The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-11-20 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT,-YESTERDAY.

(Before W. 11-OrroN. ,Esq.)
CITALONER V. WRIGHT.—Mr. Whitley appeared for
the plaintiff in this -case, and Mr. Payne for the. de-
fendant. Prom the opening statement of Mr. Whitley,
it appeared that the plaintiff was an extensive and well-
known timber broker in Liverpool; the defendant buys.
timber, and also carries on business 'in Liverpool.•
Although the amount in dispute was small, the question
involved was one. of importance to the timber trade..
Tke..plairitiff, in his capacity as a timber broker, sells
timber uncier certain conditions, called the " conditions
of sale." These conditions are read by Mr. Chaloner
at every sale. - By the second condition of sale the wood
is to be' taken with all faults as it "now lies at the
measurement of the broker;' by the fourth condition
all accounts-. are to be closed in one week ; by the fifth
condition five days are allowed for buyers and sellers to
exarnine the timber, and if any errors in measurement
are discovered in that time they are to be rectified. It
is usual, in case uf any error, that the timber should be
re-measured, and that the broker should adjust the
dispute. This, according to the plaintiff's . case, has,
been the custom in Liverpool for many years past;-
'but Mr. Wright has for some time been making
claims for what he contends to have been errors in
measurement.. In these' cases Mr. Chaloner has gene-
rally readjusted the ,measurement. Mr. Chaloner has
further. to pay the seller within seven (or ten) days of;
the sale, but Mr. Wright has , very often postponed
Payment for several months,' thus entailing upon Mr.
Chaloner the hardship of having very often to pay a
Acinsiderable sum out of his own-pocket; for wheat-Mr.•
Wright was applied-to he insisted upon making deduc-
tions on ac,count of errors in measurement. in the.
first place the plaintiff contended that his measurement
was right; and, in the second place, that Mr. Chaloner,-
the broker, was the proper person to adjust the measure-
meat, and that his decision was final. • On one occasion
the plaintiff had said to the defendant. "You can
4° as you like ;" and the consequence had been that Mr.
Chaloner had been a. sufferer, as he was unable to obtain
the full amounts.. The matter had gone so flr that the
plaintiff had now brought it before the court for decision.
The sum now due arose from the following transactions..
On the 18thof December, 1856,timber was sold to' the'
amount of £23 18s. 4d. On the 15th of May, 1857, Mr.
Wright paid un this account £22 65., leaving tin unpaid
balance:of 41 123. 4d. On the 4th of April, wO, a log,
Paft of (he cargo of the Mary Miller, was sold to the
defendant far £25 '2s.' 3d. On the 4th of May, 1860,
this tiniber was re-sold at the defendant's request, and
realised 422 Bs. 7d., upon which a claim arises for 42.
13s. Bd. Mr. Owen was the first witness called. He
was chief clerk and,.measurer for the plaintiff.. He
deposed to selling the various amounts of timber to the
defendant,. who, seine time afterwards, found fault with
the measurements, and claimed 'deductions. In some
eases Mr. Chaloner reineasured the timber, and made
*hat he considered a fair allowance ; his decision, how-
ever, was always final. This was the custom of the port,
and expressed in the conditions of sale which were pub-
licly read at every sale. One of the logs which was sold.
to Mr. Wright was
."plugged," because the heart was
decayed. After the log had been sold Mr. Wright claimed
a further allowance because both ends were plugged. The
timber was re-measured by Mr.,Chaloner, and a further
deduction made. Mr. Wright rejected this as insufficient,
'and ordered the limber to he re-sold. The timber was
re-sold, at Mr. Chaloner's amended measurement, at one
halfpenny per foot less than the defendant had paid. In
the catalogue given -tc purchasers before the sale, this
Piece of flasher was specified as being decayed. Mr.
Chaloner was also called, and he corroborated the last
witness. His (Plaintiff's) decision was always- final.
the buyer might suggest to have the timber re-mea-
sured, which might be done subject to Mr. Chaloner's
jaidgment. .The log in question was placed in the best
light in the yard ; one end was near a post, but it could
be examined. Mr. Payne, on behalf of the defendant,
stated that there had (unintentionally on the part of the
plaintiff) been fraud, as this log was in such a position
that one end of it could not be examined. The defen-
darit supposed that Only one end was plugged when lie
bought it, and paid per.foot. On finding that both
ends were plugged, he demanded a deduction ; but, an;
insufficient one being made, ordered that
thete timber
should be re-sold. It was re-sold, and rh only
per 'foot.' In support of this the' defendant and
Mr. Hill were called, and they deposedlhat in their
judgment 'aUinsufficient deduction had been made. Mr.-,
Hill had measured the log for the defendant, and
allowed less than the plaintiff allowed.—llis
Honour, in giving judgment, said he , had not felt
any difficulty with respect to the law of the case. He
had great satisfaction in seeing both sides. agree as to'
the facts; this was what he had expected, from the posi-
tion of the parties. He took it that Mr. Chaloner had
brought this case before the court chiefly to ascertain
what construction it would- put upon these conditions Of
sale. Men differed very much in their construction of
written documents. As far as this case was concerned,
he had none. The 'second condition was that the wood
should be taken as it lies, with all errors and faults of.
description, at the broker's measurement. There Was a
clear and distinct statement that it was the measurement
of the broker that was to be the guide; and he thought
that the fifth condition did not at all do away with this ;
the two ware to be read together. The fifth condition
merely said that an error, if discovered within a certain
time, would be rectified. But it did not say that it was
to be rectified by any other person than the broker,
who, from condition the third, was evidently the person
to decide. Still he did not think that Mr. Chamfer,
being the broker, could delegate his authority to any
person. This being so in the first amount claimed, Mr.
Owen's decision could not be regarded as final ; and
when the defendant offered to refer the matter to Mr.
Chaloner' he did what was quite right. Considering that
Mr. Chaloner had refused to remeasure in the case referred
to, 'and considering further the length of time which had
elapsed since the transaction took place, he was of, opinion
that the claim could not be sustained. But the case was
different with regard to the log which came by the
Mary Miller. In that case Mr. Wright did not claim
to have a,deduction made, but claimed to set aside the
contract on the ground of fraud. Now, in order to
prove .fraud, he must show that there had been deceit,
intentional or otherwise. If there had not been a refe-
rence to the defect in the log in the public catalogue,
Mr. Wright might have been quite correct in setting
aside the contract, , But, there was an express reference
to .this particulat:defect, of which Mr. Wright now
sought to take advantage. His Honour thought that

