The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-20 00:00:00

CURLEWIS V. RAMSDEN.

This was an action on a bill of exchange for 59/.,
accepted by the defendant and endorsed to the plain-
tiff ; there was also another count upon a second bill
of exchange for 651. at three months' date, drawn to
the defendant upon, and accepted by, one Bell, and
endorsed by the plaintiff; there was then a count on
an account stated, and another for goods sold and
I delivered.

The defendant pleaded infancy, and did not pro-
mise, and that the articles supplied were not neces-

series. •
Mr. Edwin James and Mr. Hawkins conducted the
case for the plaintiff; and Mr. Charnock appeared for
the defendant.
Mr. JAMES, in stating the case, said that the plain-
tiff was a tailor, carrying on an extensive business in
Conduit-street, who sought to recover, in the first in-
stance, really the amount of the second bill set forth
in the declaration and a sum of six guineas for goods
supplied, the truth being, that with respect to the two
bills, the second was a renewal of the first. Now,
the answer which the defendant had thought proper
to make to this demand was, that he was an infant.
If, however, he were correctly instructed upon the
point, all he could say was, that the defendant at the
period in question had been a tolerably large and full
grown infant, carrying in his deportment all the
manners Sind bearing of a full-grown man, and
driving sometimes in his brougham, sometimes in his
cab, and at others riding on horseback, with his groom
in due attendance in either instance. Moreover, the
defendant had been introduced to the plaintiff as a
young gentleman who was possessed of considerable
property, and he purchased certain clothes of
him, for which he paid in due course.
After that he bought another quantity of
clothes, and then he induced the plaintiff to give him
money for the first of the two bills of exchange,
which, on its arriving at maturity, was renewed
by that of which the amount, 651., was now sought
to be recovered, and then that second bill having been
dishonoured, an action having been brought, the
defendant set up the plea of infancy. It was neces-
sary he should state that the action had been com-
menced in the month of September, 1845, and why it
had happened that the end of the year 1849 had
arrived before it had been brought into court for trial.
Interviews, it would seem, had formerly taken place
between the attorneys fur the plaintiff and the de-
fendant, at one of which the Latter told the former that
there was no prospect of the plantiff getting his money
and that the defendant had gone abroad. Under that
state of things the attorney for the plaintiff had not
pressed the matter on, and so matte rs stood, when at
length the attorney for the defendant " ruled" the
plaintiff to go on with his action, and the latter was
now in court under a peremptory order to proceed.
Now, supposing his Learned Friend who appeared on
the other side were to prove the infancy of the
defendant at the time in question, then the jury would
have another point to consider—namely, were the
articles which had been supplied to the defendant
suitable and necessary for his station and
rank in life ? It was understood that the de-
fendant had come into very considerable property
on his attaining his majority, and he had, both
before and subsequent to that period driven to the
plaintiff's in a brougham and a c4b, and bad called on