Star.
London, England, 1802-11-03 00:00:00

'LAW IN? EL LIGENCE.

COURT OF KlNG's BENCH, NOV. I.
OLD AND OTHERS V. SAUEY AND OTHERS.

This aftion was brought to recover the fum of
6031. The Plaintiff's are owners of the (hip Re-
liance. Their cafe was, that the Defendants had
freighted 'one hundred tons of the above fltip on
her voyage from Surinam to London; that they
had refereed one hundred tons accordingly ; that
the Defendants had put no goods on board ; and
that they were thus entitled to 6031. for the dead
freight.
The only witnefs called was the Defendant's
Clerk. He faid that-he had been defired to fe-
cure the preference of one hundred tons in any
(hip from Surinam • that he faw one of the Plain-
tiffs at Lloyd's Coffee-houfe, and engaged for one
hundred tons in the Reliance ; and that he after-
wards wrote a letter to the plaintiffs, faying that
the houfe agreed to the propofal he had made.—
On his croft examination he faid that he had no
authority to enter into fuch a contrast • he was
not the general agent of his millers, and he had
not been empowered by them to bind them on this
occafion ; he had mentioned what he had done to
Tome of the partners, who teemed fatisfied, but he
had wrote the letter without the privity of any of
them, and it had never been copied into the letter,
book; a charter party was afterwards tendered to
Mr. Campbell, one of the Defendants, which be
premptortly refuted to execute.
Lord ELLE/41301.0%7CH was clearly of op'n'on
that the Defendants were bound by the adt of their
Clerk. _ _

Mr. ERSKINE contended, that the agreement
was only that the Defendants Should fend home
by the Reliance any colonial produce which they
had at Surinam. If it could be proved that they
had any, or any which they fent by another Ship,
then they would be liable.
Lord ELLEN BOROUGH Paid, this would be a ma-
dam pawn. Who would undertake to keep room
in a Ship at Surinam without knowing whether it
would be occupied ? Allowing that the Clerk had
not, in the firft inftance, authority to contraa, Rill
his adt had been ratified by his fuperiors The
Jury immediately found for the Plaintiffs.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH afterwards obferved, that
it would introduce the molt dreadful confufion in-
to mercantile tranfaaions if a Clerk, who was
held ont to the world as an accredited agent, were
to be allowed to come and fay that his powers
were limited, and that he had exceeded them.
Mr. ERSKINE Paid, that as his powers were li-
mited only during the trial, be muff now confefs
that he was exactly of the fame opinion.

HEATH V. HUBBARD*

This was an anion of trover to recover a third
part of a chip. This (hip belonged to a gentleman
at Newcaftle, of the name of Ward, and failed to
Rulfia in the year tBOO. She was infured by a
club of underwriters, for whom the Plaintiff is
agent, for aoool. being valued at 60001. The
embargo laid upon Britith (hipping by Paul I.
found her at Riga. The owner abandoned her,
but before all the formalities of the tranfatlion
had been gone through, Paul had met his fate,
and the embargo had been taken off by his (ne-
edier. It was then agreed that the property thould
remain in the name of Ward upon his repaying
the 20001. and 2501. additional. The furn of
Isool. was paid back, but Ward then became a
bankrupt. Before this, thinking that he was fole
owner, he had fold the (hip to the Defendant,
Hubbard, who had again fold her to a Mr. Brown
and feveral others. The Underwriters, finding
that they Would -not be paid the 7501. took out a
regiller and went through all the Reps necelfary.
for vetting in Heath, their Agent, the legal tide
to one third of the (hip.
Three points were made for the Defendant
That trover could not be maintained, a's the Plain-
taiff, if he had any title, muff be conlidered as te-
nant in common with the Defendant, or the new
vendees, no oufier having taken place : a. That
the third part of the (hip had been transferred to
Heath, as Truftee for certain perfons not named,
who, for any thing that appeared, might be fo-
reigners • and, 3. 'That the forms for transferring
the legaititle to Heath had not been gone through
in due time. The fale to Hubbard had previoutly
taken place; and had Lord Hawkelbury's Mt been
complied with, notice would have been fent to all
the. Cullom Houfes in the kingdom, fo that Hub-
bard would have Peen that Ward no longer was
owner of the (hip.
It *as agreed that a verdia (hould pats for the
Plaintiff, inbjea to the opinion of the Court upon
thefe three points.