By The Bye

In practice. Without process. A declaration is said to be filed by the bye when it is filed against a party already in the custody of the court under process in another suit. This might have been done, formerly, where the party was under arrest, and technically in the custody of the court; and even giving common bail was a sufficient custody in the king's bench. 1 Sellon, Prac. 228; 1 Tidd. Prac. 419. It is no longer allowed. Archb. New Prac. C. The third letter of the alphabet. It was used on the ballots of Roman jurors to denote condemnation, being the initial letter of condemno. See "A." "C" is sometimes used for "t" in old records, as "tercia" for "tertia," and "tocius" for "totius." Mag. Cart. 9 Hen.

Without process. A declaration is said to be filed by the bye when it is filed against a party already in the custody of the court under process in another suit. This might have been done, formerly, where the party was under arrest and technically in the custody of the court; and even giving common bail was a sufficient custody in the King's Bench; 1 Sellon, Pr. 228; 1 Tidd. Pr. 419. It is no longer allowed; Archhold, New Pr. 293. & I. does not of itself import a delivery at that port; 7 II. & N. 574. C. 0. D. Collect on delivery. Where goods Shipped are thus marked, the carrier in addition to his ordinary liabilities, and responsibilities is to collect the amount specified by the consignor, and for failure to return to him, either the price or the goods, he has a right of action on the contract against the carrier. See United States Exp. Co. v. Reefer, 59 Ind. 264; State v. Intoxicating Liquors, 73 Me. 27S: American Merchants' Union Exp. Co. v. Schier, 55 111. 140; Collender v. Dinsmore, 55 N. Y. 206, 14 Am. Rep. 224. Those initials have acquired a fixed and determinate meaning, which courts and juries may recognize from their general information; State v. Intoxicating Liquors, 73 Me. 278. The weight of authority Is said by Wllliston (Sales § 279) to support the view that possession only is to be retained by the seller rier, which view he prefers, citing U. S. v. Exp. Co., 119 Fed. 240; Pilgreen v. State, 71 Ala. 36S; City of Carthage v. Munsell, 203 111. 474, 67 N. E. 831; State v. Intoxicating Liquors, 98 Me. 464, 57 Atl. 798; Higgins v. Murray, 73 N. Y. 252; Coleman v. Lytle, 49 Tex. Civ. App. 44, 107 S. W. 562. That property does not pass, see The Robert W. Parsons, 191 U. S. 41, 24 Sup. Ct. 8, 48 L. Ed. 43; State v. Exp. Co., 118 la. 447, 92 N. W. 66; State v. Wingfield, 115 Mo. 428, 22 S. W. 363, 37 Am. St. Rep. 406; State v. O'Neil, 58 Vt. 140, 2 Atl. 586, 56 Am. Rep. 557. To the same effect E. M. Brash Cigar Co. v. Wilson, 32 Okl. 153, 121 Pac. 223; Guarantee Title & Trust Co. v. Bank, 185 Fed. 373; 107 C. C. A. 429. See also Harlan, J., dissenting, in O'Neil v. Vermont, 144 U. S. 323, 12 Sup. Ct. 393, 36 L. Ed. 450. See cases collected in 4 Col. L. Rev. 541, by Prof. Gregory. See Sales; Delivery.

[Lat. obiter.] In practice. Incidentally. A term formerly applied in English practice to a peculiar mode of declaring, as distinguished from declaring in chief. A declaration in chief was at the suit of the same plaintiff for the principal cause of action, or that for which the writ was sued out; a declaration by the bye was at the suit of a different plaintiff, or of the same plaintiff for a different cause of action. 1 Tidd's Pr. 419. The practice of declaring by the bye is now abolished. Archb. New Pr. 293.