The Sun.
London, England, 1822-12-14 00:00:00

The Jury found a verdict for the plaintifr—Damages, 37W.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 13.
The Court was occupied with hearing Common Jury causes
this day'until four o'clock ; nothing occurred of any interest to
the public.

HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, DEC. 13.
THE MATCHLESS.
_ _

(The Judges sentence, and the points reserved in that sen-
tence, in the case of the Matchless, will he found in the St:2i
• of the 12th.),
• Dr. LEMINGTON. said, that if he had rightly understood
• the Cotitt-14 the list 'Sitting, it had distinctly decided that an
alien born, though some time, a British subject, but subse-
quently a resident in America, was not entitled to trade with
the Colonies of this country under tne privileges of British-
born subjects, and that the question, therefore, which the Court
had left the ousel to discusa.this.day, if they should consider
theinselvcs.competent toSustain it, was, whether an American
subject (as it had decided Mr. Milwich really to be) would im-
port a cargo of the description, and under all the circumstances
in question, into Newfoundland-? Acting upon the Court's in-
timation, the Learned Counsel stated that he had looked at the
various. Acts of Varliament connected with the subject; and it
did appear to him, that. one of them (the 28th George 111.
c. 0. sec. P, 13), if taken alone, would go decidedly to pro-
hibit any such intercourse with, or importation into, New-
foundland. But it seemed also, that a subsequent enactment I
had. corrected. the severity of that prohibitory statute ; and he
alluded to the .53th Geo. ILL c. 19; which had, he conceived,
erected qUite a new law in the place of that laid down in the
28thsOf the'saMe reign.
Lord-STOWELL asked, in what part of the latter statute Dr. •
Lushingtou found such a new law established ?
"Dr. Lusx6:64oN replied, in the 3d and 4th section. The
object. Of this Ad (58t11..Ge0.111.) was to make Halifax, inNova
Scotia, it. freeport, for certain purposes. But the language of
the enactments for these purposes was so very different from
that of the exclusive and prohibitory, statute specially relating
to Newfoundland, (28 Geo. III: cap. 6.), that lie thought the
Court would see. the different intentions under which they had.
been framed by. the Legislature. Byithe 28th Geo. III:, and in
the casein Stewart's RePorts; to which the 'Court referred last
Court-day., the- importation was. expressly. directed to be in
I British ships, and. by. British, Subjects ;, and Sir Alexander
Croke, in his judgment, went so 'far as to hold, that certain
gOods being permitted to be imported by British subjects
only, British. subjects.resident in America, or. other foreign
States, could not lezally,iinport into the.islands and colonies .in
question. But here was the distinction between the two statutes:
the 68th of tile late King piovided. " that from and after the
passing.of.thisact, it shathaud may be lawful in, any. British-.
built strip or vessel, ci4v„.nedand navigated accbrding to law, or
• in any ship or vessel, duly navigated, but owned by:States, or
by the subjeCtsof Slates, to amity. with his Britannic. Majesty,
taimport" (and; then,followed certain specifications) cargoes of
ayartiet.ilar detscription, and of which kind was the cargo in the
present lbstance. The next enacting clause permitted the re-
expoXtation from Halifax. of. the: same-articles in any British-
built ships, duly navigated according to law, to the,United
liing4in of Great Britain and Ireland, or its, dependencies:—
'hu only, cohditithi annexed to thiieTati'se was, that the bottom
should,ha a British ship; nothing Was said as to the property
on board iving„ that of British subjects, The,next(or,4th)
clause permittcd such re-exportation of goods " that shall have
been legally imported in the 'same manner into the said port or
Halifax." Under this authority, and without wishing to open
any topic upon which the Court had already decided, the
Learned Counsel felt it his duty to submit, that importation

