which they could 
 not conscientiously send their children, pre ni- 
 dicially aflected rights and privileges vith 
 resp ,ct to their schools which they had /m 
 
 iprwUce in the Province at the union, and was 
 xillm ivm- of the legislature of the Province 
 
 t:^J'T I!""""'' ^ ^"S^' <^'^'-^-) 273, distin". 
 guished. Barn/, v. Ct/y of Winnipty, 19 S. C. 
 i-t. .1/4. iScc the next case. 
 
 III. Manitoba Act, 1870— Maxitoha .Schools 
 AfT, 1890. 
 
 Denomlnatlcnal Schools. ]- The exclusive 
 right to make laws with respect to ed ication 
 in the Province of Manitoba is assigned to the 
 provincial legislature by the constitution of the 
 Provuices as a part of the Dominion, 33 Vict 
 oh. 3, with the restriction that nothing in any 
 such law "shall prejudicially aflect the rights ( 
 or privileges with respect to denominational I 
 schools, -« hich any class of persons had by law 
 or practice m the Province at the union " The 
 words "or practice" are an addition to, and 
 
 % i 
 
 Denominational Schools. ] — According to 
 the true constriiction of the Constitutionaf Act 
 ot Manitoba, 3.3 Vict. ch. 3 (D.), having regard 
 to the i-tate of things which existed inivlamtol a 
 at the date thereof, the legislature of the Prov- 
 nice did not exceed its powers in passing the 
 Pu' ic .School Act, 1890. 
 
 Section 22 of the Act of 1870 authorizes the 
 pioviiicial legislature, exclusively, to make 
 laws jn relation to education so as not to " me- 
 judicially afreet any right or privilege with 
 respect to denominational scho<,ls which any 
 class of persons have, by law or practice, in the 
 Province, at the union " :_ 
 [Held, that the Act of 1890, which abilished 
 the denominational system of public education 
 I established by law since the union, but which 
 I did not compel the attendance of any chil.l at a 
 I public svhool, or confer any advantage in 
 ; respect of attendance other than that of free 
 education, and at the same time left each den-, 
 mination free to es'iblieh, maintain, and con. 
 , duct Its own schools, did not contravene the 
 above proviso ; and that, accordingly, certain 
 oy-iaws of ,- municipal corporation which au- 
 tl.orized assessments under the Act were valid. 
 l^^l'l of Wwmper, V. BarrM, Cihi of Wmnmtn 
 V- hogan, [1>J92] A. C. 445. ^^ 
 
 Appeal to Governor-General In OouncU.l- 
 
 --se-tiou 22 of the Manitoba Act, 33 Vict. ch. 3 
 
173 
 
 CONTEMPT or COURT. 
 
 (D.), enacts: In and for thu lYovince, the said 
 legislature may exchisively make laws in rela- 
 tion to education, suliject and according to the 
 foUr.wiiig provisions: (1) Nothing in any such 
 law shall prejndicjully atfect any right or iiri- 
 vilege with respect to denoniin/itioiial schiiois 
 which any class of persons have by law or prac- 
 tice in the Province at the anion. "(•-') An appeal 
 shall lie to the <iovernor-(iener,d in ("ouncil 
 from any act or decision of the legislatu.o of 
 the Province, or of any provincial authoritv 
 affecting any rij;ht or privilege of tlie Protes- 
 tant or Reman Catholic niinoiity of the yneen's 
 subjects in relation to edncatiim. Subsection 
 3 of section '.13 of '.he Hritish Xort-i Ameriea 
 Act, 1807, enacts : (.S) Where in any Province 
 a system of separite of dissentient schools exists 
 Dy law at the union, or it is tlnicafter estah- 
 hshed hy the legislature of the Provin x-, an 
 apiieal shall lie to the (Jovernor-Oeneral in 
 Council from any act or decision of any iirovin- 
 ''al authority atlecting any right or itrivilege of 
 the Protestant or Konjan Catholic minority of 
 the (Jueen's subjects in rehi':ioii to education 
 By certain statutes of the Province of Manitoba 
 relating to education, passed in 1,S71 and subse- 
 quent years, the Ci.Uiolio niiiid itv of Manitoba 
 enjoyed up to 1S90 immunity fioili taxation for 
 
 othersc;;oolstliant';eirowii,etc.,etc.,butl(y the 
 Public Schools Act, 53 Viet. cli. NN (IH'Kd these 
 acts ^vere repealed, and the Konian Catholics 
 v.'ero made liable by assessment f,.r the public 
 schools which ar- non-denominational, but were 
 left free to s'jiid their chihlren to the Public 
 schools. On a petition and memorials sent to 
 the (iovernor-lieneial in C(.uucil by the Catholic 
 mmority, alleging that rights and privileges in 
 the matter of education secured to them since 
 the union had been afiecte.l, and praying for 
 re'ief under sub-sections 2 and .S of section -'i of 
 tli'j Manitoba Act, 1,S7I, a special case was sub- 
 mitted to the Supreme Court of C.inada, am' it 
 was held : 1. That the said rights and privi- 
 leges in the matter of ducation, beim' ri.-hts 
 and privileges which tl.e legislature of Mani- 
 toba had itself created, and there bein" no clear 
 express and unequivocal wnr<l3 in section 2'' of 
 the Manitoba Act, l,s;i, restricting the con. ci- 
 t"tional right of the legislature of the PioviMce 
 to repeal the laws it niixht itself enact in rehi- 
 tioii to education, no right of appeal lies to the 
 OoyernoriJencial in Council as claimed either' 
 under sub-section 2 of section 2-2 of the Manitoba 
 Act, or sub-section 3 of section !)3 of the British 
 Worth America Act, 1,S(J7. Fournier iuid Kins; 
 JJ., contra. '.'. That the right of appeal given : 
 by sub-section -2 of section •_-2 of -.he Manitoba 
 Act IS only from an act or decision of the legis- ' 
 ature, which might affect any rights or privi- '■ 
 leges existing at the time of the union, as men- 
 tioned in sub-section 1, or of any provincial '■ 
 executive or administrative authorities artecting ' 
 aiiy right or privilege existing at the time of 
 the union. Fournier and King JJ., dissent- 1 
 
 Per Tascherean and tJwynne, JJ., that the 
 aecision in Cihj of (lV«)a>f«/ v. nan-M, [1S!)2] ' 
 A. C. 44o, disposes of and concludes the present ' 
 application. I 
 
 (Juctre, Per Taschercau. J.— Is sertimi 4 of' 
 C4 and 55 \ ict. ch. 25, which purports to au- 
 thorize such a reference for hearing " or " con- ■ 
 siileration, itilra vire.i of the Parliament of Can- i 
 atltt? In re Certain StatiUe-i of the Province oj 
 
 174 
 
 .Vniii/oha nlatiii;/ to Education, 22 S. C. R. ,i77 
 See the next case. 
 
 Appeal to the Governor-General in Ooun- 
 
 clLj — Where the Roman Catholic minority of 
 -Manitoba appealed to the (iovernor-ljeneral in 
 Council against the Manitoba Kducation Acts 
 "i l.SDO, on the ground that their rights and 
 priviU.ges in relation to education had been 
 atiected thereby ; — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Supremo 
 t iHirt, 22 S. C. K. 577, on a case submitted 
 to It : 
 
 (ft). That such appeal lay under section 22 
 sub-section £, of the Manitoba Act, 1,S70, which 
 applies to rights and privileges ao|uired by le.'i.x- 
 lation 111 the Province after the date thereof'; 
 
 (/'). That the Roman Catholics having ac- 
 quired by such legislation the right to control and 
 nian.ige their dcnoniinational schools, to have 
 Iheni maintained out of the general taxation of 
 the 'rovmce, to select books for their use, and 
 to determine the character of the religious 
 teaching tiieroin, wer(. affected as regards that 
 right by the Acts of 1890, under which State 
 aid was withdrawn from their .schools, while 
 they themselves remain liable to local assess- 
 ineiil 111 support of non-sectarian schools, to 
 which^ they con.scientiously object ; 
 
 ('•) 'I'hat the (Joveriior-Oeneral in Council has 
 power to iiii-.ke remedial orders in the premises 
 within tlie scope of sub-section 3 of section 
 f-i, e.j., by supplemental rather than repealing 
 legislation. JJrojih,/ v. Altorwy-Utmral of 
 Manitoba, [1895] A. C. 20-> 
 
 CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE. 
 
 See Trusts and Tiustees, IX. 
 
 CONTEMPT OP COURT. 
 
 Appeal.]— Contempt of Court is a criminal 
 
 , proceeding and unless it comes within section 
 <)8 of the Supreme Court Act an appeal does not 
 
 : lie to that Court from a judgment in proceed- 
 ings then; ir. O'Hhia v. 0\Sha, 15 p D .-,<) 
 followed , 111 re O'Biien, 16 S. C. R. 197* 
 referred to. In proceedings for contempt of 
 Couit by attachment until sentence is pro- 
 nounced there is no " Hnal judgment" from 
 
 : whicli an appeal could be brought. Ellis v. The 
 
 : Qneeii, 22 S C. R. 7. 
 
 County Court— " /Voiw.<."]_An orderniado 
 by the Judge of a County Court in Chambers 
 tor the commitment to close custody of a rtartv 
 to an action in that Court, for" default (if 
 attendance to be reexamined as » judgment 
 debtor, pursuant to a former order, is " pro- 
 cess in an action within the meaning of the 
 exception in section 1 of the Hahoas Corpus 
 Act, R. S. O. ch. 70 ; and where such a party 
 was conhned under such an order, a writ of 
 haheax corpm granted upon his complaint was 
 quashed ^.^.s, having !x,.-n iinprovidcntiy issued. 
 Ke Amkrxon v. I'anitow, IB P. R. 243 
 
 Miii 
 
 Committal— />i.ycAtt9(/e—C07weH<.]— Where .i. 
 judgment debtor was imprisoned under an 
 
 'T 
 
 I i 
 
175 
 
 CONTEMPT OP COURT. 
 
 176 
 
 ii 
 
 froa, cstody before tl.re' pi;;^^ 1. t ^^ 
 impnsonment could not be granted, e^ .u, pen 
 tl.e consent of the ju.lgment cmlitor K 
 whose motion the order for committal had been 
 matle. Jones v. Macdonakl, 15 P. R. 34o. 
 
 to Oh,;, Jnd.jmtut — Peimlt,/ - Tmns. l-The 
 defendant was arrested and i.nprisoned by a 
 sheriff ,n obedience to a writ of attacln Imt 
 
 Held, that an application to the in.luk'enee ' CoVrt for H,"'"''''''' "'"' H '" '"'""^''^ '"-■f«''e 'he 
 >d .1.8.retion of the Court for his <uXrc^ li^ fJh fP'''"''''"" "{ '""^"'fe' "' Person for 
 
 3.71 custody before tho exoirv nf Vl.l f^..„ ?.^ hia discharKe from custodj was refusal. 
 
 firaham, 10 C. B.'soo, followed ' '"^ '• 
 
 Semhl, a, habeas co,;>„.s for the purpose would 
 be refused, and a /or^.W,: a riat'or or.'er ° or 
 he sheriff woul.l not bo bound to obey it,' and 
 b. w;,'??" ^ were remove,! from prison under it 
 iegaTcSS;"*''^'"^'^"*''"'^'-"'P-P--i 
 fh .^t/'*"^^"''*",^' ?*"■''■ '"^ '"''' '^een for more 
 
 ular ,>nd in accordance with the proper practicf- 10 P. R. 450. ' '" ' ' ^""^ ■"«- 
 
 It was not neressiar,, tl,,..- +1 t...,Y^- l'"'^.'''^e. 1 ^"^"• 
 
 Evidence- P,.,«^;„,/ Moihu - Default i- 
 Under '^ule 578 a party nmy require the atteid- 
 anc. , opposite party lor examination as a 
 
 n, P ' 'A "■ If "''":-' "'"«>•" : and the conse 
 
 <iuei... default on the part of the party to be 
 exammed is to put him in contempt 
 
 And where, upon a moti.m by tiie plaintiff to 
 set aside or vary an order staying pr:.oeedinL's 
 until he should give security t^r*^ cost;, he 
 
 it was not necessary that U,; c^;^!^;^:^'^^ 
 
 e:p;^:!i:;^£S"^^^--«'°"^«-«'''^S 
 
 Owing to the character of the judgment, the 
 lamtiff was entitled to the order and writ and 
 tliey could no more be denied to her than cou 
 a remedy by way of. A. /„. be denied to a hug 
 nient creditor, an.l the matter of the defendant's 
 
 res;;;L"h'Ah'"r°"";"'""j* ^"« «'>* ••^"-"- 
 
 .esringiiitlie.liscretion of any Court or Judge. !"""'. "^ ^no"'" «'ve security tor" cost« h,- 
 
 iuSnt'm ''''''"f ,''''''■'"'1''"'^'^ *'"^ consent '■'^^"•r^'V"'*' attendance of the defendant for 
 ju.lgn^ent, and much having been done nnder it, I '^'''"""lation as a witness, and the defendant 
 ""' ' I •''"'^I'leM but refused to be examined, an order 
 
 suspending the former order until he should 
 
 Exa.mina.tlon— If e/usa I to he .SV^ov^.l—Wherc 
 a judgment debtor attends for examin.^tion. but 
 refuses to be sworn, he m ill be ordered to attend 
 and take the oath and submit to be examined a 
 h.s ow_n expense ; if 1„ makes a default, pro 
 cess of contempt may issue on further proof 
 Uhrvj v. Uhnu, 15 p. R. 53. ' '""'• 
 
 Justice of the Peace-/>o«v.,- to Commit for 
 Cu„ttm/,t.]~A barrister and solicitor while act 
 ...g as counsel for certain persons charge wTth 
 a misdemeanour before a justice of the pe.ee 
 holding court un.ler tho .Summary Convictions 
 Act was arrested hy a constable I.y the oX 
 
 it cmdd not be vac;te;r w;;^o;;^coZnt:'r;i' f 
 
 ^K^d^;::^:::.!'''^'^"-'^''-'^'-"!- 
 
 wiH '?" * ^"''"''"" ^'y *'"= ^lefendant f<.. leave to 
 withdraw his consent and to vacate the jud'^ 
 ment entered thereon, the petitioner alleged that 
 there was a mistake in the' consent ; tlmt t w'L 
 
 ^a tiff n '")'??' ''' *° ''"^' '"^'^'^'^ ^^•''*«'' th« 
 plaintiff might have over and above a life estate • 
 
 I'tie^t'^*""'"' *''"' '^' P^^'"*'"" 1""^ no «uci; 
 
 Held, that the petition could be <lealt with on 
 
 no other grounds than any other matter of pra"" 
 
 t ce although the petitioner was in cust-dy and 
 
 £uc^"tirc"'%"^^'"' ''■''' "°' -"'C^ei'it to 
 in luce the Court to vacate the judgment and 
 allow the ease to be tried out, aftJiheltlh- 
 1. awal of charges of frau.l against the ,.etitio„er 
 
 the prior refusj of^^^i^"^-^^ SZly'cci^nriifll^S oontemptZi t 
 
177 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 In an action by the counsel against the jus- 
 t.ce and the constable for assault and fdsl 
 arrest and iniprisonniei)t •— 
 
 Hc-hl, that the jpstioe had no power summar- 
 liy to imnish for contempt h, favie cun,,. at nnv 
 rat., without ... f„n„al a/ljudication and'a C^ 
 ra.it setting out the contempt. 
 
 fol'lirr' " ''"'"'"' ' ^- «• 'S3. 352. 450 
 J. That he had the power to remove persons 
 «..., by disorderly conduct, obstructe.l r 
 mtertere,! with the business of the court ;bu 
 upon the evidence that the plaintiff was not 
 i'H.ltyo such conduct, and had not exceeded 
 his privilege as counsel for the accuse^H and 
 the proper exercise of such privileae coul 1 nnt 
 constitute an interruption of ^the p^oceedinL so 
 as to warrant his extrusion. *= 
 
 If the iustice had issued 'his warrant for the 
 com.ntmentof the plaintiff and ha.I stated in 
 t suthc.ent grounds for his c.mmitment tl e 
 ourt could no have reviewed tlie facts al eged 
 tierein; but, there being no warrant, the his 
 t.ce was bound to estabi;.h such facts upon the 
 trial, aa vould justify his course. ^ 
 
 .hidgn.entof i!„se, J., at the trial, reversed 
 
 178 
 
 S5!r'^;5=':'i™'-:?.s=^:5: 
 
 r'jfused 
 
 am. 
 
 s appeal from the ju,lgm\;nt i 
 t>:rjU:<on v. Coniily f E/,,T„, ID P. 
 
 Payment of Money. KSection 6 of 11 .S O 
 ch. (),, which abolishes process of contempt for 
 non-payment of any sum of money payable U°a 
 ju,lgment or order, refers to payment of .„oney 
 as between debtor and creditor; and deS 
 ants who are, by judgment, directed to procu I 
 t he discharge of an encumbrance wrongfully 
 ? ':!; 'f /''T.,"" 'he plaintitt's lands may 1^ 
 utt ched for failure to comply with the judg- 
 ment, although payment of money may beeome 
 necessary to effect wliat is remiired. 
 
 Mah V. Boadder, 1 Ch. Ch. 359 ; 2 Ch. Ch. 
 'loi, overruled. 
 
 Hut where the jud,nncnt directs the act to l)e 
 done within a linntea time the defendants can 
 not be attaciie<l unless the judgment, with the 
 proper notice of the penalty for de au , has 
 been serve,? .ipon them in time to give th^m a 
 rea^onab e opportunity of complying with its 
 terms before the expiration of the prescribed 
 period ; Meredith, J., dissenting on this point 
 
 Judgment of Boyd, C, reported .„/,'C" 
 
 oH r ' '■■ ^^r'T' -' ^- ^- 535. affirme,! on 
 other grounds. Berrn ,. Donovav,<2\ A. R. 14 
 
 Vr&ctice- Motion for Atfachment~Cow( or 
 amml„rs.]~An application to attach a person 
 for contempt of Court in publishing in a ne'v^ 
 paper while an action is pending, comments 
 upon the matter in .juestion therein, is to be 
 <lealt with as a criminal matter, not affected bv 
 the practice or procedure under the Coi.soli- 
 da ed Rules ; and should be made to the Court 
 not to a Judge m Chambers. 5o„./i..,V/,- .!t:^: 
 15 R R m *'''"^"^ ^y ^^^ Divisional Court! 
 
 plSf X^ '"^ •""■ '"^'■^•l-^Vhere the 
 puiniti, after the commencement of the action 
 eft the Province to escape arrest un.lcr orde« 
 of committal for contempt of Couvl in c her 
 actions, he was ordered to uive secnHtv f^^ 
 costs. Codd V. D,lai>, 15 P R. 374 ^ ""^ 
 
 anbpcBna.-S„l,xtit,d,d Sprn.r. 1_A witness i» 
 notbable to attachment for .lisobediei ce to a 
 s.ibpa.„a served substitutionally p.;rs ,ant to "n 
 order authorizing such service. 
 
 ^fi//J^ V. J/c/vvc I"i 1> I' .>u) i- , 
 
 followed. na>lJy!':LL,ATim.'"'^ 
 
 ..,^!!'*'?'*'"*""? P*"?ceedlngs -Failure of Re. 
 . r,V«'"''' *""%•]-■''>' A'^ Dominion Pro- 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 I. Breach OF CoNTR.\cT, 178. 
 II. Consideration, 179. 
 
 III. CoNSTKUt'TION. 
 
 1. Conditions, ISO. 
 
 2. Implyimi Ternu, 185. 
 
 3. Mixcellaneowi Ca.ieti, 187. 
 
 IV. Making thk Contract, 195. 
 V. Performance. 
 
 1. E.KUHe for Kon-performanrc, 196. 
 
 2. Place for Performana;, 197. 
 
 3. Time for Performance, 197. 
 
 4. Who May Enforce, \dS. 
 VI. Statute of Fraud.s, 199, 
 
 VII. JIiscellaneous Cases, 201. 
 
 I. Breach of Contract. 
 
 Praotloe-J/o/t<,K to Quash Appeal. ]~T\ie 
 fac that a party to an action is in contempt is 
 no bar to his proeee.ling with the action in the 
 -ordinary way ; the cnutempt is only a bar to 
 Ins asking the Court fur an indulgence. 
 
 And where the defendants received certain 
 moneys i„ disobedience to an interim injunction 
 which was made perpetual by the judgment at 
 12 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction - 5re«c/t / 
 
 tontrart mthm Jurisdiction ~ Utter 1 _ 'il 
 defendants, resident in the Province of Quebec 
 there wrote and posted to the plaintiff in On.' 
 ario a letter putting an end to a contract of 
 luing entered into iu Quebec between the 
 
 (-/til blcc) ,^— 
 
 th^ti' '!' '■"' '1';"°° ^"^ ^'•ongf"! dismissal, that 
 the breach of the contract occurred in Quebec 
 the receipt of the letter by the pla ntitf not 
 l>e..,g the breach, but only evidenofo t ani 
 service of the writ of summons on the dXn- 
 
 Ru"e'27"(S." '' '°"''' "°* ^^ """"■'''^ ""^°' 
 Ckerry v. Thomson, L. R. 7 Q. B 573 follow 
 ed. Oford V. Bresse, 16 P. R. 33a. ' 
 
 iOt 
 
 Mil- 
 
 Ml 
 
 1 i 
 
 ,.J 
 
 ( ^1 
 
 :il 
 
ff 
 
 179 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 180 
 
 Service out of JuHsdlotlon— /i?Yra(/i of 
 
 Contrail irilltiu J itrUiiifl ion — Letter ]~\\\\evo a. 
 contract of hirinj; is made witliiii tho I'rovince 
 of Ontarid, niicl the work tliorciinder is to be 
 done thfri', tlic ucjiiuiiissioii tliereforwill be i)av- 
 able there. ' ' 
 
 Hiierkr v. Ilunio-tr, tic, IKor/t-w, 10 Times L. 
 R. 2i.', and A'-)/-*// v. Snaefi-ll Mliihiii Co., 'JO 0. 
 B. D. liV.>, referred to. ./ - << 
 
 If the eoiitraet is ended l)y letter sent from 
 another I'rovinee, 7»«c)-e whether this indieatea 
 that the breaeli eomiilained of was out of the i 
 Provint'e. , 
 
 And where, upon a motion to set aside service ' 
 of a writ of siiinniou,s on defendants resident | 
 out of the jurisdiction in an action for l)reach I 
 of such contract of luring, there was conflicting 
 evidence as to wliether tlie discharge of the 
 plaintiff fioiii the defendants' service wasi by 
 letter or liy the act of an agent of the defen- 
 dants within the Province, the plaiutilf was 
 allowed to proceed to trial upon liis undertaking 
 to prove at tlie trial a cause of a(>tiou witliiii 
 Rule 271 ((). liill v. Villein- tire, Ki V. 1!. 41.'J. 
 
 illegal and J. was not liable thereon. Pcople't 
 Ikmk of Halifax v. Johiixon, 120 S. C. R. 541. 
 
 III. Construction. 
 1. Conditiom. 
 
 See Damaoe.s. 
 
 II. CON.SIDERATION. 
 
 Illegal or Immoral Consideration. ]— A 
 
 contract for transfer of property with intent 
 by the transferor, and for the purpose, that it 
 shall be applied l)y the transferee to the accom- 
 plishnicnt of an illegal or immoral purpose is 
 void iimot bo enforced ; but mere know- 
 
 ledge (jf the transferor of the intention of the 
 transferee so to ajiply it will not void the con- 
 tract unless, from the particular nature of the i 
 property, and the character and occupation of '• 
 the transferee, a just inference can be drawn I 
 that the transferor must also have so intended, j 
 Judgment of the Court of Appeal. 'JO A. K. i 
 198, suh ,107)1. Haijer v. O'Xeil, afiirming that i 
 of Street, J., 21 O. R. 27, affirmed. Tascher- 1 
 eau, J., dissenting. Clark v. Hanar, 22 S.C R 
 510. J > - ^•". 
 
 Sale of Liquors for Use In County where 
 Canada Temperance Act In Worce—Jleimil of 
 -ilc^l— In an action for the price of liquors 
 supplied with the knowledge that they were for 
 use in a county in which the Canada Temper- 
 ance Act was in force, part of which were sold 
 prior to a vote for the repeal of llie Act, and 
 the remainder subsequent to a successful vote 
 for its repeal, but before the order in council 
 bringing the Act into force had been revoked :— 
 
 Held, that the price of the liquors sold before 
 were not, but that of those sold after the suc- 
 cessful vote were recoverable. 
 
 Pearce v. Brooh, L. B. 1 Ex. 217, followed. 
 Smith V. Benton, 20 0. R. .'544. 
 
 StiflinK Prosecution.]— In an action on a 
 bond executed by J., to secure an indebtedness 
 of L. to plaintifl' bank the evidence shewed that 
 L., who had married an adopted daughter of J., 
 was agent of the bank, and having embezzled 
 the bank funds tlie bond was given in consider- 
 ation of an agreement not to prosecute :— 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that the consideration for said bond was 
 
 Certificate of Engineer.]— In iNT!) tlie re- 
 8i>ondent tiled a petition of right for the sum of 
 5!0().S,Ol;0 for extra work and damages arising out 
 of his contract for the construction of section 18 
 of the Intercoloiuiil R,dl\v:iy without having ob- 
 tained a final certificate from F., who held at the 
 time the position of Chief Engineer. In bSSO, 
 F. having resigned, F. S. was appointed Chief 
 Engineer of the Intercolonial Railway, and 
 investigated, amongst others, the resiMiiident's 
 claim, ^vnd reported n balance in his favour of 
 •'?120,371. Thereupon the reayiondent annMidcd 
 his petition and made a special claim for the 
 8120,.S71, alleging that F. S.'s report or certifi- 
 cate vas a final closing certificate within the 
 me.ming of the contract, which question was 
 submitted for the opinifjn of the Court by 
 sjjecial case. Tins report was never approved 
 of by the Intercolonial Railway Commissioners 
 or by the Minister of Railwavs and fanals 
 under .31 Vict. eh. 1.3, sec. IS. The Kxcliequer 
 Court. Fournier, J., presiding, held that the 
 suppliant was entitled to recover on the certifi- 
 cate of F. S. On appeal to the .Supreme Court 
 of Canada : — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Kx- 
 cheiiuer Court, 1 Ex. C. R. 821. 
 
 (1.) Per Ititchie, O.J., and Owynne, J., tiiat 
 the report of F.S., assuming him to have been 
 the Chief Engineer, to give the final certificate 
 under the contract, cannot be construed to be 
 a certificate of the Chief Engineer which does 
 or can entitle the contractor to recover any sum 
 as remaining due and payable to him umler the 
 terms of his contract, nor can any legal claim 
 whatever against the (Jovernment be founded 
 thereon. 
 
 (2.) Per Ritchie, C.J., that the conti'actnr 
 was not entitled to be paid anything until tlie 
 final certificate of the Chief Engineer was a)i- 
 proved of by the Commissioners or Minister of 
 Railways and Canals : .31 Vict. ch. 1,3, sec. IS, 
 and 37 Vkt. ch. 15 ; Jone:< v. The Queen, 7 Can. 
 S. C. R. 570. 
 
 (,3.) Per Patterson, .7., that although F. S. 
 w.as duly appointed Cluef Engineer of tlie Inter- 
 colonial liailway, and his report may be held to 
 be the final and closing certificate to which the 
 suppliant was entitled under the eleventh clause 
 of the contract, yet as it is provided by the 
 fourth clause of the contract that any allowance 
 for increased work is to be decided by the Com- 
 missioners and not by the Engineer, tiie .sup- 
 pliant is not entitled to recover on F. S.'s 
 certificate. 
 
 Per Strong and Taschereau, JJ., dissenting, 
 
 that F. S. was the Chief Engineer and as such 
 
 had power under the eleventh clause of the 
 
 contract to deal with the suppliant's claim and 
 
 that his report was "a final closing certificate" 
 
 entitling the respondent to the amount found 
 
 I by the Exchequer Court on the case submitted. 
 
 I Per Strong, Taschereau and Patterson, .TJ., 
 
 ' that the office of Commissioners having been 
 
 i abolished by ,37 Vict. ch. 15, and their duties 
 
181 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 and powers transfo.re.l ^ciiorally to the Minister 
 of Kuilways ami Canals, the appn.vul of the 
 certihcate was not a c.iulition i)reoe.Ieiit to 
 entitle tli<! suppliant to claim the amount 
 awarde.l to liim by the linul oertiticate of the 
 Chief Kngmeer. Th,' (Jurn, v. McOmry, is l>i. 
 
 Oertiflcate of Engineer. l-A suh-contraet 
 for the eonatiiRtion of a part of tlie North SIkmo 
 Railway i-iuvule.l In/ir i,/i„, that, "the eiM 
 works Bhali, II. all particulars, be made to C(ui. 
 form to tlic plans, specihtations and directions 
 of the party of tlie second jmrt, and of his 
 engineer, l,y whose classitications, measure- 
 ments ami calculations, the (aiantitiis and 
 amounts ol the several kin, Is of work pel formed 
 under this contract shall l,o determined, and 
 who shall have full power to reject and condemn 
 all work or materials which, in his oi.inion, <lo 
 not conform to the spirit of this agreement, ami 
 who shall decide every iiucstion which may or 
 can arise between the parties relative to tlie 
 execution thereof, and his decision shall be con- 
 elusive and bimliug upon both parties hereto, 
 llie aforesaid imrty of the .second part herebv 
 agrees, and binds himself, that upon the certih- 
 cates 01 his engineer that the work contemplated 
 to he done under this contract has been fully 
 completed by the party of the first part, he will 
 pay said party of the lir.st part for the perform- 
 ance of the same in full, for materials and work- 
 manship. It IS further agreed, by the party of 
 the secon.l part, that estimates shall be made 
 during the progress of the work on or al)out the 
 first of each month, and that payments .shall be 
 made by second party upon the estimate and 
 certihcate ot his engineer, to the party of the 
 farst part, on or before the 20th day of each 
 month, for the amount and value of \i ork done 
 and materials furnished during the previous 
 mouth ten per cent, being deducted and re- 
 teined by the party of the second part until the 
 hnal completion of the work embraced in this 
 contract, when all sums due the party of the 
 hrst part shall be fully paid, and this contract 
 considered cancelled. - Upon completion of the 
 contract the engineer made a final estimate 
 fixing the value of the work done by the sub- 
 contractor at $79,142.65, and after deduetini; 
 the money paid to and received by the sub 
 contractor and a clerical error appearing on the 
 face of the certihcate, a sum of .§4,187 3'^ 
 reuiained due to the sub-contractor. Upon an i 
 action Ijrought by the sub-contractor to recover 
 the sum of aSCSrZl-J, the Superior Court, 
 whose judgment was affirmed by the Court of 
 * If. Q-o '>"-■''■' K':'"'l«l 'I'e plaintiff the amount 
 of H, 18, .32 with interest and costs. On appeal 
 to the !5upreme Court :— 
 
 Held, aihrming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that the estimate as given by the 
 engineer was substantially such a certificate as 
 the contract contemplated, but if not the plaiii- 
 tilt must fail as a final certificate of the enaineer 
 was a condition precedent to his right to recover. 
 UmlOauU V. AlcOreevy, 18 «. C. R. 600. 
 
 182 
 
 tract containe.l the or.linary powers given in 
 Kueh c(.ntracts to the eiiginee.s to determine all 
 points in dispute by their final certificate. Th,. 
 work was completed ami accepted by the eom- 
 iniHsioners on the 11th Oct, .her, Issl'. but the 
 certihcate was only graiitcl on th.: 4th IVbniarv, 
 
 IhHb. In an fiction brought bv the i tractoVs 
 
 (appellants) for i;l8l,241 lor alleged balai ce of 
 contract price and extra work :— 
 
 Hehl (1.) That the certificate of the enLjincrs 
 was bin, ling on the parties an,l could ii,,i; be set 
 asi.le as regards any matter ciiiiing within tin- 
 juiis.liction of the engineers, but that the 
 engineers had no right to deduct any .sum from 
 tie hulk sum contract price on acHount <.f an 
 allege.l error in the calculation of the ,|iiai.titie8 
 ot .ire.lgiiig to be done stateil in the specifica- 
 tions ai.,1 the quantities actually ,loiie, and, 
 tlieiefore. the certificate in this case ^h,nll(l bo 
 correct(.-d in that respect. 
 
 (2.) That interest could not be compute,! from 
 an earlier , late than from the .late ot the final 
 certifieiite fixing the amount .lue to the eontrac- 
 toi's under the contract, viz., 4th Febniarv, l.S.Sfi 
 htroiii; i"Hl (iwynne, ,),]., were of opinion 
 that the certihcate coul.l have been ref,,iniL,l as 
 regar.ls an item for removal of sau.l erroncusly 
 pai.l tor to other contractors by the eoninii-- 
 sioners .jn.l charge.l to the plaint'itTs. /',/,■,.> v 
 iil^MK Harhour Commusiouas, 10 S. C. U. tiSo. 
 
 Certificate of Englneer-ft(/,t Sum Contract 
 -inttred.]-In a bulk .sum contract for various 
 works and materials, executed, performed and 
 furnished on the Quebec harbour works, the 
 contractors were allowed by the final certificate 
 ot the engineers a balance of $52,01 1. The con- 
 
 Certificate of Engineer— ,^'a/,n,s.].- A con- 
 tract entere.l int.. between Her Maj. sty the 
 Queen, in right of the Province of Quel.ec and 
 !>. A. Cinion for the c.mstruction of thiee .,f the 
 departmental buildings at (,)uebec, contain, d 
 the usual clauses that the balance <.f the con- 
 tract prR'e was not payable until a final certifi- 
 cate by the engineer in charge was .ieliveie.l. 
 shewing the total amt.unt of work .I„ne, an.l 
 materials furnished, and the cost of extras and 
 tie reduction in the contract price nj,,,,, any 
 alterations. Ihere was a clause provilling f./r 
 the final decision by the (.'ommissioner ot Public 
 V\ orks in matters in dispute upon the takinu 
 over or settling for the works. The Commis- 
 sioner of Public W orka, after hearing the par- 
 ties, gave his decision that nothing was due to 
 the contractors, and the engineer in charge, by 
 his final certihcate, declared that a balance of 
 W1.36 was due upon the contract price and 
 .^42.84 on extras. The suppliants by their 
 petition of right claimed inter alia $70,"(;no due 
 on extras. The Crown pleaded general .lei.ial 
 and payment. The Superior Court grante.l the 
 suppliants ^74.20, the amount declare.l to be 
 due under the hnal certificate of the engineer 
 On appeal the Court of Queen's Bench for 
 Lower Canada (appeal side) increased the 
 amount toS13,198.77, with interest and costs :_ 
 lield, reversing the judgment of the Court 
 below, and restoring the judgment of the 
 Superior Court, that the suppliants were bound 
 by the final certificate given by the engineer 
 under the terms of the contract. 
 
 Per Fournier and Taschereau, J J., dissenting, 
 that as the final certificate ha.l not been set up 
 in the pleadings as a bar to the action, and there 
 was an ar mission of record by the Crown that 
 tno contractor was entitled to 20 per cent, com- 
 mission on extras ordered and received, the 
 evidence fully jiistified the finding of the Court 
 of Queen s Bench that the commission of 20 per 
 cent, was still due and unpaid on §65,837.09 of 
 
 ; H 
 
 
183 
 
 ■aid extra work. 
 C. R. 62. 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 184 
 
 The Quern v. Cimon, 23 S. 
 
 Ohange In Plans and Speclflcatlona.]— The 
 
 apiifllaiils cntcrod into ii coiitnict witli the 
 Uoiiiiiiidii CdVfliniiieiit to construct (i bridge for 
 a specified sum. After tlie materinls ueceMsary 
 for Its constriK^tion according to the original 
 plans and f;pecilications had been procured, the 
 «>overnnicnt altered the plans so much that an 
 entuely new and more expensive structure 
 became involved. Tlu appellants were then 
 
 fjveii new plans and specihcations by the Chief 
 .ngnieor of Public Works, tiie projior officer of 
 the (Joverhment in that bch.alf, and were 
 directed by him to l)ui]d the l)ridgc upon the 
 altered ])lans, lieing at the same time informed 
 tliat tlie prices for the work would lie sub- 
 seciuently ascertained. They thereupon pro- 
 ceeded witli the construction of the bridge 
 Under the provisions of the written contract,' 
 tlie thief Kngineer was required to make out 
 and certify the Hiial estimate of the contractors 
 in respect of tlie work done upon tlie bridge • 
 and upon the completion of the bridge, a Hiial 
 estimate was so made and certiKed, whereby the 
 aiipellaiits were declared to be entitled to a 
 certain amount. The appellants, however, 
 claimed to be entitled to a much larger amount, 
 and their claim was ultimately referred by the 
 (government to the official arbitrators, who 
 awarded tliem a sum slightly in excess of that 
 certilied to be due in the final estimate. On 
 appeal from this award :— 
 
 Held (1.) That section 7 of 31 Vict, ch I" 
 which provides "that no deeds, contracts! 
 documents or writings shall be deemed to be 
 binding upon the Department [of Public Works' 
 or shall be held to be acts of the Minister [of 
 Fubhc W orks] unless signed and sealed by him 
 or his deputy, and countersigned by the secre- 
 tary, only refers to executory contracts, and 
 does not effect the right of a party to recover 
 tor goods sold and delivered, or for work done 
 and materials provided to and for another party 
 and accepted by him. "^ 
 
 (2.) That the Crown, having referred the 
 claim to arbitration, having raised no legal 
 objection to the investigation of the claim before 
 the arbitrators, and not having cross-appealed 
 from their award, must be assumed to have 
 waived all right to object to the validity of tlie 
 second contract put lorward by the claimants 
 Starrs v. The Queen, 1 Ex. C. R. 301. 
 
 Held, that extras could not be allowed unless 
 a writing was proved. Wood v. Stringer, 20 
 O. Iv. 148, 
 
 Moneys Bntrusted for Investment— Tram- 
 
 Jer—/'n't,'.tioi,i.}-ll. liaviiig funds belonging to 
 one T. .) C for investment, agreed to invest 
 them with iM., of Winnipeg, in a certain land 
 speculation, and, after correspondsnce, accepted 
 and paid M.'s draft for $2,-Mr>, mentioning in 
 the letter notifying M. " the acceptance of the 
 draft the understamling H. had as to the share 
 he was to get, and adding : " I also assume that 
 tlie lands are properly conv.'yed and the full 
 conditions of the prospectus carried out, and if 
 not, that money will be at once >efuiided." Th*- 
 lands were never projierly conveyed and the 
 conditions of the prospectus never carried out 
 'J'. J. C. transferre<l muii^ w,;,,/ pri,r this claim 
 to the plaintitr, who bn.ught an action against 
 
 M. for the amount of tlie draft : 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Courts 
 below, (1) That the action being for th-:^ -ecov- 
 ery of a sum of money entrusted to the defen- 
 dant for a special purpose, the prescription of 
 two years did not ajiply : Article 2202 C. C. (2) 
 That the conditions upon which tlie money had 
 lieen advanced were conditions precedent, and 
 not having been fulfilled M. was bound to 
 refund the money. (3) That the transfer mtu 
 Kchuj priril of the claim to plaintiff' had been 
 admitted by M., and the plaintiff, even if con- 
 sidered as a pr^te-noni, had a .sufficient legal 
 interest to bring the present action, Moodie v 
 Jones, 19.S. C. R. 260. ' ' 
 
 Conditional Promise.] -After negotiations 
 had taken place for the sale of a farm at $9,.^00 
 the following contract was signed by the pur- 
 chasers ;— " We agree to take your farm and 
 pay you §9,000, and if we get along fairly well 
 we will give you the other $500 as soon as we 
 are able : — 
 
 Held, that the provision as to the iSSOO was a 
 conditional promise wliich might be enforced 
 on proof that the purchasers were of ability 
 to pay, which the evidence in this case failed 
 to shew. Si/lre-tter v. Murray, 26 O. R. ,599 
 Affirmed by the Divisional Court, 26 O. R. 76.5. 
 
 Extras.]— The contract provided that no 
 extras were to be allowed unless exprea.'ilv 
 ordered, and payments for the same expressly 
 agreed for in writing by the proprietors or 
 nrcliitects : 
 
 Reference'to Experts, ]— The Royal Electric 
 Company having sued the city of Three Rivera 
 for the contract price of the installation of a 
 complete electric plant, which, umler the terms 
 of the contract was to be put in operation for at 
 least six weeks before payment of the price 
 could be claimed, the Court referred the case to 
 experts on the question wlietlier the contract 
 had been substantially fulfilled, and they found 
 that owing to certain defects the ccmtract had 
 not been satisfactorily completed. The Superior 
 Court adopted the fin.liiig of fact of the experts 
 and dismissed the action. The Court of Queen's 
 Reiich for Lower Canada (appeal side) on an 
 appeal affirmed the judgment of the Superior 
 Court and on an appeal to the .Supreme Court 
 of Canada : — 
 
 Held, affirming the judgments of the Courts 
 below, that it being found that the appellants 
 had not fulfilled their contract witliin the delay 
 
 specified, they could not recover : 
 
 Held, also, that when a contract provides that 
 no payment sliall be due until the work has 
 been satisfactorily completed a claim for extras, 
 made under the contract, will not be exigible 
 prior to the completion of the main contract. 
 
 Qmire : Whether a right of action exists 
 altiiough a contract contains a clause that all 
 matters in dispute between tile parties shall be 
 referred to arbitration. Qiifhrc Street R. \V Co 
 \. City of Quebec, 10 Q. L. R. 205, referred to.' 
 lioijal Electric Co. v. City of Thne Rii-ers "3 S 
 C. R. 289. ■ ' ■ 
 
 Referenee to Biitjineer of Municipal Corpo- 
 ration.]— Under a contract with a municipality 
 for the laying of block pavements on certain 
 streets with a provision that " the decision of 
 
CONTBAOT. 
 
 185 
 
 186 
 
 £an:fc«;;L£S:hXi^^,S^ (2-) That ..ti,..,.«h 
 
 conclusivo wlifther as to the iMttMT,retft(^U,n f . ,..r ' '*' ""^""I""t int„ the formal 
 
 the variouM clanscH, tho nn^nHu .rnL "t a ! t 4^^ '^^ '^'- l"i"r 
 
 work, .,mu.tity. ,|„ality, ami all ..thJrn.atters tern m T,^.^ -T'' '" **''t"'K. J'^^t under th... 
 ami things whiol. may be in ,lian J «, f, ' ^ V,"' r""*^" ''""''•'";' l>o was entitled to 
 
 hi« ;lecist;,n there sh:jl he no'a J S'' t ' "y i r't'^r M .ttl'f'"- """.'r' ^'■""' '^'""^ "' ^''" 
 cugineer Ih not ,li.s,|ualilie.l. in the absence of ' r.,?J. » '-'"H *''" y^"'' '«"'"' f'"' '•'.. 
 
 fraud or of bad faith, from dedd^nrwhethe,- ! 1 n^^ "'"' »''""l'l 
 
 ufiffaiii work Jm „,. i„ ....^ ....._ , "« ,w."'-tn«-l , Have damages for the loss of the nrotits that 
 
 wouM have aecrued t<, him if he l!ad earrie 1 
 sucli portion of the rails as was earried by other 
 perHons during the continimnee of his contract 
 hinHn, V. Tht (Jutu), 1 K.\. C. K (i8 
 
 Contract for: Construction of a Public 
 
 Work J tKasaterm in ,su,,,.lianf.s e,."n; t 
 with the (rowu for the construction of a public 
 work ti,ut certau. timber re,,uire.l n. m.c c ,' 
 structioa .houhl be treate.l in a special n.Lne^ 
 
 certain work i« or is not extra work and does or 
 does not fall within the plans and specifications. 
 Ihe possible bias of the engineer in favour of 
 the plans and si.ecilications drawn by him is 
 not suthcient to disqualify him. Judgment of 
 Rose J. , athrme.l on other grounds. Fnr,,nhar 
 V. City of Ilamitton, 20 A. K. ,SU. 
 
 Reference to Superintendent of Works 1 
 
 t.».i«nt ,li,l „.,. ,li„|„„ii,j. 1,1,,',™, .SiZ ,S»K it ;;■ •"»'""• Ik"."!,!.!!,. ,. 
 
 phants proposal, au.l promised to appoint i 
 
 2. Imj,/y{„;, Terms. nlace VLTT'" *" '"«1'*^"' I'"' ti'»>"-'>- at such 
 
 l'"'*^?-, J '','• "ispeotor was not appointed until i 
 
 Contract for Carrying ^^ilB-Emploment suc'ridLv tb'.'.''l'''''r'"?';''',"'''' ''^ '■'''''•■^"" ^'f 
 0/ Pem<».s o</ir>- <Aa« VoiUraclor to i> W,rh T.^ t,^ ■ . '"'Pl'l""'t had to jiay a hi d.er 
 Covered Inj Co„n,„. ]_()„ the !)th A,;, , fs' / | ,'^ „,? , '"'^'^Vrt "" *""''"; *''"" ''" ""'--'- 
 the suppliant entcrcl into a written contrac I ™ ,n i i ! ''''^'^ "'"^ "■'" cMunpelkd to 
 
 with the Domiuiou Government to remove and I a'ld^v T-rZ^r" i;"f"'"''/'''^r'"'''''''-' "-''''^'r 
 carry ,n barges all the steel rails that were ' aL'esi ' ^'"' ^^•'"'^'' ''« ^han,e.l dam- 
 
 a£ bf ajrii :^J!:t™Si!is*!Z;i>''^"" demurrer to tl. petition, that the 
 the wharves in the harbo„r%," M^ntrll iT ' h ^''the'^in'r' """"' "'i"^"' "'^ -"^'act o 
 mg he season of navigation in that year, and i pace • wul K .""/"''"'^f ""-^ l""ti'^»lar 
 to dehver them at a place called the Rock Th^ rn! . , ""' "f f'c iJ.Sth seethm of 
 
 Cut on the Lachine Canal. SuuDliant dnW ^'^"^ <'"^'^'">»ent Hi Iways Act, ],S81, an,l the 
 entered upon the execution of hX " ct, nd to';Trv r^H f''%^""/'-^' ^^' ''-I - P-ver 
 nocomplamtwaHma.leonbehalfoftheGom"i !rJ..^?i.. ."^'^ '" "' '•"'""'• «■ *" l'""! the 
 ment that hm performanct of the work was not 
 
 of Sen.^.^f"'^"''ry-. '^"'"^ «"« '» the month 
 of September, and when the suppliant had only 
 earned a small quantity of rails, the Govern^ 
 ment without previous notice to the suppliant 
 cancelled the contract and employed otl e. per: 
 sons to do the work that he had agreed to pe - 
 
 Sri'ht^r'"''"", *''*-' ^m'^i^^t filed a petition 
 of right c aiming damages against the Govern- 
 ment for breach of contract. It was alleged by 
 suppliant that M.. who had acted on behalf o^f 
 the Government in making the contract with 
 the suppliant, had represented to him that a 
 
 j^o.OOO or 3o COO tons, woul.l have to be carried 
 l>y the supp lant as such contractor ; and thatTt 
 ZT. Hf»°" -'i '^ ""f P'-esentation that he entered 
 into the said contract and made a large outlay 
 with a view to etficiently removing and LrryS 
 the rails and delivering them salely at the°f 
 l»lace ol destination :— 
 
 Held, (1.) The fact that no stipulation em- 
 bodymg 8u,i, representation appeared in the 
 «ntten instrument was evidence that it formed 
 
 ^^rown by any new promise. 
 
 The suppliant's contract contained the follow- 
 ing clause:- 'The contractor shall not have or 
 u.ake any claim or demand, or bring any action 
 or suit, or petition against Her Majesty f„r a,"' 
 . amage which he may sustain by riascm o ay 
 delay in the progress of the work arising from 
 the acts of any of Her Majesty's agents t, 1 ^ 
 IS agreed that, in the event of any such le av 
 the contractor shall have such further time fo^ 
 the comp etion ot the work as may be fixed "n 
 that behalf by the Minister" ;— 
 
 Held, that this clause covered delay by the 
 Governments engineer in causing an inspection 
 
 Contract to Carry Malls.]-The suppliant 
 had a contract to cairy Her Majesty's mails 
 along a certain route, in the construction of a 
 Government railway the Crown obstructed a 
 hghw^iy used by the suppliant in the cairi ge 
 of such mails, and rendered it more difficult 
 
 I ■ 
 
 I i 
 
 i 
 
!li 
 
 M 
 
 187 
 
 CONTRACT 
 
 III i^ 
 
 ami expoiiHivo for him to execute hto contract 
 AttiT the coiitriot IiikI Iwuri fully iicrforim).! hy 
 
 both pilllKT. tllONIippiilUlt HOIIg'ht to in.ihitiiiii 
 
 an nctioii l.y nutilioa of rij-ht for l.rca.Oi th.Tcof 
 on tliL'HroiiiKl thnt then,' was ati iiiM)licil undor- 
 takniK on tho part of the Crown in nrnkin-Huch 
 contnict that the Minister of Kailways wouM 
 not flo oxorcise the pow(;rM vest.;.! in him hy 
 statute an to ren.lcr tlio execution of tlic con- ' 
 tract l.y the suppliant more onuroua than it 
 WonM otlicrwiHo Inive heen : — 
 
 Hcl.l, that HUi'li an undertaking couM not he ! 
 rca. nito the contract by implication. Anhi- 
 ii(M V. /%' QuKii, 2 Kx. (,'. H. 374. 
 
 Contract to Supply Printing Paper. l-On 
 
 the 1st |.eeenil.er, 1S7!», J{. , to whose rights the 
 
 snppliants had snceeoded, entercl int.. a con- 
 
 tract with the frown to supply, for .a given 
 
 time, 'such cinantities of paper, and of Huch 
 
 yanutics as may he recpiired or .lesired from 
 
 time to time for the printing and pnhlishing of 
 
 the ra«r„/„ (;,,-:,//., „{ the statutes ,.f CJana.la, 
 
 and of such ofhcial and <lepartmeiital and other 
 
 reports, tonus, .h.cuments ami other paiiers as 
 
 may at any time he re.iuire<l to he printed and 
 
 pul.lished or as may he ordcre.l from time to 
 
 time l.y the proper authority therefor, acc(.rd- 
 
 ing to the re,p.ireni,.nts of Her Majesty in that 
 
 helialt. Attache.l to the contract, and made i 
 
 part t.iereof. was a schedule and specification ' 
 
 shewing the paper to he supplied and the price 
 
 to he paid therefor, hut in which no mention 
 
 was made of .louhle demy,-the paper ordinar- ! 
 
 ily, thougli not, exclusively, used for depart- I 
 
 mental i.rinting :— ' 
 
 Hel.l, that iK.twithstanding tliis omission, the ' 
 contractor ha,l agreed to supply tlie Crown, and i 
 the ( rovvn l.y implication had agree.l to pur- ' 
 ciiase of the contractor, auK.ng other paper, 
 that reiimre,! for departmental printing. ClarLv 
 V. Thf (Jw.n, -1 Kx. C. R. Ul. ^ 
 
 Sales on Commission— .4 /wHce of Renressl 
 Co.frarl ,o Manufartm-e.^-ln a written con- 
 tract ot ii,i;ency the piincipal agreed to pay to : 
 tne agent a fixed connnission on all sales of i 
 goods mamifactured by the former elTected l,y I 
 or thr.nigh the atter. The contract was made ' 
 termmable at the end of a year on a month's 
 notice by either party ; but it contained no ' 
 express agreement by the principal to employ 
 '"■;;";>• 1";'""1 "'• to manufacture any goods :-- 
 . Heh , that tliese terms could not be imported 
 into the contract by implication. Morris y 
 x>i?»(!c/.-, 25 O. R. 291. 
 
 Ill 
 
 cease unlesg ho could shew "that said furnace 
 <.r furna.'es at the time sai.l notice was Biven 
 could not have a production of more than .'ilOO 
 ' per ilay : ' 
 
 Held, alfirming the decision of the Court of 
 Keviow, that under this agreement I!, was only 
 re,,uire.l t.. shew that any furnace so st irte.l 
 did not have an actual ..utput worth more than 
 ailOO per day on an average for a reasonable 
 period and that the wor.ls " could not have a 
 production of m(.re than fiilOO per day ' did not 
 niein mere capacity to i.roduce that iiuantity 
 vvhether it was actually pro.luced or not 
 
 C "r 4yo""'''"'"" ''''"" ^'"' ^' ^'"''"''^'i' 24 .s' 
 
 3. MltceUaneous Ca^es. 
 
 Agreement to Discontinue Business 1—13 
 a manufacturer of glassware, entered into a con^ 
 tract with two compiinies in the same trade by 
 which, in consideration of certain (luarterly 
 payments, he agreed to discontinue his business 
 t<.r hye years. The contract provided that if at 
 any time during the five years any furnace 
 should be started by other parties for the manu- j 
 tacture of glassware, either of the said com- ' 
 panics could, if it wished, by written notice to I 
 i.., tcnmiiato the agreement " as on the first I 
 day on which glass has been made by the said 
 furnace and the payments to B. should then 
 
 Building Contract -/j;..m/.v.«(/ o/7 •oiitriicl„r 
 —IxKjht to /,,«„„•,. Mntorhd and yVrr,(M_By i 
 contract f,>r the erection of certain l.iuldingH 
 the contractor w,as to sui.ply all lab,.nr, inateriT.I 
 apparatus, scafiolding. utensils and cartage o 
 every .lesiTiptioii needful for the perf..rinaiiee 
 of the work ; and was to deliver up t<. the owner 
 the work in pn.per repair, etc., wlien c.mplete 
 and was not to sub-let any part of the works 
 without the architect's consent ; and all work 
 and material as <lelivere,l ,.n the premises were 
 to form part <,t the works and be considered the 
 property ot the owner, and not to be removed 
 [ without his consent, the C(.iitraetor t(. have the 
 ; nght to remove all surplus material after he had' 
 completed the works. Witlu.ut the architects 
 consent the C(.ntractor entered int.. a sub-con- 
 tract with phiintiir for the excavati..n, briek 
 and masonry work, and the plaintillcommence.i 
 jwork un.ler his sub-contract an.l ■ ..ntinue.l to 
 w..rk f.ir some time when he was or.Iered to dis- 
 ! continue by the architect : - 
 ! Held, that the ].laintiir was entitle.l t.. remove 
 tn.m the premises (i.remises meaning wliat tli.. 
 parties treate.l as such) material placed there-' 
 alter he was .lirecte.l to discontinue, an.l also 
 material delivered off the premises, as well as 
 plant constituting the fixtures and the apparatus 
 etc., necessary for carrying on his business, or to 
 recover from the owner the value ..f any mate- 
 rial used by him in the buil.ling.s ; but that 
 p aintilf was not entitled to remove any material 
 placed there before he was ordcre.l to discon- 
 ^ tinue ; and that no deman.l was necessary it 
 j appearing that the owner was using the s.aiiu. 
 I awltlKis committing an act of conversion. Axh- 
 \JiM v. hdijdt. 21 O. R. 195. 
 
 Charter of Tug-i>emw or J/;rin,/.]-The 
 defendant hired a tug from tlie plain'tifr l.y u 
 eontraet signed by both parties in these wi.rds 
 
 1 agree 10 charter tug . . . to tow tw.. barges 
 fioin . . . for which I agree to pay . . . owner 
 to supj.ly engineer and captain . " The 
 
 tug on the voyage was run on a rock through 
 the negligence of the captain •— 
 
 Held, not a demise of the tug, but a c.ntract 
 of hiring, and that the defendant was not liable 
 , tor the damage. 
 
 D.icision of Falconbridge, J., at the trial 
 reversed. Thompson v. Foiulcr, 2i 0. R. iiU. 
 
 Cutting lee.]- An agreement by which M. 
 undertook to cut and store ice, provi.le.l :- 
 1 hat said ice hou.ses and all implements were to 
 be the property of P., who, after completion of 
 the contract was to convey same to M. . an.l that 
 M., was to deliver said ice to vessels to be sent 
 
189 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 190 
 
 llrM athnniMK tlio jii,l>.',M..nt c,i tli,. Coi'irt i 
 lM!l..w, timttli,. |,r.,iu.ity ill tli.^ i.v wan in M ■ 
 tlwil It wag the hiiil,li„g« ,111,1 iiiiplfimnu o.iiv 
 whicli weiu to 1,0 tlir pmiKitv <,l J', lui.li.r tlit' 
 a«M»i,ieiit, anil ii„t tliu ico u'lii.li Masai \l 'h 
 riHli ancl sl.mpocl I,.- h,..i. X,„lk Itrili.h and 
 Mririiiittk liiHunimt Co. v. McLtUan, '>\ S. C. 
 
 Employers Liability Policy- />,/; „re o, 
 
 /(,A,„M. 1-1,1 an action „,,o,i ;,„ ,:,„,,|„y,., « 
 ml.ility poliuy. wlierel.y tl„. .IffoiiclantN aJive.l 
 t.. pay the plaintiir all Min,« up to a cTilai.i 
 liinit ami full conIh ot Kiiit, it any ii 
 whuli the plaiiititr nIiouKI Ijecoim' 
 cn.pl<>ye.,« for injiuiiH r.M<.iv.Ml whilst ,11 liiw 
 soiv.ik, si.l.jeft totl,cc<.m!itioii,ainoii^'stoil„.,H 
 that if any pr„c,.L.,lii,gs I,l. taken to .11 fore J 
 any claim, lie company «h,ill have the ah.solute 
 «..n,lact an,l control of .hfcnlin-r the Hanie 
 thnm«h,.ut, in the name ami on Celiall of the 
 cinph.yer, retaining or employii,,, their own 
 miliciloi-s and coniisel theieior ' : - 
 
 llel.l, that the [.laintKl' was not entitle.l. in 1 
 t\u- face of oiieh a .stipulation, to claim froni the 
 <lotemhints the amount of a jmlgment ohtaineil 
 aK.'mst hill, by an employee in an action ilefeml- 
 «il hy he plaintif!thr,,iic;h ),;« „wn solicitor an.' ' 
 counsel, leaving the del 
 
 doing. lUliuiiji-r v. /^^i"/- r.^MS. '('"." k'. o'th! 
 
 Oral Alteration of Terms Qunn/um AferuiU 
 .^^' />riny v, /{„.ii, ly ,s. ('. K. .•|(iO. 
 
 'arm.,".'' '■'"'"'.'^ V'""''''^^^ '"'• ^'vnuation' 
 th 111 1 !"''^' "'"■ '■""^^'■,1''"'". ..laterialH anj 
 
 «o f ,n 1 r;'"-'"' '','"'■"''■'' '•>■ ""•• -""factor 
 «o.e until the eoinpletl<,li of il,,- work to be 
 
 he property of the company, when s„cl, a8 had 
 
 < t l.een used and converts irto the uorks luid 
 
 .. .. cc.uuM '-'"•"'^■d undispo.sed of were to l,e delivered 
 
 I. respect <>i :'''''; '^Vr '""^'''"r^''''' '^''t '"> -Hu-r clauhea the 
 
 ■ahletohi.s' 7'" l« «'•;""•■' ^'id horses ' were Ifspeotivelv 
 
 — • • i i.se.1 as well as the word " plant " — ^ 
 
 Held iimhr the contract, that horses were 
 
 not included ,n the Word " plant :" ami thu? 
 
 txpeitevi.lenco was not a.lnnssil.le to exolain 
 
 U8_„,eaning. Mi,/dh,o,< v. F/<u,w„u<, 25 U. it? 
 
 ri^^^^Tl T/'''^^''' ^"'^ Contracts for OaP. 
 rlageol Gooas. )-.sV( ('Ai:uiKiis. 
 
 Sale- C-,,,,^;-,. L,/,re.-]~A „,.i|e of i.ronortv 
 wasoontrolle,! l,y a writing in .h.,. nature' o I 
 'o>^ r kl/re l,y which it was ag.eed as follows • 
 
 I lie vendor 111 consideiation ot the sum of 
 
 , .. ,0 emianls t(, shew as a 
 
 £-;''°.lT3'f,,'';irs--,»,s;:,l'',,;!;;:,,r;;"''r; 
 
 elvt 
 
 tiri.ewhen the action was at issue and on th, 
 peremptory list for trial the followiiii.' day, t.', 
 
 hand over the .lefeiiee t., the defemlaiiT's aolici- 
 tm.s tt sulhcient compliance with the condition. 
 ""%-0 ^y " ".'!■" "'''"■^■'•■^' Acckkni. Imurance 
 
 if thesai.l property was his .iwn," and haiL'.ain 
 and se 1 the said property tor the l,est ,^? o 
 
 i^tw n 'l ""' ^i'"' ""^ *"'"-■• '""' 1"^V the rent, 
 t t a\ails of the said property to the purchaser 
 to the amount .,f .s^.'MO, hii.I interest at the rate 
 < I eigl,t per cent, per annum from the date of 
 
 i . , ,, ,e ouMiiess ami riXliTfl''' '"''', '''""'''"'^^'''''"'•-'''^''^'•^'''^l' 
 
 l«3ca,ne from that time sole pn.priet 1 of t e ,e v I. f '^ vemlor any pa, t of the said pro- 
 
 paper, binding hiniselftocontin.ie its mi, tion he n^.' *''''^ '""y "•'•''"^»" ""-^"''l after receiv-ing 
 
 and, in case he wishe.l f. ' . t t^ e C H wis at H?"r '""°"'!^'""V'"'^'■-«l••• 'J'l'e vendor 
 
 the pieference. The agr, n. nt i rmided th'J • tl.l "'f t'l"'" ""''^''t^''' '" the purchaser in 
 
 3. '-ftCharlesIJelan^er.ev^i a SiSji irtr,:n^ . "'" vendor had other prJ! 
 
 Jour,directeuretredaeteur,h.diVj ,.a^^^ «''^-« the purchaser a power of 
 
 nnii, devant paraitre comn.e .lirecteuren t^ te d 1 c h v \^T^ "" ''T '•^■^'' ''^^ate in the same 
 
 (lit ]f,urnal. et «„„,. »..„ „.>..„;„„,. . 1 .. • m^® "" locality. Ihe term of three years mentioned in 
 
 Newspaper - K,vin,i,',nvnt uf E,litor-.])i,. 
 ,„„W.)_A. Ij. ami C. 15. who had published a 
 mnvspaper as partners or joint owners entered 
 int., il new agreement by which A. ]}. assumed 
 piyment of all the debts of the l.u,iness .ami 
 
 ,1,, • , ' ^ v-.^,iiiMc uiiecicnren tere ilu 
 
 <lit jouriia , et p.)ur ses services et son influence 
 cniuie tel, le dit Arthur Kelanyer lui lone 
 quatre cents piastres par annee, fcuit par „Cs 
 
 tint .le cette somnie, et le dit Arthur Helancer ne 
 
 ponria mettre Hn a cet engagement sans le con' 
 
 seatenient ,lu d,t Charles Helanger. The paper 
 
 wa.s published for sometime uii.ler this agree' 
 
 nieiit as a supporter of the Liberal party, wh^n 
 
 t. I.., without instructions from or pcnnission 
 
 1-1 .' "T"'® '^'•itorials violently opp..sinK the 
 
 ea,.didate of that party at an election a 1, d\v s 
 
 dismissed f,.om hi^ position on the paper. He 
 
 then brought an action against A. B to have it 
 
 <ltUared that he was " rMwIcuv el direct.ur " of 
 
 the newspaper and claiming damages :- 
 
 Held, reversing the .leci.ion of the (^ourt of I 
 Vtiecn 3 J«ncli, that C. B. by the agreement ' 
 Wl become the employee of A^B. the?wn r " 
 t^« paper; that he had no right to change the 
 political colour of the paper wfthout the owner's 
 
 « nf "7 '<='"•%«■'" continucl bv mutual eon: 
 on..;../ f 7'f""' ''"''=*'^'l"-"tl.v paid amounts 
 on account of his general in.lebte.lneas to the 
 
 eath that the veiid.,r elaime.l fro n tlie heirs of 
 the _purchaser the balance, ab.,ve mentioned, of 
 * ,4,0 as owing to him for the management of 
 his properties :— o .• "« 
 
 Hel.l, reversing the judgment of the Court of 
 Queen s Bench^ and restoring the ju.lgment of 
 
 tion ot the contract was to be g.there.l from both 
 1. cuments and .lealmgs of the parties, and that 
 the n-operty having been dee.le.l ineiely as 
 
 r.la iili' ""''l w\!",' '^''^"l"*" «^I'^ and that 
 I Liintitt was not AI. S.'s agent in respect of this 
 pi ope I ry : — 
 
 w^Y^il! "'","•' *^** *^*= °"'y •■*"""" plaintifiF had 
 was the acw maudata rontrana with a ten.ler 
 
 S C R "30 °" '°"'''^^- '''""' '■• ^'"^'''"' 24 
 
 * ' i I 
 
 i ■ M 
 
 
in 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 B^l»- / ,„t,rN/a,- (%,Uel. ]~Mcl). houuht at 
 auotioii. throuKl, nn agent, a l.illiiud talVlu .lu- 
 ■criLtMi in thf aii,ti.„„.,.r'H mlviiliHcniont uh "a 
 full M/.. (..|,,„.k..| |.;nj..|iHl, Lillian! tul.le, n.a.lo l,y 
 ThurH .,n ..t<. , unil w.„t,. to M. & f,,, umU-tn 
 of iillian! lul.j. , ,., Toronto, ,k.«ciil.inu his 
 talilo, and uskniK toiniH ..f cx-^lmnginK it for a 
 nv^^ on., of anotlur ntvle. On rtctiving tl.e 
 infornmtion askid, Mif). urof that ho conl.l 
 not acoept thr ttrnm oKircil. M. A (•„ ,ifn,,. 
 wards wrot,. the folio,, inj, letter :-" Toronto, 
 
 Halifax Hnnkii.K i"- AntiKoni.h. Dear .Si,-,— 
 Your laconi.. reply to onr letter of '.Mth instant 
 to hand. W e ,vouM drop the matter if it wag 
 nottoranni.,uiiy,ihieh „e have jii»t received 
 from a private party in the far North-West ,vho 
 wouia like to pnreha.se a good seeondhand Kiil'- ! 
 llHh tahle. U e „..ul.l therefore kindly ask you ! 
 to inako ns y.„ir oder f ,r the propose,! e.xehaiiKe. 1 
 and if ,,eean pn...si!,ly do it «e ,vill aecept it. | 
 C.ive us as near a deseription as you ean of vour | 
 tal) e, maker s name is essential, Imt ns y.m i.ivo ' 
 nothing ,vith It Imt the l.illiard outfit (lu, life I 
 an( pyramid halls and hoards), you should not 
 make yonr priee too high, ,„■ a deal will bo 
 imposHihle. A,vaitin« yo„r kind reply, we 
 rcinain, yours truly, Kamuel May & Co." To 
 whieh Mel), unsweied;— "1 may just Pay I 
 never saw our table yet, but am informed it is a 
 verv niee one, made by 'Thurston,' and very 
 little the worse of werr. being in tho private 
 fan, ly of Mr K,,,,,,.! Kenny, in his country 
 resnlence near 1 al.fax. The gentleman who 
 purchnsedthe talde for ns writes thus : ' I got 
 the three billiard balls aii.l marker and nineteen 
 cues which IS all that is needed for billiards I 
 am told the table is a great bargain, cost i'2()0 
 in Miglan.l, and is not n,iich the worse for wear ' 
 1 he table IS (I X I'J, and for particulars ,ve would [ 
 rtjl.^"" " ■^''"yj\- Kwiny, Esq., or F. D. 
 Clark, anctioneer, Halifax. 'S'ours truly, D V 
 McDougall.' M & Co. then wrote accepting' 
 the Oder, and nd.hrg, '• We trust that the'Eng?! : 
 lisli able IS fully as represented ; and if you are ' 
 satisfied, you may ship it at once, with billiard 
 balls markers, nineteen cues, cloth, and what 
 else there may be. In the meantime we will 
 
 uL''\ 1' -^" ■'•';">"'' t'ombination table, in 
 best style, aii<l with outfits for pool, carom and 
 pin pool games. Awaiting your early reply, we 
 remain dear sir. y.mr.struly, .Samuel kay &Co." 
 The table sOnpped by McD. on reaching Toronto 
 was found to be an American made table, with 
 ^.nglisli cushions, and worth only from §15 to 
 *-.). M. & ( o. brought an action for the 
 oilginal price of the new table •— 
 
 hpW*';i"l"rr'>' ^^"^ i"'lfe""f^>it of the Court 
 below, that MeD. agreed to deliver to M. & Co I 
 an English built table, made by Thurston, a.; ' 
 described in Lis letter, ami having failed to ' 
 deliver such a table he was liable to pay the full | 
 price of the one obtained from M. & C. Man 
 y- McBoKijal/, IS S. C. B. "iCO \ 
 
 192 
 
 ; liogi," and it was .hewn that hogs were shinned 
 sometinu... ,„ the one way an.l Bometinie. i,! 'th« 
 
 Hehl Hagarty, C..J.()., distenting, that tho 
 plamtdl ha.r the option of loading^he car," 
 a.iy way 11. which a car might be or.linarily ,-,r 
 .ally oaded, ,ti,d that he having elected ,„ 
 slip a doubk decke.! cardoad, the dofemlai.ts 
 j Mere Ik. unci to aic ipt, 
 
 I Judgment of the County Court of Middles, v 
 I '( j!"','',;, ^'""''^ ''■ Oamu/in,, Purkimj Co., -.'I 
 
 I Sale of Timber- 7',»„ for rmimn,t.]~\w 
 
 awreeinent iii writing I. agree.! to sell an.l the \" 
 
 H. !..( o. toinirchasetimbertobedeliv.'ied " l n ,'■ 
 
 , of charge wliere they now lie within ten.la\s 
 
 ; fron. the time the ,ce is a.lvi.scl as ,lear out'.f 
 
 j tlie haibour so fl,at the tin,ber may be eount.d 
 
 ;,; / ''^t"hn,ent t<. be finally nia.le insi.le nf 
 
 [thirty .lays ,n cash less •_' per cent, for tl,e 
 
 , .limeiision timber which is at .lobn's Island • - 
 
 Mel. , athrmiiig the decision of the Court', ,f 
 
 Appeal, that tho last elaUBo .li.l not give the 
 
 purc'haser thirty days after .lelivery t'or on-- 
 
 ment ; that it provi.le.l for .lelivery by ven.i:,,- 
 
 and payment by purchasers within thirty .la v.< 
 
 from the .late of tho contract ; an.l that if „„V'. 
 
 chasers accej.ted the timber after tin. expirati„a 
 
 of thirty .hiys from such .late, an event not pro. 
 
 vidc.l form tho contract, an action for the prj, e 
 
 eould be brought imme.liatoly after the ac< ent- 
 
 »!%' r v'"ri!^ ^^'"''"'^^ Lumbtr Co. v. Ir,n,i, 
 
 •• Cnl/ / .n °M^ -Quanhly ~ Description - 
 
 Uti-loail ]-'lhe defendants agreed to buy 
 
 from the planitift' a enrdoad of hogl at a rate per 
 
 pouiu. live weight. The plaintiff shippetf a 
 
 refused to accept this, contending that a "single- 
 decked" car.lo.d should h.ive been shipp^ed. 
 lliere was conflicting evidence as to the mean- 
 ing given in the trade to the term "car-load of 
 
 Service— ^r6/Vmrj/ livjht o/ I)i.swi.w,l.]~\w 
 an agreement under seal between M., the inv, ir 
 tor of a certain machine, and Mcli., p,„p,iet„r 
 of patents therefor, M. ngree.l to obtai.i patent, 
 for improvements on said machine ,uul as.si.r„ 
 the same to McR., who in consi.leration thei," f 
 agree,! to employ M. for t,vo years to place tl,e 
 patents on the market, paying him a certain 
 sum for salary and expenses, an.l givinu him v 
 percentage .,n the profits made by the sales M 
 agreed to devote his whole tin,o to the business' 
 the employer having the right, if it was not sue' 
 cessful to cancel the agreement at any time 
 after the expiration of six months from its ,late 
 by paying M. his salary and share of profits if 
 any, to date of cancellation. By one clause „f 
 the agreement the employer was to be the abso- 
 lute ju.lge of the manner in which the employed 
 performed his duties, and was given the right to 
 dismiss he employed at any time for incapacity 
 or breach of duty, the latter in such case to have 
 his salary up t,> the date of dismissal but to have 
 I no claim wh.^itever against his employer. Jl ' 
 I was summarily dismissed within three months 
 , tr.)m the date of the agreement for alleged inca- 
 I pncity and disobedience to orders •— 
 I Held, reversing the judgment of the Court of 
 
 P^r^'u-l^:. ?n-^'?- ""'1 "^ the Divisional 
 Court, 16 0. l; 495, that the agreement gave 
 the employer the right at any time to dismiss 
 JU. for incapacity or breach of duty without 
 notice, and without specifying any particular act 
 calling for such dismissal :— 
 
 Held per Kitchie, C.J., Fournier, Tascherea.i 
 and Patterson JJ., that such dismissal did not 
 deprive M. of his nUini for a share of the proHts 
 01 the business. 
 
 Per Strong, and Gwynne, JJ., that the share 
 01 M. in the profits was only a part of his 
 
 lull.. 
 
193 
 
 • \l 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 ninunemtlnn for l.i. ,orvitc« v.l.ici, h.. l„Ht l.v 
 iHi.ng ,I,H„„HH..,| ,,..„„|iy ^ ,„, ,,.,, ^. y 
 
 H«l»ry. Afr/f,„. V. Mur.ha//, |0 S C. H. 10. 
 
 Sewer- A;j7, «,,,„„ „/• rim, -foirer to Kmi>l„u 
 
 con.tnR.t.o., „f a Hcwrr ,na.l.. l„.tw..t.n tL cor 
 
 w ic h was to Im. ,„,i,Io ),y itoiiiH according to 
 m,l .iulo nricH provi,].,! for Uh con.pleti, 
 w.tim, a l„„,t..,l ti,„u, which was ext ". e'l v I 
 r.»oh,,o„ of th. com.dl an.l again inC. ml v 
 .■xten.lo.I for a fm-ther perio.l. The coS 
 |.rovKle. that if ,ho oontraotor ..««!« "t" I o 
 re UKe.l to proHcct. the work to the^ong neer's 
 .at.Hfacti«n, the corporation .night em Can. 
 place on the wori{ nnch force of nun an I teamH 
 a«,l procure such nmterialH. a. nngh e 1 .erne i 
 MecesHary to con,p!eto the work l.y tl o " ay 
 M»nu.,l for co.np ction. an,l charge^ the .Z 
 hereof to the ph.intitF; an,! l,y the specifica 
 t.on,. which were „,a,le part of the cw.tract thJ 
 Kunie powers were confcrrcl wit hont any reHtrict 
 tion as to tune. The work no, hav.^.g I eln 
 proceedea with to the engineer's satisfae ion 
 the corporal, on, before tht ..xniruti, . of ', i 
 Hecon,! extension of tin.e. exercLcl the p'we s 
 above conferred :— i'ohlis 
 
 Held, that under tlio contract the power eon- 
 fcrrod could only be exereined during the time 
 hxed for the completion of the v ^rk or the 
 
 ih X 'r/' ', ■'"', •""''■'• 'h- speciticatio,:: 
 i,,^^ iV t''«refore, even if the corpora- 
 
 tion could not un.ler the contract avail tLm- 
 selves,, the second extension as gran el for- 
 mally the powers were properly extrcise X 
 
 194 
 
 I (US reference was n,.l procee.led with but «m 
 
 . ispute t,. the cn.l ot the year \SHH were set- 
 
 .;.»?,"'' ""-'■•'"'"«■•./'»' c'onfpany was to pay a 
 H .eeific su.n annually ,„.r mile in lieu , f a 
 e alms on account of ,lef,e„tureH .natnring „f r 
 that date, an,l " i„ lieu of the company's liul v 
 for oonHtruction. renewal, ma, .t,';^,., ,^ 
 
 Street Ka.nviB.y~ Pervianeut Pavements \~ 
 Ihe loronto Street Itailway CVu, .mny w^^ 
 jncorporaied in 1801, an.l its franchiVe Ls to 
 
 pin,j,l tiie city corporat,on could assume the 
 ow„e>-8h,p of the .ailway an,l p.oper " f e 
 eo..,pa„y on payn.ent of the value hereof to bo 
 deterunncd by arbitration. The co.n.mnv was 
 to keep the roadway between tl e ^ i/f ,f.l f 
 eighteen inches outside each rail pave ad 
 nmcadatnized and in goo.l repair, ., i,,g 1 c s "me 
 uatenal as that on the rem.'in,! r . f the st ree 
 but Jf a permanent paven.ent should be adopted 
 by the corporation the company was not oun I 
 to construct a like pavenient between tie rails 
 
 t^;.ltT ""'^ ^ P-^y "'^' ^-' price o the I 
 same , ot to excee.l a specified sum per yard. 
 
 Sve edl^' " '■■'»' ,"!'"" ''^'tain streets 
 traversed by the company's railway permanent 
 
 tures tor the whole cost of such works A !>„ 
 
 wHh rno'rdon T"'V '=^-«">« the Imtat 
 witii Its portion of such costs n the manner nn,! 
 I'he period that a.ljacent ow ners^Tre as 
 
 rCseedlf company paid the severaf rates 
 assesBed up to the year 1886, but refused to oav 
 
 ceuar block pavement had proved to be bv no 
 means permanent, but defective and whoHv 
 msufhcient for streets upon whinh the Z{\^ll 
 
 by"hTci?v'^ .h" ""''"^ having betbToughi 
 oy the city for these rates, it was held that tbp 
 
 TSZIZ °"'V"^''^ *° P-^y for perma*n ' 
 roa,l«ays and a reference was ordered to deter- 
 
 13 
 
 _ . . . •'^■1' mil. inane, nance nm 
 
 .■•upu"i irFh"' °' "" ^*'" p"^""- "f -t' • 
 
 ranch e J h <-'""'P""yH track ho long as the 
 was not Thff ':'. "K'-.''";m«'t pr,.vi.le,l that ,t 
 
 oTvo h "'•,'■'**■''" '" ''^' '"'•' if the city 
 took ,.\or the railway, nor any matters ii„f 
 
 'toT^ra/ ''^"".^'"' \'"'^"'' -'1 it wal o 
 I wh Xtr' T""""-'," ;'''^'>'""' the period over 
 iwhth the aforesatd f.vuuliise now extemls '• 
 i This agreement was ratiHe.l by an Act o tlie 
 I Ugislaturep,.sse,l in 18<K), wl.i^h alno r i, 
 , or the hol.fing of the sai.l arbitration wh • 
 
 i v:id"tVe";r '"""■' "pr" ""• -tveiai'me,rtl ■' 
 
 JUKI the rates impo.se.l upon , comoanv f,,r 
 
 construction of permanent\,ave,nentsf4i 
 lebentures ha,l been issued payable after 1, 
 termination of the franchise.' Tl e a itrat ,^^ 
 was'lfrouSr'l ":/"""■ ''"^ '^'-". - ac 
 
 Hehl, artirming the decision of the Court of 
 
 alFo'^tl •" U af u'^'"'"' f *'"= ""''y ^■""•'""' ' ^' 
 allowed, tliat the saiil ai'reenienf di«r.),,...., i 
 
 the company from al, liabiltty i^'V , 5 'c^"^ 
 
 struction. renewal, maintenance a. re, "i, f 
 
 he said streets; an,l that the clause , Si, k 
 
 that the agreement shoul.l not atlect the r g s 
 
 of the parties in respect to the a,bit,-ati,m etc 
 
 "i"Bt be consi.lered to have been "user 'e./;;:. 
 
 "<'Vnr, >:u,Ma an.l couhl „ot do away with the 
 
 i is"'''''- /'"-thcr, tbnf by an Act passed i„ 
 18/7, and a by-law n. ,le in pursuant tlereof 
 the cotnpany was only asscLsable "s for Tocai 
 improvements which, by the Muniei.ml A . 
 constitute a lien upon ih^ pl^Vrty asT «ed 1 ut 
 
 iers'rftriho.''h ''''■^' "P"", ""' "" -- "''-«•• 
 piers attei they have ceascl to be .such • there 
 
 fore, after the termination of the f.anchise th,: 
 
 company would not be liable for these rates' 
 
 ic'Vm" "'■ '^'°''""'° '^"•"^' ^''- '►'• Co i^-J 
 
 -la'/^.J— Ihe Bell Teleph,.ne Co. carried on tl„ 
 business of executing^rders by telephone f 
 
 w ; 7 P" . ■■ "fireeing among other thinea 
 
 or indirectl?'*'""^"'?' '" ^^ •""""er, direc ty 
 or indirectly, any orders for messengers, tabs 
 etc to any person or persons, company or eo^: 
 
 G N W" TelT \'''' '''r '^-f- Co. The 
 ^. 1^. W. lei. Co. afterwar,ls established a mes 
 
 vTr^s'ofTrT/rb*^^ Pr^'^P''^^-^ of'wirtt 
 wires 01 tfte JelephoneCo. were nsprl Tn „., 
 
 El rD^s^'Kr^ ^"^ .''«reemenrwitf"the 
 Jiiec. iJesp. Co. and for an injunction to rflufiin 
 the Tejeplione Co. from allowing their wires o 
 w'ff ^S-.T'"« °'-'^«^« f"-- messengers etc - 
 pnone Co., being ignorant of the nature of com- 
 mun.cations sent over their wires by subscriber^ 
 
 !i! 
 
 Ill 
 
 ) I 
 
 'H 
 
 I I 
 
 I 1 
 
18S 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 196 
 
 l'^ 
 
 did not "trjinsmit" such orders within the i was sent :-" f.ettcr received; offer accepted • 
 meaning of the agreement ; that the use of the I writing." No letter was written •— 
 rn,W>,n^ subscnbers could not be restricted ; i Held, affirming the judgment of the Queen's 
 and that the lelephone Co was under no obli- [ Bench Division, that there was a completed 
 gation, even if it were possible to do so, to take ; contract. Burton, ,I.A., doubting. Dalrvmnle 
 measures to ascertain tlie nature of all communi- ' V. ,Voo«, IDA. R. 477. « i 
 
 cations with a view to preventing such orders I 
 
 being given. J^'^'y;^ JJ.xpatvh Co. v. Bell\ Mining Company-Arqvisition of Land- 
 JM,>hom to. , 20 b. C. R. S3. MorUjcjc U, Snrurc PurchLe J/a,,f/l- Where 
 
 m4 V, u . ..-. ,n. . . .„. I'' company has power to acquire land for the 
 
 Tlmber-A>.mom?o/.]_Theplaint.fr was the I purposes of its incorporation, it has the power 
 ouierof afarm<,f .^boutanulembreadthivnd;to give a mortgage for and to bind itself by 
 five-sixths of a mile in length. About two- | covenant to pay the j.urchase n.oney. ^ 
 
 thirds of the farm was heavily wooded, and the 
 rest of it was cleared and cultivated. The de- 
 fendant became the purchaser of the trees and 
 timber upon the land under an agreement which 
 provided, among other tilings, that the pur- 
 chaser should have "full liberty to enter iuto 
 and upon the said lands for the purpose of 
 removing the trees and timber at such times 
 and in such manner as he may think proper," 
 but reserved to the plaintiff the full enjoyment 
 of the land, "save and in so far as may be 
 necessary for tiie cutting and removing of the 
 trees and timber." To have removed the tim- 
 ber through the wooded land at the time it was 
 removed would have involved an expenditure 
 which would have possibly amounted to a sacri- 
 fice of the greater portion of the timber :— 
 
 Held, aliirming tlic judgment of the Court 
 below, 19 A. R. 17(i, that the defendants had a 
 
 Where the power to contract exists, a person 
 contracting with the company need not enquire 
 whether the proper formalities of oxoimtion by 
 the company have been complied with in a con- 
 tract undei' its oor))orate seal. .^heppard \. 
 Bonoii:a A^ickel Mininii Co., 25 O. R. .SOj. 
 
 See Sale of Good.s— Salis of Land. 
 
 V. Performance. 
 
 1. Excuxe. for N'ov-pcr/ortnanee. 
 
 Breach byOther Party.] -Wiierc before the 
 time for the conipletion of a contract for the 
 sale of goods one party notifies the other that 
 
 light to remove the timber by the most direct ! he does not intend to complete, that notification 
 and available route, provided they acted in i may be treated as a breach and at once acted 
 g.'od faith and not unreasonably, and the reser- j on ; but if, as he may, tlie other party waits till 
 vation in favour of the plaintiff did not mini- 1 the time for completion and then brings liis 
 mize or modify the defendant's right, under the action, he must shew that at this time he had 
 general grant of the trees, to remove the trees himself fulfilled all conditions precedent on his 
 across tlip nuTirprl Ifitnl n.i'.r.^.m T A:r.r.^^i. pfij-t 
 
 Judgment of 
 
 across the cleared land. Gwynne, J., dissent 
 ing. Stephens :. (Jordan, 22 S. C. R. 01. 
 
 Time.]— Where under a building contract 
 work was to be completed by " November Slst "' 
 under pen.alty of damages : — 
 
 Held, that this must be construed to mean 
 November .SOth. McBean v. Kinncar, 23 O. R. 
 313. 
 
 the (,)ueen's Iknch Division 
 reversed, Maclcnnan, J. A., dissenting. Lai- 
 rumple v. Scolt, 19 A. R. 477. 
 
 Expropriation for Government Railway- 
 
 Pcrfiirnmnce o/Coiitrucf lie.nderid ImpoK.filjIt by 
 
 i,a7))-ov>;-i'a;io».]— The claimants songhtto recover 
 from the Crown tlie amount of damages thiy 
 alleged they were obliged to pay to a contractor 
 who was prevented by the exjjropriation from 
 completing the construction of a wharf he had 
 undertaken to build for thcni : — 
 
 r>«^»,^^ot<«>, v.„i n /• A, \ ,Held, that as the contractor had been prevent- 
 
 /;n?7 A -J^^m- Performance - Adop- ed from completing the construction of tl e wharf 
 
 out „"ffT ',"';•" '''''^^' T •■'° executed I by the exercise of" powers conferred by Act o 
 contiact for the perloimance of work within Parliament, the claimants were excused fion 
 
 worl/'l'tTT'l '. 'l'"'^; '\ ^'f^ r?^^' ^''^'^^ "^"y "'^''""y t" '"'" i" 'expect of the bJac 
 work It iias adnntpd .iiul nf «-hif.l» if l.oa ..«««;.. * .. _.. i . . . ^ ... ^ 
 
 IV. Making the Contract. 
 
 work it has adopted and of which it has receiv- 
 ed the benefit, though the contract was not 
 executed under its corporate seal, and this 
 applies to municipal as well as other corpora- 
 tions. 
 
 Ritchie, U.J. and Strong, J., dissenting. 
 
 In section 111 of the Manitoba Municipal Act, 
 1S84, which pro\ides that municipal corpora- 
 tions may pass by-laws in relation to matters 
 therein enumerated, the word " may " is per- 
 missive only and docs not prohibit corporations 
 
 contract, aixl could not maintain anv claim 
 against the Crown in that behalf, .'idm.wn v 
 The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R, 30. 
 
 Illegality of Contract. 1 —The information 
 alleged an agreement 'vith Her Majesty wjure- 
 by 111 consideration of the C(mveyance by the 
 Intercolonial Railway of certain passengers be- 
 tween certain stations, the defendants agreed to 
 pay Her Majesty, through the proper officers of 
 c ■" ■ :,'■"■ " .' ,K'". ^«. i'".u,.-.>^i.o I that railway, the fares or passace monev of such 
 
 bvL'?aw''"'li r-'''?"f''^''°,'«f'*''^'T"j?" P'^'^^-"«''^« ''•' *'- ^■■^te '•'^■'■e"' mSid as 
 .IhL « ' ^-J-'an'^tiiong. /v <l'«-|%"'e«» t" l^-itwecn the defendants and such 
 
 }"ft. fore' R r^s,^""'"^-^"^ "/ ^'"'''iS's ^ir" i'^"""r;'^ '"'""'f >« ^"-^ »«-«• 
 
 X . - .-. -. i- joi. -ment as alleged, ^ught to avoid it by selling 
 
 up as a defence that such passengers were car- 
 
 Letters, ]— To a written offer to sell some 
 Jiour on certain terms the following telegram 
 
 ried on hon.t in blank signed by one of the de- 
 fendants only : — 
 
 ! l\ i) i 
 
197 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 Held (on doinurrer to the nlpn> t„ i 
 answer to the breach of contraSl'^ L, ^1 'V^ 
 Quint V. Poidiot, 2 Ex. C. K. 49. *" "'^ 
 
 wHh the l-i-untiff^'o^^xchlVH^fCse;^;^:;!^ 
 
 ».c., by May 24th, but as a matter of fact fc ' 
 ThrnHintiff' r"' '^''T^'^^^ about M y 9tf 
 
 olaime.1 damages fo-^lrolJlSr^a'd^f'? 
 m,t he huishi„« of the houses! '^'^'"'' 
 
 ihe deed from the defenchints contained no 
 covenantscover iiL'thiMintf „ ^""^ainea no 
 
 lands at a period, after tt' tint ^^ed n the 
 same contract for tlie execuf ,n,l « V , r 
 very of the formal conveS . s „^ '? ''"''■ 
 merged in the conveyance !^ ' "°' ^""°""^ . 
 
 Held, also, thattli'e loss of rents wliich mifd,f ' 
 
 i>mith V. Tennant, 20 O. K. 180. 'entecl. i 
 
 2. Place for Performance. 
 Performance within Ontarlo-&/^ ofOon,f<, 
 
 tiff accepted the offer l>v l,.ff..,. ' ,"^l"'i'"- 
 ^■■eed between tl.cttiS'ta.;.:,:^-:: 
 t^) he shipped at Vancouver and delivered fl 
 
 b "1 pa.\inif ,iud the contract was one wlii, I, 
 C...vsa,/^, 14 P. R. r,77. "•'• ^"''"' ^- I 
 
 108 
 
 in the mortgage deed, the .lefendant is not enti 
 hi ' *'"'•" W'"e"t "f interest and costs f^ 
 havej,he judgment and execution issued tto^^ 
 
 The acceleration is nut in the ..,.*,,..„ t 
 Extension of Time— iW^,v/V» „/• i ;• 
 
 V. Ukain, 23 O. R. 103. "'""''fc"' '/'■^^a»iwa 
 
 ■♦■ "7(0 7nai/ En/or 
 
 •re. 
 
 3. Time for Performance. 
 -lely upon the covenant for pay^mint conS^d i 
 
 ir-^dHn?. ^", Ot''r"° - ('o"uex{tr.] _ The 
 nf ''I %•"''"' ''"' ■■' contract with the Citv 
 
 of lliree Rivers to sunnlv nwl ^ I ^ 
 
 and the appellants thereupon b.oiu -in letion 
 en^a,Uieslmj>le against [he resp, i! , ■ V - "" 
 below h^fV"'"* "'" .i"-'!^""''nti of tlie "ourts 
 
 fendant ami that of the plaintiffs with the citv" 
 
 Ji/ee/ric Co. v. Leonard, 23 S. C. R. 2!),S. 
 Ac^n'i*"^^ °' Contract.] -5ee Chosb m 
 Stranger to Contract. ]~5ee Covenant. 
 
 1.:-^ 
 
 ; Ml 
 
 
 ill J 
 
 iil 
 
 ! -I 
 
 hii 
 
 ( i 
 
109 
 
 I 
 
 lilli 
 
 IIU 
 
 U 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 200 
 
 VI. Statute OF Frauds. 
 
 is a contract for the sale of goods and chattels 
 Anto-Nuptlal Contract 1-An info nnnti.l ""i "°* •\<=';"*'"'\ct for work, labour and mate- 
 contract . no^ «ign..rTthe tartirbT^b^iS;..rAr.S::;/''^ ''^'''"^ "^ ^-"•'^> 
 
 notaries in their own ii..mn<. fj,..,, i,„,.; r-.n /'.".•«., ««(nr«7«e. 
 
 notaries in tlieir own names, thev having full 
 authority to do so, was held sufficiently signed 
 within the Statute of Frauds. Tai/li/er v. 
 TaUlt/er, 21 O. R. 337. 
 
 Contract not to be Performed Within a 
 Year.] -J he Statute of Frauds does not apply 
 to a contract which has been entirely executed 
 on one side within the year from the making 
 80 as to prevent an action being brought for thi 
 non-performance on tlie other side. 
 
 And therefore, where the plaintiff delivered 
 sheep to the defendant within a year from the 
 making of .a verbal contract with the defendant 
 under wluch the latter was to deliver double 
 the number to the plaintiflf at the expiration of 
 three years : — ' 
 
 Held, that the contract was not within the i 
 statute. J nmlih v. Laiiklree, 25 0. R. 109. 
 
 Guaranty.]- As a written memorandum of 
 an oral guaranty is required only for the pur- i 
 pose of evidence, a letter or other writinc sub- 
 sequently given by the guarantor sufficiently 
 shewing the terms of bis undertaking will suffice 
 
 A letter shewing the terms, written by the 
 guarantor partly on his „wn l,ehalf and partly i 
 on behalf of a hrm of debtors and signed by i 
 him m the hrm name and in his own nnme for 
 them per />roc. , is sulHcient to bind him ' 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of Essex 
 varied. Ihotmon v. Etde, 22 A. R. 105. 
 
 Judgment of Armour, C. J., affirmed. Cai,- 
 wla Bank Note Co. v. Toronto Ji. JK Co.. 22 A 
 R. 462. 
 
 Sale of Goods— 6We % Wei<ihC—Acceptamr 
 o/. J- Held, per Ritchie, C. J., Strong and 
 J'ournier, JJ., affirming the judgment of the 
 Court below, that where goods and nierchiiiidise 
 are sold by weight the contract of sale is not 
 perfect and the property in the goods remains 
 in the vendor and they are at his risk until 
 I they are weighed, or until the buyer is iu 
 default to have them weighed ; and this is so, 
 even where the buyer has made an examination 
 of the goods and rejected such as were not to 
 his satisfaction : — 
 
 Held, also, per Ritchie, G. J., Fournier and 
 laschereau, JJ., that where goods are sold liy 
 weight and the property remains in the possess- 
 ion of the vendor the vendor becomes in law a 
 depositary, and if the goods while in his pos- 
 session are damaged through his fault and neg- 
 ligence he cannot bring action for their value. " 
 Per Patterson, J., dvhitante, whether there 
 was sufficient evidence of acceptance in this 
 case to dispense with the writing necessary 
 under Article 1,235 C. C. to effect a perfect con- 
 tract of sale. lioss v. Hannan, 19 S. C. R. 227. 
 
 Memorandum In Writing.]- An acceptance 
 in writing by the owner ot land of a w'litten 
 pHer therefor addressed to him but unsigned 
 by any purchaser and without any purchaser 
 being named or in any way described therein, 
 IS not a sufficient nieniorandum to sati^f" the 
 statute, and does not become binding upon him 
 when a purchaser is subsequently found who 
 signs the offer. 
 
 PerOsler, J. A., dissenting, such an instru- 
 ment is a proposal to sell to any one who 
 
 A*""?,' no-*" °^^''' -^^(intosh v. jU'oynihan, 18' 
 .A. rC. lot > 
 
 Memorandum In Writing- D, vial of A qenVo 
 Authority. ]~ A \Qtiet referring to the terms of 
 a contract made by an agent, but denying the 
 authority of the agent to make it, is a sufficient 
 memorandum within the Statute of Frauds 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division 
 affirmed, Burton, J. A., dissenting. Hauhner v 
 Martin, 22 A. R. 468. Affirmed by the Supreme 
 
 Sale by Sherlfif Acting as Assignee for the 
 Benefit of Creditors.]— .SVe Mclnl,,r,: v. Fivi 
 bert, 26 0. R. 427, ante 82. 
 
 1B.\xie—A(ireemeni to Tran>iftr Portion of Pro- 
 ceeds oj Sale.]- An agreement by the owner of 
 an interest in a gold mine to transfer to another 
 in consideration of services performed in work- 
 ing the mine, a portion of such owner's share 
 m the proceeds when it was sold is not a con- 
 tract for sale of an interest in land within the 
 btatute of Frauds. Stuart v. Mott, 23 S. C. R 
 384. ■ j 
 
 Printing Debentures— Work, Labour and i 
 -dfaienaAs.]— A contract to print debentures in 
 a special form on paper supplied by the printers I 
 
 Timber— Lire^ise to Cut.]— Ab a general rule 
 a contract for the sale of standing timber which 
 IS not to be severed immediately i.s a sale of an 
 interest in land. 
 
 Upon a parol sale of timber for valuable con 
 sideration, with a parol license to enter upon 
 the land during such time as should be neces- 
 sary for the purpose of cutting and removing 
 t lie timber, the defendant during the period 
 allowed by the contract continued to cut and 
 remove, notwithstanding he was notified not to 
 do so : — 
 
 Held, in an action of trespass and for dam- 
 ages for timber cut after the notice, that lu- 
 was at liberty to shew the existence of the parol 
 agreement in justification of what he had done, 
 and under which no right of revocation existed, 
 and to shew the part performance as an answer 
 to the objection founded on the Statute of 
 h lands. Handy v. Carruthers, 25 0. R. 279. 
 
 Trust.]— L. signed a document by which he 
 agreed to sell certain property to W. foi' 
 !J42,500, and W. signed an agreement to pur- 
 chase the same. The document signed by W. 
 stated that the property was to be purchased 
 'subject to the incumbrances thereon." With 
 this exception the papers were, in substance, 
 the same, and each contained at the end tills 
 clause "terms and deeds, etc., to be arranged 
 by the 1st of May next." On the day that these 
 papers were signed L., on request of W.'s 
 solicitor to have the terms of sale put in writ- 
 ing, added to the one signed by him the follow- 
 ing : "Terms, §500 cash this day, $500 on 
 delivery of the deed of the Parker property, 
 $800 with interest every three months until the 
 
201 
 
 CONTRACT. 
 
 six thoM...jd five hundred dollars are paid, 
 
 executed. The property mentioned in these 
 documents was, with other property of L 
 
 rnn^T^^'"'*?*^','^- ^^'- paid two sums of 
 «500 and demanded a deed of the Parker prop 
 erty which was reused. In an action against 
 
 ' l^Ii'^^/'^ VevioTinance of the above Lei. 
 ,nent the defemlant set up a verbal agreement 
 that before a deed was given the othe.- property I 
 o L. was to be released from the mortgage^ and 
 also pleaded the Statute of Frauds •— 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 t:^Z'rZfl^?""' '^•' 'J°"bting, that there was 
 no completed agreement in writing to satisfy 
 the .Statute of Frauds ""."oiy 
 
 Per Ritchie, C.J. -The agreement only pro- 
 V des for payment of .^6.500 leaving the greater 
 pai t of the purchase money unprovided for If 
 \\ . was to assume the mortgage it was neces 
 «ary to provide for the relelst o{ ITotlZ 
 property and for matters in relation to he 
 leasehold property. 
 
 Per Strong, J._The agreement was for salp 
 ofanequ.tvof redemption only, and as ue 
 t ons would arise in future as to release of^L 's 
 other property from the mortgage and his 
 mdemnityfrom personal liability to the mor 
 gagee, which should have formed part of the 
 pre iminary agreement, specific performance 
 
 I I^T:~ ^V ^^^ *"«•• o^ fie action it w.is nroved 
 
 Sorn ^''■'^"^'"«. -i^l' '-• grandfatherhS 
 
 field work '"°'' ""'■''''' "* *'^'"""8 '=''"'«. JoiS 
 breir ^' ""^"t^'ng ^ 'eaping machine, anS 
 
 horses'i """^ '*"^'"« ^'"^ *"d ungovernable 
 
 for s'tv'^l/'" ''"''="* agreement to provide 
 fo S. by „.,ii was not one of which the Court 
 could decree specific performance, but :- 
 
 ner^Hnn f"' i"'" """* 'z' "''« ^"**"«'l to remu- 
 neration for her services, and $1,000 was not 
 too „.uch to allow her. .l/cG',,;,,! v. sZi^Tl 
 *. «... K. _'().S. Me the next case. 
 
 Trnat-Deed m .\ame of Third PartvA-ll 
 ^igreed by written contract to give to B an 
 absolute deed of property as security for Tionn 
 the same to be held V l. in trust fL the tte 
 the loan was to run. By B.'s directions the 
 deed was made out in his daughter's name 
 Ihe daughter having claimed tfiat she p"': 
 ch,tsed the property absolutely, and for her own 
 heneht an action was brought by M. again^ 
 tra " wifh R '"^'f^' performance of the^ c", . 
 tract with B. and for a declaration that the 
 daughter was a trustee only subject to repay 
 inentof the loan. The defendants denie.uTe 
 allegation of collusion an.l conspiracy charged 
 ute i? Frauds"-"' ""^"^ '^"'^ pleaded'the sfat- 
 Held, Strong, J., dissenting, that the evi- 
 ieuco shewed that the daughtir was aware of 
 
 SaXr/"' T^' ^^'"^ ^ ™'l t''« St'-^t" e o 
 Wn f 1,"°* P''^''^"* P"°> evidence being 
 
 VII. MiscELLANEou.s Casks. 
 
 Agreement for S^jrvice,- Remuneration 1- 
 ^. agirl of fourteen, lived with her grandfather 
 who promised her that if she would "emaTn 
 
 lied he would provide for her by his will as 
 *nply as for his .laughters. She livedT with 
 h.m untn she was tweifty -five, when ' , f mlr! 
 T\ ^'*®8.'"'""'f'»t''er died shortly after leav 
 Z^.^l *»« ^"' a «"eh smallerlum than hi- 
 T! •= ri? '■eccived, and she brought an action 
 «gmnst the executors for specific performance o 
 the agreement to provide %y her as amp"y as 
 
 mvment'^r^^*"''''' "'•• ' -•■' alternat7ve,^for 
 payment for her services during the ekven 
 
 Agreement to Remunerate by Legacv V- 
 
 \Uere services are renderc.l, notona^f;!^ 
 of hiring, nor gratuitously, but upon the fafth 
 
 tlstaC-Tils^^^" rP"'*>- '^-^ -"' ""i«h"S 
 testatoi f.-i,l8 to perform, an action may be 
 
 maintained against his representatives to rocovw 
 
 compensation for the services in the shape of 
 
 llie plaintiHf brought the action aL-iinsfc th« 
 executors of her grandfather's esU e^ aUe'Sg 
 that for several years she had worked for h^f 
 grandfather in consideration of Ids agreement 
 to leave her by his will as much as .my of^his 
 
 to his daughters he left §1,000 each, and X 
 thTwiSs ?!!!'^ performance, or, in th^ 'le^a' 
 
 Held, per Hagarty, C.J.O., and Burton J A 
 toth .'I' P''^'""^' '^""''1 "e^ recover wi± 
 
 eiUitled to%''^""'""'",* '^'^'"^ l"-"^-'^^' «'>e^» 
 entitled to recover damages for its )>reaoh 
 
 which would be, if the atsets were suftlcTent. 
 
 Per Osier, J. A. -That no more specific atrree 
 ment was proved, than that the f la ,^1^8 
 
 ! d'tirT'^^'r^ "^^'''^^ testator ^n h wT 
 and therefore she was entitle.! to nothing be- 
 yond the sum left her by the will ^ 
 
 ler Maclennan, .J. A. -Th.it the aL'reement 
 
 *vas prove.l, and that the plaintiff was^entS 
 
 o recover as dam.ages for its breach a sum eS 
 
 to the amount given to the least favou^ 
 
 I ^iVth 'T-\-t J^'lg'nent of Falconbridge. 
 J., in the plaintitt's favour, w.as affirmed witSa 
 variation. Smith v. AlcOu,,an, 21 A. H 54a 
 
 Iartte,.]~U., on his father's death, at the age 
 ^ther, \\., who sent him to school untU he 
 his«tnf*''? years old .and then took him into 
 his store where he oontinue.l as the sole clerk 
 for eight or nine years when W. died and M 
 died a few days later. Both having .lied h.t^I 
 tate the administratrix of M.'s estate brmolf 
 U.1 action .against the representat'ts of W tr 
 the value of such services rendered by M "and 
 
 nmlebv*w' ^^^^ -- ^^^-''^-'^ "^ st^teLnte 
 IplfFo^ffV l'"';"!^ "'° *""e of such service to 
 .the effect that If he (W.) died without having 
 made a will, M. woul.l have good wages and if 
 he made a will he would leavt the butin^ss ^.d 
 some other property to M — 
 
 Colfr/'n/ v'^'"''"! *''.^ '''^'''''°" of the Supreme 
 
 fha thL '" '^"^*!'*' ^'^^y""*'- -'■' dissenting! 
 that there w.as sufficient evidence .if .an aBreS! 
 ment between M. and W. that the servicfs^f 
 the latter were not to be gratuitous but we,^ to 
 
 
 ll' 
 
lot 
 
 CONVERSION. 
 
 be remunerated by payment of wages or a gift 
 «>y will to overcome the presumption to the 
 contrary arising from the fact that W. stood in 
 loco p«rc„/M towards M. There having been 
 no gift l,y will, the estate of W. was therefore 
 liable for the value of the services as estimated 
 hy the jury M.lhmn v. Sviilh, 21 S. O. R. 
 mA, followed. Murdoch v. Wist, 24 S. C R 
 305. ... 
 
 Crown's LlabUltles on Contracts. 1 — ,S>e 
 Crow.v, II. ^ 
 
 Married Woman's Contract.]— .^ee Hus- 
 band AND WiFK. 
 
 Remuneration fOx- Services -C'o//a/era/ Con- 
 tract-^oM,tlo,l.]~^\•here services have been 
 performed by one person for the beneHt and at 
 the request of another, and which have been 
 Charged to the latter, the fact that a third per- 
 son has sul..se<iuently agreed to pay for such 
 services, and has haj judgment recovered 
 •gainst liini tlieiefor, by the person rendering; 
 them, will not prevent the latter recovering in 
 an action against the person liable in the first 
 matance, unless the subsequent agreement 
 0°r"56j "■ "°'"'*^'°"- ^'''°'^ ^'^ Fenjiiswi, 25 
 
 Restraint of Trade.]— 5ee Covenani. 
 
 Substltutlo-i of New Agreement. ] — See 
 Pammi .yumi/actnri,,;, Co. v. Broculhead, 21 
 
 o. \j. a. 4 IS, 
 
 204 
 
 principal debtor, with the consent of the other 
 sureties, the latter cannot, Upon payment of the 
 (leht, recover contribution from the co-surety 
 
 Ihree out of four sureties on a note obtained 
 irom the holder an extension of time by a 
 renewal during the absence and without the 
 consent or approval of the fourth surety, the 
 holder retaining the original note. 
 
 After payment of the renewal by the three 
 who had obtained the extension, they brought 
 an action against the fourth for contribntionl- 
 
 Meld, that they could not recover. Worthinn- 
 lon V. Peck, 24 O. R. 535. ' 
 
 Liability of Married Woman as Co-Con- 
 tractor.]- A married woman having separate 
 otliws ^'^^ ™'^'" '°'° °' '''°"'*''^'=* along with 
 Semble a she having no separate estate is not 
 lable under such a contract the other contrac- 
 26 o'"r 84 '"*^°"' •>«••. Binfjman v. Hanh^ 
 
 Suretyship— A'«(/o/w/He«< of Xole-Rinhl to 
 Conwmsion for Emlorsi,„j.]-U., by agreement 
 in writing, agreed to become surety for iMcU 
 & h. by endorsing their promissory note, and 
 McU, &J5 on their part agreed to transfer cer- 
 tain property to M. as security, to do every- 
 thing necessary to be done to realize such 
 securities, to protect M. against any loss or 
 expense in regard thereto, or in connection 
 with the note, to pay him a commission for 
 endorsing, and to retire said note within six 
 months Irom the date of the agreement. The 
 note was made and endorsed and the securities 
 transferred, but McD. & S. were unable to dis- 
 count it at the bank where it was made payable 
 and having afterwards quarrelled with each 
 other the note was never used. In an action by 
 M. for his commission : — 
 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, laschereau and Owynne, JJ., dissent- 
 ing that i\l. having done everything on his 
 part to be done to earn his commission, and 
 having had no control over the note after he 
 endorsed it, and being in no way responsible 
 for the failure to discount it, was entitled to 
 C Vu2""°"" ^''^°""''' ^- ^tanning, 19 S, 
 
 CONTRIBUTORY. 
 
 See Company, VIII. 
 
 CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. 
 
 See Xeglksence, III. 
 
 CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS. 
 
 See Municipal Corpouationh _ Parliament- 
 
 ARV ElECTION.S. 
 
 CONVERSION. 
 
 /?.«,n!.i*^ u^ Oontract-/.',y/,< of Contractor to 
 Jiaijell, 21 O. R. 195, a,ite 188. 
 
 rimher-^3ootmgeDue.s.]-.See Ball v. Mc- 
 Caffre;/, 20 S. C. R. 319, 2'o-if, Estoppel, II. 
 
 CONTRIBUTION. 
 
 Discharge of Cosurety- Payment-Contri- 
 6«<,on.]-\\ here one of several sureties has been 
 released by the creditor giving time to the 
 
 Joint Owners.]- A sale by one joint owner 
 
 cooTn^r'To'"'' "°* "'"''""^' ^ ^inst hb 
 co-owner, to a conversion unless the property 
 IS destroyed by such sale or the co-o^Tr k 
 deprived of all beneficial interest. BollTe v 
 Union hmirance Co., 23 S. C. R. 344 
 
 Jus TertU ]-In an action for wrongful dia- 
 t ess for rent before it was due, there was no 
 allegation in the statement of claim that the 
 action was brought upon 2 W. & M., sess. 1, 
 
 '• snbl •> "■. V"""" ^^f ^'^^ «°°''^ distrained were 
 1 f 1 J'.';* ,'V®'"®^*' ^" allegation that the 
 defendant "sold and carried away the same and 
 converted and disposed thereof to his own use ■' 
 'f'l?I ^"""V v'^"". '"t*^^ ^°'' 'lo»'^'e the value of 
 S uSaVulf r ^' '^"^ ''''''' ^'""" *^« '-- 
 Held, reversing the decision of Ferguson, J., 
 that the action was the ordinary action for con 
 version, and that the value, and not the donH« 
 Ible •--° ^ distrained was recover^ 
 
 Held also, reversing the decision of Ferguson. 
 J., that a wrong.doer taking goods out of the 
 
20« 
 
 nsunt of the other 
 on payment of the 
 111 the cd-(iurcty. 
 rjii a note ol)tnined 
 n\ of time hy a, 
 and without the 
 ourth surety, the 
 ote. 
 
 !wal by the three 
 ion, they Virought 
 )r contribution : — 
 cover. Worthhi;/- 
 
 man as Oo-Oon- 
 
 having separate 
 tract along with 
 
 irate estate is not 
 he other tontrac 
 iiKjman v. Harris^ 
 
 RY. 
 II. 
 
 fLIGENCE. 
 
 [II. 
 
 ECTIONS. 
 
 — Paeliament- 
 
 !'/ Contractor to 
 ■See Ashjield v. 
 
 )ne joint owner 
 as against hia 
 is the property 
 ;he co-owner is 
 3st. Rourke v. 
 . 344. 
 
 )r wrongful dis- 
 ;, there was no 
 claim that tlie 
 & M. , sess. 1, 
 listrained wtre 
 ition that the 
 y the same and 
 I his own use ; " 
 e the value of 
 ithin the terms 
 
 : Ferguson, J., 
 action for con- 
 not the donhle 
 was recover" 
 
 in of Ferguson, 
 ids ont of the 
 
 205 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 possession of nnother, cannot set up the jui 
 terlit, but the jierson out of whose jiossession the 
 goods are taken, niay shew it, and in such case 
 the wrong-doer may take advantage of it ; and 
 the plaintdl, having sliewn a chattel mortcaL-e 
 8ul)sisting upon a portion of tlie goo.U dis- 
 trained, could not be allowtd to recover the 
 value of sucli portion without protecting the 
 defendant against anotlicr action at tlie suit of 
 the niortg.igee : — 
 
 Held, also, per Ferguson, J., tliat the plain- i 
 tiff was not entitled to recover from tlie defen- 
 dant the amo" t received '.y |,im from the sale 
 of the plaintilt s goods in adilition to the value 
 therpof ; nor was the defendant obliged to 
 deduct tlie amount so receivcMl by liim from the 
 rent which afterwards fell duo. lloare v. Lte 
 5C. H. 7r)4, followed. WiilkunH v. 'J'homax 25 
 0. R. "i.'^O. ' 
 
 206 
 
 CORPORATIONS. 
 
 See Company— MrMcirAL CoRroRATlONS. 
 
 CORROBORATION. 
 
 . Sei? EviiiKNCE, II. 
 
 CORRUPT PRACTICES. 
 
 *'e Parliamentarv Election.'), I. 
 
 JiXBTertii-na;/„iei,t.]~Se,' I,'u..s x.Edmmh, 
 11 Iv. (Dec.) 9., niitt 65. 
 
 o,^°V^°V^l"^"''^°<'.«^-^^'^ ^"^•^•v. Knon-tton, 
 'i\ h. (y. K. .1/ 1, antt .). 
 
 CONVICTIONS. 
 
 See Crlminal L.aw — I.n roxicMiNd Liquors 
 —Justice ok the I'kace. 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 COPYRIGHT. 
 
 Clroulars-i'or,«...]-Tlie purely commercial 
 or biisinesa character of a composition or a com- 
 pilation does not oust the right to protection of 
 copyright, if tune, labour and experience have 
 been devoted to its production. 
 
 The, plaintiff, the proprietor of a school for 
 the cure of stammering, liad obtained copyright 
 for publications consisting <,f : (1) "Applicant's 
 lilank, a series of questions to bo answered bv 
 entrants to the schoid ; (2) •' Information for 
 stammerers, an advertisement circular- (3) 
 
 Entrance Memorandum," an agreement to be 
 signed by entrants, and (4) "Entrance Agree- 
 ment similar to No. .S, but moie formal •- 
 
 Held, that the plaintiff had copyright in the 
 publications, an.l was entitled to an injunction 
 restraining infringenieiit thereof. 
 
 6'ri/^H V. K illusion ami Pembroke 11. W Co 
 
 Printing Ca ladlan Copyright Work 
 
 Abroad-PHWu«(,oM,»C«,»»(/'a.]_Section33of 
 the Copyright Act, it. N. C. ch. 02, does not 
 impose the penalty mentioned therein upon the 
 owner of a Canadian copyright in respect to a 
 musical composition who has the work printed 
 abroad, and inserts notification nf ti,o ^Ji^i 
 
 CORONER'S INQUEST. 
 
 See Criminal Ijiyf, H. 
 
 I. Ai'i'KAL.s AS TO Costs, 206. 
 
 II. GiVlXO AND WiTllIIOLDINC CoSTS. 
 
 1. Oeneml/i/, 207. 
 
 2. Conduct of Partii'H, 208. 
 [3. Good Cuu-ie, 210. 
 
 4. Payment into Court, 212, 
 
 5. Uiiiiecenxary Proccediiuj.i, 212. 
 HI. Scale of Ccsts, 213. 
 
 IV. Security for Costs. 
 
 1. When Ordered, 216. 
 
 2. Mlicellaneons Cases, 223. 
 
 V. Taxation and Recovery of Costs. 
 
 1. A})peals/rom Taxation, 225. 
 
 2. Apjmrticnment, 227. 
 
 3. Costs Alloived, 227. 
 
 4. Pecovery of Costs, 230. 
 
 5. Set -of, 231. 
 li. Settlement of Action, 233. 
 
 7. Severance, 234. 
 
 8. Solicitor and Client, 235. 
 
 VI. Costs IN Particular Mattrrs or by or 
 TO Particular Individuals, 235. 
 
 I. Appeals as to Cosm. 
 
 By-law m Question in Action Repealed. 1- 
 
 Court o'f' nr''""r: -f/''« J»'lgn"^"t by the 
 Loiut of Queen's Bench refusing to ..uash a 
 by-law passed by the corporation of th J 411 age 
 of Huntingdon, the by-law in .juestion was 
 cSl;-''" 'PP""^ '" '''•' S»P'enie Court of 
 
 thSf.-i'^l"'^ °"'^' "'■■'"^'" '" •''■«P»te between 
 the parties being a mere question of costs, the 
 Court would not entertain the appeal. Supreme 
 and Kxchpqner Courts Act, sec 24. Xr v 
 Vdla,,e of Huntinndon, 19 S. C. R. 363. 
 
 «T?®^®"''i^"* Ordered to Pay all Costa i- 
 
 Where a defendant is ordered to'^ay the costs of 
 the action, but no further relief is given by the 
 
 (( i; 
 
 :M I 
 
 n 
 
 11 
 
207 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 judgment, nn appeal from the judgment is not 
 an appeal for coats within the meaning of section 
 ()j O. J. Act. 
 
 A judgment ordering tlio defen(hint to pay 
 the whole costs of tliu action cannot be sup- 
 ported unless the plaintitf is entitled to brine 
 the action. 
 
 niri: V. Yates, 18 Ch. D. 76, followed. 
 
 Judgment of Street, J., 20 O. R. ri47, affirmed. 
 J-kimivj V. City of Tdnmto, 19 A. 1{. 318. 
 
 Erroneous Prlnclple.]-An appeal lies to a 
 JJivisional Court from the order of a trial Judge 
 who was awarded costs on a wrong principle 
 MctaH4and v. tjiuhcc Fire Inx. Co., 25 O. R. .3.30. 
 
 Lapse of Time Ourlngr Defect Complained 
 
 Of. J— Held, that as the valuation roll sought to 
 be set aside in tiiis case had been duly homolo 
 gated and not appealed against within the delay 
 provided in Article lOGl ( M. U. ), the onlv matter 
 m dispute between the parties was a mere .lues- 
 tion of costs, and tlicrefore the Court would not 
 entertain the appeal. Moir v. Vitlww of Hunt- 
 •«Wo«, 19 S. C. R. 303, followed. McKay v. 
 luwnihip of Hiiic/iinhrouk, 24 S. C. R. o5. 
 
 Successful Litigant in Bflfeot Paylntr 
 
 Costs. 1- .Vee Ltimb v. Clmkuid, 19 ,S. C R 78 
 jiost 207. ' 
 
 208 
 
 Special Disposition of Coats.]— ,Vee McCul- 
 lom.lh y.aiemow, 2(i o. R. 467 ; Dolen v. Metro, 
 pohtan Life. Inx. Co., 20 O. R. 07. 
 
 Test Case. ]-Cost8 of both parties of au 
 appeal to tlie Judicial Committee were directed 
 to be paid by the successful appellant, special 
 leave having been given to him under special cir- 
 cumstances notwithstan.ling the smafl amount 
 at stake. J'ori/et v. Odiijuy, [189,")] A. C. 3IH. 
 
 2. Conduct of Parlie.t. 
 
 Delay in Making Objection to Title I 
 
 Under the circiim.stances of this case, it was held 
 I thattlie veiKlee had not, by his conduct and delay 
 waived his right to object to the title, but as lij 
 had not raised the objection in the proper ma... 
 ner at the proper time, lie was allowed no costs 
 ot his action, ^„.■<o>l v. Armntrony, 22 O. R. 
 
 Delay In Taking Objection.] - An appeal 
 was allowed without costs where an objection to 
 jurisdiction was not taken in li„n,u'. JaaA.y 
 llohiihsoii, 16 P. R. 1. 
 
 11. Civi.NC AND Withholding Costs. 
 
 1. Generally. 
 
 .,,P°^*f, °?* of Bstate-.V»,vr.s,s/„; Lili,/ant in 
 Llhct Payin,, Co.Hl.-<.]-rhe Supreme Co'urt of 
 Aew Brunswick, while deciding against the next 
 ot kin on his chum as against the husband to the 
 residue of the estate of a feme covtrte, directed 
 that his costs should be paid out of the estate 
 Ihc next of km s appeal to the Supreme Court 
 ot Cauaihi was .lismissed with costs, and the 
 direction as to costs in the Court below was 
 struck out of the .lecree, as tiiat direction had 
 the etlect of making the successful party pay the 
 costs. J.amb v. Clevtland, 19 S. C. R. 78. 
 
 Discretion. ]--By their statement of claim the 
 plaintiffs alleged themselves to be creditors for 
 wages of two ol tiie defendants, and they sought 
 relief against the third defendant only as havinc 
 obtained certain assets from the other two, 
 *, ?'^''.™"'"l'^"tly or upon a trust to pay the 
 plaintifl 8 claims, in their reply they set up 
 that they were creditors of the third defendant 
 himself, upon the ground that he was really the 
 person who hired them. There was no sub- 
 .sequent pleading : — 
 
 Held that the reply was a direct violation of 
 Kule 419; and that the trial Judge was within 
 his right in refusing, in his discretion, to try 
 the action until the issues were properly pre- 
 sented upon the pleadings, and in directing that 
 the costs of the postponement -.nould be borne 
 by the plaint;fl's. 
 
 No opinion expressed as to whether a Divi- 
 sional Court had power to review such a rulintr 
 Hurd V. Bostirick, 10 P. R, 121. ^' 
 
 Ex parte Motion. ]- Costs should not be 
 awarded against another person upon nn ex parte 
 •motion. McLean v. Allen, WB.B, ^i 
 
 Extravagant Claim.]- Where the teiukr 
 was not unreasonable and the claim very extrava- 
 gant, the clai.nant was not given costs although 
 the amount of the award exceeded somewhat the 
 
 'ex."c. R lOo'" "'^'■^''"' ''■ '^'^''' <^"''="' 2 
 
 Failure to Make Proper Admissions 1-In 
 an administration action commenced by writ 
 the plaintiti was allowed upon taxation only 
 such costs as wouKl l,ave been taxed had he 
 begun Ins proceedings by a summary application 
 under Rule 905. The defendanl%ymed to 
 have taxed to him and set oflF his ad.litional 
 costs incurred by reason of tlie less expensive 
 procedure not having been a.lopted. He had 
 ""*. '" *''e action admitted the right of the 
 plaintiff to an account, but had pleaded a release! 
 andhad notobjectedtothe procedure adopted-- 
 Held that the defendants additional costs 
 had not been incurrcl by reason of the plain- 
 tiff s improper or unnecessary proceedings, hut 
 by his own conduct m not admitting the ri.rht 
 to an account and in not objecting to the 
 plaintiff s manner of proceeding at the earliest 
 possible stage ; and the case therefore ,li,l no 
 come within Rule 1195. 
 
 Semhie, it would have i)een proper to raise 
 the question at the hearing; but the taxin. 
 officer had jurisdiction under Rule 1195, with 
 
 well, lo P. R. 159. 
 
 False Affidavit of Increase. ]-Upoii the 
 taxation of the plaintiff's costs of the action, he 
 rnade the usual affidavit of increase, and w.is 
 thereupon allowed for .lisbursements of sums 
 of money as witness and counsel fees. The 
 taxation was closed, and the certificate issued 
 without objection. The defendant ;..fterw.Mds 
 discovered that the fees had not been paid as 
 stated in the affidavit, and made a motion to 
 set aside the certificate and have the items in 
 question disallowed :— 
 
 
209 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 Held that neither the Master in Chambers 
 nor a Jiulge in Chambers hiid jurisdiction to 
 cfiturtaiii tlie motion. 
 
 Upon a motion to a Jiul^-e in Conit •— 
 Held, that tin; items should be disallowed 
 Horinrk v. I tommy, 11 (!. L. T. 329, followed. 
 J/arihfii/v. himnt, 15 P. R. 80. 
 
 Fraud not Proved. ]-Co8t8 withheld from 
 tlie defendant because he had misled the plaintiff 
 as to his power to make an exchaiiKe, and de- 
 c hMt.1 to perform his contract on grounds some 
 of which were untenable, and also alleged fraud 
 
 <>, n. oOy. 
 
 210 
 
 Misrepresentation Before Action.]— Costs 
 were refused to successful claimants where 
 tliere had been a misrepresentation innocently 
 made by their agent, to whom they had not 
 communicated facts within their knuwledce 
 .'iiinlh V. J he (Jnten, '> Ex. C. R. 417. ' 
 
 UovtsB.so--Uim,cceasful Claim to Comoli- 
 «/"feJ-llie delendants before action tendered 
 Mil h the amount due on the Hrst mortKaae an 
 assignment thereof, which the plaii.tifts, bein.' 
 iiioitga^'ees in possession, were not bound and 
 <lecliiied to give, umler 1{. S. O. eh. 10"^ sec 2 
 and subsequently but without tender the defen- 
 dant ottered to take a reconveyance • — 
 
 Held, that the plaintifTs' claim to "consolidate 
 was not misconduct so as to deprive them of 
 their costs of the action. 
 
 Uecisi.u of Street, J., varied upon the ques- 
 tion of costs, aiark v. Rtid, L>6 (J. R. 257. 
 
 New Grounds of Attack. ]-The applicants 
 for an order quashing a by-law before moving 
 had appeared on a notice, given by them to 
 name an arbitrator before a Judge,' who raised 
 an objection to the by-law, whereupon the 
 applicants gave notice of abandonment and 
 moved to quash :— 
 
 Held, that the applicants were not estopped 
 Ijiit that they should have no costs. Re iJarsl 
 and City of Toronto, 21 O. R. 24,S. 
 
 New Grounds of Defence. ]-Oo8t8 withheld 
 tioin the successtul respondent where the 
 objection ns to laches was substantiated bv 
 athdavits hied for the first time in the Court of 
 Appeal. Mciicar v. McLaiKjhlin, 16 P.U. 450. 
 
 ,..Tf ?*"*' O'^ectfon. ]-AppeaI (luashed with 
 costs where, upon the merits, there appeared to 
 be no reason to differ fnm. the Cou^t below! 
 JMry V. Ae(/, 15 P. 1{. i>44. 
 
 ^i.Tn'!.''*""^?,''^ ?' '" '^«»/'-] -Costs were not 
 given against the plaintifls where they obtained 
 a change of venue to expe.lito the trial because 
 o the Illness of a wilncs. they not being in 
 Jault MerwrCo. v. Ma..cy./f„ni>, Co., 16 P. 
 
 IV. 1 J 1. 
 
 3. (I'odd Ccdiie. 
 
 Order of Judge under Rule 1172. 1— The 
 words of Rule 1172 -'the Judge or CWt 
 makes no or, er respecting the costs " do not 
 confer any wholly diseretiuiiary powers on the 
 Judge, but must be read with Rule 1170 as 
 reterring to an order made " for good cause " 
 
 Ami where, in an action in a County Court 
 for damages for bodily injuries sustained by the 
 plamtili through the alleged negligence of the 
 defendant the jury found for the plaintiff and 
 assessed t ,>> damages at ^30. and added that 
 tnede.endant should pay "the Court expen- 
 ses and the .Judge ma.le an onler that the 
 defendant should have full County Court costs, 
 and that the defendant should not have the set- 
 off provided by Rule 1172, because, in his opi- 
 nion, the injury done to the plaintiff was attend- 
 ed by circumstances of great aggravation, and 
 the jury ought to have given larger damages :_ 
 Held, Osier, J. A., dissenting, thatthesS were 
 not circumstances which constituted " yood 
 cause within the meaning of Rule 1170- for 
 the very matters relied upon by the Judge as 
 good cause had been passed upon adversely 
 by the jury; and therelore the costs shouia 
 follow the event under Rule 1172 
 
 /i^-^kelt V. Stile,, 5 Times L. R. 88, followed. 
 McAcnrv. Boyd, HV. R. is-2. 
 
 Suppression of Pacts.] -It is within the 
 po er o the Court or a Judge, upon an applica- 
 tion to discharge a defendant from custody to 
 impose upon him the term that he shall brine 
 no action against the -ilaintiff; but it should 
 only be imposed where ,he plaintiff is shewn to 
 
 tiT r'ih"'"'''/^'']"''' ""^"P*^" '" '»« 'applica- 
 tion for the order for arrest, and to have had 
 reasonable grounds for the statements he has 
 au! before the Judge. The circumstances of 
 mn/T ^'"^ V°' '^■arrant such a term being 
 imposed , for the plaintiff was aware of the 
 circumstances and the publicity of the defen- 
 'ant 3 departure in 1S91, and conveyed a false 
 mpressiouwhen he swore that the "[lefenda^t 
 "itu aUooouded from this Province." 
 
 entitLl l*" fu""^ '■'"*'°" ^''« 'defendant was 
 fl?= 1 *?}^^ '^°'*« «f his application to be 
 
 p R.'J?2 ""''°'^^- ^""'' "■ ^'°-^'y' ^h 
 
 14 
 
 iiSff% °^ '^''**' "^"^^^ ""'^«'' «"les 1170. 
 
 1172. J— In an action for damages for assault 
 and neg igence brought in the High Court 
 ami tried with a jury, a verdict for .*!1I0 dam- 
 ages was rendered. The trial Judge directed 
 judgment to be entered for that sum, with 
 County Court costs, anil ordered that the de- 
 fendant should have no right to the excess of 
 Ins costs in the High Court over County Court 
 costs, in the manner provided for by Rule 1172 
 Ihe trial Judge's reasons for making the order 
 preventing the set-off were: (1) because the 
 defendant had induced the plaintiff to go with 
 hiin to his own physician after the assault com- 
 plained of, promising to pay the bill, and had 
 afterwards refused to perform his promise ; and 
 (-) because the plaintiff might reasonably have 
 expected the damages to have been allowed at 
 more than *;200, and so was entitled to brine 
 his action m the High Court ; — 
 
 Held, that neither of these reasons could be 
 treated as "good cause" within the meaning 
 of Rule 11/0: and therefore the costs shouia 
 follow the event under Rule 1 172 
 
 J/c.V<»y ^ Boyd, 14 P. R. 132, followed. 
 Bankervtlle v. I one, 15 P. R. 122. 
 
 ,,»i'^®'',°*' "^"^'^^ •^"'^«® "nder Rules 1170. 
 
 1172.J— In an action for damages for malicioua 
 
 i; 
 
 i li 
 
211 
 
 Ji«-i 
 
 K Ji 
 
 i 'i 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 prosecution nnd arrest l.rou^lit in the Hi«h i 
 Court ot .lustice .md tnc.l l,y a jury, tlie plain- 
 tifl rtfoven ( n verdict f.,r #S0. The trial ! 
 Judge entered judtnieut fop this sum with costs ^ 
 
 212 
 
 to tlie 
 und 
 
 lie plaintill(,n the scale of the County Court 
 ordered that the defendant should not he 
 allowed to set off his extra costs occasioned hv : 
 the action he.ng hrou^ht in the High Court 
 He was ot oi,ini.,n that the plaintifflmd reason- 
 ahle grounds for hunging the action in the 
 High Court ; that tlie conduct of the defendant 
 was wrong ; a.,d that the verdict might well 
 have heen larger:— *" 
 
 Held that there was no "mod cause" 
 under ruk. 1170 for depriving the'.lefendaltt of 
 tlie set-dtl provided for hy Rule ]17-> 
 
 J/oVm-,- V. liuy,}, 14 P. R. lai"' followed. 
 Carton v. Brmllmrn, 15 P. R, 147. 
 
 Order of Trial Judge under Rule II70- 
 
 ^7HfH,/,».7 liuh-Ca.,. Atncly yV/,,/.J_'| he 
 Kule of tlie Supreme Court of Judicature for 
 W ^! ?• 'i'l'o '.' °" ''"'• Novend,er. 1S!)3, amend- 
 ng Rule 1 1 <0 hy providing that where an action 
 
 ill? V " J"''-''' ^'''^ "^"^'^ «'"'" f""ow the 
 ♦r;„l ♦/""''',' 1'^?" application made at the 
 trial, the tnalJudge, in his discretion, other- 
 
 befoVr'" ''°'' 1"°* "^P'y •" '^'=''°"« tried 
 Delore ^^ was passed. ! 
 
 And where the jury in an action of tort, tried i 
 before the passing of the new Rule, assesf«l the 
 p aintift s damages at .-^lOO, and the trial Judge i 
 did not give judgment till after the passing ' 
 °} ."'V"*;^^ R» e. an'l then ordered tlfat the 
 plaintiff should have costs on the High Court 
 
 Held that he had no power to so order 
 unless for '' good cause shewn " within the 
 
 ~r"d '^'"' "' " ''°'''^ '■'* the date of 
 
 The right to costs or to set-off costs is a sub- i 
 
 cedure '''*^ ' ''"' ""* '"^ '"^''^ ">"tter of pro- j 
 
 But, under Rule 1170, the Court has the 
 power to make such order as to costs as may 
 aeem just, irrespective of good cause ; and, as in 
 this case, the awarding of so small a mm as 
 «100, assuming the plaintiff's right to recover 
 was almost preverse, and the plaintiff had a 
 right to expect an award well beyond the juris- 
 
 r„, r ^ *''? .V"""*y <^°"^'' *'"= ^visional 
 Court athrmed the trial Judge's disposition of 
 
 pending. ( hangea in the law ns to costs since 
 tlie Judicature Act are matters of procedure 
 and, as such, act retrospectively or with refer' 
 enceto current and uncompleted proceedings. 
 Rut even If Rule 1170 in its unamemled fori,, 
 applied, the Divisional Court had under it an 
 I alternative power over the costs, not limited by 
 the condition as to goo.l cause, and, as this wan 
 I not a case in whivh the costs of the plaintill 
 ; should be diminished by taxation on a low, r 
 scale, or by the allowance .if a set-olf, the juriH- 
 cliction shouhl be exercised in accordance with 
 the view of the trial Judge. 
 
 Meredith, J., <l„hilant^, considered himself 
 bound by the decision of the Common Pleas 
 Division in Ixlaml v. T,nvv.hii, of AMammh, 
 M n,r ' to ai'ive at the same conclusion. 
 McOillivraij V. Town of Limlsay, lop. R. n. 
 
 . Order as to Costs under Rule II'JO— I >ni 
 
 \"'T', <^<(">-'-A'"c>i<lim, Hula I.J74.]- Under 
 
 ml 1 '^/f 't stood before the amendment 
 
 1 a,le by Rule 1274, a Divisional Court had 
 
 the poHcr to make such order as to costs as 
 
 I might seem just, irrespective of "good cause. - 
 
 Decision of the Common Pleas Division 
 
 attirmed. 
 
 I Mtyers v. Dcfrus, 4 Ex. D. 176; Mar.vl,,i v 
 iLmwaxhn-e, eir., /.'. (('. Co., 7 Q. B. D. 641, 
 I lollowed. 
 
 I.4und\. Tomixhip of Amaranth, IQV U ;i 
 approved. • • •>, 
 
 Where similar motions are made to the same 
 Coiirt in two actions, and the parties in the 
 first agree that the decision in the second shall 
 govern, there is nothing to preclude an appeal 
 m the first action, even though there is no 
 appeal m the second, unless it was agreed tliat 
 the decision in the latter .should be final 
 
 ler Maclennan, J.A.-Rnle 1274 was inap- 
 plicable to this action, which was tried before 
 n came into force. Covtts v. Dudds, 16 p. R. 
 
 Stratford v. S/,eru-ood, 5 0. S. 169, at pp. 170, 
 antk!tF.t /■'""'' "■ ''°'^""^'> '■^^"^"'■■ 
 
 Order of Trial Judge under" Rule I170— 
 
 Ainei'.dim, Ruk-Cases Already Tried.]~ln an 
 «:tion of tort tried before the passing of the 
 Rule of 4th November, 189.3, amending Rule 
 It «9'nn ^y^ f "'''^'' *'"^ Pliiintiff s damages 
 «ff f.?;. i J"f'g'"e»t was given for the plain- 
 tifif for that amount, but the trial Judge did not 
 give judgment upon the question of^osts tm 
 ifter the passing of the new Rule, and then 
 
 tt Hi^h^jrurM?*""^^'^""^'^ '----- 
 Dif^i'rrtUr *'" °^'^'' ^"^ '■^'"'■^««' ''^ ^ 
 
 Per Boyd, C— The amendment of the Rule 
 was to be regarded by the trial Judge, while 
 the application of the plaintiff for full^osts was 
 before h.m, and while the action was still 
 
 4. Payment into Court. 
 
 . Strict Rights. ]-The defendants having paid 
 into Court twenty cents less than the correct 
 amount due by them, the plaintiff was held 
 entitled to full costs. Henderxmi v. Ba,d- of 
 
 Tender.]— Discussion as to the effect of the 
 defences of tender and payment into Court uimn 
 the question of costs and otherwise 
 
 Rules 632-640 considered. Davit v. Kathmal 
 Asmirance. Co., 16 P, R. 116 
 
 5. Cnnecemary Proceedings. 
 
 A.dminl8tra.tion-Actiou Instead of Motion.] 
 
 PuZ, "'■'■'"'' ''^"^'''" of Robertson, J,, 13 
 1-. K.40J, upon appeal from taxation of costs 
 between solicitor and client, disallowing to the 
 solicitors the additional costs occasioned by 
 tiieir hringmg on their client s behalf an actioli 
 tor administration, where a summary applica- 
 tion would have sufficed, was affirmed by the 
 Court of Appeal, Burton, J.A., dissenting. 
 
 213 
 
813 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 '■anth, 16 P. R. 3, 
 
 In tho a<lmini8trati,.n action the a.I.litiV.nul 
 C08t8 incurrea by t ,.■ ,l,.f,.n,laMtH in tlwt action 
 were nllowe.l to tl.en, l,y way of «et.(.tr against 
 tiie costs awarded to the plaiiitill'- — 
 
 Held, that no relief eould he ..htained l.v the 
 client, npon a proceeding for taxation of cohta 
 n. respect of tliu loss sntlered l.y her in virtu' 
 ally pay nig these costs to tho -lefendants. /.V 
 Alh.nby nnd Win; 14 P. R. -J-j;. 
 
 Court Instead of Chambers. 1 — \Vhere a 
 motion to stay proceedings was nia.lo in Court 
 It was enlarged into Chand.ers, and costs were < 
 ordered against the applicant., Ue v. Mimico ! 
 litaJ Estate Co., 1,'j 1*. K. ^ss. 
 
 Expensive Defence.] -Where an ohjection 
 might have been raised by a demurrer, the 
 costs of .lefence were given as of a successful 
 demurrer, to be set otf against the costs of a 
 judgment on the pleadings for an admitte.l 
 debt. WidliH v. .V/„u(, ;>i o. R. o'A'i. 
 
 214 
 
 Injunction.]- 1 he plaintitf was ordered to 
 
 D'l,i„?7 *"* '^" '"'«"'" injunction obtained 
 by Inm, because the facts proved at the trial 
 .hewed no anticipation of such immediate and 
 aerious damage as to justify the application for 
 It. .SUitzdy v. CranaloH, 22 O. R. 590. 
 
 Printing.]— The costs of printing unneces- 
 
 III. SuALE OK Co^TS. 
 
 Arbltratlon.J-Where upon an arbitration 
 under section 38,5 .< ..,. of Tho Municipa Ac 
 1892 the arbitrators made their award and 
 directed thatr the costs should be paid by the 
 land-owners but .lid not tix the amount nor 
 direct on what scale they should be taxed as 
 re(piired by section ;)99 ;— ' 
 
 Held, that there was no authority for their 
 
 Sy C:;S:caye^°" ''' "'«" ^'-^' ^ '''" 
 But xemhle, that upon a proper application 
 he award would be referred\a^ck toT alb" 
 trators to complete it in the matter of costs 
 Be I Mage of Preston awl Klotz, If, PR 
 
 as to ilie scale of costs was ix.t ousted. 
 History of Rule 1174. 
 
 sold'hv h"'" ,"•'!.*-•■'•'*• *,'"' l"''-'o "f furniture 
 s Ibj the plain ,f|s to the defendant, accor.l- 
 
 lehver,.!i'"7. ''t"""'} "" ^'"^ '''''' '^"'' ''"'>• 
 1 . : '^- •"" «^'"t'ment of deleiice the 
 iefe .dan aduntted i?l<i0..50. which he paid into 
 
 was noff' n"'? ^"'""'-■'^ '"-■ l'"''"'^''-'" that it 
 ^sn. ct il'"^ f ■■ '""'"""'' ^''"^ K'>o-i« ordere.1 in 
 im f ', ,f 1 "■*■'■'' '"" «"1'I>1"''1 or .lelivcrt.l, 
 
 th . S if , 7 p"' '7 "greemeiit therefor within 
 
 cue .Miitilte of frauds ; — 
 
 HoM, tliat the pleadings only must be looked 
 
 cms ; ''^■"'' '."" ^■'"*' ^^'^« i" 'lispute ; that the 
 c. use ot action was one ami indivisible ; ami 
 
 Jetenee ''"""""' "'""" ^'°""*>' ^'•""•' ^•"">- 
 
 County Court-.! „,„„„< ,„ Controi;-, ■..,,.]- 
 ( -n I!:r }f l"^"'t"I« i" an action in the High 
 Court ot Justice to recover a sum for work am 
 abour ami materials, the amount not being 
 iquidated or ascertaine.l, recovered ?jl'Ja01 for 
 
 ?hewr f*'"*-'^"*^""" "'t*^---*" f'-oni the issue o 
 tlie writ of summons ; — 
 
 wiH,fn''M*'""' '''f. '""""''' recovered was not 
 within the jurisdiction ol a County Court, and 
 the plaintiSs were entitled to costs on the "so 
 of the High Court. J/«/co/m .-. Uy., 15 1". U. 75. 
 
 Om,°JJ'1*^°.°"'■* '^°"°'' '3r.nnRft.-.ea to High 
 Court ]-lhe provisions of Itule 1219 are appli- 
 cable to an action transferred from a County 
 .rVA."?' «'f'\^'""'-t by virtue of .54 Vict^ 
 ell. 14 (O.) ; and the costs of the proceedim-s 
 after the transfer should be taxed upon the 
 
 tion (4)of the Rule, by reason of the plaintiff 
 
 seeking equitable relief and the subject matter 
 
 l7p ''r ^ 'It ''^'"'^'^^^S «-'00. ^tntthL V. tlrln, 
 14 I'. R. 486. ' 
 
 ..?f?°'?~'^?"''y-]-I'> an action on a bond for 
 |50O given to secure payment of costs in the 
 Supreme Court of Canada in a prior action 
 jactgnient was given for the plaintitf or SSltss' 
 the amount at which such costs were taxed and 
 certihed in tho Supreme Court :- 
 
 Held that the amount recovered was nnf 
 ascertained by the act of tho parties or hv fhf 
 «gnature of the defendants, "wkhin R Vl 
 
 cost 'of'the^'a r ' ''^ ""'r'"'^ -as"eiuitled?o 
 costs of the action on the scale of the Hish 
 Court. Hajer v. Jackson, Hi P. R. 480 ^ 
 
 2)Srn°Wh«~'^''"'°" ^^.^'"'rf' Sold and 
 rnnrf 1 ''^'^ »» an action in the High 
 
 Court an order was made by a locn! Tu,i„e "p^„ 
 
 Zt^h ""T"« "'" P'^^'^'-ff^ 'o judgment 
 
 Held, that full costs were not implied unless 
 
 .t was a case for suing in the High Court" and 
 
 Covenant-Land/ord and Tenant-Tilk to 
 hand-DvMon Courts Act—Cnstovi.]-ln an 
 action brought in the High Court by a land- 
 lord against a tenant for damages for breach 
 of the latter 8 covenants in a farm lease, the 
 
 h.l f-"1"i ."/ '^^"^ ^"''S'^'l that the plaintiff 
 by deed let to the defendant the land described 
 tor a term of years, and that the defendant 
 thereby covenanted as set forth, and assigned 
 as breaches of the covenants that the defendant 
 did not cultivate the farm in a good, husband- 
 ike, and proper manner. By the statement of 
 defence the defendant denied all the allegations 
 tLffhff ""',"' of claim, and further alleged 
 that the defendant had used the premises in a 
 tenant-hke and proper manner, ' = according to 
 , the custom of the country where the sametas 
 isinn^h ^^' P'f""*^ ''ecovered a verdict of 
 i HfV V fi '"'\'°'\ ^""'^ *""* ^^'t^h a jury. The 
 attheVilT '*";^r'''"°' brought into question 
 at the trial, but it was .ontended that it came 
 m question on the pleadings :— 
 ! Held not so ; for the defcnd.wt was, on the 
 face of the record, estopped from pleading non 
 demmt, - d his denial could only be read as a 
 traverse , : .he actual execution of the lease. 
 j^^/»>-,ser V. Bradbw-ne, 7 P. R. 18, commented 
 
 Ml 
 
 ' ' 1 i 
 
 I ■ I 
 
fft^' 
 
 ^16 
 
 OOSTS. 
 
 Held, iiIho, that the " custom " pleaded was 
 not thu " custom " meant by section 69, mh- 
 section 4, of the Division Courts Act, R. S. O. 
 ch. .Tl, which tefera to some lcj;al custom by 
 whicli til.' right or title to property is acquiretl. 
 or on whicli il (lepcnds. 
 
 A';/A V. Jhirin, 4 Kast 154, followed :— 
 
 Held, therefore, that the action was within 
 
 the competence of the Division Court, and that 
 
 the costs should follow the event in accordance 
 
 with^ Rules 1170, 1172. Talho/ v. I'ooU, 15 ]'. 
 
 Delivery Up of Promissory Note for $280 i 
 —In an action hrouKlit in the lligli Court to 
 restrain the defeii.lants by injunction from 
 negotiating a promissory note for .'Jl.'.'iO, and to 
 cuiiipel them to deliver it up to the plaintiff, or 
 fyr daniagcH for its detention, it was determined 
 tliat the note was wrongfully held by the defen- 
 daiKs, who had obtained it under tliu pretence 
 of discounting it, but really with the view of 
 milking It the aulijoet of garnislinient :— 
 _ Helil, that the action sounded in tort and not 
 in contract, and could not have been brought in 
 a County Court; and the successful plaintiff 
 was tlierefore entitled to tax his costs on the 
 Higli Court scale. 
 
 Juhyoti V Kmyon, l.S P. R. 24, distinguished. 
 
 I}oh/, V. Murru!/, Ui A. R. 502, followed. 
 Plithimer v. Coldwe.ll, 15 P. R. 144. 
 
 Interest upon Verdict.] -The interest which 
 aveidictor judgment bears by virtue of R S 
 O. cli. 44, see. 88, is no part of the claim ; ami 
 the iiuestion as to the scale upon which costs 
 are to be taxed is to be determined by the 
 amount of the verdict or judgment irrespective 
 «i such mterest, 
 
 Malcolm w I,y., 15 P. R. 75, distinguished. 
 Spronle v. WtUon, 15 P. R. 349. 
 
 216 
 
 Mechanics' Liens. ]— The costs of lien-hold- 
 ers subsequent to ju.lgment of reference should 
 be taxed upon the scale appropriate +0 the 
 amouiitfound due to each. Hull v. Hoijg, 14 
 
 Title to Land.]- Where in an action by 
 a monthly tenant against his landlord and other 
 persons tor wrongful entry upon the demiae.l 
 premises, the landlord denied the plaintift's 
 tenancy : — 1 ' = 
 
 Held, that the title to land was brought in 
 (luestion, and the costs of tlie plaintiffs were 
 properly taxeil on the High Court scale, although 
 the (lamages recovered were only i5;l04 
 
 HV;,«,« V /?',a</y, 12 P. R. 61.% and Danaher 
 V. Little, 13 P. R. 361, followed. 
 
 Tomldns v. Jonen, 22 Q. B. D. 599, specially 
 referred to. Flett v. Way, 14 P. R. 3121 
 
 Water Privilege — Appeal from Order 0/ 
 County Conrt Jndije.]~'ihc disposition of the 
 costs of an appeal is not a part of the practice 
 ami proceedings upon the appeal. 
 
 Upon an appeal from an order of a Cc 'intv 
 Court Judge, under R. S. O. eh. 119, with 
 respect to a water privilege, the Court of Appeal 
 has power, under section 18, to direct that the 
 costs shall be taxed on the soalf applicable to 
 Higli Court, County Court, or Division Court 
 appeals ; and tlie Judge to whom application 
 tor leave to appeal is made under section 16 has 
 
 no power to control the discretion of the Court 
 in this respect. Re liunilnim, 16 P. R. 3(X>. 
 
 See, also. County Cocrt, I., and Division 
 CoriiT, 11. 
 
 IV. SKCimiTV FOK COSTM. 
 
 1. Wltm Ordered. 
 
 I Admission of Claim- A/, M,/a«/.^ PusHtmd 
 <ij llaiiifql-H Fnndx.]—ln cases where the 
 • lefendants are possessed of funds belougiiiK to 
 the jilaintiff, the discretion of the (lourt will 
 be exercised against Immpering the plaintiff hv 
 ordermg security for costs. ' 
 
 The plaintiff who lived out of the jurisdiction 
 and had lately attained his majority, sued tho 
 ilefendants for an account and payment u{ 
 funds which he alleged tliey held as joint trus- 
 tees for him, he h.iving had no account The 
 recept of trust funds by both defendants was 
 proved, but one defendant put the blame of 
 tlieir not being forthcoming on tlie other, aii.l 
 swore that he had a good defence to the action 
 though he did not disclose it. The other defen' 
 dant did not defend :— 
 
 Held, not a case in which tlie plaintiff should 
 he required to give security for costs. Diitlij v 
 Doiwran, 14 P. R. 159. 
 
 Admission of Debt. ]-\Vheie there was an 
 admission by the defendant of the debt sued 
 for, sworn to and not coutradicted, and the 
 writ of summons was specially indorsed so as 
 to enable the plaintiffs to move for judgment 
 under Rule 739, an order for security for costs 
 obtained by the defendant on imnipe, after 
 appearance, the jilaintiffs being out of the jur- 
 isdiction, was set aside, notwithstanding that 
 the plaintiffs might have paid §50 into Court 
 under Rule 1251 and proceeded to move for 
 judgment. 
 
 Do-r V. Hand, 10 1'. R. 165, followed. 
 
 1 ayue V Xewherry, 13 P. R. 354, not fol. 
 lowed. Jhiliaudeau v. llerhtrt, 16 P. R. 420. 
 
 Attachment.]— The judgment creditor ob- 
 tained an attaching order, which was set aside 
 by the local Judge who granted it ; the iudg. 
 ment creditor then appealed to a Judge in 
 Chambers unsuccessfuUv, and had given notice 
 of a further appeal to a Divisional Court, when 
 his proceedings were stayed by an order of the 
 Master in Chambers requiring him to give 
 security for costs, on the ground that he was 
 insolvent and was proceeding for the benefit of 
 another : — 
 
 Held, that the order for security could not 
 be sustained ; the judgment creditor was not 
 proceeding either by action or petition ; and 
 there was no authority for ordering security 
 
 lie Ikes, 10 P. R. 425, overruled Pabmr v 
 Lovetl, 14 P. R, 415. 
 
 Contempt— Zen (t„_r; JurUdktion to Avoid 
 ^rm<.]- Where the plaintiff after the com- 
 mencement of the action left the Province to 
 escape arrest under orders of Cuminittal fur 
 contempt of Court in other actions, he was 
 ordered to give security for costs. Codd v. 
 Belap, 15 P. R. 374. 
 
217 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 , I., and DiviHioN 
 
 BxecutorH and Administrators,] An oxo. 
 outrix gtiUKlH in no ,litr,,r.,Mit position uh to the 
 liability to give stcurity for cuhIh from ii liti. 
 gant suing in Iuh own right. 
 
 And un executrix niiident iibrond, applvintt 
 for liaynient out of Court .,f inoneyH to the 
 credit of her tCHtator, was ordered to uivo 
 seeurity for the costs of un alleged assignee of 
 
 218 
 
 the fund, who opposed the api)lication 
 The nile as to security applies to a motion as 
 /.'' I'arkii; I'urkir v. 
 
 I And the plaintiff was rc(,uire,l to give secur- 
 
 I uf.„.'l ." ""I^" ';' '' ••'""""««'-'" t" examine a 
 
 ex ct ln'.'.l>" • ^^''r","'" ""•""-"*ti.,n as to hi. 
 
 I tulHhelher lie would attend to he .■xanuiied 
 
 l.nn,i,u V 7W., -Jt (h. 1). W_', followed. 
 j (olnimu V. nnnkofM„iU,uil, 1(J 1'. j; |.-,), 
 
 hirhi; 16 1'. I!. 3!»'i. 
 
 11 pet 
 '. I!. 
 
 Palae Address- '/V»,/„„vo/, /!,.i,Uwe irithin 
 JurMlu/ton — Iiinnrinilidii „„,/-,■ Crimiml S,h 
 <fNce.]-\Vhero the plaiiitill, wlio for two years 
 previous to the conuneneenieMt of the action 
 hud heen a resident of the I'rovinco of (Juebec 
 indorsed a taise address, within Ontario, upon 
 the writ of summons, for the purpose of n,i.s. 
 leading and escai ling giving security for costs 
 and was, at the time an application was made 
 therefor, a pn.soner in Ontario under a criminal 
 sentence, he was oiilcred to give seeuritv for 
 costs. •' 
 
 Su-an-.y v. Swanzn, 4 K. & J. -.VJT, followed. 
 
 IMondo V hm/lor, 4 (/. H. U. 4 -.3, com- 
 mented on. Jiuumier v. fio</iiilh, 15 1'. K. 72. 
 
 False Address-.l/,Vaiv—/,V.s»/«,« o,,t of' 
 ll,t Jurmlifnou -■ Timimrani lieliirnA-Tho' 
 jdamtitt, who was a sailoi' on the lakes, at the 
 tune of the Kssue of the writ of summons was 
 residing out o Ontario. The writ was, l,y a 
 mistake o the plaintiff's .solicitor, indorsed 
 with a statement that the plaintiff resided in 
 Windsor, Ontario ; and, upon the defendants 
 moving for security for costs on the ground 
 that he olaintirt had given a false address, the 
 phnn lU declared that naming Windsor was a 
 mutake and that his true place of residence 
 was Cohngwoo.l Ontario. C.dlingwood «as 
 not then his actual place of residence. Pendini; 
 the motion, however, he returned to Ontario 
 and went to reside temjiorarily at Sarnia •— ' 
 Held, that the plaintiff by i-ivinL' a false 
 address entitled tlio defendants" to move for I 
 rrt? {"l'"'^^.^' r^^ i' l"y on the plaintiff to 
 shew that his misstatement was not made muM ( 
 Me. That being shewn, the plaintiff would be 
 driven to amend, ..r the .lefendants would be I 
 en.tled to the order. But the plaintifl e ul' 
 amend by substituting follingwood, fo, 1 e ' 
 1 T' r."''" ""•■'■•^ ''' the date of thl. writ • ^ 
 and the defendants would have been entitled to '■ 
 the order but for the plaintitrs subsequent 
 return to the jurisdiction. And •- """^"l""'* 
 Hedd, following Ihdomlo v. Cha,,tur, 4 Q. ]j. 
 U 4oJ, and tbmrd v. aa,,iev, 28 Ch. D. 232 
 that where a foreigner comes within the juris- 
 iliction pending a motion for security for costs 
 and before judgment, although for the tJmpor 
 ary purpose of enforcing his daim by ae ioThe 
 cannot be called upon to give security. ' 
 
 ,.„,f«l"'°!l°" ^°'' '''"^"'■ity was refused, without 
 costs to either party, and leave was reserved to 
 ho defendants to apply again if the plaint ff 
 should go to reside out of the jurisdiction before 
 the termination of the action. Amkrson v 
 Quebec Fire J m. Co.. \^ P, p 130 ^"'"^'^*"" v. 
 
 Foreign Oorporatlon-.lw. in Oxtarin.]- 
 I Uie plaintitis, a foreign corporation, havinir 
 acmiircl the patent right to manufacture ami 
 ; Htl a certain iiican.lescent light in the Hondn- 
 10 of tana.la, enterc.l ,„(,. an agreement with 
 another .jompuny by which the latter were to 
 ac as the agents of the plaintiffs in Ontario, 
 n<l to manuta.ture and .sell the lights at a 
 xed price or lease them, an.l the plaintids 
 wue t., receive the net profits, guaranteeing 
 the other company against lo..s. The other 
 company ..trrie.I „„ the business an.l Icis.mI 
 the Ights ui their own name. A large num- 
 "••.of these lights were in existence in Ontu, 
 under lease to dillerent persons :- 
 
 Held that as the liglUs could not be ma.le 
 av.lable in execution without a takin,' of 
 accounts between the two companies, thev were 
 not assets of the plaintifFs in Ont.uio sulic e, t 
 to answer a motion for .security for costs. 
 ; -Nor c.uld the idaintitls be regarded as resi- 
 
 ■nei'sH" "^"f'"'" ''y '■•-'•■'«"■' -'f their ,loingb,. 
 ne.ss through the medium of the other coinpany 
 
 1" 'i\"i! 3S2;'" ""'"" ''''"^''•''" ^'"^ ''■ ''^'- '^"■'"■- 
 
 Former Action.] -The practice by which 
 
 vlen the defendant's costs'of a former ac ,1 
 
 for the same or substantially the same cause 
 
 were unpaid, the .lefendant wis entitled to In e 
 
 the latter action stayed until tia.y shouhl be 
 
 aid, Ls now superseded by the etlect of Rule 3! 
 
 the defeiulant'H only 
 
 reincdy })eiiig to apply 
 
 under Rule 1243 for security for c.,s s in' he 
 Bccond action. Cam/Ml v. A7,/,V, lu P. R 440^ 
 
 Infant=i.]-Infants having a how) pit cause 
 o action are pnvilege.l suitors; and the sane 
 
 ^ 1 m^i.'^l *'• m"'"*^ ^'" '■"''' ''•'<'"''• ""t " e 
 applied as in the ease of a<lults. 
 
 I If the next friend of the infant plaintiffs 
 
 i |eing the natural guar.lian, is within tVe u ! 
 
 : c Km when the action is begun, and so^on. 
 
 ' *'"".^'« f "''''"'" /"', the Court will not too 
 
 anxiously scrutinize the tenure of his residence? 
 , And where the infant plaintitis and their 
 
 natural guardian an.l next irieml were foreign' 
 I e s, an.l came within the jurisdiction merely f,,r 
 
 t e p„rpo.se ot bringing the actions, but con 
 
 f^ ecnn'rTf" "^' ^ *'"-; '""'■' "^ "" application 
 ha.l a?., ?//"" '""*'• ""•' '* 'M'I»av..,l that they 
 had a bomljid,' cause of action, an or.ler staving 
 proceedings until a new next frien.l within the 
 jurisdiction should be foun.l, was reversed 
 A Ik ''\-^'"!l"'r«'^avHm/io,i Co., 15 P. R. 409 
 Afhrmed by the L-ivisional Court, 15 P. R. 455. 
 
 Foreign Commission. ]-An order for a for- 
 eign commission being discretionary, there is 
 power to impose proper terms in mating it 
 
 Interpleader. ]-Sccurity for costs may be 
 ori^^ered m interpleader proceedings. ^ 
 
 di^SX '"""''''' ' ^- ^- ^- 221. 352, 
 
 The party substantially and in fact moving 
 
 the proceedings whether plaintiff or defendant 
 
 m the interpleader issue, should, if resident out 
 
 I'.li^ 
 
 liih 
 
 
 
819 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 H ;: 
 
 I 
 
 «r !»>« jurisiliction, tfiv<' WPiirity to t\w o miu- 
 
 > let. .1, ..t ((), ). |„r »,,..,. ity f„r oc.mh in attioriH 
 
 220 
 
 Htl.l t ,at 1». (.Ittintifl' was not a can.li.lat.. 
 fnr u ,,»l.|,o othcc In thiH |-r..vin,„ uitl.ii, il 
 n...an.nK - IC S. (. .,h. .", kc... 5, nnl, ho ■. 5 
 {'». Mori' tho ,lat.. of tho «,it forth., fiction 
 u.Ml thutnMto tl,. lihelH „Il..«t.,lto hu . .! „• 
 I...hl.Hh..,l 1,.. o>.. that .ha...^. notice I,.! , 
 ncti.,n wn.l.r tl... Mtatnto wan m^vxHiuy ; l,„t Hu, 
 
 rE'!;i:*,-;r'l:'!K="'¥ = 
 
 ;r't,:;;r,£i^=*-'.''=™™;^='ft!;; 
 
 ng^iinst ju^lic.'Hof t)i 
 
 not III! more, Imt rati 
 
 or.linnry api.li.ations 1,,. Keouiitv whi.r.V*rm UV/fP """"' "l""' ""»-"" "n' Knuind that 
 
 plaintitf iH out <.f th„ countrv • * '^ | !«-"'' "^"1 ""' «'^^"' ''^' -^uck out un,l..r H„|„ 
 
 '"•"■ ■■' ■"' •'"■ """■»''«.'. = »;'v.:;v:;,t;,ii;^;;;;-:2;irw;:::; 
 
 Si!:'s;;:r!t::.:;;;rS;i;;.f->;;:- 
 
 ti"n (u', a), an.l tho slalutt. <ii<i not unplv, tl , r,. 
 liuxinK l..en no .-..tiaoti.ui. ( ■„nim, \- h . .-. 
 
 action : - 
 
 Hfl.l, tlwU tho Court «houM l,c I. .ss cxactinL' 
 .HHto the character of tho property who,,, tho 
 pcr«.n IS a .,«,)./„/, rosi.lcnt than in tho or.lin- 
 
 ;;:n^;?;:iA"ihr;'ho],!;:u-t.r tirs i -" '« '■ «• ^^"• 
 
 A.Ml>>lK.rothoplaint,irha,l property, partly 'cS^^^^^^^ '"■ •■^' '*■ ^'^'' ^''' '"■■'^- »-••'« 
 
 reala.ul partly pergonal, t,> the vUu' .,f ss() ov .^ ' Tn ^ ''"' " '".'^'-■'"""^ ''"' li'-'l eo„tu„„,l 
 
 Hocunty for costH wan not ovd.^, )Z^'y' i^^^^J^^^TT" r""'"".'''^ "^" -""''"^^t, ,1, 
 lloli,,tsov, 14 1'. K. 7 ■' " ," " ^'^^* '" t'lt'ii'foiniation of the public 
 
 n a. iiou^paper article pul.liHhoJ hy \u. 
 
 Justice of tho Peace -Mn-iu.y^u an action '•' unmiH! .?». l'' '''""!"''' ,«"« /•^''•■■■'■••-l to an aa 
 HKa.Mst a justice of tho peace for falsV ■ re ^ he^ "u^^ , ""'Ht was slato.l tha, 
 
 mi.l iniprisonnient, it aoneared tliit th .e «,1 fn.k.iv(,urnl to ruin his wife hy ineitin.- 
 
 valMl warrant „f con.n, uent ^ i s ^ ^^ ';' ' '"'V 'VT Kr7 I" "I"""'' ^"'"'"'O' «itl. W ^ 
 "II' in the county of (.., «hic| was „, , Z ^ , '''• ' I''-* ']"" ''"' ""^ i"V„lvo a criminal 
 .>!-c.nco of the j.olico n, j-i tra ml .^so 1 1 v ' T f T ''''\ *'''' "'r''''^^ section «,). 
 
 the .lefon.lnnt Lv exe,,.tion n I , ^ . ^f , ^ '"-•, '''^^ '■'"'•""« '''<• ""t •miten.l that th'. 
 
 T., an.l un.lor which the "ai iff wa i ere ' it' 'wa': '' "^ "^ "," ''T V'^'''' '"• '■■•'^■"'""« = ^1 
 ll'oste.l. ' ^'"^ *'"-■'« I 't ;\"? lo'ice.lo.l l,y the plaintifl' thai ho ha.l ,,„t 
 
 Th.. j.laintiir alloy..,! that tho arrest was action"" •"'"''"''^' *" '""'"'^'' ""= ""^'^ "^ t''« 
 
 n.;t^::'tu:iini,.£e:;iSr;^:: wr!:::t :;»? LoS -n'thri' r^^"'; ""^7'"-'— to . 
 
 Locauso the .hfen.lanfs authority was not s e.l ■. .^'f'.'"'"^' ""I'' "f "'"^t «as puh- 
 shewn on the face of his n.an,lato. It a ear.d .ItlV ;m L V' '" V"''"'^''^'' "' «'""! 
 
 however, that tho .lefcn.Ianfs n.amhatc wAs pliiutir- ">='l'^'^' "f iH-wiU towar.ls the 
 
 "^^^^^'^i^^'u^S^^lZt^t^Z^J^A^ ''f^' '"-" -— tancos. an 
 ■'-'I -t .,ut. It was a,lnutte.l tl a to plaint i h fs n . ver i '''^^'7''""', "\ '^ •'"'1^,- in Ci,a,n. 
 «as not ,,08sesse.l of property sullUe ^ '/„ .cu,?f f *^' % T^^ 
 answer costs ; '' """"-"-'"^ to ing secuiity for costs, should not prcv.iil /;,„ 
 
 ..,',';;l;:o r;;;.i.£°,;:iSK„-s "■;&■;' ••!KV;.,t"'"'" '■■■"■"" ' '•"«■'■"«'■»■■ ■« 
 
 1') I'. K. 22L' ■'ow//iu<A \. y/ar«, a elian/e thai ih. plaintiff h 
 
 crirDi.il iit.ij iL, 
 
 lllVd' .i 
 
 guilty of a 
 
 Justice of the Pe&co—Time ^—Ar, owln- I i ■"""."",'."*'' '^''''''s published )iy the dcfen- 
 -"l''-,r,;f Vict. ch. ..'.3 for seen iVfor cc.Sni;,T il"'''"'??"'^"^^^^ 
 an„ef,on n„.„-.,.,. .. :.. .: ,. .. ^ '""^ f-o^ts in , ail incorporatecl company, complain,.,! in an 
 
 the " 
 
 ing to tuem pi 
 
 'u.acti,;„ against n justice o^ h^p^u=e m, " ' ^iti, 7n "f' ' c,unpany, complain^! in a, 
 ■•I.tl.inita time within which se,..,HtTis,t ! S^^^ ''"'' the plantifTs l,a,. 
 
 U.ven nor provi.le for .lismis.a! of the^.cti,) in I m sto, k n H "'''"™'-'" ''V '^s""'« to them pai,!- 
 <Itfau It ; he or.ler shouh! he simply "thttle I 'h! '' '•'"'"I'^^'-V :- 
 
 planitill .lo giye sc.urity for the costs f tl^ .n^' 'i''°°.,'"' fW-^ation for security for 
 ■ Icfe.,lant to i,eineuric,lLthL, tin .-^vi' ."*-?'« ".Kler_the above section, that the wonl 
 
 ■lefc,.,lanto.,eineuric,l in the action.- r/w»V/ ! .IhrnnTir' i """ "'"•"'': «<;<''""". that the wc 
 
 atioi cannot be charged criminally with a crime 
 
 pi'n^^^S"f''"^-/T "I"*''^ Q//;-]-The XSr' ""'"'^ "'' *'"= ""-'«°" «f the 
 ^ 1,., ,.f f? . '.';"''.'te at an election of a 
 ; mi" 1^1^"; ;^«!^'!^^-.A--"''ly"f Ontario, 
 
 defen 7' • ."• •'"'"'^ ''^'"' Pi'l^lislieil by the 
 be * .'". '"'- "««'«P'^P'^'-. -me of them 
 
 (Jcroie he ,late ot tho writ for the election aiwl 
 some alter that .late but before the eTect/ou:- 
 
 1 ry'vro/Tir'' ^'{«"<^^«*'«'- V. Williams, [\m] 
 1 V. JJ. !)4, followed. 
 
 509. distinguished. 
 
 nnhi;!,"'"'" ''" 'defendants l,y affi.lavit shewed 
 publication 111 good faith an,l other circum- 
 stances sufficient under the above section to 
 
 ti 
 
S81 
 
 COSTS 
 
 cntiil.'thom to w.ur.fy f... cost., and the caic 
 lun.l.waH not .1,.,,1.„.,1 l.y tht. cto^m , yamimi- 
 tmn (if thu (l..pniu„t ,„, 1 s atli.luvit, ,.i, . .I.t 
 w.:. i.m.lo for H.ici B..curit^ , (/«„r,/<ViH ll.,y .sh,,, 
 (,<ii,u/ ( o. V. M uild iVew<.;ja,;,r I o. , 1(! V, A. ;)oo. 
 
 228 
 
 ll,ukm,nl. )- I ,„,„ „„ a|,,.lit„ti.,n .uhI.'i f{. 
 
 , f ■ "I'l T- "• '"•"^•^•'"•ity for c.,«tH in an 
 ..•tion for IiIhI, ,n wl.al. tho «„r,lH couiplaini.l 
 ot. ,mhli»l,e,l „, tlR. .Icfin.IantH' n..J,,„,K.r, 
 mriiwul tlu. plaintid of attrnil.t.,1 AaLV- 
 mail : — ' 
 
 H.l.i, tli.it the wor.lH nii^ht l.cnr Hud, a 
 iiH.iMii.g OH to clm,^'„ tlio i„<lirt.-,l.Io oIlViuo 
 .l..mu'.l l,y H..,tm,. Kid of tlu. Cjuunal (•,„!,. 
 un.l llio <|U.Hli..n wh.tiur thuy ,li,l «„, h lie, 
 rr«,l with tlu. context «a.s for tho jury, and one 
 whul, hIm.uI.I not l,t. ,l,ti.,„,in,..l upon tlM« 
 app ■'■H ■■"■ : an,| tlu. Master in CluunlVrs hav 
 iiiK liel.l that they " involve.! n erin.iiutl eharr.. ■ 
 liiB cleeision ..-houhl n.it l-e inteifere.l with 
 
 An aetmn .Mnnot ho eon.sjclere.l "trivial (,r 
 frivoous «,th,n the meaning of .eetion !l 
 imirey heeaUMe the cxiNtenee of a. l'..o(1 defence 
 .... the merits i. ^hewn l,y the .lefe.idanfH 
 a lidav.t and not c,.iitra\ene.I l.y an alhdavit <,f 
 heplaintill. I he latter may properly eonsi.ler 
 that upon an applieation for Meurity lor eo.st« a 
 demid on outh ot the truth of the eharues | 
 .•W'iii«thinii«unne,e.ssary. M,„;lo„<,td v. HW,/ 
 A(./.v«/".T To., 10 1'. U. 3:i4. 
 
 Libel — Amcv;,,//,, ,• — Friro/o„.H Ar/ion.]~ 
 \V here an aetmn of libel was l.iou-ht l.y one 
 t.neme complaining (.f statements puMished in 
 a newspaper iinpntuiK a crime toone(;raham 
 an.l . appeaivd that it was stat..d in the article 
 f'.inplaincl of that no one w.^uUl believe the 
 cmvKeapi.nsl (Jrahani.and that in an article 
 published in th.. Mime newspaper, after the 
 cH.uiuencem..nt of the action, it was stated that 
 the person referral to in the former article was 
 ..ot the ,, amt, i; and there were other facts 
 Sm'd to'.'i ' '*''""""' ^'"' "o'tl'« person 
 H( Id, that the action was friw.lous, and the 
 
 1 n.ler R. S, () ch. r,~, sec. 9. <,■,:,„„. v. Glohe 
 l',;Ht,i,,i Co., 14 1'. R. 72. 
 
 U\>el~K,u'^,Hiprr — aood Faith.]- On an 
 application un.lcr R. S. (). cli. o7, see !» for 
 a<v„rity tor co.sts in an action of libd, thcludne 
 is n,,t to try the merits ol the action ; if it appears 
 on the afhdavits filed l.y the defendant that [here 
 IS .1 1'nmatiirii' ease of justification or privile.'e 
 "n;l that the plaintiti is not possessed',, ,%: 
 e V M.ficent to answer costs, the statute is 
 8-i.Hlied and security should be ordered; it is 
 ot for the Jud,.,. to pass upon disputed facts 
 IS. lose, in e..ui.icting allidavits filed against 
 
 . J'^^^\-^^"'V"P'r~Good FaUh.]-\n an 
 ••' tiou of hbel ngai.ist the publishers an.l e.litor 
 01 a newspaper, the defence suggested bv affi- 
 « avu_s tiled upon an applieatiw. under R. ^8 
 
 'it'lt'J^''- ^: ^•"" «':''"" 'ty for costs, was that 
 the statements e.,.np!,.,.,^^ ^f ^^ defamatory did 
 not refer to the plaintiff. '""■•ur^ am 
 
 Blade by a Master for security being of opinion 
 
 that, imon thn fair rea.Unu of the statement, 
 comp afiied of thov .li.l .ef.^- .o l.; .tliUff?- 
 
 » t. h..d a goo.| .u^fence on the merits, and 
 hat th, aatementH eoinidained .f were pub 
 
 slioiil.l be set asi.ie. 
 S>n,,„ V Mail I'ri„ti„,, Co., 10 I'. R. |,»> 
 
 Motion to Quash B,v law l;.rou,n.au,.. V- 
 'n a iii,,tion to ,,uasl, u niunieipai by law » 
 
 ui;^^i'.",f;"'r' '/' ";:"'•''""•>■ • " '"""' ^'"'"-t '-^ 
 
 Tti T- l; l(io. "'"'""'""^ y •"'<,,,. /Arthur, 
 
 Nominal t :aintlff- .\7,wnnl of S,curily.\- 
 .\nac,,,n was begun l.y |). as plaintitf, snif^ 
 
 1 1> 1 alf of h.msel. an.l all other shareholders 
 n tie.lefendant eoinpany, to set a^de a imli, 
 "Kiit obtain. .1 by the -lefen.lant C. agains' tt 
 
 ion, amen,le.l ,h,. writ ,.f s,.nim..ns I. • „re 
 serving ,t by a.ldin,, A., another shar hoi ler 
 
 » a plaintKl. Up„n motion by C. for security 
 
 <-• costs, A. was e.a.n;ne.l, and it appeared 
 from his examination - hat he lia.l never i , e^ 
 
 hnuging any action i self, that he ,li,| .ot 
 
 know the nature or the Position of the actio. 
 ;.mi that he .11,1 not 1< ,w U. He lia, , how-' 
 ever, written a formal tfr authori/.,,^ 1)^ 
 H,d.e.t,.rstohavehima,, i.d as a plan,, ,ff. It 
 aN,. ap[,eaie.l that A. h , • no pro .ei tv ..v,.e,.t 
 son.,, houseliohl furniture ■ triiiini vah..': --" 
 
 ne ,1, tliat A. wis meiel a lUJiniual idaiiitiir 
 for il."-' '^•""'^""'1-1 to..norder for 'security 
 
 uouhl be an expensive one, the plaiiititrs woro 
 .-r, ered to give security in t ,e sum of §1,000 
 
 Komlnal Plalntm_../r/,o„ to EstahlUh Right 
 uj \\,nj-Mo,;,„u,,.r a„d M. './o-/,.,,l_ Where 
 an action ,s brought to estabi, a right o way 
 mer lan.ls a,lj,.ining those of m ich the plaintiff 
 IS the owner'subject to a iimrtL; .'e, aiul liavi.n/ 
 .■t.gar.1 to the value of th, prop, :y e am.um? 
 o he mortgage, atid oth.^r Jir. .mstanc s the 
 lan.ls may be sai.l to bo really t mortya. 'ee's 
 
 s en itlcl t,. security for costs, i the nlaintiir 
 be without substance-— •■'■« piaintut 
 
 m,^rf 'I'.'o'^ ■M'^«Mahon,.J., in Chai, oers, that the 
 m, I tgageew as not a necessary party to the -iction. 
 
 C.u r %hf] '"'■ -^^'•■'•''^""'- J •. i" "^^' Divisional 
 Im 1,. Vl'l T";J P';"'"^^'" P"'y ""<! should 
 
 Several Plalntlffs-O./,/ On. in . n-i.diction 
 ~Jou,t ^l(7/o«.] -Action by the i.low, as 
 dowress and the children, as heirs-a law of a 
 doc,.ase,l persc^n, to recover possessi, , ot land 
 allege, to be the property of 'the ,lece,..e,i • 
 
 Held that the action was a joint -ne and 
 although t)ie plaintifTs ,.ther than the wi,^^ 
 residcl out of the jurisdiction, they co.ik not 
 be ordered to give security for costs 
 
 ^mlthTTr'V-^''''^: 10 0. B. 1). 1.3. followed. 
 i>mu^ V. tiUviiiUiorne, lo 1'. K. 197. 
 
 ^**1^^,^-. ]-!?»" 'I'^tion for slander brought 
 under o2 Viot. ch. 14 (0.), the defamatory wofds 
 
 I :i 
 
223 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 complained of imimting want of chastity to the 
 
 plaintifr, an uiimiui icd feii,alc, and also for an 
 
 assault, the (kfemlant uioveil under sub-section 
 
 J of section 1 of the Act, for security for costs, 
 
 upon an affidavit whicli stated, among other 
 
 things, that the defendant had a good defence on 
 
 the merits, Ijut did not disclose such defence :— 
 
 Held tliat the affidavit was not sufficient, for 
 
 & prima Jane defence must be shewn ; but the 
 
 crossexaniination of the defendant upon her 
 
 affadavit might be read in aid of the atKdavit 
 
 itseit; and counter afhdavits could not be 
 
 received : — 
 
 Held, also, tliat the stay of proceedings in the 
 order made for security for costs should not 
 apply to the count for assault. Lancanttr v 
 liyrkmnn, 15 P. R. 199. 
 
 221 
 
 PnH.l Tr^°"*?',-°°"'*'^-^ defendant is not 
 entitled to have delivered out to him foi suit .i 
 )ond for security for his costs of the action tik.,1 
 by the plaintiff, after judgment in the defei,. 
 daiit a favour with costs in the High Court 
 while an appeal by the plaintiff to tlie Court ..: 
 Appeal is pending, notwithstanding that the.,' 
 IS no stay of execution for the costs award, ,1 
 to the defendant. 
 
 Hatilyv. Merdifin/n' Despatch Co., 12 A 1' 
 P R.^SO?'^ "'"' ^''"°"'^''- ^^/«^ ''■ *'»«e, l'(i 
 
 Slander- JJim/en o/P,-oo/.]- Upon an appli- 
 cation under 52 Vict. ch. 14, sec. 1, sub-sec. 3 
 (U.), for security for costs of an action for 
 slander imputing uncliastity to a female, the 
 onus is on the defendant to shew that the plain- 
 tiff has not sufficient property to answer the 
 costs of tlie action ; and to defeat such an appli- 
 cation It IS not necessary that the plaintiff 
 should have property to the amount of JbOO over 
 and above debts, incumbrances, and exemptions. 
 
 And where it was shewn that the plointiff 
 had property of the value of S500 at least, and 
 It was not shewn that she had not property of 
 much greater value, the application was refused 
 
 Breaily v. L'oher/.son, 14 P. R. 7, considered. 
 Jftaatir v. Coonty^ 15 P. R. 290. 
 
 WlndluK-up Act— Inter mi hi,/ Shareholder 
 out oj thi' Jw-i^ilktion.Y-An order was made by 
 the Court delegating the powers everoisable by 
 the Court for the purpose of winding-up a com- 
 pany, to a referee, pursuant to R, S. C ch l^g 
 ?D ') "— '^^ '""'-'"'^'-''' "^y ^- ^'ict. ch. .32, sec. "26 
 
 Held, that power was delegated to the referee 
 to order security for costs and to stay proceed- 
 ings till security should be given by a share- 
 holder resident out of the jurisdiction, who 
 intervened : — » 
 
 Held, also, that the liquidator and others 
 opposing the .npplications made bv the inte'-- 
 veiling shareholder were not barred of their 
 right to security by not applying till after the 
 original applications of the shareholder had been 
 dismissed, and appeals taken ; bat that the 
 security should be limited to the costs of the 
 appeals, lie Hariiia OU Co., 14 P. R. S.-^S 
 
 2. Miscellaneoua Cases. 
 
 Compliance with Order Under Protest- 
 
 Jiiyht to Appeal.]— See Dufy y. Donovan, 14 P. 
 K. 159, ante 19. 
 
 Delivery Out of Bond. 1— Where a plaintiff, 
 being out of tlie jurisdiction, has given security 
 for the defendant's costs of the action, and has 
 succeeded in the Court of first instance and in 
 the Court of Appeal, he is entitled, notwith- 
 standing that the defendant is appealing to the 
 bupreme Court of Canada, to have his secnrity 
 delivered out to iiim. '' 1 
 
 namill V. Lilley, 3 Times L. R. 546 ; 56 L T 
 -N. S. 620, followed. Marsh v. Wehb, 15 P. R. 04. 
 
 D sallowanceof Bond.]-A bond was file,l 
 
 bj the defendant for the purposes of an appeal 
 
 to the Court of Appeal. Leave to appeal wa. 
 
 however necessary, and had not been obtain,,! 
 
 before filing the lon.l which was, therefore, „„ 
 
 the . th April, 1S9I, disallowed. Leave U, 
 
 appeal was afterwards obtained, and the sam,- 
 
 bond w-as, on the ISth September, 1891, rcfik,! 
 
 without the consent of the sureties, and wa- 
 
 again disallowed :— . . . 
 
 Held rightly so ; for the sureties mi.rht 
 
 object that the bond had been improperly use.l 
 
 by the defendant ; and the respondent wa^ 
 
 entitled to a security free from any objections 
 
 of that nature. '' 
 
 The plaintiff objected to the bond on ti„ 
 ground of the insufficiency of one of the sur,- 
 ties, and m support of that objection read the 
 sworn statements of such surety in anotlur 
 
 Held, that such statements were admissible 
 against the defendant, who was putting f,,-. 
 wanl the surety as a person of substance. Jo,,., 
 V. Macdonald, 14 P. R. 535. 
 
 Dismissing Action-'' SvfiicienI Came."]- 
 The fact that the plaintiff has lodged an appeal 
 against an order for security for costs is " sutH. 
 cient cause within the meaning of Rule 12-hi 
 to exempt him from having his action dismissal 
 for failure to comply with the order, pendh,.. 
 the appeal. ^ '^ 
 
 And if a motion to dismiss is made, the better 
 pr.actice is to enlarge it before the appellate 
 tribunal, to be dealt with after the main ques- 
 tion has been determined. Jhvnelt v. Ew,,:n 
 t'rinting and PxMuhing Co., 15 P. R. 4S0. 
 
 Dismissing Action.]- Where an order f„r 
 
 security f,ir costs directs that unless security be 
 given within a limited time the action shall l,o 
 dismisscl and security is not given within the 
 time limited, the action is to be regarded ,. 
 dismissed, unless the defendant treats it as still 
 
 R"f '^o''-,'??"""'' ' ^- ^- ^- "6, followed. 
 
 Kule 12ol does not give a plaintiff any furtlur 
 time for or relieve him from the obligation tf 
 putting in his security for costs ; it only enable. 
 him to remove the stay effected by the 01, lei. 
 tor tlie sole purpose of making a motion l,.i 
 judgment under Rule 739 ; and if he does n, t 
 succeed in that motion, he must obey the or.kr 
 by putting in the full security. 
 
 But where the defendant, after the time f.ir 
 giving secnrity under the order had exinrid 
 opposed a motion for judgment under Rule T.'iy 
 and appealed tr, a Judge in Chambers, an.l ai ier- 
 wards to a Divisional Court from the or.lu- 
 mude upon such motion, without taking tlie 
 objection that the action was at an end — 
 
225 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 Held, that he hnd waivpd flin «i,j„„4.- 
 
 Upon appeal to the Divisimial Court thp 
 
 upon cross-examination on his affidavit of iusti ' 
 ficat».n, to disclose the liabilities of the Ct 
 nership. Dcujlas v. Blachy, U P. R. 504 ; 
 
 Parties to Bond-Com/iV/on of Bond] ~Jrx 
 an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada 
 although It IS not necessary that thrappellart 
 should he a party to the appeal bond The ^*s 
 made a party and does not execute the ifmJ 
 
 --"^7" l^'-,Tud'Jn/e^t':SdVnm :i t°o 
 secute the said appeal and ' tnXZl^ ^'°; ' 
 
 228 
 
 I'O^Wked" nnn"!.' ''*??«'''."'»''"• «"le 864 should 
 rliJ„f • P, ° '^^ "° "it^niiediate thinL' ai.d 
 directory ,„ character, an<l that the defen, , 
 was not preclu.led from appealing r^„, /he ' 
 l^T.ul ^''« ^"^"'g "ffioe,^eca,T«e hj did ' , t 
 appeal from the order of the Master 
 
 i n' ')/r\^^ ^- K- 30' fallowed. ■ 
 
 I fffo»'e>lh 1 1 P. R. .S(j, , distinguished 
 
 : by the Divisional Court! 14 P. R. m. ''"""' 
 
 'Hef?n\^a'^^?rti;;ie?'-f": 
 oSoVtaxSrs-^or- '^^^^•^' ^-"^ ' -"5« 
 
 : '•''"^ tliscretion of a taxing officer as to th^ 
 amount of counsel fees will^nrbe interred 
 with upon appeal. I'al/.ot v. Poole, 15 P. R 2 74.' 
 
 nH'^p'^1^T^.°■"^•'~■^ P^'y should not be de- 
 prive,l of h.s appeal from the taxation by ren on 
 of the officer having issued his ce.tificate iXe 
 the party has carried in his objections «! 
 required by Rule 1230, Mhere he has 'no? 
 
 0,1 t^P nffi'"' '"'' "■'-•**'? '" K°°'' faith, relying 
 a ter tho ?''V"°' ^'.'"'"8 I'is certih-ci^te un^i*! 
 after the taxation of interlocutory costs 
 
 Cuerrierv. lVhlte.}2V M f-,?! ,l;r*- -l , 
 Cousineau v. Park, irfp.' 1 37 ' ^'^*"'S">«hed. 
 
 Parties to Bond - Co«fWto« of Bomll- 
 \\ here, upon an application by o/e of sev^^l;^ 
 defendants, an order is ma.le for securitv for 
 Tt '' "'^y P''°Pe>''y Provi.le that the" e ^rftv 
 
 proper case. Belap J. CAaS'^ll R R. 305" 
 
 ColfHTr'' ''°'' °°^*^ °f Appeal.]-&e County I 
 
 sv, p";^'";?'^ °^ Appeal-Divkion Court I 
 
 -StU'REME Court OF Canada. ^ouRr ! 
 
 Taxation and Recovery of Costs. 
 
 1, 
 
 Appeals from Taxation. 
 
 Art^^^f to Master under Rule 851-Fnrther 
 fc ^/''t'T^^^"'' /-'« CerUfZeof 
 inanfcHm f^r"^" aPP^a) by the defendant I 
 texIL itt ""'""""y *'■•"» ^he certificate of a 
 taxing officer, upon taxation of the nlaiutift-« 
 
 a?i liL?""".^"'' 'f 7"'- bete^n" ci | 
 Pe'^diSt;. " 'in^ rtVr S*^ ^""«"'«'^S , I 
 
 -iHe^esi;:Kl„2i:j^-«„o«^f-his: 
 
 15 
 
 Solicitor „drai.M^»,i „/ Co„,J_B,. 
 
 County Court, for an order for taxatiom 
 An action was brought against school trustees 
 
 J« g: ofthTnud/cot^'f''^* applied"!": 
 tl,;„ „ /• : . fe tourt for an order under 
 
 Dk ntiff .':.l'° ^^\'^' ^'^^ "f the solicitor "the 
 
 pi^^ri^rr^'^rtoTi;: 
 
 1 here was no appeal as of riYiit to thp rn,„.i- 
 of Appeal from th^ latter decision, Imt Teave o 
 
 ^fif^^!«S^l.t":^SSw:il£? 
 
 rCd'a^-' ^•"^^°"«'^^ ^°"- «"preifc£'t 
 Held per Ritchie, C. J., .Strong and Gwynne 
 
 to^';ntertain''ih'"^'"''V""[' "^^'^ JuriBdL"ro 1 
 >.«J„ ?.''^^"PP«^'^'• tbe subject m.itter 
 
 being one of taxation of costs, this Court ^ , d 
 
 Co,h'"'1'-'1^'''^ ^'^'^ '''"^■«'°" "f the Prov ci 
 
 £a^:yS-.S^S^:iS^-3/i; 
 taxation under said section. 
 
 dict^nTrentrtidi;o^'lS"^* fr •"°- ^""^• 
 ar^pealed from wa^S aXSj^l^^rahhl 
 «.e meaning of the Supreme Cour^ Ac^. th" 
 betw- ZVZ ■" ^'^^i^^-^tj- of the Co. 
 i a SupeTiorSur"''"*^^ ^'^ "°* °"«-«t'-^ 
 
 ^1 il 
 
 t ■ 
 
 n 
 
 ;:[ 
 
 iipi 
 
 ii I 
 
 i:i: 
 
227 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 
 Per Patterson, J. , the making or refusing to 
 make the order applied for is a matter of dis- 
 cretion and tlie case is, therefore, not appeal- 
 able. McGnumi v. McOwjan, 21 S. V. R. 267. 
 
 Solicitor and Client — Report — Court or 
 Chn7i}hers.]- The certificate of a taxing officer 
 npon a reference to taxation of a aolioitor's I)ill 
 of coats, at the instance of a client, is a report • 
 and, under Rules 84S, 849 and SoO, tlie appeal 
 therefrom siiould be to a Judge in Court upon 
 fieven clear days' notice. lie Crothem, 15 P, R. 
 
 Solicitor anil Client— Pe;)0)-^]— The report 
 or certificate ot an officer upon tiie taxation 
 of the costs of a solicitor as against his client 
 falls under the provision of Rule 1226 ((/) as to 
 its continnatidn, and is, for the purposes of an 
 appeal, a report within the meaning of Rules 
 848 and 849. Ford v. Mn.wn, 16 P. R. 25. 
 
 See Knickerbocker Co v. Rati, 16 P. R, 191, 
 post 233. 
 
 2. Apportionment. 
 
 Two Branches.]— Where an action was, 
 roughly spe;iking, divisible into two parts, one 
 clainnng compensation for land, and the other 
 seeking to restrain the defendants from i)ro- 
 ceediny to estimate it in an improper way, and 
 tlie judgment gave the plaintiff tlie costs of the 
 first branch and no costs of the second to either 
 party :— 
 
 Held, tliat the taxing officer had not erred in 
 principle in allowing the plaintiff one-half of 
 the general costs and also items which exclu- 
 sively related to the first branch. VanzaiU v 
 Villa i/e of Markham, 15 P. R. 412. 
 
 3. Co'^ts Allowed. 
 
 Abstract of Title.]— Attendance to bespeak 
 and for registrar's abstract of title, to prepare 
 for litigation or prove title, is not taxable 
 against the opposite party. Carlisle v. Roblin, 
 16 P. R. 328. 
 
 -Affidavits on Production.]— The plaintifls 
 made six affidavits on production, either 
 prompted by the action of the defence or by 
 way of voluntary supplement to tlie oricinal 
 affidavit :— 
 
 Held, tliat tliey were entitled to tax the costs 
 of one affidavit only, with extra folios for the 
 additional matter contained in tlie subsequent 
 affidavits. lialdichi v. (Jui7in ; Baldwin v. Mc- 
 Outre, 16 P. R. 248. 
 
 Affidavit on Production.]— Attendance to 
 searoli affidavit on production is not taxable 
 against the opposite party. Carlisle v. Roblin, 
 
 Brief.]— Where fees paid to witnesses are 
 disallowed, the portions of counsel's brief con- 
 taining their evidence should also be disallowed 
 Carlisle v. Roblin, 16 P. R. 328. 
 
 oo?'"'®*''^"'^" ^^ A'oJ.Hiojj, 16 P. R. 423, post 
 
 Copies.]— A writ of summons is a "plead- 
 ing or other document " within the meaning of 
 Rule .S95, and more than four copies cannot be 
 taxed. 
 
 The provision of Rule 395 as to four copies 
 covers all copies reipiiied during litigation, an.l 
 extends to the copy of pleadings in the brief 
 Sparks V. Purdi/, 15 P. R. 1. 
 
 Oopi(>a—Deposifion.'i.'\—See Re Robinson, Jfi 
 P. R. 423, post 228. 
 
 Counsel FeeB—Adcl.HiK/ on Eiidence— Refer- 
 ence — Brief-. Copirs of Deposition''.] — Upon 
 appeal from the taxation between solicitor and 
 client of a bill of costs for the defeuce of an action 
 of redemption in which, before the beginning of 
 tlie Sittings at whicli the action was entered fur 
 trial, an arrangement liad been made between 
 the parties that all the matters in question 
 shouhl be referred to a Master, and accordingly 
 no witnesses were subpcenaed, and a reference 
 was directed at the Sittings ;— 
 
 Held, tliat the taxing officer had no discre- 
 tion to allow an increased coun.^el fee with lirief 
 at the trial, as tiie action conh' lor be said to lie 
 of a special and important chai: . .or, nor to allow 
 a fee for advising on evidence. 
 
 The reference lasted for 1.37 ho-.irs, 18 of wiiieh 
 were occupied in argunrjnt. Nearly tlie whole 
 of the time was devoted to the main matter in 
 contest, viz., wliether the defendants should he 
 charged with an occupation rent, and if so at 
 what amount. The Master found that they 
 were chargeable with a rent of ??312.50. The 
 taxing officer allowed the solicitor ,§302 for the 
 tune occupied in taking the evidence and $47 
 for tlie argument : — 
 
 Held, that the allowance of counsel fees upon 
 a reference, under clause 107 of the tarif}', should 
 be exceptional and made only when matters of 
 special importance or difficulty are involved at 
 some particular sitting ; and also that the tax- 
 ing officer should have taken into consideration 
 the unreasonable time occupied over so small n 
 matter, and have exercised his discretion by 
 confining the solicitor to the minimum allow- 
 ance of $1 an hour, under clause 104 of the 
 tariff, for the argument as well as for the takiiii; 
 of the evideuce. 
 
 The taxing officer allowed the solicitor !=>77.,')0 
 for brief upon appeal from the Masters report ■ 
 this amount included 807.80 paid to the Master 
 for copies of the depositions : — 
 
 Held that the solicitor had no prima fine 
 right to order and charge for these copies, ami, 
 in the absence of any authority from his clients, 
 should not be allowed for them upon taxation. 
 
 The taxing officer allowed the solicitor m 
 counsel fee upon the apjieal, §12 for travelling 
 expenses, and ,§10 counsel fee upon the plain- 
 tiff's motion for judgment, which came before 
 the Court with the appeal ; — 
 
 Held, that these allowances, though liberal, 
 were not so clearly wrong as to justify the 
 Court in interfering. Re Robinson, 10 P. I!. 4'i,?. 
 An appeal to the Court of Appeal was dis- 
 inissed, the members of the Court being divided 
 in opinion as to the regularity of the taxation. 
 
 Counsel Fees. ]~Tho discretion of a taxiiig 
 officer as to the amount of counsel fees will not 
 be interfered with upon appeal. Talbot v. Pooh, 
 15 P. R, 274. 
 
COSTS. 
 
 Counsel Fees.]-The question of the allow- 
 aiice of counsel fees is one for the .lisfretion of 
 the taxmg officer; and where the a 't 'on ?s 
 strenuously contested on both sides, it is proper 
 
 Discontinuance.]- Where the plaintiff serves 
 Be Robimon, 16 ■ « " >t'f of.'iisc;ont,„uance under Uule (J-tl the 
 
 ■ ''f'^^"''''"' '«7^t'e'l to a reasonable time tvithb 
 which to apply for an appointment to tax hi" ' 
 co.t«, and untd after the lapse of that ttnean 
 appointment will not be granted to the p a uiff 
 even where he is ent t ed upon 'lie fin,! tnvaf ■ ' 
 ^ tax interlocutory costs Xch ma; xS'ihe 
 defendant's general costs «-Ai,et(i tiie 
 
 Under Rule 641 it is not necessary for the 
 plaintiff to ascertain the amount of the defen 
 daut s costs and pay them to make the no ce of 
 discontmuance effectual. Ban-y y. Hartly" ll 
 
 290 
 
 r?h?- i-rL^'-^^r flr-{F 
 
 opposite party. StraclZ^:'Zi,:^{^!^^ 
 ^^^Re^rence.]-,SVe RelRobln.on, 16 P. R. 423. 
 
 Examinatlon.]-An objection that a person 
 exanuued by the defendants for disco^ ei^ 'as 
 not an officer or representative of the plamt ffs 
 slioi, Id have been taken at the outset an was 
 
 Examination for DlscovArv i m„ r> i I 
 13S4 Rule 1177 was rescinTed ^vm 7^1 r" e' I 
 sabs ituted, providing that the costs of em v 
 nterlocutory examination should be borne I^ 
 the examining party, unless otherwise ordered 
 ^V liere an action was begun and the defendants 
 exannned for discovery before the Ru l" was 
 passed, but was tried and judgment gh-en aFter 
 
 Hekrth:tv"''^'r,'' '^•-^■"'^ ^-^^^ 
 
 Ubia, that the new Rule applied and thp fnv 
 
 l.ifi^S'ffTi r' r Kir ^° '^ ^o thTsuc Lsfui 
 
 ot 'theSor *' °' *'" ^-™-'^'-» -ithout an 
 
 Application for such order should be made to 
 
 the trial Judge at the trial or immediate Iv affnr 
 
 ju.lg.uent. McClary v. /Y«»i-c//, Tel^ S.^Slo! 
 
 to be taxable /iw/ ''!''. '.^■i'' '"^''^ ""^ 
 
 Ch. 447 and fLiV, """^ "''*'"' " Ch. 
 ^1/, .ind jiijra V. Maiioii IC P n or 
 
 approved and followed ^- ^^' 
 
 McZTJ' n ^-i^- ^' 'li«ting„ished. 
 P. R 207. • '" •■ "'""''" '■ ^'""'«%. 16 
 
 Service out of the Jurisdiction 1 - U^i.i 
 
 the service «>'')seqnent order allowing 
 
 ijx parte Order. ]-Counsel fee on attendance 
 to obtain e.c parte order is not taxable against the 
 opposite party. Car/Me v, Roblin, 16 PR 328? 
 
 was 1)1 opeily allowed for counsel in British Pol 
 nmbia a ending upon examination of w esses 
 there. lowuxhip of Logan v. Kirk, 14 P. R. 130 
 
 Interlocutory Costs.] _ Where un.ler the 
 
 bfe t^""" "'=""" "^"^ «°'t« thereof are ?o 
 be taxed to one party, and under interlocutory 
 
 & nffl ^ event on the (inal taxath n, the 
 
 theZtsShe"?''' ""', '^'"^ *'>« ^'^'"'tion of 
 ine coats ot the action and certify the result until 
 the interlocutory oosts are taxed, unless tho, 
 
 i.wer costs. Cotmiicau v. Park, 15 P. R, 37. 
 
 Motion for JiKicmont 1 PTo! 1 fi. i 
 
 ;^e taxation ^ l.i^^^iH^ISr'km' lli^ " 
 
 w tlie costs of a mot on for summarv \nL 
 ".ent under Rule 739, >vhich Ts use?e3i"i■ 
 
 .Suchafeeis not authorized by tariff B annevp,! 
 
 eferL^ce""'"'"'"' '^"'^^« ""•''^^*'- "en '"S 
 mat er " ' r'"^""'^'' ^?'"""^tion, or other spedS 
 matter. 6rt.>vy v. Morde,,, 1(J P. R. 1.27/ 
 
 SubpoeP.a^]_E„gros.ment of order for sub- 
 pu M.a .1,... attendance to tile the order are nof 
 
 si:K^.t8?p^^"«'*« '-'>■• ^'^^'" 
 
 toTit^lnrr ^~;-^ plaintiff who is entitled only 
 to DiMsion Court costs of an action can tax as 
 part of such co.sts his travelling expenses from 
 al-road to attend the trial, if hi is a 1 eeessTrv 
 and material ^yitness. Talhot v. I'ooleTlTv^K. 
 
 Witnesses.]- Where witnesses in attendance 
 at he trial are not calle.l, the onus is o Th^ 
 party subp,Bnang them to shew their relevancy 
 tarlmle v. Roldiii, 16 P. R. 328. ""«vancy. 
 
 4. Recoi-ery of Costs. 
 
 Dleoonttnuance.l-Where theplaintiffs'-rves 
 a notice of discontinuance under Rule (ill, Tb^ 
 
231 
 
 mt 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 23a 
 
 dofendant is entitled to a reasonable time within 
 which to apply for an appointment to tax his 
 costs, and until aflei tlic lapse of that time an 
 appointment will not lie granted to the plaintiflT, 
 oven where he is entitled upon the final taxation 
 to tax interlocutory costs which may exceed the 
 defendant's j>eucral costs. 
 
 Under l!ule 641 it is not necessary for the 
 plaintiff to ascertain the amount of Jie defen- 
 dant's costs and pay them to make the notice of 
 diacontmuance effectual, liany v. Hartley, 15 
 ". li. 376. 
 
 Execution for.]— The word " immediately " 
 in Rule 863 means " instanter ; " and a party to 
 whom costs arc awarded l>y an order may issue 
 execution therefor on the day of the taxation 
 Clarke v. Cniijhlon, 14 1'. R. 34. 
 
 Notice of Taxation — Eelajiition. ] — The 
 defendant obtained an order dismissing the 
 action with costs for non-prosecution, upon notice 
 to the plaintiff, who did not appear upon the 
 motion. The defendant did not serve the plain- 
 tiff with a coi)y of the order, and went on and 
 taxed his costs, without notice to the plaintiff, 
 and issued execution for the amount taxed :— 
 
 Held, no ground for setting aside the execution 
 that the onler had not been served l)efore tlie 
 taxation. 
 
 Hojilon v. liohfrtson, 23 Q. B. D. 126h, dis- 
 tinguished : — 
 
 Held, also, that the absence of a notice of 
 taxation was not an irregularity entitling the 
 plaintiff to set aside the execution, but only to 
 a retaxation of the costs. 
 
 Lloyd v. KdU, r> Dowl. 125, followed. Cran- 
 ston V. B/nir, 15 P. R. 167. 
 
 judgment, and to have the sole right to contnjl 
 the judgment and execution to the extent (/f 
 their costs between solicitor and client, and tlio 
 plaintiff became entitled against the defendant 
 to costs of garnishing proceedings upon the 
 judgment, begun before the lien was dccl:ii< d :— 
 Held, reversing upon this point the deci.xidn 
 of Boyd, C, 14 I'. R. 31, that Rule IL'Or) did 
 not apply to enable a set-off of thn costn to 
 be made. Clarke v. Crciijhioii 14 1". K. 100, 
 
 Interlocutory Costs.]— Where, under the 
 judgment m an oction, the costs thereof aic to 
 be taxed to one party, and under interlocnt.ny 
 orders certain costs are payable in any event oii 
 the final taxation, the taxing officer should i,„t 
 close the taxation of the costs ot the action and 
 certify the result until the interlocutory ccst.'^ 
 are taxed, unless there is unreasonable delay in 
 bringing in a bill of the latter costs. Coiish„„u 
 V. J'ark, 15 P. K. 37. 
 
 Interlocutory ^Costs.]— In the course of n 
 proceeding for the taxation, at the instani-e cf 
 the client, of the solicitors' bills of costs, tluro 
 were several intcrlocuiory aiiplications and iip. 
 peals by the solicitors, Avhich were disnii.^scd 
 with costs to? be paid by the solicitors forth 
 with : — 
 
 Held, that the solicitors were not entitlid to 
 have these costs set-off against the aniouut nf 
 costs alleged to be duo to them upon the bills 
 then being taxed. AV C/arkc mid Bolmen, l,". I- 
 R. 2C9. See the next case. 
 
 Undertakings of 8olicltorB.]—Stmbl,', that 
 payment out of the moneys in Court to the 
 defendant of iiis costs of the High Court and 
 Court of Appeal, upon the undertaking of 
 his solicitors to repay in the event of the further 
 appeal succeeding, could not properly be ordered. 
 
 Kelly V. Imperial Loan Co., 10 P. R. 499, 
 commented on. JpriaiUvral Insurance Co, v 
 Sargent, 16 P. R. 397. 
 
 5. Set-off. 
 
 Interlocutory Costs.]— Proceedings may be 
 considered "interlocutory " within the meaning 
 of Rule 1205, till satisfaction is obtained in 
 respect of the moneys, costs, or subject matter in 
 controversy ; and where judgment was given for 
 payment by the plaintiff to the insolvent defen- 
 dant of the costs of the action, and the defen- 
 dant's solicitors were by an order declared to 
 have a lien upon such judgment, and the plaintiff 
 became entitled against tho defendant to costs 
 of garnishing proceedings upon the judgment, 
 begun before the solicitor's lien was declared 
 a set-off was allowed. Clarke v. Cniyhton, 14 
 P. R. 34. See the next case. 
 
 Interlocutory Costs. ]— Where judgment was 
 given for payment by the plaintiff to the insol- 
 vent defendant of the costs of the action, 
 and the defendant's solicitors were by an order 
 of Court declared to have a lien upon such 
 
 Interlocutory Costs.-Dccisions of the Mas 
 ter in Chambers and Rose, J., 15 P. R. -Jon 
 refusing to order a set-off of certain inti rlocu! 
 lory costs against the amount allcge.l to be due 
 to the solicitors upon bills in course of taxation 
 affirmed on appeal: — ' 
 
 Held, that, as the tnxation had never bicn 
 comjiltted, an<l the solicitors declined to pro- 
 ceed with it,, they were.jiot entitkd to th'j i-ct- 
 off. 
 
 If the taxation had been completed, the fact 
 of the interlocutory costs being ordered to he 
 paid forthwith after taxation, would not have 
 prevented their being ordered to be set-off; but 
 It raised an inference that it was not intended 
 that they should be set off. 
 
 Whether the costs in (juestion should be set 
 oH or not, was in the Master's discretion, and, 
 having regard to the fact that they had been 
 assij;ned, and to the other ciicunistancts before 
 the Court, it could not be said that an improiier 
 discretion had been exercised. Re Clark, iml 
 Holme.% 16 P. R, 94. 
 
 Successful and Unsuccessful Defendants.] 
 
 — By tlie judgment in the action costs were 
 awarded to the plaintiff against the chief defen- 
 dant, and to the other defendants against tlie 
 plaintiff, without any directicjn as to scttini' (ff 
 costs, and the plaintifl's solicitor asserted alitn 
 upon the costs awarded to his client against the 
 chief defendant. The defendants all defeiuled 
 by tiie same tolicitor : — 
 
 Held, that, under Rule 1204, the question of 
 setting off costs was in the judicial discretion 
 of the taxing officer, and that diserefiou «:t3 
 rightly exercised by the officer in refusing to 
 setoff the costs ordered to be paid to the 
 plaintiff by the chief defendant against the costf 
 
233 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 ordored to bo paid by the plaintiff to tho other 
 
 <lef(!tiaant8. 
 (>)ii.struotion of l{ulo9 1204 and l'»05 
 Tlieolder deoisions an t,. Hct-otfaro not appli- 
 
 calilo since Rule 3. Flcli v. Way, 14 P. R. ;/i2 
 
 6. Settle.menl of Ai'/ioii. 
 
 2M 
 
 2. Tliat tho Judge in Chambers had exeroisafl 
 h.s d,.soreUou and reversed the MasterV, S 
 
 )l'<l;W,7/ V. .SimUiu.md, 11 A. I! ro anri 
 
 •J. Agroeiiii,' with the opiiii.Mi of |i„vd c' in 
 the Court below, that 'vhen tho a^hin C 
 
 I begun the e.rcuinstaaee.s justitie.l it, and th^re 
 Oollualon -CoxU of liondtor.]-S..e Jidlamu ' rub. fh.wi*'' '" '' '!"•' ""'T'' ""' "^ ^''« ordinary 
 
 ;;w;;;;ri?p.';i. s, ;^;,;/^ -^ ^'-^^^ ^ i ^"^S' '"- ^--'^ - ^'- -"-« ^'-" ^-.;? 
 
 I ''•<"•''"'• V. /?fiy%, 42 Ch. D. 390 diatin 
 ^oiloTiiov OoatB-Powr of Mailer or Jwl,,,'^ A/uc>teW>ot:^,.rCV v. /,•,„;-;, igp'.k. 191. 
 
 phundff. against dJfendants for' afHtelS w.I^olurH^ *'"»^ *''« P'^^'ntiffa 
 
 <.l a patent of the plaintiffs. The de earu.t, i I e ime 1 "■""^', °^ ''"= '^"'''"' '^''^'^ *« 
 wore, before aotion, notitied of the infr ! o bv l./w ^ ''T' r« ''^ '"' ''^"' ^ 
 
 ment, but denied it. In tho aotion tlf, Si ' oo^.t of ! "'''"""'? "•.,'"" '" '^'''"'ion to^ the 
 
 SneWiS'"^^; SKfeu Si E^' r S'- ---- c^ 
 nr ;-;;- S"S r ^:^s « ' - f - • ^^^ "^" ^"^'^ ^" '" "^ -^^ 
 
 again, and offoro.l to give a oovem nt a^af„«, ^sl dr"'''^'""'"'" '^'^ '^'""•^'^ ^'''k^'" '•>' '''o Ior- 
 furthor use, and paid .SIO into Court asda^Jf j ^ fi^"^ Vre ^:jl^.ff\''' '"^^ prooeedin^ 
 
 Clmmhers, for the oosts of tho aotion, whieli the 
 Master gave the.n ; but Robertson, J., ..oon 
 appeal, ordererl that the parties shou d nay 
 the.rown coats up to the time of the motion 
 (winch the defendants had offered before he 
 mo ion) and that the plaintiffs should pay the 
 costs of the motion and appeal 
 
 Upon further appeal to a Divisional Court 
 composed of Boyd, C, and Meredith, J., there 
 was a division of opinion, and the appe. 1 was 
 disinissed without costs. 
 
 l-ving tiie costs of7i;;;o;;;.,:t^b d?^S"of 
 
 by the Court as if the Act had not'^Sed! 
 Do^liar V Town of Port Arthur, 19 A Hm 
 Reversed by^he .Supreme Court on the merito. 
 
 7. Severance. 
 
 P( 
 
 , „ .nr*^*",*?*" *"**. Sureties. ]-rn an action by 
 
 Boyd, C.-The plaintiffs, believing the sur" ies"'''ai? ?f '"'' " T^''^'^^"'' ""« "^ "^ 
 10 to be an invasion of tl.fiir rw,i.fo l.„_° I ''"'!'-r^' . ''"'' ^^^e executors of a deceased 
 
 th. aofendants-;;,rt;' Zl It"' All'Xt"t,?' '" '""f^'"; -»-tors. It did „oV;i;iir£ 
 
 plaintiffs claimed before aotioi was con, il I l ' ''^P'"'''''' so ic.tors were employed for the me™ 
 
 the settlement after action rndth,?;H-'^ ' P"^T/ "^ ">«'-'=asinK costs :- ^ '"^"' 
 
 - - !!!L''"J.''"'] . ,th«. l.t.gation i Held, that the deFendants were not liable in 
 
 ter, and were entitled to tax 
 costs. Towtuhip of Logan v. 
 
 machine to be an invasion of l^irrrtsVr^ the executors of 'a 
 
 not obliged to rest upon the mere iSio^o^' i.v H ^' 'T' '■-P'^''"*'' '^''^'-'"^■"^ ^^«« 
 th. defendants not to use it A tl at tl? ' ^ f''"'',''?''''''^''''"- ^^ ''''1 ""t -^ 
 plaintiffs claimed before aotioi was con, il I l ' ''^P'"'''''' so ic.tors , 
 the settlement after action rndth,?;H-'^ ' P"^T/ "^ ">«'-'=asin 
 was provoke-l by the esp° n'se of the ,l!f ^^') '"." ^ "'•''*.' ^^''^ *''" '^^ 
 to the letter before actTon t£ Jh nt^"'' '"^ Joint character, 
 
 inggiveunoticeoftheir.lemiidSC'Sttn" SM P "^30"^ 
 there was nothing to take the case out of th; ' ^^ ^^ '•^''• 
 
 onluiarv rule that the m.rnni, ;„ fi, 
 
 Bhouhlanswer in cos s' ^I 1 1 e n «n oulr"^ ^ Indemnlfled Defendant.] -One defendant 
 in.lispute is settled, leaving o'llycoVts to ?"' '''''■^'^ *" ''^"".'"'^''''^'- '''^™'««« ^^ regards the 
 determined the proper courfe is /or the parti s' ' the ?atLr'\ot' ""• v\ "'^. """'^" retainer o? 
 to agree to leave them on affidavits to the T, ,1 ?f nl . u" \'^s°''citors it was provided that 
 or Master in Chambers, whose uSmen 'l^ ' d uit Th. °n^ • 'f ■ ;^'>'\r«<^'.» *" the'former def^ 
 
 subject to appeal to the same exten^irirotLr if ihecls^f'?^"^^^ ^" "° '"='^" °'-''«'-«'l *« 
 cases of costs. ouier pay cne coats of the defendants • 
 
 Per Meredith, J.— The Master in ri,„^i Held, per Boyd, C, 16 P. R. 34f;, a Droner 
 
 had no power to try and .ktermbie the n^^K '' ^ "?'r^ '*"°"^ ^^" ««*« °^ '"•"«'«. ^"'l that nlTl 
 
 of costs, unless - 'an arbittt"^ cLtn'^r/'^ i d tntt'tt^^^^ "T ^'''' "' ^^"^ --l^^Z^:^ 
 
 -h power , and the c"o;;rco;id o rp^rl]: 
 
 6 p rNo' T'fu ^"-^•-•^"^•i--- oo}vZ:i 
 
 10 i". li. .10. .'ice the next case. 
 
 Power of Master or Judge In Chambers to 
 Dispose of Oosts -Appeal.]-Au aun^l hv f k! 
 P a,uti.rs from the abovi ordir, Ye P R. si^^t 
 allowed and the Master's ordei! restored :- 
 
 Held, that he had a jurisdiction to make tho 
 order wh ch did not „i,ossarily d.peml un on 
 eu..sent of the parties to go before him ^ 
 ■ ^ortiv Great Northern R. W. Go., 2 Giff 
 
 foiijwed.''"""^"" '■ '^""'"'''' ^ •^"- ^- ^- 70?; 
 
 /(/ryjs v. Great Western fi. W Co 8 C P 
 
 SSinSS:!^'''^^'"^'''''"''^'^'^- 
 
 Held, by the Divisional Court on appeal that 
 
 the indemnified defendant was not entTtled to 
 
 costs against the plaintiffs. ""uea to 
 
 i jAirm v. Great Western R. W. Co., 80 P 
 
 vn f^n '^^^':'"'°'' ''-P^fy of Kingston, 31 C. P. 
 333, followed. Aferiden lirHann'a Comnir^-,.^ 
 
 n'p r'. 7'.'' ""■ •'''' '''■ Affirmed iraSal: 
 
 Tenants. ]— Two actions were brought bv the 
 Bame plaintiffs against different defendants to 
 
 i i I 
 
COSTS. 
 
 23ft 
 
 recover rent for different parcels of land, in 
 which the defiiiices were not identical. A coia- 
 promiso was etieuted, and it was agreed between 
 the parties " tlmt judgment .shall be entered in 
 each of the said actions for tlie amounts claimed 
 therein by the plaintiffs, witli costs of suit 
 between solicitor and client ; and judgments 
 were entered accordingly : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintiffs were entitled to tax 
 a separate set of costs for each action. Jkiklwin 
 V. Qmiiii ; Baldwin v. McOuire, 16 P. R. 248 
 
 8. Solicitor ami Client. 
 
 Payableby Opposite Party.]— Where costs 
 have to be paid by the opposite party and 
 not by the client, there is no difference between 
 ' costs as between solicitor and client," and 
 'costs between solicitor and client;" both 
 mean costs between party and party, to be 
 taxed as between solicitor and client ; and that 
 the plaintiff was entitled to tax against the 
 defendant, under the words of the judgment, 
 only such costs as a solicitor can tax against 
 a resisting client under the general retainer 
 only to prosecute or defend tlie action ; but that 
 the taxation should be as liberal as possible 
 under the practice, in favour of the jilaintiff ' 
 Cotiwuan V. Cily of London Fixe lux. Co. 1" 
 P. R. 512, followed. IleaHli]) v. Btaslip, 14 p. 
 R. 21. .See the next case. 
 
 Payable by Opposite Party.— The decision 
 of Ferguson, J., U P. R. 21, as to tlie taxation 
 of losts under a judgment for payment by the 
 defendant to the plaintiff of costs "between 
 solicitor and client," and as to the procedure 
 where there has been an appeal to a Master 
 under Rule 854, affirmed. 
 
 _ Per Boyd, C— The real distinction in taxa- 
 tions "between" and " as between " solicitor 
 and client turns upon the source of payment 
 and where the payment is by the opposite party, 
 the taxation is on a less liberal scale than where 
 the client himself pays. 
 
 Per Meredith, J.— The words " between solic- 
 itor and client " are not technically appropriate 
 or applicable to a case where the costs of the 
 action are to be paid by one party to another ; 
 and these words cannot have any greater effect 
 or more extended meaning than the appropriate 
 words " as between solicitor and client." Ilea- 
 sttpv. Heaxlip, 14 P. R. 165. 
 
 inconsistenc with item 164 of the tariff of costs 
 appended to the Consolidated Rules, 1888, and 
 by virtue of 51 Vict. ch. 2, sec. 4, must ho 
 taken to be repealed. 
 
 J!e McKcen and Townnhip of South Oower 12 
 P. R. 55.3, followed. 
 
 Howard V. Htrrinulon, 20 A. R. 175, ami 
 Amcott V. Lille,j, 14 A. R. 283, distinguished. 
 lie Pollock and City of Toronto, 15 P. R. 355. 
 
 Arbitrator's Fees.]— &e Arbitratio.n \\i> 
 Aw,\Ki), IV. 
 
 Assignee. ]— The assignee for the benefit of 
 creditors, may be ordered to pay tlie costs of 
 the action personally as any other unsuccessiul 
 htigant may be. Macdonakl v. Batfmir, -'0 
 A. R. 404. 
 
 Assignee— Co»<« of Litiyation in lie>tpcci to 
 Dinputid Vluim.]~An assignee for the benefit of 
 creditors, on instructions of the inspectors, con- 
 tested the plaintiff's claim, who then bn flight an 
 action, which was dismissed with costs, but, on 
 appeal to the Divisional Court, this decision was 
 reversed, with costs to be paid by the defend- 
 ant, the assignee. The creditors, after takiiii' 
 counsel's opinion, resolved to appeal to tlie 
 Court of Appeal, but the appeal to that Court 
 was dismissed with costs. The assignee char<'ed 
 against the estate the total sum he had to pay 
 111 respect of the costs of these proceedings :— 
 
 Held, that he was entitled so to do. 
 
 Decision of Robertson, J., affirmed. Smith v. 
 Beit I, 25 O. R. 368. 
 
 Taxable Costs.]— The words "taxable costs 
 of defence, used in Rule 1172, do not mean 
 costs as between solicitor and client, Talbot v 
 Poole, 15 P. R. 274. 
 
 -See Solicitor, III. 
 
 VL Costs in Particular Matters or by or 
 TO Particular Individuals. 
 
 ^ Arbitration— .SpcoHrf Counsel Fee.]— In tax- 
 ing the costs of an arbitration, a taxing officer 
 bm jurisdiction, in his discretion, to "allow a 
 second counsel fee. 
 
 The provision of R. S. 0. ch. 53, sec. 25 that 
 ■ot more than one counsel fee shall be taxed, is i 
 
 Assignee— /I'ejwoj-ai of -4j(«ir/nee.]— Wliere a 
 Judge of a County Court, acting under R. S. 0. 
 ch. 124, sec. 6, orders the removal of an assignee, 
 he exercises a statutory jurisdiction as perwna 
 de.ii(/nata, and has no power to order payment 
 of costs. 
 
 The proceedings in such a case are not in any 
 Court; and Rule 1170 (a) does not ai)i)lv to 
 them. ^ 
 
 Ne Pacquette, 11 P. R. 463, followed. 
 
 History and construction of Rule 1170 (;il 
 He Yoimij, 14 P. R. 303. 
 
 See now 56 Vict. ch. 13 (O.). 
 
 Assignee— .S'ei-o//:]— The parties who initiate 
 and intervene upon the taxation of a solicitor's 
 bill of costs become personally liable to puy the 
 costs of taxation. 
 
 And where solicitors rendered to the as.signee 
 of an insolvent their bill for services to tlie 
 insolvent, and the assignee taxed the bill and 
 had it reduced by more than one-sixth :— 
 
 Held, that he had a right personally to recover 
 from the solicitors the costs of the taxation, and 
 that there should be no set-oft" against tlie 
 amount coming to the solicitors from the estate 
 of the insolvent as a dividend upon their liill. 
 Be Rogers and Farewell, 14 P. R. 38. 
 
 Barrister Conducting his own Case.]- A 
 counsel conducting his own case in Court cannut 
 tax a counsel fee against the opposite party. 
 
 Smith V. Graham, 2 U. C. R. 268, foUowcJ. 
 Clarke v, Creighton, 15 P. H. 105. 
 
 Barrister and Solicitor Acting for Him- 
 self and Co.Trustees.]— One of several trus- 
 toes who is a barrister and solicitor, and acta 
 
m 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 / Sottth Oowe.r, 12 
 
 Arbitration and 
 
 for himself and his oo-tiustees as solicitor and 
 counsel in an action, may tux against the (,i,„o. 
 site party his full costs, including instructiina 
 and counsel fees. 
 
 Cradock V Piper, 1 Mac. & G. 664, followed. 
 
 Sm>lh y. Om/utm, •_• U. ('. K. .j,;s, .Ustii,. 
 guislie.1. 'S/rac/uiH v. J!i(llaii, 15 f. R. 101). 
 
 Bulldlns Sooletles-/',7;/,o».]-A person 
 died in the United -States of America liavinu 
 moneys to his credit .leix.sitcd up„n savings 
 bank account with two Iniilding secieties doiiu- 
 business m Uutario, incorporated under R. S () 
 oh 1()9. An administrator appointed by a Court 
 in the foreign country applied to the buildinL- ' 
 societies to have the mone- -. transferred to him I 
 but the societies, tntertainii.g .loul.ts whether 
 the words of section 47 of I!, .S u ch 16!) 
 •'share, bond, debenture, or (d.ligation'- applie.l 
 to a savings bank account, petitioned the Court 
 under sec. 49 :— ^"mi- 
 
 Held that the word "obligation" covered 
 the liability of tlie petitioners to repay the ! 
 amount deposited witii tJieni :— \ 
 
 Held, also that the doubts of the petitioners I 
 wei-e reasonable and they were entitled to costs ' 
 Re Umij, 20 O. R. 1. 
 
 238 
 
 I I he Mnater in C hambers, having no jurisdic- 
 tion to decide a demurrer, has none to determine 
 I the costs of It. Jones v. MUki; 16 P. R. 92. 
 
 I t>irootor -Solicitor. l-\Vhere a director, who 
 wa.s also president, <,f a company was appointe.l 
 i)J the board of directors and acted as solicitor 
 lor tile company : — 
 
 .,n!-H ''; i" ^""'','"K-»P Pioeeedings, that he was 
 intitlcd to proht costs in respect of causes in 
 l^ourt conducted by him as solicitor for tlie 
 oomimny, but not in respect of business dom, 
 out ot Court, and was entitled to set off the 
 aniouiit of such costs against the amount of his 
 liability as a shareholder. 
 J)eeision of the Master in Ordinary reversed 
 trwlocL- V Pi/,er, 1 Macn. & (;. (J64, followed.' 
 Jl>' Mmuo S^rer Fri„- and Brirh Manujacturiw, 
 to. , reai-itun x Caxe, 26 O. R. 289. 
 
 Convictions.]- Remarks on the (juestion of 
 costs in quashing convictions. Jttiiina v n'txi. 
 lakt, 21 O. 1!. 619. 
 
 Convlotlons ] - The Court in considering 
 the question of costs suggested that in future 
 with the notice of motion for a certiorari, a 
 notice might also be served stating that unless 
 the prosecution was then abandoned, and lur- 
 ther proceedings rendered unnecessary, costs 
 would be asked lor, when a strong case would 
 be made for granting the defendant costs in 
 cases 111 wmch it would be unjust and unfair to 
 put c e emlant to such costs. Jicjina v. We^i. 
 
 Convictions.] — Convictions quashed with 
 h! o.!!'n''i]''o'i^: ''"^ P''"«^">tor. Ji,.jina v. 
 
 jJilJIi^ «0 \J, XV. oh ^ , 
 
 Convictions. ]-The practice is not to cive 
 costs on quashing a conviction 
 
 Jieijina V. Johnxton, 38 U. C. R. 546, followed 
 AV;/i/ici v. !iomtrx, 24 O. R. 244. 
 
 refustT*""""^'^"^""*^ ''^'''°^* *^^ informant 
 Re<iina v. Somn-., 24 0. R. 244, followed. 
 Reuma v. Votdson, 24 O. R. 246. 
 
 Conviction- Jko Daiial of CMi/^.J-Costs of 
 quashing conviction withheld from successful 
 defendant, where he filed no affidavit denying 
 his guilt, or casting doubt upon the correctnesl 
 of the magistrate's conclusion upon the facts 
 Reijma v. Utede, 26 O. R. 540. 
 
 leffrb"?'''^~'^7'''/^ "" ^lemurrer has been 
 left to bo disposed of by the trial Judge, and 
 ha^ not been so disposed of by him when g vTng 
 judgment i„ the action, imr by a Divisional 
 Court on appeal, he has still power to dfspoae 
 
 purnose'T °u\' ""^ ?"y«PPlioatioufortha? 
 LnFho^ /l^oulfl l>e made to him ; but if to 
 another Judge, it must be to a Judge in Court 
 
 Drainage Actions. ]-\Vhere actions begun 
 1 the High Court were refcrre.l at the trial to 
 llie draiiiage referee, and up(,n appeal from his 
 leport an order was made ),y an appellate 
 Court for taxation and payment of costs of the 
 actions : — 
 
 Held, that they were not costs coming within 
 the provisKuis of sec. 24, sub-sec. (A), of the 
 Dr.. iiage 1 rials Act, 1891, but were to be taxed 
 in the usual way in which costs of actions are 
 taxed, and subject to the san.e right of appeal. 
 
 ihip o/Mue, 16 P. R. 553. 
 
 Executors andAdmlnlstrators-yH,M/to<). 
 
 ance. - i muccessjnl LitUjatiun. \ - Where the 
 administrators of the estate of a deceased 
 assignee for creditors defende.l in good faith an 
 action brought by his successor in the trust to 
 recover damages for breach of trust committed 
 by the intestate and being unsuccessful were 
 obliged to pay the plaiiitili's costs and those 
 of their own solicitois, they were held entitled 
 accounts P^'y-'t^-'ts in passing their 
 
 Where it is plain that a dispute can be settled 
 only by litigation it is not necessary for a trustee 
 to ask the advice of the Court before defending 
 
 Judgment of. the Surrogate Court of Grev 
 reversed. In re WiUiitm-i, 22 A. R. 196. 
 
 Executors-.l/ort/or/,. Action. ]~\y here an 
 brnnc 1 f '^".^''^f „" mortgage by foreclosure ia 
 brought against the executors of a deceased 
 mortgagor and an order for payment of the 
 mortgage debt is, in additi.m, asked against the 
 executors, and judgment is entered lor default 
 of appearance, only the additional costs occa- 
 sioned by tne latter claim should be taxed against 
 the executors personally. MiU, v. BroAi, 15 
 r. ti. dio. 
 
 ExecxxtorB--U,miccexx/ul Action to Estabikh 
 »li«.J— Where the person named as an exe- 
 cutor in a written instrument failed, in the 
 fanal result of this action, to establish it aa the 
 last will of the testator, an.l the Court of lust 
 resort refused to order that his costs incurr.d 
 therein should he pai.l out of the estate :- 
 Held, that the Court of first instance could 
 
 pad into that Court by the administrators pen- 
 dente ltte,ot these costs as costs of the litiiration, 
 because they were refused by the only tribunal 
 
 i '1 
 
 !■ 'I 
 
 iii 
 
 i ;( 
 
 Mil: 
 
 :;li 
 
 !;i!J 
 
 'r 
 
239 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 «.!;I?„!^T' J"""'''"*'"" to award thorn, nor «« 
 costs and expenses properly incurred hv tlin 
 
 txecutor, because he never was an executor 
 I'urcdl V. li^rgin, IB P. R. 301. '■^ecutor. 
 
 ,.^v"h!!"''".°'*]~'^'''.^ P''"""8' ^"^ ""lered to 
 v^hi ? T^' °^ '"', ""''""' '"i»'"=ti"" obtained 
 ly Inm, because the facts proved at tiie tria 
 
 serious damage as to jusfly f.e application for 
 It. liklUztky V. Crannloii, L'2 O. R, 590. 
 
 « cS nnnr'";.^""^^''?-''" "•" "'terplemler issue, 
 w.ltred upon the application of a Hheritf who 
 had seize,l certain goods un.ler the direc on .^ 
 partof'thn"" T''7*' ""■' determined as to I 
 
 the"wiff hlH"' '^'''"''"t'°" creditors should pay 
 the mrt of iL "'/'^ poundage on the value of 
 ine part ot the goods they were found eutitlp,! 
 
 and""' ':\IT "' f '^ -'-P'-l-\ppli"S 
 ana ot a subsequent application to ifsnose of 
 
 MO 
 
 ina^rt f ^ Woman ] -Where a solicitor sued a 
 mar ed won.au au.l her lu.sban.l upon an unUx 
 ed bi 1 of costs, and, i„ default o ai.nearai.7... 
 
 HonallvC'fl'""' "^'"'"■^' '""•' defenZr":;.' 
 soua y for the amount of the bill and interest :- 
 
 mi!;hf ;. V " J"'lK"'«nt was irregular and 
 might have been stt aside with costs if the ,le 
 fendants had applied promptlv ; and, under thp 
 
 hmitir^'rr; Vr J'"'«'-"t «•.- amentd'.'j 
 limiting It as to tlie married woman to her sen 
 arate estate, by disallowing interest and ifv 
 .lirecfng that the amount shoT.l.l ab de the resuft 
 o taxation, with leave to the husband to dispS 
 the retainer. Cameron v. I/ei,/h,, 14 P. R.^g^ 
 
 _ Interpleader— /?e.verca<tV)7(. 1— The costs of in 
 in erp eader issue should not bi reserved bvtSe 
 nterpleader order to be disposed of'n Chambers 
 but should be left to be dealt with by th^^rial 
 Ju'lge. arotha v. Pearce, 15 P. r" 43V 
 
 <!os'iro1'"n,".*°1*'*°''-^-^"'^^'- K"'e 1180, the 
 «03ts Of proceedings to examine a iudcmprf 
 
 Cotr^or'T \' f"''i' ■" ^'^^ discreti^:^ oTtTe 
 noTa'ctuairySi?e^:v£r ''' ''^^"^"■^«- ^^ \ 
 ii^tTL'"'^'^'''- *.'"" J"dg'nent debtor attended 
 euml an "PP""'''»«"t for his examination, pro 
 force of fZ^'^""''",' """^ nieanwhile, under 
 ^t he w" =:::^'T'..P!!'l *■- judgment 
 
 <I,.l>f K f "^cuuiiigs, paia tlie udcment 
 
 p oc^^ml?' 7:'T' '" Bf^ **^« oo^ts^f^the 
 pioceedings. I opltani v. Flynn, 15 P. R. 286 
 
 «,;^rv-^ rV?" ^"^-Costs as hehveen Solicitor 
 <^idChent CosUa. of a Court MotionA-TloZ 
 
 i.^ and ,4 of the Land Titles Act, R. ,S O ch 
 
 <1 re,.t n""''""*'' ,*''''* ^ '^''""on be vacated o 
 <iuect payment by the cautioner of costs a^ 
 between solicitor and client; and bv Rue Tr 
 lower t" ''"'*-'' '" ^'''^ ^'^hed'ule to the Aet'has 
 
 ^:iuXi;iJ^i-CstfS5i«-,r' 
 
 CO ul'dZfv h'P'l'^''^' •''^ '.'^^ "^PP^^l ^--« ate ami 
 could only be entertained as an indulgence AV 
 
 ' lien.holders to "^nforec^" t r""li;n"'u;:dert^ 
 
 lllff?: ^■°".^'=* '' i« not nee e a y to mi! 
 
 first niTinn""'- "^ 'T*'''^''^'-'"' '■«»« P'^>-"«« " tt 
 nrst instance in on Cr to attack t)i..i.. ^t„t 
 
 hen-holders; but this c;^. be do, whe f th^:: 
 are a.ided as defendants in the Ma ter's o£ 
 Ihe amount due from the owner to the rnn" 
 tractor should be paid into Court 1^ the former' 
 less his costs, which should be taxed asTo^ 
 stake-holder watching the case '' 
 
 lien« ■..r'n 1°^ l"^'.''"'Wers establishing their 
 he.^^ should be paid as a first charge ^In the 
 
 „pE^„r'V^ ""'•l'p'd'-''s subsequent to judg. 
 ment of reference should be taxed upon he 
 sea e appropriate to the amount found due to 
 each. Hall v. llu,,,,, 14 P. R. 45. 
 
 a Z^.h^*"*M' ^^^^-rl'"y^'^''nt into Court. ]~ln 
 
 In L; ) ^V''"\ *" ^1"^ contractor, and the 
 
 PaTmeTorTh/f '''•''"' *° ''""-■'- "-'-holders 
 rayment ot the former sum into Court was 
 , ordered and made, the amount, however beC 
 Iinsuflicent to pay the claims of lien!^holders 
 against the contractor. The latter then apnea 
 eel unsuccessfully and was ordered to pay the 
 eosts of appeal to the owner, who claime7that 
 these costs should be paid mit of the moi el 
 paid by her into Court :— moneys 
 
 I,„!!l'''' f ""^ ^^ ^•"' I^'''>'»ent into Court for distri- 
 bution she was discharged from her liability an 1 
 
 noteSlTt*^ *°,'" '''^^«' --^"'^ thatshJwas 
 not entit ed to have the costs due to her deduct- 
 
 2^ 0° K. isa "°""' P'"' '"• ^^«"^" ''■ ^«^i 
 
 
 Mortgage. ]-In a mortgage action, where 
 
 possession is claimed, the writ of summons 
 
 f served on the official guardian needToT be 
 
 served persona ly on the infant heirs of the 
 
 mortgagor, if they are not personally in po^ 
 
 Partnership. ]-In partnership actions in 
 « e absence of special circumstances such Z 
 
 ^IZ^Tr "'-'^"g'^"^'^. the assets wil? be 
 apphed hrst in payment of creditors, next in 
 
 FuTS Vu H '" '°""'^ ''"'^ *° the success" 
 
 all partt; ^'' '" '''^"""" °^ "'" ""'^^ °^ 
 
 Ara,»cr V. _G;/.., 11 Ch. 1). 942, followed. 
 
 v<,rtnJ-7\V \^''l"".'-'« heing found due by one 
 partner to the other is no reason for departing 
 
841 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 take tl,e accounts o a partnership, one partner 
 J>a. m.cofu.le,l >n hi, contention' as t , HUei 
 acount. «8 aganist the contention of his co 
 partner, is not sutlicient to entitle hin, to the 
 costs of the action against tlie latter 
 
 ' iHi/midu V. iXewell, 14 P R odu f„n„. j 
 .V,A/»//v./.,V«-, L'l6.R.;i"l8 ' ^°"°"'«''- 
 
 Salvage Action. ]-*ee The Olevifer, 3 Kx 
 
 Se8Slons-.l/„«a; <o Si.xhnx- mines, Fee. 1 
 - here an appeal to the Se8.sions is .lisinisse.l 
 withou be.ng heard an.l determined on he 
 merits there is no power to impose costs 
 /.V JUadJen, 31 U, C. R. 333 followed 
 Section 58 of R. ,s c 'l, I's 'i ■ 
 ^.tices of the peace •t.^allt'^^tr'Ter 
 
 212 
 
 On a motion made therefur l.y the olainfciff 
 tl'o judgment and all suh.s<.,,u,.nt tVro, o ? 
 
 (If, (.o.u\-iUe defendant was convicted at 
 the General .Sessions on an indictm^in for a 
 nuisance in olistructing the hii/h« av I„ fi 
 erection of a wall tliereo*'ii, aiid d Sctei^ to^abau' 
 the nuisance which not having been lone the 
 hessions made an order directing the si eWff ?n 
 al>ate the same at .lefendanfs cos^ts ai d charis 
 and to pay the County Crown Attorney foftl 
 wi ha ter taxat on the costs of the apidicat 'on 
 and order, and the sheriffs fees an. c sts Ind 
 
 Held that the Sessions had no authoritv to 
 make he order to the sheriff, the proTrZde 
 m .such case be ul' bv a writ ,/^ „ ^ ^, '"°"e 
 r,«do.- that the order bdi u i' " ""^^o- 
 P-operly removed l^ St^V ,"1 T mi^s't'b: 
 qu.ished, but without costs ® 
 
 Remarks as to the jurisdiction of the Sessions 
 a.s to the costs. I?,,jina v. Ororer, 23 0? K 92 
 
 SoUcitor- ProceeJimj.-, />e/ore Exchequer ami 
 an action for his costs to establi^ Vl ^ 
 
 ni??iT?R!i~^' =- 
 
 Tlie riglit to tax a solicitor's bill of char^^, 
 lor conveyancing in the a.h%onoT If ''"'^rges 
 'Agreement, considered ' °^ " 'P'^'^''*' 
 
 reveSr O,/^^ "" ,>'"^""'« »'^"'='» Division 
 reversed. Oslrom y. Benjamin, 20 A. R. 336. 
 
 wrotp II Intfn.. t .1 I'V fe"-"''! toe mother 
 
 It was being piosecuted without and ority and 
 asked or costs against the solicitors -!- ^' ^ 
 w,,'?. I'l •" '^y'"*'' '^'^'^ P'-oceedings, that there 
 hiXr !h"« to prevent the mother Lm renoun^ 
 on^ h^'li'tt:t?o^ next friend and withdrawing 
 
 liability for costs theretofore incurred 
 AS to costs : 
 
 ext frpnd f *'^\«"""';'torwas liable to the 
 next triend for costs subsequent thereto • /in^ 
 
 lormer was liable for costs so lontr as she ,\\A 
 not make a direct application agamst the sol ci^ 
 tors, no order could be made in favour of tha 
 
 Held, also, that it was competent for fh., 
 
 aftS^h'the\""^"/° ^*'^y the^'procetinga! 
 niiiiougb the normal praut ce is for tFio n^l 
 
 '"=»•' •« "»■'• ?•«»(«> V. Il-oorf, 14 PR. S! 
 
 16 
 
 Ms .*:./."„'",;: srr; r„.ft 
 
 i 'I 
 
 1 1 
 -A' 
 
 
 ! Mi 
 
243 
 
 COSTS. 
 
 was acconliuKly hai.de.l to the niuyor, who 
 rctiiiiiLMl It, hut the action waH l)roiigl,t hy the 
 BolicilcM-*., ai.,1 tlio corporation joine.i therein as 
 planitillM, witliout the granting of any cirtili- 
 cat« un.lcr the .orporutc seal, .\ttcr the action 
 hadheen hej^iin the mayor infornieil the ijefen- 
 tlants aolicitorit tliat no certiHcute had hecn 
 U8un , an.l stated that lie wo.dd not sign one 
 until he had heen properly udvised hy eoiinsel : — 
 Held, that the action wiih hronght in the 
 "Tlfu"! ,,''"-', '-''>'l""-»li'"i without authority ; 
 and that the defeodantH Im.l the right to niovj 
 to have 8Uch name Ntruck out. 
 
 .SeiiM,; that the corporation sliould have been 
 parties to the motion :— 
 
 Held also, that aa the solicitors for the plain- 
 tins other than the corporation were not uuiltv 
 of any n.tentioual wrongdoing i„ j„i„iug the 
 corporatmn as plaintitls, they should iu7t ho 
 made liahle lor the defendants' costs. Turn, of 
 Home V. W'Htijmoiilh, 15 R R <J5 
 
 244 
 
 , uncler Rule 329, with notice of a claim f„r 
 indemnity, hut he did not appear thereto, and 
 no order was made or applie.i for under Ru],, 
 
 Held, that he was under no obligaticn to take 
 any proceeding, and was not hound hy the 
 result of the action ; and his HulisecMunllv 
 appearing at the trial and asking to he maile \ 
 <letendaiit was gratuitous, an<l he wum i,„'t 
 entitled to costs against the defendants. <;,U. 
 V. J ovmMp of Cimdtn, 10 p. R. mti 
 
 Bollcltor-naniiln-Coiidttclim/ hi'Oim ( 'nxe ] 
 —A counsel contluctiiig his own case in Court 
 cannot tax a cunsel Tee against the opposite 
 
 Smith y Orcham, 2 U. C. 1!. 268, followed. 
 Clarke v. Creujhion, 15 P. R. 105. 
 
 Solicitor— vl cfiwifur Hivimlfand Co- Truxtee/i 
 —iMtruvhons-Conitxet /«M.]-One of several 
 trustees wlio is a Imrrister and solicit<,r, and 
 ftcts for himself and his co-trustecs as solicitor 
 ana counsel in aii action, may tax aijainat the 
 opposite party his full costs, including instruc 
 tlons and counsel fees. i 
 
 CVdc/oc^- V Piper, 1 Macn. & <;. 6G4, followed, i 
 S7mth V. Urahum, 2 U.C.R. '.'68, distinguished. I 
 Sirar/ian v. /{utlan, 15 1'. R. 109 i 
 
 Trusts and Truateea.]- Upon a petithmhy;i 
 surviving trustee under a will to he dischaii/.d 
 troiii the trusteeship, it appeared that a tiu.t 
 . fund created hy the will had become iinpaiiul 
 ami a reference was directed to take an acc.iint 
 !,,, *",'', ''filings of the trustees with the fund 
 1 he Master reported that a portion of the iui„l 
 had been lost in the hands of the petitioner ,s 
 deceased co-trustee, and that the estate of the 
 latter wns Iiah>i therefor. Upon appeal tli,. 
 report was sent !-.:ick to be amended by cjiar'uii- 
 I the petitioner wit.i the portion of the luuU m 
 • lost hy his cotrustee :— 
 
 I , P.f.'''' *''"' t''-*^ inquiry ns to the petitioners 
 
 I lahility having resulted unfavourably to him 
 
 j he must bear the costs of it ; but was entitled 
 
 ! to receive out of t!ie fuml his costs of tlie peti. 
 
 tion and of bringing in his accounts ; and, upon 
 
 payment of the amount found due by him and 
 
 of the costs awarded to be paid by him, to liis 
 
 discharge, y.'e Hawkins, 16' p. R, i.so. 
 
 Will.]- Costs ordered to be paid out cf the 
 ;eal estate, as the litigation had related to it 
 McMylor v. Lvnch, 24 O. 1!. 632. 
 
 Solicitor— i'^ri^-,-,,;/ Xame of Solicitor off Holt. 1 
 —Where a client applies to strike the name of 
 a solicitor off the roll for misconduct in neglect- 
 ing to pay over the client's money in his hands 
 as solicitor, the lirst application should be made 
 to a Judge in Court, whereupon, in a proi.er 
 case an order will be made requiring the 
 solicitor to pay over the mon*y by a named day, 
 and in default that his name be struck otf 
 Upon default, no further application is necessary 
 except an application to have the roll brought ! 
 into Court for the purpose of having the name 
 struck off, and this should be on notice to the 
 solicitor. 
 
 Ruling of a taxing officer that costs of the 
 hrst application should be taxed as of a Cham- 
 ^rs motion only, reversed on appeal. Be 
 Bridijman, 16 P. R. 232. ''i^pe.u. m 
 
 Specific Performance.]- In an action for 
 *^?^ Pertormance by a vendor, whose title 
 was, to the knowledge of the purchaser, a 
 possessory one of long standing, in conformity 
 with a family .arrangement, ample proof thereof 
 having been offered before action, the vendor 
 was held entitled to Ids costs of action and of 
 proving his title in the Master's office 
 
 Gamen v Bonnor, 33 W. R. 64, followed 
 Brady y Walh 17 Gr. 699, and He BouMeadi- 
 Wartvuk 12 0. R. 488, specially referred to 
 Dame v. Slater, 21 O. R 3'75, 
 
 «.^*''f1^T7-l~^^'*'"^ 'n ^" ^'^tion for negli- 
 gence the defendants served a third party. 
 
 1 , Winding-up— P«r«o«a/ Order ayainst Linni- 
 ; dutorjor Cost.'<.]—An order was made l)v a 
 ! County Court, under R. S. O. ch. 183, for 'the 
 winding-up of the companies, and a liquidator 
 was appointed, who brouglit in a list of con- 
 tribiitories. The contributories shewed cause 
 to their names being settled upon the list, and 
 the Court made an order in the case of each (,f 
 them, reciting that it appeared there was no 
 jurisdiction to make the winding-up order and 
 that all proceedings were irregular or null, and 
 [ ordering that each contributory should have his 
 costs of shewing cause, to be paid by the com- 
 panies and the liquidator :— 
 
 Held, that if there was jurisdiction to make 
 the winding-up order, the coiitributories could 
 not defend themselves by shewing tliat it was 
 irregular or erroneous ; and if there was ro 
 jurisdiction, all the proceedings were cornm i,„n 
 judtie, and there was no jurisdiction, the Cmirt 
 being an inferior one, to order the liquidator or 
 the companies to pay the costs. 
 
 And even if there was jurisdiction, in the 
 circumstances of this case it should not have 
 been exercised against the liquidator. 
 ^, ^"l® ^r.^'' ''"«*' "ot apply to proceedings luuler 
 the \\ inding-up Act, either by virtue ot section 
 34 of the Act or otherwise. 
 
 liemarks as to multiplicity of orders taken 
 o-it in the matters. Be Cosmopolituu Lift 
 Axuoaatiou—Ile Cosmopolitan Camaltv At-wcia- 
 twn, 15 P. R. 185. 
 
 Winding-up— CVfrfiVont' .S'o/ictVo?-.?.]— Upon a 
 reference for the winding-up of a companv, the 
 referee appointed a firm of solicitors to repre- 
 
246 
 
 COUNTY COURT. 
 
 Mut the general ,o,Iy „f orclitors, un.l onlor.,l 
 that thoy Hhonhl Ijo notitinl to fttten.l when, 
 ever he ho .l.recte.l, a..,l that their cohIh, as 
 bjitweun solicitor and fli.nt, «houM I.o imi,l out 
 of the asHcts : ' 
 
 fJeM, that tills clang of order and liahility 
 was no fnvourt.l l.v tiio Courts, and should he 
 invoked and atteiulanco tlieicnn.l.T had only 
 when there was any .special .,uestiori on winch 
 the iippearancf of nonio one to represent tiie 
 ere,htor« was desiral.le ; tliat attenllances and 
 services siiouid not lie paid lor out of tlie assets 
 except where contemporuncously approved of' 
 hy the referee , and It was not proper practice 
 to extend this at the close ot tlie proceedinj/s l.v 
 obtaining a certilicafc from him tliat, had he! 
 been appliwl to from time to time, ho miLdit 
 have provided for other attendances and ser- 
 
 VlCUil I 
 
 COUNTERCLAIM. 
 
 Mechanics' Lien. ]-A defence tiled hy alien- 
 holder wulun tlie perio.l mentioned in section 
 23 of K t,. O. cli. 120, in an action by the 
 owner of the property to set a.side the lien is not 
 a proceeding to realize the claim " within tlie 
 
 ifr'nl^.! f ''^ '?'""■"■ "'°"«'' '^ '^"unterclaim, 
 if properly framed and a certificate thereof duly 
 registered might he. ' 
 
 Per Osier J. A. -Observations as to the effect 
 of registration of the lien. McVean v. Tiffin, 
 li A. U. J, considered. 
 
 Per Maclennaii, J. A. -The defendant in this 
 action having commenced an independent action 
 aBd registered his lien within the prescribed 
 period, his hen was preserved and the registra- 
 tion of the certificate in the other action enured 
 to his benefit in the present one, thouch after 
 judgment estal^lisliing his lien he abandoned the 
 A K 'ajT'"''"^'- ^'^'•^^■«'«a'-« V. Kirklaml, 18 
 
 rank on an insolvent estate is not within tlio 
 jiirisdicfon of the County Court. 
 
 .ludgimnt of the County Court of Huron 
 aflirimd, lagarty, C..J.O., dissenting. II /„V/. 
 ilKii V. Jarkm.n, IS A. K. 430. 
 
 Equity Jurisdiction -" Pnxonal AHionx:'] 
 - .Siu.c ,(•_' \ ict. ,.!,, ,1, sec. 4 (().), the Coiility 
 ^ oiirts have had cmnion law inrisdiction only ; 
 hr .liidicatiirc Act .li.l not alter the jurisdic- 
 tion of those (,mrts, but cmly made »pplic;.lde 
 • to matters cognizable by them tlie sevual rules 
 ot law therubv enacted and deilared. 
 
 An Hutioii l,y a ratepayer <,f a .scho(,l section, 
 ; '•" hehaif of bim-selt ■■.n.l all other ratepayers 
 l^gainst trustees of the section, seekii,,- to com! 
 pel the dufemlants t.i pay lo the treasurer of the 
 section such aimmiit as might be disallowed 
 upon taxati.u. of a bill of costs jmid by tho 
 trustees to a solicitor, i.s .me of purely e,,uitable 
 JUlisdictlon, andisnoteognizable by a County 
 Court, even though the amount in .iue.,ti(,n is 
 not more than >;->{)(). ' 
 
 The term "personal actions " used in It. .S. 
 
 iLxit.'' '*'■'''■ '"•'""•""* '-■""'iiion law actions. 
 /r« JUcOii;/aii v. McUiiiiaii, L'l O. l^. 'JbO. 
 
 Equity Jurisdiction- Aetim f,„- Snr/,/„H 
 ufter J/or/;,n:,e.i^^.\ County Court has juris- 
 diction, wliatever tlie amount of a mortice's 
 chum at the tin,e of the exercise of a power of 
 sale, to entertain an acti.m for the recovery of 
 an allegeil surjilus .lerived from the .sale luu" 
 
 See Pleading, III, 
 
 COUNTERFEIT NOTES. 
 See Criminal Law, IV. 
 
 COUNTY COURT. 
 
 I. J L'RLSDICTION, 245. 
 
 II. Pkactice. 
 
 1. Appeah from the County Court, 248. 
 
 2. In Oeneral, 250, 
 
 3. Transfer of Action to Hiijh Court, 251. 
 
 I. Jurisdiction. 
 An action asking for a declaration of right to 
 
 not exceeding !j!2(»0, akhough the existence"of 
 the surplus is u-mi..!. H.,ldUk v. Trw„rs Bunk 
 oj Canada, 22 O. K. 44!). 
 
 Liquidated or Ascertained Amount. 1- 
 Hhenever a sum up to §400 is agie.d on by 
 he parties as the remuneration f<,i°a .service t^ 
 
 jsol, , If the service be performed or the article 
 De delivere.l in pursuance of the bargain, the 
 amount may be recovered m the County Court, 
 denittl of the contract and price not availing to 
 oust the jurisdiction. * 
 
 Rohh v. Murray, 16 A. R. 503, considered. 
 
 Judgment of the Queen's Uench Division 
 amrmetl. Ostrom v. Benjamin, 21 A. R. 4(J7. 
 
 Liquidated or Ascertained Amount 1- 
 fA'"* .'i "^'"^ '^'•ought in a County Court to 
 on th'/, l' Trl'ir'^ '^'•"'^'^'•'^ '^"nn'i«sion 
 h?s 1 abfli '. 'ri'i: ^ ''"- ^l^f^n^l'^nt disputed 
 his liability, and the action was tried by a 
 jury, who found that the plaintiff was entitled 
 to recover §250. The amount was not a e;. 
 tamed otherwise than by the agreement of the 
 parties, as found by the jury •- 
 
 Held, by Rose, J., that the amount was not 
 ascertained within the meaning of R S eh 
 47, sec. 19, sub-sec. 2, and the County Court 
 had no jurisdiction. 
 
 ,,^°** ''• ^^"'•'•"i/. 16 A. R. 503, followed. Be 
 McKay v. Martin, 21 O. R. 104. 
 
 Liquidated or Ascertained Amount-/n. 
 
 tere■st.^~\\)y>r^' the nli-nf-Jff- ;,-. ■ ■ 
 
 tho n?„i, /■ "I -.It. pia.ntm-, m an action in 
 the High Court of Justice to recover a sum for 
 work and abour and materials, the amount 
 S?^m"f ^■T';'f*'^^°'- ••^^'^ertained, recovered 
 fh!V^ f i*'''*' ?"<1-^1'».54 for interest from 
 the issue of the writ of summons :— 
 
 III 
 
 I! 1 
 
 ^■m 
 
COUNTY COURT. 
 
 «7 
 
 848 
 
 r!^?? I ^°'''^''"''***"«'» Amount- 7V,;re,<! 
 
 (■>MU\-lnim„cUnu .w.a lm„,l f,„. ,^.v,o .iv', 
 to Humiro paymunt <,f cosU i„ tl.o Humuin 
 r....rt o, (;.„a.la in a prior uc io " j.E U ' 
 
 cii tiru'd III till! Nil preniu Oiurt : — 
 
 Moltl, that tliu (imouiit reJoverod wan not 
 usccrtaiiicl l.y tho act of tlu, parties or v th" 
 H.«..aturo of tlio .l«f.,i„|,uit.,. wiJliiu'i' "h. ,( . " i 
 
 cLn'of ;. '""!■ "'" '''".""'"■ ''''" ""'i"«'l to 
 Court. //a;/,T V. Jachon, 10 P. |{. 48s, ** 
 
 m>nt.\ -1 he County Court h.iH ik. juriB.liftioii 
 to entertain an action for more tlmii «"(M „ 
 Kuaranty. i„ goneral terniH, of pay me*,: of the 
 
 ri;!;'":::ii,:;^tar:''i'i,,St-;n":^ 
 
 Wheru an action was for two unli.nii.lato.l 
 jurisdiction of the County Court, the Dlaintiff 
 
 Sin;!ri?!£i"''«-- *" ™ni'a£ 
 
 Liquidated Amount _ GomU Sold.] - See 
 Brmn, V. //,w, 14 1'. K. 3, ,^,ue 213. 
 
 Meohanloa- Uens.J-Hel.l, that notwith- 
 Beciion 1, ot 0,^ Viot. ch .'iT M)\ oMf;*i,i 
 '•Act to Simplify th. Pi-oef, lu'.^ 'for'S; i;l 
 Mechanics' Liens," the intention of the Act is to 
 8 rnplify such procedure in the High C^ourt 01 Iv 
 
 v^ourts and Division Courts unafTccted by the 
 passing of the Act. Secord v. Trxmm,Vo.\ 
 
 , Tovt~Ac/wu U, (',„„i>rl Ih.lii'ery «,, of Pro- 
 I m..j->.7/ Vo<« ,0. ,y,',?«.]-.I„ an action hVought 
 I ;n the High Court to restrain the .lefendantHl.v 
 injuiiction from negotiating u promissory note 
 for.t2.3(), and to eon.pel then, to'deliver it^pt 
 the plaintiff, or for damages for its detention, it 
 was detorrnine.1 that the note was wroi.gfu |y 
 lield l.y the deteiidai.ts, who had obtained h^ 
 under thjpteteuco of discounting it, but really 
 
 ment •- ''""*' '""'*"'*•' '* "'" ""''J""' "' «''""''''' 
 Held, that the aotion sounde,! in tort and not 
 in contract and cuhl nut liave been brought in 
 aCounty Court i ami the successful plaintilfwas 
 tieref..re entitled to tux his costs in the HiJh 
 ( 'oiirf scale. "'«" 
 
 JohMon V Ktmion, \:\ l>. R, 24, distinguished. 
 
 Lohb V. Mumui, Hi A. |{. Ml, followe.l 
 
 Plummar v. Coldwell, 15 I'. R. 144. ' "°*'-"- 
 
 ; Wlndlng.up-.SV,/,. 0/ A.sicts l,y Li,,,udator.] 
 
 i -I he Iimii.lator of a company which was beinj 
 
 . voluntarily wound up upon the Ontario Win,!- 
 
 |ing-up Act, sold the assets thereof en bloc 
 
 j without the sanction of the contributories. to 
 
 a private individual, and then obtained from 
 
 the County (curt an order approving of the 
 
 ! sale and making eertain provisions for the dis- 
 
 I position of the purchase moneys. 
 
 : On appeal it was hold that the order was 
 
 made without authority, and that it was a 
 
 nullity. In rt J). A. Jowh Co., 19 A. R. 
 
 Winding-up -Orr/cnn.v Liquidator to Pav 
 Co.«(!*.]-,See J{e Co.-,moi,olitim Life Auocialion- 
 Jit totmwpo/ilaii Caauulti) Asmciatioii, 15 P u 
 185, ante 244. 
 
 Sm; also, the cases under Cost.h, HI. 
 
 ^" 
 
 Mechanics' Uena-Mnrtqaqe-Account 1 - 
 Sec ion 2,3 of R. S. O. cli. 12(C which aZvL" 
 iTen Tl "ft"'"""'?'"""""* "f " mechai OS' 
 , fl n ^'^?" "'"''"■ ''"*'^'" circumstances 
 111 the County Court and Division Court api.lies 
 on y to actions in which the party seek g to 
 e orceins lien is suing in the onliVry way to 
 obtain judgment and execution. Those Courts 
 cannot entertain an action in the naUire of an 
 action of account by a lien holder against " 
 mortgagee who has sold the land in ouestion 
 muler mortgage prior to the lien thoug'h there 
 
 Sir '■'"'■"'' ''^ "■">' "f ^"'"™»ry "^PP" I 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of York j 
 
 II. Practice. 
 
 Appeahfrom lite County Court. 
 
 j Attachment of T)a\ita- J, ul<jment on I^nue 1 
 -Under section 42 of the County Courts Act it 
 »• O- ch. 47, an .appeal lies to the Court of 
 I Appeal from the order or judgment of a County 
 Court disposing of an issue <lirect(!d Ijy an order 
 made m an action in such County Court upon a 
 garnishing application ; and the claimant, the 
 plaintitt in the issue, though not a party to the 
 original action, is a " party " within the mean- 
 ing of section 42, and may be an appellant 
 
 Sato V. HtMard, 6 A. R. 546, distinguished 
 HemUraon v. Boijaw, 15 P. R. 241. 
 
 Attachment of Qebta-lmie sent from Hiak 
 Court to County fo «*•<.] -The Master in Cham- 
 Partnership Accounts. 1— A Countv f'o„,f i n *"". *" "''''er in an action in the High 
 ,8 jurisdiction, where the amonnV?""th"^° i' i f "f^-^,^,™"' °i P^"-"«^ '""-ecting the trfal 
 -- '■■■! — I '1-- -- I- • - •- • ^•"''" : '" ^ Cuunty Court, between an execution credi- 
 
 tor and a claimant, of an interpleader issue 
 with respect to the ownership of certain goods, 
 which the sheriff had not seized or intended to 
 
 I .., .,„cic ijic aniouiir, ot tj'" "'.>i'n 
 
 ■cZTt'^'T'l •'"' "'•''■"'"•y JurisdictionVf'Ihe 
 Com t, to entertain an action by a partner atrainat 
 iis co-partners for a purely' nLey dS.t 
 
249 
 
 COUNTY COURT. 
 
 K.ilr \m or ot herwiH... to make ttio „r,Ior for 
 ml of the 1,8m. in tlu, (nuuty Court; a.ul a, 
 ht.»l«fnce of ,uri.. iction u a„ apoare nt th e 
 
 fact, of tlu, or.Itr, all th.. ,.roc...,lfn„H uM.lir U 
 
 of appt.5 to ,. Court of Ai.p.al from tlu, jX 
 «<(/ V. Aei/, 15 P. If. 241, 
 
 f the Judge of a County Court, in a County 
 (ourt action, t;om„,itting the -Iweiulanl to Jr i^ 
 u,H)u hm examination as a ju.lKment debtor f ■ 
 oontealinK or maluiiK away witl. his property in 
 or-ltr o .Tefeat or .lefraiul l,i« .re,litorH Sud 
 un or.Ier iH ,„ ,t. nature tiiml, an.l therefore I 
 oomen w hin Hul,.,s,.ction '> of .eetion n of tl e ' 
 tomitv Court.. Aet, I!, s. (). ch. 47. a« con 
 trolle.f l.y the proviso at the en.l of th.: s,etio, , 
 m";;i '? ".' ^^"'l"l "Ij'ction to an appeal 
 that the Ju.lge of the County Court 1ms n, tl h 
 t^tici^^."t^,^'^. ■"•"'^-•''"'K«-.^-M"e8«e,l ,n hin cer 
 tihcate hat they are certified " to the Court of 
 Apiieal.' Ikiby v. y,'oM, I4 p. R. 440, 
 
 OroHS-AppealJ-In County Court cases 
 notjce of cross.appcal is not necessary. Ih^ol 
 V. Vallwrs, 19 A. R. l,-)4. ' "cfTO/i 
 
 Delay In Setting Oovrn -nUmUmU-Tho 
 fact hat the appellant in a County 'court 
 appeal has ol.taincl from th. .hulj oF 1 e 
 ( ourt appealed from, under R. ,s () ,.1' 47 
 sec. 4b, a stay of pr.,cce.linH8 to enable him to 
 K.ve security, .Iocs not al«olve him from the 
 ueeessity of complying Mith Rule 830, Z set 
 t.nK the appeal ,Iown forbearing at h7fim 
 sittings of the Court which commence af er the 
 
 Plained of, altlmugh such sittings commence 
 
 before the expiration of the stay '""'euce 
 
 And where judgment in a Co'unty Court %va8 
 
 ?! f on the 30tli January, a stay- of proceed- 
 ngs for thirty .Lays grante.l on the' Vjth'^Febr . 
 
 ■iry, and sceurity given on the 12tli MarchVb t 
 he appeal was not set down for the Marcl^ si 
 
 tingsof the Court of Appeal, nor the pnle . 
 
 wf h'cost,"''- ■'"' /;■'■''•■'■ ^"^ '"■"1'^ -lisniissing t 
 with <^ost8, no sufhcient excuse being given for 
 the delay. Paul v. nullkl,j,, IG P. R. 140 
 
 260 
 
 n."r '.'Si',!', "m" '.^•' ^'"V* """ "^'"'"^ •"•"■"•'" it 
 
 hearing " '""" '"'" "''""'« " ''»«" ""• 
 
 Hut the Court can always extend the time 
 
 Siii^St^;;.'''*' '''-''''■-'' ''^^ 
 
 Interpleader -<4W,V„/;o/i ./ ShihhohUr-- 
 Ij^^u. yljrom mjh Court toC.u,,U,Cnrl-^ 
 AH-nUjrom Ju,h,m.nt on /•<.«,. J-The n.ut of 
 
 nt ,./''•■""""" "f"l'<'""ty Court upo, an 
 ! .t. rpl..ader issue sent f.,r trial by „, „„ i 
 "I m. c „, an action in the High Court, ,,n „ 
 «P nhcatmn ot a stakuh.Jder. ' 
 
 line 1 l(i;( applie.s only t., the case of an applj. 
 
 vithin the lirst elans,, of H„h. j U\ ■ ;,„,| "^C 
 
 la tercasotboHiglMourt hasn/Zp^v ''by 
 .1 e taili.'V'^ f the (onsoli.lated 'uule ^ 
 direct an mterpleader issue, in .,r arisii.K out of 
 an actum i„ the Hi^h Court, to be trkd , 
 ( ounty Court ; aiuF, therefore, unless otle. 
 w.se supportable, the procecl ng .nd r ^^i 
 
 or.ler so .lirect irig are coL, n jadicT 
 
 Hut If the H,gh Court IMS ,«,wer to make 
 
 junsdictioi. of the Court of Chancery 1. 
 aopeal from the .lecision upon the issu7is, ' 
 the hrst instance at all events, to the hV 
 
 'l^;C'i5t'H^^5;-^'"^^>'^-' ^^"-i 
 
 winding-up. ]-An order in a win.Iiiu/.nn 
 proceeding for the .sale of assets i.s'"^ 1'^ 
 order' as nothing further remains to be .loie 
 In re D. A. Jouci Co., 19 A. R. 03. "I''"-'"- 
 
 Delay In &f>ttinsT3ovrn-DUnmsal-Extend- 
 
 Act r^VTT '*" °^*'" C"""ty Courts 
 Act, i{ fc,. O. ch. 47, providing that the Countv 
 
 Court Judge shall stay the prf.ceedings for no^ 
 t^e to ".?v *'"■■'-■ ■''"^■■'^ *° ^"'"'l =«' appellant 
 
 anTRuI.?S?r""''''^i-*"'^";^'^''-' '"•" to appeal, 
 ana Rule 836, provulmg that a County C'ourt 
 appeal shall be set .lowii for the first sittw! 
 dayf frZ Te"? *^""- *'''= -P'-^ion oflft; 
 3oTeernt!'n£X';" ''°""^'"'""' ''^' ''-' ^° 
 Until, however, the proceedings in the Court 
 bv tL r ^' ^?, ''''' "P '" the C^onrt oFAppea 
 tion 51 of the County Courts Act, the appeal is 
 
 2. Iti General. 
 
 Change of Venue ~ Intitnlin,/ Panrr. ]~ 
 \\ here a motum ,s made to a Ju.lge of the PI L'h 
 Court or he Master in Chambc'l un.ler I uYe 
 1-bO to change the venue in a County Court 
 
 the lith'c ^'T') '','"""'' '"^^ •'« "'tit^ulcl L 
 Conr^^ v^"'""' °^ •'"''"'^'^' I""' i" the County 
 Court. leromon v. aoldimj, 15 P. R. 43. ^ 
 
 bvT%^~0 ^'f ^/i'; J-The right of action given 
 
 .been ki'li?i 1 l^'"*' '''-' V^' '" »''" °^""' "f 
 ^ ttp ki led by (logs, IS to be prosecuted with 
 
 he usua procedure of the appropriate form 
 If, therefore, an action be pnfperly broutrht in 
 nnd^uh"*^' ^""•'•^ '* '"''J' '"> '"^'1 before a^ury 
 
 Judge should apportion the damages if an 
 apportionment be required """»g'-s " an 
 
 reve"rs^T'"i:!."'%?";!;'"'y Court of Wellington 
 leverseu. tox\. Il i//jrt?»!vr..)i. OQ ^.\ r gjo 
 
 Venue- Rephnn- Tax Collector.]- A tax 
 collector sued for damaue.» in respect of acts 
 
 f>i V.^'"^ in the execution of his duty s 
 entitlecl to the benefit of R. S. o. ch 7 ,„ | 
 
 Ml 
 
 1 ' 
 
 ■ ' i 
 
li'l 
 
 251 
 
 COURT OF APPEAL. 
 
 252 
 
 him for replevin of go,„ls seizo,l by hinf »...i ! ' ^''• 
 
 him for replevin ot go.uls seized by him; and 
 for damiiges for midioioug seizure, must be 
 brought 111 tlie county where tlie seizure and 
 alleged trespass took place. 
 
 The Consolidated Rules as to venue do not 
 override these statutory provisions. 
 
 Lyin/ V. Pi/r/ier, 10 (). R. G20, diatiii- 
 guished . 
 
 Ar.'^ailtv. LUky, 14 A. R. 283, applied. 
 
 .Judgment of the County Court of Hastings 
 reversed. Howard v. Hn-rhniUm, 20 A. R 175 
 
 3. Tramfer of Aclioii to Hkjh Court. 
 
 Ascertained Amount.] - An action was 
 brouglit m a County Court to recover the 
 anKiunt of a broker's commission on the sale of 
 land. The defendant ilisputed his liability and 
 lie action was tried by a jury, who found'that 
 the plaintiff was entitled to recover §2.50 The 
 amount was not ascertained otherwise than by 
 tlie agreement of the parties, as foui.d bv the 
 jury :— •' 
 
 Held, by Rose, J., that the aiiiou;it w.as not 
 ascertained within the meaning of R. S. O. ch 
 47, sec. 19, sub-sec. 2, and the County Court 
 h.ad no jurisdiction. 
 
 Rohb V. Murray, 16 A. R. 50;i, followed :— 
 Held, by a Divisional Court, that the Act 54 
 Vict. ch. 14 (0.), passed after the determination 
 that the County Court had no jurisdiction, was 
 retrospective, and enabled the action to be 
 transferred to the High (Jourt. AV McKay v 
 Marti,,, 21 O. R. 104. 
 
 COURT OF APPEAL. 
 
 I. Bond and Sf.cukitv, 252. 
 II. Cross- Appe.'Vl, 253. 
 
 III. MiSCELLANEOCS CasES, 254. 
 
 Appeals fro.m the County Court. —,sw 
 County Court. 
 
 Appeals from the Court of Appeal.— ,S<e 
 Privy Council— Supreme Court of Canada. 
 
 Appeals from the Divi.siox Court— ,S',p 
 Division Court. 
 
 Appeals Generally.— Sea Appeal. 
 
 I. Bond and Security. 
 
 Equitable Rellef.]-If a County Court has 
 no jurisdiction over the plaintiff's cause of 
 action,^ the proceedings in respect thereof in 
 that Court are all coram, nan Jiidice, and the 
 Judge of that Court has no power over them ; 
 sec. 38ofl;. S. O ch. 47, applies only where the 
 jictKui in whicli the equitalile (luostion is raised 
 is within the jurisdiction of the County Court. 
 
 Prohibition granted to restrain a Jiuige from 
 trniisferring to the Hi^fh Coint an action 
 br<)u^'llt 111 a County Court for an equitable 
 cause of action. A'e Mcd'iifian v. McGugan, 21 
 
 Judgment Before Transfer.]— An action can- 
 not be removed under 54 Vict. ch. 14 (O.), from 
 a County Court to the High Court after verdict 
 or judgment in the County < ourt in favour of 
 the plaintiff, leaving that verdict or judgment 
 in force, with the right to either party to move 
 against it in the High Court. 
 
 R" McKa,/ v. Martin, 21 O. R. 104, con- 
 sidered. 
 
 Ju.lgment of the Count v Court of Haldimand 
 reversed. .Sherkv. Ekuhh, 22 A. R. 242. 
 
 Scale of Costs of an Action Transferred 
 from County Court to HlRh Court. ]— The pro- 
 visions of Rule x-'19 arc applicable to an action 
 transferred from a County Court to the High 
 Court by virtue of .54 \-ict. ch. 14 (0.), and the 
 costs of the proceedings after the transfer should 
 be taxed upon t!ic lower scale where the case falls 
 within sul)-.section (4) of the Rule, by reason of 
 the plaintiff seeking equitable relief, ond the 
 
 Damages — rr)(rfo)- and Purchaser.] — lu 
 winding-up proceedings a property was sold by 
 tender under the power of sale in a mortgage 
 with the consent of the li(juidator, and an 
 appeal by an unsuccessful tenderer to a Jml^e 
 from the report confirming the sale was drs- 
 missed, whereupon a further appeal to the Court 
 of Appeal was allowed upon the appell.iut 
 giving security by bond to the successful ten- 
 derer to answer the damages which the latter 
 as purchaser might sustain by being prejudicially 
 attccted in his purchase, by the appeal allowed 
 in case such appeal should fail. Possession was 
 not taken by the purchaser until after the fail- 
 ure of the appeal. Tiie conditions of .sale pro- 
 vided that possession would be given upon 
 p.ayinent of the balance of the purchase money 
 within a time fLved, but the money was not paid 
 nor did It appear that it had been set aside for 
 that purpose, nor was any provision made in 
 the conditions as to the payment of interest or 
 taxes : — 
 
 Held, that under the bond the purchaser was 
 not entitled to payments made by him for care 
 of the property or taxes, ncr was' he entitled to 
 interest on the purchase money, or to damages • 
 for deterioration of the property. Be Ahtr 
 and Sariiia Oil Co., 23 O. R. 5S3 
 
 Disallowance of Eond—/?e/?/»jj7 of, without 
 ronseiit of , Sun Iks.]- A ho-Ad was filed by the 
 defendant for the purpose of an appeal to the 
 Court of Appeal. Leave to a[)peal was. how- 
 ever, necessary, and had not been obtained 
 before filing the bond, which was, therefore, on 
 the 4th of April, kSOl, disallowed. Leave to 
 appeal was afterwards obtained, and the same 
 bond was on the UStli of .September, 1891, reliled 
 without the consent oi the sureties, and was 
 again disallowed : — 
 
 Held, rightly so ; for the sureties might object 
 tnat the bon.l had been improperly used bv the 
 defendant ; and the respondent was entitled to 
 a security free from any objections of that 
 nature. 
 
 253 
 
253 
 
 COURT OP APPEAL. 
 
 The plaintiflF ol,jccttrt to the bon.l on the 
 ground of tl)e insufficiency of one of the sure- 
 ties, and in supiiort of that objection read the 
 sworn statements of sucli surety in another 
 action : — 
 
 Held, that such statements were admissible 
 ag.iinst the defendant, who was puttiiiK for- 
 ward the surety as a person of substance. 
 Joim V. Macdonald, U P. R. 535. 
 
 Manifold Jndgment-.Sra/,- «,, to Part A— 
 The defendant in appealing to the Court of 
 Apjieal^ from a manifold judgment of the Hitdi 
 Cour in an action for specific performance,, 
 direo ing the execution by him of a conveyance ! 
 the delivery of .hicuii.ents, etc., and also the I 
 payment of a sum for costs of the action, gave 
 security for the costs of the Court of Appeal I 
 and for payment of the costs of the action, but ' 
 did not execute the conveyance, deposit the 
 dnciinients in Court or otherwise comply witl, 
 the judgment or the provisions of Rule 804 
 sul)-secs. 1 , 2, .3 : — ' 
 
 Held, that, upon the perfecting of the secur- 
 ity, there was a stay of execution, amounting 
 to a supersedeas, as to the costs of the action, I 
 by virtue of sub section 4 of Rule 804 although 
 the dcfen.lant had done nothing with respect to ' 
 the parts of the jurlgment falling under the 
 other sub-sections - an,l garnishing proceedings 
 tDk.'U f,n- the purpose of collecting sucli costs 
 we.^ not sustainable. Vigton v. Northcote, 15 
 
 254 
 
 prosecution of his opponent's appeal his only 
 course is to launch an independent appeal by 
 giving notice and security, and under ordinary 
 circumstances the two appeals would then fe 
 coii^olulated. Pickerino ^. Toronto It. W.cT, 
 
 EnforclnKOrder.]-A respondent, in an 
 appea to the Co'urt of Appeal.^ho de'sires to 
 \aiy the decision appealed against, is in the 
 same p<,sition as if he were an appellant? and 
 
 ■ .7 1 e 1 } T""'' l"" '"" ","'"'^'- ^" ''■« contention 
 If he ha.l brought an independent appeal, would 
 
 ^ urged hy way of cross-appeal. 
 I And \\heie, before the hearing of an appeal 
 , the respondent moved in Cliaml,c?s for a.i order 
 allowing him to enforce the order appeal^ 
 ngams without prejudice to his cross-appeal •_ 
 Weld, t lat it was not for a Judge in Cham- 
 bers ,i. advance of the appeal, to deterni , e a 
 question which might arise on the appeal itself 
 vu., whether the enforcement of "the order 
 «..uld be an answer to the cross-appeal A'e 
 tAf<c/e..< ,«wy(- Co., 15 P. R. 451. 
 
 wiH^'lt ^" l""- ^''n'iJ-Tlie Court of Appeal i 
 
 ^ull not entertain an objection to the secwity 
 upon the appeal given in the County Court 
 appealed from. Baby v. lio^s, 14 P. R! 440. 
 
 Parties to Bona—Nonexenition by som" of 
 Me /«rt»...]_An appeal bond for the purpose 
 of an appeal by the plaintiffs to the Court of 
 Appeal was drawn up with the names of all the 
 :.l:untiffs as parties thereto, and was executed 
 hj the sureties and some of the plaintifts in 
 tha shape, and an order was afterwards obtain- 
 ed dispensing with the execution of the bond bv 
 the other plaintiffs, except two, ,,dio had witli 
 
 '? • '".''" ■''P!'.*-'"'- ■"'« '^°n'l ^vas also 
 defective in the condition :— 
 
 Held, that the order should have been obtain- 
 ed before the execution of the bond, and that 
 only those of the appellants actnally'executiru. 
 It should have been named as parties to it ; and 
 
 P R195 ''"'''" '^' "'"'^' ^'''"""' ''• ^'"''''^' 15 
 
 ocal Judge upon the ex parte application of the 
 ee,„iant allowing him to serve a third party 
 "otioe, but, upon the application of the third 
 parties so called upon, this order was set aside 
 w^s'1"'''''"'m' 'h«/^i;'«ter in Chambers, vS 
 waaatfarme. by a Ju.lge at Chambers and by a 
 
 ant. That Court, however, at the same time 
 
 nhintmla ' n''^V,"«, "'",l"-<"^«^^'li%'s until the 
 phuntitls should ad.l the third parties as defen- 
 dan s, and trom this order theplaintitfsappeale^l 
 to the Court of Appeal, not 'making the th rd 
 parties respondents. The defendant, however 
 an rthe h'-'i"^ cross-appeal upon thi plaintiffs 
 and the third parties, by which he asked that 
 the order m.ide by the local Judge might be 
 
 Held, that the word "parties" in Rule s-' 
 means persons who are parties to the action or 
 pioceediiig ,„ qijesthn. on the appeal ; and that 
 what the defendant sought by the cross-appeal 
 was not a variation of the order appealed from 
 rtSlonrf'"* ""t '"' '^i'-'-"» '"tthesub! 
 ter ?■ f/"" ""!■ '■'" '^"t'-cly different charac- 
 
 m,o» 14't^ r >67 "'" '*''"^'' ""*• ""''-"J ^- 
 
 II. CROSS-Ari'EAL. 
 
 Discontinuance of Main Appeal. l-A uro- 
 
 "kn'^bv th" ''"■'^ '?^ ''^ "-^y -^^ cross-app^^l, 
 taken by the respondent to an aoneal to tho 
 Coiiitof Appeal, is a mere brand/ roff-shoo? 
 of the mam appeal ; ami if the appellant discon 
 
 '":;r, r 'l'^"'- °'' '''% ^-P-n'^^t cans To 
 he dis 1 issed for want of prosecution, the cross 
 
 ^jrhe difference in the English practice pointed 
 
 Ctwf '■"/"'""• '°/- P- '^' 'distinguished. I 
 objection to a judgment to bo subject to the I 
 
 III. MiSCELLANEOU.S CaSES. 
 
 fo, T, f " °^ OPlnlon.]-The Court Of Appeal 
 foi On ario, composed of f„ur Judges, pro- 
 ; louiiced judgment in an appeal bifore ^the 
 {Court, wo of their Lordships^bcing in favour 
 I o dismissing and the other two pionounciig^o 
 judgment. On an appeal from the ju.iginent 
 dismissing the appeal, it was objeit.d hat 
 there was no decision arrived at •- 
 behind Vhl'f *''^'H'l'«llate Court shouhl not go 
 th". 1 1 ""r J»'l5,"nent which stated thtt 
 WW? "'•■'' '''^""^f » ' f>'^thor, the position 
 was the same as if the f.nir Jud-es had been 
 
 rr'.^'""'/?V" "'^''"""' "■ -hfci, .;: e he 
 
 
 hii)^ 
 
 f; : 
 
 ii.ni 
 
255 
 
 COVENANT. 
 
 Mistake In Certificate.]- Where the certifi- 
 cate of ]iuigincnt of the Court of Appeal by 
 inadvertence directed the dismissal of a County 
 Court action with costs, instead of merely set- 
 ting aside the judgment in the County Court 
 for want of jurisdiction, the certificate was, on 
 summary application, amended, and repayment 
 ot costs taxed and paid under it directed. Shtrk 
 V. Evans, 22 A. E. •242. 
 
 Order not Issued.]— The Court will not ordi- 
 narily (juash or dismiss an apjieal because the 
 order or judgment appealed from has not been 
 drawn up. IJemlcrson v. liorjers, 15 P. E. 241. 
 
 Printing.]— The costs of printing unnecessary 
 D^tenal disallowed. Bryce v. Loutil, 21 A. R. 
 
 Time for Appeal— Zow/ Vacation. ]-V von 
 the true construction of Rule 484, the period of 
 Long Vacation is not to be reckoned in the time 
 allowed by section 71 of the Judicature Act for 
 hling and serving notice of appeal to the Court 
 ot Appeal. Hexpekr v. CimpheU, 14 P. R 18 
 
 256 
 
 to receive payment of the annuity. Moot 
 Oihson, 21 O. R. 248. 
 
 COURT or REVISION. 
 
 See AssE.s3.MENT AND Taxes, i. 
 
 COVENANT. 
 
 Acceleration Clause.]- Where, by virtue of 
 an acceleratK.n clause in a mortgage deed, the 
 whole of the mortgage money has become due 
 by default ot payment of interest, and judement 
 has been recovered for the whole by the mort- 
 gagee against the mortgagor, in an action solely 
 upon the covenant for payment contained in the 
 mortgage deed, the defendant is not entitled 
 upon payment of interest and costs, to have the 
 judgment and execution issued thereon set aside 
 
 Ihe acceleration is not in the nature of a 
 penalty, but is to be regarded as the contract 
 of the parties. 
 
 Rules 359, 360, and 3fil, and the long form of 
 the acceleration clause, R. S. O. ch. 107, schedule 
 P 'r^254 ''°"'"''^'«*'- W"'^*"" V. Campbell, 15 
 
 Beneficial Right Thereunder— ^c<,on Jv 
 
 Stravgtr to L„/orce.]-\\hexo the eflect of a 
 contract is to give a stranger to it a beneficial 
 right thereunder, he may enforce such right by 
 action. 6"" "J 
 
 And where in an agreement for the exchange 
 of certain lands l)etwten the sons of the defen- ' 
 dant and a third j arty, v hich was carried out, 
 and in which tlie defendant leleased her dower 
 and also conveyed lands of her own to the third 
 party for the benefit of her sons, in consideration 
 whereof they jointly with her covenanted with 
 such third party to pay her an annuity to be 
 secured by mortgage, it was :— 
 
 Held that although not named as a coven- 
 antee, she was entitkd to maintain an action to 
 ^Infr "7 ' covumnt, and that a judgment 
 creditor of hers was entitled to have equitable 
 execution ngair.st 1 cr, and a receiver appointed 
 
 [ 
 
 Beneficial 'Right— Coveiiant with Mothi-^ 
 
 : Action by Child/or Ihrarh o/.]— The defendant^' 
 
 mother having conveyed her farm to them, tin y 
 
 I mortgaged it to her in consideration of the c.:.i. 
 
 ^ veyance and of !«2,500, and covenanted in tlu- 
 
 mortgage, wier alia, to educate their youii.'ir 
 
 , brother. The latter was not a party to the tov 
 
 enant, nor was there anything in the mortcii -e 
 
 giving him a right to maintain an action m.on 
 
 It, but there was a stipulation that if the de- 
 
 , fendants failed to educate him, the mother or 
 
 j her exeeutor.s might distrain upon them for 
 
 such sums ns might be required from time to 
 
 time to secure the due performance of the af-rti;- 
 
 iment. After tl.e death of the mother, ^liis 
 
 \ action was brought by her executors and tlie 
 
 younger brother for damages for breach of tli.. 
 
 , covenant : — 
 
 Held, that there was no trust in favour of the 
 younger brother, and that the action was not 
 
 maintainable by him ; 
 
 Held, however, that it was maintainable l)v 
 the executors to the extent that they niitlit 
 recover such sum as would enable them to ptr- 
 form the covenant to educate their co-plaintiff 
 \Vest V. Honphton, 4 C. P. D. 197, distin: 
 guished. lanlkner v. Faulhier, 23 0. R. 252. 
 
 Breach— i)o;«a,7e.9—^asc»!en<.]— The defen- 
 dants granted to the predecessor in title of the 
 plaintifi^, with covenants for title under the 
 hhort Forms Act, certain lands with the ritrht 
 and easement of erecting a dam at a certain 
 spot. It was afterwards held that they had no 
 pow-er to grant such a right, but it was shtwn 
 j that It was not, in any "vent, practicable to 
 i maintain a dam at tlie spoi, in question :— 
 I Held, that the defendants were not liable to 
 j repay the full purchase money less the actual 
 ! value cf the land without the supposed rieht 
 j but only the actual practical value of the sup; 
 I posed right, which was nothing. 
 j Judgment of Ferguson, J., aifirmed, Osier, 
 J. A., dissenting. Piatt v. Grand Trunk li W 
 Co., 19 A. R. 403. 
 
 ! InAemuits—Amignriient of Covenant to In- 
 demmJ;/.]~See Sutherland V. Webfter, 21 A R 
 228, ante 131 ; Ball v. Tnmant, 21 A. r" 
 602, ante 67. 
 
 Restraint of Trade —Reasonableness — Cer- 
 tamty.]—'\he male defendant sold his business 
 ol a wholesale and retail confectioner to the 
 I plaintitl, and covenanted that he would not dur- 
 I ing a limited period, either by himself alone or 
 j jointly with or as agent for any other peis( n, 
 i carry on or be employed in carrying on the 
 ; biisiness of a retail confectioner in the same citv, 
 which should in any way interfere with the 
 business sold to the plaintiflF, and that he would, 
 to the utmost of his power, endeavour to pro- 
 mote the interest of the plaintifl' amongst his 
 (the defendants) eustcmeis. 1 his deftmlaiit 
 had earned <n his wholesale business in the 
 basement of his puniises, and his retail Inisi- 
 ness in the shop above, of which latter his wife, 
 the other defendant, had the nianatremfnt The 
 business carried on in the shop included the sale 
 ot cakes, candy, etc, and th. serving of lunches. 
 Jn the sale to the plaiiitiflT weie included (in 
 
257 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 MsiKM ent of the lease of these premises and all 
 
 he chattels ami Hxtnres. as ^vJu those used in 
 
 he serving of unehes as in other ways. During 
 
 he period hmite,! I.y the eovenantf and w f 
 
 the plaintiff was carrying „„ the business in he 
 
 same way as the male .lefenda.u had previously 
 
 earned it o„ and upon the same premises th^ 
 
 defendants began a precisely similar busine s in 
 
 a shop m the same street, the shop being leased 
 
 and the retail business carried on in the Ce 
 
 conducted by her as theretofore, while the hus! 
 band carried on the wholesale business in the 
 basement. The jury foun.l that the retail bu ! 
 ness was in fact that of the husband :- I 
 
 Held that the serving of lunches was part of ' 
 the business o a retail confectioner accorcC to : 
 
 t\rrni'°'"''^^"'^'^''*''*'^- -■•''-» I 
 
 2. That the covenant was reasonable and ! 
 sufficiently certain to be enforced by the Court i 
 
 .?. That general loss of custom after the com- i 
 meiicemeut of the new business by the defendairts 
 could be shewn by the plaintiff as evi.len^ to 
 fu^c'riS^S' "' ''"'■"'^^ -«"•«"« '^ him from 
 and fSjf.^"""^'['«^-^-Q'B- 524, applied 
 
 totheit'offiTuKn?"'''"'^ "^^^^^^^'^ "P 
 .'ila/ke.r v. Lunu-ich 15 O. R. 342, followed. 
 o. It IS no ground for a new trial that the 
 
 . u. Ige refused to submit any particular question 
 the jury, but if the Judge refuses to charge 
 
 the jury m respect to the subject matter of ai^ 
 
 ciuestion which counsel desire to have submitted, 
 
 ofo R oj"" "•'"■^'^^'^"o"- Turner v. Burm, 
 
 25S 
 
 Restraint otTrtLde— Limited Thnc~I?eamn 
 M>,es. PMir Poncy.]-On the purchase of "a 
 nianufacturing business by the plaintiff from the 
 de endants the latter entered' into a cove^ian? 
 
 of sale tl? r^ "^ "'"■';',' ^"" l"""'' °f "- '"™ 
 ot sale, that they would not engage directlv or 
 
 indirectly in the manufacture or sfue o " bU' 
 
 boo ware and fancy furniture, either as prind- 
 
 pal, agent or employe^ at any place n the 
 
 Dominion of Canada for the tera of ten years 
 
 from he date hereof. This clause does not pre 
 
 vent" (defendants) "from engaging in the retail 
 
 buBiness of lurniture and bamlfoo^ware se ling 
 
 It covers wholesale or jobbing business " :-' 
 
 Held, that as the restraint of trade was partial 
 
 only being confined to nianufacturing cS 
 
 ?o £ rVr*^'"'i^' "'^"^ l>y ^vllolestIcor by 
 jobbing and for a limite.l time, and as there 
 was no evidence on which it could be held to be 
 unreasonable, and the interests of the nublic 
 were not interfered with, the agreement was 
 not contrary to public policy, ^oolv Ia^^ 
 
 i CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 I. Accessories, 258. 
 II. Evidence. 
 
 ; i. As to Specific Ofencex, 258. 
 
 2. Cojnpetent Wilneimei, 260. 
 I 3. Coiifessioimand AdmiKK;on»,2^\. 
 
 4. Corroboration, 261. 
 
 5. Evidence in Other Proceedings, 262. 
 
 6. Procnrimj Attendance or Lndevce ,f 
 nitnesses, 263. '^ 
 
 1. View by Judge, 263. 
 
 III. Practice and Procedure, 264. 
 
 IV. Specific Offences, 269. 
 
 I. Accessories. 
 
 .I^raudulent Appropriation- r/,/av/»/ Re- 
 
 ' lZlZi7 f """""""'" ^ '■'■'•] - ^ fraudulent 
 «ppropr,ation by a principal and a fraudul.nt 
 receiving by an accesso.y may take place at the 
 same time and by the same act. McJnto.h • 
 J he Qveen, 23 S. C. R. ISO. •■^"w.u . 
 
 8t&^eholder~It/e;,o/ Bet.] -See ]Vc,l,h v 
 frehdcocl; 23 S. C. R. 695, pit. Gaming. 
 
 II. Evidence. 
 1. Ah to Specific Offeiicey. 
 
 Blgar ^ -Proof of First JIIarriage.}-UvcQ 
 «n md.etment for bigamy ,he first marTi^ge 
 nii^t be strictly proved as a marriage de jure 
 his Hrfr'' °* ^ eonfession by the prisoner of 
 his first marriage is not evidence upon which he 
 can be convicted. Ihijina v. Bay, 20 O. R. 212. 
 
 OEEDITORS' RELIEF ACT. 
 
 See Execution, I. 
 
 CRIMINAL CODE. 
 
 See Criminal Law, III., IV 
 17 
 
 ,^°^BT?\r&cs—A(ireemevi— Overt Acts— Acts of 
 to-consj.,rators-Acts Before Bate AUe<„d in 
 Indictment-Emneer's Beport-Lntries inBoel: 
 \-i>econdary Evidence - Examination in CuU 
 I A ctwn- Present to Official-Fktitious Tend, rs. ]- 
 7" \' J ?•' .'^ "^ °f contractors in Quebec 
 wrlTt^? harbour commissioners for certain 
 ^ork to be done with the approval of the Govern- 
 ment, sending in three tenders, one in their own 
 name, and two in the names of others, with a 
 common mistake as to price of a porticn of tl e 
 r'\ 'n^^" three. The defendant McG., wlu e 
 brother had been admitted to the firm as a part- 
 ner without the payment of any capital, was 
 both a member of Parliament and of the harbour 
 commission The three tenders with others were 
 defpn!i ."S^^Pl"?"^ hy the commissioners, the 
 warlJ^'i* ^^■. ^""S P''^^^"*' «"'! ^«re then for^ 
 The defendant McG. went to Ottawa and sue- 
 cecdcd in obtaining from the government engin- 
 eer particulars of the calculations and resultl of 
 all the tenders sent in, of which he advised his 
 brother by letters. When the mistake in tie 
 price was notified by the government enginee. ta 
 
 Ml ■ li 
 
 III 
 
 \H\ 
 
 I ! 
 
 Mil 
 
 1:1 
 
likil 
 
 
 259 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 the three tenderers, one tender was withdrawn 
 one was varied, so as to make it higher than 
 otliers, and the firm's was allowed to remain as 
 It was with the manifest error, and so became 
 the lowest tender, and was thus accepted. One 
 Koverninent engineer w.-is given a situation on 
 the harbour commission, and the chief eni-ineer 
 of the Public Works Department received a 
 ri.."L ? P'''-'»«'"t fi-um the firm. As soon as the 
 
 260 
 
 petition for the contracts it was "unlawful" 
 Jleijimt V. Connolly, 25 0. R. lol. 
 
 Forgery. l-.S-fe Re OarhiiH, 21 O. R. 179 • "i 
 O. R. 4(w ; and J.'e Murp/i//, 2(3 O. R. 163 ;' 22 
 
 A. li. 3SG, jnisl, KXTKAIIITION. 
 
 -Liquor License Act. 1— On motion to quash a 
 
 contract was"exe:;ui;,C7.romisso;;^:ou4'tV"n takeTw'".?" "''^"^T'^ '^'''}^' •'^"l-^' 
 amount of many tliousand (lolla.s were .ion^ Ul ''''f"'^«/ '« magistrates and returned by 
 
 by the firm and ^gi ven to i.f Srnd^i^t S felT; Te :^^:^ 'l^' ''''"' '^''^ ^'^ ^^ 
 
 Held, that there is 'no umJ^rying'ruttl^iLTti;; '""" '"'""" " ''''''"' ^^ "• «' ''''• 
 
 plicated are admissible in evideLran th t \ho I ^.f "« '^'^-''^^''^.'-^l '"'.tel-kceper under the Act, a 
 letter? written bv the .lefeml mt M^-r It m^^ i '? '" fc'V"'K,'^^'^l'^'"--«. stated defendant to 
 
 were overt ac sThe e n fu h rancf of t£.^ o^^^^ a,*;.]'""*'' ""^V^ "l""«'' aefeiulant was present 
 
 boK^cl^c^l'irZSitd s'^i^SHo,!!l?''ir''^7*' -.^"^-i-s might have 
 ;lant C. was, by his own admS pril^ £'t"e SSa '^,,'f olj';^*-;.' ^™"' "^ ^I'^f-'l-t. 
 arge payment after it was made, it was a matter ' ^ ' '''^'^• 
 
 f„„%..' y-" -•■ "."•"' uiauu, iL was a matter 
 
 tor the jury to say whether he was not thronL'ii- 
 out a participator in the proceedings: Mulca/>y 
 \.7>'r '"'"'"' ^- ^'- ' C. L. 12, followed :- ^ 
 (-) -1'ietran.sactions, conversations, and writ- 
 ten communications between R. H., McCi. (the 
 partner), and his brother, the defendant McG. 
 and the other members of the firm, were receiv- 
 able in evidence in tiie circumstances of this case. 
 It at first not available against both defendants 
 they became so wlien the proof had so far 
 advanced and cumulated as to indicate the exist- 
 ence ot^ a common design :— 
 
 (.S) Evidence as to the manner in which other ! 
 contracts were obtained by the firm previous 
 to tlie date mentioned in tlie indictment was 
 properly received as introductory to the trans- 
 action in question • 
 
 in the name of an employee, and purporting to be .^'"''^'i' J/ouse.]-On aa indictment for attempt 
 ■'""""'""''"■" ' ..''.- fc i,ng to procure a woman tn I,n.,„..o o L 
 
 i H 
 
 signed by him, were also properly in evidence :- 
 
 (5) 1 lie report of the government engineer 
 recommending the acceptance of the firm"s ten- 
 <ler, was also properly in evidence as the object 
 of all that was done was to obtain a report in 
 favour of the firm :— 
 
 (6) Kntrios in the books of the firm were evi- 
 dence against the defendant C, and statements 
 prepared therefrom by an accountant were good 
 secondary evidence in the absence of the books 
 withheld by the defendants :- 
 
 Qiin-f/.—HowUr they were evidence against 
 thefom" who was not a member of 
 
 . (7) The ex.amination of the defendant C. in a 
 civil action arising out of these matters, he not 
 having claimed privilege therein, could be used 
 against him on this trial :— 
 
 (8) The evidence of an expert in calculating 
 results on data supplied and proper for an 
 engineer to work upon, was admissible :— 
 
 (9) Jividenoe of a present being made to an 
 engineer in charge of the work with the know- 
 ledge of one of tlie defendants was proper to be 
 considered by the jury as casting light on the 
 
 '■ MnP'';^^'^*'-'"-''" ^^^ ^^^"= ■^'I'i li'^t officer :_ 
 H -f A "^® °^ fictitious tenders was a deceit, 
 
 Liquor License Act.]-An objection that it 
 did not appear that tlie evidence had been read 
 over to the witnesses was overruled, following 
 L',!/ma V. Excel/, 20 O. R. 633. *^ 
 
 The direction in sub-section 2 of section 96 
 as to the witues.ses signing their evidence is not 
 
 ""Pf'^^'^^ l^»^,.""."■''^'t'^'•y uwrely. Rajimt v. 
 6cot(, 20 0. R. 646. 
 
 Murder-- J/o/;w.]-On a trial for murder, the 
 alleged motive being the obtaining of insurance 
 moneys on policies effected by the prisoner on 
 tlie lite of the deceased, evidence of a previous 
 attempt by the prisoner to insure another person 
 tor bis own benefit cannot be given in evidence 
 against him. Reijina v. Ilendwskott, 26 0. R 678 
 
 Prostitution - Evidence of lieputation of 
 tawdy J/ouse.]-On aa indictment for attempt- 
 ing to procure a woman to become a common 
 prostitute, in corroboration of her evidence that 
 for such purposes the prisoner had taken her to 
 a bawdy house, evidence of the general reputa- 
 
 i?\r "'^ ''""^"^ i^ admissible. Jief/iia v 
 McNamara, 20 O. R. 489. 
 
 I Bape.]-On a trial for rape, the evidence of 
 the prosecution was that the prisoner knocked 
 her down, got on her, pulled up her clothes and 
 committed a rape on her. A witness proved 
 that the prisoner state.I that he did no more 
 than her husband would have done 
 
 Evidence was admitted of a statement made 
 by prisoner s counsel at a iirevious trial on behalf 
 ot prisoner, that prisoner had had connection 
 with the woman with her consent, and that he 
 had paid her SI, 00 :— 
 
 Held, that tlierewas sufl:icient evidence of the 
 commission of the offence ; and that the state- 
 ment of the prisoner's counsel was properly 
 admitted. lie,fma v. liedere, 21 0. R. 189 
 
 2. 
 
 Competent Witneane.i. 
 
 ...i ,ri7. „rsr3sr?4tsi./„?TrLS°£i^^^^^^^^^ » «- "■ 
 
 ■ *» ^i n U .^ 
 
261 
 
 ite 9 Geo. II. 
 
 By the statute the mere undertakinL' to tell 
 fortunes constitutes the offence ; and a co°u-fc 
 tion Nvas affirmed where it was obtaine.l upon 
 the ev„ enoe of a person who was not a ,lupe or 
 vi<3t.m but a .lecy. R..ji„a v. Milford, 20 o' 
 
 Judge-Y"'w.]-Review of the cases on the 
 qnost.0,,3 whether either a Judge or a juror can 
 be properly a witness in a case which he is trv- 
 iDg. Heyina v. Petrii; 20 O. R. ;^I7. ' 
 
 ••The Liquor License Aot" -E,-kkuce of' 
 l^ciiie Iii.y„ctor and Defendants — For an 
 offeiice under ''The Liquor License Act," l" * 
 S O. ch. 194, the license inspector who lays 
 the information is a competent witness lie 
 !7t?in V. /Vomfw, '22 O. R. 4-,6. 
 
 Offences Under By.Law-.l.;«k«7y;tt» of 
 hndence of D,fendant.l-On the trial of^^ an 
 offence against a city by daw in the erection 
 of ;i wooden buihlnig within tlie Hre limits the 
 defendant IS not either a competent or com- 
 pellable witness; and, therefore, where in such 
 a case, the ,Jefendant's evidence was receive 
 ami a conviction made against him, it was i 
 quashed with costs. liefuia v. Hart, 20 0. R 
 
 t 
 Unlawfully Pointing Firearms.] - On ' 
 appeal to the Divisional Court, a conviction for 
 unlawful ly and maliciously pointing a loaded 
 firearm at .a person, was quashed on an objectio 
 taken for the first tune, that the defendant who 
 was called as a witness at the trial, was not a 
 competent or compellable witness 
 
 liefnmv Hart 20 O. R. 611, followed. Be- 
 quia V. Seeker, 20 O. K. 676. 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 forge,! .locuments wore written by the accuser! 
 
 erHln tmP""'"^ ,''^^'''^ Bame\v.tne s thJt 
 
 i.wiii as tlie torgeil documents, were in th^ 
 
 I'and writing of the accused :- ^'"' 
 
 Held, tliat this was not sufficient corrol^r. 
 .01, under seetion 684 of the C^tinTto^' 
 1892. Ae,,,„a v, McBrid.', 26 0. R. G.'ig. 
 I 
 
 ! of an indictment for u/teH g f ~2 .Se eif 
 est tlierein of the note being forged. The wife 
 
 rece irr; "? "'"T" '-l-lfShc notewl^ 
 reoeved. ami who, when receiving it. was in 
 
 ;r^;S™.;?tSg''"^'^^"'>'^^'''''-^'>'«»««'^ 
 
 prove,r\^rb''f""' i-r'^^''' ''°'' '"'^'i"g '^ea 
 fnt^,jL H ^"'^"'^ ^'y " P"""" "lavin., no 
 
 j Per Rose .J.-TJie wife had no interest in 
 [the forged document; her interest, any w^s 
 I iLr"" ''1 S-nnm.n.,s ; but in any ^e'ven? 
 there ^^•as abundant evidence of corroboration 
 I Jiei/ina v. A'Aoi^.x, 22 (). H. 480. '""""'""on. 
 
 I Forgery. ]_.?.c AV a,n-lmtl, 21 (). R. 170. 21 
 A. K. .J80, post, Extradition-. 
 
 3. Conf (Unions and Admissions. 
 
 Statements to Detective. ]-During the trial 
 of t le prisoner for murder cjuestionsla ose as 
 to the admissibility in evidence of statements 
 made by Inm to certain detectives, in a fswe, 
 to questions put to him by them, he beii t a 
 the tune in iheir custody :_ ° 
 
 Hold, upon a case reserved, that the state- 
 
 "SVra ".'209.''"^ " ''"''''''■ ^^^"- - 
 
 statements to Detective. ]-In the course I 
 o a conversation b.tweeu the prisoner and a 
 detective rela ive to the purchase of counterfeit 
 mouey the pris<,ner aske.l the detective whether 
 he ad received a letter written by the former 
 •stating his desire to purchase counterfdt 
 money; and upon the detective shewim, nris 
 oner he letter he admitted it was hisT-^ ^ '" 
 
 Held, that the letter was admissible as in a 
 aense forming part of the sul,ject matter of ?he 
 conversation. *,,;«„ v. Attwood, 20 o! R 574 
 
 Statements Made by Prisoner's Counsel 
 at a Previous T.'ial. 1— 5ec /iV«;»« ^ '^"""se^ 
 21 0. R. 189, ante 260. ^ ^- ^'*'"'' 
 
 4. Corroboration. 
 
 Forgery. 1- Where on a charge of forgery in 
 'I'lition to evidence of one witness tffil.e 
 
 5. Evidence in Other Proceedings. 
 
 Committee of House of Commons 1-At th^ 
 hearing ot a criminal char-o before ■ p , \ 
 Judge, sitting as Police .Ma.dstritt i "^^ 
 
 was given belre a Bpeci^rSi t^r'o X 
 House of Commons, ami taken by steno ranh 
 
 to receive such evidence ^ "itecting him 
 
 a^mii;,:'£::;:;"rr';«;r'-,.f7-".that 
 
 that Parliament, having oi-red h ; 13? 
 the^-;aj^ce should have been recii^::?';:;:^ 
 
 .Subsequent resolution of the House of Tnm 
 moiis, authorising the evidence to be .-lien" 
 Jieijma v. VonnoUy, 22 O. 1!. 220. 
 
 Coroner's Inquest. ]-A coroner's Court is «. 
 criminal Court, and the depositions of a wit.iis 
 he ore such Court, who is sul.sequentlv chS 
 with murder, cannot sincp n!. 1^^ cnaiged 
 deuce Art moq 1," ' • V. *'''" ^-^anada Evi- 
 lenoe Act, 189.3, be received in evidence -uraino*- 
 uni .at the trial notwithstanding priv'Uf wL 
 not claimed by him at the inoii1.st /. °^ ^ 
 Hendershott, 26 O. R. 678 """^ ""■ 
 
 Bxamtnatlon in Civil Action. ]-The exam 
 
 arising out af the matters iu question be not 
 having cb.imed privilege there n, w^s alh.wed 
 to be used against him on his trial for cr nhia 
 conspiracy. J{e,,i„a v. Connol/y. 25 O "t 
 
 1'! 11 
 
 Mill 
 
 :i ' 
 
 i I 
 
 'i M 
 
 li 
 
 
263 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 264 
 
 6. Procuring Attendance or Emhnce of 
 
 Wilne.nnen. 
 
 Appeal to SeBBioQB— Sniipctna to Wilrienses 
 III Aiiolher /'>o(///(v.]— Under the provisions of 
 sections bM and 843 of the Criminal Code, 1892, 
 it is competent for a Judge of the High Court 
 or County Court to make an order for the issue 
 of a suhpo-na to witnesses in another Province 
 to compel their attendance upon an appeal to 
 the General Sessions from the action of the jus- 
 tices of the peace under sections 879 and 881 
 Regiiia v. OUli,-<i,ie, 16 P. R. 155. 
 
 Foreign OovaraXBBion- Prosecution for Indict- 
 able OJ)chce.-\~A prosecution for an indictable 
 oflence is "pnidirg" within the meaniuK of 
 section 683 of the Criminal Code, 1892, when 
 an information has been laid charging such an 
 ofTence ; and a commission to take evidence 
 abroad for use before a magistrate upon a pre- 
 liminary inquiry may then be ordered. 
 
 But the discretion of the Judge in ordering 
 the issue of a commission is to be exercised 
 upon a sworu statement of what it is expected 
 the witnesses can prove, and he must be satis- i 
 ned as to the materiality of the evidence. i 
 
 And, under the circumstances of this case, a 
 commission was granted to take the evidence'of 
 only one of three witnesses whom the Crown 
 proposed to examine, it appearing th.at the : 
 other two had not been asked to come into the 
 jurisdiction, and that their evidence would be 
 in corroboration only of a statement of the third 
 witness that he was with the defendant upon a 
 certain occasion. Bcjiva v. Vtrral, 16 P. R. 444 
 
 iJ 
 
 Police Magistrate— JCarraxi! to Compel A t- 
 levdavce of }Vilnt.^.s- Bight of Police to Starch 
 tVitiiefix Arre.'<l<d.]—'^bere a police magistrate 
 acting within his jurisdiction under R. S. C 
 oh. 174, sec. 62, issues his warrant for the arrest 
 of a witness who has not appeared in obeditnce 
 to a Bubpa-na, he is not, in the absence of malice 
 liable in damages, even though he may have 
 erred as to the sufficiency of the evidence to 
 justify the arrest. 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division, 24 
 O. R. 576, affirmed. 
 
 The right of the police to search or handcuff 
 a person arrested on a warrant to tomiel attend- 
 ance as a witness and the duty of the constable 
 on making the arrest, considered. 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division, 24 
 O. R. 576, reversed, Maclcnnan, J.A., dissent 
 ing. Gordon v. Benison, 22 A. R. 315. 
 
 7. View by Judge. 
 
 Trial of Prisoner by Judge Without Jury 
 --f'ght of Judge to Vietv Locality of Offence- 
 Absence of Prinontr.]—7he prisoner was tried 
 without a jury by a County Court Judge exer- 
 cising jurisdiction under the " Speedy Trials 
 Act," upon an indictment for feloniously dis- 
 placing a railway switch. After hearing the 
 evidence and the addresses of counsel, the Jude^ 
 reserved his decision. Before giving it, having 
 occasion to pass the place, he ex.nminpd the 
 Bwit. ri in question, neither the prisoner nor any 
 one on his behalf being present. The prisoner 
 was found guilty : — 
 
 Held, *hat there was no authority for the 
 udge taking a " view " of the place, and his so 
 I doing was unwarranted ; and even if he hr.d bt. n 
 warranted in taking the view, the manner of Ms 
 taking It, without the presence of the prison.r 
 or of any one on his behalf, was unwarranted -! 
 Held, also, that the question whether tU, 
 Jndge had the right to take a view was a .,,us 
 tion of law arising on the trial, and was a ,, „ 
 per question to reserve under R. S. C eh 1 '4 
 sec. 259. Pegina v. Petrie, 20 O. R. 3i7. ' 
 
 HI. Practice and Phocedure. 
 
 Appeal— CrinmMl Trial— Mot ion for Pes,r,;d 
 Caw- Unanimity on One of Several around. ^- 
 ^Vhere the Court appealed from lu.s iitiiinud 
 the retusal to reserve a case moved for at a crim- 
 inal trial on two grounds, and is unanimows :,■- 
 to one of such grounds but not as to the otlur 
 [ the Supreme Court on appeal can only take into 
 consideration the ground of motion in vvhich 
 S c'^R'To^r"*" -fi'/"'^'^ "■'■ ^'*« V"f",, 2.-) 
 
 } -AppeB,!— Jvrigdictinu of the Chancny l),,-i 
 
 xjon ,n Criminal Malter>i.}-On an aireal f n in 
 
 an order for certiorari, which the Juil-e (Feiyu- 
 
 ; son, J.) granting it, refused to make rct.iTn. 
 
 ; able in the Chancery Division :— 
 
 Held, per Robertson, J.— That the Chnncerv 
 Division of the High Court of Justice has no 
 jurisdiction in criminal matters •— 
 
 Held, per Meredith, J. -That it has: and 
 ought to exercise it. 
 I Boyd, C — While adhering to his views as 
 expressed in Pegina v. Dirchall, 19 O. R. (I'l; 
 that It has, thought that when there is an 
 equally divided opinicn for and agaiii.-t juiiMlic- 
 tion entertained by the individual Judges crn- 
 stituting the Division, it would be unteuiilv 
 that by a mere accident, such as the coii.'.titu- 
 tion of the Court, jmisdiction should be affirmed 
 on one day and negatived on the next ; ai.il as 
 there was jurisdiction in the other divisions of 
 the High Court, he agreed with Robertson, J , 
 that the motion be not entertained. Ptniim v 
 -0am, 22 O. R. 652. U^"a\. 
 
 Appeal-Pnhlic Health -Conviction Uviltr 
 By-law in A, .^H/«.]-Where there is a convic- 
 tion for an oflence under the by-law stt out in 
 , the schedule to the Public Health Act, R. ■< 
 eh. 205, as distinguished from any of the provi- 
 sions m the Act itself, an appeal will lie from 
 such conviction to the Sessions notwithstandiiis; 
 section 112, which has no application. P,mm 
 V Coursey 26 0. R. 635. See S. C on appeal, 
 27 U. R. jl81. 
 
 Assault and Ba.ttevy-Bay of Ci;'il Pemidv 1 
 -Sections 865 and 866 of the Criminal Code, 
 1892, whereby it is enacted that a T,;rson who 
 has obtained a certificate of the Justice, vho 
 had tried the case, that a charge against him of 
 assault and battery has been dismissed, or who 
 has paid the penalty or suffered the imprison- 
 ment awarded, shall be released from all fur- 
 ther proceedings, civil or criminal, for the siiiiie 
 cause, are intra', vires the Dominion Parliament. 
 J-la/c v. Briibin, 26 0. R. 423. fji;- 
 
 Extradition Proceedings.]— ;iJee Extradi- 
 tion. 
 
k ^ 
 
 265 
 
 HOCEDURE. 
 
 -See ExTKADi- 
 
 Information— jTioo O/TencM 1 An i„t 
 tio,. stated that the &udr''lill\TZ 
 space of thirty days last past, to wit : o^ the 
 30 li and 3l8t days of July, m->, . . d 'l 
 
 uiilawfu ly sell intoxicating liquor without th« 
 hcense therefor by law required ''•_ 
 
 PerHagarty C. J. O., and Boyd, C.-Suoh 
 an information does not charge two offences Imt 
 on y the 8inj,dc offence of telling unlawfu Iv 
 witlnn the thirty days. ""luwiuuy 
 
 Per Osier and Maclennan, J J. A. -Such an 
 information does charge two offences, and i^ h 
 
 €oae?1892!'"' ''"""" '^^ <^* "^ *''« ^"'"'n*" 
 Put, per Curiam, assuming that an informa- 
 tion so worded does contravene the provisions 
 of section 845 (3) of the Criminal Code. S 
 the defect is one " in substance or in form " 
 within the meaning of the curative section (847) 
 an, does not invalidate an otherwise valid con 
 viction for a single offence. 
 
 The provision of section 857, that no adjourn, 
 ment shall be for more than eight days is mat- 
 tor of procedure, and may be waived, aida 
 defendant who consents to an adjournment or 
 more than eight days cannot afterwards co n' 
 plain in that respect. 
 
 v/fT^'V'- '°" ^"r'." ^'^^ "ff'^n'^e "»<ler section 
 70 of the Liquor License Act, K. S. ch m 
 properly awar.ls imprisonment in default of 
 payment of the fine, and not in default of suffi! 
 cient distress. 
 
 /{e,/ina v. Smith, 46 U. C. K. 440 and R^n!„„ 
 V. Hartley, 20 0. R. 481, appr;ved7 '^ " 
 
 n J'^-IS?"* °f the Queen's Bench Division, 23 
 R. 633 ■'''^'"■^ed. J^'ei/im v. Haze,,, 20 A. 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 906 
 
 A Judge cannot, upon the return to a habea.^ 
 Mrynw, where a warrant shews jurisdiction tr^ 
 on affidavit evidence the question where' the 
 alleged offence was committed. 
 
 Sections 4 and 5, R. s o ch 7fi n-o 
 intended .0 apply to ci-iminai casel'^he'ro 
 prehinmary exam nation has taken place , 
 
 ch ooTnf . "'" ^'^i'"'""' Code, 56-56 Vict, 
 ch .9 (D. , only applies where the Court or 
 Judge making the direction as to furthur pro 
 feedings and enquiries mentioned therein has 
 pou-er to enforce it, and a Court or Judge 
 >n Ontario has no power over a Judge o? 
 Justice in Quebec to compel him to "take 
 
 Z.rr^.T-''^"-'' «"^'' «-"'ence," etc! 
 He,jim V. J)ef,-ie,, liegma v. Tambbj,,, '05 0. 
 
 Recognteance of ntiU- Entreat— W,-;i of Fieri 
 
 kfXn"'"^ ^"/r*-]-A recognisance of bail 
 1 taken in open Court by the cferk of the Court 
 
 otrS h' P'''*"^'- ""T^ "'"> before him ,n 
 «^gSLan-Sl1^^"^Slt& 
 
 wMlI'Viaierr'tL^f IT&'^'^^^P'' «'»« drawn up 
 
 a'liiii^irs.ti^rSK^-^^V^" 
 
 open (^ojirt before the c'^ek of ''aLT e^'^' As 'a 
 matter of fact the parties actually came b^forP 
 
 Held, that the recognizance sliould hav« 
 s ated that the parties personally came be ore 
 the Court, and that the recognizance was taken 
 and acknowledged in open tkiurt ; and the 
 
 scribed to It ; out the errors made in drawing 
 
 It up were not sufficient to avoid it ""^"■^'°« 
 
 3. Notice to the sureties of tlie recognizance 
 
 :thnnr^-"-'''-^^''--.'^w?r 
 
 I 4. The provision of R. S. C. ch. 179, sec*. 
 :' 'in, and R. S. O. ch. 88, sees. 7 and 
 
 8, loquinng tiie written onler of the JuXe 
 
 or the estreating or putting in process of^a 
 
 I recognizance, applies only to recognizances to 
 
 appear to prosecute, or tt. give evidence „; t^ 
 
 ' s oh^.^ h'/"'^ ' °'' ''?* '^I'P'y ^» <" recognizance 
 such as the one here in question, whereby the 
 bail became bound for the appearance of thei^ 
 
 'ForcZti^Lr' "^ *''^' "p- --!-'-" 
 
 5. The estreat roll was sufficiently signed bv 
 t^^^. '^^ ^'^-'^ »h« affida^vit^t'thT 
 I 6 It is no part of tlie duty of the clerk in 
 
 >nak.ng up the roll to instruct the sheriff al to 
 
 what disposition he is to make of Ihe m^ne^ 
 
 I therein mentioned when collected ^ 
 
 And where the clerk, making it up, stated it 
 
 to be made in accordance with a ProvS 
 ! statute, and also with two Dominion statutos 
 
 thus eavmg it uncertain whether the moneys 
 
 or to h.^ I .^''^ "^'"'.'^ '^^ ^^"^'"«'^1 '^>~er 
 : M the Dominion Minister of Finance :- 
 
 Held, that the words so used were surolaa- 
 I age and did not affect the validity of tie Cll 
 , and should be stricken out ' 
 
 'it was^l'InlfTfi '■°"'='' '''■'^^" "P- «t^ted that 
 'forlTfp/ "^ ^"^'' ""'"^«' 'amerciaments, and 
 forfettl 7^"S»'^'"'°es, set, imposed, lost, or 
 I torfeited, by or before the Court, etc com 
 
 ' which fhlh°-f'' "'"V ^'f' ^^'^ amounts for 
 which the bail were bound, filled in under the 
 hea^hng "amount of fine imposed " — 
 Held, that the roll sufficiently shewed the 
 
 I recognizance to have been forfeited, and that 
 
 :.t was fairly entered and extracted on the roll 
 
 , as a forfeited recognizance : — 
 
 debt du?'to^''hVp l""°"''«'l'Pg« to collect the 
 
 aeot due to the Crown, under the recomiz 
 
 ; ances, were civil and not criminal proieeC 
 
 , and were to be regulated by R. S O ch Tl 
 
 ffn tli,'/"S°'n-^*''^-^""«'' ^^^ capTo-ZissSd 
 «M, .i I r:/"^'"'^'"^ ^^^ form given in the 
 scliedule to the Act, was not open to any objec 
 
 for^thK;*fflV ""'^^'- ,*•'« circumstances set 
 torth in the affidavits, the Court would not b^ 
 
 ^T jiVfT^.^^'^ *"^" '•'■<"" their habS 
 ity. lie ralhol',< Bail, 23 O. R. 65. 
 
 i „^f«f«nlzanoe.]- Where the affidavit accom- 
 
 I panyiiig a recognizance filed on a motion for a 
 
 thi f'"': *°. '^T^^ " «°"^i«tion did not negatTye 
 
 I the fact of the sureties being sureties in alv 
 
 ' fhJll '"•'*' 'Vl'^'f. ^ *° recognizances prior to 
 
 . the passing of the Criminal Cole is still ,n forc^ 
 
 Jiegma v. Jiohiiiet, 16 P. R. 49. ^ 
 
 ii ': !! 
 
 m 
 
 > I 
 
 i if! 
 
 ^^?f(l 
 
 i 
 
 li 
 
 i 1 
 
 ( :m 
 
 ihi 
 
267 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 i 
 
 ■ I 
 
 
 I ' 
 
 II 
 
 n,i?i?^«°'' ?''°wn to Stand Aside Jurors 
 
 ^r^n^^^'^'^u?^ '^'"'"'■^ ^^^ been goni 
 through. 1 ~- W lu.„ H imn.,.l Imd been uoiio 
 through un.l a full j,„.y bad not been ol,tnine.l 
 the Crown on the second calling over of the 
 panel was permitted, against tlu- objection of 
 the prisoner to direct eleven of the jurymen 
 on the i,anel to ^tand aside ,. second time, 
 and the Ju.lge presiding at the trial was not 
 asked to reserve and neither reserved nor refuF ,1 
 to reserve the objection. After conviction and 
 ju.lgment a writ of error was issued :- 
 
 Held, per 1'iischereau, (iwynneand Patterson, 
 JJ. , a hrmiiig the judgment of the Court below 
 trinl ri •.1"''«"°" "f ""« of law arising on the 
 trial which could have been reserve.? under 
 
 nrror. -''•,","''• /""^ ^- '^^ *^- •'"■'l *!>« Writ of 
 ch 174 II" S e"'''^'"'^ ''^ quashed. Section 266 
 
 Per Ritchie, C.J. and Strong and Fournier, ' 
 JJ., that the (juestion arose before the trial 
 commenced and could not have been reserved, 
 and as the error of law appeare.l on the face of 
 the record the remedy l,y writ of error was 
 
 Per Ritchie, ('.J., and Strong, Fournier and 
 Patterson, J J., that the Crown coul.l not with 
 out shewing cause for cliallenge direct a juror 
 to stand aside a s.cond time. Section JC4 ch. 
 
 Jur. 250, overruled. ^ ^. ^. 
 
 Per (iwynne, J., that all the piisoner could 
 
 26a 
 
 ments subsequently laid against them at the 
 Assizes were held lad and quashed, even after 
 plea pleaded wdiere done through inadvertence 
 scctio.. 14:1 of R. S. C. ch. 174 not being in sueh 
 case any bar. * ' 
 
 Two indictments were laid against defendantH 
 one for conspiracy to procure W. to sign two 
 promissory notes ; and the other for Irandn- 
 lently inducing V\. to sign the documents r,,,,,.. 
 stnting tnem to be agreements, whereas they 
 weie ill fact promissory notes ;-- 
 
 Hel.l, that several o'tlences were not set ud in 
 c-ich count of the indictments ; that it wal no 
 objection to the indictments that the imUi 
 might not be of value until .lelivered to d.fen- 
 dants ; and further, that under section Ts of K 
 '■"i -^ „, "*' "" '"'iictmi-'nt would lie lor 
 inaucing U . to write his name on papers which 
 might afterwards be dealt with a's va 1, ! le 
 securities. '' 
 
 « ^I'm^- ^if "!'."''' 1 I>«'''-s. & ]). 307, 3 Jur. X 
 ». Wll; Aerjtna v. Gordon, 23 Q. B D V)i 
 considered. Ihyina v. Burke; 24 O. R (J4' ' 
 
 ».«.„„i .■•;•■■•''"■• """" <>" '■■le piLioner could 
 complain of was a mere irregularity in procedure 
 which could not constitute a mistriaL Morin 
 V. The Qiieni, 18 S. C. R. 407. 
 
 Right of Reply. ]_It was lield in a prosecu- 
 tion for conspiracy that although evidence was 
 called by only one of the defendants, it might 
 have enured to the benefit of both, and that the 
 
 tAn *''"'"'^'. ''-l^'y "'^^ ^'"' tl"-' counsel 
 for the Crow... Bcgvia v. Comwtly, 20 () J{ 
 
 »,V.f ^^^T?" 1r*^^^ A^^~ Territorial Jurmlir. 
 <on]-l he Speedy Trials Act. 51 Vict. ch. 47 
 {IJ.J, IS not a statute conferring jurisdiction 
 but IS an exercise of the power of Wrliar^ent to 
 regulate criminal procedure. By this Act juris- 
 diction is given ''to any Jud^e of a County 
 
 w M •'"'■■y '-"'^'•f'"" criminal otTences :- 
 n„, !'/<*. ,V'.'' «^^Pression "any Judge of a 
 County Court,",,, such Act, means any Jud-^e 
 having, by force of the provincial law re|ulatii^g 
 the constitution and organization of Countf 
 Courts jurisdiction in the particular locality in 
 which he may hold a " speedy trial." The stat- 
 ute would not authorize a County Court Judge 
 
 territorial jurisdiction without authority from 
 
 Courts of British Columbia, 21 S. C. R. 446. 
 
 Speedy Trials Act-Bail Surrcmkrinn-Rinht 
 If 5 f ^ '".^ '■'■"' ^'^'"^"ar^Vy.j-The surrender 
 of defendants out on bail, including the surreii 
 det by a defendant himself out on his own ba 
 committed to gaol for trial, has theTff ct of 
 remitting them to custody, and enables them to 
 avail themselvp.s of the Speedy Trials 4ct 5" 
 
 Sn^ntv'r- .'^ <^;,*' 1^"^ *° a/pear tfore th; 
 County Judge and elect to be tried summarily • 
 «hd where defendants had so elected, inditi 
 
 Substituting New Charge.] -The defcn- 
 dant was brought before justices of tiie peace cm 
 
 ,!,?/.?*"??*'"«"'"' '«'«"* to murder, and 
 they, not hnding sufficient evidence to warrant 
 tliem III committing for trial, of their , w 
 
 vlv^TVil'* '/I ''?'^ °f ^^"^ '^'^*'<-'' summarily con 
 Mcted the defendant for that he did "procure 
 a revolver with intent therewith unlawfully to 
 'lo injury to one J. S." It appeared by the 
 evidence hat the weapon was' bought^ and 
 carried and used by the defendant personalh 
 
 J^y the Criminal Code, section 108, it is matter 
 of summary conviction if one has on his person 
 
 an'v in*^' "■'? '"*'"' t'"-''"^it'' unlawfull/ to do 
 ''"y 'njury to any other person. 
 
 Ihe return to a writ of hahm., eorjus shewed 
 
 the detention of the defendant under a war- 
 
 rant of commitment based upon the above 
 
 conviction ; and upon a motion for his .lis- 
 
 Held, that the detention was for an offence 
 
 and the finding shawed an ofiTeuce against section 
 108, the motion should not be enlarged to allow 
 the magistrates to substitute a proper convc- 
 tion, tor It was unwarrantable to convict on a 
 cnarge not formulated, as to which tlie evid2e 
 w' M nf '''.''^'■f^^^''- "Pon which the defendant 
 w as not called to make his defence, and as to 
 
 "25 o"r"577!" ''"'"^^'^''' ^'''"" ^• 
 
 Variance between Indictment and Charge 
 
 -/a/w /•';v<e«ce«. -Onacharj^eofstealin.'-' 20O 
 
 tH:?te°f '?"' f°T^''='!.''^"- committed f^ 
 trial the evidence before the magistrate disclo^.J 
 that the prisoner had obtained cei tain chcjues ou 
 
 oixtlZ^-^^T'' *'''^V'""^'«' were 2,680 b'ushels 
 of beans m his warehouse. At the Assizes he 
 
 7Z"^rT'^ ^°r.°''taimng the chequts inth 
 false pretence "that there was then a larL'e 
 quantity of beans, to wit, 2,080 bushels " in h*i 
 Marehouse. During the progress of the trial 
 
 fhB ,-.,^;„Z -"-"S "'<'• progress 01 tJie trial 
 the indictment was amen.led by strikin" m-f 
 the words ;■ a large quantity of 'beans, to'wif> 
 and the prisoner was convicted thereon : - 
 
 llelcl, no such variation as prevented tlo 
 indictment being preferred for a charge founded 
 
CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 upon the fiicts or evidence '. ...sc.l within the 
 Tm"- "'''''""" ^^^ "^ *'"' ("'"'""il Cnle! 
 Held, also, that the prisoner not having been 
 nnsh.l orproju.l.fe.l l,y the an.en.lment.Tt was 
 propoily mn.le. /,',;/,•„„ v. J'aftrr.on i>l 1! 
 bob. 
 
 870 
 
 IV. Si'FCIKIC ()I-FF,.N( IS. 
 
 Blga.my-qilhic, ComwltM i„ Foirhpi Conn- 
 <ry.l -tonvict.on for bigamy (iiuush,.! where 
 the second imirnage took place i„ ^, foreign 
 country an, there was evidence that the 
 defendant, who was a J!nti.sh snl.ject, lesident 
 m Canada, left there with the intent to co.nn 
 the oUence. 
 
 The provisions of section li;,", ,;f the Crinunal 
 Code, makmg snchamania.e an olfence, are 
 utlia rirc, the Parliament of Canada 
 Jlocltod V. Altorniy-Ctmrnl for 'Xe,r South 
 Wates [1«01] -VC. 4.-io, follo4d. ;U;"v 
 Ploiitnan, 2o O. It.. 650. ./ «■ ^. 
 
 of . ~ • ■™' '" '"' >"«t'U">'-'"t in the form 
 of a promissory note, a blank is left for the 
 payee a name, it is not a complete note so as to 
 «:i'l';;'V-""viction for the /orgery thereof or 
 o, the forgery of an indorsement thereon ; Lor 
 18 It a document, writing or instrument within 
 sees. Mi 47 or ;-,() of k. si C. ch. ](i.-,. " 
 
 tnn?'! ' " V'^''.^i^'t'">' miglit have been sns- 
 tamed on an indictment for forgery at common 
 law. /„;iiHn V. Cormavk, 21 (). R, 213. 
 
 Forgery.] 
 -'1 O. R. 4(i.') 
 •-'•-> A. 1!. :m I 
 
 -.?'f A'e anrhull, 21 O. R. 17<), 
 ; and /,V Mnrrhij, 'M (). R. ic;j ' 
 poxt, ExTJiAD/TION. 
 
 OircMs-Merr,i.;io.liom>,l.] - A city by-law 
 passed under sub-section 2.", of section 48!) of the 
 Con Mun Act (1S!)2), M Vict. ch. 42 (O.), pro 
 hibited exhibitions of wax works, wenaceries 
 circus ridirg and other such like shows, usiiali; 
 exhibited by sIiom men :— •' 
 
 Held, that this would not support a convic- 
 tion for exhibiting a machine calKd a merrvtro 
 round, as constituting an oHence under the by- 
 law or statute. Jit<jimi v. Whitaktr, 24 0. R. 437. 
 
 Clandestine Removal of Goodslby Tenant 1 
 
 -A tenant is not liable to prosecution under 11 
 Geo 11. ch. It) for the fraudulent and clan- 
 destine removal of goo.is from the demised 
 premises, unless such goods are his own pro- 
 perty, nor can goods which arc not the tenant's 
 property be distrained off the premises. Morlin 
 V. hu/chiiimn, 21 O. I!. 388. 
 
 ConBplva.cy-L,dictwe„t 0/ On,- of Tivo Con- 
 mrator..]-A conspiracy to -lefraud is indict- 
 able e\;eii though the conspirators are unsuc- 
 cessful in carrying out the fraud. 
 
 One of two conspirators can be tried or an 
 indictment against him alone, charging him 
 with conspiring with another to defmud, the 
 other conspirator being known in the country 
 Rfijina v. trnidey, 25 O. It. 431. '^ 
 
 _ .P'ortune-Telllng.]-The statute 9 Geo. II ch 
 .) IS in force in this Province. 
 
 By tlie statute the mere undertaking to tell 
 
 ion w?, T'"*'f\''''' •■♦^''"^'^= ."Hi a\.onvic- 
 
 theevT,, "f"' "■''"' '' ''■"' "'"■•'ined upon 
 
 OR 300. " ■"^- ''''"'"'"" ^- '"''•'"'•'^' '^ 
 
 Fraudulent Saleof Goods. 1— Under the 28tb 
 section of R S. C. ch. 173, even- one .hon^llt 
 01 causes to be made, amongst other things, any 
 
 chattels with intent to defraud his cre.litors or 
 any ot them, is guilty of a misdemeanour •- 
 
 'th. .lei't 'Vh "'" 'f ^"*'"!. •""'"• tl'«-'Act, that 
 t c debt of the cre<iuor should, at the time of 
 
 S„;:'21 O.'^R. u\ "'^'"""^ ^"- ^''-'""' V. 
 
 .) J!;f"?"^^i?* Transfer of Goods-yo.HA-r of 
 
 and ChatuU]-An action by the party aggrieved 
 
 to recover the moiety of the penalty imposed bv 
 
 ! section 3 ot 13 Eli..\.l,. o, may be joiiKith 
 
 j an action to set aside a fraudulent transfer 
 
 under that Act, in this case the transfer of cer- 
 
 I tain promissory notes. 
 
 Bills and notes are, by virtue of the leuisla- 
 
 withK^j^r^'^^''^-'^''^^'''^"'^^'-"'^''^ 
 
 to the concluding part of said section 3, nlmely 
 tlmt relating to iinpiisonmei.t and conviction, 
 etc. Millar v. McJ'a'j'jart, 20 O. R. 617. 
 
 Conspiracy. ]-It is a crime under section ,394 
 mp.,nl'tn 1 f , conspire by any fraudulent 
 means to defraud any person, and so a consnir- 
 acyto permit persons to travel free on a rail- 
 road, as alleged in these cases, would be a 
 conspiracy aRainst the railway company. Begina 
 V. />r./ncs, Henma v. Tamblyn, 25 O. R. 645. 
 
 Counterfeit Note8-.&nWe/ice Shelving NoteK 
 
 he Counterfiit.]-A person indicted for offering 
 to purchase counterfeit tokens of value cannot 
 ne convicted on evidence shewing that the 
 notes w-hich he offered to purehJe were not 
 couuterie.t but genuine b.iik notes unsigned, 
 though he believed them to be counterfeit, and 
 ottered to purchase uader such belief. Gait 
 ^^J., dissentmg. Jieyina v. Atdrood, 20 0. r! 
 
 Gaming -~ Betth,,, - Hor.e Race in Forti.,n 
 6o««^ry.]-The defendant occupied a tent in 1 
 vilhvge open to and frequented by the public, in 
 nora t '" J™s a telegraph wire to an incor 
 porated race track in the United States, where 
 I horse racing and betting were legalized. In the 
 tent was a blackboard L which tvere the names 
 
 with th'' • T} J°'^^^'' *-'^'''"« l'-''" i" the race, 
 j with the weights and the track <iuotations, ami 
 
 I ^11 Z '""^ "^r ^^".'2 '■""' •''" operator called off 
 
 ner P/.^f '^ f.^'^''^^^' 8*""^ the name of the win - 
 
 .„.lf WK^ *''^ "^'='""1 "'''^ third horses, ai.,l 
 
 ■ 31' "?T r ^^^ '""''•''• l^uplicate ticke 
 were furu..,hed 1,1 the tent to applicants, which 
 requested delendant to telegraph one B. at il o 
 race track to place a certain amount of money on 
 
 ' tion«"r "i"'""^ ^^' ^'"'" '^Pl'licant at track quota- 
 ^ tions, and upon transmission thereof, the anpli- 
 
 ' an" abimf '° P7 *'f ^"^'V'^"^' *«" ''^"ts, and that. 
 ' tlVp f J i V ," "^fendant's part should cease. On 
 I the tickets being handed in, one of them « ,s, 
 , stamped with the date of its receipt and returnct 
 
 n ii 
 
 •ih!!ll 
 
 i l, 
 
 <■: ii 
 
 Hil^ 
 
 i s 
 
 \l 
 
271 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 
 
 to the applicant. The ag^TOKato amotmt of the 
 money so received was iiotiliea by telei/rain to H 
 "."1 plr.ce,l by him before the race wkhbor,": 
 makers on the track. li. paying .lefendaiit a per- 
 centago on the n.oneya received for him and ten 
 centH on each application. H. ha.l an agent in 
 another part of tl«e village, whom he furoiBhod 
 V.UIX money to pay any winnings by reniittint' 
 same to him or giving hin. orders on defendant 
 lor stated sums : — 
 
 Held, that the defendant was properly con- 
 victed under sections 1!»7 and li>8 of the Code 
 
 ot kocpiug li common butting house, the iiliio^ ' U f« i.;.., „ "• •■•--■."■" "^hb, unii namici 
 
 in question being ooo.K^d and kept fo; the recep! i care '^';>'\ ^"'^ " "'" ^''«"lle; takeg,.,„( 
 
 consideration for an undertaking to pay money 
 thereafter to the depositor on the event o a 
 horse race. J{e;,ina v. Oitei, 26 O. K. 580. 
 
 272 
 
 I was found guilty of unlawfully receiving. (.„ 
 the (juestion submitted, in a reserved cas. 
 whether H. could be f„n„,l guilty ,,f un| „• J 
 receiving money from A., who wa. custo.lia- 'i^ 
 the money as execuCor, the Court of (^icen's 
 Hench for Lower (.'ana.la (on appeal), Sr V 
 
 good. At the trial it was proved that A. a>.,| 
 B. agreed to appro.iriute the money an<l tl, a 
 when A ,lrew the money he purchased lis i 
 way ticket for the L nitcd .States, made a p,ir i 
 ,"/.'• ":::T^' *<«;<'' t".».'««tore, a„d hand,., 
 
 Qa.mlns — Ilc.romiiHj CuHtodian of Wwier— 
 J^estnc/ionto LreutH to take Place in Camda.]- 
 K. S. C. oh. 159, sec. 9, provides that ' every 
 one who becomes the custodian or depositary of 
 any money, property, or valuable thing staked, 
 wagered, or pledged -ipou the result of any 
 political or municipal election, or of any race 
 or of any contest or trial of skill or eudu/anco of 
 mail or beast, is guilty of a misdemeanour " •— 
 
 Held, that this enactment does not extend to 
 tlic result of any election, race, contest, etc., to 
 take place outside of the Dominici of Ciinada. 
 
 O&mlng—Kcqjl,,,, a Common (lamina House 
 
 7:1^^"' "r ^'!''f '^'«'^''-]-In a betting game 
 called policy, tlie actual betting and payment 
 
 S tte^ -Tri' '! ''""' 1*°°'' •P'^'^^ •" the uS 
 ht.ites ; all that was done in Canada bt g tlio 
 
 happening of the chance, on which the bet was 
 staked, by means of implements operated in the 
 house of the defendant :— *- " "le 
 
 .fVu^'V.*-'*"-" V'/^ "o offence under section 198 
 of the Criminal Code of 1892 of keeping a com- 
 mon gaming house within that sectiwi. *" Ifegina 
 V. Uettmaii, '26 O. R. 459. " 
 
 Oa.m1.as-Be//i„,, on Eli'ction.]-See Walsh 
 V. I'vebikock, 23 8. C. 11. 695, poJ, Gaming. 
 
 Larceny.]— A conviction under section 85 of 
 
 f IK oS;Z^' *"'-•*• ^'- '^- ^■■.''^- 1''^' f°r ""law! 
 tu Ij obtaining property, is good, though the 
 prisoner, according to the evidence, might have 
 been conncted of a criminal breach of trust 
 under section fio. Two bills of indictment were 
 f^r^^i^TT^ A. and B. under sectionssl 
 and 8.3 of the Larceny Act. By the first count i 
 «ach was charged with having unlawfully and ' 
 with intent to defraud taken and app opTiate ! 
 to his own use .«7,000 belonging to the heirs of ' 
 U, so as to deprive them of their beneficiary 
 inte est in the same. The second count charged 
 B. the appellant) with having unlawfully 
 "■'u^T;^ the .^7,000, the property of the heirs 
 which had before then been unlaw-fully obtained 
 fnl! n„ 1 '""' .'■'PP'-opri'ited by said A., the 
 
 ntw^ "";• """c'-'^'IS '^''^"^ ^ misdemeanour 
 under section 85, ch. 164 R. S. C. at the time 
 when he so receive.l the money. A. who wai 
 the executor of C.'s estate, an d"^ was the curto- ! 
 
 .n7l5, ! ™°"'y' Pif'^^"^ ?"'l'y to the charge I 
 on the l.rst count. B. pleaded not guilty, was 
 acquitted of the charge on the first coun^t bu 
 
 i„ \T \- 1 — ""^ -"=">"«, uu aoscondeil 
 
 of CaiTada : -1 "''P'"' '° »*>« Su,,reme Court 
 
 1,„^'''''Ik'"J'''"1'"'^ *'"' J"''K"''^"t of the Curt 
 below that whetiier A. be a bailee or truste- 
 and whether the unla^vfnl appropriation y a' 
 ook place by the handing over of the inon/y to 
 I H. or previously, B. was properly convicte,! 
 under section 85 ch. I(i4, R.' >S. C. of receivin!' 
 it knowing It to have been unlawfully obtained 
 
 S":23^C.^:^S"«' ''^^^'"^^ - rKl 
 
 illa.rria.Be-Solnn„i:„t!o„ of-MiuUter-" lU- 
 li;,om DcnovwmlwH. "J _ • • The Reorgani/cl 
 Church cf Jesus Christ of Latter Day .Sai" tt" 
 i a religious denomination xvithin the meaning 
 ol R .S O. ch. LSI, sec. 1 ; and a duly ordaii J 
 pnest thereof is a minister authorized to "n." 
 ize the ceremony of marriage. 
 
 Upon a case reserved, a conviction of sucli a 
 
 , Sashed."" ""''^^■^"">'^"'-"-"'« a marriage wVi 
 
 I .Vc«,6/e, the words of the statute "church 
 
 and religious denomination " should n.,t be con 
 
 8 rued so as to confine tliem to Christian bodies 
 
 mrjiiia V. Uidoiit, 24 O. K. 250. 
 
 Misbehaviour In Office- J udit Dermr/mn,/. 
 -J erumayy Uamwj,.. J-An officer in the iiublic 
 service of Canada having charge of the n 
 dredging and whose .luty it wT:. to and t the 
 expendituiH! therefor, u.ej property of Is own 
 ... connection with the dre.lging, having (in, 
 placed It in the name of a third party, in tl o" 
 name also he made out the accounts. No un,li e 
 gams were made by him, but as such pubic 
 officer he certified to the correctness of the 
 accounts respecting the use of his said property 
 as though for services rendere.l by contracto,^ 
 with the Government, and thereby receive.l for 
 himself a payment for these services •- 
 
 ! in nw ' '''f* l'®*""' ':"=e" guilty of misbehaviour 
 "^ oftce, which IS an indictable offence at com- 
 I mon law, and that to constitute the oflTence it 
 I was not essential tliat pecuniary damage should 
 I have resulted to the public by reason of such 
 [ "•'•egular conduct, nor that the defendant should 
 
 i^nfowfolUT 2o[""'' ""'•^^^' ^''^•^"■"« ^■■ 
 
 Practising MedIcine-.4;)o///warv.1-\ ner- 
 sTcTan 1 'T •\,!'.'-"«S'«f« «l'op, stating h'e las 
 Tv^aT} ''';«T'","8,-'"' «onipl'ii"t, udiich the 
 ruggist saul he believed to be diarrha'a, and 
 after adv.singhim as to diet, gave him a bottle 
 of medicine for which he charged fifty cents. 
 
 ij„?., 1 ■"^'^" f^""^*'' ••'!''' ''" had several kinds of 
 diaiih.wv mixture, and had sometimes to in.iuire 
 as to symptoms in order to decide what mixture 
 
 - ^ iL.>i4n.^ „ 
 
273 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 Helil, that this w.is piiictiHiiiif mcilli'iiw. f^- i . , 
 
 •S. (). ell. UN : 
 Held, ivlao, 
 
 274 
 ToiLl, 22 A. 
 
 that 
 
 heuw legiHtere-l under the IMmnnaey AcW V.f ?/^,!*?" '?.'" ^-?"''"*'*"«^"'«'''°'-S««»<»]- 
 .-^, (>. eh. ir,l, which untitled hu„ to Lt a^ "i \ ^'* •^'*"^''' ^- '>''^"l"'On>e, -o U. It. 544, j>ost A. 
 n|Mithecary iih well an a dniggiHt,.lia not author- 
 
 iz« llie practice cif medicine. 
 
 Tlio meaning of " aijothecary 
 Util'iiia V. Ilowarth, 'H O. R. ij(il. 
 
 considered. 
 
 Public Health.]-Held, that the unloadinK 
 <,1 iiiamue from a ear on a certain part of rail- 
 way premiseH into waggons, to bo carried awav 
 came with.n the terms of a l.y-law, amendina 
 the bylavv appende. to the Public Health Act, 
 K. ,>>. O. ch. HO.,, and prohibiting the unloadina 
 ol manure on sa.d pan, of said premises : that 
 tlie use of the wor.l " manure " in the amon- 
 dmg by-law was not of itself objectionable; 
 ami that it was not essential to shew that the 
 mumre might en.langer the public health 
 
 A conviction for unloading a car of manure on 
 the premises, as contraiy lo the by-law, was 
 therefore alhrmcd. A'e;/,„« v. lt,dmond, Ue.jina 
 V. Ryan, Iteijuia v. Biirk, L>4 O. R. .331. 
 
 CROSS-APPEAL. 
 
 See GouNTv OoL'KT - CouKi- OK Appeal — 
 
 Sl'I'UKMK COL-Rr OK CaNAD\. 
 
 Publls Morals -%-A,», auain.l Swearimj in 
 T ;r ^1''''7 fl'^f-^'n'-'^t'^ Office in Cuiom 
 ..y„„f]_A^;,ty by-law enacted that no person 
 should make use of any profane swearioK. 
 obseene, blasphemous or grossly insultiiiL' lan- 
 guage, or be guilty of any other immorality or 
 iiKlecency in any street or public place • — 
 
 Held, that the object of the by-law was to 
 prevent an injury to public morals, and applied 
 to a street or a public place ,ju.dem generU with 
 aHtreet, and not to a private ofHce in the cus- 
 tuiii house, llnjiiia v. Bell, 25 O.R. 272. 
 
 Ratlfloatlon of Orlinlnal Act.]~See ScutI 
 V. Haid- (;/ Aeir lirmmvu-k, 23 S C R 277 
 ywsMMtAuuA.ND Mlshki-hesentation" ' I 
 
 CROWN. 
 I. Expropriation of Land. 
 
 1. A>iKes>imeut ii/ JJiuiiui/ex. 
 
 (a) Ucmral Unlet, 274. 
 
 (b) Laiidt InjuriouKly Affected, 277. 
 
 (c) Lands Taken, 280. 
 
 2. Cro.iniuf/s, 283. 
 
 3. Misal/aneoiin Canen, 283. 
 II. LiAnii.iTV. 
 
 1. An Carriers, 290. 
 
 2. On Contractu, 291. 
 
 3. IntercoluniaX liaitway, 293. 
 
 4. Municipal Taxes, •.;94. 
 Ne'jliijence of Officers and Servants, 294. 
 Orders-in-Council, 300. 
 Torts, 300. 
 Miscellaneous Cases, 301. 
 
 III. Prerogative, 303. 
 
 5. 
 6. 
 
 7. 
 8. 
 
 I. Expropriation of Land. 
 
 1. Assessment of Damaties. 
 
 (a) General Hides. 
 
 t.i^'3";;Std£:TL^'S'r'S '^- ^^-—o- CASES. 304. 
 
 respecting offences against public morals ami 
 public convenience, 1!. S. C. ch. 157, withhaWng 
 seduced a girl under sixteen :— ^ 
 
 Held properly convicted of such oBence 
 alU,ough the evidence given, if believed Til 
 M hole, would have supported a conviction for 
 rape, an indictineut for which had been pre' 
 
 JJoty, .0 0. R. .iOi. , Bnliancement of Future Value of Pro 
 
 Threatenlno. T»., < | P«^*y ^^ Railway- ?'eH(Zer6y//je CVoitvi—Z/are 
 
 <J.7-A crm? nuZ.ui l"'"f" < Ahor- I Mc>nn.':y-Oosts.]-.Vvon n.i expropriation of 
 prisonmenf T. I'"""'h''''le by law with im- land uncier the provisions of 50-51 Vict. ch. 17 
 yrsn^eTns a crim/Vh ""' >"' *'""' seven I the measure of compensation is the dejred-' 
 for vSTs sevr VH t .'""",'""'" P"nishn,ent t'O" '." the value of the premises assessed, not 
 tern, rresc- bed l,r Z ' "' "? "»"'"'»■" ■ ""'y '" ':efer~^nce to the damage occasioned by 
 sendin,^ a Wn . t, . T -^ "'""^ °^ abortion, , the construction of the railway, but also in 
 TtiZ^~t It T^^ " P'^rson reference to the loss which may probably result 
 
 h^.ofR i p . f.S ^""'""y ^''^hin the mean- , ^rom its operation. ^^ ^ ^'"' 
 
 J./'»" /, 20 u R SOS ' '"-■• ^- ^'''^'"''' "■ ^"l" i ^- ^^'Tr *^'"" ^'^ '^^'''«"«« that the raU- 
 ' • "• •^^'^- «'ay woul^l enhance the value for manufaeturine 
 
 purposes of certain portions of land remaining 
 to claimant upon an expropriation, but it did 
 not appear that thcvr then was, or iu the near 
 future would be, any demand for tlie land for 
 such purposes, the Court did not consider this 
 a sufficient ground upon which to reduce the 
 
 CROPS. 
 
 Chattel Mortgageof Crops.] -,S'ee.Sfoo,»/f.wiL*""'!'''"/^'"°""'^ upon which to reduce the 
 • li<^Hytr, 22 A. K. 232rand Cwl •^f i ""^i""^^ 
 
 .„ ■ "-'""^ '^anaaa / ec- I was otherwise entitled. 
 
 hi!; 
 
 I 1 
 
 i ,! 
 
 I :'! 
 
 t 1 ; 
 
276 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 276 
 
 shoul.l 1,1. ull,mc..l u hbernl, m,t a l,«r.,. Uuh-m- 
 was n„t «ivrn ...stH altliough tl,.. amount of 
 
 Anf' ^"ry I^fiilway Clauses Consolidation 
 
 In B„ fa, an " Th... .M.vc.n.n.nt'' Itailwaj/Vot. 
 18«1, n..ona.;l.s tlu, jmni.sin.iH „f tl' I.an.U 
 Vs .Ti "",?•';''''""' ^^t, 8.9 Viet. (I,n,. " ' 
 .8 a, ,1 tlu. |;a,hvay ciatiscH O.nHoli.laimn Act 
 
 havn r,, ''!;•' " -^' "■'"^^'-' ''"■ l''ttc.r«tatut. { 
 hau. l.(..,..| mithontatively c.„„tr.it..i by a C.tirt ' 
 
 Jne ijiiiiii, 1 Kx. C. 1!. 101. 
 
 .>i.„. r .f ■■■•"-•• ■"^•"" mat nenmnaecl ii 
 
 en. UIKS. the ( o„rt, «l,il„ ,l„cliMing to 1 i 
 
 tl.u ,lain««,.a to tlic aiuo.int of hw\, Xv r 
 
 ;;|...". aHa«u..id..n,Kro„„,lf.r„otado: ! 
 tlu! oxtravajjaiit ..^tiniatrH .na,lo l,y clain'u.f^ 
 
 34 ol .1 \,,t. (IM ,1,. ,.2, The I'nl.icWork" 
 Act, ulnrl, i.nnul... f,,,- tho ruforonc.. to tl,.! 
 Uoanl of Otlicial A,l,it,.at.,rH of clai,,! or 1, 
 
 with tho .xecitio,., of a.,y i.nl.lic work .,„lv 
 •ontt.n.i.lnfe,, claims f.,,- ,lir,ict or fo.imo.i ?t 
 . ...mK.s to the ,,.o,,e, ty, ,„ul not to tr r, , 
 
 P,fv!li^«V^V '*'^x'^*"**««« rerlved from a 
 Public Work.|-Not«ithstaiulingtheL.eia.rulitv 
 of the tertn. of 44 Viet. ch. •>.-,, hoc^O, tie, , , .^ 
 
 ch. 0, see. .n, winch provides that the olli, i„| 
 Loss both by Construction and Operation '^.n^*'""" "'"'" *,"'''' '"*" '""xi'loration the 
 Of Hallway. I -Where lan.l.. are X? a°d W ,^^ o^^^^^^ ">'■"""'• "'' '"^''-^ '" «^'«''"« t" th 
 other., hel.l therewith iiijiuioiisiv ..filetV, ' '' | V '"' °'' '"" "'"'''^' "» "•^" »« the injurv or 
 
 ine^mueof eon,reM.satio./iHtr e;rta V^''S^^^^^^ 7'^""'^'' ''^ '•'^^'"'"" "^ the',,,io 
 va ue of the ,,re,ni.se8 .I«„,nge.l. U es ed no I wh^h 7 "''V",''t"fe'f '."••«! he lin.ite.l to'tlu^se 
 only „ ith reference to the i.nurv o, tSe.l Iv If n f ' 'T'''' "'"'/'iff^' *" si'^'h esfat.., .■;,»1 
 the construction of th.. autlorilJ, Z'i^^h \mt ' Zre,r\'. '"''^ '° '"'■'•""' *'"-' fe'^''"^'-"' '- "'i 
 »wy itMilt Horn the nature of the user. StraiU 
 
 estates. nev„«„;;'(\,;;;;:,ii;;;«2:'^r 
 
 Profits. ]-The loss of profits derivable from 
 tho prosecution of a certain business is of" 
 Market Value -/.V„/ y„,„, ,„ o«.».,- at ^s Tdfrlet nT''"'' ''"'' '^f"""* I'o construed 
 5r.m cj hx,.r..,.rwlk,n.]-hi an expro,, iatioi ' «^t hi H, "'"^f^^'l'-ent .lamage to property 
 
 matter the Court shoul.l ass,..ss clnmari i he o / .i / "'"'"'%' "' '''^■''"" •'^■* "^ •'" Vie . aI 
 same way a jury woul.l .k. in an nSfor „ ,. I •^^'"''■' '• ^^'^ ''^'"'""' ' ^''^- ^' «• '-'' 
 
 iniii^'ai:^;;;! .il;/krv«hir!^f';L'te£aife.^r;-^''Tj""''^ --^ -i-io-iv ,„ 
 
 ola>mnnt has to be indenn.iHul fo t s the .il« 1 " "'"tt'.ereof expropriated, '.Ian,, 
 
 depreciation in such value a. t had to hi., th ^^ / '"'•" ^ ^''"''^^ ">• ''"sintss, or any dam- 
 ahould be the basis of con, ,M.att>;w Z^'^^i''"''''^ ?'' ^'^ '•"J«^y to the land'it ". 
 V. The (,)ut,H, 1 Ex. C. R. I'lJ. " ; fJ^'V «™""''f »f compensation ; but ^her- 
 
 land has been t.^ken, compcBsation shoul.l l,e 
 
 Minerals-- 7V,^..]_ln a case of expropri aion arisTnTLiif t? '"'"'* '^"'. '"""^-'i^te ''aniages 
 
 the claimant ,.- not obl,>d to ptovt^.y , , t?y i ?he co, t' -^i"'" "' ""''" "' "" 
 
 t;^t^« or experiments the mineral contends of ^ r},^:.''^/?);^^^ !l^''';^^?43';n.uS 
 
 caf 2:1^ i^^^S:""-^^ ^"'"-^''- '^ ^pp- ^ ^/i:'22i:-aSr K' £"T'^s'S;ii 
 
 ^ J^h^^e. ^'^wever. .„ch tests or experiments \ '^"'■"*'' ''■ ^''"^ '«'"""- ^ f^"^" ^' «■' 191- 
 
 in*u\UndtheL'lTa'sbi\Vcun*^fr"'^^^^ Prospective Capabilities of Property - 
 
 cation, and probabilities .lLc?oee.l by the eJ: iai'^/.^rT"" ^^'^ of E,,,t.-AlJa,, 
 dence. The Qmui v. McCunlv " Kx r R ,^"'"."'t/ 'f ^ ";«'• Toun /row Iiaihcoy.\-L 
 3". ^' - ^^- *^- R-|f«ess>ng dnmnges in ca4 of expropr atiou 
 
 regard s7>o,,ld be had to the i.rospective c" a- 
 
 Municipal Asseeement Rolls,]- The valua- 1 and ehn°.' f"" P''^P"'y '"'^ing ^'-om its situation 
 
 »n of a property nppearinir ui.on he .^Li! "^ ""^ character. 
 
 aiscs°n.e,',rr'nir'\' ■^W'^P'^K "I'"' the municipal 
 assesMiieut rolls does not constitute a test of the 
 actual value upon ^hich compensation shodd 
 
 J^wfv"' "l^V. "''•'' ^'"'""t"" '« made arbi. 
 trarily and without consideration , f the trade 
 
 d^rivalle'thlTf" *'" T^'^^'y '' "- Vroiil 
 deniable therefrom. Pavadu v. The Qnetii, 1 
 
 out lit^ation, had oHercd I .ettle h. l^t \ ZH. rJ^icC Vd. JrSS ^l^!^ 
 
 2. In awarding compensation for i roi ertv 
 expropnnted the Court should consider the 
 \aue thereof to the owner and not to the 
 
 ahlrojKhton Board 0/ WoHs, L. R. 6 Q. B. 
 01, loUowed. 
 
 3. In assessing damages where land has been 
 expropriated, the unitv -^.f *h» „„*.,„ ^.... .... 
 
 considered, and if. by"'the s'eTerancey.'ne of 
 seve.a lots so situated that the possession ami 
 control lit fsn<^.ii n.»r.. ,... 1 1 » 
 
277 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 depreciation it a »u1)«tiintlvc ground for <om- 
 
 peiiHatirin. 
 
 278 
 
 I worltH that tlu. uo.l<H. an well .u, il,i,Mi in cour.o 
 
 i. The a.IvantuuerfsiiltinKtotlieowMtrofa h u'f'.','"?' "T"' V"''"' '*""''' '* '" ''""K^"' "' 
 
 paper t.,wn fr.„M tile (>..«., maki,.« itU o Lrm , , , *^ l' '""" '"""""""veH when the (iover... 
 
 lous of a C.vennn.nt railway, an.l co.iHtn.rth „ )"^,' "'■"' '"'^ '" <'P<'>.'tin„. I„ ,.„„. 
 
 within it.li.nitHaHtatio<..h,M He a 1 ,X 1, i" " ^i'' ''"".T " '\''^ 'V;;''''""'' ''^"^ ''"•" ^'"" *' "'^^ 
 
 ing,. .H cue that .shoul.l he taken i nt. , J.u '" ti . )f ''''"""*^'' ^^'"'1'' '' '^" '" 1'^'^ '''^'''^'^ 
 
 way of Het-otr under r)0.51 Vict .l, IH «! • l^ P w.^ lii.sura.iee n|mi, their «„rkH than they 
 
 Paini V. '/7,e V«t^», •_' Kx. C H U'') I'." ''"'''•'"f""-'-- paid, and that .hip*, miuht, fur 
 
 ■ ''"■ ."•'"•"• reaNoii, he deterred from UBiiig tho 
 
 Proapeotlve Value of Property Injur d 
 by Construction or Operation of a Public 
 
 Work.J_-( nder the provi«i..hH of ;il Vitt cli 
 IL, .see. ;{4, in iiHsessing eoinpcnsation in res'neet 
 of (larnaKe to property arising from tlie construe ( „,,.,„ >• /.\ . .■ .■ r 
 t.o„ or connected with the execution of any ml . l'^^ ^^7 jj':' 
 i>rk, the liro.Hiicctive <im.il,il!*i..„ „f „.. •'i ' „ i '-m i(iLire<l to 
 
 he w..rk, the pronpecti ve eapahilities of suchpro. 
 ptrtv must he taken into cuMderatiim, as tliev 
 may form an important element iu determining 
 ita real value. ° 
 
 ilaijyvo/Moiitmily. Brow,,, 2 Apn. Cas IHS 
 refene.1 to. L.jUn;. v. '!%■ Que J, Vex. b iJ.' 
 
 murine lailw.iyM ;— " 
 
 Held tliat the dania-e reHullinj! f'om such 
 increased risk from (ire wa.s a proper .-iiil.jcct lor 
 compensation. Itukr uf /lmr/ni,'h v. M.hrm,,!,- 
 fm> /lo„n/ „/ U-orh, L. R. f, H. [,. 41,S, and 
 ( "I'-pn- h.ssir V. L„ml lioar,l/ur Arloii, U App. 
 
 (■-.) Uliere lamls are t.iken and others hehl 
 therewitli injuriously ullVcte.l, the nwasure „f 
 compensation is the depicciation in value of the 
 premises damaged assessed not only witli refer- 
 ence to the injury o.'oasioned l,y the construe 
 turn of the authoii/<d works, hut aNo with 
 reference to the l,.ss uhich may probahly result 
 from tlie nature of the user. .SV(v„V., ofC,t„^,,m 
 Mannt /{. W. Cn. y . 'flu- (Jimn, -IV.x C K \V\ 
 
 Quebec. 1-Apart from any legislation of tho 
 Do.nin.on 1 arliament. whe.e lands have heen 
 expropi.ated tor any uurnose i riirlif t 
 p«..sation ohtaius under the huV'of the l'ro^."ce W^'??* Horses- /.^ ,./;,.;»,/ „■;//, W,rk 
 ofQueheointhe same w.ay as under tl e 1 w nf .T \ I"/"..]- A po.tion of the chin.mfs 
 England. ' ""^ t'"- law of property, .dthough not damaged hy „. coi,. 
 
 Under the law of the Province of O,,,.!,,.,. fff"f' i"i "'• *''" railway, was injuriously 
 where interest is allowed on a.. a« d W h' L 7 -"^ ''>' '^', "1"=™''""- i'""n>ueh as near a 
 official arbitrators, a claim for loss of nro/L ,n, 1 " J'""!' "'"'""'". '™"« '-■"""•«^''> «'"'''^"'y 
 rent cannot he entertained h the K on in '/ Th J''' ^ f''^'^''-'"- 
 
 .ppeal,as such interest mu.st •),« rega le I as i .w^ with" I '"" ^':-''' ","^ thereby i.uerfcr- 
 representing the profits. /'„, w,/,\ v '/'A. ! ' *ir ,'^'' V"-' l"''«ceutioi. his work 
 
 1 Ex. C. R 191, ' • ^'" ^<>"'^"' i Hehl, that this was a pi 
 
 pensatioii. 
 
 Sales Of Similarly Situated Properties I- L..^^''T '="'''*'!' '?»'l «;en.aining to the owner 
 When lands i nsscss a certain value for hudd U T ""'»'','"'*''-' u''^ ""'-■'-'*^'^ '" '''^^I'^''-'' "f t''" 
 ing purposes at .i,. time of expropriat on Iu ;?; ""/k '";'' '" hLu for the purposes of occupfv- 
 :i8certainc.l from a.i actual , ' '^e da.nages were ascertained and a.ss. s.'ed 
 . "'".an actuallin respect of its depreciation in market value. 
 Vkvui v. V/j, Qweii, 2 Kx. C. R. 11. 
 
 l>ioper subject tor coni- 
 
 that value 
 sale of am 
 
 ilar and 
 the best 
 
 mot 
 't or 
 
 1:T "" /'""i an actual 
 
 part thei-'-of, the sales of siin- 
 
 ,,, -, , '. • """i DUica oi siin- 
 
 'oilarly situated properties constitute 
 
 •-' 1^ C r!"s'> '' ^'"'«0''«'- V. The 
 
 (b) Landu Injuriously Affitcted. 
 
 Drainage - P,-o.p,,:ta-e I)„,naws — Acom/ 
 vice I,,, Predecesxny i,> Tui. i m/u . f f?""- 
 
 Injury Done - /.„«,/. Clan,,), i\„m,Udation 
 mVr In ^ "•■*'■ "'"J"'-y done" in .SI Vict. 
 (U.) cli. 12, sec. 40. is conimensur.-»te with, .ind 
 has the same intendment as, the phrase ' • iniuri- 
 ously aflFeote. " in 8-9 Vict. ch. IS, sec. 68, 
 imperial lands Clauses Consolidation Act, an.l 
 in 8o far a.s tho similarity extemls, cases decided 
 uiider the Imperial Act may be cited with autho- 
 ritv i„ nnnuf.ni,.., *u.- r...._ ,-.„ stat„t^ ,^^ 
 
 5,S. 
 
 in„r. r"ff~ , ' ^''"V'-tive D„,ii>if,es — Acauit- i •. •'" '^ l"'Pe™U Act may be cite( 
 tana by Predecessor in TO/?.]- Where, by the '^'Z '" «o°8t>-uing the Cana.lian S 
 -.. tuc ,on of a railway, the claimant is put to ' ^^"■•""' ''' ^'*« V"e«,, 1 Ex. C. R. 
 
 .Iter tiouble and expense in carryinc off s.ir 
 ditehl l^'f °"' ',''" '""•'« """""gh the boundary , °''structlon of Acoess-(7oH.s<r„c<;o« of Pail- 
 S?he i, ,nTm",'f f'"''" •■'"d the farms adjoiZ uZ ^l'"^ . "■ ^'''-'"'^^ Conti,,u<,m to lLi.]L 
 Cm Th""'}'''' to compensation therefor. I ^1^^'% ^n^'« «;■« >nJ'.rioudy attected, no part 
 
 ant is onp f T'^ Vf ;''''>' ot^c'^ioned to claim- I .„ ''°^ being taken, the owners are not entitled 
 tie X'ttTv'T^ ''^^"f°'-««^«°«tthe ;° 3rf8^',°" r"'"u*'"^ Government Rail! 
 purpo es of 'ih. r„ 1^" ^'"■'", '''''^ ^''^l'^" fo"- the ^^^^^v an I' ""^f«^*he "njury (I) is occasion- 
 
 purpces ot the railway, and un« ,i;=^i, , i__ ert by an act made lawful hy the statutorv 
 
 powers exercised, (2) is such an injury as would 
 Fiave sustained an action but 1,. sucfi statutory 
 
 ^rposesoftl.n;;i--^;-SrSlt. 
 
 pfSuiru:s:h^°'"^^"^^^.»'^ 
 
 awwH 
 
 l-KU V. 
 
 7.. .° - ; """" t'Xpropriation. 
 
 J he Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 391. 
 
 powers, and (.3) is an injury to lands or sorne 
 
 „, , ,!'*?''* ^'^ "^terest therein, and not a personal 
 
 Vis^—Increaseil Pish from Fire h„ Rnii,., -, \ J,"!,'''" "^^ '"J»'y to trade. 
 
 -The plaintiffs were oiZ.''jt^It^^l^^}\,r ■^■'''^ T'"-"*^""" «f "^ railway 3idin. along 
 
 proF^-.^y upon which they operated" twn'Jj:;„! ! "uJ'ur;'''''' ^""tiguous to a claimant's lands 
 
 Mi 
 
 i: 
 
 ! n 
 
 ! i! 
 
279 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 I i 
 
 llif 
 
 'M 
 
 Qi„fre.-Whether the rule that compensation, 
 in cases of injurious aflection only, must be conl 
 hne,l to such damages as arise from the construc- 
 tion o the authorized works, and must not be 
 extendeci to those resulting from the user of 
 such works, is applicable to cases arising under 
 Wie Government Railways Act, 1881? The 
 Quw.n V. Harry, 2 Ex. C. R. S33. 
 
 Obstruction of Access. ]-Thedefendaufwas 
 f'o'nHn'"''' "f ^'.>^«"inghouse and property 
 fronting on a public highway. In the construe^ 
 tion of a Government railway, the Crown 
 erected a bridge or overhead crot ing on a por ' 
 ton of the highway in such a manner Tto i 
 obstruct access from such highway to defen ' 
 en"o/ed -T'^^' "'"'^'^ '"^ ha.l fherefofore freely 
 
 Held, that the defendant was entitled to com- 
 pensation under the Government Railways!" 
 and the Lxpropriation Act. B>ck-elt vf ^nd. 
 (ami hallway Cmpaw/, L. R. 3 C P 8" 
 
 R 357 '"■ ^''" ^"""' ^- ^"''^°''". 2 Ex. C.' 
 
 Obstruction of Canal. ]-&e 
 J lie (Jumi, 24 S. C. R. 711. 
 
 FairhanlcH v. 
 
 280 
 
 I income derivable from the property as apniierf 
 tosuchause an.l ha.l rendered useless ceK 
 mills situate thereon, together with the maehin 
 ! ery in the mills, upon a special case claiming 
 I damages Hi respect of these matters being sub 
 inittedtothe official arbitrators theydismised 
 the claim as not recoverable at law. On anneal 
 from the award of the official arbitrators •_ 
 
 Held, in assessing compensation in respect of 
 damage to property arising from the construe- 
 tion or connected with the execution, of anv 
 public work, under tlie provisions of 31 Vict 
 
 «,';>, i''^'''.^^''''®,P™'P'="^'' capabihties of 
 such property must be taten into consideratiou 
 as they may form an important element in deter' 
 mining its real value. Mayor of Montrral V 
 Ji'<m-H,2 App. Cas. 108, referred to. 
 
 [ 7 ' ^ . °'^L'""' °^ '■'*»'^ through which unnavi. 
 gable water flows in its natural course is pro- 
 I prietor of the latter by right of accession ; it is 
 at his exclusive disposition during the interval 
 It crosses his property, and he is entitled to be 
 indemnihed for the destruction of any water 
 power which has been or may be derivaUe 
 therefrom. L./ehvre v. The Q^een, 1 Ex C 
 
 Potential Advantage of Railway to Re- 
 
 obiLtion :pT:cL:n t:s.:2^is ^""^ "^ ' 
 
 A'aSy*^~f """''"? T'''"^ *•" ^o"*''-'"-'"'" of 
 
 f"'>m-l~ln assessing damages for injury occa- 
 
 rlilwav th P'^I^'Y i''y *''^ construc'tici^iX. 
 railway, the annual loss of profits since the 
 commencement of the injury as well as the 
 permanent decrease in the value of the rope, ty 
 
 .r, 11 V V ••— •" "i^^... « 1111,11 compensation 
 
 should be based where such valuation is made 
 arbitrarily, and without consideration of the 
 trade carried on upon the property or the profits 
 Ex." C. R. ?,;,7"^'"°'"- ^'-"•"^'■^ ^••^'A« V«e.n, 1 
 
 Building Purposes.j-TheCrown had expro- 
 priated a certain portion of land which the 
 claimant contended was held for sale as build- 
 ing lots. It was established in evidence that 
 such land had not been laid off into lots prior to 
 the expropriation, and that none of it had there- 
 tofore been sold for building purposes. There 
 was evidence, however, to shew that there was 
 a remote probability that the land would 
 
 TalZl'^^ ^^T''V'°'\''■■''''' Operation of ,« extension of the limits of an a lioinincr tow , 
 re™Tf.-^ii!i?«'l..:\^'-'^'^"^ « e^^ H^W. that while s,-.ch reZte '^robrbdi^ 
 
 „j 1 1 ,• =v.>.i. jciiiui,e prooaointv 
 
 added something to the value which the pro 
 perty would otherwise have had, compensation 
 should not be based on any supposed value of 
 the laud for building purposes at the time of 
 «ie^.xpropriatiou. Kearney v. Tin- Queen, 2 Kx. 
 
 reasonable compensation for the damage sustain- 
 
 in valu^^f 1 ■' *'" '"J"'-'^' ^.°' -^ de1.reciatio"i 
 
 Itrn^Hn, ' T ^"'°V<^'^y '^"sing from the con- 
 
 stiucton and operation of a railway in its 
 
 immediate vicinity, he is not entitled to damages 
 
 for loss and injury to his business consequent 
 
 St"bi. ""'■ '°'" '^'''^ ''''' °f insuraTe "t : 
 
 ve£L £Zrse":rSrSii:i; ^s^KC ^ atr^S^.^^r'^rSfs^/^i.nilar,ySa.. 
 
 pZ^r^,f f}«^^^-f';-or^ctivc Caimbilitie, of 
 ^>o/H>/y~Lnuaa!ial)le .■Stream of Jrater llmi- 
 
 CraJ'"''"t ^''«""""<'^ Lan<i.UvkZ/Z 
 
 £:v t"; ":^^^f*ri:!'^,j?^ '^ puwic work i^d 
 
 , , i«^K.i,.i ame ui any loi or 
 
 part thereof, the sales of similar and similarly 
 situated properties constitute the best test of 
 such value. 
 
 (2) There is no legal liability upon the 
 Grown to give a clahiiant a crossing over any 
 ' .ov-ernmci.t railway, and wliere the Crowii 
 
 
CROWN. 
 
 enforcing the performance of such undertaking. 
 Sm now 52 Vict. ch. 38, sec. 3. ^ 
 
 (3) Where chiimant, for the purpose of efTect- 
 ing a settlement without litigation, had offered 
 to settle his claim for a sum very much below 
 that demanded in his pleadings the Court, while 
 declining to limit the damages to the amount of 
 such offer, relied upon it as a sufficient ground 
 for not adopting the extravagant estimates 
 made hy cl^aimant s witnesses. Fakuner v. The 
 Queai, 2 Ex. C. R. 82. 
 
 282 
 
 iste'r!'?!" '1 '"•''• ?^"^ ''^ '* ^^^ *° i>™ that 
 
 i should be the basis of compensation. Farculil 
 V. Jhe Qiieeri, 1 Ex. C. R. 191. 
 
 Character of the Title. ]-Claimants' title to 
 a water lot at Levis, in the harbour of Quebec 
 was based on a grant from the Lieutenant-Gov- 
 ernor of Quebec, prior to Confederation. Tiio 
 grant contained, tut,,- a/ia, a provision that 
 upon givmg the grantee twelve months' notice 
 and paying him a rtasi 11 Me sum as indemnity 
 for improvements, the Crown might resume 
 possession of the saul water lot for the purpose 
 of public improvement :— ' 
 
 Held, the property being situated in a public 
 harbour, this power of resuming possessiin for 
 the purpose of public improvement, would be 
 exercisal)le by the Crown as represented by the 
 Government of Canada. BohmiH v. Orffii 6 ' 
 .s. I. R. /0(, referred to. ' 
 
 (2.) Inasnuich as the Crown had not exercised ' 
 this power but had proceeded under the exoro- 
 priation c auses of T/ie Goi;r,muU A'aihcay-, 
 Act, the claimants were entitled to recover the 
 fair value of the lot at the date of expropriation. 
 The value however, should be determined with 
 reference to tlie nature of the title. Sammi v. 
 The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 30. 
 
 i Prospective Capabilities of Property- 4 ,/. 
 
 L^L- ''^^'^f '"g damages in cases of evpro- 
 
 ration, regard should be had to the prospec- 
 tive capabilities of the property arising from its 
 situation and character: ^ 
 
 pv!il' ^" ^^'"■'^ing (compensation for property 
 expropriated the Court should consider the 
 va le thereof to the owner, and not to e 
 authority expropriating the same. StehhiSy 
 
 ££""" "'''"-' "-^ "■'^'■^•'- L- R- Q. i".'3:; 
 
 : ('^ In assessing damages where h.nd has 
 heen expropriated, the unity „f the est t" must 
 be considered, and if by the'severan^e ^o L": 
 
 coitoS'ea^V' •""'"' '''f ""= P'-«essionand 
 
 contiol ot each give an enhanced value to them 
 
 .11, the remainder is depreciated in value such 
 
 ^e^c^ion IS a substantive ground f^r'^S 
 
 pa^rS;:SX'I^S^-;;jown.rof^ 
 
 minus o a. Government railway, ami co, truc^" 
 }ng within its limits a station-house an tothe,' 
 buildings, IS one that should be take, n?o 
 account by way of set-off under 50-.11 Vict ch 
 6, sec. 13. PciiU v. Th. <,>„,,.„ " Ex C R 
 R 718 '"^'^ by the Supreme Court, Vs 8. c'. 
 
 Market Value. ]-It is the real value of the 
 land to the owner at the time of the expropria- 
 tioii that must be taken as the basis of eomneii- 
 sation ; and where claimant sought to recover 
 damages in respect of a p.,rtio„ of his farm as a 
 gravel pit, but failed to shew that it had a value 
 ,luoml hoc at the time of the taking, the Court 
 declined to assess its value otherwise than as 
 farm land. Vezma v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R 11. 
 
 Market Value-iVn<Mreo/r,-</e.]_In assess- 
 ing compensation to be paid to an owr .-r whose 
 
 and has been expropriated, the market value of 
 the property should not be exclusively con- 
 sidered Although the claimant has the right 
 
 osell Ins property, and should, Iherefore.V 
 indemnified ,n respect of any loss which in 
 
 ZhtleT^'^''''Tr''''^"'" ''« "»ght m'ake 
 such sale, he is not bound to sell, tnd may 
 
 reasonably prefer to keep his propeky,for the 
 
 P"'-P''?tf ?f his business; and n that case 
 
 tSie'tn rf"'*^.! '"'• "">' <'«P-ciatioirfn 
 Its Yilue to him for the purposes for which he 
 
 has been accustomed, an.l still desires to use it 
 
 (-) in assessing compensation to be paid to 
 
 a claimant, whose land has been expropria ecL 
 
 the Court wi 1 look at the nature of his title as 
 
 • 
 Market yalne-lienl Value to Onmer at Time 
 ieS'^Z^^^-^'' expropriation matter 
 wav ■,;.,;„ , ']'"''^'° •''^"'•'Kcs m the same 
 
 evictio, ^rr"'''/'" '" ,"" '"='"'" for forcible 
 thTi ,■/'■' i""*^ '"f^'y "'c aepreciation in 
 
 claimant I '"^'^'v '-"'r "f "•« '-^''^ that a 
 Claimant has to be indemniHed for, it is the 
 
 tZ^n ^""^ Capabilities of Land for More 
 I than One Purpose-Z^asMo/- rotuntio.K]-l° k 
 I Co. were owners of a lot of uncleared and' in 
 i the parish of St. Paul, Province of Mai tob" 
 
 and upon which certain agents of the DonS 
 
 ir"tS;r\' ''"^- '•■"'^■^"' ''' '''ft'^'-ent times 
 undei the provisions of sec. 25 of 31 Viet ch 
 
 and !r 'l? "'r^''^"" ''"■g'-' quantitiesot an i 
 and gravel for the purposes if the Cana.lia 
 
 cubic yards. For the sand and gravel so taken 
 the Government offere.l B. & Co^ .S72.50? which 
 they refused to accept. The claim v^.s t e 
 referred to the oiiici.fl arbitrator., vi^o va e 
 
 ^!w '?'/;?;" ^"'"^ '""•'• •■""l---ded B. & c" 
 
 »100 in full compensation and satisfaction of 
 
 i their claim. On appeal from thi.s award :- 
 
 ' . Held, that the <,fficial arbitrators were wroiu' 
 
 : m assessing the damages in respect of tL a r^ 
 
 cultural value of the land ; and that sue a., ?s. 
 
 nient shouhl have been ma.le in respect of its 
 
 value as a sand and gravel pit ' 
 
 SemhU, where lands ••ire taken which possess 
 capabilities rendering then, available 0^1^ 
 
 Works Act VA'-rr'"; '"'.f "" '' "'' "- p"'-''' 
 
 purpose which gives the lan.ls hii, hi J " t 
 value. Burton v. Th^ Queen, 1 Ex. C. R 87 
 
 nHiv!'!f°^i^7'^l" '"•'P'^'*' f''..m an award of the 
 oHicial arbitrators, the Court, in assessing the 
 mount of compensation to l,epai,l to the Lea- 
 ded iied to take into con..ide,ation any adva, 1 
 age that would ,,.,.rue to th. property if a 5 1 
 ".g connecting the property with' the rl hv v • 
 were constructed, as thire was no legal o£,^ 
 tion upon the Crown to give such siding, an ft 
 
 '!.! 
 
 ! I 
 
 ) : 
 
 iMii 
 
 !i f 
 i 
 
 ( 
 
 n 
 
.283 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 i^ 
 
 P 
 
 I 
 
 III I 
 
 Special Value to 0-wnerB--A(lvcmtaf/e.i De- 
 rived from a Puhlii- Work—Xatitre of Title.]— 
 In aaaessinj,' coiiiiicnsation to be paid to" an 
 owner whoso la-.;l Ii.ia l)ecn expropriated, the 
 market va'uc of the property should not bo 
 exclusiveiy considered. Although the claimant 
 has the right to sell his i)roperty, and should 
 therefore, be indemnified in respect of any loss 
 which, in consequence of the expropriation, he 
 mi'dit make on sucli sale, he is not bound to 
 sell, and may reasonably jirefer to keep his pro- 
 perty for the purpose of his business; and in 
 that case should be indemnified for any depre- ' 
 ciation in its value to him for the purpose for ^ 
 which lie has been accustomed, and still desires ' 
 to use it. 
 
 (2) Notwithstanding the generality of the 
 terms of 44 Vict. ch. 25, sec. 10, re-enacted by 
 R. .S. C. ch. 40, sec. 15, and 50-51 Vict, ch 16 
 sec. 31, which provides tliat the official arbitra- 
 tors shall take into consideration the advan- 
 tages accrued, or likely to accrue, to the claim- 
 ant or his estate, ns well as the injury or dam- 
 age occasioned by reason of the public work 
 sucli advantages must Ije limited to those whicl! 
 are special and direct to --uch estate, and not 
 construed to include the general benefit shared 
 in common with all the neighbouring estates 
 
 (3) In assessing compensation to be paid" to 
 a claimant whose land li:is been expropriated 
 the Court will look at the nature of hia title as 
 one of the criteria of value. 'rhc. Qmoi v 
 Carrier, 2 Ex. C. R. 36. 
 
 284 
 
 written agreement to sell and convey to the 
 Crown, by a good and sufficient deed, a certain 
 quantity of land, required for the purposes if 
 the Cape Breton Railway, for the sum of §I,i,o 
 At the date of such agreement the centre' line 
 : of thi railway had been staked oflf through the 
 , defendants' property, and they were fully aware 
 I of the location of the right of way and the quan- 
 I tity of land to be taken from them for such 
 : purposes. Thereafter, and within one year 
 j from the date of such agreement, the land in 
 : dispute was set out and ascertained, and a iilm 
 and description thereof duly deposited of reclmi 
 I in pursuance of the provisions of R. S. C. ch. .S9' 
 Upon the defendants refusing to carry out thVir 
 agreement on the ground that the damages were 
 greater than they anticipated, and the matter 
 being brought into Court on the information of 
 the Attorney-General, the Court assessed the 
 damages at the sum so agreed upon. 
 
 Qu>Kre-—l!i the Crown in such a case entitled 
 to specific performance ? The Queen v. MrKn 
 ac, 2Ex. C. R. 198. 
 
 2. Crominqs. 
 
 Damage Occasioned by Want of Crossing i 
 
 — Uy the absence of a cro.ssing over the railway 
 claimant was deprived of access to the shore 
 and thereby suffered loss in the use and occupa- 
 tion of the property remaining to her :— 
 
 Held, that claimant was entitled to compensa- 
 tion in respect of tiie damage resulting from the 
 want of a crossing. Kiarmy v. The Queen, 2 
 
 Damage Occasioned by Wantlof Crossing ] 
 
 — \Vliere, upon the expropriation of land for the 
 right of \v.iyof a Government railway throuch 
 a claimant s property, a crossing over the rail- 
 way is not provided by tiie Crown, damaL'es will 
 be a lowed for the depreciation of his property 
 resulting from the absence of such crossing. 
 Guay v. fhe Queen, 2 Ex. C, R. 18. 
 
 Offer to Give Crossing — As.ie.':.'<menf of 
 Daimu^c, m respect thrreo/.j-Thcro is no le«al 
 liability upon the Crown to give a claimiTnt 
 a crossing over any Government railway, and 
 *here the Crown offered by its pleadings to 
 construct a crossing for claimant, the Court 
 assessed damages in view of the fact that there 
 was no means of enf(,rcing the performance of 
 such undertaking. S^e now 52 Vict ch 38 
 sec. 3. Falconer v. The Queen, 2 Kx C R 8"' 
 
 3. MMcellnneonit CaHef. 
 
 Agreement to Accept a Certain Sum as 
 
 Compensation.]- Defendants entered ;i^o a 
 
 Claimant's Acquiescence in Construotioa 
 
 of Culverts. J— The suppliant sought to recover 
 damages for the Hooding of a portion of his 
 farm at Isle Verte, P.Q., resulting from the 
 constraction of certain works connected with 
 the Intercolonial Kailway. The Crown pro. 
 duced a release under tlie hand of the supiili'mt 
 given subsequent to the time of the ex propria^ 
 tion of a portion of his farm for the right of way 
 of a section of the Intercolonial Railway wlieie 
 by he accepted a certain sum " in full coiiiuei,. 
 sation and final settlement for deprivation of 
 water, fence-rails taken, damage by water, and 
 all damages past, present and prospe<;tive aris- 
 ing out of the constrntion of the Intercolonial 
 Railway, and released the Crown '^from all 
 claims and demands whatever in connection 
 therewith." It was also proved that although 
 the works were executed subse(iuent to the 
 date of this release, they were undertaken at 
 tlie request of the suppliant and for his Ijcnefit 
 and not for the benefit of the railway and thit' 
 with respect to part of them, he was present 
 when It was being constructed and activelv 
 
 interfered in such construction : 
 
 Held, that he was not entitled to compeusa- 
 I tion. Berlrand v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. L'S5. 
 
 Claimant's Damages— /Jfrma,/^,, for lirmch 
 of Confracl C/aimanl uum Forced to Pay I,,/ 1,'ai- 
 xon of an Expropriation for a Oovernment Hail- 
 wrty ]— Ihe claimants sought to recover from 
 the Crown the amount of damages they allei-ed 
 ^ they were obliged to pay to a contractor who 
 I was prevented by the expropriation from com- 
 1 pleting the construction of a wiiarf he had 
 I undertaken to build for them : — 
 j Held, that as the contractor had been pre- 
 ! vented from completing the construction of the 
 wharf by the exercise of powers conferreil by 
 Act of Parliament, the clainmnts were excused 
 from any liability to him in respect of the 
 breach of contract and -could not maintain any 
 claim against the Crown in that behalf. Sam- 
 son v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 30. 
 
 Damage to Property from Work.-j Bxb. 
 cutedon Government Railway -/'aroif I 'mter- 
 'nkingto Indemnify Ownern for Cws's of R.pair, 
 oy Officer 0/ the Crowi— Crown n Liability There- 
 
284 
 
 ami convey to the 
 ;ient deed, a certain 
 for the purposes of 
 irthesumof .Sl,i.'„o. 
 ent the centre line 
 ked off through the 
 ey were fully aware 
 ' way and the (juan- 
 [•om them for such 
 within one year 
 enient, the laiKl in 
 rtained, and a jilan 
 leposited of reconi 
 3 of R. S. C. ch. S9.' 
 i to carry out their 
 t tlie damages were 
 !d, and the matter 
 the information of 
 yoiirt assessed the 
 1 upon. 
 
 Lich a case entitled 
 e Queen v. McKcn- 
 
 I in Construetioa 
 
 t sought to recover 
 ' a portion of hia 
 ssulting from the 
 ;s coimected with 
 The Crown pro- 
 
 1 of the suppliant, 
 of the ex propria^ 
 r the right of way 
 .1 Railway, where- 
 '■ in full conipen- 
 'or deprivatiou of 
 ge hy water, and 
 
 prospective aris- 
 the Intercolonial 
 Crown ' • from all 
 er in connection 
 ved that altliuugh 
 ibsecjuent to tlie 
 •e uudertakun at 
 id for his Ijenefit, 
 aiiway, and that, 
 , he was present 
 ;ed and actively 
 
 ed to compensa- 
 
 2 Ex. C. R. 2H5. 
 
 nnijcn for /ireach 
 'I to Pay III! i;,a- 
 'loverumuit Hail- 
 to recover from 
 iges they alleged 
 contractor who 
 ation from corn- 
 wharf he had 
 
 ' Iiad heen pre- 
 struction of the 
 rs confen-ed by 
 ta were excused 
 respect of the 
 >t maintain any 
 t behalf, Sam- 
 3. 
 
 1 Works Exe- 
 
 /-Pvol t'lider- 
 yo.ifii of Rr/mirt 
 Liability Then- 
 
 285 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 «nrfer.]-The claimant's property havinc been 
 .ujuriously affected in the carrying ou^Vthe 
 Crown of certan> n.provements in the yar ^ 
 an,i tracks of the Intercolonial Railway at and 
 ne,:rts station in the city of St. Joh-^N B 
 A, the chief engineer of the .aiiway, verb IW 
 agreed with tlie elaunants tliat tlie wo -ks wd ich 
 It was necessary to execute in order to restore 
 the.r property to its former safe and servLeablP 
 «.nduion shoul.l be executed «n 1 i t .^ Hre 
 tloa of M., the claimants' engineer ami tw 
 tl.CWu would pay to the cfStsThl cS 
 
 Tlie exact extent and character of the works 
 tobesoexecute.l were never definitely seUkd ' 
 The works executed under M.'s direction ex 
 ceede.l what were necessary to eino e tL 
 injury done, ..nd to a certaiili extent ad led to 
 the permanent value of the claimant's prone tv 
 M._d.d not act in bad faith, but erred '^^n 'iu'f J.' 
 
 The work liowever, was done upon and 
 adjacent to the railway prorx-rtv whr.,,. ;t 
 open at all times ..^thLLpffi:^'^:^^,- 
 and engineers of the railway, an.l the nocelarv 
 excavations were made for .\l. hy men ... n.^f ^ ^ 
 and paid on behal, of the Crown '^"'l''">-^«' : 
 
 '111. ase was referred to an official referee to i 
 
 tecl in favour of claimants for §2,65,1 02 ' 
 ..port': -'" ^''-■''"^■''""«- ^n ''PPeal frmn tlit ^ 
 
 «eld affirming the report, that while the 
 claimants were entitled to take such steps and 
 to execute such works as were necessTy o 
 make their property as good, safe and serWce 
 able as it was before the interference therewith 
 ami recover from the Crown the expen es 
 thereby incurred, they were not entS to 
 mprove tlieir water .system an.l service at tie 
 Crmviis expense. They were entitled to e 
 3.md.nm.hed for any„ injury doS^'b^S 
 
 Crowii^luib.lity would be extended, not being 
 
 Held that the claimants were entitled, under 
 the contract made with A., to recover tic cost 
 o the works executed under M.'s dirLctiou 
 .^t John Water VomnnsMonn: v. TheQaZ ' 
 
 286 
 
 jt.on, at the time of the expropriatk,, as^n^t 
 
 i a highway or public road w^itlifn the m'e ,d ,g ^f 
 
 the (government Railways Act, ISSl 44 vlf 
 
 Bl ; v^t'tuTed'tT ^""''^ P-.l-"ty. 'and Vh^ 
 
 P hi ion Tl « r '="!»Pe"Bation for its expro- 
 
 U e a e ,f ? <-'-°"n«,''"-'tention was that, at 
 
 tlie (late of the expropriation, the street was a^ 
 
 h^hway or public roa.'l withi,; the nt-a , u^^^f 
 
 Jhe (.om-nment Railways Act, 1881, 44 V^ict 
 
 , ^11. -'o, and that the Crown had sat sfierl th« 
 
 provisions of section 5, sub-sec i n t an sec 
 
 , t.on 49 hereof, by substituting a coimiieni 
 
 Held, ] That the question was one of dedi 
 cation rath-- than of ' prescription -that th« 
 
 cated the street to the public • and tl, ,t it 
 ..ot necessary for the Crown {o'o user b"^ 
 : the pubh, for any particular time! ^ 
 
 i^Sti;^t£i::;HL^SJS-iSr 
 
 ' ation IS the same as the law of England 
 
 I -ff"'''^'-. that 18 Viet. ch. 100, sec. 41 sub-sec 
 
 refem ice tc";' '? ^ '«".'P"'-'y P'ovision havTng 
 
 eleience to roads in existence on July 1st lSi5 
 
 yhich m.l been left open and used^a sucS 
 
 the public without contestation during a period 
 
 of ten years or upwards. Jlyra.d v. /.S 
 
 -/l c •J'?v.""'/'"•^^'• ''"^ o/Mon/:$ 
 
 ^ i;, 2 Ex.- a i T''^""' '°- ^'""•^^' V- ?'Ai 
 
 Uedloatlon of Highway.] - Prior to tliP 
 construction o the St. (^harlis B a ,ch of t e 
 Intercolonial Railway, the claimant ^^"vs „ 
 possession of property in tlie village of L ..o, 
 u the County of Levis, P.O., which wi,dv,oi 
 .nto 41 lots with a street laul ou t ro^,, 't, ± 
 
 cpa corporaton had never take.rany steps i 
 <le.'l.n-e the said street a public way, it was used 
 a»s,ich, was opeuel at both ends, and formed a ' 
 means of communication betwe'cn two Ct ler 
 ■•;r-t= n, tnc villag,,., and work had been done 
 ana repairs made thereon under the direction of 
 tl'e rural inspector of roads. The mmi " "x 
 council Had also, at one time, pas al 7 sX 
 
 Piling Flails— Con/ractor tn liuH,! r. 
 
 { nient Railway Act of 1881, 44 Vict ch at 
 j provides tlut "no action shall be b ouih^ 
 against any officer, employee or servant ofX 
 Department of Railways and Cana s for anv 
 thing done by virtue of his office service o^ 
 empoyment. except within three inontlis after 
 the act committeil, and upon one month's re 
 vious notice in writing • "._ '"""t" s pre- 
 
 l>elmv'^{i'tT;r";^""^ Jr'«'"«"' "^ *'>« ^^ourt 
 
 iL' tl.it n n ' , .' '"'"' '^^^y"'"^, J., <lissent- 
 
 ng, tlKit a contractor with the Minister of 
 
 Railways ami Canals, as reprcse ,', the 
 
 Crown, for the constructi.m of a brancliof th^ 
 
 Intercolonial Railway, is not an "cm Wee'' of 
 
 the department within this section -1^ °^ 
 
 Held, per Patterson au.l Fournior, ,]J that 
 
 I lent'ofT^"^"'? r"""'' ""^■'-■" *" "'« <-oV"n 
 meat of Canada to expropriate lands roouire,! 
 for any public work can oiily be exercis'-d after 
 
 Crown who enters upon t'.ie 1 m.l t . .1 \ 
 such public work the/eon is'liab t^ t^eown: 
 
 Grantor (AyxteM-^y-Expronriation for Pur 
 
 tmhs Created hy Claimanl.^ O'ranlor (Au(<ur) 
 Clam for Present Danu.je. Afectedby-oL 
 
 
 ii 
 
 
 ^iji 
 
 ■i : 
 
 !il 
 
 
 
 I 
 
287 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 peTuatton Paid to Grantor (AiiteurJ—Bii/ht of 
 Action.] — Vrior to the construction o'f the 
 Lachine Canal, faini lots (cadastral) Nos. 3617 
 and 3912, situate in the parish of Cote St. Paul 
 m tue county of Hochelaga, P.Q., were drained! 
 each m .ts own line, by a natural water-course 
 on their northern boundary. In constructing 
 the Lachine Canal the Dominion Government 
 dfcstroyed the natural drainage of the lots, and 
 as It was impossible to effect drainage into the 
 canal on account of the height of the embank- 
 ments, the Government built several culverts 
 under such embankments to answer that pur- 
 pose. 'J'o conduct the drainage fn ni the four 
 neighbouring farms west of lot 3617, as well as 
 from lot 3617 itself uiid the two farms inime- 
 oA^o ^. ^'^^^ °^ '*' '° " culvert situated on lot 
 ^91J, the Government provided the said farms 
 with a drain-ditch leading to the culvert. This 
 system of drainage appears to have worked 
 satisfactorily when not interfered with For 
 the purposes of the tanal, tlie Government 
 expropriated a portion of lot 3()17 while it was 
 m possession of P. J , the father of the claim- 
 ants, and from whom they derived title thereto 
 In pursuance of an award of the otBcial arbi- 
 
 ^'**°/r''oo^'^o^'"'^"l'""'* P-'^'l ^^'^ tl^en proprie- 
 tor ?5,320.33, with interest from the date of 
 expropriation, for the area of land so taken 
 and a further sum of $4,035.10, for all damages 
 resulting from the expropriation. After lot 
 3617 came into the possession of the claimants 
 the occupant of one cf the farms adjoining it 
 obstructed the passage of water through the 
 said drain-ditch and caused the said lot to 
 become oyeiflowcd, whereby the claimants' 
 barns and their contents were injuriously 
 afTected 8ome time in the year 1853, and 
 before lot 3912 came into possession of P J 
 one of the claimants, the Government of Canada 
 had paid for and obtained ficm the then owner 
 certain easements and servitudes for the pur- 
 poses of the taid canal, and, in the exercise of 
 the rights so acquired by the Ciown, damage 
 resulted to the lot and buildings erected thereon 
 after they came into the possession of the last 
 named claimant. Upon a claim against the 
 Dominion Government for compensation for 
 damages and loss of i)i( fits sustained bv the 
 claimants in respect of the use and occupation of 
 the two lots, being submittid to the official 
 arbitrators they found against and dismissed 
 the same On appeal fr.ni the awaid of the 
 oHicial arbitrators : — 
 
 Held, (1.) That in respect of lot 3617 in- 
 asmuch as conii.tiu^ation for all future diim- 
 ages arising Irom the expropriation had been 
 paid to the claimants' grantor {attleiir) while he 
 was in possessicn, no right of action for such 
 damages accrued to the claimants unless, as was 
 not the case here, another exproi riation had 
 been made, or s( me new work performed, cans- 
 xng damages of a character not falling within 
 the limits of those ari.smg from the first expro- 
 priaf ,.-'. Moreover, if such new damages had 
 arisen prior to the said claimants coming into 
 possession of the lot, any right of action there- 
 lor could only have been exercised by the claim- 
 ants grantor {avlebr). 
 
 2. That in respect to lot 3912, the claimant 
 must abide by the easements and servitu(lp<. 
 over and upon the property created by his 
 grantor {nutetir), and tl.at the claim for dam- 
 ages arising out of the txcitisc of such rights 
 
 288 
 
 by the Government was not well fonml,,! 
 JackHon V. The ijwni, 1 Ex. O. R. 144. 
 
 P. n. I. Railway - 2;y.,7 of Xov-Evtr,, „r 
 tommimoim-^ im Lnml Tiihii.]— Under an \/t 
 of the Legislature of Prince Edward Islniid' v.^ 
 Vict. ch. 4, sec. 13, the Commissioners who i, i,l 
 charge of the construction of the-Prince Edw,'i,l 
 Island Railway were authorized to enter i,r„n 
 and take possession of any lands required r„r 
 the tracks of the railway, and to the end tl, ,t 
 such taking should operate as a dedication to 
 the pub ic of such lands, they were rc(,uire,l to 
 lay ofT the same by metes and bounds and rccoi.l 
 a tlescription and plan thereof in the office „f 
 the Registrrr of Pceds and Keeper of Plans for 
 the jsland. I.y arrangement between th^ Cum 
 missioners and the defendant the boundary li„t 
 between the railway and the hitter's premins 
 was deflected frc m f he course originally intende.l 
 so that the same might not interfere with lis 
 buildings, and the land damages were paid j,ui 
 boundary fences erected and maintained i„ 
 accordance with such arrangement. Coniii,i.s 
 sioners subsequently appointed recorded in tl,V 
 othce of such Registrar a description and i,h„ 
 which covered the lard that their predecc.^is 
 had by arrangement left in possession .,f tl,e 
 defendant, but they never laid off the ganie ly 
 met^s and bounds, nor were in possession tlitic- 
 
 Held, that they had not complied with tlie 
 statute, and that the Crown had not acqiiiiMl 
 ^"e to such land. Tht Queen v. Shj.vorlh <> 
 
 ^fiilvi&y—Eiprofriation of u Baihvoy Im i/i, 
 C,ow„-Specint Act-" Prf.int Valve of i\\.rk 
 \ -^'^ovauce for Cajdtal EjcpendeU 1„ l.Vil. 
 way-]— 1 he plaintiff company had entered into 
 an agreement with the Dominion Gcvenin cut 
 to construct, in consideration of a certain -v,], 
 sidy per mile, a line of railway between Ox:, id 
 and J^ew Glasgow, K. S. They entered upon 
 the constiuctior of the railway, but when it (vs 
 partially completed abandoned active woi k iiiK-n 
 It for lack of funds. The Government, having 
 previously obtained from Parliament authority 
 to pay all claims standing rgainst the ccmrnrv 
 on account of their partial construction of the 
 line, and to set the same oflF against the crm- 
 I Pf "^-^ Bubsidy, was empowered by 50-51 Vict 
 j ch.^/, see. 1, to acquire "by purchase, surrender 
 ( or expropriation the worlds constructed and pro- 
 perty owned by the said company " paying tluie. 
 tor the amount adjudged by the Court " f(,r the 
 present value of the work done on the said lino 
 ot i^iiway by the said compcny " ;— 
 
 Held, that the statute contemplated the takin" 
 of all the works constructed by the company and 
 not a portion thereof ; and where a portion only 
 was taken compensation should be assessed in 
 respect of the total value of the works. 
 
 (2) That the words "present value of the woik 
 clone as contained in section 1 of the sain Act, 
 should, in view of tiip preamble and surroundiiiK 
 circumstances, be construed to mean the value 
 of the works constructed and the property ov \d 
 by the company at the time of the passii g of 
 the Act. " 
 
 m That the word •• value '• as used iu the Ad 
 must be taken to mean the value of the property 
 to the company and not to the Government ; and 
 tl.at ecmpensation for the taking should bo 
 
28a 
 
 not woll foiiiKki) 
 [. C. R. 144. 
 
 'ff of NoD-Evtrii „f 
 ^•<».]— Under an' .Ad 
 5 Edward Islnnd, u 
 iimissioners wlio li.id 
 if the-Prince Edwiad 
 H'ized to enter uj i,n 
 y lands required f»r 
 , and to the ei:d tliat 
 as a dedication ti> 
 ley were rcciuirtd to 
 .d bounds and rui.nl 
 ^reof in the oflitc (,f 
 Keeper of Phins for 
 it between th>.. (Vm. 
 t tlie boundary iiiit 
 he latter's prennVts 
 ; originally iiiteiidcil, 
 t interfere with |;:s 
 iia.ges were paid .niul 
 and maintained in 
 ngenient. Conimis- 
 ted recorded in tLt; 
 lescription and plun 
 ; their predcet^M rs 
 n possession of the 
 !aid off the same 1 y 
 in possession tlitre- 
 
 complied with tlie 
 1 had not atijniiul 
 tetn V. SUjivonh, 2 
 
 of a Eaihcoy /,i/ ilm 
 <nt Valve </ iVork 
 tl Jiujmideil ill J.'nil- 
 y had entered into 
 ninion Gcvcrnnoiit 
 1 of a certain tuL- 
 ay between Oxfird 
 I'hey entered uprjii 
 y, but when it was 
 d active woik upon 
 overnnient, having 
 rliament authority 
 ainst the ccnipry 
 construction of tlie 
 F against the ccm- 
 rcd by 50-51 Vict. 
 urchase, surrender 
 nstruotcd and pro- 
 iny'' paying thtie- 
 he Court "f(,r the 
 le on the said line 
 
 nplatedthetiiking 
 ,' the company and 
 ere a portion only 
 jld be assessed in 
 J works. 
 
 value of the « ork 
 1 of the saiil Act, 
 B and surrounding 
 o mean the value 
 le property ov -^il 
 of the passirg of 
 
 IS used in tile Aa 
 le of the property 
 Jovernment ; and 
 iking should he 
 
 289 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 assessed at the fair value of the property at the 
 
 time contemplated by the Act *^ *^ "^ '^^ *'"^ 
 
 (4) The company were iu possession of a ritht 
 
 of way that had been acquired by proceed uL 
 
 SJ^i^'SiTct;;: a^td¥?^ 
 
 299 
 
 ai-l of the company's umleitikint-. mkl tl.p 
 
 s^zt rtLro!," tJ"" J" "' •'" » 
 
 i™,.,ii.,, p...e„i,r i,™',,'*";' I' 
 
 tbe t t e to such l-,n, in Vi " n ^" '° ^'^^^ 
 
 (2) Under section 11 of the siid Anf +j, 
 compensation monev for anv in.wf^ A^'^^tJie 
 
 Mackey78, referred to T In I, ^''■' ' 
 
 -' Ex. C. R. 311 ^^" ^"^"* ^- ^cCnnhj, 
 
 matt; witrir"Th^^ d"f' \'''''' ^-^ ^"« 
 
 not appear to h/vo . i '''^f'''"'"nt. who doe.s 
 
 tioned, wished toXv„„ ■ P''''so"s 'nen- 
 
 , with gates -but the .h 7™""*'' "^ '■'^'■' '«^-^' 
 to aufhorU such gates it T""-T'' tf "'"« 
 there should l,e\n v' ",'" ''"'="^«^' t'lat 
 a grade of onrin^w^.tvS ,/■'''"'"", "'"' 
 'lefcndant signed a It tL f"" '""''""■"^'y *'"-' 
 increased to Ine in Ke as thTir/''^""''" 
 with the access f-n J,;o ' . "" interference 
 way be IeSd.*° fc PJ^S^^--''' '"«iat 
 was not gran+ed •— ^ ^ ^"^ petition 
 
 , shewn that at the tim° hen n .hi ' °'*'''"'y 
 ! assessed there was no i tention I '''""T' '^'^'^ 
 overhead bridge and that, h construct an 
 
 the understaiuf^ng ?hat t w r't ' I •''^««^«'=''.°« 
 at rail level :_ "'ei e w ds to be a crossing 
 
 Held that the defendant was .,r,f K. 
 
 n. Liability. 
 
 1- .<4.s Carrierii. 
 
 ollZtvi:V' ''^^^r''^"^ '^■"^ the owner 
 
 Government^ radwav the r *'""'*"'" °f "^ 
 bridge or overhead /r'n= • ^'■°"'" **'''''=ted a 
 highway in such » - ^'^ "" " ''°''""" °^ "'« 
 from su^ch hTghwar o""d.? ''\ "If '""^'^ '''=<'*'«« 
 
 l-S'SnSr ihl G ^-^"^ ^^•'^' -'i'^^ ' ^° -- I 
 ^.d the ESpl^l^rir^l^^^^^^ 
 
 pellttfrtrecfi^'th"' "^ ""'"'^^ "^ "^^er 
 
 iiabie\o;?hey:'";s:!;'^t„^t?""" ^ "•?' 
 
 carried by a Government r^; ^ ''' "^ 'i"i"'"l« 
 the negliaenoe of ?^ railway, occcasione.l by 
 
 train lTXhsilhiof''°"^'"^''''^'Ke "f the 
 
 of Canada relating In? . "^ *''" i^=^rliamer,t 
 other pubhc wor f '^^.^'"^'''•■"'^"it railways and 
 
 v».v.*.„,i,»,\^c.''R.'^,a£ 
 
 ceSin^^SrulSn^^S^^n:;;.^,^ 1^^,38. 
 
 Railway were to L In ^''"f ^'f J'^*«r'=»J'"^ial 
 
 i the ow^er or his atnt ani tC ^''^'^'^'^^ ^V 
 
 risk of loss or in^fry ^'p "^,^^^« *«''"?'e'l all 
 
 ."d transportation ^of the sate""^'h?';"","« 
 tions were, bv section ai f j , ® regula- 
 
 the Act, and by sectfon to /i ' '^^^ "^ t"''' "^ 
 
 ( I 
 
 
 ;'■; li 
 
 ' ■ 1 i 
 
 i;iii 
 
 i Ml 
 
 IM J 
 
 IM 
 
i 
 
 291 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 '#^ if-: 
 
 292 
 
 <lai)iago arose from tho negligence, omission or 
 <lf fault of any of its officers, employees or ser- 
 vants ;— 
 
 Held, that the regulations did not relieve the 
 Crown fiom liability where such negligenoo was 
 shewn. 
 
 (4) The owner of a horse shipped in a box 
 car, tlie doors of which can only l)e fastened 
 from the outside, and wlio ix inside the car with 
 the horse, lias a riglit to exjiect that the con- 
 ductor of the train will see that the door of the 
 car is closed and properly fastened before tiie 
 train is started. Lai-ole v. Thi' Queen, 3 Ex 
 
 c. R. m. 
 
 for goods 8ol<l and delivered, or for work done 
 and materials provided to and for another party 
 and accepted by liini. ' 
 
 (2) Tluit tho Croun, having referred tlio claiir. 
 to arbitration, having raised no legal objection 
 to tlie investigation of the claim before- the 
 arbitrators, and not liaving cross-,appealcd from 
 their award, must be assumed to have waived 
 all right to object to tlie validity of the second 
 contract put forward by tlio claimants. Slitrn 
 V. The Qucni, 1 Ex. C. 1!. .301. 
 
 2. On Contracts. 
 
 Carriage of Mails— yl utlwrittj of Poxt master- 
 Oeneral to Hind the Crown.]— \n action will not 
 lie against the Crown for breach of a contract for 
 carrying mails for nine montlis at the rate of 
 J< 10,000 a year, made by parol witli the Post- 
 master-General and acccjited by the contractor 
 by letter, notwithstanding it was partly per- 
 formed, as, if a permanent contract, being for 
 a larger sum than §1,000 it could not be made 
 without the authority of an order in council, 
 and if temporary it was revocable at the will of 
 the Poxtniaster-fieneral. Hiimphriii v. Jlie 
 Queen, 20 S. C. R. 591. 
 
 Construction of Public Work — Material 
 Cliunyi' in Plans, etc.— Wairer.]- Tlie appellants 
 entered into a contract witli the Dominion Gov- 
 ernment to construct a bridge for a specified 
 sum. After the materials necessary for its con- j 
 struction according to the original plans and : 
 .specifications had been procured, the Govern- ' 
 iiieut altered the plans so mucli tliat an entirely i 
 new and more expensive structure became 
 involved. Tiie appellants were then given new 
 plans and specifications by tlie Chief Engineer 
 of Public Works, the proper officer of the Gov- 
 ernment in that behalf, and were directed by 
 him to build tlie bridge upon the altered plans, 
 being at the same time informed that the prices 
 for the work would be subsequently ascertained. 
 They thereupon proceeded with the construc- 
 tion of tlie bridge. Under tho provisions of 
 tho written contract, the Chief Engineer was 
 required to make out and certify tlie final esti- 
 mate of the contractors in respect of the work 
 <lone upon the bridge ; and upon the comple- 
 tion of the bridge, a final estimate was so made 
 and certified, whereby the appellants were 
 declared to be entitled to a certain amount. 
 The appellants, however, claimed to bo entitled 
 to a much larger amount, and their claim was 
 ultimately referred by the Government to the 
 official arbitrators, who awarded them a sum 
 slightly in excess of that certified to be due 
 in the final estimate. Ou appeal from this 
 award : — 
 
 Held, (1) That section 7 of .SI Vict. ch. 12, 
 which provides "that no deeds, contracts, 
 documents or writings shall be deemed to be 
 binding upon the Department of Pul>lic Works, 
 or shall be held to bo acts of the Minister of 
 Public Works unless signed and scaled by him 
 or his deputy, and countersigned by the Secre- 
 tary, " only refers to executory contracts, and 
 Joes not aflfect the right of a party to recover 
 
 j Construction of Public Work— Delai/ i,, 
 
 i Exircisiwj Crouii's /{it/lit to Insju-ct Mnti'rink 
 —Indi'jhnilent Promise hy Cr<iwn'.i Serraiil li- 
 lt was a term in suppliant's contract with die 
 I Crown for tlie construction of a public work 
 , that certain timber required in such constnic- 
 I tion should be treated in a special ma..ner, to 
 the satisfaction of tlie proper officer in that 
 behalf of tlie Department of Railways „n(l 
 Canals. By another term of the contract it 
 was declared that the express covenants and 
 agreements co!itained therein should be the 
 only ones upon wliich any rights against the 
 Crown sliould be foiinde<l I)v tlie sup'iliant 
 The suppliant, immeiiiatcly after entering upon 
 the execution of his contract, notified A. the 
 proper officer of the department in that behalf 
 that he intended to procure the timber at a 
 I certain place and have it treatcil there in the 
 I manner specified, be for. s.iipinent. A. approved 
 j of the suppliant's proposal, and promised to 
 appoint a suitaldj person to inspect tlie timber 
 at such place. The inspector was not appointed 
 1 until a considerable time afterwards, and by 
 reason of such delay the suppliant had to pay a 
 j higher rate of freight on the timber tliau he 
 otherwise would have had to pay, and \vm 
 compelled to carry on his work in more 
 unfavourable weather and at greater cost, tor 
 which he claimed damages : — 
 
 Held, on demurrer to the petition, that tlie 
 Crown was not bound under the contract to 
 have the inspection made at any particular 
 place ; and that in view of the 98th section of 
 The Government Railways Act, 1881, and the 
 express terms of the contract, A. had no jiowei 
 to vary or add to its terms, or to bind the 
 Crown by .any new promise. 
 
 (2) The suppliant s contract contained the fol- 
 lowing clause ; " The contractor shall not have 
 or make any claim or demand, or bring any 
 action, or suit, or petition against Her Majesty 
 for any damage which he may sustain by rea- 
 son of any delay in the jirogress of the work 
 arising from the acts of any of Her Majesty's 
 agents ; and it is .agreed that, in the event of 
 any such delay, the contractor shall have such 
 further time for the completion of tlie work as 
 may be fixed in tluat behalf by the Minister " :- 
 ^ Held, that this clause covered del.ay liy the 
 Government's engineer in causing an inspection 
 to be made of certain material whereby the sup- 
 pliant suffered loss. Jilai/es v. The' <}iimi, 2 
 Ex. C. R. 403. AflSrmed by the Supreme Court, 
 23 S. C. K. 454. 
 
 Illegality of Contract— /dominion EkctioM 
 Act, IS74.] — 'I'he information alleged an agree- 
 ment witli Her Majesty whereby in coiLsillera- 
 tion of the conveyance by the Intercolouial 
 Raihv.ay of certain passengers between certain 
 stations, the defendants agreed to pay Her 
 
CROWN. 
 
 i- •! 
 
 Majesty, through the proper officers of that 
 
 p,i88u j,erH jvt the rate therein meutiuneil -ih 
 H^-recd to between the defen.lants am" ueh 
 ofh.er.. he .lefen.huUs aan.itting the a, re.^ 
 l..«ut a. al ege.l, «o„«ht to avoid it by seUin. 
 up aa a defence that «uah passengers Lvec"^. 
 di'on" '•'^'" «'«"^^ ''y "- °f "-•"«"-• 
 field (m .lemurrer to the pica, to be no answer 
 to -e l..e.ch of contract Alleged. jV(Z,l 
 V. /'uiiliof, 2 Ex. C. K. 49. o • •■ '"= V'"<;;t 
 
 Measure of Damages for Breach of Con 
 
 8M 
 
 Measure of Damages for Breach of Oon 
 
 .e^f^:S!^-^-Orow„a.aSuh 
 
 lioii 01 K. .V C. ch. 37, do not aijply to the case of 
 an cxeouted contract ; an.l wliere the CrowTha 
 fo Tf t.'" '^""«Htof work and hibour loue 
 fm It, or of goods or materials sunolied to iV,.^ 
 pt services re„de.e.l to it by the si t^t the 
 .nstaace ana reqnest of its officer a t ng wit£ 
 
 ^^ofthes^ne. HaU 'H^;!: ^Z,ts ^^ 
 
 LeStfon *°^/?'' ^''^^'•^"^nt to Promote 
 
 l\>w.ro MinUin- of Interior oL^, iZeT 
 AnnmsteroroiKcer of the Crown caunobil;^ 
 >.he Crown without the authority of law 
 
 trac orthe breach of which the CrowVwould" 
 be ha, e m damages. R. ,S. c. ch. 22 sec 4 
 
 C. R. 125; and,/y„« v. The Queen, 3 Ex C R 
 •U, re erred to. Quebec Skatina Club v The 
 Qiieeii, 3 Ex. C. R. 387. ^ 
 
 3. IiKercoloHial Railway, 
 fof^'^'lf^Z ^^^^^^^-^on.Liabidf,, of Crown 
 <.o/«/«Hy.J_lhe Urown is not bound to keen 
 cro ,iT"i ^''^ "'"""'l^^'y 'litehes between farms 
 
 CrSt '"t:,J:\fJI/:^'- «';• «■ 'l-^-.^ot make the 
 
 Grand Tmnk IJ.il '"'r'? "'" «'"'«'*ion« of the 
 "finu iiiink RaUway Company in resueet of 
 
 of n„Pl.' "^ '"* '"'"'"''VV i>i the Province 
 
 lace water to land cnissf.,1 l.i, n i 
 
 way Act) ■.n,lH.,M' '•*'''',': ^"tercohmial liail- 
 
 tion of right :- = '"- ' '°'"^ ''^ P«ti- 
 
 cb^pl'';.'''''"' ","''" *^'"' '^"> section of 31 Vict 
 
 A. (K. Lo. V. J he Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 433. "' 
 
 4. MunkljHil Taxes. 
 
 See Cihj of Qui-bec ^•. n,, o„^e„ o ]''v f n 
 4oO ; Quirt v. 77*,- o,„,„ ,9 i r R rui , 
 
 f>. S<',jU,jt„a of 0,f„„ a,id Stmiil,. 
 
 Sx mo7 11j'~:?' '»»"./"PP="»1 tim. tit 
 u"A incnimueii was in bone at a warcborw.. f.,.. 
 Packages used by the (irand TiCk R Iwav 
 
 (••^il" IQ) On \!- V l''"'.tlie duty thereon 
 
 C stom Ho""""^ !'"' "^"^ *° ""^ foremai" f the 
 Uistom House carters, wlio in turn delivered it 
 to one of his carters, who took it, wit . other 
 Parcels, and delivered it to a che ker a the 
 
 ,U-i 
 
 \\ 
 
 III' 
 
 r AW 
 
 i "l-'it 
 
296 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 29& 
 
 I);!?;- 
 
 Hit:. 
 
 I 
 
 lili 
 
 lii 
 
 il ip ;, 
 
 CustomH examining wartliouse. The box was 
 then put on a lift and sent up to the third door 
 of the huihling, where it remained onu or two 
 days. It was tlien l)ronght down to the second 
 floor and examined, when it was found that the 
 diauionds had been stolen— the theft having been 
 committed by removing the bottom of the box. 
 Althougli tlie evidence tending to shew that the 
 theft was committed while the box was at the 
 Customs examining warehouse at Montreal was 
 not conclusive, the Court drew that inference 
 for the purposes of the case : — 
 
 Held, that, admitting the diamonds were stolen 
 while in the examining warehouse, the Crown is 
 not liable therefor. 
 
 (2) In such a case the Crown is not a bailee. 
 The temporary control and custody of goods 
 imported into Canada, which the law gives to 
 the officers of the Customs to tl end that such 
 goods may be examined and appraised, is given 
 for the purjidfe of the better securing tlie col- 
 lection of the public revenue. Without such a 
 power the State would be ex]i08ed to frauds 
 against which it would be impossi}ile to protect 
 itself. For the loss of any goods while so in the 
 custody of the Customs officers the law affords 
 no remedy, except such as the injured person 
 may have against the officers through whose 
 personal act or negligence the loss happens. 
 Cor,se V. The Queev, 3 Ex. C. R. 13. 
 
 6° 52'. It was alleged that the persons in 
 charge of the train were guilty of negliginca 
 in passing this curve and a switch near it ut 
 too great a rate of speed. On that point the 
 evidence was contradictory, and, having regurd 
 to the rule as to the burden of proof stated aliove 
 it was :— ' 
 
 Held, that a case of negligence was not niarlo 
 out. DuM v. The Queev, 3 Ex. C. K. 147. 
 
 Injury to Person en a Public Work- 
 
 Brakeswan'^ Duty in J'li/tiiii/ Childrtn ijf ( ,ir 
 •rhni Tre.ipaMer.'i~I)amafjeK.]~rhe Crown i» 
 liable for an injury to the peison received (ii a 
 public work resulting from negligence of which 
 its officer or servant, while acting within the 
 scope of his duty or employment is guilty 
 Ctti/ of Quebec v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. '.'")'2 
 referred to. "' 
 
 (2) One who forces a child to jump off a iiii|. 
 way carriage while it is in motion is guilt v i,f 
 negligence. The fact that the child had' no 
 right to be upon such carriage is no defnue 
 to .nn action for an injury resulting from sikIi 
 negligence. JUarthi v. The Queev, 2 Ex. C . R. 
 328. See the next case. 
 
 Common Employment— iow of Quebec.]— 
 A petition of right was brought by F. to recover 
 damages for the death of his son" caused by the 
 
 negligenceof servants of the Crown while engaged 
 in repairing the Lachine Canal :— 
 
 Held, aflirining the decision of the Exchequer 
 Court.Taschercau.J., dissenting, that the Crown 
 was liable under SO & 51 Vict. ch. 16, sec. 16 (c) ; 
 and that it was no answer to the petition to say 
 that the injury was caused by a fellow servant 
 of the deceased, the case being governed by the 
 law of the Province of Quebec, in which the 
 doctrine of common employment has no place 
 The Qveni v. Fition, 24 S. C. R. 482. 
 
 Implied Liability.]— laches cannot be im- 
 puted to the Crown, and, except where a 
 liability has been created by statute, it is not 
 answerable for the negligence of its offii . rs 
 employed in the public service. Burrouiihs v 
 The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 293. 
 
 Injury to Person by Accident on a 
 Oovernment Railway— ftorfpn <f Proof- 
 Latent Difict in Axle of Gar— Undue Speed iu 
 fassxng Sharp Curve.]— On the trial of a petition 
 claimmg damages for personal injuries sustained 
 m an accident upon a Government railway 
 alleged to have resulted from the negligence of 
 the persons in charge of the train, the burden of 
 proof is upon the suppliant. He must shew 
 affirmatively that there was negligence. The 
 fact of the accident is not sufficient to establish 
 ».primdjride case of negligence. 
 
 The immediate cause of the accident was the 
 breaking of an axle that was defective. It 
 T»a8 shewn, however, that great care had been 
 used in its selection and that the defect was 
 latent and not capable of detection by any 
 ordinary means of examination open to the 
 railway nlTicials. The train jiad immediately 
 before the accident passed a curve which, at 
 »t8 greatest degree of curvature, was one of 
 
 Injury to Person on Public Work— /'j,- 
 
 wn>/;o?).]— Held, reversing the judgment of 
 the Exchequer Court, 2 Ex. C. R. 328, that evm 
 assuming 50-51 Vict. ch. 16 gives an aoti,.n 
 against the Crown for injury to the pt-r.-on 
 received on a public work resulting from nLj.'li- 
 gence of which its officer or servant is guilty 
 (upon which point the Court expresses no 
 opinion), such Act is not retroactive in its ttitct 
 and gives no right of action for injuries rcccivtd 
 prior to the passing of the Act :— 
 
 Held, also, that even assuming that under 
 the common law of the Province of Quebec, or 
 statutes in force at the time of the injury 
 received, the Crown could be held liable the 
 injury complained of in this case having 1 iin 
 received more than a year before the filing of 
 the petition the right of action was prtscrihtd 
 under Articles 2262 and 2267 C. C. 
 
 Per Patterson, J,— The Crown is made liuWe 
 for damages caused by the negligence ot its 
 servants operating Government railways bv 44 
 Vict. ch. 25, R. S. C. ch. 38, but as the petition 
 of right in this case was filed after the pnssiiii; 
 of 50-51 Vict. ch. 16 (1887), the claimant becnnje 
 subject to the laws relating to prescription in 
 the Province of Quebec, and his action was 
 prescribed. The Queen v. Martin, 20 S. C R 
 240. 
 
 Injury to Property by Government Rail- 
 way.]— A filly, belonging to the suppliant, 
 was run over and killed by a train upon the 
 Intercolonial Railway. It was shewn on the 
 trial that at the time of the accideui, the train 
 ■was being run faster than usual in order to 
 make up time, that it had just passed a station 
 without being slowed and was approaching a 
 crossing on the public highway at fidl speed. 
 The engineer admitted that he saw something 
 on the track, which he did not recognize as a 
 horse. He, however, paid no attention to it, 
 and made no attempt to stop his train until after 
 It was struck : — 
 
 Held, that the engineer, as a servant of the 
 Crown, was guilty of negligence, for which the 
 Crown was liable under R. S. C. ch. 38, sec. 23,. 
 
297 
 
 *n(l 50-61 Vict. ch. 
 
 GROWN. 
 
 wok tell from u part of u ditf, allelvl to 1 e tl?i -n ^ ''• ^'■''- ■*^' '""f'^"'-''' '"• ' 
 
 property of the Cvown, uiu ler the J a !l ? ^''^ '"Jury ooinplaiiied of |,y tlie s.mnlUnf. 
 ttuebao blookiug up H public tho,ughnr1 tn MsTr' l'^^^- '''l''"^ "' '' l>'^^^^^^ 
 that city known as Champlain «^.'oett ^8uc^ oi!h "'"•' '^ '^"'«'' »^^«tion at the eitadel .n 
 tn extent that eommunioation /as rnml^r- . '''"r'^''- '" "'" year 1889. The fallinir nf fll^ 
 impuHsible between the two e.U thereof Rv ' T'' ""' ^"'""'^ °' ''"^tened by the dil. Ir^^^^^ 
 
 that this aoei.lent was eaused by the oxecutb, < hnkl ' ^"".^V"""^'' '""' '^""»^«'l to become 
 ofworksbytheCrownwhiehhad thoeSo 'm^^^^^^ "'' ""'" ' ^^^ '='^'*''^1 '""1 works™! 
 breaking the flank Hide of the cliff l.v fh. i i ' '''=f?"'=« were under the coutrol of the r m.., .• i 
 firing of gun« fro.n the citadel, and e t t thl^ ">•' '"ntieB, and before they beca e iK'f' 
 no precautions had been taken' by he c:'own io I ^!,?cl "^ *^«.^^7'-'P'nent of tanad Th„ /xis-' 
 prevent the occurrence of bucI. an VSnt ' U? °! *'"' ''l!"" ^»<l of the defect wL not 
 1'he Crown demurred to the peti L o, / ,« ' '"^.- "'''' "^ *'''' I'^tter (fovernment 
 
 ground, uueralia, that no acL wi I L'S ( ^1,7^ "°^'\''""'°f-^'' ""''' ^'f^'''" t'^^^^^^^^ 
 enforce a claim toumled on the negligence Ire ' Tsso „? "'"■'^"' "'T'^y ^"« ""^'l^- I" the V"^ 
 '=^roST'-' "' "'^ ^--"-^-«^M'Sety3^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 Held. (I) Tliere bein^ no allegation in H I ^^« »'»« «ity engineer of Qnebec without fh^!" 
 petition that the propertj menttSt r. lH^ tZZZ'''' '^'I • ^J^'^'^"-' ^ «-Pe ng tha[ 
 ot (lerence or other public work or imrf ^f ^ T "^'^ '^"y <lischarge of water from t Th« 
 p«bhc work, and it not appearing theiein t'tT^^"" indications, moreover, were not such «^ 
 
 .ny officer or servautoftheTvown\Iu"\XLrhe"^^^^^^ '''"'''""' "^ '^ 'lofeotTvV ir 
 «r employment in connection with fh,.r...Lyi ^.^^***'' that came--' ' ° "rain. 
 
 or employment m connection with the propertv 
 mentioned, or that the acts cmplained of^were 
 committed by such officers white acting" wiTldn 
 the scope of their duties or employment.^o case 
 was shewn by the suppliants in respect of whfch 
 the Court had jurisi ction under tliP I.V, i, 
 Court Act, soil Vict. ch. iS. sec ?«'„'"" 
 _ (2) [Tnder section 16 (c) of the said Act the 
 Crown 18 liable m .iamages for anydeath o7i„ju v 
 to the person or to property on any publL worl 
 resultnigfrom the negligence of anyofficeror 
 servant of the Crown while acting withir'the 
 
 ?f "f h" tJut'es or employment. 
 
 ii) The Crown's immunity from liability for 
 
 V«e.«. 2 Ex. C. K. 262. -Vetthf Slto^^ 
 
 within a dist;;;cr;^",°:;^i^;:t;t^SS 
 
 reasonably have been supposed to b^ a n^tu^^ral 
 cMitsTf :-'" ""^ '^•^''^'*«- "■• -aeks^ri 
 
 Da?t'of'anv''nffi"''' Ttf "" n^gHgence on the 
 part ot any otiicer of the Crown in beini? ami 
 remaining ignorant of the existe oh ^^* ♦u- 
 drain amfof the defect in it "^"^"''^"^ "^ t^w 
 
 Qiu,-re whether the place where the aocidenJ 
 happened was part of tL public work' 
 
 "'''"''"', the Crown may be liahlH ilfhn,, i iu 
 injury complained of doe's Tot =.5 .al /y oSr on 
 ^.'., within the limits of, a public wo/k clVJf 
 Qu.hecy. The Qu,:m, 3 Ex. C. R. J64 .SWth« 
 next case. '** ''"^ 
 
 I AT^'*^"'^ to Property on a PubUo Work- 
 Injury to Property on a Public Work i f""-''-'"'""''*'-] -50-51 Vict. cb. 16. sees. 16 and 58 
 be Crown s n),l» f„„ „., :..;.•.. . "• "'o»'K J- confers nnr.n fl,„ ^.,K;„„i ' ,"• '""uuo» 
 
 TheC>oWisl.;r.lelo;^an^ijuryTp^„^^^^^^ 
 
 a,n,i.l,c work occasioned by the neglige 'f its I *°'7'"tam a petition of right against'feCr^' 
 officer or servant acting within the s.N.ni. !.f k- ^^ 'I'^'^ages in respect of a tort7T-ischer,.a,, 
 dnty. That liability*' is n m.'*: 'Pf ^^.J^'^ expressing no opiiA^on on this r>in. '''*"■ 
 
 dnty. That liability is rccogm.ed in 
 Exchequer Court Act, sec. 16 (c) l)Mr h^A f 
 or:g n in the earlier statute .3.3 ^'iit. ch o^ "' 
 (-'.) Prior to 1887, ivhen che Exchenuer Conrf 
 Act was passed, a petition of ri^t would no 
 he for damages or loss resulting from such an 
 >n ury, the subject's remedy being liniited to « 
 submission of his claim to%he offi iaf aJbit^a 
 tos with, m certain cases after 1879, a„ Ippea 
 ^ the Kxchequer Court and thence to thP 
 Supreme Court of Canada. '"^ 
 
 (3. 1 It is not tlie duty of an officer of the Crown 
 et rnr.lt *°?P"blic work at l^ir::," 
 
 against the Crown 
 -gniJL°^£P^^iif=U.S.^^ 
 
 'determine ^,Uer alia: (c) Every claim al.W 
 the Crown arising out of any death or injury^ 
 the person or to the property, o„ any^nubl^ 
 «;ork, resulting from the^^negligence'oF anv 
 officer or servant of the Crolii while acti^^ 
 within the scope of his duties or employmen^^ 
 (d) Every claim against the Crown a^fsi^ 
 under any law of Canada. . . Tnis^f 
 
 the Dominion Government became possessed 
 of the property m the city of Quebec on wS 
 the citadel is situated. Many years before t£ 
 
 d.Wl ni^m^T ^.^Ti^hlnKS^'S ^el^^t '^^^^^''^^S^ 
 
 ered 'Tl^'""'-""!°'^' ""'* '' ^^"» "Ot discov- 
 
 ;^.tok.wofthe=;^'rXr?^epub. 
 
 1«T fi,„ -i. — ■ . "^ ''"'' premises in 
 
 &re^877Th1"^/"'''.°^^^''^'='^ '^"'l "t^^^s. Be- 
 the watJr ™fnT. !l''1?T« '^'^"ked up. and 
 
 -..»., . p»u. ™^ir £- IS ^^r^ss^^EESts 
 
 §i 
 
 > :l 
 
 1! 
 
 :|i: 
 
 ' is 
 
 ^'^i 
 
 ,p 
 
 If! 
 
 ! ' ( 
 
299 
 
 CROWN 
 
 30Q 
 
 i:!] 
 
 li i 
 
 I h 
 
 from tbo cliff into a street of the city below 
 causing great tliunage, for whifli compensation 
 was eliiinjiil from tlie (iovcrnment :— 
 
 Helil, per TaHciierenu, (iwyniio and King, JJ., 
 afiirming tlie .loeision of the l';xebe(iiier Court, 
 3 hx. (,'. H. 104, tliat aa the injury to the pro' 
 IK'rty r)f the eity di.l nol occur upon a inMic 
 work, Huh-seotion (r) of the uhove Act did not 
 make the (!rown liable, and, morecjver, tli( ro 
 WUH no evidence that the injury waH ( auaed by 
 tlie ne^'ligeiice of any otfieer <jr servant of the 
 Crown wliile acting witldn the scope of his 
 auties or emidoynient : — 
 
 Hel<l, per Strong, C.J., and Fournier, ,1., that 
 while subsection (<•) of tbo Act did not apply to 
 the case, the city -.vas . ntitled to relief under 
 subsection (r/) ; that the words "any claim 
 against the Crown" in that .subsection, with- 
 out the additional words, would include a claim 
 for a tort ; that the added words " arising under 
 any law of Canada" do not ninessarily mean any 
 prior existing law or statute law of the Domin- 
 ion, but mi,L;ht be interpreted as meHiiing the 
 general law of any Province of Canada, and 
 even if the meaning be restricted to the statute 
 law of the Oonunion the effect of section 58 of 
 50-51 Vict. ch. 10, is to reinstate the provision 
 contained in section of the repealed Act, R. 
 H. C. ch. 40, which gives a r.inedy for injury 
 to property in a Ciise like the present : that this 
 case should be decideil according to the law of 
 Quebec, rcLnilating the rights anil duties of pro- 
 prietors of land situated on different levels; and 
 that under such law the Crown, as proprietor of 
 tone! on the higher level, wa,s lx.nn(r to keep the 
 drain thereon in good repair and 'as not relieved 
 from liability for damage caused by neglect to 
 do so by the ignorance of its officers of the exis- 
 tence of the drain : — 
 
 Hehl, also, per Strong, C..!., and Fournier, J., 
 that ludepoMdently of the enlarged jurisdiction 
 conferred by 50-51 Vict. ch. 10, the Crown would 
 be liable to damages for the injury complained 
 of, not as for a tort but for a breach of its duty 
 as owner of the superior heritage liy altering its 
 natural state to the injury of the inferior pro- 
 prietor. Oil!/ of Quebec v. The Queen, 24 S C 
 
 while acting within the scope of his duties »„\ 
 employment, and therefore came within tho 
 meaning of J50-5I Vict. ch. 10, sec. 10 (r) whi.h 
 provides a remedy in such eases. Bmilii v '/A, 
 Qxueii, ii Kx. C. K. 127.3. "^ 
 
 6. Ordern-in-Cowint. 
 
 Order-In Council Pledging the Oovem- 
 ment to Promote Legislation.]— An onl. r .,f 
 His F.xccdency the(iovernor-(i€!ii(ral in Coiiinil 
 pledging (he Government to promote legisl.iti.n 
 does not constitute a contract for the bre.u i, nf 
 which the Crown would be liabl-> in ilam;i . 
 Queher Skating Cluh v. The (Jiiecn, 3 Ex." (' 
 R. .'187. 
 
