The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-03 00:00:00

IN RE WRIGHT, A LUNATIC.

Mr. TEAM appeared upca a petition presented by Mr. Wright,
the committee of the personal estate and person of the lunatic,
which stated that it had been referred to the Master to inquire
whether it would be for the benefit of the lunatic's estate that his
stock in trade and good will should be sold, that the Master
had reported it should, that a gentleman had offered 1,000/.
for the former, and 7004 for the latter, agreeing to pay a
third of the amount down, and to give his warrant of attorney
for the remainder, payable at some future time; and the pe-
tition prayed that the Court would be pleased to confirm that
report.—Confirmed.

VICE CHANCERY COURT.--(THIS DAY.

His Honour the VicE.CuANCELLOR was occupied the whole
morning with a motion in Mountford v. Blair, the object of
which was, to compel the defendant to deliver up certain
deeds, and pay money into Court. The motion had not con-
cluded when our reporter left.

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

(Sittings at Guildhall, before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE and a

Common Jury.)
FRENDEURY AND OTHERS V. JONES.

Mr. Tisassinea (with whom was Mr. FOLLETT) stated the
case for the plaintiffs. It was an action brought by the trustees
of the estate of Mr. John Christian Hose, formerly a chemist
and druggist in Holborn, to recover penalties from the de-
fendant for unlawfully taking usurious interest on discounting a
bill for 1501. Hose had been a bankrupt, and had also compro-
mised with his creditors. Under the composition, the de-
fendant, who was Hose's brother-in-law, and who held three
promissory notes of his for 5/. each, took his dividend. Subse-
quently, Hose had a bill on a Mr. Hunt for 150/. at 18 months'
date, and being in want of cash he applied to the defendant to
discount it. The defendant agreed to discount it, and it was done
in this way. The three notes of Si. each, on which the defendant
had received a composition, and which were therefore mere waste
paper, were to be taken in part of the 1501. That circumstance
alone constituted usury, and was alone sufficient to constitute
this action. The defendant then charged the legal discount on
the 150/. of 11/. Is. 9d. The defendant then gave Hose two
bills at two months, drawn on and accepted by other parties for
141. 95., and 191. 9s. 10d., but allowed no interest on them for
the time they had to run. Then the defendant insisted on
Hose having fifteen chaldrons of coals, at 565. per chaldron,
although he did not want coals; and it was stated that Messrs.
Payne and Flower would purchase them. Hose accordingly
sold them for 441. Is. 3d., and Payne and Flower gave a bill for
the amount. It would appear that the price charged for the coals
was overcharged. The defendant next sold a cask of ale to
Hose at 21. Bs., and it would be proved that that charge was far
too high, and that in fact the ale was not better than small beer.
Deducting all those items it would be found that the only cash
paid to Hose on account of the 1501. bill was 431. 10s. 2d. The
case was, therefore, one of gross usury. The action, which
was founded on the statute of Anne, and which imposed a
penalty of treble the amount was not brought for the benefit of
Hose, but for the benefit of his creditors, to whom he had as-
signed all his estate and effects.

John Christian Hose stated he was formerly a chemist and
druggist.

Before the witness proceeded he was cross-examined by
Mr. PoLLocx. The action was carried on for the benefit of
his creditors under a deed of assignment, and not under a
composition. He was to have no part of the penalty ; it was
all to go to his creditors.
Mr. PoLLocx submitted that the witness could not be
examined, on the ground that he could not be permitted to
increase by his evidence the assets of his estate, as he had a
direct interest in the issue of the case. There was no bank-
ruptcy, but a mere arrangement, and a part of that arrangement
must have been to bring this action. The witness had a direct
and an immediate interest in obtaining a verdict for the
creditors.

Mr. FOLLETT said the action was for the benefit of the estate,
and not for the benefit of the witness, who was to receive no
part of the penalty.
The witness, in answer to a question by Mr. FoizErr, stated
that he knew he was no longer liable to any portion of his debts.

His LORDSHIP decided on receiving the witness's testimony.

