|
ENGROSSING , a See also:term used in two legal senses: (I) the See also:writing or copying of a legal or other document in a See also:fair large See also:hand (en See also:gros), and (2) the buying up of goods wholesale in See also:- ORDER
- ORDER (through Fr. ordre, for earlier ordene, from Lat. ordo, ordinis, rank, service, arrangement; the ultimate source is generally taken to be the root seen in Lat. oriri, rise, arise, begin; cf. " origin ")
- ORDER, HOLY
order to sell at a higher See also:price so as to establish a See also:monopoly. The word " engross " has come into See also:English ultimately from the See also:Late See also:Lat. grosses, thick, stout, large, through the A. Fr. engrosser, Med. Lat. ingrossare, to write in a large hand, and the See also:French phrase en gros, in See also:gross, wholesale. Engrossing and the kindred practices of See also:forestalling and See also:regrating were See also:early regarded as serious offences in See also:restraint of See also:trade, and were punishable both at See also:common See also:law and by See also:statute. They were of more particular importance in relation to the See also:distribution of See also:corn supplies. The statute of 1552 defines engrossing as " buying corn growing, or any other corn, See also:grain, See also:butter, See also:cheese, See also:fish or other dead See also:victual, with See also:intent to sell the same again." The law forbade all dealing in corn as an See also:article of See also:ordinary merchandise, apart from questions of See also:foreign import or export. The theory was that when corn was plentiful in any See also:district it should be consumed at what it would bring, without much respect to whether the next See also:harvest might be equally abundant, or to what the immediate wants of an adjoining See also:province of the same See also:country might be. The first statute on the subject appears to have been passed in the reign of See also:- HENRY
- HENRY (1129-1195)
- HENRY (c. 1108-1139)
- HENRY (c. 1174–1216)
- HENRY (Fr. Henri; Span. Enrique; Ger. Heinrich; Mid. H. Ger. Heinrich and Heimrich; O.H.G. Haimi- or Heimirih, i.e. " prince, or chief of the house," from O.H.G. heim, the Eng. home, and rih, Goth. reiks; compare Lat. rex " king "—" rich," therefore " mig
- HENRY, EDWARD LAMSON (1841– )
- HENRY, JAMES (1798-1876)
- HENRY, JOSEPH (1797-1878)
- HENRY, MATTHEW (1662-1714)
- HENRY, PATRICK (1736–1799)
- HENRY, PRINCE OF BATTENBERG (1858-1896)
- HENRY, ROBERT (1718-1790)
- HENRY, VICTOR (1850– )
- HENRY, WILLIAM (1795-1836)
Henry III., though the See also:general policy had prevailed before that See also:- TIME (0. Eng. Lima, cf. Icel. timi, Swed. timme, hour, Dan. time; from the root also seen in " tide," properly the time of between the flow and ebb of the sea, cf. O. Eng. getidan, to happen, " even-tide," &c.; it is not directly related to Lat. tempus)
- TIME, MEASUREMENT OF
- TIME, STANDARD
time both in popular See also:prejudice and in the feudal See also:custom. The statute of See also:Edward VI. (1552) was the most important, and in it the offences were elaborately defined; by this statute any one who bought corn to sell it again was made liable to two months' imprisonment with forfeit of the corn. A second offence was punished by six months' imprisonment and forfeit of See also:double the value of the corn, and a third by the See also:pillory and utter ruin. Severe as this statute was, See also:liberty was given by it to transport corn from one See also:part of the country under See also:licence to men of approved probity, which implied that there was to be some buying of corn to sell it again and elsewhere. Practically " engrossing " came to be considered buying wholesale to sell again wholesale. " Forestalling "was different, and the statutes were directed against