The National Register. — London, England, 1823-01-19 00:00:00

Defendant's dark deposed to being predrill when the pi.•in .N traveller called, sod defendant ordered the cream of to tar, Mr. Percival mentioned the price. When the delenthiot d Gs. litd. Mr. Percival said he could cot accept of that _, but would write to his principals, who would write to defendant in the course a t om, whether thee would ',crept the not, It is only one day's post to Kidderminster. 1 his Ai the 13th of March, and on the 23d, defendant ordered another house at Gs. 31r. Percival might have a book in band, but witness did not see him write. Does not remelt:- no hotly was present but Mr. Lee and Mr. Percival. Solicitor General replied. The point reserved for the ; consideration tit' the Court was, this being a veio:d and . written contract, the statute of frauds requiring that con .acts to be binding should be in writing to bind the parties.-.. Supposing the testimony of both witnesses was unimpeachable, the question was, which of them was to be relied on as correct. Mr. Percival, the plaintiffs' traveller, was bound to be correct, and nut the defendant's clerk, who was then employed in keeping his accounts, end only an accidental witness to what passed. The accuracy of the testimony given by the two wit nesses prepotideiated in favour °rale plaintiff's traveller. The Lord Chief Justice observed, there was no doubt as to the cream of tarter, which the plaintiff received, and a .koow lodged the order by paying the money into Court ; the only question was as to the lac dye. It was material to consider what the order was, it not being a valid contract, nut being in writing. Yet the defendant's accepting the contract in pert took the case out of the Statute of Frauds.—His Lordship re commended in all commercial trausactions to observe the pro wiriest* of that wholesome statute; for if the contract in this case had boen in writing, and signed by the party giving the order, there would be an end of this dispute. Till, Jury found for the plaiutiff—Dainages 1581. sal costs. RHODE, ASSIGNEE, P. PROCTOR, ASSIGNEE. The Solicitor General stated that this was an issue from the Vice Chancellor's Court, to try whether certain bills of ex change, drawn upon leaks and Co. bankrupts, were well con stituted, and whether the plaintiffs were entitled to recover against the assignees. These bills, several in number, were for 1,0001.; 8201. ; end 7801. JONES V. HENDERSON. This was an action on a charter-party, under which the de fendant agreed to carry goods to the West Indies. It appeared that Jones, who was • ship-chandler at Lime house, rPilpped on board the defendant's brig Rase, a large quantity of dry-goods, consigned to so wet at Jamaica. liy the conditions of a charter party the defendant undertook to deliver the goods, and to convey the same with doe care and caution. The freight was regulated. The ship sailed in March, 1:t21, and met with bad weather before she fell in with the trade winds. On her arrival at Barbadoes it appeared that part of the goods stowed in the hold bad shifted, and some de stroyed by the working of the ship. The plaintiff's goods were greatly damaged,aad cam bale of soil-cloth entirely destroyed. Upon the delivery at Jamaica the loss was estienth--1 ~- - whit* sera the plaintiff new sought to recover. The question was, whether the loss was occasioned by bad package by the plaintiff, or bed stowage on the part of the de reuiem. It was oonleoded in support of the plaintiff's case, that there had been a breach of the conditions of the Charter Party, inasmuch as the defendant had not conveyed the goods to the port of destination with doe care. The package of the goods at the plaintiff 's warehouse was proved to be good. On the part of the defendant the damage way solely attributed to the perils of the sea, and the insecurity of the boxes ceotaining the goods. The Jury, under all the circumstances, found a verdict for the defeutlaat. THURSDAY, JAN. 16. CRAWSHAN AND taIIEMS V. BADES. Mr. Scarlett stated that this was an action of trorer brought by the plaintifs, who were considerable iron -masters, against the defendant, a carrier, to recover a quantity of iron, which it WWI alleged the defendant had converted to his own use. It was intended this iron should be sent to Birmingham, to be exchanged