The Sun.
London, England, 1802-12-04 00:00:00

. ,
taken, and before shC- occupied it ? the- Defend-
ant contending, that she authorized Plaintiff's wife
to agree for the house, but not to pay for the fix-
tures, &c. ;
,whereas it was contended, on the part
of the Plaintiff, that her Letter to Mrs. Smith ren-
dered her liable for this money, which was clid out
most indisputably fop- her use, and without which
she could not have this house at all, which she had'
declared to be so .much her object.
Philip Wagner swore, " Mrs. Smith (the Plain..
tiff's wife) came to me, and' Miss Coates came af-
-terward. Mrs.-Smith said 'she wanted a house in
Uxbridge for a milliner :.1.-told !Ter I had one to,
lett, but that the Lease and Fixtures would come
to near 201. Miss Coates saw" the he ; she
went over it with me, and she saw the fixtures. I
took down the schedule of-the fixtures,' which she
read over, and saw that every thing was right, and
she was satisfied that the fixtures were as they were
.there set .down ; they were set down at the price
they were clmrged to me - when I took the house ;
for I did not want to make any profit by them.
I told her-that she should have both the lease and
Mixtures at price' I gave for them, which was
about zol. deduaing Os. for a glass. The
charge was in all 191. Bs. 63. She said she
had written to ' her father, for his approbation.
I told hir I. thought it commendable in her to do
- so, as she had never been in business before.—She
asked' me if 1 would wait. until she had heard from
her father. I told her I would wait, if it was
not .too long ; as there were other people asking
about the house. She said she thought that in the
course of three or filar tfays, she should send me an
answer. I waited until it came, which was in three
or four days, fOt4-she went down into the cotintry
sand wrote up- Mrs. Smith brought the answer to
me, and read iti"; • -
'Here the letter from the Defendant to Mrs. Smith
was given in. and readlt -Was dated Leominster,
'27th May, i 802 ; and, after speaking of her jour-
ney, and some familiar- topics, spoke of the subjed
now -in dispute as f011ows—" I will thank Mrs.
Smith to secure thehouse for me, as my father,and
mother are agreeable ;. and I will pay for the 'lease
• as soon as I arrive."

• The witness then proceeded—" I received from
Mrs. SMith the sum of 191. Ss. 6d..0n the tsth of
June---If I had not received the money then, I
shouldnot have Waited any longer—l called several
times after Miss Coates came to Uxbridge; ,but
could not see her.—Once on a Sunday, she was not
at the house---once at night when she was gone.t9
rest, but never saw her,
.;ind therefore I told .Mrs.
Smith that I must hate the money, on which she'
said, " if Miss Coats did not come back by Tues-
day (for she was then gone to London) I will pay
you." Very well, Mrs. Smith, said 1:—I called
on i'uesday morning, and I received the money of
Mrs. Smith—i,should not have waited for the mo-
ney any longer.",
Miss Fabel' Smith was called, but all that she
proved material to the issue was, that a receipt for
these goods passed from the hands of her mother into
the hands of the Defendant.

This being the substance of the evidence, the
Defendant's Counsel-contended, that this payment on
the part of the Plaintiff, was a mere voluntary pay-
ment, that the Defendant only authorised the Plain-
tiff's Wife to secure the House for her, that was to
say, to give her the refusal of, it. That the sen-
tence in the Letter, 44 I will pay for the Lease as
soon as r arrive" was a proof that she intended to
giVe no authority for the payment of the money,
but merely to make the bargain. That it was not
enongh* to entitle' the. Plaintiff to recover, in this
Adion, to prove that in point of fang, he paid the
sum of 191; Bs. 6d. but he mast prove to the satis_
la6tion'ot the Jury, that this paythent was made by
the authority of the Defendant. That if 'it was a
payment without the authority of the Defend-
ant, there was the high authority -of my' Lord
KENYON, for • saying, the Defendant was not
bound-by it, for he had often said one person had
no right, of his own accord, to take upon him the
debt of another, because that was taking from that
other all the means he might have, either of obtain-
ing tune for the payment of a‘demand, if it was a
just one, or of contesting it, if unjust. Here- ;he
Defendant ought to have had an opportunity of
examining this charge, of seeing- whether Wagner.
could have made her a legal assignment of the
houses, which, it was said, he could not, and *he.
ther the charge for the fixtures was :easonable,
which it was contended it was not, and of defending
herself against the AC"tion at the suite of Wagner,
whose cause, he said, this, was, although by the
operation of a 'Re-lease he was made a witness.
Lord ELLEND-OROUGH said, that this was an
Aftion brought by the Plaintiff, Mr. Smith, against
the Defendant, to recover the sum of 191. Bs. 6d.
which it was contended had .-been paid by Mr.
Smith,, or his Wife, no matter which, for the pur.
pose of this Aelion.
• No person, said his. Lordship, can, by paying
a debt of mine without my leave, become my cre-
ditor, so as to be entitled, to bring an A&ion against
me to recover.the money be so pays, because no
person has a right to conclude, without my con-
sent, any account for me, and by the payment of
money which another person says I owe him,
cloathe himself with the charafier of my Creditor,
and preclude me from all defence against the origi.
nal demand; for I have a right to settle my own ac-
counts myself, and to judge for, myself what demands
I will comply with, and what I will resist. The
question in this Case, therefore, for you to consider,
Gentlemen of the Jury, will be, whether this De-
fendant gave the Pfiiintiff or hit wife authority to
pay the' money which was -paid in this Case to .
Wagner, or only an authority to make a bltrgain
with him on her behalf for the lease of this house
and the fixtures ; for the • Defendant, when she de-
legated to the Plaintiff an authority to represent
her, had a right to limit that authority : and his
Lordship added, that if the Jury thought by -the
letter that was written by, the Defendant to the
Plaintiff; that she meant
.only to delegate an autho.-
tity to bargain for the lease. and the fixtures, and
to reserve to herself the consideration of how and
when they were to be paid for, and that' she her_
self afterwards meant to make a further agreement