Sidor som bilder

a law.

person,, with the generous ardour which enters. .80 honourable ambition in answer to the miserable abuse of largely into his character, came forward to vindicate one whose feelings with regard to all elevated objects of the departed dead, , and performed the task to the desire had been deadened less perhaps by age than by a confusion of those who had rendered it necessary. long and intimate acquai ntance with all the most contamiLord Denman was not actuated by any feelings of private nating influences of the baser portion of society. But we regard, for he stated that his acquaintance with the subject may refer to a more venerable authority for the testimony of the discussion was only slight. Neither' was he ac- that “honourable age is not that which standeth in length tuated by any political feeling ; we know not what the poli- of days,” but that “wisdom is the grey hair to man, and tical opinions of the late Mr. LYALL were, but they may be an unspotted life is old age.” Such a life, it may be affirmed, presumed to have been those of his father, the Conservative in as far as that tinge of human infirmity which clings to member for the Cityof London, while those of Lord Denmax the past and present will allow of the assertion,-such a are known to be Liberal--to an extent which has been some- life was that of the prematurely-stricken Advocate-General times regarded as extreme, But the absence of both per

--his days were few, but he left behind him a memory sonal and political predilections mattered not. It was from which his friends may derive consolation, while the enough that Lord DENMAN witnessed an attempt to blight pointless shafts of unfeelin'g tevilers fall harmless around the memory of an able and honourable man, and he, without it. hesitation, interposed the weight of his own character as a But once more as to the question of youthfulness. Is it lawyer, a man, and a gentleman, to crush it. His lordship so unprecedented for a lawyer to attain in early life those has given utterance to the general conviction of the Bar and honours and dignities which are and ought to be regarded the public as to the merits of Mr. LYALL; a more dignified as the distinctions of professional learning and ability? It or respected organ for its expression could not have been de was late in life, indeed, ere Corley and SCARLETT attained sired, and the impotent attack upon his character has ended the positions which they were formed to grace ; but there in the dismay of those who made it. ,

are precedents enough to justify the promotion of young men, On the professional qualifications of Mr. LYALL we will if young men be but qualified for promotion. "ERSKINE, not say one word. It would ill become us to add to the after serving both in the army and navy before he testimony of Lord Denman in regard to a subject upon which applied himself to the study of the law, received a silk gown his lordship is so well qualified to speak. No one now will when he had been only five years at the bar. His political venture to impugn Mr. LYALL's character as

opinions prevented his further advance till he was of mature yer, But there are two or three other objec- age; but had it not been for this obstacle his progress would tions brought forward,. ad. captandum,' to which we undoubtedly have been, through the usual course of promomay without indecorum advert. . These are, that the tion, to an early elevation to the chief seat in one of the chief deceased Advocate-General was appointed at a very courts of law or equity. The late Lord GIFFORD was apearly age; that he was the son of the gentleman who hap- pointed Solicitor-General when neither his years, nor his pened at the time of his appointment to be Chairman of the standing at the bar, nor the extent of his practice, seemed to Court of Directors of the East-India Company; and that give him any special claim to the distinction. But those his practice at the Bar was not extensive. These objections,

who recommended and those who appointed him knew his it will be obvious, are not of the slightest weight, if the qualifications ; he did not discredit their judgment; and main question-was the deceased Advocate-General com- within seven years from the first great step of promotion petently qualified for the duties of the office ?--be satisfac- he became Attorney-General, Chief Justice of the Court of torily answered ; and on this point Lord Denman has put Common Pleas, and, finally, Master of the Rolls. We turn the objectors out of court. But let us spend a few moments with grief to the next illustration, for reference to it awakens upon each of these paltry cavils. Mr. LYALL was a young sensations akin to those excited by the death of Mr. Lyall. man. Surely if this charge had been made while he had the We refer to Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT, á man, like Mr. LYALL, means of personally answering it, he might have retorted not more honoured for his professional talents than beloved upon his detractors in the language of the first Pitt, when for those virtues which lend to talents their best and brightest assailed by the hoary profligate, HORACE WALPOLA-" The charm. When Sir William FOLLETT was appointed Soliu atrocious crime of being a young man, which the honour-citor-General of England, his age, we believe, did not exceed able gentleman has with such spirit and decency charged thirty-six years. Like ERSKINE, his career was for a time upon me, I shall neither attempt to palliate nor deny.; but impeded by the state of the political world, but, 'unlike content myself with wishing that I may be one of those ERSKINE, he did not live to benefit to the full extent which whose follies may cease with their youth, and not of that he had a right to expect from the elevation of his party number who are ignorant in spite of experience. Whether

