The Sun.
London, England, 1809-01-27 00:00:00

BOYDELL, ESQ.. V. DRUMMOND, ESQ.

Mr.. Arrontsti.y-GKNEitat.-4-111y, Lords, in the
case of, Boyden against Drummond, I 3114 bututlly
to mns;o
.your Lordships for a Rule to shosi e 31350
.:-.why the rionsuit in this case should not be set aside,
• an a new trial granted.
It is not necessary that I should state the fads.
of , this case. Your Lordship reserved to me some
points at the trial, and, I shall state to the Curt•
what these points were.. , • . •
This was au aEtion brot,ght by' the -Plaiktiff,'
Boydcil, Esq the surviving partner or the
..late Mr. Aldermim Boyden, against Mr: Dram.
pond, for, not hailing taken the Numbers of the;
Shakespeare Prints, .in pursuitnee of the agreement,
which he entered into by. becoming a Subscriber'.
,Lords' there were two objeaions taßen by
my Learned Friends to my recovering in tltisadion.
One of these 'objections
,wits, that this case was
within thu Statute of Frauds ; and the' other that
this agreement` was within the,tatitri Akt. 'Your
Lordship over-ruled these- tw6' obiaions at the
but referred these two poirfiS to my .Learned.
iqiends. So that if the Ousel:id been permitted'
16 go on, and 1 had obtained a-verdili, they would
hafie been entitled to have moved. And supposing
on the points 'that were reserved to me 1 were en.►
tithad to a new trial, yet if I were wrong on these
two Pcintic that 'would be one reason for refus.ing a
11t2'7 trial. Your Lordship, at the non-suited
ale' on the 'Statute Of Liticstatiohs but you said
)0.,i would reserve all the 'NAAS to my Learned,
mend and me. The faCts of the-Case as they ap-
peared at she trial I do not go into with part kularity.
A-subscription was set on foot for these Prints,
ALA Mr, Drommond,becarne 3 Subscriber.
1.6m1 Ctujore interviising—Mr. Attor

ney-General, Will ynn have the goodness 'to give
my brothers the dates, which are material in-the
case ?

Mr. Arrontip.Y,GENNRAL--I will, TO Lord.—
Op December t, 1786, the first Prospectus was
published by the proprietors, containing the terms
on which they proposed to the public to publish this
work. •On January, 13, 1787, an additional Pro-
spe&us was published. On May t, 1789, this Gal-
lery was first opened, exhibiting 34 pitlnFei; and
there was a catalogue published explaining the na-
ture of the undertaking. On the 25th of July, 1789,
the first exhibition closed. In the year 1790, there
was a second exhibition opened, containing 50 paint-
ings, with another catalogue. On April 7i 1790,
Mr. Drummond became a subscriber,. and got a
receipt for his subscription. . A receipt was given to
him.for the amount of his subscription. He wrote
down hiS' name in a book..lstate that because Mr.
Drummond came into Court positively-deilyingthat he
had any thing to do with these Prints, till'bis own
hand writing gtareclhim in the face. Till then he
absolutely denied that he bad ever entered into the
agreement. Something was Whispered about his be—
ing a minor at the time ,when hp became a sub...
scriber. On December 6, there was'a third, ex.
,hibition.

On May 123, int, an Advertisement was pub-
, lished in the daily papers. for. the delivery of the first,
number of the Priuts, on the 41h ofJuue following.
It ufas in .fa& delivered on the 130).0 .Tune, .because
.the 4th being,the King's birth day, it was ineonVe7.
nient en that day to deliver it. The first number
the Defendant, Mr. Drununond, had. The terms,.,
of the 'subscription were these—revery Stibit,slher,
ryas to pay down two guineas at thh time of his 0b..",
scription, mid he paid an additional suinea on the.
delivery of the Ist number, and two guineas in ad-
ranee towards the 2d number. Qu March 26,
1792, the 2c.1 number of this Work was ntivertiled,
as ready for delivery, and Mr. Drummond had that
number also, and paid his farther three goineas.
From that time,. Mr. Prunnnond took none of the
numbers. It was proved at the trial,' that the sub-
sequent numbers of the work. Were adyertised from
time to time in the papers as ,they were ready
for delivery, and the last delivery of the prints
was in 180:3. Mr. Drummond was called on before
the commencemeet of this aaion, to take the prints
that remained undelivered to him, and he stated,
that he had not taken them, because he did not con-,
sider that the proprietors hadJultilled the termrof
their engagement.
My LerdS, upon these fads it was ,insisted by my
• learned Friends on the other side, that I was pre-
vented trom supporting this anion by the :Statute of
LimitationL Now, as to this work, your Lordship
sees there was nothing in the terms of the contract
which obliged the Proprietors to finish the .work
within any certain period. In truth, they did, finish
it much within the period thepheld out to the Pub-,
lie,when they thought they would probably be able
to complete it. It was not completed till the year.
11303, which is clearly within six years, Mr, Drum—
mond had received two of these numbers, and belied
sent for them, as all other persons had sent for theirS,
to the Shakespeare Gallery. When, I say, as well
as ail other perions, I should rather say, that Mr.
Drummond, from his situation at the West End of
the town, sent to the Shakspeare
,Gallery,..because
the advertisements diteaed that those' Gentlemen
who lived at this end of the town should send to the.
ShakspearoGallety, as the place most convenient for
them, and those who lived in the City were desired
to seed to Mr; Boyden's, in Cheapside: When the
two, first nuMbers were ready: for delivery; Mr.
Drouirriond sent for them to the Shakspeare
_ _

