Star.
London, England, 1819-10-19 00:00:00

LATI.7 INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, OCTOBER le.

FULHAM AND OTHERS, ASSIGNEES OW WILCOX, W.

AUSTIN.
This was an action upon a Bill of Exchange for
£250, drawn on the 14th June, 1816, upon, and ac-
cepted by the defendant, payable one month after
date, and indorsed to the bankrupt.
The usual prima facie case against the acceptor of
a bill of exchange having been proved,
The following case was proved on the part of the
defendant :—The defendant's brother, who is a Cap-
tain in the West Middlesex Militia, having occasion
'to procure a sum of £225 to complete some regi-
mental payments, applied to an advertising money
lender named Neil, in the neighbourhood of-Golden-
square, to " raise the wind.' On this occasion he
was accompanied by a brother Officer, a Captain
Chambers. Mr. Neil.agreed to supply his wants, by
doing a bill for £3OO, accepted by the defendant,
and indorsed by Captain Chambers, provided the
names and references were satisfactory, on condition
that the defendant should take one-third of the amount
in goods. This hitter part of the proposition was ob-
jected to by Captain Austin, inasmuch as he wanted
money and not goods. It was then proposed that a
hill should be drawn for £275, and that Captain
Austin should take goods to the amount of £so.
Samples of wine, tea trays, and buttons, were pro-
duced, and it was agreed that this arrangement
should be adopted, the defendant's brother taking
£5O worth of buttons. The bill was accordingly
drawn by —, accepted by the defendant, and
indorsed by Captain Chambers ; and Captain Austin
was desired on a subsequent day to call for the mo-
ney and goods, provided the parties to the bill were
found good on inquiry. Accordingly, on the appoint-
ed day, Mr. Austin and Mi. Chambers attended at
Mr. Neil's office, when the latter introduced to them
a person by the name of Wilcox, who was to discount
the bill. The sum of £225 was produced by the
latter, and Mr. Neil handed forth, from under his
counter, a large quantity of buttons, stated to be
worth £5O. Captain Austin hesitated in taking
this part of the produce of the bill, expressed a wish
to know what could be done with it, and protested
that the buttons were of no use to him. Mr. Neil
said, that they might be re-sold, but told him that he
must expect to lose at least £25 upon the transaction.
Mr. Austin expressed his astonishment at this infor-
mation, and his friend Captain Chambers earnestly
implored him not to take the money on such terms,
if he could possibly do without it. Upon which the
person introduced by the name of Wilcox said, that
the buttons were the most important part of the
transaction, and that but for them the bill could not
!lave been done by him. I'll the result Capt. Austin
took the £225, but left the buttons at Mr. Neil's dis-
posal. The defendant, who is a tradesman in the lace
way, never received a farthing of the produce of his
acceptance. When the bill became due it was dis-
honoured, and Mr. Neil proposed that it should be
renewed by a bill made by the same parties for£29s,
so as to cover accumulated interest, and commission,
&c. To this proposal all the parties acceded, except
Mr. Chambers, who refused to indorse it. This bill
was also dishonoured, and on the bankruptcy of Mr.
Wilcox, the indorsee, both bills devolved upon his
assignees, by whom the present action was brought.
The case set up in reply on the part of the plaintiff
was, that Mr. Wilcox was an utter stranger to Mr.
Neil, the money lender ; that it was a bona, de trans-
action, in which the former, as a respectable trades-
man in the furnishing ironmongery line, had dis-
counted the bill, in consideration of the sale of £5O
worth of buttons at a fair and regular price—that he
had no privity with Mr. Neil—that he was not the
person present at the interview described by the de-
tendant's witnesses, but that it was a Mr. Valentine, a
Japan ware manufacturer, of Clerkenwell, who, how-
ever, it was admitted, was his agent in the business.
To prove the counter case so set up, Mr. Wilcox,
the bankrupt, was examined, but Mr. Valentine was
not forthcoming.
Mr. GURNEY and Mr. SCARLETT severally address-
ed the Jury on the part of their respective clients.
The CHIEF JUSTICE charged the Jury, that the
question for them to decide was, whether Mr. Wilcox,
through the agency of Mr. Valentine, wilfully lent his
aid to Mr. Neil in a transaction glaringly founded in
usury ? If they should be of opinion that he did soy,
the defendant would be entitled to a verdict, other.'
wise it ought to be for the plaintiff.—The Jury im-
mediately found a Verdict for the Defendant.