Star.
London, England, 1802-02-17 00:00:00

LAW INTEL LIGENC E.

COURT OF JUNG'S BENCH, FEB. x 6.
tORIS W. JOHNES, LK:
Mr. Easels& Rated, that he was very much
furprifed that this caufe should have been brought
into Court, and that the defendant thould have
attempted to edge himfelf out of his contraa.—
The plaintiff was a printfeller, and the defendant
a Member of Parliament, and a man of large for-
tune, reprefenting a county in Wales,, where he
refided. He had a moft magnificent feat in that
dillant part of the kingdom, and was defirous of
having a complete colleftion of all the caricatures
ever publifhed. He employed the plaintiff to make
this colleaion, nor was the fancy itfelf a ridiculous
one ; it was amufing and infiruaing to fee all die
varying shapes and tirades of human folly ; and
when Mr. Johnes was at his diftant country feat,
and could not fee the fools of this town at firit
hand, it was not an unentertaining amufement
to view them in caricature. Mr. Erfkine here
entered into a very pleafant view upon the fubjea
of caricature, which he averred could not be en-
jeTed•in perfeetion, unlefs a man entered into the
femme of it. An odd Eli, a quiz, a gig, were all
diftinEt tirades of caricature, enjoyed by the ansa
teur, but paired over by the common obferver.
It was the lot of human nature not only to in-
, creafe in wifdom, but to increafe in folly alfo,
and as folly increafed, the fubjea of caricature
was enlarged. The dog of too years ago was
the fame as the dog of to-day, but man had va-
ried, not only in fifhion and form, but in mind
alto, a thoufand different ways, and each extreme
had furnifhed a new fubjea for caricature. To
thole who could relifh this, it was a (mime of
great gratification. It was on this fubjea as it
was with botany. The common man walked into
the fields, and trod on every plant inditeriminatcly,
but the botanik received esquifite pleafure in exa-
mining. and contemplating all the different con-
formations and ufes of the various plants which
he met with. He obferved his Learned Friend,
the Attorney-General, taking a note of this—he
prefumed he was a botanift.
The ATTORNAY GiNfRAL laid, No I Old) in pot
kerb:.

Mr. ERSKINE continued, fo it was with Carica-
ture as with Botany, to thofe who entered into die
fpirit of it, it was a fource of pleafure unknown to
thofe who did not. He then Rated the contraa,
and ffferal letters from Mr. Jobnes, dated from
his feat in Wales, one dated in December, 1800,
in which he defircd to know what progrefs the
collation had made ; and another of the 4th of
May, in which he declined taking the collation on
account of not being in ready cath to pay for it,
and raying, that he had given dirations the lalk
Autumn to Mr. Edwards to flop the further pro-
grefs of the collection. Mr. Erfkine having Rated
this evidence, added, that he fhould3not wonder if
this lubjea afforded new matter for caricature. As
thus--1. The Amateur ordering a complete col-
leaion, his face glowing with pleafure, and his
whole frame on the tiptoe of expeaation. Plate 2.
The Amateur on receiving his bill. Plate 3.. The
trial of the caufe : and Plate 4. Tilt. Amateur on
hearing the verdia—tool. damages. Having dil-
-1 ported al this fithien with wmpll nlosfantro Mr_

Erlkine raid he ihould produce his evidence, which
would entitle him to the verdie of the Jury.
John Herring, iliopnian to the Plaintiff, and the
fon of the Plaintiff, proved, that in June, i 3co, Mr.
Johnes ordered a complete colkdion of all the ca.-
ricatures ever publilhed. Upon crofs examination
they denied that he gave orders to exclude indeccut
ones.

The ATTORNEY CENTRAL propored to refer dee
calif:, which produced thine convcrfation, when,
Mr. Juttice LAWRENCE raid, •that if it
appear, upon looking at any of dick prints, they
were indecent and al.!••ainll thz ralzs of morality to
exhibit them, or if they were individual-,
fo that if the !Plaintiff were tried for pohlithiog
them, he might he found guilty of a libel, Ile should
tell the Jury, that they ought not to allow the
Plaintiff any thing for fuck prints, under any agres-
ment whatever. for no agreement to perform that
which would be a breach of the law, could be en-
forced in a Court of Juflice. He did not mean to
fay, that this was the charaaer of every caricature
print, for Inch as were ridicule of folly, or general
manners of the age, were not to be deemed libels.
Upon there übfervations from the Bench, the pat-
ties agreed to refer the attire.

GRIM/LDI V. WRITS.

This was an :talon brought by •the plaintiff;
who is a miniature painter, againit a young Lady
of the name of White (who was going out to In-
dia), for the value of the portraits of feveral of her
friendi, which he painted according to her di.
rations.