The witness stated that the defendant, who is a coal mer-
chant, was his brother.in-law. In January; 1829, he had the
bill for 1501. in his possession now produced. (It was at 18
months, dated 14th Jan. 1829, drawn by witness at 18 months.)
Witness being in want of linessey„ applied to the defendant
about the 20th Jan. 1829, to discount it. The defendant
agreed to discount it. Witness had previously been a bankrupt
and had got his certificate. Previous to the bankruptcy wit-
ness was indebted to the defendant in a larger sum than 151.
The defendant then held three promissory notes of 5/. each,
which were afterwards destroyed. One of them was due before
the bankruptcy, but he did not know whether the other two
were. A composition had been paid the defendant on a debt
in which the three bills were included. That composition was
before the bankruptcy. When lie went to the defendant in
January, 1829, he had received his certificate. The certificate
was dated March 3d, 1828.
The production of the certificate as evidence of a previous
bankruptcy was objected to without the production of the pro.
ceedings under the commission, and the objection was held
valid.

The proceedings were then produced.
Mr. Hose proceeded—When he asked the defendant to dis.
count the 150/. bill, the three bills of 5/. each were insisted on
by the defendant to be taken in part as cash. Witness ac-
ceded to that. The defendant was then to let him have 15
chaldrons of coals. Witness did not want coals, and told him
so. Defendant asked him whether he could sell them, and
then he mentioned the names of Payne and Flower, who were
hat dyers. Witness was to sell them to Payne and Flower, and
defendant was to send them by witness's order. The price
was to be 565. per chaldron, and the quality to be Wellington's.
Witness sent his clerk named Gunn to Payne and Flower, and
then witness went to defendant and told him Payne and Flower
would take the coats at a fair and marketable price. Gunn
got the memorandum now produced from Jones, in which
the latter undertook to deliver the coals to Payne and
Flower. Witness gave a paper to Payne and Flower, in
which he promised to bear them harmless as to a difference
of charge. He had not seen that paper since. Witness had
told defendant there would be a loss on the coals, and that
therefore he would bear Payne and Flower harmless as to the
loss. Payne and Flower gave witness a bill for the amount,
which was 44/. Is. 3d., and he sent it to the defendant for
discount, who sent back the whole amount of it. The rest of
the 150/. was made up by two bills of exchange, one of which
was now produced ; could not tell what had become of the
other. (The one produced was dated 15th January, 1829, for
141. 95., on and accepted by Mr. Bestowe.) Mr. Duncan was
the acceptor of the other bill.

Mr. Duncan was called to account for the absent bill. He
stated that he believed it to be destroyed. He was the acceptor,
and he paid it ; it was for 191. odd, and at two months.
Mr. Hose's evidence was continued. The two bills of
141. 9s. and 191. odd he took from defendant as part of the
1501. ; he got them discounted. He also got from de.
fendant a cask of ale, though he was not in want of it.
He took it at the defendant's suggestion, and was to
pay 2.1. Bs. for it. A part of it was drank, but only about seven
gallons, and the rest was either thrown away or converted to
some inferior purpose; it was not good. He also received in
money 401. and upwards, to make up the 1501. Defendant al.
lowed witness no interest on the 14Land 151. bills. He received
a paper from defendant stating how the bill had been discounted.
That paper was lost, but a copy was entered in witness's ledger,
and produced in defendant's presence at Mr. Duncan's office,
about the beginning of 1830. The object of that meeting was
to examine defendant's claim on the estate.

Evidence of the conversation that then passed was objected
to by Mr. Pollock, on the ground that the meeting was solely to
adjust all differences, and could not be given on a subsequent
action between the parties. Mr. Follett submitted that it was
proper to be given in evidence.
His LORDSlitp decided against the objection.

Witness—The defendant looked over the account in the
ledger and admitted its correctness. The items, which were
before stated, were here read. The only cash he received was
44/. 10s. 2d. by check.
Cross-examined by Mr. Pora.ocx—He received that cash at
two or three different times (a check produced). He might
have received that check, but could not say; whether he had or
not, for he was in the habit of borrowing of and paying money
to the defendant frequently. The witness swore to having only
received in cash on the 1501. bill the 431. 10s. 2d. ; would
not swear he ever received a check for that amount. Could
not say how he carne to put down "by check 43/. 10s. 2d. He
might on the same day have received a check for 44/. odd. ;
would swear that he did not receive a check for 441. as a
balance.

Mr. POLLOCK, before he proceeded with the examination,
put it to his learned friends to select the counts on which they
intended to proceed.

Mr. TIIESSIGER said, at present he intended to proceed upon
all the counts. At the close of the evidence he might then say
which counts he would select.

