The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-08-30 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER

expressing a wish to go there. The tents of the imperial
troops were distinctly seen from the walls of that city.
Our dates from Foo-chow-foo reach to the 24th ult. The
city of Yan-ping-foo, not far distant, had been besieged,
and was supposed to have fallen, and all communication
with the interior was stopped by the rebels. Great com-
motion exists at Foo-chow-foo, which seemed ready for an
outbreak ; but the Tartar garrison were determined to
make a stand on the approach of the rebel force. The
inhabitants continued to move from the city with their
property. A timely supply of rice from Formosa had
relieved the distress. Our advices from Amoy are to the
2nd instant. The imperialists still held Chongchow and
Tang-wa, where there had been constant fighting, with
much slaughter. The insurgents held Amoy, and continued
to extort money from the native merchants. Trade was
entirely stopped. _

AMERICA.
ARRIVAL OF THE NIAGARA

By the British and North American Royal Mail Steam-
ship, Niagara; Capt. Leitch, which reached Liverpool on
Sunday, we have intelligence from New York to the 16th,
and Boston to the 17th instant.

The U. S. steam-ship Humboldt, from Havre and Cowes,
arrived at New York on the 15th instant.

The Niagara brought 92 passengers, but no specie.
The America, hence for Boston, was passed about 'M
miles from the latter port.
The weather was very hot at New York, the thermome-
ter ranging from 90 to 102. Upwards of 200 persons had
died from the effects of the heat in seven days. The vic-
tims were principally Irish, with a sprinkling of Scotch
and English, one of whom was named M`Donald, of Liver-
pool. The total number of deaths at New Orleans for the
week ending the 14th, by yellow fever, was 1,530. The
deaths on the 14th were 200. At Northampton, Mass.,
whilst the officers were in the act of carrying out the
Maine
,liquor-law by destroying about 250 gallons of
liquor, it was set on fire by some thoughtless boys, and
four of the bystanders were badly burnt.

At New Orleans the yellow fever was raging with great
virulence. The total number of deaths for the week end-
ing the 12th was 1518, of which 1277 were from yellow
fever: on the 13th the deaths were 174-153 from yellow
fever.

The despatches received at Washington from Commo-
dore Shubrick, who is in command of the United States
squadron on the fishing coast, were of a pacific and satis-
factory character. The schooner Arunnah, from Bay
Chaleur, arrived at Kennebunkport on the Bth inst. The
captain reported the intentional collision of her Britannic
Majesty's steamer Dveastatiou on the 28th July. It was
clear sunlight, and the Arunnah was twelve miles from
the land, near St. John Island. The captain of the De-
vastation had spoken her the evening previous, and
ordered them to keep a light all night, which was not
done. On the morning of the 28th the steamer was seen
coming down for them, and those on hoard the schooner
heard the order given to " starboard," which made her
course directly for the schooner. The subsequent order
of " steady, steady," was given, and the steamer struck
the stern of the'schooner, taking off her main-boom and
gaff, and doing other damage. Not a word was spoken on
board the steamer, which kept on her course.
It is stated, in letters from Havana, that the slave ship
Lady Suffolk had escaped from the hands of the authori-
ties at Laguna de Terminos, and was again at large.

COMMERCIAL INTELLIGENCE.
NEW YORK, AITOIISTI6.

MolET.—The low prices that have recently prevailed at
the Stock Board have induced fresh parties to come for-
ward, or else more speculation exists among those ope-
rators who remain to watch the course of events in the
city. The sales have been large. Exchange on England
very irregular, and in general at a decline of * to f per
cent. We quote 1082 to 1091 as extremes.

Con' (From-W. P. Wright's Circular, of August
16.)—Operations have been only to a moderate extent,
owing chiefly to a difficulty in obtaining freight, while in
some cases a slight yielding in price has been apparent,
attributable to the prevailing strengency in the money
market. The sales since the 9th instant have amounted
to 6,000 bales, of which the bulk has been taken for Eng-
land. The export during the same time has been 4,183
bales, all to Liverpool. The estimated stock in port is
put down at 70,000 bales, of which I think 30,000 are on
shipboard, not cleared, or in store, sold, but not delivered ;
our available stock I estimate at 4A),000 bales.
BREA.DSTUFFS.—The foreign demand for flour having
been checked by the stringent state of the money market,
much difficulty was experienced in effecting sales in quan-
tity. On the arrival of the Africa, with Liverpool dates
to the 30th ult., a decline of 18,1 c. per barrel was submitted
to, at which considerable purchases were again made for
shipment to Europe, and about half of the decline has
since been recovered. Wheat is 2c. to 3c. per bushel
lower. Indian corn has declined 2c. per bushel.
PROVISIONS.—Pork is firm at $15,50 for mess, and
$12,75 to $l3 for prime. For beef no change in prices.
Lard dull.

htoN.—The demand for Scotch and pig is good, but no
change in prices.

