The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-14 00:00:00

ol:Plf:Yon'Z'cenatfrhd:::irina'snlltdeadenindi
he
oaoifftnhaWiterei6eff,ff.o'hantaneo4ecrdoctrithietabinrt.aoutresfedtthhoeetl
ovoreneddeinertrryto°ratnptitoaalkeentatiatteenptet-7,12u,'L..6:11.4-1,..;,.
some time, but finding that it decreased every month, and that he
had not from the beginning of the transaction more than half of the
business which the defendant represented to him lie would davbe be-
gan to think that he had bees grossly imposed upon, and he there-
fore resolved to make inquiries as to the eorreetnete of the eeprmin-
tations made to him bs• the defendant, on his taking the brim. He
accordingly went to tree Excise (Mee, and inspected the /monthly
returns, and he applied to the brewer to ascertain the quantity of
porter and stout sent to the defendint at the time he occupied the
house, and from tae books of these parties it impearri,, that
an far Prom the consumption of spirrts and bee: being what
the defendant had stated, there had not in either case been half
the quantity disposed of by hint, at any period doting which be
kept the house. The rent being then 1221, pet annum, and the ex,
penscs or keeping she business on sometK:ig considerable, the
plalatiff foetid to his sorrow that he hail act:wily given the defen-
dant more than tiottbre the value of the prortly. The Plaintiff
having thnis suffered under these mi sr epresen ta t ;ona of the de ,f.. den.,
hekad bronght the presunt action to recover at tbe hands 9f te Jury
tut* a sum wi should appear to them, under all the circurnenences.
to Inefdeouate to compensate him for the very SeTtot:i loss be had
elution* In making their estimate of the amount of comps:yea-
thin to be awarded to tire pkintiff, he begged the Jury to trite this
into their consideration, that it did tint. follow as a coneequence,
that if the returns made by the plaintiff amounted orfe to half of
the sum stated by the defendant, there Cove the plaintiff would be
errnipensitYd by their giving him back Astra the premium el by
hint ; for there was 4 certain positive expense to be yea
by the ,plaintiff, before he cool't realize any profit at • and
fa
it mny be that the one half of the returns remesented by the dew
fendant vapid be no more than =equate to meet those expenses ;
so that it would follow that no profit whatever would 'in that
case be realized ; and if so, the whole of the sum pai i by the
plaintiff to the defendant would be so much money actual.), lost to
him. The expenies of carrying on the tresine= of that hone', such
as the rent, taxes, servant.' wages, tire, candle, and all the other
,ivicidental clihrges of public-house keeping, would perhaps. be as
great where .he eeturna emotions& only as 1161., as where they
amounted to 24W. The .1/tur no-.fftl therefore keep this ;fact
I strongly in their memory, when they curie to calculate the isrirrigee
they should award to the plaintiff. He 'would now call his wit-
.nesses to establish the facts stated by, hiin.
Mr. Charles Eottertsllonamined by Mr. Port.ocx.—f AM an
auctioneer, living in the borntigh of :Southwark. I know the plain,
tiff who is a victualler, and l,tes at the ship. Ivy.lant. Newgate-
street. I also know the defendant, . who kept that houee before
the plaintiff* took it„.... In 1823 I applied to Dobell, the defendant.
in consequence of tee recommepdition of a friend, Who infoemed
me that he was about to part with his business at the Ship. The
defendant spoke to me on the inbjeet, and subsequently emplsyed
me to dispose of the house for hint. I took down a statement
made to me by the defendant on the piece of paper which I now
hold in my hand. I took it down in smiting for the purpose of in,
forming such persons as should inquire of me the particulate of the
trade and premises: This paper which 4 now produce hi
the identical writing mode by me on that omaiton ; I mem at the
time I saw the defendant. The defendant stated to me that he bad
a ten years' lease,that the rent was 1221. per annum, and that he
wanted a premium of 5001. for it ; the stack sod fixtures to be !aka;
at a valuation. He said his tap was let at 1101. per annum, and two
other apartments for 271. per annum. He also itateg that he was
doing business which returned 2'4of. it month. I did not /earn the
proportion of the trade in spirits and in porter till the plaintiff' was
about to take the boner. About the 18th or 20th of January,
1822, I began to treat with the plaintiff for the disposal of the
house. At his request I asked the defendant the particulars of the
trade,as the plaintiff meant to make him an offer for It. He said
his trade in spirits wa. about 2001 per month, and that he drew
seven butts of porter in the same time. I said, you are rather over-
rating it,—can you say 150/. or IGnl. tot' :ph*? and he said he
could, ant, that is the reason I put it down 16N. and not 2001. He
said he did not do a great dtail in ale. All vie= representations
were made before the plaintiff', who accompanied me tb the defer.
dant's on that occasion. The plaintiff theft agreed to give 400 i,
for the house, whisk the defendant accepted, rad 301. was paid by
the plaintiff= a deposit in my presence. I took a memorandum
of the contract as I had no printed stamp with me, and it was fixed.
that the parties were to Meet the next day and sign a proper agree-
ment. They did meet, and the agreement was signed, and the re.
rnainder of the premium was to be Paid on the day the plaintiff
should take possession. I was present when the plaintiff paid the
remainder of the money. The whole balance paid was 782/. ss, Sot
This was on the &It of February, and the plaintiff took possession
on that day. The memorandum now shown me was the one mad:
by me alien the deposit was paid.
Cross-examined by 11r. GURNEY—The deposit was paid the
day, before I took that memorandum. Mr. Weston was present
when the agreement was signed ; he was my clerk ; he wrote the
memorandum made on that occasion, but it ;vas detained by me.
