The Queen against Traill, Esq., and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 23 November 1840 |
| Date | 23 November 1840 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 113 E.R. 1002
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
S. C. 4 P. & D. 325; 1 Arn. & H. 78; 10 L. J. M. C. 57.
[761] the queen against traill, esq., and another. Monday, November 23d, 1840. The Judges of Assize, on appeal, under stat. 11 G. 2, e. 19, s. 17, against an order of two magistrates giving possession to a landlord under sect. 16, made an order for restitution of the premises to the tenant. The order of the Judges was not directed to any person. Held, that mandamus could not issue commanding the two justices to make restitution. [S. C. 4 P. & D. 325 ; 1 Am. & H. 78; 10 L. J. M. C. 57.] Two justices of Surrey, under stat. 11 G. 2, c. 19, s. 16, made an order, of 18th October 1839, putting William Sewell into possession of certain premises in Surrey, which, by his complaint recited in the order, he appeared to have demised, at rack rent, to Henry Wilson, and Wilson to have deserted, leaving rent arrear, and no sufficient distress on the premises. Wilson appealed, under sect. 17, to Lord Abinger C.B. and Littledale J., the Judges of Assize, at the assizes held at Kingston, in spring 1840. (d) 3 A. & E. 433. And see Stevens v. Evans, 2 Burr. 1152, 1157, 1158, 1159. (a) See Becquet v. Mac Cartfty, 2 B. & Ad. 951. 13 AD. &E. 762. ABRAHAMS V. SKINNER 1003 The learned Judges made au order, which, after stating the appeal and setting out the order of justices, concluded as follows. " Now the above named Justices of Assize, having heard the said appeal, and duly considered the same, do, in exercise of the powers conferred upon them by the statute in such case made and provided, order restitution to be made of the said premises in the hereinbefore recited record of proceeding mentioned and described, to the said Henry Wilson, the tenant hereinbefore mentioned, together with his expences and costs, amounting to the sum of 301. 8s. 4d., to be paid to the said Henry Wilson by the said William Sewell, the said landlord." The order was signed by the deputy clerk of assize only, and was not directed. In last Trinity term, Petersdorff obtained a rule tiiai for a mandamus commanding the two...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen against Sewell
...dem. Neale v. Samples, 8 A. & E. 151; Croughton v. Blake, 12 M. & W. 205; Regina v. Kenilworth, 1 Q. B. 642. (a)1 See Begina v. Train, 12 A. & E. 761. (a)1 Stat. 11 G. 2, c. 19, s. 17, provides: "That such proceedings of the said justices shall be exarainable in a summary way by the next Ju......