The National Register.
London, England, 1820-02-20 00:00:00

iIIITII W. BUTT.

This was an action to recover f be defendant a sum
of 401. Ys. paid in the plaintiff's ocu house, under the fol-
tia ing circumstances :---
The plaintiff had been a eltresemonger in the Borough,
and the defendant a cheese•factor, who occasionally sold
him goods. The plaintiff's affairs became embarrassed,
and he proposed to the a hole of his creditors a composition
of 4s in the pouail on the unismat of his debts; the defen-
dant interfered with those principals fur whom be
acted, mid agreed to sign the deed of composition for them
all, with the exception of one maned Evans. up %%hose
debt lie insisted to receisets. in the pound. and the differ-
cu ( e between four nod seven shillings ou this man's debt
till amount to 461. is. The defendant resisted all appli-
ration to abate this demand, and an interview took place
between him, the plaintiff, and his wife, at the Chambers
of their Attorney. '1 lie defendant positively refused In sign
there, except on the conditions mentioned, and the Attor-
ney retired, leaving tie parties to settle the difference. lie
returned after a short time, and then the defendant received
iu his presence a composition al 41. and Bleed the deed,
and the wife of sinsith, the plaintiff, expressed herself ex-
tremely thankful to the defendant for the care and trouble
Gee had taken in the settlement of her husband's affairs.

The Attorney, alto was examined, mould lint G n car of his
own knowledge, that Mrs. O.:nth had paid the 461. to the
defendant during his absence $ it did not appear that the
tummy was ever handed over to Evans.
Mr. Scarlet, and Mr. Gurney tainducted the kindness for
th.• plaintiff' and Mr. Campbell for the defendant, strongly
repiiivcd, in his address to the Jury, the shabby nail ungrate-
ful coduct of the plaimin, in bringing this action a,taiiist the
defendant, after acknowledging the trouble hr had kindly
taken in the settlement of his :rabs, instead of hiingieg the,
retina against Limos, to wham he most know the ntniwv.
was handed ever, it it really had been paid to the defendant;
but of that fact the Jury had an prinif farther thou by
agar' &nice.

Cittkr.luerick, in summing up for the Jury, told ,!
them that the law on this occasion oaS, that hit 'llan in
rigoing Huy composition, melt at that in question, with
the number of other creditors, had a right .to receive any
motley at- security in coosideiatioit of him signaime, be.
yonti the piopm ion accepted by the real of the creditors,
beenu.e in so doing he mould have been gritty of a Iran
&dent collusion to di ceuve them ; and the debtor paying
61161 money to security, would he entitled is action to re-
cover the sum so paid. In this case flare cntaiiits was no
positise profit that the 401. was paid to the tivfeutiant, hut
Male ChUagli of evidence for Ho-jury to inter whether
At was 01 was 0'4114h-it:tom plosidto have taken
plate at the a:forney's elmnibers. If the Jury should
lb i„ k that the mute) nee putd to the deft-iid•iit, lie not
availed liiin•elf, us he might Lave ,k tie, of the evidence of
k;ea in, to prove that the money nut paid to him ; and con-
sequeotty the Jury thought the money was paid to the
dekudant by the plaintilf, their verdict ;sunlit be fur the
Verdict atcordingly.—llatnages 461, b.

..,..S.