The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-06 00:00:00

SHIPPING MASTERS AND THE LEAD LINE

TO THE EDITOR OF TIIE NORTHERN TIMES.

The Chinese have two sayings—I only quote Chinese
when apposite—the first is, " that every herring should
hang by its own tail; " and the second, "that every tub
should stand on its own bottom ! " However, as we are
at 'war with the " Celestials," they won't get credit for
the aptitude of their remarks, however good. But I
suppose I am at liberty to differ with the Chinese, at
least, so far as:to tell the learned Mandarin, who philoso-
phises so, that " every herring" does not permit itself to
be suspended "by its own tail," and that very many tubs
stand on bottoms quite different from their own. The
only way to deceive a policeman is, by telling him the
truth, because the world is so given to falsehood, that
when " wolf " is cried in earnest, no one credits the
warning. Mr. Saxby has been doing all these things for
the benefit of Ship Masters, and yet they are so obtuse
that they will not credit his exertions. He has hung her-
rings by their own tail; made tubs stand on their own
bottoms, and yet, stupid Ship Masters are determined not
to see these things. In his letter, the exordium of which
is devoted to me (fine writing no doubt it is,) he begs of
my friends to take care of me. It is quite evident, from
his lugubrious epistle, that he lacks " troops of friends,"
for if he had any such adjuncts, I strongly suspect that
they would have put a " stopper" on the scribendi long
before this time of day. Luckily, however, he adopts
the passage " save me from my friends," and in that case
I think the " friends" have the best of the bargain, for
" quos dens volt." I was going to quote the Classics, but
the vernacular will be more easily comprehended—
" whom the Gods wish to destroy they first make mad!"
So much for Buckingham ! Mr. Saxby has been telling
the Ship Masters that the " Certificate" is no use—in fact,
it is a " badge of dependence and that is all true, but
the masters will not believe him, because he tells the
truth. A prophet never prospers in his own country, and
it is clear that Mr. Saxby must seek out some other place
to propagate his chimerical revelations,—for Liverpool
"will none of them." He has had interviews "with 2,000
captains of merchant ships, since September." If this be
not a proof of philanthropy, that deserves a monument--
more lasting than any alderman Gibbs of London, ever
got up to himself—why let the public judge. Here
we have, from the Ist of September up to the 26th of May,
about 260 working days ; and to have had " personal con-
verse," as he calls it, with 2,000 captains in that time, he
must have met (in round numbers) eight captains daily.
(if rant,a ha nnala not thaao
some conversation—" personal converse ;" and in order
to obtain the "enormous and valuable opportunity"
which he speaks of, it must have cost him. at least, half
an hour's time with each—and that is decidedly a small
here we have Mr. Saxhv ssiseailSg, ac the
least computation —four hours of his precious time daily
to " found a correct 'opinion." Verily if this does not
bear out philanthropy, it proves that time is not a con-
vertable term for cash, and that both are dross in the
eyes of Mr. Saxby. Figures are edged tools, and facts
are stubborn things. A ship master thinks a certificate
a valuable document, for without it, he can do nothing in
his profession. Mr. Saxby tells him it is of no value
whatever, and he enunciates something, in fact, on this
point, with which I entirely agree. Still, on reflection, I
will not go so far, for I have known, at least, an unit in
the service, who used his certificate to such advantage
that he lost three well insured ships by its assistance, and
on investigation the court declared the losses to result
from the non-use of the lead line! As to the Rig-a.doon
which he performs, here and there, in his column and a-
' half of what the "ship master" truly termed Bost!, I
care not to dissect it, for until sickening bluster becomes
recognised for convincing argument, Mr. Saxby may
stand " alone in his glory." What I contend for, what I
have contended for, and what I shall continuo to contend
for, is, that the law should be most rigidly put in force
against all persons who are found guilty by their "peers,"
of losing ships, containing life and property, and if a few
were compelled to "walk the plank"—alter Mr. S:Axi)y's
fashion, it would prove a salutary lesson to others. Mr.
Saxby attributes the loss of every nine ships out co , en,
to "defective vigilence." Here he drops into an admission
that he did not intend—for according to that, no qualifi-
cation—(" vigilence " alone will do) is necessary in a
master, and the examination for a certificate, a nuisance.
The gasconading flourishing contrast which he institutes
between masters of vessels and members of learned pro-
fessions, is of a piece with the whole epistle—brutun
ful—
men. If masters of vessels cannot find a different advce
cate, they will soon find themselves in a worse "
than that. in which they are at present.—Yours, &c,

ST. PAUL'S CHURCH, PRINCES PARK.

TO THE EDITOR Or THE NORTHERN TIMES.

Sir,—l avail myself of the extensive circulation
of your paper to render public a nuisance, which,
as the warm weather approaches will become more
unbearable

Last Sunday morning, four ladies (sitting in
different parts of St. Paul's Church,) wore com-
pelled by excessive heat to leave during Divine
service, notwithstanding which, the same evening
the chancel window was closed ; although the
atmosphere was then more warm then comfortable.
Now, if this is to continue, the result will be, that
delicate persons will have to deny themselves the
gratification of attending Divine service at St. Paul's,
for the next three months, not because the church
is badly built or ventilated, but simply because
they will not open the windows.
Apologizing for occupying your space.—l am,
Yours, &e., CnciactimAN,
Liverpool, sth June, 1857.

