The Sun. — London, England, 1801-12-17 00:00:00

bur se, rmy jo An this ad pre• ise and ) reside ey 1)4 and urio it Ihdis )ugh he of pet- red for dotion s at that : Private' Court 3urt is Irt had nal de- ;c steps t's Re• rcourse Board to tiic iced io lot Ling thlige3 [askea MAN'S some- given he Di- eading Ed his 'as no[ upon a t corn- elegant lion, _ 3e laid ietors- ) keep d cer- object , iubje3 :or iLiCi lic nd• narr e Nobl e °,•• licate r , t as g 1; buy Ad not unanv )und6s ! \t'3o ;t chi , driven :orally' Ile ex: ie Di' Chan ! con' Iricis 4 it was he I'v Id, r° 3i11.--' ers i'' whil ttisfiej shout"' le Di- Lin g - J.- be ratio ns 1. no; w , lan lerna r ; !lc 113" :k fill' I w e° s fr° ° , Cark uncic C :, the'r„ eaW g ' am on roug,', e E" pil? g ; w ito 013°,,r' Us s°ll 4 th e ' 4 , pete', it re DISTILLERIES. UNDER a free Government, where the energy of all Administration is, in a considerable degree, pro- Portioned to the eslimation in which it is held by t he People, a' Minister must be worse than absurd, who weakens his poWer of adion by relaxing its principal spring. To court unpopularity, would, in I:ht, be ,a folly' not dissimilar to that of the *light of the Woeful Countenance, who traversed t he world in search' of melancholy adventures. But, If it be madness to volunteer unprofitable dangers, i t is cowardice to turn from them, when beneficial: The steady course 'pursued by the present Minister On the question of the Distilleries, steers equally clear of both extremes. He has listened to the „ w ishes of' the People, as expressed by Petitions 4 °m some quarters .; and has ,consented, that dis tlssions should take place which he himself re garded as unnecessary. True, however, to his d uty, and faithful to the• important trusts which' a re committed to his charge, -he , has dared to be at 'variance with a portion of the public opinion, h e knewl that a portion of the public'opinion ''vas at variance with the public good. By so do -49 he has added new solidity, to. the high van. 'age ground on which he stands. There is a de cisiveness of character, a manliness, if we may 4 se the expression, in the mind of the English People, which turns, with disgust, from weakness and indecision; and which dwells, with affection,, 'in firmness congenial with its oWn. This kindred quality, is a bond of union bet Ween the Govern. pent and the People. Thej• rejoice to find that tritish affairs are dondufted with British. spirit ; bid, that their interests are not sacrificed, even in compliment to themselves. This stubborn virtue, which they discover in the CHANCELLOR of the XCHEQUER ) is that which they prize most highly, In the catalogue of their own. His speeches on t he subjed of tilt Distilleries, have carried con_ ! „ lion to every dispassionne mind. They teemed with argument, and supported powerful reasoning, °Y evidence the most incontrovertible—by that of authentic documents,. That in particular of Mon. t iaY was, to our understanding, Demonstration it 4elf. It was a dire& appeal to reason, which, !hough generally slow' in- its operation, is certain in its effect. This, however, we believe to be an e xception to the general rule. It has already pro,. tiaced the best consequences. We venture ,to ex. Press a perfeCt confidence, that the more the subject it looked into, and all the general, as well as more minute considerations which it involves are exa kined, the more the Public will be satisfied of the Injustice, impolicy, and, ,as far as Ireland is con_ etrried, of the impradicability of continuing the •re ttridion on the Distilleries, without a violation of the Ad of Union. We should be deficient in justice to ourselves, When arguing in favour of the Distilleries, 'did we t strengthen : it by • the following extrad, from jle Work of one whose Wisdom has never been i l 'olibted, however his political principles. may have een misrepresented. Mr. BURKE, in his Pam. 1 1 1 et on Scarcity, has the following observations on t~esubjed " The hogs ?arta that would be sufficient) which Were fed with the waste Wash of that produce, did 11 0 t demand the fourth part -of - the Corn used by cartners in fattening them. The Spirit was nearly fauch clear gain to the Nation. It is an'odd t"Y of making flesh cheap, to stop or check the " The Distillery' in itself produces