The Sun. — London, England, 1822-03-20 00:00:00

\\*Avo cy s U il 0 Ain,/ N . , /- / 'j NUMBER 9225.] WEDNESDAY, MARCH 20, 1822. ALBION FIRE AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, IMPROVEMENTS IN SAIL-CLOTH. LAW INTELLIGENCE. NEW BRIDGE-STREET, BLACKFRIARS, EMPOWERED BY ACT OF PARLIAMENT. CAPITAL—ONE MILLION. INSURANCES falling due at LADY DAY will expire, unless renewed within Fifteen Days Iron that period. The Company's Rates and Conditions are of the most rea sonable description :—no Charge is made for Fire Policies, when the Premium exceeds ss.:—no Admission Fine is charged on Life Insurance:—a liberal commission is allowed I n Solicitors, and others, who effect Life . Insurances ;—and every facility is afforded by which the interest and conve nience of the Public may be promoted. • WARNER PHIPPS, Secretary. THE PROPRIETORS of the ANTI MILDEW PROCESS have to announce the follow ing additional Testimonial : COURT OF CHANCERY, MARCH 19. As the LORD CHANCELLOR was retiring from the Bench, Mr. SHADWELL asked permission to make his motion in the case of " Hawes v. Sams," respecting the publication of the song " We're a' noddin," before his Honour the Vice-Chan cellor, on Thursday next ; which his Lordship granted.— Thursday will be the next seal. Messrs. BaowELL and Co. Feb. 14, 1824. I hare the satisfaction to inform you I have had a fore-top mast's stay-sail made of unbleached canvas, prepared by you, on board the Latona, from London to Shields, during the last four mouths, in which I experienced very heavy gales of wind, the sail being wet and dry, and often confined in the Bet, and has no appearance of Mildew. JAMES PATERSON. --.SIO-.. , HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, 31Ancif 19. JULIANA (OGILVIE, MASTER).-SEAMEN'S WAGES. This was a case of considerable importance, which bad been very ably argued on a former day by Dr. Lushington, on be half of William Lattimore, a seaman, claiming wages for his service on board the above ship ; and by . Dr. Jenner, on behalf of Messrs. Palmer, Wilson, and Co., the principal owners of the vessel. This is to certify, that the above sail was made by us of Browell and Co.'s prepared canvas, and that we have this day examined it, and it has no appearance of Mildew. WALKER and HENWOOD, Feb. 14,1822. Sail-Makers, Limehouse Hole. THREE of £20,000 ! AND ONLY TWO DAYS TO DRAW. jr and J. SIVEWRIGHT inform the Pub • lic that, with only Two Days to Draw, the Wheel 'contains 3 2,000 1 4 The Process is equally applicable to the whitest and dearest as well as to the brownest and cheapest Canvas. It does not in the least diminish the strength, but improves the colour i and softness of texture in all. It is effected n a few days, for Five Shillings per Bolt, and is returned, when sent to them, to all parts of the town without expense, the same breadth and length as when received. A red Crown and 13, or the words " Anti-Mildew," are marked in various places to spew that the Bolt has undergone Browell and Co.'s Process.— Sail-Cloth of various qualities, which have undergone the Process, may be had at the - following houses, viz. Messrs. Chalmers and Guthrie, 9, Idol-lane; George Brown, 53, Broad-street, Ratcliff; Peter Walker and Co. 310, and J. Hewens, 276, Wapping; and Walker and Heuwood, Lime house Hole. A summary petition, claiming wages, had been given in, on, the part of the seaman, and an allegation responsive thereto, on the part of the owners ; and the argument took place on the objections to the admissibility of the owners' allegation. The COURT (LorcISTowELL) having taken time to de liberate, now delivered its judgment to .the following effect :—‘ This is a suit commenced by,a mariner for wages, acquired on a very long and divided voyaipe, the particulars of which are set forth in a summary petition. It is alleged that this sea man Williain Lattimore, was hired in the month of August, 1820 , to proceed, at certain wages therein specified, on board the Juliana, from Portsmouth, designed on a voyage to New South Wales, Batavia, Bengal, and back to the port of Lon don. She accordingly sailed with a cargo of convicts to the River Derwent in New South Wales, arrived and landed them there, took on board live stock and salt provisions, and sailed to Port Jackson, where she delivered that cargo ; and then sailed in ballast to Batavia, thence took a cargo of poultry, which she partly delivered at Minto ; thence proceed ed to Sincampour, where she delivered the rest of her cargo, and took. in sugar for England, and various goods for Calcutta ; at which place she discharged the latter goods, and took in other articles for England : that in the month of December last, she arrived in the Downs, where having struck on, the Kentish Knock, she was wrecked, and every'soul on board perished, ex cept Lattimore and one other mariner, who Were picked up by a fishing boat. And it is alleged that, during the whole of these voyages, this seaman well and truly performed his duty. These circumstances are not denied on the part of the owners ; but it is pleaded in thezfirst article of their allegation, that all the mariners; previously to the ship's setting sail from England, signed articles, m which it was, among other things, stipulated, that no sea man belonging to the said vessel should demand, or be entitl. ed to his wages, or any part thereof, until the arrival of the ship at the above-mentioned port of discharge, (namely—London), and her cargo delivered. It is, however, admitted by the own ers, on their personal answers to the summary petition, that they had received nearly 3,0001. freight for the early parts of the voyage, and possibly more, as the accounts from India had not yet been transmitted. It is clear, also, that they might have received money from the insurers of freight, unless they had thought fit to stand their own insurers, as being more beneficial to themselves. 