The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-04-04 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER

ECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCR.

PREFERMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS.

---
Rev. A. T. Armstrong, M.A., to the Perpetual Curacy of
Ashton-on-Ribble.
Rev. H. Beckwith, M.A., to the Rectofy of St. Mary,
Bishop-hill, York.
Rev. W. D. P. Belcher, M.A., Vicar of Denford and King-
stead, to be Chaplain to the High Sheriff of Leicestershire.
Rev. W. H. Beevor, 8.A., Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford,
and Head Master of Cowbridge School, to the Vicarage of St.
Hilary.
Rev. T. W. D. Brooks, to the Curacy of Marston St. Law-
rence. cum Warkworth, North Hants.
Rev. F. Caudwell. to:the Curacy of St. Stephen's, Devonport.
Rev. J. Colborne, M.A., to the Incumbency of Holy Trinity
Church, Painswick, or Slad, near Stroud.
Rev. J. Darnell, M.A., to be Second Master of Archbishop
Tenison's Grammar School, St. Martin's in-the-Fields.

Rev. G. W. De Lisle, to an Under-Mastership in
Marlborough College.
Rev. H. W. Egan, B.A.,late Curate of St. Andrew's Church,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, to be one of the Chaplains to her Ma-
jesty's forces in the East.
Rev. F. Elmer, to the Curacy of Doncaster.
Rev. J. B. Harrison, M.A., Incumbent of Walmer, to be
Chaplain to the High Sheriff of Kent.
Rev. W. Hey, M.A., Head Master of St. Peter's School,
York, to a Prebendal Stall in York Cathedral.
Rev. R. Hill, B.A. Vicar of Mansell Lacy, near Hereford,
to the Incumbency of the adjoining parish of Wormsley.
Rey. H. Denne Hilton, M.A., of St. John's College, Oxford,
to the Rectory of Orlingbury, Northamptonshire.
Rev. W. W. Johnston, M.A., to a Minor Canonry in Man-
chester Cathedral. _ _

Rev. Mr. Lowe, to a Minor Canonry in Durham Cathedral.
Rev. J. S. Master, of Chorley, to an Honorary Canonry in
Manchester Cathedral.

Rev. H. Morgan, to the Rectory of St. Athan, Glamorgan-
shire.

---Rev. G. Mockler, M.A., to be Chaplain to the troops pro-
ceeding to Malta.
Rev. F. D. Perkins, M.A., Vicar of Stoke, near Coventry, to
be a Surrogate.
Rev. J. Powell, 8.A., to the Curacy of St. Matthew's, Little
London, Leeds.
Rev. G. S. Robertson, to the Perpetual Curacy of Pitstone
(or Pightlestborne), Bucks.
Rev. T. Sikes, M.A., Vicar of Luton, to the Rural Deanery
of Dunstable. _ _ _ . ..

Rev. B. Simpson, M.A., Minor Canon of Durham, to the
Vicarage of Boa'sll near York.
Rev. F. Stonehouse, M.A., to the Rectory of Honily. near
Warwick.

Re':-i. Tripp, 8.A., to the Rectory of Trinity Church,
Wakefield. _ _

Rev. W. H. White, M.A., to the Vicarage of Renton, Suffolk.
[We are requested to state that the Rev. A. Field's appoint-
ment to the Curacy of St. Saviour's, Leeds, announced in
our last, is incorrect.]

DIOCESE OF CHESTER.

PREFERMENT.—The Rev. James Cronshaw has been
licensed by the Bishop to the perpetual curacy of St.
Thomas's Church, Wigan, in the county of Lancaster,
void by resignation of Rev. P. T. Simmons—patron, the
Rector of Wigan.
.VACANCIES.—The perpetual curacy of Guilden Sutton,
in the county of Chester, by death of Rev. Peploe Wm.
Hamilton. The perpetual curacy of Great Crosby, in the
parish of Sefton, Lancashire, by death of the Rev. R.
Walker—patron, Rector of Sefton.
CONSECRATION.—The ground surrounding the new
church at Great Crosby, and forming the yard thereof, is
to be consecrated for interments by the Bishop of Chester
on Tuesday (this day), at eleven o'clock.