Mr. Porzocx said then he must go through all the 37
counts and object to all, in order to see to which counts the
evidence applied,

Mr. TIIESSIGER submitted that such a course in the present
stage of the case was a very unusual one.
His Loansuip said he thought it would be better to post-
pone the cross-examination and objections for the present.
Mr. Gun stated that he was formerly clerk to Mr. Hose,
and was present when the defendant was asked to discount the
1501. bill. The defendant propo,:.:,d, well as he recollected,
that Hose should take coals. Hose said he did not want
coals, but he would try to sell some, and he thought that he
knew somebody that would take them. They were to be
charged at the market price. The three small bills of 5/.
each were also to be taken. They were due from Hose
to the defendant, and which the latter had in his
possession. Two other bills, not then due, were also
to be given. The difference was to be given in cash, but he
afterwards understood that a cask of ale was to be taken. Hose
sent witness to Payne and Flower, to ascertain if they would
take the coals. They did take the coals, and gave a bill for
441. Is. 2d., which the defendant gave the full amount for
either in cash or by a check.

Mr. George Andrew Payne, a hat-dyer, in partnership with
Mr. Flower, stated that he purchased the fifteen chaldrons of
coals of Mr. Hose. Witness gave his acceptance of 441. Is. 3d.
for them. He had paid 301. on the bill, but he had tieser paid
any more, conceiving he had been imposed on. The coals
were the worst he ever had, and were not worth the money
charged for them. No price was agreed on, but he was to pay
only the market price. A paper was given by Hose to wit.
ness, stating that if the coals were overcharged he was not to
bear the loss. They were overcharged to the amount, he be-
lieved, of 10s. per chaldron.
Cross-examined----Could not recollect whether between the
time of agreeing to take the coals and that of their delivery
there was a difference of 9s, or 10s. per chaldron.
The delivery tickets for the coals to Payne and Flower were
proved to have been signed by the defendant.

Mr. James Hempstead, a coal merchant, stated that the price
of Wellington coals on the 23d of January, 1829, was 41s. in
the market. On the 26th it was 375. The usual addition on
the market price, independent of the metage and shooting, was
10s. The price of Kellingworth coals was the same. The price
of Walls' End Cramlington was 375., Jan. M, 1819, independent of
the additional 10s. The price of Nesham coals that day was 395. 6d.
The price of Wall's End, Cramlington, when delivered to
Payne and Flower in March was 275. 6d. That is an inferior
coal to the Wellington and Killingworth.
Cross.examined—All those prices were for ready money ;
41s. was the market price of Wellingtons, and adding 10s. ; per-
sons taking twelve months' credit were usually charged 2s.
more per chaldron.
Mr. Hose was re-called, and to a question by Mr. FOLLETT,
said the barrel of ale contained eighteen gallons.
Mr. Thomas Minns, a licensed victualler, stated that an
eighteen gallon cask of ale in January, 1829, was from 58s. to
70s. a barrel of thirty-six gallons; the latter was the price of
the best ale; an eighteen gallon cask would be 355. if the
best ale.

Mr. Robert Heath, an attorney, produced proceedings in the
Lord Mayor's Court on which the 1501. bill was attached. He
afterwards received a check for 1501. from Mr. Dimes, but
whether on that bill or not, he could not recollect. Witness
was concerned for Mr. Wigley, the then holder of the bill.
Cross-examined--Witness paid over to Mr. Wigley 1361.
out of the 1501. The balance was retained for costs.

Mr. Samuel Lepines was agent for Mr. Hunt, the acceptor
of the 1501., and employed Mr. Dimes to pay it, giving him a
check for that purpose.
Cross-examined—The verdict of the jury was for 150/., and
he instructed Mr. Dimes to pay it.
Mr. Dimes's clerk proved receiving the check, and paying
it over to Mr. Williams, the plaintiff's attorney in that action.
The case for the plaintiff having closed, Mr. POLLOCK rose
to make several objections on which he intended to move for
a nonsuit.

The case is likely to last a considerable portion ,of the day.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER,-(THIS DAY.)

(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Mr. Baron GURNEY and a
London Common Jury.
SIMMS V. ASHURST.

