The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-04-05 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REVENUE.

The official quarterly returns of the national revenue
will be made upto this day, the sth of April, and published
to-morrow. It is said by those who profess to have
information on the subject. that en the year's account
there will be an increase of upwards of half a million,
arising chiefly from excise, stamps and property tax, there
being a small decrease on the customs. The revenue for
the quartertwill exhibit a slight falling off, arising from
customs and excise ; while there will be a small increase
on stamps, property tax, and post-office. The return will
be interesting, particularly in reference to Mr. Glad-
stone's expected budget.

THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION IN

LIVERPOOL.

WE learn that an influential deputation, consisting of
presidents and secretaries of the Literary and Scientific
Societies of this town, and at the head of which was Dr.
DtcroNsoN, of Nelson-street, had an interview with the
Worshipful the MAYOR, on Wednesday last, to request
his worship's co-operation in inviting the British Associa-
tion to hold their anniversary meeting, for 1854, in Liver-
poOl. As we might expect from the MAYOR'S well-known
love of science, and desire for its more extended influence,
his worship most cordially assented to'the wishes of the
deputation.
'When we call to mind the highly-beneficial results of
the last meeting of -the Association 'here, on almost all
classes of our great industrial community, we are' heartily
glad that, at least, the several literary and scientific
bodies, with the municipal authorities, have unitedly de-
termined to give valid expression to the general wishes of
the inhabitants. Arid we have no doubt-that, should the
Association honour` Liverpool with their presence in 1854,
all sections of the community will vie with each other
in generous hospitality, and in 'the promotion of the
objects for which that learned and -scientific body was
originally constituted, and which it has so efficiently
worked out.

PERVERT'S OF INION OF THE ENGLISH
PRESS.

ALLIES, a pervert fro m Protestantism to Rome, in an

extraordinary and " very injudicious " speech, delivered
At th,n Rorccnict anirfre last Tuesday. came down heavily
upon the Fourth Estate.
"Their greatest enemy," he said, "-was still to come,
which lied upon them morning, noon, and night. It was no
otherthan a power which at that moment wne ruling Eng-
land—he meant the power of the newspaperpress. (Hear.)
Hereqvas a mighty lying forth against thera'day after day.
Within fifty years journalism had sprung _up to a gigantic
growth. It no longer,confined itself to give news ; its
area was higher: it claimed to give a decision on every-
thing,-and the Emperor. of Austria was more tolerant to
those who meddled 'with his temporal power—and that
was saying a good deal—..than journalism was tolerant to
those who presumed to have an opinion contrary to itself.
Founded on considerations of temporary :utilitarianism
alone., all its maxims and principles smelt of- this world ;
its religion was a well-grounded confidence-in the stabi-
lity of the three percents. (Cheers.)q'his--was a power
whiclb,;day after day, was directing its physical and mental
power against the Catholic faith ; and this was the last of
the difficulties by which they were surrounded in the
position -in which they were at present placed. he would
now proceed to consider what was their •safeguard.
Their safeguard was internal; it lay in their vet.? faith."
Such is a.Fpecimen of the liberty to be enjoyee.under
Romishlinfluenee.

EADVERTISEM ENT.]
LIABILITY OF BROKERS.

STITT. venue BUDD.

4-delphi Hotel, Liverpool, Apri14,,1553.
Mr. Budd presents his compliments to the Editor of the
Liverpool Standard. He requests the insertion in the
Standard of a letter addressed to the Editor of the Morn.
i.rcgPost, and one to Messrs; Stitt.

Mr. Budd has as great a borer of publicity as most
people, and it is only as Defendant that he would defend
himself.
-The question between Plaintiffs and Defendant has not
been a money cue. at was an attack and a defeneeofllr.
Budd's business. Ile,did not, condescend in his evidence
to attack Mr. Stitt'a motives, and the. Judge very seriGusly
jeopardized the defence by his well-meant endeavours to
4ettic the matter. A verdict in any form for the Plaintiffs
would t have been held by them as a, justification of their
statements to the trade. There will, of course, be no
action between Mr. Herz and the brokers, but Mr. Budd
believes, his position to be the same with botb parties. In
other words, that a broker is not legary liable for an
involuntary error.
_ TO THE EDITOR OF amE MORNING• POST.

Sta,—ln justice to a most,respectable man, whose con-
duct has been misrepresented and traduced byyour reporter
here, I must beg you to allow the statement.l now make
to appear in,the Morning Pohl. In the case tried here,
" Stitt v. Budd," the judge is represented by yuar reporter
to have said, .4' In his opinion, the return of the contract
by the principal, Mr. Herz,was a blackguard proceeding."
What the judge_said was, " It is useless to allude to Mr.
Bevan's (my partner here) opinion.on the 9th of• October,
even if Mr. Bevan had considered ;it a blackguard pro-
ceeding on the part of the principal, because Mr. Bevan
had not been in communication with .the principal at all,
and was not in possession of the facts which occurred in
London."

Those facts are very simple. Owing to a misunder-
standing, an offer of 1,000 tons of iron, made by telegraph,
was replied to by letter instead of by telegraph, and the
principal had sold the iron in London before the Liverpool
contract arrived. The mistake was entirely the mistake
of my Liverpool house, although the buyer was in part to
blame in insisting on withholding his answer until it was
a►most useless to telegraph the acceptance, so as to reach
London in business hours.

I at once offered a sum of money as compensation to the
buyer, and I have since offered £lOO, but all offers were
rejected, and a lawsuit commenced against me—as partner
in the London house and the Liverpool house—notwith-
standing I tendered the principal's name, and was not
legally liable in any way.
I had previously suffered from the astounding amount
of misrepresentation adopted by certain parties on the
Liverpool Exchange in cases of dispute, and finding the
same course adopted in this case, I have allowed the action
to proceed ; and, although it was twice tried on two suc-
cessive days with my consent, I of course gained a verdict.
At the last hour the plaintiff's counsel, through the judge,
proposed to accept the £lOO previously offered ; and this
proposal was three times made to me in court, and rejected
by me, because I was then determined to know the law of
the ease, viz., whether the Liverpool house, as brokers,
could be made liable at all. It has been decided that they
cannot; and it is a most important decision for traders.
Allow me to add, that the judge—Baron Martin—more
than once stated to the jury that not the slightest imputa-
tion could lay against either the principal or the brokers.
It was simply an unintentional error of the brokers at
Liverpool. Your reporter's mis-statement is a serious
one, but I admit it is exceedingly difficult to hear what
passes in the new courts at Liverpool.—l am, Sir, your
obedient servant, JOHN BUDD,
Of E. L. Budd and Co., London, and
Budd and Bevan, Liverpool.
Liverpool, April 1, 1853.

Liverpool, 14, Exchange-buildings,
April 4, 1853.
MESSRS. STITT BROTHERS.

GENTLEMEN,--I beg to repeat now ihe offer I made
you months ago, to pay you as damages the advance in the
market which, you stated in evidence, had taken place
when the contract for the 1,000 tons of iron was returned
to you. I beg to repeat my evidence, that I advised Mr.
Herz, on the 7th of October, his offers were declined.
You well know you were the cause of this error, but I
leave it to yourselves whether designedly or not.—l am,
Gentlemen, your obedient servant,-
JOHN BUDD.