FREIGETS.—To Liverpool, for cotton, 5-16 d. to id. per
lb. ; flour, 2s. 6d. to 2s. 9d. per barrel ; grain, in bulk,
'ltd. to Bd. per bushel.
NEW ORLEANS", AUG. 15.—Sales of the week, 2,500
bales. Middlings 104 c. The stock in port by actual
count is only 16,000.
CHARLESTON, AUGUST 15.—Sales to-day 300 bales, at
unchanged prices.

LIVERPOOL SUMMER ASSIZES.

CROWN COURT.—TuEspAr, AUGUST 23.
(BEFORE MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN.)

SWIFT V. ROSTRON AND OTHERS (EXECDTOIIO.—The
plaintiff, Thomas Entwistle Swift, is a solicitor at Black-
burn, and sought to. recover the costs in a chancery suit,
" Yates v. Anderton," which had been decided against the
plaintiff, since deceased. The action was laid against
Elijah Rostron and others, as executors under the will.
The case was an exceedingly complicated one, and had re-
ference more especially to whether the plaintiff had re-
ceived a retainer in the chancery suit or otherwise. After
the case had been opened, and one witness called, it was
as to take a verdict by consent for the plaintiff, sub-
ject to a certificate from the master in chancery, who
should also have power to decide the retainer. _

MACKAY AND OTHERS v. BIRCHALL AND OTHERS.—
The plaintiffs, Messrs. Mackay, are merchants and ship-
owners, carrying on business at Liverpool, and sought
compensation in damages for an alleged illegal distraint
on their property, consisting of collieries, &c., at Rainford,
by the defendants. The defendants, Messrs. John and
Thomas Birchall, and others, are the owners of the col-
lieries, which they leased for a certain period to the plain-
tiffs. The case for the plaintiffs was, that in 1848 they
entered into partnership as coal-proprietors, and for that
purpose took extensive works at Rainford belonging to
the defendants. Among these works were the Victoria
!collieries, at which the alleged illegal distraint had taken

place. The plaintiffs were to pay -a
certain rental for the
works, according to the amount of coal obtained, which
was to be estimated by measurement ; and under the
terms of a lease drawn up between the parties the de-
fendants had power to recover by distraint any arrears of
rent, after due notice had been given. In January last,
when it was necessary to ascertain the quantity of coal
which had been raised, some difficulty occurred in conse-
quence of varieties of the coal being obtained from different
seams, and two persons were appointed to make the mea-
surements. The 'plaintiffs employed Mr. Mercer on their
behalf, and a Mr. Bates acted for the defendants. The
difficulty previously referred to prevented the measure-
ment from being carried on so expeditiously as it would
otherwise have been, and the defendants, on applying for
their rent, were made acquainted with this circumstance.
Notwithstanding this intimation, the defendants' attorney,
Mr. Mayhew, made a distraint on the plaintiffs' colliery,
stopped the works, and caused considerable interruption
to the business ; and it was not until the plaintiffs had
paid a sum of money (much larger, it was alleged, than
was due) that the works were released. The defendants'
attorney threatened to announce a sale of the property
unless their demands were complied with. It was on the
ground that the defendants had been guilty of an illegal
distraint that the plaintiffs sought compensation in
damages. After the plaintiffs and another witness had
been called, whose evidence did not materially advance
the case for the plaintiffs, his Lordship intimated that
there was no damage on which the plaintiffs could recover.
A conversation then took place between the opposing
counsel, and it was agreed to terminate the case by the
withdrawal of a juror.
JONES v. NicnoLsoN.—This was a case involving a
question of mercantile law, upon which a verdict was
taken by consent for the plaintiff, damages £2OO, subject
to a special case.
USING SLANDEROUS LANGUAGE.—DRISCOLLV.BODDY.
—Dennis Driscoll was the plaintiff, and William Boddy
the defendant. The action was• brought to recover com-
pensation for slanderous language alleged to have been
used by the defendant towards the plaintiff. From the
evidence for the plaintiff it appeared that the plaintiff, who
is a basket-maker, worked for the defendant, a joiner and
basket-maker, at Southport. In January last he left the
defendant's service, in consequence of refusing to work
overtime without being paid for it, and went into the em-
ploy of a Mrs. Taylor, carrying on a similar business in
the same town. A few weeks afterwards, while passing
the defendant's house in company with Mrs. Taylor's son,
the defendant called out to him, You are coming to steal
some more stuff, as you did last Saturday night but one ;
you thief—you d—d thief. I have some more people to
prove you took stuff from my premises, and took it to
Birkdale station, and sent it from there to Liverpool."
Mrs. Taylor's son was with the plaintiff at the time. Next
day the plaintiff was discharged from Mrs. Taylor's service,
Ind he alleged that; he had lost his situation in conse-
quence of the imputations made against him by the de-
fendant. It appeared that some transactions had taken
place between the plaintiff and defendant, which led to the
latter being held to bail before the magistrates. The jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages Is.

