The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-04-07 00:00:00

ARRIVED.

April 4. Patriot Queen, Calcutta Bombay Packet, Bonny.,
Jamaica, Bahia—Chas. S. Pennell, New Orleans—Ariel, London.
April s.—Crisis, Carp on—Otseonthe, Odes'a, New Orleans—Annie
Fisher, Barbados —Pollok, Charleston—Emerald Isle, NewlYork
Admiral Grenfell, Alexandrla—Coronella, Chieftain, Harry Glens.
Paraiba—W. H. Wharton, Galves on—Vig lant, and Caros. Terra
Nova—Speed, Mobile—Black Prince, Reciprocity, Pernambuco—
Perseverance, Almeira—Elizabeth Ann, Oporto—Favourite. Apala-
chicol I—Walter Baine, Paraiba—Chance, Simoda, Bomarsund, New
Orleans—Morning Light, Lady Franklin, Mobile—Kertch. Savanna
Thornton, De Witt Clinton, West Point, New York—Maria, Ava,
Alexandria—Emily (s a.), Tiber (s.s.), Marseilles—Penningham,
Gir gente—Brot hers, Requejada. April 6.—John h4at thie, Canton—
Juve eta, Bahia —Lindestarne, Ceara—fticot, Curacoa—Joshua and
Mary, Gonaives—Marchioness of Queensberry, New Orleans —Dun.
donald, Moblle—Glenlyoti,:liingston, Savanna—Alliance, Charleston
—Belus, St. Michaels—Blanch, Bombay—Arabia (R. 111.5.), Bo ton.

SOUTH LANCASHIRE ASSIZES

CROWN COURT.-SATURDAY

Mr. Baron Martin entered court at nine o'clock on
Saturday, and proceeded with the hearing of common
jury cases.

FAZACKERLY V. AUKNIGHT AND ANOTHER.—This was
an action brought upon an account and a deed of composi-
tion. The defendants, Messrs. M'Knight and Abbinett,
were timber merchants, who, in January, 1855, became
embarrassed in circumstances, and called a meeting of their
creditors, of whom the plaintiff, Mr. Fazackerly, was one,
holding a bill of the firm dated October, 1854, for six
months, for £337 is 10d. The plaintiff was represented at
that meeting by Mr. Tennant, who agreed to do whatever
would be accepted by the other creditors. An arrangement
was then made that the creditors should accept a composi-
tion of lOs in the pound, and Mr. H. Abbinett, father of
Mr. M'Knight's partner, was appointed trustee, and guaran-
teed a payment at three, six, and nine months. This
arrangement having been agreed to by the creditors present,
a deed was drawn out and signed by several cf the creditors.
Mr. Owen Jones was the first who signed, on behalf of his
firm, and he was a trustee for the other creditors. Before
this meeting took place, a statement of the affairs of the
defendants was made out by Mr. Chalmers, an accountant,
and the liabilities were found to be over £lO,OOO. Mr.
Chalmers, with Mr. Jones and Mr. Abbinett, jun., waited
upon Mr. Fazackerly, with the composition deed, which
they asked him to sign. Mr. Fazackerly did so ; but at the
time of the signature he alleged that he did not know the
amount of the debt due, and that he stipulated that the deed
should be brought back to him for the purpose of entering
the sum he should sign for, and which stipulation, he stated,
was agreed to, as he had not then time to consult his books.
This was denied by Mr. Abbinett, jar, who deposed that there
was no agreement as to the bringing back of the deed, and his
impression was that the amount was written in pencil. Mr.
Chalmers and Mr. Jones deposed to a similar impression,
that there was na arrangement to bring back the deed. Mr.
Chalmers stated that he filled in the amount opposite the
plaintiff's name on the 14th June. After the passing of the
bill for £337 la. 10d, it appeared Mr. Fazackerly had
obtained from defendants timber to the amount of £142
Os. 7d. previous to the composition. The plaintiff, therefore,
contended that the amount which should be set down in the
deed of composition as that for which he had agreed to take
I Os. in the pound should be the difference between £142 Os.
7d., and the debt of the estate to him, £337 Is. 10d.
Instead of this, there was no deduction made in the deed of
composition of the amount due by him to the defendants,
and he would therefore be in the position of accepting ten
shillings in the pound on the money due to him, and be
still a debtor to the estate for the whole of the other
amount. Under these circumstances, therefore, the action
was brought by the plaintiff. The Court stated that as the
figures had been written in by Mr. Chalmers subsequent
to plaintiff having affixed his signature to the deed, that
deed could not be held to be the plaintiffs at all, and he was
not bound by it. His lordship recommended Mr. Chalmers
as an accountant, never in any future case to interfere with
any deed after his signature, as the greatest care should
always be exercised that no such interference, which ren-
dered a deed of course quite invalid, should ever take place.
It was stated that such a proceeding is common in Liver-
pool among accountants, and his lordship said that he did
not blame Mr. Chalmers individually at all, but condemned
the custom as an objectionable one. Finally a verdict was
taken by consent for the plaintiff for the sum of £2OO,
leaving the defendant at liberty to move, Mr. Hugh Hill,
Q. C., with another, appeared in this case for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Atherton, Q.C., with Mr. Brett for defendants.
BROCKLEBANK V. WILSON.—This was an undefended
action. Messrs. Ralph and Thomas Brocklebank, ship-
owners, of this town, were plaintiffs, and Robert Wilson,
defendant. Our readers need hardly be reminded that the
defendant underwent sentence of transportation at this
assizes for fruads upon Messrs. Brocklebank, his employers.
The present action was brought to establish a claim on the
part of the plaintiffs to certain leasehold property of the
defendant, which otherwise would be liable to be seized by
the crown. Mr. Aspinall opened the pleadings, and Mr.
Hugh Hill, Q.C., stated the case. Evidence was given to
establish the plaintiffs' claim, and the jury returned a
verdict for £6,000. This was the last of the common
jury cases, and his Lordship accordingly discharged those
jurors who had come from a distance.