3 4tsides the full proportion of minor Prizes of £lOO, £50 4 &c. making 1 LESS than TWO BLANKS to a PRIZE. THURSDAY, 28111 MARCH, is the Next Day of Drawing, when .the,very First Prize will l'eceive ) 4'20,000 more; and the Ninth-drawn Prize above "R 2 OO will likewise have £20,000 in.addition. TICKETS and SHARES are Selling at. J. and J. SIVE wRIGHTS' truly Fortunate Offices, 37, Cornbill ; I ' 38, Haymarket, I 1, Holborn ; Corner of Coventry-street ; Where they Sold the Last Day of the Last Lottery, and in their Last Contract, 4,421 • Prize of ',Z25,000 18,051 5,000 And a great many smaller Capitals. This, then, is a divided voyage, in which the cargoes were delivered at different ports, and, consequently, by the General Law Maritime, freights were earned at these ports respectively. By the same general law wages were due to the seamen at the ports of unlivery. What the contract was between the owners of the ship and the freighters does not appeai in the present case ; no such contract is exhibited, nor is it described; and it consequently does not ;appear whether the freight was suspended on the same terms as the wages or not. It is not material to in quire into this point, because no agreement of the owners, how ever qualified with the freighters, would bind the mariners to forego any benefit that belonged to them. If the owners have -foregone any such benefit for themselves, they are undoubtedly wise enough in their generation to indemnify themselves for any surrender of that kind by Other terms of the contract ; by the enhancement of freight, or by such other means as would re; store the just equilibrium of the contract. The common mariner lies no such resources, in his own intelligence and experience in ' habits of business, that can enable him to take accurate mea sures of postponed payments, with proper estimates of profit and loss. lie is generally mops consilii, illiterate and unthink ing ; and on every account placed under the tender protec tion of the law against his own ignorance and imprudence. I observe that many - signers to these articles are marksmen. Whether the present suitor was a person that could read or write does not appear ; for the duplicate which he executed was lost with the vessel. The probability is, that non legit ut clerieUs. Upon all principle, therefore, the agreements of such persons, so differently qualified, are not to be scanned exactly by the same measure. _ Another more important distinction between the owners and mariners is this, that whatever bargain the owners may make with the freighters, they can insure their f re i g ht against all misadventures ; it is not so by the law of France, which pro. hibits insurance of freights. By the law of England, an in surance on the freight is as little affected by the total loss of the ship, as the insurance on the ship herself. But the mari ner is not permitted to insure his wages, by the policy of our law, in order that he may be stimulated to all possible exertion for the preservation of the ship on which alone all his own in terests are made to depend. The result is, that th e mar i ner 'embarks upon termsof great comparative disadvantage. The owner contracts; with a certainty of receiving his freight at all hazards ; if not from the hand of his freighter, from that of his insurer:--and it is indifferent to him f r om whi c h. But the ma riner goes to sea upon a single security, that of the freight ; his labours and his perils have nothing else to trust tofor their compensation. Freight is the mother, and the only mother of wages; and if that is lost, every thing is lost; he has not a stepfather; if I may so say, in the character of an insurer, to .supply the loss. The policy of the general law has been anxious to uphold the title of the mariner to his lien upon the freight : whenever earned, that title of his becomes vested, though the tune of payment may, from causes of necessity or conv e n ience , b e postponed. Where voyages are divided by wasous ports of delivery, the claim attaches at such ports ; and the courts of maritime jurisdiction have upheld their title against all at. tempts to invade or evade it. These attempts have usually appeared in the form of renunciations of this right; obtained from the mariners without any consideration advanced to them for such surrender. I am not aware that the Maritime Courts have ever given way to any such contrivances in any form, to deprive the mariner of that right which the general policy of the law had conferred upon him. They have considered such renunciations as unreasonable and unjust, and therefore not entitled to be upheld by the authority of the law. It is hardly necessary for me to quote cases in support of the position, that the Admiralty Court does not uphold them. It is expressly stated by Mr. Holt, in his valuable work, as a point on which the Courts of Admiralty and Common Law are divided. I cannot say that 1 have been able to find the authos rity for this assertion. All Courts seem to me to uphold the right to rages as a general rule ; I shall therefore content myself with referring to the reported case of Buck v. Raw linson, and the rather, because that case underwent the highest, consideration, and the report of it seems to have been subject to some misapprehension. It is to be found in Brown's Reports of Cases in Parliament, vol. i. p. 137. A ship, called the Royal James and Mary, was chartered by the East India Company for a voyage to the East Indies and back ; and it was agreed that the Company were not to pay the owners any freight until the return and de livery of the cargo in the port of London, except the imprest