might legally take place into Halifax of the goods in question,
though they were not owned by British subjects.
Dr. JESSE ADAX! £olloiVed on the same side : and
The KING'S ADVOCATE did Dr: DODsol5 having been
beard in reply, - -
The COURT shortly. expressed its concurrence in this doc-
trine, observing, that if-this part of the cargo could not legally
be carried from America to Newfoundland, it could not be le-
gally transported to the latter place in virtue of its mere inter-
mediate passage through Halifax ; and therefore, so much of
the sentence of the Court below as regarded the condemnation
Of Mr. Milwich's portion of this cargo, this Court felt itself un-
der the necessity of pronouncing for and affirming.
THE TARTAR.
This cause, the principal proceedings in which were had one
or two terms since, came, on the day before yesterday, upon ob-
jections taken by the Counsel for the holder of a bottomry bond,
given by the master of the Tartar, to a report which had been
made by the Registrar and merchants, on the amount due to
that holder, agreeable to reference some time ago directed by
the Judge of this Court. The facts were briefly these :—ln
1820, the ship Tartar was chartered by Messrs. Hurry, Powles,
and Hurry of this city, for a voyage to South America; and
from thence to the West Indies ; and in case of circumstances
rendering it expedient for her to come home on the charterers'
account, back to a port in the United Kingdom. The ves-
sel performed her voyage to the coast of South America ;
hit no freight could be procured for her by the charterers'
correspondents. She then sailed for the West Indies, the mas.
ter and crew being all in a very sickly condition ; and in this
distress they put into Jamaica, where Messrs. Hurry had not
a single connexion. In this dilemma, most of his crew hav-
ing died, the master addressed himself to a Mr. Hubbard of
Port Maria in that island, for advice and assistance: Mr. Hubbard
Undertook to co-operate to the utmost of his power for the
interests of the concern which had charged the ship ; and
at the request of the master, who in a day or two after died,
discharged the original mate, a man of drunken and disorderly
habits; and the whole of the ship's company being now de-
ceased or disabled, put on board a new captain, and a new
crew. An eligible opportunity presenting itself, he dispatched
the Tartar, previously to her return to England, on a voyage
to Bermuda and back ; having previously advanced for repairs
and disbursements on the ship's account 756/., for which the
new master executed a bottomry bond, bearing a premium of
20 per cent., with a condition endorsed, that in case certain
bills, drawn on the house of Robertson and Co., part owners
of the Tartar at the same time, and falling due in May, 1821,
should be duly honoured and paid, then the bond was to be
defeasible and cancelled. Mr. Hubbard remitted these bills to
the house of Alderman Atkins and Co. of London, who pre-
sented them in the usual course at the counting-house of
Messrs. Robertson and Co. for acceptance. Those gentlemen
returned answer, that the bills could not be accepted at pre-
sent, but must wait advices from the other owners in Scot-
land. Soon afterwards the ship arrived in the river; and on
the day the bills became due, Mr. Robertson called at the
house of Messrs. Atkins and Co., and tendered payment of
the- 756/. ; but this tender they refused, on the ground that
some commission or additional premium should be paid, for the
risk which had been incurred on the ship's homeward voyage :
accompanying the refusal with an observation on the improba-
bility that Messrs. Robertsons would ever have called again
about the bills, after refusing to accept them, if the Tartar had
been lost ; in which case, of course, the bond would have been
a dead letter. The honditself, however, was subsequently put
in suit against the owners, who resisted it on the plea that Mr.,
Hubbard's charges were most exorbitant ; and that the chance
of a freight home had been lost, by, the unauthorized trip to
Bermuda. This Court reprobated the opposition so offered,
declaring that but for the interference of Mr. Hubbard, the
ship would have been a derelict; and it sustained the bond.
The question of costs was reserved to this day, when Dr.
LUSHINOTON and Dr. DonsoN were heard for the owners;
and Dr. BURNABY and Dr. JENNER for the bond-holder.
The Court decreed costs against the owners • and as Dr. Bur-
naby and Dr. Jenner had objected to the deductions made in
the report of the Registrar and merchants, which report the
Court also sustained, they applied for their costs in the present
application, but the Court would make no order on this behalf.