SPECIAL JURY CASES.

SMYTH AND OTHERS V. SCHILIZZI.—EI'.9 was an action
brought to recover damages for a breach of contract. Mr.
Hugh Hill, Q.C., stated the case for the plaintiffs, from
which it appeared that Messrs. Smyth were commission
agents, in the corn trade, in this town, trading in a firm in
which the Messrs. Rath bone and others were
also engaged: The defendant belonged to a firm
of Greek merchants, who had houses here, in
Constantinople, and other places, and carried
on an extensive business, of which the defendant was the
representative in Liverpool. On the 17th of November last,
a contract was entered into between the plaintiffs and
defendant, in pursuance of which, defendant agreed to
purchase a quantity of flour, 2,500 sacks, at 80s, and 1,500
sacks at 81s, from the plaintiffs, on the condition of its
being sent by a first-class steamer to Santander. The
provision of the contract stated that the steamer was to sail
on or before the Ist of December, accidents accepted ; and
should it happen that the vessel was not ready to sail on the
4th of December, the buyers were to have the option of
cancelling the contract. The plaintiffs chartered a steamer
from the Messrs. Moss, of this town, for the purpose, and
in the charter they stipulated that the vessel should be
ready to sail at the time specified in the contract with
defendant. The vessel arrived on the 27th of November
from Constantinople and the Black Sea. An accident had,
however, occurred to her, and some injuries had been
received by the machinery, which rendered it necessary to
put her upon the gridiron in the Clarence-dock, for the
purpose of repairing her, This caused some delay beyond
the Ist of December ; but this, it was contended by Mr.
Hill, came clearly within the exception of accident, specified
in the contract. The vessel was got ready before
the 4th of December, and everything was to have been ready
for sea at that time. She had everything in readiness, her
crew engaged, and her pilot on board the night preceding
the 4th of December, On that morning the weather be-
came very unfavourable, so much so that the pilot, acting
in the discretion allowed to him, and to which the plaintiffs
were bound to give way, refused to sail. At ten o'clock the
next morning, the weather having become more favourable,
the vessel sailed. That day a letter was received from Mr.
Schilizzi stating that, in consequence of the vessel not hav-
ing sailed, he availed himself of the option given by the
terms of the agreement, and cancelled the contract. The
plaintiffs replied, pointing out that the contract only gave
the option to cancel in the event of the vessel not being
ready to sail ; and that, as she was ready to sail on the
day specified, and was only prevented by unfavourable
weather, it was not open to the defendant to cancel the
contract. The cargo was subsequently sold at a loss in Con-
stantinople, in consequence of a fall which suddenly took
place in the markets, and the action was accordingly brought
to recover the difference between this amount and the con-
tract price agreed on by the defendant. The Attorney-
General conducted the defence, which rested upon the fact
of the vessel not having sailed. The jury found a verdict
for the plaintiff for £6,089.

