Star.
London, England, 1801-07-25 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

BURY, JULY 24.—The Affizes for the County
of Suffolk commenced here yellerday ; twenty
Prifoners appeared for trial on the Calendar, none,
however, for offences of any magnitude. The bu-
finefs at the Nifi Prim? Bar is not very great ; the
only Caufe of importance was this day heard be-
fore Mr. Baron HOT HA M.

CRAGS,/ V. OAKES AND SON.

This was an Action brought to try the legality
of Bank Notes as a tender in fatisfadion for any
demand.

It appeared on evidence that the Plaintiff, who
is a gentleman refiding near Bury, has at different
times demanded of the Defendants, who are
Bankers in that town, fpecie in exchange for their
cafh notes. The circumftance on which the aCtion
. was founded, happened on the 3 t ft of January laft,
at which time the particular fcarcity of fpecie ren-
dered it neceffary for the Defendants, as well as
other Bankers, to limit the iffue of calk to a cer-
tain proportion, in order to accommodate the
public in general. On the day before Rated, Mr.
Gr:gby brought to the Bank of Meffrs. Oakes and
Son, their notes to the amount of fifty guineas,
for which he accepted Bank notes and calh in the
idual proportion of exchange; he then prefented
a five guinea note, for which, agreeable to his de-
mand, he received calls : he afterwards repeated
it with another five guinea note, for which he was
tendered a five pound Bank note and five thillings
in calh, which the Plaintiff refilled to accept ;
and declared his objet was to infill upon having
ca(h for all the Defendants' notes he might pre-
fent, and if refufed, he would bring an aaion.
The Learned Judge, after repeating the evi-
dence to the Jury, made fume remarks on the con-
duet of the Plaintiff; which, whatever it might be
on other occalions, appeared, he faid, in the pre-
fent infante, to be bufy and officious, and, if car-
ried to the extreme, to have a mifchievous ten
dency.
The Jury feemed inclined to give a verdia for
the Defendants, but his Lordfhip obferviag, that
it was a queftion-in Law not for their decifion ;
they gave a verdia for the Plaintiff, fubjea to the
determination of the Court of King's Bench.
CHELMSFORD, JULY 24.—OUT Affixes com.
menced on Wednefday lalt, before Lord Chief
plaice Kaman+ and Mr. Jullice GROSS. Their
Lordthips arrived about three o'clock in the after-
noon, and, after opening their cornmiffion, dined
with Sir Hexer MILDM•Y, Bart. at Moulfham-
hall. Yefterday morning, after Divine Service,
(which was performed in the Nifi-prius Court),
and a molt appropriate Sermon from Prov. ch. viii.
v. le : " By me King: reign and Primer decree juiliiT,"
preached by the Rev. J. LYPYEATE, Reaor of
Great Hallingbury, and Chaplain to the High
Sheriff, their Lerdthips proceeded to bufinefs.—
There was a molt refpeaable appearance of the
Magiftracy and Gentlemen on the Grand Jury,
who were addrelfed by Lord KENYON in the fol-
lowing words :
" Gentlemen of the Grand Jury—When I firft
had the honour to reprefent my Sovereign, in
order to affift in the adminiftration of the jultice
of this country, I thought that decency and refpe.ft
required that I fhould enter into the duty and pri.
vilege of Grand Juries. The abundant experience
I have had, in the many times I have had the
happinefs of going the Circuit of the County of
Efex, has convinced me, that neither the Magi-
ftrates have Rood in need of any inftruCtion, nor the
Grand Juries flood in need of any exhortation,
from me, to look into the copious part of their
duty, in adminiflering the criminal jultice that
' falls under their direCtion. It is ufelefs for me to
detail thefe things, which are abundantly well
known by thofe whom I have the honour of ad-
dreffing. The calendar which will come before
you, I am lorry to fay, exhibits a very numerous
lift of very atrocious offences, more, I think, than
ever met my eye in the like period of time, in the
various circuits I have gone. But numerous and
enormous as they are, there is nothing that re-
quires any particular obfervations from me. I am
lorry to fay, that offences too often occur.; and
one laments to fee fo many individuals guilty of
fo many' enormities as appear on this ealendar.—
There se, however, nothing very intricate ; and if
there was any thing intricate, your knowledge is
(efficient to wet it; but the:* is nothing that re-

