George Bailey John Collier
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 May 1854 |
| Date | 01 May 1854 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 118 E.R. 1269
COURTS OF QUEENS BENCH AND THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
S.C. 23 L.J. M.C. 161; 18 Jur. 930. Referred to, Buccleuch v. Metropolitan Board of Works, 1870-72, L.R. 5 Ex. 232; L.R. 5 H.L. 418; In re Anthus, 1889, 22 Q.B.D. 350.
in thb matter of george bailey. in the matter of john collier. Monday, May 1st, 1854. The return to a habeas corpus ad subjicimidum, to bring up B., assigned, as the cause of B.'s detention, a warrant by a justice, which recited, in the past tense, that " B. was " this day " convicted befure rue " of an offence against stat. 4 (1. 4, c. 34, "and I, the same justice, adjudged" that B. should be committed for two months with hard labour; and the warrant then, in the preseut tense, commanded the constables to take and the gaoler to receive B. The wan-ant did not set forth the evidence, nor state that it was taken in the prisoner's presence, or on oath.-Held that, under stat. 4 G. 4, c. 34, the conviction and warrant might be in one instrument, but might also be separate; that the instrument in the present case was not a conviction, but a warrant founded on a previous conviction ; and was therefore good in form.-Affidavits were used shewing the evidence before the justice.-Held : that it was open to the prisoner to shew, by affidavit, that there was no evidence from which the justice might reasonably draw an inference that the relation of master and servant 1270 bailey's case 3 el. * bl. existed between prisoner and his employer, as that would shew that the justice bad no jurisdiction.-In the present case the affidavits shewed only that there was evidence both ways : and the prisoner was remanded. [S. C. 23 L. J. M. C. 161 ; 18 Jur. 930. Referred to, fiucdeuch v. Metropolitan Board of Works, 1870-72, L. E. 5 Ex. 232; L. R. 5 H. L. 418; In re Anthus, 1889, 22 Q. B. D. 350.] O'Malley, in last Term, had obtained a rule Nisi for a habeas corpus ad sub-jiciendum to bring up the body of George Bailey, a prisoner in the House of Correction of Usk in Monmouthshire, and a similar rule in the matter of John Collier, also a prisoner in the same place. On the last day of last Term it was, by consent, ordered that cause should be shewn before Erie J. at Chambers during the Vacation, and that what tha [608] learned Judge should direct should have the same effect as if done by the Court at that time. At Chambers, affidavits were used on both rules. Among them was one by the prisoner George Bailey, who stated that he was committed for two months, by a justice of the peace, charged by one George William Hutchinsori with having absented himself from the work of Messrs. Marshall & Co., his employers. And he deposed : " that it was agreed, between his said employers and himself and fellow workmen, that the rules of his said employers' colliery should be the same as in Messrs. Prothero's colliery, namely, to be paid by the ton monthly pays, and a month's notice on leaving or being discharged ; but that the price per ton should arise or fall with the price in Messrs. Prothero's works, without notice. And deponent further saith that, in the month of October last, he was working on the said contract, and that on the first day of December last the price did rise in the worka of the Messrs. Prothero's. And deponent further saith that a rise in price was then requested by the colliers of his employers' said colliery according to the said agreement, which was refused ; and, upon this refusal, the deponent and the rest of the colliers ceased working: and this is the misconduct alleged against this deponent, and for which he is now undergoing separate confinement and hard labour." "That deponent is not bound under the said contract to any hours of working; nor is he bound to out any quantity of coal: that the employment in the said colliery depends on the demand for coal: that there is not always full employment: that deponent is only paid by the ton of coal: that no allowance is made for loss of time when trade is slack or the works stopped by accident." The affidavit then pro-[609]-ceeded to enter into details of matters tiot relevant to the questions now discussed in Court. Collier made an affidavit precisely similar to that of Bailey, except that it stated, in addition, that " this deponent had a son working with him on the said contract, and who is employed and paid by this deponent, and not by his said employers." In opposition, the affidavit of George William Hutchinson (sworn in Bailey's case) was used. He, by it, deposed that he was the agent of Messrs. Marshall & Co., and that he appeared before the magistrate to support the charge of misconduct against George Bailey, " who is a man in the employ of the said Messrs. Marshall & Co., as a collier ; that he then proved the custom of the work and the particular contract between him. and his employers; and that he also proved the breach of the said contract by the said George Bailey." After several statements not bearing oil the questions now discussed in Court, the affidavit added : "that the said contract between the said George Bailey and his said employers, Messrs. Marshall & Co., was, that he, the said George Bailey, should serve his said employers as a collier, until a month's notice should be given, either by himself, the said George Bailey, or his employers. And that the contract between the prisoner and his employers, as to wages, was, that the price waa to be one shilling and ten pence per ton of coal cut, and was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The King (Martin) v Mahony
...re Heaphy (Ibid. 500). Brittain v. Kinnaird (1 Br. & B. 432), and The Queen v. Bolton (1 Q. B. 66), discussed and applied. In re Bailey (3 E. & B. 607) And In re Baker (2 H. & N. 219) distinguished. Held, by Palles, C.B., that the note in writing of the evidence signed by a Justice under se......
-
R v Head
... ... , might seem meet; and Counsel having been heard on behalf of John Shortriggs Head, the Respondent to the said Appeal; and due consideration ... the orders could be sustained, see the Habeas Corpus Act , 1816, Bailey's case (1854) 3 El. & Bl. 607 , Rutty's case (1956) 2 Q.B. at p ... ...
-
Re John Sullivan
...IN RE JOHN SULLIVAN. Ex parte BeechingENR 4 B. & C. 136; Bailey's Case & Collier'sENRUNK 3 E. & B. 607; 23 L.J.M.C.161. Keller Unreported. W. ThompsonENR 6 H. & N. 193. In re ReaUNK 2 L. R. Ir. 429. In Re Clarke 2 Q. B. 19. Charles Lampon 3 Deac & Chitty, 751, 755. Mathew's Case 5 Ir. Jur. ......
-
Fernandes, a Prisoner, &
...that the Court had not the same authority as the Courts at West minster, the merits may be inquired into on affidavits in Re Bailey (3 E & B 607). The witness was not bound to answer the question, because the production of the certificate would not protect him from impeachment by the House ......