The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-19 00:00:00

THE DEFECTIVE MORTARS OF MESSRS,

GILISSELL AIVD CO.

A long and somewhat tedious correspondence
with reference to a contract of Messrs. Grissell and
Co. for mortars, presented to Parliament by the
Royal Command, was published yesterday. The
subject has already been discussed in our columns.
It may Suffice to state, for the present, that (ec-
cording to a paper before us) two mortars, 13-inch
sea-service, 5 tons, made by Grissell and Co., were
tried by firing the ordinary service charge, at Shoe-
bury-point, Essex,. after they had been subjected
to the usual prOof-fire at Woolwich. At the 10th
round one of these mortars burst in a vertical direc-
t tion through the centre of the bore, and it was
then discovered that a plug had been screwed into
the rear of the breech about 2 inches long and 1i
inch in diameter, seriously weakening the mortar in
, that direction, , and thus rendering it more liable
to burst. This led to an examination of the rest of
the mortars at that particular point. There were
found three other mortars that had been plugged
' in a similar manner, one of which had already been
rejected on account of having plugs inserted in the
face to fill up flaws in the metal. Another of the
mortars supplied by Grissell and Co. burst on the
usual proof, such being an extraordinary instance
of inferior metal. The officer, Lieut.-Col. Mitchell,
R A., under whose orders the defective mortars
were fired at Shoebury, reports that " the screw
had evidently teen inserted with great care, and
could not be detected unless specially sought for."
Such is the substance of Lieut.-Col. Eardly Wil-
mot's official report•to Mr. M 'nsell, M.P. Here-
upon folloWs a long explanatory letter, written to
Lord Pamnure by the firm, into the details of
which it is of course out of our power to enter.
Messrs. Grissell conclude by saying--7" the gist
of the matter is, have we intended fraud ? On
this issue We fearlessly claim from your lordship
and our fellqW,countrymen au uuqual fied acquittal.'
Whatever the intentions of the Messrs. Grissell
may have,been, their explanation does not appear
to have Satisfied the Government. Their letter
was referred to Lieut.-Colonel Eardley Wilmot.
That officer is inclined to doubt that the iron
(partly) used by Grissell and Co. (the Staffordshire
iron of Grazebiook and Co.) is " the highest on the
list of strong irons ;" it is at least certain, as he
observes, that the peculiar mixture of iron used
for the mortars " has utterly failed." Colonel
Wilmot reports, with reference to the plugging of
the mortars,: that Mr. Grissell explained it
to be an ordinary custom in large castings,
stating that "it had been done by his forerean
without his knowledge, it being a common custom
—that the mortar was not a bit the worse for it,
&c." Mr. Grissell's urgent appals to the colonel
to induce him to receive the mortar (No. 4)
were met with a stern refusal, and Mr. Grissell is
indirectly censured for not having then pointed
Out that three other mortars were phigged. In
answer to Mr. Grissell's assertion that there was
"no fraud ondisguise," certain suspicious circum-
stances are adduced by Colonel Wilmot which
would seem to indicate a desire for concealing the
insertion of the plugs and determination to escape
detection. In short it appears to the colonel that
"the statement of Grissell and Co. as to the plugs
in the face of the mortar is not consistent with toe
facts displayed on the plugs being extracted. All
the plugs are 21 inches long, and there are at least
two flaws of about 4 inches deep. The plugs are
of cast iron, which is wry unusual. The mortar was
delivered painted, and ou the discovery and rejec-
tion of this mortar, Ho evidence appears of a desire
to point out and explain the cause of the plugs in
the breech."..iMn4srs. Gris4ell made another strong
appeal to Lord Panniure on the 9th inst., in which,
after entering into, all the details of the case and
adverting totbe severe remarks recently made on
the subject in Parliament, they entreat his lord-
ship to remember that " their -characters as men
and as tradesmen are at stake," and that early and
public reparation is due to them. This letter was
referred to Cul. Wilmot for his opinion, and on
Monday last (April 14) Lord Paumure wrote to
Messrs. Grissell to this etlect—viz., that after hay-
, jag carefully considered the charge against the firm
and the evidenceou which itrested, it appeared to his
lordship that Mr. Grissell's statement to Cul. Wil-
Mot of his previous ignorance of the existence of the
plugs was nut correct ; that Mr. Grissell acted most
improperly.in not stating to Coloutl Wilmot the
existence of certain centre-holes, and that, with
reference to the holes in the face of the mortar, " a
deception was practised fur which Mr. Grissell is
responsible, whether it was practised with or with-
out his knowledge." Lord Palm-lure further ad-
dtices the bursting of all the three mortars
Grissell and Co. tried with the ordinary service
charge, as an incontrovertible proof that the ma-
terials whereof those mortars were made were not
of such quality as to insure their fitness for service.
Lord Pau inure concurs in the opinion of Colonel
Wilmot and Cap,aiu Catlin, that the boring of the
holes in the centre of the breech was injurious to
the strength of the mortar; but lie admits that
ihe, plugs inserted (with the exception of those in
the face), were not placed there for the purpose of
concealing flaws_; and here the matter rests.

