Star.
London, England, 1814-03-03 00:00:00

CO JRI: OF KING'S BENCH, MARCH I.

WELCH V. TIIUMPSnN 7 .
This was an action brought by a Gritier from the
North, against a Gentleman residing at Turnharn-
green, and poisessing a farm at Northaw, to reco#ei
the sum of £.51., being the price of two cows, sold by
one .Bunker, as the plaintiff's agent, to one 4rovirti.
who managed the defendant's farm. 'The purchase
was made at Barnet, as the beasts *ere on their road
to London; and Brown gave the elaintiff's agent the
name of his mister ; and it was agreed, that Bunker
should receive the money on his way home Irani
London. It appeared that the defendant had giieri
Brown two checks, of £26 each, to pay for the cows,
!nit Brown had misapplied this money: It was
proved, that the defendant bad never authorised his
servant to buy ally thing for the fartit upon credit;
nut had always given him money beforehand to
pay for his purchases ; and when the defendant Wad
Applied to by the plaintiff for the paiment of the
.ows, he sail—"" Why did you trust asy servant he
must go to gaol."
Lord ElA.r.Nsonouon laid before the jury the law
as to this subject, between tradesmen and the :haste:
af servants; no man, he said, was liable fur a debt,
contracted through the medium of another, unteali
his authority, express or implied; and if a master
sent forth his servant to buy goods without m, ney,
the law would imply that he authorised that servant
to buy upon the master's credit ; but if the master
gives the servant money enough for the purchase
question, or always keeps him in cash for any pun=
chase that may arise, there is then no authority to buy
kpon credit. The strongest proof of a master'siautho-
ising a servant to purchase upon credit, ;s his after-.
wards paying fur the articles so purchased ; lint if it
be proved that the master always gives the servant
cash for every purchase authorised by him, no act of
the servant's can pledge the authority of the master,
and that authority is expressly negatived by such cit.
cumstance.—The Jury, therefore, found the verdict
for the defendant.

COX V. CLARK.
This was an action to recover from the defendant
£1 1. ss. dile to the plaintiff, proprietor of a Potts-
month waggon, under the following circumstan'crs :
The defendant appli• d to the plaintiff to carry certain
goods for him by the waggon to Portsmouth, and, ate
his request, the waggon stopt at his (the defendant's)
warehouse, and took in the goods in question ;—a
ticket was given to the waggoner, specifying to be
the weight of the go,,ds put into the waggon, which
proceeded as far as Chichester, when, on passing over
the weighbridge, it was found to be 19 cwt. heavier
than allowed by Act of Parliament, and the toll-col-
lector charged £5. 19s. 6d. for the over-weight. ft
afterwards appeared that the excess of weight was oc-
casioned by the defendant having put 19 cwt. 'bore
into the waggon than stated in the weight-ticket giieri
to the waggoner. Upon this discovery, a deniarid of
the R 5. 19s. 6d. was made of hairs, in addition to the
carriage of the goods, amounting in all to 411.55.
The promise of the defendant to pay having been
proved by the waggoner,-the Jury found a verditi for
the plaintiff—Damages All. ss. costs 4.13 e.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MARCH 2.
A.SIUNEES UP SMITH, A BANKRUPT, v. THE ATLAS

FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY; .
This was an action brought by the Assignees of
Smith, who some time since kept a clothes shop in
Newgate-street, to recover £2.500, the amount of his
insurance with the defendants.

The SOLICITOR CURRAt stated the case, detailing
all the particulars of the present claim. Smith, the
bankrupt, it will be recolledted, carried on extensive
business as a tailor, in Newgate-street, and was in-
sured with the Atlas to the amount of R 2500. Late
at night, or rather in the morning of the 12th of No-
vember, 1812, his house was discovered in flames.
There was no person in it at the time but his wire,
who slept in the second floor. She escaped with the
aid of the neighbours, but the highland some ibjtiry
sustained by the fire occasioned her death ition after.-
The house was burnt down, and• in corisequence of si
suspicion that Smith had set fire to it with intent to
defraud the defendants, he was' tried at the Old Bai-
ley. The evidence was extraordinary, but the cir-
cumstances brought forward by the prisoner induced
the Jury to acquit him. The Solicitor-General sum:
plained of the refusal of the defendants •to pay the'
insurance after a verdict of acquittal, and endeavou-
red not only to prove that SrOitli had acted honesty►,
but that he had been ruined by the fire. He was pro.
ceeding to call witnesses, observing, at the same
time, that he could not call several tradesmen who
had long known Mr. Smith,- because they were cre-
ditors under the commission, when
The Learned Judge suggested, that it was a cast
peculiarly fit for settlement by reference.
After some consultation between the parties oath,'
nature of the recomrnendaticn, it was agreed to tiff•
the claim to arbitration.

•

exiCE OP STOCKS THIS DAY AT TWILVZ O'CLOCK
Bank Stock per Cent: Rod. 704
Cons. 701 I—for acc. 72-4 per Ct. 85i
6 per Ct. a74--Lg. Anna. tkut—Oennium 27
Italia Bauto 71.81. Pre--Elolol4tr Ses 51, rt.

.:.~