The National Register.
London, England, 1821-11-19 00:00:00

•ILIiAX •. FELTON.

This was an action of trawler tried at the Sittings at Guildhall,
to recover the value of certain goods seistsl by tile defendant in
a distress for rent, in which a verdict was taken for the plairdill,
subject to the decision of the Court on a case, which was after-
wants turned into a special case for argument, and now came on
to be heard before their Lordships.
Before the case was gone into, Mr. Serjcant Lawes, who was
for the defendant, said, that possibly there might bc no occasitm
for going through with it, as the plaintiff had died since the
commencement of the action. _ _ .

Mr. aierjeant Marshall, who was for the plaintiff said it was
quite common in cm), day's practice to have the opinion of the
Court on a case where either of the parties died between the
verdict and the judgment.
The circumstances of the present case were these : In 1819,
Mr. Gilman, the plaintiff, who was a boinbazeen manufacturer
at Norwich. sent a quantity of goods to a person named Milne.
who was his factor in London. Ile forwarded with the goods a
regular invoice, and drew upon Milne a bill for 2011. on ac-
count, which was regularly accepted, and sent back to him in
the country. 'l'ile plaintitlgot tile bill discounted at his banker's
at Norwich, but before it become due Milne died, and on becom-
ng due it was presented at his late warehouse by the banker's
agents in London tor payment. but was sent back dishonou et
and protested. The plaintiff then demanded that his goods,
which he had placed in the hands of Milne, as his factor, should
be returned to him, which, however, was refused by the plainutli,
who had distrained upon them fur the rent of the premises where
they were deposited, which had been let by him to Milne,.
The question therefore for their Lordships to decide was, whether
goods belonging to,a third party while in We hall& of a factor
were subject to distress tin rent.
Mr. Serjeant Marshall, for the plaintiff. Lid down a position.
that goods delivered to a third poson.exercising publicly a trade
or business to be by him carried, wrought, or managed in the
way cf his trade, were not liable to distress tor rent. In support
of this psition lie cited a vast number of cases, and contended
that the object of this exception against the general right of tl,e
landlord, was the benefits of triOe and commerce ; that the pre
sent ease came within the principle of that exception; and that
the greate4 inconvenience would resit to the exiensise trade of
this country. if goals so placed wee not protected by it.
Mr. Sergeant I.awes, for the defendant, said, his learned brother
looked to the inconvenience to trade; lie, on the other hand,
would have their Lordships to look to the inconvenience to the
landlord, who had a no less inirattant interest of this abridgment
of his rights. The landlord had u primp ficie right to distrain
upon all goods found 011 his premises, which were assumed by
the law as his. There were, however, lia admitted, exceptions to
this right, which were goods tit an inn, or a wharf for carriage,
or gnoils at a weaver's era tailor's,or othet artfains to be wrought,
The ground of the exception, lie contended, was the necessity of
placing the goods in the kali; of a third panty, to undergo sonic
process or manufacture, which was not the case with goods in the
hands of a factor, which were only there to be sold. Why (lid
not the owner or manufacturer sell them himself? If he did not
choose to do so, he must submit to the inconvenience of his own
seeking, and sham in the risk to which all under-tenants woe
'abject.

ihe Chid Justice said, the right of the landlord to Glistrain for
rent was dear in point of law, and the rule was w take all that
found on the premise,: prima facie as belougMg to the landlord.
Hut this, like every other general rule, had its oweptions, and
the question was, whether the present case came witliw the scope
ut the rule, or fell under the exemptions? The foundmiun of
the rule via, the principle Of public convenience in the prevention
of trawl. The principle of the exception was very

THE NATIONAL REGISTER

down. and all were in &vow of public convenience in trade. and
seemed to him to apply muck mere strongly in the ease of a factor
than of any other exception. Deciding upon this ease by analogy
from the general prinetpl:' it appeared to him not to be disun-
guishable from the case of goods sent to a warehouse, or an inn,
or a wharf. all of which were admitted exceptions; and without
applying himself to any other case, but simply to that which was
betore the Court, he should say, that the goods of a third party
hi the hands of a factor are not liable to distress for rent.
_ _

Mr. Alsace Park. Mr. Justice Burrough, and Mr. Justice
Richardson. concurred in the opinions which had been given.
Judgment was accordingly entered for the plaintiff
WELN USDA V. Nor. 14.
The Court sat until twelve o'clock, and 'truant common
motions et ere ilispo.eil of, after which the Chief Justice vat
at Nut Fria:. The follow inx was the only defended cause.
PE4IIaoN • Sitollr ortal.D.
This was an action under the Pilo) Act, to recover of the
defendant. w Ito ran witterman, Oa penalties for acting is a
p.hit in piloting a vessel down the River Thames. be not
being duly licensed and certificated as a pilot.
By a clause in the Act, colliers and ve,sels trading to Nor.
Nay, the Courant, and the 11.thic, arc excepted from it.
operation, and the venal in yuestion being hound 1111 her
voyageur St. ri.let.hurgli, unto itlistanding that the defen.
d.ut was neither the toaster our mate, nor belonging in ally
to her ere*, there was nu ground fur sending the ease to a
jury ; and n nonsuit was accot (tingly entered.
Mr. Sergeant Lem, who was for the plaintilf,then stated,
lb at the object of the action was Heady tt cAuhlish the
caw• as w 1(11111 the eve. ptioll, With a view to an applicat lon
to Pat Harnett( fur some alteration in the regulations of pilots
under the Act.

