The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-02-07 00:00:00

COLES V. (LUPIN.

This application to the Court arose out of the well;
known transactions of Kinnear, Wolfe, Levy, &r., and
the hills which Halpin, of the firm of ('oles and tialpin,
iu lieet-street, had accepted on that firm, with t the
privity :mil consent of his partners. The Court, on a
tor met occasion, having heard the statement of 3lesiors.
Coles, sen. and jun., granted an injunction against Hal-
pin, to prevent bins from receiving or paying any ac-
counts, bills, promissory notes, or rash, in the name and
ore behalf of the said firm. The hills which, however,
had been accepted got into circnlation, and were held
hr several persons who considered them valid. An ap-
plication was made to his Honoar, the lice-Chancellor,
who, on bearing all the circumstances, ordered an issue
to try the validity of the hills. In that issue Messrs.
Coles were defendants, and Mr. Dixon, the holder of
several bills, was ordered to he plaintiff. The defence
set up was, first, that the bills were of an nsurions na-
ture ; and, secondly, that the plaintiff, when he received
them, had, or ought to have had, knowledge of the
manner in which such bills were drawn, and that they
had not received the sanction of Messrs. Coles, nor hail
even been known to them. Evidence on both these
points was produced to the satisfaction of the Jury, who,
tinder the direction of the Lord Chief Justice, found for
the defendant. It was also singular, that since that
verdict no application had been made for a new trial,
and therefore the validity of the bills was nullified. at
least so far as Dixon was concerned. 4t Mr. Wingfield
Isehl several others; and it was desirable that the case
should, as soon as possible, be sent to a Jury, to ascer-
tain whether they were valid or not. (In the part of
this Gentleman several affidavits were read, stating, that
MB value had been given, and no more than five per
r• nt. taken on the goods delivered for Le Bruhn, the
etch merchant, who was stated to have come to this
•onntrr to purchase Foods. To this it was answered,
bat if. strong swearing could invalidate truth, then it
uou'd have succeeded in the rase of Dixon, whereas
•he con rary was the fact ; but how was it possible the
parties could believe the bills to be valid at the time
they received them, when it was known that this pre-
tended Dutch merchant was no other than a wretched
individual, living in a miserable garret in Houndstlitch.
On each of these points Counsel dwelt with considerable
length.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after observing the circum-
stances which had taken place on the trial, and after
some remarks on the baneful consequences resulting to
partnerships when any individual took upon himself to
accept bills without time privity of the firm, stated, that
'he circumstance of no application being made during
the interval since the trial to have a new trial, operated
-tronglv as a proof of the nullity of' these bills, so far
as involved Diann; but then it did not follow that a
Jury would give the same verdict in the case of Wing-
field as they bad in that of Dixon. He therefore or-
dered an imam to be tried forthwith io the King's Bench,
to try the validity of the hills, and Wingfield to be
plaintiff, as the issue was to assume that they were va-
lid.—Motion granted.
No other case of interest came on.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAY. 5.

MR. HUNT AND THE LANCASHIRE MAGISTRATES.
At the rising of the Cori, at half-past four o'clock,
Mr. Hunt took his station in the centre of the floor, and
manifested an inclination to address the Court.

The Cozy Jvrrica.—Mr. Hunt, what do you want?
Mr. Herm—My Lord, I have a motion to make to
the Conn.
The Cuter .frsTrce.—What is the nature of it ?

Mr. Hour.-1 will shortly state it. I move for a rule to
chew cause why a writ of certiorari shonld not issue out
of this Court, to move my trial (the King against Hunt
■nd others, for a conspiracy to overthrow the tiovern-
ment, at the Manchester Meeting, o■ the 16th of Au-
gust last,) out of the jurisdiction of the county of Lan-
caster, and into that of the neighbouring county, that of
York, or else within the immediate jurisdiction of this
Honourable Court, in Middlesex or Westminster. I
:stake this motion on the ground that I shall nut have a
fair trial in Lancashire, where the calm now rests, anti—

The Untie Jerrice.—Are there other parties in the
cause, and do they all concur in this motion ?
Mr. tivsr.--1 du not know ; there are others with
tor in the indictment. _

Mr. Justice BATLIT.—We cannot help that, but we
must know before we can consider your 'notion; all the
parties who are indicted must come into Court, and con-
cur in the application. That is the rule.
Mr. HUNT.-1 know some of them do concur in the
motion I now make, and the rest may for any thing I
know. But bow can I ascertain their consent so as to
bring them into Court, as your Lordship says I must?
Many of them I only saw when I was thrown into gaol
among them. 1 am accused of a conspiracy with men
whom I never, to my knowledge, saw until I was made
a prisoner at Manchester. flow am I to bring them
into Court under such circumstances? lam ready to
show that the trial ought, fur the ends of justice, to be
removed out of Lancashire, and I trust that under such

circumstances the Court will grant me the role.
The OM, Jcsvcr.—We must know whether the
parties do concur in your motion. That knowledge
•mwst..wm to as in the regular way. Unless we hare
i•, we cannot receive your application.
Mr. HUNT.—My Lord, bow am 1 to procure that
knowledge?
Tie CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice BATLEY them
Loth •al I. the Court could not grant the rule. The
ledges ruse from their seats, and retired from the
Bench.