The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-11-22 00:00:00

miss a good market. 359 logs from Jacobstadt, ex, Enter-
prise, sold yesterday at 2s. ld. for clean straight but small
wood,with 4,707 pieces red wood, deals, and battens at
£l6 10a., and white at £l5 per standard ; the last sale of
common Dantzic was made at 2s. 2d. per foot.

LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT-
YES'TERDAY.

THE Second November Court opened yesterday, before
Joseph Pollock, Esq., the Judge.
THE LIVERPOOL ADELPHI LOAN ASSOCIATION V.
HOLME AND OTHERS. —His Honour gave judgment in
this case, which had been previously heard, and the cir-
cumstances made public. Ite decided for the plaintiffs.
The question was whether sureties for loans could be held
responsible for fines levied for non-payment, in the same
respect that they were for the original amount of the loan.
In this instance the borrower had by his own act
sanctioned such appropriations of money, and therefore he
held that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover. It
seemed to have been the custom of those parties
to charge fines against others than the borrower.
They admitted, if he recollected rightly, that they
had no legal right to do so, and he thought it an exceed-
ingly improper proceeding that they should make such a
claim. Whenever a case came before him in future, in
which they had endeavoured to obtain these fines from
sureties, he should always consider that an important
element in the detefminatiou of the other matters which
were left to his discretion.

. _
SHIPPING DISPUTE: PERRY V.- SPENCE,—This was
a claim set up to deduct as against the consignee of goods
certain dues payable out of the Ramsgate Harbour Act.
He had looked through the statutes at large, but could
not discover any reference to that act, but the collector of
customs had promised to supply him with a copy, and
he should defer his judgment till then. It had been said
in the case that the bill of lading contained the words—
" that the goods shall be delivered to the consignees in
Liverpool, on payment of 10s. freight in full," and the
question was, whether in full" was meant to include
harbour dues, or whe:her it was meant to include " hat
money," and other charges. Upon that he should be
willing to hear evidence, if any, of the custom, and should
then give his judgment, after a reference to the Act of
Parliament.

FECAND SITXXONSES.—Orders of committal for thirty
days to Lancaster Castle were made against the following
parties, for neglecting to comply with previous orders of
the court :—John Birch, clerk, railway station, Wapping,
at the suit of Messrs. R. and W. Fort, coal merchants,
Crown-street, for a debt of £2. 10s. ; Fanny Wilson, Tra-
falgar-place, out of Russell-street, described as a "house-
keeper," for £2 2s. 6d., owingto Joseph Myers, of Chesnut-
street, for jewellery ; Thomas Spencer, clerk with
Messrs. Browneut and Co., Exchange-alley North, for a
debt due to Mr. G. J. Aspinall, chemist, Fairview,
Park-road ; Richard Taylor, porter, at the Great Howard-
street railway station, for a debt due to Henry Beckett,
grocer, of Burlington-street ; John. Davies, Harrison-
street, ship-scraper, for a debt due to James M`Carty, gro-
cer, Marybone ; Josiah Wedgewood, of Lord-street, for a
debt due to Thomas Clarke; and Thomas Kimpton, small
parcel deliverer, for a debt due to Messrs. Parnell, printers,
of Russell-street. In this case the Judge asked, " has
thisman Kimpton no place or house where you could serve
upon his property ?" Mr. Parnell : Hellas a sort of office
where parcels can be left, in Sweeting-street, but he cannot
be seen. The Judge : I see him very often. (A laugh.)
There were several other fraud summonses heard. One
against Ebenezer Owens, dock-gateman, at Brunswick-dock,
for a debt of £3 10s, to a flour dealer, in Carnarvonshire, was
adjourned for a fortnight, that defendant might prove, as
he had stated, that he had sent off £1 10s. in a post-office
order. There was- a summons against Mr. Hudson and
Ellen Hughes. his wife, at the suit of Mr. Pennington,
surgeon, Pembroke-place ; but it was stated, amid some
laughter, that the defendant had sailed to Australia five
weeks ago. A summons against Oliver Shannon, 122,
South Chester-street, lumper, at the instance of John
Johnston, joiner, Upper Haigh-street, was adjourned; as
was alsoone against William Doolan, sawyer. Michael
Egan, of Henry Edward-street, described as a musical
instrument maker, was summoned by Thomas Denton,
Chapel-street, spirit-dealer, for a debt of £5 9s. ld. The
defendant pleaded that he had been unable to' meet
the former order, owing to the slackness of trade, and. to
his having five orphan children.. The Judge : Why, the
order was only 2s. ld. a-week, and you are a musical
instrument maker. Defendant : Aye, but they are only
bagpipes ; consider what sort of instruments they are..
The plaintiff said that his business could not be bad, it
he could- go- off drinking for a fortnight or three weeks,
as he was informed he was in the habit of doing. The
case was adjourned till the second court in December,
when his Honour said he would grant an order for com-
mitment, provided that the payments were net made
good in the meanwhile.

