Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-08-20 00:00:00

REUTER'S TELEGRAPH,

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN DAILY TIMES
SlR,—Can you inform your readers who is 3
Reuter, the receiver of the Continental telegrams.

Awrast 19 1859.

E-NQUIRER

[We believe that Mr. Reuter is a German
N. D. T.]

THE POISONOUS POTATO APPLE

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN DAILY TIMES.
SlR,—Allow me to explain, in reference to the case
of poisoning mentioned in the proceedings of the Health
Committee, that my statement was to the effect that the
potato belonged to a poisonous family of plants, but
that I was not aware of any case of poisoning by the
seeds. I had not heard of the case referred to by the
Chairman, where it was ascertained, en medical evidence,
that death had been caused by eating them. The thorn
apple (Stratnonium) and deadly nightshade (Belladonna)
belong to the same natural family_ as the potato.—

Yours, &c.
Public Offices, August 19

V. H. Dll-NCAN

OUR COUNTY MEMBERS

Monsit

HE. LICENSING Q

ed the eh

houses

Kerr. Carper, W. Brown, II
Baines, an

Plant, Williams,

good attendaucc

HAIRMAN

STION

.rth I

was a

o doubt most of

them knew the object for which they had nu

who would be listeners that evening to the s

that platform he dar
great moral evil exist

say all knew that

amongst them

there was a
They knew,

as all total abstainers knew, andthe public knew gene-
rally, that the beer-houses, the public-houses, and gin-
palaces, were nests from which sprung and was nurtured
almost the whole:of the crime that mas brought before
their courts of justice. It was really extraordinary that
an evil

so prevalent, so universal, should not long
since have called forth public attention to the evil
that exists, and have pointed out a remedy by which this
evil might have been annihilated. They who were
total abstainers were said to take an extreme course.
But all the means that had been brought forward in
tI7 —intr - ----ting tl,'

nis country, the purpose of proven, its universa,
evil, had failed to succeed. They must come to the rcot
of the matter. They wanted to give power to the in-
habitants of every locality, by a majority of two-thirds,
to put-down public-houses, or beer-houses, or gin-palaces
altogether, if they thought fit. (Applause.) Those
who were their opponents thought those were extreme
measures; but they said they were perfectly constitu-
tional, and that, therefore, there was nothing unreason-
able in the demand they made. But, whilst they enter-
tained these views, they were ready at any moment to
accept any portion of means by which this great evil
could be restrained. (Hear.) They were ready to accept
at the hand of the Government any means by which the
magistrates should be authorised to withhold the licenses
from beer-houses and public-houses. They would take
this as an instalment, not as the end to which they aimed.
They would take as an instalment additional power to the
magistrates to deny the licenses in the sale of intoxicat-
ing drinks, because they were persuaded that these in-
toxicating drinks in their own nature begot a passion
for itself, which no power on earth could restrain, and
because they knew it was the interest of those parties
who sold intoxicating drinks to make as many drunkards
as possible, regardless of the mischief and the crime
which flowed from such a source. The evil which they
now complained of was not limited to any particular
nati&m. He found that in Russia there was a great
effort being made to suppress the use of intoxicating
drinks. He was pleased to see in the Times an article
on this subject, speaking of what had been done in that
country. It was interesting to see that the whole world
was now alive to the importance of arresting the evils
that spring from the use of intoxicating drinks. lie
read an extract from the article referred to, which
spoke cf the establishment of teetotal societies and the
favour with which the Czar looked on this movement.
He also referred to the presentment the grand jury had
made with reference to the effects of public-houses on
crime in Liverpool. From this he contended they had
good grounds for the movement in which they were:now
taking nart that evening. It was evident that there was
amongst them a fearfully bad custom—a custom that
generated evil and crime of the most malignant character.
They could not take up a paper any day wherein they
would not find in it recorded acts of brutality and of
savage ferociousness of conduct, that had arisen entirely
6om the use of intoxicating drinks. lie believed, apart
frinn advantages generally, that if they could put down
all the public-houses, and beerhouses, and gin palaces,
tie country would be swept clear, of most of the crimes
that now disgraced it. (Applause.) He concluded by
calling on Mr. Plant to move the first resolution.
Mr. PLANT said that, although most of the gentlemen on
the platform were total abstainers, and although many of
them had subscribed their names for a permissive bill,
so that two-thirds of the ratepayers of a locality might
be empowered to close a. public-house if they were con-
vinced of their evil tendency, they did not come there that
night in that character, but as ratepayers to ratepayers, that
they might utter their sentiments on the subject upon
which the meeting had been called together to consider.
They thought it a more legitimate course that the rate-
payers should be called together to speak on this momen-
tous question, and that they might claim to have a right
to be heard before the magistrates on this question.
Last year there were 2,944 ratepayers signed a memo-
rial to the magistrates, praying that they would grant
no more new licenses. This memorial was turned out
by the magistrates on that occasion for reasons best
known to themselves. He often imagined that corporate
bodies, when assembled together, frequently did and
said things which in their individual capacity they
would be ashamed to do. And the gentleman who was
foremost in the opposition to their movement had
frequently in his hearing, and on that platform too,
when he was mayor of Liverpool, as well as in other
places, denounced intoxicating liquors as degrading and
demoralising to the working classes. (Hear' hear.)
He thought they had a right to come forward
publicly in order to induce the magistrates to act

