The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-12-24 00:00:00

TATTERSALL'

1, Diessusa ii.

DERBY.
tto t opt e. out of Emily It to 1 apt Pantina
e to 1 agst Fully lb to i apt Charcoal
io I. 1 agst Talisman is to 1 apt e. out of Guild-
it to 1 apt Web ford Nan.
OARS.
e to 1 apt Zaida I to to 1 apt Sister to Sultan.
to to 1 agst Sister to Sailor

ST. LEG ER.
11 to 1 apt Sherwood j to to 1 a's' Miss Fanny.

71nrIrlii‘r

LAW INTPLLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, LINCOLN'S INN,
MONDAY, C K 23

EARL GROSVENOR V. MATHER AND CO.
Mr. D. F. Jonas stated that this case was brought before
the Court, in order that his Lordship might assign the terms of
the issues which he had directed to be tried. The snit had
arisen out of the misconduct of a gentleman whose name could
not now ho meenioned by the members of the profession with-
out sensations of pain and regreL Mr. Abraham Moore, the
gentleman to whom be alluded, *silos agent of Lord Grosve-
nor, bad entered into several contracts with Messrs. Mather
and Co. for the delivery of certain quantities oflead, at prices
then agreed upon, lions the estate of the Noble Lord, with
stipulations that the Noble Lord •Isuuld forfeit certain penal-
ties if the lead should not be delivered within a specified
time. When the defalcations of Mr. Moore were discovered,
Lord Grosvenor, for the first time, became acquainted with
the contracts, and was disposed and advised to resist their
performance. There were in all fige contracts, and on the
first four Messrs. Mather neglected to sue, but sued Lord
Grosvenor for all the forfeitures on the non-performance of
of the fifth. Lord Grosvenor resisted the performance on the
ground of impossibility, because the quantity of lead to be
delivered was more than the mitres produced, and that the
defendants, from the vicinity of their establishments, must
have known this ; also because Ihn conditions were diSlitiVan•
tageous, inasmuch as the price was far below that of the mar-
ket; and farther, that in such singular contracts, the defen-
dants were bound to havo consulted Lord Grosvenor as the
principal, more particularly as the conditions of the first and
second contracts had not been complied with when they
signed the three others. The defendants had prepared furty-
four issues. Uu the part of Lord Grosvenor, ho applied for
the Court's direction. The single question was whether the
contracts were mado bone fide with Mr. Moore, as the agent
of Lord Grossenor, or whether they were not made louder
such knowledge as would defeat them. If they went to trial
only on the terms of the contract, Um attention of the Jury
would not be drawn to this question. It had been thought
proper that there should be a general question of contract or
no contract, and to that question the various circumstances
he had mentioned would furnish the proper media of proof,
and the conscience of the. Court would be informed of the
collateral points. The circumstances of the consideration of
the original contract would be shot oat on the issues prepared
by the defendants. He hoped that his Lordship would give
directions for such an issue. Lord Grosvenor neither de-
sired, nor would lie permit, one shilling to be lost by any one
who had a just claim upon him, but against the exorbitant
and unfair stipulations of these contracts bo fult it his duty
to resist.

