The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-01-14 00:00:00

THE BRITISH PRESS

trade flnurished as long as protecting duties against the imports-
Lion of foreign silks were maintained; but, in an evil hour, the de-
parted spirit of a modern econontint, now no more, hovered user
the councils of the notion, and peistaided Ministers to relax those
duties, and lower thtnn to a ruinous extent. And what was the
consequence? 4410.000 EMIR. embarked in this important depart-
'tient of trade, were as the eve of being thrown out of eniplay, and
11.000,000/. of capital abruptly withdrawn and diverted into
another channel ! He affirmed that Ministers had broken down
in the first experiment which they had tried; and free trade,
either in manufactures or in torn, cool) never be entered into by
this country with another. Granted, that the manufacturers of
this article had overtrsded t that the home and foreign market had
been glutted to a surfeit; this was an evil that would WC itself ;
a temporary suspension of capital would right the evil. But be-
fore equal laws were applied to diffetent countries, it should be
shown that they were in equal condition, and equal circumstances
as to the subject matter of the oso;iosed equality. 'Silt at site very
threshold of this case he found enough to convince hint that
Ministers were wrong. Fran T produced the raw article of silk on
her own territory; England imported it, at a considerable ex-.
pense! He alluded to this circumstance with a view, not merely of
showing that the experimental system of po:itical economy which
Ministers were pursuing was likely to be productive of serious injury
to the country, if they carried it farther—if they did not pause in their
career—but also to show that so far from there being any. )us: grounds
of jealousy between the agricultural and manufacturing interests,
there was an identity of interest dem:oiling an equality of protec-
tion. He had read in the interesting memoirs of the faithful Sully,
that the inhabitants of 31 ontpensier a, d Villerranche, during the
civil war, under Henry the Fourth of France, being determined to
destroy one another by a strange simultaneous movement, drew off
the whole of their forces, and during the night reached the walls of
these respective towns. and, finding them undefended, were
amazed at the dawn of day to find that they had aeized the citadel
and treasure of their opponent, but that each had lost its own.
Anti so it would be with rite manufacturers of Great Britain. if, by
' attending to the idle clamour for cheap bread, by goading the Le-
gisiamre of this country to adopt, indiscriminately, the principles
of free trade—tor
" Importunity will move
And gain what is denied to lore." •••
If, by aiding and abetting the new and visionary schemes of me-
dern economists. they succeeded in effecting any great alteration
in the present laws which protected the agriculture of England,
they would, in all probability, intlee,:, if Ministers were not de-
terred by these public expressions of opinion. succeed is polling
down the mighty and colossal fabric which represented the interests
of the land owners anti occupiers of the kingdom : Ina he felt that
he was speaking prophetically, when he declared th .t they them-
selves, and all that belonged to them, would be buried beneath the
rains, together with all that wss'dear to them in the country in
which they lived. Wilt these impre,:ainns lie most heartily seconded
the resolutions which Its) been moved by the lion. Baronet, and
gave them his most cordial annrohation.
It was then moved by Sir J. W. Sat IT II that a Satiety be form-
ed in the county of Dorset for the protection of agrimitute, and
that J. J. Farquharson, Em. be President of such Society.
Seconded by J. Bas ranD. Esq. and carried unaniinuusly.
The petition tni bath Houses of Parliament was moved and
read by Sir J. W. Savant.
Lieutenant-General BINGHAM moved that the petition be
adopted.
Seconded by J. CREE. lag. and carried unanimously.
It was then moved that the petition to the House of Lords be
presented by Earl Digby, and to the Commons by E. B. Portman,
Esq.
Among the numerous agriculturists present we noticed Sir J.
Smith, Gen. Bingham, J. J. Farquharson. Esq. I). P. Okeden,
Esq., the Reverend 11. F. Yeattrum, T. H. Bastard, J. Cree,
Esq., and nearly two hundred agriculturists of the first respects.
bility

LAW 2VO7'ICES.

CoURT OF KING'S BENCH.
ximmtsrx CAIJ37:I TO DE TRIED DT 9PECTAL IE2IEI

-......--.. .. -
THIS DAY AT WES-IDINsTEH.
v Rolland I Phillip. v Batoter.
lisrll v i;iielm Gold pein v
Drain. I the douise of Bulkley T; le King v Hewett, Esq.
V. ‘cittard Shgne v Berkeley, Esq.
Doe. en the sev.tiemi.teit of Ken- I Thou/min v. Neve.

aington and atonber v Forte.t.
Than wits be no itoin'enon Julia to-day.

T..41V I NTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING's
ESTMINSTER,
FRIDAY, JAN. 13.

