The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-07-29 00:00:00

CEASE V. PHILLIPS.

Mr. COMMON SEDGEAST stated that this w an action to re-1
gayer the lon of 01171. 10s., incurred by the defendant not perform-
Jogs cootract for the sale of some Spanish bonds.
James Wettenhall, stockbroker, stated the average price of
Spanish bonds, on the let May, last year, to be 311. fur every 1101.,
and an the 15th it was 115.1-35 A.
:'Three witnesses were called on their subpoenas, but they did
‘Ol appear.
The pl*Jat was nonsuited in consequence.
cittan o, SANDIIIII AND (nut as.
Mr. FitnaLETT mated the Case. This was an action of trover,
=by the assignees of Saxby to recover a quantity of hems be.
to the estate of the bankrupt, and which the defendant. cad
spawned to their own use, but Voided the general ia,ne. The
toohrupt was a hop merchant in the liorough, and the def,.nclar t
had acted as his factors. It was for the hops in their warehouse at
we time of the bankruptcy, and for some which they had sold, that
the person, anion was brought.
.Frowns Geom. was .io the employ of MT. Selby in 1923, in
the. Borough ; samples of the hops we soblited after he went
in=mi sa • nedby the A T TORIET-GEN fors he went
li= on, Messrs. Sanders and Co. acted as factors for him ;
i carried samples from him to them. Mr. Saaby was a

hop-vnerchant.
Gums, Juter tca.—Ave not faders merchants ?
ATTOIINCY-OZNERAL—Very generally so, especially in
tLe City of London.
!'question arose here, whether the dcfendantscoold or could net
&lithe hops on their readies, in order to defray the expense of
wsWesosee.roorn:
. . . . .

We CHIEF Jtrll/Ic3 thought they had better tiake a ease of
it fir the opinion of the Court.
The A/Toe/Er-1i said. the practice of the trade was';
prairpt payment on the second Saturday after the day of sale.
ype defendants knew Saaby to be a ticklishiellow' and had a right •
W detain the hops till the warehnuse.rent was paid.
John Neil, clerk to the defendants, recollected delivering a no-
tice to Saaby to clear the.warehouse.rent.
Crees-examined by Mr.& ......Had tent accounts of sales,
to gasby after he was in prison.
Joseph Parkes, clerk in the house of the defendants, remembers
toing to Mr. Suby with an offer for some hops.
lie. William Parkes had a conversation w.th the bankrupts In
A ugust, at their shop. lie told Mr. Saaby that he ought to be
ariblunebof himself in ordering hops which he eoul.l not pay for.
lilt. Hanby answered—" You need not be afraid, 1 am very able to •
pay for any loss that may arise in consequence of any fall in the
pritc of the hops." On the 23d August Mr. Selby gave a check
I...rnar., which was rot honoured; the cheek was afterwards de-
-o.roved • On the 20th September Mr. Saxby applied to have SI
pockets of hops delivered to Apple and Co.; the money was paid.
mad the hops delivered in consequence. There were bops sold on
con:misston for Mr. &shy ; on the 20th of September a draft for
.2011., on llrmrenan, was dishonoured; was not certain whether
Selby had a tv.treltra.a!, at that time.
The °RIF./ JUST ICE—Unless you can Rube him indebted to
yu.a. you des have no lien.
faros-examined by Mr Scent/TT—Move the check for 3001.
was presented, Mr. Saxby came and sdfl' that the bankers would
not open an account. The hops delivetSd to Appis and Co. were
purchased by Mr. Saxby; they might worth about 3001.
Mr. William Francis—On the 11th or September last hops were
elf red to us, part of which were said to be in possession of Green-,
wood, and part in the defendants'; witness went with Mr. Parkes
Sexby respecting the hops, which Selby said the defendants
would deliver; witness told Selby that the defendants would not
rhaarar them till they were paid for, and Mr. Parkes said that the

