HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0316 and id is 1 raw text is: THE ATTORNgY-GENERAL V. CLEOBURY
that is to say, upon a parol demise to the two parties jointly, and therefore that he
entered in respect of them both ; and therefore an action for use and occupation may
be maintained against them both, although there is no distinct proof that the other
defendant, Farrant, who suffered judgment by default, had ever entered at all. It
may be observed, that if Dungey did not enter under the terms of that agreement,
he was a mere trespasser.. The rule must, therefore, be discharged.
Rule discharged.
[65] THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. CLEOBURY. June 6, 1846.-A policy of insur-
ance on the lives of cattle is an insurance on lives within the 55 Geo. 3, c. 184,
and is liable to duty. But such an instrument is only liable to a 51. penalty for
want of a stamp, under the 10 Anne, c. 26, and not to the penalty of 5001. under
35 Geo. 3, c. 63, s. 17, which applies to marine insurances only.
[S. C. 18 L. J. Ex. 395.]
This was an information filed by the Attorney-General against the defendant, to
recover penalties from him in respect of unstamped instruments subscribed by him,
which are hereinafter particularly mentioned, and also to recover stamp duties in
respect of the same.
The information contained counts for penalties of 5001. each, under the 35 Geo. 3,
c. 63, s. 17, and also counts for penalties of 51. each, under the 10 Anne, c. 26, s. 71.
There were also counts for the duties, and on an account stated.
The defendant pleaded nil debet; and issue having been joined thereon, the
following case was by consent, and by order of Alderson, B., stated for the opinion of
this Court:-
In the year 1844, certain persons, of whom the defendant is one, formed a Company
called The Agriculturist Cattle Insurance Company, for the purpose of assuring the
owners of cattle front loss arising from death. The business of the Company has been
and still is conducted by a board of directors, of which body the defendant is a member.
The policies or agreements of insurance issued by the Company have been usually
signed by three of the directors, and have usually been in the same form as those
hereinafter referred to.
The party mentioned as the assured in the document a copy of which is contained
in the Appendix to this case, and marked (A.), having made the usual proposal for
assurance, and having paid to the Company the premium of 21. 10s., mentioned in the
said document, the defendant, being a member and director of the Company, as one
of the directors of the Company, in conjunction with two other members and directors
of the Company, executed a docu-[66]-ment, of which a copy marked (A.) is contained
in the said Appendix, and which is to be taken as part of this case. The document
'is partly printed and partly in writing, and contains the several memoranda and is
indorsed in all respects in the manner appearing from the said copy.
The document, a copy of which is also contained in the said Appendix, and which
is marked (B.), was also executed by the defendant, in conjunction with two other
directors, as appears from the said copy, which is also to be taken as part of this case.
This document also contains the memoranda, and is indorsed in the manner shewn by
the said copy.
The party therein described as the assured paid the sum of 15s. to the Company,
as the premium mentioned in the said document marked (B.).
The sums paid by the parties respectively assured in documents (A.) and (B.),
exceed the rate of 20s. per cent. on the respective amounts indorsed on the said
documents as the amount of insurance.
Neither of the documents marked (A.) and (B.), of which copies are contained in
the Appendix, is impressed with any stamp or mark denoting the payment of any
stamp duty whatever, nor was any stamp or other duty ever paid in respect of those
documents, or of the assurances or agreements entered into by them respectively, and
the said documents are on paper which has never been stamped.
The cattle assured by the documents in question were not assured otherwise than
by those documents.
The question for the opinion of the Court is, whether the documents in question,
4 EX. 65.
1127](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0316&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)