quires from Me any particular defcription, nor
does any thing luggeft itfelf to my mind, that I
can lay to you, more than you are already ac-
quainted with on this fubjea in general. There
are two offences, or two perfons accufed of the
fame offence, viz. a felonious violation of the ho-
nour of the other fez. It does not often occur that
two offences of that kind are contained in one
calendar. How the cireumltances will thin out, I
do not know. I perceive one of thefe offenders hag
been -icimittcd to bail. Whether the relpeiftable
Magiftratewho admitted him to bail be in my hear-
ing or not I do not know ; but I would jutfub-
mit to nim, that perhaps that is rather an excels
of authority. It is not ordinarily fuppofed to be
quite right, that a tingle Magifirate, or even tw o
Magittrates, can admit to bail a perfim committed
for capital offences, and a capital offence this id.—
There is likewife another offence in the calendar,
which prefents the fame obfervations to me
an offence ofemagnitude, a capital offence, and bail
ought not to have been admitted. I juft mention
this, not by way of reproach, I do not mean any
fuch thing ; but it is very fit that I fhould mention
what occurs to me, when I am fpeaking to the
fame order of men as myfelf,--11(agyfrates of the
county. If any thing does occur to me, it is du*
to them, as well as to myfelf,
,that I fhould men-
tion it.

" Gentlemen, there is a great number of offen-
ders, I underftand, who have iterated and reite-
rated charges againft them. lam very lorry that
thofe who are able to prote& us, (hould become
the plunderers of th.,le out of whole pockets their
lubsillence and cloathiug arc taken, It is a lament-
able thing, and it is proper that tkeir offences should
be looked at with eagles' eyes, and punned with
the utmoff fever ity. It is not a very pleafant thing
to adminifler the criminal jidlice of the clunti y,
efpecially where the puniffiment annexed to the
crime, by the law, is very levere. But thole who
are placed in Courts of Juflice, mull always film•
mon up fufficient fortitude of mind, to meet the
objets on which they a& ; and if the Laws muff
be promulgated, more than they are, in charaaers
of blood, fo it muff be.—Fatal neceffity calls for it,
and fa it muff be.—None of the Judges of this
land delight in blood, but, on the contrary, I
would almoll fay, a falfe humanity makes them
flop (hon.—But when offences become moll enor-
mous—when they are doubling and trebling upon
us, it is neceffary for the Law to be promulgated ;
it is neceffary for you to look minutely to the pro-
ceedings, before you fend them to another Jury to
decide on their lives, and the Judge to affiff that
Jury; and I cannot but caution you to take care
who you hand up for jullice. Ido not mean by
that to infinuate an improper lenity, but when
death is the confequence, when the life of man is
in danger, you will take care to difcharge your
duty with fortitude.—" Nulla vulva'', de murk bomti
nir cunaatio longa efl." "No delay, about the death
of a man, can be too long."
" Gentlemen, with refpe& to the offences again ft
the honour of the other fex, it has been faid by the
wileff Judges,that itis an offence ea* made, and
met with difficulty. Ido not know any offence fo
enormous as that is, but fometimes one has met
with offences of that nature, when there has not
been much ground for accufation; and no offence
has ever came, or can come, before a Grand Jury,
that calls for fo much inguilitivenefi, (it I may be
allowed the expreffion) as that offence does. If the
offence is proved, it is a crime moll enormous in.
deed; but it is not flight evidence that will prove
it, and it requires an infinite deal of circumfpec-
tion and care.

