The Sun.
London, England, 1808-11-05 00:00:00

PAZZE MEDLEY, IN MATTER 07 BULLOCK.

This was an application, on die part of the Assig-
nees Under the Commission awarded against Ja‘nes
15,:1141ck, a Will:m[4,A° have a debt of tool. proved
under the Commission by Ricliarl and Thomas Rey-
expnned, on the ground of fraud-and collu-
sion between ti,en) and the bankrupt, and that, in
fact, no such dent existed at the time of the bank-
rupt, y •
RoDULLY, for. the Assignees, stated, that
in the y eat. 1805, the bankrupt being in embarrassed
eißlons,ances, stopped payment., and enteied into
an ye, went with his crrdhois, :to pay them in
three d.tfererit instalments. He. accordingly grant-
ed to th,. Messrs. Reynolds, with whom he bad for-
,
tnerly been conne(..ted in business, three different
.suol. each, one of which had since been'paid,
R: and T. Reynold; having paid away the other
tvvo, they had been claimed un under the Coin-.
miss:.on, by the i:ersons holding them. The claim of
11.3001. therefore now made by It. and.T. Reynolds
was altogether imeginary and fraudulent, every debt
or claim due to the,b:inkrupt, in which
the bil;.4"w Lich composed ibis 16001. were compre-
hendAl, having been include*i in the I &WI. fornwhich
wtre grail ed by the bant-,rcpt at the nine of his
temporary fatiure. • IThat this was the tad appeared
by a loter from the Rwytiolds thetnselves, in which
thCy alnitted that they only held, these bills _as se-
curity for any after dealings they rnight have with
the oanktupt, and that such dealings did nut amount
to one.„holl of the sum which ,they had claimed un-
der the appearance was made for
It. and T. Re% ntilds. •
' The Loup CIIA,\ CELLOR ordered the claim to be
.
expunged, and the Reynolds to pay the costs of t;.e
application, r,:_berving to Ahem to prove before the
Coinmtssioners any debt pgainst the bankrupt which
they might be able to subsianliate.

couRT OF KING', BENCH, Nov. 3.

THE I.:ING V. THE CoMMIS•IONERS OF COMPENSA-

s: LION.

This was an anion brought by a Mr. Viney, a
very Lxteirsive waselmuseman, to reco%er compensa-
tion tor the deterioration in his bus tress and pre-
nu,es, by the operation of the confinement of land:.
inz, storing, tic. certain articles of importation, in
the West India and London Docks, under and by
virt4,e of the Statutes made tor that purpose. This
attion b,A been oriinally brought before the .Re 7
coider of the City ot London, under the provisions
o: those. statutes, and in that action the Jury had
assessed the Plaint:lrk datnag-es in the sum of
•50001.; this verdizt was, upon motion and argu-
meut in the lust term, in the Court of King's
Bench, set aside, and a new trial awarded ; and
ilpon s hat occasion, the sum ot 40001. had been
offered by the Attorney-General, in the name of:
the C(')lnmissioners, but this was refused, as inade-
quate ; --t-he principle upon -which the Commission-
eis.calcu:ated the mea,nre .ot damages, was upon
the average annual amount of the Plaintiff's profits,
upon thet,arehousing articles, for• the three
List years iminediately preceding the above statutes,
in I and 1800, as alter_ hese periods were coin-
polsortly landed and stored in the public docks ;
while, on the other hand,, it was contended, for the
Hamtilf, he was injurcd by the loss arising from the.
altenation of a variety of othef.articles,which, though
they mast be landed, were not of necessity stored
there, but the expence of removing which, to other
private stores,- virtually amounted to a prohibition.
It wa,, also centended, for the Plaintiff, that the
average %vas- ill taken,. and that the .purchase under
that. erage. should be more liberal than• that al-
16,,t•ed (three ;cars),. there being inMances.o; four
and one of six years' purchase having been awarded
is conipen.ation, To these points the evidence on
thZ....part of bbewitig his annual
prows foe a series of , years,; while on the part.of
tic licicdialos were. produced _extraets taken from
the Piaintilf's own hooks, tending to narrow the
t

wouirds which they should bottom their
1. !I

1 Atter a very minute and -patient investigation,
a groat •trariQty' of figures and calcillations, by the
1 Le.lrned 'JU,.I,-e- (Lora ELLE.spououGH), the Jury
:-) I rclii•vd fur- s(..tlie time, and' at length brought in a
i verdict t .
ur the Plaintitl—attnages 4:0751. Is. 4d.
ilttooKE V. MIDDLETON.

This was an kw.tion brought to recover, under the
Statute, if chic the amount of certain bills which
were diicounted by the Defendant, and for which
it- was ailedged lie lead usuriously charged above the
legal interest.
Mr. Gartaow, for the Plaintiff, stated.. his was
_not'of the class of qui turn actions for the benefit
of the informer, but brought by a- respectable Gen-
tleman,, whose only object was to check the -mis-
chief arising front such- transadions to the indus-
trious, but sometimes distressed trader, and whose
avowed intention was to apply the whole amount of
such damages as might- be recovered, in li;juidation
of the debts of the creditors of Messrs. Wilkins
and •Lacey, bankrupt's, and who had been the ob-
jeds of plunder to the Detendint. The above
.. Gentlemen were. Blackwell' }LH fa6tors, in the
year 1797; 'and the Defendant is a carrier, and
country banker, residing at Frome, in Somerset-
shire. In Jallluary of that year, having occasion for
• • money, they. applied, by letter, to him, to discount
certain bills, of a long date, for them, which he
did, charging over and above the discount a coin-
mission of seven shillings and sixpence for each
I ooi. In April 'of the same year, they again ap-
, plied to him, by letter, for further assistance, when •
he wrote to them that he understood it was the re-
gular custom to charge a commission of one qua, ter
per cent, by the month., wito -which terms, they
were tinder the necessity of complying. In Jutte
of the same year, Mr. Lacey, one of the partners,
went to Frome, where .accounts were setatd be-
tween the thirties, and a third accommodation took
place (Ilion similar terms. The partners 'afterwards
became bankrupts; and have since. obtained their
cert aicate.

Mr. Lacey having released ail claim to any sur-
plus out of the bankrupt's estate, was called to prove
the ahote facts. tne course -ot his es.antination,
his evidence not appearing to suppi,ri toe declaration
wldch applied to. (tie third transaction, that part of
the case %vas anandoned.

The ATTUItNEY-.GENERAL, • for the Defendant,
Contended tney had equally tailed in all-their7case.---.-
.4s to the second trans.ittion, he argued- that the
declaration havity, set forth toe forbearance of the
Defendant to be from the 20th Of April, the Wit
negatived that, inasinvelf as the letter containing the
reiontance from the Defendant was sent from Frome
on that day,_ and, of course, could not come to
hand 'before the next day ; from which latter pee,
riod the fiftbearance vk as to be compiited. In this
position the Noble Lord coincided, but waved the
point, at the request of Mr. GARROW. The first
transaction, he likewise, insisted, was equally un-
tenable; because, first, the .commission charged was
not unreasonable---and• next, because to the sum
alledged to ha‘e,been so-charged with that com-
mission shoutd be added the price of the stamp .for
the draft of the Defendant, and the postages ; both
which, it was admitted, were payable by the bor-
roWers. This, added to the other sum, made a va-
riance; which; ho•A ever trifling, was such, as in
an action founded upon a penal statute (and of
course to be construed stric,ly) was equally fatal
with the other ohjeations. , .

Tile Noble Lur'd left these last obje6lions to the
consideratiou of the Jury, who found a verdict fur
the .I)ziendaat.