 Tor/x. 
 
 Personal Injuries Received on Public 
 
 Works.]— The suppliant alleged in his petition 
 that on a certain datf he was driving slowly 
 along a road in the liocky Mountain Park, 
 rf.\V.l,, when his buggy came in contact with 
 a wire stretched across the road, whereby the 
 suppliant was thrown from the buggy to the 
 wound and sustained severe bodily injury. He 
 farther alleged that the Rocky Mountain Park 
 ^8 a public road of Canada under the control 
 Of the Minister of the Interior and the Governor 
 in Council, who had .inpointed one S. superin- 
 tendent thereof ; that's, had notice of the ob- 
 struction to travel caused by the wire and had 
 negligently failed to remove it, contrary to his 
 duty in that behalf ; and that the Crown was 
 liable in damages for the injuries so received by 
 him. The Crown demurred to the petition on 
 the ground that the claim and cause of action 
 were founded in tort, and could not be main- 
 tained or enforced : — 
 
 Held, that the petition disclosed a claim 
 ^amst the Crown arising out of an injury to 
 the person ofl a public work resulting from the 
 negligence of an officer or servant of the Crown 
 
 Acts Authorized b.v Statute ~ /'/ r./fr 
 Remedy for Damai/es Arininij Therefrom.] -The 
 suppliants tiled a petition of right claiming; 
 redress against the Dominion Oovernineiit f(,r 
 damages sustained by them by reason of tliu 
 partial expropriation of their railway tracks, 
 and incidental injury, owing to the extensieu of 
 the Intercolonial Railway into the city of 
 Halifax. The Crown demurred to the petitina 
 on the grounds that the acts in respect of which 
 the suppliants complained were authorized by 
 .'11 Vict. ch. 13, the Intercolonial Railway Act, 
 and that the suppliants had not shewn good 
 cause for relief against the Crown by petition of 
 right :— . ■' " 
 
 Held, that under the 14th section of 31 Vict. 
 ch. 13, the only remedy suppliants had was by 
 reference to the official arbitrators ; and, that 
 apart from this enactment, inasmuch as the 
 claim was founded in tort, no action could be 
 maintained against the Crown. lialijax Cilu 
 /.'. W. Co. V. The Quttn, 2 Ex. C. K. 433. 
 
 Injury to the Person on a Public Uork- 
 iiemidy — Prescription.] — The suppliant, «ho 
 was employed as a mason upon the Chainbly 
 Canal, a public work, was injured thromdi the 
 negligence of a fellow servant. Subseqii. iit to 
 the accident the Crown retained the suppliant iu 
 Its employ as a watchman on the canal, and in- 
 demnihed hiin for expenses incurred for medical 
 attendance :— 
 
 Held, that what was done was referable to 
 the grace and bounty of the Crown and did not 
 constitute such an acknowledgment of a right 
 of action as would, under Article 2227 T". C. L 
 C. , interrupt prescription. 
 
 Quiire : Does Article 2227 C. C. L. C. apply 
 to claims for wrongs as well as to actions foe 
 debt ? 
 
 Semite : That the Crown's liability for the 
 negligence of its servants rests upon statutts 
 passed prior to The Exchequev Court Act, SO-.Jl 
 \ let. cli. 10, and that the latter substituted a 
 remedy by petition of right or by a reference to 
 the Court for one formerly existing by a submis- 
 sion of the claim to the official arbitrators, with 
 an appeal to the Exchequer Court and tlionce to 
 the Supreme Court of Canada. Mariiai v. Jhi 
 Queen, 3 Ex. C. E. 118. 
 
 See the cases under sub-title 5. 
 
 Im 
 
301 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 8. Misn l/uiieoiin Canm. 
 
 S02 
 
 Damage to Property from Execution of 
 WorK9 on Government Railway - ParVl 
 h;mm, h, Olh-,r ,,/ rn>,-„ to Iml, mnii;, 0,ni.r 
 
 >rw ., /^./-"xJ^Th. cl n„u' /.rVrtV 
 
 having l.t,.«,i inj„n„u«ly uttocU.,! in the canyi.iL' 
 out by he U„„n of ..rtui,, im,,n,ve,n..nts^ 
 th- y,u-.l.i ,u„l tracks ot the lntem,l,M,iul lUil- 
 way at au.l near u. -tatum „. the o.ty of S , 
 John, M5 A., the el,ie, engineer of th.,,ai- 
 way, vcrhallv ug.ee.l with th,. el.u.nant.s that 
 the woriiH wfneh ,t wa. ■.eccasury to execute 
 on er to reHtore the.r property to itn former safe 
 am seryieeal. e condition, «houhl ho execute,! 
 umler the .liiction of M., the claimai N' 
 engineer, ancl that the ( rou „ wonl.i pay to the 
 clannantH the cost thereof. The exact extent 
 and character ot the works to he so execute 
 were never ,lefinit..Iy settled. The w rkb 
 exeeutcl under .M.'s uirection .xce.ded ^ hat 
 were necessary to r nunc the injury , lone, and 
 to a certain ext,.nt adde.l to ihe jiernianen 
 VHlne of the ^ lannant..' property, ij. ,lid not 
 act in had ta.th, but .r/ed in jil.lgn.ent The 
 work, howeve., was done upon an.f adjacent to; 
 he railu ay property, where it wa.s „|,j„ at al 
 times lo the inspection of the o. leers a ' 
 engineers of the railway, an.l the neocKv' y 
 excavations were made for M. |,y men employed 
 and paid on behalf o, the frowM". 'i he cuL was 
 referred o an ollicial referee to a.scertain t e 
 amount of dama,,es, if any, and he reported n ^ 
 favour of claimantM tor $l>,(i.-,o.,jo ^J^ ^. . j 
 
 .,";,'","»• ^" ''''r-'^ f™'" tliis .. port :- 
 Held (>.lhrming tlie report), that while the 
 claimants were entitled to take sncl. steps and 
 to execute such works as were necess'ary to i 
 make their property as good, safe and service- i 
 able as it was before the interfere,,, e therewith, 
 and o rccove,. troni the Cown the expenses' 
 thereby incurrcl, they were not entitled to i 
 unprove their water system and scrvi.,. at the 
 Cn.wns expense They were entitled to be I 
 
 ang;rr'^"^"^'-^'"i-^'"-.-tt:' 
 
 yl.) 'l'l";<liu.sti,.nof A.'sauthoiity.underthc 
 circumstance.,, to make a contract whei, by 
 
 rais"r: - ' '•' ''°"''' '^'^ '-•"*'='"'^'''' ""' '^ei"g 
 Held that the claimants were entitlcl, under 
 tl e contract ma,!e with A., to recover the cost 
 the works executed under M.'s direction 
 
 Jii. t. R. ,8. .Sec the next ease. 
 
 ' ini!,'i.v'' l'"' '-'''"5;'.;' '" '"'^' ''•"•"'«" iHVon.l any 
 , > Juiy done. '/•/,,. V"<'« v. S,. John WaUr 
 Lomiiiuwmcrx, 1!) .S. (J. R, ||>,-,. 
 
 pitches. )-The t.'rown is not under any 
 f'l'ligation to maintain .hams or backditcht'H 
 c'-Hstru.te.! under h'X Vict. eh. lit, see. \ (D ) 
 l>iili,tiid\-. The ijnini, •> Kx. C. R. -JSO. 
 
 Improvements under Mistake of Tltle- 
 
 ('>'"l'<.n.^a/io„-^Urruj,„lwH lUnl. |-- The delen- 
 daiits, o^^■„erM of land adj,.ining the bank of the 
 
 ami elevators and ma,le paths from the top of 
 
 the bank to the water's e.lge of the river to 
 
 nalde visit,.rs to descend to see the view, and 
 
 T! . J'-f Pensive repairs to the stairways, 
 
 elevators ,vnd paths were from time to time 
 necessary owm,. to their expo.e.l position. ,.,n,l 
 the defendants knew th.tt they Iwul no title to 
 the bank, which was vested in the Crown •- 
 . Held, that works oi this kii„l were not lastinir 
 .mproveme,,ts within the meaning of section :iO 
 of R..S. . ch. 100 an,l that both on this grouml 
 
 title the defendants could ii„t recover compensa- 
 
 S.„,hle- The section wouM not afTect the 
 Crown and the title being n. the Crown when 
 the improvements were made the Crown's 
 grantee wonhl take the land free from any hen 
 
 Jn .:ases c„mi„- within the section the 
 uinount by which the value „f the land has been 
 enhanced ,h to be allowed ,u„l the cost or value 
 ot the improvements is not the test :— 
 
 Held also, that the defendants were not 
 chargeable with the p,-otits made l,y them but 
 •Ji'ly with a fair occupation rent for the land 
 
 . u,lgmei,t of Street, J., varied. Cuminu. 
 
 Damages to Property ft-om Works Exe- 
 outed on Government Railway— /'(no/ Un 
 
 frtukm.j to liHlunniniOwuer.jur Cost, of Rtimirs 
 hyOihcn- oj th, CVo,-«.]-Held, attirmii/the 
 judgment ot the Exchecpier C ourt 2 Ex C 1 7s 
 that where by certain ^vork done by the (iovein- 
 meiit Railway authorities ■„ the city of i" 
 John the pipes for the water supply of the citv 
 were .nterered with, claimuntV w^ere entitl d 
 te recover for the cost reasonably and prone rlv 
 
 L^ , P';VP.e'ty to Its former safe and 
 
 serMceable condition, under an anaucement- ! 
 
 r^ntri: V" °'"1 ''"g"'-'- '' the Iwf nm:"t ! 
 th« „i'' — '• "Pf"-" his undertaking to indemnify i 
 
 ■toii'TTr ^'"" *''%r' "f *•'« «'^i^l ^vo <^' 
 arn?^i.i"'l V"'^'""''' JJ-- <^issenting on the ^ 
 ground that the chief engineer had notutl^rity | 
 
 Public Work - ro/M/,»f/ioM of ,1 (lortrn- 
 
 hat the r '"""'■ V^'^" Mipphants complain;^! 
 that the Crown, by it.-i servants, so necdurentlv 
 and nnskilfully constructcl a fish-way ,n a n ill- 
 <la,n usedt,. secure a hca,l „f water tV.r runnin,. 
 
 ml pieni.-es we,_e mjunously allected and 
 greatly depreciated in value : • 
 ,,:h *:'''L,'''"'t the fish-way was not a public work 
 M.thin the meaning of oO-ol Vict. ch. ](!, sec. 
 
 I « *'''• "".',, t'"'' ''"^ '^''•o"'» was not liable 
 I Brou-n v. /'/le (Ji,eii,,^3 Ex. C. R. 79. 
 
 I u"f'"° Work-Z;a7»«,7eN /Vom Conxtniction of. ^ 
 ,---\Miere he Crown, by the construction of a 
 
 Po t I.T.'r' ''"' '".'«'''^^>e'' with a right common 
 
 o he pub he, a privat.. owner of re^tl property 
 
 ose lands, or any right or interest therein, 
 
 luue not been injured by such interference, i^ 
 
 vlTf uU) t" ":"'P'^"^;'tion in the Exchequer 
 
 i «„«^ ' '^ ' '°"K ' 't ""'>• li'iPPe" that the injury 
 
 susta ned by him ,s gr..,iter in degree than that 
 
 sustained by other subjects of the Crown. 
 
 (^.) the injurious attbction of property by the 
 construction of a public work will not sustain a 
 c aim agamst tb,. Crown ba«-.-! upon clause (r) 
 5 0^1 vf. 'f 'r "^,'''f l^^«l»^'Juer Court Act 
 .liptin ■ '• '*?' "''"''' «'^''^8 the Court juris- 
 iction in rega,,l to clai,u8 arising out of m.v 
 death or injury to the person or to property on 
 
 
303 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 304 
 
 Kf!;n^;':;'^S^!^Zt.rfS!^oi:i';IS^ •" "7i«"""n i. to that o,t.... 
 
 aclii.u within the ««,,». nf m. ,1 .♦1.7. . " ^,"''' ' V""« .»"'««" the interference with h 
 
 IV. MiMrKLLANEoir.>< Cases. 
 
 an interforenco. Thf Qvrj-n v. Fl^h.r, '.» Jlx. (•' 
 
 Salariei* of Uoenae Inapeotom- .l;<;)>-orr// 
 J'// <,oi-tru„r Central in CommW/.J— On a claim 
 bronght by the Board of Lioenao Commisgioncr. 
 appointed nn.lor the Li(|uor F-iconge Aot, 18S3 
 for money., u.M out by them to licen.se inspec- 
 tors with the ap,)rovttI of the Dep.irtn.ent of 
 iMlaiKl |{evenue, but which were found to bo i Chose In Action. 1- Where a cho«n in „ »; 
 
 caTk; ".""-■'"'-"'.• ">'t"' "'^'""•"^ ^•''»"'' two i was assigned. ;„<.r J/;„ fo "the «e era ben 1^ 
 >LaM Liter were hxod by Order in (.'ouncirof cre.litors, all the parties inteZt mI I I 
 und^T_sectu.n .; of the said Li.uor License Act. | before the ronrt. and'^hrirown^yng '"!! 
 Heid amrming the h.dg.nent of the ^x J nlr"'"' ""*'""" «'^^" ^"^^^ '""-'" An- 
 
 coul'd not irb r7i--.V- f ^^^' ""'' the(;rown ! V«-'-r. -In the absence of acquiescence in such 
 coul I not be held liable for any sum in excess an assignment, are the assiKnee's hXh fh., 
 <.f the salary fixed and ai.proved of by the Gov- | un-- r capable of enforcein.Xainstt^^^^^^^ 
 
 ! JDstoppel. I-The doctrine of estoppel cannot 
 
 Salva^e.]--Rig,rttoclaimsalva.eforservices| n^V-::^"^!"' C.'r 'i^\^n'\:7.l 
 rendercMl to ship belonging to tf.e Dominion ^Supreme Court, 20 S. C R.Vjl ^ "" 
 
 Government. ,Vu CW^<. V. 77,6 ,y„ee,,, 3 Ex. • ^. «. oJl. 
 
 C. K. H2,po.t,Is..n^sc.,Xl. lnJ«nctlo„.-/W/,o/-CTa,...]-Thedefen 
 
 T<^k«- 1.. ^ . """'* "■'^'''•^ ""^"'P'Tatt'd 1)V letters uateiit 111,. I,- 
 
 i^ANDf,, Vi. which authorized them to construct and „vet. 
 
 ate (on all days except Sumlays) a strict r ul 
 way; — 
 
 Held. Maclennan, .1. A., dissenting, that an 
 action won l.l not lie by the Crown to restrain 
 the defendants from ..perating the road on Sun- 
 Deposits In Banks 1 HpM „««. • u ,^' T''''^'"';!'''""«aiust their doing K,,l,,.in« 
 
 of New In,',, I'^^K ••"^""-■i'^l Government proprietary rights, !„.ing sifew " '"' 
 
 "■eneral ot the Province, is pnfitlo.l <•„ „ 
 
 III. Prkrogative. 
 
 ., . . .' . '" *"'" iiaiiiu oi n^eceiver- 
 
 •.eneral of the Province, is entitled to payment 
 
 n nil over the other clepositors and sinfpl^e o ! 
 
 tract creditors of the bank, its claim being for 
 
 nJZa>o"^"l-\7^'''i^ '^' Pr«'-»g''tive attaches 
 J^ujmdalor, oj tlteAlanthne Bank of Canwin 
 V. iecetver.Oeneral of Kew JJrumwick, [1892J 
 A. \^. 4J7. iee the next case. 
 
 ■ ^^^ff,!^? °^ ^y I-ocal Government-f ro- 
 
 ^l^r^'Jt"!-^^^' government of each P^o- 
 
 Interpretation Aot-Co,/^ror«r/efi AVccY/owa 
 .Hc^J — ilie Crown is not bound bv se.tions 
 
 1874 Ihe 4bth clause of the 7th section .,f 
 I he Interpretation Aot, 1!. S. C. ch. 1, where- 
 by It IS provided that no provision or enact- 
 ment in any Act sliall affect in any manner or 
 way whatsoever, the rights of Her Majesty, 
 
 stated therein that Her Majesty shall be bound 
 thereby, is not limited or qualified by any 
 exception such as that mentioned in '/■/. 
 MagdaUu College Vas., 11 K„p. 70/,, "that the 
 King 18 m.pliedly bound l.y statutes passed for 
 the general good . . , or to prevent fraud, 
 
 vinnn r.( (• i 6""='o""e"i. 01 eacn i-ro- 
 
 lloZ. Si"''' '■^P'-esents The Qneen in the 
 aff!.Hn, H ''«>■, P''«'-og'itive as to all matters 
 alkxtmg the rights of the Province. 
 
 J/ie (Mi'u v. Jiankof NovaSvolia, 11 S. C R 
 1, followed. U Wynne, J., dissenting. 
 
 Crown. Strong an.l Taschereau, j1, dissenting 
 
 ''see, also, the present Bank Act 'i'i Vu-t /.K r ^ 
 31, sec. 53, passed since thTdedsimf 1 w^ u^"}"^^ ^V^ Bstopvel- Waive,- h,, A.i. of 
 tor. of the Afanti>ne Bank v. Re^h^-OemrToA t^^^Z "^ V'r'"''h^^''"''^ '''« '''^' '«*''■■'' ^he 
 ^Tew Brunswick; 20 S. C. R. 695 "^ ?''T " no*-'>"">"l by estoppel, and that no 
 
 I '^''^» «»» ^^ imputed to it, and that there is 1,0 
 
304 
 
 is tn that t-xtflnt 
 with mioh nas'igs. 
 'iirliftiiifiit. 
 :ituri'H, HJnci! the 
 lit imtliorizu mich 
 .-. Fii/iii; '2 Kx. ('. 
 
 < Casea. 
 
 a chosu in action 
 10 general l)t.M(,.fit 
 intort'Dteil lieing 
 rowii malting no 
 ■t t(i snoli atiBign- 
 
 luiescence in such 
 L'e's liglits there 
 {iiinHttlieCnittn' 
 
 ;. R. :u\. 
 
 ' estoppel cannot 
 1. Hiinuihriii V, 
 AHirnied by' the 
 1. 
 
 'en ]— The (lifcn 
 erH piitent under 
 -S. O. ch. 171, 
 struct and oper. 
 ■a) H street riiil- 
 
 senting, that an 
 rown to restrain 
 he road on Sun- 
 r doing so l)eing 
 substantial in- 
 terference with 
 
 sag Division, 19 
 
 fralwXmiiiiia 
 
 Tramway Co., 
 
 ■tried E/ecfiuM 
 lid hy sections 
 Elections Act, 
 7th section (if 
 , ch. 1, where- 
 ision or enact- 
 any manner or 
 Her Majesty, 
 it is expressly 
 shall he hound 
 ilitiod hy any 
 oned in Thi 
 Oh, "that the 
 ites passeil for 
 prevent fraud, 
 Puuliot, 2 Ex. 
 
 «)• hy A (■>■■< of 
 aw is that the 
 , and that no 
 iiat there is no 
 negligence ot 
 11 settled that 
 be waived by 
 af the Crown. 
 
 *" CROWN. 
 
 208 
 
 Aliornfy-Gtneral nf Victoria v Klhr^hn»l r i .i » .i 
 
 ^;Scct,on 100 of tho(iov«r, S;;V* 'j .^^^^^ ;,''" ■"»lit"t."l "«ainst the Gove^, 
 
 o: ISNl, -14 Vict. ch. -2.1, vrosu\v»th,^^ :}^^^^^^^^^ but when thi 
 
 act,,., .[.all bo l.rought\!gainst any'Lhcr ,Wer«?nr '^^^^^^^^^^^^ ""; '^ir""" *»>« 
 
 en.ploye.., or servant of tlu. departnunt HaVi: 3.^.^^^^ "'■'''-•™' t'"'t the 
 
 »c 
 
 en,ploye.., or servant of the-.tepartnu-iitTUaTi: 
 ways and Canals] or anything done by virtue 
 of h;s o hce. serv.ce or employn.ent, exce U 
 whm three n.onths after the act comnntte I 
 and upon one month', previous notice in writ: 
 
 If. Id reversing the jud^^ment of the Court 
 below, liitchie, ('.,/., an-! ,<\ , . j i; / 
 i.i«, tlut a contractor w I, tho'v ', .'..tw ofTail-' 
 wayifand Canals, as . .prcstntin« 'le Crown I 
 for the construction of , |„ u.oh of ■,..- ■ Interc..-' Uv ' "" "' '^"""='» "'"-letion umn the 
 
 ;Tffir;';r7,/'te'i.'\'r..t...,..-);'HS.' 
 
 , ^ ^ V, ." •; • firuploy 
 
 deiiartincnt within this h •.•b'u : — 
 
 ifeld, per Patterson and ■■mvw'.i .. .J,; thnt 
 the compulsory powers giv. . tne'Oovernment 
 of anada toexpiopnate lands required for any 
 public work, can only be exercised after com 
 plmncewith the statute requiring the land to be 
 set out by metes and Imunds, and a plan r 
 descrn.tion fjlcl ; If these provisions vre n , 
 cmplied wi h, and there is no order in CounCi 
 authorizing land to be taken, when an order in 
 f oniicil IS necessary, a contractor with the 
 Crrmn who enters upon the land to construct 
 .uoh public work thereon, ,« liable to the owner 
 
 "s s'c'"r 148 "" *"*''^- '^'"""V "• ^"-f «' 
 
 , ,, " ' "«it oiiiered [liut tha 
 
 f.rtiat of the i'rovuice of guebec. GranlV 
 J he QuiHi, 20 .S. C. H. 207. 
 
 Lu'n,tn,vU-(Jovtr,u,r in Council - /'.titiono/ 1{,„IU 
 
 gis ature, and its ajiplication is prescril>ed 
 '" such a way as to confer a discretion umn the 
 
 that by virtue of 51 & 62 Vict. ch. 01, the Lien-' 
 
 n"; . rr.'"'' '"f ?"""••" """ -t'.ori.e.CS. 
 
 at J.OOfJ acres of lain p,.r mile l<,r 30 miles 
 
 of the Hereford Railway ;' chat by an onic" S 
 
 snbsidlit"* "''' I^-^-'S-'. I^^^. the Van's 
 snlis ly was converted into a money subsidv 
 the 9th section of said cli. 91. .-,| & SoVict 
 
 vert"Tlu;"'tho" ^'"" "^^ '""'"'•" ^"-•••''° "««■ 
 >eit lliat the company completed the con- 
 
 s ruction o their line of railway, reiving u,»„ 
 
 the said subsidy and or.ler in council, a.ul buTl t 
 
 the railway ... accordance with the Act 51 & 62 
 
 iffifS;^Li:TS:i?t^-S::j 
 ^;-!-^^r-,..of|:ni:idS;r'S-[^l^^^^^^ 
 
 INTO, the Dominion (iove.-nmeut i.fonfnr.in T '' "*' *'"''"^'-' "'"^ permissive only 
 
 parol ag,.eement, is ei.titlerto" vluteS'K "^^^ p/eaded .«./,. uliu. that th^^ 
 
 any .ibject of the Crown would have' in r™^.^,* 1^„ ? i "r',I!i^''' '-T^ '"•'•"■ '" """"^'il to the 
 
 i'^ . . ,' ~ -•■".».. i,w lu wiiatever ritrhts 
 any .abject of the Crown would have in restect 
 «t suci, an agreement in an action between s,Uj 
 
 Pension de ^^tn.\t&~Com„mUuion-~Tram- 
 /- .»■ '<'*v.«. ] -D., a.etired .n.ployee of the 
 <."yeriime„ of (,)uebec, in rec. ipt^f^a pens on 
 
 umliM' \.t.Vl««i!-,'.i A.-- ■;'''' "r a pension '"V ' ""'»■' '-"'^ statute and i ocuments relie.l 
 
 sai. pension for a lum,. sum to the Oover" . en" 
 and subsequently he and his wife brou ' t a . 
 
 celkd 'l^ A \' T''"'^ ""'^ ^''« «"rrender cC 
 celled. By Articles d.io of H 8 P a ti,„ 
 
 .ion or half pension is neitlt'trrns'/er bLC 
 sub ect to seizure, and by Articles 5,S.S, the wi?e 
 of D., on his death, would have been en tided 
 to anjdlowance equal to one-half ot his pt 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Court of 
 RevicH, .Strong. C.J., and Sedgewick, J lis 
 seating, that D., after his retirement was not „' ' 
 permaiieut official of the Government 'orQuebee 
 
 wi. n'n ndernTtioirSss^ o^f tT" '^ *'' 
 cogbutecl yhim^j\^:r^,rn?;j;l'!Cr 
 
 .i,„""~"'i- ■ ,S"'' **' =' retired otlic.al to his xwn. 
 
 D " Srhl^'' "'!"/" '^' Governme.. ?1 at 
 
 dur „gh s i" 'i„''t :'^ 'nterest jointly with hi.n 
 
 u'oife n.s lite in the pension, and could main 
 
 t^'n proceedings to coifserve it, a„.rthere"ore: 
 
 Willi ,.nnf,. f — • 1""" "3 "niui 111 council to the 
 sub-contractors for work necessary for the con- 
 truction of the road ; that the p.esident had b^ 
 etter agreed to accept an additional subsidy on 
 n ex ension o their line of railway to settle 
 
 of ¥b oOO ,l,„ on account of the first subsidv! 
 llie petition of rigiit was dismissed :~ ^ 
 
 Held, that the statute and documents relied 
 
 <.„ . : — '...uj. uii uiio part oi Cue 
 
 Crown to pay the money voted to the appellant 
 company eiitorceable by petition of right IW 
 cherean and «e.lgewick, JJ., dissenting ; b^t 
 assunung .t d.d, the letter and receipt ^signed 
 by the presideut of the company did not dis- 
 charge the Crown from such obli^ration to Z 
 
 the subsuly an< payment by the Crown of the 
 I sub-contractors' claim out of the subsidy money 
 
 without the consent of the company w^.s a uZ' 
 
 appropnation of the subsidy, ffenford li W. 
 
 < o. V. The Queen, 24 S. C. R. 1. 
 
 Ex^C *r-?.a"*'!~n"' ''^"''^^ ^- ^'*« «««««. 3 
 
 ■C-X. C. J>. J04, poul, tilFT. 
 
 ™™/!^P^*?**T' V^^ O^o^n --Running Ac- 
 
 the defendants fo7rnt;nriruiCtrtlTomf 
 
 rth dr't""' ''""'"« ^he'reoL: ancrc^^errng 
 
 wav t^, r T'"' ^ *J"'f""'y °f timber and raU? 
 
 ch ^7 a^c So'.^'^ !? *'," Pr^'«i°"« "f 46 Vict 
 en. 17, sec. 60 ; and also for money owing to 
 
 :;l'|;i 
 
 I'll!' 
 
 MM 
 
 •; M 
 
 r 
 
 Ml ! 
 
307 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 'i f: 
 
 I I 
 
 J $ 
 
 lii 
 
 the Crown for .lues in respect of the timber ami 
 ties so cut hy the defendants. The defend'u ts 
 S:^ 'l-->tl.e allegations of the info ! 
 
 Mle^ "fl"'! h'" '•'"' '2"' P'«^' «"l^«tantially 
 alleged that the clanns .sought to be maintained 
 ^ the C rown arose out of, and were oonneete.l 
 wth^ certain contracts between them and the 
 
 indebted to them in an amount greater tluin the 
 
 inThoir'ru ^'l"" '^'V" '" ^^'' i"f<"'n.atio„ ; and 
 m their ],!th i)lo,a sul,stantially alleged that the 
 Crown was then also indebted to them in an 
 t^ori" "f.'""'i«y'>tl'er than that above men- 
 tioned which last mentioned sum was larger 
 than the amount claimed from defendants ; and 
 that, before the information was filed, it was 
 agreed between the Crown and the defendant 
 that m consideration of tlie defendants forbear- 
 ing to sue the Crown until their claims could be 
 investigated, the Crown would not, before such 
 .nvest.gation had been made, demand f on 
 the defendants, or sue them for, the claims set 
 
 by the defendants in their 1.1th plea that the 
 Crown ha.l never caused such investigation to 
 be made, althougli they had theretofore )>■ en 
 and were then, ready and willing that sucl 
 investigation sliould be had; and that tlie 
 amount thereupon found due to them from the 
 
 be app! ed by way of set-off towards payment 
 
 Crown t'T' "^ /'"^ '}"^e"' ^''-^""^ "f tl'e 
 Crown. To these pleas the plaintiff demurred 
 
 on the ground that set-otf cannot be pleaded 
 against the ( rown :— ' 
 
 Hehl, (1) That the rule in such a case is not 
 
 cw/balf. '''^ ^'"^ ''""''"'' "" "■>'-« •' - 
 (2) That inasmuch as the claim against the 
 Crown set out in the defendants' 12th plea arose 
 out of the same contracts between the parties 
 in respect whereof the claims sought to be 
 enforced in the information had arisen, and as 
 the dealings of the parties thereunder were so 
 continuous and inseparable that the claims on 
 one side could not properly be investigated 
 apart from those of the other, the rule against 
 pleading a set-ofi to a declaration for money due 
 
 to«i'^l^r'"/''nT* ^PPly. and the demurrer 
 to said plea should be overruled. 
 
 (3) That as there was no allegation to the 
 contrary, it miist be presumed that the claim 
 set up in the hrst pa.; of the 13th plea was 
 one unconnected with, and distinct from, the 
 transaction m respect of which the claims sought 
 to be enforced in Jie information arose ; and 
 that so much of the plea as dealt therewith, 
 beuig simply a matter of set-off, was bad in 
 
 (4) That a promise of forbearance to sue, such 
 
 T 1^ ? ''Kf.l ",' ^'''^ concluding portion of 
 d. endants l.Sth plea, could not be successfully 
 pleaded m bar of an action between subject and 
 ^"^'i'.ff'fr'"/"""''' '';,"'' "^ '^"^'''"'^ l^'' available 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 I, British Coi.rMniA, 308. 
 II. Dominion Lands Act, 308. 
 
 m 
 
 III. Federal and Provincial Rights, .-ios. 
 I^■. Ordnance Land.s, .310. 
 
 V. PATENT.S ANn LOCATION TICKETS. 
 
 1. Call<•^n<ltioll find CowplJanee icifh Cc/t- 
 
 (li/ioii-i, 311. 
 
 2. DcHfr'qilioii, ,'j]2. 
 
 3. I Mile of, 312. 
 
 4. Misccllaiiiotin Cn.sce, .'il,3. 
 
 VL Tlmiiei: a.m. Timj.ku Licenses, 31J. 
 
 I. Britlsh Columbia. 
 
 Right of Pre emptlon— /;a»(/.s lie-siri-.d ~ 
 A(jrmdturc,l S,-ttl<r.-<:\-ny 4(j Vict. eh. U Mdi- 
 sec.y.(B.C.) certain land conveyed I., the E. 
 
 1 . r , ■ . • ■"'"^' ^'"' f"""" ye'"'s f'f"" tlie 
 date of the Act, thrown open to the actual 
 settlers for agricultural purposes," coal and 
 timber land excepted. H. & W. respectively 
 claimed a right of pre-emption under this 
 Act ; — 
 
 Held, ■affirming the decision of the Court 
 below, that the Act did not confer a riuht of 
 pre-emption to lands not within the pre-emption 
 laws of tlie Province; that only "unreserved 
 and unoccupied lands" came within thos-e laws 
 and the lands claimed had long before been 
 reserved for a town site ; and that the claimants 
 were not upon the lands as "actual settler., for 
 agricultural purposes," but had entered with 
 express notice that the lands were not open 
 for .settlement llv;i,,m, v. E,qumall and 
 Amnmno If. if Co.. )Vaddnu,ton y. E.^iumah 
 and Aanmmo /,'. 11'. Co., 20 S. C R -'T) 
 C^"r'' I'y the Judicial Committee,'[18!)4]'A' 
 
 IL Dominion Lands Act. 
 
 Sale of Dominion Lands — /?wm(//ow of 
 \ Mines and il/m^ra/.v.]— Where the Crown hav- 
 ing authority to sell, agrees to sell and convey 
 public lands, and the contract is not controlled 
 by some law affecting such lands and there is no 
 stipulation to the contrary express or iiuiiliiil 
 the purchaser is entitled to a griint conveviiK' 
 such mines and minerals as pass without" ex- 
 press words. Canadian Ar/rhidiHra/ Coal md 
 Co/vnizalion Co. v. The Queen, 3 Ex. V K. 
 
 rP^'r, ^^'i""e'l I'y the .Supreme Court, 24 s! 
 C. R, 713. 
 
 in. Federal and Provincial Eifims. 
 
 Foreshore of Sarhour-Oranf fron, Local 
 Governwent.']- After the British North America 
 Act came into force, the Uovcrnment of Xova 
 Scotia granted to S. a part of the foreshore of 
 the harbour of Sydney, CD. S. conveyed this 
 
CIAL RlfiHTS. 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 lot, through the C. B. Coal Co. to the S. & L 
 Coal ( o. S. having diod, his widow hrouL'ht 
 an action for dower in H;,id lot, to which the 
 company pleaded that tlio grant to S. was void 
 the property l.eing vested in the iJo.ninion 
 Goveiiiiiient : — 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 below Strong and Owynnc, JJ., dissentin,', 
 that the company having obtained title to the 
 property from S. they were estopped from say- 
 mg that the title of S. was deflective. 
 
 310 
 
 Per btroiig and (iwynne, J.f., 
 
 dissentint 
 
 ated withm the railway belt in Britisli Columbia 
 should issue under the Great Seal of Canada 
 and not under tlie Great Seal of British Colnm- 
 oia. ihe iJuH-ii V. FiirireAl, 3 Kx. C. R. 271. 
 
 Railway Belt In British Columbia. ] -Lands 
 Uiat were lield under jire-emption riL'ht, or 
 Crown gr.int, at the time the .statutorv convev- 
 ^"'.'f. ?f tlf '•;"I«-ay belt by the Province of 
 British Columbia to the Dominion of Camula 
 took eflcct, are exempt from tlie operation of 
 
 rp,,„ , , ^ ■-.^^.,.[,1,1111111 LMc oiieraiu 
 
 llie I such statutory conveyance, and upon sucli 
 
 conveyance by S. to the C. B. Coal (\,. was an 
 innocent conveyance by which S. himself would 
 not have bt"t.ii estopped, and, us estoppel must 
 be nnitiia , his grantees would not. There were 
 no recitals in the deed that would estop them 
 and an estoppel could not be created bv the 
 covfnants. ' 
 
 After the conveyance to the defendant com- tn 
 
 E sioS^^Slngit^rmhfS'^tf l^t-'; S"'- '^^-e" the Provii^e" ^f" 
 of the defendant commny to all Srtv '""' »'"•' '>o>'»niou of Canad. 
 
 C. B. Coal Co. .— ^ •> ^° "" P'^operty of the I Statutes of Canada. 1872, p. XCVII 
 
 Held that if the Legislature could by statute ' ''' '" "'^ ^"""''' '' ^'^^'- * ' «• -''•'^• 
 affect the title to this property which was vested 
 in the Dominion Government it had not done .so 
 by tnis Act in which the Crown is not expressly 
 named Moreover the statute should have been 
 pleaded by the de en.lants. .V,,rf,„y ami Louis 
 bur;/ CoaUiHdJi'. ]V. Co. v. Su-or</, 21 S. C. R. 152. 
 
 pr( 
 
 Ordnance LandB-Chnin Reserve alovn Xian. 
 am n:m:]--ln an action by the plaintiffs 
 claiming under a patent from the (>ntario Gov! 
 emment, and the defendant, claiming under a 
 ease from the Dominion Government, to try 
 the riglit to a part of the cliain reserved along 
 the liank of the Niagara River and the slope 
 between tie top of the bank and the wateT's 
 edge, which had been reserved out of the oric- 
 inal survey of the tovxnship of Stamford, and 
 
 emption right being abandoned or cancelled all 
 lands hcM tlicrcnu<l(.- become tlie prcniertv of 
 tlie (r-wn in the right of the Province anil not 
 m thi ight (if the Dominion. 
 
 «*•?■•', ';''."■!" ''7>'^''' '"»''» I'eeorded under the 
 Hritish Columbia Land Acts of 1875 an.l lS79are 
 lands lieM under " jire-emption right " within 
 the ineaning .,f the Uth section of the Terms of 
 Lnion between the Province of British 
 
 See 
 The 
 
 IV. Orp.vanck Lanps. 
 
 Lease -/>oi-,.,- of Minuter of /ntrrln,-.]^ 
 Xiie Alinister of the Interior cannot lease or 
 authorize the use of onhiance laiuls without the 
 authority of the Governor in Conncil. Unehec 
 likatiiir) Vluh v. Tl,<- ijucti,, Z Kx C R .S,S7 
 
 Sale of Ordnance Lands In Quebec -Ca/,- 
 
 a/fa;mM.]_Li the year 1876 the suppliant pui- 
 chase.l a number of lots at an auction ,«ale of 
 Urdnanee land in the city of Quebec. He iiiiid 
 certain instalments and interest thereon amount, 
 ing ill all to a .sum of 82,447.92. Bein.' uiiiblo 
 was claim«l by-th;"d;Te;;.in;s^^:"ire'b:en HmTT'" ^'^ ,l-y--t« 'or which='he 'w,': 
 
 reserved or set apart for 'SMilitLv' or "Orrr~ *" *''" <^'''"^^"' "' 1*^«"^' t" 
 
 nance " purposes :- ^ ' "'''■ I 'fPfopnate the money paid by him to the pur- 
 
 Held, that the "Chain Reserve " was part of ' '^'^^,?, .^'l'.-^^ /."^''ticular lots, Nos. 10, .'IS an.l 
 the waste lands of the Crown hold for^nnllfn I f ' r . ^^"^ ^'T'^ consented to do, and upon 
 pm poses. " ''''"' *"' P"Wic I an adjiLstment of the account there was found 
 
 It was a "Government Reserve" nri„,-„ ii i i- . ^ *""' °^' '^''''''^ ''"e to the suppliant 
 made for public purposes - originally | which by mutual arrangement, was ap /ropri- 
 
 Held, also, that as there was no evidence that i e^vinl" » 'i" P'"''^l"if of '""other lot (Xo. 100), 
 
 this 'Thain Reserve "was set apart Vol militarv i fefi 0^ *^ """^ ^'"1 ^'^ **^'^ ^^'•"^^" "^ 
 
 purposes, or of any user char^-e o • <Wv^ f •'^ ' f , • ^V'''"' ''°^''^'''=''' the suppliant came 
 
 by the military L horitts Sliat k wa, '* ' 1" P'Y f*^*', '"^'""^'^ '^"'^ 8^* •»" P^'tents for the 
 
 aff«ct«lby the{)rdnance v'^ti "a TlS^ I S. dv' , r."'"- '"I'T""^ *'^!^* •°' '" ^^'""''l 
 7 A let. ch. 11, but remained a L'overnmpnt J^I '^r ^^^ militarv pur- 
 
 reserve, held for public purpose ceiSv nnr I Fl?„ '^ ^^ J^'"' ^T'^'''^'^ "'^ ''■■^l''^»^« ''"'" to 
 that the portion L quesLif ve^tefl n tSivov but ^^Z^^^^'l "\ *''?. ^''■"^'" '" *'"'* ''^''"'f. 
 .nee of Ontario, as successor of the old Province I ml 00 wL s,/"'''- T,""?"*' {"' '°'« •^•'' '^^ 
 of Canada, until vested in the .ilaintiffs whMn l '"y><^'^'l«»'s«l"ently issued to suppliant, 
 were entitled to succeed:- i'''""*"*^' ^ho ^nd nothing further was done until 1886, when 
 
 were entitled to succeed :— 
 
 8er^e''S,:l'f°.' ""'* »««"»""« the "Chain Re- 
 8er\L lad been so set apart for militarv nnr 
 poses, the "slope" formed no part o7 s^uch 
 
 iv„ /-, ° -......= i.>,..u uiiiii ii-)oo, wnen 
 
 ine Uown resumed possession of lot 19, which 
 
 was followed up by an attempted cancellation 
 
 of the sale of the lot under 23 Vict. (PC) ch 
 
 2, on the ground that as the balance due on the 
 
 reserve I,„t ..i.. ' """"•" "" P'"i ot such 2, on the crou 
 E^fSiS:^^^:"""'"'''"^^^^""^-^''' purchase ^ad not been "paiFthr te;;;"i;,;d 
 
 ,.._„ „ /' VJ_ frt'' VMcn I that the suppliant had forfeited none of his 
 
 Victoria 
 0. U. 1. 
 
 Niapara Falh Purl: v.' Hr.vard 03 
 Athrmed in appeal, 23 A. R. 
 
 .9s^"'Tw,°m" in British Columbia. ]- 
 
 •>«"W., that letters patent for public lands situ- 
 
 rights under the .iale. and was entitled to dam- 
 ages equal to the value of the lot at the time 
 tue Crown resumed possession thereof. 
 . '«'""-'•«. --Has the Deputy Minister of the Inter, 
 lor the right to exercise tlie powers of cancella- 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 \\\ 
 
 !fl 
 
 ilf 
 
 A\' 
 
 I I 
 
 \\. 
 
 ! 
 
 \ 1 
 
 ! i 
 
 • I 
 
 1, 
 
 1 
 It 
 
fl 
 
 il#l 
 
 I i 
 I I 
 
 m u 
 
 311 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 ,. 312 
 
 brthTSLSLSrrr„f f^p"^^^^^^^^^^ - undisturbed „oo„- 
 
 iswainnv LVee Tnflint... ,„„i..„ ., »___.i^*:r " ""'' 
 
 ^«ce'(, 3 PIx. C. R. 
 
 /o. 
 
 'Vee Commimioiierx 
 Nianam FulU I'ark 
 23 A. R., null. 30!>. 
 
 ./'or <Ae Quem Victoria 
 V. Jfoward, 23 O. R. 1, 
 
 1. 
 
 V. 1'atknts AM) Location Tickets. 
 
 Cancellation ami Comj^liarire with Conditions 
 
 fro?n°H»"r°"^' ^*^*-^ -, '^"PPli'">t purchased 
 of n. ^ "i; " 1''"''-''=' "f ^''"'^ ^'"•miog part 
 of .1, Jiulia- Reserve, subject to the condition 
 
 wo?ks"Jhr ""^ ";r""' '^^^''''» "manufacturing 
 forfeit all rights under the sale. A portion of 
 the purchase n.oney was paid down. Some 
 tune after the expiry of the time wherein 
 supphant was bound to erect the works but had 
 not done fo, the Crown, through a dX 
 
 bSr: ?^"'' r"''"^^ ''-I ^ceiv'ed'tt 
 balance of the i)urchase money from him — 
 
 mich oihcer stating, however, that the skle 
 would not be complete until the condition upon 
 which It was made was complied with. On 
 petition praying for a declaration by the Court 
 «SlZf!- * ""' "'""'*^ *° letter! patent ?or 
 
 bwainpyCree Indians under a treaty the * c'" 
 
 pay.able thereunder. But before takiim am 
 moneys under the treaty he enquired of thl 
 commissioner, who acted for Her Majesty in i^^ 
 negotiation, whether by accepting such inonev 
 he would prejudice his rights to his priva e p"? 
 perty, aiu was informed that he would nm 
 and wlien in 1874 he learned for the first t" me' 
 that l,y re.-ison of his sharing in such annuit?e« 
 he was liable to be accounted an Indian an it 
 lose his rights as a half-breed, he returned th^ 
 money paid to him in that year. Subseuuentiv 
 his status as a half-breed was reeogSby th. 
 issue to him m 187C of half-breed scrip — 
 
 Held, that under the Manitoba Act an.l 
 amendments, 3.S Vict. ch. 3, sec. 32, sub-sec 4 
 and 38 Vict ch. 52. sec. 1, he was entitled to 
 etters patent for the lot mentioned. 'ft 
 Qwen V. ThoinaH, 2 Ex. C. R. 246. 
 
 UescrijUion. 
 
 Held. (1) That the acceptance of the balance 
 of the purchase money, under the circumstances 
 constituted a waiver of the condition i, irespeci 
 of tne time within which it was to be performed 
 but not of the condition itself /and That 
 inasmuch as the suppliant had not performed 
 .uch a condition, l,e was not entitled to^he 
 rehefprayed for. CVa,-fe.v. The Queen, 1 Ex 
 C. K. 182 ; Canada Central 1}. ?('. Co v The 
 Queen 20 Gr. 273, referred to. Peterson v 
 The Queen 2 Ex. C. R. (i/. "" '^• 
 
 Jiight,~liegi,tratwn.]~A location ticket of 
 
 In 872c''rT ^T'"'^ *° «■ ^^- H- »' 1863 
 T 5 .V' ■ "• P"* °" '■'^co'"'! with the Crown 
 Lands Department that by arrangement w^h 
 the Crown lands agent, he had performed seTtle 
 ment duties on another lot known as the home- 
 s' f' ^"„''^^'-.F- «• t''an«ferred hiB 
 rights t, ppellant, paid all moneys due with 
 interest on the lots, reaistered the trWer 
 iinder 32 Vict ch. 11, sec. IS, and the Crown 
 accepted the fees for registering the transrer 
 and for the issuing of the patent I„ 1878 thl 
 commissioners cancelled the location ticket for 
 default to perform settlement duties — 
 
 bpW '♦i'Tm'"*^ *'*'' J'^'gnient of the Court 
 below, that the registration by the oommis- 
 sioners in 1874 of the transfer to responTent 
 was a waiver of the right of the Crown to can- 
 ce the location ticket for dofcult to perform 
 settlement duties, an.l t!„, caa.el'ation wa" 
 Illegally effecte,], Taschcreau. J., dissenting 
 Holland y. Ilox.-, 19 S. C. li. 606. ""="""&• 
 
 Uncertainty of Description. ]-A patent of 
 and from the Crown is to be upheld rathe 
 than avoided and to be construed most favour 
 ably for the grantee. 
 
 Where land was granted by a Crown patent 
 describing it as the north part of lot 1.3 tm 
 taming sixty acres, and the original plan of the 
 township shewed the lot witli centre Ihier^J 
 snnfh nf°H^ i-''^ Concession and shewed the part 
 south of the line as one hundred acres, and the 
 part north of the line as eighty acres Td if 
 
 XrtTiref'.'l™^ '° '•'•^ Iraift^fthrih' 
 part, there had been a grant of the southerly 
 pait, containing one hundred acres, describing 
 
 ntended to include all the land south of the 
 hne^although they actually fell short of doing 
 
 . Held, in a contest between the plaintiff claim- 
 ing under the patentee of the north part and 
 the defendant claiming under sales for taxes 
 based upon the lands sold being patented land,; 
 that the patent was not void for uncertainty 
 but that under the words " the north part " the 
 whole of the lot lying to the north of the centre 
 
 toou^'hli!" " ^'^''"'' ""* »'—■'-■"'"« 
 Doe Derine v. Wilmn, 10 Moo. P. C. 302 • 
 Nolan X. >W, 15C. P. 565; Jie.ina v. /Ji.^^' 
 cf Buron, H C. P. 253, specially referred to 
 ffmtt v. Mill.., 20 O. R. 351.^Rev"rsedt 
 appeal on another point, 19 A. R. ,329. 
 
 Pr,^»M*°T* A°*t/!".?"-«''«*'»« i» Granting 
 ^atint.\—\., a half-breed. \v.".s on the 15t! 
 
 jfuly. I«70, in actual pcacciible possession of a 
 
 lot ;,f and in the Province of Manitob.i. 
 
 previously purchased by him, and of which he 
 
 3. hme Of. 
 
 r.*^^^^^?"^. Remeay Sought by Petition 
 of Kigrht ]-A petition of right will rot lie to 
 compel the Crown to grant a patent of land. 
 tiark-rx. -ihi, QuKtn, 1 Ex. C. R. 182. 
 
 u n^'^o^ Applicants.]— .9ce Boutton v. Shea, 22 
 iS. C. R. "4'z. ' 
 
313 
 
 4. MtHcellantouK Casen. 
 
 OEOWN LANDS. 
 
 Iton V. Shea, 22 
 
 'uTc.u'iT-^'"' ^''■'*''"« "• ^'""•«^'"'. 
 
 Foreshore-Powr., ofCamtdian Pacific Jiail- 
 wapCompavy lo Take and Use Fore.shoreA-iL 
 44 V.ct. eh. 1, sec. 18. the CaDudian PaciHc 
 ''"i'uY, ^^""Pony " >"ive the right to take use 
 and hold the teach an.l land beh.w high water 
 mark, in any stream, lake, navigable water 
 gulf or sea m so far as the same sliall be vested 
 m the Crown and shall not be required irythi 
 Crown, to sucli extent as shall bi reouired bv 
 the company or its railway an.l other "works us 
 shall be exh.l>ite<i by a map or plan thereof 
 deposj edin the office of the Minister of Kan 
 ways." By oO & .".l Vict. ch. 56, sec -, the 
 kcat.on of the company'.s line of ra> way 
 between Port Moody an.l the city of \Vest 
 mmster includn.g tlie foresiiore of Burrard 
 Wet, at the foot of (i ore avenue, Vancouver 
 city, was ratihed and confirmed. The act .,f 
 mcorporation of the city of Vancouvti^ 49 
 Vict ch 32 sec. 213 (B.C.), vests in the city all 
 streets highways, etc., an.l in 1892 the city 
 bagan the cons ruction of work, extending frZ 
 the foot of Go;, avenue, with the avowe 
 object to cross the railroad track at a levITn 
 obtam access to the harbour ut deep Mater On 
 an application by the railway conipany for ." 
 injunction to restran. the cit/corporatioi from 
 proceeding with their work of construction and 
 crossing the railway :— " 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that as the foreshore forms part of t",e 
 land required by the rail , y company, as "hew^ 
 on the plan deposited i= the <,ffi.p of Vi, 
 Minister of Raifways, the>,, ,j£lt *t' 
 access to an.l fr.jm tlic water at the foot of Gore 
 avenue IS subordinate to the rights given to the 
 railroad company by the statute 44 Vict ch 
 . sec 18a. on the sai.l foreshore, and there 
 fore the injunction was properly era- te rvf," 
 
 *o O. C l\r, 1, ■> 
 
 314 
 
 I name to be substituted as purchaser i„ fi, 
 books of the department ; ami 1 ami ho^^ 
 claiming under ^im, including tit A^^^Z 
 ha,l remaine,! in possession of the lot ever s iice' 
 
 I iu 1872, the plauitifl havini; learned nf h> 
 
 rXss"'"Tir"'1- '^ ^'"^ ''p-"»''."/ fo 
 leuress. iiiis application was nendimr n,,^ 
 
 were allowed to the pSiTf o' rk ' i^.rim " 
 m Court ^o establish his title ; and vi ,h, 'i' 
 time the plaintiff o'.mmenced this act'o V * 
 declaration as to his right to the lanr.- *" "^ 
 Held, affirming the .(ecisi.m of Fert-uson T 
 
 ....i.„g. ti„i ....s ,f „■„ »;,a,,t , Z'ni'.i; 
 
 from the Crown which derogates fr.ni a m bl .' 
 right of navigation is to that extent voi 'u b « 
 the interference witii such navi.-ation is m /h 
 nzed by Act of Parliament. ^T e V,',;'^'^;;,- 
 Legislatures, since the union of xL P o v ic s 
 cannot authorize such an interference n« 
 qwen v. FxHher, 2 Ex. C. l!. auo. * 
 
 A patent of Indian bin.ls was obtained by tl-e 
 patentee by virtue of his title under certain 
 e^igumeuts from the original locatee rcgisti;". 
 m the Indian Department, an.l it appeaix,! thtt 
 
 registere.lm the county registry ..ffice and fl?! 
 pia^ndrnows,.ughttoiretl.,se^h;sm^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 Held, that the patentee was entitled t„ 
 priority over the mortgage to the extent o tl 
 moneys paid for obtaimng the patei" ,„d <) ''^ 
 
 Locatee Receipt - F,;mdulent Locatee 1- 
 
 •mnhVl ^'''"" ""^ '^"■'■missioner of 
 
 Id. Iif t8;!8''ir"V" 't- °' " '^'^'■"^'" '"^ °f 
 
 VI. TiMBKR AND TlMBKR LICENSES. 
 
 under' the authori^'orthJ M, "t '^ITh 'C; ' 
 lor under which the purchaser las the iJh; 
 within a year to cut. Iron, the Crown iom-^n 
 a million feet of lumber is a -„„/,, V » A ' 
 sale of personal chatteTs:'and''si;^h a' l^o^.S'' 
 anly implies a warranty of title on the par " 
 the vendor ; but if it appears from tlie l^icts ami 
 circumstances that the vendor .lid n.t intend o 
 assert ownership, but only to tr-inJ ,. ? 
 
 license to the plaintitt' company to cut timber 
 
 ZZff' •''■"^" ^='""""'' "I'on cert- /oiufi 
 tions therein mentione.l. Tlfe company dkl t 
 comply with such conditions, but 1 etore the 
 
 might have been taken .nit, proceedinus werp 
 
 commenced by the Govern.nent of ^Ontario 
 
 I thTthe trtk't"Ptb^""t'- "''''^'' -^ --2med 
 
 «t vested !ntie' r"'"' '7"''l "^^ ^''" 1*^'«"«« 
 ».is vesica in the Crown for the use of the 
 
 Province of Untario, and that contei.tioi w s 
 
 ultimately sustained by the Court of aft 
 
 field, that there was a failure of considera 
 t.on which entitled the ...onipany to recove tho 
 ground rent paid in advan'ce o^n the Go^'e^! 
 nient s promise to issue such license. 
 
 Mill 
 
 iiiil:^.. 
 
315 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 316 
 
 QiKi're.—Will an action Iiy petition or on refer- 
 ence lie in the Excliciiiicr Court n {iiinat tile 
 Crown for iinliquidiited diunages for reach of 
 warranty implied in a sale of personal chattels ? 
 •-S<. Catharim.1 Mi/liiii/ dtiil Liiwla- Co. v Tht 
 Qwi'H, 2 Ex. C. R. -JOl'. 
 
 Disputed Territory— Zi'(c».se lo Cot Tiuifu-r 
 —ImpUiU Warnnilii of Titl,'.]~By tlie 50th 
 section of the Dominion Lands Act, ISSS, it is 
 provided that leases of timber berths shall be 
 lor a term of one year, and that the lessee shall 
 not be held to have any claim whatsoever to a 
 renewal of his lease unless such renewal is pro- 
 vie d for in the order in c(juneil authorizing it 
 or embodied in the cunditioua of pule or tender'. 
 The orders in council in question in this case 
 authorized the issue of leases subject to the terms 
 of the regulations of March 8th, 18,s;j, by which 
 It was provuled that under certain conditions 
 (ex)stuig in this case) the Minister of the 
 Interior might renew such licenses. From the 
 orders in council and character of the several 
 tran.- actions it appeared to be the intention of 
 the parties that tlie licenses should lie renew- 
 able : — 
 
 Held, that such renewals were provided for 
 within the meaning of the statute. 
 
 (2. ) When the Crown agrees to issue a lease or 
 license to cut timber on jjublic lands it agrees to 
 grant a valid lease or license, and a contract for 
 title to such lauds is to bo implied from such 
 agreement. 
 
 (3.) .Not only the word "dcmiso" but the word 
 "let, or any equivalent words whiiih constitute 
 a lease, create, it appears, an implied covenant 
 for quiet enjoyment. 
 
 /Ja>f V. n-i„d.^or, 12 M. & W. 85 ; Most>/„ v. | 
 it (.it MontyH Coal and Iron Co., 1 C. P. D'. Iu2. 
 Qiiii'i-e. —If this rule is applicable to f. Crow'n 
 lease V The Queen v. lioherUun, 6 S. C. R. 5-' 
 referred to. "' 
 
 (4.) To the general rule as to the measure of 
 damages for the breach of a contract there is an 
 exception as well established as the rule itself 
 namely, that ujion a contract for tlie sale and 
 purchase of real estate, if the vendor without 
 fraud IS incapable of makii;g a good title, the 
 intending purchaser is not entitled to recover 
 compensation in damages for the loss of his bar- 
 gain. 
 
 Bum v. Fofherijil/, L. R. 7 H. L. 158; F/iir- 
 eanv. ThoriMll, 2 Win. Rl 1078, referred to. i 
 This exceptional rule is contined to cases of i 
 contract for the sale of lands, or an incerest i 
 therein, and does not apply where the convey- 
 ance has been executed and the purchaser has I 
 entered into covenants express or implied for i 
 good title or for quiet enjoyment. I 
 
 Williams V. lUirrell, I C. H. 402 ; Lock v. ! 
 Furze, L. R. 1 C. P. 441, referred to. I 
 
 (5.) The authorities are ii.it agreed, but it is 
 probable that this exceptional rule as to the 
 measure of damages for the breach of a contract 
 of sale of real estate does not apply where the 
 vendor is able to make a gooil title and refuses 
 or wilfully neglects to do so. 
 
 Fwjel v. Fitch, L. R. 3 Q. R. .S14; Rohert.wu 
 V. i>«mare.«y, 2 Moo. P. C. M. S. 84, 95, referred i 
 to. 
 
 (6. ) An agreement to issue and to renew from ' 
 year to year at tlio will of the leasee or licensee i 
 tt lease or license to take exclusive possession of i 
 a tract of land and to cut the merchantable I 
 
 timber thereon is an agreement in respect to aii 
 interest in land, and not merely sale of good.s 
 
 (7.) The claimant applied to tlie Governuitnt 
 ot ( anada for license to cut timber on certain 
 timber berths situated in the territory lattly ia 
 disimte between the Government and the 
 (government of Ontario. The application was 
 granted on the condition that the applicmt 
 I would iiay certain ground-rents and bonu.sus 
 and make surveys and build a mill. The 
 I elaimant knew of the disimte which was at the 
 [ time open and public, fie paid the rents and 
 j bonuses, made the surveys, and enlarged a iniH 
 he had previously built, which was acceptcl lu. 
 equivalent to Iniilding a new one. The dispute 
 was determined adversely to the Govermiient 
 ot Canada, and consequently they could not 
 earry out their promises :— 
 
 Held, that the claimant was entitled to recover 
 from the Government the moneys paid to them 
 tor ground-rents and bonuses but not the losses 
 incurred in making the surveys, enlarging the 
 mill and other preparations for carrying on 
 I his business. Butma- v. The Queen, 3 K.x t' 
 R. 184. See the next case. 
 
 Clsputed Territory- /./,-,'«sp ;o Cut Timber 
 -rmj,linl Warmnly of 7',7/«.]_The claimant 
 applied to the Government of Canada for litonse 
 to cut timl)er on ten timlicr berths situated in 
 the territory lately in di.spute between that 
 (.overnment and tlie Government of Uiiti-rio 
 Ihe application was granted on the condition 
 that the applicant would pay certain ground- 
 rents and bonuses, make surveys and budd a 
 milb Ihe claimant knew of tlie dispute wldch 
 wa .t the time open and public, lie j.aid the 
 rem , nd bonuses, made the surveys and 
 enl,. el a mill he had previously limit, which 
 was accepted as equivalent to building a liew 
 OLc. The dispute was determined adversely to 
 the Government of Canada at the time six bases 
 or licens„es were current, and consequently the 
 Government could not renew them. The lease 
 was granted under sections 49 and ha of -46 
 Vict. eh. 17, ami the regulr.tions made mi.ler 
 the Act of 1879 pr.ivided that •' the liceiivcj may 
 ha renewed for another year subject to such 
 revision of the annual rental ami royalty to he 
 paid therefor as may be fixed Ijy tue (iov- 
 ernor in Council." In a claim for dama.'cs by 
 the licensee : — r, j 
 
 \ ,,,''''.'''' (') Orders in council isaurd pursuant to 
 I 4() Vict. ch. 17, sees. 49 ami 50, aiitiioriziiig the 
 i Minister of the Interior to grant lic.nses to cut 
 ; tunber, dnl not constitute contracts between the 
 I Crown and proposed licensees, ^uch <,rdcrs in 
 j council b-ing ^vocable by the Crown until 
 
 acted u" . . ,ae granting of licenses iiucler 
 
 them 
 
 (2.) " .le rig!-. f renewal of the licenses was 
 optiona. wr.! ...„ Crown and tlic claimant was 
 em-.tle . ^ ■ recover from tlie (iovermneiit only 
 the moneys paid for ground-rents a .1 Ixunises. 
 
 Ihe licenses which were granted and actu- 
 ally current in 1884 and 1885 coaferrcd upon 
 the licensee "full right, power and I'cei.se 
 to take and keep exclusive possession of the 
 said lands except as thereinafter inentioiied for 
 and during the period of one year from tlie .'ilst 
 of neceiuber. IHS:'.. to the 31st December, ISSl, 
 and no longer." 
 
 Qua-rc. —Though this was in law a le ise for one 
 year of the lands comprised in the license was 
 
316 
 
 lent in respect ta an 
 ;rely sale of goods. 
 1 to tlie (Joveriiimnt 
 lit timber on coitain 
 le tftTitory lately- in 
 ivLTunicnt unil the 
 rhe application wnn 
 that the applicant 
 ■rents and liouiisos, 
 mild a mill. The 
 te which was at the 
 paid the rents ;iiiil 
 and enlarged a ijuU 
 ich was accepted m, 
 <• one. The dispute 
 to iho Goveriiuiunt 
 tly they could not 
 
 IS entitled toreoover 
 loneys paid to them 
 3 but not tile lo.sses 
 •veys, enlarging the 
 18 for carrying on 
 '' (JuetH, 'A Kx, (j, 
 
 i-euHc io Cut Timhi-r 
 'sj— The claimant 
 Canada for license 
 berths situated in 
 >ute betwecu tiiat 
 ninent of Ontario, 
 on the condition 
 ly certain ground, 
 rvcys and fmilj a 
 the dispute which 
 blic. Itc paid the 
 the sui'veys and 
 ously built, M-hich 
 ;o building a i,ew 
 lined adversely to 
 the time six Ica.ses 
 coii.sequently the 
 them. 'I'he Ifase 
 49 and oO (,f 46 
 ;iona made under 
 " the license may 
 • subject to such 
 ■nd royalty to be 
 ed by the (iov- 
 n for damages by 
 
 8aiud pursuant to 
 ), autliorizing the 
 lit lie. uses to cut 
 raets between the 
 s, such orders iu 
 the Crown until 
 >i licenses uuiler 
 
 the licenses was 
 the elaiiiiant was 
 iovernment only 
 its a i] Imnn-ses. 
 aiiteii aiHl actu- 
 I (conferred upon 
 -ver and I'ceiise 
 lossessiou of the 
 IT mentioned for 
 ar from the .'ilst 
 Deocinber, ISSl, 
 
 iwale-.seforone 
 the license was 
 
 317 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 the Crown bomnl by any implied covenant to be 
 rea,l into the license for go.,d right and title to 
 
 3ia 
 
 \m 
 
 read into the license for L'ood rLh?^?.?,?'!-.^° Y ' ''"'^' '" "'° !'''"« trees in the territnrv „r,l., „ i 
 
 Loca.tee~ri,;,/,/ to StU Pino:]--K locatee of 
 
 land whose rigtit.s are governed by R .SO 
 
 ch. 2o, see. 10, or a pat.mtee whose' right; 
 
 are g.n-enied by sec. J I, though he may reu ily 
 
 niteud to clear a parcel of land, cannot simy 
 
 pomt out such parcel to a purchaser before an ^ 
 
 thing was .lone la the way of clearing it for 
 
 cul tivatior, an.l sell to such purchaser the pine 
 
 tmihersaiidingaiul growing upon .„eh pa JeT 
 
 J he nght or liberty in such caseo is only to 
 
 cut and dispose of trees during the process of 
 
 actu.dly eleanug the laii.l for ctiltivatC"-he i 
 
 It appears to be and is rcpiisite that the tiets 
 
 should for he purpo.ses of such clearin.', 1 c 
 
 rem^^^ed. McArthnr Bru.s. C„. y. Jj 5', ^ 
 
 i-..y, laough rene;v;;i-f..;;;n ~;rUar X 
 
 jffesqid:m!^;^--t:LS-r;S £ 
 
 Va.tont-I„t.rf< ,;;„-e with Ri.jht^nf Pntnitec 1 
 -By section ;i of R. ,S. O. eh. 2o the J eu 
 tenant- Governor in Council may annroo ■ MtV. 
 any public lands . . as fn., ' ..? , 
 
 actualsettlers, etc.. and-brs:::tK.ifr^.h 
 grants or appropriations shall be contineil to 
 lands ._ .within the tract or territory 
 dehneu in that secfoii. Ry section 10 pine 
 trees on laud located or sold within the limits of 
 the ree gran territory after .March oth, 18S0 
 shall be considered as reserved from the location' ' 
 and shall be he property of Her Majesty, and sec 
 tion 1 enac s that patents of such land located : 
 or sold shall contain a reservation of all pine 
 trees on the land and that any licensee to e t ' 
 tunher thereon may. .hiring tl/e coutinuanee o 
 his license enter ui.ou the uncleared portion 
 and cut and remove trees, etc. The L. Co leM 
 a licei^e, issued May 30f.. 188S, to cut timb 'r 
 on and within the free g; ^ territory but wl d 
 
 ab'; velct'" T^^''^ ' ""'1— 't'on 3 of "li 
 aboxe Act. A icense wi<s first i.ssued to the 
 eompany in 873 and had been renewed each 
 .ear since that time. The license authorim 
 ti cutting o timber on lands uulocated and sold 
 at It, date; lauds sold or located while it was 
 ui force ; pine trees on lots sohl im.ler orders in 
 eouncil of May 27tli, KS(i9, and pine trees, whe 
 CdsllTsSo' «■'''•"!"•-"'•''-• in council o' 
 Ap a3i 1 1880, u-ion the location <]e.scribed on 
 b:ick of license. Regulations made by order h 
 council of 27th May, 1860, provided \l' a 
 pine trees on any public land thereafter to be 
 .ohl, wliieh at the time of such sale o.^ prevhmslv 
 w^s includcl in any timber license, sh .11 be S 
 sideredas reserved from such sale and'Vhall be 
 subject to any timber license covering or h dud 
 >ng such land lu force at the time of such sale 
 
 sii'sTi " tT'"; v^ ^■""•^''•.""' "- <'^" of 
 
 8UU sale, etc. All orees remaining on the land 
 •It he time the patent issues shall pass to the 
 patentee. A patent for a lot ,n the free era t 
 tern tory was issued to S. on 13tli March TsS4 
 ).. the hack of the license was a s h in f ^f 
 lot. nicluded in the location with the date of LL ' 
 <..■ location, and the sale or locatioi o .s'sht 
 t"«;ntT'"'- ^'"'r-i-'y cleimed the r g 
 to cut timber on said lot whi(.h had not been 
 <'W"opriated by the L. O. in C. :_ 
 
 Ann!; 1 f "^rl"!"'*' *''- .i'"'fe">"*"t of the Court of 
 Appeal for Ontario, 17 A. R. 32'2, that the nrovis 
 wnaiu sections 10 and 11 of R. ,S. 0?eh 25;X 
 
 Sale of Timber Limits -/wtY».>M_ /'/«,, 
 
 :theomciaidescri,;.r,;tffi:;;;z^::;-: 
 
 -.£ on amir ?1 " 't"""' '""' ''''^^ '^« ^ 
 
 in.ul::ii:;aHvr' i";;t';;H:!:';:;;r""*r'"'t 
 
 as tf> tli,> >„n -, „ """'".'''eiiai tment ceases except 
 as to the inn.ters specially excepted by the A< t 
 
 ^^^^^^=± 
 
 tain''.^,r aTti'r'f " 'I"' '" ""■■^'^''^^ ''''" *"— 
 omL'^llot '"'*"^i""'"''"^ the 
 
 reSS^'VII.'*'^ Wstriet Court of Muskoka 
 
 CUEATOR. 
 
 Set Bankkuptoy a.vd Insolvency. 
 Banki, IV. 
 
 CUSTOMS. 
 
 <S'ee Ravii.NUE. 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 I. Genekallv, 310. 
 II. Apportionment, 320. 
 III. Increasing and Reducing, 321. 
 
 I.— 
 
 i'S! 
 
 W0^ \ 
 
 ! I 
 
 } ! 
 
 ! i 
 
 )l!l!i^| 
 
 Hi, 
 
 111! 
 
 i . ' 1 i 
 1 Ml;: 
 
 . ,i! 
 
319 
 
 DAMAOES. 
 
 ii 
 
 IV. LiguiDATED Damaoes OB Penalty, ,S2t>. 
 V. Meabuke of Damaoes, 324. 
 VI. Remoteness, 327. 
 VII. Special MattersandProceedisom.SSO. 
 
 I. Generally. 
 
 Assignment of Damages. ]-^f, SiUherland 
 y. WehHter, '2\ A. R. -rs, autt 13i ; l.mdlaw v. 
 O Connor, 23 O. E. t H) ante 13i • n„i Ball v 
 Tenimnt, 21 A. IJ. i',(r2, imte 67. 
 
 Attachment of Damnges.]— 5ec l-vithun 
 V. Tai/tor, U P. R. 78, aitU 58. 
 
 Orown'3 Liability for Damages. 1 — AV 
 
 Crown— Ckown Lands. 
 
 Hjcvi'oprlatloa.' -See Crown— Municipal 
 (JohPoA .vT(ONS--Pip.;. ic Schools— Ra ilways.' 
 
 -<* " ^<)reiice to Assess Damages — Dh- 
 crai;,> -App,.l.]--rhe right of the trial 
 .JUil^'e to lelci the question of damages, as a 
 ijutation ansn,g in the action, lunler section 101 
 ot lue JuclKature Act, is indisputable, at all 
 events as a matter of discretion and subject 
 to review ; and it is for the party objecting to 
 the reference to shew that the discretion has 
 beeu wrongly exercised. 
 
 _ And where, in an action for damages for 
 injury to the plaintiff's land on the bank 
 of a navigable river and to his business as 
 a boatman, by the acts of the three several 
 defendants, who owned saw mills higher up on 
 the stream, in throwing refuse into it it 
 appeared that the plaintiiTs title to relief and 
 the lability of the defendants Had been 
 established in a former action, and the trial 
 Judge heard the case only so far as to satisfy ' 
 himself that the plaintiff had established a 
 primd fif:ic case on the question of damages 
 a^d directed a reference to assess and apportion 
 them among the defendants, reserving further 
 directions and costs : — 
 
 Held, that there was no miscarriage, and the 
 discretion of the trial Judge should not be over- 
 ruled. JiatU V. Booth, 16 P. R. 185 
 
 320 
 
 below Frv.rnur, I , dissenting .- (1.) That H ,? 
 re8po^der^:-, right of ...tion uHder Artide iS 
 «... < . aovu-.ds not (Vv i,f„;i the chura.tcr 
 of*,., ace !,-o.n wh.,h dea'.i, .n.^ued, but u, ,' 
 
 he e.m,!u.oa of the dece.|..n;'« claim at h 
 t me uf h.s ,?eath, ami if th, .l,], . was in s le . 
 Bhj^.ahatho.o.Hnottli... .avJTf'c^^V 
 had .(Ml ,1.,) ensue'., the :,,.;:,le of the eojj 
 does a. c give a rig>>t of ., t;,,, , :,nd creatJ. i' 
 habiht;/ .vliatever on the per.on inflicting tl^ 
 
 f^„?■il^''^*«.^" 'J "PPearod on the record tliat 
 the plaintiff had no right of action the fo 
 wou d grant the defen.la.t's molion for j,' ' 
 ment no^^ oUanlev, rt.trto. Arti.le 433 C. P. C 
 (3 . That at the time of the death <,t thp 
 resooiKl, ,,fs husband all . ighi of act o « « 
 pvv.onbe.i u.,;.:,- Article ?■■& ('. c. Z^ tC 
 t ;.'..■ prescr. prion i. one to wluch the tril,uimh 
 are bound t, ..ive effect although not plea 
 Artu;les :«,;, .„d 2188 C. C. Ca,u^.,vJ y>^ j.^ ^ 
 .*•■ '». Co. V. liohinnon, 19 S. C R "fl-:) r> 
 versed by the Judicial Committee, [IsVjA c" 
 
 II. Apportionment. 
 
 Liquor Supplied by Two Tavern-Keepers 
 
 -- V nt Z»a6t;«<2/] Where a person comes to his 
 de^u, while intoxicated and the intoxicating 
 hquo. has been supplied to him at two tavern, 
 and to excess m each so that an action nii.'lit 
 have b. .n brought successfully against either" of 
 the taveni-keepers under E. S. O. ch. 194, see 
 i^x -^ cannot be sued jointly. 
 The jury having in such an action in which 
 tavern.keepers had been jointly sue.l assessed 
 . the_ damages at the trial at different sums 
 't'n^T -YJ;^'^ defendants, upon applieatiou 
 to set aside the; verdict on the ground that the 
 statute woidd not support such a joint action, 
 the plaintiff was put to his election to retain 
 his judgment against either defendant, un,ler- 
 taking to enter a nolle prosequi against the other. 
 OR 641 '^^^'^'''f- Crane v. Hunt, 26 
 
 Survival of Action.]— An action for injury 
 to the person now survives to the executor of 
 the plaintiff, who can, in case of his death 
 pendente .tte on entering a suggestion of the 
 death a;ul obtaining an order of revivor, con- 
 tuiue the action. 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division 
 A k" 683 ^' ^'"""^ "-^ P^^^'-bo^ough, 20 
 
 Surviv.:' , r AcUon-DamaueH- Claim o/ 
 WmIow-F „tion. ]-The husband of respon- 
 
 dent was ii i while engaged in his duties ai 
 
 appellants employee and the injury resulted in 
 his death about fifteen months afterwards No 
 indemnity having been claimed during the life- 
 time of the hunband the widow, acting for her- 
 selt as well as in the cap.^oity of pvcn.,t,.,v f^p 
 her minor child, brought an action for compelosa- 
 tion within oi.e ytar after his death •— 
 
 Pollution of Stream-./o/Hirort./'ertwr.s !- 
 In an action against several mill owners for 
 obstructing the Eiver Ottawa by throwing saw- 
 dust and refuse into it from their mills a refer- 
 ence was made to the master to ascertain the 
 amount of damages :— 
 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that the master rightly treated the 
 defendants ar joint tort-feasors ; that he ^^■a3 
 not called upon to apportion the danrnges 
 accord; -ig to the injury inflicted by each defen- 
 dant : ve was not obliged to apportion them 
 accor( the different grounds of injury 
 claim, . ,ie plaintiff. Booth v. Batii, 21 fi. 
 
 ', ' '■ ■^J*-]— T'le right of action given by R. 
 
 ■ .!i.. 214, sec. 15, to the owner ol sheep 
 
 •^ by dogs, IS to be prosecuted with the 
 
 WM. i.i^,.iocedure of the appropriate forum. If, 
 
 i .'.7v,.;.e enaction be properly brought in the 
 
 :i i; it may be tried before a jury, and 
 
 . so tried, they, and not the Judge, 
 
 '.^tion the damages if an apportion- 
 
 iuiied. 
 
 Couni 
 wheif-- 
 shoul 
 ment ■ 
 
321 
 
 Jiul-ment of the County Court of w „■ . 
 revc.r.e.l. F,u- v. mma>LoS A. R. olo!' "" 
 
 See Edmonds v. HnniSlir,,, n ■ • 
 Society, ISA. R/jM^S £""''"'' "'''^^''«» 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 III. 
 
 I.NCRKASI.NO A.VD ReDUCINO. 
 
 tlif liability ..ftlio ■„.',,,' -^ mstruitcl „a to 
 
 alKrn.e,!. }\ /v ct' " " ",';7 '""1 «l'ouia be 
 Co, 22S C R ,07 ""'"'' ■«^a'«-'A/y> 
 
 . the jj..,,e wbo t.i^i'uL'i.j^r!!^!!,--:!-' ! ^'f -VO.U ,^hti«' rVi^if ..griin^i ';:j~ 
 
 Amount 1- 
 
 evhleuce, or there be some error", K ''"^ l'''^'""'"' ""'y was entitl .1 /'"'''"'« "'"t ore 
 
 of wbi.^b I,., .:.," i.::," J'^'^"' "It" c^onsideration 
 
 18 S. C. R. 2l>2. 
 
 Excessive Oamairnci l a „ 
 
 aste:unboat n.aki,^ wTkly"7l' |,T"'^ "ir'''''^ 
 and Ilalitux, oeeuoie,/'^ J,?^ F- ''^'^"■'''■" ^iosto'i 
 
 lea.e,l to theh^ 5 t "Jw 'i^, " '""^'' '''^^ 
 gettiiw to ami fr,m, tl„. f " ''"n'ose of 
 
 They went 4 mn. 'm" , 1 'I'^' "i ^^^^'nl^er. : 
 instead of tun jofl t t \ « ''-Walk, an,l ' 
 lights and the "ijlu : ,"'1';L''' ''''^'•'^ '"^"'« "" 
 straight down tl^e w ar^i Si '',?;!: -^"'f ""e.l 
 some di.stauce an,l (onnJT "'"'oAved after 
 whioii V.'s wife t inn. ,J"^'' "" 'etching 
 
 tried to c4h er t i i hr"/',,"? ^"''- ''"«'"■""' 
 Fortv-lour dtys .,/.?„''"' ' ^'i '"'" ^he water, 
 an action by V^at nLT b ^^''- ^' '''"'• ^" 
 
 ;t appeared that the deceased h^,.. , '^ '''^'=' 
 lar an.l continual niedicartre.ti '"Vi '''^fe'"- 
 accident, and the ,1 ./, -t ^"^eatment alter the 
 
 im.ner.ionwas 1,''^,:" ^^''^^'l'^'- or ""t the 
 
 The jury when aski^ ?\" v'^ itiTC^' '"^•- ''f ^f'- 
 recoveied. notwit Iwt,., i ■ ' ""' '"^ deceased have 
 
 had had\t u a ' tm/ ^'^' l^' T''^'"^' '^ ^^'^ 
 "'Plie.l, "very <,ub 1 ,•;""" "'"i. attendance? 
 
 the .Supreme Court f i'"^"" ''"'"ages, which I 
 
 andordereda new r"l O? '^""^'f f*^^ ."«'^'«. 
 decision:- "^'^^iwl. On appeal from that 
 
 Held, that Y.. and his wife .vera lawfully 
 
 lit the tlinn r\t iU.. _ ■. •' 
 
 agSx:!:;^^^K^-j-[-i-untofdan.. 
 
 longer route than that autli L V .*'""*'' ''' 
 "■as reduced by the cL. t f \ 7 '"' ''^''^e*' 
 rantably laroe Z„, ,1 "/.Appeal as nmvar- 
 Co., 19 A. K G04 ^'- ^"'""'' 'J''-"''^J(. ir. 
 
 Excessive Damages - X,,r 
 AoUri,uH V. G'rawl Trunk L'. ;,-. 
 
 7'ria/.]-~See 
 Co., 21 A. K, 
 
 verdicts are sulSt to tr» '" ' """ '"'^'' 
 t-V^urt, and if thi «„»„;«:!■' I'.'Vr'" "^ *''« 
 
 , that it is evident the • „u"m ' '"^ "1 '"'"" 
 «omen,aterial element T^^i^^^'^'^f^^^ 
 t.flTs case, a new trial «ill 1. ^ ^! ,tnt ' ^'''""• 
 
 A practisnig physician I,.,,-; , "• , 
 
 not permanently, .^S't;,:f ?'" '"I'^y- '^ 
 
 appeal, 22 A. R. 348. -"''^- ^'hnned in 
 
 upon the wharf'at t J'f" "^"^r '''•^•■'» 'awfully „ 
 
 that in vi^w of 'the est. I'.'f ', °^, *'"= accident; Tlf^"*"'"^,^ "^'"^^^^ '"Lieu of New Tr,«, , 
 
 S^ar.ght^^a.ml.tirit^tS-^'lhe,: 
 
 that they had ri"h >:^''°'" * '^f^amer ; and 
 
 ofapp Jch to thS ,m.:rre safe*f''" '"""'^ 
 using ordinary carp «n fi '^ ^'"" per-sons 
 
 an obligation ' s '' Z^ n ''"'"P'^''^ ^"« ""^»er 
 Held fnrM, *'-'l.'''a*; tliey were safe :_ 
 
 that til; wh ru'onil' "";'T "'^^^ p--*^ 
 J^=Sri:d£|^'-?,f'-^ 
 
 time cf tl,e accident fJ" ^°''"'"'"" °^ '' "^^ *''« 
 
 ---... „ „„.v.ei ai, a nominal .su 
 Appeal, instead of a new trid ,li,. , , :-,- 
 nient to be entere.l a.' iusr 1, 1 ' "Tted jn.Ig. 
 sheriff, for a like amo t '". '";''''f'^""f' *■ the 
 
 Se.e Taylor v. Af asset/ 20 n R i.m 
 and Cofey y. .yca.e, 25^ R^ J' „1S' C ''' '' 
 
 :il 
 
 IV. LlQUXDATEP DamAOKS OR I'liVALTy 
 
 lib 
 
 I 
 
 I '(!■ 
 
 ijiiiiii I 
 
 I i 
 
 ! IIH 
 
 t 
 
 ■ ■ 
 j 
 
 ! ■ 
 ! ■ 
 
 li 
 
 ?■-. i 
 
 
 , 
 
 If 
 
 
! Nil 
 
 323 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 r I ' 
 
 Nortli-Westorn H.iilw.ay ('iMii|)iiiiy a Imhius of 
 $(i'>,(l(H).(l() to l)u iistil in tlif ciiiiHlniction (if tlu; 
 riiilway, ii|m.ii tlii' loinlitidii that tliu Odiiiiiaiiy 
 slidiiia niiuuii "iiiilciiciKlenf for twi'iitv-ono 
 yeais. ^ In 1SS8 tli.' llaniilton an4 .\oi tli-\\\'a- 
 tern Kaihvay ( 'omiiany lifraiiif (a.s was on the 
 facts lifld) in ffr.'ct nicryiMl in tin' (irand 'I'niiik 
 Railway Company, and ceased to l)o an indc- 
 Jicndcnt lino : - 
 
 Held, alliiniing the jndginent of the (^)mInon 
 I leas Division and of Uohertson, ,1., at the trial, 
 that there had heen a hreach of tlie condition 
 entitling the plaintitis to recover the whole 
 ainount of the lionns as Ininidated damages 
 Coiiii/y of llaltoH V. Uraml Trunk I!. 11'. CIn., \{) 
 
 «i''^'v."'i^'' -A"''"'^''' "^'y *'"^ Supreme Court, 
 2\ &, C. K. 1 10, 
 
 324 
 
 is concerned, tliu purclinBer, if the work be not 
 
 completed l.y the time fixed, being entitled only 
 
 to actual damages. ' 
 
 lloliH,- V. (;„i,i,ii. .3 ^r. k W. :iS7, followeil 
 
 .ludgment of the (^tneen's liencli Division 
 
 reversed. Kirr L'i,;/i„(' (.'oni/iaiii/ v. /',y.»,-A 
 
 i<nr Tun <om/,au/,, '.'I A. R. 1ti(». Aflirmed 
 
 by the Supreme Court, L't S, C. R, 703. 
 
 Building Contract-Z»f'/r„/.]_UiuIera liuild- 
 iiig contract, in writing, the contractor agreed 
 that, Rubjeet to any extensions of time by the 
 architect, the building should bo fiiiish.'d by a 
 iianied <lay, and that in default he would pay 
 §.j() a week as li,|iiidatcd damages. It wa.s also 
 provulcd tiiat all extras, etc., should form part 
 of the contract if authorized by the architect 
 who was lirst to fix the jirice, and grant such 
 extension of time therefor as he thought neces- 
 sary, and power was also given him to extend 
 the time for completion in case of a strike. 
 
 The building was not completed for over four 
 months after tlie time fixed, and this action for 
 the balance of the contract price was commenced 
 within the time tlie final payment was made 
 payal)le under the contract. 
 
 Althongh some extras were done, and there 
 was evidence as to delay by strikes, the architect 
 was not asked for, and he did not grant, anv 
 extension of time :— = > j 
 
 Held, that the contract must govern, and 
 that the defendants were entitled to recover by 
 way of counterclaim, the sum provided by the 
 contract as licpiidated damages. 
 
 If a claim to liipiidated damages by a rlefen- 
 ■dant IS pleaded l)y way of counter-claim, the 
 plaintdi may rejily matters arising subsequent 
 to action brought. The idaintill was allowed 
 to reply that the final payment under the con- 
 tract had accrued due after action brought. 
 
 A/itri; if i)leaded by way of set-oil. Tolv v. 
 Andreict, 8 (,». B. U. 4-28, followed. MrXamara 
 V. Skatn, 23 O. R. 103. 
 
 V. Mn.^si-iiE OK I)A.MA(u;s. 
 
 Agreement to Convey hand-^ Losh of /l,,,-- 
 j <l<un I'nnunxli, J/„rfr'. J-Lo.ss of profit sustained 
 I by, and the expenses which a purchaser „f 
 I lands has been put to, (,n a resale by hi,,, 
 unknown to his vendor, before such purehnser 
 has entered into a binding .jontraet for purehise 
 !are not damages naturally tlowing from the 
 hreach of the latter agreement, and cannot \m 
 recovei'ed by him again.st his vendor. 
 
 In such a case, if recoverable ,a all, tlw true 
 measure ot damages would be the inerc,-,.,,! 
 value of the lanil, at the time of the l,re,i(li 
 over the inirchase money. Lomy v. OlU-e.r •_'! 
 O, II. 80. * 
 
 Building Contract-/J>e?flir/.]— Where a con- 
 tract provided that upon non-completion by a 
 hxed tiate a contractor was to pay or "allow " 
 ten dollars a day until completion :— 
 
 Held, that this authorized a deduction as 
 liquidated damages of the amount so "allowed " 
 from the contract price, even as against lien- 
 liolders claiming adversely to the contrac 
 other than those having liens for v" -p .here 
 such wages liens were less in the at^ ite than 
 ten per cent, of the contract price. McBcan v 
 Ktnnear, 23 0. R. 313. 
 
 Oontra,ct-D,la7j Caused hi/ Contractor.-]— 
 \\ here a contract provides that an engine shall 
 be built and placed in position by a certain date 
 with a penalty for each day's delay, the time of 
 cominencement is of the essence of the contract 
 and ir, owing to the purchaser's fault, the con- 
 tractor is materially delayed in commencing the 
 work, tlie parties are at large so far as the penalty 
 
 , Book-blnding-/.o,y.v ,./ Profit,. ]-M. entered 
 into a contract with the Dominion (Joveriimint 
 to do parliamentary and departmental bindi],<. 
 tor a period of five years. IJnring the contiiiu' 
 aiice ot the contract the (iovcrnnient emiilove.l 
 other persons to do portions of the work which 
 M. was entitled to .lo, and in conse(iuence „f 
 tins iM. (through his trustee in insolvency) 
 brought an action by petition of right, clainiii,.' 
 damages against the (iovcrnment for breachef 
 contract. The breach was admitted by tlie 
 Crown, and the case was referred by the Court 
 to two referees to ascertain the ainount due M 
 tor loss of profits in re.si,ect to the work that 
 was withheld J.-om him and given to other per- 
 sons. I he icferees found that the work .lone 
 l).y_persons other than .M. amounted to i*",") - 
 ■■fo/.iO, and that the cost of performin.' .sueii 
 work aniountcl to .•r;|(i,094.74, leaving a Iwlaiieo 
 for contractor's profit of .sir,,-_'(J,S.O.J. l-'roni tliii 
 balance_ the referees made deductions tor 
 superintendence generally, wear and tear nf 
 plant, budding, etc., rent, insurance, fuel mi.| 
 taxes, amounting in the whole to s!;{(j,S7 7l 
 and rccommeiided tiiat .M. be paid a sum of 
 Srll t)2o 34 as representing the contractor's iiroHt 
 lost to M. by tile breach of contract. On appeal 
 iroin the referees' report :— 
 
 Held, that the referees were wrong in makiui; 
 I such deducticms, and that M. was entitled to U 
 paul the difference between the value of the 
 I work done li,y persons other than himself diirii)' 
 the continuance of his contract, and the aiiioui c 
 it would have actually cost him, as such con- 
 tractor, to perform that work. Bond v The 
 Queen, 1 Ex. C. R. 180. 
 
 Bonus— /'ai/'for to Comply with Conditiom.]- 
 
 See County of Hallon v. Grand Trunk J! W. 
 
 °',' \^;f^- ^^- -''2, 21 S. C. R. 716, a»^e322; 
 
 and Vtl/a;ie of Brhihton v. Auston, 19 A. K. 
 
 305, nw^ellO. 
 
 Building CoatveLCt— Reduction of Price for 
 Bad ll'o)-^\l— In an action to enforce a 
 mechanics' hen, brought by material men a"aiii.-t 
 
ii25 
 
 IV. :iS7, followed 
 
 '» lil'llL'll ])ivis|l,ll 
 'oill/KIIII/ V. I'inirh 
 
 H. liiO. AHiiM,,.,] 
 C. R, 70;{. 
 
 the contractor and the r,>fM«f„-„j 
 contc-st was a.s tu wl.t her ,mvH • """"i' *'"■' 
 thooontractor, the re ttCo? "*'' ''""'"" '" 
 Jml.leonthecontraJtf-!! ' "''"""' '"" ''^■'"W 
 
 <ma^"^i.r,rs°i^.::„s^ /'"'"^'"^ -^ -^ 
 
 IM'«a, mMlastl.oywcre bein" L'f •"" T' ^'"-' 
 %^ v8 ma,le by the archkoniT^i' ' '" "''l«^'t'"" 
 ^u„•k,„anship :- '"^'""*"-''=* '» *'"-■"• "uterial and 
 
 Held, that the ocoiiDvin<' .if fi,, i i 
 
 of tile work :- '^ '™' '"" '■»» "«ceptance 
 
 Held, also, that a retluotion of H,„ 
 price by an amount e,,,,, 1 tothe , ,^? '■""*'''■'!'' 
 value between the bid teH.V " '^'■'='"-'« "" 
 8ho,dd have been , i ;'';'''' '''^^ ^''"'••1' 
 measure ol the set-c^ , .'| L ti "" '^'I'^'l'"'^'" 
 were entitled. '»W '; ,v!^J,;';^':5°'^;'^[-^ 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 './A:v.]-The defendant al^e7 Si "^ ■^ ^'""• 
 to exchange five hon.se ^l^ in a „ r e ^ """"^^ 
 t.on, (or certain lan.ls of the , hU tf l ",T" 
 ^•ontract, which was dated Ma c ,..4 f ^ 
 houses were to bo comnlet,.,! m"^''' ""-' 
 •^i."ilar to certain lun's^S o ' stTeet '';.'?"'i 
 coineyances were to l,« , 1 , -^'"t'wl 
 
 the parties w ii„ '; 'l^ ^^'^'l-angod between 
 
 l.'4th: but as a"L't"e/ ot'";..;"';! ''^ ^''"^ 
 e\eeuto( and e\ch inu,.,l oi /a, *'"-y ^^''^''e 
 plaintifl- snbie^u f t"5;:f .^.--^y^'J''. The 
 claimed daina-Ls for n ,„ 1 ''csent action 
 
 .oS\u;r'LieTi:,f '^tht'ST* °""''^'"'"' - 
 
 o):_ ^ "^"^ matters complained 
 
 delivery of the Z-nS%or:;arc T' '"'' ' 
 bee,„„e n.ergcd in the conveS - ' "°' 
 
 '.a!S:;::'::;;t^!;;:!;i'-"f-'ts which n.ight: 
 
 Ht the prope, ime ' « a ^ ' '^ '^"'^'Pleted | 
 <l»."ages', tlie con "act nf. m/ eThn.'"'''"^'''' °^ ' 
 that the houses were ,nt, n 1, I 1 '"« ''""^"^ 
 *«'VA V. Tenuant7iQ\lK lit ' '"'"''"'' 
 
 3» 
 
 "•'"•M-(»n the 9th a1 t s7-r'';r' '■' .^''"- 
 
 '■"tered into a writte, roMn- / ' ."?" «"PP""nt 
 "'i'"' <i<'^'Tnn,e,t ,.,,'.''"'' ^''" ""'"• 
 "11 the steel r ilftl t . 'V'"'' "''''''^ '" '"''•geH 
 
 -\thatnn«iruS::Lr.'i;;:;:::it ''"''''• 
 
 «oing vessels noon tl„. ul,. ,m '"■""'"'• '"J'" «<-«• 
 '^f Montreal d Z/t , ' ' '' f" ''"'''"'"■ 
 
 that year, and t tdi er h" ' " "''^■'^^'t'"'' i" 
 tl'« i^'ck Cut on th I, h 1 'a'nd "'s" T"*^" 
 'I" ly entered upon the e.xec utio ,' In '^"l'P'"«t 
 !V"1 "" oo^npliint was ma le / L^T" '"'it'' 
 •'overnnient that lii« i.n.f ""lalt of the 
 
 "MS not entirelv s' sf/u^. "^'^"'-' "^ "'" ^''^k 
 "'""th of slm L"l e u P'-. ^^''"I^'t""" in tho 
 l'"'l "Mlv ca>V e la ;„ ' ' "'" "'" ''"PPli''"t 
 (iovernment, w hout ; V '"'"'"^^' "^ '•'"'«• '»'" 
 pliant, caricelled tl, ,' I"" ""'"•'" '" "'« «"P- 
 •■tl.or persons'JoIlo* e Tor k tlL' h'; ', ";"^'"^'=" 
 to i.erforni. Thereuno.i tl, '""' "K""""'! 
 
 l-tition of ri.hS,/..""''!''"'"'* «'«<•* 
 
 Pctitionof ,.i.h ehd L ," '"''''"'"'* ^l"'' * 
 
 «^-n;n.cntt^ir;^iSl^'''-ttho 
 
 ti."SsS^Kn^-^:,-S'^!j to damages. 
 
 "-ingS^i;:::.:,r7'h; ^:^^::::,p~ 
 
 Con version —/);«/)•«. .. 
 
 off the plaintiff's access oLiltr'ofr'?' ""' 
 l)y diverting it from his farm ^ "^ " ''*'"^"' 
 
 tai;;,:ft,:;^::^,i '^r r ;r^ ^'"^ "-"-«« «•«- 
 
 i an,l the proper .!» s.^tir their""" ' 
 
 was to treat the diversion ,. „ ^ '" ''adages 
 
 ; consider its effect n.mn 1, P"'"''"'«nt and K, 
 
 U. C. R. OO.^listinSel. "" ''• "" ^'"■' ^-^i 
 3-. Aliirnied in appeal, 22 A. R. 8«J.' 
 
 £^^«v....„.'^!;;7^^t^'^eo„.der^^ 
 
 Diversion of Waterco-'^.c,-- 1 Th« .>i ■ .» 
 
 liavmg tailed to prove - „., [^^ Pl^ntiff, 
 allowed nominal dLnaJes f, """^'^ "^"^ 
 
 instead of granting a tand-.L ■ ''''°"« ' ""'» 
 compel the^restora^.on ^ fc Z/''J""«"°'» *« 
 Court <lirecte,I a leferenoe t . ''"^^'■•'■.^""'•se, the 
 pensation to wl ieh t' nl?'f »^"' *''^ ™'»- 
 entitled as nponaifauoriSlh:" "'""''.^ ''^ 
 watercourse under 51 V c I 2 ) "'""L°^ *''« 
 sec. h (O.). Tolionl V^^L /• '^'^!.'"'''- ^0, sub- 
 ! tb.., 22 R «04 ^«"«'/"'" A«ct>c A J J'. 
 
 *«» hours afte, the.V n '','''''*'" «'^'^n ""til 
 
 --" thus tf late'^Tco Se "hei'^ ""''''' '^"'' 
 hfl ■ "titln.^ t ! ^wiupece, tneir ownpr wis 
 
 '^■^^"^^^^^''^^^'^'^-^^. 
 
 r^tTVelii^,!'T'/ ^>'-^ of Wentworth 
 
 nants for title ml; l\ I*""'""^. with cove- 
 certain iL.df;irue*;^,,fri f ""^ ^«*' 
 
 , erecting a dam at a certain snot Tr""^°> *'^ 
 wards held that they a no L ^ was after- 
 such a right, but it wL shew r'". *" S-"*"* 
 
 I i-^-y even, praoti^I?^;;:^,:;;^ ^ ./VT-?*^ 
 the .~put in question • """ *' 
 
 |.e,%e'ull"jur'£^ -',« -* '-ble to 
 
 value of the lam" w thon th"^ '""' *''« ""^'-al 
 
 I but only the actuar 'ct cal v-duf "fl "«''^' 
 
 I posed rK;ht, which wa not ng "^ ^^^ ""^ 
 
 '■1! 
 
 i 'II 
 
 ! if' 
 
 ; I 
 
327 
 
 DAMAGE 
 
 m 
 
 •Tmign lit of Fergtiaon, J., affirmed, (l«ur, 
 J. A. , disgoiitin.!'. f'/alt v. Urand Trunk It I) . 
 Co., 19 A. E. «o;) 
 
 RM' in ini. oi' T (I'ie.J— In an action tor dam- 
 agiii ii>r lirea;', ( i c. covenant not to curry on a 
 oertuin buninnsa, It wag held that general Iosh of 
 cuMtnni after the commencement of the new 
 hnniness by the defendants could ho shewn by 
 the plaintiff na evidence to go to the jury of 
 damages resulting to him from such businees. 
 
 J.'ritr/illr v. Jirmis, [ISll'.'l 2 Q. B. 524, applied 
 •nd followed, and that damages •>■■..,. ^Derly 
 asaefsed up to the date of t' i ■• _, . 
 
 .SMkir V. Ihiuv'Uh, Ju o. K. 342, followed. 
 Turner v. Burm, 24 0. R. 28. 
 
 illness from which the plalntitt' had suffered limi 
 resultrd frou) exposure to cold upon illegal i x- 
 pulsicii Irom a street car an award of daniii;.'(s 
 in respect of that illness was uphehl. 
 
 .Ju(lgment of the foiniiion I'Icii.s Division 'J 
 O. K. (l,s;}, affirmed, Hugarty, C. J. 0., dissent, 
 ing. llrmMeil \. Tonmto I{. ((' Co., 21 A. H. 
 07M. Sie. the next case. 
 
 Blerht of vrAY—LoHH of /i».sme,M.]— The 
 defendant, the owner of certain water lots upon 
 the lake front, subject to the usual reservation 
 in favour of the Crown of free jjassago over all 
 navigalile waters thereon, refused U, allow the 
 plaintiff to l)aul ice cut from the lake over such 
 lots, when frozen, to the whari from which the 
 plaintiff desired to sluj) the ice for the purposes 
 of hiH business, uidcss the plaintiff paid toll, 
 which he refused to do : — 
 
 Held, that the water (jver the defendant's lot 
 was a highway, and the plaintiff had the right 
 without payment to cross the lot, whether the 
 water upon it was fluid oi fro> n ; and, having 
 a cause of complaint, iiv \ a rigiit of action for 
 his personal loss, he was entitled to come to the 
 Court f<r a declaration of right. 
 
 Ooiiderhniii v. Cily of Totonio, 21 (>. li. 120, 
 1?' A. R. (341, .uid Citi/ of 'J'oroii/o v. Lornch, 24 
 O. R. 229, followed :— 
 
 Held, also, that the defendant was liaVile for 
 Buch reasonable damages as flowed directly from 
 the wrong done by Ins refusal ; but, as he had 
 acted without malice and under a hona fi<h mis- 
 take as to his rights, ami is the idaintitf might 
 have paid the toll ui Jer piotest, the defendant 
 was not liable for the plaintitlV ' ,ss of busiiios 
 consequent on his failure to sli the ice. Cut 
 lerton v. JH/ler, 26 O. R. 36. 
 
 Bxpulslon from Our— Kxposure to Culil. |— 
 
 In an action for danuiges from being wroiigfuily 
 
 ejected from a street car, illness resulting irdm 
 
 exposure to cold in consequence of such eji 1 1- 
 
 uient, in not too remote a cause for dainiifii-.s • 
 
 and where the evidence was that the iieis,,,,' 
 
 ejected was properly clothed tor protei ti,.,i 
 
 against the severity of the weathe, , but was m 
 
 a state of perspiration from an altercation wit j. 
 
 : the conductor when he left the car and so IIiiIpK" 
 
 j to take cold, the jury were justified in tindiin' 
 
 that an attack of rheumatism and broiiehitj^ 
 
 ; which ensued was the natural and proljuMe 
 
 I result of the ejectment, and in awardin;; 
 
 (laniages therefor. Gwynne, J., dissentin.r 
 
 Turonlo A'. W. Co. v. Urinnteil, 24 S. V. if 
 
 570. 
 
 c. ^^^*»' '-license.— /'aiVinv to make Title.]— 
 fiir St. t'ntharine.i Miltiii<i ami Lmnher Co v 
 The Qiieni, 2 Ex. C. R. 202, and Ihilnur v. The 
 ^ueen, 3 Ex. <■■ :'^ 184; 23 S. C. R. 4S8 ; a//;-- 3M. 
 
 Trespass ti- the VerBon—ArreU before. In- 
 dor.'iemeiii „/ Wwnant—DetentUm After. i-A 
 warrant for the arrest of the plaint:" viio hud 
 madedefault in payinga tine on ■■ .ictioufor 
 an infraction of the liquor '■• Mise la- . was sent 
 from an outlying county ci' Before it 
 
 was emlorsed by a mag: i e city the 
 
 plaintiffwas arrested the I t« the defen- 
 
 dants, the chief constable d a Uci. ctive, and 
 conhned. .«onie hours aftti the arrest the war- 
 rant was properly indorocd and the detention of 
 the plaintiff was continued until payment of the 
 fine: — 
 
 Held, that the only damages recoverable by 
 the plaintiff were for the trespass, up to the time 
 
 ol VI" ,''"^ . "g °f *^e warrant. Southwick v. Hare, 
 ^^ V. i\, o2o. 
 
 VI. Remotbnkps. 
 
 Bxpulslon from Street Car— Takimi Cold.] 
 — Where there was some evidence that serious 
 
 Impurity of Seed.]— Where need isdoliveinl 
 by one per.son to another without any wariaiitj-, 
 1 honestly believing it to be clean, to be grown en 
 ' the land of the 'ittcr, the produce tie reof to le 
 ^returned .uul ; .id for at a tixcd , ce per 
 bushel, the transaction is a bailment ai. I not a 
 sale ; and damages arising from other ii urns 
 seed having been mixed therewith, an>l > :ir- 
 vesting having become n. if tered on the gieiind 
 and coming up the follow ing year on the iiiii.i 
 , are too remote, and not Mithin the rule ' ' 
 'down in Hadleij \. Ihutmlalr, I) i:.\. 341. ,„i 
 ''I'l-y v. Thame-i /vncorti Commiiiu, L. K ,0 
 B. 181. ■' "^ 
 
 I McMulhi, V. Fm, 13 O. R. 57, and Smith v. 
 Crien, 1 C. 1'. D. 02, distinguished. 
 
 The plaintiff', having received seed from the 
 defendant to be grown under the circumstaii. . » 
 ami conditions above mentioned, became awuju 
 while it was growing tha vetches were coining 
 up with it, but did not inform the defendant of 
 the fact, and permitted them to grow, ami 
 ('elivered the produce mixed to the defendant, 
 ..iid was piid for it : — 
 
 Held*, that he could not recover damages fer 
 an injur\ w hich his own conduct was responsible 
 
 McCoUum V. Dainn, 8 U. C. It. 150, specially 
 referred to. I^tnvart v. Sculthorp, 23 0. K, 
 544. 
 
 Obstruction In HlKhway.]— The plaimitl 
 was driving a horse ami sleigh along a highway 
 belongiii ^o a city corporation, when the rumitr 
 of the ouigh came in contact with a lar:;e 
 boulder, when liy both horse and sleigh were 
 overturned. In endeavouring to raise his hor^e 
 the plaintiff' sustained a bodily injury, en 
 account of which he sued the corpor tion fur 
 damages, alleging that his injury was due to 
 their negligence : — 
 
 Held, that the damages were mt too re-, 
 mote : — 
 
 Paije V. Bmksport, 64 Maine 51 ; and Stichuy 
 V. Maidttone, 30 "Vermont 738, applied and fol- 
 lowed. McKeb ill V. City of Londuii, 22 0. 
 R. 70. 
 
329 
 
 re ii't too re 
 
 DAMAGES. 
 
 Vir, Special Mattkrs aM) PnocKEi.iNos. 
 Appeal Bond.]-In wimlii.g.i,,, t).ococ.linu« 
 of Hao ia a .Mortgage with the consent of the 
 
 Tlie .lefon.laiitH h,n-.l tl.c j.Iaintiffi «,;ow and 
 pile -Iriver, ut „ ,„u,k.,1 pHce per ,lav thev t« 
 |'<i responnihle f„r da.nago thereto eicept to 
 
 ,. ., ,-- ;"6"«" "....M.e consent of the relVriTlT,' Th"' ',"■•.'""'.'> r;*""" •""' t''''''. until 
 
 Ten."'; "";' »"",''''■•''' ''> »" ""~».'ia/tr^t While ,„ the .iLfe,..!. 
 
 ful temlerer to a .liulge from the report con- f r o . .n ^' ''> ,"^''«"'| '" " 8ton„ of unu.ual 
 tirming the sale wa« .liHmiMie.l. whereunnn , I ' ^''" "^'"^ '^''•' l"'^' ''"ver w.re .Iriven fr«,, 
 further appeal to th.' Court of Annn "'V;"- ,«""">•«» an,l .kinage.l :- '"ve.i ir«tn 
 
 i^ll-wea u'p'on the appelhur^vii 'S^^ .la^f " V,"'' *''" 'l"f-"l'^.ts were liabU- for the 
 «>,.,] to the HucceH.'f'„l tenderer t?. an^ ^he i he 2T. T ""^'"""^-l' '""• f"r the re>.t .!« ,.g 
 
 t::rx.t;^!xz^^s m jEz^'^P' is r- »»• — ■ 
 ;;S"^;its-it^^^^^^^^^^^ ■ 
 
 hy the purchaser until after the failure ,.(thl\ t . 
 
 ap,M,.al. The conditions of sale pr v de.uS enoll^rTf'T ^-''?" J""«'"«ti"n to award «n 
 
 j.,s..H.,„n^woul.l he ^iven upon piy.neni ..f^ I ^f!:::Z.:'V!::J''.}']''!'^^'^ '1'^'""^- without a 
 
 fix.' 
 
 Jole, nor wan any pr;;;;iM„n mX^ill'tl^r'^ll'ir I ""' ^^P'-'^V'-^'y- 
 
 ^■T^ l^!l'^p^>::'--.^^ ■--- or taxes ^t'' [ as^;s,:;^;:7:£^^^?,:-;!:;J:t°^lirS 
 
 I the 
 that 
 
 u; da„.ages for-;i;^e;i.:;^i!;;;':;r":he"S^;tr ^Tm^'T '^'T ^'- :''?^-^'-"^^H;i;^^om 
 
 Banks and Banking - 5,...,/ i>.y.o,.V _ i ;;;rS"rhi« "'? '^T.' "''r ^i- .lefemCt 
 ho.,ifntJi.juml to Pa;, 0«/,]_The dan, ages I been T, eh J '''"'',' ''"'""«'' '''« '^"'"•"'•■t '"a.! 
 
 =-i:!:;.,!'>:,i---'"^ -.poster .n ^ S;;:?\o:;!:xSJ;r:;t:^i-r^^^' 
 
 P|)«al, The conditions of sale prov de that enollir"v"';"T ^~''?*' J""«''i«tion to award an 
 .ssc.H.,„n woul.l he given upon pL.nent .f the I re i ence w ''' "'^ '"■ ".«-■"«, '''""ages without a 
 
 :e:i:ifti;rn-?-Lr-^tr^i>r-?l£T'- 
 
 «.vi„gs..ankVrt;-;;;''7:'S°;h::L 
 
 made h,s deposit subject to special trrms.n 
 
 he wrongful refusal of the hank to pay 't to 
 
 lnm„ally, are limited to the i,{te^est on 
 
 f'>-~etti V. lyuilam,, 1 B. & Ad. 41.'-,; and 
 ho,., V Sletoard UC. B. 594, distinguished 
 y/-«rf.r.o« V. yia»i. o;- Hamilton,^ u. R 
 
 Decision of JJose, J., affirmed 
 Murray, 21 0. R. 4.58. 
 
 O'aiilt 
 
 lainnctlon- Damagex in Lieu of I„junct^on.^ 
 -.S^.e .4.//.„,.v. ^Va«,< Trunk li. IK.^a.lS 
 
 i)<V«n'"Trr/'^?" '■" ^''" "f~I»t^rext Post 
 
 LJ,un\~Ste, I he Queen V. Grand Trunk R W 
 
 Benefit Insurance. ] -The blaintiff in „. ,"•' - ''f; ^'- R- 132, /w<, Intekest • J/rrw' 
 
 piiiy tor tlie death of her huql.n 11,1 ,.., ■' .." 
 
 «un, of §250 hy a beneH sum, ce societ'v in «/^*?;^7^«'«''»''^ '« '/'« '»^«y 0/ r.arf. 1_.V« 
 
 railway company was relieved from afl itbilitv r iV,„i a,- ■ 
 
 The decease's certificate didnot pi^fe s to t da^^^^^i '"• "^" '^^-'""^^f'-J-The defen- 
 
 ,1' fi.. ..„;....:.^ "v "^ "J^i' i'''*i :i mitigation of damages that 
 
 eiiti ed to as damages. H,cks v. .^>„v^or^ .^c 
 '32, ;».v/, Interest. ' ^ ' "• 
 
 , Hi-of Gooas-^,....,., ., /...„.„_c,„. "'t' ^^*t 
 
 vfct ch '. t^'^,I-'''fl Act of .\r .nitoba, 60 
 Vict, ch. .'i, actual malice or culpable n^i/li 
 gence must be proved in an act o for fi 
 unless special damages arr claimed •- 
 Held, that a general allegation of damacea bv 
 
 damages 
 
 words are 
 
 </«»<. J-Where there i;'r„ZiHjr'''''f" ^'"- 1' .'""S*"^ *° "^^^'-ec: 
 
 do a thins not in i C;elf ..n-C' 'fl T^ '" ' ^°' ''''^^''^ «'''"'!«'• ^1'-. t!,„ ,..„,,„. _, 
 
 I wise evidenr. of the special damage « ina^lmis- 
 
 1 i 
 
 !l 
 
 nil 
 
 
SSI 
 
 DEED. 
 
 lui 
 
 
 H 
 
 •iU M. u. K. 4.), 
 
 :M8** ^'"'^■^'"'^ '■• ^'''■''''"' '•♦ J'- H. 4l.'4, ;;os< 
 
 . Replevin ]- Tim i.laintiH', a solicitor, cl^im- 
 iiiK on (|,;ftn.la,it s papers ii lien for cohIh, s.ttl.'.l 
 HiUi hiiii, • ikiiiK 11 "lite theretor iiavalile on 
 deman.l j„ then w.nt to the ll„il.;i States. 
 loavlnK the note and pi.pers with Mn..tlier «oliei. 
 tor an hiB agent. The .kfen.iaiit, HtatinL' that 
 he rc(,uire.l the impers. „,• s„nie of them, for use 
 n hiH l.,,«,ness l,n.u«ht. rei,l, vi„ pnueedingH in 
 
 the Division Court, j-iving a I ,1 t„ proneeute 
 
 the milt «ith efleet an.l without .lelay, or to 
 return the property replevied and to pay the 
 (lamttKeH suHtaine.l by the issuing of the wrif 
 and there was a hreaeh of the hoii.l in not 
 prosecuting the suit with efie.t. I'mUi' the 
 replevin the .lefen.lant only procured K,n,e of 
 the papeiH and which were tendered hack to 
 thepIaintif1;,„dref„Hcd, the defendant .(ating 
 that they were of no value, the agent havinu 
 rotaiDo,! the valuuhl.. one- Jn an actien on the 
 bon.l byplaintitr to recover the amount of the 
 vCi^^* """*'''■''' ' '""' '^"''''^'"'^'J ''.V tho rcple- 
 
 Misted, which was .,u, Mioimhic, by leaHon of I 
 the taking of the note and departure from the ' 
 country It was not .lisplaccd l,y the rei.levin I 
 suit; but. 111 any event, the plaintilf had failed i 
 toprovo any actual damage; and though there I 
 might be judgment for nominal .lamagcs and' 
 oosta there wouM be a set-titi of the defen- I 
 dant 8 costs of trial ; and the action was dia- i 
 missed without costs. 
 
 Under the Division Courts Act, U S. O ch I 
 51, see. '2m, the whole matter could liave i)een 
 litigated in tho Division ( 'ourt. 
 
 Quitrc, as to the amount of damages recover- 
 
 _ The fact of tho conditions of the bond beinc ' 
 in the alternative instead of the conjunctive i 
 remarked on. 
 
 On appeal to the Divisional Court the iudc- i 
 o"'r 484 ""''"'''''• ^'""'"' '''■ '^l«-edonatd, ti 
 
 m 
 
 In Hueh an Action, after tho lands had U, » 
 
 vacant tor many years, and th<^ mortgaaee 1, „ 
 
 then ma.le an actual entry and « as NubHem.entlv 
 .llHposHes«e.l, and the lands taken l-v a railw v 
 compnnv for the i,urpo.seH of th.ir u, dertak,, 
 ««■"«''<■''' <''t'tl'''l to recover the value.,, xil 
 l,d as aanmges, to bo held by him as seeuritv 
 for hs mortgage nmneys, the mortgagor uZ 
 entitl, .1 to redenu in renpeet of the damaj. ';: 
 he MMild have been in respect of the la, , I 
 J^''^>l'y "■■ (um.l.ai, Pari/ir J,-. (|'. Co., -Jl (.' 
 
 Wage«-vl^mm.»/ fo Hfmvn,rate I.,, U,.,,;, 
 -n<m,ui,>.jorFrihn,- u, ,h «,.]-,V„. Sv,ih v 
 M<('ii<ia>i, -M A. K. 542, '1\ » (• R Ofii ,,, /J 
 ^o.:^nnd .)/».,/.■. v. »-.,, ^24 S.V!?: "cj 
 
 DECLARATION OF RIOHT 
 
 •SVe Ice— JuDGMKNT, III. 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 See Crown- -Way. 
 
 DEED. 
 
 I. CONDITION.S, 332. 
 II. Co\KTRr(!TI()X. 
 
 1. C'indUiv,i>^, Ihxtrvafium „„,/ Exrej.Hcm; 
 
 3e\<rerB-I)nmage.H~A,:t of Ood.]-\yhcre a 
 sewer, built and maintained by a municipal 
 corporation, is free from structural defect and 
 18 of sulhcient capacity to answer all ordinary 
 needs, tho corporation is not liable for damages 
 cause.l, as u result of an extraordinary rainfall 
 
 compelled l,y by-law to use the sewer for drain- 
 age purposes. 
 
 An extraordinary rain-fall may properly be 
 treated as an act of God, in the technic^ll n.ean- 
 ing of that term, though it is not of unpreced- 
 ented seventy, ii there is nothing in previous 
 experience to point to a probability of recur- 
 rence. 
 
 Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division 
 reversed. Qarjield v. Cil,/ oj Toronto, 22 A. 1!. 
 
 2. Deso-lptioii, .3;!4. 
 
 3. Entate Crecilcd, 337. 
 
 4. Option to Pwc/iasf, 337. 
 
 III. Reformation, 338. 
 
 I. Conditions. 
 
 Slander— Fmdiii;/ of Ko Damai/tA—Sce Jjnsk 
 McCormack, 20 O, K. 497, po,t 340. 
 
 ofi^pt'^^'^^r''^''"^, ^{°'-^J^(l''i.]-Axx action 
 glie tCeol''""'* '""''" *"' "' ''^ '''' •"°'-'- 
 
 Revocation byOrantor.l-Bydeedbetwipn 
 
 , B. grantor of the first part, certain n me Ipe, 
 
 7\l T^T °^ *'"' second part, and P. gJZ, 
 
 . ot the third part, B. conveyed his prop? 
 
 the tnistees, the trusts declared bdng that if 
 
 intended for the support or advantaL-e u,,! 
 
 is:r?o°' ^ ^^'"f'^y '""^ deed hc^ ; 
 
 anted to perform, tho trustees should convey 
 , the property to P and it should be reooiueved 
 i to B. in cMe he survived. No trust was 
 I declared m the event of P. surviving and fail iV 
 to perform the conditions or of failure n ht 
 lifetime o both parties. In an actim by B. to 
 have this deed set aside the trial Judge held that 
 B. when he executed it was ignorant of its 
 
 ^^.^'^h^t? ?^/v'.t' "" "n 
 
 ment by directing that the trustees should re- 
 convey the property to B. on the ground that 
 
f^firJ^Wi 
 
 333 
 
 DEED. 
 
 ■t inn/ Exi-eiJtmin, 
 
 Hi'ld adini.inj; tho lUiaioii of tho Conit 
 
 P. «.roc„mim.m,,,mfl..,f t,. hi, n^U i,. ^ 
 conv,.jHn.r ..f th.. pr.,,„.rt,v ; that l,y fa,l, ,„ t 
 
 B , t I., grantor, linr- tht! .mly imt^oii to 1,, 
 
 m. u,„l .I.,,,,,,,., ^^ ^_,,^ ^^^. ^|_ U 
 
 l)(rf\. /oi,» ,■ V. /;,„/,■, ..(, s. c. R. U7. 
 
 as* 
 
 l^'f'M.lun H miK ,t .ell or l,.a«„ th- 1,.,„|. M uZ 
 "" ( I'l/ "J '■^t. n,„„a.., li.'l o. If. 114. 
 
 II. CoNSTIiicTION. 
 
 1. Cmlllioiix, /y-irrralioiiM ami Exception, 
 
 KlKht of V/^y-Comtrnvnon of Omnt.]-A 
 .lf..| .,t con V. vane,. ,A la,„l uikIlt tlio Short 
 Forms A,f Iron, tho ,,h„Mti,l to the .It "„ l,u L 
 recit,..l th.t th. httt.r h.,! .i.t.rmi ,' ' „ 
 Btruo watorworkH in th.-ir nu.nicipality "l 
 for that ro,,u,rc,l tho hu„l for h„ 1,11,,.; m 
 otho imrpoH... ,.o,.„o..to,l ,vith th.i wato..«ork« 
 an. thepla„,t,nha,la«,oo,l to hoII tho.,^ ,ch 
 
 •iiiM' a to tho ro,„|,t,„„8 Ml forth. Tho oonsi,! 
 *rat.on «,i8 ,i vuluahlo o„o. Tho K.ant «L io , u 
 defen,ia„t, a„,l thoir a.«i,P - ^ftr 1! -J . ^^ ^ 
 purposo« ,no„tiono,l i„ ,he reoital. of tl o Ia„ 1 
 aeso,-. .e.i, n.th full rij;ht of in^.oss an J . 
 toan.lfron, tho sai.l lands fo,. tho .lofon, a> 
 
 oth .;iZ f '■■'"' "•"''.■•■«'>'k« with to,„m an.l 
 otliirw,8e, fr.w.i a cortaii, streot. otc, aloi =. a 
 
 thoir "h',,""""' ^•''•- '7'""''."'" to the .lofon-hX 
 tl,o,r 8uocoflsoi-s an.l .•,.s,-.i...ns, for the pnrnosos ' 
 afoiosa,.! to a„,l lor thoir .solo an.l only' ".^ or 
 eye,., sul.joot nevxMtheles.s, to the follow! „„- 
 <l,o„«. The tirnt co,„litio„ vas that he 
 <Iefen,lants shonhl fenoo a,„l keep fence at the r 
 ow" <-.viHM,se tho Ia,„l conveye.l to then a m 
 P aoo an ontraooe an,! ^ate o„ the right of wry 
 
 ve>o,l, f„r the use ot tho ,,l;.int ,11', hi« heirs an,l 
 J^mt'..,, un,l all po.sons 'l-um,nK under h,.o ' 
 
 no''Trr'' '"; "■• *'-.••"'«" re,,nire the: 
 s«mo. 1 ho second condition was, that the, 
 defendants should put and .naintain L. ll'ht of 
 way ,n a reasonal.lo state of repair unt,l the 
 happoning o a certain event, in.l the,-eafter 
 that the plan.tifl- and defendants sho Id each 
 
 ucc or.li ng to tho,r respective requirements. Ce/- ' 
 ta n other conditions we.v, also made. There ' 
 was a eovenan lor .juiot possession for the mir^ 
 
 davits alll.i«^^-''"''^''^ T'' "'*^'* t'^ the defen- 
 s^il m 1 or ?"" "l"^" the land save as afore- I 
 saKi, and for the purposes aforesaid. The con- I 
 
 Sl';rnnTi'*'""';'l"" '"•'"•'«'°° th'^t thelan.^ 
 
 d t,o, making the grant void upon the happen 
 iiiiT of anv pvpi.t =„i,„.„ 1. i._ }, "uppLn 
 
 2. DtHcrlption, 
 
 Foundarles. | Tho owno.s of a Mo.k „f himl 
 " '''^-"t". l.'mndodonlhon.Mtl, l,y UVllosl V 
 «troo an.1 wost l,y Suinaoh sfo^.t. onto I 
 in nagreon.ont w,th It. who.vl.y tho latter 
 "Mi'io.l topur,ha.,ea part.,f said hhu-k, which 
 as vacant w,ld land not divided into lots n 
 
 1 yd, « ha,l boon pasMcl for tho construction 
 "Mistioot immodiately south <,f it to bee died 
 Anuha stroot. Tho al-rooinent containe.t ce . 
 t|nn nstriciums a, to bi.ihlingM to bo o.octod on 
 .0 p,.op..,.ty purcha.0,1 which front. , I o„ th" 
 tw.sro.ts north and west of it rospcti tlv 
 I'n.l hov,.,„lorMngroo,l to „,ake similar ip?,! 
 
 U el o,l,y ,st,.ee produced. A dco.l was after- 
 «, ds executed of Hai,l lan,l pu.su.tnt to the 
 ^-^^ «^''-"t wh.ol. containe,! the Lllow.ng coven 
 
 liH.o,, If " ^''""T • • • ^"^•^•"•■'"t 
 
 sale. n ^f ' /• " 'hat in case they make 
 s, n, 1 ? '" f'"nting on Wolloslev st.oet or 
 Sumach sfect on that part of l..t I, in the ..ity 
 ■f I ...onto, situate .„> tho south si.le of Welles 
 
 bv tt'ln H f !f' "^ ■'^,"""'^'' *^t'-^"-'t. "owowno.l 
 . thorn, that hey will convey tho same s„bj,.ct 
 to to same bu.hling agreements .,r cn.litio.'s '• 
 (as m the ••igreement). The vcn.h.r.s aflorwar.ls 
 -Id a po,.ti.,n of tho remaining hu„| f,.onti, ^ o, 
 A eh, stieet, an. one hun.hcl foot east of 
 
 . «H^ ^ ""-■'■'■"" ''' '•""'•'"« f">l'id,lo„ by the 
 estr.ctive covenant in the .led. H. brought "u 
 , action aga.nst his vend.„a for b,-oach .,f sab 
 
 ;;:;::ri:Lk !'^'""« '^"* '^ -'-•"^•' -> "• ' 
 
 , Hel.l, atlirmingthe decision of the Court of 
 ^PR*;"'' 'p7'V,"i'/^-' '''■''^'^^"ting, that the coven- 
 
 ts ..ny part of ,t was a portion of a lot of lan.l 
 tI,b"H ^^^"'-'"''^y •■'"•' •^•-"■"'^h streets, an, 
 
 vo> 1 !, ^''^ '^"":T 1."'^' '^'^'^ ■' '""' that the 
 vend.irs c^uld not by dividing the property as 
 
 they saw lit narrow tho operation An.l benefit 
 of their own deed :— 
 
 Hel.l, porG Wynne, J. -The piece of lan.l in 
 Jiuestion ,hd not front nor abut on either Wei 
 I'jsley or Sumach streets, but on Amelia st.eet 
 ^i one, and was not. therefore, literally within 
 
 ">^|a..yev?„ts.rbsj;,.jiutoX'g;;;:.(:':!£p 
 
 Htl.l that under the terms of the conveyance 
 
 Inn?' f ^'T:'''y -^""'lition of defeasance, 
 nd unincumbered by any trust restricting the 
 
 sect milr 'V**:?^ 1?"^'' P"*^, -t ; and that imde 
 i% n ^ of the Municipal Waterworks Act, ! 
 
 of the hnd'wh^-' *'"^ ''"'' '^' right to dispose! 
 SsSposSs." "' '""''' required for waiter- 1 
 
 ioundarxes.J-Where there is a .lisimte as to 
 Wni?"f '"'^ line, between two lots gianted by 
 patents frr.m the Crown, an.l it has been found 
 impossd.lc to i.lentify the o,igi„al line, but two- 
 cert.am points have boon recoi.le.l in the Crown 
 -amis Department, the p,oper course is to run 
 ■^ straight hue betwoon the two certain points. 
 K. N. Q. Article 4ir<5. AW/'s A>ibe>ilos Co. v. 
 Johnson's Co., 23 S. C. R. 225. 
 
 Boundaries. ]-The .leseription of a lot pre- 
 pared for and used by the Crown Lands Depart- 
 
 i I 
 ! I 
 
 ;li 
 
 hil 
 
 
 ■m 
 
335 
 
 DEED. 
 
 ,.j,p,.. . 
 
 ment in framing the patent, which grants tho 
 
 lot ' " *^^ '"^'''' '•""■ •'""■"'« "f that 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division 
 Afhrn.e,! by the Supren.e Court. 24 tcR. 699.' 
 
 Terminal Point - Xnwh,'r of Ho,l. ^ -A 
 
 ''rS': ';""' 7~oyed by ie,i :;'aLs^ 
 
 A St np o lan.l twenty-five links wi.Ie, run- 
 1' ngfroni tho eastern si.le of the afortsa d lot 
 " ong the northern si.le of tlie raihvav s ation 
 al.out twelve rods unto the westen Zl of h" 
 railway station f.ro„„,l, the sahl lot ^ml strin 
 together contandng one acre, more or less "-^ 
 f, '''',l?^''-'''""o'tl'<-''l'^'isionof the Sunreme 
 
 twelve' . 1 '' T'TJ''^'' «•»« not linnted to 
 
 e n end oh'l"! T-' '^"' f''*'''"'''^'' to the west- 
 ern end of the station, wliich was more than 
 
 ticn-rr^l'' Description -/-ate ne:mo„.,(ra. ■ 
 
 I taxes based upon the lan.is s.tld being piaente,! 
 
 ands, that the patent was not void*'f. m ^J 
 
 tainty but that under the words '' hV ,/,; 
 
 ! part 'tin- « hole of the lot iymg to t ■ 
 
 I of the eentie line p.s.sed to tlit gra, teJ^^:^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 - .- = - - "..-e.ypnvHet'es,f''''J"""'« *'"■'"'«'' ''•>"• "t^^'">'l 
 
 appurt^ant to the premises h^^by ^ I ^^l^ ^^i^ ) : ?''{^''. H) Moo, P. c . ,02 ; 
 
 Held, that the patent of lot forty.threemi.l,t!'i^^"-°"' ^ ^- I' 2-!. S-i.dK^'ref^nSIr 
 
 inent , that as that lot was described as rnn 
 
 n.ng to the water's edge of a navigable .-iv^" „ 
 
 'r,r,'."A'.,%^,..'i''l"'''r""'''!'™t '""«t l^e taken to L.-.f^^'i-L?" "^'^^'P^^^^'l-A P'-^^^-^' < f land 
 
 tlie jiatent and in the 'xioks 
 ifl 
 
 336 
 
 ' comniencing in the sontli- 
 
 - lOrty-th 
 
 twenty feet from tlie water's cu>.e oi uie Detroit 
 cdJ'-O 'fc't ]r""-''3'. P-lle1 to the wau-r'' 
 edge .08 teet, iieiiee westerly parallel to the said 
 .outherly l,„„t COO feet, more or less to The 
 ehanne bank of the Detroit river, thence snitl 
 
 :S;.SS'^' V" '^'"'■""'^ 'r'' 208 f^e^tH e 
 casteiJyOOO leet, more or less, to the place of 
 
 .^!«""^'"«> t"«^'"'^'''. «ith the fishery prhileges 
 
 Where there is an ambignity on the fi,.p , ; 
 a deed incapable of being e?plah.ed by extr ns i' 
 evidence, the maxim v,rl,a forli,,. arJ"Z 
 
 T,^f''T''"'"^ «t tl'e election of tie grantee" 
 JiarUiel v. Scot/en, 24 S. C. li. tiU7. *''"'"^««- 
 
 U here land was granted by a Cro>sn .,atrnf 
 describing It as the north part of lo .s' '„ 
 taining sixty acres, and the' original pla of "". 
 township shewed the lot with centre line ru, 
 "■ng through the concession, a,,,l she 'l t " 
 part souoh of the line as one hnndie, aerc^' , ^ 
 the part nortii of the line as eh-htv acres ^n, 
 appeared that, prior to the g mn t^' tt^ ! l h 
 par , there had been a grairt of the s uC l 
 part, containing one luindred acres, de^cr i, , 
 t by metes and bounds, wliicli wer- .v,T ^ 
 intended to inchide all U,e land "oiuh'oft: 
 
 •in« 
 
 -—,.....,„. ^" nnieiiceineni must be taken to -"""' "f" ■^'eseriptlon. J— A i 
 be twenty feet landwards, and that the pla nt ff ^^ described in the patent and 
 vas entitled to claim the strip of twenty eetT ."^ ""T^' '"■■"«"'-'^'- "« " th 
 ahmg the .vatcr's edge. ^ ''M »/ lot mimljer tliiiteen 
 
 .ludL'ment. of tl.,. n„„...,!„ -n , ^. . . sixtv acres of h..,,! i,.. »i.. ', ' 
 
 Judgment ot the Queen's Bench Divisio i 
 reversed. ..roKen v. Barth.l, 21 A 11'!"^ 
 See the next case. "• 
 
 Uncertain Descriptlon-£'.,V/e„,.^ 
 txou-] n-balorluj, Aanpiuutur Cnlra Profern- 
 tem.]~A grant of land bounded by the bank of 
 a navigable river, or an internatioifal v't r^^;^ 
 
 of a .01 navi'" 1 f ■""'""" J"" ^' »' »'- caJe 
 01 a iion-navigable river 
 
 If, in a coiu'eyance of land, tlie description is 
 
 lU't certain enough to identify the locus it s 
 
 to be coiistrueil according to tl.e language .'.f the 
 
 r mi'n"'!' "'"'"'' '' ""^•^' '■^^'"'^ i" the\ran 
 a s, m ng to convey more than his title war- 
 
 lie iiwiti! part 
 
 I. 18(N H ^""'■"'»-''' '" fact eighty.two acres 
 JLrid ihn."'''"r"''' f"\ ta1.es' fif.y acres 
 east ami .'Commencing at Ihe" north- 
 
 east angle of said north part at the limit 
 
 imit, taking a proportion of the width con'^ 
 
 ponding 11, quantity with tlie proport. 1 the 
 
 anl nortli jiart of K,t number tl irt ien i rt r,l 
 
 ^ft;L:se'Vu:i''''Tr^"'-«''''''^-'^"'^^^ 
 
 iiity acics oMand. J hen in 1,S71 there wis 
 
 ie aires ,'";■'■ "'"■'^"■" ' " ' -'»^^-nnu^ 
 18868 "'- ^'""^' '""■' ""' '"''' f'"' t^^es in 
 
 ,!?!!''; .,*'"^'^._*''^ ^'J'^.of IS'I '-■ould not be li,,,- 
 
 nii ";:::rt;;f t^:^::^:^^it^^- 1 ., "^ ''• t..at the sale , 
 
 .juences. I!,-.. ,„„,^ ,„/, ^ nvamZmt iH T" I \ *" ^"" "'''■'''^ '" ''^ ""^■''te,l by the Cm.rt " „, 
 ••vrnle to ai,l in a'lTiving at^tl^ i itTS al S t^^^^ ••'«■.•. 
 
 does not authorize the (Tourt to oveir dS: ""' o it .Tt te nf 1",7'"''^-^'''"'-^'^''''''^' '■'^--' "»' 
 
 A genera description of land as being part of t li at , . '"""""' " '"''^ "^ tlie whole 
 
 of a specihed lot, must give way to a o.rti. ? " '''' I'oition, and coiil,! not in conse- 
 
 <lescri,,tion by boun.larits, aii.L^f t'e 1, v t ' ?Qr'r' "* '''V"'",'^'""'" ^^^ '^- '"• (>• -h. il).^ "0' 
 general description wiUbe .-ejecte^H^^ Va^ j Avim tb,. ' '"'S^' ^'"^ I'l'-^'nt'tt; a purcl user 
 demondralio. ' "^ /a^^a tiom the owner after the time of the tax sile 
 
 I who then had a mere right of entry. ' 
 
337 
 
 DEED. 
 
 ^.Application and effect of this section con- 
 
 Decision of the Queen's Bench Division •'() () 
 K. 3.1, reverse,'. ILjatt v. MitU, 19 A. Rflm 
 
 SS8 
 
 3. ExUitv Creatul. 
 
 A. an, his hen-s for over, lmben,l„m to^A a. 
 
 MS «;,fe 'for anil .luring their natural life a 
 the life of the survivor of them ■ " -,ml " f ' 
 an.l after the death of hoth, t , "ive -uu f J ,"J 
 unto their lawful heirs an, as i , s f;^ ev ° '"''' 
 h-„m and after the death of hS 'l / , 4'„:^f 
 toh„l,lunto their lawful heirs, their leirs am 
 assigus/orever," A. takes a fee Simple hsol te 
 Lamihis v. Lesperancc, 22 0. R. 082. '^'^' 
 
 Maintenance- ^'//^ of Board and L..d.,hu,- 
 Ihht of O,cupat.o„.]-A father convove '^ 
 one of his sons certain farm lamls, sub eot t his 
 own hfeest^Ue tlierein, an,l subject al.o t, tl e 
 use by another son. the plaintiff of a ."l be 
 room and bed,hng, i„ n.e dwelling house mtle" 
 f.rni au,l to Ins b.nr.l so long as the nb in f 
 slimdd remain a re.i.lcnt on the farm J '"^ 
 
 tion of tile fat ir's 1 fe;st^^ r' "•"'''• 'i'"'"^" 
 «ntheland,oftl,eb:dton;rtS'''wS 
 
 ".i!5 (.leateii ov non-occiiiiat nn wii- 
 WiUon, 26 0. R. 013/ '1''"'°"- '* '*"'-o« v. 
 
 phosphate, which was not the case with the 
 
 III. Rkfor.matiox, 
 
 >,y 
 
 Absolute Transfer-r'omm.»,eH,.»/ of Proof 
 Jiurraii, 24 S. O. R. 77 "'"^U v. 
 
 Com- to , leclare a ,lee.l, absolu e on its aee to 
 t be CMdence of such intention nnist be of thp 
 C 1;. r,48. ^'^^"*" ^'^ Ontario Jhink; 20 S. 
 
 4. Option to PtitrhfLte. 
 
 visi,.n that "in case I, I 1 "-""'""'"g «- l»'o- 
 
 ^^"■•kc.,l the phosphate miiio for five 'ears ami 
 e.un.evan,^sti;.:^,';;.,^!;:iJ,;,,,SJ;^;--;ions 
 
 "3."':^t-rii£r"s'H:-'-^^ 
 
 -;-io.-, AJ., granted the exclu^.i-,!^:::'^S 
 ^," :, •■'"*' ^•«"'f "f >.>ica on s,.,i,l lam to \ V t 
 •-"■.Hlioproceede,! to develop the mica ,h 
 
 i'l- iiHriilS' .'r --'r v" "-->^- 
 
 arbit a ion f V t^ '"'"" '1"'' '''^■"■^"'led an 
 
 ^'pi-;fa,;;:^£Can:r^:.^:;„:-!^"=L^'--, 
 
 u,luntary deed will not be reformed againit thi 
 
 And \yhere the .lefendant's husbni,! Invin.r 
 app..priate.l moneys of a client in 1 is ;.,S^ 
 1 cstment, secretly execute.l in the client"! 
 a o,„ statutory mortgage not contai ng',! 
 Ml of ,Io^^•er, the .lefemlant bei.r^ a mrtv tl 
 
 le due o th. t^r ' """', P'^y'"«- ^^itl^ know- 
 n 1 Of the facts, an instalment of interest dne 
 
 lertin/."" ''-'"""i '" ••cform the inortgage b^ 
 1 ere lein . 'on ''"' '• V "' .'"""•'^'' "■«« <li«?ai'sseo^ 
 t act!. ^ ' " -'""^Kleration to sujiport aeon 
 
 her dower 7^ //"'""" "Z"'/''^' ''"'^'"'"'■^ ^o bar 
 iun\tr. JUUatnyy. Bad,/,ro!r, 24 0. R. 278. 
 
 AV.^/?'!^^^°" °^ Property by Mistake -/.•«<,<,•- 
 i/totT'^' "' ^'."^ t^''o«" an,ltowhie ,ae orcK 
 
 I. t tlic f I, "'"'"P"«'' *''? « 'Iter lot and mill, 
 i"t the latter were ,.mitted by mistake of thn 
 -l.citorwho preparcl the ins^rumen M & 
 
 I iic fon n'of : "Tl^f '''''''"'' i".strument8 in 
 
 til oci.fcfit of their crclitors, and the assilmpo 
 •»'"• ll'e sale was ma,le subject to certain 
 
 pHntedcmiitiou,;;,:::;^';,:!:;^:^--^^ 
 
 citv' :.';'""V''''r''^'i"« '" ^''« ti"^'« "f^ e pro- 
 nvent 1^ t ,""' '" i"^*^ «''l>«''»''-'-''. «tock list and 
 nutntoiy, the vendor «oii ,1 „ct warrant th^ 
 
 n^ II i.,i„ ,1 ■' P"''^'';^««'- ""•«' t;,ke subject 
 ;> all claims thereon, an,! whether h-eMi mr-n 
 
 t o..cd or not. and subject to all exempor^ 
 iaw Jlase .'onditions were signed bvth^ 
 
 purchasers to whom the assignee exec te,l a 
 tl'iTsTtr""' "" ^''«,P'-P-tyB<'-l" B ort 
 the sale the assignee had procured the two last 
 
!| 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 H''1 
 
 ,1; 
 
 ii i 
 
 above mentionrd mortg.i^'cs executed by M & 
 B. to be pnid otf by a peison wlio .ulvaiiced the 
 money and lie took lui iissigniiieiit to himself 
 after tlio side, imyiiig lli,.' iuiiouiit out of the 
 purehiise money. Tlw coiivcyaiiee to the pur- 
 chasers at th.. .sale iiurport-'d to be made in 
 pursuance of all pov cis contained in these mort- 
 gages It., the moilj.af;ee of the villaire lots. 
 broUf.'lit an action to have his mortgage reetiHed 
 so as to include the water lot and mill i>roi)ertv' 
 omitted by mistake. The iiurehasers at the 
 auction sale set up the defence of purchase for 
 valuahle eousideration witljout notice :— 
 
 Held, aflirming the decision (.f the (^ouit of 
 Appeal, Owynne an.l ralleison, JJ., dissenting, 
 that there heiiig ample evidence to cstahlish, 
 and the trial Judge having found, that the 
 mortgage was intended to cover the water lot 
 and mill, and that the imrehasers had notice of 
 Ks e(|mty before Jiaying the purchase money 
 and taking a conveyance, these facts must he 
 taken to ,)e esta!.li.-,heil and the findings deemed 
 tinal on this ajipeal and they established II.'s 
 right to have his mortg.ige r( formed ■— 
 
 Held, per Strong, d.-l. The water lot and I 
 mm there(jn were capable of being mortgaged as ' 
 real estate ami might, in e(|uity, be dealt with ! 
 l)y an instrument in form of a chattel mortgage : 
 If suiheicntly described, and the description i 
 mil j.roi.erty ' in the mortg.agea in (juestion i 
 would pass the land covered with water on 
 whieh the mill was erected. 2. "In the ease of i 
 charges upon eipiitable property where the legal i 
 estate IS outstanding the defence of purchase I 
 tor valuable considuration without notice is in ■ 
 general, inapplicable, the rule being that all such '• 
 chargeea take rank according to priority in point i 
 of time, but K. not having an actual charge, but 
 merely an e(|uitable claim for reetification, such 
 defence was not precluded. H. The purchasers 
 at the sale could not set np tvant of notice in 
 theni3elv(s and thei; iminodiate grantors with- ' 
 out shewing that the original mortgagees, in 
 whose shoes they st(,od, were also purchasers 
 tor valuahle consideration with ncjtiee i By 
 the condition of sale which they signed' the 
 purchasers incapacitated themselves from set- 
 ting np this defence. Uticnon Lumber Co. v. 
 Retime, 21 S. C. R. 218. 
 
 Fartnerahip- /,', nisfered DedavalionA—Aw 
 action was brought by \V. McL. and F. W. R 
 to recover the ani.iunt of an accident policy insur- 
 ing the members of the firm of McL. Bros. & Co 
 alleging that J. S. MoL., one of the partners,' 
 had been accidentally drowned. After the 
 policy was issued the plaintiff's signed and re-ds- 
 tered a declaration to the ellect that the part- 
 nership of McL. liros. & Co. lir.d been dissolved 
 by mutual consent, and they also signed and 
 registered a declaration of a new partnership 
 under the same name, comprising the iilaintiBs 
 only. At the trial the phiintids ten<lered oral 
 evidence to prove that these declarations were ! 
 incorrect, and that .J. ,S. McL. was a niember of 
 the partnership at the time of his death :— 
 
 Held, afhrming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that such evidence was inadmissible. 
 Article IS.S.-) C. C. and chapter 05 C:. S. L. C. 
 
 Sa<7"-^- n'V'''"' ^"'- ^"- of^'orth America, j 
 ii4 .S. C. R. 2(i,S. 
 
 was conirout.l h^ a writing in the nature of ii\ Ftn,lu,u «••>• '" tlu- Slander. \~hx an action lor 
 
 340 
 
 a,)ilve kitre, by which it was agreed as follow.s ■ 
 'I lie vendor in consideration of the sum of 
 ijL SI-JO makes and executes this day a clear iui,| 
 valid deed in favour of the purchaser of ceit;ni 
 pi-opei ty itlicrein ilcscribed), and the purdii.Mr 
 lor the term of three years is to let the vei.ii.r 
 : liave contnd of the sai<l (kcded property t., 
 j immage as well, safely and proj.erly as he woi,M 
 lit t''f s:'id property was his own, and baivaiu 
 I and sell the said property for the best price il,u 
 I can be had for the same, and j.ay the rent, intei, st 
 j and purchase money when sold, and ali the avails 
 of the said property to the purchaser to tlu. 
 ! amount of 82,!M(), and interest at the rate „f 
 , eight jier cent, per'annnm from the date of thtsi- 
 i presents, and then the .said pureliascr sliiili 
 I re-deed to the vendor any part of the said iin,- 
 i perty that may remain unsold after reciivii.- 
 : the aforesaid amount and interest." The viiT 
 I dor was at the time indebted to the punin.s, 
 i in the sum of .S2,941. The two docuiiR.i.ts wu. 
 legislered. The vendor had other prop(.ri.,s 
 i ami gave the purchaser a power .,f atlorney i,, 
 j convey all his real (state in the same loualuv 
 ; the teim of three years mentioned in the roi.tn 
 \kllrr was continued by mutual consent. Tic 
 i vender 6nbse(iuently paid anuaints on acrr.uu 
 I ot his general indebtedness to the purcliuHi 
 ! Jt was only after the purchaser's death that tiie 
 I vendor claimed from the heirs of the purcluustr 
 I the balance, above mentioned, of .^l.-lTOas (nvini; 
 to him for the management of his properties ■_ 
 Held, reversing the judgment ot the (-(.iiit of 
 gueen s Jiench, and restoring the judgiiRut ut 
 the Superior Court, that the proper coustnutin, 
 ot the contract was to be gathered from hotli 
 documents and dealings of the parties, and tl iit 
 the property having been deeded merelv us 
 security it was not an absolute sale and'thiit 
 piaintili was not M. S.'s agent in lesput o? 
 this property : — 
 
 i-leld, also, that the only action plaintiff Imd 
 was the acho indiidata cuiitraria with a tender 
 ot hisrii/diliondc lomjite. linni v. Tai,U:,,1\ 
 s. C. 11. iJ(j. 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 I 
 
 D.VMAOKs, 340. 
 
 n. 
 
 EVIDKNCE, 341. 
 
 in. 
 
 Kaii; Comment, 34;). 
 
 IV. 
 
 XEwsi'Ai'Kie, .344. 
 
 V. 
 
 I'liAtrrit'E. 
 
 
 1. Dhvovcrij, 345. 
 
 
 2. Particn/ur.1, 347. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Tkivileok, 348. 
 
 VII. 
 
 Security for Costs, 3 
 
 viir. 
 
 SpKiiAL Cases, 352. 
 
 
 I. Damagks 
 
 .■,,-v;^y? 
 
341 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 342. 
 
 I agreed as follciv,, ; 
 ion (if the sum of 
 Ilia (lay a cleiir iinil 
 iisroJiaser of ceitmu 
 , and the tiurcliiistT 
 I to let the viiidor 
 •eded iiniperty, t., 
 ■ojR-rly as lie m'oii',| 
 i own, and liaivain 
 tlie lieht price 1\m 
 ly tlierent,inter(st 
 il, and ali tlie aviiil.i 
 
 luiieliaser tri tile 
 ■eat at tlie rate nf 
 m the date of tliesi; 
 d piiicliaser shall 
 I't of tin- said [ii„. 
 )ld after reeiiviDi; 
 tercst." The vcii 
 1 to tile luifeluii-ir 
 lO dcenilieiits \V(ic- 
 1 other l)ro|nii,,5 
 wer of atloriifv in 
 the same locality, 
 ioned in the . (,i,/',f 
 iial eon.seiit. Tk- 
 iiinints on accoui.t 
 to the imichii.Hi. 
 er's death that iiic 
 s of the piuchiistr 
 (if ••:' 1,470 as owing 
 
 his properties :_ 
 «t ol the t'diutof 
 t the jud{:ni(.iit cjf 
 iroper eonstiiKtii II 
 itheied from hoth 
 L' parties, and tl.at 
 leeded merely u.s 
 ute sale and thiit 
 ;ent in ie.-|)cct of 
 
 !tion plaiiitil!' h-d 
 ria with a tcMier 
 Ivnt V. Tciiitiii, '24 
 
 >N. 
 
 19. 
 
 slander the jury returned a finding of no dam- 
 age ; hut said they could not agree aa to whether 
 their verdiet should lie for the plaintitl'or defen- 
 dant ; upon which the tiial Jiidf,re directed 
 judgment to be enteiv.l for the defendant, dis- 
 missing the aeti(jii ; — 
 
 Held, that the finding (if no damage did not 
 dispose of the action, hut that there should 
 have been a lindiiig on the charge of guilt ; and 
 anew trial was dirceled. 
 
 ((V//.S V. Canmn,, 14 A. 1!. 0,-(i, considered. 
 Bmh V. McCoriiiach, •><) O. 11. 4!»7. 
 
 Damages— -Vo 
 
 [n an action fur 
 
 Pleading— /;'(■/</,;>/'(■(.' — IJamuii^.^. ] — Facts in- 
 tended to be relied on in niiliga'tion of damages 
 ina iiliel action must be set out in the state- 
 ment of defence, and unless this is done they 
 can not be gi\en in evidence. 
 
 Consolidated Rule 39!) is inconsistent with 
 Consol. Rule f)?.'?, and governs. 
 
 The defendant may plead in mitigation of 
 damages that the article complained of was pub- 
 lished in good faith in the usual course of busi- 
 ness. 
 
 Judgment of Robertson, J., reversed. Beaton 
 V. IntttUijtiia I- Piiidiwj Co., 22 A. R. <J7. 
 
 See also 'J'ai/lor v. Afasucy, 20 (\ R, 429, post 
 341; A'ihduirn v. Manito/.a Free Pn.s-i' Co 
 20 S. C. 1!. 4S, pn.t M4 ; IHavhford v. ar,'en\ 
 14 W R. 424, iH,.sl ;j4.> ; Catton v. Gkuson, 14 
 P. R. 222, po.^t 347. 
 
 II. EVIDENCK. 
 
 Ubel—Ldto- Puhlulml in Xcirs/,„p,r.H~- 
 />niv/e;/,.|— The plaintiff, who was emploved 
 by a manufacturing company of which "the 
 defendant was president, brought an action for 
 the acduotton of liia daughter against the sup 
 enntendent of the company. Particulars m 
 regard to the alleged seduction liavuig appeared 
 in public newspapers, a meeting of some of the 
 memhers and servants of the company was held 
 at which the defendant presided, and a rcsolu' 
 tion was passed expressing confidence in the 
 innocence of the superintendent of the alleged 
 sednclion A letter was then or immediately 
 afterwards drawn up and signed by a number 
 of the persons present, including the defendant, 
 handed to a reporter for publication, and was 
 published in several newspapers, without auv 
 objection on the defendant's part. 
 
 The letter vws addressed to the superinten- 
 (lent, referring to the charges against him which 
 had appeared in the newspapers, declared the 
 belief of the signers in his innocence, and con- 
 eluded, "We believe you are the victim of a 
 conspiracy as base and ungrateful aa was ever 
 sprung ou an innocent man, and we pledge our- 
 selves to stand by you until your innocence shall 
 have been clearly established or until-whieh 
 we are contu ent will never be-you are shewn to 
 be the monster depicted in the public press." 
 Ihe plamtift was not named in the letter 
 
 IheplamtiUsued the defendant for libel in 
 conseiiuenoe of the publication of this letter. 
 
 theonenceof conspiring and agreeing with 
 hu. daughter to defame and slandei nr other- 
 Wise injure th»; reputation and character of the 
 
 supe.intendent. The whole ciuestion of libel or 
 no libel was left to the jury, who found for the 
 plaintiff with .SI, 500 damages :— 
 
 Held, that it was not necessary to decide 
 whether the letter could be construed as sup- 
 porting the innuendo of a criminal conspiracy • 
 the (luestion really was whether the defendant 
 had libelled the plaintiff ; and this (juestion had 
 been determined by the jury. 
 
 2. That the surrounding circumstances were 
 admiesible in evidence for the jmriiose of shew- 
 ing that persons conversant with those circu-n 
 
 I stances might naturally conclude that the plain 
 . till was the person aimed at by the letter ; and 
 i*^^ was enough that the .ircumstances and the 
 libel taken together ijointed to some one, and 
 that the jury found the plaintiff to have been 
 the jjcrson intended. 
 
 3. That the verdict of the jury could not be 
 interfered with ou the ground that the damages 
 were excessive. ° 
 
 4. That the evidence of what took place at 
 : the ine(;ting was admissildo as jiroof that the 
 
 plamtill was the person intended ))y the resolu- 
 jtion passed at it, the defendant having been 
 present ; and that a witness who was jjresent at 
 the meetirg and took notes, which were after 
 I war. Is printed, could refer to the printed coiiy, 
 , after tfie destruction of the original notes to 
 [ shcjw exactly what did take place. 
 
 •"). That the occasion was not one of privilege 
 I'" |j"'^!il''"^ privilege, 'rai/hr v. Maxxnj, 20 
 
 liiitel- -Personal Attack on A/to, nfy-f.'eneral 
 —PlrOAlhui—Rijijrtion of Evidence —Fair Com- 
 mi'iU—dtneral Verdict— New Trla/.]~In an 
 action for a libel contained in a iiewsjiaper 
 article re.sp(.ctiiig certain legislation the iiinii- 
 endo allcgeil liy the plaintiff, tlie Attorney-Cen- 
 '■lal of the l'rovii;ee when such legislati('in was 
 enacted, was that the article chari;cd him with 
 personal dislionesty. Defendants pleaded " not 
 guilty, and that tlie article was a fair comment 
 (m a public matter. On the trial the defendants 
 put in ( vidence, plaintiffs eouiis(.l objecting, to 
 prove the charge of personal dislionestv, and 
 evidence in rebuttal was tendered liy pkintill 
 and rejected. Certain (|uestion were put to the 
 jury rcjuiring them to liiid whether or not the 
 words bore the eonstiuction claimed by the 
 innuendo or were fair comment mi the siiliject 
 matter of the article ; tlie jury found geiieridlv 
 for tlie defendants, and in'answer to the trial 
 •hulge, who asked if they found that the publi- 
 cation liore the meaning ascribed to it liy the 
 lilaintiff; the foreman said; "We did not con- 
 sider that at all." On appeal from an order fur 
 a new trial :— 
 
 Held, that defendants not having pleaded the 
 truth of the charge in justiliearion the evidence 
 given toestablishitshonld not have been received, 
 iiiit it having lieeii received evitlenee in rebuttal 
 was improiierly rejected ; tlie genend tinding 
 tor the defendants was not sullii'ient in view of 
 fact that the jury stated that they had not con- 
 sidered the material (juestion, nanielv, the charge 
 of personal dishonesty. For these reasons a 
 new (rial was projierly graiit.'d. Atanitulia Free 
 J'l-i's.s Co. V. Martin, 21 .*>;. ( ', R, .jPS. 
 
 LibeX ~J'id,licalion — Defendant Claimin^i 
 I rv-de'ie—Tcnneury to Criwinati — Misdirection'.] 
 ■ -In an action for libel it was claimed that the 
 
 
 hi 
 
Hi 
 
 S43 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 defendant had, as a correspondent at T. of a 
 newspaper, furnished several items which in- 
 cluded one reflecting on the plaintiff. In his 
 cxanimation for discovery defendant, while ad- 
 nutting he was a correspondent at T., could net 
 say whether he was the only one ; and alleged 
 that he did not remember sending any of the 
 items; but might possibly have sent some of 
 them ; hut he did not think he had sent the 
 one complained of ; that he had had since the 
 publication an interview with the e^iitor with 
 reference thereto, Imt he refused to answer 
 whether he had discussed the item complained 
 of. lor fear, as he said, of inciiminating him- 
 self. At the trial he stated he had since ascer- 
 tained that there were other correspondents at 
 1., and on being pressed as to the item com- 
 plained of, after some hesitation, said he did not 
 furnish It. No other evidence was given con- 
 necting the defendant with the publication :— j 
 Held, that this did not constitute any evi- 
 dence of piiblieation to go to the jury. I 
 The trial Judge in his charge, after referring i 
 to the defendant's refusal to answer on hi- ^ 
 e.xaminaticn for discovery, and to his reason for ■ 
 refusinir, told the jury that they might draw ! 
 the inference as to what the true answer would 
 have been : — I 
 Held, misdirection, and that no inference 
 adverse to the defendant should have been 
 drawn from his refusal to answer. Xuiiu v 
 Braiidoti, •_'4 C). I!. 375. 
 
 344 
 
 evidence of the existence of a certain state of 
 facts on which it is alleged the comment «a. 
 f.airly made, is admisailjle, l)ut not evid.Mce of 
 the truth of the statement complained (,f ^s a 
 
 in//., V. Vnrman, 17 O. 1!. 223, discussed. 
 .Judgment of the Chancery Division, L'.S ]{ 
 1'Zi, reversed. Brown v. Moi/cr, '2Q A. V, -.Qt)' 
 
 IV. Newspapers. 
 
 in. Fair Comment. 
 
 Libel— f,V,„iv(/ ]\rd;ct-N,ir Triid.]~ln an 
 acuon for a IIIk'I contained in a new.soaper 
 article rcspcetiny certain legislation the innu- 
 endo allegcl l,y the plaintiff, the Attornev- 
 iTOneral of the I'lovincc when ...uch legLsliition 
 was eiiacte.l, « us that the article cluirge.l him 
 With personal ilishonesly. Defendi.nt pleaded 
 not guilty," aiKl that the article was a fair 
 comment on a public -natter. On the trial tlie 
 (leteiHlants put in evidence, plaintiffs counsel 
 objecting, to prove the cliarge of persoiuil dU- 
 lonesty, and evidence in rebuttal >vas tendered 
 by plaiMt.ir and rejected. Certain (niestioiis 
 were put to the jury rc.|uiring tliem to tind 
 wliether or not the word.s b„ie tlic construction 
 claimed by tlie imiuen.hj or were fair comment '■ 
 on the sul.ject matter of tlie article ; the iurv ^ 
 found generally for the defendants and in 
 answer to the trial .ludge wli,) a.sked if tbev i 
 foun.. that the puldicaticm bore tiie meaning 
 ascribe, to it by the plaintiff, the foreman 
 .saul : \\ e liid not consider tliat at all ' On 
 appeal from an order for a new trial :— 
 
 Held, that defendants not liavinu' pleadcl tin- 
 truth ot the charge in justilication^the evidence 
 given to establish it .should not hav(^ been 
 received; but it having been received, evidence 
 m rebuttal was iniproiH'rly rejected ; tlie m-ii- 
 eral tinding for the defendants was not suHit^mt 
 111 view of the f.'ict that the jury st.'tted that 
 tiiey had not considered the material (lucstion 
 namely, the charge of personal dishonesty For 
 these reasons a new trial «'as properly gi-anted. 
 Mamlolju tr,f /'n-vs Vo. v. Martin, 21 S (,' 
 
 Y^fi\~Jn>ftif,cr,lion~Faxr Commi nl. ]— Under 
 a.leteiice of "fair comment " in a libel action. 
 
 Libel— .S//(',!'ai' Datmuji's—Lnss of Cnxtom ]_ 
 5,y section 13 of 50 Vict. eh. 22 (Man.), "Tin- 
 Libel Act, ' no person is entitled to the lienetit 
 j thereof unless he has comiilieil with the i,ro 
 visions of .JO Vict. ch. 23, "An Act respectin,; 
 newspapers and other like publications." Bv 
 I section 1 of the latter \,.t, no peis.m shall print 
 I or publish a newspaiier ntil an alfi<lavit or iilijr. 
 lmationma.le and signed, ami containiii.' such 
 ! matter as the act directs, has been deii^site,! 
 I with the protbonotary of the Court of Queen's 
 I lieuch or Clerk of the Crown for the district ii, 
 j which the newspaper is pulilished ; by section 2 
 I such atKdavit <«• atKrmation sliall set forth tht 
 real ami true names, etc., of the printer or pub. 
 Jisher of the newspaper and of all the proprie- 
 tors ; by section (i, if the number of piil,li-,liors 
 does not exceed four the affidavit or aflirmatioi, 
 sia be made by all, an,l if they exceed four it 
 shall be madeby four <.f them; and se.tion i 
 provides that the alHdavit or atiirmation niav 
 be taken before a justice of the peace or com 
 miss.oner for taking affidavits to be used in the 
 (,ourt of Queen s Bench : — 
 
 Held, 1. That 50 Vict. ch. 23, contemitlates 
 anil Its provisions apply to, the case of a cor 
 poration being the sole publisher and proiirietor 
 01 a newspaper. 
 
 2. That section 2 is complied with if tlie affi- 
 davit or affirmation states that a corporation is 
 the proprietor of the newspaper anil iniiits aii.l 
 publislK.s tlie same, (iwynne, .J,, ilissentiii.'. 
 
 .■>. that tlie atiidavit or atiirmation, mi ran- 
 the proprietor is a corporation, may be niiiile 
 liy the^ managing director. 
 
 4. That ill every proceeding under section I 
 there is the option either to swear or aliiriii, and 
 the right to alhrin is not restricted to niL-nibura 
 ; ot certain religious bodies or persons having' 
 ! religious scruples. " 
 
 I 5. Th.at if the affidavit or atiirmation pnr- 
 I ports to have been taken before a commi.ssiuiuir 
 his authority will be presumed until tliv con 
 trary is shewn. 
 : By section 11 of the Libel .Act, actual nudice 
 or culpable negli.;enoc must be provi.,l in an 
 action for libel unless sjieclal danmKcs are 
 claimed : — ° 
 
 Held, that such malice or negligence must 1* 
 established to the satisfaction of the jury, anil 
 it there is a disagreement a.s to these issiies th- 
 verdict cannot stand : — 
 
 Held, further, that a general .allegation of 
 (l/iniages by loss of custom is not a claim for 
 special damages umler this se,;tion. 
 
 Per Strong, J. -Where speinai damages are 
 sought to be recovered in an action of liliul, nr 
 for verbal Blunder v.-hcrc tiic Woid.s a-ie actmn- 
 ahle /«;(••■«', such special damage must '.e alleged 
 and jilendcd with particularity, and in ea,se of 
 special damage by reason of loss of custom, the 
 
345 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 Ii. 23, contemjilates, 
 , the cas'i of a cor- 
 islior ami proprietor 
 
 nainua of the customers must be given, or other- 
 wise evidence of the special (himago is inailniis- 
 siUc. Afhdown v. Manltuba Free Prem Cn 
 20.S. C. R. 43. "fo, I.O., 
 
 Libel— .\ olicf nf Action—Statement of Claim 1 
 -Jn an action for libel contained in 'a puhlio 
 iiewsiiaper, tlie statement of claim must l)o 
 oontintd to the statements complained of and 
 specified in the notice required by R. S. (). cli. 
 57, see. "), sub-sec. 2, to be given by the idain- 
 tiff before action ; and where tlie plaintitf in 
 audi notice .opecitied parts of an article pul)- 
 iishcd l)y the defendant, and in lier statement 
 of olann set out the whole article, the portions 
 not specified in the notice were struck out 
 Ohtriikr v. Kobirtnoii, 14 P. R. 553. 
 
 upon the i)lea of justification. 
 Prmtiwj Co., 141'. R. 405. 
 
 346 
 
 Hurray v. Mail 
 
 TM,B\-l'uhtkation~Ttml,'nn, to Criminate— 
 lieJiLwl to Answer on Exnvunalion fur X»w. 
 
 V. Practiie. 
 
 I. Dincoreri/. 
 
 Libel— Damaijex in Wai/'of 7V"(/.'.]— In an 
 action for damages for libelling the plaintitis in 
 the way ol tlieir trade, tlio plaintitis did not 
 allege special damage, but alleged generally that 
 their business and commercial reputation had 
 suffered. Upon the examination of the plain- 
 tiffs for discovery they refused to answer as to 
 what l)usiiiess they had lost bv reason of the 
 alleged libels : — 
 
 Hold, that no evidence of special damage 
 would be admissible at the trial, but that the 
 plaintiffs wouhl have the right to place (igures 
 before the jury to shew a general dimiiiuticni of 
 prolits since the publication of the allowed 
 hhels ; and if the plaintiffs proposed to give tliis 
 class of evidence at the trial, the deFendaiits 
 were entitled on the examination for discovery 
 to know how such diminution was made out 
 ami the liguies by which it was proposed to 
 support it, but not to seek information as to the 
 loss of any particular custom ; but if the plain- 
 tiffs (lid not propose to give such evidence, the '• 
 defendants were not entitled to the discovery. 
 
 It was, therefore, ordered that the plaintiffs, 
 should give particulars of any damage intended 
 to he claimed for diminution of profits; and if 
 prticulai-s given, that the examination should I 
 be contniued and discovery afforded ; but if i 
 partioulars were not given, that evidence of 
 liiniinutioii of prolits should not be given at the ' 
 trihi. BUu-hj'or(i v. Oreen, 14 V. R. 4'>4 
 
 Uhel—E.mmination of J'laintijf he/ore De- 
 /<'v.*'2/ 0/ />./e»«.]-Rule 5(36 does not apply to 
 exammations for discovery ' * * 
 
 Fiskm v Chamhertan,, <, p. ]{. 2s;j, and cases 
 tollowing it, overruled. 
 
 Hut were that Rule applicable, it was n.,t 
 necessary for the purposes of justice," in i|,e 
 circumstances of this case, an action lor libel 
 I to make an order allowing the defendants to 
 examine the plaintiff tor discovery before 
 I delivering their statement of defence 
 ! l^ecision of the Common Pleas Division, 1.5 
 ! r. K. 4i,i, reversed. 
 
 I 7«/f' v. aiohe Printimj Co., 11 P. K. 251, and 
 
 j cases following it, specially referred to. 
 
 i Oonn.',, v. PHinmll, L. R. 8 ('. I'. ;i6-> and 
 
 /iifrenhtrg v. Laljonrh're, [IHiKi] 2U b'ksS 
 
 hdlowed. Beaton v. Gtobe I>r,ntin,j Co., "iG P. 
 
 SulrmnUo) Clmm.]-hi actions of slander when 
 
 , intiti, and IS convinced that he cannot state 
 fully and with sufhcient particularity his vari- 
 I'us gr(,uiids of complaint, and when the know- 
 edge rciuired is within the possession and con- 
 tiol ot ttie defendant, an examination for dis- 
 
 I covery betore statement of claim will be ordered 
 under Rule o< (i ; but in such case a further 
 examination after pleading uiU n<,t be allowed 
 except upon special grouiid.'-' 
 
 ■ , p±" '■ '^;^'y"^'/"''S 9 1'. R. 283 ; Cordon 
 
 1. R. oOO, followed. CainplM V. Seutt, 14 P 
 li. Mi. ••)« the preceding c.:se. 
 
 Llbel-ia-.d/'/ftt/./o../ of Ojh'cer of Newmoper 
 I'uOli.ikii,/ Cm/m.'/- E(litori<il Writer.]— h\ an 
 action again. „ ,u,,.n=iper publishing company 
 lor.i libel ,;, , „.■:,., I ill an article written by k 
 member of the ...wspapcr staif, who procured 
 ^fpeciid mlormalion therefor, under the super- 
 vision (,f the iiii'.nagiiig rditor, and in which 
 action tbe defendants ])1. aded justification :— 
 
 Held, iJiat the writer was not iii the position 
 ot a sun.cditor, nor could he be called an oHieer 
 •jl tlie company, and he was net examinable for 
 ihsceveiy mider Kule 41.7 :■ - 
 
 H.'ld, also, that no sufficient foundation wa.s 
 uUirrwii,: i.iid liir bis examination ; for it <liil : 
 ni't ai.pear that he could give iiitormation of any 
 acts, but merely that he could indicate where 
 lie procured ev..ience of the facts in dispute 
 
 Hl^nAev-hxaminativn of Defendant- Pri- 
 >'lye-tru,nnntn,,iAns,rerH.]-\n an action of 
 
 eland s ander, the plaintitf complained that 
 the deleidant had cnnimunicate.l to several 
 pers^ons the contents of a letter received fiom 
 another person in which the plaintiff was 
 accused ot larceny, etc. Upon an e.xaminathm 
 
 . » hethei he lad received any letter from the 
 
 er«on rained or to answer any cpiestions in 
 
 I 1 elation to such letter or its cntents, giving as 
 
 ! a mnson that it might criminate him to do so :_ 
 
 Held, that the reason given was snllicient to 
 
 p IV liege the defendant from answering; and 
 
 ;' tl.ough It was not the receipt of the letter, but 
 
 I the publication, that would make the offjiice, 
 
 : he was entitled to object to the lino of inquirC- 
 
 j at the outtet. ' ■' 
 
 ^>tatute of 1893 respecting witnesses and evidence 
 will, wlien It conies i'lto force, .supersede the 
 privilege now existing in cases of this kind. 
 (I ewt/- V. Hemtman, 15 P. 1!. 258. .Vcc the 
 next e;i.se, 
 
 Slander— ^,itiH(;»,i^o« // Defnidant-Pri- 
 
 nh-Ue -trnnwutin.j Anxn>r...] — The Ontario 
 'Statute as to evidence, R. S. t». cb. (il, sec. 5 
 
 ii' M 
 
347 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 i ' 
 
 llll 
 
 limits tlie scope of all preliminary e.xanuiiatio.is 
 tor discovery or ollurwise in civil .-ictions 
 
 Jones V. iJalhn, !) p. R. •_'!)(;, folLweil. 
 
 It has not been nfiected l.y .section T. of tlie 
 iJominion .statute r,(i Vict. o).. 'M, Kl.ich. liy 
 necessary constitutioiiul limitations, as well -is 
 by express declaration (section L'), aiiplicg only 
 to proceedings respectin^ wliich the Parliament 
 of t anada lias jurisdiction. 
 
 The langnagu ii.^ed in a pi evious decision in 
 this case, lo P. l;. .ioS, at p. 2(;0, is loo 
 broadly exiiresse.l, in the absence of concurrent 
 Ontario legislation. 
 
 And therefore, a defendant, iii)ou his examin- 
 ation tor discovery in an action for defamation 
 cannot ev(-n .nnce th.i coming into force of 56 
 Vict. ch. .il, (U.) be compelled to answer (luc"- 
 tions which may ten.l to eliminate him. (IVmo- 
 v. IU:mt:man, 15 1'. It. 407. 
 
 348 
 
 them witlulrow from it, and tlie goods wiiid, 
 were sod at it brought less money than the 
 would otherwise li.ive <lone ;— ' 
 
 Held, thattheplaintiirsho.ihlnothercniiml 
 to give particulars of the imioes of tlie person 
 wlio would have given for eacli- article in n.s.rt 
 ot which damage was churned a larg,,- pS 
 than was reahzcl at the sale ; all tliat he n„ U 
 reasonably be re(iuired to parlicnlarize was tl ' 
 amount by which his sale luul been da,„„o| 
 Uutton V. (Ileason, 14 P. K. 22-_'. 
 
 VI. Privile<ik. 
 
 '2. Piirticiilarii. 
 
 Slandex'.]- In an action of slander, the state- 
 ment o chiiin, after various specilic allegations 
 charged tjiat at divers times during the verrs 
 IhhS, ISSi), and IS'IO, a.„l to many i.eoplein 
 and about the city of T., the defendant falsely 
 and maliciously repeated the said .slanders and 
 words of like etiect, and spoke of the plaintiff 
 words conveying the meaning the said slanders 
 and the said wonls conveyed : — 
 
 Held, that this was cnibarrassing and should 
 be .stricken out unless the plaintiff elected to 
 .•uneiid, by giving details, upon payment of costs i 
 J'atei-sun \: Dunn, 14 P. 1;. 40. I 
 
 Sl&naQv—Nmnns, Tim-s, and I'liu-exA-lix an 
 action for slander the statement of claim alleged 
 tliat the defendant, on a specitied day, spoke to 
 C. and others the slanderous words allc'ed In 
 answer to a d.imand for particulars, the plain- 
 titl s solicitor wrote to tlie aofcnd.int's solicitor 
 stating that he hao given all theinformaiiou the 
 plamtift had, the names of the others to whom 
 the word.s were spoken not being known to him, 
 and tile plaintitl, when a mothm for particular.s 
 fact'""" '' ''"-'i""^^''' "" """I'ivit to the same 
 
 An order of a .Master requiring the plaintiff 
 to urni.. I particulars of all tlie persons within 
 his knowledge lo whom, the places where, and ' 
 the times when the words were spoken, was 
 affirmed by a Ju,lge in Chambers, but reversed 
 by a Uivisional Court : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintill' having given all the 
 information in his possession, and the defendant 
 not having sworn that she c.n.ld not ..lead with- 
 out further particulars, or that .Mie was ignorant 
 ot what occasion was complained of, it was use- 
 less and unnecessary to order the particulars. 
 
 IhornUmy. Cap.stork, .j P. r. 53,- ...pproved. 
 Winnett v. Appdbc el ax., 16 P. R. 57. 
 
 3la,n&BV—Part;ail(m of I)fimo<if» }~nkich 
 Jord V. dretn, ]4 P. R. ,t'J4. anlt ,345. | 
 
 Slander of Title to Goods - l)a^ipUv,\ 
 A uumi^ak ]-ln an action for slander of tit e to 
 goods the statement of special .lamaLre w.n.s that ' 
 >>y reason ot the utterances of the defendant to a 
 
 wh c! tT'T"\ "■'^•^';"''il'^'l "t an auction sale 
 which he had advertised, a large number of 
 
 Slander-/^, y_/?e/,V/-_J/„//,.,.]_The phiir.- 
 'II, the wife of a postmaster, complained oi 
 slander by the defendant, an assistant i,.,st oltic- 
 inspector, to the effect that she had taken 
 money from letters and ha.i giNcn him a writtti, 
 confession ,,f her guilt :~ 
 t Held, th.tt as to .itatenu'iils made in the (lis 
 ''V'V'i^': "f V"' 'lefendanfs ,,}iicial duty, to the 
 plamtift s husband as postmaster, and to nvo 
 other persons as sureties for liiin, the occa.siona 
 were privileged; but not so as to statements 
 made to a partner of one of the sureties who 
 used the post (,!lice, and to whose business 
 premises the defendant contemplated reiiiovinB 
 It; tor tile defendant and the partner liail no 
 such common interest in the matter as histilied 
 the communication, nor was there any iiublio or 
 moral or social duty resting on the defendant 
 which ju.stihed mm in making it. Kvon had 
 tlie evi, eiice shewn that the defendant lu.ne.stlv 
 believed that such a .lut> rested upon hi,,, or 
 tliat there was such a common interest, if siicli 
 belief were unfounded, the occasion would rot 
 I have been privileged. 
 
 1 ,--■ ,^.y,.'."-''''^ '-■'? occasion is privileged, the 
 plaintill s case fails, unless there is evidence of 
 i malice in fact, an<l the burden of proving this 
 ! IS on tlie plaintill', who must adduce evhlence 
 upon which a jury miglit say that the defendant 
 aljuscd the occasi(,n either by wilfully statins' 
 as true that which he knew t,. be untrue or 
 stating It in reckless disregard of whether it 
 was true or talse. 
 
 And whore the plaintiff in her evidence denied 
 that she had made a confession to the defen- 
 dant but admitted in a qualified way that after 
 her denial the defendant continued to assert to 
 her, and appeared to believe, that she had made 
 one : — 
 
 Held, that,' in the absence of a clear admission 
 by the plaintiff, there was evidence of malice in 
 fact to go to the jury. 
 
 .S. The defendant was not entitled to notice 
 ot action as a public olHcor ; the statutes remiir- 
 ing such notice applying only to acti(jus hrouuht 
 tor acts tlone. 
 
 1 /'''■f,"'^,'?":»;'''»»-So«V/2/ y. Parkimoi,, nsm 
 1 '.i>. 15. 4,il, followed. 
 
 Min-mi/ V. JJcSwiney, I. R. 9 C. L, 545, dis- 
 tinguished. 
 
 ■Srinllc, also, that the statutes requiring notice 
 of .-icti.m cannot bo invoked ^^•here the wonls 
 spoken are detamatory and have been uttered 
 n n V-,T'^^\ malice. Hane^ v. Hnruhnm, l!6 
 u. li. .^.ii, Affirmed in aiopcai, 2.'> A. It. !KJ. 
 
 Slander — Honest 7ie/jV/. ] _ The i.laintiff 
 claimed damages for slander in respect of words 
 
348 
 
 ixiul the goods which 
 less money titan thev 
 e : — 
 
 iliduM not he riiinired 
 imjiies (if tlie persons 
 eucli-iirticlein )ts|)cct 
 aiiiitd a liir;,'c.' price 
 -le ; mU that he emiid 
 inrliculiiiize \mis the 
 e hiid been (iuinped. 
 
 LEI IK. 
 
 -.V,,i',Vr.]_Tiic plain, 
 uster, ooiiipliiined ol 
 n iissistaiit jxist ollice 
 liiit she liad t.'ikcn 
 1 given him a wi'itten 
 
 nts made in the dis- 
 "Ihuial duty, to tlie 
 Inuister, and to nvo 
 '!■ him, the oeeasions 
 Ml as to statements 
 i)f tlie siu-etiefj, who 
 
 to whose Imsincss 
 templated reiiioving 
 
 the partner liad no 
 e matter as justified 
 i tliere any pulilic or 
 i;,' on the defendant 
 lung it. Even liad 
 ^ defendant honestly 
 rested upon him or 
 on interest, if such 
 
 occasion would pot 
 
 is privileged, the 
 tlicre is evidence of 
 len of proving this 
 St adduce evidence 
 
 that tlie ilefeiidant 
 l>y wilfully stating 
 iv to be untrue, or 
 ^anl of whether it 
 
 her evidence denied 
 sion to the defen- 
 itied way that after 
 itinued to assert to 
 that she liad made 
 
 >f a clear admission 
 idence of malice in 
 
 entitled to notice 
 the statutes requir- 
 to actions brought 
 
 Parkimoh, [1892J 
 .. 9 C. L. 545, dis- 
 cs reiiniring notice 
 
 where the x>or(ls 
 lave been uttered 
 
 I V. liurnliam, 1'6 
 1, 23 A. It. SKJ. 
 
 ] — The plaintiff 
 
 II respect of words 
 
 349 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 spokpn to him by the defendant, in the i.re.sence 
 ot otiiers, to the eliect that he ha,l sohl eer,a n 
 m'd given to him by the .lefeiidatit to plant in 
 order to raise 8,.e.l for sale. Tlie jury f.niiid 
 that the words were, not spoken in good faitli in 
 tho n^iual course of business aliairs for the pro 
 teci.ion of his own interests :— 
 
 Held that there w.as no 'evidence to sustain 
 such a tindmg ; that the ..vidence shewe.l that 
 R. defendant hoiiestly and justiliablv believed 
 that the plaintiff had .lelraude.l 1dm- th-it the 
 eocasion was privileged, and the plaintilf had' 
 failed to shew actual malice ; and there.ore he 
 eoul.Inot recover. Stf:,mrt v. . ■,;■„// 1,,,,-/, ■'-,() 
 
 Sia.naev-./mt;/;mnon. 1- Pleading juRtifiea- 
 tion m an acti.m of slander, where no attempt 
 is made to prove tlu. plea, is not in it.elf evi- 
 dence of mal.ee entitling the plaintiff to have 
 the case submitted to the jury, the wor.ls in 
 <Iu(i8tion having been .spoken on a privilened 
 occiision. ' "^4,1-11 
 
 .Indgmeiit of the Common I'leas Division 
 .irtiriiicd. Corru/au v. ir,://-o,.s„„, 20 A. H. ]S4. 
 
 Slander -y»r,/;7,-(W Z',-,,-;/, ,/,. ] -The defen 
 daiit. who was the superinten'dent .,f a public 
 a^vluni, said to a person who had formerly bec'n 
 a.scrvautatthe a.yh.ni, ■md who was em-aued 
 to he married to the plaintiff, that the latter 
 >na,,bsm-an atthe asylum, was "aeontemil^ 
 
 Id'' T ^";:, "■'''^^'' ^''" '"-"".^'I't an action of 
 •.dander. Justilication Was not iileaded The 
 evidence shewed that the defeinlant honestly 
 Wieyed in the truth of the words spoken, and 
 
 Held, that the occasion on which th(. words 
 w-re spoken was one of qnalitied privilege, in 
 that the person .uhlressed had an interest 
 receiving the coiiimnnieation, and th.at tl e 
 
 S'm^IiS'!^"' '-'-' ^^""-* I--f "^ 
 Held, also, that the u.se of tlie oualifvin.' 
 
 .^)^:i:;lc.^;'tt'SJ:!:n,S'„:;:?l^- 
 
 11S!)1]2(,.. R .TM.f.dlowol '•^'''■ 
 
 thfi^dt!t;'of';h''T"'r"'S'r- J-> that evidence of 
 tlie tdtsity of the slander given on the plaint itr's 
 v'xaminat,on..n-cliief should not h.ave bee le 
 
 350 
 
 Stliesl"!?/''!' "^ ";*; ^"^tement of claim charg- 
 iig these libels could not, on the ground that 
 
 In; 1 ' V"" '"^"'" "« ^" ""■"> xuinmarilv 
 
 I'sniisse, ; and as to the libels alleged to have 
 
 heen published after that date, .securky f or costa 
 
 could not be oidere-l nmler the statute, beeauBe 
 
 the plaintiff was then a candidateC.a puW c 
 
 ti^ I riTi ;'" ''r- '"^-""'^' "f «^'-tioii -,, s,r ec- 
 
 tioii (2) (a), and the statute did not apply there 
 
 Li oel -Kew.y^aper - Crlmhinl Charne — 
 IMu:hna, " _ ' ■ Trirkd or Frir„l„us. "l-Upon 
 an application under H. S. O. cli 57 see (| fnr 
 ■s-urity foreosts in an action fo,! HI d.'/w'hj 
 I fnoT"'!''' "'"^1''^''"^'' "f. imblished i,r the 
 ;;-om;".l'''^:ht:E,r:':--" ^'"^ ^^ 
 
 l.y section 400 of the Criminal (odraid the 
 Cr,. ^!^^''--;'-y/l''l -. when n^dUS; 
 
 . Old imtbo'i'V'"'""; J'"'-^'' ■■""' '""^ ^vliieh 
 a the V r;'''''^"'.'"''''' "1"'" <l'i« application ; 
 ai'l the Master III Chambers bavin,/ htdd that 
 they ' invo ve,l a criminal charge,' hi.!, '6^ 
 should not be inu.rfered with. "eoision 
 
 An action cannot be consi,lered " trivial or 
 
 " e.ely because the e.vistciice of"a good defence 
 on he merits IS. shewn by the defe^^idanffafH 
 
 tie plaintiff. J he latter may properly con- 
 ■s.'ler that upon an application tor si:urL for 
 '"•"••■' - oath of the truth of the 
 
 costs a denial on 
 
 chafes ngams^himirmme-L;^:"'^^ 
 R :»1. ^''^"min-rCo. of Toronto, le P. 
 
 VII. Skcuiuty Fon Cosis. 
 
 Y^f^~ X<'ir-'<p<tl>,:r ~ Camlidnb- for Pahlir 
 /A'V.J-The plaintiflf was a candidate at an 
 ■ectionofamember of the Le.dsktive Wm 
 '■f ot Ontario and brought thisraet >, in u>^ . "t 
 
 yihr;lJ^nuf'^^"'*"'"^-'^^''^-i'"Mt:ih;:; 
 
 tiL • ' '^'-": -"'^ '" ">s newspaper, some of 
 tern oefore the date of the writ for the elee 
 
 eSi!;:!^""" "^"'' '•"'* '•^'^'^ l^-t '-efore tile 
 
 fo"f n„l li ' *';,• ^^'i""'"? ''"' ""t ^ candi.lai.^ 
 camiii, ot li. ,^. O. ch. .)7. sec. ^ «^.il,-soe -•>) 
 ;U i|e!o,e liie date of the writ for the election 
 
 SiS^he^o..!''tS^'d:;if«:'^''/'-i?- 
 
 -tioa under ,^ie^;^u;^'tas\ec;^::^;rtt 
 
 cr mi , '-^'"/',".",V ]-The w.u.ls "iiiy'olvesa 
 cr.ni Id harge- in It. S 0. eh. 57, sec. 9, sub 
 nkinViff '■ ".'"volves a charge that the 
 
 -lants'^in '2^*''° ''""'' P"Wished by the defen- 
 1. nts m then newspaper of which the plain- 
 titls, an incorporated ..unpanv, complained in 
 
 had W^S't"', '!"'' ,f '^^'"^ ''^ the' SS:^ 
 Had tiled to bribe aldcMineu by is.suius to th*^ 
 
 paid-up stock in the company - ^ ^' 
 
 costs uIi-Th ■■"' /'I'l'''^-''^':'" f<^'- security for 
 casts under the above section, that the words 
 <Iul not involve a criminal charge for a corn^^ 
 t.on cannot be eha.ge.l criminag wit a Se 
 lt;;"*^'T r "? ""■ i"temio,/of theottemkr 
 
 ^O^ib^MngiSSr ^"' '■ ^'^'^^-"- '' O- «• 
 And where the defendants by affidavit shewed 
 
 publication ill good faith and other ei icumsUnce 
 
 ta,''iu"f ''"■"'? •'^''°^f ''«"''"" *° -title ?he 
 
 , f'„f r- K^^" «,ros3-e>famination of the depoii- 
 
 ■^^V^naci Co. V. World Xe,r.p„j„r Co., 16 P. 
 
 I'ihel—Xcw.pnner -('rhiihud CAan/e.l-The 
 legislation in R. S. 0. ch. 57, sec. 9, as toseeur- 
 
an 
 
 DEFAMATION. 
 
 Ifi 
 
 ity for costs in actions for libel contained in 
 newspapers, is unique, and tlie intention is to 
 protect newspapers reasonably well conihicted 
 with a view to the information of the pu))Iic. ' 
 In a newspaper article published by the 
 defendants the plaintiff was referred to as an 
 ''unmitigated scoundrel," and it waS stated 
 that lie had endeavoured to ruin his wife by 
 inciting another person to commit adultery with 
 her : — ' 
 
 Held, that this did not involve a criminal 
 charge within the meaning of section 9 (a). 
 
 The defendants did not contend that the 
 grounds of action were trivial or frivolous ; and 
 It was conceded by the plaintiff that lie had not 
 sufficient property to answer the costs of the 
 action. 
 
 The manager of the defendants swore to a 
 belief 111 the substantial truth of what was pub- 
 lished, and that it was so published in good faith 
 and without malice or illwill towards the Dlain- 
 tms ; — ' 
 
 Held, that, under these circumstances, an 
 appeal from the discretion of a Judge in Cham- 
 bers in reversing a referee's decision and order- 
 ing security for costs, should not pievail. Btn- 
 nettv. Emjiire Printin<j and PubUMwj Co., 16 
 
 352 
 
 Libel — Xtuvpa/ier — I'rifoloM Action.]— 
 Where an action of libel was brought by one 
 Grieme comphiiniiig of statements published in 
 a newspaper imimting a crime to one Graham, 
 and It appeared that it was stated in the article 
 complained of that no one would believe the 
 charge against Graham, and that in an article 
 published in the same newspaper, after the 
 commencement of tlie action, it was stated that 
 the person referred to in tiie former article was 
 not the plaintiff, and there were other facts 
 shewing that the plaintiff was not the person 
 referred to : — 
 
 Held, that the action w as frivolous, and the 
 defendants were entitled to security for costs 
 under R. S. O. ch. 57, sec. 9. Onnne v. Globe 
 Frintmij Co., 14 P. R. 72. 
 
 IM)el—Kt%v.<:pfiper~Prin/,</e.]—On an appli- 
 cation under 1!. 8. O. ch. 57, sec. 9, for secuHty 
 for costs in an action of libel, the Judge is not 
 to try the merits of the action ; if it appears on 
 the affidavits filed by the defendant that there 
 la&prmiijctcie case of justification or privilege, 
 and that the plaintiff is not posses.-ed of property 
 sufficient to answer costs, the statute is satis- 
 fied, and security should be ordered ; it is not 
 for the Judge to pass upon iJisputed facts dis- 
 closed 111 conflicting athdavit.s tiled against the 
 application, b'wciiu v. Jlail Printiwi Co.. IG I' 
 
 j the statements complained of were puhli.sln.,1 ;,, 
 
 good fnith, and therefore the order shoul.l l„. 
 
 set aside. ^ 
 
 I Su-abi V. Mail Printimi Co., IG P. H 130 
 
 j distinguished. Ltniiox v. !<tur Prinfw] ^,'4 
 
 PiMi.ht„u Co., Hi P. R. 488. 
 
 81&nder~I)isvhmi<j Def,„r,:]-ln un lutnn 
 for slander Iirouglit under 52 Vict. ch. 14 (O , 
 the delainatoiy words complaine.l of, huunthw 
 want of chastity to the plaintiff, an uiin.aira,i 
 , female, and also for an assault, the deleii,!ai.t 
 j moved under sub-section 3 of section 1 „f the 
 ! Act, for security f(,r costs, u|ion an iitlidavii 
 which stated, „mong other things, that th. 
 defemlant Imd a good defence on the i„ent« 
 but did not disclose such defence :— 
 I Held that the atlldavit was not suflicieiit i„r 
 ; apnnnl J.icU defence must lie shewn ; hut tit- 
 cross-examination of the defendant ih,„m \n- 
 athdavit might be read in aid of the aliidavn 
 Itself; and counter aflidavits could imtl,. 
 received : — 
 
 Hel(l, also, that the stay of procecdin-s „, 
 tfie order made for security for costs should ii.,t 
 apply to the count for assault. Lanm.t, ,■ , 
 Pyihuan, 15 P. R. 1<J9. 
 
 Sla.n&e,v~Prop^rtl| Sufficient to Anmnr Co,/, 1 
 — Lpon an application under 52 Vict eh 14 
 sec. 1, sub-sec. 3 (O.). for .security for a.^u ,A 
 an action for shinder imputing uiichastitv tc. i 
 female, the onus is on the defendant to'tlaw 
 that the plaintiff has not sufficient property u, 
 answer the costs of the .-iction ; and to defta 
 such an application it is not necessary that tlu- 
 plamtitf- should have property to the iini,ai,it ot 
 6h(J0 over and above debts, incuuibrauees, iiii,! 
 j exemptions. 
 
 ! And where it was shewn that the plaiiitifl 
 
 I had property of the value of goOO at Ica.st iiii.l 
 
 It was not shewn that she had not property 
 
 of much greater value, the applicatioii was 
 
 refused. 
 
 Brnul}/ V Pohtrt,,,,,, 14 P. R. 7, con.i,!cid. 
 !• tauter v. Couniy, 15 P. R. 290. 
 
 lilbel — New-ymjer — Good Faith.] — In an 
 action of hbel against the publishers and editor 
 of a newsjjaper, the defence suggested by affi- 
 davits filed upon an application under R. .S. O. 
 ch. 07, sec. 9, for security for costs, was that 
 the statements complained of as defamatory did 
 not refer to the plaintiff. 
 
 The Judge who heard an aj.pcaf f lom an order 
 made by a Master for security being of opinion 
 that, upon the fair reading of the statements 
 -lOiiipuiued of, they did leler to the piaintifi :— 
 
 Held, that it did not ajipear that the defen- 
 dants had a good defence on the merits, and that 
 
 VIII. Special Cases. 
 
 False and Malicious Publication as to 
 Goods Manufactured by Plaintiffs-^ .1//,™. 
 twiix oj Special Damai/f —Dnnnmr.]- In' m 
 action of libel the plaintiffs' statement of claim 
 alleged that the defendants falsely and niiilioi- 
 ously published of and concerning the plaiiitill's' 
 goods '' . . . We do not keep Acme „r com- 
 mon plate ' and also alleged special damage :- 
 
 Held, on demurrer, that as the allegatieii was 
 that the defendants " falsely and maliciously ' 
 published of and concerning the plaintilfs etc. 
 and as special damage was alleged in direct 
 terms, following }yesi,-rn Couiitien Mauuiy Co. 
 V. Lawcs Chemical Maimre Co., L. i!. 9 Ex. 
 218, if the plaintiffs were able to prove that 
 allegation, they would be entitled to judgment, 
 and the demurrer was overruled. AcvieSUnr 
 Co. V. Stacty Hardware Co., 21 O. K, 201. 
 
 Incorporated Company — ImpviirAv.) tb 
 yalidily of Election of l)irtctor.s.]—'y\ie defen- 
 dant published of the directors of the plaintiff, 
 an incorporated building society, in a newspaper, 
 
353 
 
 of were publi.sl].,! in 
 the order should U 
 
 ' Co., 16 P. I!. 130 
 •Slur Printiiiii », ,; 
 18. , 
 
 viis not siiflit'iciit, for 
 t lie shewn ; Imt tl.f 
 lel'tiulnnt iijH.n Inr 
 aid of the iilliilavii 
 iivlts could not 1* 
 
 eciiiity for coHs of 
 ting unchastity to a 
 ; defendant to tlaw 
 flicicnt prnptity to 
 tion ; and to defeat 
 i neccBsary tlial the 
 ty to tlie iinii.uiit of 
 
 incuuibranits, am\ 
 
 — Iwy.vgnhi'j !h( 
 '0)-.v.]— The defec- 
 •s of the plaintiff, 
 ty.in a newspaper, 
 
 a notice Bteting, n-.-^ngst other matters, that 
 certain persons ; ,senting themselves to hn 
 directors of the soe. :,,y had b^'een sd ir„intS 
 by the mos despicable, fonl, an.l fmSnt 
 mans and i„ conse.jnence. all business ran 
 acted by them . . . jg „.i,„,i „„,, ^.^^'^ 
 con rary to niles and regulations and law' ' --^ 
 Held, that the paragraph was capable of 'the 
 meaning attributed to it, namell that Ihl 
 business of the society was beiiSal v tra 1 
 acted and as such it wan .lettmatory of the 
 pla.ntiirs. Owen ,%und liuildU,,, <nJ.'Z,"t I 
 
 tacorporated Oompa.ny -Charne of Cm-run- ' 
 
 A company incorporated f„r the purpose of 
 pud.sHng a newspaper can maintain anctiou 
 
 ^^iropoHtan Saloon Omnllm. Co. v. HaH-in, 
 
 SmUh/u^r,'T">T'"^ "'^'■""' <'i«ti%'"ished 
 •■iouti, /tttun Coal Co. v. Xor//,.h;,..t,'rn AV». 
 A..uaal,ou [im4\ 1 Q, ». ,3;,, followed 
 Journal / r.Mi„!, Co. v. AfarUan, 2r. O. R 509 
 
 Pemns\'!f,.rvi''*^"''^-'''"'*'' Wor,.u,thn.]- I 
 rersons carrviiii' on « iri«,.M..«t;i^ ■• 
 
 I, ,.*' o " "■ niercantile a^'encv nm ' 
 responsdjle for ttio dainaffea ,■•.,.,..,! > -^ "^'^ 
 in lju«ine.8 wlun by c l„Ude ni ,li f"'"'" 
 
 deneeor want of skil fa IseV, '*' ^T"''' '"^ 
 „N.i „ .,.'"'"">■'' "iloiination IS suD- 
 
 pl.ed concerning his stan.ling, thon.di the info 
 mation be communicated confiden ally to a 
 subsenberto the agency on his applica ion there 
 for. Cossetle v. iJaii, 18 S. C. K. 222. 
 
 tifiWeTf h^^^'"";'''''"-^'^'''''"- J - I'he two plain- 
 ™ Kd sSl'T tl''' 'i°'".'"-"« a firm, ^?hich 
 urniiuii sold out the business to a cornivinv 
 composed of the plaintiUs and a. other LZ 
 tii'in coiitinuincr in existp.i,.,. f.,,. n "'com 
 
 be-ng wound ut>. in'^ action "slS^th 
 inuendo cliara ng insolvencv tr. tt,. ' 
 
 twrliu Ss^ni'hT";'''' P'operly framed, the 
 
 accn.i„gj[E,.^;:Su:ri:di^.ro?rt^: 
 
 meTilbSroftr "'■ ^"^'^•''■'' '''"-S and^at 
 
 the shn.ler M V ^ , '-•"'"Pany by reason of 
 ecor " ' "L'T°,"'""'r'-« 'hereof, but on the 
 
 oUnt. p,ac^n„]heU^o/'£' Sr'd;;^: 
 
 oSK::^r^^'fr-Sp:;oi;ieu^ 
 
 w accounts for sale, among them being 
 
 DEVOLUTION OP ESTATES ACT. 
 
 351 
 
 (one against "Mrs. J, Oreen (the female plain- 
 t ft), Princess Street, dry coo.ls bill T",.. •?- ' 
 ije evidence shewed i^:^: ';!Sj"^^:,, 
 
 co,!!,l'''' i'""'! ^''■' P»!''i-ation was libellous an,l 
 could only be justified l.v sliewini; itrtn 7 
 H'.d, as the .lefen.lantH had f^dod o** „t.w , 'i 
 
 ££""!'"■' '''II-'""'"— u,diioSi,. . 
 
 t^ofl""' ^ ^;"' P-""^-" iV the t, ,ful '.' f- 
 
 Hoi ■ %'!"""'.tted the dimes mentioned •_ 
 
 orEd. "'"'''"""""' '''"' - -- trial was 
 What should have bcfn Icff t„ «i 
 
 tiliwith the comniissio, of tl . ! li ^' '^ '''i-'"- 
 
 tj^wl^hea.t..,,ysaid,l^'';.,.rh,^-ne;^ 
 tion of the defem ant in this reMnB,.f . ■ 
 
 immaterial. JohnMon v. AVmrt, i>4 O. fi 11,,^ 
 
 DEFECT IN WAY. 
 •See Wav, III. 
 
 DEMURRAaE. 
 See Ship, I. 
 
 DEMURRER. 
 
 See Pleadino. 
 
 DEPOSIT. 
 
 See Banks, IV.-Bi;ildi.vo Societies. 
 
 DESCRIPTION. 
 
 See Bills of Sale— Deed. 
 
 DEVIATION. 
 
 'S'ee Railways, X. 
 
 DEVOLUTION OF ESTATES ACT. 
 
 .„-^,^inlstrator ad Litem.] — See /?,. 
 
 E^STOK^rii.^^'^'''""'"' '' ''■ ^' 338: PC? 
 
355 
 
 DEVOLUTION OF ESTATES ACT. 
 
 356 
 
 Afislgnmant for the Benefit of Creditors 
 
 — Itil.l li;i .-LvMi/,,,,/- '() Kxic>ilt,r^~Si,-i(rilii.\ — 
 See T'U'n; v. S/iriw/ct; 21 O. K. .Vij, aiil,- Hi'. 
 
 Dowor - /.'»;//// ';/"A7(Wi«H,]- Section 4 of tho 
 I>''V.ilutioii of KstiitfH Aiit, K. ,S. n. ell. !()8, 
 wliioh gives tlu! widow a right of filectioii 
 liftwi-eii Ik r diiwiT iiml n (iJHtriLntivu nhiin; in 
 liur iliicciiscd luiHl)uiid'« lands, doe^ not apply 
 whoio by nmrriagi' scttliiniciit ahv has accejjted 
 an t.'(iuivalirMt in litit of dower. In such vhko 
 sill' hiia no riylit to any sluiru in tlio lands. 
 Tiiriiiiti) OfHcnd Timtt Co. v. (.hila, 25 O. H. 
 2-10. 
 
 ZietiBe—t'orciKnil to Kctifir — Pawer of Execu- 
 tor of I.i'x.'<or III Execute H'liewat of Li-a.-^e.] — 
 Under the Devoliition of K-tates .Act tho execu- 
 tor of a deceased lessor can nuike a valid 
 renewal of a lease pursuant to the covenant of 
 tlie testator to renew, lie Canadian I'acijic It. 
 W. Co. and Salioiud Club, •>{ O. R. 205. 
 
 Mortgage by Devisee Within Twelve 
 Months from Death— .l/w//, 7 of (,\iiii;,,h.]~ 
 The deviiee of real estate under the will of a 
 testator, .subject to the Devolution oi Kstates 
 Act anil amendments, lias a transniissilile inter- 
 est in the lands during the twelve months after 
 the death of the testator, jiending which time 
 they are vested by the Act in the legal personal 
 reprfisentativcK. 
 
 Auii where real estate devised by a will so 
 ttybie-'f. of which letters of administration with 
 tiu'»<iij! annexed had been granted during tlie 
 'av.?lvi' .aont lis succeeding the testator's death, 
 l«lt rtft to which no caution h.ad ever been regis- 
 t«rtf!, was, duiing such period, mortgaged by 
 the drvisee in gond faith : — 
 
 Held, that the mortg^ige w.as operative 
 between the devisee and the mortgiii^ee when 
 made, and became fully so as to the land and 
 iigainst the |iersonal representatives when the 
 year expired, in the absence of any warning 
 that it was needed for their purposes. J{e Mc- 
 Millan, McMillan v. McMillan, 24 O. l\. 181. 
 
 that p uce *ho Devolution of Kstntes Act, as a 
 matt' ; ot ■, itle, the record is complete with tin: 
 general administrator of tho decease 1 owner „f 
 tlie Kjuity of red.niption .-is the sole defemlmt; 
 yet, asHinattii ot procedure, the inliint cliilil' 
 I en of the deceased are pro])er -iiarties, and m 
 such shouKl appear as oiigiird d. iVndants, un. 
 less some good reason exists for excluding tlifin. 
 llules :ii)'.) and 1005 considered. Keen v. ( '0,1,1' 
 14 1'. K. 182. ' ' 
 
 Mortgage Action — Person(d. Kejirenenloli,;. 
 of OfcuiHid Mo>-/;ia,fni:]~A mortgage acli',11 
 iigaiiist the hurviving husband itnd inlant chiM. 
 reu of the mortgagor, who died intestate in 
 l-ebruary, 18(12, was begun before the lapse of a 
 year from the ileath : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintitl' was entitled, after the 
 lapse of a yenr, to judgment for the enforceminl 
 of her mortgage, without having a ]ierM,iiiil 
 reprcxentativo of ti.e inortgiigor before tin; 
 (.'ourt, no administrator having been aiijiointMl 
 and no caution registered under 54 A'iet. cli. Is' 
 sec. I, amending the Devolution of Estates Act' 
 liamii.iv. Don-, 15 1'. li. 210. 
 
 Nephews and NieceB—Ri'jtit.i of Childnn i,f 
 Predectaxid ,SiM,r of /nt,;,late..]-6ii the death 
 of a person, intestate, leaving no issue, tht; 
 children of a pi edi.'cease.l sister or brother are 
 not entitled under section 6 of the Uevohitidii 
 of I'.st.ites Act. R .S. O. ch. lO.S, to 
 competition with i surviving father 
 brother or sister ol :he intestate. 
 1!U O. R. 104. 
 
 sliare in 
 Her, niiithcr, 
 Ji'c Colijidtiiuii, 
 
 Mortgage Action— Ileii-.f-at-law of Deceased 
 Mort'jiKjor.j — Siuce tho Judicature Act the pro- 
 ceeding by demurrer for misjoinder of parties is 
 no longer available. 
 
 Wei-dirman v. Society. QtSnerale D'Eleciriciti. 
 \^ Ch. D. 240, followed. 
 
 In an action upon a mortgage for foreclosure, 
 immediate payment, and immediate possession, 
 the jilaintiff joined as defendants the heirs-at- 
 law of the deceased mortgagor (who died after 
 the Devolution of Estates Act) with the admin- 
 istrator of the real and personal estate. One of 
 the heirsat-law demurred to the st.atenient of 
 claim, on the grounds that the administrator 
 represented the est ite in all regards, th.at the 
 heirs-at-law were not bound by any covenants 
 of the deceased, and that no relief was claimed 
 or could be granted against them : — 
 
 Held, that the demurrer was in effect one for 
 misjoinder of parties, and that the proper 
 remedy was a motion under Rule .S24 («) to 
 strike out the name of the demurring defen- 
 dant. Carter v. Clark.wn, \o P. R. T,d. 
 
 Mortgage Action— Per.iOHai! Beprene.ntatire 
 of Decea.ied Mortijanor— Infants.]— In a. mort- 
 gage action for foreclosure, although it may bo 
 
 Powers of Administrator — Conreyance of 
 Land hy .■tdniinistrator--JJel,ls.]~\Mm\ was am. 
 veyed n 1874 to a husband and wife who were 
 married in 1864 :— 
 
 llehl, that they took like strangers, not hv 
 entireties, but as tenants in common ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the husband could by virtue 
 of the Devolution of Estates Act, os adminis- 
 trator of the wife, and in his oivn rii'ht, make a 
 valid conveyance of the whole d the l.md, 
 although there were no debts of the wife to 
 
 pny- 
 
 Jfarlln v. Ma<ie.e, I!) 0. 
 ]'e Witsiii 'lid '/'oronto 
 Liijlit Co., 'JO U. H. .•!!):. 
 
 It. 705, distinguislicd, 
 Incandeicent EUclrif 
 
 Powers of Executor -Air Af/if/c of LawU] 
 —An executor OI' a luiinistrator cJnnot having 
 j regard to R. S. O. ch. lOS, .«ec. 9, and .U Vict* 
 ch. 18, see. 2 (().), make the lands of the testa 
 tor or intestate the subject of speculation c 1 
 exchange by him in the same manner as if id.' 
 lands were his own. 
 
 The Court refused to decree specific iierfonn- 
 ance of a contract by an executor to exchuiig.t 
 lands of his testatrix for other lands, as tliu 
 purpose of the exchange could not have \xm 
 the payment of debts or the distribution of the 
 estate, and it was shewn that the beneficiaries 
 objected to the exchange, and it did not ai.pear 
 that the olticial guardian had been consulted. 
 Teniite v. Walsh, 24 0. R. a09. 
 
 Power of Ba.\Q —■ Surviiiing Executor^.] — 
 Where exccntorr, are given express power to at!i 
 lands, whether coupled with iin interest or not, 
 such power can be exercised by a surviviiij; 
 executor. 
 
357 
 
 DISTRESS. 
 
 llieDevoution ..f Rotate, Act, and a.ucn.l. 
 meutB ,lo not ,nt.nfc.re with an cxpregH ,„.«•..■ of 
 sal. given by a will to executory eiteml , ! 
 beyo u he por.o.ls of vesting pcB.ribcl by 
 th HO Acts. In rr Kork .unl IfUwrni, •.'-. () 
 
 Reslstratlon of Caution, i -The provisions 
 "' •;•' \'-t cl,. i!(» (<).), a,s to r...«i8 ratio, ? 
 <-;';-' api.ly to a .,..e in which Voba„h^^ 
 "," ''"'^'' !'^^" °»' -J I-tt...H of ,uli,i„i„r,ai u 
 
 <) .he o« , er. l,y virti.o ot section :.', the ullect 
 ot . ^0 . Mubsciuenl registr»,tion wouhl I.h omI 
 to withdraw t'. or vest in thn executor 
 a,lmini3trator so n>u,.h of the lan.l as is pro, 
 availttbh; lor the purpose of a.hninistration 
 
 J ne p'-ovision.s of ,i(i Via. ch. '20 ,0.), a-e so ' 
 tngratte, on .,4 X'ut. ch. 18 as to Like b" th 
 .\.jts apply to all p.r^ons dying after 1st Jdy, j 
 
 /;( )v /In In/, l,"} f T T o— ' -i 
 
 In re M.rUu, MO. U. 4ii5 ■" ' '"''"^^^'^^^'^^- 
 
 Sale of Infants' Landa-f.'o,,..,,/ ,;,■ oi/lrial I 
 
 ■2 (0.) 'the approval of the olhciVl ^uSi n' IT. ^ in.f Tf f Tf^^^l-P''*'"'"'-- " ''" was act- 
 sale of land by executors or "dndoistra orl is ist.'^o f '■" "^ ""'''"' '^ ''""""r-l^ warrant to 
 Jioiv ro,Mnred<.nIvwh„,.n .!,„„„.. :.."'.'?'""* '»''i«t''"i' t"r rent, attempted to remove some 
 
 I heicbv charge my cst.atc with payn.ent of 
 
 £SSfnSSe';L.rt.rrLr 
 
 Hl-m of tile land specilically .levised, 
 
 o he I , ■ "■' J'i'™'"''".^-- ""'1*T section 4 
 ■r tiie I'-olution of Kstatcs Act, k. S. U oh 
 
 ■loitgagc debtM upon the land s.iecitTcallv 
 mwan.l ncNtot kin. .sVo« v. Sn,,j,l,, 03 (). 
 
 DISCOVERY. 
 
 <%« KviDK.VlE. 
 
 DISTRESS. 
 
 Jioiv ro,,mred only where the sale is f„r the „u. 
 po^c d.striia.tin simply, and then v 
 where there are infant.s mttrcsted, or hei a or 
 devis.ca who do not concur. 
 
 U here administrators in contracting to s.ll 
 land, muler circumstances not rc,,uiH„g the 
 consent of the oHirlnl ,, 1: l"""fe }a& 
 
 L'laiii wl,i,.l, 1, ,r i '"^". "' '*^"'ove some 
 
 slcr iir , T '"''•'" l"-ev>'.usly seized by » 
 
 £f"::St^rb;r^^^^ 
 ?'|i:ndw^=S;c.«s-— ^^- 
 
 prSecnllion""" ^'"' ^'^'"'^ '^''•^'''^ '""' '"''"^ioua 
 ..m.,e uic contract ot sale subject to his aoprovaf , ' HnM * 17^ 
 and, as was alleged, lost the sale X^Cuk\ inU^^^^ 
 
 Held, that they were not liible t^' , ,;,7e «ood ' eTnni. I""" ^r""!''"">o' ^"'•" ^u> oflencrmight 
 to^th. -'- the deiiciency resulting ^^^ '^ J;^^^";:!,,:'^ jlJ^;--' '">'• ^"^h 
 
 the latter ,s casf , ,l„^„ „ . _ .. . ^P"" ','istaadei to do as he did ; and the action ww 
 
 ;i,„ , ,, ,- ^'" 'ne 01 lands. Uijon 
 
 he latter ,s cast a duty to sell, upon the former 
 a mere dmcreti.-n to be exerci.sc'l only for "^ 
 tarn purposes and in certain events ^ 
 
 nunliu^ "'"'"? "'« .'-^in'roval of the oilicial 
 uidiari is not re.|u.red, notice need not be 
 
 Title. J-UiKlcr the Devolution of Kslates Act 
 t.e legal estate i„ the deceased's land vestV i n 
 h legal personal representative ; and the b, ,ie ' 
 1 oi,d owner, whether the debts of the decea. ^1 
 ^re paid or not, cannot make a "ood title ^^ -I 
 «uU^eo„veyance from the legall,:;:sJ;S::;tl;: 
 
 Judgment of the Chancery Division, 19 O R 
 -0.,, reversed. Jfartin v. Jjagee, 18 A. R 384." 
 
 i^li S^^,£'^:J.rT;he tc^atrix, wdu. 
 
 a tt'ivf f I. -P'-° "'-""J' devised to her grandson ' 
 
 <U''"t of her and, which was incumbered. To ' 
 
 disnnssed with c.M. Heattyy. 'J;:^,i^2rO 
 a. i84. .'sfe next case. 
 
 ttie latte does under colour of the writ 
 
 Held'ro'' ''"' "'Tf^'"^ ^y '^"^ 'lefe-iant:- 
 RenO 7 )••'■""?/'"' J»^'gn>«»t of the Queen's 
 tt"act of hTolkc'f ""^ ''-'' -^^ '-^'^ ^ot 
 
 IMMp V. Ihmhle, LM O. R. l.sl, distinca.ishe,l 
 
 ..iJsST:sS'f«;^'sfS 
 
 amount, Gordon v. Ru„l,l., 19 A. U. 440! 
 
 tile nliint • 1' V '^"'^ lacumberei 
 
 ^.nUder IfC^!.^ "^^^^^ ^^'^00. The ^ sections ^ a eriio-aml li^ o^X^Icl'l^^S:; 
 
 ai^aJti^-t:^:;o^:.,^,!:'i«ir--'*?htt^ 
 
 »'to Aaother~Runn,u,, at /.rtn,..]-The effect of 
 
 «inai„der of ler et aV "^S^'^y."' *^00l>. The ' section, 
 
 and doing d > lage 
 
 l*!i: 
 

 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 // 
 
 {./ 
 
 
 
 /- 
 
 f/. 
 
 7a 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 '- illM 
 
 lis Ibb 
 
 11:25 1111.4 
 
 IM 
 
 1.6 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 ^\ 
 
 
 6^ 
 
 >> 
 
 H'^'\<i. *%^~ 
 

 Q', 
 
 i/.A 
 
 I 
 
'I I: 
 
 fi 
 
 li 
 
 369 
 
 DISTRICT COURT. 
 
 360 
 
 but with a condition that if it be found thpt the 
 fence broiten is not a lawtul fence, then no 
 damages can be obtained by the impoiindiiig, 
 whatever may be done in an action of troi>;ja.ss. 
 
 Cattle feeding in the owner's enclosure, or 
 shut up in ilia stables, cannot be held to be run- 
 ning at large when they may happen to escape 
 from such stable or enclosure into the neigh- 
 bouring grounds. 
 
 Ivea V. Hilclicock, Drap. R. 247, commented 
 on. McSluy v. Smith, 26 O. H. 508. 
 
 Clandestlnd Removnl of QooAa— Distrain- 
 ing Ooodn Not on the Deinixed i' remits.]— A 
 tenant is not liable to -prosecution under 11 
 Geo. II. ch. 19, for the fraudulent and clandes- 
 tine removal of goods from the demised pre- 
 mises, u'dess such goods are his own property, 
 nor can good.i v^hich are not the tenant's 
 property be distrained of}' the premises. A^artin 
 V. Hutchimon, 21 O. R. 388. 
 
 Rcnt—Conivi-.iion—DoHhk Value— Jus Ttrtii 
 — D(i7na<je.s.]—hi an action for wrongful distress 
 for rent before it was due, there was no allega- 
 tion in the st^itement of claim that the action 
 was i)roHght upon 2 \V. & M., sess. I, ch. 5, 
 sec. 5, nor that the goods distrained weie 
 "sold," but merely an allegation that the defen- 
 dant "sold and carried away the same and con- 
 verted and disposed thereof to liis own use;" 
 nor was a claim made for double the value of 
 the goods distrained and sold, within the term.- 
 of the statute : — 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of Fergu.son, J,, 
 that the action was the ordinary action for con- 
 version, and that the value, and not the double 
 value, of the goods distrained was recover- 
 able :— 
 
 Held, also, reversing the decision of Fergu- 
 son, J., that a wrong-doer taking goods out of 
 the possession of another, cannot set up jn.s 
 tertii, but the person out of whose pos.-sesSMJii 
 the goods are taken, may shew it, and in such 
 case the wrong-doer may take advantage of it ; 
 and the plaintiff, having shewn a chattel nioi ■ - 
 gage subsisting upon a portion of the goo,.j 
 distranied, could not be allowed to recover the 
 value of such portion without protecting the 
 defendant agjunst another action at the suic of 
 the mortgagee : — 
 
 Held, also, per Ferguson J., that the plaintiff 
 was not entitled to recover from the defendant 
 the amount received by him from the saie of 
 the plaintiti's goods in addition to the value 
 thereof; nor was the defendant obliged to 
 deduct the amount so received bv him from the 
 rent which afterwards fell due. 
 
 Hoare v. Lee. 5 V. B. 754, followed. 
 Judgment being given in favour of the plain- 
 tiff upon his claim, an<l in favour of the defen- 
 dant upon his counterclaim :- 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of Ferguson, J., 
 that the amounts should be set off. WiUiamH v 
 Thomnx, 25 0. R. 5;i6. 
 
 selling tht ^.art belonging to imch third person. 
 Po.ni V. Starr, 23 U. R. 83. 
 
 Tax.ea— Distress for Toxes.]-Ste Christie v 
 City of Toronto, 25 O. R. 425, and 25 O. R. (lO'i '■ 
 and Aun-is v. City of 'lorcnto, 24 0. R. •>f)7' 
 ante 50. * 
 
 'Rent—Goods of Third Persm,— Resort First 
 to Goods of Tenant. ]~\,\hein a landlord has dis- 
 trained for arrears of rent goods upon the 
 demised p>w„ises liable to such distress, belong- 
 ing ir _:,,.„ to the tenant and in p.irt to a third 
 person, such third pr.r.'jon has no right to com- 
 pel, or to ask the Court to conijjel, the landlord 
 to sell the part belonging to the tenant before 
 
 D .STSIBUTIGIV OF ESTATES. 
 
 Feme Coverte — I'tisband's Bight to h'e.i- 
 c/»um—jVtx-<o/'A'»;j, J— The Legislature of \uw 
 Brunswick, by 26 Geo. III. ch. 11, sub-sees. 14 
 and 17, re-enacted the Imperial Act 22 .t 'JS 
 Car. II. ch. 10, Statute of Distributions as 
 explained by sec. 25 of 29 Car. II. ch. 3, Statute 
 of Frauds, which provided that nothing in the 
 former Act should be construed to extend to 
 estates of femes covertes dying intestate, l.ut 
 that their husbands should enjoy their personal 
 estate as theretofore. When the statutes of \ew 
 Brunswick were revised in 1854, the Act :.'() 
 Geo. III. ch. 11 was reenacted, but sec 17 
 coiiesponding to sec. 25 of the Statute of 
 In-auds, was omitted. In the administration of 
 the estate of a feme coverte her next of kin 
 claimed the personalty on the ground that the 
 husband's rights were swept away by this omis- 
 sion : — 
 
 Held, that the personal property passed to- 
 the husband and not to the next of kin of the 
 wife. 
 
 Per Strong, J.— The repeal by the Revi.nd 
 Statutes of 26 Geo. III. ch. 11, which was 
 passed in affirmance of the Imperial Acts, nper- 
 ated to restore section 25 ot the Statute of 
 Frauds as part of the common law of Ntw 
 Brunswick. 
 
 Per G Wynne, J.— When a colonial legislature 
 re-3nact» an Imperial Act, it enacts it as inter- 
 preted by the Imperial Courts, and a fortiori hy 
 other Imperial Acts. Hence, when the English 
 Statute of Distributions was re-enacted hy '.'6 
 Geo. III. ch. 11. (N.B.), it was not necessary to 
 enact the interpretation section of the Ntatiito 
 of Frauds, and its omission ii' the Revised Sta- 
 tutes did not affect the construction to be put 
 upon the whole Act : — 
 
 Held, per Ritchie, C.J., Fournier, Gwynne, 
 and Patterson, JJ.— That the Married Wonian'.s 
 Property Act ot New Brunswick, C. S. X. 15. 
 ch. 72, which exempts the separate property of 
 a married woman from liability for her luis- 
 band's debts, and prohibits any dealing with it 
 without her consent, only suspends the hus- 
 band's righcs in the property during coverture, 
 and on the death of the wife he takes the jier- 
 sonal pnjperty as he would if the Act had nevtr 
 been passed. Lamb v. Cleveland, 19 J. C. R. 
 78. 
 
 See Devolution of Estates. 
 
 DISTRICT COURT. 
 
 Order of Master for Trial of Action 
 Therein—Subsequent Judgment of Nigh (.'(Jiirt 
 Judge.]— In an action brought for damages to tlie 
 plaintiff's house, frituateu iu a provisional juiii- 
 cial district, an order was made by the Master 
 in Chambers, assuming to act under the UiK.r- 
 
m 
 
 P ESTATES. 
 
 ganwed Territory Act. R. S. O. ch. 91. .lireotin^ 
 that the issues of fact be referred to the fstriJ 
 Judge, reserving further directions and ques 
 tions of law arising at the trial for the di8?,^sal 
 of a judge in single court. Notice of tria ^^1 
 given for the District Court, and .he case w^ 
 heard by the District Judge, who made certab 
 nuhngs of fact, assessed the damages.! 
 .hrected judgment to be entered for the pla 
 t,» The plMntiff moved for judgment on such 
 findings befr re a judge in Jingle court, the 
 dcencTantat the same time appealing from the 
 judgment or report, whereupon the Judge ds 
 l.ose<l of both motions, directing judgment to be 
 entered for the plaintiff ror the P.mc unt found 
 by the District Judge. 
 On appeal to the Divisional Court :— 
 Held that apart from the <,uestion of the 
 jurisdiction of the Master to malie the order as 
 the parties lia.l treatec' it as valid, and the s.'ib 
 se.iuent order of the judge in single court 
 remained unreversed an.l i?ot appealed from 
 the aurt would not interfere ; that if the que^: 
 tion of the jurisdiction of the Master were 
 ..vo'ved th. appeal should have been to the 
 ^cirt of Appeal. Fraser v. Buchannan, 25 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 S62 
 
 DITCHES. 
 
 &'t Mp.vicipal Couporations - Water anp 
 Water Courses. 
 
 DIVERSION. 
 
 See Water . nd Watercourses, II. 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 I. Attachment of Debts, 361. 
 
 II. JriilSDICTION, .%3. 
 
 III. Practice and Procedure, .'566. 
 
 IV, Prohibition, 368. 
 
 I. Attachment op Deht.<. 
 
 ni',S"" «■' *,'"' ''i"« ""■'"»" !;»«" of York 
 <,,*"'«»»•"« Bent Attaohea-JWo; o/ 
 
 primary ciedirors began an action in a Division 
 Court against the primary deiitor for Uie reCv 
 
 cZr zrr' .T";.'",^''^ j-isdictiorr^he 
 
 '-.oiirt, and also attached in the hands of L,'^r 
 
 n.shees the amount of the debt n each c«e •" 
 
 le sum .;f *.5oo having been admittedly due bv' 
 
 Upon the court .lay, the primary creditors 
 the primary debtor an,l the assit'iee of t^« 
 
 yourt, comiscd al«,) appearing for the garnishees 
 Jmlg,ne„t >,vas Hrst given ii, favour of he S- 
 
 eZ and t'lr ;'":."""* "" '"'""^^y <lebtor in7a"h 
 case, ami then the question of the validity of 
 
 gtrSiT'tl"'" '^"'''"•"' "H°° -ndtSce 
 given upon it the assignee producing l,is books 
 an.1 giving his evidence. Judirment wL. Th^.! 
 given declaring the assign.nent^ vofd as ^'atst 
 the primary creditors as a fraud ipon C 
 {-'..m tins judgment the assignee gavi notice ^f 
 
 tT"stvl7or'' '" f ^«r^-''« Hban'done5°and .n 
 the style of ca.ise he named himself a., "claim 
 
 tion^!!.' motion by the assignee for prohibi- 
 
 . Held that he had submitted himself to th« 
 .innsdiction o the Court, an.l could not S 
 heard to say that he w.as there merely as awit 
 ness; and that the Judge, having all partes 
 beore h.m, was justified under stctkn^of 
 the Division Courts Act, K. .S. O. ch 5j ,"„ 
 trying their rights without going throuiTh 'the 
 forn,al,ty of culling them before him :- *" *^^ 
 Held also, that the Division Court had juris- 
 diction to try the right of the primary creditors 
 
 satif^JTh • '^r'""' °^"^•^ ^^ siffficient to 
 satisfy their claims ; and, under section 197 to 
 termine whether or not the $500 was at the 
 debtor \^%''"'^^'""'^''t tlie property of thi 
 L/", lit Andrews v. hOj',',-, 22 O. 1{. 672. 
 
 wh^1Tftt^~^'"^.j;:^'«'"^"t of tl^e Judge 
 
 is 1 owtn .«';"''' '"','' " ^'''y "^ ^'thout one, 
 
 ' which it f, '*"''' Jtu gment from the day on 
 
 .vMiich It IS pronounced; and where damai/Pj. 
 
 d btTSftfh"^^' f'' '^'^ attadiabTa'l 
 oeot u thout the tornial entry of judKinent 
 
 j..^p^o^5ritt^^-;s?hi^ 
 
 h.is been settled and adjusted, is not a ,lebt 
 which can b3 attached under .section 178 of R 
 
 ^i^ivto;;'^,cr°"-^""^^^^"--'^ 
 
 panv-s ■ ^ht 1'? ^"""^r *'•" "'«"rance oom- 
 fV^-1,- 8'" '° '"'^'6 the money applied in 
 
 R. 28oI'"*'' '''"* '^P'"- ■^''"''■'°" "■ ^^«n 14 P. 
 
 Judgment 3ummonB~/)efmdanU~A mu- 
 n slice 18 not a defendant within tl e .nelS 
 Act ''°"' 7f t "%■ °f the Division cZtf 
 
 under aftPr i.^i ? ' '""' '" ""* examinable 
 
 unaei alter-judgment summons. 
 
 21 i it 692 ""'■ ^'t '■' '^''"•"« ^- ^''"'^». 
 
'ii 11 
 
 363 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 Motion for New Trial after Fourteen i 
 l>iyB.l— The time limit for applying for a new ! 
 trial in onliiiiuy litigation in the Division Court I 
 cioes not apply to garnishment liials, and so [ 
 long as the money remains unixiid after jiulg- | 
 ment against a garui.sliee, he may apply for 
 relief either hy i)aying into Court, or for a new ' 
 trial, in the event of a new claim lieiiig made 
 known to him. 
 
 McLfnn v. McIaoiI, X, 1>, T;. 407, f,,l|,,\ve(l 
 I'rohiliitioii refused, lluh^un y, Sli, union. '2i't 
 O. R. 5r.4, allirnied by the Divisional Courtj 21 
 O, R. 11 ,"). 
 
 364 
 
 ferred to and considered. 
 Virltic, 24 0. R. floS. 
 
 In re Wallac 
 
 Ascertained Amount— CA/Zhi for S:.->on „„ 
 toiitnii-l Sinned hy Di/tw/iiiif—Kr'iih'nno'-/;,- 
 J'lrmfinri: 0/ Coiiililioiu on Plaiiii:t]\ J',n'/.] \ 
 Division Court has no jurisdiction to enteiiii'.i 
 a claiin for iirJOO on a e(jntract signed by diUi,. 
 < ant ivhero to entitle plaintiff to recover ( vi 
 deuce iillm must be given to shew that eomli 
 tions of the contract on the plaintitrs part h.ivo 
 bet-n complied with. y.V Sh,-ph,rd and Cooj.n' 
 -'.> O. R. 274. ' 
 
 per-<rice~Xo/i,;- 0/ A./J xcc.]— Service of a 
 Division Court after-judgment garuislieu sum- 
 mons upon the local ageut of a. foreign insur- 
 ance company, whose jjowcrs were limited to 
 receiving and transmitting applications : — 
 
 Held, eti'ective, having regard to the pro- 
 visions of .sections bS'Jand IS"), subsection ;i of 
 R. .S. O. ch. Til. 
 
 Where the defence of the garnishee is put in 
 after the expiration of the eight .lay.s from 
 service of the summons allowed by section KS8, 
 sub-section 2, of Ii. .S. O. ch. 51, so long as it is 
 put in in suflicieut time to enable the creditor 
 to give notice rejecting it, and for the clerk to 
 transmit such notice to the garnishee, the latter 
 is not bound to attend the trial if such last men- 
 tioned notice is not given, and the creditor can- 
 not proceed to the trial of the action until Uiat 
 is done. Siiiipson v. C/ulv, 14 P. R. 280. 
 
 Setting Aside Attachment.]— Power over 
 the process of his own Court is inherent in the 
 Judge of a Division Court as well as of other 
 Courts ; and, notwithstanding the lU'ovisions 
 of section 262 of the Division Courts Act, V,. S 
 O. ch. 51, a Judge may set aside an attachmen 
 which has bei'ii iinprojierly issued. J.'c MHchi ' 
 V. Scril/iier, 20 0. R. 17. 
 
 Solicitor's Lien.] -Where solicitors claimed 
 a hen for costs upon a judgment recovered, the 
 amount of which was the subject of a garnishee 
 suit in a Division Court :— 
 
 Held, tliat the Judge in the Division Court 
 had power under section 197 of the Division 
 Courts Act, R. S. O. ch. 51, to ('ecide upon the 
 proper sum to be allowed in respect of such lien, 
 and was not bouml to refer it el-icwhere. Bavkl 
 ■son V. Taijlor, 14 P. It. 7S. 
 
 II. JrRlsDICTION, 
 
 Ascertained Amount— CTi(i/tt for Bent ]— 
 The defendant covenanted in a lease to pay the 
 plaintitr$210 on a certain date as rent reserved 
 A payment of §34 having been made, Icavini!' 
 the sum of S1.S0.40 due for principal and intei^ 
 est, the plaintiff brought his acuon in the Divi- 
 sion Court for that sum, and prohibition was 
 applied for upon the ground that the claim was 
 not within the jurisdiction of the Division 
 Court : — 
 
 Held, that the original amount of the claim 
 was ascertained by the signature of the defen- 
 dant under sub-sec. (c) of sec. 7, R. S. O.cli 31 
 and that the Division Court had jurisdiction, ' 
 McDermidx. Mclhrmul, 15 A. R. 287, ami 
 Bobh V. Murray, 16 A. R. 503, specially re- 
 
 ! Breach of Coven&nt— Landlord and Ti mnil 
 '. '" 1/ 'Vr^ ^'""'''-^'"••'■'o/».]~In an action broir ht 
 in the High Court by a landlord against a In,. 
 ant for damages for breach of the hitter's eve 
 nantsin a farm lease, the statement of el.-iim 
 I al.eged that the plaintillby deed let to the .Icfon- 
 (laiit tne land described f.w a term of years im,l 
 I that the defendant thereby covenaiiLd as ^et 
 \ ''";^''' ,"'''' assigned as breaches of the covui- 
 Umts that the defendant did not cultivate the 
 ^ tarin m a good, liusbandlike, and proper 111:111- 
 ner l.y the statement of defence the defen- 
 dant denied all the allegations of the state- 
 ment of chum. an,l further alleged that tlie 
 iletenilant hiui used the premises in a tenant- 
 like and proper manner, "according i„ tjie 
 custom _ of the country wh ,re the .same w.i.s 
 i>,no !', "^ Pl'niitiff recovered a verdirt of 
 J-UIO, the action being tried with a jurv. The 
 .itle to the land \yas not brought into question 
 at the trial, but it was contended that it came 
 in question on the pleadings :— 
 
 Held, not so ; for the defendant was, on tlie 
 
 ^ face of the record, estopped from pleading mi, 
 
 ■visit, and his denial could oniv be read as :\ 
 
 ■'■i-se of the actual execution of tjie lea-c 
 
 ■'"•,se,-v. Bradhnrnc, 7 P. R. Is, coiiKnu'itcl 
 
 I V,-!. 
 
 i Held, also, that the "custom" pleaded \>as 
 I not the ' custom " meant by section (il) miIi- 
 ; section 4, of the Division Cou. .s Act, 1! .< 
 ,ch.)l which refers to some legal custom hv 
 i which the right or title to property is aciniied", 
 or on wliicli it depends. 
 
 L<-'j/, V. Heiriit, 4 East 1,-4, followed. 
 
 Held, therefore, that the action was witliia 
 
 the competence of the Division Court, and that 
 
 the costs should follow the eve-it in accor,l,-,,icc 
 
 with Rules 1170, 117'.'. Talhol v. Pook, lo V. 
 
 Incorporeal Hereditament.] — The 1 ue 
 
 assertion of the defendant in a Division Cmit 
 actnm that the right or title to any conioreal or 
 incorporeal hereditament comes in questinii 
 under K. S. 0. ch. 51, sec. 69, sub-sec. 4! is not 
 I siUticient to oust the jurisdiction of that Coiut. 
 ji lie Judge has authority to enquire into so 
 much of the case as is necessary to satisf\ liim 
 self on the point, and if there are disputed UnU 
 or a question as to the proper inference from 
 undisputed facts, that is enough to raise tliu 
 question of title. If the facts can lead to only 
 one conclusion, and that against the defendant, 
 then there is no such hon,-} Jide dispute as to 
 title as will oust the jiirisdicti(m of the Court. 
 
 In an action in a Division Court for r>nt r,t. ■> 
 covenant in a lease, in which it was couteuck.i 
 that the lease hud been surrendered, pioliilii- 
 tiou was refused, Meredith, J., dissenting, "u 
 
365 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 e legiil custom liy 
 operty is accjuiied", 
 
 the grouii,'. that a h,m,l Jhh ,lnfe„co against tl„. 
 piaintitl s njrht to any >f.it ,lue umlc. the luu^o 
 was nusuil. 
 
 Decision of A.Miour, C.J., ,,(!in.it.,l. /.V 
 MuhNii/v. JoirnoJ Co//i„,,,rood, <2r, O. R. (i3,-,. 
 
 Judgment of High Court-" /V .«/ ./,„/,,. 
 T>f„> ~.-il.„n,lum,iu A-.iv,.«.J-_l,ivisio„ (■„„,■.,, 
 liav,. juris, ictioii to ,.ntc.nain an a.aion liro,...),. 
 upon a jinlgnu^nt of tl„. High Conrt, where th. 
 
 ju..gm.;Mtotthat(onrtisatinalju,Ig„,ent. 
 I.r thirls V. /l,;.o/.;. 10 p. I; ..57 ii p ,, 
 
 2!)(i, return,! to ana folloMe.l. ' ' 
 
 In an action for alimony, the plaintiff reeov- , 
 
 ered jii.ignient against tlie .lefen.h.nt for s2] 1 -jO 
 
 taxed cost.s, and in the nsnal lorin for alinumv' 
 
 at the rate of §-..l ,,.,, ,,,,, payable n ,,1 
 
 quarterly instalments at sj.eeiiied times :- ' 
 
 1 eld, that the ji.dgnunt, so far as it related 
 
 to the eosts, w.s a final jn.lgment, whatever 
 
 ?66 
 
 I Replevln-7>„„f,,/r...]_The plaintiff, a solici- 
 I tor, elaiming 01, defendant's p:,peis a Hen for 
 
 .pajal.le on demand. Me then went to the 
 
 Lnited States, leaving the note ami pa|,eis with 
 
 ano l,or soheitor as his agent. The' defendant 
 
 •^ atmg' thuthere.iniie.l the papers, or some of 
 
 ' tlien, t„r use m his Imsiness, hronght replevin 
 
 proceedings m the Division Court, giving a hood 
 
 ..prosecute the suit with eireet,\nd without 
 
 le i., or to return the property replevh d and t(, 
 
 M.\ the , amagea siistaine.l i,y the issuing of the 
 
 ■It, ami there was a l.reaeh of the hond in not 
 
 pioseentmg the suit with elieet. i;n,ler the 
 
 ■q.Kvm the ("efendant only proeured some of 
 
 the 1 ap.rs and wl.ieli were tendered hack to 
 
 he p hunt,)} and retiise.l, the defendant statii,.' 
 
 that 1 hey were of no value, the agent havin- 
 
 retained the va „al,le ones. In an action on he 
 
 '.on,l l.ypla.ntiir to recover the amount of the 
 
 night he the .v.se will, 1 euanfto the oavments ;" ;-- ■••' I'""""" J^" ■'"•"^f'' ttie amount of the 
 ;f,^'iy"^"y.^>"l tl>ataI>i;dsion CouWhad jm' ;!;;J':^« ''="»»g'^« ^e ha.l sustaine.l l,y the reple- 
 
 isdiction under K. S. (). di. ,",1, sec. 70 {/,) to 
 entertain a suit l.y the plaintiff for ,sl(i6 in 
 respect to the co.sts. as heing a claim for a del 
 cwmg to the plaintiff l,y the .Icfen.lant, she 
 expressly abandoning the balance of the taxed 
 costs aM^rded .IMrkh <•. Al,/n.:< 23 (). | 
 3<4 Afhrmed l.y the l^ivisioi.ai O.urt, -'4 (> 
 K. 11:4. 
 
 ilehl. per ]5oyd, C, that even if any lien 
 l^l^ted, Nvhieh was fiue.stionabie, by iVason 
 o the taking of the note ami de,,art-'re fro 
 the country, it was not displaced ny the rei.le- 
 viij s^uit ; but, in any event, the plaintiff had 
 ailcMl to prove any actual damage ; and though 
 there might be jmlgment for nominal damages 
 and costs, there would be a set off of the .leten- 
 Hants eosts of trial; and the action «as dia- 
 misscd without costs. 
 
 I'nder the Division Court Act, I!. S. () di 
 
 ii i '.,T' l"'"''v!''Vv'"'''.'' '"""'•'' '•■"'•'^l iKUebeen 
 litigated in the Division Court. 
 
 <,'!(" ir, as to the anioi.nt of (iamagcs rccovtr- 
 Meehanics' Lien-^ Aforlqn,/, ~ A<-coni,n „,.?,??'"''"'.«*" *''f divisional Court the judg. 
 
 .liquors ]- J ho wonls " li,|uors drunk in a 
 tavern ur alehouse 11, subsection 2, ami " such 
 hunrs in sub..tction :i of section (I!) of ,|ul 
 Dis.onCe.rt Act, mean li,,uors drunk in e 
 
 •Sect inn 
 
 Ik.,, io h .V;r°'"' \^° '""°""' "f '^ nieelianie-s 
 lui to he taken un.lcr certain circumstances in 
 the 'ounty Court ami Division Court, applies 
 omy to actions in which the party seek ito 
 en "™.l'i« hen ,s suing in the ordinary wy t 
 ol.tain judgment and execution. Those Cm.rs 
 caiiiiot entertain an action in the nature of . 
 a tinn of account by a lienholder against a 
 mortgagee who lias sold tlie land in <„. ^; l\" \"""\"\'' *""^" """' "'".^b was subi 
 
 "'"'^■' '^:;!;^!:«:'^.'-?: to th^iSl'thHuSr ""^S^ tyilir^'"'' ""'^^ '^'*'^^^=^^" ■■ 
 
 Title to Land.J-In settlement of an action 
 on a promissory note for .s.S,S.S, given for the 
 
 .,'1 „ 1 T"? ":'*' '" ''"" ''>■ l'''""ti". a li(iuor 
 dealer, defendant, a tavern keeper, .agreed in 
 
 t. ins, by a conveyance (,f land, and a new note 
 foi the amount sued for, which was subse- 
 
 V. I (dlur.i, 19 A. 1!. 154. '^lawii 
 
 Order of High Court for Payment of Costs 
 ~Ju<h,mn,t. ] -Prohibition granted to restrain ^ 
 
 n "^'1 action brought upon an order of a Jud»e 
 
 lef;, 1 '"" I" i'"' "'■«'' <-'«"■■* orderin" ti"e 
 defendant in the Division Court action to mv 
 ^ruin costs arising out of hirdZiUaH ' 
 
 KuleS(;6 means that an order may be enforcPd 
 m tl,. action 01 matter in which it is as a iud'^r 
 
 ^:^.iSrt"^''^r''''r''^"^™'''^ 
 
 theo ler T^ "" •"''«??»''«"* action upon 
 me oi.ier. lie Kerr v. Smit/i, 24 0. R. 473. 
 
 „f ., . . ■ -' ; eaeh note was a separate cause 
 
 CVurf "" '^ '"""' '" t'"^ i^ivision 
 
 (•-'.) That the title to land did not come in 
 
 ^ (juestioii. /?p McGoMck- v. J>-,/al/, L'tl U. R. r.ir,. 
 
 ''See also the cases un.'er sub-titl I,', post 
 SbS ; and under Costs, III. an/e 213. 
 
 llf. Practice asd Pkockdure. 
 
 A-ppea.l~Sit!w,j,ie,,i/),tf:resf.]—The "sum in 
 dispute upon an appeal from a Division Court, 
 mdcrR. s. O.ch. ol, sec. 148, is the sum fo^ 
 which judgment has been given in the Division 
 
 Where judgment was given for $100 :— 
 -Hold, that subsequently accrued interest did 
 
 1 
 
 Cifi^n^f to Oourt of Appeal - Time for 
 (■>vi»,j .Sef«r,/y.]_, Security upcn a Division 
 
 IIHni 
 
 |H 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 ! 
 j 
 i 
 
 i 
 
!|. 
 
 ;i J' ji 
 
 Iff 
 
 387 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 l)i^^^^*^r.'~T''^ "^''^ "f ''PPe''' fro.,. tl.e 
 
 o n s^n "'■* " ,";'^ '"^' '"^^•'*"«« tJ'e Judge 
 o n.ts ,n an appealable case to take down tfie 
 tvi.lence at tl.e trial in writing. 
 
 I he security to he given on a Division Court 
 ap|.eal is now regulated hy r.3 Vict. c'l. 9 o ) 
 and ,s o be e.ther by 1 bond in the sua of 
 
 /2.Ci«rR/lT^'' "'*'''• ''^'"""•«"- 
 
 Din°sf^n",^~'^.P''*'r"'^ "■''" '« """"ed only to 
 of « u i ?"i'-"°''' "f,-"' ''*^''°" "^n t'^'' 'vs part 
 to att'n ^1 H '"V^*r '"'« e-M^enses from abroad 
 to attend the trial, if be is a necessary and 
 .aterml witness. Talhot v. Poole, 15 P. 1 
 
 fi'ce ol* th^. 'r" '?' ") '''^^"'•''»"«« ^' ith the ,.,,,0. 
 
 . r n — -"«»»«o.j — Held, that notwifli 
 .l.ng the a,,j,a.e..tly u..li,„ited prcwi i 
 section 1^ of ^;, Vict. eh. 37 (0.|. enulS 
 
 f^t^efSit^^iS^i;^i.K't^ 
 
 so eh ir"- f- *'"' ^'^•'«'°" Courts^Aet, R. 
 
 ?".ign.tt'u'nr;,rs"°'™'"'^'"« «-'- ^^^-• 
 
 Judgment of the Queens Bench Dinsion. 23 
 2i a: R 092 ■'""'• ^" '■" ^"""" ^'^ ^''"''■^°". 
 
 iu.tpZf hn,"^'' ''■■"•'"^'•ship, against Which a I 
 jiiiigr.ie.it lias bee.i recovpi-t.<1 ;,. „ n- • ■ 
 
 Judgment of liovd O Qi O P r-Q 
 
 Mechanics' Liens.] 
 
 standing t' ' ' 
 
 I of section 
 
 VMf." ^"^ „''>, Simplify Vhe" rroeedm-c" U,r 
 
 tt7;ris t''''-"''tf'^'"";" ^'''^ i"tentln 
 Hhrl, r . «"ni;''fy such procedure in the 
 ",« fo^.'t o>.ly, Icavi.ig the p.oce.lur „ 
 
 u Iffl ;"'l".' ^';!""y^'"»"«"".l li.visiou Co t. 
 
 Promissory Note.] -The non-filin.- of , 
 bond of .nde.i.nity for a lost note is a nmtt .' 
 
 '""rrohil'.i'r"' "/"' " ?•""'"' f'"- P'"''ibi ' "^ 
 W / / ,' *", " '-•ivision ('ourt itfu,.,] 
 J{e MMulnck V. Ilya/l, 26 O. R. 435. 
 
 IVanscrlpt - Cou„t,/ Co,n-f.] - i:,„ler tl... 
 Division Courts Act, R .S O ch ll , 1 R , 
 now i„ force, the issue of \tctioi 'an niS 
 
 whi'lf" '""" '•' \^"'-^''8» 'division ( ., t' 
 ^hid. a tianscipt has previously been s.„ 
 a suttic.ent foundation for a tra.isc.ipt f r . t| , 
 home Court to the Court under scot ,,'•.■ 
 ■^eq of that Act ; JlacLennan, J. A., ,1 s"c,;t"il 
 
 A transc.ipt to a County Cou.t is no, a ,rn 
 eeed.iig with,., the purview of sectioi V, ™^ 
 \ let. ch. 2 ((. ), providing that no further ,r^ 
 , ceedmgs shall be had in a Division Co, it at ,: 
 j tra.,script to another Division County .r 
 « ithout an o, de,. or alHdavit ; Alacleunan, .1 { 
 dissent.ng, Jono. v. Pa^to,, 19 A. R. lu;j, ' 
 
 I Transoript-C.««/j, CoHrf~J„U>,m^,/ ,V,„„. 
 „o„..]_A tianscript may be validly il'l 
 from .a D.visio,. Court to the County CY,u, t , o 
 withstanding the pendency in the DiVisi 'c " t 
 
 o"ei"udi n , A "■''"■'^^'■'i;' i« issued and We, 
 Cou -tT , ,""' '^ J'"'«»'-nt of the C.unty 
 
 Uouit and the judgment .summons procecdini-s 
 cannot be continued. 'ix-etunig.s 
 
 The form of a transcript considered. 
 Judgment of the County Court of York 
 reversed. /?.,/«» a-. McCar/Ji/, 19 A. R. 423 
 
 See, also, the cases under the next sub-title 
 
 on'^"'7';;iorf'"''''''"-'-^-'^^','"-'" ■'^" i««ne arises 
 facts ,, t f jnairata the identity of the 
 
 tacts ,n the for.ner ease with tl,ose in the exist 
 
 "y .i Jiiiy in a Division Court. In a case in i 
 DivLsion Conrt where tl.e defence o{reZ'<dZa 
 
 self tn 1 • •{"''«'' 'letermined the case him- 
 «cl^ .uid refused to allow it to be tried by a 
 
 an!/thi'/'"'* ''1 ''^'^ "" jurisdiction to do so i 
 and that a mandatory order must go to compel ' 
 
 IV. PaoHIlllTION. 
 
 t^tnlT *° °^^*«»°" Court from Magistra- 
 
 section I ^-,°v^^: '^-i "• ^^- 1^9' ^'iu^l' by 
 section 11 of ol \ ,a. ch. 23 (0.), is to rc-nlatc 
 
 appeals to Division Courts fro 11 magisi'.S 
 
 orders or paymc.t of maintena,.ce „io ,cy by 
 
 husbands to wives, it is p.ovided that th "^Lel 
 
 lant shall g,ve to the opposite pa.ty a nutice in 
 
 Ceof e 'i'r ^""^1 ',""' "^ *''" -''- •"• '-" 
 the Couit at whicl, the appeal is to be hcaid 
 
 Uheie a notice of appeal was given in time 
 
 aii:iu-' '*"*' ""^ """^^^ "'• ■'^"'^r ' of tiie 
 
 Jlcld, on a motion for prohibition, that the 
 
 Judge presiding at the Division Court had no 
 
next sub-title. 
 
 BrroneouB Interpretation of Statute - 
 
 riKl>t.s are g,veu l.y a statute with specitio vZl 
 hcH .,„■ their enforcement, the reme.ly is cm- 
 (iiie.1 to those speciHeally given 
 
 .\ml where a wife obtained a niagistrate's 
 ..rcl.r under ol \ ut. eh. 2;{, .see. L> (O ) ,„r mv 
 ni.nt by her husband of a weekly sum for her 
 
 Held, that her ren>edios were limited to those 
 gnen l,y he statute, and that an aetion i nt e 
 
 l!Z:'d.' '^ '"" '^" "'""'t'^"-' "gainst the 
 
 Tlie facts not bein- in <lisp„to, prohibition to 
 tl.e u-ision Court was grante.l o'n the g.o , 
 tLat t)>e Judge ni that Court had given ,tn e ■ 
 .iem.3 mterpretatiou to the Aet referred to > 
 ."Mn,.:; that the n.agi.strate's order vts'.uiv : 
 lent t„ the final ju.igment of a Court an t| t I 
 an -t.on upon .t would lie. 11, Sim.s v. A" ' 
 
 DIVISION OOUET. 
 
 870 
 
 NamWTi^TT*"*- J"«*««ent Without 
 jvamlng 1ime-<.m-m..<h,, .S»/« ;«,„,,.] -Section 
 
 I .u,,! must be strietly complied with *"' 
 
 . \\ here a Division Court Judue reserve.) 
 
 J Im.Mg shewn on the part of the applic t^ /^e 
 I lil'hiiii V. Cole, 21 O. R. -j;);. 1 1 '"^.""S. lit 
 
 Error In Law. ]-I'rohibition will not lie to a 
 Dn.M.n (.V.urt merely because the Ju.lge as 
 erred n. h.s construction of a statute where he 
 <lo.s n„t by tins error in coustructiou give 1 d m^ 
 sol j;iris<liction he does not in law po.sse^s 
 
 .ludgment of the gueen's Hench I)ivisio„, 19 
 H. -IS'. r«ver.sed /„ ,-, Lowj Point Co v. 
 .•lii'(')<o«, 18 A. 1;. 401. 
 
 ExceSB-Prolnhifioi, Quumqur ~/,i,a:.f 1 __ 
 \\ hwe a Division Court lias jurisdiction at the I 
 t.me 0, the institution of an action, but y he 
 addition of interest accruing during i s ^pen 
 ; n.y, judgment is given for an amomit beyomi 
 be jurisdiction of the Court, i.rohibitio.f w" ' 
 be gmiited until the Judge amenlls the judgUK. t ' 
 by striking out the excess ; or a partia pffi 
 tioi, will be issued to prevent the eiifo cement 
 
 &^*s:tt^~^^ 
 
 the Divisional Court, 21 6.' R. 4! i."^ ""'"'''' ''^ 
 
 Judge Keserving Judgment Without 
 Naming Time-^^.f„c. o;' /',>,",/,>, |*tu* 
 act that a Division CourtJudgeh '■,i;;rv^ 
 
 Division (:ourts Act, R. i O Jh 51 ^ *^' 
 xiD-c J inHiiii V. Co/e 91 n l> .)-/•' 
 
 ^^•«^theQ^e^l-:'.l;;j;';:,;:w-^ 
 
 Excess -rrohilnthn for .£'a,ww.]_J„,i,,„,e,,. 
 was lecovered in a Division Court for Stl08U3 
 
 i' ..1", ' ''""''' '«''"«i«S U» ;.ilio«i,. 
 
 
 JO (i(,y •..__'■ "•' '->'"^i"g lJio amount to 
 
 seSn '^■^'f f^?"n"'"r;^ ^^^'^" '^ '^"''te. "nder 
 
 cT • (IM wM P'"' "V'';''!'^"S'^ •^=*- «•■' Vict. 
 
 e tnelit of the executors and not to O. T • 
 
 to mact, tl e judgment was in excess of the 
 ur - ictiou win,;!, i.s limited to ;?U)() but tha^ 
 prohibition would o„ly go for the v 
 TriM. V. J/,7/«r, 22 O.^J.^'flOo! '''''• 
 
 ■ . ■/ ^^-"^ ]-\Vhere a claim for an account 
 
 tstSrc^^r^**'^^---^-"* 
 jv.';:.^rVz^;t/';ife^^^^ri 
 
 24 
 
 ^onsot section 144 of the Division Court 'vTt; 
 
 ^''M\ c nis 1 ight to complain. 
 And \»here at the tiiil - f -,1, ., .t- 
 
 ; 1 
 
 1 
 
 " 
 'J 
 
m 
 
 DIVISION COURT. 
 
 imi 
 
 thrco days later than tl.e latest .lay nan.e.l • 
 
 Hicwr that the party inovinK ha.Uver aLMeed 
 that the jwliiuivnt ,„i^,ht ),e given without i,,-,.- 
 v.onsly nannn;.- u ,!„y f„r its .lelivery, an,l h .1 
 ".t actcl so a.s to waive Ins ri«ht to ^on,,!) 
 an mlcr was n,a,le ,,„.hihiti«g the e>,foree.nen 
 R S J'"'*^"""'- '''''■ "'''■'"" V. /lull,.., -JH O 
 
 Judgment Snmmona-f.'mnMr,'—" /),./;, i- 
 M^'Vi ""/• " ""' '"virion Courts Aet, H.S () 
 
 (Iocs not inelude a garnishee. 
 
 Prohibition toa Division Court gi ante,], where 
 aJl^'ii;:.!''; 1 ""^ < '-l.-fi^ having ohtained jml.nient 
 against the garnish, ,., is.sue.l an after- u.lKn...nt 
 «um,nons "Kainst l,ii„. AV J/a,„u. y! CoZ!' 
 692 "• ^^"""i'"<l ill appeal, '.'I A. J'. 
 
 372 
 
 Money Handed by Prisoner to Constable- 
 
 Atmdnmn <j,„..,„,„ „f /,Vu7.J-.The defendant 
 was arresl.,|, an,l wlien taken to the polie' 
 station handed over the money in his poss " io,^ 
 toaconstable Creditors of the^lefend.lnt sou-dit 
 to garnish this money by Division Court suits 
 ihe Judge in the Division Court found that the 
 money was handed over voluntarily and held 
 that It eould be garnished :— 
 
 Held that the cuKstion whether the garnishee 
 was .ndebted to the .lefendant was a^uestion 
 
 cLrt /T'l'i" /'" J'"'"'''^''"'" "f the inferior 
 t-ourt, and that prohilution would not lie. AV 
 J>iM V. Jlue ; Ih Ford v. Jiicc, 20 O. R. 309. 
 
 Refusal of Evidence. ]-The refusal of evi- 
 dence IS not ground for prohibition. 
 
 nrf " "•''!•''■ ''"'■'"■'■' ^"■"'" '"'"!'' i» «■ division Court 
 upon judgment summons committing a defeii- 
 7"t "'>'''•'• seetionLMO,.sub..sec. 4 (,■), of 1! ,s O I 
 ch. 51 for liaving nia.le away with his propei'ty; i 
 It IS not ground for prohibition that the Judge I 
 has refused to allow tl.e defendant under 
 exanunation to make e.xplanations as to his ' 
 dea..ngs with money lent by an.l repaid to him 
 MO J«''^"ir"'-,. ^'' ^''"'^ ''■ ^•r^^h"vhi,otha., 
 O E 126"' ■'"^'■''"'•^'^ °" another point, 2(J 
 
 Spatting Cause of AcUon-^ Murhj,,,,.. (jf, 
 I '.7" /o/, I,. In., „„.,,■,,.]- Tlie p!ainliirc.;,v,' 1 
 
 '"";' t" thedefe mt .Mibjeet to a n„.it ' 
 
 I and a ter the maturity thereof paid the ,;;,■ 
 K.'.-- t«o gales of mtrivst sincHi aoerued. v,l, , 
 
 he sought to recover fr the defend,,, ■ 
 
 Inetiiin in a l)ivi,.-,n Court :_ ■ 
 
 Held, that thei,. was no splitting of the ,;„,., 
 
 Aet i'{'.'''s"'o .'.'iV'ni""" "' "' '''" ^'^■''"■"" ' '"•" " 
 
 I'ecisioii of Armour, C.J,, 26 () H ]•'•. , 
 veised. lie. llnH v. lull, 20 O. I!. (ioT. "' ' ' 
 
 vf/^""rw ?^T* ?^ Action- /',o»,/>,,„y 
 
 ^No^'.]--In settlem, nt of an action .m a pro n,. 
 
 jSorynot.HorS=8«;{givn,forthepri>.,.of' ; 
 
 ' Id to Inn, by j.lamtiir. a li,,uo,. dealer, d u 
 
 :.ant.atave,„.keeper,ag,eedinw,itii„to'-i 
 
 t ..lul gave seeunty upon ..ertain u-,i„s. bv a r„, ' 
 
 sued tor, whi.li was subsequently divid, d i, •„ 
 tliree notes of ,v|i.>.-, ^.;^^.\^ ._' ■' ' "■" 
 
 Held, (1.) That eacl te was a se|.arate .aii^c 
 
 of^^actien and could be sued in the Div;^!:^ 
 
 ,,ul;tj,m''"' *'" *'"^ '" '"■"' '"'1 ■"■' ™- ■" 
 
 (••i.) That the words "lirpiors drunk in a t.nv, Ml 
 o " y ",u,.e' in sub section 2 ai„l "such ii,,,,,,,," 
 in s ib-section :i ot section (it) of the l),'vi.„„ 
 Couit Act mean li,,,iors drunk in the tavern „r 
 alehou.se of the vendor. 
 
 (4.) Tlienon-filingofabondofindemnitvlu,;, 
 
 °.',,;';'\?=''^'S'r.tt^''''f Prn^tiee, amlis'unta 
 gionnd tor prohibition. 
 
 Drohibition to a Division Court refused, /,V 
 Mi-(.olrick y. l!yi,n, 2() (), R, 4.S5 
 
 /,„®?",*V"^ *^*"^*' °* Actlon-iVoH.w Payahk 
 n«.nt for sale of land, the balance ol 'L^Vur- 
 
 ttZTP '"'"" ^r^'"^'^' ^y ii'staln.ents with 
 interest at a name.1 rate lialf-yearly ; and at a 
 time when three of the instahnents of prii cipal 
 
 taxes, wiTeovenlue, an action was commenced 
 m a Division Court for the arrears of iutere.t 
 and two years' taxes, §().■), .SO •— 
 
 O "K''o-r'''''f'*^', *'','' 'I'^^^'ision of ]5oyd, C, 25 
 
 Pvi ,• •-"'^;/^''" '""• '■'^f"«e<l prohibition, that 
 
 the pla.nt.tls could have recovered all the p r' 
 chase „,o,„y , i„t„.,,t ,i„^ ^.j,^,,^ ^,^^ n 
 
 and theretore there was a dividing of their cause ' 
 of ac ion within the meaning of sectio 77 "f j 
 the Division Courts Act, R, .sfo. eh. 51. 
 
 and followed. ■'^'"""' ^^ '^^ «• 28-, approved 
 
 T<ywn.shm of yottawaHwja, ISA. R, 310 dis 
 tu.gui.hcd. A'e Clark v Barber, 26 6. R 47 
 
 (Territorial Jurisdiction — .)/,,,//™//,,,, /,, 
 7m,,.v/,„. r„„.s,._yv,„/ oj Que.slion JM...I l„, 
 Aohr. Jh..p,„,„;, J„rMli,liou-]l,j;i.sal ,.,\l„4 
 to y,y]-Ul,i,.rt. the Judge prt-siding al the 
 trial of an action in a Division Court" .le-lims 
 to try the .juestion of the jurisdiction of that 
 C onrt raisc.l by a iiotiee .lisputing the jun.ii.. 
 tioii he may be prohil,ited. 
 
 S„d,,i.,esti,,n may be tried at the time .•,i„l 
 plat^ (,f the trial of the action ; and the ,l,fvn. 
 dant isin no way bound by anything eoiit.i.ud 
 111 K. N O di, ol, sec, 87, as amended i,v ,V.' 
 
 Mciiirg the action to a Division Court Imvi,,.^ 
 Ju.-isdic.ion over it, or to apply to the Ju.i.c ai 
 any other time or place for the trial of thenues- 
 J turn so raised. 
 
 i In re Watson v, Wooh^rton, 9 C. L. T 4S0 
 i distinguished. 
 
 I Per I'alconbridge, J., dissenting,— The defer- 
 j dant bef. re cniing to the High Court for i.ro- 
 ! hibition, IS bound to apply to the County Jml-e 
 1 somewhere, either at or before the trial, ?o 
 j transfer the cause ; and in this case he did not 
 so apply. /,v J!to7)qmn v. I/ay, 22 1! 5Ki 
 ,Se,' the next case. ' ' 
 
 Territorial Jurisdiction- Traii./, ,:] - 
 Under R. ^ o. ch. 51, sec. S7, as amended hva2 
 \ ict. ch 12, sec. 5 ((.),), either party in a Divis- 
 ion Court action may, after notice disputiag the 
 juri-sdietion has „.,,„ duly given, apidy to k.ve 
 the action transferred to another Court. If iio 
 application be made, an,l if in fact there bo jur- 
 isdiction, prohibition will not lie merely because 
 
373 
 
 DOWER. 
 
 and (lid iidt cr 
 
 on, 9 C. L. T. 480, 
 
 the JikIko Ims iiSMiiiii.d tlmt as no appliciition 
 for 11 tnuiHfii- had Ihoii nmdo lio Imd juiiadic- 
 lion, (.--.. has .i„t tntd the <|ii,..stion of junsdic 
 tion. Hut If, in fact, thcio h.. no jmrndut 
 
 374 
 
 the oiiji'c'tioii still hid 
 will lio grantrd. 
 
 good, and pidhihition 
 
 Jiiilgiiifnt of the Qiiofu's Bench hividon 2" 
 a 1!. 5N,S allhn.cl. /n re Thow,,son v. I'lay, 
 
 Waiver — X-». Tr!fil~Jin;Mdiri;oii-Acll,.„ 
 ou h-o>n,s...,-;, \ot,- 1>,„,.I „, „,„ /y,,,, ,„,, 
 Mwr "t_A,n>tl,..r. I-Thc dcfen.lant in an action 
 m the lirst Division Court in the Comity of 
 Urk, hronyht up,,,, a [.roinissorv note .lated 
 
 Toronto, JM.t actually made at \Viarton, filed 
 a notice disputing the jurisdiction. .hulKinent 
 however was given in the action against liiin 
 in iHs ahseiiee, and he iiiove.l for and ohtained 
 a new trial, paying the money into Curt a« a 
 comhtion, and afterwards applied for an oriler 
 of transference, which Wiis reliised. liefore the 
 new trial ho applied for a prohihition : — 
 
 Hohl, that l.y moving for a new trial and pay- 
 ing the inoiiey into Court, the .lefemlant had not 
 waived his right and the want of jurisdiction 
 being clear, lU'ohihition shonld be granted 
 
 1 the right to prohil.iti(ui exists, it is optional 
 with tlie deieiidant to apply at the out.set of th,. 
 division Court procee.lings, or he may wait till 
 the latest stage of ai)peal so long as there is any. 
 thing to iirohiljit. •' 
 
 JndKinent of Meredith, .!.. reversed. In r, 
 BraxiU v. Johns, 24 O. It. 200. 
 
 Sheep Act— A /jporlitniwDi/ of Dammif.,.] 
 •v. /nx V. (ri//,V(ww;-,20A. ]<.{JlO,(n,t,t':i-20. 
 
 DOMICIL. 
 
 .SVf Koni:i(iN Law. 
 
 DOMINION LANDS ACT. 
 
 'SV'f Citow.N La Mis, I|. 
 
 ftv, 
 363. 
 
 also, the cases under sub-title IL ciii/e 
 
 DIVISIONAL COURT. 
 
 <SVe Jl'DCME.NT. 
 
 nOQ. 
 
 Mischievous Animal — SckiiUr^ — W 
 brought , ail action for injuries to her daughter 
 comiiutted l.y a dog owned or harboured by ti , 
 d eiKlant \ . The defence was that V. did 
 not own tlie dog, and h.ul no knowledge that 
 was VICIOUS. On the trial it was shewn 
 bat the dog was formerly owned by a man 
 m Vs employ, who lived and kept the dog 
 
 tL,;i' ?"'"•, V'^" *'•'« "'»» went awaj' 
 om he place he left the dog behind with V.'s 
 
 he'.lm' tJ^^'l /!"'' """' ^"'■' "'«1 ■•^ftfrwards 
 
 ^on of the dog on two occasions was sworn to, 
 V. being present at one and his son at the other 
 beii 'i^f^ r\ " """""■ ""^^"'-S ■•^'J°"t the dog 
 nonl- i-'i"' *""'• ^^^ t"''^' J"''ge oHlored a 
 
 beEw 'tiri?'.;;'"^ "" j^^g^^"* °f "•« court 
 
 k V ti,., V ^''^ '^"', T'-''^ --yidem-o. for the 
 ]ur> t hat \ . harboured the dog with knowledge 
 ry tlv »r' J^';°P'^"?'t.es and the nonsuit was 
 ngb% set aside. Vavy/ian v. Wood, 18 S. C. 
 
 DOMINION PARLIAMENT. 
 
 •V'e Co.NsriTurK.NAi. Law — I'akmamentauv 
 Klectio.ns. 
 
 DONATIS MORTIS CAUSA. 
 
 iSVc GlKT. 
 
 DOWER. 
 
 Assignment ot-" Pa;dia,- Chr„w.-<la„r,s" 
 —OireUtn.j-lwme I'm-lhj on Downil,: LumlA- 
 \\ here dower was claimed in land upon a p,,,.. 
 tion of which stood two-thir.ls of a dwellii,-. 
 house, the remaining third being upon the 
 adjoining lan<l which was not dowable ■.-- 
 
 Held, that ^,his was not a case within sul)-sec- 
 
 ri R «'"^1'"", ^- "f ^•'^ '^""•'■'- I'''>--'-'<hire 
 act, K .S. O. ch. -|(i, in which the coinmis- 
 sioners ha.l power to assess a vcarlv sum in Ih u 
 ot a.ssigning doiver by metes and bounds. 
 
 Ihe e(,in .doners were not bound nects. 
 sarily to a.ss. ;„ portion of the building ui,on 
 the property, ; -it might give an equivalent. 
 Ihey were bound, however, to assign one-thir,! 
 ot the whole property, having regard to value as 
 OR ";'oS° ''"*"*''^- 'Vc/»/y,t ^•. Vrockrr, 2;i 
 
 I Assignment of —^,7/o« to EsfahUsh Will— 
 \J)en-ro^ hstaUhhiwj -'SuhJ,,-/ /a Doiv,r.-\~ln 
 ; an action by a devisee to establish a destroved 
 j will devising real estate, to which the plain'titl 
 I the widow of the testator, was a defendant, she 
 a though she pleaded to the acti.,n, di.l no^ 
 claim to be entitled to or to recover her .lower 
 I in the land of which the action .^Iso sought to 
 deprive her, and a decree «as m.ade declaring 
 that the devisee, one of the .= efeiulants heret<^ 
 was en itled to the land iu fee simple, subjeo 
 to the dower of the plain till' herein •- 
 
 Held, not such a judgment as entitled the 
 dowress to sue out a writ of assignment of 
 dower under section 7 of R. .S. O eh ;56 •— 
 
 Held, also, that the decree did not prevent 
 the running of section 25 of "The Real Prc- 
 porty Limitation Act,'-K. ,s. O. ch. HI, .so as 
 to bar the remedy of the plaintill'. Cope v. 
 Cupe, 26 O. R. 441. 
 
 Election. ]-A testator having by his will 
 
 .xended lus ro.il and personal estate into a fund 
 
 trom which payments of income were to be 
 
 made to his wife and other .levisees, postponed 
 
 thednisionof the corpn.s until after the death 
 
375 
 
 DOWER. 
 
 ill 
 
 378 
 
 "towMifi.tH. taintntary be- ami that nho was entitlu.I to l,»v., it rni,l ,m, i 
 
 iiiHtiiiguishod 
 
 Thi; ti'Htator al«() gave a hoiiso for the resi- 
 
 . owrc...s, l.„t ll.at tluMk.privation „f owe" for" ' ■ r. ..1 n," I ' ""; ""■,«''''-''' '"■^■'""^' "'■ "^" « 
 tin,,. Ml part of tli,. real eHtate was not siUlk ent ' H , '• I!"-"^"'^'!' that in the event „f th, 
 to iml her to her election as to tl e r^i n I ^l^ I' >;'!'« ^^''^ .".t>'^''> i" that J'' 
 
 to put lier to her election 
 
 the estate. " 
 
 <'o,rn„v. Jl,,.serer, 5 O. R. 024, followed. 
 
 Ihe « i.low was held put to her election as to 
 noth houses. 
 
 'ihe judgment in Aws.hn v. Kyle, 9 O. R at 
 
 mectlon— A dminUrallon A<tioi,.-\~A testa- 
 tor l|e.,ueuthed his i.er.sonal estate to I,ia widow 
 "bsoluteiy, and .leviaed his real estate to h U 
 executors to l.e hy then, .sold, and four pereenJ 
 ot the proceeds pai<l to ids widow, and the bal- 
 ance invested and the income paid to his widow 
 • urtngher l,fe and afterwards the proceeds to 
 e div.de.l as .hrected ; and he gave the rents, 
 unt^l the real estate was sold, to hie widr.w :- 
 and fh ,V l"^ the widow was put to her election, 
 and that she could not claim .iower and to be 
 tenant of the freehold at the .ame time 
 
 use 
 Htill 
 
 It should be cpially <livi<led between his 
 e«t of km ; and the daughter died whi 
 an nifant and unmarried : — 
 
 Held, that although t]>e persons intend.,1 I,v 
 
 he description took only in defeasance ,„ t . 
 fee simple given to the daugliter alone „ 
 hist instance, she was nevertheless entitled a^ 
 one of the •' nearest of kin '• ; an.l the Ivi .« 
 as heirws.at.law of the daughter, and the uZr 
 ami mother of the testator: we,.; each ei i £ 
 
 o an „ndivide.l .me-third in fee simple .u- 
 
 ants in common. ' ' 
 
 lluttock V. JhiirtiiH, U L (' I • I/-^../' 
 
 '• ;!' :': ■'';"±' '~y '^- n. s. -,. foiio«e,i • 
 
 The word " then," introducing tlie ultinnt-. 
 .levise, was not use.l as an adverb of t C 
 merely as he e.piivalent of the cvpressio , '' 
 t at case, which followe.I it, and did not alfe 
 tlie construction ot the will. 
 
 The widow remaine.l in possession aft.,- tli<- 
 leath o the testator, with her infant danght 
 
 hum she supported out of the rents, until uj 
 Older was made under R. S. O. eh. i;{7 ,„.,.„, 
 n^ her to lease the farm, to retain !;nV.o^ 
 the rents for herself as dowress, and to a,,n| 
 
 bin?;'-!!'"""" ^""-"'"''^ i" «"Pl'ortiiig'|l!- 
 
 Held that she was put to her election l,v tlic 
 
 ter ns of the will, but that she bad not ehetc', 
 
 to take under it, ami «as therefore entitlul t., 
 
 mcroutof the farm in addition to the „n.. 
 
 tl.iH m fee .imple. Bnthant v. Lnhwh , •.'() () 
 
 his ,1 ." ""I'/ ■)''"''''"' '^'"'"-J-A testator by 
 his u 11 be,|ueathed to bis wife .sl.-.O a year 
 payable halt-yearly rut of the rent of his farm 
 
 ntil the sale thereof, when she was tr. be pa 
 the interest on .^2..W at (i per cent., or'the 
 ^l.-O. On the sale, .*;2,500 was to be left on 
 
 e ?o^vt'r."V",r'''"^, ''y '*'^" '-■^cutors Bt inter- 
 est payable half-yearly to the widow during her 
 ife line or widowhoo.1. nml .ucl. pro.isio.N a 
 
 oach of testator's twelve clahheu (one of whom I 
 was dead at the date cf the will), to be paid out 
 
 ^theproce.ds .,f the sale of he real esta n i <■ ■ r. ■' ^^ - 
 
 The residue of the .leceased daughters le^^v n;:'" ' ;°'' ''f fl"'' Ar/.]-Sectio,, , ,„ ,„, 
 was directed to be placed at intM-^st and divWeXS^^ "f Estates Act, I!. S, O. ch, lOS. 
 
 e.|ually between her surviving children oVh,^ Lr °V ,*''^ ^"'^ ^ ''«''* "^ *''<'^'i"'i 
 attaining twenty-one vears, an.l in a e Inv , i '1 i " ''''V'^T '""' " <list''l><'tive sliare in 
 estator-s cliil.lren died bjfore .."e v no ?hei, ^f '^T'""'"^ l-Hbaml's lands, .Iocs not applv 
 full shares and leaving i.sue the le 1 J ,Tv ''^''^ ,'"'"''''«'^ ''^^^ she has acre iel 
 
 child's share was to be efp, dl di vbled S en ^C'j'"™''-'"' -'I ''"• "^ ''°"<-''-- I" ■'^'■^•'> ' « 
 
 his or her children ; if such dece.is 'd chih 1 ' , T.l T A'" ''^^V" ^">' «'''•>'■" "> ^t- l^ui.ls. 
 
 without issue his or her share was to be diveiT^^ -•"*"'"' ^'•«'^''' <^'"- v- Qutn, -lo 0. 1!. 
 
 equally between bis or her surviving brothtTs ' " 
 
 ren " and their issue as aforesaid provi.ie,-^?'; '• : ' ''• ''•^-' '""■ ^^ "^^«' ^^ • 
 
 ami the annual interest obtainal.te or' tl e S- ' . , « , .,"""""y \?J''' ^"'1"^^' "'•>" ■'vl«" I'^dL 
 
 500 w:...". !rs« than $!uO :^ °" *'"^ *-■ ! 'Y' *''7"."'- „ ^he dovi,.ees mortgaged the 
 
 Held that there was a gift to the widow of « ,1 f ■■'/^^t'-'^h, 1870, and the nuntgnge 
 
 $150 a year, and not merel'y of the annu^f in'ter-' X eml eI•"i^;t"^e""'" ^''''''''''' ''''' ^' 
 
 ixnemiiei, l8/<), a seceond mortgage was given 
 
 BlectIon_AV/„,«. hy Marricuj, SetUewn,t~ 
 D'-rohiUo,, „t Exlnhs, ^,7.]_,Section 4 of the 
 
 ch, lOS. 
 
377 
 
 EASEMENT. 
 
 Mylor V. I.yiuh, ii 
 
 to M. »ud regmtero.1 the same nmi.tli. I„ tl.JH 
 raort«a«e the wi.low joino.l h„irinK I'-r .lower 
 an.l rflcaHiiiK hor annuity for the henftit of M. 
 ,M>f h;ul htt.l knowk.,I«« of the prior niortKauo 
 whtii It WM nm.lo an.l ^a.l refuse.l to join in it 
 Ihe Heconil mortKagco. not being awar... wheii 
 hm m..i tgagc w«h exfcute.l, of the prior intun.. 
 hraiht; «aine.l priority, an.l the hin.l w«h m.hl 
 to-atiHfy hiM niortgago: tho i,roc,....lH of the 
 Hale l.e.M« n.ore than Hntlicieut /..r that purj.ose 
 the^mirplus was olanne.l l,y both the wi.l'.w „ml 
 
 Hel.l, reversing the ju.igment of tho Court of 
 Anpeal for Ontario, l(i A. R. •.'24, .,//. „om , 
 l/,/./.«Ha«v f,/ay, (iwynneanil I'atterx.m ,)./ 
 ,ll.,.entin^ that the security for whieh' the 
 .lower lia.l been barre.l ami the annuity reiease.l 
 having ...on HutiHhe.l, the wi.low was entitle.l to 
 thefun.l in tlie Court as representing her inter 
 
 378 
 
 H. 15 ; nn.l nion,/ v. Fi/-.,j^ra/d. 15 I'. R m; 
 
 l<Wt, HrsMANI. AM. WiKE, VU. 
 
 DRAINAGE. 
 See Municipal Cori-or.vtio.ns, X. 
 
 DRAINAGE REFEREE. 
 
 See MUNICIl'AI, C..K1'0KAT|...\S, X. 
 
 Mortarage-^ftr .,/ JMwer-Con veynnce „f 
 h,iH,ly oj liedem,,lu,n hy lfn.h„„d Alone ]- 
 Ln. er8eoti.,n8 .5 an.l 6 of the Dower Act. H 
 ■>. l». rh. l.i.J, a wife wlm joins to bar .lower iii 
 ■v mortgage of lan.l ma.le by lur laisba.ul to 
 >eoinv i,ait.,f the p.irelias.: money is entitle.l to i 
 , .«.r .mtwithstan.img a eonv.^yance by him of 
 the i..,uitv of re.leinpti..n without her coneur- 
 rencf. Iho wife s.. joining in the in.,rtgage is ' 
 not merely a surety tor her husban.l ; ami she 
 IS en ,tl.Ml to dower out of tlie surplus only of 
 the lan.l or money left after satisfying the 
 ni.irtgage debt. ^ ° '' 
 
 0. R. .'0/ ; and opmum of Patterson, J. A., in 
 
 DRAINAGE TRIALS ACT. 1891. 
 See MtJ.Nic'irAt, Couroit.vTio.v.s, X. 
 
 DURESS. 
 
 /)!!, *s^^ ^°'',Money Borrowed-/y«r o/ 
 
 D,„rn--!,,Ue oJ Mo>i,m(i,d Land - /{;,,/,/ /„ 
 Da,c.r ,« 4'„rp/««.j_V. ,, ■, lan.ls mortga'e 1 to 
 secure a loan have be, , ..Id by the mongal'ee 
 wite of the mortg..gor, who has joiia-d i' 
 he mortgage to bar her .lower, is entitle.l o 
 dow.r out of the surplus, oompute.l ,m what 
 would be the full value of the lalid. if unenii' 
 
 tar as the reasoning an.l dicla therein are 
 
 An. where the .lefendanfs hu«ba„ri, hav ng i 
 "ppropriate.! moneys of a elient in his hands '> 
 
 ZZ' 1 '''''»';'"'y mortgage not containing a 
 «r of .lower, the defemlant being a party to 
 a t'h:r"["'1 "'?,"'°'-'S"g«. and subs^ [ent y 
 
 un L r .^^' "" '»3t--»l"'ent .,f interest due 
 
 i,;::". '''^^■""t" reform the mortgage by 
 
 here 1' ,''•'"'•'■'■ *^:'l- "^ •!"«'<-■'• ^'^s -iisinisse.l, 
 Mere Deng no consideration to support aeon 
 net l.y the defeiulant with the plabftiffs to ba.- 
 (lower. Udkimy v. Badi/erow, L'4 V. U. 2:S. 
 
 Bona-IUe,j„/i/y.] A bon.l to secure the 
 IK.ynient o the cost .,f maintaining at a in.l' 
 j trial school a boy uii.ler fourteen yeas of a e 
 
 wit'ldf ; °^ ''"''^'?"^' '""' ^^•''" <'tl'<--"vise eamo 
 
 Mthin the requirements of secti.m 7 of t „ 
 
 Act respectn.g In.lust.ial Sclmols, given in e. i ! 
 
 TrnZ "', ""-■ •^'"'fc"-''" «t"tcin?nt tl t 
 .lefau It the boy w,.ul.l be sent t.. the re orni 
 tory, IS vo.,1, this being in law duress. ' 
 
 Per Osier, J. A. :-The bon.l w.as also illcLnl 
 an.l voi.l on the groun.l that n.,t being re. 3 
 by aw ,t was given in or.ler that^ t i W 
 miglit be put in f.,rce, which „u,dit h I 
 been put in force an.l acte.l upon wfthou it ' 
 
 Judgment of the ('..unty C.nirt of KI,o-i, 
 reversed, Hagarty, C. J.O., .(issei.Ung.°\S^'^ 
 ^l. J/ioma.i v. yea,\,ky, 22 A. 1!. [Uyf. "^ 
 
 DUTIES. 
 
 See ilKVENUE. 
 
 J juriui oXy.]— ,bee Ayer»t v. McClean, 14 P. 
 
 EASEMENT. 
 
 Artmolal atreum - Domhutnt Tenement- 
 Vrne«< re«.m.„^]_Tlie owner of a servent 
 tenement who takes water bv .., n.H. ■ i 
 I stream from the -loniinant t'.eutit cr^ t fby 
 , the owner of the latter f..r his own coi ve iTenS 
 i for the purpose of disuhargin.. surolua w^h.^- 
 i .^on the servient teneme„r, ae.piies "no righ 
 J to insist upon the continuance' of the ow 
 I which may be termiuate.l by the owner oh^ 
 I .lominant tenement : and the fact that the bur 
 I then has been imposed for over forty years loes 
 
 i ve, f'' h"' ''' ■°''^''^^'''- °f *'•« easemL^^ml con 
 ! vert the dominant into a servient tenement 
 
 Ihe owner of a servient tenement taking 
 water under such circumstances is not ' • a peS 
 claiming right thereto " within R. .S. O. 0^111 
 
 o/£"'v:^oSlSa^?8.''"-''''""^"'«''^^- 
 
 ; ! 
 
 j j 
 
 i 
 
499 
 
 EASEMENT. 
 
 m. 
 
 380 
 
 m 
 
 .1 
 
 Notice— A'./MiVft/,/, liit,, •■:,/. l — A munkiiinl 
 coiituil V .KP, witli ilif (inil coiiKonl -if tho 
 owiifr. IhiiIiI 11 Hcwi'i- thniiiiili liiml, luciuiiiMUi 
 iiiuiliililf ri^lit t(p loiiipil a i<iiiMyMiit,(! i.C mi 
 iimoli iif thr liiiid iiM i.-i licciipicl l,v tin, howit, 
 Imt II pliiclmsir of tliu lainl withi/iit iiotiio of 
 tlie tDiiSfiit oi' (if till' (•\iHt(iii,() of tliu HUHi'i- in 
 lnotLMtrd liy till) llcjjiHtiy Act. 
 
 Judgmiiit of Aniic.ur, ('. .1., alliiniiMl, J(irri.H 
 V. Villi Iff Ttiiimlo, iil A. i:. ;t<i,"). Alliriiifil liv 
 tlii^ Suiii'tiiie t'durl, -Jo .S. (.'. U. i;37. 
 
 Notice— »S'-ip ranrr of 'J'l'iii-ini lit liy ('niii-tijnii,; 
 — liiijliln of Diaimuii niul Aijixil'iir/ --/,', iii^hi/ 
 /.(tici. ]— Wliiro llic owner of two .nljoiiiing lots 
 of himl convtys oiu. of tlitiu, ho iiii|ilitMlly gnmtH 
 all tlio.>io contimiouM iiiul appaiiiit I'liHuiiu-ntH, 
 ilioliiiliin; liglitx of (Iniiiiago iiiul uiiii- ,luct, ovur 
 tlio othci lot wliiili uni luciHsary for the rousoii- 
 alilo UHu of tlio property Hiaiileil, auil wbieli 
 are at the lime of tlie grant useil liy tho owner 
 of the entirely for tho lienetit of the iiart 
 grantcil. 
 
 The grant of hucIi nn easeinont, if implied, is 
 not witliiii the iirovisioiis of the Registry Aet, 
 and prevails over a hiilise.pieiit pureliiiser, with- 
 out notice, of the adjoining lot; it express its 
 duo registration on the lot conveyed is no'liee 
 thereof to a snliseiiueiit purchaser ol the adjacent 
 lot without registration thereon. 
 
 /)iiia of Patterson, .1. A., in Vailu- v. 0'm.idl, 
 14 A. K., at lip. 701), 710, dissented from, limel 
 V. Ltilh, L'OO. U. 3(il. 
 
 road to he laid out, hut had no right t.i t|„. 
 easement of conveying the Water" l.y |,i|,.,, 
 thmugh the defendants land. ' ' 
 
 The a'snlt of the interrii|ition in |,S8" or Ls,vi 
 
 ami theari iiige it thm made was l|i„t since 
 
 that time the plaintill must !.<■ taken t„|,,,ve 
 niaintamed the pipes, not as a matter of riuht 
 I'Ut hy th.. license of the defendant ; under «, 
 tlons ."i.) and ;t7 of the |{. S. O. cli. 1 1 1, the (nVt 
 that twenty ye.irs had exjiired hefore Hi,, hitur 
 riiiitiori was in, material ; and, therclore the 
 plaintill had not acipiired a prescriptive rii;ht t„ 
 the easement. « " 
 
 The fact that for nearly the first half ,i th,, 
 period Iron. IMJI t<, I.SSI or |ss;t, the land iivit 
 winch the eaaeiiient was claimed was unuecu. 
 pie<l, and Its owners onl of the country. c„i„ti 
 tnted another ol.jection to the aciuisition of , 
 prcserijitivo right under section ,Vi. 
 
 The license of the defendant under which the 
 jiipes Were nmintained since 1NS'_' or ISi;) heiim 
 hy parol, was .hnerminahle at any time 'hy tli,. 
 defendant; and the defendant in .xuhseonentlv 
 taking np the jiipus, which led to tlw hinn-inf. 
 ol I Ins action, was acting within his strii't le-4 
 right of revoking the license ; and the plaintilf 
 wasnoteiititlcl to damages for their removal 
 or tor disturbing the ground in which they lav 
 whereby the water was rendered impure 
 
 The possession by the defendant of tl,,. land 
 throu.di which access to the springs was to 1,. 
 Iiad tor upwards of ten ye.irs, di,l not extin- 
 gnisli the plaintill's right of access 
 
 jiy.'/ v. Doy/r, 4") U. f. K. ur., folhpwed 
 l>elore the conveyances of 1841 and l>S4;i C 
 the then owner of all the lands now in (niestion' 
 convey,.,! thei.i to .M. by a deed ahsohitc in 
 
 Prescription.]- The time forac,|iiisition ,,f an 
 e.asenn'ut by pres,-riptioii ilocs imt run while the 
 
 dominant aii,l servient tenements ar,' in the r ■■, -■ • .' " "^^" iul^^oiiiic nj 
 
 occupatiiin of the same person, even though the ]'!!'"-' ■ '"^ ',y •"t^'U'l'-'l as a im.rtgage, aii,l in 
 occuiiation of the servient ti'iienienl b,. wrontjfnl '^■'''/'\" '■cilemption suit brought by persons 
 an, 1 without the privity , if the true owner. ° 
 
 .Inilgmentol the Chancery Division reversed 
 Iiiiie.1 v. Firijiisnii, 21 A. 1!. ;«;<. Allirincl by 
 the Supreme Court, •_'4 S. C. K. 70;!, 
 
 Prescription— A'/' ;o//»(f//' /'or Tn-mtii }',(//•<— 
 liitirniptiim n/l,-r Tii-mtij Yiai:i—[ixtiii,,iii-<l,in,i 
 Airii wrii/~/,'f,j!sh-!/ /.fcrx— A'o/fVv, J-'l'he plain'- 
 till claini<;d through the ilclcmlant's predecessor 
 ill tale the right to use two springs, U and K, 
 umler conveyances in 1841 and IW.'j of lands 
 north ,if the springs. One conveyance grantcl 
 the sole anil perpetual right to spring (', 
 together with the right to use a road from the 
 .southern bouiulary of the Ian,l granted to the 
 spring ; the other granted the sole an,l per- 
 pc-tual use of anil right to the water of spring 
 K, without indicating the manner in which the 
 water was to be approached or its enjoyment 
 had. The ,lefcn,laiit was the owner of the lan,l 
 to the sinith upon which tho springs were situ- 
 ated. The water ha,l been carricl from the 
 springs by means of pipes through the dcfen- . 
 dant's laiul to the plaintill's land, from ISGl to ' 
 1882 or 18,S:i, when the defendant tore up the i 
 pipes, insisting that the then owner of the 
 plaintiffs land ha,l no right to maintain them, [ 
 and thereupon an arrangement was made under ' 
 which tho pipes were again put down with the i 
 addition of certain troughs for the convenience I 
 of the defendant's cattle :— | 
 
 Held, tiiat under the o,jn veyance.s t!ic iihiiiitiif ; 
 had a right of access to spring C by the roail j 
 mentioned, and to spring E by a convenient 
 
 who had a<'i,nired the ef|uUy of rclempthm from 
 iw'i. ''i V"', ^■«'«t'"it'"" "f the conveyances „f 
 I.S4I mill 1X4.!, It was declared that this cnivey- 
 aiice was a mortgage only, ami in 1,S,kS a cii- 
 veyanee was made by the representatives ,,f (I 
 imrsu.ant to the decree, reciting the p;,y,Mcnt 
 ot t le mortgage moneys ami c.nvcying th,; lands 
 to the plaintitls in the re.lemption suit. The 
 (lelendant claiineil the land upon which th« 
 springs were situated under the grantees in the 
 conveyance of 18.JS :— 
 
 Htdd, that the defendant was allectcl un.ler 
 tiie KegLstry Acts with imtico that M. was 11 
 mortg.agee only, and that those who redueini;.! 
 Iiim dill so as owners of the eipiitv ; .uul the 
 defendant cnihl not set up the estate of the 
 mortg.agee, which, upon payment of the mort- 
 gage, was a bare legal estate, carrying with it 
 no rights as against tho benclicial owners of the 
 land. McKay v. Jiriicc, 20 O. It. 7()il. 
 
 ! Watercourse — />>i'rcr.vi'o» o/", l,>, IMlmn 
 <.oiiip,i,i!i~hiHilahlf Ea>iiin(',it—neiiUleriil Heed 
 I — -•''■'"f'l' XotiK—l'rrsn-iiitire L':,',hf.]-\\hm' 
 the defendants in 1871, without authority, 
 diverted a watercour.,e on certain lan,l and 
 afterwards made compensation theicfor to the 
 then owner of the land, the plaintiff's preileces- 
 sor in title :— - ' 
 
 Held, that the equitable easement therehy 
 created 111 favour of the defendants was not 
 valid against the registered dee.l of the nlaintitf. 
 a hiiiid /(,/e purchaser for value without actual 
 notice; the defomlants having shewn no pre- 
 scriptive right to divert the watercourse ; aiiil 
 
381 
 
 EJECTMENT 
 
 t Imd no right t ) th,. 
 
 thf wttter by ,,i,^, 
 1.111(1. 
 
 iilitioii ill INSV! or Im;) 
 II inadt) was lli.u ,,i|,^.j 
 lUKt lie tiiki;ii I,, ||,n.„ 
 
 MS II matter- of rijjjit 
 ilcfi'iiiliiiit ! iiriiii'i' SIC,.' 
 N. O. ,•!,. Ill, tlH.laet 
 lurnl lirforu tli.' iuUr 
 ; ami, tlii'i-ftiui', the 
 II iiicscritttivf rij;lit u, 
 
 ly tho lirst half -.i tiiu 
 >r ISS.'t, tho liiii(l(iv,T 
 chiiini'd was iiholcu- 
 f tlif oouuti-y, cdiisti 
 II tiiu «i'c|ui.sitii,|, ,|f ,, 
 ctidii ■'(.">. 
 
 daiit iiiidcr which tliu 
 LX' lny.'or lss;t, huin^- 
 le at any tiiiiu l.y tin; 
 
 llallt ill HUlwil|l|i.|it|y 
 
 li k'd to thi.' Kiiniiiih. 
 within hiH strict li^iil 
 lisu ! and tlic |.l,iiiuiir 
 ;fs for their rciiinv.il, 
 nd in which th.y l;iy 
 idcrc'd inipnrc. 
 I'fcndant of il,,. l„|„| 
 ht! spriii^iH \(a.s k, 1„. 
 ■oars, ilid not ..xtin. 
 f acccMs. 
 
 . H. W, f<>lh,\vi.,i, 
 ^f 1«41 and IMH, C, 
 iiids now in (iuesti(iii| 
 
 a dfcd alis(]hilc in 
 IS a niortgajrc, ami in 
 
 Iji'oiight liy pursima 
 Y of ifdoniptiiiii from 
 f tho ooincyaiicesijf 
 red thai tids cdiivey- 
 
 and in l.SoiS a cim- 
 o]ircHcnlativf.s df (;., 
 L'citiiig tho payiiient 
 I oonvoyinu thJlamls 
 lcni])tioii snit. 'i'lie 
 id updii wliicli tlie 
 I' the grautcos in tlie 
 
 tb.. dfvorHioii l„,i„g wrnngful „« ,,g„inMt tho 
 |il.initni. 
 A»ajy.v. f,',v„/ ll,,^.,-„ /,.. II'. r„.,(i(' !• 
 
 If, I V/-^'" ;■'.'.',"•" .V; ;/'■"" ''■''"'•" /f. ir. i;,', 
 "• '"••I' l^' '• «• •••■l:"..d /v„7,w,„. V 
 
 '",'■' ."'t ;' '^'^ "• '"• •'* '• '■• "7. .li«tin. 
 Kmihoil. /oltoii v. i;iii,i,/;,iii J'nrii,,- /.' 11' i ',. 
 :'■-'(). K. '.'04. • ' ■' 
 
 Way of Neoeaslty— A/,v„v, /•,-, „.,;;-//.,«- 
 
 . •/'■""''"/ /■-/■ Av,/ ,„• ir„,v, I- 1„„„ „,.t'i.,„ ,„,, 
 
 .Ht,uctinganj.htot„ay (ho piaintdl rhii.md 
 111" U.0 of such nj,ht Loth hy proMription and 
 ii..;r«.n,out, and also .•laitn.d th,,! hv tho aur,,.. 
 incit tho way was wholly ov.r dcfcndantB land 
 ''"■'■nd.ncc on ,|„. trill Hhcwodi hat plaintiir 
 lM;l.a^''iniro,l ,ho land from his lath'r who 
 .■.■1,11,10,1 tho ad|,„nin«l.,n.U h ^^•aso^•ontnaIlv 
 c•onv..yod to tho d-fcdanl, a„<l that aflor so a,- 
 'l»""i^';t thoplaintiiroontinno.l to uso a track 
 ur trad over tho adjoining' land, and mostly:' 
 till Mi.'h hiLsh land, to roai^h tho conoossion lino 
 .■m.nns o aim to tho n.o of «ay hy prosoription 
 li-l-ndod on whothor or not his nsor was of a 
 «WUoImum1 road, or m-roly „f an irro^idar 
 triicls and l.y icooso and oourlosy of tho adinii,. 
 i.i;'o«nor. tinally an a-rooniont was ,.ntorc,l 
 iiitohelwooMll,.. plainlilland his hrothor, who 
 iKi'i .•io<|inrod 11,,. udjoinin- lot which ho after- 
 wai^ds convoyoMl to defendant, l.y which in eon- 
 «iilerat.,>n of oortain l.riyik.,es .ranted to him, 
 he In-other ooyonanto,! to permit plaintitl' to 
 li:u-f a right of ^v-ay uh.ng a huio to whh-h th,. 
 Mii.y..rn>orly „«,.,! Id, and oxton.ling forty ro,ls 
 ™.st from tho oenti-e „f the h,t, so ns to allow 
 jiliiihtitt troo oomi„i..!,ieation from (lofond„„t-< 
 l"t along sa„l lano t,, th,. eonoossion lin.-. Tho 
 issu,. raided on tho cnstn.etion of this a-reo- 
 iiii'iit was, wln-tlu-r tho ri-iit of way trrantoil I 
 
 |. ■rchysh,,nMlH, wholly ,,r1n part cm .itlilS' 
 lainl oi wholly on that of ,l,len,lant — 
 tlchl, ivyorsing the ju.lgniont of the Court' 
 
 i' ;!'''';) •-"' ^.'^- '^' "'"' '•-''t'-ii-^' that 
 .1 the I)iy,s,„nal Curt, 1.". (). R. (iH!), li,t,.|no 
 .•I-. li^sonting, that plaint ilf had no title to 
 t ludi of way l,y prosoripti.m, tho ovi,lonoo 
 Ucirly shcnyi.jg (hat the usi-r was not of a well- 
 |>"u-dn,a,l lH,t o,d>of ,-1 path through Imsh 
 U 1. ami tha ho onlv ..njoyod it l,y lioeitc from 
 ft.or, hoa,l,„„ng owner, which license 
 "„','■"?'' •'>■ ''"' '■'tiler's , loath ; hut :- 
 
 Apcahthat under (h,. agroen.ont the right of 
 
 f mlan s la,i,I the agreement, not being ex- 
 I^Uatas to (ho ,h,-,.cti.,n of such right of Tyay 
 
 ami .ig-iuKst the grantor. Jlo.jcr.i v. J)nL,;, 18 
 .'. t-. il. (10. 
 
 382 
 
 '{'-■nthmof anyHorvitu.loaml the ..rigin.-,! titl.. 
 
 w thill tho .lolay prose, il,..,l hy l , ), 4.-, yiiit. 
 (l-V-) ch. I(i, Hoc«. -, ami (;. In an a. tioi 
 
 he. a ,l,latory ox. opt,,,,, to .-nahlo him to call 
 
 |)loa,l.-,l „ the aotion. ( '. n..y,.r pl..a.lo,l •« th« 
 ments o. th.. aotion. Th.. .|„,|g, 'wl ., tr ..'. the 
 J'aso . ,sm,sso,l .\l,-l.,'„ int..rye'tion a, . ,a'l„'' 
 
 IV tie ( oiirt of i) .„•« IVnch. ()„ apnea! to 
 
 tho .Mipromo Court of Cana.la : - ' 
 
 H.ld, atlii-ming (ho i,„lg„i,.„t „f (|,^, (.„,,., 
 
 S;:t:';':i^''-'-'--'^''i.u.appare,:t;:;t' 
 
 i.lo(wl,i..h noo.t not 1.0 rogist.-i-,. I), a,,.! that 
 
 lH■^o^^^..Hsullioio„t..y,.|..nco,,f an ^ ";,«?. 
 mymg heon uscl l.y V. ,.,„,, ,,i, p,.,,,,,!,,,,.,'^'' 
 
 aS,n' . ';/""'"'^ '"' ^"' ;'■"•'• "'"i"Uin »i" 
 aciion < 'tttfrs.^nirf .-— 
 
 Hel.l, ulso, that thoii-,'li 
 the prociMluro in tho case , 
 
 I'oeu irregularly .-on.l.-mne.l joint'ly "t'lrpay 'th.' 
 ;'•"";" "t tho judgmout. yet as' .\I.- ) ^' 
 doado.l to the merits „f the action au.l a 
 
 a-.d l,otl,t,mrts ha.l h.-ld the;,, jointly liaise 
 
 /bv);:;s'22s.'c:\!.'^;;a'"'"- ''""'""«" - 
 
 it won III appear hy 
 •Mel), ami C. ha, I 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Sit ClIIWMl. 
 
 EJECTMENT. 
 
 t eu,„|o,.of ca,lastr.-,l lot No. .^dO in the parish 
 
 en il.. :.'*'"'"'' ^ '^", l5'-";«'"lie. ■liBtrict of 
 iimllo, ,o«crve,l f„r himself, as owner of lot 
 
 7sZu! % .7'"'''"- ^ '■« ■■espoiident For.lais 
 a^ig e of the owner of lot .S70 coutinuo.l to 
 
 :^L -^Xid VT ""'■''^^^••"''''/^"''=" 
 
 ISSTu.r L - """■"ted by an open loa.l, until 
 £ !:",?r '"'T^V''''^ ''.V 'M.pellaut'Cully 
 noni AloD., iiiteryeuaiit, without any | 
 
 /.0^,VM J- A notice of forfeiture .If ,, lea;(e uS 
 K. .•>. U. ch. 1-1.1, sec. 11, sub-s.c. 1, Kivcn in th.. 
 
 ^ulS/i''/" '■\^" !."■"'>'•""-' -'^ts aV5o 
 tutting timber, etc.," without more particularly 
 
 f.,;Vb;'.V!,'f i,"''"" '1 :^'1""-^"t «■''« commenced 
 t i-u 1. "i "^ "!" 'l'"-'*^' t).e lan.llord dis- 
 
 lcc;;Hngdue;^' ^'^'^'^'^•'^'^ '-'* .ubse.iueutly 
 Hol.l, that such course ,Ii,l not im- se. set up 
 the former tenancy, which o„.U,l on the eleetio 
 to foi-f..,t manilesteil by tliei.ssue of the writ 
 ...t might bo eyi.leuce for (ho jury of a new 
 tenancy on the same terms fron. year to year 
 McMulkn V. Vumatto, 24 O. R. mih 
 
 L/lwtt V. Miott, 20 O. R. i;u. 
 
 ^ro^XTlir-^" /"""" "f ejectment was 
 i V 0^ l.n t/,^ / -^l'' ^"•''e"t'^'-«'» f'"' trial in that 
 
 ol'f'ffr 1 •""'."' "'"^ l"«tl>o.ie,l. Tho original 
 , plaintiff .lied in 1S71, baying seyoral years befor 
 I o,,nyeyed the lan.ls to a pert,i, who f„ ^888 ooT 
 
 veyed to one M. !„ ks92 an ,-x parte order of 
 
 pSff:'!:" ^^'''""' '" ^'" "'"''^ °f ^ «- 
 
 oi^fu f;p"","8 "'« J'"Ig>»ent of Gait, C. J., 
 TllV'tlV: f ' '•'^^■•"'■'•«'"« tlio onlerof revivor, 
 tliat the action was goyernod by C. S U C ch 
 ^., and that it came to an end as soon a^ the 
 
 I 
 I I 
 
iii! 
 
 m 
 
 ',: » 
 
 ESTATE. 
 
 conveyance to the present plaintiffs predecessor 
 in title was ina.le except perliai)8 iis to costs, for 
 which tlie original plaintiff might probably have 
 proceeded. Lemei^urier y. Macau/ay, -20 A R 
 42J. .SVf tiie next case. 
 
 381 
 
 ESTATE. 
 
 Revivor. J-Rules 3S3, 384, an.l 385, Ontario 
 Jmlicature Act, I,SS1, Con. Rules 620, (i21, and 
 bJ2 winch relate to the transmission of interest 
 pendente hte, and permit the continuance of an 
 action by or against the person to or upon whom 
 the estate or title has come or devolved, are 
 applical)le to an action of ejectment begun before 
 the Act, when the conveyance of the land by the 
 original plamtitl' did not take place until after 
 Its passing. JriHitev. Macaulay, i(JP. R. 181. 
 
 Tenants In Common.]— A tenant in com- 
 mon, in an action for tlie possession of land 
 against a person witlioiit any title, can recover 
 jiidgmo'it only for the possession of his share • 
 and the Ontario Judicature Act has made no 
 difference in this respect. Barnierv. liarnkr, 23 
 
 Venae.]— The indorsement on a writ of sum- 
 mons issued in the district of Thunder Ray 
 after the passing of 57 Vict. oh. 32 (0.), shewed 
 that the claim was for cancellation of a lease of 
 a mining location in tlie district of Rainy River 
 for possession of the location, and for an injunc- 
 tion restraining the defendant from entering 
 thereon : — ^ 
 
 Held, that tlie action was not one of ejectment 
 within tlie meaning of Rule 653, and therefore 
 the venue was not local, and it was not necessary 
 that th .■ writ should be issued by the local 
 Registrar at Hat i'ortage under section 3 of the 
 Act. hemlell v. L'ruM, 16 P. R, 167 
 
 ELECTION. 
 
 Election of Remedies.]— &e Action II — 
 Partnkrship, III. ' ■ 
 
 MuNicuML Elections. ]-,9ee Municipal Cor- 
 
 PORATIONH. 
 
 Parliamentary Elections.] — ^ee Parlia- 
 mentary Eleciions. 
 
 Widow's Elkction. ]— .See Duwkr. 
 
 EMBLEMENTS. 
 
 6'ce Crops. 
 
 i n^9^^^^^^^ Lodging - rAaif/e on Lnn,l-^ 
 I A ».'//« uj Oc,-nimtion.]~A father conveyed f, „„„ 
 of his sons certain farm Jan.l.s subject to his „«" 
 ife estate therein, and subject also to the xZ 
 , by aiiolher son, the plaintifi; of a bed I, ',1 
 .00,11 and bcldi,,^., in the dwelling house on the 
 I farm aiMl to his board so long as the plain tf 
 I shmild remain a resident on the farm ■- 
 I Held that the plaintitl- took no estate „n,l,r 
 the deed but merely the use. after the tcn„i !. 
 I t.oii of the father's life estate, and while .1 . 
 ; dent on tlie land, of the bed-room and bonr', 
 I which was a charge thereon; that no ,H,ioIi 
 ; was lixed for such occupation, which ini'.lit l„. 
 either permanent or temporary, and thcrelVnc i,o 
 lorteiture was created by non-occupation ir,/ 
 kiH.titii V. WiUiin, 'US O. R. 213. 
 
 Conditional Fee.]-A devise to two i,ci-., „s 
 of separate lots of land with a proviso 'tl,a,' 
 either devisee should die without lawful i.s,,, 
 the part and portion of the dcceascl shnuM 
 revert to the surviving devisee, and with tli.. 
 further i)roviso that in case both devisees shorn,! 
 die without issue the devised lands slimiM |,„ 
 (HviUeil by certain named persons as they siiouM 
 deem right aii.l equitable among the relatives of 
 the testatrix, confers upon each devisee oiilv a 
 defeasible fee simple. 
 
 Judgment of .Street, J., 22 O. R. 542, allinii 
 ed. ^<mm v. ArmMroiiii, McCltlLnid v. .l,,,,. 
 Mramj, W nijht v. ArmHtnuiij, 21 A. R ISS 
 
 Reversed by the iSuprenle Court, wi aii'otlier 
 point, 2d ,S. C. R. 263. 
 
 Conditional Fee — Executory ]J,rU.- | _ i 
 testator by his will ile vised as follows :— '• I aW. 
 and bequeath to my son V. . . lot \o u 
 
 the age of tvvoiity-oue years, giving th; exe'cuto'ra 
 power to htt the rent and to rent, sai.l executors 
 paying K all former rents due after ii^' decease 
 up to his attaining the age of twenty-one yeaia. 
 At the death of any one of mv sons or 
 (laughters having no issue their property to be 
 divided equally among the survivors." 
 
 *. attained twentyoiie and died uiiinarrieil 
 and without issue :— 
 
 Held, a conditional fee, with an executorv 
 uevise over. ' 
 
 Decision of Ferguson, J., reversed. 
 
 Luije v. BUlinns, 27 Or. 353, distinguished. 
 Crawford v. liroddij, 25 O. R. 635. 
 
 Reversed in appeal on another ground, 22 
 A. R. 307. 
 
 Stt 
 
 EMINENT DOMAIN. 
 
 Crown — Municipal Corporations — 
 Railways. 
 
 Ste 
 
 Buck 
 
 ESCROW. 
 
 Kmuiton, 21 S. 
 
 C. R. 371. 
 
 Estate in Fee Simple— /)ec;,sv to Sous with- 
 on/ Hords ot Limitation-" m, wilhoHt Lmnfvt 
 Uvic --'_.Snrnror''~E.tH/e 7'((//.] -The testa- 
 tor died 111 1845, and by his will devised a 
 tarm to his two sons, without words (,f limi. 
 tation, to be eipially divided between them, 
 adding : " And in case either of my sons should 
 die without lawful issue of their bodies, then his 
 share to go to the remaining survivor " :— 
 
 Held, that the gift in the earlier part of the 
 devise, though without words of limitation, was 
 sulhciciit to carry the fee to the sons, unless a 
 lesser estate appeared to be intended on the 
 lace of tfu^ will. 
 
 Both sons outlived the father; one died in 
 
 ..,, ."^'"'^ '"^"'^ ' ^'"' "tl'er died without issue 
 in 1890 :— 
 
ESTATE. 
 
 with an executory 
 
 IIcl.l, Hiut the son who first ilie.l h.i.l an 
 cstiite m toe simple absolute in one-half „f the 
 liui.l ; and, as the other left nosiiivivor he wis 
 notwith.n the wor.ls of the will, an.lnothin ' 
 h;.l happened to divest him of the estate in fee 
 Kiven by the earlier part of the will, and there- 
 fore he also died seized in f.>,. «;„.„i.. „f ... i >, 
 
 38ff 
 
 same between her husband and ehildren in the 
 proix.rtions mentioned i„ her will •-_ 
 
 Held, that the daughter took an estate in fee 
 
 fore he also .lie.irizeTiVfcednS'oronS-d^ *''."' I'-'^visions of the will 
 
 of the land. "^*-'<; "I't a valid e.xereise of the iiower - ■ 
 
 Tl,,. „.1 II !.- 1. ■ . . V. I rntil,,ivl '■>•} i\ r> .11 . ' "i-i. 
 
 of the land. 
 
 The word "survivor "is to be .ead as mean- 
 ing loiige.st liver," not " other." 
 
 Tlie w.,rds •' die without issue " do not mean 
 rn iiidehnite failure of issue which would .dve 
 
 Urqiiliart, 23 0. R. 214. 
 
 A rc/it 
 
 
 Estate m Fee - " AhsoluM,/ " .- •■ /„ ,/,„ 
 Emit, it J/er De„//,.]— A test-aov wl„^ li i 
 the ilth April, 1891 .seiJd n'7e'e " rwiil 1 T'"*^"^"''^-^'''-'''-'' /''— 'o» 1-In 1S4I 
 
 Held, that the will wr, be construed .. ;f ' ?'"" 1 ''"',""" "■'^^ e.xecuted by her husbai T ,,." 
 
 the words " in my life-time ' follow t'eiodl .'"'''r"'./""' 'V^" ''^-l ^"^^ "-'• o the nd till 
 "... the event of her death," am tLrtle ^^ ,'''''•'',' '*^^' '""' '1'^ '"'^''"'ul til S70 
 w.do»- took an estate in fee simple in Sie :t';!^".'>'..".1;'''"»;"T- '^«!'- ' 
 
 Construetion of section TO of the Wills Art 
 
 "p>-majn,kr Exptdant Thereon I 
 
 18,!!J Tv H.^'T,' "'' T;""^''!* ''^'S"" in October. 
 ISiSJ, hy the heirs-at-huv of the wife against o.r 
 sons claiming throuy!, the hu.sbaml • - ' 
 
 Held, reversing the ,judgiia.„t of Rose J th-,t 
 
 " ■ ''^tiW^'^^M 
 
 Prlmogeniture-r/,„;„/e in L<nr ojhr Will 
 J/.aA...l- A testator, by his will, n.a.le on he 
 , August. 1S5U. devised ce.tain land tr 
 I..S w.dow tor life, and after her death t wo 
 nephews, .and in the case of the de^ h of h . 
 o -either of them, i„ hi, ..wn lifetime, he deiVed 
 the share of such deceased to the heir at hw o 
 
 M;:;:Sa:4-::" ''-'-'' '"^' ^^^^ 
 
 Ihe Act commonly known as the Act abolish- 
 
 Estate Tall 
 
 ^iXvill^irLti, son luui^. t;; ti:; hwrs l Z 
 
 'ocly a part of his real estate, and to L 
 du..,hterai,d "to the heirs of h;r body " the 
 r Kiinderof the property, and if "either^ ' 
 ould d.e without leaving heirs of their body " 
 the share of the deceased to the survive, ami 
 
 to he heirs of their body," . ' and i lIlV'Tr "■"''"'"'• ">' '"^ will, made ,m the 
 should both die " without leaving livi i./issm " 1 m "^"^'''f' '^^••'^'' <^<^vised ce.tain Id t 
 the., over in fee simple. The dauL >Vp> f • ' '"^ ^"low lor lif , „f..,.. ,. '/"".' '•'»" '<> 
 
 the lifetime of her biother t't- o t ,e "Th" 
 ^0.1 mnmcd and had living issu "lu^^^^veiS 
 
 ,„'/♦';''•/]',■■'* "" ^'*''*'' '•■^■1 ^-ested in the son 
 and that there was nothing i„ the will to , ?"'. 
 e words "die without leaving liw.'" tj^;:'^< 
 
 tl.e son. y.'e Fra.er and BM, 21 O I ]m ^ ! :,. ^\"'= "''I''"-')^- ?^ the testator died in 1858 leav 
 
 n^«'?\n"'\'"«/^^°^^''>«-''»'ltwodaiiKli^^^^^^^^ 
 
 IWled^r' ^'"''r '"^^^""y '''-'«""'•■" f''- eve waVe' -tTed ,"?^''' '''^ '"« common law liei 
 
 2 Y by dee.f or' S las^t wilT nd" esSnt ' ^^'/T "^ ^^"Z'- '« ^'"S 'approved. 
 
 «hali or in what manner her said hehl ' 'a ^« '''"«. v- Khmo,,.; 18 A. R. 63. Affirmed 
 
 have he lands and premises Chy gUt I "" '^'' P°'"^ ^^ ^^e Judicial Committee. '^ 
 
 "tr will ,1^^, , ^jjj appointed the lands to her ami ft I- *f™ °^ '"" "•'^'"'■al life, and from 
 
II 
 
 I 
 
 li«' 
 
 
 287 
 
 ESTOPPEL. 
 
 default of khoIi issue liiin surviving, then to my 
 (laugliter Saruli Jiine. fur tiiu term (jf liei- natural 
 life ; anil upun tlie death of my daugliter Sarah 
 Jane, then to tlie iaufiil issue of my said 
 dauKhtel- Sarali Jane, to hold in fee simple ; but 
 in default of sueh issue of my said daughter 
 .Sarah Jaiio, then to my hrothcrs and 
 sisters and their heirs in eijual shares." IJy a 
 later elause, the testator added: "It is my 
 intention that upon the deeease of cither of my 
 Haid eliildren without issue, if my other ehild be 
 then dead, the issue of sueh latter eliild, if any, 
 shall at ouee take the fee simiile of the devise 
 mentioned in the third elause of my will : " — 
 
 Held, reversing the judL'ment of Ferguson, 
 J., •->:( (). R. 404, that the clauses must be read 
 together, and that, having regard to the latter 
 elause, and to the direction that the issue of 
 .lames «ere to take in fee siini)le, there was a 
 suliieiently elear expression of intention to give 
 .James a life; estate only to (irevent the apjilica- 
 t ion of the rule in S/kII'i/'h Chxi: Kmiis v. K'niij, 
 '-'1 A. R. .")!!). Aihrmej by the Supreme Court, 
 1.'4 .S. (_•. R. 35(i. 
 
 ESTATE IN FEE. 
 
 See EsTATK. 
 
 ESTATE TAIL. 
 
 Sec Estate. 
 
 ESTOPPEL. 
 
 I. By Dkki), .387. 
 II. I.v Pais, ."JSO. 
 
 III. Bv Record, 393. 
 
 IV. Special Mattkks and PROCEEDixiis, 394. 
 
 I. By Deed. 
 
 Execution Creditor— /'Hrc/«(Sf of Mort(iage 
 hy—JJeiiial of Mor/i/cii/or's Tifle.'j—Aii execu- 
 tion creditor who purch ai and takes a transfer 
 of a mortgage of property is not estopped there- 
 by frem setting up in an action against him 
 for the seizure of the same property under his 
 execution against the grantor of the mortgagor, 
 that the said grantor was not the owner of the 
 property in ipiestion and that the conveyance to 
 the mortgagor by him was fraudulent and void 
 as against the creditora of the latter, (.'onion 
 
 V. Proctor, 20 O. R. 53. 
 
 Grant From Local Government— C'oji ret/ 
 WW. hy (,'m»?fe.]— After the British North 
 Ameriea Act came into force the Government of 
 Nova Scotia granted to S. a part of the fore- 
 .shoro of the harhnur of Sydney, C.B. S. con- 
 veyed this lot, through the C. B. Coal Co. to 
 the S. & L. Coal Co. S. having died his widow- 
 brought au action for dower in said lot, to 
 
 which the company jjlcaded tliat the grant to 
 S. was void, the projjcrty being vested in tho 
 Dominion (Jovernment : — 
 
 HeW, allirming the juilgiuent of the Court 
 below. Strong and (i Wynne, Jj'., dissenting, tliut 
 the company having obtained title to tlie pro- 
 perty from S. they were estoi)peil from Bayiiii; 
 that the title of S. was defective. 
 
 I'er Strong aniKiwynne,. I J., dissenting. The 
 conveyance by S. to the ('. B. tJoal Co. wa,s an 
 imiocenl conveyance by which S. himseh' wonl.j 
 not have been estopped and as estojipel umst Iju 
 mutual !iis grantees woulil not. There were no 
 recitals in tlie deed that would estop iheni and 
 an estoppel could not be created by the cove. 
 nants. S'/i/iki/ and Lniiixbnri/ Coal and It ||' 
 Co. V. Su'ord, L'l S. C. K. 152.' 
 
 Release— /.'-'(•//«/.]— A testator by his will 
 devised to his .son (i. "tlie property I may dm 
 po,s3essed of in the village of M., also l<,t 2.S in 
 the Kith concession of 1!." Jn the early part ol 
 the will he had useil the words " wishing to di.^. 
 pose of my worldly projjcrty." The testator ilid 
 not own lot 2S, and the only land he did own in 
 the loth concession of li. was a part ot lot '2D. 
 The will contained no residuary devise. 
 
 Upon a petition under the Vendor and Pur- 
 chaser Act : — 
 
 Held, that the part of lot 29 owned hy tho 
 testator did not pa.ss by tlie will to the son. 
 
 After the death of the testator, all Ids ehiidren 
 executed a deed of release to the executors id' his 
 will, containing a recital that the jiart of lot 2!i 
 owned by the testator was devised to the son 
 (i., and that he was then in possession : - 
 
 Held, that there was no estojjpel as among 
 the mendjers of the fandly, who togetlier con- 
 stituted one party to the deed : — 
 
 Hehl, however, upon the evidence, that (!. 
 had acquired a good title to the lau.ls in iiue.s. 
 tion by virtue of the Statute of Limitations. AV 
 Ham and Lenlie, 25 O. R. 130. 
 
 Title to Land — vlr?r«r.-«> Po.'t.^r.^.^loti — JIm- 
 band and n'i/r.l-hi 1841 land was granted hy 
 King's College to ^i., who in 1849 conve\ed it 
 to a married woman, wdio, with her husliand, 
 was in possession at the time of the grant to (i. 
 The conveyance to the married woman was 
 executed by her husband. The husband and 
 wife lived together on the land till her duatii, 
 in 1864, and the husband till 1870, he dying in 
 January, 1889. In an action of ejectment lieguu 
 in October, 1889, by the heirsat-iaw of the wile 
 against persons claiming through the hushand :- 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of Rose, J., 
 that the possession of the husljand wan not 
 adverse at the time of the conveyance to G., 
 and the conveyance to C. and the suhseijuent 
 conveyance to the wife were operative, notwith- 
 standing the statute 32 H. VIII. eh. 9, then iu 
 force. 
 
 Per Armour, C?.J.— The conveyance to the 
 wife was made by the procurement of tlio hus- 
 band, and he took an estate under it, and hiiviiig 
 no other right or title to the land, was estopped 
 from denying the validity of (J.'s title :— 
 
 Held, also, upon the evidence, that the pl.iiii- 
 tiffs were not estopped by the dealings of their 
 ancestress with the land, and that tlie iiefendaiit,i 
 were not entitled to be subrogated to the rights 
 of a mortgagee in whose mortgage she had joined 
 as a granting party, but which had been paid off 
 
389 
 
 ided that tho giant to 
 ty being vusted in tliu 
 
 ulgineiit of tli(' ( 'ijiirt 
 10, J.l., ilinsenting, tliut 
 liiRHl tillu to tliu jiro- 
 
 t'.stciiipud from saying 
 efi'L'tive. 
 , JJ., (liaaonting. 'J'he 
 
 ('. H. t^oiil Co. wiu iin 
 »]iich S. Iiinisul:' urnilij 
 nd iis t!«to|)|ii!l must Iju 
 d not. 'riiL'i'o wuru im 
 Would cstoi) tlu.'in .mil 
 ■ created hy tlie cuvt- 
 'tbiini Coal and I!, ||' 
 
 Jo:.'. 
 
 testator l)y liis will 
 he iJi'oiierly J niiiy die 
 o of i\J., also lot 'JS ill 
 Jn the ciu'ly [j,iit oi 
 I'ords '• wisliiij;; to ills- 
 ty." 'I'hu te.stiitiir dill 
 dy land he did own in 
 
 was a part of lot 2'J. 
 duary devi.se. 
 ' the Vendor and Pur- 
 
 lot 2!) owned hy tim 
 le will to the .son. 
 'stator, all hisi-liiMrtn 
 to the u.xeoiitor.s of his 
 hat the jiart of lui :ji) 
 13 deviso.l to the aon 
 in possession : — 
 10 estoppel as among 
 y, who together eon- 
 leed : — 
 he evidence, that (',. 
 
 to tho lan.U in (jue.s- 
 ite of Liniitations. ll< 
 13G. 
 
 i:ii: Po.fSf-^sion — JltUy 
 land wa.s granted hy 
 in IS-J!) conveyed it 
 ), with her luisliand, 
 no of the grant to H. 
 married ^^■onlan was 
 .. Tlie liusljand mid 
 ! land till her deatii, 
 till 1870, he dying ill 
 an of e jeetmeiit liegim 
 drs-at-law of the wife 
 rough the huslmud;— 
 dgmeiit of lio.se, J., 
 lie husband was not 
 e conveyance to G., 
 and the subseijueiit 
 'e operative, iiotwith- 
 , VIII. ch. 'J, then iii 
 
 J conveyance to the 
 mrement of the bus- 
 ! under it, andliaviiy 
 c land, \vas estopped 
 )f G.'s title :— 
 leiice, that the plain- 
 the dealings of their 
 d that tile defeiidauts 
 rogated to the rights 
 rtgagoslie hadjoiueil 
 ich had been paid oif 
 
 ESTOPPEL. 
 
 and discharged. Mar.ih \: ][',/,'> 210 li o«i 
 .te tins case in appeal, 10 A. R rm ■>■" i" 
 
 Ultra Vires Deed.!— The A.f ,>f ;„, 
 
 .■ r -1 wot*. J -1 lie x\Li or inoorf>ora- 
 
 (onof a railway comp.u.y, the predeces H , 
 t,tl« of the plaiiit.lFH, which was incorp iratJ 
 /or tlie purpose o constructing and ope at 'a 
 certaii. line of railway, conferred upon tl. • c ,7n 
 p;.iy .11 respect of the disposition of la Is 
 «., Hired by them, " p,„vers of lotting, con •'. 
 nig and other«-,se .leptrting there«-rt i fo the 
 bench t and on account of=tl.e conipuiy r ,' 
 t.m« to tim. as they should deem necissaV ■' 
 
 Nearly forty ye.u-.s l,ef„re the coinmencc.nent 
 of tins action the predecessors in title otic 
 defeiidaiits laid pipes for conveyiii.. wal,.,. 1. 
 theiuilwaytrack ftlieplaiiid^rsl,:;dt.i:'^ 
 usuig t Kon tor sue , purp ,se aim ,st 'contin .3 
 up to the ,.ro.sent time, such privilege l,a Wi ^ 
 been given to them by rosolutioil of thcMli vet "s 
 of the company, w)i„ a feu- years snb.eom'i th 
 msed another resolution, and in pu su' '. 
 
 The undertaking of the original railway com- 
 pauy became vested in the plaintills, wlu ^a t w 
 years before the commeuciment of this cti m 
 .le.irnig to alter tlic p ..itionof their tra-d^ v 
 notice of e.v-propriat,ou to the immediate ^C' 
 (leee^ors ui tit e of the defendants, and pla^M 
 the track over the water pipos ' 
 
 The plaintills now sought to have the resolu- 
 wu and dee 1 mentioned declared J., W 
 aid also elamiid an ii.jnuction restrainim/th.; 
 
 ,.'1, h' ■"'''"' '"';«'*• '""I 'f "^■^•e-^^ary an 
 order tor their removal : — ■^ 
 
 Held that the resolutions and <lee,l ,,.ere 
 
 e eh' h'V' "'" T'""" ^'"^ '"'"•'^••■^ specilied by 
 tlie elurler, or sujh m con d fairly be ivir,!,. I 
 ;h incidental thereto, or reaso aMy Vd^e bv 
 implieition tlierefr.)in •_ ^ "i-n\c,l by 
 
 from'''!'.:''';'' "' H "'" ''■'""""^'^ "'°'-'' "-^t '^^toPP^^l 
 
 Held lastly, that tha defendants not havin.^ 
 
 ■3.1 and enjoyed then- easem.nt for forty ye u"s 
 
 "id not a^iiuired a till,. H..... .f 1 "".i.veii.s 
 
 under R S t .1, i i , "'""''■» '^r l>'-es^'nption 
 
 nil' '■• ^""""'/-V'- ','/'"•« I'\Ms, 22 
 
 j June ; ami that defendants, by tha pavment of 
 
 Ic .Uracto,,,; ''''^ ""^■' '''-^ '"the 
 
 NorlhAnunra v. (lil,soi,, 21 O, H. (ji;j. * 
 
 Contract — /Idiniirt'H' ] ^-0" \i,.i' i i^ 
 
 of ,.,.rt..iM I ^"•.'^'•(' ■'■i-> 'or the use by U. JJ 
 
 below tl,''.ri-?'"= ^''" '"''""""It of the Court 
 
 Held, further, that even if F. MeU 's ri.rht nf 
 action was authorized by the sr it .t . I'l. ° 
 :;|auned was fully eo^pin:a;:;^;M'' ^^^ 
 amount e.vpeude 1 1„ rep.c.rs for him by / nii 
 
 <y^h..nj/u.4 ,. ^<//,2rs. C. k! 415:''"' ^''"^' 
 
 tl at an a h ""'i i"-""^'^'>i"«-^ it appeared 
 
 tl.it an alleged contributory joined in the peti- 
 
 II. In P.vis. 
 
 Thfeon. ,'" i"^"*.'""?^''''/.'''''''' '•'•^•■^•'■•'/'»''"''•]- 
 g e tl, '; ;"■ '"'^'•^'•i'^'-^ f"n>i.sliod tllerefoit 
 tl ivll 1 , '"Hiding trustees, ai.l of which 
 Uirsm'" «■••'"! •• /' ' '"y "^ the order of 
 due L I .5 T "'V' "^ '•^'•t"i«^^te of money 
 al -n- ch ich " t1°" ^T Vf'''''^' faniished to 
 
 :r--'^t!n^;:,:,,:'-Srr 
 
 wiJt'iu'fiv *'"■'■■? \?' 'i «""'• «'iuitable assign, 
 "sut m favour of ]). of money due on the^et 
 
 ( 
 
 ;Sit--r;h::':?ire^-^™;:-,-^^^^ 
 c:;n;r:;;:rr°'''^^''''"-"'t'-f-in^bS,;:^ 
 
 oSl; J,llms? ';'T "^ '^'' P-'ovisions of the 
 wuta 10 ,J„in .s,t,.ck Comoanies' Letters Patent 
 
 le oe t":r ';''^ \" '" '''^'^l--"tributoryi„ 
 
 : Semh/. :-^rto wa, liable f„r the full numl,er of 
 !B^.resme,.,.o,ied in the petition. TSL^ 
 
 ^'J:^'^'-^ '-i-Thdup;,;:, "m^^'t;; 
 
 recover damages for the Hooding of a portion of 
 his farm at Isle ^-orte. P.Q., resulting' f-r'mtlo 
 c.mstructioa o certain works connette wi h 
 
 ■eed a release under the haad of the suppliant 
 g veil sul,3e,,uent to the time of the e.^propdl 
 nt.oa of a portion of his farm for the right ,f 
 way of a section of the Intercolonial RXay 
 whereby he accepted a certain sum " in f idl 
 compensation and final settlement for do ,r 
 vat.ou of water, feuce-rails taken, damage bv 
 water and all .lamages past, pres;nt?nd% ;^ 
 speetive arising out of the construction of tl?o 
 lutercolonial Railway," and rele^iaed the Crowa 
 
 I I 
 
I' 
 
 lil 
 
 391 
 
 ESTOPPEL. 
 
 " from all claims and dcuiands whatever in con- 
 nectidii therewith." It wiis also proved that, 
 although the works were executed siiliaccineut 
 to the (late of this release, tlicy were iuid<Ttaken 
 «t tlierecjueKtof thesii]ipliiii,r and for his lieiietit, 
 and not for the btnetlt of the railway, mid that 
 with respect to a part of them, he was present 
 when it was heini; constriicted and actively 
 interfered in f-neh constuution : — 
 
 Held, that lie was not entitled to compensa- 
 tion. Birlraiid v. Tht Qvuji, 2 Kx. C. H. 2S5. 
 
 Damages — Siiihmciit of DnvKu/iH Wiik 
 C'laiii,a7i/\^ J'nclicc.sur ii) Tif/i:]- A coinpjiny 
 to wliose lights in this li-half the Crown liiiil 
 sui;ceeded, had jiaid danuiges to the elainiant's 
 prcdece.'ii-or in title for injury resulting to the 
 property ni (|Uistion fioni the constiiietion of a 
 railway. But it was dearly shewn that at tlie 
 time when such (!iini:iges were a.s.'-essid theic 
 was no intuition to construct an overheiid 
 hridge, and that they vere iisscssed on the 
 understanding that there was to he a crossing at 
 rail level : — 
 
 Held, that the defendant was not, liy reason 
 of such jiiiynient, piecluded fioiii recovuiiig 
 compensation for injuries occasidied hy the 
 overhead bridge. 
 
 The defendant, and a iiunilier of other per- 
 .■lona interested in the manner in which the 
 crossing was to he made, met tlie Chief Krgiiiecr 
 of Covernment Railwiiys and talked over the 
 matter with him. The defendant, who docs not 
 appear to liave taken any active part in the 
 di.scu.-sion, and the other pti-.'-cms n.entiomd 
 wished to have a cio.^sing at rail level with 
 g.itcs ; hut the Chief iMigineer declined to 
 authorize such gates, and it was decided that 
 there should ho an overhead cios-siiig with a 
 grade of one in twenty. 8uhse(|Ucntly the 
 defendant signed a petition to have the 'grade 
 increastd to one in twelve, as the iiiteifercnce 
 with the access to his property would in that 
 way be lessened. The prayer of the petitien 
 was not granted : — 
 
 Held, that by his presence at such meeting 
 the defendant did not waive his right to com- 
 pensation. The (^niecii v. iValcvhn,)>Ex. C. R. 
 357. 
 
 392 
 
 Bgerfora chc(|Ue he said that it was to,, l^te 
 tliat day, but he would send a che<|Ue tli, ,!,„ 
 ollowing. ^„ che<nic was sent, an<l a f. w ,| ,,„ 
 lielore the bill matnrc.l the manager and m,1„ , 
 tor of the hank called to see .). M. V., and „.k,,!i 
 why he had not .^ent (he elie,,ue. He a.(,i,i„,,l 
 tliat he had \m niised to do .m., and at the f,,„. 
 lie thought he woul.l. Y. afterwards hit tl, 
 country, and in an action agair.st the ,1, f, „ 
 daiits on (he hill they pleade.l that the signature 
 ot J. JVI. ^. Miis forged, anil on the tri.il ih^ 
 jury found that it was lorged, and judgment «i,8 
 given for the defendants : - 
 
 Held, aliiimirg the decision of the C(ii,t„f 
 Appeal I r> A. I!. r,':\ which rever.sed ,1,, 
 of the Divisional Court, I,S (). H. .tmi |i„t 
 tlKugh Iraud or breach of tru.M may he latilii',! 
 forgery cannot, and the bank could not i-,(.,v,r 
 on the lorged bill again.st the defer, l,ir,t, 
 Jxniijvr Jar.,11,.-, Carlhr v. Ikniqin- <V K,.,nm.: 
 M App Cas. lis, and llarUm v. uJu„\„4 
 Aorlh-\U.,nn 11. JC. Co., (i Times L. \\ :(, 
 tolh.wKl. Mirchovl^' Haul: of Caniul,, ,' 
 Lwax, IH ,S. C. H. 704. 
 
 Eralnage.]— Owner of land artcctcd acting 
 80 as to lead municipality to liclievc jurisdiction 
 was not disputed. Oii.wii y. Tomishi/i of A^crlli 
 EaMope, 21 A. R. C(I4 ; 24 8. C. R. 707. 
 
 Forgery— ]ialific(ili(,v.]—\'., who had been in 
 partuershiv) with the defendants, trading under 
 the name of the H. C. Company, but had retired 
 from the firm and become the general manager of 
 the company, but with i o power to sign drafts, 
 dreT>.' a lull of exchange for his own private 
 purposes in the name of the defendants ( ii a 
 hrni in Montreal, which was discounted by the 
 plaintiff bank. Refoie the liill matured Y. ' 
 wrote to defendants informing thuii of having 
 used their name, but that they would not have 
 to pay the draft. The bill purported to be in- I 
 dorse.I by the company jii;-r J. M. Y (one of tlie 
 defendants), and the other defendant liaving ! 
 seen it in the bank examined it carefully and ' 
 rem.nrked that J. M. Y.'.s signature was n.,l 
 naually so shaky. J. M. Y. afterwards called 
 at the bank and examined the bill very care 
 fully, and in answer to a request from the man 
 
 Partnership. 1— The defendant set i,„ f|, ,f 
 the plaintifhs had elected to treat other m'li.l,,',,, 
 of his him as their sole debtor, bv rcav„ii „f 
 their having proved their claim with ard luir. 
 chased the as.sefs of (he pard.ershij, f,„„i ili,, 
 assignee theieof under an assignment for the 
 I'C'lu "f '•''■"'•""■^ '■" ^^liich it was recite,! 
 that the <,ther was the only person coniii, sin,. 
 the liim ; and that the defendant had reli'dar,! 
 acted upon their conduct and election, and tiny 
 were therefore estopped from suing him av i 
 partner : — ° 
 
 Held, that, even if there was evidence, that 
 the defendant had acted in aty wav by nason 
 ot the jilaintifls' action, no estopiel ar^se 
 because the plaintiffs did nothing shewiii,' an 
 election not to look to him, and he lia,l no 
 right to assume an election from what th. y diil 
 nor to .act as if such an election had been iiiiule' 
 Ar,// V hln.ln; 24 0. R. 407. See this case in 
 ajipeal, on another point, 22 A. R. 12, /.u.-i .'iW. 
 
 Partnership.]— When a person, not in facta 
 partner, authorizes his name to be used in the 
 him name of a jiartnership there is a hol.lin,, 
 out of himself as a partner to any one who 
 knows or has reason (o believe that "this n iir,. 
 seiit.« the name of the person so authori/iiK' its 
 
 { use., but a parcnersliip by estoppel or by hMm 
 
 j out will not be created if the real positicn of 
 
 : atlairsis known to the creditor. 
 
 I Judgment of the Common I'leas Divisien, "\ 
 *6 A j.^'L'®^'^''*'^'' '" part- ^icLtan v. Clarl:, 
 
 I Solicitor— /Vac/ I'siT),,/ Wi/Iicvt Crrtifimtf- 
 lAllovmj Kamc to Appear an a Mnnhir of 
 I /»•»?.]- M., a solicitor who had not taken out 
 tlie certihcate entitling him to practice in (ho 
 Untario Courts, allowed his name to aiipenr in 
 newspaper advertisements and on iirofcssion.-.l 
 cards and letter heads as a member of a (Irni in 
 active practice. He was not, in fact, a mcmlior 
 of the firm, receiving none of its profits ami \m- 
 ing none of its expenses, and the firm naniciid 
 not appear as solicitors of rccoid in any of the 
 proceedings in their professional business. The 
 Law Society took proceedings against M. to 
 recover the penalties imposed on solicitois |)r.u- 
 
ESTOPPEL. 
 
 viisHcnt, and a U-v.- , 
 
 tismK without certihcato. in M'hicl, it was sliown 
 timl ti.e namo of tl.e Hrin was ei.,l„rsc,l on cur- 
 
 ttc^l™ •- *" "'""""'' '" ""'" """"'""^ "^ "^y 
 
 HeM, rovonsing tl,o judj^ment of the Court 
 I)elo«- 1.) A. I{. 1,,(), that M. ,11,1 not " praftisL- 
 a. a Hohcitor within the incaniuL' of the Act 
 imposing thu i)uaaltiua (1{. s. o riHTTI ,.|, 
 HOI, ao that he wr.s not o.sto,,,.3.1, l^VJ ! 
 ■NittiDg \us namu to appear as a nifmhor of a 
 Una ot practising solictors, from shewing tlut 
 ),. was not auoh a mom l,...r i n fact. Mar,L,/„t/ 
 
 III. Bv Kkcokd. 
 
 Court Equally Divided.] -When the S„. 
 prf.ne (.<....t of Ca.ia.la in a case in appeal is 
 e,|imlly <livi, e,l so that tho decision appeale 
 
 SM 
 
 the registrar of titles of British Columbia, thus 
 p. eventing grantees of the Crown from obWn 
 i"« a registered title, another inf., nation wm 
 a , ;; 1 n '^ "" Attorney General to direct «!^ 
 a UUnt to execute to the Crown m right of 
 lan'ls : - '"'■'■'-'""'"^ •"• «"»veyance of the said 
 
 ; «niit, .ihx. C. R. Vl, that tho judgment in 
 
 /Xl /;■■"■ I-,'' ^'"»"»^"ted on and <listingui8he<L 
 
 --Acl,.,n AiianM Sam,-. /W.ou J Mahr. l-^he 
 defen.lant was s.icl l.y the same plaintiffs in a 
 f-.rmer action as in,lorser of a promissory note 
 a;.. I.ulgme.it was entered in Vis favour upon 
 the .lefence that he indorscl it for the accom 
 
 ..linst stamls ..■..■ever;^,f the^ 'of 7K^ ' ^.l-'V^^^"^'"; 'l^ Y -'''''-'"it or t ^I.^^ 
 n. t le SupremeCou.-t affects the actual pLtic^ to ^ ."S"";': '''r! ''"'""""'^ ^V"""" -nsi.lerX^. 
 hu litigation on ly, a-id the Court, when a simi- j /' ,1 o I,', ^! '''!' """:'' "I'"" ^he .same „ot« 
 
 kr case IS brouglit before it, is not boun.l by the h e 1 1 k , x f 'M'"*'"''- "\ t'"-' 'i-'-a who were 
 c!?20 S. C.'r Ti'"' ''''"• ^""■^'^'"' ^/'^■''o«| p7rtnci :I "'" "'"'^''' '^'""^' ^^'ti* ^ho other 
 
 I , J'^''l'.t''''t the fact of his establishing his 
 Different Causes of Action - ,9/a/,/<e o/" Ih "' V *'"-'/V^'"'-''" '^'^'■"" ''^'l no effect°u„on 
 FrnwU. I -S. lirought a suit for pcrfonna ice of ^''^.'l"'"'^',,,,, of us liability in this. P"" 
 
 1. oinianceof, ^„, ,,,,, ^i,^. ^^\r,^nx:^\U .lebarre.l by the 
 
 Pl 
 
 ,111 iillcgeil verbal agreement by M. to ,'ivc him i ,. r • "7 ' ""^ "coarred oy the 
 
 oaccightli of an intei-est of hisf M.'sJ X^^ ! ^Z"^^," "^'"^"^ ""^"^ "^ P-tn^g 
 
 ayoM mine but f.iilcd to recoveV \is the n.n'f I '''""' '"'',»«'°« <"' action upon the 
 liel,l the alleged agreement to be w hiii , I '■*g;""«t the iiulivi.lual members of it. 
 ■SUtute of Fi-auds. On the hearing Ml" „S ' /. ''''' ^"•//"""'' " *'*' ^'- '^- •"^^^•'. ^ 
 the agreement as alleged, but a,Iinit'te,l tlia he case ^ "'^ "''"'' ~^ '"'• ^ ■*»7. ■^< 
 Kill aL'reeil to invK .< ,>«„ „;,.u.i- .■ i . . . ^ case. 
 
 he agreement as alleged, but a,ImiUe,l that he 
 
 Ki,l agreed to give S. one-eighth of his interest 
 
 in the procee, s of tlie mine when sllhl in, 
 
 h:mng been afterwar.ls sold ,S. brought .'uiolher 
 
 a"e!is"- ' ''"^""'"^ "' •''""'^ "'i'"-*^ St' the pro- 
 
 Held reversing the decision of the Supreme 
 Cour of Nova Scot a. Fouriiier and TascliLe:^ 
 J.J .dissenting, that S. was not estoppel by the 
 
 action": 1'"""' '*'"""'' ''"" ^'■'"" '"-"'^''''^ """^ther , 
 Hel,l, als,), that the contract for a •share of 
 the projcc, Is was not one for sale of an interest 
 
 lyectment— J/e.'()ie Prot'itt 1 _ l„ .. („„„ 
 
 ^'\^rfr'1 ^"^'^''^^ '"'^" '« 
 
 «g^iiist the ,letendaiits, mesne proHts were 
 cl™,c,l, but „„ evidence was givei/in reganl L^ 
 
 -s.StSs'tSf:::---r;.;r 
 
 ™.nnf,™atio„ofinti;^S-l:;,rr'^?ri^ 
 
 "ii'juiii deliver ui) nnssps"io'i nf ,.orf : i i 
 situate wirliin fi,',. , .y-"-'"-' "f certain lands 
 iace rll 'ailway belt in that Prov- 
 
 'not. lk<^\)meiix. FanvtU, 14 S C R 'w > 
 
 ollowed. 
 V'^e tlie next 
 
 \n T hV '^ ^i°*^^l^"'''"'^"'-^^'^'^«'«=«<«.] 
 
 .'111 n.inie as makers and an in,lividual aa 
 
 endorser of a note, au<l was .lisiiiis.se.l as aga „^ 
 
 he endorser on the groiiml that heha.l emCed 
 
 , at the rcjuest ot the hohlers for their accom 
 
 jmodatmn, judgment being given aglinstX 
 
 •mV/'r '40- '■','^'.^1' '".''«">«"t of Street. .J., 
 -.4 0. R. 49/, that tho dismissal of this action 
 an answer to an action on the judgment in 
 which It was sought to prove that the^ndoreer 
 was, as reganls the plaintitTs, a partner bv 
 estoppel and therefore boun,l b'y the u Wnt 
 against the linn. j^iigmenr, 
 
 •iL'ii'nstalw'n''-' ,*" ''" ^°^^°''"^ '» proceeding 
 ■igaiiist an allege.l partner on a jndgmiut against 
 the firm, considered. Ray v. MUUr, 22^^ 
 
 Trustees Accounts.] — Court of Probat« 
 passing trustee's accounts .loes no bind S 
 
 MtUI, _,1 ,^. C. R. 310, pOHl, EXKCUTOR.S, I. 
 
 """''■ ''' '^-- "«-' '"^"^tll' ^^X" I i„Sr^;i-:f^:^!f^^~f -toPPol oannot> 
 
 IV. Special Matters and Proceeding.s. 
 
 3stoppol cannot .^ 
 Ihimphrpjj V. Thf 
 
 against the Oown 
 <4mx,i, 2 Ex. C. R. 386. 
 
 •r'",yi— \yien an issue ar ses on the nlea of "wT 
 judicata the identity of the facts in the foL^ 
 
S8S 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 CMe with those in thr existing case is matter for 
 the jury wlitn tlie trial in l,y a jury in a Division 
 Court. In u case in a J)i\ ision Court wliere tlie 
 defence of ren jm/hnfn had luen rnise.l, and in 
 which a jury notice had heen {.iven, tlie JudL'e 
 determined the case himself, and refused to 
 allow it to lie tried hy a jury :■- 
 
 Held, that he had no jurisdiction to do so, and 
 that a manilatoiy order must go to compel him 
 to try the ease in aceordanee with tlie pnulice 
 of the Court. Jn n Cviruu v. Aji'ic, 1'4 t). K. ;ij8. 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 I. Admlssibility. 
 
 1. Evideticr ill Pffrioiii Proceulimjx, 395 
 
 2. Privilciit, 397. 
 
 II. COREOBOBATION, 399. 
 
 III. Examination de iiene esse, 400. 
 
 rV. Examination kok Discovekv. 
 
 1. In (lincral, 401. 
 
 2. Bi'forc Pliculings, 402. 
 
 3. Physicdl ExamiiHition, 403. 
 
 4. Sjiecial Motltrs and Persons, 403. 
 
 v. Examination on Pendinci Motion, 406. 
 VI. Foreign Commission, 406. 
 VII. Particulars, 409. 
 
 VIII. Pkesumptions and Onus of Proof. 
 
 1. Onus of Proof, 411. 
 
 2. Presumptions, 413. 
 
 IX. Pkoduction of Documents, 415. 
 
 X. Varyino and Explai.mno Written 
 Documents, -116. 
 
 XI. Miscellaneous Cases, 419. 
 
 Admission of Further Evidence on Appeal 
 "—See Appeal. 
 
 Criminal Matters. ]-,S'«c Criminal Law- 
 Intoxicatino Liquors— Justice of the Peace. 
 
 Extradition Proceedings.]— ,S'('e Extradi- 
 tion. 
 
 Paeticclar Actions.]— ,SVe Special Titles. 
 Rejection of Evidence.]— 5ee Trial. 
 
 I. Admissipility. 
 1. Eridtnce in Previous Proceedings. 
 
 of aotion<;iven by Lord Camiihell's Act f(,r tho 
 henctit ot the widow and children of a i.irsoii 
 whose death results from iiiinrics riccivcj 
 throiijih negli|;,.Mc<' is ditlercnt trom that wliiH 
 the deceased liad in his lifetime, yet t he niati ri'ii 
 I issues are suhstaiitially the siime'iu hnth a(li,,n!s 
 and the widow and children are in ell'ecf cl.,i,n' 
 ing thioiigh the .leceaseil. Tlieiefore, wli, « ,„, 
 action IS commenced liy a person so iiijiiivd in 
 which his evidence is takeiu/t time esse ,iiid tlio 
 deffiidant has a right to cidss-examiiie, siuli cvi. 
 ■ deuce is admissilile in a snljseiiueiit action t;iktn 
 after Ins .hath under the Act. 'I'ascherca,, ami 
 CiBynne, JJ., ilissentiiig. 
 
 The admissibility of such evidence as ii.'aiiist 
 the original defendants, a niunicipal coriM.riiiion 
 sued for injuries caused by falling into an ixci 
 vation in a imblic street, is not aflVcted l,y the 
 fact that they have caused a third party te l,f 
 added as defendant as the person who was nally 
 resjjonsible for xuch excavation, and that ^'mj. 
 third party was not notified of the e.\aiiiin,iti(,n 
 ot the plamfiti m the first actiim, and lia,l „(, 
 opportunity to erosB-exaniine liim. 'I'aschcrciiu 
 and Gwyiiiie, J.J., dissenting. 'J'vini o/' Wan'.r 
 ten V. Erdmtiii, 'JS S. C-'. 1!. 3,-)2, atlirmiii" ,S' (' 
 20 A. R. 444 ; 22 O. H. 093. .bV. the next ;,,.,;..' 
 
 Action for Negligence — Sulisc/ii, i,/ Arliim 
 under Lord Cain/Mt's Aet—/deiili/„ „f /.„„„ 
 —hxnni I nation de tiene csw.]— Alt'hoi'i<'li the 
 widow's right of action under Lonl Caii'mlicirs 
 Act is in several respects distinct from the Ims. 
 band s right of action in his lifetime arisin.' out 
 of the same circumstances, still the issues a're «n 
 far connected and identical that the examination 
 de liene esse of the husband in an action hn.n-ht 
 by liim in his lifetime, but which abated at his 
 death, is admissible evidence in the wi.h.w's 
 action against the same defendants, the hiisb.wd 
 having been cross-examined by them. 
 
 Wliere it is desired to use depositions Mt a 
 trial, the order that should be made is that tho 
 depositions be transferred to tlie Clerkef Assize 
 or local Registrar, the trial .Jud<;e being left iici' 
 to decide as to their admissibility. 
 
 Judgment of the Queen's lieucli Division 
 22 O. R. 693, athrmed. Erdman v. Tvvii r't 
 (I atkerton, 20 A. K. 444. 
 
 Evidence before Committee of House of 
 Commons — y/r(U')'})f/ ln/oi-e J\lwii\iral, .\^-^At 
 the healing of a criminal charge before a Ceiuity 
 Judge sitting as police magistrate eviilwice 
 given before a special committee of the Hinise 
 of Commons, and taken by stenogiaplurs, was 
 tendered before the magistrate and refused by 
 him : — ' 
 
 Held, that the Court had no power to griint.i 
 mandamus to theCounly Judge directiiii; him to 
 receive such evidence. 
 
 Rose, J., while concurring in the decision that 
 a mandamus should not issue, was of opinion that 
 Parliament having ordered the prosecution, the 
 evidence should have been received bv the m?i'- 
 istrate. ■' 
 
 Subsequent resolution of the House of Com- 
 mons .authorizing the evidence to he given, 
 Peijiiia V. Connollii, 22 0. R. 220. 
 
 NeglSence Ar,^?,Z •«» /, P^- ^rTf^, ""^ i ^ .^'"l^'-^P^i- Admlssion-C'o»..r,s..^io» Partly 
 «fe-Sr"o7 P r '/i?/^ '■'^('"''''Jfft'r?,'''''' "'' J^'''"'nl nation In C/iir/-- Lndutce of 
 unaer J.orU Campbell s ^c^]-l hough the cause , pleaded tliat it was given in settlement of pro- 
 
396 
 
 JinnilicH's Act f(ir the 
 I iliildicn of a inrgon 
 "111 in juries rucivcd 
 urriit t'ldiM llmt wliid, 
 ■time, yet t lie niiit.nij 
 ■ SHiiic in l)nth;uli„ns, 
 en ;iru in cd'tet ilnjm' 
 Tlieit'fore, hIu „ .,„ 
 . jior.son so injiiicil in 
 n(/e hnif mxe ami tlio 
 o.«s-c'xiiiniiie, siuli cvi. 
 lisniueiit iictinii tiiki'ii 
 Act. 'I'aschcii lui ami 
 
 h c'vidoiifc as iiyiijnst 
 iiiiinicipiil coi'|iiiniiir,,) 
 ,■ falliiif,' into an ( xiu 
 is not allVctcil l,y t|,t 
 il a tliird pnity to 1,,,. 
 [itrson -whu ^^,•i's iiallv 
 ■ation. ami that Mail 
 fl of tlio (.xairiiiiatidii 
 St action, and liail ii(. 
 ino liiin. 'ra.-cli,.||.;,ii 
 iif?. Ti.ini «/■ l|V,/|,,.. 
 . .S,")'2, nfliiiniii;.' ,v. r'., 
 'i. iSii- tlie next ciisf. 
 
 — Siiliso/iiiiit Arllim 
 <'t — Itltnlilji (if /.«.x,„, 
 
 "■sW.]— Altil01|i;ll tJH; 
 
 der Lord (.'ainplKllV 
 listinct from tin- Ims- 
 s lifctiniL' arising' dut 
 still tliL' issues arc so 
 that the exaiiiiiiatKin 
 in an action lir(.ii;.'lit 
 \\hiell aliated at his 
 •ncc ill the widow's 
 endants, the luishaml 
 I l)y them. 
 use depositions at a 
 1 be made is that the 
 io tlie Clerk cf Assize 
 Judge being left fret- 
 iiliility. 
 
 I's Heneh Division, 
 Enlmau v. Tovn rj 
 
 Qlttee of House of 
 
 m' Maiii.-.n-aU.\-M, 
 ■irgo before a t'niinty 
 magistrate eviiknce 
 imittee of tlie House 
 ■ stenocfraj liars, was 
 trate and iefii.stil hy 
 
 no pover to jiraiita 
 idge directing liim to 
 
 ;; in the decision that 
 :, was of opinion that 
 the prosecution, the 
 eccived by the mag- 
 
 the HouFc of Com- 
 tnce to he Laven. 
 . 2-20. 
 
 C'oiivn-mtioii rarity 
 '.'liiff — Erlihnct of 
 bond thedefendanti 
 n settlement of pro- 
 
 397 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 Diisgnry notes made by a brother of defemUnt 
 the indorsementN to whirli were forged to the 
 knowledge of phiintills, which settlement was 
 the only consideration for the execution of llie 
 Iwnd. On the trial a verdict was given for plain- 
 tiffs which was set aside by the full Court and a 
 new trial ordered on the ground of improper 
 admission of evidence as follows : 1st, evidem'e 
 by a solicitor of what one of the oth<:erH of the 
 plaintiirirink had told him relative loan admis- 
 sion by tlie allegc'd forg.'r that the notes were 
 jjenuine; part of this convers.ation, which related 
 to ft ditferent matter, had been given in evidence 
 by the same witness on direct examination, but 
 the Court below held that the balance could not 
 l>e given on cross-examination as it was not 
 connected with what had been already iiroved. 
 .Secondly, evidence by counsel for l)laintil^^^ ii'i 
 the pro(,>eedings on the note's which had led to 
 the making of the boinl of his belief in their 
 genuineness, which the ( onrt below held was ' 
 not good evidence. On appeal to the Supreme 
 Court of Canada from the judgment ordering a ' 
 new trial : — i 
 
 Hcbl, that the evidence objected to was pro- ! 
 porly admitted and that the judgment should be 
 reversed. HaUf-u- nai,khi,j Co. v. Smith, IS S. , 
 C. R. J 10. I 
 
 Malicious Prosecution— /?cfr„-rfo/'ylf7;((V;r(J 
 
 —2^dinl-^><ioii>i on Kramiiidfionfor Di^i-nnry.]— 
 In an action for malicious prosecution, the 
 indictment, with an endorsement thereon of 
 the ac(|uittal of the jilaintid' of the criminal 
 charge of which In^ had been iirosecuted, was 
 produced by the clerk of the Court, liavin.' been 
 sent to him by the Hegistrar of the (^>7iecii's 
 Bench Division to whom the indictment had 
 teen returned and which ho ha<l been snb- 
 pccnacil by the jdaintitr to produce, the Court 
 being intormed that the Attornev-Ceneral h.id 
 refiise<l h\a jiat to eiialdo a record of acquittal 
 to he made up. The defendant's counsel objected 
 to the admission of the indictment, and its ad- i 
 misLiion was refused : — 
 
 Held, that the indictment'' .so endorsed and 
 produced was not, under the circumstances, 
 sufKcient evidence of the termination of the , 
 prosecution, but that the fortnal record of 
 accjiiittal should have been ]iroduced; and that i 
 no such record, or a copy thereof, could be i 
 obtained witliout ■dfiatoi the Attorney-tieneral. 
 (^wtfc, whether the termination of such pro- ' 
 seciitiou can be proveil by admissions made by j 
 the defendant on ! is examination for discovery ' 
 Hmkt v. Cane, 21 O. It. LS.S. ''' 
 
 i the idainliir, and the idaintilV was .suing thereon 
 
 I as trustee lor such other persons. 
 
 I V'l'"" bis examination fcu' discovery, the plain- 
 tilt ivluscd to answer ipicstions as to the names 
 ot the persons for whom he was acting as trus- 
 tee, ( lainimg privilege on the ground that to 
 iiuswer woiihl tcii.l to erimin.ate him or render 
 him halde to criminal prosecution under the 
 aliove statute: — 
 
 ' Held, that he was not entitled to the privil- 
 
 , ege and must answer. MitU v. Mnor Co 
 !■> I'. U. 'JTii. '* 
 
 Crinilnatins Answers. ]- In an act ion of li bel 
 
 and slaii.ler, the plaiiitill' coni|)l,iiiicd that the 
 detciolaiit had coniiriiinicated to several persons 
 the contents of a letter received from another 
 person m which the plaintirt' w.as accused of 
 larceny, etc. I'pon an examination of the 
 defendant for diseoverv, he retiised to .say 
 whether he had received any letter from the 
 person named, or to answer any ciuestions in 
 rclaf. II to such letter or its eontciit.s, udviii" as 
 a reason tliat it might criminate him to'doso":- 
 
 Helil, tliat tlie reason given was sullicieiit to 
 Iirivilcge the defendant from answering; and, 
 jilthough it was not the receipt of the" letter' 
 but the publication, that would make the 
 oticnce, he was entitled to object to the line of 
 in(|uiry at the outset. 
 
 Si, III,/,; that section 5 of the Dominion statute 
 of ISlia respecting witnes.ses and evidence will, 
 when It comes into ftJice, sn])ersc(le the privilo'e 
 now existing in cases of this kind. ir,/,sc,-'y 
 ILuit-.niHii, 1.-. 1>. U. o-.s. .y,.e the next case 
 
 Order for Use of Evidence in Future Action 
 
 -Ml to Perpetmite Trstimoti!/. l-Thc Court has 
 no power to make an order authorizing the use 
 ma future action of evidence taken in a pendiin' 
 action. L-rdman y. Town of Walkerloii, 1 1 1'! 
 n. 40/. 
 
 2. /'nrlleije. 
 
 Criminating Answers.]— In an action upon 
 promissory notes, the <l<.fendanta pleaded that 
 the pbimtdf and oertaii, other persons had, 
 ontrary to nn Viet. (D.) ch. -tl, see. I (,,■), coul 
 spired together to harass the defendants and 
 lessen trade competition, and had procured the 
 noKiers of the notes sued on to transfer them to 
 
 CrimlnatineAnswers.l-TheOntario statute 
 
 I as to evidence, K. S. (), eli. (il, sec. .->, limits the 
 j scojie of all preliminary ex.iminations for dis- 
 ' covery or otherwise in civil actions. 
 Joiir.i y. Ck/Ioii, <J P. IJ. -JlKi, followed. 
 It has not been atfei.'ted by section 5 of the 
 Dominion statute oO Vh^t. ch. .SI, which, l)y 
 necessary constitutional limitations as well as by 
 express declaration (section 2), applies only to 
 proceedings respecting which the I'arliament of 
 Canada has jurisdiction. 
 
 The language used in a previous decision in 
 this ease, 15 P. R. o-,3_ _.^t j, ._,,.,3 j^ ^^^^ 
 
 broadly expressed, in the absence of concurrent- 
 Ontario legislation. 
 
 _ And therefore, a defendant, upon his examina- 
 tion tor discovery in an action for defamation, 
 cannot, even since the coming into force of .")(J 
 ! Vict. eh. .SI, be compelled to answer (|Hestioiis 
 I which may tend to criminate him. W'ei.ifv y 
 Heiiitzmaii, 15 P. R. 407. 
 
 I Criminating Answers — Too Lata to take 
 Olij(flion Injure the Divisional Court. ]Sei' Millar 
 y. McTaijijart, 20 0. R. 617, vost. Fraudulent 
 
 LONyKVANCE. 
 
 Husband and 'Wife— .S-oZ/r'/Coc Wiflntran-inn 
 from h.i:awiiiation.]-~l\. -S. ( ». ch. (il, sec S 
 which provides that "no husband shall be com- 
 pellable to disclose any communication made 
 by his wife during the marriage,'' is still in 
 force. 
 
 ; It is competent for a husband who is niakin« 
 disclosures as to what took jilace between liii 
 wife and himseli during coverture, at any time 
 during an examination for discovery to refuse 
 
 I to disclose anything further. 
 
ill 
 
 999 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 15 
 
 1 1 i7i 
 
 ill 
 
 iy i 
 
 If upon Huoh refuaal the solicitor for the 
 ..ppoHitu [)arty withdraws, tho exaininiUion may 
 lie jirooecU.,! witli and tlie evi.lfiice afterwards 
 taken will iM,t he Ntruek out. < 'oiiimlhj v. Mnrn-ll, 
 14 1 . K. IS7. Allirmed on appeal, U 1'. K. •_>70. 
 
 Malicious Prosecution- /'o/iV« Officer. 1— In 
 an action lor nialioi.nis ].roseontion aganist a 
 police olh,;er, ariHinyimt of a piihhV prosecution 
 initiated on an int'onn.ition sworn l.y him, lie in 
 not hound on an examination for discovorv to 
 «ive the name of the ])er8on from whom the facts 
 wtr.' ohtamed. 
 
 _ .Iiui^'iiient of the Chancery Division, 21 O R 
 .!>-.;{ reveiMe<l. Ihimiihnij v. AnhUmMI, 'ni \. 
 K. Ut)/. 
 
 Pending Lltlgatlon-Arr^T,s.]-Letter9 writ- 
 ten liy fhedetendantto a third person, wliowas 
 a principal in the tiansactions out of which the 
 action arose, and letters written by such third 
 person to the defendant : - | 
 
 Held, piivile^'cd from production in the action 1 
 where It appeared tliat they were written after 
 Uie plaintiir h:ul threatened litigation, and in 
 conseiiuence of tlie advice of the defendant's 
 solicitor. 111 the endeavour on tlie part of the 
 <leten(l;int to oI)tain information for the purposes 
 of the threatene,! liti-ation. Domhm v. Jnlui- 
 ttoii, U 1'. II, 47i>. 
 
 Report as to Accident— A^iwexo/" Wiiin'xxen ] 
 -In an action for <!ainn-cs for personal injuries 
 received hy the plaiiuirt' in a tramway car 
 accident as to which the conductor of the oar 
 had iiiadeu report to t lie defendants : — 
 
 Held, that the jjoition of the report oontain- 
 iiig the names of the eyewitnesses of the acci- 
 dent was privilegeil from productum. Arm- 
 tlroifj v. Turoiitu Ji. W. Co., 1,") P R '>08 
 
 400 
 
 Executor and Administrator.] -To enahln 
 an opposite or interested party to recover in Z 
 action against the estate of a deceased person it 
 IH HiKhcient If his evidence is corroborated , V 
 streiigthene,! l.y evidence which apprcc'lahly 
 helps the judicial mind t,. believe <,ne or m«„. 
 ! of Uie material statements of facts deposed t,, 
 It IS not necessary that the case should be wliollv 
 proved by independent testimony ' 
 
 l\irk;r v. lyhy, .3-2 C. 1'. 1|;{, apj.rove.i. 
 J he production by the plaintitf, an architert 
 aiming payment for his services in .Irawin,; 
 I plans and making estimates for tlie erection „f n 
 J house, of a memorandum in the deceased's h iii.l 
 : writing, shewing the rooms and the accoimno- 
 dation re,iuired and the suggeste.l cost, and of a 
 sketch of the property : — 
 
 Held, IJurtoD, J. A., dissenting, .sutlicient 
 corroboration of the plaintitt's evidence 
 I .ludgment of the Couuty Court of York 
 afhrnied. liiulford v. Mm-donahL Is A P 
 167. ' • 
 
 Executors. ]-The evidence of executors that 
 promissory notes belonging to the testator lia<l 
 when they came into their hands, endorsements 
 upon them shewing that i.ayments had bcoi, 
 made to lum, does not re(,uire corroboration 
 under section 10 of K. S. 0. ch. Gl 
 
 .ludgmont of Ferguson, .1., reversed. /,. r« 
 SlaMi-i; S/uMer v. Zimmernuui, L'l A 1; 
 
 Report as to Accident. ^-^Vhere reports by 
 olhcers or servants of a raihvay company as to 
 a casualty giving rise to an action are in good 
 faith i)repared for the purpose of being com- 
 iniinicateil to the company's solicitor with the 
 object ot obtair.ing his advice thereon and enabl- 
 ing him to defend the action, tliev are to be 
 regarde.l as privileged communications and 
 exempt from jiroduction for insiiectioii by the 
 opposite party, even if they answer the purpose 
 of giving information to other people as well 
 minter v. Urand Trtinl: II. )('. Co., 10 1'. R. 38 j^ j 
 
 Solicitor and Client - Solicitor IVih^-.s.t to 
 tluiKH />..,/.]-Held, that where a solicitor or 
 counsel of one of the parties to a suit has put 
 his name as a witness to a deed between the 
 parties he ceases, in respect of the execution 
 of the instrument, to be clothed with the char- 
 acter ot a solicitor or counsel and is bound to 
 disclose all that passed at the time relating to 
 such execution. Roh.'iuii v. Ktmn, 5 Ks,)";-)-) 
 and Crauxour v. .Salt,,; 18 Cb. 1). 30, followed.' 
 Ma<j,c v. J he (Jiiten, 3 Kx. C. R. ,304. 
 
 Executors -y'/co Defciidniits i„ Sam, l„/,r. 
 (!■•". I -In an action by an executor of a deceised 
 morgagee against two joint mortgagors, hotl. 
 the latter depose.l to certain iiayments made hv 
 one or the other in the lifetime of the mort 
 gagee :— 
 
 . Held that each mortgagor was an oi.posite or 
 interested party m the same decree and of the 
 same kind, aii.l constituted together an opposite 
 «.r interested party within the meanin.' of the 
 section, ami the fact of both the m.llt.'a.rori, 
 testifying to such payments did not conrtiuite 
 I corroboration within the meaning of R. s (> ch 
 01, sec. 10. 7\i//or v. Ji'etjin, 2C> O. R. 4s:i.' 
 
 Seduction — Man-iid ]yowan.] In an 
 action tor the seduction (,f a married woman the 
 non-access of her husban.l, an,l her seduction by 
 the defendant, may be j.rove.l bv her o«n evi- 
 dence. A.«». v. Waff, •_' 0. I!, m;, considereil. 
 MuUkjiiii v. J hompnoii, 23 R. o4. 
 
 II. CORROIiOUATION. 
 
 Adultery. 1-The evidenco of one witness, by 
 confession ot loose character, is not sufficient to 
 proye adultery unless corroborated. Aldric/i v 
 Aldric/i, 21 O. R. 447. 
 
 III. K-VAMINATIOX DE JiEXE ESSE. 
 
 : Rules 666, 588 - Di.n-etio,, ~ Ap,„aL]~- 
 Kules o ,0 and 588 are m ;,„,•/ mJ/riu .ind 
 contem,.late the examination of a witness ,k 
 f,ni. ,..,.. who is alKuit to withdraw from Ontario 
 i or who IS rosi.lmg without the limits theicof. 
 I And where witnesses residing out of Ontario 
 come within the jurisdiction and are about to 
 return to their homes, an order may be made for 
 their examination here before their departure. 
 
 ^uch an order is a discretionary one, and, 
 where t.ie witnesses have been examined under 
 It, will not be reversed on appeal unless a very 
 clamant case of error appears. Bc/m, y. ( 'hark- 
 iioia, \o P. R. 142. 
 
m 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 nuirtgiigoi-s, lioti, 
 
 lEXE KSSK. 
 
 IV. Examination for Dihcovery. 
 1. fu General. 
 
 Costs.l-liy Rule i;(,S4, Rulu li:7wasro. 
 soiii.led and a lu'w Kiilu siiliHtitiitod, proviiliiii- 
 that the costH (.f cvurv inteiloc.itorv uxanii.ia 
 turn NlK.iil.l hu l,„niu l.y tliu cxiuiiiiiiiiL' party 
 iinli'sH othurwisL' oiilui'ed. 
 
 \\ iii'ie an iii'tion was lit-gim and the defen- 
 dants examined for disoovery l.ufoi-e tliu Rulu 
 was passed, hut was tiled and judgment uiv.'n 
 after it was passed, Init Ijefoie it eaine into 
 force : — 
 
 Held, that the new Rule applied, and tiie 
 taxuigotticer had no power to tax to tlie mieeess- 
 ful piaintilf the costs of the examination, with- 
 out all order therefor. 
 
 AppUcation for such order aliouhl he made to 
 the trial Judge at the trial or immediately after 
 judgiuont. Mct'lavy v. I'liinktlt, Kj i>. R. 
 
 UlU. 
 
 Examiner's Chambers — Disi-relhiii in to 
 AdmUtioii of /V,-.so/^v.J_A special examiner has 
 11 iliseretion to admit or exclude from his 
 chamhers persons who desire to he present upon 
 an examination. 
 
 And where the defendant attended for exam- 
 ination as a judgment dehtor, hut refused to 
 snswcr (luestidiis unless a former partner of his 1 
 wh(. was present to instruct counsel for tlie 
 ju(l),'nFent creditors, was exeluiled :— 
 
 Held, that the examiner rightly exercised his 
 (Iworution in refusing to exclude ; and the defen- 
 dant was ordereil to attend again at his own 
 cxpunse. Mcrchanfs liaiik o/Ciiuida v. KiUluim, 
 
 Examination to Credlt-Wc^^Vt/ of /'lain- 
 lijfl- -Ihe examination of a party for diseoverv 
 m the cause under Rule J,S7 must lie confined to 
 matters which are relevant to the questions 
 raised hy the pleadings, hut a fair amount of 
 latitude IS to he allowed. 
 
 gnestioiis which go only to credit are not 
 auniissihle. 
 
 Ill an action for a partnership account, where 
 the de eiuliint denied the partnership and set un 
 that the plaintiir had heen his servant, under 
 the same name as that in which he hrought the 
 .wlion, during the period of the alleged partner- 
 
 Held that it was not material to the issue 
 that the plaintiff horo another name at -i 
 previous time, and the defendant could not 
 examine him as to the details of his past life 
 long prior to the alleged partnership, [ua./,- v.' 
 Uohi:, 14 I'. K. 4U.). 
 
 I the possession of the Assignee, and to examine 
 him for the purpose of such i.ro<luution. 
 ] rralhiiiiihaiH v. L^hiHtn; 14 1'. R, lli>. 
 
 Solicitor Wlthdrawlnar.] If upon tho 
 refusal of the person un.ler ex,imination to 
 answer .piestunis mi the ground of privilege the 
 solicitor for the oppo.site party withdraws the 
 examination may he proceeded wiih, and the 
 evidence afterwards taken will not he struck 
 out. (oiiimlly \. Miirn-ll, 14 1'. R. J87. 
 
 Subpoena -.V»/-...^V»//r);(„/ .SVcn.e.]— An order 
 
 will not he inaile for suhstitntional service upon 
 
 an (dhcer of a litigant corporation of a subpu-na 
 
 and appointment for his examiiiiition for dig- 
 
 I CO very. Jfit/.-< v. Mercer Co. ,15 1'. R. 276. 
 
 Subpoena — SnhMitiiHuiml Sn-rirr 1 — A wit 
 nesH IS not liable to attachment for ilisohedicnce 
 to a 8uhp„.„a served suhstilutionally pursuant 
 to an order authorizing such service. A/Mh v 
 jferrer, 1., ]•. R. --'.SI, applied ami followed. 
 Bar/>,r v. Ai/am.s, ](! 1'. R. i.jij. 
 
 Vacation — Sjhrinl Examim-r.] . ^ Where a 
 specia. examiner iss.ies an appointment for tho 
 examination for disc .very dining vacation of a 
 a party to an action, sticii jiarty, if duly 
 suhimnaed, is hound i-. attend for examiua 
 
 A special examiner, although an ofHoer of the 
 bupreine Court of Judicatuie for Ontario, in the 
 sense of heing subject to its control ,-md direc- 
 tion, has no ofhce in connection with the (Jourt 
 that comes under any Rule icjuiring it to bo 
 kept open or closed during any particular period 
 
 j ot the year. 
 
 j I)eeisions of the Master in Chambers and ( Jalt. 
 
 ' 15 l'"' R V''- ''"^■'^'■'*'^''' JI'ml'oom V. Cox, 
 
 Quasi.piaintlfF,]-In an action by creditors ' 
 of a ti,,n to estahlLsh the liability of the defci. 
 •lant as a partner therein, it appeared that the 
 ^Jgneeof theiirin for the hei'iifit of credito s i 
 (wli" had received all the papers of the firm) i 
 
 wa«,iUerestedintl,esueee,:iitheacUonB 
 ^ igated Its being brough 1 was providing 1 
 
 SS'f"'^'7,!^>:"f''''- -'ts, etc., to th^ ' 
 plcun 1 Is for its efheient prosecution :- ' 
 
 was tot ,''""*^';'^';'' '"t'^rest in the result, he 
 
 enciU r ?''"'""*^ "^"'.^ *'"^ <lefeudant was 
 encitlul to have production of all documents in 
 
 2U 
 
 2. Before Plead: ii'jh. 
 
 \ _ ^^ia.rna.tion~Slander~Examination of De- 
 Jrudan/ iHjoreNtaUmml of CI a.m. l~-hx actions 
 of slanaer when the Court is satisfied of the 
 ; /joua ^ftd.s of the plaintiff, and is convinced that 
 ; he cannot state fully and with siiliicient partic- 
 ularity his various grounds of complaint, and 
 when the knowledge re.piired is within the 
 possession and control of tho defendant an 
 examination for discovery before statement of 
 claim will be ordered under Rule Miii ; but in 
 such ease a turther examination after pleading 
 will not be allowed except upon special grounds 
 
 V. /'/nll,/>,, 11 p. R. .5J0; J/c/,,n« v. Uarber 
 ; .V l;-/"'<^0 followed. Camj>h.n v. Scott, 14 
 1 . K. JOJ. ,'iee the next case. 
 
 pefa.jna.tion~Uhel—E.auaiiialwn of Plaintiff 
 hejore Ddinvxj of Deftn.;'.]~\\n\c :m does not 
 apply to examinations for .liscovery. 
 
 ''xkeii V. Chamherlmii, 9 R. R, -iS.S, and cases 
 tOil '.HDg It, overruled. 
 
 ^ But were that Knle applicable, it w.-w not 
 •necessary for the purposes of justice," in the 
 eircuinstances of this case, an aotion for libel to 
 make an order allowing the defendants to ex- 
 amine the plaintiff for discovery before deliver- 
 ing their statement of defence. 
 
408 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ill 
 
 m 
 
 KK7r,:.v,.rl';.;i*^''"'"'''" ^'""' "'^•'"'^'"'•''l"'""' f-; -"--very in nn action for pnml.i.., 
 TalVvfU r ,^ .1 .. I. .,, ,'">'t''rtlu. Ontario KlfctiouN Art, 1,S!I2. 
 
 CMsfollouniL' t, 8i„o.ully n.f.TrtMlto. i nn.l Marth, v. Tvauhn- lid i I. rf,- ' 
 
 /""":''•" ^' / '" ''• L. H. H C. I'. ;UI2, n.ul i l„w.,l. Malcolm v. y/;,,';, 1.1 V. H, ;,!jo. " '"'■ 
 
 XUrrvhifii V. /j,/.,i,ir/i,ri\ [IHilS] '_' g!'"H.' isii' 
 followed. /,',((/,/, V. ^7()/je I'viidiiiti Co., KiK 
 
 Criminal Conversation.! In uri luti.m (,t 
 . .nininal convcrciition thtre in no j)owit, having 
 
 r/a,»,.|. An „ll„.,.l li,|ni,lator cannot, as an ullr^...! a.ts of u, Itm ///,™ ■ V'^, , r 
 officer .,( the Cou] t, W call.d npon to niaki. .lis- 1'. R l-',", "'""''-'>• JHuuiy v. /.,„„„, lo 
 
 covery iinli's.s ho is reiireHt-ntiitivi'ly in the i)08i- 
 
 Where certain .harehoMern of an insolvent ^ o;,;::itr',;;;::;v"io^ dl'ovnv'Sell, ''^ "r 
 ^3^f;e.^a:-f. 
 
 ants for ..onfornnty witho.U asking any relief L-l >■/»,/,/ v. /-/a./lr, HP R .' ', '- '""""M"^'"'! 
 HKainst then,, an upplieation l,y the piaintifls I " '**•«• •'■'•'• 
 
 under Jtuie .".Olifor leave to exaiiiine one of thV 
 liquidutois for discovery before statement of 
 claim was refiiseil. Il< mhrnoii v. lilai,,, 14 1'. 
 K, oOoi 
 
 .1, Plnjsical Examination. 
 
 t,\hB\.]~i:.i-awinnti„ti nfOjJictr of St i,:,,,„p,r 
 /V/-/,x/,,/„/ (Vw/„,„,/- AV/,7,„/„/ ]\-ritf,:] Inai. 
 action aj'iiinst a neus|iap,.f | uhli^iiing e..ni|iai.y 
 for a liliel rontaineil in an article written l.y n 
 nieniher <.f the newspaper stall', who jirociiinl 
 special intorniation tlicrcfor, uiulcr the .-.iip.r 
 vision of the nianaging editor, and in which 
 T» ji. , . „ . "c'lo'i the defendants iilcaded iiistiliciitiiiii • 
 
 SuZ"^l Inaury-A:,.^„..^•o. ./ Per.o. A, Hel.l, that the writc'r was !,/. i a ,o iio,, of 
 S ^■~'- "'■'";" '" ',''""■'''■ ''■•""■'^^■« f'"- 'I snl,..,litor, nor could he he called an uZn- I 
 
 SS;!e'h:;:;.;'':'r;,''iV"f'T''''''''^ *'" "i'^" '"""'^'"y- ^""' •--- -t e-m f 
 
 ri; 1 « V f*^. , "'", ''f '''"''"'t« ■- " discovei V under Rule 487 :- 
 
 thrr 1 in li to ,T, n'l"' " . "" ir''"' *" ""''■•' ' ,"^''"' "'•^"' "'"* "" -■•'i^'i'ot foundation «.u 
 t.W .r . ' '"'"I' "" '■'';'"''""^ ''^''1 f'"- l'i« ••xi>n,ination ; for il , h 
 
 t.on „f hci iierson hy surgcns chosen l,y the not appear that he cotihl .'ive info n ati ,, 
 
 ^ fj/ /.c/w/o,/, 14 1 . J>. hi. .rt.)H.,.e he procure.I evidence of the facts in dis- 
 
 Bodllw Tr,H„,.,r r ■ ,• , w ,. ,1'"''' "1"'" tli'M'lL'a of justilieation. Mm-niyv 
 /rac^»^/o»f-r-V»(,s7,„)).v.]— The statute .')4 Aict , i-* i . i^. 4uo. 
 
 ordeJm '?'!*; nndo'n'' r "' A"T !','"' ""'* '•" r. I^lquldator. ]-5ee .^m/.m. v. y;/a,., H 1' 
 oruer maj he luade directing that the person ni , R. .SOH, a„fc ]X1 
 respect of whose hodily injury .lania.'es or i 
 
 Si"To"i?e '^'::^^'\ \" "" rV"" "r'^"'!' MaUdous prosecution - Po/ic. 0,11.-, ,■ 
 pract io er" . ^s nf Z "■ ''" "^^ ■!••" >tied /V,V,7,;,.] Jn an action for malicious proMcu. 
 
 tioni wlioiu the tacts were olitained. 
 
 _.hidgnient of the Chancery l)ivision, '21 d. R. 
 n''^' I'l'^'^'i'st-'d. Humtilmij v. Atrhllmld, ■-'() j\. 
 R. 207. 
 
 Appeal. tVe»-( v. Colanan, 10 P. R. 541. 
 4. Spevial Jtallrrti and Pernoiht. 
 
 Assignee for the Benefit of Creditors 1- 
 
 f>ee Froth;ii,ihin,i v. /.A/.s^u-, 14 P. R. ll'i, (:n//.'75. 
 
 Offlcor <if Municipal Corporation - t 'nre- 
 
 I /(f/,vr o/' lUiililiiiii. ] — In an action for dania-cs for 
 
 wtiS'^xr 7f 'vrai„tenance.]--i>.cov.ery ^ iia^li^ !::nd:;^!r^ti;at'"';l;l:"^h::ntr';.,: 
 
 «a8 not entorceiihle in C(inity in cases of chani- injured wiiile in it •- ' 
 
 tCe^quh Iw'mnedl-cl' "h' .rlf 't ' r "?''^'' ' "^■'''' *''"' *'"-' '•'^^''^t'"'^"' "f 'he iniildii,., an 
 Act'^r. d .; 1 , f 'l^ ^ '-^ "" J"'1;V" "'■'-■ <-'nipl"yee of t!,e defendants, was an otiioeTcx. 
 
 examina ;, ,' ?' ""•' '^^'""l'r"'^^'l «" "finable for discovery under Rule 4S7. ^chnmt 
 
 M^l] ^ ; ''"■ ''"•^^"«ns touching an i v. T,nv„ of lU-rlin, 16 P. R. 242. 
 
 alleged champei tons agreement. I ~ . " x . ±v. _i.. 
 
 intarlicr' *'lavJ i'o 'I'^TIT^f /'"■'' " 'V'i' °',""".'«1 | , OlHcer of Municipal Corporatlon-.V.,/«W 
 pXlinto'lHv l'^ V • "''. /"J^'^ ""• Jl'""'^ 0//a...]-]nan action for an injumlina 
 porte.l into he, dependencies without .some and damages in respect of the alleged unlnnit.uy 
 
 modification. 
 
 iiam Covmiir v. Chinider, 2 App. Cas., at p. 
 210, specially referred to. Wtlhoimn- v. Can- 
 adian Paa/ic P. ir, Co., 16 P. R. 343. 
 
 Controverted Elections— Pa(rt//)V.?.l— The 
 
 condition of a certain bay into which the ihfcn- 
 dauts drained part of their sewage, the plaiiititfs 
 sought to examine for discoverv the n,eiliial 
 health oliicer of the defendants, whose sole cm- 
 nection with the snhjectinatter of the action 
 arose from his having made an examination of. 
 
 Dlaintitr i« nof »ntin 1 V„ '/"^"'^•■-.j— ine arose trora Ins having made an examination of 
 
 piaintitt IS not entitled to examine the defen- ; and a report to the local board of health upon 
 
401 
 
 artion for pdmliics 
 IN Ai't, 1,S!I2. 
 '. 10 (.». H. I), i.vi 
 
 HH.t. j;. i». -,07, ,.,{ 
 Mi 1'. H. ;wo. 
 
 11. 1 III ail aith.ii ,,, 
 
 J is IKl poWlT, ll.i\ili^ 
 
 SCI'. 7, t(« (inli )■ tlic 
 ir ilisc(i\cry us !(■ iIk- 
 Manaij v. Jlronn, |(, 
 
 •iilc, nil infant, [i,,rU 
 f cxiiiniiifd li\ III', 
 ■ry licfiiiv tlic'tii.il, 
 ni>! wiiv iiH an .i.lnlt. 
 ). .'Ilil, Ui»tini,'iii:,lu(| 
 .'t!l!). 
 
 Ojlicfr iif' yur.i/iapn 
 iiiiil \\'riln:\ 111 (111 
 I iiMisiiiiig cniiiiniiy 
 
 arliclo \\ ritt<ii hy u 
 stiitt; wlio iii'drimi! 
 I1-, miller the i^iiikv 
 iitor, and in wliiib 
 I'll justilicatioii : - 
 f not in ,1 posiiinii nf 
 (■allcil :iii i.lliii r i,f 
 
 not oxnniiiiiililf f,,; 
 
 lent fonmlatiiiii w.ih 
 iiiiniitiiin ; for ii lijil 
 give infi.iiiiatinii of 
 ; ho ooiihl iiiiliiate 
 ' of the facts in dis- 
 oation. Mnniiyy. 
 405. 
 
 rnoii V. Itlaiii, 1 1 1' 
 
 — Police OjHnr - 
 r malicious [homiu- 
 "isiiigiintof a]Mil,lii; 
 infonnatioii .^wnrii 
 on an oxaniinutioii 
 amc of the \ni-sim 
 itained. 
 
 • Division, 21 d. R. 
 •. Arc/iiliafil, -^i) A. 
 
 fporatlon - Care- 
 ;ioii for daiiiaj;i'.s for 
 lildiiij,' ill such ii 
 the plaintilf \v:i3 
 
 )f tile liiiililiii;.', an 
 . was an otiiccr ex- 
 Hule4S7. Schmidt 
 14-2. 
 
 poratlon — Mnlind 
 11 for an injiinition 
 alleged iin.saiiit.iry 
 :o which the dcfcn- 
 wage, the [ilaiiitiffs 
 overy the nuilical 
 tR, who.=e sole eon- 
 itter of the action 
 an oxaniinatina of, 
 rd of health upon, 
 
 405 
 
 EVIDENCE 
 
 the wmitnry condition of ilio'hay. The only 
 object of the examination wum to nseertaiu the 
 rc'UiiinH and groiind.t of the report ; — 
 
 Held, that for liii.H pnrpoHc he was not exiiniin. 
 uh: I as an olhci r of the defeiidantM 
 
 DcciHionof (ialt, C.l., l,", |'. R. -JT, allirineil 
 on otiier grounds, ( ■„/, ,;,„„ v_ , ■;,,. ,,,■ 'j;,r(i/it„ 
 15 1'. K. I •-'5. • ■ '""""' 
 
 Officer of Municipal Corporation -.SV>vf^ 
 
 furfmnn.] In an artiim f„r daiii.i(,'e,s lor negli 
 ^Bnce in keejiing a piilijie wav in a state of dis- 
 repair : — 
 
 Held, that a .street foreman in the employ 
 input ot the di.fendant.s under their street com. 
 imHsioner, tlie l.uter h.'iving j^eneral snpcrvi.simi 
 "f the roads and .sidewalks, was not ,in ollicer 
 I'xaniinalile for di.scovery iinder liiile 4S7 
 
 T/i(mi(i.i V. (;r(im/ 'J'ntii/.- /,'. W. Co ]•> (< f 
 J; |2' .j'l " ^'l' "■''"'"• V. ( 'ill/ 0/ ToroHio, I'h 
 
 Seduction Krumiunlioii of l'Uui>lii)\ 
 
 Duwjhl' r. I 'I'hc plaint itr in an action fur sediu- 
 tion was examined for diMovery liy the dcfeii- 
 iluiit, hut was ul.le to give very' little informa- 
 tion ; — 
 
 Held, nevertheless, that the defendant was 
 not entitled to examiiio the plaiiitiirs daiu'hter 
 llollhihr V. Aiiiiiil,!,, 14 l>. R. i|. = • 
 
 Slander--A'.c(0/(;»r(//o» of J),/; whnil-l'riri- 
 l,gf-l'riwn,'iti,,.i Ai,svrvs.y-\n an action of 
 lihel and slamler, the idaintiir complained that 
 the dciciidant had eoiiimnnicated to .several 
 persons the eonti nts of a letter received froiii 
 another person in wliicli the plaintiff was accused 
 of larceny, etc. 
 
 Upon an examination of the defendant for 
 ihsciiveiy, he r.fiised to say whether he had 
 received any letter from the person named or 
 to answer any i|iicstioim in relaliim to .such 
 letter or Its contiiits, giving as a reason that it 
 might cMMiinate him to do so: ■ 
 
 Held, tliat the reason -iven was sutlicient to 
 privi!e<.c the defendant from answering; and 
 ulth(.ii-h It was not tliu leceipt of the letter 
 hut tlic publication, that would make the 
 offence, he was .ntitled to object to the line of 
 inquiry at the outset. 
 
 Seml,l, , that .section .-) of the Dominion Statute ' 
 of 1,S<I„, respect iiig witnesses and evidence, will, 
 when It conns into force, supersede the privilette 
 now exhstiiig in eases of this kind. I|',,>,. V 
 Hfwi.vmn, 1,-, 1>. l;. 2oS. Sh- the next case. " 
 
 tion, cannot, even ninco the enming into 
 .11) \ let, eh. ai, be eompelleil to aiiswe 
 tioiiH which may tend to ci iniinale him. 
 V. llmil-.muii, 15 1'. K. 4(17, 
 
 <SV«, also, 
 aiilt ;U'.'. 
 
 406 
 
 force of 
 
 r cpieH. 
 
 Wi iiifr 
 
 Xkiiii v. Jtruinloii, 2> (). I! 
 
 ;i:; 
 
 V. KxAMI.SAril.N (IN I'KMllNii .MnrlON. 
 
 Examination Of Party as Witneas. I Uudi r 
 iMile i)7S a party may rei|uire the attemhince 
 ot the oiipoaite parly for examination as a 
 witness upon a pending motion; and the con- 
 scipience of default on the part of the party to 
 lie examined is to put him ii iitempt. 
 
 And where, upon a motion liy the iilaintifl' to 
 ,sct aside or vary an order staving proceedings 
 until he should give secnritv for costs, he re- 
 ipilicd the attendance of "the delendaiit for 
 examimitioii as a witness, and the delendant 
 attended but refused to be examined, an order 
 suspending the former order until lie should 
 submit to be exaniiiied, \Nas atlirnied. f ■/„,■/: v 
 ((im/ili,//, 1,"( 1*. It. ;j;^s. 
 
 VI. FoiiKicv Commission. 
 
 Discretion -7'( nn.-' S.'nu-ity /,„■ { W.". ] -An 
 oidirtora foreign commission being di.scietion- 
 ary. tliere is power to impo.so proper terms in 
 niaUiiigit. 
 
 And the plaintiti' was iei|nired to ixive s. crity 
 tor the costs of a eommissiou to examine ,a wit 
 iiess abroad, wiieie the inforination as to his 
 e.xact locality w.as slender and it seemed ilonlit- 
 tnl whether he would attend to be examined 
 
 Lii,i,iai V. Titir, 24 t'h. 1), .VJ2, followed. 
 (okinanv. lUmhi.f Montt-Hif l(i 1'. I!. l.V.) 
 
 Slander— Ajfi«(;Hf(^„„ of Dff,udant~rri,-i- 
 Uat-( n,nnn,tiwj .■l»,wce,w.]-Tiie (Ontario Stat- 
 ute as to evidence, R S. O. ch. (il, .sec. 5, limits 
 the scope of all preliminary examinations for 
 iliscovery or otherwise in civil actions. 
 
 ■Jmfxy. (Salto,,, <) p. j;. .jn,;^ f.dlowed. 
 
 It has not been aft'ecteil by section 5 of the 
 Domuuoi, Statute, o(J Viet. eh. .SI, which, by 
 necessary eonstitutimial limitations, as well as 
 >y express declaration (section 2), applies only 
 to procc;edings respecting which the Parliament 
 01 Lanada has jurisdiction. 
 
 thiW,.!!'"r-'Trj"o-o"' •''■ previous .leeision in 
 this case 1,, p. p. 058^ .j^ ^ oyo. j,, t„„ l.roadly 
 
 lenskTiim '" '''"' "''"'"'^'' "* '^oncmrenl Ontario 
 
 iniftr!!,' V'"' r"'''' '' 'defendant, upon his exam- 
 ination for discovery m an action for defama- 1 
 
 Exarnlnntlon of Defendant -/^'.v«/v/;o/(,]— 
 All application for a commission to examine wit- 
 nesses out of the jurisdiction is one going to the 
 (li.scretK.n of the Court, and this discretiim will 
 be more strictly exercised where the proposal is 
 to exumiiiu an absent party on his own behalf. 
 I In the ease of a defendant proposing to have 
 his own examination taken on commission, his 
 personal alKilavit may not be e.«seiiti,al, but very 
 cogent reasons should be given by some one who 
 can speak Mith knowledge. 
 
 And where the atlidavit in .support of .an 
 application to )iave the delendant and his 
 mother by whom the negotiation was conducted 
 with the plaintitf (nil of which the cause of 
 action jiro.se, examined abroad, was made by the 
 defendant's solicitor, who swore that he believed 
 it was necessary to have their evidence ; tjuit it 
 would save expense if it were taken on comniis- 
 ■sion; and that it would be very inconvenient 
 tor the defendant to be long away from hi.s 
 place of abode :— 
 
 Held, that no ease was made for the examin- 
 ation of the defendant abroad ; ami as to hia 
 mother, tli.at the absence of the usual atlidavit 
 as to her being a necessary and material witness, 
 and the omission to state any reason why she 
 should not appear at the trial, 'should prevail to 
 the upholding of the discretion exercised by n 
 Master in refusing to order a commission. 
 A((W V. /'cm/, 14 P. R. 3(i4. 
 
407 
 
 EVIDENCE- 
 
 Malarial on Application /-.'.r/ifimr.] Appli 
 . at. )i>u f(ir II foiHijjii oiiiniiiiHHiiiii to take the lU'tVti- 
 iIiHit .4 in i.lfiK'o ->ii his own ln)liivlt' in Kiijjliiiul ro- 
 fuHO(l,« liiTo tliiMi. ittcrH in (|iio«tioii wi'iiM'()iii|ili- 
 ciittil ii.iDiintM It, vn till! iiartii'H arisiii),' mit .if 
 tniiisai'thpriBlirtw.iii (Iu'mi hi Ontario at a tinio 
 wluii lioth were irxiilenttlHTi' ; where it bccimcI ■ 
 
 tliiU tlir ox|iciiHu ol oxi'iiitiiiK tin iiiini.sNiori 
 
 would vxcvvA the roMt of l|ii< ilclonilaiil travel- I 
 liiiK from KiiKlan.l to attoii.l tin- trial; itnil i 
 wlii-rotlii' only n-iiHons ^ivcn liy tin- 'It-fondaiit I 
 tor hiM iilloKc-il inability to altfint tin- trial wuri- j 
 " eiiKiiKetni'iitH in KiiKiaml " ami want i,f tinici 
 ftni! niont-y. I'i'ii, r \ . ll„iilto)i, ir> I', ii. :i\s. \ 
 
 Jurisdiction of Referee. ] A r.fcr.i> upon a i 
 rt-ft'rciiL'i' iiinli-r Hcolion 102 of tin- .hnlii-atur.' 
 Alt, K. S. (), oh, 44, IniH jiiriHiliotioii toonli-rtlio 
 <xamiiiatioii of foreign witiiusmn niidir a unni- 
 miHflioM. 
 
 KiiU'H ;)4-;)7, ,v.>, ns, wt, 7:<, r..vj, cotmidored. 
 
 iSVHiW.-, the lirovisioiiH of Hiil.. MO arc i-in- 
 l)rac'fd liy inl-ruiii.t! in Kule .Ti ho an to onahlo 
 till! ri-fi-ivc, liy i-xprcHM terniH, to >;rant oertiti- 
 catfiH for the iHsin- of foreign coininiHMions. 
 
 Hilt tin- nu-rii form, wliutlnr l>y i-crtitiuato or 
 order, ih iniinatorial, having regard to Kules 
 441, 442. 
 
 Jliii/inir,/ V. Mnliinl /frsrnr A-isnri„ti„ii, 
 (l.SOII 2 (,». ]{. 2;)(), and M,„:,l,,in, v. Cil,!,;; 
 |IH!);tJ 1 (,». 15. .')4.-), followed. Jiroohv. </,;„yiaii 
 Hay fiawLoi.i b'atm;/' Co., 16 1*. R. fil 1. 
 
 Material on Appllcatlon-^VW/';(;//(-A''.(T,«. 
 
 s,l!/j(,r /■:,■;,/./„:■ A'.,y„„s, j),!„,t Adniissxws.] 
 — In an aetioii for a libel imbli.slu-d in fin- de- 
 fondants" nowspaiier, the iilaintiir applieil for 
 the issue of a eoininisMioM to take bin own evi- 
 dence and that of other witnesses in KiiLdaiid 
 where he iiml they lived. 
 
 'J'lie iilaintill'.s atlid;ivit stated only that the 
 witnesses were material an<l necessary lor him 
 on the trial of the action, and that he was ad- 
 vised and verily believed that he eoubl not 
 safely proceeil to trial without their evidence : — 
 TIeld, sulHcieiit to entitle the plaintifF jjrhihi 
 fdfii' to a commission. 
 
 Smil/i v. (irn,), 10 1>. R. 5;U, commented on, 
 Kvery apjilicitiou for ii commission must be 
 made in g.jod faith. au,\ the evidence .sought to 
 be obtained must be such as to warrant a r .i- 
 soiiable belief that it may be material and nee . 
 snry for the imrposes of justice ; but it is safer 
 where any injustice to other parties, in ilio way ' 
 of delay or expense or otherwise, can be inovided 
 against, to favour the granting rather than the 
 refusing of the applicatoii. 
 
 The main considerations .ire a full and fair 
 trial a'ld the saving of expense. 
 
 Under the circumstances of this case the 
 -irder for a commission to take the evidence of 
 the plainfitr and hi.s witnesses abroad was 
 granteil . -n (he plaintilf seeming the ilefen- 
 dants fc • tlieir costs of the execution of the 
 commission and undertaking to speed the pro- 
 ceedings and not delay the trial. 
 
 It was contended by the defendants that the 
 evidence expected fi-om the witnesses was unnec- 
 essary by reason of the implied admissions in the 
 statement of defence : — 
 
 Held, th.-it it, \v:is for the defendants to make 
 the evidence niupiestionably unnecessary, either 
 by amending their pleadings so as to expressly 
 make the admissions or by undertaking to do so 
 
 at till' trial, A',./hVm v. A';;i/)iV« rrinliini nml 
 ri,hn>,him,('o., 14 I'. K. 4HH. 
 
 Material on Application Sliuiimi Trmt | 
 U'heiean appli<<atioii for a foreign eo"miiil.-<i,iot, 
 IH iiia.le beloie issue joined, ai d it ix not e.rtnin 
 what the issues will be, th- party applviiu- 
 mustdiHclose the nature of ihe iivi.'lenee u, he 
 given by the foreign witmss, that tli- C.nrt 
 may Kaiige whether it in likely to be Miai.rial 
 and neeessary. 
 
 Siiii'l, v. i;r<',,,, 10 V. n. r,:U, ..-vplninod. 
 
 And where isHue had been jcjined two nionthM 
 before the sittings for which' tliu pl.i i,i ;il mivo 
 notice of trial, and the .:. feiuhinl applied liv« 
 days before the Hittini;M f..i a commission t., 
 
 ''"" 'I'll b.reign miiii-.-i, upon an ulliilavit 
 
 simply stating that the witness was mxm 
 sary and material, anil lie was advi.seil ami 
 believed he could not safely proceed to lri;il 
 witliinit his evidence, and while not evplaiiiini/ 
 the delay, ntatiiig that tin? application was inade 
 ill good faith and not for delay, a .liidg,, j,, 
 Cluinibers refusi-d to interfere with a .Mast^ir's 
 order Hu- a coinniission and a stay of th,- tii.il 
 except by directing that the trial should Ink.' 
 place, on the return of the conmiission, in an 
 adjoining county. Morrow v. Mr/)o;i,iii/,l |(il' 
 It. 121). '' ' 
 
 Municipal Arbitration -/»n'v,/;c^„„ | \ 
 
 Judge of the Court of Appeal has no power to 
 
 order the i.ssiie of a commission to take evidence 
 
 abroad for use upon ii compulsory arbitration 
 
 pt iidiiig before an arbitrator naiiiell by a .ludi'ii 
 
 (if that Court, under section bS7 ('l I of tlia 
 
 ' .Muni.ipal Act, ,V) \'ict. eh. 42 ((».). 
 
 1 Such an arbitration is not a "reference by 
 
 I rule, order or submission," williin the meaniia' 
 
 Mif .s('ctioii 4!lof the Act re.S|iecting arbilratioim 
 
 I and references, Ii. .S. (). cb. .W ; nor, even if it 
 
 were a "matter" within the nieaniiig ol Kulc- 
 
 ; .'ilU!, would a .Imlge of the (.'ouit of .Appuul 
 
 I have any jurisdiction, by re.ison of his liavini' 
 
 I appointed the arbitrator or otherwise. 
 
 And .-.'"//(A , distinguishing !!<■ M i/.torr WmI 
 '••nid Mlii-ni.j Co. (1.1,1.), ;i7 W. l;. 704, it is not 
 .such a "matter." lie. Muciikcrwn iiiid Cifi/of 
 J'oro.'fo, 10 1'. 1!. 2.S0. 
 
 Prooeeitlon for InUlctable Offence ll'ir 
 ■' N'.« ' MaUriiililji.]-^. \ prosecution for ,in 
 indictable ollence is " pending ' within tliu 
 mcining of section 6.s;5 of the Ciiiniiial ( V.du, 
 1.S02, when an information has been laid chain- 
 ing such ,-in olt'eiice ; and a comniissidii lo l.iki- 
 evidence abroad for use before a m.-igistriiti- 
 upon a in-eliminary inijuiiy may tl.cn k- 
 ordered. 
 
 Knt the discretion of the Judge in ordering 
 
 J the issue of a ciuumission is to be exercised u|)oii 
 
 i a sworn statement of what it is expected the 
 
 witnesses can prove, and he must be sati-stiedas 
 
 to the materi.ility of the evidence. 
 
 And, under the circumstances of this case, a 
 commission was granted to take the evidence of 
 only one of three witnesses whom the Crown 
 proposed to examine, it appearing that th-.- other 
 two had not been asked to come into the juris- 
 diction, and that their evidence would be in 
 corroboration only of a stateinenl of the tiiirci 
 witness that he was with the defendant upon » 
 certain occasion. It&i'nii v. Vi'vml, Iti 1'. R. 
 444. Affirmed on appeal, 17 P. H. 01. 
 
408 
 
 '»)/>iV« Prinliiiij (,^i 
 
 s. 
 
 on .Sliijiiiiij Trml. \ 
 Tiri'iKii oiiriiriii^HKii, 
 HI il it JK iioi, <•. rUiii 
 th,' |(urty ii|i|iImii, 
 
 lllC uvicli'llci' u, I,. 
 
 •HH, tlmt th' ( , iri 
 ki'ly to lit! rnuiiridi 
 
 I joiii'il tw. iiumthn 
 'll lllij pl.i iirill j^HVo 
 'itriilaiit iipplii'd (ivii 
 I II coiiimnHidri u> 
 
 ii|ioii uti iilliiliivit 
 ^itiii'HH was MiMjes. 
 ' wiiM advised and 
 
 y |ii'<)c 1 t<i I rial 
 
 \liilt' nut cNiil.iiiiinx 
 |>|di(iiti.iii WiiHinaili. 
 
 delay, a .liidj^ii m 
 :ni with a Mastcr'H 
 I Htay of Ihr trial, 
 i! trial .should i;iki. 
 
 ooimiiiM.sioii, ill All 
 ;.Mil)o:iij„l,l, I til'. 
 
 -JiirUit'Klhiii. ] A 
 oal has no \h)vh;t to 
 on to tokc I'vidiinca 
 imlHory ailiilraUon 
 
 naiiieil l)y a Jiid^ci 
 ion IS- (1) of the 
 V1(0.). 
 t a " rcferciici! by 
 
 it hill the iijiaiiinj; 
 
 octin^' arhilratiiiiiij 
 
 '>'A ; nor, even if it 
 
 meaning of Ihile 
 
 Court of Appeul 
 ason of his having 
 theiwlHu. 
 
 ; /.''' Mi/Mi-i Wejil 
 S\ it. 7!M, it is not 
 heritmi ami Ciii/nf 
 
 )le Offence lf'i( 
 iroj'ecution for an 
 iiig " within the 
 he Criiiiinal Code, 
 iH heen laid olmrg- 
 oniniiHsion to laki' 
 fore a inagistrati; 
 y may ti.eii Ik 
 
 Jiiilgt! in ordering 
 I lie exercised iiiKin 
 it is expected the 
 lust be satisfied as 
 snce. 
 
 ics of this cjiso, a 
 ke the evidence of 
 ivhom the ( rown 
 ring that the other 
 ine into the jiiris- 
 inco would he in 
 iient of the third 
 defendant upon » 
 Vi-rnd, 10 1'. B. 
 P. H. 01. 
 
 408 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 410 
 
 VII. Pahtk'I'i.akm. 
 
 Criminal Convernatlon Ailiilmil oi 
 
 Dniiiil. I In nil action of erliiiin.il lo'iiveisiitloii. 
 »'tir pleading und fxiiiiiMiationot the phiiniill lor 
 iliMovcry, parti. ulatH of theniatteis eoniplaineil 
 of nlioiil.l not he orilered except upon a lull an<l 
 tttlxfaetoiy utlidavit of the ilehiidant sheMing 
 hJH iMiio(ence unil ignonuicu of the groiiml of 
 cumplaint. 
 
 Komiii V. I'limjh, 2H L. H. Ir. IX-i, followed. 
 ilurrai/ v. /Iiiurn, 10 I', li. |o,-,. 
 
 Crown /'» /iVi„» (,/• /,'/;////. /„/h,i/ U'ciml i,„ 
 Hun ni nil lit Hiiiliriiji yiiji:,!, ii,;.\ U'here In 
 his petition I he Miippliaiitaliegeil in ^(eneriil lerniH 
 that the mjiiricH he received in an aciident on 
 a (ioNernincnt railway in the I'loviin e of (.tiiei.ec 
 
 'l'""'!"' If till' negligence of the servaiil.s of 
 
 the Ckiwii in charge of the train, and from 
 ik'fccls in the conT-liuction of n rnilHuy, „|, 
 iirdci was umdi^ for the delivery to the r. spon 
 (lint of iiartkulaiHof snth negligence nnd de- 
 tects. Lnir v. Till (jwai, '> K.\. f. |{. ;),*,|, 
 
 Libel- Damaiji.- in ,niy of Triiilr.] In nii 
 netion for damages for lihelling the plaintitls in 
 the way of their trade, th.. plaintills did not 
 allege special damage, hut alleged generally that 
 their huHincss iind c<,niniercial reputation had 
 Huthred. l/'ponthc examination u( the plain- 
 tiffs for discovery tln^y refu.sed to answer as to 
 what hiisii.esH they had lost hy reason <,f the 
 allcgcil lihels : 
 
 Held, that no evidciieo (jf sjifcial <lainagc 
 would he admis.Mhle at the trial, hut that the 
 phiiiitillH would have the right to place the 
 hguresheforethi' Jury to shew a general diniimi- 
 tioii of pnihts since the piihlicatioii of the alh "cd 
 liliels; and if the iilaintids proposed to giv.> Uns 
 elnss ot evid. nceat the trial, the dcfcmlaiits 
 were entitled on the examination for discoverv 
 to know howsmh dimiiintioii w.is made out anil 
 the figures hy whi.h it was propnseil to sii|i)iort 
 it, Imt not to setk iiifoiinati..n as to the loss of 
 any particular custom ; hut if the plaintiHs did 
 not propose to give such evidt iiue.the dtfen- 
 (laiits were not i ntitled to the diKcovcry 
 
 It was, therefore, ordered that the plaintiffs 
 dhoiild give particulars of any ilamai.'e intended 
 to he claimed for diminution of imdits ; and if 
 particulars given, that the examination should 
 l>e continued and discovery aHorded ; hut if par- 
 eiilars not given, that evidence of diminution of 
 jirohts fhoiild not lie given at the trial, n/ac/i- 
 Jordv, drnn, 14 P. R. 424. 
 
 of ».p.. it!e acU, with rcgar.l to which the phtin- 
 tiir jirop,,-' 1 to give eviden. e. 
 
 '/ nrii,-,- v. Ktftr, 2< '. h, 'Y. .'iiW ! |H C. |„ .) ^v} 
 
 cxplaiiiu.l. UoIUkIi,' v. AiiiiiMi, || |'. K. I i.' 
 
 Sefluotlon.l -\Vher.> the def.-ndaiit in an 
 aelioiio! sedmlio. ,|eiites the sedihl ion on o ith, 
 the plaintiir will ,„• rtM|iiired to fniiush partieii' 
 lais of the limes ami places «t «lii.h it U 
 charged that the alleged seduction took p<lace 
 lllllJi.|,,•^ A„ual,l., U l>. I!. I I, ,,pprove,i, 
 Notuith^lailding ditleielices in the {(iiles, Ih. 
 principle n|)oii Mhieh partiriilarH are ordered is 
 the- .same here as in Knglaiid. M<ni,ii. v. Vim 
 (■'iiii/i, It I'. {;, •«)(;. 
 
 Slander.)- In an action of slander, li,.- state 
 niciil of (lairo, after various h|)ecilic allegations, 
 ihargcii that at di\ers times during the Nc'irt 
 INSM, ISM,), nd lf<ll(». and lo many people in 
 and ahout th. ity of 'I'., the dcdenilant fal.selv 
 an<l malicious i repeated the said slanders anil 
 WdidK of like !l'ect, and spidie of the plaiiitill 
 Molds lonveyiii.: the meaning the said slanders 
 iiikI the said wm K coineyed : 
 
 Held, that tl. Mas emharra.--sing and should 
 ho stricken out nUss the |d.iii.| ilf i leuted to 
 amend, |,y givir det.iils, u\„,„ paviiient of 
 costs. I'iitiy.-uii \ liniiii, 14 I', |{. 4i)' 
 
 Slander Xavn •. 'J'ime.i,riiii/ /'/mii.y In an 
 IK tion for slander tie statement of claim alir:.'ed 
 that tie; dch ndaiit, on a specitieil dav, «poki"to 
 • '- and others thu sla ideiotis words allege '. In 
 aiiNwer to a demand for partiiiilais. the jdain 
 tin's toli<'itor wrote 1 ■ t liu defend, mt's s(dicitor 
 hiatiiig that he hail ;ivcn all the iid'ormation 
 theplamtillhad.theh inesof I heotheis to « li<mi 
 thi. Wdids were spoki not heing known to Inni, 
 ml the plaiiitill, «hi ' i motion for p.irliciilars 
 iilav it to till hiiiiic facts, 
 rcqniiing the plaintilf 
 the persons within 
 
 Mas made, deposcil on 
 
 An order of a .MasI 
 
 to furnish partii nlars 
 
 is Were spoken, was 
 ainhers, hut rever.'-cd 
 
 having gi\en all the 
 ion, anil the di fen 
 
 Pate:,! Action— A'a:fi«io)i of Plnuliini-^Ex- 
 du,wn:j Ende,ice-Ducntlo,i.]-\n making an 
 Older (or particulars of the defence in a patent 
 action, the better practice is to provide merely for 
 (•xclusion of evidence in case of no particulars or 
 iiisut idciit particulars being dtdivered, and not 
 to wder the excision of the defence, if good i,i-r xe 
 
 And where both e.v. ision of the pleading ami 
 exclusion of eviiience were provided for in an 
 order : — 
 
 Held, that the discretion of a. Judge in Cham- 
 bers 111 ttriki. g out the provision for excision was 
 nglitly ex( I CIS. d. iVouoH Brot)ier.i Mmiiifnclvr- 
 Mfj , :; V, />.,,7c.- sf ;, (jjiti Brother Co. ,10 1'. K. 40. i 
 
 Seduction. ]-The defendant having made an i 
 •nidavitd.nyiiig the seduction and all know- i 
 '«'Jgeof It, an order was made for particulars! 
 
 lis knowledge t.. whom the places where, ami 
 the times when the wi ' 
 atlirmed liy a .Indge in I 
 
 ! by a hivisional Court :- 
 
 ' Held, that the plaintil 
 
 information in his j ossi , ,„ ,,^,,,,- 
 
 ilant not having sw orn th, t she could not plead 
 without further paiticula:s, or that she was 
 ignorant of what occasion was complained of, 
 it was useless and unnccesHary to order the par- 
 
 ; ticulars. 
 
 Tliorvtoii V. Cniislod; 9 P. R. 53,"), approved. 
 
 I MinneU v. Appetbc, 10 P. It. .i;. 
 
 Slander of Title to Ooona— D'unpiw/ Aiic- 
 lion ,So/-.]— In an action for lander of title to 
 goods the statement of spccii, damage was that 
 by reason of the utterances o; the defendant to 
 a crowd of persons rsscmbled a an auction sale 
 which he had advertieed, a large nniiiherof them 
 withdrew from it, and the goods which w ere 
 sold at it brought less money than they would 
 otherwise have done : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintiff should not be required 
 to give particulars of the names of the persons 
 w ho would have given for each article in resjiect 
 of which danwge «as claimed a larger price 
 than was realized at the sale ; all that he could 
 reasonably be re'iuired to particularize was the 
 amount hy which hia sale had been damped. 
 Catlun V. aitaso)!, 14 P. R. •222. 
 

 11 li 
 
 411 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 412 
 
 Wrongful Dismissal — Drfincc of Mi.iron- 
 ilnr/.]-~ln an uctioii for wrongful (iismissal, 
 where the ilufcnco is misconduct generally, it is 
 proper to direct iiarticulara sliewing the nature 
 and character of the instances relied on hv the 
 employer; tliese particulars should set forth tlie 
 dates suhstantial particulars, and circumstances 
 ot all the instances and occasions wherein and 
 whereon the piaintill' misconducted himself, on 
 uhieli tlie defendant means to iclv ; and leave 
 should l.e given to supplement with further par- 
 ticu ars if ilisco\erud before trial. Crahlje v. 
 /itctwH, 14 l: 1!. 42. 
 
 disclosed by the evidence. 
 McCurdy, 2 Ex. C. It, 311. 
 
 The Queen 
 
 VIII. PllKSI-MI'TIONS AND Oxi'S OF PudOF. 
 
 1. Oiiii.-> of J 'roof. 
 
 Agistment. ]-.sv,' /'core v. Shep/mrd, 24 0. 
 K. It)/, as to /„;i,hI j\u-i,- proof of negligence. 
 
 Election Appeal -SVai'^w of Prfitiom'r ]— Bv 
 prelmimary objections to an election petition" 
 that the respondent claimed the petiti(m shouhl 
 be dismissed because the petitioner had no ri^dit 
 to vote ,a the election. On the day fixed %r 
 proof and hearing of the preliminary ol)jeclioiis 
 the pctitumeradduced no proof and the 'respon- 
 dent declared that lie iiad no evidence and the 
 preliminary objections were <lismissed •— 
 
 Held, i)er Kitehie, C.J., and, Taschereau and 
 latteison, ,J,J., that the oiiii., prokoidi was upon 
 the i.etitioner to establish his status and that 
 the appeal should be allowed and the election 
 jjetition dismissed. 
 
 Per Strong, .1., that the o„„. )»-of.,n,di wati 
 
 iipon the i)etiti(,uer, Imt in view of the estal)- 
 
 lishedjuiisprudence the appeal should beallowed 
 without costs. 
 
 Fournier, and (Iwynne, ,IJ., contra, were of 
 opinion that the oinix /irolnvidi was on the re- 
 spondent. Miijanltr Elrrtioii Ci.^c, 8 S. C. I! KJct 
 discussed. S/aii.sl/nd /;/cctioii Ca.ic,20H.C I! l''>' 
 
 Negligence.]— In an action to recover d «„ 
 ages lor negligence, tried with a jurv, where 
 contributory negligence is .set upas a' delonco 
 the onus of ju-oof of the two issues is respectivelv 
 upon the plaintill'and tlie defendant, and tlioii,,}, 
 the judge may rule negatively that there ij no 
 evidence to go to the jurv on either issue he ciin 
 not declare alHrniatively that either is proved 
 1 he question of proof is for the jury. 
 
 Weir V. Canadkui. i'tirl/ic It \\'. Co , I (J .\ |{ 
 100, was a uon-jury ease,' and laid down no nile 
 tor the disposition of a case tried with a jury 
 
 ./udgment of the (,)ueen's IJench Divi'sini, 
 athnned. Mun-o>r v. Vaitadiua Pacilir 1/ W 
 Co., -2] A. I!. 149. • 
 
 Negligence— Z.a/''/(< f)"Jh'f hi AjJ<> ,,f Car- 
 Lnj/iii S/j.nl in l',ix.fi,i,j Sivtri, Carri'.]~{)n the 
 trial ot a petition claiming damages for persoiml 
 injuries .sustained in an accident upon a (ioverii 
 ment railway, alleged to have resnlte.l from the 
 negligence of the persons in charge of the train 
 the burden of proof is upon the .suppliant He 
 must shew alHrmatively tliat there was ncli 
 genee The fact of the accident is not sullicient 
 to establish a pmnii fio'ir case of ne.-li.'eiico 
 JMhc V. The Qii.cH, S Ex. 0. K. 147. ° " 
 
 Patent of Invention- />«/,/ of I'al.-nt.ea^tu 
 (rmliii;/ Mai-k,:t for his I nre,it ion.]— It. is not 
 incumbent ii|i.)u a patentee to shew that ho 
 has made active ellbrts to create a market 
 tor Ins patented inveiiti<m in Canachi. It rest^ 
 upon those who .seek to .lefeat the patent 
 t<> shew that he neglected or refused to sell 
 l.ie invention hir a reasonable [u^ice wh.71 i.ro- 
 per application w.is maile to him therefor Jiar- 
 
 I'r v. s,hU/,, 2 lOx. V. H. -ir,.;. 
 
 Election Petition—SYn/x.^ of Pe/iliowr ]- 
 Ihe eleciiou petition was .served upon the 
 apiiel am on the I2tl, of May. ISOI, anil on the 
 Ibth .\I,ay, the appellant tiled preliminarv objec- 
 tions, tlie lirst lieiiig as to the status of tile peti- 
 tioners. \\ hen the parties were heard iiiion the 
 merits ot the preliminary olijections no evidence 
 wa.s given as to the status of the petitioners and 
 tue C(Uirt dismissed the objections. On appeal 
 to the Supreme t'onrt :— 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court 
 below, (.Wynne, ,1., dissenting, that the onus 
 was on the petitioners to prove their status as 
 voters. Sl,nisi,,i,l. Ca.-i-.. 20 S. C. U. pj fol. 
 lowed. IliJitrhu.-i-ib Eledioii Case, 20 S. C. R.' ISI. 
 
 Executors-/;;-, „,•/. o/Tn,sf.]-Se,' Ciimnnn,, , 
 V. uiiKiiil. IxditiiKj anil Loan Co., 22 S C R 
 a40, iio-s', E.xtccuroRs, IV. ' ' ' \ 
 
 Expropriation of Mineral Lands-/'/oo/ 
 0/ (-,(/».'.]— Ill a case of expropriation, the 
 claimant IS not obliged to prove by costlv tests 
 or experiments the mineral contents of hi's land . 
 />/-o)f/( V. Coiinnisswntr for Uni/irays, 15 Aiii) ' 
 Cas. 240, referrcl to. Where, however. ™,!J; 
 tests or experiments have not been resorted to, 
 the Court, or p,ry, must find the facts as best 
 It can from the indications and probabilities 
 
 Promissory 'Note.]- A prescription of tliirtv 
 years is substituted for tliat of live vears onlv 
 wiiere the admission ,,f the debt 'from tlu- 
 debtor results from a new title which clian-e. 
 the commercial obligaticm to a civil oiic"- 
 In an actKm of account instituted in 1SS7 
 
 V,''.,,'! VA"-i"'. ^•'^''""-"' '■'"'■'■ "''■'« tlic sum of 
 •y-,.«)l. 10, being the aiiKMint due under a .loeil 
 of oiiligatKMi aii.l const iuition. ,r /n/»oC//rr;w exe- 
 cuted 111 1SU(), and which, on its fa.'e, was given 
 as security tor an anteeedont unpaid iirouiissorv 
 note ,lated in lS(J2. The dee.l stipulate,! thai 
 the amount was iiayable 011 the terms and con 
 (litions and the manner mentioned in the saiil 
 lironiissory note. The defendants ])lea,led thai 
 llie deed did not allbct a novation of the debt 
 aiKl tiiat the amount due by the lu-oiiiissoiv 
 Jiotewas iirescribed by more than live yeaii 
 Itie note was not produced at the trial ;- 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court of 
 (Jueeiis l,eneh tor Lower Canada (appeal si.le), 
 that the deed did not etlect a novation. Articles 
 11 h!) and II71 C. C. At most, it operated as an 
 iiiterniption of the i)rescripti(j|i anil a remuicia- 
 tioii to the beiietit of the time u|. to then elapsed, 
 
 so as to lu'olong it for live years if ihi tt! was 
 
 then overdue. Article 2204 C. C. And as the 
 onus was on the plaintilf to jirodnce the note, 
 ;iiH he had not shewn that less than live ^e.iis 
 liad elapsed since the matiiritv of the notJ, the 
 debt was prescribed by five ve irs. Article 22(i0 
 C. C. rare v. J'ard, 23 S. C. R. 243. 
 
413 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 L>iicc. The Qactn v. 
 
 Seal Fishery— Pc«.ve)(ce of a lirilish Ship 
 Eliui>iii'djoi- Sejdniii in llhnin/ Snt.]^{)n ;i(,ti, 
 Aiiijiist, 1S!)1, the ship " Oscii'r and IIittie,"a 
 fully e(iiiipp(j(l sealer, was seized in (iot/.lel) liar- 
 bo:ir, III Hehnng Sea, while takiiii,' in a supplv 
 of water : — - n j 
 
 Hiilil, afHrming the jiuli,'inenl of the Court 
 liolow, 3 hx. C. R. L'H, that when a Uritish 
 dlMp li found 111 the piohihited waters of Helir- 
 in,' .Sea, the hunleii of pn„,f is „[„,ii ilm owner 
 or master to rolmt by [icisitive evidenee that 
 the vessel is not there used or employed hi eoii- 
 tnivenlion of the Seal Fisliery (Uehriug's Sea) 
 Aot, ISHl, 54-5,-) Viet (Inij)."), eh. lll,°see. 1, 
 
 Held, also, reversing the judginqnfc of the ' 
 < .lurt below, 3 Kx. C. K. 241, that there was 
 jirjsitive and ele'ir evidenec that the " Osear 
 and Kattie "' wag not used or eiuiiloved at the 
 tmic of her seizure in euntravention of 54-55 
 Vict. eh. 19, see. 1, sub-see. 5. Ship "Oscar 
 ami lialtie " v. The Queen, 23 S. C. R. 396. 
 
 414 
 
 a IS ni_i,,le,_ there is under the .irnen.led enact- 
 ment ,)4\iel. oh. 2U(0.), an ineoutrovertible 
 stiitutory presumption that the instrument has 
 been ma.le with intent to give an unjust pre- 
 erciiee and il is void. Cole v. PorteoM, 19 A. 
 K. 111. Sec the next ease. 
 
 Seal Flshery.]-Tlie shi|) in (juestion in this 
 case having been seized witliin the prohibited 
 waters of the thirty-mile zone round tlie Ivoniau- 
 (lursky Islands, fully equipped and manned for 
 soiilmg, not only failed to fulfil the onus east 
 upon her of proving that she was not used or 
 fiMl.loyed in killing or attempting to kill any 
 s.mIs within the seas spoeitied in the Order-in- 
 C.jimoil, but the ovidenue was sutUeient to 
 [irove that she was guilty of an infraetion of 
 the statute and Order-iii-Couneil. The Ship 
 "Mimiie" v. The Queen, 23 S. C. K. 47S 
 
 Assignments and Preferences.! — Held 
 
 p.'r llagarty, CU.O. (h.r.UnnUu and liurton,' 
 .)..V— Hie presumption spnkiii ,,f hi sub- 
 sections 2 (<i) and 2 (/,) of section 2 of R. S. O 
 eh. 124, "An Act respecting Assignments 'and 
 1 reterenees by Insolvent I'ersons," as amended 
 by .,4 \ let. eh 20 (0.), is a rebuttable one, the 
 , onus of proof being shifted in cases within the 
 sub-seetions. 
 
 Per Maclennan, .I.A.— The presumption is 
 limited to cises of pressure, and as to that is 
 irnibuttable. 
 
 I'er Osier, J. A.— The presumption is general, 
 ; and IS irrebuttable ; but the security m (ines- 
 tlon 111 this action is sui)poi-taljle under the 
 previous jiromise. 
 
 role y. /■■or/.wu, 19 A. K. Ill, distinguished, 
 .ludgnient of theConimou I'leas Division 2'^ 
 O. K. 474, aliinned. Lumoh v. Medeoch, 20 A. 
 1 K. 401. 
 
 Slander— /'nc,Vr',7e.] -Where the occasion is 
 Iinvilcged, the jilaintiirs case fails, unless there 
 1.1 eviilence of malice in fact, aii.l the burden <if 
 Iimving this is on the plaintilf, who must adduce 
 ovi.lwice upon which a jury miL;ht sav that the 
 (Idcndant abused the occasion either liv wilfullv 
 stating as true that which he knew to be 
 initnic, or stating it in reckless diare<'ard of 
 whi'lhcr It was true or false. /luwi v 
 A(ni/(aw.^ 2() O. R. 52S. AlHrmed in appealj 
 
 Testamentary Capacity.]— .S'«« Carrie v. 
 Curne, 24 S. C. It. 712. 
 
 2. I'resHnipfioii.-.; 
 
 Appropriation of Payments.] "— ..\ppro- 
 
 pmtion of payments is a (|uestion of inten- 
 tion ; and where a creditor takes security for an 
 cxisliiig indebtedness, anil thereafter continues 
 luiiaocoiinl with the debtor in the ordinary run- 
 11111^' form, charging him with goods sohl, and 
 crediting linn with moiiuys received and credit- 
 ing and charging notes on account in such a way 
 M to render the original indebtedness undis- 
 lin;;iii9liable, there is no irrebuttable presump- 
 tion that t lie payments are to be applied upon 
 tlio ongiiial indebteiliiess. 
 
 Jiidgiiient of Street, J., reversed. Grififh v. 
 Croekr, ISA. R. 370. 
 
 Assignments and Preferences ]- Whrre 
 «" in.stiuiii..nt made by a person in insolvent 
 circunistanees has the ellect of giving one 
 
 " the 
 
 : Land Titles Act- irow7» />„.( Child-hear- 
 i'(;/.]-Lind was .levised to the petitioner for 
 lite, with remainder in fee to her children 
 surviving her. At the age of tifty-six the peti- 
 tioner and one of her ehihlivn, ;U1 the other 
 ehildren haying conveyed their shares to her 
 applied under the Land Titles Act, R S O 
 eh 1 l(i to b« registered as owners with abso- 
 lute title. 
 
 The petitioner's monthly p .riods began at the 
 age of eleven ; she was iiiarii<.d in her tweuty- 
 secoiid year, and bore children raiiidly till her 
 thirty-sixth year, when her tenth child was 
 born ; live months after this her periods, bavin.' 
 regularly continued, suddenly ceased, and up to 
 the time of the applicatioli had never returned 
 1 he evidence ot m physician who had made a 
 : medical examination of the petitioner, shewed 
 I that senile atrophy of the uterus and ovaries 
 had proceeded so far that it would 1)b an 
 impossibility for |u-egiiancy to lake place : — 
 ! _ Held, having regard to" the piuvisions of sec- 
 I tioii 2;j, sub-section 5, of the .-Vet, that the Mas- 
 |ter should have accepted the evi.leiice as sulfi- 
 I cient proot that the petitioner was phv.sieallv 
 lincapible of child-bearing, and should have 
 act(;d upon it by granting the registration. Jie 
 '.'., 21 U. U. 109. 
 
 \ sold 
 
 CTOiltor a prcferenee over others! and ur 
 Mstnunent is attacked within sixty days aftei 
 
 Mercantile Usage]. - Where goods are 
 sold by sample, the place of ilelivery is, in 
 the absence of a special agreement to the 
 contrary, the place for inspectum by the buyer 
 and letusal to inspect there, when opportunity 
 therefor is alionled, is a breach of the eontratft 
 to imrchase. Evidence of mercantile usa<'e will 
 not be allowed to add to or to atlcct the construc- 
 tion ot a contract for sale of goods unless such 
 eust<Mn is general. Evidence of usage in Can- 
 ada will not affect the construction of a contract 
 tor s.'ile of goods in New Vork by ,,arties domi- 
 ciled there, unless the latter are shewn to have 
 been cognizant of it, and can be presumed to 
 have made their contract with reference to it. 
 It parties 111 Canada contract to puichase goods 
 m x\ew ^ ork through brokers, first by telegram 
 
415 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 416 
 
 i 
 
 and letters, ami completed by exchange of 
 boutlit and sold notes signed by the brokers, 
 the latter maybe legardcd as agents of the pur- 
 chasers in Canada ; but if not, if the purchasers 
 make no olpjcction to the contract, or to want 
 of authority in the brokers, and after tlie goods 
 arrive refuse to accept tliem on otlicr grounds, 
 they will be held to have ratitied the contract. 
 7'reiil Vtdldj Wovlhn Mfy. Co. v. Otlriihs, 23 S. 
 C. R. 68-^. 
 
 Partnership Dealings— iocAe.s ami Acqiii- 
 eoeence].- A judgment creditor of J. applied 
 for an order for sale of the hitter's inter- 
 est in certain lands, the legal title to which was 
 in K., a brother-in-law and former partner tf 
 J. An order was made for a reference to ascer- 
 tain J. 's interest in the lands, and to take an 
 account of the dealings between J. and K. In 
 the Mastei 's othce K. claimed that in the course 
 of the partnership business he signed notes 
 which J. indorsed and caused to be discounted, 
 but had charged against him, K., a much larger 
 rate of interest thereon than he had paid, and 
 he claimed a large sum to be due him from J. 
 for such overcharge. 'I'lie Master held that as 
 these transactions had taken place nearly twenty 
 years before, K. was precluded by the Statute 
 of Limitations, and by laches and aecjuiescence, 
 from setting up such claim. His report was 
 overruled by the Divisional t'ouit and Court of \ 
 Appeal (m the ground that the matter being one | 
 between partners, ;ind the partnership affairs ' 
 never having been foimally wound up, the 
 statute did not apjjly :— 
 
 Held, rev( r>ing tin; decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, and restoiing the Master's report, that 
 K.'a claim could not be entertained ; that there j 
 was, if not absolute evidence, at least a pre- 
 sunijjtion of ac(iuiesctnue from the long delay ; 
 and that such prcsumptidu should not be rebut- - 
 ted by the evidence of the two partners con- ; 
 sidering their relation.-liip, and the ajujaront i 
 concert between thcni. Tooth v. Kilt i-idije, 2-i 
 S. C. R. 'JS7. 
 
 IX. I'koduction of Docu.mknts. 
 
 Action For Accovmt—Pnliminary Trial of 
 Riijht to H( qiiirt', A ccuviit. ] — Whenever discovery 
 is sought in aid of an i.^sue which must be deter- 
 mined at the hearing, the plaintiff is entitled to 
 it to help hini piove the ii-sue ; but where it is 
 sought in aid of something which docs not form 
 part of what he must pi'ove at the hearing, but 
 ismeiely conse(iuenliid to it, the right is not 
 absolute, but discretional, until the plaintiff has 
 established his fundu mental right at the hear- 
 ing. 
 
 Wlicre the plaintiff claimed a declaration of 
 the right of himself and all other persons insured 
 in the temperinue section of the defendant com- 
 pany to the ]iioHts earned by that section, j)ay- 
 inent theieof, and an account and a))portioii- 
 nient theieof : — 
 
 Held, that n)!on the mere statement of the 
 plaintiff' in ]ileading that he was the holder of a 
 jKilicy entii liiiii liini to share in certain piofits 
 of the c( nii)»ny, and without any j)roof of the 
 statement, the Court, in its disc*reli<jn, .should 
 not reipiire the c( nipany to produce and lay 
 open to him all their books of account and the 
 
 ' I)apers relating to them ; hut it was a pn.|i(.| 
 case in which to ])ermit tlu^ <lefendants li, ai^ply 
 undei' Ride 655 for an order for a ])reliiiiiniiiv 
 trial of the plaintiff's right to re(iuire an accc.um", 
 and to ])ostpone discovery of the books iintij 
 after such trial, ilraham v. Tiwpertiiny. ni„i 
 Oentrat Lift AKniirance Co., 10 P. K. oSli. 
 
 '. Life Insurance Applications.]— It is jiki. 
 vided by sub-section 2 of section .N.Sof tlie lii>iii'. 
 anceCor|)oratioiis Act, 55 Vict. cli. ,'19 ((».), that 
 no untrue statement in an a]i|)lication forMisur- 
 ance shall vitiate the contract unless niateiiiil 
 thci-eto; and by sidj-section 3, that the i|iicstioii 
 Of materiality is for the jury, or if tlieri' is n,, 
 jury, for the Court. 
 
 I NVhcrc, theiefore, a benevolent anil iirovidcnt 
 institution refused to rccogiuze a certiticate of 
 membership issued to the plaintiff, under w hidi 
 he was entitled to certain insurance benrtii>i. nn 
 the ground that he had untruly stated in \.\k 
 application that he was not, and never had Ijuen, 
 subject to asthnui, in an action to have it 
 declared that the con r .-A was a subsistni" 
 contract, production hy the defendants was 
 ordered of all applications and medical examin- 
 ations in which llu' answer as to astlinia had 
 been in the affirmative, and upon which certili- 
 cates had issued. Fergwionw PvoviMiiil I'lo- 
 i-l(k)itIii.ifitHtioii, 151'. R. ;166. 
 
 Third Person's Documents.] — Where a 
 party loan action referred ni his affidavit on pro- 
 duction to certain documents as being in the 
 hands of a third person, who refused to ijivc 
 them up until paid certain charges which were 
 disputed : — 
 
 Held, by the Master in Chambers, that tht 
 opposite party must content himself with 
 inspecting the documents and taking copies, 
 unless he would agree to indenuiil'y his (ipiid. 
 nent against the cost of obtaining the docu- 
 ments. //(i'/«''"wn V. Cox, 15 IMi. 23. lievcrseil 
 in part, 15 P. R. 127. 
 
 See, also, Sub-Title I., ante 305. 
 
 X. VaRYINC! and Exi'LAININO WriTTK.N 
 DofUJlK.STS. 
 
 Absolute. Transfer— Co?»)»fHre7nf J)/ o/Prcf./ 
 //// fVi-ititiij- (/rat Endcno — Arlii-Ux L'^'.:, L\l^, 
 ('• C.] — Verbal evidence is inadmissible to con- 
 tradict an absolute notarial transfer even wlien 
 there is a commtncenunt of proof by writing. 
 Article 1234 C. C. Bury v. Miirniy, 24 S. C. K. 
 77. 
 
 Action For Relief Against Re-entry For 
 Non-payment of Rent— Admimhilili/ if En- 
 dtiicf to i^/uii' JJi.siejm'gi'iitiitiois by Lis-ie in 
 Ohtaiiiiiiij Lccm.]— To an action for relief against 
 a re-entry made by a landlord for non-pa\ iiitct 
 of rent, the defendant pleaded that she hiid Ijccii 
 induced to grant the lease by reason of rciiicscn- 
 tations n ade by the plaintitf" to the effect thnt l.i 
 would improveand beautify thedemised pi cinist?, 
 which would enhance the value of other lands 
 of the defend.int, but that the plaintiff lisd r^ t 
 done as he represented he would, and that thi' 
 defendant had been thereby damnified :— 
 
 Held, that evidence tendered by the defen- 
 dant to establish the truth of this defence was. 
 
417 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 418 
 
 ININfl WkITTKX 
 
 a(lmissil)Ie in answer to the claim of the uhiin- 
 
 tiir fur relief. * 
 
 The origin lioth of the action for .specilic jior- 
 forinaiicu ami ot tlic action for icliuf aganist 
 ri!-cntry for ncm-paynicnt of rent is in the ecpii 
 tible jiirisdicticin of tliu (Joiirt ; the cuiniieilini' 
 lierlornianee m tlie one and the granting relief 
 intliii otlicr is in tlie judicial discretion of the 
 Court ; and in eacli tlie Court has regard to the 
 toudiict of tlie party seeking to conii)el such 
 performance or to obtain sucli relief. Conuitn/ 
 \: MiLfuii, 'J-J {). K. 1. Approved in aiipcai, 
 •21 A. K. 170. '^ ' 
 
 Contract to SupplyPrlntlng Paper— Oh( M- 
 
 siouiii Sr/icd'i/t.]- Ou the 1st Decendicr, 1S70, 
 a, to whose rights the .supiilianta had suc- 
 ceodeil, entered into a contract with tlie Crown 
 to supply, f<ir a given time, " such (luantiiies of 
 paper, and of such varieties, as may he rci|uiied 
 or desired fiom lime to time for the priiitim' 
 irnu publishing of the Vanitda Gd-.elti-, of tlie 
 statutes of Canada, and of such ollicial and 
 (lepartinental and other reports, forms, docu- 
 ments, and oilier jiapers as may at any time he 
 reiiuired to be printed and publislied, or as may 
 be ordered from time to time by the proper 
 authority lln-rcfor, according to the reipiire- 
 meiitsol Her .Majesty in that behalf." Atlaclieil 
 to the contract, and made part tliereof, u ei'c a 
 schedule and specitications shewing tiie (laper to 
 be supplied and tlie price to be paid tlierefor, 
 but ill which no niencion was made of dmible 
 (leiiiy,-the paper ordinarily, tlioiigli not exclu- 
 sively, used f,.r depaitiiieiital printing : — 
 
 Hehl, that nolliwithslanding this oini.ssion, 
 the contractor had agreed to supply the Crown 
 ami the Cromi liy implication had agreed to 
 purcliase of tlie contractor, among other paper, 
 thai reiiuired for departmental printiiiL'. Ciarb- 
 V. Tki Qatcii, 2 Ex. C. K. 141. 
 
