The Sun.
London, England, 1829-06-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNE 16.
HALL V. CURZON AND OTHERS.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (with whom was Mr.
Hour) said that this was an action against the Hon.
Mr. Curzon, Mr. Smith, Mr. Slade, Mr. Morrison,
and Mr. Letts, who had been Directors of a Joint
Stock Company, called " The City of London Cen-
tral-street and Northern Improvement Company."
The plaintiff was appointed Secretary to the Com-
pany, and the action was for work and labour done,
and for services rendered to the Company in the ca-
pacity of Secretary.
Mr. Harmer, the solicitor to the Company, pro-
duced the books in which the proceedings of the
Directors were registered, by which it appeared that
each of the defendants had acted as Directors. Two
letters from the Hon. Mr. Curzon were put in.
They were to the effect that Mr. Curzon consented
to become a director. The plaintiff was appointed,
and acted as secretary to the Company.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 125/.
SCOTT V. BEVAN.

This day was published, the Fourteenth Edition, price Ss.

hoards,
ILLUSTRATIONS OF MASONRY,
By the late WILLIAM PRESTON, Esq.
Past Master of the Lodge of Antiquity, acting by home-
morial Constitution.

With important Additions, Alterations, and Improvements,

By the Rev. G. OLIVER.

Printed for Whittaker, Treacher, and Co., Ave Maria-lane.

This was an action to recover the sum of 1,3111.
16s. 4d. The plaintiff had obtained judgment against
the defendant in Jamaica for a sum (including costs
and interest) of 1,8361. 10s. Bd. Jamaica currency.
This was admitted by the defendant. and the dispute
between the parties was upon the amount of sterling
money which represented the sum of 1,8361. 10s.
Bd. in Jamaica currency. The defendant contended,
that if the money had been paid in Jamaica, the
plaintiff must either have received it in bills, or have
transmitted it to England in bills, which bills would
bear a premium. In this view of the ease 1661. and
a fraction, Jamaica currency, would represent 100/.
sterling, and the defendant, calculating his debt at
this rate, had paid 1,1021. into court. The plaintiff
contended that he might have insisted upon being
paid in specie, if he had been paid at all in Jamaica;
that it did not follow that he meant to remit the
money to England ; and that consequently he had a
right to be paid according to the actual difference
between Jamaica currency and sterling money, that
difference being only 40 per cent. The sum of
1,836/. 10s. Bd. reduced to sterling money by this
calculation would give the sum claimed by the plain-
tiff, and the sum in dispute between the parties was,
therefore, 2091. 16s. 4d.
Verdict for the plaintiff to the full amount claimed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE 16.
WASON V. SMITH AND OTHERS.
This action was brought by the plaintiff, a pro-
fessional gentleman, residing at Liverpool, against
the defendants, who are coach-proprietors, to re-
cover the amount of the expenses which he had
incurred in posting from London to Liverpool, in
consequence of the defendants not having per-
formed their contract to convey him and his luggage
by the Sovereign coach.
After hearing all the evidence (which was of
conflicting nature) the Jury retired, and after an
absence of about an hour and a half's duration, they
returned a verdict for the defendants.

ADMIRALTY COURT, JuNE 16.
THE 1101INTSTUART ELPHINSTONE.-WAGES.
This was a suit promoted by a mariner, named
Stephenson, against the owner of the ship Mount-
stuart Elphinstone, for a balance of wages due on
an agreement for a voyage to the East Indies and
China, out and home, which lasted two years,
during which the mariner was steward of the ship.
Li that capacity he had the charge of the plate, con-
sisting of upwards of 200 ounces ; and it was agreed
between the owner and the steward, that if any part
of the plate should be missing through the latter's
fraud or negligence, he should make it good. On
the return of the ship, in April last, it was alleged
that several small articles, amounting to 24. ounces
were missing, for which Stephenson did not account.
The owner, therefore, deducted the sum from his
amount of wages; which balance the mariner now
sought to recover.

Sir C. ROBINSON said, that the law, no doubt,
held persons in the seaman's situation bound to the
honest discharge of their duty ; and they could not,
when their conduct was essentially impeached, come
to this Court for the recovery of their wages. With
respect to the particular case before the Court, it was
not possible for less to be stated to give effect to the
principle of the law. There was neither fraud nor
negligence charged against the individual; the arti-
cles missing were trifling, and such as came into con-
stant use. It was the duty of the Court to reject
the allegation, and thereby stop the suit in limine.
It was stated that the owner in this case was
owner of several other vessels, in which a similar
contract was entered into, and he was desirous of
settling the point of responsibility on the part of the
stewards.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 17, 1829.

cutor to go before the Grand Jury to peter an in•
dictment against Mary Stevens as an accessory be.
fore the fact.

NEW COURT.

Thomas Page pleaded Guilty to an indictment
charging him with robbing his employers, Messrs.
Venables and Co., linen-drapers, Oxford-street, of a
large quantity of silk handkerchiefs.
William Page and John Page, brothers of the
above prisoner, were indicted for receiving a quail.
tity of silk-handkerchiefs, knowing them to be
stolen, the property of Messrs. Venables.
The goods which were found in hat-boxes, where
the prisoners lived, were identified by a brother of
the prosecutors.
William Page, in his defence, said he bought them
of his.brother, who told him he was in one of those
shops-Ivliere they advertise to sell bankrupts' stocks
at one-third their value, and that he was authorised
to dispose of them. He gave, as he thought, a fair
price.
The Jury found William Page Guilty, but acquit-
ted his brother John.
THE'FIRE AT THE BAZAAR IN OXFORD-STREET.

Mary Hewitt, a respectable-looking, middle-aged
woman, was indicted for stealing two fancy work-
boxes, value 65., six pincushion; value half-a-crown,
and a memorandum-book, the property of Mi•s
Mary Goetze, who kept a counter in the bazaar in
Oxford-street, previous to the late fire.—The Jury
found her Guilty.