" If, Gentlemen, you Mould find I can be of any
fervice to you, fuch alliftance as I can give, you
are welcome to ; and I do not know, efpccially in
the enfeebled Rate of bodily health as I am at pre.
fent, that I need trouble you any farther."
There were 6o prifoners upon the Calendar, few
of whom have yet been tried.
Our flZcarter Seffions were held Jail week. The
appeals were not numerous, and nothing extraor-
dinary tranfpired refpeitin them.
John On the calendar Rood Mumford (lately
from the Eaft Indies,) who, under pretence of
being the owner of the houfe and premifes near the
gaol, lately occupied by Mr. Ambrofe Mumford,
and purchafed by the county, and affumin& the
name of a certain perfon, who if living is confider.
ed as the legal heir, and thereby obtaining money
from Mr. Lambirth, of Writtle, which being clear-
ly proved, the Court fentenced him to fertn years
tranfportation beyond the fear. John Hughes, a
notorious vagrant, being found with tools and
implements upon him for boufebreaking, was again
conviaed (having been feveral times before the
Court) was adjudged incorrigible arffi fentenced to
two years hard labour at Hahted. John Avery
and Rofe Obrien, were feverally convicted on in-
diaments for uttering counterfeit half-guineas,
which being fully proved, and the bafe metal cut
in Court, they were (as common utterers of falfe
money) fentenced, the fiat to one year's imprifon.
ment and to find fureties two years more, and Ooe
latter to fix months and find fureties for lix months
after. The two indiaments found at the prefent Sef-
lions againft Elizabeth Sayers and Samuel Clark,
for burglaries,are to be tried at the enfuing A al zc s.
Wm. Belcher,for flealing poultry from Mr. Thorn-
ton, of Stratford, is to be imprifuned fix month‘,
and feverely whipped at the cart's tail through
Stratford, at the end of his term.

Several of the indiSments againfl forefiallers
were swathed; but we hear three or four of them
(land for trial at the prefent affizes.
The mode of appointing Infpectors of weights
and meafures within every dittriCt of the county,
has been, and is likely to be, attended with the
moil falutary cffeas ; many perfons keeping limps
being convieted of having, and of mirk, using
fulfe weight. and unequal balances, and many and
large fines have b:en laid upon them. Humanity
thudders to think how the poor have fuffcred, r• t
only from the pretrure of tie times, but horn this
molt heinous of all fpecies of fraud. which is now
by the wifdom of the Legiflature and the exer-
tions of the Magidracy:of this county, likely to be
brought to a permanent Kite throughout the Came,
and we trait, all Gotha countiei will follow the es.
ample.

Lis INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING's ZZNCI.I, JULY z 3.

SAVILLE AND OTHERS V. BARCHARD AND ()TITERS.
Mr. HARRISON opened the pleadings. Tlik was
an aThon of Troyer brought by the Plaint ars, who
are mannfatanrers of baize, in Elks, agninft th;:
Defendants, who are dyers, in the Borough, to ia
cover the value of 300 pieces-of long milled banes,
under the following circunillances : At the tinie
when Lord Malm(hury va.nt 00 his embaffy to Pa-
ris, it was hoped that in cam:ever:cc of his nego-
tiation, peace would loon take place in Europe
and therefore the Plaintiffs fent up thefe baiLeS to
town to their agents, Metirs. Green and Walford,
who were to deliver them to the orderof Luca and
Bctke, who had been Spann Merchants, but were
now unfortunately infolvent. About the month
of July, 1797, Melfrs. Green and Walford deliver-
ed thele baizes to ale order of Lucas and Betke,
who fent them to the Defendants to be dyed, Co
that they might be ready for die Spanifh market
the moment that Peace ihould be leflored to Eu-
rope. There goods were in the hands of the pre-
fent Defendants when Lucas and Betke became in-
folvcnt ; and as thefe Gentlemen were indebted to
the Defendants in a large fum of money, they con-
tended that they had a right to hold thefe goods
till they were paid their general balance. The
firit queltion in this cafe was, whole property they
were at the time of the bankruptcy of Lucas and
Betke. According to the evidence of Mr. Wal.
ford, they (till continued the property of the Plain-
tiffs after they were depofited with the Defendants.
He did not know that he had exprefsly (fated that
to the Defendants, but he thought he mull infer
from feveral circumflances that the Defendants
knew they continued the property of the Plain-
tiffs. They mull have known, that from the man-
mer in which they were fent, and in the manner in
which they were dyed, they were fent up without
any infer, and without any price being fixed. • At
that time Lucas and Betke owed the Plaintiffs
40001. and they did not choofe to give them fur-
ther credit ; and therefore, from all thefe circum.
fiances, the Jury were /tilted to infer that this pro-
perty WAS never altered.
Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL was next heard on
the part of the Defendants, and called firft of all
one of their fervants, and Mr. Bette, whole evi-
dence feemed to fatisfy his Lordfhip and the Gen-
tlemen of the Jury, that thefe baizes, at the time
of the bankruptcy, were the property of the bank-
rupts. Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL then Paid, he
fhould prove the ufage in the trade to retain for
a general balance, which would entitle him to a
verdict.

