The National Register.
London, England, 1823-01-20 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTn

- -
Defendant's clerk deposed to being present when the plain- II4STINER AND IPA. S. THOMAS AND RICHARD AS durTs.
till's traveller called, ad defendant ordered the cream of tartar, I Alc. Seidel stated that this was an action against the wine-
whew Mr. Percival mentioned the price. When the defendant merchants in Skinner.street, Snowhill, to recover the atsount
offered Cgs. Rd. Mr. Percival said he could not acorpt of that of two bills of exchange. A letter or the defendants would be
price, but would write to his principals, who would write to put in, apologizing fur petting in a defence to this action, and
defendant in the coarse of post, whether thew would nceept the requesting further flow for papaw: they were them in the
order or not, It is only one day's poet to Kidderminster. This jaws of bankruptcy, and the action in the find holmium, was CO-
OSA ON the 13th of March, and on the 23d, defendant ordered deluded. The defendants bad since applied fur a new trial.
of another house at Os. Mr. Percival might have a book in ea the granted that they had a good defuse., for that the wises
his head, but witness did not see hits write. Does not renter- were of a lead quint,. Muses. Maniacs wore tiouidertible
ber ; uo body was present but Mr. Lee and Mr. Percival. importers of wise. This was a quality of wine Cur which the
The Solicitor General replied. The point reserved for the bills it. question were drawn. Pleiotiff, however, deteriniud
consideration of the Court was, this being a verbal and to keep eight pipes in his hands oniil the first bill should 1.41
tad a written contract, the statute of frauds requirieg that coo- paid. When applied to, Messrs. Abbott requested, plaintif
truth to be binding should he in writing to bind the parties.— would resew the first bill. They had sold part of the wise re-
Sepposiog the testimony of both witnesses was enimpettebable, I ceived from the plaintiff, and offered to deliver it back.
the question was, which of them was to be relied on as correct. A clerk of the plaintiffs proved the lewd writing of drawers
Mr. Percival, the plaintiffs traveller, was bound to be correct. sod acceptors.
and ant the defendant's clerk. who was then employed in Another witness proved the bard-writing of Mr. Thomas
keeping his accounts, and only en accidental witness to what Abbott.
passed. The accuracy of *be testimony given by the two wit- Cruurtemniriga—Witness knows nettling of the transaction.
nesses preponderated in favour of the plaintiff's traveller. The defence being that there was usury in retaining the
The Lord Chief Justine observed, there was no doubt ne to wherein question sniff the bills became due, at these wines
the cream of tartar, which the plaintiff received, and.• know- i were sold at IA mouths credit.
lodged the order by paying the mosey into Court ; the only I The Lord Chief Justice was of opinion the defendants' pleas
question was as to the lac dye. It was material to consider 1 bad (ailed as to usury. Verdict fur the piitiotiffs-1,0301.
what the order was, it not being a valid contract, sot being in PRINCE • •
writing. Yet the defendant's accepting the contract in part This was an action brought by the plaiiitiff, who is a slop
took the case out of the Staln.- of Fraede.—His Lordship re a seller, to recover O$W. the Talus of a quo ..ty of cloth, sold
commended in all commercial truseotions to observe die pro- by the defendant in India. It appeared that this cloth was
visit». of that wholesome statute; for if the contract is this I placed in the hands of Copt Clarke, with directions to sell
case had been in writing, and signed by the party giving the it in India, and apply the eds to the purchase of other
order, there would be an end of this dispute. commodities apeoified in the instractioss. Is cue he could
The Jury forted for the plaintiff—Damages 1481. sad costs. sot purchase the goods, he was to remit the proceeds in hills
RHODE, AsSIONFE, V. PROCTOR, ASSIGNER. of exchange. The defendant, on his arrival in Indio, said the
The Solicitor General stated that this was en ise„ from the cloth, lint did not bay any of the articles specified, because he
Vice Chancellor's Court, to try whether certais bills of ex- found the plaintiff would lose 2.i per cent. by the cuisine of
change, drawn upon Rains and Co. bankrupts, were well eon- the rupee. Neither did he stud bills of exchange ; but, acting as
*filmed, and whether the plaintiffs were entitled to recover he thought for the best, peaohased segue, which he shipped
against the assignees. These bills, several in somber, were in a vessel homeward-boiled, maned the Fame. The defend-
for 1,18)01.; 8201.; and 71101. ant had no anthoritt to do that, hut it did not sppetr that he
JONES V. RENDERSON. limed with any improper view to benefit himself. His letter,
This was an action on a charter-party, ender which the de- I in which he noticed the shipment of the sugars, mentioned that
•fendent agreed to carry goods to the West Indies. on the purchase of the articles specifi d 'he exchange was so
It sppesred that Jones, who was a ship-clisndler at Lime- low, dint he Ited laid out the money more to the advantage of