Lord ELLENBonoucit—What does Mr. Drum+
mond say. about the first two numbers of the' work
In his letter ?

Mr. ATTOHN%Y-GEtiEti AL—He. does not say any
thing about them in his- letter. - •
Mr. Justice ,BAILEY---I" think, Mr. Attorney.
General, you have stated that Mr. Drummond put
down his Wale -in a book when he became .a sub..
scribe/. : did lie put down his address also ? .
Mr. ATTOIINtY-GliNititAL..--NO, my Lord, he- did
not. For the whole, your Lordships see, it was
iin-
possible for us to bring an aCtion till the wlwle:work
was ready for delivery. We did not enter into any
engagement with the subscribers to. send the prints
to them, we slid not enter into any engagement with
them that ,we. should give them notice when
they were ready for .delivery, but whin the prints
were ready for delivery, we Aid- give them no-
tice... We did every thing that could be expected
from men meaning to at fairly. When they were
ready.we advertised them in two of the daily papers,
that they were ready for delivery. 'We could net.
prove that these papers came,into the hands of Me.
Ortunmund. We proved that Air. Drummond had
sent for the two first numbers. And we did prove,.
that, when he was ealiPti upon to take the
subseqeent Numbers, he did not aliedge chat he had
declined taking them for not having hastnotiee when
they were ready for delivery, bnt becatvie ltc di
riot consider Messrs. %Idea had eomptied with tbel
terms .of their euntrao, and that t 1 prints syeit-hot:!.
se tooa 4s he had reason to expel.
MI. Justice Ls BLAN C—Nopartictibi tertita have
been mentioned, but the suothat was to be paid tor:
each number.

Mr. ATTOHNEY-GENEIiAL-My Lord, there are
no other terms.

Lord EILEDUSOROUGH—You have not a copy of
the Inv:yaws
Mr. ATICIIiNET•GeN9p.—My Lord, I have it
in my brief. 1 have nouone ready. The terms are,
stated a hot t y in the, declaration. ,
Lord ELLEISIDUROCT(.II.-...11, you could furnish us
with copies of the prospeaus, we gall be obii4ed
to you.
ATTOKNUY.Gl4$tRAL—Certainlfr, ruy Lord.

Lord ELLENUOROUGH—CertaioIy I thought it
was a queStion within the statute of limitations;
that .froin :the tardy execution of the catered, the
Sehscribera. might . think it abandoned.' i 41Lboot.
leave that to the Jury. I think I was stating?sorne-.
thing on the statute of limitatiohi, and observed,
that it should go to' the Jury to a;icertain. whether.
they had abandoned the contiad; when you said,
if that was my opinion, you would be non suited.
Mr. Al-roatvIiY•GENERAL...--1 rather think, my
Lord, the course ii took was this :—After your Lord-

ship had said something on the Statute of ..1 im a-
tions, yoti thought it was a question stri •tly !cf he
Ray and I said if you entertained a d.teitite

LOD CHIPS JUSTICE (interposing)-..You. are not
to' be shut out from any advantage of the (harts-
slim ; because I considered it Alia,' entire abandon-
ment of the contra& on w. high I should, have directed
the Jury, and. in that way you Would have had.
equally the benefit of discussing the sUbjea.
Mr. ATTuaNI,4-GENErtAL-7Are there auy othor
papers your Lordships would have besides the pro-
speaus
Lord•Et..tatoonovon—The two prospetius, and
a copy of the letter written by Mr. Drummond..
Mr. ATTOIiii)f.y,PENERAL—Make n a ernoran-
dun) of these papera.'
Mr. GARRONV—We shall -take care to send your
Lordships all these papers. , •
Mr. J. LE BLANc--,-Has; the book. in which the
subscribers put &min their names any tide?
Mr. G4attow—My 1.40 rd; it is indorsed, "
ttb-
scriber's List." . .

Mr. PARK—There is nothing written on the top
of tihe book at all.
Lord EL LENBQROUGh—Take a rule to show cause.

