High Court Of Admiralty, ...
The Times, 1824-01-28T00:00:00

No business of any public interest occuried in this Court to-day, excepting the following !- THE FLORA. This case we have already brought under the notice of our readers on two or three occasions. The vessel had been arrested under a writ of fJeri facwas, executed by the -$heriff of Kent. A monition having been subse4uently obtained agzdnst her, in asnitof mariner's wages, the sheriU' gave up possession, Droposing to go for the surplus of the proceeds after the wages shoud re .satisfied. The vessel be- ing sold tinder the Admiralty process, and the wages paid, Alr. Whitfield, the owner, intervened, claiming the surplus, and alleging damages, by reason of the sheriff's seirure and surrender of pos- session. To-day Air. hliitfield, who was some timie since admitted to sue in formii pauverix, addressed the Court, and warmly complained of the delays which had been interposed as to the adjutlication of this case by she other parties. They had committed a breach of faith in haing pledged themselves to apply to the Court of King's Bench for a 7n,7zdandlts, which applic.ation they had never made, wellknow- mg, most probably, the eastigarion they were likely to receive from that Court, on accou:nt ot their having expressed satisfaction that the vessel had been sol under an order of the Admniralty Court. be- cause they believed the title of the Sheriff of Kent to be a bad one. He now prayed the Court either to continue the cause so as to carry it to a speedy conclusion, or to direct the surplus of the proceeds to be paid out to himn (Mr. Whitfield). Dr.Jaxwrn reprlled tleiniputations whlih the party lad tlrown out againsr his clients. The difficulty which had intervened was suggested by thesolicitor of the parties, a gentleman of known emi- nence and respectability in his profession; and he had instructed him (Dr. Jenner) that a coUrt of common law would not entertain this case, pending the continuance of the suit in the Court of Ad- miralty. Lord STOWELT. exprested his perfect readiness to comply with any determination of the common law coerts as to the questLon whe- ther their process or the process of this Court should govern this matter. In the meanwhile, he thought the case did appear to bear lhardlly on the owner. Mr. WVhltfleld said, he only wished the otber parties to get a zna.- darn7,/ from the Court of Iing's Bench, and withdraw " their eavert." The Conrve.-Sir I join in that wish most heartily. Dr. JENXER, on tbe suggestion of the Court, then agreed to see 31r. Shelton, the solicitor, before-the next Court-day, so as to en- able the Corurt to proceed definitively in one way cir the other. THE 3SOSELEY. This was a common salvage cause, in which the sum of 15 guineas had been offered to some half dozen men of Bridlington, who are accustomed to pilot vessels on that part of the coast into Bridlington harbour. The CouRT took an opportunity of animadvertirF on the great grievance of avits in these snmall cases. They incrc sed she bills of costs to parties far beyond the aimount of the interest at issue. The case itself was one of littre more than pilotage, and there woula be no necessity for such a multiplicity of avermetts in cases of this sort. Afterthe argumenit of counsel, Lord STOWEiLL said, that courts were bound, in looking at these cases, to consider, not merely what had actually been done in the war of salvage or pilotage, vhichever the present service might be called, but the ultimate benefit which they rendered to the commerce and navigation of the country. Certainly the case now before him was not one of a hight tlass of salvage; but it had aboLt it that degree of nlerit, that he should give the six men 51. each, and their costs. Erraztun.-JOHX and JoHw.-In this case, which was reported in our paper of yesterday, we are requested to state ttlat the libel did not pha iGnthe 2th art.) that the p arties "retired to bed wgei ther ;" bus that, fromn noises heard, &:c., the lateness of the hour to which 31r. Foester stayed with Airs. John, and other appearances and circumstances, i' they the saiid parties, committed the foul crime of adultery togetlher,'1 &c. HIGH COURT OF ADMlIRAILTY. TUESDAY. JAN. 27.