Слике страница
PDF
ePub

By recitals.

By subsequent clauses.

[ocr errors]

reason of any interest taken thereon or secured thereby, and that the liability of any party to any bill of exchange" should not be affected by any statute or law for the prevention of usury. Although the point was not actually decided, the Court of Queen's Bench thought that the general words " any bill of exchange" must be construed as "any such bill of exchange," and must be confined to bills of exchange not having more than three months to run (t).

Where the preamble of an Act, or the recital to a single section, or group of sections, shows that the Act or section is aimed at some particular mischief, general words may be restrained so as not to go beyond the declared object of the enactment. The cases in which general words have been thus restrained will be found in a subsequent chapter (u).

General words may also be qualified by subsequent clauses or sentences in the same statute (x). The Lands Clauses Act (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, s. 68) provided that any person entitled to compensation in respect of lands taken or injuriously affected, and claiming more than £50, might have the amount settled either by arbitration or the verdict of a jury. But these general words do not include a yearly tenant, for they are restrained by the express provision of sect. 121 of the same Act, that the amount of compensation payable to a

(t) Vallance v. Siddel, 6 A. & E. 932; 2 N. & P. 78.

(u) See R. v. Percy, L. R. 9 Q. B. 64; Johnstone v. Huddleston, 4 B. & C. 922, 936 ; Winn v. Mossman, L. R. 4 Ex. 292; in chapter 6. (x) R. v. Abp. of Armagh, 8 Mod. at p. 8.

yearly tenant shall be ascertained by two justices (y). So where one section of an Act empowered a railway company to make a line upon lands delineated on a plan, and described in a book of reference, while a later section provided that nothing in the Act should authorise the Company to enter upon any lands without the consent of the owner, it was held that the general words used in the first part of the Act were restrained by the subsequent section, and that the Company could not enter upon the lands contained in the plan. and book of reference without the consent of their owners (2). Again, the ninth chapter of Magna Charta provided that the Barons of the Cinque Ports and all other ports should have all their liberties and free customs. These general words refer to such liberties and customs only as are not taken away by express words in subsequent parts of the same statute, and do not include the right of holding pleas of the Crown, which is taken away by the seventeenth chapter (a).

"All

The operation of general words may also be By the subject. restrained by reference to the subject-matter of matter. the Act in which they are inserted (b). words," says Lord Bacon, "if they be general and not express and precise, shall be restrained unto the fitness of the matter and the person. So the Statute of Wrecks that willeth that goods wrecked

(y) R. v. M. S. and L. Rail. Co., 4 E. & B. 88, 103.

(z) Clarence Rail. Co. v. Great North of England, &c., Rail. Co., 4 Q. B. 46.

(a) 2 Inst. 31.

(b) De Boinville v. Arnold, 1 C. B. N. S. at p. 21, per Willes, J.; East India Interest, 3 Bing. at p. 196, per Best, C.J.

where any live domestical creature remaineth in the vessel, shall be preserved and kept to the use of the owner that shall make his claim by the space of one year, doth not extend to fresh victuals, or the like, which is impossible to keep without perishing or destroying it; for in these and the like cases general words may be taken, as was said, to a rare or foreign intent, but never to an unreasonable intent" (c). Where the Act, 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, made judgments a charge upon lands, tithes, &c., it was held that the phrase included lay tithes only, and did not extend to ecclesiastical benefices (d). Thus, the words "any creditor" in the Bankruptcy Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 112), was restricted to persons who were creditors at the time of adjudication, and were entitled to prove in the bankruptcy (e). Again, the Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, s. 88), enabled the trustee in the bankruptcy of a beneficed clergyman to apply for a sequestration of his living, and gave such sequestration priority over any other sequestration issued after the commencement of the bankruptcy. It was held that the sequestration issued at the instance of a trustee had priority over any sequestration issued by an individual creditor, but not over a sequestration issued by the trustee under another adjudication against the same bankrupt, as both these sequestrations were for the benefit of all the creditors (f).

(c) Bacon's Maxims of the Law, Regula 10, Spedding's edition, vol. 7, pp. 356, 357.

(d) Hawkins v. Gathercole, 6 De G. M. & G. 1, 21. (e) Re Poland, L. R. 1 Ch. 356.

(f) Ex parte Chick, re Meredith, L. R. 11 Ch. D. 731.

which are

in har

mony with

policy of

General words are further restrained to things To things which are lawful (g), and to proceedings which are lawful and in harmony with the previous policy of the law. They are not usually to be construed so as to alter previous the existing law, unless no sense or meaning can be law. put upon them which is consistent with any other intention (h). Thus, general words enabling all persons to devise their land by wil! would not confer that power upon infants, persons of unsound mind, or married women (). The general words of Westminster the Second (13 Edw. I.), giving creditors a remedy by elegit, and empowering auditors to commit to the next gaol all bailiffs or receivers who are in arrears, do not render infants liable either to an elegit (k), or to imprisonment (). Nor are necessary incidents (m), or customs (n), taken away by the general words of a statute. An Act which provides that conveyances in a certain form "shall be valid and effectual in law to all intents and purposes" does not cure a defective title (o). The Act 12 Car. II. c. 17, providing that ministers put in possession of benefices during the Commonwealth should be allowed to continue in possession, "notwithstanding any other matter

(g) L. B. & S. C. Rail. Co. v. L. & S. W. Rail. Co., 4 De Gex & Jones, at p. 396, per Turner, L.J.

(h) Minet v. Leman, 20 Beav. 269.

(i) Beckford v. Wade, 17 Ves. at p. 91; Osgood v. Breed, 12 Mass.

525.

(k) 2 Inst. 395.

(1) Stowel v. Lord Zouch, Plowd. at p. 363a.

(m) 2 Inst. 501.

(n) Hutchins v. Player, Bridg. at p. 319; Simson v. Moss, 2 B. & Ad.

543.

(o) Ward v. Scott, 3 Camp. 284, per Lord Ellenborough, C.J.

N

Conflicting opinions

effect of

general words.

or thing by them done, or omitted to be done," did not confirm a simoniacal appointment (p). The Act 27 Geo. III. c. 44, which enacted that no suit for incontinence should be commenced in an Ecclesiastical Court after eight months, was held to apply only to suits for reformation of manners and not to suits for deprivation (9).

The use of general words in the Acts which as to the conferred jurisdiction on the Admiralty Court and the County Courts has given rise to many differences of opinion. It was enacted by the 24 Vict. c. 10, s. 7, that the High Court of Admiralty should have jurisdiction over any claim for damage done by any ship. The Court of Admiralty itself and the Privy Council held that these words extended to any claim for personal injuries ("); and the Court of Admiralty further decided that a claim under Lord Campbell's Act was also included (s). The Court of Queen's Bench, in a considered judgment, expressed an opinion that the word "damage" did not extend to personal injuries, and decided that the Admiralty Court had no jurisdiction to entertain a suit under Lord Campbell's Act (t). The question came before the Court of Appeal in another case, and the judges who composed the Court were equally divided (u). The effect of the County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Acts, 1868 and 1869, has not been left in

(p) Snow v. Phillips, Sid. 220.

(q) Free v. Burgoyne, 5 B. & C. 400, 1 Dow. & Clark, 115.

(r) The Sylph, L. R. 2 A. & E. 24; The Beta, L. R. 2 P. C. 447.

(s) The Explorer, L. R. 3 A. & E. 289.

(t) Smith v. Brown, L. R. 6 Q. B. 729, dub. Blackburn, J.
(u) The Franconia, L. R. 2 P. D. 163.

« ПретходнаНастави »