The Sun.
London, England, 1806-07-19 00:00:00

GARDENER AND ATKINS V. THOMAS CLAY.

The 'Plaintiffs are Plumbers; the Defendant was
the intended partner with Mr. Benjamin Travers, in
the business of Sugar-refining. This a6tiOn was
brought for plumbing, at a house in Thames-street,
preparing for The manufactory in this -concern, to
the amount of 3991. 3s.
Mr. GARROW said, that after the work was done,
the Defendant desired the Plaintiff to draw on Mr.
Benjamin Travers for the amount ; this Gentleman
bad failed, and the pill was drawn and was disho-
noured, and he understood it was now to be contend-
ed, that although the business was done under the
orders and directions of Mr. Clay, by adOpting that
mode for, his re-payment, the Plaintiff bad resigned
his claim on the Defendant. This was neither law,
justice, nor common honesty. -
After the witnesses were called, Mr. DALLAS, for
the Defendant, argued, that the Plaintiff had accept-
ed of Messrs. Travers and Esdaile as his security, and
could not now come upon his Client.
Lord ELLENBOROUGtI.-" This was nudum pac-
tam, for; on your own argument, he discharged the
Defendant with Out any consideration."
Mr. DALLAS.-" My Lord, a bill for three months
is taken of Travers and Esdaile; and by this the
'Defendant is released from his engagement."
Lord ELLENBOhOUGH.---°" They only acquire a
farther security, and with regard to the Defendant,
leave the matter just where it was before. If there
had been -an agreement between the Plaintiff and
Defeuda•nt,that on obtaining this bill the former
should have been ,'discharged, it might have been
otheri.vise,"—Verdiot for the Plaintiffs 3991. 3s.

GARDNI'.II V. BARBUR.

This was' an anion on a racy of Insurance on
the Ship Volunteer, Capt. Knowles, from Jamaica
to London, warranted to sail on or before the Ist of
August 1805 ; and the only) question in the cause
was; whether in point of time, it did so sail. The
fads were; that she had loaded in Anotto nay; tha;,_
on the 31st of July she sailed froth thence to meet
the convoy, but not finding it, she, under the orders
of the Captain of a Sloop of War guarding the
coasts, returned to Lucia Bay, in the same Island,
and did not take her departure until the ensusing
convoy, on the Leith of September. It appeared
that the first 'convoy was off Port Antonio, and that
the coast was infested with privateers, so as to ren-
der it dangerous t 9 proceed. This was deemed sail-
ing before the Ist of August, within the terms of
the Policy ; and a verdict was found for the Plain-
tiff, 1001.

FR/DAY, JULY 18.

THOMAS HAWKES V. JOSEPH HAWKEY.

Both the Plaintiff and Defendant are Military ac-
coutrement-makers, residing within a dozen doors of
each other, in Piccadilly. The a&ion was for slan-
der, and was tried by a Special Jury:
Mr. GARROW, for the Plaintiff, stated, that it was
wholly unnecessary. for him to . enlarge on the
portanc.e of chara&er to Gentlemen who were so
feelingly and honourably jealous of their own, The
Plaintiff had fbrmerly employed the'Defendant, and
after the latter had quitted that service, he thought
fit to commence a Chancery suit, in which be claim-
ed upwards of 7001. of his master. To the bill the
Plaintiff put in an answer, and, in consequence, the
Defendant thoug;lit proper to.ascribe to this Gentle-
Man the foul crime of perjury, using, at the same
time, other expressions tending to vilify his charaaer. •
In order to give erre& to the.serious charge of false-
hood, on the most solemn occasion, the. efen‘dant •
sent notice to the Plaintiff that be had prepared a .
Bill of Indiament, to charge him with perjury be-
fore the Grand Jury ; and this quondam servant had
ihe iMpudence to send a message to his master, tell- ,
ing him, that he might peruse the copy before it
was presented.. .'lt would We for the Jury to deter 7
-mine what damages should be. assigned in a case of
this gross nature, and the Learned Counsel was con-
fident that the decision could not be in more proper
hands.

"Rickard Cannady deposed, that he net the De-
fendant in outhariipton-Street, Covent-Garden,
who addressed him in this. language : " When have

you seen Tommy]: lie LaL o•sgd the ve-fy ill ; he is
great rogue and a villain." To which the Defendant
added, " I have had Tommy up again ; I have had
him to the Old Bailey." On being cross-examined,
he ,said, that this calumnr.Vas uttered about eight
months, ago ; and the witness, being asked as to his
own occitpition, said, that his wife ‘xfts a laundress,
and he officiated in carrying out the clothes. •
Robert White, servant to HaWkes,"gave evidence
that the Plaintiff said to him, '' YOu_have forsworn
yourself, as yhur master has done before ; he has
cheated 'people, and I will expose him whenever. I
have it in my power." On his cross-examination,,
-the witness being questioned as to his own condu6t
to the Defendant, observed, that be Was obliged not
to be wanting.in civility, because Mr. Hawkey Would
have thrown him into-the. street; but he did not say
that. " his master was as honest n man you, Joe
Hawkey, utir-did he add, 4.4 If you will cone out,
Joey, I will pull your nose or leather you."
JOhn Hunt, also servant to the Plaintiif, deposed,
that he was at a public-house in Air-street, Piccadil-
ly, when the Defendant accosted him : " How does
Honesty do You must know I mean littlorfornmy
Hal.vkes, a great villain, and a religious rogue, who
has robbed me." On his.cross-examination, he said;
that this did not .pass at the Cat and Bagpipes, but
at the Crown.

The Rev. George I3urdon, a Dissenting Minister,
gave evidence to' the same effect.
The Bill and Answer in Chancery were then pro-
posed to be put in as evidence, but rejeded by his
Lordship.
Mr. DAUNCEY, for the Defendant, said, that it
was a very trumpery affair; and the true cause of
this irritation seemed to originate in the proceedings
in equity, which was very likely to make any man
angry who was concerned as a party, however ac-
ceptable they might be to the Counsel and Solicitors
in the cause; and his Client was not the less subject
to have 'his passions inflamed, because the suit he had
commenced would probably he his ruin. The Learned
Counsel said, that the only words aaionable were.
those which charged the Plaintiff with the crime of
Perjury, for on all the other expressions some special
damage must be shown, and this had not even been
pretended by the Counsel for the Plaintiff.—Verdi&
for the Plaintiff, tol.