"Honest Persons," for trustees, in a charitable trust deed made in 1549; V. Baker v. Lee, 30 L. J. Ch. 625; 8 H. L. Ca. 495.

"Honesty "; V. GOOD FAITH IMPOSSIBLE.

"Honestly and Reasonably," s. 3, Judicial Trustees Act, 1896; V. REASONABLY.

HONOUR.

"By the name of an Honor which a subject may have, divers mannors and lands may passe " (Co. Litt. 5 a: Vf, Termes de la Ley: Touch. 92: Cowel: Jacob: Elph. 558).

'Acceptance for Honour, supra protest"; V. ss. 65, 66, 67, Bills of Ex. Act, 1882.

"Payment for Honour, supra protest"; V. s. 68, Ib.

"When a man writes, 'I promise to pay the above as a DEBT of Honour,' he does not mean to admit that it is a debt which may be enforced against him at law" (per Brett, J., Maccord v. Osborne, cited RATIFICATION).

An "Honour," or P. P. I., Policy is one in which it is stipulated that the Policy itself shall be sufficient Proof of INTEREST; Vh, Roddick v. Indemnity Insrce, cited UNINSURED: Gedge v. Royal Ex. Assrce, 1900, 2 Q. B. 214; 69 L. J. Q. B. 506; 82 L. T. 463; Vthle for comment on Note to Buchanan v. Faber, 4 Com. Ca. 227. Cp, FULL INTEREST

ADMITTED.

Title of Honour; V. DIGNITY: Cowley v. Cowley, 1900, P. 118; 83 L. T. 218.

-

99 66 6

HONOURED. In a guarantee of a Promissory Note if it be not "duly honoured and paid, 'duly honoured,' means no more than duly paid when due. 'Honoured' means, payment at maturity" (per Parke, B., Walton v. Maskell, 14 L. J. Ex. 56; nom. Walton v. Mascall, 13 M. & W. 457). Cp, DISHONOURED.

HOPCOMBE.-"Signifies a Valley in Domesday Book" (Cowel):

Cp, COMBE.

HOPE. V. PRECATORY TRUST: EARNEST: COMBE.

"No Hope of Recovery," to render a Dying Declaration admissible in evidence, means, that "there must be an expectation of impending and almost immediate death from the causes then operating," with "no hope whatever in the mind of the Declarant that he will recover: if the Declarant states he has no hope "at present," the declaration is inadmissible (R. v. Jenkins, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 187; 38 L. J. M. C. 82, espy jdgmt of Byles, J.).

"I am in hopes I shall be able"; V. Smith v. Thorne, cited ABLE.

HORIZONTAL 888

HORSE RACE

HORIZONTAL." Horizontal Line"; V. s. 41, London Bg Act,

1894.

HORNE-TOOKE'S ACT. 41 G. 3, c. 63, for removing doubts as to eligibility of Persons in Holy Orders to sit in the House of Commons.

HORSE." Horse, Gelding, or Mare," s. 10, 1 Edw. 6, c. 12, 2 & 3 Edw. 6, c. 33, included Foals and Fillies (R. v. Welland, Russ. & Ry. 494); but a prisoner convicted of stealing a Colt did not lose his CLERGY under these statutes, because Colts are not mentioned therein eo nomine (R. v. Beaney, Ib. 416).

Quà Metropolitan Market Act, 1851, 14 & 15 V. c. 61, "Horse" includes "Mare, Ass, and Mule" (s. 44).

Quà the Revenue Act, 1869, 32 & 33 V. c. 14, and by its s. 19 (8), "Horse' means and includes, a Horse or Pony of any sex or description or age, except a Foal, Colt, or Filly, which shall never have been used for any purpose of draught or riding: Mule,' includes only such mule as shall have been at any time used for any purpose of draught or riding." For Exemptions from License, V. s. 19 (12).

.

Quà Army Act, 1881, "Horse,' includes a Mule "; and "applies to any BEAST of whatever description used for burden or draught, or for carrying persons, in like manner as if such beast were included in the expression Horse" (subs. 40, s. 190).

Quà Sum Jur (Ir) Act, 1851, "Horse,' shall include any other animal of any kind commonly used or employed in drawing any kind of CARRIAGE" (s. 25).

Other Stat. Def. -1 & 2 V. c. 79, s. 1; 6 & 7 V. c. 86, s. 2; 7 & 8 V. c. 87, s. 10. - Ir. 16 & 17 V. c. 112, s. 80.

V. JOB: PLANT: SOUND.

HORSE CAUSEWAY. - V. CAUSEWAY.

"

HORSE DEALER. Quà Revenue Act, 1869, Horse Dealer," means and includes, "only such persons as shall buy and sell horses as a Trade, Occupation, and Means of Livelihood" (s. 13, 35 & 36 V. c. 20). Vth, Allen v. Sharp, 17 L. J. Ex. 209; 2 Ex. 352.

