The Sun.
London, England, 1803-03-07 00:00:00

CORN EXCH4NGE, MARCH 7,

Svrt.l.T Es of all kinds of Grain are to-day in great
abundance, particularly 'English Oats ; Wheat is
down full 35. per Quarter in general, but a few
very fine parcels of this and most articles rerch-
ed . nearly as last week; Barley and Malrboth
lower.; White Pease and Beans is. and 23. diaper ;
Ticks 3s. ; Oats alsb may. be' quoted ,at a decline
of is. and 2ti. ; Flour but a trifle less.

- ,
Wheat 445• a sos a s6s 'ad Tick Lioiri - 25$ 4 i
3os od'
Fine ditto - s7s a sits od Oats - - 'IP ' IN a 191:
Harley - aos a ass od Poland ditto aos k,4 21$ Ott
Malt - '' 40 n:44S lA, Et_aPosce, a - • 3ti a 341
nye - . 32$ a 345 on M , Mine 1410U1 . 445 a 47s od
White Pease gra a 3its ad Second do • . 4ns a 44$
Beans - 3ts a 355, od

Ott Tuesday; and .the three preceding Jar,
-ninety couple were married at the Collegiate. Church,
Manchester.

dIV REPORT.

COURT OF,KING's BENCH, MARCH g..
SITTINGS ItivOltF LORD ELIANDOROUGH AND A St.ZOIAL
• J.VAY IN GUILDHALL, LONDON.,

THORNTOtt

This is a very important cause to the Public, and
therefore, we give it at full length.
Mr. Gilles. This is an Adiop brought by
Messrs.. Thornton, the surviving partners Of Mr.
Smaley, against two gentlemen, Quintin Dick, Esq.
and partner.; and the demand is upon a Bill of EX.
change, and the Bill bears' date on the 23d of Sep_
tetuber, 1799: the drawer is a person of the name
, of Cullen, who resides at Liverpool; It is a Bill.
on Oointin Dick and Co. for 4781. los. payable to
the order of Mr. William Noble three months after
si?,ht. The Bill was remitted by Mr. Cullen, of.
Liverpool (with whom Messrs. Dick had had very
large transactions) to the Plaintiffs, Messrs. Thorn.
ton and Co. They received is about the Ist of
Ottober, and on that day they left it at the house
Of Messrs. Dick for acceptance ; and at it was a'
Dili after sight, the time of payment depended on
the time of acceptance. The usual course of calling.
for a bill, which has been left for acceptance, is on
the next day : in the interval, the person on, whom
the Bill is drawn has to consider whether he will or
wig nor accept it ; but in this case, from accident, "
the Clerk of Messrs. Thorntois did not call on
Messrs. Dick until the 11th of Odober, having
left the Bill on the first, probably in the perfect
confihnce that Messrs. Dick would do that which
way proper, and that they had accepted the Bill, as
doubt they had. When the Clerk of Messrs.
"Thornton called on the 11th, they received this
aid great pains had. been taken, with very
block ink, to deface it ; they had been writing up,
on it, " accepted Ist Odober, t799,"—and under
that, "Q. Dick and Co.". Probably there was
an intention afterwards to cut this off, but this in.
tension, was correded oo a subsequent consideration,
pet hapi, that the striking out of the words. would
nut have the same hod effe& as cutting out,. which
would have been a further degree of mutilation ;
you must suppose this appeared pretty extraordi-
nary to Messrs. Thornton. It is now admitted
that the Bill was accepted. There was an inquiry
made into the transatlion, and I will state to you
what the result of that inquiry was. I have told
you that Messrs. Dick had very large transastions
with Mr. Cullen of
,Liverpool, and, after this
Bill hail been accepted, and lay in the hinds of
Messrs. Dick accepted, they heard from Liverpool
of the situation of Mr. Cullen ; on that, one of the
Messrs Dicks went down to Liverpool to, Mr.
Cullen,, and told him that he was a very good sort
of than ; that they had great resped for hint, and
that they wished, to support him; but he said there
were large dependencies, and there must be an ar.
rangement of affairs. Says he,. " I wish only that
you would give me a Warrant of Attorney for
50,0001. to cover all dependencies ; it is just to
spew to my partner in London,
.and then things I
will go on as before." This, in plain English,
was, if necessity required, to enter,. up Judgment
00 this Warrant of Attorney, and so to obtain a-
preferenee over all his other creditors, The War.
rant of Attorney was obtained on the 7th of Otto.
her : Mr. Dick immediately came up to town, en.
tered up Judgment upon it, sent down an Execution
to Liverpool to the house of, !silt. Cullen, and swept
him as a trader completely from the, face of the
earth. .

