The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-12-21 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY, Li Acer.ies-Tvv, Die. VP.

A PRIZE IN TRU LOTTERY.
swirl. v. MU On 1r If.
ger SAiscin. K. tsi bLy mut, .1 that the Defend-
ant rai2;it be ordered to pey into Cnnrt thp sum of
151 Si I hews :he msterath share of a Lot-
tery I ket, that was entitled to a prize of 10,0001.
to the English Lotter, of therm' ltur3. •l le steed
that the Masbat' hurl hems a livery-servant in the
service of „Limes Taylor, Esq. of Southamptoit ;
.the I)efeada.4 kept • Lottery-016r.: in this city,
sad had Oa agent, of the name of Skelton, fnr the
purpo.r of iliqinain4 of Tickets i.l Southampton.
to the year lOW, the Plaintiff purchased • Six-
teenth front Sle(too, about a week before the
(srasing comineneed ; in two days afterwards it
via. btulea from aim, and one of his fellow-servants
was suspeeted oh the theft. The Illaiatiti tient to
Mr. Skelt ))))) and 'misruled himwf his triss, and
that hr wa. tint certain whet the Auamber was, but
it war either No. .26,,t80, 01 16,0,10, Mr. Skelton
informed him, that 'he was the I)efeadaiit'.
Al-itt, and the hest thing he could do was,
ti 'me to Imo on the sahret, anti Skelton took •
•noranitium in his book N Lost. Silrertmlli•
either .1601110. or tti,Boo ; Taylor, Esq.") Ae-..
eorilinirly, on the I.lth of April. 11104 the Plaintilf
wrote to the Defend/tat. stating he had purchatied
ix sixteenth of a ticket, No. 16,880, from Mr. gket-
ts.i. winch he bad lost, and requesting that the
" eradant would assig him in recovering it, as
I ~-de him and the person su.pes_ted
u'esisy. The I)efeinhot ...eta WI the
*7th. that Nu. 2h.SS wu* not 'ins of hi. - or .
lLi the 311th of April. No. lilis24lo trie• *
• P • ••• ...I n . •1••;• Coto. ieresulAset