__ ....._.._-.
The Arroneav-Gurnut on the same side.
Mr Lerruceatz, for the defendants, was very ready to
comply with his Lordship's directions. It had been thought
necessary to get out all the contracts, as some of them were
founded on papers and correspoodence which referred to
other correspondence. lie submitted that he ought not to
be tied down to the specific terms upon which his clients
sought to establish the contracts.
The Lotto .Cnasseimuia—You had better frame your issues
in the largest and most comprehensive view ki which you
are desirous of alleging the contracts to have been made.
The Jury will then be able to find whether Mr. Moore en-
tered
into that contract or not, and if he did not, into what
part of it he entered, and whether be did so in good faith as
the agent of Lord Grosvenor. The Jury may also be at li.
berty to endorse special matter on postea.
Mr. Liml
suggested that there should also be an is-
sue
of quantum closimificalas.
The Loan Cnancruort—Let the Jury find at the same
time the damages, and I will attend to that point after-
wards. Frame your issues and hand them up to me and I
will settle them. 1
NEWTON V. STANIFORTN.
Mr. Hoene staled that this was an application on the part
of the defendants to dissolve the injunction exyarte which
his Lordship had granted a few days since. In this case it
would ho made very clear that Mr. Newton was only the no-
minal plaintiff, that the real plaintiffs were other persons who
bad assumed • numb to which they were not entitled. He'
would very briefly state the facts of the ease. The ship
Urania, belonging to the defendants, had beets chartered by
Mr.Neston, then at Quebec, in the month of August last.
The charter party was enterelle to by Newton, with the Cap-
tain of the ship, on the part of the owners. It stipulated,
that the ship was to carry to London, for 111 r. Newton, " a
full and complete cargo.' This cargo was to hue consisted
or different sorts of timber, but there not being a suMeient
quaLtity to load the ship, the deficiency was made up of other
goods furnished by other_ persons, who contracted for the
freight of the same, with Mr. Newton. at an advanced price.
By the bills of lading, made out after the ship was loaded,
the timber was to be delivered in London to the house of
Brocklebank and Co., but the remainder of the goods which
completed the cargo, and for which distinct hills of lading
were made out, were to be delivered to special consignees.,
upon their first paving the freight. By the term' of the char-
ter party, half the freight was to be paid in money 'and the
other half to be paid for in good and approved bills at four
months, On the arrival of the ship in London. Messrs. Beat-
sons, who are'the reel plaintiffs here, come forward and say
that they are the agents of Mr. Newton—and they go so far as
to pay the port duties, although it is expressly stipulated in
the etarter party that the port duties should be paid by the
defendants. This act, on their part, would place them in
the situation of
_general agents, rather than particular agents
for the plaintiff: Messrs. Beatroo and Co., however, -have
produced no one document to show that they are the agents
of the plaintiff, nor have they paid in money one-half of the
stipulated freight, nor tendered approved bills for the other
half. They has'c however brought an action against the de-
fendants for the port duties, and held them to bail. The
defendants refused to deliver the goods einle‘s they were paid
the freight; and the present bill has been tiled, complaining
against the &readouts for perlormina what is their duty un-
der the contract, whilst nothing which the contract stipulates
has been performed on the other side. "On these facts,"
the Learned Couusel proceeded, " the defendants base
been most rashly most unfeelingly, and most inhumanly
calumniated as being in a state of doubtful credit, as beine in
a state of insolvency. It is true that, in the year test, one of
the defendants, the elder Mr. &anneals, was lung, by the
circumstances of the times and failures abroad, into a Situa-
tion nf emb cnt . it is true that he entered into a com-
promise with his creditors: but it is also true that lie con-
&elect himself through all Isis &dimities honourably and sa-
tisfactortlytowards all his creditors." Mr. Horne then stated
that Mr. Stan Worth had afterwards taken into partnership his
son, who possessed some considerable property in his own
right, and Orb a Mr. Gosling, a gentlemen of great wealth
and respectability; and that the firm was at this moment oats
of the most respectable in London; and that, against such
gentlemen, those most discreditingstatemeots had been made
as the ground for his Lordship's interference. The defendants
claimed their right, and nothing more. They claimed their
freight aceoriling to the terms of the charter party ; and even
new, if that aright were paid to the last farthing, the balance
would be reduced, after deducti ig their claims for demurrage,
to the trifling sum of 481. Ile was confident, therefore, on
these statements, which bad been substantiated on oath in
the defendants' answer, that his L adship would dissolve the
injunction.
Mr. S , on the same side, said, that the whole
ground on which the injunction bad been granted was the al-
legation of insolvency, an imputation which had been most
peremptorily and satisfactorily denied—denied not merely on
the . lion of Counsel, but by the defendants themselves,
under the solemnity of an oath. The Learned Counsel read
such parts of the answer as referred to this allegation, and
which confirmed the statements made by Mr. Horne. He
then stated that the Messrs. Beatsons, who were only the
assumed agents of the Plaintiff, hail dragged before the Court
the younger Mr. Staniforth and Mr. Gosling, and bad endea-
voured to blast their credit for a suns of money, which, in its
highest amount, was only cal. Had his Lordship known these
feels, his own feelings as • father, as well as his respect for
justice, would have prevented him from granting the itsjune-
lien. Mr. Stephen then remarked with considerable warmth
on what he called the siagular fact of the former proceedings
in this case having appeared in all the newspapers witboiit
exception, and touch to the disadvantage of his clients. He
proceeded to argue that by the charter party the contract
won to toad and fill the ship, and not to Aire it, and that
therefore the defendants hail not made any transfer of their
ownership to the plaintiff. Oa this ground lie conte'ded that
the defendants had a lien on the cargo Ito i freight. There
was indeed a single cue in the books, wise the contrary'
opinion bad been maintained, but this arse, Hu ton v. Bragge,
14%it
had been subsequently reversed in the Common Pleas, in -the
case of Lewis.. Christie (5 Broderick and Bingham). There
were other very_ recent cases which overturned the case of
Hutton and Bram, the last of which, v. Dunbar,
4 Bemused! and Alderson, was precisely the present question,
where the Court held the principle fur which he eru now
contending. Thu defendants were borne out by the law of
the ease and be was sure that their legal right of -lien would
not be defeated by any decision of his Lordship.
Mr. KNIGHT' fur the plaintiff, regretted that the feelings of
the defendants had been hurt by any thing that felt from him ;
but he spoke not merely from bit instructions, but upon
affidavits' and also upon the bill filed by his clients. As to
thei mde f
u tdaet
leOdanonft, M iD"riv. ilicntein however unpleasant it might
be to o iforth, yet be had admitted it
In his own answer; nor could he now complain that an very
recent an event should be referred to in affidavits on a disput•
ed claim. No respect for any man's feelings should prevent
the plaintiff from ezereising his legal rights, or counsel from
discharging their professional duty. The argument that the
ship was not hired, when the whole space and capacity of the
ship was hired,was too absurd a proposition for serious notice.
The .ebarteeer of a teasel is pre Sae eke the owner, as was
held by the Chief Justices Gibbs and Dallas, and also by the
surelyruindeoncto,
tßheagtitsiteerdAefeetn. B
d anutts ahvaevne "a
lionilli t toni n ga•rocrairhgeo 8,
akt
Lor s
not agitate them to go round to all the (vulgates and receive
the profit freight which belongs to the plaintiff only.—This
is II presumptuous and intolerable arrogance oo their 14:
sot at all excused by their solvency and respectability,
fact was, that as soon as the ship arrived in the London Doc I,

