The Sun.
London, England, 1808-11-17 00:00:00

LEEDS GRAMMAR SCHOOL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR 'appointed' Saturday for
the giving judgment in this important case.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH. Nov. 'ls.

RUSSIAN EMBARGO:

RITCHIE V. ATKINSON.

This wasi- 'Cabe of considerable' cOnsequente to
the mercantile world. In the summer. of 1207 -a,
a charter party was: entered into between the par-.
tie.s,-Whereb,4 the PlaintiflCOvenanted 'that hii ship
should go to-Cronstadt, and having there taken in a';
complete cargo of hemp, &c. should with, all con.%
venient speed deliver the same in the port of Lon-
don ; whereupon' the Defendant was to pay freight
for the goods at a rate agreed upon. The ship pro-
ceeded to-Cronstadttand. took in about half a cargo,
when a rumour prevailing that an embargo, was itn-
mediately to be laid upon all English ships in the
Russian ports, she set sail and returned to England.
The :Defendant accepted all the goods she brought,
under protest against. his liability to pay height tore
them. • This' freight was sought to be recovered in
the present action. - When the trial took place. be-
fore Lord tULLEN BOROUGH and a Special Jury' at.
Guildhall}, asase was reserved for the opinion of the,
Court, which now came on to be argued.
Mr. LITTLEDALE contended. that, although a
complete cargo was not brought home, still that-the.
Defendant: was liable to pay for such goods as had
been safeV delivered, and in the port of London;
and he cited is in point Boone v. Air, t Henry
Backstone's Reports,. 273 ; Gamble v. Jones, 6
Term Reports, 570; Borntnan v. Took, Ist. voL,of
.Mr. dimphell's Nisi Prius Reports, 377.
Mr. 'FADDY, on the other side, insisted that the
Plaintiff's brin(Jipg home a complete cargo was a
condition precedent to 'his recovering any freight;,
in support of which. he relied upon Cooke v,. Jen-
pings, 7 Term Reports, 381, together with a own-
bee- of cases froM Valin, Pothier, and other foreign
Jurists.

-
I,ol'd ELLENBOROUGH and the other judges were
Of opinion, that the Plaintiff was entitled to_freight
pro rata. They put the case of the ship returning
with a cargo short by. a few pOunds, and asked,: if no
freight would then: be 'due for the, goods. delivered ?
Fur any injury the Defendant bad sustained, by
Means of. :the Plaintiff leaving Cronstadt so soon, a
cross 'aainii might be brought ; and, ,if that step
Could pot bejustified. by-the state of affairs fat. that
time between Russia and England, damages Would
be awarded accordingly ; but the fads stated were
no defence to the present action.--Judgment for
Plaintiff: •

The ATTORNEY-GEN4RAL -moved for leave to
file a criminal information against Robert Ellis, and
other Commissioners of the Court of Conscience
for. the town of Beverley. lie grounded his appli-
cation on the affidavits of several persons, which
stated gross inisconclua' on the part' of the Corn-
Missioners against whom he moved in their office.
By these affidavits it appeared, that a person of the
name :of IVusforth had brought an action in this
COCA' in whicij 'he was non-suited. I-le after-.
wards commenced it afresh against the four Church-
wardens, when the Commissioners having heard his
statement, refused to ask any questions for the Dv-
(eudants, .particularly.. one -desired by them to be
asked, viz: who gave the Plaintiff the order for th 6
work, in reVect of which he brought his adion
btu the Commissioners refused, and answered;thal

, . . , . • . ..
they ril` cant to gilt-, tin Pi4intifr his bills,, 35. to':ir
. . clii,iii .
thougbr. it hard: a• 1ie2.0r4i.,;1 -fitioi.titi-lose‘ it: ' . -;'
them added, that the Defendants (night thilik 1111'r
selves well off. that tney did not awrird inferc?,;,-4's?'

CULHZT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. I°'

• TlNtigitWOdit ry. MILARAND ,
This was Mati6n. to set as'ide the nonsolt
this cause. The-;a6lion was brought to recovgf
vaLr,e for the exertions made by the Plaintif is 0v.7.
inga colli r, together with the crew and. cifs.--I,(3f-
belonging,- to the 'Defendants; as proved by (LI
registry undw. the provisions of the 31,th Of to
King. For the Defendant it was proved, that 011
of the partners had sold his share to another before,
the cause of action arose. If was now conlentie.
the registry of this transfer trot having. been -e44.:
ecuted ut I after the adion was brouzlir.,
tiff was not bound",bY granted.

ELLIS V. SALTER F:7,
This was a motion to set aside' au awardtn2{T7lo
this cause. Au American ship, the findiiiiveda;`'
v.,)
her voyage from Spain. to Ramburgh, had ,i)rk "fit
tiined by our Cruizers,. but afterwaTds
and it was referred to Messrs. Ludlam
~g 115134);:;
pliant, who awarded the stroll 016371. This
resisted on the ground that, the arbitrators-133'1'e d
ceeded their powers, under the terms of the weeic
of reference. Sir J. MANSpIRLD seemed to thir
the award was correct ; he however. granted ,
title to chew cause why it should not be set-a6O