The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-04-22 00:00:00

LAW INTFLUGENCE.

SWAT OF ICINOB BENCH, THiRSD►T, APRIL 21.

In Banco.
v. PUTSIC.

101 a wee an action t7recOVertheajorunt of a bill of exchange,
e. +thigh was tried before the Lard Chief. ustice, at the Sittings
1, ,onsion, after Hilary Term.—Verdict—for the plaintiff.
ftl. P. Po v.i.oex now moved for a rule to show cause. ahy this
nnikt should not be set aside, and a consult entered, on the ground
!,et the indorsement was in pencil. There was no case exactly in
pdne, bat the Leagued Counsel contended, that writing in pencil
field not be a legal writing, inasmuch as it would be at the mercy
of every p_ersou wine bad a piece of Indian rubber. He read enteral
prinages hoot Coke on the requisites of a died, such as that the
writing must be ton parchment or paper, and not on wood or linen,
than it voila be liable to memo. 'The same reasoning which Te-
da:red that th:t material of a deed should he of a permanent and
atable nature, 'would surely apply to the writing. It was some-
thing to say that this was the first time this question hail ever been
raised in a Court of Law; but he understood from his Learned
Friend Mr. Jeremy, that a similar question had recently presented
itself to the lecelmiestical Courts, on the codicil to a will. and that
it had been there held that writing in pencil was only deliberative,
and not final. These was another question which he would submit
to their Lordships, was a writing in pencil a Writing according to
the custom of merchants? On the whole, he contended that these
• was enfiicient ground to render farther discussion necessary.
LOAD CAIET ) 03T IC 2—Take II rule.

This was an action tried at the last Assizes, before Mr. Justice
litilroyd, to recover the sum of 10L, which had been deposited in
the hands of the defendant by the plaintiff, on a wager with a
third person respecting the issue of a hone race, in which the
plaintiff obtained a verdict.
Mr. PATTI:I9OH moved for a rule Nisi to set aside the verdict,
and enter a nonsuit. lie contended that the bet was illve.J, and
that the action ought not therefore to have been tried at all. The
plaintiff, at the trial, endeavoured to prove that he had demanded
the money back before the race took place. The defender.% how-
ever. was prepared to show, that the race itself was an illegal race,
tut this we were peeverited horn going into Dv the Learned Judge.
In the case of Brown v. Easton, 2 Vacksione, and of a case in
2 Campb. 4RO, the Judge refused to try a gelation of this descrip-
tilt,. on the wound that the wager was illegal, and that the plain-
tiff had no right of sedan. What he submitted, therefore, was,
that if it be proper not to allow the plaintiff to try actions of this
kind, it was not a matter of discretion with the Judge that he
should or should not do so; but the Judge was bound to refuse to
try the question at all.
''The Loan Curer JCSTICE—Befure we grant a rule to show
cause for so small a sum, we should wish you jo consult with the
tithe parties.
Mr. Justice BATLET—Where the Judge thinks tit to try the
rinse. if the result be the legal result, I think there is no cause
bra motion, on the ground that he has no discretion. But I hope
tat the Judge may be allowed to exercise a discretion in these
EINA, for if they were not, than on the last Circuit I sinned in two
iestaofes; for there I refused to try two causes, because I thought
the brts were of too frivolous a nature to occupy the time of the
roust. In the present case, I think the Learned Judge had a
rig:u to let the cause be tried.
Mr. Justice ticit-novn—ln this case the plaintiff founded his
right to recover back his money upon the ground that he demanded
it be•lre it was lost. Looking into the authorities, it seems to me
I'm the wirer was a void wager, and that in that case the plaintiff'
was enti.led to recover back again.
M. PaTrr VION—I will mention the matter to the Counsel on
the wiler side. if your Lordship please, and if he refuses to come
to terms I w,!l mention it to the Court ngsin.
e Loan CHIEF .IIISTICE—Let it be so.

PRO2ENT, EXECUTRIX, &C. V. GEORGE AND OTHERS.
This was an action tried before 111 r. Justice Littledate, at the
'aft Slirewsbuay Assizes, in which the plaintiff obtained a verdict
ter 10/
Alt. LUDLOW said, the plaintiff was the executrix of Mr. Pro-
bra. who in his life time entered into a contract with the defend-
arts. rim were manufacturers of zinc, to exchange a quantity of
tai-.era ore, called black jack. which was used in the menufactur.
Sag oi one, for a certain number of sheets of zinc, to be delivered to
the teatator, as soon as the black jack was used. The defendants
not having peeorreed their contract, the action wan brought by the
executrix to recover the amount of the black jack. The defendant
pleated the general isue, and also that the cause of action did not
oceror vitlain six years. The Learned Counsel DON moved for a
rule to ~brow cause why the aersitet obtained by the plaintiff should
rot be sat aside. and a nonsuit entered. upon the ground that the
cause of action did not Paige within six years. The contract and
delivery of the black jack wu so fn back as 1812 ; and it was
proved at the trial that the black jack had been seen on the remises
of the defendants in a state of calcination (which was the brat pro-
cess to: making zinc) before the dcath of the testator, which
happened in 1818, sod more than six yeasts before the action was
commented, and that a reasonable time had elapsed in his life
time Mr the defendant's using the whole of it, except what was not
tit to be used. That reasonable time having thus elapsed in the
Lim! of the testator, he submitted that the breach of the contract
arcs his hie time—if so, ate statute barred the present plaintiff.
Toe defeadatits were not required to supply the zinc to the testator,
which was to be made out of the black jack debarred by him.
By the COURT—BID is the fact of the black jack being put into
a lute of ce:enatioo, • " using" according to the terms of the
cootra ct ?
Mt. LUDLOW conceived it was. No question arose on that point
at the trial ; it was quite understood by all parties, that as soon as
the black jack was made into calx, the defendant's were liable to
the testator, so that it became the duty of the testator to inform
himself wires bin right accrued.
Lo ID CHLET Ju ss xcE--Tske a Rule.