The National Register.
London, England, 1820-01-16 00:00:00

TH F. NAMONAL REGISTER.

By thus reviewing, what lus been done, ani is doing,
in the intert.iitinA science education we la lost
toessitirtion 4.ll.rure i r N .eat s.
_ • _ _
LAIV INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH; JAS. 8.
USVRIOUS IitI.LII.—DIXoN C. cott:a.
This was an issue fruits the V ice-Ctianeellur's Court,
to try whether two bills of excliange,.amottuting to
1,,8001. drawn by a person, tanned Taylor, accepted by.
Galvin, in the llJmrof Cults and Gtlpiu, and indorsed
over to the plaintiff for a valuable consideration were
converted in issurv; whether (ialina accepted the bills
without the knowledge or consent of his partner Coles,
‘lll4 51,111:i/ter the 1)661101 had used InOrtf caution in the
Iratisacnini. Titus important case occupied the whole
of the slay. and in the course of the evioeitee the follnw-
ing circumstances came tit ts—Nlessrs. Coles and Winn
were stationers in Fleet-street, and Mr. Coles had some
time :mice retired to reside in Southampton, leaving his
son and Gilpin to inall.ege the business in nowt!. GJII/111
formed a connection with Iciiinear, well known hoist
his transactions with %Voile Jllll Levy ; and a plan was
agreed on between them and young Coles to raise a large
suns upon bills, to be drawn by a person named Taylor,
accepted 1w Galvin, its the name of the huts of Coles
and Wide, awl to be discounted by Kinnear, wlinwas
to get money or goads tor them, anil to have Mr his share
of the transaction 20,0001. Upon this agreement. bills
to the amount of between 70 and 80,0001. were drawn
and delivered to Kilinear, two of iliem, the bills in mica-
lion, came into toe handl, of the plaintiff, iii.the hollow-
ing mintier:—A person named Easton called on' Mr.
Dixon, and represented himself as a broker for a respect.
..table merchant named 1)e Bran, wit's was about to
snake a shipment fur Holland, and wanted a quantity of
those goods in which Mr. Dixon dealt, for which he
would pay with the acceptance ofGoles atigial pi is; Mr.D.
saw the latter, who acknowledged the acceptances to he
his, and upon this ackbowledgment, without further
inquiry, the goods were furalisioeil, and were soon after
taken awe) in a cart under the direction, Js it now ap-
peared. of Lewis I,e‘y, and coineyett to K ar's
warehouse. De Brun did not appear at all in the trans-
action, and on investigation it turned out that he is an
old clothesinatv, sotnelities called Josephs, and occupy-
ing a lodging in the neighbourhood of Rosensary-lane,
at 3s. per week. Mr. L;oles having obtained an inti-
mation of blest bill transactions, enquiry took place,
which ended its a commission of bankruptcy. Galvin
absconded to America, and never appeared to his com-
mission... The bills held by the plaintiff and Mail others
were disallowed by the commissioners, and the present
issue was directed to try their validity.
The inry,after a summing op from the Chief Justine,
found a verdict for the defenttatit.
PRIVILEGE Or TIC COURT.
At the rising of the Court, Mr. PoiliEsk said he had to
apply to his Lordship for the discharge Of a person who
had been arrested whilst attending the Cuuu to give evi-
dence.
The Chief Justice directed the officer and the person
in custody to stand forward. The officer did so, and in
reply to his Lordship's question, said he arrested the
gentleman in eutinly at his chambers in ‘Vatisford-
buildings, between twelve and one in the day. The
gentleman said he was just !eaving his chambers to at-
tend the Coast, has ing been subp tnaed.as a witness in
a cause which stood in his Lord-bilis paper. He pro-
duced the subpTna, and on reference to Isis Lordship's
list, it appearing that. the cause was down for trial, the
Chief Justice. commanded the officer to liberate his

