The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-09-08 00:00:00

Jare d J\V of I n ot to be ecolV e oalel l ' of the imilla" t clas s i were° [ad O ) bad n n ell' dec l3 ' !onne l, ~ lout' wors e, S V 35 s were o ut bY —to deiO 3 " enstl3l, ng, lea ver) f ano ° but ice 0 think I hot Web ° le any ion 35 Speaker " n n guag e enc to Y re er r! : s_ano n Ilea W big q "e It Wll3. (1 at 1:31 e to? agit` i : vith 110 irselv es _ a loy a l toward nerit to . to dint be the in d his i of a 3 de' ri gnav f end - 0 f the I sign, shin e ~~~ itial ,iol ind"~ tem of corn laws than the most str liatnent that could be delis& more remunerating prices With their increasing strength and to the " fainous" Irish rebellion. The drift of these allusions is but too obvious. But let the wily Jesuit take heed. His inuendoes, his artful sugges tions, his broken periods, may yet prove insufficient to screen him from the consequences of his treasonable designs: 'He may yet have to undergo, in his own person, the penalty of the law. The preservation of the safety and integrity of the empire may render it necessary that he should he arrested in his mad career. The anti-corn law agitation has been resumed with as much energy as was manifested at the commence 7 ment of the year. The itinerant and stipendiary lec turers of the " League" are perambulating the king dom in every direction, mingling in their incendiary harangues the most ridiculous nonsense with the most awful blasphemies, and stimulating the evil passions of the mob by ribald abuse of both houses of legislature, and by denunciations of vengeance against the aristo cracy of the country.l One of these paid orators, a member of the numerous family of Smiths, has been endeavouring, during the past month, to gull the inha bitants of Liverpool with his trashy verbiage and shal low sophisms in favour of a repeal of the corn laws. We are glad to say that he seems to have made but a very slight impression on the minds of the operative classes in Liverpool, who are, generally speaking, too well informed to be led astray by such superficial rea sonelA as Mr. Or a t or S m i t h . • _ ...... We trust that the recent exposures, made by Mr. Handley and others, of the gross and fraudulent trick ery practised in the corn trade, by the speculators for a repeal of the corn laws, will convince the people of Great Britain of the folly of trusting to the tender mercies.of the free trade gentry. Even under the pre sent system of restrictive duties these very conscien tious individuals are able, by means of fictitious sales, to raise the price of corn almost to starvation point, and that in spite of the powerful competition of the whole ttgrieultural interest of Great Britain and Ire land. flow much more terrible NI) u1(I be their tyranny. if they had an almost unlimited command over the sup ply of the staff of life I) We should soon find the locks anti bolts upon the granaries and the storehouses of these monopolists a far more fearful practical sy goat acts of par- It is a singular and rather anomalous circumstance, that the two classes who arc most conspicuously active In carrying on the anti-corn law agitation, are actuated by different and opposite motives. One of those classes IS composed of the corn dealers. They are anxious to obtain a repeal of the corn laws for the sake of securing a more co:nplete control of the market, awl, of course Thus, the cry of this'section of the clamourers for a free trade in grain resolves itself into a cry for " dear bread." It would be preposter ous to suppose that the corn merchant would he other wise benefited by a repeal of the corn laws, than as it would enable him to secure larger profits. Those who Imagine that such men as Sir Joshua \Valmsley are disinterested in their exertions to procure a free trade In corn are fools of the first magnitude, upon whom argument would be utterly thrown away. The other Class of agitators for a repeal of the corn laws corn- Irises the manufacturing interests generally Object is to procure a supply of cheap bread for their factory slaves. Without cheap bread they know that they cannot have cheap labour. Their uniform •corn- Plaint is, that they cannot possibly comps/.e with the Their foreign manufacturer, because labour is dearer in Eng land than it is on the Continent. Repeal the corn laws, say they, and we shall be enabled to procure a fl unly of cheaper labour, and, consequently, to ester into competition with the manufacturers abroad. Granting for a moment that this would follow, how Would the poor operative be benefited by such a change? With diminished wages—and that, we ern- phatically repeat, is what the manufacturers are la bouring to bring about—of what benefit would be cheaper bread to the poor artisan ? it is a consum mate frauda mean and rascally trick—a cruel and Satanic delusion—to say that the condition of the la- bouring classes, in the manufacturing districts, would be in the slightest degree improved by the repeal of the corn laws. To them " cheap bread" would be but another name for " low wages" and a more limited supply of the mere luxuries of life. In proof of the correlative advantages of " cheap bread" and " cheap prodnction," ive may refer to the condition of the operatives on the Continent—not as described in the lying, ex parte, and well-paid-for re ports of Dr. Bowring and other political empirics, who have been sent abroad on purpose to get up a case in favour of the manufacturers—but as we find it de scribed in the voluntary, matter-of-course statements of intelligent and impartial tourists. We could fill our Paper with extracts from the works of trustworthy tra vellers, descriptive of the misery and want, the phy sical sufferings and moral degradation, of the opera tive classes in various countries on the Continent. We feel convinced that no British artisan would ex change his lot for that of most of these wretched vic tims of the " cheap labour" system. Operatives•of England ! your worse than Egyptian taskmasters want to reduce you to the same level with the serfs of the cheap-production lords of the Continent. If you have any spirit left in you=if your energies are not annihi lated by the grinding tyranny of those who are coining the sweat of your brows and the strength of your si news into gold,—tell the vagabond orators of the Anti- Corn Law League that you will not listen to their lYing declamations. Tell these bloated scamps to . go and labour for their bread, instead of prostituting their abilities to so unhallowed a purpose as that of seeking to grind the faces of the poor. But we deny that " cheap labour" would be, in the long run, of any advantage to the manufacturing inte rests of this county}•. Indeed, so convinced are most of the respectable and conservative manufacturers of this fact, that they have systematically kept aloof from the whip tyrants of the Anti-Corn Law League. It is obviously the interest of the Continental powers to Protect their own manufactures. If they cannot do this in any other way, they will do it by depriving this country of the benefit of a free trade in corn. Let us remove our restrictions on the importation of corn, and we shall soon find foreign governments imposing restrictions on its exportation. It would be an infatu •tition to expect any other result : and let it be remem bered that this result would only be rendered the more certain and inevitable by previously making this coun try dependent upon the countries of the Continent fur its supplies of corn. We believe that the conservatives of Liverpool will stand well upon the municipal registry for the present year. The preparatory struggle has been well sus tained, and nothing now remains, in order to secure such a victory, on the first of November, P s shall for ever extinguish the hopes of the Whig-radical faction, but an energetic and persevering canvass throughout all the wards in the borough. There is very little time left for exertion. We are, - therefore, anxious that that time should be well employed. Candidates ought to be forthwith chosen in each ward, and those candidates, when once definitively fixed upon, ought to have re course to a personal canvass. Much will depend upon this point. Our opponents have all along been fully aware of the importance of a personal intercourse be tween the candidates and the electors; and wherever the conservatives have, on former occasions, acted upon this policy, they have been generally successful. We may, perhaps, be, told that we are too sanguine in our expectations with reference to the approaching municipal election. We may be reminded of the gi gantic efforts made by the Reform Association and the Protector. Society to swamp the registry. We are fully aware of the desperate expedients to which our oppo nents have resorted, in order to secure, if possible, their lost ascendancy. We need not be reminded of t he extent of their preparations. We are in possession of ample information on the subject. With a full cog nizance of their trickery and of their lavish expendi ture of money, we still maintain that the strength of the conservative party in this town is comparatively greater than at any period subsequent to the passing of the Reform Act. We wish that we could say that the zeal and confidence of the conservatives had kept pace tire part The principal source from which the augmented at re ugth of the conservative party of this town is de rived, is, the gradual reaction which has taken place in favour of constitutional principles. The universal d isgust excited by the reckless and unprincipled pro ceedings of the whip-radical faction has done far more t° swell the ranks of the conservatives than all the ex- ertions that have been made to add to the number of voters on the registers. We venture to say that there is not an individual, under whose notice these remarks may happen to fall, who cannot, without a moment's hesitation,. point to some of his friends or acquaintances who have deserted the ranks of their former destrnc- . tive allies, and joined themselves to the conserva- But we challenge' nine out of ten of our memories for a single instance in which a conservative has joined the ranks of the ra dicals. Such a thing would be a prodigy worth re- readers to tax th cording. Such being our own convictions, we wish to inspire our conservative friends with a corresponding degree of confidence, in contemplation, of the approaching struggle. Let them fight like men determined to win the battle. " A long pull, a strong pull, and a pull al together," during the present year, will secure the final ascendancy of conservative principles in our municipal councils. Let us not rest satified with anything less than a clean " sweep out" of the Augean stable. FAILURES IN MANCHESTER.—Mere have been two ex tensivdfailures in Manchester, Mr. Fort and MI. Lavino. THEATRE ROYAL.—Mrs. Fitzwilliam and Mr. Mackay commenced their engagement last evening, and as may be expected from their high reputation, they gave the highest satisfaction. The " bill of fare" for the week is very rich. Mr. Paul Bedford will appear this evening.—See advt. - - • MODEL OF WATERLOO. — We understand that this unique and elaborate production, which has been visited and ad mired by thousands of our townsmen, and which has been pronounced, by competent military authorities, the most perfect thing of the kind ever exhibited, will be very shortly removed from Liverpool. We recommend our readers to avail themselves of the brief interval which will elapse before the exhibition closes for the purpose of inspecting this splendid model. Mu. HASSARD'S TABLES.—We understand that these singular and beautiful specimens of workmanship have been inspected by multitudes during the past.week, and it will be seen from an advertisement that they will be on view for one day only. Mr. Hassard deserves well from those gentlemen to whom he specially appeals for the disposal of his ingenious works of art, as he has been compelled to make many sacri fices in defence of those principles he holds dear. As some misapprehension was caused by the wording of the advertise ment in ocr last, we may as well state, that Mr. Hassan, will feel proud to exhibit his rare productions to all who may honour him with a visit, whether with the intention of pur chasing or otherwise. It will be melancholy, if Mr. Hassard be compelled to leave our wealthy town without disposing of his unique designs. NAVAL AND MILITARY BIBLE SOCIETY.—The annual ineetin.4 of the members and friends of the Liverpool Aux iliary Naval and Military Bible Society was held last evening in the Music-hall, Bold-street, and was most numerously attended. Thomas Porter, Esq. was called to the chair, and the proceedings were commenced by the supplication of the divine blessing. The Rev. W. Maynard then read the report of the committee's proceedings during the past year; from which it appeared that, since the formation of the Parent So ciety, in 1780, it had distributed no less than 356,000 copies of the Holy Scriptures amongst the me❑ belonging to the navy and the army. The Liverpool Auxiliary had been pe culiary successful during the past year; the subscriptions had increased from £37 to £lBB ISs. 6d. ; but still it entailed a loss of £509 upon the Parent Society. An association had been formed at Birkenhead; and since the last annual meet ing, 907 copies of the Scriptures had been distributed, mak ing a total of 7,112 copies since the formation of the Aux iliary in the year 1832. The meeting was afterwards ad dressed by the Rev. W. Maynard, the Rev. J. H.. Stewart, Rev. J. Baylee, Mr. Howard, Lieutenant Symonds, and the Bev. J. C. Richards; and the Doxology having been sang, it dispersed, all being highly gratified with the proceedings. ' THE MANCHESTICR NEW POST-OFFICE.—This office was yesterday week openei for business. It is said that there is nothing superior in point of accommodation out of London. The principal room covers a space of upwards of two hun dred yards, and is most profusely lit from the roof. The number of private boxes are 1,320. DESTRUCTION 01 , A COTTON MILL AT STOCKPORT BY FlRa. — On Thursday afternoon, about half-past four, an alarm of fire was given, which was found to be at the Churchgate Mills, the property of Mr. Elkanah Cheetham, but occupied by a number of tenants who manufactured weft from the lowest qualities of cotton waste, and which made a catastrophe like the present exceedingly imminent. It is said that none of them are insured. The building, however, is undersood to be so. Scarcely anything was saved. CHESTER CATTLE FAIR.—The show of cattle on Thurs day was tolerably good for the Se"ptember fair. Milcbers and barren beasts were in tolerable demand ; the former averaged from £l5 to £lB. and the latter from .£lO to £l3 each : fat cattle, of which the show was only moderate, sold well, from 51t1 to Gid per lb. and sink. There was a fair supply of sheep : fat weathers were worth 6id and 7d, and ewes 6:1 to bid. Lambs had only a dull sale. Pigs were in tolerable demand, at about the same prices as last fair. Serviceable horses were i❑ good demand. The city was not very thronged, as the favourable harvest day kept many of MR. WINTERBOTTOM, OF STOCKPORT.—We understand that information has been received in this town that an individual has been residing at Newmarket, in Monmouth shire, for the last three weeks, answering in every respect the description of Mr. Winterbottom, with the simple exception that he has no whiskers, which were rather a conspicuous feature in Mr. Winterbottom's countenance. This individual was consequently suspected to be Mr. Winterbottom himself ; but the parties entertaining that suspicion, not venturing to take him into custody without further evidence, sent to this town for some person to go over and identify him. We believe that a police officer who knew Mr. Winterbottom personally, went to Newmarket on Wednesday or Thursday last ; but we are not aware that any information has been re- ceived from him.—Manchester Guardian, ACCIDENT.—On Friday last, as a boy in the employ of Mr. Jones, Castle-street, was'cleaning the office windows, he lost his hold, and was precipitated from a height of forty feet, through the skylight of Messrs. Swainson and Son's counting-house, and fractured his skull. Mr. Swainson, jun., who was standing under the skylight at the time , nar rowly escaped being killed, the boy in his descent striking him on the back. Assistance was immediately procured, and he was conveyed to the Infirmary, where, we believe, small hopes arc entertained of his recovery. SUPERB CHIN.I.—We have inspected the truly elegant stock of china, Bisque figures, &c., at Mr. Hodgson's rooms, Church-street. The selection of ornaments (some of great size) for drawing-rooms, boudoir, &c., are most unique. We understand the sale will continue the whole of this week. — See advt. FATAL ACCIDENT.—One of those accidents which, for tunately, are of rare occurrence in our town, happened in Tithebarn-street on Friday afternoon, about five o'clock. A gig, driven by a young man, was passing, at an ordinary speed, through the street, a boy ran across from the opposite side at the time, and, it is supposed, came in contact with the feet of the horse, and fell. The gig passed over the neck of the child, and when taken up he was found to be quite dead. We are not aware that any blame can be attached to the person who was in the gig when the accident occurred. The child belonged to some poor people in Pall Mall. THE CHARGE AGAINST L. J. HART.—We stated, last Tuesday, that the legal advisers of Lewis J. Hart had ex pressed their intention of making an application to Baron Rolfe to enlarge the prisoner on bail. On Saturday night Mr. Crompton intimated to his lordship, that he was about to apply to that effect, his lordship having had the deposi tions and certain affidavits laid before him on the preceding evening. Mr. Watson said, he had instructions to resist the application for bail, but certain essential affidavits which he had to present were not quite ready, and others were only just sworn. lie wished his lordship to postpone the case till Monday morning. Mr. Crompton said, there had been am ple time to have had an opportunity of seeing them. Mr. Watson said, they had been got ready as soon as practicable ; but there was one important affidavit, the affidavit of the woman herself, which was not completed. Mr. Crompton : " The woman herself !—That is a reply !" Mr. Watson : "To be sure—and a most important one." His lordship fixed a quarter past eight for hearing the affidavits on both sides. His lordship could not say, that he would hear the application in open court, but it should be somewhere within the building.—Yesterday morning, at a quarter-past eight o'clock, Lewis Joseph Hart was brought before Baron Rolfe, in his private chamber, in the Session's-house, for the pur pose of receiving formally tha application of the p'risoner's legal advisers to let him go at large on bail. The witnesses for the,prosecution were in attendance in the ante-room; but, saving the official persons concerned, no one was allowed to be present, the application being strictly private. Mr. Crompton, on the part of the prisoner, produced the affidavits of certain parties who formerly lived at the White Bear, and, of a person who was formerly a servant with Mr. Fadeuilhe, and of the prisoner himself. Mr. Watson, in resistance of the application, produced counter affidavits from parties who were enabled to contradict the allegations of the deponent on the prisoner's behalf. . His lordship, having heard the argument of counsel on both sides, said he saw nothing in the statements produced to justify his interference. His lordship refused to allow the prisoner to be bailed. THE ORIENTAL. — The splendid steamer Oriental arrived at Falmouth on Wednesday morning, at 6 a.m., from South ampton, to receive the mails for Alexandria and India. At a very early period after she put in, the Mayor, S. Blight, Esq., and the corporation, were accompanied on board by Captain Flumridge, in his barge ; and she was likewise visited by a large concouse of the gentry of the town and neighbour hood, admitted at is each ; amongst them were Sir Charles Lemon, M.P., and family, J. Ennis, Esq., W. Vice, Esq., Captain Pengilly, R.N., Lieutenants Herrick, Leslie, Crook, Coghlan, and Smith, R.N. We learn that so large a sum as £94 was collected, by the admission fee, towards the funds of the Fishermen's Charity, whilst she lay at Southampton. The extreme civility of her commander and officers, and her magnificent but chaste fittings, with the cleanliness and order prevailing, excited the admiration of every one. There were 103 soldiers of the 77th regiment, Captain Egerton, in com mand, and ensigns Rook and Duff. She had passengers for Alexandria—Captains Reed and Ewart ; Messrs. 'Sutton, Ford, Weller, Stockham, Palmer, Daly, Powell, Rich, Black, Fletche, Strath, Dr. Fletcher, and Hassan Gammiel. For Malta—Colonel Gordon and family, Captain Rawlinson and lady, Captain Gardner, Lientenant Middleton, Lieutenant Munro. Mr. and Mrs. Dick; Messrs. Harvey, Duniell, Wil liams, Reynolds, Langhorne, Hanson, Privilege, Miss Terry, Mrs. Lancaster. For Gibraltar—Captain and Mrs. Custance and servant, Mrs. Custance, Dr. Stewart, and Messrs. Em mett and Savage. She left Falmouth at half-past 1 p.m, Lieutenant Turncock in charge of the mails. Lieutenant Green goes out to take charge of a mail steamer between Malta and the lonian Islands. There appeared an uncertainy whether the Oriental would return to Falmouth or go up to Liverpool direct. Blackpool. Southport, Waterloo, Crosby, and otherbathing places, have for a few weeks past been quite overflowing. THE ISLAND or LUNDY.—This island, situate in the mouth of the Bristol Channel, and forming part of the hun dred, of Braanton, in Devon, was last week sold for 9, 400 gui neas. It is three miles long by one mile wide, arid contains nearly 2000 acres of land. It possesses a mansion, with offices and outbuildings, including a smith's shop and forge, and there are several labourers' cottages. It is said that a small harbour might easily be formed near the present land ing-place. Lundy is famous for its butter. SHAKSPERE'S DEER STEALING.—MEIOIIC,•it is known, threw doubts on the fact of Shakapere's deer stealing in his early days, thereby offending the poet's admirers, inasmuch as otherwise the bard's attack upon Lucy of Woodcote seemed unaccountable ; and the reason he gave was that the offence could not have been committed, inasmuch as Sir Thomas Lucy, so Malone averred, had no deer walk to be poached upon ; but time, the great settler of all things, has set the matter, as well as the commentator, right; for it.ap pears, from a record of those who sent presents to Chancellor Ellesmere, when he entertained Queen Elizabeth, at his seat at Harefield, that among the givers of bucks on the occasion was the aforesaid Sir Thomas. This corroboration of the poet's deer stealing is now on veritable record among the the Camden Society in their last volume, f p r a o p m e r publish ed e s theEger by ton papers, furnished by Lord Francis, the owner of these curious and hitherto unknown documents. LIVERPOOL SUMMER ASSIZES NISI PRIUS COURT.-FRIDAY THE MILITARY ASSAULT AND RESCUE AT WIGAN At the sitting of the court this morning, Mr. Crompton said he had to show cause against a rule nisi, for an attach ment obtained against the defendant, Mr. Adolphus Fraser, for a rescue, at Wigan, of the body of Mr. Plunkett, now in prison at Lancaster. The learned counsel contended, that Mr. Fraser had already been sufficiently punished for the offence and public justice satisfied; that the body of Mr. Plunkett having been eventually taken, the plaintiff (Mr. J. S. Stubbs, of Manchester) had had his remedy as a privatr individual, in an oppressive manner, and at an unnecessarily late period after the offence. He submitted that it could answer no purpose but that of throwing costs upon the de fendant ; that the issuing of an attachment for contempt was optional with the court ; and that this was not a case in which the court ought to interfere.—Mr. Martin appeared in sup- Full of the rule, and contended that the issuing of the at tachment on proof of contempt was a matter of course, and that the court was bound to accede to the application. When the application was argued on the merits, he should be pre pared to show that the application was not wanton or op pressive, but was in fact the only means the plaintiff had to get at his debt and costs. He would assent, however, to the enlarging of the rule, until nearer to the period of the de fendant's imprisonment; and 'applying for it in term time, so as to allow both parties a full opportunity of being heard. —The learned judge, after expressing his concurrence in the view taken of the application by Mr. Crompton, acquiesced in the arrangement. ~ PRESTON AND OTHERS V. FORD. • The plaintiffs in this case are Mr. Robert Preston on his own part, and Messrs. Jones and Dagley, as assignees to Mr. Iferdman, bankrupt, formerly Mr. Preston's partner. The plaint ffs, Preston and Herdman, were wine and spirit mer chants at Manchester, and the defendant is a publican in that town. The action was brought to recover the amount of £27 odd, the balance of an account due from the defendant for goods sold and delivered. The case possessed no interest. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for £26 lOs 4d. PIXTON V. RHODES. • This was an action brought by Elizabeth Piston, tenant of T. J. Trafford, Esq., for the Croft Bank Farm, to recover about £5O rent of the defendant, a farmer, to whom she had let about 1,100 square yards of land. For the defendant it was contended that he was not liable to the plaintiff, but to Mr. Trafford, for the rent.—The jury found for the plaintiff, damages £46 10s., there being a set-off of some £3 odd. ALLEGED LIBELS ON A BEER RETAILER. H AWLEY V. WA GG.—The declaration stated that the de fendant had published two libels of the plaintiff, and the de fendant pleaded not guilty. Mr. John Hawley, the plaintiff, is a beer retailer at Greeuheys, near Manchester, and has also been an excavator ; and this action was brought to get compensation in damages for the libels in question. In Ja nuary last, the defendant, William Wagg, who is a police man at Staveley, in Derbyshire, came to Manchester, and, amongst other places, went to the plaintiff's beershop, with some of the Manchester police. The plaintiff was out, but they told Mrs. Hawley that they had come to search the house. She made no objection, and they searched, during which procesg the plaintiff came in, found nothing, and went away. Some time afterwards, ❑amely, on the 29th of Fe- • . contained one of the libels ; and, as that paper circulated in Manchester and the neighbourhood, they had, it was illeged, done great injury to the plaintiff in his business. The libels in that paper, and in the Derbyshire Chronicle, were the result of communications to reporters for those papers, made orally by the defendant (Wagg) himself, and appeared as news. That in the Courier was headed— " Spirited and Successful Pursuit of a Thief." After stat ing that there had been many robberies in the neighbourhood of Stavely, and that Wagg had been directed by the Staveley committee of police to spare no expence to trace the thieves, it went on to say, that Wagg, having some suspicion, ob tained a search warrant to search the house of Hawley, who formerly lived in the neighbourhood of Staveley, but then resided at Manchester ; and that in his house at Green Edge IGreenheys], parish of Holme [township of Hulme], Wagg found a quantity of property,—not, however, the produce of the recent robberies,—which induced Wagg to leave Hawley in custody. The article then related the circumstances of the apprehension of a man named Platts.—The alleged libel in the Derbyshire On onicle was in somewhat similar terms, being headed,—" Dispersion of a Gang of Thieves, and Cap ture of one of the Leaders."—Mr. John George Portman, sub-editor and reporter of the Derbyshire Courier, proved that the defendant communicated to him the paragragh in question for publication, which was read over to him, and he said it was all right. The defendant, subsequently to its publication, said if any one came to inquire about it, the printers might give his name as the author.—Mr. Henry Adams, editor of the Derbyshire Chronicle, gave similar evi dence as to the oral communication of the statement by Wagg to him for publication in that paper. He subsequently showed Wagg a proof, and Wagg said it was quitecorrect.— Mr. Cyrus Alcock, superintendant in the Manchester police, stated that he went with Wagg to search the plaintiff's house, and on the way there he told Wagg that he he had known Hawley and his house some years, and he thought him re spectable and honest. Witness was very sorry afterwards that the search was made at all. No stolen property of any kind was found.—lnspector Richard Green gave similar tes timony.—Mr. Brailsford, of the Brown Bull, Salford, proved that he took the Derbyshire Courier; and another witness, named Lowe, proved that he had read the paragraph aloud to the company, and then he and his companions determined amongst themselves not to go again for beer to the house of Hawley, in whose neighbourhood they lived and worked. — Robinson, another workman, gave similar evidence.—For the defendant, Mr. Watson addressed the jury, admitting that the plaintiff must have their verdict, but urging circumstances in mitigation of damages.—The learned judge said there could be no doubt that the defendant was the publisher of these statements ; and it would be absurd to say that they were not libels. He thought juries ought to deal liberally with plain tiffs in cases of libel of this kind ; and if it was once allowed to defendants to escape, on the supposition that a man who publishes what injures another is not to be civil!y responsible for it, there would be an end to all free discussion. The de fendant, there was reason to believe, had not been actuated by any malignant motives. This was one of a class of libels which ought to arrest the attention of juries, being so parti cular and specific in statement. The jury found for the plain tiff, damages £2O. HARRISON V. KNIGHT The plaintiff in this action (which was in trover), Mr. Henry II arison, was a shipping merchant at Manchester; and the-defendant, Mr. Nathan Knight, was also a merchant here. In 1838, the plaintiff bought from the defendant some " drills," to the amount of £470 55., for which he gave him, on account, a bill for £440, leaving a balance of £3O ss. ; for which balance security was given, by the plaintiff en dorsing tb the defendant a bill of £lOO, at twelve months, which he had in his possession at the time. This £lOO bill being dishonoured, the plaintiff next gave the defendant an order on London for £3l 10s., and he also paid £1 elpenses. That order being also dishonoured at maturity, legal pro ceedings were commenced against the plaintiff in August, 1838, to recover the £3O ss. principal debt. The plaintiff was arrested, and he then paid £33 18s. 6d. the debt and costs (but without interest); but have never received from the defendant the £lOO bill and the £3O ss. order, given as security for the payment. For the plaintiff it was contended, that, the debt and costs being paid in full, there was no pre text for keeping these instruments from the plaintiff. It appeared that the defendant's solicitor, Mr. T. T. Marriot, said to Mr. Mariner, the party - sent by Knight in April last, to demand the bill, that he or anybody else might have it on payment of 12s. law charges. Mr. Knight subsequently went to Mr. Harrison, and said he was exceedingly sorry that this should have happened ; he thought all had been settled, and he knew of no claim against him. Mr. Harrison said, " I have no feeling against you, Mr. Knight ; I only wish to recover my bills ; and to show you that I have not any feeling against you, I will leave it to any respectable merchant or man of business in Manchester." Mr. Knight appeared exceedingly deajrous that it should be so ; but Mr. Marriott, he said, was out of town, and he did not know what steps he had taken, but he would see him on the subject when he returned. Mr. Harrison said he was going to London that night and some party must be named that day. Mr. Knight said he could not act without Mr. Marriott ; and, at the recommendation of Mr. Knight, Mr. Harrison gave Mr. Mariner a letter, authorizing him to act for him. Mr. Mariner was subsequently told by the defendant's son-in-law that the defendant had seen Mr. Marriott, who was certain that he was right in holding the In cross-examination, the witness, Mr. Mariner) stated, that in 1837 the plaintiff was insolvent, and this year he had made some arrangement with his creditors. When a written demand was presented to Mr. Marriott, he said—" Very well." This was the case for the plaintiff,—For the defendant, Mr. Cresswell sub mitted that there was no evidence of conversion, as there was no refusal, and there was both demand and refusal to make out a conversion ; and all that Mr. Marriott had said was, " Very well."—His Lordship said, he thought there was no evidence as against the defendant.—Mr. Dundas, for the plaintiff, said, the bill was retained by the defendant's attor ney.—The Judge : Yes ; but it was held by him against the will of the defendant. A letter was then put in from Mr. Hodgson, then a clerk of Mr. Marriott's, stating that part of the costs and interest remained unpaid, and that the bills would be handed over to the plaintiff, on:payment of costs. —His Lordship thought this was sufficient to establish prima' facie conversion.—Mr. Cresswell, for the defendant, said, that the pleadings only referred to the £lOO bill, and did not include the «30 order. The plaintiff was arrested for £3oss, but could not be arrested for interest, and therefore the de fendant still had a on the bills, and was entitled to hold the bills until the interest and costs were paid. The £lO3 bill was endorsed to the plaintiff " without recourse," and therefore it was not worth one farthing to him. The plaintiff had issued two writs for the bill; and, he submitted, that, in point of law, there was a balance still due, and therefore a lien on the bills ; and, however small that balance, the de fendant had a right to retain the bills till that sum was paid. No witness was called for the defence.