The Sun.
London, England, 1802-08-02 00:00:00

L.ll;'' EPQZT.

COURT OF BEINICti:juLy 23..
sir l'iNCa A CUILDH ALL, LONDON, BEFORE 11. 0 Ilitp

LEN)3OittYUGIL AND if. SYEdIAL JUKY.

ANTONIO V. citir!co.

Mr. 'ERsxrx E stated, that ,this- was an Action by
the Piaitaii4-a Daitnadan, and,Subjeet of the Em-
peror of Germany, against Theodore Critic 6, the
Defendant, who was a Stibieti of ihe Sublime Porte,
and :he Jug 'would-find-by the evidence,' as com-
plete a Turk as ever existed ; •for he• had got
Client's money, to a large amount, and now had
gone to gaol, and held his Creditor at arm length..
I.'he, circumstances which gave rise to this Cause
were as follow Ilie Plaintiff had lent the- De_
fendant .money, with-which, he had bought a Ship.
The Plaintiff ,:iso freighted -'that ship from Trieste
to Guadaloupe, .and had provided also a freight
at Guadaloupe back .again to Trieste. • Critic()
performed the voyage,/ and took in the lading,. and
was gn his return hatne, whcn he was intercepted
by the British Ship, the Lapwing, and carried into
Sr. Kilt's, where the Ship and Cargo were condemn-
ed as Enemy's Property. Rome that sentence He
•Appealed, and
*the appeal was 'heard before 'the Lords
of'the Council, in this Country, a'nd die sentence of
the Admiralty court Wasrev'ersed;. Inconsequence
of this reverSal, The C iptor`s were obliged to 'make
restitution-;. but, as'.:the goOds were sold,. they could
not be restored, extept in value. He aetordirigly
had received from the Agents Here, the sum of 4t6;31.
tivltirh sum he was. bhund to.account for to 1118 Owner
of the Cargo,. the present Plaintiff; he however dis-
honestly_ refused to pay-it over, but rather'chose to
Waste it in a jail. The Aftionhad'been before the
Court on a former occasion, when the defence set up
vas, that he was entitled to retain a part.of it,.as
part of the Cargo was his own private adventure,
and that the ship waslot;tlly his own. As they Could
not then give distiod evidence how the gross sum
'ought to be apportioned, his Lordship was of opi,
nion that 'theform of action could' not be snstained,.
but lhat-the tiff must be non suited They now,
however, could clistindly ascertain, 'own
fidavit, in the course` of the proceedings before the
Lords of die Council, how -mita was ,his share'of
the Cargo and having proved that, , the • residue
must of course be the property of the
The Affidavit alluded-to of Critic°, the-Defeo.
dant, was accordingly put in and read,- in which he
claimed a part, as his private adventure but, on
referring to. the Bill of Salei,• from the Admiralty
Court,. at- St.
,Kilt's, it appeared that it was the
Cargo only„ which that accounted for, and that the
- private advdncure and value.ofthe Ship-were not tic:—
Counted for there, consequ-ently that the whole ire-
-ceiVed under that, was.the proceeds of the,Cargo
the Plain-14f. The Agent of the-House of Benin:::
and Co. at Trieste, proved-that Critico had alSoote..,
ceived 57 zi. from them, on account.Of the Plaintif,
while he rerriained here proseeutng. his charm before
the Priyy Council: .
• The Agent:of the' Prize Agent also provedi-that
he'had paid Cr itieo-,35931. 175 31.. pursuant to the
Sentence of the Lords reversing' the Judgment of the
COutt thc.3e t.:wo sumps made • an'
amount of 4.t651..175„,,:31. with which' the Defen-
dantstood charged.

Mr. PAilicijor the Defendant, Made a Very able
speech, in Which he represented-him as an Asiatic,'
totally unacquainted with our tnanners ; that' he felt
he had .a claim to a part of this property, aria not
.knowing how here to prosecute his- claim, -he re-
fused to give up what he had received until it was•
adjusted. With respect-to his going to.vrisoni. the:
Piaintiff had'artested him for4oool. and, as a total'
stranger bete, he knew not where to find bail, and
therefOre of necessity was obliged to'go to prison,
...Mir., Parke' then commented on several parts of Mr.
,Erskine's speech, and observed that there :vas no
proof that his ship was putchaed with the moiley.
of the Plaintiff ; on the contrary, it appeared on'the'
.faceof the Admiralty proceedi'ngs, that he was sale
ownet: He then claiMed freight, agency for three
years in recovering the ship and carp, . and law
'expences, to. be deduced by his Client from the
gross. Sum which he'had received. , •
These .items were agreed to•by, the other
,side,
which reduced the whole to a tnetiter of accia6rit;
which,•under his Lordship's.diredions, was at.last
liquidated, as follow:

Received by Critic°, purSuant to the'decree of ' -
Connell reversjng the sentence of Condem-
nation, as the proceeds of the Cargo L. 3593 '7 •3
Froni the Agent cif Benneyi • - 572 0 0

• . 416$ v./ 3
To be &hided from this was Freight, 7,500 ----
Venetian D4c3ts, at ;s. 6d. per Ducat - 300 0 0
Law Charges, prosecuting t)te Appeal - 197 0 0
Three years, tun-torahs Agency - 608 10
/
Z. 1105 to

But from this sum was. dedufted Igo,. for inter-
est of money received by Critic°, which reduced
his claim to 9551. Jos.• This -last sum subtrafted
from the:grosti. sum received by him of 4.16i1.
17s. 3d. left a remainder due to the Plaintiff of
32101, 'is. 3d. -
As Critic° made the claim on beltilf of himself
as well as his Owner, his allowances for Agency,
Law,expeoces, &c. were calculated upon a deduc-
tion according to the amOunt.of his iiiterest.—Vcr_
dia for Plaintiff for 32001.