The Sun. — London, England, 1804-12-22 00:00:00

COURT OF KING's Ne. 30. • 4-41/10 011 atioitt uoßn CLLINDOPOUGH AND srEcim.. ]cater, IN GUILDHALL' CUMMING V. THOMPSON. This was an Action on a Policy of Insurance made by the Defendant on the Schooner Nary, from Bar. hadoe,, to Cork, which was captured on her passage .by a French Privateer. Mr. ERSKINE said, that it was admitted, on the part.of the Plaintiff, that a letter, written on the 1011 t 'January, 1804, by the owner at Barbadnes to ,his agent in ,Louden, direaing the Insurance to he 0 , 4 ,1 e, an d w hi c h was received in this country on the 29 th of March, when the Policy was immediately o,wed, had not been communicated to the Defen. dant at the time he underwrote the Policy. It was, on the other hand agreed by the Defendant, that the Protest ,taken should be esteemed evidence of the capture. This mutual concession would bring the question within narrow bounds. The letter from the Owner to his Agent here, dated toth January, tote that thevessel was expected to sail fromßarbadoes in three weeks, or at farthest a month, from that date.; and if a man, of war did not at that time present ,itself as a convoy to guard her 'from the.pri. vatecre among the Islands, that the Owner would entrust, her to the care of some of the large armed vessels, which he knew would be sailing about that . tune.. This letter arrived on the agth March, on which day application was made to the .Defendant to underwrite the Policy, but, which ht did not sign sili the loth April. The defence which he under. stood was to be set up, indeed the only defence wjtich he could figure, was, thatltheAressel . must, from the tenor. of this letter, which had not been communicated to ,the Defendant, have been presum. •col to be missing, at the time the Policy.was under. written. This, Mr. ERSKINE said; he should he able i toShew, fr,an the general understanding of per. eons in the trade, could , not have been in the con. templation of the Agent who applied to have the Policy executed, or of the Defendant, had he been aware of .the contents of the letter at the time he underwrcee.the Policy. The only reason then for ins . erting a warranty that the vessel should pail be.„ fore the Ist of August,. as had , been done, in this Po. 'icy, must have proceeded. from thia..eirs:umstance, that the hurricanes commencing generally atrer that period, greater risk attached to vessels which did not leave the- country,previcius to the set of August. • The Clerk of the Plaintiff's Agent proved, that on the aoth March be applied to the Defendant to execute the .Policy, which -was signed on the *oda April. He admitted that the Defendant ask. ed him, when' the vessel was to•Oiail ? to which he gave for answer, that he was not positive. The Defendant then asked, if ,he was to warrant its sailing'before the Ist of August ? which the wit. nest said was his intention, when a warranty to that effect - was put into the Policy. Several Captains who had long traded to . the West Indies said, that seven or eight weeks made a good average voyage from Barbadoes to Cork, and that a vessel expeded to sail on that voyage three or four weeks from the toth January, could not on the •ris -‘ March he enottiAesett thhiing i b ip. Mr. GAitROW, for the Defendant, contended, thit. till once the title " Conttaimnst" could be ex. purigeti from his Learned Friend Mr. Parke's Book onlosurance, and from every other book which had ever been publisheclon the stilled, it would be on. necessary for him to spend many words to shew that a claim under a Policy like the present tould not he' maintained. He would recommend it to every Gen. tlematv about to apply for having a Policy of In. simmers underwritten, to follow the advice of his Learned Friend Mr. EttsliNr) in another east--to' empty the bureaus of every paper at all conflated with the business, and to submit them to the perusal of the parties intending to underwrite, thatan equal advantage and an equal understanding might exist on all sides before the execution of such a contrail. But , if such a pradice were nor to prevail, he would recommend to his Learned Friend, Mr. Patrice, on the, authority of the •ease now before his Lordship and the Jury, in' addition to the title " Canted. mew," to add, as a 'stanch, anti a necessary one, of that