The Sun.
London, England, 1835-12-02 00:00:00

BENCL-(THIS DAY.)

MYER V. JADIS.
The ATTORNEY, GENERAL (with whom were Mr. AonisoPT
and Mr. ARNOLD) stated the case. It was an action upoP
two bills of 'exchange, brought by John Myer, tailor to his
Majesty, against Henry -Jadis, one of the Paymasters of Ex-
chequer Bills. The hills were drawn at six mpriths' date
by
the defendant, an:l indorsed by' Lord .Foley. One was for
the sum of 5001., dated October 16, 1830 ; and the other for
the sum of 2,000/., dated October 28, 1830. The bills bad
been presented to the plaintiff by Mr. James Archdeacon
Richardson to be discounted, and after the plaintiff had made
inquiries of the defendant personally and by letter, if cora.'"
deration had been given for them, of which he had been as-
sured, and also that they would be paid when due, he dis-
counted the bills, giving Richardson cash, with the exeeption
of 1021. due for clothes. The bills were presented at Messrs.
Drummond's bank when due, and were dishonoured, and the
present action was brought to recover their amount. •
Several witnesses were examined, who proved the hand-
writing of the defendant and Lord Foley,• and the presenta-
tion and dishonour of the bills. The plaintiff's two sons dc
posed to their communications with the defendant, and Id',
acknowledgment of the bills having been accepted and pa3sncL
for valuable consideration.
Mr. Richardson was then called on his subpcena, but did
not appear ; and Mr. ARNOLD said, that as he could not go
on with his case in the absence of this material witness, bc
must submit to the plaintiff being called.
The plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited. •
This being the only case on the list for to-day, the Cot"
rose at eleven o'clock.

EXCHEQUER COURT.-(THIS DA

BULL V. TURNER.
This was an action for the recovery of 487. 9s. 2d. under
these circumstances 1832 the plaintiff, who is proprietor
or landlord of the King's Arms, Holborn, called at the Pre'
vision warehouse of Messrs. Staff, on Holborn-hill, and intro-
duced the defendant as a man that had seen better days, Nyl3°
wanted to deal with them ; he then guaranteed them to tbet
amount of 501. The defendant got goods to the amount °
about 801., but in 1833 there was a balance of 48/. owing'
which the Messrs. Staff in vain tried to get ; they therefore
applied to the plaintiff, to whose account it was placed, and
he paid it. He now brought his action to recover the amount'
Mr. Serjeant BOMPAS and a Junior Counsel appeared for
the defendant, but said they lrad no case to present to the
Jury, who immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff--
Damages, 48/. 9s. 2d.
In the course of the cause, Messrs. Staff's clerk, iv',
proved the case, had the books of the firm in order to refrese
his memory as to dates.
Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS claimed to have the right to coPI
the acount.
Mr.c PLATT objected, and his Lordshi decided that, as 66
books were not in evidence, the counsel bad no such right s 5
was contended for.

LYONS V. JACOBS.
Mr. PLATT (with whom was Mr STEW said this Wag aus
action for a most gross violation of the liberty of t",
subject. The plaintiff was not in a very elevated sit t 0
tion in society, but still his liberty was as dear
him as to any one of the Jury. He stated the ic",;
cumstances as detailed in evidence, and trusted the o,',
would give such damages as would teach the defendant no.,t
sport with a man's liberty for his own pleasure, or to sal's'
his malice.
William Martin City Policeman 94.—0 n the mornng°
be

the 13th of August the defendant came to him, and said :e,
knew where Lyons was now. They went to Lyons's Ito
and found him in bed. He got up, and witness took hiro „
Bishopsgate station-house, and afterwards to the Mansi°',,
house, where the Lord Mayor, after hearing the defen&n",
charge, dismissed the plaintiff. He was taken into custodY
little before nine o'clock, and was discharged shortly °lle

one o'clock

IreVi°l°

-------
Cross-examined,Jacobs had spoken to him the pL, fipd
day, and witness had been looking for him, but could 110 t

him.• 00
Mr. THESSIGER, for the defendant, said he agreed in
eie.

