In  assumpsit  for  weighage  of  goods  brought  into  the
port  of  London,  it  was  objected  that  there  was  no  con-
sideration for  the  duty;  but  as  the  defendant  had  the
liberty  of  bringing  his  goods  into  port,  which  is  a  place  of
safety,  it  was  resolved  that  the  consideration  was  implied.'

In  Lmrl  Falmouth  v.  George,*  it  was  held  that  keeping


1  1  Gale,  23  ;  1  C,  M.  &  R.
849.
2  1  Ld.  Eaym.  384;  S.  C,  1
Salk.  248.  See,  too,  G-unniug,
pp.    28,   62,    119,   216  ;   Woolrych,


p.  300.
'  Mayor  of  London  v.  Hunt,  3
Lev.  37  ;  G-uiming,  pp.  29,  33,
118  ;  Woolrych,  p.  30.
*  5  Bingh.  286.
Digitized  by  Microsoft®


TOLLS.  657

up  a  capstem  and  rope  in  a  cove  to  assist  boats  m  landing,
and  without  whicli  they  could  not  safely  land  in  bad
weather,  was  a  good  consideration  for  a  reasonable  toll  on
all  boats  frequenting  the  cove,  whether  they  used  the  cap-
stern  or  not;  and  the  custom  to  exact  the  toU  was  also
held  good,  although  the  party  claiming  it  was  neither
owner  of  the  cove  nor  lord  of  the  manor,  nor  were  his  pre-
decessors shown  to  have  been  such ;  but  he  and  they  had
always  been  owners  of  the  spot  on  which  the  capstem
stood,  and  of  an  estate  in  the  neighbourhood.