—The learned Baron said, that the £lOO bill, being endorsed to the plaintiff "with out resource," was no inure in effect than a promissory note, and was no more than Mr. Harrjson's personal security. The draft for £3l lOs was next given as collateral security. The question was, whether or no there washny interest or any costs due to Mr. Knight at the time of the demand for the restitution of the bills. There was an amount of £1 10s added to the £3O 5s in the order for £3l 10s. If there was a right to add that £1 lOs there was no proof of that amount having been paid, and that remaining unpaid would give the defend ►nt a lien on the bills. The jury found for the plaintiff, da lages ls, costs 40s. SATURDAY. JOULE V. JACKSON Mr. Joule, an extensive brj;eiinSalford, brought this action against the defendant, who is a hailiffof Sir Oswald Mosley, baronet, lord of the manor of Manchester, to re cover possession of certain casks of his which the defendant had seized under a distress for rent,. against William Brier ley, a publican, in Manchester, a tenant of Sir 0. Mosley. Mr. , Cresswell was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wightman for the defendant. The question in this action was, whether the casks of brew ;rs, in Manchester, and, indeed, in all the district, were Ha ile to be distrained by the landlord of a publican. The cus tom, it was proved, was, for brewers not to sell their casks, and that Mr. Joule had upon his invoices the words, "the barrels to be . returned.when empty, being never sold." In June last he supplied four casks or half barrels to Brierley, who, being in arrears of rent, his furniture and stock were seized by the defendant for the landlord. At that time two of the casks were empty, and the others contained porter'. All of these casks were seized and sold under the execution. The only question was, whether the barrels in question were distrainable. A verdict for 40s. damages was taken for the plaintiff, leave being given to the defendant to move to enter a non suit, when the question of law will be fully argued. WHITEHEAD V. CHADWICK AND OTHERS. The plaintiff, in this case, is an attorney, and the defen dants are surveyors of the highways for the parish of Middle ton. The action was brought to recover a sum of money due for work and labour done, but the proceedings did not pos sess the slightest interest. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages, £l7l 2s. 3d. NALL V WILSON. The plaintiff in this case was John Nall, a butcher and cattle-dealer, at Manchester. The action was brought against the defendant, who is also a butcher, to recover the sum of £240 56. being the balance of an a ccount due from him for cattle. 'There had been dealings between the parties for cattle, for several years, to the amount of £7,000, and the sum sought to be recovered was the balance alleged to be due to the plaintiff. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £240 ss. HOLPORD V. DUNNETT. This was an action brought by Mr. John Holford, the owner of a house at Rusholme, about two miles from Man chester, to recover compensation for damages done tothe house, grounds, trees, shrubs, &c., by the defendant, Mr. William Dunnett, accountant, Manchester, who was tenant of the house, which was called Heald House, and about two acres of land for four years, at a yearly rent of £5O. The term was from Lady-day, 1836, and the defendant left the house in April last. Several offers were made by the plain tiff's counsel to refer the matter, but they were refused. It appeared, that the defendant had removed a conservatory, a gate, and other articles,. which he had before put down, on finding that the plaintiff refused to renew his lease. A con siderable body of evidence was laid before the jury, but it was totally uninteresting. The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £3O. POTTER V. GREGOR This was an action to recover damages for false imprison ment. The plaintiff is a fishmonger, in Salford, and was in the habit of procuring his fish from a company, described as the Dublin Fish Company. In the course of his business he received a number of salmon-boxes, in which that fish is conveyed from one place to another. In the beginning of the present year he took two houses in Smithfield Market, Man chester, which wanted repair, and one of the salmon-boxes which he had by him was sent there to be used. Whilst it was lying there, some person connected with the company saw it, and gave information to the defendant, who was an agent of the company, and, by his directions, the plaintiff was taken into, custody. He was lodged in the Shudehill lockup the whole night : the next morning he was examined before Sir Thomas Potter, and discharged. For this imprisonment the present action was brought. • It was proved that the plaintiff suffered considerably from the effects of the night's imprisonment. On the part of the defendant it was con tended, and witnesses were called to prove that the police- ,fficer who apprehended the plaintiff ha'd acted upon his own .uthority, The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, da- rages £lO The Court adjourned at seven o'clock MONDAY. SHEFFIELD AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY COMPANY V. MACAULEY. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Wightman appeared for the plain iffs ; Mr. Dundas, Mr. Crompton, and Mr. Cowling for the efendant. . The declaration stated that the defendant, who is a sur ;eon at Leicester, was the proprietor of twenlohares in the - Sheffield and Manchester Railway Company, and that he 'as indebted to the company in the sum of £450, for four mils upon his shares. To this the defendant pleaded that he yas not indebted in the manner and form described, and, secondly, that he was not .a shareholder in the company in :he manner and form alleged. . . Mr. CRESSWELL said, 7cl; was an action brought to reco ver from the defendant the amount of four separate calls made upon him in respect of his proprietorship of twenty shares in the company, which was established in 1837, for making a railway from Sheffield, in the West riding of the county of York, to Manchester, in the county of Lancaster. The pro ceedings in this action would, be regulated according to the directions of the different clauses in the act of parliament. The jury would be well aware 'that when a concern of this sort was in progress, it was absolutely necessary that from time to time calls should be nude upon the shareholders, and recovered without any great degree of difficulty, otherwise it would be im Accordingly „ in this act of parliament there were provisions :0 recover calls, and the nature of the evidence which should re given was specified. Ile should, therefore, direct their retention to the various clauses in the act by which the di ... 7ectors were empowered to make calls, and describing the manner in which they were to proceed, if they found occasion, in courts of justice to recover those calls. The act of parlia ment was passed in May, 1837. After that had been done, L __ • and before they were to make any calls, of course it was ne cessary the directors should comply with one requisition of the act, namely, that all the capital of the company should be subscribed for, and until all of it had been so subscribed for, the directors were not authorised to take any steps to wards carrying the act into execution. The legislature, the jury would find, provided for evidence to be given that all the capital had been subscribed for; for, in section 107, it was enacted, that a certificate, under the hand and seal of a justice of the peace, should be given, that the whole £700,000 had been subscribed, and which certificate the justice was authorised and required to give, upon due, proof being given before him. He (the learned counsel) should show that this preliminary matter had been complied with, by the produc tion of the magistrate's certificate. That having been done, the statute required the company to make a register of the shareholders, by section 110, and he should show that this had been made. The 115th section enabled the directors, from time to time, as they should find it necessary, to carry the act into execution to ,make calls, no such call to exceed £ lO . on each — share, and 21 days' notice to be giien in one or more of the newspapers circulating in the counties of York, Lancaster, Derby, and . Chester. The proprietors were next required to pay the calls at such a time and in such a place as the directors appoint. The next clause to which he would direct attention was the 116th, which pre scribed the mode of proceeding in case the calls which were imile were not paid. The learned counsel read this clause. It provided, that in case any proprietor neglected or refused to pay the instalment due upon his shares at the time and place and in the manner appointed by the directors, together with the interest, for two months after the day for paying the same, then it should be lawful for the company to sue the proprietor in any court of record ; the clause next provided, that the company might, if they pleased, forfeit the shares, but that no forfeiture should be acted upon, unless confirmed, not merely by the directors, but by a general meeting of the shareholders. In the 118th section, the legislature pointed out the mode in which the parties should proceed when an action was brought—the form of declaration and the nature of the evidence. His lordship would, of course, see whether the record was drawn in conformity with the act, and that upon the trial it would only be necessary to prove that the de fendant was a proprietor at the time of making such calls, that such notices of calls were given, without proving the ap- _ pointment of directors who made such call prove that the defendant was a:proprietor at the time of such calls being made, the production of the register of share holders was prima facie evidence of the defendant being a proprietor, provided that the name of the defendant on the record agreed with that in the book. He (the learned coun sel) should shew by the register he should produce, of August, 1838, that the defendant was then a proprietor of twenty shares in this concern. He should complete this portion of the evidence by producing two newspapers which circulated in the four counties he had mentioned, and when he had done that, he should have proved the formal part of the evidence. He should next prove that on the 13th March, a call of £2 10s. was made, payable on the Ist May ; that on the 10th July, 1839, a call of £5 wa.5... 