It would be useless and wearying to proyouth can be imputed as a reproach, I will not assume the duce more instances. These are enough to shew, that not. province of determining; surely age may become justly withstanding the denunciations of Lords ELLENBOROUGH contemptible, if the opportunities which it brings have and BROUGHAM, the merits of young men have not in all passed without improvement.

cases escaped the observation of those able to reward them, The wretch who, after having seen the consequences of a and that the merited reward has not been withheld. With thousand ferrors, continues still to blunder, and whose age the deepest possible sense of the retiring modesty of Lord has only added obstinacy to stupidity, is surely the object BroUGHAM--a feeling which has stood so much in the way of either abhorrence or contempt, and deserves not that his of his lordship's success—we venture to think that even grey head should secure him from insult.” This is the when his lordship was a very young barrister he would not language reported to have been used more than a century have declined the advocate-generalship of Bengal, or the soliago by a young and vigorous mind burning with high and citor-generalship of England, had either appointment been

to power.


This may

His qua

[ocr errors]

offered him. In after-life, when circumstances favoured his, world to draw. Sir LAWRENCE Peel is Chief Justice of professional advancement, it is said that his own estimate of the Supreme Court, and he reflects honour on the office; his claims differed widely from that taken by the founder and but from whom did he receive it, and to what motive is his head of the Reform administration. It is only rumour, and appointment to be ascribed? The Judges of the Supreme till the secret history of Earl Grey's administration be Courts are not appointed by the East-India Company, laid open it can only be rumour,--but it is reported, and but by the Crown--that is, in fact, by the Prime Migenerally believed, that in the original draft of his lordship's nister for the time being. Sir LAWRENCE Peel is cabinet the Great Seal was not allotted to Lord BROUGHAM, nearly related to the Prime Minister now in office, and who that the office destined for the learned person last mentioned was in office at the time when the vacancy occurred which was that of Attorney-General,--that a letter was written, Sir LAWRENCE Peel was worthily appointed to fill. "No tendering that office for his acceptance, and that the indig- one denies that the Chief Justice is fit for his office; but nant lawyer tore it to pieces in the face of the messenger does he owe his elevation solely to his fitness ? Had he been who, bore it, contemptuously observing that there was no equally fit, but a stranger to Sir Robert Peel, does any

be true or not, but it is certain that he one believe that he would have been appointed ? looked for the custody of the Great Seal; and it is certain lifications formed a necessary condition of his promotion; also that he obtained it. No one ever supposed it possible but not the moving cause to it. He is indebted for his seat that Fortune, even in her wildest freaks, should tošs on the judicial bench to the affection of his relative, and there. Henry BROUGHAM on the woolsack; but so it was. is nothing discreditable in indulging the feeling, or in His tenure of the soft seat was indeed short. The Mi- deriving benefit from it. Now then, apply this case to nistry, of which Lord BROUGHAM was one of the the appointment of Mr. Lyall, and see how the matter component parts, was not long-lived, and the LORD stands, Lord ELLENBOROUGH himself (by implication) CHANCELLOR went out with his friends, complaining bit- being judge. The first member of the British Cabinet terly, and it is believed yvithout reason, of the hostility appoints a near relative to a high judicial office; the person of the highest female personage in the kingdom. But his appointed is fitted for the office, and no one impugns the lordship was doomed to something worse than going out

