Star.
London, England, 1803-01-28 00:00:00

LTOIIII O. WARR.

Mr. Exuma moved for a Rule to thew entre
why the Nonfuit in this cafe Ihnuld not be fct
Aide, and a new Trial had. The queftion he ad-
mitted. had a difficulty in non his part. ft was a
pirtimn, whether one partner can execute a dreJ
lor the other three, without the prefence and aircitt
of them 311? which, it was maintained, he tonal
not, tin% IS tune was a power of attorney given o;

A

the ether to that nne Partner for that ptirp.-)C:
N•Av tit A-c mt./ling t.f ti.at kiitd utpcw:::.

thii

1.04 EL L N BOROU(11; 14;,1, that this o,teiliw
wax let entirely at tell in tire cafe of Ilatrifon al:,
ktriliwtittli, in the Seventh Term Reports.
Mr. ERSNINE fail, he did not Jr:i.nre die Rah
of l ON', that one ITEM cannot bind anokite, by
gatarn under teal, without a power of attorney for
trat purpole, executed iin. a ice undtr feat, nor was
lie prepared to fay, that one Partner could bind
anyther without his leave, in any thin;; that w.ts
not within the fair lcopc of the partnolirip ; but
that lie could, as had been held in many initances,
fo that the aa done u AS within the for lcope of.
commerce. It would he extt timely di.lkult, and
in Come cafes perhaps impcflible, E.) C.Ol y
mi..: in the coinmercial world, particularly in its
p.el•ntif this were not fn. There was no
r. (late,
doubt upon earth that one partner might hire a
chip on his own account, and jointly with Iris part-
ners ; and if he did not put his Peal to the Chat tcr-
party, no doubt his agreement to hire the (hip
Nvculd be as binding on the other partners, as on
the individual who entered into it. Now, the pre-
fent cafe was this i—One of the dar.ndants was
rtident in England, and had executed a Charter.
party of affreightment of a (hip for himfelf and the
rca of the firm of the flotife, the other partners
being abroad. On which the plaintiff was non-1
fuited, becaufe his Lordship held, that the Charter- •
party was not binding; for being a deed under
teal, one of the partners could nut execute it for
the reit, unlefs he had a power of attorney from
the refl. The only quellion was, Kit was a quef
tion, how far a Charter party of affreightment, as
an inflrument of mere commercial purpofes, could
be conftdered as anexception to the general Rule
of Law, which fay s, that one partner cannot by
deed under teal bind another partner, unlefs ex
prefsly empowed fo to do by deed alto under real?
Lord ELL EN BOROUGH laid he ffiould be very
glad in this cafe to make it an exception to that
general rule, becaufe that would he very conve-
nient to commerce ; but after the decillun of the
cafe of Harrifon and Ruffiworth, there could be
no doubt upon it, for there was no dittinelion made
on any account ; no man could bind another by
deed under (Cal,- fur any purpofe, without efpecial
fpecific power under foal for that purpofe from
fuch perfon, except in the cafe of a Corporation,
in which the common foal was binding on the body
corporate. He was bound to fay this, becaufe in
the cafe he had kill quoted, Lord likavoN, in
giving judgment, had Paid, that there was no
doubt upon the matter, that the point was refere-
ed more from the anxiety of the parties than from
any difficulty in the quellion itfelf. There was no
diftintlion in the prefent cafe from that which had
been determined, except that the defendant here,
who executed the Charter-party, had made an ad-
minion of the propriety of the deed, and Paid no
advantage fhould be taken by their houfe ; but
that could not vary the Rate of the fail, nor give
him legal power where he had it not before. His
Lordfhip Paid, Mr. ERWIN!, do you think you
than be able to (hew a diftinelion in this cafe, be.
canfe, if you do, you (hall have an opportunity ?
Mr. Eas cies—My Lord, I have no great con•
fidence in it.
It teemed to be left to the diferetinn of the
Learned Counfel, whether he would take a Rule
or not.