Coster v Wilson, Bart., and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Date | 01 January 1838 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 1205
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 H. & H. 141; 7 L. J. M. C. 83.
[411] coster v. wilson, bart., and another. Exch. of Pleas. 18;}8. - Justices of the Peace have jurisdiction, under the 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, s. 4, to inquire into and adjudicate on an information for the alleged fraudulent removal of goods by n tenant, although it appears that the property in the premises is disputed, atid that the tenant has paid the rent to one of the claimants. - A warrant of commitment under the 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, s. 4, did not state that there had been a complaint in writing to the justices, or that the examination of witnesses was upon oath ; but it referred to the order of the justices (for payment of double the value of the goods removed), in which those matters were stated : - Held, sufficient, and that the justices were not liable in trespass. [S. C. 1 H. & H. 141 ; 7 L. J. M. C. 83.] Trespass for assault and false imprisonment. Plea, not guilty. At the trial before Tiudal, C. J., at the last assizes for the county of Kent, the following appeared to be the facts : - -The plaintiff inhabited a house in Short's Alley, Woolwich, which he had taken from a Mr. Curran, at a yearly rent of 101. Curran having died, the property in the premises was contested by two different parties. The plaintiff attorned and paid rent to one of them, and being afterwards distrained upon by the other, (who olaimed as the widow and executrix of Currau,) he left the house, and removed away all his furniture. Mrs. Curran thereupon applied to the defendants, who are magistrates for the county of Kent, under the 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, s. 4, for an order on the plaintiff to pay double the value of the goods, as having been fraudulently removed to avoid payment of the rent. The defendants accordingly issued a summons upon the plaintiff, who appeared before them, and evidence having been hoard, they adjudged him to pay, as the double value of the goods, the sum of 101. I Is. 8d. ; and the plaintiff' having, after notice, refused to pay, and no distress being found on the premises, he was committed by them to Maidstone gaol to hard labour for six months, or until payment of the money. The order of the justices was in the following terms : - " Kent (to wit): Be it remembered, that on the 21st clay of March, [837, at Woolwich, in the county of Kent, Mary Curran, of, &c., came before us, &c., two of her Majesty's justices of the peace in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Howard v Gosset, Gosset v Howard
...The prisoner was remanded. The principle of this case has since been recognised by the Court of Exchequer; Coster v. Wilson (3 M. & W. 411). It cannot, indeed, be said that the previous matter in Goff's case (3 M. & S. 203), is, in kind, the same as that which I am about to notice in the pr......
-
Sir William Gosset against Howard
...the recited order that he should " be sent for ;" and must therefore imply that he was to be brought before the House. Coster v. Wilson (3 M. & W. 411), shews that the recital may be so coupled with the mandatory part. Ex parte Go/ (3 M. & S. 203), is to the same effect, and is recognized i......
-
Green against Matthew Elgie and Toulmin
...all the proceedings out of which the contempt arose, as alleged in the petition.] That was before the rules of 1832. In Coster v. Wilson (3 M. & W. 411), [111] a warrant of commitment under an order of justices was held good, though it did not sufficiently state the cause of commitment, exc......
-
Fisher v Pyne and Another
...3 Bingh. 78, 10 B. Moore, 376 ; Fawcett v. Foulis, 7 B. & C. 394, 1 M. & E. 102; Ashcrofi v. Bourne, 3 B. & Adol. 684; Coster v. Wilson, 3 M. & W. 411; Regina v. Dodsm, 9 Ad. & Ell. 704; supra, 65, n. - . (a) The letter containing the guarantee, though expressed in the singular number, was ......