登陆注册
15416700000126

第126章 LECTURE XI.(17)

180/3 Nugent v. Smith, 1 C.P. D. 423, Cockburn, C. J., at p. 428.

181/1 Moore, 462; Owen, 57.

181/2 Dial. 2, ch. 38, A.D. 1530.

182/1 Keilway, 160, pl. 2 (2 Hen. VIII.); cf. ib. 77b (21 Hen.

VII.).

182/2 Y.B. 33 Hen. VI. 1, pl. 3.

182/3 4 Co. Rep. 83 b; Cro. Eliz. 815.

183/1 Keilway, 160, pl. 2.

183/2 Y.B. 19 Hen. VI. 49, ad fin. Cf. Mulgrave v. Ogden, Cro.

Eliz. 219; S.C., Owen, 141, 1 Leon. 224; with Isaack v. Clark, 2Bulstr. 306, at p. 312, Coke, J.

183/3 See Lecture VII.

184/1 Paston, J., in Y.B. 19 Hen. VI. 49. See, also, Rogers v.

Head, Cro. Jac. 262; Rich v. Kneeland, Cro. Jac. 330, which will be mentioned again. An innkeeper must be a common innkeeper, Y.B.

11 Hen. IV. 45. See further, 3 Bl. Comm. 165, where "the transition from status to contract" will be found to have taken place.

184/2 F. N. B. 94 D; infra, p. 203.

184/3 Y.B. 7 Hen. IV. 14; 12 Ed. IV. 13, pl. 9, 10; Dyer, 22 b.

184/4 The process may be traced by reading, in the following order, Y.B. 2 Hen. VII. 11; Keilway, 77 b, ad fin. (21 Hen.

VII.); ib. 160, pl. 2 (2 Hen. VIII.); Drake v. Royman, Savile, 133, 134 (36 Eliz.); Mosley v. Fosset, Moore, 543 (40 Eliz.); 1Roll. Abr. 4, F, pl. 5; Rich v. Kneeland, Cro. Jac. 330 (11 Jac.

I.).

185/1 Cro. Jac. 262 (8 Jac. I.). Compare Maynard's argument in Williams v. Hide, Palmer, 548; Symons v. Darknoll, ib. 523, and other cases below; 1 Roll. Abr. 4, F, pl. 3. Mosley v, Fosset, Moore, 543 (40 Eliz.); an obscurely reported case, seems to have been assumpsit against an agistor, for a horse stolen while in his charge, and asserts obiter that "without such special assumpsit the action does not lie." This must have reference to the form of the action, as the judges who decided Southcote's Case took part in the decision. See, further, Evans v. Yeoman, Clayton, 33.

186/1 See Symons v. Darknoll, and the second count in Morse v.

Slue infra. (The latter case shows the averment of negligence to have been mere form.) Cf. I Salk. 18, top.

187/1 Supra, p. 179.

187/2 Boson v. Sandford, Shower, 101; Coggs v. Bernard, infra.

187/3 Symons v. Darknoll, infra.

188/1 Reg. Brev. 92b, 95a, 98a, 100b, 104a; cf. Y.B. 19 Ed. II.

624; 30 Ed. III. 25, 26; 2 Hen. IV. 18, pl. 6; 22 Hen. VI. 21, pl. 38; 32 & 33 Ed. I., Int., xxxiii.; Brunner, Schwurgerichte, 177; id. Franzosische, Inhaberpapier, 9, n. 1.

188/2 12 Co. Rep. 64.

188/3 See, besides the following cases, the declaration in Chamberlain v. Cooke, 2 Ventris, 75 (1 W. & M.), and note especially the variations of statement in Morse v. Slue, set forth below, in the text.

189/1 Hobart, 17; Cro. Jac. 330. See also George v. Wiburn, 1Roll. Abr. 6, pl. 4 (A.D. 1638).

190/1 The use which has been made of this case in later times shows the extreme difficulty in distinguishing between principles of substantive law and rules relating only to procedure, in the older books.

190/2 Y.B. 22 Hen. VI. 21, pl. 38; supra, p. 188, n. 1.

191/1 Palmer, 523.

191/2 Palmer, 548.

191/3 Aleyn, 93.

191/4 1 Sid. 36.

192/1 1 Sid. 244. Cf. Dalston v. Janson, 1 Ld. Raym. 58.

192/2 2 Keb. 866; 3 id. 72, 112, 135; 2 Lev. 69; I Vent. 190, 238; 1 Mod. 85; Sir T. Raym. 220.

193/1 2 Keb. 866. See 3 Keb. 74; 1 Mod. 85; Sir T. Raym. 220.

193/2 2 Keb. 72.

193/3 Y.B. 33 Hen. VI. 1; supra, p. 177.

