The Sun.
London, England, 1802-12-24 00:00:00

CORN EXCHANGE, DEC. 24.

WE have today some fresh arrivals of Wheat,
and the Market short of Buyers for most articles,
WhiCh causes a reduttion of fs:per quarter; there
is a good supply of Barley; both that and Malt
are is. and 2.5. lower; the sale of Pease and
Beans are heavy, at something less ; 'Oats arc "iii
tolerable plenty, and go off 6d. cheaper; Flour re-
mailis at little variation.

Wheat ' 465 a 47s a sss &I tick Beans - 3os a 33S oci:
Fine ditto '. 56s a 57s ed Oats -' - . iss a iS$ 23s
Barley -22 S a 26$ 6d Poland ditto' 24$ a ass od
Malt - , 4os a 44$ 6d Rape Seed - - 321 a 34t
Illiye - . -35 s aOs od Fine Flour - 44$ a 45$ o'i
White Pease 33s a 4os 6d Second do. , 4os a 445
Beans , • 32s a 36s 6d

On Tuesday night, as Mr. Charles Waltham,
Clerk to Mr. Alderman Smith, of Blackfriars, was
passing along Charles-street, Hatton-garden, be-
tween nine and ten o'clock, he was stopped by four
footpads, who robbed him of seven guineas and a
seven-shilling piece, then drew a clasp knife, and
cut off part of his waistcoat, with the pocket, .it
the same time beating him in it most unmerciful
manner. On some assistance coining up, in conse-
quence of his repeated calls, the villains ran ofF,
exclaiming, ." a mad bullock."
A fire broke out on Sunday, in a cotton ware.
house in Sir Thomas's BuikUngs, Liverpool ; but,
by the assistance of a number of gentlemen, the
engines, and firemen', it was soon got under, with-
out doing much damage.
Yesterday se'nnighr were apprehended, from on
board the, Osilaburgh, .How.IE, arrived at Dundee
from London, two passengers, upon suspicion of
having forged a sl. note of the British Linen Com-
.
pany, or of having uttered the note, knowing it to
be forged. They underwent an examination before
the Magistrates, and were committed for farther
examination.

A decent girl, of the name of Ferguson, who
belonged to Greenock, and had been for a consider-
able time a respectable servant in that town, having,,
,
occasion to go some days ago to Paisley on business,
in consequence of the decease of a relation, anal left
that place on her return rather late in the day to
be at Greenock with day-light, was attacked the
other end of Port Glasgow, about nightfall, by a
set of TUfliaps, who abused her so much, that with
difficulty she reached a house the other end of that
town,
.where she wished to enter, and was endea_
vouring to relate her story, but the door was shoved
in her face, she fell in the entry, and, horrible to
relate, was found a corpse next morning.—S -
was, it is said, the only support of an old and in-
firm father,

._ • -

1

L ATV 'REPO '

COURT OF KING's BENCH, DEC. 2?..

SITTINGS BFPO.? E LORD ELLENBOROUGD AND A SPECIAL
JURY, IN c,4I...DHALL, LONDON.

TINDALL AND OTHERS 'v. LEWIS AND OTHERS.

This was an aetion on two promissory-notes,
dated in the year 1794.
The Defendants pleaded the Statute of, Limita-
tionQ. tha• was, that they did not promise to pay
within six tears.

It appeared, that two Houses in Worcester,
the one- of- the name of Glover, Edwards and Co.
and the other of Glover, Hall and Co. became
cr,rcerned with each other in business,- the one
as a Banking-house, and the other as a Brewery
that the Brew house concern received these Notes
from the Defendants,and these Bankers got them dis-
counted by the Plaintiffs. A great variety of
transaftions afterwards took place between all the
Parties, and at last the Firm of Glover and Co.
became insolvent, and it appeared, that they paid
this money to Glover and Co. by renewed papers
which was duly received, and the Defendants con-
tended that the Plaintiff's had consented to discharge
them, and to look for payment ofGlover and Co.
and the real question was, whether the Plaintiffs
had, in the course of these transactions, really
consented to look to Glover and Co. -for the
payment of these Bills, and not to the Defendants,
for there was no doubt but that the Defendants had
paid Glover and Co. this money by renewed
paper ; but the Plaintiffs contended, that none of
it came to them, it being paid away. by Glov-er and
Co. to other persons, and that they alid not consent
to. look on Glover and Co. as -the persons-to pay
these Notes.