a class of dealers who went forward and bought or contracted for corn and other provisions, and spread false rumours in derogation of the public and open markets appointed by law, to which our ancestors appear to have attached much importance, and probably in these times not without See also:reason. The statute of Edward VI. was modified by many subsequent enactments, particularly by the statute of 1663, by which it was declared that there could be no " engrossing " of corn when the price did not exceed 48s. per See also:quarter, and which See also:Adam See also:- SMITH
- SMITH, ADAM (1723–1790)
- SMITH, ALEXANDER (183o-1867)
- SMITH, ANDREW JACKSON (1815-1897)
- SMITH, CHARLES EMORY (1842–1908)
- SMITH, CHARLES FERGUSON (1807–1862)
- SMITH, CHARLOTTE (1749-1806)
- SMITH, COLVIN (1795—1875)
- SMITH, EDMUND KIRBY (1824-1893)
- SMITH, G
- SMITH, GEORGE (1789-1846)
- SMITH, GEORGE (184o-1876)
- SMITH, GEORGE ADAM (1856- )
- SMITH, GERRIT (1797–1874)
- SMITH, GOLDWIN (1823-191o)
- SMITH, HENRY BOYNTON (1815-1877)
- SMITH, HENRY JOHN STEPHEN (1826-1883)
- SMITH, HENRY PRESERVED (1847– )
- SMITH, JAMES (1775–1839)
- SMITH, JOHN (1579-1631)
- SMITH, JOHN RAPHAEL (1752–1812)
- SMITH, JOSEPH, JR
- SMITH, MORGAN LEWIS (1822–1874)
- SMITH, RICHARD BAIRD (1818-1861)
- SMITH, ROBERT (1689-1768)
- SMITH, SIR HENRY GEORGE WAKELYN
- SMITH, SIR THOMAS (1513-1577)
- SMITH, SIR WILLIAM (1813-1893)
- SMITH, SIR WILLIAM SIDNEY (1764-1840)
- SMITH, SYDNEY (1771-1845)
- SMITH, THOMAS SOUTHWOOD (1788-1861)
- SMITH, WILLIAM (1769-1839)
- SMITH, WILLIAM (c. 1730-1819)
- SMITH, WILLIAM (fl. 1596)
- SMITH, WILLIAM FARRAR (1824—1903)
- SMITH, WILLIAM HENRY (1808—1872)
- SMITH, WILLIAM HENRY (1825—1891)
- SMITH, WILLIAM ROBERTSON (1846-'894)
Smith recognized, though it adhered to the variable and unsatisfactory See also:element of price, as having contributed more to the progress of See also:agriculture than any previous law in the statute See also:book. In 1773 these injurious statutes were abolished, but the penal See also:character of " engrossing" and "fore-stalling " had a See also:root in the common law of See also:England, as well as in the popular prejudice, which kept the evil alive to a later See also:period. As the public enlightenment increased the See also:judges were at no loss to give interpretations of the common law consistent with public policy. Subsequent to the See also:act of 1773, for example, there was a See also:case of conviction and See also:punishment for engrossing hops, R. v. See also:Waddington, 1800, 1 See also:East, 143, but though this was deemed a See also:sound and proper See also:judgment at the time, yet it was soon afterwards overthrown in other cases, on the ground that buying wholesale to sell wholesale was not in " restraint of trade as the former judges had assumed.
In 1800, one See also:John Rusby was indicted for having bought ninety quarters of oats at 41S. per quarter and selling See also:thirty of them at 43S. the same See also:day. See also:Lord See also:Kenyon, the presiding See also:judge, animadverted strongly against the repealing act of 1773, and addressed the See also:jury strongly against the accused. Rusby was heavily fined, but, on See also:appeal, the See also:court was equally divided as to whether engrossing, forestalling and regrating were still offences at common law. In 1844, all the statutes, English, Irish and Scottish, defining the offences, were repealed and with them the supposed common law See also:foundation. In the See also:United States there have been strong endeavours by the See also:government to suppress See also:trusts and combinations for engrossing.
End of Article: ENGROSSING
Additional information and Comments
There are no comments yet for this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.
|
del.icio.us it!