193/4 3 Keble, 73. This is the main point mentioned by Sir T.

Raymond and Levinz.

193/5 Cf. 1 Mod. 85.

194/1 1 Ventris, 238, citing Southcote's Case in the margin. Cf.

3 Keble, 135.

194/2 Aleyn, 93; supra, p. 191.

194/3 See also 1 Hale, P.C. 512, 513.

195/1 King v. Viscount Hertford, 2 Shower, 172, pl. 164; cf.

Woodlife's Case, supra.

195/2 Boson v. Sandford, 1 Shower, 101 (2 W. & M.). See above, pp. 183,185; below, p. 197. Modern illustrations of the doctrine will be found in "Fleming v. Manchester, Sheffield, &Lincolnshire Railway Co., 4 Q.B.D. 81, and cases cited. In Boorman v. Brown, 3 Q.B.511, 526, the reader the primitive assumpsit, which was the inducement to a declaration in tort, interpreted as meaning contract in the modern sense. It will seen directly that Lord Holt took a different view. Note the mode of dealing with the Marshal's case, 33 Hen; VI. 1, in Aleyn, 27.

196/1 See Lovett v. Hobbs, 2 Shower, 127 (32 Car. II.);Chamberlain v. Cooke, 2 Ventris, 75 (1 W. & M.); Boson v.

Sandford, 1 Shower, 101, citing Southcote's Case (2 W. & M.);Upshare v. Aidee, 1 Comyns, 25 (8 W. III.); Middleton v. Fowler, I Salk. 288 (10 W. III.).

196/2 12 Mod. 472.

196/3 2 Ld. Raym. 909.

197/1 Powtuary v. Walton, 1 Roll. Abr. 10, pl. 5 (39 Eliz.). Cf.

Keilway, 160.

197/2 2 Ld. Raym. 919. See Lecture VII. How little Lord Holt meant to adopt the modern view, that delivery, being a detriment to the owner, was a consideration, may be further seen by examining the cases put and agreed to by him from the Year Books.

199/1 2 Kent, 598; 1 C.P. D. 429.

199/2 Palmer, 523. See too Keilway, 77 b, and 160, pl. 2, where the encroachment of case on detinue, and the corresponding confusion in principle, may be pretty clearly seen taking place.

But see p. 175, supra.

200/1 2 Kent, 597; Forward v. _Pittard, 1 T. R. 27.

200/2 Cf. Y.B. 7 Hen. IV. 14; 2 Hen. VII. 11; Keilway, 77 b, 160, pl. 2, and other cases already cited.

200/3 Y.B. 41 Ed. III. 3, pl. 8.

200/4 Y.B. 33 Hen. YI. 1, pl. 3.

200/5 Reg. Brev. 107 a, 108 a, 110 a, b; entries cited 1 T. R.

29.

200/6 See above, pp. 167, 175 et seq.; 12 Am. Law Rev. 692, 693;Y.B. 42 Ed. III. 11, pl. 13; 42 Ass., pl. 17.

201/1 1 Wilson, 282; cf. 2 Kent (12th ed.), 596, n. 1, b.

201/2 Y.B. 33 Hen. VI. 1, pl. 3.

202/1 Mouse's Case, 12 Co. Rep. 63.

202/2 Bird v. Astcock, 2 Bulstr. 280; cf. Dyer, 33 a, pl. 10;Keighley's Case, 10 Co. Rep. 139 b, 140.

202/3 Y.B. 40 Ed. III. 5, 6, pl. 11; see also Willams v. Hide, Palmer, 548; Shep. Touchst. 173.

203/1 See Safe Delcosit Company of Pittsburgh v. Pollock, 85Penn. 391.

203/2 Paston, J., in Y.B. 21 Hen. VI. 55; Keilway, 50 a, pl. 4;Hardres, 163.

203/3 Lane v. Cotton, 1 Ld. Raym. 646, 654; 1 Salk. 18; 12 Mod.

484.

204/1 Forward v. Pittard, 1 T. R. 27, 83.

205/1 Printing and Numerical Registering Co. v. Sampson, L.R. 19Eq. 462, 465.

207/1 Possession, Section 6, Eng. tr., pp. 27, 28.

207/2 R. d. Besitzes, 487.