comprehensive tarn in his valuable book, errant of f .t pla na ti on ." Here it was .notorious the agent. for the Plaintiff was in possession of the probable time when the Vessel wished to be insured would sail. Was it not his duty to have explained this to the underwriter ? At all events, being him. self in possession of the knowledge that the Vessel was to sail several weeks before the period of incur. WrO he entitled, when questioned as to the time of to say he was not positive; and to allow th'e• Defendant to insure a Vessel which must, 10 1114 knowledge, have sailed at least two months before ; as if it hati not then, and Might not, for months afterwartlq, or until the first of August, have quitted the port from which the Polity was to operate ? Here Mr. GARROW was interrupted by Lord ELLANHOSOUGIi, who said. that its the present case not only had some concealment been pradised, but, even when a question was asked the proper infor mation, which too it was in the power .of the agent fur the Plaintiff' to have given, was withheld. The Jury immediately found for the Defendant. Certain snares of MOM V stirred to coiner proprietors, which it was their wish to endeavour to redeem with themoney which they had thus received from the Plainti ff , but which they enuld not accomplish. In this situation the Beatsons executed a bill of sale, in favour of the Plaintiff, ofthe Ship Atlas, which was duly executed on the 9th July, 1803, and the indorsement on the oath, and other necessary for Ma. !idea, so far as required by law, and within the 'sower of the Plaintiff to perform, within to days thereafter. The Vessel, however, was then abroad ; and it being requited by the 'Earl of Liverpool's Ad, . that when the sales of Vett. sets are executed when abroad, an indorsement should be entered on the back of their register at the Cut tom.house within ten days after its arrival in a British port, the Plaintiff used every exertion to prevail on the Beatsons, and Thomas Musgrave, their Captain, to'bring the register to the Custom House, to have the indorsement put on it, but in vain: The vessel arrived on the 17th oiDecem. ber, and it was the a9th of that month, after yield. ing to numberless exadiona of William Beatson, belle the Plaintiff could prevail on him and his Captain, Thomas Musgrave, to execute the in. dorsement on the register. The Beatsons after. wards became bankrupts ; and their Assignees, availing themselves of the delay of twodays be. yond .the period prectibed by the Mt, within which the indorsement un the register had been eXtelltvii, brought as, Action of Trover, which had been tried before his Lordship. The MI seemed to his Lordship to admit of no ambiguity. It was shewn that two Sundays anti a holiday had inter. vetted, ,but his Lordship had not observed that lei. ther Sundays or holidays were . excepted in . the MI. A vertlid had therefore been found fur the Assig. flees, by which upwards of t 1,0001. bola pa ad. vanced by the Plainiff, nn account of the convey. ante of the ship in qaestion, was taken from him without any consideration whatever. It was, however, recommended to the Plaintiff, by Gentle. men well skilled in the equitable course of pro. ceedingi in this Country, that the Court of Chan• eery would affard redress against so manifest and palpable a wrong. Recourse had, accordingly been had to that Court, and the opinion of the Lord Chancellor was, that 'although;he, like the Judges of this Court, was ,bound by . the law, which was undoubted, still if a case in point of faftcould ,he made out, thata manifest fraud acid wilful wrong had been committed, it was within the juris. 'tlidion 'of this Court to grant redress. He had, therefore, sent it to the fury in this Court to find the matter in 'fad, ," . 