The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1807-11-13 00:00:00

CHAMBERS R. CHAMBERS.

Ii

Mr. Pas[ strewed cause why a %1. tit of Attach.
ment should not issue against a Mr. Nlouncey.
Sheriff of Carlisle, for an alleged miscooduft in
a-t allowing a warrant, which was irregularly ob-
tained from M. odice, to be ted.

It appeared that the warrant. which was intended
to have been executed against one of the panics in
tne above adorn, had been procured 'ruin Mr.
M.mncees dci k, duties that Gentlemaa's abuners
by a Mr. Lighttoot. an attorney, whom be (Lensed
improper to be entrured with the eiteCiltiall of it
and upon his bearirg of this. he ( Mouncey)
went himself. peraeo..ly. sad took It, wartant from
that rodivideali end gave it to another. For ibis
conduit a eomplarat had been made to the emit
by Na. Lightfoot; but it app:aring that the SoenlF
had a ight to s, e the warrant arcitted in any man•
awes Lr pieased, the Rule was accordingly discLargeil.

COURT OF COMMON PLIAS, Now 12.

M•II.I4ALL V. VOUlt.

This was an application to the Court upon a
que.tios of lave wb:ch had arisen in a CrOW of
eittitT, to ascertain the title that the Piiiititiff pos-
se:o'W is anti to certain prem ix'. and which the
D4oellsianio OE the prolluelinn t f a prcper (life. W 43
willing to purchase. It teas evidently a sham
eaves, without any adverse !mai rr of litigation,
111:ich the Court reiUSC4IIO COWICAIR, alleging that
it tat there to decide causes. and Lut to give opi-
nions.

Si AAAAA ami vilfg o. SILD61•11.

Sergeant Cocksu shoved cause why the Rule to
stet aside the metier ad rat faroradria in this affirm
should Lot be niade absolute. He presumed the
grounds of that application west, that because, tin-
der the direction of the Court, the least possible
damages were given, viz.—a farthing—that them.
fore it was contended toe Plaintiff was not entitled
to his costs. The fait was, that the :manic was aJ-
mitted in the justification, and to the battery the
Defendant had pleaded the genital issue. The
Jury, in consequence, ts.aad a
general verditk,
whorl) entitled the Plaitt.ff us his costs.
Luau Cutts Justics—.4 How can the Plaintii;
in thi. c .e. treceee costs sith,,ut the certificate of
'--loation where
wound a general
ectitles the
nothing with-
is is merely an
escettatti

which party he is to me Let the Rule be made ab-
solute with costs.
ARBITRATION.

the AsNipiee of MUNN. V. i•
Seljeallt BAIL•y moved for a Rule to chew cause
why the award in this case should not he set aside.
Tie Bankrupt, Bunn, was an insurance-broker, and
the Defendant an underwriter. There was an un-
settled account between them, and its adjustment
was left to arbitration. There were same items in
the account given in on the part of the Bankrupt,
to which the Defendant objeaed, as being merely oa
slips, and nut on policies, which the law requited.
There was a turn of 1001. with which, is the ac-
count of the Bankrupt, the Defendant was credited,
having ',illy a similar voucher ; which the Plaintiff,
on the saute grounds as were taken by the Defendant,
refused to admit. The Arbitrator tack upon him-
self to examii.e the Defendant, and to receive as
evidence the memorandums and slips, which the
Learned Setjrant contended, by the statute of the
52J of Geo. 111. were inadmissible evidence.

'There was also another ground for this applica-
tion, in crimecpience of a re-assurance on the part
of the Ddendant.

The COL PT-..-" Do these circumstances appear
on the award r

Set jeant Bt Lev—" No. I believe not."
Loon CHILE .Iticrice—', This was a general
reference to All A. litrator. for him to exercise
own judgment. l'here is no affidavit that the
award was wrong ; hut the Court is called upon to
set betausc the Arbitrator decided urn a
law did- I et.: I..iin that by which this Court is regu-
lated. Call we entertain it ?"

Serjeant IlAiLey—•• With deference, I conceive
the aroitrator brund to decide by law, and also
bound only to r-ce,ve legal evidence."
Baron Roox—.4 Brother Bailey, an Arbitrator
is not bound to obey the Statute ot Limitations, nor
is he prevented trom examining a party in the
cause."
Mr. Justice CMAICIRB" I do think that an
Arbitrator, deriving his authority from this Court,
cannot exerci►e a power of superseding those Sta-
tutes, or the principles of evidence. by which the
supreme Court from which his power emanates, is
governed."
Cu tar —" There is also ancther grcrdn&fot rer
assurance.—Take a Role to drew cause."

ala
Jury t ivaOl • b.uerr is charged. and the u
vetch& that thoviose the finding
Plaints** to costs. Their finding is n
out the cerssfic.ste of the Judge. "'lsis
attempt ut sise Y.. u itP6 Atoms),
-J.-IL-v*lllll.rd