The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-08-23 00:00:00

LIVVRPOOL STANDARD

. .
share's, but the defendant said; " It earinOt be sail-Mitt ,win, I
have anythin,,e to do with thrln." -If, lee should uot to•
prove such custom as Ile had s•irted, supp,,stog the aefenditut to
have bought the shares iiu'the 20th of April, am! to lia.,-e'refuSed
them on the 220, when the plaintiff might have again,taken his
sharer; to market, then- the, defendant would be obliged to pay
the difference in priee.between the time he phrchased, and the
time lie refused the share, which was the role of law- if,.as
he, slmuld prove, the shares were rising, then the plaintiff would
have
,sustaineil no los, and their verdict must be merely for
dadiages.; frir a breach of contract, in law, must- haVe

'some damages':
Mr. Win. Okill deposed to being a broker in' Liverpool, and
had been extensively' engaged in the purchase and nlit .of
shares. In case there was no scrip it was customary, to hand
o.ver-the banker's receipt for the deposit on the sale of the shares.
If the receipt should happen to be toe the deposit' of more.shares
than were sold to a purchaser, he should consider it atthe option
of the party to acceptor otherwise as he thought pr'oper. He
thought it would be the duty of the purchaser to'question the
isrin-production of the receipt. The vendor wguld kand..over an
engagement to deliver if his receipt should be greater than for
the ntnnber of shitres, By the custom the scrip or banker's re-
ceiptlshould be handed over to the purchaser, which ever was
used on the scrip being obtained the banker's receipt was
'giVen up.
Cross-examined.—lt was the duty of both the seller and par-
.chaser to ask .for the scrip. That was the custom in Liverpool.
Mr. ALixaNnkn.--Supposing there be a gentleman who has
grit fifty. shares and the receipt of deposit for them; and suppose
1, five „izre,utlemen purchase the shares, which is to have the.recetpt?
WitneSe.--" I never either buy or sell shares myself in that
way." The broker Who sold generally held the receipt, and
gave an undertaking on the shares. They did not consider it a
regulaF sale on the deliverY of an undertaking; in fact it was a
system be never. adopted himself. He did not consider it a re-
gular sale unless he ,had the scrip or the banker's, receipt.
Other parties might disagree with him. When the receipt in-
cluded more shares than were bought, then the broker held
the receipt for the benefit of the different buyers, and it was cus-
tomary, though not in his practice, for the broker to give an un-
dertaking in such cases for the number of shares purchased. In
the month of July last the. Ulster Railway. Shares were seduced
almdst to nothing in valee. They were falling the whole of
,ffpnez In the beginning Of July'the shares were worth from
30s. to £2. The bill for the railway passed in the month of
Mar.

