Court Of King's Bench, We...
The Times, 1824-01-27T00:00:00

'a-tA t 3 L1N - S1= Z ; t~ ~ rScd a rte t-i slhow cause ph c: Tw :1 t--9=u >t::.int. c--, the patca c*W7hilc ate tresh in the tecollectton ot our readers. ft wag an action for money lert, and had andreceived in which Air. Kinder, the contrac- tor fbr thet Pntmvia Ldan, sought to. .ecover, a very large sumib monoey retaluind by the defendaits as bankers, and wbich, be coi- tend1ed1, was necessary to intdenonify hinielf against liabilitives *hich he had inctrred on behaltf of the Government of Perui. At th&a trial -before the L ord Chtiet' Justice at'Gxdllidall, it aplpeared thiat: the ac- coani- was (riginally opened bv IV Mr. Kinder's directions, unidther- head of" Peruviant Ltean Account," bitt aflerw-ards that a larie part Otthtle fund13 wvas trantrerred toan a'ccountheadled '1 State of Peru, T. Knder, agent," over wlch theplaintiffand theEnvoys, Garcias and Paroisien,exercised control, theEIInoysatnthorizingthebankersto pay Mr.Kinder'sdraughts. Tn order to make thefunds raiseAfroo thesub. senbers available to the Government of Peru, a entlemant namiel Proctforwas dlespatched to Souith mrc,wt nhrtt rwi on. Mr.Kiuider,and raisernonev;onthem,lllrMKnderlookingforindem. nit yto the fund in thehandso6fthebatnkers. In the meantie,erientral San illartin, from whom thieEnroysderiveditheiraurhiority,wasdepos. ed;and theGorvernment eaistiigtn Peru withdrew theirpowers.Aftet two revoluticns, bowever, the perso)is. e.ereisigf ttie functions of o.i vernment reeopni'ed the lOan, .and re-stored thie vowers of the En- voys, whio now again authori7ed the defendanis to pay Al r. Kinder's tdrauglts. A bill in equity, however, had been Wed, and though dis- misnsed on fonnal objection, was followed bv anotber which is still pending, and in consequence of the opinion'thrown out by the Lord Chancelor, ana the advice of thie AttorneY and SolicitorG General essr.; maeiet cairnd Co. declined paying a'ny money to either of the partes akig caimto theo fund. At the trial the Lord Chief fsr ica bs tained fro m tgivinug anty opinion on the legality of the trasacion, ut oldthejuy, hatinependent of that ques- otion, hethought MUr. lRnder entided to recover at all events the npai in tothefirstaccount: and as to the second, lie directed them to consider whether Mlr. Kiinder was authorized in his demand bys any pedrsons whocouldfnirlvbeconsideredas "the Stateof Pertn." n. ths irection, the jtiry bound a verdict for the cntire sum, ex- ceeding Th,OOO. The learned Attorney-G eneral now urged that this verdict was wrong on three groun(s-first, that Air. Kinler never could have suistained an action in his own name for this money * se- "ond, that his authority to draw for it was terminateA with the depo- ition of General San Alartin, and tle ravocation of the powers of the Envoy= ; and lastly, that the whole transaction was illegal. It I could not be doubted that the object of raising this money was to rendes more eifectiual the re5istance offered by t:se provinces of S;pain to her authority: if it had beeni granted by the Government o ths country, it would have been a breach of neutrality justifying war, and siould individuals be allowed to adopt a sitilar pro- ceeding ? MIr. Justice BAYLEY.-Tiie question of law is,whether it is legal to raise money for the purpose of assisting rebellion against a Power with whom we are at peace. Air. BtOuGnA it said the point vwas not distinctly made at the trial. SIElsIV The iORfl CHIEeF JUSTrCE assented that it was not distinctly made, bitt it was adverted to on both sides, and was certainly left open for future consideration. The A.T TosRNEY-GEERAL begged, on behalf of the defendaits, as insinuations had been made respecting their motives, to state,that the offered, pending this dispute, to allow interest on the whole sum, after the rate which was paid on Exchequer bills. lr. BH1OUGHA3S expressed a wish that the money shovuld be in- vested at once in Exceiequer bills, anti deposited in the Bank. The LORD ClIIEF JUsTIcE thought it was well deserving of tie attention of parties, wilether they would, by creatinz another stake- holder, incur the risk of multiplying suits. Ile thought it just to say that the attacks miade on the motives of the defendants did not ap. pear to him at all borne out by the evidence tn the trial. It would be better for the parties to agree among themselves as to the dis. posal of the money: hbit if this could not be done, atiother applica- tion might be tmade to the Couirt. The COURT granted a rule to show cause. TItE RtNG V. B.ASTONE, E5Q. This was a rule cahlitig on the defendant, a magistrate of York. silire, to show cause why a criminal information should not be ex- hibited against him for illegally committing the prosecutors to r,rison. MlIr. GuRNEY, for the defendant, said that he believed the pro- tecutors were satisfied that a complete answer was given to the charge, and that the rule must be discharged; Mr. Bastone, how- ever, did not press for costs. lMr. ScARI.ETT, for the prosecation, admitted that he could tiot sustain Iiis rule, which was accordingly discharged, bitt without costs. THE FING l'. SIERtWOOD AND ANOTiIEII. This Was a rule obtained in Last terim, caliog on ilMessrs. Slier- wood and J,inec, booksellers in Paternoster-row, to show cause why a criminal iforination should not be exhibited agaitist them for publishing a pampitlet rcspecting the late Jotii Thtirtell and liis associates, wencting to prejudice them on their trial. Ilr. CiSSTTY, tor the prosecution, said that he was instructed to consent to the ritle being dlischarged on payment of costs by the de- fendlants. Mr. SCARL.ETT, for the defendants, said that lie was auttiorized1 to agree to the terms suggested. The LorD CuHtIE JUsTICE observed. that the Court had no power to compel a party to goon with a criminal itiformationl if he chose to decline it. The rule, therefore, must be lischarged ott pay- tmeat of costs. COUn? OF a;w; R LO_ __-'-' JAV.7 26.