-7,,,

notice was given to the defendants not to receive the freight
money from the consignees. Notice was also given that the
plaintiff was ready to pay half the amount of the freight to
money, and the other half to gond bills; but the defendants
have gone to the different consignees, and received from
them upwards of Gent. which is more Mao half the stipulated
freight. To say, therefore, that the pleintill bonnet, and is
not willing to perform his part of thechintract, is a mere sub.
terfuge ; As to Messrs. Bentsen, not being authorised agents,
it M admitted in defendant's answer that the captain of the
ship was told that they were so, and that be brought over a
sealed letter to them, which letter was in Coed, ready for
production, and would prove such appointment ; but the
defendants admitted that they were ready to treat with them
as agents. Mr. Knight was desirous of reading an affidavit
to these facts, but was overruled by the Court. The reduc.
(ion of the, balance to 481. was incorrect, inasmuch as his
clients did not intend to admit the claim fir demurrage.
Mr. Hoare, io reply, urged the points of his opening
speech, and said, that as the sole ground for granting the
Cr parte injunction was, the imputation of insolvency, it
must ho now dissolved, as the Counsel had ceased to urge it.
The reason why the bills tendered by Messrs. Beatson and
Co. were not received was, that the Defendants did not like
Vie security. As to the giving up the freight and recessing
the money, it was because they had been applied-to by the
consignees, and they would nut deliser the goods until the
money was paid.
The LORD CUANCRLILDR—" Tho injunction ex parte was
originally applied for before the. Vice-Chancellor, and re-
fused on the ground, as I understood, of the trifling amount
of the balance in dispute. Since that I have had some con-
versation with his Honour, and I find that ho was entirely
misconceived. His reason was, that as the slum in dispute
was very small, no great danger would arise from letting the
matter stand over, and gising notice to the defendants to up-
pose the application if they thought Bt. When it was moved
before me Mr. Knight stated—and he was bound in duty se to
do—the alleged insolvency of the dciendanta, and it occur red
to me on hearing such elle;ation, that sonic intermediate
step was necessary. I desired, however, that notice should
be forthwith given to the defendants to dissolve it if they
pleased. This is the only difference between the opinions of
the Vice• Chancellor and myself. Mr. Knight, I repeat it, did
precisely what ho was bound to do; but with respect
to the phiintiff, I must sae, that the allegation of in-
solvency against the defendant, merely Oil the ground
Ithat in the year 1819 one of the parties to the present
firm was in embarrassed circumstances, was at unee
rash and improper. Knowing, as they mist have known, the
hazardous nature of the commercial coedit of this country, it
was a very hasty and inconsiderate assertion. As this
imputation, however, was the only ground upon which I
granted the injuection, I cannot now hesitate to dissolse it.
The question of low I du not interfere with, but I dissolve the
injunction with coats."

