The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-07-18 00:00:00

itil

~.~

r" Guisse./o;''s

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. '
HOUSE OF LORDS..—.Tambsoaf.
• SILK WEAVER*.
Oa the Order of the Day for the third reading of the.
Silk Weavers' Bill,
Lord BEXLEY said that with a view of satisfying all
the parties interested in this measure, he had prepared
eertdo clauses by way of amendments, Which he should
their submit to the House. Ili the first plate it was pro-
posed, that the powers which the former Act.gave to Ma-
gistrates to regulate the wages of journeymen, should
still continue; the next clause was that master manufac-
turers should' be at liberty, if they thought fit, to employ
their capitals oat of the district comprising &Ai Stance of
ten miles round the Metropolis, and in the third place it
was proposed that all complaints against masters must
be preferred within three months after the causes :if such
complaints occurred.
Lord ELLENBOROUO4I said be &fly Concurred io
them amendments, and be believed that the adoption of
them if ollid betellelpt beneficial to the joariwymal than
theiltrowing out eithe Bill oottid•be.-and he was con.
Relent if this Bill passed in its original shape, a near Bill
for amending it must be introduced next Session. Now,
as the part of the measure which he conceived to be un-
jest was repealed, he trusted the principle of the new
Act would be considered as a measure of policy, and that
so much of the farmer Act as was confined to that ob.
jest would be retained. if the master manufacturer's
. should be disswirfwd they bed ample means of redress b
employing their Capitals to places which could not be of
by the law.
The Earl of HARROWHY expressed his entire estis-
faction at the alteration now proposed to be made, and
he must say that if the journeymen weavers escaped a
danger, it was owing to the propriety of Lieir own con-
duct, and on that sort of conduct must depend whether
the trade should go on as it bade hitherto done; for if
they did not on particular occasions submit to a fair re-
duction of prices, it would be impossible to prevent the'
masters from going away with their capitals to other
places.
herd CALTHORPE said he must regret that the Bill
did not pass in its original shape; he hoped, ho 4 ever,
that if it passed lith these amendments, it would not
have the effect of deterring his ILajesty's Ministers from
adopting that liberal course they had hitherto pursued
with regard to the commercial and manufacturing inter-
, 'nuts 4f the community. Ile believed the feeling that now
seemed to prevail in the House bad been brought about
by the good conduct of the individuals interested in the
measure, and he could scarcely regret. that their Lora-
-1 ships bad made this species of compromise, fur he' was
sure the interests of the State could not suffer by suck a
sacrifice to good order and loyalty.
Lord BEXLEY explained.
The Earl of DARLINOTON said he heartily eon-
%tarred in the alterations now proposed in the Bill, and
Iltitied'the entire measure would be satisfactory to both
parties.
The amendments were then agreed to and the Bill was
sad a third time and passed.—Adjourned.

MOUSE OF COMMONS—Teunerom
There being but fourteen Members present at four
o'clock, the Speaker adjouteed the House till to-morrow,
(this day.)
COURT OTCOMM."7"6"MUNCIL.

Yesterday the Lord Mayor bald a Court of Common
Council.

The Committee appointed in relation to the Finances
of the City presented a Report of the present State of the
Chamber, which was read.
A Petition from William Cade Key, Esq., who was
nominated by Mr. Alderman Atkins, in his Mayoralty,
to he publicly put in nomination for the offied of Sheriff
of London and Middlesex, was preserved, praying' (on
account of the ill state of his health) be niagett be Ws-
charged from such nomination,—which, being read, was
agreed to.
The Resolution of the Inhabitants of the Parish of St.
Andrew, Holborn, thanking the Court of Common
Council for the assistance that had been afforded them in
their effectual opposition to the claim of the Rector of the
Parish for Tithes, at the rate of 2s. %Lin the pound, was
laid befoie the Court and read.
The Remembrancer laid before the Coort the Act of
Parliament lately passed in relation to the London Sew-
ers, which was referred to the Commissioners of Sewers
to be carried into execution.
The Remembrancer then laid before the Court the
Act lately pissed for Rebuilding London Bridge, upon
which the Chairman of the Bridge House Committee pre-
sented a Report of their proceedings in relation thereto,
and which recommended the Court to refer the Act to a
Committee of ten Aldermen and twenty-one Commoners,
to be carried into execution ; upon which a very long
discussion arose, and various amendments were proposed;
the Court finally determined to refer it to a Committee
,consisting of all the Aldermen, the Chairman for the
time being of the Bridge House Committee, and a Com-
moner from each of the Wards.