 Contract— //o)w.s-—-' /V(()(/."]-l!y one of the 
 clauses of a railway contract for excavaticm. 
 •'all machinery and other plant, materials ami 
 things whatsoever," provuleu by the cnntractor 
 were uiilil the completion of the work to be the 
 property of the coiniiaiiy, when such as had not 
 been useil and converted into the works and 
 reuuinied undisposed of were to be delivered 
 over to the contractor, but in other clauses tlie 
 Words "teams and horses" were respectivelv 
 used as well as the woril " plant " :— 
 
 Held, under the contract, that horses weie 
 not 111, hi, led 111 the word "plant;" ami that 
 expert evidence was not admissible to explain its 
 meaning. Midd/tloii v. FIuhwjuii, •_',") 0. K. -117. 
 
 Contract -Hi'pir.si'iitaflom Priur t,, Farmalim, 
 <ll <:oiih;,ri.—Almnc,! <,/ Sli/m/afio,i L'w',od,/,i,./ 
 .W«f ,„ Cu;(0-a,y.]-8uppliant alleged tliat'oue 
 M., who had acted on behalf of the ( iovernment 
 10 making a contract with him for the carriage 
 oUaiiadian I'aeilic Railway steel rails between 
 Montreal and Lachiiio for the year lS7r), iia,l ; 
 represeiiteil to him that a very large quantitv 
 01 rails, amounting to some •j."),000 or X> OOu 
 tons, wouhl have to lie carried by the suppUaut 
 as such contractor; and that it was upon this 
 reprc.<ciit,iti.,ii that he entered into the said 
 coiitra,;t and made a large cnitlay with a view t.i 
 emeuMitly removing ami cari-ying the rails and 
 
 ti!ou '•-"^' '*'"'''^' '^"^ ^'^''"' ''''^'^'^ "' '''^»'""^- ' 
 
 27 
 
 Hehl, (I.) The fact that no stipulation em- 
 bodying such representation appeared in the 
 written instrument was deiue that it formed 
 no part of the contract. 
 
 (■-'.) That although the sii]i])liant could not 
 niiport into the formal contraet any representa- 
 ticms made by M. prior t,. it being reducL,! to 
 writing, yet uiiiler the terms oi the written eon- 
 tract he was entitleil to remove all the lails 
 laiulcl from ships in the port ,,f .Montreal dur- 
 ing the year 187.'), for the puriOHc mentioned in 
 the contract, and should have ihimaL'cs for the 
 loss of the jirotils that woubl have acerncl to 
 him if he ha,l carried such portion of the rails 
 as was carried by other pers,;iis during the con- 
 tinuance of his (tontract. A' <;,//;, ;/ v. 1 In- (hiini 
 1 V.y.. C. R. (is. 
 
 Partnership— /,Vr/i.s/,r(r/ Dn-lnrnlUiii. ]— An 
 action was brought by W. .M,L. ami !•'. \\ . \\. i,, 
 rei', iver the amount of an a,.','i, kilt policy insurim' 
 the members of the linn of .McL. liiiis. & Co.']' 
 idleging that J. .S. .McL., one of the partners', 
 hail been accidentally drowncl. After the 
 jiolicy was issued the plaintills sigiicl and regis- 
 tered a declaration to the elfect that the liart- 
 iiership of McL. Bros. & d. had been iiiss,ilve,l 
 by inutual consent, and they als,( signcl ami 
 registercl a deelara.tioii of a new partnership 
 iindei- the same name, comprising the plaintills 
 only. At the trial the plaintiffs temlcreil (u-al 
 evidence to iirove that these declarations were 
 incorrect, and that J. S. McL. was a member of 
 the partnership at the time of his ,leath : — 
 
 Hehl, aflirming the ju,lgiiient of the Court 
 below, that such evidence was inaiimissible. 
 Article IS,'?.") C. C. and eh. 0'.") C. S. L. C. Cald- 
 >ivl/v. AcridniJ hiMiirajici- Cu. of Xuith [>" 
 •J4 S. C. 11. -ZiVA. 
 
 "I'lca, 
 
 Receipt— /v; roc] -S. brought an action to 
 coinjiel v. to remler an account of the sum of 
 .•::l.',.-)UO, whiih S. allegcl had been pahl on tl,o 
 (ilh ()el,,ber, IS.S."), lo be applied to S.'s first 
 promissory notes maturing ami in acknowlclg- 
 nient ,)t which V.'s b.iok-keeiier gave the follow- 
 ing receijit: •• .Monlreal, October titli, ISS."). 
 Received from .Mr. I). S. the sum of two tliou- 
 •sand live hnmlrcl didhirs to be applicl to his 
 first notes maturing. .M. V., per F. L.," ami 
 w)'i,|i \'. faileil and neglcctcl to apply. V. 
 plea,le,l that he never got the ,'<2..'")00 aii,l that 
 the receiiit was given in error and by mistake 
 by his chrk. After documentary ami parol 
 eviilence ha,l been given the Superior Court, 
 wimsejudiiment was alhrmed by the Court of 
 • ihieen's Hench, dismissed S.'s action. On 
 apjieal to the Supreme Court of Caiuula : 
 
 Hehl, (1.) That the hniling of the two Courts 
 on the (juestion of fact as lo whether the receijit 
 hail been given through error sliouM not be 
 iiiterfereil with. (2.) That the pndiibition of 
 Arti(de i'i.'U C. C. against the ailmi^sion of parol 
 evidence to contradict or vary a written instru- 
 ment, is not d'ordre /w/illc, ami that if smdi 
 evidence is admitteil without objection at the 
 trial it cannot subsequentlv he set aside in a 
 Court of Apiical. {'.i.) Tli.it parol eviilenco in 
 I'omnierciul niatters is aihnissible against a 
 written document to prove error. J-JiZi Iimur- 
 aiice Co. V. lirodie, r> S. C. R. 1, hillowed. 
 Sc/iwcr.wtnki V. Vintbertj, 10 S. C. R. 24;!. 
 
 >S'te, also, CoNSTiruTioNAL Law— Deed, III. 
 
419 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 II !1 
 
 Mn 
 
 420 
 
 XI. Misci:i.i.ANKor.s Ca.'-ks. 
 
 Account Sales — Lctdr o/ d^Kiravfn: hi; 
 Jkink — ('/dim for l.c"" — I'raoJ nf Cluini.] — 1\. 
 </ at., upon leoiipt ot an oiiIlt l>y ti'l'jgram from 
 the Kxcliiiiigc HiiiiU to l()a<l cattle, on a .'.■tfaiiii'i' 
 for M. ^*., vitli guai-aTitce against loss, .sliippi'd 
 thi'L'u days alter llie hiuspcnsiuu of tlie bank some 
 cattlo ami eonsign'/d tlieni to their own agents 
 at Liverpool. Snliseipieiitly they tiled a claim 
 with the licpudaloi's of the hank for an alleged 
 loss of i?7,ltU.") (in the shi))nients, and the claim 
 being contested the only vilnes-s they adduced 
 «t the tiial was one of their employees who 
 knew nothing personall}' alxnit what the cattle 
 hut 
 
 I merits such a courac may be expelled," an' not 
 : bound by legal rules of evidence, and tlieir 
 j decision, arrived at after a fair investigation of 
 the facts, M'ill not be interfered with because 
 ' they have admitted as part of the evidence in 
 proof of the chai'ge the informally sworn state- 
 ment of one of the persons concerned in the 
 i transaction. 
 
 ] Where the charge has been made, discussed 
 I and replied to, in tlie public prints, it is not 
 : nccessai-y to give to the accused jierson wIk, I^s 
 ' taken jKirt in such discussion, when eallm;.' n|j(,ii 
 ' him to shew cause against his proposc<l T>.]ml- 
 , sion, s|)ecilie jiarticulars of the accuaation ; a 
 [cneral statemtnt is sulHcient. 
 
 realized, hut put in account sales received by ; Judgment of Armonr,C.J., afHrmed, dnmiM 
 mail as evidence of loss :— i y. Suni,y.-<ide Buatimj Co., '_'! A. 1!. 49 
 
 the judgment of the tlourt i 
 
 Held, aliirmii 
 below, that assinning that there was a valid 
 ^'uarantee given by tlie bank, upon which the 
 Court did not exj'tess anj' opinion, the evidence 
 ii.s to the alleged loss was inautlicient to entitle II . 
 eta/, to rccuvcr. Per Taschereau, J. — That the 
 guarantee was subject to a delivery of the cattle 
 to .\l. .S. and that'll 
 
 cattle in tlicir own name could not recover on the 
 guarantee. Uai/taicay v. Vluiji/in, 21 S. C. H. 
 •2S. 
 
 Club— E.i-i^K/.tioii of Afcin/ia- of a JleH'iil So- 
 ci'ti/.i—Oiart/ V. L'Uniou tit. Tliumu.s, 24 
 1!. 1, iiiiti il4. 
 
 t a/, having shipped the i rejiort on a reference to 
 leh 
 
 Arbitration and Award — Swcai-huj Wit- 
 Jif.wcs /ic/ort Ar/)i/)-atti!:s — Riijhl to Croax-Ex- 
 a»iine..'\—Simh/t' : M'herean arbitratororassessor 
 to whom a claim is referred l)y the Crown for 
 report is empowered to take oral evidenee, he 
 cannot proceed to take sueli evidence without 
 swearing the witnesses and giving each party an 
 opliortunity to cross-examine them. I'ou/iot v. 
 Tlw (Jtif-eii, 1 Ex. C. R. 313. 
 
 Arbitration and A-wax'd — Vmv of Pre- 
 
 mi.tt.'<.]~Sii' 111 re Christie, and Toronto Junc- 
 tion, 22 A. R. 21, ante 30; and lie Marp/ier- 
 nun and City of 'J'oronto, 21) U. 1!. oiJ8, ante 31. 
 
 Arbitrator.]— An arbitrator may be ex- 
 amined as a witnes.s upon a motion to set aside 
 an award or in an acti(]n upon an award, but 
 
 Credibility of Witnesses — Jtnh: /,.•,. _ 
 JrnJeriint A'cd/i /«■:'.]-( )n appeal from a .Master's 
 issess daijiayes it was 
 that he was the liiuil judge of the credihil. 
 ity of the witnesses and that his report should 
 not be sent back because some irrelc\ant evid- 
 enee may have been given of a character not 
 likely to have afl'ected ids judgment, esjiei ially 
 as no ajipeal was taken from his ruling on the 
 evidence. Boot/i v. L'atle, 21 ,S. C. R, 037. 
 
 V6ed--J)e'icri/^tion.^—See Scottcn v. Barthel 
 21 A. 1!. rm ; 24 .s. C. R. 367, ante 33.".. 
 
 Experts.]— An action for damages caused 
 by collision between two vessels was tried uith- 
 out a jury, and after the evidence had hetn 
 taken the trial Judge, with the consent of both 
 parties, consulted two master niariiieis, and 
 adoptcil as his own their opinion, based on a 
 consideration of conliicting testimony, as to the 
 responsibility for the collision :— 
 
 Held, that this was a delegation of the judi- 
 cial functions and a new trial was ordered. 
 
 , ,,. .,,.-., • . 'i'li« ^(^upi^ "f Con. Rule 207, as to calling in 
 
 .such exammation must be limited to matters of ; the assistance of experts, considered ]\;',.ik 
 tact arising in connection with the reference and v. Cottier, 19 A. 11. 298. 
 award, and cannot be pressed to the length of , 
 
 asking the grounds and reasons for making the Heirship — Declaration of Deceased ] - In 
 iiwanL In re Chrusttt and Toronto Junction, 22 answer to a claim of heirshin to one ,S., a wit- 
 ^- '^- -'• i ness, who had known him in Knuhunl a.s a lioy, 
 
 „ ,^ I before he came to Canada, alleged that S. hud 
 
 Cortifioate of Foreign Court-/'e^«/;o« for ' always been reputed to be illegitimate, an.l liiui 
 \/,/>ointnienl o/ Jrn.-tre.i-W here certain ii-lants ' been left by his mother on the parish, and that 
 living with their mother m the Province of he had also known his reputed father, who bore 
 Aovahcotiawere entitled to insurance moneys I a diticrent surname. Another witness stated 
 payable m Ontario, and their mother petitioned : that ?S. had told him that one H. was his latlier 
 to be appointed trustee, without security, I and that 8. on his return from u visit to Kuu 
 under R. ,s O. oh. 136, sec. 12, as amended by ■ land said he had seen the place where his mother 
 .lb Vict. ch. 32, sec. / (U)., to receive such : met with her misfortune ■— 
 inoneys, letters of guardianship having been ■■ Held, sulKcient evidence of illegitimacv to 
 is|sued to her by a Probate Court of die Province I displace the claim of heirship. In re Slun-tey, 
 of ^ova fecotia, a certificate of the Judge of that | Atturney-Oenerat v. Brun^den, 24 R 3"4 
 (.'ourt shewing the facts necessary to liring the i 
 
 case within the proviso to the amt'iidiiig section, | Judicial Notice — Order-in-Council - Seal 
 was received as eyidc.ce in support oi the I Fi.^/nry- War Vi,.-,e.l.]~rhe Admiralty Court 
 petition, le Daniel, lb P. R. 304. is bound to take judicial notice of au order-in- 
 
 _,.,.,. T „, ,. , , council from which the Court derives its juris- 
 
 Club-An/,^r ]_T he duT-etors of a club in diction, i.ssuod under the authority of the Art of 
 exercising disciplinary junsdicticm under a liy- the Imperial Parliament, 06 & 57 Vict ch. 23, 
 law providing that "any member guilty ..f The Seal Fishery (North Pacilic) Act, 1SI)3. 
 conduct which m the opinion of the board A Russian cruiser manned by a crew in the iiay 
 
421 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 <it' tlic Russian Oovernmuiit and in conuniiiul of 
 iui olliuer of thu Russian navy is a "war vessel'' 
 witliiii tiif meaniiig of tliu said onlur-in-couneil, 
 aiiil a protocol of examination of an oU'eiiiliii'' 
 liritisii 8lii|) Uy suuli cruiaer signed hy tlio oliicer 
 iii ooinniand is admissible in evidence in iiro- 
 .■(.M.'iliiigs taken in tlii^ Admiralty Court in an 
 action fur eondemnatiou under tlie said Seal 
 Fishery (Xorth TaeiHc) Act, ISIKJ, and is proof 
 of its contents. Sfiiji " Miiiiii>" y. Tin- Oiin'ii 
 L'.JS, ('. II. 47.S. <r < 
 
 Malicious Prosecution -A'kojv/ <,/ AcquUtat 
 
 ^AiliilissitiiiK (HI KjitiiiiiKi/ioH /or JJiiroreiy.] 
 
 lij an action Uiv malicious '])rosecution, the 
 iiiilictmeut, with an endorsement tliereou of tlie 
 ,i;.jiiitt,d of the plaiiitill' of tile criminal charge 
 i.r which he Iiad licen prosecuted, was produced 
 hy tlie clerk of tliu Court, having been sent to 
 liiiu by the registrar of the f^ieen's llencli 
 Divisuin to whom the indictment had been 
 rctuined and which he had been subpo'uaed 
 hy tile iilaintid' to produce, the Court bein.' 
 uifonncd tiiat the Attorney-deneral had refused 
 Ills Jia/ to enable a record of aeijuittal to lie 
 made up. The defendant's counsel objected to 
 the admission of tiie indictment, and its adniis- 
 simi was refused : — 
 
 Held, that the indictment so eiulorseil and 
 I)r..diiced was not, under the circumstances, 
 siiliicient evidence of tlic termination of the pro- 
 secution, but that the formal record of acipiittal 
 should have been produced ; and that no .sucli 
 rccipid, or a copy thereof, could be obtained 
 without a /(((!' of the Attonicy-CJeneral. 
 
 (Jwrre, whether the teriiiiiuition of such pro- 
 secution can bo proved liy admissions made by 
 the dcteiulant on his examination for diicoverv 
 JL'witi V. Vane, L'G (.». U. i;i;i. 
 
 ohildren, a daughter and another child who 
 died. About 1ST!), the husband returned to 
 I. us Province bringing the daughter with hiiii. 
 r.VKlence was also given of declarations made 
 by the husband on his return that he had l>een 
 legally married in the same manner as he would 
 liiive been had the marri.ige taken place here, 
 ivuil that the daughter was his legitimate child ; 
 and tliat lie had brought her up as such : — 
 
 Held, that, apart from the Indian marriage, 
 there was evidence from which a legal marriage 
 according to the recognized form amongst Chris- 
 tians emtld be presumed, and that the .laughter 
 was therefore his legitimate child and " loual 
 heir." I!,, 1,1, V. Hohb, L't) t). H. 09|. 
 
 Meclieal Practitioner- 
 h'ushiii'/ii.ii, L>,3 O. K. 2!)[t. 
 
 -E.i-paUioii.]—Sfie li^ 
 
 Notes -C'o/«''-'-''.]-In a libel action it was held 
 that the evidence of what took place at a meet- 
 ing was admissible as proof that the plaintiff 
 was the person intended by a resolution paaaed 
 iit It, the defendant having bjcii present; and 
 that a witness who was present at the meetin.' 
 and took notes, wliich were ait.n'wards printed" 
 could refer to the printed copy, after the 
 destruction of tlie original notes, to shew 
 exactly xvhat did take place. Taylor v. Masisej, 
 
 Malicious Prosecution-- /'coo/' 0/" Act/iiitlal 
 
 -i'luihirl'ioii nj (jri:iii,<(l y,V(.„/v7 Vv/ 0/ci-/c~ 
 C\,-I,ju,l Co/,;,.] - III au action for 'malicious 
 prosecution, the plaiiitill' sought but was not 
 permitted to juose his aciuittal before the 
 Omuty Jndgc's Criminal Court of a chiir.'e of 
 imsilcneauour, by means ui the pro<liicti.m of 
 the original record signed bv the i ■.mntv dud<'e 
 iiiuler the Speedy Trials Act, 1!. S. C. ch 175 
 and produced and verilied by the Clerk of the 
 I cace ill whose custody it was, or else by beiu.' 
 a lowed to put in a copy thereof, eertitied by 
 that othoer : — 
 
 Held, that the cvi.lcnce should have been 
 ii.hiutted in either of the above two forms, and 
 liiilgiiicut dismissing the action was set aside 
 iuul a new trial ordoreil. 
 
 ilccisicn of Mac.Maiion, J., at the trial 
 reversed. O //(„•„ v. JJ<n„/f„'rli/, -Jo (j. H ,,7. 
 
 Marriage — Jkr/amfioir-: of iM-fisiil //,(,- 
 l"iti'l-Lujithnary of ChUdrin.\ -In proof of the 
 .•olebnuion of a marriage evidence was given 
 tliat the husband, who had gone from this' Pro- 
 vu.cc to ilntish Columbia, had g.,ne through 
 he ceremony of marriage acccu'dnii: to the 
 iiiaiaii custom with an Indian wmian, he pav- 
 ing -^JO to her father; and that after the marda-e 
 tluy cohabited and lived to-ether as man ami 
 
 am! were recognized by the Iiulians 
 
 wif 
 
 Mich up to the time of the wife's di-atli, prior to 
 i»|.i, the giving of presents and cohabitation 
 "emg i-ogaided by the tribe as eonstitutiii" a 
 •liarnage. The issue of the union were two 
 
 Secondary Evidence— A'.i,'.,7(i'/'o« of Aare.,- 
 
 imiit~larl,r,^!i;,ll,t ,„ 11, Hi/ iHoon-^.ttnlimlh 
 (hum.] — On the hearing of an e.piity suit 
 secondary evidence of a document was tendered 
 on proof that its proper custodian was out of 
 the jurisdiction and supposed to be in Scotland- 
 that a letter liad been written to him asking him 
 font, and to his sister and other persons con- 
 nected with him in,|uiring as to his where- 
 abouts, but infoimatimi was not obtained : — 
 
 Held, allirming the decision of the Supreme 
 Court of Aew ISr'uiswick, that this was not a 
 sulhcient foundation f.u' seeomhiry evidence ■ 
 fiiat the letters should have stated that this 
 si.ecihc paper was wanted; that an indi'peudent 
 person should have been employed to make 
 imiuiries m Scotland for the cus-todian of the 
 document, and to a-^kforitif he had been found • 
 
 and that a commission might have 1 n i.ssued 
 
 to the Court of Session ia Scotland, and a oom- 
 missioii aiipointed by that Court to procure the 
 attendance of the custodian and his examination 
 as a witness. The suit was fm- a specific per- 
 ormance of an agreement bv ('., one of the 
 licnehciaries under ,i wili vesting the testator's 
 estate in trustees for division among her children 
 to sell lands of the estate in New Brunswick td 
 the plaintitr I'. ; and the document as to which 
 secondary evidence was o He red was an alleged 
 iigreemenl by the trustee^ and other benelieiaries 
 to convey the said huids to ( '. The evidence 
 was received, but only established the exeoutiou 
 of the alleged agreement by (jiie of the trustees 
 and one of the beneticiaries, and the proof of the 
 contents was not consistent with the document- 
 ary evidence and the case made out by the bill:— 
 Held, that if the evidence was admissible' it 
 would not establish the plaintitrs ease; that the 
 .alleged agreement, not being signed l)y both the 
 trustees, could .onvey no estate, legal or equit- 
 alde, to C.; and that the proof of its contents 
 was not satisfactory. ]>orlLi- v. llaU, 23 S. C. 
 K, '20o, 
 
423 
 
 EXCHEQUER 001/ RT. 
 
 421 
 
 Shorthand Notes — Eleclion Trial. ] — 
 Kvidence tivkcii l>y a sliDitliaiid writei-, not an 
 olliciiil stenogriiiiher of tlie Court, but who 
 luiH been nwoin and appointed by the Judge, 
 need not lie lead over to the witnesses wlien 
 extended. I'ontiac Election Cane, 20 S. C R. 
 6'2ti. 
 
 Survey — /'/(ih — Dt'xrriiiliuii.]— The deai-rip- 
 tion of a lot prepared foi an<l used J)y the Crown 
 Lands Department in framing the patent, 
 whieh grants the lot by number or letter oidy, 
 is admissible evidence to ex])lain the metes and 
 bounds of that lot. 
 
 'I'he plan of survey of reeord in and adopted 
 by the Crown Lands Department governs on a 
 question of location of a road, when the sur- 
 veyor's field notes do not eontliet with the plan 
 and no road has been laid out on the ground. 
 
 Judgment of the Common I'lcas Division 
 reversed. Kf.niii/ v. Vulilirtlt, '1\ A. R. 110. 
 Affirmed by the Supreme Court, 24 S. C. It. (jViy. 
 
 Survey — lioad ANuiraiwe Intirun Coiintia.] — 
 Monuments jjlaced in coni])liance with the pro- 
 visions of sections .S4, 3."), 'M and HI of R. S. (). 
 (1877) eh. 1-1(>, niust be placed at the true cor- 
 ners, governing points or offsets, or at the triie 
 ends of concession lines, and there is rothing in 
 the.se sections nuiking a survey thereunder or 
 the placing of the monuments conelusive, 
 whethei' right or wrong, and evidence may be 
 received in contradiction. .So held on a ease 
 reserved from General Sessions on an indict- 
 ment for obstruction of a highway, being the 
 town line between two counties. 
 
 Tanner v. liiaxell, 21 U. C. R. oSS ; Re<jii)a v. 
 McGregor, 1!) C. P. C9 ; lie Fairhairn and Sand- 
 wich East, 32 U. C. R. 573 ; and lioky v. 
 McLean, 41 U. C. R. 260, distinguished. Rcciina 
 V. Cronbi/, 21 O. R. 591. 
 
 Witnesses Resident In Foreign Country 
 Temporarily Within the Jurisdiction— Jii(jh/ 
 Id Examinr.] — See Dtkqi v. CharleboU, 15 1'. 
 R. 142, ante 24. 
 
 EXAMINATION DE BENE ESSE. 
 
 See EviDENX'E, IIL 
 
 EXAMINATION FOR DISCOVERY. 
 
 See Evidence, IV. 
 
 EXAMINATION OF JUDGMENT 
 DEBTOR. 
 
 See Judgment Debtor. 
 
 EXCHANGE. 
 
 Executor.] — An executor or administrator 
 cannot, having regard to 1!. S. 0. ch. 108, sec. 
 t>, and 54 Vict. ch. 18, sec. 2 (0. ), make the 
 
 j lands of the testator or intestate the 8ubj(.'i t nf 
 speculation or exchange by him in the s.iiiui 
 manner as if the lauds were his own. 
 
 The Court refused to decree specitic pirfdrm- 
 ance of a contract by an execiitor to excliuiigc 
 lands of his testatrix for other lands, as tlii! 
 
 i purpose of the exchange could not h:ue i.efii 
 the payment of (lel)ts or the distriluitioii nt ihc 
 estate, and it was shewn that the bein'tii i:;iii;s 
 olijected to the exchange, and it did not ap|n.'ar 
 that the (jtKcial guardian had been consulted 
 Teniae v. IIV(/.s/i, 24 (). R. 30i>. 
 
 Power of Sale — S.i/r hi/ U'ni/ oj E.ir/u.iiii,:— 
 " Sell inid Ali-iiilii.It/i/ Oi-i/ioie (if. " | — A iiiortyai't'c 
 with power of sale under the ."~hort Koiiiis oj 
 Mortgages .Vet can exercise the power by u.iy of 
 exchange foi' other land instead of, in tli,' u>iial 
 way, l)y sale ior money. The words "al.m,. 
 Intely dis[iose of in the i)ow(!iare approji, lutB 
 to an exchange. Smith v. Sjiear-i, 22 (i. \\. :.'S(i. 
 
 I Separate Estate— 6'o;/^)y((7 by Iniiiliim i,:,.\ 
 
 ', ^Held, reversing tile decision of the (.'oinni'jn 
 
 i Pleas Division, 19 O. R. 739, that the power of 
 
 i attorney to the husband of the mariie<l woman 
 
 defendant, authcuizing liim to sell her laiuis, 
 
 I did not authorize him to exchange such laiuis 
 
 I for others or to bind her to assume payiiioiit oi 
 
 a mortgage on the land given in exchange, ami 
 
 that on the (evidence she was not bouml tin it- 
 
 by. MrMkhael v. Witkie, 18 A. R. 4(i4. 
 
 Specific Performance — Title not in I'lauitiii 
 — K nuwlidije of JJe/endant.] — Where the pliiin 
 tit!', at the time he entered into a contract with 
 the defendant tor the exchange of lands, had no 
 title to the lauds he proposed to exchange, which 
 were, to the knowledge of the defendant at tliu 
 time of the contract, vesteil in the plaiuLitl's 
 wile : — 
 
 Held, in an action for specific performance, 
 that the defendant could not withdraw on the 
 ground that the plaintift" had no title, at any 
 rate before the time fixed for the completion of 
 the exchange ; and the plaintiti' having teiulured 
 a conveyance from his wife before action, win 
 entitled to succeed ; for the defendant, liaviim 
 entered into the contract knowing that it liid 
 not bind the estate, l)ut only the jjcrton, of tin; 
 plaintiff, must be taken to have relied from the 
 beginning upon the promise of the plaiiitill to 
 procure tlie concurrence of the owner, and coiilii 
 not set up that tlie plaintiff' was not the owikt. 
 
 Dictum oi Kekewich, J., in Wyl.iony. Dunn, 
 34 Ch. D. 509, not followed. St. Denit v. IH'j 
 ijins, 24 O. R. 230. 
 
 EXCHEQUER COURT. 
 
 I. Jurisdiction, 424. 
 II. Practice, 426. 
 
 I. Jurisdiction. 
 
 Concurrent Original Jurisdiction of Ex- 
 chequer OoVLVt— I njiinclioii to lU'drain Inter- 
 ference irith Narirjation of a I'uhlic Jlnrhoiir 
 Authorized by Provincial Leyiditlure.]—Aa 
 
m 
 
 Bstate the siilijiu nj 
 )y him in tlio s.um, 
 
 I liis own. 
 
 reo specitio iKifiiiin. 
 
 L'XUClltdr to L'XL'llallgd 
 
 (itiicr lands, as tin, 
 joulil not ha\(' iiet'ii 
 e (listril)uti(iM ni' fh,. 
 :liat the Ix.-ni'tii iiuie.s 
 md it (lid not :i|i|<i'ar 
 liad huen ooiimiIuiI 
 S(li». 
 
 !>'«// of E.yi-/ii ly, ^. 
 ? «/■."] — A niiirti,Mgt;c 
 the .•'hdrt Fiiinis of 
 the power liy wayot 
 itead of, in the usual 
 
 'I'liu \V(iids "al>so- 
 iiwcr arc a]i)iidjii liitc 
 Sjjtur-'i, 2-' <i. I!, lisii, 
 
 (icI by Iini'liiv! ,,u.\ 
 ion of thf t'onnu'iii 
 ), that tiie jiowtr of 
 
 tiie niai lied woman 
 
 II to sell liei- lands, 
 exchange such lands 
 
 aasunie payiiicni oi 
 ;n in exehaiigc, anil 
 lis not houiiil tluii- 
 18 A. R. 4(i4. 
 
 -Title not m I'lahilij: 
 ] — Wliei'e the plain 
 into 11 contract with 
 nge of lands, had no 
 .1 to exchange, which 
 the defendant al thu 
 ed in the plainliirn 
 
 ipecifio perfoi'niance, 
 ot withdraw on the 
 lad no title, at any 
 31- the completion of 
 itiU' having tcnilureil 
 i before action, was 
 e defendant, liavini; 
 Mowing that it did 
 y the pcrt-on, of tlio 
 lave I'clied from the 
 ! <if the plaint itt to 
 -he owner, and could 
 was not the owner. 
 in Wylsun v. J)iam, 
 . Si. Denii v. lliij 
 
 COURT. 
 
 425 
 
 EXCHEQUER COURT. 
 
 4fle 
 
 information at the suit of the Attorney-* unieral 
 to id)tain an nijunction to restrain t'lafe.idant 
 froai d ling acts th it iiiterfero with and ten l to 
 destroy the navigation of a pnhlio lurhjur is a 
 civil ami not a criminal proceeding, and the 
 1a dici|U8r C mrt has concurrent original jnris- 
 di ti on over the same under 50 &, 51 Vict. c!i. 10, 
 SI-!. 17 ('0- Th". (,>H-.ea v. Fi-^htr, 2 Ex. C. r' 
 .Sli.'). 
 
 DDinlnlon Int9r83t9.]-Tue Parliament of 
 
 I'.nvd.i has the right to enact th it all actions 
 ;rii suits of a civd nature at com noa law m- 
 c|iily, ill which the Crown in right of the 
 Di.p.inioa is plahititl' or petitioner miy be 
 liiMught in the Exjlieijuer Coart. Farir II v 
 Th- (Jiinii, -22 S. C. It. 553. 
 
 Mirltlme Law — .■■lc//o/( of Av.o'uU li'hvan ' 
 r',.o";/jer.v.] -The Hxclieiiujr Court has j irisdie- 
 t: ci to hoar an I iht^Tmme actions o.' ajcjiint 
 hr.wien co-owners of a ship, /fa'l v. Shi/i 
 ^■■'I'K'inl, 3 Kx. C. R. 2(iS. 
 
 PAt9nt3 — Jiirl-i U,-l(oii of th: .\f/,i!st,'r of 
 .l/W'V('/»ce.]— Til'.' jiirisdictioa, in respjet of 
 t:i' avoi.luic-j of patents, eonferre I up in th-j 
 Minister of Agi-icilcure by sjjtion '-'S of The 
 i'ltaiit Actof IS7l' is exjlusivj of th it p>s<esjjd 
 iiv a!iy otlier tribuu il in the Ujniinion. Toron'o 
 
 6')., 2Ex. C. R. ,-).>t. ' 
 
 Seaman's Waxes -C/a/w iiii'kr ■9J')i.]—la 
 thjye.ir 1SS7, A. s )ld a vessel t ) M. and S. under 
 an agi-eem nit stipulating, among othar thin m, 
 thit th'j vejsel was to remiin in the nim3 a^id 
 uiilor the ontrol of A. until thj parcliise 
 iintiay was fully p lid, and tlixt, in tin event of 
 the tei-ms of thecjatr.ut n)t bain^ performed 
 in- t!ie veaioas, A. was eiitilled to uki posses- 
 sJjaaad the vendeos wjuld thereupon lo^e all 
 claim or title they might have to the ship or to 
 UDaeys paid by them in respect of the contract. 
 Tiii.s agreement wa? not registered. For some 
 time the vendees performed the terms of the 
 a4ree:n iut , but li iving f.iiled to do s.) after a car- 
 tiiu parioi A. resume 1 possession of the vessel, 
 i-'piaau aetiou in r.in for wages dua to a soi 
 tiiiu employed by the veudoes and which were 
 cini el during their possession of the vessel : — 
 
 Hell, that the amount of the clahn bain" 
 'i)lov.<2);j, the Kxcheijner Ciart hil no juris" 
 diction under section 3tof Tne Inland Waters 
 Seiimea's Aat. Th" Je-tiie S/tw.irt, 3 Ex. C. R. 
 
 I.IL* 
 
 tjii^ir . Hut the Court jurisdiotion to give 
 rehet I ,r the infringement of a trade-mirk 
 w.iure tlie cause (pf aetioii arose out of acta done 
 prior to the pis.si,'e of 5t & 5) Viet. cli. 20 (l> ) 
 /) Kayp ,■ V. I'nii Dnib n, 3 Ex. C. R. HS ,Vfi 
 S. a,2i, .S. C. R. 114. 
 
 II. I'llACriiK. 
 
 Oa ovrtiBra — Eivhr^'m III of n''rit.]-.Seml>le, 
 In an action by the m iiiaging oivner of a ship 
 against iiis co-owner, the endorsement on the 
 writ iijcl not shew tint there was any dia- 
 pnte as to the amount involved. J/all v S/iin 
 .'>':.i'L' ir,l. 3 Ex. C. K. -JiS. ■^ 
 
 Bxtenslon of Time — /■:.,:piiafini,. o/StatiUory 
 /'■ ri'il i„r Aji/i a'.l -Where siilMoient grounds 
 are c iselosjd, tiie tiiir.' f jr leave to appeal from 
 a. judgment of ttie Exchciuer ( )ourt of Canada 
 lireserihad l»y seetion 51 of the iOx-he.inar Court 
 Act (as anended by 5:j Vict. ch. 3"). sec. 1), may 
 be extended after sieh presu-ibe.l time has 
 exjnra.l. [Tiic application in thisc ise was tnicle 
 wionm three days after the expiry of the thirty 
 diys withm whch an appi-il could have been 
 taUen.J (J.) The fact that a .solicitor who has 
 received instructions to appeal his fallen ill 
 before cir,-yiag out sucli instrnetions, allbnh a 
 sulheient ground upni wlii'di an extension may 
 be allowed after the time for leave to appeal 
 preseabcl by the statute his expired. (3) 
 Iressure of palilic liasiness preventing a con- 
 sult itioa b:twcen the Attorncy-Ueneral for 
 C-inidianl his solicit )r within t h ; prescribed 
 time tor leive to appeal is sulKeient reason for 
 an extension being grinle 1, alth mgh the appli- 
 cation therefor m ly not be mule uncil after the 
 expiry of aneh prescribe 1 tiiii!. (f/irh- v T/w 
 <i'i'i'ii, 3 Ex. C. R. 1. 
 
 Inropmxtlon of Intrusion.] — An order 
 directing the defeii Lint to reconvev the land is 
 not .an appropriate p irt of the rem '.I'v to be given 
 upon an inform ition of in-^riHJoii. ' Tk" Pjteen. 
 
 ION. 
 
 irlsdlctlon of Ex- 
 
 I to lUstiain Inler- 
 a Puliiic Jlavhuiir 
 : LeijidhUure.j—Aii 
 
 Tral9-mark3,] — The iiuestions which the 
 Coart has jurisdietio i to determine under the 
 Act,j:! Viet. ch. 14 a-e suah as rel.ite to rlglits 
 of property ,n trade-m irks, and not questions 
 ai to waethe:- or net a trade-mirk ought not to 
 Jie registereil, or continued on the registry 
 oeMusa it ij calculated to deceive the "public 
 or for such other reasons as are mantioned in 
 
 n ^ ^\ 'il'- ^'' ^-"- '2- ^^'6 Q'^'-'^'t V. Van 
 Dull.-,ii, 2 Ex. C. R. 304. 
 
 ^ Trai9m3,pk3.] -The Court has juriidictiou 
 
 1-0 1-cctiiy tlia register of trade-m irks in respect 
 3t entries m Ida therein without .suffieient cause 
 'itier before or subseiineat to t!ie 10th ilay of 
 ;|iuy, Is'Jl, the date on which the Act 54 & 55 
 * lot. ch. 35 (0.) came into force. 
 
 Oaislal Arbitrators —K'xhi'.iinnr Court Act 
 
 /ia'.e of CjiiH~R,ip„H 1,1/ Vio) Arhitntlor.s \ — 
 liy a, rule of Court inideoi 7oh M irch, 1S83 
 it wai oAlered thu, unless it w,n otherwise 
 specially ordered, any m itter pen ling before the 
 ^ olheial arbitrators when the Kxcheiiner (Jourt 
 Act, oO&ol Vict. eh. !(!, came into force that 
 hid been heard or partly heanl by sucli arbitra- 
 tors sliould be continue 1 before tuem as official 
 referees, .and that their reporD tliereon should 
 hi made to the Court in like inmii ;r as if such 
 matter ha I baan referred to theai bv the Court 
 under the 2oth section of th ) said Act. Prior 
 to the m iking of thia rule a claim had been 
 , referred by the .\[inisfcerof Riilwavs and Canals 
 ! to the oltieial arbitrators for investigition and 
 avyard. The claim, howevei-, was proceeded 
 j with and heard befiro two of such arbitrators 
 I only, and a report thereon in favour of the 
 claimant was made by then: to the Court. Ou 
 motion by claimant for juilgment on such 
 report : — 
 
 I Held, tiiat the heiring of the claim by two 
 I of the official arbitr.itors was not a hearing 
 I within the meaning of the rule, and that judg- 
 
427 EXECUTION. 
 
 meet could not be entered on the iei)ort. JHnjix- 
 V. The (Juttu, 2 Kx. C. H. 91. 
 
 Successive Applications for Same Relief, i 
 
 — lifi: AlUirwyilmtral for Ontario v. AlloniH/- 
 Qtneratfor Caiiatta, 1 Ex. C. R. 1S4. 
 
 428 
 
 EXECUTION. 
 
 I. Crelitoks' KtLiKF Act, 427. 
 
 11. EtiUITAIll.E E.XEcrTlON BY APPOINTMENT 
 
 OK Keceiver, 428. 
 
 III. Exemption,-*, 431. 
 
 IV. IssuiNo Execution, 432. 
 
 V. Special Matters and Per.son^, 433. 
 
 VI. Staying and Settinu Aside Execution, 
 436. 
 
 I. Creditors' Relief Act. 
 
 Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors. 1 1 
 — Creditors wliose executions 
 
 Receiver.]— The provisions of tlie ( niliton 
 Hchi't Aft are not to he extended to iiif'iH imi 
 actually provi<h.(l for hy that Act, ami thi n- 
 fore thi; aiipolntnunt of a receiver may propi riv 
 lie made for tlie lienetit of tiic phiintill' akijj 
 MrJ.tan V. A/k)i, 14 1". R. 84. 
 
 Sheriff's Interpleader — Claim hi/ Cliitit, I 
 Mi>iliiiiii,-,' — C/aimaiit Aliamluniiiii — J!iril,i, cf 
 Clnimaiit Uiiihr Ex< riilicii SiiIi'm ijinuih/ (;''• 
 m/;(K/.]— Certain gorjda of tlie defendant «ii/,il 
 by a sheriff under the iduintitl's' execution wn. 
 claimed by a ch.ittel mortgagee, whereiiiion an 
 interpleader issue was diieeted. 'I he i.ooil« 
 were .sold under the interpleader order bv tin- 
 slieritr, who deducted his ftes f r< m the' pn,. 
 ^eeds, and by consent retained the residue in 
 his hands jicnding the result of the issue, uiti-r- 
 ing it in his br.oks as held under the Cicditi^is' 
 Relief Act. The claimant never delivered any 
 issue, niul abandoned the inleipieader proui.l 
 ings. He obtaine<l judgment against the ileien- 
 dant, and, within thirty days of *he (utry hi 
 thesherili'a books, placed an execution in"tlie 
 sheriff's hands : — 
 
 Held, that the claimant was entitled to pin- 
 tioipa,te in the proceeds, and was not baried et 
 his rights as an execution creditor becauM , 
 l)efore he had attained that status, he had 
 asserted a right in a <litt'ereiit ca])acity. 
 
 Whatever might have been the etfc'ct, iiad liis 
 
 ,„ ,. . '"' '-■'-■''t'^'-'"'" claim been insisted upon 
 
 under the t reditors Relief Act are placed in the I t ion 3, of the Creditors' 
 
 sheriff's hands after the execution debtor has 
 made a general assignment for the benetit of his 
 creditors, are not entitled to share, under that 
 Act, in the proceeds of goods seized by the 
 sheriff under prior executions befoie the assign- 
 ment was made, the proceeds being iusulKeient 
 to pay these prior executions. 
 
 Ji'oac/i v. MiLwIihin, H) A. R. 400, applied. 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of .Simcoe 
 reversed. ]irtithuiq,t v. Mart; 20 A. R. (ib<J. 
 
 Certificate of Claim —t'o)i^p.s/a/io».] — Al- 
 though, under the Creditors' Relief Act, acie- 
 ditor who does not ctnie in within the peiind 
 prescribed, may not be entitlid to rank for a 
 dividend, he is interested in tlie pioper distri- 
 bution of the moneys lealized, and is there foie 
 under section 10 of the Act, entitled to con- 
 test the certificates of claim of other creditors, 
 
 for ill ease of success there may be a surplus vh. 1n the sh'eriff's hand.' 
 available (or him, or at least the liabilities of i the defendants' ycods. 
 
 of section 4, siil 
 Relief Act, 1!. 
 
 the CMunion debtor will be reduced. lUiii'n of 
 h ami/ to II v. Aitktn, 20 A. R. 616. 
 
 Chattel Mortgage— ir(';/e«.]— Executions 
 against goods in the hands of a slieriti' subse- 
 tjuent to the making of a chattel mortgage 
 
 ch. ().■), none should follow the fact that a .laim 
 was made and abandoned before it becau.i. 
 necessary to contest it. Wait v. Soiju; UP. 
 R. 347. 
 
 Staying Proceedings.]— After service of .i 
 writ of summons upon one of the partners in an 
 action against a partnership in the linn i anie, 
 an appearance was entered by a srdicilir in iln 
 names of both partners individually, but upcii 
 the instructions of one partner only, and vitii' ut 
 the authority of the other. Upon'niotion by tin 
 latter to set aside the appearance ai.d snl.-e- 
 fjuent proceedings : — 
 
 Held, tj.at the aj)peaianee and the plaiiit;li- 
 judgment founded thereon weie iriegular. 
 
 After the judgment had been set asiae, 
 several creditors of the defendants obtaii.ul 
 judgments against them, and jihued writs cl n. 
 under which lie .-(iLi 
 Up( n a UK tion by llu 
 plaintitis, made in their own action, and also in 
 the sexeral actions in which jud{.nunts. hail 
 been (ibtained, for an order direciiig the slieiiti 
 to pay tlie piocteds of the sale into Cmit, 
 instead of making the usual entries under tla- 
 Credit(irs' Relict Act, in oidcr to piestivc tl: 
 
 -. , 1 , = ,, , --;-- ■t-"t-~ • .■ I -- . ..M.i.'ii, i\tiit;i nci, 111 oHicr lo iirestivc ii:i' 
 
 the execution debtor, on the goods seized, attach priority of the plamtiCs' ju,)gnui,t, in ease it 
 only on the eejuity ot ledeniption, an.l are not should be restored upon appeal;— 
 entitleel under the C.editors' Relief Act, to Hehl, that theie was no i-ovcr, up, n th. 
 
 share with executions prior to the giving of the j plaintiffs 
 mortgage. ' ■ 
 
 The fact that in such a case the subseeiuent 
 executions are on judgments recovered for wages 
 gives them no priority under the Wages Act, 
 R. S. O. ch. 127, sec. 3, and they can take 
 nothing until the prior executions and the mort- 
 gagee iile paid ill full. 
 
 Judgment of the County Court of Elgin, con- 
 firming the sheriff's .scheme of distribution, 
 reveised. lioach v. McLachlan, 19 A. R. 4<JG. 
 
 I'over, upi 
 plilicaticn. to inttibrc with 
 sheriff's proceeding ujion writs of //. w. u 
 larly in his hands. Ma.-iui v. f( c; (i-,"l,-. 1'. 
 418, 
 
 II. EgiiTAiii.K ExKniiiv by 
 Reckivek. 
 
 f\l I'OINT.MKNT OF ■ 
 
 Judgment for Costs only — ,'l,s,v/;,;iff of 
 Juilijmtnt—litmluuiy Le<jiitte ami iixtiiilor.] 
 
EXECUTION. 
 
 430 
 
 iijs of *he ciitry ui 
 
 111 L'Xt'CUtidll ill'tlli 
 
 i AJ roIM'.MKNTiiF 
 
 -Under I!uIo 935 an ordfi- to attach .kl.t.s may 
 bo ffiiiiicled im a jiii|i,'iiioiit fur costs only 
 
 Trmitmnn v. /V4> ,/, J3 R K. l,-,3, '.li.sliii. 
 (fUlHlifd. 
 
 Under till' sainu rule nn assigiitc of a jiid.'- 
 ment, tlioiij,di n<.t a jiartv to tlio autioii' uKry 
 apply to cntoiTd tliu jiid-nuMit l.y alUiclmRiit. 
 
 All order may bo niadu attaching the amount, 
 if any, ooimiiik to a jiidijmeiit (UOilor as resi.lu- 
 ary K'^atue under a will, although it is un.h- 
 termined whether anything, and, if anythiiiL' 
 how inUL'h, is due to him. 
 
 Upon an inquiry as to whether anvtliiu" i^ 
 ductna judgment .lehlor as residuarv legatee 
 where he also has the eharaeter of exeeuto", the 
 legat(!ea ami rreditors ought to he hefore the 
 Court ; and the way to l.riug them heforc the 
 Couit IS by ailniinistratioii procoiMlings. 
 
 (iinn-r, whether the assignee of the judgment 
 would be entitled to administration. 
 
 The assignee of a judgment appointed reeeiver 
 by way of eiinitable exeeution to reeeive what- 
 ever interest llie judgment debtor mii'lit have 
 as residuary legatee. McLean v, Byiin; 14 J'. 
 K. 190. 
 
 vould have been 
 bt(pr had lotused 
 layed unreason- 
 
 Life Insurance — Suhsequmi Drchmth.i, 
 by IiMin; for B< wjii ofliU WiJ)- ami Chihlnn 1 
 -An order was made, after judgment in an 
 action, appointing a receiver and for the sale 
 by hmi of a p .licy on the life of the defen- 
 dant tor .«1,{)00 whieh would be fullv jiaid up in 
 ten years, and enjoining the defendant from 
 dealing with the jioliey. Xotwithstandiu.Mliis 
 the detendant maile an assignment or (Kvlara- 
 tion for the benelit of his wife and ehihlren 
 under K. ,S. (). ,.1,. i;j(j_ gj,;, 3 ._ 
 
 Held, revei-sing the deeision of Ferguson, J., 
 that the order iuv sale \^•as iinjiroijer. 
 
 Per lioyd, ('.— N,, order to sell should have 
 bewi ma.le again.st the will of the benelieiaries 
 under the assignment, ami r/Hr/jv if there was 
 jurisdiction to make any such order. 
 
 If the beiiuliciaries failed to pav the accruiu" 
 premiums, it might then be pVopcr, as the 
 receiver had no funds wherewith to pav them 
 to negotiate with the company for the surrender 
 of thi' ]i(iliey. 
 
 »oW y.'Cuiran, 29 Beav. (i.S7, doubted. 
 
 lor Kobert.son, .1.— It was oompeteut for the 
 (lefeiiili.ntatany time, even after the receiver- 
 ship order an,l injunction to make the declara- 
 tion tor th.. beiietit of his wife and children and 
 the planitiir could not interfere with the rhdits 
 of the benelieiaries under it at the maturity of 
 he policy, even suiiposiiig their rights to be 
 linute. to the residue after payment of the 
 plaiiititis execution, which sanhle they were 
 not. 
 
 IVr.Meredith, .J.— Whether there was power 
 to make the order to sell or not, it should ii.it 
 have been ma.le in this case, it not being shewn 
 to I,... necessary, lia\-ing regard not only to the 
 plaiiititl s interests, but to those of ot'-r parties 
 in tk. subject matter. Weekes v. FrawUj, 23 
 
 to bring an action in the name of the debtor 
 tor e.mstruetion of the will, 'l-he receiver had 
 not rcpicsted the debtor to bring the action, 
 .^md upon the application the latter expresse.l 
 Ins willingiie.sH to d.> .so and to proceed without 
 iiniiece.-sary delay ; — 
 
 Held, that the receiver 
 enlitled to the order if the 
 to bring the action or had 
 ably. 
 
 No order was made, but leave was leserveil 
 to the receiver to aiiidy again if the debtor did 
 u'Vir'-"' "'"' '''''''^^"^■'■■- ''^'■/'""' V. .l//t/,, 
 
 'Wm-Iii/itiif — .]/(t;n/inaiiri — "//, ,/•/,„ ,s',.,./-, 
 h'j'nt,/ nlii.t do /;7/((V//."]_L'li,ler a devise of 
 liiiiil to a father "during his life, for the 
 support and maintenance of liinis, If and his 
 three) ehildieii, with remainder to the heirs of 
 Ins b.,dy or to such of his children as he niay 
 dcvise the same to" there is no trust in favoiiV 
 of the cbiMieii so as to give them a bemticial 
 niterest apart from and independent ly of their 
 t.ither, but the children being in needy eireuni- 
 stanccs will be entitled as against thi' father's 
 execntioii creditor who has been .aipointed 
 receiver of his interest to have a share of the 
 ineoine set apart for their maintenanee and suii 
 port, aii.l Ml arriving at the share it is rea.son- 
 able to ,livide the income into alicniot parts 
 thus giving one-tonrth to the receiver. Ali!, 
 V. Fan,,:.., 20 A. R. ;U. 
 
 ■Will — Iii,,ht /„ "„ Horn," — Lite; xt h, 
 
 I /.„/„/.]_ A testator devised land to one in 
 
 ! trust, fii'st, to jieimil his nephew and his 
 
 ; wite and chihlrcn to u.se it for a home, ,-,iid 
 
 seccmd, to convey it to such child of the nephew 
 
 as the latter should nominate in his will The 
 
 nephew and his family were living upon the 
 
 , land at the time of the making of the will and 
 
 at the death of the testator, when there were 
 
 , two dwelliiig-lmuses thereon. Afterwards the 
 
 trustee and the nephew's father-in-law, at their 
 
 expense, improvi'il and altered the property so 
 
 that the number of houses was increased to 
 
 seven. The nephew lived with his family in 
 
 one and received the rents of the others. ' 
 
 Jn an action by judu'iiicnt creditors of the 
 
 nephew and his wife seeking the appointment 
 
 oi a receiver to receive the rents in satisfaction 
 
 ot the judgment : — 
 
 , tlehi, that the judgment ,lebtora took no 
 
 j estate m the land under the will, and notliim' 
 
 I more than the right to call upon the trustee to 
 
 ; liermit them to use the land for "a home," 
 
 i which expression, however, meant more than 
 
 I simjily a house to live in ; that they were 
 
 I entitled to the advantage of the increased value 
 
 i ot the land ; and that their rii;lit to the use of 
 
 i the land for a himie could not be reached tlirou<'h 
 
 •x receiver so as to make it available for the satfs- 
 
 ■■ D,ji,.Hoii. 24 (). R. 197, ante 56. 
 
 II a!,U, 
 
 fa.iion of the plaintitr's clniin. 
 
 Atlen v. /'»/■,/, .s,v, 2(( A. 1!. 34, ( 
 Camii-oii V. Ail(tiH-i, 2.5 O. I!. 2.MI. 
 
 stinguishod. 
 
 WiU—Ai'thii for Coii.'itnictioii.'l—A receiver 
 appointed l,y way of equitable exeeution to 
 rtceive the share of a judgment debtor under 
 a certain will, applied for an order for leave 
 
 ■Will — S'ec^ri'///.]— Motion bv the plaintiiTto 
 cmtiuue .an order for the appoinlinent of a 
 receiver by way of eiinitable execiith.n, and 
 niotmn by the defendant to discharge the order. 
 
 Ihe interest of the defendant in the jn'oiierty 
 sought to be realized was acquired under a will 
 devising an interest to liiin during his life for 
 
ii 
 
 431 
 
 EXECUTION. 
 
 432 
 
 fi '' 
 
 lit! 
 
 the ««pi)()rt and iiiaiiiti ■nance of himself imil his 
 eliihhcM, Willi iciiiiiiiiiU'r to the licirs of hJH 
 liody III' to siii'li of his cliihlicii iih he iiiiyht 
 (leviM(! the Niiiiif to. Tlu) pi(i|)eit_v in (|iie.stii)ii 
 consisted of leid as well as jiefsimal pro- 
 perly :— 
 
 Held, that the defeinl.iiit was entitled iiiidir 
 the will to a lieiietieiiil iiilelest whieli slinllld lie 
 
 U|)iiliid ill pay lit of his di hts ; Imt it eoiild 
 
 not )ii^ decided upon this niotnin whether hiti 
 cieditofs were entitled to the whole or only to 
 n pill tion. 
 
 2. 'i'liat as the rights of the reeeivcr were 
 liiiiiteil to reeeivin;; those nionoys whieli were 
 tile iihsiihite propeily of the deiitor free from 
 any trust, it was not iinpro|ier to make the 
 appoint iiient without security. 
 
 :i. That the provisions of tlic Creditors' 
 lielief Act form an e.\ee]ilion to the K'-'ieral rule 
 and are imt to he extended to eases not actually 
 provided for hy that Act: and therel'ore the 
 appiiintiiieiit of th<^ receiver was ]iropcrly made 
 for the lieiielit of the plaintill' alone. 
 
 4. That costs should not have lieen awaidcdf 
 against the defendant upon an ex /taiii motion, j 
 
 ."). That it is proper to appoint the receiver in | 
 
 the actioniiiwhicli judgment had heen recovered. | 
 McLaiii V. Mini, 14 1". II. S4. | 
 
 i 
 Se.e, also, xVi't.vciimknt su' Ukbts. 
 
 ] Where in an intorplcnder issue the ehiimatit 
 j alleges that the goods .seiz(Ml inehn'e the stntii 
 ; tory exemptions, that is a i|Uestioii for tniil in 
 : the issue and is not to lie left to the sin i ill' i„ 
 I ileal with. 
 
 .ludgineiit of the County Conrt of (hita' n 
 reversed. Fkid v. Hail, '2'i. A. R. 44!). 
 
 111. KXEMI'TIO.N.S, 
 
 Free Grants— //'/'ov.s/ n/ Localcc o.s- ^forl■ 
 (lai/if. I -The interest of a localee in a mortgage 
 taken hy him to secure part of the iiurehase 
 uioncy of land granted to him under the Free 
 (irants Act is not excnijit. Judgment of Boyd. 
 C, 1!)(). R. 4'2'_', atlirmed. Cuhii v. Kiinll'H) 
 O. R. 2!)l. 
 
 Insurance. 1 — A judgment creditor cannot 
 obtain hy a recei\in;,' order money jiayable to 
 hin ilehtor in respect of insurance upon exeinjited 
 chattels. The money takes the place of the 
 chattels and is subject to the same protection. 
 0,<hr v. M,ihr, 1<) A. R. 94. 
 
 Interpleader ^Shn-vl'.] — A sherilf sued in 
 the County Court hy an execution ilehtor for 
 SltK) damages, the value of iniplementa seized 
 and sold hy ihu sherill' without any special 
 direction from the execution creditor and alleg- 
 ed to he exempt, cannot obtain in that Court 
 an interpleailer order directing the trial of an 
 issue between the execution debtor and the 
 execution creditor, to .settle whether the iniiile- 
 ments were exempt or not. The sherifV acts at 
 hia <mn peril in granting or refusing the ex- 
 emption. 
 
 Prohibition granted, the County Court having 
 no jui isiliclion to make such an order. 
 
 .ludgiiient of the (^hieeii's Reneh Division, •>.{ 
 O. R. (cH, reversed, .Maclonnui, ,1. A. dissent- 
 ing. //( ri' (,'0111(1 v. J/uj)i', lMI A. R. ,'!47. 
 
 Interpleader— ,S7i''W//'—/;;/(f of ,SWA'.l — An 
 execution debtor can do as he pleases with the 
 atatumry rvcinpfifnig and his executifin crcditiir 
 cannot take advantage of the fact that they are 
 insulficiently described in a bill of sale thereof 
 hy the execution debtor. 
 
 IV. IsSriNO K.XKCI'TION. 
 
 Death of Plaintiff after Verdict and 
 
 Before Judgment— .1 —■/;//)//((/(/' o/' \',,;li,i.\ 
 In ail action for malicious prosecution the jury 
 found a general verdict for the plaiutilV with 
 damages. The defendant moved to set asiij.: 
 the verdiei, and hia motion being disiuissi,!, 
 I gave seciir/; for the purpose of an appeal' 
 after whidi the plaintiff assigned " the vi i'. 
 I diet or iiui-n.ent" to his daughter, and dii.l 
 about three months later. No juilgmeut liail 
 been entered, nor was there any order or dim- 
 I tion of the Judge for the entry of judgiiicnt 
 15y an «• /iiirlr order, made on 'the applirati..n 
 of the next friend of the plaintill's daughter, 
 after his death, the assignment to hep was 
 recited, and it was onlered that the .-ictiim 
 should stand revived in her nniue ; — 
 
 Held, that the action could not be revived or 
 continued by or against the daughter, she not 
 being the assignee of a judgment, and the cause 
 of action not being one caiialile ol being assiyn, J 
 ti' her so as to sue for it in her own name rami 
 the defendant's ajipeal could not be heaid in tin; 
 absence of the legal personal representative df 
 the plaintiff. 
 
 Srinlile, the assignee of n judgment delit miiy 
 obtain an order to enter a suggestion reviving 
 the action for the purpose of issuing execution 
 in his own name. 
 i /•hil>i>.-, V. J-;,x, 8 I'. R. .->1. refericd te. 
 Uliiirv. AKs(:l.-itiiir, l,-» ]'. R. oii_ 
 
 ! 
 
 Judgment More than Twenty Years Old 
 
 —Stahiti of Liiiiiliili(,iis.]~'lUf limit ,,f tuciiiv 
 
 years hoilig fixed by H. ,S. (). cli. (iO. .sec. 1 . aftiV 
 
 which, in the alisence of liayment or aciiiinwl- 
 
 edgeiiient, an action cannot" be brougiit iiiinii 
 
 a judgment, the analogy of the statute app'li.s 
 
 to applications fur leave 'to issue execution aftrr 
 
 the la[)se of twenty years from the date of the 
 
 i judgment or the return of tlielast execution. 
 
 ! An issue directed under Rule ^SSli, to try tiie 
 
 Jipiestion of lialiility upon a judgment iiiere 
 
 tlian twenty years old, is an action within the 
 
 I meaning of R. S. (). eh. (!(•, .sec. 1, and tli« 
 
 '■ Statute of Limitations would be a good ilcfcncu. 
 
 i rrke V. m„/e, 14 P. it. .SJI. 
 
 j Motion to Set Aside Judgment — !■>< nilum 
 ;/««':(/ Jl./on /lu-ii;,,:] — After judiriiitnt 
 pronounced by the Court upon default of 
 detence the plaintilf died, and the delemhuit, 
 : desiring to have the judgment set aside and lie 
 , let ill to defend, issued a /miri/ii' order iiuilrr 
 I Rule ti'J2 reviving the action in the name of the 
 ! executor of the plaintill's will. 
 
 Upon motion to set this onier aside ; — 
 Held, that Rule (J:2-2 shouhl he read as applic- 
 able t.i a case in which iiiial jiidgineiit hus'fieeii 
 entered; and, us it was necessary tliat the 
 j defendant should lie allowed to carrv on the 
 i proceedings, the order should be sustained. 
 
433 
 
 EXECUTION 
 
 pr ixsiio tlic flaiiri.iTit 
 il itifhii't) till' hidtii 
 cHlcstioii for triiil in 
 Ifft to the Bijitill I., 
 
 lil'iiM'^Ill ll|)(ill 
 
 434 
 
 AniMiit V. Sinifh, 40 Cli. I). .V,:, diHtiii- 
 
 C'iVmv. ShejH./,/, L'fM'li. I), :)!is, ,111(1 TwycroMi, 
 V. (•■rant. 4 ('. 1'. It. 4(t, fi. II.. wrd. 
 
 Attif till! ilrath of the iiliiiiitill' 1111(1 l.cfon. the 
 (jrcU;i of ruvivor tlii' Holicitor who Imil iictcd for 
 
 lier inHlltMl li Wl'itof /(///;. /'f(r'. y,„,,,, Ulioll tlic jlldu- 
 iilfiit, without the Ii'iivu if(|iiiiL'd \,y Knle NSII: 
 
 HiM, thiit tlif writ wan int'milivr ; aiid it wui 
 eiiii|»'tciit for thf (Mity iilFectiMl liy it to .■ipplv 
 tci x.t it anidi^ without tirst icviviiij,' tho lutioii. 
 Chanihern v. Kilrhiii, Ki 1'. H. 'il!). 
 
 V. Sl'KCIAI, Mattkhs ami I'kusoss. 
 
 Administrators. |— The iidiiiiiiistriitors of an 
 ins.. hunt dccciHcd person contnictcd to sidl 
 Willie of his hinds, Siil,s(.,m,.,,t|y to the eoii- 
 triiit .1 creditor who had olilaiiicil iv jiid^'mcnt 
 ag.iiiiMt the (luccaHcd in his life tiiiu,' 7ssiiod 
 f\tvuti(in thurc'on niidur an ex iiitric inAi^y there- 
 fur .iiiaiiiHt tlu' estate in the hands of the 
 iiihiiiiiistrators : — 
 
 Held, that the exeeiilion forinod no eliar^'u oi- 
 I'lMiiiiliraneu on the lands eoiitracled to he sold. 
 
 Oiileis should not lie ni.ide ,-x inrU all(iwiii..^f 
 i.isiu' of execution iij,'ainst ({nods of a testator or 
 iiiti-tati- ill thu hands of .-ui executor or admin- 
 iatiator. In >■<■ Trnst.H Cor/)oi-atioii of Ou/ariu 
 uwlJiir/imer, M (). K. I'll. 
 
 Collusive Purchase. I -Tli.Kooilsof a tenant 
 were Hei/.(Ml torrent and ollered for sale l>y a 
 liaililV. The leiiani liidlhem in and they wens 
 
 •'!' lialely si'i/ed under an exeeiition iigiiinHt 
 
 him on hehalf of an eX" ution creditor of tlic 
 teliaiil. They Were then ( l.iiiiied hy a third 
 |ier.Min, who aile^-ed tli.i! the tenant was in 
 icality liiddiii),' for him and this claiiiiaiit ixiiil 
 the |iiircha.~e money : - 
 
 Held, that if the pHids wercsold at anundor- 
 \aliie owing to the liids l,eiiii{ iii ido hv the 
 lemint osten-ilily for himself as part of a si'dufino 
 lietweeii the tenant and claimant to dufent 
 creditors liv keeping down the |irice, tlu. Naht 
 would he fraiiilulent and Miid as against this 
 creditors of the tenant, though it would lie 
 good as far as the purchase money was concerni-il, 
 which ( iiiild not in any event he recovered back 
 hy the claimant. 
 
 Aiipeal alloucd and a lew ti i.d ordered. 
 |.NV//icf(H V. l-'niiicl^, ISA. I!. Il'I. 
 
 Alimony — -U((>7c./\ J!'iii>if.] ~ Where a 
 
 rof.Teiiue is directed to the mast'T to asuertain 
 anil state the amount of alimony which the 
 ilet'ciulaiit sliould pay, execution may he i.saueil 
 fur the amount found hy hi.s report; "het'ore eoii- 
 tirmitioii thereof. L'wis v. 'I'lillmt Slnit <!i-(u-f.l 
 Jl'i.fd I'll., 11) R 1!. 1,-,, approved and followed 
 Jivkv. Hard; 10 I*. K. :ilH. 
 
 Artisan's ljlen — }fruui/iirfH>-i: of linrl;< on 
 
 P,-upn-tii of Aiioflirr rn:<'oti-~l',is.i.'«>,;oii. ] -The 
 plaintiff was employed to niiinufacture bricks 
 for ,-ui(ither in a hrickyard helonging to tiie 
 latter, (.f which, hortcver, the plaintiti' held 
 p(i.s>us3ion for the jnirpo.se of his contract, and 
 remained and was in possession ,,f the hricks at 
 the time of their seizure hv the shcritl' under an 
 cxiTut ion against the owji'er of tlie hrickvard 
 WHO, iiinncdi itcly after such seizure, made an 
 iissi.,'iiMiciit for the lieiielit of creditors :-- 
 
 Hel.l, that the jilaintiir was entitled to a lien 
 upea the hricks in prioritv to the exeeiilioii and 
 a.ssigniiient tor the lienetit of creditoi.s, and aNo 
 iniaioiity to the chiiiii of a chattel niort.'a.'ce 
 thuiigh Ins mortgage covered l.riek in con's? ,,f 
 niamifaoture diiriiiu' its continuance. A'<,h< rh v 
 Bunk if 'i'nroiil'i, •_>.".(). l;. loi. 
 
 As.slgnment forCre(Jltors-/'»,v/,rt„-,. J/,„„ ,, 
 of hnrl SoN Umkr -l/e-V;/,,;/,. ]._Wl,ere, afte'r 
 a.salu ot mortgaged premi.ses in an action for 
 
 hat iiu,po.-;e, tlie mortgagor made an assi-nniciK ' 
 tor the lieneht of his creditors under H. ,S. (). i 
 cli. l-'4, helore certain jn-ior execution creditors. 
 
 mil cstalihshed their claims in tli.j .Master's' 
 «J tice to the balance of purchase money, after 
 satisfying the amount i.f t 'le mort..-. 
 
 Held, that tl 
 
 fie mortgage 
 
 Ooats - " //((»(. (/i.(/../;/,"]— The word '< imnie- 
 I diately " in WwV- 8(i.'{ means " instanter ; " and 
 ! a parly to whom costs are awarded bv an order 
 i may issue execution therefor on the day of the 
 'taxation. ( ' In dv \ . ('raijkloii, 14 1'. K". :tt. 
 
 Equitable Interest of Purchaser under 
 
 Contract, — Ji(il;imi 11/ nicin^l A's'ljiih' of aioh 
 
 I I'liri-lin.-ii',:] -Tho ei|uitable infeicst of an" assig- 
 
 I nee from the inirchaserof a contract lor the sale 
 
 I lands, is e.-'igible under ii writ of _//.,■/ I'li^ini lA 
 
 ■ against the lands of such assi_L;iiue,"aiid't he mir- 
 
 chaser at a sheriff's s.ile of such interesl is 
 
 entitled to .spjcitic performance of the oontnu;t. 
 
 !!'■ I'ritlir II ad Criniforil, il (.'. f,. '{'. 45, 
 
 declared to have been inadvertently (lecideil or 
 
 leported. It'((r(l v Arc/nr, -.M < >. R. iriO. 
 
 Fixtures— .1/oWj/rt;/e of A', „//,/,] -'|'|,e fact 
 
 : that fixtures atiixed to the freehold in the usual 
 
 I way have sometimes been niortgageil as chattel.s, 
 
 \ and on other occasions have passed with a inort- 
 
 . ga.ge of the freehold does not render tlietii 
 
 exigible to an execution against goods if at tins 
 
 time of the seizure tho chattid mortgages are 
 
 non-existent, and a mortgage i,f the freehohl is 
 
 iu existence as a tirst charge tlureon. Carioit 
 
 V. ^iinjisnii, 2.') O. H, .'!S."i. 
 
 ^ Goods, 1- Whore pureha.M rs are not iu ijues- 
 tioii. the issue of a writ of exe(.-utioii give.s 11 
 speeiMccIaim to the goods of a jiidgmeiit debtor, 
 which remains till s.itisfaclion of tliedcbt ; and, 
 ihciefoie. the withdrawal of the sherill'does not 
 prcclud" further action upon tiie writ. Oemit 
 V. Fnniinii, 1-1 1". R. ;i8(). 
 
 Married 'Women— ATrcv/'/,,,, ni/nhisf. /fu,s- 
 l"iiii/.\-ln an action by A,, a mariied woman, 
 ag.-iinst a sheiilffor taking, under an execution 
 against her hushaiKl. good-; which siie ehiiined 
 as her separ.ite property under the .Married 
 Woman's I'roiierty Act, it. ,S. N. S, oth ser. ch. 
 !>4, the sherill' justilied under the executiori 
 without proving the judgnieiiL on which it was 
 issued. The execution w.is against Donald A. 
 and it was claimed that the Iiusband's iiainewa.s 
 
 entitled tc 
 to.'iatisfv tl 
 
 the assignee for credit 
 
 D.miel. 
 
 le jury loiiiiil thai he w; 
 
 clli 
 
 balaiK'c freed f 
 
 roiii any liability 
 
 or.s was I by both names, and that A.'s right to tiie 
 
 atone, -JO 0. K. ;{.lo, 
 
 le executions out of it. Carit 
 
 MP 
 
 &* 
 
 hIs 
 
 'd from her husband after 
 
 r\: I marriage, which would not nrike it h 
 projierty under the Act :— 
 
 er sejjarate 
 
4S8 
 
 EXECUTION. 
 
 I3& 
 
 f 
 
 IT'. fiK 
 
 Hi'lil. iTvciMiii',' tho jiiilnniint of Ih.. ('i)iii( 
 below, tlial Ihi^ lU'tinn conlcl tint lii' tiiitliilulni!<l ; 
 timt It Nliiiill HiK'd in tH'»|piisH ur trovcf U>y ink- 
 iny ;kiiiiiIm Nii/cil iiiiili'i' I'M', iilidri inn jiiKlitv 
 iincli'i' thr iMiim f witlioiit hlii^u in;< tlir jiid);- 
 mwif. Iliiiimiii \. Mil.Kiii, ;< ,s, ('. K. 7011, 
 followed i iiri.l tliHt Milder tlir lindiiiKs of llit' 
 jury, wliicli wt re .ini|)ly Nii|i|ioitcd hy ih,. 
 • •vidciicc, Hid pH)d- M'izid iiiiiMt !).■ conn'idiicd 
 to Ik'Imm); to tlic IiiimIiiuuI, wliicli wii» a coinpictf 
 unNWci to tlio iiftioii. Cfoirt \. Ailnm.s. "I 
 
 s. c. 1;. :u'.». 
 
 Lands Vested In Trustee — Kxirniinii.i 
 •uiaiiisi C.in; ,,,„ •/V(M^|-Li,Ild^ weiu oon- 
 voycd (<i, and lidd in I lie niinif of a tiiisti'c. at 
 Ihf instance and for tlie Imielii of imotjier, Imt 
 witlnmt any diselo.sed tiust. Wiitn of li. j,t. 
 lands a,!,'aiiist the i-i,liii ./ui- Inist weio pla'ct'd iii 
 the Hlieiitl N liand.s l.efoie his ileatli, Iml after 
 flic I'onveyaiieeto the tinstee. After the ileatli 
 of the C'.-hii fjiii tni-</ his udiiiiniHtratoi « sold the 
 landH, and ollfied to convey the lands with tiiu 
 trnHtee ; — 
 
 Held, that the purchaser wn.s not hound to 
 iiarry onl the >ale iinlesH tho wiits wort removed 
 or released. /!, Tni.il.-^ Corporation 0/ Ontario 
 nnd Mii//(uiil, •_';> (». R. ij;),s. 
 
 K. S. (». eh. 157, Ht'c. .VJ, connldured iiml , n 
 Mtriiod. 
 
 Simhl,, that nothin),' imcses liy micli it nalr 
 under exeeufion ; for the WordN " i{0(iils ,,|„i 
 I'h.ittels " iiiMeetlon Itlot the Mxeeiition A( ;, I; 
 >*. (). eh. Ot, do not inelnde shares in an ,111111 
 porated eiunpaiiy mi as to anlhori/e the siil. ,( 
 the npiity of ledeniption in .suoli -liaren. 
 Morion V. ('oinni, l'oO. |{, ,V.'(», 
 
 I Set M Vict. ch. i;i, HLv. ;iL' ((».). 
 
 I Writ of Execution — /o,h/. | j,, .j, 
 
 I'fovineeof Nova .Seeti.i writs of exeeiitioi, i,,,.,, 
 not 1)1! Hij.nid hy the prothonotarv of the Cmrr 
 
 I It IS the seal of the ('durt «liieir gives valhlitv 
 to smh writs, nut the si^jnutnie of the 1 flla'r 
 
 I .In-hiltii/il V. Jliih/ii/, IS S. ('. H. llti. 
 
 Vr. Stavimi .\mi Skttinu Asihk Km;i 
 
 Mortgage— I'oinr 0/ Snle—Nofirr „/ So/,'— 
 ExeaitiuH Cr,dili,r.] — \i\ taking,' proceedings 
 under a (lower of sale in a niortgai,'e drawn 
 under the "Short Forms Act," execution ere- 
 ilitorsof the mortgagor come within the scope 
 of (he word "assignu," and as such are entitled 
 to notice nnder power of sale, lint only those 
 Imvingixceiitionsin th<' sherifFs haiiils at the 
 time notice of default is given need he served 
 A'c Alilioll v. Mii/c(,(r, -JO (». H. L'!!!). ' 
 
 Partner — J>(/i miiiiiiii/ Llaliililii, )— Where an 
 application is made under Rule'sTIi for leave 
 to issue execution, upon a judgment against a 
 firm, against an alleged nicmiierof the tirni, who 
 lias not admitted that he was and has not heeii 
 adjudged to he a paitner, and who was not 
 served as a iiartner with the writ of .summons, 
 and whoilisputes his liability, there is m, power 
 111 the Court or a .ludge, under Kule 7,-)(i or 
 otheI•wis.^to siimiiiaiily determine the i|Uesti<in 
 <if hi.s liahihty : Imt an i.ssue must he directed 
 
 Tinmvit V. Maiihitrd, Vi 1>. |!. (Hi), over- 
 ruled. Stainlurd liunk v. Friml, Ml'. R. .^,-) 
 
 Appeal to Court of Appeal - Mai,„;t„ 
 
 ,/in/iii,i,iif.\ The defenilant in appealing tii tin 
 
 .Court (if A|)peal from a manifold juil'.;nieiit o! 
 
 I the High t'otirt in an action for spciilie rin 
 
 I foiniaiici,., directing the e\ecutiiiii hv liiin ef ;, 
 
 j conveyance, the delivery of doeum'eiits, etc', 
 
 ! ami iil.xo the payment ol" a xnm for costs 't,f (h, 
 
 I action, gave .security for the costs of the Cniirf 
 
 I of Appeal and for iiayment of the costs ol the 
 
 ; action, Imt did not execute the eoincviiiiw 
 
 : ileposit the documents in Court, or otiriiwiiic 
 
 Comply with the judgment or the provisidus „i 
 
 , Rnli' ,S()4, Mill-sections 1, 2, li :-■ 
 
 i Held, t hat, upon the perfecting of t he .security, 
 
 there was a stay of execution, amoiintiie. te it 
 
 ; stijii.rsedens, as to the costs of the aetinii, l,v 
 
 I virtue of aiili-section 4 of IJiile ,M((4, althii'iij.''h 
 
 I the defendtint had done nothing w itii ic>p..( t to 
 
 the parts of the jmlgmeiit falling uinlci tin. 
 
 other sub-sections ; and garnishing ])rocc..,liii^., 
 
 taken for the |nirposc of collecting sucli ccj.s 
 
 (were not sustainable. \'iiin>n \ . Xorllii m, I," 
 
 iP. R. 171. 
 
 Partner— .Vf(/< 0/ Shfir(.]—\Jm\or an execu- 
 tion against ,",n individual partner the sheritV can 
 seize the piirtiieisl) I p goods and sell the execu- 
 tion debtor's share, whatever mav be the ditii- 
 culties which ari.se thereafter ; and the .ludi.a- 
 ture Act hast made no ilitierence in this resiieot 
 J/arrixou v. Hurri.<oi,, 14 P. R. 4.S(i. 
 
 Shares— .4. «!V////»i/,/ not Eiiferid.]~A l,ow1 
 />de. assignment or pledge for value of shares in 
 the eajtital stock of a coiniiaiiy incorporated 
 under R. ,S. (). ch. l.-)7 is valid between the 
 a.-;signor and the a.ssiignee. notwithstanding that 
 110 entry of the assignment or tiansfer i.s'inade 
 in the books of the company : and, as only the 
 dtditor's interest in property seized ejin be sold 
 under execution, the lights of a /-o?i(; /fi/p assignee 
 cannot be cut out by the .seizure and sale of the 
 shares, under execution against the assignor, 
 after the assignment. 
 
 Appeal to the Privy Council,]— Uhiit 
 
 the plaintills were aiipealing to the Privy ( omi. 
 
 cil from a jiidgnient of the (.'ourt of Appciddis- 
 
 missing with costs an appeal from the judmncnt 
 ■ of the (Queen's liencli Division in favour nf llic 
 
 defendants with costs, anil had given srciuiii 
 
 in !i«'J,()(IO, as rci|uircil by section U' of K. s (i 
 
 ch. 41 ;— 
 j Ifeld, that the order of a Judge of the Cdiiit 
 j of .Apiieal, under section,"), allowing the seciiritv, 
 
 should not have stayed the pidccediii<;^ m tlii> 
 
 action, and so much of the order as lelatuil !ii 
 
 the stay should be rescinded : — 
 j Held, also, that the plaintiffs not having given 
 I .security to stay execution for the costs "in tlio 
 , Courts below, and the .stay being reiuovtil, if 
 I they now desired to have "execution for .such 
 j costs stayed, they should give seciiritv tliuiefnr 
 
 as provided by Rule S04, which is made iiijilii 
 
 able by section 4 of the Act : — 
 
 Held, al.so, that if an order for payment out 
 
 of the High Court of money therein, awaitiiii; 
 
 the result of litigation, was "execution" witliin 
 I the !)u^•lning of section .", it was ;il;iycii liy i!:f 
 I allowance of the security, and required iiooiiler; 
 I if it was not execution, a Judge of the Court of 
 I Appeal had no jurisdiction to stay prorcoliiigs 
 . in the Court below ; and it was'fer the High 
 
.', f'lrmiili'fiMl iiti 1 , ., 
 
 \iufw» liy HiK'li II ,i,|,. 
 
 I' worilH " \f 1^ ,,„' 
 
 fill' l''.Xfi!iiti(Mi Ai :. I: 
 Ic Mliari'M in mi ,|,, ,,, 
 aiithorj/c^ thf s:vl, , i 
 ion ill Miioli -li,in„ 
 :. .V.MI. 
 
 ;w ((>.). 
 
 - /■()/•»(. I - III ;|„ 
 
 I'itM of I'xi'c'Utiiin till,. 
 iiincl.iry ol' tlir ('..nrt 
 
 «liii'li y'J\\\-» vali.llfj 
 iiiitiii'.' of tilt (Hirer 
 
 ('. H. 11(1. 
 
 <: AsiiiK Ksij I ,,, V 
 
 Appeal .!/'«/. , 
 it in iijiiicalinu In' [h 
 mnifolil jnil'^iiiiiii i. 
 tioii for n))(rii|f |,|, 
 vi'futlon liy iiiiii i.f ;, 
 
 of (locnim^iits, (tr., 
 , BUin foi' costs of till' 
 he fONtM of tin. ( „||,., 
 nt of till! ocMt.s (it till 
 lite tliu (.■(iini.y.iii|.c, 
 
 Conit, or otli'rMvi.<(. 
 t or t\w |ir(ivi>.ii.ii.s III 
 
 L'ctingof tliu suciirity, 
 tion, iiiiioiintiiiL,' U< a 
 
 stH of tllL' iictidli, liy 
 
 i:iil'' SII4, iiltlKiiisii 
 
 tliiiiL' \\itli n.>ii..ct t.) 
 
 It f.'lllin;; lUliil-l till 
 
 rni.iliin^' ]iroi.cnliii^s 
 M)IK'ctin^' .mifli insts 
 'lain \. Xoilhiiiii; 15 
 
 Council. ] — Where. 
 ti to the l'ri\ y t uiiii- 
 Court of Ain'iiiil ili.<. 
 il from the jiiilL;iiitii: 
 sion ill fiiVdiir i.f lli.. 
 I had given .seeiiriiy 
 ieetiou •_' of H, S. (i. 
 
 , Jn(li,'e of tile CdMit 
 llowinm' theseeiirity, 
 ■ proeeeiling-; in tl'ie 
 order as reliiteil to 
 
 tifl'M not liavin^'dveii 
 'or the eosta in tlio 
 y heini; renioveii, if 
 exeeutioii for sueli 
 ve seeiiiity tlierefiir 
 hioli i.s made al'plic- 
 
 ler for payinent out 
 ey therein, awaiting 
 
 "execution '' witliin 
 t « lis r:t:iycd iiy the 
 d required nnonlcr; 
 idge of the Court of 
 
 to stay proceeiliiigs 
 it was for tlie High 
 
 437 
 
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS 
 
 438 
 
 tourl I > (lut«rrninii wlietiicr iiieii an order m\» 
 "elcutioii," iiiid if not, wliether thei moiiev 
 (mid mit. Mi'iliixliiv. Ilii,lfui;l, 10 
 
 uliofld lie 
 
 I'. Fi. '.U 
 
 Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada 
 
 —Cmidihuii iif ISiiilit~( 'litis Ainn-iliil hi/ Jnihi 
 mi-nt Apjutiliil l'',„m.\ -h\ an a|>iM.al'to tlio 
 Suprenit! Court of Ciumda, altlioii.,'li it \-* not 
 iieceHwiry that the iippellaiit ><hoiil(l liea jiarty 
 totlic a]i|iiai lioiid, if he is mid,, a pirty anil 
 il.wH not e\eciit(' the liond, the rcHpondeiit i.^ 
 i-ntitlc.l to have it ili.i.illowed. 
 
 Ill an appial hoiiil, where the olijoet wiii not 
 ..Illy to Meciire paymentof the .'osts whii'h nnV'lit 
 \k iiwarilid hy tin- .Supreme Court of Caii.id i 
 iiiiikr.se,-tioli-ltiof I!, .S.l'.cli. I.'!.'), I.iit aj.so un.ler 
 section 47 ('■) to procure a stay of exei-uti.m of 
 the jlld.U'Miellt .■ippi,.;iled from 'a,s to the CLstH 
 tlierehy awarde.l a,i,'aiii.st the appelhiiit, the eon- 
 .litimi »a.s ".shall eHeelually pro.seciite the naid 
 apiwal and pay Huch co-its luid dama.,',-; as may ' 
 liea«iinleda;,'ain.it the appellant hy the Supreme 
 Ciiurt of Camilla, and .shiH jiay tile amount /.// , 
 th'Kiiiil miiiliiiiiiil jwhjiniiil direetod to he paid. ' 
 either as a deht or for (lamaKeM or lostM," eto.:— 
 
 Held, that thi.s did not cover the costs awarded 
 ii^'iiinst the appellant hy the jiid-nieiit appealed 
 from. IliiliiiiMin V. J/inri'i, 14 I'. 1 1. ;i~n. 
 
 order ahuolnte would Invo operutml tin a Htay of 
 cxecutiiiM, iMit not -o tli(Miltaeliii|.,' order uii.l 
 siimnioiiH : the duty of the ><arni«liee wan to pay 
 the sheritl, advisiii- him at the name time of tli'e 
 eyisteiiee of the .ittilclliliy older, and tIliM w.ail.l 
 I have lieeii eijuivaleiit to a pavment into Court 
 Unnjr \\ Fri'iiiiiii, 14 I', I!. ;).'U). 
 
 Order for Oostii— A'«/(Ve nf Tiixniinii ~l!i 
 liLuilii,,!.] The defendant ol'.tailied an onh 
 di.smi.ssin;u theaction with costs for noiipro.secu- 
 tion, ii[)on notice to the plaintilf, win. did not 
 :ippear iipuii the motion. The deleiidiint did 
 not serve the plaintill with a copy m' the order, 
 and went on and taxed his eost^., without notic. 
 to tlio pliiiitilf, and issued t.xeeiitioii for lie 
 amount taxid ; — 
 
 Meld, no ground for setting a-side the oxeuii 
 turn thai I he order had not lieeii served hefor. 
 the fixation. 
 
 Iliilil.in V. I!„hiits„ii, '.>;}(,). H. I). I'Jti,,,, di». 
 Iiiuiuishcd : — 
 
 Held, iiIm), that the ahseneo of a notice ot 
 taxation wjis not an irregularitv entitling the 
 plaintill to set aside the execution, l.iit only lo 
 a retaxatioii of the costs. 
 
 U'lyil V. Kin', •' Dowl. I J.-,, followed. Cmn- 
 ■•'ill, V. /I/,,;,; li) V. R. IG7. 
 
 Appeal to the Supremo Court of Canada 
 
 -Miiiiiii hi Ciiurl I'lnjiiinii (hil.\-'\'\u- plain- 
 tiffs apiiealed to the Cmirt of Appeal from a 
 jiiili,'ineiit (if the High Court dismissing tlieir 
 ;iction with costs, and give the security for 
 the costs of appeal reipiired by section 71 of 
 the ■luilicature Act, hy paying .S400 into 
 I'ourt, ami also gave the .security required 
 hy Kule S04 (4), in order to stav the exeeii- 
 liou (.( the judgnieni lielow for 'taxed co.-l> 
 liy paying Si.'Wl'.M into Court. Their appeal 
 v.as (liaimssed with co.sts, Desiring to apiieal 
 t'^ tliu Supreme Cimrt of Canada, they paid 
 •S")00 more into Court, and this was iillnwcd 
 liyaJii.lge of the (.•ourt of Appeal na .security 
 for the costs of the further appeal : — 
 
 Held, that execution was stayed npim the 
 jnilgii.eiits of the High Court and Court of 
 Appeal until the decision of the Supreme Court. 
 
 Cdnslruetioii of sections 4li, 47 (t), and 48 of 
 the .•supreme and Excheiii.er Courts Act, R. S 
 ('. ell. I ;!,"). 
 
 Hmlili, that payment out of the monevs in' 
 l^ourt to the (lefcnd.int of his costs of tho'Hi..|i 
 '-'ijurt and Court of Appeal, upon 1 lie under- 
 taking of his aidieitors to repay in the event of 
 tlietiirlherappcalsueceediiiL', could not properly ' 
 he ordered. " i i j . 
 
 Kill If Y. Iiiiperiiil Liiriii Co., 10 1'. l! 4!)<) I 
 eomnieiited on. Aiiricullunil li,.-<nriu,i:v Co. v! ' 
 Sariji:i,i, Ki p. K. sijj, | 
 
 I 
 Attaching Order.]-A sherift's return to a i 
 wntol «._/„. goods set forth that he wasiiotiried i 
 tliat he amount of the judgment to he executed ! 
 liia heeu atlached l.y a judgment creditor of 
 tiie execution creditor, and that the execution 
 "eDtor (the garnishee) had thereupon satisfied . 
 'lie claim ot the garnishor, in fact there wa.s i 
 ' -'ly ;tn onier to attach und a summons to pav i 
 "ver, hut no order absolute :— 
 Held, that the return was insullieieiit iusuh- 
 tance, because it shewed that the writ remained ' 
 "^executed without legal excuse ; a garnishee 
 
 Revivor.]— After the death of the plaintill 
 and before the order of revivor the sidieitor who 
 lia.l acted tor lii.|. issued a writ of /ml,, fm: /<(..v... 
 upon the judgment, without the leave reiiuired 
 by Hide .vsi; .- _ 
 
 ir.M, that the writ was irregular; and it was 
 competent for the pai ly alleeted l.y it to apply 
 toset it aside witln.ut liist reviving theaction. 
 : C/(. '////„,•,, V, h'lfrliM,, Hi 1'. i;. oil). 
 
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS 
 
 < I. AccorsTs, 4;is. 
 
 ' II. AuMiMsrinTioN, 43!l. 
 
 III. AllVEItTlSK.MKSr KOHCllF.DlloRS, 441. 
 
 IV. liRE.VCll Ol.- Tl!l.-.ST, 441. 
 ' V. Costs, UX 
 
 VI. dlDCMK.NT Ac.MNST, 444. 
 
 VII. P.\v.mi:nt TO .\.\i) I'.v, 444. 
 
 ; V'lII. PoWKllS .VM. LlAlUl.lTlKS, 44"). 
 
 I IX. ?Ror..\TE, 447. 
 
 X. Ri.:sTn.\iNiX(! il.NKe'Lioii I'uo.m Actlnh, 
 447. 
 
 XI. Rkhit of Retainkr, 447. 
 
 XII. Sl-cue.s,siok DiTV, 44S. 
 
 XJU. SniviVAL OF Action, 44.S. 
 
 I. Accor.NTs. 
 
 Jurlsdiotior. of Probate Court — Ile-i 
 /('(/(Cdto.j— A court of probat(! has no jurisdie- 
 
439 
 
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 
 
 tiou over accounts of trustees uniler a will, and 
 the passing of accounts containing items relating 
 to the duties of hoth executors and trustees is 
 not, so far as the latter are concerned, binding 
 on any other Court, and aCourt of e(|uity, in a 
 suit to remove the executoi's and ti'iistees, may 
 nivestigate such accounts again and disallow 
 charges of the trustees which were passed by 
 tliej'robate Court, ilrant v. Maclnreii, -J.S S. C. 
 
 Reddltlon of Account — /.VAfrsy.]—!'. a. 
 A. D., respondent, as reitresentiug t lie institutes 
 an(l substitutes un.lcr the will of the late J 
 l>. brought an action against.]. H. T. 1). (npnel- 
 lant), who was one of the institutes and had 
 acted as curator and administrator of the estate 
 
 440 
 
 tiou is brought or is impending, admiiiistraiicm 
 ad lit,;n may be granted under the Itule, limited 
 to the real estate in (|uestioti. 
 
 An application for the appointment of ,ni ^cl 
 miuistrator ivl litim is projieily niadi> l„.f„rc. 
 .net ion. y.'e Williainx and McKiniiun, 14 p. j^ 
 
 Contention as to dv&nt—finn-oifafr ( 'ourl- 
 Itniioviil iiilo J/i,//, C<Jiii-t~l)i<,im,ri,iaai,j„ „f 
 Snn;i,i,i/e Jiiil;/,-~A dminist ration ljw,„il-~.l„:iit 
 Ad)iiiiii.'<lmlwii.]—Vi,on an ajiplii^ation by iit- 
 taiiMif the next of kin of an intestate, iimliT 
 section .'il of the Surrogate Courts Act. I!. S. () 
 eh. ."lO, to remove from a Surrogate Conn n,u, 
 the High Court a <'iiuse in which a coninition 
 iirose as to the uraiit of ailminisi raticin. 
 
 
 which was a largo one ; that the next of kin 
 oppo.sed the petition ; that neither wiilow nor 
 next of kin could, unaided, supply the iiece..;wv 
 security ; and tliat there were no creditors ■ ■ 
 
 Held, that the jurisdiction to award g. ; 
 lieing of a discretionary kind, could be Til.tt.'r 
 exercised by the Surrogate .Judge, .-mcl thr 
 cause should not be removed. 
 
 'JMie per.sonal ilisi|ualiticatiou of a Surni.-ati. 
 Judue to |)a.ss upon an a|)plieation, by veiis<mol 
 
 1 -•- -•■■■■", .....,-.1 Lin; iiiainiiu 
 
 .illeged the defendant had received while he M-as 
 a curator : — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the C^ourt 
 Kclow that an action <lid not lie against the 
 appellant for tliese iiarticular sums aiiart and 
 distinct from an action for an account of his 
 adiniuistration of the rest of the estate. 
 
 The plaintiff in his action alleged that he repre- 
 sented S ])., one of the substitutes, in virtue of 
 a deed of release and subroLration l>v wliii.li ;f 
 
 iitme.m.fl b,. b-,,1 „.,i,I i . « it> i ^ wiiicn it ; „uuge lo pa.ss upim an aiipiication, l,y 
 on iXl of t ■ 1 ; ll : • ' '^""."'«y f-"- ■•">'l I Ilia interest as a shafholder in a company annli 
 
 Held tbnf- •,« tl„. .„fn.;,i 1 1 c .., I to <"ie part, and to the next of km as to aiiciln.,- 
 
 ga e the ,tfe nd t f^^^^^^^^^ td ™|"'="'^."* ' 1""^ <"' ^'";''y '"^^y '"' '^ .i"i"t grant to the wi,l,n 
 
 dvirm-of-, ., li,' f complete dis- | and next of kin. ]le MfUuU, l(i 1'. 1! -'(il 
 
 cnarge ot all redclit ions of account as curator or I •■>. -m. 
 
 administrator ,,f the estate, the plaintilf could j Domestic and B'orelgn Creditors /V, 
 
 partS:;;.':,!;;:?"' '■"'''""" °' "'^"'""* "^ ^''^^-^ \ ">■'^''-■^-r^^ .^i- -i.iH,iis^"t!rof*r ouli. 
 
 The plaiiitiir also claimed that ho represented 
 1*. 1). and K. 1). two other institutes under the 
 will, in virtue of two assignments made to him 
 
 by them on the 21st January, lS()i),7ind I'.Vti. 
 JSovember 1869, respectively. In ISOo, and 
 alter the defendant had been sued in an actinn 
 of redditi.m of account, by a deed of settlement 
 the said J-'. J), and K.l). agreed to accept ,is 
 their share in the estate the sum of .S4.(t0() each 
 .and gave the defendant a complete and fuli 
 di.scharge of all further red.litions of accoii-it ■— 
 Held, afiiriiiingthe judgment of theCout of 
 (.)ueen s Kench. that the deleiid:uit could not be 
 sued tor a new account, but could only be sued 
 for the specilic performance of the obligations 
 he had contracted under the deed of settlement 
 Bonau v. Dorimi, i.'(l s. C. R. 4;)0. 
 
 II. .Vdministh.vtiox. 
 
 Administrator ad Litem — 7>io/«/;o/* o/"! 
 Lyl„/,s Act-L>,i,/E../„fc.]~-U»h' .Sll, though in | 
 exi.stence, as sec. II of 4.S Vict. eh. 13 (O f be- I 
 fore the passing of the J)evoIution of Kst'ates 
 Act, may be applied as to realty falling under 
 the operation of that Act. 
 
 If it appears thiii. thrre is no personalty, or 
 liersonalty of such trifling amount as will not 
 sulhce to answer the claims m.ade in resiiect of 
 the deceased's real estate against which litiga- 
 
 ; estate of a deceased domiciled abroad, foirii'ii 
 j creditors are entitled to dividc.nds pari /,«,«» 
 ' uith Ontario creditors. 
 J A'fi A7</./,e, -JSCh. 1). IT,-;, followed. 
 I Con. Rule 1271, which came into fore., since 
 ; tli(. above <leciBion, and which relates to s(.rvici. 
 of iiiitiato.-y jiroecss out of the jiirisdhtioii, il 
 api)licalil(. at all to such a case, merely rdatiis 
 to procedure, and does r,ot atlect a prii.r..,linL' 
 in vvhich all the parties have attorned tu thi"- 
 jurisdiction of the Court. Mi/i/c v. Jf,„„-" "I 
 O. K. 4.")(). 
 
 Judgment Debtor. |— Upon an iiii|nirv as tu 
 whether anylhliig is due to a juilgiiu.nt (Irhtor 
 as residiKiry legatee, where iie also has the 
 character of executor, the h.gatees and creiliturs 
 ought to be before the Court; and tlir wayt.i 
 bring them before the Court is by ailniiiiistra 
 tion proceeiliugs, 
 
 Qua IV, whether the assignee of the jinl-iiitnt 
 would be entitled to administration. ' .\I,-Lr(w 
 v. Ih-Kct', 14 1'. K. 1!)0. 
 
 Revocation of Letters of Administration 
 
 —Siirnif/af,' Court. \~'l'hc High ( 'ourt of .luslici. 
 for Ontario has no juiisdiction to revoke tlii' 
 grant by a Surrogate Court of lett(.is oi adiniii- 
 istratioii. Mcl'lorson v. Irriiie, -.'(i U. K. t;!S. 
 
 Solicitor's l,ien—Jitri.'<diffinii ,,/ /,>,/;>■«-.]- 
 A referee, before whom adininistraticai pro- 
 ceeiliugs are taken, has no authority to make an 
 
440 
 
 jniliiig. adiiiiiii.stnuiiin 
 
 iidfi-tlie Hull', liiiiitfd 
 
 ioM. 
 
 iippoiiitment of ari ,i(|. 
 
 )r()|)('ily madr li,.|,,r.. 
 
 ' AJcKi/iiioii, 14 I'. K 
 
 it — S!lin-oil(itr ( 'niirl-^ 
 'f — l-'i'^'indli fiend, ,11 i,f 
 ixlratioii (JutKtil ~./ii:iii 
 111 iiltliliratioii l,y (.(.f. 
 of an iiitostato, inulcr 
 a Courts Act. K. S. (), 
 
 Surrogate t'oun int,, 
 in wliicli a (•ontinlioii 
 adininistratidu, it up. 
 t a trust ciiinpany luid 
 isti'atioii of tile r<utU\ 
 tlial thu iifxt cii kill 
 It ni'itliiT willow nor 
 
 supply the litcess;;ry 
 .ore nocrcilitoi-.s ■ 
 tion to award ;;. .;, 
 wind, could lie iiettur 
 ate Judge, and thr 
 id. 
 
 atioii of a Siu-ro^nt,! 
 lication, l)y reason ol 
 :r in a eoiiipany a|i|ili. 
 removal to tlir Hijrh 
 10 aid of a neiglilidm- 
 
 cparalde. adniinistra- 
 , I.e.. to the « idll\va^ 
 S of kin as to lUKitiier 
 t grant to the widow 
 oil, l(i 1'. ];. -.'(il, 
 
 1 Creditors - /Vi 
 
 ition of the Ontario 
 'iled abroad, fciveign 
 lividends pari /,(uw 
 
 followed. 
 
 •anie into fore- siiici 
 ,eli relates to service 
 f tile jurisdie;ioii, if 
 case, iiuM-ely icdatcs 
 atlect a pnireciling 
 ive attorned to the 
 Millie V. MiHire, 24 
 
 poll an imniiiT as tc 
 ) a judgment ilelitor 
 I'e he al.so has tile 
 ■gateus and creditors 
 irt ; and the way tii 
 rt is liy adiiiinistra- 
 
 lee of the jiiilgineiit 
 listration. MrLemi 
 
 )f Administration 
 
 igli ( 'durt of .liislice 
 tiou to re\(ike the 
 of letters ol udiiiin- 
 iiie, •-'(! U. H. m. 
 
 \efiiiii III' Uif, ri'i>.]— 
 ilininistr.-itidii pro- 
 itiioritv to make an 
 
 441 
 
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 
 
 442 
 
 order depriving a .solicitor of his lien for co.sts 
 una fluid in Court on the ground that advcr.su 
 piirlies had a prior claim on such fund for costs 
 wliieh .said solicitor's client li.id heeii jiersonallv 
 iirdered to pay, the admiiiistiatidii order licit 
 having so directed the referee, and there lieiu" 
 nil general order permitting such an intiu-fei- 
 enee witli the solicitor's jirimi} Jacle right to 
 the tiiiid. /iell V. Wriijlit, -lA .S. (_'. i! (JSti 
 
 dudgiiicut of the (.liieen's ]?ench Division, l'O 
 <). K. :iW, allirmiiig ih.il of IJoyd, t!., 1!M) |; 
 4'-'(), revcr.scd ; llagirty, (■..;.■()., ilissent'in-; 
 ( inn nil III/ y. I.iunltil /liii,/.i,i>i ,i,„t / ,,aii Cfi i'l 
 A. K. 4(7. ' ■' 
 
 III. ADVKRTt.SKMKNT Kdii CliEOITORS. 
 
 Ontario Gazette.] -- I'nl.licatiou in the 
 0iilandr,Vr.(7^ dt nil advcrtistiiieiit fur creditors 
 imrsuaiit to K. S. (). ,.|,. Ho. sec. ;i(i, is not 
 neee».s:iry to lelea.sc e.vecutois from liability fay 
 payments made by them. /;< ( •umiroii, M'a.,,,,, 
 V. Ciiiiii.n.ii, 1.") P. \{, 21-3. 
 
 IV. HliKACll Ol- TlilTST. 
 
 Breach of Trust by One Executor— AV/w 
 
 -/»7"!/V/.]— After all tin- debt, of an estate are 
 paid., mil after the lapse of ycar.sfrom the testa- 
 tnis death, there isasuliicicm presumption that 
 iini'oi the several e.xoeutors and Irii.stccs dealinii- 
 Willi assets is so dealing iiiu) trustee and not as 
 exemtor, to shift the burden of jiroof. h'irait 
 V. Curdiiii, l.'{(;r. 40, discussed. 
 
 W. and C. were executors and trustees of an 
 estate, under a will. \V., without theediicurrciice 
 of C, lent iiidncy of the estate on mortgai'c, and 
 afterwards assigned the mortgages whicdi were 
 e.veciitcd in favour of hinisel/, described as 
 "triLstee of the estate and efl'ects of" (the 
 testator). In the assignment of the moit'uiges 
 he was described in the same way. W." was 
 afterwards removed from the trusteeship an.l an 
 aetii.n was brought by the iicw trustees against 
 the as.sigiiccs of the mortgages to recover the 
 prneeeds of the same :— I 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of lue Court of 
 Appeal, lit A. K. 447, that in taking and assign. I 
 ing saui mortgages \V. acted as a trustee ifml | 
 not as an executor; that he was guilty of a 
 ireaeh of trust in taking and assigning them in 
 Ilia own name ; that his being described on the 
 face of the instruments as a trustee w.is con- 
 structive notice to the assicnees of the trusts, 
 which put them on inipiiiy ; and that the 
 assignees were not relieved as persons right- 
 fully and innocently dealing with trustees, inas- 
 "iiiehas the breach of trust consisted in the 
 lulling with the securities themselves and not 
 m the use made of the proceeds. Ciimmiini v 
 LniuM liaiikiiiij and Loan Co., •22 H. C, It -241) 
 A'fe the next two cases. 
 
 Breach of Trust by One Executor.]— One 
 executor may, without the concurrence of his 
 eo-CKecHtor, validly sell or pledge as.sets of the 
 estate to a purchaser or mortgagee in good faith, 
 ™i the iiuichaser or mortgagee is not put uiion 
 nquiry er affected with notice of breach of trust 
 lieeauso the executor is described in the transfer 
 or mortgage as '• trustee.'' 
 
 Kvcry exeeiitor is a trustee, but he does not 
 eeaaeto he an executor and lieconie merely a 
 trustee ui.td the testator's wishes are comt.letely 
 >|"neiioui. and the estate has been appropri- 
 ated to the purposes of the trusts deelaml 
 
 Breach of Trust by One Executor. ] - A sole 
 executor dt the surviving excTutdrs of a deceased 
 pei-.soii may at any time within tweutv vcars 
 from the death of the testator, sell or' pled. 'e 
 any i.f the .state to any purchaser or mort'a.'ee 
 wlio has no notice of a bre.udi of trust, and tho 
 purclna.scr or mortgagee is under no obligation 
 to make enquiry as to the destination of the 
 purchase or mortgage money, or to .see to its 
 application ; but with regard to trustees there 
 :s no rule which entith's a person .idvancin-' 
 nioney to them to disregard the notice which is 
 loiiml 111 the mere, description df trustee, that 
 the per.sou to whom it is applied is not ab.solute 
 owiuu' of the security which he propo.ses to 
 pledg,.. ' 
 
 liy a will two per.sonswere appointed e.xecu- 
 
 . tors and trustees, one of the tru.sts beini' to 
 
 i invest t.ie moneys of the estate; both proved 
 
 t he will, though one was at the time an infant • 
 
 i the other mvesteil certain moneys of the estate 
 
 ",' 't^'iiges, which were made to himself 
 
 alone " as trustee of the estate' and ellects of .1 
 t ., <leeea.sed;" and ten years after the testa- 
 or s death he hypothecated these mortgages to 
 the detenilaiits for advance.-, which he misa.,- 
 
 ]jllrli : ' 
 
 Hehl that when the defendants found secu- 
 rities of a permanent character vested in one of 
 the trustees named in the will, as a trustee 
 they were charged with notice that these wen' 
 .securities which he held as trustee, and not as 
 executor, and that he was commit tin.' a breach 
 ot trust 111 holding, in his separate name, .seen- 
 ritics belonging to a joint trmst ; and therefore 
 that the idaintitls, rcprceuting the estate, were 
 entitled to have the mortgages transferred to 
 them, and to make the defendants account for 
 tlic moneys |)aid thereon ;— 
 
 Held, al.so, that as the defaulting trustee had 
 no power to pledge the as.sets of the estate, the 
 onus was upon the ilefeiidants to shew that tho 
 proceeds were applied for the purposes of the 
 
 Held, also, that the grant of prob.ite to the 
 iiilant executor, along with the adult, was not 
 a nullity :— 
 
 Held, lastly, that the recovery of judgment 
 l>y the plaiuiills against the defaulting trustee 
 tor the amount advanced by bini uiion these 
 mortgages did not bar the right of the action 
 against the defendants. 
 
 .Judgment of Hoyd, (•.,!() o. R.4-_'«, affirmed. 
 tiimniuii/v. Lawled liankimj and Loan Co., 20 
 
 Liability for Misappropriation by Agent.) 
 -Held, alhrming the judgments of the Courts 
 helow, that when a testamentary executri.v 
 employs ail agent as attnriiey, she is bimnd to 
 supervise his management of the matters en- 
 trusted to him, ami to take all due precantion-= 
 and cannot escape liability for the misappro- 
 priation of funds committed by such agent, 
 although ho was a notary public of evccdlent 
 standing jirior to the misappropriation. Loxo v 
 Canley, IS ,S. C. R. (J8j. 
 
443 
 
 EXECUTOKS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 
 
 444 
 
 Mm 
 
 V. C'osi 
 
 « S; 
 
 Administration Action— Uiiiuos.-^ui-y Pro- 
 
 <-irdi,,;i.->~l\ j-i/ o/' Sinn 1111,11.1 Iii.-/kuI i,f' Xvtiri' 
 (1/ JIiili(,ii.\— In tin .Hlniinistiation action ctiiii- 
 tueiiecd by writ, tlic pliiinliir was allowed iinoii 
 taxation only snoli costs as would liavc been 
 taxed bail be begun iiia procedings by a sum- 
 niai-y ajjiilieation under Kule Oli.j. 'I'b'e defen- 
 dant clanned to liave taxed to bnn and set off 
 us additional costs incurred bv reason of the 
 less oxpeiisno procedure not liaving been ailo;.. 
 ted. He had not iu the action admitted tlie 
 right ol the jilaiiitiff to an account, but had 
 lileaded a release, and had not objected to the 
 procedure adopted : — 
 
 Held, that the defendant's additional costs 
 liml not been incurred by reason of the jilain- 
 tittsinipropei or nnnecessaiv proceedings, but 
 by bis own conduct in not aduiittiiig the n'cht 
 to an account, au.l iu not objecting to the ])lain- 
 ti i s niauuer of proceeding at the earliest pos- 
 sible stage ; and the case therefore did not come 
 within Kule llil,"). 
 
 Srinli/r, it would have l)een i)roper to raise ' 
 the (piestion at the hearing; lint the taxiii" 
 officer had jurisdiction under Paiie llilj, wilb"^ 
 out an order, to " look into '' it. Jlouti v. Cn/d- 
 <ri'//, 15 1'. K. 1,-|!). 
 
 Failure to Establish Will— ros/.. of Prr.^,,,,. : 
 •\a„i,d„.-A:.;r>it<,r:\~Whvvv the person named 
 as an executor in a written instrument failed, in ^ 
 the final result of this action, lo c.-tablish it as 
 the last will of the testator, anil the Cmn of' 
 lust resort reliised to order that Lis costs 
 incurred therein should be paid out of the ' 
 estate : — 
 
 Hehl, that tbeCourtof tirst instance could not 
 make an order for )Kiyincnt, out of moneys paid 
 into that Court by the administrators, ri-ud,;ile 
 Me, of these costs as costs of the litigation 
 liecaiise they were refused bv the only tribunal 
 winch had jurisdiction to award them, nor as 
 costs and expenses properly incurred by the 
 applicant iii the performance of his duties as 
 executor, because he never was an executor. 
 Parcfll V. Birnin, Iti V. R. 301. 
 
 ; against the executors personally 
 \B,-u,ri,, ].-, p. H. 375. •'• 
 
 MiU 
 
 , , Security forCosts-J/.„,c///)/CoH,7-,l/„,,-,,,, 
 
 \jorl'(i!i„„iit U,d.]~An executrix stands :„ ,,„ 
 
 different position as to the liability u,' „[y. 
 
 security for costs frt)ni a litigant siiiiiK i,,"!,;': 
 
 ■ own right. ° 
 
 And an executrix resident abroad, aiinhin,, 
 
 tor jiaynient out of Court of moneys to tl e rve 
 
 -lit ot her testator, w'a. ordered t,rgive secnity 
 
 tin costs of an alleged assignee of the fiiml, ^s■\L 
 
 , opposed the application. 
 
 The rule as to security applies to a niotiim ,,v 
 well as to a jietilion. l!t Parktr, Pnrb.-y 
 I'arhi; 10 I'. K. .•«)2. 
 
 ' \'l. •lUDll.MKNT Al.AIN.ST, 
 
 _ Form of.]— In an action of .seduction, cmi. 
 tinned against the administratrix of tlie ori-inal 
 detendant, who died before the trial, the 'ul 
 mudstratrix denied the iilaintitfs li^ht tore 
 cover, but .lid not set up pkne <id,iih,i^tr,irit 
 anil a verdict for .SoOO was recovered by tin' 
 |iluintif}':— ■' ' 
 
 Held, that the judgment should be that the 
 delitand costs should be levied dc h<„ii-< tula- 
 t<>ri.< : ft -7 noil, dc boiii.t iivupriix as to the costs 
 only. 
 
 The.Juiliiatnre Act lia.s not altered the Imni 
 ot the judgment in such eases. Liiice v FnUrlutl, 
 
 j Pormof. 1- -The in-actice in force before tlie 
 ; Juilieature An. under which a plaiiititl' takiir- 
 I i>:.nie on and tailing on an executor's plea li? 
 .lilciK- nd,M,iisli-ui;i, could not have jiidgnicut of 
 
 assets qunndii. no longer exists, and It is now 
 I projier to give a lilauUiff judgment of assets 
 
 quando, if his debt be established and siicli.i 
 
 judgment be desired. 
 
 j Jmlgmeiit of the County Court of PiinceKl. 
 : ward on this |)oint revcr.setl. MuKihhoii y. 
 I /■(.'■'i/aii, I'l A. K. ST. 
 
 Just Allowance— r//.v»,vr.s.v;'-,/ X,v;,y„^-,;„_ 
 Adric- <;/ ( ■(„(,-/.]-\Vhere the administrators of 
 tlie estate of a deceased assignee for creditors 
 <letended in good faith an action brou'dit b\- his 
 successor in the trust to recover danuu'es for 
 breach ot trust coinmitted by the intestate, and 
 being unsuccessful, were obliged to iiay the 
 plaiutiti s costs and those of their own solicitors 
 they were held entitled to credit for these pay- 
 ments HI passing their accounts. 
 
 \yhereil is j, lain that a dispute e.in be .set- 
 tled only by litigation, it is not necessary for a 
 trustee to ask the advic,.. of the Court "before 
 ueteiiding. 
 
 Judginent of the .Surrogate Court of Grey 
 reversed. In n- William-i, l>2 A. it. 190. 
 
 Mortgage Action— Pi-.-vmii Ord< r. ]— Where 
 an action to enforce a mortgage liy foreclosure 
 is lirought against the executors of a deceased 
 mortgagor, and an order for payment of the 
 mortgage debt i.s, in addition, .iske.d -.wnhr-^^ the 
 executors, and judgment is entered for default I 
 ot appearance, only the additional costs ocea- I 
 Cloned by the latter claim should be taxed 
 
 ^'II. P.VyjIENT TO AND ]!V. 
 
 I Life Insurance— /»/*(«)(/.<.]— Moneys payable 
 I to intants under a policy of life insurance 'may, 
 , when no trustee or guardian is aiipointeil uiiiler 
 sees. 11 and !•_' of 1!. S. (.). ch. I.'IO, be paid to 
 I the executors of the will of the insured as pro- 
 vided by seetion V2. without security being given 
 I by them, and payment to them is a good dis- 
 charge to the insurers. Doddx v. Ancinit Ordtr 
 iif I'nitid Wtirkmiii, i>.j O. R. 570. 
 
 Maintenance— /■'»//(/ hi Ilandu of Admin- 
 /^/;v/yo/•.]— Where an infant's fund is in Court or 
 under the control of the Court, a siiiiiiiiary 
 order may be granted for the apiilicalion of it in 
 maintenance, upon a simple notice of motion. 
 
 Rut if the money is outstanding in the hauds 
 ot trustees or others, unless they submit to the 
 jurisdiction, summary proceedings are inappro- 
 imate. 
 
 And a summary application by the guardiiui 
 of infants for payment to him or intot'ourl, by 
 the adniiiiistiutor of the estate of the infants' 
 
445 
 
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 
 
 446 
 
 lent ald-oiul. a]i|]|jin<, 
 t (if iiioiioys to ||.|. ,.|e 
 irdcrcd to give sucuntv 
 igueu of the fund, nhl', 
 
 CO AND JIY. 
 
 father, of a fiinil in his hands, was dismissed 
 •*lnre it was opposed i)y the !r]mini8trfttoi' 
 /.'.' nihoii, 14 P. R. :.'61, distinguished 
 He Lnfthwi»n, '2!) Ch. h. 921, followed. He 
 Coiitt-!, 15 P. R. IOl'. 
 
 Payment out to Administrator— /»/fn(As' 1 
 .Money m Court I.elonging at, tlie time of licr 
 iL-ath to an intestate was ])aid out to her 
 ,i.iministrator notwithstanding that infants 
 miijht be or might become entitled to it or a 
 share of it. 
 
 Simhk, if the money belonged s|ieciticallv to 
 inniuts, the disposition nii^lit be otlierwise 
 au.icaH V. Wkitiiey, 14 Y\ ii. 147. 
 
 Payment out to Administratrix— /H/•(^,i^ , 
 
 -I'iie administratrix of a deeease.l pariy who 
 h:id (hed before tlie Devolution of Instates Act 
 M\K mto force was allowed to take out of I 
 Court a sum of fi-2M, which was part of the per- i 
 3.mal estate ot the decea.sed, notwithstandinL' j 
 thill two mfants were among the ne.xt of kin I 
 who would be entitled to share in the estate I 
 alti-r payment of debts, etc. ' 1 
 
 lldiirahaii v. Jlnnriihitn, 1!) O. R Snfi ' 
 followed. Re l>ai-6on.<, Joiic, v. Ke/laiid,' 14 'l ' ' 
 
 Held, that the executioi 
 
 . '11 lorniLvl no charge or 
 
 I encumbrance on tlie l;,n,l> contracted I,, be sold. 
 ; Unlcrs sb.nihl not be made ..,; /„,,■/<■ allowing 
 
 issue ol execution against g,,ods of a testator o? 
 j intestate m the hands of an executor or admin- 
 ! istrator //,, re T,;,.-:l-< Corjioraliou „/ OiUarh 
 
 mill liivlnim-, 2() O. R. 191. 
 
 Devise— /^w/fflcy C/tan/cd on. hi,i<f~Sale h<i 
 h.nri,lur.-< h, Order In /'„,/ //„, /,,,/„^,, 1 __^' 
 te.stator devised to his daughter a lot of land 
 ehargcd with .a legacy. The dauyhter pre- 
 deceased the testat..r, leaving two children to 
 whom the lot descended. 
 
 On an application by the executors at the 
 instance of the Ullicial (inardian, it was •— 
 
 Held, that it was the duty of the executoLS to 
 sell the land and pa 
 O. R. uoU. 
 
 y the legacy. Rt Eddk-, 22 
 
 VIII. POWKKS .\NI, L1AIULITIK.S. 
 
 Building- Want of Rrpair ~ Uanuuies. 1 _ 
 Iho owner (.f projieriy abutting on a lii.'hwav 
 IS under a positive duty to keep it from hmv a 
 ■MUi of danger to the public bv reason of anv 
 •ialect, either in structure, repair, or use and 
 mauagenieut, which reasonable care can guard 
 
 iJaiHc A. T. sued J. F. and M. \V. V per 
 soually as well as in their ,,uality of tcsta- 
 ment^iry executors and trustees of the will of the 
 lute J. K, claiming .S4,000 damages for the death 
 'A lier luisbaml who was killed by a window fall 
 lug on 1,1111 fr<,ni the third story of a buildi,,,,, 
 jv uci formcl part of the general estate of the 
 late J. K, but whicli had heen spccilicallv be- 
 <lu«ithe,ltooiieU. l\,aiid liischiklren for whom 
 tliesai, .1. K and M. \\. F. ,vere also trustees, 
 ino judgment ot tlie Courts below held tlie ap- 
 pellants liable in their capacity of executors of i 
 tlie general estate and trustees under the will ■— 
 Held, that the appellants were responsible ior I 
 hedaiiiages resulting from their negligence in 
 not keeping the^ buil.lmg m rejiair as well per- I 
 boaaHy a.s m their (piality of trustees (d' hrridtr.. ' 
 M<i'-mr.s) 0,. the benelit of Ci. F.'s children;! 
 I>!it were not liable as executors of the general 
 
 Where parties are before the Court ««,! ' 
 «vecnturs and the same parties should also be 
 smnnioiied;/,,,! trustees an amendment toU.at 
 «Uta IS suthc.cnt and a new writ of summons is 
 iiot^uecessary. t\rrkr v. Trepmiimr, 24 S. C. 
 
 Exchange— .Vy,c/-/(/r(^/o;,.]— An executor or 
 administrator cannot, having regard to R ,S O 
 ch. I(l.>s, sec. 9, and .34 Victl ch. IS, sec. 2 (O )" 
 make tlie lands ot tliu testator or intostate the' 
 subjec; of speculation nr excbanire bv him in 
 ties, me mmner as if tiie lands were' his own 
 
 Renewal of Lease.J-Under the Devolution 
 
 ot hstates Act toe executor of a deceased les.sor 
 can make a val„l renewal of a lease imrsuaut to 
 the covenant of the testator to renew. Re 
 
 ' .>;"/;','."", n -"'■'■"' ^'- "'• '-■''• '""' -ywioim/ Club, 
 ^l (I. U. 20.). 
 
 Sale ~S,irrirhi.j A'.ivr//^,,-. ]--AVhere executors 
 a,e given express power to sell lands, whether 
 coupled with an interest or not, such power can 
 he excr ed by a surviving executor. 
 
 'llie Devidution of Kstates Act and amend- 
 ments .l() not interfere with an express power 
 of sale given by a will to executors extending 
 boyoiu the periods ot vesting prescribed by 
 those Acts. J„ re Korh and Wid.mun, 25 O R 
 2t)2. 
 
 Contract to Buy from Admlnlstrators- 
 
 .cf'i"'-'"""''" '"''"'"ixtnitors of an insolvent ; 
 eceased person contracted to sell some of his ' 
 laml>. Siihscpiently to the contract a creditor 
 '. ^"Hiaa,,U,,ine,iaj,idguient against the. leceasc.l : 
 '" t r ,'"" .T"" «'"^^"t'"" tl'e.-eon under an : 
 •laaus ot tlie administrators :— 
 
 Sale — I'Jxi.rii/or of Snrvmmi ExrciUor ]— A 
 testator by his will directed his real and per- 
 sona property to be sold and the procecls to be 
 <livided and distributed, and .■ippointed two exe- 
 cutors to carry out his will, boll, of wiiom died 
 IJCtorc the estate was realized : — 
 I Held, that the executor of the last surviving 
 executor ot the testator's will had power to sell 
 |aiid convey t)ie land. A't .%-pheu.iun, Klnnee 
 V. M„l/„y, 24 U. I!.. '195. 
 i 
 
 , Statute of Limitations— . I (•/.v/o/M'«/7;«f.jin 
 I —An ackiiowledynient of indclitedness by letter 
 . written alter the creditor's decease by the de- 
 [ lendant to the i)erson who is entitled to take 
 out letters of administration to the creditor's 
 estate and who does, after the receiiit of the 
 letler, lake (uit such letters, is a sutiicient 
 acknowledgment within the .Statute of Limita- 
 tions. 
 
 .ludgment of the County Court of Uruce 
 aHirmed Maclennan, d.A. dissenting. Robert- 
 mii V. Hiirrilt, 22 A. R. ^^:>{^. 
 
 Vesting of Estate Rr.fiMr.ition of Caution. I 
 — Ihe provisions ot 5(j Viet. ch. 2u'((J.), as to 
 registration of caution ajiply t,> a eas(! in which 
 probate has not lieen taken out or letters of 
 
'>^ l^ 
 
 m 
 
 ^€r-*: 
 
 
 'x'M ' 
 
 i 
 
 *, <■, 
 
 H ' ■ ■ 
 
 m^ 
 
 )'l 
 
 \mi 
 
 447 
 
 EXPRESS COMPANY. 
 
 ;£■ u!^'!l™ir':''S oiUr"'^/'"" l^ >--i ---•> «■-- when s.,M „n,ler tI>o will 
 
 udiniiiistiiition. 
 
 The [.nivisions of 56 Vict. cli. •_'() (().), „i'e so 
 engrafted <m ,-)4 Vict. cli. JS as ti) iiuike lictli 
 ActM apply to all peiHOiis dying after l.st .July, 
 
 In r,' JlaJrd, ]^ C L. T. 277, reconsidered. 
 In re Mar/iii, 20 O. K. 4(!,j. 
 
 the estate. This secnrity the execiiloi 
 trustees should value pur.suant to 1{ S ( 
 124. 7'il/it V. Sj,n,„jH\ 21 O. R. 585. 
 
 XII. SuccKssioN ])i;tv. 
 
 448 
 
 li.M 
 
 HI- „f 
 
 1.1 t., 
 
 ^ iUlil 
 ). Cll. 
 
 I.\'. I'Mdll.VTK. 
 
 Ancillary Probate-.s'»>vo;/rt^c Court. ]— A 
 ■will executed liy a person when douiiciled in the 
 Province of Quelici- lietore two notaries there, 
 in accordance with the law of that I'lovmee] 
 not acted upon uv proved in any way lieforeany 
 Court there, is not within the Act respectinir 
 Ancillary Probates aiul Letters of Administra- 
 tion, 51 Vict. di. 9 (().). 
 
 .ludgnient of the .Surrogate Court of ]!rnce 
 atlirined. //( re 2l(tcliir,ii, 22 A. R. 18. 
 
 _ Infant Executor. ]— A giant of pre ihate to an 
 infant executor along with an adidt is not a 
 nullity. Cuinmiiiij v. Landed Butikiiiij and Loan 
 Co., 20 O. R. 382. >SVe this case, ante 442. 
 
 Letters of Administration— /iVcoai^/o/i.]— 
 See McI'/u'i-.-ion v. Irriii^, 2ti 0. R. 438, ante 440. 
 
 X. Restraining ExEcnroR Fro.m Actint,. 
 
 Executor Bejomlng Bankrupt and In- 
 temperate— -I /);)«! /(^?»,»/ of Jieceim: ]— Where 
 a person named as an executor was at the time 
 of the making of the will in excellent .redit 
 Jind circumstances, hut before the death of the 
 testator became insolvent and made an assi<'n- 
 ment for the benefit of his creditors, and also ap- 
 parently bccan.e intemperate, an injunction was 
 gi-anted restraining him from interfering witli 
 the estate ; and the appointment of a receiver 
 was directed. JolutKOa v. M< Kf-nzk, 20 O. R. 
 
 XI. I!i(!iiT OF Retainer. 
 
 Devolution of Estates Act— Aynii/iivient for 
 (■n-diloi;^.]— Under their father's will, two of 
 his sons were to receive a share of the proceeds 
 of certain land to be sold on the death of I 
 widow, who was still alive. They also owed 
 the testator a certain debt, wliicli, by the will, 
 was to be payable in live yearly instalments 
 from the time of his death. 
 
 About two years subsequent thereto the sons 
 made an a8>igmnent for the l)eiiefit of their 
 creditors under R. S. (). ch. 124 ■ — 
 
 Held, (1) that the ell'ect of the a-ssignment 
 w.as by virtue of ^eo. 20, sub sec. 4, of that Act, 
 to accelerate payment of the debt due to the 
 estate. (2) That the executors, being also the 
 trustees of the land of which the sons were to 
 
 Residue— /'/■-, I?„/n.]-A testator ,h',i~.:\ 
 and beciiicathc.l all hjs real and persoiKil , .t itu 
 ' to Ins executors and trustees for the pun...... o-' 
 
 paying a number of pecuniary legacies, sl.inr f,i 
 personal legatees, and others to charitable .i.,,,^ 
 ciations. and provided that the residue m l.j, 
 e.state shmihl be divided ),ro rata amon- iho 
 legntees : — 
 
 Held, that it was the duty of the execuK.is to 
 dediict the succession duty iiavable in n-.um 
 ot the pecuniary legacies, before pay in- tie 
 amounts over to the Ifgatees, and they h.^'.l n» 
 right to pay such su.'ce.ssion duty out (,t t'n 
 residue left after ,)aying the legacies in full. 
 
 \\ here the residue of an estate is diivcte,! u> 
 be divided im, rata among prior legatees lliey 
 take such residue in proportion to the amoun 
 of their prior legacies. Krjviedy v. I>,vtoilanl. 
 Orphans' Hovit, 25 0. R. 235. 
 
 XIII. Survival of Action. 
 
 Damages.] — An action of injury to the 
 Pf !*°" """■ «">vive3 to the executor of the 
 plaintiff, who can, in case of his death i,nnh),tt 
 hie, on entering a suggestion of the death and 
 obtaining an order of revivor, continue the 
 action. Mason v. Town of Peltrbonninh. •li\ 
 A. R. 683. •' 
 
 EXECUTORY DEVISE. 
 
 See AViLL. 
 
 EXEMPTIONS. 
 
 See Assessment and Taxe.s, V.— Execution, 
 III. 
 
 EXPERTS. 
 
 See Wright v. Coltkr, 19 A. E. 298, ante m. 
 
 EXPRESS COMPANY. 
 
 See Carriers. 
 
449 
 
 ion iif injury to the 
 the executor of the 
 ■■ of his (k'ath /Hiidn^ie 
 ition of the death and 
 revivor, continue the 
 I of /'elerOoivtiijIi. 'jil 
 
 EXPRESS WAGGONS. 
 
 EXTRADITION. 
 
 By-law Licensing- <7/^v, r/,v.v.]-A hv-javv 
 m.H.-j..| mu\rr sec. A'M of the R. s.() d, isl 
 
 I .1h'",!"'1' '•''"'•''■' ^■■'««""«- authori/c'.! tl,e 
 
 ;S!v:- ^^' "^'"^'""-'"^ "f ^'■'^ '"'t^^ fixed 
 
 Held. iK.yond the i,o«or.s inferred l.v the 
 
 statute „n,l a conviction under the hvlaw for 
 
 tirely tei.hnie;il in its chaiactcr. 
 -'I <». R. ITit. .V«' the ne.xt e.ise. 
 
 450 
 
 lie Gmhutf, 
 
 EXPROPRIATION OF LAND. 
 
 ,S'ef AKriiTH.vTioN .\nd Aw.ahu— Crown I 
 Kajlway.s. " ' 
 
 EXPULSION. 
 
 >''••• Ci.iJii— Ln,si-k.\nuk, V. 
 
 EXTENSION OF TIME. 
 
 See Con iKACT, ^^ 
 
 EXTRADITION. 
 
 Ahbl-/,leii/i/i/~t:xti;„/Uioii Jiiihu—For.ifru 
 -\nn„neejrum Proof-Clm.tian .\,u>,e o/eh- 
 
 /-^^•'.,.,■.l-^\hel•e evidence is f,'iven l,y the 
 
 .vuseeu i„u hetore an extraditi.u, Jnd-c no.si- 
 tively idenntying the prisoner, ti,e J udL'e can- 
 not rceive evnlcu'c on hehalf of tiie pri.soner to 
 .hewau./,. .• for that wouhl he in'effeet try 
 
 ngtlie guilt or innocence of tiie pri.soner ; if 
 the evidence ^u-cn by the i.rosecuJion is suth- 
 cient to lustity tlie committal of the prisoner 
 
 lemu.sthe committed niuler .section J oft),; 
 L.xtrailition Act, K. S. C. ch. 14-> 
 
 J""''''-, that a lu-soner is ent'i'tled to ^o into 
 tMdeiice to ihsprove his identity; hut tliat 
 ■..™..s his Identity witli the pei^oi'i n me 
 
 I «arun ; not his identity' with the per.so 
 vlH actually coinmitted the extradition 'crime. 
 
 S .V " ^.';!"'f-\<^',""~t' ""<! Iiasthe functions 
 HI an e.\tiaditioii Judge. 
 
 Ilr f.ubr. JitO. K. (il2, followe.1. 
 
 ; ' ■;"' |.."-edin«.s for forgery of u\h-aft o a 
 o.uik III tjie [,'iiited .States : — 
 
 HcM that a .junior .Judge of a County Court 
 of this |-r,,vince is an extradition .ludge wit lii 
 tiie Kxtradition Act, 11. S. C eh U-' 
 
 AV hirk.r, 1!) O. i;. (iI2, followed"' 
 
 Mifv hTis",!"!"" '■"'"' '' r'"'"'" "^" <^0'">'>it"'e"t 
 
 W m. . '" •"■'.'^■"'•"'.'"«« iMstituted in tliis 
 
 I oMuce; the previous i.ssue of a warrant in 
 
 esseiitiai: '^^ ''^■■"'""''"« -^-tradition not heinj 
 AVr„/,/,n//. .-,!'. R.L'17,fonowed. 
 
 siiouidi;e;::^;:;r'''""*^ '""■''''''■ ^''^^'"''''^ 
 
 A witness identifyh.u the prison,.,- as the 
 forger was tlie person who identJHed him at the 
 jank „• ,on lie |,roe„red the amount of the forged 
 •I'att; hut ,t did not appear that he had in- 
 euned any re.sponsihility to the hanlv :- 
 
 Hel,l, tl.at no interest was shewn in tlie wit- 
 ness .so as t<, require corrohontion ; aii,l further 
 
 the diafl or immediately arise from the nature of 
 the tran.sa.'ti,,!, or from his own acknowledgment 
 /;';/'"" V. Ihi.jnimn,, l.". O. R. D'Js;, followed' 
 .Nr/»/,/-', in extradition cases the evideiue of 
 
 H..\C. ch. 142, sec. (ir'suh-sec 
 
 mi',: d' "r^ *''," r^^''' °f '^ J"''«eto forward 
 
 tie Minister ot .Justice a report of the i.ss„e 
 
 t a warrant as re.ju.red hy the suh-seetion, is 
 
 Tl ,.',',"' 7 "'" ^•'^^'-•''"•'^'^ of tl>'> l-nsone ■. 
 
 1 nutting a i.erson to await extradition for 
 
 ■su ot the forged instrument as All.ert 
 
 "h^^aswhen tlie instrument was proved it ap: 
 |icaieii to lie ,/anies : — ' 
 
 -SU?"i,;;r^";rRr^"ri^f:r'7 
 
 .ii.^!tlon!''rt"* ^'\ ""^ I'"^"""^'' ''"'* -^^'t'"" 
 
 u' a hT; ,"■"'■■' ""* '■'=■'''' ov'-''o the prison.-,. 
 ■• a uied hy section 70 of H. «. C. ch. 174 :- 
 
 i'' disc 1 I'^w wo,,i,i entitle a prisoner to 
 
 "i titter' 7" ■" ■'''""''' r^ ''" K'^-'-'" ^^-^' 
 "^ a matter of diseretiou heeau8e it was eu- 
 
 ;20 
 
 [Fovgery- hci;tio:,s Ha„k Account-L,nv of 
 I Canada -^DeJ^clu. Warnad^A ;»«,rf,„,- w.] _ 
 ' , i'i 1 ",' l"-";"'''i"J^'^. it is sufficient if he 
 
 : e 1, lence .Irselo.^e that the otlence under tlie Kx- 
 ! ...ditio,i Acts IS one which, f.ceor.ling to the 
 av.s o Canada, w.ndd justify the comndttal r 
 tr,a o the otien.ler had the otlence been con - 
 
 th.it the otluiee was of the cjuu'acter elia.-ed 
 according to the laws of the foreign counUy 
 
 here it was alleged to have been committe, '; 
 .d, /»„.,■,. whether evi,lence is admis.sible to 
 ■shew what the toieign law is 
 
 In pursuaiH'e of a fraudulent conspiracy bs- 
 t^^een the pnsoner and his ln'.,tlier, a clie<iue 
 «as draun by the latter, under I fictiti s 
 ~, on a bank in which an account had been 
 
 ened by hi„, in such fictitious name, there bc- 
 
 ng. to the knowledge of the prisoner, no funds 
 
 to meet it, and which, on the faith of its beiiiL- 
 
 a genuine ehe.|ue, another bank was in.luced by 
 
 the iiri.sonor to cash :— ^ 
 
 ment'--''ln,'r''/'"' '''"''"f ''■"'* '"^ " fal.se docu- 
 
 4., ;• , , ■ **' .""i'"'™' ''^^ '""' ""'l<^i- -section 
 
 421 ot the ( riminal Code, 1802, ami that lliere 
 
 - was sufficient evidence to justify the committal 
 
 : of tl„ j,,,so„er for extradition for uttering a 
 
 forged insti-iiinent. *" 
 
 I!' ilina, v. Marti,,, r> Q. R. 1). ;«, distinguished. 
 
 ! \> liei-e, m such pro,-eedings, the w.irrant of 
 
 ! commitment stated that thc^.risoner ha.l bee, 
 
 ''ste.',d',T '^'V ^'"' ?" ---f'"'lit'^>>l>' ottcice, iu- 
 ste.u of his having l,een "accused" the.eof. the 
 tcict that the evidence shewed such an offen.e 
 will not warniDt the Ccn.,-(, in remanding the 
 
 I prisoner tor extradith n ; but tlie Court nity if 
 
 nece.«Hary, permit the letnrn to beanienik.d, 
 
 .1.1 lor such purpose al]o«- it to be taken off tl e 
 
 les an.l rehled. Be Murphy, 2(i (). R. ](i;^ .sZ 
 
 the next case. 
 
ill 
 
 11 li 
 
 :■ 
 
 451 
 
 FIRE. 
 
 452 
 
 Forgery— /^ff'.v l>ndn)i<v/.\—TUc |iiiM()iKM'"s 
 brotlier opciiod a, Ijiuik iiecoiiiit In an assumed 
 iianiu and drow cIumiih's fniin time to tinw tlicre- 
 on. Si'vci-.d of tlicse clicqiU's vvoit- paid, Imt 
 tlie last onu tlic prisoner laslied at liis own liank, 
 knowini.' tliat tlicro were no funds to niet;t it : — 
 
 Hfid, lur Hag.utv, ('..!.()., and Maclcnnan, 
 J. A. 'J'liat tlieie was cvidi'nee from wliich it 
 might reasiinably lie inferred that the opening 
 of the HocDiint in the assumed name was part of 
 a conspiiaey between tlui prisoner and his 
 lirotlierto defraud and tliat then^ was, there- 
 fore, the fraudulent uttering of a false doeu- 
 ment which would i.-onstitute foi'gery. 
 
 I'cr 15urton, and Osier, JJ.A. — that as the 
 aecount was a genuine one. and there was no 
 false representation as to the diawer of the 
 ehe((ue, the olfence of forgery was not made 
 out : — 
 
 Held, also, per Hagarty, C.T.O., aii<l Mae- 
 lennau. .I.A. — 'I'liat it is not necessaiy to sliew 
 in extradition jiideeedings that the prisoner is 
 liable to eonvietion of the crime eharged accord- 
 ing to tile law of the demanding country. 
 
 I'er Burton, and Osier, J.I. A.— That' it must 
 be shewn th a the prisoner is liable to conviction 
 foi- the crime ciiarged, according to the law of 
 both countries. ; 
 
 In the result the judgment of the Common 
 Pleas Division, '2() O. It. Ki,"}, was atlirined. lure 
 2I,irphy, lii A. R. .S8(i. 
 
 FALSE IMPRISONMENT. 
 
 .S'te Malic'iois I'koskcltion". 
 
 FELONY. 
 
 -See Cki.minal Law. 
 
 FACTORIES ACT. 
 
 See Mastkr and Skrvant, III. 
 
 FAMILY ARRANGEMENT. 
 
 Division of Property. ] - Upon the death of a 
 life tenant the three surviving children of a 
 ileceased nephew of tho testator (one daughter 
 had died a short time before intestate and 
 unmarried) entered into possession and enjoy- 
 juent of the land in ([uestion under the belief 
 that they were tenants in common of one un- 
 divided moiety thereof, tlie surviving nephew 
 being entitled to the other undivided moiety. 
 From time to time leases and sales of portions 
 of the lanil were made in which all parties 
 joined, the instruments containing recitais as to 
 the assumed tenancy in common, ami the rents 
 and proceeds of sales l)eing divided among them 
 in the proportion of one-half to the surviving 
 nephew, and one-sixth to each of the others. 
 In 188.") a partition deed was executeil of part 
 of the unsold portion. In 188(i the eldest son 
 for the tinst time had brought to his attention 
 the question of his title under the will, and this 
 action was soon afterwards commenced liy him, 
 asking that the title might be declared, the 
 partition deed set aside and the rents and jiro- 
 <;ee<ls of sales received by the brother and sister 
 lepaid to him :^ 
 
 Held attirnung the judgment of Robertson, 
 J., IG O. R. 341, that as there was no consider- 
 ation therefor and no compronnse or settlement 
 of any dis|)uted ipiestion the partition deed and 
 sithi'T dealings couli! not be supported as in 
 the nature of family arrangements. Baldwin 
 v. Kiiujxtone, 18 A. R. 63. 
 
 Affirmed by the Privy Council, 18 A. R. 
 Appendix. 
 
 FENCES. 
 
 Division Fencea — Trespoxx — Fence- P/tKvr.v.l 
 —The Line Fence Act, It. S. 0. ch. 219. sec. ;j 
 provides thai " owners of oc(;upied adjoininL' 
 lands shall make, keep U]), and repair- a just 
 ItropoTtion of the fence which marks the boun- 
 (lary hetween them" : — 
 
 Held, per F(!rguson, ,J., allii'ndng the derision 
 of Ai'iiiour, C.J., that a boundary fence, u]hlt;i- 
 R. S. (). cli. L'l!>, should be so ])laced that whon 
 com])leled the vertical centre of the board wall 
 wilt coincide with the limit lietween the laii.la 
 of the i)arties, each owner being liuund to sun. 
 port it by appliances placed on his own land ;— 
 
 Held, per Hoyd, C, contra, that if tlie hniiii- 
 dary line be between the posts on one side of 
 the fence, and the scantling and boards oii tlie 
 other, 80 that there is piactical eipialily in the 
 amount of sjiace occupied by the (losts iiiid that 
 occu])ied by the continuous "boards, and if that 
 method is sanctioned by local usage, neither 
 owner has legal ground for complaint. Cuuk v 
 Tate, 2G O. R. 403. 
 
 FINAL JUDGMENT. 
 
 See SuPEEME CouKT OF Canada, XL, XIIL 
 
 FIRE. 
 
 i 
 
 Expropriation.]— Danger of fire to be con- 
 ! sidcred awarding e impensation for lauds 
 
 I expropriated for railways. See Sirait.<: o/' Cini- 
 ■leau Marine h'. W. Co. v. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. 
 ^ R. 113; ante 211. 
 1 
 
 I Pall of Wall After Fire.]— Where a tiro 
 destroyed the defendant's house, leaving one of 
 tiie walls standing in a dangerous condition, 
 and the defendant knowing the fact, neglecteil 
 to secure or support the wall or take it down, 
 and some days after the tire it was blown down 
 by a high wind and damaged the plaiutilf? 
 house : — 
 
 Held, attirming the judgments of the Courts 
 below, that the defendant could not shield him- 
 self under the plea of u/s major, and was lialile 
 
 ' for the damage caused. Nordheimer v. A Itxnii- 
 
 I der, 19 S. C. K. 248. 
 
 Steam Thresher —Sjni rk A nvKter. ]- On the 
 trial of an action for damages for the destnic- 
 
 ■ tion of a liarn and its contents by tiro, alicgeil 
 to have been caused by negligence of .leten- 
 
 ' dants in working a steam engine used in running 
 a hay press in front of said barn, the main issue 
 
 i was as to the sufficiency of a spark arrester on 
 
453 
 
 FIXTURES. 
 
 454 
 
 siiiil ongiiie, and the leariio.l Jiiilgc dirocloil the 
 jury tliat "if there was no Hpark arrester in 
 thii eiighio tliat in itself Wdiihl he iiej,'ligoiice for 
 •.vhifh ihifend'Uits would be liahle. " 
 
 I'laintiff obtained a verdiet whieh was set 
 uiidc by the Cimrt I'li biiin; and a new trial 
 iirlcicil for inisdireetiiin. 
 On appeal to the Supremo Court of Canada :— 
 Held, Strong, J., dissenting, that the .fudge 
 iMisdireeled the jury in telling llnin that the 
 ,v,uit of a spark arrostei- was, in jioint of 
 l,iw, negligenee, and sueh dii'oetion may have 
 iiitiurneed them in giving their' verdiet ;" there- 
 ton.- the judgment ordering a new trial slionld 
 nut he interfered with. I'cerx v. Elliult ''1 S 
 C. 11. lU. 
 
 Storage of Wheat— Ao.w hii F;re.]-Si-e 
 I'hirk V. McCk 1/(111, 2:\ 0. H. 405, nnte (15. 
 
 Tug— I'riiximntc Caii'<e—j;,ri.^i,iirth/e I'renni- I 
 ,';..«<. I -The plaintifl', owner of a scow, had,' 
 witJKJut authority, mooted it permanently to 
 the shore of a basin artiliciiilly ereated by the ' 
 iXL'.ivation of land adjaeent to a^iaxigable river, i 
 which formed the boumlary at thiit point be- ' 
 tWfiMi Canada and the Uidted .States 'J'he soil 
 of the shore and basin liad been patented to 
 certain persons, the usual rights of aeeess to 
 the shore and of navigation being leserved. 
 The defendants, iieensees of the owners of the 
 .ihore, with authority to take, and tor tiie [mr- 
 pose of taking, sand from tlie shore bv means of 
 tlii'ir own seuw and hired tug, of wliieii the 
 nuAoA- was the owner, j)laeed the tug and seow 
 alongside the plaintitrs seow, by order of the 
 foreman of the defendants' seow, to whose 
 orders the master of the tug was bound to eon- 
 t'oni). 
 
 Owing to the negligence of the master, the 
 pluiutiflTs seow eauuht lire from sparks emanat- 
 inj: from the smoke-staek of the tug, and was 
 deslroycil ; — 
 
 Ifuld, that the plaintiff, although he liii'l a 
 right to \ise the waters of the liasin for naviga- 
 tion and the shore for landing, was not entitFed 
 to use tliem in the way he w,is doing ;— 
 
 Held, however, th.'it the delVncfints, while 
 eiuitled to similar i-ights, and, in addit;(Ui, to 
 use the shore for any other purpose wliieh did 
 iiot interfere with tlie rights of the pid)lie, were 
 ooiuid to omit no reasonable precautions to 
 avoid injuring the plaintiirs property; ami that 
 they were liable for the iiegliuence of the master 
 ot the tug. 
 
 Daiw V, .]/„)(/(, 10 M. & \V. ,-,4(;, applied 
 uiul followed. Cra7n v. Ji'yau, L'4 O. R. 500. 
 AVc the next ease. 
 
 Ihe gran^ to the shore of the river, reserving 
 free aeet^^s to the shore for all vessels, boats, 
 and iiersoiis, carried the land to the water's 
 edge, and not to the middle of the .stream. 
 
 The effect of the removal of the shore line 
 back from its natural line was to make tho 
 water so let in as much /niJilid Juris as any 
 other part of the water of the river, .mil such 
 removal dhl not take away the right of free 
 
 ' "■■* t" the shore so removed. Cram v. Jiyan, 
 
 '. K. 52-1-. 
 
 FIRE INSURANCE. 
 
 S(e l.N'SUtcANf'E, III. 
 
 FISHERIES. 
 
 ■S'ff Ga.mi:. 
 
 FIXTURES. 
 
 Execution— .yor/iini/e. „f Fixt ares as ChatteU 
 — Mortya;/.. of Rniltn — 'lJlx.hfinjii „f Clialld 
 •''"'■'.'/a.'/''.] -The fact that tixtures aifixed to 
 the freeliold in the usual wav li.ave .sometimes 
 been mortgaged as chattels, a"nd on other occa- 
 sions have passed with a morti,'age of the free- 
 hold, does jiot render tliem exigible to an exe- 
 cution against goo.ls, if at the time of tho seiz- 
 ure the chattel mortgages are non-existent, and 
 , a mortgage of the freelioM is in existence as a 
 hrst charge thereon. Carsaii v. Siin/>soii, 25 O. 
 H. t').S."i. 
 
 Immovables— /;»(;i<i,aW^.v 1,1/ Di.s/iiMli(m— 
 Miil Mwhiiiert/.] — Cnder the provision.^ of 
 
 j Articles .'iT!) and .SSO C. C. L. C. machinery in 
 muls becomes inunovable by destination, and 
 foi'ms part of the realty. LeI'dn-re v. Tlta 
 
 \ (Jiieeii, 1 Ex. C. K. 121. 
 
 Tug.]— Held, attinningtlie decision of Street, 
 •)., •J4 (). U, ;-)(;(», that the defendants were lialde 
 lor the negligence of the owner of the tug liir.'d 
 liy them HI so phicing it as to communicate tire 
 '1 the plaintilTs .,eow, as in doing s) he was 
 "heyiiig the onlers of the defendants foreman, 
 and was under his direct and personal control. 
 
 harlon,kill Coa/ Co. v. /.V/rf, .S Mac.i. 2()(5, 
 followed :— 
 
 Held, however, reversing the decision of 
 ■Street, .)., that the plaintiff in niooriiu' his 
 scow where he did was not a trespasser, at idl 
 events as against the defendants, who were 
 mere licensees "to take sand from in front of 
 the knd granted by the Crown. 
 
 Landloi'd and Tenant — Marhimni 
 
 C7/c/Y/<7.s.j— Where a trade tixturc is attached to 
 the freehold, it liecoiues part thereof, subject to 
 the right ol the tenant to remove it, if lie doe.s 
 so in proper time ; in the nie:intinie it remains 
 part ot the freehold. 
 
 I Mcux V. Jacob.s L. R. 7 H. L., at pp. 490, 491, 
 followed. 
 
 ■ ]5ut where the parties have made a special 
 
 I contract, they have defined and made a law for 
 
 I themselves on the subject. 
 
 I Danyv. UwU, IS C. C. R., at p. 3(1, fol- 
 lowed. 
 
 In a lease dated in .Tnly, 1S!)0, there was a 
 provision that the le.sste> might, during the 
 term, erect inaehiuery upon tiie denii.sed pre- 
 mises, which shonhl be the projierty of the 
 lessees and removable by them, but not so as to 
 injure the building, etc. The lessees affixed 
 machinery to the buihling demised, and after- 
 ^vards, in April, 1S92, made an assignment for 
 the benelit of creditors. The lessors elected to 
 fort'eit, nude;- a clause in the lease, but they 
 permitted M. (i., a purciiaser of the machinery 
 trom the lessee's assignee, to remain in posses- 
 
 i sion, paying rent until December, 1892, wheu 
 
456 
 
 FIXTURES. 
 
 456 
 
 i> 
 
 I I 
 
 f f 
 
 she ceaspil, Iciivin^ the machintTy on the [d'u- 
 niJMeH. 'I'hc (k'fciiihiiits Ijt'O.iine the purchiiBers 
 of the fteclioM l>y virtue of ii sale iiniler the 
 power in ii nioitgiijje in .Inly, 1.S92, l)Ut tlie 
 leu.Me liiul eoiue to an end hcfoie tlieir title ((ini- 
 nienoeil. The phiintiB's ehiimed the inatliinciy 
 uniii'i'ii chattel inortna^je made hy M. (1. on the 
 25th April, IHJt'J, iind a sulwecjuent assigi iiient 
 from her of the whole of her interest tiierein, 
 and in March, 1H9.S, tluy lnought this action to 
 ohtain possession : — 
 
 Ifehl, that the machinery was, owing to the 
 provisions in the lease, chattels, and the pi»- 
 perty of the lessees, and eontintied toheaonntil 
 they ina<le the assignment, when it passed as 
 chattels to their assignee, w ho transferred it as 
 chattels to M. (1., ami she to the plaintitl's ; that 
 the forfeitnre of the term did not atriict the right 
 to the property, iior the right to remove it ; 
 that nothing had taken place to defeat that 
 right, and the plaintiff's were in good time to 
 exercise it. 
 
 The defendants, being in possession of the , 
 machinery, and luing asked for it by the plain- ; 
 titis, asserted title in themselves, and warned 
 the plaintiH's that if proceedings were taken 
 they would set up such title : — 
 
 Held, that a wrongful detention of the goods 
 was shewn, and that the action of replevin 
 therefore lay. Scarth v. Ontario Poirer and 
 /Yrt<CV.,24 0. R. 44ti. : 
 
 Landlord and Tenant — Short Formn Act, 11. 
 'S. <K ell. Joe — liemorcil af Fixtures.] — The term 
 '• fixtures," as used in the extended form of the 
 eo\ enauts to repair and leave the premises in 
 good repair, in a lease made pursuant to the 
 Short Forms Act, R. !?*. O. ch. lOtJ, includes only 
 inemovaV)lG fixtures, which are such things as 
 niiiy be ai.ixed to (»■..'/., doors and windows), or 
 placed on ((.;/., rail fences), the freeliold by the 
 tenant, the property in which passes to the 
 laiulloid inmiediatcly ujion being so atlix(<l or 
 pl.iced, and in which the tenant at the same 
 time ceases to have any properly ; and does not 
 include removable fixtures, which are such 
 things as may be affixed to the freehold for the 
 purpose of trade or of domestic convenience' or 
 ornament, a qualified projierty in which remains \ 
 in the tenant, or such things as may be i tfixed 
 to the freehold for merely a temporary purpose, 
 or for the more complete enjoyment and u.'^e of ' 
 them as chattels, the absolute property in which 
 remains in the tenant. i 
 
 Where the lessor has elected to re-enter for a I 
 forfeiture, the lessee has the right, while he 
 remains in possession, to remove fixtures put up 
 by him for the purposes of his trade, and has a ' 
 reasonable time, after such election, within | 
 which to do so. 
 
 And where he a'-tempts to do so within a j 
 reasonable time, and is preventeil by the lessc, i 
 the latter is liable to an action for the value. | 
 
 Judgment of Boyd, C. reversed. Arf/l(!iv. ! 
 Mi-Math, 26 O. R. 224. Affirmed in appeal, 23 i 
 A. R. 44. 
 
 Iilen Afirreement — Machinery.] — See Water- 
 om En'jive Work" Co. v. MrCami, 21 A. K. 48G, 
 
 Ji0.tt, MoHTGA(3E, VIII. 
 
 Mortgage — DwdVmri-hoiufe — Hot-air Fum- 
 (tee.]— A hot-air furnace fixed to the floor by 
 screws and placed iu a dwelling-house, during its 
 
 construction, by a mortgagor, in pursiuince<,f thi; 
 agi',<iMeiit for tlu' loan on the property, caniii.t 
 be removed by hiui during the currency ot tlie 
 mortgage. The nioitgagee is entitled tu ;iii 
 oidci' restraining its removal, and if reniovid ih, 
 title to it passes as against the mortgagee ckcu 
 to an innocent puichasur aiul the former is 
 entitled to an order for its replacement. Si,,iii,l, 
 Aiiitricjtii /nrisliiii lit to. v. Si:ili,n, 20 0. II. 77. 
 
 Mortgage — Exu-ntioii— Machimrij. J — Ci it.uii 
 nuu'hinciy wasi)lace(l in «iluin\ land and IhiusciI 
 with a view to the utili/ation of the laml ii.s ;i 
 phosphate mine : and it was intended tu utiij/t 
 the nuichinery upon the lan<l, moving it hum 
 ]ilace to jjhu'c so long as veins could be iniiinl. 
 The soil was excavated in order to foini -.'. Iicl 
 for the boiler and hoist, ami tlie inachincrv «,u 
 fiiiiily attached by bidts to sleepers or skills 
 placed on the lock biiltoiii of the excMV;ilii,ii ; 
 and a house was erected over the liiachiiieiy. t" 
 erect which the soil was also t<i some exti nt 
 i excavateil. The boiler and inacliineiy were aLsu 
 \ fastened to the building by rods inside iimli r- 
 neath the lloor.and the smoke stack wasstciiilieil 
 by guys fa.steiicd to the ground and to stunips 
 in the grounil : — 
 
 Held, that the chattels in (|uestion were tix- 
 tures and could not be removed witlioul tin 
 consent of the mortgagee, 
 i Semlilf, that apart from this, it was iiiipo8.sili|u 
 to sell these fixtures under an execution a;;aiiist 
 goods so long as the jdiysical attaclinieiit In tlii' 
 land existetl, even if the owner of the eijiiitv nf 
 iidtiniition had the right to detach and ipimdvi 
 them as chattels, h'oijir.i v. Onltiriu JJiiiik, :.'l 
 (). K. 116. 
 
 RailTvays — Imvioruhk.i hy D stination.]- In 
 virtue cf the provision of a trust conveyance, 
 granting a lirst lien, ))rivilege and mortgage 
 u])cn the railv.ay iirojierty, franchise aial iill 
 additions thereto of the South Kasleiii Railw^iy 
 Compaiiv, and execut"d under the autlimitv 
 of 4;i & 44 Vict. (().) ch. 4!), and 14 & 4:> Vict. 
 {Q.) ch. 43, the trustees of the bond liokkis 
 took possession of the railway. In actii ns 
 biought against the trustees after thi'y tunk 
 j'os.,ession. by the ajipelhints, for the puichiisi' 
 price of certain cars and other rolling stock iistil 
 for operating the mad, and for work doiiu fur, 
 and materials delivered to, the com]iany iiftti 
 the execution of the deed of trust, but bchiictlie 
 trustees took jio.^-stssion of the railway ; — 
 
 Held, 1st, affirming the judgments of the 
 Court below, that the trustees were not lialilc. 
 2. That the aj)))ellants lost their iirivilegu nf 
 unpaid vendors of the cars and rolling stock 
 as against the trustees, because s-uch (irivi- 
 lege cannot be exercised when movables become 
 immo\ab!e by destination (as was the result 
 with regard to the cars and rolling stock in 
 this ease) and the immovable to which tlic 
 movables are attached is in the possession df a 
 third party or is hypothecated. Article l'017 
 C.C. 3. But even considered as movables suili 
 cars and rolling stock became atl'ected anil 
 charged by virtue of the statute and nioitgage 
 made thereunder, .is security to the hoiul 
 holders, with right of priority over all ntlier 
 creditors, including the privileged unpaiil ven- 
 dors. 
 
 Per G Wynne, J,, that the appellants iiiiglit be 
 entitled to an equitable decree, framed witlulue 
 
456 
 
 >r, ill pui'suaiicc. i il,, 
 the piopci'ty, ( ani .,■ 
 lilt! fiiniMicy (i! ii„. 
 I' Ih cMititli'il til an 
 111, und ii ri'iiKn , ^1 m, 
 
 till! lllort).'ilgei i-\,.|, 
 1111(1 tllL' f(ilMll.l |> 
 
 ephii'i'iiK'Ht, .V(. ,//)■./, 
 .Sciii.ii, '20 0. i!. :;, 
 
 Machhiiry. ]— Ci i t.nis 
 1(11)1 liiiiil aiiil li(iu,Mii 
 ion (if 1 lit; laiiii a,v ,^ 
 ,a iiitoiulcd til iitiii/( 
 
 11(1, niDviiiK it I 
 
 [■ins I'oiilil )io iiiiiiiil. 
 order to foini .i luil 
 
 I the iiiauhilieiA u.ih 
 to Hli'cpcrs or skills 
 
 ot the exeiiVuli..!! ; 
 ev till) niacliiiieiy. tu 
 also to some cxtint 
 iiiachiiiery weic ^ilsn 
 ly rods inside uiniir 
 ie staek was steinlieil 
 ouiid and to .■ituiiips 
 
 II (piestion weic lix- 
 jiiioVLil witlioul tin 
 
 his, it wasiiii|i(i.s>ili|i 
 an exeeiition ;iL'iiiiist 
 il attaclnneiit to the 
 'iier of the e(|iiity ul 
 o detach and reinnvi 
 V. Onlurio Jiimk, 'Jl 
 
 hy D sliiialion.]- In 
 a trust (.onveyiiiice, 
 .■ilege and nuirtLMj.'i 
 ■, traiu'liisi! and all 
 nth I'.'asterii Railway 
 mder the aiUlaiiitv 
 ), and 14 & 4:. Vict. 
 of till' bond li(iliUi'> 
 lihvay. In aaii ii.< 
 L'es after tliey tunk 
 ts, for the piirehasi' 
 ler rolling frtdik iistil 
 
 for vork done fm. 
 , the eoinpaiiy aftti 
 trust, liiit lefiiietla; 
 the railway :— 
 ; jud.uiiunts of the 
 itees ■were not liidiU'. 
 it their privilcL'e of 
 [■s and rolling stntk 
 liceause i^ueli privi- 
 en inovaliles liecomu 
 
 (as was the result 
 nd rolling stock in 
 ■able to which tlie 
 
 the possession of a 
 ■ated. Article -.'017 
 ed as movables siicli 
 leaine aHVeteil aiul 
 itute and nioi'tgiige 
 irity to the honil 
 irity over all "tlier 
 vileged unpaiil veii- 
 
 appellants niiclit he 
 ■ee, f rallied with due 
 
 457 
 
 PORTION LAW AND FOREIGNER. 
 
 458 
 
 iej,'ard to the other nccessa.y appropriations of 
 tlie ineomu in aeeordaiiee with the provision of 
 the trust indenture, authori/ing the payment by 
 tae trustees "of all legal claims aiising from 
 the iiptTation of the railway iiioluding damag(!s 
 eiibiil by aeeidents and all other charges," but 
 such a decree could not be made in the present 
 action. 
 
 Per Strong, J., qwi'ir, whether the principle 
 IS to the applicability of current earnings to 
 oiirrent expenses, inuurrt^d cither whilst or 
 l)efiiie a railway comes under the control of the 
 t'liuit by being jilaccd at the instance of mort- 
 gaLjei'S in the hands of a receiver, ia preference 
 to iiKirtL'ago creditors whose security has prior- 
 ity of date over the obligation thus'iiuairred for 
 wiirkiiig expenses, should bo a(lo|ited by courts 
 iatliis country. Watltirid'je v. Farwe/I, Ontario 
 Carond Foundry Go. v. Farwdl, 18 8. C. R. 1. 
 
 FORECLOSURE. 
 
 Sec MoRT(iA(ii;, VI. 
 
 FOREIGN COMMISSION. 
 
 iSVc EviOENCK, VI.— PllACTICK, XIV. 
 
 FOREIGN CREDITOR. 
 
 See Ai.iKN. 
 
 FOREIGN JUDGMENT. 
 
 See JCDOMENT, VII. 
 
 FOREIGN LAW AND FOREIGNER. 
 
 Administration. ] —5ce Milne v. Moore, 24 
 0. K. 4.">6, aii/e 13, as to rights of foreign creditors 
 in administration proceedings. 
 
 Antenuptial Contract— il/o^rimoja'a/ Donii- 
 rit.] — The plaintiff's husband entered into 
 an antenuptial contract in the Province of 
 Quebec with her concerning their rights and 
 property, present and future. He subsetjueutly 
 moved to this Province and died there in- 
 testate ;— 
 
 Held, that this contract must govern all his 
 property movable and immovable, though 
 situate in this Province, provided that the laws 
 of this I'rovincc relating to real property had 
 heeu complied with ; and that it made no differ- 
 ence whether the matrimonial domioil of the 
 parties at the time of the contract and marriage 
 was in Ontario or Quebec. Taillifer v. Tailhfer, 
 21 0. R. 337. 
 
 Bill of Lading.] A bank in this Province, 
 uuder an agreement with a cu.stomer, domiciled 
 here, advanced money to him to enable him to 
 uuy cattle in this Province, which, under the 
 -agreement, when purchased were to be for- 
 
 warded by rail by him to Montreal, and to be 
 slii[)pcd by steamship tliciice to Liverpool, the 
 bank hiving no contrid oV(!r the cattle until 
 they reached the vessel, when they wci'c to be 
 received by the steamship for the bank, .iiid the 
 customer's possession and control over them 
 was to end ; bills of lading therefor in favoiii- 
 of the bank being then signed. The cattle 
 were purchased and sent to Montreal as .agreed 
 on. On arriving at the steimsbip, and Ixifore 
 the bills of lading were made out, a credi- 
 tor of the customer attached the cattle under 
 a writ of ■■^aiiit-orrel, but the steamship owners, 
 disregarding the writ, signed the bills of lad- 
 ing aiiil conveyed the cattle to their desti- 
 nation. The creditor siibsc(|iit!ntly recovered 
 a judgment for the value of the cattle, in the 
 Province of (,»iud)ec, against the steamship 
 owners, which the latter, having paid, sought 
 to prove on the estate of the bank in winding 
 up proceedings, but the claim was disallowed 
 by the Master. 
 
 • hi appeal from him it was: — 
 
 Held, that, apart from the lianking Act, I-!. 
 S. C. ell. l'2i), by virtue of the agreement be- 
 tween the bank and its customer the possession 
 and a special property in the goods passed to 
 the bank, of wliich the steamship owners were 
 aware, and having assented thereto upon receipt 
 of the cattle, before any jirocess was served, 
 must be taken to have heUl the cattle for the 
 bank. 
 
 The agreement having been made, and the 
 parties to it being domiciled in this Province, 
 the rights of the parties to it must be determ- 
 ined by the laws of this Province and not by 
 those of Quebec, which, however, were luit 
 Bhewn to be dillerent: — 
 
 Held, also, that the rights of the parties were 
 entirely governed by the inovisioiis of the liank- 
 ing Act, and following, though not altogether 
 approving, Min'lvuils Hank v. Sitter, 24 (!r. 
 356, that under sec. 53, sub-sec. 4 of the Act, 
 the bank had, under the agreement and the 
 facts proved, an e(juitable lien upon the cattle 
 from the time of the making of the agreement, 
 which prevailed over the .attachment : — 
 
 Held, lastly, that the bank "acipiired" the 
 bills of lading within theineani'ig of the Bank- 
 ing Act as soon as the cattle were receeived by 
 the ste.aniship, although it did not at that time 
 actually "hold'' the bills. The appeal was 
 therefore dismissed. AV Central Hank, Canada 
 Shippin;/ Cn.'x Case, 21 O. 1!. olo. 
 
 Bill of Sale.] — The rights of parties resi- 
 dent in a foreign country and there making a 
 contract in regard to goods in Ontario, so far 
 as the formalities of registration or change of 
 possession are concerned, are governed by thir 
 law of Ontario. 
 
 Hirer Stare Co. v. Sill, 12 O. U. 557, followed. 
 MarthinsoH v. Patter.ton, 20 O. R. 125. Affirmed 
 in apiieal, 19 A. R. ISS. 
 
 Bond — /nterext.] — In assessing damages in 
 the nature of interest on a bond payable at ii 
 particular place reference should, in general, be 
 had to the rules in force at the place where the 
 same is so pavable. The <,!neeii v. Uratul Trunk 
 R. W. Co., 2"Ex. C. R. 132. 
 
 Foreign Ija,nd--Fraudident Conveyance.] — 
 An action will not lie in this Province by n. 
 
459 
 
 FORaERY. 
 
 460 
 
 llfl 
 
 juclj^iiifnt tTPiiitor tft set nRuk m fraudulent, a 
 convcyjiMcc inmlt' liy IiIh ilclitoi of liiiiilx situato 
 ill u forcM^,'!! cotintrv, u litii llu; rnilitor has im 
 miicily tlicri', altlioiigli all tlif [liiitit.s icnidu in 
 tliiH I'roviiicc. 
 
 Altlii)iij,'h tlid Court -.vill iiiliilm' wIrto thi! ■ 
 |)arti<!H aie within I lie jiiriHiliclidii in -kimii! crhvh 
 whoru fiaiiil exists in 'I'spiM t to H|iti'ilio pro- 
 perty out of tliu JMrisdirtion, liy oid( rin;,' coii- 
 v«!yaiic(.'s to Ik; iiiiide to tlic |ii'r«oii entitled, it 
 will not do .HO when the relief sought i^ to suli- 
 jeot tlif; )iroperty to the exipneiea of exfeution 
 which it is powerh'SM tr, enforee. Jinnin v. 
 Itaridso)!, 'Jl (). ii. r)4". 
 
 Foreign Land — Jinli'in/ilinn Ac/ion.] — A 
 un.'ditor who has recovered judgment in Maui- 
 tiiha, and who has liy virtiu' of an Act of that 
 Province a lien on tiic lands of the judgment 
 debtor there, cannot maintiun in the Tourts of; 
 Ontario an action against a luortgageo, for 
 redemption of a mortgage on lands in Manitoba, 
 which are subject t. the lien. 
 
 Judgment of the (,)ui en's IJeiich Division, 23 | 
 • ). 11. ;!l'7, rever^eil. Ihhdcrson. v. liaiik itf\ 
 Hamilton, ■.'() A. It. (i4(i. Allirmed by the 
 Supreme Court, •.','{ S. C. R. 71(i. 
 
 ' Penalty. ]— An action for a penalty imurrcii 
 under a foreign la«, In ought by n private imji 
 vidiiid in hisown interest in the foreign ciaiiilry, 
 is not '• |ienal " in the sense used ni iiitiiiia 
 tioual law, and may be ('iiforced by action m 
 this Province, 'i'lie proper lest, whetln i .m 
 action is in such a sense pen.al, is whether liu' 
 
 I" eediiig is in .avor.r of the ,Stat>' whose Imv 
 
 lias been infringed ; if it i-^ it cannot 1 nfi.|,(.|, 
 
 liy a statute of the State of New N'o U, ,uiy 
 of the olliceis of a eoiiioiation signing any cc.tifi. 
 cate or report, which shall be false in any 111,1!^. 
 rial ivpresent:ition, shall be liable for ",dl the 
 debts of the corporation eolitrai, leil while |||,.y 
 are otlieers thereof. The icspondent, w lijlc ,, 
 director of a ^oriioration, organized uudei the 
 laws of \ew 'N'ork, signed a certilicate contnin 
 ing representations which were material mil 
 false, and was sued in that .State by the appd 
 laiit, who w.as then a creditor, and judgin' at 
 was recovered ag.iiiist him foi' the debt. On ,m 
 actifin on this jiidgnicnl in this Province :— 
 
 Held, that the action was inaintainable. 
 
 dudgineiit of >;treet, .1., 17 O. ]{, o(),r, ,„|,i ,,f 
 the Court (if Appeal, \H A. R. l;i(i, rcverseil. 
 llnntiviiiloii v. All I 'ill, 2(1 A. R. Appendix i. S 
 C, [ISD.'il A. C. l.-iO. 
 
 Foreign Land- 7V/A. | -Th • Courts in thi;- 
 Province hav(^ no jurisdiction to entertain an 
 action for detci mining the title to lands in the 
 North-West Territories, even though the par- 
 ties bi> resident h(>re. 
 
 Ill- llolinisoii, •2-2 Cr. 41!t, distinguished. /.'i,,s.< 
 V. /loKs, 2:i O. R. 4;j. 
 
 Legacy to Unincorporated Ass( lat<on.!— 
 A testator ilomicilcd in the State of .Missouri, 
 U.S., at the time of the execution of his will, 
 and at the time of his death, bei|ueatlied per- 
 sonal projierty, situate in this Province, to a 
 Loilge of Oddfellows in the State of New York, 
 U.S., which, although unincorporated at the 
 time of the testator's death, was subsequently 
 authorized by law t<i take and hold, in the names 
 of trustee.';, ))roperty devised to the lodge. 
 
 In an action to test the validity of the be- 
 quest : — 
 
 H(dd, that the parties having selected their 
 forum in this Province, the action must bo dealt 
 with here according to the law of the testator's 
 doiidcil, which, in the absence of evidence to 
 the contrary, would be iircsumed to be the same 
 as the law of this Province : — 
 
 Held, also, there being no jirohibitory law of 
 the legatee's domicil, tlie beijnest to the lodge 
 was a valid beiiuest to the member.s thereof, and 
 that the trustees of the lodge could be added as 
 parties defendants, on behalf of all the members. 
 
 IValk-er v. Mnrmy, ") O. R. U;J8, followed! 
 Graham v. Cawmdaigwi Loili/r, '2-1 O. R. -Joo. 
 
 Bfoney In Court— Pay 111 mi Oiit—Marriaij<-. ] 
 — Where a female was entitled, at majority', to 
 payment out of Court of a sum of money, and ! 
 it apjieared that, although only niiu teen years 
 of age, she was inarrieil and domiciled in a 
 foreign country, by the laws of which a femule 
 is entitled, upon marriage, to receive money 
 due her, an order was maile for immediate pay- 
 ment out. Kavaiiai/h v. LmtiOii, iti P. R. 229. 
 
 Money In Court —i-'on/;/// C nard'HUi — Pay- 
 went Out.]— Sti: Re iSIoxkou, ISP. R. \ri6,pofit 5Q2. 
 
 'Wlndlng-Up Act — Claim rmbr tjinl,,-,- 
 Ac"'.]— Th,.i|. is nothing in aeelion ')(> of the 
 Dominion Winding- I'p Act which alters or inui 
 leres with the Irxluci cuniruiiiis in the case i.f ,1 
 claim. 
 
 Where a lease of property situate in tic IVi 
 .ince of Quebec, and intered into there, rm; 
 tallied a provision making the same void, a: the 
 option of the lessor, on the insolvency of tlir 
 leasee, and by the law of that Province (Civii 
 Coile, Article 1(192) 01 such in.solvency.'thc nut 
 not yet exi-iblc, by the terms of the le.isc, 
 becomes .so, ,-1 claim for the whole nnt, taxes, 
 etc., to the end of the term was, on the iii.snl- 
 vency of the lessee compan-, , idlowed to thi 
 i lessors in liquidation iirocccdings under the 
 I Dominion Act. In tv Ilailt mid (liilai-i-) Kj 
 rpre.ix mid Trmi-iporlalion Co., 22 O. I!. oKi 
 i 
 
 'Wlnding-Up Act- - Foniim Compmii/.] — :■. 
 winding-up order by a Canadian Court' in ih, 
 matter of a Scotch compans- ineor|ior;itcd umlt! 
 the Imperial Winding-L'p Acts doing business 
 in Canada, and having assets and owing ildit^ 
 in C'anada, which order was made u|ion tip 
 petition of a Canadian creditor, with the cm: 
 sent of the licpiidator previously appointed In 
 the Court in Scotland, as ancillary to the wiml- 
 ing-ni) proceedings there, is a valid order luiiki 
 the said Winding-up Act of the Dominion. Mtr- 
 chuiif.i Ilaidc of Uidifax v. ai/lcyik. 10 .-i. C. 
 R. 312. distinguished. AUm \. Ilaii.<on. Inn- 
 Scofli/</i-Caiiad'iaii Asht-sto-i Co., 18 S. C. R. ()'67. 
 
 FORFEITURE. 
 
 ■See Landi.oku a.ndTknant, VIII. 
 Invention. 
 
 -Patent of 
 
 FORGERY. 
 
 See CoNsTiTiTioxAi. Law, JI.— Ckimi.nal L\\s\ 
 
 I\'.— E.XTHADITION. 
 
461 
 
 FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION. 
 
 462 
 
 FORTUNE TELLINO. 
 ^f* Ckiminai, Law, I\'. 
 
 FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION. 
 
 Collusive Purchase - Dii-iiinn ( 'tiurl. | — 'I'lu,. 
 g(vA* 111" a tcii.iiit wcif «(i/i(l t(ir rent ami ot- 
 ffieil fur sale liy a liiiilill'. 'Jho tuiiaiit \<u\ llujn 
 in mill tiny wvw iiniiic.liatcly seizuil unilir an 
 ixfcittiuii a^'aiiist liiin mi In-half of an c-xociitiiin 
 cti'ilifiir of the tiiiaiit. 'I'licy wlto then claiintil 
 l.y .1 tliinl iiiT.snii, who ullc'^uil thai iho ti'iiant 
 was ill nality liiildiii^; for him, and ihis flaiui- 
 aiit piiil till! pni'diuMc MKiiiuy ; — 
 
 Ik'M, that if the j{oo(ls wire sold at an luidfr- 
 value owing to tlio Mils liciny made liy tin.' tun- 
 ant ostunsildy for liiiii.stlf aa jiart ofa st-hiMiu- 
 l.c-tweiii the tenant and t'lainiant to dcfi-at 
 rreditors by ki'i-iiing down the jirico, the hah- 
 HoiiM lie frandiili-iil and void aa against the 
 creilitiu's of the tenant, though it would be good 
 iw far aa the |mruhase money was eimeonied, 
 which could not ..i any event be recovered back 
 liythe claimant. SitUinm v, /Vrt;(c/.s, ISA. \\. I'JI. 
 
 Deceit-] — 111 order that a repreaentation 
 iii.iy lie actionable it must bo fraiiiluleiilly 
 niaile. Whore, therefore, in an action to re 
 riivcr damages for falsely representing that a 
 t(irj,'eil ene(|ue was genuine, the jury answered 
 in till- negative the niiestion " Did' the deten- 
 (lant lalst-ly, fraudulently and deeeitfuUy repre- 
 sent the signature to the eiieipie to be geiiniiie, 
 when in truth and in fact it waa a forgery '.' " The 
 action was held not maintainable, tlmugli in an- 
 swer to other i|iiestioiis they found that the de- 
 fcnilant made the lepiesentatinn without know- 
 ing whether it was true or false, without a rea- 
 Minalile belief in its truth and without making 
 liroiier eni|uiries. WLUtw Sane, It) .-\. K. VAo. 
 
 Pretended Agent— /'l■(^'; lir/ircs, iila/ioii-" <i.s ^ 
 h All/Ill, rill/ — Ji'ii/ljHiititiii hji Ci-inlitur—lmlitt- 
 iihli- 0//;/(('C,J— Where payment is obtained fioni , 
 a iklitor by one who falsely represents th .t be : 
 is agent of the creditor, niiou whom a fraud is! 
 thereby committed, if the creditor ratities and 
 ciintirm,-. the payment he adopts the agency of 
 tlie person receiving the money and makes the 
 liayincut eipiivalent to one to an authorized 
 a.;ent. The paymeiil may be ratilied and llie , 
 agency adopted, even though the person re- ' 
 cciving the money has, by his false representa- 
 tions, committed an indietable otlence. Scud v. j 
 Ikitik of Sew Jindi-^iri,-/.; -j;) S. C. R. 277. | 
 
 Life Insurance — "^nrrdul, r of /'o/iV//.]--The I 
 rules which govern the iniroliaae ami sale of 
 pohcics of life insurance are the same as those 
 which govern the purchase and sale of any other 
 species of personal property. ; 
 
 A cimtiact for the surrender of a life policy, 
 unlike a contract for life iiisurauco, is not iJni-. \ 
 nmiefiilci. 
 
 The insured in a life poliej-, having no sur- 
 render value, apiilied to the" insurers to pur- 
 chase it. which they did f..i a small sum, he be- ; 
 liigatthe time, to theiv knowledge as well as : 
 Ills own, seriously ill with heart disease. The ' 
 insureis in no way misled the insured, who \ 
 uied shortly after the sale. | 
 
 In an action by his exeeutors to set Uhide iho 
 I transaction :- - 
 
 Meld, that there was no evidence of fraud to 
 submit to a Jury. ///// v. (Inni, I Slai k. I;i4, 
 explained ind liistinguished ; Sniil/i v. Hiiiili--.^. 
 N. I!, (i 1,1. I!. ,')i)7, followed, .luiifs v. Kiriii-, J 
 ■Moo. .V I!. ;i-l,s, distinguished, /'iilt^ v, T' m 
 P'rciKt l.ifit J ■,.■,!( i-niifc I'll., 'IW (I, H. 7;(, 
 
 Sale of Ooods — Misldhr of Vmilui- n.i in 
 Iili iihly iif I ■(/((/- r. J - .-\ niaufacturing company 
 transleried to a ayndieate, which had hut it 
 money, its works, plant, and material, and in 
 etleet its whole buMiness, which the syndicate 
 proceeili-d to carry on, on the eompany's preiii 
 ises, for its own benelit, and at its liwn risk. 
 The managing director of the company, who 
 had become the manager of the syndicate, after 
 the above transfer, but plirsuao't to a corres- 
 pondence coiniiienrcd a few days before it, 
 ordered as in his former capacity ci rtain goods 
 Irom the ])lainiill', who suli»ei|iiL"iit to the t'^rans- 
 fer supplied the goods ordered which were used 
 by the syndicate, and he afterwards took a 
 note of the company for their price, on which, 
 when dislionoured, he sued and obtained judg- 
 ment against the company, being, however, all 
 the time, ignorant of tlie eireumslancis above 
 nientioneil. .-\boiit a week prior to the judg- 
 ment, a winding-np order was obtained ag.iinst 
 the eomii.iny, hearing of w hicli the plaintill at 
 oiiee eommenced this action against the syndi- 
 cate for the ]irice of the goods, and afterwards 
 before trial he obtained ... iKU-te an order vacat- 
 ing the jiidgineiil against the coin])any : — 
 
 Held, that the pJaintiH' was entitled to recover 
 from the .syndicate the |irice of the goods : — 
 
 Held, also, j.er Kobert^on, .)., that the judg- 
 ; inent vacated was absolutely null and void, 
 having been obtained after the winding-up 
 order without the leave of the Court :— 
 
 Per .Meredith, J. — The judmnent was at any 
 rate irregularly entered, and when set aside, 
 was as if it had never existed. Kiatimi v. Uiii- ' 
 hriii), -JG (). R. ;i(il. 
 
 Taking Advantage of One's Own Wronw. 1 
 
 — In an action to recover an anidunt received 
 by the defendant for the plaintill', the defen- 
 dant pleaded iiitir alia that tiie action was jier- 
 mature inasmuch as he had got the money 
 irrei;ularly from the treasurer of the I'roviiico 
 of (jluebec on a report of distiibutiim of the 
 protnonotary before all the conte.-tations to the 
 rejKirt of collocation had been decided : — 
 
 Held, atliiining the judgment of the Court 
 below, that this defence was not open to the 
 defenilaiit, aa it would be giving hiin the benefit 
 of his own impro|ier and illegal proceedings. 
 Utii-ii V. Mm ray, 24 S. C. R. 77. 
 
 Undisclosed Tmst—L'/ifornmijil. ] -The pro- 
 perty of .M. having been advertised for sale 
 under power in a mortgage his wife arranged 
 with tlie mortgagee to redeeiii it by making a. 
 cash priymeiit and giving another mortgage for 
 the lialanee. To enable her to pay the amount, 
 1!. agreed to lend it for a year taking an abso- 
 lute deed of the property as security and hold- 
 ing it in trust for that time. A contrael was 
 drawn up by the mortgagee's solicitor for ,i 
 purchase by B. of tlu' property at the aiireed 
 price which 15. signed, and he told the solicitor 
 that he would advise liiin by telephone whether 
 
 Ic 
 
i 
 
 4ia 
 
 FRAUDULENT OONVEYANOE. 
 
 flli 
 
 •■''"' '• ■ vvoulil 1)0 Ukcn in liii own nanipor hit 
 
 (Iii'iK'lil.r'H 'I'lu. next .liiy u tfli'pliom' ni.!HMnj{n 
 <Miii»'liuMi II. '.I lioiMc til till! Holii'itor inslniit 
 i"K' fiini to nmki! the (Iccl in lln' n.iiiu' of It.'.i 
 'lauK'liti'i, whicli MiiN <|nii,., anil tin- iIcimI wan 
 «!XriMitiMl l.y M. ami his wit'., anil tli.' arrange- 
 nicnt witli tliii tniiitKiin.;.' rariifil out, SiiIihc- 
 "liii'Mtly U.'h (lanKlitei- ilainicil that hhr hail 
 IiiinlmHiMl till" i.io|R'ity alianlut.ly, ami fur her 
 own hiiitlit, and an ailion whk lirouj^'lit hy M.'h 
 uih' au'iiinst hor ami I!, to lia\ f tlio ilaughter 
 ill', larcil a triiHtco of tiii' proportv «ulijoct to 
 iviLiyintMit of tjin liM.n from |i. anil for h|i(vitic 
 pfrtornianoii of thi' ;iKrtM'nient. 'I'ht- plaintitl in 
 the ,ifti<in cliaryiii inlhiMion urnl conMpiracv on 
 thi! part of tlif ih-fi'mlants to ih prive her of' the 
 property, ami in aililitinn to ilonvin^ saiil 
 ihari,'!' (lefeiiilantw plcailtMl tlie s'tatuto of 
 1' ran. is : . 
 
 Ilelil, aflirniint; tlie iloeiHion of thu Conrt of 
 Ai-peal, I!) A. H. (W-', Stron-, J., .lis.scntin^.'. 
 tliat the eviilenoe proveil that liis ilaugliter was 
 aware of the agreement niailt, with H., ami the 
 • leeii liavnig lieen exeenteil In piirsnauee of such 
 agreement slie must he lielil to have taken the 
 Ijroijerty in trust as B. woiilil have l.oen if the 
 <leeil liad lieen taken in his name, ami the 
 Statute of Framis did not prevent parol evi- 
 denee heing given of the agreement with the 
 plaintill. Jlriitni, V. .\f,\Uitlaii,-20S. (■ I! 404 
 
 464 
 
 ! ho munt mm on behalf of all the eruditors of tl„. 
 
 ih'l.tor, and in sueh action his relief will I „ 
 
 lined to Hettiiig aside the ennveyanee, leavm ' 
 him to rrsoit to some independent |iroeeidiii -t". 
 ohtam exeeiition against the property c.imp,r„d 
 III siieii I'lillVeyaU'e. 
 
 'I'he protection of l.'l KHz. eh. "i, is nut cm, 
 hlied to ereditiirs only, hut extends to eieditms 
 and others who have lawful actions ; and m iIim 
 case, wher.', heliire the impeached coineviitin' 
 was ni.ide. all the nionevs secured h\ a ni„it 
 gage, snhject to which the plaintitr had reii 
 veyed the miutgaged lands to the fraiiduliic 
 grantor, had fallen due, the plaintill' had at the 
 time of the making of the conveyaiiee a lawful 
 action upon the implied conliact of his vcinj.,. 
 to pay the moneys secured liy the moi tgat'e ■ 
 and this implied contract was sufficiuntlv pn.-. ,i 
 against the fiandnleiit gr.mtce by proof i,|- i|,„ 
 mortgage and of the conveyance 'hy the plaintill 
 to the traudnleiit grantor subject to the ninrt 
 
 Where a conveyance is viduntary, it is ctiIv 
 necessary to shew framlnleir intent <ui the iKiit 
 of the grantor. Otirer v. l/rLninj/i/in, •J4 (I 
 H. 41, 
 
 Undue Influence Exfrssh-e /'fii/mni/ for 
 .S» /■'■'.'■<-• I Where by reason of the contideii'tiHl 
 relationship existing between plaintill and 
 delendmit and the inlhience he was able to 
 exert over her by a.sserting knowledge of mat- 
 ters which he alleged eoul.l he used to her piv- 
 judiee, and which at the trial he admitted had 
 no existence, he Wris emiblid to jiroc^urc from 
 plaintill an excessive amount for services per- 
 formed and which was r'aid hy her even after 
 she had obtained indepen lent advice, the plain- 
 till was hehl entitled to n over the same b.ack 
 less a reasonable anionnt :„r the services per- 
 foinied. J)iHlier v. Clnn,^, :>,-, I). R. 49.4 
 
 FRAUD ON COMPOSITION. 
 
 S(<- riANKurni V ASD Insolvkmv, III. 
 
 FR -VUDS-STATUTE OF. 
 
 5((('0STUAIT, IV.-riU\CIPALAM)A.lKNT, III. 
 
 FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE. 
 
 Creditor's Action ~ A tl„rly,n<i CndUor ~ 
 (■hum Uml,ys}i,.\-A creditor for an amount 
 under ^>40 cannot att.iek a eonvevnnee of land as 
 voliiiitary or fraudulent, .and hecannot improve 
 ins po.sition by bringing his action on behalf of 
 other creditors. Zitliax v. i>,a».s, -JO ( ». U 5S9. 
 
 Creditor's Action — Execution Crniitor ~ 
 Vj...ifuy ro«,v;/ni„..] — Where a creditor 
 brings his action to set aside as fiaudnlent a ' 
 conveyance made by his debtor of his property I 
 witi- •' hrst obtaining judgment and execution ' 
 
 Creditor's Action — Sritkmnil.] — IJef,,,,. 
 
 jndginent in an action by a creditor, on behalf ..1 
 
 I himsidf and all other creditors, to set .i-ide ,1 
 
 I fraiidnleiit conveyance, the actual plaintill iniy 
 
 I settle the action on any terms he thinks pi-ni„r 
 
 j and no other creditor can complain ; hut ulien' 
 
 j judgment has been obtained by the plaint it! r 
 
 enures to the benclit of all creditors, and liie 
 
 I detendant cannot get rid of it by settliii" with 
 
 the actual plaintill' alone. If thev do so, any 
 
 i other creditor will be entitled to obtain the ca-"- 
 
 riage of the judgment, and to enforce it ; iuid if 
 
 ii|Hm appeal from the judgment, the .lefiiai 
 
 l.lamtit} refuses to support it, the Cnuit will 
 
 give the other ci editors an opportunity of doln.- 
 
 i so before reversing it. ( ■,ina<n,i,. Iin'„k i,l' Com- 
 
 more v. Tiiiiii,hj, I") P. K. 401. 
 
 Estoppel- L'nriaidii Crniitor— Pii,rJi(m, of 
 Murliiwji — I ),,.,, ,1 of Morlu'i'jors Till' .] An 
 execution eieiluor who purchases and tali, s 
 ft transfer of a mortgage of property is nut, 
 estopped thereby from setting up in a"n actii 11 
 against him fia'thc seizure of ihcs.ame propeitv 
 under his execution against the gr.mtor of th'e 
 mortgagor, that the said grantor was not the 
 owner of the property in (piestioii, and that the 
 conveyance to the inortg.'igor by him was framl- 
 uleut and vmd as against the" creditors i.f thii 
 latter, donlon v, i'rorfor, -JO O. K. ."i.'j. 
 
 Fraudulent Sale of Goods— iMlii not Due. I 
 —Under the :2Sth section of I;. .S. V. ch. 173, 
 every one who makes or cau.ses to be made,' 
 I amongst other things, any assignment, .sale, 
 etc, of any of Ins goods and chattels with intent 
 to defraud liis creditors, or anv of them, is 
 guilty of a misileineanour :— 
 
 Held, it is ii,,t essential, under the Act, that 
 the debt of the creditor shouhl. at the time "f 
 the sale, etc., be .actually due. I!.,,i,ia \. 
 Hem-:,, 21 O.K. ll.'j. 
 
 Fraudulent Sale of Goods - Fnllou-in; 
 Mi'iii'll u! th" Haiitis nfNumiiHil I'lirrha^ir.]— 
 VV here moneys arising from a feigned sale of 
 goods, fraudulent and void as against creditors, 
 
485 
 
 FRAUDULENT CONVEYANOE. 
 
 466 
 
 ^ lie tliiiilis 
 
 ifoi-—Pi{rrliuxii of 
 I'jor'K Til/'.] An 
 oliMsfs and takis 
 
 «,!.■ ,it tlic! tiiiiM of the t'liiiiinoiu'iincnt iif the 
 idiMii liy ft cri'ilitor to K<'t tlif Hiun.) iisiilc, in flic 
 liaii'U lit tliu nohiinii,! piiichiiHcT, one of tlu' ilefon- 
 il»Ml- and II l>aity to t|i,! tniniiic'tinn, hr w.ih 
 .inliii'd to |).u till' nioncyH iiituConit foi' ili<. 
 triliiitiiiii iiinon',' the rrt'illtorH ,if ili,. iiMolvrnt, 
 iiiidiniU'faiilt of p.iynii'nt by liirn, it wasordcicii 
 tliiit execution mIioiiIiI iHHuu for the iiiiioiint 
 Miiyirit V, Slnnirl, •_".> (», U. 'JIIO. 
 
 Fraudulent Transfer of Oooda -A</i,ji, to 
 
 Si I A\itte- -Jiiiiii/i r iif Afliim /or llniiriiy of 
 I'diiilly—Siitcn, (tooiliriml ('li(iilfj^<.] -An iii.'tio'ii ' 
 hy tlif piirty iij,'i^'ri(!ve(l to rt'uovcr tlic moiety of 
 till' penalty inipoKt'd liy Bfotion .\ of |;t Kliz.'rli. 
 .■|,iii;iy lie joined « itii an uction to si't iiMidi' iv 
 tmiiiliiliMit transfir under tliat Aft, in tliiM cane 
 till' ti-.iimfir of ceitiiin iiriiniis.sory note.s. 
 
 llill,'< and notes iirt', liy virtue of the lenislution 
 (laxHi'iUince l,') Kliz., goods and chattels within . 
 tliiit Ai.'t. I 
 
 Section 2S of the R. S. ('. eh. 17,S, only applies ' 
 til the eonclndiii},' part of said seetion ,'<, iiianely 
 tliiit relating to iiii[irisonnient on eoiivietion, 
 ete. 
 
 Where a defendant at the trial raises no 
 elaiiM of privilege, if any sneh exists, to his lie- 
 iiii! examined in support of a elaini for the' re- 
 i-nvery of the penalty nnder tliestiitnte of Kliza- 
 licth, such claim cannot alterwiirds he set up on 
 Hupeal to tluM>ivisi()iial Court. Millar v Me- 
 ra;iirirl,'20O. K. til7. 
 
 Fraudulent Transfer of Property— /b/- 
 
 Iviriii;! l'rocittl.>.]~-Aii ill'.,, rent delitor, for the 
 purpose of defeat!. f i,^, plauititl's' chiim against 
 luiii, hy voliinta J .Rcd conveyed the eipiity of 
 redemption u\ certain lands to another creditor 
 wIki, as prt \ ioiialy arranged with the grantor, 
 soM the property to an innocent jiiiuhaser 
 and applied the proceeds in payment oi all 
 enciimhr.uu'es on the jircncrty and all his own 
 delits and those of certain other creditors of the 
 ^^■rni! . ;»iid of a commission to himself in res- 
 
 >t the .sale, and paid over the tinal balance 
 grantor :-- 
 
 'I, that the plaintiffs h.ad no right of action 
 ayaastthe fraudnlont grantee to recover any 
 part of the purcha^it' money. 
 
 }fii.^iiret v. S/rirarf, '_'•.' (). R. L'OO, and Conii.^l, 
 V. ClarL; I.. 1{. 14 Kij. 1,S4, distingnished. 
 'laumiil V. (/allow, 23 O. H. Mi. 
 
 Husband and Wife— A iit,'.tiiij,f ml rojitr"'f 
 -Initnt to Ih/ai Cri</.ifnr.t.]-A yonni;' man 
 miller twenty-one made an otl'er of marriage by 
 letter to a young woman, and in the letterpro- 
 niiH'd that if she would marry liiin he would, 
 after the marriage, give her all the propcrtv he 
 liail (iiicaiiing real property), describing it as 
 ''myfiiriii in Osprey," and "my in-opcrty in 
 Klnivale, ,Slie accepted the otier uncondi- 
 timially, also by letter; the marria','e took 
 lil:ice; and he aftei wards conxeyed the two 
 liiii|ierties to her. After the conveyances the 
 parties, voluntarily and without any evil in- 
 tent, destroyed the letters, believing'that they 
 li,a.| no longer any use for tliein : — 
 
 Heltl, that the letters fornieil a pre-nuptial 
 -ontniot, enforceable in spile of their deatruc- 
 tioi), upon satisfactory evidence of their con- 
 tents being given. 
 
 (liMu-id V. Hfrlnrl, 20 \V. K. .34,S, fol- 
 lowcil : — 
 
 30 
 
 Held, also, that tho description of the prop 
 erties in the man's letter was siilHi ieiit. he hav- 
 ing no other pro|ierties in the iilacoH mun- 
 lioned:- 
 
 llel.l, lastly, that tin re was a duty on tlie 
 part of the husband to eouvey to his wife, which 
 negatived the existence of an intent to defeat 
 creditors. Shuirl v. TIiodi^,,,,, 2.'I < >. R. .'io.'J. 
 
 Husband and WiTB-('oiini/nii,,/„ Wtf,- , f 
 /'r,>i„rh/ rnrrh.i^i/ I,,, J/ii.<ln',H,/-Siilmniin'if 
 I'oiinyam-e hy Wif, ^H;,,ht „/■ )f„; •, rredilors 
 •loStl Axiilr 111 Fr<iwh,h,il.\ Wiicther aeon- 
 yeyanee to a wife of property |Hireliased with 
 the money of the husband is n Lift to the wife 
 isii .(iiestion of fact, as to which there is no 
 liresumption, at any rate in the lif. time of the 
 parties. 
 
 Although the object with which a eonveyanee 
 of iiropcrty is placed in the name of anotlni 
 may be to protect it against the crediturs of the 
 actual pnrchiwer, yet the property belongs to 
 Hiiili purchaser, and if in an aitimi to have the 
 gr.mtee in sui'li a conveyance declared a trustee 
 tor the true owner, the grantee does nut ehooM! 
 to raise such a defence, the plaintilf will bo en- 
 titled to judgment. 
 
 The grantee liaving no interest ii the prop- 
 erty may convey it to the true ow ner at any 
 tune, and creditors of the furnier I, ive no right 
 to have the conveyance set aside to obtain tliat 
 wliirh does not really belon;^' to their delitor. 
 
 Johifioii y. r/,H,, ii; o. I!. 129, dissented 
 from. 
 
 iMiyy. Day, 17 A. i;. |j;, specially referred 
 to. (Itlihoii^w Tuiiilhixotty'lX (). 1{. .jso. 
 
 Husband and Wife— /.%/«/, I,y the Curtem-- 
 Atlnrhmnit hij //»,y/„(»(/',v C'rt:(/ilor.]—See Pal- 
 mer y. Lonll. 14 P. K. 41,j, ante 61. 
 
 Husband and Wife - Vohwtavn Coiiveyance. 
 
 - <'.>i{H(lr„/iat im<! ri<litri,iri/ IMalionxhinA—A 
 voluntary conveyan.-e of a large |iortion of his 
 property by a husband to his wife, a woman of 
 good Imsmess ability and having great inflnence 
 ovci him, executed without competent and in- 
 de|>endent iulviee, when his physical and men- 
 tal condition were greatly impaired, he subse- 
 (luently becoming an incurable lunatic, was sot 
 aside. 
 
 ■ The doctrine of undue inlliieiice and lidueiary 
 relatiiiiship discussed. 
 
 Di rinctiiin between undue iiitluence in ca.se.s 
 of guts liilir rlro" and testamentary gifts re- 
 lerred to. ' 
 
 Judgment of liose, J., reversed, Hagarty 
 C..l.( ) ,_ dissenting. MrCifrei, v. McCaffrey, 18 
 
 Husband and Wife l|'„W-,»;/ F,,rm.]— It 
 appeared that the judgment debtor's wife h.-wl 
 mortgaged her farm for tin purpose of payim' 
 some of his ildits ; and that ; fter the mortf'a<'eT 
 instead of his continuing to work the farm for 
 his own benetit or on shares with his wife, as 
 he had formerly done, he had agreed that until 
 the mortgage was paid off he would work it for 
 his wife alone : — 
 
 Held, that this arrangement was not illegal 
 iinr niireasoiiable, and on no principle could it 
 be said th.it it was a making away with prop- 
 erty in order to defeat or defraud creditors. 
 Bal>y V. A'osv, 14 P. 1!. 440. 
 
J 
 
 H 
 
 467 
 
 FEAUDULENT SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 468 
 
 Preference— //»')((/('!•;//»/ and IMniihiii Ciflt- 
 -In an iis8ij,'nnient for tlii' l)(;netitot' cieili- 
 
 Intent — D(l'calin<j Creditors. ] — Fiaudulent I 
 intention is a nuilerial clenu.nt in an action to Co;-... j-jn an asaignnient for tlif l)(;netitot cr 
 set asicio a conveyance as l)enife' voluntary and i tors one preforre.l creditor was to receive neulv 
 fraudulent against creditors, and \vheie it doe.s i .•?;)()() more than was due ' ' - ■■ ' 
 
 not exist the aetinn cannot succeed. 
 
 The fact tliat the result of a conveyance is to 
 defeat creditors is not necessarily i)roof that the 
 intention of the grantor in niakiiig it was fraud- 
 ulent. 
 
 ini from the assi;;n.,r 
 
 on an nnderstandinj; that lie woukj p.y eeriain 
 dclits due from the assignor to other jicrsorw 
 anKniiitiiig in the aggregate to the sum liy 
 which liis (Icht was exceeded. 1'he jiersons si 
 to lie jiaid were not parties to nor named in thi- 
 
 And where a dcl.tor, under the mistaken be- 
 lief that she was a trustee of a sum of money 
 invested by her in land, in her own name, made 
 a conveyance thereof to the suiiposed fc.sCijw que 
 C>-«^Mu,nestlythii,kingshewas carrying the trust creditor could not enforcJ pa\nient"fi;,m lii,;,';;; 
 
 into eflect, an action to set .-iside the c<mveyanec "■ "' ' . - '. • ... ' " '" 
 
 was dismissed. Carr " ' " ~ 
 
 deed oi' as.signnient ; 
 
 Held, reversing tlie decision of the Supniisc 
 Courtof Nova Scotia, Tasciicreau, .1., dissentii.^, 
 that as the creditors to be paid by the pivrcivui 
 
 , . ,, - ., frciiii the assignor Mho had parted with all hi-i 
 
 V. torluld, 20 O. l;. 21,S. , projicrty, they would be liiiulcred and .Ui.iycd. 
 ~ , , .. „ ' 'II the recovery of tiieir debts and the deeil v/:i- 
 
 rS7 f^^^;^,°''''"'5^^ °5 Insolvency- therefore, void nmler the statute of Kli.ah tli' 
 yaliKhc tOH.^,d,u-aUuH~ArlH^ luUnt (o JJe- \ McDonald v. Cunmim/.s -Ji H. C. R. ryH 
 _/,•„»</.]- 1 he fact that tile grantors in a deed I 
 
 .?t"ll!'ti*'"" ';""" !'■ '^'^,'"' S'"-' -f '.'"'^^■'^ insolvent | Settlement by Debtor and other Member^ 
 .It the time ot making the deed, is in it.self in- :-' "- — '■- "•■■•■ 
 sufiicieiil to cause tlie deed to be .set .iside as a 
 
 of Family— ('((/«, //y/( Con^idei-fi/imi.] A pri- 
 son, iiavingentcred into liusiness, joined witli iii.'. 
 brotliers anil sisters in a seticineiit, the ctl'n-t 
 of wliicli w;is to tr.-msfer all tlieir iiiidiviiki; 
 interest in their father's estate to trustees for tin- 
 beiietit of tiicir mother, and siiljscipicnUv 
 liecame insolvent : — 
 
 Held, on the evidence, that there was ii. 
 fraudulent intent, and per lioyd, C, and Arinmu-, 
 <'..!., that the agreement to execute, and tin 
 execution, by the other meinbers of tlie fainih 
 was a valuable consideration for the selti.'iiiLiit 
 
 X ^ . „ i Umididl V. Dopp, 22 O. R. 422. 
 
 Land in Foreign Country — Absence of\ 
 
 !^Z!!'i .'('"'Tr '■'■'"' /,°- ^t'^"'!''- f' '■<•■ ]-An i Service Out of Jurisdiction - Fr,n,lnh„i 
 .etouMil not lie in this Province by a judg-:Co.rf,/ru/re of Lund in Ontario -F,;u,d,ln,f 
 ment cieditor, to , set aside, as fraudulent, ■.i>Trmi.-./,ror-0,,od.in(>ntario.]-SeeLimni.~i.,,<'v 
 conveyance made by a debtor of lands situate i 6VWr,,',/, 15 R R. SI.",, /,o.vMS4 ; and CT,;7.-,.o;v' 
 111 a loreign country, wlieii the creditor has no ' JJnivr, l(i P. R. 521, an/,- 77 
 remedy there, although all the parties reside in : 
 
 ^'''^ll'/.r,'!!^'";! f . -u ■ . . , I Surety.]-To avoid a transfer as a fraudideiit 
 
 Although tlie Court will interfere where the ! preference under R S O eh I'M see •> t'l- 
 
 parties are witliiii the jurisdiction in some cases i person to whom it is made innst be a ereditiir'iii 
 
 lI.f'J ?"' .?' V ■•^^.I'e'^V" "'"''■'^^ pro- I respect of the tran.saction attacked; and „ 
 pe.tyoiit of tlie ,|urisdiction, by ordering eon- I surety for an in.solvent who has not paid th. 
 
 vY iT^! ■ T \^" *' r J"-'''"'", '-•"""'-■'1' i' I ^'''''t f'"' ""'i^-li I'O is surety, is not a cr,-ditoi 
 
 M 111 not do so when the relief sought is to sub- | within the meaning of the Act. //(,/.. v. (;rnr,i 
 
 cause ^ .,^„ ,,.,.,, 
 
 fiaudulent ineference under R. S. O. (IS.S, ), cli. 
 i-U,^ following Miilson'.^ Ilnnk v. Ifa/fc>; IS .S. 
 ('. R. SS, and where valuable consideration has 
 been given, clear evidence of actual intent to 
 defraud the creditors of the grantor is necessary 
 to have tlie deed declared void under the statute 
 13 Elizabeth eli. 5. 
 
 Judgment of the Coninion Pleas Division, af- 
 firming the judgment of Armour, CI., reversed. 
 Jhcko-.son V. Farrimjlon, KS A. R. (iS5. 
 
 ,ieet the property to the exigencies of execution 
 which it is powerless to enforce. Burns v. 
 Bavid-fon, 21 O. K. 5-17. 
 
 Mortgaf^e—Snhsrqnnd Volnnfary Selllenicnl 
 hi/ J/(//-/;/((;/oc. J— Mortgagees of land are not, 
 iiierely l)y reason of their position as such, 
 c-editors of the morti.'agor within the Pith 
 
 20 O. R. 023. Sec now 55 Vict. eh. 25 (0. 
 
 Winding-up Proceedings— ,lA((.-'/r r in On!: 
 n(tnj—Jnri.-<il!,liun.]~\\\ tlie course of a refii 
 eiice made to tlie .Master in Ordinary in wimh'iiu- 
 up proceedings under R. S. C. eh. 129, see. 77, 
 sub-sec. 2, as amended liy 52 ^'ict. eh. ,'i2. sir, 
 20 (U. ), a claim was made fen- rent, and tlu 
 
 « /hi.. A, *,' T\ 1" , "'°r'«"t"', ''<-•'■* ■'' <lel't i li.,ui.latnr contended that the conveyance uii.U'- 
 within that .statute, unless it is shewn that the which tlie claimant assumed to be owner of tlio 
 n.ortgage security at (he time of the alleged i demised premises was a fraudulent preferciia., 
 
 ■audulent conveyance' was of less value than 
 the amount of the loan. 
 
 Where, therefore, shortly after the making of 
 a mortgage, the inortgugor, otherwise tiiian- 
 cially able to do so, made a voluntary settle- 
 ment on his wife of certain projiertv, the value of 
 the mortgaged property at tlie time being greatly 
 ill excess of the amount of the hian, and .leenied 
 by all parties to be ample security, and no 
 intention to defraud being shewn, the settle- 
 ment was upheld, although, from the stagnation 
 m real estate when ti;c mortgage matured, a 
 sale of the projieity for the amount of the 
 indebtedness thereon could not be effected 
 Crumbit v. Yonn</, 20 O. R. 194. 
 
 alleged Icaee was nevoi 
 
 and further that the 
 executed : — 
 
 Hel|l, that the Master had no jurisdiction t» 
 adjudicate upon this contention ; and the li.iiii 
 dalor should be left to proceed under P. .S. C.ili. 
 120. see. 31, by way of action. In re Sun lAlho 
 ijraphinij Co., Fariju/iiir'-s Claim, '22 0. P. 57. 
 
 See, also, Bankruptcy and Ixsor.viiNiv, I. 
 
 FEAUDULENT SALE OF GOODS 
 
 See Ciii.MiSAi, Law, IV. 
 
468 
 
 and Dfldi/iv'i Cn.l, 
 r llu' benefit ot i riili- 
 Wiig to receive \\vm\\ 
 im from the as>i;.ni,,V 
 lie Moul(} ji.y ei il:iiii 
 nor ti) other pi r^oii< 
 ate to the sum 1 v 
 led. The pt-i-.-nns v, 
 
 to urjr named in t!; ■ 
 
 ision of the Su]irriM> 
 icreau, J., disscntii,^ 
 paid by tlie prcii'ihr 
 Kiymeiit from i,jii; ,,, 
 1 parteil witli all l.i. 
 indcred iuid lU 'iiyK! 
 its and the deed \va-, 
 itatiito of Klizali ;li 
 I S. C. R. 321. 
 
 md other Member? 
 
 ■■<i(lertttiiiii. I A pr! 
 iness, joined with iii- 
 ietiement, tlie elVui 
 all their nndividtii 
 ite to trustees for tin 
 and sid).se')iii.iiUv 
 
 that there was r.n 
 :)yd. C, an<l Arniiiur, 
 :o execute, and i\\v 
 ■mbers of the f.iniilv 
 n for the settl.;im.iit, 
 422. 
 
 ctlon — Fr(i]uliiiii,i 
 ))i/(irio — Fi-iiinliilnit 
 .]—SeeLiriiiii'iit ikv. 
 84 ; and Cliirkson v. 
 
 iisferas a frauduluMt 
 eh. 1 24, .sec. 2, the 
 nust be a erediliii'iri 
 1 attacked ; and ;i 
 3 ha.s not paid the 
 y, is not a er<'ditor 
 et. Ilopt' V, dninl, 
 .'ict. eh. 2.J ((J.). 
 
 58 — Jfuiitr:)' in OriH 
 i course of a refer 
 .Irdinary in wiiuliiii;- 
 C. eh. 120, sec. 77, 
 52 \'iet. eh. ;i2. .sir. 
 ! for rent, and the 
 e conveyance nmler 
 I to be owner of tlie 
 ndulent prefeiemi!, 
 ed lease wa.s never 
 
 I no jurisdiction ti> 
 tioii ; anil the li'itii- 
 (I under Jt. S, Cell. 
 n. Ill ir Svii /Jilw 
 %im, 22 (). Iv. it'. 
 
 llNNOI.VKNeV, I. 
 
 E OF GOODS 
 uv, IV. 
 
 469 GAMING, 
 
 FRAUDULENT TRANSFER OF GOODS 
 
 See Ckimi.nal I..\\v, IV. 
 
 470 
 
 FUTUBE RIGHTS. 
 
 .S'ee SUPRE.ME CulKT Ol' C.\X.\U.\, 
 
 .\1I. 
 
 GAME. 
 
 Fishing and Shooting Rights — I'ni-att 
 Owmr-ihi/i — Xav'Kjahtii Priniif H'a/i'rn — ]\'a/(i:i 
 modi: yariijalilt hy I'lMii: Imjiroremail-i.]-- 
 Ownership of land or V .eer, thonj,di not enclo.sed, 
 gives to the proprietor under the common law, 
 the sole an(l exclusive right to lish, fowl, hunt, 
 iir shdcit within the precinel.s of that private 
 
 property, subject to game law.s, _ if any; and i bets between individuals 
 
 eh. loO, sec, 9, provides tlmt "everyone who 
 oecor.ies tlie custodian or depositary of any 
 money, property, or valuable thing staked, 
 waj'ered, or pledged upon the result of any 
 political or municipal election, or of any race, 
 or of any contest or trial of skill or cnduraiico 
 of man or beast, is guilty of a luisdeiiieanonr :— 
 Held, that this enactment does not extend to 
 the result, of any election, race, contest, etc , 
 to take place outside of the Dominion of Can- 
 ada. nV/As' V. Portn; :? Scott 141, followed. 
 Hiijina V. Siiii/r,/, 22 O. I!. CSIJ. 
 
 Betting— /;('«/;«;/ 0)1 Eloii.iii—Sliihtholihr— 
 .\i-os.s„r,i.]~\i. .S. C. eh. l.'.H, see. !), provide.- 
 mil r (ilia tliat " t^veryoue who becomes the eu-- 
 todian or depositary of any money . . staked, 
 wagered or pledged upon the result of an\- 
 political or municipal election . . is .guilty 
 of a niisdemcanour " and a suli-scctioii say's tha"t 
 "nothiui,' in this section shall apply to . . 
 
 tlii.s exclusive right is not diminished Iiy the 
 fiict that the land may be covered by navigable 
 water. In such cases the jinblie can use the 
 water solely for lioiidjidc pur])oses of navigation, 
 iuul must not unnecessarily disturb or interfere 
 with the private rights of lishiiig and shooting. 
 Where such waters have become navigable 
 owiiig to artificial public works, the private ' accessories to the ollence and liable as princip; 
 right to hsliing and towding of the owner ol the oU'enders. R. S. C. eh 14,") 
 soil must bc! exercised concurrently with the ' ' 
 public servitude for pa.ssage. Jlinl/'/ v. JJaris 
 •JOO, R. 373. 
 
 Id, reversing the decision of the Court ... 
 Appeal, 21 A. R. .v., ■I'a.schereau, J., dissenl ■ 
 ing, that the sub-section is not to be construed 
 as meaning tliat the main section does not apply 
 to a depositary of money bet between individu- 
 als on tlie result of an election; sucli depositary 
 IS guilty of a misdenuianonr, and the bettors are 
 
 Game 'La.-ws.Si'v.are oj Furs Killed uiit of 
 .V«o.voH.]—L'nder Article 140o read in eonnectioii 
 with Article 1409 H.,S. ((^).), ;,., game keeper is 
 .lutlioiized to seize furs on view on bo.ird a 
 .schooner, without a search warrant, and to have 
 I hem brought before a justice of the peace for 
 rxamiiiatioii. 2. A writ of probiliitioii will not 
 lie agiiii-t a magistrate acting under sections 
 1405-14011 R. .S. (Q.) in examinatiim of tlu; 
 
 lliviim v. Dillon, 10 P. K. ;i.-)2, overruled. 
 After the election when the nioney has been 
 paid to the winner of the bet, the loser cannot 
 recover from the stakehohler the anmunt de- 
 posited by him, the parties liciiig in pari ilJir/o 
 and the illegal act having b,>eu performed. 
 nalsh V. TriJiilvocL-, 2,3 S. V. R. (l!),j 
 
 Bettias—Kuepjn;/ a Conunon Guiinii'/ //oiixe 
 
 , -Off' lice in Unilcil S/a/'s.]^ln a liettiiig t;anie 
 
 called "pidicy," the actual bettini; and ii.ayment 
 
 ; of the money, if won, took place in the L'uited 
 
 .States; all that was done in Canada being the 
 
 lance, on which the bet was 
 
 furs so .seized where he clearly has jurisdiction ■ happeuiiK' of tlie el 
 
 'pilli'" 'f^' "'"'1*'.'"', '' /'■'■^«"l^'.'>t.y i'l the , staked, by means of implements operated in the 
 
 .seizure. Company oJ Adrei./iiri.rsoJ England v. ! house of the defendant •- 
 
 ■hamuw, 23 S. C. R. 41.",. | Held, there was no .;freuce under sect 
 
 Provincial Fisheries — Prasecntion 
 I'lnall;/ Kinclhi;/ .y.iV;,]— The defendant 
 
 for 
 was 
 
 eonvieted before one justice of the peace on an 
 information under 5,") Vict. eh. 10, see. 19 (0.), 
 ehargiiig him with lishing in a certain streani 
 without the permission of the proprietors, and 
 "f taking therefrom forty-tive fish : ■- 
 
 Hehl. that the conviction must be i|Uaslied, 
 for the penalty lixed for the ollcnce charged 
 exceeded S30, and, therefore, uiulcr sections 25 
 jiml 'jy of the Act, the prosccuti(Mi should have 
 been before a stipendiary or police magistrate 
 or two or more justices of the peace, or one 
 justice and a fishery overseer. 
 
 Only one ottence'is created by section 19, that 
 of fishing in prohibited waters, and that oflence 
 IS complete though no lish be taken, lleaina v. 
 'Voi'>, 20O. R.339. 
 
 GAMING. 
 
 Becoming Custodian of Wager - /.V.sYrAv/o)i 
 lu i,r«(M lo take J'lacc in Canada. ]-li. S. C. 
 
 , , ..^.lon 19S 
 
 ot the (.rimiual Code of 1^<!I2 of keeping a eom- 
 mou .gaming house within that section. liemiia 
 V. ir,,-//„i«H, 2.') O. J;. 409. 
 
 Betting— AVf/iui;/ Flare Tlanjur—llurse. 
 Han- ill Furri;/n ( 'oiinlry.] -The defc'ndaiit occu- 
 pied a lent in a village open to and fre(|uented 
 by the public, in w liich there was a telegraph 
 win: to an incorporated race track in the 
 United States, where horse-racing and betting 
 were leg.dized. In the tent was a blackboard 
 on which were the names of the horses and 
 jockeys taking part in the race, with the 
 weights and tlie , track (pmtations, and as the 
 race was being run, an operator called off 
 tlie progress thereof, giving the name of tlie 
 winner and of the second and third horses, and 
 marked them on the board. Duplicate tickets 
 were furnished in the tent to ajjplicants, which 
 requested defendant to telegraph one h. at the 
 race track to place a certain amount of money 
 on a horse iianicd by the a[.plicanl at track 
 (juotations, and upon transmis.sion thereof, the 
 applicant agreed to pay defendant ten cents, 
 and that all lialiility on defendant's part should 
 cea.se. Un the tickets being handed in, one of 
 
471 
 
 GIFT. 
 
 Hi 
 
 them was steaiped with the date of its receipt 
 and ret-..fned to the applicant. The aggregate 
 iimount of money so received was notified by 
 telegram to 13. and placed by him before the 
 race with bookmakers on the track, 13. paying 
 <lefendant a percentage on the moneys received 
 for him and ten cents on each application. B. 
 had an agent in anotlier part of the village, 
 whom he furnished with money to pay any 
 winnings by remit tini; same to him or giving 
 him orders on defendant for stated sums : — 
 
 Held, that the ilefendant was properly con- 
 victed under sections 197 and 198 of the Cod.>, 
 of keeping a common betting house, the place 
 in question lieing opened and kept for the 
 reception of money l)y defendant on behalf of 
 B. as consideration for an undertaking to pay 
 money thereafter to the depositor on the event 
 of a horierace. J'eijinn v. O'iVcx, 26 0. R. i)8C. 
 
 Broker— a ril Code, Artirte l'J.27—S<i; Vic/, 
 eh. !0!) (/»);;,).]— Article 1927 of the Civil Code 
 does not differ sul)stai.tial'y from 8 & 9 Vict. 
 eh. 109, sec. 18, and renders null and void all 
 contracts by way of gaming and wagering. 
 
 A broker was employed to make actual con- 
 tracts of purc'.iase and sale, in each case com- 
 pleted by delivery and payment, on behalf of a 
 principal whose object was not investment but 
 speovdation : — 
 
 Held, that these were not gaming contracts 
 within the meaning of the Code. Forgc-t v. 
 Oslujny, [1895] A. C. 318. 
 
 GARNISHMENT. 
 
 See Attach.uent ok Dehts— Division Coukt, I. 
 
 GAS COMPANY. 
 
 Taxation.] — .S'ee Coiif<uiiieri' (Inn Co. of To- 
 ronto V. Cih/ of Toronto, 126 O. R. 722 ; ante. 44. 
 
 GENERAL AVERAGE. 
 
 See iNsri'.ANCK, VI. 
 
 GENERAL SESSIONS. 
 
 .S'ee SKSsiosh. 
 
 GIFT. 
 
 Conditional Oitt—liideau Canal.]— 'Vhe Act 
 9 Vict. ch. 42. was passed with the object of 
 removing doubts as to the application of section 
 29 of the Act 7 Vict. ch. 11 to certain lands set 
 out and expropriated from one ^S. at liytown. 
 By the first section of the first mentioned Act 
 it was enacted that tlie proviso contained in tlin 
 29th section ot Hie Ordnance Vesting Act should 
 be constnieil to apply to all tlie lands at By town 
 set out and taken from S. under the provisions 
 of The Rideau Canal Act, except (I) So much 
 
 tliereof as was actually occupied as tlie ,ic of 
 tlic Rideiu Canal, as originally exc.ivatid at 
 tlie Sappers Bridge, and of theHasin ami liy. 
 wash, as they stood at the passing of The 
 Ordnance Vesting Act, and excepting iilso. 
 (2) A tract of two hundred feet in brfitltli 
 on each side of the said canal— the portion oi ili,. 
 said land so excepted having been freely grauti'il 
 by tlie said Nicliolas Sparks to the late CuLmel 
 By, of the Royal Engineers, for the purp pst.s oi 
 the canal — and excepting also, (.'?) A tract nf 
 sixty feet round tlie said B.-isin and Bywash 
 . . . which was then freely granted by tliu 
 said Nicholas Sparks to the Principal '( itHc- 
 ers of Ordnance for the purposes of the »n\,\ 
 canal, provided that no Iniildings siioiild l,,- 
 erected thereon. The site of liie canal ami tht 
 two hundred feet which were included within 
 the limits of the land so set out and ascertaineil 
 had been given by an instrunient dated I'th 
 Xovember, 1S26, under the hand of S. and 1).. 
 who was acting for the Crown, by which it was 
 agreed that such portion of the land so freely 
 given as might be re(inired for His .Majestv's 
 service, should be restored to S. when the raiial 
 was completed. The canal was completcil in 
 1832. Subse(]uent to the passing of the Act (I 
 Vict. ch. 42, all the lands of S. so set out and 
 ascertained were given up to him, excejit tiii' 
 portions above described, and deeds in tln' 
 terms of the Act were exchanged bctwefu .s. 
 and the Principal OtKcers of Ordnance in lei'ard 
 to the land so given up and so retained, le.spec 
 tively : — 
 
 Held, that apart from the question of aequies 
 cence and delay on the part of S., ami tlmsc 
 claiming under him, the Act 9 Vict. ch. 4'.', ami 
 the deeds of surrender so exchanged, wi re con- 
 clusive between the parties so far as the area 
 and boundaries of the lands to be retained and 
 restored respccti\ ely are concerned. 2. That 
 the lands so retained are held by the Crown foi 
 the purposes of the canal, and that as tn the 
 tract of sixty feet around the Basin and Bywash 
 there is attached a condition that no Iniildings 
 are to be erected thereon. 3. That the piovisir 
 "that no buildings shall be erected on tlie said 
 tract of sixty feet," does not create a erudition 
 subsequent, a breach of which would work n 
 forfeiture and let in the heirs, nor wmild the 
 use by the Crown of a portion of the lainls in 
 question for pur[ioses other than the " piiriioses 
 of the canal " work such a forfeiture. 4. The 
 Court has no power to restrain the Crown from 
 making any unauthorized use of the land, or t" 
 compel the Crown to remove any Iniildiiigs 
 erected thereon contrary to the terms of tiie 
 grant. 
 
 Si-mhlt', that the Crown cannot alien the land 
 held for the purjioses of the canal or anv jior- 
 tion thereof, and if it should do so the iiu|i[ili 
 ants would have their action against the grantee. 
 If the Crown should abandon the land or any 
 portion of it, the land or such part of it would 
 revert to the suppliants, and they might enter 
 and possess it. Maijee. v. The (/ue.en, 3 Ex. C. 
 R. .3(t4. 
 
 Donatio Mortis Causa— A'Wcrr;/ i/AVi/iw 
 Hor nnil !{,,om^ Contaijiin;! Vnlunl-.h-^.] Shnrtly 
 before his death the plaintiff's uncle delivered to 
 her his watch and pocket-book, and aNo tlii' 
 keys of his cash-box, which was then in tlio 
 actual possession of his solicitor, and of two 
 
473 
 
 GUARANTY AND INDEMNITY. 
 
 474 
 
 rooiiia, in which were contained securities for 
 money an<l cliattels, accompanying tiie delivery 
 with words of gift, having refetencc to tlie 
 articles actually dtlivered : — 
 
 Held, per Rose, J., 20 O. R. KiS, npon the 
 cvidein'c, that tile deceased intended to give to 
 the iplaintiff wlmt the keys i>laced in her con- 
 trol, and to part with tlic possession and domi- 
 nion iif the oasli-lidx and its contents, and of the 
 rooiiis ar.d tlieir contents ; and n))on the law 
 tlmt the intention ot the deceased slionld he 
 given eti'ect to, and a valid donatio iiiorti.s cuii-id 
 declared ; — 
 
 Held, on appeal, reversing the decision of 
 Rose, .]., '2(1 O. K. I OS, that as regards the con- 
 tents in the hox and the property in the rooms, 
 the alleged gift had not been made out. and no 
 iloniiHo iiKirtii vaiiKtl was cstahlished, otherwise 
 decision (jf Rose, .],, affirme<l. Hall v. Hull, L'O 
 0. K. 084. Affirmed in appeal, 19 A. R. 292. 
 
 Husband and 'Wife— I 'hose Ui Action— Know- 
 liitij,- „/ 7'y(n(.</;-r.]— Since the Married Woman's 
 I'l'nerty Act of 18S(, a husband may make a 
 valid gift of a chose in action to his wife witli- 
 
 r.t tile intervention ot a trustee. 
 
 A gilt to a person without his knowledge 
 iiiade in proper form vests the j)roperty in him 
 at mice, subject to his right to ic|mdiate it 
 hheii informed of it. Shu-mtt v. Sleicliaiit.s' 
 Hank of Canada, 21 A. R. 47,S. 
 
 Husband and Wife— Moiuij inSaviiKjx Bank.] 
 --.Siil).seiiiieiitly to the coining into force of the 
 Married Woman's I'roperty Act, R. S. (). ch. 
 IS'J. 11 married woman on "the day of enteiing 
 into a iiioney bond, deposite<l in her own name 
 in a savings bank a sum ot money, which the 
 evidence shewed had been given to her by her 
 husband, but of which, as against liim, slie had 
 the absolute dispo.sal by his consent and wish : — 
 
 Held, that thi.s was sutlicient on which to 
 found a proprietary judgment .against her, ' 
 tliougli it was not shown that the bond was not 
 exeenled at an earlier hour than that at which 
 the money was deposited. Sn-ccl/and v. Seiille. 
 21 U. R. 412. 
 
 Title to Land— r/Z/J Inlir Viiw~Snhi,(ii(fnf 
 DeHl.y-'i'hu parties to a gift intrr riro.s of cer- 
 tain real estate, with warranty by the donnr, did 
 not register it, but l)y a sid)sequcnt deed, which 
 was registered, changed its nature from an 
 apparently gratuitous donation to a deed of giv- 
 iiig in payment (dation en paiemtnl). IiTan 
 action brought by the testamentary executois 
 of the donor to .set .-side the donation for want 
 of registration : — 
 
 Held, atiirming the judgment of the Onirt 
 helow, that the forfeiture under Article SOO ( '. 
 C. resulting from neglect to register, ajiplies 
 ii'ily to gratuitous donations, and as the deed 
 in this ease was in eftcct the giving of a thing 
 in payment (dation <n /niienient) with warranty 
 which, under Article 1,V.)2, is equivalent to .sUe! i 
 the testamentary executors of the doiuir had no 
 figntof action against the donee, hasctl on the 
 almniceot registratimi of the original deed of gill 
 mer viron. Lacuxle v, il'Hion, 20 S. C. R. 21.S. i 
 
 aOVERNMENT RAILWAYS. 
 
 •Sec C'nowN. 
 
 GROWING CROPS. 
 
 Si'i' ]!ii,i,.s oi-' Sai.k, v. 
 
 GUARANTY AND INDEMNITY. 
 
 Bond to Indemnify — /Ui/li/ „f Action.] — 
 Su: Hoiiilv. llul,iti.^on. -l') O. \i. 404, ante ] 15, 
 i\\u\ Miwlxirn V. Miicttlcan, 19 A. R. 729 ante 
 11,"). 
 
 Construction.] -A., a wholesale merchant, 
 had been supplying goods to (.'. & Co., when, 
 becoming doubtful as to their credit, he insisted 
 on their account being reduced to ,'r5,()00 and 
 security for further credit. W., who hail in- 
 dorsed to secure a part of the existing debt, 
 thereupon gave A. a guarantee in the form of a, 
 letter, as follows :— " I understand that \ou are 
 prepared to furnish C. it Co. with stock' to the 
 extent of .•*,■), 000 as a current account, but want 
 a guarantee for any amount beyond that sum. 
 , in order not to impede their operations I have 
 1 consented to become responsible to you fen- any 
 loss you may sustain in aiiy amount upon your 
 cm rent account in excess (if the said sum of five 
 thousand, but the total amount not to exceed 
 eight thousand dollars including your own credit 
 of live tluuisand, unless sanctioned by a further 
 guarantee.'" . . A. then continued to sui)ply 
 ('. Hi Co. with goods, and in an action by hii'n 
 on this guarantee ; — 
 
 Held, affii'ining the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, (i Wynne, J. , dissenting, tli.it there could 
 be no liability on this guarantee unless the in- 
 debteilness of C. & Co. to A. should exceed the 
 sum of .■j5,O0O, and at the time of action brought 
 such indelitednc.^s, having been redui.e<l by pay- 
 ments from C. & Co. ami dividends from their 
 insolvent estate to less than such sum, A. had 
 no cause of action. Al':Xiindcr v. Watson, 2'A 
 H. C. K. (iTii. 
 
 GOVERNOR GENERAL 
 
 i'ec'CoNsriKjrioNAL Law, I., III. 
 
 1 Construction. ]— A guarantee in the follow ing 
 words. "I hereby become respimsible to H. M. 
 for payment for goods sold to F. E. for Iced store 
 situate . . U]) to.s4C10," was given at a lime 
 when the debt due by F. K. to H. M. was 
 
 .^2S0.S.") ; — 
 
 Held, that the guarantee covered the amount 
 thou due and an ailditional indebtedness up to 
 S4C0. 
 
 (Jludmcr.-i V. Vivtorx, KS L. T. N. S. 481, fol- 
 lowed. JIoijli v. EdmwuU, 24 O. R. 479. 
 
 Construction— Co»(//^/o».] — Sec, Hathaway 
 V. Cliaplin, 21 S. C. R. 2;j, ante 419. 
 
 ^ Construction— Flixdimj liidunce— Ultimate 
 Balance.]~'V\m plaintiffs testator gave aguaran- 
 ten in thp following lonn : "In consideration 
 of the goods 8(dd by you on credit to M., and 
 of any further goods which you may sell to M. 
 upon credit during the ne'xt twelve months 
 from date, I hereby undertake to guarantee 
 you against all loss in respect of such goods so- 
 
475 
 
 GUARANTY AND INDEMNITY. 
 
 476 
 
 s-1.1 or to 1)0 soil] ; provided I sliall not he 
 (■:illo(l on in any tvoiit to iniy ii iTuiiter amount 
 tlians:>,.-|(iO." 
 
 M. made an assi:.'nn-.fnt for the benolit of his 
 >Tcditors. lieiii- then iiidelited to thegcaranteed 
 ereditors in tlie sum of ,sr),5.')().2;i. 'J'hey filed 
 tlicir claim therefor witli thca.ssij;nee and'aftei'- 
 wards received from the plaintill'tlie full amount 
 covered by tile testator's guarantee. 
 
 'I'lie i)lainlifr contended that he was entitled 
 to rank ujion tlie estate for so much of the debt 
 as h'ld been tlnis jiaid by him : — 
 
 Held, Usler, .J. A., dissenting, that the 
 guarantee was one of the whole dei)t incurred, 
 or to lie incr.rred, witii a limitation of the 
 liability to S-2,rm. and, therefore, tliat the 
 plaintiff was not sulirogated to the rights of the 
 secured ereditors or entitled to receive the 
 dividends in resiieet of that part of tlie del)t 
 which hu had paid off' under the guarantee. 
 _ Per (Jslcr. ,1. A., the guarantee was a con- 
 tinuing guarantee, limited in ainiumt, to secure 
 a floating Iialance, and so a guarantee of part of 
 the debt ouly, the dividends on which, the 
 surety liaving paid it, he was entitled to reci'ive. 
 i.7/i'.s V. Eiumannr/, 1 lOx. \). loT, considered. 
 
 Judgment of the (^»ueen's V.ench Division, '20 
 O. R. -i.')?, reversed, and that of Street, J , at 
 the trial, 1!) (). I!. 'J.'iO, restored. M((,-ri,i y. 
 McMuUett, IS A. ]!. .-).-)!». 
 
 Covenant to Indemnify— y;;,//// nf Axxiipicc 
 for !J,iiiiil of C,;(/;i,„:-<.y-.S(if Ball v. Tonian/, 
 21 A. K. 002, uiiff 07. 
 
 Damages— .-1 '•//'.//) Quia T<'iiirt.]—\][Mm a cov- 
 enant by an incoming partner to indemnify and 
 save harmless a retiring partner against the lia- 
 bilities, contracts and agreements of the firm 
 no cause of action acci'ues to the covenantee 
 merely because an action to recover uidiquidated 
 damages for an alleged breach of agreement has 
 been brougnt agair.st the firm. 
 
 Miwharu v. Mwbkan, 19 A. R. 729; and 
 Lifith V. Freclaiiil, 24 U. ('. R. i:i2, distinguished. 
 
 Such a covenant is not assignable by 'the cov- 
 enantee to a plaintifl suing the hrm so as to 
 enable hiin to join tlie covenantor as a defendant 
 in the action to recover against him the damages 
 for which the hrm may be ultimat(^ly held 
 responsible. SuJitcdand v. Wehdcr. 21 "A R 
 22S. 
 
 Employee's Guarantee Contract— Co»dt- 
 
 tioii—Mifstalniiciits. J — fsy a contract in writing, 
 made in ISOO, the defendants agreed to guarantee 
 the idaintirfs against pv.'cuniary loss bv reason 
 of fratul or dishonesty on the i)art of an employee 
 during one year from the date of the contract, 
 or during any year thereafter in respect of which 
 th*^ defendants should consent to accept the 
 piemium which was the consideration for the 
 contract. The defendants accepted the pre- 
 mium in respect of each of tlie three following 
 years, ami gave receipts entitled "renewal 
 receipts," in wdiich the iiremiums were referred 
 to as " renewal premiums : — 
 
 Held, that the contract was a contract of in- 
 surance made or renewed after the coimnence- 
 mcnt of the Ontario In.suriince Corporations Act, 
 1S.S2, within the moaning of section ,3,3 i— 
 
 Held, also, that upon the true construction of 
 sub-section (2), the contract coidd not be avoided 
 by reason of inisatatements in the application 
 
 therefor, because a stipulation on the face nf tho 
 contract providing for the avoidance thereof f„r 
 such misstatements was not. in stated terms 
 limited to eases in which such -ndsst/itcnitiits 
 were material to the contract. I'/A'-;,//. ,',,- 
 London U'cs/ v. London a uariiii/cf nml Arnhi 
 Co., 2(i O. R. 520. 
 
 Endorsement— ro»(,»;.«;f,;,.]-.>?t,. .)/, /;„„„,,, 
 V. Manniwj, 1(1 ,S. C. H. 112, nnte. 20;!. 
 
 Endorsement- '/',•»./. I- . A i.romi.ssorv noiu 
 for value received, at tliree months, was inuld 
 by one of the ilefendants to tlie order (,f the 
 testator ami of the plaintill's. Some years after- 
 wards the inakei- conveyed his farm "to his son 
 the other defendant, on a verbal understandiiii;' 
 unknown to tlie payee, that the son was to pay 
 the father's debts, imduding the note. After 
 the c.-onveyance. the payee jiaviiig pres.scil the 
 fatlier tor .sccm'ity, tlic son, \\ ithout any eiulor.se. 
 ment of the note l>y the payee, wrote iii.s iianie 
 on the back of it, all parties snpposiii" that he 
 had thereby rendered him.self lialile as'eiidorser 
 .^ubse(piently he made a payment on account to 
 tlie payee. 
 
 In an action against father and son : — 
 Held, that no liability attached to the sou, 
 either as endorser or guarantor, or as trustee iif 
 tin. property conveyed to him. h'obntwn v 
 Lon^dul-, 21 O. i!. liOO. 
 
 Evidence to .Satisfy Statute of Frauds 
 
 — Vfv Tlioin.H>,i v. L'':d,;, 22 A. K. lO.'i. -(«/,- li)9.' 
 
 Extension of Time — Inn-ease in Jlale. oj 
 InUnsf—L'cscri-afion of /,'/;//,/,, (n/aiiiM Snnly ] 
 —A new agreement Ijctween tiie debt(jr and 
 creditor extending the time for payment of the 
 debt and iiureasing the rate of interest, without 
 the consent of the -urety, is a material altera- 
 t'oiiofthe original contract, and rclea-.es thi' 
 surety. 
 
 And a provision in .such agreement reserving 
 the rights of the creditor against the surety, 
 though elfectual as regards the extension of 
 time, IS idle as regards the stipulation for an 
 increased rate of interest, and iiotwithstauiliiii; 
 such reservation, the surety is discliarged. 
 Bristol and West of Ewjland Land Co. v. TmiUr, 
 24 O. R. 28(5. ■" 
 
 Implied Indemnity Against Mortgage.]- 
 
 Hoes not arise as against married woman jair- 
 chasing land subject to mortgage. MeMklml 
 v. Wdkie, 18 A. J!. 401. 
 
 Implied Indemnity AgainH Mortgage- 
 
 A'jnement—Purehastr Triisttefor Third /'ar/i/.| 
 — L. F. agreed iu writing to sell' land to C. F. ami 
 otliers subject to mortgages thereon, (". F. to hold 
 same in trust to pay half the proceeds to L. F. ami 
 the other half to himself and associates. When 
 the agreement was made it was understood that 
 a comiiany was to be formed t.-) take 'lio pro- 
 perty, and before the transaction was completed 
 such company was incorporated and L. F. 
 became a member receiving stock as part of the 
 consideration for his transfer. C F, Hleil a 
 declaration that he held the proiierty in trust 
 for the company but gave no formal conveyance. 
 An action having been brought against L, F. to 
 recover interest due on a mortgage against the 
 property C. F. was brought in as thiril party to 
 
476 
 
 lation on the face nf tho 
 le avoidance thereof fd,' 
 not. iu statail terms 
 Ai such .niisatuteinentB 
 (jontract. Villmjp „,• 
 luanuitif (uul Ac'ndm 
 
 ;.«/„/). ]_.S'e« .1/, /;,;„„/,( 
 ll-J, Hiile. '20:!. 
 
 .]-• A ]pr(inii.ssory n„tc., 
 •ee nioiitlis, was iii.'kIb 
 ts to till' onlei- (,f the 
 ;trs. ^ Scjnie years al'ttr- 
 il his farm to lijs sou 
 
 verl)al iiniler.staii.liiiir| 
 lat the son was to pay 
 iling the note. .Vfter 
 ee haviiiy pi-ussiil the 
 1, witliontany einlorse- 
 ayee, wrote liis iianie 
 
 ies sii|>|io3ing that he 
 iself lialile as endorser. 
 )aynient on acreoimi to 
 
 her and son : — 
 
 attaelied to the sou, 
 •antor, or as trustee of 
 o him. Robotsun v. 
 
 Statute of Frauds.; 
 
 .* A. it. 105. ((;,^; 199.' 
 
 ■ Iiicreasi' in Jtnle. »/ 
 'iilhta (ii/(iliisf .S/o-e/y.] 
 iveen the (h'ljtor and 
 le for iKiyment of the 
 teof interi'st, without 
 is a material altera- 
 let, and releases the 
 
 agreement reserving 
 • against tlie sunity, 
 ds the e.xteiision of 
 !ie sti|)ulatiou for an 
 and notwithstanding 
 irety is disoliaryeil. 
 d Land Co. v. Taylcr, 
 
 gainst Mortsrage-l- 
 
 married woman ])ui- 
 ortgage. McVHad 
 
 .gainst Mortgage- 
 
 xtttfor Third I'arlij.] 
 
 sell land to f. F. ami 
 thereon, C. I'', to hold 
 
 proceeds to L. F. and 
 ul associates. When 
 
 was unilerstood that 
 led t3 take 'lie l>rn- 
 action was completed 
 iiorated and L. F. 
 
 stock as iKU't of the 
 sfer. C, F. Hied a 
 he property in trust 
 o formal conveyance. 
 !ght against Ij. F. to 
 lortgage against the 
 , in as thii'il party to 
 
 GUARANTY AND INDEMNITY. 
 
 i'sauiSilm!::-"" ^""'"'"' "«'""^' ■'' ^"''«'"-^ f -7 "''"^" '" *"" «"'--^"- "-* the employee 
 Held, reversing tlie decision of the Sum-em,. ' ','.'f ;r'''"'"Vi"','^' "'' .;'-','>' ^■'i'""'"' "«fnce 
 Courtc.f NovaSco^ia, Taseherea„l KimvU ^ ' r^ 
 
 dissenting, that the evi.lence slewed that the i , I r -'," ''''' '"''''''^ *" ''^^ ""''l*' 
 
 sale was not to C. F. a.s a pnreln^e, n his ow.^ W^ I">l'cy. Iherewa.s a defalcation in 
 
 Id.alf hut for the company a iT h™ m inanv^ and the evidence shewe.l that no 
 
 and not C. F. was lialdJ to^ind n y t he 've ,^ ' tt' ".;''T'';r'"" ''"*' ^T'' "''''''''''^ "'''' ^^'"'^ 
 dor. /Va.w V. Fah-ban/i:, L'.S S. V It 79 I „"fh ', ,:"" *' "' ^""'■"'to'-s were not notiHe<l 
 
 , > . L. I>. ,J. J „,t 1 a week after employers had full knowledge 
 
 Implied inaemnlty Against Mortgage- I "'H;ddr^;:!H::::-;^"'J,i^j;£2t'':rrc^,;;i 
 gagt-, there is an implied obligation on the part 
 
 of the purchaser to indemnify the mort<'agor 
 against the mortgage delit, evidence is admissible 
 ol ail express agreement betwciui the parties to 
 the contrary. 
 
 .V .daim against a pureha.ser of an eijnity of 
 rodi'iiiptioii for indemnification against the 
 mortgage debt may be assigned by the mort"a ror 
 to the mortgagee, and is enforceable by" the 
 hittti-. lii-itkh Canadian Luan C->. v 'J',-,i>- o-t 
 
 o.n.ccA. ■ ^ ""'-'* 
 
 Implied Indemnity Against Mortgage- 
 
 A/^i'ii-rdion for Siminiarij Jiid'/mrn/.] — .v,., 
 V. Kennedy, U\ 1'. |!. sh, po.^l, .JiiKi- 
 
 ;/'■ 
 
 MKxr: and Daoidiun v. Cnnl, 15 1'. K, 31 ,;o,; 
 
 •'nil.'MKNT. ' " ■ ' 
 
 Implied Indemnity Against Mortgage- 
 
 J/««.' run-haxer:.] - 'Uk equitable doctrine 
 <f right to indemiiity of a vendor of land 
 sohl subject to a mortgage ajiplies only a.s 
 a-amst a purchaser in fact, aiul therefore where 
 ,r. the request of the actual purchaser the land 
 m (luustion was tonveyed to his nominee by 
 ooed absolute in form, but for the purpose (if 
 .- vnvity only, this nominee was held not liable 
 to mdeimiify the vendor. 
 
 It is not proper in an aetiim for foreclosure to 
 J'lin as original <lefendaiits the intermediate 
 piuxhasers (d' the equity of redemption, and to 
 ord.reacii onu to pay the mortgage debt and 
 UKleniuify his prede<'essor m title. 
 
 .Apiilication of Consol. Rules ,S2S S-^O Tin 
 
 a'ii, m, m, discussed. ' ' "^'^"' 
 
 Mtt V Tcnnant, r> O. R. o>, approved. 
 Ilrt/Krv. Z)W>o/i, -20 A. I!. %. 
 
 given immediate notice of the defalcation, they 
 were not entitled to recover under the policy 
 nurli,mrtoninus^;„ner.^ uf Montreal v. (ImiraiUee. 
 to. of y<jrth Aintrira, •2-2 S. C. [{. 542. 
 
 Patent of Invention— ylr/wjif^^^ to Maim- 
 M'y.' ~ L,ff,r of (;nar.„d,, - Failmr. of 
 ^cA.:/«.' ]-ll,o chiet obje-t ,.f an agreement be- 
 tween A. and U. was the profitable manufacture 
 and .sale „t wares uiwh-r a palcnt of inven- 
 tion issued to .v., and in consideration of 
 '"I;"''"";, ';.V !!• to an amount not ..xceeding 
 ?(>,000, C. by a ktter of gu.irantee -'a-ieed to 
 
 ^7inn"J'.f'"''^-; '" "• /""^^'"^ '^'iiynent of the 
 •':rb,(Km vMtliin 12 months from the date of the 
 agreement u it should transpire that, for the 
 reasons incorporated in sodd agivemont, it .should 
 not be carried out." On an action luought by 
 I.. ag;nnst (,. for .?fi,0O(t it was proved at the 
 trial that th.. manufacturing scheme broke down 
 tlirongn delects of tlie invention :— 
 
 Hehl, utMrmiug the judgment of the Court 
 below that r was lialde f,.r the amount guar- 
 anteed by „« U-fcter. J,,,„.s. V. Cnum Oa.and 
 Oh l^lore Co., 21 S. C. |{. 1(J4. 
 
 Siiips and Shipping— />;,s'j»i 
 
 ship iiiidrr ciruiur being loade 
 that a sum of ,t'17:5 was due tli 
 the ditiereiice I)etwcen th 
 tliat in the charter jiarly an 
 
 "!'«'•<.]— Oa a 
 
 it was found 
 
 charterer for 
 
 actual freight and 
 
 as agreed, a bill 
 
 Implied Indemnity Against Mortgage- 
 
 hihuHabI, Prc,nmptinu.]~\\h^n a moi t-a.^or 
 -'oiiveys his eipiity of redemption iu the imnt- 
 .Wigod property without any stii.ulatiori in the 
 -.wivcyauce as to payment of the iiieumbrance 
 '-IW right to imlemnification against it does not 
 iU'He from anything contained in the mortgatre or 
 conveyance, but from the facts, ami this may be 
 reljutted by parol evidence oi otherwise. The 
 right, viere It csists, arises from implied C(m- 
 
 ikalty V. FthHmmon.i, 23 O. R. 245. 
 
 Notice of Defalcation-/),/,>wce.]-A guar- 
 antee policy insuring the hone.»ty of W^ an 
 
 dSrartLf thl^anTr *''H'"''r ^•^"- 
 •im,H,..,f; : 5"' ■<"-wt.T3 eoutaincd in ihu 
 
 Z wt • '• ''?'^'f' "';'' '' t-'"-^ f'tatement of the 
 
 n . m ler m which the business was cou.lncted 
 
 ^accounts kept, and that they would be so 
 
 h iiedi:;" '^' ^'l'^\ •'"' e>"Ployers «b„uld, 
 ■'""lediately upon its becoming known to them 
 
 f, . ,, ^' i''"V' """> •"■"> agieeo, a Dili 
 
 to, the amount was drawn by the master on the 
 agents of the ship, and, also, a bill of t'Ta.S for 
 disburs.,ments. These bills not being paid at 
 im.turity notice of <lishonour was oiveii to V 
 t le managing owner, who sent his' .son to the 
 solicitors wlio ludd tlie bills for collection to 
 re.piest that the matter should staml over until 
 ;d'c sliq) arrived at St. .bdiii where V. lived. 
 I his w.as accecle 1 to an.l V. sigiuNl an agreement 
 111 the form of a letter addressed to the solici- 
 tors ,„ wluch, after asking them to .lelav pro- 
 ceedings on the dra,ft for tT.-.S, he guaranteed, 
 on tlie vessel s arrival or in ease of her loss, pav- 
 ment of the .said dr.aft and chai-es an,l also of 
 I the payment of the draft for CIT.-f and charges. 
 On the vessels arrival, ho,vev..r, he refused to 
 pay the smaller draft and to an action on his 
 said guarantee lie pleaded payment and that 
 he was induced to sign the same by fraud Bv 
 order of a Judge the pleas of pavment were 
 struck out. On the trial the sou of 'V. who had 
 interviewed the solicitors swore that they told 
 him that both bills were for .lisliursements, but 
 It did not clearly appear that Iii. rop.'ated this 
 to his faliier. V. luni.self contradicted his son 
 ami stated that he knew that the smaller bill 
 was lor .lifll.rence in freight, and there was 
 other evidence to the same etieet. His counsel 
 sou, H to get rid of the etrect of V.'s evidence 
 by ..lewmgtbat irom age and iiUirmity ho was 
 
m^ 
 
 479 
 
 HABEAS CORPUS. 
 
 480 
 
 incapable of reniL'nibc'iiiii,' the (.ireiiiiistiirK c, but 
 u verdict was givoii iij,'aiiist him ;— 
 
 Held, allinniiig tiiu decision of tlie I'ourt 
 below, that tiie defence of inisicpresentation act 
 nj) was not aviiiliil)le to V. under the ple^i of 
 fraud, an<I, therefore, was not liUadcd ; that if 
 available without plea it was not proved ; that 
 ncitliing ('(juld lie gained by ordering anotlier 
 trial as, V. having died, his eviiloiice would 
 have to be read to the jury who, in view of his 
 statement tluit he knew the bill was nol for dis- 
 bursements, could not do otherwise tluui liiul a 
 verdict against him ; — 
 
 Held, further, that the deliiy asked for by V. 
 was sufficient consideration to make him liable 
 on his guarantee, even assuming tliat he would 
 not have been originally liable as o\\ ner of the 
 ship. I'auij/ian v. Ihchardnon, 2\ S. C. R. 350. 
 
 Third Party tfotice—Actiov f,.r Xiiiliiituce.] 
 —The plaintitr sued for a peisoiial injury, 
 which by his statement of claim he alleged he : 
 bad received, wlien acting as conductor of a 
 street railway car operated by the defendants, 
 by rciii-on of the negligence of a servant of the 
 deiendauts, who was driving a scaveJiger w aygon 
 used liy the defendants. The compiuiy ^^ho 
 had operated the railway bcfoie the defendants 
 assumed it, were insured against all sums for 
 which they should become liab . to any employee 
 in their service, while engaged in their work, 
 'i'lie insurance jjolicy was assigned to the 
 dcfer.dants when they assumed the railway 
 'J be defendants served on the insurance com- 
 pany a third party notice claiming indenunty :— 
 Held, that the policy did not cover injuries 
 accruing by reason of the negligence of the 
 defendants or their servants in other branches 
 of their service; and that the insurance com- 
 pany should not be kept before the fourt on 
 the chance of a different state of facts being 
 develoj-ed at the trial from that which the 
 plaintiH' alleged. 
 
 An order was therefore made in Chnndjers 
 setting aside the third party notice. FeniusoH 
 V. City of Toronto, 14 P. R. .S58. 
 
 upon equitable principles, entitling the trustee 
 to indcnniity from his crsliiiijiK' trust. Kournitr 
 anil T.cschereau, JJ., dissenting. Wil/Uiwi v' 
 liitlfour, 18 iS. C. l;. 472. 
 
 GUARDIAN. 
 
 .SVc Infant, III.--Li.MiTATn)N m Acrn 
 
 HABEAS CORPUS. 
 
 Committal for Contempt. ]-/nappli(!Ui(,u 
 
 by th'; defeuiUmt committed for contenipl h.ia 
 fiat or oriler that he Ijc Itrought before the 
 Court for the j)ur])(jse of moving in peison h.r 
 his discharge fiom custo<ly was refused ;■- 
 
 Faril V. A'k.sw,,, >.) M. & \V. 70.S, and /•■„,■,/ 
 V. tlnihnm, 10 C. 1!. .'U;!), followed ;— 
 
 Sf.ihljlr, a /iiihtas rorpiin for the |)urpo.-e wi.uM 
 be refused, and rt/orlhri a fiat or ordtM'; f.ir tli|. 
 sherill' would not be bound to obey it, and ii 
 the parly were removed from iirison umlir it, 
 lie woidd not in the meantime l)e in pri pel' iimi 
 leg:! custody. JioUrts v. Donovan, l(i i' |; 
 4,")ti. 
 
 Third Party Notice— Covnttrcluiw.]- In an 
 action by the assignee of a mortgage against the 
 mortgagor and the purchasers fioni him of the 
 Kinity of redemption, the latter alleged that 
 they had been irduced by the mortgagee to pur- 
 cliase the lands by his promise to discharge the 
 mortgage and accept in its place an assignment 
 of another mortg.ige, w hieh agreement he had 
 failed to curry out and had alteiwards assigned 
 the mortgage to the ])laintiff, his wife :— 
 
 Held, that the jiurchasers of the ecjuity were 
 not entitled to claim " indemnity " agahist the 
 mortgagee, within the meaning of that word as 
 used in Rule 32S, as amended by Rule 131.3 ; 
 and a third j'arty notice served upon him was 
 set asiile. 
 
 Sf-.mhif, a proper case for a counterclaim 
 against the iilaintitl' and the third party jointly 
 to enforce the alleged agreement or for damages. 
 Moon- V. Utatli, 16 P. I!. 29(;. 
 
 Trustee— iVc^o/io/ Liability— Jii,/ht of Mori- 
 ijci/^e to Enforce Eqvilim lielu-ten Trust if. inid 
 if.xtid qm ^Vw.s7,J— Where lands held in trust 
 are mortgaged by the trustee, the mortgagee is i 
 not entitled to the benefit of any equities and i 
 rights arising either under express contract or i 
 
 Judge ir. Chambers— .4;i;)co; to Court <„ 
 
 /l;V'ea/.J— Under R. ,S. 0. eh. 70, sec. 1, the 
 
 writ of /laltean <:orpu-i may be made returnablu 
 
 ; before ''the Judge .iwarding the same, or, he- 
 
 ! fore a Judge in Chambers for the time beiiii;, or 
 
 I before a Divisional Court ; " and liy secticjii 6 an 
 
 appeal is given from the decision of the yM 
 
 , Court or Judge to the Court of Appeal:— 
 
 Held, that the right of appeal must be exer- 
 
 ; eiscd in the numner provided by the staliitf, 
 
 : and therefore an a]ipeal fiom a Judge ii. ( hiiiu 
 
 bers must be to the Court of AimeaJ. ViV JJur- 
 
 per, 23 O. R. 63. 
 
 Order to Commit- d?;?;/?/ Court — " Pro- 
 
 (■,.,s.v."]_An order made by a Judge of a Ceiiiity 
 
 Court in Chambers for the commitment to i-Ich' 
 
 custody of a party to an action in that ((iuii, 
 
 for default of attendance to be re-examincil as 
 
 j a judgment debtor, pursuant to a former oidi-r, 
 
 I IS "process" in an action within the nieaiiing 
 
 of the execptitiU in section 1 of the JJal.as 
 
 ; Corpus Act, R. S. O. ch. 70 ; and where siieli ii 
 
 ; party was confined under such an order, a vrit 
 
 J of /lalton corpvs granted upon his ci iii|jlniiit 
 
 I was (juashed iis having lieeii iniprovideiitly 
 
 I issued. L'e Anderson v. Vannlone, IG P. R. 
 
 243. 
 
 Warrant Issued in Qnehec— Conspiracy - 
 Locality o/tjjltna:]~A Judge cannot, upon'the 
 return to a liahi-as corpus where a warrant 
 ! shews jurisdiction, try on affidavit evidence the 
 ; question where the allege I offence was com- 
 mitted. 
 j Sections 4 and 5, R. S. 0. ch, 70, are not 
 ! intendeil to apply to criminal cases wiiereiio 
 preliminary examination has taken place. 
 
 Section 752 of the Criminal Code, ofl-i'iO Vict, 
 ch. 29 (D.), only applies where the Cor.it •■■ 
 Judge making the direction as to fmtlier pro- 
 ceedings and enquiries mentioned therein has 
 power to enforce it, and a Court or Ju(lj:e in 
 Ontario has no power over a Judge or Ju.stice 
 
481 
 
 HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. 
 
 s, uiititliiig tlie tnistie 
 i/iiir/iif Iriisl. Fournicr 
 isseiitiiig. William.i \. 
 
 ATlllN III- AciK 
 
 ill Qiifl)co to compel him to " tiiku any ,„o. 
 ceeiiiiiga or hear such evidf lice," etc. 
 
 It is a ciim.; luidrr s.ctioii .'iill „f the Code to 
 rniispire by any liaiidnlont means to d.-fraiid 
 iiiiy person, and so a eonspiraey to iiermit per- 
 Hiiis to travel free on a railroad as ulle-eil in 
 these eases would he a eoiis])iraey a-aiirst tlie 
 railway eon.panyy,V,/,-,,„ v. Ihfri,:, /.'njina 
 V. lumhljin, L'o O. K. 04"). 
 
 HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. 
 
 Breach of Contract.]— 
 
 Hi v. l;. ;!.•<•_>, <ii,t,' IVS, ami 
 Hi p. K. -ll.S, (nil, 17i). 
 
 •V'e Offiird v. Jhvsne, 
 ill// V. Villiiicuve, 
 
 Bicycle Race - l>yole>:l-^A wm;/ of Tvouhv- 
 r„;,tr Jnl,,o,,,/.\.\yh,n'c a elialleiifje enp, to 
 .«■ wor. m a hieyele ra,'e hetween eomplting 
 clnUs. was lu Id l,y trustees under an in.sh'u 
 ment ot trust by Mhich all arrangements ,>er. 
 Uiining to the course, race, pn.tesTs, and mat- 
 ters-eonueeted with the welfare of the eup " 
 were to he deeided l.y the trustee.s neeordinL' to 
 certain rules 'he Court, upon the mere alleya- 
 R.n ot iraud, and before any deeision of the 
 trustees, relused to exercise jurisdietiou re- 
 stranm..' the trustees from parting with the eup . 
 to an alleged winner under j.rotest, upon the "1 
 gi-euiid tlK.t one of the winning riders did not ' 
 K" IT.UM, the eoiirs,.. that being a matter of fact 
 t(ir the (leeKsion ot the trustees 
 
 ''Tu '': ^^':' >■'""■■"■ 11 J':v- 7'l->: AV/i-,v. //on. 
 rV^; r i ''f = -i"" -V,.'n'o;..» V. L/fJ/,, 
 
 In n • i- A '1'; \^^ ^- ^^' 2^«> followed 
 /fevs V. Un; 2.) O. It. 595. 
 
 Chancery liWlalon-Cnmiml Mnl/e,:^. ]- (Jn 
 :>i. appeal rom an or.ler for a r.rliorarl, whieli 
 Ihchidge (I<erguson, J.) granting it, refu.sed to 
 .n,jke returnable ,„ the Chaneery l^iWsion :_ 
 
 H.ld, per Kolicrtson, .J.-That the Chaneery 
 
 1. on ot the High Court of .Justice has no 
 Jiiii.sdietiou in eriminal matters-— 
 J^M, per ^le,•edith, J. -That it has: and 
 imght to exerei.se it. 
 
 lioy.hC. While adhering to his view as ex- 
 jrussud in h,,,iiin v. Bhrlm/l, 19 O. R. (i-j- ti,,,. 
 ;-, thought that when there is an e.pa y 
 
 t-'iTi. *;';"":'," ""■/:""', '^K^""«t jurisdieti.ln d 
 mailed by the individual Judges con.stituti.v. 
 
 iieJ '"";"'; " ^""'•* ^'^ ""^'^■'-'"'Iv that bv a 
 iieie aecident, sueh as the constitution of ihe 
 
 .ly and negative.1 on the next ; and as there 
 « jurisdielioi, in the other divisions of tl ' ' 
 Hg Court he agreed with Robertson , I., that 
 tenanioi. be not entertained. y.',v//.« v. i;„ 
 
 482 
 
 writ of prohibition to a revising ofhcer to com- 
 
 pel him to abstain fr.im - p., h.niing a> y duty 
 
 under the Kleetoral Fraiiehise Act " ^ ^ 
 
 I he h.g,sl;.tion in regard to. sueh matters does 
 
 not lUMich upon nor ,s the ,pi..stio,i one of 
 
 I lopertyan.l civil rights in thr I'rovinee " 
 
 l^e Sni,mon.-< ami Dalian, \-> o. l; ,-,(,,5' ,,„, 
 
 5i a iilosf ^'" ''"■"'' "'-in^ u:;;i 
 
 .pelgment creditor to set aside, ;,s fraudulent -i 
 eouveyaneemade by his .Icbtor of lands .Itc 
 i>'^i foreign country, when the creditor has 10 
 
 XsiittSr''''''^-^'' "''''-'-''--';'-' 
 
 Aithough tiie Court will interfere where the 
 
 parties are within the jiiris,lieti so „ 
 
 eases where fraud exists in re.,,,,,, to" , ' /^^. 
 I-'operty „ut of the jurisdiction, llv .one i „ 
 veyances to be made to the pei.son ent tied 
 will not do so when the relict' sought is to ul 
 
 Foreign Land- lleilemption.] ~ A creditor 
 w ,0 has recovered judgment in llanito a 'a 
 alohas by virtue of an Act of that iV vi ice 
 
 he e .?" "" ''■•"''^- "^ "'^^ .iu'lK.ne.it <1 lor 
 teie cannot maintain in the Courts of Ontario 
 
 sluim^Shei^*'^'"'''^"'''^'''''^^''-''- 
 Judgment of the Queen's Rcnch Division, 2:< 
 
 lam,llo>,, 20 A. H. e4(i. Affirmed Ivtlo 
 Supreme Court, 2.3 S. C. it. 710 ^ ' 
 
 Foreign Land - 7',7/..]-The Courts in thin 
 Province have no jui isdiction to en crtTin an 
 
 ^ rth-W^Svni/''''^ "'" "*!'' '" 1-'^^ i"'th: 
 hi: reM,ll;t'£:' """^^' -•"' *'-"«'' tl- parties 
 
 Divisional Court - Co».sv.,,^]_The wonls 
 "ther eases where all parties a^rc'^th-it . 
 
 ive in t;;*^""«';»t of all parties cannot 
 an qlil.'^'"''"' ^"""'^ J..risdiction to hear such 
 
 loS" ■' ^/v'^ir^"'""-' ^0- R '31, 737, not f.d- 
 liiL iiig/1 oourt of Justice to issue a I 
 
 01 
 
 mtirc ;]■..'), '"" ^"'' '"' i"f<"-"'--'ti,m in the 
 
 t o t i; ""."■"'•'■""'? >« th. proper proceed- 
 
 "c, t., take to imjuiie into the authoritv of a 
 
 I.-m U. exercise the office of a Hi^ll.,!;! 
 
 lovS'"' '■ '^'"""""' '-^^ ^- ^'- ^- •■^-'5. •■^*il. f"l- 
 Such a procee.ling is a civil, not a criminal 
 
 Tl^^Sr"^'*;''''"'"^*"^ ^'■°« Acting. ]- 
 
 Itie High Court has power to prevent ■inon 
 "ulifiere.it arhitrator tVom acting? ^Vtlioutw'^i' 
 ng until the award is ma.le, though perhaps te 
 -etter course is to apply for leave toVjvol^c e 
 s«),m.ssionif another arhitrator he not suhst 
 
 Malme^hury ^. \y, Co. v. Uudd, 2 Ch I) US 
 and Bnldow^ v. Beddow, 9 Ch. 1) S9, followed 
 lown^hvp ofBurford v. Cluunber,, 25 O.T OGS.' 
 
 Revocation of Letters of Administration 
 
 -!^u,roi,a(e C'ou,<. J-The High Court of Just." 
 
483 
 
 HIGH SCHOOLS. 
 
 481 
 
 m^ 
 
 Ml 
 
 for Ontario Iium iin jiiiisdit'tioii to icvoku tlic 
 grant In- a .Siirrnj^ntu ( 'mirt (if Icttcis oi uiliiiiiiia- 
 trillion. Mfl'hi r.-'ijii v. /rrliif, 2(i (>. it. I.'(8. 
 
 Service Out of Jurlacllction — AHiimvii 
 — l)o)nii-il.\ -ill an action for alimony tliu wri't 
 of siininions \v:is scivod u|)on the dufcn- 
 (lant out of tlif jinisdiction. ami u|)on a 
 motion to si.t asiilf tlio .■ii.'rvici! it a|iiit.'ai-eil tliat : 
 tliu plaiiitilf anil ilutVn<lant wen^ niarriuil ni 
 Ontario in ISSi), wliero t\w. ilfftinlant lia.i 
 resiiled I'or forty yc'ar.s prior to l(SS(i ; tliat in 
 that year lio had liu(-'ii apiiointed to a pornianent 
 position in tlie Xortli-Wcst I'erritorifs, ancl had 
 tiien sohl lii.s dweliingliouse in Ontario and 
 gone to reside in the North West, wliere liia 
 daughter ami lier liusl)and and eliildren lived, 
 ancl wliere he had ever .sinee remained, only 
 viaitiny Ontario on a few occasioiia. He swore 
 that he liad no intention of returning to Ontario 
 to live. It also appeared that tjie phiintitf. 
 Hhortly after the marriage, aecompanied the 
 (lefendant to his home in tlie NorthWest, and 
 lived witli him for about nine months, when 
 slie left him and proceeded to Ontario for 
 Inisiness jiiirposes ; that .she never returned to 
 the defendant, and had since reside. 1 chiefly in 
 the United States of Anie =ca, and since tbo 
 commencement of this act .m had stated on 
 oatli, in another case, that she resided in tho 
 United States: — 
 
 Held, that the defendant had acquired a 
 <lomicil in tlie North- West Territories, and that 
 the plaintifThad not acquired a distinct doinieil 
 in Ontario since she left her husband ; and, j 
 therefore, it was not a case in which service of 
 the writ of siiniinona was permissible under < 
 Rule 271 (c) or (e). Allen v. Alttn, 15 F. R. 458. ! 
 
 the ease consisted in allowing bini to rem uii in 
 the iiosition in which lie Had iilaeed hiiiiMif, 
 ! and there was no reason for giving leave tii 
 i apjieal. Smrs v, Meyers, \r> I'. li. 406. 
 I 
 i 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction— /"/vnc/,,/,,,; 
 
 (^'o/in'^MHCf.]— Action by an alleged cnditcir 
 
 of one of the defendants to set aside a convey. 
 
 ■ anee of land in Ontario by that defonilant to 
 
 another, as frauduh'iit. The plaintilV tlaimwl 
 
 to he ;■. creditor in resjiect of a jironiissorv n..te 
 
 made anil payable, and the makers of whii^li 
 
 ' resided, out of the jurisdiction, but he <li<l imt 
 
 , seek judgment upon the promissory note: 
 
 Held, a case in which, under Rule 271 (/,i, 
 service ()f the writ of summons efl'eeted out cif 
 the jurisdiction was allowable. 
 
 The ditferent sub-rules of Rule 271 are di.s- 
 junclive ; and under {li) it is not necessary that 
 the whole subject matter of the action sh.iuld 
 come within its provisions, 
 
 Se.inlde, also, tliat the case came within siil.. 
 rule (;/) ; for, altliough the defemlant alle-u,l to 
 be within the jurisdiction had not been served, 
 it was not necessary (assuming that service 
 within the jurisiliction is reijiiihite to hriii^' the 
 case within the sub-rule), that she should \k 
 served lirst but Oiily that the service witlidut 
 shouhl not be allowed until the service within 
 hail been effected, and an adjourmnenl for that 
 purpose might l)e granted. Liriaiiil(j}ie y. sib- 
 bald, \-> V. H. 315. 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction- .4ppeam)ice.] 
 
 —A defchdant by entering an appearance in an 
 action submits himself to the jurisdiction of the 
 Court, and waives his right to move against an 
 order permitting service of the writ of summons 
 to be made upon him out of the jurisdiction. 
 
 But where a defendant does not r.ally intend 
 to waive his objection to the juri.- iicth n, he 
 does not, by obtaining an order for seeiini^ for 
 costs and opj losing a motion for speedy jud"- 
 nient, estop himself from so moving. 
 
 A Court is not bound by the decision of a 
 Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction, where the ■ 
 matter is one of jurisdiction and involving the i 
 settling of a new practice. | 
 
 The plaintiff, a foreigner, sued the defendant, | 
 also a foreigner, upon a foreign judgment, and, 
 alleging that the defendant was the owner of 
 lands in Ontario, also claimed relief by way of ■ 
 equitable execution against such lands and an ! 
 interim injunction restraining the defendant ! 
 from dealing therewith ; — i 
 
 Held, by the Master in Chambers, not a case ! 
 in which service of the writ of summons out of 
 the jurisdiction could be allowed under any of 
 the provisions of Rule 271. Se.ar»\. Mayers: 
 Heath v. Meyers, 15 P. R. 381. See the next 
 case. 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction- ^/;;)caraHCf.] 
 —Upon a motion by the defendant for leave to 
 appeal from the decision of the Conunou Pleaa 
 Divisional Court, 15 P. R. .381 :— 
 
 Held, that the defendant by appearing had 
 submitted to the jurisdiction, and the justice of 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction - MaliriuM 
 Pn^ecntUm—Arrtst in O/f^dWo. J— Criminal pro- 
 ceedings begun in the Province of (Quebec, under 
 which the plaintiff was arrested in the Province 
 of Ontario and taken to Montreal, where he was 
 discharged, constitute, in effect, one entire tort; 
 anil service of a writ out of this Province in an 
 action therein for malicious prosecution, founded 
 thereon, will not be allowed under Rule bJO'J 
 aijiending^ Rule 271 (e). Oliijny v. Beauchtmn, 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction — " Tn.-I " - 
 
 Piv/ertntinl Triinsfer of <loo(U.]~hn action hy 
 
 an assignee under R. ,S. O. ch, 124 against pcr- 
 
 1 sons residing iu the Province of Quebec tn set 
 
 ' aside a transfer of goods effected in tliis Pro- 
 
 , vincc, as a fraudulent preference, which "nods 
 
 i have afterwards been removed to Quebec, is 
 
 I founded on a " tort committed within the ju'iis- 
 
 I diction," within the meaning of Rule 271 o), m 
 
 amended by Rule l;i09. Clarkson v. JJui.n; 10 
 
 P. R. 521. 
 
 Special Appearance.] — Where there is a 
 grave question as to jurisdiction of the I'ourts 
 of this Province in an action on a coiitiiict 
 entered into in a foreign country, a special 
 appearance under protest or conditionally may 
 be permitted nniier Con. Pule 2Sti, and the 
 defence of want of jurisdiction may be sub- 
 sequently raised by the pleadings. ' Hou-laui 
 V. Insurance Co. of Korth America, IG V. H. 
 514, 
 
 HIGH SCHOOLS. 
 
 See Plblic Schools. 
 
484 
 
 nviiif,' liiiii to ruiiriin in 
 ' had placed liiiiiKilf ; 
 II fi)i- giving leave td 
 , I'l I'. K. 4-)t). 
 
 Isdlotlon— />(/«//„/, „( 
 ail ullfgLMi fi((iit(,r 
 to set aside a oonvty. 
 I)y tiiat (iefoiiclaiit to 
 'I'lie [)liiintilt' LJaiiniil 
 . of a iii'oiiii.sscjfy nc.te 
 the makers of wliii.ji 
 ietidii, but lie diij mdI 
 l^ullli.s^;<Jl•y note: 
 , liiidei' Rule '.'Tl {In, 
 lUiKJiis eQ'eeted out of 
 alilc. 
 
 of lliile I'Tl aif (lis- 
 is not neouasai-y tliiii, 
 of tile action sli'iulil 
 
 use came within miIj. 
 ; defendant allcjcl to 
 
 had not been .serveil, 
 HUiiiinj,' tliiit Service 
 '^(niisile to bring the 
 I, tliat she slHiuiil ho 
 
 tlie service withdut 
 til the service witliiu 
 adjournment for timt 
 1. Lirinijituw V. Sib- 
 
 sdlction - Miilii-iiiu.i 
 iirio.] — Criminal pro- 
 iiice of (Juebcc, iimler 
 ested in the frovince 
 inlreal, where he was 
 tfect, one entire turt; 
 )f this I'roviiiec in an 
 prosecution, f<iUM(led 
 ed under Rule l;iU9, 
 >tiijny V. BcanclMiUn, 
 
 Ictlon— " Ti„-f- 
 -lod-i.]— All action hy 
 ch. 124 against p'r- 
 nce of Quebec to set 
 sffected in this I'ro- 
 orence, which goods 
 oved to Queliec, is 
 ted within the juris- 
 g of Rule "JTl 0), as 
 iark.Hon v. JJuprr, It; 
 
 - Where there is a 
 iction of the I'ourts 
 tion on a contnict 
 
 country, a special 
 ir conditionally may 
 
 Rule '2SH, and the 
 ction may lie sub- 
 eadings. Hoiclatd 
 
 America, IG I'. K. 
 
 485 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 HIRE OF GOODS. 
 
 486 
 
 }OLS. 
 
 HOOLS. 
 
 '■liaihf Joy ///j-r.J—Tho 
 in charge of the ilefen- 
 
 AKlater of Horses 
 
 plaintills mare, while ... ,„,,^,,. „r tlie Ueten- 
 ,lant under a contract of summer agisti lei t w' s 
 k.lle, by tallinj, through the plank coveri u^ f 
 »«;e 1 m the .lefendanfs yard, the exist .'t- 
 whicvvas known to the defendant In. ot 
 
 lS;::S.;ft dSi^rrirr^-r'^'' 
 ='';f'--'''^i'/ti..^w:;tap;Lt;r^^'''''' 
 
 Held, .Meredith, , I., (li.sseiitio.r fl,,,f ,i i ■ 
 
 tiirhad.ou proof of th!r;;::;^'j^:.'^ ;;,£;:, 
 
 ;-r.«„! j,u;, evidence of negliJence to east tl u 
 ..n".-mthedefcnda,aofsire.r,ngth:r. i 
 able care which an agister is bounil to exercise • , 
 and a non-suit was set aside. ' [ 
 
 I'crlioyd ('.-The test in such canes is not i 
 necessarily he care which the agister may excr I 
 eise as to Ins own animals. H i.s. i., ^4," 'a 
 not what any particular man docs, but wh i 
 
 Ta'ciasr '"'''■'''"'''"■'"' ^"'"''"•l''-l-.iy 
 IVr Meredith, J. -The agister is not an i„. ! 
 surer J he .mus of proof o? neglect of his du v ' 
 ..son the plaintid- ,uid had not been sati ie , i 
 this ca.se. /Van-e v. Sk,;.,,nrd, -U (). R l,;; 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIPE. 
 
 i. Ai.i.Mo.w, 4.Stj. 
 
 II. A.NTE-Xn.TI.\l, Co.NTIlACT, 487. 
 
 III. C.1I,>H.N.A,. CoNVKKSATION AND AUKNA- 
 ' HON w Akfkciio.n.s, 488. '^''"^* 
 
 IV. J'i^A^iN.^s Rktwkkn Husbani, am> Wiw, 
 
 V. I..II.K Instkam-k, 491. 
 V'l. -MAiuiiAiiK, 402. 
 
 V'lII. Skpahate Kstatk, 494. 
 
 IX. .Ml,SCELLA\KOlJ.S (JasKS, 49(i. 
 
 I. Al.lMliNV. 
 
 Agreement to Return-- />«,«,,,,- (,o-rui.m,'d\ 
 by Lnjon'seni Acn,l,:„>.\ -Where there is ,i 
 pnsitive contract to do a Ihin.r „ ,f • -. iJ 
 unlawful, the contractor n:,.:;'^:;'.,;^-;: 
 -lauiages for "'<-.-l.crf,n-nunce,',Uhoi,gh i . e i^ : 
 «,uence of unforeseen causes the pe,*^-,.,- a, ce ' 
 has^hec^ine unexpectedly burdeiJme or even: 
 
 Tlie defendants liire.I the plaintiflF's .scow and ' 
 pilo-.lriver -It a named price per ,lav t lev t I 
 
 is::r r/'"v'""'-'^ tiL.ct,r^:xcepn: 
 
 tlic engi no, .-ind ordinary wear and tear until i 
 raunie, t h J,,, .,,^.j^_ Whileinth 'de ,! 
 1...1S custody, by reason of a storm of unusual ' 
 orce, the ..cow am pile.driver were drivn r 
 their moorings and daina.'ed ■— 
 
 Held, that the dcfend.mts were liable for the 
 |l.images thus sustained, ami f.u- the rent d 
 iiy the period of repair lent ,lni. 
 
 Taylor y. Ualdw,ll, .S |J. ,t .S. ,s2(i followed 
 Harvey y. Marru,,, 1.3,i Mass. 3 7 . -ed 
 
 ilrimt V. .-1 niontr, '2.5 0. R. 7. .'I)l>ro\ cu. 
 
 Conaonatlon of Matrimonial Offences- 
 
 --hthct of Ifu,'>„„d: Ad,dl,nf-Bridruce 1- 
 
 Condonation of matrimonial ollVnoes is always 
 
 ii the cumhtion that there shall be no remi 
 
 ' ' Y «/'ireet of a husband's subsequent adul- 
 I cruelty. ''""'"'' '"■^•^'""^'y '^""'1"''<^<1 acts of 
 
 I loose'eharlT^' "^ "ne witness, by coufessiou of 
 looscclaiajlcr, is "ot suliicicnt to in-ove adul 
 ! tery unless corroborated. ^ "'' 
 
 { I'roofi.f f,r,.;ive misconduct, short of adiiltprv 
 I'y a wite will not disentitle her to al^iino y ^■ 
 A woman both in law and in morals is justi 
 hed in eaymg and in refusing to return to her 
 husband who ha. committed adultery = but i 
 t which In-eaks np the housohohl , oe.s no 
 elic e hiin iron, li i.s duty to maintain her; am 
 
 Vil^to :;f °'"i"^ ^^■'^"''' ''« smlicient'npo 
 ul.ch to award alimony. Aldr.ck v. Aldrl/,, 
 
 time H. 'l ^ •''*^.''"" '" ^''■"■t'^'- tug . 
 
 "r to :' '"'■^'^^ "•'"" • • f.- Which i 
 ^«j™.lmaro;kihroStf-,SiSr^f 
 
 ofEi'i'./'.'.o iVl'Tfr "^.*''" '"«• '"" ■■' "'^"''•■■'ct 
 
 ^^^lut (laniage. J/ium/>,-o„ v. Fowla; '2:i O. R.. 
 
 HIRE RECEIPT. 
 
 See COLJ.ATKRAL Secumtv. 
 
 HORSES. 
 
 "See A<irsT.Mi;NT. 
 
 Interim AUmony-Separation Deed-Am;-,- 
 
 m.ntuot Sm. j.jr .-U;,«o,„/.]_Tlie grantimr of 
 m crim ahniony rests in the .siun.l dit S 
 the Co r m view of all the circumstances. 
 A husband and wife l.a.l executed ,. deed 
 fe'';'«-'-!;Py'''"~es, andagreeij^^^^ 
 I'lve ap.iit. llie consideration was .S800— t 
 Jown payment of .$100 and an annual provisio 
 
 restora ion f '"° "'• 1^'''"°"^ '"■ '» «e«^ 
 
 exec Wfi,. ?^ ■*''•■'' '■'"'■•^' '■''^^ '''^'-''1 ^as 
 extcutul .ifter advice given to the wife hv -i 
 
 separate solicitor. Afte'the expiration of seven 
 years she brought an action f..i' alimonV! and i 
 or firel :°I""'"'"" '''""""y '"'^ ""* ^''^^ fraud 
 
 Held that the application must be refused. 
 
 linriVr. t', t lu » "'■ '"'"^ stipulation was i ot 
 
 I ' re 1 . ^,T ''' ^' •'^'■'' ''"' -^tended to her 
 
 ruturc lite, and a jn-ovision to arise de anno in 
 
 """ZP' r' 'T"''"^ "• "l''-!'' the deed :-i" 
 
 .y, iW,, also, that a husband ami wife may 
 
 \ali,lly agree inter., to live apart, and the wife*^ 
 
 eng,agcincnt not to sue for alimony no to cW 
 

 I m< 
 
 H> 
 
 417 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 roHtoriitidti 
 
 <in vnliialilo (.'oimidi'iatioii, will ht^ i iifori raMc 
 against In r and may liu xet up in Imr of lior 
 aotioii. Afiritoil v. .-Iliro'jd. ir> P. K. 4'i5. .S'»e 
 tilt) next cttsi). 
 
 f niaiital intL'iLiairNf, if fouinlrd j uinlcr t«(iity-iiiit' niadu an otFor of mania." l.y 
 
 littt'i' to a youiii,' Wdiiian, nuA in the Ictti i pri.. 
 : miHt'd that if slu' would luiiiiy lilin \w Muhlrj, 
 ivftc'i' till' iiiairia>.'i', give la-r all tliu Jiroinitv lie 
 had (niianing iial |iiii[Kity), tU'stiihin^ it is 
 "my faiiu in OHiuey," and "my pioiniiv jn 
 Klmvalf.' .Shu accepted tlm otl'i'r unooinlitinn 
 ally, also l>y lettui' ; tliu niiui iagu took plan ; 
 and hi aftl■^wal•tl^< convtyiil thts two (in pi rtiiD 
 to lu r. Aftor the uonvi-yam-tM tliu partim, 
 vohm'aiily and without any rvil intent, ilc. 
 stroyeil tliu lottiTH, lieliuving that they ha.l n,, 
 longer any use for them ; — 
 
 Ilelil, that the letters formed a lireiuiptiiil 
 eontraet, enforeealile in spite of their d(,-itriic 
 tion, upi n satisfactory evidence of tlieir ^u 
 tent« hi ug given. 
 
 <;i/rl,nii \\ lUi-hn-l. 'JOW. K. ;14S, followed :_ 
 
 Held, also, that the description of the im. 
 pertie.s in the man's letter was sullieient, lie liuv 
 ingiioother pioperties in the places inenticl.i il; — 
 
 Held, lastly, tliiit there was .-i duty nn tin- 
 part of the luialiand to convey to his wife, v. iiic h 
 negatived the existence of an intent to d't. at 
 creditors. Stiinrl v. 'J'hoiii.iuii, '2'.i O, R. ,')(J.'!. 
 
 Interim Alimony and Disbursements - 
 
 Septiiti/iiiii J)(eil—A{iriimiil not lt> Sm- for AH- 
 1110111/ — ^ll)^il.^.]— An appeal from the di rision of 
 Hoyd, v., li") I'. K. 4"2.-), was di.-^miHsed by reason 
 of a division of o])inion of the Judges eoiupo.-ing 
 the Divisional ( ourl. 
 
 I'er I'Y'rguson. .1.- I i • order of the Chancel- 
 lor waM riglit. 
 
 I'er jMeredith, J. — The nmrriage lieing ad- 
 mitted, and need and refusal of support being 
 proved, the j)huntill is /</ i»i() yl - iV' entitled to 
 interim alimony and dI^I>llrsenlents ; U[ioii a 
 motion tluii for there ought not to be any adju- 
 dication upon any of the issut s or ipiestions to 
 be tried between the parties ; and if the motion 
 cannot be refused without determining such 
 issues or ([Uestions, or without i)rejiidicing a 
 trial of them, the order should be made, unless 
 the action is frivolous or vi xatious. Ativovd v. 
 Aliiiood, Hi V. 1!. .lO. 
 
 Judgment — A'<siiiitmeHt>i and Pre fire no .i,] — 
 A judgment for alimony is not atl'ected by sec- 
 tion 1) of the Assignments Act, K. S. (3, eh. 
 124. Ahiahavi v. Alirvhtim, I!t O. R. 2'M. ; 
 Atlirmed in appeal, 18 A. R. 4.S6. 
 
 Master's Report — Exi'fiilioi).] — Where a 
 reference is diiceted to th(! Master to ascertain 
 and state the amount of alimony which the 
 defendant should pay, execution may be issued 
 for the amount found by his report hetore con- [ 
 iiiination thereof. Lucix v. Ttilhuf Slrei^t (h-ani \ 
 lUiud C(i.. HI P. I!. 15, ajiproved and followed. 
 JSo.ck V. Bold; l(i P. R. 313. ; 
 
 Foreign Law — Conflirt of Lawn — Pre-wiil mid 
 Fii/iiit I'l-opirty — Afdhimoiiln/ Doviiril— L x ni 
 m'/(c. ] - The plaintilf .s husband (iitercd into an 
 ante-nuptial contract in the Province of Qiiehir 
 with her concerning their rights and propi rtv, 
 present and future. He subseijuently inmeii 
 to this Province and died there intistate :- 
 
 Held, that this contract must govern all his 
 pioperty movable and immovable, tliniigji 
 situate in this Province, I'rovided thr.t the l.iw- 
 of this Province rehating to leal jiropcity IimI 
 been complied with ; and that it made no 
 diti'erence whether the matrimonial doinieil of 
 the parties at the time of the contract and 
 marriage was in Ontario or (Quebec. 
 
 The ante-nuptial contract in c|iiestioii was inf 
 signed by the ])arties but by the nolaiii.-i in 
 their own names, they having full aiithniity 
 from the parties to do so : — 
 
 Held, that this was a sufficient signatim 
 
 Restitution of Conjugal Rights— ro/u»/<;/('- 
 
 tii.n.} — 'J'he only bar, under section 'J!l (jf ]!. S. 
 
 O. ch. 44. to an action for alinujuy against a 
 
 hu.sband who is living separately from his wife, 
 
 is cruelty or adultery on the part of the uppli- ; Mitliin the Statute of Prauds to bind thepartiis 
 
 cant- i Tatirijh- v. Ttiitlifr, -21 O.R. ;?;iT. 
 
 Where a husba id who has been insane for 
 years, at intervals, and during such periods of 
 insanity had been confined in an asylum, after- 
 wards declined to live with his wife, being I III. CrI-MINA 
 
 CoNVKUSATIOX AMI 
 
 III' Affi;cti(ixs, 
 
 Al.lKN \Tili.\ 
 
 under the suspicion that by doing so he might 
 again be confined in an asylum : — 
 
 Held, that she was entitled to alimony, as, 
 upon the evidence, he was living separate from | 
 her without any sufficient cause, and under! 
 such circumstances as would have entitled her | another woman by her procurement, anil lives 
 
 Adultery of Husband — Alii ni.tion of //«<■ 
 l/aiid'-t Ajiciiiiinx — Siqumrt of M i/'c. ]— Wliuii a 
 husband ieaves his wife to live in adulterv with 
 
 l)y the law of England, as it stood on JOth 
 June, ISiJ", to a decree for restitution of con- 
 jugal rights. 
 
 Judgment of P)oyd, C, reversed. NeUhjan 
 v. Neliii/mi, 26 0. R 8. 
 
 Service Out of Jurisdiction 
 
 Aliniovy.'] — See, Alltn v. 
 onte 483. 
 
 Alttn, 15 P. R. 458 
 
 and continues by such procurement to live in 
 adultery with her, whereby his affections are 
 alienated from his wife and she is deprived of 
 her means of support, an action lies at common 
 law by the wife against such woman. 
 
 The Married ^^ Oman's Property Act, I'.S.O. 
 Action for i eh. i3'2, by allow ing a wife to sue without lar 
 
 II, Antk-nuptial Contkact. 
 
 husband and by making the damages recovered 
 the separate property of the wife, removes tin 
 former difficulty in enforcing such a cause of 
 action. 
 
 Review of English and American decisions. 
 Quick V. Church, -IS O. R. 202. 
 
 Antenuptial Contract by Letters— /'os^ i Criminal Conversation— i^((r('(>((/'(fr.- -.1/ 
 vuplial Conveyance of Lands.]— A young man I da !•(< of Den'ud— Examination of Phiiitif- 
 
489 
 
 ui olFiT of iiirtniiiL;" liy 
 , iiiiil in thu Ifttii prii- 
 
 liiai'iy liiiii lie vmuM, 
 iiT all the |)rcj|ii'itv lie 
 iTty), iKv«i.iil)iji^; I't iM 
 anil " my pripciiy in 
 
 tlir otlur luniMiilitiijii- 
 
 n)ariia(i,'u tunk iiliu,. ; 
 ycil tin: two [in [mtiiH 
 ivcyani.'cM the paiticn, 
 ; any ivil intent, de. 
 
 ing that tlii'v liml im 
 
 formed a )>ri -niii.tiiil 
 ■'j)ito (if tlifir ilisiiii,.. 
 !viilc'ni,'u of I heir i.in 
 
 \y. U. :!4S. followed:- 
 
 .'.scriiition of the iiro. 
 u;ih Mlllieient. lie liuv 
 lie jilace.i nientni.id: — 
 •e was a dnty i^ii tin 
 iivey to liis wile, v. M, |; 
 if an intent to il' t.:it 
 iii.-<o)i, '2;i (). K. ."jli:i. 
 
 of I.tiwi — Prewiil II, III 
 oiiia/ Dbmicil- 1,1. i: III 
 iliand entered into an 
 
 le f'rovince of (.hielnr 
 
 riglit.s and iiid|iiity, 
 
 snliseiinently iimvod 
 
 there inte.'itate ; 
 . nmst govern all his 
 
 irnniovalile, thniigh 
 'rovided that tin- \a\\< 
 to leal jiiopeity liml 
 d that it made no 
 latrinionial (leniii il ef 
 
 of the contruit and 
 r Qnebee. 
 
 ct in qne.stioii \\as i jt 
 t by the notaiits in 
 laving full aiitlniiity 
 
 , sufficient sigiiatmc 
 ds to liind the paitios 
 R. 3;J7. 
 
 MON AMI .Al.lKN \TlliN 
 IONS. 
 
 — Alii iti.tion of Hill- 
 ■ f>f ll(/K]-\Vlidiii 
 live in adultery with 
 ocurement, and lives 
 ocurement to live in 
 by his atreetioiis ,iii- 
 id she is dejnivid of 
 ictiun lies at eoiiiinon 
 ;h woman. 
 Property Act, U.S.O. 
 3 to sue without liir 
 le damages recovered 
 je wife, removes the 
 iiig such a cause of 
 
 Amerieaii deoisions. 
 !C2. 
 
 i—l-'(irlini!nr-i-Affi- 
 atioH of Plaiiitif' 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 «0 
 
 H'l/',]— In an action of eriminal eonvers.'ition, 
 after pleading and ttxainination of 1 he plaintiff 
 for <iiseovery, partienlar.s of the matters com- 
 pliiiiied of Blionld not be ordcreil except U)iom 
 a full and Hitisfactory afliihuit of the defomhuit 
 (hewing hiv innoeenee and igiioruuco of tlio 
 jjroinid of complaint. 
 
 fCtNian V. I'riiigh, -IH L. I!. Ir. l.S.'), fo|. 
 lowed. 
 
 In siiedi an action there is no power, having 
 rcyard to It. .S. (). eh. (Jl, see. 7, to order the 
 exiimiuation of the wife for discovery us to the 
 iillege.l acts of adultery. Marniii v. ISrmi-n 
 Jli 1'. 1!. 12r). 
 
 Taking Away Wife From Huaband— /V,,. 
 
 iiilx.\ -\i\ action will lie by a. husband against 
 Ilia fathcr-indaw when the latter has, without 
 lutlicient cause, by a display of force taken the 
 wife away from the hou.se of her husband against 
 his will, she continuing absent, whereby he has 
 lost the comfort and help of her society ; and 
 substantial damages may be awarded in such a 
 ease. 
 
 The more harbouring, by her parents, of a ! 
 wife who has left her hu,baud, without any ! 
 evidence of intluenee or persuasion on their 
 part, is iiotsutKcient to su.stainan action against 
 the parents. 1 
 
 lieview of Ijiglish and American decisions. I 
 Mblcalfwllolitrts-I'AO.K.VAQ. ■ \ 
 
 \ de.ith, he entered into poasoHslon ftiid receipt for 
 and on behalf of his infant children ami a.<< their 
 natural guardian ; and this being .so his pngseg- 
 Hion anil receipt were the possession and receipt 
 of his wife, and after her death, of his children 
 
 I and those claiming under them ; and the sHitute, 
 therefore, never began to run. 
 
 W'lll V. StdiiirH; M Ch. I). 7(i:J ; /// iv H,M>,, 
 ."JlJCh. I>. .-.,-).•{; Lyt// V. Kriiiinli/, 14 App. (;uh. 
 
 I 4,S7, followed. 
 
 //Irb'i/ V. Sti,r,r, II (). U. IO(i ; <;iark V 
 Mi-Donuell, -JO (». I!. u(i4, not followed. Knit 
 V. Knit, '.'O (). I{. 44.5. .SV< the next axan. 
 
 1 Conveyance Direct — Sepurntf UHe—Curtfui/ 
 
 ' ~/,iniitatloii-i.i -A man, married in IS.>1, eon- 
 ! veyed in lH7(l certain 1 nids to his wife by deed 
 ! under the ,-Short Forms Act, with the uhuuI 
 covenants, for the e.\pressed ccmsideration of 
 "respect and of one dcdlar." The hushaml and 
 wile remaineil in po.ssession of the l.inds until 
 the wife did in l>S7l.', leaving a will by which 
 she devised her real estate to two daughtcrB of 
 herself ami this husbaml, aged respectivelv 
 
 IV. r)KAIJX(I.S BkTWKKN HirsBAMi AS!) \V|FK. 
 
 Conveyance of Land to Wile Direct- 
 Eqiiitahic Estut,- In Wife— Husband Trustee of 
 Lijal h'stali'—Dfrl.-.-o. of f.aiuU,,/ Wtf, in Infant 
 riiililn-n — /Vv.<c.w/o» 1)1/ Hnslian'f — Xaliiral 
 ilmnlhia Sliituti' of Linillafioiis. \ -A husband 
 who was married in IS.-)4, made a eonvevance of 
 lands direct to his wife in 1870, which was 
 expressed to be in consideration of "respect an 
 of one d( liar," was in the usual statutorv short 
 form, aii<l was duly registered :— 
 
 Hehl, atlirming the decision of Boyd, ('., 20 
 U. I!. l.'iS, that the conveyance had the effect of 
 onnveymg the eijuitable estate in the lands to 
 the wife, leaving the legal estate in the husband 
 as trustee thereof for tlie wife. 
 
 A ^'ift from a husband to a wife is not an 
 incumplete gift by reasons of the incapacity of 
 the wife at law to take a gift from her husband. 
 
 L" Bntons Esla/, , 17 Ch. D. 416, commented 
 upon. 
 
 The wife died in 1S7-2, having made a will 
 eavuig her real estate to the two daugliter.s of 
 herself ami husband, who were then a^cd 
 respectively seventeen an<l twelve. The lius- 
 mnd remained in possession during the wife's 
 life, and from her de.ith till his own death in 
 I WO. Ihis action was begun in 1890 by the 
 younger ilaughter and the son of the elder to ' 
 recover possession from the devisee of the liiis- 
 baild ; — 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of Boyd, (' -0 
 •J.l!. I.i8, that the Heal Property Limitation 
 Act ilKl not apply so as to extim.Mii.sh th.. ri"lit 
 M the plaintiUs to recover: the presnmi)tTon ■ 
 nemg that the husband, after conveying to his 
 wite, was in possession of the l.mds and in 
 receipt ol the rents and profits, for and on: 
 Wialf of his wife ; and that, upon his wife's \ 
 
 seventeen and twelve. The husband remained 
 m possession till his death in kSllO. 'I'his action 
 wi.s then brought liy the younger daughter and 
 the son of the elder dau,:,diter to recover poasos- 
 Nion from the devisee of the husband ;-- 
 
 Held, that time had been a valid transfer of 
 I the eipiitablc estate in the jiroperty to the 
 separate use of the w ife, and that the huslmnd 
 must he held to have been in possession after 
 her ileath as guanlian for the children or as 
 trustee of the legal estate for them, so that 
 there was no bar under the .Statute of Limita- 
 tions. 
 
 Jiiilgment of the Queen's Bench Division, 20 
 O. K. 44-1, .iHarmed, Burton, J. A., dissentin -. 
 hmt V. KiHt, I'J A. R. :«2. 
 
 Creditors' Rights. ]- 
 
 VKYANC'K. 
 
 -.Vec Frai;dulent C«)N- 
 
 aUt—Chox" in Anion— Knoiol((l</e of Tranx- 
 /' '■. J— Since the Married Woman's Property Act 
 ot 1S84, a husbaml may make a valid gift of a 
 chose in action to his wife without the inter- 
 veution of a trustee. 
 
 A gift to a person without his knowledge if 
 made in proper form, vests the property in him 
 at once, subject to his right to repudiate it when 
 informed of it. Shemitt v. MerrhiuUs' Ikiuh .>i 
 Canada, 21 A. H. 473. 
 
 I Purchase of Land by Wife— AV -xale ~<;,u- 
 mxhninU of P,nxha-<' Momy — IM>1 of Uwt- 
 lmn,l."\~\). having entered into an agreement to 
 purchase land, had the conveyance made to his 
 wife, who p.iid the piii.diase nicmey and obtained 
 a certificate of ownership from the registrar of 
 deeds, \). having transferred to her all his in- 
 terest l)y deed. She sol.l the laud to M. and 
 executed a transfer acknowledging payment of 
 the purch.-ise money, which transfer in someway 
 came into the possession of .M.'s solicitors, who 
 had It registered and a new certificate of title 
 issued in favour of AL, though the purchaBe 
 money «•.:::;.. in faei, paid. M.'s solicitors 
 were also solic.i ors of certain judgment creditors 
 of I)., and judgment having been obtained on 
 their debts, the purchase money of said transfer 
 was garnished in the h.iiuLs of M. and an issue 
 was directed as between the judgment creditor.* 
 
m 
 
 HUSBAND Ai;D WIFE. 
 
 ati.l tU<- wife of I». („ .Ictnipiinc tliti tillr to tliu 
 
 inomiy uiicl.i- tlu'«(miiHlii nl.r, uimI tiKMiioiiuy 
 
 wiiH, by uonmMil, paiM int.. ( '.mrf. Tli.. jml^mtMit 
 .Toilitdrs (;liiiiiu'«l the in.iiicy on tli ■ jjroutid timt 
 lliu traiJsftT of the liuid to !).'« \mI " «i,h voliiii- 
 l»rv iiii.l void iiinl. f th.. stiitiit.! 1. 1 Klizal.i'th, ' 
 hikI that Nho tliercfoio lirld tlu> land aii<l wa» ' 
 «Mt7'lu<l totlio imiolia.st money on tlic rtiNalo 
 itM trnNtci for I). : — ] 
 
 Htdd, iiv.rainK the dccimon of tin. Suiirrrne i 
 <'>urt of the North.\Vf«t 'IViritoii..s, that ' 
 tinier til, ■ evid.nc.i giv.'n in the ua«e, the orii.'- 
 mill tnin^fei- to the wile of I), was l,„i,ri t\d7 ; 
 that ishe |i,ii.I for the land with iier own money 
 iind hoiight it for her i>\mi une ; and that if it 
 wi'M not hotnt Jill,' the Snpreme Court of thi? 
 leintorie«, though exereisinj,' the funetiona and 
 |ioKH«!».sing tlie powers formerly extreise<l and 
 liesHfHsed hy Conrtnof efpiity. eonld not, in tlieso 
 Htatutory pioeeedinjiB, jjrarit the relief thatcouhl 
 liavo Iieen obtained in a unit in i ijnity : — 
 
 Held, furtiier, aI.-o roversing the ji.ilgment 
 apliealed Irom, tliat even if the proeeedincs 
 were not /loiiil _M; the garnishee proeeediiig.i 
 were not jM-onerly taken ; that the pniehaHe 
 nioney was to liave lieeii [laid h\ M. on delivery 
 of deed of tran.sfer, and the vendor never under- 
 took to trrat hini as a dthtoi- ; that if lliero was 
 a< ebt, It was not (.ne which 1)., the judgment 
 •lel.tor as iigaiiist whom the gariii.-hee pioc. od- ' 
 iiigs were taken, could m,nint;iin an action on in 
 Ills own rij.dit and for his own exclusive Innelit ; 
 that I), s wife was not precluded, l,y having 
 HHsented to the issiic and to the money being 
 paid into Court, from claiming that it could not 
 lie attached in these luocecdings ; and that tlia 
 only relief pdssible was by an independent suit. 
 Donohvr V. Hull, •_>4 S. C. R. li.S.S. 
 
 492 
 
 y\. MviinrAdK. 
 
 BlKamy -I'ronf of Fir^i Marnw/,'.] [■„„„ 
 an .ndiet.nent for bigamy the Hr.t inaiii.u" 
 must b.. strictly proved as a marriage ,/. /„,.*' 
 
 Kyidence of a c(uifession bv the prisniur ,,f 
 his first mairinge is not cvi.iem'.c upon wl,,.|, i,„ 
 can beconvictiMl. /I'-.'/i/^j v. //oi/, 'iO O I; "p)' 
 
 Indian Ma.rria,gt~-lh,/„rfiiii,„s „/ Ju,;„»j 
 
 oftheeehbr.,tion of a marriage, ex ide ' „„ 
 
 given that the husbami who had gone fi,,ui tl.il 
 
 rov,ncetolh■itish(^,lunlbia,lHoUutl,,:,: 
 th. .eremnny of marriage acMuding to t Ti • 
 Indian custom with an In.lian woiuair h,- i.av 
 ing ?<-J0 to her father, aiul that after the mar 
 nige they n.h.bitcd and lived together as „,/„ 
 .'o.lw fe, and wre recognized bv the Iu,li;,„ 
 ■IS such up I., the time ..f the wife's death, i,,,,,, 
 to IS,!), the giving of pic.-tnts and .ohabit,' i,m, 
 being reganled by the tribe as coiistifutii,.- , 
 mnniage. I'he i^sne of the union weiv twi, 
 ehihlren a daughter and another child wl,„ 
 die.l. Aliout INT!) the husband ntuined tothi, 
 
 lovin.e, bringing th.. daughter with hi,,,' 
 •.videnee was also ,:ivcn of declarations nimlo 
 by the husband on bis return that he had 1„.,„ 
 eg„lly nia|-ric,l in the same manner as he w, ,,1,1 
 have been h:,d the marriage taken pl,,ce hci.. 
 mi, t latthe ,l;,iighterwas his legitimate ,l,i|,l I 
 iiiKl that he h,„l brought her uj, as sii.h • - ' 
 
 Hehl, that, apart from the Indian niarri.n.o 
 there was evi.lence from which a legal marn.u',' 
 a,.,-.,r,ling to the recogni/.cl fonn amount 
 Uiristians eouM be prcsume.l, and that the 
 daughter was therefore his legitimat,. ,hild 
 and "legal h.ir/ /,'oW^ v. /;rM,-J()() 1; -,)i 
 
 VII. 
 
 Pko(ki;i)in(i.s iiv aM) A(i 
 
 Wo.MKN. 
 
 T M .Mini HI) 
 
 Transfer from Husband to Wife—" J c/i/a/ 
 
 Will VoiitiiiKd/ C/((0/</»'o//'o.s.sf.<.vo,;,.']_AsaIe of 
 chattels, consisting ot househohl furniture in 
 tlieir ri'sidenci., between a niarrie,! woman and 
 tier luLsband, living and continuing to live to- 
 gether, without a ,luly registered bill of sale, 
 IS Void ns against creditors, for in .such a cusc .scir,T-rte"."s*i"^r,''!V'„ "'""•." '*' 
 
 .iK,-,.c,,,„„tb. „.i,i ,„ ,.•„ „„„,,,.'„;,' ;"° 3,;,,;,;,. """""""" " •"■""■"■• 
 
 Co-contractor. 1 — A 
 
 matricl w,)niaii l,;iviin; 
 
 aloiij; 
 
 iitc i.~ 
 ,.tlin- 
 
 'lli.lt:! 
 
 Voluntary Conveyance.]— A voluntary con- 
 veyance ,,f a large portion of his jrropertv by 
 a h.isbaml to his wife, a woman of g„o,l busi- 
 ness ability and having j.reat influence over 
 lam execute,] without competent ami imle- 
 pendent .i.lvicc, when his jihysical and mental ' 
 condition were greatly inip.iiicl, he subse- 
 quently becoming an incurable lunatic, was set i 
 aaide. ; 
 
 The doctrine of undue intluenee and tlduciarv i 
 relationship discu.ssed. . 
 
 Distinction between undue inflm nee in cases' 
 of gifts niter rims and testamentary gifts refer- 
 red to. 
 
 .hidgnient of Rose, J., reversed, Hagurty, 
 18A R 599'"""'''' •"''^'"•^'■^•" ^- ^^f'^Caffriy, 
 
 Judgment Debtor ~/,V/V.va/ /„ An,,,,! /,,■ 
 l:x,i,i,uutlin„~CoMmilmi,il. ]-Ai. order luav U 
 nia,te or the commitment of a marricl woman 
 to gaol for refusal to atten,l for exaiuinatin,, ,s 
 n ju,lgineiit ilebtor. 
 
 _ l!ules 9-J(i and 932, and I!. .S. (). c),. c; <,., 
 I , coiisi,]ered. ' 
 
 Metroiiolilan L. .i .V. Co. v. Morn S 1' li 
 
 *?',"m f?,"""''''- "'"'-0" v. (hitario Snuphi (',,', 
 14 1 . Ji. !lt). 
 
 V. Life Inshranck. 
 See Insurance, V. 
 
 Mortgage— 117/;, 0/ Morf,/w/or—J)o,l■,r.]-' 
 l lie wite ot a mortgagor who has joiiieil in n 
 niortgag,., made after lltli .March, bsTi), only 
 tor the purpose of barnng her .lower, is p, .iiRrly 
 made a ,leleu,lant to an action of forecloMu, , 
 in or.ler th.at she may either red.em or luotect 
 her interest by asking for a sale : ami hciiia 
 so made a ucfcndant, aiul submittiiig to a fore- 
 closure, no .piestion can .irise as to her .lower 
 being eliectually .xtinguislied. Ai/ir.st v. 
 MvVltcin, 14 P. R. 15. 
 
192 
 
 m 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 lltAllK. 
 
 4M 
 
 tr nil iiH Nucli : 
 ic Jiiiliiiii niani.ij^'o, 
 
 '("*< Murrini/,:] I',,,,,, 
 ly the Hint iiiaiiiiiu.. 
 
 "II \'\ tllC IirirHnlhr „f 
 icIcilCI- ||{MI|| \v||,,.|| l||, 
 
 ' •>. It'tii/, 'JO (A i;, •ji'.) 
 
 •'■tilillUllli.-i nf /hr.iisrii 
 
 Chi/, /nil.]- Ill |,|„„, 
 iin-iiigc, cNidcM,,. „„ 
 
 lln IiikI ^Ollf th-IM llij, 
 
 il>iii, Imil^'oiic tliioii>/h 
 ^f ^ llci.'dldillt; ti, t|„, 
 
 iicli.'iii «<iriimi, hr |,iiy 
 tliMt after tlii^ i,„.,r 
 livc'il tn^fothcr iis iiHiii 
 ;iii/cil liv tlic lihliiiiid 
 lie wifus (lentil, [,ii,ir 
 
 1 IllM HIkI l'lllial,lt,,t|n|, 
 
 ilii' im coiistitiiiiii^ J 
 tlif iiiiiiin Hcic twip 
 1 anotli.i- cliiM win, 
 iliiiiid ictiiriKil til this 
 liui^Llliter Willi |,i|„, 
 iif tli'diiiatimiN iiii,,i,' 
 iini tlmt he had l„ ,1, 
 ■ inamicraMlir w, uM 
 g<! taken jihui. lieir, 
 liis legitimate i lijM : 
 nil iiH ^ 
 Jiidiii 
 liieh a lef,Ml niainap' 
 ized fill 111 uiiiimi.'st 
 lined, ami that tin; 
 lii.s legitimate (hi|,l 
 . /.V,Wi, •_'() (). I!. ,-,!ii 
 
 I AdAIVSl .M\K|;|K|. 
 
 lied \Miiiuin haviim 
 ito a oontraet alonj; 
 
 i> nejiiii'ate estate i.^ 
 ciintraet, the other 
 nut lun: I.)ii,iji„ni! 
 
 'wal to A It,' ml /,.)■ 
 ] — All (ifder may \v 
 if a married ivetnaii 
 1 f(ir examiiiiitinii 3^ 
 
 It. S. O. eh. CT, sec, 
 
 V. iV«m, s r. I!, 
 hilario Siiiijiiy I'o., 
 
 i-fijii'jor — J)oirei: )— 
 lif) hii.s joined in ,1 
 March,' I,s7f), only 
 r (lower, i.s properly 
 tioii of foreelosuiv, 
 • redeem or jiiotect 
 a sale ; and litiiig 
 jiiiitting t<i a I'orc- 
 as to her dower 
 shed. Aijird v. 
 
 MoPtgauo Wir, 0/ Mo,i,in<ii,i Iti.ir.r.] . 
 Tlie wife of ,1 iiKiit-aK.ir, who Iiiih joined in the 
 in(irt«a«u for I he |,iir|,o,M,. of harriiiK her .lower 
 to the extent of tlii^ inortKage only, li^is the 
 riKit to redeem during her hiiHlmmV* liiutline 
 •nil 1" i> luvcfMiuy party to un aetiou 01 fore- 
 cliiiiire 111 the tiiKt instanee. 
 
 And where nIio wa.s not xo made a party, and 
 juilKnienl ot foreeloHiiiu wan reecnered in h. r 
 iJiMenee, she whh, after judgment and r.^purt, 
 lidded ivM a delendant upon her own t.elition, 
 uud permitted to re.leem or pay olJ' and ohUiii ■ 
 
 \'lll. ,ski'.\k.\tk K.htate. 
 
 Agreement to OlmrKe. I A husliand ai.'i. e,l 
 t'l pill. ,,,„,. ..,.,.(„,„ |„|„|_ „,„, |,i^ ^^,j,.^,^ ^^1^.^ ^^^^^ 
 
 ..mill, d to himiii IWli withont any marriage 
 Hottlen.eiit, and had ar.piired real e,-«t,ae in |,',7() 
 '""''''■■'' ''""' '" '.'■.■. l.er heiiH 1 aM»igM» '• to 
 
 and tor her and their mile and oidv iimi iVnever " 
 J.i.ne.l 1,1 tie agreement for the' pnrpoHo of ..e- 
 e 1 liK. t, lienig earrried out and' eh'.rged her 
 land with a portion of the pureha..- ,i,„nev 1 _ 
 
 »nii«signmeiit .,f the mortgage. JIIoikj v Fi>- 
 ijrral,/, l,"i I', I!. 107. 
 
 Next Prlena- 'urrif,l noimn—lHiiii-c/or 
 ./ / i'w„„ „„,/ /'»/,> Ch,uilie~ '—All aetion 
 wa.s lironght in tl j 11, oin <,t thi pkiiititr, u 
 uimtie not so found, vmIUicVi ii i pnldie aHV- 
 lum, hy hl.s wile n« iie.x Me.', ^o .set uside'a 
 eenyey.-inee of hind mi- by him a^ impnivi- 
 ilent, etc. : ' 
 
 Held, that the notion, lieing for the piotc. 
 lien of the lunatie'spropertv, not for the dis- 
 |io8al of It «;,. properly liiought liy a next 
 rieiiil; and, although a married woman cannot 
 till such an olhee, the faet that in this ca,se she 
 (lid s(i did not make her proeeeding.s void ; .■md 
 tlie defendant.^ only remedy wa.s to uiiiily to 
 ivmove her and to stay prdeeediiig,^ until a 
 pmiier ne.xt friend should lie ai.pointed •_ 
 
 11.1(1, al.so, that the objection that th'u action 
 Kli.mld have lieeii l.roiiuht liy the inspector ol 
 msniis and pul.lic charities could not prevail 
 for It was discretionary with him to inslitiit,' 
 jiroceediiigs or not. Ma^Hii v. .I/,,.,//,,, 1.5 p. 
 K. 1 1 J . 
 
 Held, that the wife's land wa 
 
 m';V";'. """' '" ' 1'^'' '>■ .-■''iTf.-'tl. J>< 
 -1 •'. K. .■(,,). 
 
 'lejiaiatu «■• 
 tint V. S/iilir, 
 
 Contract by Implication, l-Held. reversing 
 
 the (leciH,,,,, ,„ the (ommim I'leas Division. 1^* 
 
 . K. ,..! , that a power of attorney to the hus- 
 
 .. nd ot the married woman defendant, author- 
 
 ng hm. to .sell her I.uid,., d,d not a'uthori/ , 
 
 .. >.. ex, hange such land.s for others or to himl 
 
 lei to assume paym.nt ot a mortgage 011 t ho 
 
 l;.>"l given III e,xcha„„, a„d that ^r the e'i 
 
 (leii, e .she was ii„t l,.,iu„l therel.y ■— 
 
 ,dd, also,l,y ,).l,.,,n,„, Ma.,|enn.ui,,l.|,A,, 
 that the inipie, ohllgation to pay oil' the en 
 eninlirance which in th.. ca.se of .1 cnnveyancJ ilf 
 laiKj to a per.M,i. ,v,„ ,„,.,•,, ,« u„^„,^^.,^ ,,/,^ ^, .^ 
 ;^ ;i;>.ty IS not .ntorcealde against a married 
 woman. Ic cannot he s.iid to l.e a contract 
 or promise m respect of separate property, 
 .l/cj/i,/,,,./ V. II ,//,„, ISA. 1!. -104, ' ■* 
 
 Summary Jml.trnient — Uiiia.i-,,1 Hill ,,i 
 
 l^'i"^ l;,,,uii,r. I -.Sinninary iirocee.lmgs upon 
 .e,mliy iiidoiv,.,! writs ,1,, not apjilv wli.'iv 
 tliclelendanl li,-iliga niariicl woman, "the im|.'- 
 ineiit can lie only „i a proprietary nature. *" 
 \\ hero a solicitor siusl a marricl woman .ii„l 
 her iiishaml „pn„ „|, ,|,itax,.,l hjH of c,,.st,s, ami 
 I" 'l.'tault of a|ip,..araii,-,., signci jmlgmtnt 
 .itiHiiist lioth ,lefen,l,ints per.'onally for tie 
 .imoiiiit ot the hill ,111,1 interest : - 
 
 Hehl that the j,i,lg„,c,it was irirgular an,I 
 iiiglit have lieei, ^.t asi,le with costs if the 
 •^Icidants ha,l applied ,,romptly : ami, umler 
 t^eeircunisiances, the jmlgnient was an„.n,le,l 
 ''.\ luniting It as to the married woman t,. her 
 .".•jiarate estat.., I.y ilisallowing interest, ,an,l l,y 
 "ree ,„g that the amount sli.mhl ,.|l',i,le the 
 
 '^li-imte the retainer. Cmna-on v. 7/,;,//,., 14 
 
 Summary Judgment.!- Where it is shewn 
 
 iii(l,»„,.,„. 1 ■■" 1. , !i!"tioii lor .snnimarv 
 
 judgment under IJiile 7.')i) did «1,,,«- ;* iT 
 
 Ji;;tiffwasallowedioame:S,i";^it,':u,(U: 
 
 Contract.] -The effect of \\. s. (1877) 
 ^\ I-'.., sec. :i (now H. ,S. (). ch. l.'iL' sec 4 
 siih-sec...) IS to deprive the hnshand of'anv'e.s'- 
 tate l,y the curt.'sy or otherwi.se, , luring the life 
 '.f the wire, ,11 the lamls t.i which tlm sect m 
 upplies, h,.„ig those acpiiivd heforu or atter 
 
 .M.i>, Iholl, an,l l!n,| .March, l,S7'_' 
 
 l!y s;-,^ti,.ii_,-, ot 47 Vict. ch. Ii) (now R. S. o 
 cll. dl.', sec. .), the J.:^,i;.,.„an„li w.as .iven I.', 
 he married Woman, and l,y it lamls acpuicl liy 
 her aft,.,, the l^t July, I,SS4, hcca.ne h'er .sej J 
 act. estate, ' 
 
 Jhe an,ciidin(.|it made liy s,.,.tion "•' ,,f 47 
 
 . \ let. ch. Ill (now emliodicl in R. ,s. <).""h I;i4 
 
 sec. d). en.i ,le,l the married woman to ,lispo,seof 
 
 liei leal estate without r.g.inl to the date of her 
 
 i.am.ge or of the acinisitioi, „f the property • 
 
 Ini un,ler it she can convey her own estate only 
 
 and not any estate to which her husband may 
 
 -e entitled by the curtesy after her death'^ 
 
 while under section , of chapter l;« she can 
 
 com ;ey tree fr.ini his estate by the curtesy. 
 
 \\ here a woman marricl in I.Sfii) ac,|uiie,l by 
 c.inveyances from strangers, lamls in Ktobicoke 
 
 in bS,!) ami 1S,S2 and lamls in I'ark.lale in March, 
 I.S.>>, , and was in the lifetime .if her husliaml sue, 
 upon promissory notes made .after March l,S,S7-_ 
 Heh that all the lands were li..r sei.arato 
 
 , estate lialde for her debts: but the Kt'S: 
 amis were su.iject to the possible right of her 
 liusbaml to nold them after her d..ath, ^he dyin-' 
 .sei/e,l intestate, tor his life, i„ case he survived 
 ber as tenant by the curtesy, and that subject 
 to this possible estate ot her liusband they weni 
 lialilc to bo seized ami sohl for the satisfaction 
 o t'..= plaiiuitt 8 claim. Mo„i-, v. Juvk.,„i, 20 
 U. i>. (,.)2. .Sc« the next t«o c.nses. 
 
 Contract.]— A woman married in ISOO with- 
 out any marriage settlement, aciuired in 1879 
 
495 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 rPffl f 
 
 and 1SS2 curtain lands by conveyances from 
 stiiiiigui-.-i, her liusljiiiul then heiii.,' livin<' Tliis 
 itotioii was l)i-ought in .September, l.S8i),°hor lins- 
 baud benig still living', to recover the amount of 
 certiun jiromissory notes made by her in 18S7-— 
 Hehl reversing the judgment of the Queen's 
 l.ei.ch Division and restoring tluit of Armour, 
 C.J.,20(). U. (i52, that the lands in ouestion 
 were not tlie separate property of the married 
 woman and were not subject to her del,ts 
 Mnoiv. V. JachoN, 19 A. R. :m. See the iievt 
 case. 
 
 496 
 
 ! name in a savings bank a sum of money, whi,], 
 - the evidence shewed ha<l been given to her , 
 
 ler husband, but of which as against hi,,, .,, . 
 
 wish - ''^""'"'^'' ilisposal by his consent a,„l 
 
 Held, that this was sutlicient on which i. 
 found a proprieta.y judgment against 'v , 
 tlioiigh It was not shewn that the bond was m,,' 
 executed at an earlier hour than tliat at whi ■!, 
 the money was deposited. Sinttlaml v. X.vil:, 
 -1 U.K. 412. ' 
 
 li..^?" 'i^°'-^ — '^ woman married between 
 lb.>.) and l,S7-_' acijuired, in 1S7!I and 18S2, lands 
 in Ontario as her separate property, and in 1SS7 
 betore the Married Woman's i'roperty Act of 
 that year, R. S. (). ch. l.'^L', eanie into force, she 
 became lialiie on certain proniissorv notes made 
 by lier : — 
 
 Hehl, reversing the deeisi(m of the Court of 
 Appeal, 10 A. R. ;?S3, that the liability of her 
 separate property to satisfy a judgment on said 
 promissory notes .Icpended on the construction 
 of the Married Woman's Real Estate Acts of 
 18!5/, L ,S O. chs. 12.-), 127, and the Mairied 
 Womans Proiierty Act, 1884, 47 Vict, ch 1<» 
 read in the light fui'.iislied by certain clauses of , 
 ^. ■>. U. O. ch. ,\i ; and that her capacity to sue 
 and be sued in respect tlicreof cariied with it a 
 corresponding nglit on tlie ],ai't of her creditors 
 to obtain the fruits of a judgment against iicr 
 by execution on sucli separate property Moure 
 V. Jitct^on, 22 .S. C. R. 210. 
 
 Contract.]— A man-ied woman having been 
 informed by a relative that he had made his will 
 in her bu-oiir, signed a promissory note tliree 
 days alter ins deatli, before she had seen the 
 will, and some weeks before it w.is proved The 
 will gave lier a vested interest in the property 
 bequeathed. She also owned a proiniss'.rj' note 
 of her husliand :— "^ 
 
 Held, tluit she was possessed of separate 
 estate, and had contracted with respect to it 
 
 Decision of Street, J., 24 (). 1!. 441, alHrnied. ; 
 Miilrahy V. CoUiiis, 25 O. R. 241. 
 
 t Title to QooA3~E.KenUioHA'ia!nM Hiisha,„l I 
 -In an action by A., a married woman, ,agai„: 
 ashenlt for taking, under an execution au 
 l.or hiisbaiul, goods which she claimed .-fs |,e 
 separate property under the Married Woman 
 Property Act, K. ,S. X. S. oth ser. eh. 74 ,. 
 sheritt justKied uiuler the execution wit'ho 
 imiving the judgment on which it was iss m 
 I Ihe execution was against Donald \. ainl v 
 was claimed that the husband's name was I )ani, •! 
 i lie jury found that he was well known by be, i 
 names and that A.'s right to the goods lei/e, 
 was acquired from her husband after inarria.-,. 
 
 :nldSrii";:i""'^'^''''^^«^p'''''^'^i'-i-^>- 
 
 I Held reversing the judgment of llie Coim 
 behnv, that the action could not be maintained- 
 that a sheritl sued in trespass or trover f.„' 
 taking goods seized under execution can jnstifv 
 under the execution without si.ewing the iii,].; 
 nieiit; llnnnon v. McUan, W S. C. K 7(io 
 followe, ; and tjiat under the tindiug.s of tl,,' 
 jury, which were amply supported by tl- - evi- 
 dence, the goods seized must be comiidereii h, 
 belong to the husband wliich was a coinplet,- 
 
 o. L. li. ,)42. 
 
 IX. Mi.sc'kllan:-:ol'.s Casks. 
 
 Marriage Sottlen--)nt — /A„, J/jin,,/ — /Vo 
 P'lO/ Lx-hid,-d from, Imt. Aaiidnd after Mar 
 ri>(!,r.— /,'e.,/infl„„ for K«/»r'.J_ Where liy the 
 terms ot a doi, , .,u,<l by marriage <-ontnict a 
 tarin in the possession of one of the sons of thp 
 husbaiirl under a deed of donation ^^-as excludcl 
 trom the d,„i ninlael, and siiltsequently tlie farm 
 in .|uest,nn Ijecaine the absolute property of the 
 tatlier, tiie deed of donatitm havin>' b,'eii resi 
 ^atedforvahie itwas hehl tliat by reas.m .,f 
 the resiliatKm the huslian.l had acquired an in- 
 depement title to the farm and it tiiereby be- 
 cunie cl,arg.!d for the amount due under the r/o„ 
 m»//^c/ by marriage contract, viz. .•sT),0(IO and 
 Unit after the husband's .leatji the wife (the re- 
 spondent 1,1 tliis e-i.se) was entitled, until a proper 
 inventoiy had been made of tlie deceased's' 
 estate, to .etain possession of the farm Tas i 
 chereau an,l (iwyiine, J.)., dissenting. Mnrli],- 
 
 Moneyia Savings Bank -Oiff h/ /fn.nnvd I 
 -.Subsequently to the coming into foree of the 
 
 Married W oman s Property Act," R. s. (). 
 ch. \.i2, I married mian on the day of enter- 
 ing into a money bond deposited iii her own 
 
 rn^T n'?"^ f Intestate Bstate-/V,„. 
 
 A»/ J-1 he Legislature of .\ew lirnnswick, bv 
 2. (.CO. .i, ch 11 sees. 14 and 17, le-ena teil 
 the Imperial Act 22 & 2:^ Car. 2 ch. 10 ,.Sut„t.. 
 of Distributions) as explained by section 2;,,.: 
 
 vuled thivt notliing m the former Act should I, ■ 
 
 constr.ied to extend to estates of f nus rnrrrl.-. 
 
 : dying intestate, l,ut that their husbands shonhl 
 
 eiijoy their personal estates as theretofo.e. 
 I \\ lien tlie statutes of New lirunsuick w, „- 
 
 revised in 18,,l the Act 2(i (je,>. ;{ ,-h II «-,s 
 
 re enacted, but section 17, correspon.ling to sec- 
 , ion 2o of tue Statute of Frauds, was oniittnl. 
 
 in the admininistration of the estate of a f;,.. 
 
 corrrt, her next of kin claimed the personahv 
 
 <m the ground that the husban.l's rbdits w,-,;. 
 
 swi'pt away by this oniL^sion : — 
 
 Held that the personal property passe.l tn 
 
 tiie husband and not to the next or kin <,f tl„- 
 
 wire. 
 
 I'er Strong .J. -The rej.cal by the Revise 1 
 
 Ma utcs of 20 (;eo, :{ ch. II, which was passed 
 
 n the athrmance of the Inii.eri.d Acts, operate,! 
 
 to restore section 2.'5 of the .^tatute<,f Frauds as 
 
 part o tno common law of \,-w l;riiiisw;.-k. 
 
 lerCwynne, J. -When r colonial legisiatlli-.- 
 re-enacts an Im|,erial Act it enacts it as inter- 
 preted by the Imperial Courts, and a furliori 
 
497 
 
 1/, ru-cnactcu 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS. 
 
 by otl.cr Imperial Acts. Henco, whe.i the i 
 ,y _u <,<.n. ,5 111. u (is.H.), It Mas not iiecc'ss-irv 
 
 rroputy Act of Ni.w MnuiMvick, C. S N H 
 
 a .narr,e,l wo„,a„ fvom liul.ilit v for he' h, 1 n, ' 
 lel,ts, UMd proh,l„ts .ii.v.it.linK with it ^^i h ,? 
 her consent, only .u.spen.l.s the hu.han I'l , i'h 
 
 .leath of the w,ie he tak, s the personal pro e v 
 ashe«.n,l.l ,t the Aet ha,I n'evcr bee, ' 
 
 ilc.M,,,ren,e Court of .New ISrnnswiek while 
 . Iccuhn^ aga.n.t the ne.xt of kin on hi« elain to 
 
 he re.sulue of the ...state of ,;u>.- .orerf, ' e t. 
 
 hath,see.stsshouhlbe pahl out of thecal 
 On appeal the ,leeree wa. varied I>y Uril ,.: 
 out sud> direction. Lum/, v. tV.re/a;«/ s" 
 
 498 
 
 Liquor License Act~Sa/e hy )r,y«. l_Thc 
 .lefendant was a married Uoman, and tie .a e 
 of the imuor took plaee in the p ese. ce c^ j± 
 
 Held haviiig regard to R. S. O. eh. 194, sec 
 
 ofthehu>^.ndhadnon!;e;:':do;:,;'r!:Sr 
 
 lininia V. WifUivu, 42 U. C R !(!•> ,i; • 
 tn,gu,shcd. i,V„;„„ v. ' J/.Y,v, .o,,' ouo. R." 115.' 
 
 bird • „d ui ; .T '"'"^■>'^''' ■■" '^'-^ t" 'I i"'s- 
 uaia and wife who weje married in l,S(i4:— 
 
 e.Sc?tt:''^'""V''^'^^^''^'"«-'«'-*l^y 
 u 1 1 , f'* tenants m eou.nion :— 
 
 of .1 if "; V'"' "'"' ''"«'''""' could l,y virtue 
 
 !^la';:::^;:;.^nrVhe''':.h:r:ftr"f^ri 
 
 altlK.ughtherewerenolll.btriS.jtS'to';;:'! 
 Tort of Wlfe-.1/,/rnWv,' /^/or ^o /s's" 
 
 nsrU ,"'T "'° ''^'^^ ''•""t.M.I.jeettothe 
 
 vonvr ",'/' *"^""'' "f t'>e Crown of 
 
 ■e'Unf r""" '"'V^^'l'''^ waters thereon, 
 
 le.UM, to allow the j.ianuilf to haul ice en 
 .from the lake over such lots, when o.eV 
 ; be whart from which the pbiutitf , eX! i 
 
 ship the ice tor the pniiios .s ,,f i,;^, i,,, ;. 
 
 -nle..thep,ai„ti,Ipa/d,^,„:wd,iei;'1,;'X:i 
 
 ' ^^■,VM'l,i!^'' "'" '"'i'^T "'■''• *''^' 'lelendanfs lot 
 Mas a highway, and the plaintiff ha,l the rhdit 
 
 ■^■■tlunit payment to ero.s.s the lot, whether tie 
 
 ; ater upon it was Huid or fa.xcn ; a I 1 av ," 
 
 '.euuseo, complaint, and a rijit ,f a ■ ioi f 
 
 IH l.er.soi,al loss, he «-as entitled to e, n.e i tl e 
 
 Court tor a declaiatir,,, of ri.'ht 
 
 ^lehl, also that the .^'fend.nnt was liable 'w 
 
 jtant was not liable for the plaintif'i I i f 
 business consequent on his failure to ,1, p the 
 ICC. CuUu-tou V. Milltr, 2lj U. R. ;iO. ' 
 
 ILLEGALITY. 
 
 .?«e Co.\tract^1Iokti..m;k, \-f. 
 
 ILLEGITIMATE CHILD. 
 
 Sie ]j.\sTAJii). 
 
 IMPLIED COVENANT. 
 S<!e Crown Lam.s, M.-OvAuxwtw 
 
 l)i;.MMTV. 
 
 -AND I\. 
 
 IMPRISONMENT. 
 
 the wife:-! ' '' " ''"'^ e-oiinuitted by 
 
 .S'«ARRE.ST-C„NTKMrT-IvT,.X„AT.N,,Lj„fOIiS 
 — JUS'IMfK (I- Tin; I'K.UK. 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS. 
 
 JOE. 
 
 Damages— A 
 
 J«.J-Ibe defendant, the owner of certain 
 
 -Afu//.y,//„,,/.]^.A eovem.iit bv the lessor in 'i 
 ease of a parcel of land eovele.l by wa te, to 
 I'iiy, at the end of the tern,, for "the b ld„r = 
 ;UM ereetion.s that shall or may then be on L 
 demised premrses," .l„es not bind hi,n to ,av 
 for enb.work and ea,th-tilli„g done upon \ i 
 aroel ,„ question, by whicl,'-it was rai " d to 
 
 available a« a site tor wai.-lioit-.s. Uiaru ",\ 
 AV-.22A.R.4io. AtilrmedbythS;™- 
 
 Improvements Under Mistake of Tltlc- 
 
 C,»npinmUon ~ U,a,i>atu.u ttuil - oVcav, I _ 
 
499 
 
 INFANT. 
 
 500 
 
 The defendants, owners of land aljoiniiig the 
 bank of the Niiig-ra River, built at groat expense 
 utair ways and elevators, and niaile paths from the 
 top of the bank t.) tlie w.iter's edge of the river 
 to enable viaitira to djsceiul to see the view, and 
 large snnis were received for tlie use of these 
 facilities. Expensive repairs to tlie stairways, 
 elevators and p.-.ths were from time to time neces- 
 wary, owing to cneir exposed condition, and tlie 
 defendants knew tliat they had no title to the 
 bank, which was vested in the Crown : — 
 
 Held, that works of this kind were not last- 
 ing improvements within the meaning of section 
 30 of R. S. O. ell. 100, and that both on this 
 ^'roimd, and on the gronndthat they knew tliey 
 had no title, the defendants could not recover 
 eomp nsation. 
 
 iii'-mhli : The seetion wonld not affect the 
 Crown, and the title being in the Crown wlieii 
 the improveinonts were made, the Crown's 
 grantee would take the land free from any lien. 
 In cases coming within the section the ainount 
 by which the value of the land has been en- 
 hanced is to h ; allowed, and the cost or value 
 of the improvements is not tiie test ;— 
 
 Held, also, that the defendants were not 
 oharg.'a!)le with the profits made by them, but 
 only witli a fair occupation rent for the land. 
 GoinmUnoners for the. Queen Victoria Ximiara 
 Falls Park v. Colt, 22 A. K. 1. 
 
 Rival Applicants for Patent ol Land- 
 Pay /«'3«^ for Improvements.]— Sen Boidlon v. 
 Shea, -22 S. C. R. H2. 
 
 Tenancy In Commoa— Improvements made 
 before Accrwd of Tr.naiici/.j—The right of a 
 tenant in common, in an action for partition of 
 the property, to bs pvid for improvements exe- 
 cuted In' him thereon, is restricted to such as 
 are mule by him after his tenancy in common 
 has commenced in fact. 
 
 And where a tenant in common, in remainder, 
 by an agreement with the tenant for life, went 
 into possession of the property, and during the 
 life tenancy expended a large sum of money in 
 perm^vnent improvements at the request of the 
 tenant for life : — 
 
 Held, that he was not entitled to the value of 
 «nch improvements. Lasby v. Cremoii, 21 0. 
 K. 255. 
 
 so that his decision, and not that of the Court 
 should determine such (inestions. Johmon v' 
 Jones, 26 0. R. 109. 
 
 INDIOTMENT. 
 
 See Citi.MijfAL Law, III. 
 
 See LAXDi.oRD and Ten-ant, IX. 
 
 INDEMNITY. 
 
 See GcTARANTv and I.voE.M.vir 
 
 INDIAN. 
 
 Vrm—Male or F,'.m"l,: Indian.]— An Indian, 
 male or female, may w\kp a will, and may by 
 «uch will dispose of real or personal property, 
 saljjeet to the provisions of the Indian Act, R. 
 >S. C. ch. 43, or other statute. 
 
 Qud're, whether tlie last part of section 20 of 
 the Indian Act, R. S. C. ch 43, does not leave 
 fill (lucstions arising in reference to the distri- 
 bution of the property of a deceased Indian, 
 male, or female, to the Superintendent-General, 
 
 INFANT. 
 
 I. Custody, 500. 
 II. Estate, 501. 
 
 III. Guardian, 502. 
 
 IV. Maintknance, 504. 
 
 V. PliOCKEDINU.S nv AND AliAIN.ST, 505. 
 I. CU.STODV. 
 
 British Subjects Married In this Province 
 
 — Ri-ni'jral to the United States — Hmhaiul 
 Naturali~Ml— Divorce Obtained hy ir!/e.]--Tho 
 parents of a child seven years old, British sub- 
 jects and married in this Province, where the 
 child was born, removed to the United States 
 where the husband took out naturalization 
 papers. In consoijueiice of the husband's alleired 
 intemperance and adultery the wife left linn, 
 and on tile ground of such adultery, she apphed 
 to the Court there and obtained a decree grant- 
 ing her a divorce, and the custody of the child. 
 .Shortly before tlie decree was pronounced, and 
 with the object of escaping its effect, the husband 
 returned to this Province, bringing the child 
 with him. 
 
 On an application by the wife for the custody 
 of the child an order was male granting her 
 such custody. Re Davis, 25 O. R. 579. 
 
 Discretion of Court.]— On the application 
 of a husband against Ids wife for a writ of 
 hahea>i corpus in respect of tlieir tiiree child- 
 ren, two of them being above twelve years 
 of age, and therefore not within the discre- 
 tion as to custody given by a local statute 
 framed on the princijile of Talfourd's Act, 
 it appeared that the wife had twice left him, 
 tfiking her children with her, on account 
 of his habitual drunkenness ; that on each 
 occasion he agreed that she should maintain 
 and educate the children apart from him ; that 
 after the second separation he publicly and 
 falsely alleged on oath against his wife charges 
 *o injurious that she could not be expected ever 
 to live with him again ; that the wife had 
 ample means, while the husband had only a 
 narrow income : — 
 
 Held, that the Courts below exercised a right 
 discretion in discharging the writ and remand- 
 ing the children to the custody of their mother. 
 The father's legal power was controlled, as to 
 the youngest child by a statntn which n'iva 
 absolute authority to the Court ; it was materi- 
 ally affected as regards the other two by hreaoli 
 of marital duty, by consideration with respect 
 
501 
 
 .UA[^^.sT, 505. 
 
 INFANT. 
 
 iM tlifir welfare. 
 tiiem from each i 
 
 502 
 
 A. C. 4-2.5 
 
 o. 
 
 ' Hel.l, tiiat the Ael ;in|.i.i/t'. 
 /" /•' ''.' /•((//, i.'(i(). It. ;j.-,5. 
 
 Bellgrious Path of Father- 7', y„,„,„v„,. 
 
 /.,<x;vi,.„t ]-Ur|,hu, chiMron liaving Inn'M clan 
 
 < lostmely taken from the ou.todv of U.oir un l" 
 
 t u- te.«ament,,ry guanlian under the will of 
 
 .ew father, who had ,.iodoce:i,se,l his wife, hv 
 
 tlK'n-aunt,aR-,manCath.lie,elaimin-j;uardi,ui 
 shi;, under an invalid iuitrumoat in her favoMr 
 s.g.ed hy chu ni,lher of the ehildr.a, and' it 
 appeanng that their father, a I'rotest'tnt, ha 
 desired the ehildren to ho hrou^ht up in |,i „„•., 
 aith, an order was male for their d.liv.rv to 
 the J'.»^t^"ly o l.e.r uncle as testameutaiv 
 giiai'dian. J!e C'/iiUmaii, l'o U. II. 2(!S 
 
 an estite tail. 
 
 Sale of Lxnd-Ojn-W, '/,nr,liaH.]~U,uUr 
 
 *f«,^;n,!i,rv.;i^V-,;;r.i;;™;-5 
 
 Ex.ciifofs. 
 a policy of 
 
 life 
 
 n. KSTATK. 
 
 Life Insurance -/',(,/,;„;„/ /o 
 Mimey.s p lyaMe t ) iiifaius under 
 lu^iiranee may. where ir, tru.t.e oi' g;;;;:^dian'i: 
 uppmiited nadir sections 11 and l-JofR ,S ()' 
 >-ii. l.W. Iwpaid l.th',^ e.x-.,ci,tors of tlu- will of 
 liieiusiired, as pr.ivided hy section I-.', without 
 v.;.nirity being given l,y them, aial .iiVment to 
 them IS a good discharge to the insurers.' /) >,/,h 
 v^Aiiuenl Order of UnUe.,1 Worbmn, '17, U. It". 
 
 , Money in Cour. - "«y,„e./ Oa, ^AdmuU- 
 
 '"'■'■ -T"-^ auiniu...,trMtrix- of a pjrsoii who 
 
 had died hetore tile Devolution of Kstales Act 
 
 a .sua. of .>21(., winch wa. part of the person! 
 •state of the deceased, notwithstanding tint 
 vo 111 ant. were among the next of kin who 
 «,Hl,! he eu titled to sh.t,-e in U.e estate after 
 p;iynients of debts, etc, 
 
 ^ II iiimhriu V. Hniimkaii., 1!) (j R S')(i fol 
 .mie.l Rt Parson., Jo^,,., y. K,/'an',i, U i>. 
 
 ni.l H,,.„ ' i' "",' t"'t'"''"' "i^inoutiousimDlv 
 i e 1 on y where t >ere are infants interested 
 "1 h; n.> or devisees who do m.t concur. 
 
 ^\ Here admiaistrator.s in e.)ntraetin.' to «pII 
 lands under ciren instance.; n.t re H„? the 
 
 ; thiough. negligence and delay failed to ol.t J^ 
 «uch approval within the tin' ere ,u re Iv J h 
 
 ^ ',' , , '^'"' '" i-ertam events. 
 : .VmWt, where the approval of the otfi-i„I 
 , guards,. not reipiireil! notice nee I noit 
 
 Sf-.e the cases nil ler the next sab-tille. 
 
 III. ( 
 
 iL-AKI)IA>r. 
 
 Oaf— Ad mi Ills- 
 :iiiir at the timt 
 
 Foreign Guardian -Ve,vn-,7v 1 -An i,>f.„(. 
 -a. entitled to share in c r a a 1"sJ ance 
 ... .ney.s accruing under a policy u o, he Hfe 
 of h. ■■ deceased father. Tae infant lived with 
 liSTe "i;'"^^ foreign state, ami the IThS 
 Had there been appointed liy a Sarr.).-itf. (<J,S 
 
 . . ^^''toaniiites,atL„::si;Si;i1,uUo;;rrir£':"trii'r ""^'l ""M-^ «i->ti^ 
 nuiustrator notwithstanding- tllat infants ig It -.eti io. e t^ I'l" ",'''' ^"""■^- ''''"^ '»"tl>«^ 
 
 I . ^"'''' "''' the security given by the f 
 Money In Oom-t- Pay »ivif Oaf-Marr!„a. ' hor'mn'-^l" "'?'"" ^'""''^ "'""''' "«' attacdfto 
 
 Money in Court— /'a;/ mm t 
 ^v;'»r. I— Money in Court 'behin' 
 "therdi 
 
 Ik (ir 
 
 I', 
 
 aiipoiuted 
 
 ■•"JIJ, sec. 1-2, to 
 
 of the insurance 
 
 . ■il'inty to p.vyment out of Court of a sum of 
 ;;n^;v, and It appeared that, although ",! 
 
 mi.ete.,1 years of age, .she was mirrfed d 
 "...ciled in a foreign country, by the law 
 
 «iiiol, a female ,s entitled npou marria-'e to 
 ceive money due her, an order was n fe^ f 
 
 ■"""•■''•;.t^: payment out. Karana,k v. ^n^ 
 
 ' Slo-iHOIl, 
 
 III 
 
 •-'.Ml. 
 
 Sale of Land — /;r;ji<7,7 of Parents Tl,» 
 
 to sell an infant s estate for a pareut'.s bensHt. 
 
 oi the enactmL'iit. R,- HiVm-d, 11 
 
 Ori^'iii 
 
 P. u.it: 
 
 •"r,fS7S'^?,St^j.^.ri„s 
 
 imlu the Surrogate (.'ourt Act, li. ,S () ch 
 
 lurin'thTiTtl''"' 'H''^«^t''« l^""l^of the infant 
 periol. '■■ ' '""""''ty. '"'t not b..yoml that 
 
 lowS'"" ''■ ^^'•''^'''«''' ^3 <''•• ^aS, not fol- 
 
 tee^of'".1,"'l'' 'TT^^ f'"^ K'"'^'"'"' i^ =* trus. 
 
 a'lui . t,M ["'t/"'i""-' '"f'^'"' '^^'> ^""""t 
 he . ior f H '•''? '^^ I'^^^^-^i"". l".t after 
 
 lit n.ijoui^ of the mfant the possession of the 
 
503 
 
 INFANT. 
 
 m 
 
 guardmn cliuiiges its chariutir luid Ijctoiuefi 
 that of a straiiKii-, ami the Staliitu of Liniita- 
 tions runs in favour of the giianlian or thtHc 
 claiming under liiiii. 
 
 Ili'kiy V. Stur^r, II O. R. 10(5, followed. 
 Clarke v. MaidontU,, '.0 O. K. i,M. 
 
 Testamentary Guardian — Insurance for 
 Benejit of CMMri:n.]—A testatrix having in- 
 jured her life and made tlie polices payalile to 
 her two danghtirs, hy her will rcqutsted her 
 executors, the a.feiulants, to i)lace the anxiunt 
 thereof in some thoroughly safe investment 
 until her daughters' majority (jr marriage, 
 when the amounts and their accumulated 
 interest should be divided equally between 
 her daughters, and appointed her husband, the 
 plaintiff, their guardian. 
 
 In an action brought by the guardian to liave 
 the proceeds of the policies handed over to him 
 by the executors : — 
 
 Held, thKt the insurance moneys being made 
 payable to the daughters were l)y 53 Vict. eh. 
 39, sec. 4 (O.), severed from her estate at her 
 death and her testamentary directions could 
 not aflfect tlie fund beyond what was permitted 
 by that statute, and R. S. O. eh. l.SO :— 
 
 Held, also, that during the minority of the 
 daughters the trustees aj.poimed liy the will as 
 provided for l,y section II, R. S. O. ch. K^ti, 
 might by section i;^, invest in maimer author- 
 isted by the will ; but while the insured could 
 give directions as to the investment, she wa.'^ 
 not to control the discretic n of the lawful cus- 
 todian of the fund and child, in case the incoinc 
 was needed for maintenance or education, oi 
 the corpu3 for advancement ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the guardian was the custo- 
 dian of the daughters with the incident of de- 
 termining to a hage extent what should be 
 expended in their Ijiingiiig u]>, and that the 
 executors had cluiige of the preservation and 
 utilizat:oii of the fund : — 
 
 Held, also, that section 12 of R. S. O. ch. 
 136, dots cot justify an' Insurance Company iii 
 paying the amount of a policy to a testament- 
 ary guardian ; the guardian there named being 
 one who has given security and that the Court 
 should not tiansfer the monej s from the execu- 
 tors to the father as ^estameiitai y guardian, as 
 his right to handle any put of^he fund was 
 subject to the tru.'-ts s)itcificd in the wi'l, the 
 execution of which was visttd in the executars 
 CavipbtU V. Dunn, 22 O. R. 98, 
 
 Trustee and Guardian— /.(/f; Inmravce.]— 
 The mother of an infant to whom insurance 
 moneys were payable, having been appointed 
 guardian ard having given security, was ap- 
 pointed trustee under R. S. 0. ch. I.^(i tec 11 
 
 Scoit v. jscoti, 20 o. 11. ;n:i 
 
 504 
 
 Tutor.]— Where a father, acting generally in 
 the intercEt of his minor child, but without 
 having been appointed tutor, and being indebted 
 to the estate of liis deceased wife, of whom the 
 minor was sole heir, sul)scribtd for certain 
 shares in a cf inmereial or joint stock company 
 on behalf of the minor and eausid the shares 
 to lie entered in the books of the cfnipany as 
 held "in tiust,' this created a valid trust in 
 favour (f the minor williout any acceptance by 
 or on behalf of the minor being nectssaiy. Such 
 Bhaies could not be sold or disposed of without 
 
 con]plying witli the requirements of Aitlil,„ 
 21)7, 298 and 2i)9 of the Civil Cde ; and a 1' 
 chaser of the thaies having full knowlulL''. '„f 
 the trust upon which the shares were iii.|,| 
 although paying valuable consideratic n, was 
 bound to account to the tut(u- subse(|iicmlv 
 apiK.intcd for the value of such shares. 1\i 
 f.'ict of the shares being entered in the bcu.k-; nt 
 the ccjHii.any and in the tiansfer as licUl " „ 
 trust was sufiicieiit of itself to shew that ti,,- 
 title of the seller was not absolute and to imt 
 the purchaser un in<iuiiy as to the right tn '.U 
 tht' slmrt.'. Svnvy y. Bank „f Mm,ti;„J \-> 
 S. t. R tiOl ; 12 App. Cas. (iI7, referred to „ ,1 
 tolli,wed. lasehereau, ,J., dissentiuL;. /,',-/,/i,„,' 
 V. McFcu-lanc, LS S. C. R. is,'j. " 
 
 IV. Maintk.vanck. 
 
 Fund in Hands of Administrator 1 - 
 
 \\ here aii infant's lund is in Court, or uiiilcr the 
 control of the Court, a summary order may he 
 gi anted for the application of it in niauitir 
 ance, upon a simjile notice of motion. 
 
 Rut if the money is outstanding in the liamiv 
 of trustees or others, unless they submit t„ tU 
 jurisdictKji, summary proceedings are iiiai)ni., 
 priate. ' ' 
 
 And a summary application by the liuanli.u, 
 ot infants tor pajment to him or into Court Iv 
 the' administrator of the (.state o( the infant^ 
 i.Hher, of a fund in his hands, was disii,is-c,l 
 ..lere it was oppc sed by the admiiiistiator 
 h'( WiUon, 14 P. R. 2GI, distinguishid 
 71*6 lo///wwe, 2!) Ch. 1). !)2I, followed /;, 
 Cotdts, Id P. R. 1G2. 
 
 Interi st on Fund In Hands of Trustees - 
 
 Lnder tiie will of their father two infants ^li, 
 entitled each to a vested legacy of s,-,iio „liiui 
 trustees were diiected to invest at interest luitil 
 the infants should be of full age, and then iiav 
 to them : — 
 
 Held, that a Judge in Chamheis had jmis- 
 diction, upon a summary ajiplicatien, to iiiiiki' 
 an order authorizing the tiustces to apply tbu 
 interest for the maintenance of the infants"; hut 
 such an order should not be n)ade except upon 
 the clearest and most satisfactory evideme; i,s 
 much evidence, at hast, as is required uimii r.ir 
 a) p!icati( n for the sale of infants' lands tor their 
 maintenance should be icciuirtd, and tlic lik. 
 safet .iro gain.-t deception anil mistake should 
 be . upon. J,'e )l i/scn, 14 P. H. 2(10. 
 
 Past iV iten&Tice—Sifckil Clrcuni^/am.^.] 
 --Appl. atn-ns for past maintenance of iiifiints 
 rt. n the discretion of the Ciuirt. 
 
 \Vh"retl-e inlants' ))roiher-in-law, a farmer, 
 had lodged and fi<l thini, but expended nethicg 
 for their ch.thes or education, duiing a perifiu 
 of tw o years ai d a half previous to ap]ilviii{,' fc! 
 maintenance, knowing all the time that thcv 
 were entitled to money in Court, ai;d a .luilgf 
 in Chambeis refused to allow anything for rast 
 
 I maintenance, luit nuule a more libeial allowami' 
 for the future than he would otherwise li,i\e 
 done ; — 
 
 I Held, that, dealing with the ease on its Sjw- 
 
 I cial circumstances, ar.d ha\ing rej;ard to ti:e 
 discretion exercised, the Judge's order shouW 
 
 I not be distuiled. He Blair, 14 P. R. 22'). 
 
 Iii 
 
504 
 
 "cqiiirements of An id,, 
 ' Civil Code j ainl a |ii,|^ 
 laviiig full kii(i\vliilf..c ,,1 
 1 the slmres were lnM^ 
 fililf coiisidoratit II, was 
 
 tlio t\it(ir sulist((uem!v 
 le of such .shui-fs, "}],[. 
 ■ inti-ied in the loi.ks nt 
 he tiac.sfer as lirld " ., 
 
 itself to shew that t!i. 
 nut iihsolute and tn i.nt 
 y iis to the right tu s, H 
 . /laid' <,/ Monli;n!, \-> 
 Cas. ()17, referred u, mA 
 J., dissenting. I!,n,]wi 
 R. 183. 
 
 •;tk.n'.\.nce. 
 
 jf Aamlnlstrator.] — 
 is in Court, or under the 
 sununary order may be 
 iition of it in uiamtcr. 
 iee of motion, 
 utstanding in the liamis 
 iless they suhniit to tit 
 'foceedings are inajipK,. 
 
 ication by the iriiardian 
 to him or into Court, Iv 
 
 (.state ot tlie iiif:iiii» 
 
 1 hands, wns disMiisscil. 
 ■ the admini.strator. 
 (51, distiiiguishid. 
 
 L>. !)21, followcl. n, 
 
 Hands of Trustees."- 
 
 'atlier two infaiit.s wtn 
 
 I legacy of .s,-,(i(|_ wliiLi, 
 ) inve.Ht at interest mitil 
 full age, and tlien p.-iy 
 
 II Cliandjeis had jiiii.-- 
 y aiJidieaticn, to iiialii- 
 i tnistees to apiily tlit 
 lice of the infants'; lint 
 ; he made exceiit upon 
 tisfaetory evidciue ; i,s 
 as i.s rei|Uired upnn nii' 
 f iiifantb' lands t'ortlifir 
 leiinirtd, and tlie likf 
 :ion and mistake slimilil 
 d-scn, U 1'. H. 21 iO. 
 
 ^] cciiil CIrciuii'/nimK.] 
 naintenance of iiifants 
 lie Court. 
 
 )llier-iii-law, a fanner, 
 htit ex|iendcd netliirg 
 ution, dining a ])e!ii'ii 
 revious to aiijilyiiig tV: 
 11 the time iliat tl^rt 
 n Court, and a ,lii(lgr 
 low aiiylliing for fast 
 more liheial allowaiui- 
 would otherwise li.ivi 
 
 !h the ca-i-e on it? spo- 
 having regard tn tl.i' 
 Jiulge's order slioiiW 
 nV, 14 1'. R. 2'." I. 
 
 SOS 
 
 INFANT. 
 
 Past Maintenance— V/wm/ Cmv»»s/„ »,■.,, i 
 -Uhere appluations for past maintenance o 
 mfants are made, and especially where the only 
 mn. for payment is the eoriius of the estate, the 
 applicant shoud come on petition hefore a 
 Judge m Chambers, shewing and proving the 
 «pecia ..■ireumstance.s relied on to overcome the 
 general rule that arrears of past niaintenanee 
 are not gn-en which rule applies whether the 
 olainianf rs father, mother, or other relative -i 
 steji-parent or a stranger. ' ' 
 
 .And where it .-.ppearcd that r person makin- 
 aclaiin for the past maintenance of his infant 
 8 tep-ch.ldren. against the proceed.s of the sale 
 of then' fathers tarm realized in a.l.ninistratiim 
 proceedings ha.l not maintain,.,! the infants on '• 
 .,.■ liaMs of being coinpeusate.l therefor, but ' 
 timt ins elami was ,,„ atter-tliought, a .hnlu^ 
 veM to oonhrn, ,he .Master's °reeonimen,la. 
 tiou of an allowance, /n rr ItrnmcJ,, l!.,un,-k 
 v. Crooks, (4 P. M. ,S(ji. 
 
 Wm-'^ Jf,,rh„ ,SV>,./w frj,,;,,, ,„,,.., ,/„ J.; I, ■■ 
 
 -y,«,v.iro-.]-Uii,ler a .levise of laii,l to a t'lther 
 
 ;l"nnghi..hfe, for the support and nuunteii- 
 
 "loe othnnse f an,l his (three, children, with 
 
 reinain, er to the heirs of his b„dy, or to such of 
 
 Ls cl.ihlrei, as lie may .levi.e the .same to," 
 
 here is no trust in favour of the eliil.lreii so as 
 
 to give them a beneficial interest apart from ami 
 
 m,lependontly of their father, but the ehil.lreii 
 
 being in nee,ly circumstances uill be eiititle,l 
 
 aaagamst the father's executi,m credit,)r, who 
 
 has been appomtejl receiver of his interest, to 
 
 liave a share of the income set apart for their 
 
 nminten.-uice an,i .support, ami in arriving at the 
 
 share.tisrea.sonable to ,livide the income into, 
 
 ali,liiot pars thus -,ving oncfourth to the I 
 
 rccener. A/Uh v. J ;,..s° -JO A. K :U i 
 
 506 
 
 the ,,uestion for the jury wouM be wh,.ther the 
 
 det,.n,lanls were negligent in h.iving the mirror 
 
 so iMseeurely phu,..! that it couhl bc^-verturn; 
 
 ; ; "'''.' = ■■""' 'f V"" 'l",'sti,.n were answere.l 
 
 nthealhrmative, thechihl, having cuiie up,m 
 
 tile ,lcfen,l„,nts premises by their invitation ami 
 
 for their benelit, wouhl not be ,lebarre,l iron! 
 
 ; rcxA-ering by reason of his having .lireetly 
 
 brouglit the injury upon hiin.self ^ 
 
 //»;//,.. V. .l/'";/'V, -J H. .V: C. 741 : ^fa,„,a,> v. 
 
 Athu-lnn, 4 H. A: (.:. .'SSS ; ,•„„! /;„;/,.,,. y {■,.,,/ ,t 
 
 ■In'she,!^" '^' ""' """""^■'"•^'' "" '^""i "'li-tin- 
 
 " Srmhl,, the' the ,l„ctriiie of contributory 
 
 . negbgence is not applicable to a cliihl of tender 
 
 : ■ <^n'dn,r V <h-i.ce, 1 V. & F. .r.tl, approx-e.l of. 
 ■V/"W,-, also, that if the mother was imt 
 taking reasonably proper care of the chihl at 
 the time of he accident, her negligen,,.e in this 
 •■..■spect would not prevent the recov,.rv bv 
 th,; child. .'^(uiiiMer v. Ealo,,, L'.j O if 7s 
 Alhrnnd ii, ,., peal, 21 A. R (i24 ; and by the 
 Supreme Court, ■J4 S. ( ,'. R. JCS. ^ 
 
 V. I'UOCKHIH.VCS liY AND Ail.MN.sT. 
 
 Action Without Next Friend- -Ar,,/,,.,. l_ 
 
 Aunifantwas apart owner of a i.ateiit rijht 
 ■•n. engaged ,n business tran.sactions'with i e.sKt 
 to it. Along with other part owners he si<'iie,l 
 .retainer to -.licitors to take proeee,li„g°s to 
 
 oUcitois, not knowing that he was an infant 
 '"■ought an action lor that pur,,o.e, nsiii- s 
 ^^ ;.s a plaintiff, without 'a la.xt friend 
 
 "^■ult that the infringement ceased but it was 
 n iSff "f^ 'Hsmissed with costs against the 
 Vv f '"' T'''''^ "^ prosecution. More than 
 aside di'"' "'^,,«""e.«f age, he moved to set i 
 asme . 11 proceedings in the action ;— ' 
 
 tioner! ■ h ' "'"'"■ ^'''^ oirenmstanecs men- \ 
 ■TO,, 1 ^- T"' "°' '"''^1«' to relief on the i 
 ,romid of mfauey. MilUon v. Smak, 25 O R | 
 
 I 
 w°iu°Jn!h?°'''L'f?«"»«"°« ;i-A woman went ' 
 
 . efe ulants' shop to^ buy clothing for bot!,. 
 
 « w,?it """•"I'.Jixed to the wall, and m 
 
 l''.«nt^f which the eluld was, fell and injured 
 
 «luS'r fu^ ''• ""' ;\ 'l"estion for the jury 
 iite, ,' V ""';''"'■ ''^" ^"t'">«t any aetivi 
 
 ^t^'' V" t''« child's part; if so, that in 
 'tsUf «.is evidence of negligence; but if not, 
 
 piscovery — Exammatloi,.]~\^ a .'eneral 
 rule, an mtant, party t,> an action, may now be 
 exanime,, by the opposite party for ,liscovery 
 before the trial nn,ler Rule 4,S7, L the same way 
 as an a,lu t. Ma:i„r v. CoHi,,.., 24 y. Ji. |). ;j(ii 
 • listiiiguishe.l. Aniohl v. I'tantn; 14 P. R. .SOo! 
 
 Malpmctiee -AMica/ I'rwtitioKn—Limita- 
 t.on 0, ^r/,o..s]-An action for nialpracUce 
 
 against a registere.l me er of the Colle-e of 
 
 1 liysicians and Surgeons of Ontario was bnui-ht 
 
 j 1 1 ellects ot the treatment ,leveloped, but more 
 , than a year from the date when tne professional 
 sei'viees terminated :— 
 
 Held, that the ai^tion was barred uii.hr the 
 , (n.tario .Medical Act, R. ,S. (.. di. 148, sec 40 
 I Infancy ,l,>es not prevent tlie running of the 
 ; statute. Mill, ,- y. A>v.so//, 22 O. R. :m. 
 
 : Mortgage.] -In a mortgage acti,.n for fore- 
 e osure although it may be that since the 
 levolution ot hstates Act, as a matter of title 
 h..,tnrf H •^"•"I'l'^t^^ith the general a.lniin' 
 1st atorof thedcceaseilouner of the e,|uitv of 
 redemption as the s,.le delendant ; yet as a 
 matter of proce,;,:re, the infant cliihlrcn 'of the 
 oece;.-H.d are pr,.per j.arties, ami as such should 
 appe u :,3 original defemlants, un],. some crocl 
 reas,)n ■ xists lor excbMling them " 
 
 !rv.S!up!Vii..""' ""''''-'- "-^ - 
 
 Mortgage. ]-In a morig.-.gc action, vht,- 
 
 j possession IS claimed, the wnt of summons n. cl 
 
 , not be served personally ,ui the infant heirs 
 
 of the mortgagor, if they are not personally in 
 
 I possession. .Spnrkx v. I'lmh/, l", p. R. ]. ' 
 
 ; Mortgage. ]-Infants are bouml by a jud-ment 
 
 ; for possession against executors in a mortgage 
 
 ac.on. hey. v. Codd n P. R. bS.', distil.- 
 
 guislieil. Juiierson v. Iluiniihrki, 13 P. R. §4. 
 
 . Nf>xt Prlena Fo,r;;,i,,, - s.nmtu M 
 
 „^t'^~ ^'^'""1 '''","'"- '' '"'"'^ ■>'"''■ cause of 
 action are privilege.l suitors ; ami the same rule 
 as to security for costs sliouKl not be applied as 
 in the case of adults. ' * 
 
507 
 
 INJUNCTION. 
 
 If! 
 
 ■'ji i 
 
 m: 
 
 I' 
 
 If tlio next friend of tlu- infant idniiitiUs, 
 l)('UiK the ii^Miiral giiar.liaii, is witliiu the jiu-is- 
 ilictKiii u heu (lie ai'tioii U begun, ami so coii- 
 tiiiiKs iyi„l. ,ie iit^^^ the Court will not ton 
 ani loiisly ser'itinize the tenure of his residenee. 
 
 .'Vid when, tlie infant i>laii)!irts and their 
 iiiitnralguanlJanund uexl friendwerelor i-ners, 
 and eanie within the jurisdiction merely I tr the 
 puriiose of bringing the actions, but e'ontiu'ied 
 therein up to th • time of an aiiplieation for 
 security for costs, I'.d it appe.'f ,! ; :,at thcv had 
 a /'0«i?./rV/.' cause o: ;; tion, an -■.;.. -taying pro- 
 ceedings until a leu next friend n :, idn the juris- 
 dicnion should lie found, was rever.»'..(l. >'. (t y 
 XUfjat-ii Xitrii/iilion Cx, ]', V. R. J(,rt' Aliirmed 
 1,'y the Kivisiouul Couit, 15 P. H. iDC). 
 
 Next Friend— /,',;/(■,■,'»;,'///■ oi— Ulnrhoi i- 
 SuliCit,,,:, ,w6 to /'/•orto/.]-Ulionapplieatior to 
 tiii- Court therefor the next friend of an infant 
 pliiitirt' may \.^ allo\v(rd to withdraw, ut-on 
 3«<.'i ferins as tlu, ..•ircuinstanees of the case and 
 t))C welf.irc of tile infant may recjuire. 
 
 _"-(jIicitor.-! b'gan an action in the nanip of n;; 
 1!. > lit as pl.i^utifFby her mother as next friend 
 with the consent of the latter. After the 
 ftf-tioii had Ijcen some time in progress th- 
 mother wiote a letter to the solicito'r revoking 
 the authority to use her name, to which thev , 
 replied that proceedings would not be staye'd 
 uii ess she paid costs uj) to date, and that if she I 
 did not do so they would assume that she ! 
 mteniled them to c.ntiiiue the action. She ! 
 took no notice of this and thev went on with i 
 Bome proceedings, whereupon "the defendant ' 
 instructed by the inuther, niove<l to iHsmi-^s the I 
 action on the ground that it was being prose- 
 cuted without authority, and asked for costs 
 against the solicitms : — 
 
 Held, in staying the iiroceedings, tliat there 
 was nothing to prevent the mother from 
 renotincing her character of next friend and 
 withdrawing from the litigation, subject to her 
 remaining amenable to the jurisdiction of the 
 Court as to liability for costs theretofore 
 incurred. 
 
 As to costs : — 
 
 Held, that tlie Court roaches the soh'citors of 
 a plaintift directly for the benefit of the defen- 
 dant only where the plaintiff as client has a 
 right to lie recouped by the solicitor, and to 
 the extent of that recoupment. The next friend 
 here was liable to the solicitor for costs up to 
 her letter, and the solicitor was liable to the 
 next triend for costs subsequent thereto ; and as 
 the former costs exceeded the latter, and, as 
 between the next friend and the defendant, the 
 former was liable for costs so long as she (li<I not 
 make a direct ai)plication against the solicitors, 
 no order could be made in favour of the defen- 
 dant ; l"-'- the next friend was entitled f be 
 mdenini!!. ? by the solicitors for costs incm . ■' 
 after !■■ ■ ;,• tor :— 
 
 H la .-o, that it was competent for i 
 defendant to move to stay the proceedings, 
 although the normal practice is for the iie' s, 
 friend to move. Taylor \\ Wood,Ul\ K 44i 
 
 508 
 
 n.'tiiigtruateohe wc.it int.. possession of a fun,, 
 !»l..ng:i!,,; to the estate •■uid remained in i„wJ 
 M. !) f^vcr t^venty years, ;,,u.: i:ntil the period of 
 ui-ftri;)rtion nmh.r the .;!;.ue tibove set „,' 
 8. .iveo and then .laime,, , . have a title „,,|..; 
 tiii> it.itnK ot liibitatioii;- . 
 
 Held, .•dlirmi.ig the A- \^.,n of tiie Court of 
 Aji|.i:-il. Kill) iioiii. Wriuht \. Hell, Is \ p 
 -T), tnat .18 he held under an express trust in' 
 the term!, of the will tlie rights of the otli,.',. 
 devisees could not be barred' by the statuto 
 
 Itouiiht, -i V. Av//, •_';{, s, c. J!. i;ks. 
 
 ,WiU-/;Vpc(/^Of.i-Agrant of probate to a,, 
 iiiiawt executor along with, an adult is not , 
 nullity. Otnu.iiwj V, Um/ed IhuthiiH, and 
 Loan ( ■„.. -20 V. U. 38-', anie 442. 
 
 S(e .'^l.MlTATION (11- AfTION.S, Jl., Id. 
 
 j INFORMATION. 
 
 Information by Attorney-General under 
 
 Civil Code -.V,.. Ca.^,jr,nn v. All.oUi, and 
 
 , A orlh. \ ,.! A'. II . Co., [ 1S!).-.J A. (;. -s- „w. (i;i 
 
 o'Kl JJoiHtinun .Salmiji' and Wvtrkiwi Co v 
 
 i'/ornei/-aeuL-rid of Canada, 21 .S (' p '-.)' 
 
 |.";7HJ3. ■ V. 1.. ,., 
 
 information of Intrusion— O/*)- to ll,(o,i- 
 'y - Aj>propri,il6 HtmHlii-s to Ijp A.^hd for 
 J/„-r,,n.\~An order directing the .lefendant to 
 reconvey the lan.l is not an appro,,riate part of 
 the ivniedy tobe given upon an intorniatiun of 
 mtrusion. J /,c <,)uetu v. Kincell, ;j Kx. r. K. 
 
 iVcc. ri/.so. T/ii' Quei'ii v. Fi-iher -^ l-'v c « 
 3(i,-., ante 4-.'l. " '^• 
 
 INFRINGEMENT. 
 
 .Vec Pate.st for Inve.ntio.v 
 
 INJUNCTION. 
 
 Will— Dtsclaimrr — /'o.Me.s'siot of Land.]— 
 A son of the testator and one of tlie executors 
 aiul trustees named in a will was a minor when 
 his father died, and after coming of r„rp he n^-vci- 
 applied for probate, thougii he knew°of the will 
 and did not disclaim. With the consent of the 
 
 Costs of Unnecessary Injunction Motion.) 
 -^te .Wif^i/cy V. Cranston, 22 O. 11. ,i9(», auf 
 
 Damages in Lieu of.]— The plaintiff liavin. 
 failed to prove actual damage for the diversioS 
 ot a watercourse, was allowed noniiual dam- 
 ag. ■ In- the wrong ; and instead of grantiiiL' a 
 n;... , ,.ory injunction to compel the restoration 
 ot ■ : , itercourse, the Court directed a refer- 
 eoct ;o , scertain the compensation to which the 
 I' . oiQ would be entitled !vs upon an authorized 
 I -sion of the watercourse under 51 Vict cli 
 . , .-oc. 9(t, su)j-sec. h(l).). T<dtou v. Canadian 
 t'licijiv R. W. ('-., 22 O. R. 204. 
 
 ^ataages in Lieu of.]-The mode of com- 
 ic u ., damages to be allowed in lieu of an 
 ir ;'c; TMu considered. 
 
 .;-..Krment of the Queen's Bench Division, L'5 
 ' '. K,, affirmed. Arthur v. Grand Trunk 
 k. . ,'o., 22 A. R. 89. 
 
 Damages— Undertaking— DUnm^l of A dim 
 at IrKil-JieJiiml of lief'-rence as to Dama:jei.\- 
 
509 
 
 ^ IJossession of a farj,, 
 ' iiMiiained in jimmscs- 
 : until tile ptMioil i,f 
 :i\'o alwve set uia 
 liave a title irid. r 
 
 ^ giant of i)rol)ate to hu 
 '.Mtli an adult is mt a 
 Liiiuled liaithiiHi iiiid 
 , avXe ■i4'J. 
 
 !■ Actions, II., m. 
 
 torney-General under 
 
 f.«y;v(//( V. Allnntir „«,/ 
 
 1S'J.")JA. (.'. L'Sl', <i/((Mi:j, 
 
 «/((/ Wrtckinn ('o. v. 
 
 ;»(((!;((, 21 .S. c. H. 7'j 
 
 uslon— O/'rfo- to h'l'coii- 
 I'thi'-s to hp Axb'd for 
 noting the ilefeiidant to 
 an ap)jr()])riate jiart ot 
 upon an iiit'iiniiatiun of 
 V. Farwell, :{ l^x. ('. K. 
 
 V. /'.'.-.Aer, 'J Kx. c. K, 
 
 t Invention. 
 
 ' Injunction Motion.] 
 on, 22 O. li. ,-)90, ,;„(f 
 
 i's Bench Division, 25 
 »(>• V. Grand Trunk 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 Tli« jurisdiction to award an en.,uiiy as to or 
 I., :u,ses8 damages without a recrenee whero 
 
 «boexerci.e^ju^ic;;:;:si;:.;rr^7 
 
 \Vliere. in an action to «et aside a sale of 
 goods as fraudulent, a claim for .iamaues 1 v 
 reason of an injunction was set un i h, ^ 
 fence, and the trial Jmlge wasron'V . :.>-' ' 
 of opinion that no daiiiaL'e was rirr.vw. I ' 
 
 .i^med Uy the injunction t Zi Kt from X 
 denmen arising fn.m the litigation a ,'! 
 a.i.iitiona evidence having |,een lIv,. f 
 divisional Court, under tfc Ji:L,^;:i2:es':^ 
 
 ...Iw.r,. ti, If, ^"^""istances of 
 Mlicre the defendant was .'i yen l,ia 
 
 II, 
 III. 
 
 J'V. 
 V. 
 
 :i. 
 
 VI. 
 
 -Mai:im; Insiuam 
 
 tliis 
 
 ««t8, although hi8condu''ct"had hee.r such « 
 properly to provoke legal enquiry, n-M Z 
 aivHrd a reference as to dama.'e^ V" /, 
 .l/(in-,(i/, 21 O. i;. 458. "'^'»'^«'^s- (-'autt v. 
 
 Duration ot—Undn-taH-iiia—" /.',»„/ n- 
 
 '^''fth.Acno,r'-j„a,Zt iC'-f^l^T 
 
 ^\i.eiean injunction is granted " until fl,.-^ 
 
 orotherii^uUdispositioi^ofth .'St'.Sl 
 furtliur order," or an iin<!..rf.,l.;.. ■ ' "^"""1 
 
 that etfect, it 'remai s i K'^i^'^il'^.i^'^''^" ■ '" 
 
 i^linaily disposed of or u i 1 ,„ , ot ' "'"i"" 
 
 S^ina/tErt'^'::S'r''^'"^^''"^' 
 
 the., it cannot h--"''' ■''"'"'"•''^ ""**' 
 
 lllUllt 
 
 A 
 
 t.'iiiiei 
 
 (liUltS 
 
 other final disp'osition 
 
 furt' 
 
 aftf 
 
 til 
 
 (iftli 
 
 Coil 
 
 -ta should become entitlefu.^Sr Jl^S" ' "" ^'"'^^-' "''J-t oi .ta 
 »"'l by so doing put an end to llie ini me! n i! 
 a^ordance witli its terms. ( •arrutl v / ' • 
 
 INSPECTOR OF PRISONS. 
 
 *;(' I.lNArn;. 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 I. I.N.sniiANCK CO.MPAMKS, .-,10. 
 
 A(;ulflKXT iNtiCKANCE, 01 |. 
 
 FlRK InsI-KANCH, .-l.'i. 
 Ol!AI!A\TV I.N-.SrUANCK, r,2l. 
 LiKK I.VSUHANC'K. 
 
 1. -i^'oi'lani-r and Forfeit, u-e, r,2\. 
 
 2. For llnr.jit of ICVev and Children, 52:}. 
 
 SIO 
 
 'axes, 528. 
 •"'.'{2. 
 
 , - • , "' 'J<-'cause until 
 
 IJU certain what the final i.,d>r. 
 
 J- iN^l-CANCi; C.IMfANJKS. 
 
 
 ■li. I>..mi„i„„ lVto,li," ' ' ' ";',""?' "'"I"- 
 
 "-iiiaiS.¥r,:ii^iC'-[^-'"*-'."} 
 
 Jl^Pamy, and from attacking tie v. k/^'^' 
 their appointment. Re CuUral lin,tln^ "^ 
 ^- <-'^nlrat Hank, 20 0. R VZ/j ' ^""^' '^«^•'"• 
 
 ic alleged o],ject ot"s°irtiii<r 
 
 c.e.,-,caih:dtL",„tei::;,:;;:t;iai 
 
 '""''in;:'^lt^'--'>^fi'^«i"theui' 
 
 111 tins 1 lovince induced 
 
 wliil 
 
 
 Sunday. |— 
 
 U'enlry 
 
 •153, 
 
 INN-KEEPER. 
 
 "S'ee Intoxicating Liqdors. 
 
 INSOLVENCY. 
 
 ^^^ JiANivHUlTCV AND InsoLVEN'CV. 
 
 'e defendant with 
 
 a branch of ii so- 
 
 l''rateriial Alli- 
 
 oited .States, 
 
 sons to make ap;,ii;.':tlo.',"f "'"' " 'V""'"^'' "^ Pe^" 
 
 i <lition to certain u ' e?I . l l"' "' "'^'' '" '"'- 
 ' =^ u.enibor on p ^{t 1 tbi^l f '"""'l "'""'''' 
 
 "'""^■1,V, a cert, i ate ^^titiu^:?;'''^''-^- '""'«'«. 
 -eokly payment in c, se ot^ck irs""';^'^': f "^ 
 and certa n (,thei- .,„,„■■ "'""'^''*' "' accident 
 
 after a stated nod The'' I T% "^ '^'^''"' "■• 
 
 applicants a reee i .tkiu , i '^f':"'''T ^'^^''^ **"' 
 
 of the .*5 for, as ' ; f'u 'r'«"'^' *''*-• P'-'y'"^"'' 
 
 j ."an agreement wi'in;!;,':.S;V-'-"tioned 
 
 foruavd to the head olh,.c ' 
 I signature thereof and ,f i • ',' 
 amount paid • hut f , . '^'.■'"":'l '" return 
 
 constituted a, nenber ct '' " '.1''^ l"'>''"- ^"^ 
 bciietits of aU ocHI ;' ""l^'"'' *" the full 
 thereafter niSt s ci. ^^,"V,'"'^-'^"tages ; and 
 
 fits 0.1 applieit'tioirtlleieS -^^ ^'^'^""""•y »^"«- 
 
 obtained th^l.^^ rX™:!:';!:"^""' ''^^""« 
 to section 49 of the iLinC: ^^f's^r'T 
 tOat no p,.otectioii was affonledt 
 fraternal, etc.. societies. 
 
 iler, namely, to 
 application on 
 
 j I'^-i; an(i 
 I section 4 
 
 relating to 
 
 ofthen,^iCse:c;:L;;^ir"nd'^/"'*^'i^- 
 
 ivtiy , and tlie conviction 
 
 the .scheme not bef „ "'!'^''''"'". '^tc., societi< 
 I of the me;^W I:r:.','.*f..:'^.",'"«»''a|"--« of the lives 
 
511 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 512 
 
 iilfi' 
 
 P 
 
 therefor of llHMlufeiwlant for canyiiiK on hmcIi ■ An or.lcr mis tliereforo made in n„ , i 
 
 Insurance Corporations Act, 1892~lii/,r;m 
 Ji,'mrer~Se,;irih/.]—A Master of the lli.'h 
 (,'ourt ha.s hd .mtliority under tli(! i)i(,visii)in of 
 "'Ibe Insurance ( 'orporations An, KSil'J," to 
 direct security to he given liyiiii ollie'ur ot'a'eoni- 
 paiiy heing wound uj), in place (jf an in-sutlicient 
 security already given l.y sucl. ollieer. Section 
 .)4, sub-sect loiiH o and 7, merely provide for the 
 giving of security as interim receiver, wliicli 
 Jnay be made a condition of retention in that 
 office, Imt default in giving which cannot l)e 
 punished by ini|)risoMnient for coiitenii)t. 7,'e 
 Jhmiiiiion Pi-oridnif. Bei.ivnli'ni, (inil Endow- 
 vieiit AK!<oci(i/ioii, '24 0. R. 41(i. 
 
 Insurance Corporations Act, 1892— /'oirt'i-< 
 
 oj M(t-<tvr-Cr(dilors\ScluduUH--t\mh-ihulorhW 
 i>r/,edu!,.s.]—l lie Ontario Legislature lias iiower 
 to confer upon the Master the powers given l)y 
 ' I he Insurance Corporations Act, l,S9i>/' 
 
 The Master has po\Ner under thiit AJt to set- 
 tle schedules of creditors, which ini!)lies power 
 til adjudicate upon the claims of olHcials of a 
 couipany for services to ascertain whether they 
 siiall appear as creditors in the schedules ; but 
 lie cannot adjudicate upon the question whether 
 they have been guilty of such cou.luct as de- 
 prives them of their right to claim as creditors. 
 
 He has also power to settle scherlules of con- 
 tnbutories, but cannot adjudicate upon the 
 question whether officials of the company have 
 been guilty of such a breach of duty as to make 
 tliem liable for any loss by reason thereof. Such 
 matters can only be determined by action. y?e 
 JJomi>iio7i Provident, Bevevolmd, and Endomm-iit 
 AsKociation, 25 O. K. 019. 
 
 ; Employers Liability Policy— ro^v, »/,>,„ 
 \~-U>„ihtwii Ihfnirr „f Ar/loin /,n>,„,/i' '„, 
 
 I'-"!/.".'"""' I -'"an i-cli.,n upon an eiopl,,' ,.,'' 
 
 liability policy, thereby the -lefendants Ji,,d 
 ;to jiay the plaiiiliir all sums up to a r,'i,„ 
 : limit and full costs of suit, if jinv, i„ r^^uur „f 
 
 wlinh the plaiiitilf siiouid become liable t., his 
 , eiiii.l(,yees tor injuries received whilst in jiij 
 
 servic, subject to the condition, amongst otla-i. 
 
 that "It any irroveediugs be tak,:n i„ ,,„f„|„: 
 
 any claim, the company shall have tlic alwnlnt,. 
 , cou.luct and control of ,l„f,.nding the samo 
 I tlirongliout, III the name and on lieliali uf th,. 
 
 eiii]ih.yer, retaining or employing tliiir „«„ 
 
 solicitors and counsel therefor : "— 
 
 Held, that tlie plaintilf was not entitlr^l i,. 
 
 j the face „t such a stipulation, to claim finn.'tl,' 
 
 , <leteiidaiits the amount of a judgment ol,tni„,,i 
 
 [against him by an emi)loyee in an action ,1,. 
 
 tended by the: plaintilf through his own soli,it„r 
 
 and counsel, leaving the defiiiidaiits to slie« v 
 
 a defence or by way of counterclaim th.,t >li,v 
 
 cou.d have done better by defending it tliuie 
 
 selves ; nor was an offer by the jilaiiitiir ,t , 
 
 time when the action was at issue and on tl- 
 
 peremptory list for trial the f.dlowing ,lav t'.. 
 
 Iiand over the defence to the defendants <'nii,i 
 
 tors a sulhcient compliance with the condition 
 
 ZnJ' ;¥."«"/'■«'<"'•"•'•' Accident In.mraiK-, Co. 
 
 c ^^^ of Policy. ]_,Sfe Bud- v. KnoirUon, 21 
 ^. Vj. K. ,ii\, ante 6. 
 
 II. Accident In.sukancb. 
 
 Employer's Liability Pollcy-C'oM.sCnjcC/on 
 -ImUmmni.]-\ he plaintiff sued for a personal 
 11 jury which by l„s statement of claim he 
 alleged he had received, when acting as con- 
 ductor of a street railway car operated by the 
 defendants, by reason (,f the negligence of a 
 servant of the defendants, who .4s ddviiu. a 
 scavenger waggon used by the defendants. The 
 company who had operated the railwa- before 
 the defendants assumed it, were insured ag.dnst 
 all sums for which they shouk - • liable to 
 any employee- in their service, wl.de engaged in 
 their work. The insurance policy was assigned 
 to the defendants when they assumed the rail- 
 \»ay. Ihe defendants served on the insurance 
 company a third party notice claiming in- 
 demnity : — ° 
 
 Held, that the policy did not cover injuries 
 accruing by reason of the negligence of the de- 
 tendants or their servants in other branches of 
 their service ; and that the insurance company 
 ^houl.l not he kept before the C<mrt on the 
 chance of .a different state of facts being de- 
 veloped at the trial from that which the plaintiff 
 
 Immediate Notice of Death— Wairrr-Ex- 
 ''''■'itU Injur,e.i Produriii,/ /■:n/.,i,,el,,.,^^Pr>,.riml, 
 or ~We Cav.e of JM,lh.]-An accident polia- 
 issued by the ai.pellants, was payable in ,■;..,: 
 inter ;,;; , " the bodily injuries alone shall \v.m 
 occasio ,e.l death within ninety days fmm the 
 happening thereof, and provided that the iiisur- 
 ance should not extend to hernia, etc., nnr to 
 any bodily injury happening directly or iii,li. 
 rectly in consequence of disease, or to any lUali 
 or disability which may have been caused' wiu.llv 
 or in part by bodily intirmitiesor di..<ease exist- 
 ing prior or subsequent to the date of this con- 
 tract, or by the taking of poison or by aiiv 
 surgical operation or medical or mechanical 
 treatment, nor to any case except where the 
 injury aforesaid is the proximate or sole cause 
 of the disability or death." The policy also 
 provided that in the event of any accident or 
 injury for which claim may be made under the 
 jiolicy, immediate notice must be given in writ- 
 ing addressed to the manager of the company 
 at Montreal, stating full name, occupation ml 
 address of the insured, with full particulars of 
 the accident and injury ; and failure to give 
 such immediate written notice, shall invalhlate 
 all claims under the policy. On the -Jlst March, 
 ISHb, the insured was accidently M-ouiided in 
 the leg liy falling from a verandah and within 
 tour or hve days the wound, which npiicared at 
 lirst to be a slight one, was complicated hv 
 erysipelas, from which death ensued on the IStii 
 ot April following. The local agent of the 
 coni])any at Simcoe, Ontario, received awrittni 
 notice of the accident some days before the 
 death, but the notice of the aceid'eiit aiul death 
 was only sent to the company on tiie i.'!)tli Apiih 
 and the notice was only received at Montreal on 
 the 1st of May. The manager of the comiianv 
 
512 
 
 •(.■fori! niiide in Clmnilier* 
 I purty tioticf. /■■.•,•.»,*„', 
 I'. I!. 3M. 
 
 Ilty Policy— ro;(,/,» 7;,,,, 
 iij' Ar/ioii'i tiviiiiiihi 1,1/ 
 lidii iiiKUi an piM|ilir,(.| ', 
 I'.V tlic (IcffinliiiitN iimtfil 
 ill Slims lip to a ciTtiiiii 
 suit, if .-uiy, ill ix.^|n.,.( „f 
 
 >lllll bflMllIlL! iialilc tu ins 
 
 '« riicuiviil wliiJMt in lii« 
 .•(iiiditioii, aiiKiii^sl (itlii'i^ 
 
 illgS )„. tlli<.'|l l„ ,.|if„Hv 
 
 ly sliiill liiivo liie jiJisuiiitt. 
 «f (Icftiiiliiig til,' .simp 
 no ami dii lioliali of iiii. 
 '!• eiiiployiiii,' till if ,,«„ 
 heret'or : " — 
 titf_M-as not t'lititji.j. iii 
 iliitioii, to claim fi.iin'ili,. 
 t of a ju(l','iiiciit olit.iini;.! 
 iplovff ill an actidii ilf. 
 tliroiigh his own solicitor 
 e (IffiMidants to slirw as 
 i comiturflaiiii tli.it they 
 • by (Icffndiii^r it tlKiiI. 
 ^■r by the filaiiitiir, ,;t ;i 
 was at issue and au tb: 
 111 the following,' dny, to 
 :o the defendant's snliii 
 aiiee with tlio uonditii.n. 
 ■1' Accident Iiiminiiici- Co. 
 
 of Death— n'a!ir)-~K:c- 
 <il I'^yxifKlds^Priixiniuk 
 'i.]-An accident policy 
 :s, was payable in casf, 
 injuiies alone sliall liuve 
 n ninety days from tlie 
 provided that tlie iiisur- 
 . to hernia, etc., nor to 
 pening directly or iiidi- 
 disease, or to any di-atli 
 have been caused" wliolly 
 rinitiesor disease, exist- 
 to the date of tliis con- 
 g of poison or by iiliv 
 medical or inctluiiioal 
 case excc])t wliere the 
 iroxiniate or sole e.iiist- 
 i;ath." 'i'he policy .also 
 ■ent of any accident or 
 nay be made iiuder the 
 ; must be given in writ- 
 anager of the company 
 ' name, occnpatioii aii'l 
 with full particiiiars of 
 y ; and failure to give 
 notice, shall invalidate 
 jy. On the -Jlst March, 
 accidently wounded in 
 a verandah and witliiii 
 .uid, which appeared a! 
 e, was complicated hy 
 !eath ensued on the ISth 
 he local agent of tlie 
 ario, received a written 
 some days before the 
 tliH accident .-iimI death 
 ipaiiy on the 'JOtluVpril, 
 received at Montreal on 
 mager of the coiniiaiiy 
 
 513 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 .icknow ledge.1 receipt of proofs of death wliich 
 weresubscjuently sent witlioiit compj, ,-^ ' 
 want o notice and ultimately decline I'p, J 
 the clt 11,1 01. the ground that the ileath u^ 
 caused by .liscase, ami therefore the co ,„mv 
 cmild not recognise their liability. At t lie r [l 
 there wa« conHicting evidence as to whet itr t lie 
 eryaipelas resulted solely from the wou 1 1 I ^ 
 th Co,,„.t found on the facts that the ery pel J 
 followe.1 as a direct result from the e-c ern 1 
 mjury On appeal to the Supreme Court I ' 
 Held reversing the jmlgment of the Court \ 
 below hourn.er and I'atters.m, J.J., diLent Z i 
 tha the company had not received sTiti,.,*:; 
 notice -if the death to satisfy tl>n\.t «"""-'"'''t 
 
 o|tiuM.oiicy and that t?:;^,£,jr";i:;:;'ti^ 
 
 claim on other gioumls there l,a,l 1 ee^, „ 
 waiver ot any objection which they lia.lar <rl t 
 to urge 111 this ii't'ard, •' ^"^ 
 
 I'er .Strong, Fournier, and PatterHnn rr 
 that the external injury was the , Ste ' oi- 
 »olecause of death within the mevuiin f thi 
 
 514 
 ;.".ic; n,.i.iiiiy „„„„„„,' ,,„r ;,,",■, 1," 
 
 pose there is such a cli'i,,,,., / ! P"' " 
 
 i-.validate i.isui!^ es lei 1 •" hi'' '''■'^''- '"' ,'" 
 '^•'«e"oe of notification of t. ', a, ,':";'" ""; 
 a-sciit by. the insurance c. p.- 1 ."rho, 1. TC 
 men.bers of the partnership hoi, ,'..,. .''t "t 
 «tock 1.1 the limited liabilit'v conipan ^^ 
 
 Pe^^hen V. Vi>„ MnuUFir. U..Co., ISA. 
 
 HI. Fire Insuranci;. 
 
 S; ;;;;y;r:v^'s,;;iSr;-»'"«* 
 
 !:^ii;lfd™l,r^"^'*"°"'^^^^->-"«"-S 
 
 A'„ce V. .J ../...,„„ 1. , i^_ 2J3_ Mh^^,^^. 
 
 IS a first p.iyment on the 
 "-■'ore th... date ti.o : f„, ti„, ,.,„„. 
 
 *■'"' ' .n Was de- 
 s before the 
 
 '■■*"», 14 A. 
 
 o'^tS:''" '"'■^'"'''^ "^^ -'^ 
 
 iiiraiice 
 
 .«|Sz;ss=£::'S;^ -'»■■; 
 
 J 'iov S th« "!'*''^'"''^ '-i"'! indorsed on the 
 
 i-.i^nhl:i,;:ati<^,-tg^ejiuii^, 
 
 insurance cm sJ, "^'^'Sn'nent S. ha.l other I 
 
 ^'I'iH.did tpiiffir-^' "-'^ I"'""«^ "f- 
 ""t proinbit their assignmer.\ : »,e 
 
 :ofacl.u^Mhe',;:t;r';:trt,''''''t'"''''''« 
 with the tduii^dnva Icn. t .^ tr'''n "«'■""' 
 inl-iat a lixclsun ■' *'''^'-' "'^^ "I'l '"ater 
 
 contract, and 
 mencement of the w..rk 
 
 ■..."'ill;. ™.'„..;s"",i,'J':;,„r'r"""'»" "' «» 
 
 I'buntitis were therefo; , . u I'J 1 . 
 •. — u. u. ,,_'». 6ee the next case. 
 
 Jiulgmeut of MacMahoii, J., 22 R r^oq 
 "rt.rn.ed. ArdUl v. Clthn^ Ins.CoAdifl' 
 AAna. Im. Co., 20 A. R. 605. " '• 
 
 ' the ■oiuent of H,» " assignable without 
 
 U"d that an , TP'^'y •""'"'■^'^'l t'>^''-eon; 
 inat all c umbrances efFeoted by the 
 
515 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 n/ii'd witliiii tifuiii ilays 
 
 fjfif 
 
 aMU' : 
 thi '■ rfiui 
 
 Hulil, r. ivsi,'^ the tli'cisioii of tliu Suurcitio 
 Court of .Nova Scofia, tluit giving a . Imltfl 
 iMi.rtgiige on the pioiicrty iiixiiicd was not a 
 HiiU: Of traii.Mftr within the nif.ining of tiiis con- 
 dition, liiit it w.it a "iliango of title" wiiieh 
 avojdi'il the policy. 
 
 Soi; niijii lux. Co. v. I'eltrs, 12 S. C. 11. Xi, 
 distinguislu'd : — 
 
 Hrid, furtlitT, that m ; ... ,in rnibran« i> 
 «!vin if thi' condition meant an iiicumhranuu on 
 the i)oliey. C'iVr.cH.v' Ins. Co. v. Suit: riu, US S. 
 
 v.n. 15,-.. 
 
 Description— .Vf)7'/j lli(i/<liiiij—Anni'X.]—The 
 nsyliuii for tho insane, London, consists of a 
 centre Imildiiig containing all necessary acconi- 
 inodatioii for patients, etc., and a kitchen, 
 lunndry and en;.'ine-rooni, hniit of liriek and 
 roofed with slal •, sitnate some tifty feet to 
 tho rear of the middle of the centre Imild- 
 ing, and connected with it hy a jiassago or 
 covered vay, with lirick walls about ten feet 
 high, and also roofed with slate and with a 
 tramway to convey food from the kitchen to 
 the southern portion of the centre huihling. A 
 policy of insurance ugains tire insured the 
 " main Ijuilding" : — 
 
 Meld, atlirndng the judgment of the C'onrt of 
 Appeal and of the Divisional t'onit, that the 
 policy covered the kiteh n, laundry and engine- 
 room ^L'riia flit. Co. V. Attoriiey-Oi'iitnil of 
 Ontario, IS.S. C. R. 707. 
 
 516 
 
 matter was one for the jury w ho had proi,„iiii,,,,| 
 upon It:— ' 
 
 Held, further, thiU tho canvasser who SKiircl 
 the a|.plication could not I i.g'ar.led ns a-..,,, 
 of the assured, hut was th, ,ij,',iit of Wn- u„n 
 puny whicli was honnd l.y his acts, (.'imnli,,,, 
 Ins. Co. v. I'onmly, 20 S. C. R. 20S. 
 
 Divided Risk /\;,/„>i-lm,i of Los^.U^su 
 
 : tutory ,ondit,on ii of the ()nt;irio Insnr.n,',. 
 
 .■\cl. provides that in the event of thciv l„„,', 
 
 llhall'"o'nT'''l'''r'V;"/''" I"-"l'"'-ty. tl>« coi-piny' 
 ! shall only he liahle for the pavmeut of a ru .1,1,. 
 
 IP''>l""ti if 1 lie loss or, lama .. 
 
 j I'laintillhad insured his huildhig against tin- 
 
 I in two (Inlerent eompanirs in separate aianiu.ts 
 
 lor tie trout and rear portions, and th.- wh,,l,'. 
 
 Imildmg, without .livision, in a third coinp.uiv 
 
 A (ire took place, damaging hoth front and rci.V 
 
 M.'l( , that the proper method of ascertaiiii,,,, 
 the relatnc amounts payable l.y tl,.- dilleien 
 companies was to add the amount o; all th.' 
 policies together without reference to tlie.livi 
 sion of the risks, and that each .■omiiaiiv H .s 
 liable tor its relative jiroportion to th.' wli.,],. 
 iinioiiiil insured. .McCuu.-,laiul v. Umh.r /•■;,■,-' 
 /«,<. Co., ■_>.-. (). il. 330. 
 
 Inconuiarism.] — Sec l!„unl f,n. Co v 
 y>»//«.s, ISS. C. R. 711, ante 28. 
 
 Description — /fe/trencc to P/aih-Variniice 
 
 ~fa/.ia Dimoiislratio mm Xocet — Canru ■> ,■ 
 -—.\<iuicij.] —An insurance policy describe.l 
 the goods insiire.l as stock, consisting of dry 
 goods, etc., while coiuain.d in that one and 
 a half story frame building oupied as a store 
 house, said b,.a.ling shew- .>n plan rm bnck of 
 application as "feed hous. ituate atta. bed to 
 wood-«!u(l of assured's dwelling-house, 'i'he 
 plan referred to had been made by a i.'anvasser 
 for insurance, who had obtaineil the applica- 
 tion, and tl,n building on said plan niark.'d 
 "feedl'.oc, did not in ani lesiiecl; eonfo i. 
 to the deseripti,,,, i„ the poi. y, but another 
 building tlitreoa answere.l the desciiption in 
 every way except as to the desi'i.iition "feed' 
 house." The gr.ods insured y. , ■ stored in this 
 latter building aii.l w 
 refused to pay, allegi 
 in the policy that" 
 
 burnt. 
 
 rearli 
 
 tla. 
 -aid 
 ilildiii. 
 
 The coni]) my 
 ■f a condition 
 ible materials 
 iiises, as well 
 
 ontaining the 
 
 should be stored on t 
 as misdescription of t) 
 goods insured. 
 
 in an action on the ))o!icy it .xpi)oared that a 
 barrel of oil w>is in the building marked "feed ' 
 house"' at the time of the tire. | 
 
 The jury found a verdict for the i)laintitr and 
 a non-suit, moved for pursuant to leave reserved, ' 
 •was refused by the full Court :— [ 
 
 Held, that the non-suit was rightly refused ; 
 that it was evident that the building in which 
 the goods were store.l was that intended to be 
 • 'escribed in the policy: that the building 
 inarked " feed house " being detached from that 
 in which the goods were was a suitable place 
 for storing oil, which, therefore, was not a 
 lirea.."!! of the condition; that the case was a 
 proper one for the apiilication of the maxim 
 J'aka demonstratio non nocet, but if not, the 
 
 Insurable Interest -Co«(/iV(0)i hi /'■ilin,-. 
 Jrai,.->Jcr liij limmr -~i n^iirain'v In, ()//„.,■ :i„.. 
 tie.^.]-Aii agreement by which -M.'uiider*. , to 
 cut and store ice, provided : -That „ r, 
 houses iind all implements were to \„ „■ nr,, 
 perty of 1'., «|„. after the .■omph.t,,,,, „f the 
 contract was to convey same to M., .-md tliat.M 
 was to deliver said ice to vessels to be sent |,v 
 I ., who was to be obliged to a.'cept only gooa 
 merchantable ice so delivercl an.l st(.red "i'he 
 ICC was cut and stored, and M. effected iiisiir- 
 ance thereon ,ind o, i ho buildings and tools, 
 in the application for insurance, in answer to 
 the (juestion " J)oes the property to be i„.Mire,l 
 belong exclusively to the applicant, oi is it held 
 in trust, or on commission, or as mort'-agee'" 
 the written reply was "Yes, to applicuit'.' 
 I At t!-j ..ml of die application was a declaration 
 tliat the f .regoiiig is a just, full aii.l true 
 exposituai ot all the facts anrl eircnii„t;uices 
 in regard to the condition, situiition and valia- 
 aie! risk ot property to bo insured so far .is 
 th, same are known to the appli.'aiit ami 
 (ire material to the risk." The pn.iiertv was 
 destroyed by fire, an.l payment of the insurant- 
 was ••■fused on the ground that tlie jnoi.ertv 
 beh.ii_,, d t.) P., ami not to M. the insmv.l. oii 
 the trial ol in action on the poli,'y the .lefeii- 
 I dants also sought to prove that 1'. "hml etfected 
 insurance on the ice, and that und.r a coii.htiou 
 of the pcjhcy the amount of M.'s ,1,. ces, if he 
 was entitled to recover, sliouhl h,- i.'luced by 
 such insurance by P. This ,lefence was not 
 pleadcl. The policies to 1'. were not iir.uhieed 
 at the trial, and verbal evidence ,.f the cuitciits 
 was received subject to objection. A venlitt 
 was given in favour of M. for the full amount of 
 his policy : — 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 jjelow, that the property in the ice was in .\1. ; 
 that it was the buildings and inii.lements only 
 which were to be the property of P. under the 
 
516 
 
 jury who Imd i)ioii,,iiii.(;,| 
 
 ho cnnvasscrwIioHii.uri'.l 
 lot 1 I cn'anhd nn iiy..at 
 i til. agnit of thtuirn- 
 hy liitt iictM, (luiudiaii 
 S. C. R, -JOS. 
 
 i/ioiiioii of /v(M<,)— sta- 
 tho Ontario IiiHiiiaiii.o 
 If tvi'iit of thi'iv l,,.]iK, 
 property, Iho foil |,„iy 
 lie imyiiieut of a riitiiljlc 
 ■ (laiiiii.. . 
 Iiis Imililiiig ai,'aiiist (ire 
 
 ii's ill sopar^iti: a iints 
 
 portioiiH, luid the wjioje 
 on, in a tliinl (.■oiiipmiv. 
 iiij; liotli front and ifiiV, 
 ng done to the ivni' ;_ ' 
 nu'tlKid of asceitaininL' 
 lyable l,y tl,.' dilLTcn; 
 till' anioniit oi all tJU' 
 t rt'fcMvncu to iliL' (livi- 
 Irit (.■acli coniiiaiiy »,,, 
 n ■portion to llir wlni; 
 iii.-liiiiil V. (^hicUr fii" 
 
 '.e liiiyal Ini 
 aiilt 28. 
 
 Co. 
 
 ■Cmtdilion in /',ili,'i/~ 
 ■iiimiicf 1,11 Olhir ',r. 
 rt-hieh M.'iindr.i. , ty 
 ided ;— That ,ia in 
 ta wore to lie liif pro- 
 tia- coinplctinii of tile 
 ino to M., and that M. 
 I vosSLds to he sunt liy 
 i to accept only gonil 
 3rcd and stcprc.l, Tliu 
 and .M. clfoctcd iiisiir- 
 ! Iniilding.s iuid tools, 
 isnrance, in aiiswor to 
 ropiM'ty to l)c iiisareii 
 iiliplicaut, 01 is it lifM 
 n, or as niortyayt'e?" 
 " Vcs, to applii'.uit ■' 
 tion was a dcclaratiun 
 I just, full and triiu 
 ;s an.'l circiiiiistances 
 n, situation and valui' 
 1)0 insiiri'd so f;ir as 
 ) tlio applicant, aii'l 
 The projjcrty was 
 nicMit of the insuraiK.'-' 
 id that the pioperty 
 M. the insnicd. tin 
 the policy the defeii- 
 that P. "had etftcte.i 
 hat under a coiulitioii 
 f M.'s (hi ai,'e,s, if he 
 lionld he leiiuueil by 
 Ilia defence was not 
 '. were not jUiiiliiced 
 deuce of tllu eoiitiiits 
 bjection. A verilict 
 or the full amount of 
 
 Igment of the Court 
 , the ice was in ,\1. ; 
 md ini|)lenient8 only 
 irty of P. nnder the 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 517 
 
 iJNHUKANOE. 
 
 518 
 
 r ';;::i':i;- tr J''^ *-- -■-" - - M. , , eo„ditio , ..at .t a„v ..o the. U . , 
 
 IK.l.i y ahoiild havo lieen p e de I ui'i,' i? ,*''^' *''' »•"•""•. ■""! O.sler, .M \ TJi., f. 
 
 |..ih,v l.v insertion „>. „.f ,'?.,""".','' '"*" "' tho statutory eonditnm dd i. t „ ,K '""'''-••-'"<'?> 
 
 .1 eoritraet. " ^ '" ^^^ 1"""V|- 
 
 ^-h knowledge an;r in,;:;,.^:;,;- -^ --^.^ 
 
 jury to paa.s upon, the result wis ?!,.„ 
 whether they were warrant I "f ' , ..f"'''; 
 representations. Xor/h /i,-!/: i i , ' "''■'^'^''' 
 
 Interim Contract.)— The nliintiff" * .i 
 applied to the .lefendant iif '' H ^,' ' ^ r''"'' 
 "t^iirance againat losa l.y tire an ,1/ "" 
 wriuii,tohohM,in..elf^iaMrto'p; ft^^^ 
 
 i|.^ivourofthe\J^;i::;;i-'f ."-r:?-";;te. 
 
 ilefendants' agent gave ' •.'•'•->• Ill 
 
 eKt 
 
 .nortU'dJ^S^ryl^:;',::;;^^,'-''-!^'' 
 thereon under a cliiw,. i > ft ' ""•"' •='"'"> 
 
 H'-' nior g go ; , ; ■:?!' k'"''''t> "" ''>' ^■»'''''' 
 i"«u'td in a snii "not h.« h'"''' .,""' l""P«rty 
 
 ti.o.n,.rtgage,ri "If 'i.;t£;r;!,,t •::';;;!;" V'^ 
 
 |>">rtgagee.s might insure it a „ ■ 1 l,,"^ ''''" 
 "•"'i'. l-aid to .heiiniortgage h T ' f'"" 
 -a.^uedintheiiaine'^.tihrli.tii^.th^ 
 
 , . „ gave hill, a written n,-,,, ; '""..".'"' Pi'^muinia, ;iiid at 
 
 '';"'"',"*• ••""! 'Attached to it waa a 
 t..a irr'r"' '''" r'""''""y «'«>"1'1 
 
 andshouldV^^^ ^t";^^,'"'''"^'^''"'!-. 
 
 Ii:,l,;ilf„,i , ';', 'Y to the mortgagor no 
 
 I;" <:x.ated, said company a°u>uhl 
 
 etfeetwl 
 
 'er the 
 
 liieh wa,.s 
 
 owledge 
 
 ^K:,?rr' - "■ n «i..*». "™f ;i?i;='i'P-'^"»'»'r 
 
 tl'in^^ that th^7:l,!^r::^^''!"«' '""""^I other poHcv etlee"e^ Z^U ^t^.^^'^^' ^'^^■«»«'^?' of i 
 
 thia was 
 
 :ait„;-^sS"Ef-'"S= 
 
 -"fcsr.;r£=inSSi^^^^ 
 
SI9 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 520 
 
 Id 
 
 II! 
 
 Uivi«ioiial Pouit, 14 0. H. .TJ'J, wag iilHriinMl. 
 Imprriiil f'iir Inn. (Ji,. v. Uul/, IN S. ( '. K. (ij)7. 
 
 Mort agB' AlipfiralioH o/lniuriiiue Atoiii;/i. ] 
 Wl\. .!■ iiiNiirurici- inmieyM nr« itct-ivcd l.y ii 
 Di<)itnii^(!c uiidi'i' (V jiolify Vdoctfd liy tlie iiii'rt- 
 ^tt>;i>r |)iirsiiiiiit toiicovi-iuiiit to iiiBuro, tiiiitiiiiud 
 111 u nu»itgii«L' iiiiiilo iiiidcr t\\v Sliort KnitiiM 
 Act, the inoifgiijjft! JH not lioiiiid to iipply tile 
 iiiHuruncc inoncyM in imyiiuiit ■(' iiriiiii«, l.ut 
 Diiiy holil tliiiii in rfHtuvf as collatural .-fiuiity 
 wliil<! any imition of tlif iimitgage inonfys im 
 unpaid -. nor, tlioiivih lie applifs jiart upon omt- 
 duo printiiial, is h.' Ijound to apply tlii^ lialiiiuc 
 in diHcliuigt.' ot' ovenluo interest. L'l/iiioml^ v. 
 Ilnmillun I'roviilint dm/ Loan Sofiilii, IS A. I!. 
 ■Ml. 
 
 Mortgage — Lom I'uynlile to A/or/;iii<ii'i;i — 
 Connotkltilioii. ]—Thu owner of a piiicei of land 
 mortgaged the same, and suliseciueiitly nioit- 
 gagod it to tlie same pers^on a^ain, the .soeond 
 mortgagf eontaining other laoils on whieh w eie 
 Iniildings, and also a covenimt to insnie. 'I'lie I 
 DKtrtgagorsulinefjuently made an asM;;nnient for 
 the heneht ot his eicilitois, and the e(iMity ot 
 redemption was sold by hi.s assignee, the par- 
 chaHor eovenantiiig to ]),iy oil the mortgages, i 
 The pureliaser tlien in.sured tht^ liiiihlings inehi- ' 
 ded in the seeond mortgage in his own nrnie, '■ 
 " loss, if any, i)ayalile to the mortgagees as ! 
 their interest might appear," s-iilijeet to the 
 conditions of the moit^age elau.<e. ' A tire took 
 pl.iee l)y which the buildings in the seeoml j 
 mortgage were destroveil, the insuraiiic momys 
 payabitt being more than sutlicient to jiay tiie 
 balance ilue on the second mortgage, whieh was 
 in default, and the mortgagees dainied the right 
 to apply the surplus in pavment of the first 
 mortgage, which was also in default :— 
 
 Held, that the mortgagees were not cntitlid 
 to consolidate their mortgages so as to be paid 
 the whole of the insurance moneys, but wcie 
 restricted to the right to rec(.ver the amount 
 remaining uu] aid on the second mortgage, /iV 
 Uniov A.i.^iirojifr <\k, i',"} O. 1!. G27. 
 
 Negligence Causing Plre.]— An insurance 
 company by whom a tire loss has been paid has 
 no ionis.-</a>i(/i as co-plaintiff in an action by the 
 assured against the wrong-d( er whose negli- 
 gence has cansi d the tire. Wiidlfuv^ v. Caiiuilu 
 Southern li. \V. Co., 21 A. K. l'!)7. Jtcversed 
 m the Supreme Court on another noint. 24 
 S. C. R, 300. 
 
 jdiance with iiaid condition. On the trial th, 
 ! jury answered all the i|ue«tionN Mubmitlcl .,, 
 them. e.\(.-|it two, in favoui' of N. Th- >. n, 
 • inestions, whether or not \. could haven ;,, , . 
 t' lerably c(,mpl..te list of the contents ..< |,i, 
 -lore immediately lieforo the tile, an<l wlinh,; 
 or not he delivered as partieuhiran iiccoiml, . I, 
 las in the conditions), werem t answered. II, 
 trial Judge gave judgment in favour' el \ 
 «hieb the t'ourt > n htmr reveised, and eidrinr 
 judgment to be entered for the et.uipanv ; 
 
 HeM, .•ijlirming the decision ot the CoiutMi 
 liiiiir, that as the evidence oonelusively slii«,,| 
 that \., with the assistance of his clerk, ,-,„|,| 
 have madi' a tolerably correct list oi' the ... .,,1, 
 lost, the condition w.'is in.t complied with" 
 
 Held, further, that as, under the evidciuc, 
 the jury could not have uiHHeie,] the (iiicstiniH 
 they refused to answer in fav. iir of K., ,i new 
 trial was unnecesfuiy, and judgment was pro 
 perly entered for the comiiany. \i.iiiii v '/„.,, 
 Inn. Co., '2a S. ('. l;. 2(i. 
 
 Statutory Conditions— Oz/itr f'miiliiif,),.— 
 
 \itn,ihi,n.y l!<j ,; s,iil,ii;,,i,x in Apji/!n,fi,.,i- 
 ,l/f//«'/ /i'i4- .■lj,jjn/i,ii.-lijn of /iicrn'lliinsiii ]-. 
 \\ here a lire in.suraiice policy' does Mot ceiitiiin 
 the statutory conditions, but' contains other ceii 
 ditioiis not printed ,-s variations, It must Im- 
 lea.l a- contaiiiiiig the statutory coiidifiohs and 
 no others, 
 
 Cilivn-n hi.-i. Co. v. Ai/woH-s, 7 App. Ca.s (lil 
 followed. ' ' ' 
 
 And the law in this respect has not hen 
 altered by .-,") Vict. ch. .1!), see. ;l,T (() ), 
 
 Where the jioliey is bu.-.ed uium an aiiplicii- 
 tion containing -statements or representations 
 relating to matters as to which the iiibuiirs 
 have required information, the first of the stii- 
 tutoiy conditions in section 11-J of H s. 0. di. 
 I(i7, must be taken to refer to such statciiuiits 
 and representations, whether the risk they 
 relate to is physical or moral. 
 
 Jt'i-dilhl; v. .Soni/ftn Mutual Fire In.-: (;> 
 15 A. It. .SCS, followed. 
 
 And where, in the aiiplication, the iiisnri.i 
 was asked w hether any inceiidiarv daii-cr In 
 the iiroperty was threatened or aptrelumlui, 
 and untruly ausweieil " No " :— 
 
 Held, that the policy was avoid(.(!. /Vf/./.^v 
 v, Jurr Insirronrc Compani/ of yurth Amir'ua. 
 25 (), R. .'il,". 
 
 Proof of IjObb— Failure lo F>irnisli,]-A policy 
 ofinsuiance against tire required that in case 
 cf loss the insured should, within fourteen days, 
 furnish as particular an account of the property 
 destroyed, etc., as the nature and circumstances 
 of the case would admit of. The pro| city of 
 N., insuied by this policy, was desti. 'd by 
 hre, and in lieu of the required account . . deli 
 vered to the agent of the insurers an affidavit in 
 which, after stating the general character of 
 the property insured, he swore that his invoice 
 book had been burned, and he had no adequate 
 means of estimating the exact amount of his 
 lots, but that he had made as careful an esti- 
 mate as the nature and nirrumptnnces of the 
 case weuhl admit of, and found tlie loss to be 
 between lf3,000 and S4,()C0. An action on the 
 policy was defended on the ground of non-c( 'n- 
 
 ^ Warranty— /Vrc Orcnrrin;/ to otlin- I'n.iif- 
 lnx.]—\\\ aform of a])plicatioii for (ire insniMiuc 
 the (jnestions were asked : " Have you ever liad 
 any proj erty destroyed or damag.d l.y lire! 
 It so, when and where?" also, "llasth'is iii.k 
 been refuted by any other cemi any, or has uiiv 
 coinpany cancelled a )iolicy or lec'eipt w\ it?'" 
 .. V "'' ^^''"'''' 'l>'t«tif"i--< theap]ilicantan.swereil 
 "\n". ami signed a niemoiaiuhini at the fcot 
 
 of the application form, whereby he covenanted 
 and agrec<l with the crnipany that the foir- 
 going was a just, true, and full exi»siti(n of , ill 
 the facts and ciicumstances in leu-ard lo the 
 situation, condition, value, and risk r /' //i yi,"- 
 pcrty to he insured, and that it should he laid tc 
 form the basis of the liability of the i. iniaiiv 
 ■I lid foim a part and be a cond'ition of the iiiMU 
 aiicc contract. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the iiusured had liiuleliitr 
 properties, but nnconnectid with the projit'jt\ 
 now in question, destroyed by fire ;— 
 
520 
 ti(ii). (Ml tln< trial till, 
 
 (|lH!ltil>ll» Mlllllllitllil f,, 
 
 iDiir .if N. Til"!., n,,, 
 
 l)t N. IMllllll llHVC II iiilf ;, 
 (if till' KllltflllM III III, 
 
 till' tin-, mill Mil, lint 
 
 irtii lll:ilJlll llrooillit, itr. 
 
 I'I'flii ! illixwi'i-fij, I|„, 
 iiH'iit ill fiivimr lit x 
 '• leviiseil, luiil niilirni 
 for th(i cfiiiniaiiy : 
 L'cisioii iif till' ('(iiiit III 
 ic coiiilimivily nIuavhI 
 ilici' of IiIh oli'ik, I'liiilil 
 nwi-t liHt I.I tlir t'liiila 
 ii't coiiiiilicil \\itli : -. 
 M, iiiiilfi' tlm I'viiKni'c, 
 •umvwiri'il till' i|ii,.st|i,j|H 
 
 ill tiivi HI' lit' N., a iini- 
 11(1 juilgiiiiMit WHS pro 
 iiimiiy. yi.iiiii y. ip.,., 
 
 IS— 01 hi r Ciiiiiliii,,)!.^ 
 'ii'iii ill Appllailiuii- 
 '<<iii iif /iiri Ill/ill, i^iii ]- 
 iilioy (Iocs !i(it (-■lUitiiMi 
 lull (-'oiitains iillicr lun- 
 viiriatioiiH, it must 1,, 
 iiliitory (■(iiiilitiiiiisaiiil 
 
 521 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 A, 
 
 ip. Cils. (Ill', 
 
 re-spfcl luiH Hut !,(., I, 
 
 lia.-cil ii|.oii an iiiii.lii.u. 
 iits or i('])itji'iiliitiiiiu 
 ;() wliicli tlic iiisURTs 
 )ii, till! first of tlic i^tii- 
 ion IM i.f K, s. 0. I'll, 
 "cr to siiL'li statiiiunts 
 ictlu'i- (lie ii>li tl;,,y 
 nnil. 
 Muliial Fhr /«-. r. ., 
 
 iplication, the in-uinl 
 iiictniliiiiv ilaiinti' in 
 ['lied or appnliindiii, 
 So" ; — 
 
 wa.H avoiih'd. I",i„::,]i 
 III of Xoilh Aiii' i-vti. 
 
 rriiiil lo ulhir I'ruj,, 
 itioii for lire iu.sui-.iiiu', 
 : " Have you fvcr liiul 
 or (laniagul l.y tin? 
 also, " lla.s this i!>k 
 r coniiaiiy, or Ims i.iiy 
 vy or ri"j(ipt on if;" 
 lio aii)ilioaiit aiisweroil 
 nioraiuhiiii at tlif foot 
 hereby he eovciiiinttd 
 niiaiiy that the; foit- 
 il full cx|if sitii II of nil 
 iccs in legnnl (o the 
 ?, and lii-li (;/' Ih- pn,- 
 \i it should lie Iiild U' 
 hility of tile k nifaiiy 
 condition of the iiisiir- 
 
 insured liad limlolliir 
 id vith the piojieitj 
 1 liy fire : — 
 
 licl.l, liowovcr, th.it the an«w,r to the |jr«t 
 of th" iiiM.v.i i|iieUi.iiiM wai iiiiiiiaterial ti, tlio 
 
 Held, uIho, that the aiiHwur to the se. 1 
 
 qui'Htioii WM (dearlv a Wiiiniiitv, liiivinu refer 
 cMi.v an It hail to the |,r.i,„.rty to he inH„,v,|, 
 and thiMmly |.i>.i.t d.r the jury's de.i.i,.,, wan as 
 t(i Its truth. Sfii/f V. I.niiil,,,, 
 /'i;v lux. Co., '.'l (), II. aiii, 
 
 S2S 
 
 Meld, that the eo.iipany was not hound. 
 
 Alhlli,,,! ,„,.,, ,|,i,,,l^ .j;,.^_ 1^ <v. ouo. 
 
 ;'^-:";"?,,K|,„n!;Tii!;;i:;„iS::t:;i, 
 
 ' i k , ."l. "" " '" '•" T^- "^' '" 'l"t^'>mi.Jr^., 
 
 ?he "risk i ■ '^ T" "^ '"'/■'^■'^ti-"' to oo„ti..„„ 
 
 tli.-nsk, itei.ineHtoiiu end and mere deiimmlH 
 
 -r payment of the note and a refusal dS 
 
 h . irivney „t the note to aeeede ,o lh« in^ 
 
 .-il ed .s rciue.st for eauuellatiou of the polioy a •« 
 
 >'o .sufheieul ivideu,.. of «ueh ele.tionl ^ 
 
 'udKiiient of the (^ueeii'H lieueli DiviHion, 22 
 
 l>. I>i . ri'vi'i'si'. I.M.I H...1 I! ... .' *" 
 
 IV. (ilAllANrV Insihanck, 
 
 Employees Guarantee Contract -/,*, „, iml 
 
 i o„.liH„„^~M,..U,l.,n.;,l..]-\\y a eontraet in 
 ^.ntni^' made n. 1890. the defendants agreed 
 gau'ai.tee the plaintill, a- di.Ht peeiiuiarv loss 
 
 by reason of fraud or dishonesty on the t,ait,f (> "|""1T'","" ^"V<'"^''^,"« "'^md, Division, 22 
 an employee dun.iK one year il.. the ^^ ^S Hie tHil '.ielt^r''' i)!:; „S / '' T^:^' f' "' 
 
 , ' ' ----■■„ J.,,., ,,,,„, mo (late (It 
 
 tlio oiiiitiaet, or (luriiiL' anv vear t-lo.ri. .ft,... :. 
 
 respect of whieh the (lefen^ai^trnh 1 I , hrthe'su;"''''''':^:^ "'■'-" '^^ "• '**"• 
 
 ti.a.eept the premium which ^vas tin cm^side t ' ■^"P''"'"" Court, W .S. (' J<. UH 
 
 t:m. for the eoutraet. The defendantH aecepted' 
 he piemium m respeel of each of the three 
 ■ilhiwiu^- years, and gave receipt., entitled 
 renewal receipts,' ui which the preinium.s 
 wtM-e referred to as "renewal iiremiunls " .■_ 
 
 H"ld, that the eoutraet was a eontraci of 
 iiisiirauee made or renewed after theeonimei.,-,. 
 
 meat of the Ontario fusurauce (^^ t u s I ;l^mvM,hu^■■ "' '"'^' "V''^ «'^'"^ 
 Act. 181I2. within the meaning of ...^^^^I'ZICZ^ ZTT"^ ^^■'"" '''"' ''"'>' H'^y 
 It upon the true eonstructio of ! ,',';,''.;!' i.>">'"'-''-^ '".-''^. "I'on i^ 
 
 2n;«tliat"aglJ'S'.,:t,H';^,,.- 
 ft lowed III p.iyment of pr.nniums at the , «i.ir 
 
 Sd'tSi^v'T;^T' '''•'■"'■'- -^^^^^^^ 
 
 a ( alsi H i.^'f ''" t''^'-''"!"'" Ix^^oon.e void," 
 ;md aI.o thai '• ,f any note g.ven oi, account of 
 
 Held also that upon the true eonstruction of 
 ul.-section (2), the cont raet eould not he avoided 
 hy reason of misstatements in the aiiidicatiim 
 therefor, I.eeause a stipulation on the face of the 
 contract providing for the avoidance thereof for 
 mid. imsst.iteiiients wa. not. in stated terms, 
 liMiUeil to eases „, which such misstatements 
 wo,vnnUenalt(,th.. contract. Villu.r i/^^i: 
 ■!<iu I! .V'O " "" """■""'"■ »"<l Aixiilaa Co., 
 
 shall he forfeited to the' 
 
 V. LiFK I.NSUKANl'K. 
 
 Arotdaiuv. anil Fur/ei/u, 
 
 -Where 
 without 
 
 pon . 
 
 eomiianv." the iiium. 
 
 imei;;:r:'^ '"•'"-"• "i"'- .i^fuiltin"^^: 
 
 "-"t of a prennum note, unless the insurers 
 
 c:,'," ""^ »-'»" .v:;,;, 5s;;;;: 
 
 ;fftj,zl;!;i;;;;isir,z;r-,£ 
 
 of.Hancr of the forfeiture, tlu /a.' n^t 
 H'.iig known to the in.sured or intende to in 
 lluence his conduct. 
 
 cf'o;;"{''i: ;• •^■"'■"',,''«^'''-'«« a/^ .4.s«.r«,*.« 
 
 M>ii.^ L„. /„., c„. V. (lonlon, 20 A. R. 
 
 "e 1 loiier date or tlieir i.ay.nent, they are no CoiiiniU ^ ^°^''-^^"-l"^!n>ie„t~Forf,'U 
 
 e lydeh.rred fri.,n lusi.tm . on a sul.se.,ue t t,, c ve h;," H l'" '''■'"?'' «'^^" '^ ^he comi 
 
 ..M"U upon the strict olis,., va„ce of the eo I . ,.o H "' "i!"'"' """"'^' Premium payable i 
 
 ri'"..^'- --l-'y - to ..ayiuent X, ; ' ''^^:" 'j^^/V!---'"- oonlain/iJ no o, 
 
 Assessments — /''oz/ej/iov— I) a((v,- 
 Yniiitiial insurance company have wiuuout 
 V.cti,m received payment of assessmen s af " 
 
 £i;;::';M;!:^^,f;::,'!:^'':,!'^jvn>ent, they are t; 
 
 (lUf 
 
 |liti.,,,s of the compauy a to j.ayment uduin 
 
 ^^£:^;;;",SL;:s,;-";i,:;::,i;S; 
 if '.;;';,;".■';;■';;;■■' -''» ■ 'i'ii»'i«» - 
 
 ' C','''oo"a"" :;• T°i-"' -''rV;«« We A..snranr.e 
 
 /, ' A • '°'' '""' ■Vaiin/iu-lurer.s Life 
 
 JiisniiiiicR Co- \- (.'n,;i^.. .)/■. . t/ .,,',' '^ .ryy 
 
 Frank 
 
 Co,i,/iKoii..l- 1 he (ussured gave to the company. 
 
 under 
 
 tioii «; t„ t f •V ■'" ^""li'.iiiing no oondi- 
 
 mums two ','.;■''"'" ""' ""■'■i"V""^'nt of ,,ie. 
 "iiunis, two instruments m the form of nromiK 
 sory notes payable at !)(. .lays .and 8^ " vs 
 
 11 11^ I I I'^VMH'Mt were not made at 
 KUuiity the policy should be void. The first 
 
 Ibo'asi;::;! |;;;!:;-_:'-^"'-'^y -f the sc^md „ote 
 !!.±l' .":'«'i'-'y: <-"• J- O., dissenting, that 
 
 an ;ii,i,ii. ..,,,, f,,,. .. '.." r ••■' ■"S'eemenc WItl 
 
 V S,n, ■. '"";'^°"' -C A- K. :m, applied, 
 \. i>mi Ujii Axmniiic Co., L'O A. H .OM 
 Athrmed by the Supreme Court. ^- "* '"**" 
 
INSURANCE. 
 
 524 
 
 l5»li 
 
 Untrue 8ta,tementB—iVa/i'rla!ili/~Proi/i(r- 
 /K«/.J-]t is piovuieil by ,su1)-.sec. 2 (if sec. Xi of 
 the Insuraiioe Coiporatioiin Att, T).") Vict. cli. 
 'M (O. ), that no untrue .statcnioiit in an appli- 
 cation for insiiranoe .shall vitiate tlio contract 
 unless material tliereto : and liy suli-scc. 3, 
 that the question of materiality i.s for the jury! 
 or if there is no jury, for the Cc'iurt. 
 _ Where, tiierefore, a benevolent and jirovident 
 institution refused to reco;,'ni/(.' a eertilicate of 
 membership issued to the plaintill', under which 
 he was entitled to certain insurance iienelits, 
 on the ground that he had untruly stated in the 
 application that he was not, and never had been, 
 subject to asthma, in an action to have it de- 
 elared that the contract was a subsisting con- 
 tract, production by the defendants w.is ordered 
 of all apiilications and medical evaniinations in 
 which the answer as to asthma had been in the 
 affinnativo, and upon which certificates had 
 issued, ririiwon v. /'rorhicia/ I'rovUhnl !„■ 
 KtUution, 15 ]'. K. ;i()(). 
 
 An ai)pnal to the Court of Appeal was , lis 
 missed, the Judges being divided in opinii ii ; pj 
 
 ■Winding-up— C(n,.- Ilathn) of PdUni—Aaxc.'oi- 
 me7it.]—A resolution for the voluntary liquida- 
 tion ot a nnitual insurance company under the 
 Ontario Winding-up Act was adopted at a 
 general meeting on a report of directors, which 
 contained a recommcudati(m that jjolicies be 
 sent in to the liquidator, and that members 
 seek insurance elsewhere. On., of the iiolicv 
 holders sent in his jiolLy accordingly, but no 
 notice ot actual cancellation was given to him 
 nor w-as anything further done in reference t,i 
 cancellatuin. Afterwards an assessment was 
 made upon the policy by the directors with the 
 concurrence of the liquidator :— 
 
 Held, that the policy had not been cancelled 
 ami the assessment was good. In re City 
 Mnhiat IiMirancc Co., swlfthmyer's Ca>^^, 24 
 U. u, 100. 
 
 2. For licnijll >,/ Wire.-- mid Childrcii. 
 
 Change of Eeneflelary - Trust — hVroca- 
 Uon.\—A i)erson wlu.se life was insured r 
 f,J!.'L"''"/ ^"^'<^ty, incorporated under R. S. O. 
 (!«/,) oh. 1()7, as amended by 41 Vict eh S 
 «ce. IS (().), now H. S. O. (18S7) cli i';- 
 on the 28th January, 18S,S, his (irst wife beim' 
 then, lead, caused t,. be issued to him a eertifi 
 cate inalung the insurance money tKiyable to 
 his children After this he married again, ami 
 on the 1st June, 1SS!», at his request, a chan-e 
 was made, an.l a new certitieate issued, making 
 the money ],ayable to his .s,.cond w ife. He .lied 
 on the 19th November, KSH!) : 
 M^lV' '■^^'•-■'■■^'"y tlio judgment of Street, J., 
 that the elTect ot .11 Vict. di. 22 (O.), was to 
 make the certificate of the 28th January, bSSS 
 subject to the piovisions of 1!, S () ch ISti' 
 and that the rules of the society, in",sofaras 
 tliey were inconsistent with such provisions 
 weremodihed and controllul by them ; an,l such 
 certihcate became a trust lor the children, under 
 
 long as the objects of the trusts reiiiaiued, to be 
 un.ler the contr.J of the decise.!, except only 
 in accordance with sections a ;,,id '!. whi,.|, did ■ 
 iiofc authorize liiin to revoke the eertilicate and ' 
 
 'liH, 'o, •)> *,';' •■^"''•'^'■'l'i«'"t one. Mi,,.,, ami v. i 
 J'oi-ker, 21 O. H. 2(i7. 
 
 Change of Beneficiary — Truxt — l!n-r,ai 
 tion--Wilt.]-~h\ October, I88(i, an <'iidowii„.,it 
 certihcate uiion the life of a widower with 
 one child was i.ssued to him by a benelit -society 
 tlie sum secured thereby being desiguiitcl hj 
 a clause therein as payable to the child |n 
 February, 1888, the insured, having luariied 
 , again, mdor.scd on the certificate a writing 
 revoking the original designation and direct- 
 ing payment to his wife. In ^■oyembcr, lst|0 
 his wife having died, he endorsed on the 
 certihcate a din^ction that payment should 1„. 
 made to his executors, administrators, iiiid ,« 
 signs. He died in March, 189,S, a «id„v.,, 
 leaving two cluldren, the luie first meiitiond 
 and one born in May, 1888. I5y his will, <!at-(i 
 m July, 1888. he left all his estate to his chiM. 
 ren in equ;il shares : — 
 
 Held, that under the poweis conferred by R 
 S. O. ch. i;i(j, even as amended by ."il 'Vict" 'li 
 22, the iiisnre<l had only a limited authority tc. 
 vary the terms of the eertilicate ; and he could 
 not revoke the ilireetiou for paynuMit to \\m 
 daughter and make a direction for payment to 
 his wife. 
 
 2Ii„<Mnidy. I'whr, 21 0. R. 2(17; 19 A R 
 
 ,290, followed. • 
 
 I By virtue of -,:\ Vict. ch. ,S9, sec. (i, he mi-ht 
 
 I when he made the emhu-sement of NovciiiUt' 
 
 j 189(1, have transferred or limited the beiielits of 
 
 , tile certihcate in any nianuer or projiortion he 
 
 1 .saw ht between his children ; but he could rit 
 
 j destroy the trust created by the certificate luid 
 
 declare a new trust which might, by inaliiir. 
 
 the fund a!)plicable to the payment of debts. d° 
 
 prive his children of all benelit in it, :uul =o 
 
 render the Act nugatory. N.iUon y. Tru.stf 
 
 Corporation of Ontario, 24 O. R, ."17. 
 
 Change of Beneflclary.]-Aii erdxinient 
 certihcate issued in 1889 by a bei„.\oleiit 
 society to a member, and payable on \m 
 death half to his father and to Id's mother, con- 
 tamed .', provision that shouhl there be anv 
 change in the name of the jiayce, the seeiot:uT 
 shoiihl bo notilied, and an indorsement tlierecif 
 made on the certificate. The member siihse- 
 (jnently married, when he informed his wife 
 tliat hewimldhave the certificate cliam'c,! a,? 
 he intended it for her, giving her the certTlicMto, 
 which she deposited in a trunk used bv bcth in 
 comnion, he continuing to pay the preniimii :- 
 ileld, that this was not suHiciuit to disphice 
 the terms of the contract, as m.'inilested on tiie 
 face of the ■■ertificate ; and, further, .so far as 
 the mothi.'r was concerned, she was anqilv pm- 
 tected, r,;l Vict. ch. .'lO, sec. o ((). t, whirirap- 
 piled to the eertilicate in (|Uestion, cieatiii" a 
 triLst in ill!!- favour. ° 
 
 That statute is retrosjiective as to curiwit 
 policies, issued before it came into force. Sim- 
 mohf V. ^immont, 24 O. R. (;(i2. 
 
 Gift— 11///.]— A per.son insured his life wmX 
 signed a document directed to the maiiamrs of 
 the insurance company, in these words'-"! 
 give and bequeath to'. . the amoiilil .^l.dnl 
 on the policy given on my life by the S-- Life 
 Insurance ( o. To be paid to none other l^lle,^8 
 at my re<piest, dated later." After shewing (ir 
 
521 
 
 irt of Appeal «iis ilis 
 divided iu opinicu ; 19 
 
 525 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 y — Trust — 
 •, 1S8(), iui end 
 
 of a widow 
 in l)y a Iient'tit 
 ■ l)t'ing (lesij;!! 
 Ide to the oil 
 mud, having 
 certitli'ate a 
 signatiiin and 
 
 In Xovenilio 
 lie endorsed 
 t payment sli 
 Iininistratora, 
 I'll, 1893, a w 
 
 fine first niei 
 ■!. r.y Ills wil. 
 lis estate to lii 
 
 llniicn- 
 owiii.'iit 
 <T with 
 
 SOL'iftV, 
 
 itcd r,v 
 
 il<l. Iu 
 iiiiuriwl 
 writing 
 
 (lllfCt- 
 
 r. ISdO, 
 on the 
 oiild l,e 
 and as- 
 idoi\(| 
 itioiud, 
 '. <\-M--A 
 < child- 
 
 iweiti eonferred hy R. 
 !nded by "il \"ict! -h. 
 V limited authority to 
 :ilicate ; and lie iimld 
 for payment to hJM 
 action for paynunt to 
 
 0. R. 207; I!) A. R. 
 
 .SO, see. fi, he mi- 
 ement of NoM-m! 
 iniited the heiiehl- 
 iner or proportion 
 Ml ; Imt he ((jiihl i 
 y the certiticate a 
 1 niif;lit, by inahi 
 Jaynient of delits. . 
 beiietit in it, iiiid 
 jVdiian V, Tni. 
 O. R, .-.17. 
 
 Id, 
 
 •vi: 
 I if 
 ho 
 
 \:rt 
 11(1 
 
 ■■,tn 
 
 /■.]— All crfhaillR.Ml 
 a l>y a lielivvoluiit 
 
 id payable on his 
 d to his mother, inii- 
 lould there lie any 
 payee, the seci'et:iry 
 iiidoi'semeiit tluieol' 
 The memlier siilisc- 
 ! iiifornied his wife 
 rtitieate chaiij,'id. as 
 IS hertliecirtilicato, 
 nnk used by Imth in 
 pay the preiiiiiini :— 
 snfiieiuit to dis[ilace 
 i« nianiiested on tlie 
 1, fni'ther, so far as 
 she was .-iniiily pro- 
 e. 5 (().), ivhiih up- 
 (|iiestioii, ireatinj,' a 
 
 dive as to eunciit 
 le into foiee. Sim- 
 
 nsnrtd his life aad 
 
 l<i tin; nianam'is of 
 
 these vonls :— "I 
 
 the anioiiiil otateil 
 
 life by the S— Life 
 
 o none other iiiile.ss 
 
 After shewing or 
 
 reading the policy which he retained, he handed 
 the docnment to the plaintilf, remarking ■— 
 "There, that is as good as a will " ;— " 
 
 Held, that on aecount of its iiieonipleteness 
 the transaction was not a gift or a deelarati.iil 
 nf trust, as the iriisL intended was not irrevo<.. 
 ahle, nor could the paper take etleet as a « ill 
 Knh V. ,1/(;.vc,,, L'o O. It. ;?07. 
 
 0via,r&ia.n3hip-a'rtirir'itr of Foi-Hi/i, Court 1 
 -\S \kk. certain infants living with their mot he'r 
 m the 1 roviiice of \ova Scotia were entitled to 
 insurance moneys payable in Ontario, .-.ml their 
 mother petitioned to be appointed trn.stee, with- 
 out security, under R. ,S. (). ch. l.Sli, sec !•> as 
 amended by ,-,(i Vict. ch. ;i2, sec. 7, to reeJivo 
 such moneys, letters of guardianship iiavin.' 
 been issued to her by a Probate Court of the 
 Province of Xova .^eotia, a certilicate of the 
 Judge of that Court shewing the facts necessary 
 to lirnig the case within the proviso to the 
 amending section, was received as evidence in 
 supportof the petition, lie. Duuid, IG P. R. .•«)4. 
 