4 Had 'Wm. and John Beation. and Thomas Musgrave wilfully and fraudulently prevented the Plaintiff frorn getting the indorse. ment on the register completed within the time pre. scribed by the At of Parliament ?" In what re. aped the Plaintiff had been prevented, was of little consequence. The consideration which he had granted antecedent to the execution of the articles of the sale was a valuable one. The sale was grant. eti unconditionally, and so far as within the compass of the Plaintiff's' power to give it effed, had been rendered complete in due time. If, therefore, the Demons, or either of them, or th eir Captain, Thomas Musgrave, had been guilty of 'any at. to prevent or impede the. complete execution of the sale, such fell within the issue submitt e d by the Lord Chancellor to their consideration, , and such they accordingly return to him as their find. ing On the matter of fad. William Beatstin was examined, who said, that the vessel arrived in port on the 17th of Dream. her. ' He immediately afterwards called on the. Plaintiff, inforMing him of some of the Bills having been dishonoured ; and requested hins to put mat. 'teril to train for having them paid, that the indorse. ment on the register might be executed. at the CUstotn.house. The Witness was particularly anxi. ous on the subjeCt, as his commercial existence de. pended on the line of conduFt pursued by the Plain. tiff. He was threatened, not only to be arrested, but to have executions in his house on account of those dishonoured Bills. He did make the Plain. tiff's compliance with his terms a part of his agree. ment to execute .the indorsement at the Cus. torn.house ; and he thought himself, as an honest broker, warranted in doing so, as he did not conceive that he was hound for bad paper ru execute a good conveyance of his ship, to the prejudice of his other creditors. He, however, admitted, that previous to the execution of the articles of sale, which were unconditional, the Pkintiff was ere. ditor to the Beatsons in 40031. Tad that, of the other 70001. upwards of 50a01. hail then been paid. On the 23d of December, the witnest said, every thing Was agreed between him and the Pl a i nt iff. The witness, however, was not able that day to meet with Miisgrave, who had the register in his possession. He informed the Plaintiff of this cir. cumstance, who said he would nu longer trust to the witness, but' would look after the business himself. The witness, Wowever, remained at home' all the day of the 24th during Custom.Huuse hours, ex. peEling the Plaintiff to call, but he did not, and no interruption or impediment was afterwards put by him to the indorsement of the register. Mr, GARROW, for the Defendant, maintained that, there was here no evidence which could warrant the Jury in returning an answer in 'the affirmative to the issue submitted to them by the Lord Chancellor. The Noble Lord who presided in that Court was well known to be pos. sessed of language capable of conveying his full and entire meaning to any capacity. But could it be said, that the evidence this slay laid before the Jury would warrant them to find in terms of the issue submitted to them ? Had the Lord Chancellor ask. et' the question, Did a communing for several days take place between the parties ? The evidence ad. tiuced would have warranted the Jury in finding such a Get. But what must they have declared in. addition ? That then matters were completely a ccommodated, Demon was then ready and eager to have • indorsed the register ; that he waited all day at home for the Plaintiff, expetting that he would have called fur that purpose ; and that the Plaintiff never had called till the days prescrib ed by the At of Parliament were expired,—This, riainritt trom getting the indorsement executed. — After every misunderstanding had been adjusted, the. day of the 2 3 d, of the 24th, and (Wier two days, during which Bearson was always.to be-found, had elapsed, when the Plaintiff had never put him. self to any trouble to get the indorsement executed, and during which it could not be insinuated he 'had in the most remote degree been prevented by the Beatsons or Musgrave. Lord ELLarttioaouou said, the articles of sale were unconditional. If, therefore, W. Beatson had endeavoured, however fair and reasonable the terms might be, to impose on the Plaintiff any conditions which went to impede or interrupt him in bringing the business to the most speedy termination, he was, in the terms of the issue now before them, guilty of wilfully and unlawfully preventing the' Plaintiff from having the indorsement executed on the register at the Custom.house, within the 'time fixed by Atl of Parliament. The evidence, how ever, went only to affea W. Beatson and Thomas Musgrave. The Jury accordingly found, that Wm. Beatson. and Thomas Musgrave had wilfully and unlaiOully prevented the Plaintiff from