The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, AUGUST 8, 1854,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

-HOUSE OF LORDS-AUG. 7.

ORR AND OTHERS V. THE UNION BANK-JUDGMENT.
This case was argued some time since, and their lord-
ships postponed their decision, it was an appeal from
the Court of Session, in a suit where the appellants were
the pursuers, and the two respondents the defenders.
The appellants were Messrs. William Orr and Alfred
Barber, merchants in Liverpool ; Mr. John Tassie, a
merchant in Glasgow ; and Mr. Charles Campbell& also
a merchant in Glasgow ; whilst the respondents were the
directors and managers of the Union Bank of Scotland.
It appeared that a merchant in Glasgow, of the name of
John Gordon Campbell, was accustomed to have business
transactions with the firm of Orr and Barber in Liver-
pool, and that, in the course of such transactions, he be.
came indebted to that house in the sum of 4601. 93 ;
whereupon, on the 22d of October, 1844, he paid into
the Union Bank of Glasgow the sum of 4601. 95., to be
paid to Messrs. Orr and Barber, in Liverpool, and at the
same time, filled up the usual printed bank slip in the
following terms

t, No. 583. Union Bank of Scotland, Oct. 22, 1844.
" Wanted credit on Liverpool for 4601. 9a., payable to
Messrs. Orr and Barber."

In return for his money Mr. Campbell received from the
bank a letter of credit in the following terms :
" Union Bank of Scotland, Glasgow,
" No. 15,583, A. A. Oct. 22, 1844.
" Please to honour the draught of Messrs. Orr and Bar-
ber to the extent of 4601.95., which charge to the bank.
"I am your obedient servant,
J. WATSON, Cashier.

"4801. 9s.
" Entered, M. G. H.
" To'the Manchester and Liverpool District Bank,
Liverpool—Not transferable."
The Union Bank did not write to the Liverpool Distric'.
Bank that this letter of credit had been granted, as they
ought to have done; but the very day on which it was
granted Mr. Campbell transmitted it by post, under co-
ver, to Orr & Barber at Liverpool. It so happened that
when the letter reached, or should have reached Liver-
pool, both Mr. Orr and Barber were absent. Mr. Bar-
ber conducted the business of the company at Buenos
Ayres, and had for many years been resident abroad.
Mr. Orr, 'whose department was to conduct the business
at home, was absent in Ireland. He went there on the
18th, and returned on the 31st of October, 1844, having
been absent for 12 days. Orr and Barber had only one
clerk in the counting-house in Liverpool, Mr. F. R.
Smith, who was of course left in charge of the office in
Mr. Orr's absence. It further appeared that the letter
enclosing the letter of credit had reached Liverpool in
. due course, and on the 25th of October, 1844, Smith ad-
vised Mr. Campbell of its receipt. Mr. Orr returned to
Liverpool on the 31st, within a week of the arrival of the
letter. On going into the counting-house he found Mr.
Campbell's letter advising the remittance, but the letter
of. credit was gone. Upon its being discovered that
Smith had absconded with certain moneys belonging to
his employers, it at once occurred to the minds.of the
latter that this draught had been paid to him; but on in-
quiring for him he was not to be found. The appellants
thereupon demanded payment from the respondents, who
refusing, an action was commenced to enforce payment,
upon the ground that the Union Bank had failed to
perform what they had undertaken, namely, to esta-
blish a credit at the Liverpool Bank for the
sum of 4601. 9s. in favour of the appellants : and
further, that they had not accepted or fulfilled the man-
date contained in the letter of credit, that they had not
honoured the draught, and had refused to 'give credit to
the Liverpool bank for the sum in question, as having
been paid to their account. It was then averred that
they had still in their hands the particular sum which
had been .paid to them by the late Mr. John Gordon
Campbell. The respondents, 'however, in the court be-
low, maintained that the letter of credit having been
duly delivered at the place of business of the appellants,
in' accordance with the arrangement made, the claim
upon them had been duly satisfied, and therefore, that
as they had no further claim on him, he had no right to
sue : that Campbell's debt to the appellants having been
thus discharged, they had no claim on the respondents,
in'consequence of the non-implement of the terms of the
letter, inasmuch as that there was no privity of contract
between the appellants and the respondents. The court
below held in favour of the respondents, intimating that
the liability, if any, attached to the bank at Liverpool :
and the present appeal was against that decision.
'Their Lordships now decided that the judgment of
the court below was erroneous, and must be reversed ;
and the appeal was allowed.
COMMITTEE FOR PRIVILEGES.
Their Lordships, later in the day, resolved themselves
into a committee of privileges.
The Marquis of Londonderry's claim to vote for re-
presentative peers for Ireland was allowed.
VISCOUNT MOIINTGARRETT'S CLAIM.
The claim of Viscount Mountgarrett to vote for repre-
sentative peers for Ireland was heard on a former occasion
and evidence given • bet the further consideration of the
claim was adjourned, pending a suit involving the legiti-
macy of the present possessor of the title. That case has
been recently tried at the Kilkenny assizes, and a verdict
having been !returned which declared the present viscount
to be illegitimate, and not legally possessed of the title,
of course the claim to vote for representative peers fell
to the ground, and was not prosecuted to-day.
THE BM:THESE PEERAGE.
This was a claim to a dormant Scotch peerage. The
case was hetwd before their lordships, and a portion of
the evidence given on a former occasion. It appeared
that in 161 d Sir David Carnegie, the claimant's ancestor,
the head and representative of the family of Carnegie, of
Carnegie and Klnnaird, in the county of Forfar, was by
patent of. King James VI. created a baron and lord
of Parliament by the title of Lord Carnegie of Kinnaird,
with a limitation to him and his heirs male bearing the
surname and arms of Carnegie. He was afterwards, in
1G33, by patent of King Charles 1., raised to the dignity
of hn earl by the title of Earl of Southesk, Lord Carnegie
of Kinnaird and,Leuchars, with a limitation to him and
his heirs male for ever. James the fifth Earl of
Southesk, having taken part in the rebellion of 1715 on
behalf of the family of Stuart, was by the Act of Par
liament 1 George 1., cap. 42, attainted of high treason.
The claimant proposed to show that this attainder, how-
ever it might affect Earl James's issue male, .had no
effect upon his heirs male or collateral.
Sir F. Kelly now appeared for the claimant and stated
that the principle question in the pedigree of the claimant
related to the point whether the third earl died leaving
not more than one son, which he was prepared to prove
by showing the fact that a certain William Carnegie,
his second son, was killed in a duel in France, at the
age of 19, without leaving any issue. The learned coun-
sel having stated the evidence he proposed to give, in-
cluding indirect evidence of registries of births and mar-
riages, without producing the documents themselves.
Their lordships interposed and said that it was not the
practice of the house to admit indirect evidence of regis-
tries of this kind, unless it was shown that the docu-
ments themselves could not be found. They therefore
directed the case to be postponed till next session, and
that all the registries which were to be found should be
produced.

