Star.
London, England, 1814-02-16 00:00:00

HARTOP V. JUICES.

This was an action,• in which the plaintiff', a mes-
senger to the Commissioners of Bankrup•s, sois;_ht to
"recover the sum of rah 18s. for walk and labotit
'done fbr the defendant; an Attorney, by venom he
,had been employed as messenger in two commissions
of bankruptcy, in which the defendant was Solicitor.
Tne employment nt the.detendant to work ute
.commission against Clarkson, (lite of the h inkrupts,
was proved; and also that he undertook to work the
commission; and to procure the bots4rupt his-cert•ri-
cote for £55,, which sum had been paid Ilan by the
bankrupt's father, for who* the defendant had pro-
cured a discharge from his imprisonment in the
King's Bench, in which prison he was confined for
debt, when the defendant was introduced to him, but
his certificate never had been obtained for him.

Mr. TOPPI* G now contended, on the part if the
defendant, that he could not beirld liable for the
expencei attending the working the commissit n, s'nee
it was provided by the Statute that the' petitioning
creditor Should be held liable for the costs, which
should be paid out of the first proceeds of the bank-
rupt's estate which should come to hand.
Lord ELLENnottoccii declared his opinion, that,
as to the first commission, that of Clarkson, it was
throughout a fabrication. The delz!nclant had set up
a petitioning cr,ditor, the bankrupt's falter, and hav-
ing agreed to work the commission for a sum of 85.5,
which sum the father had absolutely paid him, he
could not afterwards turn- round upon the petitioning
creditor, a creature of his own cro.ating, wh.• had nil.
(tiled his contract with him, and paid the sum agreed
upon, and require of him to pay the expellees. of the
messenger. In the other case, perhaps, where it ap-
peated there had been a real genuine commission,
the petitioning creditors were liable. He should there.
fore recommend to the Jury ' to find a verdict for the
plaintiff for 47. 16s. 2d. the expends on Clarkson's
commission, and find for the defendant in the other
commission, with leave for the plaintiff to bring the
question under the consideration of the Court on a
future day, in the shape of a case.—Verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages AO. 16s. 2d.

-COURT OF COMMON PI.EAS, FEB. is.
WARE V. LEVY.

The Soucrriott GENEu.tL stated, that this action
was brought by the plaintiff, an holiest sailor, against
Joseph Levy, a Jew, and a button merchant. So
far as relates to buttons, said Mr. Solicitor, my client
is, in the estimation of the defendant, a foolish, stupid
fellow ; and I agree with him in that assertion. The
plaintiff, in his nautical duty, could exercise a sound
juJginent, but he was by no means able to guard
against land sharks and button dealers. The defen-
dant went on board a vessel, in which the plaintiff,
who is the Captain, carries goods along the coast to
Folkstone and Hythe, and displayed five hundred and
thirty-six gross of buttons, which' appeared bright
and good. He recommended them as excellent ar-
ticles to sell to the folks at Hythe and Folkstone. He
said they were worth 2s. 3d. a gross, wholesale price,
ands by way of special favour, offered to let the plain-
al have them at that rate, provided he paid £lO
.town, and accepted two bills-, one of re2o, the other of
IE3O. The plaintiff,' who knew nothing about the
button% gave the money and bills, and the 'defendant
urther agreed, in case the article did not prove worth
the hum paid, to return the bills and £lO, and pay in.
terest for the cash advanced. When the plaintiff ar-
rived at Hythe and Folkstonehe went witu 'llia cheap
goods to several tailors, who laughed at ,him, and
asked where he had got Inch vital ? They assured
him he mind been taken in, as the buttons, so brilliant
to the -eye, were not worth two-pence a clown. in
fact, like the Yolleshireinan% razors, they had not
been made for use, but merely to sell. The plaintiff,
fin hi 3 retort], made application to have his money re.
ruined,' agreeably to contract ; but having incau-
tionsiy given bilis with his name, the same were paid
away, and 'lie was obliged to pay them, or be arres-
ted. Whten.he went to Mr. Levy, to complain of the
curions buttons, bs told him he was a stupid felloW,
and knew nothing *boot the matter. 44 his •true,"
I said Mr. Solicit(); 4. my client was a stupid fool to
buy. these-buttons, bat he was not fool enough to be
• cheated by a cunnink 'brave, withont seeking legal
• redress." The plainuffat last got his £lO back, but,
being a loser to the =mint of the bills, he -sought to
recover their logs. The Jury would see, by the evi-
dence of several 'respectable button manufacturers,

-
thauthe articles were •trash,.and word) nothing.
George Ttn net being sworn, said, he was distantly
related to ,the -Ind Mate oi•his ship. lie was
onlboatd, on +the gob of May lau, when the. defendant
offetetl the buttons for mgr. Vane the buttons, br
sample, were produced. They woe abeemthe,etee of
waistcoat buttons, and marked so beat maauktoture,"

• , .

though they were evidently the worst Lb at can be'
wade.) The witness said, the terms on which the
parties dealt were these :—Mr. Levy saiJ, when hi
sold the buttons for 9s. Sd. a gross, they would be
found wArth the tnoney, and if .Mr. Ware did not say
so when thebills given in payment tor ttiern btcanne
due, he would return the bills with the 410, and
allow the plaintiff proper discount for his money.—
The witness then described the bills, which were pro-
duced. They went to Folkstone and Hythe, and the
people laughed at: them for fouls, for bringing the
buttons for sale. On their return the defend.lia offered
to take the buttons back, and furnish the pl tiff with
clothes instead, but the plaintiff refused to have any
farther dealing with him..
Mr. Justice DALLAS observed,, at this part of the
case, that abundant. proof had been offered of the
agreement to take bad; the buttons, in case they did
not answer the contract.

. The witness, on. his cross-examination by Mr. Ser-
jeant VAttonatc, answered the following questions
0. Did you try these buttons ?—A. They were nut
worth trying.
Q. Why not ?—A. Because they would have drop-
ped off a waii•coat, if they b. 44.1 been put on.
Q. WhAt do yon iliean by thopping Fal-
ling from the •hanks.

Mr. Justice DA LI.AS (joCocHly )—Brother Vaughan,
:they won't do for a waistcoatin which we tAke a good
dinner.

Q. Where did you try to sell them ?—A. At Folk-
stone and H'the.
Q. How king were you there ? A. A month,
Q. Did you sell any part ?—A. No ; not a button.
Here the Learned Judge observed, that the facts in
the case spoke for themselves. One was a button-
dealer ; the other a Ciptain of a ship.
Mr. Serie:lnt VAUGHAN—Why, my Lord, could he
not 481 the buttons ?

A:nos—Why ;. because when he does attempt to
sell he is laughed at. A man buys goods to sell
which he don't understand, and every body Laughs at
I him. The contract and agreement to take the but-
tons hack is proved, and there is no defence.
The Jury found a verdict, without hesitation, for
the plaintiff, damages 4'60. •