getting the indorse. !pent on,the register executed at the Custom.house, Within the time prescribed by the Mt of Patna. meat. COURT OF COMMOI4I.PLEAS, Dzc. 20. •ITTING. A •r Inks liettrs, 11111 , 01 Lt MK. JUITICII CHAU. Ski t AND A SPECIAL JURY,. MART Z. MINET. This was an action on a Charter-Party, bronght by the Captain of the Ship , to recover the freight of the Vevief from the Defendant, who had chartered it to proceed to St. Michael's and take in a cargo of oranges solely for him, and not to carry any other merchaodize. SerieAnt SHErlitRI), for the Plaintiff, stated, that in this case there were several issues joined,-but, he believed, not more than one or two would be for the consideration of the Court. He said, the De. fendant, who was a merchant in the foreign fruit line, had chartered with the Plaintiff, who was Cap. tain of a small vessel, to go to St. Michael's, 'end there to take in a cargo of oranges, and immediately return with them to London, without taking in any other goods or merchandize whatever. He said, it would be his first business to prove the charter. -party, and then he would prove that the ship did arrive at the place of her destination, that she had got part of her cargo on board, and that, before her Beading was completed, she was blown out to sea, where she remained tossing abotst for a considerable time, and, at length, being unable to regain St. Michael's, she ran into Lisbon, and was certainly. obliged to remain there a long time, on account of the very slow progress made by the Portuguese shipwrights who were repairing her. He . said, he would prove also, that he left Lisbon as soon as the necessary repairs were finished, and that he went to St. Michael's, but was there informed, by the cot. respondent . of the Defendant, that he had sent th 4 oranges by another vessel ; in consequence of which, he was obliged to return to London in ballast. The Learned Seryeant concluded by saying, that he understood the defence set up by the Defendant was, that the Plaintiff' had taken in other goods, contrary to the charrer.party, and that the ship had been under seizure at Lisbon on account of these goods being contraband ; but, he trusted it would appear, that these goods were only. a small present, left in his care by the Captain of another vessel, to be • given, on the first opportunity, to the American Consul at St. Michael's, and that he was blown out of the harbour there before he could deliver it. Robert Preston, Mate of the William, deposed,. that she was registered for sixty.three tons burden ; that she had got eighty.aeven boxes of oranges on board, when she was blown out ; that she was fifty. eight days endeavouring to gain St. Michael's, but could not ; that they ran into Lisbon on th e 3 d o f February. He then proved, , after detaining the, Court for near two hours looking over his logbook, char every exertion was made to repair the ship, and that she was not finished until the Lath of April, when she dropped down the River, to wait for a On his cross.examination, he said, though she was ready to sail on the t4.(lt, and though the wind was fair, yet she did not sail until the 22d, and he could nut give any reason for it. He then proved, that they bad gone luck to St. Michael's, where, not heing able to get a cargo, they were obliged to. come to London in ballast. Two other witneoes were called, who proved merely that they saw the workmen employed about the ship. Serjeant Barr, for the Defendant, spoke at very great length, resting bit case entirely on the unne. cessary delay of the Plaintiff at Lisbon, A Gentle man of the Jury observed, that that delay must have been occasioned by the Plaintiff's wanting money to pay for the repairs ; arid that he knew it was the custom at Lisbon, not to let a vessel out until she could pay, or give security for the debts cons rafted by her. Mr. Justice CHAMMILIt summed up the evide n ce, and pointed out to the jury the particular points fur their consideration, The Jury retired, and in abont quartet of an hour returned a verdia for the Defendant, not on account of his taking goods on board, but because he delayed at Lisbon longer than WWI necessary. CLIMINTS 4). THOMPSON. This was an Milan on a Policy of Insurance for 2001. against the Defendant, as one , of the. Under. writers of the ship Gorge and Kitty. It appeared, from the evidence of John Fownes, a broker, who proved the signiture of the ,Defen. dant to the Policy, t h at h e h a d rece i ve d a letter from the Plaintiff, stating that he had contraaed with Government to carry bricks to the barracks between Beachy Head and Dungeness, and desiring him to eirea a Policy of Insurance for 4001. This letter he *hewed to the Defendant, who was in that line, and who underwrote for 2001. The Master Of the Ship war then called, who proved the loss of the vessel. The defence set up by Serjeant Ban, for the De. 11 .