The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-04-10 00:00:00

APRA L 10. 18',S to the chief justiceship, vice Basile, who will retire with an Irish peerage. O'Connell will 'also receive the title of Baron lveragh ! His son Maurice is spoken of as likely to succeed Drununond as under secretary for Ire land !We may, therefore, congratulate-Our brethren, the Irish protestan Is, on their comfortable prospects! Under the paternal care of the arch-agitator and his offi cial minions, their lot will be one of uninterrupted peace Arid prosperity I What halcyon daysare in store for Ire land, when the virtuous disciples of Peter Dens are placed in every office of importance ! We really wonder that Lord Melbourne does, not persuade the Queen to create O'Mulgrave an Irish Duke, and elevate O'Connell into the vice-regency. That would be doing the thing handsomely at once. Such a step would be sure to ren der Iceland tranquil, as far as England is concerned — that is if the extirpation of the protestants would procure tranquillity. But what cif Lord Melbourne himself? We are in formed that he is to be created Marquis of Kent ! Whe ther this step will be in anticipation of his marriage with the Duchess of Kent, we are not, as yet, able to form any conjecture. After all, the ministry, as we have befOre intimated, will be placed in the most serious dilemma by the coronation. They must either find their new• peers in the House of CoMmons, or they must avoid any creation whatever; and in either case their position will be found by no meal enviable. If they neglect their expectant friends in the House, and give their preference to others, or re fuse to exercise the wonted privilege, there will inevita bly be a mutiny in the camp. If they draft their peers from the House, there will be the fresh elections! gun they venture to encounter such a chance as the vacation of forty or fifty seats at once ? We shall see. LIVERPOOL EASTER SESSIONS. The General Quarter Sessions for the horone; commenced • yesterday, before James Clarke, Esq. Recorder. The learned Recordar took his seat at a quarter past ten • • .The following gentlemen were sworn of the grand jury:— Edward Gibbon, Foreman. Edward Humble, George Lissaut Cox, David Lamb, John Coward, John Marriott, John (Limpet!, Alexander Maxwell, John Deakin, Joseph Parton, Ralph-Abraham; W. S. ItobinSou, Joseph Gibbons, Nichidas Roskeli, John Greenshields, Thomas Shaw, Lawrence Heyworth, jun. Thomas Tattersall, John Ilighfield, Edward Tennant, and Edmund Hore, Charles Turner, Esqrs. Her Majesty's proclamation against vice and immorality having been read, the learned Baia:otiose proceeded to deliver. his charge to the following effect :—lie did -not feel it neces sary to-trouble them with any of the alterations which had been recently made in the criminal law. These alterations bad been so lately fully explained by the learned Judge who had gone the the circuit, as well as frequently by himself (the learned Re corder) that he did not deem it necessary to make any further observations on the subject. One of those alterations had proved very beneficial. If a person were guilty of extreme violence connected with personal injury, they knew that , such person 'night be committed for felony, but by . the alteration in the law to which he alluded, the jury had it in their power, if the evi dence seemed to justify such a proceeding, to convict the pri soner of an assault. This had acted very beneficially. Under the old law the jury had no alternative but to convict the pri-' saner of felony, and in cases where they were not fully satisfied that th e offence was of that extent, offenders frequently escaped without punishment. The jury had now the power to convict for assault, this could not he the case. He hoped the total i iicatiou s Which had been made in the law would have the effect of dimi nishing that class of manslaughter which hail been so much coin • Plaiued of recently, and which had been more common iu this county than any oilier. lie hoped the tendency of these altera tiOns would be to do away entirely with this disgraceful class of tuanslaughters, of which they had so frequently heard so much, There was another class of ruanslaughters of which they had lately had many instances, which did not arise from any vin dictive feeling, but which were, nevertheless, Ida very serious "tore. lie alluded to those which arose from negligence. Those classes of individuals who were employed as drivers of 'vehicles on the public roads—and whose occupation was to teke care of the trains on railways, had a heavy responsibility east upon them. It was of the very last consequence that all such individuals should conduct the vehicles intrusted to their charge with as much attention as possible. He hoped after the * l ate examples, that the public would not have - further reason to htplain. The cale,ndar, on the present occasion , h e w a s h appy to observe, was nut very heavy, still it contained o n e or s: ` 1 "‘o very serious cases. One of these was a burglary of a very 7erious and a larming description, which had been com mitted 11 the neighbourhood of Liverpool. The case iu th e c alendar a a ; , s ,tnitubered 16, 17 and 18, and number 41 was also connected 4 th wasoffth ence. tirst c Thase,e bu he believed; rglary was comm whi h ch ( he r b ad Botriedotle-laue,that 1 1 „" e Q 4 lipened in the new borough. They broke into the house, a Ppeo e ,i, and stole a vast number of attic:les, It did pot ap eeair that they were armed with any weapon s, but the y used ver y „ ' • . - .oent threats ,towards the inmates. Lie was not ewer-valet a trY . diffichltv would arise iu the course of, their.:ivie/slizatiOi that would binder them from' cornins ., easily to a conclusion ; 4 but if there were anything upon which they required informs. tion, he would give them his best assistance. There was also a case of common larceny to which he would direct their at tention. Souse perious might think that, as the prosecutor gave up the property to the prisoner, the offence would not be larceny: that, however, was not the law now. It used for . merly to be that, to constitute larceny, the person should take the property by force; but men were so cunning and clever that they absolutely induced men to give up their property. Here au individual went into a shop in Liverpool, saving that. he wanted certain goodS that were to be sent with him by a boy. 'This was done, and the man got possession of the goods, which 'were delivered to him. Some might say—q This is not larceny, for we find that the goods were absolutely delivered to the pri soner. But the law looked at the intention, and, therefore this was rightly considered larceny. There was also a case of for gery, in which the prisoners were charged with having put the !lame of an individual to certain orders on which they had ob tained goods. He believed it was a ease iu which they would not experience any difficulty whatever. 'the calendar contains the names of 46 prisoners for felony, and 7 for misdemeanours. SHOPLIFTING- Amelia Lowe, aged 22, was placed at the bar under an indict- Meat, in which she was charged with having feloniously stolen I bag containing 28lbs of coffee, the property of Mr. Peter Bassford. Mr. Murphy conducted the prosecution. . It appeared that the prisoner on the 20th of March last, went Into the shop of Mr. Bassfor , d, grocer, Scotland-road. She asked for a halfpenny-worth of cinnamon, with which she was served. As she was going out of the shop Mr. Bassford missed a bag of coffee which had stood near the counter.. He called otit to the prisoner, who immediately dropped the hag of coffee from under her cloak. She was given into the custody of a po lice -office. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and she was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment. Fst.oNv. Thomas Martin , aged 18, pleaded guilty to a charge of having stolen a yard and three - quarters of cloth, three silk handker "let's, a stock, three nieces of ribhon, and a pair of gloves, the Property of John Lloyd, his master. He was sentenced to six Mouths' imprisonment. SHOPLIFTING. Mary Luut, aged 16, pleaded guilty to a charge of having stolen three silk handkerchiefs from the shop of Mr. William byke, tailor and draper, Castle-street: She was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment. • Joseph Page ' aged 41, and Thomas Simmonds , aged 21 , pleaded guilty to an indictment in which they were charged with having Stolen three pair of shoes from the shop of Henry Biughana. They were sentenced to six months' imprisonment. BREAKING AND ENTERING. • Peter Page, aged 19, and William Duffey, aged 17, were placed at the bar, charged with having feloniously broken and entered the shop of John Plant, Manchester-street, and stolen therefrom a pair of snuffers and tray, a bundle of pencils, a dozen- papers, each containing twelve rings, a glazier's diamond, several pencil eases. and a number of other articles, the pro perty of the aforesaid John Plant. It appeared that on the night of the 3d March last, Barnett; a police officer, was on ditty in Manchester-street, where he met the prisoners. Knowing them to be bad characters, he ar rested.and searched them, when he found on. theirrpersous the articles named in th e i n di c tm en t. . Mr. Plant stated that he left his shop about six in the even ing of the 3 , 1 of March, locking the door, but not putting up the shutters. lie was absent, about half an hour. On his return he found that that the window had been broken, and that his shop had been robbed. The prisoners, in their defence, said they had bought the articles. The jury found the prisoners Guilty.—Sentence deferred. BUILdLARY, John Thomas, aged 18, was charged with having broken into the house and shop of George Burrow, and stolen therefrom a bum of money and several articles of wearing apparel. Mr. Bartley conducted the prosecution. George' Barrow, of Alfred-street, Toxteth-park, joiner and grocer, stated that he had a lodger named Jones. On the 20th of March last he fastened his doors and windows. In the morn jog Jones, who got up first, called him down. He went, and found that an entrance had during the night been effected into the house at the back part, by breaking out a square of glass. Au inner window had also been broken, whereby access was gained to the shop. The money-drawer, which contained 20s. or 30 8 . had been taken from the shop. A top-coat and a pair °f gloves belonging to Jones, had also been taken. The prisoner ‘ 14, 5 apprehended by Chalmers, a constable, and the - gloves . tud a hat, which had been stolen, were found in his possession. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and be was sentenced to ir anspotation for ten years. LARCENY. Owen Carrijan, aged 21, was charged with having stolen the A pparel of Joseph Birch. Baincock conducted the prosecution. 8 ' t appeared that and the last femalesedneday in March, the pro ecuter vent with issolute to a cellar in Johnson 1-le went to bed. The prisoner entered the apartment, " demanded the prosecutor's clothes, saying he wished to ~`'e, l ( them up till morning that they might be safe. To this the t;, ) " ) s (!eutor foolishly assented. When he .ir)se in the morning, ;r, neither the pr.soner nor the clothes were to be fonud. pu: ,he case Was fully proved. The Jury found the prisoner I , l "tY, and the court sentenced him to fifteen months' imprison °tit a n hard labour. the (3 AlThe wind, during part of Saturday and throughout E Z ni ght, hIPw violently from the westward. A number of yes e'rs Put to sea in the forenoon, and fortunately, got a good o ffi ng a 7e the gale came on. On Sunday morning the sea on the ,' v ' i " 3 was very heavy, but, the wind having abated, towards "'ng the sea was quite calm, with the wind at N.N.W. at L A.R y WHEFL.—There is now in con rse of construction, oe , srp. Hen, and Bennett ' s millwrights, Newton-street, one of the largest fly Fheels ever made. It is 28 diameter. and 38 tons weight,- and is intended to govern r ! i enities of horses' power each, now erecting in a new, u 4 ) ,1t )11 mill bel ong i ng to Messrs. Thomas Bannerman arid Co. erdeen. , LIVERPOOL SPRING ASSIZES. CHOWN coutr.—VninAY. Sir John Paiteson oink his seat at nine o'clock; • BEN NETT v. cnosToN. This was undefended action, hi ought by the plaintiff, George Bennett, against li.ichard Proston, to recover the amount of •a promissory note. Mr. Kriowi_iis stated that the defendant pleaded, that the plaintiff and he adjusted their accounts on the sth February, 1937, when it appeared that he owed the plaintiff the sum of £27 2s. 10(1., for which he gave a promissory - note, which note on the 27th August he paid. The defendant bad not appeared; therefore he ( Mr. ,Know-les) was entitled to their verdict. ,Ver dict for the plaintiff, £2B 12s. It subsequently appeared that the action was tried as unde fended, in consequence of the attorney for the defence having failed to appear HI court when the cause was called. The at torney arrived some time after the case was disposed of as above, and his lordship blamed him in severe terms for his neglect. At the earnest request of Mr. WHIGH AM, one of the counsel for the defence, his lordship suffered the case to stand for trial, and it was accordingly resumed. Mr. Wightman and Mr. Whigham appeared for the defence. It appeared that the plaintiff, who had just received a small legacy, lent the defendant the sum of £7O. A portion of this was repaid, leaving a balance of £57 2s. 10d. Some time after Wards Mr. Bennett, having become unfortunate, the de fendant agreed, in the office of Mr. Yates, the plaintiff's soli. citor, to pay down a sum of £3O, if the balance, for-which he would give a promissory note at six months, might be allowed to stand over during that period. This was agreed to, and the defendant requested that the plaintiff would go with him to his hrewer, who said he would lend. him the £3O. The plaintiff and defendant, who were accompanied by a person named Ellis, met the brewer in the Haymarket, and the party adjourned to a public-house, when the thirty pounds was handed over to Mr. Bennett, and the promissory note was given. It was the amount of the promissory note that was now claimed. Mr. WIGHTMAN said the money had been paid, and, though they had no receipt to show, .yet they had possession of the pro missory note. Mr. Wightman produced the note, and con tended that it wis not uncommon for parties, on such payments being made, to consider the noteitself a sufficient acknowledg merit, without. requiring a receipt or the presence of a witness. Mr. KNowiEs, on the other hand, stated that the note had been returned to the defendant almost immediately after it was drawn, it having been conceived that, as he still held possession of the bill for £7O, he had no need for further security. The note for the balance, Mr. Knowles said, it now appeared had been retained to serve as evidence that the money had been Mr. William Ellis was called, to prove that the note was re turnlM for the reason above stated. He also stated; that he had c4.lled,uon tire defendant recently for the money, and thelatter stated that he had no money, but if the plaintiff would take it out in clover he should be paid. The jury again returned a verdict for the plaintiff's for £2B 12s. 22d. LAWRENCE V. DOOLEY As the defendant in this case was dead, it was supposed that the action had abated; and no one appearing for the plaintiff, the cause was struck of the list. But it appeared that the de fendant's death had taken place since the first day of the assizes, the cause, on the application of M r. Wn tomAN, on the part of the plaintiff, was restored to the list and tried, and a verdict was given for the plaintiff for £l2l. BENNETT V. BiRCHALL. This action was brought to recover the sum of £24 for board and lodgings. The parties in this case reside at Preston. It appeared that the plaintiff kept a small shop. The defendant married the daughter of the plaintiff in the December of the year 1836, after which he lived for 29 weeks with the plaintiff, who had been in the habit of letting lodgings. Witnesses were called on the part of the plaintiff, to show that the defendant and his wife were really lodgers. It appeared that after about font - or five months had elapsed, the defendant quitted his wife. Some relations of the defendant came forward and swore thitt the defendant and his wife were hired servants of the plaintiff, and that he had lent the latter EV. A further sum was claimed by the plaintiff, for money al. leged to have been lent to the wife of the defendant. This the learned Judge said could not be entertained, as a man was not bound to pay money lent to his wife without his authority. The jury returned a verdict for the - plaintiff damages £24 Is. This case terminated the business before Mr. Justice Patteson. NISI PRIUS COURT.—FnIDAY. ADJOURNED KUISANCE CASE.-THE QUEEN V. MUSPRATT. His Lordship took his seat at niue o'clock. Dr. John Rogerson was the first witness called. He was a physician, practising as a surgeon, residing in Scotland-road. He had frequently seen the vapour spoken of by the different witnesses. It had a nauseous and unpleasant odour. It pro duced a suffocating sensation; It had the appearance of a fog, caused by the muriatic acid gas combining with the vapour of the atmosphere, by means of oil which, when it was condensed it fell to the ground in the form of very diluted muriatic acid. He should decidedly say, from the taste and appearance of the vapour, that it was dilute muriatic at-id. The works from which this gas issued were those engaged in the preparation of an im pure alkali, commonly called the black ash, or British barilla. It was prepared by pouring sulphuric acid on common salt, which was a chloride of sodium, commonly called inuriate of soda. The sulphuric acid combined with the sada, and formed sulphate, or rather a bi-sulphate of soda, and the muriatic, acid gas was disengaged. It went up the chimney with the smoke, and in consequence of the beat applied, a quantity of sulphur- MIS acid gas was disengaged, and perhaps a little nitrous acid as well. The muriatic acid gas composed of hydrogen and chlo rine in equal volumes or atoms. The chlorine was part of the salt combined with part of the sodium. Salt being miked with the sodium, that was decomposed, by means of the sulphuric acid and heat. The chlorine then united with the hydrogen. Sulphuric acid consisted of sulphurous acid gas arid water.' When the pulphurous acid gas was poured upon the.muriate of soda, the water of the acid was decomposed. The oxygen of the decomposed water united with the sodium and formed water. The hydrogen of the water united with the disengaged ebb). and formed muriatic gas. • When.the sulphurous acid gas united with the sodium, it formed the sulphate of soda he .had spoken of, or the - bi-sulphate of . soda. ,The properties of the muriatic acid gas were traLsparent as a gas when in the pure state; but when mixed with the air it formed those white vapours which had been spoken of, by its couthinina with the nioisture.of the atmosphere with which it mixed. It then formed a diluted acid, having a pungent odour, an acid taste; it, was rapidly absorbed by water, which at -40 degrees of Fahrenheit took up 480 times its bulk of the gas. It turned vegetable colours red. It would not support combustion, and it was fatal to animal and vegetable life, and very injurious. He had made several experiments along with his brother, and had assisted him. He should think, from the great affinity of the muriatic acid gas for the atmosphere, it would combine with it, and issuing from the chimney-top, and fall to the ground in form of diluted acid. It would fall more rapidly where there was in creased moisture. lie hail tried experiments with his brother, and his opinion was. not what had been stated, and about which there was some mistake, that the muriatic gas when combined with the atmosphere in the proportion of one part in 15(X), did not do injury. He considered that it did, and was highly in jurious to health when so mixed. When the muriatic acid was mixed in the proportion of one part in 1500 of the atmosphere, it did not kill vegetables or plants immersed in it for a certain period of time; but it must still be considered as highly inju riour to health, on account of its irritating and stimulating properties. It could be in no wise useful to the growth of plants. Dr. Christimin, of Edinburgh, professor of the Univer sity of Glasgow, stated, that when one cubic inch of this gas was mixed with 20,000 parts of the atmosphere, it was still in -jurious to plants, and withered the leaves. This also was his opinion. He considered that it constantly occasioned injuries to the health. The experiments they had made with plants had generally been made under 12 hours. If a person were exposed for weeks to an atmosphere loaded with this vapour, its injuri ous effects would be likely to be increased. The longer the action of the gas continued, the inure injurious it would be to vegetathe and animal life. The effect of the.gas issuing from a chimney would depend upon the volume carried by . the wind. 