 Payable to "Children" - /f,j„r..rn/a/iv,> 
 oj Deceased ChM-h,:rln.-<wn of Oramkhitdrn, ] 
 -By a policy of life insurance the insurers 
 agreed to pay the amount of the insiiran.T., 
 after the ,leath of the in.sure<l, to his wife or 
 her k-'al representatives ; or, if she shonhl "not 
 then he living, to her children, or to their 
 guardian if under age. The wife iiredeceascd 
 the insured. 1 wo of her children died before 
 her. one of them leaving a child : — 
 
 Held, that <mly the chihlren who survived 
 the wife were entitled to share in the iusuraiiee 
 imuu.vs paya ihi under the policy. Marnui v. 
 
 52& 
 
 children within the meaning of R. .S. O ch 
 l.<t>, and therefore the proceeds were exempt 
 froiii the claims of creditors. ' 
 
 n'''^Jr'""'. ^^y"" "■'■ '^''•"■o"'" General Trv-^/.i 
 
 •24'('). R.'lSi* *'"' ^"""'^'''- ^^""" ''■ ^"""' 
 
 Payable to Wife, "Her Executors Ad- 
 ministrators or Assigns " — I',;.!,.,;,,.,,, of 
 
 "'/'•.]-■ A man led man insured his lile, the 
 jKilicy being made payable "to his wife, Sarah 
 lier execut.irs, administrators, or assi.-ns " 'I'lie 
 wile died before h m- husband, whS married 
 again, and died leaving a widow and children 
 
 yithout having a.ssigmd the jiolicy or altered 
 the direetiiin as to i)avnient in it •-- 
 . Held, that the jiolicy fell nmler the provis- 
 ions of the Act to secure to wives and children 
 the beneht of hie insurance, and was for the 
 benedt of the wife ab.s.dutely, the words of 
 bmilation having no ellect ; that the provisum 
 tor payment lap.sed by the <leatli of the wife 
 ami that the policy moneys belonged to the ner- 
 
 "r vrf" "'' "''' ''"«'"^'"'- -'" '•'- l^uto,,, 23 
 
 _ Recelver~0(v/, ,• to 8,-11 r,iln-c.-<t of Dehlor 
 
 I,j/I„sn>odjor li,.„,'fit of WIf, aiidChddn;, 1- 
 ■Sff ,-u.;-s V. Fnvrhy, o.'J (). R. 2.S.-), ante 4->i) 
 
 Payable to "Le.^^al Heirs "-r/j/A/,-,;, of 
 hrsi M,„-na:,,-,,„d .sto,,,/ tnf,.]-A widower, 
 liaviiig two .■hihlren, insured in a- benevolent 
 society and took out his certilicate payable " to 
 I11.S legal heirs- and subsequently married a 
 second time, and died without having altered 
 le certilicate. leaving his wife surviving with 
 the two chihlren ot the tiist marriage : — 
 
 Held, that the two children took the whole 
 fund payable under the cortiHcate to the e.velu- 
 siuii o the wife. l/,„;.„,.. V. A„cknt Ordrr of 
 I mi'd Wortiiiiii, 22 O. R. .'W. 
 
 PayabUi to Wlfe-.-l.v.v/;/»,«e„/ hi, Wif,. ]-. 
 Ilu. mtvrest of a wife in a policy effected I'ly her 
 husband on Ins o«n life, an.rwhicli has bcc, 
 declared by him to be for her benetit, nmler 
 •s e ion o ol the Act, to secure to wives and 
 ^■li.ldren the benetit of iifo insurance, is lu-i 
 ■sei'aiate est.-ite, and may, in her husband's life- 
 time, be assigned by her. The assignee, under 
 such an assignment, will bo entitled to claim 
 liereUMder subject to the exercise by the 
 lis,,,,,, of the powers conferred oa him by 
 sect on (, of the Acts and amendments, (haham 
 \. irn.oda l.,„ As.arnna: Co. Prodor v 
 
 r/^T'^'^ *° Wlfo and Children-7?.r,> /„ 
 
 rf; ,':'"" -^ >\'^'"'>-' /'•il,l"<.]-'l\vo policies' on 
 lii^ hie were be,|ueathed by ,a, testator to his 
 
 '"I Ills wife and children : -- 
 
 Held, that the testator li.ad declared the 
 •nMuaiiee to be for the beneht ..f his ;lTfo and 
 
 Will.] -A testator insured his life in a be- 
 nevolent soc.jety, the ,,olicy being payable to his 
 
 vi.loM ami orphans and personal lepresenta- 
 tives, .and altcrwards endorsed on the policy a 
 direction that the same should be iiai'itoliia 
 infant daughter. Sul..se(p,ently by his uiH l,o 
 devised the proceeds of the p'olicv with other 
 m.meysto his executors upon certain trusts-— 
 _ Hehl, that the will was inoperative so fa- as 
 It as.s_unied to deal with the policy which was 
 l)y the endorsement elotlie.l with a statutory 
 trust under section n of R. S. (). di. VMi i,, 
 favour of the .laughter, and that as the devi.se 
 to the executors was repugnant to the trust 
 tney were not competent trustees within the 
 meaning .,f section 1 1 of the above mentioned 
 Act, 
 
 The mother of the infant having beinc 
 appointed guardian and having ^dven seciiritv 
 f.ir the proper aiiplieatio-i of the policy moneys 
 was apjiointed trustee. S,(,/f v. .-icoll, •_>(» O. R. 
 
 , Will.]-A testator by his will devised an 
 insurance certificate or policy to the defendants 
 as his executors for the benefit of his wife and 
 children : — 
 
 Held, that the will was a sutlicicnt .leclara- 
 tion under R. H. O. eh. 1,S«, sec. 5, and that 
 creditors were not entitled to the proceeds, 
 .^o r6Y>"'.--^"" "■'• '^'"''O'"" <-'Vi,er,d Tnids Co., 
 
 Will.]-A berjucst of a policv of life insur- 
 ance to the testator's wife is a valid declaration 
 ot trust withm the meaning of I;. S. (t. di. i;i(;, 
 
 h'e Lynn, Lynn v. Toronto (,'r„irnl '/'.•„.,/< 
 
 O. R. ISO, a()proved. 
 
 •hidgnien: of the County Court of I'rinco 
 iMlwaid on this point allirmed, Osier, d A 
 dissenting. McKthbon v. Ft,,j,in, 21 A R 87* 
 
627 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 528 
 
 iiif! 
 
 !' 
 
 I* 
 
 iiii 
 
 will — Apportionment.] — Before tlie coniiiiL' 
 into torce of 53 Vict. ch. 39, a testator insuiefl 
 Ins lite 111 a benetit society, pavalile to his wife 
 It slie suiviveil liini, if not, to his ciiilditn ; and 
 also .siil)sei)nently insured his life in another 
 similar society, jiayable to liis wife and children. 
 After the coming into force of the ahove Act 
 le made liis will, l.e.iueathing to ids wife oiie- 
 hall of his life policies, for her life anil widow- 
 iiood ; and, after her decease, to his children in 
 equal |)nij)ortii)ns ; — 
 
 Held, that 1!. S. (!. eh. 13(i. sec. (I, the "Act 
 to .Secure to Wives and Cliildren tlie Ikiietit of 
 Life Insurance," as amended by 51 Vict, ch 
 'Jl', see. .3, and .--.S Vict. eh. 3i). sec. 0, apjiiied : 
 and that the wife was entitled to onedialf of the 
 sum payable under the policy first mentioned 
 tor life, and the otlur moietv, being untouched 
 )jy tlie will, went to lier absoliiteh' : wliile as to 
 tlic otlier insurance, she was entitled to one- 
 halt for life or widcwlioo.l l)y virtue of tin; will. 
 /''' CiniKroii, Mwoiii V. C,i nicrini, 2\ O. K. 034. 
 
 insured had no power to bequeath any i.art of 
 It to his executors or his creditors ; 'and tlj.. 
 society iiad the right to say that their coulnirt 
 was to pay the money oiilv within u cen.ii, 
 cla,ss ; that the insured iiad no riglit to ^,1, 
 stituto a beneticiary outside that class ; .m.i 
 therefore the money belonged to the wiilovv f,,,i 
 from the obligation to pay debts. M„r,i.,i, , 
 Hinit, -HSO. R. 568. ' ' 
 
 . i~ '^PPortiomnnit.] — Under section G 
 ( ) ot the Act to secure to wives and children 
 tlie henelit of life insurance, J!. .S, o di bStl 
 as amended by 51 Vict. ch. li-J, sec. 3, au.l 
 ■ '.{ \ let. ch. 3!), sec. ti, the insured h^s no 
 power to declare by his will that others than 
 tliose for who.se beneht he has ctleeted the policy 
 or dechirod it to be, shall be entitled to tii'e 
 in.surance money, nor to apportion it auKnig 
 others than those for w]io.«e benelit he has 
 effected the pidiey or declared it to 1,... j;, 
 Oraiit, L't) (.). I!. I 'JO and 4S5. .S,-,- now, 5S X'i 't 
 ch. 34, see. lU (().), and 59 Viet. ch. 4.-) {U.}. 
 
 Will— /ore,';/,; /iciiindrnf .SVi,;/t/,/— /,'„/,.> ,,f 
 '^."'.;''-";^~'^ l'"''^-'.v "poii the life of the phdn- 
 till s deceased hnsiiand was issued before his 
 inarriage by a foivi,L'U liencvident society not 
 incorporated or re-istercd under any Act of 
 this I'roviuce, payaide to his mother, 'who pre- 
 decea.sed hiin, or his executor.s. ]\y one of tlie 
 by-laws of the society it was provide<l that 
 w here the insured married after the date of the 
 ptilicy. It ,/,.vo /■,„■/„ became payable to the 
 widow, " unless otherwise ordcreil after date of 
 Bucli marriage." Under anotlier by-law the 
 policy could lie made jiavalde only to "a wife an 
 afhaneed wife, a 1 lood relation; or a person 
 dejieiident .in tlic a.ssurcd, and was not to be 
 willed or transferred to .■my other person. J{y 
 his will the ilcceased purported to give to his 
 vife the amount of this and another insurance 
 subiect. however, to the ]ia\ nicnt of his (U bts : - 
 Held that the p.;li,';, was capable of bein.r 
 controlled by conditions u't set out upon its 
 face, because section 4 <if ."I'i Vict. eh. 3-' (() ) 
 amending the Ont.Mio insurance Act,' l;7s. O. 
 eh. 107, aj, plies (udy to tlie coiniianies to wliicli 
 the latter Act ajiplies ; and as the insurance 
 and the ri-hts ot (he parties under it , lid n.it 
 depend upon anything contained in the \et to 
 secure to wives and children the benelit of life 
 insurance, 1!. S. (), ch. 130. it was not n.cessary 
 to consider whether it w.is brou-lit within the 
 scope of that Act liy its amendment by 51 Vict 
 ch. 2-2, sec. '.'. (().); and, therefore, 'the bimb 
 iiig terms of the contract were to be found upon 
 Its face anil in the rules of the .soriety. wiiieh 
 fonneil part of the contract ;— 
 
 Held, also, that under the terms upon which 
 the society agreed to pay this money, the 
 
 Win — Pnynunt to Executor.^ „v 'r,.^f„m,;i 
 tm-ii (h,„r,liai,.]~\ testatri.x having insured 
 her life and made the policies payable to hn 
 two daughters, by her will requested l,,,. 
 executors, the defemlaiits, to place the amount 
 thcreot, in some thoroughly safe investment 
 until her daughters majority or marriage, win n 
 the amounts and their aeeunmlatcd inteie t 
 should, be divided equally between her dan-li 
 ters, and appointed licr husband, the iilaiiiuir 
 their guardian. ' 
 
 In an action brought by tlie guardi.m to hav« 
 the proceeds of the policies handed over tn 
 him by the e.xecutors : — 
 
 Held, that the insurance moneys beiii" nrnli- 
 liayable to the daughters were by 53 \'Tet. ch 
 .3!), sec. 4 (O.), severed from her estate at' litr 
 death and her testamentary directions cml,] 
 not affect the fund beyond what was iiermitte,! 
 by that statute, and It. .•<. O. ch. 13i; : — 
 
 Held, also, that during the minority of the 
 daughters the trustees ajipoiiited by the will iis 
 provided for by section II, It. .S.'(). ch. l;j'(i 
 might by .section 1,3, iincstin manner aiitliorizeii 
 by tlie will; but while the insured could "ive 
 directions as to the investment she was mm to 
 control the discretion of the lawful custodian of 
 the fund and child, in case the income wiu 
 needed for maintenanee or education, or the 
 (■(ir/iii-< for advancciiient :— 
 
 Held, also, that the guardian was the custo- 
 dian 'of the daugliters wilh the incident of 
 determining to a large extent what should lie 
 expended in their bringing up, and that the 
 executors h.ad ch.irge oi the iiie.servation ami 
 utili/ation of the fund : — 
 
 Held, also that section 12 of R. .S. O. rji, bjfi 
 docs not justify an Insurance Company in pay- 
 ing the .■imount of a policy to a test.'iiiientary 
 guardian; the guardian tbeic n;inicd being one 
 who has given seem ity and that the Court .siieiilil 
 not traiKsfer the moiRvs from the executors 
 to the father as testamentary yuardian. as liis 
 right to handle any part of 'the fund was sub- 
 ject to the trusts specified in the will, the 
 execution of which was vested mi the executors. 
 Ciinijihill v. Dniin, 22 0. R. U.S. 
 
 Will- I'lii/incii/ to Exccit/io:i-—Siriirili/ -Di.'i- 
 (7(«r«/,.]—.\bineys payable to infants under a 
 policy of life insurance may, where -.lo trustee 
 or guardian is appointed uii'der sections 1 1 .■md 
 12 of H. S. (). cli. 1.30, lie paid to the cxccutiii-s 
 of the will of the in.sured, as provided by .scctimi 
 12, without security being given by tli'ciii, ami 
 payment to them is a good discharge to the 
 insurers. Doild.i y. Aiicinit Onlir „/' L'lillid 
 ll'nrl' 1111:11, 2,) 0. R. 570. 
 
 3. MucelliiuroiiK Cuxi\i. 
 
 Apportionment— /I ,(;,i,)V,//;o«(/.]— In consid- 
 eration of .^12,000, paid by plaintilfs testator 
 
528 
 
 f) bequeath any part uf 
 liis creditors ; iiutl tlie 
 say tliat their eoiilian 
 only within a ceriim, 
 hiid no riiflifc to miI.- 
 tside tliiit cliiss ; in,,! 
 nged to tlie widow fiv^ 
 [jay de))ts. J/,;;-;/.!/, v, 
 
 tatrix having iiisuruil 
 
 olicies jiayal.le to licr 
 
 will reijuested In,. 
 
 , to place the ainount 
 
 • ■j'hly safe invcstintni 
 rity or marriage, wlnjn 
 
 accnniulated " interest 
 ; between her daui'h. 
 ;iusband, the pl.iintiii; 
 
 • the guardian to liav« 
 iciea handed over to 
 
 ;e moneys being niailt 
 i were by oS \'ict. ,:ii. 
 inn her estate at her 
 tary direutitins cnuM 
 \ what was jiermitteil 
 
 (). ell. I.Sli: — 
 
 the niincjrity of the 
 [minted by tiie will :i.s 
 11, li. S. (). eh. l:i(i. 
 t in manner aiitliorized 
 e insured ermld give 
 itment slie wa^ not to 
 10 lawt'ul eustndianof 
 case the ineonic Wius 
 )r education, or tiie 
 
 ardian was the cust'i- 
 lith the incident of 
 :tenl what slioiilil he 
 IK "11, and tliat tlie 
 :be [iicservatioii ami 
 
 L' of R. S. O. eh. l:i(J, 
 lee Cotiijiany in pav- 
 ■y to a test.iinentary 
 ere named being oiie 
 that tlie (.'ourt .sIhmiM 
 trolii the e.xeentnrs 
 iry guardian, as lii,s 
 if the (1111(1 was sub- 
 id in the will, tlie 
 ted Ml the executni'.s. 
 . !)S. 
 
 '.Inyx — S'l'CKri/ 1/— Dit- 
 to infants under a 
 xy, where no tnistue 
 iider sections II and 
 aid to t In; e.\ecut(irs 
 provided by si.etiiui 
 Ljiven by them, and 
 )d discharge to the 
 '/ Onli-r (,/' i'liittd 
 
 1 Cd.'o's. 
 
 1/ Iioiiil. ] — In cousid- 
 
 [daintili's testator 
 
 S29 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 to defendants, they, liy an instrument in writ- 
 ing, agreed to (jay him Sl.SOO every year dur- 
 ing Ins natural life, in equal (luarterly payments 
 (it S4r)0 each. The tenns "j.olicy" ami " an- 
 nuity bond '' were both u.sed in the dncument 
 itself as descrqitive of its nature. 'J'he eonsid- 
 eratiou was stated to bo not onU the SlL'.dOlt, but 
 "the application for this [Kdiey, and the state- 
 ments and agreements therein contained, herebv 
 made a part of this contract ; " and it was pro- 
 vided that upon certain conditions "this policy 
 shall be void " :— ' •' 
 
 Held, in an action by his executors, that the 
 instrument was not a [lolicty of assurance within 
 the exce|ition in H. S. (). eh. 14.S, sec. .">, but an 
 annuity bond ; and that the money payable by 
 the defendants under it was a|q)o'rtionabl'e 
 within section L' ; and therefore tlio plaiutiDs 
 were entitled to recover a [lart of a ipiarterly 
 instalment in proportion to the [leriod lictween 
 the last quarter day and tho death of the testa- 
 tor. Cuthhi-rt v. ^olih Amcrkiin Li/'r As.sur- 
 aw'Co., i.'4(). I!, oil. -^ 
 
 530 
 
 Benefit Society— Kr/mUlon of Mi-mher- Fah- 
 r,ia/~l{cjiorf (if<omnii(l<:i~-Kr;d,'iirr i,ol hrfon- 
 OiMiiii/fec—.ihs.iici of Ml inhir.y- 'I'he [.laiiititl' 
 iis executor of his deceased s(m, sued the defen- 
 diints, an inem-piu'ated liencfit society, to n cover 
 the money benelit accruing n|)oii tlie death of a 
 meniher. Before tho death the defendants had 
 pu.ssed a resolution removing the .son from the 
 list of members, on tho ground that Ik- had 
 given untruthful an.swers to questi(.ns as to his 
 state of health put to him ujion his a.lmission 
 'I he complaints against him h.id been referred 
 til the committee of management, who lied 
 reiHirted in his favour, but tho society, at a 
 meeting, refused to adopt the reiiort, and in 
 the absence of tlie deceased, without any notice 
 to hnn or opportunity of a|ipearing, acc(."j,te(l an 
 !.'■ purl,' statement made by a member present 
 at the meeting, which had not been before the 
 nmimittee, and acted u|ioii it by forthwith 
 [lassiiig the n^solution referred to. h\ the rules 
 of the society it was provided that i'f it should 
 he established that a new member h.ul n.>t 
 answered truthfully, ho should /ywo l\iHo be 
 excluded from the society ; and also, that if it 
 was proved after his admission that ho liad not 
 answered truthfully, he shouh', by reason 
 thereof, b(! strindi off the list of members 'Ihe 
 ooniimttee of nianagcment was the body aii- i 
 liomted umler the rules, to take the cvi,"lence I 
 and imd the facts, ti.eir reiuu't being subject I 
 to ,_oi.lirmation or rejection by the .society :_ | 
 Held, that n[.oii the priiiciiiles govcrniie'sucdi ! 
 an niquiry, the jierson accused should not be I 
 condemned without a fair chance of liearin.' the I 
 evidence .igamst him, and of being iieird .T, |,js \ 
 own ileti.ncc ; that the action of the defendants i 
 was contrary to these [irinciiilos and to tledr 
 <«ui rules; and, therefore, the ex|iulsion was' 
 not legally accompli.shcd, and the id.aiutiir was 
 •iimleil to recover. (Jrand v. i:U„i.„i St 
 Ikmiuis, 04 0. H. J. 
 
 liefendants agreed to j.ay him at the end of a 
 .llliceilied period, if he survived, a certain sum. 
 together with his share of the [irofita made iu 
 tliat, hranch of the Imsiness during the period 
 
 I he iilaintiir, being di^sall,-lied with tlieshare 
 allotteil to hnn, claimed an account and iiav- 
 ment of hi.s share of all tho protits. The defen- 
 dants claimed a right to liold a nortion of their 
 apiiarent surplus to ensure the future stability 
 01 the company ; — ' 
 
 Hold, that the plaintill w.is bound to ao- 
 (juiesce m the discretion of tho actuary and 
 directors of the eomiiany, /,oy»/ /^V/e exercised 
 . nd to take his share of wintt was ap|)ortione(i 
 as divisible surplus ; and that being .so, that his 
 case was n.it advanced by .stitenicnts made by 
 olhcer.sot the com|iany in leitors or pain|ihlols 
 as to the course pursued by them in divhling 
 the sni'idus. linin y. JCliin [.;/<■ /ii.^. Co ■'() 
 (>• II. (i. Src the ni;xt case ' ' 
 
 Divisible Surplus - " Diri.ih;,: J'n,/!ls" - - 
 
 I loiiU t„ I rnndc. J„r C'o/,/;,„/,.„e,V..v.l_()n ,,„ 
 nppeal t.i the UivLsional ('(uii t, the judgment of 
 baleonbridge, J., reported •_'() (). U. i; ,.aK 
 afiirmed. ' 
 
 I'er H(,yd, ('.—The reiireseiitatinn made that 
 liartieipating [lolicies "would receive tlieir 
 c.imtable share of the divisilde surplus,-' points 
 lo tie exercise of the dhscretion ot the managers 
 or thecomimiiy, and the expression "divisible 
 suiiilus ,.s „ne that relers to :-<. lething less 
 hail tlie ontire prolits clainiel by tiie plaintitf 
 Jielore divisible prolits can bo ascertained, ,t 
 would wem to bo esseiitiid for the security of 
 i.olKjv-h.dders to keo|) such nsonrces in hand as 
 wotdd cover the wli.do liabilities of the compauv 
 having regar.l to the uncertain cliances of mor- 
 tality, rate ot interest, e\|ieiises, etc. 
 
 iViAKiedith, .l.-Theie is n'o express cove- 
 nant in the po icy to [.ay the plaintilf any pro- 
 fits. ■ I iiyisil.le prolits ■■ Hie the prolits which 
 tho comjiany, after making, in good faith, all 
 la-asoLi.aldo and pro|,ier provision for its .safety 
 .•imi iirospority, divide among [ndicy-liohlera 
 iMtii V. ^Ijiia lAj,- /,,,„, (7,,^ •2.\ O. K. is.S. 
 
 Benefit Society. ]-.yefi U.vii.wavs, \\. 
 
 Divisible Surplus — /J/v 
 ""'/ l>ii-ii-t(ir.f 
 
 •''ti'iii of Arturmj i 
 uimaiiii ill I .iiir.v^ I 
 
 nu I I. ,",'■"■" ;^'"'''- ""•"'•-• "fCom/iani, hi hitter. 
 d I 1?/''' '•"^~;'''''^ Pl»i-'ti"i"'".ed with the 
 iV im .' "';"," ''!'"'■ "'•■"''""■nent ,,artiei,Mt. 
 "ifc' lihiii, and by tlie -■ontruct of insurance the ' 
 34 
 
 Medical Kxamlner--A',Yv„./, „/• Conlrart- 
 Authonty o, A;in,t,]~nu'. ,„e.lieil staff of tho 
 l.(|Uitablo Life Assurance .Society at Montreal 
 I consists of a inooical referee, a chief medical 
 , exaimner and two or more idteriiate medical 
 I examiners. _ In ISyS L. was a|,[,ointed an alter- 
 1 mite examiner 111 pursuance of a sn-gestiim to 
 the manager by local agents tliat it was advis- 
 aiile to have a French Canadian on tho staff 
 l.y Ins cominissirm b. Mas entith^d to the iirivi- 
 ! lege ot such exaniiuations as should bo assi.'no.l 
 . to hnn by, or rcpiircd during the ab.sonce,°dis- 
 , ability or unavailability of, the (diief examiner. 
 - Iter L. had served tor four years it was found 
 that his met liods in h.dding exaniiuations were 
 not; acceptable to ai>|,lieant.s, and lie was re- 
 (luested lo resign wliieli he refused to do, and 
 am.ther L'ronch Canadian was a|)[K)inted as an 
 additnmal alternate examiner, and mo.st of the 
 aiipli.iants thereafter went '.;> tho latter L. 
 then brought an action against the comna.pv fo- 
 daniag,,,. l,y io.,« „i the Inisinoss and injury to 
 us iiiotcssi.mal reputation by refusal lo einplov 
 liim, claiming that on his ,i[,poiiitiiieiit the gen- 
 eral manager had promi.sod him all th'i examin- 
 ations ot trench Canadian ajiplioants for insur- 
 
531 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 532 
 
 ance. He also allecfed thnt lie liiul liccn indiiceil 
 to iiiaiii-o lii.s own life with the cdiniiany on the 
 underatiinding that tho exann'nation fees would 
 bi! more than sufficient to jiay the pieniinnis, 
 and he asked ('(.]■ leii.iynieiit of amounts paid hy 
 liim for such insuranoe : — 
 
 Held, atlirniinir the dceision of the Court of 
 Queen's I'.eneh, that l.y tlie oontraet made with 
 L. the eomimny were only to send him sucli 
 cases as they saw lit, and eould dismiss him or 
 a|)[)oint other exandncrs at tlieir pleasure ; that 
 the manager had no authority to oontraet with 
 li. for any employment oth>,M' tlian that speci- 
 fied in hiseommission ; and thnt he had no 
 right of action tVn' repayment of his premiums, 
 it heing no ecndition (;f ids employnu'nt that he 
 should insure his life, and tliere'lieing no eon- 
 neetion hetweeen the eontract for insuranee and 
 that foi' employment. Lalienii' v. Enuilahli- 
 L'Jc An.fiimn<-ij Soruty, 24 S. C'.'r. o!),",. 
 
 i,.^'^*''*^ Insurance Company — I'olicij — 
 F) iiidiiiii-iip — < 'line, Until, II — A.-^se_.is)iii-tit.]— A 
 resolution for the voluntary liquhhition' of 'a' 
 Aliitual Jnsnranee Conipanv under the Ontario 
 \\ nuhng-up Act was adopted at a, general meet- ' 
 ing on a report of directors, wliieh eontrtined a' 
 recommendation that policies be sent in to the 
 iKpiidator, and that inemljers seek insuranee 
 el>ewhere. One of the iioliey-holdeis sent in ' 
 Ins policy accordingly, lint no notice of actual 
 cancellation was given to him, nor was auythim' 
 further done in refeience to cancellation. Aftei" i 
 vards an assessment was made upon the jiolicy 
 by the directors witli the concurrence of the 
 iKpiidator : — 
 
 Held, that tlie policy had not been cancelled, 
 and the assessment was good, Jn re Citi/ M a- 
 tiial Inmratire Co., S/k/r/meyer's Casf, •.'4'() 1! 
 
 ■ under the circumstances in evidence, bec^uue 
 the mortgagee of such interest and right ■ an,] 
 the recovery of a judgment by the ass'im,,, 
 against the father for the amount of the Utl/ 
 diii not iirejudicially aft'ect the security. J)clfn 
 V. M,-fro/iu/l(iui Life IiiH. Co., 2(i (). 1;. G7. 
 
 Surrender of Policy— 6'o)//(yw7-^| /«,„,., „, 
 JM-nl - Enilnirc "/ J-' ram I.]— The rules uliiti, 
 govern the ])urchase and sale of jiolicies ot 'iff 
 insurance are the same as those which i;(iv,'.,ii 
 the purchase and sale of any other spe'cii'.s „( 
 personal jiroperty. 
 
 A c(mtract for'the surremler of a life i)ulirv 
 unlike a cccntract for life insurance, is not ('/,.',■' 
 riiii'! Ji(/, i. 
 
 'I'he insured in a life policv, having no sit- 
 render value, ai)plied to the insurers tcriiurchase 
 It, which they did for a - -nail sum, he ben>- -^t 
 the time, to their know!., dge as well as his .fwii 
 seriously ill with heart disease. The iiiMiw' 
 in no way misled the insured, who dioi! shoitlv 
 after the sale. 
 
 In an action by his executors to set asi.lv tlie 
 tran.saction : — 
 
 Held, that there was no evidence of fraud to 
 submit to a jury. 
 
 //;// v. (hviy, 1 Stark. 434, exiilained and ili«. 
 tmguished. Smi/li v. HiK/Zie.-i, L. K. Ii (^i. ]; 
 .=i!)7, followed. Joiie.-^ v. Ke.mc, -2 iloo. A |{';U8 
 distinguished. Po/l.'< v. Timhemiia: Lift- A.w 
 mice Co., •2:W. R. 73. 
 
 VI. M.AKINE LNSfKAXCK. 
 
 Premium— 7V we /or Paymev/.]—" Mouth ' 
 111 an insurance jioliey in thi form hero in (pies- 
 tion, with iin.visicjns for jiayment of senii-an- 
 iiual prennunis on named days of specific ealen- 
 <lar months nuans a calendar month 
 , Per Hngaity, (■..!.( )., and Oslei, J.A.-Snn- 
 W'!. layment must be made during the life of 
 theinsu-.ed, and if the life drop "before the 
 expiration of the time of giace anil before pay- 
 iiK nt the risk comics to an end. 
 
 I'er Burton and .Maclennan, J J. A. — Payment 
 may be made at any time before the exiiiration 
 of tho time of grace, whether the life has 
 tiropped or not. 
 
 .Judgment of AlacMahon, .1.. reversed. .]f(uiv- 
 fai/unrx' Lij) !),■■'. Co. v. Gordon, L>0 A. R. 30<). 
 
 Rights of Insured and of Benetlclarles- 
 
 A^xmnmtnt of Polinj to Smirt Jhbl-Jmh.immt 
 for Dfht.]~-\\hnti an insurance was etiected 
 upon the liff of a person lor the bencHt of her ! 
 father, brothers and sisters, the plaintitt's :— \ 
 
 Held, that the henelicial interest in the jMdicy, 
 as soon as it wis i.ssued, veste.l in the plaintiUs, , 
 and the crjntrart of the insurers being to pay i 
 them the moneys payable under the piilicy, the : 
 insured could not, by any act of hers, deprive 
 tjiem of the interest so vested in them or of' 
 their right to call njion the insurers tor pay- 1 
 meiit ; n\\,\ ;u, as-ignment matte by her and her 
 father to a stranger to secure a debt had no 
 pffeet upon smh interest or right of the plain- 
 ■tifls, except that of the father ;' and the assignee. 
 
 Abandonment— 6V//cf(,'/fi.]— A vessel, i.,irtlv 
 insured, was wrecked and the ship's I'lusbaiid 
 abandoned her to the underwriters, u ho s<4ii 
 her and her (uitlit to one K. 'llic sale wi!^ alt, r 
 wards abandoned and the underwriters nctitiul 
 the shiii's husliand that she was not a tiitil 
 hiss and rcrjuesteil him to take pos.se.ssiou. Ht 
 paid no iittenlion to the notice and the vrssel 
 was libelled by K. for salvage and sohl uikIm 
 decree of t'onrt. 'I'he uninsured owner hnaigiit 
 an action against the underwriters for conuT- 
 sioii of liev interest : 
 
 Held, aflirmiiig the decision of the Su|imne 
 C.nu-t of Xew lirunswick, th,-..t the ship's hm- 
 band was agent of the uninsured owiiiM in re- 
 spect of the vessel and his conduct |)iccliiilc,l 
 : her from bringing the action ; that he uiidjt 
 ! have taken jiossession before the vessel wai- 
 libelled ; and that the insured owner wa.s nut 
 deprived of her interest by any action of the 
 underwriters but by the (iecrcc of the Court 
 under which she was sold for salvai'e. liimrh 
 v. Union lii.-<. Co., SA S. c;. 11. .■)44. " 
 
 Application^ I'ron, i.wori/ ],'i/m ■■n.ntatii.ii. ]- 
 An application [or insurance on a vessel in afor- 
 eign port, in answer to the (piestions :^-n'liert 
 IS the vessel? When to sail? contaimd the fnl- 
 lowing .---Was at " Huenos Ayres or near port 
 ;ii(l February bound up river; w(aild t"V iip 
 and back." The vessel was damaged ii: ctmr'ni: 
 down the river not in tow. On the trial e. &v. 
 iiction on the policy it was admitted that tow- 
 ing u|) and down the river was a matter iiiateriiil 
 to the risk ; — 
 
 Held, allliining the judgment of the Court be- 
 low, that the words " would tow en and buck' 
 
532 
 
 ?s in evidence, Ijccuiiie 
 interest and I'igiit ; unil 
 ,'nient liy the m-Muuv,. 
 lie .iniownt of the llth; 
 :et the secui-tty. J>olen 
 Co., 20 0. li. G7. 
 
 ■—Contract- A Imi,,; ,,; 
 '"/.]-- Tiie iiden whicii 
 1 sale of jKilieies of life 
 as tliose ^\hirh fsiwx'n 
 if any otlier speuie.s ul 
 
 render of a lifo jjuliry, 
 ! insnranee, is n<it I'l.,',' 
 
 policy, having; no fi;!-. 
 he insurers to'piuvhnst 
 niall sum, he Wiuj m 
 dgoas well as his /.wn, 
 disease. 'I'he in^\l^■r.' 
 ired, who <lic(l shditlv 
 
 jcutors to set a.siilv the 
 
 10 evidence of fivuul to 
 
 434, e.x-jilained and dig. 
 filij/l(:.i, L. R, (i () i; 
 'e.i-iie, 2 Moo. A I!. ,'!4ij, 
 "(■miietuiice IJh ,1,«,„-' 
 
 l.NSCKANCE. 
 
 ,'/fi.]--A vessel, |i,irtly 
 id tlie slii])'s iiusliimil 
 nderwriters, ulm sdM 
 K. 'I'lic sale «iis all, r 
 
 underwriters uofilii,! 
 
 she was not a totiil 
 talie possession. He 
 lotice and the vissel 
 ilvage and sold midm 
 iisured owner hi'ijn!,'iit 
 lerwritcrs for eonvor- 
 
 ;isioii of the Sn|iiMiic 
 , th.-it the ship's Inij- 
 ninsuiod ownci in re- 
 lis eoudiict iirechuli J 
 ■tion ; that he niij;!]- 
 jfore the vessel vi;,- 
 sui'ed owner Wii.« iin! 
 Iiy any aeti<in of tin 
 decree of the Cuiii; 
 for salvage. Umid- 
 
 . 1!. -.m. 
 
 <r>i l!(pris(ul(it'o.».]— 
 Lie on a vessel in a for 
 
 D (|UCStiol1S .---WIltTt 
 
 il V contiiiiieil ilii- fol- 
 a Ay res or near port 
 livei' ; w(iidd tnw up 
 IS damaged ii; crmi'jij; 
 On the trial o. wi 
 a admitted that ttiW' 
 Has a matter niateiiii 
 
 inent of the Court be 
 Id tow I'p and li;ick ' 
 
 533 
 
 INSURANCE. 
 
 531 
 
 ill the application diil not exiires'i n im..,. m- i. ■ 
 
 pectathZr helief o„ the i:.u^""theriu. d' ' ^ ri^rnHn?^::;'; TT "-'-.^i^Ii-epresentation 
 
 i,nt „i.,„„„f,..l f„ „ :.'. . . ."• '"*^'"'"'tl""teiittoileceive vitiatesanolievhow 
 
 Imt iiinoiinted to .a promissory reiircHentation 
 that the vessel would be towed np and down, 
 
 e\er trivial or immaterial to the risk it may he • 
 It honestly nia.le it only vitiates when inateriailv 
 
 Miilthi.s represeiita,tion not havincrl,^,,.,, ...,ppi„,i i '''i '■■;,■'';■' '''.'"" . _, 
 
 nut the policy was void. Urn/,, y.lj n 1 « <« I .;,'''"■!', '^IT'^- "^■("'^■■-'•■■■tath.n in 
 If,,,.,-,.., '/„. r-o low r- ., .■...'*'"""" !'"■ '"'"UK' l>(>lcy that the ve.s.selinsure<l was l.uilt 
 
 Marini- lux. Co., 19 ,S. C. 1!. I'j.S. 
 
 General Average— /«.w>'o«cfc („i J/ii/l~Cos/ 
 nf Sanii.i Cniyo- A nyai/r /loii(/.]-A vessel 
 loiulfd with coal stranded and was ahandoned 
 Notice of abandonment was given to the under- 
 writers on the hull. The car^o wa.s not insured 
 The owners of the cargo oljered to take it out 
 (if the vessel but the uiiderM-riters preferred to 
 do It themselves and an average bonil was exc- 
 tuteil by the underwriters and owners bv whicji 
 they respectively agreed to pay the said loss 
 iiucorilnig to their several sh.ares in the vessel 
 her earnings as freight and her cargo, the same i 
 to he stated and apportioned iii accordance with 
 
 ni ISW, when the fact was that it was an old 
 •■essel, extensively rei)aire.l and given a new 
 , name and. register, but containing' the original 
 engine l.oder and machinery, with some of the 
 olil m.-iterial, is a iiiisreDresentation and avoid.s 
 tlie policy, whether made with intent to deceive 
 or iK.t. laschere.-ui,,J.. .lis.sentiiig. Xon, Scotia. 
 MtiriHii ( 0. V. .Stcmisoii, 'SA S. ('. [{, l,S7. 
 
 Partial Loss- Tot,,/ /.„,„. ] _ a vessel insured 
 
 oi , NO. age Iron, Newfoundland toCajie Breton 
 
 e t ashore on ().i,d,.r .SOth at a place where 
 
 to tid\el .several miles to communicate with the 
 owners. On Xoveniber 2i,d a tu.^ came to the 
 
 the establishcl usage nn.F a ■ ^ ^ P o^ i e" nhce whe .r''''''T'' -'''' '' *"^ '^'"''^ '" *' 
 insimihn- cases by 1i named adjust^" S^ ' fcj b, t ^r"' r'"'-""^ """^^'''f "•'>''^'>. 
 having been made to save both vessel ainl e ™, 1 Let J, i l^' t ? '" '''^''^"' '•^•'"^'^'1 '" try to 
 resulting in a portion of the latter bein- t ik: n fhl \l, ^'f"' <-»" ^^'V-^'"'";'' Kith one of 
 
 out h.it^he 'remainder and he v s ■? t .^ ' l ~^^^^ the captain went to the vessel 
 
 .hanaone.1, the adjuster apportioned the Is il v t! v I , "''''^' VV'"'""'' "'"' ^''■' '"'lowing 
 imiking the greater part paUl,lc by ..' vne s m rct.^^: M^'^r'''.''''' '^ '''''^" '^""""'t- ^1'^ 
 . In ail action on the bo ,d ' ' ' ^ u r! ^r ^"l"^"^' ''"VV'}}^ '"■'■ ^'-"I taking 
 
 of the cargo. In aii action on the bond to re 
 
 ifiver this amount :— 
 Hekl. aihrming the decisions bclo«-, 1<| \ i; 
 
 41; 20 0. R. •2!).-,; and 19 O. 1!. 4112; thftt'the 
 
 owners of the cargo were only liable, under the 
 
 homl, tojiay such amount as would be le.'ally 
 
 due according to the princijiles of the law I'x.hit- 
 
 iiii; to general average ; that the cargo and ves- 
 
 .'^oi were never in that common jjcril wdiicli is 
 
 the foundation of the right to claim for -'eneral 
 :iveiaye; that the money expended, bcvond 
 what was the actual cost of the salvage o'f the 
 cargo saved, was in no sense exiieiuU-d for the 
 heuefit of the cargo owners : and the defendants 
 hiivnigpuid into Court a .snm suHicient to cover 
 sueh actual cost the underwriters were not en 
 titled to a greater ainounl. IVi.if, 
 (''•■ V. Oiilario Coal Co., 21 .S. C. F 
 
 tasurance on Advances-- )ro,v//»V'VVV/;.»'5dil'2;.is!!^!!m'''' ""' ^totaj'lo^l^ i.^ing one 
 
 >'"'..."- 1 ..-..--^ . ,"/':.'^^"-' ,V'=tt the \esselluving been stran.lcd only, and 
 
 .here being no satisiuetory proof that she could 
 lo li.ave been rescue.l an,! repaired, the owners 
 , could not claim a total lo.ss : — 
 
 Held, fhvynne, J., dis.senting, that there l,ein,r 
 I \ ideiice of some lo.ss under the policy, and th? 
 , owner being entitled, in his action for a total 
 , loss, to rec.jver damages for a partial loss, a 
 , non-suit could not be entered, but there should 
 ^ be a new trial, unless the parties agreed on a refer- 
 Hehl. aihrniing the judgment of the <;ourt be- i '"^Jo:^::Tr\aT ^i^::^!^ i^^^:, 
 
 recover damages for a i.artial loss of which ho 
 offered no endenee at ih,. f,.i„i ,,„. ,,^,^(,,,1 ,^j^^ 
 
 ■lit the sails and ngging; ' :vo notice of "ab;,^^ 
 nonment was given to the underwriters, and the 
 owners brought- an a.aion on the p,di.-y, claiming 
 a to al los.s. I he only evidence of l„.:is given at 
 
 ha '■';!, T ""*i " ''"-■ ^^'''^'^'"' w-'io°r,..late,l 
 nh.it the tug bad .huie, and swore th.-it, i„ hi- 
 ''pinion the vessel was too high on the rocks to 
 l.'egototi ihejuryb,uud. inan.sweriO(,uesthms 
 ubniittc,!, that the vessel was a total Ireck in 
 the poMtu.n she was in and that a notice of 
 almn.h.nment wonhl not have l„.n.-titcd the 
 underwritei-s. On appeal from a judmnent re- 
 tu.sing to .set aside a verdict for the plaintitiand 
 order .-I nonsuit or ncH- trial •— 
 
 Held, per Ritchie. C.J., and Stro,;. , ,) Ti,;it 
 
 - ,""''■*' '^^''^'"''-'iie'e to justify the tr/al Jud./e i„ 
 
 'in>_A..,.-„„o: , caving to the jury td ,,ue;,ion whc li^ o?u^ 
 
 I ,'.! -.'-r'-'' r-^' '\ ^"*'^' '-*«' ^""l the bnding of 
 
 owner . „ ^ 
 
 00 eatwe to be insured, lost or not'lost,''the ^twn 
 ' t •;■ OOO. (,u advances, upon the body, <.tc 
 ■■' Hie l;//.,u Rerry. The rest of the .jolic'y 
 ■vas appheable t > insurance on the ship 
 'iny. I,. & .'o. y,c-;.. man.-iging owners who 
 .»! expemled c-nsK!era!,le in,,ney in repairs on 
 'lie vessel. i , an ...ctJon on the ijolicy the in- 
 -iirei-s claim.:! ihat iho iiisni-Hnee was on ad- 
 >^"ice.s by the ..-.-.vneis which were not insuv- 
 
 ' that the inslniment must, if possible, be 
 
 nstrued as va,lul and ..flfectual, and to do so 
 
 ■worus " on advances " might be treated as 
 
 s iplu.-ago or as merely a reference to the in- 
 
 .lenient which led the owners to insure the 
 
 01 t',. ,'"■"-''""■'"'" •'I -•'■'"»•««« To. v. /,rt„. 
 
 1!- :i25. 
 
 Mlsrnpresentatlon —A 
 
 ■" f/f'y'.VfMii..]_\Vherei 
 
 Tideneeat the tl•ial,^«„ .estcd iiis 
 aim wl,o y upon ,-i total los.s. Pliu-nix hw. 
 Co. V. Jli'(,/iic, 18 S. C. R. 61. 
 
 Salvage - A,/Jn-</,„nit of Claim—Poii-n- of 
 
 Al.'oi 
 
 '-.'/ 
 
 A crew of a tishing schooner li.ai! 
 
 'cpa'i>-< to Old V: 
 
 aiieo risk 
 
 jiiihm' ceiiain salvage ,«ervi.,,„ 
 eieiict ship, and gave the foil 
 
 per- 
 ic-es in respect of a 
 
 IS rcsi-ned on the ground of m 
 
 SMtntioi, it oui,hc to be mad 
 
 It of an insur- j attorney respecting the el 
 
 owing power of 
 
 isrepre- | the agent of the owner ot tl 
 
 laim for .iui.h ser\ 
 
 i-yclcarthatsiich jthe undersigned, be 
 
 ing all th 
 
 !ie ;-chooner 
 
 lu crew o 
 
 ices to 
 if tl 
 
 :ie 
 
535 
 
 INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. 
 
 (i m 
 
 solionner lohmthe ct tlie time said schooiicr ren- 
 .k-ied HiilvMgo s(.rvic-fs to tliu l,ai,|uc <,hirh,;; ,\o 
 
 til re hy inevocil.ly fdHNtitute and appiiiiit Joseiih 
 *J. 1 loctor oiu- tine mid lawful attoiiiey, witli 
 T«nyerof siilistitution, for us, and in oin- name 
 aiwl liehalt as iirowof the said sdiooncr, to l,nn<' 
 miitoi' otlu-nvise settle and adjnsl any claiin 
 « liic 1 we may have for salvage serviers ren- 
 deied to the l>ai(|ue (Juehcc reeently towed into 
 the port otJIalilax, \„vaSeotia, by said schooner 
 Jolanthe ; lierel,y graiitiiiKnnto our saidaltorney 
 lull liower ami authority to a.;t in ami eoneern- 
 iMg tlie promises as fully and elleetuallv as we 
 niight do It jiersonally j.resent, and also power 
 at his discretion to constitute and appoint, fnmi 
 time to tune, as occasion may require, one or more 
 agents under hini or to suhstitute an attorney for 
 us in Ins place, and the authority of all such 
 agents or attorneys at pleasure to revoke '' :— I 
 Hehl, that this instrument did not authorize 
 tlie agent to receive the sah'age payable to the 
 crew or to release their litui upon the ship in 
 respect of which the salvage services were per- 
 formed. (•:.) That iiayment of a sum agreed 
 ujion between the owners of such ship anil the 
 agent, and the latter's receipt therefor, did not 
 bar salvors Irom maintaining an action for th-ir 
 services. Tin Ship (Jnehrc, 'A Ex. ('. R. .S;j. 
 
 Salvage— ('ii/ti.'<ioii ~ Sa/i-fK/e ,SVrc/cv's />,,- 
 formc,lh.in,,e W-s.,! to the. Other vhere ISoth at 
 J>mdt.\~\\ here two vessels in collision are botli 
 at ault and one vessel renders salvage services 
 to the other, when the value of such services are 
 determined it shouhl be divided and the .salved 
 vessel only be leijuircd to pay one-half (,f the 
 S"r ""/•■ J'''-"- ^^" '"'"'> "'"' 'J'l^'' J-'m>,,/ J>ulard, : 
 
 a&\wa,s(i-<lure,;i,mnt VesHel—Sper;„l Con- 
 rac/.J-A steamship belonging to the Dominion 
 (government went ashore on the Lsland of Aiiti- 
 costi, ami suppliants reii.lercd assistance with 
 their wrecking .steamer in getting her afloat 
 Hie service rendered consisted in carryin.- out 
 one of the stranded steamships anchors, alid in 
 taking a hawser and pulling <,n it until she c.-,me 
 OH J-or carrying out the anchor it was ad- 
 mitted that the suppliants had bargained for 
 eompeiKsation at ther.iteof lifty,l„ll,,,.san hour, 
 but xvhether the liargain inchide.l the other part 
 ot .lie service rendered or not, was in dispute. 
 Ihe service was continuous, -no circumstances 
 of sud.leii risk or <langer having ari.sen to render 
 one iKirt <,t tlu! work more dilticult or dangerous 
 than the other : — 
 
 Held, that the rate of compen.satioii admit- 
 le<l y agreed upon in respect of can ying out the ' 
 aneiior must, under the circumstauc'cs, be taken 
 us albu-dmg a lair measure of compensation fori 
 the entire service. I 
 
 (2.) A petition of riglit will not lie for salvage ! 
 services rendered to a stcanishii) belonging to the 
 Dominion (Jovernmeiit. Coatt.tc v. Th,i\h,eeu, 
 
 Salvage - Ordhwry Semce-JnnMirtKm „r 
 I e-, .Adininili,, ('onrt.\~A ship was stranded on 
 a rocky shore with a jioint <.f rock protrudine- 
 through her hull. H. was employed to blast it 
 away and .so tree the ship ;_ 
 
 <o '/ Ti' ' /l?^ II'" T'f ""' '^ *^'^''^.-'« ^^"'i"-'^ 
 U.) that the Vice-Admiralty Court had juris- 
 
 dicuon to award reasonable remuiierution in 
 
 536 
 
 respect to the same. The n'nit, 2 W I;,, I, -(, 
 reterre.l to. The Costa liicu, 3 K.s. C, W. ix 
 
 Salvage - ■ Towwie -- E,pns, A,ire< m. „, f,^ 
 
 Award -(;oxt..^-X stranded vessel, abaudora.! 
 by the owners to the underwriters and ^,,1,1 U 
 them, was .saved, and was brought by th,- |,i,r 
 chasers to a shipwright for rejiairs : - 
 
 Held, liiatthe towage ot the veiael lh,u. tlii. 
 l)la(.'e where stranded to the dry-dock wis '■, 
 salvage service. 
 
 (•-'.) Claim for use of anchor, chains, et.' i,s«| 
 III .saving vessel :--Held, a salvage servirv ' 
 
 (.S.) Claim for personal services not perfornieil 
 on vessel : -Held, not a salvage service. 
 
 (4.) Claim for services of tug in an unNiicc..8s- 
 lul attempt to remove vessel :-Held, not i .J 
 vage .service Salvage is a reward for bcneKts 
 actually coiiterreil : — 
 
 (.">.) Held, following the usual rule, that not 
 more than a moiety of the value of tlie ;■. v ^t the 
 time svheii saved should be awanled to salvors 
 there being no exceptional feature except the 
 small value of tlie res. ' 
 
 Costs of salvors awarded out of other luoiotv 
 I Costs of arrest and sale and of briu-iiig fi.ndinto 
 i ( ourt paid in priority to claims out of fuml i,, 
 i proportion to the value of the /•-.,• at the time ot 
 i (leliyery to the Dry Dock Coinpanv, and balance 
 : ot tiie jiroceeds of sale, which was not sullicient 
 ; to pay claim of possessory lit/ii-holder Thr 
 I aienijjer, ;i Kx. C. II. 57. ' ' 
 
 Salvage -Ti>nri;,e—Profe.-<>^loiial ami Volun- 
 leer !^<rnces~-lhi!r of Compe,imlhii.\-'Si\hnm: 
 means rescue from threatened loss or iniuiv No 
 danger no salvage. If the ship be in dkn-er, 
 then tile rescuers can earn a s.dvage icuard 
 which, on the grounds of public pfdicv, is to 
 be hbend but yet varies according t„ the muni, 
 neuceof the danger to the ship on the one hand, 
 and the skill and enterprise aiuldan-erot the 
 salvfirs on the other hand. ^ 
 
 (2.) A small jiacket steamer, Mliile perl'oriiiiuL' 
 iueof lier regular trips between certain points 
 
 thick weather, discovered 
 
 a large steaiiishiij 
 
 111 
 
 lying at anchor in such a position as toheiii 
 imminent daii-cr of becoming a tot.il lo.ss. The 
 latter signalled the formerand asked to be towed 
 into port, 'i'his tlie packet .steamer refused t« 
 do, wishing to prosecute her vovau'e, but a..,'i-eed 
 to tow the ship out of her dangerous po-jtioii to 
 the open sea. and there give iier capt.MK direc- 
 tions to enable him to reach his port ol .hstina- 
 tion. This oiler was acceijted and acted upon, 
 ill conducting the ship to the o))cn sea the packet 
 steamer jieiformed the services both of a pilot 
 and tug, and shewed skill and enterpri-c, and 
 incurred apjircciable risk, wnile .so engageil :- 
 Held, to be a salvnge, and not a mere towaue 
 service. 
 
 Si mlile, w hile the Court is disposed to contine 
 the claims of iirofessional jjilots and tugs to the 
 tarill scale for sucii professional services, a 
 volunteer ought to be allowed a more liberal 
 rate of compensation. Canadian / 'a c i tl ,■ Xavi- 
 liathii, Co. \. Ship C. F. Sari/eiil, :i Ex. C. R. :j:iL>. 
 
 INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. 
 
 Sue CRO\yN, II. 
 
536 
 
 The Wall, 2 W. l;,,h. 70 
 I Jt'icu, H j;.\. C. i;. •.>;), ' 
 
 --E.riiris.^ .[(jvii in. Ill (iff 
 '■■ii/t—AiiioniU of S'lli'iujt 
 niult'il Vf.ssul, !il)iUi(l(ine(l 
 iiulcrwritf rs and suld hv 
 WiiH liroiiglit liy til,; piir'. 
 t for rejKiirs : — 
 e of the vertsel tiou, tho 
 to tliu (lr'\--(li,ck wivs H 
 
 UK'hor, L'liain.s, fti;,, used 
 I, ii aidvaj,'e .sci-viix-. 
 .1 servires nut ijcrtornieil 
 sal\-age servicL'. 
 * of til;,' in ail iiiisiii.'wss- 
 •esstd : -Held, not a .sj. 
 ia a reward for heueKts 
 
 he usual i-ide, that not 
 
 10 value of tlie r..«atthe 
 
 be awardeil to salvdrs, 
 
 3nal feature exceiit the 
 
 led out of other inoitty. 
 ;ndof hriiii,duj,'fi. 11(1 into 
 J claiui.s out of huid, in 
 )f the iv.-i at the time ol 
 vCoiiipaiiy.and balance 
 ivhieh was not sulficient 
 isory lii'iidiolder. Tkr. 
 
 'nifi'.-ii'ioinil. ami Volun- 
 'omiii'ii.talini). ] —Salvage 
 ened loss or injniy. \(, 
 tlie shi)! he in diuiger, 
 am a salvaj;e )e\varil, 
 if public iioliey, is to 
 
 aecordiug to thu muni- 
 e ship oil the one hand, 
 rise and ilau-er dt tbe 
 1. 
 
 aiiier, Mhile pori'.iiniiiig 
 l)el\ieeii certain ]i(iints 
 red a !ari:,'e stearnsliii) 
 
 a position as to he in 
 niii;^- a total l.i.s-. The 
 •ami askeil to hr tnwed 
 iet .steanier refused to 
 ler vo> aj:e, but a^'reell 
 •dangerous )io-ition to 
 ;ivc her eapt.,, , direc- 
 icli his port oi (li;:;tina- 
 pted and arted upon, 
 -iieopen sea the packet 
 rviees both of a pilot 
 1 and enterpn-f. and 
 
 wnile so engai'eil :- 
 nd not a mere towage 
 
 ; is disposed to iniifine 
 ])ilots and tugs to the 
 fessional services, ii 
 lowed a more lilieral 
 iiKulkui I'ac'iiii- .Vrtui- 
 (•,'/f»/, .SKx.C. [{.:«:>. 
 
 J RAILWAY. 
 
 N-, II. 
 
 537 
 
 INTEREST. 
 
 INTEREST. 
 
 538 
 
 Award. J-l,iider tiie law of tli. I'rovinue of 
 (Juehec where intere.st lri« been alh.w.d .>n an 
 award by the Ollieial Arbitiatois a idaini for 
 loss et profits or rent eannot be eiilertaiiied bv 
 the Court on appeal, as sueh interest must l.e 
 regunled as repieseiiting the j.i.dits. AV /V„„./i,. 
 
 ,:':''" t'"-'' ."•'"'■? '^-l. •■'. "!». 'Hid /,V IWI„,.n-l,, 
 Ita loz 84, .., .4S., .\o. .pj, referred to. I'avadU 
 
 V. Ill' (iiiifii, 1 i.x. c. i:. liii. 
 
 Bond— //;/,,•,,,/ />o.,/ /;;,;„ __ r)a,„wi,:s 1 — 
 Lpon a bond for the payment of inonev ,m a 
 eertain day, with interest at a Hxed r.itedinvn to 
 tlia day, a further eontraet for the eontiiiuance 
 of he same rate ot interest eannot be imnlie.l 
 ami thereafter interest is not reeoverable an 
 mterest but as dania-es. aoodr/,a/> v. l;„h, rU, 
 14 Ch. \\ 4!) referred to. 
 
 yl.) Ill asse>Mng damages in the nature (,f 
 iiitereU on a b(,ml payable at a particular place 
 reference should, in general, lie had to the rules 
 in force at the place where the same is so i.ay- 
 able. IhrQunn v. Urund Trunk H. 11' Co •' ' 
 K.v. C. K. 132. ■' - 
 
 ;.ritish Ijiorth America Act ~ Proowria/ 
 
 111 nt the i.nti.s 1 .North .America Act Canada is 
 nmiie h.'.ble tor the <lebt of eoch IVovinee exist- 
 ing at the union. By 1)2, ( )ntario ami Quebec 
 arejoiiitlyhable to Canada for any excess of 
 tl e debt of the Province of Canada at the time 
 of he union over .*(i2,-,()0,()(JO and chargeable 
 will ..per cent, interest thereon; sections 114 
 and 11,. make a like provision for the debts of 
 ^ova Scotia and New I!r,inswi,dv e.xcee.lin.' 
 eight and seven n.dlions respeetivelv ; and by 
 
 10,1 the debts ot those Provinces sh.„dd be 
 less than s.'ud amounts they are entitled coi 
 receive, by half-yearly payments in advance i 
 interest at the rate of .-. per cent, on the diHer' i 
 ence. Section US, after providing for annual! 
 payments of fixed sums to the several Provinces 
 for support of their governments, ami an ad- 
 . 1. loiial sun, per hea.l of the ,,op„latioii, enacts 
 lut s ich grants shall be in settlement <,f al' 
 u uiv demands on Canada an,l shall be ,,aid 
 lialf-yearly in advance to each Province, but the 
 government ol Canada shall deduct from such 
 grants, as against any Province, all sums char^.e- 
 iihle as mterest on the public debt of th.t 
 Province in excess of the several Mnouiits stipu- 
 
 , l'" ,'m ^''■' ^^'^ '''■''' "^ t''^ '■'■"^•""-•t' of 
 i,;^ e H '."J '"""," '''"''^^'^'^'^ the sum mentioned 
 
 abitators appointed to a.ljust the accounts be- ' 
 
 eei the Dominion and the Provinces of Ontario i 
 
 ana ynebee: — I 
 
 Held afKrming said awa,-d, that the subsidy ' 
 
 of the I lovmces under section IKS was payable 
 
 .^m tlie Ut.f July, ls.i7, but interest',,^ te 
 
 xcess of ,ebt .should not be deducted until 1st 
 
 January ISfiS ; (hat unless expres.sly n o ded' 
 
 t":n.rM'T:[ '" !'^ ''''"^ before Viri' 
 Z 'p V "ir^" "" '"'■P^'^-^^ provision in 
 
 I II 1 , ,'""'• ^"^r'''' ^^-^t t'lat interest 
 M,, II he deducted ,n advance on the excess of 
 ■li.'ht under section US. Bv.'il v;,,, ..j, nr> ,^ 
 
 the^Jvi,!''■^'^""'^'''^'^'^"■^'^ t'^'^^'th'^ 'i'^l'f of 
 11, T "\^''"'"^" '^* t'>e "»'"n was then 
 «oitaiiied to be .*i73,O()(i,088.84, and that the 
 «.l'SKl,es should thc-eufte; be paid .aecoidt^g to 
 
 ,^uch amount, liy I, Vi,:t. ch. 4, in issl, it wa.H 
 piovid,..l th.it theacciuints botueen the Domiii- 
 'ou and the Piovinces should be calcnlalcl as if 
 the last in,.nl,oned .Acts bad directed that such 
 , ncrea.se^sl,ouh be allowed from the coming into 
 force of the jintish North America .Vet? and 
 It also provide.l that the total amount ..f tho 
 balt-yeaily payments which would liave been 
 luadeon aceoiiut of such increa.-,e f,-om .lulv bst, 
 IM.,. to .January l.st, |,S7;i. with inter, st at 5 
 percent, fnoii the day on uhhii a v ,,nhl have 
 iH'eii so p:,i,l todniy 1st, I SS t. .diould b,- .leciied 
 capital owing to th,. i-espectiv,. i'rovinccs bear- 
 ing interest at .". percent, and payable after .July 
 1st ISS4, as part, of t he y.^arlv subsidies :_ 
 
 Helil, alliriningtlM'sai,l awar.i, (;wviine J 
 di.><.seiiting, that the last nu„tione,l Acis dhl not 
 author,/,, the Dominion to ,le,luct interest in 
 ailvance t,.om the sub.si.lies payable t,, the Pro- 
 vinces half-yearly but leaves smd, ,k,luctioii as 
 It was under the l!,-itisli .\ortl, Anieii,., Act. 
 Domunon o, Camula v. Pron.ns of Ontario 
 (I lid Qiiilicc, 24 S. C. P. 4!)8. 
 
 Contract-r,,Y//,^,.„/..j^_I„ .^i, action for 
 balanc.. ot contract and exti-.-i Mork interest was 
 I allowe,! from the date of the final certificate. 
 /</n:s V. (jiiihic Harbour Com„iU,io,ii-r.'<. 19 S 
 ( . K. (.8... 
 
 i Cost^.l-In the absence of special ag,-eoment. 
 I tf est cimnot^be reeovce.l upon an' untaxe.l 
 , bill of costs. Cameron v. H,t,,hs. U P. K. 5(i. 
 
 I Expropriation. 1- Land nnist, from the d.ate 
 
 ; 1 n'uP;'l""-:/;f "'r ''>-.-''^"' ''^' '''■'""•'i t.. have 
 
 j been taken by the city eo,po,.atio„, and in- 
 : ^i^';*;;'* '« P'K-^^h\c on the whole sum from that 
 
 Muj. y Jhiri- Vail,,, I!. II". Co., L. R. 1!) K,. 
 
 ;',', ""' /" '■'■ '""''">" "I'd lliniiinijliam, 27 Ch. l> 
 uf4, followed. 
 
 An a,;bitrator has j„ri.s,lictio„ i„ >ncli case to 
 awar,l in erest. /,', M,u'i,li..r.oi, and Vih, of 
 loronto, 2UU. R. ;,-,8. '' ■' 
 
 Foreign Judgment.] I ntcest inclu,le,l in 
 ttrtTl'i^'of. '" '""^"' ^"''«"'^'"'^ '^ ■■'" ""«g-l 
 
 folSed°" ''■ ^^''""'^' - ''"'■'■■ ''* I'- 1^'^^- 
 Interest upon the amount of sn,-!i a iml,rm,-nt 
 cannot, under sections Sr. and N(i of the .iTuliea- 
 turcAct, 1. S. (,, eh. 44, be recovercl except 
 as unuiuulateil, lania.es. Sohne. v. SfairCl/, 
 hi P. R 2W ^^^""""^"'''Vl'^-'^onthv.^cpoiuU, 
 
 Foreign JuagmBntSiniiman/Jndnnii^nf 1— 
 .ec'.r,.;': '""* "^ «•'!>"''""« was i„,io,-sed to 
 •etoverth.Munount of a fceign ju.lgment. to- 
 
 .Sllment*:-"''''"^* ^'■"'" *'"^ ''""^ ^htreof intil 
 
 Ifcl.l that tho claim for intcest was for an 
 
 u lupu, a e,l amount, and the tvo chums to- 
 
 mJ, t w' 11 •""r'1"",V^"'' '-' «°°'* «1"-'«'"1 "»l<"-se- 
 ment within Rule 245 • 
 
 u„on si; ;'''"•/•'"*■' "'« Pl.-'intifTwas not entitled 
 upon s lei, indorsement to a summary iud,rm,.nt 
 "ii-lcr laife 7;i9 lor the amount of the foreign 
 judgment only w,th liberty to p.oceed for the 
 .ut<:,.est ; tor that Rule is ,,ot applicable where 
 theie IS a chum tor a liquidate,! .lemand joined 
 to one for ui,li.|uidated damages. 
 
liil 
 
 Hi m 
 
 i 
 
 539 
 
 INTEREST. 
 
 Kules "-M."), 70"), 711, inid 7.'?!), i;oiisiil('ic(l. 
 So/m<.^ V. SI„iJ\,r<l, l(i 1". H, 78, followed. 
 
 540 
 
 <liscliargo under section 7 of R. S. C. lii. lo- 
 
 "„ > , ':■"',.;;,■■,,■".,'."' ■■"■""<;,"• ■'" A'-t'^l'i'^-ling interest, upon uavmcntiifH,'! 
 
 Hayy.MnMo,, 1^ I • H- o!« ,.n..t followed, inineipal and interest loia.tl>«-\v tl , 
 Holhn.hry. l'jculke.s\i,l'.U.\,.,. , months' additional interest /«,v /--ol' 
 
 /"rt/'/e;- V. Parktr, '.'4 U. K. .'J73. . ' ' 
 
 Mortgage. I — Undei' ordinary cireumstances a 
 nuirtKiigee ean claim interest oilly from tiie time 
 the moni.'y is advanced. Kilnumih v. Ilitmilhiii 
 Prori'liiit tuul Louii Society, IS A. M. ,S47. 
 
 Mortgage— ^1 ,>Tor,< of IiiU'.rist.] — Y{. S. O. 
 ch. Ill, SCI!. ]7, which jjrovides that no more 
 than si.\ years' arrears of interi'st ujion money 
 charged njion land shall be recoverable, only 
 applies where a mortgagee is seeking to enforce 
 pajmeut. out of the lands, of his mortgage 
 money and interest, and does not apjily to an 
 action for redemption i.r to actions similar in 
 priiuiplc. 
 
 In tills action the mortgagee was held entitled 
 to intciest at the rat<! lixeil liv the mortgages up 
 to the maturity tiiereof, and afterwards at the 
 rate of six jier cent.; in all for about sixteen 
 years. Ddautyv. Canadian I'nr'lia A'. 11'. Co . 
 '21 O. J!. 11. 
 
 Mortgage — ////('/vsV ;)o.s/ d;em.] — A mort- ' 
 gage of real estate provided for payment of the 
 principal money secured on or before a lixed date 
 •' with interest thereon at the rate of ten per 
 centum per annum until such princi|)al nu)ney 
 and interest shall be fully paid and siitislied '' :— 
 
 Hehl, atlirmingtlie iudgment of the Court of 
 Appeal for Ontario, 17 A. K. 85. that the 
 mortgage carried interest at the rate of ten per 
 cent, to the time fixed for ]iaynicnt of the prin- 
 cijial (Jidy, and after that date the mortgagees 
 could lecover no more than the statutory rate 
 of six per cent, on the unpaid principal. ,SV. 
 John V. Nyhrf, 10 S. (\ R. :>78, followed. 
 Peoph's Loan and J)r/,usit Co. v, Uraiit, 18 S. 
 C. R. '_>6-2. 
 
 Prohibition Quousque.] Where a Uivisio,, 
 Court has jurisdiction at tlic time of the ius'itu 
 tion ot an action, but, by the addition o'" inter- 
 est accruing during its iiendcncy, judfiii,.„i j,, 
 
 1 given for an amount bey 1 tlic jurisdicij,,,, „t 
 
 the Court, prohibitiim will be granted imlil tli.. 
 Judge amends the judgment by striking out the 
 e.xccss; or a paitial prohibition will l,e issued 
 to prevent the enforcement of judgment for the 
 
 I excess. Pe Elliotl v. Bkttc, 21 U. R. r.y,-). 
 
 Promissory Noto—Spirial Tndorxowut \- 
 I'.y sections r.7 and 8S of the IHlLs of Kxeliium' 
 A(;t, the interest accruing due after the rial cof 
 iiiaturity of a promissory note is recoverable 
 hy statute as liquidated damages and it i.s tfj 
 be calculated at the rate of si.x per cent uer 
 ^ annum, m the ab.sence of a special contract L 
 ! a ditiereiit rate. 
 
 ; And where, in an action upon two proiiiissorv 
 notes, the plaintitl by the indorsement on the 
 writ of summons claimed the principal .uid a 
 detinite sum for interest, without .si)cciiviiig t|ie 
 rate or the dates from wiiich it was I'alciiiated 
 such sum being less than interest at six percent' 
 from the dates of nuiturity : — 
 
 Held, a good s|)ecial indorsement. 
 Loii(/on, tic, llinikx. Clmicartii, [IS!)'.'] I OU 
 089, ■■iiid Lawii'iict v. WilU^od';*, ili. Uitii 'fol' 
 
 lowerl. ' 
 
 /.'(//-y V. M,i>ltr, :/,. C74, and Wi/ls v. Ifooil 
 d,. ()84,^distinguished. MrVlnir \. McLawMn, 
 
 Mortgage — InUrent on Interest — Special 
 End(»:-<'iii(nl.] — Jn an action to recover the 
 amonnl due under a mortgage, the plaintitl' 
 indorsed upon his writ of summons parti- 
 culars of liis claim, shewing the date of the 
 mortgage, the jjarties, the amount of princi)ml 
 and interist eliiimed, and the date when the in- 
 terest fell due ; also a statement that, by the 
 terms of the mortgage, on default in jjayment 
 of interest the jirincipal became due, and that 
 default in payment of interest had been made. 
 Interest on overdue interest was also claimed, 
 but no contract theref(U- was alleged : — 
 _ Held, that the indorsement was not a sutli- 
 cient special iiuhu'sement to support a .suniniary 
 judguKiut under Rule 7;{0, in that it omitted tlie 
 dates from which interest was claimed, and did 
 not state a contract to jiay interest upon inter- 
 est ; and that the affidavit in support of the mo- 
 tion could not be read with the indorsement so 
 as to make it good. 
 
 Co/d Ores Peduction Co. v. Parr, [1892] 2 
 Q. B. 14, followed. Munro v. Piku, 15 P. rT 
 164. 
 
 Said of ■L&.nd—Assnmpdon of E„niiiil.ramt 
 ~l!al(. oj lnler:M.]-ln an agreement fur the 
 ' exchange of land it was stated that the propertv 
 "_was subject to a mortgage incnmhraiice o't 
 .>/.)0, bearing interest at the rate of 7 per cent 
 per annuni." The property was one of four 
 houses and lots, mortgaged for ^W,^)^ with 
 interest at ten per cent, payable half veaily, to 
 lie reduced, if punctually paid, to seven per 
 cent., with an agreement to release each house 
 on payment of .'J750 : — 
 
 Held, that the agreement did not convey ;ui 
 accurate statement as to the nature of tlie in- 
 cumbrance. Pe Booth and JlcUan, 21 11 
 452. 
 
 Mortgage for Purchase Money— Pli/ht to 
 J.hsrhari/t. \— Under a mortgage given to secure 
 the balance of purchase money, and in which 
 the principal is payable by matalruents extend- 
 ing beyond five years, the mortgagor is at any 
 time after such last named period, entitled to a 
 
 Sale of Land— //(rrrcsY Pat/id,/, hy /'mvlmer 
 — Delay -~Df/„ all of I 'endor. ]'- - Umk-r a contract 
 ot purchase of real estate providing that "if 
 : from any cause whatever " the purchase money 
 was not paid at a specified time, interest should 
 be paid from the date of tl..." contract, tlic pur- 
 chaser IS relieved from payment of such interest 
 while the delay in payment is caused by tliewil- 
 fill d('fault of the vendor in i)erforniiiig the 
 obligations imposed upon him. 
 i A contract containing such provision also pro- 
 : vided for the ))ayment of the purcha.se money 
 on delivery of the conveyance to he prc|jared liy 
 the vendor. A conveyance was tendered which 
 the vendee would not accent, whereu'inii the 
 vendor brought suit for rescission of tlie con- 
 tract, which the Court refused on the yrouml 
 that the couveyance tendered was defective. 
 
540 
 
 1 7 of R. s. c. oh. 127 
 ;st, upon piiyment (if th.] 
 ; tofe'ctlier witli thr^c 
 toifst. Ill n- I'luhr 
 K. ;(7:i. 
 
 ue.] When.' a Division 
 tlio time of tlio iiistitu- 
 ly tlic additiiiii i,f iiiter- 
 l><:Ii(loii(;y. ,jlliU;iiifiit i.H 
 ■oihI the jiliisiliciii,!, u\ 
 »ill lie; ;,'raii1i'i| uritii tlie 
 it'ut 1)> sti-iliiiig (iiit tile 
 uiiiliitiim ■will lie issutd 
 eat of jiulgment f(ir the 
 
 itu, 21 o. R. r.y,-). 
 
 i/iirial linlorsfiiifiii ■_ 
 the Hills (,f Kxcliuiige 
 11,' line aftfi- the dati; of 
 i-y iioto is i-cooveriiUc 
 I (liiiiiagc'S and it i.s to 
 to of six per cont. per 
 •S a special eoiitnict for 
 
 )ii iipoii two inniiiissory 
 le iiidorseiiient on the 
 d the priiici|)al and a 
 without .speriiyiiig the 
 hiull it va.s ealcidiiteil, 
 iiiterestat six per euiit.' 
 
 uUirseiiieiit. 
 'Iinirarh/, [ISOl'] I O.B. 
 Willcodci, 11). ()!)(), fol- 
 
 t, and lI'Mv V. IIVw/, 
 rVifurv. M<- Liui'MiL 
 
 ntion of Eiiniiiihranci 
 an agreement for the 
 ated that the property 
 tgage ineiunhraiice ol 
 the rate (if 7 per cent, 
 jrty was one of four 
 iged for .•:--;i,(HIO with 
 )ayahle half yearly, to 
 y paid, to seven per 
 to release each house 
 
 nt did not convey u\ 
 :he nature of the in- 
 III MrLtUH, 21 (I. i;. 
 
 Pnyahic hy I'uirhmr 
 '/'.] —Under a contract 
 3 providing that "if 
 the purchase money 
 time, interest shouh'l 
 .'.' contract, the pur- 
 •ment of such interest 
 t is caused hy tliewil- 
 r in performing the 
 lim. 
 
 cli provision also pro- 
 the purchase money 
 ice to he pre|iare(l hy 
 3 was tendered which 
 -•ept. whereupon the 
 escission of the con- 
 fused on the ijrDunil 
 ured was defective. 
 
 511 
 
 INTEREST. 
 
 842 
 
 He then refused to ("^eent thi. iiii../.i.™,.„ 
 
 «-"'«-- fro., ^^^tz:r^:tnz^^ '"•■ "~t 
 
 tlio vondee for specifit 
 
 paid. In an actioii 
 performance : — 
 
 Held, atlimiing the decision of the Court of 
 Appea, IDA. K. o<»l, that the vendee was not 
 obliged to pay interest from the time the suit 
 for resciHSKui was hegun, as, until it was de- 
 eided, the vendor was as.sertiiig tii.; failure of 
 the contract, and insisting that, he had ceased to 
 he tound l.y It, ami alter the decision in that 
 ..uit, he was claiming interest to which he was 
 imtentited, an, ii, hoth cases the vendee was 
 relieved from oldigation to tender the inirchas,. 
 money. ' 
 
 Hy the terms of the contract the vendor was 
 tnremuM in possession until the purchase money 
 was paid and receive the rents and profits •— 
 
 HfM, that up to the time the vendor became 
 uulela.ll, the vendee, by his agreement, was 
 precluded tron, claiming rents and prolits, and 
 was not entitled to them after that time, as he 
 lu.l been relieved from payment of interest, and 
 the purchase money had not been paid. Haue, 
 V. Eliii»l,-y, ;i3 S. C. R. ()03. ■'" 
 
 Sale of Land- /«/^m./ Pat/ahh l,„ />„,■ 
 •■U^n-~-Delay-^D,Uy tc JW/mn' ':onrnju„ri'.]- I eitller inTl' '""-^"""^ '""'.' '^ was ascertained, 
 .\ person in possession of land under a contract o v^?, ' ■ r?''" •'''^■'' ''•'■ "'^^ "^''^^eraent 
 
 t..r purchase, by which he agreed to pay the s'A "■'^!^t'.'"' t taken in the action, 
 purchase UKmey as soon as the convevanceJ rv, i'/' .''"i. oT'''' ['""' ^^"''"'' ^''-vr. A'. W 
 were ready for delivery, and interest t^e^'m j aV.Or^isthiulif ■'''■••■ ^''^-'''^^ ^ 
 
 ■•' i,,^;;:;-'"!;' fimtable .lamages. in the nature of 
 
 ntuest, l(,r. clay, be allowed to the plaintiffs 
 
 .avmg regard to their own delay in'SS 
 
 he actum and to tlie fact that the ouiissiS 
 
 a^e tan. the amount within the time h.vc^dby 
 
 teii.lant. McCaltiju^jh v. Vlemow, 2(i O. \l. 467. 
 
 -Mastei to take an account. 
 
 Idioii appeal from the rejmrt :- 
 
 bv the ^''f "l'' r"."'" "f ^"'"I'Xtation provided 
 y t e contract being departed from „„ c r 
 mty remained as to the a,n..unt payai le or the 
 time (. payment, to ascertain wh .1, sonid hin^ 
 
 .'=:,i:,tir;!';s.?; ;,f«*"" '■ -' •'» 
 
 it- ;■'„ V ";"',■";"' '■*"""»■ ""' ji-trii 
 
 I*- 10. \, S<,i(th-tii.^ hrii I!. \y c„ nsio->ii r'l 
 l-'O, [1S!).31 A. C. 4-». f.dlowell ^"•' ^ '"•'-J ^ ^^'■ 
 
 si.K"'' '■ ^"'''""""''''' -" W. K. ^23, con- 
 
 Nor could in te,x-st be alloued under section 
 «.., as n a case in which it had been usual for 
 ^^I'.iryto allow interest: for no del t existed 
 
 were ready for 
 
 from the date of the contract, is not relieved 
 /rnni hah.lity for such interest, unless the vendor 
 ;;."wiltnl default in carrying out his part o 
 the agreement, an, the purchase money is de- 
 linsited hy th.e vendee in a bank or other place 
 "t deposit, 111 an account sej.arate from his yen- 
 '■nil current account The vendor is not in wil- 
 t"l default where delay ,s cause.l by the ncces- 
 ..ty to per ect the title, owing to some ,^f the 
 
 the purchase money is to be pai,l as soonas^ihe 
 |-|Uiveyance IS rea,ly for delivery, ,loes not alter 
 lie rule tliat the conveyance should be prepared 
 hy the purchaser. Sfinnsoii v. Dari, ')•! ,s < • |. 
 fc'9, reversing 5. C, 19 A. R. 591 ; l>i'o R ,i4.,' 
 
 dat 
 
 W • '; ^-"^■^■- ^^ ^'- ^^- ■•'■ 'li^tiriguished 
 .V'»We interest ,s to be allowed between the 
 of the verdict and the jiulgineiit. Si^Zl 
 
 V. jr,/,vo//, i,j p. R_ ;{49_ 
 
 Surety - Inrreos,' in Rate of f„fre.'<l l~A 
 new agreement between the <lebtor and creditor 
 ^tending the time for payment of the debt a 
 mereasing the rate of interest, without the Jo 
 ^eut of the su.'ety, is a material alteration of the 
 •■ngiiml contract, and releases the surety 
 
 win — U<janj.] ~ A testatrix by her will 
 I directed that a legacj' should be paid out of The 
 
 wild he's' n 't "' '•■"'•'•■^' ""''*'-' ^'- 1-ndB 
 "erdJ::S:!^^"'^*"""-''-^ two years 
 
 llehl that interest upon the legacy should be 
 allowed from the day when theUy,^ years ex! 
 p.red; or, ,, the huuls were sooner s, Id fro^ 
 the date of sale. Re Jtobin.o,,, McDondlT 
 
 in- 
 
 liiiL' 
 
 ,,,^''f y7^«'''"ff T:,m/or Paynwil of I i r- 
 151 ' A'c«/c/,v Co. v. WiUon, 22 A. il. 
 
 "rou^iit lu Ibin, „p„,i ^ ^,,.itten agreeineat 
 
 Will-Z;^;,acy.]_ Where land was directed to 
 
 Where a testator be,pieathe.l a legacy to bl 
 paid by the devisee of certain lan,ls through the 
 executor in t^yenty semi-annual instattto 
 •^'th interest at the rate of six per cent.rpay- 
 
643 
 
 INTERPLEADER. 
 
 544 
 
 able at the tin .• (/ ea(^h iiiHtidiiiciit nw thu 
 amount of siuli payment to lie ojimiutcd fruni 
 the time of his iluceaso ; and \>y iimtiml c'lriu-, 
 interest was jiaiil witli cacli inHtalnient upon 
 the whole amount of principal (Ik n reinaininj^ 
 
 unpaid, uliirh payments of intcusl wei on- 
 
 Hunied )iy tlie !■ ^atee as income, while lie in- 
 veHted the instalments of principal, and the 
 legatee now liroiiyht this action in:ainNt the 
 executor and devisee, claiming' an instiihncnt as 
 still due, the ditcinlants allc<,'inj,' that he had 
 been overjiaid, and asking an account ; — 
 
 Held, l)y .Meredith, .]., that the over-pay- 
 ments of interest were made under inistaki; of 
 fttct, and c(jnl<l lie rcCTveredor setotl'; and that 
 the ]ilaintifl', hy reason of the overpayments, 
 was enabled to, and did, invest just so much of 
 the corjiK-^, at interest, and so in etlcct, got, and 
 should lie charged with interest ujion the over- 
 payments ; and it being adndtted that upon 
 this footing the plaiiititl' was fully paid, dis- 
 missed the action ; — 
 
 Held, liy the !)ivisionnl Court, aliinning that 
 judgment ; that the over jmij nients were made 
 under a mistake of fact, and might be recovered 
 or set of}'; but varying it : that an urcount should 
 be taken, and tliat all tlie payments made should 
 be brought into arcount ami applieit, but with- 
 out addition of interest, to the aggregate of the 
 amounts properly due and payable under the will, 
 Ulid any balance due to plaintiff ascertaim d. 
 
 iViAoHi V. Kiiii/xton, 17 (). 1!. 1.S2, and 
 l'v\U'd Statis V. Saiiltnrii, 135 U. S. R. 1>7I, spe- 
 «!)fi(iy referred to. Jlarlie.r v. Clark, "JO O. R. 
 'Wi.' Atllriried in appeal, IS A. 1!. 4.")."). 
 
 Ir , ern:„tlonal Laxw li'tll of Safe, in Forfi,;,, 
 C'liiuttri/ 1/ Hooi/.-i in <hit(irhi.\—Si.e. Miiithihi.:ni 
 V. r<i/le)-s<,i(, -JO (). H. 1-20, (tiite lOS. 
 
 International Law— /■'))■(■(';//( tWtlilor-:.] .v.,. 
 .Viliie V. Mnoi)', L'4 (). K. 450, tviJi: 1,'!, ,s t„ 
 rights III foreign creditors in admiidsLr.itiim 
 prouoedinga. 
 
 Set' FoRKiuN Law. 
 
 INTERIM RECEIPT. 
 See Insuranck, III. 
 
 INTERNATIONAL LAW. 
 
 Foreign Judgment — /Vhh/ Aitioii — Din- 
 tivctioii Jlttvi-ni I'ulilU- (itiil Prii-ci/c I'< iialtieK.]— 
 Toan acti( n by tlieajipellant in an (intario Court 
 upon a judgnent of a New Wak Court against 
 the resiKindcnt under section l21 of New Voik 
 ^itate Laws of 1875, e!i. Oil, which imposes 
 liability in res] eet of false representations, the 
 latter pleaded that the jiulgmenl w,ns for a ptn- 
 ally inflicted by the nuniici] al law of New- 
 York, and that the action, being of a penal 
 character, ought not to be entertained by a 
 foreign Court: — 
 
 Held, itvir.'ing the judgments below, 18 A. 
 R. 136 ; 17 0. R. 245, that the action being by 
 a subject to jnforee in his own interest a. liabil- 
 ity imposed for the protection of his private 
 rights, vas r<n edial and not penal in the sense 
 pltadtd. It vas not within the rule of inttr- 
 national law which prohibits the Courts of one 
 country fr( m executing the penal laws of .nn- 
 other or enfi reing penalties recoverable in fav- 
 our of the State : — 
 
 Held, fiirfhu-, that it was the duty of the 
 Ontario Court to deiide whether the statute in 
 question was pjual within the meaning of the 
 international rule so as to oust its jurisdiction, 
 and tliat siuh Court Wiis ju't bound bv the 
 inteipietntitn thereof adcpttd by the Cciiits 
 of New York. Ilvvliiqlin v. Altri//, [It;,*?] 
 A. C. 1£0. .SVr S. C. 19 A. R. (Appci dx.) 
 
 INTERPLEADER. 
 
 Assignments Act— " Proceeding."] — ,s',,. 
 CuU ■:. I'arl"'. !,.•<, l!l A. it. Ill, ante H2. 
 
 OoBt8—Bi''ioiUiuunnee.] — An interpliiulcr 
 procee<ling is not an action ; and Rido(i4l (.), 
 which enables the Court to " order the intimi 
 to be discontinued," upon terms as to lo^ts, 
 does not apjily to interpleader issues. 
 
 HiiwhjH V. lii-ltfleij, (i i). B. I), t;;i, ami /,'. 
 />.V.vo», (15 L. T. N. S. 48, followed. 
 
 ti(mlili\ that the execution creditors can .iKaii 
 (bin the seizure or the jiroseeution of the \mw, 
 but only on the terms of answering allmsts' 
 Jloijahoom v. Gil/ie!>, la P. It. 402. 
 
 Costs — Iic.ir-rnilion.] — The costs of an inter- 
 pleader issue should not bo reserved liy tl:,; 
 intei pleader or<ler to be disposed of in ( 'liaiiilnr.., 
 but .'should be left to be dealt with liy tiie tiiai 
 iludge. O'rol/ii \. /'mire, 15 1'. R. 4;W. 
 
 Costs-—.S'cf!tciYv.]— Security for costs uwy !»■ 
 oidered in interpleader proceedings. 
 
 Sirni)) V. S/oddnrt, 12 1'. R. 5i)(), aijpnn.il 
 and followed. 
 
 li'iiiioiit V. Aynnrd, 4 C. P. 1). 221, .Ti2, ills 
 tiiiHuished. 
 
 The party substantially and in fact nio\i!i.; 
 the proceedings, whether plaintiti' or defeiiclani 
 in the interpleader issue, should, if resident fv.i 
 of the jurisdiction, give security to the opimsite 
 ]iiirty. He Anrjinl Order of Fartnter.t I'lnl Cn.-t- 
 tier, 14 P. R. 47. 
 
 Entitling of Order— //ii-:hiind (mil ll'-yV- 
 Oiiii.t — J'laiii/ijI' in y.<.v((f. ] — Where an inter- 
 Jileader order is entitled in two actions, in dil- 
 ferent Divisions of the High Cotut, there being 
 two executions in the shcriU's hands, ,'in njijieal 
 fidni the order may be entertained in eitiier 
 Division, altlujugh one of the execution creMlitnis 
 has been barred by the order, fioni 'ihieli tlinv 
 is no ap])e;d on that ground. 
 
 ^\■l:ele husband and wife live te^gethtr in tU' 
 .sinie htuse, the husl and being owner or ten;iiil 
 and the sheriti', under an execution against tlie 
 hutbinid, seizes the hcusilKild iniiiitiue, \tlmh 
 is elaimed by the wife as hei' own, the oniis is 
 on her. and she must be plaintilV in the is.-iie 
 directed where the sherifi interpleads. Hajn- 
 ioim V. Ihvndy, 16 P. R. 47. 
 
 Execution — Exim) ticnx.] — An exeeutifn 
 debtor can do what ho pleases with the stiitu- 
 toiy exemptions and his execution ei editor can- 
 not t; ke ad\antage of the f»et th;.t they .iiv 
 insufhcieiitly desenbed in a bill of side tlitite: 
 by the executic-n debt(jr. 
 
 Whcie in an interpleader issue the claiiiifnt 
 nlhges- that tlie goods seized it'clnle the statu- 
 tory exemptions, that is a question hr trial in 
 the issue and is not to be left to the eheiifl' (» 
 deal with, lit/d v. Hart, •22 A. R. 4'10. 
 
545 
 
 -Ihll of Sale in Fnrfi.jn 
 iirio. \ — iVe Martlniitnn 
 
 Fiiriiijit Crfili/orn. ]--,SVj 
 K. 4")(i, oidi' lit, IS ti) 
 ors ill adminisuatioii 
 
 UN Law. 
 
 EADER. 
 
 " /'roccediiiji."] — ,sVe 
 :. Ill, a)ite k-2. 
 
 •:] — An int('r|)lr;n|(.r 
 tioii ; mill Rule (HI d), 
 ■t to " ordiT llu! iii'tiuu 
 jon teinis as to osts, 
 !wuU'i- iHHUoa. 
 ! (f H. 1). (JS, iiHil AV 
 i, foUowi'd. 
 tioiici'dlitors can aluii 
 ros('cutii)ii of till' issue, 
 
 of illlSWOI'illu fill nislji 
 
 I'. H. 40-J. 
 
 •Tlio costs of an inter- 
 it be I't'.st'i'Vcil liy tliu 
 i.sj)osc'il(>f ill < 'Imnilieis, 
 ilciilt with hy the tiiai 
 f, If) 1'. H. 4:j2, 
 
 nirity for coats nmy \if 
 
 (rocet'diiigH. 
 
 : P. K. ;")!)(), ;i|iiirm.d 
 
 C. 1'. 1). l,':.'!, ;i.c', .lis. 
 
 ly and in fact nunin^ 
 r J)iaintitl' or dcfemlaiit 
 should, if resident nut. 
 security to tlie o]i|iiisitc 
 r of Funs/en (■«'/('(.•>(• 
 
 —J/ii.ihinifl and 11'//.— 
 If. j — \\'lure an iiittr- 
 il in two acti(ins, in ilii- 
 liijli Conit, tlieio leiiig 
 icrill's liands, rin .-iiiiiimI 
 J ciitei'taincd in eitlitr 
 ■ the execution ereditiiu 
 jrdcr, fioni i\hieli tliiiv 
 imil. 
 
 iie live together in ti.v 
 : Icing owner or ten.iiil 
 n ex( cuticiU ajiiiinst tlie 
 stliold lurnitnic, wliidi 
 i.s hci' own, tlie onus is 
 e jihiintifl' in the isme 
 ■ill interpleads. Ikyn- 
 i. 47. 
 
 ticv".] — An exeeiitidi 
 pleases with the statu- 
 execution cuditnr can- 
 
 the fact tlna tl:oy an; 
 
 in a hill of liidc llituii? 
 
 nder is-tuc the clo'iiunt 
 'iyed irelnle llie ttali!- 
 a qutstion f ( r trial in 
 .e left to the s-heiiffto 
 rt, '22 A. V. 4-1!). 
 
 INTERPLEADER. 
 
 Sheriff ( /a. ////or />V//<. ]— Tlio expruHs Htafn- 
 tory moviHion Kivin^ sheritii. tlie riuht to 
 luteri.h.a.l wiierc a ■iain, aKainsl tliu «,„„!« 
 Hel/cd IS iniu l.y u laiidlor.l f„r rent, wan oniit- 
 U'd in the HeviMcl StatiilcH .,f !S,S7, it |,ei„,/ 
 stilted lu the appendi.x thereto tluit it was v///„ ,-. 
 ,e,Mhy Vou. Kiije 1141, whirl, provid.s that 
 the aheriH, etc., may interplead wheiv ,i claim 
 W made, utc, to any money, jjoo.ls, or cliatt.dH, 
 ek., ff'"-'" >» execution, etc., l,y u„y ,„,,„„ 
 nther than the perwon against whom tlie proceHs 
 ISSUCil ; — ' 
 
 Held, that the rij-ht to interplead, where a 
 ukiMi fur rent is made, still exist.s. McLniKihr 
 V. IlaiiimitI, I.''.' (). i;. 4!»;{. •' 
 
 Sheriff --- Cinili/ ( ■„rirt — E.irmpliom. 1 — \ 
 
 if; r" .',1* "^ ^'"'""■'' < '"'"-t ''.^- '"' '^xec.iti.m 
 .lehlor tor .^1(0 dainai^es, tlie value of implements 
 seized and sold by the shcriir « itiiont aiiv special i 
 (In-eotioii from the executi.,ii crclit'or ami 
 iilleged to be exempt, cannot obtain in that 
 Unit an interpleader order dircctiiiL' the tiiil 
 of an issue between the exeentioii debtor .ind 
 the execution creditor, to settle whether the 
 implennnts were excmjit or not. The «liciitt 
 act,s at his own peril i„ granting or refusing the 
 exemption. ° 
 
 Prohibition granted, the County Court havini- 
 mi jurisdiction to make such an o'rder 
 
 Jinlgmeiitof thcguecn's liei.ch Division, u'l 
 U. K. 0J4, reversed. Maclenn.ui, .J A .lis- 
 .Hwiting. /// ,;■ (lould V. lloi„, •>[} A H -U- 
 
 S46 
 
 in evidence the whole facts ,,l„„it the trunsac. 
 
 IS to let n the (lU.Ntloii ot the iih I,, -In |„r the 
 
 '-"•I" o the claimants and f lu' ,r privity here" 
 
 with and a., the claim of the wife: am^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 tliere should be a new trial. 
 
 I'or l!.'y.l, C. Xot the form „f the issue, but 
 the substance is to be l,«,krd at. It is on 
 petent for the claimant to shew any facts war^ 
 ■anting h, ,n interfering with tli^ process of 
 I xecuticn, even i the property in the goo,l.H bo 
 ..•mother ; providc.l that this will not work a 
 -rprisoupon the excution crclilor, nn,l ,h,it 
 claimant ap|,eais to be in privity with or 
 mnig under the real owner. 
 Per Kurguson, ,J. The lea.-oning of s„nio of 
 the cases Unit the claimant, lucvint; e.iu.s d th 
 
 issue by assertin. his right to the ;, s, „„g 
 
 ot to be allowed to set up a case shewi,,:, that 
 the goods belonged toa third per.son, „ h„ hL not 
 ntervenedm the matter at all, ..w; „nlv Z ,W 
 o a ease in whnli the claimant d„es not pi./d^ 
 o claim tile under the third pc.-on. ' /,V,J 
 v. hiHiit'e, 14 P, K. ,-)(ji). ■!' 
 
 Sheriff -/te.s „/„/ t'o.s^s -/«.,„« I„;l,r,n, E.nni- 
 lu.ntn.lit,,,:. „,i,l Claini.nit-JJIrhleU S>ir,;.. ] 
 --Where an mterj.leader issue, ordcre.l upon 
 he apphcatmii of a sheritl' who had seized cer- 
 tain goods under the direction of tht execution 
 creditors, was determined as to p.ut of the 
 goods ,n tav.mrof the claimant and as to the 
 renmiiuler in favour of the execution creditors, 
 
 Jufty toU - ■ """' ^'"''' *'''^'''" *° *''"'^'" 
 
 Held, that the execution creditors should i.av 
 
 lu.sherilM,i.st,.es and poundage on the valii'c 
 
 ot the part 01 Uie goods ll, v were found entitled 
 
 and h,s costs ,.f the interpleader application 
 ami of a subseijuent aiiplication to dispose of 
 the costs, etc.; and that the execution ci editors 
 ..mid have an order over against the claimant 
 
 0. one-half ot such costs. Onlario .'iilc, r Co. 
 V. Jad'rr, lu P. R. ijjO. 
 
 i^"'}"'^''"''"' o/hmc-J„.s 7Vw/;.]_An in- 
 trpleader issue as to goods seized by a sheiifr 
 
 rV dntdf '" 'y '?"' ^^'"■'^^'" ti..' claimants 
 '« pl.intdts, ami die execution creditor ,is 
 <l^fendaiit. The form of the issue was he ' .' 
 
 eg.,0. sat date of seizure were the property 
 the c amiants as against the execution crcli- 
 
 • J lie claimants' contention was tliat the 
 
 e e,tr''''V'r.' """'■'!, •'.V'r in possession of the 
 
 X utio 11 debtor at all, but in possession of his 
 
 tt, and It they were not actually owned by 
 
 clannants themselves, they were owned b • 
 
 e «■ e and that there was between her and 
 
 1 'i"°''"V ^"'''' '**' t" «i^'e tliem an cnii- 
 
 Der vw ' ^".r '•■^".'^■"C''' t" shew that the [.ro- 
 Peny was m the debtors wife :— 
 
 ch i^na ;/J'"l' "m ''"'"1- "^■■^^ *°° «*'''^'' ■' tl'^it the 
 Claimant, shonhl not be shut out from ad<Iucin ' 
 
 .35 
 
 Sheriff-/ o/-„, „/ /«„,_/;,„.,/„ Far.ifio,, 
 (ruhur u, iHtrt.]- Where goods seized by 
 sherin under execution are" at the t, ne i 
 he possessio,, of the executi.ni debtor, an 
 t.e shcril interpleads in c.onse.,nem e of 
 olaim ma. e upon them by a person' out of pos- 
 
 ■Stml.h, that the claimant should, as a rule 
 be made plaintilf, where he .•lainis by transtW 
 from the exec^ition debtor, whcthe lie is in 
 pos.scssion or not. 
 
 In or.ler to entitle himself to an interpleader 
 <H'l.-'.'. theshcntlis not obliged to sliewt lat the 
 .■la..MJif.liepersouout of possession is open': 
 
 Where upon an interpleader applicati.,11 there 
 n.ore than one claimant, aml'the execu km 
 ceditor dec ines to contest the right of some 
 ;■■• om^ ot them, the order should alJlS 
 iKir the exeeutKni .Teditor as to the claim or 
 c-laims which he declines to contest. Loran v 
 'onmtu liii^jieiidcr Co., J4 p. ){. io;j. 
 
 Sheriff- Ser//nVy for Goods S.dzed-Ilarrin<, 
 t /,/,»„„/ ]_Lpon a sherifl-s a,>plication, an 
 
 "terp eader or,!..- was made in tlij usual tJrn 
 and the claimant having g,vcii security there 
 
 "H er by an approved bond for the forthco nin. 
 of the goo,ls, thesheriliwith.lrew frompos.es 
 
 C.;:;', t, ^^'''■%'''''' '"'"ph'''-' i--.e ^L.l 
 
 trial the goods were sohl for taxes, and the 
 y'ei't L"" ^•''"»""'t'« '"'"d became insol 
 
 Held that the se. urity had nothin ' to 
 
 ri"ht^. b„t"'%"'''"''i""'\'''"" "f *'»^ claimant's 
 right.',, but only ,,ith the preservation of the 
 p.-..perty pending the litigation ; and the Co t 
 !'••' ■;." '■;«''* to make an order barring the claini 
 111 lielault of giv njr fresh seeuritv U, „i 
 
 V. am;,., m i>. n.<iQ ^--cu'ity- Hu,jahoom 
 
 An appeal to the Court of Appeal w.as dis- 
 nnssed, the members of the Court being divided 
 in opini.-m, 16 P. R. 2G0. 'wuea 
 
 Sheriff- 1( nt oj Possession— Adverse Claim 1 
 -In an action upon a mortgage made by t 
 deceased person, who died in ISSO, pn- .,,t 
 
# 
 
 <\y.. 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 /. 
 
 {/ 
 
 
 
 {< 
 
 f/i 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 Iff ilia 12.5 
 
 If 3 ^__ 
 
 U 126 ^ 
 
 - lifi li 20 
 
 2.2 
 
 IL25 i 1.4 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 riiuiugidpiUL 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 :1>' 
 
 V 
 
 iV 
 
 <s 
 
 
 LV 
 
 ■e^ 
 
 
 
 .V 
 

 f/i 
 
 1( 
 
Hi 
 
 I 
 
 547 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 •leviHCMl, w.re tl,u only .Iffcii.lants. ,Ju,hnnH„. f^/1'..' '',.*. "" *"" > i-^""^lt'w ". 
 
 ileviHL'd, WL'iu tliu only (IffciidiiiitV Iii,I,m>,„.,V: I r' \" ' "" "^'V"' "" """**' ii-"».ltifs < 
 
 for ,,„sHessio„, iufa- .L w' r" , nerd lura T '','" ''''''"T "'['": ""f'"'''"' """'^■'- f'^' ^'■" 
 writ of posae«si„n pLced iu^llo shenn's i:!!ul; ' l-n^'^^:':' ^:'' •'^'^' =""' --^"<'-Mt. tl„. 
 Tlie wi.low «li(. waaone (.f tl.e oxeciitors, and 
 ho iiitant v.\u\dn-n of tl.o decoasod im.rtK.uror 
 had ,111 niU'icst uii.ltT th« will in the mort^awid 
 lands, and wuiu in iiossession wlien the sheriff 
 attenipted to execut.! the writ. 'J'lie infants 
 and tlio widow as their guanlian, made a clainl 
 to the ;io.s8ession as against the writ, l.ased on ■ ineorporate.l 
 
 Sirt^n:;h::sz'-'^"°'''^^'"«^~''H^ '-r^ ^- "' »""■•"-- ^^ '-'""^^ 
 
 '':'^",'';'^">K """"t-'ip^d self-governnient 
 
 thrill I r. 1 h «- .;i ...i . . . I "^ 
 
 543 
 
 b<T. iHsti 
 
 (''), was entitled to interplead : — 
 
 Held, also, that the aetion, as regards the 
 ^elaiDi lor possession, was properly uonstituted ; 
 and the infants were bound hy the judgment 
 against the exeeutois. 
 
 AVe// V. Codd, 14 P. R. 182, distinguished. 
 imierion v. J/iimjihri,.i, 15 1'. R. S4. 
 
 1.1,1 
 
 witliin any eity or eounty or any iiK'oip,„>i,.,i 
 town separated for munieipal purposes f'oin 1 1,,' 
 <;OUnty . . shall he pani to the treusur, r „t 
 the city, ineorporated town or eoiintv," et. 
 
 Held leversiu.; the deeision of the Suoi,-,',,, 
 Court of New l!runswi.-k, ving, J., dissel.tin ' 
 that to ooine witlun tlie terms o.' this order u 
 ineorporated ton-n need no. he separated {,,',„[ 
 
 any 
 
 Held, that tlie sherin; l,y virtue of Rule 1141 thorn,' ir"'**. """'■^'ii;''' «-lf-g<>vernn,ei,l ,. 
 
 K^was entitled to interplead :- ' "^' i.t^. i n^': ' Hn r '' "■ 'I'f '^''I'^'"^" "^ '^'--1"" 
 
 '4' i-L' Uin institutions 111 the county. Tuin, ..i 
 
 Si. Sttphtii V. 
 3:29. 
 
 CouHlij of Vhnrlolle, 24 S. C. ]( 
 
 r» (,(<.]_ 1 he Canada Temperance Act can,- 
 nto toree m tlie united counties of Lee.ls an.l 
 Crenvilleon the l.st May, ISSli 
 
 ■Section 2 of the Act declares that the w„nl 
 
 county includes every town, towu.ship, ,,tr., 
 
 of the coiuity, una' 
 
 Stakoholder-^wue Sent from Hiqh Court to 
 1^0.,,,!! ,,,,n--A,,,m,l from Jud,,mek ,m /.««e.] , -county • mdu, 
 
 latter case the High Court has no nower l>v i I *<"><",. -if i,; '-"i-uLi J empcranee Act, 
 
 virtue of any of thelv.nsolidate Ui^le to d[reet adSte, Itl e x7 l''"-'i /T '"'"l'-^' ^^■'''^'' '''^'' 
 
 „ ,. ,.„ . ■■.,,.,,., 11,11(10 — uy lurce or 
 
 section 110 of the .Judicature Act, irrespective 
 ot the Consolidated Rules, preserving the old 
 jurisdiction of the (lourt of Chancery, the 
 appeal from the decision upon the issue is. in 
 the hrst instance at all events, to the High 
 Court, and not to tlie i Vurt of Appeal. CY-t/-- 
 
 C<y V. i 0»)/,;, 1,-, p. R_ .24>j 
 
 INTESTATE 
 
 *ee Devolution of Kstatks— 1-;xec,i:tc.r.s 
 Admi.m.stkatoks. 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 I. Canada Te.mi>kka.\ck Act, 547. 
 II. Dominion Licknsi: Act, S.-.o. 
 III. Liquor Lick.n.se Act. 
 
 1. Coni'ictiom, 550. 
 
 2. Miscr/laneoun Ca-<eii, 557. 
 
 I. Canada TE.MrEKANCE Act. 
 
 Application of Flne« '..corporated Toxim 
 ^ei,aratedJrom Count, for Mun&paU>lpZ~^ 
 
 . Held Maclennan, .J.A., dissenting, that (in.s 
 iniposed and recovere.l for oflences against tlie 
 I Act eouimitted within the town of lirockvill,. 
 paid over by the police magistrate of Brock vill,' 
 to the treasurer of the united counties of Lcla 
 and Grenville b »een the dates of the two 
 orders-m-couucil, could not, after the passi,,,, 
 \LlL ?f'","l.,'?»''^'-i"-eouncil, be recover,, I 
 back by Brock vi'le. 
 
 Judginent of the (Jueen's Bench Division. 17 
 U. Iv -Jbl, reversed. Uniietl Coiudk^ of /.,,,/,• 
 <uu^ CmuriUe v. Town of Jh-uch-M:, IS A. K. 
 
 Jii8tress-/,n/,ri,onmcnt~ Warrant o/' Com- 
 mit m,u,t--i.xce.'<.s Of JnrMkthw-Summury Cm- 
 lutioa DrnM-nup Aft.r the Act Ceasrd to h, ,u 
 
 ,t t; .~; f*" ''f/*'"'''"'^ '^^'^ *''« -^'laiied police 
 n.ig Kstrate for the county of Ontario, in win. li 
 
 fo H, "' w" ,J,'^'"P^'''"'^<' Act was in force prior 
 to the .1th May, 1889, when the ord. r-inJouii- 
 oil declaring it in force was revoked. 
 
 I no.ivi f 1 VH' •''*"'V"'y' !***<"• tl'« plaintiir was 
 [con icteil before the defendant of a .ecn,i,l 
 oflence against the Act, and adjudged to pay a 
 hne of S!I00 ami s;i2.05 costs. i-o l^y a 
 
 On the 20th March, 1889, the defendant issued 
 a warrant of coininitinent reciting the plaiiititr's 
 conviction before him and the impoNlti',.i nf fli,. 
 nne and costs ; declaring that the plaintifl had 
 no goods and chattels; and directing her com- 
 mittal to gaol for sixty days "unless the said 
 
livlo in Soptcmbor. l,SMi 
 1 Hii<,'.s, j.Liiiiltifs or ,,,r.' 
 foM'cd ihkUt tlie Ciiiiuiid 
 mil aniiMidiiieiitstlii-ivt,,, 
 ily iM- any iniM)i-[)i,ii.,t,.,i 
 ioipiil purposes f!oin ih,: 
 1)111(1 to thu treasurer i.f 
 )\vn or county, " uti- :- 
 noision of tliJ Sii|„iiii« 
 k, vhif.', J., (li.ssi'iitii]r, 
 i tcnis oi tins onli-i- ,ii 
 
 no. Ije separated iVoj,, 
 piii-eB : it incliu'es any 
 
 self-goveniinent men 
 tlie expense of keeping' 
 1 tlie oimnty. Toii-n ,7' 
 i' Vharlodc, 24 S. C. ii 
 
 -Mimfij Paid ami /,',. 
 I'eniperanee Act eain,: 
 eounties of Leeils ar"! 
 , l.S.S(i. 
 
 eelares tliat tlie w,,,,! 
 i' town, township, tt,-,, 
 lita of the county', uim' 
 
 was then an ino(ir]Mir- 
 tlie eounties for miuii- 
 
 issed pursuant u, \\\ 
 d that all liius lerm ■ 
 la J'euiperanee Act, 
 )!• eoniity which hinl 
 
 1)0 fiaid to tile trcas- 
 as the ease Uiight he. 
 er-in-eouiK'il was pa,-,, 
 r, and pioviding i,i|. 
 
 the treasurer (jt the 
 separateil for- inunici. 
 nty, or county witliia 
 
 dissenting, tli/it hn-s 
 • ofleuces against tiu; 
 ; town of Broekvill,., 
 Lj'islrate of iirockvilh; 
 ted eounties of Lecils 
 le dates of the two 
 )t, after the passing 
 )uucil, 1)0 reeovend 
 
 s Bench Division, 17 
 'd Count lex (if' /,,;,l.i 
 Brud-ril/c, IS A. 1;. 
 
 — W'arraiU of Com- 
 tloiiSummary Con- 
 Act Ctaxcd, to h(. la 
 i the 'alaried pnlioe 
 f Ontario, in wIulIi 
 Jt was in force prior 
 n the ortitr-in eoiiji- 
 revokcd. 
 
 *9, the plaintiff was 
 ndaiit of a secimd 
 I adjudged to pay a 
 
 ho defendant issued 
 -itingthe ijlaintilf's 
 e iniposition of the 
 at the plaintiff' had 
 diroetiug her ooiii- 
 s "unless the said 
 
 549 
 
 several sums a-id all the costs an.l eha. s of 
 
 th.. said d.s re.s and of the couiinit.ne.It L i 
 canveyng of the said Nellie Meehiain to ie' 
 «a,d eoiniuou gaol, amounting to the further > 
 sun- of seventy-hve cents amt shall he ' 
 
 UDoner p iij unto you. " i 
 
 At the trial ot an action for the arrest and 
 unpnsou.uent of the plaintiff under this e ■ n 
 mitment a conviction of the plaintiff was put' n 
 duel 11th January, ISsK, but wh'ch was not 
 dnnvn up till ebruary, 1890. The convict 
 aajudged that the plaintiff should i.av the ,.e 
 ally and costs according to adjudication, and' it 
 th..se sums were not paid forthwith, then, ina 
 imicl, as ,t has l,cen made to appear that the 
 pl:u,i Iff had no goods or ehattils whereon to 
 evy h.vdi.st,.ss, tuat she should be imprisoned 
 h)r Hixty day.s unless these sums ami the costs! 
 au.Uharges of cnvey.ng to gaol shall be sooner \ 
 
 Tlie conviction had not been (luaslied 
 It appeared by the examination of ' the do- 
 feadaiit that the seventylive cent, in tiie war- 
 rant was charged for the warrant, and that the 
 blank waa left for tlu constable to fill i„ tl^^ 
 c.sts o conveying to gaol. The constable, how- 
 ever, did not till in the costs, but indo I'sed a 
 memorandum of tliem on the back of the war 
 rant, making them .■Ji!13.40 : — 
 
 Held, that the result of sections (ii> (i4 G6 
 ami 07 of U. S O. ch. 178, which are incor .or 
 a ed ...to the Cana,la Tcnperanec Act, K. S C 
 ± "^,^-Av.^"'t"" of section 107, is to enabb 
 tlie convicting magistrate to order the levy bv 
 .in tress of the penalty an.l costs, to dispen e . 
 with s„ch levy where he thinks it wml 1 1 c 
 113. e.s or ruinous, and to order the .lefendant 
 to he imprisoned for a term not exceedim. three , 
 mouths unless the penalty and costs, and also 
 he costs and charges oi the commit n nt and i 
 oui veying to gaol, are sooner paid ' 
 
 .. ihat nlthou-h the warrant of eommit- 
 
 10 went beyond the conviction b^ directhig 
 
 detention for the costs of the commitment, at 
 
 ,„, r' "V:o;'V>;.V'",i,' to gaol, yet as the only 
 
 in for which the gaoler could lawfully h.ave 
 
 detained the p!ainti;f wa. the sum of ..c vcntv 
 
 hye cents mentioned in the warrant, and the 
 
 c ts of conveying to gaol ureatly exceeded that 
 
 am.., there was no excess in tlie warrant 
 
 ,.i. I hat, as the only evidence given at the 
 t'':'lwith regard to the defendants a, oiit- 
 n^-pobeemagis. rate was .piitecoiK^ 
 vwtl, his being in otiice at a salary umler an 
 
 cTkt"" ^''"^''' ''''^ '">t expire witl tie 
 C ud emperanee Act, it coulll not be said: 
 
 S,w;:s:ziS:" ■'"■""''''' '''"''''y' 
 
 u"^l,r';t!f '''" ';!^;V'"ff ""'^I'f ained on account 
 -1 tlie charges of the coiistab e imlorsed on the 
 
 i.t iievei gave any authority to the constable to 
 require the ga.ler to detain the plaintiff ^r a. v 
 i^um not inserted in the wiurant.' ^ 
 
 '>■ I hat, as the eouviction stated that it had 
 5:;;;:';r'"/°iH'I-- to the maglstnlte £ 
 t icie v(as no suthcient di.stress, and the eonvic- 
 ™ had not been ,uashed. evidence wouul not 
 
 Sii'nt diitir""'^ " '*"^"' '''' ''-- -- 
 
 i^ed hv'.fi,'b ^i'""'"'^'"""* h'lving been author- 
 iull e) '/ !="»;^'ctiou, which had not been 
 
 Mua-shed, the phunt.tf was properly non-suited. 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 5S0 
 
 7. That at all events the defe'idant was 
 <;..ti led to the protection of It. .S. O "h tT 
 JUvcltiaia V. lluni', 20 (J. H. 207. " 
 
 ■H'^ <n a county in which tlie Cana.la T~r 
 
 pii-Ji to the vote for the repea of the Act a.n,l 
 lie remainder subse.jnent to a su cesst^lvoi 
 or Its repeal, but before the order'ii -c u.ioU 
 
 'Hlfl'l'th'.'; m'-'' '"^"f"'-,''';' I-- -vok'd:- 
 rtcld t.i at the price ot the Ih.uors s(dd before 
 
 ^verenot, but that of these solll after lesuo 
 
 eesstul vote were, recoverable. 
 
 I'tarci; V. JSrooL'i f. P i i.v- .)i- i> n . 
 
 II. DoMi.sio.s LiL'E.vsi.; Act. 
 , Salaries of License Txispectors-Approual 
 
 ^ feon.dubrt ";;'■"' /" /^r'-''^ ~ «« ^ -^^ " 
 
 I oionght by the Board of License C.jmmissioner.. 
 I appointed under the Li,in„r License Ac SSJ 
 or moneys paid out by them to license inspec 
 t.rs with the approval of the Depart,, et of 
 
 seX, ?^,- 1 'f ,'' ''^' "'•;l'-'''-"'-^">incil under 
 sect 101 ot thesiid Lnpior Licence Act, ISS.S :_ 
 
 yic-^/i, 20 S. C. 11. 42. 
 
 III. Liyfoit LrcEvsE Act. 
 
 1 . CoHIUCtioil-l. 
 
 Admission of Gullt-/,„/„/voy,„„„,. ]_0n a,i 
 nfo,mutio,i ehargnig that the defendai t, in hi, 
 p,em,scs being a,, lace whe,-e l„,uor niiKht « 
 '?^'' ;:,"''Vyf" 'y 'li'l I'ave bis bar room onea 
 at er 10 o clock m the evening, cont,ary to ?l.e 
 rules and regulations for license hohler.f pas, ed 
 l>J the License Commissioners, etc., the defen- 
 dant signed an admission stating thai, the ., W 
 ; -nation having been read over to liii.i, .i 11 ' , 
 to plead guilty to the charge, which vvastbe 
 j only evidence before the Co^r't, and „rwhS 
 j t he defeudan -vas convicted. It aid not ap ear 
 
 ' th'fsS^T- '^^"'^^ '''' p='^«^"' -y ''y-'- - 
 
 Held that this (li.l not prevent the defendant 
 
 from obiectmg to the power of the License 
 
 Lommissioners to pass such rules and re^n 1- 
 
 ; ions, but on the authority of Mrf.'i//. v. L<?" ^ 
 
 i Conu,u.,umer>, 0/ Brautjhrd, 21 O. R. GO", the 
 
 objection must be overruled 
 
 J^vina V. Brown, 24 Q. R D. ;i,-.7, followed. 
 By the coiivictum herein a line and costs were 
 imposed ami m default of payment, dist^^s 
 aiKUi^default of sufficient disiess/imprS 
 
 Held, under section 98 of the Li.p.or License 
 Act, 1>. is. U. ch. 194, incorporating seitioa 427 
 
sn 
 
 11^ 
 
 INTOXIOATKiO LIQUORS. 
 
 552 
 
 MMi 
 
 Si ■ : t 
 
 m 
 
 h ., 
 
 of the Municipal Aut, costs .iml iiiiprisoniiiont 
 could properly l)e imposed, lieiiimi v. Farnll 
 23 O. K. 42'2. 
 
 Olub—Sclliiiij Liquor mthoul Licc.iim — Loi-d/- 
 tty.}-A company i\as iiicorpor-ited under the 
 Joint Stock Letters I'ateiit Act, R. .S. O. •jh. 
 1^7, for estiildishing a lh•ivin^' park to improve 
 the breed of lir.rses, etc., and for .sucli imrpoacs 
 to acquire a ceitain named property, witli 
 power to erect a chil) lioitse, and, .sul.jcct to 
 the Liquor Liccn.se Act, to maintain and rent or 
 lease same, for social jjurposts, etc. ; and gener- 
 ally to do all things incid'jntal or conducive to 
 tlie objects aforesaid :— , 
 
 Held, tliat the charter did not autl'orize tlie 
 company to liave a club lioiise at any otlicr 
 place tlian that specified in the cliartcr ; and 
 where, thirtfore, the defendant was found in ' 
 posaesaio.i of ami selling licpior at another place, ' 
 though claimed to be a clul) constituted under 
 th.j charter, and of which the defendant claimed 
 to be the secretary, he was properly convicted 
 under section oO of the Li(|U(ir Liccn.'-e Act, I!. 
 .S. O. cli. liU, for nnla« fully keeping liipior' for 
 sale, barter or tratlic, withinit a license. J,',,, inn 
 V. Charlex, •_>4 O. K. 43'2. 
 
 ' Evidence — Licf line Iiispecfor — I)idi(n) /•, 
 .:,rc'.]-For an offence under "The Linn,,- 
 License Act," R. ,S. U. ch. 194, tlie liens,', 
 inspector, who lays the information, is a con, 
 
 I petfcut witness. 
 
 An objection that the conviction, which h ,s 
 
 ' for selhng Ihjuor witiiout a license at tiic vill, 
 
 j of M., Ill the toHusliip of O., sIkjuM liave ne -V 
 tived that the phice wlicre tlie otlence was rum 
 nutted was in an Indian reserve, whicii it Wi,, 
 
 ; alleged formed part ot such township, was o\ ,,' 
 riil.Ml, as there was nothing to shew the fa, l 
 alleged, and under secti(jn 1 of R. ,S. (). ^'h .", 
 
 ! there was /iriiiu} fan,- jurisdiction. Ri,ili,n v' 
 
 'Fiarman, 22 O. R. Ai,Q. 
 
 Ohx\i—ilana(jn: |— Section SO of the Liquor 
 License Act, 1!. ,S. (). eh. 194, which forbids the 
 keeping or having in any house, etc., any 
 iKluors for the purpose of selling by any person 
 unless duly licensed thereto under tlie piovi.sions 
 of the Act, does not jirstity a conviction of tin 
 manager of a cluli incoi porated under the ( )ntariii 
 Joint Stock Companies Letters Patent Act who 
 lia.s the eliargc or control of the Ihjuor merely 
 in his capacity of manager, the act of keeping, 
 etc., being that of the club and not of tlTe 
 manager. 
 
 KeuiWi V. Chart.:., 24 O. R. 4.12, distinguished. 
 Itegina v. Slatter;/, 20 O. R. 148. 
 
 Vmggist—Alk iriv'j Liquor to l,( CoHAumnl 
 oil the /'r,„ii.fes:]—lt is an offence under the 
 Liquor License Act, 1!. ,S. Q. ch. 194, and 
 amendments thereto, for a chemist or druggist 
 to allow Inpior "sold by him or in his pos- 
 session to be consumed within liis shop liy 
 the purcha.ser thereof," and it is not essential 
 that he should be registered. A conviction in 
 the aliove form does not cliarge an alternative 
 offence. 
 
 The adjudication and conviction, besides im- 
 posing tiie money penalty under section 70, 
 further imposed imprisonment for three months 
 as provided by that section. 
 
 The Court differed aii to the validity of the 
 term of imiirisonment imposed, luit held that in 
 any event the conviction could ))e amended 
 under 5:i Vict. ch. .ST. sec. 27 (D.), so as to 
 comply with section 07 of the .Summary Con- 
 victions A(;t. Jti/jiiia V. McCoy, 23 O. R, 442. 
 
 TOmsBist—Omimon to Enter Sale, in Book ]— 
 1 he non-entry in a book of a lawful sale of licnior 
 by a ilruggist, pursuant to section 52 of 1!. S. O 
 ch. 194, does not constitute an absolute contra- 
 vention of the Act ; but merely throws on the 
 (lef< ndunt the onus of clearly rebutting the pre- 
 sumption whicli the statute has raise.l against 
 hini. L'njiiui V. Elborne, 21 O. R. 504 Re- 
 veraedin appeal, 19 A. R. 430. See now, 55 I 
 Vict. ch. 81, sec. 7 (0.). 
 
 Evidence— IfitueisesBeauim/ Orer ami Siu„ 
 in;/ A>(V/<«fc — Co,sV.v.]- Under the iH.wer ,;,i 
 ferred on justices of the peace by section 2 of K 
 S. O. ch. 74, to order in and l,v tlie coiivicti ,n 
 the payment of reasonable costs, a charge ni 
 fitty cents for di.iwing up a conviction miW.r 
 the ],i(pi()r license Act, is autli(..ize.l. 
 
 On motion to quash a conviction, it was ol. 
 jected that the evidence taken before the ma-i- 
 [rate ami returned by tlieni, wa.' not shewirto 
 I liave been read over and .signed by tfj witness :-- 
 ; Held, tliat the ma.xim omiiiK indsiunintliir 
 I cw rite aria applied, and as the coxtiarv vis 
 ;notslic\i nit would be presumed to have' been 
 ' done. J.',(/iiia v. AWi/t, 20 O. R. (m. 
 
 Porin- .(/«c;»«- or /)i,w,Y.s.H Clnu.-<e~Amii..l 
 <l'il ( "Iirirlion-Erideiice of IhlemUlIlt Ji,;„.i 
 Li<>i,se,l-^SIal,mnit l,u Witnesses rnehiillnninl'. 
 —In a conviction under section 7." of tlie Liiiuor 
 License Act, R. S. O. ch. 194, for deiivciin- 
 lujuor to a jierson while int<.xicated, imiiriscn': 
 inent was directed without any provision f,.r 
 distress. On the c^ ' tion being brougiit l.e 
 tore the Court on mri, the Court, midei 
 
 section 87 of tlie ,' .y Conviction .-\cts, I!. 
 
 S. ('. ch. 178, as amcded by section 27 of .",:! 
 ; Vict. ch. ;17(I).), amended the conviction l.v 
 j inserting a provision for distress. 
 , The amending Act came into force after the 
 i conviction was made and certiorari itranted, but 
 j It being a matter of luoccdure, tlic Court li;i,i 
 poivT to act under it and make the amend 
 meiit. 
 
 Ii> |iroof of defendant being a liecnsi d hotel 
 kce'.er under the Act, a witness in giving evi- 
 dei.ce. stated defendant to be such, and altlioi.yh 
 defendant was present and represented Cv 
 counsel, lis allowed the statement to pass uii- 
 challenged : — 
 
 Held, sufficient, as the witness might \v.n-e 
 obtained his information from the defendant 
 liefjina v. Flynn, 20 O. R. 638. 
 
 Vorm. — Enforcement of Penalty -— Witnetm, 
 —Meceasilji of Eridenee l„inr/ liend Ovi-r aiul 
 Si!/ned.]^T\w defendant, holding a shop license, 
 wa'' convicted for allowing liquor to be drunk 
 on the premises, contrary to section 00 of the 
 Liquor License Act. 
 
 Qua're, whether a conviction in such case 
 need do more than impose the penalty and costs 
 and the provisions of the Summary Convictions 
 Act be called in aid for its enfoictment. nainelv. 
 by the issue of a warrant of diatie.sa under see 
 tioii 02 in case of non-payment Of the fine (hie, 
 and in default thereof, a warrant under sectien 
 67 for committal ; or whether the forms piovi- 
 
552 
 
 mpecUir — Indv.ni /;, . 
 uiulor "Tilt! Liiiii,,- 
 fh. 194, thf lici,.-,'. 
 iiforniatioii, is ii imuii. 
 
 rmvictioii, which w,is 
 I license at tlio' vilhin,. 
 .). , .shdiild have iif;.M. 
 
 the (ili'eiice was ci}!,, 
 Lseive, which it \v:i,s 
 1 tdwnship, was ov,|- 
 iig tip Nhew the fait 
 
 1 of n. N. (). cIj. ,-,. 
 
 isdiotioil. J\'l;/illll X 
 
 miiir/ Over am/ .S'/;/,,. 
 ndei' the jxiwer ciin 
 XCr liy scctiiili L'lif K. 
 Ill hy the coiivjcti 111 
 
 costs, ii chaige „i 
 > a conviction unil,i' 
 authd.i/eil. 
 nvictidii, it viis olr- 
 ieii Ixi'fore the magi,. 
 I, way not shew 11 to 
 led hy tl,j witness:— 
 iiiiiiiUt /jifiMiiiiiiiHliir 
 iis the coi'tiarv ^\,1s 
 iiimed to have' hetn 
 
 o. 1!. (i.s;?. 
 
 •(.w C/aii.-'i — Avuiul- 
 / Dijindtnil Jidti.i 
 USUI'S ('iir/iii//( iiiikI.\ 
 :ion T.'iof the Liijiioi' 
 194, for denvciini; 
 tdxicated, iniiiiiseii'. 
 t any provision fur 
 
 1 heing l)i'oui.-lit lie- 
 ■/, the Court, iiiidcr 
 Conviction .Acts, It. 
 by section •?.~ of ."i;{ 
 
 the conviction hy 
 ress. 
 
 into force after tin' 
 tiorari i;fantcd, luit 
 lure, the Court li;i.l 
 
 make the anuiid 
 
 ing a licensod Imti i 
 itness in giviiiLC cvi 
 such, and altlidi:i;h 
 d represented i^y 
 ;cnicnt to pass uii- 
 
 ■itness might lime 
 Din the <lefendaiit. 
 i. 
 
 innliy — Wiliiix.if.-:, 
 iij Jiend (hn'r dii'l 
 ling a sho[i lioeii.se. 
 liquor to he drunk 
 section (iO of tlie 
 
 tion in such ea.«e 
 e penalty and costs 
 nniary Convietidiis 
 forccnieiit, namely, 
 distress under st-r 
 nt Of the tine due, 
 rant under sectimi 
 ■ the forms piovi- 
 
 553 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 6U 
 
 ded for by section 53 must be followpd t.iov.M i ■ ,. , 
 
 ing for disti^ss and in de(:.^uZ!j;:::::i:'tv::'"^^^^ 
 
 iiig for distress and in default inipiisdnment 
 unles.., etc.; but the question was imniateriar 
 as he Court, as a matter of precaution, anient 
 dc(l the conviction so as to include these uro- 
 visions. ' 
 
 An objection that it did not appear that the 
 evidence had been read over to the witness was 
 overruled, foUowing Iie[/ina v. Axce//, 20 O. R 
 633. 
 
 The direction in subsection 2 of section 90 
 as to the witnesses signing their evidence, is 
 
 v."Lo"r'G O '"r ti46 '""'"""^ "'^'■^'^' '^"•^''"" 
 
 (w a .single oH'eiice. 
 
 The inovision of section S,", that no adjourn- 
 
 n cut shall be fornioie than eight davs is matter 
 
 ot procedure and may be waived and . def ^t 
 
 •ho consents to an adjdurnment for nio.J™ 
 
 eight days cannot afterwards complain in that 
 
 -()f.fT"T''-'"" ^°r ■" '"■'' "^'"""' ""'l^'' ««ction 
 /(Jot the Liquor License Act, R. S. (I ch 194 
 
 properly awards imprisonment in default of 
 
 payinent of the line and not in lUfault rf 
 
 snfhcient distress. 
 
 Ji',-:/i„a V. .Smith, 4(1 U. C. R. 442, and R&iina 
 V. /A„v/,,,, •_>(! O. n. 4S1, approved. '' 
 
 Judgment of the (.hieen's Rench Division, 23 
 <*. R. .M,, reversed. I'ujina v. Ncr.tn, 20 A. R. 
 
 infoi'matlon -56, •«;•«/ Ofeno',. ]-An informa- 
 
 lon aid betore ohepolicemagistratecliargcd that () 
 the defendant did on the 3Uth and .S 1st days of 633 
 July. 1S92, sell intoxicating liquor without the I 
 license tliercfor by law reiiuired Unon t) ' 
 
 hearing, evidence wa-. adduced to s'lcv that tl e I yJ/iff^f f/"°" ~:''''Z7' ^/'^'"''^' - O/Jecdon 
 , etendant had sold iatoxicating li.p.or on tho e v d ist tbf 1 'f''''^~^^ '"-'","" '"f'^'="^'ti"" l'"d 
 days; the magistrate adjudged the defr m w ¥ , 'l^ft^-Hhint, umler the Indian Act 
 guilty, and m;tde a minule t^ori;"a;Ift '^^ ! i;^;^^:^^ ^f, J^f '|,f "--ting liquor tot^ 
 punishment impose.l ; a few days afterwards he h o s t h hi! ., '^/' '""' *" *"" I "•'■■'""« "« 
 
 returned a conviction of the defendant for liav- H .f Vl,/ ?! '"', ''','' Ji'^ti^-'t's, notwithstanding 
 nig sold liquor without a license on the two I Wed '.H,;''-''"!'^''^',''^ '"""'''} "''J-'-l to the 
 
 iiig sold liquor without a license on the two 
 days named ; and a month later returned a 
 second conviction as for an otfence committed on 
 the ,{lst only ; — 
 
 Held, that the information charged two 
 offences, and it and the proceedings thereon 
 were m direct contravention of section ''6 of the 
 Summary Convictions Act, R. S. C ch 17S • 
 and that the misjoinder of the two offences was 
 not a delect in substance within the' meaniuL' of 
 section 28. *■ 
 
 /.",./;/.,>■ V. Rir/wrd.., [1S92] 1 Q. R. -,55, „ot 
 followed. 
 
 Hamillmi v. Walker, [ISi)2] 2 (,». R 2.5 re 
 ferred to : — ' " ' i 
 
 Held, also, that the objection to the informa- I 
 tidii and subsequent jiroceedings was open to 1 
 the defendant upon m< .ion to (piasli the convic- 
 tions, although it was not taken before the' 
 magistrate : — 
 
 Held, lastly, that, under the circumstances 
 iitither section 10,5 of R. S. 0. ch. 194, nor sec- 
 tions SO, sj and 88 of R S. C. ch. 178. as amended 
 b> ...J \ let. ch. 3,, applied to the convictions 
 An.l the convictions were quashed with costs 
 
 ." ,1 ' n' oc'i' *''" P'-oseeiit'"'. n<viiia V. Hazen, 
 J- (I. I!. 38,. •S'ee the next case. 
 
 niorniatl.jn on this grouml, proceeded and 
 
 ,,':,".;' "■'■'"?''"''■ '° '■'^■^P''^;' "f '^11 "'<■■ offences bo 
 UKug.^H. then amended the information by 
 substituting the 8tli August for the Sth .July 
 proceeded and heard evidence in resocct of tho 
 «..bsttuted charge and dismisse.l it and con 
 victed the defendants for sellb.g to t«o uersona 
 on the 5th ,luly, the convicti,m w.as quXd 
 hnjuuv V n,r.n, 20 A. I!. 0,S3, .listingnished. 
 lerMreet .1. It was the duty of the jus- 
 tices when the objection Mas taken to have 
 amended the information by striking out one or 
 other of the charges, ami t,. have, lieard the 
 evidence applicable to the remaining charge 
 only. Jx',,j,na v. A/irrm/, 25 O R ,5iq ^ 
 
 Information -.Vt,Yr«/ Oflhio's — Adjuum- 
 mf„t - nan-t,-~/,np,-isnnm,nt.]-An informa- 
 tion stated that the defendant •' within the 
 spare dt t iirty days last past to wit on the .■JOtli 
 
 I License Commissioner Taking Part to 
 
 irvial~Jn,n.>o>, for Distress in CourirHon and 
 I I'o t>,A,jud,ranun-SahloLod;,u- Durim, I'ro- 
 
 I under the Liquor License Act, the license com- 
 jinissioner, who was sitting at the counsel's 
 [table, went and sat in the constable's chair a 
 few feet distant from the desk at which tho 
 inagistTate was sitting, but there was no evi- 
 dence to shew that he in any way improperly 
 interfered in the trial : - •' i t j 
 
 Held, that the license commissioner could not 
 De deemed, under the circumstances, to have 
 been sitting on the bench and taking part in the 
 truil, etc., contrary to section 95 of the -Vet 
 An objection that the adjudication did not 
 
 aiKl31.st<lavsof July ISU'' d , ,1 , f 1 J -^'l, '"'Joctum that the adju<licati 
 
 i"toxieatin^li,u^'&i!^rt£SS;^^££^P;i;;:^f -"-^ -"""^ ^"^ conviction co„ 
 
 l)y lau- required " :- >-"-'i- c'ltitlor , taine<l .such a provision, was overruled, fol 
 
 IVr Hagarty, C. J. ()., and Royd C —.Such ! hT. v'""l^ '• ^"/•'''•''' '^ **• ^- "•«' =" 
 an u,f„r,„ation does noi harge two ofFenee bi, i,e he L'^'A "' '^'^^'-•^'""^^f' "'S. <'" ""t author- 
 ""l.y the single offence of selli iru.dawfull^ wl^^^^^^^ 
 within the thfrty days. ^ ""l.l^^t^lly house during prohilntcl hours ; the most that 
 
 . lVT<).sler, ard Maclennan, J.L A --Siicli an ^m't' f "". ^ "'V"'"' ''^'" '" t''^' ''"'fe'^r <loes 
 
 ...fonnation does cha^e ^ wj dffeii^es ^L t ^ ^^L^S " o' r'^I^o"' ""'"''^'•- "''""^ ^ 
 
 7 ■'■■"'•^^ ...... ..uuiiuBs aiiu is in 
 
 c"'iri89 ''"" '" ""'^"'" ^^^ *'^* "^ *'"' Criminal 
 But. per Curiam, assuming that an information 
 
 Minute of Conviction— C,.HinV7/o» „nt in Ac- 
 cor,lai,re Udh.l^-A minute of conviction for 
 
 BO worded does eont^a ^S. t^ p;^^i:r o ' seH n 7r " ""'Jt^ "'il^'te of conviction for 
 S'xtion 845 Ci) of the Crin.inal Code VsO' tl?p of f '-a' ^"''""'.'^ "'-''-■''«'-' i" oontravoution 
 defeet is one '' in .substance "in frm'' wit in cl 194 sV, 1 '^^''.''""r /-i':^'"^^^ '^''' «■«••>- 
 tl.e .neaning of the curative -tion (847;i;nd i ^ 11;^^ :^:fl^^t.;:;s::fi;!f ^L^rT ;i 
 
Illli> 
 
 8i6 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 leyicl liy (listrcsa, and in .Kfiuilt of (listite.s im- 
 T>iiH(imiiiiit, iuid a formal com iitiim was drawn 
 up folli HJiig tlif niiiiutt : — 
 
 >IeM, tliat iiiidor sertion 7(1, dixtrcss was not 
 »lithori/cd ; l)iit that the fact ol tlu niinutf con- 
 tttinirj; siicli provision, did not i.rcvfnt a con- 
 victioii ondtting siioli ]ir(ivision, In ini; drawn iii. 
 iiud r II rncd, in compliance- with a cfrHnruri 
 
 in**" -d. 
 
 He;ihm v. /Irai/,/, l-.> (). |{, .(-,«, aiid Uiyhiav. 
 Jftl/rjint, ISO. K. 14S, considered : . 
 
 Helil, also, that the c<invi';tion was good under 
 section 1 or) of the said Act. Rn/iiin v. Jlmll, i/, 
 20 O. K. 4SI. -^ 
 
 Saie—<Jii(iii/i/!t.]—T\n' .lefeiidant, tlie liolder 
 of u Hhop license under the I,i(|Uor License Act, 
 K. S. (). (ill. 11)4, was convicted liy a magistrate 
 tor selling li,|uor in less (|iiantity than three 
 half-pints, contrary to section •_', snhsection .S. 
 
 The evidence sliewed a sale of ii bottle of ale i 
 and 11 Ha»-k of brandy, each containing less than 
 three halfpints, the two together containing ! 
 more than three half-pints. j 
 
 Upon appeal from an order refusing a ct'r- I 
 tiorari : — 
 
 Held, that it was within the jurisdiction of ' 
 the magistrate to determine as a ninttcr of fact I 
 whether the defendant had sold liijuor in less : 
 quantity than three half-nints, and if arcr/io- 
 rwriweie gianttd, the Court wonhl have no 
 power, tipon a motion to (juasli the conviction, 
 to review the magistrate's decision. 
 
 Colonial Jiavk- of Aiistvniasia v. U'ilhin, L. R, 
 5 P. C 417, foUowerl /^njhia v. Cimcrli/, '2U 
 O. R. 51, 
 
 556 
 
 asked liy a coiijile of p( rsons for whiskey i,,. 
 said he could not sell it, and gave themt'i,, 
 peraiice <lrinks, and on being paid tlieiei„'r 
 treated to whisk.y which he obtained fr ,iii il 
 bottk^ behind the counter. 
 : The defendant was convicted under scetiun 
 .>0, lor permitting spirituous lienors to be dnml- 
 ; in his house, being a house of public e'ntert.iin 
 ment, the niinntc of eonviclion pi'ovidin.' f,,r 
 I distress in delaull of payment of the line , Hid 
 (Costs imposed; but the conviction drawii'ur. 
 and returned under a writ of rp.r/i,„-ni-i oiuilte'l 
 the provisions foi distress. Neither under sec 
 ; tions 0(1 or 70 is distress authorized :_ 
 
 Held, that the conviction was valid as bein,' 
 ni accordance with section .".O ; and that. niuWr 
 the circumstanees, it need not follow the 
 minute. 
 
 J.^!Ma V. //arlfr,/. i>0 O. K. 481, fidlow.d ^ 
 I Held, also, that the conviction would Irm 
 1 been good under section 70, as the giviii.r ,,„( 
 being paid for the temperance drinks was ^rr, i,. 
 subterfuge for disposing of and selling sinritiuMis 
 iKpuirs; and further, the conviction ,„uM l„. 
 supported under section lOo : — 
 
 Held, also, that the facts of oneoftlie.ui 
 victing magistrates being a chemist and drir^ 
 gist, and 111 such capacity tilling medical piT- 
 scnptions containing s.nall (luantities of s,,i.jt 
 nous iKiUdis, did iK.t incapacitate him fmni aci- 
 ing as a magistrate and adjudicating upon the 
 case. Ji'djii.n y. Unliiinhoii, '20 O. It. 514 
 
 Sale by "Wife— Prc^mnplion— llehidtdl.]— 
 The defendant was a married woman, and tlie 
 Bale of the lupior took jdace in the presence of 
 tier husband ; but the evidence shewed that she 
 •WHS the more active party, and she was the oc- 
 cupant ot the premises on which the sale took 
 place : — 
 
 Held having regard to R. S. O. eh. 194, sec. 
 11'-, subscc. 2, that, even -f the prcsum);tion 
 that the sale «as made through the compulsion 
 of the husband had not been removed bv section 
 13 of the Code, it would have been rebutted by 
 tJie circumstances. 
 
 Rfilina v. 1) Ulimt).^, 42 U. t'. ]!. 402, distin- 
 guished, licijbmw Mi(;t((/oi;'2t) O. U. llf). 
 
 Selling Without Ijicense—EiHloirc o/' /'«)■- j 
 chaxe Of Dajfs y,V,v//,/x_C'o.v/,v.]-'i-he defendant | 
 puichased for .S2.-., from a dnlv licensed hotel- ' 
 keeper, the day's receipts of the bar. and at the i 
 clo,se of the day had paid over to him such re- i 
 ceipts : — I 
 
 Held, that a conviction against defendant for ' 
 aelluig lirjn<.r without a license couhl not be - 
 maintained, and the conviction was (inashed 
 but without costs. ' 
 
 Remarks on the (juestion of costs in such 
 cases. Rcijina v. Wrsthilce, 21 O. R. filO, 
 
 Taverns and Shops- Haninj Lhpior for 
 
 '^."w-'V-^'-^'''"'"'"'"' ''''•■"■^■'' '"'■".'/ « Ilou-^e of 
 fiihhr tnh'r/mnmciif—Coi.ricfum not Folfm-iim 
 ?timi/i~t;alc Without Linn^e.^.])ru(iriixt—nio^'} 
 —The defendant had been a licensed hotel- 
 keeper, his hotel haviiig a b,.,r furnished with a 
 counter and the usual appliances for the sale of 
 liquor, his license having expired. On being 
 
 Territorial Jurisdiction— Warrani~S,im- 
 monx-E^c.-ltision of En,!ai,r.]-\jpou a motion 
 tor a rue 7(^v^ to ,,uasli a summary conviction 
 of the defendant by a stipendiary magistrate 
 tor selling iKpior without a license :— 
 
 Held, that although the conviction did n„t 
 .shew on Its face thai the otluice was comiuittcd 
 at a place within the territorial jurisdiction of 
 the magistrate, yet, as the warrant for the de- 
 tendants apprehension, which was returned 
 upon cirtiorari, sh.wcd tlie complaint m be tlu.t 
 ! the defemlant sold li,,uor at a place within iho 
 niag:strate8 jurisdiction, and it was to be in- 
 terred that the evidence returned was directed 
 to that com])laint, .sutilcieiit appeared to sati-fv 
 theCourtthat an olJence of the n.iture described 
 in the conviction was committed, over which 
 the magistrate had jurisdiction, and ther. (ore 
 the eonvic'tion sliouM not, having regard to -cc- 
 tion >M) of the Criminal Code, 1S02, be hehl in- 
 valid. 
 
 [ /.'<•;/»/(( V. Younij, 5 O. R. 184a, di>tin- 
 guishcd :— 
 
 Held, also, that, by the combined etiect of 
 sections ;V)!) ami 84;? of the Code, it was discre- 
 tionaryMith the magistrate to is.sue either a 
 suuinions or a warrant, as he might diem bcsf 
 and therefore it was not a valid objection to the 
 conviction that the magistrate included in the 
 costs which the defendant was ordered to pay 
 the costs of arresting and bringing her bilore 
 the magistrate under the warrant. 
 
 Upon the defendant tendering herself as a 
 witness on her own behalf, the magistrate stated 
 that, m view of the evidence adduced bv the 
 prosecutor, a <lenial by the defemlant on oath 
 would not alter his opinion of her guilt, upon 
 winch her counsid di.l not further press for her 
 exammati, n ; but her iiusban.l was examined, 
 and gave evidence denying the .sale of the li- 
 quor : — 
 
557 
 
 isons for wliislioy, i,,. 
 , .-iiid gave tlicn, tci,, 
 
 llflJlg ,)iii,| tli.lll,,!-, 
 
 icli liu ()l)tiiiiiL(l tV ,111 n 
 
 iiviittd iiiidir miitidfi 
 fnis licninr.s to lie (liuiik 
 iNc^_<>f_ l)ul)li(,' i-'iitci t:iiii 
 iivictioii j)i'<i\i(liim fi.p 
 yiiit'iit of tlio linr^iiil 
 t'OMviction ilrawii in, 
 t of ffviii'i-nri i.iinucd 
 1. Nt'itliei- under .sec. 
 uitliDiizcd : — 
 oii_Mas valid us luing 
 II •">•' ; and that, iiii.ler 
 need not follow tiio 
 
 3. K. 481, followed :^ 
 Dnvictioii wonld iia\c 
 0, iiH tliu Kiviiij,' ;ui(i 
 met! drinks was a n.,!,. 
 
 i iUi(lse]ling.s])iritii(Mis 
 .' eonvictioM eoiild In. 
 ()"> :— 
 
 cts of one of the t.,i.. 
 a chemist and dn,-- 
 )■ filling nieiliral ],ie- 
 11 <|Uanlitie.s of sjiirit- 
 [liieitate him from acl- 
 nl,jiidieating upon tlie 
 <oii, iOO. It. ;JI4. 
 
 ion — Warraitf — V«h|. 
 "'•'•.]— Ujjon a UKition 
 summary conviction 
 ijicndiary miigi.striite 
 . licen.se : — • 
 f conviction did ntit 
 fl'tnee wa.s comniitted 
 itorial jurisdiction of 
 ! warrant for the de- 
 ihicli was returned 
 : complaint to li,' tlii.t 
 lit a place -witlun tlio 
 and it was to he in- 
 eturned was directed 
 t aiipeared to satisfy 
 f then.aturc deserilied 
 iimitted, over wliich 
 iclion, and tin n fere 
 having rcg.ani to -ec- 
 'de, 1S02, be held iii- 
 
 '■ comhined elleet of 
 
 I Code, it was discre- 
 te to issue eithcra 
 hcniight die'ni hcst; 
 ■aUd ohjoetion totlie 
 rate included in tlio 
 was ordered to [lay, 
 bringing her In tore 
 iirraut. 
 
 idering herself as a 
 :hc ntagistrate stated 
 lice adduced by tlie 
 ! defendant on eath 
 
 II of her guilt, iipoii 
 Further press for licr 
 land Was exaniinod, 
 ; t!ic sale of tlic li- 
 
 INTOXICATINQ LIQUORS. 
 
 Waiver of Summons or Information Form 
 
 ; /'''"■'■•''''''vl -nntlietnaiofamisienu^am, ■ 
 
 ,. .r.mv,.s.r.ue..tlu.tak,n.,,fani,n,.rmai,u 
 "I Issue ol .<. suinin'Mia may be wiived 
 
 On a char^'c fur selling \,^n,n^ without a 
 i-JiHc, contrary to section 70' „f |;. s (j di 
 b',thcderendantapp..arel before the', ;:i': 
 fates, ploulcd to the eharg., and the evid.Mo- i 
 w,u g.Mo int.. and tlr- case close 1 withoit obje •.' i 
 t;..M, the detcuhnt conv,ote,l, and a Hn« of .S.V. 
 and costs miposc ,. An objection taken o.^ a' 
 1.1. .0,1 to ,pia.sh the conviction, that the infor- 1 
 """"" "■■'•* t''^^'" l^cf-c oaiy oae justice of tl c i 
 p..c.., wa. oyerru ed. it b.mg, under the ciroum^ ' 
 .stances, lield to be waived: but, S. m',h tl ■ 
 n,torm;ition was apparently taken 1,. fore' two 
 justices, '" 
 
 The adjudication di.l not state the amount of 
 tile costs iinpo.sud : — 
 
 Held following R,.iiaa y. l-V,in,, o;),). ,{ (j.^,, 
 tins did not .nval.date the coovieci.m : I nt' 
 7'Mr... whether apirt frotn tli. , amending .Acts 
 sii.M would be the case. ^ 
 
 L'nder It. .S. () 
 
 the detendi.it, .i.i'h'^re/'tionT.llTthL^'S^^^ u, ' -M .s^, ."' r' ,u,^."' '''"'•"' ''^ ''''" •^"P''«'""' ('""rt, 
 inakc her In! answer and defence. ]{,■.,;„, v ' 
 
 .l/.'.m/o/-, •_'!) o. H. 11,-, •' ^• 
 
 By-law -Sale. /,,/ IteMil-Qnoufil,,- LocalUu 
 /> ?■ -^ "'"■<"": '■^l>l'"""mn,i of A,,f,UH a„d 
 l)-dana:, th- li,.„lt „/ /'o//hr,~X<>lic'-ChrLt 
 »l'C.s Day a,,/ .V..,,- y.„.:-Oa„.\-.\ by Uw 
 : pas.sed by a townshtp council under ,-,;( Vnl oh 
 
 the retad sde of iiitox catin ' Honors io <1... 
 township of Mudposa : and enact ,. It " j 
 
 1 c p.oh.b.ted n, every tavern, inn, or ot lor 
 
 l>""soor phe.;ot ,.ublic entertainment ; and he 
 
 I sale thereof ,,. altogether prohibited in eve rv 
 
 Held, that th... last part of the elaus,. tnust h- 
 
 ca,l.„,.,„,,„,t,„„^^.i,l, the prevhms part .so a, 
 
 o hmit the prohibition to' a sale by re ,^iT^ 
 
 uhich ,s now put beyond ,p,oscion by ,-,1 Vict.* 
 
 ch. 4t), section 1 (0.). 
 
 .sAn.,» V. C>rpor„fion 0/ Ori/Kn, liC, U. (;. ft 
 l..!t. an.l/„,-c /.nrn/0/,r,on Ar,, ,S A. I{. rra, 
 
 Held also tliat the ,p,aiitit.y of li,,uor to be 
 deemed a sile by retail ne-.d not appear i„ the 
 by-law, betng ue.ined by the statute: th" the 
 h.cal.ty with,,, which the li,,uor could be sold 
 
 . valid objection v:^hJ'i:::^:tl;m;ttur did I !r''v^ , ■ i -^ 
 
 no! state that the imprisonment w,s for the' " ■^"'>'v"'"tl.V m.licated 
 t-:ni spec.licd, unless Hie costs and ch,ir..es f 
 ■ .veying to jail were sooner [luid. 
 
 that the want 
 
 C ui-i-, L'U (), K. 0-t:; 
 
 .','/( «f 6 V, 
 
 2. Mi.^n //iitieoiis OaiCK. 
 
 By-law -- I'.ihii.-ation - i;,lli,„i Pl.vci 1 _ 
 Auuce 01 intention to submit a'looal o|.t,<m 
 l-'V-hiw tu the voles of the township elect." ws 
 
 p.cn m p,-opcr form aii.l for the ,'e,,u s t • lu ; 
 '^'>' 0. nnc^ ,n a paper published in at, inc. . 
 ponted village, the bounds of which d, Viot 
 
 :ruS,:;;:;:l;i.^'-"«''^'->--)-''-'-t'.- 
 
 c , . •' -'»vv.v* , uiii: CI 10 Lilt; w>Lnr 
 
 fa penalty 10 the by law did not invalidateTt 
 I He , ay named m the by-law for tlu. appoint- 
 ment o a^'ents to atteml at the tinal sumuil 
 up ot the votes was nearly three ^veeks after he 
 hrst p.iblicalion of the bv-law. and tin , lav 
 -vmed for tl,.. clerk to .le.dare the resu .f'fe 
 po ling' w.is the secnd after sai.l polling: J 
 Held, both .lavs sutii, ■lent 
 
 The n.,tice at the foot of the by-hiw after 
 certity.ng that the f.uvgoing (/..., the co^of 
 he by-law publishcli w.is a true copy of the 
 l.r..p..,sed by-law of the township of Alariposa 
 W)i,ch had bcm taken int., cM.sid'.ration by the 
 c.uneil there..,, an.l which woul.l l.e finally 
 l.ass,Ml m the event of the electors' assent be r ^ 
 ''''■a.ned thereto attet one mo .th's publication 
 
 —'1' '" iliiestioii. This nini.p ,i-.. . I ■ ' "i "■"^' '""-' "lo un s t)Ui)lication 
 
 ,,, , "'^'^""' t'l-'t on the -1th of 
 
 iest„.,> ' oame.i in tile h) ■ !,,« tor the purpose of receiv- 
 
 h.h 
 
 11 the township in .piestu'n 
 
 as kdn"''-!t P"'""*^ t''''' "■''' 'I'^^-'Hbed merely 
 ftf. l>emg at or near a certain villa.ro It wis 
 
 .lii.lt lat the description was the same as th', 
 <..^c,l 11, the by-laws appointing the pla,fes o 
 
 St^.'::ontr'l^'rr''■'^^'"''-''^''^-- 
 
 tiidt tlic poll w,is held 111 a house el.,se t.i tl... 
 liouse m which the poll ha.l been hel.l t 1 
 
 «ext prcccling municipal election, Tit..^ 
 itseit eaviiig been inove.l away. 
 
 Au.itiicr polling 
 
 ^ -,cw for the 
 , ing the v.,ies of the electors on the saine. Two 
 
 Xew vSs'i''^^^^''"'"" "'"'■" <^hristmu8 an.1 
 Hehl, th.it the formal notice was sutfieient • 
 'tu.l the t.e. ot publication on the .lays named 
 d,.. not render the publicati.ni invali.i f puhlicl 
 t.on not being a ju.lieial act so as ll, 'p event 
 I'uMication on tho.se days. Hnu,k.r v^ToTn- 
 
 Au.itlicr polling olace waV snn .;«„,, 11 1 i ■ ^^'^^^~'^'"'"""'>'^^' I'"'" -Viar of 4,,,,/irf, 
 -rihe.1 by lilace. tt'amt -;::eXn J S^ht a 'To vi;^ ''^-'T '" '"^^'f" '"« I'-'-'^S^ 
 «.H a,i error m the number of the cieessio' si, ,? """ "■"l""''-"' ^'"^^ '^^■^'T I'Y law 
 
 ^ It was shewn that all the proceed nr'L, . :",'.'::;H'!!^'-""- ''-lings, an.l thit n^ J 
 
 iigs, an.l that no l>y- 
 which had a tendency 
 
 ..,„ , ] , , * "* ."'^ .-"oeession. sli.,ni 
 
 been takenin s^o.Ktf tiStC p:i^':«:;::; ' ^:\:': '"'T rr- ° - - '^ — «y 
 
 a'-go, an.l It did n.,t appear that a v o e u/} ' ^ .'"''' *''," ''""■''''"'^ "^ """ I'^^oi''*^. should l.e 
 
 Hel.l, therefore' 
 
 in the exe..ise of tai^^^Z^X^A ' and S'r^" " V'"^ ""'"'"''■ "^ *--" "— • 
 'io, refuse to quash the bydaw inm.esti'ou / v i " ''^TV""'' ^''I""'"'! hucIi two-thirJs' 
 
669 
 
 INTOXICATING LIQUORS. 
 
 |) '! 
 
 ceivc the rf(|Hirc(l tHotliiids' vote. A siH'tial 
 meeting of cniiiicil wns thtri iiilltd for the fol- 
 lowing evtiiiiiff, whm the l.y-liiw wiia n;tiely 
 read u third time, rtceiviiik the required two- 
 thirdH vote : — 
 
 Held, that the hj law \\,t» luid, for havicg 
 l>een deft atfd when first introduidl hy renstiii 
 of not hiiviiiL' received a twn-lhinlb' vote, it was 
 not validftttd hy merely reading it a third time 
 at the mlisiinient meeting. 
 
 The l.y-law did not thew, as iKiuiied I>y the 
 Liquor Lieinse Act the year to which it wns to 
 ne apjilicnhle : — 
 
 Held, that it wns had for this renscn, also. 
 He }\ilmn ami Town u/ ItujirtUI, 2,') O. R. 439. 
 
 By-law— yotirs.]—A local ojjtion by-law 
 carried by a vote of seventy-one to fifteui wo.s 
 quashed where it ai.pcnred that the retuininK 
 otticer had refused to accept the votes of tenant 
 voters, Keventy.four of whom were (iH the list 
 and had the right to vote, though it was not 
 shewn that more than a very small number of 
 these voters had made any attimpt to vote <a- 
 had expresftd any inttntion of voting, or had 
 heard of the returning (itticcr's refusal. 
 
 Theelection.loctrine that irregularities should 
 not he held fatal unless they actually aHect the 
 result does not apply where a class is disfran- 
 chised in a by- law contest. 
 
 In re Cro/l and J'ttfr/.orovgh, 17 A. R 2! I 
 applied. Wouliiard v. Sorfons, L. K. 10 C. p' 
 733, considered. 
 
 Judgment of Gait. C. J., reversed, Mac- 
 lennan, J. A., dissenting. In rf Ponmler a,.d 
 VtUaye of » nichextn; 19 A. R. 684. 
 
 560 
 
 Qniirr, whether there is power on noti, e .,f 
 nutiui to (juafh reeolutions of this kiiiil. 
 I DanitiM v. linrford, IM V. C. R 478 • c, „,. 
 I V- ('arluri!//if, V> U. C. H. 341, ccn.nunua w' 
 
 ,i.'l O. R. (i6.-). ■' ■ • 
 
 j License Commissioners— /.V(/j(i'((0,,„.,.|_ y 
 
 rfgiilatiim by license conimissioncra i ,.|uiiii."i; 
 
 I the k.wtr half of bai-rooni windows to be 1, (• 
 
 j uncovered during piohibited hours is viiliii ,,/{ 
 
 icasonable. UhjUhi v. IMtm.nt, ;i,"> IJ. C. \\ • 'i- 
 
 questioned, liujiva v. Martin, L'l A. H. \^':. 
 
 License CommlFslcners— /'n hd,:i;ov. ' 
 board of licen.se con niissidiitis under the I.m.i 
 
 A 
 
 Iv 
 
 I ^^^r,T "^^"^ Intoxicated— Z )<;i(or Supplied 
 '>y-'"-olair>n-keept):'<—Johi/Liabi/ity.]~Wheve 
 a person comes to his death while intoxicated 
 and the intoxicating liquor has been supplied to 
 him at two taverns and to excess in each so that 
 an act.on might have been brought successfully 
 againat either of the tavern-keeiiers under R .s' 
 
 r^u ?"'*' f ''^ J2-'t'iey cannot be sued jointly. 
 
 the jury having in such an action in which 
 tavern-keepers had been jointly sued assesced 
 the damages at the trial at difiertnt sums against 
 tne two defendants, upon application to set 
 aside the verdict on the ground that the statute 
 VV''V "ot >^"Pi;ort such a joint action, the 
 plaintiff was put to bis election to retain his 
 judgment against either defendant, undertaking 
 to enter a. v,Me pro.'<t,,x,i against the ether 
 Meredith, C. J., huxitm.te. Crave v. Ilml, 26 
 U- K. 641. 
 
 . License Commissioners— /Pewi'w/icw.v Fix- 
 ing IJovrs jor Sale of L>qt,or.]-UcemG com- 
 missioners, appointed under E. S. ch 194 
 on 17th April, passed a resolution providing that! 
 after 1st Way following, in all places where 
 intoxicating iKiuors are or may be sold by whole- 
 sale or retail etc., no such sale or disposal of 
 the same shall take place therein, etc., between 
 midniehtand 5 a.m., which was subsequently 
 amended by substituting 11 p.m. formidnight:- 
 Ueld, that under section 4, enabling the license 
 commis8ioner.s to pass resolutions fo? regulating 
 taverns an<l shops, there was power to pa.ss thl 
 resolutions here : and that such power v.ap. not 
 juterfered witb by sections 32 and 54, no by- 
 laws on the snbject having been passed by the 
 municipal council. ' 
 
 ; Licente Act, R. S. (). ch. 194, is not a 1 
 against whim a writ (.f prohibitiin will , ,. 
 granted, piohibitirg them fimi itsuin- , 
 license. 
 
 Hnjiiiav. Local Goverimmt /Joan/, to (i |: 
 D., at p. 231, and AV 6'f rAv, « and Cih/ ,./ 
 loronlo. Hi A. R. 452, followed. ' 
 
 6'tniWc, an application under the latter t,Mt 
 of sec. 21, R. S. O. ch. 194, f.,r an addii,,,,,;,; 
 tavern license in a locality largely rti-oited t.. i i 
 .summer by visitois. may be made at any tin,.- -i, 
 long as the license does not extend bevoml tl. 
 prescribed period of six months from the tii^i .,i 
 May. In re Thoman's LWaiM, 26 O. R. 44,s. 
 
 Police Magistrate - lii<j}d to Tru Com i„ 
 0/enff.s.]_'Ihe defendant was chargeil villi i 
 breach of the Li(iuor License Act in the tnw,i. 
 shi]! of Rarton, in the county of WentWMth- 
 aiid was tried and convicted at the citv ni' 
 Hamilton, situated in the said county, I rf„te 
 
 I the police magistrate tlieieof :— 
 
 Held, that under section 18 of the I'olici- 
 iMagi.strate-8 Act, R. >S. O. ch. 72, the lolice 
 magistrate had jurisdiction in the premises 
 
 ^ Rf(jina V. GvUy, 21 O. R. 219. 
 
 Reeves In Unorganized Districts — l-'x 
 ojffiaoJiu^th-ex of the P{an'.]-'\ lie reeves (,f niiiii- 
 cipalitics in utorganized districts are, under the 
 ]egislati(n lelntiig thereto, < a,- rj^ffno jlistires (,i 
 the peace in their respective municip;ditifs, 
 w ith 1 owei' to try ak ne, and convict, foi- ofli mes 
 under " The I.iquor License Act,"' R, S. uli 
 194. Keijina v. McChvav, 22 0. R. 497. 
 
 RefUEal to Admit Officer.]— The right of 
 search given by section 130 of The 1 iciurr 
 License Ait, R. S. O. ch. 194, may be exer- 
 cised without any preliminary statement of tlie 
 purpose for which the search is to be made. A 
 foimal demand of admittance is sufficient. 
 ; Judgment of the County Court of Fi(.ntenac 
 reversed. Osier, J. A., dissenting. Htmna v. 
 Sloan, 18 A. R. 4H2. 
 
 Refusal to Admit Officer — Lkihilily e,f 
 
 LKOiKee for Offence of Servant.]— VexYi»gm\.\; 
 
 ,C. J.O., and Maclennan, J.A. Under seclien 
 
 112 of The Liquor License Act, R. .s. (). oh. 
 
 194, the licensed hotel-keeper is peisonidly 
 
 : responsible for the refusal of his seivant to 
 
 : admit an officer claiming the right of Ecanh 
 
 I under section 130. 
 
 I Per P.urton, arid Osier, JJ. A. — Section \\2 
 ! does not apply to an offence of that kind, but is 
 j limited to offences connected with sale, barter 
 i and traffic. 
 
560 
 
 Ih power on noti< t r,f 
 ions of this kind, 
 » V. C. H. 478; r,,,,,;. 
 
 li. ^4\, CCn.InilltCil r,|;. 
 
 ii.wi(,))(r,i 11/ /Irtii,!/' ,■■/'. 
 
 nera— /iVj/n/d'-v,,,^. j._ \ 
 ininiissioners 1 ,(|\iiiii,t; 
 Ml window H to 1,1; I, ff 
 iti'd lii,iir» is valid 11,1 
 tl iiii.nl, ,M,") U, C. R. ■■(•' 
 Mmiiii, -21 A. H. U,-' 
 
 961 
 
 INNUENDO. 
 
 \evB— Pri hilr.iwih] \ 
 ioiiirs miller tlif I,i'(|iii r 
 li. Iil4, is not a lindy 
 if proliiliitit n will I,,. 
 licni fii III isHiiiiij.' ,. 
 
 limeht liooiil, 1(1 (^1 |; 
 VcihiU (ind Cilii ,.t 
 HoMed. -^ 
 
 iiiultr the latter p.irt 
 1!M, for (III adilitioiiiil 
 y liirgely rtMjrtid t..i:i 
 b(.' made at any tinn- -o 
 ot extend beyomi i|,r 
 lonths from the tir.^t nf 
 '•««if, 'J6 (). R, -14s. 
 
 Jtiyhl to Trii Cciiilij 
 t was cliargtd v itii \ 
 'Hse Act in the tcun. 
 ■unty of WtMtworth ; 
 •■icttd at the cily (.f 
 le said county, liefmo 
 eof : — 
 
 ion 18 of the Tolice 
 0. ch. T'i, the jdlice 
 ion in the preniists. 
 •219. 
 
 sed Districts — Ex 
 
 ]— 'Ihe reeves of n.iuii- 
 istricts are, luider the 
 
 0, (.r (fficio jiistiies of 
 ective nniiiieip:iliti(s, 
 id convict, forofl'i ihes 
 i.«e Act," R. S. 0. ih. 
 
 , 22 0. R. 407. 
 
 Hcer.]— The right of 
 13(1 of The li(,u(,r 
 
 1. 194, may he excr- 
 laiy stntemetit of the 
 eh is to lie made. A 
 :ice is Eiifhcient. 
 
 K Court of Frentennc 
 5fenting. Htijvia v. 
 
 HBcer — LlahilUy </ 
 mw/.]— I'erHagaily, 
 J. A. Under .^eclii 11 
 le Act, R, S. 0. uh. 
 eeper is personally 
 il of his seivant to 
 the right of Eeaich 
 
 JJ.A. — i^cctioii \V2 
 3 of that kind, but is 
 ed wicli sale, barter 
 
 In the result, the judgment of the County 
 ieurt of f-rontenac, .mashing the eonvietion. 
 was upheld. I!i,iiiia v. n„lt,i\ L'O A. K. r>l(i. 
 
 Search Warrant -0/«/,»w,-/„/fMV,, • ] -Tl,,. 
 
 ,lete,idunt.sw,.rec<,mn,itledf„rt.iarf.,rol,.stniet- 
 infcM. peace othoer acting under a. s, arch warrant 
 issued on an mfor.nation charging that there wa.s 
 reasonable ground for the belief that spirituou. 
 Minors v^ere being unlawfully kept for sale con- 
 holne •?_ '"'"■ l'""^'""-' Act in an unlicensed 
 
 Held, that the search warrant must bo .leemed 
 tnliave he.in issued under section l;il of the 
 Act, and that section containing no provision 
 for piiiiishn.eiit m such ca.se, the iir'needinL's I 
 against the delen.lant must be by indictment for 
 a niisilenicanoiir under I!. S (' ,1, \i\., ,„ ' 
 
 j.jj .-..-. II. iu_, SI C. 
 
 The Court refused to determine the vali.litv 
 (it tlie warrant on a motion to set aside the 
 CdMiinitment, as it ciild be raised on the triil 
 ..the indictment if a true bill were found. 
 hjinn V. Jioilni', -'.SO. 1!. 4.-)0. 
 
 562 
 
 I ^''e I"-"vis,.m that the certificate shall aceoni- 
 p.i>>> theapplic.-.tionat the time of the tiling is 
 peremptory. /„ ,r J/uutrr , Li,;ns. -.^l O R 
 l.>.i. .S(. the next case. " * 
 
 Shop License -rVr/;//,v,/, „/' Hh.toisA-Ou 
 ■m ap|,lu.ation for a sl,,^, lice,i.se un.ler sub 
 
 .Act.l.. ,S. 0. ,.h. 1!)4, a,, H.iien.le.l he .-).•( Vict 
 
 : eutionwhichisto be lil,.,l „ ii|, the inspector 
 before 1st April, be aecompanie.l by ,1 i,r. perlv 
 s.gne.l certineateof the m:, jonty of the 'elec'tors^ 
 am the Act does not aiulioiize the giantin.- of 
 secti.m """'" ''""^'"'"'>' '" ""-' l"'"vision8 of that 
 _ Stmhl,', it is otherwise as to a tavern license, 
 in winch case a .liscretion rests with the com. 
 missioners. 
 
 Decisitjn of Meredith, ,1., l>4 O U \y\ 
 reversed. In y, Hnnhrs /,/.■,/,«, "24 b. R.' 
 
 Search Warrant -,y,./;/,;,„^y of Plac: to h. 
 
 S.n,rh<d, an,l J',rs..ns to n,nk;- it.]~A so^vch 
 Miiirant issuc.l un.ler s.eti.m UU of the I.i.iuor 
 
 '""•"'.ation lai.l by ,t p.,Ii,e inspector. Iha 
 he e was reas.inal.lc grouml fo.' the belief 
 a spintuous li,,uor was being unlawfully 
 U| t for sale .,r .lisposal contrary to tlie said 
 Act, in a certain unliccnse.l house or i.lace 
 .mmtly, n. the house ami premises of the 
 li'i'mt.) In.lustrial Kxhildt On Association 
 ■Inected the city license inspectors, t^to.^ 
 ml.Ies or pcicc othcer.s, or' any of tlu'.m , 
 s,.u..|i he said house ami premisses, amlever • 
 
 tk. ,.« tl ' Z "' ^''" P''^""'*^'^ '""..ccted 
 he e«ith. In att.mptmg to search defemlanfs 
 booth, which was .lescribed as l,..ing un.ler he 
 ol. grand stan.I on the exhil.ition premises a ' 
 p..hce sergeant vyho accompanied the inspect.'.r, 
 «as obstructed by .lefendant. The evid..nce 
 
 mnises •"'''' '''"' ""^ ""'"' '""'"' °" '''^' ' 
 
 Held, that the warrant was valid: fiat it 
 was sufficiently .lehnite as to the place to be 
 .arehe. andthe pers..ns directed to make it' 
 Jii'jiiia V. McOarri/, 24 (.». R. -yj. 
 
 Shop Lloenae-CVr/i/AY,/,. of Ei,.ctoys-OmU. 
 
 X„ ..,..] 1 he contravention of Jie provision's 
 of the Li.pior L„;ense Act, R. S. ().' oh ')4 
 Funded for ,n .section!)], must be a wilful',,,' 
 knowiii!,M!oiitravention. 
 
 Where it apj^arcl that the applicant f.,r 
 a license acte.l tliroughout in g.io' fa , | 
 mmttcl ., nle before 1st April, titli ten, 
 
 ti.m, the certihcate of tli'e electors re, ' 1 
 ft} '^■^•/>. ch. 194, sec. 11, sub-.sec 4 ■,. 
 amende, by n-^ Viet. ch. r,6, sec. 1 : an 1 the 
 bo.r,i ot commissioners, after a fair he r , .'of 
 le apiilicati.,,,, and all objections nia.Ie Zfiist 
 It, mchulmg the omission of the sai.l ccit Mc'i e 
 which ha.l not been tile.l until 25tli A , H hi 
 god faith and according to the best of Li" 
 J d, nent, gr,ud;ed the fic,.„.=e, an,l th, j Z 
 
 «oi;,^:;r'^i^'';v'S"'j"''«^;' ^'-^^ theiicct: 
 
 .30 
 
 . Transfer of Llcense-O ,/;//,„r,. ,/ A7ec<or.>- 
 
 \(onnl!i Jnd.,'-Jnr..,i:,;;onl„ i;,,:,bl,U.,„,, ]_ 
 
 .Section 91 ot the I.i.j„„r Licen.se Act, R. .S. () 
 
 ch. 1,)4, is a penal enactment ami is to I,,'. 
 
 ,coiistrue.l strictly: ami, as ic refers only t„ a' 
 
 license issued .-ontrary to any of the provi- 
 
 ,-insottlie.Vct,andnot,oa ^ license K- 
 
 I e.re.l, and to the licen.see ami not t., the 
 
 Simhf it'^ ;"'!^-'^''''«'^ ''^" i'||juri.s.lictioi. 
 
 , inder It to entcitain ,t cinplaint against a 
 
 , laiLsferee tha a l.ccM..e has he,.,, improperly 
 
 rausfcre.! to l„m : ami has n„ j,„isdictio„ to 
 
 revoke or .cancel a license not al,'ea,lv issued. 
 
 Ihe applicant w^is, i„ the ,n„i:ti; of .March, 
 
 KS91,tlie hol.ler of a wholesale iievn.sc to sell 
 
 li.iu.,r in preniLses 111 polling si,b..livi.,i„n 10 in a 
 
 city. Ihe hohler of a shop license in polling 
 
 8ul,.div,s,„ii IS transferrcl his license to the 
 
 applicant on the 'ilith .March, , 91. On the 
 
 same ,lay the license commis. .-, ■>,, on the 
 
 I.etit,on of the applicant, not aceo,..panied by 
 
 a cer jhcate signe.l by a majority .,f life electors 
 
 : ip.dl.ng sub..liv,sion 10, consented in writing 
 
 I the traiisfer of the shop license ami to its 
 
 ! anstertothe premises in p,dling suli-division 
 
 10, and also Ciincellcl the applicants wholesale 
 
 I license : — 
 
 I Held, that the commissioners erred in con- 
 , senting to the transfer of the shop license to the 
 I premises <,f the appbcant in polling siib-.livision 
 : 10 vyithout Ins petiti.m theiefoi- being accom- 
 panied liy the certificate reiiuiicl by 5;j Viet 
 : cii. 06, sec. I (O.). A', Dunl.,/,, -J^ 0."R. 22. 
 
 • Warehouse.]_A cellar in a lirewery where 
 beer IS .stoicl ,s a "waielnmse' within the 
 ncming of sect,,,,, 61 of the Li.pior License Act 
 U. .s. O. ch. 194. R,,,nm v. JIalli,/a>/, 21 A. R. 
 4 J. 
 
 INTRUSION. 
 
 'SVe LNF,ii:M..VTl,,.N. 
 
 INNUENDO. 
 
 ■SW DjiF.VMATIO.V. 
 
JUDGMENT. 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 mi 
 
 II i:' 
 
 I. Amk.m.incj ,\ni> Vacatin.j, rM:t. 
 
 II. ('t)N.SKNT .lllM.MKM., ".(i.'i. 
 III. I)K(,';,AI(\1(1KV Jl IxiMKNT, .Ku, 
 iy. I>K|-.\I I.T.Il |„iM|.:vT._ r,,j,j 
 
 V. l)i:i,AV IN Kntikim;, 5(17. 
 VI. K.NK(ii(ci.\(i, .108. 
 
 VII. FOKKKJN JCIMIMKNT, .">7(». 
 
 VIII. Motion kok Jiidomknt, ,J71. 
 l\. Mi.scKi.L.v.Niioi'H Cask-s ,-)70. 
 
 I. Amkndino am. Vacatinc. 
 
 Amendment— .iy,Va/fe.l— A Judee nuiv -il 
 ways cunvct anything in an orl'r «1 'fl,' , 
 I'ten insert...! l.y nu.stake o- ina.lv. tc e a 
 HI. order Mill l,e corrected even aftei e la 
 J a year. J/,. .!/„.,«, ,.. J{a<//un/, /« P 'l.; 
 
 'orroj Ihc Mort,j(nj,d /,.(»(/.•. I- . Under tin. 
 
 «4 ,Hi<l ,M>, tl e writ of suinin.,ns and all sub- ' 
 8c<,nent proeee.hng.s n.ay l,e amended after judj. 
 
 frMu the d..scri,.t,on ot lan.Ls in the writ of 
 B... mionsina n,.,>tga«e action, a ,mreel inelnde. 
 in the mortg.-ige, an or.ler v as nm.le, after in.' 
 mentand hnai or.ler of f.,reelo.,„re, laeatingt 7., 
 final order, .l,reet.i,y an amendment of the writ 
 an.l all proeee.hng... an.l allowing a new day f r 
 r deniptum by a .ub.se.,uent inetmbraneer^wl , 
 cul not eons, nt to the order; and in default 
 
 IS P" K 54 ■'■ '" '"'■"■'""■• '■'"*' '■ ^'"""'''•■ 
 
 564 
 Mistake Of Vendor as to Identity of v.n 
 
 /"--./ I,W,..J -^ A mnnMlaetiiring , ,„., 
 
 tn.„sf..rr..d to a «yndi..at.., whi.h had ; , 
 ln.;n..y. itH w.wks, plant, and Material , , l' , 
 efleet its wh.,1,. bl.,siiu..MM, whieh the sv,,,, , 
 proc.e.led t....arry,.n, on th,. .•..mi.any'H „'.:," 
 ■-S tnr it.s„Hn iMmlit.and at il« ,,„,; i T' 
 I h.. managing .lir.rt.-r .,f the eom|,a„v 
 ha.l b,.,.ome the manager of the .syndi.at;. 
 the above transfer, but piUMUailt to i ,' 
 Iiondenee e nee.l a few diiys |„.t,, 
 
 ni'Jf^T"^^^""" ^^ Plaintiffs to Vacate their 
 Own Judgment - FrauJ-MlsUdr-Mn-mr] 
 
 apinst the defen.iant upon a promis.sory note 
 g en for part of the pnrehaso money of\-o.^s 
 sold by the i.lnintdls t.. the .lefendant. ^ 
 Under exeeution i.ssiu.l upon the jn.lgment 
 
 1^ in^T • "'"^■'' 'T""' *'"'' '" I'"rcha.i.>g 
 lie d upon the evidence, that fraudulent col- 
 
 t e plaintitrs dam, was not established; and in 
 the absence of trau.l or mistake the Court won 
 not grant th,. plaintiffs the extra.,rdinarv relief 
 h onfeVt^' "';■ J"''^f' ^'"t ngairst the defendant 
 m^order to all.,w them to proceed against the 
 
 Held, also, that so long as the iudement 
 »ooc, no acti.,n conl.l beS.r.aiLht u oTt^ 
 original c^use „1 action, which" ha.l become 
 
 ..It.r 
 
 or.l....ed a.s in his former capacity ..,.rtai„ ' 
 
 fn.m th,. phnitill, wh.. s.,l,se,,uent t... the tn, 
 ers„|,pb..dtl,eg,,,,ds.,r.icr..du-hichwcr,. I 
 by the svn,l„.atc, an.l 1... afterwar.ls t.,.'k 
 n.jteof tho.ron.pauy for th..ir pri..c, on wl,i. 1," 
 when .lish.Mi.iur.'d, he sue.l ami obtain..,! i ,,l .' 
 ;ment against th,. c.„o|,any, bci.,;., h.,w.v,. 'li 
 I the tun.. i.^n.M-ant of the circninstan.,.c.s ..U- 
 ineiitioM...!. About a week prior to th,. „, I , 
 I melit, a win.liug.u|. or.l.r was obtain,.,! a. Vi,,:* 
 jthe .....mpany, hearing .,f which the phinUlf, 
 (.nee conunence,! this acti.Mi against th,. svi„ 
 : eat,, for the pric.. of the g.„„!s, an.! alt..,'wa 1^ 
 , before tria he ..btaine.l ,„■ /,»w,. an onh-r va, 
 ing th,. juilginent .-igainst the company •- 
 
 lleM, that file plaintifl' was entille,l't,',i..i.ovr.| 
 fr.mi the syn.luatc the price of the go.„U . 
 Held, als,,, p<.r Kobertson, .1., tliat tlic in,!, 
 jnient vacatcl was absolutely mil! an, I „,| 
 
 jhaymg b,.,.,, obt,iine,! after the wm,l 'l 
 
 I or.ler witln.ut the leave of th,. ( ourt ' ' 
 
 Per Mcr..,lith, .1., the ju.lgnient was at anv 
 
 rate irn.gularly entere.l, ami when s.-t a«.,le 
 
 was as if It ha.l never existed. K,ali„„ v 
 
 Graham, '_'0 O. H. ;i(il. ' 
 
 , Order-- /'.<».,,• of Jmhje or ,IA,.,/,.,. ,■„ ,./,„„, 
 Y'S "> /,>.«.„,./.)_. A .In.lge or the Mast-r „ 
 t hainl.ers has power t,. recuisi,!,.,- a „„,ttor 
 whu.h has b.., n brought bef.ae him ,,,.,,„,,, ,,, 
 the appl,..ati.,n .,f an o,,p.,sing party ; a,i,|' 1,,. 
 can also .,pen up a matter in rcsi.ect ..f «|,ul. 
 
 •Ut.udt to shew cau.se, if he is satislie.l tint 
 oi,p..sition was intende.! and that any iinusti,... 
 has arisen. ' ' 
 
 'Su'ih/r, that if necessary the wonls '•i.vparl, 
 onler ,1, Rule ■,;«! may be rea,l .so as to t.„ver 
 cases g..ing by default, where lhr.,u;;h s.,na. slip 
 cau.se lias not l)een shewn. F/Hf v.' IIV.v, 1 J ]• 
 
 to b,t Asul,-^Stat,il,. ofLimilali<,ns.]-\u acti„u 
 upon a jyomissfiry n..te payable on the ^tll .V). 
 
 [i'lll'^- ''*''*"'• "■"' '"■«•'" "" ""^ •■''■'^t O^'tol'er, 
 Ih.M. J he writ .,f summons not bavin,, he,,, 
 serve.i, an ,,rder ^^■as ma.Ie on th.. L'.Sth Octol,,,', 
 ,, ,- 't.' V"' ,'.;';.''/"■'' •H'l'lic'.iti.,n of th.. plaiiitill. 
 under Kulel.;)S („), that service sh.ail,! he ,r„o,l 
 >f ma.le within tw.lve month.s. The vrit to- 
 gether witn this ..rder and an ..r.ler of revivor 
 -the original plaintifT havin- .lied i„ i|k. ,„«ui. 
 tiire-wa,s serve,! on one <,f the .Icfen.laiils on 
 
 bSO.i, the defen.iant « ho ha.l been serve,! n.ovci 
 hetore the local Judge who ma.le the .ir.Krof 
 
 2Stli Ot'tober, 1S92, to set it asi.le, whidi lu 
 
 refused to .lo : — 
 
 Held, leyersing the dcei8i..n of Gait, C.J., iu 
 
 Chainbers, that the local Ju.lg., was right ; for 
 
 the time for moving under Rule 530 had expired 
 
564 
 
 >r as to Identity of Ven 
 
 ''.'/ •Ill /'.iiii' III .t,/ni„„ v„, 
 
 ,."'7""'"i'!";"'K o,„„|,,;; 
 
 ^In'iiU; wind, |ia,| I,,', „ 
 HMt, an.l ii,at,ii,il,i.,„| i„ 
 
 ll'MH, Wllirll th,. MVriUh.U,. 
 
 , "11 the i'niri|,:,i|j>j, .,,,,'|^^ 
 ilil, iiikI at its (.HI, li.i^ 
 "I- iif Hir COIIjpilllv, Mil,. 
 H«'i-ot the Hyii,lj,..m;._ ,,„,.^ 
 mt piUHMaiit to a ,■,.,,;■, 
 II I'l'W <l!iys l„.c,,.^, ij 
 leroiipafily cTtiiin |j 
 
 ' SllllWIJIU'llt td tllu tl.uiv 
 ordlTcl wllicll Wi.,v iisnl 
 
 1 n>' .iftiTMiinls t.xik ■ 
 ""• tlu'ii- pi-iiv, 1,11 wl,i,.|," 
 Kiii'il anil obt.iiju'il j.ril-'. 
 iiiiiy, ln'in;;, lHi\nvri', ill 
 the (■iiviiiiiNtaiK.v.^ aUvu 
 Wfok pridi- to thf II, ,|.,. 
 
 I' T was ol,tai,».,l a, ^t 
 
 "f.wlil.:li tlie pliiniilint 
 iction ayaiiiyt, tlic .syiiili 
 !(• Hooils, and alli.|Hai(l,j 
 1 I.'- /iiir/r an onliT \a.:it 
 Hi thf (.'oMip.uiv : 
 
 ifrwascntilktil't.i|-,,„v.T 
 piici) of tlio ;,'i)(iirs ■ 
 it.-on, .)., t.'iat tlu.. i,„i.,. 
 i"li>tfly null „,„i \.„j,]^ 
 afti'i- the winiliiii.'.iih 
 of till- ('onit. 
 II' .inilf,'Mifiit ^va^ at any 
 il. iin<l when sft atale, 
 1- oxistuil. Kialiii./ v' 
 
 'he or Afiisirr i„ t ■/,„„, 
 ii<l,i.'(! or thf Mastrr ill 
 to rm.nsiilci' a n.attor 
 lii'tori; liioi (.(■ jiiiii, ^ nil 
 >liposln- iwrtv : an.l' la- 
 ter ni rispect of MJial,. 
 i^ after notiee anil upi.ii 
 if lie is (satisliecl timt 
 and that any injiijtiiv 
 
 ry the words '• ix /mrli 
 y lie read so as to eia-er 
 I liere lliroiiyh s ,. slip 
 
 1. F/r// V. H'llll, \i \\ 
 
 III' for Si rrirr—.Voii.,ii 
 .i///(Vfi//f<;(.v. I— .\iiaeti..li 
 payalile on the -Itli No 
 I on the 3 1 St Ueteher. 
 nions not haviiit; laaii 
 le on the :.'Sth (M.,\m; 
 'ieation of the ])lanitill, 
 serviee should lie g(icul 
 nonths. The writ to- 
 11(1 an im\vv of itvivor 
 viii{,'ditd in the nie.iii- 
 of the defeiidaiils on 
 n the iL'th Seiitimlitr, 
 lad heen served iiajvui 
 ho nuule the onlir ef 
 et it aside, which he 
 
 :ision of Gait, I'.J., in 
 Judye was right ; for 
 ' Hiile o'.m had expired 
 
 565 
 
 JUDOMENT. 
 
 luid had not l.eer, extended : an,! certain eor- 
 n-»p"ndenee relied on as shewing an ayreen.fiu 
 <'<''"■ the tune, had not that elVeet 
 
 The validity of the ,,e ,,„yU ord.-r did not 
 ■ irpend Hol.dy ni.oii wheth.-r th,- allidav it upon 
 H-liiuh It was nnide was sii(li,-i,.nt to .iipi, ,rt it • 
 the motion to set it aside was a sniwtantivx' 
 iimtionHupi.nrted hy allidavits ; an,l the plain- 
 till HUH at lilarty to answer the motion l.y 
 fla-winK new matter in support of the original 
 iirikT. 
 
 And upon the material hefore thu local .hnk'u 
 l,i«refu>al to set aside his order Was ri.dit upon 
 lluiiienls. Cdinix V. Air//i, \{\ I'. }{ lQ{, 
 
 6M 
 
 ||H|.. andwas not re.,uire,l in anyway as im-i 
 dental to any prevnt relief wluteuT. K S (» 
 •-•Il 44. see. .V.', sul.-see. .-,. was not iiitenih-d 
 
 j t" n.ake any radical ehaiiKe in the rules an,l 
 raetKv ot the Court, /luia.idy, (/o,-,/„». li, 
 
 II. CONSKNT Jl|.i.M|:\-r, 
 
 Giving Consent.l-.\ftcr an onler has l.ecu 
 m-M,,n,i,ie,-d, the initiallinK "1 it, as drawn up 
 l,y the soheitor for the party opposed to the 
 party having the earriag,- of it, does not make 
 itacniusent oi-der, l„it merely ass.-nts t.. it iis 
 U'liiKta' understanding of the party of what 
 ,™,,,nUrnM,^^thedudge. ../ej/,,... ., ^„,, 
 
 Withdrawing Consent.) .Much time l.avinK 
 |lap«d snu-e the consent judgment, ami niuel. 
 having heen done under it, it c.uld not he 
 vacated uuhout consent, even if a petition to 
 SlJd.''"' ""' "''■^^"'>- ''-" '"— 't-' -"' 
 
 Upon a petition hy the defendant for leave to 
 withdraw his consent and to vacate the jud-'- 
 ...ent entered thereon, the petitioner alle.rtMl 
 that there was, a niLstake i„ the con.sent ; th 
 
 "I e c,i ,„ ],^. .lischarged as to aiiv interest ^ 
 
 «.. oh tepl:,i,,tin,ni«lit have over aiidaUv!.'!; 
 
 il.'Mate: and he eontemled that the jdaintill', 
 had no NUeh interest :_ ' '"uo , 
 
 Held that the petition cmhl be dealt with ^ 
 ""■10 other grounds than any other matter of 
 imictice, .■dtiough the petitioner was i .s ,' 
 t."v: ami that the matters alleged wer ■ .-c 
 Ml hc.ciit to induce the fourt tT. vaeat. t no 
 jmii'ment and allow the ease to I.e tried o 
 after the withdrawal of charges of fraud a -ainst 
 
 epetin,.,eis the death of ^hcorigimU^;^^^ 
 tit , the lapse of more than four vears since the 
 
 jp&,:'i''" '''■"'•'•'■'•"''' '-f*--^^^^^ 
 
 - '«.-.„„, 4 1),. ,t W ur. 101), f.dh.wed. /Merh 
 >- /^Hor,(/i, IG P. R, 45(;, '•vutiu 
 
 Public HlKhway- ()l,./n„-/k,„ I.,/ /',.,■,,„„ /.,^. 
 
 >o. _.\n,unKM.al corporati.,n has the right to 
 1. eltdclai-cd, as against a private pcrs-.n, 
 
 whetherorm,teertaiMlan,lisapuldi,-liiihwa 
 "lid whether such i.er.son has tie ri-dit t pol" 
 Ht8.s, oeenpy, an,l ol.struel the same ' 
 
 eon,o,Li',.'''f' "Vi'"" '"■""«'" '-.V the municipal 
 
 empo.ation for the purpose, a declaration nmv 
 
 '•'•"'': '^'■'.•-.di.lg to the facts, ami the defe,?. 
 
 ■ I ^•iiJ.MMed roinpo.ss,..ssingoroccupving tie 
 l.ml^s,M.sto.d,str,,cttl,cuse of it as a ,ml.lie 
 
 lyiiiloii Fulls S-. rirtiirin /,'. W (•„ ..,,,.„ , 
 
 '• loo'So'T'v'""" '-■ '•'■'.'/ .;/•'/• „;;,;;„ Jin' 
 
 :-• '- V "'•■^' "'• "»". 'M'l'li.'d and followd 
 < ilij oj J'orvii/,, v. Ao/-..,/(, •it (). li. oo7_ • 
 
 IV. I)|:i All/r dChllMKNT. 
 
 /,^,w"/* °^ Appearance -.l/o„,.v A „,„„,/._ 
 ■' , ;'r\"^'""""';"^ "'^f «l-'i.^lly indorse o 
 "itli a claim to .set aside a eonvevuice tl... 
 
 Jn.titr was allowed, npondefa,:^ ^^ppct 
 . ice to sign.,, 1, Allien, for th.- money .Icmaml 
 
 o;;:;':.i!;i;r' ■'' ''''-'■•'' '■^■->"« '»- 
 
 r '/"■('"•'".;•'■ ^'""■'■< 1-' 1'. it. 11)2; Jfai, v 
 
 HI. Declaratory dri)(;.Mi;NT. 
 .<■ 'r/W^n^\f -V* *° °°^«r-/'"'/rfe„to/ 10 Pre. 
 « ent ; ,'' ^''^V''»,-^tum that the plaintitf 
 
 r adi L's , Iv ' "f"-'"' 'i"^'-^'i""« '-"^ed in the 
 Mo^l^Ll :'^'"« ^'"" ''"^'^•' ''y '^«''«ement 
 44"'!!'.' -,o"' "°t«"liston<li..g R. S. O. ch. 
 «li''uld iie'iin.fc f-^v^'-f ""' '?, f""'' 'I'^ciaration 
 olain, wl i, •' 1 ?' '* '-'■""•'' ^^ so'elj as to a ! 
 
 cunistances which might or might not hap- i 
 
 Default of Appearance - rmmU.i.nj Xo,,. 
 
 hqinatcd damages, and is to h,/:^^:;;^^^ 
 : the .ate of six per cent, per annum in t lie 
 -a^iiee ot a special contrLct for a di/fcrellt 
 
 -And where, in au action upon two promisaorv 
 no e.s, the plaintifl', l.y the imioi-s.-iuL ,' 1 'l 
 « lit of summons, claimed the principal ami a 
 detinite ,.um for interest, without spec fvini th 
 rate or the dates from which it Was calc late 
 such .sum being less than interest a six ct ce t 
 from the dates of maturity : - ' 
 
 Held a good special indorsement. 
 
 lowed:'" ''""■-'""'■''■■ 'i->'/<Wii>. mrd: 
 
 ■1 ^'Ml" '•• ;?'"■"'•';• '■''• *''^' '"«! 'f'-v/w V. Wood 
 
 ih. ()S-1, distinguished :— <' o<in, 
 
 U^tyfT' i''^*-"'^ in'Iorsement being regu- 
 a 1, the ,lefendan s non-ap,.carance ,vas touiva^ 
 
 d" ii-i .' ; ^^■i'% '•"""-' to pay the whole 
 
 vu e- . , '■' Jr'«""-'"t signed for -lefault of 
 
 appearance was, therefore rful-u- 
 
 's^ltu'W !TT'}^ ^^'^- ^'" fallowed. 
 
 -^emlil,-, that had the indorsement lacked the 
 e..sentials o a special indorsement, sue . a jud^ 
 meat would have been a nullity. *" 
 
«67 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 
 n 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 i' 
 
 i 
 
 ifl- 
 
 IKi 
 
 Rn:i(,-i V. Iluiit, 10 Kx. 474. un.l S.i„irf/,ini:i,' 
 V. llainiiifi, |1S1)4| A. ("., lU li. fidi, siii'iiallv 
 rvtVircd t(i; - ' 
 
 }leM, u1h(i, timt an iipiiliciitidii t" gft anide 
 tho juclKiiant (iiiiloHs upon trim») was toohte 
 uli.jii ni;i.lf tuclvo clajH al'ttr u sci/iiro l.y Ih,, 
 Hhcnlt \\\u\i-v liXfciilion iMHiUMl purHiiant tlicix'to, 
 and .iftiT tilt) d.f.iidaiit'.H wift) had claiuird Iho 
 KimhIh Hciizrd and an intcrplraili!!- order hud bfon 
 inadf i>n the ajiplication of thu (.hfrirt', to the 
 luiowl(.dK<; of the d.lVridant. 
 
 liiiiik III' I'lijur fiiiiwla V. Vuiirorhii, 2 I'. K 
 .'iH-i ; Dunn V. Dhiiii, 1 C. L d. '.M!) ; and 
 MrKnrJf V. McNnnylilon, li V. R. .T), siieoially 
 roiLMTt'd to. j 
 
 If thu drfrnthmt duHirrd to conti'st tlio wliolc 
 action, it was not unrtiiHoniildo that a-t a con i 
 dilion of his licin^' allowcil to do no he nhould ' 
 firing into Court thu amount of princip.il j 
 chiiincd ; l.ut if hi» only olijuction was to the ' 
 interest, the jmlgment might, at the option of; 
 tlui plaintitl', liave liton amended hy reducing it ^ 
 l)y the amount churned for interest, or limiting I 
 the deteuce accordingly. 
 
 Costs withhcM from'the successfid respondent 
 where tlie ohjection as to laches was suhstan- 
 tiated hy atli(hivits liled for tlie first time in the 
 •C'oiiit of Appeal. McViatr v. Mi-Lamjliliu, 
 16 P. K 450, 
 
 jtlnit Iheplaintiirndght have an accouiit f h. 
 desired It, ami th.it thu .lefendant sh.,,Mh,r 
 'is<:osts to the hearing. The .lecree „,,;,' 
 then drawn up and issued, a„d in I.., .ml*," 
 IHW, Ihe pl.iinlitl applied for leave t., , .,";;• 
 I he delay was not exphiii.. d, ex<!en| i.v „., ' 
 ing that the plaintilf had heen out ot tie' nuis 
 di.lnm, and m) details were given of \, i,,,,, |' 
 j went away <»■ when he returne.l. It ai,|„.a,. i 
 I I hut the plainlillhad no henelicial intei, ,,„,„, 
 j the footnig r)t the ac(Miunts, as shew , |,y ,), 
 Missignment ami the answer. The detiiiijuit 
 swore to the loss of imu muternil witjiess thr.uirh 
 tieath : — ' 
 
 HeM, that the deerou meant that the iihilntiil 
 shoidd, within some reiisonalde time, exiTu.... 
 the option given him of having a rel'.K na' t" 
 take the accounts, at the peril of losji.- it jf 
 chaii-ed circumstances worked any inv'jiKiit,. 
 tr) lie defendant; and that, under all (hew 
 cumstaiiees, the application should, in the eu., 
 CISC ot a sound discretion, lie refused. 
 
 /'mW. V. /,«/•., 14 1'. R. 44(i, and AV/yv 
 iVndi, ih. do, dlatingnished. Enlon v. Ih./,,,,! 
 l.> 1'. R. l.-JS. ■ 
 
 VI. Knkokcixu. 
 
 i^^iix^:^ii^!i^-'' ^^^ 
 
 X. DkLAV in ]-'NrKlUN(!. 
 
 Order of Court— A'//; r7 o/nul Uviiik/ -Ahaii- 
 diiiiimiir I -Where an order was in .June IS.S!) 
 pronounced liy a divisional Court, up.m the 
 application of the defendants, setting aside a 
 judgment recovered liy the iilaintitl' and <lirect- 
 ing a new trial, hut was never issiie.l : — 
 
 Held, that the original judgment must lie 
 consKJered t'l he still in force ; anil a motion to 
 set asiile execution issued thereon was refused 
 ke//y V U-a<k, 14 P. R. U. .See the next case! 
 
 Order of Court — Ihku, hi /.ismiii/~AI.,i,i. 
 iUm,,,,,,l--hjlWt of Pronoinii-hiii Jn,/,,m,',it on 
 jl/cnAs.J-lhe plaintiir, in .-in action of tort 
 recovered a verdict wiiich was set aside ami a 
 new trial was granted hy the order of a Divi- 
 sional Court in .June, ISSil. The plaintiff died 
 in the spring of 1S!)0, and at the time of her 
 death the order had not lieen issued :— 
 
 Held, upon an application in Decemlier, ISOO 
 th.at tlie defend.uits were entitled to issue the 
 order : the delay aBbrdiug no evidence of an 
 intention to aliandon it. 
 
 _ A judgment proncjunced by the Court, affect- 
 ing the nients, is an elfectivc judgment from 
 the day it is pronounced ; the formal signature 
 ^ of the judgment is merely the record that it has 
 been pronounced. K,//y v. ir,i,/, {Xo. ,.'), 14 
 ir. R. 00. .Si'( the next case. 
 
 Order of Court— Delay in Ixmiiuj—AppUea- 
 ti''njor Leave i,j ls,ue-DUcret;o„.]~]n 1880 a 
 bill was hied l.y the plaintiff for an acccnint in 
 re.<=i.pct of a nvortgagc, whioii had l,een assigned 
 to the defendant as a security for advances A 
 decree was pronounced in June, 1S80, directing 
 
 Damages — Jiu/iimenl no' Enfireil - ..:iiu4. 
 )nen/.\~See JJarii/soii v. 'J'liy/or, 14 I' I< Th 
 iiiite 58. ' ' 
 
 Division Court — Aetion on Jmhim-M vf 
 lliuh Conrf- Finn/ Jnili/men/ Ahan,/i,„i,„i Ex- 
 '■'■«. I — Division Courts have jurisdiction to 
 entertain an aoioii hrouglit ujioii a jiidgnMilol 
 the High Court, where the judgment of that 
 Court is a final judgment. 
 
 He FJ„rl-< V. Ili-oith-e, 10 1'. It. -.'.-i;, II p R 
 :2!t(), referred to and fcdlowed :-- 
 
 111 ail action for alimony, the idaiiitiiri-tonv 
 ered judgment against the defendant for .■*'JIl.,'i!i 
 taxed costs, and in the usual form for aliiiKiiij', 
 at the rate of $-ZM per year, payable in enuai 
 quarterly instalments at specified times: - 
 
 Held, that the judgement, so far as it related 
 to the costs, was a final judgment, whatever 
 might be tlie case with reg;ird to the p:iynicnt- 
 ef alimony, ami tliat a Division Court li:i,l jur- 
 isdiction under R. S. (). ch. .">1. sc ■• 70 (',1, t" 
 entertain a suit by the plaintilf for .^lOtJlii're 
 spect to Ihe costs, as being a claim for ii debt 
 owing to the plaintilf by the defendant, she ex- 
 pressly abaniloniiig the balance of thu taxe^l 
 costs awarded. Atilrieh v. /lA/nV7/, ■.':) 0. F. 
 374. See the next case. 
 
 Division' Court — Action on Jn'/i/muit of 
 Iliijh Court— Final Juihjmtnt — Ah,\ndomm 
 AVccsw.]— In an action for alimony the phiin- 
 tiff recovered judgment against the defeiulanl 
 for l:5i211.;?9 taxed costs, and for aliinoiiv at 
 the rate of .S'^O per year, payable ,|iiiiiterly. 
 After two instalments of alimony had talleniiae 
 and were unpaid, she enteri'd suit !<'r •SlOOin 
 the Division ( 'ourt in respect to the costs, which 
 were also unpaid, abandoning the balance of the 
 costs and the overdue alimony : — 
 
igllt IlIlM' nil Illl'lPIIIlt if h. 
 IIU! llffl'lMlllIlt dIk.iM h,lV.. 
 
 iiin«. Til,. ,l,.,.ri.,. „,j, ,„, 
 1 ihniumI, „ii(l ill I),,, ml*, 
 
 |>l>!il' 1 fr,|- l,.,ivi' t,< |,MU, j>' 
 
 t explain. .1, fx.'i'pi l,y ^„^' 
 I hail lifc'ii out of th.' iiiiK 
 ils Wrif givull of uli,.„'l|. 
 hi' ivtiiiind. It ii|.|„..ai,,l 
 1 no lioiii'licial inti;iv,t upon 
 aii.'oiiiiti, i\n mIiow !■ liv th> 
 ! answer. Tin, .l,.f, ."i,],,,,, 
 lie iimtcnal wmit»»tiir„ii-ii 
 
 ;reu inwiiit that the i.laJntiM 
 
 ruasoiialilu thin-, ixir, „,. 
 
 I of liaviiii; a rcfiniicu t. 
 
 It thu IKTll of l,,„|.j, it if 
 
 COS worked iiiiy iJiYiinii,.. 
 ikI that, iiii(h.|-all tlic .ir 
 icatioii Mhould, in il,,, ,,^, , 
 •tioii, 1)0 rijfiHcd. 
 I 1'. K. 44ti, and K,/!,/ y 
 iiiHhcd. L'dtoii V, /A„-','i„,/ 
 
 KSKOUCINII. 
 
 Debts by Assignee of 
 '•/.('(in V. Ilriici , J I 1'. p, 
 
 nvnt 110' Eiiiiri'tl ~ .■Uiiu-h- 
 V. Tay/oi; 14 1'. R. Js, 
 
 - A (Hon nil Jiiiliim^iit „f 
 
 iiilijiiKiil .tliaii'liuiii„i £x- 
 
 iirts havo jurisdiction ti 
 
 "light upon a jiidgiiifntoi 
 
 ■re thu judgment (if that 
 
 eiit. 
 
 , 10 p. R. •.•.■):, 11 R R. 
 
 >lloued : — 
 
 iioiiy, the i)Iaiiititl'rea)v 
 
 the defendant f(.rSL'll..'!li 
 J usual form fnr aliiiionv, 
 r year, payahle in e.|Ua; 
 at specified times : - 
 iiieiit, so far as it rcliitcil 
 iiial judgment, wliiiteve 
 li regard to the iwvment- 
 i Division Court hml jur- 
 1). ch. .")1, se-. 7(1 (M, to 
 
 plainlill' for siOOiii re- 
 heing a elaim fur adebt 
 hy the defendant, she ex- 
 e halance of the taxe4 
 kh V. Aldrkh, '.';) 0. R. 
 
 JUDttMENT. 
 
 Action on Jiiiliimmt w' 
 huhjmcnf — Ahtnnlomj 
 . for alimony tlie plain- 
 it against the dofeiidanl 
 its, and for ahiiioii)' at 
 year, payahle i|ii,irterlj'. 
 rjf alimony had lalleiuiuc 
 entered -suit f'T-SlW'" 
 ;spect to the costs, which 
 loning the halaiioe of the 
 liinouy : — 
 
 Hell a I, III ,g t .MlecHion of Kpr«„,„„, J., 
 
 .10. K. .tr». hat the Mivisioii Court Tm.l j irii,: 
 
 telofl under I!. .S, O, eh. .-.l.Mce. 70 (/,) Vj// 
 
 ,ifA V. Mdrich, -.MO. I!, jj,. ' '' •"'■ 
 
 Bxecutlon An-,,,d ,u„l SniUfu,i„„^l>art 
 IWj,in,i„i,rr 0, (W,:,„>i„i,.l A judumeiit ro- 
 m.mj. in force f„r twenty years at' least, th.i 
 unly llimtatioii that o«„ heapplieahle to it hemj, 
 K..\(>.ch (,(«,.,.. 1. In view of the aii.eml. 
 men made in l{. >. (). (H;;, ,,|,, i„s, ,,,,, :'. 
 ytheKevisimiof l,SH7, K. ,S. (). eh. || 1. «" '' 
 il, the I'.iij^iiHh authorities, sueh .as./,,,/ v /„/,„ ' 
 
 ,;;.[,?:'"'■"""•"" -• -"-S. 
 
 /W. V, 07.,.a»,,:i A. |{, l.iT, f„i|,„,,.|, 
 art payment of u judgment must, to he an 
 jUinKuishmem thereof, he expressly accept, 
 liy the creditor in .s.>tista,aion. Where, there- 
 in, the judgment dehtor forwanled to the m.li. 
 
 |..uaUeto hesoieitor'sorder.aspavment •• ia 
 -N . Jiii.l the solu-itor endorsed fh,- dralt and 
 
 •Miunnl and pjud over th. neys to ,|,e jmlg. 
 
 M-iltcre,htor, l,„t ,v,ote refusing to ;.ccept the 
 
 l.vmeiit ''m lull,' the judginent creditor ua 
 .ill"We(l to pr.ieee.l for the halaiua- 
 
 /'«yv.._l/,. /.,,,. -v. It. I). (ilO.applied. 
 
 N'otion ,,.). suh..Heofiou 7, .ludicature .-V.-t, as 
 !'M"rt performance of an <.l.lig,-aion in s.uistac- 
 |J'|i. c.Misidere.l. J/a.so« v. Ju/m.tun, -JO ,\. U 
 
 670 
 
 I Hehl. thit under Kule .-,.-.1 Iheonlertotalu. 
 Si'f KxKciTlo.v. 
 
 ^'If. KoliKKi.N JllHJMKXT. 
 
 ^Tecyxtion- Slot lite. 0/ /./,„;/„/,>,„. i .'pi,,. 
 limit ef twenty years heing fixed hy 1! .S o 
 >h.W', .see. I, after which, in the Iihseiieo of 
 !«,v.neiit or a.knowle.lginent. an action ennt 
 I* hroiight upon a judgment, the a-iaiogv o ]?' 
 »t.'t..t.; applies to applieati.ms for leave^to i. ,' 
 
 ti <Uteoftlio ju.lgment or tliu return of the 
 l.ist execution. 
 
 .An issue directed under Rule 88(1, to trv the 
 
 .^.•s..un,,.lialMHtyuponajmlguu.,ti , .\lj, 
 U^ y.^rs old, is an action within th.-n,:: 
 npif R. .s. (). eh. (;o, sec. 1, and the .statute of 
 
 Action on !>./. ,„; ~ t'ah, A, }!,!„,;, /.■,.„„,, ■ 
 
 E;f;:l=,-;i:;:, ;;;»;?:. -S-'.i' 
 li' ,1.-,, :.',i,.',':;' I"'""'" " '-'•'■™ •I-" 
 
 Held, agooil ilefeiice. 
 
 A/iwi/oirv. Orinnliiimn; Id (i. |[ |, ..,(- 
 and I „./„/„ V. Lhii;^, •.>.-, o It l» 'llii f ii ~ \ 
 
 ij' iMvu.ren,.e to the' .vj^;,, ;."■/:; '';»'^' 
 
 ^M-ra, f,,r^Oi,tario in ,roo,/,.,,^\.:'V/;- ,;; 
 '4 .\. K. .'4.'. II, accordance with the evpressio 
 ■opinion o the Judicial Committee' f 
 I nvy ( ouiicil 111 7V„„/,/, V //,// -. \„, ',.' 
 
 :. :i, that a c.,lonial court ^holdd'toh-Sie r 
 ci.s,ons, ,, the (on, tor .Appeal in Kngland"" 
 
 lo the ahove ,lefence, the nlainiilC ..f..,,. n. 
 foniing into force of Hue ■!•!■'',■/. I n " 
 ;efendantwas,,reclud:Vi^-h:'' '::;;^,;« 
 
 any iiu.stion as to the validitv of i), f "'"« 
 ndgnient which inighth;:'l2.;i"^-«;' 
 ot a,,peal m the foreign f.uuni •- ^ ^ 
 
 : H-'l.l, that tliiH replieation was e,|uivalent to 
 a demurrer under flie f.unier i.racliee • .1 .. 
 
 !-.ud„dssiouof,l,. ...ithoflirn ;;Sihi 
 the ,leenee:a„d tosueh a replicati i R , " 
 
 4( i had n,, application //,,//, w!, -v. Z^^,,//:;:^ 
 ment'underRuh/7:,u;,^i.:'^/'g":,r'-^:i''«- 
 
 Staying Proceedings-. l/o//o,i to \:t 4s,V/,. 
 M.jmn,t.]-\\h,u ,t motion to a Hivi^i^, , 
 
 lor near iig, there is a stay of l)|■ocee,linL-^ oon,, 
 «;'eh judgment ipso faj., uii es° it 2' T . 
 rtherwise onlered. W^.tcru lUinL' of C n l 
 
 m:;^\:otwi;:^t;:;,:^"?s:;cri,idim;:;,'r'h^^'''^'i 
 ;;mn, this Province. "yv,,.J^:;h':':,S;,.!::o;;'S 
 
 Subsequent Order to Take Accounts '- 
 
 '^fter ju.lgment ha.l been proiuuiuci^l m an le 
 on t ,er„,, ,, ,,,i„g th'e estate thVpl, tiff 
 
 restrfhft 'l"-" iefendants, an.l refusing to 
 
 TOe()ueiitly, on the plaint fl^s application -i 
 
 «cco,,nt '"^'''imhers to take the mortgage' 
 
 d:s;ri!;j'-ft;^i"'^r^''*"*"^^'«^ 
 
 -p-iing,-^ed:i..)S£i;:i;f-'-: 
 
 .,,,1 • i \^»sn"t rei.resented at the trial 
 
 i..Sris';:Sir::^-=r^--^ 
 
 lowli""" '■ ^'«"^- ^ l^"'-'-., at p. 1083, fol. 
 
 -tnterest upon the amount of such a judgment 
 cannot uinler soetion.-, .Sr, ,i„,l y,; ,,f h, . l 
 tureAot. R ,S () eh x± \ nie .Jll.tlca- 
 
 j as unli-iuidlt'i daiief' '" '■'^'^''^•'^'■'-"l «'''=«Pt 
 It a writ of summons is endorsed to recover 
 !a iKjut.lated demand and also unhqi'fdated 
 
571 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 (laimges, it is not specially indorsed within 
 Kulu L'4.), ami will not supiioit a Huniinarv 
 JHdgmuut un.K'r llul.' 7.'!!). 
 
 „ ''?'f;'.''.' ";"'"'• f''*!*-'! 1 <.». M. (iS4, :uh1 Sheha 
 Uold Miiiiiiij Co. V. T,-Hk<liaii;; //,. (!74, fi,lloweil 
 
 Nor can the writ be ainciiilcl after (thoiK'h it 
 may he before) motion for jud-nient by Htrikin" 
 out the claim for unliiinidatcd^lamie'e.H " 
 
 '.■iinir,, V. Snin//, |1,S91| -2 (^). ]?. ,-,s.l and 
 Paxtoii V. /l„!rd, [ISO.'J] 1 (,>. \i. i;{i), followed. 
 
 A foreign jiiilgmeut was varied and tlie 
 anioiuit reduced l.y the foreign Court after 
 action begun thereon by specially indorsed 
 writ : — 
 
 Held, tiiatan order for summary jud<'nieiit 
 for the amount of the foreign judgment as 
 varied could not be suppoi-tcd, because it was 
 for a debt not claimed bv the indorsement 
 
 ]!ut the fourt (('. 1'. 1).), „,„ler lUilo T.")? per- 
 mitted the appeal to be turned into a motion 
 for_ judgmeni, and gave judgment for the 
 piaintilt, no defence bein- shewn. .S'o/w.v v 
 
 16 P. It. •2b4, jjoH o7'2. 
 
 572 
 
 VIII. Motion for Ji'uijmknt. 
 
 Rule 739 —Coivii'iiit in Mi,rt,iiiri,i—[„tir(:.'t.'\ 
 —111 an action to recover the anuiu'nt due under 
 a inort-agc, the plaiiitilf in.lor.sed upon his writ 
 of summons particulars of his claim, shcvin- 
 the date ot the mortgage, the parties, the 
 amount of principal and interest claimed, and 
 the date wlien the interest fell .hie ; also a 
 statement that, by the terms of tlie inort"i.'e 
 on default m payment of i iterest the principal 
 became due, and that def uilt in payment of 
 interest had been made. Interest on overdue 
 interest was also claimed, but no contract there- 
 tor was alleged ; — 
 
 _ Held, that the indorsement was not a suffi- 
 cient special indorsement to support a snmmarv 
 .ludgment under Uule 7;i9, in that it omitted 
 the dates from which interest was claimed, and 
 did not state a contract to pay interest upon 
 interest ; and that the atHd ivit in support of 
 the motion could not be read with the indorse- 
 ment so as to make it good. 
 
 Gold Ores Rrducliou Co. v. Pari-, [1892] 2 Q 
 B. U, followed. Manro v. Pike, 15 P. R. I64' 
 
 only as unlicpiidated damages, and cannot 1.,. 
 tfie sul)|ect ot a speciiil indorsement. 
 
 An.l while, for the purp.isc of obtainii l' iii.I , 
 ment by default, the |,laintilf may ludorJ' " 
 writ specially for a Ihpiidat.M demand and lU, 
 f.u' a further claim under I!ule711,yet ii 1 
 wishes to be 111 a position to move for sunuiiin- 
 judgniciit under Rule 7.S0, he must hnn- hi 
 self strictly within Rule -lAo, as having iuaors" | 
 his writ only with a claim wliieh is the sii'lr, 
 ot a specril nulorseinent under that IJide 
 Judgment of the Common I'leas Divis'i,,,, i,; 
 
 P. t>. /S, attirmed on these tliiee points 
 HoUfudf-r V. Fjo,ilh;s, 10 p. |;. 17.^, ,;' , ,, 
 
 .0 V. /',/,.., 1,1 P. K. 1(11, approve . //a' 
 John.lo„ 12 P. R. m)(i, overruled. //»;,,,■ 
 J>o,,r, ,/,. 402, and M,u-h u:i,. y. /,'„.„ j., p",V 
 2!)!), commented on. s/t,hn (1„I<1 Mi,h,„i (\, .'' 
 Inil'f'vc,, [1S!I2J I (,.. R. 074, and )lV; '■ 
 Wn„d. ih, CM, followed. •■ 
 
 Wlu.re an order lor summary judgment uii.ler 
 Rule ,.j9 is se asule on appeal, Rule 7.-.7 eani,,, 
 1)0 made available for the purpose of turnm. 
 the appeal int,. a motion for judgnuut .„,| 
 granting a yet more summary judgm'eut 
 
 Jmlgnicnt of the Common I'leas divJM,,,, |u 
 t. R. (b, reversed on this point. Snl,n,\ ,■ 
 Stajord, 16 P. R. 204. 
 
 ..<]- 
 
 Rule 739 — Foreiijn Jwhjnmit — .rnteres/.]— 
 Where the plaintiff indorsed his writ of sum- 
 mons with a claim for the amount of a foreign 
 judgment and interest, and after the issue of 
 such writ and while a motion for summary 
 judgment under Rule 739 was pending, the 
 foreign judgment was varied on appeal bv 
 reducing the amount 1— 
 
 Held, that, even if the claim for interest did 
 not .stand in the way, the indorsement could 
 not be amended upon the motion for summary 
 judgment so as to accord with the foreign judg- 
 ment as varied, and the plaintiffs proper course 
 was to abandon his motion and move for leave ' 
 to amend the indorsement, or to discontinue 
 the action altogether. i 
 
 Cwnetiy. .Small, [1891] 2 Q. B .184, an<l Pax- ' 
 ton V, /kurd. [1893] ! (). !!. l.SO, fr,lKn^■ed. 
 
 Interest upon the amount of a foreign judg- ' 
 ment from the date of its entry is not payable ) 
 by contract nor by statute, but is recoverable ! 
 
 Rule 739 — Forclan Jiidnnieiil ~ IhI< 
 
 \\ I"''''.' a writ of summons was indorsed to rwevei- 
 tlicr.mount of a foreign jmlgment, together with 
 interest troni the date thereof until ju.lgmeiit- 
 Held that the claim for interest was f,,.. a,, 
 unh.pii. ate,l amount, and the two elainis to- 
 gether .lid not constitute a good special ii„|„rsi.. 
 ment witliiu Rule 24o ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the plaintitf was not eiititlcl 
 upon suei, indorsement to a summarv judgment 
 under Rule 7.S9 for the amount of 'the fore " 
 judgment only, with liberty to proceed for tL 
 interest ; for that Rule is not applieaMe wher. 
 tlieie IS a claim for a licjuidatcd deiiiaiid i„i,R.,l 
 to one for unlnpiidatcd damaj'cs. 
 
 Rules 245, 705, 711, and 7:^9, considered 
 
 Soun.:.y Slatibrd, l(i 1'. R. 78, followed. 
 
 //a// V. J;hn.io„ 12 P. R. .".iXi, not followed. 
 H'AhHditf V. Fjoulkes, 10 P. R. 175. 
 
 Rule 739 - (!o,hU S.M-Uare to D.'lhul- 
 Pa,j mud into Co»,-/.]_\Vhere no defence ha,s 
 been made t^o appear upon a motion fur jii,k-. 
 : ment under Rule 7.S9, the defendant will not I 
 allowed to defend urxonditionidly. 
 
 In an action for the price of goods sold and 
 delivered to a partnership, brought after tlicdis- 
 sohuion thererif, against the two mcmhers oi 
 the partnership, one of them set up as a defence 
 upon a niotiou f.U' judgment th.at upon the dis- 
 solution he retired ami his coiwrtuer agreed to 
 continue the business and pay the debts, in- 
 '^'"' -l. , "^ '^''«-' Pl'iintiffs, and thai the 
 plaintitts had taken securities from the enpait- 
 ner after the dissolution and given him time, 
 and so had relieved the other ; but all tlmse 
 who knew- of the dealings negatived any such 
 course of dealing, and shewed that all that was 
 done was with a reservation of rights .U'ainst 
 the retiring partner :— 
 
 Held, that the latter could not succeed in the 
 action unless the jury disbelieved all this evi- 
 dence ; and he should be allowed to defend only 
 upon payment into Court of the amount claiinetl. 
 Uuima V. NarrU, 14 P. R. 4;17 
 
 4^|iW 
 
572 
 
 ill iluiiLigoa, and caiim.t h,. 
 ^u^l iiiilor.semoiit. 
 u [iiirposf of i)l>taiiiii.g ji,,l., 
 Iio pliiiitiir iii.iy in.i,,rsf 1,^ 
 lii|iii.lati'(l (K'nimid ;,ii,| ,■,!„, 
 I iin.lur Kuk'TU, vet if h,. 
 .•<iti(m to iiKive lor'.siinuiiirv 
 ill! 7.S!), l.u Muidt l.riii- liiii, 
 till e .'4,), as haviiii,' uu[im,..i 
 
 I olaim uliicli is tlir .su',;,..,.. 
 U!iit iiMtlor that ftiilu. 
 Jomiucii I'luas Divis'i,,,,, i,; 
 
 II tliL'scj tlii-ce points 
 *-,10 1'. K. 175. ami .)/,„, 
 K. 11)1, approval. //„,^ ^ 
 
 »), ovornik'd. /fiiiinmny. 
 
 Mifb ir.ic V. y,'o.w, 11 p j; 
 
 shdia (i'ik'iI Miii:,i,/ c] .' 
 
 <i'. ]J. 674, anil I'l',//,' ' 
 
 weil. 
 
 1- siimmai-y jiiclgiiicui uii.loi 
 on appeal, iiulu 7."i7 <'ann.,t 
 for the purpose of tunnn.' 
 motion for juil.^'nient ain'l 
 siinimary judgment, 
 (-'onunon I'leas division, KJ 
 oil this point. So/mi\ v 
 
 III Jinhjilieill — /;(/, ,y,,/.]_ 
 
 ions was indorsed torecmer 
 ,'11 jndginent, togetln-rwitli 
 thei-eoi until judi,'nieiit :- 
 mi for interest was fi)v an 
 , .iiid the two claims to- 
 lite a good special indursi-. 
 ( ; — 
 
 ! plaiiititr was not eiuitlcii 
 It to a sniiiniary jmlgment 
 le amonut of tlie foreiijii 
 lilierty to pro>eed tor tilt- 
 lo is not aiiplii-alilc where 
 
 liijuidated deni.uul juini'il 
 d ilamages. 
 
 iiiid 7o!), eonsidereil. 
 Hi I'. R. 7S, followed. 
 ! I'. U. oOli, not followed. 
 
 10 1', i;. 17.-). 
 
 Sidd — Ltiavi, to Di'ff.ml- 
 -Where no defeuce has 
 
 upon a motion for jmlg. 
 the defendant will not ije 
 mditionaily. 
 
 prie(i of goods sold ,iml 
 hip, brought after tliedis 
 list the two nieniliers ot 
 ' thoin sot up as a defeiiee 
 (ineiit that upon the dis- 
 1 his oopartner agreed to 
 
 and pay the debts, in- 
 plaintirts, and that the 
 purities from the eopait- 
 ion and given liim time, 
 die other ; hut all thdse 
 ings negatived any such 
 shewed that all tliiit was 
 rvation of rigliLs agiiiiist 
 
 could not succeed in the 
 dishclieved all thiscvi- 
 e allowed to defend oidy 
 't of the anioiint claiiiml. 
 . R. 437. 
 
 673 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 Slil7.47 the 7:I^Z:rZ '' '— -'-liSStk^^s M^'"'- -«• «l-%ing the 
 
 iSp^anj^tSfpfiifc^^ 
 
 The weight of testi,, n ' .. ^", ''«'■ nominee. 
 
 tioii to re.juire the (lefendant fr, - ,\'''^'='"'^- ""'l an a.ldit .it '^ ^^')i^ -Al certain priee^! 
 
 Court as a condition o 1 e d ou'7;*^'*?J"'° ' P"'-'<^ ■■- "'"'""'"' ^■'■•'"» f"'' >"terest o' ' tlio 
 Unnmi v. IlariU i i > „ ""^'' '" <lffend. j Held tl, * • 
 
 ai.phe,at.onforsumnuu-\/i,d,o' ;'r"'^'" '° '»» t'dT.' t"-'r/"r„i v. A'o-W.r 14 I' V 
 
 :.ii), swore that it ^^^ e o T ?.' ,"'"*"■ «"'« ■ ^ • «• 
 
 tween hin, and the avC\nT\ ""''^'■^'""d he- .ule739-_ ,. 
 
 "''"'■ly liti.^Mted in the ,sna lu ""^'']' *° "''»'-■ the pli'"'^^^ '•■''l'''«« "'fl.oiit noticj 
 „, „ ''"»'l'>'omise of Hf, V ''*'"'''" '•'"•'"Ms the 
 
 BiiS^lSiiii 
 
 J'<l'J.iol,m fact.eontainan ev ,v: '"^ '''"'^ ""^es are .„u e h f ■ '"''"''^'^'^''•'''"'''O'latio . 
 
 »Pa.v the mortgages, h ," Tyi^T ^^-'^'^n^nt the onns of "i e'vi ^ 1 '"^•"'■P^"-''ted eompanv 
 
 'i'-;;!r l^tiih "^^^'- ''"S'5: tl. p, ,,^--"« -- .« not shifted ov^r l\ 
 
 fl,. ,i„„? = ""'o'lstered a.'ainst tl,„ I.,., r' ., , ..'.'-' '^i-nnan Jf„;/„-r,„. r,^ ^ ., . 
 
 ^"-l»i-luestion'^^,,e''dSlanV^"'T"''''" 
 «limortL';i.re3,.p,,;<.f,„. , ""-'Ln'tant "snhieet to 
 
 ^'rP'-.ti,^i::t^-"-„;ytl.o.Iefendant: 
 ""Iwaeinent by reference to H '"''P'"'' "'^ ''•'"'/'■'• ^• 
 
 r'^S;'^^iiS:::V'rh;":a i^---" -> 
 
 u£;,^:P'-''^ ^^-U'ca,. Co., L. R.2Ch.617. 
 ■]lMa,-d V. l}„d.l,Uil, \V V iw«. no 
 
 Ai?ii V. 
 
 
 
 It 
 
 
 I meiit. 
 
 , f'-.iiiAai;/- V 
 liolloived : — 
 
 iiinary 
 ('''•avwHor, 8 Times L. R. 744, 
 
675 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 578 
 
 the only way in which ho could recover liis 
 claim was l)y recourse to a certain fund coming 
 to the defendant under a mortgage held by her; 
 and tlie defendant set up a partne'ship l)etwee!i 
 the plaintiff an<l herself and claimed that, on 
 the accounts being taken, the balance would be 
 in her favour : — 
 
 Held, without saying that any clear legal 
 defence to tiie action had been shewn, enough 
 appeared of the (halings and transactions 
 between the parties to make it not unreason- 
 able *h^c the plaintiff should ))e left to his ordin- 
 ary remedies for (he recovery of his claim. 
 
 Quarc, as to the cirect of the items in the 
 special indorsement for costs and interest on 
 costs ; and also as to the application of Rule 
 744 to actions between creditor and debtor. 
 
 Remarks on the ori!.'in and application of tlie 
 Rule. Lf.-'/ii V. J'oa/fvii, 15 P. R. 33'2. 
 
 Rule na—Spn-icil (.'rnniiil.-, for B>/li'/.]~-In 
 two acti<]ns to recover the amounts of overdue 
 promis.sory notes, nKitions were made l)y the 
 plaintiffs, at an early .-tage, under Rule 744, for 
 summary judgments, upon the ground that the 
 sheriff had seized and sold certain property of 
 the defendants under execution, and that in 
 order to share in the distribution of tlie pro- 
 ceeds of sale under the Creditors' IJelief Act, it 
 was necessary for the plaintiffs to have ipime- 
 diate judgments : — 
 
 Held, not a .sutlicient special ground for the 
 application of tlie Rule. 
 
 Jn answer to tlie motions, the defendants set 
 up in affidaxits tlie defence that there was an 
 agreement lietween them and the plaintiff's that 
 moneys collected on collaterals should lieapplied 
 in diseiiargt of tlie notes sutd on, among otliers, 
 and moneys were so collected and applied ; but 
 
 md 
 
 the agreement was denied by the plaintiffs :- 
 Held, that this was a substantial defence ii 
 
 ought not to be tried summarily upon affidavits 
 Le>i/ie V. Poultnn, l.-> 1'. R. 3;V_>, followed. 
 Remarks by Maclennau, J. A., on the origin 
 
 and application of liule 744. Molnuns Bank v. 
 
 Cooper, l(i 1'. R. 195. 
 
 Married Woman — Summary Jinhjmeiit.] — 
 Summary proceedings upon specially ' iiulorsed 
 writs do not apply where, the defendant being 
 a married woman, the judgment can be only of 
 a proprietary nature, (.'amcron v. Hiijhn, 14 
 P. R. 50. Sci'. the next case. 
 
 Married VTom&n—Summary Jml(inieiif.\—lu 
 an action upon a covenant in an agreement, nuide 
 subsequently to the ciuiiiiig into force of the 
 MarriedWoman's Property Act, lS84,R.S.O.ch. 
 1.T2, whereby the defendants, husband and wit., 
 covenanted to pay the plaintiff the moneys then 
 owing to him, and otiier moneys thereafter to 
 be advanced, the writ of summons was specially 
 indorsed with particulars shewing the amounts 
 and dates of the various advances : — 
 
 Held, a sufhcient special indorsement. 
 
 Where it is shewn that a married woman 
 defendant has separate estate, judgment may be 
 entered against her as to such separate estate, 
 upon default or by order under Rule 7.39. 
 
 And where the writ of summons did not shew 
 that one of the defendants was a married woman 
 having separate estate, but the plaintiff's affi- 
 davit, filed on a motion for summary judgment , 
 under Rule 7.19, did shew it, the plaintiff was ! 
 
 allowed to amend his writ, and to enter a (to. 
 prietary judgment against her. ^'exbitt v. .1™. 
 strong, 14 P. R. ,306. 
 
 ■Verdict. ]— Where a verdict only is ta!ieii n> 
 the trial, and the .ludge does not proniiiui'j: 
 judgment or direct findings of fact to be euter.d, 
 a motion for judgment is necessary. Ulaii- v' 
 AmeUtine, 15 P. R. 211. 
 
 IX. MiscELLANEOt's Casks. 
 
 Creditors' Action — Sftllfment.] — V,Hnx(. 
 judguient in an action l)y a creditor, on belmlf 
 of himself and all other creditors, to set aswif ;, 
 fraudulent conveyance, the actual plaiiititl'iiuv 
 settle the action on any terms he thinks prn|n.|', 
 and no other creditor can complain ; but w lu.-i- 
 judgment has been obtained by the plaiiitilf. it 
 enures to the benefit of all creditors, aiul tin- 
 defendants cannot get rid of it by settling witli 
 the actual plaintiff' alone. If they do so, unv 
 other creditor will he entitled to obtain tU 
 carriage of the judgment and to enforce it ; ;ai4 
 if, uiion appeal from the judgment, the attiml 
 plaintiff refuses to support it, the Court will give 
 the other creditors an opportunity of doing ,* 
 before reversing it. Canadian Banl-d/'Coninnrit 
 V. Tinnimj, 15 P. R. 401. 
 
 Executors and Administrators.] — In an 
 action of .seduction, continued against the ailmiii. 
 istiatiix of the original defendant, who did bi-- 
 fore the trial, the administratrix denied the 
 plaintitr's right to recover, but diil not set up 
 plriii' admiwKtravit , and a verdict for .*,1(J0 was 
 recovered by the plaintiff : — 
 
 Held, that the judgment should be tliiit the 
 debt and costs should be levied dt liunU tf.^/ntfiti-: 
 ft SI 'ton, de bonis pro/irii.i as to the costs nnk. 
 
 The .ludicature Act has not altered the furiii 
 of the judgment in such cases. Liner v. fair 
 cloth, 14 P.' R. 253. 
 
 Bxecutors and Administrators.] — The 
 
 practice in force before the Judicature Act, 
 under which a plaintitf taking issue on and fail- 
 ing on an executor's plea oi p/ciie ailniiins/nmi, 
 could not have judgment of assets i/iiamlo, n<t 
 longer exists, and it 'is now pro|)er to give a 
 Jilaintift' judgment of assets quondo, if his iklt 
 lie established and such a judgment be desireJ. 
 McKihhon V. Feet/an, 21 A. R. 87. 
 
 Mortgage Action — Default of Appfarant'] 
 —By analogy to Rule 393," where, in a inoitL'agc 
 action for foreclosure or sale, some of the ilf- 
 fendants do not appear to the writ of siiiiinioiis. 
 and others do appear, against whom juilgnieiit 
 cannot then be obtained, the otiicer may note 
 the pleadings closed as against the forinJr, and 
 the action may be brought on for jiulgintiit 
 against them without further notice to tlitui, 
 Morse v. Lamh, 15 P. R. 9. 
 
 Mortgage A.ation—Prinipe Jnd;nnent.]-h 
 a mortgage action for payment, foreclosure, etc., 
 the defendant entered an appearance in wliidi 
 she stated that she did not reijuire the delivery 
 of a statement of claim, and added: "Take 
 notice that the defendant disputes the amount 
 claimed by the plaintiff" : — 
 
576 
 
 is writ, and to enter a [ro. 
 gainst lier. NenbUt v. Ann- 
 
 a verdict only is taken iit 
 Judge does not pmnDimi.e 
 indings of fact to be eutcrjil, 
 ent is necessaryi Ut<iir \ 
 211. 
 
 XLANEotis Casks. 
 
 )n — SfJtli'inent.]— Det'ore 
 ion by a creditor, on bclmlf 
 her creditors, to set asule u 
 ce, the actual plaiiitill' may 
 liny terms be thinks inc'iJtT, 
 r can complain ; but wh, •!• 
 obtained by the piiuutilt. it 
 it of all creditors, and the 
 st rid of it by settling witi! 
 alone. If tliey do so, iiny 
 
 be entitled to obtain tliv 
 iient and to enforce it ; aini 
 I the judgment, the latual 
 ipportit, the Court will give 
 an opportunity of doing m. 
 I'diiadian Banh (if'<Joiiii,i< /■■■> 
 
 401. 
 
 idmlnlstratora.] — In an 
 ontinued against tiie admin- 
 lal defendant, who iliei U- 
 adniinistratrix clunied tlnj 
 eeover, hut did not set up 
 uu\ a verdict for H'W \\:i< 
 intiff :— 
 
 dgmeiit should be tluit liie 
 . l)e levied i/t liunU texhituri-: 
 )/iriin as to the eiists onlv. 
 •t has not altered tlie funn 
 suoli cases. Liiicc v. Fair 
 
 Administrators.] — The 
 
 ifore tlie Judicature Act, 
 ill' taking issue on and fail- 
 plea of /)/iiie ailiitiiii-i'nmi, 
 nient of assets 'iiKuido, no 
 : 'is now projier to give a 
 
 assets qumtdo, if his ilt-bt 
 eh a judgment be desired. 
 
 21 A. R. 87. 
 
 I — Default of Appfaranr..] 
 ; 3!),S, where, in a mortgage 
 e or sale, some of the de- 
 ar to the writ of suiiniions. 
 r, agiiinst whom judgment 
 iiied, the ofHcer may note 
 aa against the former, ami 
 brought on for judgment 
 it further notice to thciii, 
 . R. 9. 
 
 I — Prarlpi' Jii(l;iment.]-h 
 payment, foreclosure, etc., 
 (I an appearance in whicli 
 id not rcfjuire the deliver)' 
 laim, and added : "Take 
 idant disputes the amount 
 iff":— 
 
 577 
 
 Held, tliat the record wns (I,o„ i , 
 
 III.1 a .1,1, „,„„ „; ,: „i", ',; ' , ,>n"'' "'" 
 
 mcnt on pnvcipe. J""g- 
 
 Upon moti(ii to the Court unon the ,< rn. i 
 .ontatned in the writ of su.Z "« „ h 'V" 
 rear.nce,an order was nuule un.ler , le '^l 
 '""' '■'•'• '"'■•'■'-■tn.g a refer.nce to t.ke le Lr 
 
 latter part of l;„le ,70, provid" ^fo' ;t„ ,^^ 
 oation tor leave to issue i noi, -, i,,,!,, "'•''■ 
 
 a tirn,, execution aga ,Vs I 1 ,>"''"^ "^'"""*' 
 
 I'ouud by the i ml n ■ t , '','''''^ "■'''^•'' '« 
 
 «™inc,Le,nei:::t:;;';iLSw::r/[^:':;i^S 
 
 :~^"'^''"--'f't«--bersorrs"n'Lf 
 
 .u»u.essot a so-calle.! lirn,, who a ^1,",„ * 
 tiie subsequent nroceediiur^ t„ 1,,,, 1 '" ^' " ''> 
 atr«.stee tor bin, of ? e no t,T '" '""V'^' 
 -ved as a <k.fe,ulant wit ',^roc; "fn'ri'' t'"'^' 
 gnH tl. tirm upon a bill of 1 ■^^^!:^:i 
 
 Held, that as there w;,s in fact no rirtnr.,. 
 V. fri,,,,, 15 P. R 438? ^'"■'' ^«"^-V Canada 
 
 JUDGMENT DEBTOR. 
 
 578 
 
 Wwmmm 
 
 !;:;»„„,;":;; ;;;"-;;;,tH;:r;';r';j.;,i"' 
 
 judgment creditor fr,:m levviny 1 '•'" *'"' 
 
 ■•' 'u.rtgnge which ,*■ ' . "^'•■•'"""t ""■ 
 
 -Hi foiiowci. .v;//,,.v:/;;.;,i;/:'or«.'^'^-;' 
 
 JUDGMENT DEBTOR. 
 
 Committal. I— It •11,11,..,,-, 1 .1 ^ ^, ■ , 
 'Ubtor'.s wife had . m ' „ "* I'Mudgment 
 
 woH<tiu.f.nnUhiro;'n,!,i^t'^:;';v:""'«*" 
 
 vith bis wife ;,s be b-,,1 f,,. 1 , " •'■''•'"■''" 
 "^r.-'.'d that n 1 e',''^'' ^' •''"'■' ''^' ''"'' 
 
 v-)dw.nk,t';;!r'h;;;:-;:x"!!^'"'''''«''''' 
 
 .u>;'iil•;^-:-;;;'-- "-not illegal 
 
 I'o .aid that it wn's ,-' ,' '""'^'l''^' .",'"''' i<^ 
 
 l'myinorderto:f ,':;'" 7,;": •'>• -■''' l""" 
 
 The onlerdirecte,] l-, t 1 f ^ ''''"T'- 
 '-committedtoil^c: itv jUn'''"''''^ °"''' 
 
 liU.;a^dJ:^ix;-^^;-----^ 
 
 : . Committal— /),V/mrr/<'_rb«w-«/ 1 wi 
 Judgment debtor wa~ in,' „-;-,; .fr" '"''''' ''^ 
 
 5;^.:cm Ids exan. •:;;;;;r:-S' ■:;:e- 
 an?^;!t;Jr^,;"V^i;!:^•t*;;;;^';•;'l':"';'"'f'- 
 fr<-n■ custody beforh, ,'";,",/';■; ''';^''"-ge 
 
 ■'"i'Hsonment could n't 1, -^ V ' "''" "^ 
 tlH-con,ventoftl,c icc ,, f .• ; 'I'r ' "'"" \'P'''" 
 ■•"'tion the onler f r c^ , n ft ' [l''^'"'' '''^"'"' 
 'lone. V. Manlomll 5 • r'^'Lj"' ''''" """'^■- 
 
 Isbinlf. 
 
 N^s"!^lr^^^-"^^W;'..]-%R S. 
 ment binds the 'l-.wla f T, ' ^ '"eg'S'tered judg- 
 
 """rtgage of uch :"'/e'''^f • ""'' 'It't.ls o,- 
 not register" 1 "re ''"''• ' "'^ '••"^'^''t-'i Imt 
 
 oredito'r who W't r. I'T'T'' "'? J"''™-"* 
 mortgage of l-,n,I , " ','' "'^ J"<ignient .. 
 i"««lver^teuce fn ''' ?"",''«• '^^ ""«t«ke ■„;,> 
 
 ■"te.e.t'i;rsr;a "'on-h:':-?,:.;; '"'^, -^""'^^^^''''^ 
 
 - ^-e|osed and the t?;oir^x^)-:fr 
 
 «»J4S0: '■'"'^'— •• ' ".-..o.e, l,i p. r/,.4,'; 
 
 obfcT-fAbf "~ ^-':""''/-"'"'^ 0/ OfflcerA- The 
 o c r f ., "■■','">"""">' "O.lor I'ule Ol>T of ,?n 
 
 <'!■ to follow a.«..et wro -,; ' I, -'^ ""^ ,^"„,pany 
 "ithin this limit a , .^ ^ 'l'spo.^e<I of, and 
 to lull dil- re f,:' ""''"'.'■ '^ ^""^'''---J 
 "■"1 "« a con.^; ;,^„ .; ,0 1 a^ ^^""^' 1 '-"T"''^ 
 l-'-tinenl to tha , .ir" 'H '," " "' ' "''^'^^ 
 is to facilitate tlm J ^-^ . V'^'on examiiud 
 
 info, n;;£rt*lh;™rs ::::'. ;^'r"'''"^"'' 
 -S':[:Jk';;'bS'i:;L^::;:rS.r^"^i'r 
 
 l'.-i'l up. Charul y GnJy './ 'm' ^"">' 
 
 »• c'o., 15 r. R. 10. ^"'"' -^"'■'/'•"(■s^ /'. 
 
679 
 
 JUDGMENT DEBTOR. 
 
 580 
 
 Costs.]- Uiul.r Kiile USO, tlie coats of pvo- f 
 cecdiiif's to exaiiiiiif :\. jiiilj,'imMit (li'litor may l)o ! 
 allowfii, ill lli(,. (list'ittioii of tliu Court or a 
 Judge, wlitTu thu exaiiiinatiou lias not actuallv 
 taken ]ilacc'. 
 
 And wln-retliejiidirmeiitdebtor attended upon 
 an appointment lor Ids examination, proeuied 
 an eiilarguiiieiit, and meaiiwliile, under force of 
 the proccLMiiiig.-, p,d,l the judgment del>t, he 
 was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings. 
 Puplmm V. Fli/iiii,, 1,1 P. R. 2S(i. 
 
 I'eing examined as a judgment debtor, tliere 
 neoil be no i.ther proof ot tlie fact. 
 
 I'lie eertilicate of an examiiKM- is good evid. i,ce 
 of tlie proceedings before him, iKJtwitlist.u.diii'i/ 
 that It was settled fx /inrte. 
 
 Hii Ilium V. ,Shniin/oii, l.S P. i;. o'J'J, (.„,„- 
 ineiited on. Jui)r,>i v. Mac/'iiiald, li P. it. Kjj," 
 
 Disposition of Goods— ,4 (^fV*! of CoKii.teJ— 
 Examiner's /tii/i/ij.] -Wliere tlie defendant had 
 before judgment a-ainst him, executed a liill of 
 sale of his stocli-in-trade, which bad been 
 registeied : -- 
 
 Hehl, that upon his examination as a jiidg. 
 nient (U'btor he was compellable to answer ipies- 
 tions in re.-pcct to his ilealings with such pro- 
 perty after tlie date of the bill of sale ; and that 
 he could not shelter himself behind the advice 
 of counsel ; — 
 
 Held, also, that notwithstanding that the 
 examiiu'r bad niled that the judgment debtor 
 was not obliged to answer certain questions, 
 and that the luling had not been appealed 
 against, the usual order might be made direct- 
 ing the defendant to attend again feu- examina- 
 tion. JJaiik of llamiUvn v. Ksnnn/, 15 p R 
 202. ' 
 
 Married Woman -/,Vr'„.sY(/ fo AffanI for\ 
 E.vnmiiii(ti(>ii—CiJinini>nfiit.\—\n order may be ' 
 made for the conimitinent of a married woman i 
 to goal for ivfusal to attend for examination as I 
 a judgment debtor. 
 
 ^ llules \)H\ and !i;!'>, and 11. .S. O. ch. (57, sec. ! 
 7, eousiilereil. ' j 
 
 Melropo'ifaii L. <t' S. Co. v. Mam, 8 I'. R. I 
 35."), followed. U'a/suii v. Onlario Siimilu Co ' i 
 UP. 11. 90. ' ^ ■' 
 
 , Re-examlnatlon.]-The examination of a 
 judgment debtor in aid of executimi under l;,ile 
 !»-'(. may be m ule of the most searching eliarao- 
 I ter-a cross-examination of the severest kii„; • 
 I au.l very strong special grounds must be shewn 
 to justify further exauiination of a debtor who 
 has fully and fairly answered on two foriner 
 examinations. 
 
 And where it did not appear that anv chanu-c 
 :n the circumstances of the ju.lginent debtor lia.l 
 taken place since her last examination, and tlie 
 allidavit on which an application for a tlnoi 
 examination was based <li,l not shew theureuiMs 
 tor the ileponenfs belief that she had iM'o,„,.tv 
 concealed, and di,l not negative the ability u, 
 • ibtaiii information as to details, the aiiplicatioii 
 was reiuscd. ' ' 
 
 • »rder and decision of IJovd, C, 1,") P P .J.)- 
 idiirmeil. I!,: Cn,/r„l lUuik of Cauada~\\\a. 
 ■■"Jii .s' Case, 11) P. K. 5."). 
 
 Refusal to be Sworn.]-Where a judgment 
 dehtor attends lor examination, but refuses to 
 be sworn, he will be ordered to attcn.l and take 
 the oath aiul submit to be examined at his own 
 expense ; it he makes detault, j.roccss of con- 
 tLunpt ma.y issue on lurther proof. [■/„■{,, y 
 Ulirtj, lo P. H. J3. •' ■ 
 
 Motion to Coramit— Appeal— Coat A.] — An 
 appeal lies to a Divisional Court from an order 
 in Chanilicrs refusing an application under Rule 
 9.32 to commit a judgment debtor for unsatis- 
 factory answers ; but, as the liberty of the sub- 
 ject is at stake, the appellate court will not 
 reverse the order unless the Judge below has 
 erred in principle, or is almost "overwhelm- 
 ingly " wrong. 
 
 And under the circumstances of this case, the 
 Court refuscil to interfere. 
 
 draham v. DrrUn, I.'} P. R. 41,5, approved 
 and followed. 
 
 The judgmi'iil debtor appeared in person and 
 
 argued his own case on appeal : 
 
 Hehl, that he sluaild be allowed to set off 
 against the jndg.oent debt his disbursements and 
 a moderate allowance for his time and trouble on 
 the argument. Millar v. Mardonald, 14 P. R 
 499. 
 
 Motion to Commit -.S-e/c/cf ofA/ipoiiitmeiit— 
 Ce -0 , ;it,> o/'A'ro //(,/(,,■.]— Where, upon a motion 
 to commit a party for unsatisfaetorv answers 
 ■ipon his examination as a judgment 'debtor, it 
 id shewn that he attended and submitted to be 
 sworn and examined, it is not necessary to ijrove 
 service of a.i appointment or payment of con- 
 duct money. 
 
 And where the depositions returned by the 
 examiner shew on their face that the party was 
 
 . Transferee of Judgment Debtor —A'«„„. 
 ./irttoH.]-Lpon an application under Rule !)i8 
 for an order for the examinathui of the wife 
 o the judgment debtor as a jierson to wlmiu 
 
 s e H ^ ."' 'W.li^.-wit, the judgment creditor, 
 .stated that the action .arose out of the sale of .i 
 stock of goods by the plainlitrto the defendant 
 and referring to a verified copy of the judgiii.,.|,t 
 deljtors exammat.Km, taken under RulS 'l''(i 
 that on such examination the hitter adniitt'eii 
 tliat he had transferred to his wife a sum of 
 uioiiey part of the proceeds of the sale of the 
 same stock of good,s. In the examination t!i. 
 ju.lgmeiit debtor st.ited that in biiyino the stouk 
 .■om the plaintiff be was acting as agfeiit for liis 
 >ufe, and that when he sold it he ga?e the pur- 
 chase money to her, as it was her ouii pro- 
 perty :— » 
 
 Held, that, upon this material, an ordc- fur 
 the examination of the wife was properly inane. 
 . ',''J'V^''-'r',J'A;-^»"such an .applicatiou the 
 leal title of he debtor shouhl not be in,p,i,e,l 
 into or tried ; nor can the transferee resist it 
 merely by asserting that the debtor hel.l the 
 property as agent or trustee; standing in his 
 name and being dealt with as his own, il was 
 prinid Jacie bis. 
 
 PerMaelennan, J.A.-The ca.so intended hy 
 the Rule IS a transfer of the debtor's own pro- 
 perty, and not of property which he has dealt 
 witli as agent or trustee for another. Rut where 
 It IS a disputed .piestion whether the property 
 was not the property of the debtor or prnpprt'.- 
 in which he had an interest, the rule ought 
 to be applied. O'uuUevc v. U'/dte, 15 P. li. 
 
580 
 
 jiKlgment dubtor, tliurc 
 : ut tlic fact. 
 
 fxaiiiiiKM- is l;o(i(1 ovid.uce 
 Jie him, iioHvithstiii,(lii,i/ 
 
 "itrtr. * 
 
 on, 13 1- I!. 299, c„m- 
 Mitril'jiiald, U i;. It. i(,9 
 
 -Tlie uxaiiiinatiuii of ^ 
 1 of exfciitimi umhji' |;„|p 
 le most searcliing i-li,ii;,^' 
 uii of the SfVfi'ust kim' • 
 1 grounds must liu slicwn 
 liiiiitioii of a deht(jr who 
 uswered on two iuiuiur 
 
 ; appear that any (■lnuige 
 tlie judgment (lehtorh,!,! 
 ist examination, and the 
 
 applii/alion for a tlii„l 
 dill not siiew thegrcuiula 
 •f that she had inojurtv 
 
 negative tlie ahility tii 
 > iletaihs, the apphcation 
 
 ■ IJ'i.vd, C, 1.-) 1', R. 4'.>7. 
 iinii/: v/ Canada— \i\u. 
 
 'n.]— Where a jiidgimint 
 iiination, Init rel'iise.s to 
 lered to attejid and t.iku 
 l)e examined at liis own 
 letault, j)rocess of con- 
 irtlier proof, i'ltrii/ v. 
 
 inent Debtor — £,«;,<. 
 lieation under Rule it's 
 andnation of tiie wife 
 
 as a jierson to wlioiii 
 er of his property, tlie 
 ,tlio judgment eredit.ir, 
 ose out of the sale of ,i 
 lintitrto the defendant, 
 !d copy of the juilgniont 
 aken under Ride Mi, 
 >ii the latter adriiitteil 
 
 to his wife a sum of 
 eeils of the sale of the 
 n the examination the 
 hat in buying the slnck 
 I acting as agent for his 
 old it he gave tlie piir- 
 
 it was lier own pni- 
 
 material, an ordc- for 
 ife was properly iii;iiie. 
 udi an api)lieatioii the 
 houlil not be iiKjiiiii'il 
 he transferee resist it 
 it the del. tor liehl the 
 istee ; standing in his 
 th as Ids own, it was 
 
 The case intended hy 
 the debtor's own pro- 
 y M-hieh he has dealt 
 )r another. ]!ut where 
 whether the propertv 
 le debtor or prnpcrfv 
 Brest, the rule ought 
 V. White, 15 P. I!. 
 
 JUSTICE OP THE PEACE. 
 
 581 
 
 882 
 
 plamtilf IS out of the country » "t-re the 
 
 lie -J . ; • ""^ I'''"""" ''^ ""t possessed of nro- 
 
 aeti'm :-^ ■'"" '" '"'"''"' ''"^ '""^^ "^ the 
 
 Jlcdd that the Court should bo less cxactin« 
 
 I ' , r '■' "■ 'T'' ■"''' resident than in the 
 
 ;l'"^try ease of a stranger who seeks to uatify 
 
 ■Pon property within the jurisdiction ; the tes^ 
 
 anil a\,iilal)le in exeeiitloii '' " 
 
 And where the plaintiff 'had property, partly 
 
 Sec, also, Attaciimen 
 
 JUDaMENT SUMMONS. 
 See Division- Cor ■, m. 
 
 JUEISDICTION 
 
 Oj- Courts.]-,S'c.' The .Seveual Titlk 
 
 JURY. 
 
 Tklu ^ ^"'''""'■' ^'^"^'^^•ui'o.N-, III.- 
 
 JUSTICE OP THE PEACE. 
 
 I. ACTIO.NS Ad.UXST, .")S1. 
 
 II. Convictions, '>S',',. 
 
 III. .Jl.'HISDICTION, oS.". 
 
 IV. yfALII'ICATION, ."),S7. 
 
 I. Actions Against. 
 
 NotlceofActIon.]-The object of the "Act 
 ta protect justices of the peace and other's fiv,m 
 vexatious actions," R. .S. O. eh. IS is for t 
 
 uough, in the p..riornuiic„ tlicreof, they miv 
 "ct irregularly or errou-ously, and notice of 
 aotiou m such case must alli^i. that ' U! 
 
 ^^redouemUieiouslyaml wiUiout va iib^ 
 nnil probable cause : but where a person et 
 .tied to the protection of the Act vo lui \ri v 
 
 clLirgc ot any pal)hc duty, such notice is not 
 
 -i> u. K. (,(),s. Adunied 111 appeal, 22 A. R. ,J22 
 
 from this duty whi^j,. r ],, ; ''„' ,"'^'»l>ts h.m 
 ma-istratoor'^v « • '■■* .■'I'-'tmg as police 
 
 ch 2; w/n^ ;;" ''Pl'''.f tions under 53^ Vict 
 justices of the peace, the rule should 
 
 Security for Coata-Form ofOnhr-Tlrw- 
 
 u'-> iiiL'iirroil in the -wttnii " ^/v 
 
 ii-.Y/,.„».„„, i,,-,.. i^~;"'°"- J''«»(>«.. V. 
 
 absence ot a police magistrate, indo ed l th! 
 defendant for cxec.ui.n" in the ei v of T^ , 
 
 -tnitimde,M,ythestat.,t:thi'tli';L^t:;:? 
 the act on should be detennined upon an a, .li 
 cat.m.^n-^^i.rity, or costs. S.A:t:k::^-^ 
 
 eace r'f^I '" '"""" "-''""^^ '^ '"^"ce of the 
 and nmh-il.i . ^ "It. lout reasonable 
 
 tioii to support it .•_ ' "" ''""'^'«- 
 
 Held not a case within section 12 
 
i 
 
 111' 
 
 lOi' 
 
 .:f 
 
 583 
 
 JUSTICE OF THE PEACE. 
 
 J,m«t^'"'''''n''/J- *!'•"* *•'" application was 
 premature. U ehh v. Sjiears, 1", p. R. o-jo 
 
 Trespass— ^1 or..^ Before Endorntmenl of War- 
 ravt-- JM, vlwu A/Umarrl.^ - JJama,,e,.U-See 
 6outhuu/: V. /Jure, '24 O. Ji, 52S, ri«^r42. 
 
 Trespass— i)A(7/)Vmj(.s Proneeii/ion. i— The de- 
 
 t,Tain7i«- '"'' "". '"f"™"**™ •■li'wginM that the 
 plaintifl "came to my house a,„l s..l,l me a ),ro- ' 
 m.ssory note ior tlie amount of ninety .lolhua 
 purporting to ,e made against .1. M.ln talou,' 
 ofl. A an.ll hn,l out the sai.l note to he a 
 forgery • Up.n this a warrant va. i.s,,,,] ,-,. 
 ei ting the o«ence in the same uor.ls, and the 
 plaint.tt was under .t apprehended and hrou.dit 
 I'.forethe justice of the peace Mho' issued 
 Hudbyhim committed for trial I>va warrant 
 
 was aa.ultl:;! :"-!^""^' "'"' ""*^""« '''^ """^' -" 
 
 .w.!!"';';! 'l''1*. *'"; .'"formation sufficiently im- 
 ported that the plaintiff had uttered the tor-ed 
 note, knowing it to he forged, to give the m ,4 
 trate jurisdiction, and therefort the wa "a t 
 was not void, ami an action of tiespu^s was t 
 maintainahle against the d.fendan ev^n u , 
 evidence of his interfeicce with the ai rest ' 
 
 ly Ui m the information tog.ve the ma-istraU- 
 jurisdiction and the warrant were voi.l? ,',, ac^ 
 tioii for malicious prosecuti<.n W(,uld neverthe- 
 less he. AwUrson v. ]fi/.,o„, •.>.-, O. R. ill 
 
 ■vit^i'iH,? ^■■^"T^'f'^' '' ''"'''■•' '""yi'^trate acting 
 .vitlii. his jurisdiction under R. S. (' di ]74 
 gee. (,!', issues his wariant for the arrest of •! 
 
 s"'i rmr'r •"" "i ^'I'^'^t''' "■ o'-ji-- ' : 
 
 Ml .pwna, ,e is not, in the absence of malice 
 
 n-e Us t ";;''*'"'•«""" "'""«'' ■'« '"■■»"'''- 
 .it iv tl *-' /"""■•"^"^•y "f tlie evidence to 
 
 jiLstily tlie arrest. 
 
 Judgment of the Common I'leas Division, 24 ' 
 
 II. CoNvirnoN.s. 
 
 tio^Tl'^^"M~^^''l'^''" " ^^""^"laryconvic- 
 t on, valid on its face, has been roturneil with 
 the evidence upon which it was made n ol e li ! 
 eice to a cer/„,-ari, the Court is not to look i 
 
 Mrir::J7^'Y '^'"-i'"^^ ^^ aetermi^ii^gi 
 
 V net her t establishes an ofiVnce, or even i 
 vie ttr ■" '•'^ ""^ '''''''''" '"^ ^"^*'-^'» - -« j 
 
 itfy- "■"''"'^4 0.!R. 127, followed. | 
 wh eh tit''' ''■ ?"^'"''t'"n fo>- .1" offence over ' 
 Which the magistrate had jurisdiction is bad ' 
 oil Its face, the Court is to I'ook at tl e ev ie^ce 
 to deern.me whether an oflenee has been co , 
 tion '^ '"' '* '''°"''l ■■'""^"^1 the convic- 
 
 for hire;- ' '''' '*"' ^"'' Pr^^'tising medicine 
 tl,f^''''f''^'' ^"'' ""certainty'in not specifyinc ' 
 pracCil.g""' '■"' "' ""'' '^''''■'' '^--"t^uted'ihf | 
 
 244%flofed.' ""' ''^^"" ^'' *'■"'"'•'■' 24 O. R.' 
 
 584 
 
 And the Court refused to amend, and fiiH^li,,! 
 the conviction, where the practising consist.., 
 in telling a man which of several patent mch 
 eines .sold by the defendant was suitable to t]L 
 (omplaint which the man indicated, and .eri„„ 
 ' him some of it. S 
 
 Costs against the informant refused 
 Jf,i,n,a V. .V„«»,-.s 24 (). ]!. 244. follow,.,! 
 , JiKjiiia V. Coiilfoii, 24 t). R. 240. 
 
 ("11. ]-\\hvre the convicting justi.e was tl„. 
 ■M,n ot the complainant, and the latt.rwm 
 '•"titled to one-half the penalty impo.d 
 summary conviction was <|uaslud. on the gr,.,m,'l 
 hat the justice had su.h an interest as n,a, 
 the existence of real bias likely, or gave gr,u,„,i 
 or a reasonable apprehension of bias, althoiit.!, 
 there was no conflict of testimony 
 
 Jfe,,wn V. yy»,/,„„.v, [KSiir.] 'l Q. n. 5«,.f 
 lollowed. ' 
 
 Die til in of Rose, J., in /,Vyi«« v. La„.,n..d 
 li>0. R. .')2, approved. 
 
 Costs of , plashing conviction withhehl fron, 
 successful defemlant, where heliici no .•,tti,|.,vit 
 ilfuyiiig his guilt, or casting ,loul.t ui..,m r|.,. 
 eorrectness of the magistrate s conclusion u,„m 
 tlie tacts. lUi/ir.a v. .SUete, 20 (). R. MO. 
 
 Interested Magistrate— //k«-;,„, h^ihr, A n 
 ol„r .Va.,;..fn,,e~J>,jn„/„„/ Jp/.tann,, 'caul 
 j4».v„.,.,„„/r/,ar.,,..]-The justice of the per,,... 
 |)ef,.re whom the mfoiniation was laid, ami ,vh„ 
 issucMl tlie summons, was claimed to be inti'r 
 este.l. riie hearing, however, took place 1,,- 
 foie ami the a,ljudication an.l conviction w«p 
 ma.le by aiK.ther justice wh.;se ,a,alili..ati„i,' 
 was not attacked, while the del, lulant i,l,.ad,..| 
 to the chnrge and laiscl no objection to th,. 
 \alidity of the proceedings until the application 
 tor a rerlmnn-i ; — 
 
 Held, that the conviction couhl not be in> 
 pugned. Ii'e</hi<i v. Stout, 23 O. R. 40. 
 
 Oftences under By-law-- AdmiMibilUy ol 
 hn,U„0' <;/ JJcJemhna. \~0n the trial ot uu 
 oirence .against a city by-law in the erection „f a 
 woo,le„ buildmg within the tire limits, tl,.. 
 de en. ant IS not either a competent or com 
 pellable witness ; and, therefore, where in su,;l, 
 .lease, the defendant's evidence was receiv,.,! 
 nnd a conviction made against him, it «a* 
 jjuashed ^^■Ith costs, llt.jina v. Hart, 20 I; 
 
 : Substituting New Charge-/,«;,r;.voio7u.,« 
 
 as brought before justices of the peace ..n an 
 n format ion charging him with the in.lictahle 
 1 oHence of shooting with intent to nnir.ier. sud 
 they, not finding sufficient evidence to warrant 
 hem in committing for trial, of their ow mo- 
 ton, at the e ose of the ease, summarily coa. 
 Mctedthe .lefendant f..r that he did " pro,:ure 
 a revolver with intent therewith unlawfully t,. 
 do injury to one .1. S." It appeared by the 
 ev'fleiice that the weapon was bought an.'l car- 
 ried and used by the defendant peisonally. 
 
 l^y the Criminal Code, seeti(,n 108, it is mat- 
 ter of summary onviction if one has on his per- 
 son a p,st,.l with intent fhert with unhuvfidiy 
 to do any injury to any other pers, n. 
 
 1 he return to a writ of /mlM„.s ro,.;)«» shewed 
 the detention of the defendant under a warrant 
 
swl to amend, and quAsh<>(J 
 ' the luactising connii-trii 
 h of nevcnil p.aoiit nicl, 
 iKlant was suitaMi' tn Hie 
 nun indicated, ami .-tKiug 
 
 fiiiniant irfused. 
 
 24 (). J!. 244, follow,.,! 
 
 O. 1!. LMO. 
 
 lilatk.u^hil, to Covij.Unn- 
 ivictiiig jiifitiit) v„n ,1,,, 
 int, and tlie latt. r m;,h 
 tlie jieiialty iniiio-uil, ,^ 
 iNciuaslKd. on tlje gniim,] 
 ;ucli an intcii-.st as iiia,le 
 .as likcdy. or gave gnmn,) 
 liension of l,ia«, altl.„iji;li 
 F testinioin . 
 
 585 
 
 JUSTICE OF THE PEACE. 
 
 .iii.'i, 
 
 ill h 
 
 \'eijiiia V. L(ii,;i/[„'J, 
 
 onviotion withheld fion, 
 ■here lielileil no f.tliihivit 
 L'astiiig doulit n|„,i, il;i. 
 strate'.s conehisinn ii|)i,n 
 fcl<', 20 0. R. aw. 
 
 ite — J/iariiiij hf/'ori' An 
 I'lmlaxl Ap/.trnitui cml 
 le jilhtiee of the \,cru-,; 
 alioii was laid, anil nhn 
 us elaiiiied to ho inter- 
 3Wever, toc.k plac,. 1,,.. 
 in ami eonvietimi weri; 
 iee vh';.se ,|ilalitieati,iii 
 the ileli iidant pli.'ude.l 
 .'d no olijection to the 
 igs until tlie apjiliuatioii 
 
 tion could not he iir 
 ', 23 0. R. 40. 
 
 law -- Admkiibiliiy oj 
 — On the trial ol hu 
 iaw in the erection of a 
 the fire limits, th': 
 a competent or coin 
 ereforo. where in such 
 videnee waa receiveil, 
 against liini, it was 
 lina V. Harl, -.'O 0. I!. 
 
 harse — ImpriKonment 
 "'.'/'■. ;— The defciiilant 
 es of the peace en an 
 1 with the iiulictahle 
 int( nt to iininler, sud 
 t evidence to warrant 
 ial, of their ow inu- 
 ea.se. summarily con- 
 that he did "pmciire 
 lewith unlawfully to 
 It ajipeaied hy the 
 was Longht and car- 
 dant petsonally. 
 eetien 108, it is mat 
 if one has on his per- 
 ■herewilli uiilav, fully 
 ler persi n. 
 'ah'iiK torjms sheviA 
 laut under a wuiranf 
 
 of oomiuitmont l.ascl upon tho ahove convic- 
 
 Held, that the detention was f„r an oltence 
 unknown l„ the Uw , ami altlnn.gh the evi 
 deuce an, the t.mling shewcl an ..fl'emx. aga , t 
 sect on 108, the motion sinml.l not l.« enh g^ 
 toHlhnv the magistrates to suhstitute a pr mer 
 canviction, for it was unwarraiuahle to c onv ct 
 
 586 
 
 In an action hy the eounsel ,-,gain,t the juatioo 
 
 -iimpr;:::;;^:-'-'^'*^'''''^*-'^'''---. 
 
 Hel.l, that the justice ha,l n,. power summar- 
 
 'I.v to pmnsh tor cmtcmpt i, ,)>.■;,■ r,n-irr at ,ni^ 
 
 ate without a formal a,lj.„lic,tion a d'a wa""^ 
 
 '.int setting out the cmtempt. 
 
 ::'i,i^,:^r- '■:i'':=^ --^w,-,ro:--s. .3. .., ^.o. 
 
 wf;'l:r;usS;L^ly':;:m;ur:=S"^? 
 
 ■"terfere,! with the l.usiness of the ('u .t but 
 
 h 1 i-iv I. '^"■"""^^'•/7'' l'."l ""t excelled 
 
 the, n °" ^^r '^-"isel for the accused; ami 
 
 evnlence W.18 m.t achlrcsscl, up„„ which the 
 .le en.lant was „„t callcl to nuk'e his . c tence 
 Hinl as to which no complaint was lahl ; and t^m 
 prisoner sl.ouhl therefore, I.c clischarg^d jt. 
 
 ./,/i1 v. M,lf:1, L',j O. It. 577. ° " 
 
 TWO Otrenoas-" /A/«,V ia S„h,tn,,r<. 
 t'lnii -I ./. 
 
 or m 
 
 tint the:fc;ei;:h:;;r'';iitid;; ihe':i:;:^:[?i:i^:; i:;:r'^''^" - i'lt-mption of^;- prs;;;'^':;! 
 
 . ays last p.st, t,. wit, on the li/t",.','^ I "^'r^.'^^'":''"'* ''■:■< ^■'^t'"«i''". ° 
 
 lays last p. stt,. wit, on the .SOtli ami 3K", 
 -LiysolJuly, 1S(.2, . . ,li,l unlawf 111 s 
 
 hvuwl^SiJr":^'''"^'^*'-'---''-^- 
 
 ..;::;;o!;fS\f:c^!^t xi^!^^^^ 
 
 SiuS:;srda??*'"""^-"'"^^ 
 
 IVr Usler ami Maciennan, .1,1. A.-Sud, an 
 ."forination does charge two offences, ,-in s'] 
 
 , Hut, /.-,• Cnna,,,, assumim.' that an inforina- 
 
 .^.n B. wor,h.d .•ojs'c:;.^:;;vi,m'^.:^';.r ;•:;!;::;; :;!:^::i:f- ■""•-, ^^ viot. cn. ,;,, !::r i;^? 
 
 .section ,s-t,, (;{, „( ^.^ Criminil {J,-„Ic \H',-> 
 be de,.ct IS one "in substance or , f. n, -■• 
 «. hm the meaning of the curative .sectio, si") 
 ^m docs iMi invalidate an otherwise v 1 '1 , 
 victual for a single offence. 
 
 init'shuVbo';'' "^ '"'"'? '^'''' *''"' "" '^''J"--" 
 m-nt shall betor more than eight ,uys, i.^ ,n:U 
 
 If the justice ha,lissnc,l his warrant for tho 
 eon,mitn,c,itoftlicphd,,tiiran,lhadstatI; ith 
 loti;';'!' '"' ' ^'"" '"1 -."""."t-'^'-t, the Oon,!t 
 
 *-'• I.. .•!,). Alhrmed in apj.eal, -JO A. R. 045. 
 
 S.^'b;:f;::'„t' • tiS'^ol^^tl"''"^ ''''- '=-"■ 
 
 infon,i.,ti,mun,ler^r\^::,1,,^l;i,S;[l,:- 
 
 for£;:;^,-^-:^--,^-;;::;.;-^^^ 
 
 and >." Vm*^' Tl' "■'""^"'■'^' •""l-----tions^o-: 
 
 , „ , -■- ■•' — . c.gni <wys, ismat- been 1. .L -'Y^' t'>'U'""ecuti,m shouhl have 
 
 «i ot procedure ami may be waive,) .„. V '" "■ s"l>"iidiary or police ma.'istr'it., 
 
 piam m that respect. '^■"''' ^°'"- „,?">' "»!-' "l'>-'"ee is created by section 19 that 
 
 Ac,mvicti,m for a rirst ollcnce under section rsconl'.'^V".?'''''",'"'"'^ ''''^''''' ^ml that olVenco 
 
 ^0,.f the Lnpior License Act, U. S () ch I U /V,'.w >*''■'.'''-'' "" '''^'' '^" ''^en. 
 
 properly awards imprisonm nt in de I^I ', f ' "' '" "^ ^'^ •^■"'- 
 
 Jieijiiia V. 
 
 of suffi- 
 
 payment of the line, an,l not in .Icfault 
 eieut lUstress. 
 
 ijf'Mna V. .SmUh, 40 U. C. R. 442, ami /?,-„/«-, 
 V. //a,V%, 20 O. II. 4SI, approved. " ^ 
 
 Judginent of the Queen's Bench Division, 2.S 
 R.e;i3 ''"'■'-''•'^'^^'- Jf'V'iMv. ILnfji, 20 A. 
 
 AND TUt, lll'LKS OK Sl-KCIFIC OfFBNUKs 
 
 HI. JlIRISblCTIO.V. 
 
 J-^?,V- *° ^PJ^M" for Contempt-/'o»„',- to 
 
 barrister and solicitor while acting ^0,1;;,'^ 
 J^cei-tam persons chai-ge,l with a .nt, en^a S 
 ,).e a ,,ustice Of the peace holding com t • 
 
 the hiimuiary Cnivictious Act was ,■•, ^Z 
 by a constable by th- „r,!er af t f '""•■^''''l 
 without any forinil .Ibf ' J"^"^'"*-'' 
 
 ■ei,>lM,l.. 1 t "','"'"'' 'idimlicatioii or warrant 
 
 ■duct in liSrL ^"'^' ''"'' ^'"' '"^"'•^'"■■ly -»..- 
 
 Summary Trials Act-Tria! of Drf,ndant 
 
 "W.j-l iclefendant, on being cha.-ed before 
 stipemhary magistrate with 1° lonh.us is /ult 
 1 n i''' '•^' '" V^""""" ^^^^> '"'t 'leaded 
 on Wn'r;"""^ fT'': '^"'''-' 'H-'^'i^trate, with 
 section S^fH '"'''■"'' ''''"' *'«^ ■•^''l"irem;nts of 
 section 8 of the nummary Trials Act, R. ,S. C. 
 
 sentll ; 'Y "'■'•■",«, ''i^f'^'-'l'"'* ^^■''^t'"^'- I'e con^ 
 ,.m I 1 f ?'"' ''"f'"'<^ ''"" '"■ ''esi.'ed a jury 
 
 on inc th.ugu of the tehmious assault : - 
 
 ■eedii is ; •".''"'''• "" ''"^ '■""" "f the pro! 
 
 ceLd.ngs a strict compliance with .such direc- 
 tion. h..,,„ia V. lloiiarth, 24 O. R. 00. 
 
 lel th. m"'"^''', '"'"'"■ ^^''^''""t u license : 
 
 Htkl, that although the conviction dhl not 
 
 shew on Its face that the ofFenco was "ommit^ 
 
687 
 
 LACHES. 
 
 II 
 
 58S 
 
 LACHES. 
 
 at a iiliici" within the tcrritoiinl jinisdiction of | 
 
 tliciiiugisliiitc. yet, im the wairj.iit for tlio .lufeii- ' 
 
 «limtH upprtlRiLsi,,!,, wliici, „im ,.i,t„riit,| iip„„: Action-/;, /«» ;., /-..o /• i . 
 
 nrttn,a,i,,luMi,l tlie i„,„|,laint to l,o that the uZh.U.Ti" i >">"ri'>i,..j.]-An actum 
 
 <Ufe...lai.t sol,l Ii,,„„r at a i la.c w thin th ,„ , ^ '^"'"■""■■' to recover the anioniit of a 1, || „f 
 
 iHtrato-H jn,.i.,lietlon, ^^.i' !/";„: e f n^, Z:Z^: 'l^-l' "t !'-;'"f""'-t "M < - '1 in 
 
 that tl,e evi,!ence returned was directe'l to ^. '"■-•'. '•'• '>"'"!"'": -^t'P «"« t:,k. ,. ti,l 
 
 that eoni])lHint, Hiilhcieiir i'lipeareil to satiNfy 
 
 the Courl tli.it an olleneeof the nature (leserihell 
 
 III the eonvi.t 1(111 wan eoiiilnilted, over wliieh 
 
 thoinagi.stiate liarl jiirisiiicti,,!!, and (lierefcjru 
 
 J^^ouv. ro<o,„ r> O. H. 184., di.ting„isli.!proeee'l'. ""' "" ""'"" ''''""''' '" """^^" 
 
 " Ifehl, also, tliat, l,y the coinhined' elleet« o{\ lUi-'u l^'TAlr" *'"' '■'"""■"^- ^•-^'' v. 
 
 se.lions i,,.!l and «.),■) of the C'o.le, it «aH ,li>ero- I ' '^ ^ " ^'- ^^"• 
 
 tionary witli the magistrate to isMie either a! Crown- .fw, „/• l/;„;./,.. r n , „•, , 
 
 Hninmons or a wanant, as he might deem he«t • : th( hnHstl, - "'':"""■'''.>"'.> C'oini.-W |„|, 
 
 and therefore it was not a vali.l ol,j " i, , J i p.s ^"l' mV' ' "/ V'"'' "'' ''V' ''.'^ 
 
 the convietioi, that the magistrate inelude ^ ml I , '''''''''" '■'"' Y' l'"';"^"' '" ''• 
 
 the eosts wlneh tl,e defendant Mas ■ e M lei .,;.';'; '■'■''«' V^'O' 't sho,,l,l s.II.t 
 
 -y. theeosts of a.restin. and '^nnging hL i t^ .;:';veniT;;::r,,lt;:,,^:i^;;- ^;:^, iii^^ 
 
 I'el.inary, IS!):.', wlmi the plaintills dcliv.n,' , 
 statement of elaiiii. Thv phiii, litis' reason f„r 
 
 : the delay vas that the defendant had m. imans 
 to pay during the period of delay. 
 
 Upon motion l,y the defendant to di>n.i-- ,r,l 
 
 I enis... motion hy the plaintill.s to valid;, le -lie 
 
 to 
 
 E; 
 
 belore the magistrate under'the wanant. 
 
 Ulioii the <h.'fendant tendering heist ii as a wit- 
 ness on lier own hel...lf, the magistrate stated 
 that, in view ol the evidence ailduced hy the 
 prosecutor, a denial hy the defendant on oath 
 woiild not alter his opinion of her ouilt, upon 
 which her eonnsel did not fui ther press tor lier 
 oxumination ; hut her hnsI,aiHl was examined 
 and gave evicUnee denving the .sile of the 
 JKjuor : 
 
 ( HI tins ease may lie waive I hy the acts of mim./LTs 
 I and ofheers ot the Crown. Al/o,vc<,-an,. ,,.l (t 
 • ii'l(ji;fi V. Aliir-hdid; L. H. (i P (■ ;),-,( 
 ' I)an->,/,oyt v. The (Jmai, 3 App. Cas. 11,^, 
 
 tened to. I'.Urxim v. The Qiitut, 2 K.x. C 
 
 07. 
 
 Mid 
 11. 
 
 H, 
 
 Crown-^ ^,,,f!,J,„re o/ 0/7/Vfr.]-I.aeh..s can 
 ''■;' ": "'ipuled to the C'.owM, and, excel)! ul,,,-,. 
 :i inil.ilily has heen created hy statute, it is not 
 
 Hehl. that there was no denial of the i-itht of answer,!, !<■ f- ,. ti r • 
 
 the defen.laiit,nii,lorsecti.,nS50 of tilt r.d e , V, n i the n.ghg.nce ot its olliar.^ 
 
 make her full answer ami liui^. /.'^ '" " ' r. '^^'i'"' l^ I!'!'' l^ T^^^-- J'»rr''Vy,.. 
 
 make her full answer and defence 
 Alcitre'jor, 120 (). 
 
 ijiiKi V. ' Tin 'Jurin, 2 K.x. ('IX. -2 
 
 'm. 
 
 Infant— J/o/zc;, to, Sri AshI^ Prorecdm.,. After 
 (o»m,,, oj /l.-A'.]-An infant was a pan o,nier 
 "' !i patent right and engaged in I.usiiiess tians- 
 ■"•■tions wuli respect to it. Along Mith otlitr 
 Jiait owners he signed a retainer to s<,licitMs to 
 
 ■Irespass—y.'«/7/'Y^i/.] — Section -is:! of the 
 Hallway Act of t anada, r.l Vict. eh. ' !) enahl- 
 ing a justice of the peace for any coniitv to deal 
 
 £.eLre.si;n'tl^mL-;^;:t-l,i-^ 
 
 iu:?,rrth-:;;n;-:t^L;;:f:lrs;n--'-^^^ 
 
 a n,ilw.ay track in^he city "of ''n;:'!;; ^ "^^ ' w/' ^ tlj'^e" ;t'',i:Tt!'r- '^""' '''' \ 
 
 linn. \!fii-(i fl..,,. „ 1-1 1 *■ 
 
 O. R. 48(j.' 
 
 .n^ ?^^ Fees.]- .Section .^S of \\. S. C. ch 
 178, authorizes justices of the peace to allow" 
 witness fees. Uajiim v. Un-hfr, '!{) () I!" (i7(J 
 
 IV. Ql.'.\I,IKICATION. 
 
 Property' — I 
 of the jience .'<i 
 qualities as sue 
 sec. 0, need not 
 It is suflicient i 
 the value of 81 
 satisfy and disc 
 the same, ami 
 charges payahle 
 swch an esfatc ( 
 section, wliatev 
 interest may ho. 
 
 a/;".]— The interest of a justice 
 property in respect of wliich he 
 u, as reijiiired hv R. ,S. O. eh. 71 
 he in itself of the value of 8I.L'0o! 
 if lie has in lands whicli are of 
 ,200, o\er and above what will 
 hargc all incumbrances atTeeting 
 over and above all rents and 
 out of or afi'eeting the same. I 
 r interest as is mentioned in the 
 er the value of the estate or i 
 Wtiv V. ^mijth, 19 A. R. 433.] 
 
 tion. More than a year after he came* of ii-c 
 he' moved to set aside all proceedings in the 
 action : — ^ 
 
 Held, that, under the circumstances iiien- 
 tione.l he was not entitled to relief on ti.e 
 ground of lulancy. MUUoii r. .Swale, '2r> 0. R. 
 144. 
 
 Jnagment-Aj'/>lmtt;on for Ltan to I...,,,- 
 
 D,,cret,u,j.]--In KSSO a bill was filcl hy the 
 
 plauiti f for an account in respect of a mortuaLf, 
 
 Much had bei-n assigned to the defendant as 
 
 seen ity for advances. A decree was ],ron„um«i 
 
 " .'niie, 18S0, din-cting that the plaintiff niiirht 
 
 ave an account If he desired it,' and that the 
 
 defendant should have his costs to the lu.iing. 
 
 J he decree w.as not then drawn up and i.-sued, 
 
 ..In, December, 18<J2, the plaintift' applied fo^ 
 
 leave to issue it. 
 
 The ,l,.lay „as not explained, except hy s,ny- 
 iiig that the plaintiff had been out of the jurii 
 diction, and no details were given of when ho 
 went away or when he returned. It appeared 
 
58S 
 
 589 
 
 CHES. 
 
 LAND TITLES ACT. 
 
 /'lYMi, •,//;)-</.]— An iictu,n 
 r till' imioiiiit (if ii Irll „f 
 tlio (Iff. iKlinit aii|i,ii,il in 
 i'lirtlicr .st<|) Wiis tiili, I, till 
 
 tliu jilaiiitillrt (Ichvir,,! .1 
 'I'llO l)l;iili;ill«' ri'lisnu fcr 
 I' iloffiidaiit liiiil 11(1 in( ins 
 (id (if (IclMy. 
 
 ' (lifciidjuit to (Iii-ii!i..~ ai'il 
 plaint ills to validate ;|;p 
 i;iit (if (.■l.iiiii : — 
 idii sluiiiM 111,' ul!(,-,v,d to 
 
 I tlic iilaiiitill's. l-'ii,kli V. 
 
 iiixhr-ioj' Cioiiii,\ 
 All is IKit lidlllld liv 
 
 W 
 
 can lie iiii|iiiti,l ti 
 
 as( 11 wliy it .-Ik.uIiI 
 M (illit-ii-i-i, yet, it a| 
 (iifcitiiii's mcli a.sai 
 fl l>ytlicact.s(jf mil 
 »ii. AlUiiiifii-Uni. 
 L. R, Ii p. ('. ;i,-,| 
 til, 3 Ajij). ('as. II 
 The Qiitiii, 2 Kx. 
 
 lulc 
 t(.p. 
 ' it, 
 idler 
 II .irs 
 
 licl 
 UTS 
 
 •Mid 
 
 ( ■. H. 
 
 <;/"0///c()'.] — Liiclics t,in 
 iiivvii, uiidjtxcfpt wlitrc 
 ittd liy .stiiliUe, it is not 
 gligmce (if its (.tiicirs 
 .sorvicu. Hiin-dvilt!' v. 
 
 A ■•:i(/c Provculiuii" Ajhr 
 ifaiit was ii pan duiier 
 gagi^d ill liiL-iiH'ss tiaiis- 
 1 it. Aldiig with i.tlier 
 
 ivtaini'i- to .^((ilii^itdis to 
 I the iiifiiiisiiiiiiiit of the 
 .'<, not kr.oMiijj, tl;,it be 
 111 a(jti(.ii f(ii-"tliat jj.ir- 
 i a plaint ill', wiiliout a 
 1 WHS pi-o.scc'iai(l for a 
 
 tliat tiic infriiij.'eiiHnt 
 lUintly dimii.s.-c'd with 
 lis for want of piiisi^cii- 
 !■ aftiT lie came of age 
 
 all proceedings in the 
 
 e L-ircunistaiieps mea- 
 |itk'd to ixdiuf on the 
 '■■'Oil r. .•iiiialc; 'J."i (J. R. 
 
 on for Lea re fo /.>>■«,— 
 bill T\a.s tikd by the 
 1 respect of ain(irii;iiLi', 
 1 to the defendant \i3 
 decree ■\\a.s])ronoiUK. I'll 
 hat the plaintiff niiL'ht 
 sired it, and that "the 
 3 costs to the luaiing. 
 drawn up and i.-md, 
 lie plaiiitityaiJiiJitii for 
 
 ained, except !iy say- 
 been out of the jiiiis- 
 2re given of when he 
 itui-ned. It appeared 
 
 hiU th.^ phuntill had no beneficial interest ntion 
 
 «»«.«nn,ent and H,,. an.swer. The defendant 
 
 "S' ■ ' '" "' "'"^^ ""^''''•'al witness througl, 
 
 H.dd, that the (lec.ce meant that the plaintill' 
 
 Hhduld wuhu. K(,n.e rtasonuiilc time, .xetc '■ 
 
 li-ip .on pveii him of havin« a reference tO 
 take the acconnts, at the peril ,.f l„,ii,„ it if 
 ehaiiK.|d .;,rc„mstances «orl<ed anv piejiolieo to 
 the defendant :,uid .hat, nnder all the eircn, i- 
 8 anees, the applieatxni shonhl, in the exerei.se 
 (il a ..(.nnd discretion. 1„, ,,,[„,„,. j.-i„,,/,;" 
 
 (iLStiiiguished. futon v. JJortiin,/, l.j 1' R fiH 
 
 680 
 
 'i^'-'tl. .It t he t,.stator-,s widow, the th ee s ! 
 mm,- children ,.f the deeea.sed nephew (o.e 
 .laughter had died a. Imrt time h.^for.^^ inte,s at^ 
 and iinmarned) entered into poF.sfH.hm -iimI ,, 
 J..y.ne.it.,fthehui,Mn,p,esti,.'nnn(l ; ;' i'f 
 hat they were tenants in common of one , n 
 divided nmiety th.Mcdf, the s.trvivin,. m^pl ew 
 temg entitled to the other nndivide.l nio ' v 
 Ir,i.n time,,, tin.e leases and sales (if ,:.',,; 
 of the anu uerc made in which all pa ties 
 
 th. .issinncl tenancy m common, and the rents 
 am proceeds of salea l.einj; ,liv„|J,| ,„„„„'; ," , 
 in the proportion „f oiiedialf to the «ni"- ivi ^ 
 neph.r«-, ami (.ne.sixth to each „f the ot u"?' 
 n ISN, a partiM,,,, ,lee.| was execnted of ,,a it o 
 the tmso Id port,,,,, j,, ,,s,s,i tl,e eldest s f, 
 the h St time had l.rwiyht to his atteiiti.ii 1 1,' 
 .|Ue.stK„i of his titi,. iMi.lerthe will an 'tir 
 action was s„„n aiterwards conimene,.,! l,v hi, 
 askn,,, that the title mi,,dit l,o ,lecl 'red the 
 pant..,,, deed set aside, ami the rents an. ni 
 
 SMt.r£r'^'^^^''^'^'^^''-'---''«i''- 
 
 Hehl atjii-min. il,e j„,l,,n,ent of R(d,ert8o„. 
 J., IbU. K .Ul, tliat. as all jiarties had acted 
 un( e,. a imstahe as to, and in igno,ancc of 1, 
 
 ^.iMnrr'n"'?'''; "^ *»'- "i'^ the plaintilf ' 
 Ha.sm,lMiie.M,v laches or acniieseence trom 
 
 time h,s (daim Mas made, ami any niortea.-es t, 
 secure purchase nnmeys of land pi-evio, « y' « . 
 
 Tiasnude, an,l any moneys receiycl l,y them 
 t^m^ '^ """i'^y--* "^'f'^lly received by 
 
 Ul I). .,,1, cinsiilered and followed. /Jaiiirii, 
 V. hii„j./oi,r, IH A. II. (i3, and Appendix. I 
 
 ' ^olieitor ami his curator, tlie latter never inter- 
 th, H, ''';'•'*'""? >■'-'"•" ''^■'"'■.•- ""■! .hiring all 
 the ime after, the making of the deeree, the 
 .""■tK.-.gee. or th(i.se claim, ng „n,|er him, ha.l 
 
 ml'tlmlrTv"'''*'''','''"'"''''"^'^-'!-''''-^ 
 
 'ii'lthe,etiti(.nerinth,smatt.T,,htii g nmle; 
 
 .; .-."rgagee, sought, after notiiying the 
 ■..••■torol t„c laets uml proeee(liims,\„^,„iet 
 Ins title iimler the Quieting Titles Act, It. ,S. O. 
 
 Held, that after •the'groat and unexplained 
 li.>.ll. tlie ledemptnm suit, the deeree made 
 I ..■.e.n was no obstacle to the petitioner's 
 "btaining a certilieate of title. J!e L/ie -J O 
 
 -ii;> lAU„U J A jii,lgm,.„t creditor of .J. applied 
 tor an ,,,der for .sale of the hitter's inte.el s 
 :;7; -■••'^"■l^.ll.e legal title t,,whi,-li,vai,K' 
 ;,'""'"■'■'"■'''"■ •■^"'1 t"i'..ier partner of .(. A 
 i.ier vyas ma.lc t„ra reference to ascertain .1 's 
 itcx.st m the lamls ami to take an aee„„t of 
 t e,U.lin.sl,etwe^.„J ai„lK. In the Mas e,''« 
 "bee K. clainie,! that m the cou.se of the part- 
 ..■■sli.p business he signed notes v^hieh .i i . 
 .l...^e,l ami (.aused to he di.seonnted, l.ut had 
 !'i.;irged against him, K., a inneli lar.'er ■ate 
 
 i..m..tth,.ivM,,^l,anheha,lpai,l,amll,ecri^n 
 •I l.'.ge sum to lie ,lue him f,-,,,,, .J. for mieh 
 ovcrelnuge. The .Master held that « t i^se 
 .■aiisactinns .,,1 taken ,,|a..e nearly twe tv 
 . .Nirs l,,,.l,„.,.. K. „,,,, ,„.eelude,l l.v the .Statute of 
 Li,,„tatn,,,su,.,ll,yhlehesa,,,la,:,^ 
 
 V fud''/""'' '■'■"':'• ■ "'■'' '■'■l""t".-i.s reversed 
 '.,; .f f H ' '',"■"'' "•••'^^'«""' "•'•■< ■■dlirmed by the 
 b i 1 o, (-^r'r' "" ""-' -"""'"' t''^" "- "'^^tter 
 sh ".ir '"■'"■'! ''^'.'■'"^•'••'*- "'"1 the p;irtner- 
 
 shipallans never having heeii formally wound 
 up, the statute di,l not apply -- ^ 
 
 Jlel.l, reversing the deei.:i(,i, of the Court of 
 Appeal and restoring the .Master's report, that 
 
 as ,f n„t ab,.„lnte evidence, at lets, a presump- 
 tion, of ac(i„,e.seenee fioni th.i long del.-iy ; ami 
 ha. such pres,,,,,,,ti,i„ «|,„„i,l not ho rebutted 
 the evi, em;e 01 the two partners, consider- 
 : :«':"\7^'^'''''''!il''lV'''''^'-'M.par,mte, 
 ! _';.;t,"eeii them. V'o„//„. y. Ki//,-, ,/,,r, 24 .S. C K 
 
 yiH,..|-.ll,,it lapse of time which W(mld he i 
 'd-iY'iidu siiou,,| (IS a general rule inmlv 1,., 
 
 ^;^to.ndt,eethe Court to eSdSd- 
 JCt 101 by l,„I,l,„g t, i,.^„,i ^^.,,^^^ 
 
 2:^'oir'i:s:::r^ '^-^ "^"-■-■'-'- 
 
 bee^imv!''^ "","•' '■'•^"''^^ ^""^ redemption had 
 
 ^ l;:'^»':^'^''•^""'^^''''"^^^■''•'-f"-- 
 t•'c suit passed between the mortgagor's 
 
 I .rinance ,it an tigieeinent hy ,|,e (r.,.yiiee of laml 
 
 ; to convey o I'., it a|,pea,ed tha.t Jie agreement 
 
 j <'f sale to 1'. was execnted in Kssi, ami the si t 
 
 was m.t instituted until .our vears I , e > was 
 
 1.1 possession of the land (lurnig the interval " 
 
 that f. v^asonlyin po.s.session .ns agent of the 
 
 tiistees under the will and caretaker of 
 
 .11(1 and as by the terms of the agreement time 
 
 . : nv« ' *'" '''"'^■'-' "f the "contract, tho 
 
 ir'^^r^a"'^'^!^;;;;:""^-"--^' ''-'^'- 
 
 LAND TITT t^S ACT. 
 
 Caution— r>,sw,Ci'o?j of—Smirilv l_TI„,]n.. 
 section Gl of the Land Titles Act R.t O. ch 6 
 at^aution «as registercl again.t dealings by 1 1,4 
 registered owner, the cautioner claiming that e 
 
LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 Mllltif: 
 
 registered owner liuld as tiustuo for iiiiof i . i . 
 
 t.oM An action IumI hern hrowght for a loWan . 7 ' ' "'""7'"' «^'"""'« f'^^t sIm m^w a Ci 
 tion to ti. u olluet. Ti>. MastcT of Tit 1.1 "„ ' i, ' ''^'"fi*''''- f">' valu. « ,tho„t notice of /h. 
 »," "-■■Kn. that entry of tl.o ce.«ation of tl . , " . ""'^ "'.",''■"«/ " 
 
 ng ; — 
 HM, that tluM-ii wa, a /,o,i,) ,/i.lr cont.'at . i 
 .lUfatio,. toHonio cxtont novol, ivl.icl, o„.,|,t , 
 '0 tanly luigate,! in tli... u.ual Way, ^ „ : 
 l'un,|,..r.n^ .■on.l.fona l,uing i„,,,o.s,H o , 
 iefenco. ./o,„.,s v. ,S7o«.. H.S1M| A. C I- 
 
 »n or, .r that u,.try of tl.o ce.«ation of tl u\^. t . 
 H.o,i.l b. nrulc, npon tlu, rogiHtcrcl o« ," 
 «.VM.« Mucunty tor tim an.ounl clainu.l by i 
 
 "lul t..{; an,l tl.al, iin.lfr 1 1.,,. ..■ircuiostan.e.s, the 
 A- A/,„;/o,„,/,/ i,„d SiillirdH, 14 P. li. (io! 
 
 Costs /•o,,.,,.. ,;/• Uoil Mn,t,r or Tiil,s 
 JMscntu.,- Ai,,.„l.\ -A local .Mu..l,.r of T tle^ 
 hasijowo,. l.j. virtnc of .scofon.. I;i7 a.,,! 74 of to 
 Lan,l r.tlcH Act, K. S. U. cl,. 1 1.), „, or,lc >,,.. tl a 
 a caution be vacatcl, to direct oayinunt by , 
 oautjoner of conts a. between ..olicitCa .1 c le ' 
 
 t at ,t '■^'V"?.'^^'' "'='i^-'' '^ «l'^^ial direction 
 tl.at co,.t.s a., ot a Court .notion may be taxed. 
 
 An,l where a ,\Ia«te,. i„ i,i,^ li.scretioa so 
 ordcre.1, a Judge in Chambers refn.e t te • I 
 w-e, more esi-ceially .-us tlie appeal was late a i^l 
 oouhl only be entertained as an indulgence. te 
 
 Evidence - ir.mff/, I'a.^t Chil,l.l,,:,riH<i ~\ 
 Jn/'sh-annni^Lund wa.s devised to the peli- 
 t " .or for life, with remainder m fee to' her 
 children Mirviv.ng her. At the age of lia -six 
 t ,,et,t,oner and one of her childre ,, l\lc' 
 
 agt o eleven ; she was married in her twenty- 
 second year, an,l bore chddren rapidly t 1 1 er ' 
 th ty-s.xth year, when her tenth d,i wa ! 
 l""-n ; ne mouths after tins her periods h-iv n' i 
 regularly continued, suddenly ceLe, ° ud ip S '' 
 
 mcdi^^.,? •■" "'■ "• I'^P'^'^'^'' ^vho had made a 
 
 at s , ,i|-!'"';'"'?''" ?^ ,""-■ P^'titioner shewed 
 
 tliat senile atrophy of the uterus and ovaries 
 
 md proeeede, so far that it would be a no al 
 
 impossibility tor pregnancy to take place :- 
 
 "•{«„' -^ '■'^"";'' '" "'^ ["■ovisions of sec. 
 
 -•i, sib-sec. .1, ot the Act, that the Master 
 
 able of e ,11 V '""'■'' V' I'''y«i"^^"y i"<--ap- 
 auic ot childd.eariiig, and shouhl have acted 
 
 upon Ubygrauti,, the registration, /.e (/^l | 
 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 I. AcHKKMENT Foil Lease, 592. 
 
 A^sn.NMKNTOFLEASKAM>Sl-..UASK. 
 AlTOIiNMKNT, a!)."). 
 
 IV^ BriMjiNCis, 5!),'). 
 
 V'. CoyKNANTS, .")!»,"). 
 
 VI. Disi'UTiNd Landi,oi:d's Title, ."i!J7. 
 
 VII. KviL'TION, ,')!)7. 
 VI f I. FoHKEITCKK OK Ll.ASE, -)f)7. 
 I.M1'R0\KMENTS, 59ft. 
 
 Lkask fok LivKs, .■i!)9. 
 
 LlAIlILITV Koli NKnLI(iEN-('E, (iO(). 
 Ml:SNE Pitol'ITS, 001. 
 
 Notice to (inr, GDI. 
 I XIV. Occupation Kent, (iOl 
 
 XV. OvERiioLDi.No Tenants, (iOl. 
 XVI. Pleading, 602. 
 
 XVII, RE-ENTRy, 002. 
 
 XVIII. Renewal of Lease, 002. 
 
 XIX. Rent, 603. 
 XX. Shout Foh.ms Acr, Got. 
 
 XXI. Suii-LEASE, 004. 
 XXII. SiTRKENDER ok Lease, (id.-,. 
 
 IX. 
 
 X. 
 
 XL 
 
 XIL 
 
 XIIL 
 
 nant for payment implied by virtue of see. 2!)' I 
 W H ■'•"= r" """■>' "" ^''" '•'•'gi'^t^''' "e...ativ 
 0^1 fm^i'' h"'";"' *'"-■ •'^''■'-'"^'-t- i" answer 
 Kul 4' "./°'' '?"""""'■>• judgment under 
 
 be wc' i '^'^'"'•^^''•^'' ''^^'^^ clea,ri; understood' 
 between Inn. and tl.e origmal el.argees that the j 
 
 LSI T(^ l.a It.. 1.1 1 ,. • 
 
 i,,„] , '' y'>= ""goiai eliargees t 
 
 land only was to be liable, aud this w 
 
 FlXTURES-&e FiXTL'RES. 
 
 I. Agreement for Lease. 
 
 ,^.^.'^°f5®™®?*, °'' Former Lease- yv ,■„„_ 
 
 107 signed 
 
 as cor-,/We.,v.c-.,.]_A lessee of house Xo 
 
593 
 
 ■'"'."'■|«i"''*l<lmr«eog; i|,„ 
 Jiiriiig ihiit she w>w a /„„„; 
 iiu without notice of ih|v 
 
 ■J a l>n,i,l ji,l,. com, .81, , I ^ 
 lit uovol, whioh (Mi-|,t t . 
 i tli« muiil way, witl.o,,,. 
 I boliig imposoil oil tl,.. 
 
 ""•|'''<'''^| A. (J. luM, i„r 
 
 ""''//, It) I'. R. -.XM. 
 
 ;r)I.oi:D's TiTLK, .■|!J7. 
 
 ail in loMeiiiuiit on tin. |i.,nn ti, ., i, , ,. , , , 
 h.n... 109 at the .,uno ,^ " i'l ", ""'"' 
 
 «.o„as8oonas tlm |,r,m ,s h, ml """""'; 
 
 Hv,, wa.no.. ,,,..n?ll,^:::,:;;!^-'-'^- ''-■ 
 
 Jo'no!^?';;.:!'^^::!!;'^^'''''^ '''--• 
 
 t..n,HaHN-o. 1„7 an .iM '^ "''"'« h,.,„u 
 
 •HMts in tlH, I..SO tin Ut. : "'''"' '""' '■"^•^■• 
 
 ..; ....ionis a'yl.a,iV : ult S^;;;";i;r-'- 
 
 t.r,.|KU,.a,in>ilar) ;;;■;;, ?'"'^ ''>''"','' 
 
 Covenant — t'oiiietif /,>,.„/ / ■ 
 
 :"£i';v;;s:;;;;"t''''"'^~ -'•!"": 
 
 '22. \. H. 4i-2. ^ ' ^' '^"""" ^'- Afi'i'iw, 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 nu.l. p;„..uaMt to the Si , K,;i "'/ «'^-<« 
 »3-ii,'Mm,' or siil,.l.,.ttin' wirU,' ,"- """T <'a 
 
 rMMiii,lerlurljrea..| ,f .;. "''7''-''' "P"" the 
 reentry re.niin.s th.. ,.,•',', "r '^"'- Pro^'iso tor 
 
 w^.ie^'aArtin;i;e,;.;t,;;'t^:-S"^""^ 
 
 tl.er,ti;ef,;rner-rerr ;■/■"'? '", '^' '•^■'''' '"='- 
 w« oil V, tlie littpr f .f , ■ ''P'"'"'""" ;"-o h'l ■ 
 
 '--iu^^i.^ie^utl.rJ' ';:^i';^'!-;r--''f 
 
 tne nj-ht of re-entry as t tlo -'V"" 
 
 •e, where a !,...„. .;!..-' ,"'^ 'vm.un.ler. 
 
 Ml 
 
 ;".«»..;■.,., »«V :„';,, ;:r::;r;i:,'"'' "• "" 
 
 '"■" •Hlionl.l not l.e Droin.li, .,1 1 ' '"^'«- 
 
 w-ar,lsasHign,! i 7,,, ' ,''" '"■"-"",'" '•■^■^«'> "fter- 
 i the hM^ors hrouL'hl ■■i> n . ' ' ''"^ ""» 
 -«ot the rents ha.. exp;;:!a'l.;^,i^:^ 
 
 "•tintaining th ^u.^tion'" ""' '"•^'^''•"'"'' ^"'"^ 
 
 l^4'^:fK:.w'fh:;:;';^.X3:;,;:--;f'>out 
 
 to:>k a surrender of i t ,.' ;,«''^'^^"^''. tlioloaaorM 
 
 :-'t^'~'l^l ! "■' r '^^'"''-- 
 
 ''"I'-let without le.u-e an 1 , , '""^ :'"'^-'*«n or 
 
 Heu'e, tt-hero a lessor 
 
 !"«'•'■ tho.lemisM or,..;,- ■\"'^'^'"*''" to nlien 
 'h«li^t.,seappie.l to r- " T"* '"•''■'■ ^''^'^ 
 
 «'>ly, an,! that , nl sub' e, ^''?^ 
 
 ai';:::,rf;ir^S:.i'^^rhrr'>rr'''-'' 
 f"^^' «--ue,i ou^;] ::!, ;,r of "t ;"'""'"■'" 
 
 'ease, l,si one month -0,^, ■ "^ «in»^nor 
 asseiitea. On . ' ' '' '" ,'''"■' ^he lessors 
 
 suh-leaae :^ ' '"' '^"^''^ ''■■""" expectant on the 
 HeM, that the lessors, mi^rht r. .,./ 
 
 *'-tti...perior^i:,l°Ul''^r:t;X'''™^-'''^'"' 
 
 »>3 
 
 l-.th November SS" f , '"""""'^ '^"^'P''-^''. "^ 
 
 po..ession,a^[-^^';rriSs'"e':i"r""^?'» 
 to .,u.t from M. I,. Jn '> isss \f •' "°'i'°'' 
 'I'^tres, warrant to reoom: rent' ,h ' T^^'^l 
 p.-emise3from M..V. . an. tho.rh . "',^*"' 
 
 amount elaime.l i^' ,M,f I / ,'-'r'-';'t P*'"^ '■'>« 
 from herself to \Lo U ""h "^^"^ ' '^""n"' 
 after the n, tiee to , nit w!.""- "'"' ^''^ ""','»*»« 
 were taken hv M t' t. ^"''"'' P'-^seedings 
 
f^ Hi 
 
 LANDL6ED AND TENANT 
 
 H«M, that ihe noiUc to nuit ^-iv.n In lUf 
 nub-toimiit, (iii.l fliP ai«tr<N« itiiriiiK the lutterV 
 
 »Ka.nHt thrin ,„,l. ' 1... trim,,. \ i,a,l alw.Iv, 
 
 l*e« re|.i..lmt<.,i J l„,n/nVr. J.." aisHcntiiiu. 
 V'hnoiir V. J/,,,,,,, IS s. ( . ]{. 5-9 » 
 
 ^ S(7f/o)i V. l-.urhaiimui, '.'-l (). R. 340, ;/<«./ 603. 
 
 III. AlTllllSMKNT. 
 
 MortKnge - />, //,;.„ i„ A/„rh,n,,nr - - /',;«« .. 
 Co., 18 S. ('. H. 4,S;i, /-(/y'603. 
 
 IV. IU'ILDINf;.«. 
 
 Renewal of Lease. 1 ,V, , ,SV,„-., v. Cily of 
 »S/. Jolw, IS s, C. 1;. 70'.', ;,o.sy (i( L'. " • 
 
 Right of BulldlMK over Lane.]-,V,,. Jams 
 
 V. OAiiJr, LO O. H. -JSi), /,o,,^ ,-|<!{i. 
 
 '^W(;«V, nii.l liin .l.niiil ,.,.ulfl only I,.' r,.,.i „„, 
 tKuiTcf of thu nttiial oxticiitioii i.f ttie Ui-. 
 ^J'„rM,rs: Hva,ll.n,w, 7 I'. 1{. |,s, c.mm„„tH 
 
 H.lil, 111*.,, tlmr til,. ".■iiHtoii, '• |,|..,„|,„i „,^ 
 
 nut till' "1 llstdlll " llifnlit l.V CI I', (ill. Kill...,,. , 
 
 of till- l>ivi>ii,.M{'.,iutH,\,t.l;.S.(». ,1,. M ,(|,|/ 
 
 j nfcr.i to f.(,i;i.. Irpil niHtoiii l.y wlilili ti„ , .t,t 
 
 «ir titio to pic|Kity iHiu.|iiiii,l, oroii uli.L ,'l 
 [ ilepciiil.i. "" 
 
 l.'Uli V. Il.iiull, ^ K„st lot, followi'.l : 
 
 Hflil. tli.r.foic, tlmt IIh' lutioii wax niti, ,1 
 
 t !.• (■oiiii.,tiii,r of 111,. Iiivicioii Coiiit, aii,l -Imt 
 
 tlif i.o.«t..< s|„, 1,1,1 f,,ii,,„. til,. ,.v,.,it ii, a<,.,.,,i.i„,i,„ 
 
 with Itul.s 1170, I17.J, Tnlhuix. I'„.,i, r, |. 
 
 Not to Asalgn or Sub-let. ]-.9e« /,">•..».. v 
 /.'_///',..'•, •.•:.• .\. 1;. \.\-2,Hiih :m; lh,l,!,.', , 
 
 II ,(«-.,,, -jl'o. r. \s\'2, .wtf. :m. 
 
 SCI. Jl:,lll!,,,t V 
 
 V. C'OVK.NA.NT.S. i 
 
 c v,.„a„ ,,1 to ,is,. fjon tl,o ,1. nn«, ,1 prr,,,,., s 
 nil tlic straw aii.l ,lmiK wl.ich fliouM he imulc 
 tli|.r<.i;|i, II ;^ 
 
 HfM, tliat 111,. Ic.s.M.r wiisnititlcl to movfi- 
 r.ir iiiji.uiR. i..niov,<l fn ni tlie i.r,i„iH,.a whiil, 
 was tlicre ,it tlie txiiiiy of tlio tiini, l,iit not for 
 •nanuri. ,,ia,le lluriafter, wliile the k.^s^.f wa.'i 
 overholdiii^. 
 
 JJw,//. y. PollUt, (i jr. & VV. .-.L'O, follnwc.l. 
 
 Jn a for,,,,.,. ,„.ti„„ „f c.jei.t„,ent lii„i,.-l,t l.y 
 the ,,la„i„ 1 ,.,^-,,i,,st the ,U.f.n,la,its, m^mv ml 
 Jits WOK. i.Iai„i(,l, 1 ut „o i-vi,!,„ct. was giv, n i„ 
 rojianl to thi,,, :— '^ 
 
 Hehl, that tlio plaintifrw.is not I'stoiipwl f,.oin ' 
 r«.coveriii- in this „,.,!,,„ ot.,.„[,ati,iii nut forth,- 
 
 . Husbandry— 7V//,. tn LaiH/-Cii.<fom-}'.'. ,„l. ' 
 r,'^- ,";'■'" <'"'"■"■ --In an action h,oi>!-iit in 
 tlie High C oiiit l,y a hin,l!,u'.l .ngainst a tenant 
 for ,!ani.,g,s for h,o..„.li of the hitter'.^ c-ovumnts 
 inafarni lease t);- .statement of elai.n all,g,.,l 
 that the plaintid l,y ,lee,l let to the .lefen.lant 
 the ln,.,I ,.,..se,-,l,e,i. fora te,m of years, nn.l that 
 tl.ii fleiiiulant therely eovenanteil asset forth 
 wi- -'aignedas hreaehe.s of the covenants that 
 Kow .'.Knt ,11,1 not cultivate th,. farm in at 
 
 giod, i, 
 ■tauji'.f 1 
 
 ■<e,,iL'd urojer niaiiiie,-. l!y tin 
 
 furt'.i 
 
 i.iknic :ho ilefemlaiit ,k,iieil all 
 ^ .8 "f t'le stateintnt of claim, ami 
 )• i.ici,' i tt.v.t the ilefen.'r ,, had ns(.,l the 
 preiii-0.1. ,.: te.,.ant-like an,' ...-oper ma.iner, 
 according t,;. :he cnMoni of the ,„nnl|-y wheie 
 the same was situate." The j.lai.itiir r, covered 
 a verdict of .SIC,.. ,i,e acticn heing t.ie,l with a 
 JU y. ihe title to the hind was not hiou-ht 
 lut.. question at the tiiai, l,nt it was contemUd 
 mat. It cr-nre m <in[f.tirn en tlie i.l.a, lings ■-- 
 
 Held not so; f,r the defendant was. on the 
 face of the record, estopijcd fn m pleading >,on \ 
 
 Not to Romovo Gravel ] 
 
 ;.«-,». 'ji's. c. i{. 7.t..', ,w ,v,)ii. 
 
 j 
 
 Qulot Enjoyment- I-ms, ,u, ht- li,il, „.h,'<i \ 
 Ihephnntillan.l .lef.mlant occnpi,.,! a,]:,,!,;,,,,, 
 shop.M nil,. ,. l,.ases fi'om tli- same lamlh,,,!, tho 
 Plamlill having the p.-ior h.as... 'J|„, |,l,,i„,,,r 
 hvvu-M this action to retrain the ,l.i, liilar.t 
 fr..m „l,^tluctillg his light and vi, w, ,„i.| ik 
 defeiulanl :;ervc,l a thinl party no,i,.e i>,„,n tlm 
 Hindi, ,1,1, claiming, uii.Ur a co\enaiit for M\t\, 
 tlijoynieiit, to he l,l-otcete,l agaiiLst the p!nii,t.fl-« 
 
 . Ilcl.I that the defen.lant could not call inmn 
 Ills laii,ll„i,l to.lefciMl him(igaiiistaiiuiit,.iii„i(,l 
 eliiini : hut if the i.hiintiirs claim w;,> «,.1| 
 toumk, , ,t was hy ,.ca.„n of an ea-.nant 
 evpi'i^ssly ..r implicHy grant,.,! hy his 1,:,. , , ,.,i!,| 
 tlie .lef,ii,l,..nt t.iok sid.ject t,. siU'li ea.-, im.|,t 
 niMl <oul,i not claim thi.t the lamllor.l c.v,.' 
 naiited ^^,th him for <|ni,.t enjoyment ,1 that 
 wliicji ,h,l not jiMss niuicr his lea.se ; and, tlitie- 
 fere, whether the iilaii.titfs claim was well (.r 
 111 loumhil, the himlh.nl was 11, ,t a prop, r i.:,rly 
 i t,' ho t.alk.,1 on for in,l,niiiitv uii,l,.r Kiik-;i3 
 Ihnnias V. (hr,,,; •_>() (). 1;. •{). -l-i:,, loll,.«t,i. 
 ■'ioijifiDf V. JUilhj, 14 r. I!. Ull). 
 
 Restrlctinsr Use of Prpmiseg^-.l»,rio» .S"fo 
 —liij-,i„:liu„.\^-\\y a ka»c muI-t seal the ddwi 
 dunt rent,.,l Ir, m tlie phiim'tV .vrtain pr.ni:.- ,•: 
 for three months, 'i;.,, !,,„ „ , . .uiine,! a coy,.. 
 runt that the Icssl... was i.ot to use the pruiiitcs 
 for any purpose hnt that of n j-rivate ilw,.ll,i.i! 
 anil "gents fiunishiiig store : '■- 
 
 Hehj, that the ca, lying 0,1 l.y the k.>se,. of 
 auction salcH of his stock, on tlieprcmi>i s, was 
 ii l.rcadi if the covcuiut rcstraiimhlc l.y iiijiiuc- 
 tioii. C'li-kburn v. (JiiUni, 'JO t,i. R. 5|ii, 
 
 To Fay Rent.l~.>-Vr. 
 -'0 .\. I!. •.'7'.', ;,o,- (iO;!. 
 
 .Vl/r/„lt V. McCfinliy, 
 
 To Pay Taxes— /,'/;//,7 , /• lUilUVnui .,nr l.mie 
 
 —J)i/,,>.^t HI 1. anil.]-. A lesstc coveiiaiitcd, pur- 
 
 hiiaiit to the .^hort i-'ornis of 1 eases Act. to j.ay 
 
 nil taxes " to be charged u|)oii the siiid dmiiscJ 
 
 prtmists or upon the said lesser in acciint 
 
 thei-eof." 'J he pumises coiisistt.l of a hiiiltliiig 
 
 with a lane to the re:i!.. dfBcrihii! i.s Iring 
 
 "north of the primi.sts herchy dmiisdl," over 
 
 which the kaH' pi(.vid,d that the li.«He niitlit 
 
 at ai.y time erect a building or extiiision, fro- 
 ..... .™, 
 
 »— .-...■. U .^ . t LiLv t,gj 
 
 
 ICVf 
 
n'i; 
 
 597 
 
 iiil eon III iiiily l,o riM.l (,(,» 
 
 I RXIX'lltillll of th« \vi*r 
 !«■, 7 I'. H. IN, C.lhlllMMtH 
 
 10 "ciiHtdin " |ilw(,|,.,i w;iH 
 i^niit Iiv fic. (Ill, iMiili.^,,. I 
 
 'Art.u.s.o.vh.M ,,i;„,; 
 
 ■UHlotii l.y wliirli til. , ^|,t 
 Ih iiiiiniiid, or nil m).,, i" ^ 
 
 M'drhtK V. Mrfiivhy. 
 
 vi,l..,ltlu.»amo «,i,, „l„,jH ninofr.t al,,,^ 
 ^[roiiijil, uiiil III ' iiMin, 
 
 thv 
 
 th 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 
 And -niihir, ,.v,.ii if it „fri) 
 a^^mal.li., this woijl.l net excuse ,|,o (Ufnulants 
 rmn ivpayin, ,1,.. K ,„., „,,„,t ,,^^ , „ , l' j' 
 Ux.s^ ... rc.,H., to It. ^ •. O'/ve^/lVliU o! 
 
 To Renew. I -,SV, Sn,,-A v. 6V;/ o/ sv / / 
 l> II- ,. ; 'T' ■ • '' '^'"'"'/kiii /''ir/ir 
 
 to H..,.U O 1,1. ,,.|i0V,.,l llOM, tho f,„f. itiiiv • I.Mt 
 
 " -»lu.,o llu, anion «a. ui«./l. :,,V 
 
 ■"r. Ol .U.'tllal IIIISNl'^HIDM : — 
 
 'v-fnt,;y,„a,ic.l,yalaM,l|o,r "'"' "- '■i.Ua 
 
 7*.v/ DO.'t, 
 To .-epalr.J-.SVe Jh„ v. ,/„;,,;, 
 
 V. i»/,.\-„ft, 1'4 U. K. 0.-.;!, ^,o,v (;o'l 
 
 \'l. lJ'.'^I'l-nS()LANI)f.,„;l,'sTlT|.|.;. 
 
 VII. Kviciio.v. 
 Mortgage --.(;./;,„.,,•„, „„„, . ,. 
 
 .-t .he ,i.,.„.i;,;y,:i;:;a:;; ;',:.m^, 
 
 llKliiCfd to(,'i';uit thf I, 
 Nt'lltatioiiH made 
 that hu Won 
 i.s< 
 
 cut of 
 
 ISO liy iTa«oii« c)i lorc. 
 
 . '>• II"- idaiiitiU to thi, .lluct 
 
 -- U k i"".'Y T "'•""" ""1""V^' ai„l heaiilifv the .lem- 
 
 I'll'.' oiigi.i both of the action for ^iHvilie oer 
 
 , fonnaneo and of the aetion for ix.lief Lai 't . • 
 
 i;-"t.y h,r,,o,,,,ayM,entof.-ent^ 1^' ,i^ 
 
 i Hide imisdietion of tl,e Court ; the en,'.,.: 
 
 {'.■■■Mrnianee in the one and thJ .VantI i^^' 
 
 ..V,J 1 • ""' "' '■"^■'' l';*-' ''""'■t has le-ar.l to 
 
 ■^"- ' 'J eondnet of the ,Mrtv «eekin,. toeoin^ .eh 
 cr ornianeo or to ohtain ..ueh i^lief. /;'.;.' 
 
 'iKlll- 
 
 VIII. FaiiFKniuK ok Leask. 
 Election to Porfelf /',/..„.<• .. 
 
 Held t|,.„ ,,,' -^ '"'"'^ '""'costs :— 
 eleciol;. r , "pJlir^^:,"' ,""-•,-•''"" was an 
 the lease whieh co 1) ."^ '""""'■'' '" ""'f'if 
 
 mu,st hav ' ei^f . ' " *''° f°''*"itu.-e there 
 
 Non-paymen t Of Rent. --Oy./;o„/o />«,•./,„.«■ 1 
 
 ,in^tl,;:;';:St;;;::o;th.a^trn"'''"-''^- 
 
 (dihivion of 'f "';' ''^''"' ''^'-^ I'Xl'iivd by 
 
 >'OM.\ion or time, even t huinrli fi... i . •' 
 
 ;m...»v„i. c„,„,j, ,, .i/,/,;:;,,-i.;^i^-,{: 
 
 n the words " ^'o^ 
 
 hive ll^r .7- ^' «"■'••" '" ""^ words "^'o, 
 
 he' bnt'd, T", '""•'■'^ P^'tieidarlv specdfyinL 
 ,cent" ""'* ''"""'"8 c">"P«'«"tioi, i.^i'^ 
 
^599 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 11 
 
 H. 
 
 ijW^'^W-f''"' 0/ ejectment was cominenccil 
 fo. tl.o forfeiture of the loa.o the l:uiai„r,l ili,- 
 
 i;'Zg.l!;e":"- '•'^'^'''^■'^J'--'* -'l>-4ueatlyac- 
 Hekl, that siieli course <lid „ot pnr .„, «et uo 
 t ha or.uer tenanoy which ende.lou the electio u 
 1 ,f '"■""f'-.st.Hl hy the issue of the «rit, 
 
 mt m.glit be cvhlcncc for the jury of a new 
 tcMancyon the same terms from year to yea ! 
 .il<:JI It/ten v. Innmit/o, •.>4 (). 11. gLM. 
 
 feBahlmnv. U'air.er, 22 0. R. (il2, anf,' 5<Xi; 
 -yi)f/i V. Ontario I'nuvr ami Flat 6'-. "4 () U 
 
 — ■♦, _^ A. |\. 44^ (intc 4,io. 
 
 IX. Imi'kovemknts. 
 
 ,y,^f°y'.'^^:^^^'^^-AMtrc,t{on and Awanl.]^ 
 < c e, k'T'h' l^-^c'.l certain Crown Lan,ls to the 
 th : ', ? ''"' ^°"t^"»"'o' a covenant Ijy 
 the defendaut not to remove gravel or sand 
 
 Z^r^XTT- '^'''"^ '''"■^•"''^■" '^ft-'«-ard 
 
 I e, artmcnt for a patent to himself, and also 
 sold gravel oil the premises. The ,)lainti(Fs 
 
 Vow, ' ''7"'-"r'»t. /'"'l the (Jon'missioner 
 ssue to tlien. on payment to the defendant for 
 h s ■n.provenicats. The deteudant refused to 
 n icc to any terms of comi)ensation. 'J'he 
 pkmt, is .served hinr with a .lotiee of arhitrt 
 tion, and an award was made, which was not 
 share of' h"' "'o -lefendant refused to pay Ms 
 ? ; , 1 t'^,^ ■•";''!' -''tors tees. Tliis action was 
 then brought clannmg arrears of rent, payment 
 for use and occupation, damages for lleL If 
 
 ;:r^^^,;';'i''" ■-""-«■■'-•- -'l-^^>i-T of 
 AtIoc','}' f '■"!"'- the decision of the Court of 
 
 tliT l 'i • ",■"■'"' *''^'y""*'' •^- 'lissenting. 
 t at the phuntils were not in a positimi to bri.rg 
 the act.on untd the defendant ha<l bee,i paid 
 b.r^Ms^improvements. BoHlton v. ,S7/ea, L'2 S. 
 
 -no"' '^'"-''^ ''• '^''11 "f ^'- John, 18 8. C T^ 
 /OL', po..t (i02 : Adam.^.,n v. Ro^m-J 2'> A 11 4|r; 
 
 a^49S; A,.A,v.rn. ...„,:/, O.Rnii'1^: 
 
 session, and in isno an action was brought ov 
 persons claiming through the lessee to Cjl 
 ossession and for an account of mesne p / 
 On the trial a counterpart of the le:v,«c f„ , i 
 'tmnng the papers of the devisee of the 1 ' 
 was received m evidence, u,,on whieli wav ,' 
 ndorsement dated m l,S,-,2, and signed h ■ ,s„ | 
 .Icvisce by which a new l,fo wa^ iiHert, J i 
 P ace of one of the original lives and ■ 'e 'I 
 the renevval hue was aeknovWe.lgcd :_ ' ' 
 Jlehl athrmmg the decision .,f the Supi .„„. 
 Court of Nova Scotia, that the wor.ls •• |! „ 
 able forever ,n the habeiuluni, taken i , ,^ 
 junction with the lessee's covenant to , a . ' 
 ,for inserting a new life in place of auv / 
 j shouhl tall, conferred a right to reuewi n, 
 ^etuty,notwitl.standingUierew,:;:n;: ■!,;;;■ 
 
 by the lessor so toreiiew ; that the indorse,,, 
 ; was an operative instrument, though to„, " 
 ; possession of the owner of the reve.sio 
 all events It was an admission by their „v,| 
 eessor in title binding on the defeiulants a : 
 titled the pi nntiUs to a renewal for a „e v If, 
 ■"serte.l, but the right to further renev a v 
 gone e.vaet eompliauee with the re,p,i,.e,n,.m 
 f the lease m the payment of the l„es l,,i" , 
 essential, au.l tlie evidence having .he«„ ^ 
 the onginal lessee was ,lead, .and the ,„■, 
 assumption being tliat his bi-other, the' 
 life, « ho was a m irried man in ISQo, was jJ 
 ■load.n 1SS4, even if the lease itsel h 1 
 prov.ded that .leath would !)e presume 1 
 (letault of pi-oof to the contrary : - 
 
 Held, iierO Wynne, ,1., dissenting, that the 
 tenn g,-anted was for the joint lives of tl„. tl.re 
 persons named, and ceased upon the falli„„„ 
 : any one l,fe without renewal as provided a.u 
 he hues not having been paid o,! tl,.. death 
 the lessee and his brother, there was a forfei- 
 tuiv which entitled the dcfe.idants U cuter 
 
 1 lie person m possession pleaded that lie'w^s 
 a purchaser for value without lu.tice. and euti- 
 tIed_to the l,..uelit of the Registry Act I! S N 
 ^•, otli sei-., ch. S4 :— • • ■ -i. 
 
 riehl, that the memorandum indors.Ml on tlio 
 lease was not a deed within see. IS of the Act 
 ..or -.1 lease within see. 25 ; that if a speeula'tive 
 purchaser having p,.st such an estate as hi,, 
 conveyance gave Iiini, the person in posses.sion 
 Houl, not be withm the pr(,teetion of the Act; 
 and that there was suliieient evidence of notice. 
 P '^:"'v"' i'''''^.«"^'- -^ "'■ t'>e Nova .Scotia .Act, 
 K. '^^ ^>. .S., uth ser., ch. ,St, applies only to 
 ieases_tor years. LTairh v. I'eniHt,:, 21 S C. 
 
 IV, OQ'O, 
 
 X. Le.vsi- Foi! Lives. 
 
 Renewal --I<:c!,kna-.-~-roHntcnmrt of L,ase- 
 
 R n' ■" 7-^^'"'r '"" '■'' '■ '/"''- l'>-rJ„ptloT\- 
 J^y indenture made in 180.) F. demise, ce.tain 
 pomises toC. to hold for the lives of tie lessee 
 Ins brother, and his wife, "and renewable fori 
 e\er. j |,e k'^.s^, covenanted that on the fall 
 of any of said lives he would, within twe le 
 months insert a new life and pay a re anv\l 
 
 lair;,': "'n r'^ '•'-'•' •'^'■^"-^•^''fLi-H^ 
 
 fallen sh.mld be forleited ; and if any ouestion 
 
 SSedb;;!"'^"''^'''^'''^'''"'-'^-''-^^^^^ 
 
 on whosl ll.e premises to prove the person 
 to b 1 ■ '•' "''-'t'-'';"' "•'•'« '»ade terininable 
 
 ,111 e, ur ill deiauh Miuli person wouhl b,. 
 presun,e,ltobedea,l. In 1884 il purelia eT f ion, 
 the assignees of the reversion entered into po"! 
 
 I -KI. Li.uuMTv Kill; Negliuksck. 
 
 Asreement to nex>2iiv~Xotk,'-l>rim,„i,, j_ 
 An exp,vss coutiMct between a l.uidlord .and his 
 tenant tha the former is to repair the d, ,„ised 
 pn.-mises does not render him lialil.. f„r au 
 ...jury to tlie tenant arising from want ..f ivnair, 
 iilthongh the tenant has notilie,! hi,,, of the 
 ilis-repair. 
 
 In such a case the ten.aiit should himself lepair, 
 at the e.xpense of the landlord. /,',■.,»•„ v. Tm- 
 I'l'iql J Ofonto General //oy,it,d,'2:iO. H 3!)9. 
 
 Covenant to Repair -Non-rcpnlr Ihmng 
 I^eas, and .S„',su,nuU Tearhj Tenanq,.]- 
 *> Mere a lessee continues iu pcssession as a 
 
600 
 an action was bi-oii.-bi i,v 
 
 >llgll thu les.SfO to IVruuT 
 
 1 aocriiint of mesne \ni,i\u 
 
 ^n.art of tl>. lo:isv, f,„„„i 
 tliu (lovisue of tlie l,-,s„r 
 
 OMco, upon whicli wa^ i', 
 l'S.')2, ami si;,'iK.(t l,v sw I, 
 n.nv hfj was iusurto.i j,, 
 
 ignial lives ami rivi'ipt .,( 
 
 lL'l<MO\,-k'(lgO(l :_ 
 
 ! ilucisioii of (lio Suiii,.,,,,. 
 ; tliit till; wonls "ruiinv. 
 liabemluni, taken in f,,,, 
 L'e's covenant to pay a li„, 
 life in place of anv that 
 a nglit to renewal in pui-. 
 mgtlioiv was no eovcnuui. 
 cw ; tliat tli(; iniloi'scnic^t 
 nunent, tliouj,'li f,,,,,!,! n, 
 .'!■ <if the revei'.sioii. or it 
 iliaisiiini hy their |i,v,|j,. 
 
 on tluMlefendants, amlrri. 
 I renewal for a new liii. s,, 
 ; to further removal wa. 
 c with the recjiiireni.^nts 
 nient of the line-; hcj,,,. 
 Icnce liaving shewn that 
 .s (lead, and the pi-„pLT 
 t his hrotluT, the thinl 
 1 man in IsOo. was also 
 the lease itself had ndt 
 would bo presnnieil in 
 contrary : — 
 J., (lisaentinji, 'liat the 
 le joint lives of tli.. three 
 ised upon the falling ,jf 
 ^ncwal as provided ; ami 
 3n paid on th^' dciith of 
 ther, there was a forfui- 
 defemlants to enter, 
 ion pleaded that la- nus 
 ■ithont notice, and enti- 
 i Uegistry Act, li. .S. .\. 
 
 •antlum inilorsed nn the 
 thin sec. IS of the .Act, 
 ; that if a siieeulative 
 such an estate as hi,« 
 he person in possession 
 
 protection of the Act; 
 lent evidence oS iioticu. 
 f the Xova .Scotia .Vet, 
 2h. 8t, applies only to 
 
 V. Penicl/t:, 'Jl S, C. 
 
 11; KiiOLiiiKNci:. 
 
 '~yo/la'"- l)'i iii'i'i' .,-. J- 
 ■eeii a l.indlord and his 
 to repair the diinised 
 SI' him liable tor an 
 igfr'oni want of re|iair, 
 i notilied him of the 
 
 i should himself re|)air, 
 lord. /Irmrii v. '/Vim- 
 •■<i'i/(t/, T.i O. K ")!)a 
 
 — Non-repair Dimmj 
 
 Yearly Trimnqi.]— 
 
 la iu possession as a 
 
 601 
 
 jcinl.V tenant after the expiry of a leasn 
 liuning a covenant by him to re, l ","'' 
 
 oWigation will be implied a It 'k'.- if ""i'"' 
 Ignorant of a .lefect ari. i, f, ,':, '""""'■'!. .'' 
 .luring the currency of the h>as ' '"""''"!""' 
 
 .iigannngthesnbs^pient^eSytmriRbU 
 to .1 straiiL'er for an inin,.,. ""■>•'■; ""t Hahie 
 
 ..■gleet. l4penhg'"|u "\;;:r'',''>' ^"^''' 
 
 1-or ti keep tl . ,'ei ,erb."'"*"' "■'^'' "'« I 
 .lau.'hter, livil,. wit'imJ'V/''-'^;'"' '''''' '"'^ ' 
 -™l^'"t, was injure I,. '",,'!, V';V''''''^ "^ \h. ; 
 .•attached to the buildin.A " "^ '' ^^-'andah 
 
 a.S:!Vi;LSs tt*"" ^l r "«"* °f^ 
 
 .gainst the lesso, r 3':^ "V'''''"^;''*^"'; 
 a.sstaiidinjrin the m.s tim f ''" '='>"s*i'lered ! 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 602 
 I of the Overholdine Tenants' A,.f 
 
 '''^£^5'1t1s^l^'^'F1''■-'''•^ 
 
 'notion c.;„ be ,„• . ""^ ^^^ ^'^ «hich the 
 
 --i-paiityil. whi.;rth^'';:;;,;;^-";:^^^ -ty 
 
 ■i.ii".iges tor injuries snstaine 1 1 J '''T''''''^ 
 "» .n. which h!ul formed o I, ^ -V '''P'""« 
 irator broneht bv tl . l ■ s"lcwalk by 
 
 /^"•-IJ-nt'i^nltng^'Li;":,,™:;/'--^ 
 ti"» over the sidewill- „, i f .-'"""ed to 
 
 ""»->oof eo„vV:/r\:"^e'''^ 
 o«nor of the bnildi u,",,,,! Ih. I *'"'"'",■' *''" 
 were, at the instance of t ^■"•'""* ""-''■'-■"f' 
 
 party defendansundJr s:c"'!;;r''7"^ """'- 
 soli,lated Municipal Act Tl, ' "*■ "'-'^ * ""- ' 
 'litina at the time of the' ., ^ '•''"-;"' '*» con- 
 th-ater upon ti:e1i,S,: '£;;'• !«;^'a^"ig, 
 the conniieneenient of th,. i/ existed from 
 
 '"' ""■ ■""nic'ilNality re ,..;';'■■'• ^^ ''y-'^"^' 
 'i'^' l^iiiMiuir, or, if un ecm . H "'''"''^"'^ "'' 
 remove ice front the .0.^'. "f ""■»<-''■- *<> 
 
 -S,i;':l:J^-^:-;--'-;;;-enantwas 
 
 -'-red. or,au..ai;'7ri!;::^roT 
 
 ^yi. i'l.E.unsu. 
 •512, ,(/,/,, 2IJ. ^'-'"^ V. I),,,,, lU'. K. 
 
 XVII. Rk-k.ntrv. 
 i *-« Corc»/i7/ V. J/eAcf,,, 00,) p , , ,„ 
 
 XII. :\|,.;sx,,: PlioITIs. 
 
 Res Judicata— /v. //n,/. ) ./• 1 „ 
 
 V. t^inon, 20 0. R. i;in;;t«""-^~*''^'''"' 
 
 XIII. .VoTICK TO QriT. 
 
 XVIII. R,cxKw.vL ot. Lkask. 
 
 : A lease for a e,,;,,';;:; •'""'•'"' ^ :^':/'■'■""""•e.]- 
 tllo te,-ni expi 'a, y ,u' di '"" ''''''' *'''^' ^^''^n 
 orected by he le L " i"'' ""P'''>^-^''"cnts 
 
 I"y tor the .same or t,, » • '"-"f ""'' ^''"'ei- to 
 ""■tlier term ik "".""»"■■ t'lo lease for a 
 
 -|.inHl the ,: ee'liemahf';"- ^^f'^' ^'^ term 
 •V-'arvs, when anewi, .1 ;?''"" l"'-'*«-«»i"" «ome 
 ■•c-cite,l the provisi s , '" ^'.^''""tod which 
 
 i»ftera -lech rat o.^tll'"''*'""^' ^'''''' "'"1 
 to continue an extend '^■««'"'« ''■'"l agreed 
 
 term of fourte ye, r ,■, .'^r'""-' ^''.'^ ''""har 
 granted thereby ilt ' ' f'"' ?' "'^' ''-''■"' 
 
 l'i<o covenants cou "i, ,"" '■"'," '""' •""'<-'•■ the 
 "•^"•c'expressedandc, t ' ,'!"' /'■'''•■^•'^'"c'lts a.s 
 , i-!enture of ra ^";['' "' ''-f i'l .fcited 
 
 I ■•vgree.l to accept the sue i ""' J''''"''' '""' 
 
 I the further te[, , 'nti^'^; P-'-^-lcd to grant 
 ture cmtaiued nn l.:"'\ '"^'"tioned inden- 
 
 
 XIV. OrccpATioN Rkn-t. 
 
 ture etmtaiued no in,I,.,7,„"i "'I'"'"""-'" "'''^■''- 
 
 irenewal. -After he '*""■ ^"^'•-^•■'"'t for 
 
 lessees continued b, o: ■'"'' "^f^ived, the 
 
 f;''-onoyear,whL'"h:nS;i';h l'"''''"^ 
 ; their intention to abando, . '''<•' >ssora of 
 
 [lessors refused to cc , / . ' l"'*-'""«««- The 
 
 after denuunl of i/ , " ''^' ""'■'''■■"'ler, and, 
 
 I execution of an imlentuie ' ''7' ^""''•''' ^'"' 
 
 |'^w':'28'S:ri;!:r,^Sr\n*"^^'^^ 
 -t'e^titiii ,^?i^' f t^^^^ic'.;:^ 
 
 Nu.ce :_ '° ■" ^''^'-'^^'' f'"- specific perfonn- 
 
 ^'V. ()vj:iuioi,Di.\(i Tkx.\nts. 
 
 ^Sl",'onJrtr '^'"'*'»« "^ °°-"ty 
 
 °"""-J -An applieation umler sec. 
 
603 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT. 
 
 m\i- 
 
 the liko covenanl.s, uonditioiis, ;iuil iigrefinoiits 
 as wet-o contained in the oriirinul loiisr, <liil not 
 oiHTiito to incor|ioi-ati; in said intii'Mturc the 
 ehuise for i-enowal in said lease, wliieh siiould 
 have Ijeeii e.\|)i-e.ssed in an in(le[iendent eove- 
 nant. 
 
 I'er(!\vyinie, d. -AsMiniin},' that tlie renewal 
 chaise was incorporated in thesiieond indenture, 
 the lessees eonld nut l)e eompelled to ueeepl 
 a renewal at the option of the lessors, there 
 beinj; no nintnal agreement tlierefor ; if tliey 
 conld, the clause wonhl operate to make the 
 lease periKdual at tiic will of the lessors. 
 
 l^er (iwynne and Pattenioii, .lJ._Tlic option 
 of the less.irs eould oniy be exercised in ease 
 there were luiildinj^s to he valued erected dur- 
 ing the term /.'ranted by the instrnni(-nt con- 
 taining such clause ; and if the second indenture 
 was subject to I'enewal, the clause had no eli'eot, 
 ns tliere were no buildings erected during tiie 
 second term. 
 
 I'er (iwynne, J.— The renewal clause was 
 inoperative under the .Statute of Frauds, wliicli 
 makes leases for three years and upwards, not 
 ni writing, to have the efl'ect of estates at will 
 only, and conse(iuently there conld lie no second 
 term ot fourteen years gi-anted excei.t by a 
 second lease executed and signed by the lessons. 
 ]'er Ritchie, C.J., and 'Jaschereau, J.— The 
 oecn|) 'tion by the lessees, after the terms ox- 
 pii-ed, must be lield to have been under the 
 lease, and to signify an intention on the jiart of 
 the lessees to aci'ept a renewal for a further 
 term as the lease provided. iS'tiicv v. Cilu „f 
 St. John, ISS. C. H. 70-_'. ' 
 
 Covenant— /V))(v;' „f Executor of Lcy^nr 
 
 Ih rohiitoi, „f E.^iai,:, A<■l.^^ -Uiuler the Devolu- 
 tion ot Kstates Act the executor of a deceased 
 lessor can make a valid renewal of a lease pur- 
 suant to the covenant of (lie testator to renew 
 lit Cami/iaii Panjk 1!. W. Go. and Nalionul 
 Club, 24 O. K. 2()r). 
 
 604 
 
 Uhere a lease of property situate in tli- 
 1 rovniee of (>luebec, and entered into tiure, eoi,.' 
 tamed a i)rovision making the same void, at the 
 option of the lessor, on the insolvency of the 
 lessee, and by the law of that Province i( ivil 
 Code, Art. 1(I!)J) on such insolvency the rc'jt 
 not yet exigil)le, by tlie terms of the Irase, hf 
 comes so, a claim for the whole rent, taxes, He 
 to th:j end of the term was, on the insolvti'icv ,',i 
 the lessee eoin|)any, allowed to the hjssors in 
 luiuidation proceedings under the Dominion Act 
 III re J/ufte (iiiil Ontario Krj,i-t.s.i ui.d Tmi - 
 ifoiiatioii Co., l.'2(). It. .^lO. 
 
 Apportionment— /'/v'oc tiwl .■<iiliscriiii-,i' Mort 
 'jri'iti Bnrthii.l — Wheru demised [iropniv i.i 
 sold Ity a piior UKu'tgagee under ])ower of sal,. 
 and tlie lease is thereby determined, hetwron' 
 two gale days, the rent is apportioiiuble, uihI 
 the tenant is lialile to pay rent up to the day of 
 such detei'iiiination. 
 
 The defendant was tenant of certain laud, su!i. 
 ject to two prioi' niortg.-iges created by his l.in.l. 
 lord. The plaintilf w.is a subseiiuent'mort.'a'.- 
 who had given notice of his mortgage, and !'' ■ 
 rajnired the defendant to pay the rent to ha.V 
 Afterwards the bud was sold by the prior nierr- 
 gagees to a person who on the same d.-^y ie-s.,Iii 
 t to the defendant. The purchaser froiii t!ii> 
 mortgagees claimed to be entitled to t]v 
 rent; — 
 
 Held, that as to the rent which had .leciiiei! 
 up to the date of thes.ale, the right of the phdii- 
 till as mortgagee of the reversion was not allrctci 
 by the sale: that tli3 rent was apportioiiahic ■ 
 and that the plaintilf was entitled to recover 
 Kin/iedv V. Asjh/c/i, 1!» A. It. -IGS. 
 
 Attachment of. as Debt—Xolii-f In Ten- 
 ax/v t„ J'ay Mor/,j,(:/'.'.]-:SW I'„>-h,- v. J/,.. 
 Jlwnin, 10 I'. K. u5,j, 17 P. H. S-t, a„lf. (iU 
 
 Seo Jaw^ V. 0' Knfe, 20 (). R. 4S!), ante fiflt) ; 
 Chncli V. IWurlte, 24 S. ('. R. 885, 071/, .V.)'.) ; 
 lit llVi^Wi'.s Trmt-s, 21 (). K. 528, po>'l, Skttlki) 
 Estates, 
 
 XIX. Rl.NT. 
 
 Acceleration — A'.i-< (•»/;»(( — /^(Vjv.v.s -— ,S'(vv>c- 
 o»(V nf lin-tr.-<inu.]—A condition in a lease that 
 m case any writ of execution shall be issued 
 against the goods of the lessee, the then current 
 years rent sliall immediately beccmie due and 
 payable, and the term forfei'te.l, is personal to 
 tlie original lessen- and lessee, and does not run 
 with llie land, and cannot be taken advantage 
 of by the grantee of part of the reversion. 
 
 Osier, .1. A., (liK.senting, was of opinion that 
 the acceleration clause Wiis a eoveiuint and not 
 a condition, ami fcu'ined i)art of the covenant to 
 pay rent, merely accelerating it in a certain 
 event, and so passed on the severance of the re- 
 version, enabUng the grantee of part to distrain. 
 Milchel/v. McCanliy, 20 A. R. 272. 
 
 Acceleration -Insofrfiin,— Wiiidimf-np Act 
 —Qiiibcc Afof.] — There is nothing in .sec. m 
 ot the Domnnon Wiiuling-up Act which alters 
 or interferes with tlie kx loci contractus in the 
 case of a claim. 
 
 Claim for Reduction— (??(eie(. Lair—Lea><. 
 
 <;/ Tilr.iniiili Lint.<—l)l-^turti<tiice of Uf'—Tn^- 
 j,as^~Tronlde d,- droit. \—(h-eat Xorlh- ll'ts/e-v 
 J i'l'-iiraph (o. v. Montreal IVtenraph Co., i'\ 
 •S. C. R. 170. "^ 
 
 Sec Elliott v. Elliott, 20 0. R. 134, rt«/e59.V 
 Cormtry v. Mcl.ixw, 22 (). 1!. 1, ,,»/,- doh ■ 6'.y- 
 cntri, v. McLean, 21 A. R. I70, ant, 5!)S ; Ihvl- 
 ■•<»n V. Maitland, 22 O. R. Kit), „///,' ,-,07 ; J/,-. 
 Mnllen v. Vanmillo, 24 0. R. 025, (,„/<' m- 
 JSroirn V. Lennox, 22 A. R. 442, dn/,' ,-,9;)- 
 /ionllon V. Shea, 22 S. C. R. 742, (,„;,■ 51)9. 
 
 XX. .Short Fokms Act. 
 
 See Thni^on v. Maithnid, 220. R. 106, '(«/. ,"97; 
 naldirin v. Wan-.'T, 22 O. R. 012, mil,: :m: 
 Ari/lci v. McMalli, 20 O. R. 224, 2;l A. It. 44, 
 ant, 455 ; Janes v. O'Ktcfe, 20 O. r'. i!i9',anl(-m. 
 
 XXI. Scii-LEASE. 
 
 See. Gilmour v. Mtioce, 18 .S. C. P. ."!», nnlf 
 594; Baldwin v. Wanzer, 22 0. R. 012, aiiir.mS; 
 Seldon V. Buchannan, 24 0. R. 349, pod 00.5. 
 
604 
 
 pi'operty situate in tlio 
 ml cMtLTLMl into tlicrc. c:oii. 
 Uiiig the saiiio voi.l. ,it tlir; 
 
 111! tiie in^•(llvL■Ilcy m the- 
 \v (if tli:>t ProviiK'i.- (( ivil 
 sucli iiisiilveiicy llio rcit 
 le tonii.s of the k'asc, Ij,.' 
 ;he whole rent, taxes, ei,-, 
 I was, on tlie insolvLiKty of 
 alloH-eil to tlie lessors in 
 ■sunder the Domini. ,ii Att. 
 'fii-io Krjire-sfi cn.U Tmh- 
 510. 
 
 "i-ior iiw/ Si(//>i(rjni}i/ ,I/(,rt- 
 leru (lenii.seil iiroprrty u 
 agee nniler power oi siiLj, 
 elty determine. 1, lietwetii 
 M)t is apportiouable, aiul 
 pay rent up to the day of 
 
 enant of eertain land, siili. 
 iages ereated by Ids laii,]. 
 s a snbsecjUeiit mortga^'i!- 
 :)f his mortgage, anil f, ; 
 to pay the rent to Inw. 
 as sold ])y the prior niort- 
 on the same ch.y lo-suld 
 The purchaser iroiu tiio 
 to he entitled to tli- 
 
 : rent which ha.l .leeiiie.l 
 lie, tile right of tile plain, 
 revcn-siou was not aUccteil 
 rent was apportionalile ; 
 was entitle. 1 to recover 
 A. J!. 468. 
 
 Debt— Xotice tn Ten- 
 '■.\--S,-,> Park, I- \-. J/,.. 
 7 1'. H. S4, auK. UU. 
 
 axi.—Qtubec Lair—Ua". 
 ■■'Iiir/iance of Usi'—Trts- 
 ]—(j>-mt Xor/h- H'cu/er,/ 
 Ireal Ti:k'jraith Co., in 
 
 20 0. R. n\.milem; 
 
 ! O. 1!. ], OH^. 0118; Co'-- 
 R. 170, anti :m ; Dail 
 R. l(j(i, nil If ,"il)7; J/.-. 
 
 t O. J{. 02,"), (I lite. .WS; 
 
 A. R. 442, (tiitp. rm-, 
 '. R. 742, auk- :m. 
 
 FoHMs Act. 
 
 '/, 220. R. I(i6, "('/■MI; 
 2 (>. R. 012, aiih' :m\ 
 ). R. 224, 2,S A. I!. U, 
 
 'c', 20O.R. 4j)9, r(«fe,m 
 
 1). LEASE. 
 
 , 18 S. C. I!. ."!), anU 
 22 0. R. M-l,aiiif.m-i; 
 O. R. 349, yw.v( UO.). 
 
 805 
 
 XXri. SUUREN'DER OK LivASK. 
 
 LARCENY. 
 
 Acc8ptance-.4rAv A'.//-',; 0,,.1-A.>ts rebel 
 on a. shewing the accept voce by the lan.ll, r'lo 
 tiie surrender ot a lease an.l as aliectin' .r 
 rciider by operatmu of law must be such as ' o 
 n.t cmsistenc with the eontinuu.ce of le 
 
 W-pi..aiis..s.uc t>let, miking some trilliu.^ 
 r.p:vn-s, ami eleanmg the premises, are a . u° 
 
 o.^acu which are u..r, suih nent for this purp ,1" 
 
 o£'22A:t:"3;^^""""' '"-""-' ^-v: 
 
 c.i>e t:i the defendant, dated Jst April 1SS5 
 f..r ten years, at an annual rent of M-20 pav,l,k> 
 .|uar erly jn each year, contained a p n^^ ^ 
 envilmg the less h, to determine the'eao 
 gmng tliree months' notice in wntiii!' efo !■ 
 Ut January in any year. Tiie defendant tor 
 hi; own business only occupied part of ifn re 
 m,.cs, an snb.leas..! the romainder. I,, N ,V 
 em or 1S!)1, the pa.'t snb-leased by th ' l^ten ' 
 ,1m hnn,- tmoccnpied, the defen lant verl.d y 
 natiticl tlie lessor that unless the premise we,o 
 Npaired be wm.l.l have to surLii 'r 'Hm 
 o..artreate this as a valid notice uuder te 
 1 as3, and afer negotiations with tlie defenli t 
 .was agree I that tiie defendant shoil.V , x 
 
 e portion o the premises occnpie 1 1 y hVni 
 !>t^'4ayear, to take ettect on 1st ipi'il tollo.v 
 
 .S]S.;pjf---:iji-,:--^ 
 ia:;^iS^^-t---oii^^^ 
 
 XXIII. Tkxaxcv Ckkated nv ^roRT,^VoK. 
 prov , ed t at ■ ^ """-'S^'o'" '-f real estate 
 
 i^w^S, t ,.;:3 :vmniu:;:::r''^t 
 
 J«nea,i,li;:ie!nS;in1tr.ft'r'''T''f 
 
 , . '^'n"Si ne, tne mortafa"or Dnvin.r ^l, .,. , 
 'orin every vear diii.;,w ^i " ■' , ' l'''->'"n tliere- 
 
 ^"'i-ei^y^:^ ";"'i^;;,r;':'''™."^o,ieh 
 
 603 
 
 iTne mortgag,>r was in p:)3se3sion of n,rt of tl„. 
 0, uses an.Uiis tenants of the rein: def^a 
 Mich possession continued afln- tl,. , ,:^' 
 was executcl. Tlie .'„ Is , 1, ""^«"8' 
 
 hivbv,. I,. • 1 o "■''* "' the mortjijuroi 
 
 " ees^c Urn T'"'' •""'•^'-.-^'^^"tion, the m^' 
 
 u:T'::t:^unf'sr"'"'''^'^-'^'^'--'^-'i- 
 
 J.l" nlitcliTe cT^' 'IV^'T' '■^"'1 P'^tterson, 
 
 ^;^;uio,;'„ftidi;;::,Y;^:f-.,:^;^rr^s£ 
 
 or ;, . '^''" I'"J^"'«'"»^ "f S Anne eh 14 -lh 
 
 ■ ga.nst an execution cre.lit.ir of the movJl:,^. 
 
 -y their acceptance o;\l^i;:^:^;t.^:r'e 
 
 Rer O Wynne and Patterson TI Ti,„ 
 gagedecl, not having b;™' J- ''^'"-j;^ 
 -IJt^agees. faile.l to create eve.'atni;!:;; 
 
 del,u:e'^;;^r^s';;;;j'';i.i'T'T^'^^'''^^*'- 
 
 exeeutin.'H.P , . l 1 ■' ' "^' '"ortgagees 
 
 b-i!npf;Mno:::;'.;i';:r'""'« ■' ''- ^'-- -ui,i 
 
 anil cnnri.,,,,-,, • '""'•^''■n'- "> tile mortgaj'or 
 
 ^ ';=-;s;T"r'H;;£;i;'i~;! 
 
 ifil^iiiiii 
 
 ;pi 
 
 Th 
 
 LAKCENY. 
 "See CiiiMiNAL Law, IV. 
 
807 
 
 LIEN. 
 
 LEASE. 
 
 See Landloki) ami Tenant. 
 
 LEASE FOR LIVES. 
 
 See Landlord and Tkna.nt, X. 
 
 LEAVE TO APPEAL. 
 
 See Appeal, VI. — Supkkme Coukt ok 
 Canada, XIV. 
 
 LEGACY. 
 
 See Will, II. 
 
 l\ 
 
 LIBEL. 
 
 See CcsTS, IV.— Defamation. 
 
 5. Contract Price, CIO. 
 
 (i. Co^tx, (!10. 
 
 7. ExtroK, li! 1. 
 
 S. Licreaxed Value, 611. 
 
 !t. Mtiteriat Mtn.^n. 
 
 10. Mor/i/di/i'd Proper/ 1/, 611. 
 
 11. Ou-mrK, (112. 
 lL>. l'<tvlie.-<, (il.S. 
 l:l. I'liyment, (513. 
 
 14. I'riuritlex, (il5. 
 
 1 1 5. /'roce((li)ii/.i to Pialiu, (il5. 
 
 16. Jier/Utraluii), 01"). 
 
 17. Simitmry Proa dure, 616. 
 
 15. Time, 6],S. 
 
 10. Vendor and Pimha.<a; 61 S. 
 -0. H ar/e.y-, a»?i(';v(, 61s. 
 Vknuor'.s Likn, 618, 
 
 See Bank.s III.— Solicitok, IV 
 I. Ahtisan'.s Likn. 
 
 LICENSE. 
 
 Brick-maker.]- A b.ick-nmker wliu „i:ike,, 
 
 ! bncks for aiioflR.i. i.erson in a hrickviu,! l,e 
 
 w„„ c„ T ^ . i°\'?'''gt''t''iit person, .-indhns i>os^sts.<<ion,, I th,. 
 
 llZJ "'' I^'*^""«'^— *« Intoxicating I bnck.vur.l while ,nf.»Kf.l in nu.king the Imkl 
 
 "'*"°^- '« entitled to a liu, ii,,on them -at a-jiinst ap 
 
 ■Mf T execution creditor or ciiuttel nioitaaJee of tliP 
 
 MtiNiciPAL LiCENSES.-.9fe McNiciPAL CoR- owner. "'"ir^afec. ci tlie 
 
 roRATiON.s, XIV. Judgment of lioyd, C, S.TO. R. 1!)4. atlin.u.l 
 
 m,. T „ ■ -""''"''■* \'' Hank of Toronto, L'l A. R 6-"i 
 
 Timber LicEN,sEs.-5'w Crown Lands. j ^. i\. u-.. 
 
 To MANUFACTrRE. 
 VENTION. 
 
 -See Patent for In- 
 
 LICENSE COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 See Intoxicating Liquors, III. 
 
 LICENSE INSPECTOR. 
 
 See Intoxicatinc) Liquor.*, II., Ill 
 
 LIEN. 
 
 I. Artisan '.s Lien, (,0S. 
 IL Builder's Privilege, 608. 
 
 III. Mechanics' Liens. 
 
 1. Action, 600. 
 
 2. Amendment, 600. 
 
 3. Chtim of Lien, GOO. 
 
 4. Coiiatrucliou of Contract, 610. 
 
 II. Builder's Privilege. 
 
 Expert— Z)»//tx of— Pr<.c,\,-virhol — Vol,,,, 
 /(0>^]— It IS not neeessaiy for an expert, wlui. 
 appointed under Art. 2013, C. C. to .'^eciro „ 
 Duilders privilege on an iinniovable, to -iv. 
 notice of his proceedings to the i)ropriet..is 
 creilitors, such proce.dings not being rtmilatol 
 by Art.s. 322 (t .sfr/., C. C. P. 
 
 1 'J'^?^'^ ^^■"'^ evidence in tlii.s case to support 
 the iinding of fact of the Courts below, tlmt tin- 
 secon<l?,ror,'..r.W,«/orofiicialstateinent,ic,|uii<-.l 
 to Ijc made by the expert under Art. 2013 liad 
 been nuide within six months of the conii)lctinii 
 of the Iniildir's works. 
 
 3. It was sufficient for the exjiert to state in 
 j his .'-ccond procr^-rerlia/, made within the .«ix 
 
 months, that tlie works .lescribed liad been ixr- 
 cuted. i.nd that such ^^•orka had given to the ini 
 movable the additional value fixed by him. Tli. 
 words " executes .suivant les r-gles de lart " arc 
 not utrlctinxinii juris.. 
 
 4. If an ex])ert includes in his valuation v.oiks 
 tor which the builder had by law no privi 
 
 I lege, such error will not be a cause of nullity, 
 ; l)iit will only entitle the interested paitii-, to 
 
 iiskfor a reducticjii of the exjiert's vahiatimi. 
 
 ii"-''''^!'^J'- t'ldfontaine, Val/ce v. PreMi/aim . 
 
 21 ,S. C. R. 607. 
 
608 
 
 609 
 
 ice, CIO. 
 
 thie, CI 1. 
 'yoper/i/, Cll. 
 
 LIEN. 
 
 Peali:( , CI;'). 
 CI"). 
 oceduri', OKi. 
 
 '^nirlia.<ci; CIS. 
 •«, CIS. 
 CI 8. 
 
 r. — SoLicnoK. 1\'. 
 
 an".s Lien. 
 
 liiick-niiikcr wliu m.-ike^ 
 rsoii in a bi-ickyiml l.e- 
 
 .Tiiil hii.s ])OS!Scs.sioiii,i tlip 
 L'<1 in making tiic Ijiicks, 
 qioii lliein iis agiiiiist :\i) 
 L'liuttol inortgagco of tlie 
 
 :.,2r)0. R. l!)4,.itiin,U(l 
 oiitu, 21 A. H. 6-.'!l 
 
 '.S I'RIVILKOK. 
 
 -Prc'e.t-vcrhdl ~V,ihi,i- 
 aiy for an c.xpeit, wlicu 
 201,3, C. C. to secure h 
 an imniovHl)lL', to I'ivi 
 iigs to tlie ])ropiietoi',s 
 ings not being reguliitcil 
 C. P. 
 
 in thi.s case to .suppiut 
 t' {'ourts below, tliat tin 
 lioialstatenient, rt'(|iiin-il 
 i-t iiiuler Art. •lOVA. lia.l 
 lonths of the coniplctiuii 
 
 r the expert to state in 
 ', made within the six 
 described had been exe- 
 
 1 k.s had given to the ini 
 •alno (i.xed by him. Tln' 
 t les W.'glea de rart"aif 
 
 'S in bis valuation works 
 bad by law no privi- 
 
 be a eau.so of nullity, 
 e interested jmilit-i t,, 
 the expert's vnluatiDii. 
 
 Vallct V. rn'ioiitmne. 
 
 [See 
 all ame 
 
 III. Mechanics' Lik.vs. 
 
 r:i'i:\c::iT^^' "^""^ ^"^ •- 
 
 '•• If- 111-', C'Jj. 
 
 liL'lU'n. liirk, rtoa v. J)„l, 
 
 610 
 
 '" name in the 
 ■'■/', 20 
 
 1. Avtion. 
 
 Mortgage Account — IiuWm,- n , -, 
 fouuty Conn.s and J;ivisi„n t h , V! ?'"' ^ ~ 
 
 aceount by a lien-l ],|. ^ "^ "" '"^^""i "^ 
 
 whohas.i,l tl^ a, i^' ,S'' %"""•'"''«- 
 ga,e prior to the li .. Kl? the' "'" '"''','■ 
 wider pow,M.s bv way ,f „, , ° "" ,'"">' '^" 
 
 HutJy. yuUiLmX. K 1,14."'^ "M'lieation. 
 
 4. Coiislrnr/wji „/ ro„/rnr/. 
 
 '-n!^!r^!^^^^rtlr;^-''--.''-'7'^i.ni.din, 
 vo.nber .■i).t''uertntv''';'' '■''•'' ''>' " ''«'•' 
 
 ^Hebi that this mt:;,; -;;:^v-- 
 
 vv^.nber3oth. J/./;-,,,, v. ^^ : v' .!.;7;"p 
 
 -• Amendment. 
 
 See Bicker/on v. I)uk{„, 20 o R lo.) m- 
 imt ,1 , ; Urr y. Dane, 22 J 1} 4^0 \^ ', l^,' 
 
 3. CTai/u of Lien. 
 
 Porm~Ai/,/re.i.f of Lien-hohhi- i ti 
 of the town and eomitv i/fi 'J",?''''" """'e 
 reside., i.s a s«tH,^iei/il '*-''' 'J ''"''•''"''''-''■ 
 of 5C Vict, eh 24 o '"')^,T ""'''-7 ^V'^' H 
 0. i;. 252. '■ •'^'y'"" \'' JJornin'j, 20 
 
 "• (.'on I met I 
 
 ■)■!!',. 
 
 for when, o? "I^on ' w o ^ 'S,?; ''tV'"' '"T"" 
 
 l-'fi. 1.S fatal to the lien. ' ' '^^ ^- '^^''' 
 
 Ihe objection can be taken I„- „■ 
 
 as against a .nb-contract , u„I '""^'■•'"-'[°'' 
 
 actiou itmijiht b'iv..l .,,, • ' , , '*' '^'^ '" ""** 
 
 f"V"— r'tobe^r^li^Sn^nhe^c^r^^r- 
 judgment on the nk-ulin fJ f ^'■'' "^ " ' 
 
 'leln. /la«;«v.^£:^;Jl';«M;"5^^'-''"ittedi 
 
 Deductions — /;„,/ ji-,,,,/. , 
 an action to enforce a M .T"' '• ' ^''"''.'■'-- J-^'' 
 contest was a.s to whetbo, I',"'"' ^'"•"' *'"■■ 
 tlie contractor "'"^'''"' '"'ytlnng was due to 
 
 ;'^hnS,"'°S,e'hirlr;,"-"-'-i''>i"gofa 
 
 i l-'ws, and a7the-wer.l'r ,•"■''''' '''.'"<-' "'^^ the 
 
 ; "■■■'■^"■adcby their ij'to7l''''' '" ""'J''^'"'"" 
 worktnanship ._'"""'t^'-t '" t'leir m.iterial and 
 
 thSsob)eJ£ir;;i'?;'"r" ''''^'^"■•'^h »*"' 
 
 of the work _ " ''*"* ""t "" ■•'^■ceptance 
 
 value between the bul , V , '"^'-'"■"'-■e in 
 
 «l.o.dd have been e ' ""', ^ '' ''"'^ "'"^'^ 
 ■■'^sure of the .etofl to w il. T,, .^" "''^■fl"''te 
 
 were entitled. "W v. .SV ■ ^ '^' /'"jj- °- 
 
 -'LirAL;^^'ri:i";t'-'''"^^-''-'- 
 
 wiforce it were t-ikT.n i ;■ '"' Proceedings to 
 which had beendisso-e? '", """"^ "^ '''""' 
 bersof which h,?,,' '""' °"'^ »f "'e n.em- ' 
 
 The n,atSs^ttd;!ci;''th' I-''" '■'■«'"';■''*'"»• ^ 
 »-We, however a I f, .■,," ,'"-'" ^''-"' <^Iaimed 
 
 theais,,oh;t;o, ' or e uf'-l^/''" '''"' '-f<- i 
 tli.it the dissolnt n, ,. ' ' '*^ ^^''''^ provided 
 o'lHTengSir ^''*' '-'*" effect this and I 
 
 ''■Sai';:Ji^,;;/:;;'';'^S"»''er which 
 °f the lien, an ' e ? r'f '.f '''" "'^'^"■"^^"f 
 tle.l to the ,en " Tl.e nf "'^ " P^'''^"" ^■"« 
 ■^•"•oli. 1, sec S n'? ^"'^'■P'-'^tft'o.i Act, R. 
 "P'-'rson" shall' inch ;: 7", "''"' the word 
 
 »:«i^'orv;::s;:hr''-"'"''"^""°"; 
 
 r''' '' person "wl''''° ^''">oulty as to the 
 
 •'-'-^-vewr.^~.J-,£;;^e^of 
 
 -oS';^^- b:d'£f ;;^^""""--J-^Vhere a 
 a fixed dite a co„ to i ';"«-^'0"'P'«-'ti"" by 
 -.ollat^a., ;';;rJ:,:;--^'yor^>allow^. 
 
 li'l"i.l^te.ft:na«::,;^'y ""'-'' '^ ''eduction as 
 I'-m the CO .^^t i^'""r;''''^^'' "■:^"owed- 
 '";'>Iors clain.in:: J v^'seh f ;? ''^''"'^t lien- 
 other than tln.sc^, ' , h'^ '' ^''e contractor, 
 Mich wages lien.sw .;,;•'•;,:"■ ""«"«• "l.ere 
 t-P--ent.ofthec„;:t,;c?f;Lf*^^''''^'^'^'""- 
 
 ;H-'i.u;:M;::,:ai,,-,-;:^^y the wages 
 
 , >o-aming unpaid .iJl^^^^^^^^^^' ^V'" 
 
 turn by reason of the non Z. A *'" '■'^''"'-■■ 
 
 : I'o nulrsl^ulle.l in ' V n f'"!''"'''""' •""' <""""t 
 
 ;'-"«throwM u;;rhelrt7f'T''"'"''>■ 
 I"■icereprcsentin^r J„.| ^. ',■"•'1. "^ tlie contract 
 
 See Ihu'jin v. .l/„„,,, 2-) r ,,,, ,,.,, 
 
 /--sv«.«,.n(w-., 23 G. R.^irl^iir;;^!'^ ^ 
 
 C. CovAv. 
 
 Parties— .S'co/e of Cos/, l t„ 
 
 lien-lHdders to enfor,^ , ' '~ ■ "" "'t'"" ''V 
 
 Mochames'LenAc tV '7'' '"" "'"''■'• "^■'■ 
 
 ' other holders of reii en") """"^'"^ *" '""'<<' 
 
 |i>'«t instance in onb^:t'tcrtr'"^'r"*'"- 
 hen-holders; but this ca, be '"-'"V^t^'tus as 
 
 "roaddedasdefen.lant:intt4;:teS:TH''"^- 
 ihe amount due from tl, •"''■'*^'-' » "(hce. 
 
 factor should Ih! ^a^ ^^ t Coul^n: ,? 'I" ^"'"■ 
 loss hseo.sta wbieh ' ,'r,'"t '^y the former, 
 3take-holder:;,;S;;;i;;;;j-taxedasto. 
 
' U' 
 
 611 
 
 Tliu L'ostH (if lii'ii-liolilcrs I'.stiililishiii!. 
 liens 
 
 , '• """t^i.-i ' .-^i It '■ii.-.iiiii:^ int'ir 
 
 ICMS .sliould IjL'iiii.l.-isii lii'Mtcliar-fdii tlru luiid. 
 Tlio C'lisls of |!uii-!k)1i|('|'.s .su1)sc(|iiciit to jiiili;. 
 lent of lofcjiciicf sliiiuld )n; Ui\v,\ iipdii il7i; 
 cale iippmiiriutc to tliu iiiiiomi; fniiint liuo to 
 ach. JIa/i V. Ilonii, 14 P. U. 4."). 
 
 LIEN. 
 
 tlioir : wilier 
 
 612 
 
 Payment Into Court— .S'»/).sv^/K,H^ Onh,- for 
 C»«t.f—S,l-ojj:\-iu a iiioclianics' liuii ai-tioi'i ii 
 certain sum was found due from tin; owner 
 to the e.mtraetor, atid tlie lattei- was found in- 
 «Iel)ted to other liendiolders. Payment of tlie 
 former sum into (.'ourt was ordered and made, 
 tlie amniint, liuwever, beinj; iri.snlMeient to jiav 
 the claims of lienholdei's a-aiiwt the eentraetor. 
 The latter then appealeil nnsMuee.ssfnllv and was 
 ordei'cd to pay the <'osts of appeal lo tiie owner. 
 M'lio claimed that tlie.se eosls shoidd lie paid out 
 of th(; moneys paid liy hur into Court : - 
 
 Held, that liy tlie payment into Coint for dis- 
 trilMilum -he was (liseharyed from her liability 
 imd the money eeased to he hers, and that she 
 uas not entitled to have the costs due to her 
 de(hii;ted irom the amount pa.id in. Pullai \- 
 
 powers hy way of st.nimaiy a ppli, ,,1.1.11, 
 I /I,it.<;H V. r.i/li,:rs, lU A. K. 154. 
 
 I Prlorltl03—.l (/<■,( »r-.« on I'ro^in.x Cuiiu.Ht,, 
 
 — /,^,7^^y)7/.■^r^]~" Prior montage," iu see ■-. 
 ;.sul.-seo. ,'{, of the Meehaiucs' laen Act, ni<M,w 
 
 one exi.stnig in laet before the lien ,u i,es, tli„ii„i, 
 I not,^iiece.ssarily prior in point of tVL'istratidii ° 
 Under a niort-age, advances wJre to he iiudr 
 , from time to time as Iniildinys iiro-icsji.ii' 
 
 Part of till' work was done, and the morf.i.r,'. 
 wa.s re^dstered, the bnildin-s eomph.ti.d. "ami 
 
 the further advances made," liefore a lieii wu.s 
 : registered, and without actual notice of it: 
 
 ^ Held, that the mort;;aj,'e had prioritv over tliu 
 lien both as to prior and suli.sei|iicnl work, mid 
 as to the latter e.vch further advance und.i- th,. 
 morti.'a'.'e attracted to itself the ailvaiiia"c r,j 
 the Kegisti-y Act so as to gain prioritv over tiii' 
 concurrent uiiref,dstei'ed lien. 
 
 The iiicrea.sed value in such a ease is ni.t ,^ 
 henelit added to the pre-existing mort^a'.'c hut 
 the^ perioiiical increase of value calls n.nh' i|,',. 
 jieriodi'Ml payments. Cook v. JS-lshti,r. •_';{ o. j;' 
 .")4."i. ' ~ " '' 
 
 .Vt ir(t///.,v. Stulii, •_'! (X R. :>:V2, a„i. UlU). 
 
 7. Extras. 
 
 Written Agreement.]— Where the contract 
 provided that no extras were to he allowed 
 unless expressly ordered, and payments for the 
 
 Priorities— /»(■/■( f^^rr; r.»/«(..]— (•iid,.r ih" 
 I Act to Simplify the Procedure for Knforcinfr 
 !. Mechanics' Liens, o.S Vict. eh. 37 (i ), 1 tiir 
 ; remedy of a liendiohlcr a.s a!,'aiii:d- a mort'M.r,.,. 
 ! IS eonliiied to the incrcasril value proN id.^lliy 
 ' sec. o, .siib-sec. .S, of K. ,S. (t. cli. PJU, and he caii 
 not (|Ue.stion the prioiit v of the mort''a"-e /;„;■ 
 '■m V. ll<rn,i,Hi, 'Jti 0. U. L>.-v.'. ■'' 
 
 same exjiressly ayreeil for in writiu" by the 
 proprietors or architects ;— ' I 
 
 Held, tliat extras could not be allowed unless 
 a writing was proved. Wood v. Strimjrr, liO (J. 
 It. 148. 
 
 S. Inrrid-ui! I'nine. 
 See Cooh v. ll'Uhcvr, J:i (). 11. 04,"), post 012; 
 
 Da/ton V. JInrnliii, lili () 
 
 -'o2, /;o 
 
 st (il: 
 
 9. Matt rial Mrji. 
 
 S,'f- Hall V. //o/,/, 'JO O. K. l.S, ;)-,..M)I,->- 
 Woodv. .Striwic.r, -M O. 11. 148, post (il;i ; m/. 
 Bean. v. kinni-.iu; 2.) O. 11. ;{i;j, post (jl.'j. J/„rn\ 
 V. Thark, 24 0. H. loO, post lilo. 
 
 10. Jfortijarjcd Projn rit/. 
 
 Inferior Courtis— .le(Y«,H('.]_Sect ion 23 of 
 R. S. O. ch. 12ii, which allows proceedings to 
 recover the amount of a mechanic's lien to be 
 taken under certain circumstances in C'oimty 
 Courts and Division Courts, applies oiilv to 
 actions 111 which the party seeking to enforce 
 Ins lien IS suing in the onlimry way lo obtain 
 jmlgment and execution. Those Courts cannot 
 entertain an action in the nature of an action of ' 
 account hy a liendiolder against a niortga-'ee 
 who has sold the land in question under molt- '' 
 gage prior to the lieu, tliuugli there may be 
 
 11. ()irni:rs. 
 
 Contract of Purchase— .SYio'ir/e o/' fninils-- 
 n^Vislrii Laws.]--\n agreement to pmvhase pro- 
 perty, under which buil,li„g.. are to he eiecte.l 
 thereon by tlie seller, and which lias been acte.l 
 on by the parties, althou-h imt hindiiM- under 
 the .Statute of Frauds if jilcadcd, constitutes ih,. 
 person agreeing to buy an " owner " within suli- 
 sec. ,S of sec. 2 of the Mechanics' Lien Act :— 
 
 Sinilih:, if not an owner under such a<'tce- 
 
 nient, then, by virtue of the Re^istrv Act" no 
 
 unregistered lien of which he had liot m'ti.'e 
 
 Jinortotlic registry of tlie died to liiiu coiiM 
 
 I prevail against liiin. /,'(,'/;//« v. Man<s, 22 (). It. 
 
 Contract of Purchase— Unpaid V,.,dor- 
 (,„».,.„^]_A verbal agreement, witliniit any 
 condition as to forfeiture on no.i-],aviiieiit of lliti 
 , purchase money, was entered into' for the 'iiir. 
 ! cbase ot certain lands, it being midcrstoo,! ta.it 
 I the purchaser would proceed to erect laiildiir-i 
 I thereon, which he aecordinglv <lid, prociiriir' 
 ! materials and work from the plaiiititf and 
 others, and then became insolvent wiihout hav- 
 ing paid anytliiug to the vendor :-- 
 
 Held, fhit, thcie having been sulilciciit acts 
 ol patt pcrloiniancc, the purchaser liad heooiiu; 
 the ow;ner in eipiity of the lands, and, the plain- 
 tilt s hen attaching to his interest, the vendor 
 could only after tiiat hohl the lands suhioct t.i 
 the burden of the lien. 
 
 P-efore the peruons claiming liens fiiriiisliid 
 work and luaterid, they were aware that tli.' 
 purchaser was in difiiculties, but the veiidur 
 ussuted them that they would be jiaid, and 
 
612 
 
 y of Siiiuiiiiuy .Ui|i|i,,-,,T,|„,. 
 !i A. H. J.jl. 
 
 7C-.-- Oil /'ro:ir<:M Crrliii.nl,, 
 'ri(ir iiiunt;iij,'o,'' iti !,i:i: ,-, 
 i'lKmi(!s' Lieii Aot, rric^DH 
 iforu tlioliuii luisf.Sj llii,ii..|, 
 in |)i>iiit ijf rf!.'isti'ati(,ii. ° 
 lulvaiifi's wi-ro to \iv iiu<h 
 as l)iiililing.-( ])ni-ris.H(.,l. 
 -i iloiic, and tlic niriitv'a'i: 
 liuildin-s coniiilctfil/i,i?il 
 I niadu, het'oi-o a li.M wu.s 
 lit actual notiro of it, ; . 
 .;;aj,'o liad pridHty over tim 
 md .suli.s(.'i|u,.|it wwk. ami 
 iii'tJKT advani'e uml.i- tin; 
 '-.<> itsflf tho ailvanta-i- ,,f 
 s to gain iirioiiiy ovrr ti„- 
 eil lien. 
 
 i; in such a case is ipdt ,t 
 )fu-c'xistini,' inoi-t;jagc, l.nt 
 io of valut calls lurTli' t;,,; 
 Cov/.- V. Ji'-isltiiii', o'j (). I;. 
 
 '■v"/ Vahit.]- I'll, I, T ;lio 
 I'roccdui'c for lOiiforciih- 
 Vict. cli. ;!7 (,).), tiiu 
 ir as against a UK.itgagfy 
 ■cased value pi'i.vid.d by 
 .S. O. oil. I -'(J,, MM.! he can- 
 
 613 
 
 LIEZI. 
 
 1 V of the niort 
 li. '2:y. 
 
 igc. 
 
 o"o' 
 
 Ihij: 
 
 ')iriii:]:s, 
 
 a.se~Sl>i/ii/eo/Fr„i,ilM-. 
 :n'(;nicnt toimivliasu prn- 
 ililiiig.^ arc to he crcctoil 
 ■nd which has hccn acteil 
 louu'li 11,, t hiudiiig uniliT 
 : pleaded, coiistltiitestlli: 
 an "ownoi- "within sail- 
 eclianics' Lien Act :— 
 vner under sucli agree- 
 >f the Registry Act, ii'i 
 hieh lu! had liot imtiix' 
 the deed to liiiii colli,! 
 •;/!liii V. J/a»,.s, L''.' U. li. 
 
 se — I'lipiiiil ];,„/„,■ — 
 p-oeinent, M-illi,,iit any 
 e on noti-|iayiiiciit of llu: 
 utcreil into foi' the pur- 
 t being undersliioil tiMt 
 Dcec'd to erect Imildiir.is 
 irdiugly did, procuriiij,' 
 i-oni the pl.iiiilitr an.'l 
 ; insolvent wiiliout luiv- 
 I veuiloi- : — 
 ing lieeu sullicicnt acts 
 -• purchaser had Ircooiim 
 iie lauds, and, the plain- 
 'lis interest, llie vciiildr 
 Id the lands siiiijoct tn 
 
 uuiiug liens furnialie'l 
 y were aware that tin' 
 iltics, Init the veiiiliir 
 ' M'uuld he paid, aii,l 
 
 urg.'d them tog,, on with the work, ,ill liou^di it 
 w.vsuot cmt.-udel ih.t h. ac^.u.lly'gi -a ?"b 
 p.vyiiieiit Iniiisclf :_ ■' " "•"■"icuii 
 
 flel.l, that the worh wMs ,I„„c and the uutc- 
 ml tiinushc.l with the " privily ,i,.,leo„seuf' 
 of the vendor within the me u.in, f ,su . , I ■( 
 
 <:ii. 1 •-'(». /''".//it \\ /i',i.:/,-2:in. \i. nr,, 
 
 S.. Jamiii.,. V. Willi., o-i (), K. -|:!!i, /, „, ,;, , . 
 McIiMii V. ktimeai; 2;i U. R, ;ii;i, y;,;/ (ij.!. ' 
 
 614 
 
 I'.'iO.lt. ;!|;! M'-lx'ui v. h'laitear. 
 
 li'. /'lu-liei. 
 
 .M;.vl.amcs L,cn Ac't, U ,s not necessuy to m ike 
 otiicr holder, ot regi.stercl lieiH pvrties in tie 
 
 ..■.t,iisa„.e.nor.ertoattad< t'heir statu s 
 l.oa-hoMers; hut this cu. l,,done wucn h^y 
 
 Zii^t:^.'u'ii!T,t ''" ''"''-'' "'"- 
 
 mucrial m.ii ag.unsL the eoiura^l.r ^^iZ 
 re,',ster.,l owner, th.. e .nte.t w.h as to wh 'ther 
 anytnug wa. due f,. the e^utra^L the re d, 
 t.n.d mvuer ,u,t b.iug li.hle on th. e'mtrac^- 
 1 Id, th> t th.j am.iiatdiie to thi e:.ut,-i. u- 
 o'.lno 1,, H.e.rtaine I without tl,^ 
 
 ,. 1 CO., toe e.utra.th dug brought h.f, re t^: 
 CjiDl. P.'0!rl V. S'riir/u; _''! (). ]•. i (s. 
 
 l-'i. f'lii/nieii/. 
 
 O»«.,.|--Afu.rpro,..c,du,gs ,-oui:u .n.-ed to eu- 
 fwv. am.e;i.u,es' lien, a suo-c.utraJtm^md 
 
 ^ "-d iu^c^T;:, H oaiu 'm'",' "^'''i'y • ^""'« 
 
 M <. n I ,,.■'"'■'" -'•'■'^'''i-nics Lien Act 
 K. •^. <>. eh. l-.'o, as amended by .-,.i Viet el, W 
 
 oft^fir'"'"^"^"''-'" thei:outr,i::;^;r'':^i 
 
 msBMm 
 
 the full vd„ . ..,- fi •'^ ' "'" ^^oiitriietor 
 
 ,«i, s°',"™'r' '"■;„'""■ '■' "'■'"" "' '"■ '■>. 
 
 Contract Price-/; ,/,„.//„„ _/v,.,.„j; , 
 
 :f-r^^f'r'M:!,^l;es^^;yr'c'{:'t 
 
 ealeulatclon the bahuico of I ' ^ ut'r'V,'^^ 
 after such de,lu,=tio,i. /^ ^/-o-.^^" ^ '!^ ^ 
 
 siipp iit his claim to a lien as to cjrtau, items iu 
 
 .igrc. w tu the coMtr.ietor to appropriate monevs 
 .■eceivc 1 from the latter aa I ':',r which -• ,! 
 
 i'lvea credit, t(, those itenn 
 
 A maua-ial man giving uotiee to the ouncr, 
 "iHlei li. ,S 0. ch. J2(i, .see. 11, „f au lui uid 
 -^-im.uag mist the eoutr.tetor, i. not t r - 
 'entitled to dispute the validlJv of p.^ u',^ 
 :'>ter«-ar,ls m ule by the owner io peil us h v- 
 mgclums t „. wages, or to persons fu is,, 
 j-'tenaN to bo used ou the building, ^vh 3 
 
 iiit^,!'ni:!'iir;'h::'.f ^"'■^•'"'^' ^' ''•■"^^- '- 
 
 And tliis also was held to .ipply to a payment 
 WK. !,> he owner by ..i,,.,|„i. ,,;iva!di i,, the 
 
 "'"-■'■ ?' '''^; ^■'"il''^'^f"r, but f,.r thJ .specilic ,„•! 
 po-e of the latter indorsing the same ove i.-i^ ic 
 Ho,, persons Who refused to I'ldv 
 " . tcrial unless paid f,u', and also t,. a pavuu' it 
 
 zt::]:x^-^- ""'^" ^'"^ — ^tir^ugi:^ 
 b/St:::n:::^',-:::i?::r'tr!"'^'^''""'^^'^v 
 
 Lvs,.,. 11 ,;■ "i """ =^^ icpired 
 
 oonh-^' } ' ' i"'';''-'' ^"■^"''"-V pavuieuts f sub- 
 
 w^r::!;:if"'"^''^''''''^"''«-"*^''^''Muyinents 
 
 Payment into Court. I -Amount dii,> f,- 
 
 Payment into Court l_\Vl,,.,. . 
 I'ud lu, ou-ner .iis^-har /. If r iV""""*^ «« 
 
 j!.i(«//((»', 0(j 0. K. IS!). '"'11-'- / aUeii V. 
 
 
Ill I'!' 
 
 ami 
 
 615 
 
 LIEN. 
 
 619 
 
 Promissory Note-— Smptiixion of Lien.]— K. 
 8uj)pli«(l a fonlmttor witli nmterial.s for luiild- 
 iiig a hoiisu for W. und took tlio contractor's 
 note for #1,100 at thirty dajK for his account. 
 The note was .li.sconnte<l Imt dishonoured at 
 maturitj', and K. took it up and regiatircd a 
 mechanics' lien aj^ainst the property of VV. 
 While the note was runninj,', W. paid the con- 
 tractor |!r)(l( », and afterwards, hut when was u<\- 
 certain, !«(iOO nu)re. In iin action by K. to en- 
 force his lien : — 
 
 Held, atliniiing the judgment of the Court 
 below, that, as the lien was suspended durinj; 
 the currency of tlie note, it was absolutely gone" 
 there being nothing in the liritish Columbia Lien 
 Act to sliew that it could be abandoned for a 
 time only, and this result would follow even if 
 part of the anM)unt only had lieen (taid to the 
 contractor. Kdinvnds v. Tim.uii. •'] S C k 
 406. . .«..tv. 
 
 cure from the latter all the material niniir,,) 
 for a particular building contract, so tluil, ;,l 
 though the prices and quantities are nuf ,1,. 
 Hned until ordersare given and deliveriis nru,:, 
 the entire transiiction. althoiigh it may .At.r.i 
 over some months, is linked together by Ihcpn. 
 liminary understanding on liotli sides, a In „ ii,r 
 all uiateiial so .sup])licd is in time if registi,, ,l 
 within thirty davs of the hunishing of tli.' last 
 item. J/(j) //.s V. Tliurh',-2\U. R. ir,0 
 
 14. Priiiri/it-.-: 
 
 Mortgage— Iii,i(ase</ ]'alw:]—S>-f Cool- v 
 lifbhaw, l>:i O. I!. 0-15, (di/r (312; Jhirton v. Horn- 
 in>j, '26 O. 1^ 252, iiiite 612, 
 
 15. Procef.di)ii/t to liiali-.e. 
 
 Defence— Cofui/cnAdWf.]- A defence Hied by 
 a lien-holder within the period mentioned iii 
 s.;c. 23 of R, S. (). ch. 120, in an action by 
 the owner of the jiroperty to set aside the lien, 
 is not; a " iiroceeding to realize the claim " with- 
 in the meaning of that i^ection, though a counter- 
 claim, if properly framed and a certificate there- 
 of duly registered, may be. MvXumam v. 
 KiiLlaml, ISA. H. 271. 
 
 Proceedings by other Persons.] — Persons 
 who have registered liens, but have taken nopro 
 ceediDgs to realize them, cannot have the benefit 
 of proceedings taken by other persons to enforce 
 hens against the same lan<ls, where the liens of 
 such other persons are not enforceable. In re 
 Senr and fVcod^; 23 O. K. 474. 
 
 See Hutxon v. VaUierx, 10 A. R. 154, anh (ill, 
 
 Proceeding to Beallze— r'o»;(/fin/,o(// ! \ 
 defence tiled by a lieii-lioldcr within the |.,'n(i,i 
 mentioned in sec. •_'.•! of H. S. (X di, I'jil i„ 
 an acticjii by the owner of the projiertv to sn 
 aside the lien, is n<,t a "procec<liiig to i,:i|i«. 
 the claim" within the meaning of that si.tinn 
 though a eonnterclaim, if properly traniid ami 
 a eertiticate thereof duly registered, may I e 
 
 I'er Osier, .J. A. Observatiims as tu tli. 
 effect of .'registration <if the lien. MeV>n„ ^- 
 T'jliii, 1,S A. 1!. 1, considercil. 
 
 I'er Macleiinan, .1. A.— The defendant in ilnV 
 action having commenced an inde)iendent artiim 
 an(l registered his lien within the prcs.riliKi 
 perioil, his lien was preserved, and the re<'ivtr.i 
 tion of the certificate in the other action t'limi.' 
 to Ins bcnetit in the present one, though iittir 
 Jiidgnicnt establishing his lien he abandoucl tlii. 
 other proceedings. McX(i7miia v. Kirhl.,,,,!, 
 IS A. R. 271. 
 
 yiovb^— Altercitloxs to, nfl,,- Coi„/,l, in.,,- ■ 
 Tiiiif.l- A lien was claimed for certain .-tiL-i 
 work done (m a building which had been (in. 
 pleted by 30th September, l.SJl.S, with the ( x 
 eeption of the cutting <lown of ccitain I i.lfs 
 which it was afterwards found inojectcd out i.f 
 the walls too far, and which was ('bme between 
 I'Jth October and 2.5th October, 189.".. 'Jhc lie,. 
 
 was registered on 17th ^ovember, 1S93 : 
 
 Held, upon the authority of Aeil/ v. (rin„ii. 
 which is incorrectly reported in 2S Ci: ,TO, 
 that the lien was regi8tere<l loo late, since tlie 
 time slionld ha\e been computed fr( ni .•fOtli 
 .September, and was not extended by the altera 
 tions to the bolts, S»//.?»<r.vv. Bimd,--iO I; 
 641. 
 
 16. Jiegislralion. 
 
 Material— 7V»)f.]— Merchants supplied ma- 
 terials to the contractor for certain buildings 
 and claimed a lien under the Mechanics' Lien 
 Act in respect thereof. There was no contract 
 for the placing of these materials upon the pro- 
 perty ; the last of them were bought by the 
 contractor from the merchants on the 2'^iid 
 November, and were by him placed in the build- 
 ing on the 2'An\ JS'ove ndier :— 
 
 Held, that the time for registering the clain 
 of lien, under .-^ec. 21 of R. S. O. th. 126, began 
 
 20 O "b Ts ^^'^ "'"' ^'"''"" '"''''• ^^"'^ "■■ JJoyj, 
 
 _ Material— rimr.]_Wheie there is a preven- ' 
 jent general arrangement, although not binding, i 
 between a contractor and a suppHer of building ' 
 material, ^ hereby the former undertakes to pro I 
 
 A-e IVickirlon v. Dakiit, 20 O. R. 102 (iO,-, 
 oiitt 6(»!) ; WnllU v. Skahi. 21 O. R. ,-.32, nuf', (iliil • 
 li'Viiii, V. Mnnex, 22 O. R. 44,S, mih (il4 : Cook 
 V. Belshiii; 23 O. R. 54.-), (iiifi 612; /)ii/h,ii v 
 Ili'niiiiu, 26 O. R. 252, aide 612. 
 
 17. Svmmari/ Proadure. 
 
 AmendmentofOlaim-Jm-Udk/ioHofMiisi,} 
 —Lxlmx-uii of 'yVjHp.J— The Master or otticiil 
 referee in a proceeding under C3 Viet. cli. X 
 (O.), an Act to simplify the procedure for 
 enforcing mechanics' liens, should he judiciallv 
 tatii-fjtd that the facts stated before h iii aiV 
 sufficient to manifeut a valid claim ; but if any 
 one element is omitted, lie has general power o't 
 permitting an amendment if the fiiets.iid eii- 
 cumstances warrant it, f.f/., as in this case, to 
 permit an amendment of the claim shewing 
 when the work was <lone or materials furnislieii 
 
 The distinction between the rerjuisite.s of a 
 claim under the amending Act and one under 
 
616 
 
 11 tlio iiuitetiul ni|iiii,,|( 
 iig tontnict, so tliut, ;il 
 I (|iiaiititici< nic nut dc 
 VIII mill (IclivcritM inm:! , 
 iiltlin.i^li it may cxf..!,] 
 iilail tciyctlui liy tlic|,ie 
 ; on liotli sides, a jj, n ii,,. 
 i is 111 time if rc^istcn,! 
 
 ho IlllTiisllill;; of tlir !,|kt 
 
 V, •->» (). K. |,-,i». 
 
 llze — ('oiDiterfldiiii.] .\ 
 oliki- within tlie iniidd 
 'f K. S. O. fh. l:;t;, i„ 
 
 of tlie t>ro);iTty to .Ht 
 "liiocccdiii.; to nulize 
 imniiig (if tliiit .'(ctiifii, 
 if iirojiiTly tianud iirni 
 ' rcgiatfi-eil, may ],v. 
 Iliscivatioiis as to thi' 
 ■ the lifii. MfWiii, V. 
 k'icd. 
 
 — 'I'lii' di'fi'iidaiit ill ilii-- 
 d an iiidi')ieiidunt artioii 
 within the iirc'.-rril/i(i 
 crved. and the rcuisti:! 
 the other nrtioii emnii' 
 sent one, tlioiic;|i aff,., 
 3 lien lie iiliaiidi.iicil the 
 X<imura y. Kukl.t,„l 
 
 to, 'tj'hr Co)ii/iliiii.„~ 
 inu'd for certain sttti 
 
 which had Ik en eciii 
 er, 1S9.S, with the ix 
 down of ceitaiii 1 nits 
 found inojeeted out of 
 it'll was done hetweeii 
 ;tober, 1893. 'J'lie liei. 
 oveniber, liS!).'} i^- 
 ity of Afil/ V. < rin.Ji. 
 loited in I'S i'.v. '.W, 
 ■ed too late, since the 
 
 computed fi( ni ."Otli 
 'xtended by tlic altera 
 H''?-.-.- V. Band, •_'((>. !,' 
 
 I, 20 O. R. 10-J, tm 
 •21 (). R. r)3'2, niti, (Kill ; 
 . -IW, mil, (i|4 : Cook 
 i, aiiti (ill!; DhO'^h v 
 te 612. 
 
 Procedure, 
 
 -Jwitidicli07i nf Mds/fi 
 he Master or otlici.il 
 iiider 5;^ Viet, cli. ,S7 
 y the procedure fo! 
 , should he judicially 
 attd Ijefore Irni ao- 
 lid claim ; hut if any 
 has general power ot 
 if the fiicts , lid cir- 
 ,'/. . as in thi.s case, to 
 f the claim slnwir.^^ 
 r materials furiiislied. 
 ,1 the requisites of a 
 i Act and one uiiilei 
 
 617 
 
 Act, R. s. (). ,,[,. i2,j^ 
 
 at". lU of the origini 
 
 pointed out. - j 
 
 A Master or referee has p„w'or to eUeiid the 
 tune for prosecuting the proceedings when' I e 
 ceititioate and appointnicn, iiavt not bo ,! 
 sorredw.thu. the time named in sec J oa," 
 Act. Orr v. J)a,;.,., •.>:.' o. [{_ 43„_ '" "'^ 
 
 Avpea.ltromReport~Cou,-to,-Ohn,nhar^ ]_ 
 
 In Miuiinary proceedings under the Act t si „ 
 
 ,haigeinp.an.ber;un:,er;:;!;.;l!;;:i;!;i.rt:: 
 
 eiders and cert.hcates ; the linal rep, ' ,1c 
 see l.t IS not included in the w.,r, is '' m I'rs 
 anil ccrtihcatus ; and the ■im I c. '"• <-'» I 
 
 report jdiouid be ,«j.Sgei^i:^il,3r;:,:: 
 
 .SiU. H,i,/Htr V. O-JJoni,,//, U I'. R. o-,^ "- 
 
 LIFE ASSURANCE. 
 
 618 
 
 Is. r;m>. 
 
 
 County ao\xrt~J,u-Mi,Ho„ of Lora/ Uax/, , 
 
 (uiir of Justice has no jurisdiction as sue t 
 eiite ■taiii a .summary procee.ling under .'; \ iet 
 
 .^■■on(v TnnnmrMO. R. J 74, followed 
 No can he confer juris.liction uponlii ,eif 
 l.y suhscpiently directing an aiucidme, t 'tie 
 •. iKlay.ts and pa|,crs ,iled, by substitut , I t e 
 Hl^'ll 1 ourt for tlie County Court ^ 
 
 All appeal from an onlcr so ainendinc was 
 albwc.l, but without costs, as theobjeca "n was 
 ™t taken >u U.nlne. Jacob, v. liohLn^MV 
 
 Ifl. \',ml„r and Piiirhaser, 
 I Agreement to Purchase-" 0,rn,-r "l_.«f.» 
 
 m, ,w/,:uio '^ '^ ' ^''"''^ ''■ '^^'1/. ^3 o. i{. 
 
 20. W'aijfHcarun-K. 
 
 Payments to — Disnu/r 1 Q,„ nr r. 
 
 Payments to— /Vrni//^,,, ^ << t 
 ->^^l^yood.,^0.{{:'^l^tZ;;]^^'-reSear 
 
 High Court _/o;«;„,, Lirm ~ Sfat.m, at of 
 t:a.,n -Am.;,Ue.nL]-^XJ,,a,v the Act to siin 
 
 IV. V'kndors LiE.v. 
 Contract Prlce—/'.iy,-f» W i 1 ti 
 
 l.,is'so as to .iv;!'^,.'!!^,.?;:'::''^''^'!^ '»J"i"|a certain nundt^fsinrer*""^ '" '•'^'"™ ^"^ 
 
 ext^ra wo!.k'for'thf ''"' "' '''" '""'••'"8 ««'-tein 
 for in eash, be me 7^'"^' ^'^'■'''''l '" ''" P^ 
 before but ,;„tc5et:rS .;■}?'' T '^«"'» 
 
 i ; 'I '" 's coiiinucent to 10 m 
 
 fiis so as o give jurisdiction to the H," h 
 I mrt though each apart maybe w thin £ 
 cumpetencc ol an inferior Court 
 
 The plaintilfs, in proceeding under o.S Vi-t 
 <;h. . / to enforce their lien, liled with a Araster 
 ii-i the "statement of claim" ment „ . 1 ' 
 
 «,2,acopyoftheclaiinTlien^ "Sawi 
 registered, verified by an atlidavit, . I tl' 
 .Master thereupon issued his certificate :- "- 
 Held that If the " .statement of claim" fiU] 
 ws not in proper form, inasmuch as it contained 
 ■11 the facts rcpi.red for compliance with the 
 At ai aiuendmeiit ,uu,c „ro tun,- sl.o„ 1 ' 
 "lloMcd. Ihckn-lun V. Dakin, 20 O. R. Ig-]. oog^ 
 
 ;«ii.nited p,iis^;^^:^tc"i"f/':;^^';?'T"'!^' 
 
 ""•^ord V. Trumm, 20 O. it 174. ° "^''^ -'^"f^- 
 
 Mortgage -/V/oW/,V.v.1-Un,]pr n, » . . 
 '"'l'!'--'- as a.^|,^^ ,,';:• *'"- .''''""-•''y of a lien- | 
 
 &e //«No« V. 
 
 f-'nWcvw.lOA. R. lo4,a„<,611. 
 
 See .S.VLK (JF (JoODS, 
 
 LIEN FOR WAGES. 
 
 See Ship, II. 
 
 LIEN NOTE. 
 
 See B,..s or Exoh^., ,,„ p,,^,^^^^^ 
 
 LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOE. 
 
 *« CONSTITLTKlNAL L.\W, II, 
 
 LIFE ASSURANCE. 
 <See Insurance, V. 
 
619 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 620 
 
 LITE LEASE. 
 
 .SVc I.A.NM.dllli AMI 'I'kNANT, X. 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 1. Cl-AIMS liV AMI Ai;.MNST IMF. ClKAN N, (i'.'O 
 II. Ct.AIMN TO HkA1.IV. 
 
 I. Ar/.H (j'Oin,. i-s/n/,, t;j|. 
 'i. Ah ivjaUixl Ihv ( 'riitrti, (;'_>■_'. 
 
 3. Jluwiiiinii .1, (i2'J. 
 
 4. Commi'iii' mail n/S/nin/' . ()•_'•_'. 
 n. Dower, Vi'J'J. 
 
 6. Eawunil-s fi-'.'i. 
 
 7. L'lilry or C/riiiii, H-2;i. 
 H. Fcmiii;/, (.■•.';i. 
 
 9. Friiiid, O-.'.S. 
 
 10. /iilirriip/lon of Sl(i/ii/i, (124. 
 
 11. Ldwl hi Trust, (i24. 
 
 12. Morhjiiiitir (intl Mortijniin , (i^.T. 
 
 l.'(. ^'iilnrc mill /'rciij <i/' J'lis.^i .^.^1,111, ()•_>(!. 
 
 14. I'arlidiiii, (iiiT. 
 
 l.'j. Pdiimiiil of Tkxis, (i-JT. 
 
 l(i. PoKKi i-iiiDi III) or Aiidiiisl Infaiil-i, 027. 
 
 1 7. Teiianln in ( 'omnwn, 028. 
 
 18. Uni-kand /.nmh, O.'id. 
 
 19. Vacant Latii/.^, (i.SO. 
 
 20. WUdLaiuh, (;:!I. 
 
 III. 1'KR.S(iNAL AlTKlX.S. 
 
 1. Arcountf, 0;-il. 
 
 2. Ackvovhi/'jmtii', CSI. 
 
 3. Covmieiici'iiiivi of ,Siaiii/i', ti;j2. 
 
 4. Disaroird/, (i.S2. 
 
 T). Exindorx dial AdiniiiMrntorx, G.S2. 
 (i. Frdiidn/iid J/(.rti/diji , (;,')2. 
 7. /?(/«)(?, (i.t.S. 
 
 H. Ldcrriijitioii of Statute, (i.'f.S. 
 9. Judijmad, (i.'J,"?. 
 
 10. iacAcv, ().■?.•{. 
 
 11. Mtdhal Practitiowr, O.3.3. 
 
 12. Money Ildd and l,'(ci!nd, U.'!3. 
 
 13. Negligtwe, (i.'W. 
 
 14. Novation, 034. 
 
 15. Partntrxhij), 034. 
 
 16. Period nf Limitation, 03,'). 
 
 17. Promigsory Xote, 03,'). 
 
 18. 7i'oa(i Companies, 035. 
 
 19. Shari.i, 03."). 
 
 20. 7V?(..7'.s a;i(^ TriLttee-s ('30. 
 Actions Against Railway Companies— 5^ee 
 
 I. ('l,ArM> liV AMI AdAINsi riiK Cli.iW 
 
 NegllKonco or Servant l.idlnfit,/,i \ 
 tliut ( sen .■i>Miiiini:; tliiii iinilfi' the ci'iii;'!!!,. 
 of till' ri()\ ill! (■ 01 (,>iitlicr', or NlatiitiH ill 
 nt till' tiiiif of tlic injury ivccivcil, t\w { 
 timlil Ik- !i:'M lialik' fm" lui iiijiiiy iim*, 
 iici,'li;.;ciirL' of its .siTvants, kiu-1i io'jiirN- I 
 lii'i'ii iitcIvim] more tliaii ,1 yi'ar licforu 'tin 
 of the pftiticiii, llu: ri.ulit' of iicticii wiiH 
 HfrHicd imhUt .\rtN. 22(i2 mid 2:'ii7. ( '.(•. 
 
 IVr I'attiTsiHi, .). 'Ilic CiiiMii is iiiiiil,. 
 for (laiiifi,i,'eM caiiscil liy t)ii' iifj,'li;,'i,Micc 
 HiTvaiits opcriitiii),' (ii.vi riiiiiciit; "laiixvuv- 
 Vkt. <.li. 2.-. (It.S.C. , li. :is,, 1,111, as til..",,, 
 of ri;.'iit ill llii.i caKi- \xiis lilcil aitiT llii' u 
 of .10 .\: .-.1 N'iii. ell. 10, the tlaiiiiaiit I, 
 subji'ct til lliii ln«M rc'liitiii;,' tu iircv.jiipti 
 thf I'MiviiiiT lit ()iii!i(c, anil his u, tion «,, 
 
 HlTlIii '1. '/'/li >Jlln„ V. J/((////,, •.'■) s, c, I; 
 
 11 law 
 f.iv,. 
 
 'lliWIl 
 ■.1 |,y 
 
 us Vr< 
 
 Hill,.. 
 pr, 
 
 iiil'lr 
 "I il< 
 1:; It 
 I II ion 
 r^-ir- 
 ■ :i|lii. 
 
 :i'ii in 
 pi-i . 
 ■J Hi 
 
 Revenue fnstiiins l)dty.\ 'I'h" aililal.inii 
 duly .it litty lucent, on 'thi tiai- diitv. |iav 
 iilile hir uiiilervaliiatioii uiidiT ■,fc. l(l''ii'ti,' 
 CuHtoiiis Act. '.SN3. JM a dflit ditu to Hit \|, 
 jcsty which is lint liarrcd liy th.; thrw v,.,,!,' 
 Iii-i'scriptioii (niitaiii.d in s-co. 207, 1 lit iiiav 1„. 
 rtcoNcicd al any time in 11 ('niirt nt' conip. t..,,- 
 jiirisdiition, l'dni,i„i Oi/ Co. v. T/iiihi,„ ■• 
 K\. (-'. K. 231. 
 
 Kailway.s and Railway CoMPANiESi, XIII. 
 
 Tierce-Opposition to a Judgment— /,/',,..? 
 
 0/ Opjiusanl 'ih,rr,nli(ii,--.Siil,i of l.it'niiuii, 
 J!i<llil-s Jw/[t,i. e: I 1*. haviii!,' tiled a t,,,-,; 
 oiii-i.silion to ,•' judgment olitaincd l.v tli^ 
 Attonuy-dciicral for 1 he I'iomiico .,f (,'i|h l,iv 
 in KS84, ill a .suit eciniiunecd )iv iiifoii'ii;.tu,u 
 III 1,00, ajiainst th(' surtossion (f one M. I' 
 in order to have the jinlumeiit set a.side 1.11 the 
 ground thut it dielaied e.'-eheated to the (Vuivn 
 .•I part i.f the Seigiiioiy of ( iron, lines, of which 
 no (I'.) had licen in possession lor a "'rent 
 niimher of years. ,md whicli jiidgimnt it^waa 
 alJe,i;ed had lauii ohtaiiied illeyallv and hv fi:iii(l 
 and eolliiMiiU, (in; .M.. ;;„ advocate, \\!i,, ki,l 
 l.uiTh.;..sed all the rij^;hfa of the I'lowu in the 
 .said siiccess:nn, intervened, and asked f„r iliu 
 (Iisini.ssal of the tinri-op/.o^^itioii. 'Jhe Atteriicv 
 (ieiieriil and the cniator to the s.iicce.--i(iii of 
 M. P., tile (lily iiarties tu tiie judgment .soiioht 
 to lie fiet aside, in aikswer to I'.'s /!, r.v .,,1,,,,,,/. 
 tiai merely appeared and declared that ",7s 
 fi'eu rapporli nt ,i Jii.-liee. " Upon the issues licing 
 joined on the /ieree-,,/, position and on the inter' 
 veuthin and evidence taken, the Superior Court, 
 disinis.scd M.'s intervention and maintained P.'s 
 tierre-oj:pi>.sltion. On appeal to the Cmirt of 
 Queen a iieiieli liy the Crown and M. jointly, 
 this judgment was revei.sed, and : I'.'s 7,V/Tf- 
 opiio.Mlinn wa.s diimisted. On appeal to tlif 
 Supreme Court of Canada :— 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Coiiit 
 below : — 
 
 I. That M. had no leeii.^ •.■^'«(// to intervene, 
 the sale to him of the Crown'.s rigjiis heiiig voiil, 
 (o) becau.se it wa.s a sale of litigious riLdits to an 
 advocate prohibited by Art.s. 'UNj ana l.'Mi, C. 
 C., and therefore null" under Arts. 14 ami lHl(i, 
 C. C. ; (b) because it was tainted with cliaiii- 
 petty • Arts. 14, (ISO, 9!I0, C. C. ; (,•) because .M, 
 , udiiiiUed he had no interest in tlie case : Ait. 
 154, C. P. C, 
 I 2. That P. . being in posses.sion of the property 
 Idcclaied esclicated to the Cnnvn in a pimred- 
 
 
|irr 
 
 620 
 
 AliAtNsT ll!K f 'liows 
 
 •ant l.i(ilnHiii.\ |(,|,| 
 
 I under tlii' re. mi \ \n^ 
 
 •lici!, Ill' wlatiitix ill fiir.'fi 
 my ii'i'C'ivfd, tlit^ ('iii«ri 
 iir an iiijuiy iini*,.,l l.y 
 lit-, KiK.h injury lnai,,., 
 n ;i yciir ln'tori' 'tin' lihi;^ 
 ,ulit of act inn Hjn 
 L'iinil •J'.'ti:, (',{' 
 U' ('ln«M M liiaili' li ililf 
 ^ tin! ncj,'li;L,'('lli'c 1. 1 in 
 I riWMcnt laii^^ily^ Irv U 
 
 .'IS|, lilll, iis till! ipctuioii 
 M lilnl aitiT tin: lia,v>iin; 
 ), tilt' (■laiiiiant ln-aine 
 iitin^' ti) iiivciiptii.ii in 
 , anil lii.< at tiiin «a- jirr- 
 Miirtiit, -M S, C. l;. •jii, 
 
 ''"'.'/•! 'I'lii,' aililiii,,iu,[ 
 on tin tnu- duty, |my. 
 
 I niidi'j' ;vl: \U-j n; tia' 
 a di'lit dliu 111 Hi !• M.i 
 ii'd l)y tin: lliiic MiiiV 
 n fcfo. 'JOT, lilt iiin I.,: 
 
 II a {'iiiirt iif i/oinpii.'ii; 
 Oil Co. V. 'fill Uii.-i, ■■ 
 
 621 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 a Juclgnxent— /((•,,..,/ 
 
 ■(i;/--.Vrt/..« o/' lAlUiifiiii 
 havini; tiled a Imi'r 
 cut (.litaiiii'd l.y tli. 
 It I'nnince ut l}i!il,(r 
 inuici'd !iy infill in-tiim 
 
 CCtMsion cf OIK' M. 1',, 
 l.mr:!'!!! ci't a.-iidc i.n the 
 •."i.'lu'atL'd t(i llic (.'rown 
 of (irendiiiis, of wliiuh 
 l)ossi'.ssii.n for a great 
 liiih jud^'Munt it HUM 
 d ill(';.'al!y and l.y fnmil 
 iiii advocato, wim lia.l 
 s of till' I iiiwu in the 
 I'd, and asked fi.r liie 
 .osiHoii, 'J"lii' Atti.ini'v- 
 
 1' (l) tllO S^lllCC'sil.!! of 
 
 o tilt' jtidgiiieiit s(. light 
 
 •I' to 1', 's liiy,: .(./.j^.^l 
 
 ml ilfi'lartd that " ;/< 
 Upon the is.sni..s luin.; 
 "ilivii and on tlu; inter- 
 en, the i^iijierior Coiut 
 on and maintaimd R's 
 ■peal to till' t'oiiit i.f 
 'lowji and M. jointly, 
 ■ised, and; I'.'.s" li, rcr- 
 I. On appeal to the 
 II : — 
 ndgnieiit of tlie ('i.iiit 
 
 (/•< y/iiiif/i to iiiti/rv'nu', 
 vn's right K l.eiiig void, 
 )f litigious riglit.-i toiui 
 rt.'?. l-l.Sj anil I.'i.s;), C. 
 idei' Arts. 14 and !)!i(i, 
 s tainted with cli;ini- 
 C. C. ; (,') l.ec-ause M. 
 ■lest in the ease : Aii 
 
 se.stion of the property 
 CroM n in a proceed- 
 
 i r...;^ 
 
 ii.;'to whnli he was not 11 party, had a Hiilfleient 
 ii.lire«t, iind-r the eiiennHtanees. in tlio ea.so to ' 
 111., a h, rn-„i,/„..,/io„, .md that tin judginent of 
 ISSjBhonld lie Het aNido liee.iiMe, iiih r iilin {a) 
 it ua..* olitained hy fraud and eolhisiim : (/-) 'tho 
 Hitiiiii lieiiiu' preseriliid in INSI : Arts "''Iti 
 
 ri^lit to avail Imn.self i,f thi,.< pieseription. 
 
 I'lairnii'i', .1,, di,sentod on the .^oimiid that I' 
 not having alleged or shewn a right ..iiiiierior to 
 t the < rmvn, hiH /iV)r/.o/</,o.<,V;(i// Hhould 
 '• '''■"■• V. Mnrin; IS ,S. C. K. 
 
 622 
 
 i po»«os^ion was t.ikeii a-ain ■„ the Hpii„g hy the 
 
 !; I '(")'.' I t.sd '"•■"'"" '"^'"'"' ''"'■'•'■'"'' '-'^"^Vo., 
 
 .SV'. ffiiriinl V. O'/Jimolioi; jS A, \l. ,■)'.'(! I'» 
 ;^" 1/ i^' ■'*'' '""'' *''-^ '• il^ilon V. (•((..'(/, -2:2 S 
 
 1. 1.. ,:!!•, /,o,,m;:;-J: /'oc/..^ v. cv//<oo//,L';f'.s. c. \i. 
 
 tint 
 
 111: lliHlni-^M 
 
 Si'r l,(ilirrtili,r (^n 
 11)4, //ov/ OJ'J : .1/ ,, 
 l:. UN, null- ;j(lo. 
 
 V. Thr tj,lr,„, f|,s!»3| A. C, 
 iial V. Till. (Jnini, ;j Kx. (,'. 
 
 II. •'I..MM.S Tt, ItKAI.rV. 
 
 I. A'-t.i of Oinitrihi;i. 
 
 yma.ncY~T(i.rii - Eiih-y — Vnaoit I',,,.-,,..,. 
 ™i«.| -In l,S.-,7 or I,S,-,,S J. entered npon the 
 liual ill (luestion in this ai'tion as teiiimt to I ho 
 trim owners, upon the terms that he should p.i v 
 thetnx.s, and he .'ultivated tin: land iliirii../hi's 
 oeeupation. In the aufniiiM of l.Slll he .'a^. up 
 thi'phieeto the plaiiitiir, who paid liiiii sonie-- 
 tl.in:; lor iniprovenients ; and in the .sprin.r ,,f 
 LSI).) the ))laniliiro:.gan to work upon it, livim' 
 upon and ,i.', npyiiig an ailioiiiin- lot of lamf 
 stpuratiil liy a f.-nce. The plaintilf ili.«'hti„„.,i 
 any kiiowl.'.lgo of .(.'s tenamy. and alleged tlirt 
 he entered as a purchaser of J,'s ri dit.s as 'i 
 sijimtter, witii the intention of aeiiuirin.'a title 
 hy pos.session. In I.S'I.S the true ouners luiileil 
 i.i.wn au old ten.'c and put up a iie-.v one upon 
 pui'tot the land iiiiinestion. In ISTTthe tdain- 
 tilt exeeuted a writing under seal, whereiiv he 
 Ui-reed to lease tho hind from the true ounei's 
 mid to j,;iy as lent the taxes theremi ,'u,d to "ive 
 111, pos,.e,sion when rei, nested. Fmm the t'ime 
 the p imtilt li.iught out .J. till |,SS-t, when he 
 cased to use or oeuupy the land, he -reu- erons 
 ftuil yegetaldes upon it in the .summer and did 
 ni.thnigatall m the winter e.\e.:pl draw manure 
 upon it, whieh he spread in the siuing : - 
 
 HeM, lollnwlng /■'/«,■/, v. minn/, lii A l; 
 4S4, that the mere f.u't that the phiintil}paiii the 
 taxes Has not sullieient to keep the ri. ht of the 
 owners alive a.uninst him ; hut what was done 
 hy the own,:r.s in lS(i8 was an entiyupon the 
 ^111(1 in the eapaeity of owners, an .'issertion of 
 tlieirrights as sneh, and a resmniition i,f iios. 
 «|.'3s.lon for the time being, l.efoie the .statute 
 then in toree had given a title to the iilaintiir, 
 am It tiirnished a new starting point; and 
 fiirther, that wimt the plaintifidid upon the land 
 ilid not shew sueli a possession a.s entitled him 
 t|) assert that he hail .'leiiuired a title as a.-ainst 
 the true owners. "■' 
 
 The arts done in the whiter diil not eonstittito 
 jm oecnpation of the ].roperty to tlie e.xelusion of 
 the riudits ot the true owners, Imt wer,' mere 
 JCtH ot tiv...p:i.<s, eovering neee.s.sarilv l.nt a verv 
 ^horfc pi.rtinn of the winter; and, as tlie ,.osses. 
 Mon ni.isr he take,, to have been v:„'n„t in- tlie 
 Mnaiuiler of it, the right of the true <,wner would 
 altaeh upon e.^'h oecasion when the possession 
 ^panie thus vaeant, and the operation of the 
 '■>tutiite ot Limitations would cease until aetual 
 
 'i. .!» A[itiii.^l till' Croii-ii. 
 
 Title — .SV;,/;),-//,'/,.] -Held, in an aetion of 
 eoetnienthy the Crown, with leu-ard to the 
 elami of the eompany, defendants,' to hold tho 
 whole ol the land in suit hy pi'eseription nml 
 imnieinoiial ii, is.se *-,ion, that imismueli a:^ tin, 
 t'omnany had di,«elo.M-d the true root of its title 
 tliohuvot pre.HL'ription did not ai.plv. /.ul.ni- 
 'l"f ( o. V, !%■ \lli,;,i, [1,S)«) A. C. 1(14 
 
 .'I, I'tiiiimkirii'x. 
 
 Elvldence-/lr/.>o/-0,n/,'nv/,;o,]_Aeti.,M.s for 
 , trespass to land, defended on the yromnl of 
 w.uil ot title in the pl.-iintills and title hy nos- 
 , S0.S.S1O1, 1,1 the defeiMlant. At the trial evidenee 
 i w_as given on helialf of the plaintills of a survey 
 j "f their l;u,d and th.' defendant's land udjoining, 
 !;»n;l«-;" ISO!. hy one I!., in whieh, ashe re! 
 J poi ed to t1,e ( rown Lands Depannnnt, ho had 
 ,niado a mistake, and uhieh In, eorreeteil by 
 
 : I'""'";- 'I',',; 1'"^'-^ ''«', '''^'l 1>1»'"''1 ='« the line was 
 
 tiaeed. Ihe di'fen.lant eontended that the lino 
 
 as ti,'st run by |J. was the true line. As to i.os- 
 
 . .se,s.sioii thf evidenee was that the d.-fendant 
 
 had eut timber on the land in dispute f,.r many 
 
 ; .years, and also t.:|,ped maple trees for sugar, 
 
 I'lit had not tem:e.i tlio land until some .six or 
 
 .jeveii year.s betme action. The trial .Imlgo 
 
 I fonnd th.atthopla,ntiHshad respeetivelv p,-..ved 
 
 I title to tl,i',r lauds, and th.'it the acts of owi.er- 
 
 j «hip shewn by the defendant we|-e mere acts 
 
 ot trespass, eimmiitted either wilfully or in 
 
 ! ignoraneeas to bi,ui„laiies,and not such as wouhl 
 
 I enalile his posse.vsion to ripen into a tith'. His 
 
 ; deeision was allirined bv the t'oiirt of Ai.i.eal for 
 
 /'ntario and by the .Supreme Court of Camilla 
 
 ■w 7'/"!'. l':.,/'""''''' ""''"" "■'■ /fnwplirii:,, 22 
 
 4. Cpiinifiinnu)!/ of Statiili: 
 
 Si'i' MiiLun: v. liUirk: 20 O. i:, 70, jxw/ Ii2;5 • 
 keiitw Km/. ':0(). II. l.-s, 44.J, 1!) V |; •(-,•>' 
 /.a</ (i'JS ; //;// V. As/,hn,/;,i-, -JO A. R. 44, ,,o.^/ lm\ 
 < I'llni V. ^oylh Amtrican Land Co., 21 O R SO 
 aiile (321. " ' 
 
 T). Z>i>in I. 
 
 Judgment- 117//. J-J,, an aetion by a devisee 
 
 to establish a destroyed will devising real estate. 
 
 to \yhieh the plaintilf in this aetioii', the widow 
 
 , oi tm: testator, was a defendant, she. althongh 
 
 I abe pleaded to the actio,,, did not elaim to be 
 
 I C'ltilled to or to recover her <l..wer in the land, 
 
 ot which the aeli(m also souu'lit to deiii-ivo her 
 
 andailecree was m.'vle declaring that the de- 
 
623 
 
 LIMITATION OF AOTIONft 
 
 vinnp oiiooftliu ilcfen.kiitg in this action, huh 
 wilitliMl t(. tlio liui.l ill fuu Himplu, Hiil.i,.,;t to tlio 
 clottvr ot till, iplaintill':- 
 
 Hilil, tliiit lliu ilecicu dill not iirovent tliu 
 ninnn.jr „i nee. •.'.-, „| i|,^ H,,,,i IV„|.,.rtv Lini- 
 itatioji Act, I! S. (». .,li. IIJ.Ho UH to iVirtlKi 
 rtMiiiMly ot tlio i)lmutitl'. Cojk v. Voj,e, •_'() o U 
 
 •I. £a1Lml)lf^. 
 
 IntBrruptlon ~-OirM;„,^;„„.|_Tlu. linui fm 
 
 ar,ui-,.tiun ot an oasmnont l.y |.r..sciii.ti Iocs 
 
 not run wliilo tliu doniinant ami Hfivicnt ti^nc 
 niunt., aio in tliu ouonpatiou of tli.) Maniu oui-Hon 
 even tlioiigli tliu occupation of the horviuiit tone' 
 iiioiit l.c wrongful and without tliu |.rivity of thu 
 truu owiiur. y«/it,< V. Frn/nmii, -Jl A. H ;f';i 
 
 AlHiniud l.y th.^ .Siii.runiu Court of fana.la I 
 fenjiiwii V. JiiiDM, 21 S. C. I!. ~{>:i. ' 
 
 Water Pipes -/>'ni/,r,i!/.]-Si.nrly {„nyymvH\ 
 liutoru tliu coinnicnuuinent of the action, the 
 l)rudccuMor« in title of the dcfcn.lants laid |,i|,u,s '' 
 tor convey. 1,^- water along the railway line of 
 tlie plaintilts [iredueessors, using thenrfor such 
 l)ur|iose almost continuously up to the time the 
 action was hrought : — 
 
 Held, that the dufendunts, not having used 
 and enjoyed their easement for forty years h id 
 not acquired a title thereto l,y prescription 
 
 'I'^'u It" n '"■ ''■ ''''""'" "•'■ '^''".'A"'" ^•«//s 
 
 Water Rights.]— .SV 
 1!. 'Jl'T, 'JiiO. K. -JIG. 
 
 £//(■■< V. Claneiu, 21 O. 
 
 imwi 
 
 7. L'li/ri/ or C/tiim. 
 
 Mortgase -Vara,,/ /,a,i(l.s.]~S((; IMaueii v 
 (■ii,m,ii.ni/;i,-!jic n. W. Co., -2X0. K. W , jmt '{Siii. 
 
 •Veri&ncy Vwniit /',,,-x, «,/„„. J_.sv,, Cuffin v. 
 J\ 0,-ih A mirirai, La, id Co., I'l U. R. 80, ante (jl>l. 
 
 H. Feiiciiiij. 
 
 Boundaries -/■;,■/,/,;„.,..] — .Vfc Horton v. 
 ta.-'iy, -J-J: S. C. 1!. 7;ii), ante 622. 
 
 Possession — T,r.-p„s.-<S/,i/r of Xaliirc 1— 
 M-e .^tovd V. (;mjury, 21 A. K. l.sj, po./ (j;il. 
 
 0. FmiK/. 
 
 Crown Patent — Lu,;,t,v Hcceint. 1 _ One 
 through whom the i.laintill' claimed obtained in 
 Jb.).. troni the eommi.ssioiier of crown lands a 
 receipt on sale of a certain lot of land. In ISCS 
 JJ., in whose posscssi(m this receipt was, handed 
 It Lack to the crown lands odicc, and l.y means 
 of fraud procured his own name to be substi- 
 tuted as purchaser in the books of the ('eri-rt 
 nieia ; and he and those claiming under him, 
 including the defendant, had remained in pos- 
 
 184 
 
 scsHiou of the lot ever Hinou. In Is72 r.|,- 
 phi.ntir, having learncl of the imposition, a, 
 I'hcd to the d..partm,.nl lor .edrea«. Tli , 
 appll.Mtinn wan pen.ling and undinpoHed „f \1 
 the commissioner till llth March, 'SS<( whei, ,• 
 ^ was onlered that the patent shuuM iHH,'... ,otl„: 
 I .letendant, but three months were.dlowe.l t.. f|„: 
 plalntill t.. tike proceeilings in ( 'omt to est il,||„|, 
 his title, and within that time the plam i 
 .•omnunced this action for a declaration ,„ 
 I hiH right to thu land : • 
 
 Held, allirmiiiK the deeinion of Ferguson, J 
 tliat t he plaiutifl » right of action was not barreil 
 by any stitutu of liiiiitati(.n. 
 
 I'er Hoyd, ('.- The cane might be likund h, 
 a matter litigate.l in the proper loruui wherri,, 
 no decision is given till after the laosu „f 
 years :— ' 
 
 Held, per I-'ergus, I., (Robertson, ,( div 
 
 mmtmg), that even if the .Statute of Liii„tati,„H 
 did coinmence to run .■ig.iiust those under who,,, 
 he plaintil claiine.l, it ceased to do so on 
 lescission of tlu! .sale an,l the substitution of H •, 
 name 111 bSliS, becau.se then all right to bri.a' 
 an action or make an entry on tlieir part ceased 
 Me Lure V. lihirk, 20 t>. R. 70. 
 
 10. Iiilcrriqit'um of Stntuli; 
 
 S<t Mr/ur,' V. m.u-k; 20 (). R. ;(,, „„U G2;) • 
 /iiiKs V. l'rr:iii,i,„i, 21 A. R. ;j2:), •>! .s (■ n 
 
 7o;), <i„u (i2j. ' • ^- "• 
 
 1 I. /, 1(11(1 id Tr((.il. 
 
 win -/V«,.«;o« In, Tr((,h,'.\-^.\ «„„ „f tj,,, 
 testator and one ot thu executo.s and ti-ustues 
 naiiied ,ii a « ill w,,s a imnoi «hun his father 
 died, and after coming of .-ige he uevu' .ippljnl 
 for probate, thougl. hu knew of the will and ,li,| 
 lot disc, um. With thu consunt of the actiiar 
 trustee l.u went int(. pos,sessioii of a farm he- 
 longing to the estate, and remained in posses- 
 sion over twenty years, and until tiic period of 
 distribution arnve.l, and then claimed to have 
 a title under tliu Statute of Limitations •_ 
 
 ilch , allirming the decision of the Court of 
 
 Appeal, JS A K. 2.'-,, th.-.t as he held under an 
 
 express triLst by the terms of thu will, the rights 
 
 I of the other devisees could not be barred bv tlie 
 
 j statute. J/u(((jhloii v. /;. //, 2;i ,s. C. K. kiCj_ 
 
 ' w«y^"* -r>'rr/((,., hy Exu-xhn:] _ Juilgmeiit 
 ■ivas lecovcred against the executors of an estate 
 
 .1.1 indorsed by the testator for his aceommo; 
 
 tn r'xr ^" ^:V" ^"'"^ •'^■^•'^'^'1 '•>' tl"^ t'-tator 
 to A. i\I., another son, was sohl under execii- 
 tion issue, on the ju,igme„t, and purchased hy 
 
 ,; }}■' \\l'°\,'" '•''•'•'• ^•°"^-^y>^-l it to another 
 hn.ther, W . M. In 180,5 it was sohl under exe- 
 cution issued on a .judgmunt ,ig;,inst W. .\1 and 
 ag.iin purchased by O. M. J,, |s,ss A. M the 
 duvisee of the land under the will, took forcihie 
 posses.sio„ thereof, an,l |), M. brought an action 
 against liini for po.ssessioii : — 
 
 ilel.l, alKrming the decision of the Court of 
 Appcat, .strong, J., d,s.sei.U„g, that tliu sale in 
 JMO_ being for his own debt, I). .M did not 
 acijuire title to the land for his own benefit 
 
624 
 
 jr giiicu. In isTj ,|„, 
 <1 <if till. inipoMitii,!,, ,i|i' 
 it'Ml lor ri!(lii'»H. T|,|| 
 K anil iiniliHpoHiHl <,f |,y 
 Hh Manli. !,SS!», »l..!ii,» 
 
 llrlll Hllullld IMsllr III til,. 
 illlIlM \V.!l<)illlowi;.| to tln^ 
 
 iiiK'tiiiCoiiittoi'Kt.iMii,!, 
 timt tinit! tli(' lilaiiiiitf 
 for a ilfi.liiriiti..ii u.h to 
 
 ^cinion of Furt,'iisriM, ,;,_ 
 1)1' iiulioii wast not iMirmi 
 tiiiij. 
 
 •<«• iiiixlit 111' likeniil til 
 
 jiio|)i.i- forum wlKircin 
 
 ill lifter tUu l,i[iHu i,f 
 
 ■ I., (Ui)l)crt8on, .)., ilis. 
 -■Statute of Linntiition.H 
 liii.-it tlio.io niii|..r whom 
 
 I CI-IIMImI til llo HO (III 
 
 thfHiil.atitiitioii of H.'s 
 thin nil rij,'ht to hrimi 
 
 ly on l\w\r p.ut cfoucl 
 ri. 70. 
 
 Ill ql .Valiifi; 
 
 '■<> <). |{. 70, uiiltlW; 
 
 ■ H. -.m, ^4 ,S. C. It. 
 
 '/( Ti-iikI. 
 
 'nis/n: I -A Hon of tlio 
 xeuiUois ami tniattus 
 liiior wUaii l,is father 
 l'iij,'L' ho iifVtr itiii)li.Ml 
 niw of the will amldiil 
 coiiHent of till' iiotiiij; 
 t;.ssion of a farm hi;, 
 il rt'inainiMJ in iiosscs- 
 iil until tliu iierioil i,f 
 thuu cliiiincil to have 
 if Limitations : — 
 vision of the Cnurt of 
 as lie hehl nuil.T an 
 111 tho will, the rijjhts 
 I not lit' liai ivil l.v tlie 
 /, 2:i S. V. 1!. ti),s. 
 
 xeiifoi:] — .JmlKmeiit 
 s.xecutorsof an estate 
 one of the executors, 
 tor fur liis aeeonmio- 
 .•iseil hy the testator 
 'S sold under excoii- 
 ut, and purehased hy 
 iveyed il to another 
 t was sold under exe- 
 It airainst \V, .\I.,an(l 
 In l.SNS A. M., the 
 he will, took foreihle 
 M. liruught an action 
 
 ion of tlie Court of 
 iiig, tiiat the sale in 
 'I't, l>. .M. did not 
 for his own lienefit 
 
 625 
 
 tlienhy, hut heeanie n trustee tor A \l 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 v.CV<o;/vv. JA„7A,W/. |>0(). |{ ,-„j, ,„„-,...- 
 
 I-'. .Uo,/;/,l,,or „„,/ .\/,„.l,,,i,/,,_ 
 Notice -^.'i 10'/ F<Ulh~l'o.„,,i.,„ K-The r.. 
 
 "IMidentH. haviiiK lent a HUM. of n onvv v. o e 
 
 S:/Lf;::-r-v;.^^i''::''- 
 
 'it«'||of Lilioiron to the ^aine wl-Tr"".' 
 
 •p I""". .'i.'.i ti„.. ii,.;i,;:i ;,„,.:,■ '■;■■ 
 
 In then' declaration the iippellants .ill,.",. I 
 - I- respondents had heen' In o^,„2^ 
 li'*.' property since !lth May, ]87<1, and aft " tl 
 -V'";: they moved the Court to an end e I 
 ;•"■"'"■; l'.V sulistituting for the !lth May m ' 
 th.-' H-iirds "1st I)coeml"r ISSii " ti ' ^' ,'''• 
 w.n rufnaein,,, f I, w ■' I lie ni'itioii 
 
 . I ,'V •■ '^"I'^''-""' ( "ii'-t. which hel, 
 
 ':tSrr'c:;;;hr;;!;:'-ij:''t'''''''^-' 
 
 to tiie Supreme Court it wL •- ' ' "" "l'''^''' 
 
 i;i.;i..nm. ..,'ti..„vi„;-,;,;;,;;i;l;:;;[S,;v 
 Itnthlv',';:;:;.'"^ '"'^'"^"'^ '<-i'^ "'-o th« 
 
 _.luil;rment of the Chancery liiviaion -'I O H 
 ;-. 1. yvers'.il, „.,,,, ,. A..^li..se,t V VV"; 
 
 TlUo, I -T),,. statutory title I'liii,.,! h., n 
 ;-nKa«orenure.ti,thoh^.etitoftr:;itX. : 
 
 Vacant Lands -f'„u«frm-/!r,' /'o.v.,,;,^,. /v, 
 l.creaiiKhtofentry has accrue,! t Tm.lt' 
 
 '■y.i:~i,;;y'nc;,, ;:■"•'■'"• '-"!"■« 
 
 In MUeh an action, after th. 
 va,:int for many years, an, 
 t.hen made an actual entry: 
 
 iis seourity 
 igiir being 
 
 lands had Injen 
 'he miirtgagee had 
 
 -lispossessed, ami'thj u;;:;?;' ri::M:\!'r'rT"^' 
 
 enti 'I'e i".""''":"^' '".""'■.V-^ the-'mort^.^,., ^., 
 
 Mo'^;,!;;Vh:u;i^^:::;^ ;,;'-'; <>'r''i- that 
 
 iJ:'p:p:(^zjiedo;^;-^^^ 
 
 .u.acU..Uor redemption or to actions si,X I: 
 
 tiJ:.^inSa?ti'"i;:[-i:,r;-tfc^^- 
 s:Ttf;:-'^f-r^.e--v-'it 
 
 ajioiu sixteen y..r._ IM/un,-, v. CuaJ^iau ^ 
 
 g£' '^''"'"'"^ "■■ ^^"P'-'^^' li' S. C. R. 5:U, po.t 
 
 sig 
 iS() 
 
 perty to a subsequent mol't. "i:::-:";;:! T- 
 
 mort'-a.roe shorn,' nff "^''"-'J'- 'he suhaequent 
 
 Pe^ty to a dr i^ "'"'''T''' ^'""^'^Ted the pro- 
 
 >w.i^ third person, hut, notwithstamling 
 
 l;!. .yalu,-e and /'no/ of Po<.csmn. 
 Disseisin— /',»«")• Tilh—T,.;.,i n 
 
 tun pirtiy in Vneeii s County, \.s., of whieh 
 tl e ^'rautor had l.eeu iu po.sc.^io, n toTs^?! 
 Comitv • "f '■r'',"P"" the'portiiin ili ijuaenba^j 
 Counts, winch he occupie.l until his <leath in 
 
627 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 628 
 
 III 
 i 
 
 1888. 'I'lic f,'r.iiitce iindt r tliu died never oii- 
 tcrtd iijoii any jmit of the land, and in IMifi lie 
 conveye.l the wlmli! to a son of C, then aliout 
 24 years old, vlio re.«ided w itli C. fiom tlie time 
 he took l)ll^K(!-,'.ion. liolh d( e<Is weie registered 
 111 Queen's. 'Die son shortly afterAvards n.ar- 
 ned, and ^v(nt to live on the (>neen's fomity 
 p(prtion. Me died in 1S7L', and his widow, alter 
 living witli C. for a time, married V. and went 
 l)!«k to (Jueen's ('„nnty. P. worked on the 
 Lunenburg land with ('. for a few years, when 
 a dispute arose and he left. C. .-ifterwards, hy 
 iiri internicdiate de<il, conveyed the land iii 
 Lunenburg County to his wife. On one oeea- 
 sion I', .sent a eow ujion the land in Lunenburg 
 Connty, «hieh was driven oil, and'no other ael 
 of ownei.-liii) "11 that ])oiiion of the laiul was 
 attempted until IMIO, ,ifter C. had died, when 
 1'. enteied upon flie hind ami eut and carried 
 avay hay. Jn an action of trespnss by C'.'s 
 widow for such entry, the title to the hind was 
 i)< t traced hack beyond the deed excculul in 
 
 isrio : — 
 
 Hfhl. i-.tliiniing the deei.Mon of the Suiircine 
 Court ol ^•ova Seotia, tl:at C'.'s son not having 
 a elear docnmentaiy title, his posiiession of the 
 land was limited to such part as was proved 
 to be in his aetna.l jursession and in that of 
 thosc_ claiming throiigh him; (hat neither he 
 iicr his succesM.rs in title ever had actual iios- 
 session of the Iriid in Luneiibuig County ; that 
 the posses.- ion of C. was never interfered with 
 by the deeds executed; and, havini' eontiiun d 
 in pcsscssien for nic re than twenty years, C. 
 hiul a title to tin land in Lunenburg ("euiity by 
 Iinscnption. J'ar/.s v. Cai.i.ov, LJiV. C. P.. !;•_'. 
 
 'Wi\l—Uii<i((iri.ilLinifl.'\—A son of the tc^ta- 
 t<)i w;cnt upon a farm of ,S(i acres, belicyiic 
 thct It had been devi.sed to him by the wilb 
 and remained in iio::sctsioii for mere than ten 
 J'tars :- 
 
 Held, upon the evidence, that he had acquired 
 a good title ly virtue of the statute, to the 
 Whole J-(i acres, thoii-h only juirt was cleared anil 
 cultiyated. !!,■ liaiiuntd l.islU^ i',", (). R, |;-;(;_ 
 
 ^ See Hivar<l\. O'Dmohoi-, Is A. I,'. .VJ!), p) 
 S. O. R. -M I . ;-o.~/ (i-JS ; ( -ojiiii y. Xci Ih A mtAcau 
 Loud Co., '2\ (). K. hO, auU (i'Jl ; MrJJomM v. 
 JUcDoiiald, '21 S. C. K. 201, aiite tm 
 
 14. Pitrt'ition. 
 
 See Hfvard y. O'Dovo/wc, IS A. U. 529. HI 
 S. C. K. ;^-ll, piiyf ()2S ; //nil/ V. //(/,',/. 20 O 1! 
 61, po'^t ()!•!); Boxhrx. /'/u'/lipx,2:\S.(.:. R. ;)17, 
 po.-f ()2!) ; llaldtriii v. Kli:i;.^f(„ic, ]S A R O.'s' 
 post C'iO. ' 
 
 ]5. Pnynii'iit n/ Tiixa. 
 
 "tenancy -Ell />■!/— Vamid /'a-v,..«/V,;/.]— ,S'<e 
 f'ojflii V. Xorlh American Land Co., 21 R 
 80, mdr 02]. 
 