money, which was two thousand pounds. The Captain hired the seamen, and, by direction of the owners, took bonds from those seamen not to demand any wages more than the imprest money until the ship's arrival in London. The ship proceeded to, and delivered part of her cargo at Fort St. George ; she sailed with the residue for Bengal, but was lost going up that river. On the Captain's return to England, a suit was commenced against him in the Admiralty Court by the seamen, for their wages on the outward voyage ; and the owners having refused to defend him against this suit, he ex. hibited his bill in'Chancery against them and the seamen for an injunction and relief. An' injunction was at first granted, but it was afterwards dissolved by Lord Chancellor SOMERS, his Lordship declaring, thA he could not stop the seamen's pro ceeding for their wages ; and that if they recovered against the plaintiff, he had his remedy against his owners. Whatever Lord SOMERS , therefore, did, in granting the injunction, was undone by the dissolution ; and I (=not but regard this as a strong intimation of his Lordship's (pinion that the demand of the seamen had a sound foundation. It was a very strong opi. nion given obiter, and as such only 1 cite it. To proce e d with the Report :—The suit in the Adrriralty Court went on ; the Captain made the best defence he mild against it, and particu larly insisted on, and gave in evidence, the bonds which the seamen had entered into, not to demand any further wages un-; til the ship's return to the port of London. But that Court de clared these bonds to be unjust, and, void in law; and thaefore gave sentence against the Captain for 6951. as the amount of the seamen's wages on the outward voyage, which sum he was accordingly obliged to pay. The cause in Chancery was afterwards heard before the Lord Keeper Wright, who dis missed the Bill ; but, upon appeal to the House of Lords, it was adjudged that the dismission: should be reversed.— The House of Lords, therefore, held, that the Captain was entitled to recover for what he had paid the seamen ; and that, -I think, was a strong declaration in favour of the seamen's right. The House of Lords, by shstaining the demand of the Captain, must have considered that it was not a rash and improvident payment on his part, but one to which the seamen were entitled, notwithstanding the bonds they had executed. The decree of the Lords, indeed, -goes on to say, that the parties should be at liberty to bring their app ea l f rom the Court of Admiralty to a Court of Delegates ; but do they express any disapprobation of the judgment of the Court of Admiralty ? No such thing. They merely say—we leave you to your legal remedy; try that, if you are dissatisfied. Then, was any such appeal resorted to ? I have caused the registers of the Court to be examined, and I find no trace of such ap. peal, so that the sentence of the Admiralty stands unreversed and unrepealed ; and I take this to be not a solitary, decision, but the standing and uniform law of the Admiialty. If the bonds in question were then unjust and void in law, they would be so in _every subsequent case similarly circumstanced ; and flie decision in that instance would be an authority bind ing in every succeeding case in that Court. Nothing, then, is dearer, than that this is the law of the Admiralty ; it is s o stated by Mr. Holt, and I think I shall presently be able to demonstrate that it is the rule of the Courts of Common Law. It is no small confirmation of the reasonable nature of the doctrine maintained in the Court of Admiralty, that the Courts of Scotland, which proceed upon equitable principles, as the English Court of Admiralty does, agree in the same doctrine. I find it expressly laid down as the law of Scotland, in a valua ble work published by Mr. Bell, a gentleman lately and very deservedly advanced to the Professorship of the Law in Edin burgh : he considers that such stipulations as those above re. ferred to, are not sufficient to oust seamen of their wages : that they operate to produce only a suspension of the demand, and not an extinction of the right, as in the case of Morrison v. Ha milton. Mr. Bell, indeed, in a note on the English cases, inti mates a doubt, whether the stipulation, if clearly expressed, might not be held valid. But what said the Court of Session in the cause of Glascock : " That the practice of inserting such stipulations was one that was to be highly disapproved, as fraught with inhumanity and injustice." If so, I should r a th er think that the more dearly such an intention was expressed, the more strongly it should be reprobated. I come now to consider what has been done by the English Courts of Common Law. In 2 Vernon, 728, is to be found - the case of Edwards and. Wife v. the East India Company, which was as follows :—.the ship Success was chartered by the East India Company for a voyage out and home • the freight not to be paid until the return to the port of London ; and Captain Jenefer, the Commander, when he hired the seamen, took bonds from than not to demand any wages if the ship was lost before her return. She sailed to Bengal, delivered her cargo, and was taken by the French on the return voyage. The Captain was sued by the mariners for the wages that became due at Bengal, the first delivering port; and although the bonds were given in evidence, yet the mariners recovered their wages in an action tried before that great master of law, Lord Chief Justice Holt. There can be no doubt of the reality of this case, for it gave occasion to the subsequent proceedings in the Court of Chancery, in which a Bill was brought by the plaintiffs (Ed wards, the wife, being the executrix of Capt. Jenefer), to re cover the wages he had thus been forced to pay