Star.
London, England, 1806-07-23 00:00:00

M•Xli V. POTTS.

This was an anion on a Policy of Infurance on the
fhip James. from Jamaica to Brian!. The policy was
not executed till after the arrival of the reit of the
fleet, with whom the James failed from Jamaica ;
when it was known that fhe and another velLI had
feparated. By the firft poll the plaintiffs fent up to
London, and had the policy underwritten. It ap-
peared, however, ►hat at this time the plaintiffs might
have known that the (hips patted company before
the fleet paled the Gulph, and that there was a ru-
mour that they had been taken. This information
they had not communicated tsr the Underwrites,
when the policy was execwed.
The Plaintiffs were accordingly nonfuited.

RICHNIOSOI4 SOVILI aND 01/11/3.
This was an aftion'brought by the Plaintiff, who
is the keeper uf a granary, fcr the accommodation
provided the Defendants, i4l houfmg and infuring
55cao quarters of grain, at 54. per huodred quarters
per week. The only queilion in the case was, whe-
ther the Plaintiff had a right to charge for the whole
bulk fu long as there remained one quarter on the
premifes ? To fimplify the cafe, the Defendants, af-
ter hoofing the wheat as deferibed, drew from it in
the conrfe of the fi ft m."-.th near two-thirds of the
bulk, and yet it was near fix months before the wbi,le
was moved off the prernifes ; the que 11 ion th erefore was,
whether the plaintiff was authirifed to charge for
the whole bulk during the whole of the period ? To
prove that fuch had been the cultom at the trade,
leveral granary-keepers were called, among whom
were Mars. Dunkin, Jaques, and Whitehead, who
all agreed, that if a merchant hoofed a thotifand qual.
ter. of grain, and fhould remove coo I f them the Inc-
ceeding week, yet if the other coo, or any traftional
part of them, fhould remain upon the premifes for
fiz months longer, the granary-keeper had a right,
agreeably to the cuflom of the trade, to charge the
original bulk up to the tail period of delivery ; pro-
vided, .at the fame time, that filch merchant Ihould
not, in the interval, have ordered his wheat to be
peeled cif, or, in other words, re-mea'uied, in which
cafe a new account would be entered inv. and the
original undertaking be His Lorslinip and the
Jury. however, conceiving this to be ex•remely un-
reafonable, the plaintiff agreed to refer the caufe, and
take a vet diet for the Ipecific quantities, according to
their refpeelive periods of hooting, and by that mesas
leave the quedion of right and the cuilona of trade
undecided.

cover OF CtiANCSRY, JULY as.
TIIIILLVSION O. WOODIOID

The SOLICITS& GINIZAL and Mr. Peacttrat
had. on a' former day, advocated the carte of the
Plaintiff in this cafe I and Mr. lista. and Mr. Mae.-
T►x were this day beard in reply. It was an appll.
cation to fat slide the will of the Plaintiff's father,
as far as regarded the bequeft to the Defendant, of
certain landed elates, on the ground that the teA
tator had not the power to alienist: them from the
heir at law. For the Defendant, it was contended
that it was cnnfonant to agreement between the
'relator and the Plaintiff, that the eltare Mould be
bequeathed to' the Deten.tant, on critideratton of
pet fonalty, and other Frorerry, to the valt.c of
ao,ocol. being left to the Plaintiff; an.i that the
Plaintiff could no:, at Duce, invalidate the will, as
tar as reiortlrd the i•lvicit ..1 others, tr,..1 hiarrelt
take the benefit lie ILIJ bi.en intended to h..tre under
it : he mt.a t ci!her to relirtioith what
accrued t., hint tirJ:r Futrua,cnt, a, i, ito id, or
~, :'•w its V ly. AS it tie o her
The Leen 1...14.1%CL1.1.CR th 'tight I.ch sites as
this u....re involved in much wwilecelrary ;
bdt 1 i.d he thi,tild *Dismay et:oll,ler. be ~e he over.
tut:le.! the dab ine of Lord liardai.kr, alit at pre.
eat tivvJ ott the rublret. _

Tue ChaXCcl t then fat upon petitions in
baultrup Lc.) •