Lord Ka arox here obferved, that be hoped the
terdia of the Jury would fettle this bufinefs, and
ibew whether dyers had a right to retain for their
general balance ?
The ATTORNEY GENERAL called reveal wit.
neffes, and by their evidence, as far as it went,
eflablithed this ufage in the dying trade.
Lord KENYON, in his addrefs to the Jury, ob-
ferved, that after Mr. Wilford had proceeded a
little way in his evidence, he Rated that thefe
goods were to lie at the dyers till peaceithould
come, and Should Dill be confideredas the proper-
ty of Melli;. Saville. If that had turned out to
be fo, there would have been no point at all in the
caufc. Upon all parts of the law, and perhaps par.
ticularly on the commercial law, it was of the ut-
molt importance where loch vail property depend.
ed, that there fitould be a known rule to go by.—
aliffira tyt firvinu, obi jar 01 v4gurtt out ineepestsni.—
When the cafe of Green v. Farmer was decided,
Lord Mansfield obferved, that the leaning of
mankind was in favour of liens, and undoubtedly
it was fo. In the cafe of a FaCtor, it was beyond
• controverfy fettled that he ought to retain for
his general balance. His Lordfhip thought it was
alto fettled in the cafe of wharfingers—in the cafe
of Innkeepers, and in the cafe of perfons that did
work upon Cloth—. Taylors. The ground on which
Lord Mansfield and the reit of the Court decided
the cafe of Green v. Farmer, certainly was this--
that in that trade there was no ufage from whence
they could extra& that fuch was the contra& be-
tween the partis, for the whole argument turned
ed upon this—whether there was an implied
contraufl if therehad been an exprefs contra&
there could have been no doubt) and it was ad•
mined, if that had been the manner in which the
trade was carried on, 'then that gave the laW
on the fubjeft. Lord Mansfield and the reD of the
Court canvaffed the evidence before them, and
there was no ground from the faits to infer that
dyers had a ifght to retain as for their general
balance ; and really the fingle queftion in this cafe
was—whether from the evidence—whether from
the ufage of the traJc—they had that right or nnt?
Lord Mansfield difavowed going on any other
ground ; and had the general ufage to retain been
proved before him, undoubtedly he (Lord Manf-
sicid) would have declared the party might retain.
But the Court decided the dyer in that cafe hail
no right to retain, becattfe on the general corn-
plexio.i of the evidence, it appeared he had troll.
ed to the rerfbnal cred.t of him who fent him his
goods to be d;.ed, and not to Cie lien. /Nur ft
pa, iibta. Th::refore the Jury in that cafe thought
there was no ufage to retain ; but if the evidence
in this cafe Cremed to lead to a different condto
he diJ not know that they were forbidden by
a,.y thing that was decided before to make a dif•
rc.t.t inference. The Law, as laid down by Lord
Mansfield, profeffed to go on the evidence in that
• according to which there was in the trade of
O ere: no ufage to retain, Gut only for the amount
of the pa-titular goods in queflion. The evidence
in this cafe, as far ads it went, famed to lean the
tit'.et way. It was for the Jury to decide. Two
or Si:.. c witneffe, had proved that they had known
this ittilted on, and that it had been acquief-
s cd t n. I lis Lordfhip Paid, he acquiefeed in Lord
Tausfield's opinion, and lie was bound on his great
a.t. nor ity to fay, tbe right was where the ufage was.
One of the Gentlemen of the Jury afited this
quchion of his Lordfhip :—Stippore, while tly.fe
t‘olAab w erc depofited at the diet's, they had been

nuilditred and Jeftroyed by fire, who would have.
tiillained the ;off.?
Lord KrNvoN obtrved, that the Dyers with
whom there good= were deposited, were only
bound to ufe all doe diligence, and to take fuch
care of them as they would of their own property.
Fver y bailee was only bound to uf? due diligence.
I/ the goods had been burncd, the Dyers would of.
rout ir have la 4 their lien ; but he did not ,
know that they would have 101 l their remedy.
Nobody but a Carrier was an infurcr. He was an
infiaer in a:1 rcipeas,txtept for the :lets of Goo'
.o:d the Kint%s enemies.—Verdia for the Depodants.
Mr. %Vaddington, one cif the Gentlemen of the
Jury faid, he had known the Trade about thirty
sears, and it had been ufually underlinod that
Lyyt_rs had a lien for their general balance.