to the mariners. Upon producing of precedents, viz. the case of Edwin and Staf ford v. the East India Company, and the case of Buck v. Sir Thomas Rawlinson, affirmed upon an appeal in the House of Peers, the Lord Chancellor decreed reimbursement of what the Captain had paid the seamen, with interest and costs—a judg , ment conveying a pretty strong opinion that the money had been properly paid in the first instance, notwithstanding the bends. Thus stands this matter, on the La* of the Admiralty, on the law of Scotland, 'on the clearly intimated opinion of the great Lord Chancellor Somers, on the decision of Lord Chief Justice Holt, and on the fair inference to be drawn from the judgment of the House of Lords. Upon all these authorities it is clearly established, that any attempt to extinguish the right of the mariner by an agreement delvers, the usual ship's articles has never received countenance from the Courts. Such attempts had failed in the different Courts, and it is perfectly clear that they had been considered so to have failed; otherwise a different mode of attaining the same object would not have been resorted to. Mr. Holt, however, admits, that a stipula tion to the same effect as the bonds was introduced into the mariners' contract itself. By this mode of shaping the matter, the advisers of the owners probably expected to escape from the difficulty ; and it appears, by reference to an early and valuable work of my most highly venerated friend, Lord Chief Justice Abbott, that they so far succeeded, as that no instance had oc curred, prior to that publication, of a claim made by the seamen against the terms of this clause in the articles. His Lordship expresses his surprise that the Court of Admiralty could hold the bonds to be void, unless they were deemed to have been obtained by oppression or fraud. They certainly were so deemed, for the Court of Admiralty had declared them to be unjust and void, which is only another mode of expressing the same thing. I understand that since the publication of my Learned Friend's work, no suit of the kind has been brought at common law, except the one quoted in argument, the effect of which I have now to consider. It is that of Appleby v. Dods, reported in 8 East, 380. This was a case at Guildhall, in which Lord Ellenhorough held, that though the ship earned freight upon the delivery of an outward-bound cargo at Madeira, and of ano ther cargo taken in at Madeira, and delivered in the West Indies, yet, that being lost in her passage home by a storm, the seamen, who had subscribed such a stipulation as the one in question, could not recover wages pro rata upon the outward voyage. It came on afterwards before the same Noble Judge and Mr. Justice Lawrence, on a motion to set aside the non-suit, when Lord Ellennorough expressed-himself thus —" Though the reason of this stipulation was, no doubt, to oblige the mariners to return home with the ship, and not to desert her in the West Indies, yet the terms of it are general, and include the present case ; and we cannot say, against the express contract of the parties, that the seamen shall recover pro rata, although the ship never did reach her port of discharge named ;" and his Lordship further observed on the anxious policy of the Legislature, as expressed in the Statute 37 Geo. 111. c. 73, to enforce the return home of seamen in their ships from the West Indies; he therefore supported the stipulation, not upon itself, but upon the policy of that Statute which he thought himself entitled to call in aid to the interpretation of it. I must observe, however, that the Statute was a West India one, and you cannot associate the policy of that West India Act with this East India voyage; it does not bear upon it in the remotest manner—not in its preamble, not in its provisions. It is a West India mischief, to be provided against by West India provisions ; Mit in every view it is as totally inapplicable to this East India transaction as the Bill of Rights. Mr. Justice Lawrence observes, that Lord Holt's case was rightly decided on the general principles of law ; and that the Court of Chancery, in its proceedings afterwards, in favour of the Captain, might have considered that the bargain was unreasonable. Nothing can be more correct than this conjecture.' On what other ground could that Court have decided in favour of the Cap tain, against the East India Company ? If the bargain with the seamen were a proper bargain, he was not justified in pay ing them, nor entitled to recover against his owners ; but if the bargains were, what the Admiralty considers them, unjust, unreasonable, and void, he was entitled to reimbursement of what he had justly paid. Far be from me the presumption of impugning a judgment proceeding from persons of such splendid talents and characters. I knew them too well, and venerate them too much. All I say is, that the judgment does not at all approach the present case ; it stands, if I may so say, at the distance of half the globe from it. The case before me comes as a perfectly new one, upon the effect of such a stipulation contained in the articles themselves, and not in a collateral obligation. It is a question (as far as I know, untouched by any Court) upon a speculation, certainly intended by those who advised it and those who adopted it, to extinguish the indubitable right of the mariner under the gene nil law, without any consideration whatever. It is a stipula tion in disherison of the whole body of mariners of this country, and this Court of Admiralty is now called upon, for the first time, to sanction that effect. In considering that question I am to recollect the authorities under which it has been held that such a covenant, expressed in a collateral obligation, is unreasonable and