Court Of Chancery, Friday...
The Times, 1824-05-22T00:00:00

LAV )RPOART. l 131s was a tltl praving that the defendant might be restrained 'froimexportibg out.df.thkinigaomA q6uinhty.,fsambergrjj; -*hat 'the fiale which had&takenrplace might be adeclared void ;. thata&ther sale might bedirectedunder the superintendence of the COurt;, snrd that the proceeds might be ardered to be distributed in just propor tions to the parties entitled thereto. T The billwasfiled underthe following circumstances:-The plain. tiffs are four of the crew of a South Sea whaler, of which the de- fendit is the owner. In the year. 1821 the defendant,--on thi-one part, anti the crew, about 40 in 'number, on the other, entered iluo a contract to prosecute a voyage to the South Seas to look for skins and oil. By the terms of the contract, the sailors were to receive a ertain proportion each of the proceeds of the cargo when disposed of; this being the usual mode of remunerating seamen engaged in this service, and not by monthly wages as in the merchants' service. When the vessel had reached a certain latitude, it was the good fortune of the crew to meet with a dead whaic floating upon the water, which, upan examination, was found to contain a very large quantity of ambergris. Being fully satisfictd with this result of their,voyage, they abandoned the idea of proceeding any farther, and returned to Loncton. Upon their arrival in port, the owner pro. ceded with the sale of the ambergris, whiclh wvas put up in large lots of 1,100 ounes each, and there beinf no other purchasers, the defendant himself became the buyer. 'qhe crew were dissatisfied 'with this sale, and proceedings were instituted by theim to set it aside. Those proceedings, however, were afterwards rithdrawn- but the present plaintil,beiug stUil dissatisfied vith the mode and result of the .sale, filed this bill on behalf of thenselves and the remainder of the crew. Mlr. HAStT ind Mr. GrrDLESTO.VE, for the plaintiffs contend. ed'that the sale ought to be set aside. By setting up the article in large quantities, all competiuion was excluded, and iUr. Smitlh ensured a monopoly to himself. The druggists who attended for the purpose of buying complained of its not being set up in smaUer lots to enable then, to do so ; and a ro- licitor who iwas present nfl behalf of the sailors, protested against tile sale as no better tban a mockery. rt was quite absurd that Alr. Sisritli should be at once the sdler and tile purchiaser; and it woultl be quite unjust to allow him to get possession of the whole cargo, at a price sn greatly under its value. Under the circuriistanres, therefore, he ought to be restrained bh an injunction from exporting it, and compelled to effect a proper sale. M1r. H OSCNE aidl lr. KxiNGHT in.Sisted, on1 the other side, that the sale was fair and bona fide. A respectable broker had been called in, and proper notice given. If it were not sold altogether, a small quantity would glut the market, and a great expense wvould be in- curred in warehousing the rest. But there was one objection to the bill whichi must be fatal-it was filed by the plaintifhl on behalf of themselves and the rest of tlie crev. It would be quite monstrous i the defendanit were to be harassed by repeatetl proceedings of this kind; first a bill by one portion. then a bill by another portion of this crew; particularl$ as he lhad procured a sa!e in the most advan. tageous way ie could fbr the cargo. With respect to the fact ofA l r. Smith himself having become the purehaser, it was thIe constant practice of the trade. Air. HART said, that when tihe vessel arrived in the harbour, amnbergris was 50 shillings an ounce; ant althoughi the arrival of ri large supply mustniecossarily have lowered tEhe price, it would at all events have fetcied a potnd an ounce, if properly sold; whereas. a part of it was disposed of for 5s.:6d. an ounce, and another part for 13 shillings. The LORD CHANCELLOn asked him if he had an affidavit of that facL Alr. HART said fie had not. Nr. HoasNp observed, that the quanrity of ambergris brought home by that ship worhld sapply the whole of the United Kingdom tor fifty years to come. The LORD CHANCELLOR asked what was amlbergris ? Air. HART said, it was matter contained in the body of a whiale, which by a certain process was converted into a perfuime and a me- dicine. There was not enorgh to supply the kingd(nn for 50 y ears to come, as Mir. Horne stated; altlough there certainly was enouglh to supply it all for the present. But there was a ready market tfr it on the continent, whsere it was used as incense in the Roman Catholic churches. Mr. IHotNE ssaid his friend slr. Hart was anxious to prevent till, offering ofizicense on the Roman Catholic altars, althougl he was willing to sacrifice the interests of' his client to a suit in the Court of Chancery. The LORD CHALCELLOR said, that the Coart of IKing's Bench had decided that the crew were not partners in a cmse of this kind; but that after tire cargo was sold, each nmight bring an action for his proportion of the proceeds. Th:at wS a doctrine wlich he (the lord Chancellor) sliould have bees very murich inclined to question, had he not such an autlrority for it; but how far a court of cquity would couritenance the bringing of 40 actions instead of one upon such a contract wuas another matter. His I,ordshlip then went.over the facts f tbre casse, and concluded by saying thrrat he could riot grant an in- Jurncon upon thiss bill, filed, as it was, by four of tue crew on behalf of themselves and the others. 'Hlie would, however, give the plaintiffs leave to a,nend; but he should expect to he put in posse ssion of all the other proceedings which had taken place relatisve to this transaction. TIIOMAS V. SMONTGOMERY. By corisentof all the parties in this cause, the sum of 477,0001. was ordered to be distributed rateably amongst tlIe legatees of tile late Duke of Qrueensberry. COURT OF CIIANCERY, FitDAY-, M1AY 21. _ MAIRYSON AND OTHERS V. S35ITIS.