The Sun.
London, England, 1826-06-07 00:00:00

JOHNSON N. DOWELL AND DAM

At the last Bristol assizes, the plaintiff, Mr. Thomas Johnson,
of Wine-street, Bristol, obtained a verdict against the defendants,
who are hat-manufacturers in the same street, in an action for a
nuisance, caused by the" effluvia and smuts arising from their
manufactory, subject to a reference to John Francis Gunning,
Esq., barrister at law, and that gentleman having awarded
7321. 158. to be paid to the plaintiff, and that the defendants
should cease and forbear the process of water-proofing and stiffen-
ing hats, on theirpremises in Wine-street.

The defendant list term obtained a rule to show cause why th•
award should not be set aside.

This day Mr. PARK and Mr. LUDLOW showed cause against
the rule; which wits discharged.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE 6.

FAWCETT V. EICIIARDSON*...POYAIS BOND&

Mr. Sergeant WILDE bad in this ease obtained a rule, for the
plaintiff to show cause why the defendant, Wm. John Richardson,
should not be discharged out of custody, upon the ground of a
fraudulent arrest, or rather detainer, upon his body. The arrest
was upon an alleged debt of 6,5001., although the plaintiff, him-
self a resident for just cause at Melina-place, within the rules of
the King's Bench prison, had the week before written a letter to
the defendant, stating the reason why he had been previously un-
able to pay a debt of 3001. which he owed him, but hoping very
soon to be in a condition to offer him a satisfactory arrangement
for its liquidation.
Mr. Sergeant Vationsw showed cause against this rule, and
said, that the defendant Richardson had possessed himself of up-
wards of 6,0001. of the money of the plaintiff and his partners,
upon a fraudulent representation of a Poyais loan, which money
had been applied to pay the interest of part of this scheme, and' he
wanted now to get released from custody, for the purpose of
escaping from the plaintiff's claim, although means had conic into
his hands whereby he might liquidate it, if the defendant were
therefore discharged at present, the plaintiff's remedy would be
entirely taken away. The learned Sergeant produced one of these
Poyais Bonds, the form and imposing appearance of which caused
much laughter in Court, although, according to the plaintiff's
statement, he, or those connected with him, had advanced large
sums upon the faith of such an instrument. It set out with re-
presenting 'that " We, Gregor," meaning Gregor Macgregor,
" Cacique and Sovereign of the States, Ate. of Poyais, do," ob-
serving the form an technicality of official appointments, " no-
minate 'William John Richardson, Knight Commander of our
Green Cross, Major of the Regiment of Horse Guards, to be his
Highness's Charge d'Affaires in London, for the states and depend-
encies of Poyais, and do hereby certify that this is a special bond,"
&e. The instrument then designated the particular amount of
the loan Which it professed to represent, and was Si signed and
sealed with our seal of legution," bearing date on the 6th of Oct.
182:1 This bond constituted a part of the first loan for 200,0001.
or 8000001. which was accompanied with a provision, that
a second loan was not to be made, until certain arrangements were
completed for the liquidation of the first; and yet, in defiance of
this arrangement, the Cacique had negociated, Cr attempted to ne-
gociate, a fresh loan for 600,0001. without making any arrange...
ment for the former. It was curious to remark, that though this
instrumenepurported to bear date in October, 1823, and tahave
the Cacique's real of legislation appended to it at that time, yet
the paper upon which this impress was made, was not
manufactured till the year 1824, as the water-mark demouetrated.
Some explanation was offered for this awkward discrepancy, by
a statement that the appointment of Viceroy conferred upon Mr.
Richardson by " We, Gregor, the Cacique," had been recalled in
consequence of some difficulty in the negotiation for the second
loan; and that in issuing further SCrip upon the former loan,
the date and form of the original bonds were, necessarily observed,
although some of them were not negotiated till the following
year.

Mr. Sergeant WILDE contended that the rule ought to he made
absolute, and the defendant discharged from custody, for nobody
could believe that the plaintiff would, on the 12th of April, be
writing to the defendant, entteating some arrangement, anti pro-
mising.taertain conditions, for the payment of 3001., on account of
some over-due bills, for which he (the plaintiff) had become re-
sponsible to the defendant„and arresting the very same person at
the end of the same mouth for a debt of no less a sum than 6,0001.
without any statement of the occurrence of any intermediate trans-
action between the parties. The Court could not enter into the
history of these Poyiis Bonds.
Lord Chief Justice BEST said, that the great difficulty in the
absence of all explanation as to facts, %yea, to.see into the justice
of the case, contaminated as it was with the dealings in such
bonds.

The instructions of Counsel lint being at all sufficiently explicit
so as to open the merits of the transactions between these parties,
it
,was at length agreed upon on both sides, that the plaintiff
should go to trial upon his claim, on the first day of the sittings
after term, and that the liberation of the defendant should depend
on the view taken of the result by the Lord Chief Justice.. lly
this arrangement his detention until the November term would be
'avoidO, wore the plaintiff's claim in reality untenable.

INSOLVENT DEuToRs• COURT, JUNE 6.
VISITATION.
Robert Tubb vame up on his petition to he dildarged, 'when
the statement made by the insolvent appeared to be satisfactory to
the Court; but as two creditors had not been served in due time,
their consents were necessary, in order to his being discharged on
the present occasion.

While the insolvent was anxiously awaithig tho arrival of the
consents, he was suddenly attacked with a paralytic affection,
and fell from ltis seat. The untbrtunate man was immediately
conveyed to the ante-room, and medical aid was speedily pro-
cured.

Shortly after this occurrence, Mr. HEATH made an application
to the Court, and stated what had happened to the insolvent.
The Learned Gentleman said, that he would tall the surgeon,
and if the Court should ho opinion that the unfortunate man
was in a fit atate to sign and swear to his schedule, he hoped the
Court would allow the discharge to issue forthwith.
The Couto, immediately granted the application.
Mr. Wm. Hughes, a surgeon, living in Newmau'e-row,Lin-
coin's-inn-fields, stated that he had been called in to attend the
insolvent, whom he had found in a. very alarming state:
he had taken a very considerable quantity of blood from the pa-
tient, and he was somewhat relieved; he had been deprived
of the use of his right side; but he appeared able to make a mark
with his left hand. In the opinion of witness, his intellects were
not so impaired as so prevent. him understanding* what. 14 was
about.

, ..,
. .
Mr. Berry, the insolvent's attorney, confirmed the latter part of
the preceding testimony, .
The insolvent having sivorn to Ms schedule, he WIN removed to
his own residence in a coach, instead, of being sent to the King's
Bench prison to await the discharge in jta usual contra:. •