selection. The Chairman of the East-India Company prowith his friends. Companionship in adversity abates its motes the appointment-for he cannot appoint by his own sharpness ; but it is hard, after sharing in the sufferings of authority-of a near relative to another judicial office. The a party, to be deprived of all participation in its triumphs. person proposed, and by the Court of Directors, not by the The Whigs returned to power, but Lord BROUGHAM did Chairman alone, appointed, is in like manner fitted for the not return to the care of the great seal. We cannot inter- office. Treat this case like the former, deal justly and pret this, nor do we feel much anxiety, about the matter. equally with both,' and we ask, competent qualification We acquiesce in Lord BROUGHAM's exclusion from office being secured, what matters it whether the name of the with far more philosophy than he displays under it; but it officer be LYALL or Peel or even LAW? is strange that from the time when Earl SPENCER'S seces- We come to the last cavil, that the deceased Advocatesion broke up the first Whig cabinet, no administration has General had little practice. This must always be the case, been willing to have Lord BROUGHAN, either at his own when an appointment is made to the office of Advocate-Geneprice or any other.

ral. A barrister in high practice at home will not take it. We have almost exhausted our space, but we must not No doubt the emoluments are very tempting to a man who altogether pass over the second head of charge, which sees before him here a long and anxious struggle seems to be thought very formidable. Mr. Lyall's father for success, but those with whom the struggle is was Chairman of the Court of Directors of the East-India past will look upon the prize in a very different manner. Company and notwithstanding this disqualifying circum- Ask Sir FREDERICK THESIGER, or Mr. Kelly, or Sir stance (if it he one) Mr. LYALL was appointed Advocate THOMAS WILDE, to go out as Advocate-General of Bengal General of Bengal. The whole question here may be dis- —will they go? certainly not. They have higher views in posed of (as we have intimated) by asking another--was a more eligible place. The officer, therefore, must be gene-, Mr. LYALL a fit person to be appointed or not? and rally procured from among the ranks of those who have not this question Lord. DENMAN has answered in the name attained much eminence. They must, consequently, be of the profession of which his lordsbip is so eminent men unknown except to their brethren at the bar, and with an ornament. Mr. LYALL then being competent, was he little practice because unknown. So, too, in India, they, bound, either in law, or reason, or honour, to repudiate an must for a time have little practice, because those who are appointment, in the bestowal of which his father had one unknown here will certainly be unknown there also, and vote out of twenty-four? Or, was the Chairman of the attorneys and clients will be cautious of trusting them with Court of Directors bound to vote for the rejection of a com- business till they have had time to establish a reputation. petent man because that man happened to be bis son? This difficulty Mr. LYALL was rapidly surmounting, his Lord ELLENBOROUGH, indulging in that rattling mode of talents and acquirements were winning the confidence of advocacy which hurries on without looking to the most the public, and preparing the way for his attaining the obvious consequences, thought fit to bespatter with his position which his professional rank entitled him to ocpraise Sir LAWRENCE Peel, once Advocate-General of Ben- cupy, when his prospects were cut off by death. gal, now Chief Jastice of the Supreme Court at that presi- And now in bringing these remarks to a close, we cannot dency. We respect Sir LAWRENCE Peel, and should refrain from inquiring who it is that thus goes out of his way. rejoice to find him receiving praise from a better quarter. to trample on the dead, and to heap additional sorrow on But let us look at the recollections which Lord ELLEN- the heads of those whose tears have not yet ceased to flow BOROUGH’s blundering has unwittingly stirred up, and at for the loss of a beloved relation. It is Lord ELLENthe comparison which he has so imprudently invited the BOROUGH, a man rejected and disgraced by the Court of


