Star.
London, England, 1802-03-06 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BIINCH, MARCH 3.

HiCKS o. *ASKS.
This action was brought againa the defendant
• for having given a talk character to one O'Hara,
whereby the plaintiff had been induced to militias
and had thus been greatly damaged. Mr. Nees,
the plaintiff's Connfel, allowed that by a late de-
cition it was neccffary for him to fix fraud upon
the defendant. It certainly was not enough that
a mifreprefentation had been made, unlefs that
mifreprefentation was malicious. But he fhould
prove in the moll fatisfadory manner that the de.
fondant well knew O'Hara to be completely in-
folvent, when he reprefented him as troll worthy.
The circumftances of the cafe,. as they appear.
ed in evidence, were as follow Feb. 1800,
O'Hara, a hawker and pedlar, came to the plain-
tiff, a linen-draper in St. John-thee:, Smithfield,
and had goods fared out to him to the value of
881. When payment came to be talked of, he laid
down 481. and Paid he would remit the reit in the
courfe of a few days. Hicks obferving that be
could not truft a perfeft granger, he referred him
to the defendant, and the flopman was immedi-
ately difpatched to make the beceffary inquiries.
The ftatementa were rather contradictory of what
Mr. Banks Paid ; but all the witnetles agreed in
reprefenting him to have ordered the lhopman to
confult his books, and he would then fee the Rate
of the dealings between them. He added, that it
was a delicate thing to fpcak of the charafter of a
enftomer, O'Hara was then in his debt about tool.
He trailed him fince, and is now his creditor to a
very confolerable amount. Upon the fltopman's
return, O'Hara was allowed to carry off the oods,
66,,d efterwards received another parcel, for nei-
ther of whish piyment has been recovered. The
e v 'fence to prove the defendant's knowledge of
O'Hara's infolvency, was that of a Mr. Hawkcf-
worth, who Tome time before this, upon the dci•
fendanes reprefentation, had trotted O'Hara. and
tcrsvhom the defendant had laid, when he com-
plained of being cheated, 6, Then the Irikman has
done you--he has been too deep for you, has he ?
You thould have nulling to do with duffers."
Mr. JURICC LAWRENCE fait!, the Jury would fir&
confider whether the credit Lad been given upon
the defendant's reprefentation ? next whether this
reprefentation was Ellie, and lafily, whether the
defendant had made it kne wing it to be fo?
The Jury having withdrawn for a few Minutes,
brought in a verdid for the plaintiff.—Damages
501. 155. 9,1.
MARCH..}.—GORMAND Ann 0 I "V.111411'
This Was an adieu on a bill of exchange,
draw‘s, cgainft acceptor. The defence was, that
the conlideratt....l..l railed on which the bill bad
been accepted. A Frenchman 'of the name of
Violet, who was in this country laft fummer, hav-
ing a large quantity of Burgundy to difpofe of,
fent a (ample of it to the defindant, who is a great
ironmonger. Mr. Binn was fo well plcafcd with
it, that he ordered as much as amounted to the
value of sccl. One half he paid in ironmongery
ware, and for the other be accepted this bill, which,
as Violet was the debtor of the plaintiffs, was
drawn by them. When the wine came home, it
was found not to correfpond with the (ample, and,
according to the account of Mr. Alderman Flower
and, others who. had tailed it, it was quite unlit
for nfe. Still it was contended that the plaintiff
could well maintain his aftion, as, from this tranf-
adion having taken place between the defendant
and a third perfon, the plaintiffs were abfolved
from all proof of confideration, although nominal.
ly tl•ey were the drawers.
The Learned Judge, taking it for proved that
the wine was unmerchan table, left the cafe to the
Jury upon whether Violet had been ading as the
plaintiffs' agent ?and, they concluding that he had
sot, found their verdict for the plaintiffs t z6l. da-
mages.
MARCH 5.--4,ITINC V. NARTSHORX.
This was an :idiots on a policy of infurance on
the (hip Arnie, from Hamburgh to London. The
lots was by the perils of the lea. There was no
difpote about the execution of the policy, the plain-
tials ineereft, or the conftrudion of the deed. The
defence was that there had not been a due difclo-
fore to the underwriters, and that the fraud of the
plaintiff thus abfolved them from all refponfibility.
The policy was dated the 19th of May, and a Mr.
Gadefdale was called to wove that at that time
the plaintiff had great reafon to fuppofe that the.
(Lip was loft. He Rated that he had goods on
board the Arnie, about which he was anxious
that ;
that being at the Cullom Houfe on the 16th of
May, he Caw Price, Captain of the Cirene,
who had arrived from Hamburgh that mewing,
and who told him that the Arnie had failed two
.days before him; that be. raw the plaintiff foots
after, and communicated this intelligence to him,
and that they had a long converfation together
about effeetig inferences. However. at bis crofs-
- ,