The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-08-27 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL SUMMER A'JbIZES.

CROWN COURT.—TuEsn IY.

Edward Standing, 57, and James Tayor, alias Wil-
liam Starkie, 21, were indicted for having committed an
abominable crime, at Bury, in May last. The Jury re-
turned a verdict of acquittal for both prisoners.
William Anderson, 42, was charged with causing the
death of Jane Foley, an infant, by administering an over-
dose of medicine. Several of the medical officers be-
longing to the Manchester Infirmary, were called to sub-
stantiate the case on the part of the prosecution, who alt
concurred in the oninion, that the mixture furnished by
the prisoner, and administered to the deceased, had been
the cause of death. The prisoner was known as man-
midwife in Manchester, but never practised surgery or
pharmacy, and was not recognised as a medical practi-
tioner. The jury retired, and after being absent about
ten minutes, returned with a verdict of acquittal for the
prisoner. He was immediately discharged.
John Ord, 36, was indicted for having in his possession,
at Manchester, on the 2nd of Aueust last, a mould for
casting counterfeit sixpences. Guilty, and sentenced to
twelve months'' imprisonment.
Barbary Ord, 10, daughter of the above prisoner, and
included in the same indictment, charged with uttering,
was not proceeded against on account of her youth, and
'the supposition that she had acted under the directions of
her father. She was accordingly acquitted.
John Kearns, 46. charged with uttering base sixpences,
at Warrington, in July list. He had been previously con-
victed of a similar offence. The prisoner was found
guilty, and sentenced to seven years transportation.
Robert Horrocks, 22, was charged with uttering coun-
terfeit shillings, at Little Bolton, in July last. He was
found guilty, and sentenced to twelve months' imprison-
ment and hard labour.

William Jones, 35, who pleaded guilty to a charge of
being in possession of a mould, and also making counter-
feit coin, at Great Bolton, was brought up and sentenced
to twelve months' imprisonment and hard labour.

NISI PRIUS COURT-.--,-Toxsolor.
BOOKER AND ANOTHER V. TEBBUTT.