 16. PosseMlon !'y nr Aiianisf Infants. 
 
 Guardian— i¥ryo)//)/o//,//h?(/.]_A guardian 
 «fan infant appointed by the Surrogate Court 
 
 under R, S. f). eh. LST has jiower to lease t'le 
 aiids (t the iiifiiiit during the l;itter's niim.iity 
 but not b( ymid that i)criod. Hn-ilr.i r v. ,1/, )/;/ 
 (nil, •l:\ (Ji-. .■;!,S. net followed. 
 
 I'nring mk h minority the guardian isa tiu-tie 
 of the lands tor tlii> infant and eannot aci|nirc ■, 
 
 title to them by possession, bill after the nia'i.Mtv 
 of tlie infant the po.sse...sion of tlie giia'r..i,.K 
 changes its character and becomes that ..t i 
 stranger, tind the .statute of Limitations runs i|. 
 .avourof the giiardinnortlio.se ehiiming i!i.,|e,' 
 him. ,///,/■,,/ v. ,s/,„v,-, 11 O. ]!. KKj, feline, ,1 
 Cl„rk,' v. M(tviii,i„l!. 20 (). K. fiU-l 
 
 Guardian— 7V»(/^^ /,,/ //„ C,n-hyii.]-.A mui 
 married in l,S,-,4, conveyed in 1S70 certain Li'ds 
 to Ins wile by dctd under the Short Porni- \.t 
 With the usual covenants, for the e.\))i( s.s, d cm," 
 KidiTat:i 11 of "rt.spcct and of one dollar.' 'Iln. 
 husband and wife rcniaincd in po.s.'-es.-.jon ,( ti,,. 
 amis until the wife died in 1872, leaving a will 
 by wh'.ch she devised her real estate to tMo 
 daughters of liersi-lf iu,d (his husband, aged le 
 speetively seventeen and twelve. The liii.djaml 
 nniaiiud m po.ssission till his death in IMIO 
 his action w;is then brought by the \<.iiii..er 
 daughter and the son of the eliler daughter" to 
 recover possession from the devisee of the hiis 
 liand ; — 
 
 Peld, reversing (he decision of Poyd (' 0(( 
 O. P. ].-.«, that the ]:eal Property Liirilat'i.,..'lu.t 
 ilKl not api ly .'^oas to extingui.'-h the ri-lits ef the 
 lilaiiitills to recovir; the pieM.mptieai'being that 
 Ihe husband, tift.r e<.nveyirg to his wi.'e, w,;^ in 
 Jio.^scssion of thelaiHhs ai'd in receipt oi tlieieiita 
 and prehts, for and.. n behalf of his wile; and tint 
 upon his wife's ilcath, he enteied into poises' 
 .smn and receipt for and on behalf of his iiilant 
 ehiidivn and as tlieir natural guardian ; and this 
 being so, his possession and receijjt were the 
 possession and neeiiit of liis wife, and, alter her 
 death, ef his children and those chiimiii" luitlcr 
 them; and the statute, therefore, never bi-c-an 
 to run. Wall v. St(u,ii:„k; 'M Cli. I), 7(i,S • /,v,« 
 H,.I,hs. ;-0 Ch. 1>. .'i.-.S; /.,/,.// y. K,,n,..l,: M 
 Ap;i. ('as. 4;-i7, followed. Ilicbyv. Si,.,-',, \\ 
 O. P. lOd; ClarLr v. J/(ic,/o/,(//." 20 O. p. :,^^ 
 not followed. K'ld v. Ki iil, 'M O.R. JtA'i. ' 
 
 Aflirmed by the Court of Appeal A',),/v 
 A'e«^ 19A. P. ;i.'i2. 
 
 17. Tinaid.-i hi Cummoi:. 
 
 Caretaker of one Tenant— /'(/)7;/;'i« — ,l,/ 
 rer.->- yV«.-.s:s./o/,.; -Tlie defendant wa.s placeil 
 in po.sse.ssion of certain property as earetiker iiy 
 one tenant in conimoii, who was ni.iniigiiiL; tlio 
 piece of prop-rly in .|uestii,n, and other" pro- 
 perty, for the bi'iulit of himself and his co- 
 tenants. In l.S(i(i a decree w.-i.-i made deelarin,!; 
 thiit this oo-tenant wiw a trustee for liiiiisel'f 
 and the other eo-teiinnls in certain propoi i ions, 
 and he w.'is ordereil to convey to the other co- 
 tt'iianta their shares, to be ascertained hv the 
 Master. Variona ))roccediiigs were taken iniilcr 
 the decree, and the shares of the dill'eieiit 
 co-teiiaiits were ascertained, the property in 
 question being allotteii (o the ]il,'iinlilfs in I'.MiX, 
 but no conveyances were executed. An order 
 vesting till' share of the plaintill's in tiieni was 
 made in ISSS ; — 
 
628 
 
 1ms ]iii\viT to liiisc till, 
 ML! thu hittur'.s mill. .lily, 
 iitiil. !iirll:./r V. J/. .1/,/! 
 
 )Ml(i. 
 
 till' gimrdian is a tnistce 
 lit iiiid I'fiiiiK.t ac-(|iiin: a 
 >ii, lull all or till' 11111,'!.! ily 
 ifssi.iii of tho gii.-ui.'ii.ii 
 111(1 liPcMdiics that i.f n 
 n of Limitations vm,^ i,, 
 ir those olaiiniiijL; npilcr 
 
 no. ]!. l(l(i, fullnM,.,,. 
 
 (). i;. rm 
 
 629 
 
 LIMITATION or ACTIONS. 
 
 <•.!';>::■ ,iil,x„;,';if!'S„"! .testes' '•■■"■ t"-- "■ <■■■-■' "- 1»' 
 
 630 
 
 fo"l fe .,n 1 ' ; ''"T'*' ";■""" ''""• t<'lli-^"i,Iow 
 
 lint '"; 'T ;''''^"'' '" '"•" "q-iH'w.s, 
 
 " n thoca.^e ot the.leath of tl,ei„. oi . itlie,- 
 "f them II, hi.s o«ii lifetime, he ,levise,l the 
 «l.a.'e of Mich aeeea.e.1 to the hei :a h w or 
 
 : -■— i-.-.-v -,^1.111 ni [lie (leleii 
 
 lie that ot the plaimifl,, who e-.iihl imt Tftei'. 
 siiel, time eoiueii.l that he was in po. e 'ioi a 
 their earetakei- ; ami therefore that ho ha 
 aoiiiiired title liy ixjsses.-iioii. 
 .liKljjmeiit of 'Ho.se, J., reVen 
 
 ;///" (■urle.^y.\-A man, 
 111 III ISTOeeitaiii l.i.ils 
 •!■ the Short l''oriiis A't, 
 .s, for tlieeN)>n>si<l n.n". 
 ml of one <lol!ar. " The 
 1K(1 ill jKpjsses.vioii (I iln; 
 
 I STL', 
 
 L'avmj^ a wi]! 
 
 her leal estate (o two 
 Ihis IuisI'mik!, a!.r.( i(.. 
 I twelve. 'J'he hii.-liaiul 
 till his death in l.sflo. 
 oii;;ht by the youn-^or 
 f the elder daiii.'!it( r to 
 tlie devisee of ihe luis- 
 
 ceisinii of Hoyd, ('., 'ill 
 'loiierly Liii.ilalioi).\ft 
 
 m^iiK^h the ri-hisff tile 
 l;icMimiili(,iil„.;i,j.-tl,at 
 
 yil'g to ilis wife, «;;siu 
 
 h1 ill roeeiptoi tlie rents 
 • alfof liisvife::iiiii|,iit, 
 le entered into iievses- 
 oii hehidf of his infant 
 lira! giiardi;ui ; ainl tlii.H 
 and reeei])t \\ei(> thn 
 his wife, ami, aitci her 
 d those claimil,;,' rmler 
 therefore, never li.;;:iu 
 A ;M Ch. I). Tli.S : f'lu 
 l.yU V. Kiliwl,:. U 
 
 Hichii V. ,s7,.,-. , . II 
 (icioiiiH'. L'o (I. 1; :,ii4 
 ■'/'/, 20 O.K. 41,-.. 
 rt of Ajipeal. Kmi v. 
 
 li Cinnmoi). 
 
 iar\t~/'arli/:iiii -~ Ail 
 ilefemlaiit wa.s phiceil 
 •oiierty a,>i caretaki r iiy 
 ho was maiui;,;iiVi,' the 
 slii'ii, and othi'r pro- 
 f hiinsc^lf and liis to- 
 ee was niiide deehirini; 
 a trustee for liiiiisclf 
 in certain pro]i(irlions, 
 iivey to the other co- 
 lie aseertained hy the 
 Ijnya were talieii iiiuler 
 ire.s of the diU'ereiit 
 ned, the pi-np(itv in 
 the |ilaiiiiilts in iMiN, 
 oxeeiited. An nrdcr 
 )laintitrs in them was 
 
 » y in as a earetaUer for one of the owners •'UeVt 
 afterwards the property was severed l.y ml ' 
 ileeree, and su..l, owner was or.lered to eo vey 
 oeitimi portiniis to the other.s ; that afrer the 
 .ev..mi,oe the delendant performed acts s^w ' 
 h.-it. he was .slillaetin^. for the owners ; and hi 
 he idso exereised aets of ownership hy'eindo'im' 
 1.1 ;.. . i-i ^ 
 
 the land with a feiiec ami 
 
 ill otlier ways ; 
 
 _ . i-t^ iu.-,uiioi-uie(i in l.^.i.S, eav 111' 
 
 iim^irviviiy twosonsand two daimhtc'rs. Tm 
 
 b^stator died ,11 ISIili, „i,d his widow in ISTiC- 
 
 Ll'onthedeatli or the testaf.r-s wid(,w the 
 
 hree surviving ehildren of the .keeas 1 eiihew 
 
 one dan.-hter had died a short time hefore. h 
 
 ■■^tateaml nnii, .rri.d) entered into po.sse.ssion 
 ai.'l enjoyment of the land in ,p,esti'on under 
 
 ,, .^, — 'uo ,„ oinerwavs- and ' fl 1 l' ? . , ""-■ """' '" 'I'le.-iti 
 
 to .let as earetaker ; and that his possessi, 
 herefore, cont.nuod to l,c that of earetaker id 
 e had aequired no title l,y possession, y,' 
 
 />oiio/w,; \S A. ];. o2i), HIS. C. JJ. :{.i| 
 
 iminon of 
 
 .0 mlivided mmery thereof, the snrvivii^ 
 •q^nv oe,n^ entitled to the other undivided 
 
 I . les .loiiied the in.tiunients eontainin^' re- 
 
 .Ml the rents ami proeeed.s of sales heim- di! 
 
 ded .unon,.; them ,n the proportion of onedialf 
 
 t., ,e survu in,u iieiiliew, and (aie-sixth to eaeli 
 
 Partltlon-.-l.«;;/,„,„,;,/ f,f i^,,, . , ^hen a ! "^'."^ '^•'■'^- J" '^>"> -^ I'artition deed was ex- 
 
 -heir lias_ assigned his share in i sn ecet ion I, T,'" ""'^ "'' ""^ ""•^"''' P'"'tio". f- iN^li 
 ^fore nartitioiK .-im. ..n,,... ... l _•. ""'-^'-■''■^"on the eldest .son for t ... il,..f »;.',.. i.. 
 
 pd,eiriias,assign.ihissi^.::'r;';; ::^,, 
 
 h fore partition, any other eo-heir may 1 
 
 thcieot tl" 1 nee of sneh assignment, and s.ieh 
 l<reserii)tilile so /.,,., .,„ 4.1. 
 
 1 ..^'t- '"".'"' *'" '"'■"' fi'iie had hroii.ht to 
 us .ittention the ,piestion of his title under the 
 
 m ei,;.:. ' V l'- "'""'/■ "•^^^^"'"> ^^fterwards eon,- 
 
 yc.ued,the iiartition deed set a.si.le, and the 
 on ts and pi;oee..ds of sales received by the 
 hrother and .sLster repaid to him :- 
 I 11'; p'".."m"-, ''"•• .i'"'.^""t'nt of Uobcrt.sou, 
 •I-: lb ). k. .;-tl, that, as there was no eonsidcr- 
 a 101, thereior. ami no emnpromise or settlement 
 o . x uispnted .inestmn, the partition .leedan.l 
 othei de lings ,onl<l not be supported as in the 
 nature ot tainilv arrangement^ •-_ 
 
 vei^.bl'''M'"-' V'^"' *••'■*'• ''•• ''i««enting, re- 
 
 fn,.fl, "Tr" """ ' ^■^•'■'^ '"K til'' rents ami lu'otits •ill'' l.^ •'""-;"""' "' ''"'■''■I'tson, ,;., U;a j;. 
 
 nl ./'''"'""'>' I"-'''''"' "f limitation a. the ' *''^'t the ehlest .son, having; alway,; re.rived 
 
 p m dl renun-ed to another lot, whieh t ej ,£ lUj^tv w "' ' '?''' 'T'' '"•'"'^'^ "^ "- »-li via:! 
 
 ftH'l as tenants 111 common, he also retaiiiim. V \ P '/"'' '" ''^"" "■"■^'V'f i" possession of the 
 
 F~,n, etc., thereof foi^hestatulinyp^Pio tile IwV '^'' ""''°'^> ' "''' ^'-'■"f'-, "hat no 
 ^nly apparent dispute between the- ,xu't ' K h, ''^^^^^ -ecu acpnred against him by the 
 
 Ph I ii 'tl'"," •?■''"'' '''"^ '«^^" """''-■ 'V tl^ i ^';";/;'■^''■"'•''"'^■'• the .statute of Limita. 
 P; iiitill that ,t was agreed that an alle.'ed T>'- '""'"'"' ^"i /'^"'•.Moiw, bs A. li. li;!. 
 
 Inn I" '■"'"" "^ ""-■ '"^ ^■^'^^■» I'y !"« Wiier f,f ""■]';'■ '^ "? V '^^ '"•■''^ V'nut by the .ludieial 
 Should be accounted for :— ^ "loinei Coininittee ot the I'rivv t'ouncil S, ,■ IS A R 
 
 Held.that the action could not be m Li„r,;„. 1 '^•''"■"''''^' ' " ' '' 
 
 ........ ._..,, j.w.eoi sucn assignment, and such 
 
 IJ- t '. iv. ,1 1 J . ' ' ~'* 
 
 Partition— i;/,sei,;,!'/«Ma;-r/; hii Q,/, „ial />n. 
 ^0.,, fhr (M,,: ^-^Vllere, bv mn ua l.tui ! 
 meat between the plaiiiti.r'and his b t . r t^• o 
 tenants ,n common of eertaiu lam! soir I t fV, 
 part,tiom.d in this action, th "f : m? ' ,,l , ^ 
 timied possession, ami the latter retaiie 1 
 plu...vo possesshm thereof, mak le v e ■ ^ 
 
 mipi..y.n.its and receiving tlie ;tn;^a;d'^X 
 .' statutory ner ,1, ..f i:,,,:*.....- .. 1 " ' i-s 
 
 IS. 
 
 Uncliarnl Lands. 
 
 I .v.. ,Vor,7 v^ Onuon,. 21 A. I!. KiT, ,,oM (i3l ; 
 /,r; h„n, ,„„!■ Aev/,,, •_',-, o. \{. l;;(), „„l. (i27. 
 
 bu 
 
 ,!!.!M°'f."*.''y-'/''"«-]-\Vl.ere there are 
 
 land, of whom all 
 
 )cfore the ten 
 
 years have run the latt 
 
 ill possession, and i 
 
 10. V,(,-iiiil Laiiif.-: 
 
 viii 
 
 le'l share from 
 
 or nude 
 
 i-accpiiresanotl 
 
 session, the .Statute of L 
 
 one of those in 
 
 uruudi-: Mortgage -/,'/,/;, 
 
 0/ Eiiirij.]~Scc- IMi 
 
 limitations runs as to i 1! 
 
 — *-* , f ' "-'/ Jv III I If , \— — ^iif 'f 
 
 'vnj 
 
 unit (j'.'U 
 
 O. R 
 
631 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 20. Wild Lands. 
 
 Possession— Trrspa.^^ — r<-iir!w/~" S/a/r of 
 .\atm-i: |— 'I'lif expiossioii "state of natui-e ■" 
 111 8iil)-syc. 4 of soo. ,-, of R. S. (). cli. HI is 
 used 111 coiiti-ii-.lisliiictiou to tlie i)iTciMliii.' 
 I'xpi-essioii, " i-osi,liii^r „,„,„ „,. cuItivaliiiL'," and 
 iiiilfss tlR. ,)alont,.f of wild lautls, or so^uf ono 
 flaiiniiig under him, has resided upon tlie hind : 
 or lias cultivated or improved it or aetuallv 
 used It, the twenly years' limitation applies. ' 
 » learing or cultivating l.y trespassers will not ' 
 avail to shorten this limit. 
 
 I'er Hiirton and .Macleuiian, JJ.A.— xMerelv i 
 fciieiug ,n a lot without i)utting it to some ' 
 actual, continuous use is not sullieient to make ' 
 the statute run. ,Stonl v. ilrnmrv, 21 A 1! 
 
 III. Perso.nai. Actions. 
 
 1. Acciiuiiti. 
 
 Laches — /',Y..>.»);,;;^;o;,.]_,S'rr Tuolh, v. Kill- 
 rahje, 'J4 S. ('. 1!. -ZSl, jtoxt (l;U. 
 
 2. Ackiundidijiiioil. 
 
 . LettersofDebtortoCreditor.l-Thofollow- 
 
 mg letters Mritteii l,y a ,lchtor to his creditor 
 were held to take the del,t out of the operation 
 ot the .statute of Limitations • 
 
 Hopewell, Augu.st !)th. ]S7(J. Dear Uncle Fin- 
 lay,--! received a letter from you some time a-^o 
 a .out your money. I .lel'iyed « ritiug because I 
 did not know what to write. I did not know but 
 ►something would turn ujithat would enable me to 
 pay you. I have a good ,leal of property-too 
 luiieli ior thc..e hard times-aiul J want to sell 
 some of It but cannot in the meantime, as 
 times arc that bad that people do not want to 
 liuy anything, only what they cannot do with- 
 out. Hut tlii.s state of matters will not con- 
 tinue long, and when the times get better 1 will 
 make some arrangement to pay you your nioiiev. 
 lie not afraid of it ; as 1 have but asmall family 
 and no boys I will have plenty to pav m • 
 debts. 1 did get somewhat behindhaiid b'v 
 railway aftairs, but have recovered, and I ain 
 now 111 possession of a good deal of iiropertv 
 and .1, a fan way .,f doing well whenever the 
 ti.iies get better. 1 regret very much keejiing 
 t mm you so long ; u.^ever, 1 hope the time 
 ^Vlll soon eoiiu. when 1 will be able to iiav Vou 
 \oiiisvery truly, Aley. McDonald. ' •* '^ "• 
 . H(,pewell,,]une IDth, bST.",. Dearrnele,-! am 
 111 receipt of yours of the .S 1st of May about your 
 money, and must say I am not astcm'ished at you 
 for wanting it. ^-o,, ought to have had it lo.iK 
 ago, and you woul.l have had it, only I was uiifoi^ 
 tuiiate in a railroa.l contract 1 t.iok, (m the rail- i 
 road between rruroand I'icton, in which ] lost' 
 considerable money, an,l got largelv in d.'bt be- 
 sides. After giving up the work J hired with , 
 the (.overnment to carry on j.art of the work. 
 At this time .lames and I eomiMenced to build 
 a cloth factory on a small scale, in order to 
 iiavc some pemianeiit work. I boir,)wed most 
 ot what J put 111. The man who had your , 
 nioney on mortgage, after having it two years, 
 
 632 
 
 I left. I had to soil the property, which I took 
 
 f*i"or,oV",' '^' '^"''' ^"'' ""« thousand .lollars 
 ; (y.OOO), losing by this likewise. I tlien ..ot., 
 offer trom the (Jovernment to go to tlie \'.!a 
 luver and Xortli-Wesi Territory to exnl,',r,. 
 there tor two years among the Indians, ami ■„,• 
 back last winter. I have now my debt ni. nlv 
 paid, and the amount of your claim seeiir,. ii, 
 property, viz., land i.roperty, so tiiat you w,ll 
 Ue as svire of your money in a short time as i. 
 you had It. Do not tiiink, Finlay. that 1 int.-,,.! 
 to do you, or any other body, out of one shilli,, - 
 (50 rest assurcil that 1 have your money seeun^i 
 in a manner that you will" get it, although' I 
 cannot send it now. Vou had good patienc^., «„ 
 1 liope you will have a little more, and i will 
 put you all right. 1 believe I worked as hanl 
 and travelled far more than you did, and 1,,ivh 
 , been much more unfortunate tlian you were since 
 I you eft ; but since two years I have done well 
 i and hope soon to do well by vou. Now Finla' 
 I rest assured that I luu'e your money' secured 
 ! so tliat you will get it, whatever beeoincsof „ie 
 \ery truly yours, Alex. McDonahl. Mr y 
 Ihompson, Fort Ludlow, British Coluni'hia' 
 I (rrant v. Vuuitruii, LS .S. C. R. 716. 
 
 Letters of Debtor after Creditor's Decease 
 
 — A^lnum.traliOH] -An acknowledgment of 
 indebtedness by letter written after the credi 
 tors .leeease by the defendant to tlie imraou 
 who IS entitled to take out letters of admini:j 
 tration to the creditor's estate, and who does 
 after the receipt of tlie letter, take out such 
 letters, is a sullieient acknowledgment within 
 the Statute of Limitations; Maelennan J A 
 dissenting. J!ohiii-tsoit v. liurriU, 22 A R '•{)()'' 
 
 .". Commuicemenl of Statute. 
 Sn' Mitkr V. l!,i,v.wi, 22 0. R. 3G9, poU (i;i.3. 
 
 4. Dinacoii-aL 
 
 Petition-/I?/o,-».//.]-Tlie only prescription 
 available against a petition in disavowal of an 
 attorney is that of thirty years. Mr/Jonald 
 V. J>a,r.,m, II <). L. H. ISl, followed. Uawmn 
 V. Diimoiit, 20 .S. C. K. 709. 
 
 5. Exrni/ors and Admhmtrators. 
 Sn I!oh(ftxon \. UnrriU, 22 A. I!. .SiiG, an/c6,S2. 
 
 (!. Fnmdidenl Mortgaije. 
 
 Registration.] -Action to have a mortgage 
 ot land declared void on the ground of having 
 been granted in fraud of the rights of creditors :- 
 
 llidd, per Fouriiier, ,L, that the mortgage 
 laying been registered on tlie J.3tli .lamury, 
 1SS4, the right of aotion to set it aside wa.s pre- 
 seribed at the expiration of one year from that 
 date: Art. 1040, C. C. Hrosmrd v. Dunni.-<, 19 
 o. C. R. ,t'A\, 
 
633 
 
 property, wliicli I took 
 for one tliousiiiul dnllars 
 1 likewise. I then got ,u 
 lueiit to go to tlie i<.;,i 
 il 'J'erritory to expl,,,-,. 
 long the Indiiins, ami ■r„i 
 xva now my (lel)t iie.iHv 
 of your claim sceniv. ii, 
 operty, so that you \j,|| 
 ey in a short time a.s it 
 ink, Finhiy, that 1 int.-n,! 
 liody, out of one sliilli,,;;. 
 lave your money secui'iiij 
 will get it, altliough 1 
 on had good patience, s„ 
 i little more, and I ujn 
 elieve I worked as lianl 
 than you did, and l,ave 
 mate than you were since 
 
 years 1 have done well 
 1 hyyou. Now, Finlay,' 
 ve your money secured 
 vhatever becomes of me 
 X. McDonald. Mr. F. 
 |)W, 15ritish Colunihia 
 . C. R. 716. 
 
 ter Creditor's Decease 
 
 n ackuouledgnieiit of 
 written after the credi- 
 ifeiulant to tlie person 
 out letters of adniinia- 
 estate, an<l who does, 
 ! letter, take out such 
 jknowledgment within 
 3iis; Maclennan, J, A 
 Biimll, 22 A, U. ;{,i(i' 
 
 Iiifimt, 
 
 LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 
 
 I to lia\-e a mortgage 
 the ground of having 
 : rights of creditors:— 
 , that the mortgage 
 1 the I.Sth January, 
 ■ set it aside wa.s pre- 
 f one year from that 
 osmrd v. Dupmx, 19 
 
 Action Against Medical Practltlonfir i 
 
 Mdlir V. Jiytrion, 22 O. K. ;JU9. """P'''''-t'"-- 
 
 S. Interruption a/ Slittute. 
 Se<'7'arev.Par.:,-2:iS.V. U. 2i:i, po.t i>:i:i. 
 
 9. Juihjmi lit, 
 
 evjs.ono 1887. R. S. (). eh. I'l .;ec ^7 '! 
 
 lowed. Mason v. Johnston, 20 a'. R412.'' 
 
 linur";!?'? "'' ^'''""^"on - &"cnti„,>.] _ The ' 
 nut ot twenty years being Hxed bv R S r > i i 
 
 An issue directed under Ruin »)*<« +^ i ^i 
 
 634 
 
 refunded " T h I I .1 ""^ "'" '"^ "^ ""^'e 
 of the draft •- ='""•'": .\J. toi the amount 
 
 i*i:'i£i;';';s,!t ,!Sr ',;''«'" '■""''' 
 
 13. Ncijtigeiice. 
 
 •'«"-i.!sra';<:':iS:zi^2*-'- 
 
 14. yijrdtiiia. 
 
 I">. Partnir^hip. 
 
 10. Laches. 
 
 11. Medical Practitioner. 
 Malpractice-CoOT»!f?iCf.,H^„/o/-.S7„,,,,„ i \ 
 
 iiati,h- P''ofessional services ternii- 
 
 oSAtL^'iVcf^R" -«« '''r;U'""" ''- 
 
 •l/'V/,r V. /,'ye,>o,, 22 a R." i.'^''" ^■*'^' «'''=• ''O- 
 
 12. Money Had and Perdred. 
 
 ^a.ches~Prr.>,„mp>:on~Ar unt. 1 i • i 
 mt-nt creditor of J an„i;,.,l f„. "'"'■'•l -'^ JU<lg- 
 of the latter's iutei-est"^ „ ' , / ■ .' "']^''' "'■ ^'ile 
 title to which a f, "';.".>'""'■'• 'i'"^ '^'«''^' 
 
 ^c^Iiscomed lit ; : ■"''',"'^-' /""I -^uised to 
 
 '1-0 lad pi nt ','\"."^ '.'""r* *''^-'-^"» than 
 ■l"e him rom r fn "" '' ''"'«^' «""' to be 
 
 -Master he l" hi t tZ e '/'""''T^"- ''''"' 
 taken place neiHv f, ? transactions had 
 
 was prich::ie, i '^;,^'^^1>-'^"'? ,';'=f°''e, K. 
 aii.l by laches an.l nrmH '^'''^"^^ "* I-iniitations 
 such cdainHs;? '1 ■''""''■ ^'"'" ^'^tting „p 
 
 :tKatndSH^--^ — ^^ 
 S:^- C. R. 287 ' ^'' ^''^'M/e, 24 
 
636 
 
 LUNATIC. 
 
 636 
 
 It). I'l rioil of IJmilaiioii. 
 
 SW Price V. U'n,!,', 14 i'. U. :]:,], a,,/ 
 
 Ili-uxKai-d V. J)i(pras, If) s. C. I!. "),'{|, „„/. ,„,_ ^ 
 
 Dawxon v. J>iiiii<iiil, 20 ,S. C. R. 7()l», «»/-■ 632 • 
 
 Mamn v. J„l<vsh,ii, -JO A. R. 4l-_', ((//^ (13;i ; 
 
 /•rtir V. /V(/y', •_';{ S. ('. ]!. -Jj:), ;.o./ (i;?.") : 1177//- 
 
 V. nnrtoii mid Stoii,// Cndc CoMuliihtt, ,t Jloail 
 
 Co., u'uo. If. :n:i, /,o.v/ (i;i.j. 
 
 (i.'i.'i ; 
 
 •20. 
 
 >S'( ( Moodir V. 
 
 Tnis'.f ami TnixlLtK. 
 
 Jmu-s 19S. C. R. 2CC, «,;(!<, o:{:i 
 
 17. I'roiiiixiorii yolc. 
 
 Security— I>i i d — Xum/i',}/ —Iiitm-ii/i/lou.] 
 — A iiri-.sen'pti.iu of lliiity years i.s sul)stif.;teil 
 I'll- that of live ycare only wlifi-e the ailiiiission 
 of tin; ilolit from the iluhtor rosults from a new 
 title wiiiuh cliangcs the commercial ol)lit,Mtion 
 to a ci\il one. 
 
 In an action of account in.stitutcd in ISS7, 
 tlic ))laintilf cl.'iiaicil iii/rr a/:<t the .snm of 
 W,.')(il.l(l, Ijcing the amount dne under a 
 deed of ohligation and voiisl'ifiilUiii d'hiii)olhii]U(, 
 execnte<l in LSlid, and wlueli on its face was 
 given as security for an .■intccedcMt unjiaid pro- 
 mi.■^<,ory note dated in ISOl'. The deed stipii- 
 l:itcd that tile amount was p.-iyalilu on the terms 
 and conditions and in the manner mentioned iu 
 the .said jiromi.ssury noic. The defcnd;ints plea- 
 del that the deed diil not allect a novation 6t 
 the debt, and that the amount due hv the pro- 
 nu.=sory note was ijrescrilie.l hy more than five 
 years. The note was not jiroduccd at the trial :— 
 Held, rcvensinj; the judgment of the Court of 
 <.>ueens liench for l-owcr Caiuida (appeal side), 
 tliat the <leed did not eliect a novation : Arts 
 JlliO an<ni7l, C. C. At nio.-,t, it operated asail 
 interniiition oi the iirescription ami a I'enuncia- 
 tion of ihelieiielitof 1 lie time up to then elapsed 
 so as to prolong it f<,r hve years if the note was 
 tlien overdue : Art. -J'-'tW, C. C. And, as the 
 <muswason the lilaintilf to produce the note, 
 and ho had not shewn that less than live years 
 had elapsed since tlie maturity of the note, the 
 delit was prescribed hv iive years : Art ■'•'tiO 
 ('. C. I'an V. /'(()•(•, 2';j S. C' R. 24.3. ' ' ' 
 
 IS. lloud Compnnieii. 
 
 Negligence— A /■(■■-r/ of /.im!fn/liiu.]~W]\ere 
 the defendants, a road company, incorporated 
 un<ler the (ieiieral Road Companies' Act, H. 
 c. 9!) of which re.iuuvs them to 
 
 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. 
 
 Sc. Dam.\(ii:s<, IV. 
 
 LIQUIDATOK. 
 
 S'-C CoMl'ANV, MIL 
 
 LIQUOR LICENSE ACT. 
 
 S'vCuX.STITUTlONAL LaW, li. — ClilMINAI, 
 
 Law, II. — Lnth.xi gating Liyrous. 
 
 LOCAL IMPKOVEMENTS. 
 
 See AssKSSMli.NT A.Nl) TaxK.S, IL— MUNICIPAI 
 COKI'OUATIONS, XV.— ,S.\Ll; OF L.\NI), I. 
 
 LOCAL MASTER OF TITLES. 
 
 See r.A.ND TlTLKS AcT. 
 
 LOCAL OPTION ACT. 
 
 See CoNsTiTL-noNAi, Law, IL 
 
 S. (). oil. 1.-)!) 
 
 Keep tlieirroad in repair-constructed a culvert 
 aero.Ms it, with post and rail guard at the mouth 
 tlien.'ot, m sucli an imin-ojier manner that, the 
 wheel f the i.Iainlitfs carriage striking the post, 
 Jie was thrown out of it into the open ditch at 
 the enil of the culvert and injured : — 
 
 Held, that the construction of the culvert and 
 the guard was a thing "done in pursuance of 
 tie Act within the meaning of sec. 14."., and 
 that therefore the time for bringing the action 
 M_a3 limited to within six months after the date 
 of the accident. Wt/,i, v. liarlnn and Stoiuii 
 Creek Consolidaltd lload Co., 2(i O. R. ;U:\ 
 
 19. Shares. 
 
 Liability for Calls. ]-,Ve" In re Haqqorl 
 JVro.v. J//,/. Co.~l'eaker and Ruinous' Case, 10 
 A. U. ;j,S2, ante 140. 
 
 LOCATION TICKETS. 
 
 Sec C'Kt)w.\ Lani>s, V. 
 
 LONG VACATION. 
 
 Sec Vai'atkjx. 
 
 LORD'S DAY. 
 
 Sec .Sundav. 
 
 LUNATIC. 
 
 Action — JW'.r/ ''^rii-7id.] — An aetinn was 
 brought in the name of tlie plaintiii', a lunatic 
 not so found, conHued in a public asvlum, by 
 Ins wife as next friend, to set aside a convey 
 anco of land made ))y him as improvident, 
 etc. : — 
 
 ^ Held, that the iietion, being for tlie pvnlec- 
 tion of the lunatic's properly, not for the dis- 
 posal of it, was properly brought Ijy a ne.\t 
 tneud ; and, although a married woman cauuot 
 
€37 
 
 ■■'■s (iihI TruntttH. 
 
 'S 19S. C. R. 20C, a«/,.«;i;i 
 
 mn DAMAGES. 
 
 MALICIOUS ARREST AND PROSECUTION. 
 
 LICENSE ACT. 
 
 PROVEMENTS. 
 
 > _ Tax k s, II. —MiJNKjiPAi 
 v.— Salk (IF Land, I. 
 
 ACATION. 
 
 1, being for tii 
 
 mi such an ollioe, the fact that i„ this cas.. .1,« 
 •Hi .so ,i„l not .nak.. her procee,! ,! -o V, .'1 
 
 tor It was ,l,«cretioMary with hi,,, '. ;;;;'• 
 procee,lu.«.s or n.t. J/../,„ ,. j;„,,;;,_ '/f//'^" 
 
 Declaration orLunacy-/>/.„,„/,,i\VI,„,,,, ., 
 
 jict!tioii to have (.'. (lechircl ., \,<, ♦• *''"'"'" 
 
 <I-.,.osit,onwhichC.ha,l,na,leo h",^;^;!: 
 av.mr o another, h.ughte,., Mith wh „ I e ve 
 f'.r «h,ch in„.,,o.se an action ha,l aire u K- 1 , . "' 
 iMMiin la t'.'a name l,v a son as n,.vi f,, " 1 , 
 italsoappoare-l to th'e .Jn,l e I ,V\i ' ""'' 
 
 eas 
 
 ^. ■/"/•//, (MO. 
 
 •*'. Jiixlin- „ftl,p I'caiv, (HO, 
 
 <i. Mitiiinpal Corporafloii.^, OiO. 
 
 7. AV(Vv o/^lr//o/(, (!-J|. 
 
 !'. J!'a<ou<,h/, and Prohah!,- Onfev, 642. 
 
 10. Slo'njr<ii,d liairff, (i4;j. 
 
 1 1. Warroiif 0/ Cominlfm, 11/, (in 
 
 12. 117/../,..,,.. ,;(;j. 
 
 I. Alii;i:sT vsDKK Civil, P,:o,-K« 
 
 Maintenance -.l/o..;-.„ ;„ Goo./ 1 c t- 
 1)1'" •!') of Ml.. \ f ■'"','^"''''. J— ■Sections 48 
 
 ^;;?t^lrri:€~~^^^^^^^^ 
 
 MAGISTRATE. 
 
 &« Justice ok the 1'eace-P„uc. MA.a.sru.vTr 
 
 MAINTENANCE. 
 
 Ste ClAMPERTV A N-„ .M VIXTKN- VNC; -Dk,-,, II 
 I.MANT, JV.-LUXATIC. ' 
 
 MALICIOUS ARREST AND PROSE 
 CUTION. 
 
 I- AiuiKST rxDKK CviL Prockss, m. 
 
 "• -^^^'''^^'"^••'^ Civu. l'Ko,'KEmx,;s, 0;5!), 
 
 ^II. .MALi,;,or,s CRr.MiN-AL I'Roci:i.:,.,.SG,s. 
 
 1. -kv/i/,,, „./,,o,< ,7 2.K-.S, U3U. 
 
 2. Conn/ah/, , 040. 
 
 •1. Infuniuxdoii, (140. 
 
 'I^i'Muges for arr^' , , 1^;^^" 'V' '^'^^'"" '"«■ 
 '■•"■•net- action he „ t ff' ' "'•''^■'•""^^le in * 
 
 C. L, au.l Fai;,;,ill,i,i;"'S".'::i'"^'''-' -f Anu«ur. 
 
 o.-lS!;r':n.i[3 ^;';'tl!;,;V" ''t ^'' "- 
 ;v^P-i.en,,e;^^';:,;'rt -[;n;:it^^-lr-^'' 
 
 <'f Ont u'io, a„,I liah' t , , 1 ' -^ "'" ^'""■'« 
 oii an-I not foll.,we,I ' '^' -^'' ''ommented 
 
 <'f0nl:wj::^,l';;;^.[!::;i:;;;;;'''«^>-...are.i..ent 
 
 "^i-iu,iin,ti;e"i::fLr;Xf;^'£^:«'''-- 
 
 without Divill" tlir 1 " ' ">VII1C0 
 
 '"■a.entlv i, tfe U W ! '^ T"^ ^' '■'^^'''" I'"'- 
 
 ■ .n.>nth::i;i';^!,t,;"'';::r"7'^f'''-"»p-i''« 
 f»M^vvittohohi,;b!;Tu:T"^"' ,"•'''" 
 
 I'ini to -rant th..o,.,l,. f ther,;l,\- in.lucin:. 
 
 for the .Jiul^e t, con ■ I . " -^ '"^''^'■iil one 
 
 ;>'-nhe,U..;^,:!:-!^;,:;;i,;;-- properly 
 
 p.iSt&/;:^^^^ 
 
 ::eti:;i;:T:;t!!o;^,:^'^,£^'''r'St^^^i-'^'^ 
 
 on the gronn.l^fo '•''';■''' '''^ ■^ '"-'«' trial 
 >li''oction: .' i. c nou, tl '' '^•'""'f ''"'I ""«- 
 cision of Anon. C J '' ^""^"'•""^ in the do- 
 
MALICIOUS ARREST AND PROSECUTION. 
 
 'IW 
 
 Hel(1,bythcC(niitof Appeal, tliatwlicri:aiii:iii, 
 huvmg minifious cmlitom in Untario, leaves tlie 
 Province o|ieiily to reside in the United State.s, 
 after puhliely iinnouneinj; Ids iiitenticm so to do' 
 without paying' his ereditois, and aftei' Iuk de- 
 parture It in found that statements made by him 
 as to ])roj)erty availahlc to pay his dehts are 
 false and tliat notliing is in fact available for 
 that purpose, his arrest ujion eivil proeess upon 
 his return to Ontario for a t(iii|iorary i)urpo.se 
 mtendin- to return to the United States is 
 justitialile. 
 
 Judgment of the (.lueen's Bench Division 
 »nirmcd. C'cj/l u v. ,Scau(->r}0. R. 22 "2 A R 
 269. . — •»■ rv. 
 
 ^eeScaiw v. Cof'i/, ir> P. K. 112, ,////, .Sii, 
 
 II. Malicious Civil PnooKiiLiiNcs. 
 
 Issue of Writ—Malla'—Spidnl Dammip ]— 
 Action for damages against solicitors U'n; as 
 alleged in the statement of claim, " wrongfully 
 and unlawfully without any instructions or 
 retainer, ' issuing a writ of sninmons against the 
 plaintifr 111 the name of a third pa-ty, by reason 
 of which the plaintifr was injured in his occupa- 
 tion as a builder, suflered in his credit and 
 reputation, and was hindered in the |)erform- 
 ance of his contracts, and had to lioriow money 
 at a higher interest than he would otherwise 
 have had to do, and other creditors were induced 
 to sue him, whose accounts he had to compro- 
 mise and settle at great loss :-- 
 
 Held, on demurrer, tlu.t neither malice and 
 want of reasonable and inobal)le cause nor 
 stieoial .lamage, both of which are necessary in 
 huch an action, were sutlicieiitly alleged 
 
 Semhtc, that an allegation that by reason of 
 tlie proceedings ccanplained of the plaintiff was 
 put into insolvency or bankruptcy, if such a 
 thing were possible in this country, might be a 
 suthcient allegation of special damage. Mitdull 
 V. AfcMiin-ich, 22 0. J!. 712. ' 
 
 64C 
 
 StwhU, that if the ollence were not siiif, 
 oiently laid in the information to give the ini" 
 latrate junsdictio.i, and the warrant were voi,'? 
 an action for malicious pioaecutioii would ii..vir 
 thcless lie. Andei-^on v. WiUoit, 23 O. R. 91. 
 
 Justice of the Peace— Warrant- Xo a,in-ir 
 /'W,. I-- In an action against a justice of the 
 peace tor false imprisonment and for aetim- ir 
 lus odice maliciously and without reas(.inl,|,' 
 and probable cause, an application was mad. 
 belore statement of claim to set aside the nr, 
 ceedmgs under sec. 12 of R. .S. O, di 7'! o,,' 
 the ground tnat the conviction of the plaintilf' 
 made by the defendant, hud not been . ua^lav' 
 It ai.peared, however, that the plaintiK w,'' 
 arrested and imprisoned under a warrant is-i,o,i 
 by the defendant, which in fact had no couvic" 
 tion ti. support it :— 
 
 Held, not a case within sec. 12. 
 
 Per Itobertson, J., that the plaintiff had a 
 complete cause of action without settinir aside 
 the conviction. b """a- 
 
 Per Meredith, J., that the application wv 
 premature, fi'tljbv. .Sptarn, 15 P. R. 232. 
 
 2. Constahle. 
 
 Se,' Scot/ V. Jtehnrn, 25 0. R. 450, y,o-/ i;ii 
 hel/i/ V. Barton and AV//// v. Archilmld, -(Jo 
 R. (iOS, 22 A. 1!. .-,22, im.t 041 ; Uordon v. J,.,.: 
 ;o/j 22A. R. 315, ,,oslM[\ ■ J/ui„phreyv ,1 ,■,./,; 
 -a/d. -Ji o. 1!. ooH, 20 A. II. 2G7, a«^ 4(i4. 
 
 S. Iiifunnatio)!. 
 A'; And^r.-on v. Wil-on, 25 0. R. 91, ani< li;{:, 
 
 4. Jury. 
 
 III. Malicious Criminal Proci;i;ijin(;s. 
 
 1. Action, ir/ieu it Lk,s. 
 
 Information -JurUdiction— Warrant — hi- 
 t>t^J\:r-jir,. I-The defendant laid an information 
 charging that the plaintilf "came to my house 
 ana sold nie a promissory note for the amount 
 of ninety dollars, purp<,rting to be made against 
 .1. Mm favour of T. A. , and I find out tht said 
 note to be a forgery. " Upon this a warrant was 
 issue, reciting the ollence in the same words 
 and the J, aintifl- was under it apprehended and 
 brought before the justice of the iieace who 
 issued It, and by him committed for trial by a 
 warrant reciting the ollence in like terms. The 
 plaintitt was tried for forging and uttering the 
 note, and was acquitted : - - 
 
 Held, that the information sufKoientlv iin- 
 porte. that the plaintiff had uttered the foi-i/ed 
 note, knowing it to b(.. forged, to give theniagis- 
 trate jurisdiction, a, I therefore the wa.raut 
 w-:is not v,nd, and an action of trespass was not 
 maintainable against the defendant, even upon 
 evidence of his interference with the arrest 
 
 Snc. I/nviilton v. Coii.ti.uiui, 19 A. R "m 
 
 I post tM2; Ikattijy. Jlumlilt, 21 (). R. 184 IJJ 
 
 W:!; Cordon v. RunMc, 19 A. P. 440, y.fw/' W;i- 
 
 Martin v. Hutchinsoi,, 210. .'JSS iio^t M-{- 
 
 , Archibald V. McLarrn,'2l S. C. ij. -,HH./„,.t M-^' 
 
 , (1 (/■•.OM v. Tinnani, 25 O. R. ;j;i9, post VA-> ■ (/,„■' 
 
 don V. Dvmon, 22 A. R, ,'51.5, post 04;). 
 
 5. Justice of the /'ence. 
 
 Av W,U V. Speor.H, 15 P. I!. 232, ant,- U40' 
 Gordon \. Dcui.-^on, 22 A. R. 315, post (ji:{. 
 
 j C. Municipal Corporations. 
 
 ] Resolution — ///(.7a/ Actx— I!at;firat!on.]- 
 A resolution of the executive committee of ii 
 I city council ^rathorizing the city solicitor to 
 j defend actions brought against police officers fur 
 I their alleged illegal acts does not constitute a 
 I ratification theieof by the city corporatinn -.:-. 
 ; as to make it liable in damages for such a-ts. 
 I ;)'% "•■ Barton, Kdly \. Archibatd, 2ti 0. \l. 
 
ION. 
 
 640 
 
 641 
 
 e ofrfiiee were not smfi. 
 fornuitiim to give the uw 
 .ml tliu wiirniiit woi-o \(i\"\^ 
 la luost'ciition would n>'v^t 
 n V. Wihoji, 25 0. R. <ii. 
 
 ,ce — U'nrraiif—Xo (•''./,,„ 
 iigaiiist a justice of tlie 
 
 oiiiufut and for actinr. j,. 
 
 y and without reuse, iml.l," 
 an application \v,is ni.iil. 
 
 laini to set aside tlic m •, 
 
 -' of K. .s. (». d,. 7:^0,- 
 
 lonvictum of the phiiutiir, 
 it, luui not been i|Uii.-.|]ii;. 
 r, tluit tlie plaint it:' wns 
 led uudei- a warrant is.-uii! 
 ell ill fact had no couvii. 
 
 thin sec. 12. 
 that the plaintilF lia,| « 
 ion without setting aM.lu 
 
 that the application wn., 
 S>a»-,v, 15 1'. R. 'i.'i-.'. 
 
 naiahle. 
 
 , -'5 0. R. 450, ;/o./ t;ii 
 '('/.I/ V. Archiindd, 'Jli (i, 
 m'<t 041 ; Gimlon v. J),,,;. 
 1)43 ; J/uiiiphrei/v. Arrl,; 
 \. R. 2(i7, auh 4(14. 
 
 'fiualioii, 
 
 OH, 25 0. R. !)1, an/^ (i.Sli 
 
 riiry. 
 
 /■■<i,i<<tii, 10 A. R. -Jo;! 
 
 w/'/r, 21 (). R. 184, /.o.v 
 MIA. ];, 4M},j,o.,f (U;!' 
 21 (). , .'IScS, ^yo.vMU;); 
 
 !1 S. C. K. oSH.post ti4-.); 
 
 '. R. 3:i9, /yosY (i42 : (!,„■' 
 
 . 315, yw.s/ 64.S. 
 
 '■ //ifi /'errtr. 
 
 15 P. l;. 232, anf,' U40: 
 .. R. 315, jjo.^/ W.i. 
 
 Corporation-^. 
 
 Artu — Itiitifcation. ] — 
 •cutivo coniniittcc of ;i 
 t the city solicitor to 
 ,'ainst police officers fur 
 does not constitute a 
 lie city corporiitiou so 
 lamages for such acts. 
 :. ArMliuld, 2t) U. 1!,. 
 
 MALICIOUS AKREST AND PROSECUTION. 
 
 A'otice of Activn. 
 
 Constable — Mni:,:' i w\ 
 agaiust ae,.nstdl f,; f I '''* '" '"' '"■''"» 
 l-y the jury tl- tin If 'i'"'''''' '* '■■*'■■"■"<' 
 
 as a constahl ' " n 1 w-'is 1 oT r';^'"'." "r"' ''"'>■ 
 improper n.oti'vc 1 c is e titled "^■'' ''■ '">■ 
 
 642 
 
 -vithouta.f:f';i,,.^i[--;- .y-htaincd 
 -l^-lendan on' is ''. '"''T'"? '"^"!i' I'y the 
 
 fcsof t;ic,X'.^i,*i?,,;^''';o protect jns. 
 action., R. s ( m; -/ 'T ^'■',"" ^•'-■''''ti"»s 
 
 of those fuifiiii,,, . „'i,ii.% ;■ ""^ r"-°f '•<••«<... 
 
 intheperfornu:;;cetCStiS;.:;r;;;',l|-''«'' 
 larlyorerrone(,uslvandno .J,f \- ■"^'"■ 
 case must allege tint h , ■^','""" ""^'' 
 
 ciousiyand.^ihS'i; ,,^:;;;:'^::;,;::S■ 
 notiniposed ,;y i;tr;h:!,i''r"'''"^'''''"« 
 i'';^ii-h.ty,.uchnouc;:i:t':t^"^-o- 
 
 A hreach of a citv hv hiw f ,. i ■' • 
 
 ;i:::f:::t7Ssii-'''---'^-''th:;^5 
 
 t .• .lis,:harp of his otlidaf |^.r V;";;' "' 
 Athruied by the Court of Appc. , 22 A R 
 
 8. Proi.f of Acqiiifial. 
 
 <f .msdenieanour, l,y ne s ,f T' ', 'l''"""^ 
 ''f the orignud rc^cfrd s ", , t' Z^t'^'T 
 
 m£^u'dtS.'^:;''^-f-'V'^^- '-"-'- 
 
 Hml a new t ■ 'u or 1 , A?./'" ''"•" ''"'t "■'^id'^ ' 
 i- 0. R 347 ^^^"''" ''• ^--'Uhn-tu, 
 
 ! ». /''■""owi/,!, aw/ /',■„/„</,/,■(■„„.,'. 
 
 iion-existcnccpf ,„, 11 ,'' '^'•^'^"■iiee or 
 
 '.nttheinferc.lcinufn'unrVvH't'r''- 
 
 f"'^i^-ir^;i?gf^';y^j'^V"''^'""^ 
 '"'W V. .i/cz.«!.j;;, o^^Kc: r'^s""'"' ^''■^^'- 
 
 e;innot w llidi-,,,- ,i, "^"^ 'acus. I fjc Jiiili;^ 
 
 , clandestine renH,;;i'of''i,^t, :;';;;'''';■■''"''! 
 premises, unless sn, •I,,,. ? V "le demised 
 
 !-'-ango,x^^;^r;:^:^:r l:;'?:"•"::p-■^>■• 
 ^l-H.•hedistrainedo,r,,:c;;L,d:^^''''^I'■■''- 
 
 i-yi.avi.:«^z,dth";Sr!"'^'''''''''''' "- 
 
 : tion of rca^mal! 1 nM.ahf"^''"'"' ^'TI""*" 
 
 Judgo. ■'"" l""'J<'We cause IS for the 
 
 -S''uponr:;:;^^,^'::?^"'''''^'^.^"'--.nd 
 
 ceeding.^ t»I<e.i In \ h ■ „'" l!'.? "' *''^' I"'"- 
 case fully and f.,i,lv ,'f ^ *= , "''' *^'"'ts <'t the 
 
 mS'^Xcnt^^ie-^-^' /^" -*-" for 
 in'lersenie, t the ;r'of ';, ""''^•t"'.""t. "ith an 
 plaintftTofthe rmi J.l ''"'"",'''' "^ ^hc 
 
 H"><-'"»rt, 1, •i;/w.,^''''''T''' '>' ""■ ^•''-''•k "f 
 KistrarofH r ® • I' '"'"* *« '"I'l by the re- 
 «<.e i i^c , : ^•;,\';;' ■]Reneh Division, I .u^l 
 l>eha,l ber", hi ,.,'..' ■•: ""'^;'' '""1 winch 
 ■I'-c. the Cm" 'bcin'r n/ *''°, J' '"'"'"' '" I"'"" 
 ncy-fJeneral tnrl vtf ^ "if"rnied that the Attor- 
 
 daufs .oX , ^ i*° ''j^ •"'" e up. The defc- i 
 
 HeM tl lit il '^ l™'^«'"" "'»s refused :- 
 
 'i*-'icnt evidence of th„ / • '-■"•^""'stances, suf- 
 ^pice of the ternimatioi, of tlie prose- 
 
 Function.'! of Court and Jurv / / ■ 
 
 ^:'^ur ;;rf:;:r';:^r["'^^'""^'^SM 
 
 charge.if Hu/ftofscve. 1 ti;i ^'T''^''""^ "^ '' 
 
 , found a venlict for the plaintdT .:_""'' *'"-' ""■>■ 
 
 i S iv/ ml,>h'''°l ''? "" "»«'l->eetion. 
 'in,^f,J^^ft',-;'l'««^'"ti.:g,that,ftheru!- 
 
 misnn,]erst,and 1 « f t^'em ' t 0^''.'' ""l'."'' '^ 
 that the tri-il I, 1,/ I °^ '"""^^h '"''"g : 
 
MMl 
 
 643 
 
 MANDAMUS. 
 
 644 
 
 facts ; til at tlieii: liiul liduii a iiiisti'i.'il. anil tli:vt 
 tliei'i.' (iiigiit III lie ii now trial, Juliiislintr v. Sul- 
 liiii, 1 'J', i;. 517. onn.siiUTL'il iinrl ili(tiiiJ3'ni.sln;(l. 
 Ii'eiilv. Till/' n\ 4 TiiMnt. (ilG, fnllowoil. U'ition 
 V. Tuuiaiii, •_'.) O. I!. H.S'J. 
 
 See. Ki'lii V. /Ifir.'nii, l\t/h/ v. Archihdid, 20 
 O. R. tlUH,'-''2 A. K. .'.-'•->, anU:. G41. 
 
 10. Slicrlfaiiil naiflj: 
 
 Bxoaiitlon — Sclimr. — hifcr/'rivinv, ] -'Yho , 
 phiintill', will) WM.H acting as a liailill' uiiilcr at 
 laiiilliii'ir:* wari'a-it In distrain for rent, attfiiiji- 
 tuil to i-i'iirivo soiiio graiii wliich liail Ikmiii 
 inovinusly -ci/uil by aslioriff nnilcr an cxciMition, [ 
 ami wliili' ill till) aut was arrt'sl-eil by tliu siuiriirn 
 olliuur, will) was al<o a county cnnstablc. JIu 
 was cuininitted for trial, ami was tried ))ut ac- 
 quitted. I 
 
 111 an action for false arrest and malicious 
 proseculioii : — ' 
 
 Held, tliat tin; grain was properly uiid'M' law- ! 
 ful scizuri^ and in the enstoiiy of tlui law, and j 
 tliat, by R S. C. oh. I(U, sec. SO, anyone tak- 
 ing' it away witiiont lawful authority was guilty ' 
 of larceny, and that by K. IS. U. cli. 174, sec.'' 
 ■25, anyone fn'ind cunnnitting such an oli'cnce I 
 niiglit be apprehended witliont a warrant iind ' 
 fe; tliwith taken before a justice of the jieaee, ' 
 and tliat the lindiii:.' of the jury that thi^ defen- 
 dant acted as ,', sherilf's baililf and not as a c.m- 
 .stable was immaterial, as it, was incunibcuL on 
 any bystandi'r to do as he did : and the action 
 was dismissed with costs, Beatly v. Jiiimlik, 
 21 (). U. 184. 
 
 ' lurest of a witness who has not appeared in 
 obedience to a sul)|iiemi, \w. is not, in tin.' abscne« 
 of nialiee, liable to d images, even tlioiii^l. Jm 
 may have erred as to the sullicieiicy of the ev.. 
 dencc to justify the arrest, 
 
 Jiid.'inent of the Common I'leas Division, '.'4 
 O. H, .'i7ll, allirnied. 
 
 In an aotio:i for false iiniirisonment judgment 
 cannot be catered upon answers to ijiiestimn 
 submitted to the jury, and a linding, in answi r 
 to a (|iiestii)n, of a certain amount of damages, 
 is not eipiivalent to the general verdict which 
 must be given by tlumi. 
 
 'I'lie right of police to search or liaudeidf ^ 
 person arrested on a warrant to compel attend- 
 ance as a witness ami the duty of tlie coustahli; 
 on midiing the arrest, consiilered. 
 
 Judgment of the Common I'leas IJivision, '_'( 
 O. K. .")7<i, reversed, Maelennan, .1, A., dissent 
 ing, (nii-iloii v. Ihii'isoii, •_>■_' A. I!. 3l,j, 
 
 MALPRACTICE. 
 
 .sVf Mkdu'ai, I'nAcriTioNtnt, 
 
 -Si-i'.nrc — In/'i-f' x'Hei'.] — A sherill' 
 ill interest with his bailill' and 
 
 Sxecutloa 
 is ideiitilieil 
 liable for wliatever tiie latter does under colour 
 of the writ. 
 
 1'lie plaiutili", assisting a person acting as 
 bailiff under a laiuiiord's distress warrant, at- 
 tempU'd to remove some grain which was at the : 
 time under S!d:';ure by the defimdant as sheriti"s 
 ollicer, and wa.s arrested by the defendant : — | 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the (^Uieen's 
 P.ench Division, that the sheritl' was liable fori 
 the act of his oliieer. 1 
 
 /luitlii v. Iliiiiih!,', •_>! (). H. 1S4, distinguished, \ 
 
 Tiu! jury having a",scssed the damages against i 
 the olHcer at a nominal sum, the Court, instead j 
 of a new trial, directed judgment to be entered 
 against his eo-defendant, the sheriff, for a like 
 amount, O'urdon v, J!i(mli'i', It) A. H, 44U. 
 
 11, Warrant of Commilunnt. 
 
 Src n\hh v, Spear-t, 15 1' 
 Andu-mn v. Wii^oii, 25 O. R, 
 
 R. 232, mile G40 ; 
 91, antt! U3!), 
 
 \m' 
 
 12, Witncuxei^. 
 
 Warrant to Compel Attendance — A rrest — 
 Impriwitmfiit —.V,,(,r/(.]— Where a police magis- 
 trate acting within his jurisdiction under R, S, 
 C ch. 174, sec, (12, issues his warrant for the 
 
 MANDAMUS. 
 
 Court of ^Revision — Cdk/) -■•/,]— Courts ef 
 Revision croaleduniler the Coiisolnliled Assess- 
 ment Anl, KS'.IJ, are not obliged to hear counsel 
 in snpiiort of an apiieal against an as.iessiuent of 
 property under that Act. 
 
 A niamianuis for such purpose was refusiiil. 
 1,'r j;o.-lnirh iiiiU Oar/i/le, 23 0. R. ,"7, 
 
 Municipal Coi'pova,tioa—Dif<-k'i<iiiil W'altr- 
 r-iiir.i,s Act-~h'ii:/iiitrr.\—Au owiKU' of liuul, 
 desiring to coniitruct a drain on his oMn l.unl 
 and to continue it throiigli tliat of nn ailjoiiiiiii; 
 owner, served liim with the notice provided by 
 the Ditches and Watercourses Act, R, S. O. cii, 
 220, see, 5, as amended by .')2 \'ict. eh. 4!l, sec. 2 
 ((J,), to S'jttle the proportions to be eonstrnetuil 
 by each, and, on tlieir failing to agree, .servij.l 
 the clerk of tlie numieipality Mith the notice 
 provided for by such Act, rciiuiring the engineer 
 to ap])iiint a day to attend and make his .-iwanl. 
 The clerk immediately forwarded the imMeo to 
 the engineer, who was absent, and who decliu&l 
 to attend : — 
 
 Held, tliat a mandamus would not lie agiinst 
 the munieipiil corporation to compel their en- 
 gineer to act in the premises. J)wii:ii'iU v. 
 Toirn of Trenton, 21 O. R. 343. 
 
 Police Magistrate— AV/'«.v((/ to A'/mli Eri- 
 denee.]— At the hearing of a criminal cliaige 
 before a County Judge," sitting as ]).ilice magis- 
 trate, evidence given before a siiecial coiiiniittii' 
 of the House of Commons, and t.iken down liy 
 stenograpiiers, was tendered before the iiiagin- 
 trate and refused by him : — 
 
 Held, that the Court had no power to grant 
 a mandamus to the County Judge directing liim 
 to receive such evidence. 
 
 Rose, J., while eonenrring in thcdceisiontli.it 
 a mandamus should not issue, was of opinion 
 that, hirliamont having ordered the prosecution, 
 the evidence should have been received by tlw 
 magistrate. 
 
644 
 
 vlio liiia not npiponif'il ii, 
 
 II, ill! i.s ii(<t, in til'! iiliHtniui 
 linages, even llioiii^rl. 1,,. 
 
 the sulHoiency uf tlie ev. 
 
 rust. 
 
 inmon I'leii.-i Divisiiin, '.'4 
 
 -• iinpiirionmcnt jii(l;,'iiif!nt 
 ion answers to ijiiestimn 
 and a liiiiliin,', in answi r 
 tain aiiiounl of ilaina^jfs, 
 le jj;eiieral venlict whii!|| 
 1. 
 
 to seareli or liaiiilciiH' a 
 i-arrant to coMipel attcMni- 
 ;lio ihity of the constalp|.! 
 -onaidereil. 
 
 nnioii I'leas OiviHi<iii, lil 
 aeleiiiuui, .J. A., dissent 
 
 III, •_'•-" A. !!. 31.j. 
 
 645 
 
 lACTICE. 
 
 l'ii.\('irno.vi;u. 
 
 )AMUS. 
 
 — ('oM/(y' ;.]— Coiii-ts (if 
 tlie Consoluliled Assess- 
 t olpligi.'d to hear eoiiiisel 
 
 a^^ainst an a.j iesaineiit of 
 ;t. 
 :h purpose was refused. 
 
 ;, ■2:i o. H. .•;:. 
 
 ,ion— Z>;/(7ie>' anil Waltr- 
 .J— An owner of laiiil, 
 
 <h'ain on Ills ow;i land 
 hl;1i tliat of an adjoiniii!,' 
 1 the notiee provided liy 
 eoiiraes Act, K. S. (). cii". 
 
 liy .',2 Viet, ch. til, see. l! 
 irtioiis to 1(0 eonstnietuil 
 failing to a^'rec, scrvu.1 
 (■!l)ality with tlie iiutitc 
 :t, reipiiring the engineer 
 ;nd and niaUe his award, 
 forwardeil tlie notiee to 
 ibsont, and who deeliiie.l 
 
 lu.s would not lie agiin-l 
 on to eonipel their en- 
 premises. JMc/nii'ii-i \. 
 
 .it. :u:i. 
 
 -lirfiKul to All mi' Eli- 
 ig of a eriiniual eliarge 
 , .sitting as jiohee inagis- 
 •fore a s|ieeial eoiiiiiiittie 
 ns, anil taken down by 
 lered before the inagi.s- 
 m : — 
 
 had no power to grant 
 nty Judge direeting him 
 ■e. 
 
 rring in tliodeeisinn that 
 t issue, was of opinion 
 ordereil the proseeiition, 
 o been reeeived by tlu 
 
 fSnhseiiueiit "esoliitidn of il,.. ir 
 mo.m authorising ii , ■ ,1 . , ":""? "' ' '""• 
 
 Revising otl)r'n,.._o/,;,,./;, / >• 
 
 s'c. 19 of the i';ie,to.Ci''i'.':., i'^ ""V'-''-' '""'"'• 
 
 ^■.cl../i... amended b;^'i''S"eh'':;'' ''^ ':^ 
 
 tu.reupon refuse t^n '''^''^'''''''K ollieer 
 Ifeld, that no ap.)..;.! wis .,;,. i 
 
 ■'"dge were rorani mm jiaU,-, ' "" *'"'"">' 
 
 A mandanins w.isgivuired. I 
 
 i)i!Sn hav-i;!'^:^;,.^^','- ;.'"-'•« i^eneh I 
 <iireeting a revisii o ,e ,•' '"^""''7'"^ t" i«--i.e, i 
 
 t'"MS tifthe o li,^'ah,;'T''''''■'■''''^•'''■i'■'^■ 
 wllo.se names am.e x;, " ,f '■'"'"" I«^'--^""m 
 crs' lists and tU^^^^^^ ^',^!f"''^^^y -'"- 
 tlK'nuindanius.thec'r?:''^^' :™;^,;!'P"<1 
 
 '■"iiMder the ,,uestion of the li r ^ i ",'" 
 
 iimridamus. "' '"^ "o'l't t„ j.|.a„t the 
 
 A notiee of .aiiiilieatioii tn li,,- 
 '""^■^■d from tlii\.oteiV !-. ' ■ '■ """""■"■ 
 ground of olm.vtion onlv i ,',.'' ♦^'"'^' ''"'^ ""^ 
 'l-li'ied/-is'.uimlr/^, 'V^l-^-'t/ynot 
 
 'iiTton ;uid .Maelennan d.J \ ^'/'''"'V .,VJ-"- 
 
 ■■>> .Auction- axd Aictiovi-i.-,. -vr, 
 C.\.N.VD.\, XV. ■■^iii.i.Mi: CoriiT of 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT. 
 
 646 
 
 ■'rhii';:;:.i'E-i:!'-v;;:ife.S''- 
 i';'".::;':;::ge'T:r;n'';ir'r'''''-^^ 
 
 'l^uigliterwaslis e it^?:T.'';"ri ^""' «''^^t the 
 iieeordiii.f to lii,. ,,. . „ i i "■ ''«■'' '"■irri(ig« 
 
 tanseo,ndbe,.:;fr*:;;'H''''';'''«^^ '■'''•"■ 
 
 Solemnisation of- V.V/s/^r •<;./•■ 
 iii>iiiiimli„ii.'\-,'i\^,,. ,;""■-'"'— h'K'"./iow'< />- 
 
 ■'«^"s ( 'hrist of uttr ;';:''c''""''". . ' ''""'•■'' of 
 
 '''■"'""i".-Uion u-h , f Z;^ ^"'■'■' >Hareligi„„s 
 eh. l;jl. .see | ,," '"^;"""« of It. .\ O. 
 
 tl'oreof is a n.inist:!' ,u ho ^^| ;"''''""-l .P'-i««t 
 ceremony of marn .-e '" «"''^"""i>'" the 
 
 i'.-Sri;,ru;dawhK^^ 
 
 quashed. y »."lumiiizi„. a marriage w.a.s 
 
 MARINE INSURANCE. 
 
 •Sec. Issn:.\si:\:, \';. 
 
 MARRIED WOMAN. 
 
 iv„ w ' ^- —Husband 
 
 MASTER. 
 
 MASRIAGE. 
 
 Bi3amy.l_,.,•,.Cia.M.^•.^,.L.^w, II., 
 
 !\'. 
 
 Indian aiarrlaijo—A'r,V/,.»,v /> , .■ 
 "'•'nl:i.,e L^^-Sde io'w^i^ '•" the eelebiv.tion of a 
 
 <^'<'luuil,ia, 1, 1 ,..r . '" ' '■"'.■""-•'^ ^° ^^"t'«l' 
 
 i?«l.er; and t a af e 't e ^"^"'^ ^-" ^" ''^-^ ! 
 h.il'ited and livlVVnV i- "'^"-'"'K'- they co- I 
 ^«'' "ere re o.'i ill |f,1^''V:."""' '"^^ wife, : 
 
 •''tl-etMueoflle .if;/,''T '"/'"'"«. '"^^ ^"^•1' "l> I 
 tlh. „iv.,,„ J ,'"- "'*'-'* ''t'tttli, prior to IS?. I 
 
 ^^«^'nled1,y'ti;^'^l'f '""' -''^^^'"f'Khm being j 
 
 •■'g'-'. The iss le of tl le im' """^"'"ti-K a marri'! | 
 
 I. 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 MASTER IN CHAMBERS. 
 
 See rK.VCTICK, X. 
 
 MASTER IN ORDINARY. 
 
 See Co.Mi'ANv, VIII. 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT. 
 l)i.s.MissAL or .Seev.in't, 647. 
 
 Lu™vorMA.STKKKOKl.vaCKVToS„K. 
 
 1. Crown, 048. 
 
 2. Ziaij-% „/ Common Law, 648 
 
647 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT. 
 
 648. 
 
 iit'!i1 
 
 I. DiSMIHSAf, OK SKKVA.NT. 
 
 Arbitrary Right— .V/jac of I'ni/il.i. |— liy an 
 atfrccmiiiil iimlri- icMl liulwecii M., lliii iiiviiitiir 
 of tt oortiiiii iiiiicliiiio, ami McH. , prdpiiftoi of 
 ijtttuiitN tliuiefiir, M. aj^rcfi) to oht.iiii iiatcnts 
 for iiiipi'iA'L'iiU'iit.i on Hiicli niarliinr anil aH!«i^;n 
 thu Hainu to MuK., who, in c'on.sicUiiation 'lit^ivot' 
 agruud to employ M. for two yiars to plaie tliu 
 putunt8on thu mui ket, paying hiui a reitain Niiin 
 lor Hulury ami oxpciiHuH, ami Ki\'"K '''"' "• P'-'i- 
 coiitajji! on tlu! piolits niinU' liy tho .shIch. M. 
 af{i'ue(l toilcvoti^ hi^ wliolu limu to tliu hii.iinuHS. 
 thu employur havinj; thu ri^'ht, if it was notsnu- 
 uu.ssful, til uMiiuul thu a>,'ruument at any timi^ attur 
 till' expiration of nix months from itsilatu liy pay- 
 ing M. his Halaryamlrthai'uof piolil.s, if any, toilatu 
 (il uanuollation. I5y unu ulausu of thu u^iuuniiiit 
 till) einployuf uaH to liu tlit,' ahsoliitu jnilj^u of 
 thu niannur in whiih thu umployuil puifoiinud 
 his duties, and vas j^iven thu right to disnn«,i 
 the eniployiil ar any timu for inuapailty or' 
 breauli of duty, thu latter in suuli uasu to liavu 
 his salary nii to thu date of ili.smissal, Imt to 
 have no ulaim whatuvir ayainst; his employur. 
 M. was suinmarilv disnii>si'(l within three months 
 from the date of the agruumunt for alleged in- , 
 uapaeity and disoliediunuu to orders ; — 
 
 Hehl, reversing the jadgmunt of the Court of 
 Appeal, 17 A. H. ."!!(, and of a Divisional Court, I 
 IBO. H. 4!)."), that the agreement gave the em- 
 ployer tile right at any limu to dismiss M. 
 tor inuapaeity or hreauh of duty, witliont notice 
 and without spuuifyim; any particular act call- j 
 iug for such dismissal : - 
 
 Held, per Ritchie C..J., t'ournier, Taschereau, 1 
 and Patterson, d.l., that such dismissal did not | 
 deprive M. of his claim tor a share of the profits ■ 
 of the business. 
 
 Per Strong and (Iwynnu, .J.J., that the share ' 
 of M. in the ,)rolits was only a part of his re- 
 muneration for his services which he lost hy . 
 being dismissed, oi|Ually as he did his tixcd 
 salar". J/.'/i'n* v. Mar.'lm//, IDS. C. K. Hi. 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Court nl 
 i (^lleen s liunch, that C. II. liy the agreemuiit lc;ii' 
 j liecomu the einplo\cu of A. !». . the ownui' of t'lc 
 I 'laiiur ; that he had no right to change tlm 
 I political coliiur of thu pa|ici without thu ownci^^ 
 I consent ; and ihat he was rightly dismiN.'<ii! tor 
 ■ so doing. /li'liiiHiir v, lii'liiinii t\ "Jt .S. C H. H'li, 
 
 Insurance Agent — lii(<i/ Kniphiii i\\ '|',, 
 act as agent for a rival insurance,' com]iaii\ i, 
 a lireauh of an insurance agent's agieemunt • i 
 fnltil conscientioUHly all the duties assignuil ti 
 him and to act constantly for thu hust intuii-.»t^ 
 of (his employer)," and is sutliuiunt justitiuatinn 
 for his dismissal. Kaxhiiiirr v. Ciinada Ai;iii i,t 
 A'oiiiiauci (.11., -."i A. K. 40S. 
 
 Misconduct— /'((('//('((/n/'-i. |— In ati action iur 
 wrongful .lisinissal, where the defence i^ mis 
 conduct gciu'ially, it is propui' to direct par 
 tieul.irs shewing the natuie and character oi ili. 
 instancei rdicd on hy the employur; tlicM' 
 parliculai's should set forth the date's, niil, 
 stantial particulars, and eireumstances of .dl 
 the instaniesand occasions wherein and whcicin, 
 the plaintilf misconducted himself, on wliii li thr 
 durendaiit means '. rely ; and leave shnuld iir 
 giv II to supplemeiit with further iiarticuliu-. it 
 discovered liufore trial. Viuhbc v. Jiic/.\.<i,. 
 JJiiHcaii, .1' Co., 14 1'. R. 4-J. 
 
 II. I-IAll!l,iTV (IK MasTKU hOK AlTS UK 
 
 Skkva.nt. 
 
 Municipal Corporation— vI/c/iVk/ HkiIiI, Of 
 j'iCLr.\- Held, that the medical health oilic r nf 
 a inuiiiciiial coi'iioiation apiiointcd uinier 1;. S, 
 t). eh. llOiJ, sec. .S", is not a servant of the cur 
 'juration so ,';s to iiiaUe them liable tor lii.-i a. l.- 
 done ill pursuance of his statutory duties. I'l.r- 
 !<i/lk V. Cannil)' uhd'City of Toronto, 'H) d. V.. 
 47S. 
 
 Bdltor of Newspaper — Chaiiiii' of J'o/iri/.] 
 A. Ij. and C. M. , who had ]iulilislied a news- 
 paper as partners or joint owners, entered into 
 a new agieeineiit by which A. I!, assumed pay- 
 ment of all the debts of the business, and became 
 from that time sole pioprietor of the jiapei', 
 binding himself to continue its publication, and, 
 in case he wished to sell out, to give C. h. 
 the prefeiencu. 'I'hu agreement ])rovided that : 
 " .'{. Le (lit Charles Relanger I'^vieiit, a ])artir 
 de ce jour, directeur et ri'dactetir du dit journal, 
 sou nom (levant paraitre ccjinmu directeur en 
 t(''te du dit jo-.-rnal, et iiour sew services et son 
 inlluence eoiiimc tel, lu dit Arthur lielanger liii 
 alloue (juatie cents plastics jiar annije, tant par 
 impressions, annonces, etc., (ju'en argent juxju' 
 au niontant d'j eutte somnie, et le dit Arthur 
 Relanger ne pourra inettre tin a cet engagement ; 
 saiiH le eonsentement du dit Charles ISelanger. " 
 'J'he paper was published lor some time under 
 this agreement as a supporter of the Liberal • 
 party, when C. B., without instructions from or 
 permission of A. 11, wrote editorials violently j 
 opposing the candidate ('*■ that party at an elec- 
 tion, and was dismissed from his position on the I 
 paper. He then brought an aeliun against A. U. 
 to have it declared that he was " 7t-ilacl< nr etl 
 ilirtctiiir" of the newspaper, and claiming I 
 vlamages : — j 
 
 III. Liaiui.itv (IF Mastkr I'lu; Is.ii it^ r- 
 Skrvast. 
 
 1. Crown. 
 
 Negligence of Servants or Officers— C/h 
 mo)i h'iii/i/oii)iieiil — Lim- of (Juihir.\ — A petition 
 of right was brought by F. to recover daniaycs 
 for the death of his son, caused by the iicgli 
 gence of servants of thu Crown while engaged in 
 rejiairing the Lachine Canal. 
 
 Held, atiirming the decision of the Excheijutr 
 Court, Taschereau, il., dissenting, that tbc 
 Crown was liable under 50 & ol \'ict. eh. 1(1, 
 sec. !()('■); and that it was no answer to tla 
 petition to say that the injury was caused liy a 
 fellow-servant of the deceased, the case being 
 governed by the law of the Province of yiiebti', 
 in which the doctrine of common cniplojimnt 
 has no place. The Quitii v. Fitiou, "24 S. C. K. 
 482. 
 
 2. Liabilily at Common Lav: 
 
 Common Employment — Defective Ai>pti- 
 ances.] — One of the directors of a quairy com- 
 
64ft 
 
 (leiiaion of tliu C'')iirt uf 
 . II. l>y the ugi'ct'iii"i;l li;ii' 
 lit' A. 1!. , lliu "wiii'i' (iT t'li' 
 no l'ij,lit to rlmjii;i. llm 
 lapcr without tin: owmi j 
 wiiH lij^htly clihiiii>ncc! tnr 
 UiiUiiiijir, -'l .S. C, I;. liTs. 
 
 - nil ill Eiii))toyi.r.\ 'In 
 il intmrauct^ coiji|jiiii\ i. 
 
 V.t- ll{,'C'ljt'H llglL'Ullll'Ml •■ (,; 
 
 1 till! iliitiiti iiM»i;,'iiuii ti' 
 tly fur thi' hf.st iiitcri'sts 
 Ih HUlIififiit justilicaliiii 
 iiiiivi' V. (Jitiuii.'ii Ai;iii'„t 
 !. 40S. 
 
 ■ii/iir-i. I — III iiii iietinii tor 
 liuif thu ili'friici; is iiiiH 
 is pro))iT to (liruLt |i,ir- 
 tuif and chiiracter ui ili. 
 I- I hi; fin])loyui' ; tlii'su 
 I forth till! iliitCH, siili- 
 iiil ciicuiiif-taiioes nf all 
 <iii.s wherein anil whcrcnr, 
 tfil hiinsi'lf, on whirh tlir 
 y ; and Icavi: sIkjuM i.r 
 ith further particulai.^ it 
 il. Ciahbi' V. //»•/,<.,„, 
 K. V2. 
 
 «49 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT. 
 
 Iastkk 
 
 VA.NT. 
 
 FOK Acts ok 
 
 tlon-jlA iliml Ilidllh Of 
 medical lieidth otlie v (r{ 
 
 \ aiipoiiited under I;. S. 
 
 ,ot a i?er\ iinL of the enr 
 them liable for his a..i,- 
 
 j statutory diities. Fur- 
 
 ij of Toronto, "JO (). K. 
 
 vsTKl: Koi; I.v.iii{\ T' 
 
 k'ANT. 
 
 ints or Officers— Com 
 of i^lnibic.\ — A IJetitioii 
 ' F. to recover daiuagM 
 1, caused by the iiegli- 
 Crown while engagetl in 
 anal. 
 
 ;cision of the Exolieijiur 
 , disseiitinj.', that the 
 r 50 & al ^■ict. eh. Iti, 
 was no answer to thu 
 injury was caused hy a 
 ^ceased, the case bcin^' 
 :he Province of Qiiehtc, 
 if common enij)lojiiiiiu 
 n V. FUion, 'li S. C. K. 
 
 Common Law, 
 
 ent — Defective Appli- 
 actors of a quairy com- 
 
 nan Wftsupiminte.] foreman of the works, with 
 
 !ul powers ot mantiK-' nl, subjeet to th e ii 
 
 reotorH eoUro, and to suel, duties as mij It I • 
 <le ..Knte.l to hnn from tin,., to time The , l,u 
 t..l one ot the eotnpanys labourers .; 
 hitheha.l sustained injury by re, sou o | ^l 
 torenmn s neKbgeuee while .o'tn'.^ under hi/i. 
 .tr et.ons. brought an action at\.onunoa law 
 aiianist tile company : - 
 
 Mehl HO far as the action nst,.,! upon the li,. 
 h.hty of the company through th,. to eruan tl at 
 
 tl„M.O was n„ l,Hb,l,ty, as hew, IS lely , J 
 
 low-serviint of the plaintitr- - 
 
 Ifeld, however that ,ui tiction might b.. «„,. 
 '"';:'' "!' I'.''""' "' "••Uligeuee of iho oinipany in 
 not turnishmg p,„pe,. appliances for th.. .'n.arr 
 H.g operations. F.onr. „f/,„. y. Uiru, Snilil 
 
 660 
 
 .'1. LidliUily if Kmpfni/rri (//. C. Aet). 
 
 Common Employment /v'nVAyKr -j,„.,, , 
 A gas ..ompany, eng.ige.l in laying a main in 
 
 -)VR.e«of oueof bis workn, In. f„r s, e 
 
 v-.rk, an,l while engag..,| t|,,,„„u H. ,vas in,' 
 l.y the negltgence of the servants ,.- th.. c on 
 W. In an action f,.r .lauiages for sueh in. 
 
 Held allirming t^e .lecision of the Supreme 
 < "in-t of N,.w Hnuis. iek, that by th.. ,.v i le," . 
 
 "- the trKd n,.glig..,,.. „.,unst thi ../^,; ~ 
 .Millieii.utly proveil :— ' -^ " "** 
 
 Ibid, fmther, that whether or n.,t there wis 
 .1 inn.mou empl.,ymeut betw<.en f|. „„,! n,,, ,,,, 
 ^.iMt of the .xunpany wtis a ,|U..stion of f,tct; and 
 
 having b.,en iiegative.l by the iimling o |,e 
 JM'y, an, he evnlenco warrantintr such ;iudiu7 
 m. appellate Court wouhl n.,t int-.rfere. .st.ZZ'i 
 f.M /.i:/hi Co. y. fia//ir/d, •_';) s. c. i;. lui 
 
 Defect In Way-.sW „/77o,/^ -.\V,e rriat 1 
 
 tor .lainages tor lujiirb's r..,.eived while i.ass ' 
 ;;;"';/'-^.--tof ...gs, U.ft nne.nere.l. ,, wS 
 
 ;'n'l the way us...l uhs more e.x.e ti.u.s t,'ai 
 t le ,on..„v..r,ngof th.. ..„,. „„.!,., the '.'war'' 
 
 iHgllgeil. llie irial.luilge, however .lismiss...! 
 
 ;;;;;piain.i...witi^l„::;;-''J''.tr."bi£: 
 
 1 i>. IheMipivm, (ourt of Cana.la allowe.l 
 
 ; ; I""al l.y the .le„.„,l,tnts, ami or.lere, *ew 
 
 ■al be.ng o „p„.,„„ ,1,,,^ .^ ^^..,^ suffici«,7 
 
 «r;;f^::-:;!,!;ii:i-; ■■;-^^^^ 
 
 .ht..txer,.us an,l ,l,.„.,.rive stat.., as .all .;.' MnUm 
 
 ^\-od-mm: Comj,c„sHllo„for Injuries Aef 
 
 Maohlnory_y>./,,., __ K„oH,,f.,,, _. ,v,/,,„^, 
 Ao„ J,,t In,.n-u..]--ln an acthu. by a sen-, , 
 .igain.st a nuister to recover ,l-,m-.ooa f, ,. ..'''."' 
 
 >^.st,uu..n.ytl.plaintitl";'i::^o^ Sen^ 
 .'Inol, oceurr..,! by re,ison „f a dcf..ct b t In 
 
 atteu.lHUtto w..rk the brake 1 Ir, , 1 ,> ^ '",' 
 
 |i-,theph.inti,rknew:;^^;,I:^|£;';:!;';:^^[;;^ 
 
 likebhoo.l of an ,icci.k.nt. he haviu<' fre, , entlv 
 
 Held, that the plaintiH' was ro/e,,.. tm.l could 
 
 xilachlnery— Defwfirn .System — \n,:,.,. , 
 
 ueetnc system ot using mticbinery as well as 
 ''-' injuries cause, by a .lefe,.t in tlw. . i • 
 Itself \f v," '"-"-i-t III tlie niachinerv 
 
 ,;;;.u^»:k, ■•-,-;-=-. if 
 "rf, iS". ';vs:r ""•■-;? "• "« >».i.i"v..' o. 
 
 ',')• V. 
 
 --' -niployer of 
 loUy, 21 S. C. K. 580. 
 
 m-'lrrn^"'"' '■ !r'^'""' -■* •^- ^•- K- 4«2, ant. 
 Hi^%T% \/^"ll'!'""" ^'-''l'"' Co., ho. 
 
 Accident -CVn,,sr-rv«y,r/,„., - Eriihnre 1 
 .leie. e 1 1 "^'"•""' ^''"1" ay company, J,y the 
 
 s^Si^c^^srisihiins^^^ 
 
 ^;..ce o. stalus in the sockets' t here, E The e 
 w.sno.ltrect evuenve to shew how the aLei- 
 .lem^happ..ued, It being merely a matter of r„: 
 
 i'he'ol'^;^ti^''' ^"^''"".Y"^ ""t ...aintainable. 
 ben. til' "••■'■Mwi.l a sum of $250 by a 
 
 r i ,1 T"'"'r' ";'■'"•:'>' "' '-•"■"'^•^tion with the 
 ,le , , -^ ', ""'' " ''"/""^' <»«aiiization, of which 
 .lece.ise.l was a member. 'I'lio nliint tr .m!,„ 
 
 Held, that the rectijit foriuc.l no bar to the 
 action against the defen.lants ; nor waa then: 
 any rt^htto .le.luct the amount received from 
 
 'i;;nHt'ler;"'"^""'" *"•■ **•■- ^heXS 
 was y.'f *.l« I to as ,lani,ig,.s. //;,./., ,-. Newprrrt, 
 
 < c., A. n . Co., 4 ii. &. s. 403 note, .listinuuisheA 
 
 /•«m,.- V. Crand Trunk It. w! Co., 21 o! R 
 
 £.xiint...\-\\ here ,i, workman was killt.l hv the 
 
 bo led i;;;:Vo *'"' 'r r^'^'' -f-- ^^^^^s 
 
 ;[efective..dt,^'i;r^;i::irt.:'ys^ 
 
 due to tliLs cause, was held suliicient ti> justify 
 
851 
 
 MABTEa AND SERVANT. 
 
 632 
 
 1 1' 
 
 1 ''^Sll t hWi ' 
 
 !i 
 
 mm 
 
 
 
 
 IWp 
 
 1 IIP 
 
 tin- siiIiiiiiNsion rif till' lasc to ili(> jury, 
 fiiik V. h'rii iiiiiii, •i\ A. I;. (i;i;). 
 
 Machinery /lunger /:'iii/>/'ii/iiii iit af' /ni'iin/ 
 Ci.iifr Tii-.tir -.r,„i,,rif.^ Ail.\~'\'\\v pluiiitill, 
 a Iniy iiiiilcr tMiUu ynus uf n^v, wn.i liiinl In 
 _>v<nk II lllll^l tor thn ili'tViiiliiutN in lluir t'.ictury. 
 'I'l (! ('luviitor wiisuiirki (1 \<\ ro|,cs i<ii tlir mitfsiili' 
 of th<i full nr friiimi wliiclixuir Iminlk'd li\ thf 
 j)i iMim htiiiiiliii^ will. ill, tlirniii:li a N(|n;uf oii.n 
 iM« t;iit ill till' iiiiiiM'MDik. I'hi. i.liiiiitiH «iiH 
 iiistrmiti (I fur a ivw Iuhhh liy u IiIl.'j;( i Imy Imw 
 to iiiim; iiikI I.ihxt tlio lioiMt, aliil w.xtt ciilltioiuil 
 111.: (,o |mt lii.s inad oat of tluj o|)(iiiiij,' wiuii tlii' 
 Jiont wits >;oiiii.', <ii. the nifahioii in «ni«.^tii.ii 
 tlii' elevator sto|i|iiil wluii jjoihj,. up, ami tliu 
 
 |)l:uiitiir|iilt Ills litail out ot tl licliilij; to Nco 
 
 wli .t Htopiird it, uIhii, till' I'lmator Htaitliig 
 Ui;aiii, tin. |ilaiiilill' ifiii\i.(l the iiijiiricx cnni. 
 Iiliiiifil oi. On this uvidciiru lliu |il:iiiilill wan 
 iioiLMiiitiil ill liis action, wliiuliho liroiight ajjainot 
 till' (liilLiiilaiits lor nf,^'li;ieiicL' : — 
 
 ll'lil, tliat till' nonsuit hIiohIiI lie set a.sido 
 and a new trial ordcnd with costs to the (ilain- 
 tiff iiiuny event. 
 
 I'er lioyd, ('. The (■inployiiieiit of a eliild 
 under twelve to Hiirk an elevator for the uais of 
 iiiiiunufaeliiriii^' eoiieerii is made ill. gal hy the 
 l''iietoriiM Art; and, foi' this iiasoii" thi. riii- ' 
 ployer hiiH to exercise more than ordinary pru- 
 eaiitions for the w. Il-ljeint; and safe-.ynard'iiig of ', 
 minors who have In en )i!il into factory work 
 conti-.iry to the iJiohihition of the l.cislature 
 O'/irien v. Siw/urd, i.'2 (), J!. l.'Ui. 
 
 Ill his fii\oiir at III,. 
 
 lilainliir winked \,„i 
 •A guard niidi i tl,, 
 
 l!i(il- in not niiikini,' provi.tioM for liin siifety, liy min 
 jdyiiig him with proper material, anil ii, i,„t 
 liaving the maehineiy sli.pped while the . j. i,ii. 
 iiig «as goiiiK ,,n, Mild th' plaintitl' was mtui,.,! 
 to 11 lain llie \erdirt foiuii" 
 trial. 
 
 Ad the place \\ here tl e 
 dangerous, und eiilled loi 
 
 Iirovi.Mciis of the Faclorieh Ail, the failui, t,. 
 Iiirnish one was jn r .<. evidence of netli;;i in e ,,|, 
 
 , the part of the dirleiiihintd, Th iihi,.,. . i 
 Wrhihl, L''.'(). 1!. lliT. 
 
 j 
 
 j Machinery— Ih/n-i- FiicluiifH Aii. |- Anan- 
 peal ly the plaiutill' from the judj/lnelit ot the 
 
 , l.»necn .s liemli MMsion, 111 (). \\. 7ii, was di,. 
 iniii,sed, *hu Court holding that on the evnUnc 
 no iiegliiitnee on the part of the defendants v;,,- 
 shewn. 'Ml... Clint also held tli;;t, as the iiijiny 
 ill ipiestion did imt occur in coniiccliiPii with ih'u 
 user of the mw, it was uniieceH.-ary to cuiNii^i.r 
 whetherthe ahsem-e of agiiaul waH a "deii.t' 
 
 I or .Hit within the inclining of the Wdrktnens 
 ('oniiiiiisalii.il for Iiijiiiics Act; and also that, 
 as there was no evidence ii.s to the niiinli, r ..'f 
 persoii.s einidoyed on the preniises in ipic^teii, 
 It was not neeess.iry to consider the poii.t.s 
 ruhseil as to the coiistruetion of the l'',.|itiiii. J 
 
 Act. //(iiiiU'dii v. ^■(•o,.•■^lci•, lis A. it. -J.'fT. 
 
 _ T>.a.chinevy - />./,,if l„-.r„l,-,i/i Srw F,/ /„. 
 jw;vo.|— 'Ihe jilaiiitill' was cmploved in the 
 lanniliy di.partmcnt of the dcfeiidirnl.-,' factory, 
 and while «he wa.s staiuling on a lieueli to open 
 ji window for the purposu'of letting steam and 
 liot air escape, her hair wa.s cau^^lit l,v an un- 
 guarded revolving horizontal sliati; w hich passed 
 through the room near the ceiling and in front 
 of the window, and she was sevei-ily injured :— 
 _ Held, Uiirlon, J. A., dhssenting, I'ltllrining the 
 Jiulgnient ot the (,)iieen"s Hencli Division in 
 fiivoiir of the jdaintiil, that she could not lie 
 Baid to liave heeii doing an act o entirely un- 
 connected with her employment and duties as 
 to he regarded as ,i mere voliintciT and as sncli 
 outside the i>roteetioii of the Act, and t hat there 
 was a "detect in the urrangenient " of the 
 niaehmery within the meaning of the amendin.' 
 Act, r,-J \-ict.eh. •_';!, s(e.;i (I).), that is, an element 
 of danger ansnig from the position and colloca- 
 tion ot machiueiy in itself perfeetlv .siaiiid and 
 well fitted for the purpose to w hidi it is to he 
 ajiplied and used. 
 
 The eflect of see. 7 of that Act and what is 
 meant liy voluntarilv incurring ri.sk of injury 
 considered. M,-aolirrtij v. ddi,- Main, fad liriw, 
 Co., 1>J A. R. 117. 
 
 Machinery — /;,;. - Fitrlories ..(cA]— The 
 plaintitl, a lad of seventeen, worked at a stamp- 
 niiichine in the defendants' laclory, his duty 
 being to kee,- it clean. lUing refused proper 
 material for this iiurpo.se, he resorted to pieces 
 ot bagging. At> iitiiig to clean it while in 
 motion, the l,ag-i got Caught in the cogwheel, 
 ami he was injure ; 
 
 ileh!. t!i.".t.thed-for:d.'tiitr, knowing that the 
 ptaiiiUll was working with improper appliances 
 i.i ii dangerous place, were guilty of negligence 
 
 ; Macliinory — yv,;/; ,7 — /',(,./„n'c.s Ai-l.\~.\ 
 \ drilling UMchine luaiinfacturcil liy a well-kiiouii 
 , maker, and simihir lo tho:,e geiieridly in i;-,, 
 Wiis put Up for the I'efendiints in their facl<MV.' 
 'Ilu' plaintiir. a woikman acting iii.der tlieiirihi.s 
 of the del'eiidants' foreiiiiiii, lor the piirpoM u\ 
 oiling the shalling on the arm in which the d.iiil 
 Wdiked. triid to push a poiiion of it uji ai:il 
 ■iouii the aim, and in order to do .-.o, kiiowiiiij 
 that the iiiachiin' ^^a^ in nuilion. |!ies,-eil iiis 
 hody against the revoh ing drill, which wa» not 
 m motion when the order was givui to him, 
 :ind his clothes ciiching in an unguaided s, t- 
 .screw on the s|i:udle. he was seriously injureil. 
 No other accidt lit had oeeiirred on th'j machiia-i 
 which was (|uiic new and in good order, ami 
 w hich, according to the evidence, Wif- soir.etiuies 
 made with the set-screw sunk in the ..pindle. 
 In an action for damages the jury louml tlmt 
 : the accident was caused hy the' deiLiiilaiits' 
 negligence, and witliout any negligence on tin; 
 part of the plaintiir. 
 
 On .'ippeal, a Ihvisiomd Court of the Coniin, a 
 Picas liivision was ci|iially divided. 
 
 I'er (lalt, C.J. — 'llicre was no evidence ef 
 negligence lo siihmit lo the jury either at com- 
 nion law in- under the Workmen's ComiieiLsitiuii 
 tor Injuries Act, nor any liahility under tin 
 Factories Act. 
 
 l'erRo,se,,T.— There was evidence of negligei, t 
 hotii at comniim law and under the Workiiicir-i 
 < 'ompensatiou for Injuries Act ; the want cf .i 
 guard to the set-screw, as rei|uired hy the Fa..-, 
 tories Act, constituted such negligence at cmh- 
 mon law ; and the absence of such guard w.m 
 also a defect in the condition or ariaiigenuiit 
 of the niaehinery within the Workniin's Cri. 
 pensation for Injuries Act. 
 
 Hehl, i.y the Court of Appeal, that the ;ili- 
 seme of a guard to a projecting screw ii. n 
 revolving spindle, part of a i-ielial drill, which 
 Was used to fasten the drilling tool into tlie 
 spindle, is a violation of the jnovisioiis oi the 
 Factories Act, R. S. O. ch. l'U8, sec. \o, the 
 
632 
 
 for h\H Hiifity, liy viip 
 •I' limltiiiil, and in ii„i 
 t''|'|"'il "liil.' till' .l.iiii. 
 Ii'- |ilaiiititr\vii.t iiitii'til 
 iiid in hit fiiviriii' at the 
 
 n I'lililitiir Wdlkrd \:„^ 
 
 tor u ^.'iiiird iimli'i ih.. 
 ■i'-K Ac t, tlii^ liillui. t,, 
 
 Mill llfu of m«lif;c llic i,li 
 
 ndaiita. VVi i»./.....,, v. 
 
 ■/■V/,vo/,V,, ,. I,/. I-Aii up- 
 Ill Uio jilil^tn.ciit ot till' 
 
 l!l <». U, 7(1, wii., ,li,. 
 IK that oil tliL' L'viiUiiiu 
 It ol tlif ilfffuihiiits Ma, 
 
 111 hi lh;;t, us the ilijiiiy 
 r illrolllicctinil with Il;'u 
 llllln■l■t■n^al■y to iviiisj,|,.r 
 I ;;uaiil AviiH a "deii . i 
 lillj,' of ihe Worh;ii. : . 
 i.H Act ; and also tl'.r, 
 I! as to till' luiiuh. ! it 
 
 • lllfniisL'S ill (|Ul■.^th II, 
 
 o iMiii.-idi-r tiiu poii.t.s 
 nt/tioii of till' Kactiiii, ^ 
 '.rck; Is A. i:. -l;i7. 
 
 — Fiii/iiri'e.H Art. | — A 
 ■tuii'cl l>y a widhkiiiiMii 
 tlioM' ;,'tiliTaliy in i:-,, 
 idaiits III Ihcir faclniy. 
 in-'tiiig iiiak'r thtordt'iK 
 Mil, tor thi' imrpo.T uf 
 ' anil in wiiicii the d.iiil 
 [Oil ion of it up aial 
 
 653 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT. 
 
 hr to d(i 
 
 uiowiny 
 
 111 motion. |iif.s;.f(l Ins 
 \ti drill, whudi Mas not 
 Itr wa.s H'vtn to hiin, 
 ; ill !iii iiiigiuudid « t- 
 wiiH airioiisiy iiijiiiid. 
 -iiniid on th'j muciiinu, 
 id ill yooil ordtr, am! 
 i-idiiujt'. Was .'■■onuaiiiii's 
 suiiU in tlif . piiidh. 
 I's ihu jury found that 
 1 liy 111'- dofLiidaiits' 
 my iU'j.'lii,'cucu on tho 
 
 Court of tlie Coniiii. u 
 y (lividi'd. 
 
 Mas no ividciicf of 
 he jury < iihcr at idiii- 
 rliiiitn's ('oinpen.'^alioii 
 ly liiihility niidcr tin 
 
 (fvidcnoeof mudiiii'i. i 
 under the Workiiien'^ 
 ■> Aet ; the want nf .i 
 
 reiiuired by the Fac- 
 'h liegligeiiee at euiii- 
 ■e of sueh f^uard w.ia 
 lition or urrangenn'iit 
 
 the Workiiien's C'mu- 
 
 Appeal, that the ah- 
 irojeeting screw in ,i 
 
 a radial drill, «liich 
 irilliiiy tool into tlio 
 the ))rovisions "; iln. 
 
 th. 1.'08, sec. 1."), file 
 
 Miiiidio heiim,. "iiiovinKpnrt.,f the iini, hiiuTv " 
 
 _«l III. li,nie,,nwiKoftliatAe, I ,t i« a,:^', 
 
 , ,n the ,„n,|,„„n ol the nuoliiiurv," 
 « thin the nieai.inuot the Workin.nVConip;,. 
 sationtorlnjuiiesAet. I!. ,s. ,,. ,|,. |.J|, ■ 
 
 asaineinhdhy .•JVn.t.,,h. •.';!,...,;(,(>.)., In i 
 
 in o.ther vuw dania^, s may 1,. reeo er ■ 1 t • 
 
 Mil aerid.lit ean..ed l,y its alienee 
 
 .liid>.'ment of the Comn I'Las Division 
 
 "Inmied J jinrton. .),A.,di.,Mntin... 
 
 Held, l,v llu. Snpretne C t'' of Canada 
 
 "ni.niiiifeMliedeeisioii of the ( ^uii t of A^ e ' 
 (.Wynne, .)„ di... ntii ,,-, that llu, iniy' ore 
 "arranted ,n l.udiiiK that there Was uiligon ,,^ 
 
 n.iot.havin,, the .s,rew ^nardid ; that: .sle 
 f.iirm.uihneu that the plaintitlha,! no evpe.t 
 «l.ee as to tl... ordinary moile of doi.e,- what ho 
 Yjstohl hevu.sinstitied in nsiiiK any reason 
 nl.le mode ; Hint he aeted within h,s in,s,,netios 
 Mi I..-.I1W the only elhciont means that h,. coi 1.' 
 aia tlu.tn,id.Mhe..ideneelu.nsed';,rd;:J; 
 <'. i!. 1-, L'l A. l;. .-,!)(;, •Ji,s,C, H..^,,s. •• - 
 
 664 
 
 !iH ',!as"t"'"^'i "," " :■"■'.'• ""l'l"''- "'"' ''.V '•«•""< n. 
 >H«as fonml l.y tl„. j,„v. „, ,|„. .lefend«nts' 
 
 '.•KllKene.. „, n„t KUardin;; the wheel,. , , . 
 
 t..Miveh,n,«elf.ea„«ht his hand. lieiein.mulli 
 
 Hehl, that the eo^-wheels e,.iu,titut. d |„.it of 
 • mailiim ry, and, liein,. .h.n.eions, I,,. .1 
 'a^ lie. 1 guarded nnder Hee. l.\ .,,1, „.,, | 
 
 I.e iMietorns Aet. U. S. O. el,. -JiM „, l 
 '■•ttlienonHUaidiuKeoiistitnt.da "d.f;,, j, 
 lie e.ind.non of the ,mu.hi,i..rv " ni,d..r tli • 
 \\orUni..nH(oni|,usation for Injuries Aet. 1!. 
 >. ( .eh. |.»l. .i/.C/„/„w,vv, <,w' ,l/„„,„;,,, . 
 -^' /OiyV,-y. !;A.I^ll7..„n,mente^^ 
 
 i-leh , a,M,, follo«in,u' l:„il,l,l,,i V. l-:,nl Urnii 
 
 ;;/'^.'^^^''■ '•• ^-J.S. that the nuixi.nVo/,,:, 
 
 ■ „"'"l"l" :""1 ""^ •■'M'ly^liereanaeenlent I 
 taUHeil hy the hieael, of u statutorv dntv. / ,„ ! 
 f/"- V, Ihnn.ilM Cullon Co., '.'i O 'ij 4..- 
 
 Machinery- l>,/cr,^-IWt,.n,s A.-i-Coutn- 
 
 ;;:'i,; ''''■'; "'■^•j-'''"-' v^-^^m was ..mphv i 
 
 fte it 'T l';r ;"' ',"/'", "■"■■'^ 'W'-l llimie 
 
 fte itl/,d h.ft he defendants' saw-mill, and 
 
 l-etere it was sliippt-,!. To y.t f^oiue Ir s , 
 
 watertodrinkthantina.suppli.d 1, thes . 
 c«.i raelor. t ,e plaintiir WenV t|„..,„. , , .' ,' ,. 
 
 m. (i.iwhiehhehadno l.n.siness i.reon nocl m 
 with Ins work), and in returnim,^. .„in,r ,,n ?,^ 
 ^pvaythroK.h the mill, to arji.st a M, , !' 
 «liowasin.nl;ieiilty with some p|„nkv 1.. . 
 
 intounnnf;uardedhole,inwliielia.s,v. 
 iiig. and was injured : — 
 
 Held that umler these eilvii. tanees the 
 
 pliiin.ilt eou , have no ela , „, ."" , ,' 
 
 .efen, ant... lUher nmUr the ( ., tari,, l-Vtorie^ 
 Aet, 1;. N. (1, .h ...(IS, or tlie W orknivn'rc' n 
 IMLsalinii i,,r Injurie.-j Aet, ;/- ,.'■ i|| 
 Kveu though the phiintiir „d,ht ho a person 
 lie serviee and cmplovni. n, of tho,l..fe!,d int" 
 «ithni t le 1 leaning ■^.,. „„tario Factorie.s 
 aasa.ueni.ed. .^.t , Uities preserihed hy , 
 
 tha Aet eaii ho enforee.l nlv hy ,„.naltv • no ' 
 
 ;;;v. -al,,,tyisim,.o..don-thoU„.:;,Vt ei 
 '■'ttoii, ,1 apart trom the statute, he M-ould 
 not have l-een lial.lo at eominou law, « ' p 
 bat the Aet in..v he used for evi.lential ,ni •- 
 'r« ... regard to thu plaee of the aeev t 
 
 «■,'/. pel I'ei-uson, .)., ,sce. IT, shew,s the Ji,,] . 
 
 ." his e-.sete. have been.) liut here the dei 
 
 Its would not be so liable, on aecount of lo 
 
 aitrihutury ne^di^enoe of the plainlilf. Fn,Z 
 
 \. Jiiisc, „!/,/,■ ;;, uo o. 1;. 29. •' 
 
 Machinery - ,'y, /; .-t-FuHorUs A rl- VoL-nll 
 
 ^u the tanks eontaininmhe dye, wa's certii. 
 mac liinery e.aisisting of a serio^ of v ]""•"" 
 «nilgnig the ,Iye out ol th- 
 
 Machinery- I,./,,-! _ K„„,H,,/.,.. _- ,|, ,,„.,,. 
 
 eeover''! '"'^■- '- i' "'•'-'"'"-- 'vol km,!, to 
 I itiover dama^;,s lor u ,U^.^^, j„ ,^ n,i, bine 
 
 l!.nderthe\Vorl:,nenH('o„,pc,isat,o, f :' • 
 
 -Aet, he must not only Lve a kiaiwleS of 
 
 t '< 'la.>;;er he incuis, but also a thoror.h eem- 
 
 '";, ':"-:i"l <": ''l'P.,oeiatio„ of the risk he ru 1 . 
 
 ""• bla.m 111. when foiiiuTly in the emi-lov 
 
 |"nent ot the defendant.s, had km wledj e'A 
 
 l-f^et.iianuiehine in their f«et<,rv, ami a e 
 
 ! -vviii^' l,ad ivlurned to sueh uiiploVuK.n , 'Vm 
 
 , bad a,ai,, w,,rknl at the machiiK, kimw e 
 
 that he deieet, of which the defen.hints w. re 
 
 -«.'ie, had not been renie.lie,!. The inrv 
 
 JMd, that he w.MS entitled to recover. //„/„/,, 
 0. R Gir" '" "'' ^^"""/'"""■'''■:/ Co„'-.4 
 
 Hers for 
 
 ^...f, w. .,^u uiib 01 tUe warn us it i-nm 
 
 w:";vir:%''^^"'s-"-heois^,:rtLe;; 
 
 "f th , they connected with the frame 
 
 ma.sl,ppc,.y eon.htion. The plaintiir, a wo 'k I 
 wa,.;':;'' r'' , ''^ ^^"r '1'-''<^'"l^'"t«. who w,,s i 
 
 of 1. 1 ■\"'-''->t. "lule returninL' aloier „ne 
 
 of these plunks from the discharge of his di, ry 
 
 Plant-/;./,;./ _ j/„. ./,,-, K,„.„.!,„l,,,A_ 
 " lieie the workman i.s a«are that the e,„pl„vi,r 
 
 !<now8 of I H, ,l,iV..,t that Kl.inuuelv cai.-' s the 
 •U"/yJ.e.snotbon,,,lumiersub.:,,.. ;!.,fHec 
 
 '" ';'i.^-'(:-;"\^'-l-.'-li'>.. i.„- injuries 
 
 : tlon hereof to the oni,.|.,y„, aii.riiis fuHu."^ 
 I ight of action if an.,m,„;.i !, ..x,uHe is shown 
 
 l::rt;mjn:r'''''' ■■''''^'''''"''^''''''■^^'^^^ 
 
 I,„ly,'"'f''.l'"",' /'"' ^"'I'l-.ver and the workman 
 know of the deh.ct. and it i. the Workman's ow. 
 duty to see that llie detVct i.s remedied but 
 
 , Plant-- I)ff,r!~-s/,v,f /.•„//„•„„ rVo-.v.l -Hav- 
 >"« ear biillers of difieiTnt lieidits, .so that in 
 co.ipl.n,; the bnfiers overlap ami ,Ulo'rd no pro" 
 tcttion to the penson eirecting the coupling, ig 
 :.;m- ,!'^ "' ""^ •■"■'•.■iiiLement of the plant" 
 1 e, i'",'- f >'\™!"n.S of the \Vorkn,en-s Com- 
 pensa ion for Injuries Act. ,-,.-. Vict. eh. " 
 .< (O.) ; Ihirton, .r.A.. ili-seinii.- 
 Joniiifo Tiiiihrnii (_',,,. i^ \ [; 7^ " 
 
 AfKrmed by th.. .Suprwn.. "CuiVt .,f Cai.a.la. 
 Jori,„fo J.'ai/wu!/ Co. v. /;.„„/. 24 .S. C. K. 71,-,. 
 
 "Servant In Huf,bandry"-A-„o,/./,,/,/,. of 
 
 .■{0, sec. 
 
 Jjilliil v. 
 
 under the Workmen's ( ■onipenslitiaa Act ami 
 eommon law lor damages f,',. injuries sust^lhLd 
 
 111 at; 
 
055 
 
 MAXIMS. 
 
 hy the plaintiff while engaged in tligging a drain, across an opening in the ground floor, intend- 
 
 I I 
 
 upon tlie dcfemiants farm, it did not appear ; ing to use it as a fulorun 
 that tlie plaiMt.fl engaged with tlie defendant to labourer earryinga heavy sc 
 do any particular work, but that he was Hr.t by the forenuvn to place it in another mrt'o'f'ih" 
 a 1 Ii^:r£d;S''' """"' "'"■' "'"' ''"" b"iMing,and, whi/e crossing the .I^,!-"!;,!^:' 
 M H, I • ^"^ ,. , , . was precipitated into the cellar by the iMviMn; 
 
 wh, , ;. t 1 "'"' ^ ;','"■"■,"" ^;'|: "'" J"''>' "fthepl.nkattl.e knot, an,l was injur ' f 
 whether the nrnig ot the planit.lF was as a , lid not appear that tliere was anv ■ v I .'v 
 servant in husbandry within tlie meaning of f,(i : tlie ..lank ■- ^ ^ •>'""' 
 
 Vict. eh. 2(i (O.), and whetlier the work he w... 
 engaged in was in the u.sual course of his em 
 
 Held, that th: 
 
 j>U.ymont as such, and also whether tlie danger men's tJompensation for Injuries Act, 
 
 ';"ss-grain were defects in the way. 
 
 was known to the detendant and unknown to the the knot and cro 
 I>huntill. or the converse, 
 
 le plank was a '• way " withi i 
 the meaning of sub-sec. 1 of sec. ;{ of the W,,,!:- 
 
 md th;lt 
 
 llic jury were asked certain questions, one 
 beni:; wliether tlie hiring was as a servant in 
 husljandry, but they were told that tliey might 
 guH; a general verdict, and they gave one lor 
 the pLiintili; answering none of the (|uestions. 
 J he trial Judge in his charge gave them no in- 
 struction on tliis point and no direction as to 
 wliat tlu' law was :— 
 
 Held, that they were not competent to lind a 
 general verdict, and there shouhl be a new trial 
 J!tid v. JJarnin, -23 O. K. -J:.';!. 
 
 for which the defendant was responsible Cnf,/' 
 "■<// v. Milh, 24 O. 11. 4(i-_'. 
 
 Way — Dcftct —CoalrlbutorijXetiluii'ncc. ]--Tlie 
 plaintiir, in going to that part of the defendants' 
 building where his work was, had to pass 
 tlirough a long ivumi, the passage lieing nearly 
 straight until within ten or twelve feet of a 
 lioist, where it turned to the left. He was ipiite 
 familiar with this passage, which was well 
 liglited, Init on tiie occasion in (piestion, wliile 
 looking at a man at work repairing tlie hoist, 
 instead of turning toward his workroom he 
 walked straigiit into the hole and fell to the 
 cellar below, thus causing injury. As a rule 
 there was a bar protecting tlie' entrance to the 
 lioist, Ijut on the occasion in iiucstiim tliis bar 
 iiad been reiuoved on account of the rejiairs : 
 
 Held, liy the Chancery Division, that the 
 action must be dismissed upon the ground of 
 coiitriliutory negligence on the part of the 
 pl:iiutill':~- 
 
 H ;1(1, by the Court of Appeal, that there was 
 no ilefcct in the condition of the "way," with- 
 in the uieaning of the Workmen's (.'onipeusa- 
 tiun for Injuries Act, li. S. O. cli 1 U, for which j „,,^ 
 the defendants Were rrspousible. ' ^"'' 
 
 Judgment of the Cliancery Division affirmed! 
 on oilier grounds. ' \ " 
 
 Held, by the .Supreme Court of Canada, 
 allirmiiig the decision of the Court of Appeal, 
 .Strong, C. J., hisitiudv, Taschereau, J., dis- 
 senting, that there was no evidence of negli- 
 gence of tile defeiidtints to 
 
 , -Way- - 1 )<./,.,•! -PahlU- Street. ] --A public st re,.t 
 in a defective condition, used by an eniiiloyer in 
 connection with his business, is not a " way 
 used in tlie business of the employer,' williiti 
 the meaning of the Workmen's Coniiiensatioii 
 tor Injiincs Act, w Vict. eh. 'M), sec. ;< (().) 
 
 The defendants' factory was Iniilt iimiiediate 
 ly on the line of a public street, wliicli was four- 
 teen feet wide at the place, .and on the other 
 side tliere was a steep declivity witliout a U-.iwe 
 One of their workmen was on a load of straw oil 
 a waggon, unloading it into the defendants' 
 premises through au aperture f.icing the street 
 when he lost his balance, fell off, and down the 
 declivity, and was killed ;— 
 
 Held, that the defeiiiLints were not liahlo 
 S/riilc V. IHiunoiid Ukis.i Co., L'O (). ][. :>'(). 
 
 S>ii lhit;.-<h r'i,/iiml>ia J/i//.s Co. 
 C. R. Til'.', aiit>: OoO. 
 
 V. .Srult, 21 S. 
 
 MAXIMS. 
 
 "Actio i-krsonalis .MoiuTnt ci-.m pkhso.na. ' 
 — S'c .ii'axoii V. Toicn of J'ttcrboroii<//i, 2t) A J{ 
 (is;!. •' ' "• 
 
 "Falsa i)i;.MoNSTHATto so.v .mkkt" — 6'cf 
 Cuardiim Anituniiice Co. y. Conmhj, l'O S. C. R. 
 
 " Hi-; who skkks kqi-jtv .mist im Kvnry. 
 8('e Alhu V. l<',iriivs.'<, 20 A. H. ;u. 
 
 "(.bl.NIA I'R.KSr.MUNTl'K IMTi; KSSK .ICTA. 
 
 Pa/ mat (try. JlcKMioii, 21 A. K. 441. 
 
 'Set 
 
 which the accident 
 coidd be attributed, and W. was iiroperly non- 1 ..d,. . 
 suited at tlie trial:- ^ ' : „., ^'';: .'''t-S.'^'""'"'^""' ''"^'^ 
 
 Held, per Strong, C. J,, that though the case : n'^. I--;} ^' ^- '*'*'^ ' ■^■="'/^'"'' v 
 might properly have lieen left to tlie jury, as, '' 
 
 tlie jiidgiueut of nonsuit had been atiiniied by 
 two Courts, it sliould not be interfered with 
 JIvwIhn-d V. M,-Cl<iry Ml'u. Co., 2,'J O. R 
 21 A. l;. 104, 24 S. C. R.'2:il. 
 
 Itiilirrts V. 
 T. Eaton 
 
 :m, 
 
 "Rks 
 
 JJnrt/ici v. 
 
 .MAlirS yALKAT qVAM I'KUKVT.' 
 Srotl,'ii, 24 S. C. R. ;i(i7. 
 
 -See, 
 
 Way — />,;/; (7 /// ^Suiin-iiit, ndeuce — firm/.: ] 
 —Tlie foreman of the defendant, a contractor 
 for the erection of a building, desiring to pry 
 up a part of the lloiiring, placed a new plank, 
 supplied by the o\yner8 of the building, about 
 elevea lei t long by eight inches wide and tiiree 
 inches thick, whieli the evidence shewed had a 
 knot in it two iiiclies wide, and was cross-grained, 
 
 •• VkHMA IXIimi-." ACCIPIl NTIIl CovrUA I'KO- 
 
 l'i;);iiNTi;.M."— ,S'(..e JJarl/ieJ v. Si'dllni, 24 S. C. R. 
 .•107. 
 
 ••Vol.KNTI \0N KIT I.N.irill.\."-.S'«- Mcfln/ieTly 
 
 v. <.lati: ,)liuinj\u-tiiriiiij (.',,., I!) A, R. 117: /'fl'im 
 V. Jlami/ton Ciilton Co., 2;j (X R. 42.') ; l'oll\. 
 Hcirltt, iti. 019; llunliiiiui y. ('kiiikUi Alliitttic 
 J>'. 11'. Co., 2.5 U. R. 20'J, 22 A. R. 21)2. 
 
656 
 
 ;lie ground floor, intend- 
 cnim. 'J'he iiliiintifT, ,i 
 
 .•y Ncantliiig, \vaH(lira,.ti.,! 
 ) it in imotlior jiartdf ih,. 
 )ssiiii,' tliL' plank to .In so 
 le cellar l)y tlii; hn'^ilsi,,^) 
 it, and was iiijnri'.l. h 
 M'o was any way licydml 
 
 i was a "way" withi , 
 1 of sue. :i of I'liu Work, 
 r Injuries Act, and th.it 
 I Were defuots in tlie way 
 was responsiljlf. C'uid'. 
 
 r(J2. 
 
 .S^ccft?.]— Ajinldicstrc't 
 
 used by an eniployer in 
 isiness, is not a "way 
 
 the employer,' within 
 orknu-n's Conipensatioii 
 t. ch. .SO, sec. ;{ ((».). 
 ly was l)nilt immediate- 
 ; street, which was fonr- 
 dace, .and on the other 
 .^clivity witliont a fence. 
 
 as on a load of straw on 
 t into the defendants' 
 -M-ture facing; the street, 
 , fell oil', and down the 
 
 (hints were not liahle 
 Co., 20 (). l;. -JTO. 
 
 .1/(7 /.v Co. V. .Vfo», 21 S. 
 
 IMS. 
 
 DlUTCk Cf.M I'KKSO.VA,'' 
 
 J'tltrbo)-uii;//i, L'O A. K. 
 
 ro N().\ .noikt" - 6'(r 
 V. Connclij, i>() S. C. K. 
 
 rV .Ml'ST Do l-il^iriTY."- 
 
 V. K. .'U. 
 
 ; urn: i-.ssk -vct.a."— .See 
 1\ A. R. 441. 
 
 U." — Sfp. J'lilnrts V. 
 .Suwjsli-r V. T. h'lUoH 
 
 i.irA.\i i'i;iu;.\T.''— fe 
 
 :. II. ;j(J7. 
 
 I'irNTlll ('(|STH,V I'KO- 
 
 V. Sfl./trll, 04 S. 0. K. 
 
 iii.v.".-.V'r- McCliihmy 
 ,MIA. R. 117: /.'..'/.;«r« 
 L'.'iO. R. 4-'.-) : I '(Ml. 
 II V. I'liiKida .lllantk 
 2-2A. R, •_'!»•_'. 
 
 '667 
 
 MECHANICS' LIENS. 
 
 Sec LiK.v, III. 
 
 MEDICAL PRACTITIONER. 
 
 Conduct ~~.U/r.r/isi>,,, _ ni.,,.;/,/h„ -. Pro. 
 '■''/"«- |--L'po„ an apj.eal hy a re^.ist,.re.l mcli- 
 Old practitioner, un.ler R. S. O. ch Us se • " 
 the Ontario Medical Act, as Jn-nded^lv •^(4 
 
 Of the Cdlege of Physicians and Sni-.a-oMs of 
 Ontano.directing that his namo should Im,. erased 
 from the register, it appeared that he h;ul a.l- 
 ertised extensively in ne«-.sp,apers ai..' l,y 
 liandh.lls, seltuig forth and huidin. i„ ^xt, va 
 «a,it anguage his .pialifications'for treating 
 catarrh, shewmg that that di.soase Id to com*? 
 siiniption, stating the symptoms of it. and .-ivin.' 
 testimonials from persons said to l,ave" been 
 cured by hini :- - ' : 
 
 Held, that mere advertising w.as not in itself' 
 j sgrjcetid conduct in a professional ,.,,j„,t ; \ 
 I'ut ti.it the advertisements pnl,lished l.v the i 
 .-.piiellant were studied etlorts to impose upon ' 
 he erednlit.y of the public for gai„,'a„,l J..," 
 <li.-raeetul in a professional respect within the 
 meaning of s,.e. .S4 of the Act. 
 
 It appe.ared .also that the appellant lia.l repre- 
 sented to two persons, who were in fact in the 
 H.-t stages of consumption, that they were suf- 
 feiing fr.mi catarrhal bronchitis, a'ml that he 
 had thepow<.r to cure them, and that he had 
 taken money Ir.nn them upon the strength of 
 smli 1. •presentations ; - *=" 
 
 Held, that this w.is conduct disgraceful in the 
 cenuHon judgment of mankiiul, an.l much more 
 so in a ]i|-otessional respect :— 
 
 Held, however, that publisliiiig broadcast the 
 syniptoms ot the disease known as catarrh Mas 
 r(''.\'e't''"^ '''*^o>'":«f"l eoiidue' in a lirofessiona'l 
 
 The council referred the complaint .against 
 tlie appellant for imp.iry and rej.ort to their ' 
 •hseipliiie eomniittee, who took evidence and ' 
 rq,u,te,l It with their conclusions thereon to the I 
 
 Held, that the rejiort of the committee could ' 
 lint he set aside or treate.l as a nullity because 
 tli.y took unnecessary evidence or because Ihev 
 < heu- conclusions from the facts ascertained bv 
 
 tllt'lll, ^ 
 
 Proper procedure under the Act pointed out. 
 t'f »(i!fhinijion, 2.'i (). i!. L'!)0. 
 
 MERGER. 
 
 as sick, .and describing his complaint, which 
 
 and arte advising him as to ,l,et, gave him a 
 'lotle o medicne, for which he t-h.arged .% 
 
 k.mls of .liarrh.ea mixture, and had somotim^ 
 t. uupiire as to .sy.n,.toi..s in order to decid^ 
 
 "hat mixture to give : <ieciae 
 
 Hehl that this was praetisin- medicine for 
 i^a.n w.thii, sec. 4.> of the Medical Act, R. S. O 
 
 : Htdd, also, that the fact of the druggist beinft 
 ''gistere.1 under the Rharmacy Art, R. S Q 
 'd.. I..1, which entitled him to act as an .apothe- 
 
 th^mneu"" r 'S:'r"««-t, .lid not aufE 
 me piaetice ot medicine. 
 
 'I'he meaning of '•.apothecary" considere.L 
 
 Uniawfully Practlslng-.V,,„„„,,,,, (j^nvic 
 
 nnn t„^l.■<.\-W\wv^i a summary conviction 
 
 ; ^-'ll"! "" Its lace, has been retui' led i 1, ' 
 
 ; evidence upon w lieh it was made, in ol . en ce 
 
 to ,a e,.W,,„vuv. the Court is not to look at ?he 
 
 ev nlence for the purpose of determ whether 
 
 t establishes an ollence, or even whether t~ 
 ■« »ny evidence to sustain a conviction 
 
 I'niina V. Il'a/A,,.,., 40. R, 127, followed. 
 „., '"1 7^ " '^""^•'^tion for an ollence over 
 
 "liieh the m.agistrateha,l jurisdiction is bad on 
 . s face, the Court is to look at the ev dence to 
 'l>;terinine whether an off-ence has elTcom? 
 -«ed, andif so, it should ainemlX':;::^. 
 
 A conviction under the Ontario Me.lical Act, 
 iVrhiie:':''- "'' '^'^ ''' f°'' I-'uctising medicine 
 
 rl„",'i'',',';,'"'l^ ^"'' "'"^^''-t'li'ify i» not specifyinc 
 : " 1 \':t'^^"'^^'' ^'-'t "■■ .'i^^ts « hid, constituted thf 
 
 ISO r"ss^^' -VV/-."-: li'Vlna^. Spain, 
 
 Aii.l theC.Mirt refu,se,I to amend and quashed 
 
 in telling a man which of several oatent mp,?.- 
 ciiies sold l,v the defendant was suitable tSe 
 ...ph... wl,.h the man indicated, and seu!;;^ 
 
 Costs against the iiifoimaiit refused. Ile„ina 
 V .Somrr... 24 O. R. 044, follo«e,l. lieXa^ 
 CoiiUoii, 24 O. R. :.'4U. '^e'jwa, v. 
 
 I5ut Hit Ihijina v. tJuii/.ion, 27 O. R. 5!). 
 
 Examination of Person by. 
 
 -•St'KvilJK.NciK, 
 
 MERGER. 
 
 -MaIpraotice-A;m/^,/;o»o/'^,7;o»,s-/»/-„„/ 1 
 --All action |„|. malpractice against a ici^tereil 
 
 «I (Mitario w.is hrouglit within one year fr<nn the 
 
 w 1 , ' ' f "."'•■^t''^'" '' .Vt'ar from the date 
 Mile, he p,ofess,o,ial services terminated :- 
 "' Id. t lilt the action was barred iinrler the 
 
 liw 
 
 ..f.' '""^> ,'^"<;» "«t prevent the rumiint' of the 
 ■■*•>. lite. Milkr V. Hijermii, 22 O. |{. -.m. 
 
 Pusun went into a druggi.st's shop, stating he I 
 42 
 
 Of Cause of Action In Judgment.]- Judg. 
 
 , men wa.s recvered by the pl.aintiff's against 
 the de endant upon a promissory note givfX 
 paitof the purchase money ot g,,ods sold hv 
 the phuntilis to the defendant. ^ 
 
 i U"iler execution issued upon tlie judgment, 
 t e goods s,dd were sci.cl, and were claimed by 
 thedefemlants wile under a bill of .sale from 
 her husband, which recited that in pure) aLbJ 
 the goods he acted as her agent :— *' 
 
 Hehl, upon the evidence, that fraudulent 
 CO usion between the husband and wife to de 
 •It the plaintitts' claim was not established- 
 ' .,." the absence of fraud or mistake, th^ 
 (-ourt would not grant the plaintitis the extra 
 ordinary relief of vacating t/ie judgment agSt 
 

 1 1 ,! 
 
 659 
 
 MINERAL LANDS. 
 
 6GC 
 
 Pu 
 
 the dcfon.lnnt in order to allow then to pro- 
 ceed agiiinst the wife : — 
 
 Held, iilso, that, so h.iig r.s the jiid<,'ineiit 
 s<tood, no iiition eoidd lie hidiiolit iipoii the oii- 
 ^.'iiiiil eaiisc of action, \\]]'wh liail lieconie mei-i't'il. 
 Trrovlo Ji,„ta/ Mannj'arluriiKi Co. v. McLann, 
 14 P. I{. H!). 
 
 Of Contract In Conveyance.]— The dtfen- 
 d.Mit, an a;hii;ii(r f,,i- eie(litor», acjix'td Mitli tlie 
 |>laii]titl to e.\c.lian,i;e live liouses, tlicn in course 
 of erection, for certain lands of the ijlaintiff. 
 l!y tile coitiact, which Mas dated 24th Mardi, 
 the houises were to he completed hv .'JOtli May,' 
 biniilar to certain houses on (». street. Mutual 
 e(.nveyances Meie to ))e exchanged hetwecn the 
 I'arties williin sixty days, ?.,., hy iMth Xiav, but 
 as a matte 1- of fact tliev were exeeiited and 
 e.vchanf^ed ahout !)tli May. The plaintiir sul'se- 
 <|aently. m tlie j.resent action, ciainied di,nia-es 
 for iion-eoinpli'tion of and defects in the lilli^ll- 
 in.ir of the hiuiscs. 
 
 The deed from the defendant e(i;t:'iiied no 
 eovenants co\crini.' the matteiseoniplaiueil of :- 
 Held, nevertheless, that the [ilaintiii' was 
 entitled to rceovei'on the orij,'inal contract. 
 
 A eontracl to jerform woik or to do things 
 for the other eonti.-ieting pai'ty on a sale of 
 lands, at a ] ei'iod after the time fixed hy the 
 same eontracl for the ixecut ion and linal delivery 
 of the fornial conveyance, does not become 
 merged in the conveyance. 
 
 Held, also, tliat the loss of rents which might 
 have been obtained for the houses, if coni]i!eled 
 at the projier time, was a j.rojH'r measure of 
 d; mages, tiie contracting I'arties havin- iinown 
 that the houses were inteniled to be" rented 
 tiiailhv. Till I. an/, -20 0. I!. ISO. 
 
 see. ;■)(),"), which gives jiowcr to the eorporntion 
 of any county or township to sell or lease min- 
 er.al right.s under highways. Onturiu Xaiunil 
 O'as- Cii. V. <i,,.^Ji(l,l, IS A. 1!. mVi. 
 
 ,. Proceeci.s of Sale — ^tntiitr <if /•>«?/./.<. K.-An 
 agreement by the oM'uer of an interest in i\ ..;(",|,| 
 mine to transfer to another, in eon.sideration of 
 .services jierformed in woi-i<iug the mine, a jior- 
 tion of sueh owner's share in the liroeeeds « Ik n 
 it should be sold, is not a contract lor sale of ai, 
 interest in land within the Statute of Frauds 
 SItiart v. M,,lt. 2;{ .s. C. K. .•JNI. 
 
 Purchaserfor Value without Notice— ("mi- 
 fiili ,(ilii.vA—.\» unpatented and unclevelo|iil 
 mining jirojieity. the value of which was j ni.iy 
 spccul.itive. ami the (ioverument dues on wltif \\ 
 Mere uu])aid, was eonvtyed to the |ilaiutitl'. tlit 
 eonsiderati(.ii mentioned in the deed bein^ .SlUO, 
 and he, for the cxjiress. but not actual, i rirsiij! 
 eration of &7,"(l, conveyed the property for the 
 I'Mrpose of selling it for his own 1 enefit to (.lie 
 o. the ilefdylants. who, after holding it fur a 
 year, conveyed it to his eo-defemiant, who had 
 no actual notice of the cirennutances. in cen- 
 sidei',-\tion of the release of a debt of i;-^', :— 
 
 Held, that the release of the debt Mas a siifli 
 ci( ut consideration for the deed :— 
 
 H<'ld, also, that, taking the circumstaniTs 
 anil eliar.-ictpr of the j rojierty into .-iccoilui. ihc 
 last grantee. Mho had uuid<' no iu(juiry, Mas not, 
 by reason of the consideration exjirc'sscd in the 
 deeds to and from the plaintill'. jiut upon impury 
 so as to affect him M'ith coii.-,tructive notice of 
 the plaintiffs rights. Moortx. Kane, l.'4 (• 1!. 
 .')41. 
 
 MINERAL LANDS. 
 
 Dominion J^a,nas— Hiyirnil inn of M!vr< avil 
 Mhimt/.-'. I— W'heie the CroMii, having authority 
 to sell, agrees to sell and eonvev jiublie Iai;(i.s. 
 and the contract is not cont' illed bv s.nne law 
 afieeting sueh lands, anil there is iio'stipnhition 
 to the eontraiy, express or implied, the ])ur- 
 chaser is entitleil to a grant eonvcving such 
 mines and minerals as pass MithoiU e.xpress 
 Wi rds. Ciniiiiliini I'ca/ riiii/ ('oloii'r.ntioii Co/n- 
 puiip {Litl.) V. Till' Qiiim, 3 Kx. C. I;, l,",;. 
 
 Affirmed by the S\ipreme Court of Canada. 
 The. Qiict/i V. Ccmadiiiii, cfc. Co.. ''-! S (' K'' 
 7i:?. , . ^. n. 
 
 ^ Expropriation- -Miuei-dl Latiil.< — I'rouf of 
 Viihi<.]-\u a ease of expropriation the elaini- 
 aiiL IS not obliged to prove by costly tests or 
 ex)ienments the min.:al conlints of"the]aiid. 
 Jhomi V. Till Co)i,iiiUsi(,ni-r fcr Jtai/iroi/.i, 15 
 Ay\K Cas. 'lUO. referred to. 
 
 Where, hoMever, such tests or experiments 
 m.ve not been resorted to, the Court or jury 
 unstfind the facts as best it can from the indi- 
 C!ition.s and tuobabilities disch.sed by tlie evi- : 
 dciice. T'lt (.hi'iH v. McCiirdy, '2 Kx. C. K. : 
 
 ol ] . 
 
 Municipal Corporations- ///v-'fiiro; Xnfiiro/ 
 <»'n,s.J---^atnral gas is a mineral Mithin the 
 meamiig of the Munieii al Act, II. .s. () cli KS4 
 
 Sale of PhosphatoMlnlng Riphts- 0/>/;.,« ^1 
 
 I'ltri-hiisr ,,i]i„i- .1/;,,, .,•„/,-■ Tntiis/.r ,,,' /,'i,,!ii,/\_ 
 M., by deed, sold to W. the phospl'iate'uiimn),' 
 ' rights of certain land, the deed eontaiiiinu a 
 lirovision that " in ease the said ]mreha.^er''in 
 Morking the said mines should fhnl other min- 
 erals of any kind, he shall have the privileije of 
 buying the same from the said vendor or r.^prc- 
 sentative by paying the jirieo set upon the same 
 by tMo arbitrators ajipointtd by the parties." 
 W. Morkeil the' ).hosphate mine for five viars, 
 and then disci.iitiuucd it. 'I'm o vear.s hitcr lie 
 .sold his mining rights in th.e land", and bv vari- 
 eius conveyances tluy Mere linally tr.-insfei'icil to 
 ;!!., each assignment Jiurporting 'to convey ":il' 
 mines, minei'als, and mining rights a'he:uly 
 found or which may here'aftei' be found " en 
 said land. A year after the transfe r to I;., the 
 original vendor, M., granted the exclusive rif;lit 
 to^vork mines and veins of mica on said hiiul tn 
 W. k Co., Mho jiroeeeded to develop the niic.i. 
 M. then claimed an o])tion to purchase the niicu 
 mines under the original aureement, anil lU- 
 mandeil an arbitration to lix the price, which 
 was refused, and she brought an action to eem- 
 pel M. to appoint an arl'iitrator, and for ilani- 
 ages : — 
 
 Held, atlirming the decision of the Court eif 
 C'neen's launch, lli.at the eiptien to pmvli.ife 
 other minerals eoidd only be exercised in resiicot 
 to sueh as M'cre found m hen netnallv Morkiiig 
 the j)hosphate, M-hieh Mas n<it the ea.se Mitli the 
 mica as to Mhieh 15. claimed the oiitiou. llnhr 
 V. MrLdlavd, -24 S. C. i;. 4l(f. 
 
 .S'ce Crow.v Lanps, II. 
 
66C 
 
 l>owor to the corporation 
 iship to st.'ll or Icusc ii,in. 
 JnvayH. Onttiriu ytttu)i\l 
 < A. J!. OL'G, 
 
 —S'tiitiilc (if Fnin'/-<.]-,~An 
 iiT of ail iiitorcst in .-i ■.•,,M 
 lotlicr, ill (•(insiilcratiiiii dt 
 wori<iii<r iIk; iiiiiK', a [,or- 
 1ku(^ ill tliu ijroctfds m hi ii 
 It II contract for sale of an 
 II the Statute of Fiar.cls 
 J. R. .-ist. 
 
 le without Notice— ("nn- 
 tcntcil anil iiiiilfVfh>|.til 
 >ahic of v.liiili uas |ii!, ly 
 ovcriiiiicnt, iliiis nn ulin ji 
 • ijcil to llic lilaimili; ilio 
 [il in Ilic (Iceil licin- 81(i(l, 
 s, Init not aclnal, iorsiill 
 •ycii tlic properly- fur il;e 
 or liis ovii Icncflt to uno 
 ), after hohling it fur a 
 li.s co-ilcfcmiant, v.lm liaii 
 e oirciinittaiicts. in um- 
 c of a (Iclit of !;0," : — 
 •c of the ilelit vas a siifii 
 the deed : — 
 
 [ikintr the circiiinstain'cs 
 ro]ie:'ty into aceoi^il. ihe 
 laile no inijuiiy, was nut, 
 leiation o.inx'.-.-cd in the 
 laintiir, jnit upcn iniiiiiry 
 h constructive notice of 
 J/oo/'t V. Kaiii:, -Jt <• II. 
 
 ini-nsRif:ht3— 0/1/ i,, II to 
 •_ T.-iiiisi'i )■ Of' /,'iii!ii,/^^ 
 k'. tiie liliosplnUc iiiii,iii(f 
 
 thi; deed eoiitainin;,' a 
 e tlie said ]iiircha,-i r in 
 » slioiilii find otlici' mill, 
 lall liave tlie iiriviieyo of 
 }:e said vender or rq.iv- 
 
 lirice set upon the same 
 oiiitcd liy tile iiarties." 
 lato mine for five years, 
 it. Two years later lie 
 n the land, and by vari- 
 ere finally transt'errcil to 
 rporting to convi'y " :\V 
 
 niiniiiir lijihts already 
 lereafter le fiund '' on 
 r the traiisfir to H., the 
 !n1od the cxelnsive ri).'lit 
 s of mica on said Iniul to 
 ed to develop the mica. 
 >i\ to purchase the iiiicii 
 lal nyreenicnt, and ile- 
 [o li.v the jirice, \\liicli 
 m.idit an action to com. 
 rliitrator, and for ilane 
 
 •cision of the Court ot 
 he o])tieii to purcli.ife 
 y lie exercised in ies[i('ct 
 when actually woikiiig 
 IS not the case with the 
 lied the ojition. linhr 
 ;. 4l(i. 
 
 MORTGAOE. 
 MISBEHAVIOUR IN OFFICE. 
 
 See CKiMiNAf, Law I\' 
 
 662 
 
 MISDESCRIPTION. 
 
 See WiLi,, IV. 
 
 MISDIRECTION. 
 
 See New Thial, VII. 
 
 MISTAKE. 
 
 Held, followinc; Alexaiuhr v t i- 
 Hovard, 14 0. R •>> and P^V^V r°"''fi'P "/ 
 Mp of Ifoirard, IG-'au 1- ^^^tT^^T" 
 wa» void, the defendants 1,.7.,-n "'^ ''^'-'"^ 
 pass it for such a ptuj^;. '"'^^ '"« "° P"""" to 
 
 fo^hiSu^^ri^s^^dir "r" !'"' p-p'- 
 
 'aw, which di^dos'r iV ", urpo"'"' Th "" ''-^■■ 
 ,- -presentation ,.y the dSCtsSrit:;:: 
 
 !cen?Slder«':,!:fZl' *'" r''\'"''«"« "'••- »•- 
 
 I because th^de'f mlL s lilrnn '■''-'°""" """" ''' 
 ! tlie contract proSlu.' ,,1° CT "iy^lf'' 
 
 , -Hstinguished. V«r Av A'^/. V ' '' ^'- ^^- "■*''• 
 ' lace rf «< R ft-c ^,, "''°" County, 10 \\-al. 
 
 I Hehi 1 ' ''t'^°"'"y '"feired to. 
 
 Overpayment of Intereqf /> , , ''0""<l' to kt-ert''h; ?/!','; "^ 
 
 ^cwu«^]_\Vlicre a fps.nf ',''°''''"2'''«'''^'- forrenairs oi t nf h '" '"*'P""' '"""J '" pay 
 legacy to be pa d L the d v' I'e nf^^'^^'H^'^ '^ they 1 ."rec ve hrn^'"''".' ^"''■''' «'"' "« 
 
 ^..,payabIea...^J^i---P^rtf.^,^^ 
 
 "•;■ i.aynent, to be computed 
 >•■• decease : and, by mutual 
 
 the amount of 
 
 from the timr 
 
 error, in teres : ^aid witb ',.7'!'' •"'^.'T""^' 
 
 npon.the whole amo^un o ' ri d'palllt^"" 
 
 maining unnaid wlii..„ . i''"";'Pai then re- 
 
 were const.m^ed by f^' ..1';:^^"^'' °^ '"''^''^^^ 
 he invested the instalni.ifT ^- '"™'"'^- "''''e 
 legatee now bro^ " s 2l^^^^^ '\' 
 
 mentto'finir'lrS'-nnie'"'^', "" "^•^••P''>- ^ 
 
 r^S^^[°c5^.s^-i==^f 
 
 should be dwrged w i, nir ? ""^^"^ F^ '*»d ' 
 payments • amT t • ^'^^""T^. "Pon the over- J 
 
 thi^ footing ti lain w '"'f"?;' '^''\ "P''" 
 missed the Iction-- '"' ^""j' P**"'- ^is- , 
 
 judgment'''' th.'t 'tirj""'''' ^'°"'-^' '■"«™'''S ""^t ' 
 nnde^a mistake o fa, t^nl"'?^™ 'i^''^, ^^''^ made : 
 orsetott;Ct varvini^^ ; tl '."'*='''' ''" '''^covered ' 
 be taken and thu 'Z hi '* ''"' '''•■™""t «'>ouhl 
 be brought to "ceo int.rr''''-' T^"" ^''"»''' 
 out addition of in?er o ,.?''''"^' '^"' ^"^h- 
 
 amounts p.operl due ', "i ""^ "««'eg«te of the 
 
 97_ ■* '■""mp of Honartl, '2'i 
 
 19 
 
 Li/,- 
 O. R. 
 
 I. 
 
 11. 
 
 MORTaAGE. 
 
 Charok on La.nd, 1)03. 
 
 Olll.IfJATIO.Ns A.S 
 
 COVKNANTS A.M. 
 
 I'av.ment. 
 
 1. Aceihi-ation of Payment, 663 
 •> — 
 
 TO 
 
 3. 
 4. 
 
 Lanps, II. 
 
 See Merger— Will, IV. 
 MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED. 
 
 drain:- ^ "'''*""'8 «"' ""^J ■epaiiing a 
 
 J^es/rklio7i of LiahilUy, (i63. 
 J'rii.'ilee.i, 664. 
 
 Upon Sale and Connyance of Enuitrf 
 of Redemption, 664. '-'y«'fy 
 
 ni. CROP.S, 666. 
 
 IV. Dower ,n Mort.^aiied Lands, 666. 
 V. Fixtures, 667. 
 
 VI. FORECMSCRE, 6G7. 
 
 VII. FoRKiov Lands, 669. 
 VIII. Insurance Money.s, 669. 
 IX. Interest, 671. 
 
 X. Parties to Mortgage Actions, 672. 
 XI. Payment, 674. 
 XII. Power of Sale, 675. 
 
 Xin. Practice in Mortgage Actions. 
 
 1. Amendment, 676. 
 
 2. Cost,-,, 677. 
 
 3. Judgment, 677. 
 
 4. Period for liedempOon, 677. 
 
 5. Service of Writ, 078. 
 
663 
 
 \IV. 
 
 xv. 
 
 XVI. 
 
 XVII. 
 
 XVUi. 
 
 XX. 
 X\). 
 
 MORTGAGE. 
 
 664 
 
 Proviso for Entkv, C7S. 
 Railway Lands, 678. 
 
 RlODKMl'iIOX, 670. 
 
 Hk'jisti- viiox, 6.Sit. 
 
 i'm>i:!:Si:vki;ai. 
 
 Kii:iiTSANiiLrAiiii.n(K 
 
 -MoHT(iA(iKS, 6S0. 
 
 (iS.S. 
 ^ (isa 
 
 TiMiiKKON- .\IofiT.;A(;Kri Lands, 
 Trespass TO .Moi:TiiA(;Kii Lani..> 
 
 -MlsrKI.LANEors CA-i>, 6s4. 
 
 L (,'jiakc;k ov La Ml. 
 
 Executory Agreement-/,', ,/,-s7,r,^-<,».].- A 
 1 ■ttci- in the- foll,n ^,1:: f„n„. •' I „'.w to clviiw 
 the east half „f !„. m,,,,!,,, ,o = ^^.j^'t"^^ 
 }«ymcu^<^ tl,. two .nort^a^e, . '. .„ : 
 
 c.\euutc' proper rnorlga^^es of said laiul tr, carrv 
 out this a-,veiiioMt or to jiay off tl-.e ^aid mort- 
 Lago, IS not a mere executory a-reeiin.-iit, l.ut 
 '..peiate,s as a pre.eut cliarge, i„ favuar of the 
 mortgagees i,ami-,I, uj.on tia- lands .lesoriln.!. 
 ami may he i-egistmnl a,.^ainn them. Houfst,-:,,,- 
 N. houbu; -ll \. R. 17.-,. .Attirme,! l.,v the Sun. 
 reme Court of Canada, 26 S C R 41' ' 
 
 the defendant wa.s that the mort-a"e was to Ih- 
 void on payment lA .s;j.o,-,(, .,,„i i„t,.rest. 'I'lien 
 followed tlie usual priiite.l short form eovcmwit 
 tor payment, tr) which was added in writing the 
 words, " l)ut l.tfoi-L proeuMlmK upon the cov 
 enant the niortga^-ee shall realize npcm the laiids 
 iMnrlga-e,l, and that the mortgagor shall then 1«. 
 lial.I'. only to the amount ,.f .-(iOo, or such ksser 
 sum as will with the net proceeds from the 
 lands make tlie .<,S,-25(I and interest." The list 
 clause in the mortgage, also added iti wr'itiny 
 was that "in no event shall the i)er.sonal lia- 
 i/ility of the mortgagor on ids covenant excee.l 
 
 Held, that the defendant was not to be suh- 
 ,ieet to any liahilily until the lands were re 
 ahzed upon and the re.Milt shewed a ,leti<'ienev 
 and then only to tiie extent of .SOOd. wiUmt V 
 r/fi'iiii;/, -24 (). 'i. .SSS. 
 
 II. Covenants and ioilkation.- 
 
 I'.W.MKNT. 
 
 I. Ara-h ration of Pa 
 
 AS Tl I 
 
 •l!m(jiii. 
 
 Default- SV7//»,/ Asid, J>H„mn>f-/'a./,w at 
 oflHt,rr.t <o,a Co./,v.]_U-hore, lA- virtue of a 
 aceeerat.oa clause in a mortgage deed tie 
 
 in default of payment ol interest, an,l iud-. 
 nent has b-en recovered for the whole b Te 
 1. -Jrtgagee agamst the mort-nger in an acton 
 «o.e y upon the covenant forlMyment con d e 
 m the mortgage deed. thcSb.femiant is no 
 h« V. tl "^r I'''^'""^'it of ii'terest and o.«ts. to 
 set asille.-'"^'""" '""^ ^•■^^'<^«ion issued thereon 
 Tlie acceleration is not in the nature of a 
 ^nalty.bt.tistoberegardeda.theeontra:?of 
 
 S<i hire f'arh'r, /'„rktr v. Parhv, 24 () R 
 
 4. rru!ftti'n. 
 
 PersonalLlablUty.J-Whereapersonholdinn 
 
 land as a trustee, at the rerpiest of the beneHcial 
 owners, and without any consideration to him 
 therefor or intention to Ijccome personally lia- 
 lile, for the beiieHt of such ouners executed a 
 mortgage on the land, tiie mortgage deed with- 
 out his knowledge containing a covenant to nay 
 the mortgage iiebt : — 
 
 Held, that the covenant was not enforceable 
 against the mortgagor personal! v, by tlieasshmee 
 ot the mortgaL'c for value wirhout' notice ; and 
 that his remedy was r.istricted to foreclosure 
 proceedings against the lands. Pntttrmi, v 
 JfrLmii, 21 (). R. 221. 
 
 Personal Liability — Iixlrmnlti,.]— Where 
 lands held m trust are mortgaged by the trustee 
 tne mortgagee is not entitled to the benetit ot 
 any e(juities ami lights arising either under ex 
 press contract or upon ecpiitalile pi'ineiples, en- 
 titluig the trustee to indemnity from his n.xUi 
 que trust; I'ouriuer and Tascherean, J,> dis- 
 senting. Williams v. llalfuiir, \HS C r'472 
 
 2. Enfonem.nt Aj'ter Exrrcis. of Poin,- ofSah. 
 See Patli-vsoi, v. T,nim.r, 22 U. R. .S(i4, ;.o.vMi76. 
 
 3. JieitrictioH of LiahUilii. 
 
 Dependent or Infopendent Covenants.]- 
 
 Jiie proviso for payment in a mortgage made by 
 
 ■). Cimii Salt anil Coni-a/anc of Equity of lif. 
 demption. 
 
 Ini^xanity— Implied Obligation— Assi,jmmHl 
 — A r8(,;c?icc.]— Although when a mortgagor cou- 
 \eys his eiputy of redemiition. subject to the 
 mortgage, there is an implied obligation on the 
 part of the purchaser to iudemnifv the mort- 
 gagor against tlie mortgage debt, 'evidence is 
 admissible of an express agreement between the 
 parties to the contrary. 
 
 A claim against a 'purchaser of ane(iuityof 
 redemption for iii<lemniticatioii against the mort- 
 gage debt may be assigned by tlie mortgagor to 
 the niortiiagee, and is enforceable by the latter. 
 JJntisI, (Uinadian Imui Co. v. Tear 2;i U K 
 ()64. ' " 
 
 j Indemnity — \omiiiiil /'niv/iastr.] — The 
 e(|uitable doctrine of the riglit to indemnity ot a 
 
 I veniiorot land sold. K,,l.m..et to a mortgage applips 
 
 I only as against a |)urcliaser in fact, a°id there- 
 tore, where, at the re<iuest of the actual pur- 
 
 I chaser, tlie land iiujuestion was conveyed to his 
 
at tlie mortgage \\as to h- 
 .S.'i.jO ,111(1 interest. 'I'lieri 
 iiiteil sliort foini corcu-nf 
 1 w;is iuliifil in writing the 
 )i-(i(o-ilini,' upon tlie cov 
 ^liiill rLMlizeu|jon the laiids 
 liu inurtHiigor shall thfn lii- 
 Hint nf ¥(100, or snrli It.ssei- 
 «' net ijrocceds from llic 
 • and intin-o.st.'" Tin; last 
 (', also .idded in writiiii;. 
 it sliall the personal lia- 
 r on his covenant uxcucd 
 
 idiiiil was not to he .suh. 
 until the lands were re 
 .-nit shewed a dcli('iencv 
 xtent of SliOO. ||';/.,„„ v. 
 
 ritsffi'.i. 
 
 I— Whereapersonhohhiig 
 e reijuest of the heneticiul 
 ny consideration to him 
 ;o heeonie iiersonally lia. 
 siieli owners executed a 
 :ii_e niort^^'age deed with- 
 aining a covenant to pay 
 
 iint Was not enforceahlc 
 ersonally, hy the assignee 
 lie without notice ; and 
 restricted to foreclosure 
 le lands. I'ntterwi/ v. 
 
 — Iivtrmintii.]— Where 
 lortgaged hy the trustee, 
 titled to the i)enetit or 
 arising either under ex 
 ;(|uital)le principles, en- 
 leinnity from his n>ilni 
 I Tasehereau, J.J., dia- 
 'alj'mii; 18 S. C. R. 47'2. 
 
 ti/aiicr' of Equity of Rf- 
 Hion. 
 
 Ohliijalion -A s-tiijiinn'jil 
 when a mortgagor con- 
 m](tion. subject to the 
 ipliod obligation on the 
 o indemnify the mort- 
 gage debt, evidence is 
 agreement between the 
 
 •chaser of an ei|uity of 
 L-ation against the niort- 
 k1 by the mortgagor to 
 'orceablc by the latter. 
 Co. V. Tear, ■2:i O. K. 
 
 MvORTGAGE, 
 
 indemnify his predecessor in title' 
 „.,,^':P'i«^ti<)n of Con. Rules 32S,'s-2'.K :m, Xi], 
 J.e, .M.J, diseusatd. < >••, 
 
 Walter v. Dickson, L'O A. K. m. ">'i""^^''- 
 
 Indemnity- AV/„,//„W, Preempt Ion. \^ When 
 a mortgagor conveys his cpiity of re, emotion 
 ...the mortgage.l property Nvitihont ,; C" 
 lationm the conveyance us i, ^ ' 
 
 the aiortg.-igee, "that" he iiaa become a mere 
 •^...•I'ty for the debt, and, .ns such ir s ' 'n 
 .Phased by certain dealing's betwee i tl ", r^ 
 gagee and assignee of the cp.ity of rede n, ti m 
 
 ... CSS snch dealings constitute a new " t A .'i 
 between then. Malh.r.. v. //,7/,„., //,''(' •* 
 1 12, distmguishcl, AMoH. v. llicL.,2\. U. 1!, yg." 
 
 indemnity- yv«.*. yb. True Purrha...,:]^ 
 L. 1-. agree,! ,„ writing to sell land to ('. F and 
 otiiers, subject ' ' ■ ^ • J- • and 
 
 1. c,l a dec aratmn that he held the property in ' 
 
 T L. ] . o recover interest due on ,■, mort- I 
 gage against the property, C. F. was I,rou<' It in ' 
 ..s .. til, r,l party to indemnify L. F, his vei lo 
 against a ju.lgnient in said action -1 ' 
 
 Hc'ld, reversing tlie decision of the .Suiireine 
 
 mortgaged lands. 
 'intut Co. 
 
 III. Crom. 
 
 -■■'" * Mil 
 
 CuiKida Landed 
 Sharer, 'Ji.' A. R 
 
 aft^^lTiiTt ^''"'"'■- ^l^"'''.'/".'/". ]-A mortgagor 
 iioitgagcl Ian,l are concernei , in the imsitinn 
 
 Married Woman -/,„/,/;„(! 01,/iaalion ^ 'J^.t Z^'il '': ""'">'" ^««» a,,d .Sa riLl 
 
 IV. DowKB IN Mokt,;.\,;i:d Lands. 
 
 '/ Piirr/idnir.] — The 
 right to imleinnity of a 
 t to a ninrtg.-igc .tpjil;™ 
 >er in fact, ami there- 
 38t of the actual pur- 
 i)n was eonveye,! to his 
 
 ,„„. • • ^"•■'■"',' oe saui to be a conl 
 
 promise in respect of separate property f^Vi'"."' ^' '," '"P '"<"-^««g« *« '"'t n.cely a surety 
 
 da =,':;^!rr:;'^rT ^'^^ '°-- defen-lSto 'tCtl^onll^'^ti?' rT''" ''T" 
 Mi,i. I ,,■ :, '^"■'I'-'.'-n.'ant considered Mr -' mt^.- „'+•(•• ^ I, -^ '" ^"^ '-""^ "^r money left 
 
 ' 14 U. K. ()t,0; Re. Cro.^kerii, 10 O. R 207 ■ a..,I 
 4Tl7r^'<>'<'.l''U^e and Pnr,ha..er-Surrtu i fC^/r ^>"^"''y"',.J- ^^ ' "' ^'-rUn'UdTt 
 '*'^J-^M.ere a mortgagor has aasigneU h'L | SX2I o! R.' l!' '"" " ' ^'•""'- 
 
 Pratt v.. 
 
667 
 
 MORTGAGE. 
 
 668 
 
 Extent ot—W/iok r<(/m>.] — Wliorc laiuls 
 iiioit;r,ig(;(l to secure a loan liave hcoii acild liy 
 t\w iiioi-tL,Mi.c(', thu wife of tlie ni(ii(.gaj,'(ii-, wli'o 
 has joiiKMl ill tliu iiiortgagc to bar hoi- dowtT, is 
 I'litithHl to (lonc-r (lilt (if tliu siiijihis, c(iiii|iiite(l 
 on what would lio thi; full value; of the laud, if 
 uiiiiiciiiidicii'd. /'ra/l v. liaiinell, -Jl (). R, 1, 
 not f(illoW(,'d MO fur as the ivasouiii',' and dida 
 tlicruiii are opiiosiMl to tlie aliovu df(jisioii. 
 (I'immiU V. XiJli'jtai, liU (_). R. ;{07. 
 
 Mortgage by Devisees— /'/■(ocfV/c.s'.l — Cor- 
 tuii laud «as d(jvis(.Ml to the testator's sons 
 charged with an annuity to his widow, who also 
 had lier dower therein. Tlie devisees inort'a"ed 
 tlie land to ('. in .Mareli, 187!), and the inoi't"age 
 was not i-L-nistered until January, ISSO." hi 
 Noveiuljer, 1S7!), a second mortgage was given 
 to M. and registered the same inoiitli. In this 
 
 iiKirtgage \\u: widow 
 
 ,i"iiied barring her dower 
 
 and releasing her annuity for the heiictit of M. 
 (She liad had hnowledgL of the prior niortgae-e 
 wlieii it was made ami had refused to join in ft. 
 'l"he second mortgagee, not being aware, when 
 his mortgage v.'as executed, of the prior ineiim- 
 lirance, gained liiiority, and tlie land was sold 
 to satisfy his liiortgago The proceeds of tlie 
 sale iR'iMg more tlian sullicicnt for tliat pui'iiose, 
 th.! surplus was claimed liy both tlie widow and 
 by C. : — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal tor Ontano, (.Jwyuiie and Patterson,. 1,1., 
 dis.seuting, that tlie security for whicli the dower 
 Imd been barred and the annuity released having 
 been .satisfied, the widow was entitled to the 
 fund in tin; Court, as representing her interest 
 in the laud, in priority to C. On;!/ v. Coiiii/n'hi, 
 
 IS .s. c. K. r,:,:i "" •' ' 
 
 Cnder the Jiidieatnre Act of Ontario an action 
 for foreclosure is not to lie regarded as inch', I 
 
 irig a right to roco-er iiossession of the niort.'ai'ed 
 
 premises as in ejeetnient, and the rule Ihlai,, 
 
 such aeti(m the jilaintiirmay obtain an order'for 
 
 (leliv<u-y of poHse.s.sioii does not apply U, a cise 
 
 ni wlueh the mortg.age sought to Ijc forechisc.l 
 
 IS held void and tlu; plaiutilf claims possession u.i 
 
 I orii.'iii;il owner .•ind vendor. 
 
 I Under said Judi(_'ature Act, as formerly, th,. 
 
 I pica to an action on a contract that i't'wis 
 
 entered into for an immoral or illegal coiisiderV' 
 
 ' lion must .set out tile particular facts relied uii,i,i 
 
 as estalilishing such consideration. 
 
 '."(■"■'■■ Can the purchaser of the ecjuitvof 
 redemption .set up such defence as again.st a 
 mortgagee .seeldng to foreclose, or is tlie'iefen.v 
 conlmed to the immediate parties to tlie con- 
 tract r Cho-h V. Ilicjiir, '1-1 S. C. R. ."ilO. 
 
 Opening Foreclosrro — /'„('•, j- of Sale 
 Athixh I,,/ ,lH,l,iinr„l C/v,/,7oi-.]— Mortgagees of i 
 1 property, n itii a power of sale exercisable „ii 
 de.ault without notice, took foreclosure nro- 
 I eec'dmgs (ui their mortgage, and pending these 
 (ibtamed judgment in a .separate action („, th. 
 eovcnant ag,iiiist the executors of the niortga-or 
 and, after foreclosure of the inort.'a 'e, issaici 
 execut -i.m the judgment, and .soh'f thoreir.,'c,- 
 other . no.s of the mortg;igor, crediting the i,r„. 
 ceeds on the mortgage debt. 
 
 Previous to tin; foreclosure proceediiu's the 
 m.jrtgaged hinds had been ofTerod for .sTle I,- 
 puli.ic auetmu under the power of sale ami al4, 
 privately, but without result. 
 
 About a year after the foreclosure the nuirt. 
 ;.ragecs soid the premi.-es by [irivate contract 
 
 Omission o:Dov/er(;lp,use—/.'«r////>f(^o)/.]— 
 .S'tc liiJIainti V. Jla'/j.r,.,,; 24. O. K. •J7,S, uiif- DMS. 
 
 See Ayei-H/ v. MeCI'iiii. M- 1'. K. i.",, ;,„,/ 074 . 
 JUoiiii V. Fihiid-al.d, lo V. K. }(i7, imsi ^\•;.^. 
 
 V. FixTi;iti;s. 
 .S'ce FixxruEs. 
 
 \'l. l'\mi:(,'L()SfKi:. 
 
 IllesalConsideratlon-/>^:/;'/((V.l— 'J'heiulcof 
 law wiiich holds contracts iniule upon immoral 
 consideration to be invalid is coiiliiie(l to ex- 
 ecutory agreements, and therefore to an action 
 for foreclosure of a mortgage given to .secure 
 part of the |nircliasc money of a house it is no 
 defence to shew that the house li.as been pur- 
 chased, to the vendor's knowledge, for use as a 
 house of ill fame. The jilaiiitill' bein" able to 
 make out the right to relief by pro(iuctiou of 
 the mortgage without disclosing the illegal 
 transaction, the defendant cannot set up the Ul- 
 egality as a defence. 
 
 Judgment of Street, J., 21 O. R. 27, affirmed. 
 Hiujer V. O'Xell, 20 A. H. ]<J«. See. ue.vt case. 
 
 Illeijal Consideration — Defui'-e~Po>i>!Ps\tJon 
 
 -rb.wliinj /'<(/•/,«. I -..-Jiidginentof the Omrtof 
 
 Appeal in Ihuju- v. Q-Ndl, 20 A. R. 198, alhrmod. 
 
 I conveying to the purcliaser by ordinary sl,ort 
 
 I form deed without rentP.ls, .-ind the purchaser 
 shortly aiterwards sohl again ,it a hir-e advance 
 both purchaser .-.nd sub-purciiasers being aware 
 
 ■ ot the sale of tlie other lauds under execution 
 
 on the ,)udguient on the covenant. 
 
 The pl.dntitf, aeredilcu' of the mortga.'nr at 
 
 the time of |,i.s death, did not recover a^juih'- 
 : mcnt tor his debt until a year after the sale li 
 : the property by private contr.act, and .subst- 
 
 (|ucntly purelia.sed it at slierilfs sale under lin 
 
 own execution, and now claimed to be let in t.i 
 j redeem, or, in tlie alternative, that the moit- 
 
 gagees should account to him f.ir the value (.1 
 
 the jiroperty ; — 
 
 Held, that the foreclosure was opened by tin' 
 jirocecdiugs on the covenant, and any ii'ersea 
 entitled to redeem had a right to brin- tlif 
 action with.jut first seltiugaMde the linal onler- 
 the right to redeem under sudi eircmiistances 
 not being merely a personal eipiity in the mort- 
 gagor :— 
 
 Held, however, that the .sale by private con- 
 tract and conveyance must bo deemed an exer- 
 cise of the power of sale, the e(piity of redemp- 
 tion tiieii being at large. Cnrnr'v. IMiurl, 
 •-I ,e.'.v. 48S, and A't/-// v. Imperial Loan Co., 
 
 II .\. R. .-)2(), U .S. C. R. ,-il(i, followed. 
 Held, also, that the mortgagees had not acted 
 
 negligently or carelessly in the sale, but ha.l 
 ; taken all reasonable care, and that they were 
 : not b(jund to oiler the property a second time 
 : by public auction without some reasonable woa- 
 I pect of a sale. 
 
 ; Held, lastly, that under any circumstance,', 
 j the plaintiir not being an incumbrancer .at the 
 I time of the sale, and the legal and e(piit,iblo 
 
668 
 
 no Act (if Ontario iui acticm 
 to 1)0 i-oganloii as iiiolu,! 
 
 inssessiuil (if t!lO lll()|-tLM"e(| 
 
 out, and tho rule urat"iii 
 illiiiay (ilitaiii an (.nlfr't'or 
 
 (looa ndt apply to a case 
 :o sought to Ijo forocloficii 
 aintill' claims possession us 
 onilor. 
 :nro Act, as formerly, the 
 
 a contract tlml j't wus 
 nioral or illo^^al cdnsiilcra- 
 larticular facts relied upuii 
 (iiisideration. 
 U'cliaser of the eijuily tif 
 ich defence as against a 
 foreclose, or is the defeiiu,, 
 Mliate parties to the con- 
 
 '/■, 2-i s. c. i;. ,-.io. 
 
 ?.ro — Puir.'r of Sail' - 
 ■i.diior. ]— Mortgagees of ,i 
 er of sale excrcisalile nn 
 •e, took foreclosure pro- 
 :gage, and pending these 
 a separate aetioM on tJiu 
 ce(^ntors of the mortgagor, 
 of the mortgage, issiieij 
 iient, and sold thereuii.'ar 
 tgagor, crediting the iirn- 
 debt. ' 
 
 eclosure proceedings the 
 been ofFd'ed for s"ile liy 
 le power of sale and also 
 result. 
 
 ho foreclosure the mort- 
 .-•es by [irivate contract, 
 lia.ser liy ordinary short 
 ili'.ls, and the luireliastr 
 again at a large advance, 
 i-]iurchasers lieiug aware 
 ■ lands under execution 
 ! covenant. 
 
 Lor of the mortgagor :il 
 did not recover a jnil"- 
 !i year after the sale Jit' 
 to contract, and subse- 
 t sherilf's sale under lii.i 
 V claimed to be let in tu 
 nuitive, that the mort- 
 to him for the value (.f 
 
 isure Was opened by tlir 
 .'enant, and any persnii 
 
 I a right to bring tlir 
 ingasuletlielinal oriler; 
 der such circuiuslancc-i 
 .lual e(iuity in tlie iiiort- 
 
 t!ie sale by private ecu- 
 ust be deemed an exer- 
 , the eipiity (.f redemp- 
 e. Carnr v. Ilifhard^, 
 7 V. Jiiiperial J^naii Co., 
 !. '>Ht, followed, 
 ortgagees had not acted 
 y ill the sale, but ha.l 
 e, and that they were 
 )roperty a second time 
 It s^.ime reasonable pros- 
 ier any circumstances, 
 
 II incumbrancer at the 
 he legal and eipiitable 
 
 'J69 
 
 title having been vested in tl,,. , i . .. 
 
 the sherill's sale to the lai, iV ^ ' KU .:'^'''''^ 
 nit entitled to an account ,mVi . ' '''■■'*' 
 
 MORTGAGE. 
 
 670 
 
 Set III- Eu,:.v /.(I, 
 
 Case, 21 O. K. ;{(;: 
 
 M^ (iS4. 
 
 \ 11. IVlliKICV Laxiis. 
 
 Action for Ueaomption 
 
 Juri.<:ir,-th„i.]~See 
 
 was not to form part of the real estite b„f 
 
 j tained a covenant td .nst'rc ""''°'°" '■•°"- 
 
 their knowK-d.o: al'?, ^A-^Ji "' '""'""^ 
 
 iVr iiurtnn and Osier, ,J,f. \ th-i( tl,,.,, 
 
 ""t - ^'ntitied. the ...ichi ,;;.;.'tm? fv tT" 
 
 i«'j;";;;"i;'";;;;2';;i.:;''r""t''"""'i'i- 
 
 VIII. iNsfiiVXCl:; MoSKYS. 
 
 :..r:;f^^e::,.::ia;ti:Tmm{:::-;i-^r'^'-' 
 
 -et^t only from the time ^ll;^'C:;:;'i:'r 
 U'huro insuiMuec moneys are rt-nn-,, I i 
 
 i:tph:;h.-xri'%--rii;ii:S^, 
 
 -:^i;u::£ir;^n,r';t;;..h^/'-r'•'S^' 
 ;.i>ouoverdt.i,u,ei,.:u:!ri:^',:',jt:K 
 
 -a Ik lance t>i dtschargo of overdue ittterest ^ ^ 
 
 Urham v. k,wis!..„, 17 0. It, V^■>, co idl;,,, 
 
 Jud-ouent of tiie ( i, >„„.,'. .....',.."' "-'^''• 
 
 \ . McUiuui, •_>! A. K. 4S(i. 
 
 Ju.lgnumtofthe.^,meM'sKc,rchD,v -m^i 
 ■)• h. 0,, varied. E.UowU v. Jl,n„:'>o,i >, 
 ■■■d.tdaad Loan Soric/;/, 18 A. I J. ;jt7. 
 
 Application of — Prior Morl.nvu- 1 T>, 
 <'«-"cr,it aparc-lof land n.ort " • e ulteT-n i'' 
 ■"Ul subsequently niortga 'ed ,"d to t n ' 
 
 ---.anting to iay'o^'tm.aSir"''"';;-?"' 
 
 f^^iSp^^^^^^ 
 
 y^'^^whK•h^LaIso[n^St"ii''"'"■^""°'•- 
 
 toSltSl'the/r'lSrf"^''""'''-*'^'-' 
 t'le whole of ;, "-" ">""i''';<'-'s so as to l,o paid 
 
 '-t,.ictcdtot^f,^;i'-rr.''"''"^V"""<^- 
 "■ii'aiuiuMinDtid of i,. ;'■'' t'"-' '"'"'I't't 
 
 «'Kr?:jn';rr.hi''""'"^"V-"'''"'i'"-"'"^ 
 
 P"P«-ty v, to t ■" '"'"•'«;«« "f tlio n>ill 
 "■""- '''" I'"--" ; tl'at the machiticry 
 
 ,-s., »...!. it t Si' ::;;:';;;'. ; ;: ■-"■ 
 
 ^'■ig'ces might insure it and ■,,! i ' ""^'' 
 
 issued ui the name of °tl.e , . ('rt / ''"'l''^ "•^'^ 
 the premiuni.:, amra,;^ ,: ' f f ;.:,''r '"''^ 
 
 shouM'eh;nia ^ft "7. ''■"•"'''''-' -'^ 
 ii'^l'iiity tile eforexi.;.d sin ' """■^^''^:'T "" 
 1- subi-ogated t^a.U lei' ';':;•';'/''"'''>■ «''""l'l 
 uud.. all se(.,rUies £,,l's5l:tlyt?-S^^ 
 
 "-.■t..^eerthe;um ;!:«,:;;;, ;i^^ii;^,,j:;-,/'- 
 
 i-'l-iimed that his inort.-i-, u-l I "'-^'''" 
 
 «ueh iMvment Tl, , ,m ° '''-^"h.irged bv 
 
 i-i^tid^tha^^hc;'w;;:^!;i;:^g;:!i-r;,:^';-;'r' 
 
 "t the mortgagees un.ler the >-^id co' H ' '=' "^ 
 H-aeuon to compel ti.e coaip.„u. ^^ ^ ^''''^ , " 
 eh.irge ot the inort 'a.'e ■- ^ ^ "^ ''■'■ 
 
 ' j/'lhat'Tlf''-''''''"''^'''''"''''''""-"- "'"' <i^vynne 
 oo., cnat tile iinuranci- i.ii'..,.f , i i ^i "jnue, 
 
 I'll- Liiect; ot convi^rtini' ih. ■,,!; • ^ ■"••'• 
 nsariii.r the ini,.,.,f f^'.i ''"-•>' """ "">' 
 
 h.it tlio p.tymeut to the morf- u^ces'irseh-V 
 tlij mortal"- • • _ ° 'o-^^ "isenargcd 
 
671 
 
 MORTOAaE. 
 
 672 
 
 iiig their liability to the mortgagor ami cstaUlish- 
 ing tliL'ir iiulumiiity from liaUility to him ; not 
 having iloiii; ho tlicy i-oiild not, in tlie preSLiit 
 action, rai.su any ((Ucstion.s wliiuli might havo 
 affonli'd tliom a iluftnce in an action against 
 thtni on tlic policy. 
 
 DeciHion of tin: C'onrtof Ajj^cal, 15 A. R. 4'Jl, 
 and of a Divi-sional Court, 14 O. R. ;t".'2, atliinuMl. 
 Imperial Fire Jnnunuice Cn. v. Hull, IS >S. C'. U. 
 697. 
 
 IX. Lnterkst. 
 
 Arrears of — Period — Hale.] — R. S. O. ch. 
 Ill, SCO. 17, which provides that no more than 
 six years' arrears of intere.st upon money charged 
 upon land shall he recoverable, oidy applies 
 where a mortgagee Ih seeking to enforce pay- 
 ment, out of the lands, of his mortgage money 
 and interest, and does not ajiply to an action for 
 redemption or to actions similar in princi|]al. 
 
 In this action the mortgagee was lield entitled 
 to interest at the rate hxed l)y the mortgages 
 up to the maturity thereof, and afterwards at 
 the rate of six per cent. ; in all for about sixteen 
 years. l)el<inr>j v. Canadian Pacijii: R. W. Co,, 
 21 (). R. 11. 
 
 Corcmencement — iMuraiice Manei/s—Apiili- 
 cdlioti.] — Under ordinary circumstances, a mort- 
 gagee can claim interest only Irom the time the 
 money is advaueed. 
 
 Where insurance moneys are received by a 
 mortgagee under an insurance ettecteil by the 
 mortgagor, pursuant to a covenant to insure 
 eontauied in a mortgage ninde under the JShort 
 Forms Act, the mortgagee is not bound to apply 
 the insurance moneys in payment of arrears, but 
 may hold them in reserve as collateral security 
 while any portion of the mortgage moneys is 
 unpaid ; nor, tlujugh he ap])lics part upon over- 
 due priiii'ipal, is he bound to apply the balance 
 in (liseharyc of overdue interest. Kdmoud.-i v. 
 Hamilbin Provident and Loan Socitty, IS A. R. 
 347. 
 
 'Deia.xilt—Arceb ration of Principal.] — Set 
 )yil.-.on V. Canijjbell, 15 P. R. 2,54, uutv. UGS. 
 
 Instalments — Payment Ante Diem.] -XJnAer 
 a mortgage given to secure the bahince of pur- 
 chase inouey, and iu which the principal is 
 piiyabie by instalments extending Ijeyond live 
 years, the'nuirtgagor is, at any time after such 
 lii.>-t named period, entitled to a discharge under 
 see. 7 of li. S. C. ch. 147, an. Act respecting 
 interest, upon payment of the principal an<l 
 interest, together with three months' additioiuil 
 interest. //( re I'arker — Parker v. Parker, 
 '24 (). R. 37.3. 
 
 Payment— .SVa^H^f of Limitations.] — See Trmt 
 find Loan ('ompaiii/ of Canada v. Slevennon, 
 20 A. It. m, post 674. 
 
 Payment to Solicitor. J-Se.' In re Tracy— 
 Scully V. Tracii, 21 A. R. 454, post 675. 
 
 Rate Post Diem.] — A mortgage of real 
 estate provided for payment of the principal 
 niouey secured on or before a fixed date "with 
 
 interest thereon at the rate of ten per centun 
 per annum until such iirincipal money and 
 interest shall be full}' ])aiil and satislicil : "-- 
 
 Meld, atlirming the judgment of the Court i f 
 Ajjpeal for Ontario, that the mortgage caiiica 
 interest at the rate of ten per cent, to the limu 
 fixed for payment of the principal only, aiiH 
 after that date the mortgagees could recover no 
 more than the statutory rate of six per c^ i.t. 
 on the un|)aid piimd|ial. St. John v. llykirr, 
 10 S. C. i;. 278, followed. Pn,ple\ Loan and 
 Deposit Co. V. Urant, l.S S. C. H. 202. 
 
 X. Partiks to MouTiMCK Actions. 
 
 Lessee of Mortgagor — Protection of Interest — 
 
 Stayini/ Proceedintj"- Order for Sale.] — In an 
 
 action for foreclosure of a mortgage, the difen- 
 
 dants were the administrator and heirs-at law of 
 
 the mortgagor and certain devisees in trust of 
 
 deceased heirs. .SubstMiuent incundirancii-s, 
 
 judgment creditors ol some of the heirs, and the 
 
 lessee of the (.Jueen Hotel, part of the mortgau'nl 
 
 property, under lease from some of the In irs, 
 
 were not made parties. None of the defendanti^ 
 
 I appeared, and the e([uity of redemptioji of 
 
 ' t: 1 mortgagor and those clainung under liiiii 
 
 W..S barred and foreclosed, and the lands onii red 
 
 ' to be sold on a day named. On that day, nr 
 
 application of the lessee of the t^uecn lloti-1, ;m 
 
 <-./■ /)(/)V(' order was made by the Chief .Ill^tic^; 
 
 directing that, on payment into Court of .'i>:i7,nl!( 
 
 ; by S. it K., further proceedings by the phuntiil 
 
 shoulil be stayed until further order, and that 
 
 the plaintiff should convey the mortgaged lamls 
 
 and the suit and benefit of proceedings tlieivii! 
 
 to S. & K., which direction was complied with. 
 
 On 2()th Decendicr, lSSi>, the defen<lauts nmvuil 
 
 to rescind this order. The motion was refused, 
 
 and the order amended by a direction that the 
 
 lessee shonld be made a defendant to the aelimi, 
 
 and S. & K. joined as plaintiU's, and that the stay 
 
 i of proceedings be removed. On 4th .Jamia'v, 
 
 I 1890, a further order was made directing that 
 
 I the t^ueen Hotel projjerty be sold sidijcct to the 
 
 rights ot ilie b'ssee. From the two hist nieii- 
 
 tiored orders i ur defendants ajipealed to the full 
 
 Court, which alfirmed that of 2Gth Deccnihcr 
 
 an<l set aside that of 4th ilanuary. Both parties 
 
 appealed to this Court : — 
 
 Held, that the order of 20tli December, 1S.S9, 
 was rightly aflirmed. The stay of ]ui)ce('din{.'S 
 I under the order athrmed by it was no more objee- 
 ! tionable than if ell'ected by injunction to .stay ;i 
 I sale under a writofy?./<i., and, being madeat the 
 instance of a lessee, and as such a iiurcliascr pro 
 tanto, of the mortgaged lands, who had a riglit 
 I to redeem, it was in the discretion of the Chici 
 ] Justice so to order. To the direction th.it the 
 plaintifT should convey the lands to S, k K.. tlie 
 defendants had no Incii.'i standi to <diject, and they 
 i were not prejudiced by the addition of parties 
 I made by the order. Nor had th(i defendants a 
 I right to object to the removal of the stay of pro- 
 ceedings ; and any right snl)se{|uent incuinlnaii- 
 cers not before the Court might have to com- 
 plain would not be effected by the order made 
 in their ab.sence. Moreover, between tlie dale 
 of the order and the appeal to the full Court 
 the property having been sold under the decree, 
 the purchaser not being before the Court was 
 a sufficient ground for dismissing the appeal. 
 
673 
 
 MORTGAGE. 
 
 iiT<:A(iK Actions. 
 
 Held. furtluT, thill the onli r of Ith Jnmmiy, 
 IHIMI, .shoiiKl also hiive Ijceii allii-iiicd l>y tlio full 
 O.iift. Ill HclliiiK the moit^M^ri.,! ;,r(,p,.,ty thu 
 L'diiit liiul a iij,'lit to I'liilcavom- to prcsfivii the 
 rights of thu \f^nrv \,y selling tii'Ht the iHjrtions 
 ill wliieh Hhu had no inteiesit. Calling v. Ciiii- 
 niniiliam, Ciiiiniinj/iam v. JJnMlo/r, •>] S (' 
 
 I!. i;i9. ^ . ■ ^. 
 
 Personal Representative "-//«■;;•< f(/- /.„»■, |._ 
 
 In a moi-tgagi! netimi for f(,n'closuie, ullhoi'igh 
 It iHiiy he that since the l)e\dhition (4' Kstates 
 A(!t. as n matter of title, the record is enniiijetc 
 with the gentr.il administrator of the deceased 
 OHMcr of the c(|nity of redein|iti<in as the .»ole 
 (IcfcMilant ; yet, as a matter of |iroecdure, the 
 infant (.'hildren of ;lie ilcceased are i)ro[ier 
 parties, and as such .slumlil appear as original 
 defendants, unless some good reason exists Un- 
 excluding theni. 
 
 Kules ;50!t and 100.5 considered. Kr< n v 
 Codil, 14 l^ 1!. l.SL'. 
 
 Personal Representative — //-»■.<-((/- /.a /r.].^ 
 
 Ill an action upon a inort-a-e nuide hya deceased 
 person, who died in l,S,N!», payment, 'forech-siire, 
 ami pcsscssion were claimed, and the executors' 
 to whom the real estate had hien devised, were 
 the only defemhints. Judgment I'or possession, 
 i}il(r(iliii, wuH recovered, ami a writ of iiosses- 
 sinn placed in the slierill's hands. The widow, 
 who was one of the executors, and tlie infant 
 chiliircn of the deceased mortgagor had an in- 
 terest under the will in the mortgaged lands, 
 and were in possession when the aherill' at- 
 tempted to execute the writ. The infants, and 
 the widow as their guardian, made a claim to 
 the possession as against the writ, hased on the 
 ground of the intants not having been made 
 parties to the action ; — 
 
 Held, that the .sherill', hy virtue of Rule 1141 
 ('/). was entitled to interi)lead :— 
 
 Held, also, that the aeti as regards the 
 
 ckim tor possession, \\as pi-operly constituted ; 
 and the intants were bound hy the judgment 
 against the executors. 
 
 Ketiiv. CoiM, 14 I'. R, 182, distinguished, 
 tm^'i-son V, Buiiip/iiir.i, 1,") p. R. S-l. 
 
 Personal Representative— //« irs-al-laiv. ]— 
 A inortgage action ag.iinst the surviving husband 
 and mfaut chddreu of the mortgagor, wlio ilied 
 intestate in February, 1802, w.is "begun betorc 
 the lap.se of a year from tlie death :— 
 
 Held, that the plaintilf was entitled, after the 
 lapse 01 a year, to judgment for tlie enforcement 
 other inortgage, without having a personal re- 
 presentative of the mortgagor betore the Court, 
 no administrator having been appointed, and no 
 caution registered under 04 Vict, ch, JS, sec 1 
 amending the Devolution of Estates Act' 
 Jiumii.s V. Doii), lu P. R. 219. 
 
 674 
 
 niinistrator of the real and per.s.mal estate, 
 t'ne ot the heirsat law demurred to the state- 
 "lent of chum, on the ground., that the adminis- 
 trator represented the estate in all regards, that 
 the heirs-athiw were not bound by any coven- 
 ants of the deceased, and that ilo le'lief was 
 claimed or could be granted against them :- 
 
 Held, that the demurrer wa.s in ellcct rme for 
 misp.imler of parties, ami that the proper re- 
 niedy was a motion under Rule ;t24 („) to strike 
 <)Mt t'e name of the denuirriiig defemlant. 
 tdi-ler v. tliirhiiii, ]', P. R. ;;7!>. 
 
 Purchaserof Equlty-/,/,,V,„»,V,/.]_It js „ot 
 pioper in an action for foreclnsiii-e to ioiii .as 
 original defendants tin; int.ni,edi;ac pnivhaser.s 
 ot the e(,uity (,f redemption, and to order each 
 one to pay the mortgage debt ami imicmnilv 
 ins pre.lecessor in title, WulL; r y. Jt;,-!.:,,,, .)(>, 
 A, R. <JU, ■ "' -" 
 
 Wife of Mortgngor- Down: ]— The wife of a 
 mortgagor who has joined in a morlgaue, made 
 after 11th M.nch. 1870, only for the |mrpose of 
 barring her dowcr, is properly made a defen- 
 (hint to an action of foreclosure, in order that 
 she may either redeem or protect her interest 
 by asking lor a sale : and being .so made a de- 
 tend.ant, ami submitting to a foreclosure, no 
 (luestion can aris,! as to her dower being ellect- 
 uallyextinguishul. AyrM v, McC/uw, 14 P. 
 
 lu 10, 
 
 Wife of MortRagor-/)oHcr,]— The wife of a 
 mortgagor, who has joined in the mortgage for 
 the purpose of barring her dow..r, to the extent 
 of the mortgage only, has the right to redeem 
 during her husbands lifetime, and is a necessary 
 party to an acti(,n of foreclosure in the tirst 
 instance. 
 
 And where she was not so made a party and 
 Jiidyment of torcclosure was recovered in her 
 uhsence, she was after jmignieiit and rep.irt 
 a(l( ed as a detendant upon her own petition 
 and permitted to redeem or pay oU' and obtain 
 an assignment ot the mortgage. B/oim v rH: 
 Uem/.t, l.JP R. 4(J7. 
 
 Sw Brool-jhld V. /lioirii, 22 S. C R "lOS 
 i />o,s/ (iH.S ; </„rk v. J/m/ar, 22 S. c" r" 51()' 
 
 I'-'-i" ''v' ;;-Y"/'' '•• ^'v^^' ^'' ^'- i^. I, /'o.l 
 
 i>i8; !><-i>U,.-<h Aimru-an luvtshnail Vo. v, I'nttie 
 20 A, R. ;m, ;jo«/; 679. 'J.^. I nine. 
 
 -Xr, Payment, 
 
 Personal Representative— //eiV.s•-((^Z;r»(• 1— 
 hmce the Judicature Act the proceeding bv 
 (leniurrer for inisjoiiuler of parties is no longer 
 available. ° 
 
 HWrferwriu y Soch-tc Qiwrak B'Ekctridtr, 
 19 Ch, D. 246, followed, 
 
 III an action tipcni a mortgage fur foreclosure, 
 mmeiliate payment, and immediate possession, 
 the plaintiff johied as defendants the heirs-at- 
 law ot the deceased mortgagor (who died after 
 tut Uevolutiou of Instates Act) with the ad- 
 43 
 
 Interest— .S'»?y«e(/((e)))! Mor/r/ni/c - S'latiite or 
 Limuatwn..]-The assignee in iiiLolvency, nnder 
 the In.solvent Act of bSti."), of the plaintilis' 
 inortgagor, m 1869 conveyed in part satisfaction, 
 ot his claim, without covenants on either side 
 the mortgaged property to a subaciiuent mort- 
 gagee, who had valued his securit\-, the plaiii- 
 ti Is mortgages being referred to -in a recital 
 Ihe subsequent inortga^'ce shortly afterwards, 
 conveyed the property to a thir.l person, but. 
 notwithstanding this convevaiice. continned to 
 pay interest to the plaiiititls'tiU within ten yeara 
 ot this foreclosure action : — 
 
 Held, on a case stated in the action for the 
 opinion of the Court, with liberty to draw infer- 
 ences of law and fact, that it was proper to infer 
 
iif^ll 
 
 675 
 
 MORTGAQE. 
 
 676 
 
 'I: 
 
 m 
 
 tliiit tlio provi«i()nn of h(m'. 10 of tlic IiiHoU-ciit ' 
 Aut of 18(1.') Iiiicl Ijcfii loiiipliid with ; that iiiuUr 
 that Huctiou th'- s'iili.sf(|m'iit, Miiirt^;iij,'L>(', lakinj^ 
 over his si(nril>, wcjuld l)c iiriiiiiirily iMminl 
 to pay oil' the piiof iiiciliiilii'ain;on ; and thin 
 theiuforu hia pavmtiitH Itcpt aiivo thu phiiutilln' 
 rights. 
 
 .liiilgiiiL'iit of the (Jliaiicury OiviHion, 21 O. R. I 
 C71, revuisL'd, Osh'r, .).A.,' di.ssiiitiiig. Traxl ] 
 and Loan ('umixiny nf Camula v. Stcrennou, '20 
 
 A. R. m. 
 
 i 
 
 Solicitor- -l"'/i"('V// f;/-.]— Tlio dims of show- i 
 ing thai a soljintoi', wlio iH in poSNossioii of a 
 mortgage and coUei'ts tin; intorest, has anlhoiit.y 
 iilso to follfut tlic i)iincipal, is n[ion llic mort- 
 gagor, ami uidcs:^ this onus is uUsu-ly dis- 
 charged, the mortgagor and not the mortgagee 
 inuslliear tht; loss arising from thu solioitor'a 
 inisapiiriiiiriation ol' the funds. //* n; Tnwij — 
 iSciillii V. Tnii-y, '.'I A. K. 454. 
 
 ObllKatlon to Carry Out Sale. 1 \ tnort 
 gii.'-"'e, having exen ImmI the power of sale in a 
 nioilgave and sold the land toi' sntllcinit to pny 
 the niortgii;^' and eosts, e-annol without siillj. 
 eieiit reason treat the sale as a nidlity, ami fall 
 
 \1I. I'owKK or Sai.k. 
 
 Porm--.S7/n)V i'oniis .4(V— .1 v.i(;/hs.]— A mort- 
 gage, made in alleged jiarsuance of the Short 
 Forms Act, eo'itained the following iirovisions 
 as to sale : " Provided tliat the said mortgagees, 
 on default of payuient for one month, may, on 
 ten days' noliee, enter on and lease or sell the 
 said lands. And provided also that in ease 
 default lie made in [)aynient of either |)rim;ipal 
 or interest; for two nio'ntlis after any i)aynient of 
 cither falls due, the said jiower of sale and 
 entry may he ai'ted unnn without any mjtiee. 
 Ami also that any eontraet of sale made under 
 the said power may he v.iried and reseimled. 
 Ami also that the said mortgagees, their heirs, 
 executors, aihninistrators, and assigns, may hiiy 
 ill and resell without being responsible for any 
 loss or deficiency on lo-sale ; " — 
 
 Held, l!uilnn,J..'\.. dissenting, that the power 
 of sale could be validly exercised by the assigns 
 of the niortg igecs. //( n Oilrhnsl ant Ishuiil, 
 11 (). 1!. 'liM, and CInrk v. Jfurcei/, IG ( ). R. 
 1.J9, considered. Unfri/ v. Andi-rton, 18 A. R. 
 247. 
 
 Notice of Sale — Demand of Payir :nl — 
 Adrertinini/ -Ininnctioii.] — .An advertisement for \ 
 sale of lands is a " proceeding " within the 
 meaning of the words " no further proceedings " 
 ill .see. .SO of H. S. () eh. Id'-'. 
 
 Where a mi.rtgagce served upon the mortgagor 
 a notice demanding payment of the mortgage 
 money, and stated that, unless payment were 
 made within a month from the .service, the mort- 
 gagee wouhl proceed to sell, an injunction was 
 granted restraining the mortgagee from publish- 
 ing, until after the expiry'of the month, an 
 advertisement of the sale of the mortgaged pre- 
 mises. 6»i!//i v. Brown, l20(). R. 105. 
 
 Notice of Sale- JCxecnt ion Credifor-'i.] — In 
 taking proceedings under a power of sale in a 
 mortgage drawn under the .Short Forms Act, 
 execution creditors of the mortgagor come 
 within the scope of the word "assigns," and as 
 such are entitled to notice under power of sale, 
 but only those having executions in the sherifl's 
 hands lit the time notice of default is given need 
 be served. A'c Abbott and Mnkalf, 20 (X R. 299. 
 
 hael; on the mortgage as if the exercise of the 
 |iower Wiis a mere matter of form. 
 
 'i'lirie jc.iiit owners of proi)erty mortgaged it 
 ainl then sold to the plaiiitifl', w ho eoveiianttMl 
 to pay oil' the mortgage. The plaintill .S(jld to 
 the defendant, taking a siniihu eovenaiit. 'I'lm 
 mortgagees exercised the powei' of sale in their 
 mortgage, and one of the origird owners beeaine 
 the purchaser, at n price .sullicient to pay tin: 
 mortgiige and costs. The piirciiaser, then.;!! 
 able, not being willing to carry out th(! sale, liie 
 mortgagees reliained friiin eomiielling him to ili, 
 sri, and, under thri'ats nt' legal proceeilnigs I.; 
 till! nie'igagiir, collceteil the ai : ears and costs 
 from the iilaiiuitr. 
 
 In an action by the phiintilV to recover fimii 
 his vendee the aiiiiiunt thus paid :- - 
 
 Held, that he was not entitled to reciiver. 
 Palti-isoii V. Tuumi; 22 (). K. .'Ilil. 
 
 Sale by Way of Exchange. 1 — A mortgagee 
 with powev of sale iiiiiier the .Short I'oiiii 
 .\loi'tg:.ge Act can exercise the ]iower by way of 
 exehaiige for other laml instead of, in the usual 
 <^ay, by sale for money. The words "nliKii- 
 Intely dispose of ' in the power are ap|iro|iiiate 
 to an exchange. ■-'ntUli v. .S/" '"■•■, 22 f). II. 2S(i. 
 
 Sale of Timber Only — Xo'lrn „/ S:dv.] — 
 A ii,ortg.i,L:ee of timbered land, whose inortg.ige 
 contained the oidiiKiry short foriii of [lowerof sale 
 authorized by It. S. 1 ». eh. 107, in the exercise of 
 such )iower suld the tniilier without the land :— 
 
 llelil, that the sale as an exercise of the i«i\v<t 
 was Void : — 
 
 Hi.'ld, also, that there being an existing inter- 
 est ill the laud vested in or elaimablc by the 
 ))laiiitill', of which the inortgagee had express 
 notice, the plaintilF was entitled to notice of the 
 sale, and, upnii the evideiii:e, that no sueli notice 
 of sale was given him as he was entitled to iiiulfr 
 the jjower. .Stciacrt v. Ikm-.-^oni, 22 ( ). R. ."i.'i.'t. 
 
 .<?ce McMkhad v. Wilkv'. 18 A. R. 404, ni,k 
 6(15 ; Chatfi'td v. Vnnuimjliam, 23 <). II. I.').'), 
 iinti (1(18; Jlrtthonr v. llrouL'r, 2:1 (). 1!. 0."iS, 
 llOil ()7S. 
 
 Xlll. I'liACTICK IN MOKTCLMIK A( TIONS. 
 
 1. AiiKiidment. 
 
 Amending Writ of Summons after JuiIk- 
 ment. J— Under the liberal powers of aiiienil- 
 meiit now given by Rules 444 and 780, the writ 
 of summons and all subseiiueiit proceedings may 
 1)6 amended after judgment. 
 
 And where the plaiiitill' by mistake (tmilliil 
 from the description of the hinds in the writ ei 
 summons in a mortgage action, a parcel iaclmU'il 
 in the mortgage, an order was made, after judf- 
 ment and liiial order of foreclosure, vacating the 
 final order, directing an amendmeiit of the writ 
 and all jiroceedings, and allowing a in'W day for 
 redemption by a suliseipieiil ineunibraiieer wln' 
 did not consent to the order; and in defaiilttliij 
 usual order to foreclose. Clarke v. Cooper, 1') 
 P. R. 54. 
 
m 
 
 MORTOAQE. 
 
 lange.]— A iiiiiitL,',i;.iir 
 n.'.er llic Slii.it I'luiii 
 <i: tliu piiwtM' liy Wiiy (if 
 iisti'iul of, ill tint Usual 
 
 '. 'I'llL' WllpU " a'hKll- 
 
 )in\i(,T luu up('r(i|iriiit« 
 . .s>. .r,v,-_"JO. I;.:.Mi. 
 
 Iifing 11.11 i;.\istiii;,' iiitt'i'- 
 u (U' c'laiiiKilil'j liy tlir 
 iii)rt^'a,:;eu liail cxiiress 
 .■r.titlod lo iintii-'f of the 
 iiuL', that 111) Kuoli notice 
 lit; wiiSfiititU'il to iiudiT 
 toirsoDi, 22 (). R. ."i.'i:!. 
 
 Hi'. 18 A. R. -{(14, fiH/f 
 i(r///fi»(, L'3 <). l;. I.").'), 
 (/•&()/■'., '2:i O. l;. (i."jV 
 
 JoliTCiAliE AcriONS. 
 
 Cusli. 
 
 Executors- /•-,•,«,»„' o,.,;, ,, | _ WLeio a., 
 maion to fiifoioo a .n<.rt«agu l.y forcloMii,.. is 
 Im.u-lit again-it tlio ex.'fiitorH of ,i, lifcoiMr,! 
 mnr g^gor an.l m, opUt for pavnioiit of tliu 
 mnrtgaKc .lol.t is, „, lul.lido,,, „sU,,,l „,rai,„t tl,o 
 -•x.TutoiH, aii.l j»,I«Mi,.,it is ..Mt,.|v,l for (It.f.mit 
 of app.'amm-o, only tlio u.l.litiunal costs o.aa- 
 ■I'mc.l Ijy tho lattcT ..■laim s;,ou!,l l.o taxf.I 
 eXfi;iltor8 I>oiS(iiially. .)/,/,< y. 
 .■)"."). 
 
 ijailist 
 liriiini, 
 
 till. 
 1.-. I' 
 
 ):. ;)7.-i 
 
 loliowfd. tlooiktil V. /lioroiri, "J 
 iiir,//,.ifui,r V. (;':nii, I Cli. CI, 
 .siilel'fii. Sriirl'/f v. /Jii 
 
 '.'/, 
 
 Iiami 
 I'. 
 
 678 
 
 '■'r. 449, (uiil 
 l;. -M..', oo.i- 
 I:. •JH;t. 
 
 "i. Scirifr 1)/' Writ. 
 
 Infants — /'i/<o//«/ ,SWri,' 
 
 '"■'• wlieiu po.ssussioii is (.■ 
 
 »iii.iiii<,nM iiiioil not liu SI rvu. 
 infant lioirs of tliu moitgay 
 prrsoiially in posstssion. 
 I"' I', i;. I. 
 
 •] 
 
 -Ii 
 
 a iiiortgaijo 
 
 laiinc'd 
 
 , tllo 
 
 writ of 
 
 1 
 
 el'Hi 
 
 iially 
 
 on tho 
 
 11', 
 
 It 
 
 tla.y 
 
 lire not 
 
 ,V/- 
 
 lift 
 
 V. 
 
 I'urdy, 
 
 ."!. Jioh 
 
 /III' III. 
 
 Appearance Dlsputlny Amount Claimed ^ 
 
 -111 a Miortgago aotioii for pavnimt, for,.'.' 
 closure, etc., the (k-feinlaiit .'iifi-,v,l an an- 
 (MMMiicc III which siiu statoil that .]„■ ili.l „ot 
 .vquirc the delivery of the .stfttoim iit of claim 
 andaiMc.l: "lake notice that the ilcfc,„l,,nt 
 ilisputcs the amount claimed by the plain- 
 
 Held, tliat the n'cord was then complete, and 
 that a statement of claim was min,..ccssarv and 
 irregular. / V, / v. n7,//e, 1 1 ]■. U. 177, approved 
 and followed. ' ' 
 
 _ Held, al.so, that the case was not within Kulo 
 WS, and the plaiiitill' could not obtain a iudc- 
 lueiit onpra'cipc. ° 
 
 U[>im motion to the Conn upon tli,. ivcoid is 
 cmuaino.l in the writ of suninioiis and tlie 
 •ip||oari.iice, an order was made iiiuler Rules .V.l 
 iUKl n>:i, directing. I reference to t.-ike the iiiort- 
 ;;ai;c acconnt, and directing that if the referee 
 sieuld liiid any amount due to the plaiiitill', il,e 
 plamiiU should have judgment aceordiii- to the 
 «Tlt with costd. M,ihn„.;j V. llorhi,.'^ U l> 
 li. 11/. 
 
 Default of Appearance-A'o/,„,, />;,«,/;,„,, 
 '^vt,/.]-|,y analogy to Rule ."iO.S, where, in a 
 mortgage action tor foreclosure or .sale, some of 
 
 the ilcfeiidants do not ajipear to the writ of .sum- 
 iiiMis, andotheiH do aiipear. against whom jud.r- 
 iiK-i.t cannot then be „bl„ined, the oliicer nufv 
 -lote (he pleadings closed as ag.vii.st tiie f„rn„., 
 Hiid the action may b,, brought on for judgnien; 
 :.« tlieniwnhc.ut furUicr notice to iheni. 
 .\lorK^ V. I.iiinli, \o V. R. !>. 
 
 Settlnff Aside Judgment on Payment of 
 nerost and Cost«.J-,sv. IIV/.o. v ("1,°5 
 "''. 1.J I . K. i.',)4, unit (;o;j. ' 
 
 4. Pni-Uxl for Hcihmjifhm. 
 
 Foreclosure after Abortive Sale 1 - In 
 
 decline as to whether iheiv shouM be i Ion" 
 
 MV. I'liiiviso mii IvNTKv. 
 
 Short Forms Act-.A,a,r-A„/,V, - Tirnh.r.^ 
 -iliere IS nothing ,„ the coveimni (No. 7, i„ 
 he Ac .■csiicclmg .Short Forms of MortgagcH, 
 
 lV,n. ":• "'■"'"" '''^'""'' ^'"- "H.rtgagee 
 
 •^hall have cpnet po.ssc,s.sioii of tie- lamis, rtpug- 
 naiit to the proviso in the s.mie Act (No 14) 
 
 h:. (ae mortgagee, on default of payment. 
 
 ..i>,o„ giving notice, enter on and lease or .sel 
 
 g.ige i.s ,1, default, may, ,„„ler the covenant, 
 without giving noliee, make any lease whi 1 
 will,,,,, ,nter,ere„ulithei,,,,rtg-u,,,.'sriSt:; 
 
 The action intendcl by ,1,0 proviso is not the 
 
 .eie taking posses.sjou for the purpose of keep- 
 
 ng down the, ntere.st, but the'cn/enng ,m the 
 
 iMiids to lea... or sell in sue!, wise tliat the riKht 
 
 <d redemption .shall be postponed or destroyed. 
 
 WluM the security in arrear is ...eaiitv. it is 
 competent lor the mortg, gee to make tile best 
 lM-ovi.iion he can tor his own safctx , even to the 
 cutting down ot trees, which power he .an 
 confer «p.,n others under him. Mibjcct to an 
 .tceount to the owner of the erpiitv of redemp- 
 K.n at the, .roper time. MUl.tl V. iJunv -it 
 l.cav. 4,0, .applied, lirclhoiir v. ll,;,ob •>•{(')'« 
 
 XV'. It.ui.v.AY Lands. 
 
 cm, tioii, or, in de.'ault" 
 
 nr short period for rc.L..., 
 
 I^e^l'^r?'"^"'- '^"^''""■''^•" '*''''' "ft'"^ n.ort- 
 
 'loiildlet 1 •■■''.''' ^■"•'-•!""«t'i>«^es of the case 
 ■•^iKul. he taken into consi.lcratioii. 
 
 And where, he amount of money t,. bo paid 
 U^ aljo„ti<150.,)00, and the mortg^ed p ope y 
 
 w of very great value, though at the ti ne 
 he was much diliiculty in coiTverting it i 
 
 -"'""wl. (aiupMi V. HdtjlMiid, 7 C'h. D. \m 
 
 pompensation-A-;,//,As- of .I/or/,,,,,/,:,.. 1_ An 
 ._u-t.oii of trcspa.s to vacant lands will lie by the 
 mortgagee there,, 1. ^ ^ 
 
 In such an action, after the lan.Is had been 
 vacant for many years, ami the mortgagee ha.l 
 then made an aetual entry and was .suirseTpient y 
 I ^possessed, and the lands taken b, the'delW 
 dait railway company for tlie purpose of their 
 nniertakmg,he w .s held entitled t'o leeo e the 
 alue of the land as damages, to be held by 
 urn as security for his mortgage moneys, the 
 mortgagor being entitled to redeem in iJpecLof 
 the damages as le would have been in respect 
 
 ' o. , _i w. K. 1 J, 
 
 Compensation A',;,/,/.,, of Mort.iwieeA— A 
 ""ortgagor does not represent hi.s m;.r!'.-a,4e f,ir 
 purposes ot the Railway Act of Ontario, "ami « 
 
 o n.chided in the eniimeration of the eoilra 
 t ions or persons who, under sec. l:j of R SO 
 oh. 1,0, are enabled to sell or convey lands to 
 the company. He can only deal with his own 
 
i < 
 
 m 
 
 MORXaAQE. 
 
 68G 
 
 equity nf rc'li'iiiiilinii, IcaviiiK tin- inottKiinif 
 oiititli^tl t(i liiivc liis i:(iiii|ii'iiMiitiiiii fur liiiiil« tiikeii 
 Beparattly a«ri'i(aim'il. //( re, Turoiiln litll l/uir 
 
 It. w. r;,.,-.'i;(). It. ii;t. 
 
 G' tnpensatlon Itiijliln of Morfiiniji-e..] A 
 railwiij i.'(iiii|iiiriy todk iioascHsioii uf certain IiiihIh 
 unilcr «uiiiiiit (if tlu^ (^'oun'y Cmirt .)iiil(;c, 
 and pi'Mcn ilfd with ini iuMtmtii h with the 
 owiira HH to llicir Mihu', 'I'hc l.tiim Vivif nuIi- 
 jccl toil iiinitg.ific t(i tlic lilailitilts, whii iciciyi (1 
 no notiiii of, uiiil timk im putt iii.thi' iirl)itiati<in 
 pri)Cft'(iiiif{H, mill j.'avi! no coiiHi'iit to tlio tnkiiit; 
 of poBHi'Hsioii. All iiwanl wan iimilf, l.iit was 
 not laUni 141 liy litiur llii! railway coiiiiiaiiy or 
 till) owiH'is. 'i'lii' lilaiiilitls linaij^lit this autimi 
 HHidiiHt (ln' railway iniiniaiiv ami the owiicr.s 
 for foil rlcisurc, 'ilt'i riiii; i" tlair claim to takr 
 tht' LM)iii|ii'lisatii)ii (iMaiilfii.ainl ickiisu thi'lamls 
 in the posscHMinii of tlir lailway coiniiany : — 
 
 Hclil, that till' lailway coiniiany wtro pro|ic'i- 
 jiartiiM to the aitioii, ami that the jilaiiititlH 
 ■wrre entitled to a jiiilL'lMi'lit ayaiiiMt all tin- 
 dofeiiilaiits \\itii, in view ol thi' oti'tr, a provi- 
 wion for the rcKascof tlu' IuihIh in tliu possc^iion 
 
 of the railway t ipaiiyon |iaviiiiiil to thu pluiii- 
 
 titli) of the amount of the award. 
 
 I'cr Oakr ami Marleiinaii, .1.). A.— Su))-si'c. 
 25 of SIC. '20, K. S, (). ch. 170, applies only 
 ■whine the roinpinsatioii has been actually ascer- 
 tained and paid into Court. Sra/li.sli Aiiitrifan 
 JnrMlmtiil Co. v. /'/■/7/iV, 20 A. 1!. '.VJB. 
 
 creditor and niortgngot' both having iloniieilc m 
 Ontario. 
 
 The only liii'iiH Ktiivdi the judnim lit cicditi r 
 would have in an (tiitario (oiiilwniild he t.i 
 have diiect. relief a;jiniir>l the lands liy mean 1' 
 a gale, to which relief lu^ would he restriclcil ii. 
 such a ease in a hiiit in the Courts of .\Ianitiil ,1 
 ami a decree for a sali^ wuuld have huen iiiicii 
 forci alile in the latter I'rovinee. 
 
 A Court of tijiiity will, where pcrNoiial cijUilic;' 
 e.\i^t helweeii tVMi parties over whom il li.n 
 jin isdiction, though such equities may lefei 1, 
 loicijjii lands, Hive relief hy a decree opeiatiiii. 
 not directly upon the luiiils hut ilirectly in ji' c 
 njiiiiw, lint such relief will ne\er lie extenilcd 
 >ii far as decreeing a sale in the nature nt .11 
 ei|Uit(dile execution. 
 
 .ludgmeiil of the Court of A|>[)eal, '20 A. K 
 C4(i, veversiliy the jild;.'li!i lit of the (.limii.- 
 IJencli Divi-ioii, •_';)(). 1!. ;,;7, alhrmeil. /I',"l,. 
 .»o» V. liiiiikif lliimittui,. .';JH, C. H. Tlii. 
 
 Lands Takez) for Railway— Cohi//(';(.v«/;(»(. ! 
 Si I I), 1(1111 II V. Ciiiiiniuui I'licljic IL ir. C". 
 
 '.'1 <>. K. w/uiiu t)7s. 
 
 Opening Foreclosure. l—SVc C/itiljitltl v. ' 'mi 
 iiinijIiiniiy'yAO. 1!. l.'i.'t, '(/((f; COS. 
 
 Period for Redemption.]- Sec Scaili/i \ . lilr 
 nm, l."> I'. R. -MS, aiilr (i77. 
 
 XVI. Redemi'tion. 
 
 Delay after Judgment— .S^(;?(<e of Lim'ita- 
 
 tlom—Qiiiiliiii.l Ttlli'. J— That lapse of time wliicli ■ 
 would he a statutory har to the assertion of a! 
 claim helore litif,'ation should, as a general rule, 
 ajiply liy aiialnjiy to induce the Court to exer- ■ 
 else its iliseretion by holdinj; its hand when the ' 
 laches occur in the prosecution of an action, 1 
 whether liefoie or after jud.L;nient. i 
 
 After the usual decree for redemption liad ' 
 been pronounced in favour of a mortgagor, who 
 was ut the time and continued afterwards to 
 Vie a lunatic residing in Scotland, no proceed- 
 ings w ere taken undei it for over twenty years. 
 Although several communications with refer- 
 ence to the suit passed between the mortgagor's ' 
 Holicitoi and his airulor, the latter never inter- 
 vened. For some years before, and during all ' 
 the time after, the making of the decree, the | 
 mortgagee, or those claiming under him, had : 
 been in possession of the mortgaged premises ; 
 and the petitioner in this matter, claiming 
 under the mortgagee, sought, after notifying the 
 cura/nr of the facts and proceedings, to quiet his 
 title under the Quieting Titles Act, K. S. O. 
 ch. 113:- 
 
 Held, that after the great and unexplained 
 delay in the redemption suit, the decree made 
 therein was no obstacle to the petitioner's 
 ol)taining a certificate of title. Be Leelie, 23 
 O. R. 143. 
 
 Jurisdiction— /'n.'V!'.;j; Lniuh.]— An Ontario 
 Court will not grant a decree for redemption of 
 a mortgage over lands in Manitoba at suit of a 
 judgment creditor of a mortgagor, win se judg- 
 ment being registered is, by statute in Mani- 
 toba, a charge i < 1. +he lands, the judgment 
 
 .XVir. ItKcISTRATION. 
 
 Building Mortgaee—Sulintfiiifnl Mort'jinji — 
 Prioiilns- Aiiiilinition uf llnjislry Acl.]-Scf 
 Piern v. Caiiaila Pirminuiil I., d- S. Cu,, 'li 
 (). 1!. 420, '.T) O. K. 071, i)o,-<l (iSO. 
 
 Indian Lands — Mor/ijat/e hifort I'nimi — 
 Xutin — J'l-iunlift.] — See AV limd v. Wi/.-'Oii. i'^ 
 O. R. rjo'J, iml 085. 
 
 Judgment— ^V(«/f(^'( — Prioritkx,] — Si < Mill' t 
 v. DiKjijaii, 21 fS. C. R. 33, ante 57S. 
 
 Witness — Ajjiilavil of Execution — Irri'ijnlnr- 
 iti/.\-Sie IluiJifU'Uir v.' lioobr, 22 A. R. 175. 
 20 S. C. R. 41, i>oM .S02. 
 
 XVIII. 
 
 RlliliTS AND LlAniMTIKS INDtR 
 iSEVEKAL MoRT(iAta;S. 
 
 Priorities— /«'»i7(/(»;/ Mortijwje. ]— After juir 
 chasing land under an agreement which pro\ i • il 
 that $2,000 of the purchase money was tn i 
 seiturcd by mortgage subsequent to a buil aiiig 
 loan not exceeding S12,(IOO, the purcha.-icr ex- 
 ecuted a building mortgage to a loan company 
 for $!ll,ri(iO, which was at once registered, but 
 only part of that sum was then advanced. The 
 plaintiff, who had succeeded to the rights of tin 
 vendor under the above agreement, then ngio- 
 tercd her mortcaee for -S2,O00. and claimeil 
 priority over sulTsequent advances made by the 
 loan company under their mortgage, but with- 
 out actual notice of the plaintill's mortgage, or 
 of the terms of the agreement for the sale of the 
 land : — 
 
m 
 
 MORTOAQE. 
 
 >tli liavintj tliiniicilij 
 
 jn.i See S'eurli It \ . /)-/ 
 
 ISTRATION. 
 
 Hol.l, KoLuitMoii, .1., .liMMcntlii«, tliat the pluiii. 
 titl wiiH Hot eiititli-cl t(i til., iiiinrity <laiii.f.l l.v lu r 
 
 Drl'IMInli ,,t h'flglH )., '.M (). I-. ,(._.,•. ,1,. 
 
 vorHfil. 
 
 IVi- II.,y,l, (;._The fiirtli.T a.lvmuox «er.. 
 fiMil.) upon a inortKilKU lih.viiliiiu' Ic.r xiii'li u.l- 
 UML','*, aii.l to »wiiie vvlii,,!, i|„. 1, yul ,.„t,,,t,. 1„„1 
 k'l'U .M.nvi!y(.(|, and r<niity :..n woll us 1 m i,i„ 
 tictml th.^ hrst mort«iij;i. v, u,lvautai.',M,iislv 
 plaoeil, aN a!,Miii«t tlm «iil,,o(|iiciit moir.M-J 
 fViMi thoUKli lvKJ.Mt.Ti..l, wli.i,. Moti.f lia<l imUiH 
 a tni.t liuL'ii t'liiiiiiiiiiiiiati'il to thr lirst iiioitga •ii. 
 ri'.spoctiiij; llif sul)siM|iiciit iiiMlniiiiciit, iiiul flio 
 K.'ifiHtry Act, (li,| iK.r, apply. /'/.<■,> v. Cnmn/n 
 I'Tiiiit Ill-Ill l.iiaii mill Sarin, n Ci,,^ •.>.-, o. K. (i7| 
 .Alliriiiril l)y tlic Coiiit iif Appciil, '.>;! A. K." 
 .NVt- now r»7 Vict, di, ;m (O.). 
 
 Vriov\tioB — I'ln/iiiiniH i,,/ striiiiij,r~Ay njn 
 iiinii.\- \ testator .Icvisfil tlio n'orth h, if ,,;■ 
 his tarni to one mom und the cast half o tl - 
 smith lialf to another .soil, the latter hall : u, 
 .■iul.jcct to iiiorlKa-c. 'j'hc. ,lcvi.suc oithc ii(,r>.' 
 halt made sever.d payiiiciits to the iiiortua' cc. 
 without any (leniaiid troiii them, ivdueiie. tho 
 !ii..ll,'ai,'e del.t to ahoiit .slOO. 'nn.. ,luvi.sue of : 
 the eawt hall of the Month half yavc a ni .rt-iKe ' 
 (Ml his laii.l, thi.s niortHayec, l.efcae ndv.MoeinK ' 
 the money. c(minin!iieatinj,' with the former 
 .iiiortga;,'ce.s and ohtaininj,' from them u state- 
 ment shewing the l.alaiiee duo to he ahont s|U(», 
 uiid then rcKisteriiig the nK.rti'aye. Siil.se' 
 (liienlly the owner of the north half pahl this 
 haluncc and took an a,v-ij^iiiiient expressed to he 
 111 e.Hisi.leriition of >f\, and in lhe.se i.nrcecdin.'s 
 lie claimed that he was entitled to hold the 
 aHd^'iiiiieut; for the fnll anioiint paid hy him •— 
 Held, per liugarty, C. ,J. ()., ,i„d Onler,',!. 
 A., that there was nothing,' to shew that the 
 IiayiiientH, other than the last, were nia.lo on 
 the tailh of getting,' the ansi^r„„ieiit, and that 
 even il they had l.ecn .so nia le, the right to an 
 ii>sigiiment was an eipiitahle one and could not 
 prevail against the duly registered secon.l mort- 
 gage. 
 
 Per Hiirton, J. A., that, on tho evi.haiee it 
 was not shewn that the iiayiiients luul heen made 
 with the iiitentidii of taking an a-signnieiit 
 
 Per .Maclemian, J. A., that the payments I.y 
 the devisee of the north half were pioperly made, 
 ni view of the iio,ssible resort to the north hall' 
 in case of deliuieney in value of the Boiitli half I 
 hut that the e(piitalde right could not prevail I 
 against the duly registered second inortg;e.c 
 
 in the result the judgment of Meredid, T) , -Zi 
 O.R. ;!.M,_wasallirincd. MrMdliui v. McS/ikan, ' 
 -1 A. \\, i{43. 
 
 riyits. firuini v. .lA-/.,,,,,, Is (). H. r-.TJ. and 
 
 *iV" I ■■,'"'";;''""■• '" "'• "• ""'•'• <li«t''>«"Uh.!(l. 
 Mr/.ii,,/ V. n<i,//„iiil., ■>:,(), K. IIS. 
 
 Right to AMlKnment (:,i,.i,/i,/„tioH.\ — 
 Alortgagors of land sold it »iil,ject to tho 
 
 t-'i.^". tl"'- purehahcr giving them a Heuoiid 
 
 inorlgage to seuiiie part of the purehase money. 
 Me liieii sold the land Huhj, ,;t to both mort- 
 gages, which his siili piircliu.scr cow minted to 
 pay oil. ,Suh.seipieiuly the (ir8t nnirtmiKorH, 
 nnder threat of action, paid the claim otl.hu 
 Inst inortgiij/ees, nud took an assignment of th« 
 lirsi inorlgag. to leie of tie ir miml.er : ■ 
 
 Hehl, tliat the sul.puiviiiMr, on being culled 
 ,on by the liisi ne.rtgagor» and first [.iirehiiHer 
 I t Indemnity agaiiisl the lirst mortgage, was 
 I bon 1.1 to pay it. and was not entitled to an 
 assign, lent thereof, wuliont also paying th« 
 seeoii._ -lortgagu, Tliunii'-'ni v, \\\uwkk;-l\ A. 
 
 Kir ,.t, to Assignment — t'lirniinii.] _ '|'|,o 
 n-.'j.ci- ol property m,.itKag,.,l it to the plaintiir, 
 aiKi then sold .subject to tlie mortgage, takinu 
 lioiii the purchaser a second mortgage aa part 
 ot Ins piirehase money, which he assigiid to tho 
 pl mitlll. I he piirclias..r tlici, .s,dd to one of the 
 iletemlaiits, who, to obtain an extensi-m of time 
 'in the tirst iiKM-tgagc, entered into a covenant 
 uith the plamtiir to pay il, and afti^rvvards Hold 
 tlie property. 
 
 In a foreclosure action the plaintiir claimed 
 
 an order for the payment of the lirst niortgagu 
 
 I by toe eovi'iiiuitor umler his covenant, and the 
 
 [latter refused to pay tUr ,iiii()i:iit dii.' on it 
 
 I unless the |ilaiiil ill' would assign the inorlgaKe to 
 
 j Held, 111, It the plaintiir was not bound to 
 j a.ssigii to the covenaiiior unless he paiil ofr both 
 : mortgages. Miiltli-ljuri/ v, Tai/lar, -JiJ () R 
 
 Prloritles->V«/;)v,r/-,^-„„, |_The plaintiir paid 
 ell a lirst niortgago on certain hands, an.l iiro- 
 cured its discharge, taking a new mortgage to 
 himself tor the amount of the advance in ignor- 
 wice el the fact of the existence of a .second mort- 
 gage, s.iortly afterwards <,ii ascertaining this 
 fua he notitie.l the defendant, the holdc " that 
 le woiihl pay it olf, und liie defendant, relviin' 
 tliuruoii, look no steps to enforce his secnnty! 
 hiiljseciuently, on the property becoming de- 
 preciate, and the mortgagor insolvent, the 
 plaintili bi.iught an iK'tion to have it. declared 
 that he was entitled to stand in the position of 
 nrst mortgagee : — 
 
 Hehl, that the plaintiff hy his acts and con- : 
 duct had precluded himself from asserting such , 
 
 Right to Assignment— /'((l/ma(^ I -Where 
 
 II mortgagor of hind siibse.pieiitly conveyed lug 
 e.|iiity of redemption to several grantees, one of 
 whom agreed to pay oir the mortgage, ami some 
 ol w^hoiii also executed further i.iortgages uixm 
 'he land, and the lirst mortgagee proceeding to 
 -reclose and to sue the mortgagor upon hiH 
 covenant, the hitter rei|Uested hiiiTto as.sign his 
 
 I mortgage to a third party who had advance.! 
 
 I tlie money and paid otrthe mortgage :— 
 
 Hehl that the tirst inortg.agce" was bound 
 under K. .S. (). ch. lOl.', sec. 2, to execute the 
 
 ; assignment as asked, notwithstanding tho siib- 
 setpient incumbrances. Tiiriin v. Smith "0 
 
 .i!l Ch. 1). CSti, followed. ' ' 
 
 I'er P.oyd, C. Kveu if the redempthm money 
 had been that ot the mortgagor himself, it would 
 have made no ditlereiiee, Qwin.i CoUeiit v 
 ; (:la.i-U,ii, L'o (). 1!. !.•«(■.'. 
 
 Right to Assignment— AivweK/'.]— Where 
 the plamtiir, the mortgagor of certain lands, 
 sol. the same for a sum in excess o( the amount 
 ot Ills mortg.age, the i)urcliaser raising such 
 excess by a mortgage to the defendant, the 
 •■rij^iiial mortgagee, the plaiiitiU' was held 
 entitled to an assignment <if the mortgage ma.lo 
 by him on his paying the defendant merely the 
 amount _ due thereon. Whttkr v. Brooke., 2« 
 U. R, 96. 
 
MORTGAGE. 
 
 m 
 
 Right to Assignment— TnH-Ui;i — Coii^oli- 1 
 do/i(*i(.]— Tlif |)lMiiitillM, litiiiL,' iiiurtiiagoes in 
 posscssidii of certain lands, af ti iwjuds auijiiircd 
 l)y transfer a sccoml niortL'ayc on tliu siunt; 
 projiurty, ami sirmI tlio fovciiantora in tlio first 
 mortgago, wlio liad luuted '.villi tlu' tijuity of' 
 rediinption bcl'orc! tliu sipond niortgaj.'u wan i 
 givtn, and wlio demanded a roconv,.'janee njjo'.i 
 payment of tiie amount of the lirst mortgage 
 Huhjcet to eijnities of redeniplion existing in' 
 other (larties : — ! 
 
 Held, tliat the defendants \vere entitled to 
 tliiii, and thai tin.' [ilaintiUs eould not taek the: 
 iiniount of the seeund mortgage to the first and j 
 re(|uirc payment of liotli. ! 
 
 Kdtmilrd v. Trollvp". ;J!) Cli, D. (!;j(i, fi.lUnved. ' 
 The defendants before uetion tendered, with I 
 tli(^ amount due on the lirst mortgage, an .issigii- I 
 nient tliereof, v.hicli the plainlills.lieing niiM t- ! 
 gagee.s in ))OHsessioii, were not iiouml and' 
 declined to give, under R. S. (). eh, \{V2, sec. '1, 
 and subseiiuently, but without tender, the 
 defendant oM'ered to take a reeonvevanee : — 
 
 Held, that the plainl ills' claim to" consolidate 
 was iKit miseondiiet so as to deprive them of 
 their costs of the action. 
 
 iJecision of Street, J., varied u)ion the <iuea- 
 
 tion of costs. Stark v. lUiil, I'li ( ». I!. lT)?. 
 
 Sec Iti' Union Assurance Co., -J,'! O. 1!. Gl'7, 
 ante 009. 
 
 XIX. Tl.MllKK ON .MoRToA(iKI) LaND.S. 
 
 See Steicart v. Ji'dir^nm, 'J:2(\ \l. i":!,'), .;.,/'.: ii'C; 
 BrcthoHv V. Brovb, i.*.'! I). K. (i,")S, -Jl A. 11. 114,' 
 anti' OTS. 
 
 X.\. Trespass to Moutcackh Lanijs. ' 
 
 I 
 
 Possosslon — Mi,rl<jaii(,r and .Uoiii/ai/i-e — | 
 Trails/, r „/ /;(/,;•««/.]— Under the Xov'a Seotia I 
 Judicaliire Act the owner of the cijuiiy of' 
 redenijnion can maintain an action for trespass 
 to mortgaged property and injury to tile free- 
 hold, though after the tresp.iSK ami liefore action ' 
 liroughi he has parted with liis eipiity ; (iwyniie, 
 J., di.--.'eiitiiig. 
 
 Mortgagees out of possessit.n cannot, after | 
 their inrerest has ceased to exist, maintain an ' 
 action lor such trespass and iiijurv eon,, littcd j 
 while tluy held tlie title. 
 
 Per (avyniic, J.— ,\ mortgagee in ])osse,-sion 
 at the time the ti-espass and injury is commit- I 
 ted is the only person damnified thereby, and 
 can maintain an action therefor after he has j 
 parted with his inter c, nor is lie estopped I 
 therefrom by having consented to a sale to one ' 
 of the trespassers of the perscjiial pnjperty as to 
 which the trespass was committed. The tort; 
 feasors eoiild not set .p such estoppel, even ' 
 though the amount recovered from them witli ' 
 the sum received liy sueli mortgagee for liis 
 interest ^;hould exceed his .'jirrtgage de))t. 
 Broohjiild v. liroiru, •_'•_' S. C. R. ;i98. 
 
 Vacant Ijands—.l/or/'/fr.'/fe—A'/(?)\y.]-- Where 
 a right, to eiiUy has accrued to a niortgiigee 
 witliout actual entry by him, and the mortgaged 
 lands ai'e sul)S(M|ueiitly left vacant before a title 
 by possession liaa been acquired by anyone the 
 
 eonstruetivc pfi.ssessioii tluieof is in the mort- 
 gagee, and the Statute of Limitations does net 
 mil against him so .-.s to t-xtiiig.iii-h his till,, t,, 
 thol.iiids; the mortgage lieing in default, ami 
 no piesumjition of payment arising, 
 
 An action of trespass to vacaiil lands will Ij, 
 liy the mortgagee thereof. 
 
 In such ail aelion, .alter the l.ir.ds had been 
 vacant for many years, and the mortgagee luui 
 then made an actual entry and was'subse- 
 (jnently ilisposscssed, and tlie lamls taken by ,i 
 railway comiiany lor the purposes of ih'eir 
 uiideitaking. lu'was iuld entitled to reeovi'r the 
 value of the land as <i,im,'iges, to be held by him 
 as security lor bis mortgage moneys, the 'mm |. 
 gagor being entitled to redeem in resiiect of iIk 
 damages, as be would have been in resjieet m 
 the land. UiUuiiy v. Camii/i'tn /'achir 1; If 
 Co., L'l U. R. 11. 
 
 XX!. -MisiEi.i.ANKofs Casks. 
 
 ^ Company— Wiii'lniij-up - -Fundosiire — S', ,„. 
 rifi/ fur li:d„iv ui(iil—-l',aiil.\-<.]~Q\\ a jietiliMU 
 by a mortgagee in the winding-up proceedin-s 
 of a company, under R. S. (_:. eh. I'.'i), a.-kim' 
 for the conveyance to him by the li(|uidatnT 
 of the companys eijuily of redemption, tlu; 
 Couit has jurisdiction to make the usual or.ier 
 for foreclosure or sale. 
 
 it is a matter of iliscretion with tlu' Cnnrt 
 whether an action v.'ill Ijc directed or summary 
 proceedings sanctioned. 
 
 A mortgage upon land, given to .'•eciiii m- 
 dorseliu'iit, upon negotialile paper to be made ly 
 the mortg.ig.e for the beuelit of the moitg.|,.;oi', 
 becouus operative only upon the indor.-eii.i nts 
 lieing made ; and an assignment of such mort- 
 gage to a bank, before the making of thi; imlcaso 
 nieiits. is not .-i violati<in of see. A'l of the Uankiiig 
 Act, R. S. C. ch. 1-Jt). y.V Ks.<(..f Land ,i,i,l 
 Tiiubri- (n.— TriiiU\-i Case, 21 U. R. ."UiT. 
 
 Creation oi Tenancy by Mortgage. ] - Sre 
 
 Ifoh/is V. (Jidnii'i l.i.aii and Jhlin.tiirc Co., In S 
 j C. 1!. 4,s;;, a„n !iO,"). 
 
 Crpclitors— J/o)'A/n,'/(:(s — ^'ali'ntari/ .S./lh- 
 : ;«(-»/. ]—.MoitLagees of land are not, n'wi\-\y hy 
 i reason of their position as .-luch, creditors i.i the 
 i iiiortgag(jr within the I:! Kli;^ eh. ,">, nor is the 
 I mortgage debt a <lebt within that statute, uniess 
 I it is shewn that the mortgage security at the 
 , time of the alleged tiansfer was of less \. duo 
 than the aiiKjuiit of the loan, 
 i \\'liere, therefore, shortly after the makiii;; nf 
 j a mortgage, the mortgagor, otherwise fin.inci- 
 ! ally alile to do so, made^ii voluntary settKiinat 
 on liis wife of certain property, tlu^ va.in ef 
 the mortgaged property at the time i liiig 
 greatly in excess of the amount of the loan, .iiiil 
 deemed by all parties to be ample security, iiinl 
 no intention to defraud being shewn, the set- 
 tlement was nphehl : although, from the stiigiM- 
 tion in real estate when the mortgage inaln'ic.i, 
 a sale of the property for tlie jmiount of tlic 
 indelitediiess thereon could not be etlectul, 
 Ci-'^inhk V. y<:!n!ij, 2(\l). R lO!. 
 
 Cutting Down Absolute Conveyance to 
 
 Mortgage. ]--,sVe MrA/irir.ii v. VvUtviu lUmk, 
 
 tio s. c. R. .-)-is, untv ;i;<,s. 
 
 Ill 
 
m 
 
 lliiici'f is in tlio iiii.i't- 
 if I.iiiiitah'oiiN (lo(-s not 
 ) (.'Xtillijllisli liis title to 
 i lifiiig in (li'fiiiilt, :uiil 
 ■lit ai'isiiij:, 
 (I VlK.'llIlt Iniulh Mill li, 
 
 VV till' l.ll'.ds llilll 1;,.|.|, 
 
 i>inl till' iii(ri-t;,'agci; luul 
 ■ntiy ami \\as siilisi'. 
 1 tlic laiiiln taken Ijy a 
 lie |nir|i(ises of th'eir 
 entilleii toreedvcr the 
 iges, Id Iio lit'lil liy Inin 
 ago nidiieys, tlie niort. 
 jileini in respect of the 
 vu l.een in lespert u! 
 •ilKli/i'ln I'lifljir II, ]y 
 
 NKofs C;asi;s. 
 
 ;) - Fun dd^nri: — Si , u 
 r(»/v. I - On a jietiti.u 
 iniliiig-ui) imiceediii 's 
 S. C:. cli. fJi), usliiiig 
 iin liy the liciuidatdi 
 ' iif redeinptii)!!, tlu: 
 I make the usual iin'.er 
 
 etioii with tlie Cniirt 
 ; direuted or suniiiiiuy 
 
 . L,iven to .'•eeuK :ii 
 (! l';i[iei' to he nuidr l^y 
 lelit of the nioitua;:or, 
 l:oii ihu indor.^ei!,, nts 
 ;iinient of siieh inort- 
 making of the indorse- 
 see. 4") of tlie liaiikiiig 
 /.'(' A'xxc.r J, and unit 
 
 . •->! o. R. ;i(i7. 
 
 by Mortgage. ] - .sVc 
 d 1 hill lit II n- Co., In tS. 
 
 < — ^'iih'iiliiri/ S. fill-- 
 ml are not, nn'i.ly liy 
 
 sueh, ereditoi's ct liic 
 'Ai.:. oh. ."), nor i.s ihe 
 lin that statute, inil.ss 
 tgagu seenrity al tlio 
 <fer WHS of less \,!liie 
 an. 
 
 ly after the makiii;;iif 
 ir, otherwise lln.nKji- 
 
 voluntary setth im nt 
 :'ol)erty, the va.iir of 
 
 lit tli(! time i I iiii; 
 lount of the loan, .liiii 
 ample security. ;aiil 
 icing shewn, the x't- 
 ugh, from the Ntagini- 
 le mortg.age nialiiicii, 
 ir the amount of the 
 lid not he elleutnl. 
 ;, 1!)-!, 
 
 ute Conveyance to 
 
 \'<'.H V. OutUfilJ JlitliL 
 
 685 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Devisee- /)r,.o/»,'/„;( of ]■:..!„ t,^ ylc/.l— The 
 .levisceot real estate under the will of a testa- 
 tor, ,sul)iect to the Devolution of Kstatcs Act 
 ami amen.lments, has a trau.smi.ssihle interest in 
 
 lie lands during the tweUe i ,ths after the 
 
 death Of the testator, pending which time they 
 are vested hy the Act m the legal personal 
 reiireseiit.itn es. 
 
 And w-i. re real ..state devised hy a will so 
 .xiihjeet of which letters of administration with 
 the will annexed had hcen granted during the 
 twelve months succeeding the testator's death, 
 hilt as to which no caution had ever heeu 
 registered, was, during such period, mortgaged 
 l)y the devisee in good faith :— 
 
 Held, that the mortgageMasoper.ativehetwccii 
 the devisee and tiie mortgagee when made, and 
 became fully so as to the land ami a-ain.st the , 
 personal repiesentatives when the year expired, ! 
 Ill the ali.senee of any warning that it was needed 
 fw their puipiLses y,V McMilUui, McMillan v. ^ 
 McMillan, L'-l O. It. isi. ; 
 
 Highway— r/o.s//i</ of — Ailjainhni LamU—' 
 hi'llil" <>1 jrvrtijaij(:e.]~A mortgagee of land ' 
 adjoining a highway is one of the persons in 
 whom the ownersliip of it is vested for the pur- 
 poses of snlj-see. !l of sec. ,")."iO of the Consf.lidated 
 Municipal Act, 1!S!I2, and as such is entitled to 
 pre-emiition thereunder, snl,ject to the right of 
 the mortgagor to redeem it .along with the mort- 
 gage, or to have it sold to the inorlgaL'or siih- 
 ject to the mortgage, if the mortgagor to prefer. 
 Jlnmn v. llu-^iuy, -.li) O. K. U12. 
 
 Indian LanAs— Pali )it—\oHre - /,'. i/isiraHon 
 -Prw ;/;„.]_ A ]iateiit .f Jn.linn lands was 
 ohtaiiied hy the patentee hy virtue of his title 
 under certain assignments from the original 
 locatoe duly registered in the lndi;,n Department, 
 and it appean d that certain iirior as.signec. froni 
 tliehieatee had executed a mortgage on the laiid.s ! 
 to the iiiaintid', of which the pa'tentee had no • 
 actual notice, neither the assignment to the ' 
 mortgagors nor the mortgage having heen regis- \ 
 tercd ill the (ie)iartiiieiit, tliough the mortgage 
 was registered in the county registry otlice,°aiid 
 the plaintiff now sought to foreclose !iis mort- i 
 gage :— | 
 
 Held, that the patentee was entitled to I 
 prioiity over the mortgage to the extent of the j 
 nionevs paiil lor ohtaining the jiatent, and that I 
 the registration of the mortgage in the county! 
 registry otlice Mas not notice toliiin. llf Htnl v ' 
 WilMi, -22 V. R. T; ,";•_'. 
 
 Rectification of Mortgage.]— 5't Utirrxon 
 LvvilnrCo. V. /.'limit. -.M S. C. R. 'JUS, aiiti' :\:;S ; 
 Billari.ij V, Jkiiliitroir, L'f (.). R. -JTS, ant,- .'i.'W. 
 
 Sale — IJi.ilrilniliiin ,,f Snrpln.i — A.-:«!ijninint 
 for liiiieiil <;/■ Vriditiivs—l'iiiii-itii Onr Exivu- 
 ho),.s.]_ Where, after a .sale of mortgaged pre- 
 mises 111 an action for that purpose, tlie mort- 
 KiiJJ'ir made an assignment for the hcnelit of his 
 ercihtors under R. ,S. O. eh. VH, hefore cer- 
 tain lirior execution creditors had estahlished 
 tiioir claims in the Master's (Jtlice to the halaiice 
 "f liii: hase money, after satisfying the amount 
 "1 llic mort^.age ; — 
 
 Held, that the assignee for creditors was 
 eiitith d to such halance freed from any liahility 
 to .satisfy ihe executions out of it. Carta- v. 
 tiloni:, 20 O. R. ;W0. , 
 
 MORTMAIN. 
 
 .S'fc Wii.i,, IV. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 I. Ai'i'iioi'KiATiDN FdiiKxi'r.MiiTn:!:, (iST. 
 
 11. Akiiiti;atiiins rM,i:i; tiik .ML\irir\i, 
 A( •]'. 
 
 1. <li III rill,'!/, liST 
 
 2. I)rain(iiji Main ri, (illo. 
 
 III. lhiM-si:s,KM.:MfTiiiNs,AM.l'uiviLi:(.iis, 
 
 IV. I!l:ll)i;|>;, ll!!,?. 
 
 V. liuii.mNiis, i)!)l. 
 
 VI. 1jY-1.\Ws. 
 
 1. Ahscnri of /li/.linr, (i|)4, 
 
 •2. Motion-' to Qiii'.''h, (JO.j. 
 
 :i. J'itii:on.i/ur, (iO.i. 
 
 4. I'roadui-i' nt ^ff■l_linl/s of Council, G<hi. 
 
 0. Pnliliiiilinn, G!ll). 
 (i. Hi'jlslnitioii, G9(). 
 
 7. Ji'i-'olnlions n/Coiinci/, C)ii~. 
 N. SHl.tnl.-<.-iion to Rntrpayerii, 097. 
 !). (illin- Va.ti'.i, (i9,S. 
 
 VII, CoNTIIAlls, (IDS. 
 
 VIII. (.;iiNTl;ovi:iiTi:ii Ki.ki -iions, (j!)!). 
 
 IX. CONVIITKIVS fMlj:li :MLMr[PAL P>Y- 
 
 LAws, 70:.'. 
 
 X. DuAiNAfii:. 
 
 1. Artlunxfor Damuiijix, 70.3. 
 
 2. Addid Ti:rritory, 70.3. 
 
 3. Arhitralionn nnder IJrainaiie Lav;i. 
 
 703. 
 
 4. A.-'sc.-<s)nijii, 704. 
 
 5. Bii-lau-.t, 704. 
 
 6. iJrainaije Trial-- Art, iSOl, 700. 
 
 7. Drain.! KxtiniUnij tliroiujh Several 
 
 Jilunirijialititu, 708. 
 
 8. Mandinnn-^ 710. 
 !). Kfijliij, lu-e, 712. 
 
 10. Pi-tilii.ns, 712. 
 
 XI. p]xri;iii'i:iATioN ok Land, 714. 
 XII. HiiiiiWAVs, 714. 
 
 XIIJ. LiAiiir riv loi: Xi:(ii.ic.i;N( k. 
 
 1. Xc,n-ri)nrir if Iruildiiiij, 71"). 
 2. Kui-u,u:r if Iliijliwaij,-,IQ. 
 
€87 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 3. AV/fV/" oi'nr Af/niml Third Parlie» 
 
 71H. 
 
 4. Olliir Cd.iey, 720. 
 
 XI \'. LlCKNSI.Nd I'oWKliS, 720. 
 
 XV, Local I.Mi'UdviniKNTs, 722. 
 XVI. Xiii'iri: ('!■' AcTiiiN, 72."i. 
 XVir, Nl'is\.n(i;, 727. 
 
 Win. 0|.|-|('|:ks OF C'llKI'ulIATHlNS, 727. 
 
 XIX. I'MiKs, 72,S. 
 
 X.\. Fi;oiiiinToi;v PowKUs, 'p^. 
 
 XXI. Skal, 72!». 
 
 XXII. Skwci.'s, 720. 
 
 XXIII. WATKItWOKKS, 7.'!0. 
 
 Ml'MCIl'AL ASSDSSMKXT AND TaXK.S— ScC 
 ASSKSSMKNT AND TaXES. 
 
 I. Ai'i'Kipi'uiATioN ^■ol^ Exi'kxditirk. 
 
 Illegality — AiiiiHlinciil—Iii<ihU of Elinor— 
 1'imi.\-'ll was enacted by sec 12 'of -12 & 43 
 \\vt. ch. ");> i(^) ) ihtil any nmnioipal elector 
 nii^'ht deinaml uie annulment of the coi'ijorate 
 «piiiM|)riation tor expenditure within three 
 inonlha frojii the date thereof on the ground of 
 illegality, Init that tliereufter the right was 
 preserilied and tlie appropriation valid :— ■_,_,. 
 Held, that on the expiration of the three 
 niontlis, upon a non-juridical day, the elector's 
 statutory rigiit \va.- at an end, and could not be 
 extended by auy ]iroi?edure clause (see sec. 3 
 of the Civil Procedure Code) which presupposed 
 an existing right of action and regulated its 
 exercise. Jhrliini- v. City of Montreal, [1894] 
 A.* \j, 040, 
 
 Remarks as to the great expense of land urlii- 
 trations under the Municipal Act. In re 
 Cliri.tlif ami Torvnlo J iimlioii, 22 A. li. 21. 
 Afiirmed by the Supreme t'ourt of Can. da ■ "i 
 S. C. R. 5,-)l. 
 
 Compensation— Aa'/iro/ic/a^/oM — Date of Jh/. 
 law— Motion to Sd A-ilil, Ainird—Tlin,:]— 
 When a municipal cori)orafion exjjropriates 
 lands, the date of tlie passing of th(^ liylatv 
 defining the hinds and tlie nature of tiie rights 
 rci)uirc(l is the date in relation to which the 
 compensation should l)e assessed. 
 
 Judgnientof Falcoiduidgc, J., reversed. Osier 
 J. A., dissenting. " ' 
 
 Section 4 of ,-)2 Vict. cli. 13 (O.), which re- 
 ipiires motions to set aside awards of a specilied 
 kind to be made witlrn fourteen days from 
 the filuig tlicreof, and .sec. of tlie .sa'nie Act, 
 whicli allow.s motions to set aside awards ot' 
 another kind, to lie made witliin three niontii.s 
 from the niakinu' and jjulilication tliereof, do 
 not apjily to arl.itratior.s under tlie .Municipal 
 Act, and a motion made on the lOtii February, 
 1801, to set aside an award made in an arbi- 
 tration under the Municipal Act on the 31st 
 Decemlier, ISIIO, and tiled on the 10th .Tanuary, 
 1801, was held to lie in time. 
 
 I'he scope and meaning of the several sections 
 ot the Act considered. Jn re I'ritfieand Toronln 
 
 19 A. R. rm. 
 
 ^ Sen In rr. (Mrcr and CUy of Ottawa, 20 A. R. 
 620, ])iisl (107 ; Villai/r of Ue.orijelown. v. Slim-son, 
 23 O. R. 33, post (iSJU ; Iler/iiia ex rel. Caranai/h 
 V. ,V;;i,7/(, 26 O. It. 032, />ost 700 ; Fleniin,/ V. 
 City ff Toronto, 20 O. R. .^47, 10 A. R. 318. 
 po/it 723. 
 
 II. AkBITKATIO.NS ir.NDKIt THE MuXICIPAL AcT. 
 
 1. Generally, 
 
 Appeal — Increase of Award — Expeme.]— 
 Held, jier Hagarty, ('..T.U., and Jlaclenuan, 
 J. A., tliat in an arbitration within sees. 401 
 and 404 of the ( ,'onsolidated .Municiiial Act, 55 
 Viet. eh. 42(1).), a Judge to whom an appeal] 
 18 taken .ngainst the award cannot, merely on I 
 his own understanding of the evidence an.' oi. j 
 s, view of the premises, increase tiie amount i 
 awarded. , 
 
 Per liurton and Osier, JJ. A., that the Judge i 
 can deal with the award on the merits, and can 
 iucrea.se or rcdijen tb.e amount or vary the deci- 
 sion as to costs. I 
 In the result the judgment of Rose, J., 24 ' 
 O. R. 443, was allirmed. 
 
 Compensation— /.((/((/.v fnjnrinn.iiy A fUded— 
 Joint Work //// City ami W/h/////. |--\Vhcre a 
 bridge over .a riv(;r, "which formed' tiie boundary 
 line between a city and a township, witliin a 
 county, was erected by the councils of tlie city 
 and county jointly, and in raising the aiiproaches 
 on the township side certain huids Were injuri- 
 ously afi'ected, for which the owner clainicil 
 compensation fmin both municipalities :— 
 
 Held, by jinyd, ("'. , that, liaving regard to sec. 
 4S3 of the ^hinieipal Act, ."i.") \'icl. ch. 42(0.), 
 the owner had no remedy except bv arbitratiuii 
 under the Act. Pratt \. Citi/ if Stratford 14 
 O. li. 2(i0. 10 A. |{. 5, followed. 
 
 Held, also, that the ease was covered bv sec. 
 301 of the Act ; tlie exiirussion " a muiiicip;'d cor- 
 poration," by force of the Inter|iretation Act, R. 
 S. O. ch. 1, sec. 8 (24), lieiiig capable of being 
 read as a plural. 
 
 ^ Held, also, that it was competent for the 
 County .ludge to appoint the same arliitriitdr 
 for both corporations, upon their making default 
 in naming an arliitiator, and that ho could pro- 
 ceed to do so i:c parti'. 
 
 Held, lastly, that sec. 4^7 did nut apply to 
 
 the case of a joint claim aj.'ainst city and ceunty. 
 
 Prolii))ition to the arbitrators refused. 
 
 Held, liy the (jlueen's lUiich !)ivisioii, that, 
 
 having ixyvrd to sees. .■)30, 532, and ."i.'ij of 
 
 the Mnnicipal Act, .").". Vict. ch. 42, tlie county 
 
 only could be comiielled to arbitrate in respect 
 
 of such coni]iensation. Pratt v. City if Stnd- 
 
 fo)d, 10 A. R. 5, followed. 
 
 Held., also, that sec. .■;',) 1 did not apply to 
 permit an arbitration belueeii the laiid-nwnur 
 and (i:;.; city ami county to!,'etli<'r, nor was such 
 an arbitration otherwise pi'ovidcd for liy law. 
 
 Prohibition against proceeding with srjH an 
 arbitraticin. 
 
 Decision of P>oyd, V., reversed. A'" I'nm 
 minii-i and County of Carillon, 2.5 (J. R. 007, 'it) 
 O. R. 1. 
 
.689 
 
 j.it expense of land arbi- 
 liinicipal Ai!t. la »■« 
 I iiiiiCkiii, 22 A. ]!. 'Jl. 
 10 C'oiiit: of CuiK.da, :,.", 
 
 n-ojiriaOon — Dair- of Jh/. 
 I xi</( A ira nl — Tiiiic. ]i- 
 )ij)orati(Hi fxi)i()j)riatt:s 
 
 piissiu!,' of the liyluw 
 tlic iiiitui-o of the rij^lits 
 
 ifliitinii to wliifli the 
 
 asst'sseil. 
 iilgo.J., lovursed, Osier, 
 
 eh. 13 (().), whioh re- 
 lic awiirils of a specilied 
 Ml fourteen days from 
 ec. of the same Act, 
 to set aside awards <ti 
 li! within three iiiunths 
 ijMblii'atioii tliereof, do 
 IS luidoi' th(! .Mmiicipid 
 ' on the lOtii Feliriiary, 
 iVard made in an arl)i- 
 :oi)ial Aet on the .'jhst 
 d on the I'Jth daiuiary, 
 iine. 
 
 ,' of tlie several nx-tioiis 
 ( re Prillic and T'mmt'i, 
 
 '■■.' /iijnntmxh/ Ajhcti-A— 
 (I. C'iiiiilii.\~~^\\'\Kr(: a 
 h formed the linumliiry 
 a township, \vithin a 
 he eoiuicil.'j of the city 
 I raising tlie ajiproaches 
 ain liuids were injiiri- 
 h tlie owner claimed 
 nnnieipalilics ; — 
 t, having regard to sec. 
 , .") Viet. ch. 42(0.), 
 ' except li\' arliitraliim 
 Citil i<f Sti-aljorit, 14 
 lowed. 
 
 ic was covered liy .sec. 
 isioii " a innnici[ialccir- 
 Interpretation Act, R. 
 Iieilig capable of being 
 
 as competent for the 
 t the same arbitrator 
 m their niakiiiy default 
 .nd that he could pro- 
 
 4S7 did not apply to 
 rainst city and comity, 
 latois refused, 
 icncli Ilivisioii. that, 
 •:iO, 532, and .'i:{.5 ot 
 ^t. eh. 42, tlie county 
 ) aibitrate in respect 
 mil V. City <i/ Stmt- 
 
 )',tl did not apply to 
 ueeii the land-owner 
 ".'ether, nor w.is such 
 ■ovided for by law. 
 ceding with sivM an 
 
 rever.sed. 11'- <'nm 
 on, 2.5 (). H. (ji)7, 'id 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Compensation— /:»»,/., /i,j„ri„i,sl,/ Afri'ird— 
 L,„l,n,,i.\-.A railway coiiii'iany <d,tained per- 
 missimi troni a n.unicipai corporation to run 
 their ine along ,•,, c.-rtain .treet, agreeing not to 
 raise t^he gra,],. ,„ ,„„,, than a eert.in heiirht. 
 Ihcy bnill the hue and rai.-ed tlu- grade of the 
 street tc) more than the .sp,.cilie.l hei-lit. the 
 corporation not coiisentim,'. but not takin- anv 
 .steps to prevent the viohiticui of the io.ree- 
 iiieiit ; — '■^ 
 
 Held, atiirming tl..e .judgment of M.ae.Mahen 
 J., that as against the plainlitis. who were 
 owners of projicrtx- injiiri.uisly alic.Ucl by the ' 
 iu.authori/ed raising of the gra.le, the railway 
 company were liable in an action for dama-es • 
 but ; — " : 
 
 Held, also reversing the judgment of Mac- ^ 
 Mahon, J Maelenn.an, ,). A., dis.sentiin.'. that 
 as against the e(,rporation the jdaintitis were,' 
 restr.cte.l to the lemedy by arbitration, and 
 that in any event the eanse <,t action was not of 
 such a natnre a.s to entitle the corponition to ' 
 hrnig m the railway company under see. rm ' 
 (4)of R, S. O. ch. 184. Il„sk.n-!ll, v ('!l„ or' 
 O^'fcm, 20A. R. lOS. '' '' 
 
 ' (i. Tliat the arbitrator had jurisdiction to 
 award interest. 7,V M,„-p/„ r.-<on wnl Cuij of 
 Jonnto, 2(5 (). |;. ."),-,,s. ' •' 
 
 Maintenance of 'Bvidses- A mird~S«Uutr. 
 
 /,-/'"</. I-'I he .saving provisions (,f sec. J4 of 
 tie .Municipal Amendment Act, 1N!)4 T)? Vict 
 c'li. .'•' (().), do n„t operate so as by iinpjication 
 leecssardy to excln.le the application of the 
 Interpretation Act, K. .S. (). [.,', ,, «,,. g .^ 
 sec. 4,1. ' 
 
 A township corporation which had obtained 
 an award against a county corporation under 
 ■sec. .,,.!« of the l.'on.s.didaled .Municipal Act, 
 iM)_, „r part ot the est of the maintenance 
 -It certain bridges were, notwith.-^tanding the 
 
 '^t:'\7i- '•'''! ^:^' '''■ '■' "f ^T Vict. ch. 
 .)0 ((».), held entitled to recover the amount 
 expende.l .,n the same up to the date of the 
 ILLssing ot the latter Act. TurmM,. of Alc»-ri.s 
 \. ( 1,1111/1/ 01 //iimii, 2(i (). R. (iSO. 
 
 N aried by a Divisional C'ruirt, 27 O. U. 341. 
 
 CDmpensatlon—A',,7),-o/))-j„/,o»--( ,•,„._/-•,.; 
 
 ''"'"■': - f«'"' - I)t,/n-or.„„>i/. --I,it,n./.]^-A 
 mumeipal corpor.-ition expropriated lai.,1 for a 
 r.,:.d. under a by- aw which oe.scribed the land 
 ar.d provided -th.^tthe .same is herebv fike 
 and expropriated lor and established aiid eon- 
 hrnicd as a publu- higlnvay or drive," pursuant 
 to which the corpor.ution took possessio!, 
 
 Lpon appeal fr„ni an award bv which the 
 .and^nvners were allowed *:5.505 as eompei , 
 .on for the land taken, and .vlO.Oil,". for ot..-. ' 
 lands injuriously atiectcd, and interest on both ' 
 sums from the date of the by-law : — 
 
 Held, that where an arbitrator has Mewe.l ' 
 he premises, but h:is not procee.lcd upon his! 
 M.;w the Court shouhl not i.dve any -reater 
 etlecttohisfimlingsthan if he had mi^ ^H a 
 
 2. A.S to the weight of evidence : there was 
 ample tes';miony to warrant the arbitrator if 
 he gave credit to it, in his (in.lings ; ami it was 
 
 I,';' ten'.' ''.V ""'■*, '" '-"y "'"* '- ^''-I'l 1. ve 
 fl .r 1 .r"'"""' "^ '"'^ ''^ "'■ ^vitnesses to 
 tlut of the other, m a matter especially where 
 so much depends upon the opinions of per-K.ris 
 conversant with the value of land, basJd upon 
 then- k lowletlge of act.ial transaction.. ' 
 
 ■l Ihat the arbitrator was justitie.l in takin.r 
 mo account the potential value of the prop,.rtv' 
 
 hm'oWnF;'?;"'' "'''"■ ''"'"^■'"« f<"'tl.ec!,stof; 
 mpioMug It, as a means of arriving at its • 
 actua value Ip/ry y. <,'rr„t Korthrrn R '. I 
 
 Ink. Huron J,> (F. Co., 27 i;. C. I!. 42.-. ; and 
 ited. "'■ ^ «"'■'•*'"'. 98 U. S.R. 4(.3, fol- 
 
 ui,onIhi"'^'f''?'' '"'" ■''"••'^^■'''' ">"st be taken 
 " K,n the tace of the award to have been allowe.l 
 as purchase money of the land taken. J,!,^ 
 O^'^'-'^and (Ml.r A" W. Co., 12 O. P. 024,' 
 '■".'^•...f- 1- siit'L'ially referred to. 
 
 Dat^i,,, '!!f fl" ';""! '""f • f''"'» ""^ ''-'te of the ! 
 
 "uk ? " b T,/'^-^^'' ''" '''^^■"•''•1 '" ''■■^^•« ''-" I 
 
 w ,,. ' b ■ \T*-^' 'r'T'OViitUm, an.l interc.t ' 
 
 wa p, jable on the whole sum from that date. 
 
 .^> y hare UdUy 11. W. Co., L. R. I<) K(|. ' 
 
 Withdrawal from Arbitration. l-Sub-sec- 
 
 i.m(,ot .se,,.. lof4!. Vict. ch. (Hi (O.), the Don 
 
 Improvement Act, makes applicable to an arbi- 
 
 tral.on under that Act all the provisions of the 
 
 Consolidate,! .Municipal Act of 1 ,SS3 as to arbi- 
 
 avitions. including sec. 404. which enables the 
 
 council to refuse to r.-itify the award, and 
 
 not merely the provisions for determming the 
 
 .amount .;t cmnpensation ; (»sler, .I.A., dissent- 
 
 I nig on tins pmnt. 
 
 : I'er Osier, .1. A.-'riiou<.di the wording of sub- 
 . see 6 ot sec. 1 of 411 Vi,.t. ch. W (()!') is not 
 I wide enough to giv„ the ,.,mn,.il this power, 
 yet such power may be exercist,!, for the laml 
 expropriated under the Don Improvement Act 
 IS real property entered up.m, taken, or used bv 
 the corporation in the exercise of its powers, 
 within the meaning of sec. ;!li:{ of the Consoli- 
 dated Municipal Act of ISS3, 4(i \-iet. ch. 18 
 O. ), so that sec. 404 applies. /„ re McGoU ami, 
 Ctti/ of Toronto, 21 A. 1!. 2olJ. 
 
 2. /Jraliia;/!- J/a.^crs-. 
 See Sub-title, " Dh.vin.v(;e," X. 
 
 HI. Bonuses, E-XKiufTioNs, a.vu Privii.eoks. 
 
 Bonus — Faftort/~Goiidition.f—/lreach. 1— Bv 
 a Liydaw passed by the city of 'J'hreo Rivera 
 
 •>-O,(l0() to a lirm for ostaDlishing a saw-mUl 
 and a box factory within the citv limits, and a 
 I mortgage tor a like amount of .-<20,000 granted 
 I'V the lirni to the corporation on the 26th 
 .November, KSSti, it was provided that the entire 
 estaldishnient ot a value cpiivalent to not leas 
 than .v,;. 000 shouM b.j kept in operation forthe 
 space ot four consecutive years from the begin- 
 ning of sai, operation, and that 1.-50 people at 
 least should be kept employe.l during the space 
 of five months of each of the (,mr yn:,r'. Thn 
 null was. in operation in ,)une, ISStJ, and the 
 box f.actory on the 2nd N.ivember, 1,S86 Thev 
 
 ' '"""'* ea. I ployed III both establishments during that time. 
 
 44 
 
691 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 692 
 
 On a contostalion liy Buliseciuoiit liyi)i)tlic(.ary ' 
 claimants <it' an (iii])ositii)ii alin ih cviixi-rn r, 
 tiled l)y thu c(ir]ioriiii(>ii tor tin: aiudunt of tlicir 
 coiiditioiiHl iiiort.;iige on tlie procuds of sulu of 
 the proiiorty : — 
 
 Held, rovui'sing tlio judLnicut of tlie Couits 
 below, that t:\i i if the words "four ooiiBtuulive 
 yiar.s"reint four uoUKcutivo seasous, theio 
 Wrts amplf! uvidcnL-t.' that tlie whole estahli.sh- 
 iiii'tit was not in opirration as required nntil 
 Kovemher, 18Sli, when the niortj,'age was 
 granted, the mill only l.eiii^' completed and in 
 cj'eration during that . eabou ; and therefore 
 there had heen a hreath of the eonditions ; 
 Fooriiier, J., dissenting. City o/ I'liri.c. li'ircix 
 V. La JJiimiiu: (/ii I'l iijili , 'I'l S. C. R. 3o2. 
 
 Bonus — FatUnji — Cvmiiliniis — liritich — 
 Jitimaijix.] — 'J"he jjlaint ill's agreed to give to the 
 dclendants a liomis of >l, (:(,(! in five ecj'ial eou- 
 steutive annual ir.slalnients of .'I'l.'lKi each, in 
 KJiisideration of tlieir estalilishing a factory and 
 working it for ten years. The del'endai.ts eov- 
 ei anted to carry on the factoi'y, ai.d to tnijdoy 
 tl erein continucjusly not less than twenty 
 persons during the term. The agreeuicnt pro- 
 vided that the annual payn\ei!ts wire to cease 
 if the defend" ts ceased to carry on liusiuei-s 
 within live year.-, h'.t there, was nothing in the 
 agreement as to rfctnrn oi any j art of tlie loiius 
 in ciise of cesser after that time. The defen- 
 dants were paid the full amount of the honus, 
 carried on husiness for si:; yea.rs, and then closed 
 their fact(jry. 'I'he plainiiirs Avere unahlc to 
 prove any specillc sul/stantial damage : — 
 
 Held, that the damag. s ci'ldd n(jt lie assep.std j 
 on the princi]-.le ot ajiportioning the honus with 
 reference to tin: term and the pciiod for which 
 tl.e lintiness had been eairied on ; — 
 
 Held, also, than the plaintills were entitled to 
 nominal damages at Kast, and, umler tlm cir- 
 cumstances, the d( femiants having deliberately ! 
 broken their covenant, to the co.--ts of the action. ! 
 
 .ludgii ent of tialt, C..]., variid, Maclennan, 
 J. A., di.ssenting. ]'iltiiiji: of Bii'lli/on v. Aiatoii, 
 M) A. K. :^l>5. 
 
 Bonus — Faflorii-'Kniaion <;/' Acl.^ — A muni- 
 cipal corporation cannot giant a honus for jiro- 
 motiiigauy manufacture, and what ic cannot do 
 rlirectly it will not be allowed to do indirectly 
 or by subterfuge. 
 
 Iherefore a by-law, \alid on its face, pur- 
 pi rting to purchase a water privilege for electric 
 lighting jiurposes, but shewn to l)o really a 
 by-law to aitl llic owner of the water privilege 
 in rebuilding a mill, v\as (jimshed. Scutt v. Cov- 
 piiriili<ino/ TilsriiihiD-fj, IHA. K. 'J.'iS, applied. In 
 rt Caiupbdl and ViiUi'jf I'f Liiiiurk, 20 A. R. 372. 
 
 iJonus — l\ailinii/.]~Sn: R.ailwav.s ami Rail- 
 way COJU'ANIKS, 1. 
 
 Bonus — SIri it l!(ii!r-ny — I'l /i/i(,>i — Vul'ituj on 
 Ly-lan\'\— A\\.\wx\^\\ under ."i-t \'ict. ch. 42, sec. 
 36 (O. ), it is necessary, when aid is sought to 
 be granted to a street laihvay ly a ])ortion of a 
 iriunieipality, that a majority in nnndier reiire- 
 senting on(.>-luilf in value of the pei.sons shewn 
 by the last assessment roll to be the owners of 
 real property in sucli ]jor„i(in shouM petition for 
 the passing of the by-law, it is sufticient if the 
 by-law is carried at the )ioIl by a nuijority of 
 those voting u|ion it. Atlivmsui) v. Tairn-tltip I'f 
 EtMcokc, 22 (). R. .-Ml. 
 
 Exemp ton— Fctrlnry — Hc^wiil — Good I'avh 
 ■ — /l(v/Hi'. v'vj/c,:.] — A by-law, on the faith of which 
 land liad heen ])uix'hascd and a mannfactoiv 
 erected, w:is pas.-^ed by a nuinieipal couh. ij 
 under sec. .SHI) of the Municipal Act, R. S. (i. 
 ch. LSI, by which the property was exemi.ti il 
 from all taxation, etc., for a period often yeai> 
 from tile date at which the lij' law came intc 
 e licet. 
 
 'I he conucil subseijuently, within the juiiol 
 of exemption, on the alleged ground tliat it v ,i.- 
 " expedient and ne(;e.ssai'y to promote the in- 
 terests of the ratepayeis," passed another by- 
 law repealing the t'xempting by-law. Tin. 
 Court, being of oi/inion, (jii the facts as set out 
 in the case, thatth.' repealing by-law was i.a.-'n! 
 in bad faith, to enable the council to colltti 
 taxes n]ion a jiroperty which was exempt uiMiir 
 the secticu. and, in the absence of any forfeitun- 
 by the ap|.licanl of his rights, ipia.shed the by- 
 law as not within the povers of the e<iUncil. 
 
 In thi:i aj lilieatioii a grouiul relied on by tin- 
 council Mas that llic a|iplicant had erected more 
 than tM'o dwelliiiL: houses on the exennitei! 
 lands, whereby, under the terms of tlie i)y.l,.n, 
 the exemption ceased. 'This was done thioi;;;|i 
 oversight, and on the a.pplicaiit's attention In - 
 ing called thereto, and on his undertakirg t.; 
 pay taxes thereon, a bylaw was passed agreeing 
 thereto and validating tiie exempting by-law; 
 but, through inadvertence, was not se:doil. 
 The dwellings were subsequently assessed, and 
 the taxes paid on them : — 
 
 Held, that the corporation by their acts am! 
 conduct, were precluiU ' from now setting tli:.- 
 up as a breach of the 1-; '. ' v. 
 
 .•>(»//</', the words ". u ufacturing ci-tahlisli- 
 meat " in the exenipti; . hy-hiw includci laiiil 
 and everything liecep..ry for the busine-s. 
 
 Sriiilu'i:, also, the ])eriod of exem|ilion \va.- 
 within tile siatiite. AliXiniilcr v. T'/.V;,' u] 
 Jhtnl-<r:!li', 2-t < >. U. ti(;.j. 
 
 Exemption-- /iV/iYi'vii/ Cumpany — A Ij.-iiirjiim 
 11/' L'.riiii/ih:(f Liinil-i into <'iti/.] — See Cilii of 
 Wiiiilidr y. Ci'huihi Sunlit/ rn 11, IT. Ce.,'JO.\. 
 1!. .SSS, pit4 TSl. 
 
 Privilege — SlrrcJ. L'tti/n-ny — Moiiiijio'i/ ] — 
 Where a munieip:d council granted to a railway 
 company authority to consiiuet, maintain, ,ini' 
 operate railways in its street-;, with the cxohi- 
 sive right to such portion of any street as shouKi 
 be oceii]iied by ihe rail\\ay, but with the phiiii 
 intent that the company should have noeoiicirn 
 
 j whatever wirh an)' junlions of 'my strccl ii'it 
 
 1 in actual occuiiation by th.i ii -a' 
 
 Held, that a subscijUen in the deeil mI 
 
 grant j.nving to the co' ipai.y .e rcfu.sal, on 
 
 'terms, of other street." i- the ■. for railway 
 inirposes, waa insrlHci nt to constitute, (.on- 
 trary to the plain meat .g of the previous 
 stipulations, a right of monopoly in any of the 
 streets of the city. 
 
 (Ji:<iy( , whether if a monoiuily had been con- 
 ceded, it was n/lr/i rin-t of the inunicijial eoun- 
 eil. W'innijxil Slri':/ lli{iln:ay Co. \\ Wiitiiipdj 
 
 I L'Ucfrk Stnci Hail way Co., [l'8!)4] A. C. OK'- 
 
 j Privilege — TcIniilionK Coin/iuny — Muiiu,>ulij.'i 
 ; — A by-law passed by the city council ratifel 
 i an agreement between tlie city and a tdi pliout 
 ' comiiany, providing that no other person, tirm, 
 I or Company should, for live years, have cnv 
 
692 
 
 )•)/ — A'c, )i-i( t — Oo'id Fa i.'/i 
 -lii«', oil tliu faith (if wliiih 
 ,8cil ;mil ii iiiiinufuutiiix 
 ly a iimnicipal counril, 
 ihiiiiui|i;il Act, R. S. II, 
 l'n>iii.'ity was cxc'iiiiti.il 
 f(yr 11 puriiHl (if ton vcui,- 
 li tliu 1 13' law caiiif isiti; 
 
 :?ntly, witliiii tlio ]i(iii,i 
 llfgfil i^i'diniil that it y d> 
 «ii-y ti) prdiiiotL' tliu in- 
 ns," Jiasstd aiiotlior liy- 
 ■cennitiiig liy-iaw. The 
 1, (111 th(.^ fat ts as ait I lit 
 icaliiig liv-law was J/u.-hi! 
 li: tin: cinniuil to cdlk-ct 
 «liieli was <'Xfiii])t iiiiilor 
 : aii.-.i'111'i: 11!' any fdifuitiire 
 
 ri.i-'lits, (jua.sliL(l tin: iiy. 
 idV. er.i (if tlio (Ji/lliici], 
 
 j;i(uiiul rt'lit'l on Ipy tho 
 )jilicaiit had i-Tcctcil iiioa 
 (jusf3 on tlie (;xt:iii;ittil 
 the tiTius of tht' iiy-l.'W, 
 
 1"lii.s was (loiiu thr<iii;.'li 
 a.jipliiaiit's attL'iitiou In- 
 1 (111 his uii(k-i-tal;ii",' tu 
 |--hiw was passed agi'Lving 
 
 tilt' exempting liy-law; 
 tciR'e, was nut staleil. 
 li.scnuoiitly assessed, and 
 
 ration by tlieir a(.:ts ain! 
 '' from now settiuL' tlli^ 
 ; !■ v. 
 
 , . u ufaeturiiij; estahlisli- 
 . liv-law included liiml 
 .ry fur the busines.s. 
 leriod of exemiitiun was 
 A!i/.cinii.hr V, ViUu'j oj 
 
 •ay Ciimjia)!!/ — A fj-^orpl'm 
 iilo ('ill/.]— See Cilii (if 
 jiilho-ii h'. ir. Cu.-20X 
 
 Hdilinii/ — Motiiijinhi ] — 
 incil granted to a railway 
 consiiuct, maintain, ain' 
 s stivets, with the rxdu- 
 ion of any street as sluiulil 
 il\\ ay, Init with tlie |ilaiii 
 ly sluiulil have niw^oncirii 
 ortions of 'uiy btrcot not 
 y tl'.i ii -a' 
 
 uen in the deed 01 
 
 CO' ipa..j ■(; refusal, on 
 H i-. thi •■ for railway 
 ei nt to eonstitiitc. con- 
 near .g of the previous 
 d niim.iiioly in any nf tlie 
 
 . nKinojKily had been ton- 
 •i:n of the mnnicipal comi- 
 lldilimii Co. V, Winiiiixg 
 I Co., [l'894] A. C. Oli'. 
 
 )/,'<: Cum pun 11 — Mviiui'Mj'': 
 V the city eonneil ratiticJ 
 "1 the eity and a telclilioue 
 hat no other person, firm, 
 for live years, have tnv 
 
 Repair— f.ia',!i:i,j _ Xon-t'idsuvn .]-~\\\\A\^^ 
 corporalions to wliich an oiiligation to keen 
 pulilio roa.l.s and bridges i,, repair has been 
 traiisterreil are not liable to an action i-i respect 
 of mere non-feasance, unless the legislature has 
 shewn an intenticn to impose sneh lialiilitv 
 upon tlieni. •' 
 
 in an aetiun for damages fur injuries caused 
 liy the neglect <if the appellant niunieipalitv to 
 repair a bii Ige : — 
 
 Held, that by the County Incoriiorations Act, 
 lS7i), under which it was incorporated, tlien- 
 wan no indication of an intention to impose the 
 hal.ility soiiiiht to be enforced. Similan/ Com- 
 iiiissin„>,:-io/i_;ih,(,liar v. Or/i/a, 1,") Aii'p. Cas 
 400, followed, T/ii_- Jlalh/:-<t Cu-ye, 4 App Cas' 
 2.j(), distinguislied. M iinicinality o/' I'idon \ 
 
 i 
 Width of Stream. ]~L'nder .sees. .-i;5'> and 
 5d4 of the Municipal Act, R. ,S, () ^h 1S4 
 ci.naty eouneils arc directed to buihl ami ni.dn! 
 ain -all briogcs ero.ssing .streams or rivers over 
 (KMeet in width . . e.mneeting any main : 
 liij;luvay : ' — '' 
 
 Held, by the ( lueen's Rcneh ])ivi.sion th.U 
 iil.(m the proper construction of these sections! 
 the county eonneil is, by the former provisio' 
 given exclusive jurisdiction over all brid.res ■ 
 wli(iiii.soever i.u;!i, crossing streams or'rivt . 
 over 101) teet in wi.lth, within the limits of anv 
 mcorp.iiated village in the county, and con 
 iiecting any main highway leading ■through the 
 coi.nty ; and is by the latter provision,*^ eom- 
 pdiahle to build such bridges only where neces- 
 sary to connect any main public higinvav Icad- 
 inL'tlirmigh the county. 
 
 Held, also, that the place at which the width 
 a .nream or river is to bo aseertaine ' is the 
 place at which the bridge ero.^.ses ; and the « idth 
 13 t.i he detei-mined by the width of tlie natural 
 jjh,innol of .such stream or river, taking it in its 
 highest oi-dhuiry state, 
 ion !!! '■'"'"'' "^' M'V^'^^ was divided in opin- I 
 
 Held, per llagarty, C. J. O., and Burton, J. ' 
 Aa^mveingwitl, the (.UieeiiV JVnch Division,' 
 Kit he wnal, 01 tlie water in its natural (low ' 
 at ",|l,i,ary high water-mark ;va.s the test of the i 
 « Ith of the stream or river for tlie puiposu of 1 
 tlie sections ; and I 
 
 willfh Vt'i"' '""' -^r'^^l''":>.'Ui. JJ.^.,, that the! 
 ^ ' 1. 01 the water at the highest or flood levels 
 
 the wait 1 to be measured for bridge purposes. 
 
 v> ,','•, '>■ '"'■ ''"l"'^'""' ^'""'■t of Canada, re- 
 »^isnig the deeiaions below, that tlu' widtli of 
 
 LT'tvl ff'''" 'r'"' ''"•'"'<■'' "fter heavy rain 
 »« itieshets each year should be taken info con- 
 « vra ion m determining the liability niider the 
 
 not th It' T"'f'' ''^< '-''"V^'y J"fe'l'-"'ater mark is 
 not the test of such liability. VUtwic of Sar 
 
 - I'l ifiiirct/-. InjinidiiDi. ] 
 ser.. eh. -JO, see. 1, as 
 I. II, " eonnty or dis- 
 
 made 
 town 
 
 County Buildings 
 
 — R.v K. s. X. ,s , .-.tl 
 amended by 4!) Vict. 
 
 trict gaols, court houses, and session.'^ houses 
 may be e.stablished, erected, ami rep:ired by 
 order of tl..- municipal councds in the respec- 
 tive miuncip.-dities." in l-^ill .;n Act was 
 pas.sed empoweiing the muiiieipalilv of l.unen- 
 burg to borrow a sum not exceeding Sl'0,COO 
 " for the purpose of erecting and furnisb.ing a 
 court house and gaol for the countv of i.nnen- 
 Inirg, or rep.-.iiing and improving the present 
 eourt hense in said countv," provision beiu" 
 b'r the municipality of Cliestc. and tlm 
 "f l.uuenbnrg (.scp-nate corporations in 
 said county) resjieetively cenfibiiting towards 
 payments of said loan. The town of L. is the 
 shire town of said countv, where the sittini's of 
 the Supreme Court are held as reouireil bv 
 .statute, and where the county eourt house anil 
 gaol nad always been situated. In puisuaneeof 
 the above authority to boriow, the eniincil of 
 Ur' municipality, by resolution, propo.sed to 
 luiiM a court b.ouse and gaol at 1! , another town 
 111 the county, intending after they were built 
 to petition the legislatnie to transfer the sit- 
 tings (if the Supreme Court to H. Tlie corpora- 
 tion of ].. caused an injunction to Ik; applied for 
 and obtaineil, restraining the municipal eoumjil 
 troni erecting a court house and gaol, for the 
 general purposes of the countv, at K, or ex- 
 lieiiding in such erecti(m any funds in which the 
 muuici[)ality of ('. or the town of L., or either 
 , of them, were interested. 
 
 I ^ On appeal from the judgment granting such 
 injunetion : — 
 
 Held, that the munici]ialirv could 11. ! under 
 i statutory authority to establish and erect a einirt 
 I house and gaol, removetlie.se imildings from the 
 town of L. and so repeal and annul the statutes of 
 the h gislatme which had establi.shed thcni in L 
 \\ It hout direct legislative anthorilvtherebir, the 
 county bud-lings eonhl only be erected in tl:- .shire 
 town. The injunetion was, therefore, properly 
 granted. Mimi'iiHiUfii of Li, , ■.!,!;,;/ v. AUrr- 
 III ii-drucnd for Sura Scotia, :'.:) -■. C.' R. SiHi. 
 
 Fire Limits.]— .V.r- /liyiiia v. I/ar/, 'JO ( > U 
 Oil, oH/f .VS-I. 
 
 Liability for Non-repair. j—^SV.. Srhmiill v 
 Joini ofjltrliii, M (». I!. 54, po-il Tlo. 
 
 Nuisance— /'»///„,/ /;oic» /iri/,/;iiii.-<~Almnce 
 ,;/ /l,,./ni,:]-s,; MrXah v. Toini'.liip of Dy. 
 surf, •2-2 A. H. o(),S, /,o.-^l T'JT * 
 
 VI. TiV-L.\W; 
 .lIlxCHCI: if llii-ldu: 
 
 Drain Fringing Down Noxious Matter— 
 
 hi-iiii^ihi lui Artio,i.]-Sir Clo.<i' v. Tvwn of 
 (I ovdstuck, -l-i U. R. 99, //o-sC 7;iO. 
 
WIfil 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 Local improvements— X(()if/v InJM-iov.^h, ; sw/.ed of an cutnte of freoliolil. ler-al or c 
 
 22 A . 
 W b." 
 
 Allirhd-ltitiU'ilji hji A(iioii.}—i<'(' Ci/y of ^s'eii 
 Wrslmiii^t'.v V. Jiriijhi. ..se, :20 8. C. R. 520. piMl 724. 
 
 .SVc, iil.Md, McXuli \. Toirii.'<liipo/'JJ,'-rirt, 
 \i. 5118, j:o.it 727 ; Mr Donald v. />(<•/,■.'), nH, 
 J!. 4."), 21 A. lv.4S,-), ;,„.(/ 720; lli'i-mirdh; •. ,)//(»i- 
 i-il>(ilil:iof Xoi-fh hiijkriii, lii.S. C. R. "S|,/)o«« 
 OOM; Wnfi roii.i A'lif/iiii WoiL-.i ('„. v. '/ onn of /'n/- 
 imrstoit, \\) A. I!. 47. 21 ,S. C. li. rCi), ,:<M (iOi) ; 
 CuiiwImih ]\i,-:jic II. II'. rv». V. 'J'liini.t/iipo/Clial- 
 hum, 25 (». 1-t. 4U."(, 22 A. R. S.SO, 25 S, O. R 
 (iOS, /,o.«^ 713. 
 
 ^[otioll\ III 
 
 Appeal — (^iiiilieit Lair.] 
 
 01' C.>.NAI)A, XVI. 
 
 -Sec. Sri'HKME Cur 
 
 iililu ; anil it (loos not includi! pc; .ons i?i ,. 
 Hi'on of lands nmler contracts tin- tlio acijui: 
 of the freuholil tliert-of nijon tlu- t'ulfilmi. 
 curtain conditions. 
 
 .ludj,'nicnt of Street, J., TOVtr^i-l, Maclei 
 J. A., dissenting. In n- Flnil uini I'mfeili 
 tie^f of I'-esmtt and J!iiisct/. 'H^ 
 
 St.e Ad'Htiioii V 
 
 R. ;{4i, <iiU('(s\)\. 
 
 !:. 1. 
 
 Toiriti/ii/) !■/ Elohkob 
 
 696 
 nuit- 
 
 ■r;>m 
 
 IV )t 
 Hi, 111, 
 
 22 0. 
 
 4 Pricednrr al Mivliiiih of Vouw'd. 
 
 :x 
 
 Third Roadlnr— 'J'lm I'linii Vote.]-- A in 
 l;i\v to rcg'i ;<te tl.-- ijni'.redin;;!> of a town coua 
 cil re(|iiired chat every hy-hiv r-lioiild receive 
 three rvadings, an I ti,j' n.) hv law toe ra'si'iii; 
 jnoney or which lia.l a .. ndency V > iiK.n ase liit 
 ]Uld b( ;mally jia.ssod 
 ay on wliicl/ it \vas iiiuoduced', e.vcept 
 1 by a two-tliinis vote of the wh(ile council. 
 Drainage — /'o.'/'c// ,;i' Lv.ji'rfatitn' — fuurfi-r- i ^ hy-law to ti.\ the nundicrof tavern licenses, 
 ';"(■■ . ] In draiuago ui.-.ttera the' policy of 'the ! "'"' '"'''''^h therefore required such two-tliiris 
 legislature is to leave !iu o anagen,. ut largely j ^■"*'-'' "'"^ ''^'^ ""''-''' '''nes on the same d.iy, 
 in tiie hands of tlio Kv h" ties, and the Court ' '""^^*''"^ '''^'^''"■^''' I'i'ss'-" It did not, howcviir,' 
 should refrain rinni iiiirrfereuce, unices there ! '''-'''^''y^ *'"- •''■il'"'''-''' t^^'" ''■Idrds vote. A S]]cM.'ia'i 
 has been a manifest, iii/d indisputable excesj of i I"'^'^.^'''S of council was ! iien called for the fol- 
 
 Discretion.] SV / , re ir,r-<c„ ami Town.<hlp\ 1"°"^'^ '"' ^'.'1"'' '""' ," "'"'' 
 
 of .South ..Xoncirh, :-.) \. R. :m, >i S C K (i(j't ' '""■'''•■"^ "' the people miou 
 //(/■v' 097. • • • '^ on the day on whicl/ it \vas 
 
 jurisdiction, 
 sonal rights 
 Jloorc, 25 ( ) 
 
 an iindoubled disregard of per- 
 Ji'c iShj'/u'Us and Toirnxliip 
 :. (iOO. 
 
 lowin: 
 
 icreiy 
 I two- 
 
 _ evening, when iii.- by-law was n 
 „yj read a third time, receiv iug the recpiirer 
 : thirds vote : - 
 
 j Held, that the by-law ^^as bad, for, having 
 Estopptl -ylc/;»7 o;/ y)\y-/r/»'--C'o.s^s'.]— Upon ' '""-'" •''■ft-'-ited when first inl-roduced by rciison 
 a motion to (juash a by-l.aw authorizing the ex- i "^ ""' '"i^'jlig received a t>U)-thirds' Vote, i- 
 liropriaticn of ^, II easement ftjr the construction of j 
 a sewer, it aiipcared that the sewer was part of 
 a .system, but tlie upper end thereof, and not an ! 
 outlet for any part already constructed 
 
 Held, that no money having been si)entunder 
 !;r,e by-law, it had not been so acted upon as to 
 pi ,'vent ils being (piashed. 
 
 T'm! applicants for an order (juashing the 
 by-law hail, before moving, appeared on a notice 
 given by them to name an arlntrator. before a 
 Judge, who rai.sed the objection to the bv-Iaw | 
 upon which they afterward.s moved, whereupon j 
 they gave notice of aliandonment :— ! 
 
 Held, that they were not estopped, but that ; 
 they should have no costs. Jle JMi.ri.t and Cilii 
 of Toruid'i, 21 (). R. 24a 
 
 Recognizance.]— A condition precedent to^ 
 the entertaining of a motion to ipiash a muni- | 
 cipal by-law is the entering into, allowance, | 
 and lihug of a recognizance, in the manner | 
 provided by sec. .•W2 of the Municipal Act, 55' 
 /let. eh. 42 (O.); and a bond, even though 
 allowed by a County Court Judge, cannot be 
 efl'ectively substituted for a re-ogni/ance. /,',■ 
 Burton and Villani' of Arthur, 10 P. R. IOO. 
 
 if not having received a tiui-thirds' vote, 
 wa.s not validated by merely reading it a tliini 
 time at the subseinient meeting. 
 
 The by-law did not shew, as retpiired by the 
 Liquor License Act, the yea;- to which it was 
 to be apjilicable : — 
 
 Held, that it was bad for this reason also. 
 He Wilson and Town (f Ini.icrxoU, 25 0. R. 4:!9. 
 
 5. PtihUcation. 
 
 See In re Ifuson and Toini.thip of Si.iilh Xor- 
 vjeh, 19 A. R. 34.3, 21 S. C. R. 0(i9, post iifl7; 
 Vil/iiiji ufOionji'town v. Slim-^im, 23 (). 1!. i\ 
 post 090 ; Re Gliambnv and TotrnMn of llnrffird 
 25 0, R. 270, jxM 714. 
 
 C. J'(':/i'<l ration , 
 
 Set Vitlaiie of Oeorqetou-n v. !^'''- >.son. -'3 1! 
 33, pod 090. ■' •' , - . u. 
 
 3. Petitions For. 
 
 Qualifications of Petitioners— " /•'/■rf/'oA/- 
 er."]— By thr term "freeholder," a.s used in K. 
 S. 0. KS,S7cl). 184, sec. 9, which eualdes a county 
 council to pass a by-law constituting a vilLn'e 
 corporation, upon the petition of a certain num- 
 ber of freeholders, is nioant a person actually 
 
 Bebt—Pai/nicid hi/ In-fUdni'jds—Iw quality.] 
 —A by-law. passed under founalities rc'i|uire(l 
 by law for contracting a ;.•' '; for a purpose 
 within the jurisdiction of i ■ uncil under the 
 Municipal Act, R. S. O. cli. , -^cc. '.UlUiseq., 
 provided for payment bv i; stamients, Init in 
 settling the amo! ..■ pay;; in each year the 
 total existing deben( ri' o.' of theniuii'icipalitv 
 was estimateil, a'l. . a'thi^n gh the aL,'gr(«ate 
 annual amount payul,; under all the 'by-laws 
 
 ' was a))proxiniately pyi.u 
 
 other years, there w;;- j \' 
 
 the amounts payable in tb:- 
 
 the jiresent by -law. The I 
 
 tcred under sec. 351, and . 
 
 sec. 354, juid no ajiplicat'' ., __- 
 
 i within three months after tiie said registry ;- 
 
 to that payable in 
 vv large variance in 
 ./ '••r- nt years under 
 '■-'<: wasd.uly reuis- 
 ■ '-■ inblishcil under 
 nash was made 
 
of fiet'liolil, le.f;al or »'r|uit. 
 
 it ilU'lluli; |jc," ,ollS Itl |l -.,08. 
 
 I'oiitnicts !;)r the iic(|uii.i'ion 
 riof iiijciii Till' fulfilmtii' )i 
 
 '.t, J., iX!Vf!TO'l, Macleiiuui, 
 /( )■<■ Fliitt uiiii I'mfed (.'tinn- 
 .'»w//, fS A. n. I. 
 
 utriishiii '■t' Etohkob', i>{). 
 
 t Md'tiiliJ^ cif Voiiw'il. 
 
 - Tirrt ikirdt I'ofe.yA i,v 
 
 irocoediii.ffr of a town .;(jiin 
 
 try l)y-liiV,- s'liouM foot-iv,. 
 
 tliJ' no by-law for ni'smg 
 
 11 tLiiilency t'l iiu.-i-i asc the 
 
 le ^1iloul(! b(.' linally ikisswI 
 
 it was inu'oiluceif, except 
 
 <>( tlie wholo council. 
 
 nunil)er(if tavern licenses, 
 
 reiiiiirecl siieli two-tliirrti 
 
 I times on the s.iine day, 
 seel. It (lid not, however, 
 two thirds vote. Aspeeial 
 as then called for the tol- 
 
 II rh'- hy-law was merely 
 iceiv iug the recjuired two- 
 daw Mas bad, for, having 
 first introduced by reiison 
 (mI a t.ui-thirds' vote, il 
 
 ■ merely leading it a third 
 it meeting. 
 
 shew, as re(|tiired by the 
 ;be yea;- to which it' was 
 
 f)ad for this reason also. 
 ;/■ Iiiijersotl, 2.5 O. K. 4:;9, 
 
 '.blication. 
 
 ■ Tiiviiship of Suiiih Xor 
 >S. 0. R. ()()!), post mi; 
 
 V. Siim.t(Jii, 2:i (I. ];, ,u 
 
 anil Township of/l'irjord, 
 
 i-ilralion, 
 
 IntUdmi nt.i — Im qualily.] 
 ider foinialities rei|iiire(l 
 g a ■ 
 of 1 
 ). cb 
 . b,. 
 R,y;_ 
 r (b'i 
 
 697 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 '■' '; for a [lurpose 
 ■ 'iiicil nnder the 
 ^ec. lUU (I leq,, 
 . staiinents, but in 
 in each year the 
 of the municipality 
 a' though the a^L';;rej,'ate 
 nnder all the by-laws 
 uai to that payable in 
 a WW large variance in 
 tbf If '■.•]■ nt years under 
 lie 1.1 ! "1 wHsdiily regi?- 
 d ■■■'■:: j.ublisheil under 
 at'' '. .jUash was made 
 fter tiie said registry:— 
 
 Held, that the by-laws and debentures is.snod i one and tbaf fl,.. I .„,.• *• 
 hereunder were valid and bindin,.,,,, tl i , .' "". ,^''" ,"" ''V^cnption was tli 
 
 thereunder were valid and bimlingon the muni 
 cipahty. I illa,,(i of <Jeoi-fj,loirn v. Stimyon, •_';{ 
 
 7. f'r.io/ii/ioiin of Council. 
 
 Sei- 1,1 rr dim- and Cily of Oltaim, it) A 
 r.'.'l), j.fj^l (i!t7. IV. 
 
 S. Siih 
 
 •nii'sion til 
 
 Ji'ii/epiit/er-i. 
 
 Disfranchisement of Class of Voters 1— 
 
 A liiral opticjii by-law, carried by a vote of 
 .ivventy-one to liftccn, was i|uasbiMl where it 
 apjieared that the leturning (.Iticer had refused 
 tu accept the votes of tenant, voters, seveiity- 
 feurof whom wcHM.n the list and had the rinht 
 to vote, though it W.MS not shewn that more 
 thiin a very small number of these voters had 
 made any attempt to vole, or bad expres-sed any 
 intention of voting, or bad heard of the return- 
 ing (ilticer's i-efu.sal. 
 The election doctrine tliat irrcularitii's 
 
 slinuld not be held fatal unless they .■ictuallv 
 
 affect the result does not apply wliero a class is i 
 
 (h.ftranehised in a bylaw contest. 
 Ill ri' Croft and Pdcrhoroioih, 17 A. R '^l 
 
 .ipplied. Woiidirard V. ,V(u«,«.s L 1! 10 ~i'' 
 . iM, considered, 
 .ludgmentof Oalt, ('.J., reversed, Maelennan 
 
 J..A dissenting. /;,, r,' I'oiiiidir and Vitlaiil 
 
 »J K i(/(7(«.v/( r, 1(1 A. i:. 084. 
 
 Necessity for Submission— ro»('ra<7' — /.\. 
 
 y,f „,/,/„, I'r.o/ii/iony. J— A municipal corpora- 
 tion has no power, without a bv-law assenrt'd to 
 l/y the electois, to enter iiil,, contracts involvi,,.. 
 expenditure not payable out of the ordinary 
 rates of the current financial year, ami resolu- 
 tions tor the execution of contracts for the j 
 building of a bridge, payment for which was to 
 be made partly m the current (inaiicial year and i 
 partly in the next, were ipiashed, .as beiio' a! 
 contravention of sees. :U4, Hr,-, and .'ion of the i 
 Municipal Act. In re Olver and Cily of Utta nxi, \ 
 -U A. li. oz9. ' I 
 
 :.,■"■, "7 1-"." "iv.-j ilie same as 
 
 that used m the by-hiHs appointing the i.lace.- 
 tor bob ing namicip.il elction.s. It was also 
 shi'wn that the p.dl was held in a house eh,.se to 
 he house in which the p,dl had been held in 
 the next preceding nmiiicipal electhm, that 
 lioiise itselt having been moved aMay. 
 
 Another polling plac; was specilicallv .lea- 
 "•nbcd by phice, b,t, ami concession, but there 
 was an error iii the number of tlie cmi.vssion 
 
 it was shewn that all th.' prnceedings ha.l 
 
 l<cen aken in go,,d faith, and that tiie poll wa- 
 
 very arge, and it <lid not appear that any one 
 
 had been misled by any of these infonnali- 
 
 I ties : — 
 
 Held, therefore, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the Court might, m the exercise of it.s .lis- 
 cretionary j.ower so to do, refuse to .piash the 
 liy-law 111 question. 
 
 Held, by the .Supreme Court of Canada, 
 iilbrming the decision (,f the Court of Amical 
 that, as the village of Norwich was geographi' 
 tally withm the .idjoinin^. municipality, the 
 statute w.as sulliciently complied with I'.y the 
 said pul,, cation. /„ re. ll„..on and Ton-nshi,> 
 >[lSontkJSyrn'ich, 1!) A. R. ;i4;i, 21 ,S. C. R. (iO!l. 
 
 Sic Ailain.ton v. 
 R. .S4I, «;//(' (lit 1. 
 
 Toii-nship oj EtoUickc^ 2:.' O. 
 
 Publication — /',;///,/,/ /V,„y.s. _ QnaMmi — 
 /A-Of/,o».]-Thol)ntario Municipal Act, 1!.S () 
 ISS, ch 184, requires, by sec. 2!);{, that before 
 ti'.e linal passing of a by-law requiring the ■■issent 
 "t the ratepayers, a copy thereof shall be |)ub- 
 li.'^itd 111 a public newspaper published either 
 witliin the municipality or in the county town 
 or m an adjoining local munieipalitv. 
 
 .V.lice of intention to submit a "local option i 
 )y-law of the township of South Norwich to I 
 the votes ot the electois was given in proper ! 
 form and for the refpiisite number of times I 
 in a newspajier published in the village of! 
 ^orwleh the bounds of which did not actually i 
 ouch diough they came close to, those of the i 
 township 1,1 .iue.stion. 'J'his paj was the 
 nearest paper : it had a large circulation in the ' 
 townsliiij ; .111(1 was that in which the townshi,, 
 i-ouiicil had been in tbe l,„l„-t ..< „„i.i.„i,;..', I 
 their nnticj 
 lishedin the 
 
 !). Other Cii.ie.-: 
 
 _Penalty.l-A by-law omitting to provi.le a 
 penalty for its violation is not necessarily bad 
 In Ji'i- Local Option Jrf, 18 A. It. .-.72. 
 
 Street Railway—/./,,,;/., of Mi,nlri,,alitv~ 
 1 „/,,/„/,;,,/ ..,./].V,.,^ I,,n,er y. 'J'on-n of Port 
 Arthur, 1!) A. II. o,m, 22 ,S. C. H. 241, ante 122. 
 
 Summary Conviction Slwn-oi- ErhihltionA 
 -Sec Lcjina V. (1 tutabr, 24 O. K. 4;i7, ante 2(Ji). 
 
 .nyf*|!°'.ff-~^'''^:'''-^-J-'''« "<"J'"'<' V. Jn.<in, 
 , -1 <'. k. .)2>, poM , 14. 
 
 [ Water Rates-/>;.,.o„»'- /'„/,/;,. HuUdinii... 1 
 
 I |7'\'T, -■ lf'l'"'^,r '.r''''' '-■ '""!' "f Toronto, 20 <). 
 b. 19, 18 A. 1!. 022, 28 ,S. C. R. 514, post 7:iO. 
 
 Sec, also, cases under the following sub- 
 
 riVl'^ irV ^'''p.'""^^' E.VKM1.T.0NS, AND I'jilVI- 
 
 .K..KS, III.: Co-NTKACTs. \'II. ; Dhain.ui,.:, X. • 
 
 ;^"v/"^'rr' ^^^■•= ^"'^'"- ''"■'^ove: 
 
 YVITT T. ■ ' ^-''•'"''•KX^ •"•■ COKPOKATION.S, 
 
 XXII '"'"""™'"' i'"^^'^"«' -^-^-S Sewers! 
 
 And see PfiiLic .SciiooL.s. 
 
 VII. CoNTKAcrs. 
 
 Executed Contract-.S>»/— ^lJ,,eHce of Bn. 
 
 '■ '«"';]-f corporation is liable on an executed 
 
 been in"tiie"habir\:t''^p;bbshi;;;;!;hf';;i',?"' f^^ I'f>;f'>n!iaiice of work within 
 
 ... ..... M,.i ,i,i. .i„„,„ ,v„ /,'1',T; J,!| i;;.;E;t..- » -;^_y ;.hc., ..,p.,.«L , 
 
!i' ( 
 
 MUNICIPAL OORPOEATIONS. 
 
 700 
 
 111 aeo. Ill (,f the ManildM .Miuiicip.il A.l, 
 1S>H, wliich jirovidt^a th.-it niiniiciti.il cinpora- 
 tiiuis limy pus.-) l)y-lii\VH in rcl.it <iii ti) imitters 
 tlu'ri.iu umiiii'JViiteil, tlio word " may " in per- 
 missive iiiily iuiil lines nut (iroliiliit ccirpoiutioiiK 
 from cxui'oisiii',' tlicir jiniHilictinn i,i iicrvvisu tlmn 
 l',V I'y-law : Uilcliic, C.J., and .Strong, ,|., iHs- 
 sontiiig, llorwii-iliii v. MunkiinHtii of Xnrlh 
 /hi/cnii, HI .S. ('. H. ,-,81. 
 
 Executed Oontra.ot~S/n/ -Ah-" nre of /}//■ 
 lair—Ih-iiiiKCji' H'or/w. J— .SV,- C„n(iili,<ii. iWilk 
 /.'. ir. To. V. 'J'<'iriiih!pofCli,:lhaiii, Si I). R.4('ir) 
 
 22 \. t;. :«(), 2.-, .s. c, K. (io.s, /«.s/ 7i:!. 
 
 Executory Contract-. SVr(/ A/i.inire of Hi/- 
 /iui:\ S(H'ii.in l'Sl' 1,1 tlic Municipal Act.'R. S. 
 O. 1.SS7 uli. I,s4, onai.'t.s that the powers of 
 muiiiiipal u.Mincil.s .shidl )it^ f.vcrcisL'd hy hy-hnv 
 vhi'n no'. <jthor\viH« autliori;;ud or providud for. 
 So'jtion -ISII of thu Act authorizes the eouiiui! 
 to purchiisetir.' app,iratii«, etc., Imtsay.s nothing 
 llliout |)a,'isui,i,' a Ijy l:i\v for tl,e piirpu.sc. 
 
 'I'iiu jjlaintillN sned upcm an all(•^'L■.l contract 
 for the Male by them to the dekndaiit.s, the 
 corporati(in of a town, of a lire engine .ind hose. 
 The alleged contract was .signed liy tlie niaynr 
 of the town and. by the clerk of the conneil, and 
 the seal of the corporation was attached, ^o 
 by daw was. however, passed anlhorizing the 
 pnrchase. The engine was sent by the |,laintill's 
 to tlie defendants, but wa.s not accepted by I 
 them : — i 
 
 Held, that the want of a by-law w.as fatal, i 
 and that tiie instrument under the seal of the ■ 
 corpiu'ation was invalid. 
 
 dudgnient of the Chancery l)ivisi')n, -20 O. K. j 
 411, atlirmed. n'(if,:roH': A'ii</lti,' ll'urti Co. v ! 
 Toirn of l'ii/iiin:^/fi:,, ]{) A. K. 47. ' 
 
 Allirmed by tlie Supremo (,'ourt of Canada. 
 Binitirdiii v. MimirlpKlifii of Xorth //iiilri-ui, 
 30S. C. R. 5S1, distinguislied. Wafcroiis Eiitfiiif: 
 M'orXw Co. v. Toirn ofPatme.r.itau, l'1 S. C. R. 05(j. 
 
 Expenditure Beyond Current 'Y&a.v—Ah- 
 
 KOice of /li/-/aiv — 'Jiiris/,;ii!i Hdiihitwii-t.] SVe 
 
 In re Ohrr and City of Ollaira, 20 A. R 5"9 
 ante (i!)7. ■ " ' 
 
 Municipal elections are not avoided for bribcrv 
 of agents without authority, where the eandr 
 date has a majority of votes cast, h'cifnii ►/ 
 )•('/. Tkoniton V. JJiicar, 2i> O. R. i)12. 
 
 Disclaimer— /I wan/ nfSnif. |— At an electimi 
 
 under the .Municipal Act, .'to \ict. ch. 42 (().), 
 
 i for a deputy reeve of a town, there were tlirei' 
 
 I candidates, .ind after the election and befen: 
 
 i the lir.stmc, ling of the council, the two wlm 
 
 j had_rcccivc<l the liiuhcst number of votes suc- 
 
 ces.siyely ilisclaimed, whereupon the remanua' 
 
 candidate, u lio had received tiie lowest numljfi 
 
 ol votes, made Ijic declaration of otlice and tool; 
 
 , his seat. ( hi a motion in the nature of a nmj 
 
 ! I'vurn/i/oinade by the candidate who had re- 
 
 : ceived the higliest luimlicr of votes to have it 
 
 ' declared that there was no election and tli.it 
 
 the seat w;is vacant : — 
 
 Held, tliiit what took place constituted an 
 election of the respondent and entitled hini t„ 
 the .seat. Hrjinatxnl.I'rrni v. Worth, ■':', t, 
 , R. G88. 
 
 Dlver!3ion of Slnklnc Pund~/>;.,/»„/;/,,„. 
 /,„//,]— No special appi(,|,riation is neccs.sary in 
 order to create a sjiecial rate apjilicablc to pay- 
 nient of iiriiici|)al and interest of a municiiwl 
 • lelit; it tlie ]n-ovi.sions of tlie -Municipal Act aiv 
 <.b.servcd,sue!i .separate nite.and thesinkin-fiunl 
 I as part ol it, arise as the ta.\es are collected ; uii I 
 where, no such appropriation having been niaili 
 one of the munici[ial council voted for defrayiii ^ 
 certain of the current expenses of the nuniicr 
 pahtyout of the amount attributable to tliat 
 fund, Ins suliscipieiit election as reeve was sr 
 aside, and he was dcelarerl disciualilied from any 
 municipal ollice for a iieriod of two years pui- 
 suant to ')') Vicl. ch. 42, sec. 373. 
 
 When, without any such appropriation, ,„ 
 much of the year's income of the miinicipalitv 
 has lieen expended as to leave -.o more tlaui 
 sutheient to cover such sinking fund, the balanr- 
 is impressed with that character, and to aj.ply it 
 otherwise is a diversion within the nicaniiK' (,i 
 the above enactment. J^jina ex rel. Cai-anwik 
 V. Umitli, 20 O. 1{. 032. '' 
 
 Interest In Contract — Mai/or of City — 
 Disqnalijiralloii |-,bV.- Ilejjind <-.« rd. McGidrt 
 V. UirkM, 21 O. j;. 102, iivst 700. 
 
 Reference to Engineer— /?/«.<.]-&■« Fanm. 
 har V. City of JJamillou, 20 A. R. 86, ante 31. 
 
 Reference to Superintendent of Works— 
 Ili<i-i.]—.Sei' Mc.yamie v. City of Toronto, 24 O I! 
 313, ante 32. 
 
 VIII. CO.STROVERTED ElECTIO.NS. 
 
 Bribery by Agents.]— A person cannot be 
 lound guilty of bribery under sees. 209-13 of 
 the Consolidated Municipal Act, 1892, 5,") Vict 
 ch. 42 (O.), unless the evidence (lisclos'es in liin'i 
 an intention to commit the olfence. A candi- 
 date _ desiring and intending to have a pure 
 election cannot be made a qiia.^-i criminal by the 
 act of an agent who, without the knowled.'e or 
 desire of the principal, violates the statute to 
 advance the election of such candidate 
 
 I Interest in Contract— AVit- Elect ion. ]-n>' 
 defendant had a contract with the corponttimi 
 
 : °! ,1!:,^"^^ ^'"■' *'"' ''"I'P'^' "f '™» "P to the tn.l 
 i0t 1890, but on the 20th Xovemlier, l.syo li,. 
 ' wrote informing the corporation that he with- 
 drew from his contract, and onclosin,' lii^ 
 account up to date. ° 
 
 On the 9th l.)ecembcr, 1890, the then imiy.r 
 of the city notified the defendant that he woiil.l 
 bo held resiioiisible for any expense the corponi- 
 
 j tiou should be ; .t to in con.se(|uence of his 
 
 j refusal to fulfil his c ntract. 
 
 I On th M. December, 1890, the city coiinoil 
 
 j adoiited a .esolution cancelling the dcfen.laiit's 
 contract and releasing him from any liirtlier 
 obligation in connection therewith. At the 
 same meeting a notice of reconsidemtion wm 
 given, which by the rules of the council h.id the 
 effect of staying all action on the resehition 
 until after reconsideration. There was no 
 reconsideration and no subscipitnt ineetiiig of 
 
 , the council till the 7th .Taiuuirv. 1891, previous 
 to which the defendant had been elected mayor 
 for 1891. At the time of his election his 
 account above mentioneil had not been paid :- 
 
700 
 
 mot avdiileil for l)ril»ii ; 
 irity, wliiM-u tliu caiiili'. 
 vi.trs cast. liei/iiKi ^x 
 L'(i I). K. o\2, 
 
 /.SV7(r|— Ataiielccti.iii 
 ;, ">j \iot. cli. f ('(),), 
 own. there mcic tliri.' 
 It' olcrtioii and liol'mv 
 coiiiii.il, till; two Willi 
 
 iiiiiiil)(;r of votes sir- 
 eri'U|ioii tliu reiii.iuiii,^ 
 veil tiiu lowent huiiiIk-i 
 ntioii of ollioe ami iim,!; 
 1 the ii:itui-o of a i/,,,, 
 umliilatu who had re- 
 jr of votes to have it 
 
 no election and lint 
 
 place constituted nii 
 t iiiid untitled him i,, 
 /'(/■'■</ V. H'uiih, -SMi. 
 
 I Fund— /v;.,v/(((,/,y/,„. 
 riatioii is necessary m 
 rate aiiplicable to pay- 
 iterest of a inuuici|wl 
 the -Municipal Act aiv 
 ;e,aiid tliesiiilviii;,'finii| 
 ixes are cidleeted ; an I 
 Joiiliavingbeeniiiadi, 
 cil voted for defrayiii:; 
 lenses of the imiiiicr 
 
 atti iluitalde lo ilmi 
 tion as reeve was scr 
 1 disi|ualilied from any 
 od of two years, niir- 
 ec. 373. 
 
 ich appro] iriatii 111, ~,i 
 J of the iiiiiniciiialitv 
 
 leave •.,) more than 
 kins,' fund, the halaiu'i- 
 racter, and to ajiply it 
 ithiii the iiieaniiig di 
 'jiiia ex rel. Caraniujh 
 
 -Xcw ElccI ion.] -Tlh' 
 with tlie corpdratiiiii 
 if iron up to the cii'l 
 November, Isyii, iin 
 ration that he with- 
 and enclosing liis 
 
 SOO, the then iiiaynr 
 
 Midaiit that he wouM 
 
 expense the corpora- 
 
 cunsequence of his 
 
 ISflO, the citj' couiioil 
 dliiiy the defeiulaiit's 
 111 from any further 
 therewith. At the 
 reconsideration was 
 f the council had the 
 11 on the resolution 
 11. There was no 
 jseipient meeting of 
 lary, l-S'Jl, previous 
 lieen elected mayor 
 ){ his election his 
 id not been paid : - 
 
 701 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Held, by the .Master in fhan.bers, that the 
 r.su ution had no direct elllvt to rele.iso the 
 deeiidai troiii lubihty under his eontrart, 
 either at law or m ,-<,nity ; and, wiiotlier -n- not 
 the resolution was to be considered in force, it 
 .Iid_ not t..ucli the .ac.ouiit, the existence of 
 which unpaid was sullicient to invalidate the 
 election, under the other circiinistances of the 
 case. 
 
 The ehM;tion was therefore set ashlo ; l„it, 
 a thoii-h the relator hid lu.tilied tin, electors of 
 the objection to the <lefeiidaiifs ijualilicatioii, 
 the seat was not awarded to the candidate 
 having the next lai-.st vote, on account ,.f the 
 resolution ot the eoiiiici], which taindit the 
 electors to .lisreganl the relator's warning • and' 
 a new election was ordercl. /.■,,//„„ ^.^ ,,.,,/. 
 Mdimre v. li(rh:lt, 21 O. H. l(Ji>, 
 
 Jiirisdlctlon Of Master In Chambers, 
 
 Held, 
 
 In- -Mac.Ma 
 
 'i"''i. •'., that the .Master'in 
 
 ,., I ' , , , ;■' ■'•• """ i-oe ^Master in 
 ( ham .era had, by the coinbincl edect of lUile 
 
 -!».>■'■ .'M.ct. eh. 2, .sec. 4 (().). all the powers 
 ;. a dudge to delerniine the vali.lity of the 
 election ot the defendant, and that liis deter- 
 aiiuation waslinal; and it was within the com- 
 pcteiice ot the provincial legislature to clothe 
 till' .Master with such powers. 
 
 Hehl by a !)ivi..ional Court, following the 
 Jirmeiple of the decision in /,',■ Wil.ou v 
 .l^■^'»ov, :-• O. It. ILS, that the provincial K-ds- 
 iatiire had power to invest the .Master w'itli '■ 
 -lutliority to try controverted iiiuiiicipa.l election 
 oases h,.inia,-xr,:L Mrdinr,' v. /Jid-.// "1 o 
 K. lb_. 
 
 7QS 
 
 ■ n eoinniissioiier for laUiiig allidavit.s, a recoimiz- 
 1 n-c appearing on its face to have been entered 
 
 into iH'toru a ussiomn' for tahiiig bail, ia 
 
 «['od; for all commissioners for taking bail uro 
 "I'Ho commissioners tor taking alii lavit" /ie>jt^ 
 <•'-■ '•'/. Maw/an v. F/t„naj, 1 I 1'. R. (,-,s. •' 
 
 Property Quallflcation.J --- A town coun- 
 cillor wlirii iioiniiiated, was pusses.se.I of a aulfi- 
 
 JMcntleisch.h ,p,,diticition,thetermofwhch 
 "ucver e..p,re,l before the election ; in tho 
 
 roner'.v " '""'l ''?'', "'''^"'""^ '"^"'^^^' '^'-^"h''' 
 pio per y on which he sought to ,|,ialify :- 
 
 to^n\d;.^:;:ti:i'y;\s.;;[-'::rti'l;^;i;;^j 
 
 WHr"r,'^"l\°^°^"°f Papers.! -A niandajnua 
 
 ^ was retused to compel a (Jountv Judge to pro 
 I ceed with a rceoimt, where tiie ball7,t p"ie« 
 cast at u niunuipal election were not .seal'Xm 
 as provided by sec. ir„5of a.", Vict. ch. 42 O) 
 /..; OllH,ra Mnmcip,,! Kh,-ii^n ~ By Ward-- 
 Utd.au II („(i, L'(j U. Jt. 106. 
 
 V.^^^i^^wm':'''''-''''-! -''''■'■■ moaning of 55 
 \ c t. eh. 42(0. , sec. l-M, is that eases which 
 have so much in common that they can con- 
 veniently be tried together, may be coinbrned „ 
 one procecM ing. '!'},■ (jucen Jrd. St. Louis v 
 
 Practice— .'Imem/nic;,^]- The noti.'c of 
 :nc.tion di,l not «liew any interest in the' ivla- 
 lor, as required by sec. 187 of the Act ; but it 
 aiiyiiig been shewn by aliidavit liled in support 
 A It that the relator w.is a candidate, an am ''u,I- 
 moiit o the motion u-ould, if neccsary, have 
 been allowed under Con. Rule 44-1. y.',.,,-,ia ex 
 "I. I'.mj V. Wurlh, 2;! (). J!. OSS. '' 
 
 Practice — X.,t;o' of Motion — J flhtani, 1 _ 
 
 'nder''[hrM"'"-"'i*'r /'''""'•" "^ 'i'^" "-"rnlnto 
 ; "'Ic the Miincipal Act, it is necessarv, upon 
 .lie true construction of Rule 1041, for the 
 
 ;-elaor to file the affidavits and matei'i.al to be 
 .ised 111 support of his motion before servin.' the i 
 m^.cy luotu even in a ease where viravH^' 
 ewdeuce is to be taken under sec. 21" of R S 
 U"^;!!- KS4; but the omission to lile .such affi- 
 "lavits and material does not constitute a gZl 
 r as„n for .setting ashle the service of the notice 
 
 c ilt re.;i'''iHf '^1-' ""''•'J' '■' *'"^* ^''^' '"''*^'> 
 suil. „t of his motirn ; and mentioning an affi- 
 davit or other material in the notice of "motion 
 when there is none such filed, does not - t •" e I 
 
 relators recognizance and the sureties as suffi- t. 
 
 Voters' Lists— /nT7»/,(,v/;t.s_AV,v«/( i_a„ 
 
 votes, ot a depu y reeve of a municipality who 
 ^: l'^''-t';;.P''tcd in a transaction' by^which 
 
 :M^t::%^^'^'T'^^^ naiiLw^e 
 ■ul. ( I tT, the voters list, over ami above those 
 
 voideT'alTho -h "''f '" ''^' ";■""'='•'>' "-- "- 
 n 11 ''•"^ "'i;'i only some thirty-,me of those 
 
 ni^aly -bM cast v-Ues. notvvi^hstanditJ^'s 
 \ itc. cli. 42 (().), sec. 1,,), wii ch provides thit 
 no election shall be invalid for wa'nt o comju 
 ance with the principles of the Act, when the 
 .■esu t IS not alllcted. n,,,iaa ,x re. StlorL 
 V. lieaium:, 2(; 0. R. 4(j'0. 
 
 IX. Convictions lmjek Minicii'ai. By-law.s 
 
 R.'iSr 720!-'" '"-""' '■■ ^^'"--' 22 o. 
 
 ),M^-Jf^'^~'''^'^ -^''':r/'"a V. Justin, 24 O. R. 327, 
 61^""^"^^-*^ ''■'""' - ^/-•'. 20 O. R. 
 
70S 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPOEATIONS. 
 
 704 
 
 Public Health.]— S'k AV,(/in« v. HrdmnniL 
 24 O. K.Xi !,„«/' •.•7;i: Th, V" '■ - ■ 
 
 26 0. K. UH,-), '>- O. li. isi, /;„ 
 
 Show or Bxhlbltlon.j-.VeB Unjii.u v. i/ AiV 
 oAvr, i!4 O. K. l;!7, ,(«/, -jiiK. 
 
 X. Dkain.\(jk. 
 
 1. Aelioin/t,!- iJtuiMiji'i. 
 
 By Tenant. I A ton.iiit of liiiul may iccovei 
 (knmge .siitli d ihiiiiig liis ()uiii|i:itifin from 
 coiistnictioii of ili.iiiKiyc woik. his lights rust - 
 iiij' upon tlic .'-aiiit; foiiiidiitioii as tliuM; of a free- 
 holder. //;/-. s V. 'J'oinisliii) 1. 1' /■:!/!(■(, Crooki y 
 Vmimsh'iji vf Lllkv, i>;) .S. V. K. 4'J!t. 
 
 Sk- Fil-.'jo'Jil V. (•iii; ,,/■ ottuirci, '22 A. 11. 
 207, /m.i^ 70.'! , S'of/t X . tiiii'iish'tit,,/ ll'f',/ O.iforii, 
 22 O. H. (i7S, ;.o,s^ 7(16 ; ■i;„n,M'i. ../' .Sniiifn t v.' 
 Toiviik/ii/i ../■ <'/,(ii/,(uii, IS A. I!. •j.'):i, 21 s. C. I 
 K. IW,"), /-r/./ 710; Cor/jomlinii of' liah'iuh v. 
 
 iimvn/i-*, [1 -iw] A. c. r)4o, ;«w< 711. I 
 
 2. Addid Tt'rrilory. 
 
 Adoption of Old Drain.] Wlicre ,i ruiiuid- 
 pality makes an alteration i;i and thus adopts 
 as part of its own drainage system a drain 
 existing in territoiy :iLi|irirLd" from another 
 municipality, it is liable lor dam.iges caiiscil l,y 
 subsequent neglect to kee|i the drain in repair. 
 
 Judgment ot Uoyd, C, S) (>. R. ur,S, alhrmed. 
 Maclennan, J.A., ilisscnting. Fi/y/,ra!'/\ Ci/ii 
 of Ottawa, 2-2 A. R. 207. 
 
 Constitution — Miiiiiil/iit/iiii'ii /ntfrenleil. I - 
 
 W her.' in a duiina^e schen.e initiated hy ,„„ 
 township, asMssincnts luv m.ide iigainstpimr. 
 tliaii Olio olher townnhip, eaeh to\\li!ihi| i 
 " interested," within the nii aniii),' of se.'. ;is:i ,,, 
 II. S. (». IHS7 eh. 181, only ni I lie ipiestinn ,,( 
 its own assosnieiit ; and on appeal from lli,, 
 assessiiK'iit, the arliitrafioii provided for hy t|i. 
 i Act is one hetweeii each appellant township ni;., 
 j the initiating townsiiip, not a joint arhitrati ,■, 
 
 IjctWCfU the latter and all the olher towii-lin 
 I usse. .1(1. 
 
 ll.c Bi-heuie o' tho .A' I is i,i make the total 
 cost of the proposed woi'k fall n|ion the initial iii.. 
 mnnieijialily, k'ss stich sums as may lie properly 
 ehargeahle against i>tlier mimieipalities for iIm- 
 lienelits received Ky them respectively, and if 
 heiielit is disprovid, the attempted eharu'e tails 
 and is not to he reiinposeil elsew here. /iV^'/'e. „. 
 n/ii/is of llarii-iili UKit IliiUi'jh, -JO (». I!. I,"4 
 approved. Iti K.i.-«\r niid /:orh, .ili ,; A-2 V. ('. i; 
 
 'i-'.'i, (piestioneil. In m Toini-.hijM of /,'„ 
 
 ami 'JHhiiii/ iyi.st, ISA. H. 477. 
 
 iSVc 'J'oirii-ilii/t of Ciii-dilor V. TiiKii^lin, I 
 Mt/,a//c, •_'! (). K. ■;){)!), ^,.,.,y 7(ii; ; (:,„-f,or,:ii'.„ . , 
 linhiijli V. William-'. llND.'i] A. ( '. 34(t, /,.,,/ 7li' 
 lir T<mn.*hii> af A uiU rdnti mid T(iirii,,lii,, „/■ i , / 
 rhfst. r Xur'h, 21 U. It. 47(i, /"W 71:.'. 
 
 4. AK^eimiind. 
 
 Adoption ofOld Drain as Sewer -A'(/;.s(„..,. J 
 
 —Drains originally constructed under townsiiip I Iv"/, 
 
 .•■V' A'. St--iilirn.i (ind 'J'oirii'<li!/t itf M„u). . j." 
 (). It. (IOi», /»'«< 70,"( ; Iti VI- 'r„ii-„.-h)p,t uf l;„„u'. 
 mill T'dhiiiii (^^.^/, 18 A. r!.477,/.(W708; lim, •■:,.. 
 tnii V. Toiriinliiji of' (lr< !i, 2() ( •. 1{, (ii)4, /u^t 71 . ; 
 Toirii.-hl/i ofSlijihtn V. I'ljini-ihiii 0/ Mi<,'iir,ii„,i 
 . IS A. 1!. ")!(;, /)o.^/ 7ti,S; A .iiiikiiisitinl Ti '■ -hi/ 
 0/ Eimi^hillui, -i.'! O. K. .•)!)!), j,i,.it 70O ; II i<,. v, 
 •c.]i Toirii-'lil/i (//' AV/.'Vy (Old t'ruok-n v. Tuii-n.^liii, „'■ 
 ■SA .S. ('. K. I'.'O, j,o.st 70!) ; I„ ,;■ Toini.hij. 
 iirirh and Tmriiilil/. 0/ /Miiijh, 21 A. I;. 
 ■■■•'I 710; Toi-ushiii iif Somliia \. Tun'wh:, 
 thnm, 21 ,S. C. It. 30o, ^/o,s^ 710. 
 
 077 
 
 Affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada, 
 '24 S. 0. R. 051. 
 
 3. Arbitrations Under Drainnije Lan.:^. 
 
 Constitution - Miinici/,a/iHi'.-< fnli renled.] ■ 
 
 A question aros-e tinder sec. .'iOO of the :Miini- 
 
 cipal Act, It. S. O. ch. 1S4, between tho town- 
 
 n>i-la,rs. 
 
 Amei ding By-law— /i'x^v/ ]york-—l'iiiri 
 
 ■iy-i:.w amelidlll'j 
 
 1, 
 
 linage hy- 
 
 authority for the drainage of surface water 
 
 merely, may, after the territoi v lias been aildcd 
 
 to a city, be adopted by the as e, mion 
 
 sewers, after which househohl. is usini' them 
 
 with the consent or approval of the city are 
 
 not responsible for nuisance at the outlet. 
 
 Judgment of Meredith. J., revcsci. Hurton 
 
 J.A., (ii.Sb(iiting. Liwi.< v. Ale.fumler, 21 A. R.' 
 
 61,3. 
 
 /'./.«. ]-^ A 
 
 under see ..7'? of tiie Consoliilatcd Aluiiici 
 
 Act, IS'i-.', "in order to fully carry out Ui 
 
 intention thereof," \\ here sutlicient funds Iwv. 
 
 t been authorized by the Miigii,„l |,j-.law, i 
 
 w h provides for tie .aupietioii of the 
 
 '>rk as to make it eili.i. nt, although tin! 
 
 ay la ..me deviations and \ iriations, ori\-;i 
 
 aiidit ions to the work as origin Uy planncii. 
 
 sill..- if W „„A V „i »V u" ;" ""••""' Uurii.;,' tilt cnstiuction oi .1 drain, it was 
 
 trtiow on 1 i! I f "V'''f r' ^'-V'^'^s j found that -stone portals were uceo.d fur tk 
 
 lahUnT \" , 'letriment of Ic, which I «<,rk, and that the outlet to the lake had t. 
 
 H^ The tou nTf *■;.;" '• 'r *h "•"r"^'^ "f ' ^' •I'^epened, and certain other e.x 
 U. Ihe township of T. .also discharged waters 
 
 over the other side of R., opposite H. :— 
 
 Held, that T. was not " interested " within 
 the meaning of sec. .SS9 of the Act ; and there- 
 fore that a board of three arbitrators appointed 
 pursuant to that section one bv each of the 
 three municipalities, wa.s not properly consti- 
 tuted to determine the question ; and their 
 award was set aside. Jte Towmhim of Ilarvnili 
 and Raleigh, 20 0. R. 154, 
 
 ..'.xtra work an4 
 
 necessities were lecoinmeiided iiy the engineer :- 
 
 Held, that the bylaw inoviding for thiiii 
 
 i was an amending hy-law, under sec. ",'^ of 
 
 I the Consoliilatcd .Municipal Act, 1S!)2, and that 
 
 the township council had power to pass it tiiid'-r 
 
 that section. lie Huxhtu and Tuirn.tlup of Uom- 
 
 ■ nci/, 22 O. R. 6IJ4. 
 
 Construction By-law — Ordinnry Ex}m- 
 diturc—tiubndmoji to liidepayers— Extra ''erri-- 
 
704 
 
 hinitiiioHlirM [iittrtHtetl. ] 
 ■ Mcliiir.i' iliitilitc'il hy uu, 
 In iiri' iiiiuli^ iigaiiist niui. 
 
 .llHllip, fiull t(HMlBlli|. I- 
 till! Mil iUlillJ,,' of Hf.'. .'(Sll (,| 
 
 ■*, <iiily 111 tlif ciii<,'sti(iii .,( 
 
 1 Hllll (111 Ul)|>l'lll flOlll 111, 
 IMtiull llldvicleil for lij' II:, 
 tell illllnll.lllt t<)«llMlli[lllll.t 
 
 \\<. rmt 11 j..iiit arliitliiti ,;, 
 ml iill till' (illicr towii-hip. 
 
 Art u t,i iiiako till' tiital 
 •ork fiilliiih.ii till' initialing 
 h .sums M.s iMiiy l>c pruprily 
 litT iiimiici|,uliti(.'.s tui Mn 
 tliiiii rcspiM'tivi'ly, an, I if 
 In; atti;iii|it(.Ml cli;iri.'i' t.iils 
 I.St'll I'Iscullfll'. lit 'l'i.> „■ 
 
 / HiiUiijli, -JO (>. i;. I, 11, 
 
 mil l:o<h, Ht( i\ -i'l U. ('. i; 
 
 ri: 'J'uiriiy/liji.i of' llu,,.,,,. 
 
 A. ]{. -177. 
 
 '.'iirailur v. 7'mi/voA;/, / 
 , /i':^! 7(l(i ; ('iiii/oid'ii.ii , , 
 
 isici] A. r. 34(1. /,.,s/:ir 
 
 ■(lo)i mill 7'iiii-ii.i/tij) III' I . ' 
 . 47ii, jioal 711.'. 
 
 ne-iniHui/. 
 
 I 'J'oini.ilii/i iij Mill,!-. .'.' 
 
 \l. )•'' 'J'llirii.-.ltip.l (>/' /ii.rii. 
 
 ■ I!. 477, /-fM/ 70S; lli;.,,;,,. 
 y, -'()(». It. (i!)4, /,o,.y7(:s: 
 
 J'oinnhi/i of Mrd'illirriit,. 
 
 A' ./i >i!:iii.iiiiiit ']',■,'■ ^li'ii, 
 i. ;>!)!), /.iiM 709; //,„. v, 
 (/ Cmok-H V. 'I'lill-ILs/ii/j ,,■ 
 
 I'O-^I 70!) ! Ill rr Tinnhhij. 
 </ii/' <■/ IMihjh, -Jl A. i!. 
 il> I'f Soinliin v. 'J'oiri,,.i,;i 
 . ;^0o, pOMt 710. 
 
 '/■/air.t. 
 
 — h'xh-ii Worl: — Pim-if • 
 idiiig a liainagf Ly-li'w 
 Consolidated \iiiaici|. 
 to fully cany out tin/ 
 urc sutliuicnt funds law 
 ' tin.' "lij^iiial liy-luw. i,- 
 r tin ,>nii,lt'tioii (if the 
 ciii'i, nt, altlniULdi th- ■ 
 s ami \ inatiou.s, or l\. ii 
 s origin Hy plumitd. 
 tion li .1 drain, it was 
 ds wore uceii'<l fur tlit 
 Ltlut to the laue iiiul h. 
 in other extra woik ;unl 
 ended by the engineer:— 
 aw [irovidinj; for thiiii 
 aw, under sec. ."i7.'! I'f 
 lipal Aet, LS'J:.', and tliat 
 d power to pas.s it iuiil,,r 
 y ami 'J'vini.ihip of Itom- 
 
 ,w — Ordiniiry Ki'jidi- 
 '(( (epaijers — Ext nt ft rri- ■ 
 
 705 
 
 t[.«lugh«.ynnderlli;.:.:;,,r ^--l-'- 
 th^de.endantHn.M.lv.dtoe.'uiMinet^'t C^: 
 
 MUNICIPAL OOKPORATIONS. 
 
 '••"""""I" 'eM)IMil t(j eoil-llnet It it.,. , 
 
 «ry, a.s part of tin- ordinary 'x , ■ | ,,', ' T 
 current year, hut, nevertheless, ,1,7 '" 
 law tor Its eoiistru.tioii to th. .. „ , ^^ 
 
 wa« .lefeate.1. Thev how ev, , 1' ,"''"'' 
 
 it.seon«trncti,u,, a uj ,.'.'' I"",>-';^*-"'- '1 "Ul, 
 
 when ,t was e,„ri.d r * ','''"" ''"'••' 
 
 Hork navin^r |,i.,.„ eomnieneed a.s an item ,, 
 ordiuiirv e.\pen, iM,,|, to,' tU,. ,• '"'.''•-"»"' 
 
 constrnetion :_ ' •' "'" '"' "^ 
 
 tl^dd, 'l'^<Ml,at the defendants h,.d power to ' 'i'-- 
 pass the hydaw notwiU.standi,,,. that' a,' ^"■'-~ 
 
 In'work wa,s to he done on l.uTd ,ts e the 
 tc'rntor.al „n,ts, and without the ' n .nt of 
 
 u hydaw .-efers to ! J,, I , V, i^"■'-. ' ^'"•'' 
 
 not hring the wn,'k V .,,,'• /'''"'■" 
 
 tohe,.^truetedu,;;,er;:^!':,„:;ffiS'-""^' 
 
 Applieat,on to quash the ' "'^ -^^^ 
 
 \illl'r tli-Aili. lur 1 
 
 706 
 
 ;;■;.■>.• »n nndonh.ed d,>,e.,„'d . / K J 
 
 -...-..{,.;,:,.:: -l.i;-,- J-;;;.;; 
 
 p^-'ifo;-i;:;':-nr::f'rr'' ,'''*'" ''>-""'' 
 
 "-'Vmdrep„i,'„„adnUn^' ' '''^■" - 
 
 ■ -i^ ( '-l:v^;rSr ''''^"'^ ' "" 
 
 ;;;.;.i^:;!^n!;;7-i--^Ss.iI-[;-;;: 
 
 h:r;:-;S '■-""^-•=: ■ 
 
 V e t^, l'l:";>- — 'i"'"iu.., the plain iv; 
 
 thed:a;!,::'';::;;^^j::-:;7^;:'---''.y 
 
 -t.f«e,si™.d::i,::„s ,°:::pair:i:T'a' f-- 7-'" 
 
 "i'«ii,'htlieas.se.s.snient wia DLl.i I ' ' , ' ^'"""•^■/"/> "/ 
 
 ...o,.,.v.,,,,„„.,,,,,„,,„,,,,j,„,^,^„.,...,....,,._,^^^^^ 
 
 fi. Dmhiwie TrUils Act, IS'jl. 
 
 Effect on Pending Arbitrations 1 - Th,. 
 '"^"■uvge Jr.als Aet, KsOl, 54 Vi" "fil a) 
 
707 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 708 
 
 iii 
 
 (Irairmge uIiuhks uf the Miitiiriii il .\.t, UiiA 
 l)rini^'lit wiitii' down iipiiii tho Urnl^ will uit 
 l)i(H iiliiiK uiiy Hillliri. lit mitli't foi' it : 
 
 Hold, lliit tlio il;im;im'*( coiiijil liliril (it' iuvhc, 
 if iiiit from tliu " I'oiiHtniction," .'.t lUI uvfiits 
 from tin; " opcintioii, ' of tli<i ili' iiiij,'c Wuik.s 
 • if till' lU'fiiiiliiils ; aiiil thori'foi, llio ("oui't or 
 u ililil^'c Imd jiaiMdiirinii uiiih r ner. II of tho 
 Diainii^f 'I'liils .\> l, 18111, to (•<iiii|MilMiiilly 
 r< fer it to tliu lIofiMou ajipoiiitud uiidiT tliut 
 Act. 
 
 Semlile, tlioi'o was no juriH(li(!tion to icfor 
 this <MSf under gci,'. !l of the Ai;t ; for, iic ■oidlii;,' 
 to till! oonstniutioii |il;iii'd l>y tho Suiirciin' Court 
 of (';illildil Mill) 1 HC1-. ."iltl of tliu .Muilicip:!! .Act, 
 which is ill the suiic words as hoc. ',1, tlu' d im- 
 ujjes C'iiiipliiiu;d of did not arisu from the omi- 
 struction of the drain within the mcaiiiii;,' of 
 iiiio. !). 
 
 \Villrim>\-. T'lifiiihij) nj' It'tl'iiih, '_'! S. ('. I!. 
 1(W. c.iii<ldcrod. Swjii V. Toi'-iiiliij) iif Wtil. 
 Oxford, •_'■_'(>. R, G78. 
 
 Powers of Heferoe— .4»ifiH'/iiien/— ^'())/(/ich. 
 
 idfion —/))i.iiirii/rM Itniitt Snli'Ctn/ hi/ h'lKiiinri;] -- 
 
 III the rcHiilt, the rcferun'K jiidxmant, hold. 
 iiiK thiit he hiid juriHdictioii and nutting iMiilo 
 the Ity-liiM', was .iltiriiicd. //i c Tn'i'itsM/) of 
 A/ii-'in iiiii/ Tiiii'ii^/ii/i ,,/ Jtoi'lin/ir, hi. rr '/'i)imi- 
 nhi)! n/'l<oiliild Sill III mill Tiniii^liiii of J{iu-hi-n- 
 
 i,i; •.'•-' A. U. no. 
 
 7. Di-diuH Eiii mlimi Thromjh Sevcriil 
 J/iiiiirijiitll/iii, 
 
 By-law —uh'iii'iiniii i,f liiiti„liii<i anil Gnu- 
 li-ihiii'ii-ii 7'i/i(V(«/iiy,', J— Where a towiishiii muni 
 cipality [lanaed a by I iw, iiiirportiii:; to he iiiidur 
 Hi'ir. ,"iS.') of the ("oiiMolidivted M.iiiicipal Act, 
 I.SI);.', for the piupo.iu of mivking curtain altem 
 tioiLs ami iiiiproveiiienta in a drain, and xerved 
 an adillinill^' imiiiicipality. which was to he 
 lieiielited liy tho WMrk, with a cojiy of |,h,) 
 eiigineur'M rcpiut, etc., slutwing the; .sum re((iiir(<l 
 to lie eontriliiitt'd liy the latter, a.* directed h^ 
 .SIM', ,'.71), and the liydaw of the initiatill',' town- 
 sliip was irrojiiiiar and invalid : — 
 
 II Id. per .Mcrcilith (). ,/,, that the contrihii. 
 
 Held, hy th(! Court of Appeal, that under the i tory low iisliip wn... nevertheless not only eiitit 
 l_)raiiiK^'c 'I'lials Act, I.SiH, "i4_Vict. eh./)! (().),! Inic hound, within th.- four months prcMirihwi 
 
 p.iss the necessary hydaw to 
 
 the referee has power to award either d,'una;,'es 
 or coiu|ieiisati.>n, whether the case before him 
 lie fr.imed fur damages only or for comiieiisatioii 
 only, and on such a reference it is iinnecesHary 
 to consider whether Hie liy-laws in ipieation are 
 or arc not invalid. 
 
 Itepoi'ts of the referee upliehl. Burton, ,}..\., 
 diss'jntinj,' on the ground tliat in the luie case 
 there was a referent'e of the action and not a | 
 transfer under 54 Vict ch, .'il, sec. 19, and that t 
 in the other ease the reference wan not within 
 tiie Act, 
 
 Held, l)y tho "Supreme Court of Canada, that 
 upon refi'ience .if an action to a referee under 
 the Drainage Trials /ict, whether under sec, 11 
 or ace. I'J, tlie nferce has full piiwer to deal with 
 the case a.s he thinks lit, and to make, of his own 
 motion, all necessary aiiiendments to enable him 
 to decide according to the very right and justice 
 of the case, and may convert the claim for 
 (laniagea under sec. 1 1 into a cl.'iini for daniagea 
 arising under sec. oOl of the .Municipal Act ; 
 
 Hold, also, that the referee has no jurisdietion 
 to adjudicati! .is to tlie propriety of the route 
 .selected by the engineer and a'loptcd by by-law, 
 the only remedy, if any, lieiiig by ajipeal against 
 the project jiroiiosed liy the by-l.iw, ////(■.< v. 
 Tuwnski/) of E/liir, Cronk.i v, Townih'i ii uf 
 Ellice, 120 A. 1!, -^25, -.'S S. C, It. 429. 
 
 Powers of Referee — Qiientlonn /felatiiuj lo 
 A>i.si'.i.'<ii»nt.]~S( I' III rt- Township of llni inch and 
 Toirnship of Ix'a/i-ii/li, 21 A. R. G77, [lo.-ii 710, 
 
 Powers of Referee — Helliivj Aildc Ih/dnw.] 
 — I'er H.igarty, C..).(),, and Maclennan, ."[.A.— 
 The drainage refer.'e has jurisdiction to set 
 aside a by-law of a minor muiiicip.tlity charging 
 other minor municiijalities with a portion of the 
 expense of sucli repairs. 
 
 Per r.urton and Osier, JJ, A,— The ilrainage 
 referee iias no jurisdiction. His jurisdiction 
 depends upon that of the township. If they 
 liave exercised it wr.ingiy or nii.stakeiily, he ni.iy 
 review their action, hut he cannot set aside a 
 by-law which they had no power under any 
 circumstauces to pass. 
 
 liy sec, riSi), to 
 
 raise its share of tlie estimated cnt" 
 
 Held, per lio-e, ,1,, that the contributory 
 township could nut 1"' required to pass a by.|;tw 
 raisin.' its share until the initiating '.nuniripality 
 had [las'jil a valid bylaw adopting the report 
 |irovi(ling for the doing of the work, inclu'lmg, 
 pi'oviaiuniilly, measures for tlie raising of it,s 
 proportion n) the funds : - - 
 
 Held, per MacMahun, .1., that the coutrilm 
 tory township had no power to pass a liy law 
 I'or r.-iisiiig its share of the proposed expendi- 
 ture until the initiat iiig municipality liid pisseil 
 its by-law for the eunstruction of the works :— 
 
 Held, however, .MacMahoii, .)., hii^liudi; 
 that in this case the iiurtion of the by-law of 
 the initiating township providing fur the c-jii 
 struction of the work was a suliicient eonipliaiico 
 with sec, SyO, aiel severable from the other por- 
 tion of it, providing fur the raising of the funds. 
 
 Where the council fur one iiiiinici|iality as- 
 sumed, under the supposed authority uf ."i.'i \'ict. 
 ch. i2, sec, jS,') (( I,), ill a by-law for the iinprove- 
 nieiit uf a drain, to assess kinds of the plaiiitilF 
 situated in anotlier iiiunieip'dity : — 
 
 Held, that sucli assessment was wholly inigii- 
 tory and void and the piaiutitl' could mil be 
 bound by it, and w.is therefor not entitled ton 
 declaration that it was illegal and iiiv.diil, 
 lirowjkkm v. Ton'whii) of (trey, 2G U, R. G!)4, 
 
 Coat of Work— r'o«/c/V;((^j.i)(.] -The scliemi; 
 of the -Municipal Act is to make the total cost 
 of the proposed work fall upon the initiating 
 munici[iality, less .such sums as nny be properly 
 chargeable against otlier municipalities for the 
 benetit.s receiveil liy them respectively, and if 
 benelit is disprov. the attempted chaVge fails, 
 and is not to be imposed elsewliere. Ill, re. 
 Townshiihf of liomiiey awl Tilbury He*/, 18 A. 
 R. 477. 
 
 Cost of Work— Cu»?/■^7,^J^•o/J— /1/);)C((/.1-An 
 adjoining lownsliip cannot lie ciiarged under 
 sec, r)7G of K, S, (), eh, 181 with a proportion 
 of the cost of drainage w iks which extend 
 beyond the limits of a third township. It a 
 
 m 
 
708 
 
 n;foroii'« jiirl({m9iit, hold. 
 iilii'tioii iiinl Muttin^ aHiilii 
 mil. lit n Tiiii'iiHhli) of 
 III' Jto'-lii tli-r. III fi- Titimt 
 mill Toirinhij) of Itiir.hi'ii- 
 
 iii'J T/iroiiijh Stvivat 
 
 ri/nliliii, 
 
 <n (!/■ tiiilinliiiii mill Oou- 
 -Wlioru H t'>wiislil|i muni 
 \y. inii|),n'tii!;,'tc> 1m- mikIlt 
 oliilntu.l Muiiiripal Act, 
 It iiiiikiiig i.'ortaiii iiltcni- 
 :8 ill II ciraiti, uinl Ki^rve<l 
 :ility. wiiifh wan to lie 
 rk, witli a cojiy of ilm 
 MJuwiiig tlicsum rei)uir(<l 
 lit; l.itccT, a.M ilirt'otiiii li^ 
 w 111 tlu! iiiitiatinj,' town 
 iinalid : — 
 
 I '. .1., tliHt tlio coMtrilm- 
 rtlicli'ss lint (inly cntitliMl, 
 
 fiHir moiilli.i |)ivn;riliwi 
 tlir iiucessiiry liy-linv to 
 tirniitcil niit : — 
 , lli.il the i.'iiuti'iliiitory 
 I't'ijiiiri'il to \yMH a l)y-law 
 liu iiiiliiitin.:.' ■.iiiini* -iiality 
 law ailoptiii',' the r<;|iort 
 
 of tliu woi'ls, iiiclii.lin^', 
 H for tlio raising of iia 
 
 1, .1., that the CDntrihii 
 pouin' to iias.-i a liy law 
 f the pioposuil t'xpi.'nili- 
 ; iiuiniui|>ality Irnl pis.-ioil 
 ;nii;ti(m of thu works; — 
 o.Mahon, .1., h'l^i'tiUi; 
 iirtion of the liy-law of 
 
 providiiii; for thu ("jn 
 us a sniiicii'iit ci)ni|iliuii(.'e 
 •aliltj from the otlirr por- 
 
 till! raisiiij,' nf thu fiimls. 
 or oiiL' iiuinioipality as- 
 iSL'il authority of .">.") Vjct. 
 !i by-law for the improve- 
 ss lands of tliii plaintilf 
 lioipality : — 
 siiioiit was wholly iuij;;i- 
 ! plaiiitif!' coiilil iiDl be 
 iiert'for not entitli'il to ii 
 as illegal ami invalid. 
 ofdrii/, 20 O. R. G94. 
 
 (rihnlvm, ] —The scheme 
 to make the total cost 
 fall upon tlie initiatiiii,' 
 iuina a.s nny lie properly 
 r inunicipalitics for the 
 0111 rcapec'tively, and if 
 attuinptcil charge fails, 
 )oseil elsfwhiTc. In n 
 mil Tilbury WmI, ISA. 
 
 U-Uiution — /l/)/iC((/.]— An 
 mot lie charged under 
 
 IS-t with a proportion 
 B W' rkj which extend 
 
 third township. Jt ia 
 
 709 
 
 -Hi^oftiioAetith: m ,, r'l':::;!'';-'''-"^'' 
 
 under -uch .^ir.Mn,,,taneo,V . ' u ' l; ,d '' " "'" 
 
 l'-r<M|orai.i| .Maeh-nn, n r ..i • .■ 
 
 to the le^^ality i,i ,a dr .', T -''''I^-^'"-"h 
 
 clones /rfth^;,;';!: ,';'-; -,-''''t-ti,,,. 
 
 MUNICIPAL OORPORATIOKS. 
 
 =--ii is not',:. Jh::^'i:;;;^ ...,?.,^--;yi' 
 
 <lr,.HI Hfi) report of in en., ". " a "^'' to tlio 
 
 ti;-inritaidn..;i;; r^j;;:,:;-^'-yt.> 
 
 '■""" \^'' '^'^l-^^nni u,..,,±:^Z^^':T■ 
 t-.i of its cost t, lb,; T' ''" '";"'""•• 
 
 the engineer of .nie of ,,,':,, 'i.''^'''; "" ' ""f 
 toiuiko a report for e u'lvi .,"""'" '^"' 
 
 :i:r.-e I ou ; for hi,,.|. „ ' " "^"" thj mniH 
 
 wHi..hei;/:j.:;:i:;lei„:^^;;:;;,--l;'i"t"nere 
 
 »..a pledge eaeh t,,wn | t^i Iv n .'"^^''"r'"' 
 afi-eal against Ih • .h-iru of th V ■ '"" '7 
 
 "1- .t, to .lie p.M.ible de in ,Tf' '.'"'^"•^•■■' 
 
 P^rty.n,„.rsa.e.se,forthJV;ti;l'ifS!:t 
 
 «Ts report was nuashed. ""1'^'"-' ' '"^ ""g"«- 
 III deseribinir lands fo 
 
 .v=re ye, IS In amldgn",sVl'e:;io :'''''■'', '" "'" 
 an to the elleet u„on th.v^' '■■""' '/""■'•'' 
 
 710 
 
 ' "■••ridy hoean , tl i ..a t, r uj''''''""^'" ".'••»"'"»''. 
 
 ^i^ a ciineetiiw li"k ,1', ,'''''''' '" """'' 
 
 '""l'-'>' that ,1,. ,0 n M ' '''■^""•/•""^truoto.l 
 
 -'.-ne i. i,/ :r\.: ii::^:v^,;'^;/;T^" 
 '=-;:-'S:ri::;;-:::;u v^^^^ 
 .^:t'^;:::e^;;L^■••'f'■■|''^i-^:^^^ 
 
 'I'^^t "in're a d aii eon.t' ii t" l' "'"'"'"• •'•A- 
 
 ■'^.'"''Miei,.aiitvli(!rdl ;i.u;''''':r"''.''y 
 
 "I'liatoly or bv nie ow I \ ■' '""""" '"»■ 
 ' witer.onrsellowio."; ,"' ? '.'''"" "'' ''»tiiral 
 
 I or unproved the oiifl. LonHtriieteil 
 
 :t|;.';.;..idatl!dy;:fc,:r:[-;;'i;;:;;^i^--^ 
 
 '"'""''••'l.ility for a prop ■ ., . o ' , .'''"'"'"H 
 '•'Miitrnet, (in or iiMiii. „. •''"•'t 'it the cost oi 
 
 '''•'-•- •'- iuHs'Kr t^'l 'i;;;^ S' ""V'^'«" 
 
 'vUtiiigt.tlie.t.H.ssm.iit 'luuHtions 
 
 ttonaildli^Stolh'r''''''''^^-'^''^^^"'-- 
 courses which have . ""■'"" "'■igiiial water, 
 and eiilai^d ai 1 , -"nv^'y^"^"^ ''""t'»»«-l 
 •^, A. H. .?!»(),• still g':,;;,;''^"'-'^ ""'^ 'i"^>rit, 
 
 i".7'^?t;r ■&,;;?'•;;• i;'.::n;;;;.th^^ 
 
 ■•'>'lil to assess was aili,-,,, I /' "'''',''•'■"«. Hio 
 
 ikt-'^nt-iti-'tr^^ 
 ;':""=i^:;;r;:':tisri:'^''''-^^^^ 
 
 benelt. S/c;,hi'ii v Ifi'lr^ V aiiesse I lor 
 tniguished. • ''•■ -■**- 'iis- | 
 
 ^™...cw tei;Ht'';^v'*'"/'''^''>'•'•''^''- 
 •■e-erce to wh m his ae , ' f'"""'"' '"'f'"-'-- ''" 
 
 ttohowas ,.ot lade u, sue'" ^'''''^' ^''' 
 matter haviiu' been eo„e IH I i ■'•^''f«^""^"t, the 
 tionof the l.yvj'u^ '-""eluded by the eoi.linna- 
 
 •li Huinieipality constrooM'n,, .. i • 
 water loose iust ins I "' ' ''™'" ^'"'""t lot 
 
 Repair , CuiitrihuHoii 1 \ri , . 
 
 works allectin- save •■ ?, I, " ~ ""'-" ''"-ainago 
 -.tHtrneted ll^t ! , "':;V'."""''P '"''"^ ■■'^» 
 
 "ti.er minor in, " di ^ T"^'''^ "'«'' 'ho 
 '••■M-'iise ,d' repiirs 7 . '^ ^ "'tnbnto to the 
 
 I A'" 'I'ow.ishin of /,,/';,' , •'l';'- i""^' 7l(i; 
 
 S. Maii.i 
 
 ll'UIIH. 
 
 •^I'-tioi, ,,yOot li. ,s O eii is;i ■■irrnunr.j 
 
 'I^ms strictly soc Hed tl at s /'^''''^f ""'>' '" 
 "* Inve been •o-HH i ii ' ''•■ ^noh outlets 
 
 """"^■ipality from"^^; f ^''"f '"■^ted ; and a 
 whether b/d . " ']T T^''? ^^''^'' ""^v^. 
 ycbaiusor by natural outlets, into a 
 
 Non-completion of Woi-kq \r ■ , 
 
 The township o (■ i;;;,.^ 'it'r"--^""'''''*-^- 
 
 Ontario Municipal Ac R s' 'eh'^r" PV*"* 
 
 al::;n."t::^riS.^t;riT^"'^^» 
 
 owing t^i^°n;;:rtS;':,;:;;;Lr^r:?i:!r"""^ 
 Str^ii;:r'^'V'::u^ti'^"°^^^'"'^^ 
 
 joined i„ an cUo,;;,a' 1 i th? T'''\''P °^ «' 
 other dra.s.r^:^--';,;^;-^^tJ.^ 
 
711 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 712 
 
 11: 
 
 i iliii 
 
 * »s " ■' '--0. ■ 
 
 to flow liack and flood tlie roads and lands in tlio 
 township, and tliey askcil for an injimdion to 
 restrain ('. from so intciferinj,' with the t'xisting 
 drains, juid a iiiaiidaniiis to t<]nijK'l the fonijile- 
 tidii of tho diain nndcitakeii to be constructed 
 by <'. , as •vvell as dani»f.'es for the injury tf> ^I.'8 
 lunil and other land in S. : — 
 
 Held, afhiniing the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that M. was entithd to daniayes ; and. I 
 reversing such decision, Tasidiejcau, .1.. dis- i 
 senting, and I'attirson, J., hesitaling, tliat the | 
 township of ,S. was entitled to a inani'i.-Mnus, Init 
 the original decree should be varied by striking 
 out the direction that the woik shnuhf be don(> ' 
 at the cost of the tovnshij)of C., it not beirg j 
 proved that the original assessment was sulli"^ j 
 oient : — 
 
 H(dd, ])er llitchie, ('. ,T., Stiong and (.'wyiine, ' 
 J.J.. that sec. rif-.S of the Mnnicij'al ,-\ct. pro- 
 viding foithe issui^ of the niandanuis to compel 
 the making of ie]iiiirs to priferve and naintain 
 a drain, does not ap.i)iy to this case, in v hicli , 
 the drain Masnevei- full)' iikhIc and completed, 
 but that the townsliip oi S. wr,s entitled to a 
 mandamus under llie ( 'ntario Judicature Act 
 l;. K. O. ch. 44 :-■ 
 
 Hehl, further, that the lloodirg of lands was 
 not an injury for which the to«nshi]) of ,'^. i-iiuld 
 niaintain an action for damagi s, even though a 
 genera! nuisance was occasiomd. 'Ihe "onlv 
 Iiecuiiiary compensation towhidi S. wastntitleil 
 vas the cost of repairing and restoring roads 
 M'a'^hed away : — 
 
 Held, |ie>'']'atters(in,,J., that it might lie better 
 to have the dicisicn of the (Van I ol ^\ppe.d un- 
 
 Judgment of Suprenu' Court of Canada, ■_'! 
 S. C. K. 10;i, varied. Onrjiom/ioii of lluli inl, 
 v. inV/mm-s, [189;jl A. C. r)40. 
 
 9. \cii/ii/i iici'. 
 
 Construction of Work /./'(/'//iV//. ]- Hdii, 
 liy liuiton, J. A., that an acticu for 'negligent .' 
 i.s not maintainable against the muiiicipahc, 
 uidtss the council lias inteifei'.d in oi' uiidir- 
 taken the constiuction of the woik : and (ji^.tri 
 vhether in such a case the mtmbeis cf tin 
 council miglit not be be peisonally liable. 
 
 Held, by the .■^uprcme Couit of Canada, lli:a 
 vheie a scheme toi' diainage wi rk to he c(.;i 
 strucied under a v.-did by-law jiroxcs defccli\. 
 ami the work ha-' not licen skilfidly and |.io](ily 
 leifoinicd. the niunici|iality cors'triu ling it i,i'i 
 not liable to iicisons whose lands are dami:g( ,1 m 
 const ijuence ef such defects and iirpiop(7 ici, 
 stiuclion, as torf /la^ois, but are liable lu.Ui 
 sec. i^91, Municij^al Act, for damage ('one in 
 ci n&truction (jf the work or const (|uciit thucti 
 //;/t.v v. Ttii:ii.--hiii (if Lir,f(\ Crij(l:.-i\\ T(.iiii.-I,:i 
 of Ellkc, 'JO A. K. •^'l'^, 2\> ,S. C. ]!. 4-J9. 
 
 10. PiliHoiis. 
 
 Necessity for— A'o/' Her/'."]— On a petition 
 tlicietor a by-!aw_ was passed and the m-mu 
 
 in 
 
 (listuihed and let the township of S. give notice I proceedings taken for the cen.stiuction of a iiiv 
 to rejair under sec. i>'.S of the Municipal Act ! frrm a j oint in the township of C,'. to the tew 
 and Vol k out its riniidy und( 1- that stctii 11. ■■ • 
 
 .hidgment of the Ct^iirt (f Ap] eal, 18 A. R 
 '■'.r)2, reversed. Tcvnshlj, of Scml.ta \. Toini.-hi: 
 of Chatham, 2] S. C. F. :^0.". 
 
 line 1 etwien the townshijis of A. and C., wiim 
 it (onnected with an existing drain, wlurdijiMi 
 certain )aii<li.wnt IS on the said town line |iti 
 tifjned the council (.f C. threati ning that if ti:, ii 
 „ , ; lands were daniagid by the said dia:ii tluv 
 
 Notice in ■Wrltir.s — JJa7>io;i<.-^~]r,n.t of would hold the town.-hip <,f C. liable thcu'd' 
 
 and 1 rayed that they would order the siirvcviT 
 to c( ntii.ue the drain to a sulllcient (riith t. In- 
 stiuctit ns were given to the .surveyor, who a.iidt 
 the necessary i. xamination, aiuf reiioitul in 
 favour cf a drain dciig the town line ; and a 
 liy-law was introduced for the constiin tin. 
 thertof, reciting that a majority of tlie lanl 
 owners benefited had pititioind (refeiiiiiir !■ 
 
 M^uivlii.nvcf ai:,/ J:( /mir- L'idiu'/i/ Itj Ad'n.ri-- 
 yvijliijoif Civ> hurtle) — Jlanah/' ty Arl>itra- 
 tiov.]~\'m\cv the Ontaiio Muu'cipaf Act, ].'. S. 
 0. eh. KS4, an action for damages lies against a 
 municipality at the suit of any jieison who can 
 shew that lie has sustained injury from the non- 
 jHifoinance of Ihe.statutt ly du'tv of maintain- 
 ing and reyairing its diainage wciks : - 
 
 tiel(. that see. 58.:}, sub-see. 2, applies to a i the petition hi.st n;entifnid), and assessic" th.- 
 case which falls within .'ec. .^SC, and. while pre- est (u the lands benefited, etc., and niuiiiir- 
 scribing a r.otice in writing as a condition pre- the propoition thereof to he borne by the liiiid- 
 cedent to a mandamus, does not, <ii its tnie • in A. On receiving notice <if the proptud U- 
 eonstruction preclude an action for damages i law the township of A. gave notice of aiiMii'l 
 without such notice. j and aibitrator.s were appointed. Subst.im iitiv 
 
 in an action brought without notice in writirg I the township of A. moved for an order of nr,;. 
 against a mumcij,ahty f,.r damages for injury \ hibition forbidding the aibitrators fi. ni fiiiiliir 
 t'ausfd to tiie plaintiHa lands and for a man- \ proceeding in the matter, on the gioiind el ll:i 
 (lamus to prevent a recurrence of the injury :— : absence of a proper ju tition for such drain :- 
 
 Held, that so far as such iiijury-B as occasioned I Held, per Street, J., that the drain iinint-s- 
 ny tlie muDicipal drain and embankment being ' tion came within either see. ofi!) or iiilK ol tk- 
 out 01 rejiair, orfrom their not being kept in such ' Municii al Act. 1!. (S. {). eh. 184, and not witliiii 
 .•V state .-.s to carry cfl', in relief of the plaintitls' sec. 58r3, an.l that a iietition was an indispci;^ 
 lands, ail the water which the drain wa.s capable i aide pieliminary to the itassing of the bv-la«. 
 ot carrying off as originally constructed, the , whereas the alleged petition was cluuiv in- 
 action was maintainable :- sufficient ; that the mere faei of its not i.eirK 
 Held, tiirlher, that so far as the injury was quashed within the iM^riod limited by sec. ,":' 
 occasioned liy the negligent construction by the wonld not prevent its being treated as iiiv.-lii! 
 municipality under its statutory powers of in other pror-eedings as here ; and that rniLili 
 another drain, the action must be dismissed, tion would be granted, notwithstanding tlic In 
 
 The remedy in such case (see see. 591) was by 
 arbitrution aa dircctc ^ by the statute. 
 
 law was good on its face, especially as there iiail 
 been no laches. 
 
712 
 
 ronie Court of CaiUKla, -Jl 
 (1. C'<irj/orn/ioii a/' lltih ,<;/, 
 fV. ('. 540. 
 
 N'( ;;//;/( life. 
 
 Work /.(■'(/-//.Y//. J- -Hi 111, 
 
 at an acticii for iirjiliViu, , 
 
 ai^^iiist till' iim:ii(:i|,iilif, 
 
 MS inteifc'i'. (1 in I'V iniili r- 
 on of tlic work ; anil <y(,'ii)v 
 
 cuHu tlio Mtnilicis of till 
 
 lie poison^illy lialiic. 
 i-iiHi Ciuit of Canada, that 
 (liaina^f vuk to lie ina 
 ill liy-hn\ )iri.\c's ileffilivr. 
 
 litiii .sliilfully anil |pro],(iiy 
 fipality corstnii tin;,' it ;ii', 
 v\lii'tolaniis art' (lanii:;.'i il n. 
 
 (Ufi'ct.s anil in'|iiinit i im, 
 :i-vO).s-, lint arc lialiK' m.iii i 
 
 Act, for damage ('nnc in 
 
 ork or conRii|Uciit tlHiclu. 
 
 KU'n-f, CifjiL.t V. T(. II 11,1,:, 
 !."', -I'A S. C. 1!. 'I-Jil. 
 
 I'liitioilS. 
 
 (W D'c?'/-."]— On a jatitiim 
 as ]ia.sKC(l aiul tlic iimkiI 
 
 tlic II nstiuction of a iliain 
 vnsliip of C.'. to tlic ti.Hii 
 ii-liijis of i\. and C., whm 
 LwiKtiiig drain, wIkiciiiim! 
 I tlic taid tov II line | tti 
 J. thrcatmiiiij that if tliu'i 
 liy till! sail! dia'n tlnv 
 hip of C. liable tlicu'ir 
 Mould order the ^nrviMr 
 to a siitHcicnt i-utli t. In- 
 to tlic .siirvcyoi'. win, n inli 
 lation, and rc]iiiii(il in 
 irg tlic (ovn line ; and a 
 ■ed foi' the constiia tin. 
 
 a majority of tlic lai.ii 
 j)(tition(d (refcniiiL.' d 
 icncd), and assesi-ii'L; d:. 
 ictited, etc., and niimin:: 
 ' to lie home liy the iiiiiii- 
 oticc of tlie jiK jii ml !i\- 
 ^.. gave notice of a|i|i'al, 
 ippointcd. Suli.^dnHiitly 
 :ived for an order of pin- 
 ; .irbitrators fii ni fiiitlur 
 :er, on tlic gionnd ul ihi 
 :ition for such drain :— 
 , that the drain in i|ius 
 -■r sec. oC!) or .'lilS o( iln' 
 ). ch. I,S4, and nfit within 
 tition wa» an iiiilit-|iei!>- 
 e i)apsing of the hylav. 
 petition was cUaily in- 
 ire fact of its not liciri; 
 !riod h"inited hy sec. h'i 
 being treated a.s inv.ilii! 
 
 licrc ; and thai [ rahi'i 
 notwitiistanding llic liy 
 e, especially as there liml 
 
 713 
 
 On appeal a Divisional C,,,,,, ^-as einnllv 
 (ivnleil, and , he appcd therefore f l' ' A^ 
 
 Uv North, L>l (). Jt. 470. ""■"-/"/"!/ Cold,,:.. 
 
 teritory benclite 1, l,v p.issini'a bv-1 iw- n , , 
 clie;:t without a petitii. , thevf r ■ AV sV ''" 
 
 Necessity tov~0/,/ lV,>,i--Xa, r,,/,.,.,; 1_ 
 
 aadconstructe :i^;;^;.;i;:;;;3;; ^;,,;';;;|:u.^ 
 
 oiistmi,' nioi-c than .S-'()(l ,»„ t i """" niLicto 
 pe,i.iia,anill,y.h:.*r, l'-^;--''--'',. 
 
 '.net entered into under .1 ' '' ^'""- 
 
 ».J"Kt:s";ti:::f- ""'-" 
 
 /r;-n.„;,,t, y. Xorth l>„ff,M„, 19 S. C R --.SI 
 <:iin,<iilereil. • <- . n. ,>sj, 
 
 ■ludginent of, he Common I'loas Divisi,.,, -5 
 
 coe„//„„- /v.,.,-,v / . I,' Co V 7-: .'";"•""-. 
 
 N"P.-e:ueV'ourttf(^m;"^.src:^^:'o,;ir''"^: 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 714 
 
 I I'cr Osier anil .Majlcnnan, ,7,1 A tbif tu^ 
 
 :^i:;J;?h:ttii;:i:;ii:^.:-i^::;-^ 
 !^^!riur;:',i':;;';;r;i!;:,,r;':;L;e./'i-f^''^ 
 
 ^^A.o-.HoytheSupre,(u;(;L;^l!!r^L.a. 
 
 -VI. lO.Vl'itoi'l; 
 
 ATloN OK L.vy,, 
 
 
 XII. HuilfWAVS. 
 
 Necessity tov~Of,l ifW/,^X,„- (huhi i a 
 lo.vnship council, Hudin.r ti,.,t ' '""''• l-A 
 
 water, by reanou of the natur.U iC^^^ ^ZX 
 
 s'':nJ,l;r-;iSti:yr'i^S^/i 
 
 sciioai... ior a new .Iran. Icidin,. frZ. tie' . Ai 
 
 j.«.,\:'il;;i.;t,s;r™;;si;™';i^ 
 
 »„,, ■•,', (1. IL 'S. '■"'■»-«./' «f Emm. 
 
 •Municipal Act vu, of .,'),. "' ^ ""^^l'<late.l 
 
 p..«scd 'under it ^ ^ '^"' "^ '^ 'auaioipality 
 
 ^^^>y"t:Ll^ "" '' ---^'- under 
 
 -i-u toX;^.g::in,':™, «--'^' "- »«- 
 
 aeicrSutr;;;ri::;::;i^-t'r'"^'^v'»* 
 ^".-.•-iyg..cu,^th;;:;^H^t;:rlri.''^- 
 
 tion to .suci 1 M ,1..]...., 
 
 vi.™!"'?^T'-^-^'''^' '•'■''"l'"' i" I'^S^, after 
 
 workorrcLn:'",;':'^',;'^^;';:^!'''''': 
 ^-'t,::~z'^-'=^^'-'^'-'<iS' 
 
 if«-a; V, I r;.^' ','' '""';",' "thcr grounds, that 
 Held I ^ U'tsonothis u-itiidr,uval :- 
 
 I'd- lla,3-Y'r,';'"r'' ''''•''' ""^"•iti"l''aH-. ! 
 "'^v.thihuu-.d" ■mlfl,.,. ^'""''' "■'■■■< ""l>"wci- 
 timi wild .V, „. \ '" ''">' ''''''■"^' tl'^' 'l''<^^- 
 *«fo,\;;:L:i;i;'""'-"^'ll"l-valor'not, 
 
 ; "■ ''.iji''^ "hjection to .sucli a oy-law 
 
 'towiihSn Si vln""f. ''•'''"''■ l'"'''i«''«<l in the 
 
 _^^_^t !/« .u,, a,„t Jui,;i.h,p ,,, Uurfonl, 25 O. K. 
 ;eeeaing^Ja;;^,;,,t",^ '^>".-''-t,'o.i and pro* 
 
 '-i^r "Sir '"^ *"-" - 
 
 i-.niiir.y lip.jii rua;l.s owm-l l.ir +i.„ 
 '". -I ij. 1 . lUO, specially referred to. 
 
i: 
 
 715 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 715 
 
 
 Unli'SH siii'cially rotaiiud liy stututc, Hit' 
 witlidrawal tit a city iVoiii tlic jurisdiction of 
 the county toiiiiiiiatcH ail lialiility of llii. fornior 
 to taxation for county imrioscs. 
 
 An agreement liy a city uitlidrawn from the 
 juri.sdiction of tliu county to contiiliute towards 
 
 the maintenance and reii! 
 
 a counly road is 
 
 in, is not lialile to a mere licensee for iiersonal 
 injui'ies fc.istaincd owir<; to want of rejiair of thij 
 buililiiit', at all events wlieri' Unowledge <]f the 
 want of rejiair is not shewn. SclmUll v. 7'oir;( 
 of Bi.rl'iii, -JO (), R, 54. 
 
 nllrii virex the city corporation. < 'uuiiUf o/' Liii- 
 rohi V. City of SI. Cdlkariii: s, -21 A. K. ".•{"(). 
 
 Natural Gas— /i'/;//''' to y<''-/« .]— Natural yas 
 is a mineral within the meaninj,' of the iluni'ci- 
 pal Act, I!. S. (>. ch. IS4, sec. .JH,'), wliich gives 
 Jiower to the coipoiatiou of any county or Xow n- 
 ship to sell or lease mineral rights under high- 
 ways. Untciriii Xaliinil (.'a-i^'Cc v. (/(j.^lii/d 
 IH A. R. (;2(). 
 
 Noxious WeedB — J.'titionil o/'.^— Municipal 
 corporations are not '• owners " (jr '• occujiants " 
 of highways in their municipalities Mitliin V. S, 
 O. ch. 202, "An Act to Prevent the Spread of 
 Ivoxiona Weeds,'' etc., nor does the word "land" 
 therein include street or highway. 
 
 The aiipointnient of an inspt'ctor under the 
 Act lieing di.seretionary with the council unless 
 petitioned for liy the necessary nnmher of rale- 
 payers, and that of an overseer heiiig altogether 
 diseretionary, in (ho al.sencc of such appoint- 
 ments, no duty is cast on the eoimeil toent down 
 noxious weeks growing in the streets. O.'/iona- 
 V. CUtij of Kmij.-iti'n, 2:) (). R. ;J82. 
 
 Obstruction by Private Person— /'rc/aco- 
 tory .Ji((li)h)f:i,t — Iiijinicfnjti.\ — A municipal 
 corporation has the right to have it dnhired, as 
 against a piivatc person, whether or not eertain 
 land is a pniili^; hii;liway, and whether such 
 person has the right to possess, oeeiiny. and 
 olistiiat the same. 
 
 And in an action l.roui;ht l.y the municipal 
 corporation for tile pnrjicse. a declaration may 
 be made according 'o the facts, and the defendan't 
 enjoined from ])essessingorocru])vimr the land so 
 as to i.hslrnct the use of it as a I'mhiic hi.'hv.ay. 
 
 Ff.iii/,i,i Fulls v. Virtoi-iii II. IP, Co., 29 (ir. 4 
 followeil. 
 
 Cooiifrlumi V. City of Toronto. 21 (). R. 120. 
 19 A. R. 641, applied' and followed, fitii if 
 Toroi,l„ V. Lor.sc/i, 24 (), ]!. 227. ' " 
 
 Repair— //ot/,/ (l'».s/»,/ Air„y—R,'.storation.'\ 
 — V\ here in an artion lirouglit to c'ompel a muni- 
 cipal corporation to r<,.pair a portion of a road 
 whicii r,in along the shore of a lake, it appeared 
 that the road had liccn coniiiletely siilmicrged by 
 the water, so th.it restoration would lie iieces- 
 aary, and no ordinary reparation could suttice :— 
 
 Held, that the defendants were not reiinired 
 by law to do the work. McCorwick v. Tovnxhiv 
 ofPelee, 20 (). R. 288. 
 
 See. ea.ses under next .sub-title .is to Ll.\n;i,iTV 
 
 FOK lN.JrKIES CI\VIS(i To AcCI DKNTS OX Hl.:ll- 
 
 XIII. LiAnif.iTv lou Nkiji.ioknck. 
 
 1. Noii-rf/iair of Iliiildiiii/. 
 
 IAceaBe—KnowM!it.]-A miinieiijal coriiora- 
 tion, owner of a public park and building there- 
 
 2. Xou-ripair if J/iij/nray. 
 
 Roadway — A/li ration — Vixililr Damji r. \- A 
 municipal corporation is not resjionsiblc ui 
 damages to a person who is injured in emlea- 
 vouriiig to cross in daylight a jilainly visihle 
 shallow t'cnch, lawfully and necessarily in tlie 
 street at the time, the person injured" beiii", 
 moreover, familiar with the locjility, and km v- 
 ing that there is close at hand a safe passage « uy 
 across the trench. Kiachii \. City of 'J'orn„iu 
 •22 A. R. -.ill. 
 
 Roadway— J //■■/•«/;../, of (,'rac/i — Apiin.urh 
 —Contril./i'or;/ 3'<;///f/t«(r. ]'— The Act of iuc.ir- 
 poration of the town of Portland, ,'« Vict. ch. 
 11 (N.l!.), which remained in force •nhtu llip 
 town was incorporated as a city by 4,5 Vici. rh. 
 HI (N.R.), em|)Owered the corjjoration to i.ik i;, 
 Layout, regulate, repair, .amend, and clean' the 
 roads, sticets, etc.: — 
 
 Held, that the corporation had autlinrity 
 under this Act to alter the level of a atrcn u 
 the public convenience required it. 
 
 W. was owner and occupant of a hoii.«( in 
 Portland, situate several feet back from llm 
 street, with sttjis in front. The corpr.'-.-itici, 
 caused, the street in front; of the house to 1^' , ;it 
 down, in lioing which the stejis weie remu\'t,l, 
 and the house left some six feet above the icad. 
 To git liown to the sticet \V. placed two .-iiml! 
 pl.inks fi<,m a |)Iatform in hom of the In. use, 
 and his wite, in going down tlic.^e p)a!<ks in tin' 
 necessary course of her daily avoc.Mioiis, sliiiied 
 and lell. rereiving severe injuries. .Sh-. |,a,l 
 used the (ilanks befon.', and knev.' that il «a.s 
 dangerous to walk up or down them, ju an 
 action against the city in conseoiience ot tl;e 
 injuries so received : — 
 
 Meld, alHrming tlie jndgment of the Ciuit 
 
 below, that the cor|)oration having authoiify to 
 
 I do the work, and it not being shewn that it 'was 
 
 I negligently or improperly done, the eitv was 
 
 not liable : - 
 
 Held, also, that the wife of W. was giiiltv of 
 contributory negligences in using the pliuik', 33 
 she did, knowing that such use was dangci'ai.s. 
 iVilliams V. Cily^of l'orl/i,ii,l, 1!) ,'S. C. l!. I.'9. 
 
 Roadway— 0^/((<r»t7i(JH.— liuildimi Mali rial'.] 
 — Sfv Mrhoimld v. Dickenson, 25 0. K. 4'\ 21 
 A. 1;. 48.'), /-(«/ 72(i. 
 
 Roadway — Obstruction — Contractor. \ — A 
 contractor with a nninicipal corporation tor tlie 
 repair of a hi;;hway of theirs, who ncgli.Lctitly 
 leave.s an obstacle thereon in such a position as 
 to frighten a horse being driven on the hij^liway, 
 thereby causing injury to the driver, is h.-iMc in 
 an action for the improper use of the liighvay, 
 and is not relieved from liability by the fatt 
 that the corjioration may have otherwise iii^'li- 
 gently allowed the highway to get out: of ic)iair. 
 
 In such a case the corporation are not lialile 
 for the accident cau.sed by the improper iiic^ 
 unless their assent thereto can be shewn. 
 
718 
 
 iiH're liceriset' for peiEdiial 
 iifl to viint of ii'jmir of th-i 
 i ulierc kiiowlcdgi' (jf tlie 
 .shown. >-iiimi(ll v. Tcinn 
 
 if (if ll'djliiraji. 
 
 ion — Vi.sililc /Jaiii/i r. I — A 
 II is not ix-sjionsililr m 
 rtlio is ii.jiired in endia- 
 laylij;lit ;i jilainly visil,|p 
 lly iuul nocLssiirily in lUc. 
 hv |)ui>iin injuifii l.tini;, 
 :li t)ie looiility, uiiil ku< \ - 
 it liiind a safe jiassage w ay 
 'tcichli- V. City of Toi-Dii'u, 
 
 iitii of (Iradi — Ap/:ri,t(rh 
 t/icf.]— Tlio Act of incur- 
 Of I'ortland, 34 Vict. eh. 
 aincd in force when the 
 1 a.s a city Ijy 45 Vicl. . h. 
 tlic coijiciratidii to i.i«n 
 lir, amend, and clean tlie 
 
 rjioratioii had aiithnrity 
 r the level of a Ktrei t ii 
 
 required it. 
 
 occupant of a hoii.-i in 
 sral ftet back from ihi: 
 
 front. The cor|i( rafioij 
 >nt of tlte hou.se lo l.c (at 
 
 the .stejis weie rcniovul, 
 i) six fe./l aliove the read, 
 leet W. placed two .-nial! 
 n in front of the ln.ufc, 
 down the.-^e jihi'iks in tlif 
 ■ d;\ily avoe.-aioiis, ,sli]i]ic(l 
 'Vere injuries. Sli-.' had 
 '!, and knew that it was 
 ' or down tlioui. In an 
 y in conscijiience oi the 
 
 judgment of the C.iirt 
 ition liaving autheiify to 
 
 lieing shewn that is was 
 .'rly done, the city was 
 
 wife of W. was f:u,lt> of 
 i in using the plank.'- as 
 such use was daiiyi I'liis. 
 nil(i)iu', 1!»!S. C. II. 1.19. 
 
 ion— liuildimi Miili rial-:] 
 ■.l^ensoii, 25 O. H. i:\ -Jl 
 
 lion — Coitvador. \ — A 
 L.'ipal corporation tur ilic 
 ■ theirs, who nrgli^cntly 
 on in such a jio.'sitiiiii as 
 I,' driven on tlie hljjhviiy, 
 to the driver, is h..hli' iu 
 >er use of the liiL'hvay, 
 im lialiility hy tiie fatt 
 ay have otherwise ni'j.'li- 
 wa\' to get out of rciiair. 
 Drporation are not liahle 
 1 by the improper Ubc^ 
 to call be shewu. 
 
 717 
 
 Per R(,ae, J —A corporation is uiuler such 
 circumstances iable f.u- nou-repair of the liigl, 
 way. llcmrth v. McOii;/nii, SAO. R. 3iJ6. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPOEATIONS. 
 
 718 
 
 Roadway- 0/,,s7r«V,-.„Z>„,„^ 
 Koadway-.?«o„._,<f,,,,< /Mhra,,-Er;,l,,,re 
 
 sidewalk -- Defect - liemtdy Ova:] _.sv. 
 «^-^ V. Cty of Toronto, '20 O. R. ^JH, 
 
 Sldewalk-/,;..]-At a certain point in a 
 frequented street in the defen.lants' town the 
 mdewalk having settled through age and -ct v 
 formed a depression where water lodge and ice 
 
 was mjuied. Ihe place had been in as l).ul 
 
 SSt :!: '-' ''' """^ '' ^'- -^^"^H^orl 
 
 HeM, by the Chancery Division, .Meredith 
 
 Per fioyd, < '.-The walk was out of re-.air 
 hcca.ise not safe at this point, having ,eg,^r to ' 
 the travel upon it and tlie resource., of I 
 Zuu'::7;. I-.efectinawayorintheeLm 
 ^u e wl 7"^ 'J"^y. '"■■^'^ ^'om superinduced 
 travel. " 'InngeHuis or u.itit for 
 
 Per J!obert-on. J.-This was a case „f ,];. 
 rep.ur and decay of a si,lewalk wh .-h t '^ 
 witlnn the power of the numieipality to p eve ' 
 hy ordmary care ami watchfulness :-. ' 
 
 Ib'hl, by th,. Court of Appeal, atlirmin.' the 
 ' ccrs.on of the Chancery Di^ilion bn, to ?! A 
 
 J^-tny, tluit allowing, for a fJr,ni.htw±; 
 toeolleet and alternately freeze and thaw in a 
 
 d^pressmn.na sidewalk in a frequented^'ct 
 
 i^^i'; ; "iiiddcr"'"" '"^ "■''■^" ••'•^ ""•■- 
 
 fh^vi!',!: '?' J'"-' ^"V^T Court of Can,ida, 
 n, V ' •'■•/''^^■'^'•"li'if-', that as the evidence a 
 
 eit lei l,„m nnproper construction or from a.re : 
 .'nd long use, had sunk ,!own so as to allow ' 
 water to aeeumulale upo,. it, whereby 1, i" , 
 
 tii^r^itir"'^"' ^^"^ ^"'■-''- "'^ -i'- 
 
 WM per Taschereau, J., that allowing the 
 't.e to form and remain on the street was -i I 
 breach of the statutory dutv to ke..p the streets 
 m repair for wlneh the corporation w^ a Me i 
 
 • In an action against the .■ity for damages it was 
 
 .ftetle wee^, the hydrant and the inner line of 
 
 - the .sidewalk, an.l that L. was aware of tie 
 
 os.tmn ot the hydrant and ace,iston>ed to 
 
 alk on sa.d .street. The, .statutes ,especti„° 
 
 the government ot the city did not ,dd;.'e tlm 
 
 l/ed them to enter into contia<.ts for that pur- 
 osc At the time of this acei.lent the citv'w'L 
 
 M . T ''■';■;■"■';">• '■>• '^ '^■"n,,mny who had 
 ••ontiacted with the corporation therefor. Pvi- 
 deneewasg.ven to shew that it was not possible 
 to picNent a single Imp or a batch,, h.mos 
 .going out at times :— ' 
 
 bew''s,''''''""'°H -r'" ■j"''S"'ent of the Court 
 
 h'.l ,1, •l"^' "'"' '''«':'''7,^'^'".-I''- .li.ssenting. 
 
 h, the city was not liable ; that the cipora- 
 
 t on being un.ler no .statutory dutv to li.J, the 
 
 streets, the rehition belweJn it and tl!c. eo ' 
 
 •actors was not that of ma.ster and servant', or 
 
 '/"•'I", and agent, but that of em,.lover .,"[ 
 
 >"'le)-ei„lent contract.,r.s, ami the cporalioi 
 
 was not liable for negligence in ,|,e p..rfor 1\^" " 
 
 the service; that the position of 'the hvdr , t 
 
 ".IS not III it.selt evi.Ienccf negligenee'in the 
 
 corpm..' i,,n ; and that L. eouhUru-e'andd" e 
 accident bv the. e.vereisc of reasonable ea e 
 Cil.'/Of HuhJ,,:,- V. I^ordhi, :>()«. ('. R. ,-,0.-,. 
 
 a HtlifOnr Ayaiii.st Third Pnrtici. 
 
 P.idewalk- -Irr A dJaccHt Hnitdin,, - Owner ' 
 
 fiiJewalk of 
 an electric h 
 ness she fell 
 
 '■•tor..] L 
 
 street in Hal 
 
 ualk 
 ifax at n 
 
 iiiji 
 
 111 
 
 Amendment- /^,V,vy r'/aim-Ordn- of Ad- 
 
 'hes.,,,,, ,/»,7/.j-Aii action for d,ur.a.4 for 
 
 .J'"rie.s resulting from a defective sidewa k w s 
 
 brought against a city, who uiuh.- li.l^o 
 
 If'h, eh JS4, .sec. m. sub.sec. 4, obtained an 
 
 ".'t;; /"'''!','-. '*;r ■•' ''■•"'>■ •'•^^f^-HiH , «! 
 
 • nu Iv ' "' ""^ ,«"1^"<'I"<. .-"Id iisked a 
 
 1. ely over aga.n.st him. (). .klivered a 
 
 defeie denying the cause, .faction, and aile,ir,g 
 tha If any a.-clent occurrcl, it wa.s through',1,^ 
 
 tli.it <). had ,,cea.sir,iKd the accident, and uave 
 damages to, he plaintitls. The plai^tilll. t^ ^ , 
 .•ipidic, for leave to .■.niend their siatement o 
 :c'laim by claiming ,!i,,...tly against O., whic 
 
 against O. f,.r the -lamages awaided :— 
 : n^M, aftirmingthcleeision of .Mae.\Iali„n, J., 
 , th.t the leave to an.eial was properly .'ranted 
 : and the judgment sluaihl be alhrnied.^ ^ ' 
 
 to w,', L •' '/';i^-^'''^\"'" l""^''--l"i'« t'uleavours 
 t wo.k out the rights an.l liabilities ,.f all 
 1 a ties as far as po.ssible in the same acti.m, and 
 s.. long a.s n,. subst^.ntial injustice is ,l.,n(., it is 
 permissible t,,c,mtorm the pleadings to the facts 
 .ic tlie close .)f the cas.'. 
 ; At the trial the Ju.ig,. ruled tliat cnmsel for 
 j O .sh.ml.l a,l. ress the jury bef..ie the counsel 
 ' against") f-" '="'"'«""' '''»"■ tl>e reply as 
 Held, that this ruling was correct, 
 ler Jbdjerts.m, J -,Vs rcgar.ls the city and 
 U., the fornier st.,..,! ,„ the relation of p.hiintiir 
 nnd uialer these circumstances, eviden.4 iiavinc 
 '"■en liiven bv (), toslj-- ^^ • ■< ■ ■ *> 
 
 *= ! Iilaiiied of w 
 
 ■hew th./.t the i 
 
 iglil, wli, n t bv thi 
 
 p went out, an.l in the ,hirk- 
 
 is II., t caused by his neglige 
 
 njiiry coin- 
 but 
 
 eiice, 
 
 over ii Jiv,lrant 
 
 an.l was iiijuie.l. | Cit 
 
 right t.i 
 
 gligcM.'e oi the city, the latter had t 
 
 i.ld 
 
 ess the jury in reply 
 
 ,'/ of Toronto, 20 6. K. 98. 
 
 iSti/ti 
 
 way V, 
 
719 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Flooding Highway — .V//Wfiw.]_ A mill- 
 •.uiier l,,-,v,ni; u Hcmso fn,m a townslii.) to on- 
 stnu-Mns n,ill,l„m in such a Mav as to tlocl a 
 ]wrt of the Inglnvay, foiistruct(Ml it so nfL'li- 
 gi/iitly that It -avf way, causing ilaimige to 
 
 ikl.l that the liuonsc to'Mam water back 
 upon the Ingliway was (cvept in so faras it 
 iniglit l)u a public nuisance allbcting travellers 
 "M the roa,l) a lawful thing: and that the 
 •la.nage benig eausci by tlie neuligence .,f the 
 inilhiwnor, the township was not liable. 
 
 Sucli a case is not Mithin K. S. (>. jss; ch 
 ISi, see. .),S1, sub-scc. 4, which gives to a uor- 
 poration against wliicli is brought an action to 
 recovei' (laaiages sustained by reason of any 
 obstruction, etc., on a highway placed by any 
 Kisou, other than a servant or agent of the 
 corporath.n the right to claim relief over 
 agiuii.st such person. Ward; v. CaMon, A hie 
 V. CiIhIuii, HJ a. I;. 6!». > ./ >= 
 
 , Ice on SidewalK— 0»-)„.,-,./M,//„rc)iC Build- 
 "'■'/■:-. '','."""• I -111 ■■111 action against a citv 
 municipality in which the [ilaintiH' recovered 
 • laiiiages bir injuries .sustained bv lier slippintr 
 on ice which had formed on the' sidewalk l>v 
 welter bnuight by th,. down pipe from the r.xlf 
 ot an adjacent laiilding, which was allowed to 
 tiowover the si.lewalk aii.l f.eeze, there bein- 
 no mode ot conveying it to the gutter th? 
 oM-ner ol the budding nnd the tenant thercf 
 were, at the instance of the municipalitv, made 
 partv dclemlanls un ler sec. 5:U of the Consoli- 
 dated Municii.Hl Act. The i„p« in its cndition 
 at tlie time of the accident, dischargin>' the 
 water upon the sidewalk, lia.l existe<l from the 1 
 eoiiimencement of the tenaiicv. A bv-law of 
 the n,unici))ality re(,uire,l the- occujiant of ai 
 'milMing, or, ir luioccuj.ied, the owner, to' 
 remove ice from tlie front of a buililing al)iittin>' ' 
 on a street, within a limited time :— '' " 
 
 Held, that the owner was, but the t'^nant was 
 not, liable over to the municipalitv for the 
 .laiiiages recM.vered. Orunn v. Ciln of Toronto, 
 
 720 
 
 ' Township of Somhra v. Toinixhip of Moore, 19 
 
 Obstruction in Highway. ] -The person wh., 
 placed on a iiighway a boulder which caused 
 injury to the plaintilf «as added as a defend.-wit 
 under .sec. o.'SI of tlie Municipal Act, K S 
 eh. IS4, and was liehl liable over to tlie corpora- 
 tion iin,,.r sub-sec. -t. V,.j,ya y. Cook, -26 
 1 . KS2, distinguished. Ilaku- v. <;oslie',L \^ (j' 
 ?2 OH ^!Jo""'"'' J^'/^'«''''« '■■ Cih, 'of London, 
 
 Practice — /> f.-ndnnt ~ Tliiid l'in-l,,.\ — a 
 
 thiiNl party is "a party to the action ■' within tho 
 meaning ot sec. .Wl. sub-.sce. 5, of the Municipal 
 Act, i,o \,ct. cli. 42; and where a ,k.fendint 
 municipal corporation, under that enactment 
 seeksto have another corporation or person added 
 as a party for the purpo.se of ciiiorcinga remedy 
 over, sueli person or corporation should be made 
 a thm party an,! m,t a defendant, unless the 
 plaintitl seeks some relief against such added 
 party; and It is imju'oper to ad,l such party 
 both as a de endant and a third party. Krdnian 
 V. lovn of ]\ alb, -ton, 15 V. R !■' 
 
 ^s's'c'r'So^'' -- '^- ^'- •^^■•' -" ■''■ '- -M^. 
 Snow on Roadway— ,SVrt,'^ IlallwiitiA-Su 
 
 L. K. dfS9, Ji:jst, .STCKKT ]!.MI,WAVS. 
 
 S,'<- also, F,r.,».on v. City of Toronto, 14 P 
 K. ^oS /,,«< ,(,<!_; ChriMir v. Cil,, of Toronto, 15 
 V «• fl;'. /W'.' ,(kS; <:il,l,y. Ton'ndiip of Cn„. 
 
 Lands Injuriously Affected— /,'ni7»r„/ 1_ 
 ^ec h„sl-, mil, V. Cil,, of Ollowa, L'O A. R JOS 
 ante (iS!). ' 
 
 Non-repair of Hlghway-Zo/^C Liahilit,, 1 
 ~.Sub-,-<ection 4 of .sec. Ml of R, S. O. ch 184' 
 provules that if an acti.m is brought agaiii-st ai 
 niumc.pal crporation to recver damages sus- 
 tained by r;ason of an obstruction, e.vcavation 1 
 or opening m a public place, made, left, .,r ' 
 niaiutaiiied by another corporation or by anv 
 person other than a servant ,.r agent of the 
 municipal cnrporati.m, the last mentioned cor- 
 poration shall hivo a. remedy over acdiist the 
 other coip<,ration or person for any" damages 
 which the plauitiir in the action nfay reeve? 
 against tliein. •' 
 
 This aiiiilies to the <aso of an obstruction 
 e.\-cav-ation, or opening, directly ami iminediatelv 
 placed on or dug in the highway by the c.,r|,,ua 
 tmn or (.erson against whom the ivmedy over is ' 
 given. It docs not give a riglit,to one t'ownsiiin '< 
 ii.unici|):il corporation to recover from an adioin- i 
 «Mg townshi.) municipal coriioratioii daniaues ' 
 recovered for an acHclct caused by nnn-r.-,mir 
 ot a road lying betMe(.n the townehi.is which 
 liiey were jointly liable to keep in' rejiair 
 
 4. Olh(^r ('axcx. 
 pama.Be to Land Adjoining Hlghway- 
 R. 100, 2'o.-i -H). . -1 /I. 
 
 I|-?/TT/V/° ^^'J'^ Adjoining Klghway- 
 
 nnlir-Al,lldom-^-/.o;,n.-;,.l^-,S,,- Hard v. 'alt- 
 don, ^lA/n; V. CaUd<,„, 19 A. J>. G!), antt 71!). 
 
 Damage to Land Adjoining Highway- 
 
 Lowtruni(h'ade—Ln.kilf„lEx,,:ntion.].~.S,,Ciiu 
 oj ^ew 11 extmin.-ter v. ltriij/wi(.'<t','>iiS r j; '\o,f 
 
 Evidence— ^c/io.i nmkr Lord C(i,ni,l„.,>l\Act ] 
 —-,^u hrdnuut v. Ton-n of H'ol/.-irton, •'•> () R 
 093, 20 A. n. 444, L'.S S.-'ci. R. srrJ, lu^:!^^^- 
 
 Injury through Horses Frightened by 
 
 Nolse-/Vo.r,m„/, Con.-c. \~-<:o„,„ II v. ToA 
 oj Pr,.scotl, 20 A. R. 4ri, 22 ,S. C. R. 147, /Jw 
 
 XIV. LkKNSINi; I'oWKliS. 
 
 Auctioneers — JJ,/.l,„r — ,v„/,, /,,, _.| ,,,,„< „,• 
 yl.s.sa/m.,..] A by-law of a cnint v niuni.'ipality 
 passed under sub-scc. 2 of sec. 4ii;-. of tlic Muni- 
 cipal Act, R S, U. ch. 184, enacted that it 
 should not be lawful for any person or nersons 
 to act as auctioiiecis, or to sell or put" up tor 
 .-ale any goods, etc., "by public auction," unlcM 
 <luly licenseil :— 
 
720 
 
 n V. Tuirihihip of Moore, 19 
 
 ighway. J -'I'lie jx'rson whi 
 ly a bduldor wliicli c.-iusfd 
 If Mas ii(l,k'.l aaii (k"fori<lant, 
 111' Muiiieiljul Act, 1!. S. (>. 
 il liiil)l(M)vci- to tlie corpora- 
 4. Vi.tprd \. Cook, 'ift (;. 
 I. liiih.ii-\. (loxlifhl, 17 0. 
 rrKdrin v. Cilij '<,/ London, 
 
 /nut— 'I'lt'ii-d />aff;/:]~A 
 A- to the action " within tho 
 suhsoc. ."), of the .Miini(;ipal 
 '; ;uiil wlicic ,1 ihjfcndant 
 II, miller tliat eiiiictinorit, 
 jorpoiat ion or pcrsoimddec) 
 po.se of ciiiorciiigii remedy 
 oriioiatiiPM slioiild lie niado 
 it a ilefeirdaiit, imlcHs the 
 relief against such added 
 iiroper to add such party 
 nd a third i)aity. Erdvian 
 ', ir. I'. R, 12. 
 
 <>. i;. (io;;, -z^^ a. r. 444, 
 
 y—Slnrf lli,ilwiiy.]—Su 
 V. Citif „f Tovuiit'j, 24 >S. 
 ■:r R.Mi.wAvs. 
 
 y. Citij of Toronto, 14 1'. 
 m/(V v. Citii of Toronto, 15 
 I'ihl) V. Toii-)is/iip of C'liiii- 
 76S. 
 
 ''(• t'ani'x. 
 
 Adjoining Hlghway- 
 
 Jjriii-,- V. IaiuI,!, 21 A. 
 
 Adjoining Highway— 
 
 "-'-•J— V"- Ward y. <ak. 
 19 A. i>. 0!}, autt 710. 
 
 Adjoining Highway— 
 
 Ifid E.r,rnlioii.\~S<'.vCily 
 lriy/tuiisr,-2f IS. C. l;..'-,20, 
 
 (/( r Lord CiH)i/,t,i/r.-iAct.] 
 "f W'llLirlori, 22 (). !{. 
 <. C: R. 3.")2, untL a!),'). 
 
 orses Frightened by 
 
 '"'■ \- '-'oiiiii // V. Tmcn 
 •2-2 S.V. R. U7,y««(739. 
 
 IMi PoWKUS. 
 
 w — Sii/,- 1,1/ AiiDil r,j 
 a county nuini.-ipiility 
 
 )f sec. 4!li'> of tlic .\luni- 
 
 . I>S4, enactc<l that it 
 any per-.son or pei-sons 
 
 ■ to sell or put" up lor 
 piihliuauotioti, " unless 
 
 721 
 
 HeM that the agent of an assh'-iee of an 
 msuvent estate «elli„.- wit,„„u a li ens th 
 .sto..k.u.-tra.leo,a„ insolvent who ha,l Lrr e I 
 on l.usniess in the countv was ,;„1„|V 
 vict.lofahreachofthei;,r, ;S „;^";; 
 .vas the only oeoasH.n he had so 'acted ii, h • 
 ininiRii)ality. li^jma v. JUucson, 22 (>. R. 4(i7. 
 
 _ Auctioneers-f •I'arwt.r.fUru,.,-, v. l-Held 
 ay Rose ,1 that sec. 49.-,, suh-sec. 2 ," the 
 Municipal Act, R. ,S. (). ,)>. 184, wh eh « 
 powers any CUV. etc., to pass hvlaws f rt le 
 •hceiisnig reguhuing, and governing of a c 
 t.oneers, etc. , is only for the purpose of rai^i e, 
 ■I ipeiiue, and does not confcr'anv rhd t ol 
 prohibition so long as the applicant is wiifin ^ 
 pay he sum lixed for the lieeii.se. wtvv 
 therelore a city retu.se,i to license the plain iff' 
 as ail aucti.Miecr on the ground tliat he was, 
 piTson ot a notoriously l.a.l character an.l ill 
 repute, a man,lainu.s was granted con.pelli '. 
 the is.iue of the licen.se to him "I'tuing 
 
 Held, by the Court of A|,peal, alHrmin- the 
 
 ,,.g,u.MUofiw^d..,i,,i^,,,'^,j' ;^^^^ 
 
 Art of lh04. ,„ \ ,ct. eh. oO, seo. S ((>.), a niunr 
 tipiil eorjioration could not, on the . oio, 1 f ' 
 
 theapplic,tntVbadeha,.act;r. :in;;"gl'tj 
 
 •'""■'"""Ct eerslicen.se. M,rritt v (Ui,,^A 
 
 Toronto, 2.T U. i{. 2.-,(i, 22 A. R. Jd,^ ''' "' 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 722 
 
 by law other and larger fees were ivt„„)>l„ • 
 
 ;~j;in ;;;£:' ;s;i-i=^ if 
 
 <; lu;r than at the place mentToned in I is Ln^' 
 
 >' tioii 4.,(, ot the .MuniciKd Act, R. ,S. () eh 
 
 IM. einpov, ers the ,,ohee cwnini.ssioners of a c tv 
 
 <• ."..n ate and lieen.se the owners of on, Ws^ 
 
 tt. Ihe e.,mini.s.sioners of a city passed a hv 
 
 l;iw enacting that no person or persons shouui 
 
 ;in-.-nvna,iyo,iiu,l!us without' bei,;gH:S 
 
 Held, that the authority conferred on the 
 
 sr;;;:n,rf'''""'^^.''"''^''«' -"'»'" 
 
 ■iivus and therefore a conv ction of a drivn,- 
 ".■ dnvnig without a license was bid ,a d ,nus[ 
 !"■ 'l"i.she,l. Tht tjneen v. Butler, 22 OR. ^2' 
 
 Express Waggons- A',/-/,,,,. __ l;,it,,,-Anr,.e- 
 «K„.J-A bydaw passed under sec. 4;i(i of R 
 SO. ch. 1S4, for licensing express wa-,, " 
 
 SrStte?;;:":^'-''-''^' ■'«'■-'-■'-' ''-^ 
 
 Held, beyond the powers conferred by the 
 
 statute: and a conviction under the bvdaw for 
 
 ,-n,les that the couneirofan/:;;;.!^;^: 
 Ir.ius 'tor licensing, regulatiu,.', and govern- 
 
 m^ hawkers and peddlers, a city'councir^^s 1 
 a l^^da^ ,0 prevent hawkers and peddler fron 
 piu-cutmg their tra,le in certain .itreets •_ 
 
 A ipi:d, 20 A. R. 4.^,,, Fournicr and Taschere-iu 
 J.l..dis,seutmg, that the bydaw was beyond the 
 
 i'.'f™:;c!;!5;4i'c's?"'""*'-"f*'-i 
 
 I VlctuaiUng Houses-/or/;..,V„r. of Lkeiw- 1 
 
 jn..in,edf;g'Ji,:];^!-i:;j- -;-ru^^ 
 
 I he ,,ower to .ivate a forfeiture of pronertv 
 >s one which must be cx„re-islv <dv,.n ' '"P*'"^ 
 
 Tor„„to, 22 (). r! 274. """"" '■ ^"^V "f 
 
 -\V. 1,01 At, Ivi'i;ovi.:.Mi.:.NTs. 
 
 n« ,,,J A bydaw of the city council pr v d< 1 
 
 Sllro'r'rf''"'"''','"^''^!'"''^"' f'"'» -^v 
 pu.lici ot iish, farman.l ganlen pro . ,eo fr- 
 
 a '1 .'oal 0,1, or other sn. til articles ll; 'r 'e , 
 ''^■-"■nHtntlie hand or in a. snmll ;,:;.:;,,.,.!''■' 
 
 AS'^'n^ii'^ •h''^''^'''" ''f the Court of, 
 «l'i"U, .OA. R. 4.i,i, Gwynne and Sed.'cwiok ' 
 JJ., .hssentmo. that a subsequent by-law (kh,.; ' 
 
 pulll.isvas not v.nd. for repugaanev. A, •. 
 ^"'ll'^«iidtht,,,fTnr.„do, 22ls. C. R. 447 
 
 E;:.!^r;l'" ^eepalivery stable at a 
 
 »u,i„ t ,^e°''4VoTth;T"""- ^T\" "'^y- p-r- 
 
 tavia.aeali^een.f !"";■'"'' ^^'- ''"^ ""t 
 '^ <.il> l.eense, for which u.ider a .sep,irate 
 
 46 
 
 By-law - ■■l««s'.v;«.W-_A'„/,v^ ._('„,.;„,,„ i 
 
 -yf- that purpose, ,;?ti^y':n::;rtw^^ 
 "^mpte;!.;;;;''^' ''" ^'•-''^' ^----^ aftjrt 
 
 ;;^.eret,iew-or.:diu;L:-d'JLtnne:;:;,;!"2S 
 
 i^umr;>^:;r;Ci^?t:rr^;:-L:i-!'';^t 
 
 I ...iposed an assessment for the o '.iTtru" 
 
 to,, as ascertained afte,- its e.xec.tio, "ndtn 
 li^. a petition .luly si.gned object m'r to tht 
 ■-'•■•hu-manceotthe w.n-k had been, wilhin thl 
 iH^per tnne. delive,.ed to the eoi „ "'/„*J^ 
 'M'-ypie and Ody of Toronto, 1!) A. R. 713 
 
 '■'-.Kiv:i'tiri;;'e^-r^;::j;:;;:j:-;-^ 
 
 division ,„ the same manner as the tiist, or 
 
7IS 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 721 
 
 
 they must dofer tl- uctuiil jiHsi'ssiiieiit i.ntil 
 after thu .oniplotinn ol' tlMMvoik, the lateii'iyci s 
 then havirii; I ho right to apiieal. Tliev luimo't 
 jnoceiMl paidv in nne way and paitlv in an- 
 other, \Mlliiaitgivii,.„'aiiy "l'P"iti!iiit v oV aiiiKMl. 
 iiij,' from a (h.liriilf assi's.sniciit. 
 
 A niiiniciiial (oiporatinn, ntiilcr the ])rovisi()ns 
 <>! II general hy-law respeetiiij; h.cal improve- 
 ments, iletei n.ineil to lonstiuot a sewer-, and 
 liroceedeci to asess the estimated cost on the pro- 
 iHTty henetiied. This assessment was eontirmed 
 hy tlie Conrt of l.'evision. 'I'lie eonneil then 
 laissed a l.y-law authoi'i/in.u' llie constrncli<,n (jf 
 the sewer to lie ]irocee(led w ilh, and on its con,- 
 pletioii ]iassed anotlier l.y-hiw liy wliitli the 
 .H tual cost, whieli was iiuieli j,'reater than the 
 luiioiint of the assessment, was impoted and 
 B^HCSKed ni)on tlie jjroperty. 'i lie eomuil iiio- 
 eeeded to enforce lliis assessment without liaviie. 
 1 rougJit it hefore the fonrt of Revisicjii :-~ " 
 Held, liiat the assessment was invalid anil 
 eoiild iiot lie siipjioited as a mere alteration of 
 the estimated eost, or us a siip])lemLnlar\' as- 
 (■ossnient. 
 
 The provisions of sec. 'X')] ..f the .Mnnhipial 
 Act, K. ,'^. O. eh. 184. are imperaiive and not 
 merely directoix, and if a local iniiirovcmeiit 
 hy-law is not registered within two Meeks after 
 UHfinal lULssiiig, a rateiiayer n.av shew that it 
 is invalid and siiccessfnily resist |)avniint of 
 the local improvement tax. J,', 'Fan'i'iH/, ,■ 
 ami i)/Mr/.v/;/'/7/, ](i O. ]!. 7±i, distinguished. 
 iSwefhi/ V. Vortivi-utioii «/' Smitli'n Fal// •>'> A 
 i:. 42!). ' , — - . 
 
 Held, hy the Court of Ai'peal, atliimiri.' tl, 
 jleeision of Street, J,, that a geiieral hy-law"!„„v 
 he |:asstd jiroviding the means of ascei taiini " 
 iind deteiiiiininir what real propertv will I i" 
 imii.'cdiately 1 enel'.ted hy any proiiosi'd work i,t 
 assosmenl the «hoh! c(jst "of which is to |„ 
 assesse.l upon that pnjpcrty, hut such a gem i.-,l 
 hy-law is not sutlicient in the ease of |i„ul iir- 
 l.rovenients or constnietioii of hiidjies, ij,,. 
 whole cost of \\hie)i Hie council deeiii li i,, 
 eciiiitahle to raise hy hical sj.eeial assessiM.r,( 
 fltiiiiiiii y. Citji III' Toimilv, L'O O. li. ri47 iij. 
 
 By-law ~ Kn; .-4l// fur—<hiii ral—Spuia/. ]— 
 ihe council of a city, l,y a resohition eonlirniin<' 
 tlio rejiort (jf the fommittee on Works, autlioi'^ 
 i/ed the corporation to enter into an agreement 
 with certain lailway ecinpanics- who vere 
 liable to maintain and keep in repair the exist- 
 ing bridges over their laiis on a certain street 
 —whereby the toijioralioii were to build as a 
 local imjirovcment two new bridges o\cr said 
 liiilsat an ajijiroximafe ccjst of .'?T-f,00O, !?-'0,(J(:() 
 thereof to be paid by the railuav companies in 
 full of all liability, S-.^O.OOO by the col |ior:ition 
 iis tlieir res|iective share.;, and IjL'.l.KtO. the 
 estimated daiimge to lands, to I e assessed 
 a^'ainst the iiroperties fronting on the street. 
 ^o provision was made in the estimates for tliJ 
 current year for the (laymeiit by the corpora- 
 tion of the amount to be jiaiil by'thein : 
 
 Hel.l, ly Street, ,1., that before the expendi- 
 tun' could be bioiit.dit within the hxa! iiiu;rove- 
 ment clauses of the Municipal Act, a special 
 by-law must ie passed lixiiig the amount or 
 Iirojiojtion (jf the cost of the work to be assumed 
 by the city and to be asse.sseil on the locality 
 and declaring the opiin'i.n of the cimncil to he 
 that the wcjik was necessary, and that it W(uild 
 h<! ine(|uitable to charge the whole cost of it 
 upon the locality; and that the fact of there 
 Being a general by-law jias.scd under sec. 012, 
 sub-.see. I (m), for determining iircpertv to lie 
 benefited by a )iroi oseil h.cai'iinproveni'ent was 
 notsuHicient ; but. even if a by-law were un- 
 iieceKsary, the resolution was too indefinite as 
 It could not be gathered with eertaiiilv there- 
 from wliat proportion of the cost was t'o be iin- 
 Jiosed fin the iirojierty to be loeallv assessed. 
 
 An interim injunction was grant'ed lestraiiiini' 
 the eurporation from acting iiiid<.r the atrrec" 
 ineut. ^ 
 
 Lancls Injuriously Affected— .1 //.> ;/,7 ,.;■/;,. 
 "nr- y,,,ii,,n„;^--.\,/;,,„.]^rhi' Act iiuorpor- 
 atii'g the city of Xcw 'iVcstmiuster, 51 Vict cli 
 ■i-2 (!:.('.), by sec. I(t0 eiiipowers the eoiiiicil cf 
 the city to order by by-law the (ipeniii.' or ex 
 teiiomg <,t streets, etc., and for .such lairiinvc. 
 lonccimie and use any land wiili.n the citv 
 hinits, either by jirivate contract or bv cni,;. 
 ply)iig with the formalities prescribed in hi\i- 
 ^ecs. ;{ and 4 of said section, which ].r,.vi',li 
 for the aiip(jintnient cjf commissioners to fix 
 the price to be paid for such hind; siib-cc h? 
 proviiles lor the coiitirmation of the ai point 
 mcnt, .■iii.l 15 for the deposit in Comtoi -M 
 lintc by the council, which deioait shoul,; vcM 
 in them the title to said land. Suli-.sectioii i; 
 of .sec. 1!)0 enacts that sub-sees. ,■} i.nd 4 diail 
 api.ly to cases of ilamage to real or per-,,i'ial 
 e^tate by reason of any alteration made Ijy enl,., 
 of council ill the line or level of anv'sticct 
 iuid tor payment of the coniiicnsati.in' tli.icf,,,' 
 wit h( ait further formality. The cuiicil v,i« 
 authori/ed by hy-law to rai.se nionev forimpnA-. 
 ing certain streets, but no liy-hiw' was |),•l-^cli 
 ex|iies.sly ordei'ing such imprdvement.s. Jn mii' 
 of the streets named in said bv-law the -lad. 
 was lowered, in doing which the aiipmach u, 
 an.l from an adjacent lot becmie vei v dillicrll 
 and no retaining wall having been bui'lt, tlir M,ii 
 of said lot caved nnd sunk, thereby wr;.kuiiii" 
 the siip(;oits of the buildings therc(''n :- 
 
 Held, atliiniiiig the dc'cisioii of theCoint 1.. 
 h>w, Kiichie, C.J., and Tasdieieau, J., (li.-scnt. 
 ing, tliat the owner of said lot couM mniiit.iin 
 an action for the damage .sustained bv lowcni.;; 
 the gmde of the street, an<l was not obli:;i.,l to 
 seek redress under the statute; that sul, Mr. 
 17 of sec. ]!I0, which dispenses with the foi- 
 malties rtrpiired by prior snb-se./tious. .injv 
 applies to cases where land is injuriouslv allcr- 
 led by access thereto being interfered witii.iiiiil 
 where land is taken o\' used for the iiui'i uses n! 
 work on the streets, the corporation iriiiH 
 comply with the foinialities prescribed bwuls 
 .sees. :iaiiil4; that the street having Uni 
 exeav; ted to a depth which caused a suhsideiio 
 of adjoining land, the hitter must be rcL'aidwl 
 as having been taken and u.st(l for the pnipose? 
 of the excavation, and tlii^ council should liavo 
 aciiuired it under the statute ; not having so 
 Bciiuired it, and having neglected to takestc|isto 
 lirevenl the .subsideuc e of t Iw adjacent laii.l, ilii'V 
 were liable for the damage thereby caused :— ' 
 Held, further', that the neglect' to take siali 
 precautions was in it.self, however legal tlie 
 making of the excavation mav have been, if 
 skilfully executed, such negligence in the iiiiin- 
 nor of executing it as to entitle the owner nf the 
 adjacent hind to recover damages for the injury 
 sustaiued : — 
 
72* 
 
 It l.f .A|'l:«ill, dflitlliiui,' tl'( 
 
 .. tluit 11 i^fllfllll liy-liiw lil.iy 
 
 tllU IIII-IIIIS (if ilMCCll.lilUl,' 
 
 liiit iviil |ii(.|;iTty «ill li" 
 I'll liy iiiiy proiMisc'il voik i,r 
 lie cijst of \vliicli is III 1,1 
 ir-opcily, liiit siifli II ,L!t.iiciaJ 
 ■nt in the cii.-c df !('„„! in;. 
 utriutioM iif l,iii|n|.s, (ii,. 
 Ii till' (imiiiil iK'fiii ii in 
 y lodil s|jc(/ial ii,--,xfi.!-ifciit 
 To, I. hit; -M O. R. ^47, 11) 
 
 y Affected— .1 h^<:iin- .//;,^ 
 I '/■'•//. I- 'I'hf Alt inii.r|,or. 
 \ ^V'|■Mllliust(•l•, 51 Vict, ell, 
 
 '0 liii|iii\MT.S tllu CdlillLJI (if 
 
 liy-liiw tliu opfiiiiij; III' ex. 
 -■t(j. , 1111(1 fill' siuli |'air],iisfs. 
 any lunil wiili.n tlic city 
 'ivat(! ccntiiK-t uv liv eniif. 
 !iKiIitic's )i!(.'S(„Ti'iioil i'li suli- 
 id .-fction, which I'luidi 
 I 'if ciiiinnissi(>n(Ms in |ix 
 fur such kind ; siih-iic. 1,'! 
 iliiniatidii of tlie a) pujnt 
 B (tcpnsij in Coiiit (If y.ij,; 
 wliicli (It'iosit slidiili', Vest 
 <aiil land. .Siili-scctinn 17 
 at .siili-sc'cs. .'i j.nd 4 shail 
 iniap,' to real or pci -.,iial 
 y altcratidii made by oni,., 
 ic or h'V(,'l of any 'sticct. 
 the coni])(.'ii,satioii' thiicf.ii 
 nality. Thc^ cmincil vns 
 to rai.si' money for iiii|iii;v. 
 lUt no liy-law wu.s jki-miI 
 ell iiiii'idvenient.><. Jri mv 
 in said liy-!a\\ the •.'i;i,|, 
 g which tlie aiii'ioach t., 
 lot hee.'ime veiy diltiiiili, 
 liavinj,' lieen liui'it, tlir N,il 
 Slink, theieliy we.-.ki niiiL' 
 lildings theiei'n ;- 
 deeisidii of the Conn Ic- 
 d 'J'nscheieaii, J., di,-i.,ii. 
 f said lot could iiiaiiitiiin 
 lye sustained by liiwcriai; 
 t, and was not oIiIIliciI t" 
 he statute ; that siih m'c. 
 1 disiieiises Mith the fur. 
 Jiiior siil)se..tidiis. milv 
 ■ land is injuriously nllir- 
 lein^' intirfered w i'tli, iiinl 
 • used for the jim) uses nf 
 -, the corporatidii iiiiist 
 alities jjieseril'eil hv suli- 
 the street having.' limi 
 1. liich caused a sulisiilfiui- 
 latter must lie rcL'iuiiid 
 ind used for the ]iai|iiisc,' 
 th(! council shoiilii luivt 
 statute ; not liaviiij,' sn 
 ne;,'!ected to take stc|"s tii 
 (if the adjacent laiiil, tlity 
 laj^e theieliy eauscil :— 
 lie neglect" to tiikc .«ik1i 
 tself, hdwevei' lcj.'al tlit 
 ition may have hccn. ii 
 I nef^lijience in the mini- 
 :> entitle the owner (it the 
 T damages fortiie injur)- 
 
 725 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 aliseiiee 
 
 HoM, per Patterson, J , that in il 
 
 of tho statutory preliminaries; ut.CZ^ CX^'' T"'7 i'"" "'^' •■i--"Htan,.e. nuiv 
 
 Ims no ^'reater ri^rlu than anv (illier Ivn/.c ^^^^^ '"' '.'V';"' s;yl> <hmia-es paid as Mr Chris i, 
 
 adjacent laud >(. disturl, the" sol , T ,, 'e "! ," V." f"', ''^'^-Pt this no noti ^"' 
 
 726 
 
 Lands Injuriously Affected- /Jmw,„e.,- 
 
 tration under tlie Miineii, 'a,',""^ ' s''..'''^ 
 lS4.se,..4s;uti.p,.dp.,.t:,„„t':,J;^^:^i 
 
 amount ot damagis sustained I,v ^ """"^ ^'" 
 propei'ty hy leasdii of iIumvoi' ' 
 enhanienient in \-aliie to the 
 .spcciHcally from the work i 
 staiidiiig liiat such 
 (JOlllUldll ti 
 
 m owner of 
 
 in (|ni,'stion, any- 
 
 liroperty d.-riveil 
 
 II 'lUestioii, notwith- 
 
 J'lie amount 
 share of the eo 
 
 ,,,, '■""•" ■■'•'■lit in value is one 
 
 II the property atieeted. 
 
 lie 
 is 
 
 to use said sidewalk 
 l''H't '<{ St. John, the 
 
 'liilit in the ease f,.- suhsei.uent proeeedim^s :_ 
 
 w" Sil, :;'ri; ■';] '"-'•'"'"«. that tlu. eitv 
 was J , 111,. toC for the injuries .so sirsfained :_ 
 
 H(-ld per i;,t,.h,e,C..J., and, Stroll., ./,, that 
 ""• I'^tter of the solicitor was not a sut-ii 
 '''."'■tion under tlie statute. 
 ' '■!■ Kitehie, C.J.— If 
 
 invited the pul.i,,. 
 After i'ortland lierame a 
 latter city hecai lef,.|,. 
 
 nolle 
 
 tha 
 
 leient 
 
 assessed a-aiust the ownei 
 , „ , "' "'the work shouM i„, 
 
 to tiKj dama-es or deducted from the sm|., 
 
 Judgnientdf.Street, J., Kit) R ;•>!; 
 liiirtoii, J. A,, dissenting. /« ' " ' 
 Cili/ of Toroii/o, •_'() A. I!. Hi. 
 
 as Ills 
 added 
 
 ■otr. 
 
 irnied ; 
 /'>•!/'■( and 
 
 --"T. the w-ant (If it "uhu:'' "■'"'' ""^ 
 
 ■IS •I deteni.'e without l.eim 
 
 Sidewalk- 
 
 I ir * 11 -'"f/d.j _ 1 |.r„|„|j.. « ho vvi 
 
 ■ alectcil hy jiroeeedings ,„„,,., ,„,. ,.r,.^'^ 
 the Cdns,,hdate.l Municipal Act, 18!I2. fdr tl (• 
 coustrucfon of .sidewalks, are entitled to alt 1 
 -t.ce thereof, and to he permitted to shew 
 l.eyeaii,_ that the propos-d .sidewad^ is n, 
 to.ral.le,„th..pul,lieiuteivst:an(lwli,.,... ; 
 n.it,ce had not heeii given, except l.v advCrti' ' 
 .i.".t in a newspaper, which had not cdiie o 
 tttention of the applicant, the hvia for 
 tli(-' cnstructidi, of the sidewalk was'iiuash,. 
 
 :;^,f ;'' P"n;'i;tcd t„ airect his p ,: e ' 
 
 Athrmed by the Court of Appeal. •.';! A. 1!. ,s() 
 •SVt S.u.t: OK Lami, i. 
 
 t he rclii'd on 
 ,. ,. , i« pleaded, 
 
 (■r laseherean,(!wynne,and Pattersdii.JJ _. 
 - ot CO was nor. i,e.=essary ; the liabilit v of t lie eitv 
 il "itdependonsee. Wof-,Vi,:t:,.|,. i 1 „■ 
 I lH'se-ti(,ns,uakingitthe,iutV(,ftl,., u ,• 
 l.keeptl,estreets,nrepair;au,^theo„lvpl V 
 
 fi'-itlK.,;erf(,rn,an,.e,;f:;;a,:;::'L;::,--'''''- 
 
 de(I-i're,l,'"'l'^'' T?"' ','f ^'"' ■•ii'iiiiunities" 
 <1. led to be vested ,n the eoiuieil was that of 
 
 I -t hc,„g. subject to an action uilh, t, " 
 notice, and no notice havin ' 
 
 ise. C. coiih" 
 
 I'linMU 
 
 not recover. 
 21S. C. 71. I. 
 
 prior 
 
 !,' iieen given in this 
 
 C'ly of at. Juhu V. 
 
 tl 
 
 is no 
 
 entitled 
 
 power to p,i>s meiit 
 
 XVI. XoTici-, oi- Action-. 
 Necessity for - Siuffidnm, of- rinidi,,,, 
 
 the town council the exclusive fm ina.'e m ,7 ,f 
 ami control over the streets, an'" '''"'""" "* 
 
 S^iii^irti'lSi^ioT'P''''''-'^'''-^ 
 
 S/ >--y'J;,e'^o^.';:;;i;'sr, ■;.£_- 
 
 lieges, and nnmn„ities vested in com i.i.s ,^• 
 |»»Klsurvey(,rs(,fr(,a,lsinsai,lt.>wn(lr.Mle.ll■ 1 
 to he vested in the council. Bv aiiothe \ ,, 
 
 ;;f:';V''"-'''-''';'7^''taMain;tae;^;;mi^ ,a" 
 f .oails unless withm three months after 1 i 
 
 M ciu^vrumg. Thetownof i-drtlan(lX'r 
 SttoM""".'^"^■"^ '''■'■^''">''- '■'■-iiin-n, . 
 ,■ ^"""' l."'"^i«"""N .-fid eventualh a 
 
 the 111 i iff ' "^ t^e injuries sustained bv 
 
 '"i^piaiiliff, and eoneludiiig : "As it is VI,'- 
 
 O. oh 73.1 -A municipal eorporation 
 ((I to iioti.'e i.j action under the Aci 
 
 topn.tectju.sticesof ,hep,.aeean, 1 "^ ' 
 
 \ oxatious actions, R. ,S () ,.|, -••, ,' - 
 
 .j':;=:,,l';,;;k:i,:r''.,;;;t:;4;"'^,;r 
 
 -A'/'"/ IV-y;rre, 16 P. R. Ho. ■' ' '""" 
 
 R 
 
 111, 
 
 V. 
 
 I. 
 
 ;'/"'""^^'T-.]-lwooftliedefcnda 
 
 ' 'ulllir'i/lcis ^ - 
 
 ,f , , ;■.' '"" "' '■'II-' iii'ieii'liinls. meinb(>rs 
 
 ^.township CO,,,,,,;,, ,,..,, ted bv ;.:;,; 
 
 d4i t^H'Ti'^'--'- 
 
 i'^^iS'^-'i:^:-^:"^'^---'-"; 
 
 '.S;d:;;v''.;!,i''^^"'''''''^^"-^''«-'5 fwiMHi. 
 
 .f ., • ' "'■"' ""^ '-"titlod to 
 
 ■■' actio.i uialer R. ,S. () ,•!, 7-^ .__ 
 
 H.'M also that that statut(' is applical,!eonlv 
 ( t i ;. '", -'"'I'- '-.v them in the performance 
 
 It, when ,t ,„ay be properly averred tl, ,e 
 : 1 I I'lol ,lT '"^''"""••^^i""l "ithout r,;asona o 
 
 IN labourer. AIrI)oual,r y. DkbmoZ ^ 
 
 ing 
 iti(e 
 
 ""--^''^ that a 0.,^:ir'Affil.me:;:i;TR.l/«5f 
 
727 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS 
 
 728 
 
 XVII. XUISANWR. 
 
 Buildingr on Road Allowance — PnlliiPi 
 
 l)0iri,—.\y,;s.ih, for /;//-/.(/r. |_\V||,.,.,, ,i ,„jl|_ 
 
 iTi'fli'(l with \,\v: lii'riiiiasioMof tlictiinrislii|)ciuiii- 
 I'il, |):irtly on iiii uiuisid null iiIIhw.iml'.' in tiio 
 "••■iipiti.iii of tlicMi.UiiM.lKiiilw,iv('..nii)inv, in 
 !.■ I (if wiiiuli thuy linl ^'iviiii iiimtliei- jiIl-cc' ,if 
 liui I f.)i' ;i I'oail, was at'terwar.ls pulluil <|.)\vm I)V 
 (he iinlciN of till! coiiMril.on llic jii-oinid tint tli'c 
 t'Tnis u|j()n wiiii'ji its eiwtion hml lieun c in- 
 Mciiti'il to had Hot lu'cn uoniplicd witli, no bv 
 law for its rcMioval ]yS\\vj, p.issctl, thr owner win 
 li'-M oMtitlud to dama^'us. Thu |)iilliiii,r down of 
 tlic Imddiiig would, uniler tlic cux-nnist inccs, if 
 Jiistihiililu at ^fiil, 1k' so only if lliltliorizud by j 
 l)> -law. McNab \\ Tnivimhij, ,,t' J)ii.mrl •>•» .\ 
 
 K. :m. . - -1. 
 
 SiK Lci'-is V. Alcnimli')-, -Jl A. R. 6I.S, 24 
 S. C. R. 5.")I, cni/f 70;{ ! C/nse. v. Toini of ]yoo(l. 
 
 Tv "lOo\!!:/'-4.r" '■'"*' "''■"" '■■ ''"'"'"' -' E"'ldinBlnPublIoPark-/.;„/.7,V,/,;,.x,,. 
 
 \ R. 54, aiita 7Iu. 
 
 ' without thfuounuil incurringanv liability thore. 
 l)y. llillemH v. City ,,f St. Calhariw^, 25 () 
 R. .)SH. 
 
 Tanure of Offlca -It.'.uinml o/' Chrk—Ihun 
 hull o/ .>,Y(/.J -I'll,. I'ljinoval of a ulork of' a 
 nniiiiL'ii)al corporation may Ih' bv a resolution' 
 It not beiiij; essuiitiil tliat a liy'-law should l,e 
 liasscd tor suidi a purpose. 
 
 I'cr/ifiii V. Corpomlidii of' Sin''/i'.i /■'.i/l^ ■>l (i 
 R. .Til, folh.wod. ■ . -' '. 
 
 When tile sell of a iiiimicipal eorporation is 
 wrDn.,'fu!ly detained liy the clerk of the eouneil 
 a b\-law removing him fromotiiee maybe seal,..l 
 with another seal pro lnV- rirr, ViUd'jt „j /^,„i 
 don )IV.v/ V, liartmm, 20 O. R. 101. 
 
 -KI.X. I' 
 
 Win. OtlHKHS OK CoKI'OHATIONS. 
 
 Engineer — Contract — lir/ennn' ~- Binx. J — 
 Sir /•',irijii/i(ir V. City of HamUtuii, 2(i A. R.'sO 
 ii}ii(. ,"{1. ' ' 
 
 Examination of Officers.] —.S'w Kvidkxce. 
 
 IV 
 
 Medical Health Officer— Am'./VrVy for Artn 
 o/.]~-Held, that the medical health otKcer of a 
 muMieipal eoi'poratioii, appoiiiterl im ler R. S. O. ' 
 eh. 2Jj, see. ;{7, is not a servant of the corpora- ■ 
 tioii so as to ni ike tliem liable for his acts done 
 in pui'suance of his statutorv duties. For.^yth v 
 Caiiii'jr and Oitij of Toronto, 20 O. R. 47,S. 
 
 Overseer -/»-•/) ,Voi'. ]-.?(.,. O-ihorm v. Clti/of 
 Aimj.^'on, 2,S O. R. .SS2. iintc 71.",. ' 
 
 Pathmaster.] -.sVr- MrDmaldy. D!rtu,<,„ 
 •-'■' O. R. 4.1, 21 A. R. 485, ant,, 72(1. 
 
 Police Officers ^UaWUyfor Art, of-RotU 
 p-aUnH.\ ^\ resolution of the executive com- 
 inittee u, a city council aulh..ri/.in- the citv 
 sfdieitor to defend actions brougJit a-ain.st pijliee 
 otheers for their alleged illegal aefs, ,loes not 
 eonstitiite a r.itilic'ation thereof bv the city so 
 ■■IS to make it liable in damages for su.di acts 
 A • II y V. liartoii, K.lly y. A rrliihai,!, 2(i (). 1! . Oos! 
 
 Tenure of_ Office -^-r/,;,/ Coms-'.,/,/,.] -Under 
 
 f,\u ■■ f,"' '■''• ■•^^' T'- ^^''' ^'>^^ '-■'"^■f '-'- 
 
 st.il,let,,r the municipality can only hold olHcc 
 during the jileasure of the couiici'l, and this 
 altliouga he niiy have been apjioiuted for one i 
 year l,y a by-law passed by the council. Vmion '• 
 y. 'or/joratioii of Smith'.i Fallx, 21 O. R. 331. i 
 
 Tenure of Office -A', moral of Oirin-r T-The 
 etieet o_t sec. 279 of the C.n.scdidated Municipal 
 Act, ;,., \,ct. eh 42 (().), which enac^ts that 
 ofheers^appo,nte,l by a municipal couneil shall 
 hold ,.rt,ce until removed by the council, is that 
 a 1 smdi officers hr.M olllee during . he pleasu-e 
 ot the council, and may be renoyed at anytime 
 without notice or eau.se shewn therefor, and 
 
 I 
 
 Public Parks Act -/.r,W, T,d.'e»~Purrh,ue 
 i./r''-l. ,'"''■'' '■' """licip'tlity adopt.s the 
 I uhlic Parks Act, R. .S. O. eh. li)0, and pro- 
 ceedmgs are regularly taken thereunder for the 
 formation .,f tlie b(,ard of park managemeiil 
 aiK tor the doing of tlie various mitters author, 
 i/.ed to be ,lo,ie thereby, including the purchase 
 by he board of lands needful for park purposes, 
 sueli Doard becomes the statutory a"eut of the 
 municip.ility for such purchase, and the imiriici- 
 pahty, ami not the board, is liable to pay tor the 
 lands, Tiu. purchase money may be raised by 
 a .special iss.ie of debentures under see. 17, ,suh- 
 seo. 4, of the Act, w maybe paid out (,f the 
 general funds of the municipality, which is liable 
 to pay, whether the delieutures speciallv issued 
 liavebcea .sold ,.r not. Mr rirar v. n„m oj 
 I'oi-l Arthur, 20 0. R. 391. 
 
 Sunday Preaching-Z;y./r»»' Prokihitiw/.]- 
 .V . A'' Cnhhin and City of Tor.mlo, 21 () K 
 .i2.), jio-''t 72S. 
 
 .X.K. PKOttlMITORY I'OWEIIS. 
 
 Hawkers— /'>'o/i(V«7;o« ai to Sir, , /.«.] _,sV^ /„ 
 /••• l^irjo and City of Toronto, 20 A R 435 
 22 S. C. n. 447, [1890J A. C. 88, ante 721. ' ' 
 
 1 Pai-ks-.S'/oe/fty Pr"arhimi.]-H. is provided 
 by R. .S. O. ch. 184, see. 504, sub-sec. Ill, that 
 the council of every city ami town may pjiss 
 by laws for the iii inagemeiit of the farm,' park, 
 garden, etc. :— 
 
 Hehl, that tlic muiiieipal couiu:il of a city 
 had jiower under tiiis enaetineiit to iiasH a 
 by-law providing that no jicrson shall on the 
 Nabbath-day m any public jiark. s piaro, garden, 
 etc., in the city, publicly jueach, lecture, or 
 declaim : — 
 
 Held, also, that the b\--law xiolated no con- 
 stitutKuial right, and was ncjt unreasonable, 
 Haih-y V. WlniamxoH, L. R. 8 Q. IJ. Il.S, fol- 
 lowed. 
 
 Held, also, thatthe by-law was not liad for 
 uncertainty as to the day of the week intended, 
 liy reason of the use of the term •■ .Sabbath day." 
 Id CrMin and City of Toronto, 21 O. R. ;Wo. 
 
728 
 
 iK.'uiTingany liability tliorn. 
 ij <if St. Cattmriwx, 25 0. 
 
 -It'.iiwi'itl of Clerk — Deffn- 
 romoviil of 11 cloik nt H, 
 •n may lie liy a i-usdliitidn, 
 il tliat a l>y-law slioul.l In; 
 p.iso. 
 'ion of Sin''/i:i F'i//s, •_>! 0. 
 
 a iiiiiiiici|)al (jurpDivition is 
 
 l)y tlii'uliM'k of till' coiiniil, 
 
 111 froiiiollicM.' limy Ik; s(;alwl 
 
 /u'lr ricr, VUld.l,; ,,/ /j,i,i. 
 
 , 2(5 (X K. l(il. ' 
 
 . Parks. 
 
 2 Park — A '■ahmiy/,,r A'o/i- 
 \-. Toii-n II/ Ihriiii, L'ti (). 
 
 -Lriiiili TiiL-eii—Purchim 
 iniiiiicip^ditv ai^nits the 
 . S. O. oil. 100. un.l pro- 
 takc'ii tlicremuier for the 
 I'll tif park iiiaiiag'jinem,, 
 II! varioiH nutters author- 
 V, iiiclmliii.L; tlu' purchase 
 iCL'ilfiil f.)r park piiipo-ies, 
 II-' statutory ,i.,'c'iit of the 
 uu'L'liasc, ami the iiniiiiui. 
 I'll, is lialile to pay for the 
 
 money nriy be riiiseil by 
 itui'os umler sec. 17, suh- 
 
 may be paiil out of the 
 
 uicip'ility, which is liable 
 
 beutures specially issued 
 
 ^[|■ Virar V. Tijinii oi 
 
 391. ■^ 
 
 -Bij-lntr Prohihiliwi.]- 
 ly of Tor.in/o, 21 6. K, 
 
 TORV PoWKIIS. 
 
 im ax to S/n I /.i.]~,Si''- 111 
 Toroii'o, 20 A (I. 435, 
 A. C. 88, ante 721. 
 
 "■'"'".'/■J— It is provided 
 
 .")lt-t, sub-see. Id, that 
 
 ty ami town may pim 
 
 neiit of till.' fjii'iu,' park, 
 
 icip:il council of a citj 
 enactment to pass a 
 u) person shall on the 
 ic park, spiare, ^'arden, 
 icly iireach, lecture, or 
 
 i\'-law violated no con- 
 ivas not unreasonable, 
 . R. 8 Q. U. IIS, fol- 
 
 j'-law was not bad for 
 i' of tile week intended, 
 eterin " Sabbath-day." 
 oruiilo, 21 O. U. 325. 
 
 729 
 
 XXI. Ska I.. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 t* r V -rr ^ ""'""■/ /'"'»„, -.to,,, l!l.\. H. 47 .,] 
 Lf,rlram -M O. 1;. I til. ,»,/,. 70s . //J; . 
 
 730 
 
 sewer has not larn const ru, ted sulIicicntU ,le..„ 
 "allow a proper fall to the .Irains from , 
 J' ses. J„Lsto„ V. City ,./ To,;.,.,., .>o . 
 
 X.XIl. Skwi:u.i. 
 
 Expropriation of Easement. ]-Seetinn 47<l 
 sub-sec. l,,of ,|„. .M„„„.i,„, It. u!"^^\' 
 
 •■' •:i7l''"^.".'.taki,„o;.nsi„^''r'S 
 
 . . •/"'•<lmnia,n.. purposes, does not ant - 
 
 / • a In-law wl„,.|,. „ hile not assuming' to take 
 h 111 r,,,uue,; (or the purpose of a se« ■ 
 attempts to expropriate the' e,,se„,ent f or t c 
 coMstl'Mction thereof. '- 
 
 .-2 Vict, ell 7;i. sec. 1 1 (O.), ,h:es not provide 
 foi^thc compulsoiy ac,,nisiti,m of .sud, an e,„e- 
 
 The .«ewer in (piestion was jiart of a s\stem 
 '"t the up,er em thereof, ami not airH 1.^ 
 for any p„rt alrea.ly conttrncted :-- 
 
 111 b\da^^, ,t li.'iil not been «. acted ui.on us to 
 
 !^S.t!;i7f;!:'Sa"- ^^'^-"^■^-^^i 
 
 pafuvT'-n" ?;''°T^' Adjoining Munlcl- 
 
 pallty.J-lhc 'teiritory „| the muim-ipaliiv 
 .;«erred o ,n I!. S. () di. 184, sec. 4'.-, su'b-s.'e i 
 -, IS the hind conipriH.d within the boumis and ' 
 "> I er the .pinsdictmn of the municipaljtv ' 
 
 One municipality cannot thcrcfo e extend a' 
 ;:■«'■'■ tl.-oucb l.-imis within the iKuinds.ii ,^w4 ! 
 '•^uous niumcpality. without the consent of 
 tlie latter, or without takiii;; the statutory sterjs 
 -en althouoli tlic huuls have been pu'diX; 
 'Iniis. '""■'■ """"^■T'^lity f'-""' tlie private 
 
 dndgment of the Court of Appeal, 17 A. I! 
 .'^^MindoftlieCiiancery Division, ISO K l.|i ' 
 
 Use of Drain as Sewer A V«„„v I- A ,„,ti 
 
 tnm by ratepayers of a, owi.bip.und.:'';.^. 
 
 ■>'\>>>l tlic Muuii'ipal Act of Ontario asked fo. 
 
 a <i>'ain to be constructed lor -iroioi ■ tlu ,r 
 IP-'fy described therein. Th ' u^u- 1 p ^' ^ 
 
 alerwarils annexed to the ml joining ,' "n 
 's «V, i^'l "■"' ^''^■••^■'"t'^^'' .'-s-l as a com, 
 
 nose' ''' •'•" ^■""^^'•"^"■•'. 'it f'U' tliat p u 
 
 Y' '» "" ;'^'|'oi, a^i.uns. a houseliolder w ,. 
 
 iuoufe '''''"'''^"''^'^''''''^''•'•'■'■^••'y-t 
 
 V ' ■• -' :V ''• ';'-^' J'l^Hiereau ami (Jwxnne 
 
 water, but sewa;.e ;.eneialh-, ami c Y"u e 
 Ii'Mo.' was not responsible for the . onsc,, k' 
 ;;| --..ni, his, iou.e With such drain 1;;-! 
 
 ^i^^!:rbe\:;^d^LirrS..^?":':-Tr;:^" 
 
 .".-..on of ,1,0 city engineer, a Vesol^Jw't,: 
 
 ^:^ u^:;"m::'o^^:,^i-j-,-!-:;;:;;,- 
 
 Liability for Damages-^, '^ o/Y-(«/.]-AV]iero 
 «.^™er, bmit and maintaine.l by a inuuic ,Vd 
 orporation, is free from structural 1 e cct 
 -. SI, icient capacity to answer all or.lina 
 neuls the coriKuatio,, is not liable for dama-Js 
 « as a resuh of an extraordinary nS 
 
 Au extra.,, dinary rainfall m.iy properly be 
 "tie,;"/'''' "['"\^^ ^•'<^ tecli'nic^I inean 
 Iw.f 1 '■''""' '''""8'' 't 's »"t Dfuni.reee- 
 
 wntt. GorfiM v. Ciy 0/ Toronto, -22 A. U. 
 
 au Ing to a g, ncral plan of drainage adopted 
 subsequentlj eicetedonthe street, because the 
 
 r^Z°'~^''T, r ^--7- .'^•"-"7' -Prirat, 
 
 sir ic ;.T I '"."■"^•'1';'' -"I'-'ation. i,aviiigcon. 
 Miucte.ladrain, witlumt a by-hiw for the ■,■ 
 
 ■enhirportion passing through priva.'pl't" 
 whereby noxious matter was b,' ,i,t ""1"'^.^. 
 
 :;l;ri.itcd thereon, was hJhM'ib^^^'l!,-;-^ 
 [Mistained thereby, notwitlistaiiding th/,1 tlmre 
 , «ere excavations on the land but for wluV, 1 e 
 , Mox.ons matter might have j.assed o '. t le 
 owner not being bound to leave 1, s la d i, , 
 state of nature : nor was it any ansMe ■ tl ,t t hi 
 
 i;irir.::;ir'^''''^''''''''''v'''-'''''-''>^'^'- 
 
 "^.^"l^lr^Sran^^^^^^ 
 
 iarbiiriii,,,, rt. ' -^ submission to 
 
 — A. Iv. 42\), ante 722. ' 
 
 XXIII. W.VTKK 
 
 \vo):ks. 
 
