The Sun.
London, England, 1826-11-30 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

• , •
couirr OF COMMON PLEAS-Nor. 29.
arkscurnarns(iN'e. atisS PLETEIIEC • •
This wit an action to recover compensation for attendance at
the defentlaWs.lionse in Claptou, where Allp kept a young ladies'
solinol. The plaintiff keeps a school near Finsbury-square, and
went every -WednesdaY to Clapton, Wheie she attended two or
three hoUrs in instructing borne of the young ladies in the French
language. The damages were laid at 4,0/.
Mr. Sergeant Vdi dti A k stated 'the' plaintiff's ease.
Miss Kerr, a young lady, who teaches fa the defendant); school,
recollected the plaintiff's coming to the school in December, 18Q4,
and also her giving instruction to some of the young ladies. The
entire number at the school were eighteen; at one time seventeen
of these were receiving iustrpctious in French. At another time
the number was considerably less. Witness heard the defendant
say, she charged the parents enough to pay tee coach hire of Miss
Cuthberson. The plaintiff resided at a distance of three miles
from Clapton, and kept a school. She was in a delicate state of
health. The plaintiff and defendant were old acquaintances, and
bad been' intimate friends. •
Miss Douglas, another teacher in the same school, corroborated
the above testimony.
Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE, for, the defendant, contended, that
the attendance Of the plaintiff was merely an exchange of good
offices.
The Rev. Alexander Fletcher, who is brother to the defendant,
was called on her behalf. His sister was in the habit of giving,
instruction in French. The plaintiff also, attended his sister's
school for the same purpose.
' On his cross-examination, he denied that there had been any
disputes in his congregation-4M disputes were without his chapel.
He had written to the plaintiff to offer an adjustment. His offer
to pay the debt and coo .s proceeded entirely from a wish to pre-
vent scandal.
Mr. Crossly, who had four daughters at the school, said he did
not find any charge made for French.
A lady who had a child at school, produced a bill, in which
there was a charge of .ss. 6d: per quarter for French composition.
Miss Charlotte Fletcher, sister to the defendant, recollects a
conversation with the plaintiff, in which Miss Cnthbertson ex-
pressed a wish to come on Saturday, instead of Wednesday, the
usual day of her attendance. Her object was to remain on Sun-
day at Clapton, but she • only attended twice or three, times on
Saturdays.
Verdict for the plaintiff 8/. 165., deducting 4/. which she had
received.

IMPORTANT TO THE MILITARY.

MAYOR'S COURT.

SIR W. DUREX TODD, PLAINTIFF, 'MESSRS. GREENWOOD AND
COX CARNISHIES, COUNT LINSINGEN, DEFENDANTS.
Yesterday this case came on before the Itircoanza. It was au
attachment issued against the firm of Greenwood and Cox the
Army Agents, for certain monies in their hands, alleged to belong
to Count Linsingen, as part of the produce of the sale of his Com-