HORSE FLESH.- Quà 52 & 53 V. c. 11, "Horse Flesh,' shall include, the flesh of asses and mules; and shall mean, horse flesh, cooked or uncooked, alone or accompanied by or mixed with any other substance" (s. 7).

V.

HORSE RACE. Quà Racecourses Licensing Act, 1879, 42 & 43 c. 18, Horse Race," means, "any Race in which any horse, mare, or gelding, shall run, or be made to run, in competition with any other horse, mare, or gelding, or against Time, for any Prize of what nature or kind soever, or for any Bet or Wager made or to be made in respect of

HORSE RACE

889

HOSPITAL

any such horse, mare, or gelding, or the riders thereof, and at which more than 20 persons shall be present " (s. 1).

V. EVENT: FOOT RACE: LITERARY: LOTTERY: RACE.

HORSE STEALER. -To accuse a person of being a Horse Stealer" is to impute that he has been guilty of feloniously stealing a horse (Mountney v. Watton, 2 B. & Ad. 673).

HORSE-WAY. V. BRIDLE-PATH: CAUSEWAY: WAY.

HOSIER. "A Draper sells materials, while a Hosier sells articles for wear" (per Channell, J., Bailey v. Skinner, cited CARRY ON).

HOSPITAL.—"There is no manner of difference between a College and an Hospital, except only in degree; an Hospital is for those that are poor and mean and low and sickly; a College is for another sort of indigent persons; but it hath another intent, to study in and breed up persons in the world that have not otherwise to live" (per Holt, C. J., Philips v. Bury, 2 T. R. 353).

A "Hospital" is an eleemosynary institution and, strictly speaking, there is no legal Hospital unless it be incorporated, and the persons benefited are themselves the corporation (Sutton's Hospital, 10 Rep. 31 a); "and of these Hospitals some bee Eligible, some Donative, and some Presentable" (Co. Litt. 342 a). Vf, Phil. Ecc. Law, Part 8, ch. 3. But referring to this definition the Court of Ex. in Colchester v. Kewney, (35 L. J. Ex. 206) said, "It seems rather more reasonable to hold that the word (in the exemption from Land Tax in s. 25, 38 G. 3, c. 5) is used in a popular sense only; and that any institution which, though not in a strictly legal, might in a popular, sense be called a Hospital, might claim exemption. But some doubts arise whether even upon this view this Institution (the Wandsworth Royal Victoria Patriotic Asylum) would be a 'Hospital,' by which word we understand, rather an Institution for the relief of the sick or aged than for the maintenance and education of children." V. that jdgmt affirmed, 36 L. J. Ex. 172; L. R. 2 Ex. 253; 16 L. T. 463: Vh, 14 Eliz. c. 14, cited inf.

'Hospital' is a word of wider and more variable meaning than DisPENSARY, and, primarily, signifies a place built for the reception of the sick, or the support of the aged or infirm, poor. It has been used in Great Britain, in some instances, to denote an Institution in which poor children are fed and educated. But that is not the ordinary meaning of the word" (per Ld Watson, Dilworth v. Commrs of Stamps, 1899, A. C. 107; 68 L. J. P. C. 4). Vf, Moses v. Marsland, 70 L. J. Q. B. 261; 1901, 1 Q. B. 668.

"I apprehend that even a Hospital would not be the less entitled to exemption under this Act (Income Tax Act, 1842, s. 60, Sch A, No. VI) because, in order to diminish its expense, certain fees were taken

HOSPITAL

890

HOSTILITIES

from certain richer patients who might choose to obtain the benefit of the Hospital for payment. As to Almshouse,' there, it would be impossible to suppose a case in which anybody except poor almsmen or almswomen would take the benefit of such an institution " (per Denman, J., Blake and London Corp, 56 L. J. Q. B. 152; 18 Q. B. D. 437; 35 W. R. 212; 51 J. P. 71: affd 56 L. J. Q. B. 424; 19 Q. B. D. 79; 35 W. R. 791). A wholly self-supporting Lunatic Asylum, though founded by subscription, is not within this exemption as a " Hospital" (Needham v. Bowers, 21 Q. B. D. 436); but when the support of such an Asylum is chiefly eleemosynary, then it is a "Hospital" within this exemption, and also within the exemption from Inhabited House Duty (Case 4, Sch B, 48 G. 3, c. 55; s. 2, 14 & 15 V. c. 36), although it may have some paying Patients (Cause v. Nottingham Lunatic Asylum, 1891, 1 Q. B. 585; 60 L. J. Q. B. 485; 65 L. T. 155; 39 W. R. 461; 55 J. P. 582).

V. CHARITY SCHOOL: PUBLIC SCHOOL: NOXIOUS: NUISANCE.

In Colchester v. Kewney (sup), it was held that no Hospital is, under s. 25, 38 G. 3, c. 5, exempt from Land Tax unless founded before 38 G. 3, c. 60.