11 44e, payable on the 6 th of August; that on the 20th November, 1839, another call was made, payable on the Ist of January, I 840; and on the 11th of March, 1840, a call of £lO, payable on the Ist of May, 1840. This would make, o n the whole, £22 10s. per share. When he had given thi s ev idence, he apprehended he should be entitled to the verdict of the jury, unless his learned friend could shew that the defendant was not a proprietor, or that he had paid his quota according to act of parliament. William Rhodes ,0 clerk in the office of the company, pro duced the register a shareholders, dated 29th August, 1838. The name of the defendant, Thomas Macauley, of Leicester, in the county of Leicester, surgeon, was therein registered as the proprietor of twenty shares.' The witness next produced several books of proceedings of the directors, and referred to an order of the 13th March, 1839, for a call of £2 lOs per share, to be paid on or before the Ist May. The proceedings of this meeting were signed by Mr. William Sidebottom, the chairman. Another call was made on the 10th of July, for £5 per cent., (the shares being £lOO each,) payable on or before the 6th August. This was also signed by Mr. William Sidebottom. On the 20th November, 1839, another call was made of £5 per share, payable on the Ist January, 1840. Another call of £lO was made on the 11th March, 1840, pay able on the Ist May. This was also signed by Mr. Sidebot tom. Witness could only say Mr. Sidebottom signed these calls from knowing his handwriting. Cross-examined by Mr. DUNDAS. — The entry of Mr. Macaulev's shares in the registry was in the handwriting of Mr. G. 13. Johnson. Witness was not present at the general meeting. Witness himself, wrote the order for the call of £2 10s. Mr. Thomson wrote the order for the call of the 10th July, 1839, for £5. He wrote that which was in pale ink, and the signature which was in dark ink. Witness went into the service of the company in October, 1838. Lord Wharncliffe was then the chairman, and Mr. William Side bottom was the deputy-chairm a n. There were sixteen direc tors. Mr. Sykes, Mr. Dalton, and Mr. Bennett were then directors. Mr. Rawdall was not, but he became one at the general meeting of February, 1840. Mr. Thomson was secre tary when witness entered the service of the company. Mr. Ward was secretary before him. Mr. Thomson was appointed July 13th, 1838,, and witness read the terms of his appoint ment. The first general meeting after the act was passed was held on the 23d October, 1837. At that meeting a resolution was passed for appointing John Bennett, of Manchester, Mr. Sykes, and Mr. Dalton directors, in .the place of three others, who had retired. At that !meeting another resolution was passed, for adjourning the meeting to the first Wednes day in February, 1838, and stating also, that in the meantime no call for money be made for carrying on the work. At the meeting on the 7th February, 1838, a resolution was passed, " that the chairman of the meeting. affix t he company's seal to the share register." In this register the name of Mr. Macauley appeared for the same number of shares as in the former register. Witness here referred to the entry of the 18th April, and among other things found, it was ordered that the subscription deeds and one copy of the magistrate's certificate should be sealed up, and deposited in the Man chester and Salford District Bank by the deputy-chairman; and then it was resolved that Mr. Vignoles be appointed en gineer for completing the work, upon the terms specified in his engagement ; that Hadfield and Grave, of Manchester, and Mr. Parker, of Sheffield, be appointed solicitors to the com pany. Then there was set out Mr. Vignoles' letter to " G. B. Johnson, Esq.," secretary to the company, detailing what he engaged to perform to the company. Mr. Johnson was a per son who kept the books. Witness does not know whether there was any treasurer appointed. On the 9th October 1839, Lord Wharncliffe in the chair, a meeting was held, at which it was moved by Mr. Ellison, seconded by Mr. Bennett, and carried unanimously, that a special general meeting be called on the 25th October, to determine the expediency of enforc ing the payment of arrears on calls already made by the di rectors, and whether any and, what remuneration the engi- shire,fo v our ca neer was entitled to receive in consideration of his services in surveying and setting out the line. On the 25th October, the special general meeting was held in the Cutters' Hall, Sheffield. Lord Wharncliffe was in the chair ; and his lord ship stated, that the meeting was saved the necessity of con sidering the second subject, as a letter had been received from the engineer, withdrawing all claim for remuneration beyond his contract. Then there was an enumeration of the arrears of calls ; and after a full explanation from the chairman of causes why they had not been enforced, a resolution was passed, by which the meeting expressed a full reliance that the directors would carry into proper effect the powers of the act for enforcing the payment of calls in arrears, and for forfeiting shares on which there were calls in arrears ; and that they deemed it most desirable to leave the matter to the discretion of the directors, and not to lay down any fixed rule for their government. (Mr. Cresswell said there was a duplicate book of the same meeting in which the entry was made rather better sense. In this book the words or forfeiting were substituted for and forfeiting.) Wit ness believed that there was another book containing an entry of this meeting at Sheffield. A rough draft book was kept by the secretary of what was to be done at the meetings. On the.4th December, 1839, there was a hoard meeting held, Mr. Sidebottom in the chair. There was an entry in the proceedings of that meeting, of Mr. Vignoles having ten dered his resignation as engineer, which was accepted, and a resolution passed stating, that there was no blame to be attached to his professional character. A subsequent reso lution related to his giving information to his successor, and to the appointment of a sub-committee, to receive from him a correct schedule of the shares held for him by parties to whom he had given indemnity, preparatory to the board de termining upon the course to be pursued with reference to those shares. The Manchester and Liverpool District Bank, at Manchester, and Messrs. Parker, Shaw and Co. were the bankers for the company, at Sheffield. Witness had paid money into and received from the District Bank on account of the company. Witness could not refer to the appoint ment of the bankers. The secretary paid money. On the 31st August, 1840, Mr. John Parker, M.P., signed, as chairman, the proceedings of the meeting, thanking Lord Wharncliffe on the occasion of his retirement from the office of chairman of the company. Mr. Parker was solicitor to the company, but witness did not know that he was clerk before he was solicitor. Re-examined. —The second call of the 6th April, 1839, for £2 10s. per share, was advertised in the Leeds Mercury and the Manchester Courier, of April 6th. These advertise ments were signed " Charles Thomson ' clerk and secretary." The third call was ad vertised in the She f field Independent and Sheffield Mercury. Mr. DUNDA.S said he would admit that the calls were duly advertised. Mr. DUNDAS.—Do you know whether any notices about the calls were sent out to Mr. Vignoles' friends before Jun Mr. CRESSWRLL objected to this question. Mr. DUNDAS repeati—' J quest; min anothe- The witness no rccr ection sent to M' of the call . said he had no recollection of any not . • Macaulfm•-` Circulars v .ound to all the sh Mr. CRES'' WELL put in a proxy to vote at a general meet signed by Mr. Macauley: It was signed 16th Dec. 1837, and appointed Mr. J. S. Sidebottom, of Waterside, Derby- This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. DUNDAS said he had an objection to take under the 115th section of the act. By that section the several pro prietors of shares in the capital stock of the company were required to pay the calls made upon them " to such person, at such time, in such place, and in such manner, as the di rectors of the said company shall from time to time direct for the use of the said undertaking." Now in the resolution of the directors for the call on the 13th March, 1838, there was no direction of any place, where, or any person, to whom the call should be paid, nor of the way in which' it should be paid. Mr. CRESSWELL said he should not answer this objection, as his lordship had disposed of it already at Durham. Mr. COWLING begged his learned friend's pardon. The learned judge had reserved the point for him (Mr. Cowling). The learned JUDGE said the calls were intended to be paid in such a manner, in such times and places, as the directors should from time to time appoint. In his judgment the re solution was what the directors had done among themselves ; but if the objection extended to that, _it was certainly not hen and w tice by which the public should be informed w and to whom the calls should be paid, and that appeared in the advertisement. If, however, there was any thing in the objection, it was fatal ; but he should overrule it, giving the defendant leave to move for a nonsuit upon that ground Mr. CRESSWELL said he did not think there were any di rections as to the places of payment in any of the calls ; and if this objection were to be fatal there would be an end to the case. _ _ Mr. COWLING said the objection just started related_ to all - - - - here was his lordship's attention. In the resolution 01 the 13th March, for the first call, it was not for a call from the date of that resolution, but for a call on a future day. This he appre . March a resolution was passed, ordering a call to be made on the 30th March, payable on the 30th May. The JUDGE said it might be a blundering way of transact ing business, but he should overrule the objection with leave to move. _ _ . Mr. COWLING then objected that the book and entries of the directors' proceedings were not evidence against the de fendant. By the 109th section they must be proved to be signed by the gentleman who acted as chairman of the meet- but the I,;itness could not prove the signatures to t proceedings to be in the handwriting of Mr. gidehottom. Mr. CRESSWL thought his learned . friend Mr. Dundas had exercised a sound discretion in not making this objection and in leaving it to his learned friend Mr. Cowling. The pro ceedings were signed by Mr. Sidebottorn, as chairman there was evidence that be acted as chairman ; and therefore no Mr. WIGHT➢IAN quoted the 'latter part of the clause to show that the book of proceedings was to be read without proof of the meeting being called, or of the signature of the chairman. All of these were to be presumed. - • The Jr, DOE overruled the objection, but reserved the point M defendant railway a DUNDAS then addressed the jury on the part of the t. After a few remarks upon the advantages which and other companies had in courts of law over ordinary plaintiffs, he said he was there on the part of the plaintiff, Mr, Macauley, to answer why it was that he resisted this claim, and why he ventured to put him- elf before _a jury to _maintain him, in his resistant The defendant said in the _first _ place, that if he ever was a proprietor, which he denied, the directors had ab solved him from all liability with reference to these calls ; and that the claim they now set up was in breach of good faith. Mr. Macauley said that for want of evidence he could Son his right of not prove this, and therefore, he fell back the law, and said to the company, " If you fix me as a pro prietor by law, you shall by law be judged, and I will shew you that within that act of porliament I am no proprietor at all." His defence, therefore was two-fold—first that the directors bad discharged him from liability ; next that they made this claim upon him in breach of good faith. His learned friend Mr. Cresswell had told them that this concern began in 1837, the date of the act of parliament! It was a very large concern ; £700,000 were to be subscribed in shares of £lOO each, and there were various enactments in the bill for securing such a proprrty. Mr. CRESSWELL begged his learned friend's pardon for interrupting him ; he had forgotten to put in the magistrate's certifi _ate. vv ..... Mr. DUNDAS would consider it as read. Mr. CRESSWELL put the document in. It purported to be signed by J. F. Foster, Esq. Mr. DUNDAS continued. The company seemed from the first to have been involved in great difficulty. Numbers of Ascribed, but in 1837 there was still wanting a considerable amount of subscriptions to carry on the concern, and the compulsory powers of the act could not be enforced till the list was full. A great number of persons who had their scrip would not register, and many who had were ex tremely anxious to sell. Very active measures were taken by persons, who, on this occasion, he might call " malig nants," to break up the company •, and under these cir cumstances, the company, through their agents, officers, and directors, tried to excite Mr. Vignoles, the engineer, by every means in their power, to purchase as much of the scrip as he could. He did so, and in that way the subscription list was filled. In November in that year, he was pressed, right and left, by the, persons belonging to the company, to make some bold measure, to strike some shew of operations upon the share market, in order to support the credit of the concern. Mr. Vignoles, who was a person of very warm and ardent views in these matters, thought .he was justified in taking the steps he did, which was, to make a very large purchase, to the amount of between 1300 and 1400 shares, a liability that not he, nor twenty such, could withstand. This was perfectly well known to the company. Mr. Leeds, a broker at Manchester, was introduced as a person through whom he might make these purchases, and through this gentleman a very large investment was made by'Mr. Vignoles., After this the concern seemed to have got new life. The market being thus lightened, the subscription list in the month of April was tilled up ; then and not till then the concern went on ; but up to the present day, he believed, the shares were worth nothing at all. The jury should judge whether the conduct of the gentlemen who had the management of the concern had not contributed to that. The company at its origin had for its chairman a nobleman whose name was a tower of strength, Lord Wharncliffe—a man of the highest honour, of the most strict integrity, and of the most excellent conduct both in public and private affairs. Of course, the noble lord's busi ness took him much to London, and though his lordship attended meetings occasionally, the management of affairs was in the hands of other parties. Mr. William Sidebottom was appointed deputy chairman. There were 14 directors besides them, and in the management of these persons from the passing of the act to the 7th of June in the present year was the foundation and government of the whole concern. The market, by the purchase of Mr. Vignolles from Mr. Leeds, being lightened of pressure, and the concern restored to integrity, it then became a question with whom Mr. Vignolles's shares had been lodged. Mr. Vignolles handed them over to friends who acted as trustees for him ; his (Mr Dundas's) client to day was one, for he had no earthly interest in the concern, having never paid one farthing to wards it or taken any interest in it whatever. True, a proxy had been put in, but it was mere waste paper, for his client had nothing to do with the concern except his name having been given to , Mr. Vignolles for 20 shares. Every person who could thus be got to act as a friend to Mr. Vignolles took so many votes ; if he had 20 shares, for in stance, he had 20 votes, and the jury would see at once the advantage the company had in being backed by Mr. Vignolles and his friends. So went on the concern. The first regis tration of any proprietor—of Mr. Macauley himself—did not take place till February 1838. Before that the whole lay in scrip shares • there were no shares properly so c alled, be cause there bad been no register prepared. Some calls were made in the course of next year, but no charge was made against the defendant, no demand was made upon him, no steps were taken against him,—in fact, he was not looked to by the company for any payment with reference to these shares. These calls were made in 1839 ; and about the 25th October, 1839, there arose, for the first time, a consideration of what should be done as to the arrears of the calls upon the shares bought by Mr.Vignolles, and transferred to his friends. Just before the general meeting, in October, 1839, negocia tions were set on foot to relieve Mr.Vignolles from the charge of engineer to the company. There was a requisition for calling upon the subscribers in general, to know what should be done with Mr. Vignolles' shares, and a special general meeting was held for that purpose in effect, although the re quisition did not mention Mr. Vignolles in terms, and also for considering upon what terms he should be discharged from his office. Lord Wharncliffe was in the chair at that meeting. The matter was fully discussed, and the share holders came to the unanimous opinion, that the directors should exercise their discretion with regard to the expediency of calling upon the parties in arrear to pay. The meeting also decided that Mr. Vignolles' resignation should be accepted. Immediately after that meeting had dissolved, a board meeting was held—there was no evidence of the fact, but still he could prove it —Lord Wharncliffe and some other directors of the company were present, and they exercised their discretion. That meeting thought that in duty. and in conscience the shares purchased by Mr. Vig nolles from Mr. Leeds, the object of it having been effected, should be forfeited, and he be discharged from all liability with respect to them. It was so stated to Mr. Vignolles by Lord Wharncliffa and Mr. Sidebottom, who came out of the committee room for the purpose of communicating it to him. From first to last the negotiation was carried on in perreca. good faith, as might be expected when Lord Whar•ncliffe was a party. So stood the matter. Mr. Vignolles believing he was released from responsibility, took no steps in the busi ness ; when to his infinite astonishment, he found, after the matter had been slumbering seven or eight months, on the 7th June—although he (Mr. Dundas) found no entry of it in the book of proceedings, he should be able to prove it—the directors resolved that Mr. Vignolles should still be held liable for all the past calls upon his shares, besides two calls made in 1840, since the time of the arrangement made with him that the shares should be considered as forfeited. This resolution of the directors was carried by a majority of one only ; there being seven to six that Mr. Vignolles should be held answerable. Was this fair play ? Could any one doubt it was a breach of faith? Lord Wharncliffe, who voted in the minority, was so sensible of the ill conduct of his brother directors, that like a man of conscience and honour, he re nounced the chairmanship, and he retired from the direction of a concern in which the parties he was connected with had not the same sense that he had of what was due to a man's word. Did not the jury think that Mr. Macauley, having now heine. called noon for the first time for the pay• there had not been, since October 1837, any legal direction appointed. In support of this thelearned counsel cited the be chosen at the first meeting of proprietors, by those then present ; but at that meeting there were no proprietors, be cause there was no register. The thing was absolutely and itirely void. The lea'rned counsel also cited the 152nd sec- It was in evidence that at the first general meeting, Mr. Dalton. and Mr. Bennett, were elected but he apprehended, as ti every thing done _ were not prop them was invalid, and went for The JUDGE asked how that point was - made out? Mr. DUNDAS replied that they could not be proprietors, inasmuch as they were not registered, there being no register. The other directors were appointed by the act of Parliament. Now of these three, two, Messrs. Dalton and Bennett, were in the majority of 7, which repealed what had been done before for releasing Mr. Vignolles from liability. This would have given a majority • for Mr. Vignoles. Another objection related to the qualification of the directors. There was no treasurer to the company, but the Manchester and Liverpool District Bank did that duty. Now, Mr. Sidebottom, deputy chair wan of this company, was a shareholder and deputy chair man of this bank; Mr. Dalton was a shareholder in it, so also was Mr. Randal. lie apprehended, therefor( these three persons by being partners and havit in the bank, were disqualified as director 150th section. If Mr. Sidebottorn this section ppointe an interest iccOiding to the an express part of the directioh had not been nd there was not a sufficient dir learned counsel, after a few general remarks, concluded hi address. Mr. CROMPTON called upon the others ption, stat Mr. CRESSIVELL said it would not be produced. Mr. CROMPTON next called for the transfer of shares from 'homas Wylie of Sheffield to the defendants. Mr. CRESSWELL produced it. It purported to be 'dated on the 16th December, 1837; that the shares were num- .he consideration was £lBl5, aomi.ToN observed, that in the book there was a 1 of these shares having been entered in the on_the 10th of January, 1838, signed by Mr. Ward lder-secretary to the fore the passing of the act, and afterwards a book ie service of the company. He prepared two re bisfers of shares, A. and 8., which he has no doubt are those now prodUced. Witness has seen the subscription deed ; the defendant was not a party to it. Thomas Wylie was a perty to it. Remembers an opposition being got up to the railway. The concern was sleeping at that time. It was in the latter part of 1837. The subscription list was not then filled up. The witness was asked whether Mr. Vignolles had not interfered, at the request of the directors, about the compan shares ; but Mr. CRESSWELL objected. to the question . , and the JUDGE held the objectioeiatid. In cross-exatninution by Mr. CRESSWELL, said there was a book kept for the memorials of the register of transfers. Re-examined.