THOMPSON T. WAGNER.

This was an action to rem-el- ;01. for ten days
detnurragc of the fhip Ocean. She arrived in the
River Thames on the 19th of December, t 799, and
was reported at the Cullom honfe nn the xoth.
The next day the hard froft fet in, which prevent.
cd the cargo from being deliverce.
Mr. ERSK IN a, the plaintiff's Counfel, contended,
that his clients having let their vefl'el for a certain
pei iod,at a certain price, were,at all events, intithd
to be paid for demurrage, if it was kept beyond
the period fiipulated, and that they had no-
thing to do with the hard froft, which was the aa
of Gon, conformably to the maxim of law, that
°Qat Dei neminem facit injuriam.
Mr. Etna, the defendant's Counfel, Paid, it was
his duty to infift that the impoffibility of the De-
fendant to dehiverthe cargo ought to preclude him
from the liability to be charged with demurrage.
If the Jury should be againit him, he wifhed the
point to be referved for the opinion of the court.
Lord KENYON admitted the truth of the maxim,
that rump tenetur ad impfibilia. It was certainly im-
poflible for the Defendant to •deliver the cargo ;
but that was a rifque, for which he was of opinion
the Defendant was refponfiblc. One of the par-
ties clearly mutt Infer, and he thought the bell
way to decide the queltion was to hold them to the
ftria terms of the contraa, which was, that for
every day the fhip was ufed beyond a limited time
a demurrage of five guineas thould be paid. The
fetting in of the froft had been the caufe of the de-
murrage ; but that was a cireumftance with which
he conceived the Plaintiff had nothing to do. How-
ever he had no objeaion to leave the queltion open
for future difctiffion, if the Learned Connie]
thought 14 could mgke any' thing of it.
A verdia was given for the Plaintiff, referving
the point, whether under the cireumftances of the
cafe, the Defendant is liable to pay demurrage ?
WEPPLFI E. DAY.

The plaintiff is a foreign gentleman, who lately
came over to this country from Oflend with a con-
fiderable property ; he landed at Gravefend, and
proceeded to Billingfgate, where he hired a cart,
which belonged to the defendant, to convey his
trunks to the welt end of the town. There was
one box, containing jewels and valuables to a
large amount, which was flolen in the way to the
Adelphi Hotel. One of the perfons concerned in
the robbery,and alfo the receiver, were difeovered,
tried, and convieted, at the Old Bailey, and the
circumftances of the cafe, as they appeared upon
their trials, have already been amply detailed.
None of the property, except to a very trifling a-
•.woant indeed, was ever recovered. This anion
was brought againft the defendant, as the carrier,
for negligently fuffering tke fame to be flolen. It
appeared however, that the plaintiff and his family
accompanied the cart in a coach, watched it as
it proceeded along the ftreets, and confequently
that the lots was owing to their own neglea and
want of care. This faa appearing plain to the
Jury, the plaintiff was nonfuited.

WITT W. FIRST.

This was an anion for 7001. for a freight of
corn on board the fhip Exad, from Pruffia to Lon-
don. The fhip met with Rormy weather, and was
obliged to put into a Norwegian port to repair ;
and (he was farther delayed by an order from the
General Conful of the part, in confequence of the
Northern difpute with England, not to proceed on
her voyage. The cargo became heated, and was
fo damaged, that it was loft to the London mar-
ket ; the Defendant contended, that, if due dili-
gence had been ufed, the (hip might have proceed•
ed on her voyage before the prohibitory order of
the Conful ; and he further contended, that fuch
order had not the effeet of a. legitimate embargo
intiticd to obedience on the part of the captain of
the (hip ; it, however, clearly appeared, the had
been ncceffarily compelled to put into port to refit ;
and that the order, not to depart, would have fub-
jeeed the Captain to the feveral penalties, had he
not obeyed it. Verdiet for the PlaintifE