-- s'. CRUIKSHANK AND ANUTLIER.
Mr. Slum?, applied fur a writ of se ereat rtgss against
the Defendants. The Plaintiffs were executors of a person
named Colman who died on his voyage to Bumbsy un board
one of the Easelndia Company's ships. He was possessed of
a considerable cargo, which at his death the defendants hid
taken out and sold for the sum of 46,280 rupees. Upon their
arriving in England, they gave the executors • bill fur the
amount at the rate of two shillings and three-pence sterling
for each rupee. The executors insisted that sane of a rupee
was two shillings and sixpence. He moved upon au affidavit
which stated the defendants were about to lease England,
and unless the writ should be marked for the sum in difference
between as. 3d. and ss. ad. they would lose that sum.
Mr. %mica opposed the application on the ground that
the delendauts had rendered their accounts, and were liable
Ito an action at law.
The Loan enxicsuan—There is no affidavit which states
positively the difference due. You swear that a rupee is
worth ss. ad. in India, bid you don't swear it to be worth so
much here. On this :Maya I cannot grant the writ.

BIRCH V. LITZTER, A BANKRUPT, AND OTHERS.
Mr. Hausa in this case applied to set aside the commis-
sion of bankruptcy issued against the defendant, on the
ground that it was concerted. The circumstances of the case
for the plaintiff were these. The defendant, John Litzter,
the ), winger, was au attorney at Stockport, where his father,
John Litzter, the elder, resided, and the third party in Ibis
case was Mr. Clayton, an attorney of Stockport, by whom
the commission had been issued. The plaintiff brought en
ir:tion against the defendant, Litzter, the younger, and re-
covered considerable damages. It was charged by Mr. Birch
that the three defendants, in order to defeat ibis verdict,
concerted a commission of bankruptcy, and that on the very
same de) that the news of the verdict was sent down to Stock-
port the proceedings were sent up for taking mit the commis-
sion. Wbcn • Sheriff's officer applied with a writ of srire ferias
to the defeddant, whom he round on the outside of his office,
which was shut up, and asked whether he was prepared to
settle the action and pay the damages and costs ? to which the
defendant replied, " No, I am not ; I'll bo d—d if you go
into my office to levy; I have settled that ; I am not to be
done." One witness swore Holton expressing his regret to
the younger as well as to the elder Litzter, at the adverse ver.
dict that had been given they treated it lightly, and said
that Mr. Birch never should have one farthing of the
money ; they had taken care of that. Mr. Heald denied
that the bankruptcy could staad, as it had not been
made out sufficiently that the defendant, Litzter, bad
been a trader. It was set up first that be bad been
a scrivener, but it did not appear that they knew what
scrivenlng meant ; for the only act which had been ad-
duced was, that Litzter bad advanced 701. upon a pro-
missory note. It was next set up that he had been a cow.
dealer ; but hli that has been adduced was, that in the course
of his life be bad bought four cows, which he had afterwards
sold. It wits then pretended that be had dealt in malt, having
sold some once; but for the tint and last species of trading,
they were palpably ou, of the qbestion. The defendant
Litzter, the younger, denied positively, in his answer, the
&wavers Woos attributed to him, and the ounspiracy ; and the
two denied that they had conspired, " as represented in the
affidavit" of Mr. Birch.
The Vica-CuaNcames said, he would give the two latter
defendants an opportunity of answering the charge of couspi-
racy more distinctly if they could.
Mr. Maur submitted, that as the trading could not be ul-
timately made out, it would be useless to postpone the cause,
as the commission on that account could not stand.
Mr. Maas, who appeared for the assignees, said, that tfse
commission might have been innocently concerted by the
father and the attorney, without reference to the son. He,
contended that every person who bought and sold cows, was a
trader.
In answer to a question from the Court, as to whether deal-
ing in cattle constituted trading, it was answered that it had
been decided that every buyer and seller of cattle was •
drover, and if be sold even iffy thousand head of cattle, he
would be only a drover, and note trader a ithin the meaning
of the Act.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT,
MUIDAY, Dsc aaaaa S.

