The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-04-12 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL ASSIZES.

FRIDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron PATZKE.)
BOLTON AND nutty caNAL COMPANY c. GRAY.
This was a Special Jury case, being an issue from the Court
of Chancery to try whether a mill erected on the banks of the
river Tong, at Darcy Lever, was calculated to injure the navi-
gation of the Bolton and Bury Canal Company. It appeared,
that an aqueduct of the canal passes over the river Tong, and
a draught of water lion the river, necessary to work the de-
fendant's mill, had injured some of the pillars of the aqueduct
in such a manner as to threaten the destruction of the aqueduct
altogether. Messrs. Alexander, Cresswell, and Tomlinson ap-
peared for the plaintiffs, and Messrs. Blackburne, Wightinan,
and Crompton for the defence. The case came on the first
thing in the morning. and the whole day was occupied in
examining witnesses. Tlie trial did not possess the slightest in-
terest but to the parties concerned.
The hearing of the case was resumed on Saturday morning.
It soon, however, came to a termination, by the Jury finding a
verdict for the plaintiffs.

SATURDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
QUIGGIN v. DUFF.
This was an action in which, at the last Liverpool Assizes,
the plaintiff had been non-suited by Lord Ahinger. A new trial
had beets granted for these Assizes, in consequence of some im-
portant circumstances in the case havingbeen mistaken by that
noble and learned lord.
This action was brought by. Mr. Quiggin, aprinter residing, in
the Isle of Man, against Mr. Duff, a shipping agent in this
town, for the recovery or the value of three boxes of type which,
it was alleged in the declaration, had been consigned from
Messrs. Figgins, London, to the defendant, as agent in this
town for the plaintiff, for transhipment to the Isle of Man.
A timaber of witnesses were called to prove that the goods
had been brought to Liverpool by a boat belonging to 'Ken-
worthy and Co.; that they were directed to "Mr. Quiggin,
care of Mr. Duff;" that they were also landed andnoticegtven
to the defendant; and that he (the defendant) did not send for
them in a reasonable time, afte,•ite had given an acknowledg-
ment of that notice, which expres.!'ed, that they were then at. his,
(defendant's) risk. An attempt was made to prove, that the
defendant had sent fur the goods to the wharf of ::Messrs. lien-
worthy and Co., and could nut have them, as they had been 'lost.
This was not proved.
The learned Counsel; Mr. CIIESSWELL, informed the jury he
could say little to them; in his address for the defendant, which
would not be either anticipated by them as gentlemen much
better acquainted with mercantile usages than he could be, or
embodied in the comments which they would shortly hear from
one, without exception, the greatest mercantile judge in the
land.
His LORDSHIP, in summing up, said, that, in the first place,
it was clear that the plaintiff must have some person to look to
as the responsible patty, and that party appeared to him (the
learned judge) to be.thedefeudant,..inasmuch as he had been
proved to be the recognised agent of Mr. Quiggin,and had also,
signed a notice, which fully expressed, that the goods were ly-
ing, at the time when he signed such notice, at the defendant's
risk. It was also proved in evidence, that Mr. Duff .had not
sent for the goods till the fourth day after notice, and then the
boxes could not be found. An attempt had been made to found
the defence upon the usage of the trade among the carriers and
shippers; but it appeared, that no particular usage had been
proved to exist; for one of the shipping agents, in particular,
had said, that sometimes the goods were not sent for until one
week after notice. He (the learnedrjudge) was, therefoie, or
opinion, that in the absence of proofs. of that usage which had
been contended for, parties should look to the words of the pa-
pers which they signed.
Under these circumstances the jury found for the plaintiff.=
Damages, £36 15s. 6d.

CON.—YEOMAN t. ASHBURNCR.
Mr. Alexander, Mr. Wightman, and Mr. Crompton appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Rushton for the de-
fendant.
Mr. CRomeToN read the declaration, setting forth that the
defendant had had criminal conversation with plaintiff's wife,
and for which plaintiff laid his damages at £3,000.
