Kearney v Power

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 05 June 1845
• Date: 05 June 1845
• Court: Court of Common Pleas (Ireland)

Common Pleas.

KEARNEY

and

POWER.

Gainsford v. GriffithENR 1 Saund. 58 f, n. 1.

Gainsford v. Griffith; Williams v. SillsENR 2 Camp. 519.

Hodgkinson v. MarsdenENR 2 Camp. 121.

Roberts v. MarriettENR 3 Saund. 187, d.

Scott v. AlsopENR 2 Price, 20.

Attree v. AnscombENR 2 M. & S. 88.

Winchester Market-place v. Gillingham 4 Ad. & E. N. S. 475.

Israel v. BenjaminENR 3 Camp. 40.

Watson v. GloverUNK 7 Jur. 68.

Anonymous 3 Wils. 155.

Green v. HearneENR 3 T. R. 301.

CASES AT LAW. 465 T. T. 1845. Common Pleas. KEARNEY v. POWER. THIS was a writ of inquiry before the Chief Justice of this Court, to assess damages on a bond, the condition of which was, that one Richard Power should pay to James Kearney the rent of certain premises in said bond mentioned, " one half year's rent before the other became due." The plaintiff, at the trial, gave in evidence the bond, which appeared to be conditioned for the payment of £140. 9s. 8d., the amount of the yearly rent of said premises. This bond was impressed with a ten shilÂling stamp only ; and Counsel for the defendant objected that this stamp was insufficient, and that the bond could not be read in evidence. The plaintiff took a verdict subject to the objection. Mr. Hatchell, Q. C., and Mr. Harris, for the defendant.-The plaintiff having set out the condition of the bond, it was necessary that he should, on the trial, produce the bond, with the condition, and identify, and therefore prove the bond itself : Gainsford v. Griffith (a); Edwards v. Stone, which is referred to in the preceding note to Gainsford v. Griffith; Williams v. Sills (b) ; Hodgkinson v. Marsden (c) ; Roberts v. Marriett (d). The only question, therefore, is, the sufficiency of the stamp, which, as the sum secured exceeds £100, a ten shilling stamp is insufficient : Mockler, 119, 221 ; Scott v. Alsop (e); Attree v. AnsÂcomb (f) ; Winchester Market-place v. Gillingham (g). Mr. David Lynch, and Mr. Ardagh, for the plaintiff.-The bond was rightly stamped, as it was executed for the repayment of one half year's rent (£70. 4s. 10d.), the bond having became forfeited on the omission to pay one half year's rent before the other became due.-[JACKSON, J. But you could proceed to recover on this bond more than half a year's rent.]-The conditioned sum in the bond is the amount of the half year's rent. At all events, the objection, if tenable, comes too late, as the bond is not produced to be proved at the trial, but only to be...