This action was brought to recover the value of certain
fixtures which the plaintiff had left in a house at Holloway
which the defendant had taken from him. It appeared that
the plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement for the
house in question for two years, the defendant paying at the
time 1001. for the fixtures, binding himself to pay other 401. if
he should hold over by any agreement between himself and the
superior landlord. At the end of the two years Mr. Ashurst
held over for a few weeks upon a verbal agreement with Mr.
King the landlord, merely in order that he might properly suit
himself with another house. It was also further agreed that if
Mr. A. should leave at the end of two years he was to give up the
fixtures, and lose upon them 40/. ; there was, however, no de-
mand made by the plaintiff, who had in the meantime become
bankrupt, nor was there any agreement between Mr. Ashurst
and the landlord proved, as Mr. King could only have recovered
for the use and occupation of the house, and could not have
distrained. The Learned Judge upon that point directed the
Jury to find for the defendant. There was also a claim for
dilapidations which was referred to a gentleman at the bar.

ARRIVALS OF GRAIN IN LONDON MIRING LA:: I , ,V.ls .
r.• F. ,c4' W c'2;
From Whence. g- ::,-1. ..F r z g s
•
r %.4
Qrs. Qrs. Qrs. Qrs. QTIII. QM Scks.
Aldborongt. 670 2333 10 L 2 2 227 136
A lemouth — 602
-
Bo:ton
Bridgwater — 150
Bridlington l7O 40 460 20
Clay 2O 613 50 180
Dartmouth
).
~ Colchester 355 54l 786 21 390 748 735
Harwich
,;. Leigh 494 222 61 479 40
Maldon lB6 91 54 61 77 410
Exeter — 61 10 4 249
Grimsby — 450.
Hull 275 424 58 450
Ipswich 697 1501 1809 13 9,6
Kent 1466 , 488 60 95 600 238 ;45
Louth • 35 1418 ,
Lowestoft 298 142 5:0
Lynn — 1016 387 248 60
Newcastle lOO 85 200
Poole
Southampton
Southwold B5 220 387 15 10
Spalding
,tockton
Wells 6O 801
Weymouth - 82 78
Wisbeach 1895 615
Wootibridge 1261 2341 44 47 16 755
Yarmouth ......
Aberdeen 2O 3100 :
Arbroath ...
Banff 2B 50 3735 19
Berwick
Dunbar — : Iro 4I
Dundee 750 56 16
Inverness 2OO 200 40,1
Leith
Montrose
Perth
11155 17820 10564 22421 1706 106.92 1033
lalsit.
Cork — 12 530
Waterlbrd — E 95
FOREIGN.
Callundborg
Dantzic — ..m;
Gothenburg
Hamburg II -87
Odessa
Total 11155 19250 10864 22438 1706 1521 1543

AGGREGATE
ye, 50—Tarek.,

QUAN7
189—Lu
Musl

TITY 0
inseed,
stard,

r OTH:
[BO6--

!EL YIN
- rtapese
ds, 212.

DS OF

PULS]
•Brank,

• g
0-

D MARK ET
was moderately good, of Sheep,
, and the trade was somewhat

SMITHFIEL,
This day's supply of Beasts v
Calves, and Porkers limited,
dull, at the following prices:—
PRICES YEA STONE Or 8L

.BS. TO SINK THE 011'ALS.

- -
a. d. to s. d. R. 0. g. t.
inferior Beasts 2 0 2 2 Large Lambs 0 0 0 0
Second quality ditto 2 6 3 U Prime small ditto 0 0 0 o
Prime large Oxen... 310 4 0 Large coarse (7alves 310 4 4
Prime Scots, &c..... 4 0 4 2 Prime small ditto 5 2 5 8
Inferior Sheep '2 8 3 0, Large Hogs ..... ~.. 3 U 310
Second quality ditto 3 6 4 2'. Small Porkers 310 4 4
Coarse-woolled ditto 4 6 4 8 i Suckling Calves It, tu 28, each.
SouthdownWethers 410 5 0; QuarteroldPigs 123. to 16.,.eacb.

SUPPLY, AS PER CLERICS STATEMENT.
Beasts. I
I Sheep. Calves. Pigs.
2,720 I 16,020 116 l2O
About fOO of the beasts came up the St. Alban's road ; about
400 up the other northern roans; about 100 (including Irish)
from the western and midland:districts ; about 1100 irom ci-
f' Suffblk, Essex, and Cambridgeshire ; aboutl4o from I: eht
and Sussex ; and most of the remainder from the marshes, &t•
in the neighbourhood of London.