—No seal was kept on that book. It was written short, and every half-year copied into the sealed transfer. • Mr. Edward Leeds said he was a sharebroker, at Alan- Chester Witnes The witness was ed what ( shares, and Mr. CRESSWELL objected to the question. The learned Judge allowed the objection, but said he would take a note of the point. Air. T. S. Eldrin, a clerk from Somerset House, produced an examined copy of the proprietors and shareholders of the Manchester and Liverpool District Bank. Mr. CRESSWELL objected to the reception of this evidence. _ _ Mr. CROMPTON cited act 7 Geo. IV. ch. 16, section 6. to how that this return was made evidence in all cases. Mr. Cr,EsswELL said, after this he would not press the objection. The witness then produced'the return, from which it ap peared that Mr. Sidebottom, Mr. Randall, and Mr. Dalton were shareholders in the District Bank. It was admitted that Mr. Sidebottom man and a director of that bank in 1837 as the deputy-chair and had continued so ever since. During the progress of this evidence, a number of que._ tions were put by the defendant's counsel, which were dis allowed. Eventually the learned j> g e took a note to this Mr. Dundas tenders evidffee to show that there agreement between some of the directors and Mr. ;s; that Mr. Vignolles, at the instigation of the Is, induced the defendant and a number of other per ry an agreement to indemnify them from all liability, res ; that they did take them accordingly ; that ds some of the directors, at a board meeting, of which there is no entry in the hooks, agreed that those should be forfeited. —I think this amounts to no forfeiture, and refuse to receive the evidence a' This was the defendants' case. Mr. CRESSWELL, in a brief reply, vindicated the proceed ings of the directors. A verdict- was then returned for the plaintiffs, damages £465, subject to the decision on the points of law. • In seventeen other causes, dependent upon similar points, verdicts for the several amounts, were recorded for the plain tiffs. The business of the assizes terminated at half-past three in the afternooon, having occupied exactly three weeks. to takes} s irrelevant y refused to come to ai After r ut Mrs. H. Cutts, their - , kneo of s and the trusiews , ultimately —.Lined that Alr. Cutts should give her £lOO down, and adhere to the first proposition as to th e se ttl emen t. I n I addition to this the watch and chain purchased on his mar- were first given to ii I solicit( hat the in his l meet in the pre and it was purloined from her the ele ,nt wearing apparel (the most obtained with money secretly ad it is but justic trinkets, &e., were given up o Mr. Cutts to say, that Mr. hired that gentleman's con- the lady's uncle, de duct to be " handsome and liberal in the extreme." This agreement was completed on the Saturday, and Mrs. H. Cutts remained at Chesterfield until the Wednesday, when she took her departure for Worksop, in company with a cele brated swell coachman well known here and at Retford. Her conduct at Mr. Evans's inn, at Chesterfield, on the above-named Saturday, was very extraordinary and alarming; and such was the apprehension entertained from her ex citement that the stomach-pump was resorted to. She was known to be in the habit of taking exciting drugs, and dur ing one of the paroxysms she gave the sum of £BO to Mi ss rrnbi watch to her brother ; but of course ..."...6 '...• ....it* 'um... -r-- •-•--- ----- ---- --- --- ,----• .uvans, aria ner gm,. ~....... --- ment of four calls, was justified in saying he was relieved they were given up to her again. From this period up to from all responsibility • and when there had been a breach of that of her death, Mr. Cutts was totall y i g norant o f whither the engagement in taking advantage of points of law under ,_e had she gone, until Saturday week, when he received the act of parliament ? Such was the history of the first part intellig ence ro thels, he immediately proceeded to Miss Sankey's, of her appalling deat h. Acc ompanied by one of Mr. Macauley's defence ; the other part rested upon legal of his b points which he (Mr. Dundas) would address to the learned at N ew Ferry. It appears that during her r es id ence judge. On the evidence as it stood there was no register of at New Ferry, she had represented herself to be the. Hon. proprietors till February, 1838, and then, for the first time, Miss Coutts, and at other times as the lion. Miss A. Coop- Mr. Macauley's name appeared as a registered proprietor. er of Watnall-hall, Nottinghamshire. We are info rme d He was not an original subscriber, therefore he must have that she bad previously lodged at two places before she went been made a proprietor under the terms of the act of parlia- to Miss Sankey's, and that she was in the habit of getting so went. Notice had been givento produce the transfers under intoxicated and excited, that the people of the house were which Mr. Macauley was a purchaser. If they were produced obliged to watch her when under these circumstanc es , lest she he should see whether they proved what the act required be- s h o uld set herself or the houses on fire. Th ere is no doubt fore a person could by. law become a proprietor. Mr. that this fatal propensity caused her death. When she lived Macauley, if he purchased the shares at all, purchased them d e rs probable of a stocking thato n the an d fatal garterni g night were r n e which fou nd s o h i e i with her husband she was guilty of this practice, and she was from some one who was no proprietor ;he might have pur- always anxious to have a candle burning in her bedroom at chased them from some one who was the rossessor of scrip night. but who could not at the time be a proprietor because the holder of stock was no proprietor till he was registered, atudi to death that she was intoxicated, and had not undressed, as no one was registered till February, 1838. The .learned of this Miss counsel quoted the 10th section of the act in support Sankey delivered to. Mr. H. Cutts of letters nneitinn nnritand;nn. thnt nntii the register had hee'! sealedtheitciins mass from noblemen and gy.,,,i—..... _.__,, wast he leg. g l i r u e r r d s had been - e -- o - r; ;.... Lii,iemen with whom the guilty Wolllgll containing of these adm pubiLum, cuitt.eaumg way uuLl• .•••• - -o no holder could legally transfer his shares. Another ob i a s n h , e t o representedo thers that hheerr husbandsel hi h rlYllng ; some of them were very curious, jection he should take was that a certificate ought to have y-infiated affectionate assurances. To some been given by the seller to Mr. Macauley, because without it there could be no memorial of a transfer or sale, and the treacherous seller continue liable on the production of the transfer ; if it were produced, he should see what was the consideration possession of her these artful schemesropey, leaving her without funds. By upon the face of it, for that must be duly stated according tofastil'leadvoibcttairflineodf she obtained from time to time consi derable the 55 George 111, chap. 84. Mr. CuusswELL as • -ked whether his learned friend meant frequent remittances. In some letters she is addressed as it Nir to contend that his client had stated that on the transfer '''y dear Mary Anne," and the copies of her replies which was false? breathe the spirit of youthful fervour and affection. From Mr. DUN DAS dared say that Mr. Macauley, when he delicacy to those who would suffer from the exposure of signed the transfer, did not care one farthing for the consi- their connections, the names of these writers are suppressed. deration, for he was, a mere nominee. When that instru- Mrs. Cutts' maiden name was Mary Steele, and not Mary ment was produced, he (Mr. D.) should see whether the Anne ; she was born at Palterton, near Bolsover, in the numbers were properly inserted, which he apprehended was county of Derby, in 1819. Her late father was an opulent necessary. There were other objections, which went to the man, and highly esteemed by all his neighbours, She was root of the whole direction. The first of these was, that married to Mr. H. Cutts on the 14 th January, 1838, and died on the 14th ultimo.—Nottingham Journal. POLICE INTELLIGENCE STEALING A SHAWL FRIDAV miserable-looking woman was brought up, charged wit inn a shawl from Mrs. Ridgeway, a lodging-house keep ark-lane ; also, with having pledged the same with ibroker in town. rs. Ridgeway stated that on Wednesday night she nu lane, in a state of a intoxic recognised her, begged some mo risoner in Pa ner having conveyed She then to s gave infor lentified the prisoner, who was sentenced to be in for three unotiths NBROKEF lamas Timmons, a boy ten years old, was accused of ing a table-cloth from Mr. Beasley, with whom he had employed, aim pledging the same with Mr. Holland, abroker, Scotland-road. :r. Beasley said he engaged the prisoner to keep an office ad in town. For some time past several articles were ;ed from the premises, and, having suspected _the pri- toner, he discharged him. Afterwards he employed Mini t attend-upon his sister-in-law, from whose house the prison( had stolen a table-cloth and pledged it. The mother of the boy stated, that when the t was brought home she inquir being told that he had receic he had c - ted him to take it to a pawnbroker, a of money. Mr. Beasley thot ;ht the pawnbroker was greatly to bleu ,6 to w 1 he should be inquired at goods from children of ten y was customary to tak, - Mr. Rushton was convinced that the pawnbrokers be checked. No good would be done tilt five or six c individuals were indicted. Every day some one or c these cases were brought up. The mother of the b , yielded to poverty, but the pawnbroker had no exec had taken the article without any. questions, and have known that a child ten years old could not hone! tain possession of a table-cloth so valuable as that otrt He considered the pawnbroker highly culpable, and sai, would remand the prisoner till Saturday. The prisoner remanded accordingly. )ther of STRIKING A SAILOR ON THE RIG - Riley,,chief nmieoith;;llip Mary, was charged with flogging and otherwise striking John Cornish, a seaman in the said vessel, while on her voyage from Bombay to Liver pool. - - The complainant stated that he had been flogged and stt by the chief mate while in the performance of his dat that his health had titled t miss the ca I the s YESTERDAY. SUSPICION OP ENTERING A HOUSE, WITH INTEN !k. young man of the name of Edv Takes, was placed before Mlli Rushton, on a charge of being fc en th Mr. L A under v eeper, llslitigton t, about half-pact ten o'cl It yard, and whom he had a scuff pnsone Idiness to be carri El the prisoner e saw the pri- Le yard wall, about two and assisted Mr. Lister HEARNE v. STOWELI The following letter has been addressed to the editor of the Times:— " Stn,—As much misapprehension prevails in reference to the case in which I was involved at the recent Liverpool Assizes, will you oblige me and serve the cause of truth, by allowing me, through the medium of your journal, to assure the public that the document which I read at a public meeting in Manchester, and which constituted the ground of trial, was neither fiction nor forgery, and that I was as little deceived as deceiving in giving it publicity ? There are at least four credible witnesses who are prepared to authenticate the narrative in every particular. These were in court during the time of the trial, besides a num ber of witnesses ready to prove that the imposition of degrading penances upon her members is alike the princi ,,h. nnrl the nraetine of 'the church of Rome. Why, then, :his evideilce ad- Lke: my dis- reamy ~rations, declined al together calling .witnesses, and rested :his defence mainly on a point of law. That point the judge so determined as to leave the jury no alternative but to return the verdict which they did. Deeply do I deplore the course which was pursued, and which was contrary to my judgment and wishes. However, we have abundant room as well as reason to move for a fresh trial. This will be done with as little delay as possible, and then, if the Lord spare us, the fullest evidence shall be laid before the public. Till then I would intreat them to suspend their judgment on the case. " Let