The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-13 00:00:00

The MAYOR.—How do you pay your rent?
Witness.—Once a-week only.
Mr. JAMES.—Do you remember when you went to th

house you na

Christmas

w occupy.
I'm not sartain; it might be a week before

How many Christmas days ha
that house ?

passed

since you went to

Faix, nearly a couple of 'em. (Roars of laughter.)
Mr. WRIGHT was proceeding to remark upon the nature
of the evidence, when _ . _ _ _ _

Mr. JAMES (with some warmth) interrupted him.—l.Ct
Me first conclude, and then you may comment.
Mr. WRIGRT•—I'II make an observation when I think

proper
Mr.
Mr.

JAMES.—I am not asleep
WRIGHT.—Nor I.

Mr. Shaw, overseer-, then examined the parish books, when
it was found that in 1838 M'Cabe was rated for a different
house to that ou which he now claimed.
Mr. JAMES.-1 must abandon this case.
Vote disallowed.'
The court adjourned at five o'clock.
THURSDAY.

The mayor, attended by the assessors, opened the court at
the time appointed. 'With the exception of some frivolous
cases of objections by both parties, which were either with-
drawn or speedily gone through, the time of the court was
taken up in attending to objections by the conservatives
against members of the Protector Society, or by radicals
against parties who had been put on the list by the conserva-
tives, and contained nothing materially different from those
already before the public.
FRIDAY.
The mayor and the assessors took their seats at 9 o'clock.

VAUXHALL WARD

The remaining objections to voters in this ward were
through, without anything of interest occurring.

'ST. PAUL'S WARD

Mr. WILKINS, on this ward being called on, said he was
instructed to more for the postponement of the hearing of
cases in this ward on the ground of the abduction of a notice

server.
Two affidavits were handed in, and read by the clerk of the
court.

The first affidavit was the depositon of a female named
Alice Jackson, residing in Henry-street, and was tothe effect
that a person named Thomas Turtle, who had been lodging
at her house, and who had been employed to serve notices of

objections upon the cons,.. tor St. Viler
Ward, was at two o'clock on the morning of the 30th August
when in liquor, taken away by two persons from her house
and that she had not since heard of him. The sv

vative interest

,:cond affida

vit was that of James Richardson, another notice server, and
was to the effect that a Mr. Wm. Jones, attorney-at-law,

had called upon deponent, and in the course of a conversa-
tion asked him if lie had seen Thomas Turtle,towhlchde-

ponent answered he had not ; and Jones replied, " he's right
enough ; " and offered deponent money and a situation if he
would leave Liverpool and go to reside in Dublin. The affi-

davits further stated that dilligent search had been made for

Turtle, and that he could not be found

Mr. Wilkins said it appeared to him that the affidavits
spoke so strongly for thernseh-es, that he should content
himself with merely moving that the court would not now

-take St. Paul's Ward, but-proceed to Exchange '
order that time might be afforded to produce Turtle

Ward, in

Mr. Harvey observed that there was one point which he
had not gathered from the affidavits : it was stated on the
face of the affidavits that Turtle had been taken away, but

there was nothing to show that he had been traced

I\lr. Wilkins replied that they only traced him so far as

this ; that it was shown that he fiad been taken out of his
lodgings at two o'clock in the morning, and the parties so
taking him had been heard to state their intentions to place

him upon the packet ; a diligent inquiry was shown to have
been made for him ; and he (Mr. W.) then asked the court
to infer that he had been taken out of the town.
Mr. Harvey said if the court saw displayed a prima facie

case to defeat the ends of justice, they should be disposed to
consider it, not only a gross contempt of court, but a most

unjustifiable attempt to defeat legitimate inquiry. He, for
his own part, thought sufficient had been shown from which
to infer that there had been an attempt to tamper with a ma❑
whose evidence lay at the very root of the inquiry.
Mr. James objected to the application of Mr. Wilkins
being complied with, on the ground that it had not been made
at the proper time ; the affidavits were sworn on the 7th inst.
and he ought to have been furnished with copies. They (the
reformers) were not prepared to proceed with other wards.

