The Sun.
London, England, 1807-06-11 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEA !UNE 9.

BAYLEY V. TUCKER.
This was an action brought by Mr. Bayley
against a Mr. Tucker, an attorney, the grounds of
which were these : a Mr. Richard Hill, an. Attor-
ney, had an action against a Mr. Parsons, for whom
Mr. William)hyley, the present Plaietiff,
.becatne
bail. Besides which, there were several other ac-
tions in which this PitiollS had been arrested, and'
in some of which, this Mr. Bayley had, along with
others, also been bail for him. - The bail becoming
anxious for their own salety.and security, a meeting
took .place between Parsons, Bayley, and a Mr.-
John Hill, one of the other bail, at the chambers of
Mr. Tucker, who was ParsOns's Attorney, Upon the.
subject of rendering Parsons in discharge of his
bail. Tucker said, ie would not stir a peg until he
was paid Upoii this, 20-1. were paid by Parsons
himself, and 41. tos. was paid by the bail, Mr.
Tucker having agreed to accept these two sums;
amounting to 241. les. as. the total, charges in ren-
&ring Parsons in five different aCtions at the same
time assuring' the bail that they were perfectly se-
cure, and might go home afid sleep quietly. It
afterwards turned ciut, however, that Mr. Tucker
only , surrendered Parsons in four of the ae,Tions
which depended in the Court of , King's Bench,
leaving the fifth one; Which depended in this
Court,- in which he did not surrender him, on
account of a writ of error being then.
Mr. Hill, the Attorney and original Plaintiff
against Parsons, some time afterwards sued out a
writ of fieri facias, and an execution followed.,--
Upon this happening, Bayley went to Tucker, and
acquainted him of the event, Conceiving that he
had employed him as his Attorney ;' anti that it
vas, therefore, his duty to free him from any
further trouble 9e expence.• Mr' Tucker told
him to go to a Mr. Morgin; his fermer • Attor-
ifey, and desire him to apply to the Sheriff, and fo
have the money, put into his hands, and upon the
matter being determined, the money would be re-
stored. Bayley, however, instead of
.doing- this,
went to Hill, the other Attorney, who told him that
Tucker was the man who ought to have paid him
the morn: y. Hill persuaded. Bayley-to employ him,
and to put the money into his hands, and he Would
engage to recover it from Tucker, and consequently
the present action was'brought under the direCtion-of
this Mr. Hill, in the name of 'Mr. Bayley, againSt
the present Defendant.
• This action was lately tried by a Jury, and a ver-
dial was given for the Plaintiff for 211. ! The two
principal' questions on the merits were, whether Mr.
Tucker was employed by Bayley as his Attorney,
so as to make him responsible ? And next, whether
the condu& • of 13ayley, in not going to Mr. Morgan,
or thing according to the directions given him, de-
prived him (Bayley) of his right of action against
Tucker ?
Mr. Serjeant BEST argued, that there were two
grounds for a nonsuit, it being stated in the decla-
ration that the Plaintiff' had 'employed the De-
fendant, had paid him 2:51. for such tendering, and
had faithfully promised to pay him such-other tea.,
minable demands as might be wade ; while thrTese
c The
count was at variance with such statement.
next ground was, that Tucker never was employed
by the bail, and therefore Tucker was not guilty of
any negligence.
The Learned Judges severally gave fheir opiniOns
at considerable length. It seemed to be 'the
sense of- the Court, that the'promise to surrender, in'
due time, as contained in the contract, was the sur-
rendering at a time when, by not doing so, the bail
would be liable. In the present instance then:; was
a Writ of Error, which suspended all proceedings,
and therefore there ought not to have been,-any
execution against the bail, unless it appeared that
the writ' had been-brought merely for the ptirposes._
of delay. Instead of the bail bringing an -aditin against
Tucker for an irregularity, he ought to have brought
one against Hill, the Attorney, for his misconduct,
and Tucker had a right to eomplain against Bayley
for not having followed his advice. The contract
was one between Parsons and Tucker, and not be-, •
twist that Attorney and the Bail. This aalien seemed
to be one which failed in its foundation; and from
the whole. circumstances .of the case there appeared
to be grounds fie: a nonsuit, the breach of COntrata,
on the part of Tucker, not having been sufficiently,
proved.—Plaiiztiff nOnsuited.

JUNE 10.

SIFTON AND-OTHERS, V. LEE AND ()Turns.

Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD and Mr. Serjeant
LAY sTiewed cause on behalf of the Plaintiffs, agairiSt
an application forn?erly made by Mr. Serjeant BEST
for a new trial in this case.

