The Press.
London, England, 1853-06-18 00:00:00

gab) AO Voila.

A Cuniors Stir, long pending before various
French tribunals, between the Marquis of London-
derry and M. Soupi, a Paris wine-merchant, has at
length been decided finally in favour of the marquis.
According to the account given in Galignani, it ap-
pears that in 1850 M. Soupe proposed to Lord Lon-
donderry to supply him with a quantity of rare wines,
said to come from the cellars of King Charles Dix,
and to take certain cargoes of coal from his lordship's
colliery in payment. This proposal was agreed to,
but when the wine was delivered the Marquis of Lon-
donderry found reason to complain of its quality, and
therefore M. Soupe began on his side to complain of
the coal. The mutual complaints, however, ended in
Lord Londonderry keeping the wine, some terms
being at the same time arranged as to the particular
quality of the coals which were to be furnished to M.
Soupe. Nevertheless the Frenchman continued dis-
satisfied, and when, in June, 1852, the marquis came
with his family to Paris, he caused him to be arrested
for the whole debt of ten thousand francs. The ar-
rest was exeeuted with great rigour, the garde du
commerce refusing to leave his lordship's room whilst
he dressed. The noble lord was carried in a cab to
the Civil Tribunal, when be represented the facts or
the case, but the judge maintained the arrest, and
ordered him to be conveyed to the debtors' prison in
the Rue de Clichy. The marquis then caused him-
self to lbe driven to Messrs. Rothschild's, and oh
tained from them 10,000 f., which he deposited as se-
cuity in the Caisse des Depots et Consignations, and
was t`lereupon released. At a subsequent period
1411 Londonderry brought an action against M.
*Qupt before the Civil Tribunal, for the purpose of

THE PRE S'S.

having the convention between them enforced, and also
demanded that he should be condemn -d to pay damages
for having arrested him illegally and without suffi-
cient cause. To this action M. Soupe responded by
declaring that, in consequence of toe delay which
had taken place, the coal would be of no further use
to him, and by demanding that he should not be
bound to receive it, but that the 10,001) francs depo-
sited should be paid to him. The Civil Tribunal de-
cided in M. Suupe's favour. Against this judgment
the marquis appealed, and the appeal was argued at
length before the Imperial Court. The court then
decided that the noble lord had been unjustifiably
arrested by M. Soupe, as the engagement between them
was, that the latter should be paid for his wine in
coal, and not in money. It accordingly quashed the
judgment of the court below, but ordered that the
10,000 francs should not be given up until atter the
delivery of the coal ; and, considering that damages
were due to the marquis for his illegal arrest, con-
demned M. Soupe to pay all the costs both of the pro-
ceedings before the Civil Tribunal and of the Appeal.
EDWARD BOYER, who had been four times com-
mit ed and imprisoned for the same small debt of
3/. 155., applied to the Bench for release
from Whitecross-street prison. His creditor had
taken proceedings against him in the County Court,
and after he had suffered one term of confinement he
was again arrested and imprisoned for another, under
new judgments for the identical debt. Thus, in
August, 1851, he spent seven days in prison ; in the
following May, forty more ; in July, again forty ; and
now stood committed for a fourth period of a like
duration. Lord Campbell found that, under the
County Courts Act, no amount of imprisonment
extinguished the debt, but that the judges held the
formidable power of issuing warrants ud infinitum at
their discretion. He could, therefore, give no order
for tho applicant's release.