"Hospital," s. 3, 13 Eliz. c. 10, means, "Hospitals, Maison Dieus, Bead-Houses, and other houses ordained for the sustentation or relief of the poor" (14 Eliz. c. 14): Vth, Magdalen College Case, 11 Rep. 66 b; 1 Rolle, 151: Southwell v. Lincoln, Bp., 1 Mod. 204; 2 Ib. 56: Moore v. Clench, 45 L. J. Ch. 80; 1 Ch. D. 447: Magdalen Hosp. v. Knotts, 48 L. J. Ch. 579; 4 App. Ca. 324; 27 W. R. 602; 40 L. T. 466.

Other Stat. Def.-P. H. London Act, 1891, s. 141; Idiots Act, 1886, 49 & 50 V. c. 25, s. 17; Lunacy Act, 1890, s. 341.

"Hospitals, Houses, and Places, . . . for the Public Reception of Pregnant Women, and supported by Charitable Contributions, or otherwise," s. 3, 13 G. 3, c. 82, does not include a Room in a Parish Workhouse appropriated for the reception of pregnant women resident within the parish (R. v. Manchester, 4 B. & Ald. 504).

"Hospitals of London"; V. LONDON.

A gift to the "Hospital "of a district by a name non-existent in the district, will go to the General Hospital, as distinguished from the Special Hospitals, of that district (Re Alchin, L. R. 14 Eq. 230). V. PATIENT: PUBLIC HOSPITAL: Jacob: 6 Encyc. 233–235.

HOSPITALITY. A gift for "Hospitality OR Charity," is void for uncertainty (Re Hewitt, 53 L. J. Ch. 132: Re Jarman, 47 L. J. Ch. 675; 8 Ch. D. 584).

HOSTEL.-V. INN: HOTEL.

HOSTILITIES.-V. WAR.

"Consequences of Hostilities "; V. CONSEQUENCES.

HOTCHPOT

891

HOTEL

HOTCHPOT.-"This word is, in English, a pudding; for in this pudding is not commonly put one thing alone, but one thing with other things together" (Litt. s. 267). "Hutspot, or Hotspot, is an old Saxon word, and signifieth so much as Littleton here speaks. And the French use hotchpot for a commixion of divers things together. It signifieth here metaphorically in partem positio. In English we use to say hodgepodge, in Latine farrago or miscellaneum" (Co. Litt. 177 a). Vf, Termes de la Ley 2 Bl. Com. 190, 517: Wms. Exs. 1369 et seq: and as to effect and construction of a Hotchpot Clause, V. Auster v. Powell, 1 D. G. J. & S. 99; 8 L. T. 73: Fox v. Fox, 40 L. J. Ch. 182; L. R. 11 Eq. 142: Re Whitehouse, 37 Ch. D. 683; 57 L. J. Ch. 161; 57 L. T. 761; 36 W. R. 181: Re Cosier, Wheeler v. Humphreys, cited SATISFACTION, at end: Re Bristol, 1897, 1 Ch. 946; 66 L. J. Ch. 446; 76 L. T. 757; 45 W. R. 552: Re Lambert, 1897, 2 Ch. 169; 66 L. J. Ch. 624; 76 L. T. 752; 45 W. R. 661: Vaizey, 1220: 6 Encyc. 235–237. In a Settlement pursuant to Articles, a Hotchpot Clause will not be inserted unless it be expressly directed (Lees v. Lees, Ir. Rep. 5 Eq. 549: Sethe, Miller v. Gulson, 13 L. R. Ir. 408).

V. ADVANCEMENT: COLLATION.

HOTEL. —“Hotel" is not to be confounded with the old word "Hostel which is a synonym for INN.

:

An "Hotel" is a place where lodgings are let and where provisions are, to some extent, supplied (Smith v. Scott, 1 L. J. C. P. 143; 9 Bing. 14: Gibson v. King, 12 L. J. Ex. 9; 10 M. & W. 667 per Ld Brougham, King v. Simmonds, 1 H. L. Ca. 773); that the lodgings are let to invalids, makes no difference (Re Jones, Ex p. Thorne, 45 L. J. Bank. 158; 3 Ch. D. 457). These were decisions on "Keepers of Hotels" in the late Bankry definition of "Trader." In Smith v. Scott, Tindal, C. J., said, "It is clear that the word 'Hotel' is not used in the sense of the old word 'Hostel,' for that means what is now termed an Inn'; and as the word Inn' immediately precedes, it could scarcely have been intended to designate the same thing by both. The modern word is introduced from the French, and rather implies a house to which people resort for lodgings, than for the sort of entertainment procured only at an Inn." In that case a Lodging-house Keeper who procured and supplied, at a small profit, provisions for her lodgers, such provisions being kept separately for the individuals for whom they were respectively procured, was the keeper of an "Hotel "; and in Gibson v. King (sup) it was held that a Boarding-house was, à fortiori, an "Hotel" within the definition. In Devonshire v. Simmons (39 S. J. 60), " Hotel" was contrasted with "PUBLIC HOUSE."

In America "Hotel" has been held to be a synonym for INN (Cromwell v. Stephens, 2 Daly, 15).

"I agree that the words 'Hotel' and 'Tavern' are undergoing a