Joseph PINGUEY, of Workington, claimed of D. PEARSON, farmer,
Crosscanonby, near Maryport, the sum of £9  7s  6d. The items were £6  17s  6d balance
of rent of Studfold Farm at Westward near Wigton; value of gate post alleged
to have been wrongfully removed by defendant and converted to his own use; and
damages sustained by such removal, 10s.

       The case was adjourned from a previous court in order that evidence
might be produced as to the custom of the country in regard to the seeds on the
land - whether they should be paid for by the incoming tenant or by the

       Mr. T. MILBURN represented the plaintiff and Mr. G. A. LIGHTFOOT was
for the defendant.

       Mr. MILBURN said the counter claim of £6  17s was for the price of
seeds that had been sown on which they desired to know the custom of the country.

       His Honour said at the previous Court he gave judgment for the
plaintiff for £5  2s  2d, and then he left the seed part over.

       Mr. LIGHTFOOT said this could hardly have been so where there was a
question of a counter claim.

       His Honour: No, I would not give judgment the.

       Mr. LIGHTFOOT submitted that in this portion of the country, as a
matter of experience and convenience, the incoming tenant paid for the seeds, but
as a matter of liability the landlord was liable. He called Mr. SADLER,
farmer, Crosscanonby, who testified to this effect.

       Mr. MILBURN asked witness for a case where it occurred for grass seeds
and no claim was made for  (unreadable.)

       Witness thought he knew of one, but upon being pressed he said it was
a case where the landlord entered.

       Mr. MILBURN said his Honour would remember that the landlord entered
in this case, but he found a tenant.

       Mr. J. TWENTYMAN, land agent, Wigton, said he didn't know a case like
that mentioned by Mr. MILBURN. He bore out the statement of Mr. LIGHTFOOT.

       Mr. MILBURN contended that this was no parallel case, as here the only
work and labour performed by the tenant was compensated for by the grazing
permitted between August and October. He submitted that such a claim had never
been made before, and hence the custom of the country didn't reach it.

       His Honour's opinion was that the landlord was liable to the outgoing
tenant for seeds. The custom of the country, he understood, was with regard to
seeds sown after wheat. He gave judgment for the defendant on the counter
claim of £5  1s  8d.