it was the defendant's own fault in bidding for" a ink
which -he- brew to be defective, without having ascer-t
tained' thii extent' or the &feet. -Itonequentlf,
defewlent'slo,,; eliargo.ahle to his ova negligence;
conduct
s, thatndduetlt
e r'ep
vset
After he knew of the'defettit,ttand its extent, he merely
diihiori in V • • - itrge.a , to ppecii apd a re-measurement;
-tt not ,re.tadiatiim tfie'contint on the tzround of fraud.
Therefore, 'upon both these point:; Mr. 'Wright tad
acted wrongly, and his dormice could not be allowed.
He bad no doubt it was not a matter of pounds, shil-
lings, and.,pcnce with either of the gentlemen:; but,
from the circumstancesuttending, these cases, he thought
the conditions of sale had not much to do with either of
them. Upon those conditions he had already given his
Opinion ; and with resped to the preSent cases, thought
that in the latter instance of the timber:by the Mary
Miller, the defencecould not be sustained, but that the
defendant was right with respect to the first sum.

CHARGE OF EMBEZZLEMENT AGAINST
THE CASHIER OF THE ,BRITISH AND
IRISH MAGNETIC TELEGRAPH COM-
PANY, • • '

Yesterday,- at the Police-court, before Mr. Raffles,
iVilliam Mathias Middleton, a person well known in
the British and Irish Magnetic .Telegraph office, was
brought up by Detective-officer Wilson on ucharge of
having embezzled certain sums of money belonging to
that company: Mr. Mar Shall appeared for the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Cobb for the prisoner. The case attracted
considerable attention, and a number of respectable
persons were present. Mr. Marshall said it became his
duty to open a charge that was preferred against the
prisoner, who held a, position of trust in the British and
Irish Magnetic Telegraph office. The charge was that
•of embezzlenient'; but all he intended to do was to lay
'one ease before his,Worship, and then ask for a remand
with the view of instituting further investigation.
Mr. Cobb—l, on the part of the prisoner, am not
prepared to go on with his defence to-day ; but I will
take Mr. Marshall's word that he has a prima facie case
for a remand; and then it becomes a question of bail.
Mr. Raffies—What is the amount charged against the
prisoner ?. .

Mr. Marshall—We are quite unprepared to say at
present ; it may, be several hundred pounds.
Mr. Raffles—l will not take bail at present, as lam
not in a position to do so. In reply to his worship, the
bridevrell,keeper said that in January, 1852, the prisoner
was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment at Kirkdale
Sessions.