Directors of the East-India Company, and whose hostility to any appointment made by that body may therefore very readily be accounted for. We do not ask where is the generosity, the humanity, the common decency of the accusation? We have said that Lord ELLENBOROUGH is the accuser, and we have no space to devote to unnecessary questions. But we do venture to inquire into the peculiar pretensions of his lordship to set himself up as a champion and pattern of official prudery. Who is Lord ELLENBOROUGH? He is the second Baron of the title, the first (the father of the present peer) being an eminent member of the profession which the son vilifies in the person of the late Advocate-General of Bengal. The first Lord ELLENBOROUGH, after being all his professional life under the ban of Lord Kenyon, succeeded his lordship in the office of Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench. Lord ELLENBOROUGH (the first we mean) was a man of masculine understanding, a good lawyer and a good general scholar. Neither his mental powers, his legal acquisitions, nor his proficiency in classical learning would, however, have placed him in the seat of his old persecutor'; but he was the intimate personal and political friend of Mr. ADDINGTON, afterwards Lord SiDMOUTH, and to his influence while Premier he was indebted for his promotion. This was before the era of reform-it was in the days of fat sinecures and luxuriant fees—when men in office could provide for their families, and did not fail to improve their opportunities. The Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench enjoyed his share of these opportunities, and among other good things at his disposal was an office designated as that of the chief clerk of the court in which he presided. This appointment Lord Chief Justice ELLENBOROUGH, in the plenitude of his regard for the public interest, conferred upon his eldest son, the Honourable EDWARD LAW. The office was executed by deputy, the honourable incumbent never rendering the slightest service in return for the remuneration' which he received, which it was the current belief of the profession amounted to not much, if any thing, short of TEN THOUSAND A YEAR. Yes, an income of somewhere about ten thousand a year was drawn by this champion of purity in consideration of an office which was of no earthly benefit to any one, but the incumbent and his deputy--which was neither more nor less than a monstrous abuse supported for the purpose of levying fees upon the public for the use of the Chief Justice's eldest son, who did nothing for them. All that was done in the office consisted of useless forms and signatures, and these were managed by deputy. In due time the Honourable EDWARD Law became Lord ELLENBOROUGH, and the noble peer continued to draw his fees with the same regularity as had been displayed by the honourable commoner. We believe they were drawn by the Honourable EDWARD Law and the Right Honourable Lord ELLENBOROUGH for a period of between twenty and thirty years; and when, in 1837, the lesson of reform at length reached this pestilent sty, Lord ELLENBOROUGH received compensation. Aye, the denouncer of all abuses of patronage, and especially of legal patronage, actually consented to soil his hands with money given as compensation for the reduction of a loathsome and festering abuse. Not only so, but he stood stoutly on his rights. A few years before the question was put at rest-namely, on the first day of March, 1831, Lord ELLENBOROUGH stood up in his place in the House of Lords, and declared that he

deemed himself as fully entitled to what he received as a sinecurist of 10,0001. a year or thereabouts—as any member of that House could be to his estate. He clung to his principle, and when the fabric of corruption came toppling down, he got compensation-on which compensation he now supports his coronet. Here are purity and patriotism! And is not Lord ELLENBOROUGH exactly the man to stand forward and impugn a legal appointment given to a deserving man, because the favoured party is the son of a gentleman who had a voice in the disposal of the favour?

We now bid good-bye to Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the lion of the evening ; but we must have a parting word with the learned peer who condescended to play the part of his lordship's jackall. Lord BROUGHAM was not so furious as his friend-he had not the same reasons for being violent. But Lord BROUGHAM rung the bell for the commencement of the drama-he struck the key-note for the assistance of the principal performer: and he is thus in some measure accountable, not only for his own share in the representation, but also for that of his noble associate —or we should rather say client, for it is notorious that on all occasions Lord BROUGHAM most ostentatiously throws the shield of his protection over Lord ELLENBOROUGH. But for Lord BROUGHAM. Let the reader turn to that interesting compilation known by the polite as the Royal Kalendar, by the vulgar as the Red Book. Let him open the page