 • ^^"^^,7 - ^'("'^ '- Di.comit- Puhlir Buihl 
 "'.v-^'.J-l'.y statute 3,-, Viet .1, -q /n ^ 
 .amended by 41 Vi. ,h 4 7o ^ fi * •'' ■ "^ 
 
 ' of the ..itv of ■ ■ ' ''' t"«'-"ip''>"liiin 
 
 i >i I R . ty of toron , was empowered in rcir. 
 i to tdie city wate,-^ 0, l:s, to fix the pn ce ra ^ ' 
 n.,t.ii.ianyo,„,eroroccupant'of',:,;;^:,;^ 
 
 ;:i;i:"i;o:;i;/;;:n:'tho;dd'p:u^^i^!r,r^ 
 
 rent, ,Uiell,er the owner o,' .,lupa fll on kU^o 
 the water ornot, having due regard t the "s 
 
 ^^yi:;! by'^n'r "" ■"'"'^'"""'""«""- -^-^S" 
 
 unon 1 „ >n?l """'"' '" '"."■P"'"' or conferred 
 upon liim or Ins property by the water-works. 
 
731 
 
 NEQLIOENOE. 
 
 mi 
 
 lli"niqi..iMU<m v,a>, ,iIh.. i.|,ip,,«-,.|c.I loHx the 
 nU;' to )„. iKii.l tnr ihu iiMM.f tlir w„t,.il,v iml.lj,. 
 I.Mi Miii,-s. |>iii-.i,mnt to thus,. pow,.,>, >l In .|,iw 
 ot the . or|K,iiiti..M wus|.nsn.,l i.iovi.liMg thi'.t the 
 hii1t-v..,Hv r,,t.s ••,,ai,l vithiM tho first tw„ 
 ninii hs o! thi- half.;,,.,,,' for whiHi llifv (in. ,Iuo, 
 shiill I,.. siilij.Ti to ;, ,v,lu,aioii of littv'pur (rent 
 Huvo MM,1 exci.pt iu the .■.i.so .,f -ovenimrnt or 
 '■th-rnistitutioii.s which arc oxciiipl fro],, ,.itv 
 
 ti.XCH. ,„ whirl, ,„WH the s„i,l pn.visioMH UH to 
 
 «lisci„i,,l «hall not appiv ; " - 
 
 llchl, 1,,V !•■< I>,'lli-,„i,'.)., (I,,, ,1„, posl.o(ti,.L, 
 yust,,ui.s.ho„su.un,lotii,.r h,nMi„cs vusl,.,l in the 
 trowii, iill ol will,;, weru pxiiupt ikhi, , it v tuxes 
 Uf,,. ••j,'ov,T„iiiciit i,istit,iti,.iis,'- willnii the 
 lin'miiii;,' o! thu l.v-liiM . 
 
 „i~: ^'l','",'^' '■'■-',"■'' '" •^•' ^'''i- ^•''- '^<»<>^- 13 
 
 (n.); 41 \ ut. ,li. 41, sec, ;j (().). ]{ .s () ch 
 li)'->, so,vs. 1<),„„|...8, t|,„t the iMo„evs ,_.i,i,r,;e,i 
 nw\ ]mu\ uswalcr-nitesoi- ,v,il for water were 
 not taxl■.•^ l.iit the price or jirices p,ii,l for wjiter 
 iijKin ii .«a!" thci'col to the cons, unci's. 
 
 ."f. That the l,y. law was not invalid as.liscrini- 
 iiiiilmi; aj,'ainst the frown. 
 
 . Hehl, hy th,_. ('o,nt of Appeal, allirniin- the ' 
 ju.l^'nient ot l'cr-i,.so„, J., that '• gov crinncnl ' 
 m^tll,.t,ons in tl„. l,y-law meant Kovei'mnct ! 
 Inn (lings in wind, some puhli, lMisin,.>.s is cr- ' 
 ricl on, and were -'puhlie Iniihlings " within 
 the imainng „! the Act :— 
 
 Helil, aL~o, tliat thu " :„ !. 
 
 jiaid for the water was 
 
 tlie ])rice jiaid for the :. , 
 
 eonsnmer, and that ti,-' .ni'. 
 
 ' "" ' '■'"•■' 1. 1,, '.oij, . I uioii Hen' no 
 
 olilige,! to allow, for -n.tter r jplied to p,d,li 
 
 Imi dnigs, the ,!iscou,it ..llo-.vc.l to taxiiavers. 
 
 tie d, l,y theSiipiemeCoii', V .,f Canada, Vevers. 
 
 iiiy the jndgnients hch,w, Patlei'son, .I.A., dis- 
 
 sentnig, that under the authoritv .dven to 
 
 municipal c,,rp,aations to li.x the rate (Vr rent to 
 
 iJe paid liy each ownc or oi'ciipanl of a liiiihiinir 
 
 fte., sujiplied by the corporation with wateT'' 
 
 the rates imposed must he uniform; and the 
 
 l)ydaw_ 111 ,piesti,m was invalid as regai'<!s such 
 
 cxcci.tion. AflorN.y.t;„„ntl for Canada v. 
 
 C(/// III Juroiilo, -20 (). li. 19, 18 a H f,o.) 
 
 tin S. C. R. 514. ' ' 
 
 732 
 
 »oc. 22, extended sous to emhraeo Iho Itin.lH i„ 
 question : - 
 
 Held, that assuming that the wivter i,,te wus 
 ftHpeeieaot taxation, the dlect of K S () ch 
 184, sec. 54, was to p„t ,',„ eu,l to the exemption' 
 Miiinriliality oj C„n„m//ii v. C,im,/i,n, j\„,„r 
 J,, r. Co., IJIS.O. K. 702. .Ii8tinguished. Cil,, 
 «;/ (I iiit/Mur y. Camiih .Soiilhtni A'. IK. Co. •.',) 
 A. It. ,'JSN. *' 
 
 MUNICIPAL DEBENTURES. 
 
 Sf.f MoNKv Ha/) .\m) Received. 
 
 MURDER. 
 
 .S'«e Cui.Mi.NAr, Law, II. 
 
 rate, or rent " 
 • ix. hut merely 
 ■ ipplied to the 
 
 it ion wer<' not 
 
 NAVIGABLE WATERS. 
 
 ■Sei WaTKK AM, WwKiU'olliSES, Jll. 
 
 NAVIGATION. 
 
 Se,i CoNSTirmoNAi, Law, ;III.— Crow.s, 1]]. 
 
 NEGLIGENCE. 
 
 I. Genkbai.i.y, 732. 
 II. Abate.me.vt ok AcriDN-, 7;?s. 
 
 III. Co.vTKiiiuroRY Neolioence, 7;iS. 
 
 IV. Pkoxtmate Cause, 7,S8. 
 
 Purchase of Land for Water-works Pur- 
 
 .^•?n^'.l"f,", ''^'''■""' ''■ ^'>IU ¥ SI. Thomas, 
 -.i<>. It. 114, aiitcX',?,. 
 
 Rate Imposed on Land — Xo,i-u>i,r of 
 nal.r ~ /a.rafioH -Exn),jUiou.]~TUe defen- ' 
 diints wx'ie the owner.s of vacant lan,l in the 
 eityot Wui.l.sor, abutting on streets in wliicl, f 
 niam.s and hydrants of the plaintiffs had been I 
 placed. 1 he defen.lunts ha,l a water-works i 
 system of iheir own and di.l n<jt use that of the I 
 plaintiffs thougl, they ..'ould h.'ive ,lone so had ' 
 they "(vished. Ihe cummis.sioners imposed a' 
 water rate " for water .supplied, or rea.lv to be ' 
 supplied upon all lan,L in the eitv baseil upon ' 
 tlieir aasos.sed \alue, irrespeetive of the user or 
 lion user of water : — 
 
 Hel.l, that tlii.s rate was, under 37 Viet. oh. 79, 
 sees. 11, 12, validly imposed. 
 _ The lands owned by the defendants were oriu- 
 inally part of the township of San.lwich West, 
 and by a by-law of that townshi,,, confirmed by 
 siiecial legislation, were exempted from taxation 
 wsJ'fl' ?"'^ f™-' the Ist January, IS83. In 
 l!"!5f> the limits of the (then) town of Windsor 
 were under the provisions of R. ,S. O. eh. 184, 
 
 Of Landlokus.— &(■ Landlord AND Tenant, 
 
 Of Masters and E.mployeks.— &e Ma.stek 
 AND Servant, III. 
 
 Of Municipal Corporations.— .?ee Mum 
 ciPAL Corporations, X., XIII. 
 
 Of Persons in Coxteol of Vessels. -&► 
 8m p, I. 
 
 Of Railway Companie.s.— .S'f,' Railways and 
 Railway Co.mpanies, IV., V., VIII., IX. 
 
 be j Of Servants of the Crown.— &■,• Crown, 
 
 II. 
 
 Of Solicitors.— .S'ee Solicitor, VII. 
 
 Of Street Railway Co.mpanies.— 5'ee .SrnsET 
 Railways, IV. 
 
 I. GE^SRALLY. 
 
 Ba.U0e—Agistm<nt— Reasonable Care.]-The 
 plaiiitiflf s mare, while in charge of the defen- 
 
733 
 
 lis to eiiiliiaee the lands 
 
 NEQLiaENOE. 
 
 5LE WATERS. 
 
 U'Ari;i;c..(KSE.s, III. 
 
 TROL Of Vessels.— .S'et 
 
 E Ciiowa.—Sn: Crown, 
 
 731 
 
 I'-f "-'y'loH'^h' Si" r;;V"'' '''■'■• ''''"• 
 
 >'-"ullv tiinuM at tip ,1 V '''"'''^'''«'«' 
 
 :;^:;d;'=x'"i S.:■'■":;l,5- 
 G:"t1:■'x:;^.::;^:;•&'-H^-- 
 ILMilMf (i,„ '• ^" •'"> ■''■'"" l,v V 
 
 nun., w,th,.tl.,M-|..r,s,H of ,|,„ ,1. . |^ | 
 
 ..HtiH..^...„'e,,.,,,;i:;,';';^^^^^^^^^^ . „.., 
 
 rr.,n„al,le..uv3 wl.i.l, .,n agistor Wb/mn V ■'''-.'''■''''• 'I'^^^A' ^•'"i 
 exonMs..; an,la„_.n.s.>it was sot ani/ll S;',''"- '*'''''''' ""'•"" 
 
 '" siii-li CHOM is not 
 
 -^ >.n. u tv J 111; II * 
 
 T'l-ir as t(i ills own atiitniN It- w ;„ , , 
 
 -t -hat any ,,.,ti„.!ar nnn !l, ;" „^";:;;''- 
 
 !'ui- .Mfre;litli, ,J. -Tin. a 'ist,.,. i 
 
 '.U:HontlK.,.lai,titF.U,!ha: .^^t- 4''J^ 
 M,Mtl.,.oa.,. /'.or«v..y^./^ /,"^lO " 
 
 Cbarteraraof Tus -Fire-R.a.o.-Me I' ,„- 
 
 ^::.:t:i;^Sho,^J^E,,S''t^''r;-''^ 
 
 raiaimtlv to tli.. s|,,.i-, ,,f , ' ' '""""■''it l"^^''- 
 ^l>:,v^ by .ML.ans „t thaif own ."Jou , ,,l , • i 
 
 ,. • - -, ami 
 
 decision •- '"" " '^''1'"'''' f""n that 
 
 ^ ■'-'^uiiK, mat tlie\- witi; idv t..,l i... n 
 
 tV.«nIsin ais'ninrV wf;'''.;''''' ""^'^^ H'ei-" 
 that they h r •;,>; f„ :"' '";,^t" '■".-■,•; an-l 
 
 iHiiU'or, iairv c ii- m I H, ' ' /"""sons 
 
 Al/au'ic 6:.<l. Co., 22 8. C r! k/; "*"^* 
 
 boiiriil to conform. 
 Thi.' plaintiffs sc-jw .vufht, Hi.„ c. 
 
 cv 
 
 «»( V. /»•(/(«, 25 O. K. ,524 
 
 ^- C. li. ,SJ, ;,„;< 7.35. -"""" ^- V,-cv>a««,cr, 24 
 Innkeeper- 
 
 
 ■ — -■ "■■ '«>.:<ietei-,.l:uics, b 
 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 y 
 
 /. 
 
 // 
 
 
 ?^^^/^ 
 
 f/. 
 
 &/ 
 
 ^ 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 ^ IM 1 22 
 - lis 111112^ 
 
 1.25 i 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 »r>U^ 
 
 1 iiuiugia[jiiiL 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 ,\ 
 
 # 
 
 4v 
 
 ^\ 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 
 
 ^ ^i 
 
 >> 
 
 '""C^""..^ *%'^'' 
 
735 
 
 NEGLIGENCE. 
 
 73a 
 
 Per Uoyd, '.;. The „.m; of tli,. 1„ic,mi U-iu' 
 lawful hy stiiHiti'. H. S. (). di. ]■>], sec. .">, and 
 noncglif,'eii(i'iM itsfimstnutidn liuiiigi/iuti'iKkil. 
 it was iiii^ossiblc to siiy that what was thus cx- 
 proHsly lf;,'alizo(l. (;oulil !„■ iiuulu thf giouiKl (if 
 an notion of t(jit. L(iii(/.-./iiir v. MrJ.'ai- •'•>() 
 R. 78. ' . - • 
 
 Ownerof Building- /-.'.^rn/,, i./Shain -Ininrii 
 toAdjaidil /l„;/,/;,i,/-.\oi;n'.]~T]w pipe froiii 
 iicondensiTattaulioil to a stwun engine used in 
 the niunufaeture of eleetrieity jmsstd tlirougli 
 the floor of the premises and di.^eharyed tlie 
 stean; into a dock below, some twenty feet from 
 an adjoining waieliouse, into whieli' the steam 
 eiitered and dan,a,ue<l th<. eoiiteuts, Xotie' was , 
 given to tile eleetrie eom]ianv, hut the injury! 
 continued, and an action was Ircught hy the 
 owners of the \\artliouse for damages :— * 
 
 Hehl, alhrming tlic deeisioii nf tlie Court 
 below, that the act eaur,ing the injury violated' 
 the rule of law wiiic h does Hot peimit one, even 
 on lu.s own land, to ih> anytliing, lawful in itself, ; 
 ■which ne.'cs.-arily injures anothei', and the' 
 persons injured were entitled to damages there- ' 
 for.niore especially as the injury continued after 
 notice to the company. CImndkr E/icliir Co. 
 V. Ivlltr, 21 S. C. K. 337. 
 
 Owner of Bunaing~//;,,/i,m,/-Or<rli(n,uin,i 
 Coni-n'. I-- The owner of a building, fioni wiiicji 
 a cornice overhanging the .sidewalk f.dls, because 
 the nails iastening il to the building have be- 
 come loosened by ordinary decay, ami iinuits a 
 passer-by, i.s liable in ihimagcs uithout pr.mf of 
 knowle.lge on his part of the dangerous condi- 
 tion of the cornice, the defect bciiu; one tluit 
 could have been ascertained by him'bv rea.soii- 
 able inspection. A'olur/., y. jilin-lie//, 1>1 A. II. 
 
 TOO. 
 
 Owner of Building — ////»,// / Adjn,-. „.■ 
 lini/i/iiKi ' Vis ,l/f(/'-r.J— Wheie'a tire destroyed 
 the defi'Milant's house, leaving one of the wliil, 
 st.'inding in a darg.'rous co.idition, anil ih. 
 defeniiant, knowim,' the fact, neglected to seem.; 
 or .sii])|)ort the wall or- take it d;i\vii, ami si>;i„- 
 <lays after tlic lire it was blown down by a lii:.'|i 
 wind ami damaged the plaintillV house ;- 
 
 Held, i.flirniing the judgments of theCnii;!, 
 below, that the defendant could not shield hin.. 
 self under the plea of rl.s iniiju/; and was li.dil.' 
 for the damai^es caused. Xonlx iiiu r \. -\l, ■ 
 ami)-,; 10 ,S. fV !'«. 248. 
 
 Owner of Eangerous Machine— liijin y 
 Chilli - Viihwhcr.] — 'I'lie jilaiiitiir, a "bov 
 eight, can.e upon the dcfcii<hnit's land, wii 
 
 the latter was mowing hay, and tlic defen 
 
 Jicrniitted hiui to get upon the mowing iiiiiclni 
 iiloiie. and to drivi; the hoises. llv Kasiii . 
 
 t! 
 
 due of tlie wheels striking into a furmw, 
 ])laintirt' was thrown (ait of his seat, and, fa! 
 on tlie knives of tlie iiiaehii.e, was injuicd. ' 
 trial .ludge told tlie jury that if the dehii.i 
 was not using ica.vonable care in alhiwiiu 
 plaintiff to be upon the machine, he was gu 
 of negligence : — 
 
 Held, a proper direction ; and a verdirt 
 the plaintilf was allowed to stand. 
 
 'J'he (juestion whether the iilaintilV was a 'i 
 passer or volunteer or licensee was not milii 
 Ciirroll V. Fmnwn, 'I'A (). K. 283. 
 
 hv 
 
 . Ownerof Building Ili,ih,ra,,— WuHloirFoll- 
 
 "i!l--Jn('</r,.-.--Kv,rii/<^rs.\^Jiha owner of pro- 
 ptrty abutting on a highway is under a pc .sitive 
 <lnty to keej, it from being ^i cause of ihingcr to 
 tlie public i,y reason of any delect, either in 
 8tructuiL\ repair, or use and inaiiucement, which 
 reasonable care can guard again.st; 
 
 Dame .AT. sued J. F. and M. \V. V. nerscn- 
 ally as well as in their (piality of testamentary 
 executors and tru.stees of the wi'l of the late 
 J. 1'., claiming .S-l.OOO damages for the death of 
 her husband, who was killed by a window fall- 
 iDg on hini from the third storey of a buihling 
 w iich formed part of the geneii'il estate of the 
 late J. !• , l,|,t y,yhi^.]^ had been .speciriiallv 
 bequeathed to one G. F., and his children, fo'r 
 whom the said J. F. and M. \V. F. were also 
 trustees. 1 he judgments of the Courts below 
 held the appellants liable in their capacity of 
 executors of the general estate and trustees 
 under the will ;— 
 
 Held that the aiipellants were responsible 
 lor the damages resulting from their negligence 
 in not keeping the building in repair as well 
 personally as in their ipiality of trustees {crhrri- 
 tiers /tdmiains) for the benefit of G. F.'s child- 
 ren ; but were not liable as executors of the 
 general estate. 
 
 Where parties are before the Court tjmi exe- 
 cutors, and the same parties sH i also be sum- | 
 nioned (j„i7 trustep.s. an nm.Mument to that rtt'ct-t 
 is suthcicnt, and a new writ of sunuuons is not 
 necessary. Ftrrier v. Tr^pannitr, 24 S. C. R. 80, 
 
 Owner of Engine— Fin —U'fuit of Sj.n,!: 
 .lcyv.>y, )•.]— On the trial of an action for (laiii/L'i-. 
 for the destruction of a barn and ils centemsl,v 
 tire, alleged to have been caused by iieglig mi 
 of the defendants in working a steam-i iigiiie iisuil 
 in running a hay luess in front of said barn, ll:c 
 main issue \Mis as to the snllieiincy of a s]iiirk 
 an ester on said engine, and the learned Juil:t 
 directed the jury that "if Ihtie was no s|iiili 
 arrester in the engine, that in itself would li 
 negligence for which the defendants wdiilii U 
 liable." The plaintilf' obtained a verdict, wliid' 
 was set aside by the Court in haiic, and a new 
 trial ordered, for n direction. On appeal (i; 
 the tSupremc Court of Canada : — 
 
 Held, iStrong, J., dissenting, that the .h;il;;i 
 misdirected the jury in ttlliiig tlum tl.,a liii 
 want of a s)iark arrester was, in jioint of law, 
 negligence, and such direction may have iitlu 
 eneeil them in giving their virdict ; theufmc 
 the judgment ordering a new trial slunild m t In; 
 interfered with. Peir-i v. Elliott, 21 S. C. R, l!l. 
 
 Owner of Engine— .VoAvr — J/lii/iirai/. |- Thi- 
 mere fact that a horse, while being ('.riven ak.iig 
 the highway, has lieen frightened by ^he whistlt- 
 of a steam engine, used by the" definilaiits 
 for the jn'vpose of their lawfully operateil water 
 works, is not sufficient to make tlieiii resimii- 
 sible for damages resulting from the horse liav- 
 ing run away. .Some positive evidence of negli- 
 gence in the use of the whistle must be givm, 
 or at least some evidence that its use niiglit l.i; 
 exjiected to cause such an accident, so as to 
 cause it to be a nuisance to the highway. /.'"'' 
 v. Village of Lticknou; 21 A, li. I. 
 
 Owner of Horse — Iliijhiiaij.] — It is not 
 
 nrjligenoe jKr le fur the driver of a horse ef s 
 ()uiet disposition, standing in the street, to let 
 go the reins while he alijihts from the vehicle tc 
 
73G 
 
 ilding — fiij 11,1/ ■ Ailjnrii.- 
 liijiir.\—\\Uv\M a tire (iestioy.,! 
 Iioiisf, Itiiviiig one of till' w.iiU 
 (iiirg.'Kiua cd.ulitidii, ami iii' 
 iiiic tlie UwX, nenk'utfd to st.oiiii. 
 ■all or lake it diwii, anil soim- 
 !•(-' it was blown down liy a InV'li 
 ui\ tlu! plainlilTs house- :— 
 ig the judgments of tlieCouii- 
 lefendant coidd not shield hiii,- 
 ea of y/.s iitiiji,i\ and was liiilil.j 
 I'ii.iised. XurtlK iiiitr v. .-I A 
 . '248. 
 
 igerous Machine — lnjin n / , 
 ■.] — The i)laintiir, a ' l)o_\ (,i 
 n the defendant's land, wii.ic 
 lowing iiay, and the ilefeiHl.-mi 
 ' get noon tlic mowing niai luiu- 
 rive the horses. Jly icasui il- 
 ls striking into a furrow, t!:- 
 )V.n out ot his seat, and, f:il. n- 
 tlie niaeliii.o, wasinjincMJ. I i;,. 
 the jury that if the defeii'iioi- 
 asoiiahle euro in allow iii_ tin 
 nn the niiieliine, he was guihv 
 
 r direction ; and a verdict :, i 
 alloweil to stand, 
 iiethei' the idaintilV w.ms a ' i . .- 
 :r or licensee was not niatir i! 
 '*!, '-'.SO. I!. 283. 
 
 ?lne —/■'//•'— ir««/ rij S/„i,!: 
 e trial of •in action fcr<laiii;'u'is 
 II of a liarn and ils contemsliy 
 ve heen caused liy neglig na 
 in working a stcani-t ngiiie u>eil 
 [iiess ill front of said liarn, llie 
 
 to the siiliicitney of a s|i:iik 
 ngiiie, and the learueil ili;(I:.t 
 
 that " if tlure was no siicik 
 giiio, that in itself woulii l-t 
 dch the defendants woiilii l^i. 
 itifl' obtained a verdict, whiil' 
 he (^uvt HI liaii(\ and a new 
 
 ir 'direction. On ajipeal t., 
 t of Canada : — 
 ., dissenting, that the .lr,ci;:( 
 iry in tilling thini th.,t tlit 
 irrcster was, in jioint of linv, 
 ch direction may have irtlu 
 ving their viidict ; theiefiiit 
 ring a new trial should i:ut In 
 Petr.'i V. Elliott, '1\ S. C. K. lH. 
 
 ine — Xoixi — Illtihirnii. |--Ti.i' 
 >rsc, while being driven along 
 leen frightened by Mie whistle 
 le, used by the defindniits 
 their lawfuU.y operated wattr- 
 cieiit to make the;:! res|i(iii- 
 resulting from the horse liav- 
 me positive evidence of uegli- 
 F the whistle must he giviii, 
 idence that it.s use uiiyht I'l' 
 such an accident, so as to 
 isance to the Iiighwav. /■''"" 
 !0(c, 21 A. It. 1. 
 
 le — Iliijliiia>i.] — \t is ncf 
 ur the driver of a horse ef a 
 landing in the street, to let 
 lie alijjiits from the vehicle tn 
 
 iH'ing at the time 
 
 <"■ disturbance to 
 
 I he owner of the 
 
 ■'iiniages .■aimed by 
 
 I"" iWghtiiicd by 
 
 '•i^'ilightud. 
 
 '/'he 
 
 owner 
 
 737 
 
 faston 5 head-weight, there 
 httle tnifhc ard no noise 
 trightcn .he animal ; and 
 lior.se i.s not res,,o„,siblo for , 
 the horse in running away m, 
 
 lisuddenmdse just after the driver 
 •'"'-'"•""v. .)/cir///,>,w, -iOA. K ('.j 
 
 Ownerof Turkey //„;/,„,„, , 
 
 =a;S-,s;;:;;!»i-:;;;v'^"«i™~;.l.i;« 
 
 the sight of t le b .f ' "" >M''"''y'^t 
 
 tlH'idghwit^^clea^, ",;^?^'" ''^''''-I''''''' 
 
 f.'Miearly two hours, i; , ; '" ^ '' o'""' ' 
 .■videueeofnegligeiie;;:,";,, t" :^.;;; V-t 
 
 person wi,o strikes a-aiust M,. , • ,''' 
 
 l«.ssing i„ a street ea? s ,c a b f"" V'"'^' 
 waggon does not brcon,. , „ ..' „ '"'^''"i ''""" 
 
 NEOLIOENCE. 
 
 738 
 
 ^/v^ri^rut^tt.'::'-'''';'^''-''-'^'''-- 
 ''•■r'' "% 4^.«li in i,!r ':;■;;:. T'"''" 
 
 find, ow lo' to I he , ,.,ri; " J '"' steamer, 
 
 '"■■nier steveih' > s' d •'/''■ '■' "'J'"''''''' "'« 
 "'i'"-v. The fall, iv. to l'" •'"'""''''^^■^ '"'• •■^"-'' 
 
 -;-uiiytaki:,,'i;;':;;a'^;.,:r:i:;!;/;,>--"'''- 
 
 Trustees. ]- 
 
 -'•-' s. r. 
 
 ' /■> 
 
 l I'l'lnliin'iii 
 
 ■X\ .S. 
 
 th.' 
 
 JI- AllATKMKNr („,• AlTION 
 
 '^^rn;(;t;';i^r£'^'^'-'i-^- 
 
 }"-^' the actio,,. V, ,," r ■"■''■.''■■r''''- 
 
 iir. 
 
 Shopkesper -■- Fall ,,/• i/; . . ,. , 
 her child, two and a i if ;;t"';'r" T"", "'"' 
 
 ;^-u'^iu,ptobi;;S,^^;^"^:'.^,'''^j{^;.- 
 
 tiiore a mirror lixed to the w-,11 ., ' f '"'' 
 
 whicli the child WIS fell n ' ' *^'""'' "* 
 
 i-i I 1 1 ," ' "•'*'> lell .uiil imuieil ,'in ■ 
 
 Muestion were answered 'in tl^.iV ■ * ■''■^' 
 
 -ou.i^,,!,' i.e.i " I : ;^.,;:;'; '"'• "'-'^ ^--'it, 
 
 of his having .lii^cc V ' r;?'''"^''^ '•'■^'-"" 
 
 'listiDguishcd! ^"' '^^""""^•"t^-1 ".. ami 
 
 neEi ^''ot'lr l-'^f r'"" "f -"IHlnitory 
 of. """. I 1". .V 1 . do!), approved 
 
 Bridge 
 
 , <if a Vessel 
 a 
 ve 
 i-n title, 
 
 -£iiu'hteiS';:;';i::-;:iV--7''-'' -• 
 
 "i'li it cannot )„. ., 7 ,'"' «*-■ "''^^ '""i«ion 
 '""..dtobe Ise, idu, i" '''■'•" ''■" '''■""' i^ 
 
 ^'--'-brid.\!wirfii^:,;;:/;::^:-'S;« 
 
 /J"!/o/ (^miiteliriilyeCo., 
 
 ^''"'/'■^'■■■"•J-Tho persons i„ ^hai-o 
 
 <''-vbri,i::,''ir;,;^;!-;<'i--i-.atlS 
 
 1 oassu.„i. that tile draw of ;|,;';;,i.b^ 
 " "•" '"■ "l"."^''" in time to let the 
 
 ■'eiitiiu . 
 -'0 A. K. 
 
 ^•ihiioiit 
 -'SI. 
 
 \ . 
 
 i-y. "i-'o :^;;5m.ibi;t, : n :f:i;-;,f-' -.th a 
 
 " ''^■tonee, the „„>,s of ur. ,> >^'^\ '" '^^'^ "I' «« 
 
 -'^'o,,ee,,,.Z;::7^:,:;^^;i^-i-etnpas 
 
 '■'-■- i«.mi.hi:S':::rtotr'""^''""'>''''''^ 
 
 i- l"'..ve,l. ' la u^ ' , ,;""'"'^. '''•'t '^^'">'-'r 
 
 -''ST;::;;i";;;wT'^''''''^''''^^ 
 
 iur\ 1/, '""I"';'- ""11 'd a case tried with -i 
 l.dHm"vI,;H-"''^''- ."'"' t''« -'"^tri'ie of con- 
 
 ^""■M nnt re"4,t the rf ^''-'■'^■^''' V''^ ''-'■^I'^^-t 
 HcM bv he P '-ecovery by the child. 
 
 thut '. ii,, ofS""'J "^ -^1''"-^"'. tliat the fact 
 
 toaji,,.;- J"'"^y *'"* ^•''S« teing submitted !<-''"•'"// V. ''•W■em«,^ 23 O R o^ S ^^o '*'*'^ ' 
 
 Affir ne 1 b-y ,t wt . ■ ^^ ' ^^^^^'-^'-^-^^ Cause. 
 
 2^^.C'. H. 70^8. '" '"P'^"'' ^°"'' °f Canada, I Acclclent-flo^,V„ /„/„,, , , 
 
739 
 
 NEW TRIAL. 
 
 740 
 
 after falling into the water from the ilefen'lants' 
 wharf. She had not had regular and continual 
 nitidioal trtvvtniont after tlic accident, and the 
 phywicians wlio gave evidence at the trial 
 (Ufiered as to whttlier or not the innnersion was 
 the cause of her death. The jury, wnen asked 
 whether she would liave recovered if she had 
 had regular and continual attendance, answered 
 "very doubtful." A verdict was found foT' the 
 plaintitffor SI, ,")00 damages, >vhich the Supremo 
 Court of Nova Scotia set aside, and ordered a 
 new trial : — • 
 
 Held, tlial the evidence and finding of the 
 jury liiiving left it in doubt that the accident 
 was tlie proximate cause of rlie death, the jm-y 
 not having been properly instructed as to the 
 liability nt tiui company under the circumstances, 
 and the (himages being excessive, the order for 
 a new trial sliiuld be allirmeil. York v. Cuxada 
 A:huil!e .V. S. Co., i-: S. C. R. U)-. 
 
 Danger Voluntarily Incurred.]— C. having 
 <lrivcn Ids horses into a lund)er yard adjoining 
 a street on which blasting operations were being 
 carried on, left tlieiu in ciiarge of the owner of 
 another team while he spoke to the proprietor 
 of the yard. Slujrtly afterwards a blast went 
 oil', and stones thrown by the explosion fell on 
 the roof of a sheil in which (,'. was standing and 
 frightened the liorses, which began to I'un. U. 
 at once ran out in front of them and endeavoured 
 to stop them, Imt could not, and in trying to 
 get away he was injureil. He brought an action 
 against the municipality conducting tlie blast- 
 ing operations to recover damages for sucli in- 
 
 jmy: — 
 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, that where a 
 man, acting as a reasonable man would ordi- 
 narily do under the eirctnnstances, voluntarily 
 places himself in a position of danger in the 
 ho))e of saving his proi)erty from probable injury 
 an<l of preventing prol)able injury to the life or 
 property of otiu'rs, and sustains hurt, tlie person 
 whose negligent act has brought about the 
 dangerous situation is responsible in damages. 
 Aiiihrsoii V. Xorllvru I!. II'. Co., 25 C. P. 
 .301, distinguislied and <iuestioned. 
 
 Held, by the Supreme C<nirt of Canada, 
 aflirnnng the decision of tlie Court ni Appeal, 
 <i Wynne, .1 , dissenting, that the negligent man- 
 ner in whicli the blast was set otf was the proxi- 
 mate anil first cause of the injury to C. ; that 
 such negligent act immediately produced in him 
 the state of mind which instinctively impelled 
 him to attempt to stop the horses ; and that lie 
 <lid no more than any reasonable man woulil 
 Jiave done under the eircuinstanees. Coiiin II v. 
 Town ofPnsrotf, 20 A. R. 4i), •>> S. C. R. 147. 
 
 1 V. Inadequacy of Damages, "-ti. 
 
 I VI. .lUHY, 712. 
 
 VII. Mi.si)iKi;iTU)N, 74."}. 
 VIM. Nominal Uamacks, 740. 
 
 IX. NON-DIKECTION, 740. 
 
 X. Stay of New Thiai. Pkxdino Appeal, 
 747. 
 
 XI. Verdict Acain.st Evidence, 747. 
 
 1. Application Fok. 
 
 Appeal — Final Dixpoxitioii of Aclinn.\~ln 
 an action for damages tor negligence by a ser- 
 vant of a street railway company who wn.i 
 injured by a car striking him while he was at 
 work upon the track, the jury assessed the 
 Iilaiiitifl's damages at •S.'iOO, but the trial .ludgo 
 dismissed the action u])on the grouml that the 
 I plaintill' was tlie cause of his own misiortiuie. 
 'I'liis judgment was altirmed by a l)ivi-;i(,niil 
 ! Court, but reversed by the Court of Ap|icvil, 
 I which ordered a new trial. Tiic Supreme ( 'oiirt 
 ot (Jaiiada aliirmcd the decision of the Criirtof 
 I Appeal, but, on cmuisel for the defendants stat, 
 I iiig lliat a new trial was not desired, (jrdered 
 I judgment to be entered ''or tlie plaintill' for 
 ; .S.'iOO. Ihtmdioii tilrt'l li(iilii\i)j (Jo. v. Mun 
 •24 S. C. 1!. 717. 
 
 inm, 
 
 *. Crnw V. liymi, 24 O. 11. 
 524, ante, 7.S3. 
 
 500, 25 O. R. 
 
 NEW TEIAL. 
 
 I. Application Fok, 740. 
 
 II. DiscovKUY OF New Evidence, 741. 
 
 III. Excessive Damaoes, 741. 
 
 I'V. Improper Admission and Rejection of 
 Evidence, 742. 
 
 ; Appeal— /'//(f// Dix},oxtfioH of Ariioa.]—Se.e 
 I Ihtnlimiii V. Piitiunn, }"-' ". It. 714, post 745. 
 
 j Appeal —/^//(((/ Di^i .11 q;' ,|(7/oH.l -The 
 
 I Court of A])pcal, having held one of the defen- 
 
 I dauts, a sherilf, liable for the act of his otlieer, 
 
 I a co-defendant, instead of ordering a new trial 
 
 I to assess the dam.agea against the slierifi', 
 
 ilirccted judgment to be entered ag;'-iisl the 
 
 sherifl' for the iiouiinal amount already assesseil 
 
 against his ollicer. Hordon v. I!>imhli , 19 A. 
 
 K. 440. 
 
 Appeal — Filial Ditposifinii of Arlimi ]— In 
 an action brought to recover damages fur the losi 
 of certain glass delivered to the defendants for 
 carriage, the .Judge left to the jury the (picslion 
 of negligence only, ;'eserviug any other (jucstions 
 to be decided subseijuenlly by himsBlf. Uii the 
 (piestion submitted the jury disagreed. The 
 defendants then moved in a Divisional Cmirt for 
 juilgment, but pending such motion the jilain- 
 tifl's applied for and obtained an order of the 
 Court allowing them to amend the statement 
 of claim by charging other grounds of negligence. 
 The (l ."endants submitted to such order, aiiil 
 pleaded to such amendments, and new and 
 material issues were thereliy raised for deter- 
 mination. The action as so amended was 
 entered for trial, but had not been tried when 
 the Divisional Court pronounced judgment on 
 the motion, dismissing the plaintiffs' action. On 
 appeal to the (\)urt of Appeal from tliis jmlj,'- 
 nient of the Divisional Court, it was vevurs."" 
 and a new trial ordered. On appeal to the 
 Supreme Court : — 
 
740 
 
 741 
 
 OF Damages, 742. 
 
 •s, 74;{. 
 
 ma(;k.s, 740. 
 
 )N, 740. 
 
 V Trial Pknijino Appkal, 
 
 LINST EVIDENX'E, 747. 
 
 LIGATION F(JH. 
 
 Ulxpn-iihnii rif Actirtn.\—\n 
 js tor iifgligi-'iicu by a sor- 
 liilway cdiiipany who w.i.i 
 •ikiiig liim wliilu liu was at 
 .ok, the jury assessed the 
 It 8.jOO, hut the trial .ludga 
 
 upiiu tlie gi'oiiiiil that the 
 ise of luM (iWM niist'orturie. 
 I alhrmcd by a hivi-uonal 
 . liy the Court of Apjieal, 
 • trial. Tiie .Supreme L'mirt 
 die ileoision of tiie t'l art uf 
 isel for the defendants stai 
 
 was not <U'sired, di-ih'red 
 tcred *'or tiie plaint ili' im 
 rti.t liii'diray (Jit. v. Mur'Ui, 
 
 ')i.sj,osii!oii. of Ai'iioa.j—Sei 
 I, 1"' ^'. U. 714, iiosi 74',. 
 
 '/.v, ,/( of .l''//o»,V^The 
 
 ving held one of tlie defen- 
 c, for the .act of his (itfioer, 
 ;ad of ordering a new trial 
 ages against the sheriB', 
 to bo entered ,ig;'-nst tlie 
 lal amount already asse-ssed 
 (lonloH V. It'll mhli, 1!} A. 
 
 t/.i/witioil of Arli',,1 ]— III 
 reeover damages fur tlie lo.S3 
 ■ered to the defendants lor 
 eft to the jury the (piestimi 
 .■serving any other ijuc-iti«ris' 
 uently by himself. On the 
 the jury disagreed. The 
 ed in a Divisional C'nnrt fur 
 ng such motion the plain- 
 
 obtained an order of the 
 1 to amend the slalemeiit 
 other grounds of negligence, 
 mitted to sueli order, ami 
 lendments, ami new and 
 
 thereby raised for ileter- 
 don as so amendeil was 
 
 had not been tried when 
 
 pronounocd judgment on 
 ig the plaintirt's' action. On 
 ^f Appeal from this jmlg- 
 lal Court, it wa^ i-ev"rs.--!l 
 iered. On appeal to the 
 
 p.,«er of the Court? ,nde"R,,t'-;;,V'f'"" 't 
 put an .Mid to the artion _ ' ' '" *"'"">' 
 
 SK;r;;Mra"?=i?""r "Si;:: 
 
 S. C. i;. i;w. • '^°'*"" -^'Jl/. Co., -j-J 
 
 NEW TRIAL 
 
 -i^ingina,,aetl.!;::*^,^em';;;^E:i":;::;"l^?:i' 
 
 Appeal— On/e)- for ^eir 7V,v,/ />■ 
 
 -■eedings i„ e„nitv^' ..rnv; 1 'i '''-■'''""« '" P''"" 
 suit "tither .: ^\, :; if' 'f '" "" -1-ity 
 
 th;^j|.geheLe^.ho;^';i:S,;,;^ -;;:,:-' to 
 
 .<l!), followed. Braihhfur y^- « ,• , ',7 ""• 
 iIU4on Board, 24 SCR. So"]. "'"'"' ^°'''''J'' 
 
 742 
 
 IV. IM..0,.K. A,.MISS,,._..,. ,,,,.^„.^ ^^ 
 
 ^-"/n"^^;;,^;:;:tr''n;f"r^'^ ^"'-^- 
 
 "•^ ^P^M^^'.-artiele e ,ee in , ." "'"V'''''''^ '" * 
 tlio innuendo alkx-cd bv fl," " "'^".' ''■^■^'"tion. 
 
 time when smhle^iitinw ''"'"',"' ''' *'»' 
 
 tlic artiele eharc.e.h, , „■ ." '" '■"^'^?''l' "■"« that 
 ■'•Ik. .lofen,ia, tf I ed '^\}:^'""^ 'li.shone.sty. 
 tl.e artiele was a t Jr 'on me ^"""^,', "'"' tl'at 
 <"' tl-'^ trial thedee, :'"•'''"':''" ""'tter. 
 
 l'i'untifrse,.i„,se o S: '"'V" ^^''f "^■'•' t'"^ 
 
 of personal ^Hshones y I^' J .C'' "'" ^''^"'^^ 
 w.ns ten.lerei* by tlie 'i ,^ 1,^"''""/" '■':''''tt"l 
 Certain .|Uestions were , t , '■'"' ''^■"''■''••''• 
 tl.on, t,. rind wlK^tlc^r'nwot ,*;,''':•)■ ';■''■'''■';■« 
 construction elaimed 1 'v e ,n ,? ' '""■" ''"■ 
 f'ur comment on the -,,0, .''"'"■ "'''''« 
 
 : 'irticlo ; the jnry ■„, ', ,:;,''' V""""' "^ the 
 
 lasked if they oim tint ho*'''n •'"''«'■• "'"' 
 
 -.ench:;i?i3S-'"i''r^^^ 
 
 l-een reoeim „t ,/ •" """'•' ""' have 
 
 evidence in rebu t d w. '■""« '"-"-'" ''"'-■^■ive.l, 
 
 tlio general /im im;!;;^,;-^/''-''''^''-^' '■"•'^'■^-' = 
 sulKeient in view of t , rf*-'"' '■'"ta was not 
 
 stated that the h Id L' ■'i^ *'''^* ''"' i'"'V 
 *e &•«„»«,,/ v.CV„W,-;j^.C.R.307,;,o.. 740. 
 
 "V". Lvai)j:(.ha(v ok Damagk.s. 
 
 11. DrscovKRV ,)K Nkw Evn,Ks-cE. 
 
 Corroborative Bvlderoo l \^ .. • , 
 
 "'e groun.l of surp.Tse ^u.^' li;;.J^^!rv *?' "" 
 evidence, refused, where 1 1 1 v ^^ "^ "''^^ 
 
 in corroboration Ho^Zul v 1/ r:'*' '"'^''^■'y 
 0. R. .396. ">"auii v. McGmjan, 2o 
 
 Corroborative Bvldonno n- 
 
 ;>?«;. ]-Alhnvi„g a nIwtrhu~,H '■*'"'"— ^Z'- 
 the discovery of new Iv^ V ■ *'"" ^"""""'l of 
 
 legal discretLi! ami whe?'ih! '' ,"• '"""«'' °f 
 of the action was of V !'•«*'"' subject-matter 
 
 Divisional Court or, ...„i ^"'^' "•■'*"''^- -^n^l a 
 
 shewing merely hi- ^i"!:^"'^':^"''^*'''"''^ 
 corroborative of the Iv l ^ ^ ^''rther evidence 
 
 or.ler was . et T i, e J^r "^ "'^'^'■■''• "'« 
 ^"'•<i«, 22 A R 51 ' ^°"°^e.l. ?V,/„,We v. | 
 
 (-•"urt, and if the ^L } «"lf vision of the 
 
 tl.at it is evident the in V* ""■'"?'^''' ''« «" s>"all 
 
 some ni^teria n^^^emeni -V","'' ^"'''''- °^''^''°"ke.l 
 
 ,tifi^caseane:;'^::-;;Vl;^;J-««-thep.ain- 
 
 Kence of t "' ef SautT";nd ^'h^'^"^ H'^ "^«'' 
 business had snifere t/ ^T P-'ofessional 
 w<^ awarded e^S";t^;;i„^--'--'^'-^tent, 
 
 A. R. .348. • '""• AHirmed, 22 
 
 in. EXCE.S3IVK Dama.ik.s. 
 
 ^«'^r^:^^jt>ti^:f^c^...^^^^^^^^.^ 
 
 VI. JURV. 
 
 arate ifene:j'S&'4^i:!:i,'J' -'-' -.': 
 atthelriul cKimorl » '" , ^'^'^•'r '> r«P'eacnted 
 
 •I"rors- Act R " V° :%^"tc^;'o""r/'- 
 peremptorv chttllBn„o„ ' :,"' ^^c. 110, to four 
 
 objected to by reTllinfT' '"'""''• *''^"«h 
 I " "y rne plamtift, was conceded by 
 
743 
 
 NEW TRIAL. 
 
 the Judge, uiiil tlu) ilefeiidants ohalleiiged six 
 juror.x hotWDon tlinn, ami tin; trial proceoiloil, 
 ivsultiiii; in ii vurdicl fi)r tlio dufolidaiits:— 
 
 Hidd, upon indtion liy till' i)laiiit;tl', that tlitr.. 
 liad 1)LTM luisti-ial, aud tiiu plaintiti' was eiititlud 
 to a now trial. 
 
 Under tin iliAf suction tlio defendants were 
 only entith 1 t.) four pereniptory cliallunges 
 Iiutwotn tiieni, and, inasnuudi as the plaiiitilt' 
 took the olijection at the time, he h.id not 
 waivu<l his right to complain by proceeding with 
 the trial. Eiiqity v. Car.^caltdi, -Jt O. U, G.JS. 
 
 Disagreement— Ar (V/«r(,/i',/)( Pivifn- l! W 
 Co. V. Cu',hauMj\i. 6\<.,•J2^S.C.K. VA2,'aiitt 74o! 
 
 Improperly Influonolng— .V(i'.'V)<(/). c Com- 
 VKiil — l'i-oi-tidhiii ii-ilh 7V(«/.]— During the 
 trial of an action for lihel the (lefemhuit's piih- 
 lislied m tlifir new.spapcr a .sensational article 
 witli reference thereto. The plainlills' solicitor 1 
 was aware that the article had come to the ' 
 hands of one or more of the jury, hut did not 
 bring tlij matter to the notice of the Court, or [ 
 take any action with rcsiiect to it, and i')ro- I 
 ceeded with the trial to its close, when the jury 
 In'ought in verdicts for the defendants. " I 
 
 Upon a motion for a new trial upon the ' 
 ground of improper conduct towards ami undue i 
 influence upon tlie jury : — 
 
 Held, thattlie ol)jectioii was too late. TiOanv 
 V. MrXu, ilttca/f V. Ah-X(C', 21 O. R. 551. ! 
 
 744 
 
 oxammation for discovery the d,.fendant, wliil,. 
 ailmittmg he was a correspon.lcnt at 'I'., c„nM 
 not say whether he was the ,.nly one- -.ml 
 alleged that; he did m.t remember sendin.r any 
 o the Items ; but might possibly have .seni^son.c 
 of them : but he ,b,l not think lie had scut the 
 one complained of; that he had had since the 
 imblicatmn an interview with the e.litur with 
 
 whether he ha.l discussed the item complained 
 of for fear as he said, of incriminating hi,.,, 
 self. At the trial lie state.l he iiad sine" ascer- 
 tained tliat there were other correspomlcnts ai 
 I., and, oil being p,e3.se.l as to the item co,,,. 
 lilaineil of, after some hesitation, s,iid 1,, ,|i,i 
 not furnish it. Xo other evidence was -ive, 
 tio,T.'!!!'"° """' '^^f'-''"''""^ "•'"' tl'e publica- 
 
 Held, that this di,l not constitute any evi- 
 ilenee of publication to go to the jury 
 
 1 he trial .hidge in his charge, after referring 
 to tlie delciidanl s refusid to answer on his ex 
 aminatio.i for discovery, and to his rci.son foi' 
 relusing, tohl the jury that thcv iiiiglu draw 
 tile infereiico as to what the true answer would 
 have been : — 
 
 Ilehl, misdirection, and that no inference 
 adverse to the defendant should have been 
 d,-awn trom his refusal to answer. Xu,i„ v 
 liramlun, -li O. R. T,o. 
 
 Improperly Influencing '' Jiii'/toDrin/:.] 
 — Wliere the idaiiitilt during the' trial had 
 conversation with memljers of the jury upon 
 the subject of his case, and his brother and 
 also his solicitor had treated some of them to 
 ••drinks' dui-ing t!ie recc^^s of the Court, t!ie 
 verdict in the plaintf!"s favour was set aside 
 and a new trial ordered. Stewart v. n'oolman 
 
 I'O u. l;. 714. 
 
 Improperly Influencing— V!cw~m.-von<lHct 
 or I mitt.-:]— See HimuuU.i v. Chcsleii, 20 S. C 1! 
 1(4, ;>os/ 746. 
 
 Insufficient Findings.] -Held, that the evi- 
 .lence and the Imding of ijic jury h.aving left it 
 lu doubt whetlier the accident to the plaintiffs 
 WHO was the proximate cause of her death, and 
 tie jury not; having been jiioperly instructed asto 
 tlie liability of the defendants under the circum- 
 stances, and the damages being, upon the evi- 
 ilenee, excessive, the order of the <.;ourt below 
 tor a new trial should be aHirined. r<,rl: v 
 Canada Atlantic S. S. Co., 22 «. C. R. 107. 
 
 Insufficient Findings. ]—.S\e Afanitnha Fne 
 /^m>' Co. v. Martin, 2\ S. (■. R. 518, a,ite 742 ; 
 Canadian Paciji,- ]{. W. Co. v. Cobban Mh. 
 
 ?-p r^-,Va ^.V'P,-' ""'"• '■'O = '^■^'=«».. v. Groil, 
 JO t . K. 210, McDermott v. Grout, ib. 215, voU 
 Ikial, I. ' > 1 
 
 VII, Misdirection. 
 
 Defamation— fl^/«.w? of Partq to An:^wer~ 
 y«/tT(«a'. --In an action for libel it was alleged 
 that the defendant had, as a correapon.lf-ut at 
 1. ol a newspaper, furnished several items which 
 includeit one retieotiug on the plaintiff. In Ids 
 
 i Fraud— 0//.-.v;-(.fi?/o;w on Matti-.r not in Iy.sw 1 
 I -In an action for winding-up a p,irtnersliip in 
 I tlie gold-minmg business, the defence plca'l,-,i 
 j was that there never was a partnership formd 
 between the plaiiititT an,l the defendants, or if 
 there was, that it had been put an end u, bv a 
 ^crDal agreement l)etweeii the parties tlie 
 case was trie, 1 by a jury, and the result depeiule.l 
 oil the credibility to be attached to tlie res,,e,- 
 tive witnesses on each side «lio gave evi.leiice 
 as to the agreement that hail been entered into 
 ^o issue of framl was raiscl by the defen.laut.s 
 but the trial Judge, in charging the jury, n,:,dc 
 strong observations in respect to frau.Uilcnt 
 conceidinent (,f facts from the iilaintilF aiitl 
 suljinitted .piestions to the jury calling for liii.i- 
 ingsin relation to such framl. The plaintilf 
 laving obtained a venlict, which was sustained 
 by the hupreme Court of Nova .Scotia : — 
 
 Hehl, reversing the judgment of the Comt 
 hclow, G Wynne, J., dissenting, that there sliouhl 
 be a new trial. 
 
 I'er U Wynne, J.— Unless either party desires 
 to give further evidence, the Court shouhl ren- 
 der the judgment on the evidence as it stands 
 which the Court below ought to have given 
 
 Per Strong, J.— Under Uule 470 of the Judica- 
 ture Act the Court can take a case which has 
 been passed upon by a jury into its own lian.Is 
 ami dispose of it if all the proper mati'rials ..„ 
 which to decide are before it, but in this cast 
 the materials essential to the final disposition 
 of the case are not before the Court, and tlicic 
 must be a new trial 
 
 Per Ritchie, C. J.— The Supreme Court, as ,in 
 appellate Court for the Dominion, should not 
 approve of such strong observations being made 
 by a Judge as were made in this case, in efl'eet 
 charging upon the defendants fraud not set out 
 in the pleadings and not legitimately in issue in 
 the cause. 
 
 Per Strong, Fournier, Tuschereau, (Jwyuiie, 
 and Patterson, JJ., that the case was essentially 
 
744 
 
 • very tlie ilcffiidaiit, wl,il,. 
 corrfspoiiilfiit at T., imuiIiI 
 -■ was tliu only due ; muI 
 Kit rt'uifiiilici' seiiiliiij; any 
 ^'htpiiMsihly have .soniljonif 
 not tliink liu had .sunt tlic 
 that he hail liail sinco tlu' 
 'u;\v with thi! iMlilur with 
 ut ho refused to answn- 
 issed tlie item coMiphiiiud 
 lid, of inoi'iniiiiatiii;,' hii.i- 
 ; stated he liad sinee aseer- 
 •e other correspondents at 
 i^ssed as to the item ti.ni- 
 ne hesitation, saiil he di.l 
 other eviilenee was L,'i\eM 
 udant with the pidliiea- 
 
 d not constitute any evi- 
 ;() go to the jury, 
 liis charge, after referriiii,' 
 Fusal to answer on hi.s ex- 
 cry, and to his rea.sou for 
 iry that tliey niiyht draw 
 lat the true answer would 
 
 , and tliat no inference 
 idant should have heen 
 ■ill ti) answer. Xtin 
 
 0. 
 
 745 
 
 NEW TRIAL. 
 
 tmii 
 
 '.8 OH Matti-r not in />■.<», . ] 
 !uling-np a partnership in 
 less, the defence pleadeii 
 ivas a partnership fornie.l 
 and the <lefendants, or if 
 
 heen put an end t(j hy a 
 iween the parties, Tlic 
 V, and the result depended 
 le iittached to the rcspec- 
 1 si<le who gave evidence 
 lat had lieeii entered intip. 
 raised Ijy the defendants, 
 
 cliarging the jury, ni uie 
 n respect to frauihihiit 
 
 from tlio plaintitf, am! 
 > the jury calling for tind- 
 ch fratnl. The plaintill' 
 liet, wliich was sustained 
 of Nova .Scotia :— 
 
 judgment of the Court 
 senting, that there shoidd 
 
 iless eitlier party desires 
 e, tlie Court should rcii- 
 die evidence as it stands 
 
 ought to have given. 
 lerKule^TGof theJudioa- 
 n take a case which h.is 
 
 jury into its own haiuls 
 
 the proper materials on 
 -■fore it, but in this ea.se 
 
 to the final dispn.dtion 
 are the Court, and there 
 
 'he Supreme Court, as an 
 le Dominion, should net 
 observations being iiiaile 
 de in this case, in eti'ect 
 iidants fraud not set out 
 it legitimately iu i.ssue in 
 
 r, Taschereau, Gwyune, 
 t the case was essentially 
 
 746 
 
 i^ir.%S'™!;^f-s,!iis,^^^^^^ 
 
 Fraud— //,7W(/ ^w •/»(,•./, i,... , , „. 
 
 E;:i;h!' ; ; ; S;ir^-«s 
 
 ti.^' Judge to inst,.,;t he V :sV'''''r'r'^''' 
 
 stunted fran.l nn.ler t e ,S ,t: , ' v'"\ "T 
 and he ,dso nr-t.,! that ?, '■■''zabcth, 
 
 taken of the .i;;.nnS'i;^..r:'u^V'r"'V!'^' 
 •'udge ielu«ed to deline frat.d t o, ' ""•' 
 
 nouested, and tlie In ,. V ^'"' l'"'.^' "« 
 
 .ni^ideto\dw';th''yi,,t;:':,,^^'^^^j-i-- 
 
 ii.iving bj,.n .riven for tl ! t' ,''"''fe""i'"t 
 ''I'inntd by th.rfnll Court "; '''■^''''''''''t'^ '^'"1 
 tfeld. that the refii.^al oi the ]m,I r„ f i 
 
 could u.,t be proi.erlv V.i.l • • '' ^'"^ ™'*'-' 
 
 3ase. <,'rijiilhs y. 
 
 Vni. NoMis-.vi, IUm,V(:k.s. 
 
 tne accounts : ami that it con 
 perly ,lealt with as an e.piity ca 
 
 On the inal of an action J LJ' 'f ''jr 
 destrueti,m of a barn •u„l ill ''"''''-''' ,f'"' the 
 -llegedtohavebemea :,|^.;":'.r:''^''^'i-• 
 'l-feudants in Horkin.'a stem ^ ^""'' "f,''"-' 
 i-unaing ,. h .v mess n V V •'»',"" '"""^ '" 
 
 --ster .ni sahi eti ,m fE-;,.;; r r'T*^ 
 
 <lireeted the jurv that •'if H, ''■""^''l Judge 
 -n-esterin the tn ' ne t it ! it^'K "° 1^^ 
 ii-,'ligencc for whrcl. th 1 f '"'^ ''""''' '^« 
 
 li ilde!" The 1.1 i ,ti c, f ''^'f^-'l'iats would be 
 
 JUL lUillIltltl Ol tamed l VnP.Iw.r 1 ■ 1 
 
 was .sot aside ))y the Conr I,, / T' " '"^'' 
 
 trial order,..! for . is.lire . , n ("/"■' ""'' .''' "'■"■ 
 .^iipi-nie Court o" Catmda " ''^''"'' *" *'"^ i 
 
 Contract — /Imirl, i c i. < 
 
 An action was bio'.Iir i.,. < 
 lor daniji.'es m ii,.f „,.: i • * against O. 
 
 Un.standa.l-,:-r^'S;:-nS^^r;^ 
 
 ihat he ws' entitle, ''•''''• ."I",""!"' «'-"un<l 
 leiMt 'n < ^""ll*^'' to nominia , ama.'cs at 
 
 fc 'tha "i^'i;!:;:;:;^""'-' '' ^-^- "n-iLwick 
 
 C,u;'rr:!;c!m!,!K''l!'"'''''"^'^'''-'^"'''<^^"P-mo 
 
 •>cI!w;';.r!!;:M''i^,:^":.^^:^^:- ''f the Court 
 
 Trespass— .1. 7/0// /„ /',■,,/,,,./ '/•■,/, . . .. 
 
 Se^h-itirs'i^tirSt^^''^^''-'^"^^^^ 
 
 -m.waterH,4ingovJr\in^!:i,Sl^---'> 
 
 ti-.,K.uid^^k;2;:;i!;r"'''^''^''^'-i-y- 
 ''.'iu.yc:;u;;;\SKrSd';;it?^^"i'«-"''' 
 
 -y^;utreve,.si,,gthe£ii:;!'^j;!-'-;;^- 
 
 '*liU lilt* <llMf<«*f iftii ♦■ . * I ■ ' > . ''liUIHt , 
 
 ■ tirriiii \. 1,1-aiiil I riiiik It. (('. 
 
 IX.'No.V.DIRijCTKiN-. 
 
 
 Co. , 2.5 () R "J- * ui .".,., i,„iii. /(. ly, 
 
 Appeal, 22 A H 89 ■'"°'' ^^ *''« ^°"'-* °f 
 
 Omission from Oharge-r/, ..,,.„/ r,,^^., . 
 I" an action under the WW L- ,„.."'(■ '•'•««'--<.]— 
 
 wlialW .', i'* ■"■"* ',' 'l"e««>ll for the i„re 
 
747 
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 74e 
 
 ■ervant in liiiRlmiidry within tlm infinning of fid 
 Vict. cli. '.'O (().), iiijil wlictlifi- thf work lie wan 
 cngiigod ill w.iM in tiic ukuiiI touisi) of hJH vm- 
 ployment us sucii, and also wlictliiT tlic dangtr 
 WiiH known to tlie dcfindiiiit and unknown to 
 Uw plaintiff or liu' convtisi'. 
 
 Tho jury wero asked I'litain <|ucstion8, one 
 l)Ciiig wlietiior the hiring was an iv servant in 
 hnshiindry, hut tliey were tuld Hint tluty niiglit 
 Wve a general verdict, and ihey gave one for 
 the phiintitt', answering none c,f tlie (|Ue8tions. ' 
 The trial ,)udge in liiB charge gave them no in- 
 struction on this point and no ilirection ns to ' 
 what the 1...V wan : — j 
 
 Held, that Ihey were not eonii)etent to find ii ! 
 general verdict, and there slinuld he a new trial. ' 
 ii'nd V. JiariHs '.'5 U. H. 2'.';{. , 
 
 X. Stay ok Nkw Trial Penoin.: Aii-eal. 
 See, Trial, V. 
 
 XI. Verdict A(!Ain.st Kvioence. 
 (SVe Eason v. McO'ivgor, 20 S. C. I!. 17(i. 
 
 nmy he agreed niion, and is not hound hv the 
 stntutiiiy reguiatioiiNnfleitingfciIicitorH'chu'rgeH, 
 orlialile to have hi.s charges taxed, 
 
 Tlie right to tax n Milieitcu'M hill ol charges, 
 for conveyiineing. in the ul)Seiice of a speniil 
 iigrtenieut, considered. O-lrum v. ItniUiwii, 
 
 •20 A. K. :m. ■' ' 
 
 Blgnature~('oi,tiiir/—S/tihih of Fiaiiils. |_ 
 An ante nujitial ecmtiHct, elite red' into in the 
 l|rovince of (,)uchec, was nipt signed hy tlie par- 
 ties themselves, hut liy the notaries in tlidr 
 own nanus, they having full authority from the 
 parties to so .sign : — 
 
 Held, that this was a .sutficient signiiture 
 within the .Statute of Frauds to hind the i.nr- 
 ties. Tiii//l/i-r V. Tniinfir, 21 O. R ;ja7 
 
 NEW TRIAL IN DIVISION COURTS. 
 
 See Division Coukt, 1., IV. 
 
 NEXT FRIEND. 
 
 Set Costs, IV.— Infant, V.— Llt.vatic. 
 
 MIAOARA FALLS PARK COMMIS 
 SIONERS. 
 
 See Crown, II. 
 
 NON-DIRECTION. 
 
 Se<i New Trial, I.\. 
 
 NOTARY. 
 
 ^OlVlinB— lioardof Xotavii .^- J uvMutioih] 
 —When a charge derogatory to tlie honour of 
 his profession is made against a notary under 
 the provisions of the Notarial Code, R. S. Q. 
 Art. .3871, Avhich amounts to a crime or felony, ] 
 the Board of Notaries has jurisdiction to inves- ' 
 tigate without waiting for the sentence of a i 
 Court of criminal jurisdiction. Trnnhlaii v ' 
 Bemtcr, 21 S. C. R. 409. 
 
 Services— CA«)v/r«—rrta:nr(OH,]— A solicitor, 
 who 1.S also a notary, and, acting in the latter 
 capacity, nhtiiins for a client the allowance of a 
 pension trom the United States Government, is 
 entitled to charge for his services such sum as 
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 Notice ok Action— .sVc Action, III. ^Ckow.v 
 IV.-Dkka.mation, IV., VI., VlI.-^MALKiors 
 Arhkst ani> I'lidSKci'TioN — Mimcii-al Coll- 
 pokationh, xvi. 
 
 Notice ok Aim-eal— .S'-. Supreme Coi-rt ok 
 Canada, XVII. 
 
 Notice ok As.sionment — .S'ee Chose lv 
 Action. 
 
 Notice ok Assignment ok Lease— AV Lano- 
 lord and Tenant, II. 
 
 Notice ok Disiionoir — sV, Banks, JIT. - 
 Bills and Notes, IV. 
 
 Notice OK Forkeitithe OK Lease— .SVi Lanu- 
 lord and Tenant, VIII. 
 
 Notice ok Hvpotiiec — .SV, Limitation ok 
 Actions, II. 
 
 I 
 
 I Notice ok TnANSKEii— .sV, Chose in Action. 
 
 Notice ok Trial— ,s',-,; Trial, III. 
 
 Notice ok TKUsTs-.SVe Trusts and Tkcs- 
 tkes, VIII. 
 
 Purchaser for Value— C/ia)v/,— /',/,« ,v;,x,] 
 —In the case of a charge upon ' e(|uitablc imi- 
 perty where the legal estate is outatandiiig, 
 the defence of purchase for valuable co>i.si,!era- 
 tion w ithout notice is, in general, innpphcahle, 
 the rule being that all such charges take rank 
 according to priority in point of time. I yi,r-<on 
 Lumbtr Co. v. Heiniii-, 21 »*•'. C. R. 218. 
 
 Purchaser for Value— Go7(.syr»r7/re .V,)//,y.] 
 —An unpatented and undeveloped mining pro- 
 perty, the value of which was purely specidative 
 and the Government dues on which were unpaid, 
 was conveyed to the plaintiif, the consideration 
 mentioned in the deed being .«100, and he. for 
 the expressed, but not actual, consideration of 
 !5>750, conveyed the property for the purpose of 
 selling It for his own benefit to one of the (kfen- 
 dants who, after holding it for a year, conveved 
 It to las uodeiendant, who had no actual notice 
 ot the circumstances, in consideration of the 
 release of a debt of §25 :— 
 
748 
 
 n, 1111(1 i.i not lidund Iiy I ho 
 » aflcitiiij,' colicitdiH' chiiijjca, 
 fliiii';^c.s liixcd. 
 I ."(iliiitor'M l)ill of i.liiiiv;cK 
 n tlic ulisi'iicu of a ^iitcial 
 ■ed. Oxlram v. Ilivjiiviiii, 
 
 rnil^Sldliit' 1)/ Frniiih. |^ 
 
 itiiitt, I'litiifd into in tlio 
 
 vns licit Nifjnrd liy tlif par- 
 
 liy tlu! notaries in tli(ir 
 
 ^iiig full iiutlioiity fioii, tli(^ 
 
 was a sutliciciit Niji;niitiiie 
 [)f Frauds to liiud tlit u:\t- 
 
 <;//;/, r, L>i o. H. ;i;i7. 
 
 >TIOE. 
 
 —.SVc Action, III, —Crow. •< 
 :V., VI., VII.--MAui!ors 
 
 I'l-TKIK — MrNICII'AL CoK- 
 
 i— -SVf Supreme Coi-rt oh 
 BNMENT — See Chosk I** 
 
 lENT (IF LHASK—Sll' LaNIi- 
 
 ^oi-R — S(i Banks, III. - 
 
 i-RKOK Lease— .SV< Land- 
 111. 
 
 iiKi —.SV/ Limitation op 
 
 ■:k— .SV( Cho.sr IX Action. 
 
 .S'«i TlilAL, III. 
 
 -See Tki'.st.s ami Tkis- 
 
 urge upon ecjuitalili' pro- 
 il estate is outstaniliiig, 
 se for viilnalilu co'i.siik'i-a- 
 , in general, inapplioalile, 
 such charges take rank 
 I point of time. l'/lir-<on 
 21 .^^ C. K. 218. 
 
 ue — Con.itrnclin'. X'liice.l 
 indeveloped mining pro- 
 3hwas purely speculative 
 les on ivhich were unpaid, 
 aintiff, the consideiation 
 I being .«100, and lie. for 
 actual, consideration of 
 perty for the purpose of 
 inefit to one of the iltfen- 
 ig it for a year, convoyed 
 ivho had no actual notice 
 ill consideration of the 
 !5:- 
 
 749 
 
 . Held, that the releiige of the doht wn. u ...ifi 
 cient CDBidciation for the d.cd _ "" " '""'• 
 
 characi., .';'th'.'.?; ^''^T ■""■ '"'^^"'"'tances and 
 tnaniLtLi < t the piopirty into account tli.. I-.m^ 
 
 rC ;;■;„" ;V""^ """^' "" "■'i>'-.v '-- .iot c 
 
 rtason of the conHciciation i xpic,..,vt.d i„ \\i 
 
 ORDNAKOE LANDS. 
 
 NOVATION. 
 
 .V« Contract, VIL - Partner..,,,,., m 
 
 J lilNOII'AI, AND Sl'RKiv. I. 
 
 NOVELTY. 
 
 -Vtc Patent Koit Invention. 
 
 750 
 
 'lie owner of the adjoiniiii/ hind iilthouwl. 
 '^1- occupied hy tenant.^ is Iml, l(,r ih ^ 
 
 X:ctr;hVTl •''"'' '^^''''''''"-''"'-^ 
 n , 1 '"^ ','"' '-"''«t'"'t "se of then, will 
 
 neee„.sanly .vsult ii, the creation of a nui ai ic e 
 
 K. OIL ' ^'""'■""^■^•- ''"'l^' V. IIV((',, •.'.•! O. 
 
 .SVeMcN„.„.,vL C(.RPo,iAT,ONS, XVII -,Sti KKT 
 
 Hailwavs, hi. 
 
 NUISANCE. 
 
 defeiK ant; was convicted at the (General Sessios 
 
 thocost.so, the application and or,l, ,■ ,. " ' 
 sheriftstces and costs and inei.le td .v, 
 aming out of the execution .If Vhc orl "^"'''^ 
 Held that the Sessions had no autl,„'ntv to 
 
 S:cfc:t^^^^-«/'-p.opc,;'i.!: 
 »««rfo,- that the ^r. ,.\:i,^ ii^n;;;:! '! V"""- 
 
 propcrlv removed by .ovL^;' t \m ist T 
 <iuashtd, Init without costs * ''^ 
 
 asS^EoJls '°;i"'^"'''«''i^t-" of the Session. \ 
 as 10 tnt costs. /,Vy,„a y. (,',o(v c, 2.S 0. R. 92. i 
 
 OBSTRUCTION. 
 ^"' WAV, \'IL 
 
 OFFICIAL ARBITRATORS. 
 
 See Crown, II. 
 
 OFFICIAL GUARDIAN. 
 
 •SV' Devoi.itioN ok K.sj ATE.S A. T. 
 
 ORDER-IN-COUNCIL. 
 
 'Vrc Crown, U. 
 
 ORDNANCE LANDS. 
 
 Dainages-..lr//o»- IIWr-^-.J-Tlie defendants 
 the corporations of two townsli „x « ! 
 
 W 1 ' "'■'Iw'^'y ^"""-se to How :- 
 wefe ; ;,t bnt*';i: ft'^^^^^\^ the corporations 
 liable Zl\t\ "^ *''° "*'"-'■■ <l^'f<'n'l'"it was. 
 
 ri;c Minister of the Interior Jannot case ,7 
 auhome the use „f Ordnance h « Uun 
 U.eautl„,ntyof the (iovernor in cCncil V> ' W 
 SLa>u,,, c/nhy. Th V„,,„, .S Kx. C. I 387 
 
 Restraining— ./I, ■/■(o»_p,.;r» pu. ,,/• 
 
 pied bv tenwc ^^~^'^'' ""*■""■ of l'"">^esoccu- 
 P'ea in tenants can maintain an action in his 
 
 ! Sa.le~Caiir(//af ion.]— Ill the veir IS-fi tl, 
 s'TI-hant purchased a\,u,id,e oflots'a an aue^ 
 tion sale of Ordnance lands in the c ,v("f , ob"c" 
 He paid certain instalment sand inteiest thereon 
 amounting in all to a sum of ,^2,447 9-' HeW 
 unable to complete the payments fV.rwhi.h he 
 
 , was liable, he applied to 'thV Cniwii, in l«s.5 tO 
 ipropnato the money paid by bin t thtfpur 
 
 •<■'. Ihis the Crown consented to do and unon 
 an adjustment of the account theieCf.nC 
 t( be a sum of 873.92 due to the suiXnt 
 which, by mutual arrangement, was ap, lop i'ted 
 
 : to the purchase of another lot (Xo. 100 le? inJa 
 balance then due to the Cr<,« n of .^126 08 Whc^n 
 Sn^'-."'' «"Pl''''"'tcame to pay this balance 
 
 and get h,s patents for the four lots, he w.as 
 nformed that lot 19 would probaldv be re mire,? 
 
 tt raian;'o".i :*'t"'\r '■•'""'^^- «« ^'-" *-'S 
 
 ;„ .1:1, , . t" tbe proper ofhcer of the Crown 
 
 ., ' ' ,.' •^"'' '0" ^■'^'■•^ subseiiuently issued to^ 
 
 untifS^^V- -''rV°^l'»>« f"'ther-was one 
 until 1880, when the Crown resumed possession of 
 
761 
 
 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 1-t 1! . w u.l, was f„ll„we.I up l.v an att..inpt,Ml nrc. 
 cau.t. latM,,. of tl.o sal.. ,.f tl,„ l„t„„,U.r 2t Virt f,m 
 
 752 
 
 I'ulcMiivMticiil Ijiw 
 
 luuii C()iii|ilii.<l 
 
 •hi.' nil til,, purclus,, 1, „1 „„t I „ pu.i, th., I.TUH 
 
 iiiiilciiii.lltioiisot the sale lm,| niit I 
 with 
 
 HlM, il.at the hvIm was noh ,1m1v .Mnuollcl 
 th! t th... suppliant had f.,it.Mt.Ml ,„m>' „{ hi: 
 nghtsmi.Iir th,. sah;. aii.l wan ..„titl..,l to .luiii 
 i^K.'.- ..Itul to tli>. value of tli.. h.t at tho ti.ii, 
 tlU!( rowii rcHiiMH..l piwsc.siori thi^ivof. 
 
 ,>";"■-: -Has th,. |j,.p,„y MiuistiT of th 
 Int;,'n.>r th.^ ii.,'ht to vxvrrWv 
 •■aii,'..llation vest,!.! in th,. {.■omiiiissiomT of 
 « .own Lands l.y s,.,.. :.'(» of thu .\,t of tho 
 I'roviiin. of Canada U.'j VU^t 
 V. 77„ n,i,.,„. ;(K.\. c. R. 7,-, 
 
 am.nlm^ to .TuicsiaHUcal law is a .snirioiunt, 
 foiindilio,, for pmou,Miii«s with tli,. virw "f 
 
 tli,j ground 
 
 tho jiowiM's of 
 iont-T of 
 of tho 
 .Uui'/i/ii/ 
 
 11. 
 
 liuiiis' tliu ,u\il ivooyuili ,f t|„a parish 
 
 No<.l)|i;ot.i(Mi th,uvto,.an li,. talifuoi ' 
 of autece.icut inrnularity of proo.Mluio 
 
 I i-oijinMlings |„.|or,. U,,. couiinisiionori of th, 
 di,.fCHo with a v,.,w to.s,i,h ,ivil ivc.wnition ar, 
 not Hiil.jout to the roview or control of 
 of jUHticu. 
 
 An ..l.j.'cti.ui to tlR. formation of a now imr 
 ish ontlio«r,mndtha,ui., ofth.old p.risV; 
 ll iiHMnl..r,Ml for that j.urpo.fw.iM in lud.t, is 
 vaidiind.Ts,,.., .•WSI.. li. s. (...; hutwh,.,.. ' 
 ■ loiit relied on was eontrael 
 it nin.st lie proveil that th 
 
 a eourt 
 
 Si I CliOW.V \,\s 
 
 .lis, 
 
 IV, 
 
 til,. 
 
 Iiy the K.ihriipi,., 
 , ., , , , l''alirj,|ue was uiialil,. 
 
 t'lpav. , an,l Hut a levy on the li.m.an Catho- 
 lie treeho.lerH 01 tile parish ha-, l,..,.n ,lnlv 
 authorize,!. Al,,(tn,l,; v. n,;,.».,r,l ||H-ni A 
 ( . ,SOI. ' I ^.'.11 j\. 
 
 OVERFLOW. 
 
 Sil WaTKK AM) \\'ATKI4(OUIiSKS, IV, 
 
 OWNER. 
 
 S,; LiKN, III. — Sliil', IV. 
 
 PARDONING POWER. 
 
 •SV( Co.v.sTiTrTiD.VAi, Law, II. 
 
 PARENT AND CHILD. 
 
 Gift of Board and Lodglng-(;/ir,)v//'-/.V,//,/ 
 
 0/ (>rnn,alwn---l>:n-ai;on.\-A father eonvoved 
 
 t" o.ifl ot h,.s .sons certain farm hin.ls, suhject to 
 
 hrsoun .10 estate therein, and snhjeet 4o to 
 
 the use l,y another son, tlie ,)laintitr, of a l.e,l 
 
 bed-room aiel he Ming, in the dwellingd.ou.se 
 
 0.1 the tarm, and to his hoar.l, so lona as 
 
 f'lnn .^""'* '''*°"''' '''■''"'"'' " '■esident on the 
 
 Hel.l, tliat the plaintiff took no estate un.ler ' 
 
 the dee.l hut merely the use, after the termin- 
 
 at <m of the father's life estate, and while res - : 
 
 dent on the lan.I, of the l.ed-room ami hoard, 
 
 whidi was a charge thereon ; that no perio.i : 
 
 was tixe.l for such oecup.ation, which might be 
 
 either permanent or temporary ; and therefore no 
 
 t<)rteiture was created by non-occupati,.n. WU. 
 
 kiwoii V. ]\il.'<oit, 26 0. l{. 2I.S. 
 
 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 I. l!ni:iKi;v AMI Coiutn.r I'kaiti, ks, -:,•'. 
 n. I'KTrriiiN. 
 
 I. Aj'/iiii/, 7,-)4. 
 •2. Cii/iy, -.">. 
 
 3. I'dllioinr, "!'),'>. 
 
 4, Senirilji, 7,"i(i. 
 *». Se.rviri , ~'~,, 
 (J. Trial, 7.").S. 
 
 III. Kr.TlKNIN,; ()i.|.|,.kks, 7(iO. 
 
 IV. ReVIISIN,; Oki KKItS, 7(i() 
 
 ' V ,. 
 
 ■ \. .STATirE,S (.OV|.;H.MN,i Klk, TIONS, 7(;i. 
 
 I. Bkihkkv and Conui-1'T Piuctoks. 
 
 __ Betting. ]-.*' TrMlroci: y. )(-„/../, ..i .\ 1. 
 ou, mtM V. T,-el.iUork,-2-iS. C. \i. (M^ n„^m 
 
 ■ , ^"'f^.^'}^, an^ Wife-/,', ,wral ami Harbour- 
 See Inkant, I. -Will, 
 
 PARISH. 
 
 Oreatlon-(.^»W,eo Zr„..].-Held, that under 
 K._ft. v., tit. IX., ch. 1, lAverv decree fnrthecan- 
 ..nical ereetion of a new parish which is valid 
 
 Corrupt Acts-./,/,A/;», ;,/ -/•'/»,/,•„,,. ]-_[„ this 
 case the jm Ignientappealcl from ,li,l not e„nt'd„ 
 an special hn.hngs ot fact or any stateuu nt that 
 any ot the charges mentioncl in tlie p:irtieular, 
 were found proved, hut statcl gone rail ra 
 : corrupt acts had hem eommittcl ?,v the ,is pll,!' 
 dents agents without his kn,,vvl,,.,l.-e. an,i ,It.■ 
 ; c ared that he had not been ,lulv eleetul, ,-u„l 
 that the tdection was voi,l, ( 1,, an appeal t,. tiie 
 Supreme Court on the ground Il.at the ju,lginenc 
 was too general ami v.ague • — 
 I Hcjld that the gene.-al fi,.,li„g that corrupt 
 
 : ;^;: Vlf ^'" P''r:V' "'^^ '^ «"'ii-ient conipHance 
 I with the terms of the statute \i. ,S, ( '. eh '» sec 
 j 4,j. J oiitiw EUrlioii Cas<-, '20 .S. C. ]{. liJtj. 
 
 I Promise by Candidate to Procure Employ 
 I ment for Voter- /■V.,//»,/ o/' VV/,,/ A, /^ f X 
 i a charge by the petitioner that the apptuant 
 i . ,1 been guilty |,ersonaIIy of a corrupt practice 
 by promising to a voter, W., to emIeavoHr to 
 piocure hi... a situation in or,ler to in.l,.,.,. hi... 
 , to voto,_a...l that s..ch promise was subseiii.ei.tly 
 I carried into effect, the trial Judges liehl on the 
 
3. 
 
 7B2 
 
 753 
 
 unhiHtiuiil law is a .siilliui.jiii, 
 oou.Mlrij;^ with the virw of 
 I ivougiiiliciii of that pariMh 
 fixMM I..' taki.li (Ml thugroiiii,! 
 iilanty of iPi-ocuilmv. 
 >rr Ihi' uoiiiirii«sio,iors of ih.' 
 • tosiii.li civil ivL();,/Mitioiiarc 
 •iiview or control of a ronrt 
 
 lliL' form itioii of a iic«- par. 
 tint oiii! of the oM piriilii.s 
 Mat piirpo.^u was in ,lel,t j^ 
 :^l», i!. S. (,t.j h„t wli,.i.. th,. 
 I'oiitracl,;! l,y the Kal.ri.pi,., 
 liat tlif l'\ilii'ii|ii(.' was iiiialile 
 a luvy (III the Koiiiaii Ciitlio. 
 the parish han l>eeh .liijy 
 /"//•' V. /;,v,s,-„v/. [1M!).-| A 
 
 rXARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 "'oKKi-rr I'k\(tii Ks, 7.c'. 
 
 ■■K'KKS, 7(iO. 
 
 ■Ktts, 7(!0. 
 
 nMN<i Elkition,-;, 7(;i. 
 
 (.'oi;ki-i't I'k\ctici;s. 
 h'lli-rick- V. I]',i/s/i, '.'1 .\ J> 
 
 /.■,-'3s. c. H. cm, ,i„f'- m 
 
 '.'""""-/•''■»'//»;/.]— In this 
 icaleiliroiii di,! not contain 
 
 fact or any ylateiiHMI; that 
 iiitioneil in the irirtienlars 
 lut .state.l gener.illv tlut 
 coiniiiitted hy the re.spon- 
 
 liis knouleage. an.l du- 
 itj.eeii iluly electul, an.l 
 ■did. (hiiui appeal to the 
 gnir.iid i:iat the jndgnient 
 iglie ;~ 
 
 -•ral finding that corrupt 
 ras a suliieiont couipHance 
 itatnte U. N. (_'. ch. !», sec. 
 l^Vwf;, 20 8. C. U. (!:.'(). 
 
 ate to Procure Employ- 
 
 'i'lH <ij"i", -in/. /„,/,/, ~,]. -On 
 ioiier that the a]jpi;llant 
 illy of a corrupt [iractice 
 "', \\ ., to endeavour to 
 in order to indm^e him 
 )|-mnisn was aubseijiieutly 
 trial Judges held on the 
 
 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 t"»'-im. of r. ^,.,'."'ii"\'."-,i'V!" "'^"i^' M, the /v,vA AVeiv/o,; otl" Jo s!"^ j;"'!;^;''"'' 
 
 \rt;:!'iri:[ it'''''"''' '■''''''• -^•''•■•'•i,rna,:;;i;;;i' 
 
 .\[ tlie tllal It was proved fhif \v '>''y>- 
 i..f<.re the tiial ina.le , , . l . ' '*"""" "'"•■ 
 tlie charge « aV e.i ''';';""■"" "'"'" "''^l' 
 
 ?^:'w':'t;:;n';r'irt:tr^''trf'^'-^'^^^^^ 
 <M.n.curehin/;h:: :•:.;,:;;■'£' ;;;;:'!--■• 
 
 ''"'ii.:-ti;^Sd,!:^r;i/'^-- ^ 
 
 7M 
 
 Xarlk 
 
 II. 
 
 I'i:tition-. 
 . I ///"■'/. 
 
 "•i''."f t.o .■o,Zvem,d'K^:r?*— ;^'" 
 
 ["■tUloii.-i was COM i"'liui..,i election 
 
 ( 
 
 i:'''i:S"S:i;i;;;;t!;:'^ir;:n:th'''''''^'-^ 
 
 '"-'t of tho trial.*' Upm th •""""""°'-- 
 
 ;:-P"n;I.MUs, Hul.jeet to the u 
 I "lilt had uo juris,liction, jud nieots „. ... • ' ' 
 v...d,a„- the elections foi^e nr , ,• ' *^'?'' 
 ^'1'-' tl- .vspondont!' .'"'"^'"'"-''^ 
 
 . '•it'lit .,f the 
 ''J'J'-ti'iii that thi! 
 
 ^■'-in.:;;;K'-r'^''i^''^"^™'-i-^ 
 p-nt.i:^:::;i::'ih';'rt:;rwVrv'" 
 
 ani.jrecoloi,,.,i,l.. , "^ '".i^ by .s. to U 
 
 ^ Spcal^rsnl„e;;e,:yi :;:;,r^-;!^''-'' 
 
 ll^" ti^'keta, and that"as"t « free'^H .W T''t '''-'I"'^'« returned to him'- 
 
 i-'n,lforhi,nX ff r?^'!!:!!' ^'.-l'" -«!>-- l,y th^ ^^^ .^^^ ^'"^ k"Pt i« 
 
 'li! 
 
 ii'Mount to 
 
 FU«. of voters withiA'Yi; 
 
 .paying the-travelli 
 
 y voted ,U all, ; roluse.j :_" 
 
 m 
 
 ing ex- 
 
 Held, also that iaasmuch as til, 
 
 "^''■e i^o^s iSrA^-'S^inv^^ i-;nn'i e:^-:?^^; 
 
 48 
 
 ■thl~viv 'r ^°'"* '^«'o*v' OUcWlt t 
 
 (hi:, hive hy un order of that Court, th" 
 
 i"i =houl(i be 
 
 inoneydepos- 
 
 '• 'lisposedof 
 
 '« I'ugi.strar of this 
 
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 <;ouitHho.il.l.,.rHfyt<.tljiC.,n,tlM.|„« that 111,. ronrni,..- ,.n.l (i« vi.n.. II ./., 
 
 Revernal (,h>'.>iiu,i., „f r,„-t.\ S,, X,.,th 
 '.,7!' I--!' •:>'<"» r,<„. •.<() s. ('. |{. ;i;!i. ,inl, 7.-,;» ; 
 nmaml hliilimi Viui . 11,. ;J7(1, iiiih- ")'2 
 
 f'"l'.'/. 
 
 Preliminary Objections Shifii^ Oi,/, ; 
 
 The pititidll WH^. SIIVcl ll|M>ll till' U|.|Hll;i|lt'..ll 
 
 til.' I-Jth Mmv, IMtl. an. I on tli.' Kith M ,» ,i„. 
 |i|>pi'lliiiit lilcl |)rcliMiiii;iry iilijivtidiiH, til.' I,i.> 
 lii'iri^! iiM to thf Ht itilM i)f tli'c |iillti,iiii'iN. \\ f,, , 
 till' pill tk'.i «iTi' hfiinl iipcii the iiii'i'itH oi i|„ 
 
 lifLliniiimty olij.cfioiiN no cvi.lei «„„ ,,n,„ 
 
 iiH In Ih,. NtiitiiH of the iii'titii.iicrN. iiiiil tin- (",,iirl 
 (liHiiiisHcd llm olijcctiniiM, ( »n niipiii! |,, i|,,. 
 SiijiK MIC Court .■ 
 
 Hilil. ri'vciMiiiL' till. iiiilj;iiifnt of till' 
 
 f,''«"'"'nary Objections ///-A . „r Cuh,-i 1 
 -Hflil, iilliiiiiiiij: th,. jii,l-im.,it of thrCnmt 
 
 /'I! u"/. ^^V'""'"'"' ''''■""• '^"•'*- "'■'■^' "' f'"'^". 
 
 1 •.Vi^''-,;- "'"■ "•■'•' "'"' tlK'tiinilfr Itulr I of 
 thosHuI luiKliNh liiihs th.. petilion..,., wlin, lilii,.. 
 an election pititin,,. i« l„„in.l to h,.v,. ,t ,.o,,y 
 with the. cii.ik of th.. CoMit to 1... mnt to th.. 
 muri.mK oili...,, an.l tluil hix fiiilnr,. to .lo .mo 
 IS lti«! Hu .). ft of ii MihBti.ntiul pivliniiniiiy ohit... 
 tlon .uiil fn,„| t„ ,,,, ,,e,it!„„; ,stroi,« ami 
 ijr.J^ )'''':.'^' ■ • -''■-►■•"tll.g. U^U'^r KU ,Ho„ Cu., , 
 
 — " »J, I,, li. J , 
 
 on til.. pi.titioiiriMtopiovi.tli..ir8tatii«,i)(iot,rh 
 
 nT"',""' ','""• -" •'^' '■ !'• •-• f"ll.'«Hl 
 /«//((•//((.«, h/,rfioii r.iM, '.'OS. C. H. IM. 
 
 .'{. /',/;/ 
 
 lOllrr. 
 
 Preliminary Objections - Dfxrrinil,,,, — 
 
 the Coiiit l„.lo« . timt till. oniiKsion to set out in 
 Iheix-.tition th.. iWuU-iw. m.I.Iiws. „n.l oucupa- 
 tion of t he p.titioiiif, i« a „„.,.,, „l,je,.tj„„ to thu 
 form, whuh ,aii l,c. miieilicil l.y Bnii'iuInRnt, 
 
 '20 SC* T^f "'' ""^ ^"*"'" ^''""■"''' ''■'' ''""" '-'""' 
 
 Preliminary Objections - IhsrrniHui, 
 
 Vcrvp,,tion.]~-'H,^. |Rtition in this oat-i' .sini.)lv 
 
 holnj, of th.. township of Loclml, in tho ,„„ntv 
 
 of Gluigairy Mitliont.l..sc.,il,ing hi„oc.iipati.,n. 
 and It was sla-wn hy alii.lavit that tlicfe were 
 two or three other peisoiis, of that name on the 
 votcrs list for that town^'liip:— 
 
 Held aHirmin- the judpnent of the Court 
 l.elow, that the jetition shonl.l not liedismissed 
 for the want of a nioie partienlar deserij.tion of 
 the petitioner. CI, i,;,an-!/ Ehrthn C,,' , -JOS. 
 
 Preliminary ObJectlons-,SVa/».s-0»?t,. 1- 
 i.y preliminary ohjeetii iis to an el..,tioii peti- 
 tion the respond, nt churned tliat the petiti.,n 
 should he diMiu.-se.I h, .an.se the petitioner lia.I 
 > o right to vol.. at the ele.tion. On the d.n v fixed 
 for proof and liearing of the l.reliniinarv"ol,j,.e- 
 tionsthe petitiom.r a.l.Iuc.d no pr.x.f, ami th.. 
 respondent .le.lar, .1 that 1... ha.l tu/evi.lenee, an.l 
 tiie preliminary ..hjectioms were disinisse.l :- 
 
 Held, per fiitcliie. C.J., and Tasehereau and 
 
 n^^ft""' ri- *'''''^ *'"" '"""' Vrohm,.Ii wa.s 
 npon the [letitioner to estal.lisli his status, ami 
 that the apptMl slionl.I be allowed and the elec- 
 tion petition disinisse.l. 
 
 ^^^^i!^*'""*^'-. •^■- *''"'^ ''"' "'"'-^ prohamV, was 
 opon the petitioner, hut. in view of fjie eatah 
 ^Hhe.1 jurisprudence, the appeal shoul.l 'he 
 allowed without costs. 
 
 Preliminary Objections — Sintn-, — /)„„,_ 
 h'li ,„,;i,„ii,,i, /,',iitini/,,/()i,i,,/;„in (,f •/■,.„/ 
 -In this i-ase th.' r.,.spoi',il..n't, hv preliiiiin:irv 
 ..iM.'ct 11)11, ol.jecteil to th.' .status" of the ptti 
 tion.r, an.l, the ..ase heinj,' at issn.', eoiii,... ,f 
 th.. voters' lists for the el..ct.)ral ilistrict «iiv 
 hied, hilt no ollur evi.h.me ofTeieil, ami tin 
 Court Hetasi.l.. thepreliniinai\dlijecli.>n • with 
 out pr.jn.lii.e to the riyht .)f'tlii. respon.ltni, i| 
 s.Mi.lvi.sed, to raise the same ohjeitiori at the 
 trial of the petition.' No appeal was tuk.n 
 from this .lecision, and the case w.'iit tniriiil, 
 where the .ilijection was reuo'ed, hiitwas ovir- 
 jiile.l by the trial .Jn.lges, who hel.l that thn 
 ha.l no ri>,'ht to entertain it, and on the nu-iits 
 they allowed the petition ami voi.led the il.c 
 
 I tion. 'I'liereupon the api.ellant appiidiil i„ tj,,. 
 .Supreme Couit of Caiia.la. on the >,'r.iiiml tjiul 
 the onus was on the res|)onilents to prove their 
 status, and that their .status had not heir 
 
 [ proved ; — 
 
 I Held, atfirminj,' the judgment of the Cmrt 
 
 : below, that the objection raising the i|iiesli(iii ,if 
 t.ie .|ualili.atioii of the iietitioner was ]iin|i,ilv 
 rai.se.l by preliminary object ion and .lispescd nf, 
 
 ; and Ihe.ludgesat the trial hu.l no jurisilictimito 
 entertain such objection : ]{. .S. C. ch. 9. .sees 1' 
 
 , and l.S. l>ri.-<,-i,tt Elirfion Cfui-, 20 S. C. 1!. IWi. 
 
 I Preliminary Objections —.SVa/H.<— y„t,n' 
 
 /■^'^/'''.'"'""''■■' ■^'''''' ''""''"'"g the .U'cisinii 
 .'t t'lll. J., that where the petitioner's status in 
 an eli'dioii petition is objecte.l to bv prelimin- 
 ary objectmn, such status shouhl be cstahli.^lidi 
 by the i)rodmti.in .if the voters' list actuiillv 
 usc.1 at the election, or a copy thereof ceitititil 
 by the derk of the Crown in Chancerv. h' ,■< 
 C. ch. ,S, sees. 41, .')7, an.l 05; K. t«. C. ili. ,'), 
 sec. ."W: and the production at the f ///?»«'/( of a 
 co].y, certilic.l by th.^ revising ofhcer, of the list 
 of voters upon which his name ajilicais, l.ut 
 which has not been compared with the votus' 
 list .ictually used at said election, is insiitliciuif 
 proof; (iwyniieaml Fatteison, JJ., dis.seiitiiii,'. 
 Hichilun Kltiiion Cati,2\ IS C. I!. KiS. 
 
 4. Securiltj. 
 
 Preliminary Objections- DcpoM—n- mpl- 
 Dtjmty J 'rot ho notary.] — la Prince Eilwanl 
 
rs. 
 
 m 
 
 757 
 
 <i»,Vllllc, .I.r, rniihv, Wcrr ii( 
 till' iiiiii. priihiiiii/i wiiH i.ri III! 
 ;iiiiilii- Hliiliiiii CiHe, 8 S. ( I; 
 
 Objections Siiihi., r)i,„.^ 
 
 eciM.l ll|ii>|i till! Il|i|ifll;iril'.,|i 
 
 111, :iii.l <iii till' Itlth M,,v ti„ 
 ri'liliiiii.iry uliirctiniiH, tli.' I.i-' 
 
 itllM l)f llic pCtitidllcIM. \\ Ih I 
 
 lii'iud ii|ii,n till' iiii'i'itH Ml till 
 
 ■tioilN III) I'V ilifllCI. Wi,M -IMi, 
 IIK' lll'titi Ih. mill till ( |,|;|| 
 
 iji'cliiiiis. (Ill npiiriil t., tlif 
 
 [ tliii iiiil^'iiicnt (if till' ( Viirt 
 ..ilisMtiitiii^,', tlmltlifoini> \SM 
 ti)|iinvftlii'ii-8tiitim,i((M,i,r), 
 -'0 S. C. It. jo, l„l|..„,,| 
 " r,iv, , -JO S. C. K. Isl. 
 
 >bJectlona — .sVn/|(.,_ fj„,,,_ 
 
 • lliini/ 1./ OhJnlU.in al Tr III. 
 
 !■ ri'spiihili'iit, liv |iri'iiiiiiii:,n 
 
 ll til till' .stlltlLS of till' |>lt[ 
 
 uai- lii'iii;; at IhsiU', i'(i|iir.'< i,( 
 ir I 111' I'li't'tiiral ilistrii't wuri 
 ir I'viili'iKi' ofTiTi'il, mill tliu 
 liMliiiiiimiyiiliji'clioii •■ with 
 he riylit of tlii' ri m|ii)iii1i'1iI, if 
 Hu the MiiiK' (jlijii'tiiiii iit (111' 
 on. " No u|i|)i'ul «ii3 tnki'ii 
 , mill the Cii.se wrnt to lii:il. 
 II was reiiei-eil. lint was uvir- 
 
 Jliilp'S, who lii'M that till'}' 
 tt'l-taiii it, uiid (111 the iiiciit,< 
 fii'titiim jinil voidi'd the die 
 the iippi'llaiit iiii|ii'al('il K, tlic 
 
 Cmiaila. on tlii' >,'i(iiiii(l iliat 
 U' ri'«i),inili'nt3 to inove their 
 
 tliiir .statu.s hiul not heir 
 
 till' jii(li,'iiu'iit of thi' Coiiri 
 ji't'tion raising till' iiiU'Mii.ii of 
 till' iietitiiiiior was |ii(jjiirl\ 
 ly olijt'i'lioii anil ilisjii'.-iil of, 
 lie trial had no jurisdiction to 
 •lion; ]{. (S. C. cli. 9. .'si'cs. VI 
 ■:i<rlion Ca'« , 'JO S. C. I!. \%. 
 
 >Jections —Sfalm— Vnfirn' 
 ield, .illiriiiing the deiisiou 
 ere the jietitioiier's stiiliis in 
 is nhjectcit to hy ineHiiiiii 
 frtatu.s .should he t'stalilishnl 
 of the voters' list aetuiilly 
 I, or a eopy thereof eeititiiil 
 e Crown in ('hiinceiv . h'. ,><. 
 ")", and 05 ; K. .S. C. ill. fi, 
 odiiction at the f«i/H(Vc of a 
 le revising oflieer, of the list 
 ieli hi.s name aii)ic:ir?, hut 
 i.'firiiiuired with the votiis 
 said eleetioii, is iiisiitliciiiif 
 Patteison, JJ., ilis.seiitiiij,'. 
 
 i'«,2i sc. 1!. las. 
 
 Scciirilij. 
 
 ICtions- l)('ponit—Ili mft— 
 y. ] — In Prince Edward 
 
 '"['""' .'"'.' '"''«•"■« "n- nturned for the .loc 
 
 S;';;:K'::;f;;;;,"^:;;;s:„„»S^H:: 
 
 K;;:;:s;tri;i:;;;r:;'; •■*'■'"-""■ 
 
 f^.nrt,andii, thi ,, ' • "■"'"'""'wy of tlic 
 
 rp'"'''" 'f''"-H.r^:':»;i:n:: 
 
 had L' Veil ."■ceiiiili til H... """itn.ii no 
 
 «;nii^ioiiai.;:r;^^.,!'V,' ,;--'•'.;•!■•:;;, thon. 
 
 IhoiiM.iii, (l,,|i,i,.,, 'M,,!, , , ', ."■'"' ''*■" 
 
 W(tSHi«iied l,v \V. A U'eU t, Ihi'ieicipt 
 thon.darv app', , ., 'd l.v 1 , |o,"'"' '^T'^l I'"" 
 
 t-.»'^M:'-Mvaj;.oIi,:;i'r'J^;--'';-;;|: 
 
 rrii|iiiliikiit : ""'J' i"l eacli 
 
 I't'l'l. th.it, there l,ein" at tli,. n,., .■ , 
 
 h";'o;,;'!r;::.,''i:''..''-'->!-mtofti,e 
 
 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 758 
 
 ''|S'."L!|!"n'"*'"' a'"''!"- v'^' ""«■ ^-^ * "" Viet. 
 
 Prellmtnary Objections I'. .■.„.„/ .v, ,,.;,., , 
 Coi i''V^^^ ^'""•'''■'■'.^'""■•'"f ""■■^"I'r.nn 
 
 ••'.{y f; ;';;™::;;;:,:K-5,;;-» ■•■ 
 
 -'>t^ «aMgood .serviee. S/„//„„;i 
 
 '■''■■hunt',,,,,, '.'(IS.C. R. 1(19 
 
 the redpoiid. 
 
 ', Aiiiiii/iiili.^^ 
 mid liii; nil ■■, 
 
 Preliminary Oblections /•, ,. , .• ■ . 
 
 i.'l. .,..,• J ""joi-iions I I rtiiiiiil Si ri'ii't 
 
 (l.b.l.) hli-,'1,01, Cisfi, i>o,s, C. K. L'(i J > '-'""■■'< -iO S. (.'. I{. i»(j. 
 
 leeti()ii.'( Act. 
 C'lnii/y i:iiiti„n 
 
 '^iTTT7, °''J°''"<'ns />.p.i.;t^u., .,;.,, 
 
 Sni'iii'tS^"'*"'^''''^-'''--'-'^^:"" 
 
 ai.ers(,n who was net in for t o. H '"'"" 
 alHiillfax, o,„I '..■..'".•"" V\' l""thniiotary 
 
 al H,'.llfax, and a receipt sif.ed I v',''''''''-'' 
 PrellmlnaryObJectlons-Ao„,//_/. ,,, ■ , 
 
 the ease was" that the seoiirit'e ,.„"i , 
 receipt were illei-al ni I ,^^ • ■ ,"' '''^■l'"-'"' 
 
 t"wit, a hank ..ot:. JslOM •''•''"''•■•. 
 
 fact, a l),,ininion.K:U',,f'.S,,ot *''■'''"'' "•-•'» 
 
 beSwi'tS-it'iii'Sr'"' -^ '"^ '•'""■^ 
 «"«ciei,tiy with r,' ^r'thfir""'^"'-''' 
 
 toutroverted Elections Act " "°"'""0" 
 
 'toil tV,.,, -JOS. C. R. MM. ■ 
 
 Preliminary Objections- 7V„„ /;„..v, ,.,./,., .. 
 l:xti II.1IIIII III ihiii,,. I, , J " '■" 1 1 III -■- 
 
 Ai.ril IS'ii 1 .''.'•"'•'■"••<»" the l.-,th 
 
 I'Mt on the -'.I 1. v'.^'i ' '.i-' ,'le|"wt n eeipt. 
 eUeiid tl . hT f '"■'' ''''I''"''' f" " •IiMl«e to 
 
 the"':! !::^, '"" t ::^;;!r I'r' I'" ""^'"'^"- 
 
 -'-■Mm'i,tiya,lini:'.r;:a;^p:d'tH''\^''''^: 
 ;f Appeal f,,r,,i,urio,„.;ri^,/;;;/,;-f 
 t' n wa.s le.scrved accordin.dy h m' h' 
 
 n fl! . . <'h.)ectioii.s ineludeil 
 "1 the first instaiiee. and al.so an 
 
 tho.se iiiadi 
 
 Ml. t,/,ii,,„ir!/ Eliit;,,,, C(i.ii 
 
 I!. .S. ( ', 
 •21) S. C 
 
 eh. !», see. 
 R. 38. 
 
 (i. 7'/vVi/. 
 
 Arij, nil tdl /;/(.,.. 
 
 - 0,-</, r. 
 petition 
 
 On 
 111 this 
 
 5. Strvice. 
 
 in^"sl!;J!'"HMlrHrn''?'.«"^«'^'«^"t «^^vieei affidavit of td^'v.^!"'"^'' T" «"I'l'"''t«'t">'y an 
 Elections Act even t ^^l""'"'"'' Controverted ; be ''a soli, piV ^ ^''"'''•'''' 'l^'''''^ ""'' ** ^-""Id 
 
 --'.^..o'£-a;-srsi;s'!cHffi=^.'-ti^-^ 
 
 I "wi, ami that it was not possible " for him to 
 
 I the i'lrd April, l,S-)l, after the 
 IZZ'" "V'""-'' ^'"' I'^'titMHiens-nioved to ha"; 
 
 el ':':;;;:::. :;:'^:-^i---''''-''ti.^«;"idS: 
 
 >efore the closinL' of the 
 
I : 
 
 759 
 
 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS. 
 
 760 
 
 ->- i.s,.u.,....s«ary, l.ofore' Ih. closing f *"tbo ti,n:i )■',', 1 "T"''" ''"V'^'' ''^- '■'•• "' ^^■•^••'. 
 
 ....t to appear „n.il aft.r tl,. « J 'u/^S' i^'tL P; In' T' ''"'''': ^' ' T'?''' ''"' "'" ■'■''i 
 'MCMt J,„.Mc,l,at.l,v aftor tho sessiu,, ua v'r , ,- \ '"■'""■,"" f 1'^^ ohject.ou ,di.,l „„ i„' 
 
 «■>. the l.st OctolKT, IS-Jl, an a,.,,li ■■, m .^. w ^''^, ' "' "''"'V^'' '''''- '''■"■ ''"• trial .1,,,!.," 
 .na,l. to fix a .lay' for the r In ^ ^7';'' ^ ''"'.r'';"''''' "'' '' ''"' I''^'"'''''' "' t'''-'.- 
 
 .■.■.s,,ou.U.nt was cxanm,..! i„ tho inter , m -lo f 'ythM.rotIn tary, a« .iirec-l,,! „. 
 
 Uk,- Kith l)ece„.l,.r ,l,o r.spon. le K.t," S/n'ntt- ' ''•- ^^ '■]^^!^ ""' '^^ -VVe^^h^<i 
 
 to tlie .,uri«,hoti,.n of tlu.. Conrt-.u tin. - ronn {."" ""-'.''. "r 'loc sion : i;. s. C. fli. «,) «..,,.-,,. 
 
 tl.at tlK. trial ha,l not oomn.enj! w flT, " v ?:^'='^::;;^' ^V. ' °»'"'""' ''«'"/'•""'' AY.,/,.; 
 
 that tl,. t,-ial l,a,l not oomn,enc.,l wiil^in'^ix KTor^'vR'\ 
 H,nt ,.s lollow,ng th. liling of the petition, and ' "" ' ^'^ '*' ^ 
 
 the obie.tion was n,aii,taintMl : - 
 
 H.1,1 ,-.ve,sing th. jn.lgni.nt of the Court 
 I'.low, hat the onler xvas in etlect an .nlarc-e- 
 ni.nt ot the tune for th. .oinni.nc.m.nt of tl,e 
 tnal ni,t,l all.,- the session of I'arliani.nt, un,!, 
 therefore, in the con,))ntation of tin,, for the 
 .on„nei_,.n,.nt of th. trial, th. tin,. o..npie,l hy 
 the session o, rarhan.ent shonhl not he in.l,„le,i'; 
 
 III. 1!ktii;m.m: ()iKlci;iis. 
 
 Claim Against Crown -,v 
 
 '(/■r/.v.s' of S.>l„i,;i,_ 
 
 ■i-'-WWi 
 
 /;'(/-. ]-A pe,-son .Inly appointed ,„,.. ,„,,,,, 
 .luring a.n ele.t,.,,. as ,-eU,r,„ng olli,.er and,.,- il' 
 provi.Mons of 1 1,. X.,rth.W.s, Ten'ito,.ies I;,., 
 sontat.on Act, K. S. V. ch. 7, .an„„t recover , 
 th. (rownf.,r the sorvi.es of several ennn.er 
 tors .lep.ity r.tni'n.ng oifie.rs, or other perso, , 
 _o/. employed in .o„„e.lion with su.h e le.tio 
 Ah.,,., v. 77... (J,iu„, .S JCx. C i; -"is '"' 
 
 I'itvU.toher, IN-ll, the .In.lge in\hi.s eas, 
 
 "■"""■'^i-v "ths after the lilin.'.,f the ele.tio.i T^ * /. • , 
 
 lx.titi.,,,J,y,,rd.,..,,|argedth.th,,.f t eeo ^;^'^''-''T''' 'i'^}'''~i'^''^^''l>--ty!W 
 
 men.en,.nt ., th. tnal to the 4th S...,:;l^l, Zl}!:::::!::':!:^^', '"' "«^'"" "a^"'"^^ a .lepntv 
 
 On' ;,'■'' >',';!',',,' '-■M'""'K "» th. ISth October. 
 On the ]!»th Oetoh., an.,tl,.r order was niade 
 
 l.y the J,:.ige iix ; g r r U e oni,: i. ' ■ r '""rT ^''iV '' '''^'- ^''- '■ f"-- al .-^ 
 tl.. 4tl, Xov..n,l..rri.Si.I, a, 1 4 cle- ■ ''I' ''^uu '","' "Y "'^' l''^'i"t,tr to vote : -^ 
 notice of trial was .dv^n. The r,'^ L i ^.iV . '■'^■'': t''^'* the w.ad " wilful - in tl,e sec 
 
 ietu,.„„,g ..ttieer l,y a ■' pers.,,," aggriev.., ' t^ 
 ......v.,- a penalty un.l.r. see. 1,S(I of the On'tJ, 
 
 l-.l_e.t,on A.t, ,,,, \ i.t. ch. .S. for an all,.ge.l w 
 
 oLJected t., Vh7.in;:i;,i.^- .- f tJe Colnt'^""'^" T";!; u!7r^"' 'P' ^'"'^"''^ = " ' -'Ult^^S 
 
 alilieii. 
 power to wit!,li,,l,| tlit 
 
 , Held, al.s.,, 1st, that the ol,j,..ti„n to the M,f ' /"''"y''* 'f ' "t, an.l there was tl„. 
 
 ticicey ..f the notic. of trial giv.! to c- s^^ j-""*^'"'^'',"',':" "V"-' ^^^t, yet, as the ,leu 
 
 under see. ;!| of .1,. !l, U. ,s. f was „ i ,!l'l ""f'f ^' ^"^r"^ *''^' I'"'"'"''*' ^vus not ,p. 
 
 ti.u wlu.h conl.l he r.liedo ^ .^ ^^^ f"; '-'''r-^'' ".''»«""■.. power to wit!, , 
 
 tioii which eoidd he reliei 
 uii.l.r sec. .")() (/,) of eh. 9 
 evidcce t.'dv.n Iiv 
 
 on 
 
 s 
 
 appeal l.alh.t, the action faile.l. A, »./,v 
 
 V. r;,.,-„ 
 
 
 oli,cial stenographer of the Court, but who ha 
 been sw..rn and appointe.l by the .(u.Ig., nee.I 
 not be rea,l over t., witneso.s wh,.„ txt.n.le.i. 
 
 Two Petitions--_\,y,«ra^- 7V;„/..-A',.„,./.,,;,„, 
 ~-J o/hoanf,n„.] |„-„ el.elion p.titions we,, 
 filed aga.nso tin; appellant, on. by A. C, til..l 
 on th. 4M, Apr,]. I,S!)J, an.l the .,tl,.r by A V 
 the r.spond.nt, lil.d , n th. dth April. ISOL'.' 
 il.ctna ,.fU,e A. y. petition was, b- an .„.,le 
 
 A/u,i. 'joo. II. orio. 
 
 IV'. Hkvisin.i Oikickks. 
 
 ■luhn- 
 
 Mandamus- loA.,.-- IJ.t-Xotire of Ohi.c 
 
 . nch I ivis,o„ that a notice under sec. li)„i 
 the .:.le.to,-al [•ran.hise A(;t, U. .S C ch T m, 
 
 of-T-ig.inchan,b;,*sr;La;:d"'th;.'^.i;dsr' ;;:i;™"'"' ■'^■^-^r^- ^''•"- ---^.t^'aVr- 
 
 emher, IS!).' dxed for th. 2(itl, ( ct'd. , by' " , 1 -/'^"'"^ "^s oh,.ct.,l to, f.n^ the pu,-iUof 
 
 On th. LMtli O.tob.r th. ap,,.ll-,,it ,, h'h „ , !''\"'- ^.''!^ "■""^' l''l<,„ oil' the vocs' list at the 
 
 the Ju.lge i„ Chan,be,.s to i.n!;'u!e tw.l'iSi: a:U,r."r u!"'!'^':"''^- "'"'^ --"^Hn^Ui.r 
 
 and have an.,ther .iat. (ix.-.l f.u' ihe tri-i .,f 1 ,1^ t' " " ' "bj.cti.m, was suiiici.at. 
 
 '^'^'-^'- ■ ■'"'^"-' -,.efe,.,.ed to thJta ha!;; s ti.t'lhrn!:^ ;:::;^ v^^f' ■""'«'' 
 
 Ju.lges, who, on tl„. L'(!th().tob.r,'l',e>,V,v pi'.','-' 
 ceding with the trial. .lisn,iss..l th. motion t„ 
 
 piT- 
 
 not,., had b.en giv.n that th. A. C. p.tition 
 had bc.n I xe.l for trial, an.l, subj.Jt 't , e 
 ol.je. lon „I..l an admissi.,,, that snlli.ict bri- 
 bei-y by th. a,,p.llai,fs ag.nt uithout his know- 
 Tlw,.i l' I ?'' ^•''"""■";'.'' t" ^^void 111. electh.n, 
 
 iyu.ei^,h,..,t;o,,;'j;:in;;i:;;;;:i'p;.,:::::,.;:::;^-;;;: Jp^"'')^^'"'"i«'n>;u;!;-^ 
 
 the A. V. petition.' Thei^cun,. h " , ,> h A ,"; ''""^^ ^^f uivali.I, and t„e ,-cvi.si„g „fcr 
 "^ ..>-..,.._ .... ... t"^ appellant therenp.m refused to go on and hear the ..,.,,. 
 
 II.l.l, vimt II., appeal was giv.,, bv scr. 3;iof 
 he A.t from the revising ollic.er's I'uliat;; m\ 
 Ih.retor. the !.n,..eiliu!.s b.for. th. Cauntv 
 Jmlg. w.re corrr,/, noii JmHrc. 
 __ ^ ^ ^ ^ ,, ^ ^ "'andamns w;is gr.'inted. 
 
 usi.ie th. elee?ion7'"' On aliaimear'tTth^'simrn.!',^' ! i» ' ''■''"'"A''^ •'''!'' ^'""" "' •'Mi?>eal, that tb. Queeu's 
 Court :--^ IKaltothe^upien.e Hen.h I),v,s,on having or.l.r.d a ,na,„laa,u.,to 
 
 I issue directing a revising oitic.r t.i ..■.,nsi,lcr the 
 
INS. 
 
 760 
 
 it umlor Hcu. -iO of eh. 9, K. s c 
 
 li.ul n perfwt right, to try' tu 
 ji'piinucly ; •iail, that Ihonih.,,, 
 low on the ohjfction i-flieil on m 
 IKiil, VIZ.. tliii', the trial .Jii,!,.^., 
 I'll Hi(h the jjetitioi) in thi.s imI. 
 ■o ]ietiti<m.s lijcd liad not l.tcij 
 10 prothonotary, as (iirectt-.l „', 
 
 K._ S. ('., was not an appealaliV 
 cision: ];. s. (;. c-ii. <J s,.c .-.o- 
 
 "loiilitni;:. Vaw/rfid/ EL, ■lie',, 
 
 iKTrnMNC Ol-KICKIIS. 
 
 St Crown—.sv /•/■;<v.« (i/'s.,i„„;[j 
 >n ihily appnintril -.md iirt,,,,, 
 
 ina-sivninnii-oliiceriMHlirtiii. 
 Aorlh.\Ves( Tenitorie.s Ucprt. 
 1^. ('. eh. 7, eanjut recover from 
 he services of several ennmera- 
 ii-inii- olfieew, or other pvrmu 
 iineetioM with SMeli election 
 "", .S Kk. C. I!. u';!S. 
 
 1 an acu.m iijrainst'a deputv 
 
 I'y iV "person ag^-rievd," to 
 
 ^'_ under .see. i.Sti of t'le Ontario 
 
 net ch. ,S. f.,r an allege.hvilful 
 lit' jilamtitl to vote : - 
 
 Mord "wilful- in the sectiou 
 or"nialici.,iia:-and,althoiiirh 
 depnveil of lii.s vote by tlit 
 ■iidant to allow hint to deposit 
 lot, and there was tlierehvii 
 lie Act, yet, as the delenilaut 
 the plaintilt'was not ipuilitieil 
 sown power to withhold the 
 taded. /.(»■/.< v. a,;,,/ ||-,-,, 
 t». 15. 1). VX-,. folh.we.l. W,d- 
 '• R. (i"), uistingiiished. .luhn- 
 
 Ji. r),")0. 
 
 KVisiNc Okfickks. 
 
 "/(■/•>■' IJyl—Xiiii,-e „/■ Ohjec 
 'V"f'A]-Hel.l,l,y the(,»ii,;Mi's 
 lat ;v notice under see. l!)ot 
 lullise Act, H. .S. C. eh. ,-), m 
 't. eh. il. see. 4, to a porsoa 
 >iected to, for the pin pose of 
 Kin ollthe voters' li.,t at the 
 I siiiip'y gave •'not (|u;ditic(l' 
 'Jiiiiion, was suilieieui. 
 eer (who was not a .Iiidge) 
 he notice was vali.l, the per- 
 sol.jeeted to appealrd from 
 'onniy Judge, u ho held 1 but 
 idid, and tiie ruvi.sing olli(.tr 
 to go on and hear the coni- 
 
 •[)eal was giv.,'n hy sec ,'ttol 
 evising oliieer's riding ; ,m\ 
 -■edings hefore the t'ounty 
 1)11 Jiii/ii',, 
 Kivmted. 
 
 t of Appeal, that the Queen's 
 ■iiig ordered a niaiidiiinus to 
 vising officer to consider the 
 
 761 
 
 fchji 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 :srs;i;?,jii;«.t;;;;E'lEE"»r-''":^S:,K:'' -- -- - - 
 
 Anotice of app Cation to I,.,,- , '"''""'^'"I's. ! 
 suth.Ment : perllnaa-tv (• \n ' , " 'l"''''ii''''- is 
 
 762 
 
 ^'I. 'I'liini, I'.vicrii 
 
 Prohibition-. /m;-m//,.//„„ .• ,,., 
 
 or;\ :ist,~;;"T'"''»™"»"|=i; 
 
 ;.;;..erf,,J,,n-;,;^^ 
 V. H. .5HS. "'"~ths.,in V. /Jo;/,/, -j] 
 
 !• <i^■^•i:l:Al,l,^•. 
 
 \'. Statutks a„Vr:uMM: Ku-rri 
 
 >.NS. 
 
 Dominion Elections Act~Cro,n, 1 Tl, 
 
 nnvn is not bound by ..ecs 100 n,, lo.l ~, , 
 
 "':'■'""'"" l-:i^'c'tions Act' 1874 -- °^ '''" 
 
 Hie 4(ith clause of the 7fl', „, ,-■ 
 Interpretation Act. I . .S (' " ,j,''T";y "^ ^'l'^ 
 >H>rovi,led tlutt no provis Im i. .l/' '"''■''•^" 
 ^."yActsh:dlali;etin u,v a ne ,^'^'''"-'!^'>' 
 
 -"■or the righrsof }{,:■ "i i' f' ' ^^';y«i'^u. 
 
 »Ufcessors, unl^s it is v", '' ', ' ' '""' '"'"■« '"' 
 
 .'a that mention,. 1 i> 77 'iV ' ,«-'-''-'-«l'tion such 
 
 '■^-titntesVasied !; S'^::;,3-''vb.,„nd 
 ■•>■ to prevent fraud, injnrv" o, .' , """: ■-,., ' 
 
 -^-n^d!^^,^'^-"^---^itors.J-An 
 •■'i' Jus estate for t ~l "'1- ■■,'**-'"a"'"""t of 
 
 ^ l»"'el...sed hy h^„'F:^'f :!,^;"'^-"'-t'''"'- wa^ 
 
 '''■f^"'l.'i.its, wh. we ro en ' '"; /^.■^■'^'.^'"■'■'. the 
 
 i '--l-Msilde't,, , ,".^ ^i, , 'y-^ ••' '■>«. l-foming 
 
 «'ife, : i|„ ,l' ,,,,'" ■-•;■"" ily from the 
 
 "■<^'*I""lsible. but also fo H ,■ i • ''"' '"■^■""'<^ 
 
 ^'annsascreo,to:!r;:;";i,:';;i,it;:r:':':-''f^''- 
 
 to l!n';i;::;:^.;';;,;::Si;!-.----^-ary party 
 
 '■-"", •-'.•}(). R. r)7;{. 
 
 "■Hlerstandirg in a t' mv4 r "'^ '"■"""'^'•' '"■ 
 '""'er that .ut a Ub?,,'^';''!'',? ''''■» '-''^'^'ti"" 
 
 PARTICULARS. 
 
 *<; KviDENCE, VII. 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 '■ ^'ENKiwLr.v, 762. 
 
 '!• Ai'i-iiAL, 7G5. 
 
 ^'■«'<igMt'd tothedeten'^nr ?'"""'"' '""''-''• «^'''- 
 ''"-Nl'i-Mterestli"!;!^: ;:;:-'■''>.'-• .n.>neys 
 
 ; gave to }. .V Co an nr,I '""'"-■ V' •''''''■"'ards 
 ,tluH,alancco,h „;,"■' •■'^' 'i---f^-'"lai>t ,or 
 : ■■o.nuin after pa ,. ds ; '7 T"17 ^'"^' """''' 
 : "• >tCo. indors. td, o ,; '" *";.'l'-''''-'-lant. 
 • tl'" plaintiff, l,v h n r . ''^^''^'^■'■'-''1 it to 
 
 i ','■ 'V C. afterwards delivor, '' "■■'\>t« face. 
 
 -''"■-•M.uentsignedbv I n, ' ■' ""j [''^'"'tiff a 
 
 i ''e^'" i"f'.nne,l that th ' . 1" .'■■"' ^'"""S 
 I "a'otiable by ind rse.nen ' l"'''''"' "'"^ ""t 
 
 I tiffs title and en ' 1' '", '"•'•'••^;t "'>^ P'ain- 
 
 ! the -lefcndanfs d ' H . "" '"•' """"•'>• '" 
 I ''■■n-ed their inte 's tin ? r""' ''"'' t''""**" 
 I I'l^"''ti'i-thciratVornev , , ■""' ■■'I'l'"i"te,l the 
 - ;.•"■-> ..se and l,en e^ to'c ||J :';,"^''''^'- '"" '■"■■ '"« 
 
 tfUdant. having rec; v, , tl ' "'"'"'■ '•'^' '"•-■- 
 
 : the n.surance , ;:;i ■ f^;;,;:;;';;''''^-"''^' ''•''■> 
 
 : Ihs donianding an aecn t h ' '''■'""""'• "" 
 
 '-■■'""« tl.at would also 'i '",/''%'; "•-■'■'■■ !"'inr 
 
 "■l»-n tile,l a bill in e,n in f ""^ l'''i'"tiff 
 
 '■ l^^ymeetof tin. annn nt '00, !"". '"'■ '"-'""""^ "'"' 
 
 ; tl-e defendant .le L^^^^^^^ ''"" '"'"' '" "'I'ioh 
 
 f^',^i..g that the e"t „;:,":';" "1 l"^''ti^'«, 
 
 f^'taswas,infact,onlv r,' /^'' '^'^'''ute on its 
 
 (•■'■'^^ocou.,tbetwee:'i^^ V,mr(''''^''"''*'''''-^'' 
 jsary to protect C.'s ri-d, "V' ' ^ ' '"•'"'« >Kces- 
 
 party to the suit. The? en,nn-r" " "'"''^'-'^sary 
 '""I the jn.lgn.ent ve n! i "rV"'''''''''!'^^ 
 f'-oiii, and the same d..fe, ,^ *^- " 'W<-'aIed 
 
 --U.P in the ,^jt::;':;r,;;';;.-^°f parties 
 
 i.-«'snt;:'a;^,1^:er:'^'"->^"^ the Court 
 
 that the quesVr o ' "r, r'of ■^•^•V'"'*««"''"i'. 
 .y»'//'r,/rt ),',- tl,,. ■ „, ' ^^'i'lt of parties was r^.s 
 
 '-'"1^ not ^e rid;!: '^:;^;;\::" ''"-'-""■•■•er. and 
 '1 it could tl.,. i., ) -' ^ t'"; answer. Kven 
 ""taneS;u'"p^§'"':i^;;-''g''tasC.;:^ 
 
 •'"'I the aofeml^ t the one ?'"' ^''^ I^"'titf 
 t-nsfe.ofthefunaSl;:i:,--';,;;-;;;to 
 
763 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 764 
 
 tliiiit, niKl wii.s tivated by all the parties iis 
 a iici,'()tiiil)I(. instniiueiit. 'I'liu flufiiidaiit had 
 Jiotliiii;; t(. do with till! oqiiitiea Ixitwcoii C. and 
 B. it Co., oi- lietwoc'ii ]{, & Co. and the plaintill', 
 lint was boniid to accoujit to the plahitill' in 
 acfordance with his luidertaldii.t,' as indicated by 
 the aceptiince of the onler. MrKuui v. ,/r,/„ v 
 HI S. C. H. 4,s<). 
 
 Company -- A<-l!o)i A,/riiiist Slian /.o/dcr.s — 
 l)i<P' !•-:.., vHh .S'6/v/rv'.]— In an action by an 
 e.xeciilion eivdilor of a company against .share- 
 holders to make them liable npon tlicir shares 
 foi- the amonnt unpaid thereon, the jilaintill' 
 sought also to recover from the defendants 
 moneys shewn to Ijc in their hands which were 
 really the inoperty of the c(]mpany : 
 
 Held, that the plaintill' was entitled to judg- 
 iiient against the defendants for payment "o 
 him of such moneys; but the company were 
 iiecc.«saiy jiar-ties to the action ; and llieir con- 
 sent to being added as plaintiffs nut having been 
 hied as reiinired by Rule3-_'4 {!,), tlicy should be 
 ilddccl as det'cnd.ints : — 
 
 Held, also, a pi'opcr case, under Rules ;i24 
 ('■) and 3L'(i, for dispensing with service upon 
 the company, as the <lefendants already l,eforc 
 the Court were directors and the ])rincipal share- 
 holdei-s in the companv. .Ioikx \\ Mill,,- "J. n 
 E. '_'(J8. ' . - • 
 
 Creditors - X »' Ca/fvc of Adioii.] — An 
 action was lirought by one of the next of kin to 
 set aside, as having been obtained by undue 
 influence, a tr.msfer to the defendant of policies 
 on the life of a person who had died intestate ; 
 and sid).se(|uently his administrator was, on his 
 own consent, added as a party plaintitl'. After 
 the action was entered for trial, the plaintiff's' 
 solicitors, also ai;ting as solicitors for certain 
 credit'irs of the dec'cased, obtained an order 
 under Mule -lir) from the Master in Chandlers 
 to amend the statement of (•hum and recoiil by 
 making sucli creditors parties, suing on liehalf 
 of themselves and all other creditors to set aside 
 the transfer of the policies as fraudulent ami 
 void against them : — 
 
 Helil, tliat the addition of the new i)laintifrs 
 was not necessary to determine the real matter 
 ill dispute in the "action commenced,'' as 
 rei|\iired by the Ride, but was tlie introduction 
 of a new action altogetiier distinct from the 
 action connneneed, and one which the plaintill's 
 in that aeti m could not maintain ; and the 
 order of the .Master was set aside. Tiniiiii'i y 
 Biii'jhaiii, 10 1'. R. 110. ' ■ 
 
 Car/tr v. ClarLson, [15 
 
 Helrs-at-Law. ]— & e 
 P. R. 379, jioft 707. 
 
 Husband and Wife— jf'or/.]— Action against 
 a husband and wife alleged to have been mar- 
 ried before 1884, for a tort committed by the 
 wife : — 
 
 Held, on demurrer, that the husband was 
 properly joined as a party. Anuf v. Jt'oijifs, 
 31 C. P. lO"), and Strolu v. Kaltuihiivij, 17 
 Q. li. 1). 177, considered. Lee v. Jlopkiits, 20 
 
 o. R. eee. 
 
 Insurance Company — Fire — Action for 
 
 Xiiili,jen.c-i' ~- Jninhifi «.v Co-plaiid'uT"..] Strp 
 Wealkaw v. Canada Southern B.lV. Cu.,2l 
 A. R. 297, po.it 857. 
 
 Issue -C/rt/wo/(^]-,SVc ILMhr.ion v. AV„,--n 
 l.> 1'. U. 241, po«< 765. ■ 
 
 Mortgagee -/,',•,//, ^ of |(Vn/.] — Where an 
 action is brought to establish' .a riglit of w,>v 
 oyer lands adjoining those of wiiicfi the iili.in 
 titl IS the owner, subject to a mortgage an.j 
 having regard to the value of the property tli,' 
 amount of the mortgage, and other ciV'um' 
 stances, the lands may be said to be rc'dlv 
 the mortgagee's, and the action substantial!" 
 Ins, tne <lelendant is entitlcil to security f,/r 
 co.^t3, if the plaintiff be without substance ■ - 
 
 Held, per.Mac.Mahon, J., in Chambers, that 
 the mortgagee was not a necessary party to th. 
 action. ■' 
 
 Hut ,«;»Wr, per Meredith, J., in the Divj. 
 sional Cmirt. that he was a proper party, ubi 
 
 10™ 1! 4"^ '"'" '"''''■'''■ ''''"■''"" '"• -"''■"''^■''■"";/. 
 
 Mortgagor and Mortgagee - 7')v.snrT.vv. -i—.v,, 
 lJro<,lilhl,l y. liro.ni, •22 S. C. R. 398, a,ife 0S,^ 
 
 Next of Kin— .•!<■/' /o» fo B-^'ahlish IIV// ]_ 
 The plaintiffs jjropounded a will in a .Surro- 
 gate Court under which tliev took the whole 
 estate, and were named as executors. The 
 defendant, who was one of seveial next of kin 
 all jiaving an ecpial interest if the will wa.^ 
 invalid, contested its validity, and the case n< 
 reinovc, into the High Court. The other iiw 
 ot km also disputed the will, but were not act- 
 ing 111 concert with the defendant. 
 
 Upon an objection taken by the defendantal 
 the trial : — 
 
 Held, that the other next of kin should k 
 made parties ; and the trial was adjourned f,r 
 that purpose, it appearing that thev could con- 
 veniently :je added, Cbriiitl v. SiiuHi, 14 1' R 
 275. 
 
 Partners-Co/-por«yors.]-In the case of a 
 nominal corporation, which has no IclmI status 
 as such, the ostensible corporators are partners; 
 and tlieir liability as partners, on tlie contracts' 
 ot the company, is a joint, and not a joint an-i 
 several, liability. 
 
 Where some, but not all, of the eolltl■i^cto^■ 
 are sued 111 an action, they are entitlcil of riclit 
 to have all the others within the jurisdiction 
 added as defendants ; and, the plea of aliatr 
 nient having been abolished, the nictlind oi 
 exception is by prompt application to the Court 
 under Rule .324. 
 
 .' s to the representatives of the deceased or 
 insolvent partners, there is a discretion to add 
 or not. Udd4:i:ile(:ir v. Balfour, 15 P. R. ;;93, 
 
 Re,\B.tora — Coiuiterchfim.] — In m\ action 
 brought in the name of the Attorney-General | 
 upon the relation of certain persons to restrain ' 
 the defendants from collecting tolls or keeiiing 
 their toll-gates closed upon their loails, the de- 
 fendants alleged by way of defence certain 
 wrongful acts of tlie relators, and by way oi 
 counterclaim asked damages against tliem;- 
 
 Held, by Winchester, official referee, that the 
 rehitors were not in any sense plaintiffs ; and 
 the allegations against them must be struck out. 
 
 An appeal to Gait, C. J., was disnu».H.i. 
 Attoniey-Oeiicral v. Vauijhan lioad C'o., 14 P. 
 R. 510. 
 
764 
 
 post 765. 
 
 i- Hiu'if "/ n'ai/.] — Wheiv an 
 iglit to I'staljlish a ri<,'lit of wny 
 joining tlumo of whiuii tlie plain'. 
 •nor, siihjfOt to a mortgago, ;ir„l 
 to the Viiliie of tlie propertv, tin,' 
 e mortgage, and otiier ciVciim- 
 lands may he said to ]»_• n^Wy 
 -■H, and the action suhstantiiilly 
 Khiiit is entitled to seeurity for 
 laintitf lie without suhstanee': - 
 laoMalion, J., in Clianihers, that 
 ! was not a necessary party to tho 
 
 per Meredith, J., in tlie ])ivi. 
 that he was a proper part\-, ami 
 ;en added, (lordon v. ,1 n,M,;,i„i 
 
 ind Mortgagee - Tn.tpns^. ]— x„ 
 'Iroiru, -22 S. C. R. 398, ante Ob,'). 
 
 n— Art /on to £siah/!.^/i \V;i/,y 
 )iropounde.l a will in a Surra- 
 uler whitdi they took the whole 
 ere named as exL-eutors. The 
 was one of several next of kin, 
 ei|iial interest if the will was 
 ted its validity, and the case Vis 
 he High Court. The other next 
 [luted the will, hut were not act- 
 with the defendant, 
 sctiou taken by the defendant at 
 
 he other next of kin should fc 
 and the trial was adjourneil fer 
 t ai)pearing that they eouhl con- 
 ded. Cor IK-// v. Smitlt, U I>. R, 
 
 766 
 
 yorporatnrN.]-~ln the ease 01 a 
 ition, which has no letral status 
 unsihie corporators are partners; 
 ity as partners, on the contracts 
 1 is a joint, and not a joint m 
 f- 
 hut not all, of the contractors 
 .ction, they are entitled of right 
 ! others within the jurisdiction | 
 dauts ; and, the plea of abate- 
 leeu abolished, the method of 
 prompt api)lication to the Court 
 
 resentatives of the deccaswi or | 
 ers, there is a discretion toad 
 ken V. BdlfoHi; I.") P. K. i;93. 
 
 Ooiii,fcrrlaiiii.] — lu an action 
 name of the Attorney-General 
 n of eertaiti persnns to restrain j 
 Torn collecting tolls or keeping 
 ■losed upon their loads, the Je- 
 \ by way of defenci' certain | 
 f the relators, and hy way ot 
 {ed damages against them:- 
 Chester, otticial referee, that the | 
 it in any sense plaintifls ; and | 
 gainst them must he struck out. 
 < Oalt, C. J., w«s didniis.*! 
 I V. Vauijhan Road Co., 14 1'. j 
 
 corporation the mayor ndce-ku ".'""""^'P'^" 
 to grant a eertitici.te e, .1 "^ "'st'Ucted 
 
 to the solicitors for the o '"■ '"n-ornte seal 
 
 ing then, to join the eo- '''.''''""""" '»'"'"■■'■^- 
 thl action «ion r cU^'m: H ]"'" T ^'^'^i'^"'^ "' 
 faction of the mavo, 1 ' " "'' '" *^'-* ''^^^^■ 
 lion against al" CO s' "" ^•l""' >">« the corpora- 
 handed to theni ; -:,'":":^""v*-'^'-''"'''"«b' 
 
 action was brotglbv /','•' ''•';•' ''' '"" ''''' 
 corporation joined the7ei.?»1'-""2' ""'' ^he 
 the granting" of y oert — to f ",""^f' "'"""'* 
 ato sea]. After the nc t o ,*- ^""''"- "<= ^^nnn- 
 mayor informed the lef. „ 1 1 ' 'r •^""' ?''*^ 
 DO certificate ha,I been isl , 1 ■""'"^■to"'-" that 
 he would not .s^n , " , j' ' ""'' f';^'«^'l "'at 
 perly advised bv^ounser'^ '"^'^ '"^■"' l"'"" 
 
 -Sh£l,S:aS.iSt'rr'^'" '^^ 
 
 that the defen.lants h d t e L'T'"'' """' 
 have such name struck out " '""''^ '" 
 
 paS?;;£'i:r''---'-'>:bavebeen 
 
 ti£^Khan'?h::i^l^^''-'«f-''''^P>aia. 
 ofanyintent"i:;Z"^;:V-;-V-t...il,y 
 
 cor,,oratiou as phuntitlL" thel^ . ^?V""« "'^ 
 ma,le liable for the Sla ft/. '?"''' ,"^' ''« 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 7ea 
 
 P^oeeedbigT , c i,: , r.V''-''' '° *,'"-■ '^'-'tio" or 
 ^'l-tthe^;efe,;da:t ogbftX'''="''''tl..^ 
 "as not a variation of t f, 7 " '"""^ "PI""' 
 
 -iHchiswiKitR "o,!;:,.S"pi-f'-i',;n,, 
 
 ti'tion of one of an .-n ire tlirtl' ''"''"■■ «"'«ti- 
 
 HI. CoL-.MKKCL.MM. 
 
 
 II. Al'PE.VL. 
 
 .sec°4"Ttl^°r " f^^^^^~C'/ai.,a»t. ] - Under 
 sec. 4_ ot the C ounty Courts Act R s O ,7i, - 
 an appeal lies to the Court of A,,,;,,,; V' '''•1'' 
 order or iidament nf -, r ' . -M'Pi-'al from the 
 ofanis.U^C^ i3^-''^j>:-t'jisposing 
 action in such Countv Co f """''^ '" "" 
 
 application ; and he^.-l , " 7"\' '' J-'^H'i-^l'ing 
 
 ^oiifV. .i^rS'^ ;t^';.!;'''«'-:;f;'ppoaie.i 
 
 Roijtrs, IT) P. R. 241 ' Hmdusun v. 
 
 w^mrrfw-fS^'-'-J-An order' 
 
 application 'of the efe3n;t"Pn' "-'° '"^ '""■'" 
 serve a third party notice.V "''"^ ''"" *>' 
 
 cation of the [hirf - ^^ ' o ^-Jlf 7 '^' "''','"■ 
 W'ler was set aside 1 ,- ,, f . "P""- this 
 Chambers, wh Ob w.';^ ffi''''";"? '''" ^"^'er in 
 
 Cl.amhcrs\.n. bj "■liSonal f '^ l -^'"'^^ "' 
 
 Wealofthe.lef^dan '"-n:U;C h""" ''''' 
 at the same tim,. ,>, , 1 '"'''' V"'"t^' ''"wever, 
 
 ProcecdinLs r,it < I i'" . "'•''^■'' «*">•'"*,' the 
 
 third pa th.s L. ,''1 ^ ?""'", •^''°"''' «''•' the 
 
 ""t n,;diini_/ tt,. ;1- 1 - '"' ^''""•t of Apiju;d 
 
 "pnthe^'Xit ^T,;r?h'°'r'^°f"''^«''pi'^=^' 
 >^^'cHhea';edth::;£iS,?sno^:^ 
 
 -Ho:;^:^"^f °:i^;|7-^ l---- '-ught into an 
 I'V the ori.dii 1 IV"'''"'^^'^'''*"'' '"^'livercd 
 
 ^oij;;terc,ai,;^.^Ln^r::.!rd fJiS;' "^'-- '^ 
 
 •<•-".:•^i:r:;-ice^;-rs-'T•'-^'■^■ 
 
 ni'uy applicatmn '"'' ""' "" -^""i- 
 
 Construction of Rules .STI-.'K'j 
 
 i^tmguished. • -^ ^- J-- I. Ucc. .\. isi,^ 
 
 Pa'-ties, eross-fel e i , S .,V'' ^'''' P''"!'"' 
 i>>'der R.de .M74 be s avi,, "■"" -'^"■'■■" ""-'»'- 
 i'l'lgnient .ecoven^^r'':- -^ f,,''^;-"^'"" "'-" •■"">• 
 
 «l>;mld establish tlUr t'-otf in ''"''in?''' '^'^ 
 action. "" '" '"' "idepcndmt 
 
 celled:- "'' '''^' ""to to be can- 
 
 ~l;dI;;nMJ;;■;:^--^P'■''Pe^ subject of 
 
 p'-"ti«s ami'ti . i\:^.Xt':':::";p '"'"r- '''<^ 
 
 -talilishment of th l"^ ^ ' /'l-T"" "^ *''« 
 tlie introduction of new , ' tV ""' '■"""'■'• 
 
 , It further asked th-U t 'f '^'^'^^''-T- 
 '"■' found entitled o I'e.o , ,0 ' ""!""" ^''«"''' 
 "'•"' defendants I ■ ,!o , Ii '!"'' "'V'^*-'- the 
 "■■dered to pay it --- """"'^''■^■l""" shouhl be 
 
 "-^c'nJ^i'nil Z' Ti J" ,"'"^'' V'« -^'-"li''^ 
 "ther persons cm, ,''';"■'-"• ""''*^'' ^^"''^ •■^T'i 
 'l-tsiiycmnSiim" '"^ ''""«''' '""^'•'^f-: 
 
 "owSSid;;;:;!:'^::',:::;;^,:;-,^^^ 
 S-;;iSrr-:;;;-'^F'^"P 
 
 "P- the note sue" fi'/S^'.^^C'lvi-g then 
 tion that the iihiintif r^ "\tt"-' e was no asser- 
 neys, or any 1 - ?, ""'-■'"■'' '^e insurance 
 
 ofen.lants iiv c nn r laiir' "? ""^^ ^'"^ "^'^v- 
 ti"'', should accou t ' ," :„"t •;''^ ^'-P'"i"- 
 
 '■Snlln^'X;;---- for joining 
 
 : ,.'^''J"'' parties.^ ,'tKS J:' ;'^^™"t "ith 
 'I'ilng the latter ' ^'""t'Te 110 excuse for 
 
 out. 6V«H "; / v'^^ ' ' rV'"f.'-'«'^ )^'« struck 
 
767 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 I 
 
 1\'. I>KMI'RKKKK(IRMis.I(iISIiKR()I!\iinM((1.MIKK. 
 
 Judicature Act AVm"//.] Si ko tin; Jmli- 
 wiUuv Act tlie prouceiliiii; b^' (luiuuri'ui' for mis- 
 joiiidfr i)f jjartiua is no longer av;iilal)le. 
 
 ir- i-ii niinil V. Sorli^lr (Inin-a'r D'Eh-rh-idlr. 
 10 Cli. 1). l.'4(), followu.l. 
 
 Ill im aiaioii upon a mortgigu for forejlo.sure, 
 iiii'uediiitB payiii 'ut, am! imiiiuiliato posse-i.sioiii 
 thu iilaintitr joined as dofuiidants the lieirs-at- 
 l.iw of tliu (leof.ise,! mortgagor (wlio hail died 
 aflL-r t!ie Devolutioa of Kstaljs Act) with tho 
 udiiiiiiistiator of the reil and personal estate. 
 One of the heir.s-at law denuirred to the Sitate'- 
 ment of claim, on the ground tint the aibninis- 
 tratoi' represented the estate in .-dl reganls, that 
 the heirs-atdaw were not bound by any coven- 
 ants of the deceased, and that no relief was 
 claimed or oould be gianted ag.iinst them : - 
 
 Held, that the demurrer w.is in ufl'ect one 
 for misjoinder of parties, and that the proper 
 remedy was a nu)tion under Rule 'Mi {a) to 
 strike out the name of the demurring defen- 
 'i lilt. Cai-lfi-y. C/(trk.-<oii, I.") 1'. K. ;}79. 
 
 •Sc( McKiaii V. Join ■■<, 1!) S. ('. H, 4,S!i, „„/e 
 Tb-J ; Alt V. lloj'kiii.-<, '20 O. 1!. Gbll, anic 7b.'f. 
 
 V. I'ARTICfl.AU I'lidCKKDINCs. 
 
 Lnteki'I-Kaiikk I.sslk.— 5t( Intki:i'Lkadei!. 
 
 -MeiIIAMCn' LiKNS. SVt LlKN, III. 
 
 MoRTCAfiE Actions.— 5ee Mortcaim.:. 
 
 VI. TiiiiU) I'ahth^s. 
 
 DeterininlngQuestloninAction-yi'ep/eci/f.] 
 
 —■J. stored certain goods with the defendant, and 
 the plaintitl' brought this action for possession 
 of the goods and damages for their detention, 
 and replevied them : — 
 
 Held, not a case in which ,J. shouhl be added 
 as a defendant, under Rule 'Al\, and not a case 
 for the application of Kule 32S ; but ratiier a 
 case in which a notice should be served on him 
 under Rule WM), in order to have him bound by 
 the judgment to be given, /'eler.soii v. Fr&ler- 
 /'■/.s, 1,-) I'. R. 3(il. 
 
 Determining Question In Action -.S>f(t/fr 
 Pnfvniiaiire.l—ln an acti(m for specific per- 
 formance by a vendor agiinst a purchaser, the i 
 (juestion raised by the defence, wlictiier a third 
 person has a title to the whole or part of the ' 
 land, is not one which, under Con. Rule 328, ! 
 should be determined liet'.reen the parties to 
 tlie action, or either of them, and the third ■ 
 per- -.1 , and an tnder cannot jjroperly be made ' 
 nicer that Rule and Con. Rule S:K\ adding .such ! 
 ' 'ird person as a defendant. i 
 
 Neither do Con. Rules 329, .301, or 332 apply ! 
 iij such a case. : 
 
 The 'Jonsolidated Rules as to third parties 
 discus.sed. 
 
 bccision of the Queen's iJencli Division 
 reversed. Bei/;/ v. EUi.sun. 14 P. R. 384. 
 
 ■Sft, also, 6'. C, 14 P. K 2G7, ante 7(J5. 
 
 Indemnity — Appi-amiu'e — CjxU. ] - - Wlitrc 
 in an action for negligence, the defendants' 
 served a third party, under Rule ,32!), witl- 
 notieo of a claim for indemnity, but ho did not 
 appear thereti, and no order was made or 
 applied for under Rule 332 : — 
 
 Held, thit he was umler id oblig.itiou to 
 take any proceeding, and was not Imuiid bv 
 the result of the .-U'tion; and his suliseoueiitK. 
 appearing at the t;i:d, and asking ti> be made a 
 defendant, was gratuitous, .-ind he was ii,,t 
 entitled to costs against tin; defendants. dM 
 v. Toirn.ihi/1 of Caiit'lm, lU P. R. 3;t;. 
 
 Indomnlty--- A /)/Mai-aii<:e~Pt<adiii>/ - Trim 
 C'.«.'., J-Wherc ,1 third party was called ui*„i 
 ijy tlie detendants fin- indemnity and appearwl- 
 ami, upon a motion l)y the defendants uirjer 
 Rule 3,32, an order was ma le, against the plain 
 till s objection, directing that the third pi.rty 
 might deliver a defence to the plaintiff's .daim 
 against the defendants, and a defence to the 
 defendants claim for indemnity ; thit the (uiea. 
 tioii of indemnity liet ween the ilefendants slu.iiU 
 be tried after the ti'ial of the plaintiffs' action 
 as the trial Judge might direct; and th.u .ill 
 costs should be reserved : — 
 ^ Held, that the onler was within the uowm 
 |Conterred by Rules 328-33-.', and was a proper 
 I order to make under the circumstances of tiie 
 case. ChrUtk v. Citij of Toronto, 1.5 P. it, j|j. 
 
 Indemnlty--Co-(^/(H(;((;(<.]..-See IValhr v 
 ^ JMrts.M, 14 P. R. 343, ;>o./, Trial, III. 
 
 Indemnity— A,/ »,//on/.] -The plaintilf anj 
 detendant occupied adjoining shops under leases 
 , from the same landlord, the plaintiff having the 
 prior lease. The plaintiff brought this action 
 I to restrain the defendant from obstructin.- his 
 I light and view, and the defendant serveiU 
 I thinl party notice upon the landlord, claiming 
 I under a covenant for (juiet enjoyment, to k 
 , protected against the plaintiff's claim :- 
 
 Held, that the defendant could not call uiwa 
 his landlord to defend him against an uiifoun- 
 dod claim; but if tho plaintiff's claim was 
 well founded, it was by reason of an easement 
 expressly or impliedly granted by his lease, and 
 the defendant took subject to such easement, 
 and could not claim that the landlord covenMitcd 
 with him for quiet enjoyment of that which 
 did not pass under his lease ; and, therefore, 
 whether the plaintiff's claim was well or ill 
 founded, the landlord was not a proper ;iarty 
 to be called on for indemnity under Itule' ;;.'9'. 
 r/wma^i v. Owe:,, 20 Q. K 1). •J2,3, foUowe.l. 
 
 Held, also, that upon a motion by the ilefen. 
 dant, under Rule 332, for directions as to the 
 mode of trial, where a third party had been noti- 
 hed under Rule 329, it was proper to nuke an 
 order dismissing the third party from the action, 
 without any motion on his part. Schifidtrs. 
 Bait, 8 Q. B. 1). 701, followed. Sn-uiliire \. 
 /^;%, 14P. R. 249. 
 
 Indemnity — iVoW^af/e — Comterdaim.\-li 
 an action by the assignee of a mortgage a^aiust 
 the mortgagor aiiil the purchasers from hiin of 
 the 0(|uity of redemption, the latter alleged that 
 they had been induced by the mniig.'.gee to 
 purchase the lands by his promise to ili.scharge 
 the mortgage and accept in its place an assign- 
 ment of another mortgage, which ngrceiiiciit hi 
 
769 
 
 ■ — Apjti'nraitre. — Cu.it.i. ] -- Wliti-e 
 for negligence, the (lefeudanta' 
 il party, uiiilei' Rule 'AM, with 
 .un Imp iiiaumiiity, hut he did not 
 'I, ftnd no order was made or 
 der Rule 332:— 
 he was luider in oliligitioii to 
 jeudin;,', ail I was not l)Oiind by 
 Mil action; and his sul)8equeiitly 
 he trial, and asking t;) he niadua 
 IS gratuitous, and he was ii,,t 
 its against tlie defendants. r,VV, 
 'CaiiuUn, 10 1'. K. .Sit;, 
 
 -—Ap/tmraiice — I'ti'adinij - Trial 
 ere a third pvrty was called upon 
 nits for indemnity and appeared' 
 iiotiiiii Ijy the defendants lupjer 
 rder was nia le, against the plain 
 , direeting that the third pi.rty 
 a defeiiee to the plaintiff's claim 
 jfendants, and a defence t(i the 
 lini for indemnity ; tint the (|uea. 
 ity between the defendants kIkjuM 
 the trial of the phiintilfs' action 
 iilge might direct ; and that iill' 
 > reserved : — 
 
 the order was within the poweit 
 ^ile.s 3l.'8-,S.S-.', and was a jiroptr 
 I under the eireuinstaiices of tlit 
 V. Ci/i/ of Toroiilo, 15 P. K. i\j. 
 
 ■-Co-d,/eiidaiit.] -See IValLr • 
 R. 3 13, po.^i, Tkial, III. 
 
 - Lii iid/ord.] -Tho plaintiff and 
 pied adjoining shops underleases 
 landlord, the plaintiff liaving the 
 'he plaintiff brought tliis actioo 
 
 defendant from obstructing his 
 r, and the defendant served a 
 ice upon the landlord, claiming, 
 mt for (juiet enjoyment, to he 
 st the plaintilf's claim : — 
 le defendant could not call uiwn 
 
 defend him against an mifouo- 
 it if tho plaintilf's claim was 
 t was by reason of an easement 
 diedly granted by his lease, and 
 took subject to such easement, 
 lim that the landlord eovenaiitcd 
 [uiet enjoymeat of that which 
 ider his lease ; and, therefore, 
 aiiitilf's claim was well or iO 
 iidlord was not a proper ;iarty 
 
 for indemnity umler Rule .';.'!). 
 ', -20 Q. H. 1). 22.3, followed, 
 at upon a motion Ijy the defen- 
 le 3,32, for directions as to the 
 lere a third party had been noti- 
 
 329, it waj proper to nrikeaa 
 the third party from the action, 
 tion on Ins part. .Schn-.ider y. 
 ->. 701, followed. Srriii/iiir \: 
 219. 
 
 Mi)rtija(je — ComUerdaim.\—h 
 assignee of a mortgage ajjainst 
 id the purchasers from liiin of 
 emptioii, the latter alleged thai 
 iudlioed by the mortgagee 
 ds by hhs promise to liiscliarge 
 I accept in its [dace ;in assign- 
 mortgage, which agreement ht 
 
 had failed to carrv oni ..„.i i i r. 
 ''^^ife'ned the iJALTtTl}'"}, '(f^,^!'".'";'!-^ 
 wife:— *= = ^" *'"= l-hnntifr, his 
 
 field, that the pnrehasi.r« of tl,,. , „;. 
 m.tentithal to claim -'iMh, '' ..'"'>' "'■''•■ 
 
 ;e;1.:i.h;''''''"'^--''''''^'-'-j4-tni';!;:;i 
 u,c7£;;;,3hen:iii7-r-^:;r'f'''-^' 
 
 tone the •ill,.,, ,1 ' -^ '"^'y to en- 
 
 Indemnity ^- A*,,,/;,,,,,,., , 
 
 •street railwav cai opcT- tl^V l.v ,r'"' "'.^ "^ '' 
 
 «-i.they should lH..^;L^iX•z^n'"' 
 
 ac"u!i'fc; ".:;r^he':eXen'"^V;i^''"'^''l 
 
 xi;)-"-wa.fromt,::,:'U;c;:;,^";;,;;-^i,j 
 
 "■ fliy of Toronto, 14 1>. IX^^t •'""'" ' 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 770 
 
 I --V;of i' «»';,'=«''««»-ai--,sv,/. ,,, Co-!,,;,...- /v. 
 
 ,;.;i.,.iiSl;i,!;™„;-:i;:i;;;s-";,:;;t;:« 
 
 hcrrdit,.,n- rights. ■"'"-''' '"""^ "iid 
 
 'I'he heir exereisiii- the ,•,/,■„;/ .„ . 
 o'lI.V l-ound to reimbTir.. , -•"■'■'■•;-■",»/ ,.s 
 
 Ji^'xUr y. PhUi;^.,^ 2;j i!'"^ \l _.,yi'- l"nchaser. 
 
 '?te f'I^MlT.ATI„XnKAf,„,.vs. 11. 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 A(;ai.nst, 770. '^•^" 
 
 II. l>issiii,rTtoN, 772. 
 
 ««^/^-^.a;/;;:;;,'2o«!^-^:£X"'r^"' 
 
 themLMiiVof.jL' • W:" "-'"';"' "'*'"" 
 «P"1 Act, 5.-, Vu^t .hi.' ''J'' •'; "' ""-■ ^J""i- 
 <lant nun icipal ™, t..ai, , T'^'T ^ ''^•''"- 
 
 ment, ieckso 1?,' '/""''■'' ""^' t-nact- 
 
 persoli^dlu-l s,''^;,;";:f"--"To.ati.,n or j 
 
 f«M')gatenudvov. • *'"^ purpo.^e of en- ' 
 
 'l-'fendant.unle.trXii'j;;;,','^' '''''''''■'.'' 
 %'iiiiist such ad.le.l •,>. 1 '• '''^ " ""-' '^■''^t 
 
 4l s„eh part o 1 : L'Vdrr \' '■'^ ""•','"''"• '" 
 1^ |.^^^ i^nlmun ^. !,..„.„ ,,, (|-„«.er/o;,, ] j p 
 
 23taR:£i''--^-K-«9;i^0A. R.444, 
 
 III. ^--MTv^oK 1.....,,,. ,„ .,„„^„ ,.^^^ 
 
 JV. '•AKrNK,;s.,„..vN„s,:,.,M:.v,.„K,.,,,,,._ 777. 
 V. I'.vhTNUjis,,,,. Um.s, 777. 
 
 Vi. Itl.aiTS AM, I.,.M>„.,TIKS OF PVKTN,,.« 
 
 I. A.TIONS AND PrO,KK.„N,:s Bv AN,. A.Ai.NST. 
 
 __ Appearance- .s'»/;«/,,//,,,/ />.„ ,• 
 
 PARTITION. |i^"^-^-£"^;i;?4:'f-;J''^^ 
 
 ,'f ^rv^-«-ts by Tenant In Co««,„n ._ <f td,';. "C-ln^ °' *'" " "^''^ «— .s'\^7of . m 
 
 •fe GtARANTV AKT. InDHMN,TV-M,x,,,,,, 
 COKJ'OKATIO.NS, XIII. 
 
 ^ a,»,i, n, i,oninion. i 
 
 -I O. R. :.';v,, a/f/c -Jy!) ' 
 
 49 
 
 liHsiiill 
 
771 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 772 
 
 lih 
 
 ollii'i'. Upon motion l>y tlic latter to set iisiile i IVr Ha(,'iirty, C.J.O.— 'I'lio luislianil uas m 
 th" fi])|)i'aiinic(! ami siibstMHiciil, indoceiliiigM : - • ' ' 
 
 Helil, tliat till! a|)|ii'.iiMm;(' and tlio iilaiiitifl's' 
 judgment totnulcd tlicicon weri' irregular. 
 
 After tlie jiidgment had lieiMi set aside, Huveral 
 creditors of tlie ilet'endants olitaiiiod jiidgnientH 
 against tliem and place 1 writs of A', /'k. in the 
 silerifl"s liandg, nnder nldeli lie .sold the defen- 
 dants' goods. Upon a motion by tlie plaintitls, 
 made in tlieirown ai'tion and also in the several 
 aotioiiK in whieli judgnienls iiad l)eeii olit:iiiied, 
 for an order dire. 'ting the sherill' to pay the 
 proeeeds of the sale into (,'<iurt, inste id of mak- 
 ing the nsual entries nnder tile- Creditors' Relief 
 All, in onler to jireserve the priority of tlie 
 
 lilaintilfs judgment, in ease it should be restored a partner, cannot be proceeded against liy an 
 upon appeal : - order for eoniinittal for non-attcndancc on a judr. 
 
 Held, that there was im power, upon the plain- : ment summons, 
 tills' application. Id interfere with tlic sherill's i Decision of Jloyd, C, -iri O. Tl. ."iT.'i, reversed 
 proceedings upon writs n{ ji. /a. regularly \n\ In re lltid \. Uraham BroHn ,:•<, -Hj {). R, l-Ji;. ' 
 liis hands. .\!a.i<,n v. C'lnipw and Smith, 15 I 
 R. R. 4 IS. 
 
 fact the tirm itself ; his liability for the dehig 
 of the lirni was established ; and it was not 
 clearly wrong to tind that lie was a member df 
 the tirm. ilul, at any rate, it was a ciuxe in 
 which the power to make all neci'ssary aiiii.ii.i- 
 ments could and should be exercised. 'Slandini 
 llitiik of Cdiiiidii V. Friiid, \'> v. R. A'AH. 
 
 Judgnaent--A'.Mi')(/;o/( — Jiid./ineiif Siimiii',i,. 
 — Diriniiiii Court.] — A nieiiilier of a partm^shii,, 
 against which a judgment has been reeovereil ji, 
 a l)ivision Court in the linn name, who has m.; 
 been personally served with the snmnioiH, an.i 
 has not admitted himself to be or been adjii(lia.,| 
 
 Discovery — 'Jnrisi-l'laihtiiJ'.] — See. F 
 iiujhaut V. /.Jii.<'n; 14 1'. R. 1 1'-_', ante -lUl. 
 
 Judgmenz — K.c. riitinii.] — Where an apjdi- 
 cation is made under Itule ,S7(J for leave to issue 
 execution, upon a judgment against a linn, 
 ugainsl an alleged menilier of the linn, who has 
 not admitteil that lie was and has not been 
 adjudged to lie a ])artiier, and who was not 
 served as a ])artner with the writ of summons, 
 and who disputes his liability, therc^ is 
 power in a Omrt or a •ludj'e, 'under Rule 
 or otherwise, to summarily determine the (jues- 
 tion of his lialiility : but an issue must bo 
 directed. 
 
 'frnndiit V. jraiihnrd, I'i R. R. 010, over- 
 ruled. Stdiii/iiri/ Ikiiik of C'tinada v. Friitd d' 
 Co., 14 R. R. ;i.-i.->. 
 
 ' Judgment Against Firm — l'ri,r,,,i;,i, 
 Aijainsl All<:(/((1 J'arlifr.]—Si i Ilai/ v. I.-<ln4n 
 ■oth- i 24 O. K. 407, -i'i A. R. 12, 20 .S. C. R. 70, ;/&,' 774 5.' 
 
 Nominal Corporation— .SCi(/(/.s' o/Corjiuralm 
 -I'tirtiti — Application to Add Co-pnrt/i(}:~i,\^ 
 
 In the case of a nominal cor[)i^ratioii which In, 
 no legal status as such, the ostensible c(a']jora. 
 tors are partners ; and their liability as partner 
 on the contracts ot the com[iaiiy is a joint, iuhl 
 not a joint and several, lialjiliiy. 
 
 Where sonic but not all of the eo-contracton 
 no ' are sued in an action, they are entitled of riglii 
 .")0 , to have all the others within the jnrisdiotioii 
 added as defendants; and, the plea of abatcniM, 
 having been abolished, the niethoil of exceiition 
 is ))y prompt application to the Court uirlcr 
 Rule H24. 
 
 As to the representatives of dci'easeil or in- 
 solvent partners, there is a discretion to adder 
 not. (•ildi:r.-<Uirt v. llalfour, Ij 1'. K. -Ji);). 
 
 Partnership Name— .('■/(Of) A// One I'lninlif- 
 Ami ndim ui.\—A person carrying on busiuess 
 alone, in a name denoting a partnershiii, carind'. 
 bring an action in that name. Wliere, hoHuver, 
 such name consisted of his surname, prefacti 
 by the initials of Ins Christian names, ami fol- 
 lowed by the words "and Co.: " — 
 
 Held, that these words in the style of fauw I 
 
 in an action were mere surplusage, or, if iin', 
 
 they should be struck out ; and, as the ini.<ake 
 
 was tririiug, and no one was misled or ati'pdcJ 
 
 'nient at the trial slmuM h:iv- 
 
 J/. 
 
 Judgment — Excrntlon—Itsun — Amendment.'^ 
 —Tlie latter jiart of Rule S70, providing f(U' an 
 application for leave to issue, upon a judgment 
 against a linn, execution against some person as 
 a member of the firm other than those men- 
 tioned in sub-sees. (//) and \() of the Rule, 
 applies only where there is in trutli a ]>artner- 
 sliiji which is bound by the judgment obtained 
 against the tirm in consecpieiicc' of the service 
 of the writ of suninions upon one of its mem- 
 bers or its nianager. 
 
 Where there is in fact no partnership, no one 
 can be bound by a judgment .against an abstrac- ' by it, an ameiidiiie 
 tion calleil " a tirm,'' exci-pt the jierson -who has : been granted as of course. Mason \ 
 been served under the provisions of Rule 20(i, '8 Tnues L. R. 805, distinguished, 
 and who has appeared or pleaded in the action. | Thompson, 10 R. R. 510. 
 
 And whe're the wife of the manager of the i 
 business of a so-called tinn, who was shewn by; Pleading — .s'/j/Zioeiic)/ of Travcr^, .] 
 the subseipient proceedings to have been merely i Mi/liit-t v. Jarkxon, 2;{ .S. C. "R. 485, /wv' 7l)j. 
 a trustee foi' him of the profits, was jiersoualiy ' 
 served as a defendant with jirocess in ;in action 
 against the linn upon a liill of exchange, and 
 det'euded :— 
 
 Hehl, that, as there was in fact no partnev- 
 sliij), an issue directed to determine whether 
 the husband was liable to have execution issued 
 against him as a member of the tirm, upon a 
 judgment recovered in the action against the 
 firm, must be found in favour of the husband ; 
 and no amendment could be made which would 
 enable the Court to tletcnnine otherwise; 1:1a- 
 garty, C. J.O., dissenting. j tary assignment by one of the partners of to I 
 
 "jriilf, 
 l.aiiij V. 
 
 Iiu- 
 
 Slander of Firm — y?/;//i? nf Artioii.]-S'.i 
 BricLir v. CampbcU, 21 O.'R. 204, ante ;ij;i. 
 
 n. DiSSOLUTIOX. 
 
 Assignment of Interest of Partner— /V 
 
 •cs.siiin of I'lirtimrfihip /'rcntixes — Tarernl.io:m] j 
 —A partnership for .a definite term, whjoli liii 
 lot expired, can be put an end to by thovolm- 
 
772 
 
 ty, C.J.O.—'l'liL' lnisl):in(l v\as m 
 iUelf ; liii lialiility for the diik), 
 was fstalilislii'd ; uml it was not 
 to tind that he was ii iiieiiiliur oi 
 It, at any late, it was a cane in 
 vol- to make ali necessary anieii>|. 
 lid shouhl lie exercised, ■^frtiolnrd 
 ula V. FrimI, i:> !'. ll. 43S. 
 
 — Jjxeci(/io)i — J III h/ men/ Si'mnnn,, 
 »/•'.)— A inendjur (if a partiKTsliij,, 
 a judgment lias lieen ii'euveri:il In 
 irt in tlie liim name, who has no; 
 ly served witli the suninKin--, hm 
 ted liimself til lie iir lieen adjudge'! 
 mot he lueieeeded against hy nu 
 littal for non-attendunue on a juili;- 
 
 M. 
 
 r.oyd, C, -i.') (). U. .")7;!, reversed. 
 jruluim lirullii rs, l'G (). K. l-Jtj. 
 
 Against Firm — /'rurinfuii 
 III l'ai-lifi:\—Sii J!, 11/ V. I.tlii!,t,r 
 2 A. R. ]•_', -Hi .s. C. I^ 7b, ;/&,/ 774 5.' 
 
 r)VX>ova,tion~Stiilit:i of Viyrjiiirahr< 
 iplimlioii ti> Ai/il I'li-pnrtiitr.i,]- 
 a nominal eoriioration wlneli Im, 
 
 as sueli, tlio o»tensiljh' euriiors- 
 :r8 ;_and their Ualiility as iiarlntrs 
 ts of tlie company is a jomt, un.l 
 I several, liability. 
 
 but not all of the co-enntractor 
 action, they are entitled of righi 
 e otliers within the jurisdiotioii 
 lants; and, the plea of aliatemm, 
 lolishcd, the method ot exee[itioD 
 
 application to the Court umltr 
 
 ■preseutatives of deceased or in- 
 I's, there is a discretion to add or 
 tee V. Jla/J'viir, ],") I'. R. •_'!«. 
 
 ) Name— .-f rfion hi/ Out rhihitiij- 
 -A person carrying on biisiuo.-s 
 ic denoting a partnershiji, eariiMi'. 
 in that name. Where. lioHcver, 
 isisted of his surname, jirefacM 
 of his Christian names, aud ful 
 ords "and Co.: " — 
 leso words in tlie style of cause 
 jre mere surphi.sage, or, if wf., 
 struck out ; and, as the niistase 
 d no one was misled or atfccteJ 
 idment at the trial should have | 
 j of course. J/n\o;/ v. Mmjruh', 
 . 805, distinguished. /.ami v. 
 ;'. R. 510. 
 
 Siijfirieiic)/ of 7'/Yi(,'C)'.-i.] — >'■:■: 
 <oii', 2;{ .S. O. 'R. 4S5, //uv' 7iW. 
 
 rirm — I!i'/hf of Aiiii,ii.]-Sii \ 
 IjMI, -21 O. R. 204, ante .Sj;i. 
 
 773 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 774 
 
 II. DiSSOLL'TIOX. 
 
 - Of Interest of Partner— f* 
 
 :rnhlp I'renilxe.^ — 'J'arern A/cc/w-i j 
 > for n- definite term, whitdi Ins 
 1 be put an end to )jy the volun- 
 : by one of the partners of hi) I 
 
 ■'•>''■' Mi:,:l„.ll V A/,/,,,. .11 /•» „ ^ 
 I or., ,>..v/ 77,;. "" '• ■^'■■"""M, -KS. c. U. 
 
 interest in the business .it i,: 
 
 atthein-stanceo :,"^, ; "«•" '"-^''"'ce or 
 
 ^.fthe other partner. ''• "^""""' *'"-' "'" 
 
 And where a iiartiiersl,!., ,.. 
 t.i, the .assignor I e ,J ^he ,s ' ?"■'"" '"' ''■'"' 
 
 <„ demand of possession. '""'"^ '"'"^^' to<|Uit 
 
 U here the holder of a tavrn i; 
 i"t" P;u-tnership with anot e r .".t' ," ""T'' 
 iH'a^^igns an mterest in hi ' Av ,' " "''""" 
 Kud, assignment is not a a. i , '•"^".'^•■-■■^, 
 l.i.siae.s vvitlun tlie , eanb / t "''"''''l.' "* '''^ 
 
 Lupior License Act. R^o\:^^^;^*" r^/'- 
 
 no-yv,p,M.eatransferoftheiice;.i''"''''''""\ 
 
 uniler tlie eoiistruetion of il,,.' ., ,. ^ 
 
 a,'rcument in this ease, the n'v , t, r ?'"fM 
 
 ^ikean undivided -med al in eU th ?' r"' '"" 
 l('.,«'/in)o/,' V. (17(6,./,,. iVyV "'"''''■'^"«'-'- 
 
 -'.-.0. 1!. 55!»: ' "'"^'•■''•'' V. \V,.lhroot,\ 
 
 Jin;. it 47(r" ''''''''■"''''" •'^■^'^'""'■q'orted 
 Registered Declara <■)«>, ;• • . 
 
 •''■'■''";/. ] -S.i. cT^w, * f "° V ;'"'''"/''^ ^'"«''•"■ 
 
 >-■*•. I.. U. _'o.J, iiiu,. 4|,s. 
 Simulated Dissolution — //, / 
 
 -cv.,/,vo,w.i-i„ Ap!.""uso"^/"s"\';^""'' "■'>■" ■ 
 
 from the lirm of M, I !.'. ' ''■ • ■^''-■'- '''tired 
 
 - ■. , ... .-I ,111, ij, 
 from the lirm of .M,.|^ |. 
 
 i^^'iif-wiiichhewaiti ;;';;::;;; ';-:-i'- 
 "■-'»;,"'•■» t" >>•-■ constituted' ly -'"m'V '^' '■; 
 
 :i"i)llar. It was ■< .,, , i / ' •^''-•f-. and 
 
 «i...nldrankaR tt^^li^V; """l'^',"^!' -.pilai 
 
 t:'e:u^yolibusine under t *:"'■''' ''"'•'^'•^"'''^ 
 
 '>i''-'l-^U»eeeml,ei^lss., r:i'''xV,''''' "''""' 
 iSthXovember, ISSi; 'm/., '.,■/ -^ ^■'^- ''''-■'I on 
 '^iteas to iiropcrtv h,l "'"■'' ^^■"" ^'as sep- 
 '-Asofhot/ihi'inl^'/i'Vthr'"''^''' 'i- 
 •S'^ment was entered in. . ,'"'''' ''"^"O- •■'" 
 
 ;-ad,nittcdto :\hrh;V';"-"''''''''''^'>^ 
 
 ilieuewiirm w-isdeel,, 1 ' , " '"'"' ^<> ^'^^'-•■\. 
 
 "■J.S. .McI..aMd by\Ni:;:"j"'^;"\\t'«^-tato 
 were contested bv the \' ..I, , •' i> ''•'''•• '^'"''y 
 
 '"-,ingj.rou„,ilton;::^l:;'!'7'S''-'t'' 
 
 £,;;nheagreeu.r:^''i^r-;[-;-l.e 
 uLited ;J ' ' *""* "'" '''>i«"lution was sim- i 
 
 "fthe/irmofS (' t ( • . "' "i /"■" "■ '»«mber 
 itii'-' h'rm of e' & r,r ". ■"'*'°''""'''n'jerof 
 
 I "".^""y tor the 'use of k-T .'" i"'^''^'- *" «^ 
 inissory note wl.iel, l, , ' "" ■"'"'" t^ Pro- 
 
 the other I r„ , '''^f^"-"! with the name of 
 
 '«"k which discoun 1 H I'? """-•"■'•'' "f th--- 
 writing of E w ,'-'\'''^''':'^''^''«wthohan(l 
 
 ,f-iu-td.':iing:'' --•;-''-ki.-lh^ 
 
 , !"'''<'-'r^ of tlie note C.lea ,,,'".' ■?°'""'"^ '^" 
 i I'y I'^. in fraud of I,; i"""'^'' '■'"'t; it was made 
 
 '-."^king of the mte •„,";; !"^\--"'t''-nzed the 
 
 I tions submitteil a to t I T\ ""'^'^'' •!»««- 
 
 "f want of autlnnity.-^ knowledge of the bank 
 
 ''^i'^Mtkliowledgc lie'"'" ''"V '"^'^ ""ffi- 
 !'''""es for his°ow''' ';,^; ;',."f '= ''"^ I'i,"-t'>«rB' 
 !'"|ii"'y its to autlimit' . V ^ ■'""' ^^'-•'" "" 
 '>"l"i.;y. tlie bank could not reeoe"*'' ""''^" ""'^^ 
 
 «;.^h!;!ri!^°^°°^:^°,°-fartner.]_Where 
 •-"'^ t" a partnersi ■"■'"'>'"'« plain- 
 
 ■l;^'V'...lants ,, to ' ,^""-^f '"=' "f the^ two 
 tl"-' ■■otiring'pu'tier e, ;"'."'"^'"" -^f the firm, 
 l"'i-« of tim .' ds that H '' ".' • " .''"'"'" f"'- th*^ 
 
 partner alone, ■flu nil ' -i ^'"' '''^'""■ining 
 ''- '-t that the pSi,.:'i.r;-''f this wut 
 ••"■■count f„r these mm , • .'''^^'"''-■'•eJ an 
 
 which the reu a nb "'";"= T'"' "^''"'^ ^o^ 
 i to the .^'n.ainiii.'t, ''"■•/''''"" ^^"^ "^'^e. 
 
 --I't-.i p'-"Mirss,',;y' ;,;.;"; ,;'^-'----'« had 
 
 ^igiiuil in the tiiin i,.,,,, ■.. , t''" amount, 
 that the lirm w, lie', ■' '""' ,""^ knowledge 
 it'K partner onl; ; _!"" ^-'""Posed of the rcnait 
 
 i'l^lil, >"«iilhcient to"shew an ■,,„. 
 as was set up ; f,,,. i|,..- t' ,7/ ''°"-'«'>«=ut such 
 t<-'»t with anS- ate I '^,,' " ■^ '"T- '»"''" '^"'"'i«- 
 
 '""k t'-iK'thdefcV, •/;:;■ I'r*'''''^' i'^"-' *<> 
 
 ■'"t ''I-' puid at mat 1 ■ t\ n '" "'"'"'' '"'''""W 
 
 '^SSte?;°i-'fr'';oftiie(.un,., 
 
 tliut the luonevs w f, , "'''•'''"I' was simulated; 
 '"•\I'-^^..(. SNId' V,' ''•'"•;'.'■"'' *" ">" "Wing 
 
 'kjio«itc,l liv l.riiusb „ '•"' ''T''^^- """"•■Vs 
 
 '^■»-""l tiiat the I .if 'i''"'"'"^ -contrary to I 
 
 r '"""lui tlicir ri'rlirs .,' ;."'-^''t''>i' being in ; 
 
 1 to treat th;\niri,tft"^/"%''^"l^'-'-^ 
 , •^"'^'I'^^l'to.Nbyrea.o oft'i, "" ^'''" "« their 
 iclainiwithaml avii '^.^^^k'^ 
 the partnership from the' ,"'^'i"'° "^"''ts of 
 I '"I a««ig.nnent for 1 e C^r"/''^''-««f ""der 
 which it was recited tli./f,"^ '"-editors, in 
 Porson coniposb fi" , , '^■.;; '-• -''« the only 
 'lant had relied an 1 i '""' that the defen- 
 
 •""l election, an I Ic^ wtl 'ir'" *'"-'»• conduct 
 t'om suiug him as a^Jn'r^''^"'' ^^'"PI^ 
 
 tl.oSiSthad'acw'r"^"'^^''''°''-*hat 
 
 theplaint.l,V^:^;/VresSef~- 
 *' ' • ' , y^coppel arose. 
 
 "t the plaintilfs' actio,. ^ ^ '''''•^ '^^ ''eai 
 •^-ause-thepliLtrZln^hltXli::^ 
 
 an 
 
775 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 778 
 
 tilcotion not to look to him, and lie liiiil no ri^-lit tlurciii t\w (|iU'Htioii ulittlu'i' the dcfendnnt w ,. 
 to unsnnif ;in election froTii what they did, nor i a nieinher of the linn so as to lie hound hy ii 
 t<» ael ax if wucli an eleetion had been made, I j\idgnient. C/<iH- v. Cnlleii, !• (,>. K. I). .:; 
 Hay V. IMsfu; -Jl O. I!. 4U7, '.'L' A. H. at p. 17. | followed. Hay v.MiV< //."J A. K. I'J. Allim,. 
 AfUnnud, 2(i 8. C. R. 7U. •_•(! .s. C. 1!. 79. 
 
 Incoming Partner — A atumpiiiui af LiahilldeK 
 — Uiillits at' ('riililur 'J'liisl Xiirnt'n)n.\—A 
 fimi consist in;,' of two iiersons dissolved |iait- 
 nershii), the retiring- iiartner reteivinj^ a rmndiei' 
 of iiromissory notes in payment of his share in 
 the business, wliieh notes lie intlorsed to the 
 plaint ill' H. 'I'he contii.uinf,' partner ot the linn 
 afterwards entered into a partnership with ()., 
 the defendant, ami transferred to the new lirni 
 all the assets of his Imsiness, his liabilities, in- 
 eludiuf^ tlie ahove mentioned |iromi.ssory notes, 
 being assumed by the eo-j)artnershipand ( haryed 
 against him. The new tirm j)ai(i two of 'he 
 notes and interest on others, and nuide a |)ro- 
 posal for an extension of time to jiay the w hole, 
 which was not entertained ; — 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal. 17 A. II. 4.-)(>, .»»// num. Ihinli rsoii v. 
 Kil/t;/, and of the (^Micen's liench division, 14 O. 
 R. i;{7, I''ournler. J., lissenting, that the agree- 
 ment between tim contintiing partner and the 
 defendant did not make the defendant a tru.stee 
 
 Partnership by Estoppel.!— When a jk ;- 
 
 not in fact a partner, anthorizes his name i 
 used in the liini nami' ot a partnership, tin, 
 a holding out of himself as a paitner to am 
 who kn<iWH or has reason to believe lli.it 
 represents the name of the person so anil, 
 ing its use; but a partnership by estopp ; 
 by h(]|ding out will not be <'reated if tin : 
 position of atl'air.s is Uuown to the creditor. 
 
 .Judgment of the Common I'leas Divisinn, 
 O. It, (iSS.S, reversed ill jiart. McLean v. r - 
 •-'(I A. 1!. «iO. 
 
 Partnership by Estoppel. |- Action a-,i.; 
 Ihc dcfend.int S. W ., as a member of the Im,, 
 S. W. Si, Son, on jiromissory notes made Kv : 
 firm in favour of the iilaintill'. The d.:, , 
 was that the defemlant had retired froii! : 
 firm long before the notes were made, aiu', 
 though his son had carried on the lin,.:i,. 
 under the same lirm name, he, S. W., \ifA ■ 
 interest in it ; also that at the most he ecir,:.'. ' 
 
 of the former's |iro|i(rty for the payment of liis liable oidy in respect to the business of a i 
 liabilities, and the act of the defendant in pay- 
 ing Home of the ncjtcs did not anuaud to a nova- 
 tion, as it was proved that the plaintiff had 
 obtained and still held a juilgment against the 
 maker and indorscr of the notes in an action 
 thereon, and there was no consideration for such 
 novation. (Mn.niti v. Ilotili ivmi, \^S. C. J{. (iOS. 
 
 country store, w Inch was the business n: ■. 
 
 firm before he withdrew, ami not tor tli„: 
 ' biyiiig and selling real estate and inve.-tii.' 
 
 .--ecurities, which business his son aleui 
 
 carried on, and in respect of which the ini!,.: 
 
 ([uestion were given. 
 I _ The tiial Judge gave judgment fortlie]ii,: 
 j tiff, Mnd the Court of Ai)])eal atlirmed ii, ii;; 
 Incoming Partner — Coniiniit uf Inilaniii!// ,iu^ th.-it public notice of the dissolution (^f'al 
 —■Annilliiintiif o/'.]— Upon a covenant by an partnership between the ilet'cndant ami 
 incoming partner to indemnify and save harm- , son had not been given ; that the <lefeiii::.;:l 
 less a retiring partner against the liabiliti-.'S, was aware that his name still appeared Mil 
 contracts, and agreements of the lirm, no cause ^ niember of the tirm on the bill-hcails aii4 si 
 of action accrues to the covenantee merely ■ other ways; that he was awari; of the ^divil 
 because an action to recover iinlii|uidated dam- i nature ot the new business cai'ried on by iii- 
 ages for an allegeil breach of .ngrecment has been i in the firm name ; and that the dcfcmliiut ».| 
 brought against the lirm. Mnvhinti v. Miir/.i/- therefore liable on the n<itcs. 
 can, 19 A. R. 7-'9, and /.tll/i v. Fndaiiii, 24 U. ' Tlie Supreme Court of Canada afMniii'd::! 
 C. R. l.Ti, distinguished. ' ' 
 
 iSuch a covenant is not assignable by the cove- 
 nantee to a jilaintitr suing the lirm so as to 
 enable him to join the ('ovcnantoras a defendant 
 in the action to recover against hinr the damages 
 for vhich the tiini may be ultimately held 
 responsible. Sutherland \. IT; Wi/-, "il A. "U. -Ji-'S. 
 
 I judgment of the Conrt of Appeal. Il'i'i; 
 WUtUimx, 24 S. C. R. 71.'^. 
 
 Judgment Against Firxa.--Aitii,n thrritm 
 aijain.st Allnjul rarln(r—lli-< Jnitica/n—J'nr/- 
 
 Promissory Note of Partnership— Z>i- 
 
 /ion — iJi.ti-lianji of t'o//a/triil Sc'urilii—ly 
 of ltd! i-i III I I'lir/ni i:] — A. ai:d I!., pMiiini- 
 business, boi'rowed money from C., giving' i; 
 as security their joint and several piniiiif-^ 
 note ami a mortgage on partnership pi.iii:' 
 The ijartuership liaving been dissohcil, A. .1 
 
 nemhip hif L'stopjiel.]— An action was brought ! sumed all the liabilities of the ti 
 
 against a firm in the firm name as makers, and ' 
 an individual as indorscr, of a note, and was 
 dismissed as against the indorscr on the ground 
 that he had indorsed at the reipiest of the hold- 
 ers for their accommodation, judgment being 
 given against the iirni : — 
 
 Held, revei-siiig the judgment of .'^treet, J., 
 24 O. R. 497, that the dismissal of this actum 
 
 ami 1 
 
 tinued to carry on the business alone. .\r4 
 the <lissohilion, C. gave A. a discluuge dfi; 
 mortgage, but without receiving ]iiiynienl '■:: 
 debt, and afterwards brought an action a;ai:l 
 B. on the iiromissory note : — 
 
 Held, atfirining the decision of the Coui; 
 Appeal, 20 A. RM)9.'>. tli.it the note liavinglr| 
 given for the mortgage debt, C. coiilil ii"t~ 
 .•over without being prepared, u)ioii pnyia 
 
 was an answer to an action on the judgment, in 
 
 which it was sought to )>rove that the indorser i to convey to IJ. the'inort gaged lands, wliiih 
 was, as regards the plaintiffs, a partner by ! had incapacitated hiiuselt from doing :- 
 estoppel, and therefore bound by the judgmeiit i Held, also, that, by the terms of tliedi?* 
 against the firm : — j tion of the partnership, the relations lietm 
 
 Held, however, affirming the judgment of j A. and Ii. were changed to those ot ])iinii: 
 Street, J., that the plaintifi's had the right to and surety, aiul it having been fouiiil at : 
 jproceed by action on the judgment and to try | trial that C. hud notice of such eliaiii,'' 
 
 Ac 
 
 p« .-i 
 Wiie: 
 
 Bri 
 
 fartii 
 
i|iii'stiiiii whttlioi' the (lefciidftiil i 
 >t tijr linn H(i itH tu 1)0 l)<)iiiiil l>y 
 
 t'lurk- V. Ciilkii, il (,t. I!. 1). ;: 
 'III // V. Ishi^li r, '^1 A. K. 1 U. A Hi i n, 
 7!i. 
 
 hip by Estoppel.!— Wlicn ii pi i - 
 
 \ pai'tiu'i', iiiitlii>ri/t's liJH iiiuiit' I 
 
 liilll MIIIIIC cil' ,'l l>ilt'tlU']'slli|l, till ; 
 
 lit (it liiini^rll' us 11 )iiirtiii'r to iiii\ 
 (ir liiiH ri'iisciii to liclievu lli.ii 
 liu ii:iinc 'it tlic |icrs(in so iiiilliii 
 ; liiit M |)iiitiiei'slii|i liy L's(o|i|i( I 
 imt will not ln! cifiitfil if I In- I, 
 ill'iiirs is known to tlie ci'i'ilitiir. 
 
 I of till' ("(million I'lciis Division, 
 fvi'i'duil in pait. J/cLeini v. ("'i 
 II. 
 
 ihlpby Estoppel. |- Aition ,ilm;i 
 lit .S. W'., as il iiii'iiilifr of the linn 
 1, oil iironiis.sory notes nnulf liy i.. 
 rmr of tliu jilaintiH'. 'I'lio ili'f.,, 
 Ill' ili'fenilaiit liiul retii'ud froin ; 
 fore tlio noti'n wiTe iiiiide, am!, 
 son had tanii'd on the Ini.-:!,' 
 line linn name, he, S. \V., Ii;:i 
 t ; also that at the most lie eoi; ' 
 
 II lesjieet to the luisineM.sof a l.'ii i;, 
 I'e, vhieli was the luisines.s n! ■_ 
 he witlidiew, and not for tl:,,' 
 selling real estate and inve.-lii. ■ 
 vliieli liiisiiiess his .son uloiic „ 
 iiid in resjieet of wliieli tliu jm!,. 
 le ;.;iveii. 
 
 Jiiili,'e gave jiidi;nieiit for tlie jii; 
 I Court of Ajipeal alliiined ii. i! 
 hlic notice of the dis.sohition i.f ■; 
 
 hetween the defendant ami ; 
 t heen given ; that the deftiiiirl 
 that Ins name still appeareil iiiil 
 the tinn on the hill-iieails aini il 
 
 that he ■was aware of the ,l,'iiivi| 
 3 new business carried on liy 
 laiiie ; and that the defeiiihiiu ».| 
 hie on the notes, 
 •tine ('(lurt of Canada alliriiii.il 
 
 the C'oiirt of Apjieal. U'i'!' 
 
 1 s. c. K. ir.i. 
 
 ry Note of Partnership— Z*i" 
 
 '■.'/' of Collotti-iil Scrurihi—tt' 
 I'lirhii >:] — A. ai:d I!., paiinn- 
 ■rowed money from C., giviii.' i.:-^ 
 their joint and sevi I'al lll■o^lif^■ 
 mortgage on partnership iiriiiirt'l 
 ship having heen dissoh <iil, A. li 
 he liahilities of the tiriii am! kJ 
 irry on the husiness alone. Mil 
 ion, C. gave A. a dischai,L'e (>l!:-| 
 it without receiving payiinnl i 
 :erwards bronght an action .'i.^aiifl 
 iniissory note : — 
 iiiing the decision of the Cci;!! 
 L. Rrti!)."). that the note liaviiigit-J 
 e mortgage debt, C. coiilil ii"t>i 
 It being prepared, iijioii piiycaJ 
 
 h). the nioi'tga,ued lands, wlikii-j 
 tatcd liiniself from doing:— 
 
 that, by the terms of tlieilif»i 
 partner.iliip, tlie rehitioiis hulM 
 vere changed to those ot pniifi? 
 and it having lieen found at 3| 
 . had notice of such chuiige, s 
 
 frli'vso of the principal, A., dis,h.iP',., 
 s;iiv V. from the lialMli.y,,,, the d^^^ 
 
 V. M- DoiMtll, •_'.{ ,S, ('. |>, (j;j- 
 
 PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 Ii., the 
 
 . ( I/ImiII 
 
 IV 
 
 'AUIN,;Ksim'.\N„Sl:,.,M(.v.n;|.;sT.lTE. 
 
 Alignment by Firm for Benefit of Oredl- 
 
 liytlie Queens ] end. Division, that ,„ a. 'i' ^ 
 jiiii'at under K. .S. (). e|, i..,, 'f,„. ,,,'", 
 
 i.";::it of creditors, niadel^r Ii, ::,trT; 
 
 tnWiug partners „p, n, the words mwitionedi 
 Un- 4, ^ests ,n the as.„g„ce all llu: prop,.,.ties 
 |« I of the partners, several as well as .^n 
 Kat.hylheCourtof Appeal,that.l,el,.i ; 
 
 .1 ,1 covenant by a third person to indcnniifv o . 
 
 ,-..tl,e partners against',, mortgag .r, . 
 
 Assignment by Partner for Benefit „«■ 
 
 Credltor8-A',y,A. uflWi,,,:,:,,?^ cv,^w' ,°' 
 IUI,..n ana.ss,gnnie„th,r the benetit of creditor. 
 I. mielehy an assignor carry in. „„ businc , 
 ll,mi.sclf, creditors having claims against h ,n f, 
 Lo.i.lssohl tea firm n, which he w"is fornic y , 
 Ipirtiicr are entitled t,i rank against his est a, 
 Ira, .Wy with cre,ht,u_s having^hiims for go,u 
 IsiiM to the assignor iihuie o ""is 
 
 Scrlion .-. of ii. S. (). cli.lLM do,.s not aimlv 
 
 l^.s,K■|,at.■se,b,,, o,,Iytothee,iseof u S- 
 \m who has both sepiirate estiite ■. : *". 
 
 778 
 
 i;i.™,.;M:U;i;:c'u--;;,=:;;r£ 
 
 »«iu.«„,,„,,,,i,,iJ,,;,;;;, ,■,•;;;. «... 
 
 ^. Costs In Partnership Actions. 
 
 \i. .'ilS. 
 -Sec Costs, 
 
 Discovery — , | 
 
 "zfZu'^r'-^-'^' ""^ 
 
 Execution against Partner -5, /■.,„■. ,„■ 
 
 UI''tr/ii( i-x/ii/) 'rail' liu \ r„.i,... •■••■"ii iij 
 
 Laii.t an (iidivi,/,,a/^rtiH.£,,;:i^'r ■'''''■' 
 
 ri,iMr,,.ershipg,,o.is and seul; '':;;:;;:;: 
 
 fli-litni- s share, whatever mav bi. H,,. .l.'o' i.' 
 |^lneharisetliercaf,er;and'^heJ i ;;:"^:;? 
 lb.m:i, c no diderenee in ,|,i,. respect /„:i''' 
 
 Partner as Suretv r'.v... ,, 
 
 "^^ share in the partnership, il;;^',,,;e .;,;:!' 
 pirn er„.ss-exainination ,„ his atlidu it „f ' 
 
 Go.nio,i,toaisch,.setlieliabilte';rtl^ ur 
 
 Distribution of Aaqefn I i . . 
 
 ■■^<ti"Ms, in theahs, „f^f,t *,"•.,;. /"■ '•■"••■'"'•Hhip 
 ■ siicli as niiscondiiei , ,■ , ,■^1"'"''' '-■H'-unistanceH 
 
 '"1 I'litv, and lastK n ' I" "''' «""«es«- 
 
 vemher, l,ss( ,; ' •(\7''"/'" ^"•'"'°"-]-In No. 
 '"•-■'-".. into I'sted in ?','""'' "* '^ '■""/'•e-^.«r., 
 ■■'^^tionsin ,ec , X '","" T^' '■"^■''^'^ *'•"'«- 
 I'. S M ,1,^ ", ■^'"'"■■^■■•>l. I'Hei'ted by one 
 
 '■ -I. .>i. In December, bSSli c l> k. l^ 
 
 -;ss:t"-L^ii::::s;«*™3-; 
 
 V. I'..vRT.VEiisim. h\sm. 
 
 framhilont, 
 
 restrained ' 
 
 of the diirc.^-ent rea .st',.,' ',. " •"' ''" account 
 eonfonnalily to t he te 1 ■ ' "''^-^''''-'^ they ha<l 
 'I'otliisacthm a lei ,, . "'" r"""''=-'e«'-e. 
 file.1. The ."u e iu ( "!'"!'.'^"«;^t'"" was also 
 
 -tioi, oii'th^^'^o ,', r .^'"^^"r'j *'"= !'r 
 
 of action, but inaintii 1 tW, ,"" ''S''' 
 
 iSu,.riorconrtd;5i,';v';;:^So::!S 
 : to ii,esupre,n^c!:!:^:,\^-l •;;:!- „-;jm;^ 
 
 
 V'¥pt'-V220.[i.-,h •>UA R .Vol ' o'"'" ''• 
 
 ■ tiu'-y V. Murp/i!/, -JZ S. C. 1!. i;J7 
 
 ioo.v/ 778. 
 
 VI. 
 
 HlliUTS AM, Ll.vmUTIKS OV I'ARTVKKS 
 
 Betwkk.v Tiik.mse,,ves. '''''' 
 
 Account - 
 
 P«e A Hi: II y 
 
 Fe -'47. 
 
 -■rurmliction of Couiily Court A^ 
 tiurjax Cheese Co., 21 O. R. 5'JS 
 
 f^-lt;^fc^S:.-„^ 
 
 lo "lluir't he "nie'rS''«""'''=''f^'-^^''"'-<' be- 
 foul dedfJ' 1 • "1, ^"",'Pfiisation was un- 
 
 ;. !■ i'S'.';;,!;;; K i^;■■fl;^sf,,,r"^ 
 .?c„r..',d'Ltt''''','i;' " >«'■■" .'""ii^' ih. 
 
 co,,,.wiii,t-iS:,;\",ff-;r*p.i^^.,«» 
 
^ ^' 
 
 PATENT rOR INVENTION. 
 
 780 
 
 nomo pcrKnn, nppoint a loceivor, Milrliell v 
 LinUr, '21 (). It. 'l-t. 
 
 Receiver— lull rim Sa/, of .1.<«/<.].-UniIiT 
 Bpocial <.iixiiiiiHtiiiic('-i nil orilc'r ni,i_\ lie iiiiiilc, in 
 ail action lor I lie ili.s8oliitioM and wiridingiij) of 
 (in iiisolviiit partn<i,-liJi), for tlic hiiIc of asi-ctH 
 by tlic receiver liefore the trial. J/./,,(n«v 
 iVhitimj, l(i I'. H. T),-)-.'. 
 
 Services — /tfn)iniif(ifi(iii,]—l( tlie I.ii.sini'SHof 
 wiinliiif,' up a |iartiiei.slii|ieoncernisaii|Mirtioneil 
 between tla? paiiner.s, anil eaeli iimlei talies to 
 perforin the .share allotted to him, one oftlieni 
 cannot afterwanls elaiin to hu paid .salary nr 
 other reinnneration merely for the reason "that 
 hifl sliare of the work has been move laljoiions 
 ordiHieult than that performed liy his co i.art- 
 ner, in the alwence of any exincss agreement to 
 that ofTeet, or one to lie iniplied from the eon- 
 • luct of the partie.s. /Ji/i/dl v. Ihunilioii, L'4 
 
 s. c. li. (;(i.-). 
 
 S-e Crriiihton \. Ildli/nx llniditui Co., 18 
 S. v.y. ]{. 1-10, «»/f' 774 ; (hi ID, -in- V. Jlniiln:-iin 
 18 S. r. R. CiPS, mil,'. --,:> : Al/i^on v. Mrhoimlii, 
 23 S. ('. 1{. (!;),"), (nitr 77(i; Siilh, rliiiiil v. Wi hsiir 
 21 A. R. 228, a»/- 77.-); ]y,.ll,r<.„k v. IIA,,/,,-' 
 25 O. R. rwit, anU- 77-'. 
 
 PATENT FOR INVENTION. 
 
 Forfelture-/rH;)?Yi;« r Importntinn. ] - -Where 
 the subject of a patent i.s a new eomliination of 
 old devices, tlie patentee cannot imi)ort such 
 devices in a niamifuctnred state, and simjily 
 apply hi.s comljination to them in Can.ida, with- 
 out violating the ]irohiliition a^'ainst importa- 
 tion contained in .sec. 2S of the I'atent Act. 
 1872. Mitchell V. llniicuvh /iispiriUvi- Co., 2 K\ 
 C. R. 53'J. 
 
 Forfeiture — Iwpn^xr Importa/inn ] — To 
 bring an importation by the patentee within 
 the prohibition of sec. 'M of the I'atent Act, 
 it S. C. ch. (il, it is necessary that it consist of, 
 or affect, the particular invention in respect of 
 which the patent has been granted. l)V/i//i/ v 
 Bell Telip/iotii- Co., 2 ]';.\. ('. R. 5,V_', 
 
 Forfeiture— J\'o».?Hf/;(»/((,7»/v..]— Section .■i7 
 of the Patent Act. R. S. ('. ,■■!,. (il, does not require 
 the ]iatentce, or his legal representatives, to 
 perao'.ally manufacture his inyentvm in Canada 
 ^)0 long as \w puts it within tlic power of peisons 
 to obtain the inventit.n at a reasonable jirice in 
 Canada, he fulfils the re(|uirementof the statute. 
 /irooA- V. Broadluad, 2 J'^x. C. R. ri(i2. 
 
 Forfeiture — Kov-maiivfurinr,- — Impi-over 
 
 /mpojva/jow. I— Although a patentee may not 
 
 have commenced to manufacture the iiatented 
 
 article within the period limited in sec. 28 of ;« 
 
 Vict. ch. 2(i, as amended by ;« Vict. ch. 14, sec. 
 -, yet so long as he is in a position either to 
 
 tuniisli It, or to license its use, at a reasonable , „■ ...u .-..a.u.u arc , 
 
 Stn^t^Cwi ''w^%*'-;'T*^''"'P^^ •« granted,- and they ought not to 
 
 (2 ) It is w "'i fV'f'^'t^''- ''^- extended beyond their plain meaning. 1= 
 
 shew t"t he h s , d "k •"'";'; 'J 'f *""■'"' *'' "'''ni"i-^terins the ..vatute, tlil. Mini.ster can or.l; 
 
 Set for 1 1 ;1^ f i' .•'^■t'^';.'-'""''t^.,to create a apply the j.enalty to the offence which the ..t.ttute 
 
 SuDon hoL r '»r"''"n 3" <-'^r''"- ^' f'"''"^'^- "^ «""""' •''Pply it to an attempt tc 
 reata upon those who seek to defeat the patent ' evade the statute. 
 
 to shew that he neglected or refused to noil tho 
 invention for a rea.sonable price when profur 
 appliiation w.is made to Idiii therefor. 
 
 (.'{.) The intention of I he legislature in pii.t. t 
 iiig the piovisions of see. 2S of .•(.■| Vict. eli. Jti, 
 which prohibit the patentee from importing hi! 
 invention in a manufactured slateafter tlieexpiry 
 of a given time from the granting of his par, it, 
 was to)irotect tile industrial iiiteiestsof Can;.;,,! 
 and the prohibition should not be extemhn \, 
 operate a forfeiture in cases where the chara. 'ir 
 and circumstances of the imjioi tation tiMcl td 
 promote rather than iirejudice sm h inten-i.-i. 
 
 (4.) If, after the time has expired wherein ih. 
 patentee may have imported the invention v :tli 
 out prejiidii'e to his rights, be consents to ■>,., 
 importation by otiicrs, such consent brings liin, 
 within the prohibition of the statute and a\. li, 
 hispateiii. Iliiiiiv \. Smiih, 2 Kx. C. It. I.".-., 
 
 Forfeiture — Xnii-viann/itiiiirr — hiiiui ,.,y 
 Imiiorhii;,,!,.] Where the owner of scm'mI 
 liatents illegally imports elements common to the 
 composition of all his inventiona, but uses tl,e 
 same hi the construction of one of them onlv, 
 such inijiortation operates a forfeiture in resji4l 
 of the particular invention so constructed, 1 1;' 
 does not atlcct the other iiatents. 
 
 A patentee is within the meaning of th( l,,u 
 in regard to his obligation to manufacture, wliin 
 he has kept himself ready either to furnisli tlie 
 patented article or to sell the right of iismg, 
 although not one single siiceimen of tlej aiticle 
 may have been |iro(luced, nid he may lu. ■• 
 avoided his iiatent by refu.sai to sell, altlii.ii-h 
 bis patent is in general use. Toronto T>l,,.hm> 
 Mfif. Co. v. Ill a Tili'plione Co., 2 Ex. C. R. ."iL't. 
 
 Porteltare—Xoiiiiiaiiii/oriiirr — llij'iiwl :■> 
 sill ~- Inijirojiir Jm/iorl,it'luv.] — ]i an aitiiie 
 imported by a patentee and used by him iti lie 
 construction of his invention is a common com 
 mcrcial article employed for many puriioscs, iiiiil 
 is not specified in the patentee's claim as .a, 
 essential part of his invention, such importiitiMi 
 does not operate a forfeiture of the jiatent. 
 
 (2.) .\ fair test of the jiatentee's ability M 
 freely import any article recpiircd in tlie Vi in- 
 struction of his inyention is to ascertain it it:* 
 open to every person in Canada to nuinufatliir., 
 import, sell, and use the same without thcul.v 
 intringing the jiatent in iiuestion. If the iiiliifc 
 is thus part of the public domain, the patentee 
 i.s at liberty either to import it (Ji-puidiase it in 
 Canada for the iiurjioses of such constructidM. 
 
 (."?.) Where the subject of a patent is a com- 
 bination of elements, and one of them is a iiovtlty 
 invented by the jiatentee, such novelty is in tli'e 
 same position as the other elements with resiiec: 
 to importation by him unless its production or 
 mannfacture is covered by the patent in iiiies- 
 tioii. 
 
 (4.) There is no extiress provision in the statute 
 imposing the penalty of forfeiture for inijiortitg 
 into Canad i the various jiarts of the invention in 
 respect of which the patent was granted, miicli 
 less for importing one of its parts. The worJs | 
 of the statute are "the inyention for which t 
 
N. 
 
 lie iie({lo(;tc(l or refiigfd to soli tlm 
 a ri'iiHoiiablo pii,!. when pr<i[.(r 
 ii8 iiiikIc til liiiii tliirefor. 
 fill inn of tlio lc>,'i.-,liifiirf in cn.i.t- 
 ^ioilH of Nci\ I'M of ;(."> Vict. ell. .'(,, 
 it the iiutintiM' from ini|ioitiiit: m', 
 iimniifactiired st/itfiiftcr tlu'f.\|'iry 
 II' fidin tile xiiiiiting of his imt, i,t, 
 the iiKliistria! iritcicHtHof CaiK.i.i' 
 hitinn .-hoiilil not 1„; cxtinilc: i. 
 Litiiiu ill casrs where the oliara. 'i r 
 iliriM of the iiiilioitntidii teinl rip 
 rr tliaii iirejiiilii !• siuh iiiten -is, 
 " the time has expind wherein tl i' 
 liave imiioitoil the invention m jli 
 to liis ri;L;hls, he enliseiits ti. ■!•, 
 y ntlier.s, siii'li consent liiiri);iH hjn 
 ihiliitioii of tlic statute and ii\, in 
 l((r/if\\ Smi/li, •_• lOx. C. l;. i:,"i, 
 
 — X<iii-7iianii/firli(yi' — Iw/ii( i.r 
 W liere the owner of sevnil 
 ly iinports elements eoninion to tlie 
 ' all his inventions, hut uses the 
 iiistnietion of one of them i.nlv, 
 on ('[leiates a forfeiture in nsjiii 
 hir invention so constructed. Ii:- 
 
 the other patents, 
 is witliin tlie nieanini,' of thi l.w 
 i ohligation to nmniifaitiire, uIud 
 niself ready cither to furiiisli the 
 !e or to Bell the rij.'ht of iisuig, 
 lie single s]icciincii of th'j aitiilf 
 n produced, Mid he may lie > 
 tent liy refusil to .sell, allliuii;.!i 
 
 I general use. Toroiilu Ti/ij./im 
 
 II Tdcjihonc Co., '1 Ex. C. R. .")L't. 
 
 -Xo)i-iii(i)iiithr/iirf — I'lfuKii/ '.' 
 )• Jm/ior/iitioii.] — If an nitiiie 
 Jiatcntee and used liy him in iLc 
 
 his invention is a common nin, 
 employed for many pur])oscs. arol 
 1 in the patentee'.s claim us ii, 
 f his invention, such import:iti'r; 
 e a forfeiture of the iiatent, 
 est of the ]iateiitee's ahilitv t.i 
 iny article required in the ci ii- 
 ■ invention is to ascertain if it :s 
 ersoii in Canada to manufatliiri, 
 id use the same without theuhv 
 latent in iiuestion. ]f theintiifc 
 the public domain, the patiiitee 
 tier to itnport it or pui chase it in 
 jiuriioses of such eonstnutioa. 
 the Hulijeet of a patent is a (om- 
 enta, and one of them is a nuvtlty 
 
 patentee, such novelty is in the 
 1 the (ither elements with resjiec: 
 liy him unless its production or 
 
 covered liy the patent in (jiies- 
 
 ,0 cxpressprovision in the statute 
 ralty of forfeiture for iniportiig 
 various jiarts of the invention in 
 1 the patent was granted, imicli 
 ng one of its parts. The worJs 
 ;'e "tlie invention for which the 
 ;ed,'' anil they ought not to 
 (•ond their plain meaning. Jn 
 e statute, the Mitiister canonlr ! 
 f to the otfcnoe which the stattiti 
 mot apply it to an attempt tc 
 
 PATENT FOR INVENTION. 
 
 t.koitJl'ij!,"!,'"'"*' '"'""'"'"' I'arliainent must 
 
 r ;^:"';h'r'"''''''"V''•'^■'^'••''•*|'"'■"' 
 ;"" V ,' "• T' '"■■'vy pcnaltv «hiil, the law his 
 
 leveled at tinW'HMripal olVcnce. on the U,", I 
 
 tlie -loing of that -which ' «''i,ld u'^, l^;''"' l;'! •" l'^'^' ^r'^"" '•">:^''"- '" <l- 
 
 ().) "hue the article patented is of delicate 
 »ti,l Hkiliul niunii.acture, and one fron , | , 
 he patentee can only reap the rewa f 
 
 Hhoiit and expenditure through its l.eing e 
 t.i med si,c,.cs>lul hy ,1m p„|,li,.. j, ;, ..'.^J, 
 Me for h,,,, at a time wh.n puMic , pi , . 
 w, I, respect to it is i„ suspcMM. ,„ decl il e 
 .sell his invention nncondi, ii.'nally't,, „ use h 
 hvunsu, alilc use, would t'lil to' derive he, it 
 froni It ticniselves. ami would create an iii, I e 
 .sion 'nlliepi.'.h.nii.iil that the inventio, 
 allure. If, u,iom application made to him f, 
 
 hepiircli„seotl,,s„,veiition,hein,pos..sa 1, 
 
 iri:v;x;::;;;'^'r!-'r-^'-...toh..'ri:i 
 
 .ippear that siiel 
 
 782 
 
 •l-'lii'the Domiui,,,,. romi,luT,t,,,l„„i. ]/„.,„ 
 
 License to Manufacture- AV,,A/ „/ Lkms,. 
 ' /iiv,i,„„/,.,J The defendants were liciZ' 
 
 ;''rpa.entumlerana,.eementwhereh:.;i:A 
 
 ,., 1 • ' •' ., '" ''".Valties to tlic iiatente.; 
 
 m-l .n ciinsiileration tlier.nf were en , ' e i 
 
 [Kill, til the end ot t lu term of the le , , 
 l;"t"»t. ■^-.iHeipiently thedel-iant he ;,: 
 
 -'''-''■•i-itoiheia.neit ' e 1 ;':.';?'r 
 
 f,,..f. ,(•' ii' '■■'■" '""'•" '"Miciil . 'f 'I" interest is tiMnsferred in a oif i 
 
 f.ifeited his patent, unless it 't I'^'luiiiM the consent of 1, , ' 1' ' ""'" 
 
 -ntafiiM.s imposed for the i ^'"'l to the tr.iiisfer 1 ,t't; ,::;'''''•''' '"' 
 !,' eoniiiliaiice wth ll.e „..,, niernlv .,, ,;..; •'"''.". t'"-' HaiLsiction is 
 
 pui;posc ot evading compliance with tl 
 vwions Of the statute which reipiiie hi,, 
 tho patented invention at a rea.sonalile price 
 (7. In relation to the provisions of see iT ,,} 
 the Patent Act touching the price of the patn 
 edinvontmn to pinvhasers. it would appel,; 
 theevilthestatutewaspniieipallvi,,'!, e 
 prevent ,s the exaction of cf.xorliit.ait ,- ic c' 
 under the mo.uipoly seeu,-e 1 hv the pit ,t 
 
 tkrtnc Li.jht Co., •_' Ex. C. R. ."iTo. " 
 
 Forfeiture- Vo».„,„„„/,.,,,„., _ ,,, . 
 
 .mportafon o the component par ,s oTte le 
 p. 0,10, in such a state' of ma, ufaetuie •, t „ 
 simply re,|Uiie i.uttiii" toirether ;,. V' 
 
 |nake,hoconi,^,tei/'in:;^;^!;:,;, ■.,:■':: r,,!;: 
 
 the p.ohiliition of see. 2,S of .W", \-ict -h ' 
 anieniicd hy ."LS ^•ict. eh. 14 see ^ '• "''• -*'• "** 
 Ljioii application l,ci„^, made tT, the ,-e.pon- 
 
 ! ients to putchase a nnniher of their teleph , Z 
 fcr private purpose.., they ■•efu..eil to se 1, 
 IZ' ^f':"'"l';"'.ving such',-efusai l.v the tate 
 
 I then! ; •'- ' '" ""' '"'' ^'-•I'^P'-H-S Imt w^'t; 
 
 I ,ff?,t'i *''"*^ ,*'"' 'cspondents had therehv 
 jaff^Jdagoodg,.u,ulforforfeitui. ortlS 
 
 Coiuiivaiiee hv the iiatenfee ;„ .,., • 
 ;«.tionis.,ualtrh ,'ti""^r^^^ 
 
 ^:!::i z:±,r'T!:T'\r-^^^^^ 
 
 to .sell inonopiily, then the 1 
 
 rem. nine ihi 
 palcnted at 
 <). 15. 401. 
 
 Iccnsce niay 
 lieeii.se and iiiaki 
 l"n peril, .\o.io;, 
 
 at his option, 
 
 the iiiachiiie 
 
 y. Xujoii, 24 
 
 -ting of a new and useful cimliii,^'^:';^;; 
 known materials or devices, wh' ' 
 result nut tlu-rctofii 
 
 licli produces a 
 
 tnt< 
 JJ,// 
 
 , Interpretation of Qmnf- 1 ti, 
 
 letters patent toinventSs* ou! e:;^.!';^"'? "^ 
 |;jjt.,,,a,opolynortheco:Shu;ofa:;^;: 
 
 I W. I . R, 4u5_ 
 
 Jurisdiction of Mini 
 
 'J'ir/tr V. .Siiiifh, 
 
 -Tl 
 
 JUiiMiiction in 
 
 Mce of patents eonfe 
 
 Agricult 
 
 i '8 exclii 
 
 lire hysee. 28 of 
 
 isive 
 
 of that possessed 
 
 ;!-uR,,iitthe,.ctofo,.eso,,i;tainui;:^ ™ 
 , ec tor a j.atent. Toronto 'l\h Ih.J "tlufu- 
 
 -NoveItyp( ■,„„W„„^-„„.]_A new comhination 
 :" known c cments ,s an inventio,,, and as s, c 
 IX p.tenlahlc. The person who ha, devised s e 
 '-•-...hMiationhasalltheriuhtsIm p. 
 gi'> of an mveiit.ir, even if the miveltv co ts 
 ' 'I tritlmg mechanical change, pi.: i K li,f 
 I't- latter case, some econiimii",, • tl. ■ .;, /t 
 ■^ produced „, some way dilleicit f, , „ .S 
 
 -.Siiii'-lii-IS^^ 
 
 'i''ig-hai, m comhmatiim with a lockimr ,ievi .. 
 
 "'■'anged to lock the head lilock ti, hi ' /he 
 -Pnng tooth is attached, subst.n ,1 V' ^' .^ 
 I for the puriMise spceilicii ' In •,, ^ . 
 
 '-^nngenlent'oftliJpaten;'it.i:Uhn^d';i:^- 
 ■111 the elements were old, b„t it w-.s 1. :, , 
 tIiatthesubstitutuinofa.!,'.: ;^,,^';^^^ 
 
 ,^SS;n:::fj:;d£S;t!l:!thXe:; 
 
 invention, being the mere iuscrti ,n , c^knoln^ 
 'irt.ele ,n place of another known a el t wa" 
 
 •ih 
 
 Jlnnfi-r v. Carrlrk, \[ s. C. R 
 
 v. f,'r,/,.'K, y ■<. (^ K 40 
 
 ixiicr 
 
 V. Coulthanl, 22,S.C.'r. 178 
 
 300, referred 
 
 Novelty— C();/(/jwf7^/ri;,_j/ 
 
 Ch 
 
 '•>', 25 0. R. 71, 22 A. R 
 
 W-f(frf/^,-.]— ,s'ee 
 
 2(JS. 
 
783 
 
 PAYMENT. 
 
 784 
 
 NovuUy Iii/iiiii/' nu'iiL] - i', * Cn, wlio 
 (is-iigliucM (if II |nitfiil (of 11 clii'ili IiiidU lined liy 
 isliii;»ki'L'[i(.'iM in iimUinj} ■ ' ilupliijiiti! iiciioiinlt 
 »>f s.iK.~ 'I'lui ullt't;>Ml iiiM itioii I'oiisUf cd (ii' 
 •I'Milil, K,(M-i, litlt liriii^ liiiuii'l toj{i'llii I- mill 
 II ' li.iif tiildi.Ml ill ax My li'iivi'M, «■;>»'> n 
 
 lai li ill lii'illid III li<^\t tlir I'OVci . , >d 
 
 lIlUM.lin «illl II l(l|lli lll,'ril:<S till' I'lld, WllMt 
 WIIM clilillie-'l IIH ll(!W ill tlli^ illVlilltioll Wll-t tlir 
 
 duvit'i', liy niiMiiH of tin- tiipo, fm tiiniiiijj mir 
 thu (Mi'lMiiii/fd li'iif without Mciiliiig tlm liiiL^mu 
 or I iiiHiiig it to ciii'l ii|i. tl. Hindi- and wild it 
 Mimllar I'licrk ImmiU with a liki> di'viir, liiit, 
 niMttid of the tiipc, t hi! end of tliu iiil hoiii/cMl 
 hiiif, fill' alioiit hiilf iiii iiR'h, wiih left witlioiit 
 cnrlMiii, and ihi^ leaf was tiii'Mcd over liy iiumii>i 
 of tills iiiai>;iii. hi an intioii liy ( '. it Co. 
 iif,'aiiiMi II. for iiifriiij,'i'iiii'iil of their patent : — 
 
 llelil, alliiiiiili;,' the ileei.iioii of tlie Kxelieipler 
 Court, ;t lv\. C. li..M."(l, that the evideinu at tlie 
 trial Klu.'Meil tlie device foi' tiirniiij,' over the 
 lilaiiU leaf witlioiit soiliiij.' the lingers to have 
 lieeii used liefoio the patent of C. it Co. was 
 issued, and it was therefore not new ; that the 
 only novelty in the patent was in the iise of the 
 tape; and that iisiii;^' the margin of the jiaper 
 instead of the tape was not an iiifi ingenieiit. 
 Citrti r ,1- Cti. V. Jliuni/fiiii, '_';! .s. C. It, ];:.>, 
 
 I 
 
 Novelty Sjuriiifniiini —A iiiliiijuilji. ] — There ' 
 is no invent i\e nieiil in uiakiiiL.' in one piece the 
 eaiiliar and pmti'etor of a washing maeliine, the 
 eaji-liai and proti'etor having liuun previously i 
 made in two separate [lieees. 
 
 A speeilication providing merely that such a ' 
 protector is to he arranged "at an angle" is 
 void for iinoertainty. '/'ai/hr v. lininilvn 
 Mitiiii/ii'tiiriiiii Co., 121 A. K. Htil. 
 
 Particulars -D'/tiire—A'-lloii far Jni'iyiii/i'- 
 nil lit. \ An making an order for particulars of 
 the defence in a patent action, tlie lietter iirac- 
 liee is to jirovide merely for exoliisioii of evidenee 
 in ease of no particulars or insiillicieiit particu- 
 lars heing delivered, and not to older the e.vcision 
 o'' the defence, if good pi r -i . 
 
 .And where both e.vcision of the plcNiding and 
 ( xelusion of evidence were iirovided for in .in 
 order : — 
 
 Held, that the discretion of a .Judge in Cliani- 
 liers ill .striking out the provision for exeiston 
 was rightly exercised. \ii.i-(iii Jirothcv AJinit- 
 fwlurimi Cn. v. I'ultir.ton tiiiil Brotlur Co., 10 
 1'. R. 40. 
 
 Prior Manufacturer — J!i;//if.i o/*.]- Section 
 4() of the Patent Act. H. S. c'. cli. til, does not 
 lUitiuiii/.-' one who has, with the full consent of 
 tl e i entee, iiiaiuifactured and sold a patented 
 aitieli " 1. s~- than a year before the issue of 
 the t>acc; 'o v'ltiii.ie the manufacture after 
 the u.iiu. ', . :,.. but •, < .illy permits him totise 
 and sc'! 'h ■ . 'iciws •r.niufaotured by him prior 
 thereto. / .,■■'■ .. -. 
 
 PAYMENT. 
 
 I. i'AVSir.VT III-' MllNKN ISTII CofllT, 7H4. 
 II. I'WMKST OK MoNKV olT OK ColKT, 7^1, 
 
 III. rv\Mi.\r To CiiKDi runs, T'Sii. 
 
 Sn LiKN, IlI.-Moirrii.Mii;, .\1., WII. 
 
 I. 1'AVMKNT oI-' .MoNKV into CofKT. 
 
 Insurance Monoyis — Tnish • .i - C'liijtii'iii;/ 
 (.'/niiii<.\ -iUi an application by a beiievuliiii 
 societ" for leave to pay insuiaiice money iii'i, 
 (.'oiirt, rlainicd by (liU'ereiil parties ; — 
 
 Held, that snb-sec. ."i of see. .■).') of the .liidi- 
 eature Act extends the benelit of the Ai't fur 
 the relief of trustees to biicli eascH, and tliat the 
 society wa:; entitled to pay the money in. Hn 
 Jtnjiit, lU (). i;. .•till. 
 
 JuclKinent — //"/-/ii;;////. I \\'heie judgnniiis 
 Were recovered agiinst the iikiiitilf, and In; siin.l 
 the defendants U|)iin a bond of iudeinnily tn 
 recover the amounts of the judgliienls, altliougli 
 he had not himself jiaid them t - 
 
 Held, that the defendants should be ordiieil 
 to pay the amounts into Court. Jlui/il. v. 
 Jloh.iis,,,,, JO (). U. 104. 
 
 Mechanics' Liens — /)i'<rli(inie of Oini'r- 
 (,'(/>/.. 1^1 11 a niei'hanies' lien action a certain 
 
 sum was tiiiiiid due fr tlu' owner to the cun- 
 
 tractor, and tin: latter was fuiind indebted to 
 other lienholders. I'aymeiit of the former sura 
 into Court was ordereil and miide, the amount, 
 however, being iiisullicieiit to pay the claims of 
 lienholders ag.-unst the cont ractiir. The latter 
 then ap|iealed iiiisucces.-,fully, and was ordered 
 to pay the costs of ap[ieal to the owner, who 
 claimed that these costs should be paiil out of 
 the moneys ]iaid by her into Court : — 
 
 Held, that by the payment into Court for 
 distriluition she was discliarged from her liability 
 and the money ceaseil to be hers, and that slie 
 was not entitled to i.uve * he c., ts due to hr, 
 deducted from the nnn.i\ii,l ii '.lu in. . J'allniw 
 Lili'l/lilir, '2(i U. It. "^<A 
 
 Payment In with Defence. ] -.s'l'e Jfcmtirsui 
 V. /Inn/: of //.iiiii/iiiii, •_',•) (). U. (i4l, •2-^A. 1{.4I4, 
 /iiisi 7S(i ; /hiri" V. yalioiiiil As.siiriuici- (u.vj 
 Inlniiil, IG 1'. U. lit), j,o>^t 7!Mi. 
 
 Protection awalnst Incumbrances. ] - &( 
 
 Anii-'lniiiii V. .4 »;/()', 21 O. H. !IH, yw.i/, .Sai.E Of 
 Lami, 1. 
 
 f.'iniirii, 25 * >. 
 
 il. 
 
 Protiuisaory Note — "(•'irt'ii for n Patent 
 
 JUi/lll."] S'CC lill.LS OF KxCllANdt: AM) PjtO- 
 
 MISSOR\ NoTK.S, 1. 
 
 PATENT FOR LAND- 
 Sec Crow.n' Lands, V., VI. 
 
 11. I'aV.MUNT of MoXKY OlT OF ColIiT. 
 
 Infant — .l(/i/i'«iVra^)/'.]— Tbeadministr.itrii 
 of 11 ilecensed party who had died before the 
 Devolution of Kstates Act eaiiie into force was 
 allowed to take out of Court a sum oi .'*'2I0, 
 wliieli was part of the personal estate ot the 
 deceased, notwithstanding that two infants were 
 among the next of kin who would be eutitleilti) 
 
'':i^ 
 
 785 
 
 PAYMENT. 
 
 IK MiiNKv rNTii Ciiiwii', 7H4. 
 
 K MiiNhV HIT UK t'nrilT, "SI, 
 
 (( Ciium I'KKx, Tstl. 
 
 I.— MoimiAdK, M., XVII. 
 
 T (IF MltNKV INTO CorUT. 
 
 aneys — Trtixii'H - CniitHfiiini 
 I aii|>liL'iiliiiii liv 11 litiiii.'Volc'tit 
 tr) |i.iy iiiMiiriiiii'u iiionuy iii'i) 
 y ilill'i'iviit iiiii til's ; — 
 
 IMl'l'. .") (if MCC. X\ (if i\\V .lllflj. 
 
 iiiIh tlif lii'iiclit (if till' Ai't, fur 
 li'i'.s til siifll fascH, (uu! liiat l\u: 
 ticil to pay tliu iiioiu'y in. /,'« 
 i!l7. 
 
 'iiil'iiiiiily. I -\\'lii're jiiilj,'iiii'iin 
 i;,uii.sL till' |ila: itill', ami liu mii:,1 
 U|ioii a l)(iiul (if iiuiemuity tn 
 lilts (if the jiidguiuTils, allliduyh 
 ■If iiiiid tlu'iii : ~ 
 ' ilifciiiliints .sJKiiiliI l)u (irdi'icd 
 Kiiiiit.s into Court. Iluyil. v. 
 I. 4U-I. 
 
 AanB IHsthdnie of Oinir — 
 'I'iiaiiii's' lifii action ii ((jitiiiii 
 lie fidiii tli(! (UMici- to tlic i:(in- 
 latter was fniiinl indelitcil to 
 I. I'aynii'iit of tin; forniur Kiim 
 idcicd and iiiadi.', tliu ainoiiut, 
 iisulticiont to pay tlie clainiM of 
 St tliu eon tractor. The latter 
 nsiici^essfully, iind w.as ordcrcj 
 of appeal to the owner, wliii 
 'Se costs slioiild lie paid out (jf 
 liy her into Court : — 
 ' the payment into Court for 
 vas discliarged from licr lialiility 
 Biiaeit to be hers, and tliat she 
 to ii'ivc. 'he c .. ts due to hrr 
 ;lie nmoiiTa ii'.iil in. , J'atttn v. 
 
 t. 'S'l. 
 
 flth Defence.] -.sVe /feiidrrsm 
 lion, •_>,-)(). U. (141, i-lA. H.4I4, 
 
 V. Xntiiiiiiil .{.■'.■< II niiicr III. lij 
 . 110, jio.'it TIKI. 
 
 cainst Incumbrances. J - &< 
 
 '(/()■, 2\ O. K. m, poxt, .Sai-eoj 
 
 OF MoNKY Ol'T OK Coll'.T. 
 
 »/.s7)(i^i;'.]— Theadministratrii 
 U'ty who had died before the 
 itutea Act came into force was 
 out of Court a sum oi .*2!0, 
 of tile personal estate ol the 
 istanding that two infants were 
 )f kin who would he entitled ta 
 
 • ^|< '. I" I ,i,:^im.~- Jon,, V. Krll.,,1,1, 14 1-. K. 
 
 PENAL ACTIONS AND PENALTIES. 
 
 Infant — .I,/h/;h;.o„/,„. I \i, , , ,, 
 '"'■■"«",«,„ the tin,,!., )•,,,, ,,y'A"7 '"'""•■' 
 'It was iiaJd.,,,1 . I "'"I' to an inlcH. 
 
 TK 
 
 -'f<''"K(if(;„ , ' ,, 'J!;';'>;.''M-ayMK.ntout 
 
 ri.'d an,| domiciled in „ V . " ' "'"' "''■"' '"'"•• 
 l-vs,.fwhiel a , ,','^:::'^''1'''''"^0-. l.yth,. 
 
 -receive money ,,,",,,.' ' ', 'I'"" ""''Hwe 
 
 i,"" 'i''tepaynlnt(. 'a- iUr'V"'^ 
 
 hi I', l;. '.'2!). nniiinil;//! \. I.-iiiidh, 
 
 ^e.teillite^^.tlrin':'!';''^';''-'^'' 
 
 ;""■. I'-'Viu^ assi.oied their inte , , t| ' i' 
 
 "a purchaser, ,h,. ('„„r, , ,„, ,„''!'',' '".'"' 
 
 I, ^i;;^iod ,,f (,i.ffl;:;,-^J;- -;^. 
 
 •.s';cd'i^'?.7ih:'A'.;':"'"~f''^''7'"''-']-««^-'i""« 
 
 ir:.h;:;;;«;;!:..'|-.';'f'-'-f''^"- 
 EK!;;;;;:-{i^a 
 
 ;''-i'^^:e,ont::'wim;:lrti-^;,;S:s 
 
 I" /.'«(/, He <:„,„,,hiii, u V. i;. 401. 
 
 t, n!r'"/* "'' P''°°«edlngs ^A,.p. al.V.Hy the 
 tiiiii>'iit a consent iir,l.,.- ,. ' •! "' 
 
 .iv J wi £,,c„t ,'■■';'""'■ , "'.'«'■« '» 
 -I .......li., .n h " J rf'.r ""■■'' ■;«'"" 
 
 '"«s^ir"pi';t,!f'sueh^'''''''•^'^''*^"f "''=P'-°''«e<'- ^ ^"^^ ACTIONS AND PENALTIES. 
 
 III. I'.UMKNT TO Cl,(|.,r„KM. 
 
 Appropriation Of Pavmnnto I ». 
 tl... Nn ,,,,, '' ''■ '"'f'l !■■ l..v-i.rii|.ti..., ||„t 
 
 '•''^-' ;;.*;■;■'? tut'i^^irir-^is 
 
 Bank -.y„,.,„/ />,„,;, /,•,/•„„,, ,„ ,.„„ 
 
 '■•:■■;,;,■," '"'.oc. 11. .■,',;. J,; ,„,:,■,„;■" 
 
 Cheque of Third Per<inn /> 
 
 Snl'ui^^l-Cplt.rir-Lr';;-;^;:^!"^ 
 
 ""'"»•>•'-■' I. uotity thedelit.,,- .>f the ict u d cll^^" 
 ts.s L lies this ,s done, the creditor will be 
 >'<tiry,, X. riiomas, 1,SA. R. |o(,. ""'''"'"•ged. 
 
 ii"vi"g f»u.i, ,1,,; '„,'-; ■;'•■," '-''"i"* 
 
 OK Gooii.s. • ^'- ''*' /*"■< '^Al-E 
 
787 
 
 PLANS AND SURVEYS 
 
 788: 
 
 M 
 
 PWflj 
 
 Contract -P()K(/^i/ for Di'lay—Damnufs.]— 
 Sw. K<rr EmiiiK Co. v. Fniu-h Dlri-r Tii'j Co., 
 21 A. R. IGO,' -lA S. C. R. 703, ante 3-.>3. 
 
 Foreign Judgment— /V)(((//,v.l 'I'lie Cmiits 
 of tliiH I'ldviiuu will not iiiiliitctly ciiloMi.' tliu 
 penal laws <A ii fmci^'n tniintry liy i'ntertaiiiiii,i; 
 an action fMinilcd on a juiljinii'iit (jbtained in 
 that fiireij^n omiiitiy in a i)cnal ailion. The 
 Court bc'inu diviiliMl in opinion, liotli aa to the , 
 penal naliiir of the jncljinient suud on and as to 
 whethei- the lav ai.jjlirable to sueli iinestion 
 was that of the forci^'ii eonntry or of lliis I'ro- 
 vinee, tlie ai)lieal was dismissed, and the JiuIl;- 
 ment of Street, ■!., 17 O. K. '-'45, was atKrnied. 
 JIv)i/!ii;il(.ii V. Altrl/I, 18 A. R. KMi. Sa- the 
 next ease. 
 
 Foreign Judgment— /'<;(((//// ]- To an a( lion 
 by the 'ai.pellan't in an Ontario Court niion a 
 jiidgnient of a New Vorli Court ayainst the 
 respondent ninler sei-. 21 of New York Stale 
 Laws of 1S7.">, eh. (ill, whi<'h iniiioses liahility 
 in rcspcet of false repi'esentations, the latter 
 pleaded tliat the judi;inent was for a jjeiialty 
 inflicted hy the nnnuei]ial law of New York, and 
 that the action, licinj; of a penal character, ought 
 not to he entertained hy a foreign Court :— 
 
 Held, that the action being hy a subject to 
 enforce in his own interest a liahility imposed 
 for the protection of his private rights, was 
 remedial, and not penal in the sense pleaded. 
 It was not within the rule of international law 
 which prohibits the Courts of one country from 
 executing the penal laws of another or enforcing 
 penalties recoverable in favour of the State: — 
 
 Held, further, that it was the duty of the 
 Ontario Court to decide whether the statute in 
 question v. as penal within the meaning of the 
 international rule so as to oust its juris.lictiou ; 
 and that such ( 'ourt was not bound by the inter- 
 pretation thereof adopted bv the Courts of New- 
 York. Iluntinutoii V. AltrlU, [1893] A. C. luO. 
 
 Fraudulent Transfer— i)' EH--. '/' ■'—AHioii 
 —Eridnict — rnr:f"'j('—Appi(il.]—Au .action hy 
 the party aggrieved to recover the moiety of the 
 penalty iniiiosed by sec. 3 of 13 Eliz. eh. o may 
 l)e joiiied with .-in action to set asi<le a fraudu- 
 lent transfer under that Act, in this ease the 
 transfer of certain promissory notes. 
 
 Bills and rotes are, by virtue or the legislation 
 passed since 13 Eli/.., goods and chattels within 
 that Act. 
 
 Section 'JS of the R. S. C. ch. 173 only apjihes 
 to the coiududing part of said sec. 3, namely, 
 that relating to inii>risonment on conviction, etc. 
 
 Where a defendant at the trial raises no claim 
 of privilege, if any snch exists, to his being 
 examined in su))])ort of a chiim for the recovery 
 of the penalty under the stat\ite of Elizabeth. 
 such claim cainiot afterwards ))eset U))on appeal 
 to the Divisional tJourt. Millar v. MiTaijijart, 
 20O. R. 617. 
 
 Parliamentary Elections— ^'//V, i. /'or Pni- 
 ally — Di^ir,)-! ii/—-Ex'niiiiiniii'ii <if Jh'i'i ndoii/.] — 
 See ilalnilni v'. J.'an , Hi V. I!. 33(1, aii/> 403. 
 
 Parliamentary Elections - /Vh((/^// ./or Be- 
 fusal of \'oli.]—8(:( ,/ol.ii.fOii V. A/loi, '26 0. R. 
 650, aiite 760. 
 
 See Damaoks, IV. 
 
 PENSION. 
 
 Retiring Pension — '^iirnndi r—CniireUation 
 — Hhihl-i of ir//;.!- 1)., a retired_ employee oi 
 the tloveriniient of (.luebee, in receipt of a pen- 
 sion under Arts. (iTO and 677, K. S. Q., surren- 
 dered said pension for a lump sum to tin; 
 (iovernment, and subsc(iuently ho and his wife 
 brou'dit an action to have it revived and the 
 surrender cancelled. By Art. CM) of It. S. I'. <.). 
 the |iension or half-jxiision is neither transfer- 
 able nor subject to seizure, and by Art. 683 the 
 wife of 1). on his death wduld have been entitled 
 to an allowance eiiual to one-half of his pen- 
 sion :— 
 
 \ Held, reversing the decision of the Court of 
 lieview, Strong.'C J., and Sedgewick, J., dis- 
 
 ■ senting, that \K after his retirement was not a 
 jiermanent othcial of the Government of (i>nebec, 
 and the transaction was not, thercl'ore, a resig- 
 nation by him of oliiee and a return by the 
 (lovcrnnlent, under Art. 6.HS, of the anumnt 
 contributed by him to the jiension fniul : tliat 
 the i>olicy of the legislation in Arts. 68.') and (iOO 
 is to make the right of a retired official to his 
 
 . jicnsion inalienable, even to the Government ; 
 
 • that D.'s wife had ;i vested inteiest jointly with 
 
 I him during his life in the ))ension. and conkl 
 maintain proceedings to conserve it ; and there- 
 fore that the surrender of the jiension should he; 
 cancelled. DUniw- v. Th(: <Ju<n), 24 S. C. K. 
 -1.->1. 
 
 See Oslrcm v. Bd'Jamhi, 20 A. R. 336, antelM. 
 
 PERFORMANCE- 
 
 Si'i' CoNTK.vi-r, IV. 
 
 PETITION OF RIGHT. 
 
 .SV( Crown— Crown Lands, V. 
 
 PHYSICAL EXAMINATION. 
 
 Si-e ]<'vinENCK, IV. 
 
 PLACE OF TRIAL. 
 
 Si' TitiAi., VII. 
 
 PLANS AND SURVEYS 
 
 Amendment of Plan (7os!iuj S/nr/ - 
 "I'(irt!/('niir'i-ii<tl"—Lc(iiil 7V//'.-.-. If/.]— All per- 
 sons who buy lots according to a registered plan 
 do not j'/^vo /fcVo become " paities coneenieir' 
 within the meaning of sec. 7 of the Land Titles 
 Act, "ri Vict. ch. 20 (O.), in every streetshewn 
 upon it. Whether they are " concerned '" or not 
 in having a ])articular street kejjt open, is a qucn- 
 tion of fact ; and in this case, in the absence of 
 any representation at the time of the sale, liy 
 the vendoi-, that the street would be kept opeiij 
 it was hehi that a per.-MiU owning a lot several 
 hundred yards away, and on the other side of » 
 highway "from the street in (luestion, eoidd not 
 object to its being closed. /(/ re Alcltmurroy 
 and Jcnl.ins, 22 A. R. 3i)8. 
 
78a 
 
 NSION. 
 
 1 — Surr<inh r — Cniu'dlation 
 1). , iv retiifd fiiiployee of 
 •iii'licc, ill loceiiit of ii pen 
 I 1111(1 ()77, H. S. Q., suncn- 
 
 for 11 lump sum to tin; 
 isciiuenlly lio mid his wife 
 [) liavi! it revived iind the 
 
 15y Art. CMIof 1!.S. I'. (^ 
 leiisioii is neither transfer- 
 ei/.ure, mid liy Art. 6«3 tlie 
 111 wiiiild liiive been entitled 
 lid to oiiehalf of Ids ptii- 
 
 le decision of the Conrt of 
 
 I., imd .'-^eili^cwiek, J., dis- 
 
 ■r his retiienieiit viis not a 
 
 the Government of (t>uebcc, 
 
 vas not, therefore, a resig- 
 
 ilHee and a return by the 
 
 Art. (iSS, of the iiniouiit 
 
 to the pen.sien fund ; that 
 
 ishition in Arts. (iS.") and fi!)(> 
 
 of a retired oitieial to bi.'v 
 
 even to the Government; 
 
 vested interest jointly with 
 
 in the i)tnsion, and could 
 
 s to conserve it ; mid there- 
 
 iler of the |ieiisioii should hi, 
 
 V. The V""". 24 S. C. v.. 
 
 mnm, 20 A. K. 3.16, ante 747. 
 
 'OKMANCE. 
 
 ONTUACT, IV. 
 
 )N OF RIGHT. 
 
 -Crown L.\sds, V. 
 
 EXAMINATION. 
 
 IIIIKNCK. IV'. 
 
 E OF TRIAL. 
 
 TiiiAi.. VH. 
 
 A.ND SURVEYS 
 
 f Plan r/o.<//';/ SI net — 
 — X((»(/7'/7A.<, 1 (■.'.]— All jier- 
 ccordiii]!,' to a registered jiliui 
 ceome "parties coneerned ' 
 ; of see. 7 of the Land Titles 
 II (O.), ill every street shewn 
 they are " concerned '" or not 
 iir street kept open, is a (|ues- 
 11 this case, in the absence of 
 
 at the time of the sale, liy 
 e street would be kept opeu, 
 
 Ijel.Miii owning a lot scverui 
 y, and on the other side of iv 
 
 street in ([Uestion, could not 
 ,' clo.sed. Ill re Mcllmurrat) 
 
 R. 398. 
 
 PLEADING. 
 
 PLEADING. 
 
 I. AmKND.MKNT ok I'LKADINOS, 700. 
 II. f'l.osK oi- ri.iiAniNos, 791. 
 
 III. ColSTKUl I.AI.M AM) .Skt-,1FF, 7|tl. 
 
 IV. Dki.ivkiiv oi- Pikapinos, 7!».^ 
 
 V. DKMfKliKI:, ~\¥.\. 
 
 ^'I. IIkii.v, 7ii4. 
 
 789 
 
 Boundary— .l.svr>Vrt;H^H,»^^ — '^^•]^e,.e *, 
 |s a .iKspiite as to the boundary line between, 
 ots granted by patents from the Crown, and it 
 has been found impossihle to identifv the , rigi i, 
 line but two >xrtain points have I'.een record. 
 .n he Crown Lands I.e,,art„ient, ,h e ,r ; 
 cour.se ,s to run a straight line between the two 
 certain points i H, s. (). Ait. H.-,,^. /,' ■ 
 Anbe^lO'i Co. V. .I„lni.-.„ir.< (:'o., -lli JS. C. I;. l'lV) 
 
 Description- /;r;,/™..,.i,/p|,„ ,,„„,Hption of 
 a ot prepared ,or and use.l l,y the Crow i Land 
 department in raimng the patent, which grai, s 
 
 SemJ'-t'"""T''"'' i^''^"-' ""■.v. in '^dm'i^sib: 
 
 evKlenee to exolain tie nu.t.. . .,.,1 1 1 \-ir 
 
 that lot. ' '"-^ •""' '""""'-^ '" ^ '^- •^Tvri:Mi.:NT ok Claim, 7!)4 
 
 and no road has been l.iiil ,,ni ,.., n 1 '""' ^ 
 
 Monuments-^nVa.cv-/.'oa,/ A/hu-ame.]- ' 
 
 Monnments placed in eompliimee with the , „- 
 visions of sees. ; 4, ;«, .S(i, ,/n.l ;>- „f ,;. ,s. ^^- 
 ch ]4b must be placed at the true co ners 
 fiovermng points, or oH-sets, or at the true en h 
 of concession lines, ami there is nothingi,, t .1' 
 
 Xrof";i^"'f " '""^^' "'-•"■■"''^" -■ the !'>.i-tice to thV/othj; ;;;i;; 
 
 placing of the monuments ,„nclu.sive, whether " ' 
 
 right or wrong, a„,l evidence may be receive , 
 contradie, io„. .s, held on a case reserve f , 
 General Sessions on an indictment f,,r o 1st 1 " 
 tton of a highway, being the town line beiwee^, 
 
 l.ir. a>.l S„n.,.n,k Aw! -^o'u c' n '^.{■. an •.mendnielr^"^^"*""" «™''"'« - -f-i-g 
 guislied. h,ijina v. Coshy, -Jl (). 1;. .-,!)i. 
 
 79(K 
 
 I. Amkm.mkntok I'i,i:ai.in(is. 
 
 Bills of Sale Act.] Under I!nl.. ui 
 -;>emi,,,ent should be'alhJ:/ j'!^. ^;^,^- 
 
 in[.J;;r^•';^^;;,J-;-•■;;,,-•;j.^vitI;:.,l; 
 
 notwithstiuiilin 
 Unh'. 
 
 tlie difference in the Kiiulisl 
 
 an amendment. 
 
 f ^a'clnS''- i;;;'V';'''T *'' '■"■'■^■^■'- l'..ssession 
 ' a ciitte, the defendimts, wjio were sob 
 
 ::"l!r' (:'r •'''('■.P-r'--- for vahm withi 
 
 tHe ..... of a plan! and the sal-Jf'tt;^:::;^ l! tl :;- S^^lro^i.^^, ^^y^h!. S::?:[X^^7 
 
 which amendment would have .billed tor m; 
 
 additional evidence, a Divisional Court a Iwel 
 t upon appeal Wni.n.s v. /.,„,.,„/ HKl" 
 :'44. A Iirined by the Conrt of .\pp,al, 1 7 " R 
 ,.>, and by tlie .Snprenie Court. ~ 
 
 the tiling of » plnn, ,,,,_- „ „^. , 
 
 ing to it abntting'on";; .sti'eet!' u'.e property in 
 
 jilthough they may liave ilone no .■orp.irate ae 
 
 of a township lot, WW Id ; 5' ::,t't:: ;;;r;:;,7,;i::;-"''""'^-%-'^'^'"^ f-^ thJ bi!i ,;;; 
 
 clustere.i. there is not an ineorponu 1 vi' -, , ZC^TrT^''-^'^ '"'"'' '^'■'"'^■'l ''>• =^ 
 continues to be .. pri^■ate street o'r r, d i,^ li lea el ,1 i^":'l V'"'''"''^'^'' , ""^ <lc'f<'..dants 
 
 an 
 
 v^yo. until tlie pubi,ei;ti.;;.:„ii;^;;r;'L 
 
 accepted the dedication olleied by tiie p'„prietor 
 
 towns, or incorporated viliau,; ^ ' 
 
 A person « hopurcha.ses lots uceordii," to such 
 
 acijiiius, as against the person who laid out the 
 plot and .sold him the land, a private right to 
 
 property .smcf ilth Mav LS7(; 1 ,f ,f/ lu 
 
 the words '• Lst December, ISSO • -L ' ' '''' 
 Held, rever.sing the judgment of the Court 
 "■:'"", that the motion .houhl have bel'n allow 
 
 use those streets s biec i,; t e Zio^^f ^i ' . l" ' ''"'^ "'" ""•''"" ^''"-'l'' L^ve been ^Ibw 
 tnepi „t^.,,.I,tlj^,,„mj,S,.,,„ .^^^ TIC tacts as disehwed by the 
 
 .^t!^ ''' "^ "«^'^ P'ivat? road does not SorMrl,: f^^HiJ-'^T'^'^'"^^- /'"^"' v. 
 
 nece.si'S'.,:",::;;^:;,;; l!'';'"^ '■'""' '•o'^^ uut SorMr de Con. 
 -.\ .i.e.m n i,i:Jit Y^er every part »f the : Ii. liM. 
 
 i roadway, but only to'such a width 
 necessary for the reasonal 
 
 'ruction M'tromlit, 
 
 as may be 
 
 .V;-/iV:.v/ 
 
 .'/ V 
 
 Cramion, '22 O. R. 'm, 
 
 joynient of it. ' *'' ^'ntlnson v. Smith, 14 I'. R. r-iitS 
 
 Th 
 
 'll>lllp-'<OII 
 
 Ho 
 
 See C 
 
 0"- I<> I'. R. ,'i 
 
 •-'•-> S. C. 
 
 post 795 ; 
 
 Rowy, I, 
 
 Stilhway V. 6'(^2/ of Toronto, '20 O. I 
 
 1-8, y,o,sy 791 
 -/9, ;io,v/, Skihction 
 
 I'X, nj/^t718. 
 
^! i. 
 
 ^ 
 
 791 
 
 PLEADING. 
 
 II. Cr.OSK OK Pl.KADINI.S. 
 
 792 
 
 Issue. 1 A (loffiidiuit, l,y simply lakin.' in.sue 
 ui)on tlu'sl.itfiiieiitof claim closes the ploadin.'s 
 iiiKl maytlicM .serve notice of trial. //„>>%' 
 
 /.""■''","/",; ',' ';• "■ ••^•'••i. folloH-cl. Ma/colmy'. 
 ./"«'■', I(> 1'. R. li'iO. 
 
 Issue -ro»,//.,T/„/„,.i_A ,,k.,uli„g ,leliverc(l 
 I'V tlie defendant lo a coiMiterelaini, in answer 
 1 hereto wlietlier l,y the original i)laintift' oi- l.y 
 a.lded defendants, which denies the alloiration's 
 111 tlie eonnterclaini, jmts the plaintiff to the 
 proot thereof, and submits that tlie eounter- 
 elaini slioiild be disnii.ssed, is not a j..iiider of 
 issne, but a statement of defence; to the c.uinter- 
 elnim : the plamtilf by counterclaim has by the 
 l.ii.e.s three weeks f) I'eply thereto; and the 
 Jileaclings, at least i/uom/ the coiniterclaim .are 
 ■ lotelo.se, nntil after the lapse .,f three weeks 
 or nnld the plamtilf by eonnterclaini has joined' 
 issue. ■' 
 
 Xotico of trial set aside where Lnven by the 
 origiiiid plaintiffs after the lap.se of four day.s 
 ti.im the deliveiy of such a jileading, no sidisV- 
 <|Ueiit pleading having )„,.en delivered 
 
 ' 'oiistruetion of Knles 37!)-;is;!. l/arr v Ctvr 
 
 liroini, !•_' 1'. T^. (iH!(, overruled. 
 
 V;""v'. wliether ■• pj.untitf - in liulo 381 does 
 not include a iilaintiff liy counterclaim. Jrivin ' 
 V. / II run: HI P. R. .•j49. 
 
 Issue-0)Y/(,'-.l,»e,«;»„„^]_\Vherea plead- 
 ing IS amended under an order giving leave to 
 amend Hnle 4u'7 does not apply : and. under 
 Kule ,j<)_), ^vhen the amendments allowed bv the 
 onler have been made or the time thereby lim- 
 ited^ tor making them has elapsed, the pleadin.'s 
 are in the same po.sition as to their being closed 
 us they were in when the order was ma,le. 
 J liiimimoii V. Jliiii:i,m, 10 P. i;.;J7S. 
 
 plaintiflTs 
 Rule ;i7(), 
 as defen- 
 
 lll. ('or.NTKRCl.AIM .AND .SkI-OIT. 
 
 Cross-counterclaim ~Sti-U:iii., Oiit.-Cro.s.s- 
 rilifl — On:/,iia/ C'oinitrrr/iiim ~ Por/ks l~ \ 
 peivson brouglit into an action as defendilnt to 
 11 counterclaim delivered by the original defen- 
 dant cannot deliver a counterclaim against .such 
 defendant. " 
 
 .-Such a pleading, not being authorized bv the 
 Rules or the practice, ^^■as struck out on sum- 
 mary application. 
 
 Construction of Rules .S7I-:l8:i. S/n, f v. (^orer, 
 f^) '!;,)--l!'S. followed. Ui.my. Thorn J, {) 
 L L. I. Occ. .\. IHil, distiuiiuished. 
 
 ■Sniiik, if the company 'bnmght in here .as 
 defendants by counterclaim luul been i.roiier 
 parties, cross j-eli,.f might have been given thJni. 
 -ni.ler Rule :!,4, by staying execution upon anv 
 Jtidgment recovere.l against them until they > 
 should establish their set-off in an iiideiiendent 
 action. ' 
 
 1 lie action was upon ;i pronii.s.sory note The 
 countenlaiiii of the original .lefendants alleged 
 tjat the plaintiffs took the note un.ler circinn- 
 staMce.s which disentitled them to recover •— 
 Meld, a deteiice and not a counterclaim i 
 
 t further asked that the plaintiff, might be i 
 ordere.l to .leliver up the note to be can- i 
 celle<l ; — 
 
 Jleld, that if that was a proper sulijecb of 
 countercl.inn, it was one arising between the 
 Iilaintiffs and the defeiulants as the result of the 
 establishment of the defence, and did not render 
 the introdnetinn of new parties neeessary 
 
 It f-urther asked that if the plaintitls sh.iuld be 
 
 : to.in.l entitled to recover upon tlie note, the new 
 
 ' iletendants by counterclaim should be ordered 
 
 to ])ay it : — 
 
 Held, not a matter in which the 
 were concerneil, and therefm'c, under 
 other persons could not be lirought in 
 dants by counterelaim. 
 
 Jt further alleged that tlie iibiiiitifls and the 
 new defendants by counterclaim cmispired 
 together with the fraudulent intention of keep- 
 ing certain insurance moneys without aiiplyinif 
 them upon the note sued on ; but there was no 
 a,ssertion that the idaintitls received the insur- 
 ance numey.s, oranyiiart of them, bevmid the 
 amount of the note ; and the jiraver w.is that 
 the new defendants by countereJaiin, and not 
 the plaintiffs, should account for the insurance 
 money over and above the amount of the 
 note : - 
 
 Held, that there was no excuse for jciningtlie 
 plaiiitdlsas p;irties liable to accmint with the 
 added parties, and therefore no excuse for add 
 ing the hatter. 
 
 -And the counterclaim of the original defen- 
 dants, so far as it added new parties, was struck 
 out. (.■eiieru/ EIrdrlr Co. y. V„-loria Khctrir 
 I. "Jill Co. of Liiici^aii, 10 P. R. 470, 529. 
 
 Exclusion of- /iniim;/,:^- l,;irUor.<.]~-In an 
 action brimght in the name of the Attorney- 
 (.eiieral u|Km the relation of certain persons to 
 restrain the ilefendaiits from collecting tolls or 
 
 ^ keeping their toll-gates ilosed upon their roads 
 
 , the defen.lants alleged by way oi defence certain 
 wrongful acts of the relators, and by way of 
 
 i eonnterclaini asked damages against them :_ 
 Held, that the relators were not in any sense 
 
 I plaintiffs : and the allegations against thein must 
 be struck out. AlioriKy-ihiieral y. Vaiinhan 
 Itixiil (^'o., 14 P. K. 510. 
 
 Liquidated Damages.]— If a claim to li(,ui- 
 <iate<l damages by a defendant is pleaded by wav 
 ofcouiiterckiim, the plaintiff may reply matters 
 arising subscipient to action brought. The 
 plaintiff was allowed to reply that the final pay- 
 nieiit under the contract had accrued due after 
 action brought. AUltr, if pleaded by way of a 
 set-off. Toke. v. Andrcic.-i, S (,). H. l). 42S, fol- 
 lowed. MrXamaia v. .S'tei'w, 23 O. R. 103.' 
 
 lS.ortsa.see-Aiiivunnil~/iid,miii/i/.]—]nan 
 action by the assignee of a mortgage .-igainst 
 the mortgagor and the purchasers from him of 
 the equity of redempticm, the latter allege.lthat 
 they had lieeii induced by the mortgagee to pur- 
 chase the lands by his promise to discli;ir.'e the 
 niortgago and accept in its place an assignment 
 of another mortgage, which ameement he had 
 tailed to carry (,ut, and had afterwards assigned 
 the mortgage to the plaintiff, Ids wife : — 
 
 Held, that the purchasers of the eipiity were 
 not entitled to claim " indemiiitv " against the 
 mortgagee; within the meaniiiL' oV that w>rd «« 
 used 111 Rule 32«, as amended by Rule 1313; 
 and a thii<l jiarty notice served upon him waB 
 set aside. 
 
792 
 
 .t was a proper siil).ject of 
 f one iirisiiig Ijctwcen the 
 fiulaiits as the rusiilt of the 
 • ieffiKjc, iuid did not ruiiiler 
 i'W parties lU'i-essary. 
 id if tliu plaiiititls »]u,nhl be 
 iivur iipcjii tlif iioti;, the new 
 ti'olaiiii .slididd lie ordered 
 
 ■r ia wliifli the plaintiffs 
 tliei'efore, under liule ;i7(;, 
 lot be br()U>,dit in as defen- 
 u, 
 
 hal tlie ])laintif}s and the 
 
 eounterelaini eonwpircd 
 
 udulent iiiteniion of kecp- 
 
 nioneys witliout ajiplying 
 lied (in ; but tliere was no 
 lintili's received tiie insur- 
 puit of llieiji, lieyond the 
 and tlie jiraxer was that 
 
 by eountereiaiiu, ami not 
 account fill- the iiisiiraiice 
 lOve the auioiiut ot the 
 
 1.S no excuse for joining the 
 iable to aeeount with the 
 erefore no excuse for add 
 
 ill! of the original defen- 
 ed new parties, was struck 
 ■ Co. \. Vi'toria Elixtrii; 
 10 I'. (!. 470,529. 
 
 !"(".'/'-v- AV/'i/d/x]— In an 
 c name of the Attorney, 
 fionof certain persons to 
 s from collecting tolls or 
 s closed upon their roads, 
 by way of defence certain 
 relators, and by way of 
 mages against them : — 
 irs Were not in any sense 
 ,'ations against theni must 
 riicy-'.'ciieral v. VaiKjhan 
 5. 
 
 jes.]— If a claim to li(jui. 
 :eiidaiit is pleaded by way 
 aintiff may reiily matters 
 ) action limught. The 
 ) reply that the liual pay- 
 ;t had accrued due after 
 •, if pleaded by way of a 
 K'S S (). H. I). 42S, fol- 
 akain, l'3 O. R. i ().'{. 
 
 nmt—hn It mil ifi/. ] — I n an 
 3 of a mortgage /igainat 
 purchasers from him of 
 111, tlie latter alleged that 
 by the mortgagee to pur- 
 )romise to (liseharge the 
 its place an assignment 
 hieh agreement he had 
 had afterwards assigned 
 intiff, his wife : — 
 isers of the eipiity were 
 indemnity " against the 
 leaning of that w>rd as 
 uneiided by Rule i;iI3; 
 ! served upon him was 
 
 793 
 
 V. JJm//>, l(j p. i-i. oj,y_ ' "" '''"'I'lgts. Moore 
 
 PLEADING. 
 
 794 
 
 .Vet /rwln v. r,m,<r, K; |'. ]■. jj^p^ „,^,,, - 
 
 Till 
 
 IV. l)i:i.,v,.:,.v OK I'l.KAin.v.i.s. 
 Default — l)i-<iii!^^,,l i e , 
 
 Vacation. 1— A nartv to •,„ „ .• 
 
 ;i::^.:!/l;:^i'!rtr^''r"'^^''^^-'" 
 
 'i-th^g:^;;r;:s; ----;• -.'^i^'Ma.n 
 
 i;':^:n;:/d:LS,;;t^-';l;;'-'^'--^ 
 
 i tliey had demui:;.",! .'"' "1' ""-' '^'""^ ■•i«"'ts as if 
 
 '^^^o..i.n.su.:::tv;ut'::: •:,;;-;::;:'- ^'»'' 
 
 •^«,;;''-v..y.K/«-, III., li. u . r4r,;d' , ' 
 
 ...- n;xr;' the^:, i^ ^^^^^^- - 
 
 Vf. Kkim.v. 
 
 .•{N!>, 
 
 and 
 
 ^^ Di;.-«ihi;i:k. 
 
 Costs of Demurrer 
 
 V. Mill. >; l(i I'. R. 'J-J 
 
 iy<rOnr.\-~Se,Jo,u-..-.\ 
 
 aetion, the defendant nay i de I-?!"''"..,'' ' 
 plead to one aii.l demur to H "'^' , '^^^ 
 liliuK tlu. alHdavit ic ,,, l''r l'''l "■.;"'""' 
 obtaining leave under \^^^^, '" '""'" '^^^ '"' 
 
 week, or m.intli, >ot , '^ "'>' "T /'".V- "■• 
 to be frivolous. /^^J'^Z^; U k'h.'';:;^''' 
 
 prSt'^^^^^^lh?'^---'''''^-''^^ 
 "Ot to tiio e-iu>ce .,f ., r '■''""^^,"f aeUou, and 
 
 fowed.Rr^rr ;;?::;,'[:■'•• ;:'»-ti'^'i 
 
 LawjhUn, 24 O. I!. 41 ^ '""' "-' ■ ''^'•- 1 
 
 What Constitutes— /.',;/,, /,/ • • , 
 
 Held, a good defence. 
 
 R.^ol-i^o':':;:i;;i''Jf';,^l-7'-'« into force of 
 eluded by 1 ,,,,*' •''^' ''"'-"lant was p,c. 
 
 the validity ot,''~ "">■ '""•^"■"■' "' to 
 nn-ght hax.bee 1 , se T''" J'"^-"""' "luVh 
 fortign forum :.!1'''' ''^ "'^i' "' "I'l'^'''' i» the 
 
 an admission Sh tut of ';r7"r' "'"' "^ ' 
 the defence ■ ■. „1 .^ i " *•' '''^^^'^ stated in 
 
 '""' "o appiiJ in ")^;; '-I'li^'tion llule 4..3 
 
 I Inconsistency—/,', /■,,.„/ ,, -;• . . 
 
 : the defendants and 1 . '' T''^^\ "^ '"'' <'* 
 
 .the third dc^:,£t''^i;:Saw:!^'r«^'"i 
 
 ^•■ertain assets from tlie„H, , ♦ "'" ' « obtamed 
 
 olai.ns. In tlei, re , ,1 '"'-^ ^'""^ plaintitls' 
 
 , were cre.lito ro/\ J tl Tl "}' "';" ^i-ey 
 
 "pon thegnumd h l„ ''''♦'-'.'"'^'"t himself, 
 
 :«l'o hired era Th'c ::'■"'"'>■ '''P'^''-'- 
 pleading:- "^ ^^'''* "" «"ljse,,ncnt 
 
 l'i« >iglit n re u i . , l '"',' •^"''-^- "^'-^ "ifn-i. 
 
 .i.i«:;iK:;;';;:ri;'~.';',''»'°"i"'''"«i'"i- 
 
 \'II. Statk.ment Of Claim. 
 
 
 : I'o made until al^Vl'd:.;^;^,^^"'-'^'"''"'^"-'^. to 
 
 within eiyht davs ,<,.„., ,? statement 
 
 44!l. • "• t-"-. 1') P. R. 
 
 
:Mi ■ • ' 
 
 795 
 
 PLEADING. 
 
 VIII. .Staiemknt ok Dekenc'k. 
 
 796 
 
 Defence Arising After Actlon-Co»/<>.v.v,o// — 
 Ji>,/,,mn,l~-"Oih,nris, (M/-/-."J-I„ an acticn 
 agiiin.st ii jiiiluiiifiit (lol)tiir ,111(1 his biotliiT tosct 
 .•laule ii oonvcyaiicf. l.y tin; foinici- to tin: latter- as 
 traudiik'iit, both .U'fondant.s pleaded several de- 
 fences. Afteiwanls the judgment debtor applied j 
 tor leave to amen 1 by adding as a defence, with- ' 
 out aband,.iung his other defences, that since i 
 action the judgment had become e.xtin aiisheil ' 
 by reason of a set-oil' or.loreil in another i 
 action : — ■ | 
 
 HeM, a case in which the plaintiir should not l 
 be allowed to confess tlie new defence and si.'ii 
 judgment for his costs under Kule 44(1, but one 
 in which the Court sliould " otherwise order " 
 niKler the List clan.se of the Itiile. 
 
 Construction and history of Paile 440. Ilar- 
 ri-ion V. Ma,'iui.-<iifAli,r<jiirciiini, ", L. T. \ S 
 3G0, discussed. l'n'Ur.-<oii v. Siililh, 14 1'. I!, o'.js" 
 
 Defence --C/jrtw;„,yy.]_To an action under 
 l-ord (anipliells Act the defemlants pleaded 
 t Kit It was brought and maintained under a 
 chamiiertous agreement which disentitled the 
 IJlainiid t(j sue :- - 
 
 Held, that this defence should not be struck 
 fnit : if proved, it was for the Court to say what 
 c lect should follow. \y,4l.,nn,. v. cZJdlll 
 
 I'ocju' n. \\. Co., Hi P. It. :u;i. 
 
 Veieace-JJuihil of Uah)lihj-Tnidtr ami 
 I injmuit inio Uonrt ~ Pnjndic, ~CuM.s—Iiuk. 
 
 /''. J— Jn an action upon an insurance nolicv 
 
 Defense au fonds en fait.] -The want of 
 sigiiilication <it a tr.msfer <n' sale of a debt .as a 
 bar to ail action by the transferee is put in i.ssue 
 
 f I,., ,1 ,f ' 1 7 — ■—--.. ..,,.,., ,,., iii.-,iiiiiiue poiicv 
 the defendants pleaded denying tlieir liability 
 and also tender before acti.m and payment into 
 Court. The plaiutitf replied th,u there was due 
 to him a larger sum than that paid in. 
 
 deni'iT"- '""'"'" '° ""''''" "'"^ "'" ''^*f«-'"ce3 in 
 Held, that they did not teii.l to prejudice 
 embarrass, or delay the fair trial of the action' 
 within the meaning of Rule 42,S ' 
 
 ])i,-<cussion as to the eiiect .,f 'the defences of 
 tender and i.aymeut into Court upon the (nics- 
 tion ot costs and otherwise. iJules Ki-'-iiM) 
 consulered J'-ri.y. Xaiioual .-l.v,,,,„,,, co. oj 
 Iriiaiiil, lU I'. K. IK). ■' 
 
 Defense en fait— ,V/,7/»,v of P/alii>!in~rh<j 
 (juality assume.l by the jilaintifr in the'vvrit and 
 declaration is considered ailmitted unless it be 
 siic'ially denied by the defendant. A dr/fin-<, 
 , ii.jaif IS not a special denial within the ineauim;- 
 ot Art I-14._C. C. I'. Martiwiak v. I'oa; r.^, -J 
 
 Denial- .V»//V.7Vh/v/ of Ti-arcr.'^,' —AppnU "j — 
 1 he plamtiii by his statement of claim alleged a 
 partnership between two defendants, one bcin'' 
 married whose name on a rearrangement of the 
 partnership was substituted for that of her iius- 
 iiaiid without her knowledge or authority •_ 
 
 Hehl reversing the judgment of the Court! 
 below that a denial by the married woman that I 
 ■•on the date alleged or at any other time she ! 
 entered into liarlnership with the other defjii- ' 
 daiit, was a sullicient traverse of the liiaiiititrs | 
 allegation to put the parly to proof of that \ 
 
 Held, also, that an objection to the sullieiencv ' 
 ol the traverse wouhl not be entertaineil wlieii 
 taken tor the first time on ajijieal, the i.ssue 
 having been tried on the assumiitioii that the 
 tiaver-^e w;i.s sutiicient. Myil,,. y. JurL.on, 2;! 
 
 Soc MwL-cy V. lih-rej, 16 P. R. I4.S. »«/f. 7!« . 
 nilliQUDif V. (\m,idiiiu. /'(tri/ic L: ir. Co l(i 
 P. ii. :u:i, //o.s^79G; J)ariH\. Xathnal aZ-io-- 
 am-e Co. 0/ Inland, IG P. P. ] u;, j,„,, y,,;; . 
 ■yraiJordi;a.'<Co. v. (lordo,,, 14 P. it. 407, ^o.v< 
 ;;i(. ; MrCmih// v. Toiniship of Vr.-<i,ra, 10 P 
 K. 410,/).«/ 7t)7 : Hank of Jlamilton v. <;i-o,;ie 
 
 i! 4 i;/-'r ^"''" ''*' ' ^^"''^ '■• '''''''"'' ^^ '^'• 
 
 I.\. Stkikimi Out Plicvblnos. 
 
 Counterclaim. l-.S'cc (h'nn-al KIcctri,- On v 
 \icU,na EhHrir Lujht Co. of Uitdxaii. 10 P p' 
 4iO,.)2». <nili.-m • ■■ ■■ .■'--■• 
 
 Hoad <\ 
 
 Oltl, ,'.11 
 14 P 
 
 A//U 
 510, n/i/e 792, 
 
 •y-<i<'iieral\. Vmijliuii I the disoietion 
 
 ^oi&nce~Eml,(imu.^i,u„i—Pronxilii. 1— The 
 plamtil Is were a gas company, doing 'business 
 "' ;">.l .hstrilmting gas by their niaiiir through! 
 out a city ; the .Icfendant was als<, the owner 
 of gasworks 111 the .same place, from which he 
 sil.pl.ed certain buildings in the citv. The 
 s .a ement of dain. charged thai the djfendant 
 ,1. or caused to be laid a pipe to conimuuioato 
 uith the pipe belonging to the plaintilfs, or iu 
 some way obtained or used the plaintills' g.as 
 without their consent ; an,l claimed the penalt^ 
 
 Act, K. S. O. ch. 1(,4, and als., the value of the 
 gas alleged to have been taken. 
 
 The defendant in thirteen paragraphs of his 
 sta'.ement ot .lelence, set out at grc-at len-'tl, 
 vai'ious facts ami circumstances, the gist'of 
 which was that the pipe mentioned in th'stato 
 nient ot clann was so laid or eauscl to be laid 
 I'.V the j.laintifls, or by some (,ne on their behalf 
 j and not by the delendant ; and also made therein 
 ; alleg.atioiis of a nmlieious course of c.mduct by 
 : he plaintitls towards the defendant, allbrdnig 
 icas(,n3 for the probability of the truth of the 
 defence. 
 
 The thirteen paragraphs containing these alle- 
 gations were moved against by the plaintiUs as 
 oinbarra.ssing and irrelevant : — 
 
 lleld that an embarrassing pleading under 
 
 whan the delendant i.s not entitled to make use 
 ; ';"t l'«'-i' tl.e deteml.mt was cntitle.l to make 
 use of the defence .set np, and there was notliiiig 
 1. tne paragraphs tendftig to prejudice or delay 
 the fair trial ot the action. ^ 
 
 Jt might be that evidence of the ,.onrse of 
 
 d',n"' I ::' }'''""""■' •■^"^'^^■'l '-y tl.e dcfen- 
 d.uil could not be pernutted to be given ; but 
 
 tli,a„ was a question for the tri:d.Iud ^e, ami not 
 
 one to be detcrniinc<l upon a motion to strike 
 
 out plca.hngs except in a jilaiii case. Even if it 
 
 w.ns unnecessary to plead this course of comhiot, 
 
 that did not make the plca.ling einbarrassiiig. 
 
 1 he ( onrt .-dinidd not hesitate to intorleie with 
 
 I defei 
 
 ■xercised in (.' 
 
 to intorle 
 mibera, where the 
 
 ulant has been thereby deprived of his right 
 
796 
 
 i/i>:rli/.]— To an iictidii under 
 Act tlie (lefcmliuits pleaded 
 ght and iiKiintaiiied under a 
 jnicnt wliich di.srntitled the 
 
 k'funcc should not be struck 
 Aiis for the Court to tiiy what 
 >w. WiUmantK V. Canadian 
 Hi 1". i;. 3«. 
 
 il cf l.iahllihj—T'iiiltr and 
 ft — I'njiidiri —Cu.-<t.s—llults 
 ;tion upon an insuruncf policy 
 ded denying tlieir lial)ihty, 
 !>re action an.l [layinent into 
 in replied that tliere was due 
 
 than that jjaid in. 
 ;o strike out tile defences in 
 
 did not tend to prejudice, 
 the fair trial of the action' 
 of Rule 4L';i 
 
 ho eileet of the defences of 
 , into Court upon the (pies- 
 otherwise. Rules ();i2-(;!0 
 V. Xuiiotud A-^>:ura>,r>- Co. oj' 
 
 ■ra-<siainl~Prolixilii.]—'Y]ui 
 s company, .loing ^business 
 jas by their mains through- 
 iudant was also the owner 
 ame place, from which he 
 ddings in the citv. The 
 J'harged that the djfendaiit 
 laid a pipe to communicate 
 '.ng to the plaintilfs, or in 
 >r used tlie plaintills' gas, 
 t ; and claimed the penalty 
 Gas and Water Companies' 
 , and als) the value of the 
 oun taken. 
 
 thirteen paragraphs of his 
 5, set out at great length 
 ireiimstaiices, the gist of 
 ipe mentioned in the state- 
 laid or eauseil to be laid 
 V some one on their behalf, 
 uit ; and also made therein' 
 ^ions course of conduct by 
 the defendant, airordiiig 
 bllity of the truth of the 
 
 aphs eontaining these alle- 
 ,'ainst l)y the plaintills as 
 levant : — 
 
 ai'iassiiig pleading under 
 brings toruard a defence 
 i not entitled to make use 
 daut wa- entitled to make 
 up, and there was nothing 
 iftig to prejudice or delay 
 :ion. 
 
 i-ideiiee of the .■ourse of 
 lis alleged by the .lelen- 
 nutted to be given ; hut 
 'V tlie trial dud^e, and not 
 upon a motion to strike 
 I a [ilaiii case. Even if it, 
 id this course of conduct, 
 [ileading einbarra.ssiiig. 
 hesitate to interfere with 
 I in ('hainber.s, where the 
 •eby deprived of his right 
 
 797 
 
 Wt^up a defence which he is entitled to make 
 Co. w.'cordon^Uv: ii!^:" '^'"''"■^'"''^ "'" 
 
 t.. notiL;^''^' ,xrthe"vrr"'"'''^^. 
 
 Ji.stiees of the l-eaee i 'tl , f '" ^"'"^'"'^ 
 ^u;tion.s, I!. S O ch "V f , ^'■'"" ^■^■''■iti'Hi.s ; 
 
 IJefenee of want o .m i-^' ' '""""■'-■<'• ' 
 
 s^une strictness , „?"" l^" '""'^'''' ^^'it'' the 
 should not be i,;,u"PZ,,' ::"';''•'}''•: a party 
 ■^■■hstantial defence Ivl' "^ '' K-'omd of 
 
 ^^ J'-I,^..umt ill Charnl;;^,*'"- ^"'"■"^"'y t"'-'--'^ of i 
 
 ^'iiS;:;u;e:Sd"r{oiir;;"^^7V'''i^-' 
 
 tl.e I>laintifis after niuriv.f "''''' ''H'"' ''•>• 
 "'«.t, estoppel by co I " ^;, "^;'-'^'^'^. "' l^'V" 
 ^^I'le proteetion ari i 'i t o " ''"''''J"''- 
 
 -illowed to remain OM f agreement, were 
 
 ^^'on;,on V. 'c-o:^;:, 7^ ^^^t^^l^'- ^""^ of 
 
 POLICE MAGISTRATB. 
 
 Defence — Snlurlinn - Cans, or t -r 
 
 ^esu;r;;^^;-;;tf^-^;^ead(;.g';^i7:.::^ 
 
 thatitisd^uinible ■' '""'"''^ "" '"^' «™U"<1 
 
 '//'(.V.V V (,V„,,^, 1.2 p, ^ ^^ Mhwcd 
 
 Uhero the statement of <)..f,-, 
 <'{ seduction alleged Via the en. "f 'Z '''''""' ' *-<^ I'^nk 
 "> '»'othe,. thanlhe lai^, • ,', TV-' "^■t""' was [ 
 
 that that other song,!^t^;L;^:^,l:j:-::^^«^ 
 i^SS.srt:z:^:^-^itirr';4f' 
 
 struck out; but leave u-.T •' "*'"'"'''' "•><:'» 
 'lemur. Ba/^v:%r,:Zf:t4:''''''^"''' 
 
 798 
 
 ia;Zg:r;i£zStt;-;v;;%"'r't''«^ 
 
 (■•^'Hel Hallway CoimVi ,,, . •^'?""-?' ''"d 
 <l''''t.S ami had neither mnl '""''"neJ With 
 place the roa iru,,i "':;>', "'.'.'■ """"'^'^ '" 
 amount claimed fo. d " "^J i ;;;; ^^ The 
 r'Ver .S(5,O0O. The Siineri, r ' e '''-• ^«« 
 
 !;'-nt wasallirn'id b" ^^'^S-^^-JU'lg- 
 Jieneh f„r Lower CiMMln 1- , ' <^'ieen'a 
 tion „./>. diXny, ''^^' ''""""^'^'•''l *''«-' "I'Posi- 
 
 ^>^:^\s\o',2:;irtr!:n^T'''''r''-p-. 
 
 that the anionn ' f tlie 1 "^'-'"/'"^ «'•""■"! 
 Itl^eoiilyniatterinei :^;''^j;;''^"'-'tw^^^ 
 
 ,^\mt 111 amount to „iv-.. -.>'. '\' ''"''■■< '"sulh- 
 
 'i~iin-h;wtSb"r=''^'^r'' '""«'= "^^ 
 
 t.' -l.fraud, and w,t V i. s to",''l"'" ^^''''. '"tent 
 
 f'-oftheMont,;:/; ir^^:. '^.-:;';-rcre. 
 
 En .K'.aie^t^'r ^'^''-'T'-^-i^^tS; 
 I "ad not!&;:S:^ .^'";r:st: *'r'^""^^ -^ 
 
 anterior creditors of el, m '""1 ''gainst the 
 Hadway Con! 'u;/ Alt, :^7^'^;;y;'i '''■'' ^-1 
 t- C. .S. That Art. 41<| C ' " 7 ' '""' -^^'J"*. 
 a pledgee of an nnmov^bK: who le,s'?' T""' *" 
 tered liis deed, a ri'dit of .•' f ■ '''■' ""'' '■%''*'- 
 the pledgor-s execi^^ on ei^H^-^';!^ /'gainst 
 m^'"t of hi, disburseiii..nts t,L '" P''^' 
 
 Pl-^'lged, but the pledgJe- re le i'"VP'''^' 
 
 Kooee,lsof'thejndieS::Ue:''l'r'l'^!i'°{"- 
 
 ni. - COLLATEHAL SeCURITV - 
 
 Co.Ml'ANV, Via. "* 
 
 POLICE MAGISTRATE. 
 
 <inu: -m. ■' '■ ^^"■'"■^' I'' !'• It. US, 
 
 Statement of Claim 1-S'f.^ i/,v ; 
 'Lonn,ll, 15 P. R. 14, yZ si3 ^^ ^'^"'^■ 
 
 PLEDGE. 
 
 ^^^ntr4/an.l^^::?''uw.::^'c'''"^ ''«"'-''''« 
 "•ent for the sun. oV.^rJ .nd ..o't'''''"Y '" •''"'='- 
 
 --.dlwav pronertv <,f / T '"" ''-'anist the 
 
 wntingto be entitle It > ''■ /'r'taiii a-,'r.,T.|iient in 
 -•^ilway pro u.r V le I, 1 f ''"i''"^^''^^-'"'> "' tl'o 
 In-rsenK.its't lev t i; ," *''^'" *'"■ ^'^ 'H^' 
 !W".sitiou ,* . V; Lro/;'/, "• '""'.«'-' an 
 "" tl.<' hands of the s e ■ f Vl """ '", ■-•^■''""" 
 te-^ted the opposite. "'Hie i ',vem'"'r''-";!' T"" 
 y the appellant eonipanv w .^ ''''',"-''.' "" ' 
 
 ■-t-en the Montreal '^,:::^ ^:^:^ ^^ 
 
 I -Arrest of Witness-.-l^,,,,,,.,, of U.r , 
 \» here a jiolice .].■,,ri.^, \" "" _V M((hce.]~- 
 
 ;j"nsdictioi[ :;mL;Ts'rer ';-?"■''■''" '»« 
 
 I warrant for tlie arresi- nf V 1 ' "'■■""^^ his 
 
 :aiU-redino^d;;^^,:£";'r'"^"''' 
 HI the absence of mal ee liZ ''^'' ■'.'^ '« ""t, 
 
 »-\ven though he may a -e'ei ; ■ "Z ^^S^'' 
 cieiiev of the evi.l..,, I ■ ''"' t'> the audi- 
 
 R. .315. '"'"""-''• '•ordoH V. Deuison, 22 A. 
 
 Ijieaehof the Li,, or I il,,"^" ='■''' ^^'th a 
 i «l>ip of liarton in Iji eou, " of UV,' J" ""^, '°"'"- 
 I Has tried and conviete I .t tl , ''"V'''"'t'> : and 
 •situated in tiio sii J ."" l'"^ "^ ^ Hamilton 
 
 I -nagistrate thereof :i''°""*>'' ^'"'"'^ the p„li,^. 
 ! Held, that under see I>< r,f ti,„ n .• 
 : t'ates- Act, R. ,s. O eh 7.° 1 1 ^"l""^ ^^g'^- 
 
790 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 800 
 
 *l !: 
 
 ii i 
 
 Sec. (i of 1!. S. (). cli, 77 t'.\cniii(.s him from 
 tbi.s duty, « liitlur he is iictiiif; um police Hingis- 
 Irate or i x ajjitiu j\s justite of the piaue. Hunt 
 qni taiii V. alidni; 22 A. R. 202. 
 
 Salary— .1 f/tirlimm/ — J'lili/h- /'ti/i'r,/, ] - 'I'he 
 siihiry of a jiolice niugislriite iippointed l)y the 
 Crown, l.iit piiid hy u imuiicipiility, ciiiino't, on 
 grounds of pulilii- policy, lie attached ; llagarty, 
 C.J.O., expressing no oiiinioa on this point. 
 Cmtral lluuL v. Ellis, 20 A. It. .S()4. 
 
 See JlSrit'K OF TIIK PKAtK. 
 
 POUNDAGE. 
 
 See SiiEHiHK. 
 
 POWER OF APPOINTMENT. 
 
 See Will, IV. 
 
 POWER OF ATTORNEY. 
 
 See Pi'IXCII'AL AND ACKNT, III. 
 
 POWER OF SALE. 
 
 See MoLTfiAcp, XII. 
 
 I. 
 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VIII. 
 IX. 
 
 X 
 
 XI. 
 
 XII. 
 X!II. 
 XIV. 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 Al'l'KAHA.Nt'K, SOO. 
 
 Consolidation ok Actions, fSOl. 
 DiSCON TI X VA N c I :, 802. 
 Dlsmissinc; Actions, S03. 
 Intitclinc ok l'Ai'i:iis, S04. 
 
 Jli.lSDICTION OK DUAINAUK ReFERKK, 
 
 ,S(I4. 
 
 JlRISUKTION of Jl UIJE IN CllA.MBEKS, 
 
 804. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Local Ma.sti;k, S04. 
 
 JuiiisiiicTioN OK Local Master of 
 Titles, 8U.5. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Master inChambers, 
 80."). 
 
 Jurisdiction of Ma.stek in Ordisahy, 
 SOO. 
 
 Jiiusdiction of Kekeree, 800. 
 
 Orders, 800. 
 
 Reference, 807. 
 
 -W. Second Aitlications, 810. 
 
 XVI. 8LKVICI: OF I'ai'eus, 810. 
 XVII. StAVINO I'ROCKKllINOS, 810. 
 
 XVIir. ,Stvi,i: ok Cacse, 811. 
 
 .\1.\. WuiT OF Simmons. 
 
 1. (.'(IK rally, 812. 
 
 2. Amendment, 812. 
 .'!. fndursemt id, 81.'{. 
 4. lltiaii-al. Si;). 
 
 Ti, Strrire out (if Jm-indii-tioii, Hir>. 
 See Abscondino Dehtor-Action— Akkida^ \r 
 
 — A.M KN 1 i.M KNT — A I'I'KA L— ArIUTLA I 1 1 -! 
 
 AND Award— AiiiiEsi—ATTAciniENT . 
 Dehts. 
 
 I!V-LA\VS. 
 
 Certiorari— Company, A'IIL— Contim: i 
 OK CoiLT- Costs — foHNTV Coi i:t - 
 CoiKT OK Ai'i'EAL— Cri.minal Law, 111. 
 
 Dekamation, IV., v., VIIL— Devolitiii, 
 OK Estates Ait— Division Coiut. 
 
 Evidence -KxciiK.viEu Court, I|, — Km 
 
 CCTION— EXECITOUS AND AdMINISTH 
 TORS. 
 
 Guaranty and Iniemniiv. 
 
 Habeas C'oiii'fs— llicii Couet ok Jcstk f. 
 
 In KANT -In.unction— Inter i'leadek. 
 
 JUDCiMENT~-JrD(iMENT DEBTOR — Jl SI UK 
 
 OF THE Peace. 
 
 Laches— Land Trii.Es Act— Lien, 11!,-- 
 Lunatic. 
 
 MoRTOACE, X., XIII.— .MCNICII'AL ( CU 
 I'OHATIONs. 
 
 Neclicence— X'ew 'I'eiai.. 
 
 Paklia:mkntarv I'.i.ections, II. ~ rAi:iii:> 
 —Partnershie— Payment— Pleauenu 
 
 — t'RIVY COUNCII PROllllilTlON— I'l n 
 
 LIO f^CIlOOLS. 
 
 Recei ver. 
 
 Scire Facias and Revivor — Siiehhi — 
 Sim- — Solicitor — Specikic Pekiok 
 
 MANCE, III,— SlPKE.ME CoURT OK CAN- 
 ADA — SL'KKOCATE Co CRT. 
 
 Trial — Trusts and Trustees. 
 Vacation. 
 
 I, Appearance. 
 
 Default Qt—Xothii/ Phcullnqn Closed. ]-Sft 
 Morse v. Lamb, lo P. R. 9, ante 077. 
 
801 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 dmtiil, SI -2. 
 
 ■icmi III, Sl.S. 
 
 ■al, 8i;i. 
 
 ■(■ out iif jHrimUrtlon, 815. 
 
 Dkhtoi:- -Action — Ai-pii)a> it 
 
 KNT -- Al'l'KAI.— AkI!ITI:AI ic-- 
 D— AuiiKSl— AlTACIiMENT ■ ' 
 
 COMI'ANV, VIII.— Co.ntim: i 
 — Costs — t'ouNTV Coui.t- 
 ii'i'KAL— Cki.minai. Law, ill. 
 
 IV., v., VJII.-DEVdI.lT.o, 
 
 Act— DivisjdN GdL'KT. 
 
 Vrili;iil-KI! C'ni-RT, 1I._|:\|; 
 tKClTUKS AM> AdMIMSTKA 
 
 I) IM'K.MMTV. 
 
 >— HiCH CoUliT OF Jl'STK I, 
 
 NCTION — iNTERl'I.KAnKU. 
 
 •rxiJIKXT 1)E1!T0K — JrsjIcK 
 
 IK. 
 
 ) Titles Act— LrEx, II!.— 
 ,, XIII.— JIu.Nicii'Ar, ( pu 
 
 N'eW 'I'lM.M.. 
 
 ;V Ki.ECTIDNS, II. - 1'ai;iii> 
 HIP — I'aV.MENT— Pl,IA|i|.N(i 
 :iU.NCll.— I'KOlllJUTIO.N— 1'( II- 
 
 AM) Revivor — ,SiiEn II I — 
 ciTou — Si'eciitc Pkkiok- 
 -Sri'KKMK Court m- Ca.n- 
 
 ;1ATE CoUUT. 
 
 ; AND Trustee.s. 
 
 iri'EAKANOE. 
 
 hiij Plea(lhi(]n CIohcI. ]—See 
 l\ R. !), aiii'e li77. 
 
 of h . V n ;''' '" '" "":i-'i"ti'>-' of tl,e Conns 
 
 802 
 
 '.],.!!'',''';, "•';"! '"*" ;'PP''>'"ti<'n l.y tl,L. ,l,.,-.,„l,,Mt 
 
 Time for Appearance - Jud.iment 1 — ,sv,. 
 
 i- vl M^ r"' *"* '■« to ..„,„.rs..,lt. sec. 7 f 
 4, V,ct. di. U (.).). ,„,.l to incorporate it. ro 
 ■.«on.s into tl,o P„les, „n.l the fo mum p met ' 
 ':'"f ""^^'"^'^t^'-'t «ith the K.ile... U „ -se lea 
 I'.V tho,„.ovi.sm„s of K„h. :{ : ,,„.l therefore ther 
 
 to lUMl.L'e the tinu, for appearanee to a writ o 
 -UMUHoM.s ,ssue,I i„ the lli.strietof A^™ a • 
 iluinder Pay. AV»,/,// v. Eni.t, l(i p. r'. l,;;. 
 
 Time for Appearance-,s7,o,v,.„/„,; _,>,.,/, ,. 
 
 Waiver of Irregularity. 1 .sv, !/,• V,,/> v 
 MaMoiiii.l/, I,-, 1-. i;. |-t, ^,o,, si;}. ' '• 
 
 II. 
 
 CONSOMIUTIOX OF ACTION.S. 
 
 UWthe*il°o °' Common Defendant. 1_ 
 
 lUuiL tlie issues in .^'veral aetioii.s are not the 
 .ui.es here eannot he a eonsolMatio,, oi' t I „""- 
 
 Where .several aetions were hroierht ., , i„ f 
 ;jum,dpaIc,u.pora,h.nh 
 
 Hl.1,1, that, it being necessary for eaeh plain 
 
 .; ,ot :^ .ssues „, the several aet ons 
 tlu laet that, in any ease, there wouh have t 
 1»^ several asse,ssn,ents of .lania^es. ' 
 
 ,"/"■"■, whetlier a connno.r ,lefen,lant enn 
 
 dan?i:"l' ;^PP"«=a."°n of Dltteront Defen- 
 dants— -hour actions were l„o„ul,t |,v the surVe 
 
 S:"e;:-r iiis-t:;:?;;^ 
 t.>^:it-£-;r.s..lt •':::;;;:;;- :::^ 
 .i'i:^.a:;,.i::;::i-r-\- 
 
 ":"h ,i" '*^'"^'"^'' assessment of .lania^es In 
 
 other Rtis' "!V '"'* 1 "•"'■-'•''!"«« in the 
 uuin actions should hi' staved rill tl,,. t. * 
 
 action shonld have heendet^;- aid 'tivlM 
 result on the main (,uesti(,n ; or, if th ■ drfen 
 dants would eaeh siihmit to pay tie l' est 
 
 is taved i ll"' V"'' '■'" P'o^eeuin.s should he 
 
 r eh '■'.'■^•-■"V'^'; thelai-est anionnt, 
 
 'iMl such action should he alone liti-.ted 
 
 I _ ffnt Application of Different Plaintiffs. 1 
 
 ^'Hte;:Mh-^e;e:d::::%.;^-,,r';;;;:i£-:^ 
 
 S""«l,t entirely dille.vnt, thou.-l art of 1 e 
 
 111 tie other, an application liy the ijlaintiffs 
 oonjointly lor an order oonsolidati..'^ 't " o 
 aetions was refu.sed. ° ^"'^ 
 
 .„; order';''!'' '''^f^,"-''"'ts would be entitled to 
 an order to have the aetions trie.l together in 
 
 d Ueiei t Courts. Uijan v. Cuntnn, Af/unuv- 
 <.a„;-„l j,,r Canada v. OnUirio and f ern 
 ^'">dia- Compani/, Hi l\ }i_ 2Sr>. " ^'•'eui 
 
 III. DrSCONTINfANCK. 
 
 ^einrf/"'^*??" °f Common Defendant.]-Two 
 
 ?«i oftS'';"";'?]i'«"^"''"i"''-'-«^-^ 
 
 >>ad -n Je of hi^ , ^^' '"""« *" *'"^ ""^■'■""l 
 »f hoi; 's t '''•■li-'i'iJaut in perinictiiiL' a pair 
 
 51 1-1 
 
 ceedfmf T; n r ^^"f ^-^" interplea.ler pro- 
 ceding IS not an action; and Rule G41 (,■), 
 wind enables the Court to " onler the ac 
 t.on to be discontinued,-' upon tenns as to 
 costs ,loes not apply to m terpleade i sues 
 
 I ^^.'^r'"';/'-' ^- '• -^- «• ■!««, followed. 
 
 ! 'Se"'W., that the e.xeoution creditor can 
 
 jU^andon the seizure or the prosecution ^f he 
 ..sue, but only on the terms <,t answering all 
 Losts. Uuijahoomv. ai/lit,, IG P. R. 402. 
 
 Notice — raua/wn of Co.v/.,.] _ Where the 
 gain, rt serves a notice of .liscoiilinuanl'lS 
 
 ; ent lo t.rf"" "!''^''' '? ^'''''y ^"•- ■•'■' -PP"i'' - 
 o t i.t hr? •'"''' ''"'' ""'" "fl'^'- the lapse 
 ot hat ime an appointment will not be gran ed 
 to the plaintKl, even where he is entitled ui 
 
S03 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 804 
 
 tlif liiiiil tiixiition to tax iuti'rloc\itoiy costs i till February, 1892, when the plaintiffsi delivered 
 
 whic'li iiiiiy cxoiiL'd tliiMleteiidiuifs ),'C'iienil ostn, 
 Under Rule fill it is not iiccossary for tlif 
 plaiiititl' to ivscortaiii tlic ainoiiiit of llii' dL'fcii- 
 dant'a cost and pay tlicin to make the iiotii'u of 
 disuontiniiaiic'c otluotual, 
 I'. I!. 370. 
 
 IV. Dismissing Actions. 
 
 Default— .SVc»r(V// for Coitn— A ji/iral. ]~'l'he 
 fact that tlie plaiiitiir has lodged an ajipeal 
 against an order for seonrity for oosts is "sutli- 
 eieiiL cause," witliin tlie nieanini; of M\de l'J4(), 
 to excin])t liiin from haxin;,' liis action clisnii.s-!ed 
 for faihnc to comply with the order, pcndinj,' 
 the appeal. 
 
 And if a motion to di8niis.s is made, the JKst- 
 ter practice is to enlarge it hefore the appellate 
 trihnnal, to he rlealt with after tlie main (pu's- 
 tion has heen cletermined. lii iini/l v. /■Jui/iin' 
 PrhUiiitj mid Piilili-ihiiii/ Cmiiiiaity, 15 1*. K. 4H1). 
 
 Default — .VmvovV// /be ContH — O'fiuTj-.] — 
 Where an order for secnvity for costs directs 
 tliat unless security he given witliin .a liniite.l 
 time the action sliall he dismissed, and security 
 is not given within the time limited, the action 
 is to he regarded as dismissi'il, unless the dcfeii- 
 <lant treats it as still alive. Cnriir v. S/nhh.--, tj 
 Q. V>. 1). 110, followed. 
 
 Rule I'J.'il does not give a plaintill' any fur- 
 ther time for or relieve hir.i from the obligation 
 of putting in his security for costs ; it only 
 enables him to remove tlie .stay effected by the 
 order, for the sole ]nir]iose of making a motion 
 for judgment under Kule 7.")9 ; and if he does 
 not succeed in tluit motion, he must oliey the 
 order by putting in the full security. 
 
 r>ut where the defendant, after the time for 
 giving .security under the order had expireit, 
 opposed a motion for judgment under Itule I'M), 
 and appealed to a .Judge in Chambers and after- 
 wards to a Divisional (,'ourt from the order 
 made upon such motion, without taking the 
 objection that the action was at an end : — 
 
 Held, that he had waived the objection ; and 
 a bond tiled after the time limited was allowed. ' 
 
 Upon appeal, decision varied by extending, 
 pursuant to Itule 48.'), the time for giving accu- ' 
 rity. llolkmkr v. Fj\ndki-'<, 1(> P. R. •J-jh, 31,'.. 
 
 Default— .S'/(i^<;)/(r»^ o/ r/,/('//f.] — Uniler Rule 
 4S.') the Court or Judge may, in a proper ease, 
 crdcr a ))lainti(F to deliver his statement of 
 claim within a limited time shorter than that 
 .•illowed by Rule 'Mi'.i ; but an order dismissing 
 the action for failure to deliver the statement 
 within the time so limited i.s not, having regard 
 to Rule 040, to bo made until after default. 
 
 And an order directing that the action should 
 be dismissed for want of prosecution if the state- 
 ment of claim was not delivered within eight 
 days, was amended so as to make it direct only 
 that the plaintiff should deliver the statemeil 
 within eight days. Arm.-<troii(/ v. Tovoiitn ainl 
 Richmond Jlill street R. W. Co., 15 R. R. 44!). 
 
 a statement of claim. The plaintitTs' reason for 
 the delay was that the ilefeiidant had no meaiis 
 to jiay during the period of delay. 
 
 U[ion moticm by the defendant to dismiss and 
 Bnrrij v. UaiiUij, 15 ercjss-motion by the iilaintifli to validate tin 
 delivery of the statement of claim : — 
 
 field, that the autiun should he allowed to 
 I proceed. 
 
 Terms imposed upon tho plaintiffs. FiiiUe v. 
 Lilt:, 14 1'. R. 440. 
 
 V. Isnrri.iNd m- I'ai'kus. 
 
 County Court — 1/ii/h ( 'oiirl.] — Where ,t 
 motion is made to a Judge of the High Court oi 
 the Master in Chambers under itule I'JOO to 
 change the venue in a 'niiity Court action, the 
 jiapers should not he intituled in the High 
 Court of Justice, hut in the County Court. 
 Fenjii-i'iii v. Goldinj, 15 1', R. 4.'). 
 
 Divisions of High Court. J— Where an iiitei- 
 pleader order is entitled in two actions, in ditTer- 
 eiit Divisions of the High Court, there beijii; 
 two executions in the shcriH"s liands, an a)i|iLiil 
 from the order may be entertained in eitlirr 
 Division, although one of the execution creditors 
 has been barr(Ml l)y the order, from which theru 
 i.s no appeal on that ground. //(n/almom v. 
 ih-tindy, 10 1". R. 47. 
 
 Divisions of High Court.]— .SVe Clarke v, 
 Ci--:i;ih''>ii, 14 V. R. .'{4, ant>- 14. 
 
 VI. JrUISDICTION (IF Dl;.\INAGE ReKEREK. 
 Sf'i- MUSICU'AIj CoKrOKATIONS, X. 
 
 VII. .JriilSDlCTlON OF JuiHiK IN CHAMBERS. 
 
 Appeal — Fitud lliporl — Jri'cha'iics' IJcn Pro- 
 f/^fdiii'/.l—See H'aiiiirr v. O'Donndl, 14 R. R. 
 
 •2.i4, ((H^;017. 
 
 Certificate of Taxing Officer — Mulion loSij 
 A-<idi .] — .bVt Hardin;/ v. Knitil, 15 P. R. so, 
 ant" •-'US. 
 
 Contempt of Court — Mo/ion fur Attaclimait.] 
 — iVt SoiUhirk/c V. Hart; 15 P. R. '2:m, 331, .((,(■ 
 177. 
 
 Costs — Action — Stttlcm('nt.'\—Sie Ki,i,h,-- 
 ho'ltr v. Hat'., 10 P. R. 30, 191, ante -233. 
 
 Costs— /-'e)«»rre)-.]—,S'ee Jone/i v. Miller, hi 
 P. R. 92, ante 237. 
 
 Rescission of Order.]— .S'ee F/ctt v. Wa>/, 14 
 P. R. 123, poyt 807. 
 
 Venne—C/iange of- Countt/ Court— Apiital.] 
 —Ste McAtliMer v. Cole, Hi P. R. 105, imt, 
 TiuAi., VII. 
 
 VIII. Jl-RISDICTION OF LoCAL MASTER. 
 
 Default — Want of Pro-ircution.] — An action I 
 liy solicitors to recover the amount; of a bill of 
 eosts was begun and the defendant appeared ; Pi-oceedlngs for the Winding-up of Com- 
 in February, 1883. Xo further step was taken panies.j— .Vee Companv, VIH. 
 
SOS 
 
 !, when the pliiintiffsi delivered 
 ini. Till! ipIiiiiitiffH' reason for 
 t tlio ilifeiiiliiiit Imd no meaiiH 
 perioil of di'liiy. 
 ■ tlio ilffciiiliiiit to dismiss and 
 lie iilaiiitidV co salidate tin 
 itcniunt of rlaini : — 
 action siiould be allowed to 
 
 upon tlio pliiintitfs. Finkh. v. 
 
 rt-r.iMi i>i' I'Ai'Kiis. 
 
 — Ili'lh ('o\ir!.] — Where ii 
 a diidge of the High t'cmrt in- 
 lanihers under Itule I'JtiO to 
 in a /:)iiiity Court action, the 
 t be intituled in the High 
 but in the (,'nunty Court. 
 ;/, 15 1'. H. 4;!. 
 
 gh Court.]— U'here an iutti- 
 titled in two actions, in difTcr- 
 he High Court, there buiiii; 
 the sheritt"s hands, an aiijiiiil 
 lay be entertained in eitliii 
 one of the execution creditors 
 ■ the order, from which tin lu 
 hat ground. //m/alioom v. 
 47. 
 
 igh Court.]— .S're Clarke v. 
 . :i4, an/i: 14. 
 
 N (IF l)ll.\IN.\CiK ReKEKKK. 
 •AL CoRl'OHAriaNS, X. 
 
 3X OF JriKiK IK Chambers. 
 
 lieport — Mi'dmiiics' Lien Pro- 
 /net- V. O'Donndl, 14 V. R, 
 
 axing Officer — MuHoit loS^i 
 'in;/ V. Knu^t, 1.') P. I!, so, 
 
 urt — Motion fur Attachment.] 
 Hare, 15 P. R. ■2.39, 331, .<«(. 
 
 — Sctl/am'nt.]—S(e Kidrlcf,-. 
 ■\ K. .30, 191, ante l!33. 
 
 r.]—See Jones v. Miller, hi 
 
 rder.]— ,S'ee Flett v. Way, 14 
 
 of- Count!/ Court — Appeal.] 
 \ Cole, 10 P. K. 105, jmt, 
 
 ;tion of Local Master. 
 
 [• the Winding-up of Com- 
 KVXY, VIII. 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 ici'lTer ^^^';°rr,7,r ""''"•°« '^«'=^- ; , «;- °^ P-ceedl„g« - Motion for ^ 
 
 IX. jt,„ts,„„u. of loca. MA..EK OF TFr,.Ks. I ^'/S^,:;.S?;"„Kri?;?,S'az:/^ 
 
 Si'e Land Trn.K.s Act. 
 
 \. JUK.SI,I,T10N- OF .MamTKK I.N CllAMBEIW. 
 
 Certificate Of Taxing Omcer-.l/„//,„, to s,f 
 iSot ' '"^ ''■ ^""■"' '•' ''• R- 80, 
 
 Costs - A rlion — Srtllemfnl. ]_,S',v Knicker 
 bnrbr V. Jiut:, l(i P. H. so, m,ante L';«. 
 
 Municipal Election - Va/i.lin, of- Trial 1 
 
 - .eld, by \lao.\lahon, ,J., that the .Ma.ste „ 
 
 '.■i".U!.'s had, by ih, co.ubiued elleet „ " 
 
 .1 a Judge 10 .leternnne the valhlity of the 
 el..ot.on of the detendanl, and that hi.s determi 
 "HUou w,,s M.al; and it was within the c . 
 
 ii::ih:s,:;.Sh'"ri:';Sir«'''^"-*-'^the 
 
 Held by the Divisional Court, foUou .,- the 
 ,,rmci,Je of Uio election in /^.ir/^o.v. .!/,.;?,,•'; 
 - U. K, ll.S, that the provincia.l loi-islatur, 
 uul power to invest the Ma.ster with »,tl S 
 « try eontrovc.rted municipal elec i , eV 
 Ji':i,nn e.v rel. Med, lire v. liirk..ii, 21 O. ll!^ hi2.' 
 
 XI. Ji-.us„„Tio.v OK Master ,v Ordinary. 
 
 panresT'*s"*r'°''*''° Winding-up of Com- 
 
 panies. I— .^M Comi-a.nv, VIII. "*»« 
 
 XII. JiniM.icTioN OF Refebee. 
 .Foreign Commission. ]-.SVr Broohiv 0«>r 
 
 .".• damages t;: the pLnUdflur^ It, ri^i! 
 .. provisioual ,u, hcial di.slrict, an order was .nale 
 liy the Ma.ster in Chambers, assumi, tu . t 
 nmierthe U'norgaui.cd Territ.a-y {c Ii S O 
 
 ) till, tnstiict Judge, rcserviiicr fm-tlie,. ,1;,.,,,. 
 
 rrrrof"rV7"^^''^^^^'''"r:'"- 
 
 ,f f,. 1' a .Judge ill Court. N,.tie.. 
 
 1 trial wa.s given for the iJistrict Court 1 n .1 
 1.^ c;ise was heard by the District Ju le w 
 "luide certain liud ngs of f lot ■,« , "„ i V, 
 -laniages, and .lirected iu .',„e^,; /''T-'^--'^'^ ^lie 
 
 ^.tj^piaintin: i^u'£iS',^;;i'f -'!;-;•: 
 
 "luat on .such findings before t T n , ^ ■ 
 
 Curt, the defendant at the a ue ' inl ami,,. ," ' 
 "y 'rom the judgment or rep.a't wl up rt ' 
 ■hulge disposed of both inoti'uis, d 'c'ctiii ,,1 ' 
 '">.'nt to be entered for the . lai nt ff i^„ ?,; ' 
 amount fouii,! by the District .jVd'' ''"" 
 
 On appeal to a Divisional Court" -'. 
 
 ■"'";ed unreversed and not "appcale f,om 
 
 oC,H,.t would not interfere jt/ii^t^'.^e"^: 
 M < f the j,-.ri.sd,ctiun of the .Master were "n 
 
 '"I'Peal. /v<,,«,- V. Jinrhan.iaii, 25 0. R. ]. 
 
 XIII. DniiERS. 
 
 Consent Order— /«,7,-,,//;,,„ 1 ,, , , ., ^ 
 
 McMaMtr v. Radford, 10 P. R. 20. "^""e*" 
 
 Oorrectlon-.)/;,/„/.v_r/me.l_A Judire mav 
 i'lways correct anything in an ord:^ wl fclX^ 
 
 :LT~.^z;v;:"' ""^'■~«''' "^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 ■default as i witness '"''■''"° """^ "^ ^^^^ 
 
 Osf an'i,H'';.""f'l"« n" '^■""^''^ P-'ovisions of Rule 
 Jo4, an Older of the Court or of a ,Iud-o is no? 
 tor all purposes and to all intents a uLme"t ' 
 and no debt e\ sts bv vi, i-„ f 1 J""s"ient ; 
 • was sued on he,J ^ ■•■ "^ '""'' '"' "'''l'"- »« 
 
 jud.auent may be enforced, and does not ex 
 
 costs set aside. /.V J/Xv/ P ° '-"nation of 
 C'artAy, 15 P. ",. 201 ''' ^''''■' «»<^ -^^c- 
 
 ^^^'';z^!'^''-^-'-^''^'^^-^^'u^^^ 
 
 1 20 a If 1^?; ^^°'-'-« </ 0...no a«rf bZ\JI', 
 
807 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 ■x Parte Order— /^mciWoji. ]~A Judge or tlio 
 i\ .(.Htt^r ill Clmiiilxir.s liiiH [lowt'i' to itiiiiiiHidtr ii 
 iimttcr wliicli li.iM lioiii liroiiglit licfoii! Iiim tx 
 /jartn, ini tli<> a|)|ilit"itic)ii nf an o[i|i()Hiiig paitj ; 
 iHiil lie cui iiIno i)]1(Ii ii]> ii iimttir in it:«p<(:t ol 
 which III! oidir liiiM liLi'U iiiiidir after iioUci' iiiid 
 mioii dct'iuilt to .shi'W ciiUHc, if 111' i.s HiitiMticd 
 that (>|)|)ositiiiii WHK iiitoiidtii ami tlml any in- 
 juHticc li.iH nriHvn. 
 
 Semli/t, that if nct't'SHary tho wonls "fj- /my/c 
 order" in iJiih; TiMd iniiy In: road so as to tover ' 
 caHfH ^'oing iiy default, where tliroiigh Home slip 
 eauite lias not been shewn. I'Icll \. H'ai/, IJ I'. 
 It. I'J.i. i 
 
 Ex Parte Order— h'xii union of Time, j'ur i 
 S'ervit-e of 11/ 1>. )— iSV (Uliiiuiir v. Maijfr, U I'. 
 K. l'J(», y/(/N^ 8l;{ ; lluii'Utinlv. huniiuicn Bunk, 
 If) I'. K. f)(i. '-"J .S. C. R. |;iO, />(«; «14; Cairns' 
 V. Air/h, Hi I'. II. KMJ, iio.il 814. 
 
 Multiplicity of Orders. |~6V(.' /,'« Conmnpuli- 
 Ian Life Ansiifia/iun, Ri Coxino/tiilitmi Caxualli/ 
 Aswcitttioii, ITt P. R. 185, ante 244. 
 
 XI v. Refkrence. 
 
 - Dnmnijf.t - hisi-ri lion 
 f tlic trial Judge to I Valcn v 
 aniage.s, as ii (juestion 
 
 Directing Reference 
 
 — ^4/7y(,(/.J- 'J'hu right 
 refer the i|iie.stion of d 
 
 ari.siiig in the aetioii, under see. 101 of the 
 Judieature Act, is indiisimtahle, at all events as 
 a matter of diseretitJii and Hiilijeet to review ; 
 and it is for the party ohjeeting to the lefereiiee 
 to .-.hew that the (iiseretioii has been wrongly 
 exercised . 
 
 And mIicio, in an action for damages for 
 injury to the plaintitt s land on the bank of a 
 navigable river and to his business as a boat- 
 man, by the nets of the three several defen- 
 dants, ■\vho ow iieil fa^^ -inills higher up on the 
 stieani, in throwing refuse iiitoit, it apjicared 
 that the plaintill's title to relief and the liabil- 
 ity of the defendants had been established in a 
 former aetion, and the trial .ludge heard the 
 case only so far jis to satisfy himself that the 
 plaintiti had established a //»'!W'! yWc/V ease on 
 the i|Uestion of damages, and direeted a refer 
 
 eosts, althonifh IiIh ronduet had been suili ,ih 
 properly lo evoke legal inc(iiiry, refused to aw an! 
 a lefeieiiee as to daniages. (laull v. Murraii "I 
 
 (>. i;. 4,-.s. -^ 
 
 pireotlnB Reference— .S'/w/i// /,v/^r(,"— A .• 
 
 //('///// ^ />/!)//(/</"'. !-• Kxeept by eonsent, (lie 
 Court has no power to onler a refereiiec! uiniu 
 see. 101 of the Ontario Judicature Act, R, S u 
 eh. 44, to any person other tlinii ollieial ref. n i 
 or the .ludge ot a ( niinty Court. 
 
 SVhere the ipiestiun of the defendant's lial.il 
 ity ill an action is cxoressly raiseil on the pi, ail 
 ings, such c|Uestioii slieuhrbe determined belei. 
 a lefereiiee of all the i|Uustioiis of fact in ri,i 
 trovcrsy, iniludiug the amount of damages-, j, 
 ord.ered. Fni>Ur\. T<iwn.-liip o/' Jia/riiili. Il 
 1'. I!. 4l'!». 
 
 Proceedings on Reference— /'«/«// — 11 , 
 
 J-n«/.J--'riie object of l!ule;"il is to protect t! 
 Court and its ollieers from undue delay in iL 
 prosecution of references. 
 
 U'licri. there has lieen umli!.; .ielay in li^i 
 prosecution of .-i reference, the par^y haviii;; lii. 
 conduct of it should not ))(■ retufcd a wai in: 
 to proceed, if he applies therctor b,'forc :,i:, 
 uetioii has been taken by the Master iii, it 
 Rule !t\, and there is nothing Init dela\ ;. 
 interfere with the granting of it. J{i' Ciiiii;„>, 
 CcDiiwji. 14 I'. I!. oOl'. 
 
 h'riiU, 
 
 I'roceedlngs on Reference 
 
 7!eii.i<,iis fi.r J,'<jiori:i~HM, 'that the M;i 
 was the final Judge of tho eri<libility oi tl,- 
 witnesses, and hi. I'eport should not lie sM,r 
 baidv because smiie irrelevant evideiu-e liiay h;. ,r 
 bien given of a ebaiacter not likely to 1 ,ni- 
 allecteil his judgment, especially as "no apju.,: 
 was tid<cii fidiii his ruling on theevidence. 
 
 On a refeieiiee to a Master, t lie latter, pioviiln: 
 he sulliciently follows the directions of the li, 
 eree, is not obliged to give his leasons for. <•! 
 enter into a detailed e.xjjlanation of, his k pci: 
 to the Court. IJooth v. Jiallc, 21 .*<. C. R. •,:(;. 
 
 Proceedings on Reterence—Farripn C\mi- 
 mis.^ion—.hirixliiiidii <,/ J,'i/, )■,(-,]— X. referei 
 upon a reference under sec. 'lO-' of the .luiiii.i 
 ture Act, R. S. O. ch. 44, has jurisdiction 
 
 ■. , " \. , , I -"•"• "-'•, >>. . ■. '.'. '11. T-t, oas uiisoicniiu i 
 
 ence to a.ssess and appoition tlani among the , order the examination of foreign witi.e-i 
 tictendunts, reserving luither direction.^ and i under a conimi.ssion. 
 
 costs : — 
 
 Held, that there was no miscarriage, and the 
 discretion of the tiial Judge should not be 
 overruled, liuttd- x. Booth, l(i T. R. 1S5. 
 
 Rule :i^..S7, .■J2, oS, oO, 7;^, 
 
 .y* «)/-/(, the jirovisioiisof I'.ule rjliOareenibiaiii; 
 
 by inference in Rule ;).') so as to enable the n-inn 
 
 by express terms, to grant certificates for tin 
 
 i issue of foreign eomniissious. 
 
 Directing neters^ace-Dawauc^-Injumtion \ Rut the mere form, whether by certifieale or 
 
 -t ml, rial:,,.,, - JJi.nuhon - A,,pml.\-'ih^ order, is immaterial, having regard to Piules 441. 
 
 jurisdiction to avaid an in(|uiry as to or to i 442. 
 
 assess damages without a reference, where an I jlmjvard v. Mnlmil j;,.,rre A^mriallc;.. 
 uviuuetion has been granted and an undertaking flMllJ 2 Q. R. 2,S(), and M„ca/pi,w v. CiMr. 
 
 as to damages given, is a discretionary one, to 
 bo exercised judicially and not capriciously. 
 
 Where, in an aetioii to set aside a sale of 
 goods as fraudulent, a claim for damages by 
 reason of an injunction was set up in the 
 defence, and the trial Judge was, on the evi- 
 dence, of opinion that no damage was proved 
 
 occasioned by the injunction as distinct from authority to make an ordcT depriving a solicitor 
 the < etnmeiit arising from the litigation, and of his lien for costs on a fund in cSurt ,m the 
 no .additional evidence having been given, tho ! ground that adverse parties have a prior cia.c 
 livisional Court, under the eireumstanees of ; on such fund for costs which the said solicitors 
 tins case, wliere the defendant was given Lis : client has been personally ordered to pav, tlit 
 
 [bS9;i] 1 Q. B. 545, followed. Brooks 
 C'lonjian Bay Saw-Loij Satrnijc Co., Ki V. Ii. 
 5!1. 
 
 Proceedings on Reference— •.S'o/(V/foi',s Lli? 
 — J)i>i(i/l(,ir,iiiCf.] — A referee before wlioni 
 administration pi,iceedings are taken has no 
 
808 
 
 I liJH cfiiKliict had lieeii aiich m 
 IV li'(,'al iiH|uiiy, ri'fiiHi'd toiiWiinl 
 1 (l.iiiiiigL'H. (,'iiit/f V. Murray. L'l 
 
 aference — Spcritil /{f/tree — /, -i 
 
 ■^1. I— Mxcriit l)y (■iiiiat'llt, llif 
 iwrr til nnlor a icfcrfiico uiih,i 
 • iitiiriii Jiulicianic Art, H. S o 
 i'i.-*on othiT tliiiii olliiiiil rcf' II I 
 a ( iiiiiity Ccitii t. 
 ichtinii (,t till! (li'fciiiliint'H liiiKil- 
 IH exiircsMly raisi'd on tlii' jilra.l 
 iiiii J^liciild III' (U'tciiiiiiiod lii-ldir 
 11 till' (|iii,'atiiiii.s of I'ai't in r(;i 
 iiiij llic aniiiuMt (if diiniagfs-, i, 
 ir V. '/'oini.'^/nji nj Uulfiijh. Il 
 
 S09 
 
 on Reference — Dthtii — II 
 I'rt of Kiilo j')l ix to ])i-otc'il 
 iii'iM from undue dulay in 
 ffcreiifes. 
 
 liaH lift'n undi!'.; diday in 
 M'fi ri'me, the ;)ar+y liavinjj 
 ouid not 111! lotiui.'d a wan 
 11' ii)i|ilifs tlii'iclor ln'fori' ; 
 taki'n liy tlic Master iiu 
 lii'iu is notliin;j; Ijut dolay 
 ii: urantinj,' ot it. Ih- t'ui'ir 
 
 14 P. i;. uoj. 
 
 on Reference - Kriditm — 
 1(197. J— J It'll! , 'tliat till! Mii.M 
 iid(;« of the fiidiliility n! \\v 
 lij rojsort flimild not Iji' si n: 
 le it'i'i-'lcvant cviili luomay In,'.. 
 
 fl'aiactn' not liki-ly to l.,i\i- 
 jniciit, I'spocially as no aiipi;.; 
 lis niliiii^ on tlif fviilencc. 
 to a Mastir, tliu lattiT, inoviiltil 
 Hows till' diicrtions of tlu' ik'- 
 ;i'd to givt! liis roasonM for. nr 
 lied f.xjilanation of, his M']iiiit 
 ooth V. liutle, 21 S. C. R. il,)7 
 
 an Reference — Fureifin Con, 
 (iicii (;/■ A',_/;,-fe, |_A rcfcifi 
 .' iiiidcr st'c. IOl' of tilt' .luiiii.i 
 (.). I'll. '44, has jnrisdictidii i" 
 ination of foreign witiit.-i-i.- 
 lon. 
 
 "i.S, ii'J, ';i, iiii'J, consiili'i'i'i!. 
 ,i?ion.sof Hide ollOai't' t'niliiacii; 
 lie .■)■) so as to enalile the ri-ftrit. 
 I, to grant eertilieatts for tlic 
 immiissions. 
 
 orni, whetlier by eertificaie or 
 lal, liaviiig regard to Rnle.-, 441. 
 
 Mnttial Ei.'irre AfKwidlk-iu 
 
 ■"(i, and Mnrii/jjinf v. Vulihr. 
 
 5ii>, followed. Brooh v. 
 
 nc-Loij tiahoijc Co., Ki P. R. 
 
 n Reference— iS'o/?V'/Voc'.< /.in 
 — A referee before wlioiii 
 loceedings are taken has iiu 
 ! an order depriving a .solii'itor 
 its on a. fund in Court on the 
 rse parties have a prior ckuE 
 losts which the said solicitor's 
 lersoually ordered to pay, tlit 
 
 .ilmmigtrat.on order not having so din rted the 
 .ftereo, uud there l.i'ing no goneral Order pe 
 "uttng .„.'!, ,„, .nterferenie with the solicit r's 
 
 ProceedlnKs on Reference -.Vei'W.,./- /r,„.. 
 
 '" "mMilii'rH tor an order dispensing w'.,^" 
 H' - '.t a warrant and all s„l,s.',|'„,'„t p*'n„" i ' 
 a - he .Masters olhee u,.o„ ,.„rta,n al s.'„t d e f" n 
 
 ;:,:;;:p"^::tif;"::"""-""'^^ e,nterl'st'L^ 
 
 'f"M. I'.v.Meredith, ,)., that Hide 4ti7 did nut 
 .|.I.^Iothe,.ase,aMd,astl,,MMat:', 1 .1"^^^ 
 .lKMa..terHd,scret>oii.,lK.order.ho,ddno,l'el 
 
 1 e.'ive heinyuiyen to renew the appli.alion • -^ 
 
 Held. l.vHoyd. '..that, in aeel. dane' with 
 
 hue .i, the practi.e should lie regulated V 
 
 an.dogy to „I. Mu, and the order slo^ 1 i 
 
 iNiide. Smith V. Ili„i.,l„„, 15 j'. k, 1,s! 
 
 »bit„te and Kuh's .applicalile to reterenee. sho , I 
 nnl and need not 1,1,. so r ead as to pnidue e 1 t 
 r«..al oftwodistinet lines of praet ee i, v'te 
 eaoeto report.s of Masters and leferees 
 
 he well-settled i-roiedure in ihe'iaseof ,he 
 "•■'l"""v report is e.vtended l„ the st i t , .v 
 reports ot referees under «ee. .01 o the • : 
 
 .halieature .\et, K. N. t). eh. 44 nwMU. 
 
 .\ud a motion to vary a repu'rt uiKin a refer 
 ™ce under that .seetiun. aith.'iugh made ,t the 
 .*iMie time an a mouo..i ror ju.lgnieiit ., , ,! 
 r|.,..a ;t, eaunot he entertained mdeS a de u , d 
 th. tnue limited l,y Rule.s S48 and ,S4!. 
 
 T'l"- ^'f'- '•■* '^' '«•• ••^•14, not fo lowed 
 ti:thorii\\ \aiHliis,ii^ 1,-, |>. K. o,j., "»cii. 
 
 PRAOTIOE. 
 
 intothe whoh.eas.. upon tl,., .vidcnee, h„twa« 
 I. ind to ad„pt ,|„. ,','tere.'-s ti.idings and t^ 
 « t. the judgment whi.h those linding.. , | * 
 'or. /,•,,/„„•„ V. WuidiM,,, 1.-. V It "u 
 
 "I'P'.ned of and f. wed. Vv ',',., L",, "V ^^1 
 
 '■Ixx'n-.SoHn, v. I •«/,„/, 24 .S. C. H. wJl. 
 
 Report ~Cn,,lirnm>i,m--K.rrnition.]^\\'\^t,rii 
 
 ■end , ji'^?'''''''^ "t alimony whieh tlm 
 r 1 1, ''i '"'>> ^••^^'•^'"i-m Mi:.v ho i.ssue.l 
 
 |i''':t''';r-;,^!!.;;,'|-,/-';,''<;|;-v-iandf,dh,wed. 
 
 n S';i.::::r'-'''''->^-'-'^i'-''f--,ee:houhi 
 as.oihed-mnri;e~:h;i::i;['i.;.^^^^^^ 
 
 ""I hoth parties should have , ,n„d facilities ot' 
 
 ■ -in;: .^■ni'^'-'''';f'"-'!^i~ 
 
 w 
 
 SKfONI, AlTl.lfATIONS. 
 
 Report _ Coiun-maflon - A, m. „/.]-.},, .,„ 
 ction liy \ ,g,,i,„, ,, ,„unioi,,ali V fordan v. " 
 fon, injury to property hy the negli'^M^t c,*!,, 
 
 :n:^^dait;:>i:'iv^:/t:r~wf-wedto 
 £iSi""ihr;e;i:!-'t;;e^cia 
 
 iwt the appeal was too late, no notice h-i • , 
 hi le S4S, and refused to e.xtend the time for 
 
 I''Uiij tUat the whole ease sIk.hI.i i ,. ■ 
 
 ;;P^.. the evidence, wlneh^tco;;^^:"!;; 
 
 Held, athrniing the decision of the Court nf 
 Appeal, that the appeal not having een la'o idit 
 wit m one month from the date of the leS 
 
 ITT ''•\*-;"'-, J^"''' «-««. it was toXe. 
 thdt he report had to he filed hv the r ■ tv 
 
 rennn i '' •"■ 'V*^^'"'" •^•. <ii'-seutiMg, that the 
 qort having been confirmed by lapse of tine 
 
 Son fm."'?,r"' "«"•"'■ tl'e Cou'Jt on t : 
 motion fo, judgnient was not at liberty to go 
 
 i Leave toAppeal M7,„//i„,.„,,.),.M_VVheru 
 .n.adeundi'rsec.74,anii;ef,id'b;\Xw''a 
 
 iam:^iij;';i:l;i::r'' ^^■"' "'•'•- -'-'-^ 
 
 statute. A,. Sanna O.l Co., 15 P. U. ;j47. 
 
 A- /,Wi„./.s y Do.oran, 10 P. R. 450, „,^,^ 
 
 I o, Atlor,,,!,.<,eua-f,l /or Ontario v. Attomtv- 
 (-'tiitra/jorOnia,/,,. ] Ks. (', l;. JS4_ -"'"'"^"V 
 
 XVl. .Skkvu'k of ['.m-kkh. 
 
 i Dispensing with Service. ]-.S>,. Smith v 
 
 |"fheer of a luigant corporation of a s tena 
 
 co;lAI^''T/)rr [/■' '"%— ""ation'Kl^ 
 eoverj. Al,//.^ \. Mtrrtr Co., J5 P. R. 281. 
 
 Substltutio.ial Service.]-A witness is not 
 
 .;>Me to attaehmeiitfoi- di«,!bedience toMub' 
 
 pu'iia served .substitutionally pursuant to an 
 
 ^VII. SrAvi.vG Procebdinos. 
 Action- .4 /,».v, of I'ro»...., of Court.] - See 
 
I If. 
 
 811 
 
 PRACTICE 
 
 812 
 
 ^^ Action — Co'h of Fnniifr Arlioti rnpaid.] — 
 Thi) practice liy wlihli, whi^n the (Ic'feiuUiifii 
 cofltii of a foiiiHT iiitioii fur tlio snino or huliHtiiii- 
 tially the Hniiii' cniiMo wiir imiMiid, IhtMlefciidiitit 
 waH oiititlrMi t(i Imvc flic later iiitinii stiiycil until 
 Ihey Hlioiild In' ]i,\iil, in now mi|ii iHcdfd l,y fhu 
 tfffect of |{ulc ;t, flic dft'ciidiuit'H only rcinidy 
 being to iijiply under iluiu \-24H for .scuuiity for 
 i^ouUi in the Hocoml action. C'limitl'ell v. Kliiie, 
 16 r. K. 440. " 
 
 Bxeoutlon. ]— .Vrc Kxkci'tion. 
 
 Judgment — .l/()//(.// /« S^i Aiiil<:] When a 
 ■notion to a Divisional Court to xct asido the 
 judgini'nt pidnounicd at the trial, hut not yet 
 untered, Iium hcen set down for hearinj,', there in 
 a stay of |iroceedinj,'s upon .inih judgment ///io 
 facto, unlcHM it should he otlierwiae ordered. 
 tVrnterii llaiih of Chiki'Ih v. CotirliiiKHirhr, l(i 
 P. R. 513. 
 
 Judgtaent-S/iti'^fiirtlnii—Afo/loii. ]—A tnotion 
 •<y the defcndaiit.M, after judgnieiit in an action, 
 to stay proceedings therein, afti'r .sitisfaction of 
 the plaintifT'H claiiiis. .sliould he made in I'hatii- 
 •wra, not in Court. 
 
 Where HUeh a inotieii was made in Court, it 
 WHH unlarj;ed into Chanihers, and costs were 
 ordered aj,'ainHt the applicants. I.tf v. Mhnicu 
 ileal Entatii Co., l.j P. 11. 'IHH. 
 
 Jna.BTaBnt—Slti>/ nf h'n/i-y — EJut of.] — 
 Where an interim injunction wa.s ohtained liy 
 the plaintifl's restraininj,' the defendants from 
 doing certain acts until the trial or other final 
 disposition of the action or untih further order, 
 and by the judgment pronounced after the trial 
 the action was dismissed. l)ut the entry of the 
 judgment was stayed until the fifth day of the 
 nojrt sittings of a Division.al Court :— 
 
 Held, that the etiect of tlie stay was to leave 
 the whole matter in "'nhi quo until the defendants 
 should heconio entitled to enter judgment, and 
 by 80 doing to put an end to tlie injunction in 
 accordance with its terms. Cai-ro/l v. Provinciiil 
 Natural Oas ami Fuel Co. of Ontario. 10 I*. U. 
 ol8. 
 
 'UriBi- Ap)ifal front Order Directimi Xeir 
 Trial.]—See Tuiai,, V. 
 
 XVIII. >Stvi,e of Causk. 
 
 Action agalnBt Crown.]— In this case the 
 action was instituted against the (iovernment 
 of the Province of Queliec, hut when the case 
 came up for hearing on the appeal to the Supreme 
 Court, the Court ordered that the name of Her 
 Majesty the (,)ueen lie substituted for that of 
 the Province of Quebec. Grant v. The Oueeii. 
 20 S. C. R. 297. 
 
 Firm Name — Amcjidmnit.] — A pcison carry- 
 ing on business alone, in a name denoting a 
 partnership, cannot bring an action in that 
 name. Where, however, such name consisted of 
 bissumanie, prefaced by the initials of liia 
 Christian names, and followed by the words 
 "and Co. : "— i 
 
 Hehl, Ihnt thmo wordi in the style of catmo 
 in an action wen- mere nurphmage, or, if in.t, 
 they Hhouhl be struck out ; mid, as the miHl;il,. 
 Wfis trilling, and im one was misled or afTec i.,l 
 by it, .i:i iimemlment at the trial shoMid hn. 
 been granted a.s of cnurNe, Mit^un v. Mciiriihi. , 
 H Timis L. K. W»."i, ilistinguishcd. Liiii'i\ 
 Thomjivin, lU P. H. .■ihl, 
 
 Sie Clnrb V. Crtiiihlim, 14 P. I!. .■14, ani' II 
 
 .\1.\. WkIT t)!'' SfMMoX.S, 
 
 1. (/emrnl/y. 
 
 Copies.]— A writ of summons is a " pleading 
 or otiier hicuincnt" within the meaning of l.'n!, 
 XM), and more than four copies cannot be ta\i ,i 
 S]mr/:i v. J'nrily, \r, P. R. I. 
 
 Issue of— I'rori-iiiiKi/ Jvdi'ial Di.-drtct'. \ 
 'I'lie indorsement on a writ of summons, isMiiil 
 in the .listrict of Thunder H.vy after the paving 
 of .")7 Vict. ch. .'fJ (().!, shewed that the cl.nm 
 was for cancellation of a lease of a mining hm- 
 tion in thedistrict of Hainy Kiver, for posses-ion 
 of the location, and for an injunction restraining 
 the defendaut from entering tliercon: — 
 
 Held, that the action was not one of ejeii- 
 ment within the meaning ot Rule O.').'!, aii,l 
 therefore the venue was not local, and if waa 
 not necessary that the writ should be issued l.j 
 the local liegistiar at I'at PortaL.'(' under sec. ";i 
 of the Act. KiKihll V. Krwl, l('i P. I!. KiT 
 
 '2. Animilmmit, 
 
 Character of Parties.]— Where parties an 
 before the Court ipn) executors, and tlie .simi' 
 parties should als<i be summoned >iii(\ trusties 
 an amendment to that ell'ect is sutHcient, and ;i 
 new w rit of summons is not necessary. Firn>T 
 V. Trc'/iaiinier, 24 .s. C. R. HG. 
 
 Character of Parties.]— .9ec McNah v. !/./.■ 
 
 doiimll, li) P. H. 14, y,(W813. 
 
 Shortening Time for Appearance — Jml'i- 
 ment.\—.\ writ of summons issued for aeiviue 
 out of the jurisdiction rc(|uired an appeanuue 
 thereto to be entered witliiu eight weeks 
 after service, inclusive of the (hiy of service. 
 The iiluintiffs obtained an order shortening 
 the time for appearance to ten days, not 
 speiifying whether inclusive or exclusive of the 
 day of service, and amended the writ under 
 order by merely substituting "ten days" for 
 "eight weeks." The writ as amended was 
 served, and the order with it, on the 27th Janu- 
 ary. On the Oth February following judgment 
 was signed for default of appearance : — 
 
 Held, that the judgment was irregular; for 
 the writ was not amended in accordance with 
 the order, and the latter must govern : umi 
 according to its terms, having regard to Eiile 
 474, the ten days were to be reckoned exclu- 
 sively of the day of service, and the defendants 
 had the whole ..f the (ith February to appear. 
 Bank of Bri/i..h Xorlh America v. //(/v/us 16 
 P. R. 61. 
 
812 
 
 o worda in tlm itylo of caimit 
 niori' »iii|ilii"i\|,'(', or, if n.t. 
 ■i\eU iiiit ; mill, an tlic iiiiHi.il < 
 111 olU' wiiM tiii.Hlnl (ir iiffii n 1 
 ii'iit at till' trial -IkihIiI lin. 
 ' (Miurhc. .1/'(,«<//( V. Mi'iiri'lif, 
 iti.'i, ilixtiiiguiHlird, Liuhi \ 
 U. .■.1(1. 
 
 rtiijhtni,, it I'. It. ;)», am. I I 
 
 IV'KIT iiK Si'M.MdXS. 
 
 , O'lit riilltj. 
 
 it iif H11II1II101IH in n " plfuijiiiji 
 r" witliiii the imMiniiiK of linji^ 
 
 II four coiiit'« cuiiiint lie tiivnl, 
 
 \r*v. R. I. 
 
 '■i-itiiKi/ Jniliria/ hislrld^. \ 
 
 III a writ of Hiiiiini(iii8, isMiirl 
 'liuuilcr l{,vy uftt r tlio im-^iiij^' 
 
 ((). ), mIiuwimI tliiit tlif i|,,iin 
 II of a UiiHc (if a iiiiniiij; 1. c a 
 of Hiiiiiy Uivrr, for posai.s.iiiu 
 
 I for an injunction restniiniiiK 
 
 II entering tin icon; — 
 ai'tion «na not one of cjcd. 
 iiiianing of Hulti 0,">.'), ami 
 
 w «a« not loial, and it was 
 tlie writ should lie iHsiitd hy 
 at I'at Portajxi! under sii-. :f 
 
 '7/ V. AV»/.«/, Ki r, [{. KiT. 
 
 .1 }iiilliimi:lil. 
 
 artles.]— \Vlitre iiartit s an 
 /() exeuutois, and the :-;\\w 
 ) lie miininoned ijih} tnistifs, 
 ;hat effect i.s sutHcient, ami ;i 
 iiirt is not necessary. Firmr 
 <. C. R. ,se. 
 
 irtles.]— .Sec McA'nh v. M,i<: 
 , J'("<f H13. 
 
 le for Appearance — Jm/'j- 
 siiinnuins issued for service 
 tioii ie(|uired an aiipeuiaiice 
 tered within eight weeka 
 sive of tho day of service. 
 lined an order shorteniiig 
 caraiice to ten days, iint 
 inclusive or exclusive of tlie 
 d amended the writ under 
 ibstituting "ten days" for 
 The writ as amended was 
 er with it, on the 27th Jiiiiu- 
 eliriiary following judgment 
 idt of apjiearance : — 
 lulginent was irregular ; for 
 mended in accordance with 
 e latter must govern ; and 
 ns, having regard to Kule 
 vere to be reckoned exclu- 
 ■ service, and the defendiUits 
 iiu tiUi February to aiipear. 
 or/h Aiiiirka v, llwjht-i, lt> 
 
 813 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 Tlmo -./,/,/;,'"'•;-/. I -rnderth..lilH.ral iinu,.,H 
 ofameMilnient iimv given by IJuUh UJ and 7m(. 
 Iho writ of .uininons and all -ubginuent ,„■„. 
 
 814 
 
 .'). IikJuiii mint. 
 
 Character Of Parties /,r,.„i/„nh/ - it„i,., r 
 
 -/I ,».■»-/,»//,/.) The writ of suniniuns whs in- 
 dorsed on y with a .■lain, for daniageK for u.'uU- 
 u'ence and breach of trust on the ,, art of tile 
 .lefendants ii; the investment of niom.vs upon 
 iimrtga;,'... I here was i„. indoisemeiii „f the 
 oharacter of ,, a, ties. The defendants aiiiieaied 
 and the iilmiitill theieii|,.in delivered a -tate' 
 nient ot claMii ill wliiel, it was .set forth that the 
 plaintil was the adiiiinistiator of one who was 
 m her lietime entitled to the laoiie.vs imote, 
 by the de endaiits. It was shewn that one of 
 til.! delendaiitH was lully aware of all thc' facts 
 n lhecs.~e, and ot the capacity in which the i 
 plaintitl sued. I 
 
 Upon a motion by the defendants to .strike ' 
 out the statement of elaim as emlmrrassing in 
 that It did not folliiw the writ :— | 
 
 Held, that the d.fendaiits bv enteiiii' an an- 
 pearaiice, mstcail of moving against the writ, 
 mil waived the irre'^uhiiity of the plaintitl' in 
 not sta ing the character of the parties as re- 
 quired by Jtnle L".>.J ;- i . >e 
 
 Hehl, also that as tho statement of claim 
 shewed the character in which the plaintiff was 
 suing, It was not necessary to amend the writ' 
 McN(i/< V. Miu'louiiiU, I,-. I'. I!. 14. 
 
 Ship-owners - A rrounl - Dl.,,,,/, A^.s^mh/, 
 that 111 an action by the nianau'ing owner of ■[ 
 ship against his .■o-owner, the indorsement n„ 
 the writ need not shew that there was anv dis- 
 pute as to the amount involved, //„// v' '/'/„ 
 ■shtp "S,,t,r„,;l,'' ;{ Kx. C. R. 26S. 
 
 Resclhalon of Bx Parte Order " <,',„„/ 
 
 /.'''v,„ s/,in,lr ../ l.i„n,H,,„n.,.\ Where «,, 
 
 I oMier has been made, on the ,r /.<(,/, aiiiilhatioii 
 
 j;. .^pU.ntill,umlerl!ule2:.^,,0. enlmlS 
 
 j t.i. time for service ot the writ of HiimmoiiH. it 
 
 withiM",."* '" '''■'•■•"""■,",'" "'-ve against it 
 wi Ml. he tune or extended time preserib.d by 
 
 Kill" .!.)(., and lo shew, it 1 an, that the.e 
 
 as no good reason for making it, even though 
 IheleMiltof setting It asi.le iiiav b.. that the 
 
 i'M'''t".l'':1^''''''''''/'''''«''''''"''>'''-M'<r' 
 tlo I ot llie .Mafule ot l.iiiiitatioim. 
 
 such ;,; '"."'■ 'i" ''''•■' ;f''-"l"'"l'<'lias made 
 
 HI. II an Older, lia.s |iii isdiction under Kule .W(j 
 
 to reconsider and resiind it. 
 I The reason „(l-,,,-ed by tlie plaintitrs for an 
 
 -■Mensu.ll ot the time lor service ot the writ 
 J was hat until they sliouM aseeitain, by the 
 
 result ot the retereu.e in another pendnu- p,,, 
 
 If'-lMig, that there had been a ' 1 ,„ 't|,.. 
 
 I ;","'7 .''• • '", "'^^ -lefendants, in nspect of 
 
 Uh.ch It would be worth while to pioseeute this 
 
 .ction 1 wouhlboa.Uisableto ilelay the .ser- 
 I ice ot the writ, as, in the event of there being 
 1 '"tind, this action would be useless. There 
 |ha,ibee,i,lelayinpro„.eutilig the rebreiiee in 
 the other pi oeeelin-. the plaintdls having the 
 'comlucto. It. The Master in ClMmbers, m, ,, 
 the application of the defemlan.s, set a.side his 
 own.i/„„v, order eMemliiig the I imc for .ser- 
 vice oi ,)„. „,,t, and his ileeision was alhrnied 
 ('oui'ti- "'' '" ''''•""'"■'■'* "'"' " divisional 
 llehi, that the three tribunals could not be 
 .-anl to have been wrong in holding that no 
 gooil rea.soii was shewn tor extending the time 
 U(.irl,„i,l. V. Iiomiinoii ISniiL; I.', P. j; -,(i 
 
 ^^SpeclalIndorsement.l-.SVi.In..iMi.M.,IV 
 
 4. J'i'iieirii/. 
 
 Order- />/s,v,7/„«_.v,,v/,Y,]_A writ of sum. 
 mons cannot be renewed without a .lu.b'e's 
 orrler, and to satisfy the teims of Rule "'3S I 
 leave to serve the writ after the lap.se of a 
 year sliouhl also be obt.iined. , 
 
 Kilt where an order for renewal was obtained '' 
 and the writ was renewed pursuant thereto ami ! 
 was.HTved without any onler for leav c to serve it 
 wa,s dca t with under Kule 4-12, and the service 
 was coiihrraed. 
 
 Inconsistency in Rule 2.S8 and Forms Xos O-i 
 and I-J4 pointed out. ' ' " 
 
 hl\T "'^''^''^'>■ "' «<^''^-'"K the writ arose 
 from the pendency ot .-u. appeal in an action 
 between the same parties, the decision of which 
 would atlcct tho plaintiffs course, and service 
 was not made till that appeal was decided :- 
 
 f^nil ' l\"'^ ". '"'-"l •^"''S'^''' <'i'^*-'>-ctiou in ex- 
 ten'lmg the time for service should not be 
 intrrfi-red wuh. 
 
 01^ '"i'"' ;^"''.«'= '"^« jurisdiction under Rule 
 f<^. f>/. Lotiin V. (> Citllniihaii, IH P. R •}•'•> 
 followed. Oilmour v. Maijee, 14 I> R l-^o ~" 
 
 Re.sclsslon of Ex Parts Order - 7h„^ _ 
 M'n/< -- ,>/„;•„,„ „f l,i,nii„i,„„^. |---...\n aetion ui.on 
 jM'i'-'Mi^sory note payable <in the 4th .Vovim 
 
 IVll. Ihe writ of summons not haviu,' been 
 
 7Zl> ' 'i'l '"''''■'■ ''■'''' '"'"''■ "" ""■ -'"^tl' October. 
 IM -, oi, tlier.,. i,„rtr aiiplie.itioi, ,,f the lilaintill' 
 
 !>»;l>H;nle .J.^SI^M, that .service shoiiia^i^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 It made withm twelve months. The writ to- 
 gether witl, this order ami an order of , .evivor- 
 theorignialplaintillhaviii- dh.l in the mean- 
 time was .served ou one of tl cfendaets on 
 
 he I'nd August, S9:<. On the PJth .September 
 KS.>.,, t he delendant who had bee, served 
 looved before the local .lodge who made the 
 -der of 2Sth October, ISO^T to set i asi le 
 which he refused to do : - ' 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of (;alt, (' ,J !„ 
 C .ambers, that the local .ludge was right ; 'for 
 t lie ine lor iimving under |;„le ,-,;!,; had expired 
 and 1 ad not been exfiidcd ; and certain corre- 
 spondence relied on as shewing an agreement to 
 extend the time, had not that effect 
 
 Ihe validity of the e.r part., order did not 
 deiieml .solely upon whether the alKdavit upon 
 >^hich It was made was sulficient to support 
 . , themoti.m to .set it aside was a substan- 
 tive motion su,,porte<l by atlidavits : and the 
 plaintitl was at liberty to answer the motion by 
 shewing new matter in support of the original 
 
 And upon the material before the local .Tudce 
 his retusal to set aside his order was right upon 
 the merits. Cahns v. Airth, 16 P. R. 100 
 

 815 
 
 PRACTICE. 
 
 816 
 
 ■1; 
 
 5. Service out of J iir Miction. 
 
 Alimony — Domifil.]— In an action for ali- 
 mony the writ of sniuiniins was served ujion tlie 
 (lefeiidant out of tlio jurisdiction, and upon a 
 motion to set aside tiie service it apiiearcd tliat 
 tlie jilaintilf and defendant were married in 
 (Jntario in ISS!), wliere tlie defendant liad re- 
 sideil for forty years prior to 1880 i that in that 
 year he had lieen aiipointeil to a permanent 
 position in the North- \\'est 'I'erritories, and had ; 
 then sold his dwellingdionse in Ontario and 
 gone to reside in the Xorth-West, where his ; 
 danghter and her husband and cluldren lived, 
 and'' where he hiul ever since remained, only 
 visiting Ontario on a few occasions. Jle swore 
 that he had no intention of returning to Ontario 
 to live. It also ai)peared that the ])laintiir, 
 .shortlv after the marriage, accompanied the 
 defendant to his home in the North West, and 
 lived with him for ab'uit nine months, when 
 siie left him and proceeded to Ontario for hnsi- 
 ness purposes: tliat she never returned to tlie 
 <kfend:int, and had since resided chiefly in the 
 United States of America, and since the coin- 
 mencctnent of this action had stated on oath, in 
 another cause, that she resided in th.; United 
 .States : — 
 
 Held, that the defendant had aciiinred a 
 doniicil in the Xorth-West Territories, and 
 that the plaintill had not aei|uirtd a distinct 
 domicil in Ontario since she left her husband ; 
 and, therefore, it was not a ease in which ser- 
 vice (if the writ of summons was permissible 
 under liide '271 (<■) or ('•). Allt-n v. Alh n, 15 
 1'. K. toS. 
 
 Breach of Contract.]— The defendants in 
 British Columbia liy letter otl'ered to sell the 
 plaintitt' in O.itario a car-load of lumber, accord- 
 ing to a sample previously furnished, at a cer- 
 tain price, free on board cars at Toronto. The 
 plaintiff accepted the oiler by letter, and it was 
 agreed between tlie parties that the lumber was 
 to be shipiied at Vancouver and delivered at 
 Toronto, upon which being done the jirice was 
 to be paid by means of a diiift. When the lum- 
 ber arrived at Toronto the plaiutitl' inspected it 
 and refused to accejit it or the draft on the 
 ground that it was not up to the samiile. He 
 then brought this action for damages for breach 
 of the contract : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintifll' had tlie right to make 
 inspection of the bulk at 'J'oronto before accept- 
 ing or paying; and the contract was one which, 
 according to its terms, ought to be perl'orniecl 
 within Ontario; and therefore service out of the 
 jurisiliction of the writ of summons ought to be 
 allowed under Rule '271 (' )• Fither v. Ca-Hmdij, 
 14 I'. U. o77. 
 
 Breach of Contract.]— The defendants, resi- 
 dent in the Province of Quebec, there wrote 
 ami posted to the ])laiiititf in Ontario a letter 
 putting an end to a contract of hiring entered 
 into in t^iiebec between the parties ; — 
 
 Held, in an action for wrongful dismissal, 
 that the breach of the contract occurred in 
 Quebec, the receii)t of the letter by the plaintitt' 
 not being the lireach, but only evidence of it; 
 .iiid service of the writ of summons on the de- 
 fendants in Quebec could not be allowed under 
 Rule '271 (e). Chant/ v. ThuiiipwH, L. H. 7 Q. 
 B. 073, followed. OJord v. Iii-e.i.te, IC 1'. R. 332. 
 
 Breachof Contract— f'd'/i'Wn/.fH'/.]— Where 
 a contract of hiring is made within the Province 
 of Ontario, and the work thereunder is to be 
 done there, the C(immis.sion therefor will be play- 
 able there. Ihurl, r v. Ilauonr, itr.. Works, lo 
 Times 1.. K. "22, and Hohnj v. .Siuu/ill Aliniiij 
 Co., '20 Q. B. 1). l.")2, leferied to. 
 
 If the contract is endeil by letter sent from 
 another Province, ijua'n whether this indicate- 
 that the breach complained of was out of the 
 Province. 
 
 And where, upon a motion to set aside service 
 of a writ of summons on defendants resident, 
 out of the jurisdiction in an action for bro;ich ol 
 such contract of hiring, there was conflicting 
 evidence as to whether the discharge of the 
 plaintill' from the defendants' service was by 
 letter or by the act of an agent of the defendaiils 
 within the Province, the plaintill' was allowed 
 to proceed to trial uiioii his undertaking to prove 
 at the trial a cause of action within Rule 271 (« ). 
 /icii v. Vilhniure .t' Co., 10 P. K. 413. 
 
 Foreign Judgment— ii'-yci'/aW'' K.rfxntiun.y 
 The plaintill', a foreigner, sued the defendant, 
 i also a fniciguer, niioii a foreign juilgiiient, and. 
 alleging that the del'eiidant was the owner ot 
 I lands in Ontario, also claimed relief by way of 
 I eijuitable execution against such lands and an 
 I interim injunction restraining the defcudaiii 
 ■ from dealing therewith : — 
 
 j Held, by the Master in Chambers, not a ea.se 
 
 I in which service of the writ of summons out 
 
 of the jurisdiction could be allowed under any 
 
 of the provisions of Kule 271. Sutr-i v. Mei/irs, 
 
 Ikath v. Mcijtrx, 15 P. R. 381. 
 
 Fraudulent Conveyance— /'coj/i/^soi// Xnh . | 
 — Action by an alleged creilitor of one of the 
 defendants to set aside a conveyance of land in 
 Ontario by that defendant to another, as fraudu- 
 lent. The plaintill claimed to be a creditor in 
 respect of a promissory note made and payable, 
 \ and the makers of which resiiled, out of the juri.s- 
 I diction, but hti did not seek judgment upon the 
 promissory note : — 
 
 Held, a case in wliich, under Kule 271 C'l, 
 service of the writ of siumiions eil'ected out of 
 the jurisdiction was allowable. 
 
 The dilFereiit sub-rules of Rule 271 are dis- 
 junctive ; and under (h) it is not necessary that 
 I the whole subject-matter of the action should 
 i come within its ])rovisioi)s. 
 
 .S'' ;"''/'■, also, that the case came within suli- 
 
 rule (;/) ; for, although the defendant allegeil to 
 
 be within the jurisdiction had not been served, 
 
 i it was not nee i.'-:ary (assuming that service 
 
 I within the jurisdiction is rei]iiisite to bring the 
 
 'case within the sub-rule) that she should he 
 
 I served first, but only that the service without 
 
 should not be allowed until the service within 
 
 had been eti'ected. and an adjournment for the 
 
 purjiose might be granted. LtniiijMuiie v. Sili- 
 
 ibaltl, 15 P. 1!. 315. 
 
 I Tort — Cowjiirnci/ — Uiidcrtdkiiuj.] — Whcie 
 i the alleged cause of action was a joint conspiracy 
 
 by the defendants, tw o of whom resided within 
 1 the jurisdiction, and a third, who was a foreigner, 
 I wa.s implicated, service on the foreigner out uf 
 i the jurisdiction of a notice in lieu of the wiit uf 
 
 summons was :- 
 
 Held, properly allowed under Rule 271 (;;)• 
 Ma.itf!/ V. Ihym-K, 21 (^ U. 0. at pp. 334, 3.)."», 
 
816 
 
 it — i')('A'?-/ri'/,-('Hf/.]— Wliero 
 iiiado within the I'rovinco 
 work tht.reuiuki' i.s to lio 
 is?ii)ii ihurt't'ur will be |iiiv- 
 v. Ilduoii r, ill-., Work-i, Id 
 Itoliiij V. Snai/fll Miiiiiiij 
 icfiTiud til. 
 
 iidfd by Itttcr si'iit fnjiii 
 ('/■' whcthei' this iiidiuiite^ 
 )liiiiicd oi was tmt (if thi- 
 
 I motion to sut aside soi'vice 
 lis on diifi'iidaiits resident 
 
 I in an action tor breaeli ol 
 •iiiy, tliere was eonllictiiig 
 tiler the discharge of tint 
 jfenilaiits' service was by 
 
 an agent of the defendants 
 the plaintilV was allowed 
 on his ninlertaking to prove 
 action within K\ilc271 ('). 
 
 ;,;., lur. K. 413. 
 
 It— Ei/iiilah/i' Krexnlion. ] - - 
 i^ner, sned the defendant, 
 
 II a foreign judgment, and, 
 Icndant was the owner nt 
 ) claimed relief by way nt 
 against such lands and an 
 restraining the defendant 
 th :— 
 
 er in Chambers, not a case 
 the uiit of summons out 
 jonld be allowed under any 
 iule'271. 'Stiiri \. J/c/crs 
 r. R. ;!8I. 
 
 eyance— /'''CK/i/v.soc.'/ Xal: , \ 
 gcd creditor of one of the 
 lie a conveyance of land in 
 ndant to another, as fraudu- 
 daimed to be a creditor in 
 ry iKJte made and payable, 
 dch resided, out of the juris- 
 ,ot seek judgment upon the 
 
 vhieh, under l!nle 271 (''), 
 f summons ett'ected out of 
 allowable. 
 
 rules of Rule 271 are dis- 
 ■ (li) it is not necessary that 
 alter of the action should 
 isioiis. 
 
 the case came within sub- 
 gh the deleiidant alleged lo 
 iction had not liecli sel'ved, 
 ry (assuming that service 
 (111 is recjuisite to bring the 
 )-rnle) that she ahouhl be 
 ly that the service without 
 j(l until the service witliin 
 .nd an adjournment for the 
 [•anted. Lirimjuluiie v. Sih- 
 
 1/ — Uiidi-rti(L'iiiij.] — Wliure 
 iction was a joint conspiracy 
 ,«o of wdioin resided within 
 a third, who was a foreigner, 
 •ice on the foreigner out of 
 notice iu lieu of the writ uf 
 
 llowcd under Rule 271 (!/)• 
 >1 tj. B. \). at pp. 384, .Slf"), 
 
 817 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. 
 
 818 
 
 mA Imliiio Co. V. 0,iil,-y, [1S91] 2 Cli. 'M, 
 specially referred to. 
 
 Such an order should not bo made unless the | 
 Judge is re.isoiiably satislied as to the lioiia fides | 
 oi the plamtitl'm joining the foreign defendant ; 
 and as an evidence of such hoiui jiihs the plaintilF 
 111 this action was rei|uired to ii'ndertake to sub- 
 mit to a nonsuit if he failed to [.rove a joint 
 raise of action at the trial asa-aiiist the foreign 
 .leteiidatit. 7'lm>ii,i.^ v. llumilloii, ]' {.). |{. |) 
 
 'I'r ','/ ,"',"i; ,^l"' '''^"y referred to. .Simpson v." 
 Hall, 14 r. H. ;)lli. 
 
 Tovt—M(ilh-w,isPfusei'nii,)ii—Ai-m:i:\--{_^ni^i. 
 iiial proceedings begun in the I'roviiiee of gue- 
 hec, under which the plaintirt' w,is arrested in 
 tlH' I'rovniee of Ontario and taken to Montreal, 
 where he was discharged, constitute, in efieet,' 
 niic entire tort ; and service of a writ (uit of this 
 I'rovmee ni an action therein for malicious pro- 
 secution, fouiiiled thereon, will not lie allowed 
 under Rule l;{()<), amending Uule 271 (c). Oliinii 
 V. Ikaacheiiiia, 10 1'. R. 5o,s. 
 
 Tort— Tmiiifir of (;,„„h-Fvaif]ntrnl I'lf- 
 .'"■""■''•]— An ,acti(m by an assii.'iiee under R. S. 
 (I. ch. J24 against persons resfding in the I'ro- 
 vmee of (,i bee to set aside a transfer of goods 
 ellected m tins Province, as a fraudulent pre- 
 ference, which goods have afterwards been 
 removed to (.tiiebec, is fonn.Ied on a " tort 
 omiimitted within the jurisdlcthm,'" within the 
 
 ',",nn""*''„"^^"''' ^"' *'-)• ''^ ■""ended by Rule 
 1309. Vlarkxoii v. JJki.ii', 10 I'. R. ,-,•_»!. 
 
 Waiver of Objection to Allo'wance- lo- 
 
 p:ara,ic,-.]-A defendant, by eiilering an appear- 
 iiiiue in an action, submits himself to the juris- 
 diction of the Court, and waives his n<ri,t to 
 iii"\e against an order permitting serviecMif tlie 
 writ of summons to be made upon him out of 
 the jurisdiction. 
 
 Tpou a motion by the defendant for leave to 
 appeal : — 
 
 Held, by the Court of .-Appeal, that thedefen- 
 < .ml:, l)y appearing, had submitted to the jnris- 
 'licticm, and the justice of the case consisted in 
 jU.mnng hnn to remain in the position in which 
 le had placed himself ; and there was no reason 
 tor giving leave to apjieal. Si:ai:< v. ^fn|n■< 1,") 
 
 PREROOATIVE OF CROWN. 
 
 Sue Crown, III. 
 
 PRESCRIPTION. 
 
 ■V' LiMirATioN (,F AcTio.Ns -Wav, II. 
 
 PRESSURE. 
 
 Stf RANKlillTCV AM) 1 NSOI.VKNCV, I. 
 
 PRESUMPTION. 
 
 Set IJANKRIII'TCV AM) I.NSIll.VKNCY, I. 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. 
 
 I. AfrolNTMlONT, SIS. 
 II. LlAlllI.ITV Ol- I'UI.NCII'AI. TO TimtD PARfV, 
 
 III. I'owKu AND ArritoiiirY OK AdRNT, 819. 
 1 V. RiciiTsor Ai:i;nt Aiiainst Pi!INcipal,82I. 
 
 I. Al'i'OI.\TMKNT. 
 
 Waiver Of Objection to Allowance -/«/,»- 
 
 '.M„--Pra,.m//„,/.s.]_.\Vliere a defendant does 
 not really inteml to waive his oiijectiou to the 
 junsdictum, he does not, by obtaining an order 
 fir security for costs and opposing' a motion 
 tor speedy judgment, estop himself from niovin.' 
 .ig.iiiist an order permitting .service of the writ 
 "1 sainmons to be made upon liim out of the 
 jurisdiction. JJmfk v. .U>'i/er-', I.". R. R. .•{,si. 
 
 MUm 
 
 Sparta v. Pimly, l.", p. K. ], aiil, 
 V. .Uuon-, 24 O. R. 450, mil,. 440. 
 
 I'M 
 
 PRACTISING MEDICINE. 
 
 'Vet Medical PKACTrno,Ni.;K, 
 
 52 
 
 PREMIUM NOTE. 
 
 .SVe I.ssiiiANcK, V. 
 
 Evidence of Agency — Fraud — S/alul^ of 
 /•/•,(»,/.•. -Property of the plaiiitiirs husband 
 having been ottered for sale under mortgage, 
 she agreed or.ally with the mortgagee's .solieitore 
 to purchase it, but, not having the means to 
 inali.e the cash payment required, she .saw one 
 ot the defendants, wh- agreed to lend her for a 
 year the necessary money, and to take a deed 
 of the property as security, and he gave to the 
 solicitors a written oiler to purchase on the 
 terms arranged by the ijlaiiititt, which oiler was 
 by the s(dicitors orally accepted. The property 
 [was howev,.r in fact conveyed to the other 
 delendanl, who was^the daughter of her co-de- 
 fendant : — 
 
 Held per Hagarty, C. J. 0., and Macleunan, 
 J. A., that, on the evidence, the conveyance to 
 the daughter was the result of a fraudulent con- 
 spiracy between her father and herself to deprive 
 the plaintiir of her bargain ; that therefore the 
 daughter stood in no hetter jiositimi than her 
 lather; and that he was an agent for the plain- 
 titl whose agency might be proved by oral evi- 
 deiH'e notwithstanding the Statute of Frauda-— 
 Held ])er lUirton and Osier, ,J,J.A., that, on 
 the evidence, the purchase by the daughter was 
 not a collusive one, but was one for her own 
 beneht, and could not be impeached. 
 
 The Court being e.pially divided, the judg. 
 ment of Rnbctson, J., at the trial was affirmed. 
 Upon appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada 
 the opinions of Hagarty, C. .1. ()., and Maclen- 
 «";,.;,•' ^■*^'''' »''"P'*^'l. '"Strong, J., disseiitiDK. 
 McMdkin V. liartoii, ly A. R. 6U2, 20 S. C it 
 i 404. ■ 
 
t I 
 
 819 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. 
 
 820 
 
 Ratification of Agency — False L'ejmmn/a- 
 lions.] — Where iJiiyniinl is obtained from a 
 debtor by one wlio falsely rejiicsents that he is 
 agent of the creditor, ti])on v lu^ni a fraud i.s 
 thereby coniniittid, if the <reditiir ratifies mid 
 confirms tlie jiaynient, he iidopts the ayeney 
 of the person receiving the nmney and makes 
 the payment cnuivalent to one to an aiithfiiized 
 agent. 
 
 The payment niiiy be ratified and the agency 
 adopted, even thcjiigh the person receiving the 
 money has, by his false representations, com- 
 mitted an indictable oti'ence. iSco/t v. Baid- 0/ 
 New BninxuncL; 23 S. C. R. u77. 
 
 II. Liability or riiiNcirAi. 10 '1'iiikd Partv. 
 
 Executor — MiMippropi-ialioii //// Aiienl.] — 
 When a testamentary executrix employs an 
 a^ent as attorney, she is bounil to supervise 
 his management of the matters intrusted to him 
 ami to take all due precautions, and cannot 
 escape lialiility for the misappropriatiim of funds 
 committed by such agent, although lie was a 
 notary public of excellent standing prior to the 
 misappropriation. Loir v. G'l inU'ii, IS S. C. R. 
 685. 
 
 owner constituted her husband "son procureiir 
 genei'al et sjit'cial " to a<lministcr lier aflairs, 
 specifying such acts as drawing bills of exchange! 
 and making pr.imiss(]ry notes : — 
 
 Held, tliat the wife's liability extended to all 
 prnmissdi-y notes granted by the husband, am) 
 was 7iot limited by Art. 181 of the Civil C'.iiii. 
 to such notes as wei'c re(|uircd for purposes i.f 
 the administration. La jjaiiqnt if Jloflii/iurt!, 
 V. Joduiii, [lS!).j] A. C. ()12. 
 
 Attorney — Iiidorsiinj liUln atid Ifotes.] — 
 Where an agent accepts or indorses " perpri'.,'' 
 the taker of a bill or note so accejited or 
 iiulorsed is bound to incpiire as to the extent uf 
 the agent's authority ; where an agent has sm li 
 authority, his abuse of it dues not-"atlect a liir/u'i, 
 liili: holder for value, liryaiil v. I,(i llaiKiut iln 
 /'fii/i/r, lirinihl V. Qi(fbc,- //(t*//,, [isas] A. r. 
 170. 
 
 III. POWKR AND AUTHOKITY OK AcE.NT. 
 
 Attorney— .SV//e i,f Afo/i/.]— Acting mider a 
 power of attorney from the defendant, enipowir- 
 ing him to attend to and transact all the dof' n- 
 dant's business in connection witli her proper- 
 ties, Itoth real and personal, and generally todd 
 anything he might think necessary, etc., in tiie 
 premises as fully and etl'ectually as if she were 
 personally present, the attorney entered into a 
 contract for the sale of the defeiulant's farm to 
 the plaintiff, and a deed was executed by the 
 defendant and delivered over to the attorney 
 for the purpose of carrying out the sale. The 
 terms of purchase were tluit the plaintiff was to 
 Agent of Bank— Z»;.sco(())/i'H,v.]— K., agent pay off certain incumbrances, make a cash pay- 
 of a bank and also a member of a business firm, ment, and execute a mortgage to secure the 
 procured accommodation dr,-,fts from a customer balance of the purchase money, which he did, 
 of the bank, which he discounted as such agent, making the cash payment and mortgage to tiie 
 and, without indorsing them, used the pro- attorney as trustee for the defendant, which the 
 ceeds, in violation of his instructions, in the attorney was willing to hand over to the latter 
 busii: :ss of his fiini. The firm having become on her delivering up possession, whicli she 
 insolvent, the (piestion arose whether these refused to do :— 
 
 "Iraftf* <-'f>iistituted a debt due from the estate to Held, that the power was a sufficient autlior- 
 the bank, or whether the bank could repudiate ! ity to the attorney to receive the purchase 
 the act of its agent and claim the wliole amount money and bind the defendant in the arrange- 
 from the solvent acceptors :— ment made ; and that the plaintiff was entitfwl 
 
 Held, (iwyinic, J., dissenting, that the drafts to possession of the land. MrClelian v. Mc- 
 were debts due and owing from the insolvents C(iii',iltaii,2:i 0. 11. 079. 
 to the bank; — 
 
 Held, per .Strong and Patterson, J.f., that Attorney- .s'a/rtt;/*' ^I/ohcv-s'.] -A crew of sail- 
 the agent being bound to account to the bank ors, claiming salvage from the owners of a ves- 
 for the funds placed at his disposal, he became sel picked up at sea, gave a power of attorney 
 a debtor to the bank, on his authority being to P., authoii/.ing him to briny suit or other- 
 
 revoked, for the amount of these drafts as 
 money for which he had failed to account. 
 Merchmitu' limik of Halifax v, W/iiddiii, 1!) 
 
 s. c. R. ra 
 
 wise settle and adjust any claim which they 
 might have for salvage services, etc. :— 
 
 Held, atlirming the decision of the localJiidge 
 in admiralty, ^ Kx. C. R. .3.S. that P. was not 
 authorized to I'eceive payment of the sum awar- 
 ded for salvage, or to apportion the respective 
 shares of the sailors therein. 
 
 Taschere.au, .)., took no part in judgment. 
 
 Attorney— /?o??o?(i'j/f/.]— An agent who is 
 authorized by his power to make contracts of 
 sale and i)uichasc, charter vessels, and employ 
 
 .servants, and as incidental thereto to do certain entertaining doubts as to the'jurisdiction'of the 
 specified acts, including indorsement of bills and Court to hear the appeal. Cliinrhill v. MrKny 
 other acts for the piu'jKises therein aforesaid, but —fit r,' Thi- .Ship " (Jiichf,-' '_'0 S. C. R. 47:>. 
 not including the Imrrowing of monc\-. cannot 
 
 borrow on behalf of his principal or bind him by Bankers- Co//cc/jo»—,SV/-o//:] —Hankers are 
 contract of loan, such acts not being neces.sary subject to the principles of law governing ordin- 
 tor the declared jmrposes of the power. Bryant ary agents, and, therefore, bankers to' whom as 
 
 MSq^l a'p' "i-n ^ *"^''^' '^^^""' ^- ^'"-^^'^ ^^"■"^'' •■>«'="*» '^ ''ill "f exchange is forwar.led forcolkc- 
 Uoa.iJA. L. 1(0. tion, can receive payment in money onh, "'"' 
 
 . .^ r, . , . cannot biiul the princiiials by setting off the 
 
 Attomey-Z>ra7*,'()(,v ami Mohwj Bills and amount of the bill of exchange against a balamx 
 JSOteti.\—\\ here, by a document indorsed "pro- , due by them to the acceptor. Donouh v. (Iilk»- 
 curation generale et speciale,'' a wife being sole I pie, 21 A. R. 292. 
 
820 
 
 lier Inis]iiin(l "sun prociircnr 
 " to niliiiinistcr Iut iidairH, 
 :s as (liawiiig bills of ex(;liaii','(! 
 ■S(iry notes : — 
 
 life's liability oxttniled to al- 
 irantcd by tlie liusbaiiil, ami 
 >• Art. 181 of the Civil CmIi, 
 .vere re(|iiire(l for purposes ..f 
 . La jIdiiqiiL il' JJorlidihiii, 
 i. C. (il2. 
 
 hwwKj BUIk (111(1 Xole,".] - 
 lepts or indorses " perpn., ' 
 U or note so accepted or 
 o iiKiuire as to the extent of 
 ty ; where an agent has sm h 
 s of it does not afi'eet a hcnd 
 e. J}ry((iit v. An B((ii(jiii da 
 Quebec /Jail/:, [189.S] A. •'. 
 
 </ 7>'/)/(/. ]— Aetin,^' under ;i 
 roin the defendant, enipowri'. 
 o and transact all the def' ii- 
 connection vith her pi-oiirr- 
 personal, and generally to dd 
 think necessary, etc. , "in the 
 nd effectually as if she were 
 
 the attorney entered into a 
 3 of the defendant's farm to 
 
 deed was executed by the 
 vered over to the attorney 
 carrying out the sale. The 
 ■ere that the plaintitl' wivs to 
 mbrances, make a cash puy- 
 
 a mortgage to secure the 
 lase money, which he did, 
 ynient and mortgage to tlie 
 For the defendant, which the 
 g to hand over to the latter 
 
 up possession, which she 
 
 wer was a sufKoient author- 
 y to receive the puruluise 
 e defendant in the arnuiye- 
 lat the plaintiff was entitlcil 
 le land. McClellan v. Mr 
 i79. 
 
 (jr- ^fone^/■•(. ] —A crew of sail- 
 t! from the owners of a vcs- 
 i, gave a power of attorney 
 dm to bring suit or other- 
 just any claim which they 
 ,ge services, etc. : — 
 e <lecisioii of the local Judge 
 C. R. 3;{, that P. was not 
 ; payment of the sum awar- 
 to ap|iortion the respeelive 
 therein. 
 
 ook no ])art in judgment, 
 as to the jurisdiction of the 
 tpeal. C/imrhi// v. 2liKny 
 hiehfc," '.'0 S. C. R. 47l'. 
 
 i'o»— ,V(7-o//!] —Hankers are 
 |des of law governing orilin- 
 reforo, bankers to whom as 
 inge is forwarded forcolkc- 
 /ment in nioitey onlv, ami 
 incipals by setting otf tlie 
 ' exchange against a balance 
 cceptor. J}(mo(jh v. (!Uk»- 
 
 821 
 
 WheT^f Of Railway Company-Co«^r„./.| 
 -Where the oidy evnience of the contract t. 
 earry was that the foreman of the frei-ht den irV 
 mentatone of the defendants' s ation ,f^ve d 
 on the' w""," 'r'.'-'"'-"-^'r''-l to a station no 
 llrJ^ilhJt'wa^^J'''"'''''^"'''---"'-^-^ 
 
 Held, that this was evidence to be submitted 
 toa jury of a contract to that e.lect, hi , , w 
 
 Kv"r'j'(r"' • ''"';^ """""' ^^•"^"•'■"•>^: 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. 
 
 822 
 
 Appeal 'JO A. R. (Jfl,-,, th;,t, by the tern.s of the 
 dissolution ot partnership, the relations between 
 A an,l ], were cuinged to tli,,se of princii.al 
 
 t.ial that . ha.l notu^e of s„..h chang,., his re- 
 le,' 50 of the ],rincipal, A., discharged 1!., the 
 
 McUoiiiibl, 2."! .S, C. J!, (i;),-). 
 Extending: Tlme-A-o//rr of .S',,r, ///..// //.. 1- 
 
 ti-d'crnJ'.rT"^'"""' '•'■ /•'■«'"'M-The ante-nup- 
 tial tcntract in (|uestnui was not signe.l bv tl.. 
 parties, but by tl,e notaries in their^o , nie 
 they^having tuU authority from the parties to do 
 
 Held that this was a sutlieient shr„ature 
 w^h.n the Statute of Fnunls to l>ind the p rties 
 
 IV. RloHTS OI- A(^iKXT 
 
 .VO.MNST rKINCH-Ar,, 
 
 a written con- 
 :reed to pay to 
 
 Commission— Co;(^rac^ ]-In 
 tract of agency the principal a- 
 the agent a fixed commissioiron all salens of 
 
 01 thiol gh the latter. The contract was made 
 terminable at the end of a year on a non 1 's 
 notice by either party; but it c,mtain..d no ex 
 press agreement by the principal to ,1 v fo^ 
 
 any- period or to manufacture any uo,.ds ' ' 
 . Hod, that the.-, terms eouhl n„H,e imnorted 
 into the contract by implication ""f*".""' 
 
 Dtimick; 2;) O. Ji. 201. 
 
 M>n-i 
 
 II. 
 III. 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. 
 
 DlSCHAKliK AM, HklEA.SK o|.' Sl'lIKTV. 
 
 1. Course of Beating, S21. 
 
 2. Xcijleet of OhlUjee, 824. 
 
 LlAlilLITY UK .SdUIJTY, 82j. 
 
 Kiciri'.s OF Si'Kii'.Ty, 820. 
 
 Matexei ot the plaintitl's knowledge of the 
 covenant uiuler which tl,e alleged swretyshi , 
 
 |m,^andashehad,,oreasontAhinkthrZ 
 iLlation .d prmc.pal and surety existed, hi-^ 
 '1<^^'1>.'J,' with tl,e debtor did not work a release 
 "S«mn.ng that the relationship .lid exist. ' 
 
 ler Hagarty, C. J. ()., ami Osier, J \ tli-t 
 ;: S'"'-''.-- volunteer, conhi,K,t\^.t;i,! 
 
 nor <?^, V' /' ""■''•^' "'"''=•• "'^ ^'"venant of ti,e 
 I loitgag,,!, the grantor of the equity of redemii- 
 
 r^t."^;",'"' v"./''""'/'''' t'- ---lit- of , lie 
 
 1 ntgagoi. .\o,ih,ro,Ml V. K,:„lii„i, is (Jr. 64;i 
 
 reterred to. I1U(,U y v. K.;,n,,,, IS A. R. 1^.^.' 
 
 I .Interference with Rights of Surety. ]--The 
 
 L.uon hank agree,! to discount the pai^.r of si' 
 -\., & Co., railway contractors, in,U,r.sed by (/<; 
 as surety, to enable them to carry on i r,il« ■ v 
 contract for the Atlantic .1 Xortii-U est T; U^ 
 iiu; o, .,,'■ ""'"'■•^^■'1 tl"-' ""tes on an nnderst'ancb 
 
 lieb., H,ir',r'''' "'"' "'^^ -""'■■■■'ctors and 
 tie bank that all moneys to be earned nn.ler 
 
 an, not to the contractors, ami an iirevoc-ible 
 a^sij^in^nt by the contractors of all mon^^^^ 
 tlie bank was in cons,.,,uenee exeeutcl After 
 several estimates had been tlius pai,l to the Inrnk 
 .t was tound that the work Ma. n,.t pro ,res i,,', 
 fav,niraldy,andtherailwavconipany then wit," 
 out the assent of OV. but'with '.heU: 'o he 
 
 U)t.s due to creditors ot the contractors, and 
 
 t of moneys subsequently c,-une,l by thj con- 
 
 t actors nuule large payments iuv wages, sim- 
 
 "oik In October, 1888, the l,ank, also with- 
 out the assent of 0'(i., applicl for ami ".'ot pos- 
 
 acceptcl by the bank ami hehl by the company 
 
 * '— - " ' ;™";"^-»-;ri^s»-i- » 
 
 ;-rw;-s,;;-;-E;;;rs,s-i- 
 
 aid contract ami f.„- material an, s i plie" 
 which went mt,. tlie work." The eoiitr ,^t 
 
 I. DisciAKoP .vn I... under certain circnmstauces ^.ave the rhdi to 
 
 the company to emph.y num ami ad.lftional 
 workinen, etc as they might think pro J Im 
 I '" /'"^ ^'''^ *'"^ "J^'l't t,. guarantee contra.^t orL' 
 DlsohargeofCollateralSecurlty.j- \ u,,! H Vi"'.'!'''^' l?' l""vi^ions ami f„od, ef, :- 
 a. partners m business, borrowe.l mo ley f,, i ,.; V'''''/ 'i'. .""^^'''^ ""-^ «"'''' a variation of the 
 C., giving hiin as security their join Zl'evT^^^ *^ *'■ ",' ■"'"•'^*>- "^ '" 'Ii«charge hi ; 
 
 promiss,iry note and a mortL'a-e .,or.n^ V A •'''''''''-*''" """' <^'Wyiine, JJ.. dissenfin^ 
 
 p^perty. The pa.tnershi^ti;;;;/';::::r:ii:'; ! g/;;-; v. umonnuj,: (f ca(,;:,ia:''^T^, 
 
 Ro.Ni. Collateral .Secukitv -iMiMni-- 
 
 r-HNT C0.NVKVANCT._GrAKANTV K^\ U- 
 nK.MNITY. 
 
 DiscHAK.iR Asu Rklkasi: (,i Si;kctv. 
 1. Course, of iMdiicj. 
 
 1 I --J. ^,.^ iJ.iniicisni ) laviiii. lii.i.i, .1; . 
 
 Novation - Mor/,/anf; „„,{ 4.n„,,rr .r 
 £;','";;" '!f i^TP"'"-^ ~ Where a n:fr gagof 
 has assigncl his e,|nity of rclemption the 
 ,-...»>,■..>,„ uie promissory note'- , assignee ovenanting with him to pay the 
 
 Held, athrmiiig the .lecisi'o.i of th« Court of X^^^V l^ *'""'«'' f-'^ ,'-*--' thV mor" 
 
 01 I gagoi ami the assignee the latter thus hecomea 
 
823 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. 
 
 824 
 
 liiimarily liiiblo for the debt, this does not 
 create any jjrivity of contrail between the 
 assignee anil the nioitgagee : anil the mortgagor 
 cannot content!, as against tlie niortgageo, that 
 lie has hceoine a mere surety for the debt, and, 
 as sneh, has been ri'leaseil by certain dealings 
 between the mortgagee and assignee of the 
 ei|nity of I'edenii'tion, unless such dealings con- 
 stitute a new lontraet between them. Mailirrs 
 V. Ihlliinll, HI (ir. 172, distinguished. Aldoiis 
 V. //,V/,w, 21 (). I!. <X,. 
 
 Novation - J/o/V;/r(;/oy miil Asitiiiivc of 
 MortiiiKji Hi.-iirratioii ij' J{i,ilit.s.] — A new- 
 agreement between the debtor and creditor 
 extending the time for iiayment of the debt 
 and increasing the rale of interest, witlumt the 
 consent of the surety, is a material alteration of 
 t I'-- original contract, and rtde.Tses the surety. 
 
 .And a provision in t<uch agreement reserving 
 the rights of the creditor .-.gainst the surety, 
 though efleotual iis regards' the extension of 
 time, is idle as regards the stjpulation foi- an 
 increased rate of interest, and, notwithstanding 
 such reservation, the surety is discharged^ 
 llristnl and ]\'(xf of Eiiijldnd.' fAiml, Morti^iiii , 
 and Jiire.'</iiitid l.'o. v. Tmjlor, 24 O. R. 28(i. 
 
 Novation — Voidur nud Ax^it/iipe of I'm-- 
 '■/i<ii<rr.]---Au agreement for sale and purchase of 
 sevei'al lots, entered into between the plaintitl's 
 and tlie defendant, described the lots by their 
 phii; nundier, and after providing for p.ayment 
 of the purchase money, part in cash and jiart at 
 times (ixed therein, witli a right of prepayment, 
 containeil the words : " Company will discharge 
 any of said lot.s on iiayment of the proiiortion of 
 the purchase [)rice applicable on each." 'I'he 
 defendant sold and assigned his interest ip_ tlie 
 agreement to a third person, who made several 
 payments to the plaintiti's, and sold several lots 
 and parts of lots, which wcie conveyed to the 
 {lurchascrs by the i)laiiitills, who did not iirst 
 insist upon payment of all iiileiest, and who also 
 on one occasion gave time to the third jjcrson 
 for payment of interest : — 
 
 Held, 1. That there was no novation, the 
 relations wiiicli the defendant himself created 
 between the plaintills and the third person sutti- 
 ciently accountim.' for the dealings between tliem. 
 2. That the iirojiortion of the purchase price 
 applicable to each lot was to be ascertained by 
 dividing the balance of purchase money, after de- 
 ducting the cash payment, iiy the number of lots. 
 :i. That the jilaintiffs were not entitled to 
 convey lots without rc(]uiriiig payment of all 
 interest in arrear at the time of each conveyance, 
 and interest to the date of the conveyance upon 
 the portion of principal being jiaid. 
 
 4. Tliat t' High the jilaintiti's had no right to 
 convey parts of lots, or to convey without reipnr- 
 ing payment of interest, the defendant, even if ' 
 merely a surety, was not wholly released by i 
 tlieir doing this, and giving time for jiay- | 
 nient of interest, i)ut was released as to inter- ! 
 est in arrear when lots were conveyed and 
 time was given, and was t'ntitled to credit for 
 the full proportion of purchase money of those 
 lots of which parts had been conveyed. Land 
 Ji^ciirifi/ Co. V. \\'i/s(in, 22 A. R. laf. Affirmed 
 by the .Supreme (Jourt. 
 
 Satisfaction of Principal Deht—Rtleam' of 
 Del)tl)|■—^^ol■ation.]-lle\(\, by the Court of Ap- 
 
 peal, reversing the decision of the Chancerv 
 
 Division, 22 O. R. 23."), that a creditor may b'v 
 
 express reservation jireserve his rights against 
 
 a surety, notwithstanding the release of the 
 
 princi])al debtor, the transaction in such a case 
 
 amounting in ellect to an .-igree'iient not to sue, 
 
 liiit if the cllect of the transaction between the 
 
 creditor and the principal dclitor is to satisfy 
 
 ; and discharge and actually extinguish tlie debt, 
 
 i there is nothing in respect of which the creditor 
 
 j can reserve any rights against the surety : — 
 
 Held, by the .'Supreme Court of Canada, 
 athrmiug the decision of the (,'ourt of Appeal, 
 th.at, as according to the evidence there was a 
 complete novation of the debt secured by tlu' 
 inomissory note sued on, and a release of the 
 li^iker, the indorsers on the note were also 
 released. Jfo/lidai/ v. J/oi/ini. 20 A. J!. 208. 
 Hollhliiy V. Jr(r/.-xi,ii, 22 .S. C. R. 47!l. 
 
 2. Xi'ijlert of Ohlir/ee. 
 
 Employer — Gnamntte Po/inj—Eniji/di/ie— 
 D(f'di-<ilioii.t—Xotirc — Siqwrn.iidii.] — A guiiran- 
 tee policy insuring the honesty of \V. , an em- 
 ployee, was granted upon tlie express conditions, 
 (l)lhat the answers contained in the applica- 
 tion contained a true statement of the niamier 
 in which the business w.ts conducted and ac- 
 counts kept, and that they would be so kept, 
 and (2) that the employers should, immediately 
 upon its becoming known to them, give notice 
 to the guarantors that the emiiloyee had become 
 guilty of any criminal offcnct entailing or likely 
 to entail loss to the eniijloyers and for which a 
 claim was liable to be made under the policy. 
 There was a defalcation in W.'s accounts, and 
 the evidence shewed that no proper sui)ervisioM 
 had been exercised over W.'s books, and tlie 
 guarantors were not notitied until a week after 
 the employers had full knowledge of the defaica 
 tion, and \\. had left the country:— 
 
 Held, atKnnhig the judgment of the Court 
 below, th.at as the employers had not exercised 
 the stipulated supervision over W., and h.ad not 
 given immediate notice of the defalcation, they 
 were not entitled to recover under the policy, 
 //tirlmur Comi)ii.'^iio)ii-rx of Monircal v, (,'miraii- 
 trK Company of Xorth America, 22 S. C. H. 542. 
 
 Municipal Corporation— /i'o)(</—Co//e(7o>-— 
 Xoii-dixr/osiiir of lJ(/ai(//.-<.]--ln an action by a 
 municipal corporation against the sureties to 
 the bonds of a defaulting collector of taxes, for 
 the due performance of his duties for KSSti and 
 1S.S7, it appeared that there had been greivt 
 laxity on the plaintiffs' part, but that shortly 
 before the collector absconded, in bSSS, a ma- 
 jority of the members of the corporation had 
 contiilence in his honesty: while the defendants 
 had not sought information from the plaiutifis 
 as to the way he had performed his duties in 
 former years: — 
 
 Held, that the non-disclosure liy the plaintiffs 
 to the defendants of a motion having been made 
 in council in 188.'> that '[ he roll for 18S4 Wi>s 
 not returned by the next meeting, an inniiiry 
 before the County Court .hidge would be asked 
 for; or of a resolution in August, 188,5, instruct- 
 ing the treasurer to take jiroceedings against the 
 collector and his sureties for the balance due on 
 the 1884 roll unless fully settled before 10th .Sep- 
 tember next, which it was; or of another like 
 
824 
 
 (loeisinii of tlie t'lianceiv 
 ."), that a oi'tditor may by 
 l^l•^•l;l■vo liis riglits against 
 imliiig tin; I'L'lcasu of the 
 traiisaotiim in such a casi- 
 > an agi'(ji"nunt not to suo, 
 e transaction hetwctin the 
 iiciiml (lelitor is to satisfy 
 tually extinguisli the debt, 
 speot ot which the creditor 
 s against tlie surety: — 
 preme Court of Canada, 
 1 of the Court of Appeal, 
 the evidence there was a 
 ■ the debt seeuicd by th" 
 1 on, and a release of the 
 s on the note were also 
 \: J/oi/at/. •_'() A. Jt. L'!t,S. 
 •22 S. C. R. 47it. 
 
 let of Ohtir/ec. 
 
 unite Pd/iry—Eiiiji/di/ce— 
 -Siipfrri.iioii. ]— A guaran- 
 le honesty of W., an em- 
 [•on theexjiress conditions, 
 contained in the applica- 
 
 statement of the manner 
 IS was conducted and ac- 
 t they would be so kept, 
 jyers should, innnediately 
 own to them, give notice 
 ; the employee had liecouie 
 
 oH'enci entailing or likely 
 nployers and for which a 
 : made under the policy, 
 on in W.'s accounts, anil 
 hat no proper sujiervision 
 ver W.'s books, and the 
 otilied until a week after 
 
 knowledge of the defalca- 
 
 the country ; — 
 e judgment of the Court 
 |)Ioyer.s liad not exercised 
 sion over VV., and liad not 
 :e of the defalcation, they 
 recover under the policy. 
 ■< of' Montreal v. (liiaran- 
 America, '2\> S. C. R. 542. 
 
 &tion— Hoik/ — Co//erlor— 
 a »//.<.] — In an action by a 
 1 against the sureties to 
 ing collector of taxes, for 
 f his duties for ISSO and 
 at there had been great 
 :s' part, but that shortly 
 lisconded, in ISSS, a ma- 
 s of the coriiovation had 
 sty: while the defendants 
 nition from the plaintitis 
 performed his duties in 
 
 lisclosure iiy the plaintifls 
 motion having lieen made 
 ; 'f he roll for 1SS4 was 
 next meeting, an inouiry 
 irt Judge would be asked 
 in AuiTMsr,, 1X85, instriiot- 
 ce proceedings against the 
 ies for the balance due on 
 ly settled before 10th .Sep- 
 t was; or of another like 
 
 825 
 
 considered. Ton;, of /'„,>, / T' '''l"^^''''l'y 
 R. 42, 541. ■ '''"'■'""'/ "•■■ l-uiKj, 20 U. 
 
 PRIVY COUNCIL. 
 
 82S 
 
 in. RkjHTS OV SfliKTV. 
 
 II- LlAlilMTi- OK NrilETV. 
 
 Lui condition::! r i-,-;";;';''- i" a 
 
 principal o„ ,/,.„„./ of I /a u ey Ue ';^' ""T 
 
 the sure les, /'orf A'/,,;,, />„i'- ., , , ,''"o'' 
 V. El,,,, 2(i (). It, 7.x ^ '"• '^'■''"°' '^"«''' 
 
 ,:;;s.,":;s,;;i::;,i>;r-.;;L,f :«- 
 
 "111 the li,,|,|(.,. an ix(,.„sio„ ,>f Uitu- l,v 
 
 pa,.t,,e, abon.LombLS rr;l-,r;/'th!i 
 
 husband should save delVn,! ■,„ t it the 
 
 -Hitttiiyindennn,;'ti:c';iin;ia':uMr^ 
 
 costs charges, an,l .lamagcs ami ex e T' 
 
 iL'i^iSS^^H?:!";'^?"™" 
 
 the phvintilf u ^Z;rlbv 1 h '"*;;">'"" """' 
 
 t^.uiLuotobefro^^uf\nd";:trH:b,Hiv'::f 
 
 .N.ry natmx. an,l kind soever of thl sa I -^„ '• 
 .ludgments were recovercl bv crclitors ', , 
 
 s™s:;:;i,;n;:;™l,'i;',s™'^«""'S 
 
 Held, that he was entitled to Iv,,-., ti • i ' 
 
 mentsan.l costs paid i d H,. ., J'*-' ''''''K- 
 
 „.,„, .. 'r 1 ' '■'"' mninnits ncees. 
 
 saiv were tor that purpose (.rdered to 1, n,f 
 '"to Court by the <lLfe, dants. /fo w v y>„' 
 'Oil, 20 (). R. 404. -^ JiOhii,. j 
 
 „„f ^?"'""y Held by Creditor-/.',/,.,,,, ir;//, 
 
 01 CoHxrnI of Surer,,-,/,,,/ ",.. { V , 
 
 ti is, who held ., „, """./"""'.J- Ihe plain- 
 
 t's.t=rSr™' ?--""■ •- 
 
 ^'a^Sii h^i;::l;:;.,S?,f-"""'^'"-"-' 
 
 tliat security had nn.'r-^ l"'>l'crty when 
 'lebt h^ et^, , i,,'",t ,r'' -f" I""!"-''--, or the 
 
 -hhed. ^foisoii. n,,,i/; Jrji::u;:' i;-o:t 
 
 FEINTING. 
 
 See Costs, III. 
 
 PRIVATE WAY. 
 
 See Way, \'JI1. 
 
 PRIVILEGE. 
 
 
 ■See Dekamatio.v, \ I. -Fvnnvn.- t c. 
 
 '■Y"i,Mi.., I.— >Souci- 
 
 TOB, VI. 
 
 PRIVY COUNCIL. 
 
 ,w|S,3|;-;;£;;>^S£i?,:n»: 
 
 .rt... 1 "'""'.''^''•■L'lt, and had Iraudulentlv 
 etb'cted a transterencc of tir.- ins,,,- r i ■ 
 
827 
 
 PROHIBITION. 
 
 Ifc'ltl, that tlio appellants could not, bo allowed 
 in final Hjipi'al to cimtcnd for the liral time that 
 the plcadinj^H and cviilencu disclosed such negli- 
 gence or Ijieaeh of duty hy the res|)oudeMt as 
 their agtiit as is in la\r sullicienl to infer his 
 liability for the amount paid by them under the 
 insurance so transfcried. Fraud was of tlie 
 essoui.e of the <lcclaration, and the evidence of 
 the rcsponilent directed to that issue cannot be 
 accepted as representing all that he would ha\e 
 brought forward to reljut'a charge of negligence, 
 lujr iiad the jioinls cunuected with that issue 
 Ik'CIi svdmiitted to the Court ))clow. Ctmnecticid 
 Firv Iii.^. Co. V. Kamiuuih, | bS'J'JJ A. C. -ATU. 
 
 Appeal to — Seciirih/ — I'J.cniitioii.] — Where 
 the phiintili's were appealing to the Privy Coun- 
 cil from a judguiunt of the Court of Ajipeal dis- 
 missing with costs au appeal fi'oni tlie judgment 
 of the <j)uccii's I'lCneli Division in favour of tlie 
 defendants with costs, ,and had given security in 
 S:.',000. as rcMpiired by sec. '2a{ K. S. O. eh. 41 :— 
 
 Held, th.;t the order of a dudge of the Court 
 of Apjical, under sec. ;", allowing the security, 
 should not have stayed the jirnccedings in the 
 action, and so much of the order as related to 
 the stay should lie rescinded : — 
 
 Held, al.so, that tlie plainlilis not having given 
 security to stay execution for tlie costs in the 
 Courts below, and the stay being removed, if 
 they now desired to have execution for such 
 costs stayed, they should give security therefor 
 as provided by Kule S04, which is made appli- ' 
 caiile by sec. 4 of the Act : — 
 
 Held, also, that if an order for paj'ment out 
 of the High Court of money tlierein, awaiting 
 the result of the litigation, was " execution '' 
 witliin the meaning of see. 3, it was stayed by 
 the allowiuice of tlic security, and reipiired no 
 order; if it w.'is not execution, a Judge of the 
 Ci'Urt of A)>](eal had no jurisdiction to stay 
 proceedings m the Court below ; and it was for 
 the High Court to determine whether such au 
 order was "execution," and if not, whether the 
 Huuii'y should lie paid out. McMasli r v. Rwlforil, 
 Ki I'.'!!. 120. 
 
 I. GKNKiIAI.I.Y. 
 
 PROBATE COURT. 
 
 Jurisdiction — 'J'nixlii i' Aowuiif ■•:.]— A Court 
 of Trobate has no jurisdiction over accounts of 
 trustees under a will, and the passing of accounts 
 <ontaining items relating to the duties of both 
 executors and tru'itees is not, so far as the latter I 
 are concerned, binding on any othe" Court, and | 
 a Court of ('(juity, in a suit to remove the i 
 executors and trustees, may investigate such 
 accounts again, and disallow charges of the trus- 
 tees which were passed bv the Probate Court. 
 Oi-iint v. Jft:c/unn,'2:i S. C. K. :!10. 
 
 PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS. 
 
 See EviDKNCE, IX. 
 
 PROHIBITION. 
 
 I. Ckxkuai.lv, S2S. 
 II. Particular Trihivals, 829. 
 III. PAiiT PuoimsrnoN, 829. 
 
 Error in Law. ]— Prohibition will not lie to 
 a Division ( 'ourt merely because the .ludge hits 
 erred in his construction of a statute where he 
 does not, by this error in cdiistruetion, give him- 
 self jurisiliction he does not in law possess. 
 
 .ludginciit of the Queen's i>ench Division, 19 
 O. i-t. 4S7, reversed. //( ri: Loii'i I'oiiil Co. v. 
 Amtd-suii, IS A. 1{. 401. 
 
 Error in Law.] — The facts not being in 
 dispute, prohibition to a Division Court wa^ 
 granted on the ground that the .ludge had 
 given an erroneous interpretation to .")! Vict, 
 ch. 2S, sec. 2 {().), in holding that a magistrate's 
 order thereunder was equivalent to the linal 
 judgment of a (!ourt, and in entertaining an 
 action thereon for arrears of payments. Ki 
 Simx v. A''////, 2(»D. R. 291. 
 
 Evidence— /M«j«r«a^io» nfJudnmenl Dnhtar.] 
 — 'I'lie refusal of evidence is not ground for 
 priiliiliition. That the .liulgc has refused to 
 allow the defendant, under examination upon 
 judgment summons, to make explanations as to 
 his dealing with money lent by and repaid to 
 him after juilgment, is not a grounil for piolii- 
 bitioii against proceeding upon an order for 
 committal for making away with property. /iV 
 h'l'iil V. Gniliaiii, 25 O. K. r,T.i. Su H. r'., 2IJ 
 (). Li. 12(1. 
 
 Excessive Jurisdiction.] —An order of pro 
 
 hibition is an extreme measure, to be granted 
 summarily only in a very plain case of excessive 
 jurisdiction on the part of a subordinate tri- 
 bunal. Ji'i-. Cnminiiii/.i (did Coiiiih/ of'Car/f.ton, 
 2,5 O. R. (j()7. .V'T ,S'. v., 2(i t). K.' 1." 
 
 Question of Pact.]— ^Vhere the Judge fouml 
 that money was handed over vcduntariry by the 
 detendant t:o a constable upon liis arrest, and 
 determined tliat it ccnih" be garnished : — 
 
 Held, tliat the (jiii'Stion whether the garnisliec 
 was indebted to the defend;int was a question ot 
 fact within tlic jurisdictiiui ot the inferior Court, 
 and that pr<diibition would not lie. AV, Fiil,l. v. 
 JUn, AV Ford v. JHce, 20 O. K. :md. 
 
 Territorial Jurisdiction of Division Court 
 
 — 7';'((/(.v/'e/-.] — lJndi;r 1'.. !S. (). ili. ,")1, sec. S7. 
 as amended by 52 \'iet. cli. 12, >' 5 (O.), either 
 party in a Division Court action may, after 
 notice dis])uting tlie jurisdiction has been duly 
 given, apply to have the action transferred tu 
 another Court. If no application be made, ami 
 if in fact there be jurisdiction, prohibition will 
 not lie merely because the ,]udge has assiniiuil 
 that, as no application for a transfer had ijcfU 
 made, he had jurisdiction, (',.■ ., has not tried the 
 cjuestioii of jurisdiction. Put if, in fact, tlu'iv 
 be no jurisdiction, the objection still holds goml, 
 and inohibition will be granted. 
 
 Judgment of the Queen's liench Division, '" 
 0. 1!. 5S;i, atllrmed. //( re Tlioiiijitott v. J/iiii, 
 20 A. a. -.ild. 
 
 Time of Application for.]— If the right to 
 prohibition exists, it is optional with the de- 
 fendant to apply at the outset of the Division 
 C(.nrt ju-oceeding-^, or he may wait tii! the 
 latest stiige of appeal, so long as there is any- 
 thing to prohibit. In rt Bradll v. Johus, 21 
 0. l;. 209. 
 
k ^ 
 
 829 
 
 iKNKilAl.T.Y. 
 
 -I'roliiljitioii will not lie to 
 rely lieeause the .luilge hu.s 
 :tion (if ii statute where he 
 >i in i(jiisti'iietion, give him- 
 loes nut in law possess. 
 Queen's liiiich Division, 1!) 
 Ill r<: Loiiij I'oint Gii. v, 
 401. 
 
 —The fiiets not being in 
 to a Division ('ourt was 
 )unil that the Judge hail 
 interpretation to .")l Viet, 
 holding that a magistrate's 
 as equivalent to the final 
 rt, and in entertaining an 
 arrears of payments. W 
 R. 1291. 
 
 illation nfJmhtment DnhUir.] 
 
 videnee is not groun<l foi' 
 the .ludge has refused to 
 ., under examination upon 
 
 lo make explanations as tn 
 niey lent by and repaiil to 
 
 is not a ground for prohi- 
 uedin,'4 upon an order tur 
 g away with property. AV 
 J O. K. .JTS. .Vc .S'. ('.. Jli 
 
 llction.] —An order of pro 
 
 me measure, to be granteil 
 very plain ease of excessive 
 part of a subordinate tri- 
 ('/.'■■ (I ml (Joiihh/ of C'ar/i:f(iii. 
 . C, -Jd (). K.'l.' 
 
 ;.] — ^Vhere the Judge foiunl 
 lied over vobintarilj' by the 
 stable upon his arrest, and 
 lulc' be garnished : — 
 stion whether the garnislu'c 
 defendant was a ([Uestionoi 
 lietioii (It the inferior Court, 
 woidd not lie. A'e Fiiiil v. 
 e, '-'O (». It. ;J09. 
 
 diction of Division Court 
 
 1- ]'.. !S. (). rh. ."Jl, see. s;. 
 ;et. ell. VZ, > ."i (O.), eitkT 
 
 1 Court aeti'iu may, aftiT 
 ! jurisdietion lias been duly 
 
 2 tile aelion transferred tu 
 10 application be made, ami 
 .irisdielion, prohibition will 
 .ise the Judge has assumed 
 ion for a transfer had liceii 
 etion, /,.■ ., has not tried tin.' 
 ,ion. !>ut if, in faet.tluHe 
 e objeetiou still Indds gued, 
 be granted. 
 
 Jueen's l>encli Division, 'li 
 III re T!ioiiip>iOH v. //»//, 
 
 tlon for.]— If the right to 
 t is optional with the de- 
 the outset of the Division 
 or he niay wait till the 
 il, so long as there is any- 
 In re Bi-ar.ill v. Johnx, 24 
 
 PUBLIC HEALTH. 
 
 n. PakTICULAR TRinDNAM. 
 
 830 
 
 I Judgment— iK-re*s;ce Amoiuii 1— \Vf.or<, :„ 
 
 County Courts. ]-.s'«e C.UNTy Court. 
 
 ^g^ofTorcmto,un,«e'r;;.!;;:i:;::::::;'k:l^r 
 
 and ascertain if the eitv I,.,. I i ''"^/^"™s. 
 
 outofpublienn^eysl^tLSii-neJ 
 cm raets; to imjuire into the whole sv en o 
 
 te^and^;c;;::;;it^-;:-r'r.^^£l 
 :'■-•'• pn-ceed oni;'':ir:i^ej:Mo'e,ni:ge:r^;:t 
 
 .,ts:uiee or ni.seonduet, and the Jn.ige refi is 1 1 
 to o,lersueh charges to be fornmlated 1 o n! 
 pheJ tor a writ of prohibition •- ^ 
 
 ."'•'''•/■'";;■'"'''= ""-■,) "dgment of the Court of 
 
 luugiiient .mpos.ng any legal duty or obi S 
 "";uiy person; and he wat not, therefo ^tr : 
 
 Held, per (iwynne, J., that the writ of prohi 
 ijumii wouUnie. ami in the eircunistance s' et 
 
 Division Courts. ]-,sVfi Uivi ,io.v Couut, IV. 
 
 Juf'rZf^^^; ^^''^•Jr*^ Company of Ad- 
 itiluiei, of Liijland v. Joanntttc, I'.S ,S C R 
 
 M 
 
 PROMISSORY NOTES. 
 
 See I5iu,s of ExaiAv.iE and I'ko.mi.s.sorv 
 
 PROMOTER. 
 
 I 'SVc coMfANv, v'lir. 
 
 I 
 
 , PROVINCIAL FISHERIES. 
 
 Sen Ga.mk. 
 
 PROVINCIAL PENAL LEGISLATION. 
 
 See CoNSTiTCTioN-AL Law, U, 
 
 PROVINCIAL SUBSIDIES. 
 
 See CoNSTiTtrrioNAL Law, JL 
 
 PROXIMATE CAUSE. 
 
 •S'ee Neolickxck, IV. 
 
 PUBLIC HEALTH. 
 
 
 in. I'AHT PiiommnoN. 
 Judgment— Zi'.t,'f.s.v/,r (wn,,,,, i u-u 
 
 ■!-tednatiltlie.;uS"ami^;?^l^°;„S..S^ 
 «f j»dgne.ft fn> tl '"'""''"', ''■" eaf<,rce,neat 
 
 i of liealti oil cers ' ^ ^ T "''' ''l'P"i»tment 
 ^ntil the powe s ami a'utlu r tie f"'*' "V"''*'''" 
 
 'iuco..ts^.f^essioJ:t:^^;-;—t:^::[ 
 
 appoint ^'i:ii,S:,t;::^r'-'^''^'-"-^« 
 ico;:^iS;?;l!:£-:j;S;:S'vi^'^r'^""^-° 
 
 the facts of Ins engagement and dismissal. aLd 
 
831 
 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS. 
 
 E32 
 
 claiming,' payriient for liis serviccH mito the d.ilc' 
 at wliiili the last simill-iidx patient wmm ciiiimI, 
 and Hpccial diiiiuigcu for hum cif ri'putation liy 
 the dismissal. 
 
 The Aft K. .S. X. S., 4th ser., uh. '20, sec. !•.», 
 allows tilt! lioai'il of lit'altli to inoiir reasoiialiie' 
 ex])eiisis, which arc dctiiicd hy '(7 Viet. (N. S.) 
 eh. (i, see. I. to lie services performed aii(| 
 hestowed and mt'dieiiie supjilied hy the pliysi- 
 cinns in cniryinj; o\it its iirovisions, and makes 
 sucli expenses a district, city, or county charge, 
 to 1)0 assessed hy the justices, and levied as 
 ordinary county rates : — 
 
 Hehl, per Fournier, (iwynne, and Taselie- 
 reau, JJ., allirmiug the judgment of the Court 
 helow, tliat the contract with M. was to payliini 
 ii-O.nO per day so hmg ns small-pox shouhl pre- 
 vail in the ilistrict during the season : that his 
 dismissal was wrongful; and the fultillnient of 
 the contract cotdd lie enforced against the muni- 
 uijiality hy action. 
 
 I'er Kitcliic, ('. J., and Strong, .]. — There 
 was sutlicient ground for tlie disnns.^al of .M. 
 Assuming, however, his dismissal to have heen 
 unju.stifiahle, M.'s only renieily would have heen 
 by mandamus to compel the municipality to 
 make an asses..-ment to cover the exjiense 
 incurred. But the claim being really one for 
 damages for w rongfid dismissal, it diil not come 
 within the " reasonable exjicnses'' which may 
 be incurred by a hoard of health and maile a 
 charge on the county, and the nnniicipality was, 
 therefore, not liable. 
 
 Per Patterson, J. — The proper remedy for 
 tiie recovery of the expenses mcntiimed in 
 see. 12 is by action, and not by niandannis 
 to compel an assessment ; but a claim for dam- 
 ages for wrongful disnussal does not come within 
 the section, and is not made a county charge. 
 County of t\ti)e lirctouw McKay, LS.S. C. R. Oiill. 
 
 Summary Conviction — liy-lan; ] — Held, 
 that tlie uidoadiiig of manure from a car on a cer- 
 tain part of railway premises int(. waggons, to be 
 carried away, came within the tcims of a liy-law 
 amending the by-law appendul to the I'ublic 
 Hialth Act. 1!. S. f). eh. -JOa, ami i.rohibitiug 
 tlie unleadiiig of manure on said part of said 
 ])remises : that the use of the word '• nuuuire " in 
 the amending bylaw was notof itself objection- 
 ahle ; and that it was not essential to sliew that 
 the manure might endanger the ])ublic health. 
 
 A convii'tioii for unloading a ciir of manure on 
 the premises, .'is contrary to the by-law, was 
 therefore ailirmcd. lleijiiia v. IIhIiiihikI, I!f(/ii{a 
 V. J{i/nii, Ih-ijiiia v. Burk; 2-1 {). R. 331. 
 
 Summary Conviction— /j/z/n "•_,!/);), rti lo 
 
 Sosnioii".] — Whcic (here is a conviction for .'in 
 otlence undei- the by-law set out in the schedule 
 to the I'nllic Health Act, R. S. (). ch. 20."). as 
 distinguished fiom any of the provisions in tlie 
 Act itself, an appeal will lie from sucii convic- 
 tion to the Sessions, notwithstanding sec. 112. 
 whicli has no application, lityinn v. Cuurxey, 
 2(i O. R. (in.-). 
 .Reversed on other grounds, 27 O. R. 181. 
 
 PUBLIC MOKALS AND CON- 
 VENIENCE. 
 
 Municipal By-law— .S'lccac/nf/ in SireH or 
 J'ltlilk- I'iaif —I'rinitt Office in Custom Hoiise.] 
 
 —A city l)y-law onacted that no person shoiil.i 
 make use of any profane swearing, obsei m, 
 blasphemous, or grossly insulting language, c i 
 he guilty of any other immorality or iudecein \ . 
 in any street or public place : — 
 
 Held, that the object of the by-law was t., 
 prevent an injury to public morals, and applii ' 
 to a sli't.'ct or a public ))laee ijiixdi in i/rnnus w i;ii 
 a street, and not to a private ollice in thecust'.;, 
 house. Ildjina v. Hell, 25 O. R. 272. 
 
 PUBLIC OFFICERS. 
 
 See Action, III. 
 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS. 
 
 I. Exi'i;ni)1tiki-; iiv Sciiooi, Hoakos, 8.')2. 
 
 II. I'OU.MATION AM) ALTKUA'] ION OK Sr:i(il,|, 
 
 SwTiuNs, 832. 
 III. Hicii S( iiooi.s, 8,35. 
 
 Sei' CdNsTrruTioNAi, Law, HI. 
 
 I. ExrENIHTUEE IIV SCIIOOL BOAHU.S. 
 
 Erection of School House— Canlract-i'lii'i 
 (7)v.<. J — 'i'hc si.'hool Ijoard of a city, town, ur 
 incorporated village has no authority to ccm 
 tract for the buihling of a school house, uiui! 
 the necessary funds have been provided, innii ; 
 .")4 \'i( t. ch. .').■), sec. 11(5, or for one iuvobii:^ 
 tlie ex]ieiuliture of any gi'cater sum than h;:- 
 h(.-en so provideil. 
 
 The ])laiutiir, a freeholder, rate]\iyer, ,,'..''. 
 electrir of the town of Fort William, and i 
 supportci- of the public schools theieiu, suiii.- 
 on hehalf of himself and all other ratepayir, 
 was held entitled to an injunction to restr^iiii 
 the proceeding with the erection of a schi ..i 
 house, in a case where the contract i rici 
 exceedtil the amount provided under sei. 116, 
 and to an order com])elliiig the repayment ti> 
 the school (.-orporation of certain sums paid ly 
 individual members of the school hoard to tli'' 
 contractors for a portion of the wcu'k alrcaii} 
 performe<l. Smith v. Fort W'illiiiin Scltoo/ Boani, 
 24 O. R. 3G(). 
 
 Payment of Solicitor's Bill—JU'jIil af Unif.- 
 paytr la l'iixati(in.]—Sct> MciUKjan. v. Jtcdiiiiiin. 
 21 O. 1!. 2S1I, I 'J A. R. oO, 21 S. C. R. 2(J7, «« ■ 
 220. 
 
 II.- Formation and Alter.vtiox of School 
 Sections. 
 
 ATvard — By -laic — Petition — Appeal— Tim 
 — H'a.u'ej'.] — In the absence of satisfactory evi- 
 dence of waiver of the objection by all jiersoiis 
 interested, a county council has no juri.sdictimi 
 under sub sec. 3 of sec. 82 of tlie Puiilic Silien!- 
 Act, 54 Vict. ch. 55 (0.), to a])point arhitnUois 
 to hear an appeal from the action or refiis;il tn 
 act of a township council and to determine or 
 
832 
 
 nacted that no person sliciiilu 
 ■ [irofano swoariiij.', olisct m, 
 ;;roHsIy inMiltinj; liiMj;uai,'c, i,| 
 llier ininiiiriilily or iuilecfin \ , 
 ililii' jiliict^ ; — 
 
 olijfit (if the ))y-law was ti. 
 
 to piililic morals, and ajiplii ! 
 lilic |plafu (Jiixili III (jeiierU \\ i;h 
 ) a |)rivati' ollicu in the custu,: 
 
 IMt, 25 O. R. *27'-'. 
 
 .10 OFFICERS. 
 
 Aitkin, III. 
 
 AO SCHOOLS. 
 
 ; r.v .School Hoakhs, S.Sl'. 
 
 ,M1 Al-TKilA'JlON Oh' i»(llli(i| 
 
 ^32. 
 
 s, ,s;i5. 
 
 iTLTioNAi- Law, III. 
 
 •RE iiY .School Boahhs. 
 
 ool House — Ciiiitract -I'lii'i 
 )1 liiiaiil of a city, town, cir 
 :o has no aiitiiority to mii 
 iling of a school house, until 
 3 have liocn iirovidcil, iindi: 
 c. ll(j, or for one invohir.' 
 f any greater sum than \\,:~ 
 
 freeholder, rate)>ayei', ,^l,^ 
 vn of Fort William, ami .i 
 lublie .^^cliools therein, Miii!.; 
 df and all other ratepiiy. i-. 
 to an injunction to restrain 
 Ith the erection of a selinol 
 
 where the eontiact [irict 
 Hit provided umler sec. 116, 
 onipelliiig the repayment tn 
 tion of certain .sums paid l.,v 
 s of the school hoard to tli.. 
 portion of the vork alreii(i) 
 .'. Fort WiUiiun Svlwol ISijinil, 
 
 icitor's Bill— JUijIil <•/ /.'<//.:■ 
 
 — See Mclliiiiaii V. ^lilhi'inx, 
 
 K. 50, 21 S. C. R. •JG7, «/<' 
 
 JD Alteration of Si iiooi. 
 Sections. 
 
 t' — Petition — A ppeci I— Tim> 
 absence of satisfactory evi- 
 the objection bj all jiersoiis 
 f council has no juri..^ilii;tii'ii 
 .sec. 82 of the Piiiilic .^^thw!- 
 > (O. ), to ajipoint arhitriUors 
 from the action or refusal tn 
 ouncil and to determine or 
 
 833 
 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS. 
 
 834 
 
 
 •'"„« ..i;:.;;',, ';;;".',;:;;.;";'"""■"»» 
 
 "lure a by-liuv of fl„. . 
 
 pointinL' arhitia .. "'""'y council np. 
 
 "*'!d. thai the ivord "viar " as >■..,. I .i 
 '"cans the cah.n.l!,,. .. ^ as uscl tli,.,,.,,, 
 
 loL laiendar year ii mineiii-ii.f i^f r 
 
 ••fe;".^;;..;. h^rep,.;:'- -yjL 
 
 '■nt!^u,S:t :^;:'^^Y''^*'''''"••'''••''f--t'' 
 -'tof'j,;nS,t ' >,,,^''")^"<'-tedi,ythe 
 
 l'yl"w. their aw 1 ;,, I ,';''',''■'' '".''"■^■'' ""' 
 l'V-lawuaM;;,Ls|„.'l ' "'"'"'^ ^^^f: ""'I the 
 
 ^a^'"or';l:etho:r';''';■'"■''^'''"''''•'y -■'''- 
 
 '-■'•'• in .lu sti: ;' i^^' "■' ^^'"-'^ b..undaries 
 '.'"••^tee.s of the s V i, *' > ■'"" '''■''"'■''^t of the 
 
 :y!'''^^-^--'-y--'-.-"i!pi^r,:;'',,.^r^^:j 
 
 -ndli^;;;.;-r;;:7::ri.;;:,ft:!''^?,'^'''- 
 
 ai.r<,i..].,„ :_, , i"o I. ii oi ,>te. \ ictoire, in 
 
 
 "nia,,.ui,,i:;zrr'';M;rrt'"'';''"''^ 
 
 pt of union . duioi ^:i^i, ^;:,,:,;;-;'.>'f- 
 
 ■-''''i'-n, alt 'i ;j".l'''r'^''V''." ^°'' <'"• '•"•- 
 c. 1 , . <'"ti.ilion, or dif-Ki iitirii „f .. r-...- . 
 
 i'-dity v-iie;r;i """"■' II""'";"' f-' the muniJi- 
 
 Sirs ;';F-i"'-"■-::"■- 
 ,.• V V '- -• H,r.'theSeeof;f-''"'''"*'"'""'''^'P'''"°''t''"t<>« 
 N^^-ol 'Section';;;;^,. '•si'TiT'eh ^^ " '•■'-' : the S^^.ect: ' :; ^^^ ^li^";* ^'"t^' ^hat L., 
 
 rf^.,. >j- '■"'!"'*'" i-t-'tnction in sub-sec 1 1 i sPT.n,.,iV~ ""-''"""'■'' V of a I'rotesfint 
 
 "'/.v»;'f :,r r;,,;;r ''■■'■^■' '■■■ - '-''" °' "- "'"■„■;:;:!;;;;. ";:si!-iT!"P' 
 
 ^ ar-.ed by a Divisional Court, 27 O.Rrsj.,. 
 
 /v^'^-rfti- ;^'('T'"- r ^'^''""■'-''- ^ ^- ' -"' "^'-" 'Sf ^v-r -^'^'-i: v. 
 
 I'uration. 
 T! 
 
 '"enIw::?V;^l*r^1'''" "■"' .t'- "-livid 
 
 lie cor- 1 tliereiipon 
 
 heni 
 
 ;-ume.ltodo:butV;i,y ti:;..::':^ 
 
 Piniier jNirties t 
 
 of the propose<I new s 
 
 liy.l 
 
 aw for 
 
 such 
 
 " an action to ha\ 
 
 ■chool 
 
 were resi.lenfs of the same sch.ol 
 
 board arc Held, tl 
 
 - - - -MVIV,*, ,0 V»l Lilt," SJI 
 
 and also luads of families :— 
 
 section. 
 
 e ."in inva 
 
 (O. 
 
 lat the rf(iu 
 
 ^--A^; VZ/^,^;:^ ^ ir\?!j"- ^"'^ V. i ;.4;.;::;;ti^' f, 
 
 quireineiitsof J9Vict. eh. .16 
 
 53 
 
 sees. 22, 24, were rot compli.'d 
 
 lere was no vul 
 
 ot tliv trustees elected at such 
 
 Kl iiicor 
 nieeting, 
 
 with, and 
 pointien 
 
833 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 836 
 
 I'cr Hoyd, f^, — Tlic I'ltMlion of ci)r|)nr<iU(>iiM 
 is a |iiiiiieitHvu not, and wlicru the power to 
 iiiiilii! tliiiii in, (in ill tlii.s caoi!, (lclf;,'iifi.Ml to 
 priviit*! pi'iHonH, tlic iiutlioil prcscrilicil liy the 
 li'^iNhitiiri' hIioiiIiI ]iv siili.^itiiiiti.illy folliAvci'l. In 
 mioli ease form in of tlir suliHt.inJc, iiiiil liliiiider 
 ill torm iiieans iiivali litv. 
 
 Held, aluo, that a cuieNtion us to tho wil'd 
 ineoijioiatiiiii of ti-ii«tee.i of ,i Hoiinti ( 'atliolic 
 Sepai-ale ^'.l■hool (hies not coiiii' «ilhiii the pur- 
 view of -IK \'i(t. ill. 4(i, j-ec. OS (().;, K. S. (), 
 ISM7 eh. '22'>, sec. 07, wiiieh inyhiippoMuH iiieoi- 
 poi'ation. 
 
 Dei'lMion of l''ei>.'iisoii, ,1., atlirined. 
 Ifehl, also, per I'Vi-guson, ,1,, that ilie words 
 "or other niiiniripal authoritien '' in thif* sec- 
 tion do not eiiil)race the niunieiiiality itself. 
 
 Held, also, pi.r Mureilith, .f., that tlie incor- 
 poration niiLst he !iy lioiiian CathulieM within 
 an existiiii; I'lihlii Seh.iol section, with the' 
 same lioundaries ami numlier as sneli I'lililic.' 
 ■S.'hool seel ion ; ami, tlierelore, apart from I he 
 informality of the iiroeei din^s, there could lie 
 no valid imor|ior;iti()ii hei'e ; that the relief of 
 tlie dissatislied sujijiorlers of Koman CaJiolie 
 t5eparat(^ .'-'eliool No. (i If they were entitled to 
 uiiy — was ill additKnial school aecommc lation 
 under R. S. (). l.SST di. -J;.';, sec. L'S, siili-see. 
 11, ami not as here songlit ; that no jirovisiou 
 i.s made for the wilhdiawal of a Itoinan Catho- 
 lic Separate iSc!i()(d sii[iporter from one section 
 to sii[iport another : and that the iilaintill's' 
 remedy, if duly incoriiorated, was Mot in an 
 action to recover rates eollccti.'d by the defeii- 
 danls foidther.s, Imt in proceedings to compel 
 the collection of their rates. Trii«tit-< of /'omaii 
 Culholic Hc/xinilf Hrhool SccHon Xo. V) uf 
 Arthur v. Toinis/ilp of Arthur, 21 O. K. (it). 
 
 Set, also, /)( ri' U'i/.iOii and Coitiiti/ uf Elij'ui, 
 21 A. K. 0S5, -^4 S. (.'. l;. 70U, post six' 
 
 III. Ilii.ii Schools. 
 
 Alteration of Districts.] —Under sec. G of 
 the High Schools Act, ."i-l \iet. eh. bl (().), as 
 amended hy ri7 Vict. eh. .5.S, sec. 1 (0.), a comity 
 council has ])ower to detach a township from a 
 High School <listrict M-ithout tlie consent of that 
 townshii) or of the other townshi])s included in 
 the high school district in (picstion. In re 
 Wilton ami t'onntij of t'lain, '21 A. R. oS."), 2-t 
 S. C. R. 7110. 
 
 Trustee — A p/wbitmunt to F'll IVfrvT/cv/.] — 
 In a High School hoard of a High School district 
 constituted under sec. 11 of .54 Vict. eh. " (().), 
 a vacancy occu-red hy reason of the expiration 
 of the term of ollice of one of the trustees 
 appointed by a town, whereupon the town 
 oouncil passed a by-law appointing the plaintiff 
 to till the vacancy. At a suI)SO(juent meeting, 
 in the .absence of any of the causes provided 
 for by the Act, namely, death, resignation, or 
 removal from the district, etc., the council 
 passed a by-law amending their previous by-law 
 by substituting the name of the defeiidaiit for 
 tliat of the plaintitF :— 
 
 Held, that the plaintif was duly appointt'd 
 to fill the vacancy, and that he was entitled to 
 the seat, and the subsequent appointment of 
 
 defendant was illegal. Jlfijinn ix re.l. Afoorr v 
 Xii'jie, •-'(!(). !i. lM!). 
 
 Trustee- /'/o.'."/;*;;/ to /{, more—Quo War 
 ntntii.y-Ste Qio Wmiuasto. 
 
 PUBLIC WORKS. 
 
 See C.'oNTKAiT, III. -Crown, II, 
 
 QUEBEC LAW. 
 
 .SVf CkOWK, I. — I-'OKKKIN Law and FoRKKiSKn 
 Sri'KKMK CoKKT OK CANADA, I., ll., Ill 
 
 VII., M., XII., XIII., XV., XVI.. XVIK.; 
 
 QUO WARRANTO. 
 
 Information— //i;//t ,S<;ho"l Tnixtttn — VU'J, 
 Prorudiiij — Si-njt,' ,/H(lif:]~\ motion for an 
 information in the nature of a 7«o i(yu')V(,/^o n 
 the proper proceeding to lake to iiKpiire into th.; 
 autliority of a peio> • to exercise the odice uf a 
 Hig! Sch<i(d trustee. Axktir v. Mannimi, :W 
 
 U. c. R.;ur),;i(ii, followed. 
 
 Such a proceeding is a civil, not a criminal, 
 one ; and is pro()erly taken before a single.Juilge 
 in Court, by way of motion, upon notice. 
 liKjiiia ex- rtl. Moore v. Xai/li; 2-t U. K. .J07. 
 
 Si'f JIUWICIPAL ColiPORATIONS, VIII. 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COM- 
 PANIES. 
 
 I. All) iiv AIuMciivu.iriES, .S37. 
 
 II. AM.VUiASIATIIIX, S37. 
 
 III. Bonus and Bonmioj.deiw, 8;17. 
 
 IV. Carjiiagk ok Good.s, s;i9. 
 
 V. CaKRIAOE OF I'.VSSENCBHS AND LtlitiAI.E, 
 
 841. 
 
 VI.' Fire kkom Engines, 842. 
 
 VII. Government Railways, 842. 
 
 VIII. In,(ukv to Ani.mals, 843. 
 
 IX. In.iury to Pkk?on.s. 
 
 1. Alighting from Trains, 844. 
 
 •2. A t Croi<miiiiii, 84.j. 
 
 3. At citations, 847. 
 
 4. By Derailment of Train, 848. 
 ."). lin Shunting, .S49. 
 
 (J. Fading Frogs, 849. 
 7. Seruant.'<, 849. 
 
837 
 
 EBEO LAW. 
 
 WARRANTO. 
 
 iL COUI'DRATIONS, VIII. 
 
 RAILWAYS Am RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 ^i U„nurY ••.KAcT.s<,KA«KNT.s,«.5;i, 
 \'J. l-iKv Knit DisnnwB.MK.srs, «,-,;<. 
 Mil. L.MuvTiuN ,„, A,;nc.,., N-,4. 
 'MMCKr,(,AMKnUs C'.V..K,S, X33. 
 i'U.UKIf AliUANOKMKNTS, N37. 
 
 .\IV. 
 
 \v. 
 
 ' AssK-SMKNT \Nli 'I'lvi-o \' /> 
 
 i- Am i.v MiivicuMMnKs. 
 Bonus--Cu/if/(</o/(— (•/(„„,,,, „/•/-. . . 
 
 poi-putii ty l)v til,. I'lr ^.,. . ''■'■■•'IIS 111 
 
 iie.-tii.;^u,i,*!;;tj"f cn37^|'-- 
 
 relations upon tiu- •■,. 1 ', ""'"'"''"' "'■»• 
 
 iiiont iKul 1,,.,.,, .s.ui«(io,r 1 V t , ■ ""*''''-"-■■ 
 til. «ivi.l .sl.o,,. I.v tl" ,. in '"""^'■'""^'-' "'■ 
 
 ,«■"".•. til. n.npy''l' ■'■''•''' '" '•'-•" "'« 
 , t" K. & W. a Irttor ;..„ 7 . "U.iiig.'f. wrote 
 
 iHtiMito K. A- \ ' a„ i.o 1 '""''"•i""'l<l sub- 
 
 ; til. conipany r.;,."n^ ",'^'';; ;;;>; .;';-'-a.,io of 
 
 itlio aforrsaiM auivoiMmt . , l • ., P'"V«*:ioaui 
 
 tl"^ (inc. un,l in he 1 tl, ,.'',r'' ' "-' ";""''* ^"^ 
 : '"^>'t in i|„, inttT. ' of / '•'•^' """'•' •'"«"' 
 
 ^'«re.'l to .lo"..t,,7;V ;..'';•,"''''■''• '""' ^»^ 
 
 ''<lvaiit-..s, ,1,1,1 .L. t ' I. / • '""' """'" ^"'•thur 
 
 "f tlio oxti.,i,i,.,l time thu h, ^-M'Ttttwn 
 
 "'■Mlf .Iftault in ,.an,,',^, V'-'"'.''"l''"'y''»»" 
 
 >-'lia.so undtT that «:vlu '^ • ••" l"""" 
 
 J'uM, fiirtli,.,., tii^i't if K, ,t \V Mlw.nii 
 ^•li.;i.^..' al .si,.,l, sale., tlu.y. w ,11 , " ■'"""''' pur- 
 l"'''lt''i--i of thu lu, : "'-'"'"'^'^''''W'lto 
 
 -i-u..a hyZ ;:•,::;:,;;;"' ""^ '-'^'-^ *° bo 
 ^;'K,:':.;;/':::;t£iS'';;j:;ii:t,!r'''^r"' 
 
 Trustees— A)s-.p<./n., r ■ / ... 
 
 , lyo/'oity. flinch ::,' a f:,!":/;;-' ^'"^ "^^'^y 
 
 ^l'« .Sontl. K,i.stc.i 1 Ka ; ,''■ !'^'''^ thereto of 
 tixeeuted im,!,.,. n, "•' "*V'i,> l-oiupany, and 
 
 Wi-) c^l.. 4> a.,1 i^l t''r'''vV.';'' ^'i^t-t^ Vict 
 
 ti..ti-uste.s'of ",;.l,,tii;';,,i,:;,',^'' ^''- .*•»• 
 
 of tliu la hvav Tn .,,./• . ''' I'osseaaioii 
 
 '^'I'ollaMta, for l"; „ , '•"»-^'-'?^'"". Ly the 
 
 "i-lorsud by K. t^ enable \V ' '' "''*<-^'' i "''I'^'i'l vencl,,,! , i . '"•'"' l"-i^'>'ege of 
 
 """"^y to 1.0 advance tlie. ■ Ml P'''^"''" ""^ ^^J-"'"'«t the •,' tL , '"" ,'""'"« '^'"^^ =«• 
 
 <^u.etl.econ,pany«|^^M^h'oZ::?;'"'f ''^' 'N ''•''- ''Vd^^^^^^ 
 
 ';-^ agreed, to rel.^ive tl , , , ''f^, ';''^'''^ '"'^-^ '" the ca.s ai 1 ol ;, ^ s' ' 1' '•.^■'^"'t.^ith regard 
 
 («" which W. iu.hl ..e-n-i v' , t'"^ <-o">l«ny I the iniM,„v,b! ■ ?' Ih .^V'^'^."' this case) and 
 
 ir"'> with whicii tilc^";^2.^[':;:;^i^ f""' .— lattacj,^ i.ln p.,^ , oi":'. "'n .'r^'^'^*'^^ =^«^ 
 
 .,...., >^ .''■^^i"-Joii_<,f athini party or is 
 
 II. AMALi^AMATiy,;^ 
 
 5«e cases under preceding sub-title. 
 
 ill. IJONUS AND li0M„,0LI>,.;,,s. 
 
 Security — *.,.o;,,i Morh,,,,,,,. n , 
 J'-"^' -/?a»/xl-\\- 1„" ? ''^-'"'■'•^«•^'^- 
 
 Il^Ol:(..,tdg as set 
 
 ■lii", applying the 
 
 eousidered 
 
 -'•'17, (_'. c. ;}. V 
 
 liut, eVCQ 
 
 ' " ""^'"^''t out n the ai'i-i.,.M„ „f i '1 " '",•= i '^""■''Ulerei as niov ible.. , \ ^'""^' «*von 
 
 -^ --p-y .Hd not lepii^ n- ':^*;,r; :r- ; bf^^h.^-- aS:;'";d '£ -r ^i^^U^ 
 
 ^'greed.andlthestatu^raii^ 
 
 ;narge() by virtue 
 "'"•■tgage made thereunder. 
 
 of 
 aa 
 
no 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES 
 
 840 
 
 Mflourity t» tli)> lionilliolili'iM, nitli ri^'lit nt prini' 
 ity Dvi'i nil I'tlii r ii'i'illtoix, iiicliiiliii^ tlii' |iiivi- 
 \uftfi\ iiii|iiilit viniliirH. 
 
 I'l'i' <iwyniit', .!., tliiit llii' iipi><'l|jiiitH tiii^lil lie 
 «iititl)'il to .III cijiiitiilili- ili'ci'i'i', t'niliicil witli iliic 
 i(')(uiil til tlir iitiiir norcHHiirv u|i|ili>|iiiiltii>im nl 
 the iiii'iiiiir ill nil ni'iliiiiri' with llu' |iiiiviMJnn nf 
 tlif tiiiNt iiiilriitiui', niitliiiii/'in^ tlir iiii\ limit 
 \>y tlic tiiiMtciH "(if all If^'iil rluiiiiH niisiiij,' fli'lii 
 till' 11)11 iiitiiiii ol' till' niiluny. iiirluiliii^' iliuiiii^'t's 
 caiiHi'il liy airiilriitN iiml nil ullioi' clini't^i n," Init 
 Hiich II lU'ci'i'c cniild nut III' iiiuili' in tlii' prcspiit 
 nutidii. 
 
 IVr Strong,', .1. — (Jiimr, Mlictliii' tlir |)rin- 
 cipUi !\K to till' ii])|iliciiliility nf rnni'iit I'nriiiiijiii 
 to iinitiit i'X|)info», iiiriini'il litlii'r whilst or 
 lii'fiilr 11 inihviiy mnirH linilir tlli' ci'lltlnl nf till' 
 f'ciiirt by lii'iii;,' iilmi'il at tho iiiHtniiii' of moil- 
 gftgri'H In till' liiiiiils of a iti'civir, in jurfi riiiii' 
 ti) lMoit),'iigt' ( rt'ilitiirs wliosi' si'Hii ity liim priority 
 of (Intc (ivor tliL' olilii/ntion tlius iiiiiii red foi' 
 working' I'Vpi'iisi'!*, hIiouIiI lii' mloiitcil liy Cuiul.i 
 in tliin coiMiti V. WiiHliruliii V. Fudi-i II, Onhirin 
 Car and Foil lid 11/ Co. v. Farinll, IMS. ( '. 1{. 1. 
 
 iiH hii(.'j;i Mti'il ill tliis Ictti'l, (Ii'IIvithIiIii to Ms 
 own iiiili'i in Itritisli ('■linniliia :- 
 
 Hrlil. atlii mill); tliii iliriHiiin of tlii'Coiiil <f 
 Appi'nl.L'l A. I!. .■)•-'•-', mill of tin' < liiuu'ciy \)\\^. 
 Hioii, •_'•_' (• K. (i'tri, timt on iirrivnl of tin- ^oiiU 
 nt St. I'mil, till' Noitlicin I'milic Hnilwny ('..m 
 paiiy \sv\v lioniiil to luii pt ili'livrry of tlu'lii tc r 
 rnri'in^'i' to I'li'itiHli ( 'iiliinil'iii, ninl to rxpul •, 
 Niuli nirriiijii' : tlinttlii'y wririn tin rnii'ot -nl 
 loliipiiiiy from St. I'liiil to lirit i.-li< 'I'liiiiiliin : t' ,l 
 till' friij^lit iij<riit nt 'roionto liml iiiitliority »' ti, 
 lilnil the I'onipniiy : ninl tliut the iinipniiy t( . .' 
 lillhle to (J. t i|' till' Vlillir of the ^ooiIm \\\ 
 were ililivi'itil to K. at lliilich ('nliiiiiliia. vi 
 out nil onltr from <1., ninl imt pniil for So 
 ini I'lirl/ir /.'. II'. Co. \. tliinif, -.'4 S. ( '. I!. ; 
 
 1.1; 
 III 
 'h- 
 
 I W C.VUItl.MlK OK (llinliS. 
 
 Liability as Carriers or Warehousemen. { 
 
 — VVIii'ii II Hhipiicr .stoi'fH i^'iioiJH from tiiiiii to time 
 in a rnihvny wnrilioiisi'. Ii'iiiliiij,' n iiir when n 
 I'arlond is ii'ndy, thi' fi'S|ionsiliility ot tlir r.iil 
 vay loiniiniiy in rospi'it of siuli of the ^ood.'< ;is 
 have not In en spocilic.illy set ii|i;iit tor .whip- 
 niL'iit Ih not tlint of em I ill s Imt of wnrehonse- 
 nien, and in inse of tlitir aeeidentnl destriietion 
 by lire, the sliijiper Iiiim no riniedy ng.iinst the 
 conipniiy. 
 
 iludfjiiient of the Coniiron Pleas Divisif.n, 'i.'? 
 O. R. 4j)4. leveised, Milloy v. <lnnid. Tridik 
 R. W. Co., L'l A. R. 404. 
 
 Liability Beyond the Line — Conlriicl - 
 Eridmri— /^n/.(i;/',s.]— Wlieie the only eviilem i 
 of the eontuut to eiiriy wn.s that the foixniiiii 
 of the friijilit depmtnunt at one of thedifm 
 dants' .".stations agreed to have eeitnin tiie.s 
 forwarded to a .'tntioii not on the defi nd.'int.s' 
 line, lint on one coniieetiiig tlieieu ith, it w as : — 
 
 Held, that this v;i» evideiiee to lie .siilmiitted 
 to a jury of a emitinet to that i fleet binding 
 tlio defendant.", and that a non.suit was wrong; 
 Hagnrty, ('. J. O., dissenting. 'I he nieamie 
 of (laniiiges against earriers for lun-di livery ol 
 trees eon.sideied. MvUill v. (Iruvd Tnnit 11. 
 W. To., 19 A. R. 245. 
 
 Liability Beyond the Line — Conlmct 
 A<,ieul.\-A\., ill British ('oliinibia, being about to 
 purehas^e goods from (i., in Ontario, signed, on 
 re(|U( st of the freight agent of the Xorfbern 
 Paeifie Railway (onijiany in Hritish ("ohinibia, 
 a letter to (1. asking hini to ship goods vh'i 
 Ornnd Trunk Railway and ChiinLO & North- 
 Western, care of Kurtht i u I'aeifie Hailway at 
 St. I'nnl. 'J'his letter «na forwarded to' the ' 
 freight agent (if tin Northern Paei He R.iil way ' 
 (lomjiany at loronto. who sent it to G., anil 
 wrote to him : " T enclose yon card of advice, 
 and if yon will ^.^nlly «'■' '■'■ ^ ;• when y-u make 
 the shipment, anit send !.. me. I will trace ^ 
 and hurry thtm tliroiigli, and advise you of ■ 
 delivery to consignee." O. shipped the "goods, i 
 
 Liability for NegllKence— Arij/fHcc— r, , 
 
 ji'iiiir /i'ldiim/ AV(/i — A'- /(((,«('. |--\\'liere ll:.. 
 tindings of the jury a.'< to the grounds of i e^'h 
 gi'iiee in an action auainst a railway ceiniiaiiy l..i 
 ihiliinge to goods w ere based on mere eonjeetim.. 
 the verdict for the plniiitilTH was set aside. I.iit 
 as it could not be said that there was no i.\i 
 d 'iiee of negligence on other grounds, n ii. u 
 trial was diiceted. 
 
 I I'er Mnc.Mnhon, .T,, ilissenting. — A presm-.p 
 tioii of iiegligeliee nrose from the iion-deli\ . i y 
 of the goods, and the plaintills were not boiiiiij 
 to shew any iiarticnl.ir .•ut.s of negligence. 
 
 The plaintitl's' agent shipped a ijuaiitit\ ..t 
 ])late glass by thedefeiidnnts' r.'iilway, sign in:; ,ih 
 ngreement tiiat, in consideuilion of the diini 
 limits receiving the gnoil.s at a rednced rati- i.f 
 twenty-three cents per Km p ids, they sin iil.j 
 
 : not be responsible lor any dumatjc' iirisii'ig in tin 
 course of the transit, including negligi m ... 
 The defendants had two rates, namely, tie 
 twenty-three cent.-., a tliiid-cl.is.s rale.'aiiil i 
 double tirst-elass late of sixty cents, wlii.li th". 
 contended w ■ re in aeconlmice with the Ciiiii- 
 diaii Joint Ficiglit ( 'I is.silication, adopted liy 
 them and npinoved by the (lovernor in ( 'iniii(!l 
 under see. '2'2li of fi| Vict. cli. lM) U>. L th,' 
 b'ailway Act, the said cla.ssiticatien stiitiii;; 
 that the third class rate applied where the 
 goods were "shipped nt owners' risk — shipjiir 
 signing 8]ieci.- plate glass release foim." Tin- 
 Jilaint ills' a;' nt was aware of the two rates, iiiiil 
 signed the .igreenient nssintiiig to the hiivir 
 rate, iiinler the belief that the dcfeiulnnts ceiiW 
 not. under see. 24t), take advantage of the 
 provision absolving tliim from liability wlinc 
 the ilmnage wns occasioned by ii< gligeine. >" 
 by-laws apiiroviiig of the company's tm iHiiiulu 
 which these rates were ehaiged" had been aii- 
 proved of by the Ooveinor in Council, altlioii:.'li 
 
 a by-law fixing a tirst-class rate of sixty-.'^ix 
 cents and a third-class rate of llfty cints liiul 
 iiili )■ iilia been so approved : — 
 Held, per Meredith. ( '. J., that nctwitl; 
 
 standing the pay iiient of the lower rate, aii'! 
 
 the agreement signed by their agent, the n' 
 
 fenilants could not, under sec. 'J4ti, relin. 
 
 themselves frcin liability when negligence \\:i~ 
 
 proved. 
 
 Per Rose, J. — The third-class rate was ti' 
 
 only rate " lawfully payable.'' If only one i:it> 
 
 was fixed, the provision in the freiglit'cla-SMtiia 
 
 tion as to release was ii.'/rn rire-i as contriiry t" 
 
 the p-rovi.- inns of sec. 2i(i. 
 
 Per MacMahon. J.— No bylaw fixiij: tij 
 
 rate at sixty cents having bei n ap] roved ct ly 
 
 the (jo\ ernor in Council, there was no freight 
 
\miiB. 
 
