The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-10-04 00:00:00

(BEFORE JOSEPH POLLOCK, ESQ., JUDGE.)

THOMPSON v. FORDE.—The plaintiff in this case was the
owner of salt works, at Northwich, having offices in
Eagle-chambers,• Fenwick-street, Liverpool, and the
defendant was captain and part owner of a vessel, called
the Marshal Pelissier. Mr. Hime appeared for the
plaintiff, wad Mr. Almond for the defence. The amount
claimed was el 2 15s, being the value of 30 tons of Prussian
rocksalt, at 8s 6d per ton. The case for the plaintiff was,
that a person named Hughes, who was a man frequently
employed in the operation of salting vessels, a seasoning
process necessary for some voyages, came to the agent of
the plaintiff, in Liverpool, and gave an order for salt, for
the Marshal Pelissier. Mr. Bowden, the agent, com-
municated with Northwich, and a flat load was sent down
on the 21st of last August. The flat was taken to the
Brunswick Dock, where the vessel was lying. Captain
Forde asked how much salt was there ? and the master of
the flat, a person named Buckley, said there were 33 tow.
Captain Forde required to have the salt weighed, on which
the master of the flat said that process would cause a
great waste of time, and offered to let him have the 33 tons
as 30 tons. The captain assented to this, and, turning to
the shipkeeper, told him to sign the invoice for 30 tons.
The invoice was signed and handed back to Buckley. It
ran thus :—" From John Thompson, Eagle-chambers, 13,
Fenwiok-street, Liverpool, 21st August, 1856, to the
owners of the Marshal Pelissier, 33 tons Prussian rock
salt.' The salt was put on board the ship. Subsequently,
when Mr. Bowden, the agent of the plaintiff, called for
payment, the captain said he had paid the amount to
Hughes, who had been employed to salt the ship, and
who gave the order for the salt. It appeared that Hughes
had made an agreement with the captain to salt the vessel
at the rate of 8s 6d per ton of salt, being 6s per ton for
the article, and 2s 6d for his labour. The captain, not
having looked very closely at the invoice which bore the
name of the plaintiff, thought Hughes was the perso❑ to
be paid, and accordingly handed him the money. Under
these circumstances, the plaintiff claimed to hold the
captain liable. Mr. Almond contended, for the defence,
that as Hughes was the person employed by the captain

to salt the vessel, and as the salt had come through his
instrumentality, the captain was fully warranted in draw.
.ino the conclusion that he was the party to be paid. His
Honour said it was a very hard case, no doubt, for
Hughes had robbed one of two persons, and the question
only was, which of the two honest persons should suffer
for the dishonesty ? He was bound to adhere to the prin-
ciple of law, which had been frequently decided, not only
in that court, but in the superior courts, that if a party
receives goods with an invoice from a particular indi-
vidual, he must take care to pay that individual. Now,
this invoice had been received by Captain Forde, who,
no doubt, was telling the exact truth when he said that he
had not. read it over very carefully, but took it to be
all right. By handing over the invoice to the shipkeeper,
he made the shipkeeper his agent, who signed
as owing the money to John Thompson, the plaintiff. it
was quite clear, therefore, that he was bound to pay the
money to John Thompson or his authorised agent. He
did not pay him, but paid a person named Hughes, who
was not an agent of the plaintiff, and, therefore, he was
clearly liable to plaintiff for the value of the salt. His
Honour accordingly gave a verdict for £9, being the value
of the salt supplied, deducting the amount of the labour.

LIVERPOOL BANKRUPTCY COURT

(BEFORE MR. COMMISSIONER PERRY.)