• HAACK. V. BACHELOR AND ANOTHER.—This was an
action brought to recover damages for demurrage. The
plaintiff was the owner of a vessel, who made a charter
with the defendants, Messrs Bachelor, of Newport, to take
a cargo of timber at a port in Russia, and proceed with it
to Cardiff. The charter party stipulated that the vessel
should be discharged in fourteen running days, or that
demurrage should be paid by the defendants for every day
she was delayed beyond that time, The plaintiff contended
that the vessel had been delayed unnecessarily fifteen days,
from the 29th December to 12th of January. The defend-
ant paid five days demurrage into court, and contended
that the remainder of the delay was caused by the plaintiff's
own fault. Mr. Wilde, Q.C, and Mr. Blackburn appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Hugh Hill, Q.C, with Mr. Cross,
for the defence. The jury returned a verdict for £6O.
BAINES AND Co. V. GIBBS, BRIGHT AND Co.—ln this
case the plaintiffs were Messrs James Baines and Co, and
the defendants Messrs. Gibbs, Bright and Co. Mr. Hugh
Hill stated the case for the plaintiffs. He said both the
plaintiffs and defendants were well known in Liverpool, and
very extensive shipowners. On the 7th January, 1854, a
contract was entered into between Messrs Baines and
Messrs. Gibbs Bright and Co., by which the latter sold to
the former a vessel called the Saldanha, of about
1562 tons burthen, at a price of £lO 10s. per ton,
and a deposit of £2,000 paid. The material part
of the contract was that the sellers guaranteed the vessel to
class A 1 at Lloyd's for seven years on the hull ; should not
have less than 108 fathom of chain, with anchors, &c. The
vessel was built in Canada, and sent over to this country.
It was sent over under such circumstances, and with such a
reputation, that Messrs. Gibbs, Bright, and Co. no doubt
expected that she would class A 1 at Lloyd's for seven years.
Mr. B iincs, and indeed every one else, fully expected the
same thing. Mr. Baines therefore, immediately upon the
hull being delivered up to him, and without waiting to knew
whether the vessel wruld class or not, incurred an expense
of £3,516 in fitting her un with masts and spars, &c., and a
further amount of .t 2,541 for cabins, 'berthing, fitting up
with tanks, &c. This enormous expense was incurred in the
faith that the vessel would class as was expected. She was
to be put on the Australian line as a passenger ship. The
certificate, however, was only A 1 at Lloyds for six years.
This was believed to he owing to a defect in the want of a
spar deck, and the defendants did finally succeed in getting
the vessel register-d as A 1 for seven years. But the great
length of time which intervened was productive of serious
loss to the plaintiff, and this action was accordingly brought.
Mr. Hill read several letters which passed between Messrs.
Baines, Messrs. Cunard, who had nego'iated the sale, and
Messrs. Gibbs, Bright and Co. The Attorney-general con-
ducted the defence. Mr. James Baines, who stated that he
is sole partner in the firm of Baines and Co., was the
principal witness for the plaintiff's case. Ho deposed to
the purchase and the contract. The certificate from Lloyds
was not obtained until a few days after the vessel had sailed
on her first voyage. Ile stated that the Saldanha was
chartered to government at 18s per ton per month, and,