ST. Joules, KNOTTY ASIL—From the account of a
presentation of plate to the Rev. G. F. Greene, late curate
of this church, which appeared in our last number, it
might be inferred that Mr. Greene, having been appointed
to the curacy by the late Bishop, was removed from it
without regard to the wishes of the congregation by the
present Bishop. We take the earliest opportunity of
stating that neither the removal of Mr. Greene, nor the
nomination of the present incumbent of Knotty Ash, was
the act of the Bishop—that Mr. Greene's curacy termi-
nated, as a matter of course, with the death of Mr. Tuer,
the late incumbent, in consequence of whose non-residence
he was appointed to it, and that the present incumbent
was nominated to the benefice by the Patron of it, and
not by the Bishop.

THE BISHOP OF CHESTER intends to hold his next
ordination at Chester, on Trinity Sunday, June 11th.
DIOCESE Or MANCHESTER.— Preferments : The Rev.
Gage Freeman to the perpetual cvracy of Emanual
Church, Bolton. On Tuesday the Bishop of Manchester
collated the Rev. Richard Durnford, M.A., rector of"
Middleton, to an honorary canonry in the Cathedral
Church of Manchester, and issued his mandate for hie
induction and installation thereto. His lordship, also, on
the nomination of the Rev. John Owen Parr, vicar of Preston
licensed the clergymen named last week to perpetual
curacies in the parish of Preston ; and the Rev. William
Benjamin Findley, 8.A., to the stipendiary curacy of
Atherton, on the nomination of the Rev. Samuel Johnson,
the incumbent.
A NEW CHURCH NEAR BLACSBURN.—It is in contem-
plation to build another church in the township of Livesey,
to be called the church of the " Atonement," for the
rapidly increasing population of the neighbourhood of Mill
Hill. The site will be near the hamlet of Waterloo. Mr.
Joseph Eccles, of Mill Hill, with his usual liberality, has
consented to endow the minister.—Manchester Courier.
TRE AMERICA'S Cnuncin—News has been received
of Bishop Kip's safe arrival at San Francisco, after a long
passage, the steamer having been nearly wrecked. He
arrived on Sunday morning, and preached within three
hours afterwards. Bishop Scott has sailed for Oregon, a
cheerless and uninviting region• at present, but which may
become the nursery of active- and daring men, like New
England, which, in its natural features, it somewhat re-
sembles.
CHESTER DIOCESAN CICURCH BUILDING SOCIETY.—
The annual meeting was held on Wednesday, at the
Savings' Bank, Bold-street ; the Ven. Archdeacon Brooks
presiding. From the accounts of the honorary treasurer,
Charles Groves, Esq., it appeared that the amount in hand
on the Ist of January was £3,946 16s. 9d., against which
there were outstanding accounts amounting to £3,450,
leaving an available surplus of 4496 16s. 9d. The annual
report stated that a sum of £1,150 had been distributed,
during the year 1853, upon, the following districts :
Crosby, Rostherne, Woodchurch, Liverpool, Bebington,
Bollington, and Nantwich. The first grant was an addi-
tion of £5O to a previous grant of £250, made during the
year 1852, to Crosby, to enable the incumbent to prepare
for the consecration of the new church. On the same day,
Rostherne, a small parish, received £l5O, it being consi-
dered important to provide a separate chapel for a hamlet
of 800 persons, in a large straggling district. The cha-
pelry of Oxton, in the district of Woodchurch, received
£5O for additional accommodation. The district of Vaux-
hall, in Liverpool, received, a grant of £5OO towards pro-
viding a new place of worship. £lOO was granted for a
new district church in Belaington. Bollington, near Mac-
clesfield, obtained a grant of £126. Towards providing
400 additional sittings in the parish church of Nantwich,
£2OO was granted. The report mentioned that, in the
sister dioceses of Manchester and Chester, twelve new
churches had been consecrated during the past year,—
namely, four in Manchester and eight in Chester diocese.
The Rev. B. Greenall, in moving the adoption of the re-
port, observed that every one must feel that the mission
of the church-building societies was not yet accomplished.
Large as was the number of churches built during the
past year, it could hardly be felt that they were sufficient
to meet the increasing wants of the great towns. The
provision made in the new churches was generally made
for the middling classes, who felt the want of places of
worship, and were able to pay money to supply them.
What they wanted was more free accommodation for the
poorer classes. Charles Inman, Esq., in- seconding the
motion, remarked that the efforts of their society were
principally directed to the latter object, and instanced the
church of St. Chrysostom's, Everton, to which they had
granted money, and in which there were 600 free sittings,
or nearly half of what the church would hold. The report
was unanimously adopted. The Rev. F. Hordern, vicar
of Rostherne, moved the appointment of officers, which
was seconded by C. Jones, Esq. A resolution, acknow-
ledging the blessing which had attended their efforts, and
urging the claim of the society to public support, was
moved by the Rev. F. Fenton, of Wavertree, and seconded
by W. M. Collet, Esq. The following important resolu-
• tion, extending the operations of the society, was moved
by the Rev. Rector Campbell :—" That it appears advisable
to this meeting that a Hind be provided in connexion with
this society, and subject to this committee, for the purpose

