HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0148 and id is 1 raw text is: WHITFIELD (IN RIE) [1838]
instance, entitled, [269] and his claim ought first to be satisfied. It may be that the
interest of the fund will sufficiently represent the labour: and the more obvious
means of providing for that, and at the same time securing the fund to the Lessor,
would be for the Appellant to surrender his present lease on a new one being executed
to him by the Respondent for the remainder of his term, at a rent equivalent to his
present rent, minus the interest of the compensation-money awarded in respect of the
slaves. Their Lordships, however, leave this mode of carrying their decision into
effect to the Commissioners or to the parties, desiring that in the decision they have
come to, they may not be supposed to have given any opinion as to the rights of
either party under the arbitration clause in a case coming within its contemplative
operation.
[Mews' Dig. tit. SLAVERY AND SLAVE TRADE. See Case of the Compensation
Commissioners, 3 Knapp, 155 and note thereto. As to expression of existence of
unanimity or divergence of opinion among members of Judicial Committee (2
Moo. P.C. 268), see 0. in C. of 4th Feb. 1878; and authorities collected in Philli-
more, Eccl. Law, 2nd ed. p. 975.]
ON PETITION FROM JERSEY.
In. Be GEORGE WHITFIELD * [Feb. 22 and Dec. 10, 1838].
Proceedings having been taken and execution issued under an Ordre de Justice,
against a party, for frauds committed against the Revenue Laws of Jersey,
the Defendant presented a Doleance and Petition to her Majesty in Council,
complaining that the proceedings were irregular, having been taken ex parte
and in his absence from the island. The Judicial Committee having as-
certained that the proceedings ex parte were in conformity with the law of the
island, dismissed the Doleance and Petition, but it appearing that the
Petitioner's not defending the suit was occasioned by a mistaken notion of the
law, which led him to give insufficient instruction to his counsel to act for
him in his absence, remitted the cause to the Court below, with liberty for him
to defend the suit.
The Petitioner, a native of England, in the year 1833, established a distillery in
the island of Jersey, where he carried on business without interruption until the 1st
of September 1836, when a proceeding [270] or writ, called an Ordre de Justice,
was issued by the bailiff at the instance of the Attorney-General of the island, under
the authority of which the spirits on his premises were seized and sequestered. On
the 20th of the same month a second Ordre de Justice was issued, by which the
personal estate and effects of the Petitioner were also attached.
The proceedings came on for hearing before the Royal Court of Jersey, on the
31st of October 1836, when the Court condemned the Petitioner for a breach of the
Revenue Laws of the island, in a fine amounting to the sum of £3989 is. 6d. and
costs, the seizure being confirmed; and the sheriff was authorized to sell and receive
the produce in the usual way.
On the 15th of February 1837, the Petitioner presented a Doleance and Petition
to His late Majesty in Council, alleging that the proceedings taken against him in
the island were illegal, inasmuch as the second Orde de Justice had never been
served upon him personally, as required by law of the island, the Petitioner having
in fact left the island two days after the first warrant was obtained against him, and
not having returned to it since, or authorized any person, to represent him there;
that therefore all the judgments of the Court in these matters had been given ex
parte: and praying, that the Royal Court of Jersey might be ordered to stay all
further proceedings against him,-to lodge at the Privy Council an authentic copy
* Present: Lord Broughaun, Mr. Baron Parke, Mr. Justice Bosanquet, and the
Chief Judge of the Court of Bankruptcy [Sir Thomas Erskine].
1007
II MOORE, 269](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0148&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)