2'20 
G A 
fore A. B. and C. D. comniinioners appointed by an aft 
for granting to Ids inajefty an aid and contribution for 
tlic profecution of the tvar, tlien and there acting as 
fii'-'lvcoinmiilioners, did make a declaration in writing, 
figned by him, that liis annual income did not exceed 50!. 
and being examined upon oatli, depofed tliat tlie value 
of the whole lands, tenements, and eftate of the faid de¬ 
fendant was then 70I. a-year and no more ; and that 17I. 
a-year intereft money was then payable out of the faid 
lands; and claimed to be allowed the fame as intereft 
paid for money charged upon the laid lands; and the 
■fame was allowed. And the defendant admits that he 
made the faid declaration and claim of allowance; and 
that the value of his faid lands, &c. has not increafed 
fmee the time of making fuch declaration, and that he 
has not lince the faid 22d of March acquired other lands, 
and that the 17I. a-year intereft m.oney is. ftill payable 
out of the faid lands, &c.” The conviffion next pro¬ 
ceeded to thite, that the defendant, being called upon to 
make his defence, faid that he tvas poUetfed of an eftate 
in the parith of Whitgift of the yearly value of tool, and 
upwards, and produced a witnets, who faid that he knew 
the defendant’s faid eftate, and he thought it worth tool, 
a-year, and that he would give lool. a-year and up¬ 
wards for it, but admitted that he would not fwear that 
the defendant’s faid eftate was worth lOol. a-year clear 
of reprifes.—Per curiam. It muft be taken pro confejjio that 
the defendant at the time mentioned in the convidtion, 
when lie was before the commillioners on the amount of 
his income, Iiad not then an eftate of tool, a year in va¬ 
lue; it is evidence out of his own moutli ; and the wit- 
nefs adduced bv.him did not contradict this, even if lie 
were credited to the full extent of what he depofed ; for 
he would not undertake to fay thattlie eftate was of that 
clear of reprifes and as to the dedudtions being on 
account of limple contraft debts, the contrary appears 
by the defendant’s own Ihewing; for he claimed the al¬ 
lowance before the commiflioners for the intereft of mo¬ 
ney tt/icTZ/its Convidtion aflirmed. D. 8c E. 
S V. 220. 
By Estate for term of life. —It hath been 
doubted upon thei'e words, in what order of qualification 
an ecclefiaftical living ftiull be ranked, which a man 
holds not in his own or his wife’s right, but in the right 
of iiis church.. ^ It is allow'ed to be a life eftate, although 
it may happen to be determined fooner, as by refigna- 
tion, deprivation, or accepting another living incompa¬ 
tible. But the queftion is, whether thefe words^ fliall 
belong to the former or the latter part of the fentence ? 
The difiiculty feems to be partly occafioned by the dif- 
jointed manner of pundtuation. But the points are no 
part of the ftatute ; the ftatutes themfelves are with¬ 
out points; the punctuation is only made by the printer. 
Abftradted from the pundtuation, it fhould feem that 
the former part of the fentence, refpedting the qualifi¬ 
cation of lOol. a-year by an eftate of inheritance, ought 
to terminate with the words per annum. And that a 
life eftate, being of inferior quality, ought to be coupled 
witli leafehold, whereof 150I. a-year is neceflary to con- 
ftitute a qualification. And fo it was determined in the 
cafe of Lowndes, efq. v. Lewis, clerk, that a life eftate 
of let's than 150I. per annum is not a qualification to kiL' 
game. Cald. Caf. iS 3 . 
By Lease of ninety-nine years of 150I. yearly 
VALUE.— An eftate of the value of 150I. per annum, 
holden by the party in his own right, under a leafe for 
ninety-nine years to truftees, if he and others Ihould fo 
long live, is a fufficient qualification; and leafes of this 
kind have always been to deemed. Earl Ferrers v. Hen- 
ton. D. & E. & ‘V’. 506. 