of assistinglin the Provision of endowment of churches,

and the building of-parsonage-honses ; and that such fund
should be dispensed on the following conditions :—That
the patronage of such churches shall be in the hands of
ecclesiastical persons, or in trustees possessing no bene-
ficiary interest in the same. That, in a grant of aid, re-
spect shall be had to comparative destitution, the amount.
of local aid, the character of the population, and the num-
ber of free sittings in the church for which aid is sought."
The motion was seconded by the Rev. W. Pollock, and
carried unanimously, after which the meeting concluded.

LIVERPOOL SPRING ASSIZES.

CROWN COURT.-TUESDAY, MARCIE 28.
(BEFORE MR. JUSTICE CRESWELL.)

ARRAIG4NMIINT OP TIIE PRESTON DELEGATES.—George
Cowell, Michael Callager, Mortimer Grimehaw, Luke
Wood, James Waddington, John Brocklehurst, John
Lang,JohnGardner,Wm.Parkinson,TosephDolphin,and
Thos. Gregson, appeared to answer their recognizances, and
pleadednotguiltytothechargeof conspiring togethertopre-
vent person s bein g employed at certain mills at Preston. There
were several other counts in the indictment, but this was
the main one upon which the prosecution was founded ; the
other counts being merely legal technicalities to support
the case. Mr. Watson applied for a postponement of the
trial till next assizes, on the ground that the period which
had elapsed since the committal of the prisoners was so
short that there had not been sufficient time to prepare
the materials for their defence. Mr. Spinks supported the
application. Mr. Knowles, the Attorney-General of the
circuit, opposed the application on the ground that the
nature of the offence was such, that public justice demanded
its investigation with as little delay as possible. His
Lordship quite agreed that it was important that this case
should be decided ; but at the same time it was of the ut-
most importance that no trial should be conducted under
such circumstances that even the most ignorant person
should imagine, or be able to say, that a full, fair, and im-
partial trial had not taken place. He had looked at the
affidavits, and certainly thought the time to prepare the
case had been very short. On these grounds, however
much he deplored—as every sensible person must deplore—
the state of things in Preston, he thought it consistent
with the ends of justice that the trial should be postponed.
The traversers and their recognizances were then bound
over to appear at the next assizes.
CRIMINAL Asslurirs.—John Duncan Campbell, wire
drawer, Henry Dagnall, labourer, Thomas Moore, roper,
Joseph Bibby, sawyer, and William Maguire, labourer,
were charged with having criminally assaulted Margaret
Gannon, at Warrington, on the 14th of January. The
prosecutrix, it transpired, was a female of questionable cha-
racter. The jury acquitted all the prisoners.—Jame?
Watmough, labourer, was indicted for a similar offence on
Ann Marsden, a girl of 13 years of age, at Standish, on
the 28th of February. The jury experienced a good deal
of difficulty in this case, and though they retired twice to
consider their verdict, up to ten o'clock they could not
agree. They were accordingly locked up all night, and in
the morning, after attempting to return a verdict of guilty
of a common assault, which could not be received, they ac-
quitted the prisoner. —Michael MiMullin, indicted for a
similar offence upon a factory girl of 16, at Bolton, was
acquitted.