PITCHFORTII V. THE LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE
RAILWAv.—The plaintiff, who is a carter, in the employ
of Mr. Bigley, of this town, claimed compensation in
damages from the defendants for an injury alleged to have
resulted from negligence on the part of their servants.
On the 29th January last, the plaintiff, a youth about 17,
was employed to cart goods from the warehouses of the
defendants, in Love-lane. The plaintiff placed his cart
close to the warehouse containing the goods, and a chest
or case was lowered to a certain distance, and checked
before it reached the cart. The plaintiff was unable to
reach the case, and while standing underneath-, waiting
for its gradual descent, it came down suddenly, without
any previous notice being given by the men in charge of
the tackle. The consequence was, that the plaintiff had
one of his legs fractured, and received some other injuries.
He was taken to the Northern Hospital, and it was some
time before he recovered, even partially, from his injuries.
It was alleged by the plaintiff that, owing to the person
in charge of the jigger taking off the break entirely, the
case had gone down suddenly into the cart, and so caused
the accident. This view of the case was supported by the
evidence of a witness. Several witnesses were called for
the defence. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff
—damages £l5.

Tuol&roN v. REDnEAD.—This was an action to recover
a sum of £5B Bs. 7d., being the balance remaining due of
an account originally amounting to £124 Bs. 7d. The
defendant had paid £l5 into court, The plaintiff is a
shipowner and shipwright, and the action arose upon an
agreement to execute certain repairs to the steam-boat,
Helen Fawcett, of which the defendant is the owner.
The question was one involving an examination of matters
of account and charges for work done, and whether such
work had been executed by the defendant's authority.—
After the plaintiff's case had been partially gone into, the
court adjourned at half-past six.

from the plaintiff in April last. It appeared that the de-
fendant had filed a bill in Chancery in reference to some
of the questions involved in the bargain. After the case
had been opened, and the plaintiff examined, a conference
took place, at the suggestion of his lordship, who foresaw
that there was likely to be much conflicting evidence. The
result was that a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, by
consent, subject to a reference, the plaintiff withdrawing
the count for slander, and the defendant his plea of fraud.

THOMPSON v. TINDAL AND ANOTHEII.L.- In this case,
the plaintiff, Johnson Thompson,'a ship joiner and cabinet-
maker at Sunderland, and the defendants, Mr. Peter
Tindal, jun., and Dr. Hodgkin, residing in London, are
owners of a ship called the Kangaroo, lately built at Sun-
derland. It appeared that the plaintiff was employed to
fit up the ship in an elegant manner for the Australian
passenger trade. He received from the defendants £212
whilst the work was going on ; since the present action
was commenced they had paid £202 into court, and they
pleaded that they were not indebted in any further sum.
The plaintiff claimed £l4B 7s. 6d. beyond the amount
which had been paid. The defence rested mainly upon an
alleged overcharge for the work, which was not contracted
for. At the close of the plaintiff's case, the court was
adjourned.

WEDNESDAY.
(Before Mr. Justice Erie, and a Special Jury.)

TURNER v. TINDA LL AND ANOTHER.--In this Case it
was sought to recover a sum of money for work done. The
sum of £212 had been paid under the contract, and a further
sum of £202 had been paid into court, which it was con-
tended was sufficient to meet all claims due by the de-
fendants to the plaintiff. The jury, by their verdict,
awarded £95 to the plaintiff beyond the amount paid.

ATTWOOD V. COLE AND ANOTHER.—This case was
settled out of court.
WIVArGHTEN. AND OTHERS V. THE MAYOR AND COR-
PORATION OP LIVERPOOL AND OTHERS.—Sir Fitzroy
Kelly, Mr, Hugh Hill, Q.C., and Mr. Cleasby, appeared for
the plaintiffs ; the Attorney-General, Mr. Knowles, Q.C.,
Mr. Cowling, and Mr. Milward, for the mayor and corpo-
ration of Liverpool; and Mr. Serjeant Wilkins for the
other defendants, who were the contractors under the cor-
poration. The declaration alleged that the plaintiffs were
possessed of certain bleaching, dyeing, and printing works,
situated on the River Yarrow, and were entitled to the
water of that river for the purposes of such works, and
that the defendants dirtied the water, whereby the plain-
tiffs were injured, and unable to carry on their works. To
this the defendants pleaded " Not Guilty ; " a denial
that the plaintiffs had a right to the water ; a denial
that they dirtied the water; and a justification, under the
Liverpool Water-works Act of 1847.

