Shepherd, Deputy-Master of the Trinity House, Deptford Strond v Sharp

1140 shepherd v. sharp 1h&n 115. [115] in the exchequer chamber. (In Error from the Court of Exchequer ) shepherd, Deputy-Master of the Trinity House, Deptfonl Strond r. sharp. May 12, 1856.-By stat '22 G. 3, c. 40, the harbour of Katnsgdte was vested in trustees, upon certain trusts, and subject thereto, was vested in and to be disposed of by the authority of parliament. Stat. 32 G 3, c 74, an "Act for the maintenance and impro\ement of the haibour of Ramsgate," repealing the former Act, vested the haibour in trustees, who were empoweied to impose duties on all ships passing Ramsgate, to be paid to the collector of the customs, &c., in the port whence such ships should set forth or where such ships should arrive. By s. 10, foreign ships are to pay the same rates as ships cleared out of British ports, such rates to be levied in any part of her Majesty's dominions. S. 11 empowers collectors to enter and measure ships, and imposes penalties on persons obstructing them. By s. 11, on producing his receipt for payment ot duties, the master-is entitled to an allowance from merchants or importers. By s. 13 accounts are to be transmitted to the receiver general of the customs. Sect. 15 gives power-to collectors to distrain on nonpayment of duties By s. 53, accounts are to be annually audited and submitted to parliament By s 72, penalties may be levied by distress and sale by the warrant of any Justice of the Peace in the town where the offender resides ; and in case no sufficient distress is found, the Justice may commit the offender to prison Held, in the Exchequer Chamber (affirming the judgment of the Court of Exchequer), that the 32 G. 3, c. 74, is an Act of a local and personal nature within the meaning of 5 & 6 Viet c. 97, having a local object, the improvement of the harbour, and affecting only certain specified classes of her Majesty's subjects -Statutes which, since the resolution of the House of Commons in 1801, have been punted by the King's printers amongst the public local and personal Acts, are statutes commonly called public local and personal within the meaning of the 5 & 6 Viet, c 97.-A defendant may bring error on a judgment for the plaintiff on demurrer to a replication to one of several pleas, though the plaintiff has subsequently discontinued the action except as to the costs of the demurrer. [S. C. 25 L. J. Ex. 254, 2 Jur. (N. S ) 617 ; 4 W. K. 570 Applied, Beg. v. London County Council, [1893] 2 Q. B. 454 ] This was a proceeding in error on the judgment of the Court of Exchequer in the case of $haip v. Shephetd. The fourth plea and the replication were similar to those in Mooie v. Shepherd (10 Exch. 424). After judgment for the plaintiff on demurrer to the replication, judgment was signed by the plaintiff for his costs of the demurrer. The plaintiff then discontinued the action, and the following entry was made .-" It is considered that the plaintiff do tecover against the defendant 171. 3s. for the plamtiH's costs of the said demurrer, and the said judgment in that behalf. and afterwards on the 6th [116] day of July, in the year of our Lord, 1855, it was by a rule of the Court, ordered that upon payment of the defendant's costs, to be t.ixed by one of the Masters of the Court, this action should be discontinued, the plaintiff thereby undertaking to pay the said costs to be so taxed, and consenting that, if they were not so paid within four days from the date of the master's allocatur, the defendant should be at liberty to sign judgment of non pros, and the said costs were afterwards taxed by H. Walton, Esq., one of the Masters of the Court, at twenty-two pounds and two shrllings, and upon the said taxation the said costs of seventeen pounds and three shillings were not deducted from the defendant's costs, or otherwise allowed to the plaintiff; and the plaintiff paid the said sum of twenty-two poands and two shillings to the defendant, and he discontinued this action, except as to his said costs, amounting to seventeen pounds and three shillings.(a) The case was argued in last Hilary vacation (February 5) by (a) It was suggested by the Court that the above entry was imperfect, but it was arranged that the argument should proceed as if the judgment had been correctly entered up. 1 H & N 117 8HEPHERD T SHARP 1141 Bovill, (\\ith \vhom was Norman), for the plaintiff in error (b) [Ciompton, J. If theie is a...