'towing to the wind and the moisture of the atmosphere, this white vapour actually descended so that it could be seen, it would be decidedly prejudicial to vegetables on which it fell, and pro tanto to animal life., If a person complained of his lungs who had been inhaling that atmosphere, it would not be necessary to resort to experiments to pronounce as to the quan tity.of injurious gas he had inhaled ; he should say at once from the fact that it was injurious, and explain his complaint to having inhaled a nitrated atmosphere. If a patient suffered in his lungs, and the inhaling of this muriatic acid steam made him suffer, he should say that it increased his disease. lu his judgment it increased the irritation of the lungs. As to how much irritation would produce death was a matter for inquiry. It was a very difficult question to answer the proportion of muriatic acid gas there was in the white vapour as it left the chimney top. • Cross-examined--He had not examined as to the relative proportion of the gas that issued from. the chimney top, and was not able to tell the jury whether the proportional parts were 51 of muriatic acid gas to 941 of other matters. He had tried the experiments with the muriatic acid gas on, plants, which had died when submitted to its action, by putting them into a glass receiver with the gas, and covering them up. A plant would live a considerable time without being enclosed, when submitted to the vip'our. There would be an immense difference between the effect of the - experiment when confined and where the open air was not excluded. His opinion was that romantic acid, 1 Aloweiter diluted, was injurious, as it was an improper aciatic stimulent. Carbonic acid gas did a great deal of good to vege lables, but it was highly injurious to animal life. Wherever coal or lime was burnt it would be given out in large quantities. Sulphuretted hydrogen was very destructive to animal life; but 'he thought they ought to put that outof thequestion. It would :he'also injurious to vegetables from its acid properties. That would be plentifully supplied by the soap . manufactories. Bi carburited hydrogen gas would be injurious to vegetables but not to animals. Its proper term was bihydrogulated hydrogen. It would issue from the gasometers. The manure heaps would furnish parametic oil of ammonia; so would the bone boilers, and the horse boilers, and wherever animal matter was decom posed. He was not quite certain whether the turpentine works would give out ammonia. They would give out acetic gas which would make people cough, but it would be soon condensed into vinegar. If by chance sal-ammoniac works were added, they would increase the ft easure of gas. There would he brim stone acid gas from them as well from the works of the muriatic acid manufacturers. These constituted the sweets of what was called.spice island. If there was' mariate in the clay for burn ing bricks, they would get muriatic acid gas front the burning of bricks. He found the vapour from the alkali works iujured asthmatic patients. Mr. James Cooper,' -surgeon, of St. Ann's-street, was exa mined, and spoke to living in St. Ann's:street. The gas came full over his house.from Mr. Musprates chimney, and caused him and his family to cough. It rusted his surrical instruments, which he was obliged to keep constantly cleaning. He had formerly lived in Fraso.-street, and had not experienced the same effect. When the wind blew in an opposite dit eCtion from Muspratt's chimney, the leaves, and trees, and plants, in his garden, were quite green; but when the• wind blew from Mus prates chimney towards•his house, it turned all vegetation black in his garden, and would kill and wither. the trees and leaves in a single night. , Cross-examined.—Fraser-street, his former residence, was 300 yards from where he now lived. _ Dr. William Reynolds was next examined.--Fie was a phy sieian, residing in Liverpool, and lecturer on chemistry at the Royal Institution.. He -was acquainted with the process of manufacture of what was called black ash, and also of salt cake. In the-manufacture of salt cake a volume of muriatic acid gas was poured, out of a chimney. It then combined with the moisture of the atmosphere, and was no longer governed-by the ordinary laws of grsses. It became heavier than the atmos phere, and ,than the ordinary moisture of the air, from combin ing with the muriatic acid. The vapour was a liquid muriatic acid gas, in very small globules, the same as steam. It corroded metals, and gave the appearance of being rusted. A ton , of salt would give nut upwards of- 1-1 O. feet of muriatic acid gas.- It would produce irritation of the air passages through the lungs, end produce cough, and also, when" a person was exposed for some time to its influence, produce disorder of thEC'stomach. it would-be extremely injurious to vegetable-life, and would cause the leaves to wither'and he destroyed. If vegetables were -sub mitted to its action for some time there would be an apparent THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD deposit Ilion them which woutd have the appearance of dew. would als) have the ,i,l1110: effect upon vegetable sutstances. Forestlrees submitted Le its action .vnuld decay from year to year. 'nit. witn,ss teen proceeded to describe the different processes of the manufacture of the The suPhurous acid. gas which escaped from the works themselves, in the ma nulicture of sulphuric acid, was extremely deleterious. Cross-examined.—He had seen a dew-like deposit of the vas upon artificial leaves: The taste was intensely seer. The Botanical Gardens had been removed owing to the quantity of buildings about, the quantity of smoke, and the comparative impurity of the'air. During his investigation of this subject he had not seen oysters speedily jaw-locked by this gas; csabs and lobsters quickly die, and lively shrimps unable to crawl away. This wits the case for the prosecution. • Mr. ALEXANDER then rose to reply, and spoke with great fluency anti eloquence, on behalf of his client, fur two hours and twenty-five minutes—a speech which it is, of Bourse, entirely beyond our limits even to give an outline of. He spoke of his anxiety for the success of his client, and the weight of respon sibility resting on him, and of the disadvantage under which he laboured in rising to prole his case, after forty-five witnesses had endeavoured to prove the prosecutors' case against him. It was one of the feelings of human nature to be biased by the first story. The case was one of immense importance to his client, fur on it depended whether or not he should be allowed to continue his business. He had expended a large*suin, about £30,000, in the erection of his works, and' was' now pitched single handed to uphold these, the fruits of his industry, against a corporate body, wielding all its influence in a town like Liver pool, and p . ossessing as much wealth as many petty monarchies. He desighated the prosecution, instituted by the corporation against Mr.. Muspratt, as a harsh proceeding. If parties were damaged by his works they had their remedy by action against him, which he contended was the proper course, leaving those individuals who felt aggrieved to recover, if they could prove that he had injured them, compensation at his hands; that was the proper course, and not to attempt to crush a man by an in dictment supported by all the wealth and influence of a power ful corporation. He contended that the manufacture of the alkati was one6f immense importance to the soap manufacturer, to the glass manufacturer, to the palm oil merchant, and others, and that this was an. attempt to exterminate the, trade, which was a novel one. The attempt would have been a great deal mire Quixotic if it had been made against an older established trade, though proved to. be highly detrimental, because there would be more individuals engaged in it. He contended that he should be able to prove that the evidence of the prosecutor's witnesses. was not correct—thatle should bring- front the same . streets and from the same neighbOurhood, witnesses to prove that the gas was not at all injurious and not unpleasant;—that it did not damage vegetation, nor deteriorate the,yalue of pro perty. He contended that it was impossible that gas from Mr. Muspratt's chimney could strike Everton, because it had been proved that Everton Hill was only 225 feet above the level of high water, whereas Mr, Mu s p ra tt' s t a ll c himney, tollich was so. much spoken .if, was 228 feet high, and its base was 15 feet above high water. So that if the gas issuing from that chimney travelled in a horizontal direction, it would pass over Evertor; but that if it ascended, as was its inclination to do, it would pass far away above it. Mr. Muspratt had bad three indictments preferred against him, and. at each one had endeavoured to render his manufactory less obnoxious, by improving the con struction of his apparatus, and by heightening his chimney ; and .now, for that very act, his high chimney was to be the cause of this indictment. Mr. ALEXANDER then proceeded to call an immense number of witnesses, who nearly all of them reiterated the same story, that they lived in the neighbourhood of the works, and felt no inconvenience whatever from Them. That •property was gene rally increased in value in their neighbourhood;.ana that, since the erection of Mr. Muspratt's tall chininey, ten months ago, they had felt no inconvenience whatever. On cross-examina tion they generally stated that they had been inconvenienced by the white vapour, but it was not from the .defendant's chim ney. The vapour from his chimney went right over their heads They were principally annoyed with the vapour proceeding ft oin manufactories in Canning-street and Paul-street. Some 'of them swore stoutly they never were inconvemei by any vapour at all, though they had lived a great number of years in the town. One witness. a farmer, brought to prove that it. - had not affected his crops, said he had heard a good deal of Muspratt's smoke, and was determined that morning to get a mouthful, and for that purpose went down to the manufactory when the chim ney was vomiting forth its vapour, and snuffed lip the air, and felt not the least inconvenience. On being cross-examined by his lordship, he said the vapour was not near him. When asked if he expected to snuff it' down, he answeretL "To be sure." This, of course, as were many other similar sallies, was Wowed by loud laughter. Mr. John Miller, merchant, residing in St. George's-place, Everton-road North, was examined. He deposed that his resi dence was east north-east of Mr. Muspratt's chimney, near Mr. Horsfall's. about three quarters of a mile from Mr..Muspratt's works. He could distinctly see his chimney. He had wsbrub lieu in the front of his botise, and a small garden behind. He had suffered no inconvenience whatever from Mr. Muspratt's works that. he was aware of.. His garden and shrubs were not injured by it. He had fruit trees which produced abundantly. He WAS not aware that he lied suffered any of the evils from Mr. Muspratt's works, derailed.by the witnesses for the prosecution. Cross-examined.—He had resided four years in his present premises, and nearly three close to them. He had not been in the habit of going into any gardens but his own to obserVe any alteration in them. He - had not noticed that vegetation was not in a flourishing state, so far to the contrary, the field iu the front of his house had produced a very abundant crop the last year. He had traced Mr. Muspratt's vapour, and be did not believe that it did fall. It appeared to him to atceind in an angle of 25 or 30 degrees, and he did not believe that it did fall. He had noticed the vapour. issuing from the other alkali works. He thought the vapour front them did fall. He bed observed the vapour and smoke from Mr. Muspratt's chiinnex ascending in the angle he bad said, while the smoke of the others seemed to hang in suspension at the_ height of 20 from the ground, and remained in that suspension for about an hour, perfectly-mo tionless. The smoke from Muspratt's chimney seemed to go in an upper current of air. •Ha could not pretend to explain the cause of - this appearance, but so he had that morning seen it, and had watched it for an hour. By the JUDGE.—Th(tre was a strong wind blowing against his windows, and the vapour from Atuspratt's chimney passed rapidly over head, apparetitlj , in a current, but ifie vapour below was stationary, and did not appear subject to the scrim of the wind. • ,' Re-examined.- 7 -Uniformly when he had been thle to trace the vapour it passed over the highest ground at Everton at fully a greater height than when it issued,from the chimney.,-. Mr. William Skirving, nursery gardener, had a nursery at Everton and another at Walton. Forest trees an - 1 fruit trees throve welt at his nursery at Evcrtou, which was close to Mr. Horsfall's residence. Cross-examined:—llis nursery at Everton was surrounded with high waits. Ou the whole the trees did nut thive so well there as at Walton, and,he could not account fur it. Michael Ashcroft, farmer of Kirkdale, deposed that he occu- Pied ab‘iut 250 statute acres of land. His crops wets Out at all injured by the vapour from Mr. Muspratt's works. Cross-examined.—He had a large shrubbery httween the manufactory and his fatal, which acted as a screen. Dr. Thomas Thonipson, professor of chemistry at the Uni versity of Glasgow, and had passed a long life in chernieal pur suits. He had had his attention directed to the purposes of the enquiry that day, and had paid much attention to it. Muriatic acid gas was evolved duringmne process of the manufacture of alkali during the decoMposition of common salt. , The first pro cess was to decompose common salt by mixing with it sulphuric acid, and during that process muriatic gas was evolved. The proportion of gases escaping from Mr. Musuratt's chimney was not more than 6,1 per cent, of inartistic acid, and the rest was carbonic and azotic gases and common air. There might be less than that proportion of muriatic acid gas, but certainly not more. During the decomposition of the common salt, for every ton of salt four tons of .ceat are consumed, The coal, by beinv burnt, was converted into water and carbonic acid gas.. The water was in a state of steam from the heat of the fire, that was to say an invisible and elastic substance like common air, and the muriatic acid was united with it. The moment it came at the top of the chimney it expanded and became a visible smoke. The water was changed into the substance of a cloud. That cloud consisted of a congeries of hollow bladders of water,e n v d er s y o one at a small distance from the other. The diameter of these blad ders varied immensely; generally they were so small that they could not be seen. lie had seen them as large as peas, a small as to be invisible. These globules, combined with mu riatic acid, were generally in the form of a cloud. It was a little lighter than atmospheric air, and or course floated on. As it went through the atmospheie,. it gradually changed again into what was called steam, that was to say air elastic and visible vapour, after which it dispersed, but the process was a very slow one. It never fell till it was all dispelled. The muriatic acid was changed again into muriatic gas, which moved at the visible rate of 1000 feet per second, so that by the time it got to a cer tain distance, depending on the state of the atmosphere, it was impossible that there could be the least particle oluturiatic acid in the atmosphere. The gas would one day travel a long dis tance, another it would go a short distance. He had examined the air at a distance of a of a mile front the alkali works, and could in that air iletect no muriatic acid at ad by the most deli cute test from the largest manufactory of this suit that there was at Glasgow. He had investigated in consequence of a law suit similar to the present which was tried last year, and he had been determined not to give his evidence until he was perfectly satisfied of the correctness of his judgement. If there had been but one lifty-thousandth part of this - acid to the bulk of the air prereut, the tests he applied .would most certainly have detected it.. The consequence of which uses that the Inuriatic acid spread itslf equally through- the Whole . 'atmosphere; and by the time it had got a quarter,of a mile it was so very dilute that he could not detect it except . by one test, the smell. It was most certain that no mischief could be done by the muriatic acid so diluted. He thought that few people were properly capable of observing the white vapour impinging against anything. No witness could speak of the white vapour impinging at different distances, It was not possible so to impinge- unless the wind brought i:. The vapour would gradually rise at an angle when it issued out of the chimney top till it was lost. It would ultimately become re solved into steam and muriatic acid gas, just in tie same state as water when in the atmosphere. It could not be brought to the earth unless there was a vertical wind, a water-spout, or some thing of that kind. If the vapour, instead of assuming the character of a cloud on leaving the chimney top, assumed the character of drops, it would fall to the ground; and if the dia meter of a drop was one thoUsandth part of an inch, it would begin to fall at the rate of ten feet in a second, tie next second at the rate of forty feet, the third at ninety feet, and so on, as the square of the time. Ile never saw this to be. tie fact, though. he had watched a chimney of the same kind for twenty years. The vapour, at the heights of Mr. Al usprait's chimney and :%rerton hill given, must necessarily pass ovet Everton hill. It would be contrary to a law of nature if it did otherwise, unless there was a wind blowing it down. He should attribute the rusting of the metals talked of to the primary aid great cause of it —Abe moisture of the atmosphere. a pers'n were stand ing 300 feet from the base of a chimney as deseihed 228' feet high, vomiting forth this vapour, the proportion that would pass to. him would he one-ninety-thousandth part per volume, that is if the muriatic acid gums were pure; but, in order to get at the actual quantity he would breathe, they must multiply that quantity by sixteen, whieh would be less that one-Millionth part. if there was a wind, it would have the teidency to make the gas go all on one side, and then the quantity of gas so breathed would be one five hundred thousandth tart. That was an established law of mature, about which their , could be no doubt. Muriatic acid gas had no effect on meat Jut what would wash off directly. The examination was contnued at great length, which our limits oblige us to curtail. Cross-examined;--All gases expanded accordng to the same law. The rate at which the vapour moved %%luld depend on the velocity of the air. The gas, when it esuiped from' the top of the chimney, combined with the action ofthe atmosphere would not be so heavy as common air. Raindid not always fall in right lines; a wind would prevent it. HEcould not rre cisely tell where a drop of acid would fall, driven by a current of air, without the velocity of the atmosphere ads ascertained. If the vapour once got to the ground it mightfloat along the surface, and, with as much as 61 per cent. of muiaticacid in it, it would be decidedly injurious to yegetation It Would kill man, woman, ,and child, and destroy every thin}. if it wept en the surface, forever; but there was a law of natire which made . that impossible. • If it was'a foggy day it wouldcertainly carry the yapourdoiva with : it. If, the,vapotly were,trivep,alongohe, ground it would do mischief five hundred mile• off, if it Went that far. Wherever it was smelt there was no dispute the gas wat present. It was an irritating gab, and could not he drawn into the lungs at all except in a very dilute state. It did not make hint cough. It was a gas that would not only irritate but ties; roy tiie mucous membrane,/ completely. This was this case for the defendant. Mt, court then adjourned at ei ,, ht o'clock, the further hear. ing of the case to be resumed in the morning. SATURDAY. (Before Mr. Jusiice Coleridge.) His Lordship took his seat at nine o'clock. The whole of the evidence in the case of the QUEEN V. M US- Plt ATT baying been got through on Friday, Mr. CRESSWELL rose to reply. He could not, he said, rise to address the jury on behalf of the prosecution, without offering an apology for being the means of calling them together again; but he was so much exhausted, and had been suffering so se verely from indisposition for. a considerable time past, that he was utterly unable to go on on •the ,preceding evening, and he thought be should have ill discharged his duty to the Corpora tion and public of Liverpool, if he had unt asked for R postpone ment to enable hint properly to fulfil his task. He had one or two preliminary observations to makeson the remarks that had fallen fronahis