The VICC-CiIiNCZLLOR—P Can you persist against this,
Mr. Horne, in contending that he is &trader 1"
Mr. Hoans—" Not unless we can make him a bit ofia
butcher, which wo capcot we oan do."—(Mueb laughter.)
The cause was ordered to stand over, tbat further affidavits
might ho prepared.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Weennwsris,
MONDAY. tize KKKK it 13.

Before the 1601 D Cant Jaynes mid Combos Juries.

TUE KING V. ItAKER..
This was an indictment against the defendant, a briukmaker,
for deatruyiug a public highway, and rendering it impas-
sable.
The prosecutor was a Hebrew printer, nailed Alexander,
and resided in the neighbourhood of the road in question
( Union-street, Stepney). It appeared that the defendant's
carts, in passing to his field at the end or Union-street, bad
much cut up t be road (which had never been regularly formed)
and he had been in the habit of carrying away to his brick-
field the loose soil, by which the road had been made much
lower than it originally was.
Forth° defendant, several witnesses were called, who proved
that the defendant had certainly carried away some of the soil
of the road, but be had shot down in the place of it a consi-
derable qaratity of hard rubbish; and that in fact, by his
operations the road, so far ti um being injured, bad been ma-
terially improved.
The Juty, without hesitation, returned a verdict of Not'
Guilty.
VINWICK V. MORTKAM.

Mr. Orem stated that this was an action by the plaintiff,
an artificer in fireworks, to recover the sum of :ell. from the
defendant, by whom be bad been employed in preparing the
fireworks wlstoli were displayed,ln the Park on the occasion
of his Majesty's coronation. The defendant was himself em-
ployed by Sir Win. Congreve ; and though he now disputed
ibis demand of the plaintiff, ho had set a suMcicotly high value
on his own labour, as he had demanded from Sir W. Con-
grave 4501., although, till the last day, there were only four
men employed in the business, and (bur days was the whole
time employed. It should be recollected that this was such
an occasion as seldom occurred ; the sum therefore demanded
by the plaintiff was by no means unreasonable, and he should
be able to prove that the defendant's son, who managed the
Inises' bad promised, on the part of bis father, that that sus
should be paid to him.
The Learned Counsel then called the following wit-
nesses :
Samuel Drewell, an artist in fire-works, assisted in making
up the fire-works which were displayed in the Park at the
Coronation. The plaintiff also was there. He was employed
" - " - Thy morning till Thursday evening, and worked
look in tbo morning till nine o'clock at night
gi,
hey made up twenty-six pieces, and a ' which
-- Aso pieces. Ile made applicants,* to,
the defendant for 501. the 'monist of Feawick's d sod
the defeodaut said, " Very well, whoa 1 get the money fhb

from two ON
eackday. T,

guarantee that his Niter should pay him sal.
Cross eiamined by Mr. SEMILITT.—Whips •ow sell•
potatoes. lle had sold a great mum' other things, but never
suld his wife either alive or dead. He was had hetore a Ma -
Fistrate, but it was a mere squib. Ho was /el of without
injury. There we.. no foundation for the charge.
Wm. Swill, an ■,list in tire•works, thouglst sal. not' too
much. He would not have done it for less.
Mr. Miller, another artist, considered bal. too much. He
should have thought himself well paid at two a day if
he could have left his business to hate attended to such au
employ.
Mr. Wright, clerk to Sir William Conereve, stated, that
the defendant's first charge to Sir W. Cosign:be was 43Ui., asst
ho ultimately received asul.
White, late foreman to the defendant, stated, MA on
such an oocasion be would not hate thought himself paid by
mere day wages.
Mr.tlessaLurr, for tha defendant, emit
showing of the plaiotitt's own witnesses
to more than the 111. lost" which the defer
Court. As to the midence of the alleged
improbable in itself that the Jury would
credit ; but he would not rest ois that, bi
no such agreement was ever made. Thi
the contra:A existing. was clear f: um this,
who called himself, forsooth! en artist
who sold potatoes, but did not sell his u:
master of a powder boat, which worked
river, and in that situation, hat in,c an opp
hands on a little powder, he made up a few
era, and sold them in an illegal spanner to
on the sth of November; and this was the
his labour at lal. los. a day! The Lea►
called