for a quantity of steel. The defendant having re ceived these goods to delayer to llornblower. of Birmingham, to whom they were directed, by the Paddington boat carrier, fading Hornblower'a premises under an extent of the Crown, would not deliver them to him, but detained the iron on 1100111111 i of a debt due to him by Horublower, and for a lien for carriage sow set op in defence to this action. Plaintiff's clerk preyed the delivery to the defendant. Mr. Horn'dower proved the consignment to him of the iron in question, which he did not receive. A letter, addressed to the defendant, was Imre put in, de niandiag the delivery of the iron—also defendaut's answer, claiming a lien. The value of the iron was estimated at 2001. 'Witness had no opportunity of staking the intended exchange far steel. Mr. Hunt, of Staffordshire, purchased the iron ,in question of the defendant. Mr. Marryatt, for the defendant, contended there was no difference between a delivery of goods on sale and a delivery on barter, as affecting the defendant's tight of lien and stoppage in transitu. Robert Howe was clerk to Ilornblower, and was present when ten lona of iron arrived on the Bth of February ; bcard some quantity was delivered at the wharf, but did not see it ; defendant was there, and was anxious to know whet lie should du, seeing Mr. Hornblower's premises in confusion ; witness said lie could nut act without Ilornblower's authority, but told him lie thought lie 1... d better hold the iron ; Mr. liornblower had quitted the 'troilism and was absent. The Lord Chief Justice.—The questionis.whether this was a good delivery, and whether the defendant bud a right to hold If here was an imperfect delivery, Ilia Lordship thought Horn blower's assignees had no right to recover. One of the Jury.—The assignees, my Lord, perhaps will re turn the money received from defendant. The Lord Chief Justice—l am of opinion the iron not having been weighed, and no receipt being given, that this wax no de livery, although landed ou the premises of llornblower the bankrupt. The Jury, under his Lordship's direction, accordingly found for time plaintiff—damages 2261. 6s.11(1. and costs.: PENDAIMS e. GEVSN. Dlr. Park opened the pleadings. Mr. Scarlett stated that the plaintiff went formerly by the Name of Steakhouse, entering into partnership with others in the North Cornwall Hank—each partner was to supply a certain quantity of stock. The plaintiff supplied his part, but the de 1, Want and other pertn trot failed to comply with a hood given fur that purpose; and upon which this action was brou,,ht to recover the penalty therein set forth of 12,1961. and advances ainennting to 5,1551. which were secured to the plaintiff by the bond in question. Mr. Thurston Collins, subscribing witness, proved defers• dent's everuthm of the bond. Tim Jury found s verdict for the phiutiff fur 1.21 H. p nereni tin'•, &al when Mr offered 6 price, In defendan order or wu on tl • ulothe kis band, ber ; no The Si future co not a writ tracts to I Suppinini •rHE NA (OVAL REGISTEIt MARTISEA AND CO. V. THOMAS AND &tenets) ADROIT& M. Scarlett stated that this war, an action against the wine , mer.liante its Skinner -street, Snowball, to recover the amount of two bills ofesebange. A letter of the defendants would be put in, apologizing for putting in a defence te this action, end requesting further time for payment: they were then in the '.11.W11 of bankruptcy, and the actluu iu the first instance, was on defended. The defendants-had since applied for a new trial, on the ground that they bed a good defence, for that the wines were of a bad quality. Messrs. Martinez were considerable importers of wine. This was a quaetity of wine for which the bills iu question were drawn. Plaintiff, however, determined to keep eight pipes in his hands until the first bill should be paid. When applied to, Messrs. Abbott requested, plaintiff would renew the first bill. They had sold part of the wine re ceived front the plaintiff, and offered to deliver it back. A clerk of the plaintiffs proved the hand writiug of drawers and acceptors. Another witness proved the band-writing of Mr. Thomas Abbott. Crime oxamined—Witness knows wellies of the transaction. The defence being that there was usury in retaining the wines in question until the bills became due, ai these wines were