Mr. G

SketeetA

pinion of tl

DEN moved the ad(

pful the M

MI of the follow inz

" That according to the report of Major Greig, as pre-
sented to the Council on the 29th October, 1858, there
were 1,494 homes licensed for the sale of spitits, and 899
houses licensed for the sale of beer, making a total of
2,393 houses licensed for the sale of intovicatimy drinks

in the borough of Liverpool
" That, according to the

were brought before your worshipful bench in the year
September 29, 1858, for drunkenness and eiindis-
orderly
idg
conduct.

"That during the same year 5,015 informations were
laid by the police for breaches of the license laws, and

542 fines inflicted

" That in addition to these cases—directl- connected
with the traffic of intoxicating. drinks—the experience of
your worshi-Jul bench, as well asof all persons con-
nected with the admimstration of justice, proves that a
large majority of the criminal cases brought before you

are caused by the use of intoxicating beverages.
" That pauperism and disease, as well as premature
death, are very frequently produced by the same cause.
" That much and heavy expense, in the shape of poor-
rates and other charges, is thrown upon the ratepayers
in consequence of th traffic.
" That it has been repeatedly shown that the presence
of public-houses, and especially of gin palaces, is a
temptation under which many persons are led into
intemperate habits.
i-g our h
emgermeao
tria numberl memorialists ba\o-ef hhousesoeuasreds
atgheadt
not less than 184 persons have made known their inten-
tion of applying for licenses for the sale of spirits, not-
withstanding the li yl
in the trade.

" That your memorialists, viewing the granting of
new licenses with great alarm, as dangerous to the
morality and injurious to the well-being of society,
would humbly pray your worshipful bench not to grant
any new licenses, and so stringently to enforce the
existing laws for the regulation of the traffic as to
decrease, as far as possible, the number of houses
engaged therein. _

your memorialists will ever pray, &c."
The motion was seconded by Mr. Capper, and carried
unanimously.

Mr. BAIN- ES moved a resolution to the effect that,
there being in existence two different and conflicting
bodies for granting licenses—the excise and the magis-
trates—that meeting considered it injurious to the
welfare of society, and called for the action of the
Government to assimilate the law, and to report the
granting of licenses to-public-houses and beer-houses in
the hands of the magistrates.

The resolution was seconded by Captain HARVEY, and
carried unanimously. _ _

The Rev. Mr. KERR moved a vote of thanks to the
chairman, which was seconded by Dr. Buitnowas, and
passed with acclamation.
The Chairman returned thanks, and this concluded
the business of the meeting.

SOUTH LANCASHIRE

CROWN

ASSIZES

3efore Mr. Baron WATSON.]

Henry Fitzgerah
James Ferguson, to
Thomas Steveuso:

four years'

Mary .Yorris,
Taylor, at Wig:

SENTENCES.

or assaulting

imprisonmer

3, for the manslaug
,ervitude.

Yothi Widwal, 40, fo:

months' imprisonment
Martin Connor, 40,

month's imp:
Mary Wil

month's imps
Henry Mi

mment

tabbin.

zlias Har

bigamy, eighteen mo.

George Chest(

ad robbing

?er, two

MIR J'(

Johnson, on

tided guilty to bigamy, five

months' imprisonment.
William Wilson, who pleaded guilty to bigamy, two
months' imprisonment.
John Fisher, 23, who pleaded guilty to having caused
the death of Philip Ihmmersley, at Manchester, two
months' imprisonment.

ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT AT LIVERPOOIL.
John Davies, aged 26, was indicted for having, at

£2OO, £lOO, and £5O, which he had received on account
-of his employer, Robert Morrison, in 1825. Mr.
Temple, Q.C., and Mr. Leofric Temple, were counsel
for the prosecution • Mr. Overcnd, Q.C., and Mr.
Deighton, were for the prisoner.
The prosecutor is a provision merchant in this town.
The prisoner was a clerk in the employ of the prose-
cutor, and had served his apprenticeship with him, the
term of which expired about the beginning of 1855.
Up to that time Mr. Morrison had had no reason to
doubt his integrity ; indaed, he entertained such a
favourable opinion of the prisoner's conduct and ability,
'that he appointed him to be cashkeeper. In the course
of 1855, while the prisoner was so employed, the

