The Sun.
London, England, 1835-12-08 00:00:00

TILE FUNDS.

Consols closed yesterday at 911 -a for the Account, and may
be quoted at present 91-PF. This improvement may be attri-
buted to arrivals from the United States, stating that they do
not expeot a war will take place with France. Omnium 4
prem. ; Exchequer Bills 12 14; India Bonds 24; Bank
Stock 210} 211.
In the Foreign market, Spanish Active Bonds closed at
45H—are at present 45A-; Portuguese ; Three per
Cents., 314. 32 : Mexican -38-a ; Dutch 2} per Cents, 5411.
HALF-PAST ONE.
The Lisbon mail has arrived, and the letters have been
delivered. _

Consols have remained steady during the morning at 91i
for the Account, with very little doing. Exchequer Bills
have improved to 16 18; India Bonds 3 5 ; Bank Stock 2101
211 ; India Stock 256 257.
In the Foreign Market Spanish Active Bonds 45+ if; Per.
tuguese ; Three per Cents. 55-4- ; Colombian 311 321
Mexican 381 39-1 ; Dutch 54i

THREE 0' CLOCK.

IN BENCH.—(rnis DAY.)

HAYWARp V. PHILLIPS.
This was an action to recover a sum of 300/. for a breach
of covenant in a lease, and for delapidations occasioned by
the negligence of the defendant.
Mr. J. JERVIS\ appeared. for the plaintiff, and Mr. F.
KELLY for the defendant.
After the case had been stated, Mr. KELLY, for the
defendant, suggested that the matter should be left to the
decision of agentle!non of the bar, who would be empowered
to assess the amount of damage sustained, and state what
sum should be laid out on the repairs of the premises.
After some discussion as to the terms of the arbitration,
Counsel for the plaintiff assented, and a verdict for tho
plaintiff was then entered by consent. , -
This being the only case for trial to-day, the Court rise
at half-past ten o'clock.

EXCHEQUER COURT.--(THIS DIY)

HILL V. LLOYD.

The plaintiff in this case was an upholsterer in Hatton-
garden, who brought his action against an attorney of Cheap-
side for the balance of an account amounting to 288/. 12s. sd•
for goods furnished him in 1829, 1830, and 1831, and upon 3
bill of exchange for 201.
Mr. ERLE having stated the case, called a Mr. Young, who
proved the delivery of the goods, but in his cross-exP.mination
it turned out that he had been a partner with tl-.,e plaintiff
during two of the years.
Mr. HUMPHREY took the objection, but offered to waive it
if the whole matter were referred. The offer was accepted,
and a verdict taken for the plaintiff, subject to such reference.

MITCHELL V. JACKSON.

Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS stated that this action was brought
by two carpenters, to recover for work and labour done upon
a house of the defendant's at CheshrAnt.. They had been en-
gaged to do certain work under a contract entered into be-
tween the defendant and a mason named- Cheek. After
they had commenced the work, they found that they
were required to do much more than was speci-
fied in their contract ; and on the plaintiff complain-
ing of that to the defendant, be answered, " d—n the contract,
you do your work as it ought to be done, according to the
orders of myself or Mr. Izard (the clerk of the works), and
I will pay you." He would prove that such a conversation
took place more than once ; and that, in fact, such orders
were given and acted upon. The defendant having got the
work done as he wished independent of the contract, wished
to stick to it when called upon for payment. How-
ever, he trusted that the Jury would not allow him to do so)
the more especially as when the plaintiffs wanted to send in a
surveyor to examine and estimate the work they had done, the
defendant absolutely refused to permit him upon the premises-
, They had kept an account of what they had done, and under
such circumstances the defendant must be bound by it.

Several of the men who were at work on the house in ques-
tion, proved that they heard the defendant tell the plaintiffs to
go on according to the orders of Mr. Izard, and he would pal
them; and that he told them-4, Not to spoil his ship, for
want of a halfpenny worth of tar." Also, that the orders
were all given by Mr. Izard.
That finished the plaintiffs' case, the point of the items in
the bill being reserved for arbitration, if the Jury found ',MI
Mr. Jackson was liable.

Mr. PLATT addressed the jury for the defendant.

lie said

the man who was sworn to have " d-d all contracts," BP'
peared to have been the most cautious man who ever dealt
with carpenters or builders. He' would shew that Mr. Jack'
son being desirous to have his house repaired r'inteied into !!
contract with Mr. Cheek for 180/. to do'all then -wanted.
he was not skilled in carpentering he applied to his friend Mr,'
Izard to superintend the whole of tile wink, am'A gave him di"
rections to do nothing without a written contract, and, in fact!
more work having been thought necessary, three or four other
contracts were entered into with Cheek for: them. . Cheek P(B5

the only party with whom the defendant 'nud any thing to Of
and he was actually paid the whole amc,unt .of his contracts;
that was the reason the defendant reused to permit the sur'
veyor to come on the premises,' for he denied that he owed the
plaintiffs anything, and would not so. far admit it. He would
prove further that when the plain.tiffs were in want of money
while the work was going on, they; applied to Mr. Izard, cora',
plaining that they could: get n'Jne from Cheek. Mr. Izard
said if they got Cheek's receipt for the money, he would Ole
it them, and they actually gave a receipt from Cheek, for
101., thereby showing that at was to him that they had given
the credit, and that to hirro it was they were to look. De'
further, he held in his hand, and would put in the ac-
counts for the work now in question, which were We°
out by the plaintiffs to Cheek. From these circumstances the
Jury would judge the probability of the plaintiffs' evidence.
The Learned Gentleman then put in the specification Of
the work to be done, and a contract entered into between the
plaintiffs and Cheek, the whole of the carpenter's work to be
done for 401.
Mr. Izard said he was engaged to superintend the works in
question. He found the workmen standing idle, and he was
not satisfied. He told Mitchell that he was not, and he wool
give him 51. for his job, if he would leave it. The plaint!
said he would go on with it. He was obliged to depart iron
the specification. On all such occasions he made new contrac!!.
with Cheek. He proved the handwriting of the plaintio
Wood to several accounts, for extra work done at the house ill
question. He paid Check for all the variations from the coo'
tract, as soon as they were done. There was no carpenter's
work done that was not paid for to Cheek. Neither of the
plaintiffs applied for any money due from Mr. Jackson before
Cheek was paid all that was due to him.
The plaintiff then called two witnesses, who proved nothing'
The Jury intimated to the Court that they had made of'
their minds—they found for the defendant
The Learned JUDGE said they must hear the Counsel for the
plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS then -replied. Because that Chee/:,
was not called, he contended the jury could not find for ,
defendant.
His Lordship was about to sum up, when the Jury inter;
rupting, returned a verdict for the defendant.