The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-02-10 00:00:00

TRURTILL V. BEAUMONT.

, Mr. Justice Peas read the notes of this trisl. (See the
Statesman elsJuse26 1823. It will be recollected that it was
au action brought by Thomas 'Dimwit against Mr. Ilarber
Beaumont, as manoging director of the County Fire-office,
upon a policy of insurance, to recover the amount of
certain goods &Hedged to have been destroyed by lire in
Watling Street, in the month of Jaunarv, 1e,23. The
principal witoess upon this occasion was fohn Thurtell,
who afterwards acquired such unfortunate notoriety, and
upon his evidence, anti that of other witnesses, the jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages 1,9001., the
tall sum .claimed.)
On the ]Nth of November last, Mr. Sergeant 'faddy
moved for a rule to sheer cause why the verdict should
not be set aside and a new trial granted, on three grounds
—first, a misdirection to the Jury by the Learned Judge ;
and secondly, that a bill for conspiracy to defraud the
Gouutty Fire-office bad been found by the Grand Jury of
Middlesex against the two Thurtells, and two of the other
violent:, in the case.
The Court refused the motion on both these grounds;
but granted it oe a third ground—namely. that it appear-
ed by the affidavit of James Wtigglesworth, that a quanti-
ty of the geode stated to have been in the warehouse at
the time of the fire. had been sold at various times
on. and „mtbseemenely to the 2241 of December, 182 t, by
Jobs TOMB and J. E. Snowden, to filesars. Ahrens...a,
of Wood Stmt. at a price twenty per cent. less than their
first cost t sad ley an affidavit of doeaph Hunt, that in a
conversation with Jolla Thane% Ilse latter etessillik-saby
stance that the premises bad been wilfully set on fire.
. Previously to the arguments of counsel for and against
the rule, the affidavits on both sides wise ordered to be
read by the officer of the Court. Of those for the defendant
*e moat material were the affidavits above alluded to, toge-
ther with that o a person named Robinson. who lived op-
prsite.to the premises. and swore that be could see the
plaintiff's rooms when the premises were on .fire, anti that
they were quite empty. These were met oat the part of the
plaintiff by numerous affidavits, the most important of
which were' thing of Messrs. Margraves, and some of their
servants, and of J. B. Snowden, which contradicted the
alferaeons containedin Wriggleswortb's affidavit. They
were also.deuied in the affidavit of the late John Martell ;
es were also the facts stated by Hunt. The affidavit of
names Tlitirtell alleged, that when he taxed Hunt in his
peollser's presence at Hertford with having made that
eittittereene. be (Ham) burst into tears, begged to be for-
ATM laid OW that he had only done it to try to save bins-
Jelf.
• Tie reading. of the affidavits occupied the Court to the
bm4f lie riving. The case will be resumed to-morrow.
4WI-44/4 • • • •
, . 1•11 r
. .
PISOLVINT DEBTORS' COURT.—Max DAY.
+11111!•-•

!!~

William Date was opposed by Mr; POLMICIE, oa behalf
avaeSetliao. The inoolvast war "Ail/ assaafaelater.
wapothooe Ms- ow*" earditor keeps a public
asighiood &olio& appaseediby the evidence.
,;4kViosisteipst ioessaesitsd st Ili Boder'ank
of SU. is Awns NMI VIM ball. at/
IsaL3ool. meek .110 tjossemed ia the Three
011111.11111.paiL ail his utbsicrelian, one of laws

~o.
'..;

«~

e
• *

i>