The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-17 00:00:00

'

priety of drawing • distinction between the balance of the cash
account, and Alr. Watson's salary ; many thought he oughtio
stand as a aeditor for the former; others were of opinion, that as
his services might still be wanted in the progress of their affairs,
it world be better, and more liberal to draw no distinction in the
account, but pay the whole. Mr. Watson had been in the house
twenty-five years. Mr. Tyson eighteen years, and others, seven-
teen, fourteen, and six years. Four of the clerks, it appeared, had
got employment elsewhere, three were still kept employed in
winding up the bank affairs, and it was acid, that the estate would
be relieved of this expense of management, as soon as it could be
conveniently accomplished for the interest of the creditors.
It was then unanimously resolved, That the clerks and Servants
should be paid in full, including 21r. Watson's balance of account.
MR. FAUNTLEROY'S PRIVATE PAPERS.
Mr. Gonnox said, that in examining the private papers of the
late 31r. Fauntleroy, they hail found • policy of insurance upon
the life of Mr. Gordon Urquhart, for 1,500/. There was no ex-
planation of how it came among these papers, except that there
was an assignntent upon it. as security fir 2,400/. The whole
debt, however, appeared to have been paid off last July by Al n.
Christie, and no notice seemed at the time to have been taken of
this policy. The assignees, however, did not feel thetnelves jus-
tified in airing up this policy to Mr. Urquhart, without some con-
sideration to repay the outlay of Mr. Fauntleroy in maintaining
the policy, and which was estimated to amount to 233/. 2a. Messrs.
Robinson and Co., the solicitors for Mr. Urquhart, had agreed to
give 1311. for the restoration of this policy, and the only object in
getting it seemed to beAus enable some of Mr. Urquhart 's friends to
keep up the policy for the benefit of the family.—The power to
surrender the policy on these conditions was then conferred, by a
unanimous resolution, upon the assignees.
PROPERTY IN HOUSES-
Mr. Kum T (the assignee) then said, that there were several
houses and ground-rents among the wale of the bankrupts'
estate. There were six houses in ilryanstone-square, and two
houses in York-street, belonging to Mr. Fauntleroy's separate
estate. It was thought that if these were sold piece-meal by pri-
vate contract they would bring • better price titan if put up to
public suction.
Mr. Lour) objected to any sale by private contract; he thought
it much better for the creditors, and certainly more satisfactory for
the assignees themselves, that the sales should be by public sue-
noon. It would obviate the possibikty of any future imputation
of partiality in the disposal of the property. (Hear.)
Mr. KNIGHT and Mr. ROLLAND both concurred in the view
taken by the last si.. her, that the public sale would be more sa-
tisfactory to their feelings. It an then carried unanimously, that
the sale should be by public auction.
In answer to a question from a creditor, Mr. /CND:3NT declared,
there was no truth in the report; that any thing had been disposed
of by private sale, by the assignees.
Mr. Daersow (the auctioneer) said, that if they had ten times
the property which belonged to the estate to be disposed of, they
would get by auction good bidders for it, at the present moment.
After some motions of mere form, the meeting adjourned.

LAID INTFiLIGFNCE.

COURT OF CRANGERY,SATuato.or, JAW. IS.

• NX-PARTE LIMAI TN 7111 L X OF TITOR.MANTLi•
Mr. Haul- said, this was a matter in which he appeared as
Counsel. but so long ago, that he had no doubt of its being entirely
out of his Lordship's reeollection. The original application was
for leave to prove a debt under this bankruptcy by a note of a par-
Ocular nature. and the order upon that petition was appealed from.
It was the application of a very poor woman. and his Lordship was
as good u.to say, without incurring the expense of having it argued
here, as well cs probably elsewhere, if the papers were handed to
him, he would consult aids some of the common law judges upon
ft, and inform the Bar of the result.
His Lounsitir now perfectly recollected the case, and if 31r.
Hart would have it put into the paper fur Wednesday next, his
Lordship,would dispose of It.

COURT OF KING'S BENcti, SetranAT,Jmr.ls.

Sittings at Guildhall, Landon, be pre Mr. ✓usSOC ABBOTT and
Special Jur ics.

timer) AND ANOTHER V. orciwnttxte Up ANOTHER.
This was an action to recover the value of a quantity of sugar,
sold by the plaintiffs to the defendants, through the medium of a
broker.
TheplaintiTs ose was conducted by the ATTORNEY-GENE-
' a•c, blr.3leaavAT and 1111.Coniu. ; and the defendants by
air. SEARLE./ T and Alt. CAMPBELL.
The principal witness examined was Mr. Thomas l'ippet, a
sworn broker of London; and ii appeared, front his evidence, that
the sugar in question, which consisted of two pireels, had been
bought by him of the plaintiffs, and sold to the defendants. He
was broker in the transaction. In the bought notes delivered to
the plaintifti, it was stated that he bought fora principal, without
naming Mtn. The sugars were to be paid for to the plaintiffs,
prompt, at two months. lq the eels notes, the contract was, that
the defendant should pay for the sugars in ready with on deli.
very. When the sugars were delivered, the defendants paid *witness
ler than ; but by the time the prompt expired, and plaintiffi de-
manded payment, according to their understanding of the contract,
witness had become embarrassed, and was unable to pay the money.
The plaintiffs then. for the first time, demanded the names of wit-
ness's principals. On cross-examination, witness said, that, in
point of fact, he had no principal on whose account he bought at
the time the sugars were purchased of the plaintiff, nor did the
defendants instruct him to purchase the goods of the plaintiffs, of
whom, in fact, the defendants knew nothing, except by name, in
the transaction. It was true he had in the bought notes stated that
he purchased fora principal ; but it was not usual for the vendor
to have the name of the principal given to him unless it was de-
manded. Witness had frequently dealt with the plaintiff's in this
manner. In this instance they did not demand the names of the
defendants until after the prompt had expired, nod when witness,
who had received the price of the sugars of the defendants, was
unable to pay it. The plaintiffs had attended the meeting of
witness's auditors, but he was unable to state what passed on that