Sittingt &jure the I.onD retire. JUSTICE and a Special Jury.
COI. F. MAW V. SYM MONS.
Thin was an action brought by the plaintiff', who is a retired
tradesman, living in Lower Brook-street, flroavenor-square, to re-
cover from the defendant, who is a getillentan of Meiotic tesiding
at Padditigton.green, the sum of 1.0001. on a Bill of Exchange,
&awe by a person named Delisle, on and accepted by the defend.
ant on the 6:h of December 1823. payable a; 12 months after date,
and which was endorsed by Delisle to a person named 31ago, who
endorsed it over to the plaintiff.
3lr. Brougham and 31e. Park conducted the came for the plain-
tiff; and 3lr. Searlett and 31r. Chitty appeared on behalf of the
defendant.
31r. litlnt7ollAM having proved the aeteptance by the defend-
Ant, and the several endorsement. on the said he should rest
hin ease upon the ground of Ins client being entitled to recover as
being the holder of the bill when it became due. If, however. his
Learned Friend Mr. Searlett should make it necessary for the plain.
tiff to adduce further testimony to establish his right, he was pre-
pared to do so.
Mr. SCARLF.TT said his Learned Friend no doubt anticipated
that further eviaetice would be required before he could prevail on
the Jury to give the plaintiff their verdict. He on the part of the
defendant addressed them with great confiden T as to the result of
this trial ; for he had not the least doubt of bring able most wk.
factorily to convince them, that not only had the bill, which was
the subject of the present action, been obtain I by 31r. 3Psgn, who
was the plaintiff's immediate endorser, upon an usurious consider.
atio:t, but also that the plaintiff' himeeir was the holder of it, not
for a, valuable, but for a colourable consideration only ; and when
he should have proved this, his Lordship would tell them, that
upon a bill obtained under such circumstances it was not compe-
tent for the plaintiff to maintain an action in a Court of Law.
Mr. Augustus Dellsle was called to prove these fasts. This
person stated himself to be a gentleman of literary pursuits, and
to be author of the French opera Agamemnon. He said he was a
native of France, and came to this country a few years ago, with a
viewlto write for, and heotherwiee connected with, the stage; but
his dramatic speculations wire not so profitable as he expected
them to he, and he consequently became embarras.ed. Having occa-
sion for noire ntoney in November. 1823, he made applicatinn to
the defendant (who had frequently berme acemomodated him in
the same way), for a loan of 2,000/. The defendant proposed to
give hint his acceptance. for two several sums of 1,000/., at 12 and
at 10 months date, which lie accordingly took. Soon afterwards
the witness applied to Mago to discount these two bills, who re-
ferred him to a person named ('oaten, a mercer, living in St.
31artin'e-lane. On the witness calling at Coates's, the latter in-
formed him that the hills should be discounted, provided he
Delisle) 41111111 allow 3751. to be deducted for the discount. After
some hesitation, the witness assented to this proposition, and on a
subsequent day he met Alago by appointment at Coates's house,
and received from him the whole amount of the two hills, Mago
deducting only the lawful discount of Live per cent. But the wit-
nc,s, in pursuance of the original agreement made between him
and Coates, afterwards gave to Coates two checks for the differ-
ence between the sum so deducted by Magri awl the B]sl. which
it had been agreed should he paid in the transaction.
Cross-examined by Mr. littOttottAM.—The witness had been in
prison both in this country and in France for debt. He was quite
certain that on his first applying to Alago to discount the bill,
Mago referred him to Coates to effect the arrangement, and that
the ntoney to be paid by him for the accommodation was 3751.,
which was accordingly paid by Mago's lino deducting the legal
charge, and then by Coates's being afterwards paid the difference.
Mago was not present when the witness paid the cheek to Coates.
Coates was then called, but did not appear, and he was called
upon his subpeena.
Mr. Buotrottaats in order to meet the evidence of Dag,