various acts with which he was now cliaried were
that

committed ; but it was
Mr. Morrison had disco
prisoner's appoiz

as cashkeeper, Mr

Morrison

iook him into partnership, and sent hiM to New York,
where he remained for some time. Dissatisfaction
having. arisen. the partnership was dissolved, and
the prisoner returned to Liverpool. Circumstances
then occurred which excited suspicion, and on.
examining Mr. Morrison's books facts were dis-
covered, which led to the present charge. With
respect to the first item, £2OO, the device for its appro-
priation commenced on the 14th June, 1855. On
reference to the cash book, which was kept by the

prisoner, it was represented that on that date he' paid
into the Bank of Liverpool £265 2s. 2d., and on referring
to the ledger, this amount did not appear to have been

r did it appear, on r€

to the banker's pass book, that any such sum was paid
to the bank upon that day. In the cash book, opposite
to the £265 2s. 2d., there was a reference to page 148
of another book, indicating that the particulars would be
found there. Under the date of the 28th June, there
was an entry to the effect that there had been withdrawn
2s. 2d., previously paid in. By
entries were cancelled, and the
then resor ed to other ways of accounting for
ney. On the same folio (148), and on the same
he represented that he had paid back into the
n.l •

this means the two

bank the s
for. Thi

ix of £2i

foi:', and it w

aving £66 2s. 2c

D be accoantec

way into th

the £206 was still udaecou

for the appropriation of that sum to his

own use that Oa
159, at the date
he had drawn out of the bank th

vas now charged. On page
represented that
£2OO which, it

19th July, the prison

mtended, had never been paid in, and with

respect to which he had made frmr or five fictitious
entries. On reference again to page 159, they found an
entry, "Bank of Liverpool, received W. G. Crory,
£200." On turning to Mr. Crory's account in the
ledger, they found there had been an entry of £5O, and
it was contended that even this entry of £5O was a false
one, having, it was alleged, been altered by an erasure
into the sum of £2OO. Mr. Crory was an insolvent at
this time, and his account had to be given in by Mr.
Morrison. In the corresponding entry in the bank
account it was contended that the figure 2 in the £2OO
had been scratched out; and a cypher substituted, so
that the item read as 000. To make the addition right,
the sum total had been altered by erasure.
The other charges in the indictment were next gon
into.

Morrison stated, in the course of his examination,
that he had given permission to the prisoner, since his
committal, to examine all the books, except the sales

Mr. W. G. Crory, provision merchant, proved that
one of the items, £5O, had been paid to him, and that
this sum had been transferred, in regular course, to the
debit of a person named Fowler. The witness likewise
accounted, by reference to entries, for another of the
charges against the prisoner—the item of £2OO.
Mr. Overend then addressed the jury on behalf of
the prisoner, and urged that up to the time of these
alleged discoveries, the character of the prisoner was
without suspicion. He was asked in 1859 to reconcile
differences in accounts of transactions which occurred
in 1854. It had . been shown that all the books had
been inaccurately kept, and that there were numerous
erasures

Theie Were so many mistakes that the
iccounts could not be reconciled, and the prisoner had
been suddenly charged with fraud. Not a sixpence had
been traced to his client's possession ; and it was not
until Mr. Morrison was led to look into his books for
another purpose that, finding differences he could not
reconcile, he began to suspect the prisoner. At this
remote period of time, the prosecutor asked them, from
these errors, to suppose the prisoner guilty of fraud ; he
asked them to rob 'him of his character, and to destroy
his prospects in life. All the erasures had been done
openly, and Mr. Crory had satisfactorily explained two
entries. He admitted that the prisoner had acted care-
lessly, foolishly, and inexcusably, but not that he had acted
dishonestly. The jury had to try the prisoner, not for
bad book-keepinm, but for embezzlement and fraud.
With regard to tie other two items, the sole ground of

)n, it was the duty

of the jury to take that vie
bank had beeli alive, he must

Mr. Cr

have completely altered the character of the allegations.
He asked the jury to look at the prisoner's character,
his position, the name he bore for integrity, all which
had secured for him the position of a partner in Mr.
Morrison's establishment—the distance of time, the
numerous entries, the complicated accounts,' and the
number of clerks in the concern, and not consign him to
infamy.

Hi; Lordship, in summing up the evidence, said that
it always required the greatest possible care, at a dis-
tance of time, to reconcile accounts. He was always
much afraid of being led to wrong conclusionsfrom books
alone. Finding an entry here and an entry there, persons
might construct a theory on those books which surround-
ing facts would not bear out: He need not tell the
jury that if the prisoner had committed error after
error that was not embezzlement. Embezzlement was
stealing money belonging to an employer. During the
whole.time, there was no concealment of the books by
the prisoner ; they were open at all times to his em-
ployer, Mr. Morrison. The explanation of the item of
£5O was as clear as the sun at noon day. The question
for the jury to decide was, whether the charges brought
forward were founded on mistakes ; mistakes did not
constitute embezzlement. The point was, whether the
acts charged
against the prisoner had been
i done in
error, or whether they had been done with the intention

of fraud.
Th 4 jury found the prisoner not guilty The ver-
dict was received with applause, which was immedi-
ately suppressed. The prisoner then left the court.