Zachiriali Mortram—l am the son of lb..
Mr. Overlay asked if lie was in partnersbi
in this transaction ?
He replied in the negative. Re said, "
the plaintiff; ho works a powder boat up
lie is no artist. There was no agreement
to be employed as a labourer. I never guarani
lather should pay hini He was emple-
he did nothing but la hat I ordered him.
men employed. The plaintiff furnished a
be worth Ins., but it failed in the exoeut
handsome globe given him for it.
Cross-examined by Mr. 0 • .
swear to any thing to get my father a verdict.
once arrested me .iliout twelve month.' ago.
Re-examined by Mr. filcangwre.—Fenot
du with the arrangement of the lire-works.
Josh. Southby, the are-work maker to
stated that lie was employed in the Chrk
Breve ; if he had not beers so employed he,
glad to have taken tl. a day.
Two other witnesses were called, who wi
but bad no extra wages.
The ease for the defence being closed,
Mr. Outwit. called
Wm. Morgan, who stated that on the necastot
the Marshalsea Court aeainst Mortram,
he heard Mr. Mortram, jun., say, that "I,
any other rascal, should get over him, he
swear any thing."
Mr. Orme replied.
The Carer James summed up the evi
and left it to them, on the credit of the
given conflicting testimony respecting the
they did not believe there had been such a
would then be fur them. on the evidence,
11. tos. was not a sufficient cotspensid ion; i
was, then the verdict would be fur the defono
The Jury immediately found a verdict for

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS,
MONDAY, DSClellitli 23.

-

Lamellas adjelersed Sittrage after Michael's°,
Loss CORI IV Juirrtes and a Special
___,'

