The Express.
London, England, 1850-07-01 00:00:00

Law 3

COURT OF COMMON PLEAB.—Samtorr.
homes AT PM PSIOS AT GOITAKALL..—DITTaIa LOSS CAMS
JTIMOT WIMPS ASS A BPSLIAL JUST.
DICISOS v. ZaziPut.—Acrtue isv TNN PCRCHAIDUIa
OP a C•NO0 or CONN SU RIO TSB TUN B•LASCII or
TUN POSCR•eII MONIST. ON Accoutre or TSB Corot NOT
11110 SNIIISID IS • 0000 CONDITION.
Sir P. Timelier, , and Mr. Bramwell. appeared for
the pleintiff.; sad Mr. Martin, Q C., Mr. Orealweed,
Q C.. aid Mr. Renal. represeeedt the defieedasts.
'llls was at adios beraght by Matra. Diokan, who are
ewe beam at Belfast, plait Maws Lasts, cote dealon
lowideta. to reamer eampeaatim in datums arbiter from
cite %reed sake a sheet 1.600 marten of ladiaa sere at
Malta, whisk had been Miami at Thesealonies, which
proved to bombed that it was audeeined by the authori-
ties at Malta immedietele ou the arrival of tho vessel I.
which it wasiisiped at that port. It appeared Met eau
had been shipped at board a vessel sailed 0tt0.... at
Odium, acedonia (the cots keel, easier item Thum
Wales), is the begiseingof the year 1847. Tim shippers of
the cotsw.re /desire. Visatow, sastessate at Orfano, and
they coasiensid it to Mesas. Z'pisis, in Leda.
Mums. Z Maki, es hearing that the tern was
shipped. drew bills epos the plaintiffs, who had
aimed to purchase it. The amount for which
the bills were drawn was 5.0741. Is. 6J., and they were
duly honoured oe wilder( at inanity. Upon the arrival
of the Ottoman at Malts ea her way to Berated, it was die.
covered that the eau was iamb Meted, asd is sub a dem
genus Downtime that very serious spareheaeloas were saw-
mined that it would take ire or swell to such an mast as to
sink the ship. The autlawitirs nadir these cimuneteasse
immediately 'ashamed the taw, which was at onee leaded,
and after it became soffiaisatly dry was sold by public
satsios. sad peedated aft*, the payment of all exposes the
sum of 6301. The plaintiffs on learning this were desirous
of Midas their money returned on the ground that the de.
Madams had failed to fulfil their contain, but all that they
received wee the 8301. realised by the sale at Malts. Tbsy,
however, esseldered that the corn could not have been
shipped is a good and merchantable) toeditiow, end they
therefore brought the present action to recover the differ-
ence between the sum realised and the sum paid by Mem to
the Wombats. The mode gasetion in eti•pate betwetn the
Duties was whether or not too seen what it was shipped at
Orfaeo was to proper condition to undergo ao long a voyage
as fires that pert to Leedom or Cork. which would take about
three months. Oa the put of the plaintiffs it wee ceatesded
that the etre meld not have bees shipped in a good and
machined& sonditioe, as it was &covered to be fensontier
when the Ottawa arrived at Malta, which was tole 17
days' sail from Odium. The dideedeets, at the other
hard, urged that they amid not hi answerable for the state
N *seams WON shipassate provided it was in a good sad
seiscshostalla 011111dithe it for sale es the spot where it was

shipped.
The &modem of sevenl triteness who wore examined cm
both lama Ilelamica sad Melte were read and were very
contradialery. Some of the witnesses on behalf of the
plaintiffs Eseiered that portions of the corn were in a bad
stwe awl illetataid wends when placed on board,
ad others prevail the bad state of the entire cargo
whim it arrived at Malta. The witnesses oa the part
of the defendeats swore that the corn was ell laud,
dried, and to Tory good condition when shipped, and
thtt its beansieg heated was a thing beyond the con-
trol of the dehadaats, breams in the year 1147 every cargo
of &Maim cora which was shipped an Itsetsd. The
defendaats isomplaimd of the cargo having been seised and
coodemned at Malta, it being alleged that if it bad been pro.
perly dried sad taboo can of, it could have been restored sad
would ban realised the full value.

The Lord Chief Justice wormed up at considerable
length, and the question left by his lordship to the jury mu,
whether or not when the corn wee s►ipped et O►fatto it wee
in a good and merchantable condition ? If it wee, then they
would find a verdict for the defendants; but if it was not,
then the plaiatiffs would be entitled to a verdict, and it
would be for the jury to say w►at the amount of the
damages ought to be.
The jury then retired and, after a long &bones, returned
into curt with a verdict, " That the cargo was not is
a merchantable condition for • foreign voyage," which wee
a verdict for the plaintiff.. The jury messed the damages
at 2,2601.
Tbil case was commenced en Friday last, and a gnat deal

of evident* woo Wooed oa both shfei.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—SATVADAT.
Firma. a &JIM
THE GORHAM CASE.

Ex AAAAA ma Bomar or EIBTIII IN 11 Tor Ray.
Coarsues Goon Am.