同类推荐
  • 集文字禅

    集文字禅

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
  • 大乘起信论义记别记

    大乘起信论义记别记

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
  • 般若心经略疏

    般若心经略疏

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
  • 六字课斋卑议

    六字课斋卑议

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
  • 何耶揭唎婆像法

    何耶揭唎婆像法

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
热门推荐
  • 世界上最神奇的故事

    世界上最神奇的故事

    1900年,“神奇故事”第一次在最早的《成功杂志》问世之后,立即引起了全世界范围的巨大轰动。应成千上万人的强烈要求,一本银色、微小的书籍出版了。这本书分两个部分。第一部分揭开斯图尔特万特的故事,一个忍饥挨饿的窘迫艺术家用3美分买了一本残破老旧的剪贴本之后,他的生活在一夜之间发生了巨大的改变。在这本剪贴本里面,他发现了他所说的一个“世界上最神奇的故事”。斯图尔特万特看到这个“神奇的故事”后,向人们宣讲他从故事里获得的神奇力量,几乎每一个听这个故事的人都获得了成功。
  • 相思谋:妃常难娶

    相思谋:妃常难娶

    某日某王府张灯结彩,婚礼进行时,突然不知从哪冒出来一个小孩,对着新郎道:“爹爹,今天您的大婚之喜,娘亲让我来还一样东西。”说完提着手中的玉佩在新郎面前晃悠。此话一出,一府宾客哗然,然当大家看清这小孩与新郎如一个模子刻出来的面容时,顿时石化。此时某屋顶,一个绝色女子不耐烦的声音响起:“儿子,事情办完了我们走,别在那磨矶,耽误时间。”新郎一看屋顶上的女子,当下怒火攻心,扔下新娘就往女子所在的方向扑去,吼道:“女人,你给本王站住。”一场爱与被爱的追逐正式开始、、、、、、、
  • 雷厉风行第一季

    雷厉风行第一季

    白骎,一次触电事故和天象所致,激发了他的修者血脉,从此踏上了修者之路。看热血小生白骎如何勇斗妖魔鬼怪,他和他的伙伴们又将面临这什么样的命运呢?在这繁荣的大都市中,看他如何扫尽灰暗!
  • 如何赢得上司的赏识

    如何赢得上司的赏识

    本书是一本励志类通俗读物。是一本引领你在职场中如鱼得水的图书,告诉你怎样才能得到上司的赏识,使自身的理想和目标得以顺利的实现。
  • 王爷大大,死开啦

    王爷大大,死开啦

    鹿弥,当朝右相之嫡女,尊贵无匹的睿王妃,温柔娴雅,宽容善良。本应拥有世间最美好的生活,但事实是,她幼年丧母,父亲淡漠,后母百般刁难,姐妹肆意欺凌,兄弟鄙弃厌恶。嫁入睿王府三年未见夫君一面,看似相敬如宾,实则搁置一旁,而如海潮一般的恶意汹涌而来,她最终......而当箴言逆转,来自二十一世纪的灵魂强势来袭,面对王府的勾心斗角,娘家的淡漠讥笑,她傲然独立,轻笑说:想要欺我的往左排,我接招;想要阴我的靠右站,我领教。想要重新开始?......王爷,给我死开!【情节虚构,请勿模仿】
  • 云挽卿

    云挽卿

    她云挽卿,无所不能。一次偶然,她改写了自己与别人的命格。或许改编太多,也会受到惩罚。亲人的怀疑,朋友的欺骗,以及所爱之人的背叛。她失踪了。再次露面,已经改朝换代。她所认识的人还是那些人,可梦想不再那么单纯。物是人非,真是一个残忍的词语。她这辈子,都不适合有任何感情吧。也许,就这样一直睡下去......会更好。
  • 大宋天朝

    大宋天朝

    二十二世纪三十年代大龄单身屌丝封越莫名奇妙穿越到靖康之耻前一年,面对着还处于愚昧的大宋,他的恶趣味上来了。枪械?不不不,这是制式火属性黄品仙武。手雷,大炮?不不不,这时制式金火属性黄品消耗型仙武动力外骨骼?不不不,这是制式玄品仙甲。电磁炮(地级仙武)?空间折叠装置(传送阵)?空间存储装置(须臾戒)?拜托,科技,哦不?仙道不是一天建造而成的。若干年后,封越回过头,看到的是人类最真实的一面。(别问我金手指是什么?知识就是力量,知识就是真理,好吧!我承认还有个智脑。)
  • 罪恶食人族

    罪恶食人族

    人类,自古称为万物之主,拥有无与伦比的智慧和能力;在渊源历史河流中稳固和繁衍。但在时间的生发与流失之际,一个分支族种的崛起让这个看似祥和的世界有没有改变与进步呢?时间走走停停,唯一不变的,只有一个……————我是井盖,感谢您的关注。
  • 光明王国

    光明王国

    强者主宰命运,弱者屈服命运。承受宿命之重,冠以王者之名!史诗般的大陆,绚丽的魔法,精湛的剑术,奇妙万千的种族......众生崇尚光明女神,罗锦以光为名,以信念为剑,登上王座。
  • 血炼神武

    血炼神武

    既然老天给我重活一次的机会,那么,这一世,我只为巅峰。