The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-20 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.-LIVERPOOL, Atm. 18.
RHODES AND OTHERS V. BURMESTER AND ANOTHER.

This was an action brought by the Messrs. Rhodes, wine-
merchants at Huddersfield, and also carrying on the busi-
ness of hop-merchants and brewers there, to recover da-
mages for the non-performance of an agreement for the
supply of a quantity of port-wine entered into by a Mr.
Willett, a traveller for the defendants, on their behalf.

The Messrs. Rhodes, in Ockober, 1835, wished to pro-
cure a supply of curious port, commonly known by the
name of Rory's Port," of a good age and superior quality,
having found it, from experience, to meet with a ready sale
among the curious in wines in Huddersfield and its vicinity.
They had an interview with a Mr. Stone, traveller for an-
other London house, at Manchester, and exhibited to him a
sample of the wine which they wished to procure, and which
was part of a supply obtained through the house of Messrs.
Haythorn, of Oporto, under an order to supply the very
best that Portugal could produce. Mr. Stone, on compar-
ing the sample produced with his own, found that required
by the Messrs. Rhodes to be very superior to any which it
was in his power to supply, he having none ranging higher
than about 481. per pipe. The Messrs. Rhodes then ap-
plied to Mr. Willett, traveller for Burmester Brothers, who
was then at Manchester, and met him on the business at the
King's Arms. A specimen of the same port was exhibited to
him. He was asked at what rate he could supply wine of that
quality—(the travellers for Burmester Brothers do not
carry samples)—and, after tasting the wine, stated that his
employers would be willing to supply wine of that quality
at the rate of 411. per pipe. There was a good deal of dis-
cussion respecting the terms, but a bargain was finally struck
for twenty pipes at 421., to be delivered at Goole. The
agreement was drawn up in writing, and signed by the
parties, it being therein stipulated that any dispute
respecting the quality of the wine should be referred to the
determination of a mutual friend. The titan which usually
elapses between sending out an order to Oporto and the re-
ceipt of the wine in London is about two months. in
March of this year Messrs. Rhodes became impatient on
hearing no tidings of the expected supply, and wrote to the
Messrs. Burmesters Brothers, demanding the immediate
fulfilment of the contract. In May they were informed that
two sample pipes of the wine ordered from Oporto had
arrived in London. Messrs. Rhodes stated in reply that
they were willing to receive samples of the two pipes, with-
out prejudice to their right to insist on the fulfilment of the
whole contract, by the delivery of the twenty pipes at
Goole. On receipt of the samples they again wrote to
Messrs. Burmesters, stating that they did not think them
quite so good as the original sample, but that one of the part-
ners would be in London in a few days, and would call
'on them respecting the matter. On the 17th of June, one
of the firm did accordingly call at the office of the Messrs.
Burmesters, and complained of the inferiority of the wine.
A Mr. Wilde; a wine-merchant, was then, according to the
terms of the agreement, called in to settle the dispute. Two
glasses of wine were produced ; and he was requested,
without any further information, to give his opinion respect-
ing them. One he found to be a mature wine of superior
quality, having all the peculiar characteristics of Rory's
port ; the other was also a superior wine of the same kind,
but with more colour—less mature, and decidedly of not
so good a quality as the former. The latter, it then ap-
peared, was the wine supplied by Mr. Burmester. Mr.
Rhodes then refused to accept the wine as a fulfilment of
the bargain. The action was commenced on the 4th July.
There was a good deal of varying evidence as to the pre-
cise value of the two wines. One witness stated that the
value of wines in the market was to a very considerable ex-
tent influenced, not so much by slight shades of difference
in the flavour or quality, as by the prices at which they
were quoted, and the respectability or reputation for good
wines of the house by which they were shipped. As to the
wine in question, Mr. Rhode's sample, he stated that
though indubitably Rory's port, and of a very superior qua-
lity, yet its impression just on leaving the palate " its fare-
well flavour," had an astringency which Rory's port does
not usually possess, and which, in his opinion, detracted
from its value. He estimated it at from 501. to 521. per pipe.
A verdict was finally returned for the plaintiff. Da-
mages, 2001.