The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-12-02 00:00:00

LC•%'ER V. LANE.

Tins was an action Inought by the Plaintiff
against Thomas Lane, a publican, who bad
agreed to deliver up the lease of a public-house,
tie.ierlier with all his stock on hard, upon the hut
of October last. The sure agreed to be paid for
this transfer was 4051. thw , iyus^ 301. a. •
deposit: and should an) of the parties violate the
engagement, or omit pelorining the Atipalations
upon that day. they were to forfeit tool. The
public-house in question was known by the name
of the Ox said Owl, and was ..tuatt,:rl in Rumford,

in the county of EVACIi. • .i:,11 stork
on band were to be valued by uppriotert. The
Plaintiff alleged that lie was ready to perform his
part of the contract, upon the day appointed, but
tusk the Defendant was not ready, and therefore
had forfeited the stipulated pelialty. Although
.the Plaintiff had only 1001. ))))) ey, he had
property in the three per cents. reduced, which',
being shut at the time tins agreement writ to be
canted into effect, he was tinder the net:laity of
raising money upon that fund, in order to per-
form bin part of the bargain. The present ac-
tion was therefor,• brought, in order to recover
the deposit he had made, and the penalty stipu-
lated in the agreement. It appeared teat that
agnseniant was dated he Oil of September ljtt,
and that the Plaintiff, eluding Wllle difficulty in
raisiug the money, applied, upon the ...!;.h of Sep-
tember, to a Mr. Abliag, manager of Truentan,
Banbury, and Co.'s brewery, to advance him the
money, who refused to do so till he could get pos-
lithilllOU of the funds in the t per cents. reduced,,
which were not to he open till the 13th of October.
The Plaintiff upon this stated that the perform-
ance of the ngreerueut could not be put otf beyond
the Gth of (ktolwr, otherwise he must incur a pe-
nalty, nod therefore expressed a wish that the pe-
riod of performance could he postponcd. Mr. Ab-
bug informed him that he could inistpone it to the
13th October, by writing to Mr. Lem., the Defend-
ant, as he was contort ted with him in business.
With this the Plaintiff seemed perfectly pleased,
and left the 10401. he was then palletised of iii the
hands of Mr. Abliag. Previous to the 6th of Oc-
tober, however, Mr. Leaver called back, nod stated
he lied got a person to advance him the money,
and therefore he would not need such an advance
from Mr. Abliag, as lie would be otherwise fully
enabled to pay the money upon the 13th of that
month. Notwithstanding this postponement, how-
ever, the Plaintiff went, upon thelith of October, in

. ,
a chaise to Rumford, accompanied by an attorney
and another, and offered to perform the eiNage-
%most according to the ori;inal stipulation. He had
on that same day sent his appraiser. On being told
by the Defeat/nut that he had received a letter, post-
potting the business to the 1.011, and that therefore
he was quite unprepared, the assignment not being
made out, the Plaintiff pretended a total ignorance
of saeli a letter haring bwn seat. The testimony
of Mr. /titling put the twitter beyond all doubt,
and shelved that the Plaintiff was perfectly well
aware of the postponement, and therefore that his
whoa object was to tanks the Defendant incur the
penalty mentioned iu their agreement.
Plaintid nonsuited.
WELEICER r. LE PELLETIER.

This was an issue out of Chancery, to ascertain
whether the name of the Defendant, one of the
French Noblesse, a Cornet in one of our r..4iinents
of horse, was Louis Pelletier, or Loins Auguste
Alexandre Pelletier? as the result of a suit de-
pending upon this fact. It appearing. however,
from the statement of Mr. CiASELY, who was
Counsel for the Defendant, that no positive evi-
dence could lie given as to his baptism,
The Jury, by the direction of the Judge; gave w
verdict for the Plaintiff—Damages, is.
COTTERF V. [NT.