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

. .
• •
cent. on all adVances, and also a cemmiscaon of one
per cent. for their trouble_ as' agents, provided Ailch-
should produce 3001. a-year ; but at ail e'ents, such
commission should be made good in that sum ;
upon thesetransaaions there was a balance r:atiain -
ing doe of-upwards of 23,0001. and for tills tin; the
• aelion was brought.
The deed -of partnetship between the Defendants
was produced, and proved by the Attorney who
prepared it ; tvho, on his cross-examination, swore
the Plaintiff, Workman, was present, and witnessed
it, and .heard it read. The deed recited that Tomlin-
Son was to have equal share in the benefits arising fr,
to -
all the existing or future contracts with Goveinment,-
fi?r ship building, in consideration of the- Sum of
0,0001. ; and that lie yeas to hater) per,cent. upon
all sums advanced by him, and 5 per cent. on all navy
bills issued in payment of . ships built ; ,fit also con-
tained a clause by which all profits beyond these
Were to go to Tanner, for his trouble and use of his.
dock raids; and Tomlinson should be-at liberty fo
withdraw from the partnership by giving six.mouths
notice, lind take out all monies advanced by hill] to
the concern -; and that Tomlinson's nime should
not appear or be made use of in the partnership.
Charles Foster, the first witness, was clerk to Mr.
Tanner. He knew of his ha% ing several contracts
with Government, for building vessels, fourteen in
all ;• which were entered into interior to the
partnership commencing between loin and Mr.
Tomhnson.
Thomas William Masters produced a large bundle
of bills of exchange, drawn by Mr.'Tanner on -the -
PlaintillS, 'and paid by them: to the amount of
62,5031.1 they SA ere all drawn subsequent to conU-
mencement of the parnership, which took place in
December, 18u4.
• Mr. LAMB, the Solicitor foe the -Plaintiff's, proved
the hand-W ruing of Mr; Tanner, as the drawer of
these hills, the first of which was dated the f9th
December, 1804, the day subsequent to the com-
mencement of the partnership between the De-
fendants.
Mr. f-fingston lives at Dartmouth, and knows
Mr. Tannet', the whole of whose business, after his
entering into controas with Government, was con-.
fined to, building ships tOr their service. Upon his
cross-examination-he Would not swear lie built ves-

•
gels for no one else.
-John Gregg was an
.apprentice to 'Mr. °Fanner till
his failure ; he could not recolletaekaaly the period
he begin to-build on aCeotint cat Government,
but he dici no business for others front the time of
his entering into these contrats.,. •
Mr. Laughlin, agent to several. Contraaors with
Government, proved he charged one per cent. com-
mission upon all'such business; in one instance he-
charged one and a half, but that was under a special
agreement. The bus:ness, of such agency waslo-
attend to see contracts executed, to take up Navy
Bills; in some instances to pay money in advance ;
and to obtain final payment froM Government for
their employer. He would not undertake the busi-
ness- for less than..one per cent. commission.
Mr. Cowper has one accbuntWith a Government
Contra tor. His 'business is to accept Bills, to're-
ceive Navy Bills, and pay them. Be charges one
per cent. commission on all payments, and the like
commission on the Navy Bills ; and he considered
one -per cent, as a very reasonable charge for his
trouble. -

Mr. Raikes proved the enstoin of a like charge
of one per cent. commission for the trouble of
agency._

Mr. George Boyer, a clerk in the Navy 01Tice,
produced nine navy bills, which, had been Paid on
account of the Defendant, Tan4r, on the back of
which-the name of Workman appeared indorsed..
•This, Lord ELLENBOROUGH observed, Only shew-
ed he had a power of attorney to receive the amount
of them, but not that he had the tronble of procur-
ing them to be issued; he wished the Plaintiffs to
skew the'services they had done to entitle them to
the commission they claimed. ff
Mr. Henry Hunt is agent to the Gentleman who
has the contract for bunding the prison at Dart-
, mouth,- and he charges -one per cent. commission
for his. trouble.—To a question by a juror, he said
he• would by no me:ens suffer any one to draw on
hitn, and at the same time to draw out of the
Transport Office the fund for payment.
Here Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD declared he must
rest his clients' cast; as to their right to coitimission
on the proof of general practice.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, on- the part of the
Defendants, insisted, that in addition to the failure-
of proof by the Plaintiff's, to entitle them to the
charge of commission, there %t its another ground
upon which he had a right to a nonsuit, for want
of a partnership between the- Defendants, and he
would try it by this test ; if this action had been
brought against Tanner alone, he could not plead.
the partnership in abatement ; it was proved by the
Plaintiffs themselves, that Tanner had eniered into
the contra•as with Government, and that he had
merely admitted Tomlinson to a participation of the
business; they had also proved, that 'Tanner had
tnerely druwn on theca on a general account, and
that they had accepted as his general agents. •
Lord ELLENBOROUGH observed, that a man may_
draw in two distinti characters,—he clay draw on
his private account, and also on a partnership ac
count. He could not think of turning the Ih:inliffs
round upon this point, but he would reserve it for
future consideration.

Mr. ATTORNEY-GENtRAL grounded his cliet t,'
defence upon two general grounds---,usury in the
dealings between the Plaintiffs and' Del-end:4ms-,
and the non-existence of partnership between the
latter. With respell to the former, he insisted
that the commission„ or one per cent, was a nit-re
colour to charge more than the legal interest for
money advanced, as they had totally failed in prov.=
ing any services done as agents on the- contrary,
that alone which they hadailet',ted tohave:perlorin].
the procurement of rho Navy Bills, he would'el
prove was actually done by another, who had cSarge,d
Mr. Tanner commission- for that very serytee_i and
that at any rate,'• the 3001. a year, when divided,
on the payments made by them, wOuld amount
to above one and a third per cent over and
above the five per cent. interest. With regard
to the second ground, the want,of partnership in the
Defendants, he would prove it by the affidavits of;
the Pl,,iiliti:ls thethselvt,is, who, upon a motion in tke