The Attoraey•General at the sitting of the court proceeded
to show erase against the rale for a prohibition in this case,
which has already =ea so fully and friquntly before the
public as to reader any recurrence to the facts gaits uneene-
sary. The learned 'oedemas commenced by observing that
he did not regret the personal trouble which the preparation
to discharge the duty of showing cause against this rule bad
cost him, and, with the &Watson of those learned friends
whose able moisten= he bad he did not doubt his ability to ,
satisfy the coon that the rule ought to be discharged. la cos=
=doting the first point, on the construction of the sots of 24 '
sad 25 Henry VIII, it was impossible not to see that this
rule owed is origin to an object faz deeper sealed
than was at first sight involved. That object was the
revival of the authority of the Houses of Convocation,
awl be agged to *sprees his impression that that wee a step
width could not fail to be attended with the most serious
ea' fetal coasequesca. Os this subject the learned Atter-
aey General could sot but agree with Mr. Burkt's letter to
the sheriff of Bristol, wherein that celebrated man had re-
corded his modernisation of such a project. In order to
comae to a correct decision on this point it was necessary to
extmine the 24th Henry VIII., which had been pared over
in comparative silence hitherto. For this purpose a copy of
the statute from the Record t Mee had been brought dowa
and the coo= would perceive that the strangement was in
four paragraphs instead of ten sections. The object of the
act is thus more distinctly brought under notice, aod it
would not he unimportant to observe that the preamble
greatly vain from that used in the 26:h Henry VIII
Tam we., however, no doubt that the 24:h Henry VIII.
gave three classes of suits is which tho appeal to
Some was prohibited, and wi hoot venturing into the
doubtful field of historical data, it might be
Named that Henry VIII. wished to divorce Quote Ca•
thermal from him at that time, and that the establishment
of such an appeal is his own person was highly desirable.
We aecoidingly find from Herbert of Cherbory's life of
that monaten, p. 344, that soon after the passing of that
act Cfllllol,l proceeded to Dilatable, and cited the Queen to
spa ear before him as representing the King. On her
°sham to *ripest, the archbishep, who was seem
naiad by several bishops, and "many great clerks," pro-
ceeded to pronounce her is contempt, and ultimately a
=steno of divorce was given. Now, it is said, that as
appeal to the Kiag in such a ease would be monstrous;
bat as the common law =lows of as appeal to
the King from convocation itself, there is as much
abrudi•y ono way as the other. Be that as it may
It is submitted that the 26th Henn VIII. did sot =solo.
rata the 24th Henry VIII. in It, but rather repealed it. The
preemble of the former act seta up the elan as the apt
jaws Mao three dame of suits thus mentioned, in one
of Ida* the K•ogwas then so deeply interested ; but the
preamble of the Ws Hoary VIII. speak, of their emana-
tion, sad their bob* made eat= at varieties with the
law • molt isally. lb* int section proceeds to ens= as a
=M it of lam that the convocation shall not be holds.
inept war the King's writ, sad that it shall cooly
Nome oath settees as may be presses= to them
by him. T eat the. gives to the Grows the power
el
dr:idles whether there shall be any appeal at =l—
iken with there sea be =thing more opposed to the
notion that it was paned to extend the appellate jurisdiction
of the connealies. Reim that statute, at all events, the
appeal to the isimisiellas was only in 3 cases whore the crown
was conarsed, sad item= a ligesassument which was urged
by the Court of Oases= Piles that the crows could not be
affected except by Ewen weeds, and if there were so
Mier authority the court would inept the judgmeat of
that coot and of the Coon of Queen's Beath as =sad ex-
positions of the law on this rattiest. If, oa the other band,
all cases were to be spoilable at under 24 Usury VIII., there
would be no appeals from the courts of the archbishops at
dl, which are declared to be definitive. The 26 Healy VIII.
aecordingly goes on to give appeals, as is heretofore dose is
Admiralty came, and, though the crown was generally =tit-
rested, there the appeal was to the &legatee. If this bad
Imes an objection there would ban been some proviso in-
toted, but nose such appears ; and, as this was an express
f smsedial act, it may he urged that there we.
a amble appeal contemplated, and that then:ciao end the
emanation have concurrent jurisdiction. The crown as head
of the church would retain its prerogative power, and Good-
ma's Bess, and Bishop Gardiner's, may be ea .d as =atoms
of this double appeal. Passing from the judgment of the
Common Plea to the authorities by which it may be sap-
portei, the earliest we find is an Irish act, named coos after
the 26th His. Vlll.—nantely, Ia 28th Hen. VIII., e. "
which ties a the appeal in all cease to the king, and is Sloe
althidian sew the =avocados, though it fasted la high
power in Ittihad at that time. How can this be onenated
for exes Wes this eammption common tow text writers,
that thseßini WA repealed the 24th Hes. VIII. ea sera ea
be had assomplehrd his objects. In later the.. that statute
was rosialesd by the 28th Gee. 111., e. if, and it is
impamilde N doubt the infernos that no smelt Weal
them exists, The same view of the at is takes la
Roll's A tide " Prerogative de Hoy," aad " Power
de Cita " where no such appeal as is now contended
far is measismed. There is also the eautemporanea expoeitie
of Ruda and ethers engaged in the Digests of the Statists,
beibre mad afar 26 Henry VIII., all of which are IWO ,
ra to the miasma of es= an appeal ; and Nathaniel Hoe"
Is his " Mersey of the Law," which is highly spoken of by
Lod Chatham, expreetly smuts that Henry having ere
end= Is the 'West proposed by 24 Henry VIII., had re-
sealed the power then gives to the easvotation is the 26
lion VIII.
Bases Abienoa—That is the opiates of • lamas, net of
a lawyer.
The Attorney-General—Yee; but he refire tb flelfta
ea authority, sad it is at all events as good as some ei these
whisk =re dud on the other side. We thee NOD W
Bishop Watass's case, where it was cowed= In *rissole
that the ounvontion kid no each appellate Whiled's ; sad
though it was Is argument only, it is not without maga.
After this is kton's " Onto Judielarana," p. 431,1
when the appeal is gives to the King without
allusion Se the esavotadon. Asa the SUM My be mid
el Thalia Cedes Zia*" published Is 1686, Chant'