The Sun.
London, England, 1808-07-30 00:00:00

GORDON P. VAUGIIAN.

This was also an action on a pulley of °insttrance
on the 'Danish ship Aeutratity, bound from Barce-
lona 'to Vera Cruz, in Spanish America, and from
thence to some port, Of the United Kingdom.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that the Plain-
tiffs, Messrs. Gordon and Murphy, were most
tensive merchants in this city, and for the purpose
of exporting British manufaetures, and of bringing
Spanish dollars to this country for the publlc service,
they had, in virtue Ut Orders in Couticil., received
licences to carry on this trade with the Spanish co-
lonies. The ship Neutrality sailed tron) Barcelona
on the 28th of May, and arrived at Vera Cruz,
from which she sailed on her return, upon the 7th
of -November, having on board a very large quantity
c:. dollars-: Shortly after:she left Vera Cru2 she ex-
perienced bad weather,- and some Of the water casks
were started by the rolling of the ship. The Captain
passing near Charleston, put in there to get some
water ; but, being Sunday morning, was told by the
Pilot that no water could be given him on that day.
The wind turning fair, he did not choose to delay
atiutherday, but sailed without the supply he had
expeEted. The ship tnet with very bad weather
afterwards, and sprung a leak. In this situation it
was tnet at sea, and captured by the Caledonia Letter
of Marque front Liverpool.
.The Captain of the
Neutrality never mentioned a word of the licence' at
the time, as he at first suspe6fed the Caledonia to.
be a French Privateer, and afterwards he wished
that she should consider it Its, a capture, in order that
his vessel and cargo might be taken care of. The
Neutrality was lost the next day. I,le Would prove
th::',a.r.ces from his'Majesty, and he was not aware
what defence would be set up to the ailion.
Mr. Capper, from the Secretary of State's Office,
produced the Orders in Council, in pursuance of
which the licences were granted.
Eliason, the Captain of the vessel, proved
the circumstances of the voyage, as stated by the
Attorney-General.

Me. PARK, on the part of the trrnderwriters, rested
their defence on objeClions in point of, law : fait,
he argued that the voyage was illegal, as contrary to
the Navigation Ad, and not within the possibility of
dispensing with the power given to his Majesty by a
subsequent Aa, as a considerable part of the proper-
ty belonged to Spaniards, Who 'Were at that time
alien enemies. His next objection was, that the
voyage interfered with the Charter of the South Sea
Company, and was on that account illegal.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH- suggested, that if the de-
fence rested merely on those objections, it would
be the best way to put them in the form of a spe-
cial ease, which could be better decided by the
Court, after reading those different laws more atten-
tively.

This was acquiesced in by, both parties.
It was .somewhat remarkable that this defence
rested entirely on those legal objettions,'which the
Defendants in the former action did not think it be-
coming their charaeler, as Underwriters, to take ad-
vantage of.

NIURRAY

This was an action on a policy of insurance efFeEt-
-ed on an American ship by -an American-subject, and
the loss was by the detention, in consequence of the
gmharg6 by the American Government. The qnes-
ton Was, whether an American subje::.-1 could reco-
*er a loss arising from an att of his' own Govern-
ment ? It was agreed to reserve the point for, the
future Consideration of the Court.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CLTILDHALL, TULY '2 9 .
400,fts SIR JAMES MANSPIXI.O AND A SiECIAL
411itrOR1?,_ WILLIAMS, AND CO. V. MERRY, MILLER,

AND CO.