Sir F. KELLY said that the plaintiffs were calico prin-
ters and bleachers, and had carried on their works for
nearly a century. The Corporation of Liverpool had ob-
tained an act, authorising them to construct certain large
reservoirs, for the purpose of supplying the town of
Liverpool with pure water. In the execution of these
reservoirs and the works, they had inadvertently and un-
necessarily injured the waters of the river Yarrow, by let-
ting into that river large quantities of foul water, so that
the plaintiffs were at length obliged to stop their bleaching
and printing works. A supply of the purest water was
absolutely necessary to their business, and so excellent was
the quantity and quality of the water of the river Yarrow,
that the plaintiffs and their predecessors had been enabled
to produce goods which had obtained such celebrity= that
they commanded the best markets, not only in this coun-
try, but on the continent. They employed 500 hands, and
had laid out £30,000 in improvements in their works, and
were possessed of a capital of £60,000, Up to August,
1852, the waters of the Yarrow were perfectly pure and fit
for use ; but, during that month and September, they be-
came mixed with some deleterious matter, although only
slightly and occasionally. During the months of October,
November, December, and January, the water became im-
pregnated with some foreign and clayey substance, which
injured all the operations at the works. They could not
produce a clear white or clean colour, but only a dull
dirty hue ; and the goods, instead of being of a first-rate
quality, became second-rate, and unsaleable, and only
fetched .a reduced price in the market. For some
time the works were obliged to be stopped altoge-
ther. Inquiries were made as to the cause, and it was
ascertained that the impure substances came from the
operations connected with the Knowsley embankment at
Rivington, as a portion of the Liverpool water-works. In
the formation of this embankment a substance consisting
of silicate of iron and alumina was dug out in large quan-
tities. The defendants had allowed this to become mixed
with a stream called the Old Goit, and had, for their own
convenience, made a communication between this and the
river Yarrow, whose waters thus became impure. Com-
plaints were made to the corporation, but they ended in no
satisfactory arrangement. Irresponsible corporations were
very often-reckless of consequences to individuals who were
less powerful than themselves. They said they found it
necessary to do what they had done, and so had done it,
and that the plaintiffs must seek their remedy elsewhere.
For a time the plaintiffs were obliged to stop their works
altogether, because they found that they could only pro-
duce an unsatisfactory article, which was calculated to in-
jure their name in the market. The defendants said that
they were not the cause of the injury to the plaintiffs. But
that it was caused by them would clearly appear, for dur-
ing a cessation of pumping the water into the Old Goit,
viz., in February and March, the water in the Yarrow was
as pure as ever it was. In April the Goit was again
opened, and then again the water became foul, impure,
and injurious to the plaintiffs' works. At the end of
April the case was taken before Vice-Chancellor Sir
Page Wood, who granted an injunction against the defend-
ants, which still existed, and from that time down to the
present moment the water had been as pure as ever. The
defendants could not contend with success that they were
not liable, because they were empowered by their act to do
all that was necessary in doing the works; or that if they
had caused an injury to the plaintiffs, they certainly were
entitled to compensation ; but that it was not to be ob-
tained by action, but in the mode directed by the act—in
other words, that the present action was not maintainable.
He contended that
,the defendants were bound to go to
even an unnecessary expense so as not to injure the water
of the river; in point of law they had no right to injure
the waters of any river common to the Queen's subjects.
They were bound to execute their works, doing as little
damage as possible, and the only question was, was it pos-
sible to avoid the injury they had done ? It had been found
possible to avoid doing injury in April, and he would ask,
why not possible to avoid it altogether ? The corporation
proceeded under the Waterworks Clauses Act, 10th Vic-
toria, cap. 17, s. 12. The proviso in that section was,
" that in the exercise of the said powers the undertakers
shall do as little damage as can be." Could they execute
their works without this damage ? If they could not,
then compensation was to be given in the way directed by
the act ; but if they could, then the plaintiffs had a right
to maintain this action.

Mr. Justice Erie called attention to the words of the
act, that the defendants " may from time to time make
such other works as they shall think proper?' He sup-
posed that it would be admitted that nothing had been
done which the corporation did not think necessary.—Sir
F. Kelly said he would admit, if it were wished, that the
corporation had done nothing to wilfully damage the
plaintiffs ; but at present he could make no admission as
to what might have been thought proper.—Several wit-
nesses were then called and examined for the plaintiffs.
After which the court adjourned at six o'clock, till next
morning at nine.