58' FAIRS AND MARKETS OVERT, ETC. 



was proprietor, and whicli was capable of holding one 

 hundred head of cattle, and which was moreover con- 

 tiguous to a yard capable of holding 1,400 sheep; it 

 was held that these premises were not the Auctioneer's 

 dwelling-place or shop, notwithstanding that his dwelling- 

 house was only separated from the hall by the yard (o). 

 And, " under that state of facts," said Cockburn, C. J., 

 " it is impossible to say that the sale took place in the 

 dwelling-place of the respondent ; for the place is entirely 

 separated from his dwelling-house ; and assuming (con- 

 trary to my opinion) that a distinction was intended by 

 the use of the phrase ' dwelling-place,' instead of ' dwell- 

 ing-house,' which occurs in some of the other statutes, 

 and that ' dwelling-place' may apply to somewhat larger 

 and more extensive premises than the term * dwelling- 

 house' would apply to ; yet I do not think that in any 

 sense of the term can those premises be said to be the 

 dwelling-place of the respondent, separated as they are 

 from the place in which he lives. Then, is it his shop ? 

 I am of opinion that it is not. It cannot, in any proper 

 sense of the term, be called a shop. I agree that there 

 may be cases in which the term ' shop,' in its popular sense, 

 would not be applicable to the premises in which things 

 were sold or exposed for sale, and yet, by a liberal and 

 rational construction of the act, the premises might be 

 considered as within the exception of •' shop.' Take, for 

 instance, the place of business of a Horsedealer who has 

 stables in which he keeps Horses for sale, either as his own 

 or on commission. Although tolls are payable for the sale 

 of Horses in the market, it would be, perhaps, too much 

 to say that the Horsedealer is not at liberty to sell 

 Horses on his own premises, as not being within the ex- 

 ception of ' shop ' in the statute. I think we might say 

 that, on fair construction, the Horsedealer's premises were 

 ' a shop' within that term as used in sect. 13, But each 

 case must depend on its particular circumstances. Alv 

 though, as I have said, the premises of a Horsedealer 

 might come within the exception, it is a very different 

 thing when we have to deal with an extensive area like 

 the present, which is, in fact, nearly as extensive as the 

 Market-place itself. It is true that the auction itself took 

 place in a building, but the sheep and other things, the 

 subject of the sale, were exposed for sale in this large 



(o) Fearon v. Mitchell, L. E., 7 Q. B. 090 ; 41 L. J., M. C. 170 ; 

 27 L. T., N. S. 33. 



