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 up to this day, the Sth of April, and published
to-morrow. It is said by those who profess to have
information on the subject, that on 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 quarter will 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 expeeted budget.

THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION IN
I,INTERPOOL.
Wu lean 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.
Dicimrsorr, Of liielson-street, had an interview with the
Worshipful the havoa, on Wednesday last, to request
his worship's cooperation in inviting•the British Associa-
tion to hold their anniversary meeting, for 1854, in Liver-
pool. As we might expect from the Itavoit'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. And 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.

A PERVERT'S OPINION OF THE ENGLISH
PRESS.

Ma. ALLIES, a pervertfrom Protestantism to Rome, in an
extraordinary and "very injudicious" speech, delivered
at the Romanist soiree last Tuesday, came down heavily
upon the Fourth Estate.

" Their greop.t arta:ll,r." lrA.aeid, "was still to come.
wilicn lied upon them morning, noon, and night. It was no
other than a power which at that moment was ruling Eng-
land—he meant the power of the newspaper press. (Hear.)
Here was a mighty lying forth against them day after day.
Within fifty yoars journalism had sprung up to a gigantic
growth. It no longer confined itself to give news.; its
aim 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 itamaxims and principles smelt of this world.;
its religion was a well-grouni y.el confidence in the stabi-
lity of the three per cents. (Cheers.) This was a power
which, 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 very faith."
Such is a specimen of the liberty to be enjoyed under
Roroish influent*.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]
LIABILITY OF BROKERS.
4s,
-STITT versus BUDD.
Adelphi Hotel, Liverpool, April 4, 1853.
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 Editoeof the Morn-
ing Post, and one to Messrs. Stitt. j
Mr. Budd has as great a horror of/jr2blicity as most
people, and it is only -os Defendant thit he would defend
himself. I
The question between Plaintiffs and. Defendant has not
been a money one. •It was an attack and a defence of Mr.
Budd's business. He did not condescend in his evidence
to attack Mr. Stites motives, and the Judge.cery seriously
jeopardized the defence, by his well-meant endeavours to
setae the matter. A verdict in any form for the Piaintiffs
would have been held by them as a justification of their
statements to the trade. /There will, of course, be no
action between Mr. Hetz.tind the brokers, but:Mr. Budd
believes his position to be the same with both parties. In
other words, that a broker is not legally liabia for an
involuntary error. / .----
To THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING POST.
SIR,—In justice tola most respectable man, whore con-
duct has been misrepyesented and traduced by your reporter
here, I must beg you to allow the statement I now make
to appear in the 21(Orning Post. In the case tried here,
"Stitt. v. Eudd," Ole judge is represented by your reporter
i 7(
to have said, " I his opinion, the return of the contract
by the principal, Ir. Herz,was a blackguard proceeding."
What the judge aid was, " It is useless to allude to Mr.
Bevan's (my Fortner 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
Loudon."
Those facts are very simple. Owing to a misunder-
standing, an offer of 1,000 tons of iron, made b' teleg,raph,
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
almost useless to telegraph the acceptance, so as to reach
London in business hours.
' lat 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 bad 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 case, 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, Eschantre-buildings,
April 4, 1853.
MESSRS. STITT BROTHERS.
GENTLEMEN,—I beg to repeat now the 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,.--I am,
9entleinen, your obedient servant,
JOHN BUDD. 1