The Sun.
London, England, 1822-11-15 00:00:00

THE KING 71. JAQUEB.2

The COURT this day resumed the consideration of the case
of this defendant, who was brought before them for practising
at Leeds as an attorney in the name of a person named Thack-
eray, who has been struck off the roll for his share in the of-
fence. Mr. Jaques now urged thgt he ought to have been tried
by viva voce testimony, and not on affidavit, 'and that the ap-
pearances against him were fairly to be attributed to the embar-
rassed.circumstances of Thackeray, whose clerk he really Was,
and whom therefore he assisted by the advance of monies. He
also put in an affidavit, stating that he had a wife and live chil-
dren dependent on him for support, and had already suffered
great expenge by the proceedings against him.
The COURT said, that by their invariable rule, all cases
*ere brought before them on affidavit—a practice favourable to
the party accused, who thus was etiabled to give to his defence
the sanction of an oath, and necessary when referred to'the'ex-
tent of their jurisdiction throughout England. -A compari-
son of the affidavit, and of the books to which it referred, had
,
satisfied them of the truth of the charge„ for which, taking all
the circumstances into consideration, they sentenced the defend-
ant to be imprisoned in the prison of the Court for six calendar
months.
THE KING (ON THE PROSECUTION OF THE DURHAM
CLERGY) AGAINST JOHN A. WILLIAMS, FOR A LIBEL.
The Court of King's Bench have peremptorily fixed on Mon-
daywhe
when
next,hi
a theC an nlsfietihwi n t
move , for the
an calrrefeeantdaafnt toacai in Court,
judgment,
or that a
verdict of acquittal be entered, or a new trial granted on the

grounds of misdirection of the Learned Judge, and the finding
Of the Special Jury.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 14.
The Court heard motions until 1.2 o'clock, when Mr. Justice
Bunnotrou sat at Nisi Prius.

DITNCOMBE V. FINLA,YSONS.

Mr. Serjeant LENS stated, that this was an action brought
by the plaintiff, a newsvender, to recover sornecompensation
for an injury 'of which he would always feel the effect. The
defendants were linen-drapers in Holborn. On the 11th of
August, 1820, the plaintiff was going into their shop to get the
amount of a little bill due from them, when he fell through a
trap-door that had been improperly left open in the shop. By
this fall he had broken his leg in such a serious manner as to
be Obliged to lie in St. Bartholomew's Hospital for six
months, whence he was at length discharged, a cripple for
life. No.blame could be attached to the defendants personally,
but still they were legally responsible ; and as no offer ofcont-
pensation had been made, the present action was brought, and
the-Jury'riduld 'say to what, under all the circumstances, the
plaintiff was entitled.
_ _

John Duncombe, the son of the plaintiff, proved the injury;
he had been sent for immediately on. the accident occurring ;
the trap-door was just in front of a desk, where his father went
to get his bill paid, being told by the defendants to do so.
Cross-examined—Did not know that money was always paid
at the counter; did not know that there was a bell which his
father ought to have rung before going to the desk ; it was in
the evening that the accident happened.
Two surgeons, the first called in when the accident happen_
ed, and the 'Alex who attended the plaintiff at the hospital,
proved'the extent of the injury. The 'plaintiff Would never
again have the perfect use of his leg—it was broken.a little
above the ankle, both the bones *ere fractured.

-- Cowell, a butcher, proved the trap-door to be in the Tvay
to the desk.