unjust ; and in that form has been ever frowned upon by the law. Does it become more reasonable and more just by being incorporated in the A NEW HUSH PAPER; INTITULED Tur CONSTITUTIONALIST, OR, CORK MORN- ING POST." TO THE PUBLIC. AT the urgent requisition of numerous and zealous Friends, and also, in deference to the strong s ense of the necessity for such an undertaking which exists, 40 WARDS and SAVAGE have adopted the resolution of en gaging in the establishment of a Pursue JOURNAL, and have advanced a considerable way in the most extensive arrange- Inents for the handsome and effective execution of this design. The Journal, which they hope in a short time to present to the Public favour, will be established upon one simple founda tion, equally dear and interesting, and that IS—THE MAIN. TAINING OF THE GENUINE AND VITAL PRINCIPLES OF OUR GLORIOUS CONSTITUTION,. AS ESTABLISHED IN CHURCH AND STATE. This brief exposition of the /mother principle upon which their undertaking rests, the Pro prietors humbly conceive is sufficient to recommend it to every real Friend to true Civil Liberty. For no thinking man can Mistake the character of the present times—can view with db.- . regard the drift of those desperate theories which are pressing With the full force of their hostility and power against those Institutions which should be held by the British race amongst things the most sacred ; because, it is within those Institutions that the spirit of British Freedom is enshrined and preserved, --and because, it is owing to those, and to the immeasurable energies of which they form the salient spring of supply, that we are indebted for the immortal triumph obtained over that tawdry despotism, which was the offspring of the French Revo lution ; and to the same source also is Europe indebted for its redemption from an afflicting and a grinding military vassal. age. By means of those Institutions, as the fountain-head of our national power—just such as they have been handed down to the living generations, UNCHANGED by metaphysical ex periment, and UNSACRIFICED to abstract projects about go vernment—the noblest and the grandest ends have been ob tan-led : die Confederation of a hostile world has been defeated and crumbled at one time,--at another, the languishing Na tions of Europe have been refreshed, their fears converted to courage, and their despair to hope ; and, during the mighty conte s t, in which the powers of the British Empire were un veiled In such awful virtue and splendour, the enslaved mind every where was taught to pant for disenthralment,—and to all Nations, Communities and Sects, something of a generous desire was imparted for that Liberty which for so long a time has been the happy enjoyment of the genuine Sons of the English Constitution ! lor obligations of such paramount value, and for results so splendid and illustrious, much is due to the jealous anxiety with Which the principles of our Constitution have been guarded by the manly reason and spirit of the Empire—much to the reverential zeal with which our Civil and Religious Institutions have been Protected against the inroads of spurious and profligate theories, arid of those blasphemous experiments that have covered with clinic's so many other Nations and States ; and a vast portion to those able and honest men who presided over the destinies of the Empire. The spirit which served to resist those awful en. croachments upon the national welfare is the offspring of that sober thought that still directs and influences the course of ilritish Public Opinion, even when its counsels are unheard and its operations unseen amid the occasional uproar created 1 1 popular infatuation. To act auxiliary to this spirit—to sup- Port it, and to nourish it by all the means which truth and reason abundantly supply, is at least a generous and an ho nourable task; and it is one, which the loyal and enlightened of every description, it is to be hoped, will not grow weary of Cheering in the execution. To them the ietors of TBE CONSTITUTIONALIST; or, CORK MORNING POST, look with honest confidence, in the attempt which they are com rnencing• The Proprietors intentionally avoid resorting to those prefa tory recommendations which generally usher in the publication of new Journals--the Public have long had an opportunity of determining concerning their characters, and to this they ap- Peal.—They trust it will entitle them to public confidence when they affirm, that the CONSTITUTIONALIST, or, CORK MORNING POST, will be published with sound and honest Pretensions to the public favour—that no expense or trouble shall be wanting to render it a handsome example of typogral Phical industry—that they have formed the most efficient con nexions for procuring the EARLIEST and the most AUTHEN. TIC intelligence—that they have engaged able and experienced literary support—that the most rigid impartiality shall be ad hered to, in the reporting of the Debates in Parliament—in re eurding the public occurrences, and all other matters and cir cumstances, whether political or otherwise. To those essen tiol, elementary duties, in the conducting of a Public Journal, the Proprietors pledge themselves to add a continued, anxious, „nd diligent attention to the Commercial, Agricultural, and 4 anufacturing interests of their Country—an industrious re gard to all Judiciary and Magisterial proceedings in this City, and to all other matters of what may be deemed local inte rest. It is in truth the earnest purpose of the Proprietors of the CONSTITUTIONALIST, to deserve the favour and c °ofidence which have invited and encouraged them to the Pe "odical Press ; and it will constitute their most ambitious re- Vital, if the Patrons who have called them to their new post snail be satisfied. To the busy orders of life, and to advertising friends of all d escriptions, the CONSTITPTIONALIST will hold out !!lore inducements than can be specified in this place, as from t he encouragement already received, and the extensive circu it?