occasion.
Mr. Rucker, a sugar broker, deposed, that It was the custom in
the sugar trade fur brokers to purchase goods for principals without
naming them. The name was never given unless the vendor
demanded it. Witness, as a broker, always had a principal before
he purchased.
Under these circumstances, it was contended for the plaintiffs,
that, although the defendants might have paid Mr. Pippet for
the sugars, still they were liable over again to the plaintiff's, Mu.
much as the sugars had been gold on their account, and for their
benefit. The defendants ought not to have paid Pippet after the
names of the plaintiffs hail been diselosed.—For the defendants it
was insisted. that, however improperly Mr. Pippet might have acted,
still, as the defendants did not know any thing of him but as •
vendor selling for his own account, and had paid him according to
the terms of the contract, on that footing they could not be liable
again to the plaintiffs. The defendants knew nothing of the plain-
tiff', at the time of the sale.
The Lout, Cum, Jurrlcr thought there was no evidence to
charge the defendants with any liability to the plaintiff's. Properly
speaking, Alr. Pippet was acting as a middle-man between the ear-
ties, and it was his duty fairly to disclose to each their relative situ-
ation ; but instead of doing so, he withheld the name of his prin.
viral from the plaintiff's, and did not inform the defendants that he
was selling merely in the character of a broker. Ilis bought aad
sold notes did not correspond. In the one, the plaintiffs were to be
paid prompt in two months ; and, in the other, the defendants were
to pay ready money on delivery. Whether a man carrying on bu.
&mess as a sworn broker should be allowed so to deal, was a matter
with which the Juty and his Lordship hail nothing to do ; but
sitting in the situation in which his Lordship did, he felt it his
duty to remark upon, and express his disapprobation of, such
conduct. The question was, whether, as between these parties,
the defendants were liable to pay for the sugars a second time.
They had paid the broker in ready money, and had dealt with
him as a principal, and it seemed to hint that there was no pretence
for holding them liable.
Upon this intimation of his Lordship's opinion,
The A u T 0 R 31 Ett-Gxx E A A L elected to be nonsuited.
Plaintiffs nonsuited.

DEVIS ♦ND OTHERS V. TURNBULL AND ANOTHER.
Thi% nu an action by the assignees of J. Richards and fleas,
bankrupts, to recover from the defendants a sum of 111101. received
by them to the use of the bankrupts.
Mr. CAMPBELL and Mr. MART were for the plaintiffs, and Mr.
M AAAAA Tr for the defendants.
it appeared that persons trading at Gibraltar, under the firm of
Johnson and Gratiano, owed the bankrupts a considerable sum of
money, and one of the latter went to Gibraltar and obtained bills
of exchange to the amount of the debt. These bills were deposited
with a person named lielfe, for the bankrupts account, with direc-
tions to transmit the proceeds to London. Ilelfe had dealings with
the defend.sats, who carried on business at Gibraltar, and they (as
was alleged) prevailed on him to go to America, leaving in their
hands woe of the bills of exchange, amounting to SOU The qua.
lion in the cause was, whether this bill had been deposited with
the defendants for the purpose of transmitting the proceeds to
the bankrupts, or was a discount transaction between them and
Relfe. . .

The examination of Relic, on interrogatories, was put in and
read, from which it appeared that the bill had been handed to the
defendants with full knowledge that the bankrupts were entitled to
the proceeds.
111 r. MallrAT, upon this state of facts, yielded to a verdict.
Verdict forrhe plaintiff's. Damages—.so4l/., without interest.
CHARLETOX cotEswonvu.

This was an action brought by a eornmander of the Oporto
packet, against the owner of the vessel, his employer, to recover a
sum of money as primage (or per centavo upon the amount of the
height. No agreement had been made between the plaintiff and
defendant as to this allowance, and the plaintiff had never made
any such charge until he rendered his third account, upon his being
deprived of the command of the vessel ; and the claim was now
set up upon the ground of the general usage of the trade au-
thorising such an allowance to Captains of merchant vessels in
that trade.
Several witnesses were examined upon this point of usage, and
the Jury, after having feint! from the bent for about two hours,
returned a verdict tOr the plaintiff: Damages-161.

The Magistrates have unanitnously rewired to apply fur
the removal of the Insurrection Act from that part of the
county Clare under its enactment.—Li,,ici ick C4runicie.

.... - ...,,