In re BRINDLEY.—This case was resumed on the sitting
of the court, at eleven o'clock, yesterday. Mr. Aspinall
appeared for the bankrupt, and Mr. Simon appeared to
oppose the allowance of the certificates on behalf of the
assignees and all the creditors. The bankrupt was
examined at considerable length by Mr. Simon. He stated
that he ceased to be one of the masters at Swinford Hos-
pital in 1839, and that he came to Chester in 1841. During
the interval he was occupied as a public lecturer against
infidelity, but chiefly socialism, and he derived from
this pursuit an income of £3OO a year, exclusive of
travelling expenses. Testimonials in the shape of cash
presents, amounting to between £BOO and £9OO, were also
given to him by various towns throughout England. In
1842, he took Tarvin Hall, near Chester, just previous
to which he received presents amounting to about £6OO,
from Prince Albert, the Queen Dowager, and several
members of the nobility and gentry. He purchased £3OO
worth of furniture at different sales, and had then about
£3OO over and above his debts, to carry on the school.
The average number of his pupils, after the first three
years, and during the remaining seven, was 100, and with
that. number his income was about £5,000 a year; but, in
addition to his other outgoings, he alleged that ho
spent not less than £4,000 or £5,000 on Tarvin Hall
during his tenancy. In order to meet the expenses
of the school, he borrowed .t'2.155 from Mr. Ducker, of
Chester, on the 17th May, 1846, and the promissory note
which he gave in return ran thus :—" On demand, I pro-
mise to pay .W 2.155 16s, with interest at the rate of 5 per
cent., &c., value received in 90 hogsheads of tobacco."
He denied that this transaction wa4 a purchase of the
tobacco to be realised by him, and declared that, at the
time he signed the note, he took no notice of the conclud-
ing portion of it. He merely borrowed the money; and
Mr. Pucker, not having the cash by him, gave him an
order on his brokers, Parry and Crosbie, of Liverpool, in
order that they might realise the tobacco which they held
for him, and hand over the money to him (the bankrupt).
The tobacco, when realised, brought 600 less than
the amount for which he gave the promissory note.
He subsequently, on the 21st August, 1846, gave Mr.
Ducker a hill of sale on his furniture at Tarvin Hall, and a
warrant of attorney, and in May, 1847, he borrowed £l,BOO
from Mr. Bancroft, and gave him as security a mortgage on
his freehold property, and a warrant of attorney. Mr.
Simon here put in two letters, written by the bankrupt to
Mr. Walker of Chester, at the end of 1848, to fix the date
of this transaction, and to show the bankrupt's position at
the time on his own admission. Mr. Walker was at the
time attorney to both Mr. Ducker and the bankrupt, but
in those communications the bankrupt intimated that they
were confident. [Mr. Aspinall observed that it was a
singular thing for an attorney to produce the confidential
letters of a person who was once his client. Happily, it
was not the practice with Liverpool solicitors.] Mr.
Simon replied, that if there were any blame in
the matter, it was in having pat in the letters
without first having read them. Mr. Walker
laboured under a misconception of his position, as
in those very letters the bankrupt requested him to com-
municate the circumstances mentioned in them to Mr.
Ducker. But rather than Mr. Walker should be subject to
any remarks affecting his professional character, he (Mr.
Simon) would, with the permission of the court, withdraw
the letters: Mr. Aspinall expressed himself as quite willing
to acquiesce in such a course. He did not impute to Mr.
Walker anything but the want of proper caution in pro-
ducing inch letters. His Honour observed that it might be
that Mr. Walker had overlooked the last paragraph of the
letters containing the intimation of their confidential cha-
racter. The letters were then withdrawn. The bankrupt
was then examined touching the deed of arrangement with
his creditors in 1850, and the circumstances under which
he took Abbots Grange in 1852, and on which he said he
expended in alterations, £3,900. The examination
was adjourned at a quarter past four o'clock to eleven o'clock
this day.

" THE Naw SAFETY INKSTAND, we can bear personal
witness to, secures to all classes one which will keep the ink
always clean and good, will prevent that accumulation of
oxide which spoils the finest writing, and de: troys the
test pen ; by means of this inkstand, too, the amount of
ink taken up by the pen can be easily regulated."—
Portsmouth Times and Naval Gazette.—Sold by all Book-
sellers. Price 4s, 3s, and is

MRS. STOWE ON TEMPERANCE AND THE NEW PRESIDENT.—
The supporters of the temperance movement sent through
the Earl of Harrington an invitation to Mrs. Stowe to
attend a public meeting in Derby, in order that a congra-
tulatory address might be presented to her. The Earl of
Harrington accompanied the invitation with one from
himself, requesting the honour of a visit from Mrs. Stowe
and her husband (Professor Stowe) at Elvaston Castle,
during their stay in the neighbourhood. Mrs. Stowe
declined the invitation, as her husband was ebliged to
leave England to resume his official duties, and she was
unwilling to undergo the reception of an address unas-
sisted by him. in her letter to the Earl of Harrington
she speaks of the advantage which the Main Liquor law
has been to the State, and adds t--" My heart warms with
satisfaction at the beginning of the cause in England.
rejoice that the splendid accessions of your lOrdship's
rank and position are being made instruments in
the great cause of human improvement, and I trust that
the English and American oaks which have been planted
together in your beautiful grounds, in commemoration of
the inauguration of this cause in England, may grow and
mingle their branches together—emblems of our national
union in every work of peace and goodwill to men. It is
my belief, from observation and travel in England and
Scotland, that almost all the poverty and misery of the
lower classes now arises from the traffic in intoxicatin g
drinks. In no country has benevolence been more ener-
getic and the progress of social reform more rapid. The
benevolent works of England strike a stranger as really
stupendous, yet this one cause seems to nullify all and keep
up misery, vice, and distress. it seems to me that there
is now scarcely any cause of poverty and distress which
the suppression of the liquor traffic would not remove.
Since:emigration to the colonies has equalised the popu-
lation, it would seem as if there might be money enough
and work enough to support the whole labouring popu-
lation, were it not for the enormous taxation and drain
of ardent spirits. The view of your great cities flaming
nightly with signs of 'rum, brandy, and gin,' is to the
eyes of an American as appalling as the slave market of
our Southern States to an Englishman. With the ma-
jority of our respectable Poplilatiqn in New England
these articles are considered as pertaining only to the de-
partment of medical practice, and if we have them in our
houses at all, it is with the same precaution and watch-
fulness that we use other medicines. When we see how
they
are PubliPl7 Obtruded on the eye here every night,
with all the attractions Qf brilliant lighfs and splendid
shops, we wonder that there are any' who escape such
tem • ptations. But let us hope that our two eountries are
both on the eve of new and better things. It is our hope
that the cause of liberty in America is a.
bout to triumph
—that the wise and good, who too long have slumbered
and slept, are awakening
in good earnest to wipe out the
disgrace of past remissness by P ;,leing in our highest
national seat a President
who snall consistently uphold
' the principles of freedom."