called
Henry Mago, who Pared that he was in the habit of dis-
counting good bills. In November or December 1823, Delisle
(whom he bad known before) called on iiiin to discount the de-
fendant's two acceptances Inc 10001. each, and in order to induce
the witness to do so, Delisle represented the detendant to be a man
of large property, that he kept his 'carriage and two footmen, and
was l,kely to become a good customer with hint (the witness), who
was by trade a tailor. The witness agreed to diaconnt the bills,
and lie accordingly paid the full value of them to Delisle, deduct-
ing only the lawful charge of 51. per cent. amounting to about
98/. 3s. He had never received a farthing more than the legal dis-
count, nor did he refer Delisle to Coves to settle as to the premium
to be paid. Coates had never acted for hint as his agent in the
transaction. In September or October 1024, he was going abroad,
and he deposited the two hills of exchange with the plaintiff' who
gave him his check for 20001. on Chambers and Co. the bankers, as
a security. His object for depositing the two bills with the
plaintiff' was for security, and in order that they might be regularly
presented for payment, in cue they should become due before he
plaintiff from abroad. On his coming backato this country the
returned to him one of the billy, andltept the other, for
which he gave him (the witness), bills at short dates, rather ex-
ceedn in amount the value of the defendant's acceptance. He
belieivedg Coates had of late been frequently at the office of the at-
torney for the defendant.
In his cross-examination by Sir. Sceitterrv. this witness ac-
knowledged that he had been intimately acquainted with Coates
for upwards of 20 years, and had had various dealings with him,
both as a draper and mercer, and also in the way of discounting
bills ; so far at least as discounting bills for persons who were re-
commended to him by Coates, but he did not keep tin account of
discounts with Pates. It was certainly true that he paid the
money to Delisle at Coates's house, which arose from the circum-
stance of his being frequently in the habit of going there ; but he
did not make it it rule to go to Coates's house to discour t bills for
the persons whom that individual might recommend to him. One
of the mull bills received by him from the plaintiff, in part consi-
deration of the defendant's acceptance, via a bill for 4001. drawn
by the plaintiff's attorney, 31r. Vincent. He was not aware that
any of the other small hills which the plaintiff' paid to him had
been discounted by Mr. Vincent for a Mr. Legg.
The several bills of exchange were then put in anti read, end
also a letter front the defendant to 31ago, thanking him for the
handsome manner in which he bad conducted himself in the trans..
action, and requesting Mtn to accommodate the defendant with a
loan of money.
In reply to this evidence Sir. Seent.ETT
called
Mr. It. Hu DSO); (the defendant's attorney), who stated that he
had never seen Coves in his life; that he had, after much difficulty,
found him out, at .1 subpcenaed hint to attend, but .tad never had
elnotes taken of the testimony he could give.
"'homes Frederick Everett, formerly a clerk in the bankirg-
house of Chambers and Co., stated that lie was in the habit
'of making the entries in the account which the plaintiff kept with
that firm previous to its failure, and that there neve; was a balance
at any one time between the Ist of January to the Ul.ll of Novem-
ber, 1824, of more than 260!. in the plaintiff 's favour. If a check
of the plaintiff's for 2000/. were presented to the bank witout ef-
fects to that amount being in hand, it certainly would not have
been paid.
Mr. Thomas Legg proved that four of the bills which had
been put in as being part of those which were paid by the plaintiff
to Mago, in consideration** the bill of exchange which was the
subject of this action. were drawn by biro (the witnees) anti that
they were discounted for him by Me. Vincent, the pleintiffs at.
torney.
The evidence on both sides having closed,
Mr. Semi LET T addressee the Jury on thatamint of it which had
been offered by the plaintiff in reply. Ile first dwelt upon the
comparative credit due to Delisle and to Mago, and saiii that as
Daigle had bees released by the defendant, he was no longer reapon.
sible on the bill, and therefore had no interest in the cause, whilst
Mago, being an endorser of the bill, would, in case the plaintitT had
really paid a valuable consideration fur the bill, be liable to hint for
the amount; :lingo therefore had a direct interest in obtaining •
verdict for the plaintiff, and compelling the defendant to pay te
bill; fat then the plaintiff' would have no claim upon him ; but h
if
the Jury should give is verdict to the defendant, Mago would still
be liable to the plaintiff. There was no satisfactory reason given
why Mago met !Delisle at Coates's premises; or why Coates in.
deed had been at all engaged in the transaction ; anti without such
an explanation the Jury must inevitably come
that
contract was in point of fact made for Illago a own personal benefit,
and that Coates and Mago had acted in collusion. The Learned
Counsel then adverted to the evidence as to the consideration said to
be paid by the plaintiff to Mago for the bill, and contended that it
was merely a, colourable consideration. The check which the
plaintiff gave for 20001. without a date. on Chambers and Co., at a
time when be had only a balance of 2501. or 2601. in their hands,
SUM a piece of trash, and not worthy a serious observation. One of
the bills given by the plaintiff to !flag° wee a diehonoured draught
dishonoured at that ray time when so paid by him. Four other
bills were drawn by Legg, and endorsed to Mr. Vincent, who had
endorsed them to the plaintiff. but Mr.dVincent. it unfortunately
happened, was confined with the gout, and could not thevefore ex-
plain this transaction ; nor that which related to the promissory
note which he had given to his client the plaintiff, and wk.& also
formed part of the consideration to Mega
would Vincent's evidence
would have been very important to have cleared up this mystify,
and which, without expluatioo, made the thing appear very ems.
picioue. When a person bag • bill of exchange which had a
month to run, he must be In one of two situations—that was, he
must want the money, or he must not. If he wanted the tinnuey,
he would get the bill discounted. If, then, 31r. Map had wanted
the money, why did he receive those various bills from the plaintiff,
several of which would not become due foe some months after the
bill of exchange itself ? Could any man entertain the least doubt
that this was altogether a fictitious soasideratien ? The firm clue-
d**, then, far them to consider was whether this bill waedissounted
on an usurious onnaldscation g and nest, whether the plaintiff sad
Eisen only a colourable eousideration fin it. Whether tits usury
taus owe la their offset goal or Lad, dials petatellsed duty