Mr. Farington's Case

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1729
Date01 January 1729
CourtCourt of the King's Bench

English Reports Citation: 84 E.R. 1227

COURTS OF KINGS BENCH

Mr. Farington's Case

En capital causes le jury ne serra stricken per le Clerk de Crown.

JONESFT.m TERM. MICH. 34 CAR. 2, B. B. 1227 [220] sir eichahd temple, &c. and the mayor, &c. of london. Commissioners of the customs, with a salary of 12001. per ann. liable to pay to the tax for the building of ships, for their salaries. 3 Nels. Abr. 277, pi. 1. See 2 Salk. 615, 616. 1 Salk. 156, 169, 198, 221. 5 Mod. 368. 6 Mod. 306. On a reference by the King to all the Judges and Barons. They met together this term in the dining-hall of Serjeants Inn in Fleetstreet. And the sole question in debate there was, whether the commissioners of the King's customs appointed by letters patent under the Great Seal, with full power and authority to manage, and cause to be collected and levied the customs and duties, and to appoint inferior officers under their hands and seals, and to remove them, and to give oaths, with divers other powers, exemptions and privileges, were taxable in the tower-ward in London, where they executed in the Custom-House there the said powers and authorities, for their salaries of 12001. per arm. granted to them by the said letters patents, for their care and pains in the said service, by the name of annuities or salaries, to the payment of the assessment granted by Act of Parliament for building of ships, and by the other Act for disbanding the Army; by which all lands, &c. annuities, offices (other than military offices, and offices relating to the Navy, under the command of the High Admiral, and offices within His Majesty's houshold) profits, and all other real and personal estates, are required to be assessed within the respective parishes equally by a pound-rate. For the commissioners it was urged, that the word offices does not extend to them, and the other words (annuities, profits, and personal estates cannot make them taxable in the said ward, for they follow their persons. And as to the word offices, it was argued, that an office is a stated and ordinary charge with perpetuity, and the business of this employment is pro ho.c vice tantum, of new erection, and the matter of it is not perpetual. And here nothing is intended to be charged besides estates...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Westoby against Day
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the Queen's Bench
    • June 13, 1853
    ...of a legal debt from himself to the defendant in that court would have defeated such plea. It was indeed held, in Lewis v. Wallis (2 (T.) Jones, 222), that such debt is not liable to be attached. That case is not very clearly reported; and there appears to have been an attempt at trick, on ......
  • Turbill's Case
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • January 1, 1845
    ...within a year and a day and put in bail, though after judgment and execution against the garnishee, the attachment is at an end; Sir T. Jones, 222, 223, Lewis v. Wallis. Garth. 26, Andrews v. Clerke. 3 T. R. 313, n.; if satisfaction be not entered upon the record. So it is if the defendant ......
  • The Queen v Daniel M'Cartie, and Several Others. The Queen v Denis O'Sullivan, and Several Others
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • May 4, 1859
    ...511. Witham v. DuttonENR Comb. 111. Bambridge's caseUNK 17 How. St. Tr. 398. Barthelemey's caseENR 1 Dears. C. C. 60. Farington's caseENR T. Jones, 222. Harvey of Comb's caseENR 10 Mod. 334. Morgan's caseENR 1 Bulst, 84. The Queen v. BarronetENR 1 El. & Bl. 1. Platt's caseENR 1 Leach, C. C.......
  • Best, Assignee of Thorowgood, an Insolvent, v Argles
    • United Kingdom
    • Exchequer
    • January 1, 1834
    ...has the beneficial interest in. Winch v. Keeley (1 T. E. 619), Carpen/er v. Marnell (3 Bos. & Pul. 40). So, in Lewis v. Wa.ll.is (T. Jones, 222), a debt assigned was held not to be attachable on a foreign attachment in London against the assignor. The case of Williams v. Everett (14 East, 5......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT