date

28 Jan y 1808 II Appeals 5
28 Jan y 1808

II Appeals

5

To sell a twelvemonths factitious delay to every man that will pay the price, is to sell to every dishonest man in condition of his standing suit and so becoming and remaining defendant, a twelvemonth's interest upon the sum of money representative of whatsoever portion of another man's /the plaintiff's/ property he has contrived to get into his hands. In the three English intermediate Chambers of Review, the King's Bench, when sitting over the Common Pleas, the Exchequer Chamber which sits over the King's Bench, and the Exchequer Chamber which sits over the Exchequer, may be seen so many markets overt in which factitious delay has for ages been sold, and in the Year 1798, + not to speak of present /posterior/ times continued to be sold, in pieces of a years /twelvemonth's/ length more or less: the property of the injured plaintiff /in the character of plaintiffs/, to as many wrongdoers as /to whom/, on striking a ballance between profit /an account taken of profit/ and loss, it might happen to see more to gain in the shape of interest of money, than to lose in the shape of costs.

In one of the Tables that accompany these sheets, Your Lordship may see the quantity of the article sold in the three shapes[?] in the three years ending 1797, together with the amount of the dividend received into the pockets of the Master manufacturers, the managing partners of the great commercial company composed of Lawyers and distinct[?] /Judges, other official lawyers, professional/ litigants.

 Add further reference to Ellenboro and Mansfield.

+ 27 Report of Finance Committee A o 1798.
Similar Items
  • Title: [4 May 1807 7 Feb 1808 on L d Eldons]
    Description: 4 May 1807 7 Feb 1808

    on L d Eldons Bill

    Appeal List defective

    English Review Chambers

    Such being the profit allowed by the manufacturers of factitious delay to the customer, I [...?] now to give an account of the profits made by the manufacturers, the reverend the manufacturers with their junior partners constituting together the great firm of Judge and C o: the profits which constitute the valuable consideration - the quid pro quo - and that reciprocity and mutual good understanding which is so essential to trade.

    Here as before I have to deplore that want of appropriate power, which no labour however hard can supply.

    Here as before I am reduced to take for the subject of my labours the materials furnished by the Committee on Finance so long ago as the year 1798, compounded with the Accounts of Costs as furnished by Mr Palmer.

    1. Costs of one Writ of Error (not argued) (alias a sham Writ of Error brought for the mere purpose of delay) from the Common Pleas to the King's Bench, Pllf's side £28:15.0. Defend ts d o 14.18

    to the King's Bench - - Plaintiff's side £30:1.3

    Defendant's side £25:19.2

    Together £55:0.5

    This, multiplied by 543, being the n o of these unargued Appeals presented in the three years ending 1797, gives for the amount of manufacturers profit for the three years in the Kings Bench manufactory £29,876:6.3

    2. Costs of one d o from King's Bench to Exchequer Chamber

    Plaintiff's side £28:15:0.

    Defendants side 14.18.6.

    Together £43:13.6

    Multiplied by 1247, the n o presented in d o 3 years, gives the amount of d o profit for d o years in the Exchequer Chamber

    manufactory £54,460:14:6

    Profit in both manufactories for the three years, viz. £84,339:0:9

    Divided by 3. years the average profit for one year £28,113:0:3.
  • Title: [2 Jan y 1808 Elucidations to Tables]
    Description: 2 Jan y 1808

    Elucidations to Tables IX, X, XI

    At the date of the first of the two periods comprized in those accounts, came the Union between Great Britain and Ireland, effected by the Statute 39 and 40 G.3.e.67 2 d July A o 1800. Antecedently to the Irish Emancipation Act 23 G.3.c.28. of the Appeals called Writs of Error such as were presented from the Irish Court of King's Bench and to be presented - not to the Irish House of Lords nor to the Irish Exchequer Chamber but[?] to the English Court of King's Bench. By that Act ('. 2.) all Appels of both denominations were forbidden to be received by any English Court from any Irish Court. When by Article 8 th of the Act of Union the state of judicature came to be fixed, the superordinate jurisdiction of the English King's Bench over the Irish King's Bench was not restored: but all such Appeals of either sort as, during the period of emancipation, had gone to the Irish House of Lords, were without exception, consequently those that before the emancipation had gone to the English King's Bench, made over to the House of Lords of the United Kingdom.

    At this conjecture, the House (as may be seen in the Table), was already labouring under the incapacity of answering the draught already made upon its justice by antecedent titles. A denial of justice already existing, and manifestly destined to encrease received thus an aggravation from positive law. Of the Minister by whom this Union was brought forward and the arrangements of it settled, the most active and confidential assistant was an Honourable Gentleman, now Right Honourable, who, in his character of Clerk of the Parliaments, principal Officer of the House of Lords, had not a little to gain by this injustice, and nothing at all to lose by it, moreover lest the profit derived from such a source should come[?] too soon, it had already been continued in the same family, for and during the term of a young life, by reversionary[?] grant, bearing date in October 1795. In the House of Commons Account of Plans for life ie.[?] Order for printing dated 8 th Feb y 1802: p.7. The year's profit was at that time stated at ,3,300. If ,[?] must [...?] as these Tables shew, have received no inconsiderable encrease; and it seems destined to go on encreasing, in proportion to the distress of the injured and the triumph of the wrongdoers. For ulterior exemplifications of the effects produced in this way by the fee-gathering system, see Elucidations to Table XII. (d)
  • Title: [Elucidations to Tables IX X XI At]
    Description: Elucidations to Tables IX X XI

    At the close of the first of the two periods comprized in these accounts, came the Union between Great Britain and Ireland; stated[?] by the Statute 39 & 40 G.3.c.67 2 d July A o 1800 antecedently to the Irish Emancipation Act 23 G.3.c.28, of the appeals called Writs of Error, such as were presented from the Irish Court of King's Bench used to be presented - not to the Scotch House of Lords, nor to the Irish Exchequer Chamber, but to the English Court of King's Bench. By the act ('. 2.) all appeals of both denominations were forbidden to be received by any English Court, from any Irish Court. In consequence, the Writs of Error, which till then had gone from the Irish King's Bench, to the English King's Bench, went thereforward to the Irish House of Lords. When, by Article 8 th of Union, the state &[?] judicature came to be fixed, the superordinate jurisdiction, of the English King's Bench over the Irish King's Bench, was not restored[?]: but all such appeals , of either sort, as, during the period of emancipation, had gone to the Irish House of Lords, were, without exception, (consequently those that, before the emancipation had gone to the English King's Bench) made over to the House of Lords of the United Kingdom.