learned friend. • It had been stated that it was a contested wager by a public body, in possession of an ample public fund, for the purpose of crushing Mr. Muspratt; that it was no fair war, but one waged at unequal odds; and that, if it turned out that he could not effectually, defend himself, they were to consider that it arose from the great weight with which he had to contend. To what better• purpose, he would ask, could the -corporation apply their funds? what could they do better than listen to the complaints of their fellow townsmen, sod protect those privileges which ought to be equal to all? They came forward to help those who could not help themselves. Au injury against two or three was no public injury, and could not be, in the case of a nuisance, proceeded against by indict ment. But if they found, upon an examination of the evidence in this case, that the injury was spread far and wide, and in a degree that depreciated the value of property, invaded the corn forts of multitudes of people, and prodticed great distress and inconvenience, then the proper mode was by indictment. Let them mark the condition in which Mr. Muspratt was placed by the mode of proceeding that had been adopted. He bad had but oue action entered against hitn, and he would have the costs of but one action to pay. ,If one hundred and fifty actions had been brought, he would have had to pay the costs in every one of them. He knew of no better way of crushing an individual than that of involving him in one hundred and fifty or two hun dred lawsuits. His friend said, they had called people who spoke only of Mr. Muspratt; that the complaints that had been made were the effects of vulgar prejudices directed against him; that the effluvium had obtained the name of the Muspratt smell; and, in fact, that he had called people to speak of Mr. Muspratt only. If he had called witnesses who had spoken of other par ties who had produced the vapour, what would have been the cry then? Why, it would have been said, that be had called peo ple who spoke .of muriatic gas only being produced without speaking of any particular individual as having, produced it, but merely proving that others produced it as well as Mr. Muspratt. He would call their attention to the 'distress, discomfort, and loss which had been suffered at Everton, and in the more imme- • diate neighbourhood of the works, all of which was attributed to Mr. Muspratt, His learned friend had set up two defences, one of which was, the ga's was not injurious, and the other, that it was impossible for it, because of certain laws of nature, to get near the parties who complained. He was glad of this, for, if two evidences which were inconsistent with each other were set up, they either neutralised. each other, or, as it generally hap pened, they both short of positive proof, and, in such circum stances, two halves would not make a whole. They would new see the state of the village of Everson, slid examine-how the gas had effected it. It appeared that it was about twelve years since Mr. Muspratt first introduced his alkali works, and very soon afterwards it was surmised that it was a nuisance. Be it particularly remembered, that all the annoyance from smoke, kilns, tanneries, and so forth existed before that time. They had. the testimony of most respectable witnesses to the fact. No complaint was made of injury to vegetation. it was the same iu the parts that appeared to be more inhabitati ; each man pur sued his trade or occupation without loss or discomfort. It was said, that Mr. Muspratt contributed to increase the wealth of the town. how, then, could they say, that prejudice existed, or that so strong a complaint would have been made unless a nuisance did exist that was intolerable ; In 18.38 Mr. Muspratt was indicted, and, in the years 1829-39, he erected this very tall chimney. Up to that time no complaint came from Everton. All the complaints had been confined to the Hat intermediate space. But, within a year or two after the tall chimney was erected,, Everton began loudly to complain. Why did not Everton complain befure? It had been made evident, that all the other mannfactures existed before, and the fact of the an noyance commencing at- Everton at the time this chimney was erected proved,. that the chimney was the cause of it. He would be governed by the evidence of his senses iu spite of the inge nuity of theorists. What followed? Why, Mr. Muspratt was indicted by Everton ; Evertou evidence was excluded, and Mr. Muspratt was acquitted. The evidence from Everton having been excluded, how was it possible that the indictment should succeed? It was found that Everton was not within the same boundary, and he could easily believe that this would cause some doubts in the minds of individuals who were but imperfectly ac quainted with the law. The municipal boundary line had now included Everton, and the case was now brought before the present jury. Several of the witnesses for the defence had given testimony that showed the effects had been produced that were stated by Dr. Thomson. The learned gentleman here ptoceederl to comment upon the evidence that had been brought forward for the defence, particularlydwelling upon that given by Dr. Thom Son, and its variation from the facts proved in the evidence of the numerous witnesses for the prosecution. Was this mighty town, asked the learned gentleman, which, within the last century, had arisen from being a place comparatively little known until it was almost a rival of the metropolis itself; arts, • were the inhabitants, with their taste for the to have their town, which it had been their pride to adorn, disfigured, to increase the wealth of the overgrown Mr. Muspratt, who lifted his bead and destroyed the comfort and the property of others, just as some towering tree reared itself on high and floruished, while it withdrew the norishinent from the surrounding vegeta tion ? His LORDSHIP said, it was :tow his duty to assist them, as far as he could, in the discharge of their much more important one. Ile had thought it right; considering the importance of the ques tion, both to the Wine and to the parties, to allow the fullest investigation, and to allow the case to be resumed at intervals such as would permit the advocates and the jury to recruit their strength, and he wished the jury now to act with the same deter mination for patient and, calm inquiry. They had been very naturally addressed, by the counsel on both sides, as to the pro bable consequences ; but he wished them to understand, that in no point of view ought the consequences to operate in their minds, except for the purpose of inducing them to give the sub ject inure deliberate consideration. It would be incumbent on 'them to throw altogether out of their consideration the conse quence, (which, to either Party, which ever way the verdict was given, must be of great importance,)and to ueliberate only upon the real question at issue. With respect, to the consequences, if they were of opinion, that the effect of a verdict against the • defendant woulii be to remove a growing and beneficial branch of trade, and to remove it to a foreign shore, they . had nothing to do with it; nor would it be any defence at all. that Mr. Mus pratt caused great benefit to accrue to many individuals, and that he was making a large and honourable fortune. He was charged with having caused a nuisance to the inhabitants of Everton. A public indictment only extended to a public nui sance. It was necessary that they should be convinced, that the injury complained of was a substantial injury, and not merely such an annoyance as would be taken notice Of orly by nervous people. It must be an injury to the health, comfort, or properly of the people residing within its influence. if they should find, that, in Evertoe, property had been depreciated by what had been )lone; if they should find, that furniture had been spoiled, that iron had been rusted, that articles exposed for sale in shops had been discoloured or changed, that would be a tangible in jury, and would be sufficient. Though they Should not find that it was productive of any fatal consequences, or any series of af fections peculiar or dangerous, yet, if the general daily comforts of the inhabitants were broken in upon, that was a substantial injury. Their next point would be to bring this home to Mr. Muspratt. Yet, ft was not necessary that they should bring all home to him. The learned Judge here explained, that all the parties could not be included in one indictment ; and, there fore, it was sufficient if Mr. Muspratt were proved to have done some substantial injury. If they knew any of what were com monly called reasonable doubts on the subjects, it would be proper to give him the benefit of that doubt. He did not mean that they should require mathematical demonstration of that which was not capable of demonstiatiou, s but that they should see that the case was not encumbered with such doubts as would hinder them from coming to a general conclusion. Both par ties came into court armed with a scientific evidence. His lordship dwelt at great length on the evidence, parts of which he analyzed minutely. At the request of one or two gentlemen of the jury, lie read over the testimony of Horsfall, Mr. Mil ler, aneMr. Warner. If the evidence did not. carry conviction to their minds, thew would at once dismiss the case ; but, if they were satisfied that - Mr. Muspratt had produced such a nuisance as had caused serious loss and discomfort, then they would de•• tide against the defendant. The jury retired at twelve o'clock ; they remained out until half-past two, when they delivered in a verdict of Guilty. The court, which hail been excessively crowded up to this hour, was immediately deserted by the vast bulk of the auditory. hurreatwoirrn AND ANOTHER V. CATESWORTH.-SPECIAL JURY CASE. Mr. Alexander and Mr. Crompton appeared for the plain tiff; and Al r. Cressweir for the defence._ The deciaratign stated that this was an action brought for money had and received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff, and for interest on an account, stated. - The defendant pleaded that he did-not pro mise, as alleged, and, secondly, that £195 7s. Gd., part Of the money, was received on certain terms, which was denied. This was an action .brought to recover the above sum, with such interest as should have become due. The question de pended upon the construct* to be put on certain documentary evidence. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Butterworth and M'Dougle, were merchants at Manchester, the defendant was a merchant at London. The late Mrs. Duncan M'Dougle, formerly re sided at Liverpool, and carried on business at Buenos Ages. In 1825 the plaintiffs intended making a -'onsigninPnt of goods to Buenos Ayres, and through the medium of Mrs. Duncan M`Dougle, the goods were sent out; and it was agreed between the parties, that. an a d vance s h ou ld b e ma d e on th e se goods by the defend an t s i n L on d on; an d t h e plaintiffs sent out a quan tity of marino and other goods, subject to the commission of 4 per cent. at Buenos Ayres, and some other charges. There was an alleged breach of contract on the part of the defendant, for which the action was brought. The case hinged upon a point of law, on which the terms of a future agreement were settled; and a verdict was taken for the plaintiff by consent, subject to a special case. 111`KEN . Z . IE AND OTHERS V. COCKSHOT. — SPECIAL JURY CASE. In this.caseth;action Wasbtought for the recovery of a large sum of money from the defendant, on an order by him to the plaintiff, Allcenzie for a quantity of cotton. In the August of 1836, Mr. Cockshot, residing in Liverpool, had some conver satibn with an individual named 111`Kenzie, the nominal plain tiff in this action, relative to the purchase of some cotton. M`Kenzie was going to . reside abroad, at Mobile, and the de fendant was anxious to speculate for 500 bales of cotton, pro vided the crop of cotton in America that year did not exceed a certain amount of bales, and that prices did not exceed a cer tain amount fixed by himself. But whether the markets brought the 'prices within his limits or not, he was desirous of having 200 bales at all events. The queStion was whether Mr. Cockshott did or not. altogether repudiate the authority he had given to Mr. Il`lienzie to purchase those bales for him. It was also contended by the defendant that the specific order given, was not executed—that the cotton was not of the required qua lity. The names by which cottons were known in the trade, were " good," "good fair," " fully good." and " fair." fair being the lowest -quality. l t was contended by the defendant that the cottons, if ordered at all, were to h e goo d: , an d t h at even it' he had not repudiated the order given; still the cottons did not answer the description ordered. The plaintiffs con tended that the order was for cottons ranging between " fair" and "good fair," and that the cottons sent ranged between those limits.. A number of letters to.M'Kenzie from the defendant, contain ing the orders, were read . The first was dated Liverpool, Sep tember, 1836. stating, that probably his limits would not be practicable early in the season; but in the event of Mobile cid.- tups:og.good qualities-being purchasable at 91 per Ib, freight - ioclUded,'Pe was - to purchase 500 bales on his account; but that rather than not have any cotton, he was at liberty to gelid him 200 bales, when he thought it would he incist to his (defendant's) benefit, though his former limits should not he practicable. The next letter was on the 13th of October, 1834, which did not at all notice the 2U) hales, but reduced the limits for the 500 to 9d per lb. add in c a s e th e market increased, to repeat the shipment of a fair quality of Bd. On the 3d of November the defendant wrote again to 111'Kenzie, saying he " had that pleasure on the 15th ult.," and reducing his former limits id per lb, with this order, "my limits now stand 814 for good,' 7-id for 'fair,' and if this should not be practicable, then 2.10 bales to be sent when you think your market lA at the lowest." The defendant's limits net being " practicable " Al'Kenzie, on this order, purchased 200 bales, and shipped them to Liverpool, at the invoice price of £3016, which duly arrived in Livet pool, but to a falling mar ket. Under these circumstances the defendant refused the cot ton, and it was sold by other parties I'r £1598. On the 7th of February, 1837, some time after the 200 bales had been bought, the defendant wrote to Al - Kenzie that he was to consider the order given to him on the sth of December as null and void, the market being in the most ." awful". state. It was on this le scinded order that the defendant. refused to pay. The action was brought to recover the difference between the price for which the cotton was bought and sold: A verdict was taken for the plaintiff for £1175 8s 3d, subject to a motion. HUMBLE AND ANOTH4R V. MITCHELL. The plaintiff in this case sought to recover the difference in price, between two stated periods, Iu the value of 100 Northern and Central Banking Company shares. Oa the Bth of July, 1837, it was stated by the plaintiff that he bought the shares in question of the defendant, at £2 lOs per share, and that the de fendant refused afterwards to sign the transfer Dote, and com plete the contract. On the 4th of August, 1837, the plaintiff made a tender to the defendant of the amount ►.f the purchase money of the shares, which he refused, and„ the action was brought to recover the difference between the price of the shares when bought and when the tender was made. The sale and the tender were proved, and two gentlemen, named Barber and Sinclair, of Manchester, were called to prove the value of the shares at those periods. They, however, proved the value of the shares when the tender was made at £2 7s 61 less than the purchase price, though no actual dealings had taken place at that rate. The first actual transaction after the 4th of August was at £3 10s, which, being within a " reasonable time" of the date of the tender, was taken as the price, the defendant object ing. A verdict was accordingly entered fo► the plaintiff, damages, £lOO, costs, 40s, subject to a motion in court. Y ESTER DAY. RANDLESON V. MURRAY AND ANOTHER. Mr. CUESSWELL, and Mr. COWLING, appeared for the plain tiff; and Mr. ALEXANDER for the defence. The plaintiff in this case is a labouring luau, and the defend ants, Messrs. Thomas and Henry Murray, are persons in a respectable station in Liverpool. The action was brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation in damages from the de fendants for a serious injury he received, in consequence of the neglect of the defendants' servants in foweiing a barrel of flour, which fell in consequence, and broke the leg of the plain. tiff. It appeared that Randleson was employed 'by a carter, and sent to the defendants' warehouse in Gibraltar-row to bring away some flour, when the servants of the defendants lowered some flour so carelessly, by means of can-hooks, instead of by nippers or slings, which are much safer, that it fell a height of six stories upon the plaintiff, injured his back, and crushed one of his legs and thighs to pieces. He was obliged to have his leg amputated in consequence, and was thus, when quite a young man, rendered a cripple and unable to get his .icing. For the defence tt was urged that the men who lowered the flour were not in the immediate employ of the defendants. but in the employ of a master porter rthined Wharton. It was, however, contended in reply, that the men were in fact and in law em ployed by the defendants. Several surgeons were called, who spoke to the injury which the plaintiff had suffered. He had lost his leg, and hail never since been well in health in conse quence. Witnesses were called who deposed to the extretne carelessness of the porters who lowered the flour. His Lord ship said he had no doubt the master porter employed by the defendants, was their servant, and he did not think the men employed by the master porter were the less servants of the de fendinis. For the defence it was contended that this action was got up, not by the plaintiff, but by his attorney, Mr. Blackhurst, of Preston, who made a tool of the plaintiff, and brought the ac lien to put the costs in his pocket. A witness was called, named Newton, who deposed that the plaintiff had told hint that Mr. Blackh'nrst wanted him to enter au action against Messrs. Murray, and promised to do it for him for nothing. That he (wi4ness) advised him to do no such thing as he (plaintiff) was very comfortable, and Mr. Wharton, who would have to pay the expeuces, had been very kind to him. His LottosuiP, in summing up. said one part of the defence was, that this was a stale action brought long after the acci dent, and that it would not have been brought had it not hap pened that Mr. Henry Blackhurst, the attorney, had heard of it. Any attorney who thus hunted out actions on the principle of " no cure no pay,' in his opinion interfered improperly, and in a manner disgraceful to an honourable profession. But the jury must take care and not mix up with the cases of Randle son the plaintiff, and Blackhurst, the attorney for Randleson, might be entitled to damages, though he had had the misfurtune to fall into the hands of Mr. Biackhurst the attorney. The jury, after a short consultation, found a' verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £lOO. SFENCE AND ANOTHga ASSIGNEES, V. ROLLO, This was an action brought by ,the assignees of a bankrupt firm, Messrs. Moleson, Pearson, and Dempsou, to recover from the defendant the price of the third part of a share in the Laten Mining Company. Et appeared that the three partners of the firm bad purchased a wl.ole share in the Miring Com pany, each paying a share. Mr. Molesou afterwards sold his share of the share to Mr. Rollo, at the price of £360. of which stun he had paid £270, leaving a balance of £9il unpaid. For the defence it was contended that Mr. Bello way a creditor to the bankrupt estate, and that the share was purchased front the partnership, and not from Moleson individually, which was de nied by the plaintiffs. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £9O. -.,. _. ... .._. r. Jn 6 assistance of a constsble, inflicted a grievous insult on the plaintiff. What was the cause which first gays offence to Mr. Fegan ? The fancied wrong that Mr. Gratiras had done him. lie knew nut whether it was that Mr. Gi . ittri a had, in his paper, exercised so opiuiou adverse to inns, or whether he, had not done justice` to some of his exhibitions of magisterial autharity and judgments : he could not profess to judge, but hey shouldjudge for them Selves whether Mr. Fegan and Mr: Whittle had not to gether been guilty of inflicting a grievous Mita yon Mr. Griffiths, and whether they would find any, the slightest palliation fur what bad been done. 7u fact, Mr. Feg in ciltnitted that he had dune wrong, and if he had, Whittle had done wrong a 150.., It would appear that the magistrates of Wigan are lit thehabit . of holding their petty 'sessions, and sit, two together on certain days. Mr. Fegan hail obtained his office on the passing of the municipal reforM bill: s Why by a coincidence of opinion, amongst those iu the town, Mr. Fegau should ever have been: recommended to the important office of magistrate, he could not guess. Unquestionably it would strike all, that Mr, Fagan ?could be little adapted by education, by teeling, "tra , occupation. or judgment, for the *office he filled, and left them - to regret that the magistrates should not have been appointed by the ,respon sitiitity of the crown's minister, father than on the recominenda tionof others whose judgment in the matter could be little re lied on. It would appear that Mr. Griffiths was in the habit of taking notes before the magistrates of such cases as were likely to create public interest. Every newspaper editor employed souse person to attend in courts of justice whese proceedings at tracied attention, to take note of such cases as were calculated to give pleasure or interest the readers of their paper; but. was it ever heard of till the present time that a judge—in ' deed, they would not care anything about the matter iu any of the higher courts—should- get into his head that a newspaper editor was to publish every case that was heard its his court. It was one of the absurdest notions he ever heard in his life. It appeared that Mr. Fegan had taken. great offence against Mr. Griffiths because he had not published' all the reports of all the cases brought before their worships the magistrates of Wigau. Perhaps Mr. Fegan was ambitious of the fame of some of the Lornian police magistrates, renowned iu the reports for their sayings and the laughable cases brought before them, and therefore was offended that some such case was not reported. On the 231 of June the petty sessions was held at Wigan; and Mr. Griffiths's clerk had in the first instance gone to take notes, and Mr. Whittle oils him " if he did not. report every thing he should report nothing, and the clerk upon this told . Mr. Griffiths, who went himself to see what was the matter, when Mr. Whittle said to itim, " This won't do at all; you have left out Dauber's case." To whist; Mr. Griffith said, " What is the harm of that?" Said Whittle, "If you don't publish every thing you shan't publish any thing; don't sup pose you are to sit at that table, and take notes without." Sup pose •every newspaper eilitisr in Liverpool were to publish all the trash they talked at the assizes; the readers of those papers would be titles-iv disgusted, and vote the editor a very great goose for his pains, and condemn his paper as a dull affair, and commit it to the flames, and send for some other paper where better taste was shown in the selection of matter. Mr. -Griffith replied to the constable I can't and won't." "Thou you be off from the table" said he, -` end take your suction among the crowd, and what is moo es if you don't publish every thing, you shan't come here at all." "1 choose to manage my own affairs in my own way," said the plaintiff. " Oh, take him to prison, take 'him to prison," said the magistrate, and Mr. Griffiths was accordingly seized by two constables, taken through the public market; placed in custody, and lodged in gaol. As soon as he was there, he sent for his attorney, who applied to the magistrates on his behalf to know what they intended to do next, when they replied "that he must enter his recognizauces, himself in £2O. and two sureties of £lO. each." "What to do?" asked the altos ney. "Oh, to keep the peace towards the magistrates of Wigan." (Laughter.) The jury would say what compensation should be paid for this injury and insult on a respectable man. Mr. Fe gan had afterwards aggravated that insult by offering £5. in compensation, when an apology for his conduct would have been worth ten times £5. to Mr. Griffith. He called Greehadge, who deposed that he was in the office of the ; plaintiff, who was editor of the • Wigan Gazette." Mr. _Vegan was a Justice of Peace at Wigan, and M r. Whittle was the Chief Constable. Mr. Griffith had been in the habit of attending the Petty Sessions for the purpose ref reporting the cases that came before the Court. On the 23d June, witness went to the Petty Sessions for Mr. Griffiths, and Mr. Fegau was there on the bench, and Whittle was present. Whittle asked where Mr. Griffith was, and then askefflim why Dauber's case was not re: ported. Mr. Vegan inquired of Whittle, " What is to do now? and Whittle said, " Another case left out,"—(a laugh,)—and . Fegan said, " Aye, let me see, that case of Dr. Lambe's was not in;" and they went on grumbling, and he (Witness) said he would go and fetch Mr. Griffiths; and he came and took his seat at the table where he usually sat, under the bench. Whittle asked him why that case of Dauber's was not in, and Mr. Grill= fiths said, " rdon't know," and Whittle said, " If you come here you must report impartially ; you are not to pick out cases here and there; you must report all or none." Mr. Griffiths said, " Ile should do as he thought proper, and_not submit to his interference." Whittle then said, " Stand behind among the crowd ; you shall not sit there at that table. 'Mr. Griffiths said, " lie should not leave the room, till they made that a clear court, and then he should leave it with the rest of the people." Whittle then said, " Leave the room, Sir!" Mr. Griffiths said,' " I shall not." Mr. Fegan then said, "'H e must either report' impartially and correctly, or he shall not report at all, and he' shall not sit at that table; and unless he reports every case, he shall leave the room." Mr. Griffiths then said to Mr. Fegan, " I wish you would mind your business and I will mind mine." Both Mr. Fegan and Whittle then ordered him to leave the room, and he refused. They then called constables, and ordered them to remove him; the plaintiff seemed unwilling to go, and Fegau called out, " take him up Milgate, take him up Milgate, take him to pr son." The plaintiff was then conveyed between two constables to the lockup, where he remained about half an hour, till he was released on bail being given fur him by Mr. Ackerley, his attorney, and another gentleman. The wit ness was cross-examined at great length, to show that both the plaintiff and defendant were' irritated. Mr. Ackerley, solicitor, proved the giving bail for the libera tion of the plaintiff. Mr. ALIMANDER raised a point of law, if his Lordship did not think the defendant justified in committing the plaintiff on the ground of his being insolent to the magistrate in the execu tion of his office, quoting Chitty's edition of Burns, vol. 3, page 164. His LORDSHIP overruled the point. He said, we should live in a strange country if a magistrate had a right to do that. Mr. AsaxaNusii then addressed the jury fur the defence. lie said, they must attribute the unlawful proceeding of the magis trate to his ignorance of the law, and not to a wilful breaking' d theuc a i injurynn, pre to the of it. He lamented with his friend Mr. Cresswell, that th e class of persons admitted as magistrates under the mu n i c i pa l e i y e e i i t l l , 1 e that t. e act, a ere not fitted for their tgaelcioutiilt bel vi defel s°ctdleLiamn occupation, was ii(n ' small, °rfeeling ' H he bad only been imprisoned twenty minutes, and called on the jury to give light damages. • His Loanstile briefly summed up the case, and the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff damages £7O. BAPTISM 01 , CONVERTED JEWS.—We understand that nn Friday evening next, a sermon will be preached in St. Simon's' Chapel, Sir Thomas' Buildings, to which "the children of the House of Israel" are invited, and that two converted Jews will be baptised on the occasion, making a total of seventeen siiuce• the above place •was •opened for divine worship, under the ministry of time Rev. H. S Joseph. We rejoice to find that so many dthe Jews in this town have been led to embrace christi-• anity. Several others are now inquiring after the truth and under probation, previously to their admission into the christian church. It is gratifying to witness such conclusive evidence of the futility of those arguments which have been so much pressed upon the christian public to dissuatk them from all exertions for the conversion of the Jews. LIVERPooL AND NEIV YORK STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY. —Great surprise has been expressed, that Liverpool, which is so intimately connected with New York, should have allowed London and Bristol to get the start of her in the enterprise -to navigate the Atlantic with steam-ships. We understand that a company has been started in Liverpool, under the 113 Me of the "Liverpool and New York Steam Navigation Company," who propose to build steam-ships for the purpose oft tinning between Liverpool and New York. We trust that the scheme will pros per, and that Liverpool will, at length, take proper place in keeping up and facilitating the intercourse between the Oil and the New 'World. We are evidently on the eve of a revolution in transatlantic navigation. STEAM NAVIGATION ACROSS THE ATLANTIC.—We have in setted, in another place, an account of the departure of the Sirius steam-ship, from Cork to New York. She is expected to reach that city about the 20th inst., and the Great Western, steam.ship, which was to take her departure from Bristol on Saturday, about the same time. The Sirius is' it will be seen, chartered by the British and American Steam Navigation Corn- . paiiv, who, through the failure of a party in Glasgow, a ere un able to get their own steam-ship ready at the time they expected. - The Victoria, one of their steam-ships, of which an account is •• given in another page, is building at. Limehouse, on the Thames. • She is expected to be ready in a month or two, and will, when . fully equipped, take her departure front Liverpool for New York. • Of the practicability of navigating the Atlantic by steam-vessels there can be no doubt : the only question to be settled is, will it pay. if it will, steamships will, in a very short time. monopo." lize the conveyance of passengers and light goods between the Old and the New Work!. The experiment as to the practica bility of steam-vessels crossing the Atlantic as well as to their paying their enterprising owners will be fairly tried during the present year.—ALiva. LIVE TuntioT.—We are requested to contridict the fiilloning paragraph, which appeared in the Chronicle, or Saturday I,w " LIVE TuttuoT.