_tion which the Proprietors anticipate upon the surest grounds, ne greatest : publicity will be afforded to WANTS and DE ,3IREs, not only in thiaProvince and-Ireland in general, but in the Sister Kingdom. The Proprietors hope their Journal will afford some excite ment to that mass of talent which they are convinced slumbers In comparative rest in this City and County, and they trust they s nail succeed in inviting some share of its exertions to the Space which shall be always reserved for Literary contributors. It inay nt be oueof place Mails to remark, that the present mode L'f dispatch o ing his Majefor the South of Ireland, has disposed the Proprietors to select a Morning instead of an Evening Publication ; as by that plan, though at no small in crease to their labours, they will be enabled to give both their . own and Country Subscribers the most recent intelligence, at the usual charge for Newspapers in this City. In soliciting from the Public a g enerous s h are o f t h e i r pa tronage, E. and S. have again to add that their warmest en deavours shall be used in inculcating LOYALTY TO THE SO- E REIGIN—SUBJE CTION TO THE LAWS, AND VENERA TION FOR THAT GOVERNMENT UNDER WHICH WE HAVE THE HAPPINESS TO LIVE A FREE AND INDE r PENDENT PEOPLE. Castle -street, Cork, March, 1822. To 'l'. TAYLOR, Esq. No. 9, New Bridge-street, London. HONOURED SIR, • IBEG leave to inform you, that ever since the year 1790, I had been afflicted with the Lues Venereal, which, from its obstinately resisting every course of medicine prescribed by the most eminent of the faculty here, and un dergoing severalsevere courses of salivation, and twice dis charged frOm the Hospital with little relief, would appear to be of the mast inveterate nature. In the spring of last year my disorder bad got to such a head, as nearly toput a period to my existence—l had a large ulcer on the crown of my head, one on each arm, and my legs were broke out in a frightful manner; my right was dreadfully Painful, and had been in a state of ulceration for the last seven years; my left had also two large nodes on it, was very much discoloured, and .gave me such excruciating pain, particularly when warm in bed, as nearly to deprive me of rest; is this lamentable state,• I was recommended by Mr. J. Thompson, - (who received so great a cure by them here), to take your Leake's Patent Pills, -which I began to do on the 26th o. May ;. in the course of a fortnight I began to receive benefit—in little more than a month the ulcers on my beadand arms were soundly_bealed—' soon after, the sows on my legs healed also ; leaving, how ever, considerablediscolouration in the skin, and pain in the bone of the left, which, .by the blessing of God; and a little longer perseverance in your invaluable Medicine, -subsided; the nodes dispersing, the skin regaining its natural hue, and the nocturnal pains gradually going otr.--4 thus became, by your liberal advice and medicine, perfectl7 free front all niy former complaints—have recovered my former spirits a nd strength, and am become jolly and fat, in which state having continued many months, to the astonishment of all who knew me, I am at a loss in what terms to exi,resS my gratit tide, but beg you, for the good of other suffering mortals, to make this my case as public as possible, as I shall on every occa, sion ; in so doing you will greatly oblige, Sir, your grateful, obedient, very hurnbl e servan t. ALEX. NI LAMER Swan's Close, High-street, Edinburgh. Witnesses to the above Cure:— John Thompson, N 0.43, New Poultry Mar Let, Edinburgh, - John M'lntosh, Old Assembly (lose, Edinburgh. Prepared and sold by the sole Proprietor, TIIONIAS TAY LOR., Member of the Royal College of Surgeons, at his house, No. 9, New Bridge-Street, London; ,wlicte, after a constant residence of more than 40 years, in a practice parti cularly directed to the cure of Venereal Complaints and those incidental to the Parts of Generation, with t hat inviolable secrecy,whieh men of his profession should alwaA oh serve in such cases, he flatters himself the advice and assistance he gratuitously administers to persons taking this Medicine, will be esteemed, by a discerning Public, as an advat.tage seldom attainable, and void of all ambignity. Also sold, by his appointment, tor the convenience of those living at a distanCe, at the Toyshop, No. 103, Oxford -street; Kr. Dishorough's, Nu. 7, Fish-street-hill; Mr. Baxter, South-bridge, Edinburgh ; Mt. t,allwel .'s, tlo blin ; and of one person in every considerable town in Great Britain and Ireland, in boxes alonly 2s. 9d. each, stamped, and sealed up with full and plain directions, •vhereby persons, of either sex mayeure themselves with ease, speed, secrecy, and safety, IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OP LORDS, TUESDAY, 31.mcn 19 The House met at half-past three o'clock. The second reading of Sir John M. Doyle's Divorce Bill was postponed till Thursday. The Land Tax Commissioners Names Bill, the Bradford and Wakefield Gas Light Bills, were brought, up from the House of Commons by Mr. Broaden and other Members, and read a first time. With reference to the first-mentioned Bill, the Earl of Shaftesbury gave notice to move the Suspension of the Standing Orders to-morrow that it might pass through all its stages. On the motion of Lord KING, with reference to his motion respecting the Civil List, an Ad dress to the King was ordered, praying for an Account of the Names of Ambassadors, Ministers, and Envoys, in 1791, with their Salaries, Ap pointments, &c., and a similar