(iii) Vol. IV of a supplement, published in 1843, purporting to include cases between MICHAELMAS TERM, 1824, and MICHAELMAS TERM, 1840, is the first abridgment that treats negligence as an isolated subject. [This does not mean dealing with negligence as an independent tort].{MICHAELMAS TERM: September-December; Hilary: January-March; Trinity: April-June}. That if you look at law reports between 1824-1840 you will find declarations in the action alleging that the Defendant: "So negligently, carelessly, unskilfully, and improperly did something or the other that harm ensued to the Plaintiff". "Negligently" is frequently used. That is judges between 1824-1840 had a sub-conscious appreciation of negligence as an independent tort. Before the rise of Negligence as an independent tort, trespass covered a good many cases which would now go under the tort of Negligence. No one can point
109 exactly at a time when Negligence as an independent tort was born. WINFIELD has argued that the year 1837 was a turning point: VOUGHAN V. MENLOVE, 3 Bing. (N.C.) 468 (1837) Was an action upon case. Defendant had been warned that his haystack was likely to overheat and to take fire, which might spread to the land of his neighbours. He said he would chance it, and he was held liable when spontaneous ignition of the Defendant's carelessly constructed haystack caused a fire which burned his neighbour's house. It was argued, inter alia , that the case was prima impressionis
