The Sun.
London, England, 1824-12-14 00:00:00

LAW INIT,LI,IGENCE.

SECONDARIES' OFFICE, Dsc. 13.
IMPORTANT QUESTION A$ TO THE TRANSFER OF

ECCi.ESIASTICAL PROPERTY.

WED)) AND PRICE v. WILKINSON.

The plaintiffs, Messrs. Webb and Price, of Doctors'-tlom-
monse who are agents for the sale of ecclesiastical property,
sought to recover the sum'of 101/., as a remuneration for work
and labour done, and services performed, for Dr. Wilkinson,
of Essex, who is a dignified clergyman of the Church of Eng-
land.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE stated the case for the plaintiff. TI e
defendant was a gentleman of great respectability, the ad-
vowee or adrocatus of the living which he held himself. In
1823, he was desirous of raising a sum of money upon
the property, and for that purpose applied to the
tiffs, who were welt-known and respectable agents. The
.Jury were, perhaps, aware that the sale
.of such property
was, from its nature, attended with more difficulty than
that of most other property. It was most difficult to find pur-
chasers for it, and it was generally incumbered with impedi-
ments' in the transfer. The usual mode of remunerating agents
for the sale of ecclesiastical property was to give them a cer-
tain per centagc on their success in finding a customer' and of'
course, in consequence of the greater difficulties and labour
encountered, a larger compensation was expected than was given
in cases where other property was concerned. When the agent
received nothing for his trouble upon failing to succeed, of
course he was entitled to the greater recompense when he
succeeded in his search for a person who was willing to ad.
vance money or purchase. The defendant, who, as they
would perceive, was a man of business and experience, hav-
ing failed in his own efforts to procure a purchaser, applied
to the plaintiffs in 1823; and their efforts were continued
through that year, until January in the following year, before
they were successful. The money advanced upon the advow-
son was 4,2001., and the remuneration promised to the plain.
tilt' was 2i per cent. upon the sum obtained. This promise was
containetr in a letter in which were used termite) this effect,—
" I have no objection to your terms of'. 2i per vent., provided
the business is done quickly." Now, if there were no law to
enable the plaintiff to recover a compensation for their indus-
try, they always considered the word of 'a clergyman stronger
than any Act of Parliament. It wss not objected that money
had not been obtained by means of the plaintiffs; it was nut
to be charged against them that theruhatt been any delay on
their parts; but it might be pa there the negociation which the
plaintiffs had lirst introdtteed was broken, and had, ee,ased—,
that the second negociation was distinct, and that tne nerenn-
ant's contract to pay 2i per cent. did ,not apply to it, and that
the plaintiff's were not entitled to any such remuneration for the
labour they underwent. The Learned' Sergeant then read a
number of letters, from which it appeared that a long corres-
pondence had been maintained on the subject. The defendant
requested that an advertisement should be, inserted on the sub-
ject, as the plaintiffs should think fit to propose.
.Mr. J. W. Freshlield, of the (inn of Freshfield and 'Kaye,
solicitors to the Bank of England and other public companies,
stated, that an application had been made to him on the 31st
of December, 1023, by the plaintiffs, fur an advance by
mortgage, of a sum of money upon property, 'consisting
of the advowson of a rectory in Essex. 'The application
was made to him to obtain an advance front the Bank
of England, but he returned an answer that the Bank did
not advance such small sums, neither would it have any thing
to do whir such property. He, however, mentioned that a mer-
chant was willing to make such advance, if the security was
good. A negociation took place, but it broke off for some
dine. It was subsequently renewed with another of the wit-
ness's clients, and completed. 'The suns advanced was 4,100!.
at 4b per cent. by the Globe Insurance Company. The net pro.
duce of the living was 7801. per annum, but during the period
of the high pric a, it was made to produce 1,3001.
Mr. A aces BO I.D, at great length, cross-examined the witness,
with the view of showing that the first negotiation had broken
off entirely, and the second had been commenced without the
tad of the plaintiffit ; but
Mr. Freshfield said, he considered it a continuation of the
same transaction ; that it was introduced as a thing already
known, and would not have taken place had it not been for the
introduction of the defendant by the plaintiffit. The business
was finally concluded by Messrs. Scott and Clayton, the de-
fendant's solicitors. The plaintiffs were clerical agents acting
for the sale of ecclesiastical property, and the recovery of tithes,
&c. They wore neither brokers nor solicitors.
This was the plaintiff's ease.
Mr. A 'milliner) submitted that there was no evidence cf
work and labour done by the plaintiffs to entitle them to the
remuneration which they claimed ; but even it' they were tun-
titled to any thing, they were debarred by the statute of the 142:h
of Ann (2 C. 111, see. 2) from receiving more than sa. per cent.
The section pointed out was then read by the Secondary, and
is as follows r—" And be it further enacted by the authority
aforesaid, that all and every scriveneteor scriveners, broker or
brokers, solicitor or solicitors, driver or drivers of bergaius
for contracts, who shall after the said 29th of September take
or receive, directly or indirectly, noy sum nr sums of money,
or other reward or thing, for brokerage, soliciting, driving, or
procuring the loan, or forbearing of any sum or stops of money
over or above the rate or value of ss. for the loan or forbearing
of 1001. for a year," &c. The Act then directi that the pe-
nalty of 201. be inflicted fur each (Cure.
This Act, the Learned Counsel contended, mode. it evident
that the plaintiffii, at all events, were entitled to no prow than
53. per cent. •
Mr. Sergeant WILDE and Mr. STEP)! Wee contended that
this case by no means came within the Statute tiled, which wes
the well-known Statute of Usury.
.
' Mr. COI.I.IWanIDGE. the Sreontfary, was Of opinion that
the Act applied to the plaintiff' The case of the WWI depend-
ed upon the contract for an allowance of a per tentage, and
they could not recover more than five shillingaper cent. fur their
services.
Mr. STEP.HEN said, that in n point of this impoetence, he
trusted the Learned Secondary would tape suck a note„tif the
case, as would enable them to have it determined bY the Ciiurt
above.
COLLINGIUDEVE said he should. He then told the
Jury it was clear that the defendant had been bimefitterl by the
advance of 4,2001. in consequence of the plaintiffS" services, and
It was for them to say whether they ought in &knees to receive
a less sum than five shillings per cent. for
The Jury assessed the damages innuedietely at 101. 10s.,
being five shillings per cent. upon the sum obtained.

CAmunteur.---The fire in the new quadrangle
of Trinity College (of which we yesterday gave
an account) is supposed to have been foceasioned
by the stove for drying the timbers, being too
much heated. When the Barnes had •abated a
little, several persons ran into the holm, anti
threw out of the windows the smoking tiobricand
planks, which proved a most judicious expedient,
as it caused the fire' within to become less fierce
every minute, and of course greatly accelerated
its final extinction. The damage is estimated
at 5001.