a cotton-mill of his own, and that the firm should supply
the machinery for it. He subsequently left the firm, and
became a barrister, and the intended mill was not built.
On the promise alluded to the plaintiffs grounded their
action. In support of the case an estimate of the expenses
of the machinery, drawn up at the time, was put in by
the plaintiffs ; but his lordship, observing that it was not
signed by both parties, informed the jury that it was no
proof of the existence of any contract. A verdict was
accordingly returned for the defendant.
HEYWORTH v. BARNES.—This was also an action for
an alleged breach of contract. The plaintiffs were
Messrs. H. and G. Heyworth, who carried on the business
of chemical works at Church, near Blackburn. The de-
fendant, Mr. Joseph Barnes, was proprietor of a colliery
close to, so close that a bridge over the canal connected
the two works. November, 1851, the defendant sent
in a note to plaintiffs, having the signature of Mr. Baillie,
son-in-law to the defendant, offering to supply coal at
4s. 6d. per ton for three years, for the plaintiffs' works :
payments to be made quarterly. On the same day a note
was sent by the plaintiffs to defendant accepting the offer.
For some time the supply went on as the contract pro-
vided, and the payments also went on, but perhaps not
always made on the exact day. There were certain pre-
vious transactions between the parties about the payment
for a patent, which remained unsettled. On May 1, 1853,
a note came to plaintiffs from Mr. Baillie, saying that no
more coal could be supplied unless for each night, and, in
consequence of present high prices, at not less than ss.
per ton. On the 10th of June, plaintiffs sent a note by
their carter, requesting to be supplied with coal on the
terms provided by the contract. Since the time, however,
that Mr. Baillie sent his note, the plaintiffs had not been
able to get coals at the price agreed upon in the contract,
and had been put to considerable expense and loss in con-
sequence. After two witnesses had been examined for
the plaintiff, and the various notes put in, a legal point
was raised on the validity of the contract. On examina-
tion of the notes it appeared that the defendants had sent
in an offer to supply coals for three years, at certain
terms, commencing from the Ist of January ; and the
plaintiffs, in their reply, accepted the terms, but stipulated
that the supply should not commence until the Ist of
October following. On this it was contended for the de-
fendant that the terms of the contract were not recipro-
cal.—His LORDSHIP said he must rule against the plain-
tiffs, on the ground that the contract had been voided by
them. He was sorry for it, because it was on purely
technical grounds. The plaintiffs were accordingly non-
suited.