an immense a rticle of trade almost all over the world, to Africa, t° North Amerka, and to various .parts of Europe. is of &eat use, next to food itself, to our fish, rtes, and to our whole Navigation. A great part ° F the Distillery was carried on by damaged Corn,. ti nfit for bread, and by Barley and Malt of the low est quality. These things could not be more un_ trtionably employed. .The domestic consunip t'L'ii of Spirits produced, without complaints, a bergb great Revenue, applicable, if we pleased,' in fa r to the bringing Corn from other places, 4 r beyond the value of that consumed in making II or to the encouragement of its increased pro. `lllt-tion at home. " As to what is.'s,aid; in a physical and moral "Lew, against the'hoine consumption of Spirit's, ex has long since taught me very little to re; S heet the declamations on .that subjed—whether t he thunder of the laws, or the thunder of do tleence, " is hurled on Gin," alwayS I am thunder.. proof.. The alembic, in my mind, has furnished to the world a far greater benefit and blessing, than if t he opus maximum had been ..really found by che -111. istry, and, like Midas, we could turn every thing i nto gold. Undoubtedly there may he a dangerous .abuse 1 4 the excess of.S7irits ; and - at one time I am ready I t) believe the abuse was great. When Spirits are e lt, p, the Sness ofdrunkenness is atcieved `vith little time or labour s ; but' that evil Ico h nsider l ° be wholly done away.Observarion for the last fo rty l years, and very particularly for the last thirty, . 414 s furnished me with . ten instances of drunkennes s r °M other causes, for one from this. Ardent Spirit is a great medicine, often to remove distemp_ Pers—much more frequently to prevent them, or 10 chase them away in their beginnings. It is not t'Litritive in any great degree. But, if not food, It greatly alleviates the want of it. It invigorates t he stomach for the digestion of poor meagre diet, ~b t lt easily aiable to th human cnstitution. Wine 'Tie Poor can ll not te,uch. e Beer, as applied, to Many t keasions (as among Seamen and Fishermen for in.. s tance), will by no means do the business. Let t ne add, what WitS inspired with champaigne and will turn into ridicule—it is a medicine for : be mind. Under .the pressure of the cares and 11 9rrows of our moral condition, men have at all ,T oes, and in all countries, called in'some phySical ';'Ll to their moral consolations—wine, beer, opium, randy or tobacco. " I consider, therefore, the stopping of the Distil, d d .Y, economically, financially, commercially, me, „.. ! Linally, and in some degree morally too, as a asure rather well meant' than well considered.— t i 3 too precious a :;acrifice to prejudice." tt, The Polly, Redhe a d, of Ncwca,stle, was lost in ' - e i 3 4ltic ) 4th LAW REPORT. COURT OF CHANCERY, LINCOLN'SINN HALL, DEC. 16. DRURY-LANE THEATRE. THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the last hearing relative to the above ,ConCefn, many new Affidavit's had come to his hands, and One re-' tition which was extremely' material.. I-1e thoUght it would be better to put the matter in This course, that all the information deemed to be important for him to know, should be given within a certain time, and that oty.a subsequent day, he. Mould de termine. Mr. HOLLIST . appeared for Mr. Weitiey, late Treasurer of the Theatre, With whom, .he said, it was agreed by the Proprietors; that Mr: Westley should have a salary of cool. a-rear, whilst Trea surer, and that it was also agreed, upon his quitting that office, that he should have sool. per annum, for two years, and if he lived longer than that pe xiod, zsol. per annum afterwards. A Deed to this effete had been executed . by Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Richardson, and was now in the possession. of Mr. Grubb, who had not returned it. Mr. Westley claimed the arrears of his annuity, for which he had at prepent no security. The. LORD CHANCELLOR said, he Was anxious to relieve the parties from all anxiety upon this sub- . jefl, and also to deliver himself of it, but he muet first know, that he .I.ad ail the information relative .to It that was to be given. A Petition had come to his band only yesterday, which went .to make an . entire new arrangement ;—he must repeat, that some day should