defendants would not have their samples hawked about the market;
Saaby showed other samples, anti said lie would settle with the
defendants.
Mr. Parkes recalled—Sixby said mere than once that the hops
were to remain in defendants possession till paid for.
Mr. SCALLETT, in reply. said the only rtes: stion at issue seemed
to be, whether the defendants or had not rescinded the contract
with )444:by, by the nofee of the tith of Septembrr. In his
opinion they had nut, for after the bankrupt was in prson thheey
retidertd him an account of Kali& If foci had a tight tri keep
hops till paid the rent, what tight had they to sell them ? They
could not blow hot and cold with the same breath ; and were clearly
answerable to the assignees for the bankrupt's proptrty.
The Cm Er JUSTICE said, the point for the Jury was, whether
the notice of the 6th of September rescinded the contract or not?
The other points would he left fa the consideration of the Court.
The Jury thought that the notice did not rescind the contract,
and found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 3,000 L, subject to
a wile.

COURT OF
W COMMEDMESDONAI PLEA GEILDHALL,
LY 2IL

Sittig:* at Nisi Prins, before the Cam. JUSTICE and a
Common Jury.

EAGLE e. PArLDEN.
This was an action brought to recover the amount of two bills of
exchange, one for 401. I:A. and the other for XL drawn on and ac-
cepted by a pima of the name of Thompson. and indorsed over
by the defent'ant to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a hop-factor,
and the defendant a general agent. In October, last year, the de-
fendant bought a quantity of hops of the plaintiff for dlr. Edward
Rusaell, and tendered the hills in question in paytnert. On the
first bill becoming due, it was presented for payment at the Philan-
' thropie Society, but the acceptor had disappeared. On the follo
ow-
ing day the defendant called on the platetiff, and presented
wrapped up, and said he had returned three of the pockets of hops.
The plaintiff said he had nothing to do with that, and he would
Dot put them to the credit of Paulden. The plaintiff kept the 131.
and put it into his desk, and in the course of what passed said,
" Teete is another bill cowing due, I hope you will be provided
for iL" The defendant said "` certainly," or something to that
;effect. It appeared that the three pockets were returned at a diffe-
, rent price and at different weights from that at which they had
; been delivered to Paulden The hops were placed in the plaintiff's
. warehouse, and Mildly put to the credit of Mr. Edward Russell.
31r. Sergeant PF.LL conducted the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY addressed the Jury for the defendant.
The derence was, that the hops were returned because they were
damaged, and that the bill for 4% 15+. was satisfied by the return
of the hops and ipe payna-mt of the 1:11• lie also submitted there
wee no evidence to prove the was Thomper's.
The Cuter JUSTICE Obiefs , there was evidence in his Lord-
sh:p's opinion to satisfy the Jury on that point.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY—Do let me go on without interruption.
Came J STICZ —YOU are addressing the Jury as if the case
wee one fat a nnnauit, when it is a question of tact on the Jury.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY—I beg I may be allowed to Address the
Jury without interruption.
IT? JUSTICE—But, BF )ther Teddy, don't be so warm.
311. Sergeant TADDY—It is utterly impossible to do business in
the way this Court is going on.
Ciller Juerice.--Tbere is really nothing for you to be offended
at.
Mr. SeiltraUt TADDY—I am not angry. lam far from being
angry ; but it d sea put an Advocate under great difficulty when he
hi add:awing& Ji.rv, fee a Judge to interfere with an exprartiol of
his opinio The Learned Sergeant, atter a few more observations
to the Jury, called his witnesses, who underwent examination and
cross-examination, but their evidence did not vary the case from.
the way ia which it was left by the plaintiff's CounseL
Mr. Sergeant PEEL replied, and argued that the defence was
tie most shabby one he had ever heard. Bat shabby as it was, it
assisted the plaintiff's case, for one of the defendant's own witneses;
stated that he believed the acceptance to be in Thompson's hand-
writing.
i
The CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidence, and left
it to the Jury to say whether the first bill, that for 4111. Isa, was
satisfied by the return of the Circe pockets of hops, and the pay-
, meat of the 131. If they should be of opinion that bill was not ea-
' tisfied, they would give a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of
Iw h bill+, deducting the 13/. tendered to and received by the
The Jury found a. verdict for the plaintiff on both bills—da.
maga 86L 7s. 6d.