
    Low against Rice.
    Where ,\ us» tice, after a suit was commenced; moved into a part of a house where a tavern was kept, and there tried toe cause, v/hile the tavern was kept in the other part of the house ; it was held, that the justice, under the 20th sec» tion of the act* (24th sess c. 165 } had no ju* risdiction; and, his judgment was reversed **
    IN error, on certiorari, from a justice’s court
    
      Law sued Rice before the justice. There was a trial b;= j -jry, and a verdict for the defendant. Before the trial, the justice moved into the house of one Morse, who kept a tavern. He occupied one end of the house, but the whole communicated, in the inside, by a passage, and Morse continued keeping tavern at the time of the trial.
   Per Curiam.

The justice, at the time of the trial and judgment, lived in a house in which a tavern was kept, and he had no jurisdiction •, for the statute (sess. 24. c. 165. s. 20.) says, that no such justice “ shall try any cause by' virtue of this act.” . To say, that living as he did was not living in a house where a tavern was kept, would be to repeal the law, by allowing it to be evaded, on the most flimsy pretexts. The justice moved into the house after the suit was commenced, and before the trial. The plaintiff’s appearing and going to trial, will not give jurisdiction where there was none by law.

Judgment reversed.  