 840 
 
 Sll 
 
 liii letter, ilt'liv«>mlp|i! to \,'h 
 ■"h Cnliiinliia :- 
 
 tliij ill ri»i(in iif tlif ('(1111 ( . f 
 '-".', mill of tile Cliaiiccrv l)i\ i 
 , that nil arrival of tlie ^'m iN 
 ortlii'i II I'arilie Uailway ('■■in 
 to nncpt ili'livrry ot tliciii N i 
 li ( 'iiliiiiiliiii, anil til i'y|ii II 'i 
 t lliey wci r ill till' line ot • h I 
 I'aiil to llritislil'oliiiiiliia : t' I 
 it Toronto liail aiitliority •■ 'o 
 
 ; anil tliat tlic roiiijiany \\ i > 
 le viiliii' of till' ji^ooiIh w III. li 
 K. at liiiti>'li Coliiniliia, v ith 
 (i., anil not |iai>l for, A'n, 'h- 
 .'o. \. (iiiiiif, -24 S. (', l!. r, III 
 
 NegllKence— Aii'/(»('r— ' i , 
 
 /iVi/i - /,''/,,Mc. I- Wlu'rc tl. 
 y .IN to till' jii'i'ii'iil^ 'if I I'.l! 
 ajjainNi a railway I'oniiuiii) lf\ 
 rri' liani'il on iiii'ri' con jrrtm. . 
 |ilHliititV« waH Hi't asiili', I m 
 Hiiiil lliut tliere wan no i\l 
 ce on other },'ronn(ls, a m » 
 
 ■ f., ili»Ht'iitliiH.---A prrsm.p 
 aroNc from the noiMleli\i ly 
 he |>laiiitil1.s were not lioiiiiil 
 iil.'ir aets of nei;li;;enee. 
 i^'enl shippeil a i|ii:uitit', .t 
 etenilanta' railway, siL;niii'. .n, 
 I fiiiiNiileralioii of the ihi. n 
 e giioils at a reilneeil riilr nl 
 1 ]i<'r l(!(i jiouiiiIh, they Au iiM 
 for any ilania^i' arisinyiii tin 
 ansil, ineliiiliiis; ueglij;i im.', 
 ml two ratiH, namely, tLr 
 .-. a tliild-elasM rate, ami ,i 
 itf of sixty ceiitH, w hii li tlin 
 I Hicoiilaiioe with the Ciiii.i- 
 t ( '1 isMifieatioii, ailojiteil ly 
 I 1)\ the (lovernor in ( '(iiiiicil 
 f fil Viet. eh. --".I (D.). til.' 
 
 said L'la.ssiticatieii .•^tiitiii-.' 
 ii.-s into aiiplieil where thi- 
 ed at owner.s" ri^k— slii[i|jir 
 te glass release form.'' Tlio 
 .s aware of the two rates, and 
 lent assinting to ijie |,nur 
 ief that the ilefeinliints eellM 
 (I, take advantage of tlie 
 g them fiom liahility wlierc 
 easioiied liy iii gligi.iu-e. Nn 
 of the eoni]iaiiy's taritl'iiinki' 
 vere ehargeil had lieeii ii]i- 
 overnor in Couiieil, altlioii:;|i 
 
 lir.-t-elasH j-ate of sixty-s-ix 
 Lilass rate of lifty cuits limi 
 [iproved: — 
 
 ilith, ('. J., that notwitli 
 lent of the lower rate, mm 
 led liy their agent, the ili 
 it, under .sec. '.'-I(i, relitvi 
 iljility when negligence wa> 
 
 he thiid-class rate was tin 
 ,' jiayalile. ■' If only one liili 
 ision iu the freight eliis.-itica 
 as ii!/rn rives as eontriirv to 
 c. Slti. 
 
 il. — No bylaw fixing the 
 having hem np] roved of by 
 juncil, tlitru was no itui^ht 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 8lt 
 
 A.i'neal' '"."."'''■.''"'V ''■" .i"'lU">e„t of tlio (^„rt of 
 
 5r'u«~t::™.:;i'i:"£':i;L;iir 
 ,-;™,., ,. . ._ „„.„„„,„ _ c te,:: s-'e;: i;:-;:;: =■; » 
 
 "' '"'"'■"••'•I li^ « "■' ■■" '• "• 'I"' l;aint.fl, she was not h„„nd \,y t |om 
 
 .iiid could recover her loin from H ' ' 
 
 It,/.,. ,f ,■ ... iioin till' CO iiDniiv 
 
 ,;fii'' '■ ' ''"" /'"">'• A', w. fo., IS .s. [' i\: 
 
 "I nvf.illy p,iyahle," willnnit which there could 
 I' N • a teniative rate, and ,|,, rehuse w 
 
 would o .,,,,,„,,,,, ,,^,„„ ,,,„,. ,,,,:";, "' 
 
 Hu.'{\:i ■^""' "'^"'"<' tof.vpp..,, 
 
 ^■"i ■:;:-;;: :S:-:ri::.iJ:;rit'^^ 
 
 piiiy orot itsHurv.iuts:"— "' 
 
 Held, ,t((|rml„i^ the dejisjoa of the ( '„„rt „f 
 Ai.p.-'al, that ti.iH piovi.hm does „"t di, I , , 
 r.uhvay company fn,,,, enterinL' into a t ,'i 
 
 t, li.dnl ty as to til, a ,„il of damages to 1.^ 
 
 r.c ivered tor loss in- injury to such gin s d 
 
 ■'i.H.'andTruku;ii.::;;S.i;r:;:^ 
 
 .J.m R a horse to he carried over it's Inn' a,, , 
 .^gc.it o the comp,i,iy .uid R. signed a co tract 
 
 »iM"n. he company shall in no ease he 
 
 respnius.l.le tor any un.ount exceeding oi.e'l ,, 
 'l"'l jlollars tor each and any horse,"ttc 
 
 Hell , a hrining the decision of the Court of 
 
 the horse Imvmg hceii kille.l hy ncdj.' 
 servants of the company, U. cuhl m t ' 
 
 m'.re,ha,i8ioo,tiio,igi,^,,:-;x; , ti.x;:!: 
 
 lar.'ely exoeo led that amount. /,lw.,,7v! 
 
 SKrs'-f'^'-' =-"~:rtlr 
 ...ii:™:";;;,;:''£-':,,;;;:;:,"- «'-"r.i....s 
 
 I he amount of dam ig,.s allowed l.ir ili 
 
 It a passenger rightfully travelling up ,n ' 
 
 1, "'.V /"^^ V'"" "" '''"■ ^^■"iductor's order at 
 the pen ot not lieiiiguhle to recover dam Jei'fr 
 
 .u.diuon;,:;";:''^''^'''''''''^''''^-^--'''-' 
 
 •h.dguientof the ..ucen's Mei.cli Wvisio,,. -J,) 
 
 ir^'ii.r'R'-.i.ii'"""^^^-'^'"""^'""^/''- 
 
 
 V. (Jahriagk (ik Pas 
 
 AMI LlliiiAOK. 
 
 Luggage— *>;,■»•«/ ( ,„ „■<_ v,,/;,,, v /• 
 lie de endant company at Ottawa, wliaMv 1 
 
 uic iiawiity ot the conipanv for hai/Lnum f,. 
 wearing apparel not excLdu,g7l,,o K, '" 
 
 ti't";!'"''"'"'' "-/i«'"^Uu'e of "the p":: 
 eiigti foi the purpose of iaentitieation and to 
 
 DaniHlV' ""'"'l"^- ■^''"-' "«^"t "l.tait; the 
 
 'ia.oiis, and, having sore e, es at t^,' tii o "'i"" 
 was unable to read'them la' "elf ()n re'tf" 
 toUimi.peg an accident happened to the h-,? 
 
 •ij^'nages tor such loss t i;''j\;ry found1r/h'' 
 
 Act -,1 V-J \ Tm "^ "•*^ "*-■'"-•'■'' Hailway 
 w v'tr i> I •r''""y 1"''-*^'="K'-''' -n a rail 
 ;a^<au.Su'^''"'''"W'"-f-o.naybe 
 
 ,,',,"• ''-*'' •'• '''x, I'ouriiier, .;., dissentinir 
 la the contract between the peiso, , "> " [ 
 
 "'"''lu so to produce .'uid deliver u Sj.e aim*" 
 I ;;^;y .snot liable to an action fo,'':;X:^: 
 
 tv .(.lb /'o.' .'^■1-t ; Jum. v. /,-,'«(«,/ 7',-„„^. ^. ^ 
 
 VI. Fire Fkom Kngises. 
 
 •.'1*A I;"'.Mr"\;-. ^';"""''' 'Vo"<A.m /.■. fK. C»., 
 -I .-1. i>. ..),, M,cfi,,/(iu Cmtml It li, Co v 
 II tallea„x, 24 .S. C. R. :109, po.l 807. * 
 
 VII. (lovKKNME.NT Railways. 
 See Ckowx, I., n. 
 
843 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 844 
 
 VIII. iN.iiinv Til Animals. 
 
 his farm, owing to tlie insufficiency of the fas- 
 tenings, and lire killed or injured. MiMichuet 
 V. (irand Tnml- U. IC. Co., 12 O. R. M?, ap- 
 proved. I >i(>h'<l'o'r<l V. JUichii/aii ('tntral li. W 
 Co., -JO A. K. ;"-. 
 
 Government Railway.]— .SVp (Ulchrixt v 
 y/if i^hio'ii, i Kx. <;. Jt. ,•«)(), (iiii.< 'i!)(i. 
 
 "At Large"- fliij/iinii/— Jury,]— Cattle arc 
 "at largo" within the meaning of ace. '271 
 of ni Vict. eh. '_>!) (I).) win 11 the herdsman in 
 following (iiie of the herd which has strayed 
 gets HO far from tlic main liody that he is unable 
 to reach them in time to prevent their loiteriiii' 
 or stopping on tlie highway at its intersection 
 with a railway wlien he sees a train approach- 
 ing. 
 
 The question whether cattle are at large or not 
 need not under all einumstancos he suhniitted to 
 the jury. It is for the ,lndge in that ea.sc as in 
 others to say whether tlienr is any evidence for 
 the jury that the cattle were in (Oiarge within 
 the meaning of the Act. 7'hriiiipy<oii V. (Ira/id 
 Tnmk /.'. If. Co., 2-2 A. R. 4.->.S. 
 
 Cattle Guards--//».<7/("'".'/ - - " /'/m-r Where 
 they miijht Pntitiriy Ih'."\- In an action for dam- 
 ages for the lo.sa of horses killed on the defen- 
 dants' railway, the gtateiiieiit of claim alleged 
 
 that the horses " escaped " from the })laintitrs' .._. „ ..,.„ ._. ^ ,......„.^ „.,.,. t,„- 
 
 farm, passed down a concession r(,ad to an station iilatform, the train beinu lom-cr than 
 
 IX. In.iurv to Pkk.sons. 
 
 1. A/ir/hHii'j from Tr<ii)iK. 
 
 Government Railway.]— Sec JAoc/i'^. v. I'he 
 Queen, -1 Kx. (.'. R. ■.\-lH, 'JO S. C. R. 240, -Ht< -JIKi. 
 
 Negligence — Coiilrilmlory Xeijlif/tnce.]— L. 
 was the holder of a ticket and a passenger (rn 
 the company's train from Levis to Ste. Mane. 
 Reauee. When the train arrived at Ste. 
 JJarie station, the car iipcJii which L. had 
 heon tra\elling was some distance from the 
 
 allowance for road which was intersecteil by the 
 railway " on the level," then along the allow- 
 ance for road to the point of intersection, and 
 thence along the railway to the place where 
 they were struck by a passing train. The only 
 negligence chargeil was that the defendants hail 
 not constructed and maintained cattle-guards 
 or fences. It was not alleged that the horses 
 were in charge of any person : — 
 
 Held, upon demurrer, that the horses being, 
 contrary to the provisions of sec. 271 of the 
 Railway Act of Canada, T)! Vict. eh. L'S, within 
 half a mile of the intersection and not in charge 
 of any person, they did not get ujioii the lafl- 
 
 the platform, and L. , fearing that the car 
 would not be brought up to the station, the 
 time for stopping having nearly elapsed, got 
 out at the end of the car, and, the distance to 
 the ground from the steps being about two feet 
 and a half, in so doing he fell and broke his 
 leg, which had to be amputated. 'I'he action 
 was for .^5,0(10 damages, alleging negligence and 
 want of proper accommodation. The defence 
 was contributory negligence. Upon the evi- 
 dence the Superior t'ouit, whose judgment 
 was afhrmed liy the Court of Queen's liemh, 
 gave judgment in favour of L. for the whole 
 imount. On appeal to the Supreme Court of 
 
 way from an adjoining place, where, under the Canada ;— 
 
 cu-cunistances they might properly be, within Held, rever.sing the judgments of the Courts 
 
 the meaning of 53 V ict. ch. 28, sec 2 (D.) ; and belo\v, that in the exercise of ordinary care I 
 
 therefore the defendants were not liable. KI.eoii could have safely gained the platform by pass 
 
 V. Grand Trunk R. W. Co., 2;{ O. I!. 124. 
 
 Fences — Adjoimii;/ Properly.]— Z'^ Vict. eh. 
 28, sec, 2 (D.), amending the Dominion Rail- 
 way Act of 18S8, enacts " . . and no animal 
 allowed by law to run at large shall be held to 
 be improperly on a jilace adjoining the railway 
 merely for the reason that itlie owner or occu- 
 pant of such place has not permitted it to be 
 there." 
 
 ing through the car forward, and that the acci- 
 dent was wholly attiilmtablc to his own default 
 in alighting as he did, and therefore he could 
 not recover ; Fournier, J., dissenting. Ijmhtr 
 Central 11. W. Co. v. Lortk, 22 S. C. 1!. 3;i(!. 
 
 Negligence— Co;(^'!7/H(or?/ Xcj/if/etire—Peni 
 vieiif — Ueee.ipl — Trial.] — In an action ti.r 
 negligence, whereby the plaintitr was injured 
 in alighting from a train, the defendants dinicd 
 the negligence and pleaded contributory negli- 
 gence, and also a payment of .SIO to the plaiii- 
 tift' before action and a receipt in writing siyiRd 
 
 Horses belonging to the plaintiff, while run- 
 mng at large, strayed from premises adjoining 
 
 the defendants' line of railway, where they had uui oeone acLioii aim areceipt in writin- 
 been without permission of the occupant, on to by him therefor, "in lieu of all .daims'l mi-ht 
 the railway track, which, (;ontrary to the sta- have against said comi)any on account of"an 
 lute, was unfeneed and were run over by a injury received . . by reason of my .-iten- 
 locomotive and lulled. .\o attirmative by-law ping off a train . . ; such act being of i,!y 
 naa been passed by the local municipality per- own account, and not in conseiiuence of any 
 mittuig horses to run at large :— negligence or otherwise on behalf of ' 
 
 Held, that the defendants were not liable. 
 nwiffin v. Canadia)! I'aeifir /,'. 11'. Co., 21 () 
 R. 35"). 
 
 Oatea — Far)ii-rro.i.mi(i.] — Tt is the duty 
 
 such rail- 
 way company or any of its employees." Tlie 
 plaintiff replied that if he signed the receipt, 
 he was induced to do so by fraud and undue 
 influence : — 
 
 Held, by the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 
 or uio railway company to make and duly issue raised by the document was not a distinct 
 maintain gates at farm crossings with proper issue, but rather a matter of evidence upon the 
 lastenings, and the knowledge of the owner issues of negligence and contributory negli- 
 Ot Hie tarrn that the fastenmiis are insurticient. ' genee. and shouh! h,iv<i hern submitted to the 
 and lus failure to notify the company of that < jury, and not separately tried by the Judge. 
 lact, will not prevent hiin from recovering dam- Johmm v. (Irand Trniik R. W Co '^5 1! 
 
 ages from the company if his cattle stray from | (i4, 21 A. R. 408, distinguished. 
 
NIES. 
 
 844 
 
 845 
 
 the insufficiency of the fa8- 
 illeil or injureil. Mr Michael 
 
 : n: Oo.,']'2 o. r. .w, ap- 
 
 V. Mkhiijan Cinfral H. \V. 
 
 ailway. ] — See (likhriM 
 .J!. ;«J0, ft lit, '_'!)G. 
 
 JRV TO PkHSONS. 
 
 tiiij from Triiina. 
 
 ill way.] — Si-e Mo it in \. Thf 
 «.S, -JO S. C. R. 240, -nU '-'illi. 
 
 'htritiutory Xeijliijtnce.]- L 
 . ticl<et and a passenger cir> 
 1 from f^evis to Ste. Maiie. 
 lie train arrived at Ste. 
 
 • car upon \vliicli L. lind 
 IS some distance from the 
 he train being longer than 
 
 L. , fearing that the car 
 Lj'lit up to tlic station, the 
 havi'ig nearly elapsed, got 
 le ear, and, the distance to 
 ; steps lieing about two feet 
 oing he fell and liroke his 
 1)0 amputated. The action 
 ges, alleging negligence and 
 ommodation. The defence 
 egligcnce. Upon the evi- 
 [• Court, whose judgment 
 
 • Court of (j»ueen's Bench, 
 'avour of L. for the whole 
 
 to the Supreme Court of 
 
 le judgments of the Courts 
 cercise of ordinary care, I,, 
 ined the platform by piiss- 
 forward, and that the arci- 
 ibutahle to his own default 
 id, and therefoi'e he could 
 ier, J., dissenting. (JihIih 
 J.ortie, -22 .S. C. 1!. 3;)(;. 
 
 triliutory XKjtintnec—l'aij- 
 'rial.] — In an action for 
 ■ the plaintiir was injured 
 rain, the ilefeiulantsdtnicd 
 )leaded contributory ucf;li 
 ynientof SIO to the plain- 
 
 a receipt in writing signed 
 1 lieu of all idaims I niight 
 impany on account of an 
 . by reason of my step- 
 ; such act being of my 
 ,ot in consequence of any 
 ise on behalf of such rail- 
 f of its employees." The 
 
 if he signed the receipt, 
 o so by fraud and undue 
 
 "a Bench Division, that the 
 icument was not a distinct 
 ^tter of evidence upon the 
 and contributory negli- 
 ,vp, Ik-oii submitted to th-^ 
 tely tried by the Judge. 
 rviik R. iV. Co., '25 0. li. 
 inguished. 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 The document would not support a plea of 
 accord and satisfaction, nor of edcase nor dh 
 It operate by way of estoppel. ' ^ 
 
 Held, by the Co.irt of Appeal, that the nav 
 
 s^tKin^'"* "'*«'-^ --"'■■'« --^ -I 
 
 Hehl, also, that an issue as to tlie «m.,.f ,• 
 
 i^s'rv";^t'-"T'f''?'"'*^ ---'- 
 
 ny lla.ul ma\ be tried by the Judge presidiiiL' 
 at the trial o. an action to reco^•eI. dan a" ,^ 
 
 84S 
 
 2. ^t Crii.s.iiiir/s. 
 Notice of Approach. 1-In an aeth.u a-aiint 
 
 nee caused by tlu, neghgence of the servants 
 of the company ,n not giving proper no ice of 
 the approach of a train at a cross n' w I, ,.?l 
 the plaintitr was st_ruek l,y ..^^i^^'^^a^S 
 the case was withdrawn from the jury by "on 
 sent and referred to the full Co irt to "'asses 
 damages or enter a non.Miit ()„ -..ni,.., , Ti '■ 
 
 Supreme Court of Canada fron!'ti::f':^l^;,*S 
 the Ml Court assessing damages to the pki„ : 
 
 mg, th.it the decision was not oijcn to review 
 on appea , but if the merits could l.c confide ed 
 the decision should be alKrned ""-""-leil , 
 
 Per Gwynne and P.atterson, ,f J., that the case 
 was properly before the Court, and, .s he evi 
 dence shewed that the servants of tl e con 
 pany had complied with the statutory .'"'e 
 men a,s to giving notice of the appro.^-h T t 'e 
 
 fe /? T^':^' "'";'.; "".^ "^'''>-"- ' '"""/'■'" 
 laajic 7i. M. Co. v. Fli-iiiiiiij^ o^ .s. (■. R 33 
 
 ■ JMd, |,v the Supreme Court of Caiiadi 
 
 1^ .n.ngthej,MgmeMtoftheC,uirt ofA S' 
 
 i nil! t 7-' '-''.""'""'y ''^'« "" author ty. 
 I uild ,ts road so that part of its roa.l-bed slnll 
 I 'Je some distance below the level of the 1 i'lw 
 
 ". \ .^l.all be rcst<,red „o as not to impair its use- 
 
 bu.s a,„, tne company so coiJnicti.rs 
 
 . nd any other .ompany operating t s 
 
 "•'I' e for in|uri..s resulting from the daii"eroiM 
 
 -n-btio,, ot the highwa? to pc.ons la^'f^dly 
 
 ; A o.mpany wliich has not complied with the 
 j statu ory condition of ringing a 1 ell when u 
 I |;.--liing a crossing i.liablA,ri: „,.;:. ^^,,;V: 
 I 11 1' from a horse taking fright at the aoim, I, 
 ,o^.t™nandthrowingtt occi^iao^l'' ft : 
 , tai lage over the dangerous paitof the hh.'nv v 
 
 'bei::.«tl^''"'^'''''''^^V''^'-'^"-^---»^^^ 
 
 t 1 , ••/;"• ^'- J"""ll/,tiyfi; i),s. C. 1; Sll 
 
 t dlowed. SMrM v. t.^an/rnm/.- A' ir Co ' 
 
 /S'';;^:v':S'''''''^-^^'''--'^-.''^a'r: 
 
 oj ^fO(«/-6r,r/.]-Juogmcnt of the Chancerv Divi 
 mn in favour of the plaintilfs, reportedly () 
 164, aftnned by the Court of Ai peal u .0, t „'. 
 ground that the defendants h d 0, t "d to 
 
 51; g T b dl 'T'"'' -"""-"-ts'as t' 
 ringing tlie bell when approachini' a riilwiv 
 crossing: Burton, J.A., disVenting W. ! . 
 
 aSi1,:o2,Li:'^^^-«-^-«-*-?o''^:, 
 
 ml ot the highway, they exceed their statu 
 tory powers ami are liable to indictmei.t' Thev 
 Z *''? ff°l',« trespassers ah initio and charL'c^. 
 able with all injuries resulting even i mlirtetlv 
 n coiisequence of the .langcrous eo. t" m 'j? 
 he Inghway to those lawfullv usii... it ■i„ Itll 
 laLdi ty attaches to a company o7,ci;vi J t Ic 
 me who have not theinselvei iJen co ice tl n 
 the ong,„a imp,.„per construction. "'"'"'""' '" 
 
 •n ^hc manner in which it was made bv tl o rn.,. 
 
 lie accident it was an illegal crossing, no matter 
 what company was operating it. 
 
 Notice of Approach-;;,-/,/,,,,,, of Knili. 
 lltl'ljl g>, Hiil.vitllstHll.ITIf; tliiit till, iiiiv .„^ 
 
 ,,i.«,i.,, ,vi„.tiii,i. til, j™,,!, ii;:'£,,'5,» 
 
 itgligence to be submitted to tl,e jnrv when it 
 
 tk, i.ulw y track m a vehicle just before tim 
 
 ttainpis., 1 tile decea.sed and the hor.ses were 
 
 toiy^signals ot the approach of the train were 
 
 •fiulgmcnt of the (^leen's Hen,-!, Division 
 
 •''i (,■/",,"■?" x^'- '"■"'"' '^''■""''- "■ !'•■ <•"., 
 -o ('. ii. ()4, 21 A. R. 40S. ' 
 
 s o„ . V '*-'''^ ''"-''■'" ' *'"-■"• passenger 
 8 ation hiy a.ljacent to the highway on the east 
 
 • ll tv m 'f ''"'!'^>"« yanl was less than 
 
 : hi ^^. ' '" "''^'''"^ *'■""' f'x^ liighwav an<l 
 
 n few"f,iri"r' ""' ',"«'"™>- "'"> "'^-v»l^' 
 
 s luntin « f "T". ""••'"• '''•'« '''^f'--"<l»nt» 
 
 1 e e t "ml tot!" "^ "'' "'T '^''''■' *''«'" from 
 tie d^tcmlto he west end of the yard, and 
 
 • tH.rt i-auisc backetl them eastcrlv. After 
 
 track n H ',"'"'"' ,«""^'l'«l "ponano her 
 Wl. *•"-' r'""'- ""^' t''e train and encine 
 I'oth eont.nue.l to back down on difTere. t tracka 
 
847 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 848 
 
 m< .i 
 
 to the higliway, at a speed of about six miles an 
 hour. At the time the plaintiff was proceeding 
 along the highway from south to north, and was 
 about to ciosH tlie tracks. 'J'he Hat cars had 
 reached the highway and were pa«si;ig over it. 
 Tlie phaintilf, wliile watcliing fhose in trout ot 
 her, did not .see or liear tlie engine coming down 
 on tlie other trai:k, and was struck by the ten- 
 iler and injured. I'liere wa.s no look out mm 
 on the tender, and there was contr.idictory 
 evidence as to the. ringing of the bell at all, 
 though at most it was not rung until the engine 
 hail inu some distance towards the highway, 
 and tlie whistle was not blott'n. The jury fouiKl 
 tliat the accident was caused l)y the negligence 
 of tlu^ defendants, and that the negligence con- 
 sisted in not ringing tlie bell in time : — 
 
 Held, l)y the (,>iieen"s Bench Division, that 
 wheie the conii)any are not alile to comply with 
 the terms of sec. 2.j() of 51 Vict. ch. L'i) (D.) as 
 to ringing a bell or smindiiig a whistle at least 
 eighty rods from a crossing, because the engine 
 starts to cross witliin that distance, some 
 other kind <if precaution shouhl be taken to 
 warn the jjublic of danger ; and where, as in 
 this case, the crossing is unusually dangerous, 
 it is incumbent upon them to use even greater 
 and other precautions than those reijuired b\- 
 the statute : — ' ; 
 
 Held, also, that an engine with tender, niov- i 
 iiig reversely, is a " tniin of cars '^ within the - 
 nieamng of sec. -.'(iO, and some one should be 
 stationed on the tender to warn persons cr jss- ' 
 iiig tlie track. j 
 
 The rule " stop, look, and listen," as applied ' 
 by the Pennsylvania State Courts to persons 
 about to cross a railway track, is not in force 
 here, and is not one that sli.(uld be adopted. 
 Upon appeal to the Court of Appeal : — 
 Held, iier Hagarty, C. J. O., that there was 
 sutticient in the general facts of the ease to 
 justify a verdict in favour of the plaintiff :— 
 
 Held, per Osier and Maolennan, JJ.A., that 
 whether sec. :>56 of the Railway Act, 1888, 
 applied or not under the circumstances of this 
 ease, the defendants did not object to its appli- 
 cation by the trial Judge, and the jury having 
 on contradictory evidence found negligence 
 against them in not ringing the bell in passing 
 over the distance from the starting point to the 
 erossing, the verdict should . ot be interfered 
 with. 
 
 Per Burton, J. A., that sec. 2.16 did not 
 apply to shunting in a station yard, and that 
 there had been misdirection on that point, but 
 that the defendants had no right to use the 
 liighway as part of their station yard, and were 
 therefore trespassers ah initio, and liable for all 
 <lamages resulting from their dangerous use 
 thereof. 
 
 In the result the judgment of th<^ Queen's 
 Bench Division v .s atiirnied. //o//hii/er v 
 Canadian I'aci/c Ji. H\ Co., 21 0. K. 703, 'JO 
 A. a. 244. 
 
 from the highway was by a planked walk 
 crossing several tracks, ami a train stoppiu" 
 at the station sometimes overlapped this walk" 
 making it necessary to pass around the rear ear- 
 to reach ilie iilatforin. J., intemling to take ,-., 
 train at tliis .station b^'fore daylight, went along 
 the walk as his train was coming in, and seeim' 
 apparently, that it would overlap, started CI 
 go around the rear, when he was struck by a 
 shunting engine and killed. It was the dutv 
 of this shunting engine to assist in moving the 
 train on a ferrj% and it came down the adjoin- 
 ing track for that purpose before the train hid 
 stopped. Its headlight was Imrning briglitly, 
 and the bell was kept ringing. Tlicre was 
 room between the two tracks fur a person to 
 stand in safety. In an action by the widow of 
 J. against the company : — 
 
 Hild, Fournier and (Jwynne, JJ,, dissent- 
 ing, that the eompamy had neglected no duty 
 which it owed to the deceased as one of tli.' 
 public : — ■ 
 
 Held, per .Strong and Patterson, JJ., that 
 while the public were invited to use the planked 
 walk to reach the station, and also to use the 
 company's premises, when necessary, to iiass 
 :iround a train covering tlie walk, there was no 
 implieil guaranty that the trathc of the roail 
 : should not proceed in the ordinary way, and 
 ! the company was under no obligation to provide 
 ' special safeguar<ls for persons attemjitini' to 
 I pass around a train in motion : — ° 
 
 j Held, per Tascliercau, J., that the death of 
 j the deceased was caused by his own negligence 
 j ^The decision of the Court of Appeal, i6 A. H. 
 37, attirmed. ./of/cs v. Grand Trunk II. W 
 '. Co., ISS. C. R. 69(j. 
 
 j Negligence - Waif-Plni/onn—Exca ration I 
 
 ! ~A railway company is bound to provide for 
 
 passengers safe means of ingress to and egress 
 
 from its stations ; and where "a jiassenger arriving 
 
 at a station at night walked along a platform, iidt 
 
 j intended but fre(iiieiitly used as a means of exit 
 
 I but which was not in any way guarded, ami 
 
 I after leaving the platform fell into an excava- 
 
 i turn in the company's grounds and was injun-d 
 
 I the company was held liable in damages tt/d'. 
 
 ri./ht V. Grand Trunk U. W. Co. 22 A R ''Sfi 
 
 4. By Derailnient of Train. 
 
 See Aforrow v. Canadian Pacific li. W. Co 
 21 A. R. iA^d, ante r.iS. 
 
 3. At Station.-!. 
 
 Negligence -/«(•('<«< WM— ll'ay.]— The ap- 
 proach to a station of the Crand Trunk Railway 
 
 0&\xae— Defect. ] - Held, reversing the jnilg- 
 nieiits of the Superior Court and Court of gucen', 
 Bench for Lower Canada (appeal side), that where 
 he breaking of a rail is shewn to be due to thu 
 severity of the climate and the suddenly great 
 variation of the degrees of temperature, and not 
 to any want of eare or skill upon the part of the 
 railway company in the selecting, testing, laying, 
 and use of such rail, the company is not liable lu 
 damages to a passenger injured by the derailment 
 of a train throii-U the breaking of such rail. 
 Fournier, J., dissented, and was of opinion that 
 the accident was caused by a latent defect in the 
 rail, and that a railway company is responsihle, 
 under the Code, for injuries resulting from such 
 a defect. Canadian Pacific Ji. W. Co. v. CImli- 
 foux. e-.'S. C. H. 721, 
 
 Government Railway. ] — See Duhe v. Tht 
 (Jiteen, 3 Ex C. R. 147, ante 295. 
 
NIES. 
 
 848 
 
 819 
 
 was by a planked walk 
 icks, ami a train stopping 
 inius ovLTlappud this walk, 
 to pasa around the rear car 
 in. J., intending to take,-, 
 b.jfore daylight, went alont; 
 
 I was coming in, and seeing, 
 would overlap, started u> 
 wlieii he was struck hy a 
 
 killed. It wa.s the dutv 
 ine to assist in moving the 
 
 it eaiue down the adjoin- 
 iirpose before the train had 
 !,dit was Imrning brightly, 
 kept ringing. Tliere was 
 wo tracks for a person ti> 
 an action by the widow (,f 
 my : — 
 
 lid (Jwynne, JJ., dissent- 
 ny had neglected no duty 
 lie deceased as one of tile 
 
 and Patterson, JJ,, that 
 i invited to use the planked 
 ;ation, and also to use the 
 when necessary, to pass 
 ng the walk, there was no 
 at the tralHc of the road 
 in the ordinary M'ay, and 
 lerno oljligation to provide 
 'or persons attemjiting to 
 
 II motion : — 
 
 can, J., that the death of 
 sed by Ids own negligence, 
 
 Court of Appeal, 16 A. R. 
 
 V. Grand Trunk /,'. |)'. 
 
 7— P/at/orm—Excarati(,„ J 
 y is bound to provide for 
 IS of ingress to and egress 
 where ai)as3engerarrivin>' 
 alked along a platform, net 
 ;ly used as a means of exit, 
 n any way guarded, and 
 tform fell into an excava- 
 1 grounds and was injunjd, 
 I liable in damages. Old- 
 ■ A'. W. Co., 22 A. K. -Mi 
 
 i/iiieiit (if Traill. 
 
 field, reversing the jiuly- 
 Court and Court of (^hiceii', 
 la (appeal side), that where 
 
 is sliewn to be due to the 
 e and the suddenly great 
 eaof temperature, and not 
 
 skill upon tiie part of the 
 e selecting, testing, laying, 
 he company is not liable in 
 r injured by the derailment 
 !ie breaking of such rail. 
 d, and was of opinion that 
 id by a latent defect in the 
 ly company is responsible, 
 juries resulting from such 
 '\tcijic li. W. Co. V. CImli- 
 
 way. ] — .Vee Day. v. fAe 
 1, aiift '295. 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 5. /j'y .S/illlUiw/. 
 
 VoIkiiI; Xoh I'lt Iii'inrii.] — 
 c'lmpmy sent an engine and 
 
 Negrllgence — 
 
 U'Ikiu a railwav 
 
 cew to the yard of a lumber c.nipany, an 
 ""I->- the direction of serv.u.ts of the 1 ,„,bei 
 ; ; "Pany, cars of lund.er were shunted fron, 
 pla'c to place by this engine and crew the 
 
 nv vli -'^ '^^rvantof the h.niber cmi- 
 
 paii\. »|,o was m a car counting lumber, caused 
 I'., "eghgence 11, the management of tlie en.-ine 
 A tinding by the jury that "the decc° .sed 
 ohuitarily accepted the risks of ahuntiZ" 
 «..> held to mean that he liad accepted tlie 
 -'■'iHiary risks and not risks arising from le.Vl 
 
 api'lLl. '■• '"'''"''' ^'**'"1 "■^- ^"^' 
 
 2.>"sI'c."r -S '^''" '^"''"^^"'" *-'"»'t of Canad.a, ' 
 
 '-'I O. li. 705, 20 A. R. 244, aut,' S4G. 
 
 Co. 
 
 Contlnuou! 
 
 cimipany unde 
 ch. 2!' ' 
 
 (i. 'iij Fro'ji. 
 
 ■• •; , -The duty of a railway 
 .!!t.-see. 3 of sec. 202. ol Vjct 
 
 » (p-).,is not only -„ fill witl. iiackin.. the 
 sii.aces beh.ii.l an.l in front of eviry Hw y 
 fmg, but contninously to keep the same fillcY 
 Misuia- V. Mcdu.jau Cntr.Uli. J{. (■„., 24 \ 
 
 7. Serrant-i. 
 
 Negligence -^,;c7We;,< -C-rn^se- Coineclure 
 ~l.Ua.e-ltm,lU .s'oaV:/.,/.] -Action under te 
 Workmen s Compensation for Injuries let 
 
 ini us atrix for damages sustained throu.di 
 deceased s death while engaged, as alleJd n 
 oouph„ , t ,e defen.lants' oars,*'cause 1, a ^ ;, ' 
 l>y his being struck by the ovei^opp „.! Xr : 
 en a lumber car, through the abseiiLe of t. £ 
 m the sockets thereof There was no ,li eet 
 evdenoe to ..hew how the aeeide. t 1~ cd' 
 •t l>e.ng merely a matter of conjecture :L^ ' : 
 
 The nla!',ff iff"' ''"'''""■ V'^ ""' '"■■^"'t-'inable. i 
 Jilt plaintiff was paid a sum of .s2:)() by a 
 
 Xr'tho ° '\'''*"^"'^t ,.rgani.ation, of 
 I „HH' ''♦-"'^'^*^'^'.' was a member. The 
 
 pUiutitt gave a receipt stating that tlie A 
 way company was relieved frSni all ia'.i !" 
 in insunn*: ' ^'■^I'^'^^^te di.l not profess to I e 
 a nsmance against accidents, and the rail- 
 
 Held, that the receipt fornie,! no bar to the 
 
 y'wgirri f"^''f' "'-'t«= "<"■ was the,, 
 the 1 en Hf '''^.''""St'"^ '""""■'t reecive.l from 
 
 was entitled to as damages. Hi,-b. v. .\K.;,ort, 
 'I;-, A. I) . Co., 4 U. ,V S. 403 nok'. distincuished 
 "='■««• V. CrauU Trmdli. W. Co., 21 OR •'99 
 
 860 
 
 leonipany whos(i duty it was to couple cars 
 ; ni tiieir loronto yard. In performing this dutv 
 ! on one occasion, under speciMc .lirections froni 
 t he conductor of an engine atlache.l to one 
 <d he cars being coupled, his han.l was 
 I ushed owing to the engine backing down ami 
 iij-,ng the ear.s together before t1,e coupling 
 was maUe. (J„ tlie trial of an action tor dam- 
 ages resulting fnmi such inpiry the conducto- 
 Ueiied having given directi.ms tor the couplini; 
 ■■i"d It was contended that W. improperly p«t 
 ; I'.s hand between the draw bars to lif[ out 'the 
 ';""1'1>"{,' pni. It was also cmtended that the 
 urn. uel^or had no authority to give .lirections as 
 10 t)ie n ndeof ,l„ingthe ivork. The jury found 
 against both eontentuuis, and W. o'ltaiiied a ver- 
 d ic , whuh wa.s atiirmed by the Cmimoi, Pleas 
 
 '-0 T'Tt'.'^ls L "'■^'^' '""' ""^ ^'"'""'f ^I'l"^'''' 
 wi!1-''''F"l'"'H ''"'""!''"''■', '^"'**^'-'"-'= "■■'". atid Sedge- 
 « e e not satisfactory U|.oii ttie vidence, a second 
 eom tof appeal ccn.ld not interfere with thein:- 
 HeM, per lung, J., that the tinding that 
 spe.'ilic directions wen- given must be accepted 
 , as conclusive ; that the mode in which the coup- 
 j nig was , one was not an improper one, as VV 
 •ad a rigit to rely on the i,ij/me no be Pg 
 nmcd until the coupling was nmde, an,l could 
 Ipiolierly perform the work in the most expedi- 
 ' tious way, wind, ;, was shewn he di,l ; that tlio 
 , eonductor was empowered to give directions as 
 . o the mode of do,„g the work, if, as w.as stated 
 .It the trial, he believed tliat using such a mode 
 leou d save time; and that W. wts injure.l by 
 , amf.irnimg to an order to go to a dangerous 
 place, tne person giving the order being guilty 
 of negligence. Urand Trniik II. W. Co v 
 W wgar, 2.S .S. C. R. 422. ' 
 
 Od n'' if 'r.';"' '■• -^''"''i'.l"-n Central li. 1{. Go.., 
 24 0. R. 411, liiili: S49. * 
 
 .\. LaXDS and TIIKIR Vai.cation. 
 
 I .yee Ckown, 1. 
 
 \ Avra.vd-Appeal~Re,Mew. ]-\Vhere an award 
 
 le ;''!',l':'r'''"'",;' T'^" '" '"> arbitration under 
 
 I e (anadian Railway Act, bS^S, ol Vict. ch. 
 
 : -J.jvas appealed trom umler sec. 101, sub-seo. 
 
 i Held that the Court rightly e.xerci.sed its 
 
 diction by reviewing the .iwar.l as if it had 
 
 ceil tiie judgment of a subordinate Court, that 
 
 IS, y deciding whether a reasonable est mate 
 
 authori/.ed by the section to disregar.l the 
 
 award and deal with tlie cMdenee * .o.o as 
 
 t It lunl been a C.nirt of first instance. Atlan- 
 
 1. ^'!^^'-"'-^*'^' '''• "'■ Co. V. iVood, K] 
 
 ^iuaiciu.]-.\y_ was an employee of the railway 
 
 Ayva,rd — f„tere.st — Co7if;rmn/{on of Title— 
 ./h/>;,ai,:e.]-On a petition to the Superior Court 
 praying that a railway c.nnpany be ordered to 
 
 > pr, ,o, Court a .sum e.,„iv,ik.„fc to six per cent, 
 on the amount of an award previously denosi^ 
 m Court under sec. 170 of the Radwly aS^ 
 and praying further that the company should 
 , be enjoined and ordered to procetnl to conar- 
 
851 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAIIWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 852 
 
 mation of title with a view to the diatribution 
 of the money, the comiiany pleaded tliat the 
 Court had no power to grant sucli an order, and 
 that the dehiy in jjroceediiig to eonHrmation of 
 title had lieen cau^Kl l)y tlie petitioner, wlio lia<l 
 iinBUccessfuliy aiijiealed to tho liigher Courts 
 for an inereased anionnt : — 
 
 Held, reversii thc! ju<lginent of the Court 
 below, that liy . e tcniirs of sec. l~-2 of the 
 Railway Ac. it i;, only by the jiuignient of (,011- 
 firmatio;i that tlie (jiicstioii of additional inter- 
 est con 1)0 adjiidicati-d upon : — 
 
 Held, further, that assuming the Court liad 
 jurisdiction, until a iinal ileterinination of the 
 controversy as to tlie amount to ))e distiibuted, 
 the railway company could not be said to be 
 guilty of neglig.nce in not obtaining a judg- 
 njent in confirmation of title : Railway Act, 
 sec. 172: Fournier, J., dissenting. Atla-iitic 
 and Xorth- Wist li. ]V. Co. v. Jadnh, I'i S. C. 
 R. 231. 
 
 I landowner that the com])any is proceeding 
 
 ! without having taken tlie necessary steps 
 
 under these sections, that it has the authority 
 
 of the Railway Connnittee of the Privy Council 
 
 for the execulum of the works. C'orjioration nj 
 
 i VarkdaW v. KV.v/, 1;.' A]ip. Cas. (102, followed. 
 
 Held, also, that a bylaw jiassed by the 
 
 municipal council for granting aid to the rail- 
 
 : ^\ ay, and the validating Act, 08 ^'ict. eh. (is 
 
 !(().), did not afi'ect this (piestion. Iliudrie \. 
 
 i Toronto, //(tiiiii'ton, uiid liullhlo li. W. Co., '_'(> 
 
 (). H. (5(17. ^Vf, also, S. C.', •-'7 O. R. 40. 
 
 Lands Taken— Coin/jcnydioii — Li/r Teiiauf 
 
 \-llc.m(niiileriiwti.]—A\t\\(Av^\\ uiuler C. S. C. 
 
 cli. (i(), see. II, as aaiemled by 24 Viet. cli. 17, 
 
 sec. 1, a laihvay conipiir.y coidd obtain a good 
 
 title in fee simi)le to expropriated lands by \ 
 
 conveyance from the tenant for life thereof, 
 
 i they were not justilied in Jiaying the conipen- 
 
 I satioii m(jney to the t;.'nant lor lite ; anil when- 
 
 I siU'h ))avment was made in KS71 tlie companv 
 
 Foreshore of Harbour— .SVa/?t<or)/ Ilhlhl to : were ordcreil to pay the amount over a^'ain t'u 
 
 Jake—CoiijhH intli .MniiP-\,mlily—JriK y^'Wi- [ the persons entitled in remainder whose title 
 
 cum-Cro^siuii.]-''y 44 Vict. ch. 1, sec. 18, the ! ac(-Tned within six years of the time of bringing 
 
 Canadian Pacitic Kailway Company " have the I the action. Came.vn v. IIV'/Zc, 24 Cr .S^ 
 
 right to take, use, an<l liold the beach and land '. approved. 
 
 below high w.ater mark, in any stream, lake, 
 navigable water, gulf, or sea, in so far a.s the 
 same shall be vested in the Crown and shall not 
 be required by the Crown, to such extent as 
 shall he required by the company fo'' its railway 
 and other works, and as shall be exhibited by a 
 map or plan thereof deposited in the ottice of the 
 Minister of Railways." Ry .TO & 51 Vict. ch. 
 5(5, sec. .'), the location of the companv's line of 
 railway between Port Moody and the city of 
 Westminster, including the IVneshoreof Rurrard 
 Inlet, at the foot of (iore avenue, Vancouver 
 city, was ratifij.l 
 incorporation c:f tl; 
 ch. 32, sec. 213 (R.C.), 
 streets 
 
 Street, .1., atfirmed, Burton, 
 Yoiimiw Midland!'. W. Co., 
 
 .Iiulgnient of 
 J. A., dissentinj 
 1!) A. R. 2(i,-). 
 
 Atiirmed by the Supreme Court of Canad 
 22 S. C. R. 190. 
 
 Lands Taken — Conijienmtion — jSIortijwjee.] 
 —A mortgagor does not represent his mortgagee 
 for purjioses of the Railway Act of Ontario, 
 and is not included in the enumeration of the 
 corjiorations or persons who under .see. 13 of 
 R. S. (). ill. 170 are enabled to sell or convey 
 ui,l contirnied. The Act of 1 hinds to the company. He can only deal witli 
 city of Vancouver. 49 \'ict. his own equity of redemption, leaving the 
 city all mortgagee entitled to have hiM compensation 
 highways, etc., and m 18!I2 the city for lands taken sepaiately ascertained. In rt 
 began the construction of works extending from i Toronto Beit Line li. W. Co., 20 O. R. 413 
 the foot of (iore avenue, with the avowed object j 
 
 of crossing the railway track at a level and 
 obtaining access to the harliour at deep water, 
 On application by the railw ay company for an 
 injunction to restrain the city corporation from 
 Proceeding with their work of construction and 
 «- 'CHsing the railway : — 
 
 Held, alHrniing 'the judgment of the Court 
 below, that as the foreshore I'oinis part of the : tion proceedings, and gave no consent to the 
 land required by the railway company, as shewn ; taking of possession. An award was made, 
 on the plan dejiosited in the office of the Minister i but was not taken uji by either the railway 
 of Railways, the ,/(/.< jndtl'innn to get access to ! company or the owners, the plaintiffs brought 
 and from the water at the foot of Core avenue j this action against the railway company and 
 IS subordinate to the rights given to the railway j the owners for foreclosure, (dferini' in tlicir 
 company by the .statute, 44 Vict. ch. 1, sec. 18a, claim to take the compensation awarded and 
 
 Lands Taken — ComyrMsation — Morlijcuin.] 
 — A railway company took possession of certain 
 lands under wariant of the County Court Judge, 
 and proceeded with an arbitration with the 
 owners as to their value. The lands Mere sub- 
 ject to a mortgage to the plaintiffs, who received 
 no notice of, and took no part in, the arbitra- 
 
 op the said foresjiorc, and therefore tlie injunc 
 tion was properly granted. City of Vohcouver 
 V. Canadian Pari/ir /.'. W. Co., 23 S. C. R. 1. 
 
 Tjands Injuriously Aflfected — lii/ Whom 
 Work Donii — Qiifstion 0'' l''art.\-Ste (,'rand 
 Trunk P. W. Co. v. Fitzgerald, 19 S. C. R. 359. 
 
 liands Injuriously Aflfected— /.';>//'' to Com- 
 pen.sation.]—'\'\io sections of the Dominion Rail- 
 way Act, 1888, un ler the headings " Plans and 
 Surveys "and "lands and their Valuations," 
 apply as well to lands "Injuriously Affected,'" 
 aa to lands taken for the purposes'of the r"il- 
 "Way. It is no answer to a complaint by a 
 
 release the lands in the possession of the railway 
 company : — 
 
 Held, that the railway company were proper 
 parties to the action, "and that the phiiiitifis 
 were entitled to a judgment against all the 
 defendants with, in view of the offer, a pro- 
 vision for the release of the lands in the posse.s 
 sion of the railway company on payment to the 
 plaintiff's of the amount of the award. 
 
 Per Osier and Maclennan. .IJ. A.— Pub-sec. 
 25 of sec. 20, R. S. O. ch. 170, applies only 
 where the comppnsation has lieen aetunlly 
 ascertained and paid into Court. Si-ottisli 
 Ammcan Inve«lment Co. v. Prittie, 20 A. R. 
 398. 
 
(TIES. 
 
 852 
 
 853 
 
 le (.■oiii])aiiy is prooeediiijf 
 iiktn iliu iiect'ssiiiy steps 
 s, tliiit it lias the authority 
 iinitteu of tlio Privy Council 
 
 tlie works. Corpora/io)i nj 
 2 A]>y>. t'iis. (102, followfd. 
 
 u bylaw jiiissiMl by tin: 
 ):• grantinjj aiil to the lail- 
 atiiig Act, 58 Vict. ch. (W 
 
 this (|U(stion. Hniilriix. 
 
 and /iiql'i/o J'. ]\'. Co., li(i 
 o, .S. C.', -j; O. I!. 4(). 
 
 (/oiiijicnyfitioii — L!f,- TeiMiil 
 -Altluiu^'h under C. S. C. 
 iiencled liy i.'4 Vict. ch. 17, 
 npiir.y could obtain a gooii 
 :o ex[iioiiriatcd lands by a 
 le tenant for life thereof, 
 ed in i)ayinj,' the comjieM- 
 
 teiiant for life ; and where 
 nade in 1S71 the conijiaiiy 
 
 the amount over again tij 
 1 in reniiiindor whose title 
 ears of the time of bringin:; 
 OH V. U'iij/i-, 2i (ir. S, 
 
 cct, .7., atlirnied. Burton. 
 oiuKj V. Mid/and A*. ()'. Co., 
 
 jupreme Court of Canadi., 
 
 Conijieiisation—Morti/ftijce.] 
 not represent his mortgagee 
 
 liailway Act of Ontario, 
 in the enumeration of the 
 ■ons who under sec. 13 of 
 ! enabled to sell or convey 
 y. He can only deal witli 
 
 redemption, leaving the 
 to have his compensation 
 rately ascertained. /;; re 
 
 ir. Co., -JOO. K. 413. 
 
 Compmsalioii — Morlijcujei.] 
 y took po.s.session of certain 
 of the County Court .Fudge, 
 I an arbitration with the 
 due. The lauds were sub- 
 the plaintifl's, who received 
 ik no part in, the arbitra- 
 d gave no consent to the 
 I. An award was made, 
 uj) by cither the railway 
 n-H. 'J'he plaintiffs brought 
 the railway company and 
 :;closure, olfering in their 
 nnpensation awanled, and 
 le possession of the railway 
 
 nay company were proper 
 1, and that the plaintiffs 
 judgment against all the 
 
 view of the otter, a pro- 
 of the lands in the posses- 
 )nipany on payment to the 
 lint of the award, 
 iclennan, .JJ. A. - -?nb-sec. 
 
 O. ch. 170, a])])lies only 
 ation has been aetniil'y 
 id into Court. Scottish 
 
 Co. v. Pril/ie, 20 A. R. 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 854 
 
 -^: T^'^'i7Z''Z';,2:!''T^^'''' '" -*-" P"-ession of the railway pro 
 against a railway c^nl C ^Ir " X'utn I &':^'«'"; '" ^''-' t *'- ''^^-^.X ^ 
 for ra, way purposes, .smh' lands f,M•mi^u^,,art ' K/ "^de on it and filed an opposition n 
 lands owne.l by,, party, tlH. con vevi"?av^^{.„ n'^T ^^ '^^'''^ "*' ^^^'^'^ "' *!•« 
 of the whole of such lan.ls does not of t elf s nd H ' "'' -l- '• "'" '■'■^P""<lent con- 
 carry the right to compen.sation. 'ofl.wf "VP^^tion. The agreement relied 
 
 The right to compensation is not barre.l until ^TetwLv'';r''"x'.''''' 7'"l';"'y " ■'« entered into 
 the e.xpiration of twenty veirs f>r.n, Vi,/ , """^ecn the -Montreal and Snrel liaihvu Cnm 
 
 li-unk A'. )r. Co., •_'! O. r!.-.':>4. 
 
 Lands Taken— />nn^,o, 
 i ompeivation — Wamuit of 
 
 — I'IiIII—NijIIci; — 
 /'(js.i(:xxioil- — /((/•/.<(- 
 
 ilelifi !')'"'?■■ I*'""''^"^y ''"''' ''>"<l<^>'e>l with 
 
 l'ce\he ,.oT^ •"""*''"■ •"'""^■y "'"• ^^^<lit to 
 place the road ni running or.Ier, etc " 'I'h,. 
 
 ■•H'^ount claimed for .lisbnrsem'nt-. etc w s 
 
 :;:i:;;^^;Y'o%, T1.C Superior conrt^ ;-w'j.,:^J 
 
 •i""t ^^as attirmed by the Court of (,)ueei"s 
 
 other lands c.m,pulsorily f,,r the n?,ose.: Md"',"!! '"' «';"""' '}'''' ^''^' -»"''"' "f ' ' 
 alteration from the original locatLn howevt^ , ^Zd'' F"'™'-'''^^ ""'y ">'^tlc'- in con- 
 
 sniall the deviation may be, must ile nd,^. ,' 1 ■!,'"';', "'"* '"^n'ticient to give jurisdie- 
 sub-sec. 7 of sec. 10, a^dan 7V^,:^^:^\ l^ '^"^f ^^'-^': Tbo ..'ourt without Leidg 
 <l'ivi«tion. I P"«e" I te question of jurisdiction, heard the appeal 
 
 ;S>mW., under the Dominion Railway Act ' Hi'l'/''^"-^:,- 
 this re<|Uiremcnt must also be observe.l. ^ deeio l' i \' ","'' ■''" "^''^^nont must be 
 
 The notit^e rcjuired by sub-sec. 1 and the IVl '! '"''i '"''"^ ''f^'"nade with intent 
 
 cert.tieate of a. surveyor under sub.sec. 2 o sei . i dito, 'V '^^^^^ >V'' '""' ''"' *" ^lio anterior 
 
 ^it;^uts^r-tdL^-^rtfs^^ 
 
 compensation for the lands to be taken -1; dS-ott^-j^^irn^'^'^ira 
 . And wd.ere a railway company, without hav- ' T 'ailw'fv r"" "■^''''""s,'^'' t''e Montreal a.ufsorcl 
 mg hied any plan of a proposed -leviation [^^1^^'^^ V,?.-^!" ">.V ^ Arts. 11177, .'Olo, ami 20!)4, 
 ' " ' .rn1,;r ',""-"V'''*J!'.<"-C'., does not give to 
 
 .1 pledgee of an immovable who has not regis- 
 te ed h,s ,lc.e.l a right of retention as agai^.st 
 , cJ PV-" r.-^r"""" crclitors for the? pay- 
 n cit of his disbursements <m the iironertv 
 Plt'<lged, but the pledgee's remedy i's by :>, 
 
 the proceeds of the judicial sale : Art. 1972 C 
 43','''"'^"'''«''"^'- "'• (^o- V. Land,., 21 S c' 
 
 ™r 1 f -.; I _— "' 11 iJiuMoseci (leviatnm 
 applied for and obtained fron.^L C.n.nty cW. 
 Judge a warrant for possession on a not ce n 
 winch, ,n addition to a sum in cash, eerta 
 crossings and station privileges were < flere.l Z 
 eompeusation for the lan.l and the dama.'es, aid 
 wliioh w-iis accompanied by a surveyor's cJr^i 
 cate that he .um ottered was a faii- con.pJn . 
 tion therefor : — t-^^oi. 
 
 Held, that the foundation of the JudL'e's i ^ 
 authority to issue a warrant rested on a p iX r i 
 compliance by the railway company with the' 
 above. sub-seetions, and that he hid acted re n ' 
 without jurisdiction. 
 
 The High Court of Justice has power to ' 
 
 XIII. Limitation ok Aotio.n> 
 
 restrain railway companies from actfn.r unon r. 
 
 warrants so obtained, and it is not necestarv to . <^°'»PeTisatlon for Land Taken. 1-The rhdit 
 
 proceed by rn-Uorarl. Brook,- y. ZlttoVe/t nS7T'!r '''''" '""'''' ""«' *''« -Moni 
 
 ,0 teieuupon and taken for railway pur,.oses. 
 \j>'-^^-Orond J'nnd' J!. H". f,,, lOO. 1 . 447 
 
 lAiie A', ir. Co., 21 O. R. 401. 
 
 XI. Liability i-or Acts or Ace.nts. 
 
 JinMrdlllx. Grand Trunk I! 11' 
 R. 24,), ante S39. ' " 
 
 Co. 
 
 XII. Lien fou DisiiLit,sE.Mi.;.Nis. 
 
 i()A , """"Pulsation for Land Taken.]- Where 
 
 1 J A., compensation money was paid by a ra 1^^ v 
 
 I company to a tenant for life in I,S71, the com- 
 
 -any were ordered to pay the amount ovJr aga i. 
 
 aeci u.rw>l"' "'*'"''* "' '•'■"'"i"'!-'' whose tWe 
 
 Ihi' lir ■'" "^'. ^'''"'■' "" ^^"^ time of bring. 
 1 iiig Llie action. Cameron v. lI'mA- <H v.r 5 
 
 '^:'S,2Jr^.ii5f"'"^-'"^^-'^ 
 
 Working Arrangement- P/«/,/, o/Immor- 
 
 Jt^ r^"r~^^^'''"? ''""■■- i-'l'i'e res ,1- 
 & .'"' ''S'""^t ''>>■ -^l"»t>eal and Sorel 
 
 Smid c-oTtTuHl can" T"'"' ■"' ""^ '"'" "^ 
 
 «pov,«.s'to''lsue'"aga'inst"the inilLi'v 'iX'.!- "f ^ f'""" ?"• ,^'''-' '""' rel>'-"ary, 1891 bv'a faU 
 of that company. !'he appdla nt ," i J'^S?. tt'd^n 1^? K'' "' " 1">'''^^>'' -''ieh cr'os S 
 possession and working the railway . N m. ' .ii •'*'*f "'"»'.> line, and had been negligentlv 
 
 Damage by Reason of Railway - Lord 
 Caniphr/r. .lc^]-Tlie plaiutitt's father w a, 
 killed on the iOth February, 1891, by a HU 
 from a bridtr,. «•,,.(■ ,.f „ i.;,.i..';.' . ,'. '.'J •* '•^" 
 
i 
 
 855 
 
 RAILWAYS AND RAILWAY COMPANIES. 
 
 856 
 
 more than six months after tlie iiociiltnt, no 
 letters of administration having been taken 
 out : — 
 
 Held, per liiirton, Osier, and Maclennan, 
 •J.i.A., Ilagarty, C.J.U. , exijiessing no opinioii, 
 that this was not " damuye sustained liy ri'asnn 
 of tile railway," iind tliat the limitation clauses 
 of the Itailway .Act did not ajjjjly :— i 
 
 Held, also, per Ha>,'artv, V. ,}. (>,, Burton and 
 Maclcuuan, JJ. A. , Osier, J, A., expressing no i 
 (il)iiiicu, that the provisions of K. ,S, O. eh. 18,"). 
 Lord ( 'anipbell's Act, arc not alfected by special 1 
 legislation of this kind, so that in that view ! 
 al.so the action was begun in time. i 
 
 • ludguient of Kobertson, ,)., -Jl O. 1!. &2S, 
 allinued on other grounds. Zimiiitr v. (.■rii.iid 
 'J'rniik It. W. Cu., 1!) A. 11. MV.i. 
 
 Death of Servant— IliV/ow'.v /,'iijht o/Ar/ioii 
 ~Pnscrlj,tio,i. ]~lhc husband of the respon- 
 ilent was injured wliile engaged in liis duties 
 lis the ap|)clliuits' employee, and the injury 
 resulted in his death about tifteeu months after- 
 wards. \o iiiilciiiiiity having been elaiined 
 <luring the lifetime of the husband, the widow, 
 actnig for herself as well as in the capacity of 
 executrix for her minor child, brought an action 
 for compensation within one vear after his i'.eath. 
 
 Held, by the Siii.reme Court of Canada, that 
 ■at the time of the death of the respondent's 
 husband all right of action was prescribed 
 inider Art. l.'2(CJ, C. C, and that this prescrip- 
 tion is one to which the tribunals are bound to 
 give effect, although not pleaded : Arts. 2207 
 ■and 218S, C. C. 
 
 Held, by the Judicial Committee of the Privy 
 Council, that the Civil Code of Lower Canada 
 does not make it a conditicm precedent to 
 the right of action given by Art. l(),-)li to the 
 widow of a jierson dying as therein mentioned, 
 that the deceased's right of action should not 
 have been extinguished in his lifetime bv pre- 
 scription under Art. 22G2 (2). 'J'he death 'is the 
 foundation of the right given by the former S'.-c- 
 tioii, which is governed by the rule of prescrip- 
 tion contained therein, and is exempt from llie 
 rule of prescription which barred the claim of 
 the ('eceased. liobiiisoii v. Cdiiadinu Furlfir /,'. 
 II'. r'o.,[lS!»2] A. C. 4S1. 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the ,Su 
 preme Court of Sova. .Scotia, (iwynue, ,1., 
 dis.seiiting, that jiart 1 of this Act ajiplies 
 to all railways constructed under I'rovin- 
 cial statutes, and is not exclusive of thosi- 
 mentioned in part 2 ; that a comiiany incor- 
 porated by an Act of the legislature as a mining 
 company, with power " to construct and make 
 such railroads and ))rancli tracks as might he 
 necessary for the transportation of coals from 
 the mines to the place of shipment and all other 
 business necessary and usually perf(jrnied i,n 
 railroads," and with other powers connected 
 with the working of mines "and operation of 
 railways,'' and empowered by another Act, 49 
 Vict. eh. 4,5 (X. S.), to hold and work the rail- 
 way " for general traffic and the conveyance of 
 pas.scngers and freight for hire, as well as for all 
 purposes and oiierations connected with said 
 mines in accordance with and subject to the 
 lirovisions of part 2 of ch. r>H, I!. S. X. S., .'itli 
 ser., entitled 'of railways,'" is a railwav com- 
 pany within the meaning of the Act ; and that 
 the reference in 49 Vict. ch. 14,'), .sec. 1, to part 
 2 does not prevent said railway from coming 
 under the operation of the first part of the Act. 
 hitirnalioual Coal Co. v. Countu of Cant' Bntnn 
 22 S. C. Ji. 305. 
 
 Sasement —Enjoi/mmt aijninnt Railway Coin- 
 jiaiii/.l-~S,e Canada Si, iithevHli. II'. Co. v. Toim 
 <;/ Xiaijara Fa/l.i, 22 0. R. 41, aid". (i2.S. 
 
 XIV. -MiSOKLLANKOUS Ca.SK.S. 
 
 Assessment of Ra.ilwa.y ~Cciii.<h-iictioa l,ij 
 Miiiiiii,Oompaiiy.]-~]iy 1{. .S. N. S.. jth ser.. ch. 
 .Jo, sec. 9, sub-sec. .'10, the road-bed, etc., of all 
 railway comi)anies in the Province is exempt 
 from local taxation. Uy sec. 1, the first part of 
 the Act, from sees. 5 to 3.3 inclusive, applies to 
 every railway construetetl and in operation or 
 thereafter to be constructed under tlie authority 
 of any Act of the legislature; and by see. 4, part 
 _ ai.piies to all railways constructed or to be 
 constructed under the authority of any special 
 Act, and to all companies incorporated for their 
 construction and working. Hy sec. 5, sulj-sec. 
 15, the expression "the company" in' the Act 
 means the company or person authorized by the 
 epecial Act to construct the railway :— 
 
 Closing Public -Lane in City.]— Art. i)i)7 
 of the Ci\il Procedure Code relates, on its true 
 construction, not to every ilh-g.il act done by an 
 associ 'Ion therein mcntionecr, but only to .-.ici, 
 acts ai. ire professedly or manifestly done in the 
 assertion of some special power, friinehise, or 
 privilege not conferreil upon it by law. 
 
 Where an information under that Article 
 alleged that the respondent company had closed 
 a public lane luider the pretext that they ha.l 
 ac(iuire<l private interests therein which entitled 
 them so to do : — 
 
 Held, that this did not amount to an allega- 
 tion that they closed it in the exercise of any 
 power, franchise, or privilege within the mean- 
 ing of the Article :— 
 
 Held, also, that the Court had jurisdiction 
 under .Arl. 998 to prohibit the issue of a writ of 
 information under Art. 997 ; but that after 
 issue the Attorney-General is dominii.i lifia, and 
 can discontinue proceedings or control their con- 
 duct and settlement independently of any private 
 relator. 
 
 Held, that, .assuming the lane in question to 
 have been a public one, the respondent company 
 were entitled to close, occupy, and use it with 
 the assent of the city council, which as.seiit was 
 empowered by sec. 12 of the Railway Act, of 
 (Jaiuula, 1888. Vayiimin v. Atlantic and Xorth- 
 Wist It. W. Co., [189.-.] A. C. 282. 
 
 Conveyance of Basement — AV.so/h/wiw— 
 Ultra Vir<'n~EMo/>pel—Pn.'<cri/it{on.]—TUe Act 
 of iiicor|)oration of a railway company, the pre- 
 decessors in title of the plaintiffs, ,ind which 
 was incorporated for the purpose of const rnct- 
 ing and operating a certain line of railway, con- 
 ferred upon the company, in respect (jf the 
 <lispositioii of lands acquired by them, powers 
 of " letting, conveying, and otherwise depart- 
 ing therewith, for the benefit and on account 
 of the company, from time to time, as ihcy 
 should deem necessary." 
 
 Nearly forty years before the connnenceinent 
 of this action the predecessors in title of the 
 
VllBS. 
 
 856 
 
 857 
 
 tlie (leui.sioii of the Sii 
 sova fSootia, (iwyniie, ,1,, 
 It I (if this Act iii)ijlie.s 
 msti-iiutuil uiiiltr I'rovin. 
 is not L'Xcliisive of thosi- 
 - ; tlmt a coinpiiny inuor 
 : tliu legislature as a niiiiing 
 .•V " to construct anil niaku 
 hiancli tracks as niiglit lib 
 •anspoi-tation of coals from 
 je of sliipnicnt an<l all other 
 anil usually iierfijrnicd on 
 h other powers connected 
 if mines ''and (jperation of 
 jwered liy another Act, 49 
 to hold and work the rail- 
 ■attic and the conveyance of 
 lit for Iiire, as well .is for all 
 tions connected with said 
 1 with and subject to the 
 of ch. .-)3, a. S. .N. S., 5th 
 Iways,' " is a railway com- 
 uiing of the Act ; anil tliiit 
 ict. ch. 14"), sec. 1, to part 
 said railway from coniinj; 
 )f the first part of the Act. 
 '. V. Couiily of C'(i.j>i' Jintiiii, 
 
 jane In City. ]— Art. !)!); 
 'e (,'ode relates, on its true 
 ivery ilk-g.il act done by an 
 lentiiiued, hut only to ...ici, 
 y or manifestly done in the 
 lecial power, friinehise, or 
 m1 upon it by law. 
 lation under that Article 
 indent company had closed 
 the pretext that they had 
 rests therein which entitled 
 
 not amount to an allega. 
 
 it in the e.xeroise of any 
 privilege within the mean- 
 he Court had jurisdiction 
 )hibit the issue of a writ of 
 trt. im7; but that after 
 sneral is dominii.i H/Im, am! 
 edings or control their con- 
 idependently of any private 
 
 ng the lane in (jueslion to 
 e, the res])on(ient company 
 3, occupy, and use it with 
 council, which assent wa,s 
 '2 <jf the Railway Act of 
 •nin V. Atlantic and Xorfli- 
 .")] A. 0. ;28'2. 
 
 'asement — llcaolniioM — 
 ' — /^»'e.scT7'<!0H.]— The Act 
 railway company, the pre- 
 the plaintiffs, and whicli 
 the purpose of construct- 
 irtain line of railway, con- 
 nipany, in respect of the 
 iciiuired by them, powers 
 g, and otherwise depart- 
 e benefit and on account 
 n time to time, as thcv 
 V." 
 
 before the coniinencfiuient 
 edecessors in title of the 
 
 RECEIVER. 
 
 eclared ;.''', rn rin v 
 
 . "1 .iiijiuictiou restraining the 
 
 "t the water p.pes, and, if necessary, an 
 
 defen.lants Iniii ju-pes for conveyin- water alom. 
 
 'iisly up to the present time, such privilege 
 
 SI- "f'uf"'"' '" """" \'y -"luti'n of the 
 airectois of the comiiany, who, a few years sfb- 
 seiiuently, passed another resolution am n 
 pursuance thereof executed a dee Lm' n 
 releasing, and c i.ming such rig^ a^"S 
 ege which at ( time this actio,! w,-^^ rCht 
 had become v, ,,1 i„ tlu, defendants. *' 
 
 J he undertaking of the original railway com- 
 pany became vsted in the WnMiuAh ,x 
 few years before the comn.'ncement of this 
 acton, des.nng t„ alter t),e position of the r 
 
 iliate pi edecessors m title of the defendants 
 a..il placed the track over tl,e water pipe ''' 
 ihe paint, Is now .sought to have' he re.solu- 
 tions and deed mentioned " '">''-.s„|„ 
 
 and p'so claimed 
 user of 
 oi'dei' for tiieir rcnoVa'l - 
 
 Held, that the resolutions and deed were 
 vlmnr... as not within the powers specitie 1 v 
 the ch,-.rte,., or such as .•ould 'fairly bl ,V'a led 
 as ■nciieutal thereto, or reasonably derive by 
 inil)liration therefrom :_ '"-■iNnioy 
 
 Held, also, that the i.laiutilVs were not estop. 
 SdeniS:-«^"^"-"-"*'^'--''Wi.!; 
 
 Held, lastly, that the defe,>ilants, not having 
 used a,Kl enjoyed their ea.e.nent lor f.rty vea.i' 
 
 R. 41." '" "-^ '^ '«■'/«'■« /'((/As ■22(). 
 
 Trespass-^ ,r.'..y_./»,s/;,., o/' /h, l>,„c, I I 
 
 \ la.ch J!) emabliuga justice of the peace foranv 
 county to deal with cases of person : fi,un tri?. ' 
 passn.g upon .-ailway tracks, applies o.'vW: 
 
 lie'Ss™^""""^'"'^' '^^'^-•>- 
 
 A suinniary conviction of the defeudint bvi 
 
 od lu 4 iin "/'"^.'-•■ty "» 'l'"''onti,, «as i,u Isl,- : tion_1>k,nc,p.u 
 
 t<i« IMC tile defeiulant w.is not arivsted but i 
 
 mendy summoned. J,,,u,n v. T/.^A.^ uli a ! _ 
 
 85S 
 
 ! An inanrance company by whom atii'doss has 
 lieen pa,d has no h,-,,. s,„,„/i as co-,daintif} ,! 
 an action by the assu.ed against th. w , ' 
 doer whose negligence has caused the tire *'' 
 
 1 he Canada Southern KaiK. ay t •onipanv', bv its 
 'liarter and amendments thereto, has au'thoritv 
 to enter into an agreement with anv other riil 
 Hay company with respect to trailie arran'ce- 
 "lents or the use and wo.king of the .aihvav or 
 
 TK ^'i''!.'-^!;''.'''"''' •""' '•>■ t'"' ""'"'"ion IJaiiWav 
 Act ot LS,9 It ,s authon/,e,l to enter into tn.fhc 
 .'irangementaaml agieements for the mani.'i 
 ment and working ot its railway with any other 
 lailway company, ,n Canad.i ,„• elsewhert' tor i 
 pe,-.od ot twenty-one y.ars :-. ' 
 
 Held, by the Supreme Cnurt of Ca,iaila 
 revers„,g the decision of the Court of Appeal," 
 
 at authority to enter into an arrangement fo," 
 the usea,.d working" or '• management and 
 working ■ of its road conferred upon the co 
 pany a lai'ger ,igl,t than that of makin.' a 
 torwarihng ag,-eement or of conferring lunnluLr 
 powei-s ; tlmt the company could lawfully Ica-e 
 a port,on of Its road to a fi,iei,n company and 
 transfer to the latter all its ■i^htsand mivil;!! ' 
 in respect to such portion, and the fo,'ei,q, cun- 
 Ijany in such case would be protei-ted fron, 
 liability for injury to property occur.in. with 
 out negligence m its u.se of the ,oad .soleasi.,1 
 
 'al w'lv''".''' '-'■^"^"^"«. t'f, ^'^'''aila .Southern 
 Kailuay Company is ,tHelt lectected. li; a' 
 ''«".s v. taiKida Sontlitni I!. W (q '^\ j^ \' 
 
 ^4's. c'lt'^SO!)^'"'"'"''''' '''■ ''"• '■• ""■"'''' ""•^'. 
 
 RAPE. 
 
 *'. Cr[m,x.m. L.uv, li., IV..-,Si:,„,r,oN. 
 
 RATIFICATION. 
 
 AM) -Misi;i;i'itKsKNr,\- 
 
 ■\M' AUE.NT, I. 
 
 XV". TkafI-IC AliliAM,' 
 
 i:mknt.s. 
 
 «/X^r 7V* "'J"' ^°''f *^" Company-/..^... 
 
 /'".|-Held, by the Court of Anneal that 
 
 Loll ^'"V""' '^'"""'t- without le.Mslativc 
 anefoii, confer upon a foreign .ailwa com' 
 l«i"} the immunities and privile-es whirl iV 
 pos.sesses, and the foreign railwavM'un, ■ ■ i 
 running engines over tim Hue o tii ay' ' ilds i 
 
 H tt :'"!' r''"'' »«i."y '-^ 'lange,-ous anil 
 
 tne'en thf • ''■".•^''"'"-''' *>"' agreements he- 
 rn he 0^,.;"";/"" '"".' f'"''''"'" '^"'"panics, 
 Sieirfur''''°'"°''^-^'^'''-l''"eri; 
 
 REASONABLE AND PROBABLE 
 CAUSE. 
 
 .Vce Malicious l'iiiisi:rrTio\, III. 
 
 RECEIVER. 
 
 I- By Way uf lliHiTAiu.i; Kxncr 
 
 rioK. 
 
 Si'e Asses.s:mknt axu Taxks 
 
 COVKXANT— EXKCI-TION - 
 An.MIXISTKATOKS, X. 
 
 — AlTACH.MF.XT 
 
 KXK( LTOKS AND 
 
 11. 
 
 I.N PAKTxiciiSHii- Actions. 
 
 Appointment. ]-\Vliere partnership articles 
 provide that on dissolution the partiiers sh.all 
 
 settle the partnership affairs, the Court will, on 
 
859 
 
 REaiSTRY LAWS. 
 
 860 
 
 :( !; 
 
 Hii 
 
 failure of llio jmitiL's to agree on some iier.idii, 
 appoint a receiver. Mitchell v. Liiter, 21 O. R. 
 
 mterltiTSale of "Aageta. | -■ UuvUr .special 
 circuniMtaiiccs au order may lie made, in an 
 action for the ilissohition and \vindinj,'-iip of an 
 insolvent partnerwliip, for the sale of tlie assets 
 by the receiver before the trial. MrLurm v. 
 n'hi/iii'/, l(i J'. It. 552. 
 
 RECOGNIZANCE. 
 
 Ball— iVmi<.]— .See J!< TiiUkjCh Bail, 2;{ O. 
 K. (ij, (iK^e 2(i."). 
 
 Controverted Municipal Elections.] — sVc 
 Jiei/iiM ex ri'l. MawiniL v. Fltmiin/, 14 !'. K. 
 4o,S, aiitt 701. 
 
 .'Motion to Quash Municipal By-law.]—**' 
 y.V IJui-ton mill VUkKjt of Arlhio; IG 1'. 1!. IGO, 
 (iiif(. 095. 
 
 Motion to Quash Summary Conviction. I- 
 
 ,S'ee L'lijimi v. Hohintt, lU P. U. 49, uiihi 2C'(J. 
 
 REEVE. 
 
 .SVe I.NTOXK'ATINC LllifOKS, III. 
 
 REFERENCE. 
 
 .S'ee Pk.vcth'k, XIV.— Thi.al, VI. 
 
 REGISTRY LAWS. 
 
 I, Effect of KKiiisTKKi.Nc; oi; Omission io 
 *-•», J. Rkuister, 659. 
 
 II. iNSrKU.MKM.S WHICH .MAY BK IvKci ISTFKEl), 
 
 ISG2. 
 
 III. I'luioi- lOH Rkoistration, >S(!2. 
 
 IV. Reulstrars, SG2. 
 
 KEdlSTRATIOS OF Mr.NILIl'AL |;Y-LA\V,--— .9,7 
 .Ml'NU'll'AI. CORI'OUATIONS, \l. 
 
 I. Effect of Ri;i;isTEKiNii or O.mi.ssion to 
 Regi.ster. 
 
 Assignment of Lease without Leave — 
 
 JV'u/i'r'S.]— .S'le ISaldiria w Wuiij r,22 O. 1!. 012, 
 <in/(i 59.S. 
 
 Building Loan — Furlhr Adraiices— Priori/ y 
 o/Siili-'fijiK lUli/ liKjitU nil Morf;li.tijii—Xotici-.]— j 
 After purcliasing land umleran agreement which ! 
 provided that §'.',000 of the purchase money was ! 
 to be secured ]>y mortgage subsequent to a 
 building loan not exceeding $12,000, the pur- 
 chaser executed a building mortgage to a loan 
 company for ."^l 1,500, which was at once regis- 
 tered, but only part of that sum was then 
 advanced. The plaintiff', who had succeeded to 
 
 the rights of I hi' vendor under the above agree- 
 ment, then registered her mortgage for .'j2,00(>, 
 and claimed priority over subseipienl advances 
 made by the loan company under their niort 
 gage, but without actual notice of the plaiulitl's 
 mortgage, or of the terms of the agreement for 
 the sale of the land : — 
 
 llelil, Uobcrthoii, J., dissenting, that tlu: 
 plaintill' was not entitled to the pri(jiity claimed 
 by her. 
 
 Decision of Ferguson, J., 24 (). R. 4-ji, 
 reversed. 
 
 I'er Uoyd, C— 'I'he further advances were 
 
 ma<lo upon a mortgage pr-.viding for such 
 
 ad\auce3, and to secure which the legal estate 
 
 had been conveyed, and eipiity as well as law 
 
 protected the first mortgage so advantageously 
 
 placed, aa again.st the subscipient mortgage, 
 
 eve though registered, where notice had not 
 
 as a faet been conmiunicated to the first mort- 
 
 I gage(.' respecting the .suliscijuent instrument, and 
 
 ! the Registry Act did not apply. Pitro. v. 
 
 \0(Uiii(la PtniiiiiKHt Loan ami Sariiii/H Co., 2.") 
 
 I (). li. 071. .\llirined by the (.'ourt of Appeal 
 
 I '23 A. R. * ' ' 
 
 I .SVe now .57 \'icl. cli. 34 (O.) 
 
 Datlon on Palement — Wiimiulij — Furj'ri- 
 turf for Sou-rci,!i'i/r(tli(jiK]—'i\ui parties to a 
 gift liiti^r rirufi of certain I'cal estate, with war- 
 n, ty by the donor, did not register it, but 
 by a subse(]uent deed, which was registered, 
 changed its nature from an a)jparently gratui- 
 tous donation to a deed of giving in payment 
 (ilatiim en /Hiierm iif.) In an action l)roug"ht by 
 the testamentary executors of the donor to set 
 aside the doiuition for want of registi'.ition : — 
 
 Held, allirnnng the judgnient of the Court 
 below, that the forfeiture under Art. SOO, ('. ('., 
 resulting from neglect to register, applies oidy 
 to gratuitous donations, and as the deed in this 
 case was in effect the givnig of a thing in |iay- 
 ment (dalinii ui /mikmeiil) with warranty, wliiuh 
 under Art. 1592 is e(iuivalent to sale, the testa- 
 mentary executors of the donor had no riglii at 
 action against the donee liased on the al)senir 
 of registration of the original deed of gift inln- 
 i-iro-f. Laco.sle v. Wil.ton, 20 .S. C. R. 218. 
 
 Basemont \'i,iire—E<iuiial)l(i /iiteri..it.]-A 
 municipal coinn i\ who, with the oral consent 
 of the owner, build a sewer through land, 
 acquire an eciuitable right to compel a convey- 
 ance of so much of the land as is occupied liy 
 the sewei', Init a purchaser of the lainl witljou'i 
 notice of the consent or of the existence of [\w 
 sewer is protected by the Registry Act. Jayrii 
 V. Ci/y of Toronto, 21 A. R. .•{95. Allinned ljy 
 the Supreme Court, 25 S. C. R. 2o7. 
 
 Easement — Xdtice — PiorhaM'i- for Valiif.] 
 — Where the defendants in 1S7I, without 
 authority, diverte<l a watercourse on certain 
 land, ami afterwai'ds made compensation there- 
 for to tlie tlicn owner of the land, the plaijiliti'.-f 
 predecessor in title ; — 
 
 Held, that the equitable easement thereby 
 createil in favour of the defendants was nut 
 valid against the i-egistered deed of the plain- 
 tiir. ,-1 lioitil riilr ))urehaser for value withcjut 
 actual notice ; the defendants having shewn no 
 l)rescrij)tive right to divert tlie waturconse ; 
 and the diversion being wrongful as again.st tlm 
 plaintiff'. 
 
860 
 
 idur miller tliu iiliovc iij^ree- 
 I'll \nv iniiitgiige for .'J2,0(X), 
 y over Hiilisi;iiiioiit iidvuiiccs 
 c()iu|jiiiiy umlur tlic-ir inort- 
 jtual notice of tlio plaiutitl'H 
 terms of the agreement for 
 
 , J., <liHHeiitiiii,', that the 
 itleil to the priority ohiiine<l 
 
 ,'118011, J., 24 (). K. 4-M, 
 
 ')>e further iiilvaiioen were 
 rtgiige prn-idiiiL' for sucii 
 jure wliich the Tegjil OHlate 
 and eiiuity as well as law 
 lortgage so advantageously 
 the subseijnent mortgage, 
 .'red, wliere notice had not 
 iiunieated to the tirat niort- 
 siil)Sc(jiient iiistriinient, and 
 lid not apijly. I'iira. v. 
 Loan and .Sdrint/s Co., 'J.') 
 1 by the (.'ourt of Appeal, 
 
 ;h. 34(0.) 
 
 lent — Witrrantij — Fur/pi- 
 ■nlinn.] — The parties to a 
 itain real estate, with war- 
 ', did not register it, hut 
 ed, whicii was regi.stereil, 
 I'l'om an apparently gratiii- 
 deed of giving in payment 
 In an action l)ronglit Ijy 
 eeutors of the donor to .si.l 
 IT want of registration : — 
 le judgment of the Court 
 iture under Art. SU(i, ('. ('., 
 -•ct to register, a)iplies oirly 
 (lis, and a.s tlie deed in this 
 e giving of a thing in pay- 
 i«e(/0 with warranty, wiiicli 
 juivalent to sale, the test;i- 
 f tlie donor liad no right ni 
 Diiee liascd on the aliseiuc 
 ; original deed of gift inhr 
 ihon, 20 .S. C. R. 218. 
 
 ■e — E'jni'/ahle /ntensl.'j—A. 
 ho, witli the oral consent 
 I a .sewer through lauii, 
 
 right to compel a coMvcy- 
 he huid as is oeciipieil liy 
 diaser of the land witliou'i, 
 
 or of tlie existence of tla: 
 ■ the llegistry Act. Jurri^ 
 I A. R. :«)■). Atiinned hy 
 2.-> S. (.'. i;. 2:17. 
 
 re — Parchaxer for \'iihu:\ 
 idants in IS71, without 
 a watercourse on certain 
 made compensation there- 
 • of tlie hmil, the plaiiilill's 
 
 uitalde easement tlieieby 
 f the defendants was nut 
 istered deed of tlie pluin- 
 cluiser for value withnuD 
 ^feudauts having shewn nu 
 ~> divert tlio watercousi' ; 
 ng wrongful as against tlio 
 
 861 
 
 REGISTRY LAWS. 
 
 Kmpp V. Orrat lVf>i/n-n R. W Co C I' 
 
 4 (r r^7"'7-.','' y.v 'ir" "'■'''■'•« i^' »'• G«:, 
 
 ;- , ,;r"' ^•,^- '^- •"•! ; ."'d ParlrUh,,' v 
 giXr^'"" '''■ '^•^'-•«^- P. 97. distin: 
 The plaintiff having failed to prove actual 
 •lainage, was allowed nominal damages for the 
 wrong ; and, instead of granting a mandatory 
 miunetion to rompel the restoration of thl 
 watercourse, the C'onrl directed a ref.Tenee to 
 ascertain the compensation to which the plain- 
 fiir would 1.0 entitled as upon an authorised 
 diversion of the watercourse under ol X'iet 
 eh. L». see (»0, suh.,sec. h (I).). Tollon v. 
 tiiimiliun I'linjir /,'. ||'. (■•(,., 22 0. R. 20-t. I 
 
 Indian Lands -.l/o,V.va,/c n,.for, /'atenf-' 
 A,ito;.]_A patent of Indian lauds was obtained 
 by the patentee by virtue of his title under eer 
 tani assignments from the original locatee duly 
 registered ni the Indian Department, audit 
 appeare. that ei.Ttain prior .■issignees from the 
 -icatee had executed a mortgage mi the lands 
 to the plaintiir, of which the^j.UenU. ,a ,„ 
 actual m,t.ce, neither the assignment to t e 
 mortgagors nor the mortgii;e havin- beer, 
 registered in the d;.partuient! though tliTMimt-' 
 g.ige was registered in the county ngistry olhtv 
 
 ni!it '','e^ - " ' '""' '""^'''' ^" iovJoJX^ 
 Held, that the patentee was entitled to pri- 
 ority over the mortgage to the extent of the 
 -noneys paid for obtaining the patent, ami that 
 the registration of the mortgage in the eountv 
 
 v!';s:f;i;;'aR:';;k""'^^ '"'"■"• ^'^^^-^i 
 
 creditors for the payment of his disbursements 
 n the property pledged, but the pledgee's 
 emedy is by an „/.po.,n..u a .a'„ ,/, r,„l.rver to 
 
 Alt. 1(1,2, C U Gn^.U AW-m A'. IK. Ou. v 
 Ltimhr, 21 ,S. C. R. 431. ■ ^^". \. 
 
 Judgment- .Vor/t/a;,,' - Pnorifle., _ /.Wtifi. 
 :;fo".J-i!y R. S. N. S., .HI. ser., eh. S4 sec 
 
 H,V'!„'i*'^" T' J'"l«'"«"t I'i-ds the lands of 
 the ulgment debtor, whothor ac,,uired before 
 
 ;; ."e "inl"',' '>''■""■>'• "' ''"■'^'-•t"-lly as a mort! 
 gai^e , and deeds or mortgages of such lands 
 duly executed but not registered, are voki 
 "gainst the judgment creditor who irst re.-is 
 tens his judgment. ° 
 
 A mortgage of land was made, by mist ike 
 and inadvertence, for one-sixth of the moitJt 
 g'-rs interest instead of the whole. Tlie nio°c ' 
 gage was foreclosed and the laml sold. IJeforo 
 t he force osurcajudgment was registered against 
 
 l.c inortgagor, and Uvn years 'afterwards a, 
 execution was issue.l, and an attempt mi.le to 
 ievy on the tivo-sixths of the land not included 
 m the mortgage. "-""leu 
 
 In an action for rectification of the mort- 
 t,aL,c unci tor an injunction to restrain the jud-- 
 'imn creditor from levyin.'-— ^ 
 
 heMw^'^H"^''"""" ,*',"; J"-°o""«"t "f the Court 
 Im ^'s ^ T" '"''} ,'■'"■■■""". •'•^- dissenting. 
 Id, if> 1, f "'f ''^''^■^^t''^ "f tl'« land the 
 phimtift had only an unregistered agreement 
 <'n- a mortgage, which, by the statute, "was void 
 - ■•'g.unst the registered judgment of the crodi- 
 
 11. INSTUU.MKNTS Wllln, .MAV UK RwaSTKRED. 
 
 'oil, 1 .igree to charge the east half of lot 
 number, I neteen . . =.vitli the payment 
 the to mortgages . amounting to ,5750 
 
 • . ."Id 1 agree (m demand to execute proner 
 •nor gages of said land to carry out ds a X^ 
 uieiit or to pay olf the s ud mortgages,'' is nota 
 mere executory agreement, but^iperates as u 
 present charge in favour of the ni rt' aaees 
 ''■'•'■••'l. "l«m tlie lands described, a i. In y^ b' 
 littered against them lIo.f.MUr .. lJoh-r\ 
 
 III. I'kook for RucisTKATroy. 
 
 J Witness --/r,v,,/K/„,.,Vy. ] _ |v, M.,,,,.„„a„, 
 ■-i.A.-Aii alhlavit ot execution for the our 
 P;|seot registration may be nude i.v a ~ 
 
 wSes"li'^' ''""""'■^ ""■• ■^'■^'"'^"'■■'-■' '"'t who 
 
 re is ,„;:;'" '"; ''■■"?• '^''« i"«tru,nentV 
 iigistiation) IS addressed. 
 
 , I'er Osier and Maclennan, ,I,J. A. -Where an 
 
 Cis't'rv"; 'r '" *■'"'' '"'"^^"'-l. «-■• Sli of the 
 fcr^re iV, ,'; ""'■'-■■V"'y,"-'''-"o"'l^u-ity in the proof 
 tc.- egistrat loii. looj.i.tUr v. Roobi,; 22 A. 
 
 tor. (Inndli'ij v. inaklr, liPx. S. 
 
 ;t!;::«:7*<•^P•-^Seeofan■innno!^i 
 ^'10 iias not registered his deu.l, a ri-'ht of 
 retention as against the pledgor's execution 
 
 IV. Reuistkaks. 
 
 Fees- -l/;.,.<rr„,./.]_A registrar's abstract hav- 
 ing heen demanded of all instruments rcdstored 
 imu'^e':-""^'''' '"' "-"I'-c^ in a^e'rtliu 
 
 charfl'v^^''"'' ^''f '•'^o'^trar wa. entitled to 
 clia ge ^2 m, each general search of the town- 
 ship h.ts and twenty-live cents for the iirst 
 hundred wonls and iiftecn cents for each a dl- 
 lon.d hundred words of the abstract, as mo- 
 M.lcd ,n R. ,S. U. eh. lU, .sec. 'J,',, sub-sees 2 
 and 4; but the fact that' the lot h d subse 
 Hucntly to the mortgage been sub-divide I by 
 the mortgagors, without the assent of the mort 
 gagee, into a number of lots upon redstere 1 
 
 i|.laus, did not under sub-sec. !>, justify hi^. 
 
 each 0?^:^'/''^ '' f"' ^'-Parate search o 
 
 :i/i.:^v.'t.s;yi,rino7:" ''" '■''' »''^"^- 
 
 Reversed l)y a Divisional Court, 23 0. R. COS. 
 
 Liability of Sureties.] -- Held thit fl.^ 
 sureties to a band, da.edlsth January 188^ 
 ui.gisilV Act, K. .S. () ,1 , !i 1 f„_ fi, 
 
 ance Of -the duties, ete.;';;f^^,!^^^S.nS::i; 
 the form of bond prescribed by the^Act in force 
 p lorto themtroduetion of th/ provision g ivi,^ 
 the municipalities a share in the fees, were not 
 hablefur the non-payment over of such shl^e 
 
863 
 
 RES JUDICATA. 
 
 864 
 
 iPP' 
 
 iK'.iM'oii of Strut, J., 10 O. Fl. .1l!l, .itlliimd, 
 Coviily if Mttlilli.-,.v V. Sii((i/I)ii<tii, '.'(Ml. l;, 487, 
 
 BELEASE. 
 
 Of Cause of Action— la liiHl;/-7'rin/.]— A 
 
 Mcltlt lilt Ml it '1 |iiiicliiii^ Hitidii. iiurt'cd to liy 1111 
 ilhlriiiti' |j|iiiiilili w itiioiit iijniiinininitioii mIiIi 
 licr sfilicitii- mill V. il limit fiiii iIimi Ihmuc of fuel.-, 
 raiiiiiit Hiiiiil, mill its \,iliility niiiy lic-ttiid in 
 thr ])CM(lili;.' Ill tinli if plfiiilril ill lljir. J<,/riis(}, 
 V. di-tii.i/ Tri'iil.- II. ))'. r.y., •_'■) (I. R, (Jt, 'Jl 
 A. R. 40H. 
 
 Sfi; nlsfi, Fiiriim- v. Cravtl Tnnik It. W. Co.. 
 '21 (». I!. '-'!l!l, nnh 84!l; llai.f v. (hand Trwd- 
 It. ir. To., -Ji; (), ];. 1!), 'l'> A. R. .'■)04, null- S44. 
 
 Of Surety, l--,Vr. Phiscipai, am. Sikkty, I. 
 
 REMOVAL OF ACTIONS. 
 
 .SVc ClIlMV C'dll.T, II. — SrHKIli: A'lK ClIIUT. 
 
 REMOVAL OF TRUSTEES. 
 
 Set Thi sTs AM) Tkistkks, .\II1. 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 Set- I'ha<tiii:, .\I\', 
 
 ^<l' KsTnl'l'KI.. 
 
 RES JUDICATA. 
 
 Sri'RHIH CoritT (IK (^\NAI' 
 
 \I. Triai., I. 
 
 RENEWAL. 
 
 Sn Ijih.siiiSai.k. \'I. — Lami|.iiuiiam>Tknant, 
 
 -Wlll-PUAITICE, XIX. 
 
 Information of Intrusion — Tiilr — ,S'i,, 
 ' >■' )(i/i / . |- 111 |iii i,'iailii';;.s nil an infoniiatiiiii iit 
 iiitiiisioii cxliiliiti'il liy tlio ,\ ti>iii.'y-(!c'neriil loi 
 ( iinMiUi Mj^'ciiiist tlie iijiiu'lliiiii,, it luiil litpii imI 
 juilgid tliivt till' ii|ii)cllaiit, who clfiiiiieil titir 
 itniler a ;.'r,iiit tiuni tlif Crown iitiiler tlie (Innt 
 ; Senl of l!iili>-li (diiiiiiliiii, should deliver ii]i 
 posHCPsioii of it'itijii lands .litiiiito witliin the 
 railway liidt in that I'lovinoc : Tlie. Qui-iti \ 
 Farw'\ 14 .'^. ('. I!. .S!t2. Tlio apptll.int 
 liavin;; regiftcnd liia fjrnnt and taken steps ii. 
 procnie an inik'finsiliU' title from the Hegisti.n 
 of Titles of liiitisli {'oliinihia. tluia Tireveiiliii;; 
 gmiitecs of till! down from ohtaiiiiiig a rej,' >■ 
 teitd title, aiiotlii r iiiforniatiim wii.s exhihitMl 
 lij' the Attorney (ieneral to diieet the' appellant 
 to exeeute to the Crown in right of ( anaihi i 
 tinrieniler or eonveyaiue of the .«aid IiuuIm :— 
 
 Held, atlirniiiig the deeisioii of the Kxeheijiii i 
 Court, ;i Kx C. It. 'JTI, that the jinljiiiicnt in 
 Intrusion was eonelnsivo against the appellant 
 as to tile title. 7'/V' (Jumi v. Farirc//. II 
 S. C. II. .'i!f2, and Atloni'ii-Ctin-al fur Hrifi^h 
 CoJumh'ia V. Altnnie\j-<;i iirrdi for Ciiiiail'i. 14 
 Api). Cas. '2'Mi, eomnieiiKHl on and distiiignisluil. 
 ■J. That the proeeeiliiiL's on the information m 
 intnisioii did not preeliule the Crown from tln' 
 fiirtlier remedy elaimed. Fanl•^l/ v. 'J'/w (.limn, 
 22 S. C. R. m':i. 
 
 RENT. 
 
 Sec La.vdi.oj;!) ami Tknant, XI.X. 
 
 REPLEVIN. 
 
 Booms — l'ni/,n'it<ii!/ It:(ihl!i— Iti r<n(/lra/io» 
 — /{■■•lo/i/zi/ 1,1/ C(iii(/i<ri.]—(>'S., (•lainiing to he 
 the legal dej ositary, and T. MeC., elainii-ig to 
 lie the iisufnietiiary, of certain honms, i aaiiis, 
 and anehoi > in the Xierdet river, under .S(l X'iet. 
 ch. 81, {Q.). and wliieh (i. I'., licirg in poss-es- 
 sion of the same for several years under eertain 
 deeds and agrnmeiits friniT. Me(;., had stoud 
 in a filed for t}ie \i inter, lironght an action <v 
 rirnnlitrilioi, to replevy the san.e and for i^r^OtiO 
 damages ; — 
 
 Held, iiHirniiiig the judgment of the Court 
 l:elo\\, that (!'>. ard T.'MtC. -were not entitled 
 to the ])osse^sii ii as alleged, and that they were 
 inecliuled hy tlieir conduct and aci|nie'scence 
 from distr.rhinu (1. B. 's jiossession. Sin Ball v. 
 MrCoffny. -JO S. C. R. Hli). 0'Shamilme.ti<y v. ! 
 JJ(UI,-^\ S. t'. 1!. 415. I 
 
 See Solicitor, IV. 
 
 REPLY. 
 
 See Cki.mi.nai. Law, III.— Pleadi.m;, VL 
 
 I Promissory Note- Indorscr — Mahr — Pa,'- 
 I »«(-)•.-/('■/)--.//((/;/».;</.]— The defendant was sm li 
 ' liy the s.'ime plaiiititVs in a former ••letioii as i':- 
 dorser of a promissory note, and judgment w.is 
 entered in his favour iijion the defence that fr 
 indorsed it for the accommodation ot the ))l,iiii- 
 tills without eonsideiation. In this action I. 
 was sued upon eertain other noles and ujion I !ii' 
 judgment recovered in that action against tin- 
 firm who were the makers of the notes, iis a 
 ))artii( r in that firm, along with the other iiint- 
 ner : — 
 
 Held, hy Street, J., that the fact of his estah- 
 lisliiiig his defence in the foimer action had no 
 efiiet upon the {|ucstion of his lialiility in this. 
 
 Held, hy the Court of Ajipeal, reversing the 
 decision of Street. ■!., tliat the dismissal i f tlic 
 foiiiu r actii 11 vas an answer to this action in fu 
 far as it was an action upon the judgment, the 
 plaiiilills seeking to ^ rove that the defeialaiit 
 was, as rcgard.s them, a jiartncr hy estoiipd. ami 
 therefore hound hy the judgment against ilir 
 firm. A'n?/ v. I.-lf^lir, "24 O. R. 497, '2-J A. K. 
 12. Aflirnied, '_>(> S. C. R. 79. 
 
 Specific Performance — IiihrcH in Minf— 
 .S7i(i;c o/' /'<T)Cf((/.s. J— S. hrought a suit for pir- 
 forniaiiee of an alleged verltal agreement hy .\I. 
 to give him one-eightli of an interest in' lli.^, 
 M.\S, interest ill a, guhi mim-, hut failed lu 1 1- 
 cover, us the Court held the .ilk ged agreement 
 to be within the Statute of Frauds. (in the 
 hearing M. denied the ngn ementas aliegeil, hut 
 admitted that he hud agreed to give S. one 
 
864 
 
 866 
 
 lEPORT. 
 
 UAcTii i;, M\', 
 
 JUDICATA. 
 
 I'HI-.Mi; ColKT OK C!aN.\I'\, 
 THTAt., I. 
 
 Intrusion^ Title — Sin' 
 
 (lii ;.'.s uii ;iii infoiin.'itiiiii ni 
 l.y till' A t'>iii"y-(!on<>riil \><r 
 ' nplnlliin' , it liiirl liecii \[i. 
 i|iilliiiit, \vlio tluiiiiod litir 
 tlif Cinwii (iiiilor tlie (ill ar 
 iliiiTibiii, should dflivtr ii|i 
 in lands sitimto within llir 
 t I'rovliicc : Tlii' (^htn n \ 
 
 n. .Sii'.'. Tho npiifllaii- 
 is grnnt luiil tiii<en stops ii. 
 liU' title friiin tlio lit'gi.stMi 
 
 ('niiiiiiliia, thus prevent ill.: 
 wii from ohtiiininj,' ii re;; >- 
 
 iiiforiimtidii wan exhiliiti.i 
 neriil to direct tin? a])|ielliiiii 
 
 rown in right of ( imail . i 
 aiue (if the siuil Iiiiids :— 
 11^ (leei.siiin of tlie Kxelieqiii i 
 'J71, that the judfimeiit ii: 
 isive against tlio appeli.uir 
 77/'' V" ' " ^'^ Farwcll, 1 1 
 'ttni'iiiii-<lr)ieral fur liriti^h 
 py-dtHfrdl for ('(mad'i. 14 
 leiiteil on and distingnislml 
 ["iliiiL'H on the infornmtioii ot 
 ■elude the ('rown from tl.i 
 lied. Fariri://. \. Tlif (.himi. 
 
 s— Iitdor-ifr — Mul(r — Pari- 
 — The defenilant was siini 
 s in i\ former action as v.- 
 ry note, and judgment w.is 
 r njion the defence tluit In- 
 ccfimniodatiiin ot the pl.iiu- 
 'lation. In this action 1 r 
 in other notes anil uijoii the 
 
 in fliat action against the 
 ii!al<i 1 s of the notes, as ;i 
 
 along with the other piirt- 
 
 . , tliat the fiu:t of his cstali- 
 1 the foiiiier action lind no 
 ion of his lialiility in this, 
 •t of A))pcal, reversing tlie 
 , tliat the dismiss-al (f tlic 
 
 answer to this action in so 
 m upon the judgment, the 
 
 (rove that the defeinlant 
 , a jiartner hy estoppel, ami 
 
 the judgment against ilie 
 
 r, 24 (). 11. 497, '-'l.' A. R. 
 I ■. R. 7!). 
 
 ance — Iti/crest in Miiif— 
 S. hrouglit a suit fur jicr- 
 d verbal agreement hy .M. 
 ith of an interest in lii.~. 
 lid Jlillie, Imt failed lii u- 
 eld the alleged agreement 
 itute of Frauds. On the 
 c agr( einent as alleged, hut 
 id agreed to give S. one 
 
 «uch Hhure ofVh.,';';;;:,'::;,;.'!'''" '^'' ''"^"""^ -f 
 cSofN:;:;r!i;«S^;^•--• "f "..■Supremo 
 
 'i^«tj,uIgmen,%;H;i ;;,;':'' ^'^'''It-dhy the 
 uetion :-^ ■'t»i">-t him ftom hringingmiothcr 
 
 REVENUE. 
 
 869 
 
 RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 Set BANKntrmv am. i.vsor.vKscv, II _i!v 
 
 LAWS. 
 
 RESTRAINT OP TRADE. 
 
 See CovK.w.NT. 
 
 RETAINER, 
 
 Ste BAMUlUPTrv ANT, I.V.SOI.VK.Srv I 
 ."^OLICIToi;, IIJ., Vllf, ■ ■ 
 
 RETURNING OFFICER. 
 See Pabliam.:ntauv Ki,,.:,tions, m. 
 
 REVENUE. 
 
 I. CUSTOM.S DCTIK.S, 863. 
 
 II.;Inlani> Revkxik, 869. 
 HI. SCCCE.SSION- DUTV. S(J9. 
 
 I. Customs Ul-tiks. 
 
 '" the Caradinn n ., t'^" P''^'^ l-er gallon 
 
 le .1 ut the oil's were .nu7enalu.d. 
 
 of'il.:^' Canadnf ^"''-'^ ^''^ ''-trihuti.ig p^ut 
 
 The invoices si * Y°"""''' '" «''"'l^'«''Io lots. 
 below fl,f^ f'hewed prices which vere n<it 
 ''elo>» the fa,r market value of such oils when 
 
 M.UhiU, hen, was no 11,11,.,,.,,;;: .,,, 
 theUd^n ;!«::;.-;• P;''!--l''y|nncU., in 
 
 tiMMuari .:ir ie ,:if ''^'r'"^ 
 i.«^u3^att,u;o,^!r;^J,^J^l-:;-Mtllat 
 
 «il''l.narkelso I't;, '.'''V 
 
 puid, l.y con.sum, s , , i i • • - ""■' I" "■'• "" '■'•" 
 
 asccrtaii^ed I ^, . See i'u'r''''^^ '''"«''--• 
 of«Ucli ,r lii, ' 'l'"'l''ir niaiketvulue 
 
 P'i'i'ilal niarUitso f •■""■-'""l;tnin m the 
 
 "■■'•expi,,-,,,! '■■'•'f tl''' ■"iMiliy. whence they 
 
 ' Ijy notice in wii,,' T^' "-'.'V'", '," '*"^'' «"'"l« 
 ' the Cisto, A !"«•'" '""•"'■'' ''y«ec. llsof 
 act of ii,e Mi i't' ^f ; '^ '"■ "•"'^■"' 'O'liio 
 the goods in , .,; LV'?, '""^ '■" ''""l"'Aith 
 intention on his pi^ ,,„' r;;"^''^""' "'"' «" 
 
 ! for uant of nouJ,, .'"•'"' '''^ •••",'"'""'""' 
 
 ; to a ease where nii^S's'.lcir.tcd '''',•'!''''>: 
 goods seized •' •^ "Li^on.tcd m ]ieu of 
 
 ca,uidawa:::;Uuaed:r,';';'7!-'-'' of 
 
 St. .Joh„>, po ,, V """'■ '^"«'"^'ss i" 
 
 f-n. the u^dt,;f «ta ,;:;';:;;;'^"?'', *" ''"p-'rt 
 
 ill the prepar It oi, . f tl "',''''^'^'-'* '•'•'l"'l-e,l 
 
 ,..,.1 _ . . ' loiiiint lliiuii conii„.t,„.l,. 
 
 anil were vilii<.,r'f ',. "i"" "' ',i'l>''d eonijK.unds, 
 of the 2; o^'Ln! J ';^. "";'','• tl-epr vision; 
 i" force, at th,',V,, ,,;''• V I '''"■'-'"■''• '''eii 
 value o the S.V rn f ,•'' ""^ '""' "^'"'^''t 
 ti.eeo,„pou,ds .',, f;::";".:,-^"i-V^i"to 
 "fall colts andchir S^^^ *'"-' "''''i''"" 
 
 insredients,aftcram'd ,,'':',' '^'''"''- ^'}'-"' 
 ''Oltled, and sold , ... ■'•'""'"' "*-■"•• ""■'^•'•■'1. 
 i"'l<ort eiitr es c, t 1 ""1' ' V'"'- '''''« 
 «lu V li.ved 1 Mhe , \, ■ "'l''"' t'"' ''al'^ ot 
 
 of,ti,epri;.L!';:';,rr\r''S'i^.i:'V''?"'^ 
 
 fully a«are of the purposes t ',l,i'. h /l ^ "V^ 
 '"'I'orted were to' he' appld Tie ' "'■''''''' 
 continued to imp„rt su i ■ f • '•""'P''"y 
 
 upwards of ,w.' ,y j^i ';'',? '''"* "^ *'>'• 
 tions they weie ,.,Il, ' ^cipt some alteru- 
 
 valuatio,?fo ,L;^;' "'"." \" ">»'^''' i" the 
 
 Customs auti.oiT; cst^;,,"^';^:"'-^ 'V""""" 
 
 caused an 
 iipany for 
 
867 
 
 REVENUE. 
 
 ft'lliMn U"'"'" ill<';,'ally iiii|i'>rtt'(l, iniitiary to the 
 lp|'ii\ iiimiN (if till' ( ■||MtiiiiiM Act, 1MH;(: 
 
 Hc'M, (I.) 'I'liiit tluM'r w^M no iiii|i(ii'tatii>ii (if 
 ^oo(l..( iiM ('(iiii|ioiiiii1c!(l UK (lii'incH ready for nuIc, 
 and tint tlii! duty tiaviiij,' \ir.vii jiiiiil ujion tlio 
 filir niiirkut v.diic, in I ht.' id.icc of t'xijoi tiition. 
 of tilt' in;^i(''Ut'nt..< ot wliicli tin' li<{iii<i in ImlU 
 wero coniiiiiMi (1, tlu^re was ii" Im Milalion fm the 
 81" 'ire. ('J.) When' the i-'onNUI ii'lit piirlH <ii' 
 ilii^rciliiMits of II xpeeilie article in e Iniported, 
 their viili, ■• for duty within t'le uieaiiin;; of neis. 
 «1H and (.!» of theCuHtoinH Act \x^'\. In not the 
 fai' nmrlift v.ilneof the eoiniilcicd .uliLle in the 
 itlii ■■■ of exiiortiitioii, liut isxinijily the fair mar- 
 Ret value Inere of tlie Heveral inj^redient». 'The 
 form in which tlie iiiiiteiiid is imported eoiiHti- 
 tut(^M the (liscriniiuiitinL,' test of the duty. (.'<.) 
 Notwitlistaiidin),' the intei-iiictatiini ehui.fe in 
 tiu! I'u-toniM Ael, IHSU, wliioh provide.s tiiat 
 
 Customs laws hIiiUI reeeive si'ch lilieial eon 
 gtructiou as will hest insure tli,' iimtection of 
 tlio revenue, ete,, in eases of douhtful iiiterp'e- 
 tatioii the eonstruction sliould he in favour of 
 the importer. (4.) Where an inilioiter openly 
 imports ^'oods and jiays all the duties impij-iod 
 on them at the fair nurl.'et value theleof in the 
 Jiliice of expoltalion at the time the same were 
 exporti il, he has not ini])orled sueli goijds with 
 intent todi'frand tlie revenue, »iui|ily because he 
 had the mind to do K'linethiiij^' with them which, 
 had it heen done in the ((uiutry from which 
 they were exported, would liave ( nhaneed their 
 value, and, jonseijiiently, made them liable to 
 pay a higher late of duty, hut which, in fact, 
 was never done before the goods came into his 
 possessicui after passiiii; the Customs. 77ii 
 iMei> V. J. C. Ayrr if,,., 1 K.\. C. K. 2;^-', 
 
 "Shaped" Lumber.]— Under item (Depart- 
 mental N'o.) 7-1' ill schedule "C."of the 1'arill 
 Act, ISSli, oak lumber sawn, but not " shai;ed, 
 planed, or ot'u rwi~e manufactured," may be 
 imported into Canada free of duty, 'i'he plaintiff 
 imported a (|uaiility of white oak lumber from 
 the L'nitcd Stales, which had been sawn to cer- 
 tain dimeiisiouH so as to admit of it bcinj; used 
 in the iii mufacture of railway cars and trucks 
 without waste of material, but yet before beiiiL' 
 used for such jmrposj had to be re-eut and 
 titted: — 
 
 Held, that the luiubHr, beiii;; merely sawn to 
 such diinensioiis as would i^nable it to be worked 
 up without waste, was not "shaped " within the ■ 
 meaning of the Taritl' Act, and was not dutiable. 
 Maijaiiii V. 'J'/ie Qitwii, "_' Kx. C. 1!, 04, 
 
 Ship — Carijd — Hnrhotir — I'l /lorf — Fiirfdlmv 
 — /'ro'v(/«/'('.]— Held, (1.) Where there has been ; 
 nothing done by the master to show an intent 
 to defraud the Customs, a vessel entering a port ' 
 f(U' shelter, before reaching a place of safety j 
 there, has not "arrived" at such port within ; 
 the meaning of 40 Viet. cli. 10, see. 12, se as to ' 
 justify seizure of her cargo for not reporting to ! 
 the Customs authorities. (2.) Where false 
 stateiueiits are made by the master regarding 
 the character of the cargo and port of destina- i 
 tiou of his vessel, which would subject him to a 
 penalty under sub-sec. 2 of sec. 12, 40 Vict. ch. 
 10, they cannot he relied on to support an in- 
 formalioii claiming fcrfcilurc of the cargo for 
 his not having made a report in writing of his j 
 •iirrival as reipiircd by sub-sec. 1 of sec. 12 of i 
 the said Act. (.3. ) That sec, 10 of 44 Vict. ch. 11, I 
 
 amoiiding sees. ll!» and 120 of 10 \'ict. uli. 10, 
 merely provides a lUdcediiio to lie followed whon 
 the Customs hcparlmciit undertakes to dual 
 with (piestioiiH of penalties and forfeitureii, and 
 does riit div( -it the Crown of its right to sue for 
 the same in the mauuer provided by soch. UK) 
 and 101 of 4I( \'ict. ch, 10, even « hero dupart- 
 liuntal piiM ceilings have been cumiiieneed lllidui 
 the said piuvisions of 44 \'ict. eh. II, see. 10. 
 (4 ) 'I'hateven i( sees. 100 and 101 of the said Act, 
 4(1 \'ict. ch. 10, had b(!en repealed by thi) lutei 
 statute, the Clown could pnieeed by iuformatioii 
 ni !■ Ill at eoinmon law, and this ri;;ht could not 
 be taken away t xoept by express words or 
 ii.cesHirv iinplicalioii. 't'lir Qua ii v. MudJonell. 
 1 Kx. C. R. !M), 
 
 Tea,B— Till inif ihmiijh ''iiiliil X/'/^c.s. |--Thc 
 plaiiitill's maile two shipmciitsof te i from .Japan 
 to New ^■(lrk for tr iiMportation in bond to 
 t'anad.i. In one ease the bills of la ling were 
 marked " in transit to Canada ; '' in the othi'r 
 j the ti IS appeired ii|iii ' the cnnsiil ir invoice, 
 I made at the place of sh.pment, to l>. con.iigned 
 ^ to the iilaiiilills' brokers in New York for Iran 
 shipment to Canada, (in the arrival of lioth 
 lot -I at New York, and pcicliiiga sale tliernof 
 ; ill Caniula, they weic .Jiowcd to be sunt to ii 
 bouilc I warehouse as niielainied goods for some 
 live (11 six months. 111(1 weie tinally entered at tin 
 N'cw Ndrk Customs House for trans|iortatiiiii {>• 
 lanaila, and t irsvanli'd to Montrc-al. 'I'lien 
 was nothing to slew that the plaintill's at any 
 time iiro|ioseil to make any other disposition ot 
 the teas, and then^ was nothing in what ihey 
 did that contravened the 1 iws ami regulations 
 of the United St ites or of Canada with respect 
 to the traiispoiiation of the goods in bond ; — 
 
 Held, alliinnng the judgment of tlu! K.\- 
 chc((U('i' Court, 2 Kx. C. H. I'JIi, (iwynne, ,1., 
 dissenting, that, as it clearly appeareil that the 
 tea was never eiitereil for saU^ or eoiisiimplidn 
 in the United States ; that it was shipped from 
 there within the lime limittul by law for goods 
 during transit to remain in a waridiouse ; and 
 that noact had been dune changing itseharactci 
 ill transit ; it was tlierefoie "tei imported iiiti. 
 Canada from a country other than the United 
 States but passing in bund through the United 
 States," and under see. 10 of the Act rolatiiii; 
 to duties on (^istoms, U. S. C. eh. 3;<, not 
 liable to duty as goals exported from the 
 United States to Canada. Hut uti' now Wl 
 Viet, ch, 14 (1). ) Curler, Mmy, ,L- Co. v. Tin 
 (Jiifii, KS ,S. C. K. 700. 
 
 Watch Cases — \'aliif — Jfifreprenentalion — 
 Co.v/.<. |--'rhe rule for determining the value for 
 duty of goods imported into Canada, prescriliwl 
 by the ."iSth an.l "»!)th sections of the Customs 
 Act, 11. S. C. ch. ,'{2, is not one that can he 
 universally applied. When the goods impoilcil 
 have no market value, in the usual and ordii ry 
 commerciul acceptation of the term in the <■ m- 
 try of their production or manufacture, or w here 
 they have no such value for home consumption, 
 their value for duty may be determined hy 
 reference to the fair market value for home con- 
 sumption of like goods sold under like eoinli- 
 tions, Var.aum Oil Co. v. Tke (Jueen, 2 Kx. 
 C. R. 2;U, referred to. 
 
 (2.) The goods in (jucstion in this case were 
 part of a job lot of discontinued watch cases, 
 and at the time of their sale for export were 
 
868 
 
 ml l'Ji» r,f 10 Viit. oh. 10, 
 Oi'cliiio til lie fiillnweil whon 
 riiciit iiiiili.'r'takvH to ilvul 
 laltlrs uiiil I'di'fiMtitrL'H, uikI 
 iiAvii iif ilM li^ht to Miiu for 
 iiiiir |ii-ovi(li'(l liy HocH. KM) 
 ■li. 1(», cviii wliiM'u ilupart 
 
 :\vi' I h (iiiimiuiik^imI uikIui 
 
 if U N'iut. oh. II, HOC. 10. 
 
 lOlliUxl 101 n|'tl>.'.s;li(l Act, 
 
 Ijr.'u ii|niil(il liy thu hitti 
 uM |iiM(fiil liv iiifi)riiiatioii 
 I', anil thJM li;;ht (.'inilil Hol 
 !|)t liy cxt>ns.i Wdi'ils oi 
 . Tlif fjiici II V. Mne/JoHetl. 
 
 mill f'lii/n/ S/'ih.i.\ Thi 
 lipriic'ufHiif tci li'diii .lupun 
 I' iiisiiortatinii ill Ixmil to 
 
 I tlio liilla of la lin),' won 
 o t'liiiada ; '' in tlio othi.'r 
 fidi the ciiiiHiil ir iiivoiof, 
 .shipiiiciit, til I ' con.iign<,'(l 
 urn ill New \'oik for traii 
 
 ( )ii the arrival of both 
 III iK'ii'lin^a xali' thcritnf 
 
 .illDWiil to 1k' tidiit to a 
 luiclainu'il f,'0(i(ln for sonn- 
 
 wore tiiially oiitoroil at tlu 
 liiiiHO for traii.Hportiitioii tn 
 h'll t(i .Moiitroal. Thorr 
 that till' plaiiilill's at un\ 
 
 II any othor ilixposition ni 
 ,Ms iiiitliiiig ill what thc\ 
 
 tho 1 iws ami rogulatioii... 
 or of ( 'aiiaila with rosjicul 
 of tho i,'Oo(ls ill hoiul : — 
 u^ ju'lijiiioiit of tho K.\- 
 ;. C. H. 12(i, (iwyiiiio, .1., 
 
 cloarly ap|ii!iiroil that tho 
 il for Halo or ooiiHiiiiiption 
 
 that it was ahippoil from 
 
 liniitoil hy law for f^omis 
 iiaiii ill a warohoiiHo ; ami 
 loiio ohaiigiiii,' iLscharactoi 
 rofoio "toi iiniiorlod inti. 
 y nthor than tlio Uiiitoil 
 
 liiiiiil tlirouyh tho' Uiiitril 
 )c. 10 of thu Act rolatiiix 
 IS, l:. S. C. oh. H.i, nut 
 i'X])orto(l from tin- 
 Hut sec now 'd 
 Maty, <t' Go. V. Till 
 
 869 
 
 ;o Ills 
 mada 
 rt,-i; 
 
 \>. 
 
 Iiu: — Jtfinri'presentdlioH — 
 (luterinining thu valuo for 
 (I into I'anada, J)i't'scriheil 
 .-(ections of thu CiLstums 
 is not one that can ho 
 Whon tlie goods importod 
 , in tho usual and ordii ry 
 11 of thu term in the o' la- 
 I or inannfaoture, or wliuro 
 uu for home consumption, 
 may be determined hy 
 larket value for home coa- 
 ls sold under like comli- 
 7o, V. The Queen, 2 Kx. 
 o. 
 
 jucstion in this case were 
 discontinued watch cases, 
 leir sale for export were 
 
 lor a u : tiior 7 ;'""'i' '"-• '■'"•'^''"•"-•'' 
 
 wouM imv fi.r thoin ^ti ' i ' ""^ """ 
 
 'm;i:^r;^:;;;ir;;,!:'7-'i;,!rT;'^^'^'- 
 :::hi:':S;,;ti'^i:i;::'''-v'''''^' 
 
 lodo.-.i . ,. "'<''"'• ""'"'I't illtomlillL' 
 
 a h, „,. "'"'"' appruLsor, nproHen .?J 
 
 S;:d:':o,!i;rb:,i';;ii.--,i|;--.:^^,^i.i.'i.tii.! 
 
 •''"-'yi-iforhiinioc';;:,,, .^^i;^';;,;!i;;' 
 
 .sfiitatiun uaH iintriie <)„ ,i,. . '1'"- 
 
 "{i<:K.'.i;n.dorvah,a;-:;,^;;\t.r^:;:';'f;;;'t 
 ('. li. Vir"' '"■■"'■ ''"''"' ''■ '''•' '•""•' '- ■^v:i 
 
 RIDEAU CANAL. 
 
 REVIVOR. 
 
 870 
 
 .^<• Snu,.. K.uiAs a.m. l{r iv„h. 
 
 II- Im..\ni. Hkvkm'k. 
 
 Sillde and Boom Duea-sv,,/,,^., /- , 
 
 ""'i«r .hid, ,i,„ ,V ,'™; ""'",'■'.""' '• 
 
 li.llll,'!' |.:,.,i„.. l|,;„„. , ,1 -"""""« ■vlMll), b, 
 
 I 
 
 REVOCATION. 
 
 •S>. 'iULMLS AM, Thl.TI.,.,,, MV.-Wlu., III. 
 
 RIDEAU CANAL. 
 Conditional Olft — !■', ■,.,... .. 
 
 -iKJwaspasseiuS'^.]:,,' ;;,^^V' ''^"'- 
 dii ' ts aM 111 ti,,. . - ""|oit ot roinovini/ 
 
 •■M.riri::,;;:dfJ,/;.;:r'^''"';v':-'''<'uta«.i 
 
 'i.Nt sootion of M„! i t mi ti.n r'v'. '^^'"' 
 ""''^■tod that tl,,. rovi'r •V''."'«'a« 
 •■""f tho Oi-ln^noi" V^i„r't'l"' "1/f 
 ■■"iHtnie.l to apply to all.,'? •^■^;'''""'I'J Im 
 ""t ami takon f i ,, 1 .' ' ,|/'\ ">'^"y^" «"'■ 
 llH' l.'idoau <'anal .let' '.",-:. ,'( !^'' l>>'>vmnuH of 
 
 -*i!e';;i;o:f'\[.l!-;;it:yvf::?-'''>'-=»pia.i 
 
 yxoavatoii :a the s : "• ',: ';|^ "^ ■':■'«'»■*% 
 
 li lain and Uvwish Z\i I'lidgo, and of tho 
 
 'H'>»va,h, asthoystoodatthu pa.s8i„<, 
 
 ostinci- A..t ,...,1 . -.' . . » 
 
 of tlio (lidnaiicu Vostin'' .\,.t „.. i •■—■■ti 
 •"■"la act, and excepting 
 
 IIJ. 
 
 'SfcrK.ssioN Di'Tv. 
 
 Executors— Ae,/'/,;,,. /> ■ ; , 
 
 •lo'VLscd and heoM -; I Ti, -'"'"'•,' ■-■■^^'■■^'"'tor 
 
 --M.o til Vers,';;! " l';--"»|">.'uy legacies. 
 
 Iho legatees:- ^''^"'-'1 /"''^ m^; among 
 
 <.vc|f to t eX "' iT ''h' '''V"T ""-■ ^^'""•""■^ 
 
 REVERSION. 
 
 Sie Action, 1. 
 
 REVISING OFFICER. 
 
 See PAKLIAMK.NTAUy ELEcriON.S, IV. 
 
 REVIVAL. 
 See Will, 111, 
 
 luilding.s should 
 
 ■ two hundred fuet 
 limits of tho land 
 
 aliio, 
 
 -loh'side of1ho *:il '"""!'■'"' ^'•' "■ '"••""1th oa 
 H:.id laud :;i^ ;;!;;:; -'I'-' l-''ti.m of the 
 '■y tho said Nlch , la s' , l-^ ,"h" '■."••'y «''<'nt«d 
 
 thoainal-anV-xeoK;:,,!:'' ""^ ""'•P"''«« "^ 
 
 '>yth;^SNii;,,^;rs":^'rth''^.'^^'""«'' 
 
 "ll'^i-s of OrdniMl! y,l ,: ' "'" ' '■'""'pal 
 
 -i.ioa,iai. pi'ivZ^th:;; ;!r i^:'?^i^^^''^ 'i^ '»■« 
 
 I'o oructod tlioreoii. 
 
 Tho .,itc of the canal ami th 
 which were inclii,l.,.d within th 
 
 wa.s actiuL' for fl, , •' ? •"■tter oi whom 
 •igiLud that such portion of tl o 1 md Jtr-i 
 
 canal was oomolute 1 "\ i '*''"'" *''« 
 
 in the terms of ll.e a;4 wo,- , v ' VV' '^'"'^" 
 
 I ■ cdiu ucjaj on Llji,- part ot S un.l fw 
 
 aiming under him, tho Act !) Vict" ch 42 .^ 
 
(:f*|i 
 
 m 
 
 fin ' : 
 
 871 
 
 SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 872 
 
 2. That the lands so retained were held liy the 
 Crown for the piiriioses of the canal, and that 
 aH to the tract of .sixty fctt around tlie liasiii 
 and Bywasli tlicre was attachc<l a con<lition that, 
 no buildingH were to lie erected thereon. 
 
 ;j. That the jiroviso, " that no buildings shall 
 bo erected on the said tract of sixty feet," did 
 not create a condition subseiiuent, a breach of 
 which would work a forfeiture and let in the 
 heirs, nor would the use by the Crown of a 
 portion of the lands in ijuestiou for purposes 
 other than the " purposes of the canal "' work 
 such a forfeiture. 
 
 4. The Court ha.s no power to restrain the 
 Crown from making any unauthorized use (.f 
 the land, or to compel the Crown to remove any 
 buildings erected thereon contrary to the terms 
 of the grant. 
 
 Semlile, that the Crown cannot alien the land 
 held for the purposes ,.f the canal or any por- 
 tion thereof, and if it should do so the sup- 
 pliants would have their .-iclicju against the 
 grantee. If the Crown should abandon the 
 land or any portion of it, the land or such ]jart 
 of it would revert to the suppliants and they 
 might enter and jjossess it. Maijit v. 'flia 
 Queen, 3 E.\. C. R. 304. 
 
 RIGHT OF WAY. 
 
 See Street Hailways, 1\'.— Wav, \U1. 
 
 RIPARIAN OWNER. 
 
 See Water and Watercoukses, VI. 
 
 ROAD COMPANY. 
 
 See ^^■AY, IX. 
 
 RULE OF ROAD. 
 
 See Ship, I. 
 
 SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 See Contract — Fraudulent Convevance. 
 
 Conditional Sale — Default — Ser.ure—Rt- 
 aak — liiijhi in Sue fov Dijiciency. ] —After default 
 in payment by the purciiaser ofa machine under 
 an agreement whcrcb'' the property was not to 
 pass until ]!aynicnt in ;idl, with a provision tluit 
 on default the whole price should fall due, and 
 that the vendors should be at liberty to resume 
 possession, nothing b'.'ing said as to I'e-salc, the 
 vendors seized the ir '.hiue and re-sold it, and, 
 after crediting the proceeds, brought this action 
 to recover the liahmce of the original price : — 
 
 Held, per Boyd, C, disseni ig from the de- 
 cision of AruMHir, CI., at the trial, that tiie 
 plaintills were ntitled to judgment. 
 
 Diflerence between American auil Knglish 
 authority pointed out. 
 
 Held, per Robertson, J., conira, that by rc- 
 
 sunnng jjosscssion the plaintifTs put an end to 
 the contract of sale, and had no longer any right 
 lif action in respect to it. 
 
 Held, also, per Armour, C..T., that ol \'ict. 
 ch. li) ((,).), as to conditional sales, is not retro- 
 spective ; and per Boyd, C, that its provisions 
 are <leclarat(iry of the common law in providing 
 for a re-sale in case of default. Lmnond v. Due 
 nil, !) Q. B. 1030, and Maeliun v. iJiniii, 4 
 liing. 7-2, specially referred to. 
 
 Held, by the Court of .-Xijpeal, Maclennan 
 .)..\., dissenting, that l)y the I'e-sale the original 
 agreement hail been put an end to, and that the 
 plaintitls had no riglit of action. 
 
 I'er Maclcnnau, .I.A.— 'I'lie vendors became, 
 in cti'ect, mortgagees of the machine, and on de- 
 I'aidt in payment'were entitled torthwith to sell 
 and tlieu sue for the unpaid l)alance. Saiei/' ■ 
 v. I'nu,ile, -20 O. R. Ill, IS A. R. -JIS. 
 
 Conditional Sale — J x fault — Jinl'jmehl — 
 Sul'-Kiiii III Sii-jiie-Jie-sdle — Iliij/it to Pruei 
 I '/aim, Jor iJtfeliiiei/,'} — The defendants pur- 
 chased machinery from a company under a <;on 
 j tlitioual contract of sale in writing, providin- 
 ] that the property should remain in the companv 
 I until payment of the price in full, with tlu 
 I right to resume ))ossession and re-sell on iu)ii- 
 payment, but withoutany provision that in such 
 I latter event the purchase money was to lie ap- 
 plied ;»v' tautii, and the ilefcndants remain liable 
 I for any balance. On default, after ccitain pay- 
 mcntshad been made, the company obtainci! 
 ' judgment on notes whicli had been given for tlu 
 purchase money, anil snbsetiuenlly seized autl 
 sold the machinery, ami, applying tin; proceeds, 
 souglit and were allowed to prove a claim in tin.- 
 Master's ollice for the lialance due on tlie judg- 
 ment : — 
 
 Held, that the whole matter was examinable 
 in the .Master's otHce, aithoiigh judgment had 
 been recovered, and, a.-> the consideration for the 
 judgment had ilisappearcd liy the intentional 
 act of the company in taking possession and 
 selliu'.', tlie claim should have been di.siUowed. 
 Sair;,'er v. I'liiiijlr, 18 A. R. 'IIS, followed. 
 Arnold v. Plaiikr— iVuteiou.^ Emjiiie Work- 
 Co.' -s Claim, i'l'O. R. (108. 
 
 Conditional Sale — Mannfiie/ured Artieh — 
 ViJidor'-i Lien — l!eiiuir<iiieiit-i <f •Statute.] — The 
 lien of an unjiaid vendor of a manufactured ar- 
 ticle is not invididatcil if, v.ichout his direction 
 or connivance, tlie jmrehaser paints out or oblit- 
 erates the name and address of the vendor that 
 were, pursuant to the Conditional Sales Act, .'il 
 Vict. ch. to ((>.), jiropcrly lu^akcd on the article 
 at the time of the conditional sale. 
 
 iS'i ;;)W(., that an instrument in the form of a 
 promissory note with conditions thereunder 
 written is an instrnnient evideiieing a conditional 
 sale within the first and sixth sections of that 
 Act. n>lliaiifr V. Se<,l/, liO A. I!. O.VJ. 
 
 Party Liable for Price— 7V) IVIiom Crulii 
 (/((•(■/(.] — A., doing business under the name ot 
 J. A. & Sons, assigiu d all his piopcity aiiii 
 eti'ects to H. for beiictit of creditms. H., Iiv 
 power of attorney, authorized A. to cullci t all 
 moneys due his estate, etc., and to carry on the 
 business it expedient. A. continued tlie busi- 
 ness as before, and in the course of it purchased 
 goods fr(<m I'"., to whom, on some oeca.'ioiis, he 
 gave notes signed "J. A. & .Sons, H, trustee, pci 
 
872 
 
 plaintins put an end to 
 
 I had no longei- any right 
 t. 
 
 (iiir, C'.J., that 51 \'ict. 
 ional saltH, is not retro- 
 1, ('. , tliat its pi'ovii'ions 
 (jiiiniim law in pnAidinj^; 
 cfault. Liimoiid v. Jktr 
 \ M<i''liaii V. Diiiin, 4 
 jrred to. 
 
 of Appeal, MaL'lennan 
 y tlic n^-salt; thf diiginai 
 L an end to, and that tlic 
 if action. 
 — Tho veiulor.s liccanie, 
 
 tlui niacliinc, and on de- 
 .'iitillud t'ortlnvith to sell 
 njaid balance. .Sairyi r 
 
 1, l,s A. II. -.'IS. 
 
 - Jh/auil — Jiii/i/mciil- — 
 -.■,(//,- — llin/it to Prori 
 — Tho defendants pur- 
 
 a company under a i:on 
 Ic in willing, providing; 
 d remain in tliu compan\ 
 
 price in full, witli tin 
 iion and re-sell on non- 
 iiy provision tliat in sueli 
 ise money was to he a])- 
 
 defendants remain lialih 
 cfault. after ecitain pay- 
 thu company ohtainei! 
 .■h liad been gi\en fiU' the 
 subse(|Uenlly seized and 
 1, a])iilying Llie proceeds, 
 ■d to prove a claim in the 
 balance due on the judg- 
 
 .■ matter was examinable 
 although judgment had 
 the consideration for the 
 
 arcd by the intentional 
 
 II taking jMSsession an.l 
 Id liave l)etii disallowed. 
 ) A. R. 2 IS, followed. 
 Witt'roiui Enijiiir Wovh- 
 08. 
 
 ^ftiiiiijarfiircd Arlich — 
 I'liieiitH (if Sidliilv.] — 'I'lie 
 ir of a manufactured ar- 
 if, without his direetior 
 •luisef paints out or olilit- 
 .drcss of the vendor that 
 .'onditional .Sales Act, ."il 
 •rly lUiukcd on the article 
 iticiual sale. 
 
 rumeiit in the form of a 
 1 conditions thereunder 
 t evidencing a conditional 
 nd sixth scctiiuis of that 
 
 0/1, lio A. i;. O.V.\ 
 
 'rice — 'J'n Whom Crull' 
 •iness under the name ol 
 d all his iiropeity and 
 lit of creditors. 11., by 
 tlit,ri/.cil A. to culh. 1 ail 
 etc., and to carry on tin 
 A. continued the busi- 
 the eour.-:eof it imichascl 
 ni, on some occasions, he 
 A. & .'Sous, H. trustee, I'ci 
 
 ■B73 
 
 SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 A." All tho goods .so purcliased from K were 
 charge,! „, the bo.ks to ,1. A. k .Sons, and tl e 
 dea hngs 1)0 tween them aft,;r tho assignment con- 
 tinued for live years, f-inally. A. being unable 
 topay wliat was due to I-"., the latter 1>rought 
 .m action against H. on notes signe.l as above 
 .md for the price of goo.ls so sold to A. — ' 
 
 (W of 'v ■'"''">"'!'■' ''/;''''"" °f the Supreme 
 nc tl, ,. H '"'' i''"'"^' J"«^l"^^>-^'''"b J., dissent- 
 ing, tha*-, the evidence at the trial of the action 
 clea,l3 shewcl that the crclit for the ,'ood" 
 sold was given to A. ami not to H. ; that .A. ,lid 
 i.ot carry on the business after the assignnien 
 
 ii ,°."';-',^"'"' "■' •'" ^'"•' '^fe"^"* of "•• ""• f'"- tl,e 
 eneitothi.s estate; that A. was not autlior- 
 
 that H. was not liable either as the person to 
 .hom^cred. was given or as an uildisCoscd 
 
 Hehi, further, that if H. Mas guiltv of a 
 breach ol trust in allowing A. full control over 
 the est. ate. that woul,l not make liini liable 
 
 r R 4S9 "'■"""• ^^"'''''■'' ''■ P'^'-^y"', -'2 S^ 
 
 874 
 
 Party Liable for Price- I'mv,/;,,,/ Ju,!.,,,,,,,, 
 -lnaml.]-A manufacturing company trans- 
 ferred to a .symlicate, wliiehluol l..nt it money 
 Its works, plant, and material, ami in efiect its 
 
 o .' ;:,v"""''''.Y'"^'' ""^ ^.vmlicate proceeded 
 to carry ,m on he company s premises, for it.s 
 own beiieht, ami at Us own risk. The niana- 
 ing.hreetor of the company, who had become 
 the inanager of the .syndicate, after the above 
 transfer, Imt pursuant to a correspondence com^ 
 menced a few .lays before it, or.lcre,!. as in T s 
 fornier capacity, cM'tain goo,ls from the plain- 
 t fi, who, subscpient to the transfer, su, |,lie,l . 
 the goods onlered wliicli were uscl by the .s ^ • 
 d.cate, and he afterwards took a note of tl e , 
 company f,n-tlieir price, on which, when .lis 
 iumoure, , he .sia.,1 and obtaine.l juih^nient 
 against the company, being, lioweve, , .all thl 
 time igimrant of the circumstances above 
 mentioned. About a week prior to the i,„l,.. 
 ment a win,l.ng-up onler was obtaine.l a,' vinst 
 the company, hearing of which, tlic plaiiuitfat 
 once eoiiimence,! this action against the syn-li- 
 
 be o, ?■; • ? r'\ r^-*'"^, ^'°"'^*' "■»' afterwanls, 
 bef,,ie tria , he obtained cv;,ar/.- an or.ler vaeat^ 
 ing' the judgment against the eompanv •- 
 
 Hel, , that the plaintiffwasentitle.l to recover 
 from the .syndicate the price of the g„o,ls — 
 
 Hehl, also per liobertson, J., tliat the iud-- 
 ment vacated was absolutely null ami void 
 li.aying ),een obtained after the win,li„.^-up ' 
 or,ler without the leave of the Court " ^ 
 
 Per Meredith, J. that the ju,lgn.enl was, at 
 •any r.ite, irregularly entered, ai„l, wlieii set 
 aside, was as if .t Inul never existe.l. K..,iln„ 
 V. Omham, 26 O. R. ;i(jl. '' 
 
 option to ,h-aw them from the piles, if he wants 
 :.rFr.ie.'''"° ""'*••■'"• ^■""■■^ *"">■• N. HuHeau 
 A few (l.iys after the s.ale the agent gave an 
 -ler m, t,, owners of the yar.I for dolive^ 
 f the luMiber to L., winch order was accepted 
 V he owners. L. had given a six months' 
 otefor the pnce ot the lumber, and ju.st before 
 It mature,! h.. askcl the .lefeiulants to renew 
 whi,d. th..y ,,.f„se,!.. an,! on L. saying that he 
 couhl n..t pay, the defeiulants replie.T th.t he 
 ust keep lis lumber, whereupon he was 
 onue.I by L. of his .agreement with the plUn 
 t nia, e about a mmitb ,ifter tli.. purchase from 
 
 lain' ii ni; '"'■ '-^ "■''''•'' '.'^ ^'^^-^^ to the 
 ■ s c, 1 t I "■'"■'■''.""^". '''-'^il't '■'"• the lumber 
 as udl.ite, securit; „r advances to him bv 
 
 m.''o"!"/'- *^" ,""-'",■'''• "'■ ■■"' interpkadfr 
 
 hewn bv'tr'""'!*-; "'" '';'" '" ^''■'^ '•■■"''^•^if' ^^ 
 slienn by the evidence that the ,iuantity sold to 
 
 ..ha< never been separate.! from th^ defen- 
 
 . Its lot in the yar.l, an,! that the defendants 
 
 umii Imiin,!"!" " """"''' -^"-l-'ing it theirs 
 
 Aime'i'l' sI',''"'" 'I'V.'"''^'""^"* "f ^''e Court of 
 tl, i ;;/ ^^\'""-' *■"■■>•'""-■' -'J- dissenting. 
 01 t of rl, 'T7 ^'/''/''' '""''"• "°^'''' P««««'l 
 
 Property Passing- ll'.„v:/,o».s, h'erd,,/ -Xo„. 
 
 mei 4,(100 100 feet ot lumber in a var,l in 
 RookLan. , Out and sold l,.-iO0,00(. tlinuigh , 
 agent to L of -Montreal on six months' crclit i 
 ratifying the .sale by a letter to the owners of : 
 he yard as follows :-Montreal, 12th .lanuarv ! 
 ISS., Me.«r3. A\. C. Edwards & Co., Rockland, 
 On!. (.entleinen,-\ou will please ratify \|r 
 Uunays' order for one million feet .S mill culls 
 
 sold to Mr. U illian, Little, f.o.b. of barges, with 
 
 Pi-opprty Passings- /!!,ihf to Pos,emon-Pau. 
 "'-/o; /V-<v.J-The .lefendant agreed to Z 
 : t W00.1 for the mortgagors .,f the plaintils 
 
 ile"ras".:'l ="f'^" "'^■'^'•"'- '^'='-'^''" -'-1 then 
 e.l, as also future acpnre.l woo,! brought on 
 
 he prennses and to place it upon the premises 
 
 at a speeilicl price, ami the mortgagors agreed 
 
 oVaL''tr r^^'''' "'■"".■■'^ thewcK,dwaf go 
 out, .ui,l tlic balance m e ish u,,„n and aocordins 
 to a measurement to be nia.le by them. nS 
 
 Ifot'nit ;,/.",''"'%';' ''"' "-'-tWe, wood ^ 
 n tl, ;,.' "'.' V," V^eum^H, and measured 
 
 u the presence o all parties, and the quantity 
 .ig.^ee.!jipon, an,l niarke,! with the plaintiffs- 
 Held, that the pr.iperty in the wood became 
 at once veste. in the nmrtgagors, and throuch 
 hem in the plaiutills ; but such vesting did ntt 
 nuisfer the right of possession without pay- 
 ...en of the ,, nee : am! therefore the plaintSs 
 icmldnot ma.ntan trespass or trover for woo^^ 
 akeii away by the .lefendant after approp^! 
 tioii and before payment of the full price ; but 
 ^vere entitle.! upon amendment of the pleadings 
 ; to a .leclaratiou of their right to theVopX' 
 and t,> possession upon payment of the amouit 
 
 Iv'th'l.m ;"' ■■^^•°°""V'*'.""^ ^^■"'"•' »°t received 
 by them. Ho;, rs v. Jhritf, 25 O. R. 84. 
 
 Quality -- Partirn/ar i 'haM - liepre-^enta- 
 hoH.]-^]cl) bought at aucti.m. tlir<3ugh an 
 ageut, a billiard table describe! in tlie aitctio^ 
 eers a,!yertisement as "a full size « pocket 
 iM.gbsh biUiar.! table made by Thur.ston," eta 
 and wrote to M. & ('o. . makers of billiar.l tabl^ 
 
 style "^,;,T ,!"'^-"'^^ " 1',"' ^"r^ """ "f '">°the? 
 style (»n receiving the information asked. 
 Mel), wroto t lit lie i<.-,l 1 -. f t !• "°''"'*» 
 
 offered \f \r "'""'' "V^ ''^'^•-Pt tno ternui 
 hnr letto-. T '"-"f ''•;'•"■•■"•''« ^'-"te the folio w- 
 .. g lettoi - - oront.., Oct.iber 2nd, 1S86. D. C. 
 McDouga I, Ks,,., Agent Halifax Ranking Oo:; 
 Ant ig,mish Dear Sir.-Vour laconic reply to 
 our letter of 24th instant to lian.l. We wouW 
 
Mil 
 
 lii 
 
 fiili 
 
 87S 
 
 SALE OP GOODS. 
 
 87a 
 
 drop the matter if it was not for an inquiry 
 which we have just received from a private 
 party in the fur Nortli-West who would like 
 to purebiise ii, good second-hand Kngliah talilc. 
 We would tlicreforo kindly ask you to make us 
 your offer for the iirop<ise(l excliiiii!;e, -nd if we 
 can posbihly do it, we will acceji'. it. (iive us 
 as neai' a description as you can of your table — 
 maker's name is essential— hut as you have 
 nothing with it hut the billiard ou'lit ino life 
 and pyrannd lialls and boards) you should not 
 make your price too high, or a deal will be 
 impossible. Awaiting your kind leply, we 
 remain, yours truly, .'Samuel May & Co. To 
 wliich Me I), answered : 1 may just say I never 
 saw our table yet, but am informed it'is a very 
 niee one, made by " Tlnuston,'' and very little 
 the worse of wear, beiuL' in the private faujily 
 of Sir Edward Kenny in his country residence 
 near Halifax. This gentleman .vho purchased 
 the table for us writes thus : "I got the ,> bil- 
 liard l)alls and marker, and I!) cues, which is all 
 that is needed for billiards. I am told the table 
 IH a great bargain, cost t'iOO in England, and is 
 not mueh the wor.«e for wear.'' The table is 
 6 X 12, and for particulars we woidd lefer yim to 
 Jerry E. Kenny, K.s<[., or F. D. Clark, auction- j 
 eer, Halifax. Yours truly, D. C ?^.I)ougall. 
 M. & Co. then wrote accepting the offer, and 
 adding, " We trust that the Knglish table is 
 fully as represented : and if you are satisfied, 
 you may ship it at nnce, with billiard balls, 
 markers, 1!) cues, cloth, and what else there 
 may be. In the meaniime we will get up a 
 ii X 9 Eclipse Comliiuation table in best style, 
 ami with outfits for pool, carom, and pin pool : 
 games. Awaiting your early reply, we remain, l 
 dear Kir, yours truly, Samuel May & Cn. The 
 table shipped by Alcl). on reaching Toronto 
 was found to be an American made table with 
 Knglish cushions and worth only from $\o to 
 $2ii. M. it Co. lirought an action for the ori- 
 ginal price of the new table : — 
 
 Held, aflirming tlie judgment of the Court 
 below, that McD. agreed to deliver to :M. & Co. 
 an Knglish l)uilt table made by Thurston as 
 described in his letter, and having failed to 
 deliver sucli a table, he was liable to pay the 
 full price of tlie one ol)tainod frfim M. &.. Co. 
 Maif V. McDoiiijall, 18 S. C. K. TOO. 
 
 ^xiaMtY—)Vuvm»ly—J)crirer!i^Airiptancc.'\ 
 —In a contract for the purchase of deals from 
 A. by S. tt (iL, merchants in London, it was 
 stipulated, int<r alUi, as follows :—" Qualitj-^ 
 Sellers guarantee (|uality t- be e(|ual to the 
 usual Etchemin Stock and to be markeil with 
 the lieaver IJranil, " and the mode of ilelivery 
 was f. o. b. vessels at Quebec, and payment by 
 drafts payable in London 1'20 days' sight from 
 date of shipment. The deals were shipped at 
 Quebec on board vessels owned by P. it Bros., 
 at the reipicst of 1'. & P., intending purchasers 
 of the deals. When the deals arrived in Lon- 
 don they were inspected by S. et a/, and found 
 to be of inferior i|uality, and S. i/k/., after 
 protesting, sohl them at reduced rates. In an 
 action in damages for breach o\ contract ■ — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgmeit of the Court 
 below, that the deliveiy was to be at Quebec, 
 snbje'jt to an acceptance in London, .ind that 
 the purchasers were entitled to recover under 
 the express warranty as to (juality, there being 
 abundant evidence that the deids were not of 
 
 ! the agreed (juality : Arts. 1507, 1473, 107.*?, 
 I C. C. : Strong, C..T., and Sedgewick, J., dis- 
 senting. Sitirart v. Atkiii-(m, i!'_' S. (,'. R. .Slo. 
 
 Quantity — JJe-im'pfion—" Car-load "—Cni^ 
 trait— I'erfoniuniie- Option.]— 'I'hc defendants 
 agreed to buy from the plaintitt' a car-load of 
 hogs at a late per jound, live weight. The 
 plaintitt' shiiiped a "double-decked'' car-load, 
 and the defendants refused to accept this, con- 
 tending that a " single-decked " car-load should 
 have been shipped. There was conllictiug evi- 
 dence as to the meaning given in the trade to 
 the term " car- load i.f hogs," and it was shewn 
 that hogs were shipped sometimes in the one 
 way and sometimes ni the other :- - 
 
 Held, Hagarty, C. J. ()., dis.senting, that 
 the plaintiir had the option of loading the car 
 in any way in which a car might l)e ordinarily 
 or usually loaded, and that he having elected to 
 ship a double-decked car-load, the defendant? 
 were bound to accept. Hauln/ v. The Cana- 
 dian Packing Co., i\ A. R. Hi). 
 
 Sale by Sample— /;)<p'(7/o)(.] — See Finlter v. 
 (Uiamtly, 14 P. 1!. ,377, ante 197. 
 i 
 
 I Sale by 3a,xnple—InKpectii.m—A'j(nci/—I!ali- 
 
 7(V((/)(//(.]— Hold, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 
 j in a sale by sample of goods to be " laid down '' 
 
 at a certain place, inspection, if desired, must bo 
 
 made there, and if a proper opportunity of mak- 
 
 I ing inspection be afl'orded, and the buyer refuse 
 
 to inspect and demand that the goods be ship- 
 
 ; ped to another place for inspection, the seller is 
 
 justified in treating this as a breach of con- 
 
 ; tract ; — 
 
 Held, by the Supremo Court of Canada, 
 attirming the judgment of the Court of Appeal, 
 tliat \yhore goods are sold by sample, the place 
 of delivery is, in the absence of a special agree- 
 ment to the contrary, the place for inspection 
 by the buyer, and refusal to inspect there, when 
 opportunity therefor is afforded, is a breach ot 
 the contract to purchase. 
 
 Evidence of mercantile usage will not be 
 allowed to add to or affect the construction of ,i 
 contract ffir sale of goods, unless such custom is 
 general. Kvidence of usage in Canada will not 
 affect the construction of a contract for sale of 
 goods in New 'S'ork by persons domiciled there, 
 unless the latter are shewn to have been cogniz- 
 ant (>f it, and can be presumed to have mailr 
 their contract with reference to it. 
 
 If parties in Canada contr.ict to purchase 
 goods in New York, througii brokers, first by 
 telegram and letters, and completed by exchange 
 of bought and sold notes signed by the brokers, 
 tlie latter nuiy be regarded as agents of the pur- 
 chasers in Canada ; but if not, if the purchasers 
 make no objection to the form of the contract, 
 or to want of authority in the brokers, and 
 after the "oods arrive refuse to accept them on 
 other grounds, they will be held to have rati- 
 fied the contract. Oelri'-jm v. Trtnl Valh y 
 ]VooU,n Mfii. Co., 20 A. R. G7.S, 2,3 S. C. R. GS2. 
 
 i .Siile by Weight— Comp/itloii of Contrwt— 
 i rcn'lar'.ih'isk — Dipijyitarij — Ai-ri'ptan<'< .]--Hv\A, 
 ipci Ritchie, CI., Strong and Fournier, .1.1., 
 ; atfirmir,-; the judgniont of the Court below, that 
 : where goods and merchandize are sold by weight, 
 ■ the contract of sale is not perfect, and the pro- 
 I perty in the goods remains in the vendor and 
 
87o 
 
 Arts. 1507, 1473, 1073, 
 . , and S'edgewick, J,, di.s- 
 AlkiiL-vn, '22 S. (,'. R. 31",. 
 
 •ipt'ion — " Car-load "—('im^ 
 Oiilion.]~'\'he ili'fendiuit.s 
 the jiliuntitt' a carload of 
 louiiil, live woiglit. Tlic 
 ' doulile-decked '' curdouiU 
 refused to accept this, con- 
 ;le-decked " carload shotdd 
 There was conflicting evi- 
 ing given in the trade to 
 >f lioga,'' and it was shewn 
 led sometimes in the one 
 n the other : — 
 '. J. O., dissenting, that, 
 option of loading the ear 
 a car might be onlinarily 
 d that he having elected to 
 i car-loa<l, the defendants 
 t. Ilcmlii/ V, The Caiia- 
 A. R. 11!). 
 
 877 
 
 hh-^pir/io)!.]- 
 1, uH/e 197. 
 
 ■Sec Finlier 
 
 ■Inspection — Aijency — Bali- 
 he Court of Appeal, that 
 
 goods to be " lai<l down '' 
 pection, if desired, must be 
 jroper opportunity of niak 
 rded, and the buyer refuse 
 id that the goods be ship- 
 for inspection, the seller is 
 
 this as a breach of con- 
 
 )reme Court of Canada, 
 it of the Court of Appeal, 
 sold by sani))le, the place 
 absence of a special agree- 
 , the place for inspection 
 usal to inspect there, when 
 is atTorded, is a breach of 
 [ise. 
 
 untile usage will not be 
 •fTect the construction of a 
 iods, unless such custom i.s 
 ■ usage in Canada will not 
 1 of a contract for sale of 
 y persons domiciled there, 
 liewn to have been cogiiiz- 
 presumed to have madr 
 ferenee to it. 
 
 da contract to purchase 
 through biokers, first liy 
 md I'ompleted by e.\chani.'i 
 tes signed by the brokers, 
 irded as agents of the pur- 
 lit if not, if the purchasers 
 the form of the contract, 
 •ily in the brokers, and 
 1 refuse to accept them on 
 ill be held to have rati- 
 Oelrh'hn V. Tnnt Vn//ty 
 \. K. 073, 23 S. C. R. (i«i 
 
 -Comphlitjti of Contrail— 
 'ar;i—Ari;'plmH-f.]-tivh\, 
 rong and l-'ournier, .1.1., 
 t of the Court below, thr»t 
 landize are sold by weight, 
 not perfect, ancl the pro- 
 iniains in the vendor and 
 
 they are at his risk until fl,..,, .... • ■ , 
 
 ""til the buN-er s i L? i^/''.Vl'"'^''''lV °'' 
 weighe.l; and thi. is. ', , ^'V" *'i^"' 
 
 has >n.i,l,. .,,, • '^'"' •'^'^^" ^I'here the biner 
 
 Taschere-iu T 1 .1, V ' ^■•^•- ''"'"•"i'^r and 
 
 'leposit,try, and if th '.oo h wl 'i "l"' '" '''"' " 
 --<ion are dama.'cl thrcM I ■ ' ''"* I'°-''««s- 
 
 gence, he ca„m:tyi;;;:st,;;;?or;£ir:: ,;;:«"■ 
 t-tofsaie. ii<ti;r,z:;!!:::s:^;^tt->->- 
 
 SALE OF LANDS 
 
 878 
 
 Salo of Timber.!— ,Ver TrMii-,. ..- 'n 
 
 •J -le' ilMl.I.K AND TkeES. 
 
 , Warranty of Title Falhir, „/• n ■ , 
 
 l'.>nk to recover tle'ST,^ud tlV '' 1 ^ " 
 
 tain goods which, o win ' t r r"'' ^"^ "'"■• 
 and forfeiture, the „1 1 Tiff ^"■''t"'ns secure 
 
 The bank w,- s „';."' V'^'T ''""'''''"^■ 
 the goods, but a il .f '^'"'''' I"''^«'«si'>» of 
 H.emas a sec ri J i l "^ "''' ''"'"'•«°'l t" 
 
 !;KH"«waS; ■!,?:, ;'d:i;:::;;;i"i:;if'f'f 
 
 'lireetly to the plaintifls "*-"^' ''> "'^' '"'"k 
 nuist be rerrarded •.,'., "'V ■,"■•"'■" tion 
 
 pi^igees wifir;l::^;:nc , ie':^a : ^';' "^ 
 
 and not as a mere transfer ,f ft • P'^-'l^'or, 
 
 •"Mk under the bi 1 ,, m, ' ' "i'll' ''^ '^''' 
 Plaintiffswereentitle/to": C;e;'tie 'h "'" ^ 
 
 Teo-d-S"-x---£S<r^f ^' 
 
 thi?;: 1 o-^nthe:^!' ^''^^\""t«-ithstandin, 
 
 '•o should tai; alt t^^^U "^ " ^T"'"^'"" «"'" 
 
 i tied to have a j oo lifp ' *'? r''"''^'''' "'^^ ^'»ti- 
 
 ioonveyancJ-t^^H^i^jS^-y^i-^'-fore 
 
 "'•^ke any title to the nronerf ''■'"''' ""' 
 
 of the contnlct:^ I'«'-formance or rescission 
 
 Up;'"app,^ltothoCourtofApne..l. 
 Held, i,ei- ff,iL'artv' C i ,\ ''{"-'"• — 
 
 tl-at this 'condi f , • i',,^': • • '*•• '"'.'1 « W'-T, J. A., 
 
 of objection within th^t^ndteV'^^'Tr 
 , vendee to a.^eept a .kfeetive [;;';;,'"'' ^•""'l'^'' the 
 
 !c..n,lRi;!;'^::::i.S;f-;'V\-'J-A.. that the 
 
 '"Mited time, to .™c"p L ewlf,'"'' ^■i'^'"" the 
 "li-ht be able t., givel "'*- "' ""• "^''-'"''o'- 
 
 •Tmlgment ,f Street, ,J,, affirmed v 
 
 ■S'. C, 25 S. C. R.i"''^- -' -^' ^'- ^^-i- ••V«e 
 
 
 C/ark 
 
 •/ ', -- •^. U. K. y|0, aole 067. 
 
 SALE OF LAND. 
 
 I. CONTKACT OF SaLE, S77. 
 
 n. MoKTCAiiKiJ Land, 8S0. 
 
 III. U.VDER OUBER OF CorUT, SSO 
 
 i'""!^s free fro n incun "•'^'■'''"'g'' of certain 
 
 rates impose.l f,„. lo,-il "i n, ' '''' '""""tage 
 
 istruction of sewers bv l'"""*'^ ^""' ''■""■ 
 
 the contract, the icr iod f '' ''"'*'^ "'''"'■ 'o 
 
 l>acl not exp ,^d er, V '','"""'"= "^ ^^-'"^li 
 
 for the completio of tlu '"■'' ^'''^ '''^t'' fi-^^''' 
 work was .i'tu V ,0 c Tn:.' tl""'""-''^ T "''^ 
 actually made before he ,, t 'l^ '''"■"'''*"'•.<; 
 havingfirstiloiied,,. ,. 1 "'"''"t, the counc 1 
 ''.y-law to pa o/it unX: ■-'r\-*''^" '^"^^«' 'he 
 
 into existence nnoe H,,. J r?^ ^''olecame 
 
 Re 
 
 !• CoNTKACT OF Sale. 
 
 '>g^-t°^^^e^::r„^^-t-^''-.]--An 
 
 con.lition that " the ven 1 '■""' ^'""f'**""'! the 
 title .at his owa evnc„~ fV ^'^ "="^"''"'-' *''« 
 f'-"»i the date hereofor'thn'f '" "^'^'" ^'"' ''''^8 
 •'e deemed to 1 ave Idvo 1 nP'i' •''°''*''^' ''""' ^''--^H 
 "ot raised wit that time '"'^^"''""""^ *" *'"« 
 
 tl.e sale of la /"; .^d", '■'/■J-^ -^"tract for 
 tlie purchase oney i ,/T ''"• '''^>'"^'"* "^ 
 when half was . 7t le vend"''' '"^■•^'^"""ts ; 
 ""<! give the us I = , \ ''"' "''''^ '«> '••onvey 
 P"rcliaser 13 onavH^ "';'■•'' '-^"^''^"'ints ; the 
 contract. ^^ ^■^■'''' f''°'» the date of the 
 
 contrac"t:-°"*° ""''''•'''■ "'^talments under the 
 
 ..y^Si^S'i:^' ■l^'PT^'^-'f "'^« '™P--' 
 
 •.ecndoneQor k::hat "'f til' "''f' i'''""« 
 incumbrances to ir.l.'r' i ''^ contract, were 
 
 >'"t rates imj os d ,„ woH>T' ''^'/'"^^ ^■'^»''°--! 
 tract wore not so ff/r '^"'•' "^^*^'' "'« '=on- 
 

 : , ^ ;! 1^ 
 
 Hii 
 
 
 II «^' 
 
 ;::» 
 
 879 
 
 SCHOOL TRUSTEES. 
 
 88a 
 
 •20 (). R. l!in, foildwod. /,(•.< Krxli'Kiaxtiqtii'H de 
 St. Siilpici' 'Ic J.u>i/)-i'(i/ V. Cih/ of Moiifrrd/, IG 
 S. C. it. ;W!l, ilistinguislieil, 
 
 Hflil, also, that the ciovunaiit Uiv |)ayineiit of 
 thu insliiliiifciitsand tlii' covcuiint against iucuin- 
 l)ranccs, wen.' iiidepenik'nt ; and tlie veiuhjf was 
 entitled tii judgment for tlie instalniouts ; but 
 the pui'ehaser wa.s entitled to shew the exist- 
 eiiee of ineuinliiimees as an e(|nital)le ground of 
 relief, ami, the time for coin])letion of the con- 
 tract not havin arrived, to pay into Court so 
 nmch of his pmeiiiise niimey a.s might be necoa- 
 sary to protect him against the ineumbranees. 
 McDoiKi/il V. Mill-ray, 11 A. R. 1(11, and Ti^- 
 dalv V. J)al/(iti, 11 'C. ]'. "iofS distinguished. 
 Armslroni/ v. Atujcr, •_'] O. I!. OS. 
 
 Rescission — Tiicuiii!iraiic(s.] — W. bauglic pro- 
 perty at auction, signing on purchase a memo- 
 riiadum by which he agreed to pay ten per cent, 
 of the price down and theluilance ondelivc-ry of 
 the deed. The auctioneer's receij)t for tlie ten 
 per cent, sojiaid stated that the sale Mas on the 
 understanding tliat a good title in fee simple 
 clear of all incundjrances up to the tiist of the! 
 ensuing month wa.s to be given toW., otherwise 
 his deposit to he returned. After the date so 
 specitied W., not having been tendei'ed a deed 
 which he would acceiit, caused the vendor to be 
 notified that he consideied the sale off, and ' 
 <lemanded reiiaymenl of his deposit, in reply to 
 which the vend"'- wrote that all the auctioneer 
 had been instructed to sell was an eipiity of 
 redemi)tion in the projierty ; that W . was aware 
 that there was a mortgage on it and had ni; de 
 arrangements to assume it ; that a deed of the 
 equity of redemption had been tendered to W. ; 
 and that he was rccjuired to complete his pur- 
 chase. In an action against the vendor and 
 auctioneer for recovery of the amount deposited 
 by W. :- 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Supreme 
 Court of Nova ,Scotia, that the veiulor having 
 repudiated the agreement, W., being entitled 
 to a title in fee clear of incundnance, and not 
 bound to accept the equity of redemption, could 
 at once treat the contract as rescinded and sue 
 to recover his deijosit. Wrayton v. Xavlor, 24 
 S. C. R. 29.-). 
 
 Statvite of Frauds.]— An acceptance in writ- 
 ing by tlie owner of land of a written offer 
 therefor aildressed to him but unsigned by any 
 purchaser, and without any purchaser "being 
 named or in any v\ay described therein, is not a 
 sufficient menicjranduni to satisfy the Statute, 
 and does not become binding upon him when a 
 purchaser is subse{juently found who signs the 
 oflFer. 
 
 Per Osier, J. A. . dissent ing, that such an instru- 
 ment is a proposal to sell to any one who accepts 
 the oflfer. Mclnlosh v. JSIoynihan, 18 A. R. 237. 
 
 Statute of Frauds. ]— A contract for a share 
 in the proceeds of a mine when it should be 
 sold is not a contract for the sale of an interest 
 in land within the Statute of Frauds. Stuart 
 V. Mott, 23 S. C. R. 384. 
 
 Statute of Frauds — Sheriff.] — A sheriff, 
 selling lands as an assignee for creditors, under 
 R. S. O. ch. 124, cinnot, as when selling under 
 un execution, sign a memorandum winch will 
 bind a purchaser under the Statute of Frauds, 
 
 for he is not, as in the latter case, agent for 
 both vendor and (lurchaser. Mclnttm v. Fan- 
 h<rt, 2(i U. R. 427. 
 
 II. M0ET(i.*(iKD La.ND. 
 
 Sr.e Moii''<!A(iK. 
 
 Ill, Undkk OiiDJiR OF Court. 
 
 Sale by lenAov— Procedure— Time.]— 'Uu; 
 words -'peremptory" or "peremptorily" ilo 
 not always mean "absolutely linul," then- 
 being a discretion in the Court, under spcciid 
 and urgent circumstances, whether they sliall 
 have tluit nujaning or not. 
 
 A sale b> tender (n(jt .saying that the pro- 
 perty will 1)6 sold to the highest bidder) is a 
 mere attempt to ascertain w-liether an oti'er can 
 be obtained within such a margin as the sellei 
 is willing to adoi)t. 
 
 In winding-up proceedings of a joint stock 
 cfiiipany, tenders were advertised for the pui - 
 cliase of the company's property, to be receiveil 
 by a certain time, when the sale was to li- 
 '- peremptorily closed."" At the time ti.xed one 
 tender only had been received, and the refciee 
 enlarged the time for the arrival of a train 
 wiiicli was late. Two more tenders were 
 received l)y that train ; one on behalf of the 
 largest beneficiary unde; the mortgage to en- 
 force which the sale was being held, .iml tin- 
 other by a stranger, mIucIi was a little liiglier 
 than that of the beneficHary. The latter then 
 by his agent handeil in :nuch higher tender, 
 whereupon the referee - . c.ucted notice of the 
 last tender to bo given Jie other tenderers, 
 aiicl on a subsccjuent ,<\y accepted the last, 
 which was the highest tender : — 
 
 Held, tliat he was justified in so doing, lie 
 Al(je.r and Sarnhi ViiCo., 21 (). R. 140. Atlinir 
 ed, 19 A. R. 440. 
 
 See Infant, II. 
 
 SALVAGE. 
 
 See Shii', V. 
 
 SOALa OF COSTS. 
 
 See Co.ST.s, V "^ 
 
 SCHOOL SE-'^^OI'iS. 
 
 See Public Schools. 
 
 SCHOOL TRUSTEES. 
 
 See Public Schools. 
 
880 
 
 11 ilie lattLT case, agent for 
 iclia-^er, Mclnttjri v. Fan- 
 
 kt(;a(iki> Land. 
 Mok'i'()A(;k. 
 
 i OiiiiKR OF Court. 
 
 — Procedure — Tmc.]— Tliu 
 y" or " peremi)torlly '' do 
 "nlisoliittly tinul," thiTr 
 in tlie Court, under .special 
 stances, whether they shall 
 >r not. 
 
 ■ (not saying that the ])i(] 
 to the hifjhest bidder) is a 
 ertaiii whether an otter can 
 such a margin as the sellei 
 
 •oneediogs of a joint stock 
 ere advertised for tlie pui • 
 y's property, to be reeeiveil 
 
 when the sale was to l,- 
 d." At the time ti.xed one 
 .ni received, and the refeiti- 
 for the arrival of a train 
 
 Two more tenders were 
 ain ; one on behalf of the 
 iinde; the mortgage to en- 
 e was being held, and the 
 
 which was a little higher 
 leliiHary. The latter tlun 
 
 in :nuch higher tender. 
 ree ' . c.ucted notice of the 
 ven ;he other tenderers, 
 nt ,ay accepted the last. 
 !St tender : — 
 
 3 justified in so doint;. Re 
 Co., -11 O. i! 140. Athrm- 
 
 NFANT, II. 
 
 LVAGE. 
 Shu-, V. 
 
 881 
 
 ! OF COSTS. 
 
 ^OST.S, I^T 
 
 . SE-'P'OlSiS. 
 
 IMC Schools. 
 
 TRUSTEES- 
 
 Lie Schools. 
 
 SCIRE FACIAS AND REVIVOR. 
 
 S,:e COMI'ANV, HI., V'l. 
 
 lAWoHo^"'/'^'",*."^ ""''^^ Judgment - 
 --Attei jndginent pronounced by the Court 
 ..pon default of de^.nco the pi .intilf died an 
 
 •set aside and be let in tu .lefead, issued i 
 pr,,-,i,,e order nn ler Kule 022 re iW,, i,"' 
 ;i^u,n^m the name of the executor of the pl:i 
 
 IJpoii nu.Hon to set this order asi.le :- \ 
 
 Ht-1. , that Itule (i2.' should be r.a.l asappli- \ 
 
 bcS-.^:^4.rL":s'-t^':^/"''^'""'"'h' 
 th3def.niant houidi;:,i::^do:^:;:;{;Si 
 
 'vv.. V. Gmnt 4 C. P. \). 40, foUowel ' ' 
 
 After the death of the piaintilf, an I b .fore 
 he order of revivor, the solicitor who had acted 
 (...■ her issued a writ of h ..•.. fa-. ;>.., , pV, tli 
 ludgment without the leave required by kul; 
 
 llel.l, that tJie writ was irregular ; an.l it 
 was competent for the party alf^etcl b t i 
 Hpply to set .^ aside without- hr.t ■•eviv „ the 
 a.tion. Vhamh,-r. v. KiMm,, Hi 1'. K°-n^i 
 Alhrmed, 17 R It. .3. "^ • rt. _ij. 
 
 SEAL FISHERY. 
 
 ^^•ho can, :n case of his deatii pMdnile. lite on 
 entering a suggestion of the death and obtainb . 
 an order of revivor, continue the action. Mas^ 
 V. Join, 0/ P,lu-h,m,m,h, 20 A. R. 683. 
 
 [ am '■,oH"""f ';^- ';i™t"'"''t was brought b^ 
 foV ; I ^ ^'-"Z ''■"'' ^''■^'" »'"1 the case centered 
 toi trial for l,,th ( »ctol,er foll,nvin.< The trill 
 
 and his motion bein-' dismisse.l ,',, •:" 
 
 L,i».,,ur,;!.,'t;r;:i;;;,r;i;i;";r;:! 
 
 iiie pumtifts dauglitor, .after his death tl.,. 
 Held, that the action coul.l not bo revive I or 
 
 anythTTV."'''i"' ""'^' '^ *'^'«n "^^^ the trial, 
 
 -Wf 1 °I.r^!""^' ^^"'iente Llto-7'o.V 
 
 «o^v rvi ts o the'' V ■' ';'J"'->'r° t'"^ '>'='-^"» 
 arvues to the executor of the plaintiflF, 
 
 .50 
 
 W.IS p<.stprmel and o ' . V °r ^"^ *""' 
 
 ^tiiei'uid toL'Tlns^iri;;^ ::::7«^i7-^i 
 
 phnti'iV'ln,^';-^' '''"• '• -"4'aVthe 
 
 le. Ll, rn '''"'"■^',' ''^"-' '"' "-•P'"-'e order 
 
 rom the ^ r "■■'' "''^""^■'' ''V tl'« Plaintitf 
 
 ,/•?"' '•«g"^f'"-. 'V.vivingthe aition ir. 
 
 olid, d the df' S'"^" l'l'","tiirs s.;- itors had 
 
 fr. , t. ition of reviving the action, and they 
 :g \e iiolice ot trial for the ensuii w assizes 
 
 ' ^^'onThe ;;;."■" ^--i. '-'--- ^^s^ 
 
 • on ev i '" ''';^'"""-^ ^i'""'t'"--^ refraining 
 
 lefendin. ^ ■ '-'"^ "'''^^f'l'ug to trial, tht 
 
 etend, nt s solicitors \/ould abide by the result 
 
 o another named suit, and if that result should 
 
 n. /iV "'■ °^ '''" Pl^KitiH; an o.-.ier of revivor 
 
 ' ^:'S:^i-;s-'/-&KsS 
 
 ' he";tatutc'' V' r ""^^^ '■'«'"« being baVredbJ 
 « n„M 1 ^>mitat.oas, no order of revivor 
 
 ! so bVi on f \ \ "''^ ■^."'■•'-''"ent made by the 
 ; the d'ent!- ° '° ^'^"'^^ ''' ^^" "'J^'««°« ^ 
 . Held, by the Court of Appeal, alKrmins the 
 !ju.lgment of Gait, C.J., dischai'gingte order 
 I of renvor, that_ the action was' gterned by 
 I soon' ., , ' "' ' '""* "'"t 't '^*'»e to an end ai^ 
 
 Mmaukuj, 22 0. R. ;J10, 2il A. R. 421. 
 
 meotment -Com-pyance P,;id,;Ue Liu "k 
 
 SlS?;c'f'R'"r' /?^'^ ^'''^^"•'»^-t- 
 relUe to t ^p • ^"''? '^-'^' •*-'• '"'d 6^^). which 
 ruatt to the transmission of interest pendente. 
 
 c ta e or it 1, '"'"""''' '" r' "l^"" ^^'»'"» thi 
 cs te or title has coine or devolved, are appli- 
 
 the v.. wl' ''"'r "f eiectnunt begun before 
 t eAcL.when the conveyiuic. of the land bv 
 
 fe,"!tfn'' .?''""'■«■ ;"'l -^ take place Itil 
 ■ift^ei Its passing. L-chi, v. Jiacaulay, 16 P. IJ. 
 
 SEAL. 
 See CoMPANv IV.-MuN,r,PA,. Cohporations, 
 
 ' 'H-— Pl'BLIC S1JHOOL.S, II. 
 
 SEAL FISHERY. 
 
 See Ship, VI. 
 
883 
 
 SESSIONS. 
 
 884 
 
 
 W^^^ 
 
 ^iiAMENS WAGES. 
 
 Sep KXC'IIEI^IKR CoKUT, I. 
 
 SEARCH. 
 
 See Lnthxicatixc I.iQtKms, III. 
 
 SEARCH WARRANT. 
 
 See I.NToxii Ai'iNi: Lk.hoh.'-, ill. 
 
 SECURITY FOR COSTS. 
 
 i'le C'lisT.-*, I\ . 
 
 SEiUTOnON. 
 
 Action by Mother -.)/' V- I'd' ';/' Fn/lnr.] — 
 Held, on (k-miiner to , j',J\;ivn.nt of cliiiin in an 
 action of seihRtJou, tlu.r, t',\u luothei of tho girl 
 seduced, suiiia; as h< v ■.listressi, \vu] a sutticit-nt 
 common law liglit to luing the action, in the 
 absence froiii tiie I'rov in»,e of the -^rVn father :— 
 
 Held, also, that LI. s. O. 1887 oh. .58, "An 
 Act re!ipecting tiie Action of Seduction," is only 
 anenublipt; Act, enlarjiing the right to maintain 
 the actio ;. umlcr ciixHinistances which would 
 not be suriiuient at common law. Ooiild v 
 Erskine, 20 O. U. .S-17. 
 
 ^ Action by Mother— An/// of Father ajur 
 Seduiiion.]—ln an action, after the iltatli of 
 the father, by the mother for the seduction of I 
 her daughter in tiie lifetime of the father, who ! 
 '..as an invalid sufiportod by tho mother and i 
 daughter, no evidence of the actual relation- I 
 ship of mistress and servant was given :— | 
 
 Held, that the action was not maintainable. ' 
 Entner v. JJewn cv As, 24 O. R. 407. i 
 
 i 
 Action for Connection by Wovce— Pre rions i 
 Acquittal for Rnjw— A m<h<hunt.]— In an action 
 for enticing away and having carnal knowledge ! 
 of the plaintifi's daughter, the plaintiff' was 1 
 allowed at the close of the case to amend by ' 
 setting np, as an alternative cause of action, ! 
 the enticing ,iway of the daughter and having I 
 connection with liy force and against her willi' ' 
 and conse(juent loss of service. No application ' 
 vas made by the defendants to put in further 
 evidence, nor was any si;ggestion made that 
 they were in any way prtjimiced by the amend- 
 ment : — 
 
 Held, that the amendment was pronerlv 
 allowed:— "^ ^ ' 
 
 Held, also, that the fact 
 having been jireviously acrji. 
 ment for rape on the' pla'. 
 not a bar to the action. C 
 I!. 279. 
 
 [iroved by her own evidtme. Kinnn v. KVv, 
 2 (). H. Kid, considered. Miil/iaini v. Tliomp. 
 xuii, 2;!<). I!. 54. 
 
 Action I'li-Hriilnrx—, E.^'i,iiiii<itU„i.] — Tl,, 
 plaintiir in an action of ii-MUctLoi tvas exaioiiiiMl 
 f()r discovery by tlic defciidiiul, !mt ivaa a'l.e t., 
 give very little iiiforniatici :- 
 
 Held, nevertheless, thii; the defeiidant w,i,- 
 
 not eiit'lleil to examine t'l;' | lii^ntiirs dar,,. iit' i , 
 
 '!'l\e dcfendai.i. having ii. uloan ifridavit deny 
 
 ing thi! seductio!! and all knowledge of it, ;'ie 
 
 I order was made f.>i particui.u-; of speciti(.' an-, 
 
 I with re,i,'ard to whidi Hic |)laiiitilf' proposed i. ' 
 
 Igivo ..xiil-.-i'CP. Tin-nn- v. Ki/I,-, 2C. L. 'i'. .'i!!,- 
 
 18 ('. L. ,i 402, e.xpjaiiied. //. /Ii^t(rv. AiinnU' 
 
 114 !'. I,, n. 
 
 { 
 
 ' Action /'rtWr7(/ar..l- Where the defemhe- 
 in an ai-tioa of S'duc'ion deni's Hie scduetio', 
 on oatli. the ]>lai' tiff will l„. ref|Uired to f'.riiis! 
 
 ipartienlais of the tin e.- and pi 'is at whiel\ it 
 
 ! is charged that the ulhr.-.d se-hu t.ou took [da.v. 
 
 JloUi-^ln- V. Aviiiii.li-, 14 P. 1;. II, approved 
 Ma-^oit V. VitiiCiiini,, 14 I'. R. 2n(i. 
 
 Action— /Ver(,/;,/,y.] — 9,, 
 
 '. R. 4, anir 797. 
 
 -Dd/i/ V. Hyriii 
 
 Sff C'RfMrNAi, Law, 
 
 AUMIXISTKArOltS, VI. 
 
 IV. — i'l.MX-UTOliS 
 
 SEPARATE ESTATE. 
 
 .SV«! Bankkui'tcv and InSi/LVKNCV, I.— Ho.s 
 liA.vi) and VVike— I'aktnershii', IV. 
 
 SEPARATE SCHOOLS. 
 
 >SVe Pl'ulic Schools. 
 
 SERVICE. 
 
 See Practick, XVI. 
 
 "f the defendants 
 
 < d on an indict- 
 
 danghter was 
 
 ' . . HidMe, 20 O. 
 
 SESSIONS. 
 
 Appeal to — Cos'/.i — Certiorari,] — Wiicrc an 
 appeal to tho Sessions is dismissed witlioiit 
 being heard and determined on the merits, 
 there is no power to impose costs. A'c- Mmldm, 
 31 U. C. R. 3,S:?, follow. 
 
 is given for the 
 I i- 1 is not heard on 
 ■ ^rtiorari is not taken 
 '. eh. 178. Jx'eijiiirt. \: 
 
 Action — Seduction of Marvin!. Wovimi /u'i- 
 
 (Ueiice.}-ln an action" for the seduction of a 
 married woman the non-access of her husband, 
 and her seduction by the defendant, may be 
 
 ^^'hen a notice of 
 wrong sessions, and th 
 the merits, the right ■ 
 away by sec. , , ^ 
 liichr, 20 0. P ., 
 
 Appeal to — .S( ■? 
 Uecdth Act.]—\\\,i;' 
 an offcijcc under '.'■ .' i- 
 dule to the Public Hei/ 
 as distinguished from 
 the Act itself, an app-. 
 
 nry Conrirlii'ii — Pu'ulk 
 iicre is a conviction for 
 . 1. . ■ set out ill the Bciic- 
 ■■ ■•..., R. S. O.ch.20p, 
 J )t the provisions in 
 '■I'' lie from such con- 
 
884 
 
 1 evidenrc. h'miis v. IVn'f, 
 durt'il. Mii/Zli/dii V. Thomp. 
 
 ii/nrx — . E.I'll 'niiiiithiii J — Tli, 
 11 f'f "■•iiiL'tlon rt'iii pxaiiiiiicil 
 e (Ic't'iiuliiuf, (int was ii.'i.o u> 
 T'liiiitiii'i :— . 
 
 ss, thiii the tlefendimt^ wa.s 
 lino t'lr y In'.ntitrs il.ar,,.,ht' i. 
 viliy K. iiio an iiiid.ivifc deny 
 lUld ;ill !;iw)\vlt'd^'(' (if it, ;i|i 
 ))iii'ti(nii.i.' ; rif sijocitii- ,irt>, 
 cdi tlio idaintilf proiiosi'd \,: 
 •ii^r V. h'i//r, 2 (.'. L. 'I'. -,!1,<, 
 laiiied. //. /liitivv. Animhh. 
 
 'ar-. ] - Wlieie tin- dcfi iid.i!' 
 K'tidii deiii's .'ii!' Ki'dui-tio'i 
 T wdi l,e reiiuired t" f'.nsisi 
 ill <■-. and p). < ik at wliif)\ it 
 ill<".'>'il Mixhu lioa took iilarc. 
 A', 14 J>. li. 11, aiinrovdl 
 , 14 I'. R. •_';)(). 
 
 /.] — Sic Daly v. llyriip, 1,' 
 
 \ W , I \'. — ]■; X i;0 (JTO lis \ M , 
 I. 
 
 ^.TE ESTATE. 
 
 ND InSi.LVKNCY, I. — Hlls 
 
 E— Vautxkrshii', IV. 
 
 885 
 
 SHERIFF. 
 
 .TE SCHOOLS. 
 
 ILIC Sciiooi.s. 
 
 IRVICE. 
 a<:tick, XVI. 
 
 3SI0NS. 
 
 ' — Ce.rliorin-i.] — Wjicro an 
 oils is dismissed witlioiit 
 jtermiiied on tlie iiiorits, 
 imr-iSf costs. Jtf: MmUkn, 
 
 I ■<■ is givL'ii for the 
 
 th(. .., i. 1 is not heard on 
 
 '■ • :rtiorarl is not taiieii 
 
 '. ch, ITS. Reijiint v. 
 
 piry Coni-kt'h'n — PuUk 
 V ihcro is a conviction fm 
 ti\ -1. . " tiet out in lliu ai in.-- 
 ju'ha Aci, R. S. O.ch.20n, 
 1 »>v .)f the provisions in 
 K'"i. A il' lie from sucli oou- 
 
 Ih*'' «!,!". '.'"' ^"'""''""; ""t^^'ithstanding sec. 
 Reversed on diflVrent gn.undx, -j; (). R. isi, 
 
 OtAbt hy - Ahnleini-nt of XuUnnn —C,v 
 The Ce ;"'V^ ''■''•■ '•'■f""''""' was convict 1 
 nuisance m olistiiictiiiL' the lii.-liu.v l,v tl„ 
 
 «i,r:'",'';l!„3;:~" ■■"-""■■ »"' ••< «•" 
 
 Held tliat the .Sessions ha,l no authoHi v tn 
 make the order ,o the siicritf, the p«^^ , ode 
 
 miulo that tlie order, being a judicial act wi, 
 properly removed i,y ci-monni an ,,, ;tT^ 
 quashed, Imt without costs mn.^t Ue 
 
 asShe cosTs '" /!"■ J"''''"'''^'t'"°» "f tf>e Sessions ' 
 as to tlie costs. /,V:,iiia v. f/cocfv, •_>;{ o. R. 90 j 
 
 886 
 
 SHEEP. 
 
 Sen Citi.MiKAL Law, II. 
 
 SETOFF. 
 
 Against Crown. ]-,S\f Th, i,>n,ai y 
 head, 1 Rx. C. R. VM, ante ^iq. 
 
 White- 
 
 »tio„to.aelaii,i dne to th;'';,!;inul?al 1.',' rnt' 
 
 Sr:;;±!'ir^^i'^''-'^'H-ftheaS 
 
 whom the 
 Uui-y V. M 
 
 Qlv ng of Sheep to Double" _ Coutrni't 
 
 ~!^(i,h,l. 0, ■,;,wh.]-'l]w .Statute of FnunN 
 does not apply to a contract which has I.een 
 entire y excuUe.l on one si,U. within the year 
 from the makin^c so as to p,.ev..Mt an aeli,,, 
 I'eing hroiight for tlie non-perforniance o„ ,|,„ 
 other siih'. 
 
 And, therefore, where tlie plaintiir .lelivered 
 
 i^heep,„ the deleiidant wit Inn a year from the 
 
 laking ot a vcrha contract uith the defendant 
 
 nider whi,.li the latter was to deliver donble 
 
 he luimher t.. the plaintiff at the expiration of 
 
 tliree years : — 
 
 Held, that the contract was not within the 
 statute. rnm/,/i v. I.aiiht,:,-, :.>.-,(). j;. 10!). 
 
 Protection of Sheep Act - . I, ■/,„,/ _ /Vo- 
 '•"/»!■<-.]- 1 he right of action yiven by R S O 
 
 dogs, is to he iir<,.se,.„t,,.d with the nsual pro- 
 ccdnrc of the appropriate forum. If, therefore 
 an action bo properly brought in the Cuntv 
 
 it IS .so tried, they, and not the .hidiic, should 
 apportion the damages, if an apportion nent be 
 n^iH-ircd. l-ox V. ll'////,,,,,.,.,,,, /., ^ , "o f "^ 
 
 SHELLEY'S CASE. 
 
 Si'i- lOsTATi:. 
 
 SHERIFF. 
 
 <> sul.sc(,uent to the date of the action' 
 
 lie who IS not a party thereto, and for .,„'^''f ^P'''^'^^ Debtor-/',v,y;pr^» 
 e plaintiff IS alleged to be a y.v^^'to r^'",';ii/."-^°"-/^'-''''''V/ U, Shlnfi 
 Murmy, 24 ,S. V. \\. 77. ' "°"'' I v. II xlhaim, l(i |>. R. 4:i, ant,- 1 
 
 h\ IlainU oj 
 -See liuntin 
 
 .S'epBANKRi;p'rcYA\Dl.ssor.vi.:.Ncv,j._]j^;.^|.j. ! Action Against 
 
 VI.-Co.sTs, II., v., VI 
 wo, III. 
 
 -.Jllx.MKNT— RlKAI)- 
 
 SETTLED ESTATES ACT 
 
 K;^.sh SettJ.1 P^tates Jt of ^"^ ^ 
 
 wen recogni/cd method or usa"c of frimin,' 
 building leases in a given localitv r-. ''"""= 
 statute and CS ^'ict. c 1 14 /( ^tl, "' "'"^ 
 
 SETTLEMENT OF ACTION. 
 
 *'■ ACTTON, IV.-COSTS, V.-^ JAL, IV. 
 
 SHARES. 
 
 See Co.Mi'A.vv. 
 
 6e. /;, re < 0,1 1, 1 v. Hop., o| o. I;. i'J, -20 X 
 
 Action Against - Malido,,. Prnyecntion- 
 I.inhibiy for A.I.., of nnUiil-] ' '"Y'<^" "">— 
 
 Action Against - 7Ve .;>„.« . _ Jii.iinrnthn 
 L>iiirh^cieu„on.]-ln an action bv A.,' i at- 
 nod woman, against a sheriff for takii,.:, u dor 
 a 1 execntion ag^ainst her husbaml, goo.hs w lid 
 .she claimed as her separate propertv undei the 
 Married \\on,an-s Property Act, R S N S 
 ..th .scr., ch. 94, the shcriff^justit^ed md;,.' the 
 execution without proviu.' the iud o enf r^,^ 
 
 , whM.it was iss,..,.'T,ioexei.i!'S:S.^ 
 I Uoiiald A., an.l it was alleged that the hus 
 I hand s name was Daniel. The jury fot d that 
 
 ^ A WhtloH''"^'"^ '•'''' "^■-'^- -'iK 
 A s light to the goods seized was acouired from 
 
 mciko It her separate property under the Act :- 
 
 hel"w ;i';7tT'"^V'''" '"'i'?""^"' ^'f '■'« t'ourt 
 thir V in f "" '""''' ""^ I'e maintained; 
 that a .ho.ili sued .„ trespass or trover for tak- 
 ing goods seized under kecution can jLt fy 
 "nder the execution without shewing tliiS! 
 McLean v. Hmmon, S S. C. R. 706 
 
 j ment : . 
 I followed 
 
 .... .. i,,^iutuii, ,5 ,■>. (^;. j^ jQ(j 
 
 and that under the findings of the 
 
i 
 
 887 
 
 SHIP. 
 
 jury, wliicli wfio amply supported l,y the evi- ! Return — Wilhlrao-.tl — AllarhmnitA — A 
 
 (leiieo, tlie f,'(io(ls Kc-iz.d niuHt, l)e coMsidercd to slKMilfs rcuirii to a writ of //. /;,. mods w-t 
 
 belong to the liiisluiiid, which was a eoniplete forth that he was iiotilud tha't the amount ,f 
 
 answer to the action. Cnwe v. Ailnm.,, 21 S. the judgment to be .^vcciited had been attaehcl 
 
 ^- '^- ■^'*'- 'ly a judgment creditor of the execution crcdi 
 
 , , , „ , , tor, and that the execution delitor (the yar- 
 
 ,.,'^^f'S»\e^°»' Of editors -.Sa/*; of Land- nishee) had tlicreupon satislied tlie clam, 
 
 SlaUil, oj l'nu,<l,.\-\ jshcntr, selling lands as of the garnishor. Ju fact there was only an 
 
 issiguee for creililois, under R. S. U. cli. \-H, ■■ ' ' " ' ' 
 
 order to attach and a summons to pay over, 
 but no oi'dcr alisolute : — 
 
 Held, that tile return was insutfieient in sul). 
 
 stance, !■■ I'aiise itsliewed that tlie writ remained 
 
 unexecuted A\ith()Ut legal excuse ; a garniahue 
 
 order alwolute would have operated as a stay of 
 
 _ , , ,,., , I execution, but not so the attaching order anil 
 
 Pounda8re.]-Uheregood.sscizedbyashciitFi.suninions: the dutv of the garni.sliee was K. 
 
 un.lerexecuti.Mi.aiid sold under an inlerplea- pay the .sheriir, advising him at the same tim.. 
 
 .ieronler. were a tervyaids found to be l lie goods of the existence of the attaching order, and this 
 
 ot the claimant therein and not ot the execution would have leen cfiuivaleiit U 
 
 ell 
 cannot, as when selling under nn exccuticm. 
 sign a nieinoraiidiiiii which will bind a inirchascr 
 under the Statute of Frauds, for he is not, as in 
 the latter ease, agent for both vendor and pur- 
 ■' Mcliili/ntw Fanhii-t.-ltiO. II. 4l.'7. 
 
 eliaser. 
 
 defendant 
 
 _ Held, that the sheritr was not entitled under 
 Rule I'i.'i.'i to an allowance in lieu of poundage 
 in respect of the goods sei/.ed. Ttinur v 
 CrozUr, 14 P. R. 272. 
 
 Poundage.]— A sherilT is 
 Jioundage under a w rit of //'./'k, 
 has been a sale under the writ. 
 v. CamplicU, ;!2(:. 1'. 170, followed, 
 Lukt Siijxrtor Mimnil Co., 14 V, R 
 now Con. Rule l.'Co. 
 
 not entitled to 
 lands until there 
 Ml rchaii/.t' Ijimlc 
 
 Ffdicli V. 
 
 .-)41. S<( 
 
 a payment into 
 
 Court. 
 
 Where purchasers are not in question, tlie 
 issue of a writ of execution gi\ es a specific claim 
 to the goods of a judgment debtor, which re- 
 mains till satisfaction of the debt ; and, there- 
 fore, the withdrawal of the sherid' did nut 
 preclude fuither action upon the writ, dmw 
 V. I'm mil II, 14 P. R, .'i.SO. 
 
 Venditioni Exponas— O/v/o-.]— A petition 
 (« nuUilr ill- ili'cri/ has the same effect as an 
 opposition to a sei/.uie, and under Arts. 0f)2anil 
 Mhi, C. C. P., a sherifl' cannot proceed to the 
 sale of projierty under a writ of vendiliom 
 ixpona-f, unless such writ is issued hy an 
 order of the Court or a Judge. Jiixsonnelte v. 
 Laiiixiil, 15 Rev, Leg. 44, approved. Tasehereau 
 and Gwynne, .T.T., dissenting. Lefmntun v 
 Vilroniiiun, 22 8. C. R. 20.'{. 
 
 Ste KXF/'CTION— Intkkplkadkr. 
 
 Poundage. ]— A sherill inade ,. seizure under a 
 /.,''(. against the goods of the deleiidants, but, 
 learning that they were about to appeal, of his 
 own motion, and for the purpose of saving 
 exjieiise to the jiarties, withdrew his officer in 
 possession, and, the apjieal having been subse- 
 quently brought, the exteution wa.- superseded. 
 The appeal was disini,ssed, and the juditment 
 debt and costs were afterwards settled by 
 arrangement between the parties : — 
 
 Held, that the sherifl' had not sn withdrawn 
 from the seizure as to disentitle him to )i(mud- 
 age m- an allowance in lieu thereof, and that, 
 notwithstanding the superseding of the execu- 
 tion, he was entitled under Rule 1233 to such 
 allowance— the words "from .some other cause '' 
 Jn that Rule being wiile enough to cover the case. 
 BrorL-nUi' and {)lla>i-a 11. W. Co. v, Canada 
 Cminil 1!. ir, Co., 7 P, R, .S72, and Mnrrixou 
 v.Taiil'.i; P, R, .•JiMl, apjiroved and followed. 
 
 'J'he Court M ill not interfere with the discre- 
 tion exercised by the Master in fixing the 
 amount of the allowance. Weenar v. Grand \ 
 Trunk li. W. Co., IG P. R, 371. \ 
 
 Poundage— Co.-Zv,] — Where an interpleader j 
 issue, ordered u)jon the application of a sheriff I 
 who had .seized certain goods under the direc- 
 tion of the execuliiui creditors, was determined 
 as to part of the goods in favour of the claimant 
 and as to the remainder in favour of the execu- 
 tion creditors, and no costs of the issue were 
 given to either party to it : — 
 
 Held, that the execution creditors should pay 
 the sheriff his fees and poundage on the value of 
 
 the part of the goods they were found entitled ...,,, ,j „ „.,^ „„. 
 
 to, and his costs of the mterpleader ,a,.phcation of' Pith August, 1891. a collision occun 
 and of a subsequent aiiidication to dispose of the I between the plaintiffs' vessel, lying moored 
 costs etc.; and that the execution eieditors a .dock in Windsor, Ontario, ,uul a haiKe 
 
 should have an order over against the claimant ' " ' '" 
 
 for one-half of such costs. Ontario Silrer Co. 
 V. Taifker, 15 P. R. 180. 
 
 SHIP. 
 
 1. Collision, 888. 
 
 II. DKMURRAdE, 892. 
 
 III. Master, 892. 
 OWXER.S, 893. 
 Salva(;e, 893. 
 Seal Fisheky, 897. 
 Seamen's Wage.s, 898. 
 TowAdE, 898. 
 
 I. Collisio.v, 
 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 Burden of Proof —Admimon -- Evidenee- 
 Xe<fli:/(-iici-.— Cost of Snmtj — Notice— Demw- 
 ,•„;/(,]— During the early hours of the inoming 
 
 ollision occurred 
 
 to 
 
 ill 
 
 tow of a tug. The defendants in their pleadings 
 
 admitted the collision, but claimed that the 
 
 plaintiffs' vessel was in fault, since there was 
 
SHIP. 
 
 ('■'(/ — A//(ichment.] — A 
 writ (if ,/('. /(/. i^'oods mt 
 iliid that thu iimount if 
 t'ciitud liiul been attacheil 
 I- (if the execution crcdj. 
 ;uiiti(in ilolitor (the gar 
 ion tiitisliiMl the claim 
 fact there was only an 
 , smnnions to pay over, 
 
 n was insufficient in sub 
 L'd that tlic writ remained 
 ■1,'al exiusf ; a garnishee 
 iivu operateil as a stay ef 
 the attaehiiif,' order ami 
 )f the j,'arnisiiee was to 
 ig him at the same timi' 
 attaching order, and this 
 valeiit to a payment into 
 
 xre not in (|ue8tion, tlit 
 tioii gixi's a Hpecifio claim 
 [iniiit delitor, which re- 
 3f the (lelit ; and, there- 
 of the siicrifl' did mjf 
 1 upon the writ, (,'eniii 
 30. 
 
 as — 0/v /()•.]— A petition 
 s the same eflfect as an 
 
 and under Arts. GfiUand 
 fi' cannot proceed to the 
 er a writ of raidiliom 
 
 writ is issued by an 
 a Judge. JiUtonnette v, 
 1, ajjproved. Taschereau 
 sscnting. Le/euniun v. 
 
 203. 
 
 — IS'TKRI'I.KADKR. 
 
 [IP. 
 
 97. 
 5, 898. 
 
 LISION". 
 
 AdmUnion — Evidtixet- 
 urre;/ — Notice — Demur- 
 y hours of the niomiiig 
 , a collision ocourwn 
 vessel, lying moored to 
 'ntario, and a barge ui 
 idants in their pleadings 
 but claimed that the 
 I fault, since there was 
 
 Lu light on boar.l au.l no stern line out, in eon- 
 
 into the stream as the tug and its tow were 
 passing at a rea.sr,nable .listance away from her, 
 and hat the collision was occasioned tlierebv. 
 begin---'"'" ' 'H'l-stion as to wlio sliou'l.l 
 
 Jfeld that the defendanls having admitted 
 hat tlunr%essels wcie moving an,!' the plain- 
 t.fts vessel was at res,, and tliat a coUisio , had 
 oceurre.l they must beuin on the question of 
 liablhty for the acehUnt, with a right to reply 
 on the ijuestion of the amount of .kmace if it 
 were necessary to go into tliat .piestion :-' 
 
 Held, also, that it was necessary for the 
 .lefendants to e.tal,li-i, such negli.enee auai . t 
 the paint.tls as would coia.il.utelo-^the acenle t 
 and that, as it was about .laylight at tl,e time 
 It. occurrence, and the plaintitls' vessel was 
 adm. telly seen by the tug nhen more tl "n 
 one hundred feet distant, the tow bein.V ^ 
 the time three iiundred feet behind thelu. 
 
 the plaintitts vessel was proiierly and seciuelv 
 moored to the dock, tin/ alienee of li.h d 'l 
 not constitute such negligence on thel,art o 
 
 he pla.ntifls as contributed to the accident. 
 They were, therefore, entitled to recover f o • 
 
 he damage arising from the negligent naviga- 
 tion of the tug an, her tow, to thT. amount' f 
 the actual cost of the repairs and also the cm 
 of towage to the ship-yaid. 
 
 (2.) A survey of the damage .lone to their 
 vessel was made at the plaintitls' iustanc- 
 Notice of intention to have a survey made was 
 only given t.. one of the defendants, and tlia 
 
 y mailing a letter to his address on the d v 
 tefore the survey was made. Notice „f the 
 
 Tnt:- ""'''^ '"" °''"" ^" ^'»-' ''^•'^•'' 
 
 Held that the cost of the survey was not 
 ohargeable to the defendants, because re.uslln 
 ible notice was not given to enable them to l,e 
 present or to be represented thereat •-- 
 
 Held, also, that demurrage should „at 1„. 
 .flowed, inasmuch as the vessel was Kii„. idl« 
 at the tune of the collision, ami that as soon as 
 the i.laintifls obtained a commission for her the 
 vessel went to work, although repairs were not 
 then con.pleted-no loss of "earn/ngs occurring 
 hy reason of the accident. Cluuilo,, v. 77,?. 
 i.olorado and Uyron Trerh-e, ,3 Kx. ('. R. ._>(;;j 
 
 890 
 
 10 of the Navigation Act, It. S. C. oh 79 
 "l.creaeolisiunoecnrs, tl-.e ship ii-glectin./to 
 
 assist IS to be deemed t. ime I'or t^eo lili. 
 
 in the absence ot a reasonable e.xeu.se Tw< 
 steamship.., the ( '. and the ./., weie ieavin 
 
 I-^ togetlier in broad dayligl,t,\„,d':e!dM;oC 
 ocuiired between them. The ,7. reeeive.l sue 
 "Uuryasto be rende,e,l helples.s. T e ' I i 
 |.';as.,.t, or Oder to assist, ihe.lis,dd^i;i 
 
 loiwaidhythe master of tlie C. was tint the 
 ^.a.d not whistle for assistance, ah,,! o 
 evi. ence shewed that he must have i eeiw wa e 
 the serious character o, thedamag. sust.di ed 
 '> liei. Ho further atten,pted to justify his 
 ta.lure to a.ssist by the fact that othe • Ihh , 
 were not far off; bnt it was shewn Da Dee 
 ship.s were at anchor and idle ;- 
 
 Held that tlie circnm.staiiees .lisclo.sed m. 
 lea.sooab e excuse tur failuie to assist ,m tl le 
 I'ar, ot the C. ami that the conse,,uJ iite, f it 
 eoliismu were due to lier .lefault : - - 
 
 Alt. Itjof .sec. :.'ot the -Navigation Act for not 
 keeping out of the way of the J., the lat e 
 being on the starboard side of the 6 wl ile hev 
 w.re crossing. AVj,,,.^ ,„„; Xannilno) II 
 
 Rule of Road. | _ Action for daina<^cs to 
 
 £.£nt's'r^''"'''"^^^'^^'''''---^l'tle 
 I Ltcndants steamer m the Hay of (luinte In 
 the marine protest by the -captai of" tl, 
 
 I'loptiMg the opinion of as.,essors, had de e^\ted 
 Ins judicial fnnctio,,, (,., a. R. ■ilsl'''^ 
 ^iM^ou, trial resulted in a verdict forthe'plai ' 
 t.tt which was alMrnu..d by the Court of Ape 
 ,"'' ^npreme Court of (Vuin.la alhrmc 1 t t 
 
 Dangerous Ohannel-/.'»/,.>o/7,'oa,/_-,i/„„,„,(. 
 'ir'-'r/l? "*'''''"""'** '"' ^'""si'lcrablc length and 
 li: • Vt'^'^-^.^-tfnoi,' ••'Ud the other kavi II 
 
 he port ot x\ signalle.! to each otlicr that the? 
 Mh propo,,ed to t..ke the same channel, which' 
 t ough shor , was narrow and tortuous. The 
 ■m steamer being fully committed to the chan- 
 nel, it was, undti Art. IS of H s (■ ,,|, -(, 
 .kdutyof the odier steamer to remain coml 
 
 veP^Ln?"'"",'"',",'''''" ""VV'^va possible, but as 
 oarin / '^^■«'''''^'«- "i^^fl - Vessel has a right 
 sse "''•^"".^^^•'■^'''/v^^ioli place the other 
 
 IZf r '!''"',""" of """eoessary embarrass- 
 ~ilf'"'.-'""^,- '^''"^ ^V'"ng-/oer is solely 
 S '•/•"•'-•''""'''S'^-'' f""" ■■■■ '-•'>"se,iuent 
 
 Refusal of Unlnjurt: 
 
 Jtule of A'ocK/.J-Under 
 
 Vessel to Assist— 
 
 le provisions of sec. 
 
 VA,m,;/.v,].-l„.„ steamers were approachin.r 
 
 each other near a,,ul.l,c harbour in a I'e 'e f 
 
 those in charge having mutually learue t lieu' 
 
 approximate ^vla.reah,n,ts by an intc u ,!e' 
 
 I'b'Stsigoais. Aotwitlistaudii,,, such or, vim i^ 
 
 a.ul the act that the courses they ;^e tec ii. 
 
 eacli others bows, one of them maintainc.l a 
 speed ot from three to four miles an h , .1" 
 «-a.s running with a tide, at tloo.l force of one 
 ana u half ki.otsperhour:ti,e other w^ULn^ 
 ">g at a s,.ecd ot about tl,ree knots an hour ad 
 
 n ctlort was made to alter her course A co 
 Iision occurred ; — 
 
 Hehl, that both vessels had infringed the pro- 
 
 ons of .Arts. i;i and bSof the Imperial: ","- 
 
 l.itions for Preventing Collisions at Sea .". 1 
 
 «^re, therefore, mutually l„ blame for the'eoul 
 
 I-'.) The word "moderate" in Art IS is ■. 
 
 ;,-:mth.*r''"''''""''"'"'^'"'"'»-t4 .: 
 
 ,',' " V '-"^•'""«ancc3 of tlie narticuiar ■■i-e 
 ll>e object of this Article is not i e le y tt t 
 ^•esse]s should go at speed which will ie's, „ e 
 violence ot a collision, but also that thev^l lould 
 go at a speed which will give as mtKrj;. 
 
 «f«% 
 
891 
 
 SHIP. 
 
 I- 
 
 IKiMNilili! fdi avoi.liiig ii oollisioii when luiolher 
 »lii]) sinliltnly fiPiiiiH into view iit a Mliiut dii- 
 tini f. It in ;i gitifial [iiin' iplc that niiccil siicli 
 that luiotlii'i' ws.scl I'uiiiiMt I,, iivoidcd iiflcr «h(.' 
 
 11. I)i: 
 
 I.MiR. 
 
 IS seuii, i.s unlawful. 
 n;fcTieil to. 
 
 (H.) 'l'\w owner nf 
 in a uiilliaioii i^ until 
 oimpletclv ii paiiiMl, 
 llu; owjicr is fiililU; 
 \alue at tlio tiun' of t! 
 
 n. / 
 
 1>. II J, 
 
 •N'f: Cliarliuh \. '/'/if Coliiradu and liyron Trr- 
 •(■■. :i i;.\. (', I!, .'li.'l, inifr MS!). 
 
 ■' " > ! injiiivil 
 
 '■ ■ liilly anil 
 
 iii'l ila.-ni|) U totally l.i-t, 
 1 to recovui' lii'i' uiaikft 
 If t'ollLsion. 
 
 (4.) Whcit; liolh Hhi|is ar.> at f.uilt, the law 
 alii.oiticMx thi' Ins.- Iiy oljliginjj ..aeli w roiij,'iloi,T 
 til |hty (inc-liali the l,l^^ of tlir othci'. 
 
 'llic pr'iiviyiniis of .s<M'. )L' ,,f l!. S. ( '. di. 70, 
 liiiiitin.:; the lialiilil.y of tlu; party at fault i\ a 
 ■ olli.sioM to a hum of .■■.•;s.!l'J f,,,. ,.;,ch ton of -logg 
 tonnagf, were ajuiliiil to tlii.s wise. 'J/,, J/ntl/ur 
 Jidl mill Till' Fii.ilii't, ;j Ivx. (J. K. K). 
 
 Spfc.ea--IIV(/// iij Foi/-li,,ni.]^-ln a foUi.sion 
 iii'twcfM t steamer ami a ^<ailinl,' ve.-.'iel, in a fo^-, 
 the Htiiiiuer was goin^' half-.^iiceil. Had mITc 
 been j,'Miiig dead slow aim iiii!,'lit have heen 
 !iti.))ped ill tini(^ d. prevent the collision : 
 
 llela, that the .steamer was partly in fault. 
 althoil;,'h tlie collision was no douht due to the 
 want 01 t fogdiorii on the .sailin;; vessel. Tlir 
 Xdinlit.fi and Till- Finiinj JJiitunl, '.i l'.\. C. R 
 <)7. 
 
 Steering gear— A";/;,.?,/ — Jiide, of Road— 
 
 i.'iKs/iui, <,j F'lr' — Appeal.]— The Mteaiiiship 
 •V wa.s proeeeihiig u|) the harhuur of Sy.iuey, 
 < .1!., nt a rate of speed of almut S or !» miles 
 an hour. When entering a channel of the har- 
 I'our, which Wiis aknit a mile in width, her 
 sleam steering.gciir l)ecame disabled, and she 
 collided with the ,/.,a idling ve.^.sel lying at! 
 nuciior in the roadstead, damaging the latter: 
 seriously. It was shewn that 'the master of' 
 tlic .V. had not .acted as promptly as he might 
 iiuve done m tak'ng stops to avoid the collision 
 vv hen it appeared likely to hap|,eu :- 
 
 Held, by tlie Kxche'(|Uer Court, that even if 
 tlie hreakiiig of the .><teering-gcai -the proxi- 
 mate cause of the colli.- . -:was an iievitalpk 
 accident, the rate of s)(ee i \i hiei. Jie ,V. was 
 being propelled, wliile jiassinga vessel at anchor 
 111 a roadsteail such i;s this, was excessive, and 
 that, in view of this and the further fact that 
 the master of the ,V. was no' n/iipt in taking 
 mea.-ures to avert a collision when ho became 
 aware of the accident to hi,s stoei ing-gear, ) he S 
 mis m fault ami liable under Art. 18 of sec. 2 
 of H. ,*<. C. ch. 7!) : — 
 
 Held, al.so, (hat the jirovisions of Art 21 
 .'^ee. 2 of R. ,S. C. eh. 7!) should he aiipli- 
 roadsteads of \_h\s character, and that, i 
 much as the .V. did not keep to that side • 
 tairwayor mid-ehannel wl.ii li lay on her 
 
 board side, she w/is also at fault iinde: 
 
 Article, and .-.■sponsible for the collision which 
 cconircd. 
 
 Held, liy t lie. Siiinemc Court of Cau.tda.afii rm- 
 mg tlse decision (.'■ the K.xcliei|uer Court, Sedg- 
 wick and King, .IJ., dissenting, that only a 
 MUestion of fad was involved, and, though it 
 was doubtful if the e\ii!eiice was sutlicient to 
 warrant the finding, the decision was not so 
 ' .early wrong a.s to jii.stily an appellate Court in 
 reversing it. Thi' t^anlandirhio, .'J Ex. C R 
 .•J7S, 23.S. C. K. 14.-). 
 
 of 
 
 I) 
 
 III. Mastku. 
 
 Bottomry Bona— lU.^' nliah •>/-- /lrak.'r - 
 
 Co,„,ji;.<«;i;/i.'. ] The hypothecation of .a ship ij 
 only jiistilied when it is done to .secure anioinit.- 
 due for necessary repairs to enable the ship t;,, 
 pi-ocee ' -ith her voyage, or for necessaries m 
 [II ov !^. ,,.,, reipiircil for the same purpose. Kur- 
 thcrinore, in oruer to enalde the creditor tc, 
 ■ : hciictit by the hypothfcalion, the following elc 
 meiits musL be jireMnt in the traii.sactioii •- 
 (a) The repairs musl be performed and thi' 
 necessaries or pro\ isioiis supplied on the exprcK- 
 condition that the claim is lobe secured hy ■, 
 bond ; (/,) there must be a total absence of por 
 ' sonal iredit on the part of tfie owner or master • 
 {(■)_ before pledging the ship, the master should,' 
 if it was .at all possilile to do so, have eomniuni- 
 cated with the owner; and ('/) thero mii.st nut 
 be snilicient rash or credit available to the ii,u.v 
 ter to pay the amuunt of the indebtedness .si, 
 incurred. 
 
 (2.) A master g.ivc a hottomry bond on his 
 ship for repairs executed some time iirevious to 
 the voyage he was then prosecuting, and whicli 
 Were done entirely on his persnc , oredit at tlio 
 time, ai^d iipmi thedistinct ii -; i standing that 
 lie would iiul lie rcijuiivd to pay for them until 
 his return from auo; iier voyage, "it also appcareil 
 that the master hail not, ■omniiinieated witli 
 , the owners before entering into the b,,u 
 although means of coinniuuicitioii were oi»eii t,, 
 him ;_ and it was, moreover, shewn that the 
 ship iiad eiiuugli .reilit at the place where the 
 bond was luiide ti. ,. ly the wdiolu ai.ioiiut of the 
 claim : — 
 
 Held, th::t the bond was 'oid. 
 ■ !. ) A sliipdiiokcv's commissions cannot he tin- 
 ojecl of a bottomry hond. ChrUtiaii v. Tin 
 ■/o-iij,h, ;i K\. C. H. ;W4. 
 
 Lien for Wages—S/ittit'i'-i—Retro'tHiiHri/.l- 
 The master of a vessel resnst-ered at the port of 
 Umnipeg, and tr.iding upon L.die Wimiipi-i; 
 had. m the year. iSSS, 1S.S9, and ISIK), no lie,i 
 cpi'ii the vessel lor wages earned bv him assucli 
 lua.ster. 
 
 (2.1 Kven if such a hen were held to exist. 
 th.r. ivas in the years mentumod no Ci nut in 
 the I'roviiice of .A! initoha in wnich it could huve 
 j been iiforced : and it coulrl not now be enfui-u,| 
 ni the Colonial Con of Ailiniraltv Act, 
 
 iJ- i.S & .■)4 Vicl (Imii. . ih. 27, or the ;\ili,ur. 
 ah, U-t, 18!>l,r)4&- ,-w\'i,t. (D.)ch. 2!), ; ,,use 
 to give those statutes a re- ■oaetive efreet msudi 
 a case as this would he an 'erferenee with the 
 rights ol the parties. Bifijiuaii v. The Aurora, 
 3 Ex. C. H. 228. 
 
 Lieu for Wages and Dlsbursements- 
 
 Imrroir 111,1 J/,,,,,.,/.] _ '|'i,e nM\.Si\.iiv of a ship 
 sought to enforce a claim in rem for wages as 
 well as for disbursements a.ud liabilities .■!.-'..sii!.ie(l 
 111 respect 'if nteessaries supplied the sliip, for 
 « liich he had made a joint note with the owner 
 for .•:<2.-)0 under an agreement that the nntf 
 
892 
 
 893 
 
 1)K 
 
 SHIP. 
 
 riv Co/iinnlu and L'l/ron Trr- 
 
 •y.i, iiiiir SS'.I. 
 
 I. MAVrKI!, 
 
 cl— h\.i' ii/iii/-< iif-- liniLr s 
 ■ liypiitliouiition of a Hliip ia 
 
 it is (Iciiiu to .scijiiri! aiiiouuu 
 u[)aii'» to (■iiiibif ihu Mliip Ui 
 oyau'c, or for mx'ijMNiitifs ,,1 
 
 iov tlic Hiiiiu; imrpoHi'. Fur- 
 1- to tiialilu till' ci-uditor t<, 
 ithecatioii, tlie following elt. 
 usciit in tho ti.iiisautiou ;_ 
 iiMt Ih' perforineil and the 
 sionx sMjiplicl iin the oxpni- 
 
 ( l.iiiM is to Ih; seourud liy ;i 
 isl In; a total al>Men(:e of per 
 p:irt (if thu owner or niastor ; 
 tlie ship, thu master Mhoiild, 
 lilo to (|.i HO, liavt; (;oniitnni)' 
 ler ; and ['I) there must not 
 
 credit availalih' to the nia.s 
 mnt of the indehtednesN m. 
 
 :u a liottomry bond on his 
 lilted home time previouH tii 
 lien |)ro>sc(;uting, and wliidi 
 )n lii.s per-sor ,: credit at thf 
 distin(.'t u.i(l,i-standing that 
 J 11 i red to pay for them until 
 ler voya-.'e. It also appeared 
 id not lommiinieated with 
 eliteriii4 into tht; 1m,ii 
 )inimiuication were 0])eii ii, 
 moreover, .shewn that tiie 
 edit at tho place where thi> 
 ly the whole amount of the 
 
 id was eoid. 
 
 "s commissions cannot he ilic 
 ry hoiiii. Christian v. Tin 
 H. .U4. 
 
 ~>^tatnh>s—I}elro<trtii}il>j.\~ 
 el rciristored at the port of 
 ing upon Lake WimiineL', 
 SS, ISSO, an.l ISilO, no lien 
 .-agcf' earned Ijy hiui as. such 
 
 a lien were held to exist. 
 ars nientinned no i 'ourt in 
 itoha in wiiich it could hue 
 ;t ciiiild not m.wheenf..: \-a\ 
 Coll ()• Adiniraltv Aet, 
 Inij). rh. -SI, or the Admir- 
 :")5\'i.-t. (D.)ch. 2!), 1., ..uise 
 5 a re: roactive efreet in siiuli 
 be ail -erfcrenee with the 
 Bi.rijiiMii \. The A urorn, 
 
 s and Dlsbursements- 
 — The master of a ship 
 claim ill. rem for wages .as 
 entsand liabilities assiinitt! 
 ies .supplied the sliip, for 
 joint note with the owner 
 agreement that the nntf 
 
 ;.lionld be pahi out of the earnings of the Hhii. 
 Ihisagreeineut was nnide without the eonj.t 
 •ir knowledge ol the iiiortga!,'ee :- 
 
 Held, that the muster ha. fa nriritinie lien for 
 hi.^ wages, as well as for disbursements actually 
 and neeessanly made, ami liability incurred in 
 eonnect ion with the proper working and ma,,, 
 ago neut ot t he Hhip. and tli.it the limit of suedi 
 habl ity would betn the value ot the vessel and 
 
 (•^.) That the master did not exceed his 
 .•lutliority m borrowing m aiey on tli.. note for 
 the puriioses .d the .ship, a „p,H,„ring tli at the 
 .sum so borrowed had been duly and properly 
 
 894 
 
 ■ lur^jo, from . , for which I agree to ,my 
 • . owner to supply eiiglneT an I eimtaiii 
 
 lo k through the negligence ot tile ckptain : - 
 Icid, I, ,1 ,t , ,;m se of the tug, bat a eontraet 
 
 ■■l..nNi|, an.l th.a the d dendaul wa. not liable 
 I. .1^ the danuge. J%,in,mii v. /',„„/,.,•, 23 O. R. 
 
 IV, fi«,i, ff/irt j.i.j, 
 
 Negllffonce of -///,■/<(;/ „/ ]\...4 -LinhiUli, 1 
 
 . 'ii'?'" '• ^'^""- -^ <'• i'^- ">U0, -jr, O I!. ,V)i 
 nii'e 7<j3. ' 
 
 IV. OW.NEU.S. 
 
 Communication Wlth-/;.v/o/;„v/ /lou/.]- 
 :iU,anleH'.>± ' ' ''■^' '■ '' 
 
 Conversion of Vessel—/,,;,,? Oir„..,-H- Mm- 
 
 ,«. I,i.<i,i;,ii.'r - Jl.c,r/„i„rii' - .V,/ea,,c.j Ja 
 sde by one joint owner of property a,e,s not 
 e,eeant,as a^aPHt hi. cowii.;., to a conver 
 n, UMle.ss th.3 Pfoperty is deatroye 1 by such 
 • . '; " ; "'" ^•'^-"^^"'-•' '^ 'ieprivjd of all beneficial 
 
 . ^sjel, p.irtl,y i,is,„.o,l, „..m wrecked, and 
 tli«saips husband ab.uidoae J her t,, the under 
 writers rho sold her and lior outfit t. one K 
 I lie sale as afterguards abandoned, and the 
 uuler« , notine ttie ships husband that 
 
 .le was n,t a tot ^ ^ loss and Ve.juested liiint 
 .Hke possesion. I paid no attention to the 
 notice, and the ^ was bbelle 1 by K. for 
 
 stlvage, and sold undei lecrae „f tlieCourt The 
 uumsured owner brought an action a,^ain3t the 
 na.ierwnters for convcsion of her interest - 
 Held alhrmmg tha decision of the .Supreme 
 ourt of .New ISrunswick, that the sliip'sh, 
 luud was agent ol the uninsared owner in 
 .|.|pect of the vc.,ael, and liiscnduct precluded 
 
 IV taken possession before th. vessel was 
 iWled : and tlut the insure I owner was ^o 
 I prived of her ujtere.t by aay action of the 
 a, erwriters, but by tl.e docrea of the On.rt 
 mder wh.^^h she w.is sold for salvage. Hoarb- 
 
 Co-owners - Arronnl -- Jurisdiction of Ex- 
 bxche.juer (..'ourt has jurisdiction to heir and 
 ;If a'shi/r '"'"'" °' '"^""" l''-'t»«-'-'owne;J 
 
 -;-■"»';/,, in an action by tdic maniging owner 
 ship ,vi|a.nst_l,is co-owner, that the fndorse i 
 
 • lis „t '":" "r'' "°' ^''*'"' t'"it there ,s 
 ' ' . dispute as to the amount involved. Hall 
 *. -HMward, .SEx. C. It. 208. 
 
 Oemlseor Hlrln«-A>//,>„,„ -/.;„/./,/ y. ]__ 
 «o. 1 tie ' ? I'l"','" V'° ^'■"■" "'« l-l'"'>ti'tVby 
 
 ' I a.rP. ^"'''' '^' '"'"' •'"•^''^^ "' f'-^*^-^ words, 
 I agree to charter tug . . to tow two 
 
 "/y.l-Cna ship under charter being l.,,X 
 'was found that a sum of LI7;{ was due ti e 
 cdlarterer tor the ditreieuce between I eetal 
 
 •i,rLt.,i, ,1 i„ii ) „. tiijj ,^,|j driwn bv the 
 
 bliT of 'c-v, f '::• i'T'' "' '"" ^ "" '^- ^ 
 
 ii.aV ,.'?■""""".' ^' '''"-•"" ''ill« not 
 mo V \u ^""''ty-. """-•■■ "f dishonour was 
 
 Ccti .'■'■''' '''I ^''"" l'"''l<li«l-illHforcol. 
 -vu until the ship arrived at .St. .lohn, where V. 
 b^cd. ||„s was .acceded to. ,ind V. sim.ed ai^ 
 
 clcbiy pro, .,. lings on the ,l,-,,ft f.,r t7.-,;j he 
 ™nteed, on the vessels arr,v,d,.,inV^eS 
 ,1 also '":■['"""' "* "'" said dr.ut and charges 
 ."1, ,d.so the payment of the ,lraft for avi 
 and charges. (),. , U vess.d's ,uriv,.l 1 yever 
 he re us.dtopw t!.e suuller draft,' and tTa„' 
 
 m.i t were struck ont. ()„ the trial the son of 
 
 ; •, "' " '!,"' V-'" "'■■■ ■''''-■'' "■■' «»■'"■" that th.y 
 
 nU ',i:d'''not ' 'f' 'f ^ "■'■'•" ^'"- '''•^•»— -"K 
 out It (11(1 not clearly apiiiar that he e .t.,...f« i 
 
 tu.s to his fathe,-. V. hims.lf c! t. dieted n 
 
 b^l^;^sf^r^n!■''''''''^'"'"^^■^'-'"---"" 
 
 le e -id , ;'''h'"" '" "••^'-^'' ^»' there w,m 
 oJie eyideuce t(, the sun ; ellect. Ifis counsel 
 sought to get rid of the ede,t of V ■■ ev e^oe 
 !.y shewing tint (Von age and in.iniHty h was 
 
 a'vl^SSw^'""""'"'"'^^'''-^''— 1-«^^ 
 a y^l I et WIS given ag i„ist him : — 
 
 Hell, alhcming th ) dejisioa of tlia (!o,,rt 
 l.alow, that ti.e defeao of inisreo-es •, Uti< aV 
 I'P was not available to V. „ ,. i], . , " ,] 
 
 t-ud and, therefore, w,.s not plea,le;:ti 
 available w.th.ut plea, it w.is Aot p.-ov^l 'il- 
 
 otmgconl,ilK;gu,u;lby,.r(lJ:,,,,a,;othe 
 hV; •/ 1 V""- ''"-■'■ I'i-^ evidenej would 
 
 have ti b . r„'a 1 to ll,.; lu^v. wlia, in view of I, s 
 .stUcnent th»t he knew the lull ^a" notVr , s 
 bursements. couM not do otherwise thin iTa a 
 verdict ag.amst him : _ * * 
 
 llehl further, th it the d..Uy .sked for by V 
 e.ass„(l,cn,nt consideration t(. make him liible 
 on his guar.mty, eeea a-su7.ing that he wo d 
 not have been o, , iually liable as owner .f 
 ship, ramjkan v. l!i:hu:U..„, 21 S C R -n, 
 
 i V. .SAi.vaci:, 
 
 (-onU.]-A ship was stranded on a r(,ekv shore 
 w. h , „f p-otruding throujl : 
 
 ' Se'-tlJ'shTjrri'"^"''^'^^" '•' ^'-^ '' ''-y -'I - 
 
'i , M 
 
 SHIP. 
 
 89P 
 
 HcM, Unit tliiH wad ii'it a s^alvMj.'e ncrviii!, 
 
 (<J.) 'riialthu ViccAdiiiiialtj <'iMiit hail jliiiH- 
 
 diction to awunl rvahimnlili' ii'iiiuiuratiini in 
 
 reapevt to llic minic 'J'Ih- i\'(ti/, '2 \V. Mo)i. 7", 
 
 referred to. Tfn CvMu Jlim, ,i Vs. ('. ir. '.'H. 
 
 Ovw—Seri'iri n—LUii — Aiinit—U'lfii.. Uiir 
 fit Arliov.] — A cipw (if II ticliim,' silKiiniti- Imd 
 pcrforini'd t'cituin tahiigi! 8(r\ !■ ih in ifujn'ct of 
 a derelitt hlii|), and ^.'avo tlic |i 'iiwinj/ jkjWI'I' of 
 uttoiiicy rcsprctinjf tlic iLiiiu .)!■ suuli hiivIcis 
 to the n;;i'nt ot the ownt r of I ho Hihoonir ; 
 " Wc", tliL' iiiidfi«ii;nt'(l, hiiii^ ill! tliu cnw of 
 tho Ht'hiK ncr hilimdn lit tho linic haiil scliooncr 
 rrndtll'd nil\a(;c .-cl vir(H to tlit; hnii|Uu Ijvil'ir, 
 do licri'liy Iiiim i uhly constitute ami ap|<iint 
 Joseph i). I'ini tor our line and lawful attoinry, 
 with powei of >.ulistituti(iii,for UH and in our nanii' 
 and lifliiilf as ci rw of tho Kiiid Hchonncr, to hiiuj; 
 suit or otherwiso mttli! and iidjunt any claiiii 
 which we may haxi; for salvage services reiideiid 
 to the hurciue V" '" '' r( eeully tow ed into the liort 
 of Halifax, Kova Seotia, hy n\U\ Helieontr 7^ Au;- 
 the : hercliy granting; unto our sai! attorney full 
 power and authority tti act in and rMicerning the 
 prenii8tH as tully and ellietually as we inij^ht 
 do if personally prcKeut, ami alt^o power at his 
 discretion to constitute and ijipoint, from time 
 to time, as ((ciision may ri (|uire, one or nure 
 agents under him, or to sal ^.tilute an attorney 
 for UH in liis place, and tht' authority of all s\icli 
 ttgents or attoruiys at pleasuie to revoke ;' — 
 
 Held, that this instrument did not authorize 
 the agent to rictive the saha^'e ) ayalile to the 
 crew or to release their lien upi n the ship in 
 rcs])ect of which the salvage services were per- 
 formed. 
 
 (-.) That payment of a sum agreed ujion 
 between the owners oi such .vhi]) and tho agent i 
 and the hitter's leeeipt tlureloi', did not Imr 
 salvors from nuiintainim.' an aition for tlicir 
 services. 7/.t Qinhiv, ,'i Kx. C. I!. '•V^. 
 
 Nature of ServicoB—'/'nii'diji^—fJiinn/tim of 
 liemininalioit— I oylf.]— A sliandeil vessel, alian- 
 doned by the owners to the underwriters and 
 sold hy thcui, vas Siived, and was hrought hy ; 
 the purchasers to a shipwright lor rejiairs ; — I 
 
 Held, that the towage ct the vessel from the 
 place where stranded to the dry deck was a sal- 
 vage service. 
 
 (2) Claim for use of anchor, chains, etc., 
 iKscd in saving V( ssel ; — 
 
 Held, a salvage seiviite. 
 
 (H.) Claim for personal sci vices not performed i 
 on vessel ;— j 
 
 Held, not a salvage service. \ 
 
 ('%.) Claim for .services of tug in an unsuccess- 
 ful attempt to remove vessi 1 : — 
 
 Held, not a salvage .service. Salvage is a 
 reward for bcnolits actually coiifcvred. I 
 
 (.?.) Held, following the usual rule, that not ' 
 more than a moiety of the value of the n !< at i 
 the time when saveii should he awarded to sal- ' 
 vors, tiicro being no exceptional feature except i 
 the small value of tho ;v.v. Costs of salvors 
 awarded out of other moiety. Costs of arr( st 
 and sale and (.f bringing fniul intoCouit ])aid in j 
 priority to claims out of fund, in proportion to 
 the value of the ?t,s at the time of <lelivcry to the j 
 I>iy Duck Company, and balance of tlic proceeds ; 
 of sale, which was not sufticient_to pay claim of 
 possessory lieu-holder. The. Okniffir, 3 Kx. C. 
 
 Quantum ol' Remuneration — CdUUiun \ 
 \\\u re twovesuls in rojli-iion are both at fault, 
 anil one vei^Mel renders xalvage itrvices to th< 
 other, whin the v.iliit? of hik li serviecii in detci 
 mined, it nliould bi. divided and the s dved venN< I 
 only bo iei|uired to pay one-half of the amount 
 I'hi' Xamliifi iiiifl 'I'll' h'tiiiiii/ Ihildnl, .'I Kx. < . 
 K. (17. 
 
 Special Contract— /i'"'' (•/ Uniiuiieralioii— 
 
 I'ltiiii.ii 1:1 l!iiihl.\ — A st( ,inifhip belonging i'. 
 the Uondiiion (iovernnu iir went ashore on lli. 
 iKlaiiil of Anticosti, ai.tl suppliants renih reii 
 nssistance w dh their w locking Hteaiuor in get 
 ting her allo,it. 'I he seivii'o remloicd eonsistfe 
 ill eariying oi.t oi,(> of the stranded steamslii|i - 
 iinchi rs, and i'l taking a hawser and pulling on 
 it until she uinie etV. For earryinu out tlj. 
 anchor it was ailinitted that the suppliants ha< 
 bargaimd for eoiopensation at the rate of ."•."ii. 
 ail hour, but whether tho biugain included tin 
 otiier piit of the service lendiTed or not w.i.- 
 in dispute. The S'lviee waseoiitimious — no i ii 
 en ins ta I I'M - nf sudden risk or da Uiier having ai i. . i, 
 to lender oik^ [)art of the work more ililba nil i.i 
 dangeioii.^ than the other : — 
 
 Held, I hat the rateof compensation admittcilly 
 .igrei d ii|)on in respect of eariying out the am hm 
 must, under the eireumstances, he taken a- 
 aHording a lair measure of comiiensation for tlu 
 entire service. 
 
 CJ. ) A petition of right will not lie for salvagi 
 services rendered to a steam- lii|) belonging to tin 
 lloniinion (Jovernment. Coiielti- \. J'hi (JiC'h. 
 •.i Ex. C. 1!. »-J. 
 
 To^wage and Salvage— /^'Vi'/fr/io/^ — Vulim- 
 ten-Hull', (if A'. (///o(r/'((^'o/i.]— .Salvage im aii.s 
 rescue from threatened loss or injury. Xn 
 danger, no salvage. If the ship be indaiij(r, 
 then the rescueis eain a salvage reward, wlmli, 
 on the grounds of ]iiibiic policy, is to be libi i ,il. 
 but yet varies acconliiig to tho imminence m 
 the danger to the ship on the one hand, and tin 
 skill and onteiprise and danger of the salvnrs 
 on the other h.riid. 
 
 ("J. ) A small jiackct steamer, while pcrforniiii- 
 one of her regular trips between ctrtain ))i.ii.!,< 
 in thick weatlii r, discovered a laigi' stcaiiisl,i|. 
 lying at anchor in such a jcsition as to ho in 
 imminent d.inger of becoming a total loss. Tin 
 latter signalled tho former and asked to be tov.ul 
 into port. 'J'his the )iaeket steamer ri fused toile, 
 wishing to jirosecuto her vovage, but agn i d tn 
 tew the ship out of her dangerous positii n to 
 the open sea, and there give her captain diie( • 
 tions to tnable him to riuch his port of desliiia- 
 tinn. This oiler was aceiptcdaml acted iii)"i!. 
 In conducting the slii|i to t lie open sea, the paclat 
 steamer performed the services both of a jiilat 
 and tug, and shewed skill and enterprise, anil 
 incurred aiipieciab'e risk, while so eugHgcd :— 
 
 Held, a salvage and not a mere towage sci- 
 vice. 
 
 Stiiihk, while the Court is disposed to conliiie 
 the claims of professional |)!lols and tugs to tin 
 tariir scale for such piofis..-ional services, .i 
 vohinteer ought to be allowed a more lihi.ii 
 rate of coni) ■ nsation. Cioniiiiini Paiijif A'loi 
 (,aiioii Co. \. The C. F. >ar(jiitt, 3 Kx. C. R. 
 
 Towage and Salvage — /'/-Y/di^'o)),]— Iniv 
 collision between a steamer and a sailing vessel. 
 
m. 
 
 Lineratlon — Cnl/iili.n \ 
 rolliHimi iiiij lidth at t'aiih, 
 ^■» siilviiuo KTvicin til tin 
 II of Kill h aurviciH in ilrtci 
 vidcil anil tile Hilvcil Vfjoii I 
 iiy out 'halt of tliu atiiui.nt 
 /■'iiiiKi/ l>iil(iril, .'t Kx. • . 
 
 — //"'• (/ RtinHHtrutltJii— 
 A sti iiiitiliii) lilongiiif,' 1, 
 imi'iif \v( nt ashore on th. 
 hmI .><ii|)|iilarit.M rcnilii'i 
 • « ifrkiii^ Htoiiiiiur in •.;. i 
 
 SI'IAl'lc K'lillrU'll rOOMistii 
 
 f tlir HtiMnilid HtiaiiiMlii|i > 
 'U' a liawKir iiiul piillii'j,' (mi 
 It', {■'of carryinL; out tli. 
 1(1 that fill' siiliplinnts ha^ 
 isution at the lato of .■>."ii. 
 r thu l'iiri;aiii ii'.uluiU'il tin 
 ■vice ii'iitli'i'iil or not \v:i.« 
 ii.'i' «i\Hi(iiitinuous — no lir 
 n.«k or I hinder luivinf^ ari. cii 
 the work more ditlicull m 
 thrr :— 
 
 if conipcii^utioii mlniitteiily 
 I (if cany i 11;^ out the ani Imi 
 rciini^taiie(.M, he tiiUiii li- 
 ne of ('(inipeiisation for tl'. 
 
 ight \\ ill not lie for salv:i^:i 
 steam- hip lieloiij.'ing to the 
 lit. Vijurllv V. Till <Jhi' ,1. 
 
 7aEre— /^i^lincihiii — Vulim- 
 lit I lO ion. ] — Salvage meaiiii 
 tied loss or injury. Xi> 
 If the ship ho in (lar^ir, 
 II a falva^^e reward, which, 
 lilie iKpliey, is to he lihii.il. 
 ilinj,' to the imniinenee nt 
 |i oil the one hand, and tlir 
 and danger of the salvins 
 
 t .stcniiior, wliile jierforniin^ 
 ■ips hitweeii ctrtaiii ])iiiii!,< 
 eoviicd a laif,'e .'-ti aiiisl.ii. 
 lich a I'osition as to he ia 
 leeomiliL; a total loss. Tin 
 liner and a.--lve(l to he tov. ul 
 leket steamer ri fused to(l(i, 
 
 her voyage, hut agiKil tn 
 her dangeidus iiositiiii to 
 re give her eaptaiii direi- 
 I) r(.«eli his ])ort of destiiiii- 
 
 aeeipted and acted u)!"ii. 
 !i to theoi^en sea, the pailat 
 he services hotli of a [-ilnt 
 1 skill and enterjiri.-c. ami 
 risk, while so eiigngcd :— 
 id not a mere towage mm- 
 
 Jourt is disposed to confine 
 ional pilots and tugs to the 
 li piiifis.-ional services, ,i 
 he allowed a more lihu.il 
 I. CiiiHiiiiiiii l^aii/ii: yiii'i 
 '. F. l-unjtnt, 3 Kx. ('. R. 
 
 vage — iyi.-<t'ii!iiii>ii.]-h\i^ 
 :e:iincr and a sailing vosd. 
 
 897 
 
 Mil; lutter ininicliutely he. «,„e wat. 
 
 SLANDER. 
 
 «8t 
 
 f-'r the moment, she miyht very kho, Iv 1, Jl T*-'"""" "'", '"-Irr -m ..aim, I, hut the ov 
 1h|I' n. great (huiger :- ^ """"• ""*" enee «a« snth, lent (.. p,.,v.. that ilie »as ! inltv 
 
 Held, tlaitt.-resMie h..r«asu salvage an.liiotil'"' VV'''V,'!'''' ''''''•■"•''•'''-• ''-''l''''!''^^ 
 
 V'l. Sum. I''isiii;kv. 
 
 VJI. Skamks's W'aci -.-. 
 
 Action In Rem - ./h,-/.(//.7,„,, „/• /,•,.;, 
 
 H.;l.f, l.y the i:x,.l,e(,,ur fVnirt that the ' n W '"a"*'' '•■''''■'' "• ''"«" ''',.,';;,'',; 
 Held, hvthe Supreme (V„H. of Canada, atHrm- : „as;ell 1,''h„^''.'' '","''*'*''' ,'" "'" ^■"■^■^'•' '''"l >">t 
 
 Forbidden Waters- Prr.uirc o,' S'/iin A- • « "'" Oim.loy .-d him « ere I hw, t li(. s , ,,,( se l" 
 
 ^^^rS^;;rv:.:;;;s';;:,-i,;i'£i""-'« - '■' "' """ '"""■ 
 i5ii';i'.;:,Sr'-"''-^"'' '■'■'"'■>■ ''•■••ni:! 
 
 
 t)^;f; I 7- examination ot an oHemlim' 
 
 British ship hysuch cruiser .signe,l hvtiie. -r 
 nconimand isadinissihl, ;„ e.'^, ei ,.e'i, ,^. ' , ' 
 »gs taken in the Adnnraltv Coin, i , . , i 
 
 T e sli '• ' '""' " '"'""f "f "-^ ^•"identH. 
 
 >i:Si';;}:!p;'^--l-.-' '-""«>-" 
 
 ""i. .one roum/ h;,:-k.,::: ■!';''"ri'"'^> 
 
 fully 
 
 the Koniandoiskv Isl 
 
 'Piippedand ma, cd f.)r seal 
 
 amis, 
 ug, not onlv 
 
 t .,■' , l — l'l"-'« u 
 
 g- to fulfil the o.». .ast upon herTf n„,vini 
 'l"tBhe was not used or emplovcd ,„ k llin„'"t 
 
 07 
 
 ing or 
 
 SHOP LICENSE. 
 
 Sec Into.xicati.nc Lri^i-oiis, ui. 
 
 SLANDER. 
 
 See Co.sis, IV.— Dk 
 
 I'.V.MATION, 
 
SOLICITOR. 
 
 900 
 
 SLANDER OF TITLE. 
 
 .Va, Dkiamation. 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 I. Admission- to Pkac risi;, S!)ll. 
 
 II. Al'TUORITV. 
 
 1. In Artiom, 899. 
 
 •J. To h'l-O'ln. Monnj, 9111. 
 
 III. Costs. 
 
 1. Delivery and Taxation of Bill ^ W\. 
 
 2. Director of Com immj, nOS. 
 
 3. Payment oat of Court, 90cS. 
 
 4. Iiei'ori ry by Action, 9I)S. 
 
 IV. LiKX FOR Costs, OoS. 
 
 V. Praitisim: Wri'iioUT (Jkktikh'ati;, 91"J 
 VI. l'i;ivii.i;(.n, 91'J. 
 
 VII. i'ROCKKDI.N'GS AclAINST. 
 
 1. Action.1, 91-2. 
 
 2. Stril-iwj Xanv o If Roll, 9l:{. 
 
 VIII. Ri;tainkr ano Ai'I'oint.mknt, 914. 
 
 I\. MiSCELLANKotrs CASKS, 914. 
 
 I. Admi-sion to Puactisi:. 
 
 Appeal.] -IVr StroiiLj aiiil Tasclieicau, .1.]. — 
 It Mils ni'vci' iiiteiidoil tliat the .Supreme (•oiiit 
 of Canada sliouM interfere in matteis rospecl- 
 iiig the ailinissidii oi attoi'iicys and barristers in 
 tiie several I'ldviiiees. In re Cahan, 21 S. C. 
 R. 100. 
 
 II. ArTirouiTV. 
 I. In Actioii-1. 
 
 Action — A*) /',:l<iiner — ^C<w/.s. ]— An action, 
 liroughc l)v solieitors in tlie plaintiIVs name, 
 was disniissed with coats, and judgment entered 
 against tlie plainlill'. 'I'he solicitors had acted 
 without any written retainer from the plaintitT, 
 or any instructinns flora her personally, relying 
 on instrnctiuns received from the plaintiirs hus- 
 band, which she positively denieil ever having 
 given, and also on letters written to her, the 
 sending of wliioh was not strictly proved, and 
 which she denied ever having received : — 
 
 On a motion made therelor l)y the plaintili', 
 the juilgment and all snb!'ei|Uent proceedings 
 were set asiile, and tlie solicitor ordered to pay 
 the plaintilF's costs as between .solicitor and 
 client, and the defendant's costs as between 
 party and party. Scrilmcr v, Furcell.i:, 20 O, R, 
 554. 
 
 Agreement Not to Appeal.] -An attorney 
 nd lilf/ii h.is no authority to l.iiiid his client not 
 to appeal liy an agreement with the oiiposiug 
 attorney that no appeal would be takei>. Per 
 Tajchtreau, .i., in /.a Sociele Caii'iili' nn'-Fran- 
 cii'ixe lie Conxtrwlion il<- Monircul v. Dave.luy, 
 20 S. C. R. 449. 
 
 Appearance — lioiiiiirition — hi-iaronyd of. \ — 
 In an aeti'in brought in ISdU for tlie .sum ot 
 .*S00 and interest at twelve and a half percent, 
 against two brothers, S, ,T. I), and \V. McI). D., 
 being the amount of a promissory nnte signed 
 by them, one e.ipy of the sunii'K.ns wis served 
 av, the domicile of S. .7. J), at Tiir<.-e liivers, the 
 otlu'r defend.Mit, W. McL). 1)., then residing in 
 the State ii New ^'orU. (Jn the return of the 
 writ , the n -po:ideiit llled an ap)ii'aranee as attor 
 iiey for buth defendants, and i)roeeiMnngs were 
 suspended until bs74. wlien jurlgment w.ist.aker, 
 and in Uecenil)er, ISSO, upon the issue of an ri/.n.s- 
 writ of execution, iho a.p)iellaiit, lia\ing tailed 
 in an ojiposition to judgment, tiled a jjetition iii 
 dii-avowal of the respondent. The ilisavowed 
 attorney pleaded inlir olid, that he liad been 
 authorizeii to appear by a letter signed by .s^. 
 .J. I)., saying ; " I5e so good as to Hie e.ii appear- 
 ance in the case to u iiich the enclosed lias refer- 
 ence," etc., and also prescription, r.atitication, 
 and insuilicieiicy of tlie allegations of the peti 
 tion of disavowal. 'I'lie petition in disavowal 
 was dismissed : — 
 
 Held, that there \va ■ no evidence of authority 
 given to tiie respondent or of ratilication by the 
 appellant of the respondent's act, and iherefoie 
 the petition in disavowal should bo maintained. 
 Diiir.^on V. Dmnoiii, 2i) S. C, I!. 7<i9. 
 
 Joining Plaintiffs V/ithout Authority - 
 
 tW.-i. ]— ]!y a resolution of the council of a 
 municipal corporation, the mayor and clerk 
 Were iislructcd to grant a ecrtilicate under the 
 corporate seal to the solieitors for the other 
 plaintill's authorizing them to join the corpora- 
 tion as pliiutiiVs in this action, uiion receiving a 
 bond, to the satisfaction of the mayor, indemni- 
 fying the corporation against all costs. A bond 
 was accordingly handed to the mayor, w!io 
 retained it, but the action was brougiit by tin' 
 solicitors, anil the corporation joined therein -i.- 
 lilr.iiitiU's, wit.hoat tlio gruiting of any certili- 
 cale under tlie corporate seal. After the action 
 had been begun the mayor informed the defen- 
 dants' solieitors that no cerliiicite had been 
 issued, and stated that ho would not sign one 
 until ho had been uroperly advised bv coun- 
 sel:— 
 
 Held, that the action was brought in \\v'. 
 name of the corporation witliout authority ; ami 
 that the defendants iiad the right to move to 
 have such name struck out. 
 
 Simhli-. that the corporation should have heen 
 parties to the motion, 
 
 Held, also, iliat as the solieitors for the plain- 
 till's other tliau the corporation were not gnilty 
 of any intentioiril wrong-doing in joining tlie 
 corporation as plaiiitili's, they shouhl not be 
 made liable for the defemlants' costs. Townnf 
 /iorric V. Wuiymonth, 1.") P. R. 9i). 
 
 Next Friend — L'l-iin nient — • Withdraicid of 
 
 . Authority — Costs.] — L'pou ajiplication to the 
 
 Court therefor, tlie next friend of un infant 
 
 plaintiff may 'oe allowed to withdraw, uponsiicii 
 
900 
 
 o Appeal.] —An attorney 
 rity ti> l.iind liis client not 
 ccmi'iit with tins oiiposiiig 
 fill would he takei'. Per 
 Sdcii'lr Caii'idh iiH'-Frau- 
 ih' Monireiil v. Daveluy^ 
 
 \i!<'aliif)i - /)isaroirfit of. | — 
 . in 1S()0 for tliu isiim ot 
 iWL'lve ,inil II half ])i;r uuiit. 
 S. ,T. 1). nu.lW. McI). !>., 
 
 a prouH-isory mite Nigned 
 
 tliu suniiMC.ns wis served 
 d. I), at 1"hri.-e Kivers, tlir 
 Mel). 1)., then residing in 
 rk. (3n the return of tlir 
 iled an a^ijifaranee as attor 
 its, and jn'ocecdings were 
 wlien juo;.'nient Wris tak<.T, 
 J, uiHUi the issne <•{ an ri/.u.s 
 o appelhiiit, having failed 
 dginent, filed a petition la 
 pnndent. Tlie disavowed 
 )■ I'/ia that ho had been 
 
 hy a letter signed hy S. 
 ) '^(joil as to (ile i'.u appear- 
 dull llie eiielcsed lias rcfer- 
 
 preseription, ratilioation, 
 ho allegations of the peti 
 rhe ))etition in disavowal 
 
 1 ; noevideiieo of authority 
 at or of latilicatii'ii by the 
 indent's aet, and iliorefoic 
 wal should lie maintained. 
 ;i»S. ('. K. 7<i9. 
 
 3 V/ithout Authority — 
 tion of tiio couneil of a 
 HI, tlie mayor ami elerk 
 xnt a eertilieate under the 
 solieitors for the other 
 them to join the corpora 
 lis action, upon receiving;! 
 ion of the mayor, indemni- 
 against all costs. A bond 
 ided tv) the mayor, wlio 
 etiou was brought by the 
 •poration joined therein ;is 
 gruiting of any eertiti- 
 iite seal. After the action 
 Mayor infrrnied the defeii- 
 : no eertilieate hail been 
 it he Mould not sign one 
 iroiierly advised liy <:ouii- 
 
 tion wa.s lirought in the 
 on witlunit authority ; ami 
 lad the right to move to 
 k out. 
 rpoiatiiiii should have been 
 
 the solieitors for the plain- 
 iirporation were not guilty 
 rong-doing in joining the 
 tills, they sliouhl not be 
 efendants' costf. Toicii of 
 ; l.-)P. R. 95. 
 
 /■/i)-' iiiiiit — Wilhilvaiml of 
 ('poll apidication to the 
 next friend of an infant 
 i-od to witiulraw, upon sucii 
 
 301 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 weirre'of'lT '^.''^""^tanees of the case and the 
 wellare ot the infant may rcpiire 
 
 Solicitors began an action in the name of an 
 H. an as plaint, IFby her mother as next frlen 
 
 th the consent of ,l,e latter. After the .actio, 
 
 ^^.o.e .a letter to the s,dicitors levoking the 
 an lonty to u.se her mune, to which they ivplied 
 th.U p,-oeeed„igs would not be stayed unlesi ,s i.. 
 pa,d co.sts up to date, ami that if she ,lid not d,-, 
 M, they would assu.ue that she intended them to 
 continue the action. .She took no notice of Jhis 
 and they went on with some proceedings, wliere- 
 ;i"m he defendant, in.trucled by tlm mother, 
 :noved to ,i,s,niss the action on tlie giv.und that 
 It was being prosecuted without autliority, ami ■ 
 askc, or costs ag linst the solicitoi's :- ^ 
 
 w, ,;,'•" 1''"^'"« ^'"' P'-"^^«''li>iSS, that there 
 
 wasnotliingtopreventthe.nolherfrom,', une- 
 
 "ig her ediaraeter of next frieml, ami wilhdraw- 
 iug from the l.tigation. subject to her remainin.' 
 amenable to the p.nsdietion of the (Jonrt as tS 
 liability fo,' costs theretofore incurred 
 As to costs .- — 
 
 Held that the Court reaches the solieitors of 
 aplaiutili.lu-cctly tortile benelit of the defen- 
 dant only «-here the plaintitf, as client, has a 
 nght to bo .'ecouped by the solicitor, an.l to th.. 
 extent of iliat recoupment. The next lri,.,Ki 
 here was liable to the solicitor for costs up to 
 her letter, and the solicitor was liable to the 
 next tnend for csts suliscpieut then to ; and 
 as the former costs exceeded the latter, a,i,l 
 as between the next friend and the defendant' 
 the former was liable for co.sls so long as she 
 .inl not make a dii-ect .aiiidieation aga'inst the ; 
 solicitors, n, order eouhl be made in^favonr of 
 tue defendant : but the next tVicid was eutitled ^ 
 to be mdemiiil,e,l l,y the solieitors for costs : 
 'uenrred after her letter : - 
 
 Held, also, that it w.is competent I'or the ' 
 ■ eie.ida.it to move to stav the proceedin.'s, 
 aUooiign the noi-inal pra ■tiee is for the next 
 tnend to mov... T.n/'„r w. ]]'„(,'!, UP [\ 4P) ' 
 
 S02 
 
 et rn „,^.d the vali.hty of a disputed agreement 
 lien,t,n-eof a compromise relating^o Home 
 
 hchthesoueitoi-nowclaimedslKuddbe allowed 
 at tlieirt.iee value agiin^t moneys received bv 
 ;■-''. ■'•'; "-Inoh the applicants claiincl ZZ 
 
 disputed agieement : — ^ 
 
 Per Hagarty, C. .f. ().. and Ihirton, J. A 
 tnat the oilicer la.l no jurisdiction under th4 
 m, ill 'l^t"'-"""" tl'" validity of tho agree 
 
 ._2^,r..ler and Macleni.au. J,J.A., that ho had 
 
 TlieCourtof Appeal beingthuse,piallydivi,led, 
 
 : he decisions of .Armour, C. .1.. and the Common 
 
 1 -a-. Divisional Court, VI P. jl. oi± were 
 
 affirmed. ' ""-'»- 
 
 Held, by the .Supreme Court of Canada 
 
 amnn,,igthe,iiidgri,entofti,e('ourtofApa 
 th.U the olhecr m.t only had authority, but wiw 
 |.>l.goa, „j,,„, 1 ,,„! ,„,,„,tasl,e'did, and 
 his repoitsliould be allirnied. 
 
 It isd.mbtfnl if a matter of this kind, which 
 
 !h m T /. •'■ ';' }^'? 1" ■'"''■"'-■ '^"■' l"""^e'Iure of 
 Jn, iligh Coui'tof .lustiee f.,r Ontario, ami of 
 ^'" "Iheei- o| that C.uirt in eoustrui.ig its ruh-a 
 a«<l executing an ordc of n..fcre,i,.e made to 
 him. ,,s a proper subject of appeal to the .Su- 
 preine_ t ourt. /.V O'Jhnoho'-, a So/;nf„r, 14 P 
 K. .ill, O Jhmohor V. lloMt.i/, W) S. C. R. .'Joe. 
 
 •2. To]!,i, 
 Mortsrage. I 
 
 MoiK t/. 
 
 , . he onus of shewinc that a 
 so icitor WHO i-i in possession of a mort'a.'e and 
 collects the interest has anthoritv also tocolleot 
 t he principal, ,s up ,ii the niortgag.ir, and unless 
 thLs onus is Clearly .lisciiargcil, the mortga..'or 
 :uid not the mortgagee must b.-ar the lo^sansin.' 
 i,-om the sohcitor'smiaappropriationof tiic funds" 
 H rc J mnj—Sru/./!/ y. Tracy, 21 A. H \:,\ 
 
 11 r. Costs. 
 1. Ddiixry (did Turalioii rf /;;!/. 
 
 Account!ns-/»,;,„V,/ /M„/;h,, /„ Hill, noti 
 
 ',V r' ■',{ "■"'"''" "■'' '''"--'"".I Olli,rr.<~Pr„;-inc ' 
 
 |v ,,■ 0/ /;,„ ,.„..e.]-]{y an o,.de,-, obtained by ! 
 
 uiits upon praecipe, a bill of costs was referred ; 
 
 totaxatKui, ami the taxinu olMcer was di,-eeted ' 
 
 Mi.-.keaiiacco,„,Co! all sums of inoiicv received ' 
 
 l>>t esolioitor of „, on account of the applicants. I 
 
 Under this the t.ixiiig ollieer taxed the bill ! 
 
 ^id t.iok an accoiiiit of the moneys received by | 
 
 -lie solictor, and m so doing impiircd into and 
 
 bills 
 
 November, 
 
 Application for Taxation— yVw^—.Wciai 
 :.//■-,„„.,..,,., l._Tlio solicitor defcmlci an ac- 
 tion of ejectment and piusecnted three actions 
 . loi mab.nons prosecution on behalf of the annli- 
 cants. ' " 
 
 On the ISth October, 18S!), before the tor- 
 m.natioii ot ,aiiy of .he actions, the solicitor 
 c einered to the applicants his bills „f costs in 
 hem all up to that time. On the -Ith .-Vpril 
 \S.)0, he.klivered further bills of costs in all 
 the actions, which had then been brought to an 
 
 .-Vp|/licition for a reference of all th 
 to taxation was made on the •'Otli 
 
 isno:- 
 
 Held, tli.it the application was in time ; for 
 , the retau.er existed until the litigation ended : 
 I ijud the ap|)liea,its ha.l a full ve.ir from tlio 
 de.ivcry of the bills last delivered to ai)i,Iv for 
 I die t.ixation of all the bills :— ' ' "^ 
 
 I Held, also, ihr.t the " special circumstances " 
 I v.nch by sec. U ot R. S. O. cli. l-t7, must 
 [cx.t to .lustily a refei-eiice to taxation after 
 tv elvo months Iron, .lelivery of the bills are not 
 c .iifined to cases ot aetiml frau.l or gi'oss over- 
 ' hargi! .and pi'essiire. J{,; Norman, lij Q. B. ]). 
 Oi.j, followed. 
 
 Ileld, also, tliat bringing three separate 
 actions which might all h.ave been joined in 
 one, and eharging excessive coun.sel fees, were 
 special circumstances to be reg.ir.led in order- 
 ing^ a taxation after twelve months. A'e /;«/. 
 t<'rjti4il, a So/idlor, 14 P. 11. 14U. 
 
 Application for Taxation— rhw-Smcial 
 
 .V , .'..]._U here a bil of charges ,and .iishurae 
 M eiits rendered by solicitors was jiosted to the 
 client on lie 11 th April, Is;);), 'l.„t did not 
 reieh the client till a dav or i h-o later ■_ 
 
 Held, by the Master in Cliambers, that aa 
 ttx iiar.e order for taxation made on tho 11th 
 
' liii 
 
 903 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 90£ 
 
 April, 1S94, was nuide after the expiry of 
 twelve months, iiiiil slioulil be set aside. 
 
 'I'lie bill wa.s for services rendered and moneys 
 expended in obtinning un Act of I'lirliiinient for 
 the divoice of tin; client from her husband : — 
 
 Helil, l)y the Master, that it was a solicitor's 
 bill, and as such taxable under the Solicitors' 
 Act. 
 
 Qiiiire, per Street, .1., as to this. 
 
 Held, per Street, J., that "special circum- 
 Htances " justifying an order for taxation after 
 twelve months from delivery of the bill must 
 be proved l)y the affidavits filed upon the ajjidi- 
 cation, and wliere they consist of alleged over- 
 charges, they sIujuM be plainly indicated by 
 the applicant, on whom lies the onus of estab- 
 lishing them. 
 
 And where the only overcharge indicated was 
 the payment to a (jhysieian, who was absent 
 from his business three days for the jjuipose of 
 giving evidence befoie a parliamentary com- 
 mittee, of .'j.JO and his disbursements, and it 
 appeared that the solicitors had paid the amount 
 in gooil faitli, and the client liad at one lime 
 a.Hsented to it, and it di<l not appear that the 
 physician's attendance could have been secured 
 for any lesser sum : — 
 
 Held, that there were no special circum- 
 stances warranting an order for taxation after 
 the lap.sc of twelve mouths and after settle- 
 ment of the bill liy cash and notes, which latter 
 hacf been paid in part and renewed from time 
 to time. 
 
 Decision of the Master on this point reversed. 
 In re Chifholm and Loijie, Solhitom, 10 P. It. 
 
 Application for Taxation by Solicitor — 
 
 JJisjnitc us to lletaiiiif — I'tfi-riniv as /o ijnan- 
 /itm.] — Wheie one of two alleged clients, against 
 whom solicitors seek to obtain a taxation of 
 certain bills of costs, disputes the retainer, the 
 usual order for taxation should be made against 
 the unresisting client, such taxation to be on 
 notice to the other, with liberty to him to 
 attend and intervene, and to be C(.nclusive 
 against him as to the quantum of liability in 
 case be is ultimately found liable in tlie dispute 
 as to tlie retainer, fii )•<■ Joiks, 'M'\ t'h. I). 1(15; 
 III re Sa/awa,i, []S'M] '2 Ch. •_'0l ; and //, n 
 To/tdi, 27 U. V. E. 441), discussed. 
 
 Decision of Street, J., reversed; Aleredith, 
 .1., dissenting. J!t lilacdoiia/d tt al., Siilirilm-n, 
 16 I'. H. 4i1S. 
 
 Certificate of Taxing Officer — Rrport — 
 AiipiuL\-'-'\')n.- certificate ot a taxing ofhcer 
 upon a ret'eience to taxation of a solicitor's bill 
 of costs, at the instance of a client, is a repoi't ; 
 and, under liules 848, 84!», and 850, the ajipcal 
 therefrom shoulil be to a Judg'.' in Court upon 
 seven clear days' notice. /iV Cfothtrs, a Soli(:i- 
 for, 15 P. Pi. 9-1 
 
 Certificate of Taxing Officer — h'ipor/ — 
 y1 /i/jfaV. j— The re|i<irt av certificate of an otiicer 
 upon the tax.ation of the costs of a solicitor as 
 against his client tails under the piovision of 
 Itule P2'J() ('/) as to its confirmation, ami is, for 
 
 th: 
 
 piirpi 
 
 Interlocutory Costs — Scl-qii'— Jj'tHcrctiun. ] — 
 Decisions of the Master in Chambers and Rose, 
 .]., 15 1'. R. 2(j9, refusing to oider a set off of 
 c(^rtain interlocutory c(jsts against the amount 
 alleged to lie due to the .solicitors upon bills in 
 course of taxation, athrmed on ap))eal : — 
 
 Held, that, as the taxation had never been 
 completed, and the solicitors declined to pro- 
 ceed with it, they were not entitled to set 
 off. 
 
 If the taxation had been completed, the fact 
 of the interlocutory costs being oi'dered to be 
 
 j piid forthwith after taxation would not havr 
 
 i prevented their being ordered to be set off; but 
 it raised an inference that it was not intended 
 
 j that the\ should be set off'. 
 
 Whether the costs in question should bi 
 
 i set olf or not was in the 5laster's discretion. 
 
 , and, having regard to the fact that they had 
 been assigned, and to the other circumstances 
 
 j before the Court, it could not be said that an 
 
 I inqiroper discretion had been exerci.sed. Vi'. 
 
 j Vlurkc and llohnvs, Sulicltors, l(j P. R. 04. 
 
 I Party Liable — ('imts nj 'I'djutinn — Sd-oj)'.]— 
 The jiarties who initiate and intervene upon th. 
 
 i taxation of a solicitor's bill of costs become per- 
 
 1 s( iially liable to pay the costs of taxation. 
 
 j And where solicitors rendered to the assign^ 
 of an insolvent their bill f(u- servi<'es to the 
 
 I insolvent, and the assignee tiixc<l the billaii'' 
 hull it reduced by more than one-sixth : — 
 
 Held, that he had a right personally t^ 
 i-ecover from the solicitors the cc'Sts of taxation. 
 and that there should be no set-oil' ag.iinsl tin 
 amount conniig to the solicitors from the estati 
 of the insolvent as a dividend upon their- bill. 
 Il( Uinjiis find F(nriril/, So/iiifm-i, 14 P. R. ."i'i 
 
 Party Liable— /'?"■(■///(- Ordt-.r — Account.]— 
 All <■.:■ jMirti- orilers are /i/ricn/u pctentix. 
 
 And where the defendants in an acticjn liaii 
 agreed with the plaintill'to ]iay the costs of \\\> 
 solicitors, and, being furnished with a bill or 
 such costs, obtained on pr;eci|ie an order foi' 
 the taxation thereof, which order was drawii up 
 as an order to tax i:pon an apijlication by tin 
 client, and directed that the taxing otllin 
 should take account of all sums of montv 
 received by the solicitors for or on acc(.unt of 
 the api)licaiits, such order was vacated with 
 costs. 
 
 The defendants were to be regarded as tlihd 
 persons liable to jiay, and were entitled to 
 an order f(jr taxation ; but they shouhl liavi' 
 discliised all the facts and ap|iliid for a spe.'ial 
 order ; and the ])lairitili should have been madi' 
 a jiarty to the j.roceeding under Rule 1220, tin 
 the iiur]iose of taking an account between him 
 and the solicitors, lie McCmi/ii/, I'lqiltr, iiikI. 
 MrCtirl/ii/. Solicitor.'', 15 P. R. 2li'l. 
 
 Party Liable- .SV/ioo/ Hoard — Hati'payi-r.]— 
 Held, by the Court of Appe.d, reversing tliu 
 decision of the <i>neen's liench Division, 21 (I. 
 R. 280, that an individual ratepayer of a si'linol 
 section is not merely by reason of his having to 
 contribute as a ratepayer, ert'aled to obtain an 
 order for tax.'ition ot a bill of costs delixered U\ 
 and paid by the Jtoard of I'ublic School Tiusti.es 
 
 >f an appeal, a repr.rt within the cither under R. S. O. 1887 i h. 14 
 
 meaning of Rules 848 and 840. Ford v. ]\la>i 
 
 and 42, or under Con. Rule 1229. 
 
 l(i P. R,. 25. .SV. 7.V llohiniion, a Solicitor, 17 I Upon ajipeal to the Supremo Court of C 
 
 P. R. 137, 
 
 ada 
 
90£. 
 
 ts — Si'l-qli'— iJ'iHcrction. } — 
 !!• ill (Miaiiiliers iuul Rose, 
 inj^ to ordfi- a set off of 
 aosts iigaiiist tlie amount, 
 10 solicitors upon bills in 
 1 iDt'd on ap])eal : — 
 taxation hail nuvor been 
 olioitors (k'c:lineil to pro- 
 icre not entitled to set 
 
 been eonipleted, the fael 
 ists being ordered to be 
 axation would not havi- 
 ordered to be set off; but 
 that it was not intended 
 
 ott'. 
 in (pie><tion should be 
 
 the Slaster's discretion. 
 ) the fact that they had 
 
 the other eirounistances 
 mid not lie said that an 
 lad been exercised. Ri 
 lUUor^, 10 P. R, i)4. 
 
 'k (</' Ta.iiitioii — Sd-off.} — 
 Le and intervene upon tli^ 
 ; bill of costs become per 
 le costs of taxation, 
 i rendered to the assignc 
 
 bill for services to tin- 
 iignee taxed the billaui' 
 
 than one-sixth : — 
 I a right personally tn 
 tors the costs of taxation. 
 
 be no set-otV ag.dnst tin 
 solicitors from tlie estate 
 dividend upon tlieir bill. 
 /, 6'o//V'7o/-.s, 14 V. R. :is 
 
 fcipc (Jrtlc.r — Account.]— 
 Ill ricuhi pclciitii. 
 ■ndants in an action had 
 ill' to ]}ay the costs of hi.'- 
 furnished with a bill or 
 on pra-cipe an order for 
 liicli order was drawn up 
 :in an application by the 
 that the taxing otticcr 
 of all sums of money 
 tors f(ir or on acctiUnt ni 
 orilei- was vacated with 
 
 : to be regarded as thinl 
 , and were entitled to 
 
 ; but they should liavc 
 and apjilicd fer a spci'ial 
 li'shotdd ha\(' been made 
 ing undei- Rule l'2'2i\ foi 
 
 an account between him 
 V- McCiirlliil, I'rjjtu-, (lull 
 5 P. R. L'Ol. 
 
 <ol Ilnard — Jiali'pnyir.] — 
 >f Appeal, reversing the 
 
 s Rench Division, l2i (I. 
 ual ratepayer of a scluml 
 ly reason of his liavin;j to 
 yer, ei'f-'iiled to obtain an 
 
 liill of costs delivered t.i 
 f I'ublic Scboiil Trusties, 
 ISsT ill. i-iT, sees. "rJ 
 ^ule !•«!). 
 
 l5ui)reino Court of Can 
 
 905 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 JJ t ;,' ' ^'*."'"«' C- •!., strong and fJwynno 
 ente. tdn Tr"""'« '" V"'"-^ •'^'<' j"n^.li.^tiou t''. 
 one of tav H ^'"'T'' *'"" «"''J«'-t'.mtter being 
 
 t£l 'r'.t'',""'' *-'• ■'■• ■^'™"K'"'<1 I'atterson, JJ., 
 that a latepayer is not entitle.! to an order for 
 taxation under said section. 
 
 i er lascliercau, J Tlie r',>ii,.f i, 
 
 'liction to entertah, the aJpS as tl ■''■'•''''■" 
 
 906 
 
 I The reference lasted for 1,^7 hours I« ,>f 
 
 " I'.ch were occupied in argunrent, ^^,'1^, 
 
 1 o e of the tune was devoid to the mai ^^..a' 
 
 HioiiM be cliargeil with an occupation rent and 
 «o, at what am<n,nt. The M.lster found that 
 they were chargeable with a. rent of $312 W 
 
 thete occupied in taking the eVdenee, .•»„,! 
 «•+( toi tlie argument :— ' 
 
 Held, that the allowance of counsel fees upon 
 
 Retaining Pee.] -The .solicitor during the 
 ogress of the a...tion in res|,ecl of yvh^ e 
 
 costs ,n .piestion were incurre.l made a ,.o r ct 
 .1 writing with his clients for the pavine t, 
 
 him of a retain no- fee of <!l(il) ,.v„l . • n 
 
 tothemtheeff^aof tieb !,,'t 'tf^a n 
 case of their success in the ".ctloi' , Id t;s^ I 
 being asvarded to them, they would no be be i 
 to tax against or claim from the opposite pu tv ' 
 the amount ot this fee. The odicJ, 'allowed 1 1 I 
 retaining fee „n taxation, and reported t'l- 1 to I 
 contract was a fair ami reasonable one - 
 
 He d, on appeal, that the contract Jould not 
 be entorced against the clients I 
 
 S oti^'u- ?V','" t'' '•''■'*P«^'»'« -'Heritors, R, 
 SO. ch 14, relates to matters of conveyaiic u,r 
 etc and not to the conduct of an action in tlu' 
 ordinary way. Ford v. Ma.ion, Iti P R .." 
 
 Retaining Pee.]-By the judmnent in an 
 action the defendant was rci/iired t,. ,,a v t 
 Jilain Ills cost.-, of a former action, as 1 etwee 
 solicitor and client, to be taxed • "-'-"'■en 
 
 Held that an unpaid ret.uniug fee which the 
 plaiutitls had agreed in wiling to pay o h, ? 
 solicitors, over and above theco^tso the a • on 
 
 ireddi-. nml Wd.o,,, 2 Ch. Cluunb. R. 417 ami 
 Ford v. J „.,o«, l(i ].. R. o-,, approved ad 
 
 K S '■'^'^"''"'' ^'""'>" V. ComHlty, lu p. 
 
 •1 sses w* 1 ^"■' ;""' '"^'''''-'linglv no wit- 
 
 ... '.',',■'''' ' ^"? t'"-' ''■'Xing olficer had no ,iis,.reH<.n 
 reaseil counsel ft 
 
 of the (evidence. 
 
 The taxing ollieer alhiwed the -s.dicitor S77 ^O 
 , or brief upon appeal from the Maste's report 
 
 loi (.o|nes ot the dejiositioiis • 
 
 I Held that the .solicitor had no pnniA foci. 
 ,.t to Older and charge for these copies, ami 
 n the ab-;enceot any authority from his el ents 
 should not be al owed fortheni upon taxaWon ' 
 
 1 1.0 taxing officer allowed the -solicitor sLt", 
 counsel tee upon the appeal. .s,._. for ravellin ' 
 expenses ,„ids;l(l ..ouusel fee upon theX" 
 t lis ino lon or judgment, which came boW 
 the I (mrt w n\\ the appeal — 
 
 Hel.l, that these allowances, tluui -h liberal 
 «ere not so clearly wrong a.s u> jT.st fy the 
 
 "1 aiipeal, 17 p. R. 137. 
 
 Hi P. R. 4i.';j. .SV,-,y; 
 
 ■,?,"■■■'.; f"'"^'*'"-' "■'"' w^^lsoa notary, and 
 ■acting in the latter capacity obtains for a client 
 the allowance of a pension from the U„ te.l 
 States C.vernmeut, is entitled to charge for h^s 
 services such somas mav be a.^reed uno and 
 1.S not bound by the .statntorv regnlato.fs affect 
 
 ch^i^:;'t::;;:J ^'-^- - ''^'^" ^^^ 
 
 . :'7. .soiciu.rin delivering a bill of coRb. 
 o mi ed to lualuyniy chargesfor 'Nlaysemplojed 
 » «oing to ami leturniug from Ottawa " unon 
 
 sought now to make these cinrges if thTtaxW 
 o hcer had allovvcl him cerlaiu^'sums , I larfS 
 the original lull for tr.uelling ex-peimes bit 
 
 was tr.iveiiiiig on a pass : 
 
 H..M.that ,l,er.^was no clear evidence that 
 
 •■-.-.. >,wuii.sei 
 
 till' trial, as the action could 
 
 a special an. 
 
 ce with brief at 
 not be sii.l to b 
 
 >w a f )e for advisi 
 
 I important character, nor ti 
 
 liigon evidence. 
 
 the 
 
 omis.sion arose from mere accident 
 
 take, and that the Court I 
 
 or mi8- 
 
 said to 1 
 
 lo,r could not te 
 
 wrong in holding that no spociaJ 
 
 circumstances were disclosed for mak 
 iimeudmont. 
 
 ing the 
 
907 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 908 
 
 Wni'4 
 
 Per Osier, .1. A. — As a j,'cneral rule, it is too i Rule 739, which was useless and not according 
 late to make Muh !in apijlication after tlie result to the imicticc, and was refused because thr. 
 of the taxation is known. 'indorsement on the writ of summons claimed 
 
 Judgmtnt of the Queen's Bench iJivisional | " interest on arrears of rent," .md was, tliere- 
 (Jourt, 141'. K. 571, attirmed. He O'Doiiolioc, a i fore, not a good special indor.senient. Jia/ihrlii 
 Solicilar, 1") 1'. R. iKJ. v. Qiiiitn, Haldinn v. Mrihiin, Hi P. 1!. 1^48. 
 
 : 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 Unnecessary Proceedings — Adniiiiiitratlun 
 — Action.} — The ordei' and decision of Rohert- 
 Hon, J., \'^ v. R. lo.'i, upon apjii'al from taxa- 
 tion of costs between solicitor and client, 
 disallowing to the solicitors tlie additional ! 
 costs occasi(]ncd Ijy tlieir liringing on tlicii' 
 client's helialf an action lor administration, 
 where a summary appliiation would have 
 suificed, was aiiirmcd by the Court ot Appeal; | 
 Burton, .1. A., dissenting. i 
 
 In the adniinistrati(.n action the additional 
 costs incurred by the defendants in that action 
 were allowed to llum by way of sct-oll against 
 the costs au arded to the plaintiH' :— 
 
 Held, that no relief could be obtained by tlic 
 client, upon a proctcding for taxation of costs, 
 in respect of the lo.'^s suficrcd by her in virtually ' 
 pa^ing these costs to the defendants. Hi- 
 AihnbyaiHl Wur, So'idtorx, 14 V. 1!. •2-27. 
 
 Unnecessary Proceeding."; — Jfnl/i/Jici(y of 
 Aclionn.] — A solicitor, acting on behalf of three 
 clients, bioughl three separate a<-tions for mali- 
 cious prosecution against the same defendant. 
 The three causes of .■iction all arose out of an 
 information for an assault laid by the defendant 
 against the plaintitTs : — 
 
 Held, that under Rr.le 300 the three causes of 
 action could have Ijten joined in one action : 
 that it was the duty of the solicitor to have so 
 advised his clients ; and that not having done 
 so, he could not be hoard to say that Ids clients 
 had instructed him to biing three separate 
 actions. And u])on taxation of his Ijill between 
 solicitor and client he was allowcil costs as of 
 one action only. Hoolh v. Brisco", 2 i). B. 1). 
 496, and Voii v. 1,'oini, >/, 17 Q. B. D. &2r-,, fol- 
 lowed. Apjilitoii V. t'hapil 'I'mrii Pa//(r Co., 
 45 L. J. Ch. •_»76, not followed. Be Buttirjield, 
 a Solicitor, 14 ]'. R. i307. 
 
 Unnecessary Proceedings — Sjikci'i/ Aijrct- 
 mciit — Midtiviicily of Allien,'^ — Aj'idaritu — 
 Million for J i'diimod.\ — Two actions were 
 brought by the same phiintitl's against diU'crent 
 defendants to recover rent for diti'crent parcels 
 ot laud, in which the tlefenccs were not identical. 
 A compiomise was elfected, and it was agreed 
 between the jiarties "that judgment -^hall be 
 entered in each of the said actions for the 
 amounts claimed therein by the ijlaintill's, with 
 costs of suit lietwecn solicitor and client ; " and 
 judgments were entered accordingly : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintiB's were entitlcil to tax 
 a separate .set of costs for each action. 
 
 The plaintifi's maile six attidavits on produc- 
 tion, either pr(im]ited by the action of the 
 defence or by way of \oluntary supplement to 
 the original alHdavit : — 
 
 Held, per Boy<l, C, in Chambers, that they 
 were entitled to tax the costs of one atlidavit 
 only, with extra folios for the additional matter 
 contained in the sub.s('({Uent a.tlidavits : — 
 
 Held, also, per Boyd. ('., that upon the tax- 
 ation "between solicitoi- and client" of the 
 plaintifi's' ccsts, they were not entitled to the 
 costs of a motion for summary judgment under 
 
 •1. Director of Compaui/. 
 
 Profit Costs — Contrdiutorij — Sd-ojl'. \ — Wher. 
 a dirccte..', who was also president, ot a conijiany 
 was appointed by the boai'd of directors and 
 acted as solicitor for the company : — 
 
 Held, in winding-up pioi eeding.s, that he w;i- 
 enticled to i>rotit costs in resjiect of causes in 
 Court conducted Ijy him as solicitor for the com 
 ])any, but not in respect of business done out ci 
 Court, and was entitled to set oil the amount it 
 such costs against the amount of his liability :i- 
 a shareholder. Crnduct v. I'ijur, I Maen. * (.. 
 (iG4. followed. J'e MimiroS' mr PijK and. Ji: 
 Mfj. Co.~-riar.io7i'.-' Cant, 'id 0. R. 289. 
 
 3. Payment Out if Covrt. 
 
 Undertaking to Refund.]— •S'ec AijririiltiinU 
 Jus. Co. V. Sanjent, Hi P. R. 397, niiti- 231. 
 
 4. Rerc>-f-ry hij Arlio'i. 
 
 Quantum Meruit. 1 — In proceedings before 
 the Kxchccjuer and Su])reme Courts, there being 
 no tarilV as between attorney and client, ^'ii 
 i.ttovney has the ri'^ht in an action for his cos-t^ 
 to establish the qvantnm mervit of his services by 
 oral evidence. Paradi.i v. iio.«t , 21 S. C. R. 4Ul 
 
 _ Set-off-- iS'^'cm^ Sirrirts.] — In an action by i 
 firm of attorneys for costs due from clients, the 
 defendants were not allowed to set oH' against 
 the plaintifi's claim a sum pai<l by one of tliciii 
 to one of the solicitoi s for special services to Ir. 
 rendered by him, there being no mutu.ility, ami 
 the jiayment not being for the general serviue.j 
 covered by the retainer to the firm. McDoiiijull 
 V. Cavitrvn, Bhkford \. Camtron, 21 S. C. E. 
 379. 
 
 IV. Lien for Costs. 
 
 Fruits of Litigation — Col/imrc Seltlfviml 
 
 ^Notice] — Where a com])romise ot the action 
 ' has been etl'ected between the parties without 
 
 tlie intervention of the solic'itors, in order ti> 
 '' entitle the plaintitTs solicitor to enforce his lieu 
 
 for costs upon the fruits of the litigation, by 
 ; means of an order upon the defendant, collir 
 I sion nnist be shewn, or the act complained of 
 ' must have been done after notice from the 
 
 solicitor comiilaining. 
 
 And where the parties made such a coiii- 
 1 promise, and the plaintili's solicitor gave notice' 
 j to the defendant's solicitor aftei' the agreement 
 I but before payment of the money agreed upon:— 
 ! Held, that this was .suiiicient notice. .Van 
 I ridfje V. InlamI, 14 P. R. 29. 
 
90S 
 
 selees and not according 
 ivns vefupcd lieciinse th(! 
 lit of suMiniona claimed 
 )f rent," and was, there- 
 I indorsement, liakhciii 
 lA(/»i)7 , 10 P. H. -MS. 
 
 of Coiiipany. 
 
 ihii/or^—S(l-nff.\— Who; 
 J president, ot a company 
 ! Ijoard of directors am! 
 le company : — 
 pro( eedinj^s, that he was 
 s in respect of causes in 
 m as solicitor for the com 
 ct of ))usiiiess done out cf 
 d to set otl' the amount d 
 anuiunt of his liability ;l^ 
 •■/.■ V. Pij,<r, 1 Macn. .t(;. 
 iiifo Si ii'it Pi/ii and Bf'k 
 axt, 2() O. II. 289. 
 
 Out of Cuvrt. 
 
 fund.]— .S'ee Ai/ricii!tiimt 
 P. R. 397, 'u,lr-2:n. 
 
 ■y hi/ .-I'-'iO''. 
 
 ! — In proceedings hefi.n 
 ])reme Courts, there being 
 attcuiey and ilient, I'.n 
 in an ac'u'nn for his cost> 
 m ini.niit of his services l)y 
 s V. Boxsi, 21 S. C. K. 410 
 
 ■(■/<•(>.] — In an action by i 
 :osts due from clients, \\i> 
 .liowed to set (jH' agaiii.^' 
 sum pai<l by "iie of tlieiu 
 ' for S])ecial services to In; 
 licingno mutuality, ami 
 ^ for the general service.' 
 :r to the firm. McDiiuijh'' 
 V. Cameron, 21 S. C. 1' 
 
 fOR COST.S. 
 
 ion — CoNvKiri; Seltlminil 
 'omproniise of the action 
 ween the parties with'iut 
 lie solicitors, in order tu 
 olicitor to enforce his lici! 
 uits of the litigation, h) 
 )on the defendant, lolhi 
 i)r the act complained nl 
 e after notice from the 
 
 irties made such a com- 
 itilfs solicitor gave notii.' 
 citor aftei' the agrecmcni 
 the money agreed upon ;— 
 s sufficient notice. i>an 
 . R. 29. 
 
 909 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 Fruits of Lltisatlon-rv,7».MVc S,'l//imi;,f~ 
 Ao^r..J-lt,s eonipetent for a client t., settle 
 1.18 uc'tion behind the back of his .solicitor, not- 
 withstanding tlu.t th.. .solicitor has given notice 
 to the cln.ut and to the o,,posile party not to 
 settle except witl, the soliutor's consent. 
 
 lhe,.,i„„;,l,i,. inte,fe.<necof the Court can- 
 not be inyohe, on behalf of a solicitor in an 
 action settle,! in such a manner, uide.ss there 
 are ruits arrsmg from such settlement ni.on 
 which the sol, cit„r'.s lien can atta.Oi ; for there 
 is no hen on the actidii. 
 
 . Upon such a .settlement, unless where .-ollu- 
 sion between the p.'irties to defrau,! the plain- ' 
 tiffs solicuor of his eost.. is clearly sheln, a 
 defendant wil not be ordered t., pay the coks ' 
 r pV 8- '"''^■""'■«' '^i"'""/ V. CoinwliW, ; 
 
 910 
 
 Held, also, tiiat tiie referee before whom the 
 adiMHiLstration proceedings were pendiii.' had 
 »<■ authonly to make an or.ler .lepriviio' the 
 solieitor of his lien, not havim.' heeii so directed 
 l>y tiic ailniinistra'.i<,M onler, an.l tlicre litMii.r ,„, 
 t-encral (Jrder permitting such an interference 
 JMth th(| .soli,.,t„r's /„■;„„; ,„,./, riixht to the 
 tiiiid. /!,// V. II'/(;//(', :-'l .s. C. ].;. (;,■;(;. 
 
 Fund in Coxirt- C/i'n,,,P of So/ii-l/or.. ~ 
 I non(,es.l lu a„ action for an account against 
 « trustee tlK. plaintilis c!,a„,.o,l th^ir sofi.. or 
 during t ,e course of the action. l',efore the 
 change th. first solicitor obtaioci a judgment of 
 .■eference, and, on the defendant •s'^consent.u 
 TfiUT T','"-"!" "'".',f''""'t I'.V the defciHlaot 
 subject to mrther order and to a claim for cm! 
 mmion. Nothing was done by Uw, .sc...,, 1 
 .solicitor to procure the pavment in. Tie 
 .second sohut.a' then c<.nductcd llie reference 
 "Md brought the action to an end, with ho 
 result that the Sl'oO was freed tVom all claims 
 for comiinssmn and left absohitely as m.mey 
 recovered for tiie plaintilis :— ^ ; 
 
 Held, per Royd, C, in Chambers, that the 
 fund in (.ourt had been directly •'created " by 
 the exertions of the first .solicitor, an.l that he I 
 ^.ad a first charge ujion it f(,r liis costs. , 
 
 upon appe.il to a Division.d C<,nrt : — 
 Held, per Fergus(,n and .Mere.liih, .1,1. tint 
 . le general rule is tiiat tiie solicitor «ho con- 
 duces the- action to a .succosfu! terminaticm is 
 entitled to be jiaid (irst. 
 
 But per Ferguson, .1., tliat tlie .'<-.ViO sli.add 
 he consuiered iis paid in immediatelv uijon the 
 order being made ; and the general' rule doe. 
 not apply to a case like this, wiien tlio first 
 .solicitor has virtually preserve,! and reoov(M'ed 
 )i fund by his e.vertions, ami has not abamlone.l 
 Ins right to a lien, or been )iaid. 
 
 Per Meredith, ,)., that the fund m'is not 
 ' created by the first solieitor ; ami there was 
 iiothinsfin the circanistanecs to take tliis ca-e 
 imt of tne general rule. 
 
 Corinai/.- V. />;../». ;i De(i. & .J. ].", ami /.', 
 lyiiijhl, [mu] -2 Ch. .S68, discussed. Fan/ y 
 Mam!. 15 P, R, 30'2. -"' ' ^. 
 
 Insolvent Estate-,1 /,.«»« o/Woz/ry Fu,ii/ 1 
 -Iwi. .ict.ons were brought by a tnider, to 
 ieslrain proceedings under a cliattel iiiort-a-e 
 , against the trader's stock of goods, and interlo- 
 cutory injunctions were giante.l, b.,t the actions 
 «ere not earned further. The chattel m, rtga-ee 
 brought an actum to recover the mortgage nmney 
 and to restrain the mortgagor fi„m .sellin- the 
 g'ooils, M-herenpou the latter made an assi-ninent 
 
 oreredit<,rs.ai,d,by,.n,a,ngementiothat'action, 
 the goo.ls were .sold by tlie assignee, and pav- 
 inent was nia.le in full to tiio'ino-tga-ee for 
 debt, interest and .-o.ts of that act^n, after 
 notice and without objection on the part of any 
 of the creditors or of tiie solicitor who conducted 
 the actions brouudit bv tlie trader 
 
 Thesojicit.ir claimed tlial by Ids ex.rtions in 
 
 : these actions he had saved the goo,!s from being 
 
 sacrificed by summary .sale, and brought this 
 
 actum to have It declared that he was"e„title.l 
 
 Jo a preferential hen for costs upon tlie estate 
 
 in tlie hands ot the assiu'uce :~ 
 
 Held, th.-it, even if it' were .shewn that stop- 
 piiig the sale under the mortgage was a benelit 
 to the estate, there was no jni isdictioii, without 
 I the direction of a statute, to chaiire tlie pro- 
 Jierty recovered nv preserved, amf without a 
 money fund there was no subject for a lien. 
 , Costs .IS of a successful demurrer only were 
 allowe. to the .lefendant, Trimnar v. Law- 
 reiin; :i(M). R. i.s;. 
 
 Judsment — JJiri.-^loii Coiirf-^Om-vii/imi',// ] 
 ~U here solicitors claimed a lien for costs upon 
 a lu.lgment recovered, the amount of which was 
 the suiiject ot a garnishee suit in a Division 
 
 Held, that the Judge in the nivishm Court 
 ha.l power umlei' sec. 197 of the liivision Courts 
 Act, R .S. O. eh. .jl, to deciile upon the proper 
 sum to be alloweil in respect of sucii lien, and 
 was not bound to refer it elsewhere, VarkUon 
 V, layloi\ 11 P. R. 7s. 
 
 Fund In Court--.S7/a)-c of I\rrM-('o..u of 
 Othnr rai-i:,..-P,lo,-!tks-]i,f,riv.].-Ux a suit 
 or constructnm of a will and lmii!i„i:ration of 
 <«tat<,rs estate, where the i:,^ ,^ of the estate 
 had been sold aii.l the p.'ocee.ls |,,nd into Court 
 ■'. J. R.,a beiiehciaiy under the will and entitled 
 I" a share m the fund, was ordered persomillv ' 
 to pay certain costs to other beneticiaries •— ! 
 Held, re\ersi-.g the decision of the (■„„,.[ of I 
 fnipeal, Hi P. ■;. XXr,. that the soliei.':or c.f .j. ,J ! 
 »'. h.a(i a lien on the fund in Court foe his costs 
 a-i »w;tween solieitor and client, in priority 'to 
 tin; p.irties who luul been allowed costs a./ainst i 
 •I J. V>. personp.lly :— "^ 
 
 . Judgment -,v,/.„/y_ />,,/,„/;,,.]._ ^vhere 
 imlgmcnt was given for payment bv the plaiii- 
 tjll to the insolvent defeii,laiit of "the costs of 
 the action, and the defendant's sidicitois were 
 by an orjc.r of Court declared to have a lien upon 
 sucli judgment, and to h.ive the s(de rhdit to 
 control the judgment and executi.m to the 
 extent of their co.sts between .solicitor ami 
 client and the plaintitl' became entitled against 
 the defendant to costs of garnishing proceed- 
 ings upon the judgment, begun before the lien 
 was dechired :— 
 
 Hell, reversing the decision of Royd, C. 14 
 P. R ;« that Rule VM di,l not apply^o enable 
 a set-oil of the costs to be made. Clarku v. 
 Crnuliloii, it P. R. 100, 
 
 Judsment-,s:7-o//'— Pr-juili,'e— DUn-MonA 
 
 Hy tlie j.idgnient in the action (;osts were 
 
 awarued to the plaintiir against the chief defon- 
 
 dant, and to the other defendants against the 
 
DU 
 
 SOLICITOR. 
 
 912 
 
 ml 
 
 jtliiintilT, without any (liruutiou as to setting off! 
 costs, anil t)ie plaintiif's .siilicitor aastTtod a lion j 
 upon tlis oosfc.s au ;irileil to liis client againut the 
 chief (kfenchiiit. i'liu defeudants all detumled \ 
 by the same solicitor : — 
 
 HeM. that, under Rule 1'204, the (|ne.stion of 
 setting otf enst.s »-as in tlie jmlieial diseretion of 
 tlie taxing olli* r, and that discretion was 
 rightly exercised l>y tlie officer in refusing to Hct 
 off the costs (inleied to he paid to tlie piaintitV 
 by the chief clefemhint against tlie coats ordertil 
 to be paid by the plaiutiti' to the other defen- j 
 daiits. 
 
 Coiistnictlon of I'ules 1204 and 120o. | 
 
 'I'he old(.T decisions as to set-otl'arc not appli- 
 cable since liiilc ;i. F/'/i V. Day, 14 R R. ;n'_'. 
 
 Judgment — V. ff/' ni' iit — (larnUhmnit. ] — It I 
 appealed that the solicitor for the execution j 
 creditor iiail a lien for his costs up(Ui tiie judg- 
 iiieut obtained liy his client, and also an assign- 1 
 nieiit of tile judgiiieiit, wliereof the garnishor i 
 and garnishee liotli had notice : — i 
 
 Held, that the ganiisiior and garnishee should i 
 not have settled the amount garnished tietween \ 
 tliemselves ; au<l tliat tlie solicitor should have i 
 intervened, and had tlie attachment order set 
 aside by disclosing the assignment to himself of , 
 the debt attached. 0V/»/,- v. F,-. tmitii, 14 P. R. 
 
 Papers and Documents— Wairer—Iicphnn.] 
 — The plaint ill; a sniiciior, claiming on the defen- 
 dant's jiapcrs a lien for costs, settled with him, 
 taking a note therefor jrayable on demand. He 
 then went to the United States, leaving the 
 note and papers with another s(dieitor as his 
 agent. Tlie <lefend:iiit, stating that he leiiuired 
 the papers, or some of them, tor use in his Imsi- 
 ness, brought reple\-iu proceedings in the Divi- 
 sion ('(iurt, giving a bond to prosecute the suit 
 with effect and without dehiy, or to return the 
 property icjilevied and to pay the damages .sus- 
 tained by the issuing of the writ, and there was 
 a breach of the bund in not prosecuting tlie suit 
 with eliV'ct. Under the replevin the defendant 
 only procured some of tlic papers and which 
 were tendered liaek to the ]ilaintitl'and refused, 
 the defendant stating that the> were of no 
 value, the agent having retained the valiiabh 
 ones. In an action on the IkuuI by the plaintiff 
 to recover the amount of the note as damages he 
 bail sustained by the replevin : — 
 
 Held, ])er Hoyd, U., that even if any lien 
 existed, whii-h was (picstionable, by reason of 
 the taking of the note and dejiarture from the 
 country, it was not displaced by tlie replevin 
 suit ; but. in any event, the plaint ill' had failed 
 to prove any actual dam.ige ; and though there 
 might be judgment for nominal <lainages and 
 costs, there would l)e a setofFof the defendant's 
 costs of trial ; and the action was dismissed 
 without costs. 
 
 I'luler the Division Courts A(.'t, R. S. (). cli. 
 51, sec. l2(i(), the whole matter could have been 
 litigated in the Division Court. 
 
 V"" /e as to the amount of damages recover- 
 ttble. 
 
 The fact of the conditions of the bond being 
 in the alternative instead of the conjunctive 
 reiiri.vke.! on. 
 
 On appeal to a Divisional Court the judg- 
 ment was alHvmed. Kemiin v. Mnn/imaliL L'2 
 <>. R. 4.'<4. 
 
 V. I'lt.vcTisiNi! Without Ckrtifi<;.\tk. 
 
 Member of Firm — Ifn/i/inrr-oiU — EiinjipKl. J 
 — .\I., a solicitor whoha.l not taken out the certi- 
 ficate entitling Id'n to (jractisp in the Ontario 
 Coui'ts, .allowed his name to appear iu news- 
 paper udvertisements and on prolessional cards 
 and letter heads as a member of a tirm in active 
 practice ; he was not, in fact, a member of the 
 firm, receiving none of its jirotits and paying 
 none of its expenses, and the firm name did not 
 appear as solicitors of record in any of the pro- 
 ceedings in their professional Imsiness. The 
 Law Sciciety took proceedings against M. to re 
 cover the [lenalties imposed on s.ilieitor:) prac- 
 tising without certificate, in « liicli it was shewn 
 that the name of the firm was indcused on cer- 
 tain papers filed of rec<'rd in suits carried on iiv 
 the tirm : — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, b") A. R. Ipo, .nd of the (.hieeu's Uencii 
 Division, 13 O. R. 104, that M. did not "piau 
 tise as a solicitor '' within the meaning of t he 
 Act imposing the penalties, R. S. O. i,S77 ch. 
 140. and that he was not estoppel, by permit- 
 ting his name to ajipear as a ineniiier of a firinoi 
 practising scdicitors, from siiewing that ho was 
 not such a nicmber in fact. Mrai/viiiiiUlv. Lan- 
 Sociity of L'jijii ,• Canada, ISS. C. R. 203. 
 
 VI. PiiiviLKCi-:. 
 
 j Witness to Deed. J --Held, that where a soli- 
 
 I citor or ccjiuisel of one of the parties to a suit 
 i has put his name as a witness to a deed between 
 j the parties, he ceases, in respect <if the oxeeu- 
 I tioii of the instrument, to lie clothed with the 
 i character of a solicitor or counsel, and is bouuil 
 j to disclose all that jiasseil at the time relating,' 
 j to such execution. Ilohsdii v. Kcinji, .') lOsp. ^yl, 
 I and Cratrroiir V. Saltir, IS Ch. D. .SO, followed.' 
 Miii/te V. The Qntcii, 3 Kx. C. 1!. 304. 
 
 VII. RliOCUKDIXlJ^ AflAINST. 
 
 1. Ai'tioiis. 
 
 Neslinence—Assi./iiiDi 11/ of Claim for.]- A 
 claim by a client for negligence against a firm of 
 solicitors in directing the distribution of moneys 
 in the sheriffs iiaiids was assigned by him to 
 another, and by the latter to the jilaintiff :- 
 
 Held, jier Armour, C..1., at the trial, that 
 the claim did not by virtue of }{, s. O. ch. 
 l'-'2, see. 7 (O. ), pass to the plaintiff so as to en- 
 able him to maintain an action therefor in his 
 own name ; but in any event no negligence wtus 
 proved. 
 
 On appeal to a Divisional Court the juilgni.nt 
 was afHrmed on the gromul of the abseiicc ni 
 any proof of negligence ; but 
 
 Per MacMahon, .1., that if negligence li.id 
 been proved, the ] laintiH' could projierly have 
 maintained the action in his own name. J^uiil- 
 laii' V. O'VuHtior, •_'.'{ (). R, (iOti. 
 
 Negligence -/V.;/(V/--( '/„/,, ,/ JwlijmniL]- k 
 solicitor is liable in damages to bis client for 
 neglecting to obey instructions to register ^ 
 judgment and tliereby precduding the client 
 
912 
 
 913 
 
 iViTiiKCT Ckbtikkutk. 
 
 SPECIAL EXAMINER. 
 
 — Hiihlinri-out — JUito/ipiil. ] 
 lia.t not taken out tlio oorti- 
 t.) ]j:ai;tisp in the Ontario 
 
 natni) to appear in news 
 I and on jjiolessional canlM 
 
 niumlierof a titiii in active 
 , in fact, a nioiuber of the 
 
 (if its ])rolitH and paying 
 and the firm name ijid not 
 f record in any of llie pro- 
 'ofessional Imsijieshi. Tlit- 
 ('•coding's against M. to re 
 niposed on .solicitori prai;- 
 ate, in « liicli it was shewn 
 
 tirni was indorsed on eer- 
 icord in suits carried on in- 
 
 ! judgment of tlie Court of 
 , .nd !•[ the Ij'ucen'g Bein:li 
 -I-, tliat .\1. did not "piau- 
 i'itliin tlie meaning of I lu- 
 nalties, U. S. O. is77 cli. 
 not cstoppt .1, l)y permit 
 •ar as a member of a firm oi 
 from siiewinf,' tliat lie was 
 1 fact. Mftrihinnill V. /,((('■ 
 ttda, ISS. C. R'. -203. 
 
 'niVILKCK. 
 
 .J — Held, that where a soli- 
 le of the p;uties to a. suit 
 . witness to a deed between 
 (, in respect of the oxeeu- 
 it, to lie clothed with the 
 r or counsel, and is bouu.l 
 asscd at the time relatinij 
 ,'(///.so/i v, Ki ,n]i, ,') Ksp. ."d, 
 >; IS I Ml. I). ;W, followed, 
 
 ■.i Kx. c. u. H>n. 
 
 EDI.N(;-i Acf.VINST. 
 
 Actldii'i. 
 
 iniiuiif of Claim for.] — \ 
 iegligeiu;e against a firm of 
 the disti'ilintion of moneys 
 < was assigned by him t« 
 ••tier to the ]ilainti(f ;- 
 , CI., at the trial, that 
 y virtue of U. S. (). .;li. 
 :o the plaintiff so as to en- 
 an actic/n tliorefor in liis 
 y event no negligence was 
 
 sioual Court the judgment 
 groun.l of the absence ii( 
 .'e ; but 
 
 , that if negligence h.ul 
 intiti' could properly have 
 in his own name. /^uid- 
 . H. (i!)(). 
 
 /i-ii'i'dii. (f Jiiiiijmiiit.^- A 
 lamiiges to his client fm 
 istructions U> register ;' 
 ly prciduding tlu; cliciii 
 
 flel"t 'T,")'/"";. tl";.'"n'.m.t of hi.s judgn.ent 
 deht. J/etf V. J'ini. /'on,/, IS S. C. li. -iJIO? 
 
 Wrongfully Commencing Civil Action 
 
 Malir.^Sj.na/ M„;,„;/,,J .. Action for dam- 
 Hges aga.nst Hoheitors for. as alleged in the 
 '?ulIv"wiH "f '-•'^'""•.""■.•ongfully Ll unlaw' 
 full.v without any instructions or retainer" 
 issu.ng a writ of .summons against the plainti'tF 
 >" tlic mum- of a tliird partv, by r4.son of 
 
 wl.ichtheplantill' was inured in -his oc,.np 
 ton as a builder, su(lc,v,l in his credit and 
 
 •mce of h s contracts, and luol to li.irrow money 
 'It a higher mteiest than lie would .itherwise 
 .ave ha,| to do, and other crc.litors were imliiJc'l 
 
 ise and settle at great loss :— 
 ,,.,^,[f''''f "" '''^'""'■'•'■'■. tli.d neither malice and 
 ■ri' . .d 1 '"''■''^""'^''''-; "'"• Iiiobable cause, nor 
 special damage, lioth ot which are ne,;cssarv in 
 .such an action, were sullicicntlv allcL'ed 
 
 the pioceedings complained of the plaintiff was 
 put into insolvency or bankrnijtcv, if such a 
 thing were possible in this country, might be a 
 
 tni 
 
 And, it appearing that the third solicitor had 
 a sum of money in his hands against which he 
 alleged tliat he had a claim for costs, an orfler 
 wa,s made for delivery and taxation of bills 
 of cost.s am for an accounting, and for payment 
 liy bun of the balance, if any, found due :— 
 ^^^ Ultras he denied that any balance was 
 
 Held, that it would be unfair to add to the 
 order a provision th^t in dcfiiult of payment his 
 name should be struck otr the r.ill. A'e /iridn. 
 dmu, 16 l>. R •J.Sti, distinguishe,!. lie /fo..! 
 Lnimroii, uikI Mallon, Solicitors, 10 1'. R. 482. 
 
 ■2. Stfikiiuj \nn„ of IMI. 
 
 311 uck oil the roll unless by a uaiued day he 
 should pay an amounl found by tlie renort of •, 
 
 ■uu Itb '^' r "■'"' "'^'.'■"^'•'^ "' l!'«. taxation 
 . nd of the motion to strike him off the roll 
 Ae .hams kiioir/,,,, a Solirifur, l(j P. R. 408. ' 
 
 to .^tnke the name of a .solicitor of}' tl„.. ,.,11 for 
 .msconduct m neglecting to pay ove t lie i 
 cl.euts money in his hands as' .solicitor lie 
 
 U'st application .should be made to a J Ige in 
 ^.ourt, whereupcm, in a proper ca.se, ,ai order 
 will be made re.piiriug the .^'olicitor t , pay o ve, 
 
 he money by a name.l day, ami in def lult tl,^ 
 i- name be struck oli; Upon dcfauU n In- 
 
 her application is nece.ss.iry, except an aiiplica 
 non to have the roll brouglii into Court fo tl . 
 l;>--pose of having the name struck off, a u , s 
 ■should be on notice to the solicitor. 
 
 liuhng of a tayjng odicer that costs of the 
 iMst a|,i,l,eation should be taxcl as of a Cham 
 y; rs motion only, reversed on appeal. A' 
 '>,i(l/jiiuiii, a Huhcitor, Hi I'. R o.'il.'. 
 
 VIII, RkT.MNKK .WIi Al'I'OINTME.VT. 
 
 Absence of.]-.S'r'c' Scrilm>-r v. ParreMi, 20 (> 
 
 Termination of-,/»,/v,»r,,^]_. Per strong 
 
 •J. ---A retainer to prosecute an action does not 
 
 erminate whcm the judgment is obtained, but 
 
 rth';nl "..''"'••"'' '''*•■ '^""■■"eyor solicitor, 
 wi hout Uirther instructi.in, to proceed after 
 judgment and endeavour t.. obtain the fruits of 
 the lecovery, including the making it by reeis- 
 tration a charge on the lamis of the judgment 
 debtor. H,tt v. P„h I'o,i<j. 18 .S. C. R. 290, 
 
 Winding-up— /l;>/,o,«^,,e„/ /„/ CouH.\—la a 
 piTiceeding tor the winding-up of a company, a 
 solicitor who IS acting for cl.iimaiits whose claiAia 
 "Hist be contested by the li.iuiilators, cannot 
 obtam the sanction of the C„nrt to his actinjz 
 also as solicitor for the li,,uidators. Nor will 
 the Court sanction the appointment of a special 
 solicitor to act for the li,|ui.tators in the matter 
 of the contested claim. The winding-up must 
 lie prosecuted by one di.-.int(u-ested solicitor. 
 wliose services will not be divide.! by the aaser- 
 1 1011 of antagonistic claims. /^. OhadM Stark 
 Co., 1,) P. R. 471. 
 
 .sVe, also, Ih- Drury Nickel Co., IG P. R. 52.';, 
 null I5S. ' 
 
 f cbenTf'/r'^^ ^'"r '■' ■■^"•"""^■y '^I'P'i^-tion 
 I y a client for an order t„r payment over by 
 
 111 their lands a., a firm, am! in default for an 
 order .striking them otf the roll :_ 
 
 Hel( , that no i.rofcssn.md misc.m.luct being 
 
 Ltt the hrin before, and the other .,f whom was 
 
 J/Zv M ri, r ;^' ''1 '". '"' '''■■''""■ '''■ ' ^'""''^ ""'' 
 
 Ml ""aW,, 3 O. It. 42,-), followed:- 
 5S 
 
 IX. MlSCELL.^.N'Kors C.VSES. 
 
 Absconding Debtor- /',-o/)erty in Hands of 
 Mor-Mm^,-y lo Shcriff.]-See. Buntin v. 
 Uilii, tills, JO P. R. .t3_ cnif. J 
 
 Arbitrator— .S'o/mvV,,,- A,-ti,„, as-IiUerenf. 1— 
 663 anteti'' ""^ '^"'^°''"' ''■ C/'«'«''fr.,, 25 O. R. 
 
 Employers Liability Polioy-(7o«d«!io,j as 
 
 /o hmployimM qt .Sol,r!to,:]-.See Wylly- v. 
 MauvfaHmvrs'' Accident Iiw. Co., 20 O R 15.'} 
 
 SPECIAL DEPOSIT. 
 
 Sec Banks, II. 
 
 SPECIAL EXAMINER. 
 
 See EyiDExcE, IV. 
 
i;; a 
 
 915 
 
 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 
 
 916 
 
 SPECIAL INDORSEMENT. 
 
 .SV^' JULCMKNT, TV., VIII. 
 
 SPECIAL VERDICT. 
 
 S':r Tl'.IAL, I. 
 
 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 
 L Gkneuaij.y, Ol.'i. 
 
 II. AORKK.MKNTS T(l liKi.'t 1:ATI1 PtkiPEETY, 915. 
 
 III. Contracts for Sai.k ok [.ami. 
 
 1. Ahatemcnt of Pmxhuae Moneij, OKi. 
 
 2. Exchaiu/e of Lamh, 91G. 
 
 3. Intcri'st, 910. 
 
 4. Partinrfhip Laml,Q\'!. 
 
 5. Pnir/lre, !)1S. 
 
 6. Staltilr ofFnuidfi, 918. 
 
 7. riwic, 919. 
 
 8. ll'fT«^ of Titii', 920. 
 
 9. 0(/i-T Caxex, 921. 
 
 (See Salk of Land- 
 
 -\"f.ni)()k.s and Plkchaseks' 
 Act. 
 
 I. Gkn"ki;ali,v. 
 
 Discretion— Co»rf»r/.]—Tlu^ exercise of tho 
 jurisdiction to order .'<i)ecitio i)eiforniance of a 
 contract is a niat'er of judicial discretion, to be 
 governed, as far a? po.ssil)le. t)y rixcd rules and 
 principles, lint more clastic tlian in tlic adminis- 
 tration of other judicial lenicdie.^. In tlie exer- 
 cise of the remedy nmcli regard is shewn to the 
 conduct of tlie person seeking relief. J/nriitv. 
 Booin-smi, 21 ,S. (J. K. :mi 
 
 Origin of Action — DUcr(tioii — Coiulit'-t.]— 
 The origin ijotii of tlie .iction for specific perfor- 
 mance and of tho action for relief agaiupt re- 
 C'ntryfor uon-p.'iymeut of rent is in tlie e(|uital;le 
 jurisdiction of the Court ; the compelling per- 
 fomianco in the one and the (granting relief in 
 the other is iu t'le judicial discretion of the 
 Court ; and in eacli the Court ha.s regard to the 
 conduct of the party seeking to compel such 
 performance or to obtain such relief. Coniitry 
 V. McLean, 22 0. R. 1. 
 
 II. AOREEMKNTS TO UkQUEATH ProPEKTV. 
 
 was twcnty-ti\ e, v/hen slie married. The grand ■ 
 father died shortly after, leaving her by his will 
 a niucli Hinaller sum than Ids daughters received, 
 and she brought an action against the executoi> 
 forspccillc perioniiaiii'c of the aiireement to pro 
 vide for- her as aiii|)ly as for hi-* daughters, or, in 
 the alternative, for jiaymciit for her service..- 
 during the eleven years. On the trial of the 
 action it w:is proved that S., while living with 
 her grandfather, had perfoniicd such services a^ 
 tending cattle, doing Held work, managing a 
 rearing maehiiic, and breaking in and drivnij 
 wild and unuoveinable hors,;a :-- 
 
 Held, atHrmini.' llie decision of the Court oi 
 Appeal, 21 A. R .")12, that the alleged agree 
 ment to |)rovide for !S. by will was not one o| 
 which the Court could decree specific perform 
 aiice ; but : — 
 
 Held, further, that S. was entitled to remuner- 
 ation for her services, and .'^l,(!00 was not toi, 
 much to allow her. .!/'■'.' »f/a// v. Smilli, 21 S. C, 
 
 i:. 2(i;i. 
 
 .SV( Miir'I'ji'll 
 
 "1. L' \ .s. C. R. ."id.), (iiiti 20:1 
 
 III. Contkacts fou ,Sai,k of Land. 
 
 1. A'aiftiiu'iit of Purclutst Money. 
 
 .SVc ('mill V. Rapple, 22 O. R. 519, 20 A. R. 
 291, pod 918. 
 
 2. ExcltaiKjc of Laiidi, 
 
 Powers of Executor. ]-- An executor or ad- 
 ministrator cannot, having regard to R. S. (.). 
 ch. 108, sec. 9. ami 54 Vict. eh. IS, sec. 2 (().), 
 make the lands of the tc-tator or intescale the 
 subject of s])ccu!ation :•': exchange by him in 
 the same manner as if the l.iiids wvve. his own. 
 
 Tiie Court refused to decree specific perform- 
 ance of a contract by an executor to exchatcje 
 lands of his testatrix for other lands, as tin; 
 puriHise of the excliaiige eould not have been 
 the payment of debts or the distribution of tin; 
 estate, .iiid it was shewn tii;it the beneficiaries 
 objccteil to Die exchange, and it did not appear 
 that the olilci.vl guaniian had been consulted. 
 TemUev. Woisli, 24 0. R. :!09. 
 
 Purchase Money— Convci/euire. — Brlai/ — Pw 
 nesninii.l — Under a contract of purchase of reiil 
 estate providing that " if from any cause what- 
 ever'' the purchase money was not paid at ^ 
 
 Grandchild — Jiemmieratioii for S(ifiia:i.] — j specified time, interest should be paid from thi 
 S., a girl of fourteen, lived with her grandfather, | date of the contract, the vendor is relieved from 
 •whr. promis---(l her tli.'it if she avouM reiriain with ; payuieiit of .-■iich interest while the delay ic 
 him until he died, cr until she was married, he j payment is caused by the wilful default of the 
 would provide for her bj' his will as amply as t vendor in jierforming the obligations iniposeo 
 for hia daughters. She lived with him until she '■ upon him. 
 
917 
 
 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 
 
 918 
 
 MS. c. n.;wr>,(iiitt'2o:\ 
 
 A contract contiuiiiiig sncli provision also 
 provided for tin; jiavnitjiu of tlio piufhaso 
 money on delivery of tiio conveyance to lie pre- 
 (Wired l)y tlie ven.lor. A conveyance was ten- 
 dered wliicli the vendee would not ,ent, 
 whereupon the vendor l.ronslit ^'^ut fov r< ..cis- 
 sion of the contract, which the Court refuiyed on 
 the ground that the couveyancc tcndereil wuh 
 defecttive. He tlien refused to acccjit the pur- 
 ehaae money unless interest from tlie date of the 
 contract was p.dd. In an action liy tiie vendee 
 lor specilic ijerfnrniance ;— 
 
 Held, allirniin,^' the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, Ml A. H. ■.'(•I, and of the Chancery 
 l)iviaion, '_'! (). 1^. r,U->. tliat (lie vendee was mil 
 ohiigedtopay inti'rcst from t!ie time the suit 
 for rescission was hegun, as until it was decided 
 the vendor was ass.iting the failure of the con- 
 tract, and insisting that lie liad ceased to 1,(. ' 
 bound hy it, and attor the decision in that suit - 
 he was elainnn- interest to which lie was not ! 
 entitled, and in hotli eases the vendee was re- j 
 heved from obliLjation to tender the imrehaso ' 
 money. 
 
 ]'.y the terms of tlie contract the vendor was 
 to remain in possession until the jnirehasc money ! 
 was jiaid and iccei\ e the rents and jirotits :— 
 _ Held, that up to the time I he vendor became ' 
 in default, the vendee, by his agreement, was! 
 preclude.l from claiming rents and profits, and 
 was not entitled to tlieiii after that time, as he 
 had been relieved from payment of interest, and 
 the purchase money had not been paid. I/ai/^i 
 V. Elm.'^h!/, •_>:! S. C. I!. li'J.S. 
 
 Purchase Money— <'o»iv//fj»<v _ l),f„,,lt— 
 Ihlay.^—A )jer,>ijii in possession of land I'liider a 
 contract for purchase by which he agreed to 
 pay the purchase money as soon as the'oonvey- 
 auces were ready for delivery, and interest 
 tliere(m from tlie date of the contract, is not re- 
 lieved fnmi liability for such interest unless the 
 vendor is in wilful default in carrying out his 
 part of the agreement, and the purchase money 
 IS deposited by the vendee in a bank oi otiier 
 place of depo^.it in an aceouiii separate from his 
 general current account. 
 
 The vendor is not in wilful default where 
 delay is caused liy (he necessity to perfect the 
 title owing to S(jnieot tlie vendors being infants. 
 iior by tendering a coiivcy.'iiice to whicii the 
 vendee took exce])tioii but uhich was idtcrei! to 
 his satisfacticm while still in the hands of the : 
 vendors' agent as an escrow and bef.ire it wa.s i 
 delivered; fournier and Taschercau. .J.T., dis | 
 seuting. i 
 
 A provision that the purch.ise money is to be i 
 paid as soon as the conveyance is ready for i 
 delivery does not alter the' rule that the'cim-l 
 veyance should be prepared b\- the purchaser; ' 
 H'ournier and Taschcreau, d.F., dissenting. 
 
 •ludgnient of the Court of Appeal, 111 A. H. 
 .Ml, and of the Chancery Division, 21 O. K. (>42, '■ 
 reversed. S/' nii-cii v, Driri.-^, 2;! S. C. 1^. G2!l. I 
 
 in the lands of the contracting partner with a 
 proportionate abatement in the price. 
 
 diidginent of the (.'ominon I'leas Division, '.'-J 
 <». I!. .TM), reversed. Grain v. /.'no;-/', •_'(• A. 
 K. •_'!ll. 
 
 '). /'nicllrf,. 
 
 Coats. I— 111 an action for specific performance 
 by a vendor, whose title was, to the knowledge 
 of the purchaser, a possessory one of long 
 staniliug, in conlcirmity «ith a family ar'-ange- 
 iiii'iit, amiile proof theriMif havieg been ollered 
 bcfori^ action, the vendor was held entitleil to 
 his costs of action and of proving hi.s title in 
 the .Master's oliice. (I'dwix y. lUiinior, .'W \V. 
 H. (i4, followed, lii-fclii V. ir///.i, 17 Cr. ()!)0. 
 anil /,'. /Uiii.stKiil awl 'Warn-'n'L; \2 (>. R, 48S. 
 specially referred to. Datiu v. Staler, 21 0. R. 
 
 i :i7.-.. 
 
 I 
 
 Costs.]-Costs withheld from the defendant 
 
 j because he had misled the plaintilV as to his 
 
 power to make the exchange, .-ind declined to 
 
 peif(n-ni his contract on grounds some of which 
 
 I were iiiitonabic, and ab-o alleged frau.l \\liich 
 
 he failed to prove. TkiiuIi: v. \\'a/^/i, •_'4 O. K 
 
 Costs.]— Although the plaintitf, the vendee, 
 had not, by his conduct and delay, waived his 
 right to object to the title, yet,''as he had not 
 raised the olijection in the proper manner, he 
 should have no costs of his action for specilic 
 pcrf'ormaiici! <>v riscission. Xa-mn v. A rm-ilromi. 
 •22 O. H. .-,.fL'. 
 
 Third Parties— 7V/k.]— In an action for 
 specific iierforinanee by a vendor against a jinr- 
 chaser, the (iiiestion raised by the defence, 
 whether a third person has a title to the whole 
 or part of the land, is not one which under Con. 
 Rule .'!l'S should be deterniiued between the 
 liarties to the action, or either of them, and the 
 third person : and an order cannot properly be 
 made under that Rule and ( 'on. Rule 330 addiu" 
 
 such third person as a 
 
 Neither do Con. Rul 
 in such a case. 
 
 'I'lio Consolidated Unles 
 discussed. 
 
 Decision of the ()ixeiin'a Bench Division re- 
 versed. Jinj,, V. El/hon, 14 P. R. .S84. 
 
 :fen;lant. 
 32i), ;«I,..r:{32, apiily 
 
 to third parties 
 
 4. I'arliicrshqi Law/. 
 
 Abatement.]— \\ here a contract is ma<le by 
 one partner for the sale cf partinorsliip lands, to 
 which the other partner refuses to '•••nsent, the 
 purcha,ser cannot insi.st upon taking the share 
 
 (). S/a/ii/r „/ FramU 
 
 Incomplete Written Agreement.] — L. 
 
 signed a ilocunient by which be agreed to sell cer- 
 tain property to \V. for .■?42,.-)i.lo', and \V. signed 
 an agreement to purchase the same. The dlieu- 
 ment signed by \V. stated that the pruiierty 
 was to be purchased "subject to the incum- 
 braneestb.ereon." With thipexception, the papers 
 were, in substance, the same, and each con- 
 tained !tt t!ie end this clause "terms and deeds, 
 etc., t.:be ,: . -..nged by the 1st of May next." 
 On the d;" hat these papers were signed, L., 
 on rciiue . ..f W.'s solicitor to have the terms 
 of sale pi • \-\ writing, adiled to the one signed 
 by him the following: "Terms, 8oOO cash this 
 
919 
 
 SPEOinO PERFORMANCE. 
 
 920 
 
 (lay, S'lfKloii (Iclivnry of 111.' ilcf.i (if ilic J'lirkcr 
 property, ^H(m wiili int. rest i-vory llirr.- imintliH 
 until tlic!5iti,r.()(t,m' paid, when lluMl-ed (if tl.e 
 ontire propel 1^ will be ()X(M'ut(!(l." I'lio proii- 
 erty nic iifinneil in these doeiitnents «:i.s, with 
 othei- pi'.ipeity of L., ln()rlj,'aj{eil |',ir 5«;t(i,IKli(. 
 W. p.iiil tun sums i,f ,s,-)(M(, and deiuiinded n 
 deed of the I'iiiUer [iLrperty, which was refused. 
 Ill an iirtion iiijaiiist I,, for speri'i; iieifonn- 
 lUlee (if the aliiive agreement, the dtd'endant net 
 up a verlial a;.'reenienl that before a deeil was 
 1,'iven, the other pniperty of i,. was to bo 
 released friiii) the mortgage, and also pleaded 
 the Statute (,f {•Vaiida : - 
 
 Held, .illirniing the judgment of the (.'ouit 
 behiw. I'.itlersoii, d., donbting, that there was 
 no coiiipletiul agre'jinent in writing to Hatisfy 
 the Statute of Krauds. 
 
 Per llitdiie, C.d.— 'I'ho agreenuiit onh pio , 
 vides for payment of $i\,:m, leaving the greater 
 part of the |iiireliase money uiijirovided tor. If I 
 \V. was to Hssuiiie \]if mortgage, it was neees- j 
 nary to provide for the release of L.'s other 
 pro))erty ami for matters in relation to the 
 leaseholil jirojierty. 
 
 I'er Strong, .I.-TIk- agreement was for. 
 sale of an ei|nity oi leilemption only, and, as! 
 (|iiestions \wiuld ari-e in future as to releasL- of 
 L.'s other property from the mortgage and his 
 indemnity from personal liability to tlie niort- i 
 gagee, \vlii,:h should have formed part of the 
 lireliminary agreement, specific (lerformance 
 could not be decreed. Willislni, v. Lair.-<,,ii. Ill 
 S. C. R. 07.S. 
 
 la time 18 e.xpressly fixed, bo rebutted by the 
 
 ! Iiarties treating the contri: 't as atill sidir.isting 
 after the time lix.id for it? ;omi letion. 
 
 TlioCinirtof Appeal wa.i divided in opinion. 
 
 j Held, by the Supremo ("otirt of ('anada. 
 
 ; athruiiiig in this respect the jiidgnientH Iwlow, 
 that rime was originally of the essence of the 
 contiact, but there was a waiver by the defeti 
 daut of a eoin|iliance with th( provision as to 
 time by entering into negotiations as to the title 
 after its expiration. Iloliin.ioii \, llarri«,->\ (» 
 R. 4.S, Mt A. K. i:U, 'Jl S. ('. \{. ;«io. 
 
 Laches — /'o.».s(M/i)rt.]—fn a suit for I'lxicitir 
 performance of an agreement by the deviHee of 
 land to eonvey to 1'., it appeared that the agree- 
 ment of sale to 1*. wa.s exeentcd in 1HS4, and 
 the suit was not instituted until foury(!ar8 later. 
 1'. was in posi^e.ssion of the land during the 
 inter\al ;— 
 
 Held, that as the evidence clearly xheweil 
 that 1'. was mdy in possession as agent of the 
 trustees under the will and eaietaker of the 
 laiul, and as by the teriiis of the agreement 
 time was to be of the essence of the contract, 
 the delay was a sultieient answer to the suit. 
 I'orirr V. Hide, '2\i S. C. H. L'ti,"), 
 
 Objecting to Title. ]-.S' 
 ■S//0/-//, li-' (). R. 'i4.:, 2) A. K 
 2tW, aiiU: 878. 
 
 Xitnou V. ./In7i- 
 18,3, 2.-. S. (;. H. 
 
 Parol AgreexiUirr 
 
 Milhni, 20 S. U. !;. >••' 
 
 Parol Agreemfrif.-- 
 Jl'il'i'l', 22(). R. ,-,19. 
 antt ills. 
 
 Si I Jiarlon v. 
 ■.»e 201. 
 
 .1/e 
 
 .fiiynfisn'itiii.] — .SV( CrnUi V. 
 Rover-sed, 20 A. 11. 2!»I, 
 
 7. Thill'. 
 
 Date of Performance on Sunday.] In an 
 
 actinij for specific performance, even when time 
 IS of the essence of the agreement, if the party 
 111 dctault lia:i done what in him lay to iierform 
 . the contract, the Court may, in the exercise of 
 Its drscretion, grant t)ie relief claimed. 
 
 And where, by such agreement, the convey- 
 ance v,-as to be tendered by the plaintitf to the 
 (letendant and the transaction closed on the 
 first day of .Iniic," which fell on Sumlav, 
 when no lender was made, and the conduct of 
 the detenilanl on the following ,hiy was sueli as 
 to exclude a tender on that day, in an action for 
 specilic performance the iilaiiitilf was held 
 entitled to judgment. Cndm-ii v. (lire-s, 20 
 K. .")00. 
 
 Delay In CarryJng Out Contract.!— .V<e 
 
 i.'^TV',.'^ '"'"''•'• -' ^^- 1^- •"'"-. I'J A. R. 291, 
 i\ n x> ^\^p\""!'' ''H ; Stiniimv v. Dncu, 
 — l U. It. t>4! 
 ante \)\~ 
 
 Repudiating Contract.] — Sic Pnixhiiw Will-', 
 IS A. I!. 21(1, post !)2I : SI. Ihiitx v. ffniijiiix, 24 
 n. R. 2.",0. post (120 ; llnli;,i.<oii v. Hn rii, 21 (» 
 R. 4.S, J!) A. R. 134, 21 S. C. R. :JilO, ponl <J2I. 
 
 1"J A. J^ 5<)l, 23 S. C. R. (129, 
 
 Extension— lla/!vr()/'C(i)i(Z(V;u//.]— Held, by 
 the (Queens Bench Division, that although, 
 where the property in a contract for the sale or 
 exchange of lands is of a speculative character, 
 the presumption is that time n of the es-enee of 
 ■the agreement, such presumption may, as when 
 
 S. U'aaf uf Titli. 
 
 Conditions of Sale— Oh/i el ion— Time.]— Sn. 
 X<i.sf„i V. Ariiislroii:/, 20 O. R. 542, 21 A. R. 
 1S3, 2.J S. C. R. 2(i3, iiitle S7S. 
 
 Repudiation — A'/ioc'/w/.'/c—yVwr.]— Where 
 tlic plaiiitili', at the time lie entered into a eon- 
 tract witli the lU'fcndant for the exchange of 
 lands, hud no title to the lands he proposed to 
 exchange, wliicli were, to the knowledge of the 
 defendant .at the time of the eontraot, vested in 
 I the jilaintili's wife : — 
 
 Held, in an action foi' spccitie ])erformance, 
 
 that the defendant could not withdraw on the 
 
 ground that the plaintitr had no title, at any 
 
 , rate before the time fixed for the completion of 
 
 I the exchange; and the plaintiff, having ten- 
 
 i dered a conveyance from Ids wife before action, 
 
 I was entitled to succeed ; for the defendant, 
 
 I having entered into the contrac^t knowing that 
 
 i it did not liind the estate, but only the person, 
 
 I of the plaintiir, must be taken to' have relied 
 
 j from the beginning u|ioii the promise of the 
 
 i plaintifi'to |uocure the concurrence of the owner, 
 
 j and could not set up that tlie plaintiff was not 
 
 the owner. Dictum of Ixekewieh, .J., in Wyimt 
 
 V. huiin, ;U Ch. D. 5(i9, not followed. -SV,. 'Deiiii 
 
 j \\ lli'iilinx, 24 O. R. 230. 
 
 i Repudiation — TiiiK — Iti'fi-.mice. ]— A pur- 
 chaser of laud may, on discovering that the 
 vendor has no title, repudiate on that ground ; 
 but attempted repiuliation on another groun(i 
 
920 
 
 (ixdil, lie rohnttcil by the 
 I'diitiv; -t, iiH Htill Hiil)KiBtin^; 
 fur it' jDtn. Iction. 
 Ill Wii.i ilivi'U^d ill iijiinioii. 
 ii|ii('nio ("liiirt of ('anadd, 
 i|)ii't till! jiiilijnifiitH below, 
 iiiiUy of thi' osMcriL'ii of tin- 
 wuA a waiver by tliu (lefan- 
 ju with tin provision as to 
 
 I lie;,'oti:ltioiis iix to the titlr 
 
 /I'liliiiiioii V. Ilarrii, 'il (). 
 
 •_'i s. ('. i{. Him. 
 
 <«.]— Fn (V suit for (>|M3(;itir 
 i,'r(;oin('nt liy thu ii('vi.see m 
 it :ii)|)c'iiri'il that tlie agree 
 wan (XL'cutoil in 1,SH4, ami 
 tulcil until f()iiry(!arH latiir. 
 
 II of till! liiiicl (lining Uic 
 
 ! (!\ idcnuo cleaily whewi'd 
 pds.Mc.s.siiiii US agent of tin- 
 will iiiiil e.irotaktM' ul the 
 e ternm of the agieuinent 
 e eHsenoo of the ooiitraot, 
 icient answer to the Huit. 
 C. K. ■_'(!."), 
 
 \e.]—Si I Xa-ion v. Ann- 
 21 A. U. 1«3, 2.-) S. V. H. 
 
 ;ract. \—.SW Pahliij v. Wili<, 
 I ; SI. J)i iiin V. Hif/ijiihi, '24 
 
 J!'i/i;ii.-<oii V. Hnrix, 21 (>. 
 
 •-'I S. C. H. :ti)0, po"/ U2I. 
 
 Ill/ I'f Tith . 
 
 ie—Oli/i c/ion — Time. ] — Hft 
 : 20 6. R. 0-12, 21 A. R, 
 
 aiiU'. S7S. 
 
 novAuhji' — Tliiii'. ] — Where 
 inie he entered into a coii- 
 ilaiit for the exchange (if 
 > tlie lands he jiroposed to 
 L>, to the knowledge of the 
 : of the contraet, vested in 
 
 1 foi' specilie perl'oniianee, 
 imld not withdraw on the 
 intitr had no title, at any 
 ixed for the completion of 
 the plaintiff, having ten- 
 roni liis wife before action, 
 ceed ; for the defendant, 
 he contract knowing that 
 itate, but only the person, 
 ; be taken to have relied 
 upon the promise of the 
 
 2 concurrenee of the owner, 
 that llic plaintiff was not 
 )f Kekewich, ,]., in Wyimi 
 9, not followed. St. J)eiii' 
 !30. 
 
 me — Itfjcri'itce. J — A pur- 
 
 on discovering that the 
 
 repudiate on that ground : 
 
 lation on another ground 
 
 921 
 
 SPECIFIC PERFOAMANCE. 
 
 do.'« not keep this right alive, if (1,1. vendor at 
 'he proper time can make a goo.l title 
 
 iJi « " ,'"" ""mi- a ^ood title. 
 
 Whore a piii. baser, wh,., in an action by the 
 veil, or to eoinpel „pe,.ific |a rforinan.. ' U u, i^ 
 lM« defence that the .onlVa, t was void I„." , 
 o fraudulent misrepresentations „« , va ' 
 attempttMl at the trial to rc[M,diatc als , , , ,'. 
 
 trroundo wan. nftitlci.uhl vendor, he lav ' 
 known of this want o, title for sonu tin a d 
 having because of i, obtained an ord. r f r sec r 
 -y or costs, ,t was hebl that there ,o,| 1^" 
 then be repudiation on I hat ground, and tlia 
 It would be snIMcicnL for tht^cnd, r o sh w 
 title on the reteiviice 
 
 ,/;j*'«I'''-"',;.'f the C'onimon Pleas Division, li) 
 n^H. .Sb,i albrine.l. l'„iJ. ,j , . ,|-- v,_ ,^ .^ ' j^ 
 
 Rescission --Ao/,.._ 77/«- -- r,,,,,/,,,./, i_H 
 ind R. agreed to ex.hang.. land, and tl,e aV'," 
 ment, whi.l, was in the form of, letl, i w tttea 
 
 "'"7 ^ "■'-•'-•I'Kd, provided thai the ni-.tter 
 was to be closed in ten days, if p„.,il i'^. " h" ,[ 
 the time ha.l no title to the pro K-rtv I ^ wu; o 
 nanser, b.it was negotiating for it. Xe ul^ „„" 
 mniiths after the ,latc of tl,e agree e it the 
 matter was .still unsettled, and • btt, v! 
 nritten by H. to I! 01 ;, , "" ,^*"" 
 
 ,, . . •! • •■" '•• « solii itor niitifvini' h m 
 'lii^t unle.ss something was done by tl I'MT 
 "MM-ning the agreement would l,enull and v o^fl 
 Vtor to tins there had been severa i icMTie 's 
 I'etweeii the ,,artics and their s„li..it'rV' : 
 «.;!.l'.t. was pointed out to li. that h i-e we e 
 '■""■uU.es.n the way of his getting a ill?, o 
 "h' land ne proposed to transfer ■thatiiee 
 
 ^rtiue'^ft^ "' ^'T ^""^""^' "hieri!!;", 
 
 ;;■ u- ' '""'^ "" '^'t"''' «t'-I'« to .'et the 
 ■hthcult,a..s removed until aft,, M,. abovT- letter 
 was written, when he bioughi :.„ actio, a-ai, 
 lie propose.! vendor and obi,, .,1 .., .tecrJe 
 ccarmg his title good. He then brougl^^ ^ 
 
 Sfot'^xchar •- ^"■""" -"f-'— , 
 
 Wei!' !MTl''^'.)f J'>''«"!-;t "f the Court of ' 
 . ppe.il, 1! A. 1. I,U, and ot the (.lu,-,-n's IJemdi i 
 
 ug, that the action couM not be maintained • 
 
 at R. not having title when the agr.e e t' 
 
 «a» made, H. could rescin.l the cont.act wt li, I 
 
 ^.nngreiisonable notice of Ids intenUo'e. 
 ^^">dd be boun.l to ,lo if the tith, were mere Iv 
 milierfeet; that the letter to the s„lic t , w- s 
 Mtthcent to put an end to tlie b.-.i-M, . , a 
 'i'a , even , there had been no resefs i „' 
 ."'iuctof K. in relation to the com , -Vionof 
 contract was such as to .liscntitlc I m t, 
 ;>li f by way of specitic performance, y}" ,!;" 
 - Unmoii, 21 ,S. C. R. .'{yo. 
 
 Expropriation by Crown .(,//•.,»„,,/ ,;„. 
 i '<»V,w^.//„„.| The ,|e„.ndants en,,-,- .t-;^": 
 "itt.-n agreement lo «,.|| and .■onve^ t , 
 (■•'.«n, by„Koo,lau,lsuflieieMt,leed act,, 
 ;i"'"'''fy '•fla.al,tT,,Mired.,.r. I,., p ,;:,;/ 
 
 At th,:, la col such agreement the e,.utre I : 
 
 :if^;:^.:;::i;r:;;;,r;s;'w:'::..';;;si: 
 .!utnn;:;,r.:.'be-;s.,;--;:r£ 
 
 ";-li«lH.tewas set out am/'a ..!;.]''';, r^ 
 •l^''>';>M^lescription,lu.re,,fdulv 1-^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 .e,.,r,l ,11 piirsuan, the pron.i„ni .7 ' s' 
 
 l-.ch .W. Lpont dants,ef„«i„„f„ ,',;.• 
 
 ."■II . '» tliet rowninsuchacas.-entithdi,, 
 s,.en„eperb.r,nancey Tli..<ji.„.n.. i^^K!:^}:: 
 
 Restriction Against Selling -.SW,-/,,/ .,., 
 
 ::'rsf;;',;r«i:^:;^;;,.':',»i*''f; 
 
 l>- l>- H»/. .N. then apo'ied f„r a .special A,-, 
 yln. 1 waspas.se,l, giv,!,,, l,i,„ |,,„u. „- t, ' 
 
 , |U|.t.„gthe,-e.t,-ietionmthe,lil|, ;.' ^ : 
 
 l.iiiil. anil diii'.-ting that the on,,- . 
 
 -houldbe paid to-itrust.„:'v""',. ;;';":>• 
 
 ""• passing of tliis .Act, \ in ,i .'r , " 
 
 ",l'--mtl,eland,ha.r,m.dJa ',.y'i?';:,r-; 
 
 tnr.l party, which h-a.se was m,„-t,,a.,ed a „ V 
 : aHe,;wai-,l. assi;;ncd his revetsiou. " ^ ,1 ! j^, 
 , ^y \ . tor .specfi,- performance of ,l,e ! , , ," 
 
 hid o, ','1' ""^' *''^' ^'^""''^t ^•"■^ -t -' ^'... lie : 
 
 M^;.;.;.ioniytheba,anee:j5:te?!;;:;'i;y:;;;'^ 
 
 lleh , allii-ming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal for Ontario, that il was n,.; o,h, ,,, V 
 t" attack the decision on the p,-(i io •' It ' e„ 
 .tUwe,.e,imltluUd..cisionslLd,n::;.S;ir[: 
 
 ' V. wotihl be all'^ho more eutitle.l to ^p^dhe 
 
 pe, foi uiance ; that the evidence shewed the lease 
 grantcl by X. to have been merely col uial e 
 iu.d an attempt to raise UK.ncy on the Id ' 
 >'"l"-«' ..-ans; and that there ..h.a 1 I 1 'I 
 decix^ for ...pccitic performance with a I rect'on 
 tha the whole of .l,e purcha.se in..„ey s It IdP 
 paid to tie trust cnin-inv V -// , ''"";'."' '"-' 
 
 9. Other Cnxe-s 
 
 I Sheriff's Sale -.A9»,Vc,W, /«/,,.,.../ i _ ^he 
 DesoHption_.<J/o;,,„^/^,,,,.",_^Vhere..c.tv el''.'" f >"t'''-'^«. "f an as.signee from the „ur! 
 '""'luig lot was described in an a., re^ "^ a contract for the sale of lamls s 
 
 wchange as having a .leoth o '' n«V ' , I f-^'^''''*-; ""' ^r a writ of nni r-nas ^t.^\u't\hl 
 - .ss,'-and had in tact ,!'de,nL of'f ,^ ' ^ ? i E^!! ?f ' --K--^. -d the .n^^:^ ^l 
 ;; J'alane m the rear 12 feet widcU peeih^ s e,' i ic'neef "' "'"'! """''-■'** *■" '•'"t'tle'l to 
 
 rfermanee at the suit of the owner v*' s Cder i 'I'V, '''^.I .^ .f"'''»«"ce ot the contr.-.et. 
 f^ particular circumstances refuse lA,tL-i "',' "'"' Crairfoyd, <) C ].. T. Uce K 
 *-'- V. H..i.K 22 A. R. no' '^^"-''- ^'^-' • ^±^^ t", --o been .na.lvertently de^^idcci 
 
 I o; repoitct,. II ,,,,/ V. Airhtr, l'4 O. R. (ir>0. 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 k 
 
 // 
 
 // 
 
 
 A 
 
 C* 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 2.5 
 
 ■- Ilia 
 
 • 5 '""== 
 
 ^ as, 12.0 
 
 L25 i 1.4 
 
 18 
 
 1.6 
 
 ¥%:w 
 
 /or^^fe 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 m 
 
 V 
 
 iV 
 
 :\ 
 
 \ 
 
 % 
 
 .V 
 
 
 I.V-0^ 
 
 -^t'"''" ^-U" 
 
 <> 
 

 i/.A 
 
r 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 924 
 
 SPEEDY TRIALS ACT. 
 
 .S'c C.'Ki.MiN.M. Law, III. 
 
 SPLITTING CAUSE OF ACTION. 
 
 .S'(e Division C'oruT, IV. 
 
 ■STATEMENT OF CLAIM. 
 Sir Plkauim;, VII. 
 
 STATEMENT OP DEFENCE. 
 
 See ri.KAi'iNc, A'lll. 
 
 STATUTE OF FRAUDS. 
 
 SVeC<>NT)lACT,VI.— Sl'F.CIl'lL rKUI'UKMAM'K, III. 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 I. CONSTUICTION OF, (i liNKIiAIXY, 92.'^. 
 II. l.Ml'EKATIVi; Ol; UlKECTORV, i)'20. 
 
 HI. 1nteri'i:kiatkin Act, 927. 
 IV. Puosrr.rnvK mi Kftkospeitivi;, 928. 
 V. Kki'Ealini: Statites, 9.31. 
 VI. Time OF Passinc, 9.32. 
 
 I. CoNSTKl'lTION (IK, (!i;NEUAI.LV. 
 
 Code — l'i/i-.ri]iri In Etirfur Litii\] — An appeiil 
 III earliiT law ami doeisidiis [<ii- the purpose of 
 inturprotiiij,' the provisions of a statuloiy codo, 
 can only bo justifieil on some speeial gi'ouiul, 
 such as" the ilonlitfi'l inijiort or previously ae- 
 <]uireil technical nicanini; of the language useil 
 therein. lliiliiin'oii v. ( 'aiMiUaii I'aritii' It. W. 
 rVj.,[lS92]A. C. 4S1. 
 
 Eijeotment — .^f ioiicurh — liii'dijniHnn hi/ Slat- 
 ,il, — /Jl'i 'f (if — l'ri-'criiilio>i.]—\\\ an action of 
 ejectment liy the Crown, it aiiiicared that the 
 appellant ci.niiiany derived title through a grant 
 made in lUOl by the French (iovernment, \\liich 
 gave no seigneurie iivei- the land in ilispute, but 
 onlv a right to make establishments for hunting 
 an(i lishing within cert;\in limits ; that an ()r- 
 donnance in IT.io, together with the action of 
 the Ki-ciuh ("vowii thereunder, did not create or 
 
 the Canadian Act IS \'iut. eli. .3 (amended by 
 Hub.seijUent Acts) recognized that there iia a 
 seiuneurie of Mingan, being (lart of Ihc (iisputcd 
 
 seiuneurie of Mingan, being (lart of Ihc (iisputcd 
 land, tlie bunndaries whereof were conclnaively 
 itHtablishiMl by a scliedulu authori^';,! by thi'- 
 A.'t :- 
 
 recognize an 
 .such scigncurii 
 
 y title in t!ie iieirsi of the grantee t 
 
 ■\ that down to IH" 
 if cither its creatoMi 
 
 lion 
 
 idcnc 
 by the British Crown ; but that in 1854 
 
 Jiere was 
 recogni- 
 
 Imperlal Acts — /Ac/.-'OH-'* on.] — Held, (I.) 
 In so far as the (Joveriiment Railways Act 
 ISSI, re-enacts the provisioii.s of the Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act. N & 9 Vict. (Imp,) ch. 
 IS, and the Hailwav Clauses ('oiisoiidation 
 Act, S< it 9 Vict, (liiiii.') eh. 20, where the latter 
 statutes have been autiioritatively construed 
 by a court of appeal in England, such con- 
 struction should be adojited by the courts in 
 Canada. TriwhU'w IIUL .'i App. ('as. .342, and 
 Gil II lUiiil V. lUu-i-nv. ,') App. Cas. (i(i4, referred 
 to.' /'iii-ifli's V. //if; QwcH, 1 Hx. C. R. 191. 
 
 Imperial Acts — /'"■'■.■•■/,(■< (.». |— The phrase 
 
 "iniury done'' in .31 Vii t. (I».) ch. 12, .sec. 4(i, 
 is eonnneiisnratr witli and has the same intend- 
 ment as the phra;;c '' mjiuimisly allecled'' in 8 & 9 
 \'ict. ch. IS, sec. (IS, the Imperial Lands Clau.scs 
 Consolidation Act, and, in so far as the similar- 
 ity extends, eases ilecided under the Im])eri,il 
 Act may be cited with auth.nity in constiuing 
 the Canadian si",tule. .M'Tlbr-vtuw Tin <Jiit.i-ii, 
 
 1 Lx. c. R. ri-.i 
 
 Intention — VV/A.]— In (■(instniing an Act et 
 Parliament the title may lie leferreil to in order 
 to ascertain the intention of the Icgishiture. 
 
 The Act of the Soya .'^cotia Legislature .'(l 
 Vict. eh. 23, ve.-ting the title to highways ami 
 the lauds over which the same pass in the 
 Crown for a piblic luLiiiway, does not apply t(i 
 the city of Halifax. O'loinutr v. Xorii Si'ii-ci 
 ']'•''■ pk'iii'- Co., 22 S. C. M. 27(i. 
 
 Municipal By-lav/ — ]'ii'td(iliiiri Act — I'n 
 amh/i ,\—]\i January, 1S9!. the defendants 
 passed a by-law to ra'sc .s7,"i,(IO() for street 
 railway purposes, with a recital that it Wiis 
 necessary to raise that sum for the purpose nf 
 building a street railway couuecting the muni- 
 cipality of Xeebing W't.h the munieipality of 
 Port Arthur, 'i'he by-law had been submitleil 
 to the electors, and had liceii carried by tlieii 
 votes, but no by-law had lieou passed under 
 see. ."i(l4 of the Municipal Act actually .uthor- 
 iziiig tlio construction of tli.; railway, nor had 
 the approval of the l.ieutepant-(;overnor in 
 Council been ob'"aiiied ; and the provisions of 
 sec. ."lO.") of tliO .Municipal Act h.'id not .' -en 
 observed. Tliis action was liroiight to restraiu 
 the. municipality from eonstrncting the street 
 r.iilway under this by-law, and on the llii 
 May. IS9I, while the action was jiending, an 
 Act, .'4 Vict. ch. 78 (O. K was passed, the jire- 
 " 1, (• " 
 
 of 
 
 imble of which recite 
 iration wp.s desirous 
 
 (I /id, th.'it the cor- 
 onstruetiuL' and c-'er- 
 
 ! 
 
 ating an electric street railway at a cost estimated 
 not til exceed .S7.">.('ilt!). That they ha<l, on the.'ith 
 .lanuary, 1S91, passed a by-law authorizing the 
 construction and operation of such a railway, 
 
924 
 
 IS \'ict. c\\. '.i (amended by 
 L'cogiii/c(l that there (is a 
 II, l)(;iii',' (liift (if lluj (iisputcd 
 s wluTiMif wi.Tu conclusively 
 ilicilulu luilhori'/'.'.I l>y thi-^ 
 
 nii't Iiclow was ri^lit in (lis 
 icg:ir(!« tlip sohcihilcd landii. 
 liccu luailc, till' legislature 
 it ; a luiirt of law i iiist give 
 lint as it stands. The law 
 lint apiilv. Ldlinwor C'>. v, 
 
 ■ Dirl'-'Oiix o».l — Held, (1.) 
 idvcninient Railways Act 
 L' iirovisioMS of the Lands 
 m Act. S & Vict. (Imp.) cli. 
 ivay Clauses ('oiisolidatioa 
 in.) ch. i;(). where the lattei- 
 I authoritatively construed 
 [icid in l",ngland, such con- 
 ! ad(il)ted liy the courts in 
 ■. //;.'/. o A pp. ('as. ;U'2, and 
 If, J App. ('as. iili4, referred 
 e Qii^'u,, 1 Kx. C. R. 191. 
 
 -])ii-i:s',,iiiK <-/(.]— The phrase 
 ;!! Vi.t. (Ii.) ch. 12, .sec. 4(1, 
 til and lias the same intcnd- 
 ' injuriously allected'' in SiVli 
 , the Imperial Lands Clauses 
 
 and, in so far as the similar- 
 decided under the IniperiMl 
 
 ith authority in construing 
 ,e. M'/'/ii rmii v. TIk V"'-'"- 
 
 •.]— In c'Diistrin'ng an Act ol 
 ; may lie leferrcil to in order 
 :;ntiou of the legislature. 
 Xova Scotia Legislature ."II 
 g the title to highways ami 
 nch the same pass in the 
 ; hiuliway, does not apply to 
 O'luinior V. Sofii iSfd./'t 
 
 . ('. i;. 270. 
 
 ^vj—]'ii'iil(i>in;t .Irf — /'n 
 ry, 1S!)1. the defendants 
 to ra'se s7,"),(IO(» for street 
 with a recital that it was 
 that sum for the purpose of 
 iiilway connecting the muiii- 
 g W'th the municipality of 
 liy-law had been submitted 
 d had been carried by theii 
 aw had bcou passed under 
 icipal Act actually .uthnr- 
 ion of the railway, nor liad 
 he l.ientenant-Ciovernor in 
 lied ; and the provisions of 
 micipal Act had not ; 'eii 
 turn was bninght to restrain 
 ■oin constructing the street 
 i liy-law, and on the -Itli 
 the action was jiending, an 
 i (O.I. was passed, the ]jre- 
 ted, iiut r (i/ia, '.hat the cor- 
 ns of eonstructini; and <-;-'er- 
 'et mil w.'iy at a cost estimated 
 !(. That they had, on the oth 
 ed a liy-law authorizing the 
 pei'.ition of such a railway, 
 
 r25 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 ..n< hadpet.t.oiied that it might be (,-ontirnied 
 an, legalised Tlie Act then declared that the 
 l.y-law referred to,n the p,-,. „nb!e, and of which 
 n <|opy was se. forth in the schedule to the Act. 
 It being he by daw in ,,.iestion, was legal ,an, 
 al.., to all intent-, and ,mrposes ; and that, for 
 
 'n!rr\T}T,f "^r'l"f^ ','• ■■^"y '»>'! '^ am-md- 
 r? .1 '■ ^'"""'•I'^'l Act having force and 
 etfect on the 1st Angusl . IS!)| , sj,„„l,t be deemed 
 and taken as having been coi.;plied with, and 
 as hav.ng^ been jnvde and being in full f„rce and 
 (dfeet prior to the passing of the by-law. Afte 
 lie passing of the Act an in.innction was graiite I 
 by s,treet d., restraining the defendaiUs from 
 ac n^. under the liy- aw, on the ground that the 
 Act .n (jucstion did n it go far enough. The 
 
 .;,' r'xrr'x^ ^^'-•■•"/"•''^' "■"%'>"' 'l'»vii°to trial, 
 and .Mac.Mahon, ., t„ l,,,;,,. t,,, j„,igment of j 
 Mieu J mad.! the in.iunction perpetual :- i 
 . Hel.l, by the Curt of Ar-nal, roversin.' these ' 
 
 of establishing the by-law as one not merely for 
 ;a sing money but also as one for the construc- 
 tion f the road, a-id that it had made it valid 
 for all purposes: — 
 
 Held, also that the plainti!!', were entitled to ' 
 the costs of the act.on down to t!ie time of t! e 
 pissing of the Act, and, in addition, to tlic costs 
 of a motion ii Cl.ambers for the disposal of the 
 action, oml that the defendants were entitlcl 
 to the subsequent costs and to the costs of the 
 
 Observations on the course lalcen by the Icls- 
 iaturo 111 passing Acts to v.didatc proceedim's 
 which are under attack in ,-. pending action, 
 .caving the costs of the action to be 'dispo.se, 
 of by the Court as ,r the Act iia.l not passi,l. 
 
 Held, by theSui.reme C.n.rt of Canada, re- i 
 versing the decision of the Court of -\n„eal 
 asohercan, .1., dissenting, that the Act d„l noi 
 hspcnsc with the re,,uirements of sees, rm ' 
 and oO.. of the Municipal .Act rcpiiring a by-law , 
 m-oviding lor the c,instru,.tioii of the 7ailway to I 
 lie liassed, l;ut only conlirnicl the one that 'was 
 fiasseil as a niomn- by law : ^ 'I 
 
 Held also, tliat an erroneous recital in the 
 preamble to the Act that tli ■ town council ha,! ' 
 passed a construction by-law had no etreet on I 
 tj_ie (piestion to be ,leci,lc,l. /)iryrr v. Toini of\ 
 
 ' II. Imi-eiutivk (lu Directory. 
 
 ^/n^TT^''^ A0t-/V/;,.,.y of Roll to Col- 
 
 • :'., ihl' "'-■'-:• ""'" tne Ontario Ass<33sment 
 Act, .,., \ let. en. 4S, provision is m nlo for the 
 inc, aration every year by the clerk of the muni- 
 ■■•ipa ity ol a '•cdlector's ndl.- confining a state- 
 .nent o, all assessments to be made for n.unid™: 
 purposes ii the year, and sec. 120 provided ^fa 
 similar roll with respect to taxes payal.le t< the 
 
 •^ h't;^.'f n " '''■'"•'"^:^ Al/lJendof*^ 
 -0 IS the follow,,,^,: o'p,,^ ^.,^,,,|. g|,..j„,i^,i 
 
 the iv, 1, certih ..I underhis lian,l, to the collecl'r 
 (m .,r liotoiv the nrst .lay of i )ct,iber : "- 
 
 ^tS'l A''|!'"-o'';i''^'''r'^ the Court of 
 
 .li '"i:r '^•,.•^'•'1 tl'it the provision a.s t(. 
 
 delivery of the rol. to tlie cdlector was impera 
 
 .ve, an,l its „oii.,lelivery was asudicient ■■Zwer 
 
 (.a suit against the colle.tin- for ndlur. toTol' 
 
 Ilel.l also that s,i,.h delivery was necessary 
 
 1 the ease ot the r,dl tor miniieipal taxes pro 
 
 nled f.irin the previous secli.m'a.s well as U> 
 
 that,,.,.ov,ncia:^.es. T. .rrrZ:^, 
 
 Port Arthur, 1!) A. R. ru,r,', 22 .S. C. li. 241 
 
 New Iilghtg-.S;,.v.;,;,. /,>,„„,//,.,]_ where 
 aew rights are given by a statute with spc'ltic 
 reme.hes for their enforcement, the remi,lv is 
 conlmed to th.jse spccilieallv given 
 
 •Vihl \ -hore a wife obtaincl a magistrate's or.ler 
 under ..1 \ ict en. 2;}, sec. 2 (, .. I, ,or payment by 
 ae husband of a weekly sum for her support:- 
 
 llel( , d;at her reinclies M-erc limited to tin.se 
 yivcn by the statute, ami that an r.ction in the 
 
 ivisnm Court foi arrears of payments umler 
 
 e(U'(.er coo;, m.t ,,„ .namtaiiied against the 
 inishaiid. A'e Sim.i v. A' %, 20 O. R. 201. f 
 
 Seduction— /v//f(/,/,-.,7 ..),.'. ]_|. s () iss" i 
 1. .iS, " An Act resp ..cting the Action of Seduc- I 
 
 ; I: " ■>' ;"' '■■",^''''"'" ^^^^- '-■"'^"•ging the i 
 
 rght to mamtiin the acli.m. under ciKuim- 
 I. ;J""%" V7 ' '^'""'''.'"^t be sullicient at common ! 
 law. (rotild V. Erd-ni<; 20 O. R. ;) i7. '■ 
 
 Assessment Act -/;„/,•/, .V on /,'o//_Com.,,_ 
 
 !0..r/;ft,Y,/,.,, Mie proviMiins of sec. 12! of th« 
 
 : Conso uiat.. Asses.,ment Act as to entcri^gT^ 
 
 ; t e r,dl, by the clerk of the municip:Uity. oppo- 
 
 ite to each lot or parcel all the rate, or charges 
 
 i ohmn t''' ''"r""" *^^'-•."■■-l''•^ i" .separate 
 
 c<dun US tor each r.ite. is imperative, and mm- 
 
 I compliance therewith remlers'sueh roll a nullity. 
 
 I Ami Avherct.ie amount of such rates or taxes 
 
 . ml the lod was so trunsmiltcl to ti;^ treasurer 
 
 hlhl'invXr'- " '" '■'■' '""'"•"'• *'»'-"■' -- 
 
 The provision of see. 141 of the said Act. 
 
 hich icpiires a tnio cpy of the lists retu.ae(i 
 
 y the assessors t,> the clerk to be furnished to 
 
 til , county treasurer, certilicl t,i by the clerk 
 
 ..mler the sea o, the corponaion, and that of 
 
 sec. U which re.piires an assessors certitieat« 
 
 to eaeli Jisr, are also ii iper.itive. 
 
 The princi|,le of the decisi,M> in Toini of Tren- 
 to. V /V,., -21 A. I!. .-JTO, followed. L.vcy. 
 Ifeli.id'r, 2(i n. U. .J.",:;. 
 
 /''"'/,■ 0/ Caii.itla V, 
 (»'■'', Tolls. 
 
 Th 
 
 'Jiie':i, I i:x. C. I!. 1, 
 
 : As.sessment Aot-7Vmv _".iA„/.-|_.s-,e He 
 \ 7'ln"" ' '•' ^''"'^ Arthur, 21 O. R. I75, 
 
 : Ditches ana Watereoursos Act— .-1 warrf— 
 
 :.-;;T'-'fl;l.T^'^^ P'''^'''^''''!-' of suo-scc. <iofm.o 
 
 i ^- ot .., \ ,ct. c,i. .-,,-,(().,, the Ditches an,l Water- 
 courses Act, 1,S04, which re.,uire thedudgeof 
 
 : the t ,mnty Court to hear a,„l ilctermim, an an- 
 Ileal from an award thcrcumler within two 
 
 ; months after receiwng notice thereof, are merely 
 
 I directory. /,V McFarUuit v. MUhr, 20 (J. R. .jia. 
 
 Joint Stock Companies' Act- CVffs. I- An 
 o lerwise valid transter „t shares allotted o the 
 tians eror upon wliicli Ue l.as not panl anythii.,/ 
 m calls having ,ee:i made at thc'tinie of^;r.l' 
 tei,is lot invali,! bee uise the ten per centum 
 ..P'mal otte(l st,ick, ,lirecte(l by sel Wo'f'u^ 
 •loint.S.ock Comp.inies' Act, It. S () eh |.-.7 
 t"''«,"-»f "' I nia.le payable witjl';, oil- 
 
 h^rnorbLen'air'''''''''''"''''^^'''^-'"!-'^." 
 
 The last nn.ntioned ...eeti.m is direoiory iner,.- 
 
 O.' R. 44u''"' ''""'''""='" -^■^■^' >'■•'•""•"" V. .SiiuH, lij 
 
Ill 
 
 U I' 
 
 (!'. 
 
 ii 
 
 ' .:i 
 
 I 
 
 17' '^ 
 
 Miiii 
 
 N1i ' ■ 
 
 927 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 92? 
 
 Municipal Act — liylaw — PanHinij.] — In | alleged an agreement with Her Majesty wherebj 
 sec. Ill of tlio Manitoba Municipal Act, 1.SH4, j in considciutidii of the conveyance by the Inter 
 whicli provides that municipal cor[joration8 )(,«;/ ; colonial Kaihvay of ccitain passengers letweer 
 
 pass by-liivs in relation to niaiters therein enu- 
 merated, the wold "may'" is pel missive only, 
 and does not prohibit corporations frcni exer- 
 cising their juiiHdictioii otlieiwise than by by- 
 law ; Ritchie, C.J., aiul Strong, J., ilissenting. 
 Bemardiii v. Mmdc'qndity oj' 2\\irtli JJiiJIerhi, 19 
 S. C. R. 581. 
 
 UunlclFal Act- Jly/aw — Rifji-^tralidv.] — 
 The provisions of sec. '^f>\ of the Municipal Act, 
 R. S. O. ch. 184, are imperative, ami not mere- 
 ly directory ; and if a local impiovtmcnt by-law 
 is not registered within two weeks ;. iter its final 
 papsing, a ratepayer may shew that it is invalid, 
 and successfully resist payment ot the local im- 
 provement tax. Sirccm/ v.Corjiorntioii o/'.9m'7/i'< 
 Fal/.% 22 A. R. 429. 
 
 Rallvray Subsidy — Cromt — Discn lion. ] — 
 Where money is ^-'anted by th>; k;,'i.slature, and 
 its application is prescribed in such a way as to 
 
 confer a di.scretion upon the Cr.,wn, no trust is ^ jj,,^,,^,,, „^ .(UaUned bv any exception sucn as 
 imposed enfoic.:-ble agamst the Uown by peti- U),at mentioned in Tli. M, u, Men Colin, e Ca 
 
 certain stati(]iis, the deltiidants agreed to paj 
 
 ' Her Majesty, thron^li the jiroper otiieers of that 
 railway, tlie fares or passage moiuy of such 
 passengers at the rate therein mentioned as 
 agreed to between the defendants and such 
 •iflicers. The defendants, admitting tlie agree 
 
 1 nieiit as alleged, sought to avoid it by setting 
 up as a defence that .>-uch passengers were car- 
 
 I lied on //(,)(.s in blank signed by one of the 
 defendants only ;-- 
 
 Held, on demuircr to the pica, to be no 
 answer to the breach of contract alleged. 
 
 ('-'.) Tlie Clown is not IkjuhiI by sees. 100 and 
 
 ! 12'J of the Dominion Klections Act. 1874. 
 
 i (3.) The 4(itli clause of the 7lh section of the 
 Interpretation Act, \\. S. (,'. ch. 1, wlrMeby it i,- 
 provided that no provision or enactment in any 
 Act shall afi'ect in any manner or « iiy whalsoevei 
 the riglits of Her Majesty, her heirs or succes- 
 sors, unless it is exj'ies.^ly stalc<l Ihcrein thai 
 Her Majesty shall be bound thereby, is .ict 
 limited or ((Ualified by any exception such 
 
 tion of right. 
 
 The appellant railway company allegeil by 
 petition of right that, by virtue of 51 & 52 Vict. 
 ch. 91, the Licutenant-dovenior in Council 
 was authorized to grant 4,000 acres of land I 
 per mile for 30 n-iles of the Hereford Rail- i 
 way ; that by an ordcr-in-council dated Oth ' 
 
 11 Rei). 70/;, " that the King is impliedly bi'ind 
 by statutes passed for the general good . . 
 or to prevent fraud, injury, or wrong." Tin 
 Queen v. Povliot, 2 Ex. C. U. 49. 
 
 R. S. O. ch. 1, sec. 8, sub-sec. 13—" Pinion ' 
 August, 1888, the lami subsaly was converted [ ^^ j,,,, gijj^ „„;g eo9. 
 
 into a money subsidy, the Oth section of said 
 ch. 91, 61 k 52 Vict, enacthig that "it shall be 
 lawful," etc., to convert ; that the company 
 completed the construction of their line of rail- 
 way, relying upon the said subsidy and order- 
 in-council, and built the railway in accordance 
 with the Act 51 & 52 Viet. eli. ill. and the pro- 
 visions of the Railway Act of Canada, 51 Vict. 
 ch. 29, and they claimed to be entitled to the 
 sum of §49,000, balance due on said subsidy. 
 The ('rown demurred on thj ground that the 
 statute was permissive only, and by exception 
 pleaded, inttr alia, that the money had been paid 
 by order-in-couneil to the sub contractors for 
 work necessary for the construction of the road ; 
 that the president had by letter agreed to accejit 
 an additional subsidy on an extension of their 
 line of railway to settle difliculties, and signed a 
 receipt for the balance of !*<).5<itt due on account 
 
 K. S. O. ch. 1, sec. 8, sub-sen iS—Bepml.] 
 — Ste Toirnship of Mmrix v. County of Hiiriii,. 
 20 0. R. 089, 27 O. II. 841, post 931. 
 
 IV. Peospectivk oh Ri 
 
 ► CTIVK. 
 
 of the first subsidy. The petition of right was ; ^j^^ ^.^^^.^ ,^.,,r,,ged n' 
 dismissed : — 
 
 Held, that the statute and documents relied 
 on did not create a liability on the part of the 
 Crown to pay the money voted to the appellant 
 comjiany enforceable by petition ot right; 
 Tasehereau and Sedgewiek, .1.1., dissenting; 
 but assuming it did, the letter and receipt 
 aignid by the jiresident of the comjiaiiy did not 
 discbarge the Crown from such obligation to 
 pay the subsidy, and payment by the Crown of 
 the Hub-eontractors' claims out of the subsidy 
 money, without the cc nsent of the conii)any, 
 was a misajipropriation of the subsidy. Here- 
 fm-d H. »r. Co. V. T/ie Qwen, 24 .S. C. R, 1. 
 
 Conditional Sales — A ct /i'(v"'<'i'"'/. ] — ^" 
 Sainjer v. Priwjl,, 20 0. R. Ill, ante 872. 
 
 Crown — XeijlhiLVCt — Art (lirhij h'ii/ht ij 
 /I '/(O)/.]— Held, reversing the judgment of the 
 Exche(juer Court, thai even as.suniing 50 & 51 
 Vict. ch. lOgiiesan action against the Cr(jwii 
 for an injurj' to the person received on a public 
 work resultin:; fioni iiegligeiue of which its 
 officer or serv.int is guilty (u)ion which point 
 
 [III. I.NTEKI'KKTATION AcT. 
 
 K. S. C. ch. 1, sec. 7— Exception — Crown 
 — Domivion Elections Act.^ — The information 
 
 o opinion), such Act is not 
 
 retroactive in its effect, and gives no right of 
 
 ; action for injuries received jirior to the passing 
 
 I of the Act, The Queen v Martin, 20 \i. C. R. 
 
 j 240. 
 
 Drainage Trials Act, 1891.]— iSce TowwhitJ 
 \ of Carniloc v. Tou-n-ship of Metcalfe, 21 O. R. 
 .S09, ante 700. 
 
 Municipal By-la-w — I'aliilatin;/ Act—Snbs(_- 
 (/uent iSiiriiHj ." -nilinij ProcKdinii-i.] — A motion to 
 (juash a municijial by-law was dismissed on the 
 ground that it had Ixen expressly validated by 
 54 Vict. ch. 82. sec. 14 (O.). While an ap]ie:il 
 from the judgment was peiuling, 55 Vict. ch. 
 90 (O.) was passed, see. ti of which enacted tliat 
 "nothing contained licrein or in the Act passed 
 in the 54tli year of Her Majesty's reign, and 
 chaptered 82, shall allect any action or pnjcetd- 
 ing now pending. " 
 
92? 
 
 vith Htr Majesty « liereby 
 ' convoynnce by the Inter 
 rtiiiii jiasseugtis ),et\veeii 
 (lelnulimts agreed to pa\ 
 the jiioiier dtiiceis of that 
 r passage nioiuy of siieh 
 ite therein mentioned as 
 lie defendants and sneli 
 lilts, admitting the agree 
 ht to avoid it hy setting 
 ■ueii passengers were ear- 
 ly signed by one of the 
 
 i- to the Jilea, to be no 
 if eoiitraet alleged, 
 ot bound by sees. lOO and 
 ';ieLti(.ns Act. 1874. 
 ' of the "ill seotioti of the 
 , S. C. eh. 1, \vh"reby it i.- 
 isioii or enaetnu'iit in any 
 iiKiiiiier or « ay whalsoevei 
 jesty, her heirs or sueees- 
 essly .stated therein that 
 e hound tliereby, is .lot 
 y any exeeption such as 
 I Mii;iila/cn Colli ije Ca.-i ., 
 e King is impliedly bi'ind 
 the general good . . 
 injury, oi' wrong." Thi 
 . C. K. 49. 
 
 3, sub-sec. 13- 
 
 /', 
 
 Birbrtoii V. JJakiii, 20 O. 
 
 8, sub-sen 43 — E'ptaL] 
 rrit V. County of Hunih. 
 'Ai\,postWi\. 
 
 : oii Ri 
 
 (CTiVE. 
 
 — A cl lit'^ihrtiiKj. ] — Si( 
 0. R. Ill, aiifeS?2. 
 
 ('—Art (t'iviv'j li'ii/ht 01 
 ^ing the judgment of thi' 
 t even assuming i'O & T)! 
 aetion against the Crown 
 rson reei.ived on a public 
 negligenee of which its 
 [uilty (iijioii which point 
 ) opinion), sueli Act is not 
 t, and gives no right of 
 ived prior to the passing 
 ;)( v Martin, 20 '6. C. R. 
 
 ct, 1891.] — See ToKwhiiJ 
 Ip of Metcalfe, 21 0. R. 
 
 — Valiilatinri Act—Swhxe- 
 roccrdiii;/".] — A motion to 
 law was dismissed on the 
 en expressly validated by 
 4 (i.).). While an apjieal 
 as pending, 55 Viet. eli. 
 . I) of V liieli enacted tli.it 
 ■rein or in the Act passed 
 ler Majesty's reign, and 
 ■et any action or proceed- 
 
 929 
 
 STATUTES. 
 
 at, rv n^ '/■ '^' "'^' '^'''^'' •■^^•t "'^^ ''^■^•'^'■•. 
 
 Lwh 1 '"""■■'!''* "■'"" '^""•-■'■tii'K that the l,y. 
 
 herefor. h' ',"'';'■"",'' ''>' ""^ <'»Hi^'- -Aet. and 
 therefore, the l,y law being ,ie:'eetive, the jud- 
 
 wl.u. ,twa.sde!iver...d. (,>,.lli,r y. JA,,./,..,,.,' -17 
 
 '-'ly of loroitto, W) A. \\.-\X 
 
 3bi.p~Muxln-x I.U ii-AdmhalluArtsA- The 
 ...sterol a vessel registered at\lie port of 
 
 v^ innipcg. and trading upon bake \Vi uiin,.,' 
 '-'>" l^^S-l«i'0 no !!,.„' upon ulevessd'f^ 
 
 . .(s; and, evn if s„cl, a lien were hehl to 
 
 Vamoha „, winch ,t could have been enforced; 
 ••■Id It could not now b,. enforeed under the 
 I -loma ( ourta of .-Vdiuindty Act, .-.;! k .Tt Viet 
 eli. -, (Imp.), or the .■Vdiiuralty Act, .".-I & .-,-, 
 
 a retrr,actne elh-ct in such a case would bo an 
 mterferenee with the rights of the parties 
 Utryman v. The Aurom, 3 Kx C H • .'s' 
 
 930 
 
 I'efore the (Vmrts, no special words to that efTect, 
 being used. Williamx v. Irri,,,, 22 ,s. C. R. l(,!s 
 
 Supreme Court of Canada-.-J/v..„/_.v.„- 
 
 •'r -;,'"'"'•' -■''•'"'"■^' stand n,, for J,,,!.,- 
 «'M.A]-The statute .14 & .".r, Vict. eh. 2,-,, .sc 
 which provides that "whenever the right' tj 
 api eal IS dependent upon the aiiiuuut in dispute 
 ^uh atnonnt shall be understood to l:e' 'u 
 ' emandedand not that recovered, if they a le 
 d lerent, .Iocs not apply to ca,-,.. in which he 
 ^npenor Court has rendered judgment or to 
 ca..cs argued and standing for ju.lgnient (u, 
 drMnr) helore that Court, when the Ac .,, 
 .n o ,„,.ee. mi/ian,. v. Irnne. 22 S C ' ' 
 0,S, followed. to>rn, v. AV„„.., J/,V,/„// ,.. r.i . 
 Iioliiie, MtlU V. A,„ioy,.s-, 22 ,S. C. R. ;!,S1. 
 
 h<jht~I,n,lua, Aetxon- .l,„h,m,,d on Day of 
 
 (uiYied by the .Supeiior Court in review, in 
 
 which the Act 5-1 & ,■;.-, ^•,et. ch. 2.-. ca-no into 
 force, see. .S of which provide,! for an appea o 
 
 Held, that the a,.pellants uot having shewn 
 
 hat the judgment was delivered sub,-eouei,t to 
 
 tl-passm.,ofthcAct,theCouithadn'oj„.:I? 
 
 . y'/'"n>, whether an ap[ieal w.uild lie from a 
 Jiitlgnienl pronounced •■ilocr the passing of the 
 Act in an aetion .■dready pemli.ig. lla-tM^. 
 v. Dexmarteau, 19 S. C. R. .-|i-> -"'"""•>< 
 
 ..urv»,y of Land--. I //„»•„.,., .■ ,;„. si,-,.i. i-_ 
 
 lie. per()sleraiid.Maeleni,ai,..IJ.A.,lH.,.a,tv, 
 ..J_n expres^ioj. no opin,„„J, that .sec.'liJ I.f 
 '- >. '. e.i. 1„2, wliuh provides that all allow- 
 ances tor .streets surveve.l in cities or aint 
 thereof which l.ne l.een „, ,nay he surv. ed 
 and lai.lout an.l lai.ldowuon the plans t.eW 
 ;7'1 "Pon which lotsof lau.l fmi'tiog , : 1 
 
 allowances for streets luue been or may he .so 
 
 out on V " '^^'""I-'t'^'^'""' "M-He's to streets laid 
 
 ^;i^"tAer'^'''"'"«'"''^'''^'^^"''^*'-P- 
 
 Hel.l. per burton, J.A., that though the eec 
 
 n l"or tf,.'r""'"'"! '' ':''''"^''' °'''>' I" fl'^' '"'i^i- 
 :; l" "=* ■^•"■\'=.y.".' l' ^Uy, etc., or part thereof, 
 
 "he Jilv. ' '" ■^'""•'^•'«'-^" '" '"ts or iiareels witlii.l 
 
 ,/,'."'V.'''"^;.''" '.'"^ Common Pleas Division, 21 
 -. b. . ,, all.rmiiv, I'V a .livision of opinion, 
 t;.al of lergiis,.,,,, ,1., alhrme.l. Coude.hamx 
 Ci'ii (;/ J'oioido, 1!) A. R. (i41. 
 
 Supreme Court of Canada-.-J^,/,^„/_.rCe»' 
 Enihl~Pemh„<, Anion- Jnd,,n.ud Afu,. j>J. 
 iwjoj Awe,.d,n,, .lc/.|-I„ ai, action l^wight b. 
 t) e lespondent against the appellant for ,sl' 0(l(i 
 which was argncl and taken' » ,/./;/«.;■,; I'th' 
 Superior ( ourt m review on the .SOtli .^epteniber, 
 lVU,_the day on which the Act .Vl & o,') Viet 
 ch. _'., was sanctioned, sec. ;! of vl,ie], ,,,ave a 
 right of appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada 
 Jiulgment was rendere.l a month later in favoui' 
 
 cL rt'oM'"""','-'"*- '^" "''I'^''^ ''' "'^' '^"l"^'""^ 
 touit ot Canada : — 
 
 ll^H?;.'"*! '~'"""^' J^""'"'^'-'"'! Tascheuan. 
 JJ., that the respondent's right could not be 
 .rejud.ced by the delay of the Court in ren.ler' 
 iK.the judgment, which should be treated as 
 laving been guen ..n the .Sdih Sejitemher ; and 
 lieref,^-o no appeal lay. //nrlu'U v. jMxma-. 
 
 ,,.^,^P''?,'^«.Co"rt of Canada-.l;v«a/-A-,». 
 
 a 1.1 .Se.lgw,ck, JJ., that the right of appeal 
 pven by 54 & ,V, V,et. eh. 25 .lots not eiten 
 
 cases standing ...judgn.ent in the Supei o 
 Uut prior to the , assin,. of the Mu.l Act. 
 
 P,':V- ^^"'"■'""/'> •-',' '^^ C. li. 181, lollowe.i; 
 
 ai hLiT"*"""'' •^•,' ""^' ^'"^ statute is no. 
 
 aiplicable toccses already instituted or pendint: 
 
 5U ^ 
 
 Toll-gate-^l<.< Pnduhifu,,, - Provision for 
 
 road.:mpanyl.d,J.i„^teef.. ;i 
 be of years ami ha.i ereete.l toll-gates and 
 
 y theguelec Legislature, 52 Vict, ch -13, for- 
 !■ hlmg any such eon.pany to place a toll or 
 
 V h'e"::.;;'! '"I^T *'"■ '"""-^ 'f ^^ ^-^vn o 
 ^elhn - ;""'.'';' ^■""■"-■"'"f tlie corporation, 
 si d 1 v "' «^">'^'-'t,l»">vi.le,l that "this Act 
 wis ■ I ; ''Vi'"'''^" '-■"■^■^t," which section 
 was upuiledjn the next scs.sion by 54 Vict. ch. 
 .^t'. Alter o2\,ct. ch. 43 was passed, the 
 «.mpai,y -n. ted one of its toll-gate's to a poi t 
 ey,.,, the hn.its of the villagt, which llnii" 
 le suh.se,iueiitly extendc.l so as to bring said 
 g»lew,tli,nthem. The corporatim took pro- 
 eee.iings agamst the company, contending that 
 
 A.t letieaetive, and that the shilling of the 
 to Igate without the cnsent of the corporal on 
 was a violation of said Act — 
 
 Oueen's 'it"''":'"^ *''« decision of the Court of 
 gueen s bench, that as a statute is never retro- 
 .ct.^c unless ma.le so in express terms, sec. 2 
 had no cttect, and Us repeal coul.l not make it 
 letroactive; that .Le shitting of the toll-,-ate 
 was not a violation of the A.^ ,vhiJh ouK 
 pi.'eil to llie erection of new gates ; and tha't thf- 
 
 .fleet the pre-existmg rights of the company. 
 ■'Hen, St. Joachim dr la Point CInin v. Wnt 
 tluue lurnpike Road Co., 24 f. C. li. 4!5(j. 
 

 
 931 
 
 STREET RAILWAYS. 
 
 932 
 
 V. r.lJIK.M.IMl StaTI TKS 
 
 Distribution of Estates. 1 Tliu Lcgislatm-o 
 of Xuw HniiiMwiL'k, liy -'(1 (mo. 111. cli. ll,.xecs. 
 14 mill 17, ri'-ciiiictc'il tlui Imptriul Act •-'•Jit L'.'t 
 (Jar. II. I'll. lU (Statuti! I't' I •ist.i'ilnitidii'-), iin ex- 
 l)laino(l liy set;, -'"i 'if '2!) ( ':ir. II. ih. :( (StiUuto of 
 Frauds), wliic' luMvided tluil notliiii;,' in tlie 
 former Act h1 .mid lio coiisinitid tn ^;xlend to 
 t'Statt'S of ^/' mtv fon-rfi'i >\yii\-j, inti.'stato, but 
 that their hnsbamls hIiouM enjoy their |)ersonal 
 <!states as tlierelofore. Wlnin the stiitntos (if 
 New IJrunHwiok were revised in IS.'i-f the Act 
 "0 Geo. III. ell. 11 was rt^-enaeted, but sec. 
 17, eorres|ioiidiin,' to see. '!'> of the .Statute of 
 Fraud.'), was oniitteil. In the administration of 
 the estate of a fiini' i-m-ii-li , her next of kin 
 clainie<l the per.sdiialty on the ground that '.lie 
 liuaband'a rights were swept away by this omis- 
 sion : — 
 
 Held, that the personal property passed to 
 the husband and not to the next of kin of the 
 wife. 
 
 Per Strom.', .1. — The rejieal, by 'the licviscd 
 Statutes, of •_'() (leo. 111. ih. 1 1, which was passed 
 in the allirmauc(; of the [uiiiirial Acts, operated 
 t(i restore ber. •J.'i cif tlie .Statute of Fraud.) as 
 part of tlie ccininiou law of \ew Brunswick. 
 
 Per G Wynne, .1. — When a colonial legislature 
 re-enacts an Imperial Ac^t. it enacts it as inter- 
 jiretcd by the Imperial ('oiirts, and afortinrihy 
 other Imperial .Acts. Hence, when the Kngli.sh 
 Statute of Distributions was re-enacted by 20 
 (ieo. III. cli. 11 (X.B.), it was not ueees.'iary to 
 enact the interpreting secticm "'' '','• Statute of 
 Frauds, and its omission in the lieviaed .Statutes 
 did not afl'ect the construction to be put upon 
 the whole Act : — 
 
 Held, per Riti-hio, C..!., Fournier. (Iwynne, 
 and I'atter.son, .T.]., that the Married Woman's 
 Proiierty Act iif New lirunswick, C. S. X. B. 
 ch. ',■!, whicli exempts the separale jiroperty of 
 u ni.irried woman from liability fur her hus- 
 band's debts, and prohibits any dealing witli it 
 without her Cdiiscut, only suspends the hus- 
 band's riglits in the property during coverture, 
 and on the death of the wife he t.akes the 
 personal projierty as he would if the Act had 
 never been passed 
 
 The Supreme Court of Xew Brunswick, while 
 deciding against the next of kin on his claim to 
 the residue of the estate of (ifi-mi corerli , directed 
 that his casts should be paid out of the estate. 
 On apiieal the decree was varied by striking out 
 such direction. I.tnnli v. Cttvilund, 19 S. C. 
 R. 78. 
 
 Municipal Corporations — Awnril. j — The 
 saving provisions of sec. 1-1 of the Municipal 
 Amendment Act, 1S!U, 57 Vict. ch. ,5t) (O.), do 
 nnt operate so as by implication necessarily to 
 exclude the application of the Interpretation 
 Act, 1!. S. (). ell. 1, sec. S, sub-sec. 43: and 
 
 A township corporation which had obtained 
 an award against a county corjioration under 
 sec. 538a of the Consolidated Munieiiial Act, 
 1892, for part of the cost of the maintenance of 
 certain bridges, were, notwithstanding the repeal 
 of sec. SiJ.'ta by S'-c. 14 of .")7 Vict. ch. 50 (().), 
 held entitled to recover the amount expended 
 on the same up Lo the date of the passing of 
 ♦he latter Act. Township of Morri'' v. Coniify 
 of Huron, 20 O. R, 089. ' Varied, 27 O. R. 
 341. 
 
 I Municipal Corporations- /<oar»/o///ea/</i.| 
 ! - Section 07 of the Act by which innnieipal 
 corporations were establislied in X'ova Scotia, 
 ' 4'2 \'iet. ^h. 1, giving them "the appointment 
 of health olliccra . . and a board of health " 
 with tlie j)(/w<!rs and authorities formerly vested 
 in Courts of .Sessions, does not repeal eh. 29 of 
 ■ K. .S. \. S., -tth ser., providing for the appoint. 
 menl of boards of health by the Lieutenant- 
 Governor in Council ; llitchie, C..1., doubting 
 the authority of tlic r>ieutenaiit-(iovernor to 
 a])point in incorporated counties. Cottnti/ i.f 
 CiijK' /Inhm V. .l/cA'c//, IS S. C. R. CSO. 
 
 ! Toll-gate — Aft Pr^hihiliiiii ■ — /'rovision for 
 ' Xoii-rclfOdclirili/— !,') jual of] — ,?( /; yillru/e. (f 
 
 St. Juachiiii dii la I'ointi: Cluire v. Pointe C'tair" 
 
 Turnpike liond Co., 21 S. C. R. 4S0, ante 930. 
 j 
 
 Tort — Action Aijnintt Crou-n — Pnlilir 11 'orts, | 
 
 — Sex Vitij of (Juebtc v. 'J'he Qiuni, 24 S. C. li. 
 
 420, ante 299. 
 
 VI. TiMi: (iK Pas.sin(!. 
 
 Effect — Portion of />«//.]— Acts of Parlia- 
 ment take effect in law from the earliest 
 moment of the day on which tliey are pas.ned, 
 and tlic Act 54 Vicl. ch. 20, amending the 
 Assignments Act, K. S. O. cli. 1"24, to whieli 
 the Royal Assent was given at three o'cloi^k in 
 the afternoon, was therefore held lo apply to a 
 chattel mortgage executed and registered before 
 twelve o'clock on the same day. Cole v. Por- 
 teous 19 A. l;. HI. 
 
 Effect — Portion of J)a>/ — Jndijment Ddirtrul 
 0)1 Sami: l)a>/.] — .See l/urtuhisc v. Desmarienu, 
 19 S. C. R. 502, ante 929. 
 
 STATUTORY CONDITIONS. 
 
 See Insuuance, III. 
 
 STAYING PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 .See PiiAcTicK, XVII. 
 
 STAYING TRIAL. 
 
 See Trial, V. 
 
 STOCK. 
 
 .S'ee Company. 
 
 STREET RAILWAYS. 
 
 I. BoKUH, 933. 
 
 II. Contracts with Municipal Cortoba- 
 Tio.NS, 933. 
 
932 
 
 )ratlon3- Ihinnl nflle.altk. | 
 
 u Ai:t by wliiili inunicip.'il 
 .'stiililislictl in Xova Scotia, 
 i;,' tlieiu " tlio iippointrpciit 
 . and a hoiinl of health" 
 1 autliorities fuiincrly voHted 
 s, iliiL's not 1 ijR'al ch. 2!) of 
 ., ]iiiivi(liii^ foi- tlie apiioiiit 
 liraltli by the Lieutenant 
 il ; lUttliie, ('..1., doubting 
 III' Li(,'iitoaant-(!overnor to 
 rated oonntius. Counti/ i.f 
 Kiiii, \H H. C. R. 039. 
 
 Priihiliitiiiil — I'rorininn for 
 't'i'jK.al of.\^S((: Villai/e nj 
 [liiili: C/iiire v. Poinle, (Jlairi- 
 •-'IS. C. n. 4Sli, aH<«!)30. 
 
 xhid Croini — Piihlic Workn.] 
 : V, The (^unn, 24 S. C. K. 
 
 mi; ok I'ASSINd. 
 
 I o/ />rt^. J— Acts of Parlia- 
 in law from the earliest 
 on which they are jjansed, 
 'ict. fli. '20, amending tlie 
 K. S. O. eh. 1-24, to whieli 
 •as given at three oVloek in 
 iherefiire held to apply tci a 
 L'Ciited and registered before 
 he ."jame ilay. Cob. v. I'trr 
 
 yf Day — Jiid'/ment Df.lircr, d 
 il- Uaiitibi-ic V. De.tmarteau, 
 r- !)2a. 
 
 XY CONDITIONS. 
 
 :.sii;ance, III. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 .AtTICK, XVII. 
 
 ING TRIAL. 
 
 Trial, V. 
 
 3T0CK. 
 
 ; Company. 
 
 C RAILWAYS. 
 
 iTH Municipal Corpora- 
 
 S33 
 
 III. iNMi'itv TO AN:M\r,s, 93.-I. 
 •IV. In.iciiv To I'kksons, 938. 
 ^'• OiKKvnoN, 939. 
 
 I. lioNlJ.S. 
 
 By-law — /',/,//,„ _ I ->,<;„„ 1 \u\ 
 Hn.ler .-,t Viot eh I' .„.,. •< • "Z; T- ■^'""""-'' 
 
 -ry when aid i;:;;;g;u-t:'V^g^:t':i"r; 
 
 t 1 It ,1 mi|ontyi„ ninnb^'r representin 'oue-hilf 
 in value of tlie persojis sheH-n bv 1 1, . wf 
 
 ;s::;:'isr;:-i;:;-;irS S 
 
 il. CoNT.vrrs wrrn M,-N,on.A.,C,.,u.,„MT,.v.. 
 T^°TT f'^'f^^ ^^n^^y Company - 
 
 ^":.?^s^^;,w?: •"'"*^^^^'^'^^"f^I""^-^- 
 o^.rteritw.ip.ut.dti;:i;:::L^t:^i;!;.;::^^^^ 
 
 !'oS,u!d;d'veSoSu:u:'::''^ir'^' «'-•''::>' 
 
 Hehl am,',nin,' the jud,'m..>.t of tlie . '..n.-t 
 -1-y, hat the exupany ^v', liable for th. ^^ 
 
 •r.i S. C. R. 2.-)9. ■' " ■'^'"'''•e-..', 
 
 STREET RAILWAYS. 
 
 Toronto street Railway Comnanv 
 
 Court of App3a,t4tnmb;tii;^;?;ij:>', - 
 
 Hgre^nients a!l\,.ti„g the TonmU, S^^R^ 
 v.iy Compvuy, the possibility of exe ot im the 
 ranoaise b..v.m 1 ,he pen, I of Lh r v\ur« 
 
 ovu tie Luhv.iy, h not '• |)i',)pjrtv '■ th ■ v lI„ . 
 
 ■tturZ':'-''"^''^'^''''^^'-'"-'-^-'^ 
 
 Xor was the company entitled to anv allow- 
 lKeitv^ln'^;"'"'' ''"'"''^'"-^ -'■-'■•-'- V 
 
 ri^^KeS" ^'^^ '"'-'■'"■'' ^"--fo; 
 
 sions of the railway made from time to time 
 ;nnetoanend at the e..piration of "jk tli^v 
 
 •)ii<lgmeiit of Robertson, .1., •?•> o r o-, ' 
 ^H,™ed,Hnrton,.,.A.,dissentin:;„the^eji;'l 
 
 Cmu'n ''>^''"^^.J">I;''i'il Committee o.' the I'rivv 
 
 An 'that";.','"-!"' J'"V;"^''" "f ^'"^ ^^'^'"■t of 
 ^PP^al, that the Aets eoiild not be e Jiiatrued as 
 
 guntmg a perpetu.d privilege to u,e the slreeL 
 
 8M 
 
 to:; the purp.^e.s of the r.iihvav, but that th,. 
 >^.ti-t by tlie agreement and byd uv. Th a liVnh 
 
 :;.v'i::rt'ti;r'""-'''^''''''^'--'>^'-''^i 
 
 ■,, H,nr ! I varioiH extensions thereof 
 
 c-o-, 2i»A. H. iL>,, [1S9.1)A. C. .->U. 
 Toronto Street Railway Company_/Vr 
 
 ;-ycomp,^7w;;:'t^.r,rit:d-:',sr^:„S^ 
 r j^i^r-oVSi-i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 theieof, to be determined by arbitration Th,^ 
 H o, 1 .; ,t'i''l" ' ■-' P'''-"'."'"Ut pavement 
 
 ;^i;;, up ...ee.t.!in Greets tlt;^:^,^'^^ 
 I ny. r^invayperiunent puements of cX 
 
 ;;|-.i;;.theeonip..ylte;'- :-:;-r^^ 
 
 ad e|tt ------. PX\:S 
 
 i'tep;:ir ■;::=-;- -rrs 
 
 f:^>3'ui[;!-:d;i;'i:s'-= 
 "pon whieh the'\.s.;:r':i^.r-ij:;j"i^ 
 
 iWtioii having been 
 
 In-oiiglit by the eity for 
 
 PUte to the end of the "a SS 4rs ''ttl'l" 
 
 stmet ion renewal, maintenance, andrenair in 
 "peetof all the p ntions of street ^0," 
 y ...e company s track so long a. the franS 
 
 not t aireetVl ''^'7:''"^'"' l'™^-i'Io'l that it was 
 
 :::;ii;£i^Sffih:-irL:r^^':n?^F 
 th^x^"'-^;'''T'^^'^'p--i"-'S 
 
 the aforesaid franchise now e.vtends " Thi» 
 agreement was ratiliod by an Act of the leci^ 
 
 construetion of permanent pavements for^hioh 
 .lebentures had been issued payable aft^tho 
 termination of the franchise. 'Ae Lb£to« 
 
• ;r ^Mi 
 
 ass 
 
 STREET RAILWAYS. 
 
 93S 
 
 !;[ 
 
 ;!:. I- 
 
 I; ■ ■ " : 
 
 hiiving rcfiLsi'il td nildW tliiH vlaim, un action 
 wiiN brotiglit by tlie city to recover the Kaiil 
 ariKiiint ; — 
 
 Held, ullirniiii;,' till' (Iccisidii of the Ciiiiit ot' 
 Appeal, tlmt the eliiiin of tliu city could not lie 
 ullowcil ; that the said a>;r«eineiit diHiliarj;i d 
 the company from all liahilitj' in respect to con- 
 struction, rene'val, maintenance, ami repair of 
 the Hiiid Htiiets ; and that the clauMC iirovidin;,' 
 that the agreennnt should not atl'ect the ri^htB 
 i)f till) iiurties in resiiecl to the arliitration, etc., 
 must tie conHiilcrcil to have hceu inserted ix 
 VMJori cavtili'i. anil could not do away with the 
 express contract to relieve the company from 
 liability : — 
 
 Held, further, that by an Act passed in ItSTT, 
 and a bylaw made in pursuance thereof, the 
 company was only assest^ablc as for local im- 
 provements which, by the Munici]ial Act, con- 
 stitute a lien niion the pioiierty asseased, but 
 not a personal lialiility upon the owners or 
 oc(!upiers after they have ceased to be such ; 
 therefore after the termination of the franchise 
 the company would not be liable for these rates. 
 City of Ti'i-onlo v. Toronto Stmt /i'. M'. Co., '.'3 
 S. C. R. 198. 
 
 Winnipeg Street Railway Company— 
 
 JJighivoi/i — JI/oi/'^/o///. I -- Where u municipal 
 council gr.'inted to a railway company authority 
 to construct, maintain, and operate railways in 
 its streets, with the exclusive right to such por- 
 tion of any street as should be occupied by the 
 railway, but with the jilain intent that the com- 
 pany should have no concern whatever with any 
 portions of any street not in actual occupation 
 by their rails : — 
 
 Hchl, that a subse(|ueut clause in the deed of 
 grant, giving to the com)iany the refusal, on 
 terms, of other streets in the city for railway 
 p\irposes, was insutlicient to constitute, contrary 
 to the plain meaning of the previous stipula- 
 tions, a right of monopoly in any of the streets 
 of the city. 
 
 Quo re, whether, if a monopoly had been con- 
 ceded, it was nltrd rlri--^ of the municipal coun- 
 cil. U'imiipi'(i Street It. IT. Co. v. Wiiiiii/ieij 
 Kkctric Strctt 'jl. W. Co., [l.S!)4] A. C. 015. 
 
 III. Injcuv T(i Ani.mals. 
 
 Height of Ralls — .Statutory Ohlvjation.] — 
 The charter of a street railway company re- 
 quired the road between, and for two feet out- 
 side of, the rails to be kept constantly in good 
 repair and level with the rails. A horse cross 
 ing the track stepped on a grooved rail, and the 
 caulk of his shoe caught in the groove, whereby 
 he was injured. In an action by the owner 
 against the company it appeared that the rail, 
 at the place where the accident occurred, was 
 above the level of the roadway : — 
 
 Held, atlirniing the judgment of the Supreme 
 (^ourt of A'ova Scotia, thatasthe rail was above 
 the road level, contrary to the reijuiremcnts of 
 the charter, it was a street obstruction unauthor- 
 ized by statute, and, theretore, a nuisance, and 
 the company was liable for the injury to the 
 horse caused thereby. Uul'ifax Street li. W. Co. 
 V. JoijKt, 22 S. C. R. 258. 
 
 IV. In.ii KV TO I'kksiin.s. 
 
 Action — Priidiietioii of Jioiiimeiitu— Pririli i/e. j 
 In an action for dam.igis for personal injuries 
 received by the {ilaintiiriu a tramway car acci 
 ilent. as to which the londiictor of the car had 
 made a retiort to the defindiints : — 
 
 Held, that the jiortion of the repoit contain- 
 ing the name.i of the eye-witntsscs of the acci- 
 dent was privileged from prodiiction. Arm- 
 Mrunij V. Toronto J{. IC. lo., l."> 1". R. 20«. 
 
 Motorman — ( 'on/ill-ni/ < 'ars — Difnt In I'lnnt. [ 
 --Action by a motorman in the cin|iloynient 
 of a street railway company, under the Udrk- 
 men's ('onipensiition fur injuries Act, to recover 
 damages for injuries sustained by the jihiintill 
 while coupling together a motor-car and a 
 trailer : — 
 
 Held, by the Court of .Ajipcal, that having i.:ii 
 butlers of ditt'erent heights, so that in cou[ilini.: 
 the liulleis overlap and alturd no protection to 
 the person ellecting the coujiling, is a " defect 
 in the arrangement of the plant" within the 
 meaning of the Workmen's Compensation foi 
 Injniiis Act, .")5 Vict. ch. '.^^\, sec. il (O.). 
 
 Held, by the .Supreme Court of Canada, that 
 negligence on the part of the company in nut 
 having )iroper appliances to |irevent injury was 
 ckarly proved, and a new trial properlv refused. 
 /loud v. Toronto 1{. II'. Co., 22 A. R.'TS, 24 S. 
 C. n. 715. 
 
 Passenger — Atttiiiiithiii to lintird Car — Coit 
 tril)iitory ^ytiiliijinre.] — 'I'hc jilaintitT, in broa.I 
 daylight, having hailed -i we.-,tward bound tram 
 way car, on the north tiack, crossed over from 
 the south side of the street to get into it ; the 
 eastward bound car at the time was coming 
 along on the south track at a fast trot, but was 
 some 300 feet away to the west. 'I'he iilaiuliti 
 was somewhat intoxicated. As he took hold ot 
 the westward bound car to board it, he fell, aiul 
 the eastward hound car passed over his foot, 
 which was on the rail. 
 
 The jury found that there was no negligence 
 on the part of the defendants, and that tlie 
 plaintitf was guilty of contributory negligence, 
 on which the trial Judge entered judgment fm 
 the defendants : — 
 
 Held, that the attendant or surrounding cir- 
 cumstances were, in the absence of any e.Nplaii- 
 atory evidence by the defendants, sufficient to 
 raise the presumption that there was negligence 
 on the part of those in charge of the castw .-ird 
 bound car, the conseiiuence of which was the 
 happening of the accident, and that there must 
 be a new ti ial. Forirood v. City of Toronto, 'I'l 
 O. R. 3.')1. 
 
 Passenger — Exjjidxion from Car — Expomrt 
 to Cold — Con.'iequent Il/ni'<.i — JJainai/c-i — litmoti- 
 nt.tn — Eridtnee a.t to Operidion of ltinlii:riy htj 
 Difindinil.-!.] — A passenger on a street railway 
 having the right to be transferred from a car on 
 one street line to that of another street line (ii 
 the railway was refused such right by the con- 
 ductor of the car to which he had the right to 
 be transferred, and was forced to leave it : — 
 
 Held, that he was entitled to recover danianes 
 occasioned by an illness caused by exposure to 
 the cold in leaving the car, such damages not 
 being too remote. 
 
«37 
 
 tV TO 1'kKSIINS. 
 
 /( 11/ I>ori(iiii'>ilM — Pririliiji'. ) 
 i:i^'is I'di- pciMdiiiil iiijiirii'M 
 itiir in a Iriiiiiwiiy cur ucci 
 iiiiiihictor of tlie car liad 
 (Itftniliiiitti : — 
 ion of tlie rtport contain 
 eycwitntsuca of tliu acii- 
 froni proihii'tion. Aifii- 
 W. Co., I,-. I'. K. -.'OS. 
 
 'iii'i Cars — l)ificl ill Plant. | 
 rnian in the cnii)loyiniiit 
 lonipnny, under tlu; U'ork- 
 or Jnjnrits Act, to rccovir 
 Mustiiinocl liy the pl.-iintill 
 •tlicr u motor-car iinil a 
 
 of A|)])cal. that having car 
 ights, so tlnit in conplin:.' 
 1(1 atlcird no protection to 
 tlie coupling, ia a " defect 
 of the ijlaut " within the 
 kinen's Compensation fni 
 ch. ;i(), .sec. ;■((().). 
 L'mc Court of Canada, that 
 irt of the company in not 
 ices to |)rcvent injuiy was 
 new trial properly refused. 
 r. Co., -I'ZA. R.'7,S, -lis. 
 
 jilitKi lo Jliiiinl Car — Con 
 
 — 'J'iic ])laintitl', in broad 
 
 •d a we.-,t\vaid liound tram 
 
 1 tiack, crossed over from 
 
 street to get into it ; the 
 
 at the time was comini; 
 
 ick at a fast trot, hut was 
 
 o the west. 'J'he ])lainlitt 
 
 .'ated. ,\s he took hold ot 
 
 .•ar to lioaid it, he fell, and 
 
 car passed over his foot, 
 
 it there was no negligence 
 lefenilants, and that the 
 f contributory negligence, 
 dge entered judgment fm 
 
 ndant or surrounding cir- 
 he absence of any cxplan- 
 ! defendants, siitticient to 
 that there was negligence 
 n charge of the eastward 
 iijuence of which was tlie 
 lent, and that there must 
 ovd V. City of Toixiiito, '-'•_' 
 
 iun from Cat — Expoxnre 
 l/iii-xn — JJaniai/et — lli.moli - 
 
 Ojii-ratioii of liaihrdi/ iiij 
 bnger on a street railway 
 
 traiisfericd from a car cii 
 t of another street line I'li 
 .■d such right by the con- 
 ,liich he had the right to 
 [IS forced to leave it ; — 
 ititled to recover daniaucs 
 ess caused by exposure to 
 he cur, such damages nut 
 
 STREET RAILWAYS. 
 
 wnT!'!!''"^""''*"*'' "" i"C"n'"''.^ted company, 
 wore the mmceM.s„rs of certain persons who lud 
 l.uroh.vsed the road, and, althon^^^h no .n^y^ 
 '> the roa.l to the defend int.s was prove,!, it w'as 
 
 trtc time of the occurrence were in the defend, 
 mts employment, and that the car in (u.estion 
 was in cluux^, ,.f their cmph.vees:- ' ' 
 
 Held, snih.ient evidence that the defendant., 
 were operating the r.ad so as to render then. 
 1.0.h3 to^U. phdnthb .rin..,t..r.r,j!:T 
 
 Atlinned by the ('..urt of Appeal, -Jl A. R 
 -./S ami by ti,., Supreme Court of Canada, i>l 
 
 Tva.yeller-Oh.t ruction of StreH-Acmuniln- 
 
 <.ity of lorouto to recover daina.'cs for injuries 
 
 sustamod by the pl.vi.aitr, who^ was ■ • '' 
 
 hrough the city, by reason of snow 1, -^^ 
 
 hcen piled „„ the si.le of the .street, a n , e 
 
 iWlty I lie evidence was that the snow from 
 the snhnvalksw.isplace.l „n the roadway i 
 media ely adjoining by servants of the city ad 
 snow iro.n the r.iilway tracks was place 1 y 
 servants of the railway company .i|io, th^ roa i 
 way immchately adjoining tli track, wi lo t 
 any pennrssion Iron, the city, thus raisiin t he 
 roiulway next to the track, where the accidet 
 occurre, , to a height of about twciit 'he 
 
 above the rails. The jury f„u„d that 'the dis 
 repair of the street was the act of the raihvu- 
 company, which was therc.re mule liable vt 
 to the cay tor the .lainages assesscl. Tne eon, 
 pany contended on .■ippeal that the ve, , ct "3 
 pen'erse aim contrary to evidence :- 
 
 Heh , alhiu.mg the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that under the evidence given the 
 manner in which the snow from tlu. track Id 
 been placed on the ■■oa.hvay immciiately adio ,. 
 \Z\ if. ri "If'' '"^tso-'ablv b. of opinion 
 that ,f It iKul not been so placed there thi acci- 
 .lent would not have happened, and that this 
 was he sole cause of the acculent. Toronto J. 
 n. to. y. til!/ of Toronto, 24 S. C. R. 589. 
 
 938 
 
 ; excliisive right of way upon their tr.ickH or the 
 right to riiu their cars at any r.Ue of sp,,.ed they 
 Plfise. \\ hilst their cars must not b'e wilfnny 
 inipede.l, they are bound torecogni/e the riuhts 
 ana necessities of public travel ami so to re^u 
 late the speed that the car.^ ni ly be .nue^lyr 
 Ntopped, should occasion reipiiie it 
 
 Where, therefore, there w.is some evidence 
 
 that an accident was the result of a ,ar runi.in- 
 
 at evccssive speed, the judgment of the Common 
 
 Ne.is Divi.io,,. uphiddmg a verdict agiiiiHt the 
 
 , company, was allirmcl. *■ 
 
 Held, by the Supreme Court of Canada 
 a hrmiM- tlie judgment of the Court of Anncar 
 that persons ero.ssii,g the stre.^ railway racks 
 are entitled to assume that the cars runn n' 
 over them will be driven moderately and pru'! 
 .liMitly, and if an acci.lent happens through a 
 •-•ar going at an .'xccssive rat,, of spc,.,l, the street 
 lailway ,,.mp.uiy is responsible. The .Irivor .f 
 a cart struck by a ,.ar in ,To.ssiMg a track is not, 
 gu 1 y of contributory negligeiwe because In ,li,l 
 not l,)ok tos.^e 11 a cvrwas approaching, if, i„ 
 tact. it_ wa^ f.Hi- enough away t,. enable him to 
 cKMsif It had been pro.celiugin,.derately an,l 
 ru.lciitly. lie can h.. in no vvn^se position than 
 f he h ul ,Mdve,l au,l scm that there was tim,- 
 to ^ros.s. (.wynue, .(., .lissentmg. <l„m,>ll y' 
 loroiito li. II. Co., 21 A. I!. ,j,-,,% 2t S. C U 
 
 TravelIer-fi,,/;,< of \Va„^.^i„,d.]~\:h^ right 
 of way w'h.ch street railway cars have over t le 
 portion of the street on whi^h the rails e ai 
 
 reijuiring 
 
 is not an exclusive right o^ „ 1,, 
 vehicles or pedestrians at all hazanls to get out 
 of the way at their peril ; and, notwithsttmling 
 theabsencct any regulations ,as to sped, the 
 cars must l,e run at such a rate as\na y be 
 reasonable under the circumstances of each 
 particular case. 
 The plaintiff was sitting on a w.iggou which 
 
 pie by the rails, and >vhilo going ilown a steep 
 nchne, a motor-ear ami trailer coming aloiiL 
 ehind, by reason of the motorman not l.avi ^^ ' 
 
 l.roper control of the car, .iml of the excessive 
 
 nldnfiff ■''^°^' ^'"^ '^''^S^'u was run into and'the 
 piaintitt injured : — 
 
 Held, that the defemlants were liable there- 
 lor, Eii-mri y, Toronto R. W. Co., 24 0. R, 694. 
 
 the Court of Appeal, that the Toronto Railway 
 jompany have not, under their charter and 
 their agreement with the city of Toronto, an 
 
 Workman on Road -C',«(/n7,»/ory NejUi 
 ,/,„,.,.]_ A w,,rkman in tlie employincnt of a 
 street railway c,jiiipaiiy was injured by a car 
 striking hmi while working on the track, an,I 
 hrougit this action for .lam.agcs. The company 
 ,lefen,le,l on the grouml that he couhl have 
 escipcl If he ha,l been reasonably careful i,, 
 , looking out for pissing car.s. The trial Judi-e 
 dismisscl the actum, hohling tliat the plaintiff 
 was tlie cause of his ow,, misfortune, ami cuhl 
 not make the defemlants liable. This jr ■ cont 
 wasafHrmed bya Divisional Court, but u .- od 
 by the Court of Appeal, which ordered a 1 -w 
 trial I he .Supreme C.mrt of Cmada allirmed 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, (iwynne 
 ■L, dissenting, and, 01, counsel for the conipanv 
 ^.iating that a new trial was not desired, ordered 
 jiidgment to be entercl f,ir the plaintiff with 
 •>.)00 damages, the amount asse-ised by the iurv 
 at the trial. Ifamillon Slri-.H R IV On J 
 .Vom«, 24 S.C. R. 717. ' 
 
 Workman on Roa.d-h'i;i/u of Ua,,— Speed 
 , --II «)•«,»;/. ]-A car of the ,lefeu,lants' electric 
 street railway was moving very ,p,ickly along a 
 down grade on a street in a city, where the 
 Iilaintilf, who was 111 the employment of the citv 
 corporation was engaged in his ,luty of sweeping 
 the road-be,l. 1 he motorman ,li,l „ot sound the 
 gong oil tlie car as was customary, and ran into 
 the plaintiff, injuring him :— 
 . Ilehl. that although the defendants had the 
 right ot way, the omission to sound the Konc or 
 give any warning of the approach of the car was 
 actionable negligence. Gn^m v. Toronto R. W 
 
 v. OrKu.iTiox, 
 
 Evidence of. ]—&'e6'nWcrfv. ToroiUo R W 
 Co. , 24 O. R, 68,3, ante 937. ' 
 
ii 
 
 SUPERVISION. 
 
 910 
 
 
 Bonday — fvjnnnlnn — Crown — Drench of 
 Charter.] — .SVc Al/imny (I'lvirnl v. Aitnjnra 
 FatlH, Wenliy l'(irk\ nnd I'iiflun Trammay' Vv, , 
 18 A. R. 453, po.^i <M0. 
 
 SUNDAY. 
 
 SUBPCENA. 
 
 iSVc KVIIIKNCF, 1\', 
 
 SUBROGATION. 
 
 Conventional Subrogation — Paymmt aj ^ 
 l)f.bla— 111 ijhirnlion — Lrriiv. | No foinjiil or ex- I 
 preBBflecliinitidiiofsiiliioMation isi(.'(|iiire(l under | 
 Art. 1 1.'').'), Kte. '2, V. C, wlicn tluMlel.tor lioriow- \ 
 inj; the sum of money deeliiie.s in liis deed of loan j 
 tliat it is for the iHiipose of imyiiig liis dehts, 
 and in the iieiiiiittiuiee lie deeliires tliat the imy- 
 ment ha» been ni;.<le witii tile moneys furnished '• 
 by the new eieditor foi' thiit pnrjiose. Where 
 suhrogntion is },'i\in hy the teinis of a deed, tlie ■ 
 erroneous notiuj; of tli'e <let(l liy tlie legiMrar as , 
 a dischiir^'e, and tlie gianting I'ly him of errone- 
 oiiB certiheates, cannot prejudiee the Jiiii ty suh- ' 
 rogated. Om us v. Ikihll, 1!)8. V. H. 1S7. 
 
 Mortgage.]— Held, that the defendants were 
 not entitled to he sulnogated to the rights of a 
 mortgagee in whose mortgage the idaintifi's' 
 ancestress had joined as n granting party, hut 
 which had heen paid off and discharged. 
 Marsh V. Webb, 21 O. K. 281. 
 
 I 
 Mortgage.]— The plaintiff pai<l off a first | 
 mortgage on certain lands, and procured its dis- 
 charge, taking a new mortgage to himself for ' 
 the amount of the advance in ignorance of the ' 
 fact of the existence of a second mortgage. | 
 Shortly afterwards, on ascertaining this fact, he 
 notified the defendant, the holder, that he would \ 
 pay it off, and thcdefendant, relying thereon, tooii 
 no steps to enforce his security. Subse(iuently, 
 on the property becoming depreciated and the 
 mortgagor insolvent, the plaintiff brought an 
 action to have it declared that he was entitled 
 to stand in the position of first mortgagee : — 
 
 Held, that tlie plaintiff' by his acts and con- 
 duct had precluded himself from asserting such 
 right. Brown v. Mcl.an). 18 O. R. ,")33, and 
 Abellv. Morrison, 19 O. R. (iG9, distinguished. 
 Mcleod V. Wadland, L>,T (). R. 118. 
 
 SUCCESSION DUTY. 
 
 See Revenue, III. 
 
 SUMMARY CONVICTION. 
 
 See Justice ok thk 1'eace. 
 
 SUMMARY JUDGMENT. 
 
 .SVe Judgment, 
 
 By-law /'a;/- /'rf<iiliin<i.\ It isprovideil l.y 
 K. .S. (). eh. 184, Hcc. cm, bubsec. 10, that tin 
 council of ev<ry city and town niny pass by-laws 
 for the management of the farm, park, garden, 
 etc. : - 
 
 Held, that the municipal council of a city 
 had power under this enactment, to pass a by 
 law providing that no peisipii shall on the ,'>i,ili. 
 bath day, in any public park, S(|uare, garden, 
 etc., in the city, publicly preach, lecture, or 
 declaim ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the bylaw violated no con 
 Rtitutional right, and was not unreaHonal>le. 
 Hai/,// V. WUIwmsod, I,. R. 8 (,». li. 118, fob 
 lowed : — 
 
 Held, also, that the by-law was not bad foi 
 uncertainty as to the day of the week inteiideil, 
 by reason of the use of tlie teini " .Sabbath-<lay.' 
 he Cribbiu and City of Toronto, '21 O. R. .^2.^. 
 
 Contract— y^n^* of P(rj'orvmvi'e.] — ln nn 
 action for specific performance, even when time 
 is of the essence of the agreement, if the party 
 in default has done what in him lay to perform 
 the contract, the Court may, in the exercise of 
 its discretion, grant the relief claimed. 
 
 AmI where, by such agreement, the convey 
 ance was to be tendered by the plaintiff to the 
 defendant and the transaction closed on the 
 '•first day of June," which fell on Sunday, 
 when no tender was made, and the conduct of 
 the defendant on the following day was such as 
 to exclude a tender on th.it day, in an action 
 for specific performance the plaintitf was held 
 entitled to judgment. Vudmii v. (llns, 20 
 R. .'lOO. 
 
 Street Railways— Injinii-lion — /in-aih ff 
 Charter— Croir)i.]—'yhti ijefendants were incor- 
 porated by letters patent under the .Street Rail 
 way Act, R. S. O. 1887 ch. 171, which author 
 ized them to construct and operate (on all days 
 except Sunday) a street railway :— 
 
 Held, Maciennan, J. A., dissenting, that an 
 action would not lie by the Crown to restrain the- 
 defendants from operating the road on Sunday, 
 the restriction against their doing so being iit 
 most an implied one, and no substantial injur,' 
 to the public, or any interference with propric" 
 tary I'ights, being shewn. 
 
 Judgment of the Common Pleas Division, II) 
 O. R. ()2-i, affirmed. Atlomey-O'encral v. iViVt- 
 ijara Falls, Wislnj Park, and Cli/lon Tramwny 
 Co., 18 A. R. 453. 
 
 Summary Conviction- Lord'n Day Act— 
 Cahtlrirer,]—A cab-driver is not within any of 
 the classes of persona enumerate.i in sec. 1 of 
 the Lord's Day Act, R. S. O. ch. IIO.S, and can- 
 not be lawfully convicted thereunder for driv- 
 ing a cab on Sunday. 
 
 Conviction of the defendant under the Act 
 for unlawfully exercising the worldlv business 
 of hi.s ordinary calling as a cab-driver on the 
 Lord's day : — 
 
 Held, bad for uncertainty. Rcnhia v. Somers, 
 24 O. R. 244. 
 
 SUPERVISION. 
 
 See Peikcii'al and Surety, I, 
 
940 
 
 Ml 
 
 NDAY. 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 tnhiiiij.] It isproviilcil l.y 
 r.Ol, Mihscc. 10, that III! 
 .ml town limy iiun« by-lnw« 
 if tilt) fiiriii, park, giirdfii, 
 
 nicipal ('(nincll of u city 
 » I'liiictiiitiit, to iniKS tt liy 
 ' ptiNdii hIiiiII (111 tlie S.iIp 
 ilii' piiik, K|iiuie, jiardi'ii, 
 lilifly piiiiL'h, lecture, m 
 
 (• liy law vifjliited no Clin 
 
 1 was not iiiiixnsonaljli'. 
 
 1-. K. S (,). 1!. 118, fol 
 
 « liylaw «ii8 not lincl fm 
 (lay of till' wc'i'k iiitLiidul, 
 tlio tei III " .Sal)liatli-ilay . ' 
 'Toronto, '2\ O. R. 3'J"(. 
 
 / Ptrj'ormnnre.] — In an 
 "orinanct', evtii when tinn' 
 ic ii)^i( I mint, if tlio party 
 hat ill liini lay to perfoim 
 rt may, in the fxtrcise of 
 10 relief claimed. 
 Ii agrecnunr, the convey 
 cd liy the plaintitl' to the 
 runfactioii closed on the 
 vliicli fell on Sunday, 
 lade, and the condnet ot 
 following' day was .such as 
 111 that day, in an action 
 Lc the plaintitr was held 
 
 ClllllKI/ V, (ilrrri, 20 (), 
 
 Iiijiniriioii — ISreaih of 
 a defendants were incor- 
 int under the Street Rail 
 1 cli. 171, which author 
 
 and operate (on all days 
 t railway : — 
 LA., dissenting, that an 
 
 the Crown to restrain tiie 
 ting the road on Sunday, 
 their doing so heing ;it 
 ind no sulistaiitinl injuiy 
 itcrference with propria" 
 
 n. 
 
 imnion Pleas Division, 1!) 
 Attorney-llenfral x. Kia- 
 k, and Clifton Tramuny 
 
 Ion — Lord's Day An— 
 iver is not within any of 
 enumernte.i in sec. 1 of 
 . S. O. ch. '203, and can- 
 ted thereunder for driv- 
 
 efcndant under the Act 
 ng the worldly business 
 5' as a cah-driVer on the 
 
 .inty. Rfifnia v. Somers,. 
 
 942 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. , Attorney .Cioneral could not he the suhjeet of an 
 
 appea to this C.nrt. tin// v. MrCluhnj, •_'(► 
 S. ('. R. ;ti!i. ' -" 
 
 L Acyt'lKSCKNrl-; IN .lllKlMKNT, !IU. 
 
 II. Amkndim; Aits Kxtkm.ino .Iikihuic 
 THIS, !ICJ. 
 
 III. A.MOINT IN OlSTItoVKKSV, !(13. 
 
 IV'. Afi'KM.s IN ('iiiMiNvr, I'uoi Ki:i>ixiis 
 !l4(i. ' 
 
 V. Ai'i'KAi.s IN Ki.ixTios Casks, U47. 
 
 ilTKAl 
 
 947. 
 
 Agreement ofSolicltor.l-llva jmlgmunt of 
 
 the (omt ot t^iceiis lien.h, the defemlai.t 
 Hoeiety was ordered to ,;,.|ivir up ;, certain 
 luimher of its sliaies upon pavmcnt of a certain 
 .sum. IScfore the time tor .•.|M,.,ding cKpiivd, 
 the attorney ,../ /,7,:,„ f,„. tl„- ilctcndant luiiv 
 ered the shares to the plaintills atlmney and 
 stated he «„uM nut app.al if the society were 
 pai.l the amount diiedcil to he paicl, An 
 
 VI. A1TKAI.M IN MviTKKS MK DiMPrrinv T''"'I •„-""' ■"'''■^^'I'lfntly taken l.ifnie the- 
 ^^_ .MAiiKKs Mh DIM KKnoN,,pa,iititl.s attorney complied with tlicteims 
 
 ot the oiler. On a motion to (|iiash the aiiiieal 
 VII. A';';f:;*>.siNMnTKns„K I'nA.Ti, ,; ani. | mint •-'""'""^ "^ ^te.,„icseence in the Jmlg- 
 
 IfeM, that the ippeal would lie. 
 I'cr 'l'aseheii';;u, ,1., tlial all .ittornev tvl lil.m 
 has no authority to l.ind his client nut"lo appeal 
 liy an agreement with the opi„,sini; .■ittoriiev 
 that 110 appeal woiihl he taken. h, Surivir 
 tuiim/iiii,„.r,HMrai; ,/t < oiisffiirliond,' Mi,i,lrtat 
 V. Ihiriluy, -.'OS. C. R. 44U. 
 
 VISION. 
 
 AND Surety, I. 
 
 riiolKIHlil:, ills 
 
 VIII. Ai'i'KAi.s (IN (,>iK>ri()Ns OK Fact, !»40. 
 
 IX. ClKISS-AI'I'KAl,-, ll.'iO. 
 
 X. Dismissal uk .\ici:.u,s, (I.M). 
 XI. Final .JincMiNTs, 950. 
 XII. FuTini: linnns, !).-.;). 
 
 XIII. Ins(ilvi:ni V, 0.")t;. 
 
 XIV. Lkavk to Aiikal, <).-)(;. 
 XV. Manda.mis, !)."i7. 
 
 XVI. MiNKD'Ar, l!v-r,Aws, 9,j7. 
 XVII. XoTK 1: oi- Aiim:w,, !)58. 
 XVIII. Pautiks To Aiii:Ar,, !)5S. 
 XIX. 8kci:ritv on Aitkai., iWS. 
 
 XX. TlMK Foil Al'l'DAI.INIi, !),")9. 
 
 XXI. Validi ry ok SrATCTK.s, !)(!(>. 
 XXII. Othkr Casks, (Mid. 
 
 I. Acl^riKSCKNIi; IN JrncMKNT. 
 
 Abandonment In Intermediate Court.]— 
 
 in an action in which the constitutionality of 
 •6 Vict. eh. SI ((,».) was raised by the defen- 
 dant, the Attorney-(;eneral for the Province of 
 •Quebec intervened, and the judgment of the 
 Superior Court having maintained theplaintitl's 
 action and the Attorney-Oenerars intervention, 
 the defendant appealed to the Court of (.lueeii's 
 bench (appeal side), but afterwards abandoned 
 Ills appeal from the judgment on the interven- 
 tion. On a further apjieal to the Supreme Court 
 ot Canada from the judgment of the Court of 
 Queens Bench in the ininciijal action, the 
 defendant asserted the right to have the judg- 
 ment of the Superior Court on the interveu- 
 cion reviewed : — 
 
 Held, that the appeal to the Court of Queen's i 
 Hench from the judgment of the Superior' 
 Court on the intervention having been aban- 
 doned, the judgment on the intervention of the 
 
 II. A.MKNI.lNO A(TS E.XTKNUINll ,1 1 l:]M>l( TION. 
 
 Appeal from Superior Court, Quebec |— 
 
 l;y sec. ;i of the Supreme and K.xchcnuer 
 Courts Amending Act of 1S!)|, an appeal may 
 lie to the Supreme Court of Canada from the 
 .Superior Court in review. Province of Uiiebee, 
 m cases which, by the law of that Province, arc 
 appealable direct to the .fudiciul Coniniittce of 
 the irivy Council. A jud^,meiit was delivered 
 by the Superior Court in review at Montreal 
 in favour of D., the respondent, on the same 
 day on which the amending Act came into force. 
 Uiianapp('al to the Supreme Court oi Canada 
 taken by If. ,1 <tl. :— 
 
 Held, that the apiiellanis not liaving shewn 
 I Mi.it the judgment was deli\eicd suliscirucnt to 
 t.,i oassing of the amending Act, tlie C(,.iirt had 
 no .;urisdictioii. 
 
 _ y'""f, whether an appeal will lie from a 
 ,)iidgment prononnced after the passin" of the 
 aniciidiiig Act in an a;ti,,ii pending bcbne the 
 (j;.iaugcof the law. Jhirttihi.,. v. Ui.murlniu, 
 
 I Appeal from Superior Court, Quebec. ]- 
 
 In an action Imaiglit by the respondents against 
 the appellant for S'.',(l(t(i, „ |,i,.h was argued and 
 taken «■// ,/,/ih,rv by the Sii|ierior Court sittintr 
 in review on the SOtli September, 1S91, the d.av 
 
 on which the Act ."4 & ,m \'ict. 
 
 eh. 25, see. 3, 
 
 I giving a right to aj.peal from the Superior 
 Court in review to the Sui.reme Court of Can- 
 ada, Wiisranctioncd, the judgment was rendered 
 a month later m favour of the rcs]ioudents. Ou 
 appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada:— 
 
 Held, per Strong, Fournier, and Taschereau, 
 .JJ., that the respondents' right c(mld not be 
 prejudiced by the delay of the Court in render- 
 ing judgment, which should be treated as havin" 
 been given on th<. Sflth September, when tht 
 ease was taken tn drlihnr, and therefore tlie 
 case was not aiipealablc. Hurluhiie v. Desmar- 
 ttaii, 19 S. C. R. 50l', followed. 
 
 Per Gwynne and Patterson, JJ., that th& 
 case did not come within the words of secticu 
 
913 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 944 
 
 iil 
 
 iii- 
 
 11 
 
 •t "if .■>( vt M Vict. oil. 'J.", iiianiiiMrh iH tlui I 
 jilil^imMit, liciiiK fur \vt"t tliitii tTiOO utiTll ;,', 
 
 Will licit II Jll<ll{lll('Mt fl'iilll Wllicll till' ll|l|l<'l''lllt 
 
 Imil a li'^jlit to ii|i|i':il III tlic I'rivy ('miiicil in 
 KiiKl.iiiil : Alt-. II7S, 117H./, C. (J. I', Coiihirii 
 V. n.i.irliaiil, -Jl S. (', K. •jsl. 
 
 Appoal from Superior Oourt, Queboo. ] 
 
 — Ily wi\ :\ iif .'I A .'i.'i \'ut. cli. •!:>, an ii|)]ii'il 
 Iil gi veil til till' Sii|iri'iiif Ciiiirt (if (\iiiuilii Inun 
 till' jiiil^iiii-nt III' tliu Sii|n'ii(ir Coui-t in iTvirw 
 (<i'.) " wlit'ii' nml «(i liiiij,' IIS no iippcal lies 
 friiiM till! jiiij'.'iiii'iil c.f that ( 'iMirt vIh'ii it con- 
 tiiiMs iIr' juclj,'mi'iil iciiiliTi'il ill till' ( 'unit up- 
 pi'ali'd fimii, which liv the law <<i the I'roviiici' 
 of t.hirlirc Ih ajipiMJalilo to the .lihlicial ( 'uiiiiiiit- 
 tt-'u of tho I'rivy ('omiuil.' Tim iud'^'inuiit in 
 this casu was ilclivci'L'tl liy the Siipiniiir ('oiiit 
 on llic i;tli NovcmliLT, ISOI, ami wan aliirmuil 
 iinaniiiiously liy the Siipi'fiof Cuiirt in review 
 on the •Jilth' Kehniafy, iJiO'.'. wliieli latter jiulj,'- 
 nieiit WiiH by the law' of the I'riiviiiee of (^(i.ehee 
 appoalaliii^ to the .linlicial ( 'iMiiniitttMi, The i 
 statute ol it 1).') Viel. ul). 'J'.) wan parsed on the 
 .'lOtli S|.|,teiiihei', IS'.ll, lint the plaiiititl's aotion 
 had lieeii instituted on the '_''_'iid Noveinher, 
 1H!I(», and wax slanirii\' for judj,'nuiiit liefore 
 the Superior .('onrt in t'le nionth of June, IS!I|, 
 prior to tlie passing; of .'it ft ,"i,") \'iet. eh. L'.'i. 
 'hi an appeal from the judgment of the Superior 
 '.'oiirt in review to the Siipienii! Court of Can. [ 
 ada, the respondent moved to ((Uasli tlio appeal '■ 
 for want of Jurisdietioii :— ' 
 
 Hi Id, per Stroni.', ('..)., and l-'oimiier and 
 .Sedgewiek, .1,1., that the right of appeal yivoii 
 by ")1 i'i ."i.") \'ii;t. eh. 'J.'i does not extend to i;asen 
 staiiilinj,' for ju(lj,'nu'nt in t!ie S'ljierior Court 
 prior to the passing of the said .\et. Coiiliiri. v. i 
 liiiiiihuril, lM S. C. [;.-_'SI, followed. Taseiiereaii 
 and (iwyniie, .1.1., disseiiliiig. 
 
 I'er Fournier, J,, th.at tin' statute is not i 
 appliealile to eases already instituted, or pemling 
 lit'fore the Courts, no special \vord.s to that 
 effoet lieing used. U'lZ/hniis v. /rriiif,-2-' S. C 
 
 1!. \m. 
 
 Iiecn pin 
 novalilen 
 liailiuee of .'^l.l.'it to till! 
 
 thiit the defendants had liecn paid liy the ilittimt 
 fii jinie,tii>il of the immovalilen, and llint tho 
 di)fi'iiilantM owed a 
 plaiiititf;— 
 
 M"ld, Unit the pecuniary interest of tho 
 tloffjiidaiilH, ad'ected liy the jndyment appeal, d 
 from, was more than .•«■.', ()il(» ovir mid aliovo tlio 
 plaiiititl's I'laim, and tliereforu tlm e;uiu was 
 appealalile under 1.'. S. C, c|i. l.Vi, noo. •.",(. 
 
 iiiiiii v. 'yv,y,/,H, '.^ s. c. It. :i(i. 
 
 Award -ln/f:)-e^f—Cu.ilt.] -In an action to set 
 aside an award of .r^ I,! 174. •J.'i, Mmng and Ta-, 
 I herean, .1.)., ilonlited the jiirisdict ion of the 
 Siipremu <'iiurt of Can.ada, to hear an appeal 
 from a deiidon of thot'ourt ui (,lue> n's lieiali. 
 Lower Can ida, liucause, to m ike up tlie appeal- 
 able ainouiu, either interest accrue I .iftor date 
 of iiWiird or the co.st.-, taxed on the aibitralioii 
 inocei'diiigs Would llaM' to be added. (Jiiih,,-^ 
 Aftin/iii'D-ciifi/, mill, lliiir/i-rui.r II. IT. Co. v. 
 Malliiiii, wis. Vj. R. 4'.'(i. 
 
 Damages ''oio'^ of i'h-ii //^^^l/l(•••.)— Whure 
 till! plaintilf HI an action for .'<U),0(M) for diuniiges 
 obt.iins a juilu'inent in the Suiicrior Court fnr 
 I.'iwer C.inicU tor S'J.dOO. and the defend, int 
 appeals to the Court of (.Mieeii's Wench, wlnie 
 the judgment is reduced below said amount c.f 
 •¥•-',(1110, tlic case is .appealable by the plainti;! 
 to tliu Supreme Court, tiic value of tliu mall, r 
 in ciiiitrciversy as regards him being the amcuiiit 
 of the judgiiient of Ihi' Superior Court ; Tus- 
 elu'icau and I'al tcr.ioii, .I.J., dissenting. 
 ^ Tlic aiiiimnt of d.imau'es awarded in his iliscre- 
 tilin by the .Judge who tries the case in the Court, 
 of tirst ins-.anee, should not be interfered with by 
 a ciiiirt of appeal, unless clearly unreasoiiable 
 and iin.snpported by ihe evidence, or there bi! 
 some error in law or tact, or partiality on the 
 )iart ol the Judge. I.iri v. 11, nl, \\ S. I'. 
 I!. 4S2, aiicl (;ii,,ira-i v. l)rniif/.i, Ca.sK^ls' Dig., 
 •Jnded., •Jl'i, followed. I'lisnetlt v. Dun, 18 S. c' 
 11. 'I'l'l. 
 
 Appeal frcm Sviporior Court, Quebec.]— 
 
 S(r I'liinii V. J:'riiil>, Mitr/i'/l v. '/'rtuho/w, 
 .)////< V. L!inii<r.^. '2> S. C. K. ;W1, po.-/ 044; 
 Kiiii/honi V. /.nnir, I'-J S. C. R. .'U7, //ov/ 94(i ; 
 Lrtiu ri/i V. Ki/iilfiili!,- Lij)- Ay.iiti-niKy Sociihj, 24 
 S. C. K. no, /iij-'f !)4,-i. 
 
 Future RlKhts.]-.S'c,' Chniiiln-!aii<l v. For- 
 //'»•,•.'.•! S. ('. I!, .-i:!, p)sM),-)4; O'Dcl/v. ';,■<■/,.,■,/ 
 '-'4 S. C. R. (161, /:cHt i),J4. ' ■ 
 
 III. Amoixt in Cuntr(ivi:k.sv. 
 
 Account— Co)»/i,».sa/;o;,.]— The plaintilf, w ho 
 had acted as agent for the late J. IS. S., I 
 brought an action for .*1,471.07 for a balance of | 
 account, as iii;iol;oniiii i/fxhir ot J. B. S.. ncninst i 
 the defendants, exeeiitor.s of J. ]!. .S.^Thei 
 defendants, in addition to a general denial, I 
 jile.Tiled compensation for 5',S,410 and interest, i 
 The plaintill' rejilied that this sum was iiaid by 
 a (Inlioii (11 pitiemiiU of certain immovables. \ 
 The defendants answered lluil the tiansaetion 
 was not a giving in ]).iyinent but a giving of a 
 security. The Court of Queen's lleiiLh, ri'ver.s- 
 ing the judgment of the Superior Court, held 
 
 Daraages— Z>f»)a//(^— .l)HeH(/iHi/ /l<•^]— The 
 statute .'14 & 55 A'iet. eh. 2,'), sec. 3, which pro- 
 vides thai •'whenever the right to appeal is de- 
 pendent upon the amount in dispute, sikIi 
 amount shall be understood to be that demandecl, 
 and not tliat rceovered, if they are did'erent,'' 
 does not apply to eases in wh'ieli the Supermr 
 Court hiis rendered judyment, or tocases argiied 
 and standing for jiulgn.eiit {(ii •lri;i,ri;:) before 
 that Court, when the Act came into force (Silth 
 September, bSUl). William.'' v. Iiriiiv, •_'-J .S. C. 
 R. I(l,s, followed. 
 
 In actions for damages d.-iiming more tliiui 
 §2,(100, the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower 
 Canada, on appeal in one ease, gave the plaintitf 
 judgment for .SSOO, reversing the judgment ef 
 the Superior Court, which had dismissed t!ie 
 actions, and in the other cases, on appeal by 
 the defendants, athrined the juclj.;mcnt8 of tlie 
 Sujierior Court giving damages for an amount 
 less than :.52.000 :— 
 
 Held, following Manitti' v. LfjVbnv, l(i S. 
 C. R. 3S7, that no appeal would lie to the 
 Supreme Court, in these eases, by the defen- 
 dants, from the judgment of the Court of Oiieois 
 Bench, under sec." •i!) of eh. i;Vi, R. "s. C. ; 
 (iwynue, J., dissenting. Cuiciii. v. Ernii-s 
 Mifrliell V. Tienholmi; MiU.<< v. Lltno'ic-i. '2:1 S. 
 C. R. 331. 
 
944 
 
 94S 
 
 IVil lii'i'ii iiaiil l)y llic 
 iiMii<iviil)li'M, niirl tlint tlm 
 
 I XI 
 
 ilnti'ni 
 
 llM 
 
 iaiicc of rf\,\rti to tliti 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 riiiiiiiiiy iiitcri'Ht of th(( 
 liy till.' jiiil;(iiiuiit appi'ul. i.| 
 .yJ.Oiiit iivi !■ mill iiliove till) 
 1 tlii'ri'fiiio the o.mu w.ii 
 S. C. ill. l.T), HOC. M, 
 (', I!. -.M. 
 
 f'nts.] -Ill III! iictiim to Hct 
 ,!i74.'J'i, Miuiijj mill T.iH 
 I till' iiu'iH>|i(.'iiiiii of till' 
 
 :iii:til:i. to Ik'HI' nil a|i|iiM| 
 
 I'lllllt Hi l,lllli IIH Ill'llLJl, 
 
 <i', to III ike ii|i tlit^ appt'iil- 
 itoivHt aciiiiel ,ilt(;r ilatr 
 taxiMl oil thu ailiitnvtioii 
 i\i' to 111' ailili'il. (^iifliif, 
 liiir/iroi.r I,'. 11'. Co, V, 
 
 l' Firtt lint'iiiC'-,] — Whero 
 111 t'lir .'<U),()0() fur (lama;,'i!s 
 I llm SaiicriiM- ( 'oiirt foi- 
 ;,OiM), ami the acfi;iiii,iMt 
 I'f t^'iiffii'd IJoncli, wIhii' 
 I'll liclow said aiiioiiiit '.f 
 |)]iL'alal)lo liy tliu [ilaiiitiil 
 , fill.' valiU' of the mall' !■ 
 ids him hfiiig tht- aiiioiiiit 
 ■lie Sii|icrior (.'iiiiri ; I'u-i- 
 
 , .J.J., lli«rt(Mltillg. 
 
 Ui's awanli'il In IiIh ilisi'ii' 
 ti'iu.s thu lasi.' in tliu C'oiiil, 
 1 not I'L' iiitcrfureil with l.y 
 k'sa clearly uiirfaaoiialjlr 
 llio eviileiiiju, or there In: 
 taut, or piuliality on the 
 Ld-i V. Ji'int, (i S. ( '. 
 V. Di'xii'i'l.-i, C'a.sfcils' Dij,'. , 
 CosMetft V. Dun, 18 S. ('. 
 
 l—AmeniHii[i Acl.^ — 'J'he 
 ;li. 2."i, SCO. 3, which pro- 
 tlie light to apjieal is ilt> 
 iiioiiiit in ilispute, siuli 
 tdod tolic thatdeinandeil, 
 1, if they are ditlerent, " 
 ■M in which the Siiperi'T 
 I'^iiieiit, ortocaBes argiieil 
 [ir.elit ((II il'lihi'i-i') hefore 
 :\et eaiiie into force (.SOtli 
 illiam-i V. /iriiii; 22 S. ('. 
 
 iires claiming more thiin 
 Queiii'si Bench for Lower 
 lie case, gave the plaiiilitT 
 versing the jiulgment "f 
 vhich had dismissed the 
 her cases, on appeal 'iv 
 cil the judgments of the 
 damages for an amount 
 
 iii/tf V. J,ef,bn-i\ Ki S. 
 ippeal would lie to tho 
 ese eases, liy the defcii- 
 iltof the Coiirtof Qiiiicn's 
 
 of oh. l.Ti, U, s. C. ; 
 ig. C(/iri:ii. V. Eniiii, 
 
 Mil/') V. Lhnoiiex, 22 S. 
 
 vntiu, of H,.l...c..., 4 of Mee. 3 of ch. ^ of .^■j'.t }\ i .' l"'.!;:"'""' ''""'' ^'V""-', v. I.nni,, 22 S. 
 \ lot., in d.'termming fh., amount In dinpute ii, ' ' 
 
 ;i..:g:K;.:;::;';;T;;r;;;;-':^:;;;r:l:::»^ 
 11. ;i^ 
 
 aiiDcallii.r r.il, . 'I'l'' ' "I" '" t lie d.','. iidaiitH v.Ulli'd at over ."I'l l.llili), .,.t a. side ,w niiuin in 
 
 Htd'l, tint, as the aiipellanf/ own claim w.w 
 .Ml.ler ^...,0,,., ,,„ they did m,t Icpiesen X 
 
 ereilitor. of I',. K.K., the aM.o.int in controvorsv 
 was in.Mllic.eut f. make ( !,.■ case appealal.l... 
 