Now, why do I state these observations ? For
this reason, that independent of the point of Law
which I shall presently submit to his Lordship, on
every principle of Justice_ and Morality (and these
are the principles that govern mercantile transac.
tions), Mr.. Quinrin Dick is bound by law, and
in honour and conscience, to pay the amount• of
this bill, without waiting for your verdia ; and the
season why he is bound to pay is this, because .he
obtained this Warrant of. Attorney of Mr. Culren
iron') an undertaking implied from the strongest
terms, if nut expressly stated, that he would sup-
port him id business. Now, how could he support
hint without. paying his bill ? He came- back,
however, to London, after having obtained this
Warrant of Attorney, and struck out his acceptance,
and returned the bill in the mutilated state in which
you now perceive it. It is impossible for me to
stifle this case up to the terms which it .deserves.......
On t,wo grounds I ask your verdin: one of the
grounds will he for his Lordship's judgment, which,
you will follow ; on. the other you want no direc-
ocin from his Lordship, but the ratitude of your
own minds will lead you to a proper conclusions
The first point is, -that Mr. Dick has'rnatie himself
liable because he.accepted the. bill and hail no right
to strike out. his acceptance. In the next place, by
mutilating the hill he has made it his .own ; this
case is not new ; there was a case similar to it of
the name of Tremor and Oddy, where a person
had accepted a bill and :afterwards struck out his
acceptance, held by my Lord NANYOkI iincl a Special
jury that he had no right to mutilate the bill.
Lord ELLENBUKOUGH here OW if he could
read the acceptance to the Kill. '
Mr. G111136-,--" No,.tny Lord, but it is admitted
that there was an acceptance." •
Lord ELLENBOROUGH" There can be,no
doubt on the. Case. as you., have stated the
former Case to, which-you have alluded, there was
some doubt whether the' lids, had been accepted, and
whether . they ought not -40 have declared upon it
as a Bill elefaced. Now, if You accept a Bill
Once; you have. done the aCti and cannot retran it.
It is extremely material to the 'commercial world
than pat ties'should be bound" by their engage_
nice

Mr. E.Ksr.ttiEs tin behalf of the Defendants, said,
" my Lord, I wish to suggest this :-`Suppose a
yerion draws; a bill Upon me, and 'it is left with me
for acceptance, 1 accept it, considering at the time
that .1 ought to accept it, but afterwards-some rea-
sons, occur I ought not to have put try Oarne on
the till, and before a nocificatiiin of it to any other
person that 1 have pot ,my name upon itoo create
an interest in a:third perion,7Tiibliterate that ac.
ceptance ; suppose that no other man.eVer :raw: MY

name upon it, or gave 'credit to the bib, I ask pile-
ther as to third persons, that can ,be considered as
an accepted hill I will suitose I hive a son in a
distant part of the world, and he
.sends me a letter
that he is in embarrassed circutnsiances, and in-
cloaing a bill for my,ilcceptanee for wool. to re.
,lieve him from his pecuniary embarrassment. I ac-
cept the bill, and before the person, in whose fa-
vour
.the bill is drawn, calls upon me for that ac-
ceptance, I receive another letter from my ion,
stating that- indebted 20,0001. by. which I
see that my acceptance ,can be of no use to him,
and I strike it. out." '

Lord ELLENBoRo.u6I4.—" I tilink, Mr. ER
sKINt, it is still in Acceptance."

One of the jury.—“ My Lord, there are great
doubts upon this question."
Lord ELLENSUROiIdII.^." Sir; if it is wished,
the question: may,belit upon the Record—no man,
I am sure, would wish to warp the point of law. It
has been considered
,as a settled point, and if
.there
be any doubt, whether an Acceptor is liakle on
Bill of Exchange, they may .movi-for a new trial
the :Wm is 'sufficienily large fOr that purpose, and
here there is an admission upon the fads."
One of the Jury,—" My Lord, an old Juryman'
told me, that the Earl ,of ,MANsFrELD had said,
that a Bill was never accepted until it was delivered
back into the hands. of. the Holder."
Lord ELLENBOROUdIi." You must not meddle
with the Bill .from the moment it is accepted ; it .then
runs. The Admission here raises the question, and
you may have the opinion of the whole Court."

Another Juryman.-7" If that qtwstinn was to
be agitated in the Court of King's Bench, for the
satisfatlion of the Mereantile part the Public, it
wotilti be very desirable to determine, whether there
is any distinke.tion between A Bill drawn after date,
and a Bill after sights Your Lordship, sees this
is after sight, its operation being after acCep.-
ance, but that point of law would not attach in like
manner on a Bill after date."

Lord ELLENBOROUGHt----" Sir,- I would not
have a. moment's ,doubt upon that subjea, that. the
same Law attaches, because it is got at its essence
and completion from the time of acceptance, and it
running from that moment. There is nodiffer-
ence in point of legal effect, whether after sight or
after date. In the former there-was a doubt upon
die fact as to the acceptance, and whether the Bill
was not to be considered as a defaced bill, and yet
there was a verdia for the Plaiutiff upon the ac-
ceptance; and_there was no motion for'a new trial.
litre the aeceptanceis,adMitted.'' • -
Verdict for the Plaintiffs, damages 4781. toy.