The National Register.
London, England, 1809-12-24 00:00:00

$2O

My Lord, Mr. Wright has in his answer, sworn, in these
words. 66 That the greatest part but not all of the household,
" and other furniture of and belonging to the said house, in
Westbourne-place, was supplied and sent in, by this De-
" Pendant, during the said mouth of December 1808, or in the
" early part of the month of January following, and the re-
" mainder some Niue afterwards ; but the particular days when
" every article of furniture was so supplied, and sent in, this
66 Defendant cannot state as to his belief or otherwise, save
" and except, that the first delivery of any goods, by this De-
" fendant, at the said house, was made on the 10th day of
" November, 1808 ; and the last, on the 20th of Nay follow-
" ing."
In this, Mr. Wright, my Lord, had an object; for had he
stated the dates of the delivery, and orders, it would have ap-
peared, that almost the whole of the furniture was ordered, if
not delivered, before my acquaintance with Mrs. Clarke coin-
mowed.
Upholsterers, my Lord, throughout the trade, do keep their
books (and so does Mr. Wright) in such a manner, that not
the date of the delivery of every article can be set forth,
but the name of the porter making the delivery. This,
Lord, I was prepared to prove, but I understood such evidence
is not aiiinissible in a Court of Justice.
I t&a...rxe, your Lard..hip, upon the motion for anew trial,
to have said—" I feel great difficulty in granting this motion
thus applied for, on behalf of the DePodant ; at the saint.
" time Mrs. Clarke IS NOW MIXT MOk E, FROM THE 8E-
,6 GINNING TO THE END, WITH Wright, THE PI.4.INTIFF,
" than she appeared to be at the time of the trial ; his reproen-
" falions rtspc, !ing her, are, in swore reprel,, IMpORTANT:
" and Ihere seem to be matiers NOW DISi LOSED. ii.siiie'tptSct:
iheM ROTH under other rirromstaaces than I/vise undo- zchicu
" they tv-re pre.ented t.) the Jury, at the time of the trial."
Your Lordship has sinee altered )our opinion; and I undet-
stand yon now think " the little matter,: of taking the house it
" Hollev-street, and the transaction s ith Curt, to be but trifles
•6 in the rause."

Excuse we, any Lord, if I adopt your first impression, and
reject the latter.
It was in evidence that no bill was delivered tome, until the
FIRST OF JUN C, when it came, inclosed in the following note.
set forth in the answer of Francis Wright :
" F. Wright's respectful compliments to Colonel Wardle :
" has taken the liberty to inclose his bill; and as the articles
'• were to be charged for ready mope), having !oet a mos;
ous disappointment, will thank him to settle the lyilance :• for
•` that purpose, will call utpon him to-morrow morning, eleven
•' o'clock."

Now, my Lord, I never yet heard, that tradesmen were io
habits Of KEEPING COPIES of such sort of notes, I believe it to
be unprecedented ; Mr. Wright had a motive for preserving a
Copy of this Letter. The action, my Lord, as brought
against Ole on the 2d of' Jt: Nr, THE BAY A FrEn. 'THE Ell •
VERY OF THE BILL, and tried nu the 3d of .1 uN—why all this
hurry ? What purpose was to he answered by it ? 1 have not
yet heard from any quarter, the shadow of a reason attempted
to be assigned for this haste. I do not lay stress upon thes*
matters, as decisively sheaving a preconcerted scheme, fix
me with the payment of an unjust debt ; but I am reasoning on
the ettoBABILITIES of the case, as they appeared in evidence
Let ow, whilst I am upon this part of the case, bring to your
Lordship's recollection Mrs. Clarke's letter to me, of the Llth
of MAY ; wherein she demands of Major Dodd and m SELF A
JOINT BOND for 10,0031. and the REMAINDER OF Wright's
BILL. TO DE PAID BY vs. Why, my Lord, if I WAS DEBTOR
to Mr. Wright, should Major Dodd he thus applied to ? if I
bad, in the language of Mr. Wright. given orders to his brother
to furnish the house, and taken upon myself to pay Win;
" honourably and honestly," why, I appeal to your Lordship,
should Mrs. Clarke on the I.ITH OF MAY, demand of Major
Dodd and myself, not only 10,0001. but the remainder OF
Wright's BILL to be paid, and that, BEFORE it had been
delivered TO ME I What reason had Mrs. Clarke to doubt,
Altai, if liable, I should pm it ; or, did she think, that Mr.
'Wright had neither the means, nor the inclination to compel
me? And recollect, my Lord, she swore that the first she
&viol of my refusal to pay the bill, was from Mr. Wright, a
fortnight or three weeks before the trial.
31IF. Clarke, my Lord, and Mr. Francis Wright, were ma-
terially contradicted by Mr. Illingworth, upon whom nu impn-
tatiou was attempted to be cast; yet it does seem, in weighting
the probabilities of the case, his evidence was deemed unworthy
of coasidericioa.