••• ••ia. t. 1.41.11, 41111 11141, he would not have become an Underwriter without being paid a hazard insurance. The Serjeant, therefore, h , iped, that on account of this fad being concealed from the Defendant, he would obtain a verdid. II ni IC II 11 idl IU Mr. Justice CHAMBRe observed to the Jury, that the Defendant, as an Underviriter, should have been acquainted with the coast between Beachy Head and Dungeness, and that he thought the, letter from the Plaintiff , was very fair and explicit. The Jury itn. mediately lountita verdid for the Plaintiff—Da. mages !col. 35. the difference between that ■nd the tool. insured being allowed for salvage. DFCROUR 21. GUARANTEES. PFFLE Z. HOIVON. This was an Aaiun hrotight by S4r Robert Peele to recover the value of a qu 'miry of goods furnished to the Defendanr, who had Mentioned that The base of Lindsay, Smith, and Co. would be his guarantees. The goods were nccording I y furnished and charged to Messrs. Smith, Lind.ay, and Co. These, however, falling into bad credit, notice was given to Hodson not to pay them 'for the goods w hich he had bought of the PlAintiff. Hodson, however, irwould appear, did pay them,, and 'they soon afterwards bteame bankrupts,--Thevestion was, whether ,in this case the Plaintiff bad a right to call upon fl it Defendant for p a yme nt , or was h o und to take the house of Lindsay, Smith, and Cu. as his 4t 1 )(4 ) r• The Jury were of opinion, that he ha r ight to have the value of hiS goods from-linds-,n, the house of Lindsay a n d C o . h a d only crime in AS an additional security. A verdin was ace, , rdinglf found fur the Plaintiffifigei 3000/. • INSURANCE. SCOTT V. THOMPSON. This was an Anion'on a Policy of Insurance,-- Bath orties were agreed on the faets, but it involv ed a point of Law that had never been dNci,ied. The Plaintiff therefore agreed to take 'a vcrdi:t sub: jeel to the opinion of the C.'nrt on the point. Verdict fur the Plaintiff—Damages 2001. Saha Populi ruprema Lex.—ln 1795 HIS MA. jESTY was graciously plessed to grant a plot os ground to the HUMANE 'Sot I ETY, near the Serpen tine River, to erect a Receiving.house for the Fre servalion of the lives of the people.—The AsivA o EIS daily employ men to request Sinittrs, avoid those ports where danger may ensue. The Persons employed have.on their arms a Badge. in.. sc/ihed Humane Society. By the immediate aid of the Assistants, and the Preservative Ladder, t•eve— cal have been rescued fran under the irr• 3 ° 43 . re stored to their friends.—An Institution ra humane merits the support of the Politic, as its ex ertions at . all seasons of the year are devoted to save and restore human life. —Subscriptions, .4ic. received at Baron Dimsdales an ofee.hoose, and.d Ca..Dr.tunmond'at Sir M. Bioxham's, Limbo C No. 8, Spital.square. • R IR r ff. On Tuesday, at the Grnve, Sig/imam, Ala, L37~, t hi Lady b et:l-wig:it br Lpattght or. MARR lAD. Yesterday, at St. Mary, Newington,. Mr. Samilel to 'Linde, only daughter or Luke Wilda, Esq. of Kvq, Road. aat Roberton,n Thursday the ( 3 1 k inst. Pembrokohire,, Owen Phillipps Ssq. Lieutenant.Colunel.Comniandant ot the Royal Pembroke ruzileers, to Scourrield. eldest daughter of Henry Scourtield, Esq. of Robe in the same County. DIED On the t2th inst. at Portsmouth, Lieutenant William Askew, of the Royal Navy. On Sunday Se'nnight, Board man Ilroinhead, Esq. of Lin coln, aged 77, formerly Lieut enant-Colonel in the North Lincoln Militia. • On the Loth inst. at his ho use in Chancery-lane, ad 31• ge Samuel R0...e, Esq. barrister ut Law. On Thursday last, at his s cat near Richmond,Mr. Piga°. formerly ate of the Direetors of the hank and India-hou e. The same day, at her brot her ' s house, at Ilatl i nal• gram' , Mrs. Ann aged 63. Last week, con sequence of a fall from his horse, Wil• ham Day, Esq. of Day Ash, near Harrogate. Last week, at his house in S hzrborne, Mr. William Crag well. r........