remark of his Learned Friend--that the plaintiff-was not 6.0
vated in society—he was an old clothes-man. Now, he kii,,eo
that it would not become either him or his Learned Frienu,,,
find fault with him for going about with a bag—(Laughtcti of
still it would detract from some of the high-flown flourish loot
his Learned Friend. He acknowledged that the defend°,
had mistaken his remedy, when he made a charge of fel
but when the Jury knew the circumstances, they *Mild ,
that the defendant was not actuated by the malicious 10t1:114
imputed to him. The. defendant was a person who was in
habit of lending sums of money to persons who-went about
ing up different sorts of goods ; they were to bring back the g°, cc
purchased, or the money in a given time. On the 12t' of
August the plaintiff called upon him, and asked for a loathe
15/., as he had bought a lot of clothes at Mr. Cordin:;'s,
pawnbroker's, and he would be back in a quarter of an be fri
He got the money, and the defendant saw no more of
the evening the plaintiff's wife brought a small parcel, c.f,
taming 81., which' she gave to the defendant, and walked af`off,
Mr. Jacobs thought he had been swindled, and gave notice,
the fact to the police. There was no doubt but the fact
so, and though the defendant had made a mistake in the ero
nion of the Lord Mayor, still he trusted the Jury would gl.ct
no more than nominal damages to a man who had never
paid the 71. of a balance due to the defendant.
Several witnesses proved that they heard the plaintiff nfr,
for the 151., and that they saw him get three 5/. notes, cn;f
of which were returned ; also, that the plaintiff had man
purchase from Mr. Cording. .0 l
1
Mr. PLATT replied. He said the defendant had acted
very cunning manner, for he, had on the pleadings rnerebto
flied his guilt, which prevented the plaintiff from proving „of
the 71. was due to him on a former account. It Was str3sil
that the defendant had not sued out any writ, or ta'4es,
to
other step for its recovery, from the day of the transactiros,
the present time. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
COLLIER V. BALLANTYNE.
Mr. WinnormAN stated that the plaintiff in this Ons-,to
well known in the medical world as a man very
preparing medical students, especially for the navy. 13, edo
given up four hours of the day for four months in teaebl9Tatir
defendant. The sort or education appeared to be of a 411
rious nature, for he was informed that it was technl
called " grinding." 006
" 'll
Lord ABINGE it—l have heard it called "cramming 5
places. 0 of
Mr. WIGHTMAN—Whether it was called "grindingb
" cramming "—(Laughter)—it was apparently well wort
money charged for it, which was 21/. As the causeical.d.
defended; he would prove his case at the smallest possiblea 01"
He would call a gentleman to whom the defendant lin 01J
mitted the debt after the action was brought, and that
entitle him to a verdict. fender
Mr. Mayhew, clerk to plaintiff's attorney, said the defe% af;
came up to their office from Plymouth, where he bad bee Le
rested. The amount was mentioned to him distinctltod
he proposed to give a warrant of attorney for the de eief
costs. The warrant was drawn out, but the defendant
came back to execute it.
Verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages, 21/.

INSOLVENT COURT.---(THIS

Phillip Du Pont, applied on his petition to be dischaffil !.!
The Insolvent said he was of French extraction, but b°
England. He had resided at Jersey for some years, whe,tio!';
father, who died in 1831, had held a responsible sit„gi'
He had studied the French law with a view of practil'efbrt
that island, where only six Counsel were allowed ; be P'l3 th.
come partner with Mr. Kaye, the late Bank Solicitor, 10,Cei
Jersey Times, of which he was sub-Editor, at 3., 6'l',
He complained, that in his 'absence, his valuable librlie
other property had been arrested and sold. He ca
London a short time ago to seek a situation, and was s°jm
rested ;he had only three creditors in England. 'filen,' er`,;
vent made a statement respecting the law of debtor a, e,
ditor in the island ; he said the property of 'an Insolve:o4
seized, and two Juries appointed to administer. Vier
could not conceal property—it was all given up. all 14'
CIIIEF COMMISSIONER—They profess here to give it
but do not.
131°
The Insolvent said no concealment could possibly,

••
The law was very severe. CIF it
The Learned COMMISSIONER complimented the Ins° ciiej,
the intelligence he had shewn, and hoped he would ec4rgto
in future to keep him out of difficulties. He was discupt:l(A
David Chalmers, a printer, late of W batliucr-stre'
opposed on the part of a creditor named King in
trade, with whom he had incurred a debt of 97L,
volved, and was sentenced to an imprisonment of seven
for contracting the debt,- without means of payment.