The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, MARCH 26, 183,9.

the present case was one in which it was the peculiar pro-
vice of a jury to decide upon, more espcially where such a
mass of contradictory evidence had been laid before them. He
believed the only objection to the case being submitted to a
jury was its great length ; but it appeared to him that that
was the great objection even in that House, and he was satis-
fied, from his experience, that the four days during which he
( Lord Wynferd) had attended would have amply sufficed,
instead of the forty or fifty days spent, and that a jury
would come to a satisfactery decision in two days.—
Mr. Attwood had stated the mines produced 90,000/. a year,
whereas they never produced near that amount. This showed
the quo animo by which Mr. Attwood had been influenced,
throughout these transactions. Mr. Attwood represented
the expense of making the iron as 4/. Its. per ton ;
when in fact it was 5/. is.—making a difference per ton
of 165., and a total amount of 18,0001. per annum.
Did Mr. Attwood wilfully make this misrepresentation ?
This was a question which a Juiy would he especially qualified
to decide. He (Lord WT.) thought there was considerable
ground for suspicion on the evidence that Mr. Attwood had
been endeavouring to w'thhold from the deputation data
which might have exhibited the misrepresentation. Now
with regard, for instance, to the quantity of iron pro-
duced, it was proved that there were some papers
withheld. . It was utterly impossible that in such a concern as
this there should not have been some accounts varying with
the prices of the articles produced at different periods ;
and it was in evidence that such papers did exist,
but they were not produced. The P. T. papers stated
that 360 tons of iron were produced per week ; also that
there were six furnaces on one particular part of the estate,
which in fact did not exist, but he ( Lord W.) was ready to
admit this was rather in the way of estimate than actual statement.
No man in his senses would take a hypothetical statement
from a man who had a practical knowledge of all the mat-
ters of which he was treating. He stated that 360 tons were
made every week, which was a gross misrepresentation—it was
impossible but Mr. Attwood must hare known that it was so.
It appeared to him that there were two gross misrepresenta-
tions, and as was not unfrequently the case in issues, he would
like to see Mr. Attwood in the witness-box, not for examina-
tion in chief, but for cross examination, and to be contradicted,
if necessary. He would like to hear what explanation he would
give of the two misrepresentations which he had alluded to.
He should like to know how Mr. Attwood would account for
the extraordinary circumstance of the property which had
produced 90,0001. a year, according to his statement, produced
now only 6,000/. or 8,0001. Then there were certain other points
relative to parties having been improperly made defendants,
on which: he would merely observe that it would be very
desirable they should be examined. It would be desirable
that Mr. Phillip Taylor should be examined who could
throw much more light upon this subject than had hitherto
been thrown upon it. He was one of those who thought
the case had not been half tried, and until it was fully
tried he was satisfied they would never arrive at the
truth, which was the first step towards a just decision. The
length of time that had already been occupied upon this case,
instead of tending to elucidate the truth had only tended to
perplex the mind of the Judge, if any thing could perplex so
luminous and enlightened a mind as that possessed by his Noble
and Learned Friend near him (Lord Lyndhurst.) He was
satisfied that a just judgment could not be pronounced until a
full examination into the points he had submitted to their Lord-
ships had taken place. He would therefore move that the
judgment in this case be adjourned till an issue should have
been tried.
The Earl of DEVON thought that the motion of the Noble
Lord ought to be brought forward as a substantive motion.
The Loan. CHANCELLOR thought that the proper time for his
Noble Friend to make his motion would be after he had moved
that their Lordships should dismiss the Bill with costs.
Lord BROUGHAM said that the judgment, as it at present
stood, must be got rid of before the Noble Lord could make
his motion.

