LAW RELATING TO SEIZURE OF GROWING CROPS. 293 



vegetables, &c., contrary to the covenant. By section 3 the sheriff 

 may dispose of any crops or produce to any person Avho shall agree in 

 writiuo- with such sheriff, in cases luJiere no covenant or ivritten agree- 

 ment shall be shown, to use and expend the same on the land in such 

 manner as shall accord with the custom of the country : and in cases 

 where any covenant or written agreement shall be shown, then accord- 

 ing to it. By section 6 landlords are not to distrain for rent on crops 

 or produce sold subject to such agreement, under the provisions of the 

 act, nor upon any beast whatsoever kept or used upon the land for the 

 purpose of consuming the produce under the provisions of the act, and 

 the agreement directed to be entered into between the sheriff and the 

 purchaser of such produce ; nor on any carts or other implements of 

 husbandry which such purchaser may require. By section 7 the sheriflf, 

 &c., is forbidden under any process whatsoever to sell or dispose of any 

 clover, rye-grass, or any artificial grass or grasses whatsoever, which 

 shall be newly sown, and be growing under any crop of standing corn ; 

 but by section 8 the act does not extend to any straw, turnips, or other 

 articles which the tenant may remove from the farm, consistently with 

 some contract in writing. 



The law relating to growing crops seized under execution was dealt 

 with by section 2 of 14 & 15 Vict. c. 25, which enacts that in case all 

 or any part of the growing crops of the tenant of any farm or lands 

 shall be seized and sold by any sheriff or other officer, by virtue of any 

 writ of fieri facias, or other writ of execution, such crops so long as the 

 same shall remain on the farms or lands shall, in default of sufficient 

 distress of the goods and chattels of the tenant, be liable to the rent 

 which may accrue and become due to the landlord, after any such 

 seizure and sale, and to the remedies by distress for recovery of such 

 rent, and that notwithstanding any bargain and sale or assignment 

 which may have been made or executed of such growing crops by any 

 such sheriff or other officer. 



According to Owen v. Leigh, a tenant whose standing corn and grow, 

 ing crops have leen seized as a distress for rent before theg were ripe, 

 cannot maintain an action upon the case under 2 Will, d- llarg, sess. 1, 

 c. 5, s. 2, against the landlord or his bailiff for selling the same before 

 five days or a reasonable time have elapsed after the seizure. Such sale 

 being wholly void, the plaintiff sustained no legal damage from it, and 

 has therefore no ground of action in respect of it. And per Abbott C.J. : 

 "It was clearly competent under 11 Geo. II. c. 19, s. 8, for the tenant 

 at any time before the corn was ripe to have tendered the rent due, and 

 if after that the landlord had taken the corn, he might have been pro- 

 ceeded against as a trespasser." 