sold at 12 months' credit. The Lord Chief Justice was of opinion the defendants' pleas had failed as to usury. .Verdict for the p:aintiffs-1,031.11. PRINCE O. CLARKE. This was an fiction brought by the plaintiff, who is a slop seller, to recover 6891. the value of a quantity of cloth, sold by the defendant in India. It appeared that this cloth was placed in the hands of Captain Clarke, with directions to sell it in India, and apply the proceeds ye the purchase of oilier commodities specified in the instructions. In case he could not purchase the goods, he was to remit the proceeds in bills of exchange. The defendant, on his arrival is India. sold the cloth, hot did not boy any of the articles specified, because be found the plaintiff would lose 25 per cent. by the exchanga of the rupee. Neither did lie send bills of exohange ; but, acting as he thought fur the heat, purchased *tigers, which be shipped io a vessel homeward-hound, named the Fame. The defend ant had no authority to do that, but it did not appear that he acted with any improper view to benefit himself. His letter, ito which he noticed the shipment of the sugars, menliuned that on the purchase of the articles specifi d the exchange was as low, that lie had laid out the money mere to the advantage of the plaintiff. He sent this letter, dated January 17, and the plaintiff received it on the 29th of Mat. The ship, whio soiled from Calcutta with the sugars in February, was expect ed to arrive in July, but unfortunately she a as lost of the Cape. The question was, whether Mr. Prince, the plaintiff, having received the letter, stating the shipment of the sugars, and containing the bill of lading, was bound, as a man of business, to apply to the defendant's agent, a Mr. Lee, and either accept or reject the sugar. It was admitted that the defendant could not impose on the plaintiff an obligation to receive the etagere ; bet it was also contended, that he was bound to give notice to Mr. Lee, that he would not receive the cargo, in which case Mr. Lee would Lave known what to do with respect to the in surance. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant. FRIDAY, JAN. 17. TYLER V. JONES, CFSTLESIAN. The Solicitor General stated, that the plaintiff is a gentlemau advanced in life, who by this action ►ought to recover a com peneation iu deranges for the negligent and unskillful couduct of the defendant in his profession of attorney, in that of taking invalid and insufficient security in • Transaction of annuity. wherein be was employed and retahred on behalf of Mr. Tyler, the plaintiff. Mr. Scarlett, for defend at, proposed the matter in dispute should be referred to some gentlemea out ammo. This being assented to, the Jury found fur the plaintire- Damages 1,0001. sohject to a reference. ENTER, A►SIUNRE v. TODD. Mr. Merryatt stated, that this was an action of trover by the assignee of a person mimed Sorden, a bentropt, to recover the amount of 5001. in a bill of exchange drawn by the bankrupt, and accepted by a Mr. Stokes, of Hell. He should prove one act of bankruptcy within the knowledge of Todd, the defendant, antecedent to the date of this bill. It would likewise appear, that with knowledge of his insolvency, the defendant had canned the bankrupt to execute to him a warrant of attorney for the debt in question. Mr. Alexander Ludlow knew Mr. Benjamin Sharp Sorden ; witness was a small creditor, but has released Isis debt to the wieners. Sorden was a cornfactor and general merchant at Hull. On the 11th of July, 11321, he came to witness's offices: saw a person, likeaeountry servant, on a horse, which appeared to be hard ridden, stop at the office of 31r. Ssndon, an attorney, which he immediately communicated to Mr. Surdon. W iiness thought it remarkable to see a horse so hardly ridden, all over froth. Surdon observed it was Mr. Herding 's horse, and It:a man -servant, and he surmised that a writ had been conveyed by the party against him. He asked witness's leave to walk as far as his house to be out of the way. Tine was a mile and s quarter from the office. Witness thinks I.e went there with him. This might be front eleven to one in the smarming. He remained at the witness's house till past nine at ni;lit ; they dined together, and came to town in company in the evening; witness's house is not in the body of the town ; he went to a house in Trieity-liouselane, kept by a Miss Tickney, whose sister married the bankrupt's brother; doses not know what he went there for ; witness saw him at Mr. Todd's shop the nest morning ; Todd is a grocer, end at that time kept a Melt ; wit ness sew Stamp the bailiff, peas the shop ; lie mentioned it to Surdos, who immediately went to the hack pert of the house, to a hich witness Itch no access; witness went the next day to a meeting, held at Stamp the bailiff's bow ; Sorden was still in custody. - . Cross-esamined by Mr. Scarlett.