which records the names of the Masters in Chancery, and passing his eye over it, he will, in proper time, read that of WILLIAM BROUGHAM. The office of Master in Chancery is one of great dignity, great importance, and great profit; and it is usually bestowed on men who bave established a claim to it by their display of learning at the bar. Should the reader be tempted, as perhaps he may, to inquire into the claims of WILLIAM BROUGHAM, it is right that he should be gratified. He will ask in what court William Brougham earned the reputation which gained for him the valuable office which he now holds? Did his bag overflow with briefs? Were his chambers besieged by attorneys, anxious beyond all things to obtain his opinion for their guidance in conducting the affairs of their clients ? Has he given to the world any elaborate treatise on Law, which, like the great works of Coke of SAUNDERS, shall be pole-stars to lawyers yet unborn ? Should the reader put these questions, the answer must be as follows. It is not believed that Mr. WILLIAM BROUGHAM was oppressed by the extent of his business in the courts, or that his repose was annoyingly interrupted at chambers ; nor is it known that he has contributed any thing to law literature which the legal “ world will not willingly let die.” But still he is a Master in Chancery, and he and the public owe this to the circumstance that Mr. WILLIAM BROUGHAM is a brother of Henry LORD Brougham, some time Lord High Chancellor of England. And so having exposed this last " great fact,” we leave our friends to digest the whole by " much pondering thereon." And we think they will come to the conclusion that a dismissed Governor-General of India, who affords in his own person so extraordinary an illustration of nepotism, and a superannuated Lord Chancellor, who, in his family affords a like instance, are not exactly the persons to declaim against all in authority for the mode in which they bestow their patronage. The adage giving a wholesome caution to those who have glass windows is very trite—but it is sound also.


[ocr errors]



dence, and the strongest evidence was that be had no privatə business whatever,

The conversation then dropped. JULY 8. — ADVOCATE-GENERAL For BENGAL.-Lord BROUGHAM wished to know whether an office which he held to be of the greatest possible importance, next to that of the GovernorGeneral of India--the office of Advocate-General of Bengal- JULY 15.---Lord ELLENBOROUGH-Mr. Huxe intimated the had been filled up.

withdrawal of his often postponed notice of motion on the The Earl of Ripon did not know whether the office had been recal of this nobleman. filled up, but he believed it was. He agreed that this was an July 17.-Hill Cookies. – Mr. Hawes wished to put a qnies. office of infinite importance, but there had been considerable dif- tion to the Under Secretary for the Colonies. He believed that ficulty in procuring a fit person to fill it.

a committee had been appointed in the Mauritius on the subject Lord Brougham said, that the late appointment was of a near of the immigration of the hill coolies into that colony, and that a relation of the chairman, who had never been heard of in West- report had been prepared on the subject. He wished to know minster Hall.

whether the Colonial-office had received a copy of this docuLord ELLENBOROUGH said, the salary was 5,0001. a-year, and ment, and whether there would be any objection to lay it on the there was also the liberty of private practice worth 6,0001. a-year table? He also wished to know whether there would be any more: it was also an office which led to great distinction, and he objection to furnish the continuation of the various reports rereally thought, ifdue diligence were used,a fit person might be found. ceived from the stipendiary magistrates on the same subject? He agreed in what had been said of the importance of the office. Mr. G. W. Hope stated that a copy of the report of the com. The Governor-General had no other adviser, and his opinion mittee alluded to had been received at the Colonial-office, but was necessary on great questions of international law, and on the rot the evidence on which it was founded. The report con construction of treaties, as well as in conducting matters of great tained very full statistical statements on the subject, which ap-, importance to India. The juries of Calcutta were willing peared quite long enough to enable any one to form an opinion enough to find verdicts against the government, and it required on the subject. There would be no objection to place this rethe best advocate to conduct a case before them; not only was port on the table. With respect to the papers sent home by the this gentleman not the best advocate, but he was the very worst, stipendiary magistrates in the West Indies, the only objection and he had never heard a reason touched on for his appointment to their production was their extreme bulk, considering also the except that touched on by his noble friend, that he was the son very little use hitherto made of those which had been printed. If of the then chairman of the Court of Directors. He would ask, the honourable member would look at the papers, and select what would be the opinion of their lordships, or of other houses those which he thought to be important, they would at once be of Parliament, or of the people of this country, if the prime furnished. minister of England should suggest his own young son, a barris. July 18.--Captain BERKELEY brought forward his motion of ter without practice, as Attorney-general? The administration which he had given notice, that this House resolve itself into a of that gentleman would be at an end, by the universal disgust of committee for the purpose of considering the propriety of an the country, in twenty-four hours. Yet it was of infinitely less address to ber Majesty, humbly requesting that she will be importance to England who was Attorney-general, than it was graciously pleased to take into consideration the claims for to India who should be Advocate-general. He would only ex- further pecuniary recompense to the officers, seamen, soldiers, and press a wish that, in this instance, former precedents, and not marines engaged in the operations against the Chinese empire the last, would be taken, and that a really competent person in 1810-41-42. After a speech of considerable length from the would be appointed. The office had been held by Mr. Ser. hon, and gallant member, in which he eloquently put forth the jeant Spankie, and recently by Sir L. Peel, than whom there claims of ihose engaged in the war, could not be a more able and competent person, and he hoped, Sir C. Napier seconded the motion. moreover, that in the selection, care would be taken to avoid a The CHANCELLOR of the ExchEQUER rose to oppose the moperson in any way mixed up with local interest, for if he were so,