This was an anion founded on an Aa of Parlia-
.m.ent, passed in 1794,•!ct recover damages from the
Defendants, who were calico-painters at 'Manches-
ter, and keep a warehou'se in London, for, pirating a
stamp pattern on certain pieces of printed goods,
Which. pattern was alleged to be tie sole, invention
and property ofthe Plaintiffs, who were calico.prat-
crs- and wholesale drapers in the Poultry.
Mr. Serjeailt BEST stated the ca,.eto the Court and
the. Jurrfor the Plaintiffs, and proved, by the evi-
dence of a linen-draper from Aidgate, and another
from the Borough of Southwark, that they had pur-
chased pieces of the goods alleged to be counterfeits,
at the warehouse of the Defendants, and considered
the pattern quite new and fashionable, and that it
was sold to them as Burford's pattern. The simili-
tude between those pieces and Burford's pattern was
so strong; that they discovered no.differencc, when
examined asunder ; but when comparrd together,
a slight ditKirence was visible, and consisted in the
weavhig of the lines, in the one running a.different
d'reJton from that of the other.

A a:36i in the house of Whhains ami Co.

, . .
. „
pros ed the deCea'se'sof 'die safe in the angina? pafirr.
between the first and second month, was Ervin 85
to 17 pieces. ,
. ,
.. _ _

• Mr. Serjeant SHEPH'EUD, for the Defendants, con.
tended that -the Adt of Parliament, in granting a rno:-
tiopoly for three months in any new pattern to the
calico printer, posilively required that the pattern
should be entirely- a new invention, and not a mere
alteration from any other pattern ; and that upon
this ground, the Plaintif had no claim whatever. ton
monopoly in this pattern : but if the Atc.t of Parlift-
went had extended the monopoly to three years, in-
stead of tht-ee months, his Clients Would have h 4
the right to an a6tion against the Plaintiffs tbt the
piracy, as, in tad-, the pattern upon which they
tnundtd their right of action was nothing more than
a very slight alteration froM a pattern orignially in 7
vented 10,-1 published by his Clients so long since. ;t$
the year 11;06.

The Learned Serjeant then called Witnesses to
prove that the first of this pattern sold by the De-
felidants was not until the 23th November. Upon
cross-examination, however, these Witnesses ac-
knowledged 'the pattern was sent dawn to Man-
chester froth the Defendants, with orders to copy
it,' and that this was about the second week in Sep-.
feather, a few days after it had been published by
the Plaintiffs.

Mr. Serjeatit Rest, for the Plainti.frs, contended;
that if the construalion of the Aet of Parliament in
thia case was to be that no pattern could be consider-
ed new, and 'entitled to a 'monopoly for three months,
except such as Was totally and entirely of original
ve;ition, and like nothing which' had ever appeared
before, then was the /'vet utterly nugatory and use=
Jess; for, from the very nature of the ornaments
usually introduced in the patterns or calico printing,
it was morally 'impossible to produce any design to;;
ta'ly new. Those ornaments for the most parr on-
sisted either in !traiglit' or waving lines, in one di-
reCtion or another, enriched with sprigs, dots, or
flowers, in which no man could pretend to invention;
In these :consisted the, whole system of pattern-
drawing; and the whole novelty of invention was
in the various transpositions, alterations, and changes
of size and ki•teetion, in those lines or bowers: It
was obvious from the Defendants' own conduct, they
were conscious of compassing an illegal purpose by
illegal means; for if this pattern was merely a copy
of their own, as pretended, why not print from their
old_blocks ? or why be at the expence of ptircl6sing,
a piece of the pattern from the Plaintiffs, in order to
have it copied at their own works ? Front all these
circdmstances he contended the intentional piracy
was plain, and that the damages sustdined by his
Clients were not to be estimated by the paucity of
the pieces sold by the Defendants, but by their hay-
printed the pattern on _cloth of an inferior qua-
lity, and sold it at an inferior price, whereby it sun
to the. use Of the lower orders of SoCietv, atM
instantly lost its estimation with persons of fashiona-
ble taste.

