Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine - Volume 55, No. 343, May 1844Various
History
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine - Volume 55, No. 343, May 1844
Various
England -- Periodicals; Scotland -- Periodicals
And right clumsily has he performed the duty assigned to him. Had his
cunning been equal to his malignity, he would have acted with more
prudence. He would not have recklessly asserted in one place what his
own admissions refute in another. He would not have charged the most
talented, distinguished, and impartial law-officers of the crown with
having strained the law to protect a delinquent because he was a
Protestant--and afterwards shown that the conduct of this man was
condemned by those very persons accused of partiality towards him; and
that his illegal acts were punished by those very tribunals to which (he
asserts) no poor man need think of applying for redress. He, however,
does his best to cover those glaring inconsistencies. He breaks the
thread of his narrative, and intersperses his stories in such a manner,
that a casual reader, who has not time or inclination to examine or
compare them, may easily be deceived and misled. For the purpose of
showing the reliance to be placed on Lord John Russell's authority, we
shall take up one case, (that of Patrick Ring,) and follow it out to its
conclusion.
"The first proceeding was against Patrick Ring, a tenant, who held
on a lease of thirty-one years and a life, and who owed no arrears
up to 1842; the proceedings against him began in March 1841, and
have given rise to a complicated variety of actions at law, ending
with his ejectment and utter beggary.
"As he owed no rent, and as no possible reason for getting rid of
him as a tenant could be assigned, nor was ever offered until long
after proceedings had begun, a bold stroke to make a beginning was
absolutely requisite, and it was struck. The lease specified a
certain day in May and in November, as that on which the
half-yearly rent would fall due. Those days had been strictly
adhered to, and no one knew this better than the landlord. But in
1841 he obtained a warrant of distraint,[39] and seized on Ring on
the 26th of March, for rent alleged to be due on the 25th. It might
have been a hard enough misfortune to be distrained on the day
following that of the rent being due in any case, especially in
spring, when the cattle and implements of labour, as also the
seed-corn, and potatoes, the articles distrained, are required for
the peculiar duties of that most important season, seed-time. But
when such a distraint was made on such articles, so indispensable
in their uses even for a day, to say nothing of weeks, and no rent
nor debt of any kind owing, the case is peculiarly a hard one on
the tenant.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account