be 'appointed to conclude all fur ther information upon the subjea. As the matter at present stood before him, it was impossible to know whether Mr. Grubb was a Proprietor or not, Mr. Grubb saying he was, and Mr. Shetidan sayir% he was not. As to Mr. Richardson, it did not ex aElly appear in what situation he stood relative to the Theatre. With res;.th to Mr. HOLLIST'S Client, a Petition would he expensive, but the matter should be before the Court. Mr. Flom. tsT said a feW words more on behalf of Mr. Westley. Mr. SHERIDAN said,. it was his earnest wish that the Case of Mr. Westley should have a fair hearing as well as every other. He was extremely anxious that his own condud should be sifted to the bottoin, as well, as every circumstance relative to the Concern. • At the same time there was no person to whom delay was more vexatious than himS'elf. He was the more anxious upon the sub. jed because an objection . had been made to the reading of his Affidavits, on the ground of.their not being filed in time, tho'ugh that was the only way - by which he could answer what had been brought forward on the other side. Mr. Holland's Affidavit had been introduced by Mr. MANSFIELD'S Client . ; he did not objet to any Affidavit on the ' other side, but he submitted to - his Lordship that time should be given to answer the Affidavits he had brought forward. He pledged himself not to bring krward any further information, but he - would not object to the Affidavits on the other side, al though they might not be. presented in time. He , hoped till Lordship would ha, little further trim-. ble upon the subject, and he was convinced his final decision would be founded in Justice to all Patties. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he had read the Affidavits of Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Grubb, and he was of opinion they contained matter which it was important he should be acquainted with, nor did.he . think the filing of either of those Affidavits improper. - In consequence of Mr. Holland's Affi davit; there was a Petition now before the Court, calling upon the Trustees to rill Upon Mr. Holland to Complete his original Contrad. It was his duty to consider whether that Petition could be support ed or not. He did not mean to say that Mr. Hol land's Affidavit; or any Affidavit in answer to it, was improper, but from the attention he had given to the subjed, he hoped he might throw himself upon the Parties,. and that he might kno' when he had got all the information they meant to-give him. Mr. HOLLAND said; that the starementg which had appeared in the Public Papers of assertions made by Mr. Sheridan, had done him a very great injury b and materially affected his character. He had filed his Affidavit eight days before the final hearing of this Cause, and not a single fan contained in it had been contradicted but his misfOrtune was; that the circumstances contained in his Affidavit were buried in . that Court, whilst the speeches A:3f Mr.' Sheridan were every day published to the World. It was a fad well known, that he had not ex pended, the _sum of 45,0601, but, as appeared by his. Affidavit, no more than 71,oOd1:. which was within the Estimate, that being 80,0001, and not 75,0001. as was proved by the accounts. When the dazzling proposal for rebuilding the Theatre was first made, it appeared that 80,0001, was to be immediately raised, and that the sale of Boxes and other matters was to make it Up 14.1,0601, Of this ouly 71,0001. had been a&ually paid, and only 75,0001. laid out ; what became of the remainder he'Could not tell, but this was certain, that there were only Bills for 75,0001. He humbly sub mitted to. his Lordship, that his Affidavit-might be read, ,that the Publiu might. know how the matter stood. The Loan CHANtELLott said, that when this matter first came forward, Mr. Sheridan did make some statement relative to Mr. Holland. He could only say, that the Court could not decide before Counsel, and parties were heard, , whether the mat ter they were about to state, was relevant or not, and this was pert: fitly obvious, that justice could not be done, if all parties were not allowed to state what they believed Lo be true. Mr. Sheridan cet taint), did reflex upon Mr. Holland ; he thought the matter so stated was not relevant, and he thought he should have said to Mr. Sheridan at the time, what he should have said to any Counsel in a similar situation, that it was not relevant ; but it was im possible for the Court, in the course.of its multifa rious duty, not sometimes to omit something.