HALSALL V. AINSLEY.—The plaintiff in this case was
Mr. John Middleton Halsall, stock and share broker, in
this town, and the defendant, William Ainsley, a dealer in
provender and horser of coaches, at Fort William, in
Scotland. The claim was for commission on certain trans-
actions between the parties i n the share market, the plain-
tiff buying for the defendant. On the 31st of December,
1851, the plaintiff rendered to defendant the first account
of transactions between them, showing a balance due to
the defendant of £2lO. Plaintiff paid him £2OO of this.
The s account was made on the 15th of January fol-
lowi en there was a balance due Mr. Halsall of
£328 They went through the items of the account,
and some charges were withdrawn, previous to that sum
being agreed upon. The defendant gave plaintiff a bill
for £3OO, leaving an account against him of £2B 15s. The
third account was rendered at the end of January, when
there was a sum due from the defendant to the plaintiff of
£59 4s. 10s., and for this sum, and 2s. 6d. additional
charges, the present account had been brought. The de-
fence, on several pleas, was that the money was not due,
that the transactions were merely wagers as to the prices
of stocks and shares, and that the shares were never in-
tended to be taken up and paid for, John Middleton
Halsall, the plaintiff, was examined at great length, and
spoke of the several transactions alluded to, and gave fur-
ther details. He said that the business was effected about
the time of Louis Napoleon's coup d'etat, when there
were many rises and falls in the market. On the 15th
December, 1851, he purchased for the defendant about
£5;000 worth of Midland stock, and on the 17th another
£5,000. worth of the same stock. The purchase-money
of the two transactions amounted to, £6,692 10s. He
expected the defendant would take up the shares. They
were resold on the 29th Dec., and again re-bought, and
the profit on; these transactions was £2OO in favour of
the defendant. In the early part of January more Mid-
land stock was purchased to the amount of £5,000, the
purchase-money of which was £2,932 6s, 3d.. This made
the whole purchase-money about £8,500 on-the 13th Jan.,
1852. Subsequently, Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln-
shire stock was purchased to the extent of-£1,600, and on
one day the whole of the shares were re-sold. The total value
of the stock sold on that day was about £10,320 ss. The de-
fendant had informed him that his previous-brokers were
Messrs. H. Davies and. Co., and that he had anaocount with
them. He had often asked the defendant for the Valance
due, but had never seen him from the time of the last
account until he had commenced proceedings against him
in last September. Mr. Millward, in defence, said this
case was one of those which were heard of every day, but
which. very few persons had the courage to'bring into
court. He regretted that such cases were not oftener
brought into court, and there shown up in all their defor-
mity. There was no doubt that they were• gambling
transactions throughout. They were certainly not in-
cluded- in the old law respecting stock jobbing; but it
would be for his lordship to say whether they were
included-in the present law or not. Mr. Millward called
the defendant, but his evidence threw no fresh. light on
the case, except that he had told the plaintiff he would
not pay him the balance claimed " till he had won him
his money back." His Lordship, in summing up, said,
the " work " had no doubt been done by the plaintiff.
There was nothing illegal in snaking a time bargain for
shares. But you had no legal right to make a wager
with a man, and say, " I will bet you so much that shares
are at suchn price at such a time." The question was
whether these were real contracts for shares, or mere
shams. The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount claimed.
GABDINEB V. ROWETT : CZAM FOR DEB'",..—Mr.
Samuel. Gardiner, ship-storedealer, South Castle.street,
plaintiff, and. Mr.. William Rowett, sailmaker, &c., de-
fendant. Mr. Cowling for plaintiff, and Mr. Mellish for
defendant. A claim for £270, balance of an account for
stores supplied to two ships, fitted out for Icheboe,
belonging to Messrs. Campbell, Tomkins, and Company,
of this town.. The stores had been-ordered by defendant,
and the only question in the case was, whether-he was
merely an agent for the owners or a partner in the firm.
The jury gave a- verdict for the defendant. It is said
that an application is to be made for anew trial.
ASHWORTH' V. TRYMAN.—Frederick Ashworth, mar-
ble-mason, Manchester, plaintiff, and Andrew Tryman,
architect, London, defendant. Mr. Knowles for the
plaintiff ; Mr. Atherton for the. defence. Plaintiff
claimed £49' ls. for a number of marble chimney-
pieces supplied by him in October, 1851, to a mansion
called Bardsea•hall, built near Ulverstone, under the
direction of the defendant. The contract for the hall was
let to a Mr. Waring, a builder, and the chimney-pieces
were included in the specification. They were ordered,
however, by the defendant, but at the-latter end of October
the plaintiff received a note, signed, by the defendant's
clerk-of-the-works, a person named Machland, informing
him that the-defendant was leaving for London, and that
his account was to be made out to Mr:. Waring. Upon
this note the- plaintiff was nonsuited, Mr; Knowles remark-
ing that he must now try an action against Mr. Waring.