GRINSTEAD V. SHAW.
This important cause, arising out of the
Howard and Gibbs, in which Ilse interests
*ideals are involved, was ealfed on' This,.
beg of the Court.
Mr. Serjeant Lass, Mr. Serjeant V
F ice Posi4cit, r..ncturletl the plaint
Soiserrea 0 a., Mr. Ildrjeant Pau.,
were engaged in the defence.
Mr. F. Pozsece opened the pleadings.
Mr. Serjeant Laws aged the ease to the
an issue from Use Yoe-Clianceltor's Court. '1
out of which the present ease arose, hods place
plainti Cr was a gentleman of considerable forte'
to invest his property in annuities, was ;
Gibbs' one of the lirm of Howard and Gib,
With this object in view he advanced em
Mr. Gibbs, and was deceived by 'his lAA
who, instead of applying the money to the put
tiro, employed it to his own benefit. Tiles g
present proceeding, and the question which I
have to determine was, whether or not this nu
advanced solely for the purpose of porchivoug
whether Mr. Griiasteid was acquainted r
Messrs. Howard and Oilbe, and had thus
in the fraud. Mr. Gibbs would be ,
Airy, who, whatever =debt have been bls
ass DOW at least entitled to credit, for his
plat.erially operate against his nwo interests,
review of the entire case, the Jury wou'd to
James Gibbs was then called and sworn,
the (Ple3i ions of Mr. Serjeant Vaughan, he r
I bare been in partnership with Mr. Ho,
scrivener. I knew Mr. Grimslead in the
I became a bankrupt early is 1821. A gent.
of Walsh introduced Mr. Grimstead to me.
lay out a sum of money in the purchase
Issentioned a particular one, the grantor
James Murray. The conversation was c(
annuities were likely to produce. It was m;
.bat was their probable produce. I stated
that tbo money which he should invest woul
*EL and upwards. I produced a securil
granted by Lord James Murray, at seven
which was paid off in April, laticiThe
banded a passdaeuk, and prim: to s
transactions, and enumerate the various
total amounted to 44,ital. as. 2d., all of
transactions. I frequently applied to Mr. (
hag him that many persons had made appl
aplious to raise money on annuities i epee
taboos he advanced me differeat monies. I
be advanced me the sum of 7,00131. a part
sluiced io real annuities. I never applied
to advance money for any purpose but that
annuities ; and on such representations red
the money. Whenever I told Mr. Orimstes
security, be then advanced the money, and
men t of the investment to me. Upon some c
purchases actually were made, About thr
before our house failed there was a ver'
in consequence of a heavy. debt due
and monies not coming in its fast
cd, instead of investing his mosey in
Woad it in our own heads, and paid him
the same as if the investment had been made.
never was apprised of this misapplication.
tuber, 1819, when the clerk delivered me the
was a balance due to Mr.Orianstead of u.
the other side of the pass-hook 1 exhausted
setting out three or four annuities that in
been purchased, but which I told sr. Gt
really invested. The fictitious names of ,
think three others. were introduced. They
with a cash payment of imel. odd, exile..
After I recei,ed the pass-book from b e
erasures, and then chewed it to Mr. Helms!'
state. I was desirous that the clerk should
the represeatations made to Mr. Orients:ad,
delivering 12 to him for the subsequent settle
the entries I had made. There could be no
that the book exhibited the appearance I
November, leo, there was due to Mr. Grim
38,8272 los., and that was the amount of the
In the new accouut, the entries of the prel
were introduced. In the fictitious seemed
apeared to vary.
Crooszooed by Mr. goumors-Chstaat.—
pr w en Up Vice•Chaocelitir gave bisidearsios,
r Me. Howard was resat, 'rho
i 1211 eladliealiasalod the baleen. I mad*
ttireransaction to a book, which, amongst other

0.

i

.• . •. . •
*lk t..
11.117
• - . • i .
retake the freight lbe Ordnanoe, he shill be fsali.:: Ile eille.l aft. r 4 anis, mug •
also given that the received a similar ens* i.. Wm a. ests h A
thonelit theideintilf was '
tof the freight is a man of skill in his b , t t. tot tut. . ''.
but the defendants to compensate him foarroahle.
..2iii.
~ .
Ind received from Cross-examined by Mr.licasicrorr.—Witness was employed
half the stipulated in his younger days In his Miler. to make shoes, but &Afire.' .7,.
. til ;
tiff has not, and is years of age, his genius fur tire•woras first deseluped itself, s L
act, is a mere sub• and he commence milking shekels and squibs. ite had de- '•
authorised agents, mantled of the Defendant sol. for his lo.ii es% n.ent. The ..
the captain of the fireworks mincer aNuperior description. The materials wefit
be brought over a furnished by the Ordnance.
n Court, ready for G. Ernst, another artist in tire-works, thought sot. nob it.,
sintment ;.but the exorbitant demand for a mister. • .., .
~.
to treat with them Mr. Crompton, else an artist in fire-works.—He said tbd
eliding an affidavit best assistance could be got Ed. sc. a day.
ourt. The reduc. Mr. Guesser said, as it would probrblv be the shortest way
t, inasmuch as his be would call witnesses to prove the agieenient.
.r demurrage. Geirro Howell deposed, that he waited on the Derendant.
Is of his opening in January last, and demanded filly guineas for the Pl.iiiitit 1. s
id for granting the The defendant said he did not know the plaintiff, it was 4
3 of insolvency, it business of his mot's+ if A. kid made such an agreement, bd .
d ceased to urge it. offered to pay ten guineas.
essrs. Bastson and John Consign; was present when Sir W. Congrese cameo
idants did not like sad inquired for the defendant: lie saw young Mortriuti. .
ight and recessing sod told hies he wen to bring all the artists he could get.
i applied_to by the Young Mortram Men asked Fenwick if he would join him
e goods mad Use and go and assist him. After some hesitation 1.;,e plaintiff , ,
said, if Igo a its you f will hero 1001. Young Mortrsin ru- .
i. lion export. was plied, it would Ise a d—d good job, as MAN-m:IA jobs
haneellor, and re- always were. Ile could not give , .
that sum, but he sueld

