The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-01-29 00:00:00

factory state of things, and which was a question of
some importance, considering the magnitude
.of the
interests involved ; but the suhject was beset with
difficulties insurmountable, and the more so, as Rail-
-1 way Shareholders were widely scattered, changing
levery day, and possessing no common bond of unity
by which their numbers could be made available as an
element of strength. Some time since it was proposed
that the Government should appoint auditors of
Railway accounts, but then came the jealousy of
Government interference with private property, which
rendered the scheme abortive. Occasionally com-
mittees of investigation have been appointed, but their
proceedings have rarely led to any practically beneficial
result, shareholders being naturally unwilling to
depreciate their own property ; and so Boards of
Directors have virtually had immunity for all their
doings, however imprudent, injudicious, or even re-
prehensible.
An attempt, however, has at length been made to
try the effect of general combination, and accordingly
on Tuesday last a meeting was held in London under
the presidency of Mr. MALINS, M.P., and a society
formed under the title of " The Railroad Proprietors'
Association." The avowed object of the association
is the protection of railway property, by restricting,
and where possible closing, capital account, the sup-
pression of unremunerative tariffs by territorial
arrangements, and by entertaining all questions
conducive to the benefit of railway property, in the
shape of economical working or otherwise. There
can be no doubt that the interests of shareholders
require some protective measures against the injuries
which appear to have been inflicted by the conduct of
Directors and the want of unity between rival
concerns ; but the objects set forth by this new asso-
ciation are not the most desirable, while the real wants
are left wholly unprovided for, or at any rate,
unnoticed. By far the most important requirement
is a more efficient audit of railway accounts, and this
might be accomplished by the appointment of a body
of competent auditors, invested with full powers of
investigation ; and if their appointment were entrusted
to an association of shareholders, it would obviate the
difficulty; occasioned by. a jealousy of Government
interference. Such a point gained would do far more
for the interest of shareholders than any of the
objects professed to be sought by the association.
We are aware that the closing of capital account
has long been anxiously desired as a means of protec-
tion to the shareholders ; but it is not always attain-
able, owing to bonds and debentures falling due and
being renewed at varying rates of interest. Again,
much erroneous opinion exists as to what are called
unremunerative tariffs, as though the riteipts of a
railway augmented in proportion with the increase of
fares. The fact is more often the reverse ; and if the
shareholders hope to increase their dividends by
raising the charges for traffic, they will find them-
selves grievously disappointed. There is no want of
evidence. The London and Brighton Company has
been conspicuous for running trains at low fares, and
yet their dividends are higher and their shares bear
a better price than almost any other great trunk line.
Take the Southport line for another example. Last
year the fares were reduced by competition till they ,
were ridiculously low, and yet in one week the traffic
produced £7,000 to the Lancashire and Yorkshire
Company alone for trains running in and out of
Southport, an amount considerably greater than was
ever received from the previous rates. Excursip
trains also, however low the fares, produce far
greater profits than the ordinary trains ; and it will
be found the interest of shareholders to promote the
traffic derived from low charges as far more remune-
rative than the tariffs which are to be promoted by
territorial arrangements. The interests of the public
as well as shareholders would then be consulted ; and
as dividends increased we should hear less of com-
plaints against the management of Railway Directors.

TUE "MERSEY CONSERN'ANCY."—The commissioners for
the improvement of Birkenhead and Claughtou-cum-Grange,
,n pursuance of the powers in them vested, have given notice,
dated the 15th instant, to the acting conservator of the
Mersey, to the clerk of the peace for the county of Lancaster,
to the clerk of the peace for the county of Chester, and to the
clerk of the peace for the borough of Liverpool, that they
intend, within two months from the above date, to erect certain
quays, wharfs, &c:, in the said notice set out, in or adjoining
the river Mersey at Monk's Ferry.
COUNTY COURT JURISDICTION.—In the Court of Ex-
chequer, on Saturday, Mr. Milward moved for a prohibition to
the Judge of the Liverpool County Court in several cases, on
the ground that they did not fail within his jurisdiction. The
plaint was brought under the 65th section of the 9th and 10th
of Victoria, chap. 95, which gave the County Courts jurisdic-
tion to try suits for "any legacy under a will," and it was now
contended for the defendant that the case did not fall within
that section. It appears that in 1839 a man died, and by his
will he gave certain furniture, goods, and debts to the defend.
