The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-05-09
curt OF Common Pleas
Before Judge Inglis.

MAY s,-M Flynn Us. George Barcau and Simon Huff
(Sher!t2-Springtng VIE upon Landlord -rhis was
an action OF rover TO the damages arising from
the conversion by the defendant his of horse
belonging to the plaintiff. 1t was very curious case,
and peculiarly illustrates the value of marimopy and
the worth Of wife in protecting mans property. This
IS case IN which poortenant sprung wife upon in
nocen landlord very much unawares, and to the very
greet advantage of the said tenant 1t appears from the
evidence. that Mr. Flynn unmarried young man. rent
Ell sundry rooms and apartments In 2st street. of Mr.
Barclay at SIS per month payable in advances cemmen
chg in June, 1871. Time ran along till this present
month and some $500 rent had accrued Mr. Barclay is
sues landlords warrant for the amount, and takes
tain horse belonging to the plaintiff which is sold for $40
The plaintiff brings the present action of trover the
ground that the horse was exempt from execution under
the new $3.50 law To take the benefit of this law
must be householder, Of family, and not pos
the plaintiff must have been the Of 'team"
for so the statute reads"necessary tools am &c. Az
Flynn taking advantage 81 one Of our natural and nsien:
able rights which not ncrfsred with by any civil
law constitution and without consu tug his landlord
Mr. Barclay, committed matrimony about four or five
months ago This act at established him gentle
man and mtn of honor, and especially IMAM Of fam
ly" within the meaning of the statute in such made
and provided. The law Mr.. Flynns wife mean, inn
mediately threw around him and his property her fair
protecting arms, and the sheriff warrant, shot from
LAWYERS quill, fell harmless at his feet Mr. Barclay
looked on with asonishment-he caught in snare
wife had been sprung upon him unawares-and he
remedies. As wife therefore protect $50 worth
of property and no more may be safely considered that
tablishedby law is $3.50.
There was another very important point in the defence
q
mans And Mr. Benedict, the learned counsel TOR
the defence denied that one horse and cart team
In proof of which he quoted any number Of authorities
to the small amusement of the Court and Jury for they
authorities not often quoted to establish the lsw be-
fore Court-such Piers, Pleughman. Fabysn, Holland
Spencer Chapman, Homer Beaumont, and Fletcher, Vr-
gil, Dryden Cowper. Gay, and we believe Hudibras.
By some of these authorities it proved that litter
of pigs democr atcay considered) a whole
team we suppose, and may be regarded going the
wholelitter By other authorities il proved that
there might be Team Of ducks" and SO on Cowper
There from the sunburnt bayfield, homeward creeps
The loaded vain; while, lghtened Of its charge,
The vain that meets it passes swiftly by;
The boorsn driver leaning DER his team
Vocii'rous, and impatient OF delay.
In short Mr. Benedict considered that according TO all
authorities he was safe in that horse and
cart not team.
On the other side, Mr. DEwIrr contended that It was
capable of mathematical demonstration that the whole
equal all its parts and that the greater
sary include the less admitted that two horses
and team, and exempt by the statute
horse and cart must be half team, and fortiori
exempt He also contended that it the INTENT by the
spirit of the law to exempt the means by which poor
man gets ms living; ana ne gave as ms OPINION tsat
bakers for loaf of bread.
b vent n,n s ,us very in
lx,cograPhsealy eiymologicaliy arithmetcay gram
litter Of pigs could be democratically considered
team the Judge did not say but he clearly Of opinion
that horse and cart was team within the meaning Of
the statute, although he was equally well assured that
far the usage ofthe word team concerned all
the old English authorities used the word in plural
mo had been cited in which single pig al
though he might be" democrscsily right" had
been regarded a whole team. II is impossible for
pig to go the whole.litter From the phraseoogy Of
the law the Judge supposed that it must have been
drawn by country member Of the Legislature and
il such member had been asked he meant the word team
to protect cartmans horse and cart, he had
doubt but that he would have replied in the affirmative.
The law any laboring ANIMAL and intends to
tsct the poor He also decided that any man was
householder who rents the upper part Of house. even
though his apartments do not touc h the ground.
Verdict for plaintiff 500 damages.
Mr.. Benedict for defendant. Mr. Dewitt for plaintiff