prisoner..
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL, JaN.lO.
SEFLUIIE, OP SLAVES.—MANDRAGO V. WILLES.
This was an e.citun of considerable importance, both
to the parties immediately concerned, and to all persons
eliga4ed in the Slave Trade.
Tlie plaintiff was a Spanish merchant, and the ole-
felid.int the Captain of a ship of war. The action was
one of trespass, in which the plaintiff sought to recover
a compensation in damages Irons the defendant for hav-
big seized a ship the property cf the plaintiff, and taken
' out of her a number of slaves and goods by which the
plaintiff had been deprived of the profits he expected to
mate irons her voyage. The plaintiff's vessel, the Es-
cuidore, of 200 tons burtheii, more or less, had sailed
ft am the Ilavatinah to Cie coast of Africa, with a cargo
of goods for the purchase rtf 500 slaves, with which he
was to return to the liavatinah. She had touched at
Porto Novo and other places, and had taken in slaves
at each. Site also met a Portuguese vessel, from which
she purchased several, cuts had got altogether ego
ou
Want. Tile defendant was the commander of one of
the British ships of war stationed on the Af:ican coast
to prevent the illicit traffic in Sieves, and to repr:ss pi-
racy in thus-. seas. Having fallen in with the Porto-
gu.:se vessel above m. rationed, he received such infor-
titation respecting the Escuidore as induced I to
consider her as tralfreiting for slaves in breach of the
law and existing treaties on that subject; he, therefore,
sailed in search of her, and ou coning in sight, the
Lscuidore cut her cable and ran ; the defetitlant, how-
ever, purstied and tool possession of her. This was out
the lids of January. The Captain proceeded to Cape
Coast Cast le, to St. Thomas's, aivl other places, and ul-
timately, to Sierra !tone, where he delivered over the
slates to the several authorities, and disposed of the
other cargo. consist tog of tobacco, Ste. by AMU. .
however, it was discovered, that the Captain
was IVA authorized to detain the Escuidore, amid site
was restored to Iter.owners at Jamaica on the 29th of
July. The Captain at the saute time deliverimt user an
account of sales of cargo, amounting to 4251.. Tuts
howevei, not satisfying the owner of the Eseninlirri
the present action was brought to recover the value 11i
the cargo, the value of the slaves, and the loss of profits
on the voyage.
The slaves were vatted on the part of tile plaintitl it)
.bc.warth at prime cost on the coast of Airtea 121. tsar

on the average of nun, WOlll3ll, and child. and had they
urrivid at the I lavainialt would' have produced MO.
eachZvalti. tv as also said that the cargo, which was
1011ROWIls ve.prodiseed only 4201. was worth at the,
title of the scialim 6,1001. ; anti limber, that the
cuidore would INVe compleated her voyage to the IL.
mana' by the latter rad of March. wlnie, as she was
detained by the tlrfentlatit. end hcr ea►niu,a for • that
period lost to the plaintiff, aud fur these loopes he 11 WI.
sought coast peawation:
Ile Chief Justice said, .that in this case there were.

three questions or the consideration of the jury : first
as to the deterioration of the ship iii consequeoce of her
detention ; 2.1, as to the valise of.alir goods at the lime
of.the seizure, .and ;id, as to the, loss of instills of the
voyage. For himself he had his • douhts how far a
foreigner could recover in a &hist' Court of Jirstice fur
a loss in the Slave Trade; that would be a subject or
the future consideration of the Court of Bench,
and the Jury would therefore distinguisti what they;
gave, if they game any thing, as the alio t of time
main; of the slaves, they would also consider that
the defendant stated th it at the • of the seizure the
skives were dying daily of the small pox .and another:
epidemic disorder.
Time Jury retired, and were out two I ttttt rs, when they
' returned with a %collie' for the pkiistilf—Datiriges
21,1eu1. being 18,1801. fur tire estimated value of the-
slaves.

TAYLOR V. Eueas.

