The Sun.
London, England, 1801-09-04 00:00:00

omission, she was not seaworthy at the commence- 1
ssment of the voyage ?
It was proved that the ship.had analergone a tho.
rough repair in England, and that the iron bolts
-had not been replaced by new ones, because they
had been deemed sufficient for the voyage by the
shipbuilder.
The Mate of the ship stated from his journal the
course and events' of the voyage ; ht attributed the
loss of the ship to the strains the received by the
tempestuousness of the weather with which site had
had to contend. •
The ATTORNEY.GEINERAL, for the Defendant,
insisted, that' it was incumbent on the Plaintiff to
have had the iron bolts replaced by new fines, or by
copper bolts-; ond'fiat for want of such precaution,
thou she. was perfectly repaired in other respe&s,
wathe % not sea-worthy for so long and dangerous a
voyage,. - •
ale .oneuf the Captains who had survey-
ed the ship at the Gallapagos, who was of opinion,
from the. appearance of the iron bolts after she was
,
_broke ap, that they could not have beedih a good
condition when the ship sailed from England.

Mr. EIt!iKINE replied. -
• LorSKsrmrow said, the Plaintiff's tight to reco-.
;ter was made out, unless his claim was repelled by
the ship's not being sea-worthy when she,left- Eng-,
land. If she was unworthy, he did not know how
a perSnn insuring his ship •could ever be. safe. It
would be impossible for any man, whatever sum.of
money he might expend in repairing his vessel,. to
obviate such Latent objeaions as Underviriters
might-sort, in order 'to_ avoid the payment of..the
insurance.
- The. Jury found. a .verdia: for the Plaintiff, da-
snages 3951,

LEIGH V. PAYO.

This Was'an Aai6n brought oh a Foreign Bill of
'Exchange for 6271. by the Indorsee against the In-
dorser.
The Leading Counsel for the Plaintiff observed, .
that the 'uncertainty of the Law had been a topic of
invective at all times, but the Law was more abused
'thin it 'ought.to be, because there were many things
in• it.perfedly Certain ; and the Plaintiff's demand
wouldfurnish a very gOod illustration of it. The
.only defence in this case- was, that the Plaintiff
ought to have sent this Bill for 'acceptance the mo-
ment it came into 'his hands, ''which he had not.
done. No such thing was required by the Law.
This the names that were upon it, and the
protest for non-acceptance being proved,
Mr. Gress, for the Defendant, observed,. that
if this Bi:1, which was drawn ,in 'lreland, on" the
House of Gorman, in London, bad been sent over
earlier by the Plaintiff; it would certainly have
peen accepted and paid. Mr. Gorman, refused- to
accept it on account of the failure of a }louse that •
uos conn.':ied, with ;- bUt he did not, however,
mean. to say, though that was the effea of having
sent over this 'Bill so late, that the Plaintiff was
under any obligation to .send it sooner. His de-
-,fence was, that upon'the House of Gorman refusing
to accept it, the holders had not given notice of
that circumstance in due time to the people in Ire-
land. After the Counsel had stated the dates, he
insisted they ought to have written to Ireland one
day earlier than they did.
Lord KENYON said, the only question here was,
'whether the Plaintiff had used all due diligence ?
That question he submitted to the Gentlemen of
the jury ; who found a verdict for the Plaintiff
for 6271.
The question beingasked, whether this was Eng-
lish or Irish money ?: Mr. Barnwell, one of the
Gentlemen of the Jury,' observed, that it was
English money: All' Bills drawn in Ireland upon
England were to be considered as English money ;
-on the contrary, all Bills drawn in England on Ire•
land, were deemed Irish money. , •

IREECHANT BIRNET.

Mr. Eisit INE stated, that this Attion was brought
by a poor Sailor, to recover a satisfattioO in da.
mages for the brutal conduct of the Defendant, who
was his Captain. He was extremely sorry to be
called, upon to state such. a case of any being thac
belonged to our common nature. Without any pro
vocation, he took an iron rod, nine feet long, and-
'knocked 'down the Plaintiff. After he was down-,
and insensible, he struck him several blows, and
jumped upon him in' the Violence of his passion.
In a case of this sort that was' tried lately, When his
friend Mr. IVIINoXY was,for a Plaintiff, as be was ,
ihen for the 'Defendant, he "made 'an obqervation
which Mr. ERSKINE said he felt exceedingly when
standing in the' situation in which Mr. MINGAY
then stood for this Captain. He asked, as his Friend
had done in that case, what was it that had raised
the glory of our Country so high ? By procuring
English Sailors, so different and 'so much superior
to those of other ,Nations. It was because they
went. out the protedcd subjects of a free Country ;
- and that they were not to be irregularly beat and
knocked about' for the preservation of discipline, as
this Plaintiff had. His Lordihip had never
refused authority ,in anyone instance,. to punish per-
sons who had been guilty of any miscondutt, when
they were brought fairly to trial before their supe_
'riors; but, without the • smallest provocation, to
beat and kick a free man in the brutal manner that
this Defendant beat and kicked .the Plaintiff, was
not to be endured in. 'any Country that boasted of
its Liberty, and where the rights of its inhabitants
were in the smallest degree attended to.. He .waS
certain, if he made.out this case to the ,satisfattion
of the Jury by evidence, they would give the Plain- ,
tiff exernplatt.damages, in . order to read a lesson
to this Defendant, and others in his situation, that
they were not to treat :those that were under them,
and, to whom they owed proteWon, in a manner
• in which no man of feeling or humanity would treat
the lowest of the brute creation.
Mr. MiNcAy, Leading Counsel for the Defend-
ant, here stated, that his defenCe to. this Attion
was,a Release that had been signed by the
His candour and honourable feelings induced him to
admit that it was a hard' case on the part of the