-- Mr. Holland alledged, that his chartiaer was in jOred : he was sorry for it ; but 'Mr. Holland must excuse him if he could not prevent any state ments made in that. Court .from gOing. before the Public. He thought, however, that those who were conacious of being influenced by just motives and of itfling tpon conscientious jiatinds, need not feel nfuch froM the observations Nlle in News papers. if it was :the Law `of O r e Land, that what passed in a Court 'of justiee . shoUld be` pub. fished to the World, the matter `would of cOnrse go forth to the Public whether he interfered' or not. The question had been 'decided by Chief Justice EYai; and though he 'paid the utmost respett tti.the ability and legal knowledge of that Judge, there was still no other authority than a nisi prius case. would say, however, 'that if the private happiness of an individual could, as appeared in :he case of Mr. Holland; be thus injured; he should be glad to know 'what end of public uti lity could` be answered by it ? But whether the' publication was legal 'or illegal; it must rest with 'Mr. Holland to at as he thought proper • With respeet to the reading of the Affidavit, he must ob .serve, that he could not deVote the whole' time of the Court to thiS concern. Whenever the day came for him to decide, which he hoped would not go yond next Tuesday, he should then consider the matter of the several Affidavits before him; and should make theise observations Which he thought were called for relative to Mr. Holland, whilst he should at the same time do every thing that was consistent with justice to all parties': Mr. HOLLAND said, he had understood that the reading of the Affidavit was a mere matter of form. The LORD CHANcELLoa observed, he was, not at all surprised at' the 'anxiety displayed by Mr. Holland—he Thought it did him credit; Mr. SH E RIDAN said, he trusted his Lordship would allow, that by presenting the Petition relative tb Mr. Holland, he had taken the fairest way to bring - the matter before the Court. The Loan CH,cELLott said, he wished his opinion to be rightly understood. The observa tion relative' tb Mr. Holland was not relevant at the time it was made ; it was now rendered so by the Petition. Mr. Ac Na said, in reference to what had been stated by Mr. Sheridan, that he did not oppose the reading of Mr. Sheridan's Affidavits, but he did not think them an answer to what he brought forward. _ _ Mr. GRUBB, brother to Mr. Grubb who claims to be a Proprietor, said, he could make it appear by Affidavit, that Mr. John Grubb was a Proprietor, contradiaing at the same time, which he should be sorry to do, some statements on the other side. • Mr. AGAR again add' essed the Court. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he wished to be delivered from so desultory a conversation. The SOLICITOR GENERAL submitted, that no Pe:ition or Affidavit should be received after Smut by next. The LORD CHANCELLOR decided that none should be received after Saturday next, unless by his particular direaion. COURT OF KING's BENCH, DEC. 16. SITTINGS BEFORE LORD I:ENYO4 AND ASPECjAL JURY, IN GUILDHALL, _LONDON. LITTLEDALE AND OTHERS W. POYNTON AND OTHERS. THIS was an Alion .for Damages for the non performance of a CootTae.t. Mr. Easi‘lN'e said, the jury would hate very little trouble in the decision' of this case, because, upon an attentive perusal of it, he was convinced it, was a very plain one. The Defendants had put them Selves to a good deal of unnecessary trouble and expence in preparing for a Defence which would be found to amount to nothing, for it was one which could not be received in a Court of Justice. The Defendant, Mr. Poynton, lived at Wakefield, where he liad'a large Warehouse for the reception of Corn. He came to the 'counting house 'of the Plaintig, Who imported Wheat to a large amount at Hull . . He said he was desirotis of pun:basing Wheat, and that he was willing to give six guineas a quarter for it ; Upon which a conversation arose in which Mr. Par-- kin Son, one of the Firm of the Plaintiffs' house, said; they