The Sun.
London, England, 1807-11-10 00:00:00

ROBINSON V. DARTIIWAT7

Mr,,TA mitt-toyed lora to t,e ehtereil in
this which was-ii qui-tfitn action, tried at Yorl: .
beforeir: Justice -CHAm B UpPit
4 Gvo. 3, c: go; s. ti.•
-_ _ _

'There were lout...counts, which cliamed the lac-
fendAnt with being a Captain iu the d
:Surrey 21/411i7-
litia,tind lining at the town and co'nty o(Kingstou
upon iiull,.executed certain acts and powera under
A.U.4,Parliatnent, as a. Cm'ilitin in the Militia,
without having-delivered Ito the-Clerk of the Peilee
for the-. coluiv.,Of Sutrey. a due certiticate
qualification,. ~,In:some a the counts he. was charg,
with some siXcific acts,. such as sitting upon. a
Com! •Alartial its. President, but these ;taw being laid.
to have been performed in the town., and county
of and, not being proved its laid there, thu
.Learned Judge non-suited the ;Plaintiff on thew
counts.. •

, 'rhe count in ()notion was laid generally, eharg-
ing him simply
,with executing the powers vested in
3 Captiiiii by, the St4lllo.
was a Lieutenant in the same ITO-.
ment. The Defendant was properly lualitied, being
the son of a gentleman 46001. per annum, and had,
sent a certificate of his qualification,; but. though 'be
stated the coniity in which the qualiriCation was,'hu
omitted the, parish. Since the ai:lion he hadosent
a proper certificate.'
The only to proved againt him was that he had
received his own pay, in the town of Hull.
The Learned .Judge re carved the point at the
trial, and gave liberty to Move for a nonsuit, irk
case the Coui t should be of .opinion that receiving
pay wercly, not doing such an an as fell with-
in the words of the stutute,77The Court gratiml the,
Rule.

•There is a farther motion alto in arrest of judg.
went, whether the count iu such general words Was
good ; and whether it ought mot to have speciiie4..
the a6ts done,

PITT U. GREW .

Mr. DAmrimt moved to set 13ido a vet ditc.t before.
Mr. BARON l'itoukkam, at. Exeter, and enter a
nonsnit.

The peint was reserved as follows
The altion was in, covenant upon a lease of lands
diserihed,in the declaration, one of which was OA re-
in called " The Seller's Bean Field."-The Defen-
dant pleaded
.71011 esfiftfaUm, anti other pleas.
In-the lease; produced in evidence, the field was
described " 4110'S Been Field." This, the Counsel
contended, was a material variance in setting.,otu the,
etl'eet of a deo .', and Cited Cowper 664, 4 Term
Rep. Min. and a .Nisi Prius case at Salisbury, betbre
Justice Bot./..pa, Lent Alisins, 1797, which was a
k:4lward VI. for ,not setting
dLbt on the Statute of.
out the tyt he of lands, and. there the Plaintiff kiln-
ed, that the Defend3ut was possessed of, a. certain
close, called Wood /ant. 1n evidence it appeared
that it mas talk(' " Woodhhawy" and the Plaintiff
was tionsuited. So also in flos. and Pull. the vari-
ance nt St. Ethelberg and St., Ethelovrga,was.held
because: one was a will: and the other a female
saint,

In the prevent case there were other lands, and
other breaehet, of covenant, end the Plaintiff did not
take a. ver4lict upon any of the hreaches'Avith respeet
to thkelosie.

Loril ELLZNISOROUGH, Chief Justice, upon these-
anthorities, grinned a Wile to 11011

DAnurr AND AfitienEtt Ews.
, Mr.•Cunwoon Moved to discharge the Defendant.
upon filing common bail.
He was arrested for z,OOl. This debt 'was in ha
liquidated upon an agreement entered into under the
fiAlowing circumstances t—The Del'endao( kept a'
shop as a taylor, in Chartfig-eross, and wafsnPPlied
with goods by the PloiutitFs, who were Iris partners..
At the cod of the week they crane and took all 'the
money received, and allowed him 301. per week far'
his trouble; but finding the ho3iness not ans Wei,
they put. an end to it, 3lld made him sign an agree.
Meat to give op the bowie at Alicdiaelm:l4. He ob.
jedetithat there was a lodger in. the house, who
could not, he turned out,,and they said it vas very.
well„ the person Who took the haute Would pi obably
let hint stay 3 but In order to'protet his ludger, the'
'Delendatwretitsed tolive up that part of the house,
and the •Plaintiti- brought netion, and also an
ejellment, whit+ the Learned 'Counsel contended,
was extremely hard upon: his client
The Court held,. that as this Went to the merit's,
and ai the' penalty was liquidated, and the Counsel
could state no Error OA the faee of the AffidaVir, the,
motion could net be graute&

:Novt*lmrt 9.
rem. v. TAYI-011.