The 140 ED CHANCELLOR then put the question to the House,
whether the judgment appealed from should be reversed, and
declared it to be carried in the affirmative.
Lord WYNFORD then made his motion—That the judgment
should be adjourned till an issue had been tried.
Lord BROUGHAM said, if the Noble Lord persevered in that
motion, he should meet it by an amendmen*, that the House
should now adjourn. He could assure his Noble Friend that
the issue that he proposed could not be tried.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was convinced that it was impossible
to frame an issue properly to meet the justice of the case ; but
independent of that he apprehended that the present was not a
case in which an issue could be directed. It was not a
matter of course with a Court of Equity to direct an
issue ; it only did so when it had a case before it,
which it could not satisfactorily decide without. The
plaintiff had deprived his opponent of two of his principal
witnesses, by making them co-defendants, and even then he
had failed to make out his case. If the record could not be
sustained under such circumstances, and with such an
advantage, he (the Lord Chancellor) thought that this was
a case in which an issue ought not to be directed. His Noble
and Learned Friend (Lord Wynford) had referred to a
part of the case which was also referred to by his Noble
and Learned Friend who tried the case in the Court below,
and both the Noble Lords, after observing on the question of
the Yields and the Stock Books, said, that he (the Lord
Chancellor) had not adverted to that part of the
case, although it was important, and now he was
only anxious to state to their Lordships why he did not ad-
vert to it. The proposition was raised from this fact that
they imputed fraud to Mr. Attwood, because, when the depu-
tation went down, be produced the books of 1818, and said
that none were kept subsequently. The allegation was,
than although that was true, yet there were stock
books, which would show the yields were different and
less valuable after the year 1818, and that Mr. Attwood
fraudulently withheld the information. Rut it was quite
clear, according to the rules of Courts of Equity, that proof
could not be admitted of an allegation not set forth in the Bill.
The Noble and Learned Lord ( Wynford) adverted to this as
a question to be tried by a jury. But feeling as he (the Lord
Chancellor) did, that the plaintiff had had every possible
advantage for bringing his case before their Lordships, and that
he had failed in making that case out—that the plaintiff had
had the advantage of examining his witnesses, without per-
mitting to the defendant the same advantage-- and feel-
ing the utter impossibility pf framing this case, so
that it might be tried by a jury—he was confident that their
Lordships would not refer it back to a common law tribunal.
Lord WYNFORD said a few words, which were inaudible in
the gallery.
Lord LYNDHURST said on the face of the bill, the plaintiff
charged the defendant with having withheld the yield ac -
counts.
To this the defendant answered that there were
no such accounts. Before the answer of Mr. Attwood to the
amended Bill, he was told the very names of the witnesses
who could prove the existence of these accounts, so that he
could not say that he had been taken by surprise. And it
was said that in a very short time these accounts could be
made out.
The Earl of DEVON said the only question which their Lord-
ships had to decide was whether, after they had come to a de-
cision, they were to send the case down to be tried by an issue.
His Noble Friend behind him (Lord Wynford) had sug,
gested two points upon which the opinion of a jury ought to
be taken. Even if they were to be found in the way, his
Noble Friend expected they would not in any degree alter the
view of the question taken by the Noble Lord on the Woolsack
himself, or his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham. )
There were at least a dozen other points which must be submit-
ted to a jury, and found otherwise than he could expect before his
opinion would be altered in the slightest degree, considering
,al the circumstances of the case—that it had been fully argued
at the bar, and that the House had fully made up its mind upon
its judgment, he thought it ought not to be delayed.
Lord WYNFORD said a few words which were inaudible.
Lord BROUGHAM having troubled their Lordships at
°Teat length in stating his opinion, and the grounds
on' which he had arrived at that opinion it would
be unnecessary for him to say anything except that he
agreed with his Noble Friend who spoke last, and his Noble
Friend who spoke before, in thinking that no issue ought to be
directed, and that there were materials enough already before
their Lordships to enable them to come to a conclusion. He
had always understood that a party was not to come into a court
of equity, seeking to set aside a contract, and having failed in
supporting his allegations, he was not to be allowed to mend his
case, as it were, by having it sent to a Court of Law. It must be
shown to the Court before which the party came for relief that he
had a ground on which ho could stand. Neither party in any
stage of the cause had ever suggested such a thing as an
issue.
The Loan CHANCELLOR then put the question from the
Woolsack that the bill be dismissed with costs.
Agreed to.
We understand the costs amount to upwards of 150,0001.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE applied for the payment out of Court
of 44,0001. which had been ordered to be paid in.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that was a matter for the
consideration of the Court, and not of their Lordships' House.

A SPOTTISWOOD CIIICKEN.—May we be per-
mitted to inquire of their reverences, the Tory clergy of Dur-
ham, whether the news is true that their friend Mr. Peter
Borthwick, the Tory Champion of negro slavery, has been
kicked out of the House of Commons for bribery ? The
report is very current—the printed votes of the House
absolutely declaring it to be the fact, that his doom was pro-
nounced by a Tory Committee, with Sir Robert Peel at its
head?

THE WEATHER IN SCOTLAND.—Winter seems
to be returning again in all its yiffour. On Thursday night,
and with few interruptions yesterday, showers of snow and hail
fell, accompanied with a cold north wind. The snow, how-
ever, melts as it falls, though, we fear, that in the country. it
may occasion some interruption to farming operations.—Edin-
burgh Courant.
On Thursday Mr. George Heath, a young man
who wes confined to his bed in the last stage of consumption,
was left alone by his mother for a short time, when, during
her temporary absence, he managed to hang himself to the
bed-head, and was quite dead on her return.-11"11 paper.
COAL MONOPOLY.—The Sun asks why there is
such a great disparity in the prices of coals, according to the
coal letter emanating from the Coal Exchange ? The reason
is obvious. The coal merchants recommends their customers
to buy the best coals, and the higher these coals are quoted
the
better for their purpose, as the inferior coals are mixed
with them. The letter itself is a mere tissue of lies, and has
been so ever since it ceased to be published by authority.
The
coal merchants can have such prices inserted in it as pro-
mote the object in view. If the inhabitants of London wish
to obtain cheap coals, and to continue manufacturing pursuits
on the banks of the Thames, for which the locality is so well
adapted, they must put down both the Coal Exchange and the
Coal Letter, neither being now sanctioned by the Legislature.
—Hull Advertiser.