INSOLVENCY CASES.—Mr. John Turner, late chemist
and druggist at Runcorn, but now a clerk in the office of
Messrs. Eyre and Co., of this town, drysalters, appeared for
his final order: The insolvent was-opposed by Mr. Simon,
on account of Messrs. Roberts and Co., tea merchants,
Royal. Bank Buildings. It appeared that he had paid
£l7l, being 18s. ed. in the pound, to the creditors who
had signed the deed of assignment but there were about
thirty-six other creditors, the aggregate amount of whose
debts was £24A who had been paid nothing. The case
was adjourned, to the next court.—Samuel Hulse, fur-
niture-broker, who was unopposed, obtained his final
order.—An adjourned audit meeting, was held in the case
of Dennis Sullivan, clerk, and late a, flour dealer, &c., in
Crowmstreet. It was urged against him that since he
had obtained his final order. he had disposed of the
good-wilt of the baker's shop he held, for £6O. His
Honour said he saw no reason, why he should
not have parted with it before. for the good of
the estate; and he thought that he ought to account
for the expenditure of the money to-the assignees, other-
wise their proper course would be to apply to him for re-
scinding the final order. He ordered the case to stand over a
fortnight for the purpose.--In the case of Mr. Lawrence
Holden, plumber and glazier, of 56, St. Anne-street,
Mr. Blackhurst, solicitor, called attention to the fact that
Mr. Fazakerly, who had been appointed trade assignee,
had receivednn his own account £27 10s., the proceeds of
an.action which had been brought against Mr. Cribbin,
one of the insolvent's debtors. It appeared that the
defendant, who had been appointed trade assignee, had
. not acted that capacity. The petition of the insolvent
had been dismissed, Mr. Fazakerly being a consenting
party to that through his attorney; and ou the very same
day the insolvent had given him ainorder to receive the
amount of the action when brought His Honour, from
his remarks, appeared to think that this had been a cor-
rupt arrangement, Mr. Fazakerly consenting to a dis-
missal of the petition that he might himself pocket
money, which it was his duty, as assignee, to see should
have gone to the estate. He did.not like to see a man ap-
' pointed assignee at the request of his. legal adviser one day,
and withdrawing from it the next, and he thought that
this was a daring attempt to. make use of the pro-
, cesses of the court for the purpose of enabling one
creditor to put money into, his pocket at the expense
'of the rest. He (the Judge) had been called upon to
exercise his powers to make-the, insolvent appear in the
action, and he had done so, but felt keenly that he had
been made a tool of, and that the processes of the court
had been diverted to serve a private purpose. It was such
a contempt of the court, that, for the first time in his life,
he could not trust himself to give judgment at once, but
should postpone it for a fortnight. Mr. Fazakerley stated
that he was not cognisant of the dismissal of the petition,
and that the insolvent, on leaving the court on that day,
had come down to him, to ask him what he should do.
He had told him that if his debt were not paid he should
send him to Laneaster,.and it was then that he had given
him the order. At the urgent request of Mr. Toulmin,
who appeared for Mr, Fazakerley, his Honour consentectto
hold that no imputation rests at present upon that
fortnight.gentleman ; and then adjourned the inquiry till that day
master porter,
suPomilLEßn'edt3
Messrs Grimshaw
haJowhnan7 Welsh,
shipbuilders, &c., for a sum of £25 Os 6d, for labour-done.
of which £l5 had ben paid into the court. Mr. Hime
appeared for the- plain tiff, and Mr. Almond for- the defen-
