The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1849-02-20 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.-=-FttinAy

M'CALMONT v. RANICIN..—HiS Honour said he had no
doubt that at the time the arrangement was made between
the plaintiff's firm at Liverpool and the New Brunswick
house the whole of the business of the latter house in
Liverpool was transacted by the Liverpool branch of the
New Brunswick house, and there was also no doubt that
the understanding was that the agency business of the
American house should be transferred to the plaintiffs.
There did not appear, however,,to be anything positively
binding upon the New Brunswick firm to. send all their
consignments to one particular house, or to prevent them
from sending their ships and cargoes to any other port or
place., The plaintiffs, by their agreement, came under an
obligation to make cash advances to the New Brunswick
house not exceeding £5,000, and the intention must have
been that these advances should be covered by the amount
of the consignments to be made to them from America.
The transactions of the two houses went on upon this
footing until the plaintiffs learnt the fact of the failure of
the house of Duncan, which it was apprehended would
involve that of the New Brunswick house, and the plain-
tiffs then ceased to come under further liabilities. The
ti ansactions out of which the present suit had arisen took
place immediately before this, and the bill of lading, and
the power of attorney to sell the ship Miracle, had been
transmitted to the plaintiffs. In order to establish the
plaintiffs' claim they must show that the agreemeet gave
them the benefit of the appropriation of these consign-
ments, for otherwise the plaintiffs were mere trustees for
the New Brunswick house, who were at liberty to point
out the destination of the consignments ; and, secondly,
the plaintiffs must show that such acts had been done it
would preclude the New Brunswick house from altering
the destination of the ship and cargo. Upon these points
he would read the evidence in private before pronouncing
his judgment.

The Judges have decided on admitting Messrs. Warren
and Fuller, the Bath jewellers, to bail. Each has beet,
'uuuua-iu-a,ta uwu reeuguizt.ieea uI aoZUW, wtn tour sure-
ties of £5OO each, thus making, in all, £BOOO.
On Wednesday, in the Court of Exchequer, the case of
Wakley v. Cooke and Healey, for a libel, was brought to
conclusion after three days' discussion. It arose out of
what the defendants had published in the Medical Times
on the conduct of Mr. Wakley as Coroner on the well-
known flogging case at Hounslow. 'The Jury returned a
verdict of £350 in favour of the plaintiff.

THE MARQUIS OF CHANDOS ACQUITTED OF PERJURY.
—A pending indictment against the Marquis.of Chandos,
for perjury, excited much interest in the Queen's Bench.
Nisi Prius Court during Monday, Tuesday, and Wednei-
day, the days on which it was expected to be brought for-
ward. The charge arose out of proceedings in Chancery
connected with the pecuniary embarrassments of the mar-
quis's father, which lately ended in the sales of Stowe.
Interesting revelations." were anticipated, and the court
was crowded by the curious. But at the calling of the
case on Wednesday, the prosecutor's solicitor was not at
his post, "he was gone for papers," and in his absence
the prosecuting barrister did not " feel justified " in open-
ing the case. On Lord Denman's direction, the jury im-
mediately returned a verdict of " Not guilty." On this
triumphant acquittal, the marquis rose from his seat,
shook hands with his three eminent counsel, and left the
court. •

PROSECUTION FOR SELLING A CADETSHIP,—IR the
Court of Queen's Bench on Thursday, before Lord Den-
man and a special jury, five persons were indicted for
being concerned in the sale of a cadetship in the East
India Company's service, contrary to the statute. Mr.
Kendall, Mrs. Binckes, Mrs. Linley (wife of the compo-
ser), and a Mr. Bickley, were charged with conspiring to
sell the appointment, and Mr. Henry Moore with buying
it. The last defendant pleaded guilty, and was admitted
as evidence against the others. The parties are all in
respectable stations. Bickley is a solicitor; Kendall was
formerly consul at St. Michael's ; the defendant Moore
himself is a shipowner at Plymouth ; and Mrs. Binckes,
through whose immediate influence the appointment was
obtained, claims still higher connexion, representing her-
self as " cousin to the queen." The transaction is alleged
to have taken place in 1845, when the Earl of Ripon was
president of the Board of Control. The patronage of
some cadetships is the privilege of that minister, and it
appeared that Mrs. Binckes agreed to use her influence
over Lady Ripon, with whom she represented herself to
be intimate, to get a cadetship for Mr. Moore's son, on
that gentleman's depositing with her a thousand pounds.
He did so, and Mrs. Binckes kept her word, and the
young gentleman was appointed, but died after his arrival
in India. The Earl of Ripon was examined, and confir-
med these facts. He said that Mrs. Binckes was not an
intimate friend of his family, but that Lady Ripon had
requested and obtained from him the nomination, at her
solicitation. Lady Ripon was not in court herself, and his
lordship, in answer to questions, said that she was too ill
to attend, and that there was no probability of her being
able to attend if the trial were adjourned. The other de-
fendants were engaged in the transaction as mediators,
between Moore and Mrs. Binckes. The defendants were
found guilty.
In the Court of Queen's Bench, on Saturday, the
remuneration to which a short-hand writer is entitled
became the subject of litigation. The plaintiff had
1:2211t,a1. 4,11.ial ti!,F.,te.T,1:!4,t;,.711,00jas saigre
of Bd. per folio of 72 words. The defendant had offered
to pay him 4d. only. After examining numerous wit-
nesses, the court decided in favour of the plaintiff's
claim.