The plaintiff has not, to my knowledge, parted with the house
since ; he hai never employed me to dispose of it. Ido not know
that hehas agreed to sell it, and that it is arranged between the
parties that that agreement shall not be made known till this ac-
tion is decided. Ido not know Mr. Cwigu, a broker. The plair.tit
never said to me that he had disposed of the house, nor did he ever
request me to do so ; but he did as to me about two months ego:
, tbat if teade did not mend,he thew.* ligsfessaid lease it.
Mr. Thomas Weston exainined by Mr. PottoCx—l was clerk
to Mr. Cotterell in the early part of last year. I was present at
the meeting of the pisintiffsod defendant, and was the subscribing
witness to the agreement then Sighed by them, and which is now pro-
duces]. The memorandum which is iodoraed on the back of the
agreement was done at the same time.
The agreement was !hen read. It was dated on the 22,1 January.
1824, and it was stipulated that an assignment of the lease should
be executed, and possession taken, on or before the sth of February
then next.
Cross-examined by Mr. Cox MOY SERGEANT—I have been in
the line of* beaker about nine or ten years. On the occasion its
question, Mr. Cotterell acted as agent for both plaintiff and defen- .
dant. It is in some fasea =mil to stipulate, that a certain sum
shall be even for the house, provided the going-out tenant produce
the brewers' and distillers' books
' Mr. Common Sena CANT—Is it not the invariable custom to—.
Mr. SCARLITT—We have nothing to do with custom.
r Judge LITTLEGALE—There cannot be any custom to control
the parties in what they shall accept as a representation of a fact.
111 r. Cosmos SERGEANT said, he would not contend fur the
point.
He then continued the cross-examination of tire witness._—l
have a faint recollection of the booki having been produced at the
meeting between the plaintiff and defendant, but I cannot swear
that they were. I certainly have an idea that they were on that
occasion. I never went to the plaintiff about the insurance of a
life, or of the house; but when I went to him on other business.
which was on the T.ith of February, he told me that Mr. Steven.
had not signed the memorandum on the back of the policy of in-
surance, and that there was some difference between them In con-
sequence ; but he did not then complain about the falling.offof bu-
siness. Some time after this, I saw him at his own house, about
settling the tame that were in arrear—this was in April. I remain-
ed at his house for more than half an hour ; plaintiff did not make
any complaint then respecting the trade ; this was the first time I
applied for the taxes. When I called the second time for the taxes,
the plaintiff showed me some money (about three sovereigns art
r• ne silver), which he had taken before twelve o'clock that day t
coupling the act with the remark, that by goin into the market.and
drinking with the people, he should make the house every good thing.
I called again on the zth of October and saw the plaintiff; the
plaintiff's wife was present ; he then complained of the fa:lin off'
of the bneiness, and his wife said " Dohell, you hail better hold
your foolish tongue ; the business would be well enough if yon
would attend to it." He had heard Mrs. Dobell make this remark
several times before. Plaintiff' was angry, bat did not make any
reply. The business of a publican requires much attention, and an
active man to conduct it.

Re-examined by Mr. Pottoc x—l was not present when the
ha was paid be the plaintiff: I think the brewer's book was pro..
duced, but I will not swear it. I have a strong idea that it was.
Mr. POLLOCK—alien your recollection is faint, but your ideas
are Strong ?
Witness—No, no. I don't understand that. I have had
quarrel with Mr. Cotterell ; it was in consequence of his comm.::
to me, and in which I thought he very ilhused me. Articles of
partnership were prepared between us, and he then took offence at
something, and said he would have nothing more to do with me. .
Of tours this irritated me, and we quarrelled. I never bad am
quarrel with the plaintiff. I certainly have heart Mn. DobelL
make the remark to her husband, that if he would attend to the
business it would do very well, two or three times. I have. of
course, heard the plaintiff make the complaint as often. I cannot
' state whether I heard the complaint first in the month of April. or
io October ; the difference is certainly great, but still I cannot state
when it was 1 first heard it.
W. Probyn, clerk to Messrs. Coombe, Delafield, and Co.
brewers. produced the assignment of the lease front the detendang
to the plaintiff.
James Russell was the subscribing witness to the assigmnent.
and saw the consideration-money, being 4101., paid by the plentiff.
The assignment was then put in and read.
C:oes.examined by the Common SERGEANT—I was at the tIIK.
fendant's house when the assignment was executed. I did not
hear the parties speak of the rent of the tap; they went into the
tap, and talked about it, but I do not know what it was that
passed. I have a slight recollection of something having been said.
Mr. COIIHON SERGEANT—Now, really we had better have a
I faint recollection than a slight one—tell me, Sir, did you or did woe
not hear that the conversation was respecting the rent of the tap?
' Nl'itnesti—l did not.
Mr. Harding examined by Mr. SCARLITT—I aot clerk to
Messrs. Raid and Co. brewers. That firm supplied Stevens. the
defendant, with porter for three years and one month. I have the
books to show what was the consumption per month; it was Are
butts and two-lifths of a butt. I did not know of defendant's.
assigning' his interest in the house to the plaintA cur am 4.
aware that our hooks were ever produced on any such occasion.
Cross-ctuunined by Mr. GURNEY—Every publican has a pass
book, and that goes with the house. showing die quantity of beer
that has been bad every month. Slur months are lunar months, of •
'JR days; the plaintiff did not continue to have the porter fur the
house font Rrid and Co.
Wrn. Johnson, collecting clerk of Reid and Co. was next called.
Mr. SCAELETT declined to take the evidence of this witness,
as it only went to prove the facts spoken to by the former one.
Cross-examined by Mr. flues; ets-31esars. Rei d and Co. sell
porter and stout, but not ale; the money paid by a publican foe
di butts is about 351., being 61. Ills. 3J. per butt. The pubbcan's
profit is isß2el.3z3hs., p;:rraubutt.
the
Examinees
at
the
Ezzire.
was