Mr. STREET, Attorney for the Plaintiffs, said,
that on the..24.th of July IStat, he went with one
•of the Gantiernen Of the Plaintiff's house to the
house of the Defendant, for the purpose of. asking
payment of these Notes. He saw Mr. Lewis. The
Gentleman who was with, the Witness spoke to Mr.
Lewis of the Notes in question, which were in the
hands of the Plaintiffs : Mr. Lewis • said that they
had been settled, or paid, and that he could thew
how they were settled. He took out of his bureau a
paper she Wing how' it had been settled, and permit- ,
ted them to takta copy of it, by which it appeared
that the Defendants had paid Glover and Co. by
the renewed paper, as already stated, and that such
Bills had been,paid,. and the Defendant Lewis in-
sisted- on it that the Plaintiffs had taken this as
payment.
dlt then appeared that none of the Bills so paid
by the Defendants to Glover and Co. had.conie
into the hands of the Plaintiffs, but had been:paid
by them to other persons.
Mr, Etisxr NE lamented that so many trifling cir-
cumstances ,had been allowed from rime icitime to
-do away the effeCt and spirit of the Statuteof leimit-
ations; which ••was a wise and a wholesome Statute,
made to protect men against attacks for old debts
which they had discharged, but .which, by the
:death of witnesses, the destraaion or the.loss of
documents, they 'night be unable `to prove. This
was a .case in which the Defendants had most con-
-scientiouSly pleaded the Statute of Limitations ;
theirs was a very hard case indeed, if they were to
pay this money, for they had already paid it to
Glover 'and Co. so that if his Lordship should think
it too much, according to the authority of decided
Cases, to say that the Statute did bar-the Plaintiffs
in this Case, he Would be so good as to save him
the point. Another point, be submitted, by which
it was to be inferred, that the Plaintiffs really con-
sented to look to Glover and Co. for payment of
these Notes, which was this : The ,Plaintiffs had
not once, in. the course of eight years after they
became the holders of these .Notes, called on the
Defendants for the payment-of them.
Mr. Grass observed, that with regard to the
Statute of Limitations, the rule of Law was this—
if a Irian made no promise within six years of the
commencement of the action, the Pfaintiff could not
recover ; but if, on application to the Defendant,
lie said there was nothing due, that let in the ques-
tion to try whether any thing be due or not. If
lie r
said lie had
.paid the debt by such a-bill, or in any
other mode,- that let in the proof of whether-he bad
so paid or not. He contended' there was no dis-
tinguishing this from to,ooo other cases. ,Here.
the .Defendant had said he had paid this debt, and
had said he had paid it by certain hills, which he
specified ; now that was falsified, by shewingthat
these bills never came to the hands of the Plaintiffs,
and therefore there was an end of the Statute of Li-
Mitations. As to the idea that the Plaintiffs had
consented to look to. the house of Glover and Co.
for, payment, instead of the Defendants, that was
highly improbable, for that would be to prefer an
insolvent party to a solvent one.
Lord Et.Lasteoßoutati made many able obser-
vations on th-_, case, and left the Jury to consider
whether the Plaintiffs not having called ion - the
Defendants for eight years, rendered it probable'
that they had consented to look to
,the house of
Glover and Co, instead of the Defendants ; 'for as'
to the Statute of Limitations, he considered that
the Plaintiffs were-not barred in this case.

The Jury found a verdia for the Defendaots.

DECEMBER 23.

TENANT V. SLATER.