Hammond against Bendyshe, Esq., and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1849 |
| Date | 01 January 1849 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 116 E.R. 1495
QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 3 New Sess. Cas. 619; 18 L. J. M. C. 219; 14 Jur. 62.
[869] hammond against bendyshe, esq., and another. 1849. Plaintiff, the steward of a friendly society, not having paid money in obedience to an order of two justices under stat. 10 G. 4, e. 56, s. 28, the justices, without further summons, issued a distress warrant, under which plaintiff's goods were seised. Held, in an action of trespass, that the seizure was not justified by the statute. [S. C. 3 New Sess. Cas. 619; 18 L. J. M. C. 219; 14 Jur. 62.] Trespass for breaking plaintiff's house and seizing his goods. Plea: not guilty, by statute. Issue thereon. On the trial, before Parke B., at the Cambridge Summer Assizes 1848, it appeared that the plaintiff was steward of a friendly society, and the defendants were justices of the peace; and that the plaintiff's goods had been distrained under the defendants' warrant, for non-payment of a sum of money ordered by them to be paid by the plaintiff and the other stewards of the society. Several objections were taken to the order and warrant. The learned Judge directed the verdict to be entered for the defendants, giving leave to move to enter a verdict for the plaintiff for 81. Is. Id. Watson, iu Michaelmas term, 1848, obtained a rule nisi accordingly. In this vacation (a)2, Byles Serjt. and Metcalfe shewed cause; and Watson, Keane and Crouch supported the rule. The facts raising the only point on which the Court expressed an opinion are fully stated in the judgments. Counsel on both sides referred to Painter v. Liverpool Gas Company (3 A. & E. 433), Expai'te Kinning (4 Com. B. 507), Kinning's case (10 Q. B. 730), and In re Hammersmith Rent Charge (e). No further report of the argument is deemed necessary. Cur. adv. vult. [870] Lord Denman C.J., in this vacation (July 5th), delivered the judgment of the Court. (a)1 Reported by C. Blackburn, Esq. (a)2 June 15th. Before Lord Denman C.J., Patteson, Coleridge, and Wightman Js. (e) 4 Exch. 87, 101. See Bowdhr's case, 12 Q. B. 612. 1496 HAMMOND V. BENDYSHE 13Q. B.871. Thia was an action against two justices, in trespass, for causing the goods of the plaintiff to be distrained, under their warrant, for non-payment of 51. 8s., 41. 4s., and 10s., pursuant to an order previously made by them. The defendants pleaded not guilty, by statute ; and the defence was under stat. 10 G. 4, c. 56, s. 28. One Jacob Wisby...
To continue reading
Request your trial