ASSIMILATION OF THE MERCANTILE

LAW.

(Prom tote Times' City Article.)

On the 26th ult. attention was drawn to a clause
in a bill brought in by the Lord Chancellor for
assimilating the mercantile law of the united king-
Auto intended to repeal the 17th section of the Sta-
tute of Frauds, which provides that no contract
involving IQ/. or npwards is valid unless made by
some note or memorandum in writing. This has
always been acted upon in Libndou and regarded
with great favour, but in Manchester and. else-
where it has fallen into disuse, while' with regard
to Scotland, the statute has no application what-
- -ever. The question was, should the Scotch law be
made to conform to the English, or the English to
the Scotch 7 The Chancellor decided in favour of
the former ; but, looking at the fact that all the
principal transactions of the empire centre here, it
seemed questionable whether it would be wise to
disturb the London system, unless some strong
'objection to it
,could be urged upon principle.
This, however, was not possible; and, as the ques-
tion was obviously one of expediency only, it was
-recommended,. that the merchants and traders of
the inetr6Polis should not allow the clause to pass
without clearly coining to an understanding as to
, its-. desirableness or otherwise. It is now under-
. stood that the feeling is generally adverse to the
proposed change ; and a. petition against it, of
which the following is an abridgment, is iu course
of signature
:
"That a bill has been introduced the first section of
which purpose to repeal the enactment • That, no cot-
tract for the sole of any goods, ware,i, and merchandises,
for the price of 101. sterling or upwards, shall be al-
lowed to be good, except th,- buyer shall accept part of
the goods so sold and actually receive the same, or give
something in Earnest to bind the bargain or in part of
payment, or that some note or memorandum in writing
of the same bargain be made and signed by the parties to
be charged by such contract, or their agents thereunto
lawfully authorised.'
"That the mercantile business in the City of London
has grown up under,, and has adapted itself to, the pro-
visions of the said act, and, while your petitioners appre-
hend great risk and danger from a depatture from this
practice, they are unable to discover any advantage in
the proposed alteration.

"That the 4.41 V imposes no unnecessary technicalities
on contracts ; they are reqUired to be in writing, but
may be in any forma convenient to the parties, And are
frequently effected by letters between the principals..
"That in London a large part of the contracts are
negotiated by brokers, aed by the present practice all
contracts entered into by a broker are sent to principals.
who are untitled to reject the same within 24 hours, if
not in conformity with the intentions of the parties.
"That these provisions inure certainty and give con•
fidence in transactions in business, the importance of
which can scarcely be appreciated.
"That your petitioners conceive that, notwithstand-
ing; the proposed alteration of the law, all contracts of
importance will atntinue to be reduced to writing ; but
your petitioners will lose the .protection the law now
gives them.
" That if the law shall bs,altered your petitioners may
be called on at a lapse.otmany months to perform con-
tracts of which they have no knowledge, arising, nut of
misconception of those with whom they have been en.
gagedift treatiw-or of brokers or agents, to say nothing
of the risk of fraud.and collusion on the part of brokers
and afrent4, the result of which must obviously be an
increase of litigation and perjury.
"That a large proportion of the contracts entered
into contain stipulations as to the period of arrival, of
the shipment, or the delivers of goods, besides provi-
sions as to their qoality and, price; and tha value of the
contract mainly depends on these details. That, unless
those stipulations are reduced to writing, there can be
no certainty that buyer and seller C
are agreed upon the
contract they have entered into.' •
" That your petitioners attach great value to the prin-
ciple now acknoWledged. that none but written con•
tracts are validin law. Those who choose to rely upon
an honourable mutual understanding can now do so,
but in practice it, is rarely ever done, from a sense of
its inconvenience:* The measure now contemplated
would not probably alter the practice of using written
contracts, but would deprive the merchant of the secu-
rity be now possesses in the knowledge that he is bound
by no agreement which has not been accepted and re.
vi,ted by him, or which he has not had the opportunity
of revising."

FOREIGN CHAPLAINCY. —We underetadd that One o
the beet chaplaincies of Brussels will shortly become
vacant by the resignation of the presentghly-esteemed
holder, the. Rev. Mr. J. Blacker. The appointment,
we believe, rests with the Bishop of Londoz, upou
recoptuandation of the It of Obireadon: • •