me just add, that had I omitted the priest's name in the narrative which I read, there could not have been even the shadow of a pretext for charging rue with defamation, but I thought it more manly and straightforward to give the document as it stood, pledging myself to afford the Romanists opportunity to test its genuineness, should they require it. Of this promise they might have peacefully availed them selves, but they chose rather to make no application to me on the subject, save through an attorney's letter_ " I am, Sir, your obedient servant, " HUGH STOWELL." THE LATE MRS. HENRY CUTTS, OF CARBURTON It is with feelings of the most painful nature that we again recur to the appalling death of this female. Every circum stance connected with the brief but eventful life of this de pr•aved woman, far exceeds those detailed in fiction. Young, handsome, accomplished, and of the most captivating man ners, apparently artless and ingenuous, her heart appears to have been " deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked." The cool and systematic manner in which she for months kept administering poison to an affectionate husband ; the pleasure with which she witnessed his daily and ni g htly sufferings, the gradual wasting of his frame, and the total deprivation of the use of, his limbs, appear too monstrous for belief. But yet these are, unhappily, facts beyond the possi bility of a doubt. Nor• does it appear that her murderous ef forts were confined to her unsuspecting husband, for it has been also ascertained that poison had been administered by her to the household servants and farm labourers in his ser • vice. We feel it necessary to make this preliminary state ment les ly of our readers might be iniorant of the facts Ited. on oath upon ,the inquest held in October last upon ___e mother of her husband, when the corpse of the old lady was disinterred, in order that the charge of having poisoned her mother-in-law by means of small doses of arsenic might be investigated before the coroner ._rs. H. Cutts had been placed at that time under the veillance of the police at her husband's residence, and in formation was brought to the inquest-room that she had effected her escape from their custody. Nothing was heard of her until July last, when Mr. Cutts had intelligence of her at intervals. Shortly since,, her husband was informed that she was entitled to some copyhold property at Bolsover, under the will of her father lately deceased, and Mr. Cutts finding it necessary that they should be admitted to it. and also.b.ing anxious to make a competent provision for her, he authorised am, to go to CE Ld find out the wretched wont .s referred by her to Mr. Drabb an, whom he saw there, le, her attorney, in that Mr. Cutts - offered to settle on her the whOle of the of the property, and _.:tso a-year, if the trustees towu proe( would insure him from be This they refused to do, and the la n mater also accused the chief -mate with having applied olfensii oames, and done everything. to torment him during a In defence, Riley admitted that he - •had struck the pt soner, but denied that he had done him any bodily ha Ile called s rat wit ;es who .oved t was shipped he w I on going out saw tt lie, and who was afterw; in the entry. He afterwar& which his boy had closed a that a hair-brush, a cloth (the last soiled by si the floor of the roor apparently in He alarmed the watcl. :itry. A young man e soner iu!lie act Of drOpping . from .t before he va to seize him. Mr. Lister produced a pick-lock, found on tl spot where the prisoner was detained; which corresponded with those of there was one wanting, picked t remanded until this day i the yard He was ROBBERY FROM A SHOP. A youth named John Knowles was charged with having Saturday night, between eight and nine o'clocl from a shop. He was seen by the shop-keeper taken while in the act of putting it on. He s stolen a saw a lad running away with when he was caught. He was committed to gaol for fourteer ATTACK ON A GENTLEMAN William Wallace, a placed at the bar. The police officer o'clock on Saturday night, he saw the prisoner and a num ber of other desperate characters surroundi ing to rob a gentleman who was intoxicate( Gloucester-street, where there wa on the look-out for passenger hard labour for a month man of bad character, was 1 that, about 12 CHARGE OF STEALING WHIS Jasan :_, The prisoner was sent to RD OF A VESS} Ambassador, cask belonging to the ship bad been taken out of bond on board the shit .hat six Puncheons i his appearing to be intoxicated, t fell on the prisoner fr he had abstracted some of i there was found in it a large butt was remanded until this day, so be produced SMUGGLINC An old black man, named John Smith by a white gentleman, named Mr toms, who had found in his pos manufactured tobacco, of the kinds kin whisky .t further evid James Crow, of the Cu ,sion about 7111 of fore Cavendish. Prisoner said he brought it for his own use. Mr. Rushtcn said that he knew full well that in bringing it on shore he was doing an illegal act, and remanded him till Thursday, at the instance of the agent for the Custom house. ROBBERY BY A SHOPMAN A respectable - looking young man, named John Hollins head, was charged by his employer, a shopkeeper, with taking several articles of dress, consisting of gloves, &c., which were found in his trunk. The prisoner was remanded until further inquiry should be made. ASSAULTING A POLICE-OFFICER Simon Cummins, and five others, were charged with a violent assault on a police-officer, in Uorer Mann-street, while in the execution of his duty. It appeared that the prisoners and two others had been fighting, and making t disturbance in the street. The officer endea;Oured to restore quiet, and was finally, it appeared, at the instigation of Cummins, set upon by the whole eight, who knocked him down, beat and abused him, and tore his clothes. The whole of the prisoners (the two other aggressors having es ciped) were afterwards apprehended in Cummins's house. The evidence against the five not named was not complete as to identification, and they were discharged with a strong eaution.—Cummins was regifired to pay a fine of £5, ( imprisoned for two months. ASSAULTING AN OFFICEI Robert Peters, William Peters, and Samuel Scott, thre genteel-looking young men, were charged with being disor derly in the streets, and afterwards with assaulting a polic officer. They offered no defence. A respectable elderly fe male, mother of the two brothers Peters, stated that the had all been nell-behaved until recently, when she had dis covered that they frequented a notorious public-house ii Knight-street. She appealed to the magistrate to have 01 house put down, by withdrawing the license. the officers corroborated the testimony of the witness to the house, and instructions were immediately gi, institute proceedings against it. The three young men each fined for the assault 20s. and costs. Several of LIST OF PASSENGERS PER THE BRITANNIA SEPT. 4, 1840 FOR HALIFAX.—Lord Falkland, Lady Falkland, Hon Master Falkland and suite, Miss E. Hill, Mrs. Bo va y, Mi s Moore, Mrs. Macdonald, Aitken, Mrs. Booth, Mrs Bunker, Alexander Morris, Esq., Mrs. Morris, Rev. Henr: Scadding, Fred. Paull, Esq., John Bogert, Esq. and lads E. Ross, Esq., James Farish, Esq., and Mrs. Parish, Janie Osborne, Esq., and Mrs. Osborne. John Torrance, Esq. and Mrs. Torrance, Andrew Brand, Esq., W. H. Jeffeil Esq., Edward Oliver, Esq., Count de Barreul, W m . L ove tt Esq., M. Worms, Esq., Rev. George Bradburne, J. Wo Esq., Lieutenant Blackburn, 85th regiment, E. Billing, Et R. F. Maitland, Esq., J. Greig, Esq., Rev. W. Sommervi Thos: G. Taylor, Esq., Edw. Nickols, Esq., John Fral Esq., Rev. M. Ritche, Benjn. Davis, Esq., Jos. Rose Robt. Watson, Esq., Mr. Jos. Thompson, Mr. Jno. I Mr. J. Richardson, Mr. Geo. Barton, Mr. Gousint Mr. Wm. Johnson. FOR BOSTON.—AI family, Mrs. Cuunit Waller, W, H. Clam! Beck, Esq., S. Adams, jun., Esq., D. B. Strac S. Oakford, Esq., E. H. R. Lyman, Esq., J. Moor man, Esq., J. Lawton, Esq., J. C. Johnston, Esq., Long, Esq., J. 11. Greene, jun., Esq., T. C. H. Esq., M. oseph Bigwood, Esq., Charles Homer, I J. F. C. Vies. Esq., J. de Castro Foubla, Esq., R A Haller, Esq., David Been, Esq., Peter Allen, Esq., A n Hilliary, Esq., H. A. Newton,Esq., Richard A. Poole, I and Master Poole, Samuel Charlesworth, Esq., J. W. Gi.,„ Esq., Fletcher, Esq., J. W. Burke, Esq., and Mr. I Franklin. • wander Brown, Esq., Mrs. 1 gha►n, Alfred Waller, Esq., :e, Esq., E. W. Tryon, Esq The number of visitcrs to the Zoological Gardens, London, in the month of August, was 16,248, -from whom upwards of £6lO was taken. HARD CASH. -" Musket balls, full bore,' tender in Massachusetts. in 1656, and were current t farthing a piece, provided no man was compelled to above 12 at the time. v a legal Mr. Richard Smith, of Broad-street, in this city, has suc ceeded in so crossing the bean as to produce a beautiful va riety, plump, fleshy, and of a fine flavour. It is a cross be tween a foreign common horse-bean and the broad-bean ; and it is very remarkable to observe the gradual improvement which has taken place in six years. We have seen it in all its stages, and pronounce it a - —Gardem , - Gazette. great acquisition By an act of the legislature, which became raw on the 11th August, the title of " Warden and Fellows," heretofore borne by the Chapter of the Collegiate Church of Manchester, is from henceforth to cease, and the warden is to be styled " Dean," and the Fellows " Canons," of Manchester. There is at present the eldest son of a member of her Majesty's government, a youth of seventeen, •wandering about the streets without a shoe to his foot, and denied relief by his father, and threatened with a police officer if he goes to the house ! So much for Whig-radical parental affection! OXALIC Acin.—lt may be important to mention, espe. cially in this suicide -loving age, that two ounces of sia, mixed with about a quart of water, or of common whitening, thrown into the sto (the stomach-pump being readiest and most such occasions), will effectually neutralist this most active poison ne quantity mach b NOVEL SCENE. — On Saturday las (lurch of High Holyhead, prey ,pectacle. The Right Rev. Ath Jacobite bishop, from Dit interpreter, Mr. Joussuf visit to the Rev. Dr. Wol., Holyhead, With whom the bishop had (A.II, ouLusA a when the doctor was in Mesopotamia. It having been pre viously announced that the right rev. bishop would present himself at church that day, and would deliver an address in the Arabic language, which Dr. Wolff would interpret, a very great sensation was excited in the neighbourhood. The church was crowded to excess, and many hundreds could not gain admittance. The estimated number present was from twc to three thousand persons. The rev. gentleman congratulatei the Christian church in England on the near affinity it bore to the oriental churches, and alluded with fervent gratitude to Dr.- Wolff 's visit to Mesopotamia in the year 1823. Aftei service the rush to get a sight of him was immense, he being dressed in the oriental costume, with a fine flowing beard_ The right rev. gentleman seemed to be highly pleased, and kept continually bowing to the assembled multitude on his return to the rectory house, accompanied by the churchwar dens and neighbouring gentlemen.—Leeds Intelligencer. a rather extra, Missalli, from Aleppo h, a Syr 1, L.L.D D.D., Ctirate of