The National Register.
London, England, 1821-01-15 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 10.
Alleettereed Sittings before the Loin Cum' J trrux.

wet ours v, BAIA:own.
Mr. Gurney stated, that this was au action by the
plaintiff, an East India Captain, to recover from Mr. Bat-
comb, a merchant, at St. Helena, 1211. for goods sold and
money received fur his use. The defendant pleaded, first,
that he aes tiot liable, and, secondly, the statute of
limitation. The last idea he should dispose of by proving
an application within the last six years, and as to has lia-
bility, the following were the circumstances out of which
it muse :—ln 184 the plaintiff delivered to the defendant,
un his tuna hiaag at St. Helena, several different sorts of
goods lo be sold. Ainougst them were 12 a bolts of Bengal
canvas, which Mr. Balconib was was to sell at St. Helena
if he could get 41.105. per bolt for it; if it would not
fetch that price, it was to be sent to Mr. Amyott, the
philutiff's agent at the Cape of Good Hope, and to be
represented as Portuguese goods, to avoid the objection
to them as India goods at the Cape. In 1810, when the
plaintiff again touched at the Cape, Mr. BiliC44lll deli-
vered him an account of Sa bolts sold on the island, and
stated that the other 40 had been sent to Rio Janeiro, and
sold there to a person named Hall, on whom in England
the detendant gave plaintiff an order to receive the pro-
duce, 1211..5. 6d. Plaintiff took the order, but could
never dud Mr. Hall, and now sought payment of the
defendant, on the grounds of his having disposed of the
goods to Hall contrary to his instructions, which were, to
seed them to Mr. Amyistt at the Cape.
Mr. Marryalt, for the defendant, contended, that his
client was instructed to soul the goods to the Cape by
way of Rio; in no other way could they have had the ap-
pearauce of Portuguese goods given to them; and further
he contended, that the present form of actives for money
had and received, and for not accounting fur the goods,
could out be supported. No money had been received,
and the defendant had accuunted fur the in which
they had been disposed of.
The Chief Justice said, if there bad been a collusion to
represent these goods as Portuguese, to evade the Nevi-
gation Act, neither party could sustain an action. It
there was no such collusion, be was still of opinion this
was not the proper form of acsion ; it should have bets,
an action of 'rover. He should nonskid the platutitt,
giving him leave to move to set aside that tionsiiii, and
bare a verdict entered for the amount of his deniand.—
Plaiutiff uousuited.

COWIE V. HALSALL.
This was an action on a bill of exchange, drawn by a
person named Daniels, le
er ?W. accepted by the defendant,
dated Dec. 13, Id i 9, payable three months after date, and
iailuised ores to the pl If, but dishosionied when
The acceptor of the bill, it appeared, resided at
Bristol, but the bi.l in question was made payable at Mt.
lisillake's, No. 48, Uaiaarll•strrrt, Loudon. These facts
weie proved by the wittiesses called WI the part of the
plaintiff, but at appeared that the words payable at Mr.
tlidlake's, Nu, lc, Utiswelf sweet, were nut ita the band-
writiog of the defendant.
Ma. C map bell, fur the defendant, contended, that his
c,.ent was nut liable upon this bill. He accepted it me-
at, rally, payable at his iesidence at Hi islol, and the words
making it payable at BullalLr's, an London, were Added
slier he had accepted so, awl too Ulan'. his sanction. his
addition, lie contended, on the drendon ul the case of
Tidisiaisii and Drove, irporteta in lit M4Uie and Setts, Ws
Reports, went to vitiate the bill.
The ‘ilset JUIIIICC1141(1,1111. tillebLOTl relf the Jury would be

ti kilter tidditioto ill:ltir vials the

Jtdge of the defordant If Iu ue wituuul ui knomllidge or
•.` untel.t. It 'kitidied tor btll ob 'eroded mon, 'hough ne nould
-t.
.• *tun be hoble to Models for t debt due to hint, fur whiclt
;tie hot i►a. gore'.
• 'row Jury too, 4 that the bill had been altered without the
hoots iefixe of the doendoot, u.t t or; elure tumid a wtril:ci,
by tn. LUlthhillp% lot the defendant.
Si ASTLIL V. ROW NS.
The plaiulit In till. (MN: isb JOUrIlle)111i41 sugar boileei*

su..istrt lu tlse trade, iu ;1, Wee employ the
•
11111.0 ,