The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-16 00:00:00

VICE CHANCELLOR'S COURT, JAN. 15.

His Honour the VICR-CHANCELLOR was occupied the
whole morning with unopposed petitions and short causes.

COURT OF QCERN'S BENCH, J. 15.
(Sittings in Banco. )

PETERS V. ELDERTON AND OTHERS.-EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

This was an action against the defendants upon- a bill of
exchange for the sum of 3001. drawn by Julian Hugh
Peters, and accepted by the defendants, who were in part-
nership at the time. 'The bill was made payable seven
months after date. Two of the defendants suffered judg-
ment to go by default, and the cause was defended by El-
derton. At the trial, before Lord Denman, at the last
We,tminster sittings, the Court had permitted one of the
defendants, named R. Jones, who stated that he was a con-
vej anzer, to be called and examined as a witness on behalf
of the plaintiff He swore the defendant Elderton was
present when the bill was accepted, and also when it bad
been discounted by Peters, and that Eld rton had part of
the money. The Jury, upon that evidence, found for the
plaintiff.
Sir F. POLLOCK now moved for a rule to show cause
why the verdict should not be set aside, and a nonsuit
entered.
_ _ _

Lord DENMAN said the rule might instantly be granted
upon the ground of the reception of Jones as a witness.
Sir F. Pot.Loma had other points which he wished also to
state to the Court. Indeed, the ease was in his opinion one
of the most extraordinary that had ever come before him,
and he hardly knew how to shape his application, and he
should wish to hear the opinion of the Court a* to whether
it should be against the witness or the attorney. The bill
was drawn upon a stamp issued in Feb: nary 1834, and the
case of Eldcrten was that he had never seen or heard of
the bill till the action had been commenced against him ;
that be never received any of the money ; that he was
utterly unacquainted with any person of the name of.
Julian H. Peters ; that he had made every attempt to
discover whether any such person exiated, but that no
person of the name could be found. The case was perfectly
'tmexa4lecl Itatzttoi hislorrof the jur`NrOderieCtir the wen-
try, fur he hadWWthlition the affidavit of an attorney's
clerk, who deposed that he had furnished the stamp upon
which tho bill bad been drawn Months after Jones swore
that it had been drawn —that be had filled it up at the re-
quest of Jones, and that Jones had disclosed to him, after
the action had terminated, that he was in fact the real
plaintiff in the case.
Lord DENMaN thought quite enough had been stated to
entitle him to the rule prayed.
Sir F. Potamme said, as the case might affect Mr. Babb,
the plaintiff's attorney, he wished to state that so far as he
knew, that gentleman was of unimpeachable character, and
it was not surprising that he should believe the statements
of Jones, who was in appearance and by birth and educa-
tion a gentleman. He wished to know in what way he
should shape his Application. Perhaps the better course
would be to move that all the proceedings in the case
should be sot aside, and that the plaintiff's attorney should
pay the costs.
Lord DENMAN thought that would be rather a strong
course to take.

Sir F. PoLLocit—Tho attorney gay° a wranfr address
of the plaintiff.

After some further discussion, the COURT granted a
rule to show cause why a nonsuit should not be enter( d,
and why all the proceedings should not be set aside, with
costs, to be paid by Janes or his attorney.

13 AIL COUR"! , JAN. 15.
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)
FULLER v. CURLING.
Mr. CLARKSON moved in this case for a rule to show
cause why the verdict had for the plaintiff should not be
set aside and a new trial had. The action had been tried
a few days since before the Under-Sheriff. It was brought
by the plaintiff, a gardener, against the defendant, whose
name has been lately before the public as one of the can-
didates for the borough of Southwark, for work and labour
done, in converting a small piece of ground into a garden.
The defendant had paid 381. Is. for gravel and mould, a
sum of 171. at different times to the plaintiff, and 8/. Rs.
into Court, and the Jury had given a verdict for 81. Bs.
additional. The Learned Counsel referred at some length
to the evidence at the trial, and submitted that there was
nothing in it to warrant the Jury in finding any additional
sum fur the plaintiff. It would be only mere justice if the
Court would also direct that the trial should take place be-
fore one of their Lordships.
The COURT said that should be a substantive motion in
itself, and granted a rule for a new trial.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JAN. 15.
(Sittings in Banco.)
ALAVA V. THOMFSON AND OTHERS.

This was an action brought in the name of the Spanish
Ambassador against Lord Sydenham upon a bill of ex-
change for 3,17.5/., dated in 1823, and accepted by the late
firm of Thompson, Bonnar, and Co., of which the Noble
Lord was the head. The bill was accepted upon a con-
signment of sugar from Teaser and Co., of the Havannah,
and was made payable to " the Prior of Consules of the
National Consulate of Cadiz, " which body was suppressed,
and its functions distributed amongst other bodies, one of
which was called " The Junta of Commerce of Cadiz."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had obtained a rule for on-
lorging the time for returning a commission to examine
witnesses in Spain, and to add-anew plea.
Cause against the rule was this morning shown by Mr.
Cresswell, who was interrupted by the Court suggesting
that the action should proceed, a verdict taken, and the
defendant have a stay of proceedings until he had a release
from the Junta of Commerce at Cadiz, and from the
Spanish Government.
suggestion from the Court. Acting for
The ATTORNEY. GENERAL said if his noble client were
present he would without doubt pay the utmost respect and
follow the coarse which he, if present, would
judgment upon those terms,
id
himta
at kt een,ht
aoi on
wnd
ot
at
prove • d that General Alava gave up the bill and also gave
a release. tldaonnce consent to a y
These terms were agreed to, the defendant to pay inte-
rest from the time of the demand in 1839.
The COURT gave costs against the defendant, observing
that the interest upon 3,000/. for 16 years would have fruc-
tified into more than the original.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, J. 15.
DE VEAVX V. HILL

This was an action upon a policy of insurance, tried at
Guildhall in the sittings
The after last Term, and reported at
length in this paper, plaintiff, as the agent of a mer-
cantile house in I3ourdcaux, effected at Lloyd's the policy
in question (of which the defendant was the first under-
writer) upon a brig named the Bengaly, on her voyage
from Bourdeaux to the isle of Bourbon and back. The
o was based in fraud, and that the
plaintiffgreat length. The defence was that
case occupied two days, the evidence for the plaintiff being
„ere absurd and contradictory. Several
who had experience of those seas, unkesi-
tdhe ocucmacsnetaorf the
y' and
statements of the captain and mates respected the alleged
suffering of the brig in the Indian Ocean and off the Cape
that the statements of the French log could
seafaring
taifGnagroiionydgs
wlni-loocrptele,,
not be true, and the Jury found a verdict for the defendant
It will be remembered
that, on the return to Europe, the captain took his vessel
portion
iruttisho, ena grot
fee nretrhae out ward voyage.
l average, and for the plaintiff for a small
loss,
namely, the expense of repairs at the Mau-
r
into La Rocbele, at the mouth of the Gironde (only forty
miles from Bourdeaux, the port of her destination), and
1 there had her condemned and broken up. The action was