--ii:-examined.—lf nothing was said on the purchase one. way
or the other,, the purchaser was to have the receipt. If, he
could not get either receipt or scrip, .he should think he might
reject the bargain, but he invariably inquired whether he could
have the scrip or not before he made a bargain. In April
shares were worth froth £8 10s. to £9 10s. 'They began to tall
iii May.
Mr.ltichard Dawson deposed to being a broker, in Liverpool,
of considerable standing and business, and was chairman of the
brokers' association. Firstof all shares were allotted, and then
the deposit was "mid to the banker by the party to whom they
Were allotted. He then received a receipt for his deposit. The
person contracting for shares expected the receipts as his
security.
Mr. C nEssivELL.--4f be finds lie cannot g,et the bankers' re-
ceipt, do you consider that he is bound to complete his bargain;,
or may he be off it ?
slaiinld certainly consider him bound to complete
his bargain without the receipt.. •
Mr. CatisswELL.—What would he have in lieu of that re-
ceipt ?
Witness.--An engagement.: .
Mr. CRESSWELL.—Iions whom would he have that engage-
ment? •
Witness.—From,the original holder of the shares. • .The pur-
chaser was bound to take either the receipt. or the engagement.
Mr. C kESSW ELL, would admit that he could not prove the
plea, " according to general custom," from this evidence.
Witness's examination continued.—On the 18th of April
shares Were worth £8 or £9 premium. They fell from that
time 20s. or 30s. per week till the middle of May. He could not
speak as to when they first got lower than they were on the
.18th of April.
-Charles Cresswell examined.—He deposed to being clerkin
the office of Mr. Webb, on the 19th of, April last, and recol-
lected Mr. Coglan, jun. coming to the Office about some sharers.
He called, to ask payment for some Ulster -railway shares. Mr.
' Webb refused to pay him.
Win. thiffey examined.—Was -clerk with Mr. Webb on the
19th of April. He recollected 'Mr. John Coglan coming on the
17th of May with the receipts.
Cross-examined.—The defendant, Mr. Webb, is a carpet
dealer in Liverpool. •
This was the case for the defendant.
Mr. ALEXANDER, in addressing the jury for the plaintiff said,
the answer which had been attempted to this.actiOn was, that
there was a custom in Liverpool that a person was not bound
to take share's on a bargain, unless the receipt for the deposit
was handed averto him. That havineailed, the question now
was, what was the amount of damages which ought to be paid,
by Mr. Webb for his breach of contract? On that question
'there would be no difficulty whatever. The condition on Which
the transfer of shares was made was, when the scheme should
hive become authorised by act of 'parliament,' the defendant
would, on consideration of receiving 25 shares,- pay to.the
plain-
tiff the sum of £2OO. The statute did pass, an& a tender of the
sharei was made after the statute had passed. In April, at the
time of the contract,"the shares were selling:at from £7 Ws. to
£B. The contract of sale was for £7 and, £1 deposit. On the
19th of May, after the act had passed, and when a tender of the
'shares was made-atitt refirsed, they had it 'in evidence that the
shares. were worth only 255. premium, and the amount, of
damages to which the plaintiff would be entitled, would be the
difference between' thtSse two prices.
His Latinsarr, in addressing the jury, said the measure of
"dimages 'was the difference of value at the time when the
shares • were "bought and when refused. The difference was
£5 15s. per share,,so.that it would be for the jury to calculate.
The jury turned round in their box, and found a verdict for
the Plaintiff. Damages '£l43 15s.

