ent alleged to be due on the
29th of September. Again Patrick Ring replevined, and proved his
rent-days to be in November and May, and not in September and
March. The case of costs and trespass came to trial in respect of
both seizures, and was decided in Ring's favour. Thus a jury and a
judge certified by their decision that the tenant was right, and
the landlord wrong. The damages awarded were very moderate, only
L12 and costs; but the tenant looked on the verdict as most
important, in respect of its setting, as he thought, the validity
of his lease and the period of his rent-days at rest. But that the
damages were too moderate as regarded the landlord was manifest
from the fact, that he again distrained in March for rent not due
until May.

"He now, it being again seed-time, took a more effectual way of
crippling the tenant than before. He seized on the farm implements
and stock, of which the dunghill was in his eyes the most important.
He had it, without a legal sale, carried away to his own farm-yard,
even to the very rakings and sweepings of the road and the yard near
which it lay. This he did that Ring might have no manure for his
potato ground, knowing that crops so planted would not easily afford
the rent; and that, when no rent was forthcoming, an ejectment would
soon follow. Other things--a plough, and a horse, and some
furniture--were sold, and Ring was once more involved in litigation.
These things were bought in with his own money, save the dung-heap,
which the landlord would not give him a chance of buying in; and
thus Ring was obliged to pay his rent before it was due, with all
the expenses of a distraint and sale--the most expensively conducted
of any distraints and sales under the British crown. He thought to
recover damages for all this loss; but he was not able to pay his
rent in addition to all this, when it became due; and thus, by some
hocus-pocus of the law, the two cases became so mingled together as
to be inextricable."

From this statement it would appear that this Mr Shee distrained
illegally, that the tenant sought the protection of the law, and that he
obtained damages to the amount of L12. This may appear an inconsiderable
sum; but when it is considered that an officer entitled a "replevinger,"
resides in almost every town, that the sto