Star.
London, England, 1811-11-16 00:00:00

• "Ir— •"''' • _ ,- • .
. . - ie 4/Kra. •
- the " tittle between 'Dyke/ n'i kill', 1,04
toned in the STAR, cf Thursday, proves t, have been
I•
a Aiwa—palmed tip:m tit by A letter from rortsetuathe
There was no occurrence of the kind. , . . ,
LAW INTELLIGENCE, ' '1: •'' • .
...
..........-......- .
OM= OF KING'S BErCH. NOV, is. •
• noarursim V. itasticroa:
This case was called on for special argument. ft
was an action of ainiottuit upon two pol Lies 4 f in.:
'surance fr im Corunna to London,- on the slip,
•11.11. ..
vage-charges &c. in which the Jury, at the Loud, is
Sittings after last Trinity Tkrra, had found a verdict
for the Plaintiff's, subje.cito the opinion of the Ci Puri oft. ,
la c ise. bir.TADDY argned'on behalf of the Plairitiff; • ' '
lin support c f the vefdict ; and Mr. Rico t ilosox contra.
1,111i.T Anny was stopped by the Court in reply, as they
were with him; and Lord ELLesnotiouott, in deliver-
ing their opinion. lai I open the into ninent circurz. •
stances .f the cm'. The question was, whether is
PlaLitiffs had an insurable inWresq and Lord Et.-
LENBIROUOII said, th it to a person ni.accustomed to oh'.
serve the °pica fur; t, which the Court was in the hibit
of handling, it would seem the strangest proposition in '
the world to conteni that th's was a gambling put,
l'cy ; for to say, that the prcsi.nt Pla miffs had not
NI insurable iaie esr, was tuiteur mire nor leas th .n
to s.ay the:• were ganiblevs The P 1 .intilts were rte
osawrs of the ship R. ss ; Messrs, Foster, Kidd, ar d
Waring, bang owners if the ,hip Atlantic ; and .
:tun ships wir2 con:pinions in misfortunes having '
bt,el captured ty a Sp :Wish priva e. r. Ihe assured
were immediate paid by the Under*r;ters fir the
Ad intic Rs for a total loss; but that circumstance
lid not preclude the assures! In m 'using the means
of litigating the captiice, and of obtaining i.s re-
tifution. The assured of these two ships addressed
..heirselves accordingly to !sir. Cowan, their agent, at
C nuilmt; oh ectinghimsby mutual powers of attorney,
o 1 rocure the res:oration of thf ships, and protect an I
:',sward them to London 'l'lA st ip A tlailtiz, and part

...

of her cargo, were restored; and than it was s. id, that
the agent had no authority to instr.o. Toftrcuard to
London, meant sfawal4o to forward ; and a ship may
be int Tcepte i by the perils of captur..., r r lost by the
peids -nt (Lc sets. Tr.e qu2stian, then, was, how can
the sliip be effectually fro warded, by guarding against
theSe perils? Why, by insurance; and accordingly
,Cowan inured. But bi.fofe the Atlantic left the
'port of .Cinunna, such was the uncertain state of that
place at, that tinge, that she Sias re-captured. 'Then,
in whom was the interest pf-these ships ?• In the mi.; _-1
ginal owners, who had by a hritchpot agreement, .
vested Cowan wilt an authority to procure their re-
storation; and Cowan had an interest in them for his
espences, and the plaintiffs bad accepted hills on
them; brides' the paramount interest they had as
owners of one sh:p. Having
-those complicated kite.
lens, they were also the consignees of the ship from
Cowan; and, could -it be contended that they had no
nsurable interest? Lord Eli thorough had thought, ,
that as one of the defendants was the very person
who had paid the total loss on the Atlantic, it would
have been cont nded, that, as against,liim, the plain-.
lags could not recovtr ; and certainly-the original
ndens titer might recover aga'nst the Illaintiffs, in ass,
naravAment of the complicit d interests of this insu-
rance in, die Court of Chancery. The present plain-1
ifs had thus an interest in three characters.- by vir-
tue of the agreement by which the ships were itrmitei
,together, as the expression was; as the re:priseittative
of Cowan ; and in respect t f one of the defendants
laimself, w th whom the plaintiff would have to ac-
4ount for the rri;port'on of the o.tal,loss paid on the
first policy. The whole Court were therefore of opi-
nion, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover for the
total loan; and that the verJct should stand as it did..
Pottea to at plaint if.
TIN ZINO st.llo/3ERT W3ol'.
Mr. SCARLETT moved for a rule to spew cause why
a criminal iiif irmation shouldnot be flied igainst Mr.
Robert Font of Charlton Placein the county of Kent,
for:provoking Mr. Timothy Brent, of 'Old Burling-
tun-street, to a challenge. Mr. Scarlett moved tins
upon a long affidavit, which stated in full the whole
connect', on between the parties, which.it seems, began
in the prosecutor's fattier putting the defendant to
school, and laying him under many peconiary and
other obligations ; and was followed up by the pro-
secutor'l advancing him money to purchase a com-
mission, which the defendant refused to refund, and
.pleaded infancy against the recovery at law but
I Lord EtteNtionouttit said, that criminal informa-
tions were not to be granted because a man had viola-
ted all the charities of life; and advised the Learned
Counsel to curtail his affidavit till he came to the
material wort of it, by saying, that, by divers circum-
stances,- the prosecutor had' reason to believe the de-
fendant 'sought an opportunity to affront hith, bring-
,ino, it at once to the iime and place of the affront
otherwise (as Mr. Justice Le Bianc observed) the
defendant must go into the reasons why he pleaded
Imtoncy, tat:.
Mr. SCARLETT then proceeded to state the particular
'insult upon which this application was founded, which
took place on the 24th of June last. The defendant had
frequently hef ire, when he met tae prosecutor, shaken
his cane (Wee 114 head, thrust his clbaw in his face, .
&c. all. which insults the prosecutor affected not to -
notce ; but on that day, the prosecutor Was passing .
through-Bond-street, and observing the defefidant at a
distance, ace ;ht to avoid him by making a circuit,
'but the defendant prevented this, and ac:nally struck
him so violent a blow on the face, as to cut his lip
against his teeth. The prosecutor, irritated at this,
struck the defendant with his cane ; and the two cow-
panious with wham the defendant was walking then
interfered.; but the defendant said, ". By G—D, Sir,
you must tr.ect Me: name your time and place.' The
prosecutor having recovered himself, proposed to the
defendant and his companions to repair to his house iu
Old Burlington.street, in order to explain to those/lea-
dsmen the nature of his connection Kith ihedcfendant,
and in order to avoid any alttrcation in the public
street ; but when they had proceeded a little way, the
defendant's friends refused to acc om pan y the prosecu-
tor. 'lt was also sworn that the prosecutor had never
provoked the defendant either by word, look, or
gesture.
Lord Etootosonotou was inclined to grant the rule
upon the amended affidavit which had beta suggested)
Anti with which stiggesiou Mr. S:arlett p onised Was
AtT4tato4orkpliancl.
, .
•
r• •