The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-24 00:00:00

MAHONEY V. ASHLEY.

This case turned upon a point of law. The
question wag, whether a bill drawn in Ireland for
acceptance in England, and vice versa, could be
considered as an inland bill of exchange. By Act
of Parliament, all inland bills of exchange can only
be valid with the acceptance endorsed upon the
face of then, which was not the case in the present
instance. A similar Act was passed by the Irish
Parliament relative to inland bills in that country.
If this bill could not be considered an inland bill of
exchange, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
This was the simple point at issue.
Lord TENTERDEN had no doubt on the subject,
and therefore would direct a verdict for the plain-
tiff, with liberty for the defendant to move to enter
a nonsult.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Arm 23.

CATHERINE SIMPSON V. BARROW AND ANOTHER.

This was an action brought against the defend-
ants, representatives of the Globe Insurance Com-
pany, to recover the sum of 1,500/., being the
amount of a policy of insurance effected on the life
of Lydia Jane Simpson, the daughter of the plain-
t i ff.
Mr. Serjeant TADDY stated, that the insurance
was effected in September, 1828, for the term of
seven years. The young lady died in March, 1829.
She had previously been in good health, but early
in that month she paid a visit to her half brother, a
Mr. -Edwards, t►nd .returned home suffering from
what appeared-to be an attack of bilious fever. She
was immediately attended, as .they would hear by a
medical man ; but her illness defied all the efforts
made to preserve her, and she died in about a week
afterwards. Her body was opened, but no latent
cause of death was discovered, and, as iometitnes
occurred, the medical gentlemen were at this moment
unacquainted with the cause of her dissolution.
Under these circumstances, he was unable to antici-
pate the nature or course of the defence. It would
be most distinctly proved that her's was an insurable
life, and the verdict must be for the plaintiff.
The policy was read. It was dated on the-10th
of September, 1828, and effected on a declaration
made on the Gth of the same month.

Mr. Thomas Edwards deposed—l live at Ken-
nington ; I knew Miss Jane Simpson ; her mother
married my brother; her daughter was the child of
a second marriage; Miss Jane m as the eldest of eight
children; her mother lived lately at Plymouth; I
knew Miss Jane at a very early age; she came to
join my family at Christmas, 1827; she was then in
a fair state of health ; she had been living at IVan-
tage, in Berkshire; she died in February, 1829;
Miss Jane had been at the house of her half-brother
when she was taken ill. She had sometimes com-
plained of what was called a determination of blood
to the head. Mr. Edwards, her half-brother, lived
in Brunswick-square ; when she came back she com-
plained that she could keep nothing on her stomach.
She was attended by Mr. Edwards and by Mr.
Handy, who resided on the Surrey side of Waterloo-
bridge. She died in a week or ten days ; I did not
know until after her death that any policy had been
effected on her life. In September, 1828, she was
in general good health.
Cross-examined—When she came to my house

she was under 20 years of age; I had not seen her for
seven years before she came to my house; I never
heard of leer living with a Mr. Bradbury ; the lady
with whom she lived at \Ventage was Mrs. Pearce ;
that lady kept a school; she came at once from Mrs.
Pearce's to my house; she had been there nearly
two years ;• I understood she had been subject to
these little complaints in the head—a weight in the
head; it used to come and go ; I never heard any
thing about her fainting in consequence of these
complaints ; she was a pale weakly-looking person.
I understood she bad had a very severe illness at
Wantage—an illness of some continuance. When
absent from my house she was always at Mr. Henry
Edwards's. I never heard that Mr. Edwards had
effected a policy on her life ; I was on good terms
with Mr. H. Edwards during 1827 and 1828 ; I re-
ceived 15s. a-week for Miss Simpsen's board and
lodging; it was all paid, and 'paid regularly each
quarter ; I received payment from Mr. H. Edwards;
I received also a few pounds for teaching her music;
it was not until after her death that I became ap-
prised of the circumstances of her having had a child,
nor of her having miscarried; the child died soon
after its birth, at least so I understood ; her eldest
brother was a year or two younger than she was. I
understood he was apprenticed to Mr. Edwards; that
gentleman was about 30 years of age; I never knew
he had been a refiner; I heard he was once a stereo-
type printer, and afterwards a medical man ; he had
a chemist's shop in St. John's-street, at which his
brother, George Simpson, attended; Mr. H. Ed-
wards had a brother named 'livid Edwards. He was
about 25 yeats of age.

Mrs. Catherine Edwards deposed—l am the wife
of the last witness ; I knew Miss Jane Simpson ; she
came to our house about January, 1828; I consi-
dered her perfectly well ; she was delicate, nothing
more ; in the September of that year 1 went from
home for some time ; I left her perfectly well ; she
went several times on visits to her brother ; she went
in February, 1829 ; when she came back she was
exceedingly unwell ; she had not had any, illness at
my house between September and that time; Mr.
Handy attended her till her death.
Cross-examined—She was always delicate. Her
appearance was always very pale—rather cadaverous,
perhaps. She could not bear walking very well.
She was moderately strong. She was at her bro-
ther's four or five times for a week at a time. She
frequently took medicine. Always by the order of
Mr. H. Edwards.