Mr. Cobb—He was sufficiently punished for his
offence on that occasion. He has conducted himself
irreproachably for eight years, and the company have
presented him with a snuff-box as a testimonial of their
esteem for his conducts
Mr. Marshall—Oh, no ; not the company, certainly.
Mr. Cobb—Suppose the amount charged be £5.00,
what sureties would you require ?*
Mr. Raffles—What do you say, Mr. Marshall ?
Mr. Marshall—l think, sir, under the circumstances,
that we cannot consent to bail.
Mr. Cobb—Then let them go on with a case.
Mr. Marshall then proceeded to open the case at some
length, the substance of which was that the prisoner
was the cashier in the office of the company. The com-
pany were in the habit of issuing adhesive stamps,
called franks, to customers, for the purpose of conve-
nience to gentlemen on the Stock Exchange. The
stamps were issued in sheets ; and these were in the
possession of Mr. Blackburn, who kept them in a safe.
Mr. Walsh was the superintendent of the Liverpool
district ; and it was the duty of the prisoner, -when
'he wanted stamps for customers, to send a written
requisition to Mr. Walsh for them, who procured them
from Mr. Blackburn, to whom he gave a receipt for
,the amount. The stamps were given, not in less sheets
than five pounds worth, and the prisoner was to receive
cash from the parties for whom he, got the stamps, and
to account to the treasurer for the amount. He then
explained that £ll ss. worth of stamps were issued for
£lO, the company allowing the ss. discount on £lO
worth of stamps ; and he also explained the manner in
which the books were kept in regard to the issue of
stamps, and their checking off when they came in on
messages. The prisoner accounted at the end of each
week for his cash and stamps. The specific charge that
he (Mr. Marshall) would at present prefer against the
prisoner was for embezzling £lO on the 2nd November,
which he had ,received from Messrs. Colchester and
Woolner for stamps.
Mr. Raffles—Does he keep a book of the stamps
himself ?

:Air. Marsha think not. It was recently observed
by scydral clerks in the office that a large number of
old Stamps, that were issued so long ago as 1857, *lade
their appearance from particular firms—Messrs. Morris
and Mr. Stewart ; and it was observed that some of
these stamps had been obliterated with 'blue ink—a
colour which the company had long since ceased to use
for that purpose. It was observed that latterly black
ink was ,used to obliterate the stamps, and in some
cases the black was put over the old blue obliterations.
Mr. Marshall went on to state that the prisoner used
the old' stamps from former messages, getting out' new
stamps in their place, as for a certain firm, but selling
these to another firm and keeping the money, and in
this way he bad been guilty of the embezzlement. Mr.
Marshall admitted that it was a very complicated and
difficult case to get on with, and that he must be par-
doned if he were not able to open it as clearly as lie
could wish ; but from.the shortness of the time he had
to enter on the case, and its great complication, he
would only lay' one charge before his worship, so as to
ask for a remand. It was true (he said) the prisoner
did receive a present of a snuff-box, and something else,
froth seine stock brokers and gentlemen on the Exchange,
but thathad nothing, to do with the company. He then
said the way that the prisoner managed the fraud was,
that he took the'ti/d used stamps issued to Morris and
Stewart in 1857 and used them as new ones, drawing
£lO worth of now stamps as for Colchester and Woollier,
which stamps he sold to some one else, and kept the
money.
Mr. 'Raffles—Where did he get the old stamps ? -
Mr. Marshall—We are not able to say.
Mr. R.affieS—What becomes. of the old stamps ?
Mr. Marshall—Every six months they are collected,
as they accumulate very much, and are then destroyed.
Mr. Rattles—How destroyed? •
'Mr. Marshall—Sent to the stationer's and pulped up
again.

Mr. Cobb—But he could not take them off.
Mr. Marshall—Oh, yes, very easily with hot water.
The following witnesses were then called and examined
to support the charge :
Mr. Brown, a clerk in the office of Colchester and
ViroOlner, said—l 'Purchased £lO worth of stamps on
the 2nd November from the prisoner, and paid a cheque
on the Bank of England.
Mr. Cobb objected to this, as the charge was for
embezzling money Or'stamps, but not a cheque.
Mr. Rattles: To -whom did you pay the cheque ?
Witness : nannot swear to whom.

