Star.
London, England, 1823-12-12 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
IK CONSINCATJON roma THE PIIIC.FIZSG ?AIM
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ECF.M BER 10.

A TAILOR "aka.—FLICK V. TOLLEM ACI4 E.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN stated this case to the Jary.
, was an action brought by the plaintiff, who was a
:ailor, residing at Woolwich, to recover froth the delen-
Ant, who was a gentleman of rank and fortune, the
:mall sum of 61. the price of a snit of clothes which had
been furnished to'his son, whilst a cadet at Wo ,lwich
cademy. The clothes Bad .been charged at a mode-
rate rate, and he was quite at a loss to know what de-
-Ace would be set up.
Thomas Thelkell was then. called, and stated that he
•as'a workman in the employment of the plaintiff; he-
ld made the clothes in question:
The following cross-examination excited a good deal
men iment in Court :
Serjeant Nita—What arc yon, Sir? •
Wituess,...What am I, your Worship ?,
Serjeant Pret..—Yes, Sir ; what are you ?
Witness.—Sir, I am a tailor, and I hope an honest man.
Seq•ant ?mt.—Weil, John ?
Witness.—My manse is net John, your Worship.
Serjeant niatter about your name; you are fore-
Stan to Mr. nick ? •
Wiraess.-40, your Worship; I'm only, as I said before, a tailor,
. one might say ; and I hope an honest man between Gomand my
Own conscienee—(ankh laughing).
Serjeant Neu—Tell Me now, between Gon and your own con:
science, did you ever see that paper before?
• Witness.—T cannot tell till I get my glasses.
Serjeant lint—Come then, I'll lend you my barnacles (a laugh).
• The witness, having got spectacles on nose, replied—Yes, your
Worship, I have seen that paper before.
(This paper contained the regulations of the College.)
Serjeant t'eie—ln your master's shop?
Witness—No, your Worship.
Serjeant come, John, let us have die truth.
Witness—My name is Thomas, your Worship.
Serjeant Psee—Welt Oleo, honest Thomas, between roy and
your own conscience, answer me this question : Did your master
say, that although it was contrary to the regulations of the College,
Jet, if he did not give the lack clothes he could not live?
Witness—No, your Worship; between Goo and my own con-
science, my master as honest a man as ever drew a stitch, and
never spoke to me in any such a manner (a laugh).
George Lathan, an apprentice to Flick, proved the
delivery of the clothes on the Saturday, and deposed
dimity saw them on the young man the following day
Whit-Sunday); and that they were afterwards brought
the house to be repaired..
Alexander Calder dePoled, that he was Quartermas-
. at Woolwich' College; he recollected young Tolle-
mechehaving been at College; he appeared to be be-
100'1.18 and 19 years of age. The young men never
curry away their regimentals from College, but on this
occaston, when young Tollemacte was leaving the Col-
legelor the vacation, he did not leave his uniform behind.
.On his cross-examination he stated, that he had been
his present employment for 13 or 14 years, and he
;membered that The regulations contained in the paper
hich was put in his hand had been constantly in the
tblio room at the College.—This Was the plaintiff's case.
Serjeant PELL humbly submitted to the Court
3-4 there was no evidence to go to the Jury, and that
e-plajntiff ought to be nonsuited. There was nothing
Vim:we that the clothes had been firrnished with the
went• or• authority of the father of the young man,
al therefore he was not-responsible.
Mr. SerjeantVauouAn contended, on the other hand,
lat there was very strong evidence for. the Jury toform
judgment upon ; the fair and natural inference which
y man must draw from the Statement they had heard
is, that the contract had been adopted by the father.
Mr. Justice Butiaouen.-Why,' brother Vaughan, is L not yet
even proved that dais young man.had a father: •
Mr. Serjeant Varottax.—Sureli, my Lord,•you don't doubt that
CoL Tolletuacheis the father of this young man?—( Laughter.)
A letter: was then put in in evidence, which Mr. Mof-
the Solicitor for the defendant, proved to be the
hand-writing of his client. This letter was written in
Answer to an application of Messrs. Bell and 13rodrick,
plaintiff's Solicitors, in which Colonel Tollemache
denied all knowledge of the transaction, and said it was
rntrary to the regulations of the College to give young
credit, and if men would allow boys of 15 years
accumulate debts, they deserved to lose their money.
Mr. Serjeant PELL then addressed the Jury, and said
they had now an opportunity of seeing one of those in-
stances in which causes were brought lamely into Court.
Here was a letter of the utmost importance, as explain-
'ng the reasons -why Colonel Tollemache resisted this
'and "all the while it was lying concealed in the
pocket of a Gentleman in black, wire was sitting behind
him, the Solicitor for his client, turd would probably
there have remained still, had not his.ctlient been driven
hit. the very jaws of senonsuit. (The Learned Serjeant
was interrupted in the course of his observations by some
*Real from a Gentleman behind him.) He repeated
'• there the letter would have remained; the character'

Colonel Tollemache might have been aspersed, and
.s OkiNtuct subjected to every kind of suspicion, and
4e leiterUld never have been produced. lie was
trot ma of those tnea who could be diverted from his
course by any impertinent interruptions, come from
at ;itriarter they might. He was. as unwilling as any
tn4tt co say uncivil things, or wound unnecessarily the
feelings of any man; but when lie once had made such
iservations as be felt called upon to do in the dis-
karge of his duty, he should never retract them, until
found them to be wrong, and that he took. to be the
pnatii.uf a man of spirit as well as an honest advo-
te. Now, could the Jury suppose for a moment that
le tie pounds was any object to. Colonel Tollemache?
• -
io, certainly not. Ile had been properly represented
wan of family and foitune,,aud could they doubt
tat he supplied his son with all that was requisite for
um? 'lt was of importance . that—the law of the land
pop this subject should be fully understood. This was
pe case of a common school i • but if it had been
it would not alter the laic, Now look to the conse-
peaces. What must he the-habits which young men
rouldecquire, if their first step in life was to contract
bts which they were unable to discharge? and who
'AS to blame but those who instigated them on, by'
lying them credit? }lu therefoie
,Intreated the. Jur,
decide according to the evidence. .
Mr. Justice Buatiouan was still of•opinion that there
was not evidence sutlicieut to go to the .Jury ; but Me.
',dram. Vaughan having pet sifted, the Learned Judgel
ld them that this was a case of the greatest import-
lace, although it was for a trifling sum. At the (Jai-
Jersities those matters were narrowly watched, on ac,'
cOuntiffthe dangers that would arise front encouraging
eittrairagance, by tradesmen giving young men ciedit..
it Avowed to hies that there was no,evideuce to prove
thumbs father hag adopted the clothes which had bewtl
furnished to this young man; and if this were the cast;
it wouldhave been easy to hare called some df the ser-
"44 its the house to' prove the fart; .10n the whole, hat
thought the defendant has/ done wisely in resisting the
degniteds and he felt 4.114 duty to tell'them thXt they.
suust.find,a verdict ageism the plitintiff.---The Jury
'returned a verdict Tot the deteadatit.