Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-19 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL BANKRUPTCY COURT. the amount of the purchase money for the Sardinian, and that on the day of payment, fully a month after wards, the Borough Bank's debt had increased to £14,000, leaving, notwithstanding, upwards of £5,000 for them to draw out of the bank, independently of any other source, to pay Mr. Denny ; and to a question why he did not, according to his promise, take up the bill due on the 19th of June, he replied, because much more delay took place in obtaining payment of the purchase money than he had anticipated ; and that the advances by the Borough Bank had increased to the sum he had stated; and that in the meantime the other bill had matured, and Mr. Denny refused to receive anything less than the whole money. The bankrupt Lamont also stated that, about ten days before the bankruptcy he offered Mr. Denny one-half of the sum then due to him, and security for the balance, and that this offer was made personally and through a friend, a Mr. Thompson, who agreed to pay off the sum of £12,000 due' on security of the Italian (which had been purchased for £24,000 and since sold for £20,000), and to take a transfer of this vessel, so as to make it available (as I presume) for a security to Mr. Denny, subject to this £12,000, by which, as Mr. Lamont states, there would be left a margin sufficient to cover Mr.:Denny's .e 5,000 proposed ,to be secured to him; and it appears that Mr. Thompson went to Dumbarton to make this proposal on the 23rd of August, and remained there until the 27th, endeavouring to induce Mr Denny to accept this offer ; but Mr. Denny refused all approaches on the subject, stating that he would have all the money, or they were to take the consequences. Now, here also the court is left to rest upon the sole testimony of Mr. Lamont and upon the assumption that Mr. Denny cannot contradict it, but which as I have before observed, is entitled to full credit ; and upon consideration of all the facts as they are thus supported, it does not appear to me that there is any grouud for this charge of false pretence, for at the time when the promise of payment out of the proceeds of the Sardinian was made, whether it is to be considered as a promise to provide for only the bill then due, or both that and the one coming due, it is not, I think, too much to suppose that it was made bona fide upon the full expectation that, notwithstanding the security to the Borough Bank, there would, at the time the promise was made, be enough left out of the proceeds, or nearly so, to meet even both bills ; and it is shown that it was in consequence only of the increase of the debt due to the Borough Bank since the sale, that the balance of the proceeds became insufficient to meet more than £5,000 towards the payment of both the bills. The next objection for consideration is that taken on behalf of Messrs. Bost, namely, that their debt, amounting altogether to £1,640, was contracted whilst the bank rupts were in a hopeless state of insolvency. This debt arose out of certain orders for iron given by the bankrupts to Messrs. Bost, in the following manner :—On the 7th of July, 1856, orders were given for two shipments, for which the bankrupts' acceptance was taken on the Bth August, at 14 days, for the slim of£BB2 is 6d; and on the 12th of August following, another order was given for a shipment, for which their acceptance was taken on the 25th August, at 14 days, for the sum of £760 ; the date of such accep tances being the periods when the respective orders were executed, and the bills of lading were delivered. Both of these acceptances having been dishonoured, the amounts constitute the debt in question. There had been a previous order for iron given on the 9th of June, 1856, amounting to £942, for which the bankrupts' acceptance had been taken on the 17th of July ; but this acceptance was met at maturity. All these shipments were alleged by the bankrupts to have been made in consequence of orders from their correspondents at Genoa and Marseilles, although made on their own account, though Messrs. Bost seemed to have entertained some doubt of this, and to have considered some charge could be made against the bankrupts on this subject, though not persisted its. But from the examinations of the bankrupt M'Kean it would appear that some such order had been given ; and of course, therefore, no objection could be sustained on this ground. Some objection was also pro posed to be made on the ground that these shipments were intended originally to have been made for cash, and not upon any terms of credit, and there has been con siderable discussion on this subject ; but I cannot under stand what objection could now be made upon this ground, seeing that, whatever might have been Messrs. Bost's original intention on their executing these orders, they afterwards consented to take the bankrupts' acceptances, and, indeed, their letters show that they were willing to take further orders upon credit ; and of course, therefore, no objection can now be made upon this subject, it not being even alleged that they were induced to take these acceptances upon any misrepresentation ; nor should I have thought it necessary to refer to any objection made on these grounds, which might be considered to have been abandoned, had they not been made the subject of con siderable discussion, and referred to by counsel on behalf of Messrs. Bost & Co., in his address to the court. Another subject calls for some remark from me in consequence also of its having been much pressed in the argument, although, like other charges referred to, it was merely insinuated, and not expressly mentioned as an objection. The point I now allude to is that relating to the application of the bankrupts to Messrs, :Bost to advance £5OO, to enable them to take up the before mentioned bill for £BB2, falling due on the 25th of August last, which it has been insinu ated was made without any bona fide intention of applying it to such purposes, or without the bankrupts having the means of providing the remainder to take up the bill, thus to defraud Messrs. Bost & Co. of this sum. This amounts to a charge of too serious a nature to be allowed to rest upon a mere implication, and I therefore propose to con eider the grounds upon which it is founded. It appears that two days before this bill fell due, the bankrupts, not being prepared to meet it. aneo;ee by letter to Messrs . bush Le eurance tnem tens sum of Xooe, me enne.a. ~..0.,, L 6 retire this bill. But this Messrs. Bost at first refused to do, and did so more than once, on being frequently ap plied to ; but on the 25th of August, the day the bill became due, the bankrupts telegraphed to Messrs. Bost, proposing, in order to give them a few days to get the needful from Marseilles, to pass a cash order upon them for £5OO, and to send their acceptance, so that the bill might be regularly retired. To this Messrs. Bost replied by telegraph, "Do as you propose," and consequently, as the bankrupt M'Kean states in his examination, relying upon his assent to their request, they (the bankrupts) passed to their bankers (the Borough Bank) a check upon Messrs. Bost for £5OO, informing them that they should require the amount early the following morning ; and on the manager of the bank ask. ing the bankrupts whether they were certain it would be paid, they showed him the telegraph answer of Messrs. Bost, and assured him that it would be all right; and the bankrupts, by letter of the same date, informed Messrs. Bost that they had passed this cheque, requesting them to honour it on the morrow early, and forwarded their ac ceptance for the amount. But on calling on the following morning at the bank, they were informed that they had just received a telegraphic message from Glasgow, stat ing that the cheque had been dishonoured, and the bank of course refused to provide the bankrupts with the funds to take up the bill, and thus as the bankrupt states, their credit with the bank. became materially affected. Mr. Bost, on the same day that he sent his answer by telegraph, left Glasgow for Liverpool, and left instructions with his brother and partner not to honour the cheque unless he received ,a telegraph message from him to do so, and this message he never sent, in conse quence of which the cheque was dishonoured. Mr Bost states that the reason why, after having refused to make the advance, he at last agreed to do so, was because he thought the bankrupts were pressed temporarily, and that he would give them a little time. On the following day (the 26th of August) Mr. Bost had several interviews with the bankrupts, when they still proposed to retire the bill if Mr. Bost would honour the cheque, the dishonour of which Mr. M`Kean alleges they had received notice of from the bank, and had communicated to Mr. Bost before they made any further application for the £5OO, though Mr. Bost denies this. But Mr. Bost still refused to make the advance, and proposed (if the bankrupt would hand him over the £382 to retire the bill himself and hold it over a few days. Mr. Bost states that the reason why he did not direct the cheque to be honoured was that the bankrupts would give him no security that they would employ the amount of the cheque in retiring this acceptance. Mr. Bost also states that he proposed to the bankrupt M'Kean to go together to the telegraph office, and to deposit the money there to advise the bill, but the bankrupts would only promise to take up the bill if he would provide them with the £5OO, and they stated that they had no money, because the nonpayment of the cheque at Glasgow had affected their credit. The bankrupt Lamont states that at his interview with Mr. Bost on the 26th August, after being informed by him that he had been with his partners, M'Larty and MlCean, about this bill of £382 is 6d, and getting some explanation from them, he told Mr. Bost that he had acted very wrong in not carrying nut hia agrooment to advance the £5OO, and he thinks Mr. Bost asked him if he did so would he (Mr. Lamont) give his word that the bill should be taken up, to which he replied that he would see to it personally, and that it should positively be done, and that this was the substance of what passed between them, and that this was after Mr. M'Kean had satisfied him that he was prepared to carry out the offer ; and Mr. Lamont also states in a subsequent part of his examination that he at that time had referred to his partners for expla nation of the facts regarding the transactions with Mr. Bost, and which he had received from them. In a subsequent examination, the bankrupt Lamont states, in answer to a question whether arrange ments had been actually made with the Borough Bank that morning or the day before for the taking up that bill, if Mr. Bost had honoured the check in due course, that he could only answer that by saying that he heard so from Mr. M'Kean at the time. Now, taking all these statements into consideration, I cannot come to the con• elusion that there was any intention to defraud Messrs. Bost in respect of this proposed advance of £5OO, but that it was applied for with the bona fide intent of appro. priating it to the purpose proposed, and upon the fair expectation that with the assistance of this advance they would be furnished by the Borough Bank with the means of retiring this bill, which object was wholly frustrated by the very extraordinary course that Mr. Bost chose to pursue in allowing his cheque to be dishonoured, when he was of courso fully aware that it was the intention of the bankrupts to pass it to their bankers towards enabling them to retire the bill; and the circumstance of this cheque being dishonoured after the bank had been assured of its being duly paid, would of course seriously injure their credit with the bank, and deprive them of the very means by which they then expected to carry out their proposal; so that whatever blaraP, 'might be considered to (BEFORE MR. COMMISSIONER STEVENSON.) In re 11PLAR'FY AND Co.—His Honour delivered judg ment on the certificate in this case at twelve o'clock yester day. Mr. Fletcher appeared for the assignees ; Mr. Danson, instructed by Messrs. Squarey, Duncan, and Squarey, for Mr Denny, of Dumbarton, and Bost and Co., of Glasgow; Mr. Aspinall, instructed by Mr. E. Banner, for Mr. .Lamont ; Mr. Almond, for Mr. M'Larty ; and Mr. John Yates, jun., for Mr. M`Kean. His Honour said—The certificates'of these bankrupts are opposed as well on behalf of Mr. Allan, on general grounds, at one of the trade assignees —the other assignee, Mr. Cox, having withdrawn his intended opposition— as also on behalf of certain other creditors, on special grounds, in reference to their respective debts, namely, Mr. Alexander Denny, of Dumbarton, ship-builder ; Messrs. Bost and Co., of Glasgow, merchants and Messrs. Irving, Ebsworth, and Holmes, of London, mer chants. The general grounds of objection taken by IVIi.. Fletcher (of the firm of Fletcher and Hull), on behalf of the assignee, are, trading without capital, reckless trading, dealing in accommodation bills, fraudulent or undue preferences, negligent bookkeeping, and lastly, the conflicting accounts given by the bankrupts of por tions of their transactions and liabilities. The specific grounds of objection taken by Mr. Dauson (as counsel on behalf of Mr. Denny and of Messrs. Bost and Co.), are as follow :—First, on behalf of Mr. Denny, that the bank ruptsThave, by false pretences, obtained his forbearance as a creditor, thereby constituting an offence within the 3rd clause of the 256th section of the Bankrupt Act ; and secondly, on behalf of Messrs. Bost and Co., that their debt was contracted when the bankrupts were not only in a state of insolvency, but after all reasonable prospects of surmounting their difficulties had ceased. The spe cific grounds of objection taken on behalf of Messrs. Irving, Ebsworth, and Holmes (and for whom Mr. Fletcher also appeared) are, that the goods sup plied by them to the bankrupts were obtained at the time they were hopelessly insolvent, and were improperly dealt with by advances being immediately obtained upon them, and paid over by the bankrupts by way of preference to their bankers. I propose, in the first instance, to consider the grounds upon which the specific objections are founded ; and first, as to the objection taken on behalf of Mr. Denny, which arises ont of the following circumstances :—ln the month of September, 1855, the bankrupts agreed with Mr. Denny to purchase a screw-steamer then building by him, and nearly ready for launching, and intended to be called the Sardinian, at the price of £22,500, to be paid for as follows :—One fourth, or £5,625 in cash when launched; a like sum in cash when the vessel was delivered complete ; a like sum by bill at four months' date ; and the like sum, being the remainder of the purchase money, by bill at nix months' date, all the terms of which purchase was reduced into writing, and by the sixth stipula tion it was provided that the bills for the two last instalments were to be renewed by the builder, each for four months, if required by the purchasers, and at their expense, and by the seventh stipulation it was provided, that 30-64 shares were to remain on the register in the name of Mr. Denny, as security for the payment of the bills, and until the same were paid, Mr. Denny signing a declaration that he held such shares for such purposes, in trust, and undertaking to re-transfer the shares, or any part of them, as the bill or bills were retired, the remain ing 34-64 shares to be registered in the name of the pur chasers, on payment of the second instalment. The first two instalments of this purchase money have been paid, and bills were given for the other instalments, both of which were renewed according to the agree ment, and such renewed bills became die, one for £5,725, on the 19th June, 1856, and the other for £5,275, on the 19th August following, and in respect of these bills Mr. Denny is now a creditor on this estate for the sum of £11,475. Mr. Denny's name has never been placed on the register of this vessel, accord ing to the seventh stipulation. But this was not done because (as Mr. Lamont alleges in his examination) Mr. Denny dispensed with the performance of this seventh stipulation, by acts as well as words, though not by writ ing. as was the case in respect of some of the other stipu lations. It would seem, however, from the tenor of the examination of Mr. Lamont, by Mr. Denson, on Mr. Denny's behalf, that Mr. Denny disputes that he has ever dispensed with this clause. But Mr. Lamont's testimony, I think, clearly shows that it was understood between him and Mr. Denny that this clause was either dispensed with or that the non-fulfilment of it was acquiesced in by Mr. Denny ; and this is, I think, strongly corroborated by the fact of his having, on the 18th of October last, signed the usual certificate as the builder of this vessel, certifying M`Larty and Co. to be the first purchasers thereof, by which means they were enabled to have the vessel registered in their own sole names. It was urged that this certificate was signed inadvertently, so far as it was intended to give the bankrupts a right to obtain the registry of the vessel in their own name. But I scarcely think much reliance should be placed on this argument, seeing that, in the course of Mr. Denny's business, he must have been called upon to sign many like certificates, and to have acquired a full knowledge of the effects of them. And, besides this the circumstance of the bills having been renewed affords, I think, a strong presumption that Mr. Denny had acquiesced in his name not being placed on the register, as it might be fairly sup posed he would never have assented to these renewals had he not so acquiesced ; and it is to be observed that the complaint which Mr. Lamont admitted to have been made by Mr. Denny, that his name was not pieeea on the register, was not made until after the first renewed bill became due, and then in consequence only of his bankers, on their being applied to by Mr. Denny, to discount the proposed further renewal of the bill, requiring that his name should be placed on the register. And again, the circumstances referred to by Mr. Lamont on his examination, that Mr. Denny had been informed that a power of attorney was given to Mr. IVl`Larty to sell this vsssel at Constantinople, also tends to show that Mr. Denny must have been aware that his name could not have been on the register, for how otherwise could the Power of attorney have been sufficient without his jeinedly in the power ? It was expected and understood that Mr Denny, who was present during the examination of Mr. Lamont, would have tendered himself for examina tion upon this subject, when he would have had the op portunity of contradicting Mr. Lamont's testimony, if he thought proper ; but he was (as he alleges) called away by a telegraph message, and returned to Scotland with out communicating with his solicitor, and although an opportunity was afforded to him to give his testimony on a subs quent day, by this case being adjourned ex pressly for that purpose, yet he did not think proper to avail himself of it. This circumstance has natu rally given occasion for remark on the part of the counsel and solicitors on behalf of the bankrupts ; and after the charges apparently insinuated on his behalf, and no doubt according to his instructions, and consider ing his position as the principal opposing creditor, his absence, voluntarily, as it was ultimately at all events, if not in the first instance, may scarcely be considered to be free from censure. Assuming, therefore, as I feel justified in doing, that Mr. Denny was not prepared to contradict any of Mr. Lamont's statements, and which, from the very straightforward and satisfactory manner in which they were given, appear to me to be entitled to full credit, no objection on this ground can, I think, be considered to exist, and which indeed may be treated as having been abandoned, if ever seriously entertained, though it has been prominently referred to in the course of the obser vatioes of counsel, and for which reason, and as it involves a serious charge, I have thought it necessary to enter thus fully into the consideration of the subject. With regard to the objection which is still insisted upon ou Mr. Denny's behalf, namely, that of his forbearance having been ob tained upon false pretences, this relates to the before mentioned renewed bills which fell due on the 19th of June and the 19th of August, 1856. It appears that shortly before the first mentioned renewed bill became due the ban krupts applied to Mr. Denny to renew it, and for. warded to him their acceptances at three months in re newal thereof. Thi s Mr. Denny declined to do, although not (as has be en b efore referred to) until after he had endeavoured to negociate this further proposed renewal at his bankers; and t hi s renewal, it appears, earshe has not returned, but is still in his hands. The ground of objec tion taken on Mr. Denny's behalf is, that he was induced to forbear enforcing the payment of this bill and the other bill which fell due on the 19th of August, on the faith of the promises of the bankrupts, more particularly by the bankrupt Lamont, that these bills should be paid out of - the proce e d s o f the Sardinian when sold, and which pro mises, as it is a ll eged, they had the power' of fulfilling, by reason of their h av i ng in tho previous given a bill of sa l e o f this vessel to the securing the bal ance ultimately due Borough to them Bank and the for amount of whi c h security, on the completion Of the sale and the receipt of th e purchase money, swallowed up nearly the whole of the proceeds. Now, Mr. Lamont, in his examination on this subject, states that from the very first Mr. Denny knew that they, the bankrupts, in tended having a number of co.() wners of this and another vessel which they afterwards purch ase d ; and that imme diately on purchasing this second vessel they took steps and got subscribers to the extent of the value of one ship, and that itw as quite understood between him (Mr. Denny) and the bankrupts that he would give more time for the payment of the bills if required, and that he (I'dr. Denny) had stated so distinctly to all of them, and that his refusal to renew the bill due on the 19th of June took them by surprise at th e l as t mome nt ; and further, that it had been subsequently proposed that the bankrupts should give a letter stating that Mr. Denny's name on the register should hber vessel belonging to them, called the Italian, the bills nt of e considere payment to secure the payment the payment in of that vessel, but likewise renewal co of those for the Sardinian, including the which the bill that had been recently dishonoured, Ourse the bankrupt explained to have been ren dered necessary islt3ecause one of the owners, whose absent, and therefore a of the Italian as security, was _ rupts intended and bill of sale could not be made, as the bank rupts on that vessel Lamont was ende had arranged, so as to pay off all the ; and it was about this time that Mr. did about the avouring to sell the Sardinian, which he It does not appe middle of July, for the sum of £19,250. ar that this letter of security was ever , char has it traiven, does charge has been made against why it was not ; but no respect. The bank rupt Lagainst the bankrupts in this the sale they ow e d ;the ;Borough states that on the day of Banh about one-half of be attributable to them in not having more surely pro- favour the bank. This very circumstance, of the bank vided for the payment of this bill, it is not for Mr. Bost to rupts continuing their payments into their bankers hands, complain that they could not carry out this proposal, as usual, I think alone affords (as it has been strongly which he by his own conduct had been the means of pre- argued) a fair presumption that no bankruptcy could have venting them from doin. I consider therefore that the bankrupts are wholly exonerated from any charge been then in contemplation. For these reasons, I consider on this subject. 