At LEWIS & COMPANY'S, Ranelagh street,
BOYS are CLOTHED from the Aces of 6 to 20 Years.

EXTRAORDINARY WATCN ROBBERY.—Mary Kennedy,
a good-looking young woman, was brought before Mr.
Beadon, at the Marlborough-street Police Court, charged
with stealing a silver watch, the property of Lyndon
Dalton, of Brown-street, Grosvenor-square. The prosecu-
tor stated that on Sunday night, about eleven o'clock, he
was proceeding along Oxford-street, on his way home,
when the prisoner came up and accosted him. He con-
versed with her for a short time, when she told him she
-was a servant out of a situation, and was in such en
exhausted state, that she was fainting for a glass of wine.
There was no public-house open at that hour, and thinking
she really was in need of some refreshment, he look her to
his lodgings, where he gave her a glass of brandy and
water. I a the meanwhile witness took off his coat and
waistcoat, as the weather was rather sultry, end threw
them over the back of a chair. He then had occasion to
leave her for a few seconds, and when he returned she
expressed her gratitude, and said she must ba gone, as her
friends would be alarmed at hrr absents. He escorted
her to the door, and bid her good night, and she then ran
off as fast as she could. This excited his suspicion, and
on feeling his waistcoat pocket, he missed his watch,
worth about Z 6. He at once gave information of the
robbery, with a description of the prisoner, to the police,
and the result was the prisoner was apprehended. The
prisoner, who made a most infamous accusation against
the prosecutor, denied the charge, and was remanded for
a week in order that further inquiries may be made about
her.

BELLHOUSB AND ANOTHER V. THE CORPORA-
TION OF MANCHESTER.

In the action tried last Liverpool assizes, before Mr.
Justice Crompton, a verdict, it will be remembered, wag
found for the plaintiff—damages £4,500. The case came
before the Court of Common Pleas, on Wednesday, Sir
Fitzroy Kelly having obtained a rule nisi for a new trial,
on the pounds that the verdict was against the weight of
evidence, and that the damages were excessive. Mr.
Atherton, Q C., Mr. Manisty, and Mr. Wheeler appeared
to show cause againt the rule; and Sir Fitzroy Kelly,
Q.C., Mr. Hill, Q.C., Mr. Monk, and Mr. Mellish in
support of it. Mr. Atherton, in showing cause against
the rule, was stopped, and the court called on the learned
cousel for the defendants to support the rule. The action
was brought to recover damages against the corporation of
Manchester for having erected a bridge and tunnel upon
the river Medlock, whereby the water was obstructed in
its flowing and thrown back, causing it to rise higher than
it otherwise would have done. On the 9th of August last
year there was a great flood in the river, and these ob-
structions on it, made by the defendants, caused the river
to overflow the plaintiff's premit es (a mill and factory
built on its banks), whereby a large quantity of machinery
and goods was damaged and destroyed, their mill was
stopped, And they lost much profit. The plaintiff's evidence
was that the obstructions caused the river to rise 264
inches, which was 22 inches above the embankment wall
of their premises ; and, according to the plaintiff's evidence,
if the tunuel had never been made the water would have
been 41 inches below this embankment wall top, and
the damage could not have occurred. According to the
defendant's witnesses, the corporation works only raised
the water 15 inches ; consequently, as the water went
22 inches over the plaintiff's wall, if these works had
never been made, the water would still have gone seven
inches over the plaintiffs' wall, and would have inflicted
nearly as much damage as the plaintiffs complained of.
It was also stated, that for several hours before the water
had surmounted the wall it had got into the mills through
the soughs and damaged the carding engines. The Chief
Justice, in giving judgment, said he was of opinion that
the rule must be discharged. The question was one
entirely of fact, and therefore a proper one for the deter-
mination of a jury. It was true that it involved a some-
what complicated question, depending very much on
scientific views, and therefore it might have been as well
or better disposed of before a different tribunal. This
had been suggested at the trial ; but the learned counsel
on both sides had declined that mode of settling the
matter, and had desired that it should be left to a jury. After
a very careful consideration of the arguments presented
to the court in detail, he was not at all sure, if the court
were called upon to decide this question as a jury, that
they should not come to the same conclusion as the jury
had done. The whole argument rested on the assumption
that the plaintiffs' witnesses, in ascribing the rise of the
water to amount to twenty-six inches in consequence of the
defendants' works, had not given credit for fifteen inches of
rise said to be due to the Oxford-bridge over the river ; but
the sensible effects of the obstruction of the bridge were
only felt at the tunnel, and consequently, but for the tun-
nel, no mischief would have arisen from a rise of fifteen
inches. But be this as it might, this was a question for
the jury to decide. It was true that the jury hid not had
the advantage of the addresses of the learned counsel,
which had been waived at their request ; but, on the other
hand, the jury had all the evidence before them. If, as
the court was now told, upon the figures as admitted or
proved beyond dispute (as to the number of inches the
water had risen) certain conclusions could have been
arrived at, or could only be arrived at, it was for the
learned counsel for the defendants to have insisted on his
right to address the jury, and he could not but believe that
a special jury of the county of Lancaster would ha re given
every attention to such an address, and, if necessary, have
changed their views upon it. The learned judge who tried
the cause was not dissatisfied with the conclusion at which
the jury had arrived, and he therefore thought that the
court ought not to put the plaintiffs to the expense of
going down to have this action tried again. The other
learned judges concurred. Rule discharged.