Mr. Cobb said that would not do. How did they
know that the cheque was paid at all.
Mr. Raffles—The cheque can be had. What does
the counterpart say,? .
Mr. Cobb—That will not do, sir. ‘,

311. Marshall—No doubt it is a difficult case; it was
only dis Covered on Saturday.
Mr. Cobb. was proceeding to argue on the case, when
Mr Raffles said Mr. Walsh had better be called.
. .

Mr. Walsh was.thenepmined, and said the prisoner
was cashier to the company ; and his' duty was to receive
all money paid for messages, and stamps sold to the
public. When he wanted' he should send me a
written requisition.
Mr. Cobb—Then produce the written requisition.
Mr. Raffles—When it comes to a particular case you
can have it, but this is only as to the general course of
business in the office.

-, The -witness then went on to say—lt was, the duty of
the prisoner, at the end of every week, to return me all
he received, which. I checked with this book, The
witness, after examining. several books and accounts,
said hedid not find any stamps issued to Colchester and
Woolner, on the day in question.

Mr. Cobb asked. the witness one or two questiona,kut
the answers were not material to the case.: .
Mr. John Leland; the treasurer of the company, was
examined, and said it was the duty of the prisoner to.
hand him hulk cash every day, and settle up every
fortnight. Witness generally refuSed to take cheques.
Both this witness and Mr. Walsh were examined as
to the last fortnightly account settled up by the prisoner,
but this was a matter of detail, and not exactly con-
nected with the charge,*whon . •

,
Mr. Marshall said—l submit there is a ease for
remand.

Mr. Cobb—And I submit there is not. They have
not shown that he did pass the'cliegae for £lO into their
accounts at all.--To the Treasurer : Now,' suppose
stamps were issued for one party, and that another came
in in a hurry before the stamps were sent out, might the
prisoner not issue them to the person in the shurrv,
instead Of-the parties..to whom they. were issued ? It
was not the custom to,'do so.—The witness, however,
admitted that such a thing did happen once, but it was
not in' his department.—Mr. Cobb then asked his
worship to admit the prisoner to bail.
Mr. Raffles (to Mr. Maishall)—What do you say to
that?

Mr. Marshall—l cannot shut my eyes to the fermcr
conviction.

Mr. Cobb—Then I must explain that eight years ago
he went into a gentleman's house where there was a
Young lady, in whose bed he was found. He made all
`the -reparation lie by Marrying that lady, NA Vis
now his wife. But there was some confusion on the
occasion,; and A shirt and a pair of hoots belonging to
flat gentlenian'who owned the hOuse.were found on the
prisoner; and although he took them by mistake, he
suffered eighteen months' imprisonmenffor it.
Mr. B,ailles—Well, I don't *want to know anything
about. that.

Mr. Cohb—l only want to explain the matter, as they
mentioned a former conviction; and they would not
shta.olyrie
.tknoßo
aw.
f police
soaLl 3(1,'
ntvl
wilt l
not
,hloinint sehl re .d the whole
1. take hail for him at
present.
Mr. Cobb—Will you make an order to give up his
watch; the testimonial that was presented to him, and
other things that are in the hands of the police? The
.company have behaved very kind to him, and I am sure
'yOu vill'ifot refuse this.
Mr. Raffles declined to interfere in this matter.
The prisOner was then remanded till Friday next.

Tins fll CENT ROBBERY OF SPECIE IS :MEXICO. I
-The council of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce,
at their meeting yesterday, resolved to forward a
memorial to the- Forcign-office, calling the attention
of GoVernnient to this matter, and praying that such
steps may be taken as will insure a restitution of the
money, and prevent the recurrence of such robberies.
TIIE AlAuxors ConmirrEE.—The weekly meeting
of this body Wa.s held yesterday, at the Town-hall. Mr.
Ridley, the deputy chairman, presided ; and the other
inemberS present were—Messrs. Shimmin, Crellin,
Haydock, Holden, Aspivall, Nickson, Johnson, Barton,
and Rogers.. From the cash-book submitted, it appears
that from the Ist of September last down to the 15th
inst., the receipt. from all the markets have been £3,498
expenditure on wages, £476. In the corresponding ,
period of 1859 the receipts were, 13,192 ; wages, L 4,15-7
the return showing, on the simple receipts, an increase
of £306. The bad provisions seized and destroyed
during the past week were reported as follows :—ln the
central district, 1,32 S ths.-of meat; north district, 1,954
lbs. of meat; in the town, 456 lbs. of fish. Some con-
versation. took place in reference to the lighting of the
wholesale vegetable market at. the Shaw's brow, but
involving matters of finance, the reporters were requested
to retire. ,