The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-10-26 00:00:00

THE WELLINGTON MONUMENT.

A very numerous and influential meeting of the in-
habitants of this town was held on Saturday, to decide on
the propriety of raising a monument in Liverpool to the
memory of one of the greatest men the world ever saw.
It is but fitting that in the commercial metropolis of Great
Britain an example should be set of performing an act of
public gratitude to the man whose transcendent military
services rescued British commerce from the trammels
with which the conqueror of Europe would have fettered
it, and whose subsequent career as a statesman gave a
value to it at home which it could not otherwise have en-
joyed. It would be as tedious as unnecessary to recount
the varied and valued services which the illustrious de-
parted rendered to his country, to civilisation, and to the
world ; for all are unanimous in his praise. His name
and his fame will endure so long as language shall exist in
which to recal them ; and WELLINGTON will be remem-
bered as the name which shall most fitly express a genuine
patriot, beside which all other titles are poor and un-
meaning. All are united as to the worthiness of the
object to be commemorated, and it only remains to be
seen whether the town of Liverpool, conspicuous above
all others for the magnificence of her public buildings and
the public spirit and munificence of her inhabitants, the
emporium of the world's commercial greatness, of whom
it may truly be said that her merchants aro princes, will
yield the palm to any other city or town in raising an
enduring monument to the memory of England's noblest
and greatest son. Shall it be said of this great port,
which is first seen by most of the foreigners who land on
our shores, that, with her capacious docks, crowded with
shipping from all parts of the globe; her St. George's
Hall, unrivalled in Europe; her commodious Exchange ;
her stately churches; her wide streets, and commanding
edifices, that she has no monument connected with a
name which all the world revere—in honour of the man
who, more than any other, made the name of England
respected and feared in every part of the habitable globe ?
The credit of Liverpool it at stake, and we have no fear
for the result of the appeal. We would, however, remark
in passing, that while the loftiness of a pillar would make
such a monument an object to be seen from afar, the
placing of the propsed statue upon the top is at best one
of questionable taste. It may be worthy of consideration
whether a statue of the Duke upon an extended pedestal
in the front of a lofty pillar would not better answer the
requirements of enabling the statue to be seen from near
and the monument to be seen from far.

FUNERAL OF THE DUKE OF

WELLINGTON

1T has at length been officially announced, that the fune-
ral of the late Duke of Wellington will take place on
Thursday, the 18th of November, and that the route of
the funeral procession will be from the Parade at the back
of the Horse Guards, through St. James's-park, by the
Mall, and up Constitution-hill, in the Green-park, passing
under the equestrian statute of the Duke, rnd proceeding
in front of Apsley-house down Piccadilly, St. James's-
street, Pall-mall, Charing-Cross, the Strand, Fleet-street,

and Ludgate-hill, to the western door of St. Paul's
Cathedral.

THE COURT OF PASSAGE.

This Court commenced i, ssitting yesterday, before E.
JAMES, Esq., Assessor, and was held for the first time in
the Nisi Prius Court, in St. George's Hall.
The following cases were tried in the course of the
day ; but, in the early portion of the morning, eight or
nine were struck out, owing to the parties not being
prepared :

A SAILOR'S BILL

PATTISON v. WILLIAMS.—In this case Mr. Aspiaall
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Blair for the defend-
ant. The plaintiff is a lodging-house keeper, and the
defendant a sailor. The defendant had lodged with the
plaintiff, and was supplied with goods to a considerable
extent. Money had been paid on account ; and, accord-
ing to the evidence of the plaintiff, a balance was struck
amounting to £4 ss. The defendant most positively
denied this. Verdict for the defendant.

THE SHIP CONSTITUTION

REDHEAD AND ANOTHER V. BRITTON.—This was an
action brought by the plaintiffs, Messrs. Redhead and
Kerr, the owners of the steamer Helen Faucit, to recover
from the defendant, the captain of the ship Constitution,
the sum of £lO upon a breach of contract. Mr. Atkin-
son appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Aspinall for the
defendant. It was alleged on the part of the plaintiffs,
and evidence called to prove it, that on the night of the
29th June last the ship Constitution was brought out of
dock into the river. The weather was very stormy. and
the vessel about ten o'clock was dragging her anchor,
when the Helen Faucit went to her assistance. On reach-
ing the Constitution the parties offered to pay £1 if they
would fetch the Defiance to her. This was refused.

On the part of the defendant the captain of the Con-
stitution was called, and he stated that the ship was not
dragging her anchor, that she was not in danger, and they
only called to the parties to send the Defiance steam-tug,
which had been engaged to take them out to sea.

The assessor in summing up said the simple question
was whether there was a contract between the parties or
not.

The jury found for the defendant.
ALLEGED TRESPASS

In this case, John Hay was plaintiff, and Anne Rae the
defendant.—Mr. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Aspinall for the defendant. The defendant is
a shoemaker, and was in the possession of a cellar at 173,
Scotland-road, as under-tenant to the defendant. In the
month of April last the defendant gave notice to quit to
the plaintiff, and he was to leave on the 3rd of May, or
pay double rent ; and on the 10th of that month he paid
Gs., being a week's double rent. On the same day the
front of the shop was made up, and he was unable to gain
an entrance, or to get away his goods. The damages were
laid at £5OO. The plaintiff having failed to establish that
the boarding was put up by the defendant, the Assessor
directed a non-suit to be entered.

COLLISION IN THE STREET,

BRANIGAN v COPPLESTONE.—This was an action to
recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiff
when crossing towards Fenvvick-street, by a person
named Ashton, who was riding a grey galloway at a
furious rate, ran against him, and knocked him down, by
which he received considerable injury. Evidence was
adduced showing the nature of the accident, but the only
testimony to show that the horse belonged to the
defendant was that of an Irishman. who stated that it
was considered that the galloway belonged to him, and
that Ashton was his cart.follower. The Assessor ruled
that it was not sufficient, and the plaintiff was nonsuited.