The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-08 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

SIR JOHN PERRINO, BART. AND OTHERS V. SAMBRE:IK AND
JOHN WILES, JUN.

Mr. PARK, in the absence of the Solicitor-General, on
the part of Mr. Verheke, moved for a rule to show cause
why the verdict for the plaintiffs should not be set aside,
and a new trial granted. This was an action on a bill of
exchange for 2,0001. dated Jan. 1826, at two months,
drawn by John Wilks, jun. upon, and accepted by, Wilks
and Verheke, who were in partnership as attorneys. The
bill and signature were all in the handwriting of Mr.Wilks,
and on the 4th of January he sent it to Mr. Barber, one
of the plaintiffs, enclosed in a note, which stated that he
(Mr. W.) " was in need of a sum of 2,0001., and in order
to accomplish his purposes withcut inter firing with his
other means, or selling stocks, he would feel obliged
to Mr. B. to discount the enclosed bill, and that
he would not require to get it renewed when due."
On the same day a sum of 2,0001. was paid to the
plaintiffs, on account of the Welsh Iron and Coal
Joint Stock Company, to whom Mr. Wilke was indebted
in a private account. The point submitted by the Chief
Justice to the Jury, at the trial, was, whether under
all the circumstances, it was apparent to all reasonable
men, that Mr. Wilke had used the name of the
firm for his own private purposes, and if they (lid so, they
should find for the defendants, but after the strong csldress
of hie Lordship, they found for the plaintiffs. It appeared
in evidence that the plaintiffs never discounted any similar
bill for Mr. Wilks, and though there was a notice left at
the office of the firm when the bill was due, yet it did not
appear that it came to Mr. Verbeke's knowledge. There
was a letter, however, subsequently written to Mr. Ver-
beke, advising him of it ; but he referred to Mr. Wilks, who
managed the cash-transactions of the firm. Mr. Park
contended that, from all the circumstances, the plaintiffs
should have known that Mr. Wilke had transgressed
that authority which one partner gives to another, and
therefore that thecase was deserving of further consideration.
Lord TENDERDEN-Take a rule to show cause.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
Nothing of public interest had transpired previous to our
going to press.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

This Court sat for a short time this morning, during
which some motions of course were disposed of.
The LORD CHIEr BARON, at its rising, proceeded to the
House of Lords.

HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY.
HEAD-MONEY. THE AMAZON.
The KING'S ADVOCATE moved far the usual allowa: ce
of head-money in the case of the piratical schooner, the
Amazon, which was chased by the sloop Scout, Captain
Wigston, in the Bay of Honduras, in the wonth of August
1f324. The pirate got amongst a reef of rocks, and the
Scout having pursued her as near as possible, despatched
an English schooner to block up the only outlet from the
reefs, upon which the crew of the pirate ran their vessel
ashore and escaped. A pursuit, however, was commenced,
and 24 of the pirate's crew were captured and taken to
Jamaica, where they were tried as pirates, but for want
of sufficient evidence they were acquitted. It ap-
peared, however, that the Amazon had been the
property of a Spanish merchant, and was captured
by a pirate. Several of the crew were also identified as
persons engaged in piratical exploits, but there was no
insane of compelling the witnesses on these points to at-
tend at Jamica.

The COURT granted head-money for 43 men, the sup-
posed crew of the Amazon.