bonze, shipped on hoard the defendant's brig Rase, a large I the plaintiff. lie sent this letter, dated January 11, and the
quantity of dry-goods, consigned to an ageut at Jamaica. By plaintiff received it on the 29th of May. The ship, which
the conditions of a charter-party the defendant undertook to sailed from Calcutta with the sugars in February, was expezt•
deliver thee goods, and to convey the 1/111111 with due rare mud ea to arrive in July, bet enfurtunutely she wet. lost off the Cape.
elution. The freight was regulated. The ship sailed in Marcia, The question was. whether Mr. Prince, the plaintiff, having
and met with bail weather before she fell in with the received the letter, stating the shipment of the steirs, and
trade winds. On ber urinal at Barbadoss it appeared that ewaiainiali the bill of lading, was honed, as a Man of'boalmaso•
part of the goods stowed in the hold had shifted, and some de- • to apply to the defeetbuit's agent. a Mr. Lee, and either alle•Pa
strayed by the working of the ship. The plaintiff's goods were or reject the sugars. It was admitted that the defendant could
greatly damaged, and one bale of sail-cloth entirely destroyed. not impose on the plaintiff an obligation to receive the sugars ;
Upon the dili-,ery at Jamaica the loss was estimated at 531. I bat it was also contended, that lie was bound to give Indio*
which sets the plaintiff now taught to recover. to Mr. Lee, that lie would not receive the cargo. in whirl case
The question was, whether the lose was occasioned by bad Mr Lee would have known what to do with respect to the in-
package by.the plaintiff, or bad stowage on the part of the de- I service.
resident. It was contended in support of the tosiiitirs case, The Jury foetid a verdict for the defendant.
that there had been a bresc!, of the conditions of the Charter FRIDAY, Jas. IL
Party, intoned' es the defendant had not conveyed the goods TYLER V. JONES, C.FSTLEMAN,
to the port of destination with due care. The package of the The Solicitor General stated, that the plaintiff is a gentleinau
geode at the plaintiff's warehouse was proved to be good. On i advanced in life, who by this action sought to recover a cons-
the part of the defendant the damage was solely attributed to penastion in dsnisges dm the negligent and unskillful conduct
the perils of the sea, and the insecurity of the boxes containing . of the defendant in his profession of attorney, in that of taking
the goods. invalid and insellicient security is • tran.aotion of annuity,
The Jury. ander all the clrcomstalices, found a verdict foe wherein lie was employed and retsised on behalf of Mr. Tyler,
the defendant. the plaintiff.
Mr. Scarlett, for defend not, proposed the matter in dispute
should be referred to some gentlemen out of court.
This !mkt assented to, the Jury found for the plaintiff—
Damages 1,0001. subject to a reference.
remit, asviGNSE IL TODD.
Mr. Marrysit stated, that this was an action of truer by the
assignee of a person Jowled Sorden, a bankrupt, to recover the
amount of 5001. in a bill of exchange drawn by the bankrupt,
and accepted by a Mr. Stokes, of Hull. He should prove one
act of hankraptoy within die knowledge of Todd, the defendant,
antecedent to the date of this bill. It would likewise appear,
that with knowledge of his insolvency, the defendant had caused
the bankrupt to execute to him a warrant of &florally for the
debt in questiou.
Mr. Alexander Ludlow knew Mr. Benjamin Sltarp Sorden I
witness was a small creditor, but boa released his debt to tha
assignees. Sorden was • cornfactor and g I merchant at
Hull. On the Ilth of July, 1821. be came to witoess's (laces;
saw a person, like' country servant, oar a horse, which appeared
to be bard ridden, stop at the office of Mr. gentian, an attorney,
which he imniediately communicated to Mr. Snrdon. W hoes*
thought it remarkable to see a horse so hardly ridden. all titer
:rolls. Station observed it was Mr. Raiding is horse, and his
man-servant, and he.sormilted that a writ had been conveyed
by the party against him. Ile asked witness's leave to walk
as far as his house to be out of the way. This was a mile end
a quarter from the office. Wittiest thinks he west there with
him. This might be from eleven to one in the morning. fie
remained at the witness's house till past nine at night ; they
dined together, and came to town in company in the evening ;
witness's house is not in the body of the town ; he went to •
flute is Trinity house•lane, kept by a Mimi Tickney, whose
sister married the bankrupt's brat. er ; does not know what he
went there fur ; witness saw him st Mr. Todd's *hop the next
morning ; Todd is a ;Jour, m.d at that time kept a shop; wit-
oest sew Stamp the bailiff, pus the shop ; by mentioned it to
Surdon, who immediately went to the back part of the house,
to v Main witness had no access • witness went the next day to
a meeting, held at Stamp the bailiff's hour ; Sorden was still
in custody.
Cross-examined by Mr. Scarleft.—Witness is a tanner, but
lies acted a good deal as ell agent ; has been a bankrupt since
1821 ; has been in a good many sitsaations, such as a gentle
man's steward, a broker, or commercial agent.
Hannah Adams I Ted servant with Sorden, limns May, 1818,
. .