Account to the present time ; also, on his Lordship's motion, Accounts were ordered of the benefit derived to the public from the execution of the provision 3 of the 'Act of the 57th Geo. 111. (for the Aboli tion of Sinecures after the termination of existing ititerests), and of the Pensions granted under the Act of the same year, for granting Pensions on the retirement of persons holding certain high offices. On the motion of the Earl of LAUDERDALE, Accounts were ordered of the Amount of Unre deemed Five per Cent. Stock on the lgt of Fe bruary, 1822, the Amount of new Four per Cent. Stock created under. the Act of the present Ses sion, the Amount of Unredeemed Four per Cent. and Three per Cent. ,Stock on the Ist of Fe bruary, 1822, the Money Value of Stock at dif ferent -dates, &c. On the motion of Lord KENYON, an account was ordered, as was understood, respecting the collection of money on Church Briefs. The Aliens and Denizens' Bill, the Indemnity Bill, the Mutiny Bill, and the Royal Marine Mutiny Bill, passed through Committees, and were reported without Amendment.--Adjourned a few minutes after five till to-morrow (this day). HpUSE OF COMMONS. At four o'clock, there being only 26 Members present, an adjournment necessarily took place. Ss 01 46 41 4 101; 3s od 9s 6d os od 6s Ad Os od lls 04 Ios.od () 2s 4d 10s Od Os Od to od :o °sod , , 84s „ 94s „ 98$ „ 145 lIA t,i.• is Od. h 16. 2s 91,1 41s 0d 142 s 9d , to 112 s to 11 Ws to it 7 5 to 01 Os he. Lady ly of the rbitry's, ghter. 1 Gouly, iss Mar- ighter of .e illness? Frederick vocate:-- romoting s was the career / 11 ity of 11 . 1 5 e Ls were (.)' he aryl:" ne live l to thanY ending L i! whi/1 Is of fla >spitatte,,' art:c," 1. • d year, Nr0. 7 .. it CharlFP Ensign 111 the OE' yhonolf; agal fargar et. Berkeley ' lary-:Ares ----. the SVS' FitO. ' o r , E.- ::, / r' '.`~ PRICE SEVENIIttiCt. articles ? : its moral quality at all altered and improved ; by that alteration of form ? It it be vicious in its substance and grain is it purified by its insertion in the articles ? Can it be con sidered that the mere bond is the mother of all the mischief ? , How this might be considered if it occurred in a Court of Coma mon Law is not for me to predict. I know that that system, admirable in its structure and still more in its actual admini stration, resting most properly on it s anc i ent an d approve d technical rules, is on that account unable Sometiines to reach the real justice, which it therefore leaves to other jurisdictions to discover and apply. Great part of the Chancery jars., diction rests upon this very foundation. To maritime Con , tracts, in particular, the principles of equity have thus been applied. It is unnecessary to multiply instances, but I will just mention the case of a Edwin and Stafford v. The East India Compan7," Vernon, 210, where it waB held 'that " though a charter-party is so penned that no freight can be recovered upon it at law, yet if the owners of the ship have a just demand, equity will relieve." A Court of Law works its way to short issues, and confines itself to them ; a Court of Equity takes a more comprehensive view, and looks at every matter that ought to influence its judgment upon the total jus. tice of the case. Ido not mean to arrogate to this Court the character of a Court of general equity, which it is not, but by the tenor of its commission it is bound to proceed upon e9uit4 able'principles, and according to the justice of the case, arintrio boni 'air'. How far a Court of Law would confine its view to the express letter of the contract, and leave such a party as the present to find his way out of a bad bargain of his own, where there was not absolutely a tu7pis eontractug, I cannot pre.. sume to say. There are those who, perhaps, might regret if this humble class of suitors were compelled to make a journey through a second Court, This Court is not inclined to impose that obligation upon thein. It will, as it has done in the former cases, protect these illiterate and inexperienced persons against their own ignorance and their own imprudence ; and, I con fess, I feel rathet more disposed to do so in the case of mere articles than in the case of articles and bond ; for I think it much more probable, that covenants bearing hard upon men should slip into the mariner's contact unnoticed than into a bond, an instrument of rare occurrence, and by which, on that account, their curiosity would be naturally excited and alarmed. I must add, that the terms in which die stipula tion is framed might be understood by the mariners, as they are understood by the Courts of Scotland, to mean that no part of the wages should be demanded, or considered as actually recoverable', till arrival at the final port ; but not as breaking up their title to what the general law had guaranteed to them, The words are sufficiently satisfied, and I infer from the pre sent proceeding that they were so interpreted by the suitor, or, otherwise, he might be charged with a want of that good faith with which he has a right to be credited, if lie were resisting a claim which he had fully understood and admitted at the date of the agreement. _ _ _ I have - been alarmed in the argument with the terrible conse. quences that would ensue, if I were to reject the allegation ; for in that case, it is said, the Representatives of all the unfortunate persons who have perished, would attempt, by the same remedy, to recover the expected fruits of the labours and perils of their departed relatives. That objection carries with it no terror to my mind. If they are entitled to the remedy, it is peculiarly fit, in such a case as this, that they should have it. It has likewise been urged, for the same purpose of alarm, that I should introdude a diversity of law upon the same sub ject. That suggestion assumes, what lam not prepared to admit, that a Court of Law would give a sanction to this con trivance for eluding the law, by the incorporation of the contract in the articles. lam not to anticipate that this will take place ; but, if it did, no diversity is introduced ; it is a diversity already existino- • it is no more than that which ordinarily results from the different operations of the principles of law and the princi , pies of equity. It is an objection often justly made to arguments, that cases of great hardship and inconvenience are put to exemplify the evil consequence that may result from the doctrine Which is opposed, if it should be established--that the eases are ex treme—,exist only in ingenious fiction---or, are totally extrava gant, and out of the sphere of all probability.