tion on grounds of public principles the rewards of officers and the result must be universal suspicion of every advice given to men engaged in war had always been left to the discretion of the the board.

Crown. If rewards were given in every case, men, would not Lord CAMPBELL knew of no office under the Crown which march to battle without promises of largess. had been filled by persons of greater competence; whether there Sir C. Napier, Mr. J. A. SMITH, Mr. H. BERKELEY, and was an exception in the last case, he did not know. He was Capt. Pechell having spoken in favour of the motion, astounded, however, to hear that the office was going begging in Sir R. Peel rose and said he entertained no doubt that the Westminster Hall, for he had always considered it a prize for a House would feel they ought not to interfere in the case, young lawyer of great eminence, and he had no doubt that men nothing could be more dangerous than making that House a among the highest bonour-the brightest ornaments-without court of appeal respecting the rewards to be bestowed on the local connexion, would accept it.

naval and military establishments of this kingdom. It was The Earl of Ripon said, the salary was only 3,5001. a year, quite a mistake to suppose that the Government were not disthough the emoluments from private practice might make it

posed to be liberal with the servants of the state. reach 10,0001. Certain it was that this office had been offered Mr. W. WILLIAMS opposed the motion. to eight or ten individuals of very distinguished talents, with

Lord PALMERSTox did not think that the House ought to respect to whose competency every means had been taken to interfere in such cases, but thought that the Government ought ascertain the truth, and that it had been declined by them one

to reconsider their determination respecting the case under disafter another, as not being consistent with their professional

cussion. views.

Capt. Harris opposed the motion. Lord BROUGHAM said, that nothing was so easy as to make

Capt. PlumRIDGE defended the character of the British an offer to those by whom it was certain to be refused, that

seamen; glory was very well, but prize money was a great

stimulus. under cover of these refusals an incompetent, though a worthy and well-meaning man, might be appointed.

Sir. J. DUKE objected to a mercenary disposition being attri.

buted to our seamen. Lord DENMAN said, the office had been very properly offered to many gentlemen of ability, whose situation at the bar of this

The house then divided, and the numbers stood :country could not make it a safe speculation to refuse this ap

For the original motion..


27 pointment; they were gentlemen of moderate business, though

Against it of high expectations and of great talents and learning. With


41 regard to the last person who had held the office, he had the slightest possible acquaintance with him, and had no evidence to bear of his position at the bar ; but many persons who well knew him had formed the highest opinion of his ability; they

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. would hear with pain the observations now made, and their

Wednesday, JULY 9. opinion was that he was overcoming bis difficulties, and was getting into a position in which, by his application and industry, (Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildball, before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN he would in time remove the objections to him. He had heard

and a Special Jury). this from many individuals, for whose opinion he had enter

HYDE v. GREEN AND ANOTHER. tained a high respect.

