The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-19 00:00:00

IftPIMY
E XCHLQUER COURT-THIS DA

(Sittings in Banco.)
MOENS V. HAYWORTH AND OTHERS.
The defendants in this case carry on a very Jarge
ness as general merchants in Liverpool, and arc 5...4".
partners in a house in Rio Janeiro, The latter bt'ur;
shipped on account of the house in Liverpool 2,500 b„,f,
of coffee, stated to be of the first shipping quality. 'l.e
house in Liverpool rent up the iavoice to Mr. Caftl
their agent in London, who sold the cargo to the
in April 1836. It did not turn out of the described (11
lity, and then the present action was brought, the plaiZti
in their declarations imputing legal fraud to the °t
inasmuch as they said the invoice was only from the oe.
Pendants to themselves.
The trial was bad before Lord Abinger, when the NJ
found for the plaintiffs.
During last term the Attorney-General moved for, el
obtained, a rule nisi for a nonsuit, cause against which el.
shown by Sir W. Follett and Mr. Kelly on Friday 10j
They contended that althoug O
h they imputed no le°lo
fraud, yet the invoice was clearly proved to cave been s
by the defendant in Rio Janeiro to himself ie. Liverer:
that the invoice was laid before an eminent Locclon ey
cantile Jury, who must be the best judges of such a °of
All the circumstances of the case were clearly matter the,
the Jury, and not within the jurisdiction of the Contl.'
lie
Jury having decided upon it. They.trustcd, therefore, t
verdict would not be disturbed. , t
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in support of the rtne,'-ensi
that there was anything unusual in the transaction; it
the usual one. The agent shows the invoice, he is AS
to warrant the coffee, but he said No, my principals to
not bind themselves, for they had not seen the good0,2:41::
they showed the invoice in order to prove that the
were so described to them, and that fact wei bit I
serted in the contract of sate. He contended tio
there was no proof of fraud, for upon the face of tbedbi
voice it clearly appeared that the coffee was iloneigile
Hayworth, Brothers, of Rio, to Hayworth, Piriplof
Co., of Liverpool. Not one word was said by the bfraiii
in order to lead the plaintiffs to suppose that the nil" ,
was made by an independent party. 011'
The case was resumed this morning by Mr. Crag°
who was followed by Mr. Cowling. Both gentilf
took the same line cf argument as that taken by the Ate-a;
ne3-General. Frsud was disclaimed ; it was not pr°l-
and if so, then there was no question for the jury. 96
The COURT were of opinion, that the jury wcra theeitl
persons to say what interpretation should be put uennLere
invoice. There was some although little evidence, tP
fore there was no ground for the motion for a nononitobl
the sum was large, and as the Court bad some 1;0
upon the matter, as according to the pleadings, ill ,001
to support the verdict, it was necessary to prove of
fraud, they were of opinion that there ought to be $
trial on payment of costs.
ROBY V. MOSS AND ANOTHER. 100
This was an action for false imprisonment upon ac- il'
of forgery—it was tried before Lord Abinger, at th%titt
tings in London, when the jury found for the Pl6/00
with 4001. damages. Last term Mr. Kelly obt1" s
rule nisi for reducing the verdict, or for a new 0'
Mr. PLATT appeared to show cause, when •Aeolll
The COURT suggested that the damages were eshte+
too large. Would it not be better to agree at one.
new trial, on payment of costs. Ik be,,
Mr. PLATT did not know upon what grounds be eisi
agree to such a course. Here were two attorneOgee
acquainted with the law, yet they trump up the ebaAr4l.
forgery upon which the plaintiff, a surgeon, was lock ors
a felon's bar until discharged by the Lord Mel;,itir,
order that he may be immediately arrested upon a`
of
suing from their office. Who was to be the inag,be
amount:of damage? He bad always understood th,st be
of England said it was to be a Jury, and the tlsee
no jurisdiction, unless the damages were so esee-1
to be outrageous. eft°
Mr. Baron PARKE—The Jury would not have
e
400/. had the defendants not been attorneys. le
g
Mr. PLATT.--.WAS 400/. too much w satisfy a -
man for being locked up ?
The case was proceeding when we went to press.
11A
COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS

NORRIS V. STAMP. ; a bal/t;
This was an action brought by the assignees 0' 0171
rupt against an eminent auctioneer at Hull, to r-cocii°
the value of a large quantity of the bankrupt's stock Ate
at auction by the defendant, under circumstances, rpol
alleged, of a collusion with the bankrupt, for the liuore
of defrauding the creditors of the latter. It '11;011';
that the bankrupt, Mr. Murfin, carried on business ;;I:,00:
cheater, in a very large way, as a wholesale linen, 5" or
woollen merchant. Shortly before his bankruPl'slal°(
his liabilities amounted to 90,000/., he sold to Mr. Bretttf
at several intervals, the goods in question, fur thc
part of which the defendant remitted the part4;e,
large amount, beforehand. The case of the 0I
was, that these payments were below the valoc
goods, as the defendant must have known, and In
whole nature of the dealing was irregular, allied
the suspicion of fraud. Evidence of great bolic
was given for the defence, to show the art ,
fide character of the transaction on the I:
Stamp, and his honourable conduct throughcncittre
Jury, however, found for the plaintiffs, and the .7ei,"l
General obtained a rule nisi to set aside the verdlet:;o
Kelly yesterday showed cause against the rule,
reading of the Judge's notes, and the documentB'; 115;
dence put in at the trial, occupied the whole
Richards this morning followed in support of th°
and the Solicitor-General replied at great lenath,tibilil,
ing his support of the rule chiefly upon the in"adelifricold
of accounts and oral statements admitted in eylues ror:r
and upon the failure of proof that the defendant ''lropcf,?
nisant of fraud. The claim of the assignees to r'adco"r
in the goods after they were to Stamp, in eeng`lieohci
of the improper conduct of the bankrupt, and his i°s°,llrt'f,
at the time of the sale, could not be entertained 1; (1031,
declaration which alleged fraud against the cle'Ae°
The state of the bankrupt's affairs had nothing toss"citt,',",
the issue between the parties in this case, which ;
titer Stamp bought the goods honestly or n°t'atiOre'
Learned Sergeant submitted that this question ws!
torily answered by the defendant; but that the JuriirtPr
influenced altogether ty the evidence given of 't.,ef,4l
insolvency, and irregular, if not fraudulent conchlcAorb
dence which had nothing to do with the case, tin"chifi)
was, moreover, in itself unsatisfactory and inccfi go'
In fact no charge of fraud was made out ever' ' '
Murfin. a is It
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE observed that it vo
(fence that Murfin was indebted to the defendant,
the goodst were sent iw satisfaction of the debt: pre'
of
the issues tried was, that this was a fraudulen dl
ence, on which the jury found for the plaintiff. .
The SOLICITOR GENERAL said it could not he a 0),;
fraudulent preference, inasmuch as it was not v°A.6 by
the delivery of the goods having been corerileeesdrci
o
repeated demands and menaces of Stamp. In the
of Stamp there had been nothing in any &Vag °'
and the verdict against him was unwarranted.
The case was not finished when we went to Pre—

COURT CIRCULAR.
5 Prlel
li
WINDSOR, MoNnAY.—His Royal ['iglooe 0,0
Albert, attended by Colonel Bouverie, rode t°
~t SF,I
of the Harriers this morning, in the Great Par, f
excellent runs were enjoyed. To-morrow rfl'
t ';'V
Hi
Doi
Bedford,
'err ett,(issreirii
,saLel
oirtt
rrp(giene
At
field,
eldfl
rdtee,d
among joini, aget
th, e sport again; „
whomand
thew.er were C •
of Cal,
Murray. 14
Her Majesty and Prince Albert, attendc" „oelpf
Bouverie, drove out this afternoon in a WV, fAcit
'rum Duchess of Kent, attended by .I)""Yrfcr°
Howard, walked for sonic time to-day on the of
of the Castl.
The Rev.e Lord W. Russell will have the l'°7llifigs
dining with the Royal party at the Castle this
.he
CO'
His Royal Highness Prince George of
left town, at twelve o'clock yesterday, on a
Duke of Beaufort, at his seat, Badminton, (31)iike.or
41ire. His Royal Highness dined with the feol
Sussex on Sunday evening, at his residence, in o,',
ton Palace. Acolicsl6'
Sir Martin Slice, President of the Royal
had an audience with the Marquis of NOrniFate,,i,li,
terday, at the Home•office. The Marquis of soecip
Attorney-General, Mr. Haviland Park, Mr.'
and Mr. Tristram, Secretary to the Yorks h Sestet
v
had also interviews with the Noble Marquis Y
at the Home-office. Ll,3)'
amaApsannawaremaricsomiepl..
There is now no question that on the
:iii goit
of the present Term, Mr. Justice Littledalc
bench, after fifteen years' service. It is Veil' °t.rade
ported in Westminster Hall that he will be "u
C°,
the Attorney- General. e
M doubt
CONCERTS D'HIV WER.-0i1S• Jullje otv
ductor of these concerts was welcomed last niglistctabl tiO
turn from Paris by a most numerous and rorloy brig
dience. Baumann, who astonished tha ee'll 00119 01°
I,„
brilliant and exquisite performance on t so"' ,cruA
great acquisition, and forms another importan„., ~. •
the solo players. Kcenig's horn solo yiv,v,
and the melo-dr,rnntie ft,• v
z.,r desoiptive L" _ is
ousty rjoycd by the audience, and prev,:d
w j gotseemore
Schillcr's " Ode to Joy," by Beethoven,
but the concert on the wholo went off well.