mission in the Army.
The London Gazette of October 10, 1828, was produced, from
which it appeared that Lieutenant EWen M'Phemon, of the Ist
Foot, had purchased into the Ist Hussars, and that Captain W.
Count Linsingen was allowed to dispose of his half-pay.
Major Milling, Under Secretary in the Officeof the Commander-
in-Chief, produced an order from his Royal Highness the Duke
of York, with the sign manual, addressed to Afessra. Greenwood
and Cox, authorizing the payment of money by them to Count
Linsingen, to the amount of 1,2001., being part of the proceeds of
the sale of Count Linsingen's half-pay, and authorizing the pay.
went of the residue thereof, being 800/., to the Treasury. This
order was dated the 10th of October, and sent on that day to
Messrs. Greenwood and Cox. On the 11th of October Messrs.
Pierce, army clothiers, made application at Messrs. Green-
wood and Cox's Office for payment of a very large sum of money
'due to them by Count Linsingen; and Sir Herbert Taylor, on
the same day, sent a verbal message to Messrs. Greenwood and
:Cox, desiring that those agents would not pay over the amount of
the sale of the Commission to the Count. On the 12th of
October an attachment was issued, and on the 13th a written
noticeivas sent by the Corninander-in-Chief, directed to Green-
wood and Cox, revoking the order of the 10th for the sale of
the Oammitisiou.
It was contended, on the part of the plaintiff, that the purchase
money in the bands of tLe garnishees was to all intents awl pur-
poses the property of the defendant, from the moment the order
was issued to Alessrs. Greenwood and Cox, authorising the pay
itierit of it to him, and that the subsequent notice of revocation
WAS not available, inasmuch as the attachment had been issued
previously, and could not be prejudiced by any order of the kind
even if the po*er of revoking existed.
Against the plaintiff's claim upon the garnishees it was con-
tended, that until Count 'Linsingen had actually received the ailment
of the sale of his commission,which could not have been disposed of
without the permission of the Commander-in-Chief, he could' not
be said to be time owner, of that, amount which lay in the hands of
the army agents, subject to the future disposal of the Commander-
in-Chief, as if no orilir of any kind had been issued.
The COURT was of opinion that the money in the hands of
Greenwood and Co. was not the property of Count Linsingen, as
the actual payment of it to him had not taken place, but was sub-
ject to military law, and under the controul of the Commander-in-
Chief, the Commander-in-chief having exercised such controulling
power, by revoking the first order. The plaintiff, therefere, was
not entitled to a verdict.
A Juryman observed, that it appeared to him that COunt Lin-
singen had possession of the money from the date of the 10th
October.
The RECORDER said, that the Commander-in-Chief, who
alone had the power of allowing commissions to be sold, had for-
mally revoked the order authorising the payment of the money.
Juryman—" The Money was nut recalled until after' it was at.,
tubed." .
The REconnia---" If it had been paid before the attachment
was issued, the attachment would certainly not be available. Be-
sides, a verbal order revolting that of the 10th of October had
been sent to Messrs. Greenwood and Cox; which verbal order was
followed up by the written order. In my opinion the attachment
is of no avail.
Several of the Jury respectfully expressed their dissent from the
opinion of hie Lordship,. and said they considered that the gar.
nishees were liable.
The Reconnee—" If you take upon you to say that this is
Linsingen's money, notwithstanding the revocation of the order, 1
cannot help it. 1 only say that it is my opinion that the money
is not his, and cannot be attached as his."
.luryman—" It cannot be wished or expected that we would
give a verdict contrary to the evidence that has been adduced."
The Ratiortnen-L." Certainly bOt. The evidence is to me
quite satisfactory on the point. It is quite evident that the money
is the money of the military Board, and that the defendant has no-
thing to do tvith it. r
Jurymau.—" The money becomes his, in my opinion, after the
sale of the connissiou."
Mr. A:immunise, for the Plaintiff, suggested that as the Jury
seemed dispoied to find against the opinion of the Court, it would
be the better way to return a special verdict.
Jitryman—The money wasgiven up to the defendant when the
the purchase was completed upon the Commauder-in-Chiers
permission ; and the third party, Which is recognized by this
Court, having it in possession, it, it appears to us, subject to the
authority of the Omit
The ReCortorst still maintained, that the money was not legally
attached ; but said, dot if the Jury were determined to find other-
wise, he could not help it.
The Jury gave averdict for the Plaintiff.
Mn I.ltrutnouse said, that an injunction would be moved for.

HATHWAI V. BLP:ADSI4.
Mr. LA w stated that this was an action brought for the value
of goods sold and delivered, for money lent and advanced and ex-
pended, &c. &c.
Mr. BoLLAND said, that the plaintiff and defendant were re-
spectable 'gentlemen of the Corporation of London. The plain-
tiff kept a stationer's and newsvenders shop close to the Royal
applied to Mr. Bath-
Exchange; and Mr. Bleaden Was secretary or clerk to the Royal
Alliance Mining
way, who is in the habit of inserting advertisements, to do jos.
tice in that manner to the Company alluded to. Mr. liathway,
CAmpany. Mr. Bleadeu
in compliance with his directions, put adeertisenieuta in several
of the papers relative to that .Company, 'and 10 a second Com.
pang, the debt to which SSI: 101. 6d. was , Admitted, and to a
certain monumental trophy, in honour of hie 3fajesty King
"e"ffu M. The Jury knew the expences of advertising. it
cost Mr. flathway between iti/, and 17/., upon which hit corn-
mission amounted to no more than )os.
Mr. IllesChsuof the London Tavern, was called. lie deposer,
, • avern,
tb4t hr believed that a paper, stating the names of the Newspapers
in %Odell the several advertisements were to be inserted, was in the
writing of the defendant, who wax' a relation of his.
3 ed. 'Weir liv with Mr. Ilathway ; had applied to defendant for
payment of s!.loe. 6d. for advertising the Alliance Co
mpanY ;
was desired to call frut o time to time, and was protnimed payment
itt ?,1t eh Wit it There was also Monumental Trophy account.
.lue Rre"DEtt having summed up, the Jury found for the
plaintiff to the
amount of the ittlinitted debt.