The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-11-02 00:00:00

VICE-CILINCELLOWS COURT, MONDAY, Nov. 1.

His linsrotr II came into Court this mining at ball-past eleven
o'clock. The effects of his indisposition were most spparent, and
be had his left arm in a sling, which, we understood. arose from
the effect of rheumatism. A notice was posted on Saturday and
this morning, that his Hollow" would sit at (Leven o'clock, but
as be die not arrive till half an hour later it was supposed that he
Lad been worse. On Saturday a consultation took place with his
physicians, v Ito were of opinion that it could not hurt him to sit
to-day, provided he did not sit too long : it, however, happened,
that he was not required to sit late- as only a few gentlemen behind
the bee were prepared to move, and his llost nu a rose at about a
quarter past twelve o'clock.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Mostua, Nov. 1.

QUIROCi V. TRUMAN.
Mr. CAMPBELL appeared to sustain a special verdict af 1,611/.
les. aid. which way given for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of
the Coon, on the following case :—'f he plaintiff is a merchant at
Pio Je Janeiro, who made three censignments of cotton to
Comm. a factor, residing in London. These consignments were
cunveyed to this country in three ships, at different periods, the
.Aurora, Putivella. and Riga. The tint of these vessels reached Li-
verpool, with 160 bag. of cotton ; the other two arrived in dock in
the city of London. Content employed the defendant as broker at
Liverpool, to sell the cotton fir the principal abroad. Several draft
were drawn and accepted by the defendant, as payment for the pro.
eels of the sale, before the sale actually took place. Two of the
Li/bi, for a considerable amount. became doe; one on the 10th of
Jemmy, and the other on the 16th of January. 1316. On tile 9th
of January, however, Coniont, the factor, became a bankrupt, and
nn action was brought by the plaintiff for the recovery of the value
of the cotton front the defendant. This action was tried, and a
verdict returned for the plaintiff, subject to the minion of the
Court. The principle on which that verdict was obtained was the
well-known one, that a factor had no authority to pledge the grinds
consigned to his ease by a foreign merchant i and that if • broker
or merchant advanced money to hint, he did cost his peril. It was en.
deavoured to overturn this case by the letter which the plaintiff wrote
to the factor, requesting hint to make remittances to him, although
the cotton was not sold as an encouragement to make consign.
meats in future. This it was contended, was equivalent to an
authority front the merchant to the factor, to pledge the property
aoneigned to his etre. Rut this was • construction which he (Mr.
Campbell) submitted the letter could not bear. The remittances
were requested as as encouragemeet to send more consignments to
hint, but dial not convey any definite authority to plealge the cot-
ton, or to do anything with at not allowed by law. The questions
for the consideration of their Lordships were. whether the defend-
ant got the whole proceeds of the sale ?—whether lie paid it to Co-
tnont ?—or whether he held the cotton as a set-off against the de-
mands due to him from Comont ? If • Lui,a fide payment for the
cotton war made by the defendant fin the benefit of the consigner,
it wan in the power of the defendant to prove it, and it was incum-
heat on him to do so. In cases where a consigner draws bills on a
factor against the consignment made to him, it had been ruled that
even this circumstance did not entitle ter empower the consignee to
pledge the ;male consigned to him. This had been laid down hr
Lord Elleithorough, in • A'iri Prins ease, " Graham v. Dyster,"
reported in 2d Starkie. In the case of Broderick and Keymer, sit
bills hid been draws against the consignment, yet it was unani-
tualudy held by the Court of Common Pleas that this did not war.
rant the factor to pledge the property, but that he should wait until
the sale of it, which it was presumed would take place before the
became due. The learned Gentleman proceeded to cite se-
veral other cases in support of this position, and that money ed.
argued previous to sale was advanced at the peril of the parry
siding it; and was about to cite other precedents to the same
edit, when
The Loan CHIEF JustrcE intimated that the Court wished to
hear the other aide.
Mr. JONES, on the part of the defendant., admitted that a factor
wes not legally entitled to pledge any goods consigned to him, but
contended that • principal might empower the factor to pledge
them. Such an authority was given by the letter which aceompa.
ALS tilts, and gave instructions for the mode of disirmieg of
them. The consigner had no right to expect a remittance until the
proceed. of the sale were forthcoming; and for any remittance
with the consignee made previous to sale, would give him a lien
on the consignment. If this were the case, it was not material to
inquire abriber the money which he advanced upon them was his
own money, or procured from a third person.
Mr. Justice WV Lr —A prudent person who made such an ad-
. sauce, ehoold take care that it went to the party in whose favour
the remittance was advanced.
Joe ea resumed, and said, that the bills of lading of the
Isabella and Riga never reached the defendant t that he therefore
not know whether the goods cams liens•Comunt to them as
-.inept]

,
;