Mr. CROWDER, Mr. Martin, and Mr. PEACOCK, were counsel The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH did justice to the good inten- for the plaintiff; and Mr. Watson, Mr. JERVIS, Mr. BOVILLE, tions of the gentleman, but he did not enjoy the public confi- and another gentleman, for the defendants.

[ocr errors]

The declaration in this case stated that the defendants were care was taken of the boxes on board, and that it was impossible owners of the ship Stag, then lying in the Thames, bound to they could have been opened while in the vessel ; but the boxes Madras and Calcutta; that the plaintiff put on board that vessel being opened in a room at Calcutta, where there were many two boxes containing bullion, to be carried from the Thames to persons, and it being known that sovereigns were to be in one, Calcutta; that a portion of the goods had been delivered, but it was not difficult for some of the persons then present to have one other portion had been lost. The defendants pleaded sere. abstracted the bag containing the sovereigns, and to have left ral pleas : first, that they did not promise; that the plaintiff did the room. He then appealed to the good sense of the jury, and not put the goods on board the vessel; that the goods had been called upon them to look at the probabilities of the case. If the feloniously stolen or lost through the default of the plaintiff. gold was not taken while it was on board, the defendant would

Mr. Crowder stated that the plaintiff had formerly been in be entitled to a verdict. the service of the East-India Company, and the defendants The officers of the vessel were then called, and they stated were extensive-shipowners, and this action was brought to re- that the boxes were taken every care of, and were placed in such cover £1,000, being the amount of that quantity of sovereigns a situation in the hold that they could not have been opened which were shipped on board the Slag for the purpose of being during the voyage to Madras, where the ship remained six days. conveyed from London to Calcutta. On the 26th December, The boxes were then taken from the hold and put into the cap1842, Messrs. Dennie, Clarke, and Co., obtained £1,000 in so- tain's cabin. When the vessel was leaving Madras, the boxes vereigns and £1,000 in dollars, for and on behalf of the plaintiff, were again put into the hold. During the time the boxes were who was then in Calcutta. On the 27th December they were in the captain's cabin, one of the officers kept the key of the weighed, the gold and balf the dollars were put in one box, and cabin-door. the other half of the dollars were put in another box; the two There was a discrepancy in the evidence given by King and boxes were nailed down, and each bound with two iron hoops; by the oflicers as to the time when the boxes were first put on they were then given into the charge of a person of the name of board, King stating that it was half.past 1 o'clock, whereas the King, who took them in a cab to the East-India Docks, and officers said it was certainly not before half-past 2. carried them on board. He received from the second mate a Mr. Crowder having addressed the jury, receipt for the two boxes; a bill of lading was afterwards signed by Mr. Justice WighTMAN summed up, and the captain, stating that the boxes contained gold and silver bul- The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; at the same time, lion, and were shipped in good order, and were to be delivered in the Jury begged to state that they thought there was great want the like good order and condition. The freight note was made out of care in packing bullion in secondhand boxes. for two boxes of specie, value £2,100, at 1 per cent. The Stag sailed on the 28th December, and arrived at Calcutta on the

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. 26th May. The boxes were delivered to the plaintiff's agent at Culcutta, when it was discovered that the gold had been ex

WEDNESDAY, JULY 9. tracted. The plaintiff was compelled to bring this action; and (Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before Lord Chief Justice the question would be, whether the facts laid before the jury sa

TINDAL and Special Juries). tisfied them that the plaintiff was entitled to recover. Several persons were then called who were present when the

Scott AND ANOTHER v. BERKELEY. boxes were packed and nailed down, and delivered to King.