—We are happy to announce to our readers, that. during the ensuing week, they will have au opportunity of obtaining that delicious luxury—live turbot, at an exceedingly low price. Mr. Newton, 14, St. John's Fish Market, has; we believe, received an abundant supply, at prices varying from uinepence to a shilling per pound."—We are assured, that no such article has been recently imported into Liverpool. We are also informed, that it is not true that the Coleraine and Port rush Salmon Fishery has been let, as announced in a former number of the same paper. POLITICAL UmoNs.—At the Warwick Assizes on Monday last, Mr. Justice Park, in the case of Forty v. Allport, said, that political unions were disgraceful to all men who were members of them, and ruinous to the country. As an bid man, he re commended all young men to avoid any connection with them. A hs mu OF FlRE.—Early on Saturday morning„ a dense smoke was perceived by oneof the workmen who sleeps on the premises of the extensive colour works of Messrs. J. and J. Taylor, Sed don-street. He inpantly aroused Mr. Goldsmith, the principal assistant, who, without waiting for his clothes, fortunately suc ceeded, by dint of great exertion and presence of mind, in ex timmishing the flames before they had committed any consider able damage to the properly. B - ut for this prompt interference there can be no doubt, from the inflammable nature of the ma terials used on the works, a mo i st disastrous conflagration must have ensued. THIF. DISPENSARIEs.—There is, it will be seen by the adver tisement, a vacancy among the physicians belonging to these institutions. Dr. Nicholson, uho has held the situation of phy sician for sevent4rryearS, has found himself under the necessity,' from the pressure of his private practice to resign his office into" the hands of the committee. We understand, front gentienten' whose connexion with the institutions has given them ample means of observation, that Dr. Nicholson has, during his lung► period of servitude, displayed the greatest zeal in the performance of his 'plolessional duties, and that the committee, while they recognise the necessity, regret the fact of the resignation of so skilful and zealous en otficer.—Albion. '1'141; NORTH UNION RAILWAY.—This greatfundertaking is in rapid progress towards, completion ;.and notwithstanding the xnany unforeseen 'and unfavourable circumstances that have, from•Aitne• to time, retarded the works, the whole line will probably be opened towards the end of August.• • • CoAL-PiT Tuesda.y last, Thomas Longworth and Joseph •Lawton, two colliers, went into the pit at Fat ti.ortho nei:r Bolton, to makesothe repairs in the walloluring the atsvuce of the workmen; when either trom want of caution ni taking out the bricks and stones, or by misadventure, a great portion of ine wall fell down with such force as to carry Lon , ' rworth • along with it out of the tub in which be stood ;'and haYingforced 7 - the timber in which the : conducting rod is fastened, the• whole was precipitated to the bottom: Lawton remained in the,tot, ; hat when brought out, both men were dead. Lawton has left a widow and one child, and Longworth a widuurand three children, to bewail their less. JARDINE V. WNFiILE AND ANOTHER. This was an action brought for a breach of contract in the non-fulfilment of a charter-party. The plaintiff chartered a vessel with the, defendants, the vessel being then at sea on her way to New York; that the vessel, (the Eliza Grant,) if she had not taken in a cargo before the intelligence of the charter reached the captain, was to proceed to Richibucto, and take in a cargo of yellow pine timber and bring it to Liverpool. The intelligence of the charter went out, and arrived in New York before the Eliza Grant. The captain, however, was short of money, and his owners had made no provision for him, so was obliged to break the charter, and take a cargo of timber front Miratnichi, for which he received an order. The case was not fully gone into, but was referred, and a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to a reference. . BRADLEY V. HOULDSWORiTH. This was an action brought to recover asn - tn of £439 17s. 6'l. part of the amount of a bill of Exchange for £772 Os. 6d. It appeared, that in the month of April, 1836, the plaintiff and de fendant entered into a contract respecting ten shares in the London and Birmingham Railway, by which the defendant agreed to sell to the plaintiff the shares in question at a distance of time of six months, at £i.s premium, the plaintiff paying for them in a bill of Exchange, to become due at the time of the sale of the shares. Afterwards the contract was altered to five shares instead of ten. The defendant wrote to his agent in London to purchase the shares, and two were transferred to the plaintiff. The plaintiff, meantime, had given - a hill for £772 Os. 6d. in payment. The defendant for want of money was un able to complete his purchase of the remaining three shares in London, and had discounted the bill given by the plaintiff, which, when it became due, the plaintiff had to take up to the full amount. The present action was brought to recover the balance of the bill after the price of the two shares transferred had been subtracted front the amount. Verdict for the plaintiff £439 17s. 6d.' CASE AND OTHERS V. PHILLIPS. The action in this case was to try whether Messrs. Case and others, the assignees of Messrs. Hardisty and Ki!straw, were entitled' to recover interest on an amount of money which Messrs. Phillips and Co. had in their hands belonging to Har disty and Co. Hardisty and Co. formerly curried on business at Buenos Ayres, and Phillips and Co. had a house at Monte Video. Hardisty and Co. sent out a cargo to Buenos Ayres, but owing to that port being blockaded, the goods were landed at Monte Video, and Messrs. Phillips and Co. sold the cargo. It appeared there had been a long-running account betvieen Messrs. Hardisty and Co. and Messrs. .Philiips and Co., gene rally in favour of Hardisty and Co., and that they charged 18 per cent. interest on both sides for money advanced by either party. But eatly in January, 1831, on the lauding of the cargo of Hardisty and Co. Monte Video; the balance of account be came turned greatly in favour of Hardisty and Co., and then the defendants refused to allow Hardisty and Co. 18 per cent., the usual interest of the country, but contended that it was not usual to pay interest to English merchants, or at most, that 5 percent. was all they ought to pay. The amount claimed, was interest upon £533, the baiance in the hands of the defendant at Monte Vide. Interest was 'claimed to June 33, at 18 per cent., at which time the money was alleged to have been remit ted by the defendants to their agents; and from that time to May, 35, at five per cent., at which time the principal was invested in Exchequer bills. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff with 18 per bent. interest till the money was remitted, and 5 per cent afterwards, till it was invested. CORLETT, PUBLIC OFFICER, &C. V. AM DDO:.:1( AND ANOTHER. This was an action hrought by Thomas Arthur Corlett, the public officer of the North a•nd South Wales back against Daniel Maddock and a person ntoutl Edwards;. to recover front them £4,700, advanced to them by the North and South \Vales Banking Company. It appeared•-that the Clwyd and Liver-. pool Steam Packet Company were anxious ►o-purchase a steam boat for the use of the company, and sent Maddock and Ed wards to Glasgow to purchase a steam boat. These two indi viduals, having credit on the North and South \Vales Bank to the amount of £5OOO, purchased a boat for 1.:4700, and a bill was drawn by the seller on the company, and accepted by the company, and duly honoured; and now the action was brought by the Banking Company to recover this amount. For the defence, it was contended thatthe Clwyd and Liverpool Steam Packet Company gave a i;uarrantee for the amount to the Bank, and that the action ought to have been brought against the Clwyd Steam Packet Company, and not against these, individuals, who acted merely as their agents. Edwards had suffered judgment to, go by default. The bank cau►e.on the other defendant as the person who accepted the bill, and as one of the shareholders. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £4700. GRIFFITHS V. VEGAN AND ANOTHER-WIGAN LAW. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Alexander and Mr. Wightman for the defendants. The decimation stated, that JosepVGriffiths was the plain tiff, and Richard F egan an d J o h n Whittle the defendants; that the defendants assaulted the plaintiff, and dragged him through the town, and forced him to go to a certain Coon-hail, and 'there imprisoned him, to which the defendant pleaded not guilty; and,second, that the outrages were committed by hint in the execution of the-duties of his office; and that within a calendar month he tendered the plaintiff £5 amends, which the plaintiff refused to have. The plaintiff denied the tender. - -- Mr. CitasswELL, in opening the case, said, this was an attion brought by a Mr. Griffiths; whom he understood to be a person of great respectability, filling his position in society.with- tlie respect of all those to whom he - was known. In the town of Wigan, Mr. Griffiths edited a newspaper called the Wigan Ga zette. lie was so much in the enjoyment of the esteem of his fellow neighbours and townsmen, that he also filled the office of churchwarden. Mr. Fegan Was one in high station, being one of those to whom the important office of Magistrate was assigned under the new jurisdiction there. - Mr. Whittle was the chief constable. Sorry was he to detail to them the subject matter of this ingeiry,'lrecause it was always grievous to him to have to bring before a jury a complaint against any one filling the high station of magistrate. it was a most im portant office, and he for one had always been of opinion that it was of the utmost importance to the web-being of society i❑ this country that those holding that office, should so connin:t themselves as to secure the admiration of the public by the calm and dispassionate administration of the laWs.. And he thought that the jury would - say that Mr. Fegan, iu his conduct to Air. Griffiths, had totally forgotten the duty which was incumbent on him as a magistrate, and, instead of using his lamer for the purpose of protecting those placed under his.superintendeni!e as a magistrate, had exerted that power, or, rather, by the exer cise of a power wholly unentrusted to him b, law, hiid, with tha r