.
It was an action-upon a policy of insurance upog
the -Ship Minerva, a Dantzic Ship, bound from that
port tO_Dublin.- The question upon the .evidence
was, whether or She was proved to be a Dantzic
Ship within the meaning of the warranty ? This
Ship was taken by the French, ankalt hough q neu-
tral, carried into a port in France, where she was
detained for a considerable time, and the insured
Were put to much expence in recoveling. their Ship,
and Suffered ''loss by the detention, for which con,
sequences this•adion was brougii against the Un-
derwriters.

After hearing Argitinelits "of Cchins:4 on bath
sides, at great length, the -Learned Judges severally
gave their opinions ; the united result of which was,
that. the Underwriters were clearly. liable, .unless
they could. shew-that the Plaintiffs were not enti-
tled to recover; because the loss they had sustained
arose from a
,breach of their engagement', or
some tnanjfest faplt upon 2their party iir'rerrard to
the Ship'!; docuinents. It, had been' sairisfat'dorily
proved that she xitras a 1/intzic Ship, and had all
the docnnients on board which a Dantzic Ship.
'usually had. It had been stated, on the part of the
Under Writers, that they were not liable, because,.
although the Court .of France finally decided that
the capture Was unlawfdl, they did not subject-the
captors to damages and costs, On accountof.the in-
formality of the musterLroll and pasSpork.. kap-
peared, that by an ordinance of the French Ad-
miralty Court, all neutral vessels were required to
specify, in their muster-rolls, the place of nativity
of eaCh of the crew on board ; and on this account,
although the Minerva was:dechtte'd to "be' regUlarly
docim eoitedl according to the Law of Nations, they
refused to allow the owners damages:or costs from
the captors. AnOther reason
,assigned.- by the
Frond' Court; was, tliat the slip's passport had been
used in a former voyage:. If the French' Court had
persisted in condemning the ship as a just prize, that
might have been conclusive evidence
,in-favour of
the Underwriters. The,consideration of darhages
and costs depended upon the discretionary, judg-
ment of, the Court,..before whom such .questioni
Might chancel° come, but afforded no reason why
the Underwriters should not he Halle to the OWners
to make good the damages,•arishig froni,the liregn-
lardetentiOn of the ship in , a ret:ifdh The'
original grounds upon which daMaget and costs
had been refused-by the French COUrt, Were not on
account of any ads done by the Plaintiffs, -contrary
to the known Law -of Nations„,but solely on account
of an at done of omitted, contrary to the regula:-
tions of a French Ordintance, which they were not
bound to know; and therefore the Underwriters
ought to indemnify the Plaintiffs for the damages
they
.had 'sustained by- the irregular detention.—
Rule discharged.

COURT OF CHANCERY, trikl6 ID.

CITY OP LONDON against MITFORD AND ANOTHER,
ASSIGNEES OF NICIIOLAS TURNER, A BANKRUPT.

In this case, whiclt the CIiAt4cELLOR stated to be
quite new, there-being no case, citect.at the bar; riot_
withia his Lordship's -knowledge, exaaly in point;
nor even -like it, he gave judgment elabdrately, this
day, against the City of.loirclon, .as we yesterday-
anticipated would be tlie result, -from the points .sug-;
gested during the long arguments by the Cuttrt:.
He grounded his judgment not 'merely on'tlie.latise
of time, in not renewing or tendering- a lease fqr a
renewal to the lessors, on the
.termination 'of- the
original lease.-of „.1736, buts also. an the ,tirctina-
stance .of the City having sold. the fireiniges demised
to them by the first lease, and. along *ith them
other premises, the property of Mr. Lennon, the
lessor, not included in such original deMise,Ao the.
Committee of Blackfriars' Bridge, in the'year 1760;
in violation of their covenant with Mr. Lennon,
Without calling upon Mr. Turner to consent. .It
appeared that the City had passed a- Bond of In-
, demnity to the, Bridge CoMmittee for the sum of
60001. to secure the Committee against the claim of
Turner; and that the City had, in 1775, upon filing
their bill against -the moldier of Turner, for a spe-
cific execution Of the original covenant, instead of
following up the-sarrie, abandoned it, and accepted
a lease from het, Who had 'only a life estate in the
whole, and a reversionary right to the heirs of One
moiety only, withont any regard to the present Mr.
Turner's right to the other moiety, upon his step-
mother's decease (he- being a soar by a former mar-
' riage). This 'lease, from Mrs. Turner, in •1775 i
.was in the same words, and with the Same cove-
nants, as that of 1736, notwithstanding the total
change of the state of the premises, fifteen years pre-
vious tb the latter lease, and the sale of them under
the At of Parliament, in 1760, to the Bridge Com-
mittee.. This latter lease, said his 'Lordship, was
utterly impossible to be, executed, or acted under,
and it was made so by the City themselves, whose.
acts in this case were irreaoncileable with law- or.
reason, nor did the acceptance of rent cure it. -They
came here, praying an impossibility, by their pre-'
sent Bill, for a -specific execution of 'a Contra&;
which,they themselves had rendered utterly impos-
sible ever to be acted Upon. He Ordered the in-
jun6tion, obtained by the Plaintiffs, to be dissolved,
and that they should pay all costs:

bur)Ll-N, 3UNE G.