mended, that on ti ,
s he was glut entitled i
fondant had paid icto
d contract, it was s i
I scarcely give it nil.
sot a ou'..i prose that
the imprainbilily of I.
lib, I bet the pliiintin. lu
(like the gentleman •
site), was mare!) the!
iil op and (twat' too
ipportunityl.o !Ay his' i
'
•.
rest squibs sod crack-.
to young gentlemen'`
he artist, %she valimi, l,
armed Counsel their. i
the defendant.
ership with' his father
'• . 1
" I was applied to by
rand down the riser.
at whatever; lie was •',. i
guaranteed that my
doled (our days, but 1
There were la els,/
a wheel which might
'ution, and he had a
t
neier said I wniaa
1 1
relict. Mr. Fen % icl:
pl.
sick 'had nothing to
s.
to Vauxhall-gardens;
•rk by Sir Wm. Con- l'
1
beshould hare been
worked in the Park,'
cession orate snit iiit
i. jttn., by Fens* iek;
' before Funwiek, or
lie (Mortrads) wadi
• q
. i 1
thinner to the .Isty.'
11
:I
ll'
s a i toessei, who tree
the agreenseat. If
di are agreement, it
net, to soy whether r
n; if they thoiight to
'fialdant.
S' li
fur tire defendant-
s, f
I, filergoassa,,
.•
23.
t .
'nut, Term, before rte
'cilia Jiary. .
1 I
w.
' the bankinpfef of l.
its of sit ;may iosti.
i. morning at the sit -
VAUGHAN, ,alid It. •
_
min.'s cote': ana .
t., and Mr: W it.
the Jnry.
.Tfiis,sitz We,
rt. The traiate t
Place in tet# T)*
so ri toto one)
IL!
.illll/ I
i•joil:lns'ifire,lern'rd'lreawh:bachstllbil"e:n•Pusna:titnfe:tl'*i'ls:oo.6.lll;rntoelf: •.
e porehuse'rif Mind- . Ilr'
'ha gave rise to' tab
hid, the Jurywinfla
lids money likd been
hiroug aatititiet,,l/r •
will, the ctioduct cif
is hcchnie a piltpes-'
io called before the •
his fernier conduct,
his testimony you
••
sts, and upon til r t
i form their °Arlin
ii, and in aevebrth, .
!deposed all rillornr:
• . .
coward ai.a' mode -
a early parttr, is . .
ntleman of the nit •
me, who wantfed
a of annailics:_,. .
• of which witel,ia
confined to what
my practice lost •
ml to Mr. Oriffilt
• • : nuld produce 16'
trity. oh iln'afit
.. ulty t.
en years inN'llasd,
is witness eat t "Pa • ' .
stale the die t , /
is annuities,]' 1
Jr which were r i .
Orirristesd, IPA,
ilicatioiisi wi3u ‘4l' • '
no which reprr
On seal Juliil , •ri
rt tiliseliieb was - ,
•d Vi Mr, Orittat
1
...
.
at of investing 1 ',
oily did he aiitonne
teat' that 1 had' I
itd left-the arrange
'I.
of tat redentpit6
tree or four' ibn s
!my belay pre so , /
D to 00 Nobleni i •
L 44 we c4nad-
f
annuities. die ri•-
du the t.
likntereit is
de. r. Orims ad • - .
on. the ell Ot- /
the pat-book, note i
1141* 21. CA. Qtr • • • :
'ed that balance 6,,
i reality novel bo-I
Lirimstead had heirs • .ic
of Bennett, Nest t • ' ' ,i
['hey taken teiatqc
Nautical the balancr.
•
clerk, 1 made the
nstead in its idtehed ,
uld not be iwate ofl I
ad, and presiens to I •
Moment, I tool O.::
~ i
no doubt, isovrev.r, -
c of erasures. Iht a
rinistes,d the sum ••l'
the present balance. •
pretended imaripitivi
'rates, the ihiescht ,
..
ii. 1,...
,
neinut.—l was net •••
idleapsioe, eft* I •
et, The pat/546d
..
I made an entra,ul ,
angst other captts, 1,
• . ..
..4