--,.....„*..........-__ , NEW INVENTED HA.'ll4. .TN consequence of t he ver y g reat complaint J. late, of the bad quality of Hat t s la:int:al Mr.. of HARE, of No. 7r, Strand, who has s, i resided ha there these a. • years, to try the experiment of mixing Mules' fur With Bea , - ver, and which he has found to answer his nlost ardent espec...• rations. not only for their durability, xyllich, on trial, Will b e found to wear out near two such li sts as are Utak 11% the t usual way, the Niol::: Fur making them so muc h liner, and 4) made use of in the Nlanufaituring of Hats ; 31 a , a closer texture than the Vailt3US coarse Fills that tire 1.161.1,i10r good dualities, the Fur will liot collie oil, which has been 1 1 . much complained of of late, as well as their taking a ul?t, beautiful Black, which will main their colour: and hang the lllanufatturet of his own Hats, he sells theft.; at the lo price of it. 35. Stamps included. • ditto, Likewise a variety of Ar - • 'Fists, rolling ditto, poxin Silk mos . iny and Navy Chiltticlisr li , Livery Hats, and Ladies an Hats, elegantly trimmed. . don. N . B. Worthy the attcntiOn at Merchants li.Exporta * * Mole Skiusbought in any quantity. , 4 ,... Letters (post-paid), respecting Mole Sicito, on'Y "- tended to. _..--1--.•' mt h other FOR THE STONE AND GRAVEL. 4 Atong sticcessful Practice has row estahlish the reputation of AD A itiSis SOLVENT, for ea , ing the above afiliaing Disorders in either Kidneys or /OA — der, after fruitle::4 trials of Soaß, Lime, and Soda VVaP r f l4, thereby . saving thousendi front the pain and dangcr Dt k: • knife; but as there eve many' persons who may not .... v e heard of this happy discovery, the Proprietor avails hinfoi.., of the benevolent disposition.of those who wish, to tc"," . its efficacy and innocency, viz. Lord Sackville, the pourable Mr. Germaine, Sir Edw ., rd Knatchbull, 13,4r.re' T. IS, Lane, Esq. of Dover. Castle ; J. Shipdem, ESLI ' 3 ' t Mayor of Deal ; the Reverend Coxe fem. Oluinisharo, OW St. IVe's; the Rev. Mr. MOlyntaux, of Garbeldish4;th. Norfolk ; [canals Thonias, Esq. Bristol ; S. baker, Ei,l' Blegden t i I. Roberts, sq. Newport, Isle of Wigftt ; i '; Gibbs, Esq. Bath ; . Alliyatt, Esq. M. P. with a, V' number . of the FJculty, via. Mr. Gunning, Mr. Bell, , I *,t r ", Hume, Dr. Livingsroue, and Dr: Stevenson, vv WO 4tilir c ' was cured by this Medicine,: just se he was a bout to undc6 o the operation ; - 3[o.l'n:cent ly. it na.zieffeited a sinmlar and li i NI cure of a neat relation of AtiiititaP Sir Richard Bart • The Solvent to Sold by: the Proprietor, Mr. Perry, Sur' teen, No. 9, SouthartiptOn.strect, Mooinsbury. square ; ani . .ill Recoil mut Co:, Nc. t -o, Oxford-street, in HottirS of 4s* ° ,'• tiviod. 2,,ritcto9zrepaate)rzgoiiiiii,indgi,a,treslioit-nwithicenhiaablv4“., • l, thereby. prevent the tOrMationor a , Stone in Bedell I'o,o''.i_, N. E. A Treatiseoli the Disorder anti the Regimen tu Of observed, With CAWS of Cure, may be had, price 2s. -...............< ME,TARit w. GILLE6PIS. Mr. Rpm; Nl4 Stated, that this was an issue sent from the Court of hancery . for the jury to try, Whether William and James fleatsm and Thomas Musgrave had a ill fully and fraudulently prevented the •Plaintiff in this , casa from getting iln indorse. meat on, the register of the Ship Atlas executed at the'Custoin.house within the time prescribed by Aft of, Nrliament ? In the month of June, 1803, the Plaintiff granred bills , to the amount of 70001. to William anti James Beeson, in consideration of their. graritinKhim an assigrunent to one.balf`of the Juhaea and Cream, two Ships then said to be their property. At this time the &arsons were indebted to the P144'.. ,, iir in a ; farther b um of 40001. and it was t lwttly alierwaras discovered .that they could tut grant hip the share they had promised of the Au a bit 6 Sea Fr (of south Molto Holton, s. in N N printed by Kictin n iii, (of Nu. NartfrUCOtirtt NJW.Stree;) ; and viihlishwt by W I At t h e s v p re Ovw No. la, Stowed ; wher e Advirt;generret, Ordrri. fur . thc, 41 3 0er, Lelltri fo r t h e Bitter; &v. (potr-paid), •itt GralVelltir•Stitt2tt a) Mit ( be addressed,