• Sir JAMES MANSFIELD was of opinion that the
Apt of Parliament which gave a three mouths' mo-
nopoly in this case, positively required novelty and
originality of invention, and that no man had
right to set up a claim to these upon.a mere variation
or transposition of the ornaments already used by
others. For instance, a smaller line instead of 'a
larger, a wave in one. diretiion instead of another,.
eight lines in a stripe in place of six, three flowers
h•.;,,tead of ;:vie, &c. were changes werely, and not
original inventions; and of this destription he con-
sidered the pattern in the present case. If, how-
ever, the Jury should think otherwise, the next
thing to be,considered would be the quantum of dao
mages, and in this they
.would be guided, not by the
alledged falling off from 35 pieces to 17, in the third
month, .but by considering the period which re-
mained between the o,sth of November, when the
first piece of this pattern was sold by the Defendants,
and' the expiration of that.month, which closed all
right to monopoly._ in the Plaintiffs.
The Jury, ',after retiring nearly half an hour, re-
turned a Vetch a for the Plaintiffs—Damages,
Costs,-.468; •

COURT OF CHANCERY, lULY 29.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. WANSEY.
In this case it appeared that. a'certain sum of mo-
ney had been left by will forthe'purpose of putting
nut as Apprentices the children of such members of
a Presbyteriail Congregation in the parish of • St.
Martin', Old Sarum, as might apply for the sarne.--,.
There did not happen, however, to be a sufficient
number.ofapplicants troth-this Society to exhaust
the annual:funds arising from the grant, and an ap-
plication was now made to the Chancellor,. ,in cor-
respondence to the report of the Master, for the pur-
pose of receiving his dlreaions as to the future em-
ployment of the .surplus funds.
In this case, the Loin) CHANCELLOR gave direc-
tions that-the.7'.benefits of the fund should be extend-
ed to as many members of similar Presbyterian
Cotiregations in the vicinity as might applY2'for the
same, and as far as the funds would go, under the di-
reaions of the Trustees; and also observed, that- it
might be proper to :extend the application of .the
fund to the apprenticing of female childten.

SPORTIAG INTELLIGENCE.

KNUTSFORb RACES.

TU ESD AY JULY 2.6..
Was run for, over Knutsford Heath, a Maiden Plate, Of sol,
kr all ages, that never won a Plats of snl. matches and
sweepstakes eN..-,!pted. Four_yr olds to Larry fist. t zlb ;
S-yr olds, Sst. ; 6-yr o'ds and aged horses, Sst. Celt .
.Blares and allowed aib. Three roil:; ►:e•,ts, A
svinLer of a' stakes (in. the present year) to carry 31b';
two or more Ob. extra. The Second horse is entitled to
itcl. It tnree or. more start.
Mr. Smith's b. f. Miss ttlanehard, 4-yrs old
Mr. TnOinpson's b. m. Miss Creeper, aged
Mr. Care's b. g. by •Sir Peter, 4. yrs old
WEUNHSUAY.
A Sweepstakes of logs each. Three year ells to carry, 6sr.
rolb'. ; .lour-year Olds, 8;t. ; live-year olds, Bst. lelb. ;
,six.
year olds and aged horses Sst. 'alb. Mares and .Geliliny,s
allowed 211 N One heat of three times 'round the cocrse,
bona fide the property of the Subscribers at the time of nam-
ing.

2 3
S 2

I. Clifton, Esq.'s losephini, aged
Earl St.nntOrd's b. 1. Belinda, by Beningbro', . yrs old z
T. L. Brooke, Esq.'s b. h. Banker, $ y is old. dr

SAME DAY.

A Subscription of cgs. each, with 4ogs. added, for thre.e-
year. oids carrying 7st. 41b. arid, tour. year olds, Bst. 7ib.. ;
fillies and,gcldings allowed 21b. Owner or the. bt"4.:Vi
borst to have his r+take back. Three Sito,cribers or no
race., A winner of a plate or stuites (in. the present )ei.,r)
to :3TII 311). o, rot° or more sib. extra. Three
ok:-1s,

I: ail 0; rf)iet: b. f. 3 -1 rs out
S. F4.2ltua, Esq.'s D. c. 3 yrs old

a t r
1 2 2

I~

1

r
~~