1 come now to the considera- that the objections taken on the part of Messrs. Irving and tion of the graunds upon which the objection Co,, are also unsupported. Having disposed of the several actually persisted in on behalf of Messes. Bost specific objections taken to these bankrupts certificates, I is founded. This objection is founded upon the now proceed to the consideration of the general objections alleged hopeless insolvency of the firm at the time taken on the part of one of the trade assignees. And first, that Messrs. Bast's debt was contracted, and for the as to trading without capital: The bankrupts, in their purpose of this question the respective periods when the balance sheet, profess to show that in April, 1851, when the orders were given for the iron in respect of which this new firm of 111•Larty and Co. commenced, and when the debt was contracted must, I think, be regarded as the bankrupt M'Kean first joined the concern, they possessed a time when this insolvency should be shown to have ex- capital of £4,802. This was not such an amount of capital isted. The counsel on behalf of Messrs. Best deemed it as so extensive a concern would seem to have required; proper, in respect to this objection, to refer to the state but it may be regarded as sufficient to jusiify them con of the bankrupts' affairs in the month of March, 1854, tinuing a business which the othsr bankrupts, M'Larty being the commencement of their belance•sheet, and and Lamont, had succeeding in establishing, with every when the business commenced wieh the recent firm of fair prospect of probable success. But it is urged M'Larty and Co., and proposed to show that their affairs that the bankrupts are not justified in bringing the were not even then in a solvent state ' • but supposing item of £17, 200 into the capital account, as part o f that to have been the case, though without meaning in their assets ; and that, consequently, by leaving out this place to enter into the consideration of that subject, that item (as it is contended they ought) they would it appears to me that the present question ought to be be shown to have been insolvent to the extent of the considered wholly irrespective of the state of the bank- difference between this sum and the alleged balance, rupt's affairs at that period, and the question of the being ahout £12,398. This item is composed of two sums propriety of any debts being subsequently contracted of £7 200 and £lO,OOO —the former being described in can and ought only to depend upon tho state of their the balance -sheep, and by the bankrupts in their exa affairs at the time. Now, iii the first place, there seems urination, as an amount agreed to be paid by the Cana to be no question but that the order for the iron dian Steam Navigation Company for the transfer of a forming the subject of this debt constituted a part of mail contract between the Canadian government and the the legitimate business of the bankrupts, consisting in former firm of M'Kean, M'Larty and Co , for the payment the employment of their own and chartered vessels in of a subsidy o f £24,00 per annum for the establishment the transmission of goods of every description and to and use of a line of steamers, for which transfer the firm all parts in respect of which any profit might be hoped were to have 5 per cent. on that sum of £24,000 for six to be gained, and the iron in question was regularly con- years ; and the other sum of £lO,OOO is describe 1 as the signed to correspondents of the bankrupts, according to estimated value of agencies of steamers, at least £5,000 orders or suggestions from them, and in whose custody a year, at two years' purchase. This agencywas stipulated this iron still remains ; so that it can only be on the fo r in the transfer of the above contract, and for which the ground that the affairs of the bankrupts were so ember- fi r m o f M'Kean, M`Larty, and Co. were to have certain rassed and in such a hopeless state of insolvency that commissions on the gross earnings of the steamers, which they ought to have stopped and ceased to carry on their th e b an krupts estimated at the above sum of £5,000 a year. business at the time they gave these or ders for iron that Upon this contract a sum of about £B,OOO for commissions the present objection can be supported. The very im- and otherwise hes been received from the Canadian portant judgment of Lord Chief Justice Knight Bruce company under this contract, and further sums are in ex parts. Johnson, to which I have so frequently had expected to be received. Now, therefore, although there occasion to refer in cases similar to the present, has been may be some question whether the benefit of this contract, quoted on behalf of the bankrupts, showing how diffi- and at the estimate placed upon it, is, strictly speaking, an cult it is to say when a trader, although in an ember- asset, yet I think it may, as it has been forcibly argued, rassed state, ought to cease carrying on business, and that be considered in the nature of property sufficiently to it can only be when his affairs are in a hopeless state warrant the bankrupts in calculating upon it as a means to of insolvency that he can be considered under an oblige- be relied upon, from dine to time, towards carrying on tion to cease trading. Now, it appears that the only their business; and, therefore, looking at the whole of the bill which has been dishonoured at the periods when the position of the bankrupts at the time of this new partner orders for this iron were given was that of Mr. Denny's ship, which then lead a fair appearance of prosperity, I for £5,751 16s, which fell due on the 19th of June, 1836. think that this objection as to want of capital, is not sue- It is true the other bills of Mr. Denny and Mr Falk, the tained. Next, with regard to the charge of reckless trading, petitioning creditor, became due very shortly afterwards, and with which may be considered the general charge and, indeed, before the delivery of the bills of lading on the referred to, that the bankrupts have continued to carry on Bth and 22nd August, and it is possible that at the periods business after they werehopelessly insolvent. It is not shown of these orders, or before the bills of lading were delivered, in which particular instances this reckless trading, is suffered the bankrupts might not be considered as being sure of to have occurred. 1 presume it is considered to consist in being able to meet these bills, so that the bankrupts' affairs the very large tr , nsactions in which the bankrupts hive might not then be deemed to be free from embarrassment ; entered into, the impropriety of which is deemed to be but recollecting the peculiar circumstances attending Mr. shown by the heavy losses which have been sustained by Denny's bills, and the fair hopes that the bankrupts had at the bankrupts, but this is scarcely a fair way of judging one time of having them again renewed asd of subsequently whether the trading has been beyond the ordinary and providing for them, either wholly out of the proceeds of the legitimate bounds of carrying on business of so extensive a Sardinian, or partly so, and of giving some satisfactory a nature as that of the bankrupts ; and when it is consi security for the difference, it cannot, I think, be con- dered the heavy losses that have been sustained were sidered that their affairs were in a hopeless state of in- occasioned principally by the sudden termination of the solvency until not only after these bills of Mr. Denny's late wa - , which of course disarranged the whole of had become due, but until all negotiation for their renewal, their transaction, which had been so greatly extended in or for their satisfaction or security, had faille 1 ; and it is consequence of the war, and which it may be difficult to to be observed that it was not until the 27th of August consider to bo beyond the legitimate bounds of their that Mr Thompson's endeavours on behalf of the bankrupts business, lam not prepared to say that the bankrupts to make some arrangement with Denny entirely failed, and can be fairly charged with having so traded as to bring no doilies (as it has been observed) this total failure to upon them the censure of this court, and as to he general make any terms with Mr. Denny was the principal and charge of having carried on business too long, I have already immediate cause of their stoppage , and I think it is not adverted to the grounds upon which I consider the bank shown that before this total failure the bankrupts were rupts were entitled to continue their business whilst they imperatively called upon to give up all hopes of retrieving had fair hopes of retrieving their difficulties, and which themselves ; for although Mr. Falk, whose bill fell due on considering the peculiar nature of this business requir the 17th of August, had issued a trader debtor's summons ing the personal exertions and talents of the bankrupts, against the bankrupts, yet it appears that they had some may perhaps (as it has been very forcibly urged), be deemed reason for considering they had an objection to the payment to be such a case as might warrant a longer continuance of part of this bill, on the ground of its including some and struggle than what might be 'warranted in many freight which they had been compelled to pay to other other instances. The next objection for consideration parties ; and there is therefore little doubt that had they is dealing in accommodation bills. This applies to settled with Mr. Denny they could have in some way bill transactions between the bankrupts and a Mr. avoided any serious consequences from this claim only, M'Millan, trading under the firm of M'Millan and Co., but to which, in consequence of this failure to arrange and a Mr. James Taylor, trading under the firm of with Mr. Denny, they seemed to have succumbed, by Taylor and Co. As to the bills with M'Milan, the bank failing to appear at this court on the day fixed for their rupt M'Kean denies they were accommodation, asserting appearance to this summons, namely, the Ist September, that they were drawn against coal supplied to Mr. i'er. , Milan, and thus on that day committed an act of bankruptcy, who was a co-adventurer with the bankrupts in certain the seven days from the service of the summons coal transactions, and also in respect of the purchase having then expired, and which act of bankruptcy was money for M'Millan's shares in the Cleopatra and other actually taken advantage of in the afternoon of the same vessels. Mr. M'Millan, certainly, in his examination, day when the petition for the adjudication was filed. states that these bills were, probably, to some extent, Under all these circumstances, therefore, and in accord- accommodation bills; but there is some dispute between ance with the view taken in the cited case of ex parte him and the bankrupts M'Kean and Lamont as to his Johnson, I have come to the conclusion that this charge liability for some loss in respect to this Cleopotra, and in a asa 6 in ti s ti U s te e tenkrats,,, made on c M on e s s i s u r g r .?t , ljzfat_te_rs , w_hic?..involv . e , s ii; a question whether he is a that taken by Mr. Fletcher on ale i tese e e a R t set, ion l i d Ebsworth, and Holmes, which arises under the following erneau sun Lamont, and the bankrupt M'Larty, who is Messrs. Irving, there is also a difference of opinion between trig dßuZilitit circumstances :—On the sth of May, 1856, the bankrupts brother-in-law to mr.M•Millan, and upon which the character had ordered from the firm of Messrs. Oates and Co., of of thosebills maysomewhat depend,and therefore it is urged Messina, a quantity of brimstone, from 200 to 300 tons. that Mr. M'Millan's version ought not to be relied upon ; This brimstone did not arrive until about the early part and considering that his statement is given in so loose a of August last, but before it arrived, and before the manner, referring only to the probability of the bills to bankrupts had received any advices respecting it, or even some extent being accommodation bills, and also that the the bill of lading, they were surprised at having bills official assignee in his report on this subject of exchange presented to them for their acceptance for considers the view taken of this disputed subject by the sum of £2.029 15e. 7d., the purchase money for the M'Kean and Lamont to be the correct one, and that brimstone These bills were presented to them by Messrs therefore Mr. M'Millan is a debtor and not a cre- Milligan, Evans, and Co., as the agent of Messrs Irving, ditor on this estate, I think I cannot venture Ebsworth and Co., and who frequently applied to the to treat it as clear that any of these bills are accommo bankrupts to have them returned to them accepted, which dation bills, so as to hold the bankrupts liable to censure they very naturally declined to do, having had no advice on this ground. With regard to the bill transactions with or bills of lading ; but on the 18th of August they wrote Mr. James Taylor, it appears that these bills, in the to Messrs Irving and Co., for explanation, and on the first instance, were drawn in respect of work done to following day Mr. Evans called and presented the letter the Waterwich steam vessel, which the bankrupts had of advice from Messrs. Oates and Co., to Mr. M'Larty ; paid him in excess of his contract, by the amount of and from this letter it appeared that the bills of lading upwards of £3,000, and for other work for other steamers; had been inclosed, of which, until then, the bank • and that as he had not be king facilities for dicount rupta were in ignorance, but which Mr. Evans had ing, and in order to assist him, the bankrupts drew upon withheld, in consequence of some indefinite instructions him, instead of his drawing upon them, and got the which he stated that he had received from Messrs. bills discounted, and the proceeds were either then Irving and Co., for requiring a security before they were handed over or a balance struck from time to time be to be handed over to the bankrupts. On the 20th of tween them ; and this plan has been continued up to the August Mr. Evans called again, stating that he had the bankruptcy. bills being drawn and accepted, sometimes bills of lading, and suggested that the bankrupts should in respect of work dens by the bankrupts, sometimes in write to Messrs. Irving, so as to elicit from them what contemplation of such work, and the result has been that course they intended to pursue, and the bankrupts wrote there are bills outstanding which considerably exceed to them accordingly on the 20th of August, and in their the amount of Mr. Taylor's claim upon the bankrupts, letter they offered to return the bills unaccepted, and told and to this extent it may be said that they were ac them the brimstone would be on their account, and would commodation bills ; but, although partaking of that cha only be subject to freight the same having come by raster, they do not appear to me to fall under the a vessel they had chartered, and slatrtly after sending description of accommodation bills which are usually that letter the bills of lading were given up to considered so very objectionable to be resorted the bankrupts, without security, and they then to by commercial men, as they here actually sprung returned the bills of exchange accepted. These bills out of bona fide transactions, and for which there of lading the bankrupts, on the 23rd of August, handed was some consideration either in existence or expected, over to their brokers, Messrs. Cox, upon whom they, on and therefore, although there may be some objections made the same day, drew for the sum of £2,300, and with whom, to such a mode of doing business, yet, lam not prepared as the bankrupts state, they bad had many previous tran- to say that it forms such an objection as to call for the sections, and in which they had over advanced to them, usual censure of this court, by a suspension of the cer - and which had beea repaid to them. And this acceptance tificate in cases where mere accommodation bills have of Mr. Messrs. Cox for £2,300 the bankrupts, on the been dealt with. The next charge for consideration is same day, paid into the Borough Bank. Under these that of fraudulent or undue preferences. This relates to circumstances the bankrupts are charged with keying several payments made by the bankrupts, of bills and obtained the bills of lading for this brimstone without sums into their bankers (the Borough Bank) within having the means of paying for it; and, also, with having a few days before their bankruptcy ; and after the improperly obtained an advance upon it, and having dishonour of Mr. Denny and Mr Best's bills, as well paid such advance into their bankers by way of fradult-nt as the service of the trader debtor's summons, on behalf preference. In the first place, with regard to the obtaining of Mr. Falk, the petitioning creditor. Now, the same these bills of lading, it is to be recollected that the orders remark applies to these payments as that which I have for this brimstone were given so far back as the mo nth of ma d e in reference to the p a y ment of Mr. Cox's advance May, 1856, long before any of the bankrupts' bills had in the like manner ; such payments to a banker in the been dishonoured; and that the bills of lading also had ordinary course of business, and without contemplation been nistained by the bankrupts before the period when, of bankruptcy, and without any apparent collusion be es I have before obee:ved, the bankrupts had reason to t 4 eon the bank and the baukrupt, or intention of favour suppose they could not succeed in effecting some arrange- ing, being, as I repeat, free, in my opinion, - from this mint with Mr. Denny, and until which time they could charge of fraudulent or undue preference. There is one not, as I consider, be imperatively called upon to cease payment, however, to which some objection seems to apply ; their trading, and, therefore, until then, without entering this was of bills for £1,321 18s 3d, so late as the 28th of into the question whether the bankrupts strictly had any August, as the bankrupt M'Kean states, though in the option to refuse to receive the bills of lading when they bank and bill book these bills seem to have been received were offered ; it does not appear to me that the bankrupts and paid in on the 29th ; but this bankrupt is positive on can be censured for obtaining these bills of lading, espe- the subject. Now, this payment being after the period up cially as they were sent in compliance with orders given to which I have considered that the bankrupts had a fair so far back as the previous mouth of May. And, with hope of overcoming these difficulties, it would seem to be respect to the advance obtained upon these bills of lading, subject to this objection of preference on that account; this having been done in the usual course of business, but it is to be observed that the bankrupts, on the same the same remark applies as that before noticed in respect 29th of August and following day, drew out from the bank to the orders given to Messrs. Bost for the iron, and about £9OO, which reduces considerably the amount of this equally free from objection, considering that this advance preference—if it may be so termed—and the application of was obtained before the period when all hope of nego- this sum of .£9OO appears tobe accounted for in the cashbook, ciation was at an end. And with regard to this advance and in respect of which Ido not understand that any objec having been paid by the bankrupts into their bankers, tion is made, and I think that being a payment to a bunker, and, therefore, amounting to a fraudulent preference, even atthis late period, without any collusion bei n g shown this, again, I think dep ends u p on the view to be taken ' or preference intended beyond whet may be implied from of the state of the bankrupts' affairs at the time. Now, the same consa ; it is, I think, very doubtful whether it on the 23rd of August, when this acceptance was paid ought to be idered as one of those payments made on into the bankers, the bankrupts may be considered, as I the eve of bankruptcy, and which are Iry pro ot, phowerly ever, con have before observed, to have had some fair g rounds for sidered so objectionable in a trader, cann expecting they might stand their ground, and before absolve the bankrupts from all blam course of e on this th groun dis d. which period it may be inferred t h a t bankru p tc y had Some remark has been made, in the is not been contemplated by the bankrupts; and therefore cussion, that the giving of the bill of sale of the Sar- I cannot conclude that such an ordinary course of proceed- diman to the bank was also a fradulent preference. But ing as the paying of moneys or bills into their bankers this appears to have been given so far back as April, 1836 ; ought to be regarded as undue preference, there being, and, although it was madeasurety for an ultimate balance, apparently, no collusion between the bank and the bank- by which the proceeds of the Sardinian became nearly rupt's, in reference to thee payment, nor any intent to absorbed, yo 1 atn to t aware that it is for that raat!oxilio)l • o objection. The remaining objections for consideration are that of negligent book-keeping, and the conflicting accounts given by the bankrupts of portions of their transactions and liabilities The latter arises out of the difference of opinion entertained by M'Kean and Lamont, and by M'Larty as to the rights and liabilities of Mr. M'Millan in respect of certain losses on the Cleopatra and other matters to which I have before adverted ; but as this is a matter of opinion and a question of construc tion as to the arrangements made between the parties, I do not see how this ought to affect any question of , conduct of the bankrupts unless it were shown that these differences arose from some wilful mismanagement of any of the bankrupts which I do not understand to be the case, and, therefore, I consider there can be no objection made to the certificates on this subject with respect to negligent hook-keeping. This objection would appear to apply only to the ledger and journal, the cash and other books having been tolerably well kept. It has been very justly observed, that when the cash-book, which is the great test, has been well kept, as it has been in this case up to the bankruptcy, there is great reason for overlooking many defects in the keeping of any other books. There does not, however, appear much to be complained of in respect to the other books in this case. The arrears of past entries in the ledger and journal seems to have been occasioned through the negligence of a book keeper, but latterly these books appear to have been well kept, the bankrupts having employed au efficient book keeper, who, it was expected, would in time have made all the books correct, had he not been prevented by the bankruptcy. Under these circumstances I cannot think that any objection can be sustained on these grounds. I have now gone through the various ground 3 of objection that have been made to these bankrupts' certificates, and although they appear to be of a formidable nature, and have been strongly urged as forming serious objections, yet, upon full investigation, and mature deliberation of all the circumstances, I cannot consider, as my foregoing remarks show, that any of them are sustained sufficiently, so as to affect the claims of any of the bankrupts to immediate certificates ; and although the recent payment of the lolls for £1,302 into their bankers' hands is not entirely free from blame, yet I do not think this alone, under the cir cumstances in which it is made ought to be treated as a sufficient ground for a suspension ; and I therefore grant each of the bankrupts an immediate certificate. But, as I cannot say that the losses are wholly unavoidable, and though I acquit them of all charge of fraud on the subject, yet, as I feel that it might have been more prudent in them to have stopped at a much earlier period, I can only grant each of them a second-class certificate. THE HUNDRED OF WIRRAL COURT LEET. IMPORTANT PROCEEDINGS. Yesterday, the Lord of this Hundred, Mr. Morton, held a second, or adjourned meeting of this ancient