dants. It appeared, from Mr. Hime's opening' statement,
that in the month of October, 1852, Mr. Milligan, who
was one of the acting partners in . the house of Messrs.
Grimshaw and; Co., employed the plaintiff to.unload one
of the Black Star line of packet-ships, called the " Joseph
Walker." In the usual course of business the vessel
would have- taken some little time to discharge, but it
being to the interest of Messrs. Grimshaw that it should
be got ready as rapidly as possible, Mr. Milligan instructed
Mr. Welsh to get the goods out with haste, and they
would pay the expense. Consequently, a great number
of men, were put on, who worked from seven o'clock in
the morning until dark, and by that means the ship was
discharged in. three days and a half, where it would
otherwise have occupied seven or eight days. Mr. Wick-
stead, clerk at that time to the plaintiff, deposed to these
faets ; and Mr. Welsh himself was then called in cor-
roboration, and in cross-examination stated that Mr.
Milligan had told him he had been paid enough by them,
and that he ought to look to the consignees of the
goods for the balance. In answer to the judge,
he said that all extra charges in such cases were paid by
the consignee of the ship, and not by the consignees of
the goods.--William Beatty, a master porter, was called to
prove that this was the custom. In cross-examination he
stated that when goods had been landed on the quays, they
were there at the consignees' of the goods own risk.—
Mr. Almond then addressed the court for the defence.
He contended that the residue of the claim beyond the
£l5 ought to be paid by the consignees of the goods ; and
read the by-laws of the Dock Committee for the regula-
tion of master porters, one of which declares that all
goods shall be removed from the quay within 48 hours of
being landed ; and that when any goods ready for de-
livery shall be left on the quay, the expense of watching
them shall be paid by the consignees of the goods pro-
portionately. Now, amongst other items, the plaintiff
was claitiung from Messrs. Grimshaw 445. for eleven
night's watching, at 4s. a night —His Honour said he
entertained much doubt about the general doctrine. He
could not be persuaded that if it became the interest
of the owner of a vessel to get their vessel ready
rapidly for another voyage, and they employed men all
night 'in discharging, they could call upon the con-
ascnihoncir, iefutmhsetaDlizsk
equal speed away. The consignees of the
sggioooodsgndoeesawpoipefthotrhee goods to pay a double price to get the
d tohim
to
in haa
nv,earaehrigonshte,ofohraavereathseomnahrele;
their goods within the limited time from the quay,.they
foTifusnoteteiewmeorveint ;
could recover the amount again from the consignee of the
time
e tanned;
partiesandn the
inunder vhes s
eOslpui
ship.—Mr. Milligan was then called and stated that when
the plaintiff applied to them for his bill containing the
extra charges, he alleged as a reason for charging it on
them (the defendants), that he could not get the con-
signees of the goods to pay.—His Honour suggested that
the dispute was one which could probably be settled out
of court ; and both parties concurring, Mr. Beatty was
appointed on the part of the plaintiff, and Mr. M`Lean, a
master-porter (whom Mr. Almond had intended to call to
prove the custom), on the part of the defendants, to go
over the accounts. They retired for the purpose ; but, on
their return, stated that they had not been able to agree,
but that they were mutually willing to appoint a third
party, Mr. Wright, as referee. This was then agreed to.
COLLISION AT SEA.----IMPORTANT DECISION.—His
Honour gave judgment in an action brought at the last
Court to recover damages for a, collision, sustained by the