,
ceedingly idle if they had hold any couterence with you on Or:, I
subject. Your object ,was. to get them to interfere with the
judgement of the magistrates—a rich was no it regular mode of
proceeding, -and those g,entleitien:rinly discharged their duty in
acting:as they did, and had I been iu their place I should have
done precisely the same..
Defendant.—Perhapa von May think it was idle, Mr. Hall;
but I Think very different; I am nut alluding to my last com-
munication, but to former eurninuoications. They came into
my placei-they came inte mTly eStabliShteent—l shoWed them
all the tricks inmy box. Mr. Whitty cane and. said.
"I believe you have a female singer who sings very well." I
said' I had, and let theitt hear her. (With great energy.)
They walk into Thy, place.without communicatin,,,,to me any-.
thing, whether they, were pleased. or displeased. I might have
been as abject a brute as old Atkirisrs' rhinoceros. If they had
comae .forwards and told me if they approved of it or not—
Mr. HALL.7--This is all irrelevant. lam bound in justice to
say I still approve of their CondUct. They are not to be called
on to be conferring with individuals where there is a law that is'
plain for them—a law you have previously twice transgressed.
The act of parliament is so exceedingly plain on the snbjeet
you could have no ohjeet: seeing those gentlemen but to work
on their feelings. They. had a, duty to discharge, and I
am confident that there is no' Object in view with them to annoy
you or any other man,.bnt simply to perform their dtity. They
cannot grant every idle application and every conference which
is sought.
Defendant.—l. cannot say mine is an idle application. I
have been 20 years a licensed.victualler, and I never was drawn
into the dilemma lam now in. I must say that the clause of
the act you have been. connuending is not a sufficient guide to
the victuallers in conducting their business;
.for on that clause,
you find them on the knowledge of the policemen. I have no
kno,wledge of these women being prostitutes. Your policemen
say they have. I need not remind you sir, with your intelli-
gence, that there are circumstances in life which cannot be
takin cognizance of—ctistOM becoMes law.
Mr. HALL.--The observations I made were only called for by
the remarks you addressed to.the gentlemen who composed the
watch CoMmittee. You have nothing further to say on this
queStion ?
Defendant,—l do say I have no
,positive knowledge of these
women being prostitutes or bad characters. Yoer officers say
they have, and therefore it is on their knowledge you fine me,
and, not on my own. These women have been tolerated in that
neighbourhood for the last thirty year's to iny knoWledge, and
the,Square was never reduced to the good, :civilized state to
whibh I have brought it, and for this I am unmercifolly.prose-
ented. My property at stake, gentlemen ;do what you like
with me. have been twenty years a licensed victualler, and
it is very hard to stand here as a criminal at the bar. This is
the public day of judgment of the licenSed victuallers, but theie
will come a day of judgment fur those who oppress us.
The magistrates.then conferred together for some time.
Mr. Hall at length said.—" The magistrates are unanimously
of opinion, thatahe ease is proved, and we therefore adjudge
you guilty of a third offence against the provisions of the act of
'parliament, and do adjudge that you do pay-and f6rfeit the sum
of £5O, together with the costs of the conviction.
.Defendant.—Allowine to ask one question., How does that
affect my license ?
H have disposed.of the case asirar as it has Ode;
that will be another consideration.
Defendant.--Will you let me ask what time I may have to
. pay it in ? You have oppresied me so muchlhat I cannot pay
it now.
Hr. HALL—The law must take its course. We cannot
-enter into any terms with respect to the period of payment.
Yon will have intimation before the period when it will be
Wanted.
Defendant.—You may send intimation One day and take it
the nest. How am Ito raise £5O?
Mr. Har.i...-7We have nothing to do with that?
Defendant.-The magistrates
havenothing to do'with mercy
to the subject (With great emotion.) lam sorry we have to do
with such magistrates, very .sorry I
Mr. HALL —So far as regards your licence,Whether continu-
ed:or not, it. will depend on the circumstances Which Will come
before the magistrates when you choose to apply. At present,
it will be dis'pensed with till the application is made.
Defendant.—l thought this, was the day of application'?
Mr. HALL—There are three classes, which Mr. Ellis will
read to you.
Mr. Ellis then read that the first class of licenses to be grant-
ed were those against which. there was no complaint ; the
second, thcrie fined and objected to; and the third for transfers
and new licenses.
Mr. Shaw then left the court.
The renewal of his license will probably come on, on Wed-
13sday or Thursday.

FUNERAL OF. LORD DUFFERlN.—Theluneral of-this lamented
nobleman took place yesterday morning. The mournful
proces-
sion left'Ballyleidy at four o'clock, and agreeably to the ivish
w
of the venerable deceised, it as intender:l-that the ceremony'
should be strictly private. The spontaneous ,demonstration
ofd nublic Veneration and affection, hOweVer, could riot be repres-
se ,and before the cortege reached Killyleagb, where the remains
'were deposited; there was assembled attendance .a train of
yeomanry such as has seldom been witnessed iu the north Of Ire-
lahrl. The chureh; the churchyard, and the,road for a' consider-
able ,distance, ipresented., one mass of respectable
collected to do honour to•the memory of one of the bestrandlords
and thiat amiable of merr.-.=Dublin Mail of Wednesday.
'BILLS OF EXCLIANGE.—AD act of parliament has just passed,
which settles a disputed.point in regard to bills of exchange,
and which ought, therefore, 'to be known to men of' business
generally. The point alluded to is-that respecting acceptors or
referees for honour, in which no uniform practice existed, some
hOu'ses presenting the bills so marked on the day when they be-
came due, and others the day after. It is now declared, however,
that it shall not be necessary to present such bills of exchange
until the day following that on which they become due, and if
the address of the acceptors or referees for honour shall be in
any other place than that in which the bills shall be made pay-
able, they need not be forwarded until the day succeeding that
in which they become due. If the following day shall be either
Sunday, Good Friday, or Christmas-day, they need not he ,pre-
stilted or forwarded until the day succeeding such day df non-
business.