had 'an expedation of a Vessel arriving soon with about 850 quarters of Wheat from Pomerania, and he read to the Defendant exit - ads from several letters they had from Hamburgh, of the 28th 'of February, and the 28th of March, giving an account of the Ship being cxpeted to sail at the first opening of the water at Wismur, which would not be long, and the Plaintiffs gave the Defendant all the information they possessed 'upon the sUbje6t, upon which the Plaintiffs and the Defendant came to the following agreement in writing " 1 ail, z 4 of May 1800, Mr, Poyntop bought of Littledale and Co, 850 quarters Of Wheat, daily expelled by" the Anna Catherine Eliza, Captain Jank, at i2b shillings Per quarter, payable by Banker's Bills at two Months date, fee. ;, the danger of the seas ex cepted, to be delivered in as good condition as can be'expetaed according to sample, considering the length of the voyhe." On the second of May 1866, thin wts a good bargain, for the Defendant had actually paid three shillings per quarter more for same other Wheat ; but afterwards the article fell, and that :was the whole English of this case the Defendant refused to take the Wheat. On the 9th of May, - the' Market fell about five shillings per quarter, and so on the loth, the Defendant iwrote a letter to the Plaintiffs, dated on the loth of May, 1800, direded to Messrs, Littledale and Co. stating, on behalf of the Defendant, and his partners,—"When we made the agreement with you for Wheat, say 850 guar, tens, on the ad instant, it was then understood that the same would be delivered in two or three days, at.the most as we had none, and as there is no' 'account of its.arrival, we do not consider ourselves bound for the same, and shall therefore from this notice, decline accepting the same." To which the Plaintiffs wrote an answer, dated Hull, the i zth of May, in which the Plaintiffs said, they should hold the Defendants to their agreement—upon which the Defendant, Poynton, wrote another Letter to the Plaintiffs, alledging, that it was not he who had broken the Terms of the Contract, but the Piaintiffs had broken theirs, as the Corn was not yet delivered, and expressing an expedation, that they would make satisfy lion for the disappoint ment. The truth of the matter was this : if the Article had been of the same price as when this 'Speculator in. Corn contraded for it, he would have waited with patience for it, and would have taken it cheerfully into - his Granary, and . the Porir might ruSk at it through a Telesccipe, t‘ntil the priCe for it kal become surn::ieeitly high in his opi.. nion to bring it out again. Ihe kiss wnz very considerable upon it, however ; and Mr: EKSKI . Nt Maid he was glad 'of it, and- wished it had been much greater. A mess was then called, who proved the whole of the conversation between Mr. Poyntoti and one of die Plaintiffs, As stated by Mr. ERMINE; and like Wise the agreement already stated, Ed wrEt the is'ubscribing witness. lie proved lob that the Ektia'of the letters which had been sent to the 'Plaintiff - 4, and all the information they possessed, was faithfully communicated 'to the De . .; tendan: Mr. POynton ; and it was ()roved also, that the Whea:', when it 'did arrive, whir t was a consi.: dcrable time afterwards, was tendered to the De fendant, &c: It was proved also, that Corn fell about ss. quarter on the 9th of May I Soo, at the market at Wakefield. Lord KENYON said., that for the purposes of this Caine, it . did not signify whether it tell or rose, excepts it o shelved 'the conscience of the De. fendant. The ATTORNEY GENERAL submitted to the Jury, that the Witness for the Plaintiffs had not' represented the Case correctly ; that the under standing between the parties was, that the whole of the (Zinn was to he deliVered in two or three day's, otherwise that the Defendant Should repudiate the Conrrad, and this, he contended, "'was to be inferred from the words of the Contrad, as well as' the probability of things; for the Contra,` stated the ship to be expelled should call a witness to prove, that the information stated by the Plaintiff's witness', was not corre&; that the cir:. cUrnstances stated in the letters were notcommuni cated•to the Defendanr, and that the Defendant was: not to wait an indefinite time for this Corn, after