• The plaintiff, iii this ease is Captain George Taylor,
brother to Mr. ICm. Taylor, the. late owner of the
Opera-house. Tits defendatit keeps a circulating-libra-
ry in New Bond-street, and deals in opera•boxes and.
tickets. This action was brought to recover the sum of
3311., being the sum agreed to be paid to the plaintiff;
fur the hire of a box for the season.
Mr. Bebbolie clerk to the plaintiff's attorney, proved,
that at the latter rod of the year 1817 he called on the
defendant, nu the belialt of Mr. Taylor, anal riated to
him that he had three boxes to let ; two of them, num-
bers 23 and. 58, were the properly of the plaintiff, Mr.
Geo•ge Taylor ; the oilier was the property of a Mrs.
Dunn. lie asked the defendant vvlist Ire would give for
them. The defendant said they had teen let for 3601.
and 3001. He would give the larger suns for the two
hest, namely—Mrs. ()toot's I,ox and No. VO. of the
plaintitrs ; and 250 guineas fur Nu. 58, if he could get
it. lie did not think they would t•ruiloce much this
season'. If the witness would cell two ur three days af-
ter tiro season hail coositiericrd, he mould let hint know.
Ile aid cell, :mil it wus staled that the defendant slionlri
have them at the above price: the payment was to be
in cash, at three equally distant periods, during the sea-
son. The witness accompanted defendant to the Opera-
office, and pro.litccd the ueeds relating to the hoz, and
the clerk received orders tot make out the tickets fur the
defcrolant. When tire first instalment because due, he
called and received 3.121. ; after the second became doe,
Ihe called again and received 2501. The defendant then
said, that inete had been no written agreement, and he
proposed to the witness to give him one. lie said,
Suppose we convider N 0.20. as the misruled box, and
you gave toe a orremarenduto of having bet led for the •
other two." Tins was accordingly done, and the deferi-
dent paid him 121. tos., arid he said he would pay the
remaining 3321. as soon as the season was ended:. In
May, 1819, he called aizaiii on the defendant, with a Nlri
Thompson. lie detailed the transaction to the defen-
dant ; the defendant said that was correct, but he hal a
Len on the be»:, arid referred him to his attorney. Cn
his cross examination he said, that the defendant had
shorted him a deed of the date of the 1761 M September,
and asked him Mott Ire thought of it. lie said he
thought it was toad. I).:fetolaut said he only askel out
of not to inettlion it.
'lire Lord Chief Justice observed, that they were not
their trying the title to the box ; the question was, whe.
titer lite defendant had actually made the agreemette
stah2tl by the winless.
Mr. Marryat, said the defendant was in undisturbed
'possession of the. bus, (which was demised to hiru by
tale deed of 17th September), prey irms to, and at the time
of, the stippo,ed agreement. it was there:ore highly
im-
Irrobable mat such an aureeineitt was made; he should
',Mee that 110 such agreement ever was made.
The deed-was then read, which was a demise of the
box Nu. 20, to ILIA-re, if the Opera-limier, which was
then to be re-acrid, ettould fetch wore time 60,00n1. The
Operaehouse had been sold to Mr. ‘Vaters for 41,0001.
and at re-sale by order of the Court of Chancery, the
defendant, on behalf of smut gentlemen who had suir
scribed for that purpose, hid againit Waters for 70,1001.
It was sold to Mr. W. ten, for 70,1501. 'lire defendant
was nut to advance airy motley, Ire was to hate the box
as a compensation fur ors ;rouble.
/dr. Andrews, the defendarit'sa•sistant said he recol-
lected Lteblie often calling on thedelentlant ; he did trot
hear them make the agreement tor thebox. Near the end
of the season he first heard Bubb apply for payment of
hos No. 20. lie recollected the defendant *inswing the
deal to Bebb, and asking.hia opinion of it ; Ilebu said
ire did nor know what to think; he had better write to
Captain. Teylor, he would do the brit4le. He put a pad-
lock on the box do sr before this agreement, to prevent
lienb's entering ; Inc claimed the box for tile plaintiff.
Mr. Read, the Clerk of the Opera-rdlice, deposed that
Hein; applied for the tickets, and said that (tire tickets)
were to Ire giver: to 111111, and riot to the d...ielittaise, and
deed of assignment from IVilliatti Taylor to
.his brother-0404:e. Its 1818, tite tickets were made
out in the iiattie all me gemlerssati who took the
Irox. In 1819, they were made out in the 'Mlle of
ale plaintiti.
Toe Lord Chief Justice told the Jury, that unlesithey
'totally distseliesed toe evidence of HAM, they must nod
1.4 toe pl lie was 110 t contradicted by the de-
IOC!.
he July have a verdict for the p'aiutll-4)autsgtss
ddla.

al-- .....---..-.