Star.
London, England, 1803-12-22 00:00:00

LAW' .11SITELLICiN.CA.

COURT OF KINGS 11 ENCII, DEC 2o
mvuo‘q..r •U. HOTtIAM AsD OTHERS.

The ties io Otis cal....ne Al extremely ref
ab/c. The Phrtitiff is Cartan litt,ldart, who W for
; I • d a, the mait.r of a fltip in the
Arnetican tta‘h:. Richard Ilotham, whore repre-
fentative,. the d:f.::..lants etc, was engaged in EAR
India aii..l the firopri,:tor of t i•f6tlis of the
Royal Adron.il Indiatnan. Sir Richard having
:1147 the rrevail,:d on him to
leave tittiai ion, and to enter Imo the service ()Idle
Company. lie at lir could only enter as fourth of.
fleet- on board, lo th.i! there wee no great encourage-
ment i. r him, who was rat her advanct.%l in life,tn enter
i, to ti c fervis-e ; Le however did enter into it, and was
la• promoted to be the Captain of the Royal Ad•
mind, pet formed four voyages in her. Before
• time the ',..ommands of the Eall India fhips puffed

f )m ban,! to band by file; bit afterwardsytin

I t " .
..•uenee of nefolutions entceed into by that rich and li.
lheral Company, no Glrain could be removed from
his fit nation witliont content of the Court of Di.
rettors. Sir Rehm,' Hothans being about to fell his
fhip, afked the Plaintiff, Capt. Huddart, if he would
give up his ll:nation as Captain, which, to oblige Sir
I Richard Hotham, he did ; and by being able to fell the
fitip witla•ut Any Captain bel, aging to Incr,Sir Richard
had been enabled to get S.acol. more for his (hip than
Le °thy-wile wouid have done; and Mr. GARROW
enatended that Ilcocl. ought to be in the pocket of
his client. It was not eii,puted that the plaintiff was
in that Citation, and 'bat he had given it up.
Captain Btinehaid was 'lie only witncf4 examined
in the cattle. He laid he was very intimately acciu tin-
ted with Sir Richard Hotham t he Alfa knew Capt.
Huddart; who was see Car -tin of the Royal Admi-
ral. Sir Richard Florham was pOireffCd Of 14-56ths
of the Royal Adiriral. In :he year ISt.tt, he parted
with all his interelt in that (hip. Captain Bond fuc-
ceeded Captains Fludiart. He faid he had heard Sir
Richard repeatedly fay, that he had promifed Capt.
Huddait soool. to give up his fituation as Captain
of the Ruyal Admiral. He believed he was appoint-
, cd to that lunation entirely from friendfhip : there
friendfhips were very rare. Before the refolutinns of
the EA! India Company, not to fell their commands,
he had known 90001. given for focls a fituation : the
fum, were veil, different that were given; he had
very often known :toool. given. Sir Richard Hotham
bad alfo provided I,r one of the fons of the Plaintiff,
by appointing hint Captain of the York Bail India-
mass. The witnef, did not think that Capt. Huddart
bad ever afked for this rood. from Sir Rich. Horham.
Mr. Elisio.' was next heard on the part of the
Defendants, who, he laid, from their fituation, were
bound to defend this action.
Lord ELLIt43OItOUGH obferved, that Sir Richard
Hotham had carved out the law fortialfelf. He had
made a promife to pay this Gentleman roool. and
there was a confederation for that promife. There
was no imputation whatever on the. Defendants in
Vefißing this demand. They could riot do otherwife
than have the pellilllll of the demand meafured by
the verdict of a Jury.—The Jury found a Verdi& for
the Plaintiff--Damages wool.
twirls si rviasse.

This aelon was brought to recover a mom of money
tinder the following circumflances :—The Plaintiß
being called upon to fell a large quantity of rum,
brandy, and tobacco, to a gentleman, of the name of
Gilbert, of the Nand of Guernfey, Mr. Gilbert be-
ing a Ilranter to him, he would not truß him with
the property, unlefc he was guaranteed by Mr. Do.
brat. He undertook to give Bills in favour of Gil-
bert, to the amount of yool. But after Gilbert had
got the goods. he fent Dobree notice not to give the
Plaintiff thefe Bills. It appeared. from the evidence
of the Captain, thefe goods were flung, when they
were put oo board, in (mall calks of about ty
quarts, whereas the calks ought to have contained
6o gallons. And the Plaintiff having &Sled to de-
fraud the Revenue Laws of this country, it had been
determined that he, under fuch circumilances, could
not recover.—Verdift for the defendant.
COPPINGIR AND co. V. JOHNSON AND CO..

This affirm was brought to recover :401. under the
following circumtlances :—A Mr. Alkire, who lives
at Rouen, fent syy bales of clover feed to be infured
and ftild by them in this country. The plaintiffs ae-
corditigly infured them, and, when they arrived, be-
ing in p in ofa bill of lading, they paid the Cur.
torn houfe duties, &c. The plaintiffs had been put to
sonfiderable expence.. and jail when they were about
to take poffellion of the goods in the river,theCaptain
received orders from the Confignor not to deliver
them to the plaintiff. but to the defendants. The
plaintiffs had been reimburfeel the money' they had
bid out, and ¶he defendants, who were only nomi-
:tally In offered to pay their commiflion on the in-
furance. But they silo in filled they had a tight to their
cammitGon of a' per cent. on the fate. They contend-
ed, that the Conlignec bad no right, after they had
engaged their refpcniibility, to take it out of their
bands. •
Lord F.l.Lswamtovorr &id, it might be laid demo
ns a general principle of law, that wherever there was
an authority g ven, coupled with an intereft, that
that authority was not countermandahle. Here there
was an authority to receive this clover feed, coupled
with an actual in•creil. The plaintiffs had contrafted
their refponfibility ; and, theiefore, that confignment
could not be taken out of their hands, till they were
relieved from that refponfibility. That was not done
at the time, and, thcrciore;the plaintiffs, his Lordfhip
thought, were entitled to a verdift. Verdi& fur plain.
tiffs 2401.

of %11%Cli V. ■OBINSON.

This is one nat 14 ten codes for infurance, cnm-
menced by the nwners of the (hip Franklin, Captain
}Alward Goodrtdge ; ti.; total amount of the value
being 26,7011. r s.
I ride trials had h" refereed until a deciflon was
obrainedr.n rh..! 1, whether-the (hip named were
:in American. and conferitientlA a neutral read, or
otherwde. The owner Mas a Mr. Tubbs. a native
ut America, aril a merchant at Liverpool ; and it
was decided that hi, tertier.e:: or tlismiciliati,in at that
port fur two years had deprived him of the right of
neutrality. It wa. iolni.ted on the part of the De-
fendant, thr.t the 11.1intiff, who was a merchant at
tl,e faid pert, was re.wrr:r to the extent flared, aid that
t e were Ch;pred Mr hoard the ved:l named.
rilaip was deitinc.l from Liver?uol to Nqles, Pa-