The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-06-30 00:00:00

THE BRITISH PRESS.

fore that month of April had expired, when it was intended that
the marriage should have taken place.
Mr. Cityra- v followed on the same side : but
The Loan ettrEr JUSTICZ was of opinion there was nothing
in the objection.
Mr. (amiss then addressed the Jury in mitigation of damages.
He allowed that a verdict most pass against his client, but lie sub-
mitted that as the defendant had only declined the promised match
from prudential reasons, and because he conscientiously Mt inca-
pable of supporting a woman whom he esteemed and respected as
she deserved, the damages ought not to be heavy.
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE summed up use case to the Jury.
His Lordship said, that the Learned Counsel for the defendant had
most wisely admitted that a verdict must pass against his client ;
and then the only remaining question was as to damages. The
Jury could not fail to observe. that the only reason assigned by
the defendant for not fulfilling his promise of Marriage was his in-
capacity to support a wife; nevertheless, as lie had improperly
trifled with a Toung Lelings and affections, it was but pro-
per that he should pay some damages. The amount was wholly
for the Jury to settle.
The Jury, alter a short consideration among themselves, found
for the plaintiff—Damages 2.101.
There was no other case worthy of public notice.

COURT OF CO3IMON PLEAS, OVTLIMALL, JuxE29.
lIANITAN V. TILEVE'rr.
Mr. PLAT: opened the proceedings.
111 r. Sergeant Tanny stated the case to the Jury. The plain.
tiff in this action was a wine-merchant, in extensive business.
The defendant was a boot and shoe maker, residing in the neigh.
bourliond of Finsbury-squere. This action was brought to re.
cover damages for an injury the plaintiff had sustained, in con.
sequence of a false representation by the defendant, of the sol-
vency of a publican, named Dunham. The facie were shortly
these, : Dunham, a friend of the defendant's, took a public-house,
called the Three Tuns, in Coleman-street. Shortly afterwards,
the defendant introdoced a clerk of the plalniff's to him, and
after some tasting of wines, at the Docks, Dunham ordered two
pipes of wine, a puncheon of rum, and a pnricheon of brandy.
The plaintiff"; clerk, whom he should call, then asked the dee
fentlant if Dunham was a safe man, upon which the nefenee.nt
replied, "As sale as the Bank." This the plaintiff's clerk coin-
mueicated to his employer, and the order was in consequence
executed. Shortly after the money became due, Dunham was
declared a bankrupt. Ile should prove the defendant to have
been well aware of Dunham's circumstances ; for the latter had
owed him' large sum of money ever since 1818. Not only that,
but what rendered the part taken by the defendant more suspicious
was, the fact of his taking a warrant of attorney against Dunham,
about the time, and not executMer itt ill the wine was delivered to
the latter. If he established these facts by evidence, he thought his
client would he entitled to their verdict. The Learned Sergeant
then called the following witnesses.
J. May examined—Witneris was clerk to the plaintiiT in Anemia
last year. He then knew Mr. Trevett; had some conversation with
Trevett in July. Ileilcarnt that Dunham had taken a public. house,
called the Throe Tuns' in Colemaii.street, and expressed to Tre-
vett his desire to deal with Dunham. Trevett afterwards intro.
duced him to Dunham. Ititness said to Dunham, that if he
wished to go to the Doeks lie would take him. They, in come.
quence. all three went on the 9th or 10th of August. Dunham
then ordered three pipes of wine. Witness then said to 'frerett,
" I supplate Dunham is perfectly safe; as safe as the Plink, I sup.
pose i" Trevett replied, " Yes, for any thing I know to the con.
teary." Witness had received orders from his employers to inquire
into Dunham's respectability. In consequence of this representa-
tion of Trevett's, Dunham's order was executed. Afterwards a
puncheon of Brandy and a puncheon of rum were sent him in. The
total amounted to 36.11. us. 3d. The wine was sold at two months'
credit, and the runt and brandy et four months. When it was due,
he weat and applied for the money, but had not been able to get it.
Cross-examined.—lt was witness's business to solicit orders, and
he was to receive a gratuity at Christmaxaceording to the number of
orders he procured. No orders were executed except with referen.
ces. %Violets inquired of Dunham's son, who was at variance with
his father. He made no inquiries of any body else ; told his em.
ployer that he had. He solicited Dunham to give an order before
lie made any inquiry of Trevett. Dunham gave an order for a
dozen of wine before lie made any inquiry of Trevett ; but the
order was not executed tili the 13th of August. No conversation
ever took place in which Trevett expressed a bad opinion of Dun-
hant's solvency. Witness thought Dunham's eireninstancre were
good from Trevett's introducing him to him. When the
execution was pot in, he did not complain to Trevett of
having deceived him. The reason why lie did not complain
wart, that Mr. Hanham, his employer, thought it was a con-
spiracy' between Trevett and Dunham, and Mr. Hanham whited
him to get all the information Ire coedit out of Trevett. Trerett
shewed witness his books and said that he had an account with
Dunham since 1818, which was not settled. Trevett still then,
that he thought Dunham was able, and would par hint, and
that the reason of his entering up judgment was to frighten
Dunham.
lie-examhied—Before the order was executed, witness told Mr.
Hanham the answer of Trevett. (An account-book was here placed
in the witness's hands.) This was the book Trevett showed him
when he told hint Dunham had owed him money for many years.
[Tire warrant of attorney given by Dunham to Trevett, to secure
the payment of four bills of exchange of 1131. each, was put in.]
Front Trevett's hooks it appeared that Dunham's debt to him
kept accumulating from 1818.
The Filazer of the Court of King's Bench proved that Trevett
became bail for Dunham for 1751. on the :{oth April, 1825, and
cash in June for 100!. In the latter part of the same month for 127/.
Mr. Rule, clerk to M:. Justice Littledsle,-proved the justitica-
thin or bail in an action by original against Dunham for Wt.
The Sheriff's officer proved the seizure of the wine for Dunham.
Mr. Kemp, an auctioneer, proved the sale of the stock of the
Three Tune. lie sold 110 or 70 dozen of wine, and a puncheon of
brandy, with a piece of rum. He handed over 344/. on account of
the execu ion, to Mr. Passmore, the attorney for Trevett. The
remainder of the money arising from the sale, he paid to the
astrigneo. There was a pipe of wine in wood besides the 60 or 70
dozen in bot le.
An officer beiongina to the Docks then proved the transfer of two
pipes of port wine, and the puncheoas of brandy and runt by the'
plaintiff to Dunham.
The Filezer was recalled, and proved bail was put in foe Dunham
by Passmore, the attorney for Trevett, and that the co-bail Was the
petitioning creditor. This was on the 11th October, a little before
the execution was put in.
The Gazette of the 111th October was put in, and !Mewed the
declaration of bankruptcy to have taken place oil the 17th.
Mr. Blachford -mired that Dunham serrentlered