—Witness is a tanner, but has acted a good deal as an agent : his been a bankrupt since 1821 ; has been in a good many sitnatioas, such as a gentle man's steward, a broker, or commercial agent. Hannah Adams I.ved servant with Sonlon, from May, 1818, to the time of his bankruptcy at Briglingtoa ; his sister kept his house ; witness was generally iu the kitchen ; it ►ecame neces sary to pass through his counting-house to the kitchen ; about July, 1821, he became embarrassed in his circumstances, and told witness he could not pay his creditors, sad desired witness to say, when they called, he was not within, because be said lie had no money to pay them ; witness's wages are still due, ten guineas. Mr. Scarlett—You hail better get the ten guineas before yoo give further evidence. You would like to base your wages before you say any more . . (The - guineas were bore accordingly paid in sovereigns to the witness, who counted and put them in her pockM. She pm erected with her evidence.] The persons who called were Christopher !Tartly, Mr. Alli son, and Mr. Harding. Remembers bankrupt's being are. bred on the Ilth or lath 1.1.1u1y ; the daeial lu medit..rs waa beture t:.is. Zito • 1p Cross-easinined by Mr. Scarlett—Witness can read a•d write; what suede her think he became embarrassed was, be had not money to psy his creditors. Is sure it was nut in Aogast ; it Man brfere he was arrested ; wan not elamitied before the commissioners ; on Tuesday morning was asked abut t! story she has told, not before. Mr. Wardle, at torney, served ber with the subponta ; did not tell her what was wanted. Witness's mistress had • letter the neat day, that her MR ter was arrested on a Friday. Witness now lives with his sister ; has lived in the family niue years; went is Sep ember, bat does Hut recollect the day. Re examined by Mr. Cemphell.—tier muter returned an the Sanday, and thinks be went away on the Tuesday ; the books were packed op and sent to his sister's ; the goods of the bankrupt were taken under Todd's eaecotion in the beginning of Angust ; she had denied I a month before this. The cterk to Stokes, of(lull, produced the bill. Mr. Scarle't submitted, lie should prove Sorden was in credit after this time; and bud bills diseonnted. If the Jury believed this young woman he would not contend further. Th. Lord Chief Justice concurred with the Jury that there was no reason to doubt her evidence. • Verdict fur the plaiutiff--Daitives 5001. end costs. BARRY e. PRATT. This was an action on two policies of insurance, on We ship William and .Nary, at and from Rio Janeiro, to Monte Video, Valparaiko, in the SonthiSesa, and thence to Europe. The ship sailed to Monte Video, and performed her voyage to Valparaiso, where she took in • cargo of copper. After she sailed with her ladinz, she encountered bail weather, and was euinpelled to return in a shattered state to Valparaiso. The Captain then had the ship repaired, and the owners sought now to recover a partial loss. *lt was contended oo the part of the Underwriters, that the ship was not sea-worthy. Der construction-was said to be too weak to carry a cargo of copper. Upon a survey, the keelson was found started, and other damage done, which was said to be occasioned by the pressure of the copper. The plaintiff met the Cale on the pan of the Underwriters, by proving that the ship's inability to return to England was the result of her bad state and condition when she sailed front Rio Janeiro. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.- Damages 4001. 