ant (who was his executor), in trust, to sell and realise the
same, and invest £lOO and the interest thereon, until the
plaintiff (his nephew), then a minor, should come of age,
and then upon trust to pay him the same, with power to ad-
vance the whole, or any portion, if such a step should be de-
sirable. A similar provision was also made for two sisters of
the plaintiff, to the extent of £6O. At the death of the tes-
tator the mother of the children was " on the parish," and the
defendant made from time to time certain advances for the sup-
port and benefit of the children, which exhausted all the funds ;
and when they, came of age they each brought an action
in the County. Court against the defendant, to recover so
much of their respective legacies as fell within its jurisdiction,
abandoning the excess beyond that sum, The learned judge,
on objection being made, stayed execution, in order that this
rule might be discussed, and it was now argued for the defend-
ant that the section of the act only applied to the case of a
mere legacy, where nothing remained to be done but for the
executor to hand it over to the legatee. ln the present case,
however, the executor was clothed with a complicated trust,
and the legatees, by the process of the County Court, were
virtually suing him for a breach of the trust.—Mr. Aspland
showed cause against the rule, and cited a case where this court
held that a sum given to an executor in trust to pay to the
legatee was a legacy which could be recovered in the County
Court.—Mr. Milward, in reply, showed the distinction drawn
between a legacy in the hands of an executor and one in the
hands of one who was both executor and trustee, in which
latter case the legatee could only resort to equity.—The Court
was of opinion that the distinction so taken was well founded,
and that in the present case the County Court had no jurisdic-
tion. The rule for a prohibition must therefore be made abso-
lute in each action.—Judgment accordingly.
PAINFUL . SCENE AT THE POLICE-COURT.-.—On Saturday,
before Mr. Mansfield, a well-dressed man was charged with
having, on the 14th September last, and at other times, stolen
some silver spoons, ten silver dessert forks, and other property,
to the value of £3O or £35. The prisoner was very much dis-
tressed, crying the whole of the time the case was being heard ;
while his wife, a respectably-dressed young person, with a
child in her arms, sat just under the dock, weeping piteously.
Mr. Stephen Schilizzi, a Greek merchant, of this town, said
the prisoner had been in his service about nine months as but-
ler, and the plate was put entirely under his care. He was not
aware of any impropriety until Detective-officer Povey went to
him on Friday, when he identified the articles of plate produced
his property, and as a portion, of the plate entrusted to the pri-
soner's care. Mr. Green, pawnbroker, Marybone, pointed out
several forks and spoons as having been brought by the pri-
soner, on different occasions, to his shop. He first came on
the 4th of September, and pledged a spoon, which he said
had been given to his child by its sponsor, as a christening
gift. He came again on the.2oth Noyember, and pledged a
.spoon; again on the 12th instant, in witness's absence, and
pledged another teaspoon. Thinking the case one of suspicion,
witness gave instructions that if the prisoner called again that
he was to be watched. On the 24th he called again, and
pledged a pair of trousers. He was followed to Mr. Schilizzi's,
Holly-road, Fairfield; and information was after Wards given
to the police. Mr. Edward Byford, pawnbroker, deposed, to
the prisoner pledging a silver fork, on the Bth November last,
in the name of Stephen Shephardson. David W. Winsta,nley,
assistant with Mr. Woodruff; pawnbroker, Pembroke-place,
stated that, on the 24th August, the prisoner.pledged a spoon
at his master's shop, stating that it was a christening gift.
He said his name was Shephardson, and that lie lived at
No. 8, Ashton-street. Mr. Frederick 'Walter, pawnbroker,
London-road, deposed to the prisoner pledging spoons and
forks on the 20th October and Bth instant. Povey, the detec-
tive officer, stated that, in consequence of evidence received
from Mr. Green, he apprehended the prisoner, and
charged him with robbing his master. He admitted the
offence, said he was very sorry for it, and .that he had in-
tended to have redeemed the articles, and restored them to
the stock of plate belonging to Mr. Schilizzi. Mr. Mansfield,
(addressing the prisoner :) Do you wish to plead guilty ? The
prisoner : Yes; but indeed I intended to restore them. In
reply to the bench, Mr. Schilizzi said the prisoner had been in
his employ nine months : that he was a most excellent ser-
vant—the best, in fact, he had ever had ; that previously to
coming into his service, he was in the house of Mr. Rodo-
canachi about a year, and that that gentleman Was very much
satisfied with the manner be had conducted himself while with
him,' although he was surprised at, his style of living on £37
a-year. Mr. Mansfield said he was very sorry that a person
in his nosition, so highly spoken of, and having a life of use-
fulness open to him, should have fallen into a temptation, of
what nature known to himself and the Almighty, to induce
him to commit this criminal act. It was a lamentable and
painful thing for the court to do, but it must pass a severe
sentence. The prisoner had come into the posession of valu-
able property in trust a trust which he had violated, 4,nd,
instead of protecting, had stolen the property so placed in his
care. He must be sentenced to six months' hard labour. Mr.
Mansfield directed that the whole of the recovered property
should be restored to Mr. Schilizzi, who, he was sure, would
make some suitable present to Mr. Green, to whose honesty
and praiseworthy conduct he was indebted for the discovery of
the.robbery.