giving this high price, &e. He did wait seven or eight days', which was a reasonable time. .John Richardson, Clerk and Nephew to one of the Defendants, was examined, and li,. said, that Mr. Poynton said in the Plaintiff's ounting-house.,. the Coro must come immediately, or else it wou!:1 not do tor him, and that Mr. Clarkson, 'one of the Plaintiffs, said to Mr. Poynton,. if. he would stop: till Tuesda):, he had no doubt it could arrive. SoMe of the paragraphs, - .which were extraels from letters to the Plaintiffs, and which the Plaintiff's witnenS— sworOvere read to the .DefendantPoynton,, were stated to this witness, and he said they were not read to him at all, &e.-Scc-. , . The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, he had anotner . witness IO: - •the same ile4, but he could not go fur ther than the statement Of. this witness, and there_ foie he Ocinld not eAll him. Lord KENYON said, there never was a clearer case than this was: the ,Plaintiff was entitled to 're cover most clearly ; for the Agreement. spoke for itself. The Defendant knew that the arrival of the vessel was a circumstance of which the Plaintiffs had no more controul than the Delenciantit must depend upon the elements. There was one obser vation made by the Attorney General, on which his Lords* could not help saying a few words.—The observation was ) that it was not likely that the Defendant would agree to give this price and wait an indefinite period. . " Gr a ci ous G o d!" . sa id hi s Lordship, " Have we forgotten , the pralices of these Engrossers and Monopolists—has it not ap peared before us in evidence, and even in lodgment, that they have not only paid the price of the mar ket at once without offering to lower it, but -that they have offered to give more than was asked 10., why don't you. ask 161. ? give you 161.-- , Have.we. nor heard. these things proved ; it might appear extraordinary that a purchaser could do this, but there is no won:ler in it when you come to con, sider, that this very pUrchaser has got an enormous quantity of the article in his own haods, and that, in fad ) he is interested in giving the highest price, that any body askS him ; and - then he takes care to Charge the poor consumer roundly—he . having ob tained the command of the marker. Ido not wi.sh_ to make use of invidious expressions on these per sons, bit I Cannot. help feeling these ..tbings. To be sure, nothing can, be more clear Chan.the Plain tiffs' right to: recover in this Adiot4''" - Verdi& for the Plaintiffs,—Damages to be corn putcd by Mr..LOIIION . , to whom the quantum was . referred. . CbRNWAL WRIGHT. This tas - an Aaiun for Criminal Correspondence between the Defendant and the Plaintiff's wife. That propf-whih constitutes the right of Ataion,' here deStroyed ir; 'namely; the Adultery ;' for if appeared by the-evidence of the - Plaintiff's own'wit.: ness ) that the Plaintif'f's Wife had actually solicited the Defe6dant to co►n;;;it the ark ; and it was stated,: that there was untold to the Court, a shocking tale of the most ihatrieless and disg - usting lewdness, &c., but Which was better concealed. Mr. ERSKINE said, he had tried, and tried in vain, to make the Plaintiff withdrAw his Record in this case, for 'he foresaw, on reading the case, the disgrace which must attend the disclosure of it ; but there Was a fatuity about some men which no thing:but their ruin could overcome. He had ab solutely over-ruled all advice; and so the Cause came on, and he was glad there 'was end. of it.— An . Advocate could nor, consistent with the rules of the profession, refuse to open a case if a Brief r; as given to him, but he was very uneasy while , this was under his care. Lor KENYON said, he saw enough o( •this Cause to be confident it was humanity to, the Plaintiff' to proceed no further in it. The advice which Mr. Erskine gave the 'laintifF, was wise and very kind; but if a man would run !lis head against a wall, no• body could help it.—Plaintiff nonsuited.• GRAYSON V. CASTLING. An Mt . = upon a Bill of Exchange the Drawer against the Acceptor. Defence—that the Bill was altered after it was accepted; the date changed ; and so it appeared in the evidence, but who altered it did not appear. The Declaration contained money counts, s well as that upon the Bill of Exchange ; but the Plaintiff