Two witnefres were called on the part of the
plaintiff, who proved that the piaures, which
were the lubjed of the action, were executed by
the order. of Mils Whit; and that it was Mr. Gri•
maldi's cultom to hang up fpecimens of his per-
formances, with the prices affixed to each, ac-
cording to their fixes. Mifs White faw there fpe-
cimens, and direded the portraits to be executed
in the fizes between Nos. 7 and 9. Neither of the
witneffes could floe accurately the different man-
ners in which the refpe'live portraits were done.
Mr. Ease:es, for the defence, contended, that
the pictures were not done in that manner %%Lie-,
from the celebrity of Mr. Grimaldi's 1::p-,iz4t.ten,
the defendant had a right to expeCt. Lie iztc.r.
him full credit for great and extraordinary talta:s,
but what he complained of was, that in the pre-
Litt cafe he had fuffered thole talents to be wailed,
aid had not painted any thing near his fpecimens.
He had his client mere daubs, and by no
means likenefft.;. U.' remembered a Rory that lie
once heard from his late reit; .61ed friend, Sir Jo.
fhua Reynolds, upon the fobjed of a bad likenefs,
which this caufe brought to his recolledion :—A
notorious rafcal and fwindler, who had frequent
occafion to hide himfelf from his creditors, never-
' thelefs7cletermined to have his portrait taken.—
The paifiter he employed did not make a happy
I likenefs. When Sir Jolhua faw the pieure, as the
was a well-known charatter, he told his friend that
he had not been fteccefful in the likencfs. The
painter, who was a no:n of wit, immediately e-
plied, " Aye, there is policy in that, the man.
does not wish to be known." This was not the
cafe with his fair client; fhe wanted correct like.
neffes of her friends, to folace her in a diftant
climate, from whence the might never return
again ; and as he thould prove there fail's, he tru
ed the Jury would think the fum of tool. which
file had paid into Court, was abundantly fuffi-
cient to fatisfy the plaintiff's demand.
George Denman, a jeweller in the Strand, and
Birch, a miniature painter, were called on
behalf of the defendant, but they did not go fur-
ther than Rating that they had feen better per-
formances of Mr. Grimaldi's than thole in queftion.
The latter witnefs, however, obferved, that the
better pidures lie alluded to were copies of Sir
Jolltua Reynolds, and the works of molt modern
artifts were better when they copied from him,
than when they produced original compofitions.
Another witnefs Rated, that none of the pi Lures
were good likeneffes except one.
Mr. Juflice LAWRENCE obferved; that as to the
ckarader of the paintings, perhaps the Defendant
might have a right to infift, not that they fhould
be equal to any thing the Plaintiff ever painted,
but equal to what might be reafonably expelled
from a man of his (kill ; but in this cafe, the De-
fendant precluded herfelf from going into that
evidence, by accepting the pidures. If they wet e
not done as they ought to have been, by a man of
the Plaintiff's (kill, the Defendant's way would
have been, to return the pidures, on the ground
that they were not agreeable to the contract, and
then evidence might have been giventiii had
Thewbteheant
they were ill dime, &c.: but that queai„i
concluded by the Defendant's accepting the pic-
tures. 'The contract here was an entire contma,
and the Plaintiff here had earned all or nothing,
and the Plaintiff mull be taken to have earned all
of it, becaufe the quellion upon tile value had been
(hut up by the Defendant taking the paintings, &c.
Nor was this new doctrine: Lord KEN YON had held
the fame in the cafe of the painting of a horfe for
an eminent Solicitor in the City ; and the fame
had been held in the cafe of the painting of a boric
of Sir Harry Vane. As to the overcharge in the
letting, which was two guineas, as fpokcn to by
one of the altneffes, that might be redeced fairl7,
if the Jury thought fit, and therefore the verdid
would be for the difference between the tool. paid
into Court, and the amount of the Plaintiff's de-
mand, which was 1331.
. Verdict for the Plaintiff—Damages 311. gs.

People grown up, and of any age, that are quire
ignaraht of dancing; Ail) those who only w int the
I athionable Ileps, acquire them ninft expeditioufly,
and in the firit ft yle, at Mr. Ai. E s 's, No. 19, Sher-
rard•llrect, Golden-quare ; or No. to, Great-
Alie-lireet, Goodman's-fields; and thole who love
dancing to good maim, may, by fubfcribing to
the Sole& Aftemblies there, enjoy a pleafure which
as one Alterably in England gives betides, as Mr:
Gow and Mr. MACKINTOSH, the molt charming
Performers of Ball tel clic in this country, arc poll.
tively engaged to lead the Band alternately, from
the heniunios of February to the eud of they:Aron.