Mr. J. Handy deposed, lam a surgeon. I reside
in Stamford-street. I was slightly acquainted with
the family of Mr. Edwards. I was introduced to
Miss Simpson in June, 182.5. She was a person of
pale complexion, but rather of a full or pluMp habit
of body. I had no reason to suppose, from what I
saw of her, that she was a vary healthy young wo-
man. I attended her on Monday, the 9th Feb. I
saw her then in Brunswick-square. She came into
the room, and said, " What do you think of me, I
have walked to Hampstead and back ?' Oa the
9th of Mach I saw her at Kennington. There
was great nervous irritability and sickness of the
stomac'i, and general excitement ; I mean fever.
On Tuesday her pulse was exceedingly quick, and
she could not keep the medicine of the day before on
her stomach. On the Wednesday she was much in
the same state : the medicines were repeated. On
the Saturday the medicines had operated tolerably.
She complained of great debility of stomach. On
the Sunday morning I saw her at about nine o'clock.
As near as I can recollect, I called about seven or
eight in the evening. Miss Simpson was then dead.
I expressed the greatest surprise, and said I should
wish for a post 2110 T tent examination, not being &aut.-
fled as to the cause of her cleat's. I obtained the
consent of her family, and I called in Mr. Franks,
and he brought with him Dr. Wilmot. The ex-
amination took place on Tuesday morning. There
was nothing to lead us to judge that she had been
affected with any latent disease tending to shorten
life.

Cross-examined—Mr. H. Edwards was an old
friend of mine. I don't recollect any dispute be-
tween him and me as to the young lady's life. I
i
believe I did ask him how he came to nsure her life.
I have been about 25 years in the profession. I
once used this expression to him, " Henry, what
could induce you to insure the life of the girl ?"
conceiving her to be so healthy and well. I thought
her a good life. This was in consequence of being
applied to by one of the insurance offices. His an-
swer certainly was not " I considered her health bad,
r.nd that she could not live," or that he thought she
was not so good a life. My opinion that she was a
good life, was confirmed by the post mortem exa-
mination. I think I called his attention to the fact,
and said, " See, I was right." This was one of
those cases where we cannot tell the cause of the
death. They often occur. When I was first intro-
duced to Miss Simpson, I observed that for so
young a person she was very stout. I did not then
know nor suspect her pregnancy. Mr. H. Edwards
was with me taking a tour in the West of England
when I first saw her. He then told me of her preg-
nancy. I did not attend her in her confinement. I
learnt of it before the child died. I can't tell the
date of that event. I did not learn who was the
father of that child.

Dr. Byam Wilmot, a physician, residing at Ken-
nington, deposed to the circumstances attending the
post mortent examination. There was nothing to
make him think the deceased had any disease to
shorten life. The fact of her having had a child
was mentioned. He should not otherwise have
observed it. That would not, in his opinion, have
accelerated her death. _

Cross-examined—lf a woman has had a very bad
delivery the first, that is likely to influence her
health in future life. I should consider it somewhat
material to tell that fact to persons who applied to
me on the subject.

Mr. Serjeant WILDE, on behalf of the defendants,
said, that the defence of the Globe Insurance Corm
parry was, that the whole transaction on the part
of Mr. H. Edwards was one of fraud and con-
spiracy. The Learned Seijeant then detailed the
circumstances which, be said, he should prove in
evidence. Among other facts, he said, he should
produce the letters of Miss Simpson to a young
school-fellow, written both before and after the date
of the policy. These wculd show that, at that
very moment, she believed her constitution to .he
quite undermined, and that she should not live
long. , It would be proved that not, only Mr. H.
Edwards must have known of the bad state'of her
health, but that in disposing of this and other po-
licies among his own creditors, and for his own
benefit, as he did immediately after effecting
them, he actually told them that the policies were
valuable, for that the life would not last..
The CHIEF JUSTICE stopped the Learned Ser-
jeant, and said that, if these letters contained what
was now stated, he should consider that these ex-
pressions of Miss Simpson's opinions, with respect
to her own health, as quite decisive of the cause.
He was also of opinion that the concealment of the
fact of the pregnancy, especially when one of the
plaintiff's own witnesses had stated the necessity of
mentioning that circumstance to the insurers, was
of itself sufficient to vitiate the policy.
Mr. Serjeant TADDY, for the plaintiffs, submitted
to a nonsuit under these circumstances.

A crowd of witnessesAvere in Court ready to have
been examined for the defence.

SPRING ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

CHESTER, AP 90 ItIL --.
NAYLOR V. CLARKS.

This was an action for trespass and false imprison-
ment against the reverend defendant, a magistrate of
the county. The general issue was pleaded, with a
plea of tender of 5/. amends to the plaintiff, under
24 Geo. 11., c. 44, sec. 2. The plaintiff replied, that
the amends tendered were insufficient, upon which
issue was joined. In consequence of plaintiff reject-
ing 51. as amends, it had been paid into Court by the
defendant, under sec. 4 of the statute.
The Jury, after hearing evidence, returned a ver-
dict for the plaintiff—Damages, 101.