Mr. ALEXANDER then rose to open the case. He said, may
it please your Lordship and gentlemen of the jury, I don't
know anything that forms, to an observing individual, a
more striking type of human life—of its various offences,
passions, habits and feelings, than the proceedings which take
place in a court of justice during an assize: for as in life.
we turn rapidly from joy to sorrow, grave to gay, plea-
sire to pain, backwards and forivards, so in a court of jus-
tice we have a cause—a mercantile question, we have an assault
and battery, we have a libel, we have in short, questions of all
sorts; and I am happy to say, that amongst the various de-
scriptions of causes we have had at these assizes, and I may
add also of the Lancaster assizes, this is the first of this descrip-
tion which I have now the honour to lay before you this day. It
speaks well, extremely well for the feelings, and habits, and
morals of the country ; it also shows where it has happened, it
has harp ned as a beacon to warn others from entering on a
path that has proved invariably so fatal to those who have
trodden it. I shall state the case as simply as possible ; the
case of Mr. Yeoman, who complains before you, a jury of his
county, of the deepest wrong that can be inflicted on a human
being. You all know as well as myself, that no offences pre-
sent so many hues of distinction between one another as that
kind you have now the duty to inquire into; from presenting
appearances of the greatest turpitude on the part of the accused,
or the greatest suffering on the part of the husband, down to a
transaction which has some excusing traits—if such an offence
can have them. All these shades of distinction are found in
the kind of action we are about to try. Whether this shall be
a case of the first description or pot, when you consider that the
husband thus about to complain—without the least speck on his
own.character—whether you consider that his wife has rendered
herself up to the wiley arts of long continued seduction, or has
yielded herself willingly, and an easy prey, is for voirto try.
Mr. Rusrurois here appealed to his lordship. Mr: .Cresswell
was cennsel for the defendant, and was engaged in the other
court, and could not in justice, just at tbat moment leave that
case. He begged for a postponement. (After a short pause,
during which time it was found that no other short case could
be taken in the interim, his lordship decided that the court
could not be delayed, that the case must goon, and that a junior
barrister Might take notes.)
Mr. ALEXANDER again rose and proceeded. Gentlemen,
there will he little lost from my friend not being here himself,
and for this reason, that_the case is not,nua.that.can depend on
observation. If there be one case less than another that does
not require lengthened observations it is this, because it is a
question that is intimately connected with the feelings of us all;
every one knows the nature of such a circumstance, and how it
is calculated to wound. We all are interested in deprecating
and preventing such an offence,-,aint a civilialo`can form' an es-
timate of its character as well as a: laseier. 'But if it W ere other-
wise I am quite satisfied there Will be suflielerit brniight before
you to afford my.frienettopiee-ott.Which`(cri•eply: The plaintiff,
Yeoman, resided up to evirliiit three.years..ao with his mo-
ther a nd,sister. His mother, Mrt;Arelier;is a..persori 'verriat
advanced in life. They are persons of moderate' fortune;.and
live. in comfortable style in the town.-of
believe, will be the facts which will he elicited before yan as to
the terns on which he lived before his marriage. In 1.83 b, while
Mr. Yeoman was living with his mother, the defendant was in-
troduced to his acquaintance. The,defendant, Mr. ABM/timer,
is an opu ent wine merchant in this place, and I am sorry to
say is a husband and a father. In the year 1831 he was intro.
duced to the plaintiff, and, I believe, an intimacy sprung up
between those two gentlemen, which continued unsevered sub-
sequently to the plaintiff's marriage; they were on confidential
terms, and if there was one man less than another from whom,
apparently, the plaintiff might have expected to have received
such an injury it was the defendant. In the autumn of 1833, a
Miss Cross was on a visit at Major Axford's, of Liverpool; her
father had been a fellow-soldier of Major Axford's. Ihe plain-
tiff was introduced to her there. I understand she is a woman
of agreeable manners and person, and, at that time, her age
was 25. Mr. Yeoman was a man of 40; the result of that in-
troduction was, that in the course of a couple of months the par-
ties were married. Her father came over from the south to be
present at the marriage, and so far as the parties could then
judge it was a marriage likely to be attended with happiness to
both. Immediately after the marriage Mr. Yeoman removed
to the house where he now lives ; the house where his mother
lived was not so convenient as they wished, and they moved to
the house where he has lived Since that time. Mrs. Archer,
his mother, also removed with them; I understand that Mr.
Yeoman's fortune is £6OO or £7OO a-year, and his mother bad
a small jointure of £3OO, and they lived together because they
could live more comfortably. The defendant, Mr. Ashburner,
was one of the earliest friends to compliment Mr. Yeoman on
his marriage; he was there at the breakfast that was given on
the day of the marriage, and he appeared to be as overjoyed as
the rest of the parties at the prospect of his friend being happy,
and there was no reason to doubt but' his acquaintance would
continue on the same satisfactory terms as before Mr. Yeoman
was married. Mr. Yeoman was mistaken. Mr. Yeoman found
that instead of a friend whom he had taken to his bosom he
had got a viper introduced to his family—that all the attentions
he had shown him had but warmed that viper into the power of
steel. He found it out, but too late; the defendant's attentions
had been going on some time before they were communicated
to him, and it was not till after his wife had left his house on a
visit, that he had the least idea of the injury he had suffered.
I understand that Mrs. Yeoman has considerable skill in music
and Mr. Ashburner has also some knowledge of it ,• it appeared
that Mr. Ashburner was perpetually attending to Mrs. 1 eoman,
singing to her—always about her at the piano-forte; and it
appeared to have been through the medium of his powers of
pleasing that he has entered so fataly into her affections; for after
her visit some verses were found which had been given by him to
Mrs.. Yeoman in the early part of their acquaintance. They
were found in- Mrs. Yeoman's pocket book, and in order that
you may see how he has proved the correctness of the old
French maxim " through the ear to the heart." I will read
you it. This is one of the pieces found in the pocket book after
the separation of the plaintiff and his wife ; it was in all pro-
bability handed over by the defendant to her at the piano-forte.
" Could I but find a !thrills or flower
To tell thee all -I feel,
I'd teach it from this very hour
My passion to reveal.-
But why seek nature's loveliest flower
With dew drops spangled o'er ;
It fades, it withers in an hour,
And then 'Lis seen no more.
Oh_ would'st thou wish a heart like this
To leave thee for an hour;
One who but seeks a present bliss
As be would seek a flower?
No, no; you cannot wish for joy
So fleeting and so vain;
There can be bliss without alloy,
And pleasure without pain."
(The conclusion of the reading of this' morceau was followed
by an irrepressible burst of laughter.) Gentlemen, continued
the learned counsel, it has not been so on this occasion; Mr.
Ashburner did find the opportunities to tell Mrs. Yeoman—
" To tell thee all I feel"—he found the opportunities, but all
the pleasure belonged to Mr. Ashburner.—Mr. Yeoman got
the pain and the suffering he has felt since. After Mrs. Yeoman
left fur the south, she wrote a letter to.her husband. 1 will read
that letter to you with a view of showing you the terms in which
she adressed her husband whom she had all alcng been betray=
ing. It begins:—
"My Darling Henry,—Though exceedingly fatigued, you
see I keep to my promises. Ido not arrive here till half-past
seven.".
It then states! that her uncle, " who is, matter of fact itself",
came to meet her at the coach, and was delighted to see her.
She speaks of her " being so bappy, for her friends there are
so kind that, if it were nut ibr your being away, I should never
wish to see Liverpool again. It is a I sirfect paradise here, and all
so kind. I finned a great deal after 1 left you. I have had a
long talk with aunt to-day about you, who is glad that I have
so kind a husband, but wishes that von would come here." She
then enters into some family matters and speaks of the kind-
ness she has received. I read this letter to show you how she
treated her husband. After she Had been away a few days, a
letter was received by Mr. Yeoman, stating the misconduct of
his wife. There was no doubt-what his feelings would be then;
because eve'my rifle etitild,Pip.,v them. fle.directed vsqiiiries to
,be al 4. for he was unwilling' to lit!lieve
that the:. woman, Wiest 100(4 hetild .01-4tra.twei car thret;
'before' eiluid Tii at the Seine dtne aulti(rin.