The sureties justify their solvency upon the real estate which is described in the bail bond.

One surety suffices, if he is the owner of real estate which he describes, provided that the value of such real estate is equal to the amount of the security, over and above all charges and hypothecs.

The judge who receives such security may order, either on demand or otherwise, the production of the registrar's certificate, the valuation rolls and any other documents for the purposes of the security, and is bound to put such questions as he deems advisable to the sureties, and such questions and the answers thereto may be taken down in writing

The party appellant may, however, exempt himself from furnishing such security, by depositing an amount equal to that required for the security, either in money, in bonds of the Dominion, or of the Province of Quebec, or in corporation debentures, and such moneys, bonds or debentures are deposited either with the clerk of the court of Queen's Bench, or with the sheriff, as the judge may direct.

1. The amount of security may be increased on causes shewn. Boswell v. Kilborn et al., 7 L. C. J. 150, and 12 L. C. R. 161 (1860).

2. The respondent served a notice that security would be put in on the 18th, but made default. Another notice was given for the monday following, in the judges' chambers, in the court House. Security was put on that day, but in the judge's house, one the parties signed the bond in the forenoon and the other in the afternoon. On motion to set aside, the court maintained the bond, but the parties were allowed to make such objections to the sufficiency of the security as they might legally have made when it was put in. Gibb et al. v. The Beacon Fire and Life Assurance Co., 10 Ľ. C. R. 402 (1860).

3. After an appeal has been allowed to the Privy Council, the court cannot set aside the bail bond for alleged irregularities, and dismiss the appeal. Painchand et al. v. Hudon et al., L. C. J. 112 (1870).

4. Where an appeal to the Privy Council has been granted and security given, but that one of the security becomes insolvent and the other has left the province, the court of Queen's Bench may order new security to be given, but cannot dismiss the appeal if new security is not put in. Johnson v. Connolly, 16 L. C. J. 100 (1871).

5. The attachment of municipal debentures, deposited as security for the costs of appeal, would not prevent the court from accepting it as such security. Jetté et al., v. McNaughton, 21 L. C. J. 192 (1876).

6. A judge of the court of Queen's Bench has powers in chambers to extend the delay for giving security, provided this delay is not expired, and to stay the execution of the judgment appealed from. The Mayor, etc.. of Montreal v. Hubert et al., 21 L. C. J. 85 (1877).

7. When a deposit has been made as security on an appeal to the Privy Council, and the judgment appealed from is confirmed, but without costs in that court, the deposit will nevertheless avail to liquidate the costs in the court below, and it cannot, therefore, be withdrawn by the appellant. Lemoine v. Lionais, 22 L. C. J. 23 (1877).

8. When the appeal is from the court of Review to the Privy Council, the judges of the court of Queen's Bench have no jurisdiction to accept the security, it must be entered in the Superior court. Young v. The Dental Association, II L. N. 294 (1879).

9. Where appellant neglected to apply for leave to appeal to the Privy Council during the same term, his lawyer being absent when judgment was rendered, but was allowed to put in security during fifteen days after judgment, the record will not be remitted to the court below for execution on the respondent's motion. Brewster v. Lamb, 3 L. N. 75 and 109 (1880).

10. Certain rents were declared, by the court of Appeal, insaisissables as "aliments," the party succeeding made application for as order to execute the judgment provisionally, but was refused an permission to appeal to the Privy Council had been granted. Molson v. Carter, 7 L. Ñ. 292 and 28 L. C. J. 103 (1883).

11. A bond given as .security for debt, interest and costs, on appeal by a defendant from the Superior court to the court of Queen's Bench to the effect that the bondsmen will pay the condemnation money in case the judgment be confirmed, is binding, though the judgment of the Queen's Bench reversed the judgment of the court below, if the original judgment of the Superior court has been restored by the Privy Council, and the effect is the same as if the judgment of the Superior court had been affirmed by the court of Queen's Bench. Lowrey et al v. Routh, L. R. III Q. B. 364 (1887).

ART. 1180. The appellant may also consent to the judgment being executed, and in such case may give security only for the costs in appeal, under the same conditions as under article 1124.

1. When security is given for costs only, the court will not allow the record to be remitted to the court below in order to enforce execution of the judgment. Painchaud & al v, Hudon & al, 15 L. C. J., 112 (1870).

2. Security for costs only having been given, under this article for an appeal to the Privy Council, by depositing a City of Montreal

debenture, the respondent in execution of his judgment seized it in the hands of the clerk of the court. Held, that notwithstanding the seizure, the security as given was valid and sufficient. Jetté & al v. McNaughton 21 L. C. J. 192, Q. B. (1876).

ART. 1181. The execution of any judgment of the court of Queen's Bench cannot be prevented or stayed after six months from the day on which the appeal was allowed, unless the appellant files in the office of the clerk of appeals, a certificate signed by the clerk of Her Majesty's Privy Council, or any other competent officer, and stating that the appeal has been lodged within such delay and that proceeding have been had therein.

1. When a record had been remitted to the court below in consequence of the certificate not being lodged, the court could not order the prothonotary of the court below to return the record. Brewster & al v. Chapman & al, 20 L. C. J. 295 (1856).

2. The delay of six months mentioned in article 1181 C. P. C. is not absolute but directory only, leaving a certain discretion to the court of Queen's Bench. Jones v. Guyon 2 L. C. L. J. 161 (1866).

3. Where leave of appeal was granted, and copy of the record was transmitted within the delay, but the certificate required by article 1181 C. P. C. was not lodged within the delay, the court of Queen's Bench would not order the provisional execution of the judgment appealed from. Jones v. Guyon 17 L. C. R. 377, (1867).

4. Where appeal had been granted to the Privy Council, and a certificate was filed setting forth that the case is pending before the Judicial Committee, no application in the case could be entertained before the court of Queen's Bench. Brown v the Mayor, etc., of Montreal, 19 L. C. J. 140, (1875).

5. Where appeal was had to the Privy Council, and the respondent moved to declare the appeal deserted on the ground that the record had not been transmitted, the motion was rejected as a certificate of appeal to the Privy Council was before the court. Whyte v. Home Insurance Co., 19 L. Č. J. 196, (1875).

6. The only penalty which the failure to proceed on appeal to Her Majesty for more than six months after security has been given can entail, is the execution of the judgment appealed from. Merchant's Bank of Canada v. Whitfield 27 L. C. J. 183 (1883).

7. When the appeal to the Privy Council has not been lodged within the six months following the leave of appeal, the record may be transmitted to the Superior court for execution. Allan & al v. Pratt III L. R., Q. B. (1887).

ART. 1182. The clerk of appeals of the court of Queen's Bench is bound to register any exemplification of a decree of Her Majesty in Her Privy Council, as soon as it is presented to him for that purpose, without requiring any order of the court of Queen's Bench to that effect, and to send back the record in the case to the court below, together with a copy of such exemplification which has been registered as above mentioned.

APPENDIX C.

DOUBLE ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF CASES'

A

McGibbon v..... 776, 829, 830 Amy, Crédit Foncier of England v. 119

.210, 853 | Amy, Baily v.

323 Anonymous

Apcar and Co., Ocean Steamship 54, 593

1 The v. always follows the name of the appellant.