In this case, Sir T. WILDE, Mr. Serjeant SHEE, and Mc. William King stated, I am clerk to Dennie, Clarke, and Co., GREENWOOD, appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs; the defendant of Austin-friars. On the 27th December, 1842, I went to Mr. was represented by Mr. Serjeant TalFOURD, Mr. Serjeant Carre Thomas's for two boxes of bullion. I had several times before NELL, and Mr. HAYWARD. been to the ship Stag relative to this bullion, and had seen the Mr. GREENWOOD opened the pleadings by stating that this second mate. I obtained the clearance at the Custom-bouse. was a scire facias, the declaration alleging that the plaintiffs had I took these two boxes in a cab to the East-India Docks, where recovered a judgment for £35,000 against one Henry Manning, the vessel was lying. The two boxes were carried on board, the secretary to the “India Steam-ship Company;" that execuand put in the cuddy. I saw Boucher, the mate, and had from tion had not been obtained upon that judgment; and that the him a receipt note for the bullion. I returned to town by rail. defendant was a member of the company at the time when such On the same day, Mr. Clarke gave me a bill of lading to fill up, judgment was recovered. The defendant pleaded that he was and I took it to Messrs. Green's, and afterwards received it back not a member of the company at the time of the recovery of the from them.

judgment. Cross-examined.-I heard of this specie being about to be Sir T. Wilde then rose and said, that the action in which sent to India two or three days before Christmas. I believe judgment had been recovered was brought by Messrs. Scott, who the whole of the cargo was in the ship when I delivered the were extensively engaged as ship-builders in the north of Eng. boxes. I have applied to many persons to give evidence. I never land, upon a contract for a certain ship which they had made for said these boxes were in the cuddy all night. I never said so to the India Steam.ship Company. The form in which the action Deverell,

was commenced was necessarily against the officer of the com. Re-examined. While the boxes were in my possession I did pany, and when judgment was recovered it became necessary to not open them, but delivered them in the same state in which I look to the members of the company for satisfaction. The de. received them. ' I live at Holloway. I never kept two horses fendant, Mr. Craven Berkeley, was a member of the company, and a carriage. My brother-in-law, in 1843, sent me a small and the present proceeding was instituted in order to charge him pony, which was very old. I gave £5 for on old gig, but the with the debt which the company had incurred, The India pony being too old, I bought another pony, which I have since Steam ship Company started with high pretensions, professing sold.

to have objects in view of very considerable importance; and for The depositions of several witnesses who had been examined the purpose of carrying those

objects into effect, a partnership in India were read. They stated that they received the boxes was established by an Act of Parliament. On the 31st of July, from the ship; that, upon opening them, the gold was missing ; 1838, that Act received the Royal assent; and the contract for the box was filled up with shavings. There were no marks of the building of the ship was made in the August following the box having been opened. One of the witnesses stated that The Act, after reciting certain letters patent, and the importance the boxes had been stowed under a case of muskets, and could of steam.communication between this country and India, and not have been gót at without breaking the cargo.

that Sir John Ross, the Hon. Craven Berkeley, and other genMr. Watson, for the defendants, in addressing the jury, said tlemen, were willing to form a company for the purpose of that one issue was, whether or not the defendants had been effecting such a communication, enacted that the said Sir John guilty of negligence in carrying these boxes; and before the jury Ross, the Hon. Craven Berkeley, and the other gentlemen could find a verdict for the plaintiff, they must be satisfied that whose names were set out in the Act, should be united into a while these boxes were on board the vessel the £1,000 was ex. company, by the name of the India Steam-ship Company. The tracted from them. The case for the defendants was, that they respectability and condition in life of the gentlemen whose had delivered all they had received. It was clear that the £1,000 names were thus put forward as forming the partnership, neces. was obtained by Mr. Clarke and put into the box, and it was sarily tended very much to affect the credit of the concern ; and equally clear that Mr. Hyde had never received it. There were it was too much to expect that, when tradesmen had parted with three modes by which the loss of the money might be accounted their property upon the faith of those names, the parties who for: it never went on board the ship at all; or it was stolen had suffered their names to be used were not to be called when on board; or it was stolen out of the box at Calcutta. It upon ito pay the debts which had been contracted by such had been proved that, when the box arrived at Calcutta, there a company. The defendant said that he was not a member of was no mark upon it; and yet he would defy any one to have the company at the time when the judgment was recovered. opened the bor without making considerable marks upon it. That he was a member of the company when the Act paspel The learned counsel then stated that he should prove that every was perfectly cleat, and he (Sir T. Wilde) was not aware of any

« FöregåendeFortsätt »