The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-28 00:00:00

£3,000, and no more. He made no further agree-
ment with Taylor to reduce the amount due by
Monteith and Co. The bill for £2,600 was re-
turned unaccepted, and he agreed to get Lupton
and Co. to accept another bill for £1,600, besides
the one for £1,400. Taylor said Monteith had had
the money, and witness expressed his surpise that
the bank should advance money on bills before they
were accepted. He recollected circumstances under
which he signed the letter of the 15th of August.
It was written
.and indited by David Murray,
cashier to John Monteith. During Monteith's
absence, Murray came to him and said he was
pressed by Taylor for money to pay a bill, and it
was useless his writing to Taylor himself. Murray
then wrote the note, and placed it before him for
signature, saying that if he refused Monteith must
stop payment. He read the note, and very reluc-
tantly signed it. He saw Taylor again, and said
the same thing as before, that he would do his best
to get the £3,000 accepted by Lupton and Co.
Lupton and Co. only accepted the £1,400 bill, and
Monteith had the benefit, as it was carried to his
account at the bank.

Cross-examined—Witness received upwards of
1,000 in 1856 from Monteith, and in 1857 perhaps
£3OO or £4OO. His belief was, but lie could not
swear, that it was £l,OOO in 1857. He had
arranged with his father-in-law's partner, previous
to going to Glasgow in August, 1857, about draw-
ing the bills on Lupton and Co., by Monteith and
Co., for £3,000.
Re-examined—There was a balance struck in
1853, and above £2,000 was coming to him then.
He expected to receive £lO,OOO up to the end of
the partnership in 1855, as the books showed a
profit of £20,000 a-year. Up to the end of 1855 he
had every reason to suppose the business was very
profitable indeed.
Lord Campbell read over the letter of the 15th of
August, 1857, called the defendant's attention par-
ticularly to the wording as of a partner in the con-
cern, and asked whether he had any further expla-
nation to offer of his signing after reading it.
Mr. Needell could only say that it was done under
the excitement of the moment, and the pressure of
Monteith's clerk. The wording_ was not his. That
was Mr. Murray's. It was all Mr. Murray's doing.
Mr. David Murray, the cashier of Mr. John Mon-
teith, said he accompanied Mr. Needell to the bank
the first time that defendant ever saw Mr. Taylor.
Mr. Taylor said he was very glad to see Mr.
Needell. He had been anxious for a long time to
see him, as he had been very desirous of talking to
him about the affairs of John Monteith and Co. Mr.
Needell said he was not a partner in that firm. Mr.
Taylor said,—" We were not to know that. We
look upon you as a partner and we hold you as such.
It is best to be plain with you." They then began
talking about Lupton and Co.'s bills, and Mr.
Needell expressed very much surprise at Mr. Taylor
having given money for the bills unaccepted. He
promised, however, that he would get £3,000 ac-
cepted by Lupton and Co. Witness believed that
Mr. Needell mentioned the time when the partner-
ship expired. He wrote the letter of the 15th Aug.,
1857, which Mr. Needell signed. No one had told
him what to write. He indited it himself. He took
it up to Mr. Needell, who objected to sign it. He
said he could not get any money from Mr. Taylor;
he had tried all he could., and as there were bills to
pay, unless he had money the concern must stop
payment that day. Mr. Needell read the letter and
ultimately signed it.
Mr. Henry Monteith said he was a member of the
firm of John and Henry Monteith, which was
formed in Feb., 1856. It was put into writing.
He went to Mr. Taylor before, and asked whether
he was satisfied that witness should become a part-
ner in the concern. Mr. Taylor said he had no
objection. Witness said he was going that night to
Manchester, in order to satisfy himself that the
property was at Hayfield, near Manchester, as re-
presented. Mr. Taylor approved the step. On his re-
turn he took the deed of partnership to Mr.
Taylor to know if there was anything to be added to
it. Mr. Taylor said he was too busy to look over it,
but if witness was satisfied he dared say it was all
right. Subsequently Mr. Taylor saw the deed after it
was executed, with the inventory, and bills to the
amount of £15,000 were handed over to him at the
same time. Witness brought no capital into the
concern, and had drawn out £2OO or £3OO only.
The firm at Hayfield was indebted £60,000 to the
bank.

Mr. Wylde, in summing up the defence, sug-
gested that the letter of the 15th of August,
was drawn up by a clerk in the usual language of
a firm, and signed by Mr. Needell, in an unguarded
moment, under the fear that Monteith and Co.
would stop payment, in which, of course, he was
deeply interested.
Mr. Bevil' replied for the plaintiff.
Lord Campbell left it to the jury to say whether
Mr. Needell held himself out to be a partner in the
firm of John Monteith and Co., of Glasgow, at the
time these bills of exchange were negotiated—viz.,
between January, 1856, and the 20th of April,
1857. It was admitted that the defendant was a
partner ; that he had never given public notice of
his having ceased to be a partner, as every prudent
man should do, and that he had not given any such
written notice to the bank. The defendant relied
on verbal notice to the manager of the bank, but
that was distinctly denied by Mr. Taylor. The
most important evidence was as to what took place
on the 15th of August, 1857, when the letter was
written by the cashier of John Monteith, read over
by the defendant, and signed by him.
The jury retired for a quarter of an hour and
then returned a verdict for the plaintiff.