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/ssactsengr0559 and id is 1 raw text is: 1 CAM. 89. GRAFF V. GREFFULHE 887
ment of these negroes. In 1803 the defendant wished to transfer them to his estates
in Georgia, and for that purpose his agent at the latter place dispatched the ship
Mary, Captain Beck, to Jamaica. The negroes were put on board by the plaintiff
at Port Maria, and carried to Port Antonio ; but as the captain had not got a permit
for receiving them, they were there seized as forfeited, together with the ship and
the rest of her cargo. To release them, the plaintiff paid as a composition £1.200
which he sought to recover in this action.
Lord Ellenborough held, that it was a voluntary payment. The plaintiff could
possess no general authority as partner of Mr. Leckey, whose powers as attorney
on record were clearly uncommunicable; and as manager of the gang of negroes, be
was fui etus officio, after delivering them on board the ship.
Verdict for the defendant.
The Attorney-General, Dampier, and Horner for the plaintiff.
Garrow and Marryat for the defendant.
[Attornies, Blesdale & Co. and Rivington.]
[89] Same day.
GRAFF AND OTEERS, ASSTONEES oF D. J. VANDER HOEVEN, A BANKRUPT,
V. GREIFFUL14E.
(If a trader on receiving bills of exchange from one of his creditors abroad, to whom
he is indebted beyond the amount of them, after becoming insolvent, but before
committing an act of bankruptcy, delivers these bills, with the consent of his
other creditors, to an agent of the person who had remitted them, for the use
of the latter if he should be ultimately entitled to them ; this is a legal and
valid transaction, and if a commission of bankrupt afterwards issues against
the trader, his assignees cannot maintain an action against the trustee to
recover the produce of the bills.)
Assumpsit for money had and received, &c. The declaration contained two
sets of counts ; one laying the promise to the bankrupt before his bankruptcy, and
the other to the plaintiffs his assignees. Plea, the general issue.
D. J. Vander Hoeven established himself as a merchant in London in the year
1800 ; and from thence till the time of his bankruptcy had various dealings with
the house of Vander Hoeven and Co. of Amsterdam. In December 1804, he con-
signed a parcel of sugars to them, to be sold on his account. On the 24th day of
that month, lie received a remittance from them by the post of three bills of exchange
on different persons in London, value together of £487, 14s. 1 Id. in a letter, in which
they say, -' according to your desire, we remit you inclosed against the consignment
of sugar for your account £487, 14s. lid., as per note, making to your debit 5714,
8 guilders, with which please to do the needful, and to credit us in conformity. Two
days before D. J. Vander Hoeven had stopped payment; but he did not commit
any act of bankruptcy till the October following. On the 7th of January 1805,
a meeting of his creditors was held at his house, when it was agreed, that the
remittances which had been made [90] by Vander Hoeven and Co. of Amsterdam,
to D. J. Vander Hoeven since he stopped payment, should be delivered to Mr.
Greffulbe, for him to receive the money, and hold it for the persons who might be
ultimately entitled to it. The bills had been previously delivered by D. J. Vander
Hoeven to the defendant, who was the agent in London of Vander Hoeven and Co.
for their use and on their account. The defendant accordingly received payment of
the bills as they respectively became due. A commission of bankrupt issued against
1). J. Vander Hoevei, on the 30th of October 1805. At the time when he consigned
the sugar and received the remittance, he was, and afterwards continued, indebted
to Vander Hoeven and Co. beyond the amount of the proceeds of the sugar, and
beyond the value of the remittance.
It was proposed to take a verdict for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the
Court of King's Bench upon a case reserved. But
Lord Ellenborough said, he could not grant a case, having so clear an opinion on
the subject. These bills did not pass to the assignees as part of the effects of the
bankrupt at the time of his bankruptcy. He had parted with them previously, and
the possession of the defendant could not be construed as his possession. Vander
Hoeven and Co. being his creditors to a larger amount, were ultimately entitled to
them, an( were the persons for whose use and benefit they had been deposited with](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0559&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)