The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-17 00:00:00

HAGUE V. BR)OKES.

This vas a❑ action tried at the last Liverpool Assizes
ef,re 11r. Justice Erskine, in which a verdict had been
fzve•tt 6,r the plaintiff, with damages to the amount of
1 I 0001., the Learned Judge reserving to the defendant the
right. to move that the verdict should be set aside.

Air. CRESSWELL moved that the verdict should be set
ps'cie and a nonsuit entered, or a new trial should be had.
It wig an action brought to recover on a guarantee. The
d,•elaration alleged that the plaintiff had given up to the
tictoi,dant a guarantee of John Lees and Sons for 10,0001.
the del,:adants undertaking to see that certain bills of John
Les and Sons should be paid when they came to
m i'urity. To this the defendant pleaded-Ist, that
th.., c had been no promise; 2d, that the guarantee
had not been given up ; and 3d, that ilbe con-
tract was void by the Statute of Frauds. To this
last plea there bad been a demurrer, which had
[wen argued in this Court, and judgment had been given
for the plaintiff. The case then went down for trial at the
Ass z..s, before Mr. Baron Alderson, and certain docu-
ments were produced and admitted as a guarantee by the
Learned Judge, which was not stamped; a new trial was
in consequence granted, which came on before Mr. Justice
Erskine. The defendant was taken by surprise, and had
nut hi; witnesses ready. The defendant was called on to
produce the document, but could not do so, as it had been
destroyed. The plaintiff contended that the Judge was
b .und to refuse to presume that the document was un-
stamped. He had called the plaintiff's attorney, and put
in Lord ChierJustice Tindal's order to produce the docu-
ment, in order to have it stamped. As Mr. Baron Alder-
son had admitted the document before, Mr. Justice Erskine
said he would reserve the point, and they might contend,
if they pleased, before the Court, that he ought not to have
refused to presume the document to be unstamped. The
former verdict had been for 9,0001. In this instance it was
for 11,0001., the Jury giving interest. Now, he contended,
that this being not an action for debt, nor an action for a
sum certain, the plaintiffs were not entitled to interest. On
these grounds he thought be was entitled to a rule either
for a nonsuit or a new trial.
The Court took time to consider.
ELECTION or CHURCHWARDENS IN LAMBETH.

ARMSTRONG AND ANOTHER V. FORBES AND ANOTHER.
This was a traverse to a return to a mandamus which
Lad been tried before Lord Abinger at the last Surrey
Assizes, when a verdict had been returned for the Crown.
Sir F. PoLnocx moved that the verdict be set aside on
the ground of misdirection by the Learned Judge. A
mandamus had been obtained calling on the churchwar-
dens, overseers, and collectors of the parish of St. Mary,
Lambeth, to produce their books, in order to enable the
actor to proceed with a scrutiny into the validity of an
election for churchwardens, which had taken place last
EAsti r. On Tuesday next a new election would take
place, and then procedings would cease to have any
interest; but the great reason for bringing these subjects
of annual elections before the Court, was not so much for
the purpose of correcting any past wrong as to obtain the
sanction and direction of the Court with regard to future
proceedings, which, when obtained, would be respectfully
received and implicitly obeyed. The mandamus set forth
that there had been an election held for churchwardens on
Easter Tuesday last; that a poll had been duly demanded
and duly granted by the Rector, and calling upon the de-
fendants to produce their books, in order to enable
the Rector to proceed to a scrutiny of such elec-
tion, or to show cause why they refused so to
produce them. There had been two elections
and another proceeding, which he would not call an elec-
tion. Ist. There had been an election of Churchwardens,
and next a nomination of four persons to be presented to
the Justices, out of which four the Justices were to choose
the Overseers. This last nomination took place under the
local Act of 60 George 111. The first question which
arose in this case was, what was the authority of the Rec.
tor, the Chairman of the Vestry, sitting there, not ar, a
shorn
have filled it, and having no right to control the