COURT Of COMMON I'LLAS, JAN, 2b., .
LORD DORMER V. KNIGHT, ESQ.
; • Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD made an application to tbe
,Cdrirt for a new trial, on the grounds that: the opinion
tlelivered.by the Chief. Justice was erroneous., that
illfrs; Knight, merely by receiving the visits of Colonel
Faller, as of anyother Gentleman qf her acquaintance,
:would incur the ibrAiture Qt. 4001. per annum, part
;roheprovision thr her maintenance," utd the Serjeant
insisted that the word "asSociate," introduced into the
`Deed, must be undcrstond to mean assbeiation:ora
crirnina/ nature, Which-thither was proved, nor had
been attempted to 'be proved. That, evidence. had.
been received of a person calling herself Mary
Etches, brit whose real name was Hobbs, of sfonecir-
curnstateti, from whence it had been insisted that
Fuller and Mrs. Knight had been previous to
the separation, 'found in iinpraftr situations. The
,Learned Serjeant stated, that since the trial of the
cause, Colonel Fuller had .made an affidavit; in
which he in the most solemn and positive manner
swore that,the whole of, the.evidence was absolutely
false, and that he had never either before or after the
execution of the Deed, or at,any time, or upon any .
occasion in his life, taken any improper liberty with
Mrs. Knight,. That Colonel Fuller was ready and
anxious to have given -the most positive and. pointed
evidence to that effee, and the Plaintiff's Counsel
would most certainly have called him, but were
prevented by the opinion delivered ,by the Learned,
Chief Justice, in as much as it never had been
.attempted to be denied that Colonel Fuller had
visited, Mrs. Knight subsequent to the execution,
of the deed ; and however pure and proper •the
condo& of the parties at such interviews, still their
operation destroyed the provision atade by,tlio first •
deed.

That in addition to the affidavit of Colonel Fuller,
he had also the affidavits, of four other persons of
unimpeptable credit and character, well acquainted
with Mary Etches, direaly proving the lakehoOd of
her teitimony, but the Court did not think it ne-
cessary to send the cause down tar a new trittt, as
they concurred with Olp Cider' Justice in his letgil
,COUSITUttiOII Q 1 the 'Mid,

CONSITOR.Y C9tIRT, jArs. 2S.
GIiGSON V. CIitEGSON.

This was a snit instituted by Jesse iGregsbn, Esq.
againit Grace Gregson, his wife, for. a divorce,; a
.inensci et thorn, city account of adultery committed
by her with Thomas Theaker,.. their coachman, and
with John M'Taggart.
Dr. ARNOLD and Dr. Jmiett *ere beard for the
husband, and Dr. .ADA.M9 and Dr. SronpAa'r far
the wife, and the cvWence on both sides being then
read, •
Sir Wsr. SCOTT observed, that the allegatioas,
supported by the testimony of the witnesses; in ei-
ther case were fully sullicient to establish the adtiltel,
ry ; and he was at a loss to understand upon what
principle the Jury. had ae-ted, on the trial of the
cause against ihe latter,. in giving only a shilling da-
wages. •Nothing appeared upon the proceedings to
cast the slightest imputation on Mr. Gregson, who
was fully entitled to the relief prayed for :.'and the
Learned Judge deemed a divorce accordingly.
. .

For tne ttitortnation of those rersons who 2
partiality t'or particular numbers in the ensuing State
'Lottery, they ate infortue‘d that/ho numbers of th
1 spctTickets given by the Coatradars, are publish-
ed in the. Scht:tne inserted in this Paper and on no
account can they be altered. An early application
must be-Made-if other numbers are wanted, as near-
;non Ticket: out of the t 8,500 for sale, ire.alieady.
taken from the Bank of England, and disposed. of.'

An offensive breath- is.of all other things the most
disgusting, especially in the Fair. sex. It arises,
Wienerfroni want of, attention-to the teeth, thanfrom any other cause Fhe-regu'lar use of a Tooth 7
powder, to rermve all impurities,..and preserve the -
teeth sweet and clean, becomes on this acceutivin::
dispensably necessary. Of all the compositions for,
this purpose, BoI.t.EWS 11ssToittolvs, ToQTI •
P 0.% bER, trout its. carminative and restorative qui:. •
lilies, has deserVeMy gained•a preference;
,it render§
the teeth 'of a pearly-white colour, gives a cleannesS
and vermillion hue to the gurus, and imp its a der,
leelable. fragrance to the breath. So extensive haSi
beets the demand for it, 'that- it forms the appetuinge
to the toilets of the Royal Family, Nobility, Dna
others of rank and fitshion.---Sold whoTesale
BuTLatt's, NO, 4, Cheapside, C(srner„
of: Paternoster-row ; and retail by most Cattetrf
Booksellers and Perfumers, in Boxes, at. 2s,
each.