By being the son and heir apparent of an 
ESQU IRE.—Efquire is a name of dignity next above the 
common title of gentleman, and below a knight. Here- 
totore he was attendant, and had employment as a fer- 
vant, waiting on I'uch as had the order of knighthood, 
M E. 
bearing thcWfiields, and helping them to iiorfe, or fuch 
like. See the article EsOiCire, vol. vii. p. 20. And 
this title is of that nc.turc with us now, that to whoin- 
foever either by blood, or place in the date, or other 
emincncy, we conceive feme higher attribute fliould be 
given than that foie title of gentleman, knowing yet 
that he hath no other honorary title legally fixed on him, 
we ufually ftile him on efquire, in fuch paflages as require 
legally that his degree or ftate be mentioned. Seld. Tit. 
of Hon. 374, &c. 
Or Person of higher degree. —In the order of 
precedence, the heralds, next below knights and th'eir 
fons, and above efquires, rank colonels, ferjeantsat law, 
and dodfors in the three learned profeftions. i Blackjl. 
Comm. 405,—In the cafe of K. v. Utley, upon an infor¬ 
mation on the game l.iws, and a conviction of the defen¬ 
dant on the fiat, of Car. 11 . as “ not being tlie eldeft fon 
of an efquire, or of other perfon of higher degree,” Cham- 
bre moved to quafii this information on the infertion of 
the word of-, and contended, that though this was copied 
from precedent, yet it was not warranted in law, for 
that by this conftriuStion, neither an efquire or a knight 
would be qualified as fuch.^—^Buller J. I'.dd, that the le- 
gifiature feemed to him to hav-e taken it for granted, that 
an efquire or other perfon of higher degree would have 
a fufficient eftate to qualify him, and therefore they had 
neglcdled to do it exprefsly; though there was a cafe in 
Lord I-Iardwicke’s time, where the word of was rejeCted, 
and no notice taken. However he was of opinion that 
the convidtion’ ftiould be affirmed : and it was fo. D. 
83 E. I V. 413. 
Case of Jones Smart, Mich.T. 26 Geo. III.—This 
was an aCtion to recover a penalty for killing game, by 
5 & 9 An. not being duly qualified. The queftion was, whe¬ 
ther a diploma from St. Andrew’s in Scotland appoint¬ 
ing the defendant doElor of pkyjic, him a qualification 
under 22 & 23 Car. 2. c. 25. to kill game ? Confte for 
the plaintift' argued, that fuppofing him to have the 
fame rank as a dodtor of tlie Englifii uhiverfities, yet he 
is not fuch a charadler as was meant to be qualified by 
the ftatute of Car. II. The qualification claimed muft 
be derived from conftruing the words or other perfon of 
higher degree in the nominative cale, and f.ippofing that 
every perfon of higher degree than an efquire is thereby 
qualified. That this is not a true conitruclion of the 
ftatute is clear by the cafe of K. v. Utley, 24 Geo. III. 
And fuppofing the dodtors of the two Englilh unlverfi- 
ties have the right contended for by the prefent defen¬ 
dant, which is a very doubtful matter, yet this diploma 
does not confer fuch a right. There is no inftance in 
which foreign diplomas and degrees have been acknow¬ 
ledged here, and there is a great difference between de¬ 
grees acquired by long labour and refidence, and one be¬ 
llowed in a fummary manndr. % Rep. iiy. Dr. Bonham’s 
cafe. And by the union, it does not follow that per- 
fons having taken Scotch degrees are to be endowed with 
all the privileges of Engliffi degrees. Dr. Gilbert, hav¬ 
ing taken his degree of D. D. in Scotland, wilhed to 
preach at Oxford in his proper habit as doitor, but was 
not allowed : and Dr. Pitcairn accepted a degree at omr 
univerfities, although he had before taken the lame de¬ 
gree in Scotland.—Erlkine in reply made tliree quef- 
tions; iff. Whetherontheconftrueftionof22 & 23 Car. II. 
every perfon as a member of the civil ftate, who is an 
efquire or fuperior in rank, may not kill game ? 2dly. 
"Whether a doflor of phyfic who has taken his degree in 
England be not fuch perlbn? 3dly. Whether a Scotch 
diploma does not confer the fame privileges? As to 
the firft, the language of the ftatute is very ftrong; the 
W'ord other muft be confidered as the nominative and not as 
the genitive cafe, both in reafon and grammatical con- 
ftruPtion. It is clear the ftatute did not mean to confine 
the qualification altogether to landed praperty, by ex¬ 
tending it to the fon and heir apparent of an efquire, 
who is fuppofed to have no lauded property of his own. 
