Court Of King's Bench, Gu...
The Times, 1824-04-26T00:00:00

LAW REPORT. This was an action of trover by Messrs. Bartons, who are tallow. merchants of great respectability, to recover from the London Dock Company the value of 100 casks of tallow. The tallows, wvhich lay at the London Docks, were sold to the plaintiff; on the 18th of Sep. tember last, and they, on the 26th, sold them to Aessrs. Moberley and Bell, and gave an order to the defendants " to transfer, weigh, and deliver" the same to the vendees. Before the taUows were weighed or paid for, Moberley and Bell sold them to .Mr. Hawes, who gave his acevetance for them, and the Company, on their order, trans. ferred themnisto the name of ir Hawes. On the I0Lh ofOctober.Mo- berley and Bell gave 112essrs. Barton a cbeck for the tallows, which wras nOt paid; and on the 16th of October, they having stopped pay- ment, Alessrs. Barton gave notice to the Company not to transfer, and contended that they had a right to stop the tallows in tsamsitu, as the delivery was not perfected. The LOItD CHIEF .JUaxCE said he shomld advise the jury to find a verdict for the defeadant, as he was decidedly of opinion that where the owner of goods sells them and gives an order for de- livery, and the vendee sells them again to a party who pays for them, the original vendor has no right to stop them intrnsitu. But as the questiou was one of great importance to the commercial world, he was desirnus that his opinion should be solemnly congidered ; and therefore suggested that the counsel for sthe plaintiffs should tender a bill of exceptions to his charge. The ATTotIOcEYd3ENERAL, for the plaintifFsh, intimnated that he shoultd adopt this course, and accordingly The Jury found a verdUct for the defendant, which will be re. viewed in the mar.ner suggested. MR. WILLIS. At the close of this cause Ar. SCABLETT, who had been counsel the defendant, rose and expressed a wish to say a word respecting sometsing which had beeR aupnesed to iu the cause of " Ravenga v. Mtickintosh," tried on hee preceding day by a jury somt of whom were then in the box. He had received an ap. plicatign from Mr. Willis, of the Chancery. bar, of a nsture which he could not notice in that place; but this morning he bad received an application of a different kind, which he was happy to notice. It bad been supposed that he h-d said something personaUv offensive to Mdr. Willis ; he did riot think he could be so understood by his Lerdship or the jury; but if he had been so understood jtothing was turtherfrom his Intention. The LoRD C.srsEr J*sTICn said, he did dotso understand any tlhing which Mr. Scarlett had said. Two or three ofthe jurors joined in expresging the~same opinion. Air. Willis, who had sat within the bar, without his professional dress, then retir6d. It was understood that some communications hlad passed between 31r. Scarlett and Ur. Willis, which led to this disclaimer on the part of the former; but as we are not suire that our information Ls accurate, we forbear from publishing it in a case where a slight variation of expression may be material. We are happy, however, to state, that the result is quite satisfactory to the friends of both parties.] CAMBSRIDGE V. ANDERSON. This was an action on a policy of insurance for 4001. effected on the ship Comnzmerce, from Qaebec-to Bristol. In the river St. Law- rence a fog came on, and during its continuance the vessel stranded at about two hundred fa,homs from the land,and sustained great in- jury. The Captain finding it impossible to obtain imnmediate assist- ance, returned to Quebec in an open boat, with a view of consult. ing the correspondents of his owiners. In pursuance of their advice, the agent for loyd's and three surveyors inspected the wreck, and they were of opinion that it could not be repaired without an ex- pense exereding its value. It was determined, therefore, to sell it, and being brought to-Qaebec, it was put up to auction and purchased with its register, for 1301. The questien was, whether the plaintiffs were entitled to claim as for a total loss with benefit of salvage, or for an average loss only. The LoRD CHIEF JUSTICE gave Isis opinion, that if the vessel could not be repaired at a less sum than lier value, though sold with her register, the owners had a right tQ claim as for a total loss; but if she could have been repaired for a less sum, then they could onlv recover average. As this subject had been already much discussed, and as the law perhaps was not quite settled, he should be glad that his view of the case should be re-considered by the Court. The jury expressed their opinion on the facts, that the vessel coulsi not have been repaired for a less sum than her value and fonnd a verdict for the plaintiff-Damages 3401., deducting from 4001. 16 per cent. for salvage. CUnItTS V. WILLIS. This was sn action against the sheriff of Warwickshire for a false return to a writ ofj$eri faciae, issued by the plaintiff, a wholesale draper in Friday-street, against a person nanmed Crutclley, a linen- draper at Warwick. It was admitted that there were goons on the premises to satisfy the execution, but it was alleged that they were bound by a previous act of bankruptcy committed by the debtor. The act of bankruptcy relied on was, that (Crutchlev, being at the warehou%e of MVir. Corbett, in Friday-street, heard that a creditor named .Johnson was coming, and went out of the war to avoid Ihim. The ATTOitNEY-GnNERAL contended, thatthiswas not an act of bankruptcy, as the party was not in hIsown house. The I,oRD CuIEF JusricE clearly held that an avoidance of a creditor any where was an act of bankruptcy, and consequently that the return was true. The plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited. At the rising of the Court all the causes in the paper were dis. posed of. The Lord Chief Justice on Mlonday (this day) resumnes COURT OF KING'S BENCH. GUIT ITTAT.T- A - -A BAR -TON V. Ttn--rv,--