court, which, as Blackstone states, its institution was probably coeval with the Hundreds thease lves,which were introduced,though not invented, by King Alfred, and were established for the ease of the people, that they might have justice done to them at their own doors, without any charge or loss of time. The court was held at the Tranmere Hotel, and Mr. it. Grace, the steward, presided. The usual formalities observed in opening this court having been disposed of, the following gentlemen, belonging to the Hundred, were selected as the jury : W. W. Perrey, Esq., Foreman. Mr. J. M. Constable Mr. Scott Mr. William Ellis Mr. Thomas Monsdale Mr. G. S. Gopsill. Mr. E. M'Keverigan Mr. W. Mundy Mr. R. Helsby Mr. J. Robinson Mr. C. Ramping Mr. G. Spenser Mr. Nicholson and Mr. Evans were chosen by the jury to act as assessors. The jury having been sworn, the Seward briefly recap:- tulatect the business that had been transacted at the last court, (a full report of which appeared in the columns of the NORTHERN TIMES), and then proceeded to say that the court was ready to hear any comptaiut that any of the in habitants might be ready to make, that came withi❑ its jurisdiction. The FOREMAN of the jury said he, as the Chairman of the Trantuere Highway Board, had been served with a process from the former court, calling upon the inhabitants to repair a certain well within the township, declared to be dangerous to the lives of the inhabitants, in which case it had been ordered to be put in proper repair, under a penalty of £5O. The Highway Board had put that well in a safe state, and had erected a pump in its place, so that the inhabitants had then the means of obtaining a proper and good supply of water. He then, in consequence of the rumours on that, and the other side of the water (Liver pool), requested to know as to the authority that court possessed, finding that the former Lord of the Hundred, John Williams, had been convicted of felony in the year 1820. A long but desultory conversation followed, based upon the point raised, the result of which was, that the Steward, after quo' ing various acts of Parliament, clearly allowed to the satisfaction of Mr. Perrey, and also to the jury, that the „. . . enforce the penalties that rniglat he imposed. " Mr. PERREY : Has it been proved that Mr. Williams is dead. _ _ The STEWARD : We have full proof of that. Mr. PERRY : It is, I suppose, within the last two years, and hence the revival of this ancient court. MR. CHR(STOPHER BUSHELL'S ENCROACHMENT. The STEWARD: Exactly so. I have to tell you that in the case in which Mr. Christopher Bushell was ordered to ply a fine of £5O for making an encroachment on a certain ancient footpath, and to restore the same, that he has re stored the footpath to the public; and that in the case of Mr. Billinge, who was fined £5 for permitting a certain quarry to be in a state dangerous to the public, that the latter gentleman has paid the fine imposed upon him at the last court. Mr. Mulvey : But Mr. Bushell has not yet paid the £5O. Tne STEWARD: No ;Mr. Bushell is a gentleman holding such a stake in the hundred, that he is not a man that is likely to run away. We are not in a hurry with him, and we give him time, that he may come to his senses. It is a large sum that was imposed, and as he is a man that likes fighting, we give him every opportunity before we proceed to extremes. The fine will be enforced, but it is best not to be in too much of a hurry. I will tell you this, that he has dismissed all his lawyers in this district, and has now got a London man to do his business. (Laughter.) He has restored to the public the ancient footway upon which he had made an encroachment. A Juitoa : I suppose there is no truth in the statement that he had enclosed another footway. I heard the other day that heehad done so. Mr. PERREY said, from what he had heard at the Board of Guardians the other day, he could gainsay that. The STEWARD: I think that if he had done so the court would have heard something about it. I scarcely think that a man like him would have done such a thing, after he had been compelled to restore the other by the order of this court. Mr. PERREY : It is scarcely likely. Mr. MUNDY : It has been reported that the cfficer of this court went to Mr. Billinge's with a warrant, and re fused to leave until he had the money. I should like to know it that is the fact. If it is, Ido not think that it is fair that he should have been treated thus, while nothing had been done to get the fine from Mr. Bushell. The STEWARD: if such was dune, it was without my knowledge. I do not believe it, but the Reeve of the court will be here shortly, he should be here now, and he will be able to explain what did take place. After some further discussion, in reference to having a pinfold at Neston, which the Steward, on behalf of the Lord of the Hundred, agreed to supply, Mr. W. EDMONDSON, the Reeve of the court, entered the room, and, on being informed of the accusation against him, in the case of Mr. Billinge, said : I wish that gentle man, or his wife, was present to hear the statement I am about to make, and then they could confirm it. I simply went to the house ; I did not enter it, and told Mr. Billinge the business I went upon. He said he knew all about it, and I told him I did not wish to put him to any inconvenience by remaining there. He said he would pay it and meet me where I thought proper. We agreed to mce at Mr. Morgon Scott's -Hotel, and in the afternoon he called there and paid the money, and he likewise com plimented me for the gentlemanly and modest way I had behaved. Mr. MORGAN SCOTT confirmed the above statement. Mr. MUNDY : Then there is no truth in the statement, and I am glad this explanation has been given. The REEVE of the Court then detailed the steps that had been taken in reference to the orders made at the last court, all ()F which had been fully carried out, or were about to be done. A JUROR : Is n t the Lord of the Hundred hound to provide public stocks. The STEWARD : He is, and will do it if dais court make an order to that effect. Mr. PERREY We do not want stocks in Tranmere, (Laughter). A JUROR : It would be well to have them before the next wakes. COMPLAINT ACAINcT A SLAUGIITEIt':MOUSE. Mr. M‘lirriNEsirzn said : I have a complaint to make against a slaughter-house belongir to Mr. Sewell, in this township. It is close against my premises, and the stench from it is most abominable. At times we cannot live in the back part of our ',douse. It has existed for some time, ity,d IVIr. Sewell bas been summoned before the magistrates for permitting it by the late nuisance committee, but the infoppation failed for the want of medical evidence. Besides the slaughter-house, there is a stench from the boiling of refuse for pigs. That used to be done in the day time, but now it is carried on at night, and the effluvia from it is most annoying ; and besities that there are a large number of pigs kept there, which is not right in a place so densely populated, as the smell fro o them ➢s not only annoying but is dangerous to health, ehould the ch,ilera break out. The STEWARD :—Arid this has been complained of before, and the parties have been sammoled before the magistrates. Mr. NicifoLLs Yts ; I can spelt to that, as I was a member of the Nuisanc:! Committee at the time. Mr, PERREY also confirmed the statement. At a subsequent period of the siting of the court, Mrs. WHITLOW care forward, and spoke to the tuisanee that rose from the smell of the pigs—the boiling of the refuse stuff, and the blood that oozed out of the bricks. She also stated there had been as many as forty pigs kept on the premises at one time. The STEWARD: How COMO it that the magistrate; did not stout? kr. PzitnEY ; Tly3 else ;v a 3 tliv,lfssa I f the win: of medical tes:imony to show that it .ta;.S iaj.irloin to health. The STEWARD 7- Yea ; hut we do not want that evidence, it is quite sufficient fur us to know tbstL is an aaney tate to the public. er the jury had inspe,7'ed` the slaughter-house CAD . - plaiued of, The FOREMAN' said :- fire have been and