TA Ila V. WOODROI.
Sergeant Vaughan fur the plaintiff nail obtained a con-
ditional rule, caning on the defendant, who is Warden of
the Fleet Pi isms, to chew cause why au attachment should
Ilul imsllti against.
St geant 111isset now xliewed cause against the rule.—
It appeared by the affidavits that 4 person of the name
Isit 11(.4E13 Farre had been confined in the titles of the
Heal itt the suit of the plaintiff, and that all 01 ill`r of
Covet had hero served un the defendant's deputy, to to tug
him into court on the last day of 7liuity Perin, to be
charged in execution, which order was not obeyed in
consequence of the prisoner's nut being to lie found till
after rising of the cowl on that dal ; at which time the
Warden's deputy, in consequence of tion-appearance
when called un, refused to allow hint the privilege of the
rules any longer, and crannied him within the walls of the
prison till he was released under the liseutrent Debtut's
Act.

Sergeant Missy( contended, that as the plaintiff had
nut sustained any loss in consequence of the order served
on the defendant to bring up his prisoner not being
obeyed, he was nut entitled to any damages.
Sergeant Vaughan, for the plaintiff, very earnestly
contended, that as the defendant granted the privilege of
the rules at his own discretion, and for his own emolu-
ment, and always took security for the prisoners being in
;codifies& to obey the orders of the court, lie must be held
accountable fur every act of disobedience, and would of
coarse be indemnified by the security he had taken.
The court, atter considerable consultation, said it did
not appear that the defendant bad used due diligence to
bring up the prisoner in obedience to the older of the
court; it was therefore proper lie should suffer in some
degree tor his neglect ; bid it was quite manifest, that
hail the defendant obeyed the order of the court, the
plaintiff would not have been benclitted. as the pi isoner
would have been equally discharged under the Insolvent
Debtors' Act, and it would be too mocha for the court to
say, that the del endant should pay the plaintiff's dent,
when Ins conduct had by any means contributed to its
loss. 'Dia judgment of the court therelore was, that the
rule obtained by the plaititill should be discharged, and
that the defendant should pay the costs.

A Midnight Botber Ki.fkd.—On Friday a Coroner's
inquest was held at Shidnall, Shropshire, on the body
of T. Pouter, who was shot in au attempt at robbery.—
It appeared 111 evidence that the shop of Nit's. Austin,
of sititheall, havinki been several tittles robbed very re-
cently, a friend persuaded one of Mrs. A's daughters to
scatter some meal round the front doorway, in order to
aseerfon whether access was made by that entrance.—
This plan was adopted on the 2goi ult. and next morn-
ing it was clear that some person had ethered by that
way; that the lock of the shop door had been forced,
and that the [Miller had retreated the same way, fasten-
ma toe door after him. On We nesday night list Mr.
Dunbar, with Mr. Edmunds, rut Cr, and Mr. George
Austin, remained on the watch ; and anont one o'clock
on 11110Taling a person in a stunek frock com-
menced opening the door, and thus molt hits nearly an
hour and a halt to etket, when ite entered the shop, but
went out and returthd .tellll. Mr. Dittilta r mimed tatel
seized hilts, hut Air. 1.1. arms coming nt contact between
the upper and lower part of the door, which
was in his
hand, ne was obliged to louse his huid beliire Mr. Austin
could get out at the passage door to seize the robber out-
side. The Wall ran ofl, but Mr. Austiu came up with
him near the house of Mr. Foulkes; u sculde emitted,
and the robber's frock riptug near', through, he again
got loose. lie was however, pursued by Messrs.Austiti,
Danbar and Ed ds. 11. mg now without his smoct
(rick, hal, anti shoes, he gained g din the pursuit,
sipon which Mr. Dunbar called out to hint to stop, but
tins challenge to surrender being distegarded, Mr D.
fired a pistol at him, the ball from which entered his
back and passed direct through his heart, itotwithstand-
nig which the unfortunate maisfurther ran with great
speed down the Jerissingham Arms lim-yard. over the
b.tlle, and hall way towards tine cnorelt; he then felh
Mr. 1). ran for a surgeon, but the Wall net er spoke dim
In has pocket was hound a picklock ; and ate WAS-known
as a sagaiamd. Coroner's Jury returned a verdict
of "Justifiable Homie.dr."

Au accident occurred to the Hon. Sir Charles Paget,
id the evening of Saturday se'lluight. at Deal, which
timatt ti:d unpleasant consequences. Sir Charles having
arrived to minds( Ins broad pendant, das desirous, not-
withstanding site gale, of going o: tana:ll,. and, accom-
panied by his brother, the Host. Berkeley Paget. 4:111.
harked in his boat, which was soots after meattip..d. By
good management no ill consequence ensued beyond a
thorough wettiug of all that were in the boat, with their.
clothes, Waage, istc.