Tower v. Wilson , 3 Cai. Cas. 174 ( 1805 )

Per curiam.

Take the effect of your application. The trespass here was not voluntary in the defendant, for he is sued for an act of his deputy in taking wrong property on a fi. fa. when he knew nothing of it himself. To make the case of Stiles and Hathway a pply, the trespass must be voluntary in fact, and not merely by construction. In the present instance it is impossible to say the act was voluntary in the defendant.