inspected the slaughter-house, the piggeries, and the cesspool by the side of the premises. In the piggery we found twenty pigs, which, in my humbly opinion, and in - the opinion of the jury, is a very serious nuisance. We have also visited the slaughter-house, which is only about, six feet- sq pare, and we think it is a very impro;ter and inefficient place for the purpose of slaughtering cattle. Terre is also a sewer running from the premise', from whieli arises a most unwholesone—l was going to say ~- ,s aglignant—smell, t - ,nd of which all the occupiers complain. We also found that the pigs were feel upon blood and grains, which certainly was one of the most repulsive sights I ever witnessed in my life. We asked his son what they did with the pigs; and he told us he did not kill them but sent them away. After some euisideral - de discussion as to the amount of flue that should . be imposed, the jury decided that the court should order the defendant, Sewell, to pay a fine of2os far the offence that he had cenamitted, and that the en tire nuisance should be abated in fourteen days from the serving of then Ake, or be fined 108 each day until it was removed. That thesewer should be altered in fourteen days under a penalty of £2O for not doing so. A DANGEROUS ERIDGE. The STEwAnn then read a letter, which had been handed to him since the opening of the court. The STEWARD: In this case we have no evidence, bat the jury have the power of inspecting the locality for themselves. The FOREMAN : I know the place, and without pre eeeding further I will, with the permission of the Court, write to the trustees, and perhaps they will take steps to obviate our going any further. The Court assented to this suggestion, A PUBLIC ENCROACHMENT. Mr. THOMAS M. PENNINGTON, upon being sworn, said— I have to complain of an encroachment made on the public road from Spittal to Clatterbridge. I have known the road for the last twenty-four years, and recollect the Dart that is now enclozed with hurdles ; - :nd planted, as a siding on which the people used to walk. It is an ancient foot path. It is now enclosed ; but I cannot tell how much of the road has been taken in. I am sure there is not twenty-five feet from the centre of the road to the hurdles I should say that from ten to twelve feet, on the average, have been enclosed along the whole line. The Srw CARD : I may say that the attention of the trustees have been directed to this encroachment, as two letters has been sent to them, but they have not con descended to answer either. A very long conversation took place on this complaint, the result of which was that the whole of the jury went and visited the spot, for the purpose of seeing for themselves. To accomplish this object, the Lord of the Hundred pro vided an omnibus to accommodate the parties, and on arriving at the spot the road was measured, and all and each of them expressed their opinion that a great encroachment had ben made on the public rights. On the return of the jury, after certainly a most pleasant drive, the Reeve of the court was called, and he stated that he had measured the length of road enclosed, and he found it to be about 1,780 feet, and he should say, tak ing the entire length, that about eighteen feet had been taken in. A JUROR: I should say it is about four acres. The FOREMAN : We have viewed the place, and are perfectly satisfied that a great encroachment on the pub lic road has been made. In fact, the stile that his been erectei is an encroachment, for it stood out so at the top that you must knock your head, or, if you escape that, you must break your shins at the bottom. Indeed, this encroachment on the roadway is so great, that there was not room to turn the omnibus that conveyed us. The STEWARD : This is decidedly the most important matter that has been brought before the court. As it could not be ascertained who had made the en-. t t gr i AviaiLa conversation aSt , (2 1 e u i rj . decided upon the parties for th rittrencp of dirontinn. t u bair " Tt u p,7,17, 11 , 11 ,, the fact; and the further consideration of tne A stioiettnyud postponed until the next court. THE TOWNSHIP WELL. Mr. HELSBY directed attention to a well that had been enclosed in the township, at the top of Green-lane. It appeared that many years ago, an accident had occurred at this weli, and that after that, it had been closed up by the highway surveyors. After some discussion, the steward agreed that the Reeve of the court should re-open the well. and the jury directed that an order on the Highway Board should be made to properly enclose it, so as to secure it against accident, and give the people a proper supply of water. THE SUPPLY OF WATER FOR TRAMIZRE. In the course of the conversation that took place, tele- tive to the want of a good supply of water, from the want of which, it was alleged that it was impossible that the poorer classes could keep their dwellings in a state of cleanliness. The FOREMAN of the Jury said : It is quite evident that we in Tranmere have not a sufficient supply of water. I have lately returned from London from opposing the Bir kenhead and Claughton Gas Bill, which was thrown out, therefore we have not that difficulty to contend - vith . We have gas in the town, and my attan•ion has been directed much of late as to whether we cannot have waterworks of our own. For my own part, lam prepared to go a great length to secure that for the town. I have a spa'i in my eye from whence we could get a good supply, a supply that would give us a sufficien- quantity for this tovrns,hip, and also for New Ferry, I mention, this at this paha; meeting for the purpose of having a comp nay formed to carry out that project. I will do all in my power to get it done. Mr. NicaoLsoN fully agreed in the proposition, and hoped it would be carried out. Mr. PERRRY: It can easily be done now- that we have not the incubus of the Birkenhead and Claaightm Gas and Water works hanging about us, and I think it would be a paying concern. The subject then dropped. A FALSE GEORGE Altuxa complained of a Jvaha Spruce, who occu pied some land adjoining to his, not having prowl. fences. The jury visited the place, but found the charge to be unfounded, and it was suggested. that Miller should be fined, but in that the court could not give its assent, there fore the subject was dismissed, PENALTY AGAINST THE RAILWAY COMPANY. The FOUBMAN of the jury stated, that in making their inspections they had found that one of the Railway bridges, crossing the public road, was in a most dangerous state, and might at any moment cause a direful accident. One of the timbers had got loose, and was nearly falling. The bridge belonged to the Birkenhead, Lancasire, and Chester Junction "Railway, and I think that after the accident that recently occurred, when a bridge fell of its own accord, some notice should be taken of this matter. While discussing on the amount that should be levied, The STENTXRD said that the jury must recollect that they were dealing with a large and, rich public b)dy, and should inflict a fine accordingly. After some conversatioz. Cue jury agreed to fine the railway company ~E 5 for the offence, and .£5 per day for every day it was left in its present state after the notice had been served. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS. The jury then appointed John Monks and Robert Capping ale testors for the hundred, an opinion being expressed that it was exceedingly desirable that the poor people should have good and wholesome ale. Mr. Bales was re-3.7,pointed the constable of the court, and the steriard agreed to find the inspector of weights and measures with the proper instruments for detecting false weights and measures. After some further routine business the court was adjourned. At the conclusion of the business the jurors and others partook of a most excellent dinner, provided by Host Fernihough in the best style to which they had been invited by the Lord of the Hundred, and a most agree able and harmonious evening concluded the business of the day. THE NORTHERN TIMES.---LIVERPOOL, FRIDAY, JUNE 19, 1857.