Upon a Report from the Improvesneot Committee, the
sum of 400 L was ordered to •be subscribed towards lin.
preine the end a Fore-street, Cripplegate, opposite to
CrlpplegeteCbureb.

his Lordship should, with regard to the protest, have.
suffered himself to be made the " cat's paw" of a set of
Oren who were afraid to come forward themselves with
the avowal of their opinions.
The LORD MAYOR said the Court would natiuraliy est
pect an at answer from him, and though be web at a lost
to see in what way the question related to any lois or
breach of the privileges of the Court, beebould undoebt-
edly answer it. He must say, then, that he had not pnt
any sash question in the House. of Compions as to the k-
gsAty of the French Loan. He had no concern with it
If It we'e illegal to lend money to Foreign. Powers, indi-
gduals who made the Loan would be liable to proseca•
ti'on. Neither he, as Lord Mayor, nor the Court in li-
vidually or collectively, had, in his opinitin, any thing to
do +nib it., At the Caine time, he could not help express•
log his istonishntent at the manner in which the course
be had taken on a former occasion had been misrepre•
sented. He begged to state that be had then given no
opinion as to the merits or demerits of the question. lie
bad abstained front doing so. The'conesai be had taken.
heaves litisfsed, from ail he had suhseqnently heard, nas
a perfectly correct course. He could inform the Court
that strong opinions had been given by high law autho-
rities that the vote of money was tap!. His Lordship
said, as to his having been made a " cat's paw" of, that
he had done no more than his duty."