4 SECONDARIES' OFFICE, COLEMAN STREET. VRIDAY, JAN. 17. CARL V. P'..WPIL AND WHITE, A Jury was summoned to acne MI damages in a case of assault and false imprisonment. Mr. Platt 'anted that the plaintiff was a naval officer, and that he had suffered the indignity of an arrant without cause, at the hands of White, a Sheriff - a officer. The other defend ant was High Sheriff of the county of Kent, and was included in the 'Mien on account of his respectability for the 'misdeal or White as an officer. Sarah Holt, teeniest to the plaintiff's mother, stated that the defendant White kuocked at the door of bar mistress's house. 'l4. one night in October, at Skater's-bill, and the plaintiff opened the kitchen window to me who was there ; White immediately seined him by the collar, mud said he knew him to be Mr. 10, 1 . i. • 4 0 B— the lawyer. Witness said he was Mr. Ear'. but AVliite dragged him over the table and out of the window, mid : 4t. refused to let him go round 1:9 the door; the dragging was not 14 •ialent. Sir. Earl was absent from the house about an hour ; Mr. 11— was in the house at the time. George Farthing, a waiter, Mated, that Earl's cottage to White, lie told White' Mr. B. hot afterwards told him it was I however, held Mr. Earl in custody upon a The Secondary charged the Jury, that the no dawage, and that their verdict mast ' fact. Dunne' M. FATAL A cci DINT.—Ott Moods,/ th.._ the coach that runs from Bath in the Bolt-in Street, Lonthot, was proceeding at its the declivity just beyond Itatheaston li contact with the wheel of a cart, in consiltience carter drawing the horse across she road. the vehicle against the fore-whet : of titer the po'e was broken, and the coarhinal between the horses, when the wheel v which, however, was not broken. outside passengers, one nn the box, the root; the former became alarms situation, and instatitly attempted to lea' but was dissuaded by his companion, the coat for some time, till at length . down, and was tinfortim oely killed on dislocated his neck I l'he coach went turnpike (within %00 yards), when she said the remainder of she passengers carat jury—th• y compri,ed four insides, wi passengers above alluded so. The non notate deceased was Mr. Webb, a sack. at Abingdon, in 13?rkshire. DEATH Or FOUR PRRiltowS oy Po maoriiiint of Tuesday, she 7111 awl. oboist the tteighbou:hoost of St. (ieorge's &bid, was alarmed by she cries of •• murder" I ae in Pilling s-buildings, close to stage-coach proprietor) stables; on the others approaching the house, they were • iiiii Mier of i reriosis had been pm iiiii cd tering they found two persons dead, r struggling ass the agonies of death. M. was procured as soots as possible, but ing tniffersrs died in a short time—the it is exit( met', will recover, though th. very Isogon:thing state, front the effects the inmates of the house were a mat th..ir iota ; with a young mats sisal three The pois in is supposed to have been water used for colmary porpows, as all the water experienced' its effects. Our well (3 !tmtit.), and she as now in custody of administered the deadly t:ose. MIDOLtarIEZ Hot's& or CoRRECTIOI rt eLDS.—().I Toursday lag ass aoitasarittal assasistrates of Middle's% was held at the Cleo kenwell, lair the porittise of pr,ocreili Of J G. aerator of H, !ion, in the room of the late Mr. Adkit ink sap the votes, the ittonhers wee Mr. Froisharil 22, roe: Field E 2, Mr. . Mr. Vickery was, of course, declared duly ANIL M s+~r the dragging was not 't '" - ouse about an hour ; that be *hewed Mrs. e that the plaintiftwas s a mistake. White. a writ. the pleintillt sustained be decided by that lemon y worninst last. as s Bolt-in Tun, Fleet is usual pace clown House, it came in consilitence of the road, and backing le coach, by which • matt thrown down went over his leg, 4 There weir two , and the other on ied at his perilous leap front his seat ; who held hint by • he fell or junired • 111 tile spot. hawing tit nil to the Mai ihe horses stopped, • sashed without in. 4 With the outside ante of the enrol. ack-tnanufacturer, loisore.-04 the root three o'clock. opt, Manchester. nr" hinting fr ttttt a Mr Lacy's (the to watchmen and • .ere informed that • led ; and, on en. , and Into others Medical assistance I ffr two of the linger. Ie restiainitei two, ihey are now in a it of the poison . in, his wife, and c women lodgers I mixed with the • • 1 WlllO p monk of 4,1 e lodger only Wall tody on staple ON. COLDSATII ti meeting of th : it Sessions-hot.se ! t hing (.11 the the- House rf Correc- iits, and nit east. -Mr. V eLry r. Van.ell I duly el.ct d. ;.• •