Star.
London, England, 1805-06-10 00:00:00

KENNETT V. DUFF*.

This alto was an alion to try the validity of a
Comtnitton of Bankruptcy, and the chief queftion
was, whether the Plaintiff had committed an ad of
bAnkrnincy previous to the debt of the Defendant
aceruill due ?
The Plaintiff was formerly an upholfterer in Bond-
, ftreet, but is now a curer of the tooth ache. reftding
in Lincoln's-inn-fields, frotn whofe advertifernent it
appeared tbat the Gentlemen of the bar were great-
ly aftifttcl it; their articulation by the mere fmell of
this infallible remedy.
The Dcfend,int was the Maher of an Academy,
and the raintiff had contratfted a debt with him for
the education of his three fons, amounting to to7l.
A commiftion was formerly iffued againit the Plain-
tiff, which was fuperfeded. Another loon after was
iffued, and Meffrs. Palby and Mayfair were appoint-
ed aftignees ; they were afterwards removed, and the
Defendant appointed. It appeared that the Defen-
dant had pruved his debt under the commiffion, in
the prefence of the Plaintiff, who then made no ob-
jeetion thereto. The exiftence of the petitioning cm
ditor's debt was fully proved, and the Jury found a
verdict for the Defendant.
ALLEN V. CASTELL.

The Plaintiff is a taylor in Bond-ftreet, the Defen-
dant is the fon of a Gentleman, lately at the headed a
banking Ilona. and is now refident in the Ealt Indies.
This action was brought to recover the firm of to4l.
the amount of a bill for wearing apparel.
Mr. GARROW, for tlte Plaintiff, laid, that this was
a hill of two years ftanding, and to a man of fafhion, '
was a very moderate one for that period. The fon
of an eminent banker could not dine eradly in the
drefs in which he paraded Bond-Ilreet, or ambled in
the Palk ; finite additional ornament muft be fup-
plied for the hour of the convivial banquet, and a
cotlume yet more fplendid for the fucceeding feflivi-
tiei of the ball, the concert, and the Opera. He should
prove, that the clothes were fupplied, and that they
were to a reafonable extent, foe a perfon of fuch
portance in the world of tafte and gallantry.
The feveral workmen were then called, who de-
livered the articles of drefs for the ofe of the Defers
dant.
William Williams faid, that the father, Mr. Sa-
muel Caftell, called one day, and Mice" how the
monkey's account flood, adding. My monkey is
coming from fawn', and what is tent in future !hall
be charged to his own account."
Mr. ERSKINE, for the Defendant, faid, that this
was an attempt, on the part of the Plaintiff, to ren-
der the bail of the young man refponfible, on account
of the failure of the father. The Defendant had been
fitted out for the Eaft Indies, whither he was about
to proceed, in the fituation of a Cadet. The Plaintiff
took the opportunity of arrefting him, jolt for to his
departure, bail was provided, and the yotrh was not
difappointed by this obtruave claimant. The learn-

ea-Creanfal faid he &mid ihew that the father en
alone liable.

Mr. Same r2'&ll (the father of the Defendant)
deni ever having ufed the difrefpeftful err: ffi 3ns
regarding in inn, attributed to him by form( r wit.
net's ; he raid he made the youth a fnfficient allow.
ante after he left Harrow, where he had been n;ne
years ; he had never intimated there was to be any
alterati ui in the accounts with the Plaintiff, nr that
the bills were in future to be made out in ton's
name.

Lord Et.tAxaoftoocti" The rum paid into
Court cot-2rs every demand fubfequent to the tit of
April, 1804. The queilion for you is, if the father
or fon were liable bzfore that time ? It would h

been a very important matter in evidence for the
Plaintiff, if he had (hewn any one inßance in which
he had delivered the bill to the fon, or made any
account out in his name."—Verdift for the Defendant.
SATURDAY, JUN[ S.