The Express.
London, England, 1846-12-21 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-GVILDITALL.

Nl;;E;L;T—icibr;:iirTijisirce Cresswell and a special Jury.
HALL V. GURNEY.—THE CHINFAE
Serjt. Bylee, Mr. Serjt. Dowling, and Mr. Henderson for the
plaintiff; Mr. Serjt. Channel' and Mr. Peacock for the de-
fendant; the Solicitor-General on behalf of the crown. This
was an action brought by Messrs. Hall, Custom-house agents,
against Mr. Samuel Gurney, jun., as the executor of the late
Mr. Nathan Dunn, proprietor of the Chinese Exhibition, to
recover a sum of money alleged to be due to the plaintiff
from the estate of the deceased. The plaintiff's claim con-
sisted of 52/. for his services as a Custom-house agent in
clearing the articles of the exhibition on their arrival at the
Custom-house ; 500/. for the " risk" incurred by the plaintiff
in entering into a bond to the Treasury ; 62/. for paying
newspaper reporters; 31. for petitioning the Treasury to per-
mit the intxoductiou of the exhibition, and a few other items
of a small amount. It appeared that the Lords of the Trea-
sury consented to permit the introduction of this valuable
and curious collection for a period of six months, upon re-
ceiving a bond to the amount of 20,0001. Mr. Hall and Mr.
Dunn entered into this bond, which was renewed from tima
to time, and upon each renewal the plaintiff claimed a
commission of 100/. The ground upon which the
plaintiff made his demand of 621. for paying reporters
was, that Mr. Dunn, being the defendant in an action of
" Thomas v. Dunn," was desirous of obtaining a good report
in the Times newspaper, and that he expressed his willing-
ness to give any sum fur that purpose. A. gentleman named
Roper mentioned the circumstance to the editor of the Times,
and told him Mr. Dunn's inclination upon the subject. The
editor, it was stated, replied, " Go and report the case your-
self:" and accordingly Mr. Roper wrote a full account of the
proceedings and published them in the Times newspaper.
For his services in this respect he received from Mr. Hall, on
behalf of Mr. Dunn, 511., which, together with a suns of 111.
paid to Mr. Roper for obtaining information respecting Mr.
Thomas, the plaintiff in the action, amounted to 621.
Evidence upon these latter points was given by Mr. Roper,
who stated that he was authorised to furnish the report in
question ; that Mr. Dunn complimented him upon its rue-
racy, and that he received the sum mentioned from Mr. Hall.
On the part of the defendant evidence was given to show
that the cause of action arose in the year 1311, that Mr.
Dunn died in 1844, and that no demand had been made by
the plaintiff until after his death. It was contended, more-
over, that between the years 1311 and 1314, accounts Lad
been tendered by Mr. Hall to Mr. Dunn, but that no
mention whatever had ever been made of the matters consti-
tuting the present claim. It was also urged that the services
of the plaintiff were rendered gratuitously ; he and Mr. Dunn
having been fur a long time upon terms of intimacy. In
proof of this argument a letter was produced, in which it
appeared that Mr. Dunn had expressed his thanks to Mr. Hall
"for his kindness and attention." In reference to the claim
of 62/. alleged to have been paid to Mr. Roper, the learned
counsel observed, that it was somewhat remarkable that the
dates of the cheques received by that gentleman were prior
to the time when the trial of " Thomas v. Dunn " took place.
Mr. Justice Cresswcll, in summing up the case, said that
with respect to the claim fur the plaintiff's " risk " iu enter-
ing into the treasury bond, there was no evidence of custom
or usage to justify such a demand in the absence of any con-
tract expressed or implied.
The jury retired for about half an hour, and returned into
court with a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 1001., which
rim was reduced to 90/. is., on the ground that three sepa-
rate items of ss. each had u'reaely been paid.