Cross-examined--,There was a bell in the, shop; witness
should always ring that bell before he went _foiward ; the trap
door was a little behind the place where the bells hung.
Re-examined—That bell was the house bell 't persons going
into the kitchen would ring the bell, but not customers. • ,
Air. SerjeantVAuGua N addreised the Juryfor thedefendants.
Though the case of the plaintiff was a most unfortunate one, yet
the damages to be given him must be given in cool judgment,
and not in the warmth of feelings occasioned by the recital of the
accident. He should prove that the son was mistaken in his idea
of the situation of the trap doOve-the mistake might, and probably
did arise from the agitation he felton.seeing his father in such an
unhappy situation, but still it was a mistake, and made a *rest
difference in the 'case. As it stood at present the plaintiffclatmed
compensation on the ground that the defendants had improperly
kept a trap door in their shop, and in such a part of the
shop that any body had a right to go there, anti going there
was liable by the defendant's negligence to accident. Now, if
he could prove that this trap-door was situated in a remote
corner of the shop, and was necessarily open, and only so for a
very short time, during which the accident happened, he should
put an end to the plaintiff's case. He' should be able to show,
by evidence, that. a servant of the defendant's had gone down
into the cellar by that trap-door, to turn on the gas, and though
he had made no delay, he had not returned when the accident
happened. This cleared the defendant froth the imputation of
negligence and impropriety; and the Jury, on all the dream-
stances of the case, would act like men, holding the scales of
Justice with an even hand, and would return a verdict for the
defendant, whose conduct was in no respect blameable.
Andrew Hill Gibbs was in the employment of the, defend-
ants ; at the time this accident happened, witness was iu the
cellar, the trap-door was in a part of the shop where .no persons
had a right to go; witness was turning On the gas at the time,
witness did not make any delay but turned on the gas as quickly
as possible; there was no other way of returning but by the
trap-door ; the bell which had been mentioned, was the house
bell ; witness had not been below.a miante.when the plaintiff
fell down ; money was always paid at thtr'cOunter.
Cross-examined.—Witness IEI a light with him when he
went down.

Other shopmen were called to prove that money was always
paid at the counter. One of them (the cashier), on cross-exa-
mination, said the order to receive only, and not to pay money
at the desk, was given after the accident.
Serjeant LENS replied.
Mr. Justice nu Imo 130/1 summed up the. evidence, and told
the Jury, that if they gave a verdict for the plaintiff', they must
not include in the damages what would have been paid for the
cure to a surgeon, that having been effected at the hospital. No
proof had been offered to shew that the plaintiff had needlessly
and wantonly gone into that part of the shop where.the trap
door was situated ; leaving the door open was a negligence for
which the defendants. were liable, and the Jury taking all the
evidence into their consideration, would saw to what exent.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 501.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

SHIP AGENTS AND BROKERS.

MANsIoN-HousE.—Yesterday Mr. Capp and Mr. King,
who have been for some time actink as ship-brokers in Botolph-
lane, appeared upon a summons before the Loon MAYOR, to
answer the complaint of a poor woman, whom with her children
they had engaged to send out to the Cape of Good Hope for the
sum of 401.

It appeared .from the account given by Sarah Rigley, the
complainant, that she received a letter, front her husband, it
soldier in .the Gth Regiment, stationed at the Cape of Good
Hope, inclosing a 501. note, and desiring her to go thither with
her children to settle. She saw in a Liverpool Paper an adver-
tisement stating that the Dart, Captain Havelock, would sail
direct for the Cape from London, and Messrs. Capp and King
were referred•to as the ship-brokers. Those Gentlemen, upon
.being written to, engaged to send -her and her children to the
Cape for 401. She came up to town, and on the 29th of July
paid the passage money, which was all she had in her possession,
into the hapds of the defendants ; she and her children were then
shipped onboard the Dart,,whieh was lying at Gravesend, and
to. all appearance prepared for the voyage. A most at,raordinary
delay, however, took place, and she remained on board, living
on the ship's rations, until about a fortnight ago, when it was
announced, that the ship could not sail at all, but would pro-
bably.be sold, the Captain being in prison, and in a state of in-
solvency. She went ashore with her children without a farthing
in her pocket: Her complaints to the defendants were produc-
tive of no advantage; they disclaimed all responsibility, and.
coldly referred her to a Court of Law for recompense. They
had certainly promised at different times to obtain redress for
her, but she had waited until all,hope had fled, and in her de-
spair she applied to the Lord Mayor.
lir. King, who had a legal adviser at hi 4 elbow, submitted,
before he made a single comment upon this charge, that the
case was one which did not come within his Lordship's cogni.
zance, and that a law process was the only means through
which the complairiant could arrive at her object.
The Loitn MAYOR was not convinced that the case did not
come within his cognizance ; but he would ask, whether that
observation was seriously meant as an answer to such a com-
plaint. The defendants (night to 'consider that a public charge
had beeri made against them, which it might be of the utmost
importance to them to rebut.
Mr. King then declared, that so fo,r from neglecting the poor
woman's claim, they had exerted themselves for her with'azeal
as great as any case of extremity could demand. Their con-
duct in :every part of the transaction was unexceptionable.
Upon receiving the 40,. theY immediately handed it over to the
Captain and owner of.tlie Dart,. who engage& to take the com-
plainant and her children to the Cape. A delay, however, oe-
• corred in consequence of some pecuniary difficulties in which
the Captain was involved, and the vessel was actually sold on
the day the Money was put into his hands to a person named
Smith. They had themselves sustained the loss of 3301. by the
insolvencyof the person- who had thus appropriated the poor
woman's money; and it would be too hard to expect from
them an indemnification, especially as they had taken such
pains on her account. They were' willing to continue their
exertions for her, and had indeed come to the determination to
-give to her out of their own pockets the whole amount of her
loss ; brit they begged leave to withdraw that charitable inten-
tion now, as a compulsory course had been thus adopted.
The Loin) Mart:tit begged to be informed whether the de-
fendants were sworn brokers ? . •

