The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-06-20 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

- A Court of Common Council was held yesterday at
Guildhall, to consider the adjourned Report from the
Orldge-houge Committe on their proceedings in Parlia-
ment upon the bill for rebtti.dine London Bridge, and
also upon the Report recently made by Thomas Telford.
Esq. as to the probable effects in the navigation of the
river, front taking down the present bridge and building
a new one.

The Court resumed the digrussion on the tnotion made
at the lakt Court, for agreeing, with the report of the
Bridge-house Committee, then presented, and the amend-
ment then voted against the same ; when, after consider-
able debate, there api
For the amendment-2 Aldermen-62 Commoners-2
Tellers-66. _ _

For the report-1 Alderman-21 Commoners-2 Tel-
lers— 24.

The amended motion being then about to be pie, also.
they amendment was morel-" That the hill be abindon.
ed, and that thy %wile b- oppns.tl, unless an indemnity is
given fur any ill effects that way arise to the river;"—
which was finally agreed tn.
The Lord .laynr %vas requested, in the event of a clause
for such indemnity n.t bring inserted in the hill, to
move that the third reading he postponed for 3 months.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDUALL, Jurra 19.

This day the sittings at Ni4i Prime for London tom•
tanned before the LORD CHIRP JusTicz and common
juries.

MEDLEY AND ANOTHER V. ANDREWS.

This was an action against the defendant for not ac-
cepting Suanish bonds for 5,100!„ sold to him by the plain-
tiffs on the sth of Nov. last, for the 30th of Nov. following.
It appeared by the evidence of Mr. Kirwan, the broker,
throngli whose agency the bargain was effected, that he
was directed by Air. Andrews tt, purchase Spanish stock,
and in pursuance of such directions made the contract in
question, which was fur the purchase of five bonds at the
rate of 64. The day mentioned for carrying the en-
gagement into effect was also the settling day at the
Stock Exchange; and before that day, Sp mills bonds
had fallen to 584, in consequence of news from Spain,
and tam purchamrs were unable to pay their losses.
Mr. Andrews was then informed 'Mt the bonds would
be ready for him at a certain hour; but he did not ac-
cept or pay for them, and the difference on their price
amounted to 4271., which the plantiffs now sought to re-
cover. There was no positive evidence to show whether
the stock was in'ended to be really transferred, or whe-
ther the difference only was to be paid ; the contract it-
self was in the ordinary terms in which a real contract
of sale would be expressed; lint the day appointed, and the
, fact that the sum was the amount usually sold or bought,
were relied on as furnishing moral proof that the trans.
action was merely in the nature of a wager.
The LORD Cater JUSTICE desired the Jury to consider
whether the parties intended to agree for a bona fide
sale of the Spanish bonds, or whether they merely des
signed that the one should pay and the other receive the
difference which might arise an the price between the
Bt:t of November an 1 the 30th of the same month ; and
directed them, if they were of opinion that the former
supposition was correct, to find. their verdict for the
plaintiff for 4..71.; if ,liey acre satisfied the latter was
true, to find fur the defendant.

The Jury, after a short consultation, found a verdict
f.nr the defendant.

The LORD CHIEF .li/erica told them they had &tend •
very proper verdict, which he hoped would tend to snp-
pre•s the practice of speculating on the future prices of
funds, which so often led to di►tress and ruin.