. .
Mr. Harvey suggested that when an objection made by
Thurtle was come to, it should stand over.
Mr. JAMES said this would naturally lead him into the
merits of the case. The learned gentleman went on to con-
tend that, to substantiate grounds for the application, it must
be shown that every individual connected with the ward, who
was brought into court, was implicated in, or connived at,
the abduction of Turtle ; because no individual ought to be
injured, because another party had chosen to interfere to take
away a notice server. Mr. James, in allusion to copies of
the affidavits not having been furnished, denounced it as a
" trick" to serve a party purpose, and take him by surprise,
not being in a situation to proceed with the cases in other
wards.

Mr. futuis, in his reply, in remarking upon copies of
the affidavits not having been furnished, observed that there
was no recognised party upon whom to serve them.
After an exceedingly protracted discussion, in which much
warmth of feeling was displayed, not only by the learned
barristers, but also by the members of the court, it was ar-
ranged that those cases in which objections had been served
by Turtle should stand over until the other cases in the
ward were gone through, and that Mr. Wilkins should then
be heard, it' he had any further reasons to offer for a further
postponement. Copies of the depositions were ordered to be
made and furnished to Mr. James as soon as completed.
John Agnew's name was then called upon as one of the

parties upon whom Turtle had served a notice of objection.
Mr. Wilkins called Richard William Windle with a view to
prove that he accompanied Turtle to see him deliver the
objections, and to prove that in this particular instance the
objection paper had been delivered, in his presence, to the
party objected to. The witness, in his examination in chief,
produced a small memorandum book, in which were entered
the names of the different parties upon whom objections, in

his presence, had been served, and amongst which the name
of John Agnew. Witness stated that he wrote the names
and memorandums appended to each with a pencil, whilst
standing in the street, and afterwards " traced" the pencil
marks with a pen.
Mr. James requested witness to write a similar memoran-
dum to the one appended to the name of John Agnew, to do
so whilst standing, in a similar manner in which he entered
the original memorandum, and afterwards to trace it with

a pen.
Witness did so.
Mr. James then exhibited the books to the court, and con-
tended first, that what the witness termed " tracing," was,
in fact, a recopying, inasmuch as the pencil marks were in
no means followed ; and that, therefore, supposing the book
containing the names of parties objected to to have been
similarly written, the witness could not refresh his memory
from that book, as it was not the original memorandum.
The Court here interfered, by observing that the point
raised by Mr. James was not of importance, as they (the
court) were decidedly of opinion that no pencil marks had
ever been written in the book produced by Windle ; there-
fore, they rejected his evidence.
Mr' WiLiclics then supported his application to the court
for a postponement on another ground. He produced du-
plicates of about 180 objection papers, which he proved, by
the evidence of Mr. Marrow and Mr. Lysaght, to be endorsed
and signed in the handwriting of Turtle.
Mr. JAMES then contended, at great length, that this was
not sufficient evidence of a single notice having been served
by Turtle. Turtle, it had been shown, was a drunken
fellow ; and, with respect to the endorsements, it was quite
possible and probable that he lead neglected his duty, had
never delivered a single notice, and had endorsed the dupli-
cates to blind his employers, and then taken himself off. The
court had no right, he contended, to assume that his (Mr.
James's) party had been accessary to his removal. For
aught he knew, he might at this moment be indulging his
Bachanalian propensities in some cellar in the town.
The Court finally decided that, although the duplicate no-
tices produced did not prove the clue service of any objec-
tions by Turtle, yet they furnished prbna facie evidence,
which determined them to postpone the hearing of the cases
involved until the other objections in the ward were disposed
of, when Mr. Wilkins would again be heard (should Mr.
Turtle then not be forthcoming) in support of further post-
ponement. If, in the meantime, Mr. James should show
cause, there would be an end of the case.
The diScussion of this case occupied upwards of three hours.
A notice server belonging to the reform party was exa-
mined as to the service of a notice of objection, by the coun-
cil for the party.
Mr. WILKINs, in cross-examination, asked the witness
what was the nature of his employment, and whether regu-
larly employed by the Reform Association ?—No. Was he
not employed by the Protector Society ?—No. Have you
not paid rates for several persons ?—I have paid some. Have
you not paid many ?—I Cannot really recollect how many.
Will you swear you have not paid twenty ?—Yes. Twelve ?

—Yes. Six ?—I wil not swear I have not paid slx.
was the person you paid for ?—I do not know him by name,
Where does he live ?—ln Westmoreland-street, in a court on
the right from Vauxhall-road. Did you go to him, or did he
come to you ?—I went to his house. Do you know the name
of the court ?—I do not. N-- `` house ?

Ivor the number of the .
No ; could find it if I went there. How did you come to find
him out ?—I inquired. How often did you inquire,
times ?—I do not think I did. Did you inquire six times.
I may have done so. How long was this ago ?—lt was two
or three weeks ago. I cannot say it was a month ago. I
will not swear it was five weeks ago. I did not go directly

a dozen

to his house. Can't tell the name of any c
inquired where he lived. I did not know
1 will not swear that I have no' pt,
swear that I have not paid five oir ix rates.
from the Protector Society. I sted to Mr. Murphy, who
-uatpurpose I wanted
'ey. I paid the

from whom I

for whom and for v

gave me the mm
it. I went to Back (
rates at the Parish-of

paid six

to Mr. Peach

I cannot say

some remark to
Mr. HARM

li. WILK

gestion to Mr,
Mr. WILK'
you don't kno

who sat

w to wi

have pa,
th Mr. liarvev. n

Wilkir

ustified

Lid not allow any

d, he merely mad

! Why

A scene of great confusion here ensued, which the mayor
in vain endeavoured to check • but, in the course of which,
Mr. RossoN, addressing Mr. Wilkins said, do you dare
to tell me, sir,_that I do not know the meaning of the words

am:cus curve
Mr. wILKU
Mr. Rosso:

Mr. Ross
of which I

I tell you, you are an ignorant

upon bec

le considerably greater. Th

who had risen during the proceedings, evi-

r. Mayor, I call u

with vche

you to call an officer to
Mr. Wil-

d that he did not choos
;y, that he had risen the

D be dictated

moment the al-

court for tt

silty, he did consider the matter might now

be suffered to drop.
Mr. WitzGuTstill persisted in his request, upon which Mr
Rosson rose, and bowing left the court.

It was then stated Vial any party who had received notice
of objection from Turtle, and who chose to answer to that
objection, if he came forward should be heard. Several cases
were disposed of, but they partook of no particular interest.
The court adjourned at five o'clock.
MONDAY.

The court commenced this morning with the investigation
of the claims made in several wards. Most of the claims
made by members of the Protector Society, but we are
tolerably successful

tives v

the whole d,

T V ARD

:e on Fri-

distrus

such v

the case with t

Well knowing that Mr. Jam(

:enUeamn,-m4

)1e of Wolver:

to become chairman on the

pliance to boot

yen with this " ap-
e aid of Mr. Thomas Thornely—the
meeting was decidedly a downright cold affair, if not a failure.
The room was not crowded, even when Mr. Aikin was speak-
ing, twenty minutes after the meeting commenced, for at that
time even numbers were " tailing out," apparently quite satis-
fied ; and had it not been for two fat gentlemen, with luxuri-
ant corporations, standing on each side of the door, thus
preventing tho egress of those wishful to leave, the room
would have been half empty at a much earlier period than it
really was.

- -
Mr. An in the course of his address, alluded to the
schools, and made some observations respecting "old women,"
but whether in reference to the radical members of the coun-
cil or not, we did not exactly comprehend. He stated, that
the children educated in the corporation schools would for ever
bless their fate in securing a liberal education. Mr. Aikin
also alluded to the establishment of a sailors' home, and

gave expression to several clap-traps respecting the " blue
call applause followed the orator, and the
:ed. One remarkable fact was stated by the
had been a reformer from the time that his
No wonder that such brilliant ta-
lerva-like,

father gave him birth

On the conclusion of MI

ikin's speech,_ somebody sak

ice
Judeed
that several persons inquired the reason the meeting was not
proceeding. _

;oinething, but in so low
)etween that and silence

t it seemed only " a sound
so faint was the voice,

NDAL ATKINSON

all the dignity
d. The uplift-

) emir

The most brilliant
to exhibit his zoc

is well known
one, for it proved to be
ors withdrawing during
son hammered away at
style, and if we

.e to be-
we been