Midelton against Gale, Stone, and King, Esquires
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 April 1838 |
| Date | 25 April 1838 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 796
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 3 N. & P. 372; 1 W. W. & H. 352; 7 L. J. Q. B. 103; 2 Jur. 819. Followed, Bruce v. M'Alister, 1881, 8 L. R. Ir. 195; R. v. Tyrone JJ., [1902] 2 Ir. R. 80.
[155] midelton against gale, stone, and king, esquires. Wednesday, April 25th, 1838. Under stat. 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 32, s. 30, it is not necessary that a conviction for a trespass in search of game should purport to be, or should in fact be, at the instance or on the information of the owner or occupier of the land, or of a party interested iu the game, or of a person authorised by such owner, occupier, or party. [S. C. 3 N. & P. 372; 1 W. W. & H. 352 ; 7 L. J. M. C. 103 ; 2 Jur. 819. Followed, Bruce \. M'Alister, 1881, 8 L. E. Ir. 195; R. v. Tyrone JJ., [1902] 2 Ir. R. 80.] The first count of the declaration skated that the plaintiff was summoned to appear before Gale and other justices for Somersetshire, to answer the complaint and information on oath of William Sparks for having unlawfully committed a trespass by entering and being in and upon certain waste land called Pickeridge Hill, being part of the waste land of the manor of Taunton Dean, in Somersetshire, the property of the lord of the said manor, in search and in pursuit of game: that the plaintiff appeared before Gale and other justices, &c., to answer the complaint and information ; and that the defendants, being three justices for the county, did, as such justices, claim and exercise pretended jurisdictioti over the said pretended offence, and hear and determine the said pretended complaint and information, whereas in truth the defendants had not any right or power by law so to do, nor any jurisdiction whatever over such pretended complaint and information, the said W. Sparks not being, at the time of the committing of the said supposed offence, nor at the time of the hearing and determining of the said pretended complaint and information as aforesaid, nor at the time when the said W. Sparks made such complaint and gave such information as aforesaid, the occupier of the said land on which the said trespass wag so alleged to have been committed as aforesaid, nor being the lord of the said manor of Taunton Dean, nor then having the right of killing game upon such land, nor having been proved to [156] the said defendants, or any or either of them, to have been such occupier or person having the right of killing game as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tarry v Newman
...against a party has had a certain penal result, no one else shall have a civil remedy for the same matter.] Though Midelttm v. Gale (8 Ad. & E. 155 ; 3 N. & P. 372) seems to the contrary, the stat. 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 32, there acted on, shews, by sects. 30, 37, 46, that it was there contempl......
-
Kenyon v Hart
...committed a trespass by entering upon land in search of game within stat. 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 32, s. 30. [tie cited Middletan v. Gale (8 A. & E. 155).] [Oomptou J. This section is directed against poaching, against persons who go upon the laud of others in pursuit of game. If the bird had beeu w......
-
Cole Appellant against Coulton, clerk to the King's Lynn Paving Commissioners
...but for the protection of the persons to whom it was given.] Rex v. Daman (2 B. & Aid. 378) is to the same effect. In Midelton v. Gale (8 A. & E. 155), although the Court held that any person might lay an information, under stat. 1 & 2 W. 4, e. 32, s. 30, for a trespass in search of game, t......
-
John Powell, Appellant; Lord Castletown of Upper Ossory, Respondent
...15 Ir. C. L. R. 406. Countees of Kingston v. O'NeillUNK 6 L. R. Ir. 101. Bruce v. M'AllisterUNK 8 L. R. Ir. 195. Middleton v. Gale 8 A. & E. 155. Hope and Others v. CalleghanDLTR 24 Ir. L. T. R. 5. Game Laws (27 Geo. 3, c. 35; 27 & 28 Vict. c. 67) —— Penalty — Informer. Voi.. XXX.] Q. B. & ......