INTERPLEADER. 303 



tiff, who at the sale had said, " It would be one thing to buy the stack, 

 and another to take it away/' assaulted him and prevented him from 

 removing it, and kept and converted it, Leverton never paid the price ; 

 but the jury found that he had never had at any time after the sale an 

 opportunity of taking the stack away ; and upon these facts it was held 

 that the distress having been rendered abortive by the wrongful acts of 

 the plaintiff, a second was law-ful. Wightman J, thus distinguished it 

 from Bagge v. Mawlnf: " There the creditor, who subsequently became 

 assignee under the bankruptcy, had merely threatened the landlord to 

 hold him accountable if he proceeded with the distress, and the landlord 

 upon the threat ^vithdrew. If no more than that had been done here, 

 the case would have come within the principle of that decision; but 

 here the plaintiff has converted the distress to his own use, and deprived 

 Leverton of it for ever." 



Unregistered transfer of growing croj) good against execution creditor. — 

 A creditor having agreed with his debtor to take a growing crop in satis- 

 faction, and the dehtor having given him a receipt for the amount of the 

 debt as if for money paid on a sale of the crop, and the creditor having 

 taken possession, it was held by Wightman J., that the transfer though 

 not registered was good as against an execution creditor {Neicman v. 

 Cardinal). 



Interpleader.— 'SS\\QXQ an execution has been levied, and a landlord 

 makes a claim upon the sheriff for rent, which the execution creditor 

 lias not expressly disputed, whether as regards the amount of rent due 

 (on the construction of the lease), or as regards the liability of the 

 property which has been seized to distress, the sheriff is not entitled to 

 an interpleader, at all events unless the landlord claims any part of the 

 property ; and semhle that in no case where the claim is for rent can 

 there be an interpleader {Bateman v. Farnsivortli). 



Distress an affirmation of tenancg. — A landlord by distraining for rent 

 afEi-ms the continuance of tlie tenancy up to the day when the rent bo 

 distrained for became due, A tenant under a lease at a quarterly rent 

 of £80 payable quarterly, with a clause for re- entry if the rent should 

 be in arrear for 21 days, was in arrear £60 for three quarters at 

 Michaelmas ; for these arrears his landlord on October 2nd took a 

 distress, which on October 16th realised £27 6.?., leaving due £32 14s,, 

 there being no sufficient distress upon the premises. On November 2nd, 

 the landlord (under the Common Law Procedure Act 1852, s, 210) 

 served a writ of ejectment. It was held by the Court of Common Pleas, 

 that the landlord had affirmed the continuance of the tenancy up to 

 Michaelmas, and that as half-a-year's rent was not in arrear at the time 

 the writ was served he could not recover. And jat Curiam : '■'■ The 



