Open main menu

Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/450

This page needs to be proofread.


444 Cnr: ruled and adjudged iu the 1793. to the parties): The ufual reference appears to have ·been to the

 Treafuret and Barons, commanding them todo jullioe _:·Some·

` ` times a writ under the great feal was direéled to be iffued to them for that pnrpofe: Sometimes a writ from-the ·GH¥neery direéling payment of money immediately, without talting_no{ rice of the Barons. And other varieties appear tohave taltert place. See Hurgrnvir nw { tb: Banbrr, j. 73, E5'},. ·· But in all cafes of petition of rig t, of whatever nature ·is` the ile-, mand, Ithinlt it is clear beyond all ’dou`l;, {bot there m¢jI'—h_ imlor rm: or order a IL-: Kin bim · to rtwrrant _ `gfiifber pr`!-cisdggr. The rigimedy, ingtlie language of being a martcfgf gran, and notes — ` . In a very late cafe in Englantl, this point was incidentally difeuffed. The cafe frefef to, is the cafe of Ilavbtaib againfh Haldimaud, reported r/I D1¢rr_yfhrd€9'.}E¢ ry:. The aétion was againfl the`Defendaitt, for `goods furirilhed by the Defen- dant’s order in Canada, when the Defendant was Governor of Qtelvc. '[ he defence was, that the f‘laintiH*` was ernployed`by_ the Defendant in his official capacity, and not upon his perfonah credit, and that the goods being therefore furnillied for the ufc. · cf Government, and fhe Defendant not having undertaken per- fonally to pay, he was not liahle. ` This defence was fet up- at

  • the trial on the plea of the _geriera1v·ilfue,` and the ]ury, by

judge Bullzr': direélionf found a vctdiél; for the Defendant, Ugon a motion for anew 'trial he reported particularly all the faels given in evidence, and faid his opinion had been at the tri- al that the Plaintiff fhould he nonyfuited Q fj but the Plaintiffs ‘ eounfel appearing for their clierit,` when he was called, he left` the quellion tc the Jury, telling there-that they were bound to find for the Defendant in point of law. " Andupon their allting him whether, in the event of the Defemia¤t·not`being liable, any other perfon was, he told them, that was- no partof their confideration, but being willing to giye them any information, he added, that he was of opinion,·_t_hat if the Pl:imtill’s" demands were jufl, his proper remedy was by a Petition of right to the crown. On which they found a"verdi¢‘1 for the Defendant. The rule for granting a new trialwas rpoved_ for, dn the mifdireélion of two points. tfl. That the Defendant had hy his own conduél made himfelf liable, which quellion lhould have been left to the ]ury. gdly. That the Plaintiff had no remedy againfl the crown b a Petition of right, on the fuppolition of which the ]ury had been induced to give their verdi•E.lf’ " Lord ]|·fim.yieId, Chief- jufliee, now declared, that the Court did not fcel it necelfary fbt them to give any opinion on theifeeond ground. His Lordfhip {Z-tid that great difference had arifcn`fincc‘the revolution with re- fpedl. to the expenditure of the public money. Before ·that period, all the public fuppiies were given to the King, who liu · - ua_