The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1855-08-28 00:00:00

SOUTH LANCASHIRE SUMMER

ASSIZES.

NISI FRIUS COURT.—YESTERDAY.
(Before Mr. Justice Crowder.)

The•court met at ten o'clock,

ACTION ON A PROActISSORYNOTE.—GARDNER AND OTHERS
.1/.'W.a.Lsii.—( Special jury.)—This was an action brought by
Messrs. Gardner, Sykes, and Gardner, wine and spirit mer-
chants, of this town, .and the defendant was Mr. Richard
Walsh, lately a sizer .in Manchester. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr.
Milward were for the plaintiffs; Mr. Atherton, 4(4. C., and Mr.
Ovens .for the defence.—Mr. Atherton said that although he
appeared for the defence, as the burden of proof would be with
the defendant, he would state the nature of the action, which
was-for the sum of £soo„due on a promissory note granted by
the defendant.and Mrs. Burton in security to the plaintiffs. In
February, 1863, the defendant and Mrs. Burton went to the
office of the plaintiffs, and there signed the note in .question.
Subsequently Mrs. Burton, who kept the Blackfriars Inn, Man-
chester, became embarassed, and executed an assignment for
the benefit of her creditors. After this it was made apparent that
the name of Mrs. Clarke, the mother of Mrs. Burton, had been
added to the note, without the knowledge of the defendant,
and for no purpose contemplated in the note. The defence
was that such an addition vitiated the note ; this view of the
case was, it was stated, supported by Chief Justice Campbell,
who held that, in such respect the same rule applied to
negotiable instruments as to deeds.—The defendant was called,
and under a law tross-examination he refused to answer the
question as to whether he had been on habits of criminal inti-
macy with Mm. Burton while shelived in Stockport before and
also after she removed to Manchester. At the time the note
was signed Mns. Burton was indebted to the defendant, al-
though not much.--John Cothana, formerly a clerk in the
employment of the plaintiffs, saw Mrs. Burton and the
defendant sign the note, and he himself signed it as a witness.
He did not hear anything said as to any third party signing
the note, and paid no attention to it beyond witnessing the
signatures o the parties.—Elizabeth Burton, up till March,
1862, kept the George Inn, at Stockport, after this
she went to keep the Blackfriars at Manchester. She was
indebted to the plaintiff' £l6O at the time she left
Stockport. This witness also declined to answer any question
as to whether she and Walsh had been on terms of improper
intimacy. Mrs. Burton had lived some time separate from
her husband before his death, which, she believed, took place
in 1852. Sergeant Wilkins, in addressing the jury, said,
if they had any sympathy with the woman who had just left
the box, he felt assured, before the case was over, he would
obliterate that sympathy, and show that the present was an
attempt on her part and on that of her paramour—he used
the word advisedly—to defraud her benefactors. He com-
mented at great length on the refasal of the defendant to
answer questions as to the kind of intimacy subsisting between
him .and Mrs. Burton. He next stated that he should be able
to prove that Mrs. Burton proposed that her mother should
join Mr. Walsh in the note for £5OO. She admitted that she
had been liberally treated by the plaintiffs for upwards of ten
years. He remarked on the various steps observed in
completing the note, assertingthat, till it received thesignature
of Mrs. Clarke, it was not treated as a negotiable instrument,
but immediately on receiving this signature it was recognised
and treated as a completed instrument. Why, he might ask,
was not Mrs. Clarke called ; she was in Liverpool ; but it did
not suit the convenience of the defendant to call her, and
therefore there was a material gap in their evidence.—Mr.
Luke Pickup, was one of the travellers for plaintiffs, who had
been in their employment for upwards of fifteen years, : At
the George at Stockport often saw the defendant ; the
house was in the name of Mrs. Clarke, but Mrs. Burton
managed it. After she left Stockport witness presented her
account in December in Manchester, and she said she had no
money. She had previously been due £l5O, and the account
included that and the then current one. Witness asked if
she could not give security. She proposed to have her
mother and Walsh joined in a note for £5OO as security.
This witness assented to, and Mrs. Burton said she and
Walsh would come over to Liverpool and sign it, and her
mother's signature could be got in Manchester at any time.
Witness said if she would pay 5 per cent. on the £5OO,
they could supply her with goods on better terms, and
that as they did not want the money, the note would not be
negotiated or put into circulation. Witness took the note
over to Manchester, on his usual March journey, and in the
house of Mrs. Burton, at the Blackfriars, Mrs. Clarke
signed it. It was signed in one of the rooms, and Mrs. Burton
was going out and in ; and both said after the note was signed
that they hoped now the house would go on and do well.
Mrs. Burton did not get credit for the MO contained in the
note, until after Mrs. Clarke had signed it, as they did not
think it complete till that had been done.—Sergeant 'Wilkins
summed up, claiming a verdict on behalf of his client.—Mr.
Atherton replied, and His Lordship in summing up made
allusion to the painful nature of the cross-examination to
which the defendant and Mrs. Burton had been subjected,
remarking that he had tolerated it only with a supposition
that some matter relevant to the issue would come out of it.
He remarked also on discrepancies as to some of the points
between the witnesses.—The jury returned a verdict for the
defendant.
BREACH OF CONTRACT.—LEWIS v. BROMILOW
AND
OTIPA§,-"Mr. Forsythe q.C., on behalf of the plaintiff; stated