Thursktay being the Anniversary or .that ,Day.
which blessed these ,Flealms by,, the Birth 4)f our
good aiid gracious King, the -heloved Fath6 of hi;
Pep Ole, and -fiiithlnl •Deiender of the CO1131404)0 iu
Church and State, every loyal breast throbbed with
eniplation manifest the most, ard.pt, and dutiful
etreaion, by.inarkitig with respect, as an high-holi-
day, that day on which our Monarch entered on his
70th year;

In the.morning the Garrison of Dublin, together
-with the Yeomanry of the City and its vicinage,
marched to the Phoenix Park, •and there remained
drawn up in two lines till his Grace appeared in the
field, when the Review proeeede.d according to the
following, order-:
Twenty-one-guns--announcing the approach of
his Grace.

One gtn=when bis-Grace arrived apposite the
dentre, being the signal for a general salute ; arat4
pregente4 coloUrslowered,,&c.

His Grace haiiing passed the two lines, and moved
from the. right of the Second to takeliis Station, t.b.6
,whole primed and loaded.
-T,wpnty--one guns wet e -then fired :.-43pOn ;t4p-
nineteenth the Whole presented; and'on the twen-.
ty-first a running fire began on the right, and was
most expertly continued along to the left.
This w'as thrice, pertbrined ; after which, on the
signal of one gun, the whole gave three cheers, sar
loud and heirty as made •the welkin ring
part of the,exerciSe the spectators, whose numbers.
were immense; joined most cordially.
A signalwa-S then Made to wheel into open columa
of half squadrons and companies; and in this order
the whole, marched past his Grace,; then returning
to their :first position„ 'Wheeled into line,- opened,
ranks and gave a general salute.

His Grace the Lord Lieutenant was attended by
Generals Fr.pvn, MANLY, Sir A.WELLESLEY, MAC-
WLANE, and a numerous Staff ;..and folloved bi
her Oracethe Duchess of RICHMOND, in au open
barouche, ,drawn by six beautiful blood horses ;
Ladies 'of her sdite in a coach drawn by sii very
handwrite chesnuf horses ; all.the out-riders and
vatit.s in splendid liveries..

The whole S:o64ticle was uncommonly splendid;
and we were happy to ohi'erve- marl more persons
of distlnelipn than for; some years have appeared in
the train'
.of -Lord Lieutenant. The Yeomanry
mustered stronger than they have "been seen sincet
• Lard.l-lALowtoxf.'s terrors began to subside • aud
was Impossible to contemplate their martial appear,
• ante without entertaining a gratelui recolleaion of that
excellent Nobleman, Lord CAMDEF, under whose.
'auspices they were formed :*.it is to him we are inj.
debted for tAisgallant force, who saved-their•Coun,.
-try in the most ittitninent-dang-er.'
Upon-returning floin:- the Yield to the Castle, his
'Grace held a Levee, which was most numerously at.;
tended :. there were presetiti . the .Lord Chahcellori.
the Judges, Great' Officers of the State and,..a.the
law, several Bishops Ind Dignitaries of the Church;
the' Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, -Aldermen, and a great
many persons of distin6tion.'

An Ode was then performed; after which tho.
sacred song of God . save the King Was sand, his
Grace rising frorn the Throne, and all tie Aiiserribly
standing.

At the conclusion .of the Ode and Song, upon Et
signal by rocket from Dublin Castle, the PArk guns
fired sixty-nine' rounds, -corresponding in number
with the sixty-nine years which ,his Majesty has so
happily completed, •
The Curragh- Races commence next Monday,
and will be honoured with the presence of the Duke
and Duchess of RICHMOND.

.B I R THS .

On Tuesday last, at Homerton, Mrs. !awes Luglam, of
a Son:

Yesterday morning, at his•house in Manchester-street, t
Lady of Major-General Sir George Brathwaite B.ouginoub.of
a Daughter.

Lateiy, the Lady of William Barr, Esq. of Syroosts's
Wharf, Southwark, (AA ailighter.

MARRIED.
On Tuesdaj' the 2d u►st. David Hinckley. Esq. of Boston,
in An►erica, Merchant, to Miss Outran, et Alireton, Der-
byShi re.

Last week, at Bristol. John Thornton, ESQ. of. Huh, to
.Miss M. Clarke, daughter of john Clarke, Esq. of Aunt
Green, Yorkshire.

YeSterday, at St. George's Church, Queen-square, Mr.
Samuel Large, .of Orange-street, iiiumnsbury-squae
draper, to Miss Sarah Tebbutt, second daughter or INdr.,Thu..
Inas Tebbutt, of Devonshire. Street, Queen square. °.