THE TRACY PEERAGE.

Counsel—Messrs. Glasse, M`Naghtes2, and Webb.
In this case Mr. Glasse, Q.C., said that the house had
decided against the title of one claimant to this dormant
peerage, and he LOW appeared for a different claimant,
and he applied that in order. to cave expense the evi-
delice which had already been laid before the house and
printed should be taken as evidence for the present
claimant as was done in the Roscommon case.
The Lord Chancellor said they could. nct bind them-
selves that the evidence would be received, but the
claimant might be at liberty to offer it.
Mr. Glasse said all he.asked was that it should be
used de bene we, and that he should be allowed to refer
to it as evidence in the case. He also wished that the
claimaint should be allowed to inspect a picture of one
William Tracy, which was locked up in a box, and was
in the custody of the officers of the house, together with
a tombstone which was alleged to have been fraudulently
concocted. The object was to assist in the identification
of William the third peer.
Lord 'Redesdale said there would probably be no ob-
jection 'to allow the inspection, but there would be
plenty of time to do so when the witnesses were called
hereafter.

. 'WESTMINSTER COUNTY COURT.
NATHAN V, CALTHORPE-THE FRENCH AMBASSADOR'S

BALL.
thrT t This was an action brought by the plaintiff, costumier,
of Castle-street, Leicester-square, against the defendant,
the Hon. Augustus Calthorpe, son et' Lord Calthorpe,
to recover the sum of 131. ISs. Mr. De la Mare, solici-
tnudrendedo:iinbsechribalfedo_n
of tiheTpu:7.iineyti.ff. The defendant
not appearing, and the summons 'served at his residence
being
Mr. De la, Mare having stated that he was in a posi-
tion to prove that such could not b..: the fact, was allowed
to proceed with the case in tll%, hon. defendant's ab-
sence.
It
witnesses that, prior to the bal bting given
appeared from the evidence o!., 11:.iittiff and his
by his Excellency the French Ambassador, at Albert-
gate, Hyde.park, defendant called upon plaintiff, and as
one of the intended visitors to the fete, requested to be
furnished with a drers, the costume of Oliver Cromwell,
for the hire of which for that night only he would give
121., and should he not return it within three days,
should be happy to pay any further demand. It was
not returned till some time afterwards, when plaintiff,
seeing that it had been nearly "used up," made the
claim sought for, which being refused, the present pro-
ceedings were instituted.
In answer to Mr. De la Mare, plaintiff said he kept
the best Londori-made Oliver Cromwells, and amongst
the aristocracy they were always sought and well paid
for. (Laughter.) He himself was a Conservative—(in-
creased laughter)—but ever ready to oblige that party
of liberals. (Laughter.)
A servant of plaintiff's said that, in contradiction of
the defendant being in Turkey, he met him near Pall-
Mall last Thursday week, before which he must have
for some days been in the receipt of a request for his at-
tending that court, whicla invitation he had not deigned
to notice.
His Honour gave judgment for plaintiff, with all
costs.

[ADvEßrlsEmErr.]—Holloway's Pills Invigorate the
System and Promote Health.—Mrs. Reynolds, of Bur-
ton, has been a great sufferer for many years, front a
complication of nervous diseases, so that her constitution
had become very much impaired, which affected both her
mental and physical powers. Her strength also was
completely prostrated. Change of air, change of scene,
and every available remedy was resorted to without any
beneficial effects whatever, as sho appeared to ho sinking
fast. Holloway's Pills were commenced at this critical
period, and by this unrivalled medicine Mrs. Reynolds
speedily derived temporary relief, and ultimately a per-
manent cure was effected, and she continues to 'enjoy
excellent health. Sold by all vendors of medicine, and
at Professor liolloway's Establishment, 214, Strand,
L 912491.1,

,

yli ~