 Money Demand -.V.,,' /;,y,^ ,„• An,^^_ 
 
 i' ",";'"/.'"■'' '''''I ■^" '"III I,,;. V. ll.iiirhanL 2\ 
 S. t. l:. L'sl, iiiii, !M;i, 
 
 Coveral GUimn - Diride.d Suec'mA — C 
 liioiiglitaii acliun .igaiiist I-;., elaimiiig: 1 Th il 
 ;! '••^^',t'""""'l'li".^' contract s.oiiUl he reseimleil ; 
 .. .>1,OOI) .lama -es ; ;{. .sVt.Tf,., value of bricks 
 111 posse.i.sioii of K., I, lit heloii-iiig to C 'piie 
 ludgiiient of the Superior ( 'oiirc ili.smisseil C '.s 
 ,• , „ - , -o o, execution, the • "" '"'; •""■•""^•,1'"' Ki''"itcd the other oonelu- 
 
 |ii'li,"ient, Med a petition ni ili-avowal of the!.? ''•' H"-' .'i-'tion was dusmisscd in |«<)3. V, 
 ■'"""'"■'"•■* "- '• • "'^'''•,'l'l»'lc'l to the .Supreme Court :- 
 
 Held, llut the liuilii.ig f„r which the con- 
 tract h..,l l,ecn ciiter> ,1 into having been com- 
 pleted, theie rcniaiiied but the .,iic-,tion of costs 
 and the claim tor .S>i.-, in dispute betwoen the 
 imrties, and that ai.iouiit was not .-^ullicient to 
 trive junMlicnoii to the s.ip.eme Court uu.br 
 
 Disavowal of Attorney I'.rni,,,, ,{„„„„„ 
 •■' ■''":'"["", •'.■"""^' I'M;,,.,..]. -In aiia'ti 
 
 I'n.Mght Ml ISimforthesumof.is,.,;, V ,t. 
 -t a twelve and a half p.r cent, ag i, t 
 wo brothers, S. .J. |,. ^.J,, yy <,U'U U 
 -n.g' the amniiiit „f a promi,..„ry note signed 
 
 >> them one copy „f , „„ ,^ „,,s s,.^ve. 
 
 ■It the d.imicil,, ,,f s. .1 I) ,,» 'I'l,, p; 
 
 tl.n other dcf..ndmt.-U-:M;',S'X.n^S 
 
 ' the wMt the respondent |i|,.,l ,,„ appear- 
 .; t" a, attorney f.,, |,„i|, defendants ' ,,1 
 Pt-eeed,ngs were suspended until l,s7( ,vhei 
 judgnient was t'.ken. and in Deccinl ei lss( 
 
 "!;:;" r'!^'''?''^'f "'•'''/- "••■i''''-'x..n,ti,;ii, the 
 
 i , 
 
 respondent The disavoweii altornev pk..„u.,i 
 ,"""•,"'" "';'' I'" Imd I ,1 a,,tliori.ed-to\i ,;. 
 
 turn, .at ticatio.i and iMsudiceucy of tliealleua. 
 
 urns of the petition of disavowab The p.. itt , 
 
 in disavowal was dismissed. (),, appea to the 
 
 Nup,viiie(,.iirtof.:.,„ada,thercspon',c tiio. 
 to.pias, the apiie.U. on the grlnind tlia t . 
 
 .mg.,n..mtroversydidn,it,.;,,,nuttotli«sum 
 ,.!':!;!: .n'::^'^' \^r i'^lV"""" obtained against 
 
 hcajipellantiii .March, IS74, onth 
 
 Wlndlns-up Aot-N r,u:,/ ( ■ontrihnloriex — 
 •p,fC'r'" ':l"'"!''!{-\-^^ appeal by the liqni- 
 
 i;irn»" Ttriin t wi il..,..' ^c ti /. . ^ . * . 
 
 .iNM 1,;. the ..s,;oi;d;';,t; :;;:;:'d:,^;;;:':i:;;™';;^ i>^'- \r-^^- ''-i^ ....'of th^'o,:i;;^of aS 
 
 ■■-',.KH) the jmlgmen, on the ,, 1 i f ;' ^ T 1 -i =•;.'■ 'r'^"!^' 'I- "'•'l^r of HoyTl (;. 
 
 avowal „-as .-ippcalable. h„iL, ,. /v„ „ ' ' :f,, , •, f ' -'l''.,'^'^""^^'"^' '"' appeal by sevent 
 •-'<IS. C, R, 7(l!l. '^""'"". i alleged eontribui,.i,es irom the report of the 
 
 Master in Ordinary placing them upon the list 
 
 . ,. •• I-"— ■•■fi viiuiii iqiou cne list; 
 
 Execution-/',',,,., „,/.. „,-s„l, ^^n;.,/,, ,„ w,,,.,, ! " """'!"^'"1' procechngs. An appeal will lie 
 
 J'i"-'];[ of -■IyvW/,.,,N--:..,„,„,/; , '' .:f^ 1' j ;; '- ■^up.c,.leCourlof Can.ida in 'proceedings 
 
 (plaintilT) e-miesri"! an oimo.it i„„ ■,>„■„.;' ...'^' I ""''''^".'" N.nimg-up Act only where the 
 
 •""""lit involved IS .'^■J.OOO or 
 
 U'laintilT) cmiesrcl an oppo..iii., ■.;;;,)," ^ ! ?,'''''•' 
 
 ven',Mc,'.*'.M,„o„iii,,, bvl'. on the prc'ed, f ;""'■'•'' """"■"' " --r™" '"■ "'■'''■ !« this 
 
 a sale of monci c „ .• *i '.";.'""' '.^"■''.V' I V''«« '■'^'^'-'^""-^ "'ere placed on the list one for 
 
 ! '•:>!, OOU, and the otln'i-s for s'lOO e.ieh,' ami ,all 
 
 ..»....,,, ,,,,,|„.,ay upon the execution be K ki noo ' i V ., i"'':^'""> ':i""i-*t, one tor 
 
 tained tiui o,;posiiion';;;:;' iXr^ ^i : ';rt fj'sii T1^ ''" "^' ^'r^ *''- ^^^^^^^'^ — * 
 
 collocated an mnvr t„ /in: .,„ f Iw. s„n, , f . /' ' v' \ '''" '''•■'■r',''''-''''^ ^^■'^•■^' «ougl>t to be 
 
 CO located an mnvc l„ //,.,., .,„ the sum f "" ,"''tl'-' ', "'" '''•■'^l'"'"!*-'"'^ were sought to be 
 ^-!'TO, being the .'tmm.iit of the , ro eeeds f the ' I '"'''.I" -■«<^-l'^'l '^-''OOO di.l not give the 
 a-^le,:- pioctuls of the | Court luriadiction ; but that the position was 
 
 the s:une as U proceedings ha.l been Ukeu 
 separately against e.icli. .Sif./ihrii.i v. Oerth—In 
 1-e Oiitiinn Expn.-i.'i and Tranyiorlatiuii Go.. 24 
 •>. C. K, / Ifi. 
 
 sale : 
 
 ■i„m."'','l'!: *'J''^ '''f 1"'''"">'"-.V iulerest of K. 
 
 appealing fr,,,,, the inL'.neut of the Court of 
 
 m.e,, s Heneh (appeal side) being under 4 000 
 
 '>ii^;:i^d ;;U.:'tii:;o,ri- '""''''"■ ^"^^"'^^ 
 
 pioM.ling for an appeal where the amount 
 •'••■manaed ,s .?L>,UOO or over, had no applicS 
 (10 
 
 IV. Ai'i'KALs IN Ckimi.v.vl Proceedinos. 
 
 Contempt of Court. ] -Contempt of Court is 
 a criminal proceeding, and unless it comes with- 
 
947 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 94& 
 
 In sec. 68 of thi' SiijueiiiL' C'ouit Act, uii appciil 
 does not li(' to this Coui t from a jiulgnieiit in pro- 
 ceedings thcitfc r. O'S/iia v. O'S/t.M, 15 P. D. 
 69, followed. Jii vf- O'Jiii'ii, Hi S. (.'. K. 197, 
 referred to. L'//l- v. Tlir (jumi, '22 S. C. H. 7. 
 
 Motion for Reserved Case. | Wliore tlio 
 Court aj)peiil(.Ml ti:iin li.i.s alliiint'ci lliu refus.'d to 
 reserve a cnsf iiiMVfd for at a tiimin»l trial on 
 two grounds, ;uiil i.-i unanimous as to onu of .such 
 grounds, iiut not as to tlio otlur, tlit; .Supreme 
 Court on a])peal c;\n only take into consideration 
 the ground (p| luotion in \\ hicn tlicrc was -.lis- 
 sent. MvJiitofli v. T/n- Qiinii, 2.'? .S. C. R. ISO. 
 
 V. Ai'i'K.M.s IN i:i,i;(,-ntis Casks. 
 
 Consent to Reversal of Judgment.]— The 
 trial of two coiiiri.vci'n cl Domininn election 
 petitions w.is commenced more llian six nioiiths 
 after the filing' of tlie jictitioiis, no order liaving 
 been made enlar^'im.' the time for the commence- 
 naent of the trial. Uji^in tlie eonpout if the 
 respondents, suljjcrt to tlieir olijection that tlie 
 Court had tio jurisdiction, judgnicnts were 
 given voiding tin.' elections for corrupt prai;tices 
 by agents. Upon the respondents' appe.nl to 
 the Supreme Conrt of Canada, the jietitioneis 
 filed a consent to tlie reversal (if the judgments 
 appealed from witliout costs, admitting that the 
 objection was ^\ell taken. Ui'on the filing of 
 an affidavit as to tiie facts stated in the consent, 
 the appeal was allowed and the petitions dis- 
 misaed without c(jsts. JJai/vt L/iclion Case, 
 Sotirilk L'/ectkm Can, -21 S. C. IX. iS. 
 
 Discontinuance.]— Uiion tlie trial of a con- 
 troverted Itominion election iietition tlie res|ion- 
 dent was un.-eated by the judgment of the 
 Superior Court, by reason of corrupt practices 
 by agents, and apjiealvd to the .Supreme Court! 
 of Caaada. Wlien the case was called, no one 
 appearing for the .Miipellant, counsel for the : 
 petitioner stated that he had ! eon served with 
 1* notice of discontinuance. 'J"he Court ordered' 
 that the appeal he struck otl' the list. L'A"- 
 ■icwptiov tl<<ti<iii t'o.sp, 21 .S. C. R. L'!). 
 
 BuUngastoMcdeof Trial.]— The ruling of 
 the Court below on un objection in proceedings 
 on an election petition, vi/., that the trial 
 Judges could not jiroceed with the petition in 
 tliis ca.se, hecau.«e the two pttitioiis tiled had 
 not been bracketed by the prothonotary, as 
 directed by sec. ;10 of ch. !•, R. S. C. , is not an 
 appealable judgment or decisicm : R. S. C. <h. 
 9, sec. flO : .Scdgcwit k, .].. doubting. Vandii-itU 
 Eleclimi Case, '1-2 ,S. C. K. 1. 
 
 VI. Appeals in Matters of Discretion. 
 
 OoBts.] — The nuikiiig or refusing to make an 
 order for the taxation of a bill oi costs, upon 
 the application of a third paity, is a matter of 
 discretion, and no appeal lies to this Court : 
 per Fattcrs<}n, J. ShUiKjan v. ileOvijaii, 21 
 S. C. p. 267. 
 
 Stay of Proceedings.]— An order perpetually 
 restraining the plaintitis from proceeding is one 
 
 made in the exercise (if judicial discretion, as to 
 which sec. -7 of the .Supreme Court Act does 
 not allow an appeal : per I'atterson, J., in 
 ^liiritivi* lilt Ilk of the Dominion of Caiiuda v. 
 Ulnrarl, :;() S. C. K. 10.".. 
 
 Summary Judgment.]— An order allowing 
 juilgmeut to be entered by the ])Iaintiffs on a 
 specially iudmsed writ is one niadt in the extr- 
 ci.sc of judicial discretion, a- to which see. :;7 ( i 
 the Supriine Court Act does not allow an 
 appeal : per I'atterson, ,1., in Itiirol Minucijial 
 If)/ of Morris V. Loinloii and Canadian L. <(• A. 
 c'".,'l!)S. C. K. 4;i4. 
 
 Vll. Al'I'EAl.S IN MaTTKHS ok PkAi'TICE AM: 
 T'KOCKDrilE. 
 
 Costs. ]-U is doubtful if a, decision allii'miiig 
 the Master's ruling on taxaticju of a solicitor » 
 bill of C(jsts, whi(.h relates wlmlly to the prac- 
 tice and procedure of the High Court of Justice 
 for Ontario, and of an ellicer ot that Court in 
 eoustruing its rules and executing an order ot 
 rcfeience made to him, is a jiroper subject ot 
 appeal to the Suproiie Court. O'Donuhoe v. 
 lkall>i, 10 .S. C. R. .S5(i. 
 
 Costs.] — After the rendering of the judgment 
 by the Court of Queen's liench refusing to 
 (plash a by-law passed by the corporation ot 
 the village of Huntingdon, the by-law in ques- 
 tion was repealed. Un appeal to the Supremo 
 Court of Canada : — 
 
 Held, that the only matter in dispute between 
 the paities being a mere (piestion of costs, the 
 Court would iKit entertain the appeal : Supreme 
 and Kxcht(iuer Courts .Act, sec. 24. Moir v. 
 VUluije of Huntinf/don, I'.l .S. C. R. \MiS. 
 
 Costs.]— Held, per Ritcliie, (.'..J., Strong and 
 (iwynne, .7.1. , that, assuming this Court had 
 jurisdiction to enteitain an appeal with respect 
 to an order for taxation of a bill of costs applied 
 for by a third party, it should not interfere 
 with the decision of the I'lovincial Courts, 
 which were the most eoni)>eteut tribunals to 
 deal with such matters. McGni/an v. McGmian, 
 •21 8. C. R. '2(17. 
 
 Costs— 0;o'y Matter in I)i.'/,iile.]—See McKaij 
 V. Tcirnship of Hiial'ii(hro(ki', 24 S. C. R. 
 ;"."), poxt 95(). 
 
 Irregularity — Exeevtiov.] — A judgment of 
 the Court of (Jueen's ]?eiich foi' Lower Canada 
 (appeal side) held that a rendiliini ca-j viui- 
 issued by the Superior Court of Mcntical, to 
 which Court the record in a contestati( n of an 
 ( pposition had been removed from the Superior 
 Court of the district of Iberville, under Art. 
 1S8, C. C. P., was regular. On an appeal to the 
 Supreme Court of (^irada : — 
 
 Held, that on a ([uestion of practice such a.'; 
 this the Court would not interfere. Mayor 
 of Montreal v. Brown, 2 App. Cas. 168, fol- 
 lowed. Arpin v. Merchants Bank of Canada, 
 24 S. C. R. 142. 
 
 Irregularity — ,/ndijmenl.]— It appeared by 
 the procedure in the case that MeU. and C. had 
 been irregularly condemned jointly to pay 
 
948 
 
 if judiciiil (liscrf'tioii, as to 
 SupiTnic Court Act dfios 
 : ijor I'atturadii, J., in 
 f: Domiiiio)! of Canudii v, 
 O.'i. 
 
 ent.]— An ordtT allowiiij; 
 I'l'ii liy tliu plaiutifls on a. 
 t i.s one niadt in the fxtr- 
 i(in, a- to wbicli sue. '^7 i ! 
 Aut does not allow an 
 1, .1., in Itiirat Minnci}ial 
 in and Ciiiiailiaii L. it- A, 
 
 vrrr.ns of Pkaitice am; 
 rKiiriiE. 
 
 Ifn! if a. ducision afliniiing 
 n taxation of a solicitoi'» 
 dates wholly to the prau- 
 the Hij^h Court of Justice 
 1 dH'iuer of that Court in 
 nd t'xoeuting an order ot 
 ni, is a proper sid)ject ot 
 ne Court. O'JJoiiuhue v. 
 li. 
 
 rendering of the jtulgment 
 een's Bench refusing to 
 id by the corporation of 
 U'don, the by-luw in ques- 
 n appeal to the iSuprenio 
 
 matter in dispute between 
 re (juestion of costs, the 
 tain the appeal : Supreme 
 s Act, sec. 24. Moir v. 
 , 1!) S. C. K. -Mill 
 
 Tfiteliie, C.J., f^troDg and 
 i.ssmniug this Court had 
 in an a|-peal with respect 
 >n of a bill of costs applied 
 it .'■hould i.ot interfere 
 tlie Provincial Courts, 
 t conijiitent tribunals to 
 s. McG'ii'jan v. McOmjaii, 
 
 • ill B/.^jjvte.]—See McKaij 
 ddi,l,rv(b', 24 8. C. I{. 
 
 ctitioii.] — A judgment of 
 Kench for Lower Canada 
 hat a vtndilii VI ex/ oiuu 
 ir Court of Mrntieal, to 
 rd in a contestatii n of an 
 [moved from the Superior 
 
 of Iberville, under Art. 
 ular. On an appeal to the 
 
 ad a :— 
 
 istion of iiractiee sucli as 
 d not interfere. Mayor 
 II, 2 App. Cas. UiS, fol- 
 .rchcmix Bank of Cuvada, 
 
 gmenl,]— It appeared by 
 aso that McU. and C. had 
 denuied jointly to pay 
 
 949 
 
 ha^ tT°?*, "! ^^'^ J'"'gmcnt. Vet, as McT) 
 had pleaded to the merits of the nc.ion ■ , i 
 
 K^andT{f';'''''''T^*'-^^'^^'^^'-" 
 
 ^oiifn^s^rS^i:;'^:,:,;:;^;::^,!;::^: 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 950 
 
 vin^.f«*l"r*'*,°^"*^''*'^*'«''-f'*-'^i*i«"« of Pro- 
 
 VIII. AlTKALS o.v (,)l f>TI()NS OI' Fa.t 
 
 hands and disi,o,sc <f it if ■ Vt .^ '" "'" """ 
 
 Halsonwhieh^odeeil^^kt, .ririn';^-; 
 case the materials essential to the i'„ I l' 
 tion of the case were n, bef re tl, • 1'^°"; 
 there must be a ne,,- t.ial ' ^ °"'*' ''"'' 
 
 apK'S;;r?•il;^o:;;s:;^S^^r'^■^ 
 
 .n^the cause. Jf„rdiiian v. /^Uiu^Z^S S. ( ■ '|f 
 
 i „/''l°r Decisions - /nte,ifer,mr.] - The 8„- 
 Ip'vme Court of Cana.la, on appeal fm,, 
 I ensn.nafhrndngthe report of .-{ 'referee in 
 
 re . ,r .li'riT"'" r^^'^'"'"'." •'""' f'.stees, which 
 
 qx'it disallowed items in acecmnts previoush- 
 
 passed hy the ,.,.„,,,t,, ,. , , ..t ec ,' 
 
 s-ler the iten, so dealt with, tv,, Courts 1 a v n. 
 
 !]::^::;;:;^>---ri-i>.diciaidiserj;'^,„:Vtfi 
 
 j in\ol\e,l. („■„„( V. Mac/anii,, 2;i S. C. |;. -Jid 
 ' v„^''^°'", P?'=lslons -/„/, rf nnrc. ]~ } I eld per 
 
 |Pellyhlve been left to the jury, as tlfe ii d.r 
 
 I "K'n of nonsuit was aliirn,ed' by 't • , c'ouv .t 
 
 shoud not be i„terfered witiK //.S 'v 
 
 Sei Ai'|'i:ai., IV. 
 
 I IX. Cnoss-Ari'KALs. 
 
 I 
 
 ' win^ll^V^'""'^';'"';''^ " ''/'-l-A cross-appeal 
 
 t:? ', V"' .^I'l'^^'""- <■->'« K"l''« have not 
 
 j been eo'''''''^'! with. /Mnier v. Th, (,>,„:, n, 23 
 ■ »~. \_/. It, -iXa, 
 
 d5v-^tTv J^l"''"''^'- l^'f"' As.uranc, So- 
 titlij, _'4 ,S. C. It. ,,9, ante iJ4.">. 
 
 Coi,.enl.]-On the trial of in tt on^au.in"' 7 
 ra.lway company for injuries al eged^o ,■ v 
 been caused by noTli.'enee of t ,^ '^^^ 
 
 X. DiS.MISSAI, OK AlTKALS. 
 
 was withdrawn from t 
 
 le juiy I 
 
 >y consent of 
 
 "» xn^iii III 
 
 •'*■, 0" « -I from 1). ".i S S£'S; 
 
 ^T.U"r;s*27.5;:.:.s,!;''';-rv 
 
 "f jucieial procedure^in the Court "^ '"' ^"""'-' 
 
 ''on.pany had complied with the st.fnf ^ 
 requTement as to giVin.' n^ ce of h.!„ '7 ' 
 
 of the n-iin (1. "" "oiict ot the approach 
 
 Application to Reinstate.] -Motion to rein- 
 state an appeal which ha,l been dismissed be- 
 cause no counsel appeare.l for the apj.ellant 
 hen the case was calle.l. The only ground 
 ' '':!''', ^•"' "^"^"'y, V"-' ">'>"lgc'nee of the Court 
 ^^.o that counsel had been present not long 
 before the ease was called, an,l had felt satisfied 
 that It would not be reached that day, but that 
 the ca.^es before it had been unexpectedly dis- 
 |>osed ot. I he Court refused to reinstate the 
 appeal and refused the motion with costs. 
 (■■'i-ini v. llavdlaj, 24 S. C. R. TOti. 
 
 XI. Final Judiimknis. 
 
 Admission of Attorney. ] - Held, by Tasch- 
 (creau and Patterson, J.l., that a judgment of 
 
 I admit the appellant as an attorney was not a 
 
 i (inal judgment within the meaning of the 
 
 •Nn-i eiue Court Act. In re Ca/iaii, 21 8. C. R. 
 
 Contempt of Court. ]-In proceedings for 
 contempt ol Court by attachment, until sentence 
 IS pronounced there is no "linal judgment" 
 from which an appeal can be brought. £IIU v 
 Jhi: (Jiiieii, 22 S. C. i; 7 
 
 I Costs- Taxafion - On/, r for. ] _ Held, per 
 I I aschereau, J. that the Court had no jur sdic- 
 
 I I'e'co'n.T'f'A'" '"; ^'PP^''^' ^'■""" '^ 'Incision of 
 
 n t ,? • ')M'^''^ .".1>^" »PPwil from an order 
 
 I 01 taxation of a solicitors bill of costs, at the 
 
 I instance of a third party, such decision not being 
 
951 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 952 
 
 a final jiulj,'ment witliin tlie iiit'iiiiing of the 
 Supreme Court Ai't. .!/(•'>'»</»» v. MrGKi/an, 
 •21 S. C. R. 2()7. 
 
 Costs— Tax<ifioii—Set-<ij]'.]— In an action liy 
 a tirin of solicitors (o recover coats from clients, 
 a reference was directed to a taxing oHiccr, and 
 upon appeal from his rcjuirt to the Hiuli Court 
 a .set-off claimed liy one of the defend nits of a 
 sum ])aid hy iiim to one of the plaintiffs fni 
 sjiecial services was disallowed. This decision 
 was aliirnied liy tlie Court of .Appeal : — 
 
 Held, per Tascherean, .1., that the decision of 
 tlie Court of Ajipeal w:is not a final judi,'ment 
 from wliich an appeal would lie to tlie Supreme 
 Court of Canada. Stroii'T, .)., also expressed 
 <lcnibt .-IS to the jurisdiction. MrlJninia// v. 
 Cdnui'oii, tliil-furil V. C'li/ii'io/i, '2\ S. C. K. ',i~d. 
 
 New Trial. ] — Wlieie a new trial has licen 
 iirdcred uixm the ground that tlie aiiswei' ^ivcii 
 hy tlie jury to one of the ipu stions is insiulicient 
 to enable the Court to dispose of the interest of 
 the parties on tlie limlings of tlu' jury as a 
 wlude, no appeal will lie from such or<ler, which 
 is not .-1 liiial judgment, and cannot he held to 
 come within the exceptions provided for by the 
 Supreme and l>',xchcipier ( 'ourts Act in relation 
 to .'iiiiieals in cases of iieiv trials. .See Supreme 
 and KxcliPipier (.'ourts .Act, sees. '24 {;/). ,'!0, ami 
 *)1. /l(ifi-iii<//oii V. Sco/tlf^li Union (tv(l Xntioval 
 Jii-iiniiwr Co., IS S. C. U. 015. 
 
 New Trial.] — In an action tried by a .Judge 
 ami jury, tlie judgment of the Superior Court in 
 review dismissed tlu' plaintifl's' motion for judg- 
 ment and granted tUo dcfeiiilants' inntiou to 
 <lisiiiiss the action. On a|))ical to the Court of 
 yueeirs Bench, the judgment of the Superior 
 Court was reversed, and the Court set iisiile the 
 assigunient of facts to the jury and all sulisciptciit 
 proceedings, and, "iio ■mutii, ordered a niiirv 
 de. iioro. on the ground that the assignment of 
 facts was defective and iiisuflicient .•mil the 
 answers of the jurj' were insuliicient .-md contra- 
 diet ory ;-" 
 
 Held, that the ordei' of tlu' Court of (,hieen's 
 Bench was not a final judgment, and did not 
 eome within the exceptions allowing an appeal 
 in ease« of new trials ; ami tlierefore the .ippeal 
 woidd not lie. Acciilmt Iiriiiranci' ('••. ij Surth 
 America v. McLnchhm, bs S. C. II. (iiT. 
 
 Ne\v Trial. | — In an .-letion lirouglit to recover 
 damages for the loss of certain glass delivered to 
 tlie defendants for carriage, tiie .Indge left to the 
 jury the inustiou of lu-gligenee mdy, reserving 
 any other i|Ucstions to be <lecided suliseipienth- 
 by himself. On the (piestion submitted the 
 jury disagreed. The (h'leiiiliints then moved the 
 I >ivisiomil Court for judmiient, l)ut ))endiiig 
 such niotion the phiintiils ajiplied for ami oli- 
 lained an order of the Court allowing tliein to 
 amend the statement of claim liy chinking other 
 groundsof negligence. Tbedefcndants submitted 
 to such orde" and ph-ailed to such amendincnts, 
 and new and material issues were thereby raised 
 for determination. 'J'lie action as so amended was 
 entered for trial, hut was not tried before the 
 iJivisioiial ('oiii X proiiouiieed judgment on the 
 motion, dismissing tlie idaintilTs' action. On 
 appeal to the Court of Appeal from the judgment 
 of the Divisiou.d Court, it was reversed and a new 
 trial ordered. On appeal to tlie Siipieme Court ; — 
 
 llidd, that the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal (Mihning a new trial in this ease was not 
 a final judgment, nor did it come within any of 
 the provisions of the .Supreme Couit Act author- 
 izing an appeal from jiulgmcnts not final. Cati- 
 nilidii I'wiiii- 11. \V. (0. V. Culilmu Mf/. Co., '22 
 S. C. R. i:i2. 
 
 1 Petition to Quash Seizure.]— A judgment 
 
 i of the Court of (^hieen's Bench for Lower 1,'an- 
 
 ada (appeal side) reversing a judgment of the 
 
 Su]ierior Court, which i|Uaslied on jietition a 
 
 seizure before judgment, and ordering that the 
 
 hearing of the iietition contesting the seizure 
 
 j should be proceeded with in tlie Superior Court 
 
 i at the same time as the he.iring of the main 
 
 I i-iction, is not ahiial judgment .ippealahle to the 
 
 ! Supreme Court : I!. S, C. cli. Ki.'), sees. 24-'2M : 
 
 StroiiL.', •!., dissenting. .\!o/ioii v. liariKird, bs 
 
 S. t". R. ()■-'•-'. 
 
 ; Revivor — I.tijat'-c — Di^jinli- <ix to ICiV/. ]-- 
 
 i The plaintill' in an action bnuight to set aside 
 
 I .1 deed of assignment died before the case was 
 
 ready for judgment, and the respondent having 
 
 jietitioned to be allowed to continue the suit as 
 
 ■ legatee of the plaintilf under a. will dated the 
 
 ■ 1 7th November, bsij!), the appellant contested 
 j the continuanee on the ground that this will 
 
 had been revohed bj- a hitcr will dated I'th 
 i .lanuary, l.S.Su. Tjie respondent reiilied that 
 I the last will was null and void, and upon th:it 
 I issue the ('onrt of (^Hiecn's I'lcnch for Lower 
 j C:niada (ainieiil sidt'), reversing the judgment of 
 j tiic> Superior Coarr, dech'.rc^l null and voiil the 
 j w ill of 17th January, ISS.'), and held the con- 
 tinuance of the original suit by the respondent to 
 be admitted. (In appeal to the Supreme Court 
 i the respondent moved to iiuash the appeal on 
 ' the ground that i he judgment appealed from 
 I was an intcrhjcutury judgment, and it was :— 
 j Held, tliat the judgment was ri-i judicala 
 i between the parties and linal on the petition 
 . for ci^ntinuance of the suit, ami therefore 
 ; ap)iea!al)lc to this Court : R. .S. C. ch. 1,S."), 
 i sees. 2 and 2A. Shnw v, St. Louii, 8 S. C. R. 
 j 3S,">, followed. JJapti-'it v. liaj)li.'<t, 21 S. C. R. 
 . 42.-). 
 
 ! stay of Proceedings.] -The defendants to an 
 i action in the High ( 'ourt of .Fustice for Ontariip 
 
 were made bankrupt in laigland, and the plain- 
 , tills tiled a claim with the assignee in bank- 
 1 ruptey. The High Court of Justice in Kngland 
 
 made an order restraining the plaintifTs from 
 , proceedir • with their action, and a like order 
 : was made by a Higli Court .Tudge in Ontario, 
 
 ■ per|)etually restr.iiiiing the plaintiffs from pro- 
 ceeding, but reserving lilierty to apply. This 
 latter order w;is atUrmcil by a Divisional Court 
 and the Court of Appeal, and tlie plaintifTs 
 sought an appeal to the Supreme Court of Can- 
 ada : — 
 
 Held, that the judgment from which the 
 a])pcal was sought was not a linal judgment 
 within the meaning of the Supreme Court Act. 
 Mitrilhnr Bank of thf Doniinioii of ('(iiutda v. 
 gl,-ir,irt,20H. C. "R 10.-). 
 
 i Summary Juagment. ]— An appeal does uut 
 lie from a dcci'^ion of the Court of Queen's 
 j Bench (Man.) alKrming the (U'der of a .hulgc, 
 i made on the return of a summons to shew 
 I cause, allowing judgment to be entered by the 
 
952 
 
 iilgmcnt of the Court of 
 «• trial in this casi; was not 
 dill it coiiii! within any of 
 •>iilir(Mii' Court Act author- 
 judj^iiu'iits not final, Cnii- 
 "0. V. Culilian ilj\i. Co., fl 
 
 iSelzure. ] — A juilgment 
 n's hinoli for Lower Can- 
 cTsiui; ii judunient of the 
 ^.■li (juiislieil on petition a 
 ent, and ordering that the 
 on contesting the seizure 
 ivith in the Supeiior Court 
 the hearing of the main 
 udiinient Miipeal^ble to tlie 
 •v C. eh. i;{5, sees. 24-'.>8 : 
 ,'. Mnl.^nii V. Ilaninrd, IS 
 
 — l)i-pillr ((.s- /.- ll'iVi'.] -^ 
 ■tion brought to set aside 
 
 died liefore the ease was 
 mil the respondent having 
 ,ed to continue the suit as 
 lit' luidei' a will dated the 
 ), the appellant contested 
 the groiinil that this will 
 (■ a later wdl dated 17tli 
 ! respondent replied that 
 
 and viiid, and upon th:it 
 Queen's IJeueh for Lower 
 leveising t lie judgment of 
 leeha'Ci' null and void the 
 , ISS."), and held the con- 
 id suit by the respondent to 
 peal to the Supreme Court 
 d to (|uasli the appeal on 
 
 juiltnient a])pealed from 
 judgment, and it was : — 
 udgnieut was ?v.v judicala 
 and linal mi the petition 
 the suit, and therefoic 
 Jouit: R. S. C. oh. 13."), 
 iw V. St. Lniiix, 8 S. C. R. 
 'id V. llaptUt, 21 S. C. ]{. 
 
 gs.] -The defendants to an 
 iitrt of .Instice for Ontario 
 in I'ligland, and the plain- 
 ith the assignee in bank- 
 ourt of Justice in England 
 ■ainiug the plaintiffs from 
 ir action, and a like order 
 li Court Judge in Ontario, 
 ng the plaintiffs from pro- 
 ig liberty to apply. This 
 med by a Divisional Court 
 ippeal, and tlie plaintiffs 
 :he Supreme Court of Can- 
 
 idgnient from which the 
 .vas not a linal judgment 
 if the Supreme Court Act. 
 <!• DniiiiiiidH of Caiuuia v. 
 lO.J. 
 
 ent.]— An appeal <loes not 
 of the Court of Queen's 
 ing the order of a Judge, 
 I of ,1 summons to shew 
 nent to be entered by the 
 
 953 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 pliiinti Is on a specially indorsed writ, which is 
 not a hnal judgment " witliiii the meaning of 
 the Supreme Court Act. J{„rai MnniriJtii,, 
 
 'iL 'J. T/'',.'- '^""'^'"' «"«! Camidian L. .l-A. Co 
 i" o, C \\. 4tS 1. ' 
 
 Writ of Summons -.SV7///,7 A.-^HeA—AmAi- 
 cation was made to a .Indge t/, s.t aside .-t writ 
 ot summons served out of the jurisiliction of 
 tlie (.ourt, on the giomuls that the cau.^e of 
 action arose m •.iigland a;;d the defendant was 
 not subject to the process of the Court, and if 
 the Court had jurisdiction that the writ was 
 not ,n proper lot in. The Judge refn.sed the 
 application, and his decision wasatiirmed by the 
 lull Court : — •' 
 
 f u''"'"; !,''w'"""' •'•' /'"-''""''•. tliat the decisimi 
 of the full Court was not a final judgment in an 
 action, suit, matter, or otlnr judicial proceeili„g 
 within the meaning of thi; Siipienie ( ■oiiri -\et 
 and no appeal would lie from such decision to 
 the Nupreiue Omit „f fanada. MnUln v. 
 Moore, IS S. C. K. C.'U. 
 
 .S'ee Snah v.Hauar, IS S. C. R. 71.-,, „o.,, 93,) i 
 J^m,,n,, y. Us Co„mi^..an,. ,rKc_ol. pom- la\ 
 Jluma/itili/c dr St. Mmr, Is S C R V)<) /«,«/ 
 
 XII. riTllil: RtCHTS. 
 
 Annuity.]-]}. R. claimed, under the will of 
 (. >S. R. and an Act of the Legislature of the 
 I'rovince of Quelice, ,-.-t Vict. cli. '.)(), from -V L 
 
 !r«9nr/"''-' f^"":''^- "f t'"' e.tate.th;".sum 
 of §200, being f„r an instalment of the monthlv 
 allowance which A. L. was autliori/ed to pav to 
 e.'ich of the testator's dau-hters out of the reve 
 nuea of his estate. The action was dismissed 
 by the Court of (^tueeii s IJeiieli f,,r flower Can- 
 ada ; and on an appeal to the Supreme Court :- 
 Ueld, that the amount in controversv beim' 
 only ^200, and there being no " future rights " 
 ot B. R which might he bimnd within the mean- 
 mg of tho.se woiv.s in sec. 2',) (/,) of the Supreme 
 and Kxche.pier Courts Act, the case was not 
 appealable. Annual rents in sub-sec. (/,) mean 
 "ground rents" {rt,it'../o,i,;Vi;.) and not an an- 
 nuity or any other like ohai-es or obligations. 
 Jiodu'r V. Lapuire, 21 S. C. R. (ii). 
 
 Annuity — Marrhnie Conii(i,t.\.-V,\ Y, S C 
 ch. 135, sec. 20 (/,), amended by .-,() Viet'Vh" "<) 
 (I).), an appeal will lie to the Su,,reme Court 
 ot Canada from the jmiginent> of the Courts of 1 
 Inghest resort m the IVoviie e of Quebec, in 
 eases where the amouir, in controversy is Ic^s 
 than .S2,00(), if the marter reiaM. to any tftle- to 
 lands or tenements, annu-.l rents, and other 
 
 ;;;iS"e bomi:fe "'"^■■^ "•■ "'^'"^ ■" ^"^»- 
 
 Held that the words '■ other matters or 
 hings mean rights of pn.p, ,r,y analogous to 
 titletolands, etc., which ar specifically men- 
 Honed, and not per.sonal rig', is; that "title" 
 means a vested right ,;r tii i. drea.iy actiuired, 
 lough the enjoyment ma.^ • ,- postponed; and 
 tliat the right of a married « ,„„an to an annuity 
 providca by her marriage .■on n.et in case she 
 M ould become a wido« , is ,,„, n right in future 
 *hich would authorize an ,,,. 1 i„ u,, action 
 by her husband ..gainst t;, or .-rparation de 
 •("7", m which, if judgne,., , cut against her, 
 
 954 
 
 the nght to the annuity would be forfeited. 
 (' Ihit V. (n-eijonj, 24 S. C. R. (i(i|. 
 
 Calls. ]--.\ joint stock company sued the de- 
 tent, on 1(10 shares 01 .slot, .,,.,|,, ,.^||, j ^^ , 
 l.cei, subscribed by 1!. in the capital stock of the 
 company and prayed thaMlie /letendant be eon: 
 ; enined to pay thesaid sum ot .s|,(K)() with costs, 
 he defendant .lenied any liability, and prayed 
 for the dismissal of the actum. ];nrim: the 
 pendciieyof the suit, the company's ,^i„i 
 «as ordere.1 to be wound u), under the Wind 
 ."g-upAct,.loViet.eh. 2;!^,.,,,„Hltlielii i^. 
 ;^atorw..sauthoii>..edtociinlinni.thesnit. Tie 
 
 he unount claimed, but on appeal to the Court 
 
 aintU, compi.ny was u.smis.s, ,|. On appeal to 
 the .Supreme Court of Canada •_ 
 
 Held, (Iwyniie, ,J., dissenting, that the m- 
 l-.l would not lie, ,he amounl'^in eonfi, ye' y 
 be ng under .^2.1,(10, and there being no future 
 nghts „s specimd in sub-.sec. (/.) of sec. 27, ch. 
 
 judgment. (Ull.rt y. ,;hnm„, Hi S. C. R'^ isg 
 
 Bivirii, 20 S. C. R. L'd.-J. •' 
 
 0,i^rn'!T"V7"-V' Judgment of the Court of 
 Queen s bench fo.- Lower Canada (ajmeal side) 
 
 mild ■ n l'"''-^ 7 !'"■ ■^'^'•'■" "'■'■'■' -> 'l-med to 
 
 bui d and complete c.rt:iin works ami drains 
 
 I HI hin a certain delay, in a lane separating t 
 
 I .';':;":•';" % r:^ , l'l^'i'"i""« properties .,1^ the 
 
 : "est side of Peel str,et, M.mtreal, to ,,revent 
 
 M-atcr from u.tcrm, the plaintilfs house wic 
 
 :^c::::irt <•""«-'-' '"ti-^up-necott 
 
 Hehi, that the case w.s not ajipealable, there 
 
 no "^'tl'" r"l " l'''°^' '••' '" •--•^"" '" ''^■^''•- '""l 
 w til, 1, ' "■■ T"'"'" '''-''^^ "' 'l"««tion 
 
 I Mthm the meaning ot sec. 2!t, sub-sec. (I.), of 
 the supreme Court Act. The words "title to 
 auds in this sub-seeti,m ate only applicable to 
 aca.se where, .itule to the propierty or a right to 
 the title niay be m ipiestion. The fact that a 
 qiiestmn<,f the right of .servitude arises wmdd 
 not give jurisdiction. iy/iu/,-r y ///,,,./. i, 
 S. C. R. 2^^, referred to. .;;//„.. ,; ^^^ io 
 ^0 sic: Rim! >^ ""'"''Vv. //nmp..ou, 
 
 Basement-.l n.,„/i„,f .-I,./.] ___ j,, ,,„ „,/;„„ 
 nr,iat..re the plauilili' soiiglu to have aservitu.le 
 claimed by the defendant declared non-e.xistent' 
 and claimed .S.W damages :_ 
 
 Held, that under o(i \iet, eh. 2i), see. 1, amend- 
 
 ■ M,ed.,n ;. '• '•*■'•• ''-■•■• -" <'"' tl't' case was 
 ajipealalde, the (|uestion in controversy relatin.r 
 to matters where the rights in future' might be 
 bound ||,„7„,,/ V. y/„.,„.s„», 19 .s. ^. r' 
 m) distingiiished. an,,N'.,r/u,id v. Fortia; 23 
 
 , ^ee ot Omce-Si'hoot- mist n. ■<,.]-]<: Larivi 
 ere, a school-mistress, by ],,, action claimed 
 , 1 . 43 as fees due f. her in virtue of seo. (i8, eh. 
 I , L,. s. 1,. (,, which was collected by the 
 ■school eonimissioners of the city of Three 
 Rivers while she was employed bV them. At 
 le tune o the action the plaintifl' had ceased 
 to be in their employ. The Court of Queen's 
 
955 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 956 
 
 IJunch f If Lower Canndii (appeal .side), affirniiiig i aotion bv a r.itepayor noiitestiiig the validity of 
 tlio jii(l<4ment of t\w Snporior ( lourt, disiiiishiiMl : an lioiiic)lo!,'at('d valii.itioii roll is not a jiiilgmeat 
 the artioM. On a motion (o tlir Snpivnic C'uui't appdalilile to tlio Siipi-emf ("ourt of Canada 
 oi' Cunadii to allow a liond in appual. tlie same under sec. '-'4 (;/) of the Sii|)i-eme and PJxcjhe- 
 having been refused by a .Iud;.!e of tlie ( 'ourt ! (luer Courts Act, and does not relate to future 
 below, the i-egistrar of the Siipivme Court, and rights witliui the meaning of sub-seo. (6) .of 
 a Judge in Chamljers. on the ground that tlie sec. 'Jil of the .Supreme and Kxelieipier Courts 
 
 ease was not appealable : — 
 
 Held, that the matter in controversy did not 
 relate to any ollice or fi'e of ollice within the 
 meaning of «eo. 'J!) (/<) of the Supreme and 
 Kxcheipier Courts .Act, R. S. C. ch. l:f."i. 
 
 lOven as.suming it did, no rights in future 
 
 Act:- 
 
 Held, also, that as the valuation roll sought 
 to lie set asiile in this cas,: had lieen duly homo- 
 logated ;'nd not appealed against within the 
 ilelay provided in Art. ItXil, .\1. ('., the only 
 mutter in dispute between llie parties was a 
 
 would be bomid, and the amount in dispute ' more ipie.stion of cost.s, and therefore the Court 
 
 being le'is than c!"J,U(}0, the ease was not apnea 
 able. 
 
 :f. Tlie words "where the lights in future 
 might lie bound'' in sub-see. (h) of sec. '29 gov- 
 ern all the jireceding words " any fee of oltieo, 
 c.U\" Chfiijii'iii V. Xdrmanil, Ki S. C. R. (iiil ; 
 Cilhirl V. (lilmaii. Hi S. C. 1!. l,Si) ; J!,nik nf, Vf&y — Oh/i;)alion lo A'epatr— ni/./nii\] — In 
 Toi-nnto v. Lc Cure, etc., de Sin. (•■('-■)•./(■, 1'2 S. ! an action brought by the respoudont'eorporation 
 C. R. 25, referred to. harirun: v. Soliool Com- ' for the recovery of the sum of .Sili-J. 14 paid out 
 mmio7iern for Three Hirers, '2:1 >!i. C. R. 72;i. '• ■ - ■ . . . 
 
 Mould not entertain the .appeal. A/oir v. Vd 
 huji ,;/• H-iii/.iii:/'liiii. 1!).S. C. I!. ;i(i;i, followed. 
 \l'- lister V. Citi/ of ."Ou'ri'ruoke, '24 S. C. R. 52, 
 distinguished. McKmi v. TiiwiiM/) of Jlinch 
 iiilirooke, 24 S. C. R. .■).'). 
 
 Sheriff's Sale -V(i.raliiifi.\—\\\ appeal will 
 lie to the Supreme Court under see. '2!) (//) of 
 the Supreme Court .Act from the judgment in an 
 action to vacate the sherill's sale of an immo'. ■ 
 ,ihle. Dnfrtsiie v. Dix'in, 1(} S. C. R. oKli, fol- 
 lowed. Lefeiintiinv. r'';'OHH''fi», '22 S. C. R. '203. 
 
 Taxes.] —.^'v CitiiofShprhrooh: \. McMaiinmy, 
 l.S S. C. R. r)94, po-it 960. 
 
 ; by it f(U' niiicadani work on a piece of road front 
 ing the aiipellants' lands, the work of in icadam 
 izing the ro:id and k<-epiug it in repair lieing 
 ini|> )sed by a by-law of the inuniciiial council 
 of the respondents, the appellants pleaded the 
 nullity of the by-law. On appeal to the 
 Supreme Court of Canada from the judgment of 
 the (.'ourt of l,)ucen's Jiench for Lower Canaihi 
 (a|)peal side) dismissing the apiiellanCs' plea :— 
 Itehl, that the appelhmts' obligation to keep 
 the road in repair under the bylaw not being 
 "future rights'" within the meaning of aec. 
 Title to Land.] -Tn an action brought before . 2!) (//), the ease was not appealable. Couuly of 
 the Superior C.)urt with seizure in recaption : Vcrchrrc.i v. I'llta/f of V(irnnui.<, 10 S. C. R 
 underAr .. .S,-)7 and SS7, C. C. 1'., and Art. I()'24, j ;<(J5, followed, and l!'hin;> v. .He. Anne, \'< 
 C. C, the <lefendant pleaded that he iiad held ! S. C. R. 92, distinguished, (iwynne, J., dis 
 th.e property (valued at over ?!2,000) .since the : senting. DiiIkus v. Coriairalioii of t^te. iios, . 
 ex|iiration of liis lease, under some verbal agree- | 21 S. C. R. (!5. 
 ment of .sale. The judgment apjiealed ■ from, 
 reversing the juilgment of the Court of Review, 
 lielil that the aeti(m ought to liave been insti- 
 tuted in the Circuit Court. 
 
 On ajipeal to the Supreme Court : — 
 
 Held, that as the ease was originally insti- 
 
 XIIL Insoi.vknoy. 
 PlnalJudgment.]— A final judgment of tin 
 
 tilted in the Superior Court, an.l upon the face. Court of Qucen'.s Bench for" Lower Cana.b 
 of the proceedings the right to the possession (appeal si<le), ujioii a claim of a creditor tiled 
 and property of an immovaole property was : „itli the assignee of an estate under the Insol 
 involved, an appeal lay : Supreme and K.xehe-j vent Act of IS?.-., is not appealable to the 
 (luer Courts .Act, sec. 29 (/,) a„a sees. 28 and 24 : i Supreme C:ourt of dnmda, the right of appeal 
 wV'?"?rV.' 'l'*^^'^"t'"J<- Ji''/'-hlonl V. -lA'tfrrm, : having been taken awav by 40 Vict, eh 41! see 
 19 S. C. R. 42. See, also, ,s. e.,20 S. C. R. 269. ^2S (D.). C.^hlii;, v. JJn/wj, .5 App. Ca8.'40ll, 
 
 „,^, .. ^ ^ -, T r ,. , followed. Seaih v. /h-uur, IS S.C. 11.115. 
 
 Title to Land.]— Ill r. case of a dispute be- i 
 
 tween adjoining proprietors of mining lands, 
 
 where an eneroachmcnt was com])lained of, and 
 
 it appeared that the limits of the respective pro- , 
 
 perties had not been legally determined by a -^^^'- ''K-^^K TO Api-eal. 
 
 I'nrnwr', the Court of f^)ueeirs L'onch (appeal 
 
 sid(.) held that an injunction would not lie to Per Saltum.] — Action to replevy from the 
 
 prevent the alleged encroachment, the proper • defendant books which were in his lossession as 
 
 rem v beii " a 1 action en horihKje. I clerk of the plaiiitifl's, a municipil corporation, 
 
 On 'Def.lto the Supreme (/ourt of Canada:- •! he having been dismissed from the office. He 
 
 Hell hat as the niatt(!r in controversy did refused to give up the books on the ground that 
 not put in issue any title to land where the i his dismissal was illegal. Judgment was given 
 rights in future might be bound, the ease was for the plaintifFs at tlie trial, and alKrmed by a 
 not apiicalible R. S. C. ch. I.Ti, see. '29 (/<). Divisiimal Court, and an application by the 
 Kmoralil Phosphnte Co. v. AtiijIo-ConlineHtal defendant for special leave to appeal was 
 
 ihiinm Wi:rk.->, -J! S. C;. R. 422. 
 
 ■Valuation Roll — Validity — GonleHtation — 
 //o(«o%(/<[o;).]— Held, that a judgment iu an 
 
 appeal 
 
 refused by the Court of Appeiil. The defendant 
 then ajiplied for leave to appeal pnr .■ialluni to 
 the Supreme Court of ( 'anada. The motion 
 was made to the registrar, who dismissed it j 
 
956 
 
 r itoiitesting the valiility of 
 itioTi loll is not a judgment 
 ■'iiliremo Court of Canada 
 llu^ SuiiroiiK! and Kxche- 
 I docs not relate to future 
 leaning of sub-sec. (6) of 
 •mu and Kx<Oiei|uer Courts- 
 
 1 the valuation roll sought 
 ) oasj had l)ei.'u didy homo- 
 [leaied against witbm the 
 rt. lOUl, M. ('., the only 
 etweeii the [larlies was a 
 ts, and tlierefore the Court 
 tile apjieal. Moir v. Vil 
 1!)S. ('. I!. .-)(!;}, followed. 
 :h>:i-hruub', 24 S. C. R. 52, 
 'nil V. 'J'ownshii> of Hincli 
 
 lo Itepnir — f!;/-/am.] — In 
 tlie lespondciit corporation 
 lie sum of .S2(i:.M4 paid out 
 irli una piece of roid froiit- 
 nds. tlie work of macadam 
 ieeping it in repair being 
 ■ ot tlie iiiunici|ial council 
 ;he appellants pleaded the 
 aw. On appeal to the 
 nada from the juilgment of 
 
 Jielicli for Lower C'anuda 
 ng tlie uppellants' plea :-- 
 leliiUits" obligation to keep 
 ider the by-law not being 
 thin the meaning of see. 
 lot appealable. (,'ouiUy of 
 <;/■ \'amiHK.i, 1!) .S. C. H. 
 I'lhiirn V. oYe. Anne, Vi 
 lished. (i Wynne, J., dis 
 Coflioration of iSle. /fo.s« , 
 
 Insoi.vk.noy. 
 
 I— A final judgment of the 
 5enili for Lower Canada 
 claim of a creditor tiled 
 an estate under the Insol- 
 s not appealable to tlie 
 iiiada, the right of appeal 
 ay Ijy 4(1 Viet, ch 41, .see. 
 Diijiuy, 5 Api). Cas. 40!l, 
 'wjui; 18 S. C. R. 715. 
 
 VK TO Ari'EAI,. 
 
 tion to replevy from tlie 
 h were in his I'osseasion :is 
 
 a ninnicipil corporation, 
 ised from the office. He 
 
 books on the ground that 
 ;al. .ludgnient was given 
 e tiial, and allirmed by a 
 il an application by the 
 il leave to appeal was 
 >f Appeal. The defendant 
 ; to appeal iif.r Galium to 
 of Canada. The motion 
 liatrar, who dismissed il ; 
 
 %7 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 tlie defendant tlien appealed without success to 
 Court--!'" ^''•""'"''••'' : "'"' «"ally to the full 
 
 Held that he ha.lf.ailed to shew snflicient cause 
 \. Vida'jr nj L,„iiloii W'.'sl, i.'4 S. C. i;, 70,-). 
 
 Winding-up Act -C'„„v, „,_'/',•„„, j^.^tter 
 
 t oapp,.l!,uit w„l, the cmsent of M,e respou! 
 . Mt o ,t,,,„,d nmi a .Judge of the .. u.rt bJlow 
 a 1 order t,. exteu.l the time for brin.'in<' the 
 appeal and snlne pienllv, before th "ti-i le 
 
 r,^'"^'' ''« o",t a -.lerfroni the registrar. L 
 
 the .Supreme (ourt, sitting as a .ludgeTn ( 'ham- 
 I't;.-.-., giving h„u l,.u-e t.^aupeal hfaccorda ice 
 "•ah .sec 7(i of. tlie Winding-up Aefc, and l^e 
 onlerdeelire,! that all the prr..{.lin.s la 1 ui. n 
 
 S,?^r r''"''r■■''■''''^''''^^^••-*^^'''''"^- 
 JUeut to tlu- ord.T granting leive to apnea 
 
 <>nlarv,nauU v. Clvipihi, MS. C. R. \r,2 
 
 968 
 
 I reversed I he judgment of the .Superior Court and 
 ■l.sm.ssed the actions, holding the tax valid. 0„ 
 I ajipeal to the Supreme Court of ('auada :- 
 
 He d, tu It the .vises were not appealable, the 
 
 ' a pellauts not having taken out or been refused 
 
 jitter argument, a rnl,- or order .p.ashing theby- 
 
 aw in (piestion w.tliin tiie terms of sec. L'4 l,i)o! 
 
 the Suprcne and Kxche.p.er Courts Act provid- 
 
 ig lor appeals m e-ases of mmiicipal by.|aw.s. 
 
 s. C. K. .,(..,, and Cit,/ of .-in, ,-h,:,ok.' v. Mc- 
 Manamy, IS S. C. I!. oW, followed. BM Veil- 
 f^?"",'''- V C!l,or<jn.i,.r, v,e/,.c f?,.s- Go I. 
 (- Hy qt QirUr, -JO S. ( '. R. o;;,j_ 
 
 -V\'. Manila Mils. 
 
 Interlocutory Jud.jment.1 - interlocutory 
 
 udgn e Its upon proceedings tor and upon a wril 
 
 ot m; u,lam«-, are not e.pp.dable to the Supreme 
 
 «- ourt under see -.'4 (,/, of the Supreme and Kk- 
 
 c.e,p,er Courts A^-t. The word " jud.nueut 'in 
 
 / LJ °r'"''l ' ■'":^'--^'-". •'■'-. 'ILssentiug. 
 
 Petition to Quash. ]-l'roeee lings were com- 
 meneel ,n the Superior Court !.>■ petition to 
 
 . city ot slierbrooke under see. 4;;S'.) I{ ,S P O 
 
 ' Court r^'''"' ^'r ■■■'='"■ '" '"■^'''"" ""'' •'^'■P^'-'""-' 
 Lo 1 1 to auuu a muiiici|ml bylaw. The judg- 
 ment app,.,ile- irom, reversin,' the judgment tf 
 the Supenor Court, lield that the l.ydaw w^s 
 ^><tra nrcs ()„ .notion to ,p,ash an appeal to the 
 •Supreme Court of Cauad.i - - 
 . Held tiiat the proeeJdings, being in the 
 interest ot the public, are equivalent t" the 
 lotou or rule to.p.ashof th. ,.:„.,i,,. ^^^^ 
 
 a tlierefore the Court ha,l jurisdiction to enter 
 t lu the ai.peal under suhsec. ,.,,) „t .sec. 24, eh. 
 
 i fef ' '''■;r'■^!''^ F- '-i'-. 'listinuuisl^ . 
 It klj,ter V. a,/// ,;/ Skti-l,ruoke, L't S. C. R. 5:;. 
 
 XVI. .MiLNicii-Ar, Rv-i.Aws, 
 Action for Taxes -Pl,,i of InnilHll,, of liu- 
 IS .S. U R. o'J4, pout (KiO. 
 
 Action to Set Aside.] -The municipality i 
 ot tlieoounty of \ ercheres passed a by-law or ' 
 
 i hi, f ^r "^ "'?'• "!;'"'t""^u,ce of a certain : 
 I" dge. 1 ,ie municipality of Varennes by their ! 
 action praycl to iiave the by-l.aw or/;,-.,,.,'^,.. -^"^ '. 
 
 J!Te'uKr^''^'Tr'^"''''''''«'••''''^•''f-'•tai^^ 
 itgml, rities. h,3 above was maintained am] ^ 
 
 ri^oSL;:^:!:: ^'-^H-'^""- Supreme' 
 
 ■gilts witliin the meaning of tlie former section 
 bemg in ,pu^tion an.l the appeal not being from I 
 a rule or order of a Court (jua.liing or relusin" 
 
 ■:,;,T ? ''?-"''r"^ " ""•■■i'^iP'^l corporation? 
 
 .VVII. XoTlCi; ,,K Al-l'KAL. 
 
 _ Special Case.] -The ju,lgment upon a 
 n»-'^-ial ,,-,se ,iiten,le,l by see. 41 of the 
 Supreme ami Kxchc.juer Courts Act. R S (; 
 ch. ld.j, IS a ludgmeiit cm the kin.l of case well 
 known by hat iianie, ,u„l has no reference t^ 
 the ca.se which, by the Con. Rule 41. "J, is pre- 
 pare, for the purpose o, tiie appeal to the 
 Court of Appeal f,)r Uutai-io. 
 
 An obje.jtn.ii to a bon,l on appeal from the 
 Court ot Appeal to the Supreme' Cmrt. in "^ 
 e .0.1 trie,l up,,,, p!..a,Un.s a,n,l o.-al evi^lencJ^ 
 aidMhu,.hcauu, before the t ,m.-t of Appeal in 
 the usua way, that notice of appeal wL not 
 given wuhm twentv ,lays pursuant to see. 4L 
 n on he gr,,u,,,l that every apj.eal from the 
 Court ot Appe.ll ,s"up,m a special case," was 
 he -ef,,i-e„ve.-ruled. iJvap;- v. Uadmhnr.t. H 
 • . II. o/u. 
 
 Action to Set Aside.l-In virtue of a by- 
 ^twiiasse, at a meeting of tlie corporation of j 
 
 'Hit piesnled over by a ooun,Mllor elected to the 
 
 the Hell lelephoue Company of Cana,la i.ml 
 
 a tax 01 .^|,()U0 on the (,.uei;ec (ias Comi'.any. 
 
 " actions ..istitute.l by ti.e appellants f,.r the 
 
 'chiteiis Bench for Lower Canada (appeal side) 
 
 XVIII. I'.VHTIES TO Al'I'EAL. 
 
 Petition In Disavo-«ral.]- Where a petition 
 n disavowal lias been served on all parties to the 
 wl o'emM":'"'-^ c-ontestcl by the attorney 
 whose authority ,s denie,;, the latter cannot on 
 an apiiea complain tli.-.t all parties interested in 
 the result are not j.arties to the appeal. Date 
 xoii v. Dumoiif, liO S. C. R, 709. 
 
 XIX. .SkCUKITV on Al-l'EAL. 
 
 .iee Hwjer v. Jwkmu, lU R. R. 480, aMt 213. 
 
859 
 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. 
 
 960 
 
 ji ■ ', 
 
 Bond — Piiiiies—Covtliliou.] — In an a]i|ical to 
 th\) ISuprfiiu' t'oiirt of Ciiiiiiila, altliimj^li it is 
 not iiecessaiy tliat tlie appellant slioiild lie a 
 party to tlic appeal bond, if liu is inailt ,i party 
 and doL'B not ixccutu the bonil, tlie respondent 
 is entitled to have it disallowe<l. 
 
 In an ajipeal bond, where the object was not 
 only to seeiire paynient of the eosts wliicli niiglit 
 be awarded by the Supreme Court of Canada 
 under sec. -Iti of It. S. C. eh. I. ').'), but also under 
 sec. 47 ('-) to procure a stay of execution of the 
 judgment appealed from as to the costs thereby 
 awarded against the ai)pell,a>t, the condition 
 ■was " shall eliectiudly prosecute the said appeal 
 and pay such costs an<l daniagts as nmy be 
 awarded ag.iinst the ai)|iellant by the Supreme 
 Court of Canada, and shall ]iay the amount hi/ 
 III) xaid mtiilionnl jiiili/iiK lit directed to be paid, 
 either as adebt or for dainagesorcosts,"eto. : — 
 
 Held, that this did n(jt cover the costs awardeil 
 against the njipellant by the judf;meiit .nppealed 
 from. Jiolii II xoii V. J/in-rif, 14 I'. It, 'A'i'A. 
 
 Execution — .sVfi,'/ — Mmmj in (.'ouit — l'nymciil 
 (lilt 1 — The ijlaintifl's ap))ealed to the Coui't of 
 Appeal fr(.ni a judjiment of the High Court 
 dismissing their action with costs, and gave the 
 security foi' the costs of ajipeal re(|uired by 
 see. 71 of the .Tudicaturo Act, by paying .S40O 
 into Court, and also gave the security recpiired 
 by Rule S(I4 (4), iii order to stay the cxecutii n 
 of the jiulgment below for taxed costs, liy pay- 
 ing .?.S'2-. 1 4 into Court. Tlieii' appeal was dis- 
 missed with costs. J)esiring to a|)peal to the 
 iSu]ireme Court of Canada, they i)aid S500 more 
 into Court, and this was allowed by a Judge of 
 the Court of Apiu-al as security for the costs of 
 the further a|ipe,il ; — 
 
 Held, that execution was stayed upon the 
 judgments (pf the High C(.urt and Court of 
 Appeal until the deci.«i< n of theSuiireme Couit. 
 
 t onstiuetiou of sees. 4(), 47 (c), and 4S of the 
 8u]irnne and Excheiiuer Courts Act, 1!. S. C. 
 
 ch. i;i->. 
 
 Siiiihle, that ]]iiyment out of the moneys in 
 Court to the dt leiidant of his costs ot the High 
 Court and Couit of Appeal, u; on the under- 
 taking of his Kilicitois to lepay in the event of 
 the furtliei ajijical succeeding, coidd notjiroperly 
 be ordered. Kil'i/v. Jiiijurlul Li an Co., 10]'. 1\. 
 49!), commented on. Aiirim/lurdl hisnnuin- Co. 
 <)/ Kuttrloini. A'. Y. w'Saujint, IG 1'. R. ;W7. 
 
 Ex Parte Appeal.]— -An ajipeal was .sought 
 fuui the refusal of the Supi'enie Court of Ivova 
 Scotia to admit the appellant as an attorney ol 
 the Court. 'J'here beiiig no person interes^tel in 
 o])liosing the application or the appeal, no secur- 
 ity for costs was given : — 
 
 Held, (Iwynne, J., dissenting, that the Court 
 had no juiisdictiou to I lar the appeal. 
 
 "erPiitcliie, C.J., amrraschereaii, J. — PLxcept 
 in c.ises specially ])roviiled for, no appeal can be 
 hear<l by this Court unh ss security foi costs has 
 been given as ]irovided for by see. 4(i of tlie 
 Supreme and KxclKi(Uer Courts Act, U. S. (,'. 
 ch. 135. In re Caluni, 21 S. C. I!. 100. 
 
 Si'e Mamh v. Welih, 15 P. R. C4, ante. 223. 
 
 XX. TlMK FOR Al'PEALINO. 
 
 Judgment — liifirencr. — Judgment on lii'port 
 -Ejctenniuu of I'ime.] — On the trial in the Ex- 
 
 ehe(|uer ('ourt in 18S7 of an- action against the 
 ( 'row n for breach of a contract to purchase paper 
 from the su|ipliant, no (U'ience was otl'ered, and 
 the ease was sent to referees to aseeitaiii the 
 damages. In IMIl the re]poit of the referees 
 was brought ijcfore the t'oiirt. and judgment wa.-i 
 given against, thi^ (.'rown for the amount thereby 
 found due. The I'rown ajipi aled to the >u|ireine 
 Court, having obtaineil (vomi the l';xche(|Uer 
 Court an extension ot the time for appeal limited 
 by statute, and sought to impugn on such appeal 
 the jiidgmeut iirohounced in \S>i~ : — 
 
 Held, (iwyiiiie and I'attersoii, JJ., dissenting, 
 that theajpinal must be restricted to the linal 
 judgment pr< lunncid in IHUl ; that an appeal 
 Ironi the jnclgii.ent giv( n in 1S87 could only be 
 brought within tliirty days thereafter unless the 
 time was extended as provided by the statute, 
 uuil the extension ot time grantid by the Kx- 
 chei|Uer Court on iis lace only referred lo an 
 appeal from the jr.dgnient proi.iiiiiieed in bS!)l : 
 
 lleld, per (iwynne aii(l Patterson, J.I., that 
 the judgment givcii in I.MIl was the only judg 
 inent gi\en in the suit in respect to the matters 
 put ill issue by the pleadings, and on aiipial 
 therefrom all matters in issiu; were neeessarilv 
 open. 'J'lii: (,>n(in v. C/tid; 21 S. C. K. lioli. 
 
 See. Ontario Haul: v. Cliajiliii, 20 S. C. P. 152, 
 ante 957. 
 
 XXI. V.VLIDITV OK ST.VTUTKs. 
 
 Taxes — Aft of Qiiehec Leiji»la(nre.] — The 
 plaintitl's sued the defendants to recover the sum 
 of .S150, being tiieauK.unt of two business taxis, 
 one of .?10O as eoinjiirundeis and the other of ."r^ijO 
 as wholesale dealers, umier the authority of a 
 municipal by law. 'J he defendants pleaded that 
 the by-law was illegal and n/lra viri.t of thr 
 n'unicipal council, and also that the statute 47 
 \'icl. eh. .S4 ((}.) was n/lra rinn of the Legis- 
 lature of the Province of (Quebec. The Superior 
 Court held tliat both the statute and by-law 
 Wire iiilrii riif, and condemned the defendanl- 
 to pay the anu iiiit claimed. 0:i an appeal to the 
 Court of l^Hieen's Puuh by the defendants, that 
 Court contiiined the jiulgieeiit of the Siiperiov 
 Court as riganis the validity of the statute, but 
 set aside the t,-.x ot .t-U.O as not being authori/.e<l. 
 The plaintil's tin reupon appealed to the Supreme 
 (.'ourt, complaining ol that jait of the judgment 
 which declarid the business tax of .iflOO invalid. 
 There was no cross-api)eal. Cn motion to ipuisli 
 for want of jurisdiction : — 
 
 Held, that the ap]nal would not lie, see. 24 
 ((j) of the Supreme and Kxclieipier Courts Act 
 not being applicable, and the case not coming 
 within see. 20 of the Act, the ammint being 
 under S2,(JC0, no futuie rights within the mean- 
 ing of sec. 20 being in controversy, nor any 
 questio'i as to the constitutionality of the Act 
 of the legislature being raised. Strong, J., dis- 
 sented, on the ground that the judgment ap- 
 pealed from involved the question of the validity 
 of the Provineiiil Act. ( ill/ of Hhii-bruotf v, 
 McManamij, IS S. C. IX. 504. 
 
 XXII. Oiiimi C.ASE.s. 
 
 Court Equally DividecT—A'/rcr^ o/.]— When 
 the Supreme Court of Canada in a case iu 
 
960 
 
 7 (if nil- actiiin ngaiiist tlu) 
 
 coiitraot to puix'liaso pajiei- 
 ti (Iclriico %va.>i otruiLd, and 
 
 n'ttiri'.s to a«c'L'itaill tlio 
 lio rcpiiil of llu; loferetn 
 i' (/oiii I, anil jii(li;nicnt w a.- 
 wii for tin,' amount iIiltcIiv 
 vn iiiipt alt-d to lliu >u|iii'inc 
 iilmI fi-oiii tlu' Kx(jlit'i|Uii- 
 
 lijt' tiniu for aiipuiil liinitid 
 t to iiiipii^'ii on audi appLMl 
 iced in '.Sb' : — 
 
 I'altor.son, JJ., diss-cntiii:.', 
 lie rosiiic'tfd to tliu final 
 I ill liSill ; that an apical 
 V(n ill 1SS7 could only bo 
 
 ■ (lays tlKrcaftor uiiU'Kstli( 
 i pi'dvidcd liy thu .statute, 
 tinu: j;raMt(;(l by tlu! K.\ 
 
 liit'i.' only iift'i'i'c'd to iin 
 Kilt iiroiiiiUiKx'din 1891 : 
 
 ■ ami I'attiTson, J.I., tbal 
 1 ISIH was thu iinly jiidi,' 
 t ill ripp(.i.t to the niatliT.-- 
 
 ]ilfiidiiigs, and on apptal 
 in issu(-: were neeessarih 
 'J/arL; 21 S. (J. H. (i.j(i. 
 
 . Cliujjiiii, '20 6. f. H. lo-2, 
 
 ITY OK ST.U'L-TKS. 
 
 ■tiehec Lf'ijifilatiire.] — The 
 ciidants to rcciivcr tl'.e sum 
 huiit of two business taxes, 
 in(lei'.s and the other of .'T'Tid 
 
 uiiiier the autlioritj- of a 
 le defendants pleaded that 
 :al and ii//n( lunx of the 
 d iil.so that the statute -IT 
 1 ii//ra riris of the Legi^- 
 
 ot (Jiiebee. The Superior 
 I tlu; statute ami bydaw 
 L'dudenuied the defendaal- 
 imed. 0:i an appeid to the 
 
 h by the defendants, that 
 juilj;ii'e)it of the Superinr 
 lididity of the statute, but 
 XOiisiKit being- autliorizei!. 
 Ill ajipcalcii to the .Supreme 
 
 thiit 1 111 t of (he judgment 
 isiuess tax of .'jlOO invalid, 
 ijieal. On nu.tii)n to (jUMsh 
 
 tal would not lie, see. 2i 
 i(i Kxehe(iuer Courts Act 
 and the ease not eoniiiij.' 
 e Act, the amount beiiig 
 II! rights within the mean- 
 in eontroversy, nor any 
 listitutionality of the Aet 
 g raised. .Strong, J., dis- 
 il that the judgment ap- 
 he question of the validity 
 t. ( ill/ of lShi}-brook(' v. 
 R. 594. 
 
 ■iiii;ii C.\SEs. 
 
 /jded— AV/Jrd q/'.]— When 
 of Canada in a ease in 
 
 961 
 
 . eal ,H ctially .Hvided. «o that the deei.ion i 
 .' H (.'aled against stands unreversed, the res dt 
 •"the ea,se ,„ ,he Supreme Cour af^e'ets f 1, 
 
 L:o^:Sb;^i;:-^f^'.,7i''?''''-^''-'i>; 
 
 TELEPHONE. 
 
 ter.ndnot,,riginatei;fe;;,!;:r&^"'^'- 
 ni.^v.Xl^^jT'^ P «;/'-,«•. «0(i, and' 
 
 <^?rj(^^^^,(!ir}!*^;f-i;-;^M,- 
 i./<^/^5-V;:"Sx,s*/s:';^!'^;47?"''-^^^'-i 
 
 roruo SCreeC It W. Co., U i^. ]{ i^H:^:^^''- 
 
 m 
 
 i"»>L i':,',;v::i«;," ' - - ■■' - '^■ 
 
 J<>n.sdietion to revoke the r 1. J '" "" 
 
 ;/'yn (.f letters of ad,i:;;:,sr^;^':,^:y;i:;':';; 
 
 *- KxtOCToKs AM, Al.M,MsTn.VT(,>t.--I.„o 
 IIAIK ColUT. 
 
 TACKING. 
 
 Ute MoiiT(;A(;K, .Will. 
 
 TAXATION OF COSTS. 
 
 ■Ve-- Costs, V.-SoLtcnou, III. 
 
 SURROGATE COURT. 
 
 perS^.E^-|-A will exeeiue., ,y a 
 
 or proved in any way bef" "• , ' '^^f .;??*f "P"." 
 not within th/ Ac/ r.::!?:^;"? £^ ,^"'^;,^^ 
 
 ch t (o" )Trv'; A ''"--'-tion ;"i\ii ?: 
 
 (-". J [U.) Jii re Maclareii, -22 A. R. 18. 
 
 Boc. 3^, the Wo f'"/'^''" "'testate, under 
 ch ^n f„ *"'rrogate Courts Aet, R. S O ' 
 
 £ hCu err: ^'" ^ '"^■;"«''to Courtf^n^ ^ 
 
 ^trsstixsl^'Sf?F?i 
 
 creditors:— ^ ' "*' *'"'''« ^'e>e uo 
 
 Held that the jurisdiction to award ..rant 
 rL"el"bv '?!,''" s""'^ ''""'• "-^"I'l ^'^ '' t - 
 
 TAXES. 
 
 Set A,s.si:.ss.mi.;nt a.nd Ta.xes. 
 
 TELEGRAPH. 
 
 'M-Ikc Law -TrexpcLiH-TroMt de litX r 
 
 TELEPHONE. 
 
 r, Itel'']"^ "" '^«'--""-'t betwe..nthec J 
 le. ,. 7'r' ^"'"P"">'. providing that no- 
 
 jeais, hav e any license or permission to use anv 
 of the public streets, etc., of the eitv for H^ 
 
 ;.^:^;^yt1il-szr^:!'v::t^x 
 ^iSctvS^i-,---3 
 
 he personal disqualification of a Surrogate 
 
 •'»<lge to pass upon an application, by reZfof 
 
 61 ' 
 
 \ Service — Contract.] — The Rell TaUr,hr.^ 
 
 oiacis in te ephonc for messenger boys cibs 
 C.l'I^''^ '' .«"''' to the Klettric ^^A 
 mS'ov^''''""^'^'''"''*'' ""'^■'- *''»'e« "ot to 
 in Uiec V /''"■' T ""^ """'""■• ''■•■"'^tly or 
 etc., to any person or persons, cmirianv or 
 corporation, e.xcent to tie Fleet , in 'v^.i 
 Company. The oLt North - West;: TdSlS 
 
-I 
 
 «S3 
 
 TIMBER AND TREES. 
 
 064 
 
 C"niii|)any afti-.rrtar.ls ostiiblislii'il a inu.sauiigor 
 BLTvici! for tlie iiui'iio^fs of wliioli tin' wires of 
 tlii^ U'elcplioiii; ('uMi(i:iiiy were usoil. In an 
 action for l)re;u;h o( the agrecnuint with the 
 Klectrio De.sijateh (lonipaiiv and for an injnne- 
 tion to restrain tlie Teleiihoiio Company liom 
 alluwinj^ their wires to l)e iisuil for giving orders 
 for niessen,'ers, etc!. ; — 
 
 Held, Ritchie, C. J., dimliting, tlial tliu Tele- 
 phone Company, lieing ignorant of the nature of 
 ooinninnic.itions sent over their wires by snli- 
 serihers, did not "transndt" sueh orders within 
 the meaning of tlie agreement : that tlie nse of 
 the wires hy subscribers conld not be restricted, 
 and that tlie Telephone Company was under no 
 obligation, even if it were possible to do so, to 
 take measures to ascertain tlii' nature of all 
 eominunieations with a view to preventing such 
 orders being given. K/fr/rir Dvpali'll Co. of 
 Toronto V. Ill II Ttlcp/wiic Co. of' Canada, 20 
 
 s. c. R. s;!. 
 
 Hei' 'TlMMKll ANIv TUKES, II. 
 
 TENDER. 
 
 Stt S.VLE OF L.iND, III. 
 
 THIRD PARTY. 
 
 Sm I'aktiks, VI. 
 
 THREATENING LETTER. 
 
 Stf CuiMiXAL Law, IV. 
 
 TIMBER AND TREES. 
 
 I. CONTUAOT FOR SaLE, 06.3. 
 
 II. PuoPERTV IN Trees, 964. 
 
 I. CoNTKACT FOR .SaLE. 
 
 Crown Timber.]— S'tfc Citowx L.vnds, VI. 
 
 Delivery — Time, for Payment.] —By agree- 
 ment in writing I. agreeil to sell and the V. H. 
 L. Co. to purchase timber to be delivered " free 
 of fiharge where tl.^y now lie within ten days 
 from the time the ice Is advised as olear out of 
 the harbour, so that the timber may be counted. 
 . . . Settlement to be finally made inside of 
 thirty days in cash, less two per cent, for the 
 dimension timber which is at .John's Island:" — 
 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that the last clause did not give the 
 purchasers thirty days after delivery for pay- 
 ment ; that it jirovided for delivery by vendor 
 .ind p.aynient by purehaaera within thirty days 
 from the date cjf the contract ; and that if pur- 
 chasers accepted the timber after the expiration 
 of thirty days from such date, an event not pro- 
 vided for in the contract, au action for the price 
 
 could be ijrnughl immediately after the accept- 
 ance. I'ii'fiiriii Iltirlioiir l.anili.r Co. v. Irwin, 
 2i S. C. 1!. i;'»T. 
 
 Stancllna Timber -Parol .9«/... ) -As a gen- 
 eral rule, a eniitract fur the sale ot standing tini- 
 be!- uhicli is not to be severed immediately is a 
 sale of an inl'.rest in land, 
 
 L'pon a piinil sale of timber fur valuable con- 
 sideration, v\ith a parol license to enter upon 
 the l.uid di'.riiig such time as should be necessary 
 for the |iurp im of cutting and leinuving the 
 limber, the defeiuljiit duiing the pi'iiod allowed 
 by the contrnct continued to cut. and remove, 
 iiolH-itliat;iniiing he was notilieil not to ilo so; — 
 Hold, in lui aetion ol trespass and tor damages 
 for tini'iei cut after the notice, that he was at 
 liberty to .-hew tlie existence of Iir parol agree- 
 ment in jusl ilieatioii of what he h;id done, and 
 under which no i ight of revoc.ition existed, and 
 to shew the part perforMianee as an answer to 
 the objeelioii founded on the Statute of Frauds. 
 Hanili/ v. (Jarrii/liers, 2.') (). 11. '27!'. 
 
 Standing Timber — AV,»ocft/ -- H'ciy— " A'ec- 
 /<«( /■;/." I -The plaiiititi' was the ouiierof a farm 
 of about a niilc 111 breadth and liw -sixths of a 
 mile in length. About two-third.^ of the farm 
 was heavily wooded, and the rest of it was 
 cleared ami .■iillivated. The defendant became 
 the purchaser of the trees and lilniier upon the 
 land, under au agreement wliieli pi nvided among 
 oilier lliingi iliat the jmrehaser should at all 
 times within three years have full liberty to 
 elite'- H)Kui the lands and to remove the trees 
 and tini'i'jr in sueh manner as he might thinU 
 proper, not interfering with the enjuyment of 
 the plaintilV >ave in so far as might be uecessarj'. 
 To take timlier from the centre of the wooded 
 belt througii the woinllaiid to the roads instead 
 of passing"o\er the cleared l.md would have cost 
 more than the timber was worth : — 
 
 Held, that the word " necessary " was to be 
 reasonably (onstrutd, and that this timber- 
 might be lakeu across the cleared 1 iiid. .SVf/;Acj/s 
 V. <!ordo,i,U)A. K. 176. Alhrmed. -Jl'S. (J. R.61. 
 
 Tolls—Slatulori/ ll'iivlalionx. ]— See Tolls. 
 
 II. I'Roi'EUTY IK Tk!;i-;.s. 
 
 High-way — yV7f/;/i0HC.]— The iilnintitf wastlie 
 owner of laud in the city of Toronto fronting on 
 a street which was an original road allowance. 
 The defend:uit3 the iSell Telephone Company, 
 with the assent, but without any express reso- 
 lution or by-law of the city, or any notice or 
 compensation to the plaintiff, cut off branches 
 overhanging the street from trees growing with- 
 in the plaiiitiiTs grounds, and also branches of 
 trees growing in the street in front of the plain- 
 tiff's ground, alleging that the branches inter- 
 fered with the use o! the wires of a telejihone 
 system for police purposes, which they had con- 
 tracted with the city to maintain. Section 'A 
 of the Tree Planting Act, R. S. O. ch. 201, had 
 not been brought into force in Toronto : — 
 
 Held, per Osier and MaelRnn.an, .1.1. A., Hag- 
 arty, C..1.0., dissenting, that sec. 479 (20) of 
 the Municipal Act, I\. S. O. ch. 1S4, applies 
 only when sec. 3 of the Tree Planting Act, 
 K. S. 0. ch. 201, is in force, and that the plain- 
 
964 
 
 :ili.itely iiftur tlio aucupt- 
 itr l.iiiiihrr Cii, V. Irwin, 
 
 I'liiol Sa/t.] ~M a geii- 
 
 ' tlltl ball' Ol HlillMllllg tiiii- 
 
 Huvurcd iiiinii.'ilialuly is a 
 ,11,1. 
 
 tiiiiliLM- fill valuable con- 
 i)i lieriisu lo enter upon 
 me iia slioiiKl lie iieci;ssai'y 
 ilti;iL; ami n iiiuviiig tlie 
 iliiiiiiy the ii^'iiiiil allowed 
 uilmI to cut, ami remove, 
 ,s iiotilioil mit to do so :~ - 
 :' lrc.s|)ass ana for .lainagfs 
 i; notice, that In: was at 
 .-.tciiee of liii parol agree- 
 wliat ho li;iil ilime, and 
 if revoc.iticii ixiHed, and 
 riuaiieo as an answer U> 
 on the Staluie of Fraud.s. 
 ■2r, O. R. •>:<.). 
 
 ■Ilriiioral. — W'liy—" .Vec- 
 i' was the ou ner of a farm 
 iillli and Hi c.-sixths of a 
 t tHotliiiii? of the farm 
 
 and the I'ciit of it was 
 , The defendant hecamo 
 cci and timiier upon the 
 -lit wliieh iiMividcd among 
 
 imrcliaser should at all 
 .ai'S liave full liberty to 
 md to remove the trees 
 uiuer as he iniglit think 
 ; with the eiijoyiiient of 
 
 far as might lie necessary, 
 he centre of the wooded 
 land to the loads instead 
 :ired l.uid would have co.st 
 Has worth : - 
 
 " necessary " was to be. 
 
 and that this timber 
 
 he cleareil 1 iiid. Sl^iiheiis 
 
 .. Alhnneil.-'l'S. (J. R. 01. 
 
 ijiilalioH'i. ] — Ste ToLL.s. 
 
 ;1TV IN Tkkks. 
 
 >H'.] — The [ilaintitl'wasthe 
 it^' of Toronto fronting on 
 1 oii>;inal ro:id iiUowanee. 
 !ull Telephone Company, 
 i-ithout any express reso- 
 le city, or any notice or 
 [ilaintitf, cut olf branches 
 , from trees growing with- 
 ds, and also branches of 
 reet in front of the plain- 
 that the branches inter- 
 the wires of a telephone 
 OSes, which they had con- 
 ■ to maintain. Section S 
 ^.ct, R. S. O. ch. 201, had 
 force in Toronto : — 
 
 Manlenniin, d.T.A., Hag- 
 [ig, that sec. 479 (20) of 
 . S. O. eh. 1S4, applies 
 
 the Tree I'laiiting Act, 
 force, and tlut the plaiu- 
 
 966 
 
 TOLLS. 
 
 «HSS!^'.K>,.;- r""s:^^xs:;t;:'T,r -- 
 
 , ... . . >,,.u- u.ii ung; hut : — 
 "eld, iil.so u^.,. Ha'irfv l< I {\ j ,> . 
 
 ,1 A \r., I '',"'.-." K) . ' ■■'•U., and Dsler 
 
 •'-i^^u!;;;;; :::;,iL^;:f;'l:-;^»«. -'.-astile 
 
 i" the pCu.ui.rs griinsiri'''''"'^' '"''''■ 
 them. 
 
 L.Kx*AS!i:^':E:';:r^yir'^---M«™.-' 
 
 , ,- ,■■■; '■■ '""-••" ti.e comh.VintfTin'rf'i'I^^T,'^'''''''-'''"^^^^ t„ tho 
 
 'I^"ts h.ul no right to cut perul!aK si *'', •/;'''■'*-■'' ^^'•"■'■'n's I'ro? 
 
 in the result, 
 junior Judge of tli,. eouutv nrv'","."""'"'- '" '"" 
 
 ;yi^nrd,tLdan:..e:t^,^^, ;:;-;;!'!;;';;' 
 
 ' l>erefore, the judgment of the Z-A^^^ \'^ "'^'"''"^ '""' ' " , « 
 
 .I.KZ.'r','''','''"'"-!-""" 'Ii« o-v.l.-r. 
 
 :!ir:;r^j;4r';S'T'" •?-'»;-;£: 
 
 of Halifax' ^ '^' '''"'^ '"" ■■'W''^' '" tl"' -ity within three month.i froni J K ,'H''""''f ""'^ 
 
 £.;p.ny..j:;,;;^,C^^ 
 
 2ldlr::;j^^:;::':'''>-^''''''i''''''t-'tdowu,,o^ 
 inS:t'tr'~;:r;.S';:r;!'S*''^^"'!'- 
 
 oit, .o.dd iniintain ar';;ctm:'r"!Cit 
 
 i-"ywhiij::j:;;.j;^^^-^-!;^^,-^;i;<Ko- 
 
 valid ; 
 
 ^•lector-s'stat torv iir'o-' ""''■J'"-i-'i'-'''l) the 
 
 -uianotbeSdii^Sr:;!::.,;;;::'',""'^ 
 
 <' I' sec. 3 of the Civil f-,./ 1 '"'";';'''"<-' "-'lnu.se 
 P-supposed an ex U i„ l"! -S'" f' r'^" "^'*=^ 
 .•egnlated its exercise. y"-,7,' v rv» '^•V"'^ 
 
 .'Anvo.«f22 o^K.''i^^::::;f'r. V. yv,.,.Ai, of 
 
 TIME. 
 
 ■INS VIII.-COL-.NTV CoaiJT, II. 
 
 
 (O,), provides that by- a;;?';''* ^ -ct. eh. S5 
 
 «ai.l section for alterh.. ete' ^T i"""'*''". ^^'' 
 
 shall not be passed 1 r"',- ,' ■''"°,' '*«'>"on8, 
 
 : .vear, and slna no tike >( ," ,''r' ^^"-^ '" *•>« 
 
 ,i December nexi ulere'lft- '' ''''^"'' '^^ ^o"* 
 
 I mS'tl^tlSd-n;!.:^'^'''" '■-"-' therein 
 
 ju-ya.uiend^^gltstV.^cJir;;:'::;;:;^^-;^- 
 
 ANo'T^i^^'ll: ^''"''''^^■'-See Assessmext 
 
 TOLLS. 
 
 ■Sec AVay, IX. 
 
 For Movi.no Ao.\i.\st Awabt^ c., a I 
 T.UT,ox .xn Aw.Ku,\l^ AWAKB-.... Aiu.,- ^ ^Un ■Ii.,u/aHo„.-S.... l_rna«„„eh 
 
 I Viot. ch. 12, such regulations are in effect 
 
987 
 
 TRADE MARK. 
 
 968 
 
 lilj- 
 
 i . 
 
 to Im! coiiHtiMuil ikH haviii^ licvii iiiuclu uikIit tlui 
 latiT Htiitiiti'. MiicliKiifn' Hauk of Canada \, 
 The. liufm, 1 Kx. C. it. I. 
 
 Toll Bridfie Fnuichiie of—Frtf. Uriiljie — 
 ItUer/p.rtnre hy — Iiijitiir/inii. ]—Hy 14 & 4") Viul. 
 (Q.) «!h. itO, sfc. ',i, jjnintiiig to thu icgpondeiit u 
 statutory privilege to coiigtrtict a toll-l)riiigt' 
 acrosH tlic ClmuduTo river in tiie piirisli of St. 
 Ooorgo, it was emitted tliat "so «oon as tlie 
 bridge Hhall lie ii|)iii to tlie use of tlie imljlio aH 
 aforesaid, during thirty years no perHon sliall 
 eruct, or caimu to Ijc erected, any liritlee or 
 bridges or works, or use or cause to lie used any 
 means of passage for the conveyanee of any per- 
 sons, veliiele.-f, or ciittli', for lucre or gain, uerOMS 
 the said river, within the distance ot one league 
 above and one league lielnw the bridge, which 
 shall bo measured along the banks of the river 
 and following it« winilings ; and any jjerNon or 
 persons who shall builil or cause to be built a 
 toll bridge or ' ill bridges, or who shall use or 
 cause to be used, for lucre or gain, any other 
 means of jiassage across the said river for the 
 conveyance of [lersons, vehicles, or cattle, within 
 such limits, shall ])ay to the said David lioy 
 three times the amount of the tolls imposed by 
 the present Act, for the persous, cattle, or 
 vehicles which shall thus jiass over sucii bridge 
 or bridges ; and if any person or persons shall, 
 at any time, for lucre or gain, convey across the 
 river any person or persons, cattle or vehicles, 
 within the above mentioned limits, such offender 
 shall incur a penalty not exceeding ten dollars 
 for each person, animal, or vehicle which shall 
 have thus passed the said river ; provided 
 always, that nothing contained in the preseut 
 Aet shall be of u nature to prevent any persons, 
 cattle, vehicles, or loads from crossing such river 
 within the said limits l)y a ford or in a canoe or 
 other vessel, without charge. " After the bridge 
 had been used for several years, the appellant 
 nmnicipality passed a by-law to erect a free 
 bridge across the Chaudiere river in close 
 proximity to the toll bridge in existence ; the 
 respondent thereupon by petition for injunction 
 prayed that the appellant nmnicipality be 
 restrained from proceeding to the erection of a 
 free bridge : — 
 
 Held, atHrming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that the erection of the free Ijridge would 
 bo iin infringement of the respondent's franchise 
 of a toll bridge, and the injunction should be 
 granted. Corporation of Aubert-Oallion v. Pay, 
 21 S. C. R. 450. 
 
 TORONTO STREET RAILWAY. 
 
 See Street Railways, II. 
 
 TORT. 
 
 See C'kown, II. 
 
 TOWAGE. 
 
 See Ship, V. 
 
 TRADE MARK 
 
 Jurisdiction of Bxchequer Court - Kirty/i 
 
 vfttioii if liKjinler — lifrini,inntiit.\- 'Vho Court 
 has jurisiliction to rectify the register of trade- 
 iiiii.kM in respect oi entries made therein with 
 out sutlii'icnt i-u\ise either before or subseipient 
 to the loth day of .luly, IHOl, the date on which 
 the Act ."i4 it ii.'i Vict. eh. It,') came into force, 
 
 <,)iiiire, whether the Court has jurisdiction to 
 give relief for the infringement of a trade nwirk 
 where the cause of action arose out of acts done 
 prior to iht! passage of ."i4 i^: ")."> Vict. ch. "26. lit- 
 Kiiiiim- V. \'(iii JJiilhii, 'A K\. C. K. M8. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Exchequer Court— /i'(;//i^to_/' 
 
 I'rojuily til iiintr(itiitii.\--'\^\\ii i|Uistions which 
 the Court has jurisdiction to deterndno under 
 the Act ."i."{ Vict. ch. 14 are such ns relate to 
 rights of projierty in trade marks, ami not 
 (lUtstions as to whether or not a tradi^ nuvrk 
 ought not to be registered, or continued on the 
 registry, because it is calculated to deceive the 
 public or for such other reasons us are mentioned 
 in It. S. C. ch, (>."<, sec. \'l. The. Queen v. I'ac 
 JJi(/ktn, •-' Kx. C. K. 304. 
 
 Right to Vae-- Aniiii/niiieiit — JieijixtiiUion — 
 C««(f //(///((((. J -- The essential elements of a 
 legal trade nuirk are (1) the universality of 
 right toils use, i.e., the right to use it the world 
 over as a representation of, or substitute for, 
 the owner's signature ; (L') exclusivenc ^ of tht 
 right to use it. 
 
 •2, Will re the respondents had obtained the 
 right to use a certain trade mark in tlie Dominion 
 of ( 'anada only, and hud registered the same, 
 and claimants 8ubse(juently applied to register 
 it as assignees under an unlimited assignment 
 thereof, made before the date of the instrument 
 under which the respondents claimed title, the 
 prior registration W'ls cancelled, J. I', Biixh 
 yifil. Co. v. Hnnnoii, 2 \'.\. C. R. ,557. 
 
 Right to \Jb&— Prior Uncr^ltectijieulion oj 
 Jiei/inlei:] — In the certiticttte of registration the 
 plainliii's' trade mark was described as consisting 
 of ' ' the representation of an anchor, with the let- 
 ters ' ,1. I). K. & '/,.' or, the words ' John DeKuy- 
 per & Son, Uotterdani,' etc, as per the annexed 
 drawings and aiiplication. " In the ap])lication 
 the trade mark was claimed to con,-ist of a 
 device or representation of an anchor inclined 
 from right to left in combination with the letters 
 "■I. 1). K. it Z."orthe wonls "John DeKuypei', 
 etc., Itottcrdam," which, it was stated, might be 
 branded or stamped upon barrels, kegs, cases, 
 boxes, capsules, casks, labels, and other packages 
 containing geneva sold by the plaintills. It was 
 also stated m the application that on bottles was 
 to be alKxed a printed label, a copy or/dC-simiV" 
 of which was attached to the application, but 
 there was no express claim of the label itself as 
 a trade mark. This label was white and in the 
 shape of a heart with an ornamental border of the 
 same shape, and on the label was printed the 
 device or representation of the anchor with the 
 letters " .1. U. K. & Z. " and the words " .Jolin 
 DeKuyper & Son, Rotterdam," and also the 
 words "Genuine Hollands (Jeneva," which it 
 was admitted were common to the trade. i lie 
 defendants' trade mark was, in the certificate of 
 registration, described as consisting of an eagle 
 having at the feet " V. D. W. & Co.," above the 
 
968: 
 
 MARK. 
 
 tiequer Court — Kivt\fi 
 
 rijiiji ineiil. \- 'I'liu ( 'ouit 
 ify till) regiBtur ol tnulu- 
 v'wn iiiudf tliei'oiii with 
 itT l>ef(iro (ir aiil)sr(|iifiit 
 , lMi)l, tho (Into on which 
 . M.jcanii' into force, 
 'ouit Ims juii8(iiction to 
 gt'iiR'iit of a ti'iule iiiiu'k 
 III aroac out of iictM ilont' 
 Ak .Vi Viit. L'h. •_'6, Dt 
 ;( \\\. ('. K, MS. 
 
 lequer Court— /I'l'i/A^io/' 
 j--'rilli r|lustioilH whic'li 
 oil to (Ifti'iiiiiiiu iiiidei 
 4 ari! «m.li ns relate to 
 trado iiiarUH, and not 
 er or not a tradt^ niarii 
 u<l, or uontinucd on the 
 ttlculated to deceive the 
 reaHonis uh are mentioned 
 12. Tht Qiiceri. v. Van 
 
 iwiiml — lieijinlnUion — 
 isential tlenients of a 
 1 1 ) tile uiiiverhality of 
 lij^lit to use it the world 
 111 of, or Mubstiliite for, 
 (\t) exehisiveiu'f :5 of the 
 
 dents liad obtained the 
 le niiirii in tlie Dominion 
 id registered the siiine, 
 ntly applied to rej^ister 
 1 unliiiiited assignment 
 ; date of the instriiment 
 leiits claimed title, the 
 laiicelled. J. /'. Ihc^h 
 ■2x. C. R. 557. 
 
 • L'tier—Jitc/ijiidlion oj 
 cate of registration the 
 s described as consis^ting 
 E an anchor, with the let- 
 he words ' John UeKuy- 
 ete., as per the annexed 
 n." In the ap])licatioii 
 ftiiiied to con,-ist of a 
 1 of an anchor inclined 
 bination with theletter.s 
 ords "John UeKuyper, 
 , it was stated, might lie 
 on barrels, kegs, cases, 
 bels,aiid other packages 
 ly the plaintitls. It was 
 tion that on bottles was 
 ,bel, a copy ot fiic-simil" 
 to the application, but 
 ,iin of the label itself as 
 el was while and in the 
 )riiamental border of the 
 I label was printed the 
 of the anchor with the 
 ' and the words " .John 
 ;teidam," and also the 
 nds (ieneva," which it 
 lion to the trade. i'iiu 
 n'as, in the certificate of 
 8 consisting of an e.ngle 
 [). \V, & Co.," above the 
 
 TRESPASS. 
 
 &t"'^ " ""r' ","-• «•'"•''" " ^'""■••^t Hollands 
 
 word"Se I ^;:"' ^-^^''r"'- * ''•■•'■'""I tl>e 
 Two f„ •^"'"^'''Jl'!' /""I lastly, at the bottom, the 
 
 n the „h..nK. of a heart (le tout sur une etioiiette 
 
 970 
 
 Court 4 'v i*' "J^' J'';l«"""""f th« Kxehe,,uer 
 ^ourt.4 Kx ( . K.71. that the lubel.lidnotform 
 v.. essential feature of the plaintillV tra. e , i ir 
 us registers, but that, in view of the , 1 ii V 
 pnor use of the white heart-shapeVl 1 . 
 
 aiada, the , efendants had no exdusi e L 
 to the use o, the .said label, and that tie entry . 
 registration of their tra,Ie niaik should beVnrc^ 
 ie.l as to make it clear that the heart-shaped I il„ 1 
 formed no part of such tra,le mark ; 'l' ?,cl ere , 
 and ( wyuiie, .f,!. . dis.seuliug on the g 1 .' 
 
 the white heart shaped label with the s I a, 
 .ts constituents was the trade mark wlic T^ 
 protected by registration, and that the defe 
 
 nii/krn V. JJehiiypei; 24 S. C. K. II4. 
 
 TRESPASS 
 
 I. To Land, 070. 
 
 II. To I'KR^o.N, 970. 
 
 I. To l..kM). 
 
 (f ) III the year ISS.l Uie respondents bv 
 then; corporate title, registered 1 t de mark 
 
 Flake I'/fu-"^ 1'. ''^'i'^'' "'"' '''« ""me .'S ow 
 i" ake ]?akimr l.o„.,ler" printed thereon in the 
 Department o Agriculture. .Some fo e .^ 
 after such registration by the respondents te 
 
 cl,i Tf n. . f, 'v " '?''" """•'^ f'"- tl'c same 
 
 the respondents registration, and alleging that 
 
 lurhis"nn';' ''•" '"'""" '^f,P»'"- "^'I'V hi 
 aiul lis piedeeesiors in title. The evidence 
 sustained the claimants allegation :- 
 
 becomhho'L'J'.t/T^?^'"'''',' '" '1"*^''''"" '"^'1 
 
 fjL K 1. ^ ^"^^ "'*'• '""I tl'at tl'e registra- 
 rZJ^^ .*'"" '■«»P"'"l«nt8 "uist be eaiicelle 
 C. if Sbn ■'■^' ^^»^'",'/ J'o,Hcv c"; 2Kx.' 
 
 See Copyright. 
 
 ^e,;;.n^:;y,:;;S\.::;,'-r?tS" 
 
 "'"' "I'lau or -lescripti ,/i|,,''iV !''"''"''"• 
 «i-msarem.tcomplLdwi' .;,::';::';;; 
 
 wiuinii I 1 ler 111 (.,uii,i| is necessary, a con 
 ractor with the Crown who enters^, pn the 
 ''"; t'l construct such public work tKoniH 
 i.able to the owner in trespass for iicl !, t J 
 /\<aniri,v. Onh^, IH S. C. IJ. 148. '^^ 
 
 Mortgaged Land - E./ojmfn- Under th., 
 N..V.I Ncotia Judicature Art lhe\.wm" of t e 
 
 spiid-tiSi^^MrSs^-^^ 
 
 th, i,.','?.f *'"■? /"" "^ i"'s--t.ssi,.„ ,„n„ot, ,iftor 
 actio, f" "*r "'■■'■'"'' *" *^-^'«t. -ain ain an 
 
 u^lii:;\h:y 3 ,^:;;r;:'^"'''''^->' -"'"""«'• 
 
 at'tlmtiumth?;!-""-^ "i,„,.agee in possession 
 
 IH the only person daiiinirie.l theicby, and can 
 
 with hil"- 't "^1"" """•'■*■"'■ '^f^"' '"-' 1"« parte 
 th his interest, imr is he estoj.ped therefrom 
 
 i.issus of the personal property as to which 
 the respass was committed, llie tort-ft'isoVs 
 could not set up such estoppel, even th„,ih the 
 
 :";:;;;i!;vr^:!:-;'^'-!fi-",w.th''th:f''si 
 
 TRAFFIC ARRANGEMENTS. 
 
 ■See Railways and Railway Co.mpa.viks XV. 
 
 TRANSFER OF SHARES. 
 
 ■See CoLLATERA.. Security— Cojii'AN-v VII 
 
 shouMov''^ r.'-'' '""■■'«'^«^^^' '"r his interest. 
 
 TREES. 
 
 See Timber and Trees, II. 
 
 II. To Person. 
 
 Arrest before Indorsement of Warrant- 
 
 S,U>jun, lMn-Ht,on.\~\ warrant for tl"^^ 
 f the plaintiff, who had made default ipayS 
 hue on conviction for an iiifrictio,, of fK^ 
 1.4«orl cense law, was sent f m. u°'^ul J,^ 
 county to a city. Kefore it was iu.lorse.l by .^i 
 magis rate in the city, the plaintiH' was arrested 
 there by two o the defendants, the chief con 
 
 ho r .ff'\l '•'-'t'"-'''^-^'- '""1 conhned. Some 
 hours after the arrest the warrant was pro3v 
 
 ■■uiorse.! and the detention of the plain«"rwaa 
 continued until payment of the fine- :- ' 
 
 tl>" pi';; ,S t'' "';'•'■ ''"""'fe"^^ recoverable by 
 
 tiLtel^klng^oft^-w^Sr^*"*'^ 
 
m 
 
 TRIAL 
 
 972 
 
 BfaUm;, "I lietwci'ii Nubstitimnt olvil uiiil 
 ^iHMM»l Pro>.(('«liiij{i( ill Hiuh vnnv» (,/)intc(l out. 
 "—"^'■i V. //,„, •_•» (). K. .■•.»s. 
 
 It tViifi'ioiiH J'riivnilif)U — Iii/orwation 
 — Wdrraiii. \ I j ^ Ocfiiiiliuit liiiit nil infiiriiwitioii 
 • liurKiii;^ lliat till pliiiiiliir "(iiinc t<p iny lioiiir 
 
 '"•'• "ol'l .1 l>r<ini)H.siiiy note for tlic anioiint 
 
 lit iiiiifty (li.llari-, imi|r.ii"tiiiK to I milcnj^uiiiNt 
 
 .1. M. ill t'iiMiiir (it 'I'. .A., mill I lind oiit tlnmid 
 iirite to lie <i ttPiKc ry " l'|,ni, tliiu a w urraiit w.i» 
 iMHiicl mitiii^; till' iiMihti! in the Huim' woiiIb, 
 ami till' |ilaiiitillHa.s iiiiilcr it aii|iiiliiiiiliMl nml 
 liroilglit liitdlf the jiistiic of tl.c [K'acc wli.i 
 isHued it, uiiil liy liim roiMmittiil fur trial liy a 
 wairunt rt'citiiii; tlic cllrmr in like tcriiiN. Tlir 
 plaiiititr was tiiid fur forj^iii^' anil uttiTiiii,' tlif 
 nolo, and wuk ai.i|iiitt( d : 
 
 Held, that tiie infniniatidii .siillii iently iMi|i(M- 
 ted that the iiiuintill liad iitUred tlie fur-, d note, 
 kniiwin^' it to he forged, to give the iiiaKi.strate 
 juriHdifti'iii, and then fdio liie waiiaiit was not 
 void, und ail ai;tion of ticsiiasw was not main- 
 taiiialile ai,'aiiist the deti luli.iit, even ii|>n|i evi- 
 <loiii;o of his interferelue wilii the iiireMt. 
 
 Sfmlili , that if the otleiiee were not sulticieiitly 
 luid in the infmniation to give thi; niagi.strute 
 jurisdietion, and the warrant were veid, an 
 aotion for nialieioiis jiroi-eention would neverthu- 
 k'HH lie. Aiiili;:ioii y. H/Ao/i, •.'")(). I!. !)1. 
 
 Witness - .1 m s/~~ Iiii/i)-imi,M'ii/—Ai:iaiilt — 
 Mwii-<lriit, -V<nul<iht,:\—'\\w. iilaiiitilf, a bar- 
 rister, Iwuing beer. .snb|Meniied to f<ive eviileiicu 
 for the proseciition in a eriniinal ease before 
 a [lolioe nia}.'i.strate, attended at the time t 
 named; but, oiitheea.se being ad jouined, diil l 
 not then attend, and the ea.so was liirther 
 luljouriied : the iiimceutor forthwitli laid an '. 
 intornmtion on oath before the magistrate, that 
 tlio witne.s.s was a material one, and that it was 
 Iirobable he would not attend to give evidence : 
 upon whieli the magistrate issued a warrant 
 under sec. (i'J. K. ,S. C. eh. IT-l, addre.ssed to 
 thechie' ciiistable or other jioliee otHeeis, ete., 
 and to tlii Ueejier of the ooinmoii gaol .if the 
 county ami eity, ilireuting tlieni to bring the 
 Witness before him on the date of the adjourn- 
 ment, some five days ilistaiit. The witness was 
 forthwith ariestiMl by two jjoliee oftieera, and 
 brought to the othee of one of the iiolice inspec- 
 tors, and on his refusing to answer the ques- 
 tions usually jmt to erimiiial.s except those iis , 
 to his name ami addres.^, the inspector ordered < 
 him to be searched, which was done, and his 
 personal property and private memorandum 
 book were t;.k"" from him, the latter being! 
 opened and re;. ';•/ the ins))eetor. He was then ■. 
 taken to th-; c. . vJiere h:i remained some 
 twenty minut. .^ v- , ' was br night before 
 the magistrate, a::<l ,Mf. gin... iiis personal 
 undertaking to (pu.i m •' . day named, he 
 was liberated. Li . o -, ...oi: .igainsc the ,, >ee 
 
 magistrate and p lii';. i, I . ",cr)r; 
 
 _ Held, l)y the Covinion I ens Division, revers- 
 ing the judgment of J-tose, J., at the trial, that 
 the magistrate, having jurisdiction by virtue of 
 sec. 62 of R. S. C. eh. 174 to issue the warrant, 
 incurred no liability, even though he might have 
 erred as to the sutliciency of the evidence 
 brought before him, and on which he acted. 
 
 As to the liability of the inspector the Court 
 was evenly divided. Gait, C.J., being of opinion 
 that his acts, however unreasonable, were done 
 
 in the oxocntion of his otllce, and that under tub 
 [ ieo. 'J of ii..e. I , li. .S. (). eh. 7.'I, he wim protected. 
 j AlaeMnhdii, .1., agreeing with liiwe, .1., at the 
 i Itit'WI. wa» iif opinion that there being im author 
 I U- '»» the wairaiit to seiiieh and eiiiiline, he 
 could not jiistifv thereiimler for the exeesi). 
 
 ',"""■'. whetfier see. (iL' initliorl/es the iNMUo 
 of the warrant or its eiiforei rneiit an uiireaHon- 
 able length ef time befnie the day named for 
 till- alteiiilaiK e of the w itness. 
 
 Held, by the Coiiit of Ajipeal, that where a 
 police iiiagistiate, a. ting within 111.1 jurisdiction 
 under It. ,S, (', eh. 171, see. (I'J, issiies his war- 
 rant for the arrest of a witness who lias not- 
 appeared in obedience tiM. siibpieim, he is not, 
 in the al sence of malice, lialile In damages, even 
 though he may have eried iis to the sufficiency 
 of the evidence to justify the arrest. 
 
 .ludginent of the Comnioii I'leas Division on 
 this point Btliinied. 
 
 In an action for false imprisiiiinient judgment 
 cannot be entereil upon answ ers to (|uestiiiiiB sub- 
 mitted to the jury, and a liinling, in answer to a 
 i|Ue8tion, of a certain amount ofilamiiges, is not 
 ei|uivalent to thi! general verdict, which must 
 be given by them. 
 
 The right of police to search or handcufT a 
 [lerson arrested on a warrant to compel attend- 
 ance as a witness, and the duty of a constable 
 on making the arrest, coiisideied. 
 
 Juil^meut of the t'onimoii I'leas Division on 
 this (.i.int reversed, MaeU-nnan, .J.A., dissent- 
 ing. Oonton V. iJmix,,,,, li4 U. K. ,j76, 22 A. 
 K. •M5, 
 
 Ste Malicioch AiiitKsr ami I'uiiskcl-'iion. 
 
 TRIAL. 
 
 I. JUKY, 972. 
 II. .loKV Notice, 976. 
 
 III. NiiTicK 111- Thiai,, 977, 
 
 IV. SkI'AKATK (j)l'K.'iTIO.N,S IN -vWIV AcTiov 
 
 97il. 
 \. Stay ok Trial, 980. 
 VI. Til I A I. ,JrnoK, 980. 
 
 VII. VKNfE. 
 
 1. Application lo Chavi/r, 981. 
 
 2. Local V'onie, 984. 
 
 3. Venue, in Comity Court Actions, 984. 
 
 See New Trial. 
 
 I. JfKV. 
 
 Addresses of Counsel.] — In an action 
 brought against a city corporation for damages 
 for injuries resulting from a defective sidewalk, 
 O. was added as a p.-irty defendant, under ]•;, .S. 
 U. ch. 184, sec. 531, sub-sec. 4, at the instance 
 of the corporation, who asked a remedy over 
 against him, 0. delivered a defence denying 
 
973 
 
 I otiice, and thut under su)i 
 ). I'll, T.'l, hi' Willi jirotcotcd, 
 linu ^wtll \U>m\ J., iit tin- 
 liat tlitrc lic'iiij; 11(1 luitluir- 
 I Niiin li and ciiiiliiif, hv 
 I'liiiili r I'cir tliM I'Xci'HH. 
 ('. ti'J iiiitli(.iizi« tht> iNHiu! 
 ml'inii iiitiit nil iiiirmsdii- 
 ifiiif tilt! iluy iiiiriiL'd fur 
 
 iif A|i|ii'al, that whuri' ii 
 iii>; within hia iuriHiIictiiiii 
 J, src. (1:;, idNiicH hii) war- 
 f a witni'KH « ho liaH iiof 
 c til h ^.ll^plrl,a, he in imt, 
 ci', lialili' 111 ilaina^'CN, uvea 
 •ntil iiM til thi; sufficiemy 
 ify I hi! iinest. 
 iiriiiiinii j'ltaa |)ivi8ion on 
 
 u liii|iiiHiinniciit jnilfjiiicnt 
 1 aiih« I iH to iiiii'Mtiiins 8uli- 
 1 a liiiiliii;{, In ansMur to ii 
 iiiioiint ol ilanuigcs, ia not 
 ■lal virdict, which nniHt 
 
 to scnicdi or handcufF a 
 lariant to tomiiol attend- 
 
 tiio duty of ft (.onstaiilc 
 L'onsiileieil. 
 
 ininion I'leas DiviBion on 
 ilai'knnan, J. A., dissciit- 
 "I'li, !i4 U. K. r)76, 2'J A. 
 
 ST AMI I'KtlSKt'CXION. 
 
 TRTAL. 
 
 isel.] — In an action 
 corporation for damages 
 am a defective sidewalk, 
 r defendant, under H. S. 
 J- sec. 4, at the instance 
 o asked a remedy over 
 Bred a defence denying 
 
 the cii.i*,. of n. tliin, nml nllrKi.iK (hat if th.T.i 
 Son! ''"'"'''""«'' ''''••''■«'''^''' '«- 
 At th.. trial II,.. .InilKc nihil tliat.iiiuiMt.l for 
 
 . Hhoui.i ,.,1,1,.,,, ,i„, j,,,,,. i,„f„,,. ,1,.,':.,,,^ 
 
 ;;:y';:;:«:ir:;::""""«'-'«'"^'''"to;';he 
 
 Hifhl. th.. thisrulin-wnHcoii t. 
 
 rer Uolifi •; ,111, ,1 Am r,„, i„ ,i 
 
 ad o [[. as."''"''' '"'"' ■" '■ '"•"■' '/ ■'■«"""'* 
 
 AnsweratoQuostlonB.I- In an aitimi for 
 "H«.ni,,r,.H,.n,i,i.,,,,j,,i,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.^,,..;'' '^^^^ 
 
 '7"V.'-^".'''": -'ioi,s.M,l„„i,,.,it.,„,. ,' I 
 
 tnd a tinil,„,MM uiiHv.rr to a i|,u.Mioii, , f , . . .' ' 
 tain aiiioiini „ , ,„„;,,,i,^ („ „,.f .,.„,>, .4 1 
 K.■ne^ulve.liet^vh^rnl::;';,:.X,'r ;■ -: 
 ' ''onion V. />«;iiww, •_••_> .\, ]{. ;||,V 
 
 Answers to QuentlonR />„■„„..;.', „r,n -^ 
 Hold, prr l.'oh.TtM.iii, ,1., iiiHt f|„. t,,, i'', 
 was within Ills ri..|,t „n, . ./ «"■ 1 -liiilp 
 
 my hack „. ,.,;.„;.;::' zi ■„";;:"« a'" 
 
 pntinK on. ,l„.i,. in..o,,.i,stc ,.3 ' ' '^, ./.f :■• 
 
 j4r^;;;,:7.^i;;ii;;:;jr^-Vi;:;';,f!;;:r'^r 
 
 th.iy eonid not a.r,eo a.s to « . , ,1 ■ ",""' 
 
 §mmm 
 
 974 
 
 , m the, ,„.My ,„,,!, i„„r,r.. tli,,,, a,ul i,i,.,.,| „ 
 MudKocouM .1,. n,„)iin« hot o.d, 'i, '' , 
 
 "" '^' ''.V r hnK It ,|o«i, f,„ ,1 „ew tiial 1,1 l,v 
 
 loriU.rii.K jn.,«,„„„ f„r ..i,li..r pnifV „ , /„ ^ 
 -A. ; mill, nnil.r all tlu, .•i.n'iii.tlni.c^ I'f u 
 tanc. thr |,ii,|,|.r niniH,. «;„ ,,, ,,j,,, I,.,.,, 
 
 m..-.ora,,..«.,rialn,,twi,l,Ma,,/i;:;t;:: ,, 
 .r t mo ii.iil u,,oM that motion to x, i usi.l Ju 
 
 wholoo, l|,,,H„.|in„Handor,|,.ran..J,na| '" 
 
 -W, co,iM,,.,v,l ir.YA V, Cnnmn.. I A. ? 
 l;.(..s,ewallvr...rr,,lto. S„ ,;.„< y. a^o^.l^i 
 
 ' ■ IV. .lU. .Nl-I tlu' II. xt CILhC, 
 
 A//";:/'! lhi..iut,unvvnMri,.d«ill, ' ,, «. 
 
 . './o« .„pn,, anil came lafi.re the ( ■, „„„ „ 
 
 l^its llniMon ,,,„.„ tlu. Miinc Mate i,f !.,,," 
 
 'i't 1.1,0,1 wlii.l, that aetion , ,u,„ het , t! 
 
 '.'uc.n'.s li,„,,l, liiviHiuii:— ■' '"" 
 
 H.1,1, tliut th,. JMil-ii„.nt of t|„. tri.il .;,„l,.,.„t 
 
 the lirst tna wa.. a J„ilm„i,„ „f t|,„ |i „| ',-,,,7 
 
 j'ml. as neither ,.:,rlyni,.v..d against rtv:;^^ 
 
 uiicit'il on till' I1111I1111.S ,,t t If iiiiv •..,,1 ti 
 JudKeatthe.ceoniltii;:isl.o„l.N, ?;.,i.S^ 
 to try tlie action ; and a motion to the . v Ksiom 
 ou t was not necessary. J/.'i;, ,„,,,/ ,. ^/^ 
 
 '■M'-tt 1;/. I-.Sh- M„i,,/„/,a Fif^. I'lK-ti Co V 
 I .V'trn,,, -2} ,S. C. II. ,-,iS, a,/, 74l'. ' 
 
 Challenffe.j-^The ,l,.fc',„laiils, having .leliv 
 C'd separate ilefence.s and lieinj, .«,.p,tr,it,'lv re 
 l';"P'Mteil at the trial, ..liimeifto , ei jtled 
 
 n.UTthe.hiriirsAct.K. .s, <.. ch, .lo.J ,M 
 
 to toir pereniotory cliallen.....H eaeh, wliioli 
 
 tho,,,h „,jec,.„i t„ liy the p),,i„tiir, .■,?«!,: 
 
 ce,ll,y „,..,,„, ,^,„, ji,^ ,1,„„,,„.,, ,.,,,. 
 
 .lueations. made tw, in iLl ii? f'" '""'"" ,'" 
 plaintiff, luit f 1.1 . r KV . h'IV'.o''"' 
 
 und refused, n..t,i:ti ;,;;!;- -;^^^ 
 
 iiicQi''''""' ''^■•''"' ''^•f'-''"l'"'t from the order 
 riS T '■'"'""^' "• "•■* "Sidetlie notice of 
 
 tnal, and upon motion hv the i.liintitr l,v ii-n.l 
 oi appeal from the ruling .,f tie i.e.itf h^ 
 B^cond trial, or for IcavC to ,1 ove .T'liii" t It 
 hnd.ng of no da.nages at (!,,. ,|r.st tHa "', oU it, 
 |<Uud,.,g liiat two sittings of the D vil, al 
 W ha.1 passed since that (iiidi,,^, : i^'"""'"^' , 
 
 .Uk 'u'*'' ^''^ *'•*"'-'''"'» '='^^"^•1' division that ' 
 although no judg,iient could be ente"e'd fo; ' 
 
 I Itngeil six jurors 'Letwei'ii tluii"', ;„i,l the trial 
 |pn.ceeiWii,resid.iii,iuaver,.icttorti;.;^^^^ 
 
 ' Held, uiion motion l,y the pLnntitf, tliat there 
 
 Under the above section the defendants yyt-ro 
 only cititkd to tour peremptory el:al!eii-,.„ 1,,,; 
 t een them, a,,,| inasmuch as the ,.i,ui,tiir l„„k 
 thcoljectioii at the time, he li.nl m't Maivcdhi., 
 light to complain by juoceeiliii- witli the trial 
 
 lis. din their newspaper a s. nsational article 
 
 , « .th reference thereto. The (daintiffs' solicitor 
 
 IS aw.re that the article had co„;e to the 
 
 Ids of one or ,ru,,.e of the jury, but did n^ 
 
 ke*^., ,^ "'alter to the notice of the fourt, or 
 
 with •;; y;'^l'"""'"','i'«P«ctto H, ami proceeded 
 
 with tie trial to Its close, when the jury brousht 
 
 in vei'dicts for the defendants. ^ ^ "roug"- 
 
 I'I'ou a motion for a new trial iiiion the 
 
 ground of imp,.,.per conduct towards a&due 
 
 inllueiice upon the jury :— 
 
 Held that the olijection was tno late. Tiff- 
 «"y V. McX.e, Metcalfy. J/,-.\V,, 04 q. R. 55I 
 
975 
 
 TBIAL. 
 
 976 
 
 li^ 
 
 Verdict— Dinpemal — Waiver.}— Where a, jmy 
 wero allowed to disperse witlioiit arriving at a 
 verdict, but on reassembling in the jury Ijox 
 next morning were treated by Judge and coun- 
 sel as the same jury, and being interrogated 
 declared themselves agreed upon one of several 
 issues in the action, but not upon the others, 
 and the Judge recorded their verdict on the one 
 issue, and discharged them : — 
 
 Held, that all irregularities in regard to the 
 dispersal over night liail been waived, and the 
 issue upon which the jury had agreed must 
 upon any further prosecution of the litigation 
 be reganled as having been fully disposed of ))y 
 the verdict. Cohma'ii v. Citii of Toronto, i'S O 
 R. 345. ' ■ 
 
 Withdrawal of Case from 3uvy—l)ici.non 
 Court —i.jmnlidii of Law.] — When an issue arises 
 
 I Held, (Jwynne and Patterson, JJ., dissenting, 
 , that as by the practice in the Supreme Court of 
 New Mruuswick all mutters of fact must be 
 decided l)y the jury, and can only be enter- 
 tained l)y the Court by consent of parties, th(3 
 full Court in considering the case pursuant to 
 the agreement at the tri;d acted as a (juasi-arbi- 
 trator, and its decision was not open to review 
 on appeal as it would have been if the judgment 
 liad been given in the regular course of judicial 
 procedure in the Court. Canadian Parific R. 
 \V. Co. V. rieiniiirj, L'l' ,S. C. R. ;«. 
 
 II. Jruv NoTicK. 
 
 Filing— Time — Allotranci-..]— Where a jury 
 notice is served in due time, but hy inadvert- 
 
 on the pea of r,:'< jndinita, the identity of the ; ence is filed too late to comply with R S O 
 factsmtheformereasewiththoseintheex,sting!ch. 44, sec. 78 (•_>), there is power to make' an 
 case IS a matter for the jury when the trial is l)y a i order allowing it to stand as a good notice • and 
 jury ni a Division Court. In a case in a Division ' such an order should be made if the case is one 
 
 Court where the defence of res jiidiraki had been 
 raised, and in which a jury notice had been 
 given, the .Jiulge determined the case himself, 
 
 and refused to allow it to be tried by a jury : 
 
 Held, that he ha<l no jurisdiction to do so, 
 and that a iniuidatory order must go to compel 
 him to try the case in accordance with the prac- 
 tice of the Court. Lire Cowan v. AtJii. 'M () 
 R. 35S. 
 
 Withdrawal of Case from Jury— Ma./iri- 
 
 ous I'ro.vcntioii—Part of ('hariic.]—l\i an action 
 for malicious prosecution of a charge of theft of 
 several articles, the trial Judge held that there 
 was no reasonable and probable cause for charg- 
 ing the theft of some of the articles, and with- 
 drew the case ..s to tiicm from the jury, but held 
 otherwise as to the other articles, and directed 
 
 proper to be tried by a jur\ . 
 Printimi Co., 10 P. R. SOM." 
 
 Jlacrae v. JV^eu'.s- 
 
 Service— 7VOTc—.V<i(7.iH(/ 0/(/.] — The plain- 
 tiff'!- liaving on the .'ilst October, 1800, served 
 notice of ti'ial for a non-jury sittings to be held 
 on the ITth November, ISOO, the defendant, on 
 the 10th November, KSOO, served a jury notice: 
 
 Held, that this notice was bad ; for it was not 
 served at least eight days before the sittings at 
 which the action was to be tried, as required by 
 R. S. O. ch. 44, sec. 78, sub-sec. (2). McBrid, 
 V. farroll, 14 P. R. 70. 
 
 Striking Out — nisrrelion.] — A Judge in 
 Chamlieis or the ^faster in Cliair.bers has juris- 
 diction under sec. 80 of the .Judicature Act, R. 
 S. 0. ch. 44, to strike out a jury notice wliere 
 
 the jury that the fact that there was reasonable | it has been regularly served ;" but the iuri.sdic-' 
 and probab e cause to charge the theft of some [ tion should not be exercised, because the exer- 
 of the articles only bore upon the que-^tion of : ci.se of it will hamper the discretion of the trial 
 damages ; and the jury found a verdict for the | Judge. JJristo/ ami n'e,t of Ewjlaud Loan 
 
 plaintiff 
 
 Hel.l, that there was no misdirection. 
 
 Per Meredith, J., dissenting, thatif the ruling 
 of the trial Judge were right, the (Uimnges were 
 excessive, and appa-ently assessed under a mis- 
 understanding of the effect of such rulin 
 
 V. Taijlo)-, 15 P. R. 310. 
 
 Vo. 
 
 Striking Out — Ditcrelion — Irri(/u!ari(t/ 
 
 S'rj-rii-e-Time..]—Smcti the passing of the Rules 
 of 4tli January, 18!)4, providing for the holding 
 
 t,,„ +„:.,, T„r 11 ,■ -S • tliiit . of separate jury .■in<l non-jury sittings for the 
 
 he tnal Judge could not m any case rightly trial of actions, it is desirable to have the ques- 
 have rilled as he did without hrst having lind- tion whether an action is to be ■ ' " " 
 ings of the jury upon certain material facts j without i 
 that there had been a mistrial, and that there ! sible 
 
 ''"°/!;A»M';f-^'"^«'''S T R -.- ■, .'■ A Judge in Chaml,crs has fnll discretion under 
 
 Jolin-'^ton,- \ tiiitlon, 1 1. R. ;>4/, considered sec. SO of the .hidicature Act R .'S O ch 44 
 
 and distinguished. L'eedv. Taylor 4 Taunt, i to or.ler tiiat an action shall be tried without 1 
 
 €10, followe.l. II ,l,vt V. lennant, 2,j 0. R. 33!). I jury, and that discretion is not lightly to be in- 
 
 . ' terfered with. 
 
 Withdrawal of Case from. Tury-Xe;//;,,.;,,., And wiiere a Judge in Chambers reversed an 
 
 — Co;i*.H<-/?,;/,.,v»r^ /o Co«rt.]-()n the trial of order of • • - ?' 
 
 an action against a railway company for injuries 
 
 tried with or 
 . jury settled at as early a stage as pos- 
 
 local .Judge, and struck out a jury 
 notice in an action for an iiijunctiou to aJiate a 
 nuisance and for<lainagcs, his order was alHrnied 
 on app'.'al : — 
 
 Held, jicr Robertson, J., in Chambers, that 
 the action was one witliin the exclusive juris- 
 diction of the Court of ( iiancery before the Ad- 
 ministration of Justice Act, 1H73, and could al.s<i 
 
 „c e 4. 1 .1 I ' 1 <• , ■, -----i-'es be more conveniently tried without a jiirv. 
 
 of fact, and on the law and facts ...tlicr to asso.s <J,„^rr, ■.^Ur. per l!r,l)ert8on, J., u licthcr a .le- 
 .lamages to the plaintifl or enter a judgment of , fendant can properly give a jurv notice before 
 nonsuit. On appeal from the . ecision of the , delivery of his statement of defence. Lander v 
 full Court assessing damages to the iilaintiflf : - i Didmon, 16 P. R. 74. 
 
 allegeil to have been caused by n"egligence of 
 the servants of the company in not giving proper 
 notice of the approach of a train at a "rossing, 
 whereby the plaintiff was struck by the enyiiie 
 and hurt, the case was withdrawn from the j'ury 
 by consent of counsel for both parties and referred 
 to the full Court with power to draw inferences 
 
976 
 
 Patterson, J.J., diHsenting, 
 in the Supreme Court of 
 iiiiiltirs of fact must bo 
 , and can only ]>e enter- 
 by consent of parties, tli(; 
 ring tlie ease pursuant to 
 trial aeteil as a (juasi-arbi- 
 n was not open to review 
 have iHien if the judgment 
 regular course of judicial 
 irt. Cniiiii/i(t>i I'acific H. 
 
 : .s. c. H. :n. 
 
 tY NoTIC'K. 
 
 loirancfc.] — Where a jury 
 le time, l)ut hy inadvert- 
 to Comply with R. S. O. 
 ere is power to make an 
 iind as a good notice ; and 
 be made if the case is one 
 I jury. Jlacme v. iV^cw.s- 
 3G4. 
 
 yi/.-iiiii 0,1/.] — TU^ plaiu- 
 st Octol)er. 180O, served 
 )n-jnry sittings to be held 
 , 1890, the defendant, on 
 'JO, served a jury notice : — 
 je was bad ; for it was not 
 ays before the sittings at 
 :o be tried, as required by 
 8, sub-sec. (2). McBruli 
 
 iin-etion. ] — A Judge in 
 3r in Chan.bers has juris- 
 if the .Judicature Act, R. 
 out a jury notice where 
 erved ; but the jurisdic- 
 rcised, because the exer- 
 he disoretii;n of the trial 
 'eat of EwjUiiid Loan <Jo. 
 ). 
 
 screlioii — In-iguhirity — 
 the passing of the Rules 
 )rovi(ling for the liolding 
 non-jury sittings for the 
 sirable to have the ques- 
 1 is to be tried with or 
 it as early a stage as pos- 
 
 s lias full discretion under 
 re Act, R. 8. O. ch. 44, 
 sliall be tried without a 
 )u is not lightly to be in- 
 
 n Chambers reversed an 
 
 and struck out a jury 
 
 an iiijuiictioii to abate a 
 
 ?s, liis order was aihrmed 
 
 , J., in C'liambers, that 
 liiu tlie exclusive juris- 
 l hancery before the Acl- 
 Act, 1H7.S, and could also 
 ied witliout a jury. 
 rtson, .1., whether a de 
 ive a jury notice before 
 tof defence. Laiidrrv. 
 
 'QTJ 
 
 TRIAL. 
 
 striking Out-7rm/«/,nvVv.]_An action for 
 •■vn injuneticm and to establish , will and for the 
 eoustructiono the will and an account is one 
 
 SoTofPn""'r'''^ ''''}"" *•'« '^•^'^'"Bivf jur 
 <lictionof the Court of Cliancery prior to the 
 
 Admin.stratuin of .Justice Act of ^ S^.'i and 
 should therefore, be tried without a j , n- 
 
 ess oherw.se ordered, by virtue of s!" ^77 
 the .Tu.lieature Act, R. S. O. ch. 44 : an.l a i irv 
 
 <'Ut. lie Uin.s Jnct-^oi, \-. Sn,tt,U V R Ifl" 
 followed. Mcdill V. McDowell, U P. li.4s!i." 
 
 978 
 
 I V»a',r.;^-'iether " plaintiflf - in Rule ,'181 does 
 
 Striking Out-/,vr.7„/„nVv.] -Where eouit 
 
 S: ":t;::i" ''"'"'I '" ^ ?•""■"- '-'tc,^:i ; 
 
 e"ture Aef p'T f.'''"; "'"'^■■' ^'>'^ '»»t"'i" •'"'•- 
 
 III. XoTICK OF TkiaL. 
 
 Abandonment--Co.^v.j_Whe,oo„eofseveral 
 defendants gives notice of trial, and afterwards 
 
 a:~fir'^;r''i *'";''^''''"'^ -'""^^^ 
 
 ag.^inst the other detendants, aliandons his 
 
 Held, that the notice of trial, liein- deliver..,! 
 before the e ose of the pleaduigs, w fs r re 'irf 
 under Uule fir,4, and should l.estt aside Iw i 
 
 simi!l??.,kf, ^^^^'^^"S^-J - A defendant by 
 e Z ^t.; *-' r'"" "P"" *'"-■ ^t'lteiuent of claim I 
 o tr .d J'/f "''"g«> -""l >"^'y then serve not ce 
 
 ;;>^n^^2r--us:n^it:S 
 
 proo thereof, and sulimits that the counterclaim 
 -houldbe dismis.sed, is not a joinde oHsm " 
 
 the plaintiir by counterclaim has by the |{u les 
 hree weeks to reply thereto ; and tlil j la. ^ 
 at least 7«o(((/ the counterclaim •.!■,. ,,„( i ^ ! 
 until after the lapse of three I'^Cori^^H 
 rl.a.nt,H by counterclaim has joiued'issue ' 
 
 Notice of trial set aside where ,riv,M, bv the 
 
 tic . elivery of such ;i pleadintr, no Kiibseouenfc ^ 
 pieadnig having been deliverer ' i 
 
 lhroT\Tv''S^ ?,l"'"\F9-'W;^- liar, v. Ca,r. I 
 
 E; \-v'nAf' '''*'^",'K!"'^'>°'I- Irwin V. ; 
 ijiuun, J* 1 . K. 0.3'J, overruled. 
 
 C2 ' 
 
 Close of Pleadings- Vacation.]- A party to 
 an ac lon has the right, notwiti stan.C tlm 
 
 wo~'or'oft?''r'''t' ''^ '""^ >••«■ o^thc 
 ^^ol,ls oi of the Cnristnias vacation," to deliver 
 
 a pleading during such vacation ; an.l a notice 
 of trial given tlicrein is regular 
 
 \\ here a pl..ading is amciul-.l un.ler an order 
 giving l,,,ve t,. anien.l, l!„le 427 .lo.s not apply ' 
 " ul, under K„k, .S!)2. wh.Mi the amendments' 
 al owe.t by the or.lerl,ave been made or hS 
 thereby limite.l for making them has elas^ 
 1 1 lie plcadnigsare „, the same position as t^ 
 I their being cl.,sed as th.'y w.re in when tl>^ 
 R .^7,S-''" "" ■• ^''"""^'■-" '■■ ^/o">o«, 16 K 
 
 -hile .J',S IS applicable where a .lefendant 
 claims indemnity or relief over against a e, 
 
 ag.unst . co.,le en.laut who lia.l not appeared or 
 defen.Ied tlicplaintirt's claim •- 
 
 thSi'inlrn'" '"■'';■'■ "T i"'°i"-''''y '"'»''« f"-- 
 
 .1 u,. Mf ''"r''"" ^'''''''«" '''« co-defen- 
 
 , ant. ,it the same time and place as the plain- 
 ts » s claim, notwithstanding tliat the time fo- 
 ; pleading to tlie claim for relief over had not, 
 
 t^'kt ' ;""' ""I,'' ^"" '\' "'" '^'''^ "f the order 
 tri^ M /f"''' t''f. "-^"^^l t*^" 'lays- notice of 
 tiial. (I alhii- V JJirt^oii, 14 P. K. 34,3. 
 
 worl '"■( ' '"7"' ";"'"■" "f *'''^'' *» these 
 
 .rood; Hi' ."",*'"'-■ .r^ '"''' "'" this action at 
 
 Usgoode Hall, at the Chancery Sittinirs forth*. 
 
 mil .lay of October, 1S90." ' A sittings of So 
 
 ! High C.nirt f.u- trials, to l,c hcl.l by a Judge of 
 
 the Chancery Division, at Osgoo.le Hall, had 
 
 beeii hxe, tor the 17th Xovcnbt.,-. 1S90 •- 
 
 Held, that the notice was .siiflicient ; for it 
 
 ^/,'X,.-7 ,'"'"'"'» /'", ""parted knowledge. 
 Mcli,idt V. Carroll, 14 P. R. 70. * 
 
 Next Sitting of the Court.] -The plaintiff 
 gave notice of trial for the Toronto AasSes 
 
 ^■uuri'uTf"''/""' ^''"' ^'"' <'hancery .Sittings.' 
 a 1.1 the .lefendants gave notice of trial for the 
 Chancery .Sittings. The actions could pro^rly 
 
 ite of tl '.'"V "' "* '^"-i I".-"^'^'l"ence o?^the 
 til t f f '"" ','1'"'''^ 't ^i^^LMiie.! probable 
 
 that the actions woul.I really he sooner trie.l if 
 set .Imvn for the ('hancery Sittiiu's •- 
 
 tleld, that the Assizes w.is, aii.T the Chancery 
 Sittings was not, "the ne.xt sitting of th^ 
 Court, ' an.l the .iefen.laiits were, therefore, not 
 H.thin their right, un.kr Rule O.U, in .rivinp 
 notice of trial for the latter. llo.ahofm''f 
 LunI, Hoijahoom v. McDonald, 14 P.' R. 480. ' 
 
 Next Sitting of the Convt—Dutv of Tiff,,. 
 
 dant (/..•;»'/ .NV,V,.J-Un,ler K.^'}^lLl&- 
 dauthasa right to give notice of trial for the 
 
 eg 111. r, the plainti 1 cannot interfere with such 
 > ight by giving notice f.u- a more .list.^nt ^.ftiT" 
 ,\nl's. ,''^ "'." 'l'^^'''='"lant, setting a OMe 
 other parties ; ami it s,.nie of them are defpn 
 ;o".t:'rh'"^" "?' appeared, an.l i't'is itLc^a"; 
 to give them notice of motion for judgment. 
 
h'i 
 
 S79 
 
 TRIAL. 
 
 980 
 
 such notice slionlil be for (Iil- Piinie time anil 
 place as the nutiee of trial. McLlill v. MelJonetL 
 14 P. R. 48.1. 
 
 Setting Aside — A)i]iHmtion ofOitf Defivdant 
 —Notice („ tin Ollnr— Costs.]— WhfsYti tlierc^ 
 were two (Ufemlanl.-i anil untice of triid ^^■i^s 
 given by the iii.iintill' to lotli, anil set aside 
 upon the apiilic.ition of one -Hitliont notice to or 
 knowledge of tiic rtJuT, wlm attended witli lii.s - 
 witnesses at tlie liim^ and place named in tlie 
 notice : — 
 
 Held, tlnit tin; defendant who moved against 
 the notiee of trial was not bound to give tiie ' 
 other defendant notice of the motion; that it 
 was the duty of the plaintiH, if he desiied to 
 protect himself, to notify that defendant that 
 the notiee had been set aside ; and, tiierefore, 
 the plaintif!' slionld pay the costs of tlie day. 
 Knight v. Town of Hiilijdovni, 14 P. 1!. SI. 
 
 Held, by the Qneen's lieiich Division, that 
 tljo issue raised by tlie document was not a 
 distinct issue, hut rather a matter of evidence 
 upon the issues of ne<:!igence and contributory 
 negligence, and simuld have lieen subnutted to 
 the jury, and not .'^eparalelv tried l)y the 
 •Judge :— 
 
 Held, by the Court of Appeid, reversing this 
 decision, that the issue might proiierly be tried 
 by tlie Judge, and need not necessarily be left 
 to the jurv. Ilaist v. (I'ruiul Tniii/c /,'.' W. Co.. 
 •-'« (I. 1!, i>.), ■2-2 A. R. .-.04. 
 
 Sf:c 1'aRTI|-.S, VI. 
 
 IV. Sei'.vrati: (Jitstions in Sa.mk Aition 
 
 Account — Pro/oiiiiKir;/ Trial of IHf/lit to.]' 
 — Where the j.laintilV claimed a dcelariition of 
 tlie right of Idniself unci all other persons 
 insured in the temperance section of the defen- 
 dant company to the ])rofits e.'iined by that! 
 section, payment thereof, and an account and 
 apportionment thereof : — [ 
 
 Held, that upon the mere statement of the '] 
 plaintiffin pleaiiing that ho was the holder of a i 
 policy entitling him to share in certain profits! 
 of the company, and without any [iroof of the j 
 statement, the Court, in its discretion, should i 
 not require the company to produce and lay , 
 open to him all their books of account and the \ 
 papers relating to them ; but it was a proper i 
 case in which to p.^'init the defendants to apply i 
 under Rule 6;-).") fi>r .-iii order for a preliminary ' 
 trial of the plaintilf 's right to require an ' 
 account, and to postpone discovery of the books 
 until after such trial. (Irnhuii i/iii tarn v. 
 Tf.mpe.ra.we ami Ctni'i-al Lif- Assiiy-<n>ri> Co. 
 of North Aiiii'.rh-a, 10 1'. R. TJJ^O. 
 
 Indemnity— V^'.v/io^ hetircin Cn-dff'iidaiil.i.] 
 —fiee Walk-er v. Dlrksnu, 14 V. R. ;?4;V, o«/<-078. 
 
 Settlement— I 'o//'/(Vi/,] — The validity of a 
 settlement of a pending action may l)e tried in 
 such action, if pleaded in bar. In this ease tlie 
 Judge tried the ipiestion as to the settlement 
 without the assist.iiice of tlie jury, although the 
 otiier questions in the .action were left to the 
 jury. Johiisini v. (Ir.nal Tniii/c A'. 11'. Co -',5 
 O. R. 64, L'l A. R. 40S. 
 
 Settlement— Vali(lili/.]—ln an action for 
 damages for negligence, whereby the plaintiff was 
 injured iu alighting from a train, the defendants 
 denied negligence and pleaded contributory neg- 
 ligence, and also a payment of $10 to the plaintif! 
 before action and a receipt in writing signed bv 
 hini therefor, "in li( n of all claims I might have 
 Bgainst said eompany on account of ..in injury 
 A'ceived . . l>y reason of my stepping oft' a 
 train . . ; sucii act lieing of my own account, 
 and not in consiipience of any negligence or 
 OilicrwiBC on behalf of audi lailuay eompany 
 or any of its emidoyees." The plain'tifi" repliell 
 that if ho signed the receipt, lie was induced to ! 
 do 80 by fraud and undue influence : — 
 
 \'. StA\- 111- TUIAI.. 
 
 Appeal from Oixler Directing New Trial. 
 
 — 'I'he (Joiut may in a jiroiter case stay the trial 
 of an act ion pending an appeal to the Court ot 
 Appeal from an order directing a new trial, but 
 only under special eircumstancis. 
 
 It is not a ground for a stay that in the event 
 of an iipiieal being successful the costs of the 
 new trial Mill be tlnovn away, and thai; om 
 party will be in danger of losing such costs, the 
 other not being a person of means; and it is not 
 desiral.ile that the tiial .should be delayed, to 
 the possible prejudice of a party liy the loss of 
 testimony. Arnold v. Toronto R. W. Co., lU 
 P. 1!. ;^!I4. 
 
 Appeal from Order Directing New Trial.] 
 
 — A second tri.d of an action was stayed pend- 
 ing an aiipeal to the Court of Appeal from the 
 order directing such trial, wheie the principal 
 question npi.n the appe;d was as to the proper 
 method of trial, and tlie appellants had been 
 diligent in prosecuting the ajipeal and there 
 was no suggc'-tiou of any p'ssible loss of testi- 
 mony. Anicid V. 'J'oroii'io I'. I!'. Co., l(i P. R. 
 394, distinguished, /laist v. Grand Trunk li. 
 
 W. Co., 10 P. U. 448. 
 
 VI. Ti;iAi, JfDiiK. 
 
 Consulting Experts.]— An action for dam- 
 ages caused by collision between two vessel- 
 Was tried without a jury, and after the evidence 
 had been taken, the trial .'uilge, with the con- 
 sent of both ))arties, coiisulted two master mar- 
 iners, and adopted as his own their opinion, 
 based on a consideration of coiitlicting testimony 
 as to tile responsibility for the collision : — 
 
 _ Held, that this was a delegation of the judi- 
 cial functions ; and a new trial was ordered. 
 
 Tlie scoi)e of Ckin. Rule 'JO?, as to calling in 
 the assistance of experts, considered. Wrii/lil 
 V. Ccllirr, 19 A. R. '29S. 
 
 Observatlonsto Jury.]— Per Ritchie, C.J.— 
 The Supreme Court of Canada, as an appellate 
 (.■ourt for the Dnmiiiion, should not approve of 
 such strong observatinns biing made by a.Iinlge 
 as were made in this ease, in effect "chargiiig 
 upon the di^fendants fiaucl not set out in the 
 pleadings, and not legitimately in issue iu the 
 cause, llardman v. Pnliiam, 18 fS. C. R. 714. 
 
980 
 
 coil's Uciicli Division, tliat 
 the (Idciiiucnt was not ii 
 •itiier ii matter of evidence 
 ejiligeiice and oontrilintciiy 
 lid have lieeii sul)mitted to 
 separately tried by the 
 
 t of Appeal, reveraiiig this 
 iUe niiglit [iroiierly be tried 
 ceil not iiei!ea3:irily be left 
 .'. (iraml Triitik I!.' W. Co.. 
 
 . rm. 
 AiiTiKs, vr. 
 
 U' OK TkIAI,. 
 
 er Directing Now Trial. 
 
 a jpioper case stay tlie trial 
 ; an appeal to tlie ("ourt ol 
 r directing a new trial, Imt 
 reiiiiistaiiees. 
 
 for a stay that in the event 
 uccessful the costs of the 
 iiowii away, and that oni 
 ;er of losing such costs, the 
 ■son of n:eans; and it is not 
 lial should be delayed, to 
 e of a party by the loss of 
 V. Toronto Ii. W. Co., IG 
 
 er Directing New Trial.] 
 
 in aeti<in was stayed pend- 
 C'ourt of Appeal from the 
 
 trial, \\ lure the principal 
 peal was as to the proper 
 
 the appellants had been 
 lug the ajijieal and there 
 
 any ]v ssilile loss of testi- 
 )ni,i)o a. \V. Co.. 10 P. R. 
 llai.ll v. Grand Trunk 11. 
 
 ;iAi. JrucK. 
 
 ts.] — An notion for dam- 
 siou between two vessels 
 iiry. and after the evidciue 
 trial .'iidge, with the coii- 
 jonsiilted two master mar- 
 is his own their opinion, 
 on of eonrlieting testimony 
 y for the collision : — 
 s a delegation of the jiidi- 
 new trial was ordered. 
 Rule 'iOT, as to calling in 
 lerts, considered. Wrhjlil 
 )S. 
 
 iry.]— Per Ritchie, C.J.— 
 f Canada, as an appellate 
 111, should not approve of 
 ■nsbeii;g made by aJiidue 
 8 case, in eH'ect charging 
 
 fiaud not set out in the 
 gitiiuately in issue in the 
 
 Putnam, 18 K. C. R. 714. 
 
 981 
 
 TRIAL. 
 
 Jud^rfo ^ f^*'^f,''-^~^'^° "K'^* "f the trial 
 mlTf- ••''' .^'"^ 'l"Mtion of damages as a 
 
 •luest on arising in the action, under sec. 101 of 
 the Juihcatnre Act, is indisputable, at all 
 events as a matter of .liscreuon and subject t, 
 review; and it is for the party objecthig t 
 
 .ee„'w"""T' '" ■^''•'^"■, "''■^' ''- -li-retion^, 
 Deen wrongly exercised. 
 
 . .^"'^' where, in an action for dania.'es for 
 
 ...jury to the pl.untiirs laud, on the ban! of a 
 
 navigable river, and to his business as a boat 
 
 stream "h""""' ■^'^"•.■"'"■■^ higher u,, on the 
 that h/p 1 ;*')r"°- ';^'"'-'" '"'" '*• ■' 'M^'e^"''.! 
 ■ty of the . lefendants had been established in a 
 
 Ir'Lr""' r' ''" ''■■'^' •^'■''"- '■-'•'1 "'- 
 fhp .>1 ?'.r ? {'■"" "•'' ^" «'^''«fy '''"isolf that 
 the planifif lad established a prund fan, ease 
 
 roferen.e' '" "* ''-'""'n-^' ^^"'l 'Hreeted a 
 
 th . d.fo , ;"'"'" •"!'' ^M""'tH'n them among 
 costs? "'' •■^"^'^'■"".y lurther directions and 
 
 Held that there was no miscarriage, and the 
 discretion of the trial .fn.lg. shonl.l imt U ve 
 ruled. Ualli v. Booth, lif P. U. 1S5. 
 
 982 
 
 Refusal to Try Action-. SVa^- of Pbadiwii ^ 
 By their statement of claim the plaiutitrs" "'Cd 
 themselves to be erclitors for wages of two o 
 tJe thtl 'T*;' T' ''-.V-J='''tl.lief again 
 
 claims, in their reply i!,ey set up that thev 
 were creditors of tlie third^lefendlnt Idmselt' 
 upon the ground that he was really the pc 'on 
 plilligl^'"-""' ^'"^'^ ^^'"'^ ..o^ubs'pient 
 
 V^flm"''^ tjie reply was a direct violation of 
 Kule 4 9 : and that the trial Judge M-as within 
 ns right u, refusing, in his discretion, ot" 
 the action until tb<. issues were properly pre- 
 sentedupon the plea.lings, and in .'lirectiit' t^ at , 
 
 . No opinion expressed as to whether a Divi- 
 sumal Court had power to review such a ruling 
 Hurd V. UoMirick, IG P. R. 121. ^ 
 
 Hehl, that had the scales been more evenly 
 iMlanccd than they were, the fict that the cause 
 ot actum arose in the county of Rc'iifrew should 
 Uecide the (juestion in favour of Pembroke the 
 p'r'^KSi"" "^ ^^'"f'''^'^- ''""■' V. y.'«w//, 14 
 
 Convenience -/-rnV Trinl — .Inn/ -- Trial 
 
 ^'iV^'h, ''^' ';''"'"'"; '''''' " settler 'in the dis: 
 tnetol Muskoka, ,ind the .lefendant a timber 
 Ucen.see. J he .piestion of fart between them 
 was \yhether certain limber w;is the property of 
 the pl.uMtili or of the defendant. The defen- 
 dam applied to liave the venue changed from 
 Muskoka on the ground that tlie jury wonld be 
 argcly drawn trom the settler elas.^ and that 
 he heiieve.l he would not have a fair trial :- 
 
 llehl, that this was not aground for change 
 of vc.uK., and any possible injustice to the defen- 
 dant would be prevented by the trial .Judge, 
 vho wouM have , a discretion as to the mode of 
 trial. Unijer v. Bitnnan, 14 P. R. 2!)4. 
 
 Convenience -/•A7-o»,/tn,;(cc.-/,erece to An- 
 />«(/.) -1 he question of changing the venue is 
 I to a great extent a matter of discretion. The 
 I present Rule („,;•! „as not m oic anv substantial 
 clKuige in the i)racticc; an,l an overwhelming 
 preponderance ot convenience in favour of a 
 change IS still necessary. SImxhr v. .1/,/, ,-.., M 
 
 „ ,;.-!'' ' ' ""''V -'''°"'''' '' '''""«s f- «• •■'«o ; 
 
 and hndct v. />„„raii, 7 TmwH L. R. ,",14 
 referred to. ' 
 
 Rut where the venue had beei changed by an 
 order ot the Master in Chambers, atlirmed by 
 a Judge m Chambers and a l)ivisi(,nal Court, 
 lie ( ourt oi Appeal, tliough not satistied that 
 tl-ere was an overwhelming preponderance of 
 convenience ,1, Iay,.ur of a change, refused to 
 interlerc with the discretion exercised, by grant- 
 ing leave to ap|)eal. /;<:,■ ,(. ('o. y, Xortit W.st 
 Jransporlatlon Co., 14 P. R. .-JSl. 
 
 Convenience - Prqmmbrawt ~ jritm:-:s, s.-[ 
 - L pon a motion co change the venue it is neces- 
 sary to shew an overwhelming preiionderance of 
 
 convenience in favour of th 
 
 e change. Peer 
 
 VI [. Vk.nlk. 
 1. Application to Chanijt. 
 
 to establish a right of way over laml i„ the 
 county of Uentworth, the venue was ehamj 
 rom Brantford to Hamilton, it a,,pearing th 
 n rvoT? 'f ^ l«''t. irP'""l^Tance of convenience 
 in favour of Hamilton :~- 
 
 of^ll''iv"*r'"' ^'''''' ''^'"^^ ""•' ^"'•J'^'^t matter 
 \Untworth, and that a view by the jury might 
 he nece.,sary, were facts to be co..sidel■ed^„ 
 14 P^K ISo"'"' *""'■ ^''"'' "■ '^^"^''o''">< ■ 
 
 ConvGnlence-ru»,sro/.lrt/o».]-VVhere the 
 balance of convenience was in favour of a trial i 
 of an actum at Pembroke rather than at Corn- 
 Wall, where the plaintifls laid the venue, it was 
 changed to Pembroke ;— 
 
 ^o>t/i-l\c<f JraiLiporlation Co.. 14 P. R. 381 
 i followed. ' 
 
 [ Where the defendant moved to change the 
 place ot trial from Berlin to Belleville, shewing 
 that the saving of expense to him. if the case 
 uas tried at Belleville, wouhl be about S40, and 
 that there were two or three more witnesses at 
 bellevi le than at Berlin, ami the cause of action 
 arose at Belleville, the motion was refused :_ 
 
 Held tliat the question whether it would be 
 personally more inconvenient for the phuntiffs' 
 witncs,ses to go to Belleville than for the defen- 
 dant s witnesses to go to Berlin, was not one 
 that could be considered. JJerlin Piano Co. v 
 I J nuiisr/i, 1,-) P. R. 08. 
 
 Convenience-/?,/,,..,,/ /,. Int,rth;.-Ap,,or. 
 tw,nnen oj f W...]_Having regard to the diffi- 
 culty of .leculmg upon contradictory afihlavits 
 whether It IS proper in any case to order a 
 change of the place of trial, and to the unsatis- 
 factory nature of the practice .■„,d the conflict- 
 ing decisions upmi the question of change of 
 venue, ,t is better to refuse applications for 
 cliange of venue, and to leave the tiial Judge 
 to apportion the costs so as to do justice, if it 
 appears to liim that the expense has been in- 
 
983 
 
 TRIAL. 
 
 h:rH 
 
 I 
 
 984 
 
 tHnr'V'i^ ^^^ plaintiffs choice of a place of i Per Rose. J.-Tl.e Curt will not, upon an 
 
 V ;* 1'?..''-^''^°'m\'V','', "''''■•'' ''• ^''■«'" application to cliange the V * 
 
 Northern K. W. Co., Ll.SiUJ "2 Q. B. 194, fol- ■ ' 
 lowed. Mc Arthur v. MichUian Central li. W 
 Co., 15 P. R. 77. 
 
 Bzpense — Con rpnitncc — Preponderance. ] — 
 Tiie (leciceil casus have not yet entirely forbid- 
 den a change of tlie place of trial. 
 
 And wliere the cause of action arose in the 
 county of Hrant, the plaintifl' and defendants 
 resided therein, the defendants swore to thir 
 
 teen material and necessary witnesses all rcsid- i change the 
 
 ■eiiue, enter into an 
 iniiuiry as to the personal inconvenience of wit 
 nesses. Standard Drain Pi/n' Co. of St . John' s 
 P.(^., V. Toirn of Fort Wi'liam, 16 P. I!. 404. 
 
 Preponderance of Convenience — Appeal 
 
 —Xew Afatirial—Chan'ii' of Circnmslinicen.]- 
 The plaintiti's right to select the place of trial 
 is not lightly to l)e interfered with, where it 
 has not been vexatiously chosen. 
 
 And wliere the <lefendants in moving U 
 
 the 
 
 •uno '?vTll?H ^ff .^^^^ f ^^'■''''' "''"• ">'^' *''« 'M'l'<^-^1 >.."3t be dealt 
 
 He 1 tlr . t T' H ''!:"'«'"'<l =r 1 «itl' on the faets as they were o.iubited before 
 
 Held that although the difference in expense the .Master and Judge in Chambers, although 
 
 «as not consi.Urable, the great preponderance of ; since their orders tlie trial had l,een postpon^o 
 
 coiiyeniencetow.tnesses and parties was ill favour from the spring to tlie autumn; the Court 
 
 of Braiittoni. /irethonr v. IJrooke. 15 P. R. l>05. I ought not to look at new matoriJl, nor listen 
 
 Ti,^„„„„„ / • n ■ T n,, , i^" suggestions of possible changes, unless, in ,■: 
 
 Expense— //y»?-y—CoH(V'«ir/ic»'.]— The place' ' " .» '. '^ 
 
 of trial of an action will not be changed unless the 
 
 defendant shews that some serious injury and 
 
 injustice to his case will arise by trying it where ; 
 
 tiic plaintiff proposes to have it tried. The 
 
 question of injury is one of degree, in which' ..„i,„. 
 
 the eleinciits of expense and convenience are to | (O. ), it i 
 
 I proper case, to allow a new substantive applica 
 tion to be made. HalUduij v. Toimmhip m' 
 .Stanley, 16 P. R. 49,3. 
 
 Residence of Parties— 6'a«.st if Action- 
 " Cood Ca?(.':e."]— By sec. 21 of .58 Vict. ch. l.'! 
 , it is provided that every .action in the Higli 
 rt shall be tried in the countv in which tin- 
 
 be considered. j Qgur 
 
 Andwlierethee.vtrae.'cpensecouldnotexceed|cause of action arises, in ease all the parti.'v 
 Mu, and the place proposed by the plaintiffs ' reside in that county, provided tliat, "forKoo.l 
 
 Wasnotfai'fllim t-hnf rirf.nncn,) ),., fl,„ ,l„f T....4. i v _ ., t , ' , .' ^"IKO""! 
 
 ause shewn," a dudgo may order the action tc 
 be tried in another county : — 
 
 Held, that tliis applied to an action pendiny 
 before it was passed ; and that where the cause 
 of action arose and all the jiarties resided in 
 
 i;/ltl, 16 P. R. 505. 
 
 Local Venue. 
 
 Po/- 
 
 was not far from tliat propose<l by the defendant, 
 a motion to change the venue was refused' 
 Bowk V. Partlo, 15 P. li, ;^1.S. 
 
 Illness of Witness — /-JxpnUtiny Trhd — 
 r'o„7.v.]--The place of trial of an action may be | one county, a very strong case, which had not 
 
 AlrTt be'n 'h P"?'"':';," '■^■'^^^'''*'"« t''« t'i^'l- i '>cen made out, wouhl have to be made before 
 
 All.! u here the plaint. Is named Barrie as tlie \ trial in another countv could be ordered 
 place ot trial, and the defeii.iaiits had it changed ' /or/ v II'W. 
 to loroiito, and, through no fault of the i)arties, 
 the .action was not tried at the spring Sittings 
 there, nor at Barrie under an alternative order, I 
 it was, on the ajiplication of the plaintiffs', 
 changed to Bracebridge, where a summer Sit- 
 tings had been ajipdinted, a witness /or the 
 plamtirts being so dangerously ill tliat he might 
 die at any moment, and there being no summer 
 Sittings at Toronto or Barrie. 
 
 Costs were not given against the plaintiffs, as 
 they were not in fault. 
 
 lilenkloii V, Kn.tton, 9 U. C. L. J. O. .S. 2o • 
 
 Mcrc(r v. 
 McDonrll v 
 O. S. l,S(i, 
 ( lAmitrd) \ 
 P. R. 171. 
 
 'oijlit, 4 U. C:. L. J. O. 8. 47 ; and ] 
 
 Provincial In.f. Co., 5 U. C, L. .). ! 
 
 'jpeeially referred to. Mercer Co. ' 
 
 . Matsii/./Zarri.^ Co. (Limited), 16 I 
 
 Bjectment.] — The in<lorsenient on a writ of 
 summons, issued in the district of Thunder Bav 
 after the passing of 57 Vict. ch. 32 (O.), shewed 
 that the claim was for cancellation of a lease of 
 I a mining location in the district of Rainy River, 
 ! for possession of the location, and for an injunc- 
 tion restraining the defendant from entering 
 
 Onus as to Convenience— II V/Hr.vw.s.]— The 
 
 plaiiitill Ikis tile right to select the place of 
 tiial of the action, and the 
 d.efe " 
 
 thereon :- 
 
 Held, that the action was not one of eject- 
 ment within the meaning of Rule 65,3, and then- 
 fore the venue was not local, and it was not 
 necessary that the writ should be issued by the 
 local Registrar at Rat Portage under sec. .'i of 
 the Act. Kendell v. Ern.4, 16 P. R. 167. 
 
 ,„„,,„., , ,, , onus IS upon the B.Bv\&vi-a— Tax Collector— County Court.]- 
 
 .temlant to shew that the iirepondcrance of ; & - Howard v. ITerrimiton,'l(\ A.K m, rx^m, 
 invenience is against the pla..'e so selected. ' ' 
 
 Per Meredith, C. J. --It would be more s.itis- 
 factory_ if the jiractiec were tliat primi) facie 
 the action should be tried in the cmiity where 
 the cause of action arose, leaving tiie onus upon 
 the plaintiff to shew a prepouder.inee in favour 
 of the place selecte<l by him ; but the contrary 
 practice is well settled. 
 
 3, V-'nue in Coinity Court Actions. 
 
 Application to Change -C((».se of Action— 
 Convenience —Apjieul. ] —Where an iipplicatimi 
 is made to the Master in Chambers, under Rule 
 
984 
 
 le Court will not, upon an 
 ;o the vuuue, enter into an 
 •aon.'il inconvenience of wit 
 ')rain /'i/u- Co. of Si. John'--, 
 'ft William, 16 P. I!. 404. 
 
 of Convenience — Appeal 
 haii;/!' iif Clrcitmslances.]- 
 
 to select the place of trinl 
 
 interfered with, where it 
 usly chosen. 
 
 (lefendants in moving t(. 
 to the county where the 
 ! (lid not shew considerable 
 nvenienco in favour of the 
 ition was refused ; and the 
 
 on appeal to a Divisional 
 
 the api>eal nuist be dealt 
 they were exhibited before 
 ge in ('hanil)ers, although 
 3 trial had been jjostponed 
 the autuiiiM ; the Com t 
 t new material, nor listen 
 3sible changes, unless, in ^i 
 a new substantive applica 
 Halliday v. TuiviMhip ui' 
 i. 
 
 .rtles — C'aiist of Action— 
 • sec. 21 of 08 Vict. ch. \:i 
 at every .nction in the High 
 n the county in which the 
 js, in case all the parties 
 , provided that, " for good 
 io may order the action to 
 ounty : — 
 )lied to an action pendiiii; 
 
 and that where the cause 
 all the parties resided in 
 ;rong case, which had not 
 1 have to be made before a 
 tv could be ordered. Pol 
 
 R. 505. 
 
 Kal Venue. 
 
 indorsement on a writ ot 
 le district of Thunder Bav 
 r Vict. ch. 32(0.), shewed 
 • cancellation of a lease of 
 '.le district of Rainy River, 
 ocation, and for an injunc- 
 
 defendant from enterinj,' 
 
 ion was not one of eject- 
 ing of Rule 653, and there- 
 nol local, and it was not 
 it should be issued by the 
 ,t I'ortage under sec. 3 of 
 Erw-it, 10 P. R. 167. 
 
 olleclor — Cowily Court.]— 
 Hon, 20 A. R. 175, 7)o.s<9S.'). 
 
 HHty Court Aclioiix. 
 
 ange — Caii.'te of Action— 
 — Where an application 
 in Chambers, under Rule 
 
 985 
 
 IL'GO to change the place of trial in a Countv 
 Court actum, no appeal li.s fron, his order he ?- 
 m to a Judge m Chandlers ; and no appeaM es 
 
 tractor V t? ""i"' ^"I" ''^•"'^«''« for ''reach of con- 
 t act an.l the breach was at Pendjrokc, which 
 the plainfff named as the place of trial The 
 defendant moved to change it to Toronto :- 
 
 be Sowed t ^ r '"'°'?"' '""' "''^ ^I'Untiff shoul.l 
 )t. allowed to retain the venue 'here, although 
 the defendant swore that he had .. much lar "er 
 number of wunesses at Toronto than t aln- 
 l' R 105! ^ '-''"'^'■"'^'''- ^'<^AIIi.ler V. 64, 10 
 
 uTJ", '"'■'-''' "'"*^""' '** '"'I'le to a Judge 
 
 .mderRui':^'. rnl'' ?' '''' ,'''^^'-- "' t'lwunl.e^- 
 mdei Rule 12h0 to change the venue in a County 
 
 ■ouVt A^..^""" "V "A"^''' '"•' '" tl>e County 
 i.ourt. Joinjuwii v. aoldiii;/, 15 P. R. 4;i, 
 
 \^f7T''^~{^''''"'"~ ■^'«^- '■o/leclor.]~ 
 acts done by hmi m the execution of his dutv 
 la entitled to the beneHt of R. S. O. ch 73 nd 
 under sec. 15 of that Act, and sec i ofR.'V O 
 
 h.oo, a County Court action against him for 
 replevin of goods seized by him, a.t'd for dm S 
 tor malicous seizure, must be brou.dit in the 
 Z^%Zi:'' ''- ^^■'■"'■'^ ^"'^ alleger/'t'r^spS: 
 The Consolidated Rules as to venue do not 
 ..verrido these statutory provisions. tZy 
 A cAer 10 0. I!. 6-0, distinguishe.l. J^Co v 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 986 
 
 XA'. MIsc■Kr.J..\N^:o^.^ Cask.> 
 
 994. 
 
 ■S'-.C COST.S, VI._EXKCIT<.U.S ANI. Al..M.N,s. 
 TKATOHS— FliAfDCLKNT Cl>N VliVAMI-. 
 '•CAKANTV AND InDKMMTV. 
 
 I. A ceo r. NTS. 
 
 nf"^prw^f °" °f. Probate Court. J- A Court 
 
 of 1 robate has no .|u,i.diet.„n over accounts of 
 trustees under a will, and the nassi,,,- of accounts 
 
 executors and Inistees ,s not, so far as the latter 
 
 a ( W T' •' '^""'"'t: "" ''"y ""-• ^'-urt, InVl 
 .1 t ourt of L(,uity, in a suit to remove the 
 executors anu trustees, may investigate such 
 U'counts again and disallow charged of the 
 trustees wine 1 were passed by the Probate 
 Couit. I, rant v. ^facl.a|■r„, 2;) S. C. R. 31(i. 
 
 II. 
 
 AnvicK OK CoriiT. 
 
 Lltlgation.J-Wherc it is plain that a dis- 
 pute can ,c settled only by li/igation, it is not 
 necessary tor a trustee to ask the adWce of the 
 r'pIU ""'" '•''''-■""""«• J" '-^ iy'"i«>n., 22 A 
 
 I. 
 
 II. 
 
 III. 
 
 IV. 
 
 V. 
 VI. 
 
 VII. 
 VIII. 
 
 IX. 
 
 X. 
 
 XI. 
 XII. 
 
 XIII. 
 XIV. 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 Accui'NTs, 9S6. 
 Advick Oh' ConiT, 9S6. 
 
 Al'POINTMKNT OK TkistNKS, 9,S(i. 
 
 Compensation to Tisu.stkks kok Skr- 
 VICES, 987. 
 
 Evidence ok Trist, 987. 
 
 MoRTOA(iK OK Tkcst K.statk, 988. 
 
 Notice of Trust, 988. 
 
 Particular Trust.s, 991. 
 
 Payment into Court, 992. 
 
 Pkockedinos against TBU.STEES, 992. 
 
 Purchase ok Trust Propertv iiv Trus- 
 tees, 992. 
 
 Removal ok Trustek, 993. 
 
 Revocation of Trlst, 993. 
 
 111. .\)'1'I1INTMI-;\T (JK THrSTEE.S. 
 
 Security _ C.m/ian of h,f„nl -In.m-once 
 Mo,,.;,..]- An infant was entille.l to share in 
 certain insurance moneys accruing un.ler a pol- 
 ic.y .il)ou the hte of her deceased fatlier The 
 infant lived witli her mother in a foreign state 
 an,l the mother ha,l there been appointed by a 
 Surrogate Court guardian of the intant, and had 
 given security to the satisfaction .,f that Court 
 Ihe mother petitioned the High Court to be 
 appointed trustee un.ler R. .S. (). d, ISO sec 
 12, to receive the infant's share of the insurance 
 moneys without security :— "lauce 
 
 Hel.l tlialthesecuritV given by the petitioner 
 in the foreign Court would not attad. to her 
 appoint.neut as trustee under the Act ; and the 
 , Court declined to appoint her unless she fur- 
 
 i 1. Ia. 490, followed. A'c Aiidrncf, II 1> R loo 
 I not follo\\ed. A'e ,SVo.v.«o«, 15 P. R. 156. ' 
 
 pointed Ijv the Court in the place of one appoint- 
 ed by will IS not rcpiired to give seeur ty ?or 
 the due performance of the trusts. 07/„m v 
 
 Vesting of Estate- A-e(" Tni>,t^,,. l-Where 
 an appointment of new trustees is .liily ma,le 
 under R. S. O. 1887 ch. 110, the lega estate 
 by vntue of sec. 4, vests in the new ^ stees so 
 appointed, even though it was not ve. ted in the 
 
 r'^;;;:iSl;!rSi""^"^- '"-^''"""• 
 «;?2JaR:'5^:'Sgr'''"''"'^'^'''°'-^- 
 
987 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 IV. C(l.Mri:NSATIllN T(( 'I'KI-STKES Kdit Skkvicks. 
 
 m 
 
 Will — A ji/iiiiiifiiii'iil.]—Sttmlik, tlmt tliu limi. 
 tiitiiiu of u will iiM to tlic airouiit to bo |iai(l for 
 the services of tliu oi'liiiiml t,nisti;i;s iiiiclt-r it 
 does not .ipiily to a trustee iiftc rwania iii)|)oiiili(l ,S()7. (I'liti ,") 
 by tliu (,'oiiit, lit lliL' iiistiuioL' of the '■' -./('i' '/»( 
 trust. Williitim v. Uu;,-, \> (). H. .VU, .listiii- 
 guisliuil. Frttlioni v. Vaiidii.s()i, I,') I'. K. -'M. 
 
 being yiven of the agreement with the plaintiff. 
 /iartuii V. McMillan, .'() ,S. C. Ji. 404. 
 
 Insurance Moneys ~/>irlarat inn of Tnut — 
 /ji.vy,/;;//. /(//(«. ]-,Vm A';V:A V. J/o.^'.v, 22 O. R. 
 
 y. KVIDKNCK (Jl 
 
 I nrsT. 
 
 Deed — Umli.sflo.ie<l Trux! — I'arol Eridcnci — 
 Findinij of l''aii — .l/z/i'-'i/. ] .Suit to enforce nn 
 alleged trust in a deed al).<olute on its faee. or, 
 in the alternative, to have the property recon- 
 veyed or sold according to tiie terms of the 
 alleged agreement. 
 
 I'arol evidence wa.s given at the trial to 
 establish the trust, and its existence wa-s found 
 as a fact Ijy the trial Judge, who made a decree 
 ordering the property to be sold and the proceeds 
 applied accfirding to the agreement set up by 
 the ))laintiff. The decree was attirmed liy the 
 Supreme ( 'onrt of l>ritisli ('ulundii:i /'/( liaiico: — 
 
 Held, that l\n- fact of the existence of the 
 trust having licen found liy the trial .Judge, and 
 his finding allirmed by the full Court, it should 
 j\ot lie disturbed on this further ai)poal. JJoir/ccr 
 V. Lamncistcr, LO 8. C. li. 175. 
 
 SeeA— riidiHiioscd Trust — Statiiti' of Frauds.] 
 — The property of M. having been advertized 
 for sale umler power in a iiMirtgage. his wife 
 arranged with the niortgiigee to redeem it by 
 making a cash payment and giving another 
 mortgage for the balance. To enable her to pav 
 the amount, B. agreed to lend it for a year, 
 
 VI. LlAUll.lTY ol 'i'UUSTKKS I'OR NkULIOKNCK. 
 
 Building- H'l//'/ r,/' l!,i,inr—i'ir::(,niilLia- 
 l>ilily.]-[huuc .\. T. sued .1. !■'. and M. \V. V. per- 
 sonally, as wellasin then'ijualityof testamentary 
 executors and trustees of the will of the late .). 
 h\, claiming jil.lKIO dami.ges for the death of 
 her husband, wlio was kilicd by a window fall- 
 ing on him from the thii-d storey ol a building, 
 whicli formed i)art of the general estate of the 
 late J. v., but winch liad been s|)ecifieally 
 bequeathed to one i-. I-'., and his cliddren, for 
 whom tlic said ,J. F. and M. \V. F. were also 
 trustees. The judgment <if the t'nurts below 
 hehl tlie appellants liable in their capacity of 
 executors of the general estate and trustees 
 un.ler the wills : — 
 
 Held, that the appellants were responsible 
 for the damages resulting from their negligence 
 in not keeping the building in repair, as well 
 personally rs in their (piaJity of trustees (d'liM- 
 tlrrs ji.luciairi'.s) for the be'netit of ti. F.'s chil- 
 dren, but were not liable as executors of the 
 general estate. F'-rrii'rv. Trcpaniiicr, 24 S. C. 
 K. S6. 
 
 ^'1I. -MoKTOAtlH ul- 'J'ufST KsT.\TK. 
 
 Covenant for Payment — Fi-rsomtl fAahility 
 fTni-'tfc.] — Where a ]Kirty holding land as 
 
 taking an alwolnte deed of the property as ■ trustee, at the re(juest ol the bcnelicial owners 
 security and holding it ni trust for that time, and wdthout any cimsideration to him therefor' 
 A contract was drawn up by the mortgagee's ' or intention to become personally liable fertile 
 solicitor for a purchase by H. of the projierty at : bcuelit of such owners, executed a mortgage on 
 the agreed price, whic'h 15. signed, and he told the | the land, the mortgage, without his knowledge 
 solicitor that he wonhl advise him by teleiihcme! containing a covenant to pay the mortgage 
 
 whether the deed would be taken in his own i debt : 
 
 name or his daughter's. The next day a tele- \ Held, that the covenant was not enforceable 
 phone message e-iine from B.'s house to the ' against the mortgagor ]jersoiially, bv the assig- 
 solicitor, instructing him t.i make the deed in the! nee of the mortgage for value without notice ; 
 name of IS.'s daughter, which was done, and i and that his remedy was restricted to foreclos' 
 the deed was executed by .M. and his wife, and I nre proceedings against the lands. Patterson 
 the arrangement with the mortgagee carried v. J/r-/,e'n;, 1.M O. K. -J'Jl. 
 (iiit. .Subsc<pieiitly B.'s daughter claimed that ' 
 
 she had purchased the property alisolutidy, and Power of Sale— /'r/o,' Incnml>ran''e..]—Uehi, 
 tor her own lieiietit, and an action was brought ' that trustees of real estate, with a power of salel 
 by M.'s wife ag.iin.st her and B. to have the had power to mortgage fm' the purpose of pay- 
 
 dau>;hter declared a trustee of the propertv. 
 subject to repayment (jf the loan from B. , and I 
 for specific performance of the agreement. The j 
 plaintifl' in the action ch.-irged collusion and J 
 conspiracy on the pail of the defendants to i 
 deprive her of the property, and. in addition to 
 denying that charge, the defendants pleaded; 
 the Statute of Frauds; — 
 
 Held, aliirmiug the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, 19 A. K. (iOi', JStrong, J., dissenting, 
 that the evidence proved that his daughter was 
 aware of tiie .agieeinent made with B., and the 
 
 deed having l»e.n executed in 
 
 lUirsuiiicc Ol 
 
 such 
 
 agreement, she must be held to have taken the 
 property in trust, as B. would liav<^ been if the 
 
 deed had be 
 
 tak 
 
 en ni lug name, 
 
 id the 
 
 Statute of Frauds did not previ it parol evidence 
 
 mg a part of a prior incumbrance thereon with 
 a view to saving the property from foreelosnre. 
 J't Vansir/df nnd Moore, 2'2 O. K. ."iliO. 
 
 Promise to Ejxercise Power to Mortgage, j 
 
 — 6'te Conu'jr v. Vrooin, 24 .S. C. ii. l{)\,post !)!)4. 
 
 VIII. NOTICK OF TllU.ST. 
 
 Constructive Notice— P/crfi/e of Dank Shan.. 
 
 — FoUowin; 
 bstitutiou 
 
 Mo 
 
 W. I'etry paid to the respondents the sum of 
 SS,G;$2, to redeem .'U shares of the capital stock 
 of the Bank of Mont-eal entered in the books of 
 
988 
 
 •Ofiiiunt witli tlio plaintiff. 
 -'0 S. V. It. 404. 
 
 ) — Dirhiritt'irin of Tnuit — 
 Knii V. .Vos's, 22 O. R. 
 
 LL>TH;s lOK >."KllLl<iENCK. 
 
 ;/' />'' />'iir--l'n-:fiiiiil Lid- 
 lud.l. !•". aii.lM.W. F. per- 
 ieircjuality of tivstiiiiientary 
 s i>f tliti will (if till! late J. 
 l.uiKigcs tor tiie death of 
 i liillrcl by a window fall- 
 third storey of a building, 
 
 tile ycneral estate of the 
 uli bad been s|)ecifica]ly 
 , F., ami bis cliddren, for 
 
 ami M. W. 1'. were also 
 lent of the C'nurta below 
 iaiile ill their capacity of 
 leral estate and trustees 
 
 liuUants were responsible 
 :ing from their negbgence 
 ni'.ding in ie|i:iir, as well 
 iiuaiit.v of trustees {d'/uiri- 
 lie benefit of (i. h'.'a ehil- 
 ialile a.'f executors of tlit^ 
 (')' V. Trepauiiitr, 24 S. ('. 
 
 •; oi' 'J'ki'.st I'-statk. 
 
 nent — /'/■r.-iomil lAahilily 
 \. ])arty boldiic^r land as a 
 
 t>i tlie lienelieial owners, 
 ideration to liiin therefor, 
 
 personally lialjlo for the 
 , executed a mortgage on 
 ', without bis knowledge, 
 t to pay the mortgagee 
 
 nant was not enforceable 
 jK-rsonally, by the assig- 
 nr value witliout notice ; 
 a? restricted to foreclos- 
 ist tlie lands. Patterson 
 
 toy Inamiln-a)i<x.] — Held, 
 tate, -with a power of sale, 
 ; fur tiie purpose of pay- 
 iicuinbrauce tiiereou with 
 ■operty from fureclosnre. 
 v, '22 O. H. .")(iO. 
 
 ie Power to Mortgage. | 
 
 , 24.S. C. 1!. lUUpontmi. 
 
 CK OP Trust. 
 
 s—Pledije of Bank Shares 
 Uidciiiiilioii — FoUomiii\i 
 • to the substitution of 
 respondents the sum of 
 lares of the capital stock 
 d entered in the books of 
 
 989 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 thebank in tluMiimeof W.d. p. intrust and 
 
 wh.cn the said ^^^ (;. R,,,,,„fii;^ ;.;•:*/;;;; 
 
 ma.nyer of the ctate, ba,l pledged to the respon- 
 den s for advances made to hi,,, persnnally. .1. 
 n. I . ,1 nl ap))ellants, reprcsentiu- the sub- 
 ^ .tut.on by th,.ir action .Icn.ande.fto be re- 
 lumled tlie uumey wlii.di they allced 11 ,1 |> 
 •me of then,, had ,,aid by cr>or .^s cuiiitoV to 
 tuloem shares belo„gi„g to the substitution. 
 
 tl . wll'"'f'u''ir'^'''';,"''''^ ""t mentions in 
 he v,ll of W ,1!,H,„ ivt,y, ,,„, t|,„.g ^^.^^^ 
 
 in entory to shew they foru,ed part of the 
 
 estate ^^' "'*''''" ""'l""'''^ "'''' *'"' "«-^>-'t« "f H'e 
 
 ■iwil'l' I"''\V^''^'''i^'' ^'J-. "■"! "ou,-nierand 
 ( W ;''■' ^iv '^"""'"'n' tl'^' JO'Umcnt of the 
 Umrt below, that the ,lebt of \V. <! p h-ivia- 
 .ee„ paid by l|,c curator will, full kn.'.wled^S 
 
 Ari' .ai?'ifc,'^:"S""^^ ""'' '"' ■■--•'^- 
 
 J'a!' ■'*t''"'5, «»'1 l''ournier, d.J.. tl,at bunk 
 stock cannot be l,el,l, as regards tliird parties 
 m goo.l fa.tli, to f ,n„ part of substituted p.-o' 
 per y on the g,ot,„,l that it has been puivha<ed 
 with the moneys Udonging to th. substitution, 
 itho, t an act of mvestmoni in the name of 
 the subs itnuon and a due registration tliereof : 
 Arts. 9.il, fl}s, !);W, C. C. ; Patterson, J., dis- 
 
 -\<jlre Dame da Qutbec, 19 S. C. R. 7i;{. 
 
 90O 
 
 in the interest of his minor child, but without 
 having been appointed t„to,-, and bung indebted 
 to the estate of h,s deceased wife, of whom the 
 nim(,r was sole heir, subscribed f,u- certda sharea 
 jM a con„ne,vial or joint stock company o,, 
 
 eha f of tne minor, and caused the shares to be 
 euteie,! lu the books of the coi„pany as held •' in 
 trust, tlii.s created a valid trust i i favour of the 
 ininor without any acceptance by or on behalf 
 
 fie minor, being nece.s.sary. .Such sharca 
 could not be .sold or dispose,! of u ithout comply- 
 ing uitli the rcipiiremeuts i,f Aits ''(17 .jiii 
 ami -Ji)!. of the Ci^il Co,le: aul a purchase", of 
 the sl,,u.es having full knowledge of the trust 
 !'1>"" "inch the shares ^,el■e held? although pay 
 ng v.duable cn.sidenUion. was bo„n,l toaccount 
 to tue tutoi .subse,|uently appomtcl for the 
 •able o, such sh,,-es. Tl.e fact of the shares 
 >omg e.ntered in the books of the company and 
 
 't^uT^""] '' ''.t' " ? "■""' " "--^^Ullieient 
 of it-self to shew that the title of the seller 
 was not ab.solute ami to put the puroha.sor on 
 mquiry as to the right to ,,.11 'the share" 
 .V/'er/iy V. /,(ud' iij Moiit,;,,;^ JO v; (• j, ^^^• 
 I-' Apii. fas. 017, refeiTcl t., and followed! 
 
 Oonstructive Notlce-A'Kvr; nfS„imik.- 
 
 n'X ,"■( ''■"^' '"-'ll"'nnu •V.v/;,7;,,s.] -After 
 atl the debts of an estate are i)ai,l, an,l after the 
 lapse of years from tlie testator's death, the,-e is 
 a suthcient presumption that one of the several 
 executors and tru^tcs dealing with a.ssets is so 
 'U-ahng ,,ud trustee and not asex.^cutor, to shift 
 the burden of proof. E„:art v. Oordon, 1.3 Gr 
 4U, discussed. 
 
 \V. and C. were executors and trustees of 
 ■m estate, under a will. W., witliout the 
 concurrence of (^, lent uiouey of the estate 
 "11 mortgage, and afterwards assignci the niort- 
 gnges, which were executoil in favour of him- 
 ■self, describe,! as "trustee of the estate and 
 c lects of (the testator. ) In the assi:,mment of 
 the mortgages he was described iu^tlie same 
 ^^ay. u. w'as afterward.s removed from tlie 
 trusteeship, and an action was brought by the 
 !iew trustees against tlie assignees of the mort- 
 gages to recover the proceeds of the same • — 
 
 Held, ■•e\er.siug the jinlgmcut of the Court of 
 Appeal, PJ A. R. 447, tli.it in txknv, am! assrm- 
 ing the mortgages \V. acted as a trustee and not 
 as an executor; that he sv,, guilty of a breach 
 I't trust in taking and assigning them in his own 
 ume ; that his being described on the face of 
 ^lie instruments as ,1 trustee was constructive 
 notice to the assignees of the trusts, which put 
 them on impury ; and that the assi.,niees were 
 iiot_reheved as persons rightfully au,l innocently 
 aeaiing with trustees, inasmuch as the breach of 
 rust consisted in thedealing with the securities 
 tneinselves and not in the use in ule of the uro- 
 ceeds. ■■ 
 
 Judgment of Boyd, 0., m 0. R. 42!!, afhrmed 
 iiy tlie gueeus IJench Division, 20 O. If. 3S2. 
 V'-storcd. Cumiiiiitij v. Lmided Bankiwi ami 
 Loan Co., 22 S. C. U. 24(i. 
 
 Constructive Notloe-S'/tare.s' FLld ' ' in Tru.'^t" 
 ;oc/»/a«<.] -Where a father, acting generally 
 
 Oonstructlve Notice - 7V„„v/;.,. ,/ /,.„„^. 
 
 W'-'h \' r '•'-T'",""'^'"' '-"''^ (iucorponUe.1 
 
 I )> l^ \ let. eh. 202 ivgisterd an absolute 
 
 ^;:^;!;;- "''''' f'--. -Inch had been jr^S 
 
 bj t u.stees and executors ualcr a will to one of 
 
 the r si, uary egatees, regardless of a provision 
 
 n the will ,lirecting the substitution of the 
 
 .egatees lawful issue at his de.ith, ami e 
 
 l^'Sdir 'tT""' "' "" ^'''"'^^ ^" - *-'«^^^' 
 me rigiits of the issue : — 
 
 Hel.l that such registration, unle.s.s with 
 actual knowlclge of a breach of trust, wa.s n t 
 wrong ul,liavii,g regar.l to .sec. £ of the 
 Act, « Inch enacts that the b.iuk is not bouml 
 to si^e to the execution (,f anv trusts, expre.ss 
 .npbed, or constructive, to wiii,.h any of hi 
 shares may be subject. 
 
 Notice that the ...iiares were held by the trus- 
 tees and executors in trust; possess'inn by the 
 bank of a copy of the will ; the facts that trans 
 ers of others ot its shares by the s uiie trustees 
 to other residuary legatees eoiit.iiiie,! notice of 
 substitution, that the presid,.nt of the bank was 
 also ,111 e.xecutot of the will, a,„l that the I.vw 
 agent of the b.mk was also l.nv agent of the 
 executors ;-- ° 
 
 Held, ti) be insutlicient to alilct the bank 
 with knowlclge of the particular trusts .southd 
 
 Jl I ' ^"^^ ''""■ "'" ■■^'^l">'i'leut had tran.s- 
 
 feiTc! shares as security f,jr a loan ■ — 
 
 Hehl, that the appellants, as derivative trans- 
 
 feree.s from the lemler, were not affected by a 
 
 trust m favour ot the respon,lent, unle.ss sifch 
 
 rust was c early disclosed on the face o? t£ 
 
 ihem'' ' "' "'" ""'"■"■'«« notified to 
 
 : The words "manager in trust," appended to 
 
 I he signature of a bank manager,'impo?t tha h^ 
 
 I held an.l transferred the shares in trust for 1 i^ 
 
 ' !,',? Tff' lY '^r^' '""' •■^'■^ ""' calculated U 
 , .suggest that he stood in a fiduciary relation to 
 
9»1 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 Bonie third porson, so us to affect i\ transferei" 
 for value with odiidtniutivu iiolicu of siicli rcla- 
 tioii8hip. 
 
 JuJgmuiit of thi' Siiprtme Court of ; aniida, 
 '_*() ,S. r. It, 4fSl, itVL'iMud, and judyiucut of tlie 
 Court of Aiipial, IH A. H. 305, restored. Lon- 
 don and Caiiiiiliau L. <0 A. Co. v. Diniijiiii, 
 [1893] A. C. -jOO. 
 
 IX. I'.MlTICll.AK TltlSTS. 
 
 Covenant— /iV/«<((//oy( o/' Itifaui—lh-rach— 
 J)ama<je.'<. \- '\'\ni dcfciuhmts' iiiotlier having ooii- 
 vcyed her funn to thtiii, thty mortgaged it to 
 her in coii.siderntic ii of the eonvejance and of 
 $2,500, and covoniiiited in the mortgage, //(/(/■ 
 alia, to. educate tlieir younger brotlier. The 
 latter was m,\ a party to tlie covenant, nor was 
 there anything in the mortgage giving him a 
 right to maintain an action upon it, hut there 
 was a stipulation tliat if the defendants failed 
 to_ educate him, the mother oi- lier executors 
 Itiiglit distrain upon them for such sums as 
 miglit be required from time to time to secure 
 the due performance i-f the agreement. After 
 the <leath of the motlier, this action was brouglit 
 by her executors and the y.;;;;-,j^ci brother for 
 (luniages for breach of the covenant :— 
 
 Held, that there was no tiust in favour (jf the 
 younger brother, an<l that the action was not 
 maintainable by Idin : — 
 
 Held, however, that it was maintainable liy 
 the executors to the extent tliat tlity might 
 recover such sum as would enable them to per- 
 form the covenant to educate their co-plaintit}'. 
 Weal V. /Joii(jhtoii,-i V. l\ D. 107, distinguished. 
 Fmilkner v. Faulkner, '23 O. It. -Zo'l. 
 
 Sale of Land by Promoter to Company. ] — 
 There is a distinction between a trust for a 
 company of properly acquired by jiromoters and 
 afterwards sold to the company, and the fiduciary 
 relationship engendered by the iiromoters, be- 
 tween tliemselvesiind the company, which exists 
 as soon as the latter is fi'rmed. 
 
 A pi'omoter who pui chases property with the 
 intention of selling it to a company to be furmed 
 does not necessarily hold such pioperty in trust 
 for the prospective comp.-iny, but fje stands in a 
 fiduciary lelation to the latter, and if he sells to 
 them must not violate any of the duties devolving 
 ujjon him in res))ect to sucii relationship. If lie 
 sells, for instance, through the medium of a 
 hoard of directors who are not independent of 
 liini, the contract may be rescinded, provided 
 the property reiiKuns in such a position that the 
 parties may be restored to their original status. 
 There may be cases in which the property 
 itacif may be regarded as being bound by a trust, 
 either ah inilio or in <!onse(iuence of ex poit facto 
 events ; if a promoter purchases propel ty for the 
 company from a vendor who is to be paid by the 
 company when formed, and. by a secret arrange- 
 ment with the vendor, a part of the price, when 
 the agreement is carried out, comes into the 
 hands of the promoter, that is a secret jirotit 
 which he cannot retain ; and if any part of such 
 secret profit consists of paid-up shares of the 
 company issued as part of the purchase price of 
 the property, sucli shares may, in winding-up 
 proceedings, be treated, if held by the promoter, 
 »s unpaid shares for which the promoter may 
 be made a contrihutoiy. 
 
 Judgment of the Court of Ajipeal, 21 A. R. 
 Cifi, athiined. In re IIl-k M/tj. Co. — Ldgnr v. 
 Shian, 23 !>. C. K. 044. 
 
 Will — .Viiinlinann <//' Infant,- — Inrumt — Srt- 
 (inn a/iarl .s7/(ire.]-- Umler a devise of land to a 
 father " during his life, for the sui)port and 
 mainteiiaiico of himself and his (three) children, 
 with remainder to the heiis of his body or to 
 such of his children as he may de\ise the tame 
 to," there is no tiust in favour of the children 
 so as to give them a beneficial interest apart 
 from and independently of their father, but tlu 
 children, being in needv circumstances, will be 
 entitleil as against the fatlier's "tcution credit(Ji 
 w ho has been apjiointed receiver of his interest 
 to have a share of the income set apart for their 
 maintenance ami siijiport, and in ai riving at the 
 share it is reasonable to divide the income into 
 alii|iiot pails, thus giving onefouith to tlie 
 receiver. Atl/n \. I'linirss, 'JO A. It. :U. 
 
 X. 1'av.mknt Into Coi-kt. 
 
 Insurance Moneys— Covjiirtinij Claims.] — 
 On an application by a benevolent society foi 
 leave to pay insurance money into Court, 
 claimed by ditlerent jiarties : — 
 
 Held, that sub-sec. ;> of sec. 53 of the Judi- 
 cature Act extends the benefit of the Act for 
 the relief of trustees to such cases, and that the 
 society was entitled to pay the money in. lie 
 /Jajn.i, 24 O. R. 397. 
 
 Si-r Re Coiiltx, 15 I'. R. I(i2, antt 445. 
 
 XI. PitOCEKDIXfiS AflAINST TRU.STKK.S. 
 
 Action — />'()• — Foilovhifj Securilien.] — Held. 
 that the recovery of judgment by the plaintiffs 
 against a defaulting trustee for the amount of 
 trust moneys advanced by him upon certain 
 mortgages did not bar the plaintiffs' right or 
 action against the defendants, to whom tin- 
 trustee had, in breach of trust, assigned the 
 mortgage.^, to compel a reassijjninent thereof, or 
 an account of the moneys paid thereon. Cum 
 ni'inij V. l.nniled Bankwi and Loan Co., 201). 
 R. .SS2. ,Vw S. C, 19 A.'l!. 447, 22 S. C. R. 2-10. 
 ante 980. 
 
 XII. Purchase of Tku.st Pkoperty iiy 
 Trustees. 
 
 Assignee for Creditors— /?(.'*/)f'7()/w.]— A 
 purchase by the assignee for the benefit of cred- 
 itors ->f the assets of the estate, made by liiiu 
 at the request of the inspectors of the estate 
 after futile efforts to sell at auction and by 
 private tender, and after a circular letter li;iii 
 been sent by the inspectors to each creditcr 
 stating that the sale would be made unless 
 objection were taken, was set aside, there being 
 evidence that at the time of the purchase the 
 assignee knew of and was negotiating witii a 
 possible purchaser, to whom he afterwards 
 resold at a large profit, and had not discloscil 
 this information to the inspectors. 
 
992 
 
 Joint of Ai)pcal, 21 A. R. 
 Uim Mfij. Co. — Ldijnr v. 
 
 [. 
 
 (if IdJ'uiiI.- — Iiiroiiit — tifl 
 niliT ;i (k'vinu ot land to :i 
 life, for the sujiport anil 
 If iiiiil liis (tlireu) chililitn, 
 I litiiM of Ilia Ijoily or to 
 i lie may (le\isii tlie baiiic 
 ill favour of tliu fliildixii 
 
 b( iit'tifial iiituiest apart 
 ly of tlair father, Init tin- 
 (Iv circuiiibtaiiLt'S, will lie 
 fatiier's itciition ureilitoi 
 lmI reetiver of his iiitiTfst 
 iueoiiu oft iqiiiit for their 
 orl, iiiul in m riving at the 
 to liiviile the iiieoiiie into 
 jiving oiiefouith to the 
 nios, lO A. n. lU. 
 
 r Into C'ofKT. 
 
 3 — Coiijflitinij CIn im.'<. ]— 
 a bencvfileiit society ftji 
 nee money into Court, 
 irties : — 
 
 5 of sec. 53 of the Juili- 
 le benefit of the Act for 
 I such cases, and that thi> 
 ) pay the money in. Ii'r 
 
 R. I(i2, mite 445. 
 
 Ad.AINST TrU.STEKS. 
 
 wing Senirilien.] — Held 
 idgnient Viy the plaintitls 
 ustee for the amount of 
 id by him upon certain 
 r tlie plaintitls' right ot 
 'feii(Uints, to whom tlic 
 h of trust, assigned tlie 
 . rcasf-igiiiuent thereof, or 
 leys 1 aid thereon. Ciiiii- 
 »(/ ujid Loan Co., 20 t). 
 . 1!. 447, 22 N. C. R. 24(1. 
 
 Trl'.st Pkoperty bv 
 
 STEKS. 
 
 Utors — hinperhDv. ] — A 
 •e for the benefit of cred- 
 lie estate, made by him 
 inspectors of the estate 
 sell at auction and by 
 ter a circular letter h.nl 
 [lectors to each creditor 
 would Ije made unless 
 (•as set aside, there beiiii; 
 me of the purchase the 
 was negotiating with a 
 whom he afterwards 
 , and had not disclosed 
 uspectors. 
 
 993 
 
 1^^., (lisaonting. Momso,, v, ir„it,, 19 a. R. 
 
 21 a''r "^i^^'u'if \-/^';:'"-->"' -^-'^o. H. 573, ! 
 
 .v^^r2ji;^c:^.^5:tJ.^[;^"""'^-^-' 
 
 purchased by the said c..ceuto The ri'dna 
 ; opeTtv "th'e^' !f ^■"/"'■f '•« P-sessL'of"; 
 receiver ii •- ''"'"' '^'•""«'^* "» '^'^"^n to 
 
 «aK;.gtr"^;i.t?:^S^;i-^.;^^^^ 
 
 tru^cordi..cdf^::t tt;-:-::^^ 
 tme. AfrDomM y. McJ)onald, 21 S. C \<. 
 
 TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES. 
 
 994 
 
 idir!"Jf. "( '■'■''^V""' '■"'■''"• "■« judgment by 
 
 '• . o^^ '^ "p the trustees should lee^.n v. y tl^ 
 
 propel ty to ,. „„ tl„. g,„un.l that I', had laile I 
 
 to perform the conditions he had agree I bi 
 
 Held al '" •''P"'; "• "'^ ■^"I'.e-ne (•; u t:-^ 
 Held, athrmmg the decisio,, „f ti„. (.,,,„.. 
 
 XV. .MiscKLLANKors Casks. 
 ^I'Jnlo.h V. V/,e V«ee., 2;i S. C. K. Isp, a^u 
 
 XIII. Removal of Trcstfe 
 nrtir:\n/rf ''".''^ ■•.nlne.nl^e'r: oval 
 
 p;;; ,^i;s^5^z:l;:;:/■■;;;r,,r 
 the same position as the trustej ^ ' 
 
 r.,,','fn'"'',''*"'™'' ^'y ^''^' ■^"l"-^">" Court of 
 Canada. ( oiniur v. frou,,, 2i 8. C R 701 
 
 XIV. Revocation of Trust. 
 
 Condltlons-F«,7«,.« i„ Perform.]- By deed 
 between B., grantor of the first i.art certii 
 
 advantage and secuSSl/vSibXde^di 
 
 ™rtC' '° r'-^'^™' "^^ trust/es sh u I 
 
 econv^eve.ltn'RP'''*^' '°,^'- '""' " «J^""''l I'e I 
 
 thir^^^r^^r'^'^'^^'-^^^'j-'gei^e 
 
 that B. when he executed it was ii.norant of it. 
 
 The" fun"cot;^'' '"'' '''' \' 'V''^ oli'thir^round 
 • ne tun Court, on appeal, dissented frSm this 
 
 6.3 
 
 'Iren he grantee undertaking t pay off l" 
 banhtles and reconvey the lantls on "^^^ ,ay „ t 
 of the amounts advanced to her. A ponion of 
 the land was sod for taxes •,.„! n, ''"'"°" "* 
 
 ;e:;nr*:c;U:,r:s^"£S,£-"'t 
 
 grandchildren o. die testato^. IMo e t e di'tri 
 b.ition of the money paid by the , urcha er It J 
 
 fpnt claim deeds, the trust deed, which had bein 
 
 ! ,°"®^;. ■^' '^ '- ''er heir« of the te.-.tator brou"hfc 
 I th^aetion tor their respective shares ,_ ""^"'^ 
 I Held, affirming the judgment of the Court nf 
 Appeal, Gwynne. J., dissenting, tl at he n„r 
 chaser at the tax sale paid the ni.ney to obtain a^ 
 I perfect title, and as the defendant's, the cldl 
 
995 
 
 VENDORS LIEN. 
 
 996 
 
 11: i! 
 
 (Iren of tlio ItiisttH', wcn' tlii' "nly pcrHoiiM wlm 
 could ),'ivc Ku.li title, the Ic'j^iil int'itu lieiii;^ in 
 thi'iii, the |il uritill.i coiiM not ehiiiii any (lUit ol 
 the iiinney. unit that no a^ieeinmt to a|)|i<j| tlon 
 the nioiiry \mih proved, any ii^'ieeiuent made 
 liy the plaint ills with tlie pMicliaser not bindinj^ 
 the defeiKiaiits. /Jra/ur v. li'nilen/iiiVff, 21 S. 
 V. R. 714. 
 
 Release Hm-i^-sinu - Un in/i nf Tnin/ — 
 Lnrlie'<-Arrniiiif.]—\'„ M. died iiitentato in 
 1H71, and his liidtlier and liii!<inesH piii-tner, H. 
 M., olitiiiiied fi'otn liin widow and his t'atlier, as 
 next of Uiii, a release of their respeetivo interests 
 in all real mil ])ersonal pru)ierty ot the cloeoiised. 
 In getting tliis, he represented that the estate 
 would lie saciiliced if sold at auction and that 
 the most eoulil ho made out of it liy letting him 
 have f\dl eoutrcd. He then took (Uit letters of 
 
 udnuidsirati liut took no fuither proeeedings 
 
 in the I'roliafe ("ourt, and uiaiiaued the property 
 as his own until he died in ISIS.S, During that 
 time he wmto several letters to the widow, in 
 most of whieh he stated that he was dealing 
 with the jiroiierty for her benefit, and WJuld see 
 that she lost nothing by giving him control of 
 it. After li;,- death, the widow brought nn 
 action again-^t hia executors for an account of j 
 the partnership anil of his dealings with the i 
 property since her Inisband's death ; also to i 
 obtain payuK iit of hci' share ; and to set aside [ 
 the release. 'J'lie del'endant.s relied on the release \ 
 as valid, and also pleaded the plaintitt's laches : — 
 
 Held, atlirming the decision of the Suiirenie 
 Court of Nova Scotia, that the release should 
 be set aside ; that it was given in ignorance of 
 the state of the ])artuership business anil K. 
 M.'s all'airs, aiul the jilaintitf was dominated liy 
 the stronger will of II. M.; that the latter had 
 divested himself of his legal title l)y admitting 
 in his letters a liability to the plaintili', and 
 must be treated as a trustee; that, as a trtistee, 
 lapse of time would not bar the plaintiflF from 
 proceeding against him for breach of trust ; anil 
 that the deliry in ])rcssing the plaintiff's claim 
 was due to II. M. himself, who postjioned from 
 tinte to time the giving of a statement of the 
 business, when duinauded bv the plaintili'. 
 Mack V. Muck, 23 S. C. R. IW. 
 
 without comj)etent and indepi tulrnt advlue, 
 when his pliyMieat and mental eon<lition y/n» 
 greatly impaired, he subs< ipiditly becoming an 
 incurable lunatic, was set aiide. 
 
 The doctrine of midne inlluiiice and liduciury 
 relatioushi|) discussed. 
 
 histinction lictwe>n uuihu' inllut iice in caHCH 
 of gifts inic)' riruM and testumentttry gifts re- 
 ferred to. 
 
 .Judgment of Rose, J., reversed, Tfagarty, 
 (.'. J. <!., dissenting. McCiiifini v. M(('ujj'rey, 
 IS A. H. .V.li). 
 
 VACANT LANDS. 
 
 iS'ee Limitation oi Aition--, II. 
 
 UNDUE INFLUENCE. 
 
 Excessive Payment for Services — /?e- 
 cocer!/. ] — Where, by reason of the confidential 
 relationship existing between the plaintiff and 
 defendant iUid the influence he was able to exert 
 over her by asserting knowledge of nuitters whioli 
 he alleged could be used to her prejudice, and 
 which at the trial he admitted had no existence, 
 he was enabled to procure from the plaintiff an 
 excessive anu)unt for services performed, and 
 which was jiuid by her even after she had 
 obtained indi'iiendent advice, the plaintiff was 
 lield entitled to recover the same liack, less a 
 reasonable amount for the services performed. 
 Disher v. Clarris, 25 O. K. 493. 
 
 Voluntary Conveyance — Fiduciari/ Rda- 
 
 iiOH.sA/p. ] -A volunrarj- conveyance of a large 
 portion of his property by a husband to his 
 wife, a woman of good business ability, and 
 having great influence over liim, executed 
 
 VACATION. 
 
 Examination for Dl icovery.] — Where u 
 special examiner issues an ap])ointm(nt tor the 
 examination for discoveiy dtiiing vacation of a 
 |)arty to an action, such )iarty,it duly sidipcenued, 
 is bound to attend foi' I'V.'Uiiiiiation. 
 
 A special examiner, although an oliicer of the 
 Supreme Court of .ludicature for Untario, in the 
 sense of being subject ti. Us jontrol and direction, 
 has no otiiee in c(MUU'c'> "i with the Court that 
 comes under any Rule -. niuiring it to be kepi, 
 open (pr closed 'luiiiig any |)iuticidar jieriod oi 
 the year. 
 
 llecisious of tile Master in Chambers and 
 (ialt, CI.. 1.") 1'. U. 23, icversed. llo'inUooiii 
 V. Co.j,-,L- Co., 1.') F. K. 127. 
 
 Notice of Appeal.] -I'liou the true construc- 
 tion of Kule 4^.14, the period of long vacation is 
 not to be reckoned in the time allowed by sec. 
 71 of the Judicature .Act for filing and serving 
 notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal. IL'it- 
 pele.r v. Camphdl, 14 I'. R. IS. 
 
 Pleading — Xotire of '/'rlnl.] — Tleadings may 
 be delivered and notice of trial given in (Jhrist- 
 m.as vacation, 'rhuinpaon v. llowmnt, Iti 1'. I!. .'{"S. 
 
 VALIDATING ACT. 
 
 See. Statutes, I. 
 
 VARIANCE. 
 
 See Criminal Law, III. 
 
 VEHICLE. 
 
 See Bicycle. 
 
 VENDOR'S LIEN. 
 Ste Lien, IV.— Sale of Goods. 
 
996 
 
 iiiid inili'iKMilint advice, 
 11(1 iiii'iitui I'liiiclitiiiii wiui 
 HiiliMri|iii'iitly Incoming an 
 1 Hi't iiiiilii. 
 Iiio iiilhunco ami tidtiuiury 
 
 1 iiiHliiit iiilhiciico ill (jitHCH 
 lid li'Htaineiitury gifts re- 
 
 , J., reversed, Hn^^arty, 
 McCiijIWy V. MiCdffrry, 
 
 STT LANDS. 
 
 N IlK AlTlliN--, II. 
 
 997 
 
 !ATION. 
 
 Dl'icovery.] — Wiiere u 
 •H nil aii|)i)iiitiii('lit lor th(! 
 very iliiriiig viuatiou of ii 
 I ])arty , il duly .^^iilpipci'iiucd, 
 
 I'xaiiiiiiatiiii). 
 
 altlidiigli an otlioer of the 
 lioutuve for Ontario, in the 
 to ita-joMtrol and direction, 
 ct ''I v.itli the Cuurt tii.it 
 le ;i'(iiiirii\i,' it tu lie kepi 
 
 any jnutiL'iilar period of 
 
 dast<i' in (iianiliera niid 
 l',\. ivvertied. 1 1 oijnhooiii 
 
 -Upon the true lonatnic- 
 puriod I if long vaiation is 
 I till' time allowed liy see. 
 .Act for tiling and siTving 
 ; Court of Appeal, i/cs- 
 '. I^ IS. 
 
 )/■ 'I'lHil. 1 — I'leadiiigs may 
 !e of trial given in Ciirist- 
 so« V. JioiD-ion, 10 1'. 1!.;{7S. 
 
 LTING ACT. 
 
 ATUTES, 1. 
 
 JANCE. 
 SAL Law, III. 
 
 BICLE. 
 
 Bicycle. 
 
 )R'S LIEN. 
 
 — Sale op Goods. 
 
 VENDORS AND PURCHASERS' ACT 
 Church Property Sri/, o/'|_sv, /- ii- 
 
 '""^■'y-ltoand Lut, \ ' -" f'""l-i were 
 
 lanl/u d 1- . '. '"'•"""■-t'-aora «old the 
 triHteo ■- " "' ' "• ''"''^y ''■" '"'"l^ ^v-ith tile 
 
 ."-n-ed ,' re as;" 'fl'^'f V'' ^""" ••- 
 
 l-aed ex,.e,fi;::ii,t,i::;drL;^'":i^r:i::^ 
 
 ^;S;nLir'o.r^r£;/:;;;i--rg: 
 .fe;!;-S;lrt;;Lrid:,r^;ilr:;- 
 
 VICE- ADMIRALTY COURT. 
 
 K-arun.fern."'' '"/Ime of Sale.J-.V mort- 
 
 j,''bK-i '"Mer tuoiiiortuai/ex Mnl.l tl... I ... i i 
 
 |..^he£Ue-i;:-,-:-^-i;-',:;:.|.^ 
 :n.iS^2":::dte;rrh:;'';n\^eoSv'T 
 
 and interest- thaf f '"; ""■."'•■*' """■^^'4 
 l>o lH.1,1 uooi M i '"',"'"'■■' """ ^^'""" 
 
 I "■ ^>.n.., wiin ,in agreement to rfln'iun 
 - aeh hon.se o„ payment of .sT^O ; J *""'"- ; 
 
 Held, tliat tiio ai'i-PiMnnnf i; i . j. 
 aeeiiritn ct.,f '^v>-'-liltiit ilnl not convey an I 
 
 aLciirate statement as to the nature of tlie i„ ' 
 cumhrance. J^e. nooti, and McUanriXU. ',;." 
 
 Uiaigel l,y the vendors, respectively :- 
 3.S (0.). Ihe substantial charge as a whole L-ame | 
 
 Title- \VUl-h\tatc.]^\ t..stator devised his 
 
 /W "o-r ,^- b :^' '""■; '-^f; /•'' ^Vmbr ami 
 •'nV' / o-i" ^- "'"' ^"t'onal C/i,/,, 24 R 
 
 VENUE. 
 
 See Ti;iAi., VII. 
 
 VERDICT. 
 
 See Jud(;mknt, VIIL-Trial, I. 
 VICE-ADMIRALTY COURT. 
 
 Jurisdiction - Sen-ice, _ Remuneration 1- 
 
 awarJ ™".'r''^' ^'"'"-^ '"^« Jurisdictbn to 
 a«arl reasonable rornimeration for services ren 
 
WATER AND WATERCOURSES. 
 VIEW. WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS 
 
 lOOO 
 
 5m Cbiwinai. Law, II. - Mi'Nir iiai, (Ok 
 
 I'(>KATI(IN><, ll.-TlllAl, VII. 
 
 VOLUNTARY ASSIGNMENT. 
 
 See ('i)Mi'Asv, VIII. 
 
 VOLUNTARY CONVEYANCE. 
 
 Action to Set ABlA^—FrawluUnt Intuit-- 
 Ve/mtititj Crtdiior.i.] - Fniudulfiil intention is a 
 matcrial't'li'mcnt in an Hctii)n to sit uwiile a <'on- 
 voyanco an hu'wn voluntary and fraudulent 
 auainst creilitors, and wiiero it does not exist, 
 the action cannot succeed. 
 
 The fact that the result of a conveyance is to 
 defeat creditors is not necessarily proof that the 
 intention of the grantor in making it was frau- 
 dulent. 
 
 And where a debtor, under the mistaken 
 belief that she was a trustee of a sum of money 
 invested liy her in land, in hor own name, made 
 a conveyance thereof to tlie supposed nstids qiip 
 trvnt, honestly tliinkiuL; she was carrying tlic 
 trust into ellect, an action to set aside the con- 
 veyance was dismissed. Carr v. CorJii'M, '20 
 O. R. 218. 
 
 Set Hankh, III. 
 
 WAREHOUSEMAN. 
 
 Sf.i- Hailmknt— Cakkikus, I. 
 
 See Fraudolent Conveyanck- 
 
 ENOE. 
 
 -Unpuk Inki.ij- 
 
 VOLUNTARY WINDING-UP. 
 
 See CoMi'ANY, VIII. 
 
 WAGES. 
 
 See Execution, I.— Likn, III.— Siiir, Vll. 
 
 WAIVER. 
 
 Claims Against thk CnuwsSic Starrs v. 
 TheQuem, 1 Kx. ('. R. 301, ant,: 2H'2 ; Mt Oren-i/ 
 V. The Qmi», ih. 321, 1« S. C'. R. 371, ante 181 ; 
 Peterson v. The Queen, '2 Kx. C. R. C7, ante 305 ; 
 The Queen v. Maliolm, 2 Ex. C. R. 357, ante'l^O. 
 
 In Matters of Pbactice— .%e Practice. 
 
 Notice of Application for Certiorari— >SV'*' 
 Keijbia v. Ifhilaker, 24 O. R. 437, ante 128. 
 
 Ts'^oTlcK OF DisiloNouu— iS'ee liritton v. Mil- 
 SOTO, 19 A. R. 9C, ante 104. 
 
 Right of Appkal— -See Appeal, II. 
 
 See iNTOXKATlNd Lk^uors, III. 
 
 WAREHOUSE. 
 
 See Intoxicatinc Lkjuoks, III. 
 
 WATER AND WATERCOURSES. 
 
 I. DrriiiKH AND VVatkkiouhses Act, 1'KM». 
 II. Diversion of \VATKiicofRSK.><, 1001. 
 
 III. Navihahle Waters, 1003. 
 
 IV. 0VEI1F1.OWISO Lanp, 1004. 
 V. I'HEscRii-rivE Kkihts, 1005. 
 
 VI. Riparian Owners, IOO.">. 
 
 VII. Unnavkiaiii.e Watkrm, 1007. 
 
 VIII. Watkk l'itivii.E0E.s, 1007. 
 
 I.\. What Constitutes a WATERcurRsi: 
 1007. 
 
 Drainaoe— .Vec MrNU'iPAi. Coui'okations, .\ 
 
 I. Ditches and VVatkrcourses Act. 
 
 Appeal— 7'ime.] — The provisions of sub-sec. 
 (i of sec. 22 of "t Vict. ch. .■)5 (O.), the Ditch.- 
 aiul Watercourses Act, 1894, which reiiuire t\n- 
 Judge of tlio County Court to hear and deter 
 mine an api)eal from an award thcreundc r 
 within two months after receiving notice then 
 of, arc merely directory. Itc McFarlane v. 
 Miller, 2(1 (). R. 51ti. 
 
 AvfBrd — Enejiiiter — County Court Judyt-- 
 Be(ji!ilr(ili(in—"Ovner"— Truant at Will— 'J )•'>• 
 im-^fi.y Held, bytlic Quecn'.s nench Division :-- 
 I 1. Where the 'jiigiiiccr of a municiiial corpoiu- 
 ! tion ])urpoits to m.ike an award under tlii' 
 Ditiilu'.s and Watercourses Act with respect tii 
 the making of a drain, the atliimance of .suili 
 award liv the County Court .Judge does not |)Ti'- 
 elude tlu: High Court fn^m entertaining tlic 
 objection that the eiigincLr had no jurisdiction 
 to inake the award; nor is such an ol)jecliua 
 one for the determination of the County Comt 
 Judge alone. Murray \ . JJau'.-on, 17 C. I'. .')feJ<, 
 distinguislied. 
 
 2. In the absence of a resolution of the muni- 
 cipal council such as is pioviiUd for l)y sec. 
 (J (h) of the Ditches and Watcrtourses Act, H. 
 S. (). ch. 220, the (lUestion wlnther the engincii 
 has jurisdiction to nuikean award depends upon 
 whether, l)efore tiling the reiiuisition, tlie owner 
 tiling it has oijtained the as.sent in writing of ,i 
 majority of the owners affected or intercstcil, 
 as provideil by sec. (a); if iie has obtaincil 
 such a.ssent, the engineer is, immediately upon 
 such tiling, clothed with jurisdiction ; and tlio 
 absence of the notice (Form D.) recjuired by 
 
lOOO 
 
 lOOl 
 
 WATER AND WATERCOURSES. 
 
 J&E RECEIPTS 
 IUnkm, III, 
 
 I0U8EMAN. 
 
 BNT— CaKHIKHS, I. 
 
 WATERCOURSES. 
 
 VVATK.iiCoitiixEs Act. liHMi. 
 ■ WATKHCorhSK.s, 1001. 
 
 ' ATKRX, lOOli 
 
 Lamp, 1()04. 
 llmiiTS, 1005. 
 
 NEKS, 100."). 
 
 ! Watkhs, 1007. 
 
 ILECIES, 1007. 
 
 T1TUTE8 A VVaTKKCuI'KSE- 
 
 MClPAr, CliKI'OKATIONS, X 
 
 I) Watkrcoukses Act. 
 
 -'{"he provisions of sub-Mei'. 
 ict. ch. .").') (O.), the Ditch. - 
 ict, 1H94, whicli rciiuire tin- 
 ;y Court to iicar iiiiil deter 
 roiii an aw.inl thereiiiuli r 
 after receiving notice then 
 ectory. lU McFarlaiie \. 
 
 er — County ('our/ Jwh/t — 
 ,fr«-.Te,iaiit at WilZ—'J >•'-■ 
 _' Queen's Bench Division : — 
 inecrof a niuniciiial corpora 
 uake an award under tlif 
 courses Act with respect to 
 rain, tlie atliinianee of .sudi 
 y Court .Iiidge does not pre- 
 i.url I'roin entertaining the 
 nj;iiietr had no jurisdietina 
 Ij nor is such an object ica 
 luition of tlie County Coiut 
 ray \ . Davton, 17 C, I'. ")t>S, 
 
 of a resohition of tlie muni- 
 as is piovided for by sec. 
 ■s and SVatercour.'^es Act, K. 
 lestiou will t her tlie eiigiiutr 
 iiake an award depenils upon 
 ig the re.juisition, the ownci 
 ud the as.ient in writing of ii 
 ners affected or interested, 
 ;. (a); if he has obtainci! 
 igineer is, immediately uiion 
 with jurisdiction ; and the 
 ;ice tForm D,) reciuired by 
 
 MO. fl woul.l not doprivo l.im ,f H.ieh juri., 
 .liotlon, hut would form only u grwuml of u ppoal 
 tt)jnliiNt hiM iiward. ' ' 
 
 .•1, The «H«eni of iho inuuicip;»l corp.iration a^ 
 «m« of tho hmdowaeiH interested iimy ho sliewn 
 ■V roiolutioui p.-M.Ml hy the .■ouneil ,lirButin« 
 lliu eiiuuieer to proceed with the work. 
 
 4. The lerni "owner" ax used in t),,. \^.^ 
 nienns tlui iw«eHne,l „wiier ; and ti tenant at will 
 
 ■ nay be an owner alFecl^d or interested witliin 
 the meaning ol lli,. Act. 
 
 5, Tlie .leeinion ,,f the ('.iiinty Court .liidu'e 
 ai to matters over which tlie en«in.M.r ban iiiris-' 
 diction cannot be reviewed by the Court and 
 wlielher the pkliilills were lM.|ielitfd by i lu. 
 l.roposed work w,m a matter to be .letermiued 
 
 -y the en-meer and the Hubjoot of appeiil to tlio 
 (ounty Court .ludgt', 
 
 0. 'Ihe mere publication by the eiiuiiieer, 
 witliin a year after (he allirmaiiee of an award 
 of a notice that he would let the work t„ bo 
 don,| upon I he Ian.; of „ue .,f tlu. persons .illected 
 bv the award, and that such letting would take 
 place alter Iho e.xpiry of a year Inun such allir- 
 niaiice, .Iocs not tttlbrd any ground for an action 
 or trespass. 
 
 Hehl, by the Court of Appeal, reversing the 
 decision of the Queen's Itciich Divisi.m, that 
 the word " owner ";iHU.sed in the Diiches and 
 WatercourHcs Act, li. ,S. ( ). di, 2l'0, means the 
 actual owner ami not the assessed owner • ami 
 n tenant at will of land afleete.l, assessed as 
 owner, is not an o«iier allected or interested 
 within the ineaning of tins Act. ' 
 
 Held, by the .Supreme Court of Canada, alKrm- 
 iiig the judgment of tho Court of Appeal 
 that "owner" in sec. (i („) does not mean thJ 
 assessed owner ; that the bidder of any real or 
 substantial interest is an "owner alleeted or 
 mteresteil ; ami that a mere tenant at will K-».n ' 
 neither file the rcipiisitioii nor be included in 
 the majority reipiired. 
 
 y«-Mv, whether, if tho porsou Hliiig the re,|iii. 
 sition IS not an owner within the me.ining nf 
 that term, the proceedings are vali.l if tlieiv is 
 a majority without him. y,„-k v. Tiwnshi,, ol' 
 O^'ijoode, 24 (). R. P_>, -.'l A, II, IGS, •_>4 ,S. (;. 
 K. mHm. 
 
 1002 
 
 I ISim, contains the foll.iwiiig provlmonn : -44 
 
 Kvory person lawfully o,vi,pyi„g ,i,„| /,„,^j 
 
 ./t.^ eiitivatnig lands, may divert any .«jeupio.l 
 
 water from the natural channel of any stream 
 
 , lake, or river adjacent to „r passing throiigli 
 
 ;miehlan,| for agricultural and other purposoM 
 
 I upon obtaining tho wiilien authority .If tin' 
 
 i.Stipendiary Magistr.iic ,.f the .listricl tor the 
 
 pur|..,se, aii.l rec.u-.liug the sam. with him, ,ift„, 
 
 line notice, as hereinafter nienlione.l, specifyinu 
 
 the name ol the .ipplic.ml, the .piantity Hoiigbt 
 
 to be . ivert.d the idace .,f .liversion, tlio obioot 
 
 thereof, and all aueli .,( I„ ,• parliciilais oh mich 
 
 nirvL-istrat.. may iv,,ui,v.- 4.-). " IVevions to 
 
 , such authorily heing giv.n, the applicant shall 
 
 , lost lip 11, a eouspicu.ius place on ea.li person's 
 
 land thn.iigl, whieli II ,s pr,.p„scd tfmt the 
 
 mryginwv— Notice— Miuuinmu.'-.] -An owner 
 of hind, desiring to oonstruct a.lrain .m his own 
 land and to continue it through that of an 
 adjoining own.u-, served hiiii with the notice 
 provided by tho Ditches an.l Watercourses Act 
 R. .S, 0. ch. -I'ZO, s.'e. 5, as aiuemled bv ol' Viet' 
 ch. 49, sec. 2 (0.), to settle the prop.u-tions t.i 
 be constructed by each, and, ou their failin.^ to 
 agree, served the clerk of tlu, municipality 
 with the notice provide.! for by mich Act re.iuir- 
 ing the engineor to appoint a d.iy to atten.l and 
 make his award, rhe clerk inimediatelv for- 
 warded the notice to the engineer, who was 
 absent, and whodecliuc.l to iittend :— 
 
 Held, that a maudamus woul.l not lie against 
 tlie_ municipal corporation to compel their 
 engineer to act in the premises. Dm/cmii.i v 
 1 own of TruUon, 24 O. U. ;U;t. 
 
 11. Diversion ok \VATKRcofHSE.s, 
 
 Authority— ff,';//i?« of Riparian Owners— 
 -Aoifce.]— Ihe British Columbia Land Ordinance, 
 
 water shouhl pass, and „ii "tin/ District Cwt 
 U.ms,., n.Ui..,..Niu wrilmg. stating his intention 
 to enter .sii.di land, and lln.>u^l. .ui.l over th,- 
 H.uiie to take and c.irry Mich water, specifying 
 dl pirticulars relating tlieret.., including dire.; 
 
 f" I>''"'t'ty, puii...se,amlt.u-m." I nan action 
 
 \>y a grantee of wat.'r iin.ler this onlinanco for 
 I mterterence witli the uscf the same •_ 
 
 Held, allirming the judgment ..f tho Court 
 -elMW, 1 hat I hu orilinance was not passed for thu 
 Itenehtol riparian owners .,iily, but any culti- 
 vator ot :an.l could obtain a grant of water 
 thereunder ; — 
 
 Hul.l, further, t hat the water of a stream, etc 
 may be .jccupicd nii.ler the or.linance, oven 
 , tli.>ugli there m.iy be a riparian proprietor upon 
 a part ot it ; — "^ 
 
 Held, also, Ritchie, C.J., and .Str.nig, ,J , ,\[^. 
 sentinj,, that the provisions of ,s,e. 4,-. are merelv 
 .ll-ectoiy, but if imperative, a grantee of water 
 un.ler the or.linance, who his use.l the w.iter 
 graiitc.lt.) hiin for .several y, ars, woul.l n.)t bo 
 ic.piire.1, ill an action f.u' damage's eause.l by 
 interference with siicli user, t.. pr.ivo that he 
 gave the notices re, I uired by that section, an it 
 would be presumed that the same were Miveii 
 lief.ue recor.ling the grant ; — 
 
 Held, per Ritchie, CI., and Strong, J., that 
 the water records in evidence were imperfect, an.l 
 the grant to the plaiutill' was not proved there 
 by, an.l, liaviiig faile.l to pr.)ve authority from 
 , the magistrate to .livert the water, his riparian 
 I rights, either at common law or nu.ler the ordin- 
 aii.^e, wero not established, and the action failed 
 I Martley v. Car«on, •_'() .s. C. \{. C.'i4. 
 
 ; Railway Company— /'«;v/(a,vtc — Xotiee — 
 {<pl*'<tralion~rr,ismi,t,on~Comi,,malion.\~ 
 \\ here the defeu.lants in 1 87 1 , withon t authoritv 
 
 diverted a watercourse on .e. -tain land, an.l after! 
 
 wards made compensat'oii therefor to the then 
 I owner of the lan.l, the plaintitl's predecessor in 
 j tlClu ; — 
 
 I Hel.l, that the e.jnitable easement thereby 
 j create.l in favour of the ilefen.laiits was not valid 
 I against the registered deed of the plaintitT. a 6o;.4 
 Jidc purchaser for value witli.mt actual notice • 
 the defendants having shewn no prescriptive 
 right to divert the watercourse ; ami th- diver- 
 sion being wrongful as against the plaintiff 
 
 huappv. Great Wt-yti-ni Ii. W. Co., C. P 
 187 ; L'Eniierance v. dreat Wenterii. R. W Go ' 
 
 Ir !'•■ ^'; JVt '<r\; "''"''"'•'' '■• '''"■'"'■ '^'^^nk ii. 
 
 . Co., 10 U. C. R. ool ; an.l Partri>l</e v. Oreal 
 n extern R. W Co., 8 C. P. 97, .listingui.shed. 
 
 ihe plaintiff, having failed to prove actual 
 damage, was allowe.l nominal damage-; tor the 
 
1003 
 
 WATER AND WATERCOURSES. 
 
 loot 
 
 
 liM 
 
 wrong; and, iiiatc.vl of granting a mandatory 
 injunction to compel tlie lestoration of tlie 
 watercoiirsc, the ('(Hii't directed a referenee to 
 Jiscertaiii the coiiijieii-atioii to whicli the phvin- 
 tiff would be entitled as upon an authorized 
 diversion of the watercourse under 51 Vict. eh. 
 29, .sec. !K), sub-sec. //, (IJ.). ToUon v. Canndhni 
 Pacific n. II'. Co., •-'•_> O. R. 204. 
 
 Railway Company — Heiwdii Ai/niii'd— Dam- 
 ageii—Coiiipeiis<iliiiii.]--}iy see. (K) (A) of the Rail- 
 way Act of Canada, ~>\ Vict. ch. "J!), a railway 
 company have power to divert any watercourse, 
 subject to tlie ]iiovisions of the Act ; but, in 
 order to entitii' themselves to iu-sist upon the 
 ari)itration clauses of the Act, they nuist, having 
 regard to sees. 1'2.S, 144, HH, ]4(), ami 147, shew 
 upon their registered i>lans their intention to 
 divert. 
 
 The defendants built an embankment which 
 entirely cut off' the ])laintilf's access to the 
 water of a stream by, divei'ting it from his 
 farm : — 
 
 Held, by the <,)ueen's P.ench Division, that 
 the diversion, not the damage sustained there- 
 fnjHi, gave him his cause ot action ; and the 
 proper mode of estimating the damages was to 
 treat the diversion as permanent and to consider 
 itH effect upiin the value of the farm. Mcdil- 
 Vm-ay v. Onat WeMeni R. W. Co., 'Jo U. C. K. 
 69, distinguished. 
 
 Held, by th(^ Court of Ai)peal, atiirming the 
 above, that where a watercourse has been 
 diverted by a railway company in constructing 
 their line, without filing maps or giving notice, 
 the landowner injuriously affected has a right 
 of action, and is not limited to an arl)itration. 
 
 For sucii diversion tlie landowner, in the 
 absence of an undertaking by the company to 
 restore the watercourse to its original condition, 
 is entitled to have the damages assessed as for a 
 permanent injury. 
 
 The mode of computing damages to be allowed 
 in lieu of an injunction, considered. Arfhur v. 
 Grand Trunk II. IF. C'r;.,25 0. R. 37, 22 A. R. 89. 
 
 III. N.\V((i.\IlI,K W.M'KRS. 
 
 Access to Shore — I'uhiic Hiijht.'i — I'rivati' 
 Jii'ihtti.] — The ]ilaintiff, owner of a scow, had, 
 without authority, moored it permanently to 
 the shore of a basin artificially created by the 
 excavation of land adjacent to a navigable river, 
 which formed the boundary at that point 
 between Canada and tlic United States. The 
 soil of the slioie and basin had been patented to 
 certain persons, the usual rights of access to the 
 shore and of navigation being reserved. The 
 defendants, licensees of the owners of the shore, 
 willi authority to take, and for the purpose of 
 taking, sand from the shores by means of their 
 own scow and a hired tug, placed the tug and 
 scow alongside the plaintiff's scow, and this 
 action was lirought for damages caused by fire 
 commtniicated by the tug to the plaintiff's 
 scow :— 
 
 Held, reversing the decision of Street, J,, 24 
 O. R. oOO, that tile plaintiff in mooring his scow 
 where he did was not a trespasser, at all events 
 as against the defendants, who were mere licen- 
 sees " to take sand horn in front of " the land 
 granted by the Crown, 
 
 The grant to the shore of the river, reserving 
 free access to the shore for all vessels, boats, 
 and persons, carried tlie land to the water'.s 
 edge, and not to the middle of the stream. 
 
 The ell'ect of the removal of the shore line 
 back ficiin its natural line was to make the 
 water so let in as much //uli/iri jiirii as any 
 other part of the water of the river, and sne'h 
 reino\aI did not take away the right of free 
 access to the shore .so removed. Cram v. Hyan, 
 2.-> O. R. 524. 
 
 Access to Shore — Public It'Kjhts — Printte 
 J'iijliti — /(■(-.]— The defendant, the owner of cer- 
 tain Vvater lots upon the lake front, subject to 
 the usual reservation in favour of the Crown of 
 free passage over all navigable waters thereon, 
 refused to allow the plainiitl'to haul ice cut from 
 the lake over such lots, when frozen, to the wharf 
 from wliicli the plaintiff desired to ship the ice 
 fur tlie jjiirposes of his business, unless the plain- 
 tiff iiaid toll, which he refused to do ; — 
 
 Held, that the water over the defendant's lut 
 was a highway, and the plaintiff had the right 
 without payniriit to cross the lot, whether tlie 
 water upon it was fluid or frozen ; and, having 
 a cause of complaint, and a right of action for 
 his personal loss, he was entitled to come to the 
 Court for a declaration of right. UtKKh.rhani v. 
 Cih/ of Tnronfo, 21 0. K. 120, 19 A. R. Ml, and 
 ('ill/ of Toronto v. Lorscit, 24 O. R. 22", fol- 
 lowed ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the defendant was liable for 
 such reasonable damages as flowed directly 
 from the wrong done by his refusal ; but, as he 
 had acted without malice and under a bond Jide 
 mistake as to his rights, and as the plaintiff 
 might have paid the toll under protest, the 
 defendant was not liable for the plaintiff's loss 
 of business consequent on liis failure to ship the 
 ice. Cullaiou v. Miller, 2U 0. R. .SO. 
 
 Private Waters— F>.shinf/ and Shoot in;/ Hiijht.% 
 — Public /i';,'////.>(.]~ Ownership of land or water, 
 though not enclosed, gives to the proprietor 
 under the common law, the sole and e.\clusi\e 
 right to fish, fowl, hunt, or shoot within the 
 precincts of that private property, subject to 
 game laws, if any ; and this exclusive right is 
 not diminished by the fact that the land may be 
 covered by navigable water. In such case the 
 public can use the water solely iov bond fide jmr- 
 
 ' poses of navigation, and must not uiineeessarily 
 
 : disturb or interfere with the private rights of 
 
 i fishing and shooting. 
 
 Where such waters iiavo become navigable 
 
 I owing to artifical public works, the private right 
 to fishing and fowling cif the owner of the soil 
 must be exercised concurrently with the public 
 servitude for passage. Bcutty v. Bavi.t, 20 O.R. 
 373. 
 
 Sec Booth V. Rattc, 15 Ajip. Cas. 188, post 1006; 
 Ilamdin v. Bannerman, [1895] A. C. 237, vont 
 1 000. 
 
 Sec Constitutional L.*w, II. 
 
 IV. OvERFLOwiNd Land. 
 
 Boom,] — In an action for damages caused by 
 ovcrflowage, it appeared that the defendants' 
 
loot 
 
 ire of the river, reserving 
 ■e for all vessels, boats, 
 the laiiil to the water's 
 iddle of tlie stream, 
 niovnl of the slioro line 
 line WHS to inaUe the 
 ich jtnli/ici jiirin as any 
 [• of the rixer, and sncli 
 away the right of free 
 jnioved. Cram v. JHyan, 
 
 - Public HUjh Is — Priiate 
 ndant, the o^^^lor of eer- 
 ie lake front, subject to 
 favour of the Cro'O'n of 
 ivigable waters thereon, 
 imitl'to haul ice ent from 
 ivhen fru/.en, to tlie wharf 
 f desired to ship the ice 
 lusiness, unless the plain- 
 refused to do ; — 
 over the defendant's lot 
 e plaintitr had the right 
 •OSS the lot, whether tlie 
 [ or frozen ; and, having 
 md a right of aetion for 
 s entitled to come to the 
 of right. GiJdclerhaiii v. 
 !. 120, 10 A. R. (141, and 
 )•«•/(, 24 O. R. 227, fol- 
 
 ilefendant was liable for 
 ges as flowed directly 
 y his refusal ; but, as he 
 ee and under a lioiid, Jit/e 
 lits, and as the plaintiff 
 toll under protest, the 
 le for the plaintitl'"s loss 
 on liis failure to ship the 
 >; 20 0. R. 3(). 
 
 Hliinr/ and Shootimj liUjhts 
 lership of land or water, 
 gives to the proprietor 
 , the sole and exclusive 
 mt, or shoot within the 
 ite property, subject to 
 :1 this exclusive right is 
 act that the land may be 
 ivater. In such case the 
 r solely iovhonafiih pur- 
 l must not nnnecessarily 
 th the private rights of 
 
 ii.'ive become navigable 
 3 works, the private right 
 of the owner of the soil 
 irreutly with the public 
 Bmlty v. Davix, 20 O.R. 
 
 Ajip. Cas, 1S8, pout lOOfi; 
 I, [1895] A. C. 237, pout 
 
 lO-NAL L.4W, II. 
 
 owiN(i Land. 
 
 n for damages caused by 
 ed that the defendants' 
 
 1005 
 
 boom 
 tloodi 
 
 WATER AND WATERCOURSES. 
 
 1006 
 
 in a river broke by reason of the h 
 
 boom 1 
 
 3, whereupon they eoiistrueted another ' 1 
 
 cavy.'moor to his bank a floating wharf and boat- 
 
 ower down near t( 
 
 which also br 
 
 against 
 
 the excess of rai 
 
 a certain bridge, nav 
 
 louse, the same not 
 
 oke, and the logs became massed f 
 
 igatioii, and 
 
 lieiiig an olistnietioii to tl 
 
 is entitled to maim 
 
 wliieli the jury found, with unauti 
 
 or damages in respect thereof 
 
 ic 
 liii ai! action 
 
 d b 
 
 anv 
 
 ,,.-.- , ---JautlKiri/.ed intei terenuc with the iKnv and 
 
 of Thev did , n'; I'^T 1 ■ "'J'"'^ '•'''■"planned j.urity of the stream, .hid.iiient of Court of 
 
 1. 'i"^J ''"'"o"""l""^'gl'K^''i^L'on thepartof Apiiual, 14 A. R 41<) 
 
 the deteiidaiits, but that they were guilty of a 15 App. C'ci.s. " 
 
 IS8. 
 
 afliimed. Iloolh v. J!<illf\ 
 
 \yrongful act in throwing the boom across the 
 
 "^H,.l!rfhof t)„. If 1 i ., , Navigable Rlver-.sViA ry' . I /•//•//■,/(fi! ]Valer- 
 
 Held, that the defendants were entitled to poirir ]~\ ' • • 
 
 judgment. ■ ■ 
 
 I'erRoyd, C— The use of the boom lieiiu' law- 
 ful by statute, R. 8. (). ch. 121, see. 5, and no 
 negligence iii its eonstriietion being pretended, 
 it was imjiossible to say that what was thus ex- 
 pressly legalized could he made the ground of an 
 action of tort. Lamj.sldjrv. McHae, 22 O. R. 78. 
 
 Drain— Ch/coV. ]— The defendants the cor- 
 [lorations of two townships, without beinc 
 bound to do so, built a culvert under the bird" 
 
 ing that the 
 
 riparuiii proprietor, notw itlistand 
 river is navigable, can aci|iiire an 
 interest in its water power, as derived from a 
 reseivoir artitieially formed bv a dam acro.ss its 
 cliar.nel, and sell tlie same along with and as 
 aiiimrteiiant to his land. Kveii if such sale 
 should not lie efl'ectual against the public, the 
 vendor cannot himself imptaeli it on that 
 ground. 
 
 _ Held, in this case, tliat as the vendor of a spe- 
 cilied amount of water-power had not reserved 
 
 1 i. ii . ,. •■■^■- *° liiniself a riidlt to suiiijlv. eithei mni nn^i^n 
 
 way between the townships, to wliieli the otiier with or ,,refenrbly to tlie pure! ^"."' /'"'^" 
 
 ,f i.,,.,K. .uljoming one was entitled to damaties in 
 
 laser, the latter 
 respei/t of any loss 
 y tlie vendor's use of the water in 
 ilimmutiou ot the amount sol.l. J[,,»i<Hn v 
 Hunncrmni), [18!)5j A. C. 2,S7. 
 
 incurred 
 
 defendant, the owner of laii 
 side of the highway, in order to carry olf the 
 surface wate' if his lands, built a drain, and 
 subsequently ,. -'gangway" of stones for the 
 eonveiiience of access to the highway, which 
 had the etlect of damming the water on his 
 land. He afterwards made an ojiening in the 
 "gangway," and the wati^r suildenly°rushim' 
 
 through the culvert. Hooded the plaintilfs land 
 
 on the other side of the highway, which was retard Yr'witlun certain limit 
 also connected with the culvert by a receiving which intl 
 drain, throuj^di which he had theretofor 
 
 User of Stream — Injury — /'rr.in-l/ilion _ 
 
 J'ai,Hi,„:s.] Held by Street, J., that riparian 
 
 proprietors are entitled to make a reasonable 
 use of the water of a stream, to detain it and 
 
 but any user 
 g wliicU inflicts positive. re)jeated, and sensible 
 
 •ii ] ^, - . . . ,. P<-r- , injury upon a proprii.t(.r above or below is not 
 
 mitted^the water m its ordinary course to , to be considered reasonable. 
 
 w„'iT +1 * .-1 1 f 1 ., -'^'"1 "here the deiemhuit and his predecessor. 
 
 Held, that the defendants the corporations i by discontinuing the use of the w iter durin.^ 
 
 ,yere not but that the otlier defendant was, ; the hard frosts,!xlthou,di a a lo s t^^ iJniS 
 
 /^!^ :'% ^'•/''"^'■ T'Tr' ''^^*''" l'^^"'""'- ""«l'thave ,.revented\he damage compline, 
 
 /h-yre v. Lout,f, 21 ^. R. 100. of by the plaintitf. but did , ot .^o discontinue, 
 
 though rei|iiested to do so by the ))IaiiitifF :— 
 
 Hehl, that they were making an unreason- 
 able use of the water and were liable for the 
 damage done. 
 
 The fact that the defendant and his predeces- 
 sors liad maintained their ilam, mill, and lace- 
 w.-iy in the same position for upwards of forty 
 years, and had during all that time used the 
 water as the necessity of their business re- 
 iiuired, did not give the defendant a i i-lit to use 
 the water to the prejudice of ilu' plaiiitilf ; the 
 defendant could not insist tli;it he lenl !;aiiied a 
 prescriptive right to injure the iilaiutiti without 
 that he and his 
 
 V. Pp.Ksc'iui'Tivn RifiilT.s. 
 
 Basement— yl rlifida! Strmm. ]— The oA\-ner of 
 a Hervient tenement who takes water by an 
 urtitieial stream from the dominant teiieii'ient, 
 created by the owner of the latter for his own 
 oonvenience for the purpose of discharging sur- 
 plus water upon the servient tenement, aeipiires i 
 no right to insist ujioii the continuance of the ' 
 How, which may be terminated by the owner of 
 the dominant tenement ; and the fact that the ^ 
 
 , , , , . , , , , l>roviiig tliat he and his predee.ssors had for 
 
 Imrden has Jieen ^imposed or oyer forty years ; twenty years been makmg an unreasonable luse 
 .".'^^'^ ."'.°. efi-sement ; of the water, to the injury of the plaintiil'; the 
 
 formerly been reasonable becom 
 
 does not alter the 
 
 and convert the dominant into a servient tene 
 
 ment. 
 
 The owner of a servient tenement takin" 
 water under such circumstances is not " a |ier- 
 son claiming right thereto" within R. S, (). ch. 
 Ill, sec. 85. Knuor v. Btirur//, 2 OifT. 410, 
 distinguished. Olinr v. Lackk, 26 O, R. 28. 
 
 use which '. 
 
 ing unreasonable because of ch.uigcd conditions, 
 within twenty years there aro=e for the first 
 time a grievance which gave the pluntiff a 
 right to eomiilain, and he was not barred of 
 that right by reason of his making no complaint 
 until he began to be injured 
 
 Held, by the (,)iieen's liencli Division, that 
 the use by riparian jiroprietois of the waters of 
 streams through w hose lands they How must be 
 a reasonable use, and the proprietors so using 
 the waters must rest-'re thorn to their natural 
 channel before they reach the lands of the pro- 
 prietors below them. 
 
 »,„ . , , „, ,, T IT , 1 ., ''"' 'Itifuixl'i'it, in restoring the water of a 
 
 Navigable River- Aunnr/ev.]- Held, that a stream used by him to its natural channel did 
 npanau owner is at liberty to construct and i so at euch times and in such a manner that the 
 
 See EUU v. Chmens, 21 O. R. 227, 22 O R. 
 216, post 10O7. 
 
 YI. RiPARiA.N Owners. 
 
1007 
 
 WAY. 
 
 1008 
 
 (!!j 
 
 water froze as it \\as being restored, and formed ' 
 a solid mass of ice, completely filling the j 
 natural channel, so that the water coming 
 do'.vn flowed away from the channel and over 
 tlie ])laintitfa land, and injured it. Tlie evi- j 
 dence shewed that tlie cause of tlie water 
 freezing as it did was the times at which and ' 
 the manner in whicli the defendant so restored j 
 it, and was the natural result thereof ; and it 
 appeared that the defendant had been remon- ■ 
 strated witli by the plaintift' and the conse- j 
 (juencos of his action pointed out to him : — ' 
 Held, that tlie defendant's use of the water 
 was unreasonalile ; and, as there was no proof' 
 to sanction a prescrii)tive right to restore the [ 
 water at the times and in the manner indicated, ' 
 he was liable to tlic plaintiff for the injury so j 
 caused ; his conduct being wrongful, his per- ' 
 sisteuce in it was malicious ; and the injury to ! 
 the plaintiti' was an iuvasion of his rights, and i 
 imported damage, whether there was any actual \ 
 damage or not : — ' ' 
 
 Held, also, that even if there was a cause, I 
 for which the defendant was not responsible, j 
 concurrent with the wrongfid acts complained 
 of, anil contributing to the injury sustained by j 
 the plaintiff, the defendant would still be answer- 1 
 able for the injury sustained by such wrongful i 
 acts for such damages, or such portion thereof, ; 
 as were caused by tlie wrongful acts complained 
 of. 
 
 Judgment of Street, J., alhrmed. Ellis v. 
 Ckmms, 21 O. R. 227, 22 0. K. 216. 
 
 within which the water can be confined ; and an 
 occupant or owner of land has no right to drain 
 into his neighbour's land the surface water from 
 his own land not flowing in a defined channel. 
 
 The rule of the civil law that the lower of two 
 adjoining estates owes a servitude to the upper 
 to receive all the natural drainage has not been 
 adopted in this Province. 
 
 McO-dlimi!/ v. .Vi/li,i, -21 U. C. R. C2; Grew- 
 soH v. ariiiitl Trunk Ji. W. Co., ih. 08 ; Darby v. 
 Croirland, ;W U. (.'. I!. 338; and Be.erw Stroud, 
 19 (). It. 10, considered. Willkvitx v. Rkharda, 
 23 0. R. 051. 
 
 See Marth'!/ v. Carson, 20 S. C. R. 034, anii 
 1002. 
 
 VII. USN.WKiABLK W.VTERS. 
 
 Water Risb.tB~Di'xtriictiun—Compi'nmlioii. ] 
 — The owner of land through which unnavigable 
 water Hows in its natural course is proprietor of 
 the latter by rifiht of accession ; it is at his 
 exclusive disiiositiou during the interval it 
 crosses his properly, and he is entitled to be 
 iudcmiiitied for the destruction of any water 
 power which has been or may be derivable 
 therefrom. L'Mvre v. The Oiiteii, 1 Ex. C. R. 
 121. 
 
 VJII. Watkr Privilkcks. 
 
 Occupied Mill Privilege.]— There can be no 
 interference whatever, under the Act respecting 
 Water Privileges, K. S. O. ch. 110, with an 
 occupied mill |irivilege, even though the author- 
 ized works \\nidd not affect the mode in which 
 the occupied mill privilege has, up to the time 
 of the application, been used. 
 
 An order made under the Act must state 
 specifically the height of the authorized dam. 
 J II re liuniham, 22 A. R. 40. 
 
 See as to costs, S. C, 16 P. R. 390, aiile 216. 
 
 • IX. What Constitutes a \VATK,!;!^:'itR»;K, 
 
 Surface Water — Defined Channel. ] — That 
 cannot be called a defined channel or water- 
 ■eourse which has no visible banks or margins 
 
 Surface Vrftter—Perniannif Source— Visible 
 
 Cause.]— 'i'hii alleged watercourse was a gully or 
 
 depression created by the action of the water. 
 
 The defendants disputed that any water ran 
 
 along it, except melted .snow and rain water 
 
 j flowing over the surface merely. The plaintiff 
 
 j contended that there was a c(/nstaiit stream of 
 
 water, only, if ever, ceashig in the very dry 
 
 I summer weather : — 
 
 I Held, per Street, J . , that without a permanent 
 source, which, however, need not necessarily be 
 absolutely never failing, there cannot be a 
 watercourse ; and that, as the attention of the 
 jury was not expressly called to the difference 
 in effect between the occasional How of surface 
 water and the stea<ly How from a source, and as 
 a passage read to the jury from the judgment in 
 heer v. Stroud, 19 O. It. 10, divcjiced from its 
 context, might have misled the jury, there 
 should be a new trial. 
 
 Per Armour, C. J., that what the Judge told 
 the jury could not be held a misdirection with- 
 out reversing the decision in Beer v. Stroud : 
 and the objection to the charge was too vague 
 and indefinite. 
 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, that if water 
 precipitated from the clouds in the form of rain 
 or snow forms for itself a visible course or 
 channel and is of sufficient volume to be service- 
 able to the persons through or along whose 
 lands it Hows, it is a watercourse, and for its 
 diversion an action will lie. Beer v. Stroud, 19 
 O. R. 10, considered. Arthur v. Grnml Trtmk 
 R. ir. Co., 25 O. R. 37, 22 A. R. 89. 
 
 WATER PRIVILEGES. 
 
 See Water and Watercour.ses, VIII. 
 
 WATER RATES. 
 
 ■See Assessment and Taxe.s, V. 
 
 WAY. 
 
 1. Clo.six(! OF Hioiiwavs, 1009. 
 II. Dedication of HifiiiwAvs, 1009. 
 III. Defects in W.\ys, 1011. 
 
 IN'. EsTABLISHINd HiCillWAVS, 1012. 
 
 V. Incumuerinq Highways, 1012. 
 
lOOS 
 
 can 1)6 confined ; and an 
 nd has no riglit to drain 
 1 tlic suiface water from 
 g in a defined channel, 
 aw tliat the lower of two 
 , servitude to the upper 
 d drainage has not been 
 e. 
 
 , 27 U. C. E. 62 ; CretD- 
 
 W. Co., rt. 08; Darby V. 
 
 338 ; and Beer v. Stroud, 
 
 Wit/iaiiix V. Jiicliarda, 
 
 riitaniiit Source. — Visible 
 iten.ourat' \\ as a gully or 
 16 action of the water. 
 3d that any water ran 
 [ snow and rain water 
 ;; merely. The plaintiff 
 as a constant stream of 
 jasing in the very dry 
 
 hat witlujut a permanent 
 need not necessarily be 
 g, there cannot be a 
 as the attention of the 
 called to the difference 
 ;;asionaI How of surface 
 w from a source, and as 
 ■y from the judgment in 
 . 10, div<jrced from its 
 lisled the jury, there 
 
 at what the Judge told 
 ild a misilirection with- 
 sion in Beer v. Stroud : 
 3 charge was too vague 
 
 Appeal, that if water 
 ouds in the form of rain 
 f a visible course or 
 nt volume to be service- 
 rough or along whose 
 atercourse, and for its 
 lie. Bi-er v. Slrovd, 1!) 
 Irthur V. Grand Trunk 
 22 A. R. 89. 
 
 IVILEGES. 
 
 TEUCOIRSES, VIII. 
 
 BATES. 
 
 AM) Taxes, V. 
 
 .Y. 
 
 VAYS, 100!). 
 [liiiWAVs, 1009. 
 , 1011. 
 
 ill WAYS, 1012. 
 HWAYiS, 1012. 
 
 1009 
 
 WAY. 
 
 VI. -Maintenance AND Rei-aiiiof Hkuiways 
 1012. 
 
 VII. OnsTHUCTioNs IN Hi(;iiwAy.s, 1013. 
 
 'VIII. Private Wav.s, 1014. 
 
 IX. Toll Roads, 1016. 
 
 See Municipal Corpoeatio.nr, XII., XIII. 
 
 I. Closini! of Highways. 
 
 Owner of AdJoinlnR l.a.naa—MortiiwiteA— 
 A mortgagee of lan.l adjoining a highw'ay is one 
 -ot the persons in whom the ownership of it is 
 vested for the purposes of sub-sec. 9 of sec. 
 oM ot the Consolidated Municipal Act 1S9'' 
 and as such is entitled to iire-emptiou there- 
 under, subject to the right of tfie mortgagor to 
 redeem It along with the mortgage, or to have 
 It sold to the mortgagor subject to the mortgage, 
 
 1010 
 
 II. Dedication of Hi«invAYS. 
 
 Adoption by Seaaiona — Prexumufum.]- A 
 road was surveyed in 1834, and the surveyor's 
 report was made to the Quarter Sessions in that 
 year. Ihe records were, however, lost or des- 
 troyed, and there was no evidence that the ro i I 
 liad been adopted by the Sessions under the Act 
 then in force, nor was there a record of anv 
 order directing it to be opened. It was, how- 
 ever, actually opened before 1853, with the 
 assent of the owners of the land, and was used 
 for several years, and statute labour was done 
 upon It ; — 
 
 Held, that the maxim "Omnia prn'mmunlur 
 rde esse acta applied, and that the duo adop- 
 tion ot the road by the Quarter Sessions should 
 oe presumed : — 
 
 Held also, that the evidence of dedication 
 was suibcient : — 
 
 Held, also, per Maclennan, J. A., that the 
 expressions "laying out" and "opening" a 
 road are used in the Act 50 Geo. IK. cli 1 in 
 an equivalent sense, and tliat actual work on the 
 ground IS not required before the road becomes 
 a public iighway. Palmatia- v. ATcKibbon, 21 
 ■A. i\, 441. 
 
 village, and work had been done and repairs 
 made thereon under the direction of the rural 
 inspector of roads. Tiie municipal council ha<l 
 also, at one time, passed a resolution for the 
 eonatr'iction of a sidewalk on liie street, but 
 nothing was done tlieieundei'. Upon the hear- 
 ing of the claim it was conteiuled on behalf of 
 the clainiaiit that tlie .street in question, at the 
 tune of the expropriation, was not a highway or 
 public road within the meaning ,,f the Govern- 
 ment Railways Act, ISSl, 44 Vict. ch. 25, but 
 was her private property, and that she was 
 eiUitled to compensation for its expropriation 
 [ llie Crowns contention was that, at the date 
 of expropriation, the street was a highway or 
 pubhc road within the meaning of the Govern- 
 
 Jw f?^'"}''"'^'' ^°V l'^^'' '-^ ^'''^'- "'" 25. and 
 that _the Crown had satistiud the provisions of 
 sec. u, snb-sec. 8, ami sec. 49 thereof, by substi- 
 tiilmg a convenient road in lieu of the portion 
 ot street so diverted, and tliat the claimant was 
 therefore not entitled to eompensation : — 
 
 Held, 1. That the question was one of dedi- 
 cation rather than ot prescription; that the 
 evulence shewed that the claimant had dedi- 
 cated the street to the public ; and that it was 
 not necessary for the Crown to prove user bv 
 the pnblio for any particular time. 
 
 2. That the law of the Province of Quebec. 
 relating to the doctrine of dedication or des- 
 tination IS the .same as the law of Knrrland 
 
 SembU that 18 Vict. ch. 100, sect 41, sub- 
 sec, y (irov. Can.), is a temporary provision 
 having reference to roa.ls in existence on Ist 
 July, 1 So,), which had l)een left open and used an 
 such b3' the public without contestation during 
 a period ot ten years oi upw.irds. Mvrand v 
 /.(^i/rnr 6 (J L. R. 120, and '.'„!, v. City of Mon- 
 treal 2:y L. C. J. 132, referred to. Bourget v. 
 J he Queen, 2 Ex. C. K. 1. 
 
 Obstruction Before Dedl. ,lon.] — See 
 /iroirii V, Town of Edmvntou, 1!„ S. C. R. 308 
 
 Evidence — User — Prescription.] -Prior to 
 the (^nstruction of the St. Charles Branch of 
 the Intercolonial Railway, the claimant was in 
 pos-session of property in the village of Lauzon, 
 in the county of L<5vis, P.Q., which was divided 
 into 41 lots, with a street laid out through them. 
 A plan of the lots shewing the location of the 
 street had been recorded in the registry otHce 
 tor the county of Levis. In the construction of 
 the railway the Crown diverted this street, pur- 
 chasing for that purpose one of tliR 41 lots in the 
 elaimauts property. Although the municipal 
 corporation had never taken any steps to declare 
 tlie said street a public way, it was used as such, 
 was open at both ends, and formed a means of 
 communication between two other streets in the 
 64 
 
 Plan— L ser — Municijial Corporations— By- 
 laiv.]~A piece of land about twenty acres in 
 extent, fenced in, had been owned and occupied 
 as a held by the plaintitis and their predecessors 
 in title for tweuty-tive years. Before that it 
 Had, with other land lying immediately to the 
 north on which streets had been laid out and 
 opened up, one of them forming the boundary 
 l>etween the north and south portions, been 
 surveyed and laid out on a registered plao into 
 lots and streets, and some lots liad been sold by 
 the then owners partly from the land vested in 
 the plaintiffs, and partly from the land to the 
 north. Snbse(iuently the plaintitfs acquired by 
 purchase or lease all the lands to the south of 
 the dividing street, and sought to restrain the 
 deteudants from opening up the streets throueh 
 these lands : — ° 
 
 Held, iier Osier and Maclennan, ,1J.A., [Hag- 
 
 flo*^f ?>'^iP-A «'=,P''f s'"g "" opinion], that sec 
 62 of R. ,S. 0. eh. 1.j2, which provides that all 
 allowances for streets surveyed in cities or any 
 part thereof, which have been or may Ijo sorl 
 vcyeil and liiid out and laid down on the utaoa 
 thereof, and upon which lots of land fronting on 
 such allowances for streets have been or may bo 
 sold to purchasers, shall be public highways and 
 streets, is retroactive and applies to streets laid 
 out on plans made and registered before the pas- 
 
lOU 
 
 WAY. 
 
 1012 
 
 I 1 
 
 Btng of the Aa, ami that the Rticets shewn <m 
 thophm wcif liighways whi'h tlie city were 
 entitled to open ; 
 
 Held, pciMintoii.J. A., that thoujih the section 
 was retniactivu. it ap|ilioil .mly to tlie original or 
 first Bnrvey of a city, etc., or part thereof, and 
 not to a suliiiivisif'ii of lots or |)arcels within the 
 city, and theicforc not to the snrvey in (juestion 
 in the iires<iit case. 
 
 Judgment of the Con tnon I'leas Division, 21 
 O. R. 1'2(), alllrniing. l)y a (li\i.sion of opinion, 
 that of Ferguson, J., aflirnu'd. dooihrham v. 
 City of Toronto, 1!) A. It. (ill. 
 
 Plan — lii'iiixlrnlioii of ani/ Sii/et Umhr.] — 
 Under the Municipal and J^urveyors' Acts, by 
 the filiujr of a jilan, and the sale of lots accord- 
 ing to It, aluitting on a street, the property in 
 the street licconies vested in the municipality, 
 although the)- may have done no corporate act 
 by which tiity have become liaMe to repair. 
 Hoche V. Ilyaii, lii.' (.>. It. UiT. 
 
 Flan — /{I'l/ixlration o/diu/ Sa/ei Uiuhr — Uxev 
 — Ado/i/i(iii.] — A street or road laid out upon a 
 registered jilMn.jf a township lot, wiiere, although 
 houses are clustered, there is not an incorpora- 
 ted villaiie, continues to ho a private street or 
 road, althougl) the owner should sell a lot front- 
 ing on it, until the township council adopts it 
 aa a piildic highway, or until the public, by 
 travelling ujion it, li;is accepted the dedication 
 olTere<l by Uie proprietor. 
 
 H. k-;. O. ch. I'lL', sec. ()•_', only applies to cities, 
 (owns, oi- incorporated villages. 
 
 A peis(jn wlui purchases lots according to such 
 •i rdi".n, abutting upoji streets laid out thereon, 
 acquires, as against the person who laid out the 
 plot iind sold him the land, a private right to 
 use those streets, subject to the right of the pub- | 
 lie to make thetu highways, in wliich case the j 
 private right becomes extingui>lied. i 
 
 The -.-'ght so to use a private road does not 
 necessarily mean a right over every part of the j 
 roadway, but only to such a width as nniy be [ 
 necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of it. '' 
 Sklitz'iky v. Craihstoii, 22 O. H. ,")!/o. 
 
 III. Defkci'.s is V.'.vys. 
 
 Workmen's Compensation Act — I'lun/.:] — 
 The foreman of tlie defendant, a contractor for 
 the erection ot a building, desiring to pry up a j 
 part of the llooring, placed a new jilank, sup- I 
 plied by the owners of the building, al)out eleven | 
 feet long by eight inches wide and three inches J 
 thick, which tlit jviilence shewed had a knot in | 
 it two inchc'! wide, and was cross-grained, 
 across an opening in the ground floor, intending 
 to use it as a fulcrum, 'i he plaintitl', a labourer 
 carrying a heavy scantling, was directed by the 
 foreman to place it in another part of the build- 
 ing, and, while crossing the plank to do so, was 
 precipitated into the cellar by the breaking of 
 the plank at the knot, and was injured. It did 
 not appear that there was any way beyond t'ne 
 plank : — 
 
 Hehl, that the plank was a "way" within 
 the meaning of sub-sec. 1 of sec. 3 of the 
 Workmen's (Joni))ensation for Injuries Act, and 
 that the knot and cross-grain were defects in 
 the way for which the defendant was respon- 
 sible. Caldicell V. xMilln, 24 O. R. ■402. 
 
 Workmen's Compensation Act — I'nblii 
 Street. ]--.\ public street in a defective condi- 
 tion, used by an employer in connection with 
 his business, ia not a "way used in ihe business 
 of the emplovcr" uitiun tlie meaning of 5"i 
 Vict. eh. ;!(), sec. .'! (O.j. 
 
 The di'femUints' factory was built immciliateli'- 
 on the line of a pu))li(; street wliich was fourteen 
 feet wiile at the ))la(.'e, ami on the other side 
 there was a stceij declivity, witliout a fence. 
 One of tlieir workmi'u was on a load of straw on 
 a waggon unloadir.g it into the defendants' 
 premises througli an apertuie facing the street, 
 when he h.st his bidauce, fell oil, aiul down tlie 
 <leelivity, and was killed ;-- 
 
 Held, that the defendants were not liable. 
 Stride v. Diamond (//hw Co., 2(1 t). R. 270. 
 
 I\'. KsT.UU.ISIIINc: IfllUiWAVS. 
 
 Description— / 'ncirfain/y — /ly-law — PuUi 
 cation. \ -A municipal by-law establishing a 
 public highway is not void for uncertainty 
 when the boundaries of the land so declared are 
 describtd in I lie by-law witli sutlicient precisimi 
 to enable them to be traced upon the ground, 
 and if so properly described, it is not necessar_\ 
 when private gruuiul has been taken to distin- 
 guish it as such. 
 
 The fact that one of two parallel courses 
 in a description has by obvious clerical error 
 been incorrectly given in the published notice 
 is not a valid objection to such a by-law. 
 
 Where there is no paper published in the 
 townshiji, weekly or ofteiier, it is not obligatory 
 to publish tlie re(]uiied statutfiry notice of the 
 by-law ill a iia])er issued therein semi-monthly. 
 /I'e Vliaiiihers uii'l Corporatinii of JJvrj'vril, '2i> U. 
 1!. 27U. 
 
 V. iNCl'Mr.KUlMi Hl(;ll\VAY.<. 
 
 Sidewalk- -/i'V'//'V<.]- A bicycleisa "vehicle," 
 and riding it on the sidewall; is "incumbering" 
 the street within the meaiiing of sub-sec. 27 of 
 sec. 4(10 of the t^'oiisolidateii Municipal Act, and 
 of a by-law of a niuiiieipality passed under it. 
 
 A ixrtinrnri to bring up a conviction under 
 the by-law was refused, /'fi/imi v. Pliunmer, 
 .SO U. V. R. 41, approved. Ji'n/iiia v. Jantiii, 24 
 0. It. 327. 
 
 VI. Maintenancr and Rei'aiu ok Hiohwavs. 
 
 County Road— .SV;OTm^ r/ (7(7//.] -Held, that 
 the legislation and j)roceedings thereunder, set 
 out in the judgment of tliu Court, relating to 
 the Queenston and (irimsbyroad and the city 
 of St. t'atharines, did nc.t make the city liable 
 to pay to the county of Liii.i. .i any jiart of the 
 exjienditure of the latar in connection with 
 that road. 
 
 Kffect of the withdrawal of city from juris- 
 diction of county upon roads owned by the 
 county passing through the city, considered. 
 
 Hi'i/inn v. Loulh, 13 C. 1*. (Ho; Itiijina v. 
 liroirn and Street, ib. 357 : St. Ctttharines 
 Road Co. V. Gardner, 21 C. I'. 190, specially 
 referrctl to. 
 
101? 
 
 snsatlon Act — PnMir 
 lit ill u ik'foutive cdiidi 
 oyer in (■(iiiucctidii with 
 way iisud in iln; Imsinoss 
 liii tiio nit'aiiing of 5") 
 
 ly \\iis Imilt immcdiiitcl)'. 
 trtft wliicli \viis fdiU'toL'u 
 , 1111(1 (111 tli(.i otlior side 
 livity, witlidiit a feiiLv. 
 I'iis (111 a load of straw on 
 L into the defendants' 
 ertiiie fueing tlie street, 
 e, fell oil', and down the 
 d:- 
 
 iidaiita wei'e not liable. 
 ■N Co. , 20 (.). R. 270. 
 
 INC IflllliWAVS. 
 
 'ahih/ — ISii-kur — I'udii 
 by-law establishing a 
 I void for uncertainty 
 the land so deelared are 
 witli siifiieient precision 
 t raced iijion the ground, 
 ilied. it is not necessary 
 IS been taken to distin- 
 
 ■f two parallel courses 
 y obvious clerical error 
 in the published notice 
 to such a by-law. 
 paper published in the 
 ener, it is not obligatory 
 statutory notice of the 
 I therein send-monthly. 
 rut'inii of JJvrj'i,ri/-, '25 O. 
 
 m; Hiciiwavs. 
 
 A liicycleisa "vehicle," 
 ■walk is "incimibering" 
 leaning of suli-sec. 27 of 
 ted Municipal Act, and 
 lality passed under it. 
 
 uji a conviction under 
 I. /'';//»(( V. Plionmer, 
 d. Ufijina v. Justin, 24 
 
 liEi'AIU (IF Hk.HWAYS. 
 
 •atnl C(7//.1-Held, that 
 cedings thereunder, set 
 f tlie l.'ourt, relating to 
 nisby road and the city 
 lot make the city liable 
 Liii..o .1 any part of the 
 ar in connection with 
 
 iwal of city from juris- 
 n roads owikmI by tlip 
 the city, considered. 
 
 C. 1'. 015 ; Rcijina v. 
 , 357 : St. CatharinoK 
 
 21 C. r. 190, specially 
 
 1013 
 
 WAY. 
 
 1014 
 
 An ..greeuieut by I lit^ withdrawn from tiie 'i^J^i^l^t^^l'^lZ::^:^^ Z 
 
 JurisiiKjtion of the county to contribute towards 
 the maintenance and rejiairs of a county road is 
 nltrn virtu the city corporation. Coiniti/ or' L'ui- 
 '■oln V. Cihi of St. Ctttharincn, 21 A. R.':)7ii 
 
 Versed 
 
 ;uii. 
 
 (Jiti) t.f llui;/nx V. 
 Trees.]— .S'c- Tnir.i:i;, II. 
 
 A'ttrt.f, 2;{ S. (.'. K 
 
 VII. OnsTKfCTroNs in Iliimw.ws. 
 
 'See Mi'Mfii'.vl. 
 
 Accidents Caused By.] 
 
 COKI'OKATIO.NS, XIII. 
 
 Building on Road Aliov/ance.] — s',p y,.. 
 A ''/' V. Toin,~/i>). r.y Jhj,urt, 22 A. R. r;0«, nnt^ 
 /2i. 
 
 Existence Before Dedication — Compois,,. 
 Iwn.]-T\u, right of the public to the free and 
 unobstructed u.^e of a street cannot lie taken 
 away by the existence of an obstruction at the 
 tune when the street is dedicated; nor is the 
 occupier of a house which constitutes sucli ob- 
 struction entitled to compensation from the 
 municipality tor its removal. Decision of the 
 .Siiprenie (■onrt ..f the Xorth-West Territorie... 
 
 ^ ^;," • ' •. Jf'^l'"' V^- ■^' P- 39. atliimed. n,;,>.-„ 
 V. lotvn <;/ hilmonlon, 2;? .S. (J, R. ;j()s. 
 
 Municipal Coi -orations — Zfccfem/'Oi) — /,, - 
 JttH(tioH.]-\ municipal corporation has the 
 right to have it declared, as against a private 
 person, whether or not certain land is a pulilie 
 highway, and wliether such person has the ri>dil 
 to possess, occupy, and obstruct the same. ° ' 
 
 And in an action brought, by the municipal I 
 corporation lor the purpose, a declaration nlav 
 be made according to the facts, and the detcii'- 
 dant enjoined from possessing or occupying the 
 land so as to (djstruct the use of it as a ptiblic 
 highway. ]-a,don FnlU v. ViHoria R. IP. Co 
 -.) Gr. 4, followed. Oooikrham v. ftiii ,,'t 
 ron,nto 21 O. R 120 19 A. R. 041, applied 
 and followed. Ct,/ of Toronto v. Lor.'.h "4 
 
 Vllf. 1'iiiv.\t:; Ways. 
 
 Government Aid -Kjfrlof, ,o, Prim't Road 
 — < ul(,i,,yr„.ii /;„,,,/. j^'i'iie proprietor of a piece 
 ot land in the jiarisli of ( harleslnmrg claimed to 
 ; have himself declared projirietor of a lierita>'e 
 i purged troni a servitude, bein- a right of passage 
 claimed by his neighbour, the defendant. The 
 I'oad was partly built with the aid ol (Jovein- 
 nient an,! municipal moneys, but no indemnity 
 was ever paid to the plaintiff, and the privilege 
 f't pa.ssmg on said private road was -ranted by 
 notarial agreen.ent by the plaintiir'to certain 
 parties other than the defendant ;— 
 
 Held, ruvei>ing the judgment c;f the Court of 
 •,hieeus IJeucli ;or Iv.wer Canada (apjieal side), 
 that the mere granting and spending of a sum of 
 imjiiey by the (iovernmcut and the municipaliry 
 did not make such iirivate road a colonization 
 road within the imaningof Art. 171S, R. S. Q. 
 Ckaiiibiridud v. J-'vrthr, -S.] S. V. R. 371. ' 
 
 Grant - Ap/Xirfj)! Sfrritntlf—Rfi/i.^tration — 
 tridnio:]—V,y deed of sale dated ■2nd April, 
 ISOO. the vendor of cadastral lot >'o. ;W9, in the 
 parish of .ste. Margnerite de lilaiiliiidie, district 
 of Iberville, reserved for himself, as owner of 
 ■■" 'Mt, a carriaue road to Ijc kept open and 
 
 Removal of Building -Pe^/V;-//^ -Kridcnn- 1 
 — By sec'. 4.)4 of the charter of the city of Hdi- 
 tax,any person intending to erect a In.ildiiii;- iinon 
 or close to the line of the street must tirst\;uHe 
 siR^h line to be located by the citv engineer, and 
 obtain a certihcata of the location; and if ■, 
 bill ding IS erected upon or close to the line 
 without such certiHcate having been obtained 
 the Suiiremc Court, or a Judge thereof, niav, on 
 petitiori of the recorder, cause it to l,e rein.'ived 
 A petition was presented to a .lud-e, umlor tliis 
 section, asking for the removal of a ponli built 
 by H. to hi.s himse on one of the streets of the 
 eity, which, the petition alleged, was uiion the 
 line of the street. A porch had been erected 
 on the same site in RSoJ and removed in iss.;- 
 while It stood, the portion of the street outside 
 ot It, and since its removal the portion ui^ to the 
 house, liad been used as a public sidewalk ; on : 
 the hearing of the petition the original line of 
 the street could not bo proved, but the .Judge 
 held that It was close to the line so used bv the 
 pubhe, and ordered its removal. The Supreme 
 Court of N ova Scotia reversed his decision. ( )n 
 appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada •— 
 
 in Older by the vendee The res'iioniient F., 
 as assignee of the owner of lot .'170, continued to 
 enjoy the use of the add carriage road, which 
 wa.-,_3ufficiently indicated by an open road, until 
 ' 1SS7, when he was prevented by the appellant C. 
 from using the said road. C. had purchased 
 lit .309 from MclJ., intervenant, without any 
 mention of any servitude, and the original title 
 d(jcd creating the servitude was not registered 
 witnin tile delay prescrilied by U ^t 45 Vict. 
 I*.*.) oh. 16, sees. 5 and 0. In an action con- 
 ./''.«.sM/-t brought by F. against C, the latter filed 
 a dilatory exception to enalile him to call McD. 
 Hi warranty, and .McD., having intervened, 
 pleaded to the action. C. never pleaded to the 
 nitrrn of the action. The .Judge who tried the 
 ease dismi.ssed .McD.'s intervention and main- 
 tained the action. This judgment was athrnied 
 by the Court of tjueen's i5ench. On appeal to 
 the Supreme Court of Canada :— 
 
 Held, attirming the judgment of the Court bo- 
 lo\y, that the deed created an apparent servi- 
 tilde (which need not be registered), and that 
 there was sufficient evidence of an open road 
 nayiug been used liy F. and his predecessors in 
 title, as owners of lot \o. .370, to m dntaiu his 
 action <-o)ifr.,.mire. Macdvtwid v. Ftrdain. 22 
 ^. C. R. 200. 
 
 Grant— roH.s;r»(r;i-oH.]— A deed of conveyance 
 of land under the Short Forms Act from the 
 plaintiff to the defendants recited that the 
 latter had determined to construct waterworka 
 111 their municipality, and for that required the 
 
1015 
 
 WAY. 
 
 1016 
 
 
 land for buildings and other i)urpo8e3 connected 
 witli the waterwoiks, and the ))liiintifF had 
 agreed to sell them Huch land for hucIi purposes 
 for the consideration and subject to the con- 
 ditions set forth. 1'he consideration was a 
 valuable one. The grant was to the defendants 
 and their assigns for ever, for tl'e purposes 
 mentioned in the recital, of the land deacribeil, 
 witii full riglit of ingress and egress to and from 
 tlie said lands for tlie defen(hints, their eni]ilovces 
 and otiiers doing business on and about tiie said 
 waterworks witli teams and otherwise, from a 
 certain street, etc., alonir a certain roa<l, etc. ; 
 lialiiiidtiin to the defemlants, their successors 
 and assigns, for the purposes aforesaid, to and 
 for their sole and oidy use for ever, suljject 
 nevertheless to certain coniiitions. 
 
 Held, that tlie grant of the riglit of way gave 
 to the defendants and their employees foot-way, 
 carriage-way, and way for horses, but eonferreil 
 no rigiit of way njtoii i)ersons to whom tlie 
 defendants might sell or lease the land. McLnui 
 V. City of Si. T/umas. 23 0. R. 1 14. 
 
 Grant — (.'onslrwiion — " AVce.v.vttr//. "] — Tlie 
 plaintiff was t)ie owner of a farm of about a mile 
 in breadth and five-sixths of a mile in length. 
 About two-thirds of the farm was heavily 
 wooded, and the rest of it was cleared and 
 cultivated. The defendant became the pur- 
 chaser of the trees and timber upon the land 
 under an agreement which provided, among 
 other things, that the purchaser should have 
 "full liberty to enter into and upon the said 
 lands for the purpose of removing the trees and 
 timber, at such times and in such manner as he 
 may think proper," liut reserved to the plaintiff 
 the full enjoyment of the land "save and in so 
 far as may be necessary for the cutting and 
 removing of the trees and timber." To have 
 removed the timber through the wooded laud at 
 the time it was removed, would have involved 
 an exjienditure which wnuKl have jiossibly 
 amounted to a sacrifice of the greater portion of 
 the timber : — 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of t!ie t'ourt of 
 Appeal, 19 A. R. 17(), that the defendaiit.s had 
 a right to remove the timber by the most direct 
 and available route, provided tjiey acted in good 
 faith and not unreasonably, and the reservation 
 in favour of the plaintifl' did not niinimi/e oi 
 modify the defendant's riglit, under the general 
 grant of the trees, to remove the trees across 
 the cleared land. Owynne, .J., dissenting. 
 titc/t/iijiis v. Gordon, 22 S.'C. R. (il. 
 
 Orant — Connlrnetion — Prescription .]— In an 
 action for obstructing a right of way the ]>lain- 
 tiflf claimed the use of such right, both liy jtre- I 
 scription and agreement, ami also claimed that 
 by the agreement the way was wholly over 
 the defendant's land. The evidence on the trial 
 shewed that the plaintiff had aeiiuired the land 
 from his father, who retained the adjoining 
 land, which was eventually conveyed to the 
 defendant, and that after so actjuiriiig it the 
 plaintiff continued to use ii track or trail over 
 the adjoining land, and mostly through bush 
 laud, to reach the concession line, and his claim 
 to the use of way by prescii ion depended on 
 whether or not his user was of a well-detined 
 road, or merely of an irregular track, and by 
 license and courtesy of the adjoining owner. 
 Finally an agreement was entered into bct'.veen 
 
 the plaintitfand Iiis brother, wlio had acquired 
 the adjoining lot, whicli he afterwards conveyed 
 to the <lefenilant, by which, in consideration of 
 certain privileges granted to him, the brother 
 covenanted to permit the plaintiff to have a right 
 of way along a lane to which the way formerly 
 used led, and extending forty rods east from 
 the centre of the lot, so as to allow the plaintiff 
 free communication from the defendant's lot 
 along said lane to the concession line. The issue 
 raised on the construction of this agreement was 
 whether the right of way granted thereby should 
 be wholly or in part on the plaintiflf's land, or 
 wholly on that of the defendant : — 
 
 Held, reversing tlie judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, 16 A. R. 'i, and restoring that of the 
 Common I'leas Division, !.")(). R. (i!)9, Ritchie, 
 ('..).. dissenting, that the ]daintitf had no title to 
 tlie right of way by iirescription, the evidence 
 clearly ahcwiiig that the user was not of a well- 
 defined road, but only of a path through bush 
 land, and that he only enjoyed it by license 
 from his f.ither, the adjoining owner, which 
 license was revoked by his father's death ; 
 but :— 
 
 Held, athrming the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, that under the agreement the right of 
 way granted to the ))laintifl was wholly over 
 the defendant's land, the agreement, not being 
 explicit as to the direction of such right of way, 
 rei|uiring a eonstructiou in favour of the plain- 
 tiff and against the grantor, lloqersi. Duncan, 
 IS S. C. R. 710. 
 
 See Sklit'-ili'i/ V. 
 1011. 
 
 Cranston, 22 O. R. .'iOO, an/r. 
 
 IX. TOLF. ROAUS. 
 
 Bates — liiter-secti-.d /.'■/«(/ — Afiindamus.] — 
 .Section 87 of R. S. O. cli. 159, as extended by 
 sec. 157 of that Act, and by 52 Vict. eh. 27 (O. ), 
 applies not only to toll roads owned or hold by 
 private companies, or municipal councils, but 
 also to all toll roads purchased from the late 
 E^rovince of Canada, sc that, where one of such 
 roads is intersected by another of them, a person 
 travelling on the latter ro.ad shall not be 
 charged for the distance travelled fri>ui such 
 intersection to either of the termini of the 
 intersected road, any higher rate of toll than 
 the rate per mile charged by the company for 
 travelling along the entire length of its road 
 from such intersection, but subject to tho pro 
 duction of a ticket, which he is entitled to 
 receive from the last toll-gate on the intersect- 
 ing road, as evidence of his having travelled 
 only from such intersection. 
 
 Mandamus granted to compel the issue of 
 such tickets. Smith v. Connti/ of Wtntivorlh, 20 
 0. R. 209. 
 
 Road Company — Lfixc of Tolls — LinbilUy 
 for Xdjlii/enfi'.] — C. brought an action against 
 the K. it B. Road Co. for injuries sustained 
 from falling over a chain used to fasten the toll- 
 gate on the company's road. On the trial the 
 following facts were proved : The toll-house 
 extended to tho edge of the highway, and in 
 front of it was a short board walk. The gate 
 was attached to a post on the opposite side of 
 the road, and was fastened at night by a chain 
 which was usually carried across the board walk 
 
1016 
 
 ither, who had iic(|uire(l 
 ho afluiwarda conveyed 
 hiuh, in Loiiaideration of 
 ted to him, the brother 
 
 j)laiiitilT to have a right 
 wiiich the way formerly 
 ig forty rods cast front 
 ( as to allow the plaintiff 
 )ni the defendant's lot 
 ncession line. The issue 
 jn of this agreement was 
 y granted thereby should 
 
 1 the plaintiff's land, or 
 ;!feiiilant : — 
 
 nd^ment of the Court of 
 id restoring that of the 
 1, 15 (). R. (109, Kitchie, 
 le plaintill had no title to 
 escription, the evidence 
 D user was not of a well- 
 )f a path through bush 
 ,' enjoyed it by license 
 uljoniing owner, which 
 by his father's death ; 
 
 idgment of the Court of 
 agreement the right of 
 lintitl was wholly over 
 le agreement, not being 
 ion of such right of way, 
 in favour of the plain- 
 tor, llofitrs v. Duncan, 
 
 /o», 22 O. R. rm, anfi. 
 
 . Roads. 
 
 /'nad — Aft'udamus.} — 
 ill. 150, as extended by 
 I by 52 Vict. ch. 27(0.), 
 I oads owned or held by 
 Dunioipal councils, but 
 Lirohased from the late 
 that, where one of such 
 uotherof them, a person 
 ;er road shall not be 
 je travelled fruiii such 
 of the termini of the 
 igher rate of toll than 
 ;d by the company for 
 itire length of its road 
 
 but subject to the pro 
 ihich he is entitled to 
 ill-gate on the intersect- 
 of his having travelled 
 tion. 
 
 o compel the issue of 
 'Jounlij of Wtidworth, 2() 
 
 riKi' of TolU — Liability 
 uglit an action against 
 for injuries sustained 
 1 used to fasten the toll- 
 road. On the trial the 
 roved : The toll-house 
 if the highway, and in 
 board walk. The gate 
 on the opposite side of 
 ned at night by a chain 
 d across the board walk 
 
 1017 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1018 
 
 and held by a large stone against the house, 
 ilie board walk was generallv uscil by foot 
 passengers, and C. walking on it'at niglit tripped 
 over the ehani and fell, sustaining the injuries 
 tor which the action was brought. The toll 
 collector was made a defendant to tiie action, but 
 did not enter a defence. It was shewn that he 
 had made an agreement with the company to 
 pay a fixed sum for the i.rivilege of collecting 
 tolls for the year, and was not to .account for the 
 receijjts. 'J'he company claimed that ho was 
 lessee of the tolls, and that they were not 
 responsd.le for his acts. Tlie jury found, hou ■ 
 '■ver, that in using the chain to fasten the «ate 
 .as he did, he was only following the practice tliat 
 had existed forsome years prcviouslv, and doin>' 
 .18 he had been directed by the coinpany. The 
 statute under which the company was incor- 
 porated contained no express authority lor leas- 
 ing the tolls, but used tlie term " renter " in one 
 section, and in another spoke of a " lea<e or 
 contract " for collecting the tolls. Tlu' coniiiany 
 claimed, also, that C. liad no right to use the 
 board walk in walking along the liighway, 
 and her being there was contributory negligence 
 • m her part which relieved them from liability ^ 
 for the accident :— [ 
 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, Hagarty, 
 O.J.O., dissenting, that a company incorpor- 
 ated under the (Jeneral Road Companies' Act, 
 R. S. O. eh. 159, may validly lease a toll-gate ^ 
 and the right to collect tolls thereat. 
 
 Held, by the Supreme Court of Canada, ' 
 athrmiDg the decision of the Court of Aiipeal 
 Owynne, J., dissenting, that (^ had a ri.dit to • 
 use the boanl walk as pnit of the publio high- 
 way, and was, moreover, invited liy the <■ "in- 
 pany to use it, and there was, therefore, no 
 contributor)- negligence ; that whether the toll 
 ■•oUector was servant of the (tompany or lessee ' 
 of the tolls, the coinpany, under the tiiidini' of 
 the jury, was liable for its art.-*. Cam,,h,n v ' 
 Kingston and Bath Jioad Co. , IS A. K •',S(i •>() i 
 •S. C. R. 605. " ' " I 
 
 ot repair, until he further reports that the road 
 has been put in good and etlicien. repair; and 
 an action will lie at the suit of the AttormA- 
 <.eneial to restrain such collection. 
 
 Iteversed by the ( 'ourt of Appeal, but restored 
 l)y the .Supreme Court of Canada. Attuni>-y. 
 (lnund v. Vawjhun tioailCu., 21 O. R. .■)07 19 
 A. i!. 2;W, 21 S. C. R. (i.-n. ' 
 
 Toll-gates — .S7a^;^x.] _ A turnpike ro.nd 
 company liad been in e- I '.nee for a number of 
 years and had erected i nbgates and collected 
 tolls therefor, wlicn an Act was passed by the 
 (,)uebec Legislature, .-,2 Vict. ch. W, forbhhiinu 
 any such company to place a toll or other gatt- 
 within the limits of a town or village without 
 tlie consent of the corporation. Section 2 of 
 said Act piovi.led that " this Act shall have no 
 retroactive eliect," which section was repealed 
 mthe next ses.sion by .54 Vict. ch. ;i(i. After 
 .)•- \ let ch. 4;i was passed, the company shifted 
 one ot Its toll-gates to a point beyond tlie limits 
 ot the village, which limits were subseciuentlv 
 extended so as to bring said gite within them", 
 the corporation took proceedings against the 
 company, contending that the repeal of sec. 2 of 
 
 '!: : "^.'' '"'V-^'^ '"•"""' ^'"^"^ ^"^t retroactive, and 
 that the shifting of the toll-gate without the 
 consent of the corporation was a violation of said 
 Act : — 
 
 Held, alfirming the deeisimi of the Court of 
 t^ueen s Bench, that as a statute is never retro- 
 active unless made so in express terms, sec •> 
 luid no etlect, and its repeal could not make it 
 retroactive ; that the shifting of the toll-gate 
 was not a violation of the Act, which only 
 applied to the erection of new gates, and that 
 the extension of tlie limits of the village could 
 not allect the pre-existing rights of the company. 
 Viltaije oj St. Joarkim dt la Pointe Claire v 
 lomti- Clair,: T,inq,ike. lioad Co., 2-t S. c" 
 K. 480, 
 
 Road Company— A'pf//j>«rr -Limitation of 
 A(tionx.]—\\\uivc the defendants, a road com- 
 pany, incorporated under the (ieneral Road 
 Companies' Act, H. S. O. ch. 159, sec. 99 of 
 which recpiires them to keep their road in 
 repair, constructed a culvert across it with a 
 post and rail guard at the mouth thereof in 
 such an improper mam sv that the wheel of tlie 
 plaintifTs carriage striking the po.st, he was 
 thrown out of it into the open ditch at tlie end 
 of the culvert, and injured :— 
 
 Held, tint the construction of the culvert 
 and the guard was a thing " done in imrsuance 
 'if the Act" within the meaning of sec. 145, 
 and that therefore the time for bringing the 
 action was limited to within six montlis after 
 the date of the acci<lent. Wttib v. Barton 
 Stoney Creek Consolidated Road Co., 20 O. R 
 
 M'^. 
 
 Road Company— r^/A' — A'e/mir— Attorney. 
 '.'ene)W.]— Held, by the Common Fleas Division 
 that the provisions of the General Road Com- 
 panies' Act, R. S. O. ch. 159, relating to tolls. 
 taken in connection with 53 Vict. ch. 42(0.)^ 
 apply to a road company incorporated by special 
 Act, so as to prevent the company from demand- 
 ing tolls after the engineer aiipointed under .53 
 
 WILL. 
 
 ; 1. 
 : n. 
 
 I in. 
 
 I 
 
 IV. 
 
 v.t. ch. 42 ,0.) has ^r;;ied't^.';;;;:d i^^o^t l.s:.i^:^{;-SS'£:^ t 
 
 Construction, 1018. 
 
 Lkgaciks, 1028. 
 
 Rkvocation and RKyivAL, 10,S2. 
 
 Validity. 
 
 1. Willi in <;uierat, 1033. 
 
 2. Intert.it of Witm^.i-i, 1034. 
 
 3. Mi Intake and Minde-ieriplion, 1034. 
 
 4. Mortmain Art, 1035. 
 
 5. Power of Appointment, 10.39. 
 V. MiscELLANKors Casks, 1040. 
 
 I. Cox.struotion. 
 
 OM\ArB-n—arandMldrcn—I.isue —Leiiacv— 
 I erml of VeMing.]-A testator devised and 
 bequeathed his real anil personal estate to his 
 wife for life, or until remarriage, with powers 
 ot disposal ; and by a residuary clause devised 
 
1019 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1020 
 
 If 
 
 i;uc:itli<;iU ami iiotsiilcl or ilisposcMl nf liy his >M 
 \vifii- iiiiiiic'(liatfly al'tor lu;r doalli or ix-niar- 
 ria^f, t(i Ilia cxcfiitMrH to soil i\iiii oonvcit tin- 
 Baini.' into iiioiuy, ami out of tlif ])i(K'eeils |riy a 
 epucilir Kiini to t;:\cli of iiis livo sons, anil to diviiie 
 tlic baliinui', sliari: and share aliko, botwcui 
 liis thi-co daM;,'liturs. ami if Ins siid daii}ihtfi>- 
 slioiild die liifore him, oi' liii'oi'e said <listri- 
 liution, lo.iving issno, tlio share or sli;u'e> of Ids 
 Kiiid dauglitois so d>ini:: slionld lie divided vat- 
 alily and i)roiiortinmite'.y amongst The eliild or 
 eliiidi'eii of said daughter or daiiglilor.s living at 
 tlie time of said distriliution, so tliat the issue 
 of any of his said ilaughlers who nuglit be dead 
 should receive her or tiieir parents' share. The 
 widow survived tlie testr.tor and I'ied without 
 having remairiud. A son, C K. li., and a 
 daughter, M., also survived th>i testator, but 
 died jirior to the widow, the son leaving no issue, 
 and the daughter a son, F. , anil a daughter, 
 M. C, the said last-named daughter having 
 also died leaving two children ; — 
 
 Held, that the Word f.'iiUlrcii liere must be 
 talien in its primary sense, i.i., the immediate 
 children of the testator, ami excluded grand- 
 children, so that 1"'. took the whole of his 
 mother's share to tlie exclusion of the cliildren 
 of the daugliter M. C; and that the legacy to 
 (_'.. K. K. became vested on testator's death, 
 payable on the widow's death, and that iiis 
 personal rejiresentatives were entitled thereto. 
 yi'..;/rrr.s V. Carmicliael, 21 C). R. (i.'JS. 
 
 Children Taking Sliare of Deceased Par- 
 ent.] — A testator by his will, altci' directing 
 payment of his debts by his e.\ecutois, gave his 
 personal estate and the dwellingdiouse with the 
 land occupied therewith, to his wife for life, and 
 alter her decease to his daughter M., and gave 
 M. a legacy of ji-'.OOO. He then devised the 
 reshlue of his real estate to Ids ex.cutors in 
 trust, to lease the same and pay the interest to his 
 wil'o for life, and after her death to sell the same 
 and divide the proceeds between his children, 
 share and share alike. At the time of the testa- 
 tor'sdeath, the personal estate was of small value, 
 and was exceeded by the' amount of the debts ; 
 and it did not a])pear whether, when the will 
 was made, the testator had sullicient persona! 
 estate out of which the legacy could be paid : — 
 
 Held, that M. eould not claim to have the 
 8"2,000 paid out of the proceeds of the real estate 
 devised to the executors, but that there should 
 be no deduction from her share by reason of the 
 real estate devised to her : — 
 
 Held, also, that the children of a deceased 
 child took the share of the proceeds of the real 
 estate which their jiarent was entitled to. Tot- 
 ttii V. Tollm, 20 O. R. .■")(»5. 
 
 Conditional Pee — Exenttory TJcmx'-.]— A tes- 
 tator by his will devised ps follows: — " I give 
 and bequeath to my son V. . . lot No. 
 at the age of twenty-one year.^, giving 
 the executors power to lift the rent and to rent, 
 said executors paying F. all former rents due 
 after my decease up to his attaining the age of 
 twenty-one year?. 
 
 "At the death of any one of my sensor 
 d.uighters having no issue, their property to 1)e 
 divided equally among the survivors." 
 
 F. attained twenty-ono and died unmarried 
 and without issue : — 
 
 llelil, a conditional fee, with ;\ii executory de- 
 vice over. Lilt/' V. /lil/iiii/s, '21 (Jr. ;!,">.'{, dis- 
 tinguished. Ci-uirjoril V. Iti-oihh,, •_'.")(). I;. U35. 
 lieversed in a|Jiieal on another point, 'J'2 A.R. 
 .'!l»7. 
 
 Condition Precedent— t'onnatinn nf I'art- 
 II,, skin — I'ridecii'nt d' Inleuilnl J''iilutr.] — A 
 teslatcr liy his will i.uveted that " as soon as 
 conveniently may lie after my decease, a part- 
 ui rsliij) be lormul liv my two sons ... in 
 w hich partnership and lirm my two sons sliall 
 )'c equal partners in every particular, and shar- 
 ir.g equally in the prolits of the same. To the 
 said lirm so to be fo'incd I give and bequeath as 
 partneishiii assets, tiie building," etc. The tes- 
 tator then proceeded to give and bcip.iealh to the 
 said firm certain speeilic lands ;.nd personal pro- 
 perty, and ultimately tho wdiole of liis residuary 
 re:d and ]ici>:onal estate. After the death of 
 01 |. if his said sons, who predeceased him, he 
 m ide some codicils to his will, in which he re- 
 ferred to the above portion of his will and re- 
 voked some of the liequcsts to the said firm, but 
 otheiwise ratified his will : — 
 
 Held, that tlie formation of the partnershipas 
 directed was a condition precedent to the vest- 
 ing of the gifts and bequests above mentioned, 
 av.d that, as one of the two sons predeceased the 
 testator, there was iiii intestacy as to them. 
 • :.lrca/liim V. ilhlAhll, 23 <). I!. 5:;"7. 
 
 Condition Subsequent — J'ayineut <;/' Jfort- 
 ;/(/;/'■.] -Where land is devised upon condition 
 that a mortgage thereon be jniiil by the devisee, 
 and the devisor pays olF the mortgage, the de- 
 vise is good, such a condition being a emidition 
 sub.sequent. 
 
 Judgment of Ferguson, J., 2-1 0. R. 132, on 
 this i)oint altirmed. McKiiiiKni v. Liindi/, 21 A. 
 ]!. .")()(). Reversed on another jioint by the Su- 
 (jreiiie Court. Linidi/v. I.iindij, 24 S. C. H. 650. 
 
 Defeasible Fee.] — A testatrix devised separ- 
 ate lots of land to each of her two daughters, 
 A. and 15., and then provided that if " either of 
 my daughters die M-ithout lawful issue, the part 
 and portion of the deceased sliall revert to the 
 ■ surviving daughter, and in case of both dying 
 , without issue, then I authorize '' . . naming 
 her executors and other living pcr.sons to sub- 
 divide the estate among her relatives as they 
 ' should deem right and equitable. li. conveyed 
 ' the lot devised to her to a purchaser, through 
 ! whom, iiiB.'s lifetime, title was sought to be 
 ! niinle : — 
 
 Held, that B. took only a defeasible fee 
 simple with a devise over to her sister and her 
 heirs in case 15. shouhl die leaving no issue at 
 her death. 15. being still alive, it was impos- 
 sible to say that a convevanee from her passed 
 a good title. Littb' v. Hiniuri-% 27 (!r. 3.n3, fol- 
 lowed. A-<hh-id<t>' V. Ashbrklur, 22 (). R. 146, 
 ! not followed. XiL^iOH v. Armntroiif/, 22 O. 1>. 542. 
 AlHrmed in appeal, 21 A. R. 18.3. Reversed in 
 the .Supreme Court, 25 S. C. R. 263. 
 
 ] Description of Land — Devixe of Land Fac- 
 iii'j on Two Streets III/ Description of How^e Facing 
 oi; (hi".'] — In 18.S() a testator by his will devised 
 
 I to his brother "all that real estate now owned 
 by me, being No. 32 on the north side of A. 
 street, for and during his life," and afterwards 
 
 I over, aud then made a general residuary devise 
 
1020 
 
 eij, with .111 oxccutory ile- 
 lil/l iK/s, '_'7 <Ji'. It.'IJ, (lis- 
 ' V. fh-iuhh,, •_'.■)(). 1!.C35. 
 1 aiKitliti- i>uiiit, 112 A.R. 
 
 snt — I'ofmoiiiiH of Part- 
 'I' Jiifeiiilnl J'arlnu:] — A 
 inctL'il that " as soon as 
 iltci- my (l(/ooasu, a part- 
 iiiy t\V(i sons ... in 
 1 lirm my two sohk sliull 
 x'l'y iiarliiular, unci sliar- 
 its ot tlic haiiie. 'I'o tliu 
 i_(l 1 give ;iiiil l)Ui|UeatliU8 
 
 IniiKllui;,'' ctf. 'I'lie tes- 
 ) give auil liuquoatli to the 
 ic hinds uiid pfrsonal pro- 
 tho whok- (if jiis rusiduary 
 ite. Aftin' the death of 
 ,vh() jirudeceasi'd him, he 
 
 liis will, in wliiuli lie re- 
 ortiiin of his will and re- 
 ucsts to the said tirni, Imt 
 vill :— 
 
 ition of the partnership as 
 :>n precedtnc to the vest- 
 '(|Uests aliove mentioned, 
 
 two sons predeceased the 
 m intestacy as to them. 
 
 23 (). 1^ rySl. 
 
 aent — I'ayiiiPiit (;/' Mort- 
 i devised upon condition 
 :jii lie paid by the devisee, 
 oil' tlie mortgage, the de- 
 indition being a eondition 
 
 son, .T., 2-: (). r;. l;5-2, on 
 
 tcKiiiuon V. Lniidii, 21 A. 
 
 another point by the Su- 
 
 .-. L,iH<li/, 24 S. C. R. 650. 
 
 A testatrix devised separ- 
 
 ch of her two daughters, 
 
 rovided tliat if " either of 
 
 lont lawful issue, the part 
 
 jeased sliall revert to the 
 
 iid in case of both dying 
 
 authorize " . . naming 
 
 ler living persons to sub- 
 
 lUg her relatives as they 
 
 eijuitable. 15. conveyed 
 
 to a purchaser, through 
 
 i, title was sought to be 
 
 ik only a defeasible fee 
 river to her sister and her 
 d ilic leaving no issue at 
 still alive, it w.is inipos- 
 ivevance from her passed 
 , Ii'i/ling.% 27 Cr, .S.^3, fol- 
 Axkhrkhi"., 22 (). R. 146, 
 ■.ArmHtrouq/12 0. I!. 542. 
 A. R. IS.3! Reversed in 
 5 S. C. R. 263. 
 
 nd— Z>ei!i.se of Land Foe- 
 )escripliun of Houte Facing 
 .■it.ator by his will devised 
 lat real estate now owned 
 
 on the north side of A. 
 
 his life," and afterwards 
 i general residuary devise 
 
 1021 
 
 WILL. 
 
 of the rest of Ida land to Ids si,tera. It appeared 
 that Ml lM(i7 the testator pu.vha.'jed the land iu 
 .nicHtion, with a frontage of twenty-six feet on 
 A. street, by a dcp-.l, „f 200 fret to a"lane twenty 
 feet wule, which lane was in 1,S,S2 converted 
 into I' street At tho tim,, of purchase there 
 was a house facing on A. street known as Xo 
 .(•-, and also 01 ■• facing on the lane, afterwar.ls 
 known as No, 21 I' street, occupied as .listinet 
 tenements, an 1 each with a fence in the rear 
 but with certain ground between the two fences 
 nseii to some extent in connnon : — 
 V '"^'^'''' /''''' *''" «l'i''.'ilic devise W.IS eonlinod to 
 -No. .i~ A. street, and tiic lands appcrtainim' to 
 It, to tlie exchisiou „f the liousc on I'. streetTuid 
 the lands appert lining to it, whi.^h passed un<ler 
 the residuary devise. S,;,,.li„i v. ticai,/o,i, 22 O. 
 
 Devise to Ohilclren and Their Issue /',)■ 
 .S^V/<;.s or /;,■ r,V/,;/a.|-L-nder the fullowin- 
 provision of a will, "When niv beloved wife sliafl 
 have departed this life, and 'my daughters shall 
 have married or departed tliis life, I direct and 
 rejiuire my trusti'es .md e,\ecutors to convert the 
 whole ot my estate into monty . . . .-m,! to 
 divide the same e(|iially among those of my said 
 8ons and daughters wlio m,..y il,en be living, and 
 the children of those of my siid .sons aiiddaULdi- 
 ters who niay have departed ihis life previous 
 thereto : — ' 
 
 field, reversing the jud£;ment of tlie Court of 
 Appciil, 18 A. K. 2.-), .si,'> noin. Wrh//,> v. A',// 
 Kitchie, C ,1., di.s.s,mting, that the .listribution 
 ot the estate should be /.e,- rj,/,Ua and not ».-,• 
 ■sUt-pen. Jlouijhton v. IhU, 23 S. C. R. 498. 
 
 Devise to Sons Without Words of Limita- 
 tion— "y^/e IIV//(o)// Lairfid I-<.iie"~"Su): 
 I vor"~E>ital^ in F,f. Simple— Esi„tc TaUA— 
 he testator died in LS4.j, ami by his will 
 devised a farm to his two sons, without words 
 of limit.'.tion, to bj equally divided between 
 them, adding : " And in ea-^e either of my sons 
 should die without lawful issue of their bodies 
 then his share to go to the remaining sur- 
 vivor : — ° 
 
 Held, that the gift in the earlier part of the 
 devise, though without words of limitation, was 
 suthcient to carry the fee to the sons, unless a 
 lessor estate apjieared to be intended on the 
 laee of the will. 
 
 Roth sons outlived the father ; one died in 
 I S74, leaving issue; the other die<l without 
 issue 111 1800 : — 
 
 Held, that the sou who Hrst died had an 
 estate 111 fee simple absolute in one-half of the 
 land ; and, as the other left no survivor, he was 
 not within the words of the will, .and nothing 
 liad happened to divest him of the estate in foe 
 given by the earlier part of the will, and there- 
 tore.lie also died seized in fee simple of one-half 
 of the lan.l. 
 
 The word "survivor ' is to be read as mean- 
 lier. " 
 
 • 1 c" "" .. .;"" >.>.i.ssiie" do not mean 
 
 an mdehnite failure of issue which would give 
 rise to anestate tail. Axhhridje v. AMmdijc, 22 
 O, R. 146. 
 
 1022 
 
 xne word -"survivor is to 
 
 in^ "longest liver,'' not "otii 
 
 The words "die without i.ss 
 
 Estate in Fee-"Ah^o/uU/y "-"Iti'he Ewnt 
 n-lu . .^'^«'/'-"]— A testator who died on the 
 9th April, 1891, seized in fee, by his will devised 
 and bequeathed all his real and personal estate 
 
 I to h,« wife absolnt.'ly, ,,n,l in the event of her 
 ile.ith to be tcpially .l.vided among his ehild- 
 
 I JK'hl, llut the will was to b( c(Miatriied as if 
 
 j tlie words "111 my lifetime " followed the wor.U 
 
 ni t.ie event of her death," and that the 
 
 widow took an estate in fee simple in the lamls 
 
 Lonstructmn of sec. ;!il „f the Wills Act' 
 
 H. S ( ). ch. 101). /;, 11',,//,, , „„/ /,,.,„,, ..mo; 
 
 ; B3tato Tall-"/.,..,,, "--" Fe,:Simi>l,:-'~Shtl. 
 I -V/,, (a.."--/„y.„/,-„„ j_.A testator by the third 
 <.-l,uise of Ir.s will devised certain l.mds "to 
 my son James, for the full term of his natural 
 ite, ami fr,,m and utter his decease, to the law- 
 till isMie ut my said son .lames, to hohl in fee 
 , simjde ; but ill def.uilt of sucli issue him sur- 
 Iviving, then to my daughter .^arah .lane, for 
 I the term of her natural lite ; and npon the ,leath 
 of my daughter ,Sa;;.h .Jane, then to the lawful 
 i.s.-^ue,,) inv.said .laughtei Sarah .lane, to h.dd 
 m tee sinip.e ; but in default of such i.ssiie of n.v 
 said daughter .S.u'ali ,lanc, then tu my brothers 
 ami .sLsters and their heirs in cqu.i'l shai-e.s." 
 l.yaiat-r clause the te-iator added : " It is 
 my intention that upon the decease of either of 
 my sai.l chi.,lren without i.ssue, if my other 
 c iih be then dead, the issue of snch latter 
 e.ild, 1 any, ..liall at once take the fee simple 
 ot the devise mentioned in the tliir.l clause of 
 my will ; — 
 
 T ^\f}\ '■f';''f,'"'-^ t''« ,i'"lK""'"t of Kergnson, 
 .1., 2. t). R. .m that the clauses nuNt bt rea.l 
 together, and that, having reg.ird to the latter 
 clan.se, and to the direction that the issue of 
 James were to take in fee simple, there was a 
 sutficiently clear expression (,f intention to .'ive 
 James a liteestate only, to prevent the appliea- 
 ti.m ot the rule in .Sh.J/cf.s r.,.,. Av'm.v v. 
 
 r"'''l L-^: ^.- •?'"• --^""""^'l ''V tlie Supreme 
 Court, 24 S. ('. I!. .S,-)(i. ' 
 
 Estate Tall -AV«w ,•„,/,.,■. ]_A testator by his 
 will devi.sed to Ids sou, and " to the heirs ot' his 
 body a part of his real estate, ami to his 
 .laughter, and "to the heirs of her body " the 
 remainder of the property, and if "'either 
 . . . should die without leaving heirs of 
 tiieir body, the share of the deceased to the 
 survivor, and "to the heirs of their body" 
 : . ._ and shouhl both die " without leav- 
 ing living i.s.sue,' then over in fee simple. Tho 
 daughter died in the lifetime of her brother 
 witlnmt issue. The son married and hud livin<^ 
 issue, aud conveyed in fee :— "'' 
 
 Held, that .111 estate tail vested in the son 
 ami that there was nothing in the will to .'ive 
 the words " die without leaving livin.r JssSe " 
 the meaning of "an indehnite tailiire of issue'" 
 and that the ultimate remainder in fee sirnnie 
 expectant on the estate tail couM be barred bv 
 tho son. lie Franer ami Bdl, 21 (). R. 4,--,,-,. 
 
 Executory Deviae-Dealh of De.msee li^fora 
 OoHlaviniaj //appe„..y-A testator devised his 
 tarm to his wite "to have aud to hold unto my 
 said wite until my daughter K. K. shall arrive 
 at the age of tweutv-one years. After tha*- tn 
 my sai.l daughter aud her heirs forever "and 
 should my said daughter die before attaininjt 
 the age of twenty-one yeans, I give and devi^ 
 the said farm to my said wife, to have and to 
 Hold unto her aud )ier heirs forev«r." The 
 
loss 
 
 WILL. 
 
 lOStr 
 
 m 
 
 |J: 
 
 widow iliid intestate hifciro lln^ dauKlittT, who 
 was the only iliilil, and who hriHulf clicd intuti- 
 taU) and uiuuariifd bofoiu iiUaiiiing twenty- 
 one :— , , 1 lit 
 Htdd, that the widow, under the »econ(l gUt 
 to her, to<ik an oxocutoiy devise in fee, wlii ;h 
 pa«8ed ui)on lii-r ileath to the danyiiti'r, upon 
 whoRC deatli it i)\HstMl to lier proper re[)reHenl.i- 
 tivcB. /iV Boiitij-'lioirnjy. Anlill, 21 (). K. 'MW. 
 
 Executory Vevlae—ffappenino oj Event— 
 Vtsttii EMnt<'.\-\ ti'stator devised a farm to his ^ 
 executors in tiawt for liis grandson, with power i 
 to aell and apply tliu liroeeeds for liis heneht ; j 
 ar.din case lie died hefore attaining twenty-one, ! 
 they were to transfiT the l;ind, or, if sold, the i 
 iMklance of the procteds, to liis f.itlier. The 
 father died before IiIm son, wlio died_ before 
 attaining twenty-one, w ithout issue. The land 
 was not sold :- - ^ , i ^ 
 
 Held, that tlu^ grandson took a vested estate 
 in fee simple, 8'.il>iett to be divested on Hie hap- 
 nening of a certain event, which liad become 
 impossible, and tliat his estate liad l)ecoine 
 absolute. I'ufh" v. Tnixt', C'irpo.afion of 
 Vntiirio, 2<i<). K. 4!M. 
 
 during the son's lifetime or at hig doftth and 
 not an imletinite failure, and that by virtue of 
 tlie sul)sei|Uenc clause he took a life estate and 
 not an estate tail by impli' ition, and timt on. 
 'ho termitiation of the lile estate the lands fell 
 in and formed part of tlie residue. /.'■ Ihrd and 
 nrrininr^i Coi./mcl, :>>.) L. T. N. «. KW. '"'d 
 SiMmu'I v. (.'iianlhDiixr, 7 O. K. 'I'M , di-am- 
 guished. Atmliii v. Chawllar, 26 O. H. 81. 
 
 InoonaistentClauBes. ]— A testator l>y tin' 
 
 thiril clause of liis will, uiaite in nund)ered 
 
 clauses, devised a lot to bis son F., and l).v 
 
 the fourth clause be appointc<l executory ami 
 
 devised another lot to tlieui to be disposed of 
 
 l)y them for the benelit of named sons and 
 
 I daughters in certain shares and amounts. In 
 
 ' this idause tliere wiis the following paragi'aph : 
 
 !"At the death of any one of my sons -or 
 
 ' daughters having no issue, their property to- 
 
 1 be divided e(iuallv auiong the surviv(us ; " — 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Chan- 
 
 I eery Di.ision, -r. (). h. C.i.j, .Street, .!., dissent- 
 
 ' ing" that this paragrajdi did not apjdy to or 
 
 modify the devise to K. ni the thud clause. 
 
 Crawford v. Bruddij, '22 A. R. :107. 
 
 Executory Vevlae—Rtaidunr!/ i>ecj>.]— A ^ 
 testator devi.sed certain land to his son W. dur- i 
 ing his lifetime ; and in tlw; event of his death, | 
 leaving his wife surviving him, be devised- the 
 rents, issues, and profits to her during her life- 
 time or widowhood ; but in the event of both 
 dying within thirty years from liis death, in 
 such case he devised the rents and profits 
 theieof, until the expiration of such thirty years, 
 to W.'s children e(iually, share iind share alike ; 
 and after W.'s de.itli, and after the death or 
 remarriage of his said wife, and provided that 
 the thirty years should have elapsed, to all of 
 W.'s ohih'ien by his said wife, share and share 
 alike, to have and to hold the same after 
 the specified perioils to them, their heirs and 
 a:>sign8 forever. By the last clause of the will, 
 the testator gave all the residue of his estate, 
 real, personal, and mixt il, of whatever nature or 
 kind soever, and not otherwise disposed of by 
 his will, to W. , to have and to hold the same 
 to him, his heirs and assigns forever. 
 
 The testator died on the !hh .lanuary, 1ST() ; 
 W. and liis wife both survived the testator and 
 enjoyed their life estates, and died leaving child- 
 ren still surviving :— 
 
 Held, that under the will the fee in the land, 
 subject to the estate devised to the children 
 until the expiration of the thirty years, vested , 
 in W. and his heirs, and, in the absence of j 
 any evide'ice shewing w hether or not W. had 
 ditposed of the land, the children could not 
 impart a g..od title in fee. Ii'<- Garbult and 
 Uovidrfi', 'Ai O. K. 62.^. 
 
 Failure of Issue. ]-^-Hy his will the twtator 
 devised to his son the use during bis lifetime 
 of certain land, but if he died without issue, 
 then it was to be etjually divided between two 
 named grandsons, and by a subsequent clause, 
 on the death of the testator's widow, he directed 
 that the said land and all other property not 
 bequeathed by his will sliouldbe equally divided 
 amongst all his children. The son died, leaving 
 issue, his mother predeceasing him : — 
 
 Held, that under R. S. O. ch. 109, sec. 32, 
 the failure of issue referred to was a failure 
 
 Infant— il/(<if' ikokc.]— Under a devise of 
 h iiil to a father " during his life for the support 
 and maintenance of hinistlf and his (three) 
 cbildicn, with remain.ler to the heirs of his 
 body, or to such of his chlidren as he may 
 devise the same to," there is no trust in favour 
 of the children so as to give them a beneficial 
 interest apart from and independent of then- 
 father, but the children being in needy circuin- 
 stances ^ill be entitled as against the fathers 
 execi-tion eieditor who has been appointed 
 receiver of his interest to have a share of the 
 income set apart for their maintenance and .sup- 
 port, ami in arriving at the share it is reason- 
 able to divide the income into aliipiot parts, 
 thus giving one-fourth to the receiver. Al'iii 
 V. Furiiess,'20 A. K. 34. 
 
 Mistake— Z>''rf<^oH to JJinile in htiiiosaih/e 
 Fr,irHoii.t. 1— A testator by his will directed : 
 " When my youngest son is of the age of 
 1 eighteen years, my estate shall be dividtil 
 anu.ngmy children then living, i.>'., to each of 
 my sons I leave two-thirds, and to each of my 
 daughters one-third, of all my estate and 
 efleets." VVhen the youngest son attained 
 eighteen, there were tlieu twelve children 
 living, seven daughters and live tons :— 
 
 Hehl, that the most reasonable and satisfac- 
 tory construction of this clause, having legaril 
 to the words used, was that each child should 
 have a share, but that each sou's portion should 
 be double that of a daughter. 
 
 The principle of construction in such case:< 
 of mistakes in wills is that the "words are 
 not corrected, but the intention, when clearly 
 ascertained, is carried out, notwithstanding th« 
 apparent difficulty caused by the particulai 
 words." Laiihy v. Crtwxoii, 21 O. R. 93. 
 
 "My Lawful Heirs" — Time wlun Hnr 
 Ainrtai)ii-d.]—A testator by hia will, after j 
 gift to his daughter and her mother for thei 
 joint lives, and to the survivor of them, directec 
 that " at the decease of both, the residue of m; 
 real and perscmal jiroperty shall be enjoyed 1) 
 and go to the benefit of my lawful heirs." Bot 
 
102« 
 
 llfctiiiiu or III liiH iluatli iiiiil 
 failure, and that l)y virtiio of 
 I'liUiMu 111' took a lift) (.'Stato ami 
 il liy iiiiiili'atioii, anil that on. 
 of tiio lilt! vA-Mv- the lantU fell 
 irtof theroHiiliie. /.'' Hint ami 
 n„-t, r.it L. T. N. S. Itili, anil 
 irdhoifo; 7 O. K. S.'lt , iliHliii- 
 In V. Chanillar, '26 O. H. 81. 
 
 OlauRes. 1 — A teHtator l>y the 
 liis will, ii::iile in niinihoreil 
 
 I a lot to liist «on F., anil li.v 
 He he appoiiiteil exeiiltorf. and 
 r lot to llieni to lie iliHposed of 
 he lienelit of namt'l boos and 
 itnin hharea and aniounts. In 
 L- wiiH the following i)aru^!tai)h : 
 
 II of any one of my souh -or 
 ng no issue, their iiroperty to 
 lUv among tlu! survivors ; " — 
 ng the judgment of the Chan- 
 >,") (). K. li:!"), Street, J., tliasent- 
 panigraiih did not apply to or 
 vise to V. ni the third elause. 
 ■„<l,ly, 22 A. R. ;i07. 
 
 »■)/, wdiKr.]— Under a devise of 
 ■ " during his life for the support 
 ice of himself aiul his (three) 
 
 remainder to the heirs of his 
 ueh of his ehlidren as he may 
 e to," there is no trust in favour 
 n so lis to give them a litnelieial 
 
 from and independent of_ their 
 ! ehildren being in needy cireuin- 
 e entitled as against the father's 
 ditor who has been appointed 
 i interest to have a share of the 
 irt for their maintenance and sup- 
 rriving at the share it is reason- 
 J the income into aliiiuot parts, 
 ne-fourth to the receiver. Allen 
 A. K. 34. 
 
 Dhrrlloii to Diridi' in Inijioi-tihle 
 i testator hy Ids will directed :. 
 
 youngest son is of the age tit i 
 ■s, my estate shall be divided | 
 ihlren then living, i.'-., to each oi ' 
 ve two-thirds, iuid to each of my 
 le-third, of all my estate and 
 hen the voun^est son attained! 
 .■re were 'then twelve ehildieni 
 daughters and live tons :— 1 
 
 the most reasonable and satisfac- ; 
 tion of this clause, having regardj 
 used, was that each child should | 
 
 but thnt each son's portion should 
 Lt of a daughter. 
 
 pie of construction in such case^ 
 in wills is that the "words arc 
 , but the intention, when clearly 
 s carried out, notwithstanding the 
 liculty caused by the particulai 
 .,l)ij v. Ciewwii, 21 0. R. 93. 
 
 rful Heirs " — '/"/'"le v>Ii()i Hiir 
 _A testator by his will, after ; 
 lughler :iiid lier mother for thei 
 id to the survivor of thein, ilireotei 
 decease of both, 'i-he residue of nv 
 ional property shall be enjoyed b; 
 e benefit of my lawful heirs." Botl 
 
 1026 
 
 WILL. 
 
 H.irvive.1 the teBtator ami died, the daughter 
 snrv.vmg the „,..lher. At the death o? the 
 u ,",''• '''"'^''t^'f was his iiidy heir •- 
 Held, that the testator Inid Inmsilf ixihnle.l 
 his .laughter from benig treated as la.i. uf his 
 noifB, anil jiy the exi.resniim " mv lawful hiirs" 
 moani the person* who at the time ..f t||,. ,l,.ath 
 of the lust surMVor of Ids wile and d,iu;;hter 
 «houM then be his heirs-at-kw ./n,„ < v ( W- 
 »',!?, ^ '■"• •'***■ "l'l""ved and speiiallv r. ferred 
 to. llio)„,.snH V. Sinilh, 250. R. (i.-.2. ileveraed 
 in apiical, 23 A. R. 2it. '"^^tiaui 
 
 "My Own Rlsht Helrs."l-A testator by 
 hw wdl , Incited that his trustees should, in 
 eortain events, after the death of hi- wife and 
 'laughter sell all Ids estate, real and inisonal, 
 an. divide the same ei|ually amongst his ■• own 
 right heirs ' who niiglit prove their relation- 
 snip, etc. :-— 
 
 Held that the conversion directed created a 
 Idemlcd funil ilerived from realty and person- 
 alty, t.> be distributed eiiuallyamon- the same 
 elass of persons, and that the words •• my own 
 right heirs" signitied those who won! take 
 real estate as upon an intestacy, and not nextof 
 kin, and that children of any tleceased heirs at 
 law were entitled to sine pn- Mi,;„s. Cijat.'<- 
 worth V. Cur..on, 24 O. il. 185. .V« the next 
 case. 
 
 ;'My Own Right Heirs."— /'^r/f-/ „/• \snr- 
 lawmtnt-Dislriljulion of EM.itt - " kmrntly-' 
 -1.V Capita ami not /Vr .SV,Vy., v.l_Upon ap- 
 peal froin the Master's report on a reference for 
 the administration of the estate of the teft.itor 
 whose will was construed in CoatH,n„th v Car- 
 ■ioii, 24 0. R. 185:- 
 
 Hel.l, having regard to the judamtnt in that 
 case, that the " right heirs" were to be a.,cei- 
 
 tained at the .late of the death of tlie testator's 
 daughter, and among tin m the whole of the 
 
 estate was to be divided etpially, share and 
 
 share alike. 
 
 The exiiression ••per xtirpe^" in the former 
 
 judgment was improvidently used, due weight 
 
 not having been given to the word " eoually " 
 
 Ue terguson— Bennett v. CoatworUi, -Jo O 1! 
 
 591. 
 
 102$ 
 
 "Nearest ot Kin" - Period of Asnrtain- 
 menl—1 kimntu in Common—" r/u,»."]— In the 
 absence of any controlling context, tlic i.ersoiis 
 entitled under the description " nearest of kin ' 
 in a will are the nearest blood relations of the 
 testator at the time of his death in an ascend- 
 ing and descending scale. 
 
 An.' where the testator devised his farm to 
 his only chiltl a daughter, giving his widow the 
 use of It until the daughter became ot age or 
 married, and provided that in the event of the 
 latter dying without issue, " then in that ease " 
 It should be equally divided between liis ■ -nearest 
 of kin ; and the daughter died while still an 
 infant and unmarried : — 
 
 Held, that although the pensons intended by 
 the desijription took only in defeasaiu e of the 
 fee simple given to the daughter alone in the 
 nrst instance, she was nevertheless iiitlthd as 
 one of the "nearest of kin ; " and the widow, 
 as heiress-at-law of the daughter, and the 
 lather and mother of the testator, were each 
 entitled to an undivided one-third in fee simple 
 08 tenants in common. Bullock v. Dotcne.-, 9 
 05 
 
 II. L, r. 1 ; Mortiiiio)!' V. A/ur/imore, 4 Aim. 
 (as 44S! and AV, rurd, /'all,,, v. .V/«,r/.,, tl> 
 L. I. N. .S. ,-,, foUowed. 
 
 The wonl "then," intro.lucin,' the idtiniule 
 devise, was not iiKcd as an adverb of time but 
 merely as the ..■ipiivalent ot the euuession " in 
 that case, ■ which followed it, and did not atlect 
 the lonstruition of tlie will. 
 
 The «idow renuiined in possissioii after the 
 lU'ath of llie testator, with her infant daughter, 
 whom she su|iported out of the iviits, until an 
 order ivas maile under It. .S, O. ch. l;t7 permit- 
 ting her to le.ise the t'arin, to retain one-third of 
 the rents for herself as dowiess, ami to apply 
 the remaining two-thirds in supportiiiL' thu 
 infant ; — ■ i b 
 
 Held, that slie was put to her election by the 
 terms of tlie will, but that she had not ei.eted 
 to take under it, and was theretore entitled to 
 dower out ol thu farm in addition to tjie one- 
 K""i'.' .','-', ^^''' '*'"'l'l"- firubant v. La/ondt, 2B 
 
 Personalty— irocf/x o/ Limiiaiion in Tail 
 A/>i>/„:d fo.\- A testator be(,ii,i,llied personal 
 estate to his wife, "to have and to hold unto 
 her and the heirs of her body thiougli her mar- 
 riage with me, their, and each of their sole and 
 only use forever : "— 
 
 Ht^^lil, that the wife was entitled to the per- 
 sonalty absolutely, there being nothing to shew 
 that the testator meant that the words, " heirs 
 of her boily through her marriagt! with me '" 
 shoiild import aiij thing dilTeient from their 
 ordinaiy, natural meaning. Crair/ord v. 'J'rut- 
 tcr, 4 Maild. 361, distinguished. Fuller v 
 Awltrm>ii, 20 O. R. 424. 
 
 ^ Poor of County — Town Ihkulitd from 
 ( ouulii Jin- Muniripal Purpo.'ieK Ouly—ll:,//,/ of 
 h'f.-iidi hl-t of Town to /'tirtiViV'a(e.]— The testa- 
 trix by her will gave the residue of her estate 
 in trust for a certain class of the poor of a 
 county, "who must have been /«)»(? /Ide rtsi- 
 (leuts of the said county before becoming 
 destitute or needy." A town in thu county 
 originally formetl lart thereof for all purDose.s 
 
 hilt Miiu ill ly/^o ,,.,.l„.. .1 • ■ ' '.• . .' ' 
 
 --0 ,/ _ -.. ^.... V v.iviv. IL I,. I till [an |Hises, 
 
 but was 111 1S59, under the provisions of the 
 Municipal Act then in force, detached from the 
 
 county for municipal purjioses only : 
 
 Held, in the absence of anything in the con- 
 text of the will clearly to tiie contrary, that 
 residents of the town coming within the class 
 referred to in the l)ei|uest were included therein 
 Slftle V. Crortr, 26 O. R. 92. 
 
 "Property— "^v^rt/.."] — Either of the 
 words "property" .)r "estate" is sufficient to 
 pass realty under a will. Camiron v. IJarutr 
 21 .S. C. R. 27.3. ■^ ' 
 
 Right to "a Home"— Interent in Land.]— 
 A testator devisetl land to one in trust, tirst, to 
 permit his nephew and his wife and children to 
 use it for a home, and, second, to convey it t(> 
 such child of the nephew as the latter should 
 nominate in his will. The nephew and his 
 family were living upon tl;e lanil at the time of 
 thu making of the will and at the death of the 
 testator, when there were two dwelling-houscw 
 tiiereon. Afterwards the trustee and the 
 nephew's father-in-law, at their expense, im- 
 proved and altered the property so that the 
 number of houses was increased to seven. The 
 
1027 
 
 WILL 
 
 1028 
 
 I !, 
 J- ' 
 
 iicliliiw livcjil Willi lii.i liiiiily ill Mill' mill iti'uivml I 
 
 tllll I'LlllM III' I llll lltlllTH, [ 
 
 111 ail ii.tiiiii liy Jiiilniiifiit iii'ililiirs ul lliu 
 iicpln'W mid Ills wifr, Hockiiii< the apiinintim-iit 
 of H ri'crivri- III loijc'ivi' till' niiiH in .itaittutioii 
 
 <lf tllf il|il;,'llll'lll ; 
 
 lli'lil, lliiit the jiiilgiiii'iil Irlit.ii'.i tiiiik nil 
 t'Mtiitu in till' liiiiil uiiilt'i' llir ttlil, ami Miitjiin^ 
 Uliiic tliuii tlir ii.;lit til i.'iill upon tin: tiiiNtci' tn 
 |i(.'l'liiit tliclii to II--I: till' liiinl till " a lioiiit',' wliirli 
 t'XjIlfHsillll, IkhmVIT, IIK'UIlt Ulul'u tli.ui HJiiiply 
 
 u IiiiiiHu to liM' in; tliiit tlu'y «i'i'o iintitltil 
 
 to till,' .lllviUltil;,'!: of till! ilKTC'llsLiI VllllU? of 
 
 tlui IiukI ; and tliat tliiMi' riglit to tliu ii^r nt' 
 tin: land lor a lioiiic could not lie roaolmd tliroiij^li 
 a rc!>i'ivi'r mo as to niakf it availaldi! lor tlic 
 watisliiclioii (if tilt' plaiiitills' ilaiin. Al/rii v. 
 Fiiniis.i, 20 A. K. ."14, liisliii^in-liud. Cuiutroii 
 V. vl(/(//,/s -2:, (». K. •J'.'K, 
 
 RlKht to Remain and Live on " Place " 
 while Unmarried.) A ti-latnr l,y Ids uiU 
 
 iitrson or |m i .,oiis wlioniHoi'vcr : (o liavii and to 
 liold till! h.iid lii'iiliy In i|iiiatlncl and j^ivrii pro- 
 puity to tin.' Maid .laiiii's .Mc( iii-),'ur, IiIh lieii-8 
 and assiyiiH, slioiild lni siii \ ivu his Hiiid inotiiur, 
 iiH iiMil lor IiIm and tlu'irown iiiopi'i ty forever, 
 and in tin.' I'Vunt of liis ini'iU'ciusiiiH lim Maid 
 niutlur, tin.' said Hi'Kii .Nlain'is, Inr Inirs ainl 
 
 iwii propt-rty 
 
 iishijjnM, as an. I tor In r and llii'ir 
 loruvi r : ' 
 
 Ill-Ill, alliiiiiiin,' till' ind^niciit of tlii' Court of | 
 f.'iliin s litiiili lor Lower Canada (appeal «ido), 
 that the ^^dl of J, .\Ie(;. did not ciuatu a 
 liiiliititiition I't't a siinpli' liei(Ue«t of UHiifruct td 
 hilt wile aim of o\wieihliip to liJN son ; — 
 
 Jleld, also, that a .sla nil's m\v [lii'mt) of pro- 
 perty foiiniii^' part of .1. .McC.'.i e.-tate under nii | 
 1,'Xecutioii JMsued ULiainst a [lerson who was in] 
 possession iindera title fro;ii his wife, siieli oalo 
 liavin;; taken plai'u after. I. .MeC.'uHoa hecunii! | 
 of iijie, was valid and piiryid all real right." 
 wliieli the .son might have had under the will : 
 \rt, 711, C. ('. 1', I'hHoii v. Moiiii, 1(1 L. C. 
 
 evLsedasfollows: ■' I will,iUviM',ainl lieipieathl K. i>(17, approved. Mi'drfij,,)- v. C'tDiiiilri III 
 
 lo my wife S. .1. all my real and personal pro 
 perty iliiiiiig her natural life, and that my 
 daughter .■>. .(. .>liall remain and live on .said 
 place as long a.s she reiiiaina uiiinarried. " The 
 inly real estate or " place " the testator owned 
 
 vinlmml mill Aiji'in-y Co., L'l S. ('. R. i\)\), 
 
 ■Vesting— '//'/■/ Coiitinii.il, in J)i,ir/liiii III l'iii\ 
 
 — I'otfimiii llll lit iif h'iiJiiyiii<ii/,\ A testator hyl 
 
 his will directed that Iuh estate should litl 
 
 was his lariii, on which Ida widow remained divided U)ion hiti youngest cliihl atlainini; tlit 
 with the dau.'liler until the lornier's death :— I a^e of taeiity-one vears, the iiieome of tin 
 Held, that the daughter had the right, after estate in the nieantiinc to he imid to the wife 
 
 the mother s death, to live on the property '-o " 
 
 long as she remained iinmarrieil, and that she 
 hud an estate in and was entitled to the use ot 
 it, as she might choose to use it, lor that period. 
 Ju'/;/e r. Siitaiui, 22 O. R. 4liy. 
 
 Substitution— (/.««/',-H(7 - .S7i. ,•;//"„• Sale.] — 
 The will of the late .l'. Mo(;. contained the fid- 
 lowing provisions:— " Fifthly. I give,dcviae,aii.I 
 l)ci|ueath unto Helen Mahens, of the said parish 
 of .Montreal, my present wife, the iisiifnict, use, 
 und enjoyineut, during all her natural lifetinii', of 
 the rest and residue of my jiroiierty, movahle or 
 iiiimovalile ... in which I may have any 
 right, interest, or shareat the time of my death, 
 Without any c.\,;eplion or reserve : 'o have and 
 to hold, use and enjoy the said iisiilniel, use, ami 
 enjoyment of the said property unto my said 
 
 wife, the saiil Helen .Mahers, as and for her own . 
 
 ]iroperty from and after niy decease and diiriDg ^ general lien'elit and purposes of li'is estate ; and] 
 
 for the luiietit of herself aiid tlie children 
 The only gift wis contained in the direction tc | 
 |iay ami dix ido upon the arrival of the period o'J 
 disti'iliiitioii 
 
 Held, that the gift vested prior to the enjoy-i 
 nieiit of the i-oi-jiit^ of the estate, wliiuh wiiaonlyl 
 postponed in order to provide for the main | 
 teliaiiee of the tiiliily : — 
 
 Held, also, lliat the^ift vested in each eliilul 
 iipnn attaining the age i-r twenty-one, and thalT 
 Jio child who ilid not attain that ago was in-| 
 !■ iided to take a slMi,.iif the coc/^i/i. AV. Dou<j-\ 
 ■ - — Khisiy V. />i,ioila.i, -22 O. It. ,"i,-).S. 
 
 "Vesting—/, ' L'lhiti'—Hemnliiilfr Tntit- 
 Coiiiti-y'iuii iiil'' I'd-MiiiiiUy — " I'liji or ■t/>lily."i 
 — Devise of lai. 1 to widow for life fertile supportl 
 of her.self and testator's children, with powerf 
 to sell, etc., as she might think iiroper for thel 
 
 all her natural life! iiiie. .Sixthly, I give, devise,' 
 and liequeat li in full property unto my son James 
 McGregor, issue of my marriage with the said 
 Helen Maliers, the whole of the property of 
 whatever nature or kind, movable, real, or per- 
 .sonal, of which the usufruct, use, and enjoy- 
 ment duiing her natural lifetime is hereiii- 
 lief<ire left to my .said wife, the said ffelen 
 JNlahers, but suhject to the said usufruct, use, 
 
 upon her death, ilevise of such part of land as 
 might remain undisposed of to trustees to standi 
 seized and poases.sed of for the benefit of testa-l 
 tor's children, in equal shares, and to pay tol 
 each his share at majority : with a provision! 
 that uiion the death of any child before major-r 
 ity without issue, the trustees were to pay orl 
 apply his share to and among the survivors :- 
 Held, that the estates of tTie children became 
 
 and enjoyment of his mother, the said Helen I equitably vested upon the death of the testa 
 
 .Mahers, during all her natural lifetime as afore 
 said, ami witiiout any acconut lo be rendered 
 of the same or of any part thereof to ,iny per- 
 son or persons whomsoever : should, liow'ever, 
 my said son, the said .James Mcliregor, die 
 before his said mother, my said wife, the said 
 Helen Mahers, then and in that case I give, 
 devise, and beipn ith the said property so 
 hereby beqiieiitheil to hi'.!!, to the said H;:!fn 
 Mahers, in full property, to be disposed of uy 
 last will and testament or otherwise as she may 
 think fit, and without any sccount to be ren- 
 dered of the same or of any ;Kirt thereof to any 
 
 tor, subject lo the mere powers for sale con 
 lained in the will ; and so vested as realty, for 
 there was no trust which required, and the use I 
 of the words "' pay" and " pay or apply" did 
 not work, a conversion of realty into person- 
 alty. MrDoiiell V. ilcDoiiell, 24 0. R. 468. 
 
 II. Lkoaciks. 
 
 Assignment of — Payment hefurt Period qf\ 
 Diatribixtion, to Assi'j>iee.'\—'Jl'wa devisees of fuilf 
 
1028 
 
 ( wlicrinH(i(v<r : lo liavi.' uml ti» 
 
 ■liy Ik i|llr,ltlnil 1111(1 ^;ivi,'ll jiro- 
 I .laiiifM .M(.<ii('Hi.i', IiIk heiin 
 ill lir sill A ivi; lUH mini lliutliur, 
 
 I tiniriiwii iiriijifity for uvur, 
 
 nt Ills llll'llcL'iaMill),' liiit Haiij 
 
 Hiliii MaluiH, lirr luirs uiiil 
 ■ Ik r mill tlifiiciwn iiidpcrty 
 
 till' iiiilj^iiuiit i)f tlif I'imrt, of I 
 ' l.nwi r ( 'iiiiadii lii|i|n,'iil (iido), 
 
 ' J. .ML(i. llill not tlUllto II 
 
 siiiHilf l)C((utHt ef UHiUruct t< 
 Hli'ixln|i to hJH son ; — 
 
 11 sIm nil's Milu tilicrrt) of pro- 
 t ot .1. Mi.li.'s o.-t.itf uiKJt'r mil 
 iiv;aiii8t ii iifisoii who wuH in ' 
 
 titlu I'loni IiIn \tilu, Hiicli Hale 
 L! llftLTrl, .Mc'd.M won liucaiiif 
 
 : mill ]iiiij;iil all nul rij^hts 
 lit liavi' liail iilnk'i tlie will :| 
 
 . I'liiioii V. Moiiii, k; L. (,'. 
 
 I. Mih'reiiiii' v. Viiiiiiilit /n-i 
 <ij Co.. Ul S. C. R. 4(1!). 
 
 "oiitiiiii'il in JliiididK Id l'(ii,\ 
 h'lijnymi ii/.]- A testator hjl 
 that his f.stati' slioiilil lul 
 yoiiiij;L'st chilli attaining tlitj 
 f ytars, the iiu'oinc ot tluf 
 itiliic to lit' piliil to till! wife 
 f liti'stif and the chihlri'ii 
 ■oiitainoil in tlif diiccition ti 
 111 lliL' anival of the iit'iioil . 
 
 (ift vu.stuil piior to tin; enjoy , 
 of tlui t'htiitu, which witaonij] 
 r to proviilu for the main 
 ily :- 
 
 the L'ift vested in each chil 
 agent twenty-one, and that 
 not attain that ago was iii- 
 laruof the corjitix. II'- J>oiii/\ 
 Kjlai, 2LM). 1!. .-).-)3. 
 
 Enhile. — Ilemaiii'hr Trust 
 '■sniiiilly — " I'd II or i/ij>l!/.'"i 
 widow for life for tin .siipportl 
 ;ati)i'.s ehihlrcii, with powerl 
 might think pioper for the! 
 [iiirposeM of lii-i estate ; andl 
 ■vise of such part of land asl 
 iposed of to Irnstees to standi 
 il of for the beiu'tit of teata-f 
 ■i)iial shares, and to pay tol 
 majority ; with a provision! 
 1 of any child hefore major- 
 lio trustees were to pay or 
 nd among the survivors :- 
 tates of the children became 
 pon the death of the testa 
 mere powers for sale con 
 and MO vested as realty, for 
 which reijuired, and the use 
 '■ and " pay or apply" did 
 •sion of realty into person- 
 McDonell, 24 0. K. 4(J8. 
 
 Lkoaciks. 
 
 -Payment he/ore Period o/\ 
 V//iee.]— Two deviseea of fuUf 
 
 1029 
 
 WILL. 
 
 Age hiving a venti'l inti-re,t alw te in a deli 
 
 lite fnndin , „.rt. althoiigh not divisiMe 1 v 
 III t,'r,m of the will until a third devinir 
 
 ;^"^' '. twenty.one, hiving a.sigiu.d I, i 
 
 .ni're.t.n tie fund, i,r^iase,..\|.^ .:.!;;:; 
 
 t,:::;:ilerf;-;:;:;;;,,-;:r;:;,::;';;- 
 
 1030 
 
 . On an application l.y the i vctorH at the 
 
 '"" ",V";"' "i'"'U'U'irdiaii, it was : - 
 
 Held, tlmtitwasthedutyofth.ex.'eiuonili, 
 ••OK '^li' '""' '''^ "'" '>■«"'•>■• "• «'''<•'. 
 
 Attachment of Legaole-i. I -V,, .]f, ■/„,,,, v 
 
 OlmrKe on Land - ll,,,i,ir„iln„ uf \V,ih , 
 
 .\ testator l.y his will devised land { , his so,, 
 .lames Hul.jeet to the payment of an aim y 
 Ins widow tor her life, after tli,. expira, o, of 
 l"i^He given hy the testator, and Ureete 1 hi, 
 J'xeeutors to apply the rent derived f, the 
 
 theieon, so that my son may have the siid 
 l..M.orly, at the expiration o^he^,",:^' 
 •':'■" '",>"' '■'" I'lcnml.ranee:" and he the, 
 
 -'-■■-t-l thU his son .^une. should ply oV..ha 
 " the sums thereinafter l,e.,neatheil u eae ' 
 1>H daugh.eis, as „oon as his son Daniel suodd 
 attain the age ot twenty .one ; and to the atte 
 he devised other land, and iliieeted hin aNo , 
 
 '':,'>■"";••;''"",' '"-■ l"'-lHto.liedai.' Iters 
 
 I hen toUowed the l.e,pi..sts to his ihuH te s 
 
 withnanu'saMdaniounts, tohepaidtotliei in 
 
 the lat ter attaining the age of Iweiity-nne, Tl„ 
 will was entirely silent as to the debts ,,i . 
 testator. 
 
 .lames adopted the devise to him 
 session of tli,. land, and dealt wl' 
 
 1 look pos- 
 " 's his 
 
 propel fy liii- iiiiuiy years 
 
 Held. Ih.it the'one-lialf of the , ti,„ 
 
 tn!!f's'"'^.'7'^ '''"T"',"'"" ''"• 1 ""' 'l-iscd to 
 •l.inies. /lo'i^oyM. ./rt/(/(»(, •_••.' I il (■>(, f,,i|,,,..,.,i 
 
 The will was duly regist, 'v,, Vuil' ' 7 lie 
 
 dates or registry of certain mort.' a-es erci e I 
 
 l.y dames upon the land .ed to him : - ' 
 
 He d, that the niortga^. must be taken to 
 
 .avehad,a, thetimeof a.lv. iug these ninevs 
 
 full notice ot the will and its "ontents a , d 
 
 vere bound to see to the application of the 
 
 inoneys advanced by them ; and that, m.t liav- 
 
 prkiiSv':-"' "'" '"■"""■" "■^■'■" '=""*'-' t° 
 ^ Held, also, that that part of see '"> of P 
 .^. U. eh. 110 which i.n.vides that the four nro- 
 eeding sections '• shall not e.-ae,id to a devise t°, 
 any person or persons in fee or in tail, or for the 
 testator s who e estate and interest eliarg,.,! with 
 debts or legacies," is of general application, an 
 applies o wills eon-,n,g into oneiation as well 
 after as before th, l.Sth .Septenilier, !S(m:_ 
 
 Held, lastly, that see. H of \>, .s. () ch IKt 
 
 «ee. 1,5 of J!. .S. O. ,1, „,.., did not tp!y 
 
 because the mouey was not i.ionev l)aya),le , mo, 
 
 an exprt-ss or implied trust, or for a limited nr 
 
 pose, within t I., meaning of the section. Vc- 
 
 j •' i.h, .1 (). K. 1,4 distinguished. Gran v 
 
 Interest-Z^coe^ri/ lt.,rk~Int, r,,t nn Over- 
 
 /•"!/'■"":' -A H/«M Where a tiMtator be- 
 
 'Mleathed a legacy to be paid l.y the devisee of 
 certain lands, through the exeeiiloi, „. twenty 
 Heiiil-annual instalments, with interct at the 
 liite ot NIX per cent,, payable at the tin,.' of each 
 iMstalineiit on the amount of „i„ I, pavmenl, to l»- 
 '■"Miputed Iron, thetimeof his decease; and, by 
 mutual error, interest was paid with each install 
 ""■■nt upon t'u,' whole amount of priuci p 1 
 u'l. reinamnig unpaid, whirl, payments' of 
 lute est wceionsiimed by the legatee as ineo„,e 
 "l.ilc he invested the iiislalments of pnneip,,! 
 
 .;'>'ltlinegatee now bro,,ght, his actio,, agal,;s 
 the executor and devisee claiming an iiistal.nent 
 n^ .sfll due, the defendants alleg,\, th„ he I, 
 l"en I'verpai, , and asking an ;,.'count :- 
 
 nf „t ,.; ';>'J''''""'";- •'- ^i'^^t <lM'over,„tymontH 
 ol inte, est were made under mistake of f,u.| 
 and could be I'ecovered or set oil'; and that the 
 
 'uabled to, and dni, invest just so n,ueb of the 
 '•'"■;'».sat mter-'st, and so, in ellect, got, and 
 should be charged w„h, iiitc'est upon the ove 
 l/a.vn,ents : an. ,t being ii.hnitte.l that upon Ihi.s 
 
 'he "'t'ion ^ ' "■■■" ^""^' 1'"'''' ''"^'"i*"^' 'l 
 
 Ifehl, by ■, Divisional Couit, allii'ming thir 
 Ji.n-u.ent. that the overpayn.ents Were ^nade 
 ..n.ier a mistake of fact, and ,„ii;l,t be .-ecovered 
 ■.'I- set ,.11: but, va,ying it, that an account 
 
 n ,; "■ I'^V"' ;""' V''^' '^" ""-■ P'->vti.ent8 
 
 made sliouM be l„-oi,g|,t into accmmt and 
 applied, but without addition of interis,, to the 
 aggregate ot the aniounts pr,,p...rly due and pav- 
 -'le nuder the w,ll an I aiis i,ala,i.:e due to tie 
 lamt.ll ascertained r. rl,„„ y. Ki,„j..,,„^ ,7 
 
 U 1 on"', "t"''-';'^'"'^' '^''••"•''•'l to. Iinrh,.r v. 
 R .W5 ' ■"^"'''"""' '" '^l'""^^^''- "* ^• 
 
 Interest.]- \ testatiix by !,., will directed 
 tha a lepcy should be paid „ut of the proceeds 
 of the sale 01 lauds, and that the lands should 
 
 deaTh • *"^' *""* "''''^'" ^'^" ^"'"'^ "^'"'' ^^^ 
 Held that interest upon the legacy should be 
 all<,wed fron, the day when the two years ex- 
 pired ; or. It th'j lands weie sooner sohl from 
 the 'late of sale. II, UMic^mi-McDonMy. Rol^ 
 in.li,,,, i''2 (). R. 4;iS. 
 
 Interest-Z).V«f<;o»7o,SW/.]-\Vhero land was 
 directed to be sold within three years from the 
 testator-s death it was held that^egaJie bor: 
 nterest from the date when the lamia should 
 have been sold. McMylor v. Lyuc/,, 24 O. R. 
 
 la ?^!^T T ^^""^-'l"''' ''!/ i-'-^-'-ruto,:. in Order 
 f'> I I .-/ the L,,,ar,,.\^A testator devised to his 
 daughter a lot of laud charged with a ijga J 
 I be dau"hter predecease.l the testator, leavi,^- 
 two chiiaren, to whom the lot descende,!. 
 
 Legacy to Widow in Lieu of Hower- Pirjht 
 
 ';:, :',""''!.' ;'>;'^C'^'- Stim-ah!/,/ren of Drr.JJ 
 U,,hi--hi,,ht to l-arent\-< tlhare.]~A 'testator "by 
 his w_,l bequeathed to his wifeSloO ayear. pav^ 
 able h,alf.ycarly out of the rent of his farm until 
 the sale thereof, when she was to be paid the 
 intei-est on .^2.500 at six per cent., or the SIW 
 On the sale, «2.50O was to be left Jn mortgS 
 
1031 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1032 
 
 or invested by the executors at interest i)ayable 
 half-yearly to the widow during her lifetime or 
 widowhood, and such provision was to be in 
 lieu of dower. Legacies were given to each of 
 the testatdr's twelve children (one of whom was 
 dead at the date of the will), to be paid out of 
 the proceeds of the sale of the real estate. Tlie 
 residue of the deceased daughter's legacy was 
 directed to be placed at interest and divided 
 equally between her surviving children on their 
 attaining twenty -one years, and in case a ny of tlit 
 testator's children died before receiving their full 
 shares, and leaving issue, the deceased child's 
 share was to be ecjually divided between hia or 
 her children ; if such deceased child died without 
 issue, his or her share was to be divided equally 
 between his or her surviving brothers and sisters. 
 All the residue of the estate, not thereinbefore 
 disposed of, lie gave to his children, " and their 
 issue as aforesaid provided for," to be divided 
 equally between them from time to time as the 
 money should become payable. The estate 
 proved insufficient to provide for the annuity 
 and payment of the legacies in full, and the 
 annual interest obtainable on the §2,500 was less 
 than $150 :— 
 
 Held, that there was a gift to tlie widow of 
 $150 a year, and not merely of the annual inter- 
 est derivable from the investment of the .f 2,500, 
 and that she was entitled to have it paid out of 
 the residue in priority to the other lefiatees : — 
 
 Held, also, that the deceased daughter's chil- 
 dren were entitled to share in the residue. Koch 
 v. Heiney, 26 0. R. 87. 
 
 Succession Dnty— Residue — Pro Jiatd.]—A 
 testator devised and bequeathed all his real and 
 personal estate to his executors and trustees for 
 the purpose of paying a number of pecuniary 
 legacies, some to personal legatees, and others 
 to charitable associations, and j)rovided that the 
 residue of his estate should be divided 7)ro raid 
 among the legatees : — 
 
 Held, that it was the duty of tlie executors to 
 deduct the succession duty payalde in respect of 
 the pecuniary legacies, bt forepayiug the amounts 
 over to the legatees, and they had no rijiht to 
 pay such succession dutj' out of the residue left 
 after paying the legacies in full. 
 
 Where the residue of an estate is directed to 
 be divided pro raid among prior legatees, they 
 take such residue in proportion to the amount 
 of their prior legacies. Kcmudy v. Protn>iavt 
 Oriihaiin' Home, 25 O. E. 235. 
 
 Trust — C/aim onAftsets — Priority — Charge on 
 Ri'alty.] — T. H. and his brother were partners in 
 business, and the latter having died, T. H. became 
 by will his executor and residuary legatee. A 
 legacy was left by the will to K. H., part of 
 which was paid and judgment recovered against j 
 the executor for the balance. T. H. liaving in- j 
 cumbered both his own share of the partnership 
 property and that devised to him, one of Iiis ! 
 creditors, and a mortgagee of the property, ob- i 
 tained judgment against him, and procured the j 
 appointment of receivers of his estate. E. H. j 
 then brought an action to have it declared that ' 
 his judgment for the balance of his legacy was a i 
 charge upon the moneys in the receiveis'luinds, i 
 in priority to the personal creditors of T. H. : — 
 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court 
 below, that it having been established that the 
 moneys held by the receivers were jjersonal 
 
 assets of the testator, or the proceeds thereof, 
 E. H. wasentitledtopriority of payment, though 
 liis judgment was registered after those of the 
 other creditors. 
 
 Held, also, tliat the legacy of E. H. was a 
 charge upon the realty of the testator, the resi- 
 <huiry devise being of " the balance and remain- 
 der of the property and of any estate " of the 
 testator, and either of the words "property" 
 and "estate" being sufficient to pass realty. 
 This charge upon realty operated against the 
 mortgagees, who were shewn to liave had notice 
 of the will. Cameron v. Harper, 21 S. C. R. 
 27;^. 
 
 III. Revocation and Rkvival. 
 
 Codicil.]— Where by a codicil dated the 21st 
 July, 1882, expressed to be a codicil to his 
 will of the 17th July, 1880, the testator con- 
 lirnied the said will, and it appeared that the 
 said will consisted not merely of the document 
 of the 17tli July, 1880, but also of an inter- 
 mediate codicil revoking », particular bequest 
 therein : — 
 
 Held, that, though a reference simply to the 
 date of the earlier document was not sufficient 
 in itself to restrict the confirmation to that par- 
 ticular document, yet other words and sur- 
 rounding circumstances could and did convey 
 such an intention with reasonable certainty, 
 and accordingly the will of the 17th July, 
 after confirmation, was no longer attected IJy 
 the partial revocation made by the intermediate 
 codicil. McLeod V. Mcyah,'[lH9\'i A. C. 471. 
 
 Codicil.] — The testator made a will on the 
 14th May, 1800, disposing of all his estate, 
 giving to certain charities specific proportion.'^ 
 of the residue, and naming three persons execu- 
 tors. In January, 1891, he made another will 
 revoking all previous wills and making a num- 
 ber of specific devisf s and bequests, but leaving 
 a large residue undisposed of. In March, 1891, 
 he executed a codicil, in which, after stating 
 that "1 will and devise that the following be 
 taken as a codicil to my will of the 14th day of 
 May, 1890," he revoked the appointment of one 
 of the named executors in that will " to be one 
 of the executors of this my will," and in his 
 stead appointed another jjerson "with all the 
 powers and duties . . in my said will de- 
 clared." The attestation clause stated that this 
 was signed, etc., by the testator "as a codicil 
 to his last will and testament : " — 
 
 Held, Hagarty, C.J.O., dissenting, affirming 
 the judgment of Robertson, J., that there was 
 shewn in this codicil an intention to revive the 
 revoked will within the meaning of sec. 24 of 
 the Wills Act, R. S. O. ch. 109:— 
 
 But held further, reversing the judgment of 
 Robertson, J., that the will so revived took 
 effect as at the date of the codicil, and that, for 
 the purpose of deciding as to the validity of the 
 charitable bequests, it must be treated as if 
 executed at that date, holmes v. Mvrray, ].S 
 O. R. 75(), and eases of that class, where the 
 codicil in (lueslion refers to an existing will, 
 distinguished. Ptiriell v. lierrjiii, 20 A. K. 535. 
 Reversed by the Supreme Court, 23 8. C. R. 
 101, suh vom. Macdonell v. Purall. See the 
 next case. 
 
1032 
 
 r, or tlie proceeds thereof, 
 priority of payment, though 
 [^istcrecl after those of the 
 
 he legacy of E. H. was a 
 ty of the tcHtator, the resi- 
 f " the balance and remain- 
 and of any estate '' of the 
 of the words "property" 
 ; suthcient to pass realty. 
 ;alty operated against tlic 
 •e shewn to have had notice 
 OH V. Harper, 21 S. C. R, 
 
 noN AND Rkvival. 
 
 by a codicil dated the 21st 
 ed to be a codicil to his 
 ly, 1880, the testator con- 
 and it appeared that the 
 )t merely of the document 
 880, but also of an intcr- 
 kiiig a particular bequest 
 
 a reference simply to the 
 ocument was not sufficient 
 e confirmation to that par- 
 et other words and sur- 
 3es could and did convey 
 k'ith reasonable certainty. 
 ! will of the 17th July, 
 vas no longer atl'ected by 
 I made by the intermediate 
 J/c.V((?.,"[1891] A. C. 471. 
 
 tator made a will on the 
 fcposing of all his estate, 
 arities specific proportions 
 iming three persons exetu- 
 !91, he made another will 
 s wills and making a num- 
 i and bequests, but leaving 
 josed of. In March, 1891, 
 il, in which, after stating 
 lise that the following be 
 my will of the I4th day of 
 ed the appointment of one 
 rs in that will " to be one 
 this my Mill," and in his 
 ;her jterson "with all tlie 
 . in my said will de- 
 tion clause stated that this 
 he testator " as a codicil 
 stanient : " — 
 
 J.O., dissenting, affirming 
 bertson, J., that theie was 
 an intention to revive the 
 the meaning of sec. 24 of 
 0. ch. 109:— 
 
 eversing the judgment of 
 the will BO revived took 
 if the codicil, and that, for 
 ig us to the validity of the 
 it must be tieated as if 
 . Holmen V. Slvrray, l.S 
 of that class, where the 
 ^•fers to an existing will, 
 n V. Berrjhi, 20 A. K. 535. 
 rcme Couit, 23 S. C. R. 
 mell V. PurciU. See, the 
 
 1033 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1034 
 
 OoAiQiX — IiUcntion In Rerive — Reference to 
 JJate-Removal nf Exccut>n:]~A will which li.as 
 •been .revok»d cannot, since the passing of tlie 
 Ontario \V ills Act, R. S. O. 1887 ch. lOi), be 
 revived by a codicil, unless the intention to 
 revive it appears on the face of the codicil, either 
 by express words referring to the will as revoked 
 ami importing such intention, or by a disposition 
 ot tlie testator's property inconsistent with any 
 other intention, or by other expressions con- 
 veying to the mind of the Court, with reasonable 
 certainty, the existence of the intention in cjues- 
 tion. A reference in the codicil to the date ot the 
 revoked will, and the removal of an ex>ioutor 
 named therein and substitution of another in 
 his place, will not revive it. 
 
 Held, per King, .}., .lissenting, that a co.lici' 
 
 itmg, 
 viU h\ 
 
 reterring to the revoked wiULydite and re 
 moving an executor named therein is sutWcieiit 
 indication of an intention to revive such will, 
 more especially when the several instruments 
 are executed under circumstances shewing such 
 intention. Manhndl v. Parcell, Chary v. P,„- 
 '■M, 23 S. C. R. 101. y • "' 
 
 Oodlcil—Remai/hii of neqiie.if.]—A testatrix 
 by the tlurd clause of lier will bequeathed to S 
 the interest on the sum of ><:i,(m) for lite, and 
 after his death directed the S3,000 to bo divided 
 among his children, and by a subsequent clause 
 she directed her executors to deduct out of the 
 J..i,000 all paymc:its made to S. after the date of 
 the will. Hy a codicil she directed that the 
 bequest number three, bciiueathing to S the 
 interest on .§3,000, be revoked, and in lieu thereof i 
 the sum of ?5300 be paid to him, or his heirs, and ' 
 that the direction as to payments made after the 
 date of the will should apply thereto :— 
 
 Held, that, the etFect of the codicil was to '■ 
 revoke the whole of the third clause. Edn-ard., 
 V. Findlay, 25 O. R. 489. 
 
 IV. Validity. 
 1. Wills in General. 
 
 Absence of Witnesses. ] —A person insured 
 his life and signed a document directed to the 
 managers of the insurance company, in these 
 words : " I give and bequeath to . . . the 
 amount stated on the policy given on iny life by 
 
 the S Life Insurance Co. To be "paid to 
 
 none other unless at my request, dated later.' 
 After shewing or reading the policy, which he 
 retained, he handed the document to the plain- 
 tiff, remarking : "There, that is as good as a 
 will : "— 
 
 Held, that on account of its incompleteness, 
 the transaction was not a gift or a declaration 
 of trust, as the trust intended was not irrevoc- 
 able, nor could the paper take effect as a will 
 Kreh V. MoaeK, 22 O. R. .307. 
 
 Indian.]— An Indian male or female may 
 make a will, and may by such will dispose of 
 real or personal property subject to the pro- 
 visions of the Indian Act, 11. .S. C. ch. 43. or 
 other statute. 
 
 Qu(vre, whether the last part of sec. 20 of 
 the Indian Act, R. S. C. ch. 4.3, does not leave 
 all questions arising in reference to the distri- 
 bution of the property of a deceased Indian, 
 male or female, to the Superintendent-General, 
 
 ' .so that his decision, and not that of the Court, 
 shouhl doterinine snch questions. Johnson v. 
 Joii^x, 2(j O. R. 109. 
 
 Solicit irs Advice.]— Pel (Jwynne, ,f.— A 
 will IS not invali.l because it is executed in pur- 
 suance of a solicitor's opinion on a matter of 
 law, which proves to be unsound. .^racdotvU v 
 I urcell, CImrij v. Piirceli, 23 .S. C. R. 101. 
 
 Testamentary Capacity— ir,abit'M of Mind 
 
 — UndiK. /,*/;«(;«,•,:, |_In 18S9 an action was 
 
 brought by (I, if. H., in the cap.icity of curator 
 
 to Mrs. B., an interdict, against A., in order to 
 
 nave a certain deed of trausl'or made to him by 
 
 Mrs. B., his mother, set aside and cancelled 
 
 Mrs. B. having died before the case was brought 
 
 on to trial, the respondent, M. B., presented a 
 
 petition for contiuuarice of the suit on her 
 
 behalf as one of the legatees of her mother 
 
 under a will dateil the 17th November, 1869. 
 
 I his petition was contested by A. B., who based 
 
 I his contestation on a will dated the 17th .Jan- 
 
 j uary, 1885 (the same date as that of the transfer 
 
 , attacked by the original action), whereby the 
 
 late Mrs. B. becpieathed the residue of all of 
 
 her property, etc., to her two sons. Upon the 
 
 merits of tlie contestation as to the validity of 
 
 the will of the 17th .January, 1885 : — 
 
 Held, adirmiiig the judgment of the Court 
 below, that Art. 831, C. C, which enacts that 
 the testator must be of sound mind, does not 
 declaie null only the will of an insane person, 
 but also the will of all those whoso weakness of 
 nund does not allow them to comprehend the 
 eSect and consequences of the act which they 
 perform : — ^ 
 
 Held, further, that upon the facts and evi- 
 dence m the case, the will of the 17tli .January, 
 188,'), was obtained by A. at a time when Mrs. 
 R. was sull'ering from senile drmevlia and weak- 
 ness of mind, and was un<ler the undue influence 
 of A., and should be set aside, /iantint v 
 n.ipilii, 23 S. C. R. 37. 
 
 Testamentary Capacity.]— iVe Cttrrie v 
 Cnrrie, 24 S. C. R. 712. 
 
 2. Iiittre.sl of IVUness. 
 
 Legatee.]— Where one of several residuary 
 legatees was also a witness to the will :— 
 
 Held, that the will must be read as if the gift 
 to her had been blotted out by the testator and 
 the residuary gift distributed ratably among the 
 othe- residuary legatees as if she were non- 
 existent. Fnntrdl v. Farewell, 22 O. R. 67;i, 
 
 Legatee's Husband.] — A legacy invalid 
 because of the legatee's husband being a wit- 
 
 ness to the will was held validated by a reviv- 
 ing codicil witnessed by iiidepeiideut persons. 
 Fiirctll V. Bergiu, 20 A. R. 535. 
 
 3. Miitah' and Afhtlrtirriplion, 
 
 Falsa Demonstratlo. ] — A testator by Mb 
 will devised to his son (!. " the property 1 may 
 die possessed of in the village of M,, also lot 
 28 in the 10th concession of K." In the early 
 part of the will he had used the words " wishing 
 
1036 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1036 
 
 to dispose of my worldly property." Tho t<.«. | executors to invest $2,000 and pay over ti.e 
 
 li down i^; f ";■;,;,'"* ''■ ""'' '^;."°'^■ ''^"'' '"■ ^^'^^'y ■"*'=^'-'«' *" "^^ iric„ltural sSt? (i Lo 
 f lo7 . Th l""'"'»f««'o»"f «• wasapartipon.tcd under R. ,S. O. 1877 ch. 35, and there- 
 . t lot _9. I ho w.ll contained no residuary de- I by authorized to acquire and h.dd, l.ut not to 
 
 fV. .... , ., TT , , „ I ^"'^"^ ''>■ tl«^vise, real estate), to be applied as a 
 
 Upon a petition under the Vendors and Pur- p.vnm.ni for tiie best resultL in a specified mode 
 nth) f) i^'Ti * f , ^ .T> , , , °^ agriculture, but with a provision that all corn- 
 
 Held, hat the part of lot 2) owned by the petitors should declare that they were neither 
 
 ^aif,!'/ / "/ ».'f^oVv,r''" '" "'" '""• ^'' ' .''^^"""-"^ Orangemen, nor Oddfellows ; and! 
 Bam and L,,t,e, -'o O. R. 1.^6. ^ i„ ,..,^0 „f neglect to comply with the conditions! 
 
 _ „ _ I tlie executors were to apply such vearlv interest 
 
 C To"[TA^uT'"'°f^7''7 Hagarty,; in procuring lectures a^L^st Fre'l.Snry Lnd 
 visf wnVnrt fi^ fn, • • • •~;^ ^'^^ "'•'"■ ^ oth^'-/^'^'«t «°cietics. The legacy was payable 
 
 V se will not fail for a misdescription or an im- ^ out of a mixed fund consisting in part of iinpure 
 perfect or inaccurate description of a legatee or ; personalty — i impuie 
 
 n-T'l^iVl'! *''" ''«^','^;'P'*°" >« sufficient to desig- | Held, that the society came under tlie Mort- 
 nate with reasonable certainty the object of the j main Act, and, so far as the bequest consisted of 
 
 testator's bounty. 'J'herefore the Methodist 
 (-.'hurch may take under a gift to " The Mission- 
 ary .Society of the Methodist Cnurch in 
 Canada." Ti/rr-l/ v. Sniioi; 20 A. K. ITiO. 
 
 Misdescription of Land. |— A testator, own 
 
 ig lots () aiiit S ill the lii st concession, devised the I testator. 
 
 ,7I1<> in litu ti7»ll ■>> *-«..-^ — .„ *.,. ,1 .* _ . .< i ml 
 
 same m his will in two separate devises as •' my 
 property known as lot . . . second conces- 
 sion," etc. : — 
 
 Held, that liis lots in the fir.st concession 
 I)assed. Hickeyx. Hivkey, 20 O. R. 371. 
 
 Mistake— 7)j/-((7iV;» to Diridi in Inipo.^.-^i/jlr 
 Frar(wii.-<.]—A testator by his will directed: 
 "Wlien n'y youngest son is of the age of 
 eighteen years, my estate shall be divided 
 among my children then living, i.f., to each of 
 my sons I leave two-thirds, and to each of mv 
 
 impure personalty, it was void ; — 
 
 Held, also, that the society was not bound to 
 expend annually the interest received, but might 
 apply It from time to time as deemed best, so 
 long as It acted in good faith and did not divert 
 th(! money from the purpose directed by the 
 
 The executors were directed to invest the 
 residue of the estate and to apply the annual 
 interest therefrom for the promotion of free 
 thought and free speech in the Province of Onta- 
 rio : — 
 
 Held, that this bequest was void as oppoted 
 to Christianity. Primjlt v. Corporation of 
 Aapanee, 43 U. C. 1!. 28r), followed. Khiseii v 
 A'iH.sf y, 2() O. R. 99. 
 
 Application of Act.]— Held, per Owynne 
 and (Sejlgewick, JJ , that the Imperial statute 9' 
 
 .hiughtersoiie-thir.l, of all my estate and effects."" (ieo. ll.°ch. '36 (the M'miiiarnTt^tVis'iu ^10^11" 
 When the youngest .son attained eighteen, there 1 the Province of Ontario, the Courts of that Pro- 
 were then twelve children living, seven daugh- | vince having so held (Dae d. Aiidir.ton v Todd 
 ■ H ?; ^r.'T '- , : 2 U. C. K. 82 ; Corpora/ion </ WfMy v. ul' 
 
 Hehl, that the most reasonable and satisfac- cow,//.', 23 (ir. ]), and the legislature havin.' 
 tory construction of this clause, having regard recognized it as in force by excluding its opera 
 to the words used was tliat each child should I tion from Acts authorizing corporations to hold 
 have a share, but that each son's portion should lands. Mardondl v. PurrdL Cliurv v Pnmll 
 be double that of a daughter. : 23 S. C. R. Joi. "'"", 
 
 The principle of construction in such cases of'i 
 mistakes in wills is that the "words are not! 
 corrected, but the intention, when clearly ascer 
 
 taiiied, is carried out notwithstanding ''the^ip- 
 parent difficulty caused by the particular words " 
 Ijo^hyw. Vri'V-sony 21 O. K. 93. 
 
 H'^/"i'°*r"**°"^^ Omission- - Word., Rtad Into ->■ ..u .... .cga^^ „a» „oi 
 
 K ?«.J— A testator, being possessed of personalty I nitene.s, and discretion havintr 
 
 \ut\ rt»jih-\. Itroiw^.if 11r^.I . ; 1 . . '' I i.1 _ -1 . 1 . .. o 
 
 and realty, btcpieathed pecuniary legacies to a 
 much greater amount than the personalty left 
 by hini, and then bequeathed to his "executors 
 . . . in trust to dispose thereof to best, luvan- 
 tage,.in trust to be divi.;^-(i and paid over to my 
 children in the sums mentioned, and as soon as 
 maybe agreeable to the terms and conditions of 
 certain mortgages and leases now standing 
 against the property," without mentioning any 
 property ; — 
 
 Held, that the woids "my property," pre- 
 sumably unintentionally omitted, should be 
 read into the will. Colrin v. Colrin, 22 O. R 
 
 Charitable 'BeqyxBSt—Itidtfinitenms—Srhenit. J 
 -A testator by his will devised to certain' 
 named persons, who were appointed the execu- 
 tors ai,d trustees thereof, the remainder of his 
 estate to lie used to further " the cause of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ ; " — 
 
 Held, that the legacy was not void for indeti- 
 
 been given to- 
 
 4. Mortmain Act. 
 
 AKrlcultural Society— FreemanoHry—Frfe 
 Thowjht.]— By his will the testator directed his 
 
 the c :ecutors and trustees, it was not neceseary 
 
 that a scheme should be directed. Phehis v 
 
 Lord, 25 O. R. 259. ' 
 
 Charitable Vse— Augmentation of Particu- 
 lar Funil or Rmiduary Estate.'\—A testator bv 
 his will provided as follows :— 
 
 " I do order and direi that my executor sell 
 the real estate owned by me, such sale to be 
 made inside of three years from the date of my 
 decease, and out of the proceeds of the said sale 
 to pay to the Archbishop of the Diocese of 
 Toronto •!irm ; to the Bishop of the Diocese of 
 Hamilton C.-xOO ; to be applied for the education 
 of young men for the priesthood ; and the balance 
 to be invested by my executor in the proportion 
 of .§15 for my wife and §8 for my mother. 
 
 " At my mother's death, I order that her pro- 
 portion . . be divided . . " between five 
 nieces, and that "on my wife's death, her pro- 
 
1036' 
 
 $2,000 und pay over the 
 agricultural society (incor- 
 
 O. 1877 oil. 35, ami therc- 
 [uire and liold, but not to 
 estate), to be ai)plied as a 
 ; results iu a specified mode 
 ith a pr<>viaioii that all coin- 
 ire that they were neither 
 lien, nor Oddfellows ; and, 
 onii)ly with the conditions, 
 > apply such yearly interest 
 i against Freemasonry and 
 The legacy was payable 
 onsisting in part of impure 
 
 ety came under the Mort- 
 as the bequest consisted of 
 
 was void : — 
 
 e society was not bound to 
 ijterest received, but might 
 o time as deemed best, so 
 )d faith and did not divert 
 
 purpose directed by the 
 
 e directed to invest the 
 : and to apply the annual 
 )r the promotion of free 
 ch in the Province of Onta- 
 
 uest was void as opposed 
 n'lKjle V. Corpoi-ation of 
 •285, followed. Kmsei/ v. 
 
 ct.]— Held, per Owynne 
 hat the Imperial statute 9' 
 ortmain Act) is in force in 
 io, the Courts of that Pro- 
 Doe d. Aii(l(rnon v. Todd, 
 oraliuu nf Whilliy v. Lis- 
 d the legislature having 
 ce by excluding its opera- 
 ■izing corporations to hold 
 Purrctl, Ckury v. Pvrn//,^ 
 
 >—Iiidefi7iilen(.'<s— Scheme. Ji 
 will devised to certain 
 '•ere appointed the execu- 
 -'of, the remainder of his 
 irther " the cause of our 
 
 y was not void for indeti- 
 
 )n haying been given to- 
 
 tees, it was not necessary 
 
 be directed. Phelps v. 
 
 I iiijmentation of Particu- 
 ' EMatf.'l — A testator by 
 lows ; — 
 ic\. that ray executor sell 
 
 by me, such sale to be 
 ears from the date of my 
 
 proceeds of the said sale 
 sliop of the Diocese of 
 
 Hishop of the Diocese of 
 iipplied for the education 
 iesthood ; and the balance 
 xpcntor in the proportion 
 $8 for my mother, 
 ath, I order that her pro- 
 ed . . " between five 
 ly wife's death, her pro- 
 
 1037 
 
 WILL. 
 
 1038 
 
 be divided" between nephews 
 
 portion . 
 and nieces 
 
 " All the residue of my estate not hcreinbe- 
 tore disposed of, I give, devise, and bequeath 
 unto my wife : ' — 
 
 Held that the beciuests to the Archbishop 
 ami Hishop named in the will l,oii,- Lsseutiallv 
 different from their names in their corporate 
 capacity, were intended for tluiii individually 
 subject to the trust declared, the innposc of 
 which was a charitable use, and tliat tlic money 
 being derived from the sale of land, tlie legacies 
 failed, and the amount went to augment the 
 residuary gift of the particular fund out of which 
 It was directed to be paid, and not the general 
 residue of the estate. 
 
 That as there was no special devise of tliereal 
 estate, but only a. direction to the executors to 
 sell and pay legacies, the land and rents arising 
 therefrom belonged to the widow, under the 
 general residuary gift to her, and tint the execu- 
 tor had no power to lease. 
 
 That the widow was not Imuud to elect be- 
 tween her dower and the will. Mr.1f„lor v 
 Lj/nch, 24 O. R. G32. 
 
 Church- .l/-,>rf i_A test.itor l)y his 
 
 will bequeathed a ; noney to the trustees 
 
 of a church '• to b( nsed in tlie i)ayment; of 
 
 any indebtedness o.i said church and for such 
 other purposes as they mav leem wise. " At the 
 time the will took etfeet there was no debt on 
 the church : — 
 
 Held, that the reference in tlie will meant 
 outlay in connection with the churcli such as 
 repair and maintenance fu- any obligation incur- 
 red for which the land was not liable, and that 
 the bequest was valid. liiiiifiwi v. Marrijtt 1<» 
 Heav. 16,S, followed. ' " 
 
 The will directed the becjuest to lie paid out 
 of a mixed fund derived from the sale of land 
 and personalty : — 
 
 Held, as far as the real estate was concerned 
 that the gift failed. 
 
 Directions as to the application of the fund 
 Oxtrom V. A//ord, 2-1 O. 1!. 305. 
 
 l.ishop of the Diocese of Algonia for the sup- 
 port of missions of the said Diocese, and the 
 br.lance, to wit, the sum of .*3..'il)0, towards the 
 support of any mission or missions which may 
 be undertaken or establislied by the b'ev. Edward 
 F. Wilson, the said Mr. Wilson having left the 
 fShingwank Home witli the intention of estab- 
 lishing a now mission rjr missions elsewhere : "— 
 
 Held, (i ) that the bei|Ufst of the sum for the 
 •support of missions to be undertaken was not lu 
 Ijequest to the Rev. Kdward K. Wilson person- 
 ally, but to the exi'uutors for the support of the 
 missions. 
 
 (3) 'J'hat it was a good cliaritable berpiest, 
 and refi^rred to missions connected with the 
 spread of religious teacliing either in a field or 
 locality of missionary work. In n- Jnrimvi'it 
 L^li'li. Lruiru-s V. 0/,iyi„i,, H (;i,. D. 584, and 
 ill ri- Jlilaiiii'-t K'tiil, , PhiZ/ijii y. h'.,i,!iison. W. N. 
 18S1, p. 17,s, distinguished. Toi-imto Oeneral 
 
 inixtsCo. V. ir;/.soH, 21) o. i;. (17 1. 
 
 PoorofCounty. I -The testatrix by her will 
 gave the residue of her estate in trust for a 
 certain class of tlie poor of a county, "who 
 must have been huml Jid,- residents of the said 
 county before becoming destitute or needy." A 
 town in the county o' inally formed part there- 
 of for all puriioses, but was in 185!), under the 
 provisions of the Municipal Act then in force, 
 detached from the county for municipal pur- 
 poses only : — 
 
 Held, in the absence of anvlhing in the con- 
 text of the will clearly to 'the coiitrarv, that 
 residents of the town coming within tlie class 
 referred to in the liccpHst were included therein. 
 Steele V. (Irorer, 2(i O. R. 92. 
 
 Marshalling.!— There can be no marshalling 
 m favour of charities ; yet where charitable anil 
 other legacies are payable out of a niixeil fund, 
 the proceeds of realty, impure personalty, and 
 Ijersonalty, the charitable legacies do not fail 
 in toto, but must abate in the proportion which 
 the sum of the realty and impure personalty 
 charged with charitable gifts bears to the pure 
 personalty. Jn re Staehki; Staihln- v. Zimmer- 
 man, 21 A. R. 2G6. 
 
 Methodist Church.]— Section (i of 47 Vict. 
 eh. 88 (O.) does not confer upon the Methodist 
 Church the powers of the Comiexional Society 
 of the Weslayan Methodist Church in C:aiiada 
 to take by devise withont reference to the 
 restrictions of the Religious Institutions Act • 
 and a bequest to the Church jiayable out of 
 realty, made by will executed within six 
 months of the testator's death, was held void 
 Smith V. Mitkodixt Church, 16 O. R. 199' 
 approved. Tyrrell v. Senior, 20 A. R. loli. ' 
 
 Missions.]— A testator by his will bequeathed 
 to his executors out of his pure personalty the 
 mm of $10,500, to be paid by them as follows • 
 "»3,500 to WyclilTe College, .S.3,500 to the 
 
 Temperance Legislation— /»(;)!(re I'erwn- 
 «".'/■]— Where a testator bequeathed a sum of 
 money to trustees, upon trust " to apjily the 
 same in such lawful ways as in their discretion 
 they may deem best in ordir to promote the 
 adoption by the Parliament of the Dominion of 
 Canada of legislation i>r(yliiliiting totallv the 
 manufnoture or sale in the Dominion of intoxi- 
 cating li(juor to bo used as a beveiage, and in 
 order to give practical aid in the enforcement of 
 such legislation w lien adojitod, whether by 
 educating and developing a strong public senti- 
 ment in its favour or by other and more (lircct 
 means, or in sucli other ways as mv trustees 
 shall think best : '— 
 
 Held, a good charitable legacy, being for a, 
 lawful public or general imriose, and not con- 
 trary to morality or to public policy. 
 
 The testator merely sought to promote a 
 desnable change in the law by constitutional 
 means. 
 
 Held, also, that a promissory note payable to 
 the testator collaterally secured by mortgage on 
 land was impme personaltv. Fareice/l v. Pare- 
 well, 22 O. R. 573. 
 
 Unincorporated Association.]— A testator 
 domiciled in the State of Mi.ssouri, U.S., at the 
 time of the execution of his will and at the 
 time of his death, bequeathed personal property- 
 situate in this P;ovii,cc to 3 [,odge of Oddfellows 
 in the State of New York, U.,S., which, 
 although unincorporated at the time of the 
 testator's death, was subsequently authorized 
 by law to take ami hold, in the names of trus- 
 tees, property devised to the lodge. 
 
f',i;j.-, 
 
 w ; 
 
 1039 
 
 WILL. 
 
 In an action to test the validity of the 
 l)i'(nicst : — 
 
 Hold, tliat llie parties having selected their 
 foruni in this Province, the action must be dealt 
 with litTe according' to the law of the testators 
 doniicilt", which, i the absence of evidence to 
 the contrary, woul be pi esumed to be the same 
 as the law of this x'rovince : — 
 
 Held, aiso, there beinj; no prohibitory law of 
 tile legi'.teos' domicile, the be((uest to the lodi;e 
 was a valid bcijiicst to the members thereof, and 
 that tlie trustees of the lodge could lie added as 
 parties defendants, on behalf of all the iiiemliers 
 It aa-er v. Mnrmij, ,5 O. R. 638, followed. 
 irraimm v. Caiianddir/ua Lod/ie, 24 O R 
 2.55, 
 
 1040 
 
 V. Miscellaneous Cases. 
 
 Void Bequests -/«yfi«tory.] -Certain charit- 
 able .jeijuests having been held void, it was 
 further held that those tliat were good were 
 not increased, hut that tlie amount of the void 
 be(jue8ts was distributable as in ease of intes- 
 acy. Puro:l/ v. Ik, nii, 20 A. R. -)35. 
 
 o. Power of Appointment. 
 
 Mode of Exercise. ]— A deed of trust pro- 
 vided that certain lauds should go to the sei 
 tier's tliree chihlren in default of appointment 
 by deed. Afterwards he made Iiis will, under 
 seal, wlioreby lie devised " all the rest of my 
 ■estate, real and pergonal, to which I shall be 
 entitled at the time of my decease," to one of 
 the three children ; — 
 
 Held, that this residuary devise could not be 
 regarded as an executinn of the power of appoint- 
 ment, nor even as such a defective execution as 
 equity would ahl, at any rate at the suit of the 
 plamtitl, wlio, i's an illegitimate child of the 
 testator, was only a stranger. Shore v. Shore., 
 
 Mode of Exercise.] — A father conveyed 
 Jan s to hi., (iaiighter by deed with hahcmhim 
 tc have and to bold the same unto . uid 
 
 the heirs of her body lawfully begotten, to and 
 lor their sole and only use forever . . . to and 
 for the sole and separate use and bJi.elit' of 
 (grantor) for and during the term of lier natural 
 life, and after her death then to the heirs of 
 her body lawfully begotten forever. Provided 
 always, however, that it shall and may be lawful 
 ior (grantor) to direct and appoint, either by deed 
 or her last will am' testament, which or in what 
 manner her said heirs shall have the lands and 
 premises herel)y granted, should circumstance-: 
 at any time render it necessary, of which cir- 
 cumst-.nces she shall and may be sole jiulge '' 
 She died leaving lier husband i.;d several child 
 ren surviving her, and by her will devised aii<l 
 appointed the lands to her eldest son with 
 instructions to dispose of the same between her 
 husband and chihlren in the proportions men- 
 tioned in her will : — 
 
 Held, that the daughter took an estate in fee 
 tad general, and that her husband was tenant 
 by the curtesy : — 
 
 Held, also, that the provisions of the will were 
 not a valid exercise of the power. Archtr v 
 Urqiihart,2iO. i.i.2\i. 
 
 ^Ivlsion of Estate -/?;!7A< to Postjtone.y- 
 1. K h., who, in partnership with his brother 
 • '. J*., carried on business as manufacturers of 
 Ijoots and shoes :m Montreal, by his last will left 
 all Ins property and estate to lie c(pially divided 
 between his two brothers, M. W. F., the appel- 
 hint, and .1. R, the respondent. The will con- 
 tained also the following provision : "But it is 
 my express will and desire that nothing herein 
 contained shall have the ctfcct of disturbing 
 the business now carried on by iiiy said brother 
 .Jeremiah and myself in co-parttiership, under 
 tlie name and firm of Fogarty k Krother, should 
 a division be requested between the said Jere- 
 miah Pogarty and Michael William Fogarty, 
 should the latter not be a menilier of the firm, 
 tor a period of five years computed from the 
 (lay of my deatli, in order that my brother, the 
 said Jeremiah Fogarty, may have ample time 
 to settle his business and make the division 
 contem])lated between them and the said 
 Alichael William Fogarty, and in the event 
 ot the death of either of them, then the whole 
 to go to the survivor. T. F. F. died on the 
 29t,i April, ISS'J. On the .SOth April, 1889, a 
 statement of the aliairs of the firm was made 
 up by the book-keeper, and ,1. W. and M. W. F. 
 having agreed upon such statement, the balance 
 shewn was eijually divided lietween the par- 
 f^,^'"-' •^■-'•I.IK'-^-^ being carried to the credit 
 01 .\1. \\. i'., in trust, and .•?'.M,I4G.:U being 
 carried to.]. F.'s general account in the books 
 of the firm. At the foo, of the statement a 
 memorandum dated 12tli.j.ine, ISSi), was signed 
 I by both parties, declaring that the said amount 
 liad that day been distributed to them. On the 
 Oth March 1890, M. \V. F. brought an action 
 against J. l-., claiming that he was entitled to 
 ••:?-'4,14G.,S4, with interest, from the date of the 
 division and distribution, viz., .SOth April, 1889. 
 J. I', pleaded that under tlie will he was en- 
 titled to postpone payment until Hve years from 
 the testator's death, and that the action was 
 premature : — 
 
 Held, athrming the judgment of the Court 
 below, tliat J. F. was entitled under the wiU to 
 hve years to make the division contemplated, 
 and that he had not renounced such right by 
 signing the statement shewing the amount due 
 ."." y "[.^ p'' j"^'"'*' ^^^'^- ^'^'Jarhj V. Fooart;,, 
 
 Exoneration from Incumbrance— iJero/u- 
 
 /('/;. o/E.-<fii/,..t Act—JJU/ri/iution </ Es/ ate.]— The 
 testatrix, who died in ISm, specifically devised 
 to !ier grandson a jiart of her land, which was 
 incumbered. To the plaintiff she gave a legacy 
 of •':ro,000. The remainder of her estate, con- 
 sisting of personalty and other lands, she did 
 not dispose of or in anyway refer to in her 
 will, except in this clause : "I liereby charge 
 my estate with payment of all incumbrances 
 upon the said lands at the time of mv 
 death : " — 
 
 Held, that the residue of the estate was 
 charged with mortgage debts to the exclusion 
 ot tlie land specihoally devi.scd. 
 
 Such i-esifhii- ivas fr> be treatcrl as one fund, 
 and as if it were all personalty, under sec. 4 of 
 the Devolution of Estatcj Act, 1!. S. O. ch 
 108 ; and out of it the debts, including the 
 mortgage debts upon the land speciticjilly 
 
1040 
 
 ELLANEOUS CASES. 
 
 1041 
 
 WITN£SS. 
 
 ta,te—Rir/ht (o Pof<t/x)He.'] — 
 iutnership with his brother 
 usiness as iniinufaoturers of 
 VIoiitreal, by liis Inst will left 
 1 estate to l)e e(iiiiilly divided 
 itliers, M. W. b\, the appel- 
 respondeiit. The will con- 
 iwing provision : "But it is 
 1 desire that nothing herein 
 ve the ctl'ect of disturbing 
 rried ou by my said brother 
 ilf in co-partnership, under 
 if I'ogarty & Urotiier, should 
 ied between the said Jere- 
 Michael William Fogarty, 
 it be a member of the firm, 
 years eompnted from the 
 order tliat my brother, the 
 rty, may have ample time 
 MS and make the division 
 eeu them and the said 
 ogarty, and in the event 
 3V of them, then the whole 
 or. T. F. F. died on the 
 )n tlie 3()th April, 1889, a 
 airs of the firm was made 
 er, anil J. W. and M. W. F. 
 iuch statement, the balance 
 divided lietween the par- 
 being carried to the credit 
 ust, and .•?i4, 140.34 being 
 eral account in the books 
 L' fo(M of the statement a 
 i'Jtii.Mine, 1881), was signed 
 iring that the said amount 
 itrijjuted to them. On the 
 \V. F. brought an action 
 ig that he \v;\s entitled to 
 ;rest, from the date of the 
 ion, viz., .'iOth April, 1889. 
 nder the will he was en- 
 •ment until five years from 
 and that the action was 
 
 e judgment of the Court 
 entitled under the wiU to 
 
 le division coutemplate<l, 
 renounced such right by 
 sliewing the amount due 
 
 89. Fuijarltj v. Fo/jarti/, 
 
 I Incumbrance— />ef;o/u- 
 
 '■■'/ri/iution (if Estate. ]— The 
 \^9\, specifically devised 
 ; of her land, which was 
 lilaintifi' she gave a legacy 
 iiidcr of her estate, con- 
 :uid other lands, she did 
 any way refer to in her 
 luse : "I hereby charge 
 lent of all incumbrances 
 s at the time of my 
 
 idue of the estate was 
 e debts to the exclusion 
 
 devised. 
 
 be ti'ealcd as one fund, 
 
 rsonalty, under sec. 4 of 
 
 ate J Act, I!. S. O. ch. 
 
 ho debts, including the 
 
 the land speciticjilly 
 
 devised, were first to be paid, and then the 
 legacy ; the balance, if any, to go t,, the heirs- 
 ■ at-]_aw and next of kin. ScoU v. Supple, 23 0. 
 
 1*. OifO. 
 
 Felony.]— A devisee who kills the devisor 
 •and IS convicted of manslaughter therefor, does 
 not forfeit the devise, the element of iuteut 
 <Jein<'msuch ease necessarily absent. Cleavi,- 
 ■V. Mutual Restrvti Fund Life A.iwciatiun, [18921 
 I Q. B. 147, distinguished. 
 
 Judgment of| Ferguson, J., 24 0. R 13" 
 •reversed. McKinuon v. L^mdij, 21 A. K. oGo' 
 ■'See the next case. 
 
 1042 
 
 Residuary Gift.]— Where there was no 
 special devise of the testator's real estate, but 
 only a direction to the executorp to sell and pay 
 legacies, it was held that the land and rente 
 arising therefrom belonged to the widow, under 
 the general residuary gift to he-, and that the 
 executor had no power to lease. McMyhr v. 
 L<ju<-h, 24 (). R. 632. 
 
 ■ ^^\°^y~J^^'^"h of Testator Caused by Dt- 
 •(•(.see.]— ^o devisee can take luider the will of a 
 testator whose deatli has been caused by the 
 •criminal and felonious act of the devisee 
 himself, and in applying this rule no distinction 
 can be made between a ileaih caused by murder 
 ■and one caused by manslaughter ; Taseherean, 
 .)., dissenting. Judgment of Court of Appeal 
 ■•<nb nom. McKiiniou v, Lund;/, 21 A. rT 560 
 •reversed. Lundy v. Lundy, 24 S. C. R. 050. ' 
 
 Heirsat-law — Change in Law After Will 
 Made.^—A testator by liis will, made on the 
 14th August, 1850, devised certain land to his 
 widow for life, and after her death to two 
 .nephews, and in the case of the death of Miem 
 ■or either of them, in his own lifetime, he 
 devised the share of such deceased to the heir- 
 at-law or heirs-at-law of such deceased, his 
 her, or their hei.-s and assigns. The Act com- 
 monly known us the Act abolishing piimoKcni- 
 ture, 14 & 15 Vict. ch. (i, was passed on the 
 2nd August, 18ol, and came into force on the 
 1st January, 1852. (Jne nephew of the testa- 
 tor died in 1858, leaving liiin surviving two 
 sons and two daughters. The testator died in 
 18t)b, and his widow in 1870 ; — 
 
 Held, Gait, C. J. C. P., dissenting, attirming 
 the judgment of Robertson: J-, IbO. R. 341, that 
 the Act abolishing primogeniture did not apply, 
 (1) because the will was made before it was 
 passed or took effect ; and (2), because the land 
 had been lawfully devised by the person who 
 died seized, and therefore that the eldest son of 
 the deceased nephew, as his common law heir, 
 was entitled to the remainder in fee expectant 
 upon the death of the widow. Ti/ke v. l\al 
 19 Gr. 601, approved. lialdicln v.' Kim/stone, 18 
 A. R 63. Affirmed on this point by the Judi- 
 cial Committee, 18 A. R., Appendix. 
 
 Products and Services Charged on Land 
 
 lender oj and liefusal to Aea-pt—Omipensatioii ] 
 —A testator by his will <levised his farm to his 
 grandson charged with the siipi)ly of certain 
 products and personal services in favour of a 
 daughter and granddaughter. 
 
 On a disagreement between the parties, a 
 tender of '.he products and ser\-ice3 was made 
 and refused, and an action was brought to have 
 them declared a charge on the laud and for a 
 money compensation : — 
 
 Held, thai the refusal of the products did not 
 deprive the plaintiffs of the right to recover 
 their value, but that they were not entitled to 
 compensation for the personal services proffered 
 and refused. Murray v. Black, 21 0. R. 3Vi!. 
 
 Transfer — Sale of Ri;,hts — ^fandatory — 
 Ne^/oltorum (U:stor.]-ln 1871 ('. Z. D., one of 
 the institutes under the will of (i. D., die<l 
 without issue, an<l by his will made the defen- 
 dant his universal legatee. The i)laintiff claimed 
 his sliaie in the estate of (i. I), under a deed of 
 assignment made by the defendant to the plain- 
 tiff in 1862 of all right, title, and interest in the 
 estate : — 
 
 Held, that the plaintiff did not acquire by 
 the deed of 1862 the defendant's title or interest 
 I in any portion of C. Z. J^.'s share under the 
 will of 1871 :— 
 
 Held, further, t!:at under the will of the lute 
 G. D., C. Z. D.'s share reverted either to the 
 Burviviiicr institutes or to the substitutes, and 
 that all the defendant took under the will of 
 C. /. 1). was the accrued inteiest on the capital 
 of the share at the time of his deatli. 
 
 By tlie judgment appealed from the defen- 
 dant was condemned to render an account of 
 his own share in the estate which he trans- 
 ferred to the plaintif}' by notarial deed in 1862, 
 and also an account of the share of C. D., 
 another institute, who in 1882 transferred his 
 rights to the plaintiff. The transfer made by 
 the defendant was in his capacity of co-legatee 
 of such rights and interests as he had at the 
 time of the transfer, and he had at that time 
 received the sixth of the sum for which he was 
 sued to account :— 
 
 Held, reversing the judgment of the Court 
 below, that the plaintiff took nothing as regards 
 the.se sums under the transfer, and even if he 
 was entitled to anything, the defendant would 
 not be liable in an action to account as the man- 
 datory or nejotiorum (jestor of the plaintiff. 
 2. That F. D. and K. D. having acquired an 
 interest ;n C. Z. D.'s share after they liad trans- 
 ferred their share to the plaintiff in 1869, the 
 plaintiff could not mainfiin his action without 
 making tliem parties to the suit : Art. 920 C. 
 
 (,hiaiv, per Taschereau, J., whether the trans- 
 fers made ))y the institutes K. D., F. D., and 
 C. 1). to the plaintiff wliile he was curator to 
 the substitution were not null and void under 
 Art. 1484, C. O. Dorion v. JJorion, 20 S. C. R. 
 430. 
 
 WINDING-UP. 
 
 See CoMi'ANv, VIII.— Costs, IV. 
 
 WINNIPEG STREET RAILWAY. 
 
 ■See Stkeet Kailwavs, II. 
 
 WITNESS. 
 
 65 
 
 See Evidence— Malicious Arrest and Pbosk- 
 cuTio.v, III.— Will, IV. 
 
#$' 
 
 VMS 
 
 WORDS AND TERMS. 
 
 WORDS AND TERMS. 
 
 R 'iA ^T^.-n':;:'^'' <^''">^'-<»i V. Adams, 25 0. 
 K. 229, ante 1027. 
 
 "A person cliiimiiig right thereto." — &, 
 Olwer V. ioa,V, 2(i (). R. l'S, a„l, ;j7S. 
 
 " Absconded. "-.Sc- Coffey v. .S'«iHe, 25 O. R. 
 5BS, an<e 40. 
 
 O. R. 332, OH^c 1022, 
 
 ^<S U. K. 280, aiile 424. 
 
 ^/Ifp'i"''"'!-"-*'; -'•'' Central Ba„k~Caimda 
 Shipptmj Co. v C«M-, 21 O, R. 515, ante 8«. 
 
 "Act of (iod."-&e Gmifield v. City of 
 Toronto, 22 A. R. 128, aute 729. ^ "^ 
 
 „«/l^';!^°°//~^'f ^""''■' '■• '^'"^«' '4 !'• R- 351, 
 ante 569 ; Ifo'iahoom v. GUlitH, 10 P. R 40» 
 ante 544. ' 
 
 Aam, 16 P. R. 110, ai.it 763. '^ 
 
 o-^S^"'?' ^"^ continued change of posBession. •' 
 —SeeGillardx. Bolkrt, 24 O. R. 147, aw/, 113- 
 Jiogaboom v. Uraydon, 26 O. R. 298, a,ife 491. 
 
 "Actual settlers for agricultural purposes."— 
 Co., 20 is. C. R. 23i), ante 308. 
 
 516, tnfe TO.'"*" '^'"'^ "• ^^^'"^^^''"' ^« P" I^" 
 
 21 S^rP^.r"'V';r-f' ^'"''«'" ^- ^«?>»«"-e, 
 'SI is. C R. G9, oH^e 953. 
 
 104« 
 
 /»• » . Co., 22 A. R, 453, cuifc 843. 
 
 23 O. 1!. 4U.), o^/eO,"). 
 
 " 15aggage."-.S>e Dixon v. y.',V/ir/;cH AVnvvo- 
 <«o« Co., 18 S. C. I!. 704, ante 127. 
 
 c 'A'^?,^"? ine.'--.SV,. Avehibald v. //»/,/«», IK 
 8. C. R. IKi, iinle 105. 
 
 " KuiI(liDgs."-.SV,- /l,/f,w.so)/ V. /I'of/ecs, 22 
 A. R. 41,5, aute 498, ' ' 
 
 "Car-load."— S(Y' //«»/,;/ v. Canadian Park-, 
 ing Co., 21 A. R. 119, a»/e 192, 
 
 I) att, 22 S. C^ R. 300, ante 44, 
 
 .^ 'tP',?'' "'■ matter."— .See /.'f Coe v. Coe, 2t 
 O. R. 409, o;,^c 369. ^o^, ~t 
 
 Chanfre of title."-*? C'(V(-.o(.s' Inn. Co. v 
 Salteno, 23 S. C, R, 155, «»/, 515. 
 
 '' CJiildren."— ,S>« Mnrraij v, Macdonald, 22 
 
 J^" !;■ ;.':o' ""'*' "'"'-•^' ^''"y"" '^'- C.^rmichael, 21 
 O. R. 6o8, «?)/? 1019. 
 
 "Christn.as vacation."— ,SVf Thomnscn v 
 Hon-mn, 16 P. R. 378, «„^e 793, 
 
 "Consecutive years,"— .Vff CiV)/ 0/ Three 
 lurerx v, /,,/ Banqne dii Pevple, 22 S. C R 350 
 a7t/e691. ' ""' 
 
 ir"!-!^"!-'''",°*l°";"~-*" ■'''"•''^ y.^Tovmhip of 
 Wext Oxford, 22 O. R. 678, ante 707. 
 
 Costs as between solicitor and client "— 
 I V,^'""*^ between solicitor and client,"— .^ee 
 
 Any clam, against the Crown,"— S>.e City ' ' ' ' -^''• 
 
 o/Quebec V, //,e v„,,„, 04 g. c, R. 420, anH j j, 'jCWt e^^I-.--. "_,Ve J/.X.;. v. Boyd, 14 
 
 .ll^^^wl'S':.!.^ County Court.;'-5.e ^« ' ,90 ^^I^^J '-^^^ ^'''^ -• '^^'«'"'. 15 P- K. 
 
 "Custom,"— .S-ce 7'„/6,j< y. J'oole, 15 P. R 99 
 ajj<(' 215. ' 
 
 " Damage sustained ))y reason of the railway " 
 A. R. 693, a«/e855. ' "^ 
 
 County Court., oj British Columbia, 21 S. C R 
 446, ante 164. 
 
 "Day's sitting. "-&e /» re r^i™ r,/- rAorw. 
 bury and County of Orqi, 15 P. R. 192, ante 34. 
 
 ^.•."'^JT^, "'"'",/"y I1W of Canada, "-.Vee 
 
 I " Defect, "-*.p //n,»,y/on v. Oroesheck, 18 A. 
 
 " Arrangement. "_.9« J/.CToAeWj, v. ««/e I ?; 'MaT f^ '„.^T^"'''i..'>- ^'^''^'"'^ ^•^''• 
 ^/ff. Co. , 19 A. R. 1 17, «n?e 651 , ^ ,": 'M.dln 7 r r ^"^ = ?^'""""- ^'- ^«»i<^ 
 
 tonBnlge Co., d,. 596, «„?e 653 ; MeCloherty y, 
 
 I l!iX. C. R, 99, ante 868. 
 
 <on, 24 S. C. R. 69, ante 106, '' 
 
 „."-*^'g"^-"— *>■"■ .C"'-r(/v. Anderson, ISA. R. 
 ^, o«/e 6/5 ; i?e Abbott and Medcalf, 20 O. R 
 299, o?i<e 435. 
 
 Oale 3//,/. Co., 19 A. R. 117, a»^' 651. 
 
 "Defect in substance or in form "— .9ee 
 Berjina v. Hazen, 20 A. R, 633, ante 585." 
 
 23 O. R. 493, 21 A. R. 092, ante 371. 
 
 "Demise." -,9e«Zf„/^er v. 7'Ae Qu^en, 3 Kx. 
 v./. K. Ja4, a?i<e 316. 
 
104< 
 
 Thomjwip V, Grand Trnnk 
 453, aiilc 843. 
 
 'Sfc Clark V. MrCMlan,. 
 
 Dixon V. Ilichi'lieu Aavii/a- 
 704, cuifc 127. 
 
 '■ Archibald v. Uuliley, IK 
 5. 
 
 Adanixo)! v. Iio(jern, 22 
 
 7a);/(?/ V. Canadian Pari-- 
 , «»^^ ly2. 
 
 I." — sv,. OVy f/ London v.. 
 , mi/e 44. 
 
 "--.See /,'e C'oe v. Coe, 2» 
 
 — .SV«' Cili-.fns' Inn. Co. v. 
 ")"), «)(/t 513. 
 
 Hurra;/ y. Mardonald, 22 
 lioyer-'^ v. Cirmichael, 21 
 
 on . ' — .SVf ?'/i ompxo 'i v. 
 aw/e 793. 
 
 s."— .Se^ C?Vj/ o/ Three 
 u Ptvple, 22 S. C. R. 352, 
 
 ?pc .SV/;/e v.^Tovmhip of 
 078, r/;(/e 707. 
 
 snlicilor and client " — 
 :;itr.r niul client."— .S'ee 
 P. [{.21, 105, r,H^e235. 
 
 SVe .1/f A'o/)' V. Boyd, 14 
 
 »•(/ V. J/(7,S0», 15 P. K. 
 
 ^«./ V. Pooh, 15 P. R. 99, 
 
 y ifHson of the railway." 
 I Truiil R. W. Co., lf> 
 
 ? In re Tou-n of Thorn- 
 >/, J5 P. R. 192, ante 34. 
 
 il/on V. Orocxheck, 18 A. 
 •Iford V. McClary Mfg. 
 55 ; O'Connor v. Hamil- 
 nite 653 ; MrCloherty v. 
 117, OH^' 651. 
 
 ;e or in form."— 5ee 
 K. 633, a»/e 585. 
 
 '« re Hanna v. Coulson, 
 92, aHZe 371. 
 
 «r V. rAe Qti-'en, 3 f^x. 
 
 1045 
 
 WORDS AND TERMS. 
 
 1046 
 
 '—See Sl'PKEME COI'KT OK 
 
 26'a rS !rX"-*^ -^"^ ^- ^'^'^' ! R.'ogf tri^*^ -^'^''^^ ^- ^^'"^' -" "• 
 
 wl'l-i^*'"'''''' ;''>.?," "iV"''"'' int'-'-eHt."-,S'ct AV' , •• Franchise, "_.9te /„ re Cih, ,.f Toronto and 
 H^gms and Cxty of Toronto, 20 O. R. 480. ant. I Toronto Street /?. Jl'. Co., 20 aI^R. 12,C<n' '°034 
 
 • in- -ii . , . ' " Prt'uholdcr. " — 5(6 In re Flat! an<l f'niffit 
 
 " Die without Iciuiiij,' living ihsue."— ,S'ce /f c i "From some other cnu.sc."— .S'ee llVtwar v 
 Jra-ser and Bell, 210. 1!. 455, Vn^^' 1022. '.<lrand TrnnL- R. It". Co., 16 P. R. ;}7i, ante 
 
 "Divisible profits," "Divisible 8uri.hi.s.-- .. ., . ., „ 
 
 See Bainv. J-Una. Life Inn. Co., 20 It li •)) ,, l""t'ii'« iiglits." 
 O. R. 23.3, rt,(^e .'j;V). •.',-! C.vs.uxv, XII. 
 
 " Doinft business in Canada. "—S'ee Re O.dario a ''/."'Im,'!"''^'^;' •IT-'''' ^" '''' '''"""'* ''■ C'ohAsom, 21 
 torge and Bolt Co., 25 O. H. 407, ante 148. ' "'"' •^*''' 
 
 " Done in pursuance of this Act.' -.?- M>/,6 .V,,'"mS'% W '' T^i'. 'v*^''''''r*'^^.''"'^ ^• 
 
 ^"v, "' ""''- -i2; to»to V. i^ofW-t, lb. 273, (Ui^e 
 
 . K. ,S2/, ««?e 97. .. (jj^od cause shewn. "-.S'cf /.s/„7k/ v. Town- 
 
 i< u 11 •, r, „ „ "hi/' of Amaraiilh, Hi V R 3 a?i/c'Ml ■ Pr,lln-,rl 
 
 K. Si<i, ante 1026. 
 
 '•Every...fere„ce, inquiry, examination, or LSw^^*^, J^;:?'^^ ^,So '^0 oT 
 
 ';E-ution.;;^^e. i/c^«,.. v. /.„./,b,,, 16 i P. "l^TSti;'-''' ''"''^ ^'^ '•'■^'''''''"' '' 
 I . n. 20, o?i/e 28. i 
 
 R ';i^ r^-^-- '-^- ^V.. V. ira,, 14 P. I 22 a'l-rSiri;^^^ ^^ '^'"''^'•""'^ ^'•^"'' 
 
 Ki. l^O) CllltG oU7* 
 
 *i XT 1 T-v .L n rt », i *' ^*^ ^^^ event of her death."— .S'ee y?e Wnfl-pr 
 
 li.\ltan}e7m ^ ^^'^■''' "*^ ^^ ' "'"' ^'''"'' " "• ^- =^^2, ctnte 1022 
 
 'ii7„„oj 1 •, c. r- „. i "Ii transit to Canada. "—.9(>eC((r<pc. J/act/ .{• 
 
 519 Se iS'S ^'"""^ "'■ ^"■'' -^ ^- ^- I ??•• "• ^''''^ '''"^"'' - ^^- C- R. 126. 18 S ^'r 
 
 oi», urtte iu — , ^Q(j_ „,,;g ^^)^ 
 
 "Final disposition of action."— .9et (7o,To/Z V '-In trust " — .?<«> 7li.„,,.,« ,. /•„ 7 j 
 
 Provincial Natural Gas Co., 16 P. R. 518, aJti ' Ca,^i.!:Z.n cf.lHA.T .305,^IoS"c"r 
 
 •^?1> ""'"i 137; Harte v. Ontario Exprexs and 
 ;;Fi„al,.d«ment."-*e S.pkkm. Covhx ok | li'o:tto::;.S'i47f ISt/^rSS:; 
 
 "Final order."— See /» r« D. A. Jona Ci 
 19 A, R. 63, ante 250. 
 
 " Indemnity, "-^ee Moore v. Z)ea/A, 16 P 
 290, ante 793. 
 
 R. 
 
1047 
 
 WORDS AND TERMS. 
 
 1048 
 
 I ^ i' 
 
 "Injuriously nffected."— Sen Haulrie v. To- 
 ronto, Hamilton, and, Buffalo It W. Co., 26 O. R 
 667, ante 852 ; Mcl'lm-son v. The (Jueen, 1 Ex 
 C. R. 53, ante 278. 
 
 " Injury done."— AVf McPherson v. The Quuji, 
 1 Ex. C. K. 53, ante 278. 
 
 "Interest."— ,SVe Lynch v. Canada North- 
 west Land Co., 1!) 8. C. R. 204, an<p 56. 
 
 "Interested."- ,S'« Re Towmhipn of Har- 
 wich and llakhjh, 20 (). R. 154, ante 70,3 ; In 
 re J oimshtps of liomnnj and Tilhury Went, 18 
 A. 1!. 477, ante 704. 
 
 ''Interlocutory."— AV-fi Cfej-ie v. Creii/hton, 14 
 r. R. 34, ante 231. 
 
 " Invention for which the p.atent is granted." 
 -—Se, Jtoyal Electric Co. \. Ediion Electric Linht 
 Co., 2 Kx. C. R. 576, ante 781. 
 
 " Involves a criminal charge. "—SVe Geornian 
 Bay Co. V. World Co., 10 P. R. .320, ante 221 • 
 Macdonald V. iVorld Co., ib. 324, ante 221. ' 
 
 "Issue." -See £(,>an,s v. Kmg, 21 A. R. 519, 
 Kin,/ V. .£;m7M, 24 S. V. R. 356, ante 387. 
 
 "Judge or Court makes no order respectinK 
 the costs."- 6'ee McNair v. Boyd, 14 P. R 13'> 
 ante 210. "' 
 
 " Judgment. "-See Langevin v. Xes Comtnix- 
 sairex (V Ecolc pour la Municipalitd de St. Marc, 
 18 8. C. R. 599,a«/e957. 
 
 ''Justice of the case."— 5ee Mell v. Morrison, 
 14 P. R. 210, ante 26. 
 
 ' ' Labourers. 
 255, ante 139. 
 
 -See Welch v. A7/;.s, 22 A. R. 
 
 f^ o^^'i'l'""'*"* ^■"■'"''•"e V. «<if 0/ Kingston, 23 
 U. K. .182, on/e 715. 
 
 "Lawfully pay.able."-.Vec Co/V^aw v. Canadian 
 Pacific B. II-. Co., 26 0. R. 732, ante 841. 
 
 „'\^'^yJ^S-o\it."-See Palmatier v. McKibbon, 
 21 A. R. 441, a;i<c 1009. 
 
 ''Legal heirs." -Ac- ^l/enm.'* v. Ancient Order 
 of United Workmen, 22 O. R. 34, «»//- 525. 
 
 "Let."— See /?H/mc»- v. y/ie Queen, 3 Ex. C. 
 R. 184, ante 316. 
 
 " Letting, hiring, and otherwise departing " 
 —See Canada Southern B. W. Co. v. Toimi of 
 Niagara FalU, 22 O. R. 41, ante 857. 
 
 " Licensing, regulating, and governing. "—See 
 In re Virejo and City of Toronto, 20 A. R. 435 
 22 S. C. R. 447, [1896] A. C. 88, ante 721. 
 
 "Liquors drunk in a tavern or alehouse."— 
 See Re McGolrick v. Byall, 26 O. R. 435, ante 
 
 .TOO. 
 
 " Live transportation contract."— See Robert- 
 son V. (;m«d Trtink B. W. Co., 24 (). R. 75 
 ante 841. ' 
 
 " Located and maintained. "—See City of To- 
 ronto V. Ontario and Quebec R. W, Co., 22 O R 
 344, rtH^e 116. 
 
 " Look into."— See Moon v. GaldiueU, 15 P. R 
 159, ante 208. 
 
 "Main l)uiMing."-,S'ce yEtna Im. Co. v. At- 
 torney -Utneral for Ontario, 18 S. C. R. 707, ante. 
 51,5, 
 
 " Management and working."— See Michigan 
 Central R. If. Co. v. Wealleam, 24 S. C. R. 309 
 ante 858. ' 
 
 ' Manager in trust."— Ste London and Cana- 
 dian L. 'jA. Co. v. Dwjijan, [189.3J A. 0. 506, 
 ante 991. 
 
 "Manufacturing establishment."— See Alex- 
 ander V. Village of Huntnrille, 24 (). R. 665 
 ante 692. 
 
 " Manure."— See Rcgina v. Redmond, 24 O. R. 
 .331, ante 831. 
 
 "Market value."— See The Queen v. J. C 
 AyerCo., 1 Ex. C. R. 232, ante 867; Vacuum 
 Od Co. '. The Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 234, ante 866. 
 
 "Matter."— See Be Macphernon ami City of 
 Toronto, 16 P. R. 230, ante 33. 
 
 "May."— See Bernnrdin v. Municipality of 
 Aorth Dufferin, 19 8. C. A -)Sl, ante 927 ; Re 
 Dwyer and Town of Port Arthur, 21 O. R. 175 
 ante 49. . . , 
 
 " Moderate."— See The Heather Belle, ^'Rx 
 C. R. 40, ante 891. 
 
 "Month."— See Manufacturer/!' Life Ins. Go 
 V. Cordon, 20 A. R. 309, ante 531. 
 
 " More or less."— See Moorhouse v. Bewiih 
 22 A. R. 172, rtH^e921. 
 
 "Moving."- .See riamiUon v. Groesbeck, 18 
 A. R. 437, ante 632. 
 
 "Moving machinery."— See O'Connor v, Ham- 
 ilton Bridge Co., 21 A. R. 596, ante 653. 
 
 " My lawful heirs."— See Thompson v. Smith. 
 
 25 0. R. 652, ante 1025. 
 
 "My own right heirs."— See Coatsworth v. 
 Carson, 24 0. R. 185, ante 1025. 
 
 "Natural gas."— See Ontario Natural Oas 
 Co. v. Gvsfield, 18 A. R. 626, aji^e 715. 
 
 " Nearest of kin. "—See Brabant v. LaUmde. 
 
 26 O. R. 379, rt)i/e 376. 
 
 " Necessary."— See Stephens v. Gordon, 19 A. 
 R. 170, n7i^e 964. 
 
 " Necessary for the purposes of jnst.ine." S'e 
 
 Beaton v. Globe Printing Co-, 16 P. R. 281, ante 403. 
 
 "Next sitting of the Court."— See HogaJboom 
 V. Lnnt, Hogaboom v. McDonald, 14 P. R. 480. 
 
 ante 978. 
 
1048 
 
 intained."— .^ee City of To- 
 Quebec R. W. Co., 22 O. R. 
 
 Moon V. Caldwell, 16 P. R. 
 
 — See yElna Im. Co. v. Al- 
 itar!o, 18 S. C. R. 101, ante. 
 
 I working, '"—oVe Michigan 
 Wealleaiis, 24 S. C. R. 309, 
 
 ."— 6'((: Loniiin and Cana- 
 Owjijun, [1893J A. C. 506, 
 
 8tal)lishment." — See Alex- 
 Jluntxnlh, 24 O. R. 665, 
 
 egina v. Redmond, 24 0. R. 
 
 -See The Queen v. J. C. 
 . 232, a life 867 ; Vacuum 
 2 Ex. C. R. 234, ante 866. 
 
 • Macpherson and City of 
 ', nnte 33. 
 
 ardin v. Mmiicipality of 
 
 C. xi .J81, ante 927; /?(•■ 
 
 ^ort Arthur, 21 O. R. 175, 
 
 The Heather Belle, 3 Ex. 
 
 mufactnrerH' Life Ins. Co. 
 IJ9, ante o31. 
 
 36 Moorhouse v. Hevoith, 
 
 amilf.on v. Oroeabeck, 18 
 
 . "— i^ee O'Connor v. /fam- 
 R. 596, ajiCe 653. 
 
 — iSee Thompson v. Smith, 
 
 i, 
 
 irs." — 6'ee Coatsworth v. 
 x?j<e 1025. 
 
 !c Ontario Natural Qas 
 R. 62G, rt«<6 715. 
 
 See Brabant v. Lalonde, 
 Uephens v. Gordon, 19 A. 
 
 lurposea of just.ioe," 6'ee 
 
 Co-, 16 P.R;.281,ante 403. 
 
 Court."— ;?ee Hogaboom 
 McDonald, 14 P. R. 480, 
 
 1049 
 
 WORDS AND TERMS. 
 
 105O 
 
 "No reasonable answer. "—5cf Bank of Ham- 
 'Iton V. Oeon/f, 16 P. R. 418, a»C« 797. 
 
 "Not covered."— .See y/ie Queen v. Bunk of 
 Montreal, 1 Kx. C. R. 154, rtH<t 104. 
 
 " Not qualified."— See Re Lilley and Allin, 21 
 O. R. 424, ante 761. 
 
 "Occupied mill privilege.''— .SVc /« re Burn- 
 ham, 22 A. R. 40, ante 1007. 
 
 " On advances."— iS'ee British America Axtur- 
 <ince Co. V. Law, 21 S. C. R. 325, ante 530. 
 
 "Opening."— 5ee Palmalier v. McKibhon, 21 
 A. R. 441, ante 1009. 
 
 " Operation."— .S'ee Sage v. TuwuMp of West 
 Oxford, 22 O. R. 678, ante 707. 
 
 "Or other municipal authorities."— .S'^'e Tru't- 
 tees of R. C. Separafc School .Section Xo. lu of 
 Arthur V. Township of Arthur, iiO. R. 60, anti 
 
 "Or practice.''— S'ee Barrett v. City of Win- 
 nipeg, 19 S. C. R. 374, ante 172. 
 
 "Or which has such effect."- .9ee Motson« 
 Bank v. Halter, 18 S. C. R. 88, aiilt 72 ; Stephens 
 v. McArtlmr, 19 S. C. R. 446, aui,- 73. 
 
 "Orders and certificates. "—6'ee Warner v 
 O'Bonnell, 14 P. R. 254, ante 017. 
 
 " Other cases where all parties agree that the 
 same may be heard before a Divisional Court." 
 —See Re Wilson and County of Elgin, 16 P. R. 
 150, ante 481. 
 
 "Other matters or things."— ,S'ee O'Dcll v 
 Gregory, 24 S. C. R. 661, ante 954. 
 
 "Otherwise order."— 5ee Pattemon v. Smith, 
 14 P. R. 558, ante 795. 
 
 "Overwhelmingly."— .Vee Millar v. Mardon- 
 aid, 14 P. R. 499, ante 579. 
 
 "Owner."— S'ee York v. Township of O^noode. 
 •24 0. R. 12, 21 A. R. 168, 24 S. C. R. 282, ante 
 1001 ; Reggin v. Manex, 22 O. R. 443, ante 612. 
 
 "Owners," " Occupants."— ftf Osborne v 
 City of Kingston, 23 O. li. 382, ante 715. 
 
 " Parties."— S'ee Begg v. Ellison, 14 P. R. 267, 
 ante 254. 
 
 " Party."— See Hemlerson v. Rogers, 15 P. R. 
 241, aide 246. 
 
 "Party aflfected."— S'ee PaHw v. Mcllwain. 
 16 P. R. 555, a«<e 60. 
 
 "Party concerned."— See In re Mcllmurray 
 and Jenkins, 22 A. R. 398, ante 788. 
 
 " Party to the action.''- 6'eeii'rrf/HaK v. 'Toivn 
 of Walkerton, 15 P. R. 12, ante 769. 
 
 "Pay," "Pay or apply."— S'ee McDmell v. 
 McDonell, 24 O. R. 468, ante 1028. 
 
 " Payment."— .Sec Jennini/s v. Willis, 22 O. R 
 4.39, <(n/e (114. 
 
 " Paymeutof money toacredit()r."—Sff Ann- 
 strong v. Hemstreet, 22 O. R. 3.36, an<e 786. 
 
 " Penal. "—S'ee lluntbiglon v. Atlrill, 2(» A. R. 
 Appendix i., ante 460. 
 
 "Pending."— .S'ee Regitia v Verral, 16 P. It. 
 444, av'e 263. 
 
 "Peremptorily closed."— .S<-e Re Alger and 
 Sarnia Oil Co., 21 (». It. 440, ante 158. ' 
 
 "Person aggrieved."- ,9ec /oAh.ioh v. Allen, 
 26 0. R. 550, ante 760. 
 
 " Person claiming right thereto,"— .Vr* Oliver 
 V, Lockie, 20 (). R. 28, ante 1005. 
 
 "Personal actions." — .See /> McOugan v. 
 McGugan, 21 O, R. 289, ««('e 246. 
 
 "Persons who become creditors."— See Oillard 
 V. Bollert, 24 O. R. 147, ante 113. 
 
 "Per stirpes."— .Sir Re Fcniuson— Bennett v. 
 Coatxn:orth, 25 O. 11. 591, ante 1025. 
 
 "Plaoe."-.Se( Judge v. Splunn,-22 O. R. 409, 
 a?}<e 1027. 
 
 " Place where they might properly be."— .See 
 Xlxon v. cyra/K^ rr/oii- R. W. Co., 23 O. R. 124 
 ante 843. 
 
 "Plaintiff."— ,S'ee /ncm v. Turner, 16 P R 
 .349, aH<e 791. 
 
 "Plant."— See Middleton v. Flanagan, 25 O. 
 R. 417, ante 190. 
 
 " Pleading or other document.''— .S«e Sparkx 
 v. Puj-(/y, 15 P. H. 1, ,uifeSl2. 
 
 "Practise as a solicitor." — See Macdovqall v. 
 Law Society of Upper Canada, IS S. C. R. 203, 
 ante 912. 
 
 " Preference. '"—.See .S'^v^/ifH.^ V. McArthur. 19' 
 .S. C. R. 446, a?t<e 73. 
 
 "Present value of the work done."— .See Mon- 
 treal and Euroiienn Short Line R. W. Co. v. The 
 Queen, 2 Ex. C. R. 159, ante 289. 
 
 "Prior mortg.ige."— .See Cuok v. Belshaw, 23 
 O. R. 545, ante 01'2. 
 
 " Proceeding. "-S'ee Cole v. Porteous, 19 A. 
 R. Ill, ante 82 ; Smith v. Brou-n, 20 O. R. 165, 
 ante 12. 
 
 " Proceeding to realize the claim."- See Mc- 
 Namara v. Kirkland, 18 A. R. 271, ante 245, 
 
 " Process."- .See Re Anderson v. Vanstone, 16 
 P. R, 243, ante 174. 
 
 " Property. ''-.Sfc Camtron v. Harper, 21 S. 
 C. I!. 273, ante 1026 ; /» re Citi) of Toronto and 
 Toronto Street R. W. Co., 20 A. R. 125, anie 
 934. 
 
^°" WORDS AND TERMS. ^^^ 
 
 **' ^*' *"/) tlWe/' Oo], 
 
 J<. L'72, riH/e SH-2. ' '■ , '/"'/'<o(( ftiitl Hammy, 11 1'. R. .ji.r,^ ((«<« 770. 
 
 "Ftcul mattor in dispute."— ^9,,- TiHulw, v w. "•';*"''*";',l''«"t imrchastTH or mor i/AKeea "— 
 lUmiham, l(i 1'. R. no, a»^ 703. ' ! 'W il/a*7A ,«.&// v. I\,iu,-h„„, 20 O. It 7l!0,a»«f. 
 
 '•Runsonable expenses. •'-,V,er,.»»^,/f7'CVn)e' .,. u i- 
 /yrc/o« V. McKny, \H S. C. K. im, „><}, kw .... , . „*' ,•''!"'"•«■ -*'• AV McOoMck v. «vai' 
 
 .-O (7. K. 4.15, <ni/(i ,')(),"). " * 
 
 "Rcfercnuel.yrule, cmler, (pisulmiiHsioi,.-- ..«,„■• . ., . 
 
 "Roligious denomination."'— ,yte yi-^-/;,,™ v ' 
 
 "•'""" ■" " " """ ■"' ■ I p ';,""■" i";liBpute."-Se. /We. v. Emory, 14 
 
 ''Snrvivor.''-jS'ee ^Wt4nV/i/e v. A^hbridge, 21.> 
 I'. K. I4(), an/e 1 021. 
 
 ••''"6'""=' "ciiununiinon. — 
 JJivkont, 24 O. I!. 2.")0, re,i^e 134, 
 
 " Renewable forever. —SV, Cli„r/, y. }\, 
 nc«e, 24.S. C.J!. .'JH5, «h^. (iOO. 
 
 "Renewal premiums. "-.Ve^ vm„,,,. ^f i„„. 
 
 CO., iU O. J,. a20, r(//r. 47li. • J Oixmto, 2(i O. R. 558, unit .S|. ' •' 
 
 ir"'/^v"r'''/''''T.P'"-''"-''*'' '''■''«.'/'• o/Zo«,/o„ ,, "l^"ke notice that the defendant disputes 
 
 "Sell and absolutely dispose of.-— ,sv,. Smth 
 V. .S;..,., 22 O. R. 28<i. ant. 424. I ^_|^ Th../J_^ee Drabaut v. Za/o«cfc, 26 0. R. 
 
 60i;«;S95l'^'''''^''^'^'-^''W.24 8.C.R. 
 
 9r/n'^'S''T,o'" J'"«bandry. - -See lieid v. A"„,v„ x, 
 io U. K. 22.1, «)(<(» ti.)5. 
 
 ''.Servants. •■-.See JlVr/i v. A7/,\., .».> 4 R 
 25u, ttK^: 13!). ~ '^- ^' 
 
 "Shall in no ca.se he responsible." —,S'ce ' 
 JwOerfgoii V. < I rand Ti-Kni A' W ^'^ .>i w /. ^ ..mi , 
 
 R.C11,«H^.,S41 ^'- "•^''•■-^■'^•♦■i' ''r°.>^e beneHtad"_ye. Tfe ,§/,;,*.„, „„,; 
 
 ! Towmhij^ of Moore, 25 O. R. 600, ante 706. 
 
 CuIlSS'praSS.:^.. tsve «r' v''^W. '::!f i ^^rS-'^""""^'''' ^V'">*« the iurisdiction."- 
 16 P. R. 4%, 541, ante 40;}. ' ^'''""""' i ^^ Glarhon v. i)»;„.,', u; R. r. 531, a„<e 484, 
 
 ^S7 ' "^ ^- ^' ™^' 20 A. R. 244' 
 
 -«./; ?eA7,Ao«e Co., 20 S. C. R. 83, „«<e 963. 
 
 ''Shapcd."~*f J/„3rt»« V. 77,. (juee^, 2 E.x. 
 C. R. 64, ante 867. 
 
 "Sold."-5'«fi /?,„•«/ Munir}p„Ui,i of Corn. 
 vaUm V. Canadian Panfic R. \\\ Co 19 S O, 
 R. 702, ante .'52. '' ' 
 
 H'i?^^r!;^6:^;^r ^'••^-- ^-^ ^-'^-^--J "^•^c^^R^Rrfei.f^o'^'''''^'^ - 
 
 " Special circnnistaiinf.H,-_.Ces AV Hnu—H-ll ' t> ".H"''*'''^"!-"— *e i?«7i?ja v. Co7mnlh/,25 O 
 « ..WicvVo., 14 R R 149, a»^,.902; 7?e O'Doiloho; | ^^ ^"'' *'"' "''"• 
 
 itigated scoundrel." — 5ee Bennett v. 
 
 In 
 
 162, ante 903. 
 
 '.Of/ie, 
 
 10 I. K. i^mpjre PnH<,wj, aa,^ Publishina Co. 
 
 : 63, a»i<e 220 
 
 16 P. R. 
 
1062 
 
 —Ser Stovel v. (/mi/ory, 21 
 
 f. ' See Cojir V. Cope, 2fl 
 
 ciliiij^s," — SV<' Lniiiiman v 
 1 > I'. H. '-'15, ,uUe'nO. 
 
 lasers oi' iiior g,\({ee«." 
 
 '''/-"^", 20 0. K. 7:!0, ante. 
 
 ce III McOfilrkk v. RyaU, 
 
 —Sec BennHt v. hhnpire 
 !/ Co., I.-, P. R. J30, ««<(- 
 
 -Sf /'o((<e/' V. Emory, 14 
 
 shlridije v. Anhbridge, 22 
 
 MwphcrHon mul Cili/ of 
 a/i/e'.il, 
 
 tho (lefendnnt disputes 
 1)V the p'"iiitiff."— iSef 
 t 1'. R. 117, fiiite(J-7. 
 
 efonco."— ^ee r(itto< v. 
 e '-'3,'). 
 
 'y ofllamllton v. TWn- 
 1{. 173, rt«<e 720, 
 
 1 to tho contractor." 
 
 'd'i, 2;j 0. R. 474, 'ante 
 
 If V. Lalonde, 26 O. R, 
 
 V. Onijory, 24 S. C. U. 
 
 Wliieherg v. Hampson, 
 
 Sec Rt Slephem and 
 R. 600, a/(<e 70e. 
 
 in the jurisdiction." 
 
 : I'. R. 521, ajjte484. 
 
 Hollhiijer v. Canadian 
 R. 705, 20 A. R, 244, 
 
 /'•tV hexpatch Co. v 
 '. R. 83, a/(<e 903. 
 
 '—See Alacdotiald v. 
 lJUe 350. 
 
 ua V. Connolly, 25 O. 
 
 2l." — 5ee Bennett v. 
 «s/iin(jf Co., 16 P. R. 
 
 1053 
 
 WORK AND LABOUR. 
 
 " Until principal ami interest Hhall l,u fully 
 I>aid anil satialied."— .SVc Peopd'^ Loan and 
 Deposit Co. V. Uraut, 18 ,S, (j, U, 2(12, ante 672. 
 
 "Use and working."— &.; Mii-hli/nu Coitrnl 
 h'. U. Co. V. Wealltans, 24 .S. (J. R. \m, an/,: 85H. 
 
 "Used or employcil." — .?ef Thf (Jiteen :: 
 Tlie Omir and Jlatli', 3 Ex. C. R. 2*1, ante 81»7. 
 
 "Usual custom," -5ec Be lVal.ioii'n Tntxti. 
 21 O. R. .528, ant,: 885, 
 
 " Value."— See Monfn ,d nn,l Eiiro/;,'un Short 
 Line It. W. Co. v. The (Jwn, 2 Kx. C. K, 100. 
 mUe 288, ' 
 
 "Vehicle,"— .9t« Ihjjina v. Jnnlin,24(). R. 
 327, ante 97. 
 
 "Via direct lino."— .V«»; Danau v. (Iran,/ 
 Irunk li. ]y. Co., 19 A. R. 064, ant, 127. 
 
 "Void as against creditors." — 9;? Meridi-n 
 Britannia C. v. Llnukn, 21 A. R. 352, ante 4. 
 
 "Warvessel,"— ,SVr 7V/( Minnie \. Tin Owen 
 23 ,S. C. R. 47S, ((/(^c WIS, • . 
 
 " Warehouse. "—&e Itti/ina v. Jlaltidau, -21 
 A. R. 42, ante .-<&2. " 
 
 lOM 
 
 i provided tiiiit all extrai, etc., shoidd form a 
 I part of the contract, if aiitliori/.od l,y thc! arohi- 
 aecl, who waslirst to lix (Ii,. price, and j/rant 
 I such extension of time tlieicfor as he ihouiihL 
 necessary, and powvr w.is also given liim i„ 
 extend the time for completion in case of ,i 
 ; strike. 
 
 The building w.is not completed for over four 
 uioiitha after tlie lime lixcd, and this action for 
 the L.dancc of ilie contract price was cominonced 
 withm tlic time the linal payment was iiumIu 
 paya'ile under tlic ciintract. 
 
 Altliimgh some extras were ilone, and there 
 was evidence as to del y by strikes, the iirchi- 
 tcct was not iisked tor, and did not grant anv 
 extension of tinii:— ' 
 
 Helil, that tho contract must govern, and that 
 the dcfciidaul i were entitled to recover, hy way 
 of countei claim, the sum provided hy 'tho con 
 tract as liipiidatea dalna^'es. 
 
 Jf a claim to ii.,iijd,ited damages hy a defen- 
 dant IS pleaded Ijy w.iy of counterclaim the 
 plamtill m.iy reply matters arising snl.seouent 
 to action l)r(mglit. 'J'he liliiiititfu.is allowed to 
 reply tlial thc final payment under the contract 
 had accrued due after action hroudit, 
 
 AliU'v, if pleaded by way of set'^ofF. Tohn v 
 .1 «-/,■,»•.•,, 8 (l li. I). 428, followed, JA;A«,«rtm 
 V. ,V/,(ii//, 23 O. R. 103. 
 
 "Way."— &e CahhrcU v. MilU, 24 O. R 
 402, aiH,: (i.-.O ; //,;ad/onl v. McC/atu M/'./.'co 
 21 A. R. 164, a/i^e 655. JJ-^"-' 
 
 ^ " Way used in the business of the employer," 
 Sec .Stride v. l>i<unond (lla-i.i Co., 26 O, I!, "-'70 
 ante 656. " ~ ' 
 
 " Where the rights in future might be bound." 
 —See Lttririh;- v. S,-h'n)l Coinnvssioner.f for 
 Ihree Ru-isrx, -..'3 S. C. R. 723, ,inh Wm. 
 
 "Wilful."— &r Johnson v. Allen, 2G R. 
 550, ante 700. 
 
 " Within (Ontario. "-.S'(«roHH/f/o/' IVnit worth 
 v. Smith, 15 1'. U, S72, ant,' M ; Parker v. 
 Odette, 16 P. R, 69, ante 58, 
 
 "Wi'hin six moutlis after the fact com- 
 mitted."— .5tc Wdj/, V. IJiirton Sfon,-!/ Creek Cun- 
 lolidated Road Co., 20 U. R. 343, ante 1017. 
 
 "Woidd tow up and back "— ,SVv liailey v. 
 Vcea.i Mntaal Marine In.>:. Co., 19 .S. C. R 153 
 ante 5.T2, ' 
 
 " Year."— .S'cr //( ,r Tru.it,-c.t of School Section 
 ^o. ■■> of the Ton-nMp of Anphudd and Humph- ' 
 nes, 24 0. R. 682, ante 834. 
 
 WORK AND LABOUR. 
 
 Building Contract-^ c^/on,/))- Pri,-e— Delay 
 
 — Tinii-.—Liqiii, luted Dama'i,:-'..\- Under n. build- 
 ing contract, in writing, the contractor agreed 
 that, subject to any extensions of time by the 
 architect, the l)uilding should be finished by a 
 named day, and that in default he would pay 
 $50 a week as li.iuidated damages. It was also 
 
 I Building Contract -DimniiHal of Contractor 
 
 j —llujht to A'(„,o/v' Mat,ri,d and Pl'int Dnnamt 
 |--C'o/i(v,-.,o/(.|-l!y a contract for the erection 
 of certain buildings the contractor was to suuulv 
 I all lalxjiir, material, apparatus, scaffolding, uten- 
 sils, and cartage of every descripti.ui needfnl for 
 thei)er!(ii-maiicenf the work; and was to deliver 
 up to the owner, the work in [lerfect repair etc 
 I W-hen complete, and w,is not to sub-let any oirt 
 I of the works without the architivt's consent • 
 and all work and niatciial as delivered on the 
 premises was to form part of tlie works and be 
 considered tile property of the owner, and not 
 , to be removed without Ids consent ; the coiitrac- 
 : tor to have liberty to leinove all surplus material 
 after he had eomplel 1 the works. Without the 
 architect's coiisont the eontractor entered into a. 
 sul)-contract willi the plaintilf for the excava- 
 tion, brick and m isoiii-y work, and the plaintiff 
 j commenced work under his sub-contract, and 
 continued to work tor some time, when he Wiia 
 
 ' ordered to discontinue by the architect : 
 
 Held, that the pi lint.lf was entitled to remove 
 
 from the premises (lu-emiscs meaning what the 
 
 parties treated as such) iiiateri.d placed there 
 
 after he was directed to diHcoiitiiiiie, and also 
 
 material delivered oil' the premises, as well as 
 
 plant constituting the Hxtures and the apparatus, 
 
 etc. , necessary for e irryiiig on his business or 
 
 to recover trom tin- owner thc value of any 
 
 material use.l by him m the buildings; but that 
 
 the plamtill was not euLitled to remove any 
 
 material placed there before he was ordered to 
 
 I discontinue ; and that no demand was necessary 
 
 I It appearing that the owner was using the sjime' 
 
 and thus committing au act of conversion Ash- 
 
 ^Mi V. Ednelt, 21 O. H. 195. 
 
 j Oontruct Con.^nuction of Hewer — 'J\nte 
 
 ; Si)eeiJiMtionK.]—.\ contract for the construction 
 j of a sewer made between the corporation of a 
 j town and the plaiutitf, payment for which was 
 I to he made by items according to schedule 
 I prices, provided for its completion within a 
 
li . ti 
 
 1056 
 
 WRIT or SUMMONS. 
 
 iii 
 
 loss- 
 
 limited tiniu, which wan extended hy r<«ohitioii 
 of the council andiiBiiin infoniinllv I'xtcmlcil for 
 a furthi-r \m\m\. Thr contnut Vrovidc.l thiU 
 If the contractor ncKlcitcd or refiiHid to pro- 
 •ocutc the work to the c ngiiiccr's aiitisfaction, 
 tbu cotporntioii nij^.)it cniploy iiDil place on the 
 work such lorcc of men and tcaniK ,iiid jirocnro 
 MUoli materials as iniKJit In- deemed nisieMnary to 
 complete th. work hy the day named for com- 
 pletion, and <har«o the cost thereof to the 
 plaintit) ; and hy the speeiticatioiis, w uich were 
 made part of tlie contract, the same powerH 
 were conferred witlioul any restriction as to 
 time. The work not having heen proceeded 
 with to the engineer'H Hatisfactinn, the corpora- 
 tion, before tliu expiratirin of the Hecon<l exten- 
 Hion of tinif, exercised tlio powurs above eon- 
 lerred : — 
 
 Held, tiiat under the contract tlie power con- 
 terred coid.l only he exercised during the time 
 fixed for tlie eoi.ipletiou of the work or tlie 
 extension thereof, but under the specitieatioiia 
 thereafter; and therefore, even if theeorpora- 
 tiou could not under the contract avail t liem- 
 
 >/ 
 
 •elves of the second extension as granted 
 informa ly, the powers were jiropcrly exercised 
 under the specilications. Maiif/au v. Tuwii of 
 Wiudwr, 24 (). R. 675. '' 
 
 .SVb Vamuhi lUink Note h'liiiritiniii/ a,i,l Priiil- 
 III!) Co. V. 'i:,ioiito /.'. )('. Co., '22 A i{ 4(i" 
 illi/r '200. " ' "' 
 
 Ser t:oNTRA(rr, V'.-LlKN, in. 
 
 WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION FOR 
 INJURIES ACT. 
 
 .See Mastkr a.sd .'^ehva.nt, III, 
 
 WRIT OF SliivIMONS. 
 See I'KACTIUE, XIX. 
 
105& 
 
 ,<)iiil I'xti'iiMion UK graiittMl 
 I tin wori' i)i((|icrly excrcinfd 
 tioiid, M(iii(/an V. Town of 
 U78. 
 
 t Nolf Kiifiniriuii and Print- 
 < li. »r. Co., -22 A. H. 4tW, 
 
 U'l', V.-LlKN, III. 
 
 30MPENSATI0N FOR. 
 FRIES AOT. 
 
 AND Servant, III, 
 
 )F SL.vIMONS. 
 
 lACIIC'E, XIX.