The reply was in the 'negative ; and his Lordship observed,
that, notwithstanding the absence of the necessary sanction,
they had acted in the character of brokers. There was "a slight
hesitation in the. answer to this observation. Ship agency, they

said, was the nature of their employment, and they did not
think it necessary to be. sworn as brokers to transact the busi-
ness which they had long been in the habit of undertaking in
the most, reputable' manner.
It was here stated to the Lord Mayor, that the names of the
defendants were exhibited ,ori their doors as ship-brokers. On
referring to a letter which the defendants put into the Lord
Mayor's .hands, his Lordship perceived that Mr. Kipg styled
himself a broker ; and that gentleman admitted now that he
had acted' as Such, but it was :under the impression that the
terms ship-broker and ship-agent were synonituous.
The.LORD MAYOR said, that in another place the distinc-
tion would be.shewn at the instance of the City Solicitor, who
should be instructed to proceed against them for having acted
as brokers without being legally authorised.
Mr. Capp said lie had been engaged for eight years in a house
of the highest respectability in the City in ship agency, and he
was ignorant until then that any particular authority or form
was necessary. Numbers of highly respectable persons were
daily acting under this impression.
Alderman ATxrivs, who took part in.the examination, said
that all commercial men must know that no man had a right to
act as a broker in London without being duly sworn and 'admit,
ted. Those who held out that they were brokers without being
sanctioned, committed a fraud upon the public ; who were, by
such an imposition, deprived of a security which they would
otherwise have had. A broker was obliged to obtain certificates
of good character, and securities for his good behaviour, before
he could legally act; and he might be dismissed for miscon-
duct. The evil required to be suppressed by a rigorous en-
forcement of the laws against those who exercised such decep-
tion. A ship-agent was a different sort of person ; and he
challenged those who assumed it to shew any Power of Attor-
ney for managing the business of a ship.
Mr. King, with much warmth, complained that the Alder.
man had attempted to cast an unwarrantable imputation upon
his character.

Alderman ATKINS said, his observations were directed
against the practice, which he was convinced did great injury
to the public. He threw no slurupon the-conduct of the de..
fendant.

Mr. King said be should take care t 9 avoid any future at-
tack, by getting himself sworn the next day. In. the mean
time, be should not hesitate'to pay the penalty for having acted
as a broker.

A Gentleman; who seems' determined to get redress for the
poor woman, said that he should at once proceed against the de-
fendants.

The Lord-MAYOR said it was his determination to order the
City Solicitor to proceed against the defendants, fbr having act-
ed as brokers without authority. There had been so many cases
of misery arising from the loss of passage-money, that great
jealousy ought to be exercised in the permission to act in the
capacity of broker. His Lordship hoped that it would soon be
generally known, that prosecutions should be instituted against
all who should be found acting in violation of the well-known
rule. His Lordship said he regretted that he could no further
interfere in this matter, and the defendants left the justice-
room, after having stated their readiness to give the poor
woman one .half of her demand.