The Sun.
London, England, 1801-07-14 00:00:00

LAW I'EPbRT:

C Cif, MONDAY, Ivi.V rj,
• :
si_
f.r PrP,FR4k,Lpi:D: kENYON AND A SeECIAL
Ji N'lthr- ii:DtiALLi LONDON.
SAVILLE—v. BARCHARD.

Tuts was-an AtliOn of Troyer to- recoVei•
large. quaotity of baize; which Jut& been sent to the
Defendants, who •are:Dyers, to be dyed-about the
time, of .the Nhision of Lorci Malmesbury, which
was e?cpeaetl, to' have procured Peaces in .which
case it ?A:Ldd haye,been a good artiole.in thu,Spanish
mitrket.
.The .Defendants detained these goods; alledging
that they.l44; by the custom of the trade of Dyers,
a i.ieu upon them; not only for the price of dying,
but for the general balance Which was due to •them
'from the owner of the goods. There were manypoints
mooted in the course of the Cause; but it was at last
reduced to that single point., It was contended on
die part df the Plaintiff that the Case of Green and
. Palmer, .settled the LaW upon this subjed, which
was a Case tried before Lord MANSFIELD, in
Guildhall, and argued in the Court of King's Bench,
and determined by the• Court. By that determina:
,tion. it was settled; "-That,a Dyer, like any•cther
• oetbii, had a Lien upon goods, for the payment of
his.deinand for specific work and labour upon such
goods, but that he had no Lien for his general ba-
lance."; This was a CaSe, decided in the year i 768,
and had alWays been undetstood to be the Law ever
since, so inuCh,so, that it was under Stood not to be•
dciubted., On this the Plaintiff rested—for 'there
was no doubt of a large balance being due to the De..
fendants, so that if they had a Lien, they *ere justi-
fied in detainipg these goods.
On the part of the Defendant- it was contended
that this was a matter to be governed.by the custom
of Trade=-that that custom was in.favour bf the
Defendants.
In support of this, two or three persons who had,
fOrty yciirs ago, been in the trade, the one who had
continued. all that .while. in the trade, and the other
who lad been in it
.for twenty years, but retired
from it twenty years ago, gave evidence of its hav-
ing been the custom of Dyers.to detain goods sent
for the purpose of dying, until their general balance
.was paid ; they gave a few instances in.which they
held them, adversely,. • after
.a Party had ' become
bankrupt to whom they belonged, and aftet
tion had -been brought against theth.
Lord KENYDN said, that the question upon the
custom, which must govern the Law, would be de..
tided by the Verdict in this Cause. His Lordship
then-ohservffid) that upon ail parts of the .1.,a w, and
partieularly on Law as it, related to'Cotriniereial

affairs, where large- property: was depending, it Was
important tote Law -Should-be known ; *and
almost ail human affairs in society, it was more
important 'that the Law--shonld- be knoWn, 'than that.
it Should, in all 4rartieulars, . be' agreeable' to our.
notions.ofabStraß Justice; because;while we know
what the Lati44is, -we know what is the rnensure of
-our anions. •- The Case of Green and Palmer was
a Case decided • before : Lord MANSE t E . That
Noble arid 'Learned-judge- said„npon that Case, that
the leaning-of trta-rtkind was in favour of Liens: It'
had been, settled that, a. Fattor had a Lien—that a
Wharfinger- had-a Lien,,that an inn-keeper had a
Lien was also settled. The question here, was,
" Whether the.Prer ha& lien for his balance due
to hiM'frorn the qwner of Cloth, or other gfods
sent to him in the way of his trade r"i That a
taylor, or any oiliFr person, had a lien on the cloth
he.worked-for the price of his labour, as it should be
I,es t owed upon its: was a ~point not to be dispnted..—
. but the question was, " Whether the Dyer had a
lien. for his general- balance ?" .Now, as to the case
of Green and Palmer, as decided in the time of Lord'
MANSts I E LD, it had not proceeded on any general
reasoning, but upon the idea that. no usage of that
trades had been proved tá exist, fol.. the Dyers to,
keep goods sent to them in. the way of trade 'to be
dyed, until 'the general balance due to them should'
he paid: •If .there was a specific contra between
the parties, that wotild, of course, be binding with-
out , any reference to custom, 'because. a specific
contract WM to be decided by the letter of it. In
the case of 'Greet and 'Palmer, tile Court considered
tharthere. was titi evidence of the custnni of the
trade being- for tars lien for a general balance. If
the usage had been proved to be so, the Law would
have.been decided --ti be so in the case of Green and.
,Palmer. h Was nottoo late to teftify that error'in
the case, for if it witran'errot at all, it waS.an
ror as to the fa6l., For the determination 'that, a
Dyer has not a lien 'forhig general balance,:had been
founded on the supposition that there- was no custom
to that •effeet... If- the 'fad had been mistaken, the
conclusion upon,if,
.was wrong.; Surely,, then, the
question, now before the. Jury,' was,. Whether the
evi•.,•,
ence before thein warranted them to conclude
the 4-6 Was such a _custom, or not ? the whole
case depended Upon thtie tact.' Lord MANSFIELD,.
in .giving'judginent on the case of Green ana Palmer,
had said, that if there had ben evidence ofa custom
to retain the goods by a Dyer to answer his general
Wince,. the Law would hive been, that he -Waddle
right to retain, BuC:iii that case; the Jury did
not find there was-any'llage to retain, if this case
exhibited to the Jury a different order of things,
and dant they found, by-the evidence, it was a cps-
! tom, in this trade, to retain goons for the general
balance,', his Lordship said, he did not know that
they were prerented from saying soin this case, by
sun}- thing that was decided in-the -case of Green and
Palmer. ' There was 'no evidence in that case of the..
usage ; but the evidenee here, 'as far as it went-,
which was nut far; seemed to lean the other way.
That, howeve?, was entirely, for the Jury to de-
. termine. Sonic Gentlemen spoke of opinion ; that
was' -but little. Others gave some instances in,
which the right of retaining. had been adversely
made, and, afterwards, acquiesced in ; they were
good as.far as they
.went.
Verdit`.l for the Defendant, by which it is, for '
the present, decided, that the Dyer has a lienson
()pods:for his General Balance. .

Mr. Waddington, one of the JurS', then said,.he
had known the business for thirty years; and, dur-
ing that time, it was well understood, " that Dyers
had a lien on all goods left with viten) in trade, for

r C:ra, I D..l_