The Sun.
London, England, 1810-06-27 00:00:00

LAW I.iEPOlri'.

COURT OF KING'SjtEN,CI44.Iu-N246.

BLAKUY 11. ASTLEY.

Me. ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved that :thOlaster
ahould be order,cl hi • taxation of the Bill
of dosti' in this case'. He stated-that the defendant,
Mr. Astley, a• gentleman of independent
fortuff,-, in Cheshire; the defendant a person
fond of colouring canvas'', and, 'in_ hips own opinion,
an ade;it in the art of painting. He got an iptio-
cinion to the defendatit's fatrulyi. and soon
brong,,t thorn to an opinion that ail the paintings
I_;iv. kit had b4n collected :by ,he itetendanti ances-
tor: were.m -re daubs. :Ile- nOt b ing a connoisseur
telHed What the plaintiff asserted, an,l engaged him
try turn h a sef nt o.i4inal paintings, for which. the
defendant gave' bis bond o a large amount. • After
its- execu'ion;' the defendant discovtred that the
paintings: on4ht to have entered wood, 'instead of
canvas, for they were only fit for sign's, iu.tead of
being calCulated to o: anent Picture Gallery,
which determined the defendant to dispute the va-
lidity of the bond. The plaintiff brought his iiiton
to recover- the interest d4.7.e. 471. -19 C. and the &fen-
dant was prepared to have defended it, but was ad-
viAtid by' his Counsel that his relief ]ay; in equity,
.arid be-lefittlginetit go by default... The casts were
sent tot he Ma-ter for taxation-; and it,appear,,.d ex-
traordinary -that, after- his taxation, they should
anio4nt hi the sum of 401. It was true, tha• the
pUiintitt had brought up witne'ses from Chester..
Lord .ELLENBOttOnGII—" Were you nut under
short not ice' of trial.?

Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERA!,--t" We were, my
Lord ; but we resisted, on the ground that the
paintings were not originals, as engaged." •
Lord ELLENBOROUGII—" [Lye you the affidavit
tfia't`induced ete Master to enlarge the costs; for,
in justice to him, we cannot send it back, for his re-
vision, without being in possession of the gtoond
that he at-led Upon ?"
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—" I am not in.pos-
session of the affidavit, my- Lord ; but perhaps the
Court would allow me to rake a rule to stew cause."

Mr Justice GROSE-.--" It is. not in the power of
the Court; without being more: fully in possession
of the facts. When you get a 'copy of . the Affida-
vit which the Master acted on, it will be in. your
power to move for a rule to shew cause."—Motion
refused.

ADAMS V. OGTLVIE.

Mr. G.OROW moved: for a rule, .to slew cause'
why the non;uit in this Icasiiio 'ld net be set
aside, This
.amion was tried in Mid and-
the noos-iiii took place in!er the to lowing cir.:
curnsta;ece.-,-4 pers'ia) of, the na;ne, of Davey was
the Olaintitr in
.the shell of 1861. He
,nded it, wit h• the -inteuilon of puicha4ing
rpilk-walk. I)avey :informed him, -that be could
not immediafely'eive him the 7niorsey, but to pro.;
ceed ire the contraa f,r the milk-walk, and agree
pay for it on a certain day and if hr ,(13/Vey)
disappointed -inrn._of the:lB6l. at the time of com-
pletion, he would fel-frit 201. more in fati, he did
d:-appoint the plaintiff, and, to 4ati,oy the claim,
gay', a bill on the defendant, he being the drawer,
f.), 2071. On the trial,. D.lvey. was produced as. a
witness, to chew that the bill w,s. In usurious one.
The Learned Counsel stated, th it it world he re.
collthe'd by the Chief Justice (Lord Ellenhonuehl,
that the lvitness spoke very indi,tiuKr, in so
~low
a voice, that a few, •moeosyll,lbl;'s only conhr be'
wh;eh were suffirient. to lead Lreds' ip
and the Jury to 'believe, • that the Plaintiff le-A
entered into %an agreement to receive.2o per cent.
for his money. Under these considerations, he
.(the Learl•ed Counsel) sr4fered his client to be non-
New has had come to his knowledge
since, that Davey, the drawer of the bill, and the
uitness,:was also the defendant's bail in the anion.
Under 'these' consideraeonsi he trusted their Lord-
ships would grant.the rule. .
• Lord Et. titt4ButtouGt+—'‘ Your desire of being
non-suited was not forced;_ I did no , on the trial,
hold out any thing that slfould hate encouraged
you to that mode of. proceeding ;. you haye an op-
portunity of bringing it beforea jury, but, under the
present circumstances, you cannot expect the Court
to intr.' fere."

Mr. GARROW—"-I am fully aware of the trUt7t
of your Lordship's observation. I. felt an anxiety to
bring it before the Court, for my judgment has been
rather doubted ; in looking over.my brief, I could
not see that Davey had been mentioned as the bail
of the defendant. It might have been mentioned by
those persons whort we generally receive in,,trbc-
tions from ; but, front the great press Of bu,iness,,l
'might hwe forgotten :t ; and, tinder the same cir-
tumstances, I don't know but I would to-morrow
ip a similar way. I havle_ thought if necessary to
mention Inns much in defence. of rnyelf, and to ac-,
kno, ledge that the Lord. ChiefLAi!stiae appeared'
on the issue_to have an opinion in cniion with mine."
—Rule . -

COURT OF 'COMMON PLEAS, fvxs z 6.

SLAG V.'LOVELL.