wrote to inform Skelton, that he hail the pleasure
of informing him that he tSkeltori) had sold a six-
trenth of that prize. Skelton answered tout leiter,
stating he had snlu it to the Plaintiff, a livery ser-
vant of Mr. Tayior, bet who had unfortimattlt .
lost it. Mr. Sheltisa, instigated by humanity, did
not inform the Plaintiff, tint waited enahisanaster,
Mr. Tuylur, and acquainted !Mx with the circum-
stances, who inecteil his huller, a person of the
mitre ui Bruadrett, to write to the Defendant to
.thefollowing purport, dated May 1 :
" Christopher Swift bought the sixteenth of a lottery
ticket fruit nr. Shelton. which he has lost, but the number
of whisk 11 believes Is '2s,uuts, the late foctouatt
From the keuisih respectability of pour house, 1 have au
duukt hat jettYsllstacilitate the recovery of it, and if ter
fired, y.llol'lll teem it stopped, aud give notice to yours. &c.
" ROBERT 13111.'1X:1111ETT."
On The 3d.of May the Defendant sent the fot
Towing a. swee-waliat a share of Sk lottery ticket be-
ing isekitiable„and payable like a Ihink note, it
was Very hard To retrace it, but he would do what
was in his power. In the year 1805 the Plaintiff
filed a bill of discovery, and in June ittOS tiled a
• further bill, praying relief. The Ifefendunt in his
first answer says, he believed, that on the 15th
of May, 1803, the share that was sold at South-
ampton was paid at the Office in London, by one
I of his clerks, who did not, as be believed, make
any inquiry, and that it was directly destroyed, as
was customary iii lottery transactions; he admitted
that one sixteenth never had been paid or demand-
ed, but he believed it was dot the one sold at
Southampton ; the were private numbers put
upon atm es. and entrust SO Ms book ;. that the
share sent to Southampton, had a private mark
of the *umber Otso, ilid that paid had the
mean number. In his subsequent answer, he
dgties that he ought to have given the Plaintiff any
indica of its ben tendered. us he had uo power to
volute the payment, and parthiulaz ly so, as the nano-
tier was nut sworn to by .tll PIIIIMVE lie adinitted7l
that he he did not give any directions to his clerk
to step ar make any inquiry ; and he also admitted
Shut be visa unable ti swear positively that the sixr
.tontth .14W/has not Ivrea tendered, and remains
umpoid, samosiet the one purchased by the Plaintiff.
tfisplee thimphskentostiners, Sit Samuel Itottilly
site be .116ewsiOn • wooLl order the money to be
:.pstid into Ccied.,. It *old be He hiircishi,i on the
Defeinkist ;. 4*, sv, a if the Plaintiff failed its
maktstrostaimalmise, the Defendant was only the
triesteolofAsparepie.foi the motley did net IlelOOK
to Iliac; rilairkie, the master of the Plaintiff,
had eskiiinkta,inaeinnify him three-kW ; awl -he
Mild 'int ot Luse Plainta io Ili, hand, in
which hevattosr :lie share he purchased from
war it:Motes:oth or the ticket, number 26,u3n,
lifefren.e lies ail found a inemora•alittn made in his
a.l v: • Mr. during tlw. time be Mid the t.eket is
his polaimiso.
dr. Hale aged ''r. Wtf.afix, Comisel for the De-
fondant. coot witakt liat there eons tin caMIIA• shown
why the moary shauti be paid two Court It Linda
ansiverno pllr6ol4lto the Plaintiff. etc,: pt he taought
induce t Orretidant to rum into a t
iii-
pr,.:ase. At the tint the Plaintiff might
have. brought suf action at few. Why did he wait
tin, e after he sae apprised of the iiiiitorr
being' drawn, before he bronelit nis Bill of Re-
• overy. and then not stir agxt..l for two years moss '
it must hart, hism us:cause he knew his case was
bail. The Corot OR no maxims• would order money
to hr paid into Court to tie up the hand' of. a De-
rendant. and induce him to enter into a compro-
mise. It was not pretended to be stud. that the
money was not as safe in the hands of the Defend-
ant as iii those of the Accuuntant-Gen. rol. The

. iamtiff never conk' get relief by his lull in that
Court, for the minute the ticket was drawn, the
amuunt tcif the . prize became money, hint and re-
ceived, anil, as such, it was only recoverable it. a
Court of Coiamon Law. If the Court refused
this motion, he might bring his action to-morrow.—
It was the first titas they had ever heard of money
•being asked to be paid into Court, because the De-
fendant MAIM be a trustee to some person. Under
evervitirentnatauce, they felt confident hi. Lordship
Iniald ohne the motion.

•-ftir iCt. Relit LLY replied m a speech replete
'4lllllllllll= CHANCIELLOR observed that he eon-
! Mewed Abe ease as perfectly cognizable by a Court
411 a even in a Court of Low •cogiliziatice
' isigiatbe bikes of it; for so far hack as the reign of
Willies. the Third, negociable• securities carne
uuder Abe jurisdiction of Courts of Law ; and
if it wen .proved that Skelton Dever had a
store of the ticket, number 96,*801 and hail that
of 0480, with the circumstance of the Drferaflant
having destroyed all evidence, by the destilictiou of
the shin which he paid on the 35th of May, he
did not believe there was a Jury in the world that
would not give a verdict for the If thiN
woe the caw/ to a Court of Law, what could pre-
vent a Court of Equity from having jurisdiction,
when it was never disputed that they had ? But,
recording to the rules of the Court, whatever might
be its opinion en the heasisig, and in giving a di--
Grew, yet when the Defendant did not admit
sufficient in his answer to warrant the order for
the payment of the looney into Court, the Court
could not comply with the application, whatever it
might de on the bearing of the cause.
The motion was of coarse dismissed.