imm•
COURT ote EXCHLQUEIt, Dram%
serous Thu CUM BARON.
ANNUITIES PURCHASED FROM SUPERANNU-
ATED REVENUE OFFCERS.
Riddorks v. IVorion.
This was an action of aasumpsit, for money had and
received by the defendant for the plaintiff—to which the
defendant pleaded the general issue. This novel and
very important case, as regards the above subject, was
stated by Mr. Bennett. The defendant, he said, holds an
office In the Custom•houar, as Pro. Collector of Excise ;
and it is amongst his duties to pay salaries, at certain
times, to Superannuated Officers of the Revenue ; the
plaintiff Isla Superannuated Surveyor of Excises now
near 80 years of age, who for several years' services has
two,pensions—one is for 861. 13i. 44.—the other, on the
Charity Fond. is 141. annually. The plaintiff got into
deep distress some time aga, and obtained a loan of in.,-
ney from apersan of the name of Hautenvi!-e, to whom
he gave authority to receive the said peusions until the
money lent and interest should be discharged ; but a
usurious claim being set up against Ritlilocks as soon
as the principal and interest, amounting to 3531. 2s. Sd.
had been paid, the plaintiff served notice on the defend-
er t not to pay any further'gale to Haivenville ; hut the
defendant notwithstanding, continued to hand over said
money td Heutenville: IVe will prove, said Mr. 8., that
a paper is directed periodically to defendant, called the
Establishment, from the Board of Excise ; that defend-
tilt received the amount of said pensions, and that be is
.botind to give the same to this poor old gentleman and
to no other person.
After evidence had been adduced to establish the plain-
tiff's case,
Mr. Foster—The money givon to the plaintiff, my
Lord, was not as a loan, as bfr. Bennett stated, but for
• an absolute assignment; and as well as an equitable
case. we have an excellent legal one to stand on if it be
' deemed necessary to go on with it—but I submit to your
Lordship, that on the following grounds, amongst others,
the plaintiff should be minsuited :—lst, the money pass-
ing through the hands of the Collector is as the affidavit
states, for his Majesty's use, and no actionof this nature,
by law, can he brought respecting it, without the pre-
eious consent of his Majesty's Attorney-General, which
has not, nor, I am sure, will not be obtained in this
case-2dly, the action is brought against a wrong per-
son; even if it could be justly broaeht against the
Collector. Mr. Rushe or Hautenville, it could not be
maintained against the Pro-Collector-3(11v, the action
is for money had, and received for plaintiff.; use by de
fendsot, whereas all money received by him as Collec-
tor, is lodged daily in the Bank of Ireland.
Mr. Perrin stated also, that it bad been decided in
the case of Disney against Palmerston, that no action
lies against a public officer, though be lodged in his
private banker's hands money for the public use.
The Chief Baron directed a nonsitit to be entered
against the plaintiff, subject to the opinion, if be
thought proper, of a full Court.
MARK, TIMM, AND MARK, V. CROKCR, DARLING & CO.
This rause has created a very considerable interest
among mercantile men. In the year 1814, a Mr. Brewer
purchased from the plaintiffs 2000 barrels of oats, and
4000 barrels of wheat, for shipment, for which they re-
ceived, by agreement, the defendants' acceptances, at four
months, for 60001.. who, however, having stopped pay-
ment in the month of June in the same year, (when only
one cargo was shipped, which was subsequently paid fur
by a bill in London, for 954/. 40.2d.)served notice thereof
on the plaintiffs, begged of them to cancel their accept-
ances, and to act as they thought proper with the re-
mainder of the grain ; it was shipped thereafter to Liver-
pool, to the care of Cropper, Benson and Co. friends of
the plaintiffs, who directed them, on being paid 53701.
Be. 10.1. to place it (the grain) at the disposal of Brewer,
who, in the course of some time, advanced 3,3001. in ad-
dition to the sum already mentioned, and came to a kind
of final settlement by giving another hill for 9001. old.
During those negociations the markets fell ; a loss was sus-1
Weed in the sale, Brewer himself failed, and the bill was
never paid ; to recover whido, with interest thereon, and
other expences attendant on the contract, this action was
brought on the acceptances of the defendant, which the
pliintills still hold. The case has already been before
several Juries ; the first b;ought in a verdict, which was
Act aside for nun-conformity, we believe, to the Judge's
Charge on the law of the subject. Another Jury was
impannelled ; two of whom were chosen, by consent, as
arbitrators, with the assistance of Counsel, and their de.
cision was to stand as the J•ary's verdict, but they did
not agree; a third Jury was the consequence, who, dar-
ing last Easter Term, were locked up all night, and not
being able to conic to an agreement, were discharged at
eleven o'clock the next day. This day the panel was
called over twice; the last time, by order of toe Court,
under a penalty on each person absent of 51.1 but normore
than four or five Special Jurors having answered to their
names, the Chief Baron was reluctantly obliged to put off
the trial till next Term.
Mr. Bennett, K. C. an I Ar. Jackson, Counsel for Plain-
Jiffs complained of the great expense of having witnesses
in Ouldin from Li insriek and (Aster parts of Ireland, and
stated that Mr. Brewer was up attendance from Liver-
pool, and were willing t the matter should be even
tried by a common Jtir!
Mr. WA LLACI, for the defendants—is 31y.. Lord, before
this it was said at the other side, that every thing wont I
turn upon documentary evidence, and we are willing to
save trouble, and the further attendance of witnesses, to
admit all papers, letters, &c. that were marked by regis-
ter, or appeared on tho last trial admitted on the Judge's
hooks, with the exceptions of a notice, letter, att. of
Brewer's."

After atone forther conversation on this point. :$e
Chief Baron snggemed, that Mr. Brewer bring here now,
Lis esamination and cros:•examination might be taken