Star.
London, England, 1802-12-28 00:00:00

LA, INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF RING's BENCH, DEC. is.
lIIVSH V. kOWLIT.

This was an i(fue from the Court of Chancery to
try whether the Plaintiff and the Defendant were
joint proprietors of a cargo of fifh tent to the Me-
diterranean by the fhip Plato, and whether the
Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiff ? The De-
fendant maintained the negative of both there pro-
pofitions. But from a letter he had 'written, and
his anfwer to the Bill filed againft him, it appear-
ed moll clearly that in this adventure a partnerfhip
fubfifted between them. Mr. Bufh is an American,
who, during the war, was going to Italy for the
recovery of his health. Mr. Rowlet, an eminent
merchant in the city, advifed him to carry out
Come Mil, which he might difpore of to great ad-
vantage at Genoa or Leghorn, he being neutral.
He objefted that he had not funds, upon which
Mr. R. entered with him into this engagement.—
The fecund point depended 'upon whether the De-
fendant had a right to charge 25 guineas per cent.
as a premium for infuring the cargo. No policy
had ever been effefted ; he contended only that he
was willing to Rand the Mk. This was declared
by the Learned Judge to be contrary to a Ratite,
as well as again the general law of infurance. If
an agent was direfted to infure, and negledted to
Jo fo, he was liable to wake ood a lofs, as the
Underwriters would have been ; but though the
'hip arrived fafe, he could not fue for the premium.
The Jury therefore found for the Plaintiff on
both iffues.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DUBLIN, DEC. si .
DUNSTIRVILLt V. CORNWALL.
This was (laced by Mr. Sankey to be an action
on a bond for 3,5001. alledged to have been paired
by the defendant to the plaintiff, to which the for-
mer pleaded non el pawn ; he, however, did not
deny either the figning raid bond, or receiving va.
'liable confideration, but, from incidental circum-
fiances, was compelled to offer fuch plea.
It appeared that the plaintiff was a (hip carpets;
ter in Plymouth, and-employed by the late Thos.
Whaley, Efq. while refiding in the Tile of Man, to
build a pleafore boat for him. The carpenter's ark
4414 in the bufinefs was not liked,' but he did,-
complith a boat, &c. to Mr. Whaley's fatisfaaion,
at a charge amounting to the (um on the general
dealing fpecified in the bond. Mr. Cornwall, the
defendant, was introduced into the final fettlernent
between Mr. Whaley and the plaintiff as trnilee to
Mr. Whaley on the demife of a Me. Paul, of the
county of Carlow. Defendant, in cent-wenn,
did execute a bond for the rum in quellion, payable,,,
after the deceafe of Patd, to the plaintiff, who in
Tome time had raifed money on the bond from a.
Mr. Tinchum. It was further alledged on behalf.
of the plaintiff, that when the bond became due,
the defendant had been written to by Mr.Tinchum,
to which he received an anfwer from defendant,
that they had then recently put, downs formidable
rebellion in the county of Carlow, but thot-tht &lit
of the country was fuck as to preclude regular pig-
ments 'events to gentlemen of landed prbikrt,---
that the ekate ()Mlle late Mr. Nut was tfrell circuit.
flawed and extremely ptoduEtive.: being near
too& a year, and that Mr..Uncbsasmight rely
on fpeedy and fatisfaftory partsent berth of PrIAL
cipal and intereft of his bond.; 'itirsiii fOrthee-il-
'edged, that the defendant a- till the boudissiiii
own hand-writing, and put his feel and lignature
to it in the prefence of his own tenants, Doyle and
Neale, being. perfons confidentially iit'his fervice
at Mini*, in the County If Otiloir. •Vhit pro-
.ceedings (tad been previouily entered into for.the
recovery of this bopd, in which thi Plaintiff vim
certainly nonfuited—that the fubfcribing witn.
to the uldruarient, whole fignatures and interfe-
' tame the defendant always denied, could Not be
produced even at this day ; but lease of thegeotirt
was obtained to have the defendant's anfwer to
an amended bill in the fame? weer; read id evi:
dence,alfoleveral letters,
.wberein he apoSgiaed
for watit'of pualuality in payment of the debt,
one of which tended to lupplicate the holder to
raseive his demand by intlehnents out. of the
growing seats of the deceafed Mr. Paul.
The feveral documents quoted II Mr. Sankey
loran read in evidence when ".P. •.:1 xi .
Mr. Claus, in his defence, Rated, that the
feigned figuatuma of the alledged fubfcribing
witneffes had been furreptitiouily annexed to the
bond by fome,oollttfien between the Vliuntiff,it was
fuppofed, and thelite Mr. Whaley. The Defen-
dant in the original dealing did pafa a bond for
1 tool. to the kiip-builder for * kin& oft ritime
bitable firkieh Mr.. Whitley did. elhibit
,i, wat,
iiotWithflindiegy induoecUto count to a fe-
.
cond. bond fOr 3.5001. to the fame perfon, • Plain-
tiff in this anion, but on the ettpref• condition of
having the preceding bond annulled. In executing
the fecond bond, his client went fo far is to fill it
and put his'llame to it, btu finding that the former
one, which be looked to have extinguilhe4 ;wan
not forthcoming, be gave the latter, withetosbe.
ing formally executed; or any witneffes *lllolntridio
to Mr. Whaley, who put it in his pocket.
To fiqipOrt this plea, another part of the De-
fendant's...wives to-the mended bill was read in
evrtiestosw.., ~ 1, .

fingular
will
view .
morial _
curious anehrietElling, tracing the pradite'llp to
periods when men were pronibut illittrat4.„"
whence retultr,4 the •necefrsty of eitablirititfta by
feels when-fignatures wensunfrequent.. Refpeaing
the bond in queilion,his LordthlptouclV delicate,
on the altecistd coOtrivince' of affixing the..
names hf witneffes to it ; he reamed, howev=
:from any confederacy he Mat
Incipfe of common fenfe, ti fit
ltely vitiate the only legal
for a confiderable property.
leaned to be, that a bond

ed in preened whneires, enakquently not a legal
inftruntent ; but his Lordfiiip Paid, that if the Jury
believed the defendant had figned and fealed the
bond, which by the evidttsce adduced he did not
deny, that his coriefponding letters in acknowledg-
ment of the debt would go then for inquiry and
be good evidence to etiablilli the fael.
The Jury returned a verdia againft the defen•
dant with coils.

exculpate the plaintiff fr
ftratagetn. on a princip
w man would deliberal
docpment he pofeffed f
The general inference f

Arbiet
Lord ATowlebet's trailooked to: with
)gular expedkatio9 aii, ' y, but otarlintitte
ill not adroit *ny thin';
. *Kit% .tOiccurati
ew of it. 'Hu Lordfluesbilioxi offealtand sr
orial bearings to law inanimate woe extremely.