The ATTneNtcy.thiNKRAL 'moved for 'new trial
in this case. It Wjfi no salon which bait been -tried
at Gtiildhall, ott . the Atli. of Jti laftt.t.tbroslight by-
Mr. Poi), the Commander of a Revenue-cutter, in
cad& to recover the produce of certain prize-money
arising from the capture of certain Dutch vessels,
The tricts,of the case Were t he.se :—This Mr. Pell had
beert‘Commander ()film Hind Revenue-cutter, of.
kk hide •Captain Allan had' formerly. had the corn-,
tumid. Against this latter Gentleman a complaint
had heat made, and he had been trio(' by the Otti-
cent of; tan Customs, 4ind a/though absent, was
found guilty of certain charges; his Commission ,
was ordered to be and the seal was
tarry did it. On a 'representation, • however,' being
made, the matter was're-heard, and the Sentence of"
dismissal rescinded ; his commission .was delivered
up,andditted.as his former Commission. In the
interval between his dismissal and restoration, this
'vessel, the find, captured certain prizes,. while the
Plaintiff in this CatISCI vino was formerly,. Eliate Was
:aesing•as.Commander, and this was previous to the
'formal declaration of 'war, .or at
,least the issuing
-of,tetters:,ofMarque. '&t Pell was! riding without
a Commission,,,the disposal of_ the Captain's share
-of prize-money was ia.the. Prown. His' Majesty,
by:his worrant, datedu4th July, 1005, cli'retied the'-
Agents to pay three-eipths,of the proceeds to the
Coimuanding!Oilicer atilt the-crew. of the Revenue-
eutterihe or to lttl*n -TaylOr, 'General
:Prize :Agent, forJall cantutes tnade by cutters
ployetlits t .service of the. Revenne:. and. CUSWI'IIS;
By that warrant the particular distribution i 4 ttireet-
ed.46- take plact4 in the f.ilow;ng manner
the -Commanderobe 14.32 d part to the Mate, the
.part ;• to, the Deputed Marinersi the 3-2'2tl

part 5 to the IMAI-iners, the rernaitit% 8-324 part
if there be no, 13iinited,•Marfiltirs;,-.4bue hail to go to
the Commaoder; 1--tthief\ the Mate, and aiiotti
to ft,e40414,1gF5.: t,his time,
merly hadthtt Cunauiis tpu Wal,k4bien.t, and •PetlijolOP
was,,eetorkiantliug the Outeri;':
so thatittArkOieiugpe legaUletumander, that 4,bare
a dt.Uil 1y,71; mpaineo uhdiqlos4d, cri-and„ the Vatrant
in censequence• i 11- t hat • respeCt, cont ;titled tutopt-ra led
upon.. It .had, in.)wever,.,struek,,liisi. Lordship (A-
lenhorough) that .as- this was,. intended aS.Arewalki
ter actual ~servicel'ell was .entitled to. the prize,'
money. .The, Cotpptroller • of. the •Custoins,, who
teas a witness this case,
,said ;that Pelt was di-
rected to keep the Cutter atsua. under his command,.
and although he was not. paid as the ACting.CoM-
wander, he wiis allowed
,vl6tqalliog ‘timiusy 'as such.
.A letter was also written authorising Pell to at iu
the mean time. From . the •circußstance of there
lA:nig a Deputed Marieer, the Captain's .share was.
less,. and that-Deputed Mariner, said, that. if Pell
was acting as Cen.mander, then he (the Deputed
{was
was acting as ;Aate, and therelOre entitled
to a Nikte's share while. Pell says, that in that case •
he (the Deputed Alariner) not being entitled to•the
Depqted Mariner's share, would consequently en-.
title hith as Commander to a greater share. Sup-
posing; therefore, that Pell was entitled to recover
AS Commander, his (the Attorney-General's) appli-
cation would then be, that the vertiio should be re- .
(Weed to such suns as he would beentitled•to, sup-
posing a Deputed Mariaer to be reckoned amongst
the number. • It was for their Lordships' decision,
whether Pell's :toting as Commander lifted up the
Deputed Mariner to •the situation of Mate,. and left
no Deputed Mariner. It did not appear from the
et that the Deputed Marioer• ever acted asp
Mate. Toe Met, howe%er, was, that if there. wai a
ease where a person u ho was absent was entitled to
his share of the prize-money, it was this, because
Allan
,v..as put .out of the command by gross in-
justice; lie (the Attorney-General) was not, how-
ever,. contending, tor Allan; but was contending on
behalf of Taylet, that. the prize-money in this case
ought to be otherwise distributed.---,!rule granted.