—What is the ac tual existing case taken in the simplest form of fact ? Here is a poor man compelled to sue as a pauper, not being able to find , any body to stipulate for him ; a man in a station of life humble but most useful, and on that account highly to be fa voured by the maritime law of a great maritime country ; he enters into the service of a ship in the port of London, which carries a most troublesome , a most disgusting, and a most dangerous cargo, a cargo of 7 convicts to a port in New South Wales, and delivers them at that end of the globe ; there wages, by the general law, are earned, without any regard to the special agreements between owners and freighters ; the ship takes in a new cargo there, and earns wages by the delivery of it at Port Jackson ; she sails to Batavia, takes in another cargo, which she delivers at illinto, in Sincampour ; there takes a cargo, partly for Calcutta and partly for London, delivers the goods destined for Calcutta, and there takes in others for Lon don, for which place she sails, arrives, infra quatuor maria, within what the law calls the King of England's Chambers—in the Downs--in the very faeces, as it were, of her ultimate port, after a voyage of about 16 months continuance. There this ship is unfortunately wrecked, and every soul on board, captain, officers, and men (the exact number does not appear, but forty names are contained in the, list extant), all perished, save two men, who were left alive to tell the story ; one of these men applies for his wages, states his services of labour and danger, which are not controverted, but fairly and honestly admitted ; he is met, however, by a covenant, that he shall be entitled to nothing, unless the ship is actually returned to the Port of London. Now, I mean not the slightest reflecton on the Gen tlemen who take this objection. They have a right to stand upon their covenant, for their own interests in this case, and for the general interests of the Gentlemen occupied in other cases of the like kind. I must particularly speak with approbation of their personal conduct towards this man : he was naked, and they cloathed him—hungry, and they gave him food—sick, and they administered to his recovery. On regaining his health, he, notunjustly, demands his wages ; the result is, that, pereunt tempora . langi servitii, for himself and his disappointed family, if he has one, he is compelled to come to this Court for his pittance, having nothing to shew but his ser vices and his misfortunes, not much sweetened by reflecting that it is all his own doing, that he has thought fit to bring.it upon himself by his own indiscretion. I shall say no more than that this is the firsttourt to which the validity of this co venant has been submitted. The facts of the case are such as cannot recommend it, I think, to any Court upon any dicus sion—but, at any rate, I will not be the first Judge on record who shall gibe it a sanction. I therefore reject this article of the allegation, and shall of course permit the summary petition to be proceeded on; and, if it be duly supported in proof, I shall feel myself bound, by law, authority, and natural justice, to pronounce for the wages claimed, as earned on the outward voyages. NOTE.—The second article of the owners' allegation, plead ing that a small quantity only of the cargo was saved, was ad• mitted to proof. ASSIZES: MAIDSTONE, MARCH 18. The Lent Assizes for this county commenced here to-day, on the Crown Side, before Mr. Baron WooD. On the Civil Side the business does not begin until to-morrow. In both Courts the business is likely to be heavy. The Gaol Calendar contains a fearful list of offences in point 'of number, there being no less than 176 prisoners for trial. The Bank of England have but one prosecution, which was disposed of to-day, as follows James Good:A:F:1 'Was indicted for knowin,,dly uttering to Fran. cis Porter Molloy, at Chart next Sutton Valence, on the 22d of January last, a forged Bank of England note, for the pay ment of 51. Mr. GURNEY, the COMMON SERJEANT, and Mr. BOL LAND, • conducted the prosecution ; and Mr. ADoLPH us she defence. It appeared in evidence, that on the 22d of January, at seven in the morning, the prisoner went to the Buffalo's Head, pub.. lie-house, kept by a person named 3lolloy, and tendered the note in question to pay for about three and sixpcnnyworth of liquor he had drank. It was also proved that the prisoner had uttered on the 3d of December, 1821, another forged sl. note, to the wife oft pub lican, named Barham, at Headcorn, in this county. An Inspector from the Bank of England proved , that both the notes were forgeries in every particular, had been struck off the same plate, and. were of the same date. The prisoner t.aiel nothing in hie defence, but called one wit= ness, who gave him a good chaiamr. bluilty—Rtath. • )out )0. roaf, .07. 4 5 22i ”gq6 -, ;wt. Tii. ' gr. Mt, 155 11 35 4105 3 6d is 4ti ..150 ..250