THURSDAY, JAR. 10.
CRAWSIIAW AND OTHF.Rs V. HADES.
JTr. Searlett stated that this was nn action of Ironer brought
by the plsintitli, who were considerable iron-wasters, apittst
the defendant, a earrier, to recut er a quantity of iron, which it
was alleged the defendant bad converted to his own use. It
was intended this iron should be sent to Birmingham, to be
exchanged for a quantity of steel. The defendant having re-
eeited these goods to deliver to Hornlilower. of Birmingham,
to whom they were directed, by the Paddington boat carrier,
finding Hornblower's premises under an extent of the Crown,
would not deliver them to him, but detained the iron on aocouet
of a debt due to him by Hornblower, and for a lien for carriage
sew set ep is defence to this action.
Pie/mitre clerk preyed the delivery to the defendant.
Mr. Horsblower proved the consignment to him of the ieee
in question, which be did not receive.
A letter, add d to the defendant, was bare put in, de-

mending the delivery of the iron—also defendant's answer,
claiming a lien.
The value of the iron was estimated at 2001.
Witness bad no opportunity of making the intended exchange
far steel.
Mr. Hunt, of Staffordshire, purchased the iron question of
the defendant.
Mr. blarryalt, for the defendant, contended there was no
difference between • delivery of goods on sale soil • delivery
on barter. as affecting the defendant's right of lies and stoppage
is &maul*.
Hobert Howe was clerk to Hnrnblower, and was present
when ten tons of iron arrived on the 11th of February ; hoard
some quantity was delivered at the wharf, but did not see it ;
defendant was there, and was anxious to know what he should
do. seeing Mr. Hurnblower'a premises in confusion ; witness
said he could not act without Hornblower 's authority, but told
him he thought lie Io d better bold the iron ; Mr. Hornblower
had quitted the premises, and was absent.
The Lord Chief Justice.—The questionisovbether this was e
good delivery, end whether the defendant had a tight to bold t
If here was an imperfect delivery, his Lordship (bought Horn-
blower's assignees bad no right to recover.
One of the Jury.—The essignees, my Lord, perhaps will re-
turn the money received from defendant.
The Lord Cider Justine—l am of opinion the iron sot having
been weighed, and no receipt being given, that this wee no de-
livery, although landed uu the premises of Hornblower the
bankrupt.
the Jury, under his Lordship's direction, accordingly found
far the plaintill—daninges 22111. Its. ltd. and costs..
ri.xliakvis e. GEYhN.
Mr. Park opened the plendings.
Mr. Scarlett stated that the plaintif went formerly by the
scene of Siarlbuuhr, entering into partnership with others in
the North Cornwell Hank—each partner wan to supply a certain
quantity ot stock. The plaintiff supplied his part, hot t:.e de-
fendant and oilier purtii,rs Nord to comply with a bond giv. is
for Wet purpose; and upon which this action was bron.,,lit to
rimy er the penalty therein set forth of 12,11.61. and ad v &Hera
amuuming to 5,1551. which were secured to the plaintiff by
the hond in question.
Mr. Thurston Collins. suliscrihing witness, premed defog•
clant's eh. VIII ion of the hm.d.
'I he Jut a ve:Ciel for tie plaintiff fcr 5,11 M.

to the time of his bankruptcy at Brigtingled ; his sister kept his
house; witness was generally in the kitchen ; it he,,swie mecca-
wiry to pass thrusgh his counting-house to the kitchen ; about
July, Mt, he became en,bsvasseil in his ci,,•nmstauces, and
told *Owes) he contd's, t pay his creditors, luiti desired witness

to say, when they called, he was not within. hectAuse be paid he
bed no money to pay thew ; witness's wages are *till dee, ten
guinea►.
Mr. Scarlett—Yon had better get the lea guineas before you
give bather evidence. You would !No to hose your swages
beetre yue say Any more?
1 be gniueas were here accordingly paid in sovereign, to the
witness, who counted and put thou in her pocket. She pro-
ceeded with her evidence.]
The persons who called were Christopher Ilartly, Mr. Alli-
son. and Mr. Harding. Rm.:Julien. bsokrapt's bring arrotted
0o the I!th or I ztlt of July ; the to credit. ra ass lit ore
this.