The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-29 00:00:00

more than three per cent.; the damage sustained by stranding
alone-did not amount to'three per cent.
The admissions of the defendants, as spoken of by Mr. Serjeant •
Spankie, were put in and read.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL admitted for the defendants,
that the addition of the boat to the average loss would be the
main question, but he would not consent that the thirty-two
rupees for the survey, and one hundred and seventy-seven rupees,
for the protest:, should be added to swell the amount, If the three
per cent. should not be previously made up by the damage. •
Mr. Serjeant SPANKIE admitted what the Attorney-General
stated to be correct.
Captain Bugg, the Commander of the Thames, proved the loss
of the boat at sea, on the 13th of June, IBa.l, and the stranding
of the vessel in the following August. The boat had been slung
over the quarter, which he stated to be the usual place on board
such vessels, and several Commanders of vessels proved that to
be the usual and safest mode of slinging boats; indeed they
would not go to sea without boats so slung, on account of the
readiness with which they can be manned, in case of a man fall-
ing overboard, or any other accident occurring.
The ATTORNEY-GENERALadthessed the Jury for the de.
fendants, and said it was monstrous to suppose, if a loss occurred
which was under three per cent. that subsequent damage should
be added to, it to make it up to the amount for which the de.
fendants would be liable. The defendants did not impute negli.
gence to the crew, they wished to treat the question fairly, and
they considered, that if one species of damage occurred, for
which they were not liable (the amount being too small) and
another injury occurred two months afterwards, for which alio
they were not liable, that being also under three per cent., the
two should net be allowed to be added to make up the three
per cent. The Learned Counsel stated that he would call wit.
ncsses to prove that by usage the Underwriters in such a ease
would not be considered liable, when
Mr. Baron VA UGHAN interrupted him by asking if he meant
to say that if damage should be done to the ship one day under
three per cent., and the next day further damage should be done,
the two should not be made as one loss, and recoverable from the
Underwriters ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, he did not now moot
that point, became these accidents were done at a distance of
several hundred leagues.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN said he should give either party
liberty to move the Court upon the subject, but his opinion was
against the defendants.

-Mr. CAMPBELL (who was with the ATTORNEY-GE-
NERAL) proposed to tender evidence that, by the usage of trade,
the Underwriters were not liable for loss of boats slung like the
one in question.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN was unwilling to receive that evi-
dence, because it bad been proved that boats so slung were in the
best situation for the safety of the ship and crew in case of an
accident.

Mr. CAMPBELL said that mercantile contracts were gene-
rally determined by usage.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN said it would be difficult to deal in
any particular case according to any general abstract proposition.
In this case it was proved that the boat was in its best and
safest place. His opinion was that the policy was against all the
damage done during the voyage • but as there had been no •
formal decision upon this point, he would reject the proffered
evidence, and give the defendants liberty to move in a full Court
upon the point of law.
The Jury then, under his Lordship's direction, found a verdict
for the plaintiff; giving the defendant liberty to move upon the
point of law to enter a nonsuit, or upon the rejection of evi-
dence for a new trial.

LONDON SESSIONS.-(THIS DAY.)
MAIDEN SESSION.
This morning at ten o'clock, the LORD MAYOR took his
"seat in the Court of Aldermen, for the purpose of swearing the
Grand Inquest of the City of" London. His Lordship was at-
tended by the Recorder, Sheriffs, Aldermen Atkins, Thorp,
Ansley, Sir C. Flower, Sir Peter Laurie, &c. &c.

Pre,Wous to the commencement of business, in consequence of
Mr. Baron Vaughan occupying the Court where the Session is
usually held, the Jurors were repeatedly removed from one apart-
ment to another, until they became rather displeased.
The King's Proclamation and the Riot Act having been read,
the Grand Jury were sworn and addressed at considerable length
by the Recorder.
The Learned JUDGE congratulated them that on the London
side of the calendar the oflbnces were not of an aggravated de-
scription, and required but little observation from the Court.
As, however, there had beenlan alteration in the law in regard to
some offences in the calendar he would make a few remarks, and
commence with that of receiving stolen goods. Under the old
law a person Must be proved to have purchased the !property
well knowing it to have been stolen, but, as the law now
stood, any person who gave house or warehouse room to
stolen property, he knowing it to be so, was equally guilty
as if he had purchased it of the thief. Again, formerly, a
person might have a quantity of counterfeit coin in his pos-
session, but' he could- not be convicted unless he was
proved to have tendered part of it for public circulation. At
present the fact of having such coin in possession was enough for
the purpose of conviction, unless he could prove by what means
he became possessed of it. After remarking upon the evidence
necessary to induce the Grand Jury to return a true bill for
perjury, &c. &c. the Learned Recorder dismissed the gentlemen,
expressing his confidence that they would discharge their im-
portant duty in a manner which would be grateful to their own
feelings upon reflection, and satisfactory to their fellow-citizens.
There was not a single case for trial, or matteY of nuisance or
assault to be investigated, which reflects great credit upon the
police and inhabitants of the metropolis; and if old custom was
observed, the Recorder is entitled to a new pair of white gloves.

THE MAR.KETS -(THIS DAY.)