This was a special jury case brought by Joseph Booker I
and James Whitelegg, assignees of James Potter, against
the defendant, Thomas Tebbutt. It was an action of
trover for the recovery of letters patent, documents, and
papers. The defendant pleaded first, that he had never
converted them ; secondly, that the plaintiffs were not
possessed of them; thirdly, that the defendant purchased
them for £2O from James Potter; fourthly, that they had
been deposited by James Potter for a loan of £2O before
his bankruptcy; and fifthly, leave and license to commit
the grievance, on which pleas issue was joined.
Mr. Knowles, Mr. Tomlinson, and Mr. Hoggins ap-
peared for the plaintiffs • and Mr. Martin, Mr. Green and
Mr. Cowling for the defendant.
Mr. KNOWLES stated the case. He said the plaintiffs
were the assignees of a person named James Potter, who
carried on business as a cotton spinner at Manchester ;
and the object of the action was to recover from the de-
fendant certain letters patent by which the benefit of a
very valuable invention had been secured to Mr. Potter.
It was unnecessary to inform the jury that letters patent,
if iu the possession of a bankrupt at the time of his bank-
ruptcy, became as much the property of the parties to
whom he was indebted as any other description of pro-
perty. It would appear that a short time before the
bankruptcy, Mr. Potter delivered the letters to the defen-
dant without any consideration at all, or for a considera-
tion so purely nominal that it would be idle to say it was
any consideration whatever. The defence was, that the
defendant fairly bought the patent, and that it had been
as fairly assigned to him. This would be the question ;
and he (Mr. Knowles) would convince the jury that the
defendant had no right to the patent, that it had come in
his possession in a way which the law designated a fraud,
and that a concert had been entered into between him and
the bankrupt to deprive the creditors of that to which
they had a legal claim, for the advantage of the bankrupt
and his family. It appeared that Mr. Potter was in part-
nership with his father, Richard, and his brother John,
and that they carried on their business at Manchester, had
a mill at A.ncoats, and a warehouse in Mosley-street.
They carried on a very extensive business, and occupied a
respectable position in trade. It would seem that in the
year 1841, the firm began to feel embarrassed, that they
owed considerable debts, and that, among other parties to
whom they were largely indebted, was the Bank of Man-
chester, to whom they had given a warrant of attorney,
dated July, 1841, which authorised the bank to issue exe-
cution, and enter judgment to the extent of £20,000; and
upon the 28th August, in the same year, execution was
issued, and the whole of the property at the mill and
warehouse was seized under that warrant of attorney.
The property seized was much greater even than the large
sum which the warrant covered, but owing to the extreme
mismanagement of the sale, the sum realized did not
amount to anything like £20,000, and did not exceed
£12,000. This fact was not in issue to-day, but was men•
tioned merely to show that when the execution was put in,
and the property of the bankrupts seized, the whole of
their stock was taken away. They had not, in short, a
shilling to pay the creditors, except some small debts and
household furniture, which, curiously enough, in the fa-
mily arrangements that encompassed the whole transac-
tion, found its way, by an assignment, into the hands of
Mr. Tebbutt, the defendant. The assignment was not,
however, ultimately insisted upon, and the money was re-
funded. It might also be mentioned, not as a part of the
case, but with the view of explaining it more fully, that
ultimately the hank of Manchester was found not entitled
to the property it had recovered, and that a sum was reco-
vered from the bank t,ufficient to give the creditors a tri-
fling dividend in the pound. His principal object in call-
ing attention to the execution was this, that at the mo-
ment, the 28th of August, Mr. Potter and his partners
were utterly and hopelessly insolvent, that there was no
resource or refuge but in bankruptcy, that no man at all
acquainted with the matter could doubt that when the
bank seized the whole of the property, bankruptcy was
inevitable, and that these facts must have been known to
Mr. Tebbutt. The latter was a merchant at Manchester,
and was a family connexion of James Potter, having mar-
ried that gentleman's sister ; and it would be shown that
throughout the whole of the transaction Mr. Tebbutt was
in the warehouse, that he conversed with the different
partners, and that he was just as well acquainted with
what was going on as the firm itself. He knew that
bankruptcy was inevitable, and that, when the execution
was issued, no man could treat with James Potter for any-
thing. This being the state of the case, it was unneces-
sary, at this stage, to call the attention of the jury to the
immediate subject-matter of the action, which was to re-
cover letters patent. James Potter, a man of considera-
ble mechanical genius, had turned his attention in the year
1829 to the improvement of that part of the machinery
with which his business made him conversant, and he
more particularly turned his attention to the improve-
ment of a machine called a " mule"—a machine used in
spinning, and a very important one indeed in that opera-
tion. Mr. Potter had, as he thought, discovered an im-
proved mode of making it, and, after expending consider-
able time, labour, and expense, he brought the invention
to a head ; and in December, 1836, letters patent were
granted to him in England, and in the following year,
October, 1837, Scotch letters were granted to him for the
same invention. It was for a term of fourteen years, and
then he might have an opportunity for renewal, if he could
make a fit case out for such a proceeding. Besides this,
be took out letters patent in France, Austria, Holland,
and Belgium. In the foreign patents, a gentleman named
Nicholson had some share ; but in the Enish and Scotch
patents nobody had any concern or interest but James
Potter himself ; and at the time of the execution, the 28th
of August, it seemed to have entered into the mind of the
said Mr. Potter that he might, by some scheme or other,
secure the benefit of those patents to himself. It would
be shown by the evidence of a party, who was free from
suspicion, that on that very day he heard James ask Mi-
chael Potter " to whom he should transfer the letters pa-
tent." Michael replied, " say nothing of that," and there
the conversation ended ; but the jury would have no doubt
that about this time, or shortly after, James Potter con-
sulted his family connexion, Tebbutt. and that between
the two a concert was entered into for taking the letters
patent out of the hands of the creditors and assignees, and
of keeping them in the hand of Mr. Tebbutt, for the be-
nefit of Mr. Potter. At the time in question, one of the
letters patent was at the warehouse in Mosley-street; that
letter was carried to Mr. Potter's lodgings ; and the whole
of the letters patent were conveyed to Mr. Tebbutt's
house, on the 2d September, five days after the seizure;
but in order to make out that something of a legal as-
signment of the letters had been effected, it was consi-
dered advisable to prepare a transfer. In the meantime,
on the 4th of September, a meeting of the creditors was
held, and when the bankrupt was requested to execute an
assignment for their benefit, he thought fit to refuse, and
put off the execution until he had done some other act, by
which he supposed he had parted with the letters patent;
and, in fact, he did not execute the assignment in question
until after an act was done, which would be relied upon
to-day, as a transfer of the letters patent. The bankrupt,
Mr. Tebbutt, and Mr. Lever met together about this time,
and then the farce, now about to be described, was en-
acted. Tebbutt drew a cheque for £2O. The cheque was
then handed to the bankrupt, and the latter was requested
to write his name on the back of it; and after he had en-
dorsed it in this manner, the cheque was delivered to
Lever ; and from that day to the present neither cheque
nor money bad been recovered by the bankrupt. The
cheque, which was drawn on the 4th of September, was
dated the 28th of August; it would he observed that it
was for £2O for letters patent, worth, perhaps, as many
thousands; and upon the 6th of September the bankrupt
executed some instrument, which was called an assign-
ment to his creditors. It was only by a strange providen-
tial circumstance, and when the parties quarrelled among
themselves, that the matter of the so-called transfer,
which had slept for a long time, was brought to light ; for
it was only in the December of 1842 that the assignees be-
caene,more correctly informed of the circumstances under
which the transfer had taken place. The learned counsel
concluded by stating that at the time of the sale of the
effects in the mill, Mr. Tebbutt demanded a shilling for
every spindle made according to Mr. Potter's invention ;
and as there were many thousands of such spindles in the
concern, the jury would be enabled to form something like
an estimate of the value put upon the invention by Mr.
Tebbutt.
After the examination of a • number of witnesses, the
parties consulted, and agreed to Withdraw a juror, upon
the understanding that the letters patent were to be given
up to the plaintiffs. A juror was accordingly withdrawn,
and the case was thus brought to an abrupt and amicable
conclusion at half-past two o clock.
His lordship then proceeded
d totry
CRIMINAL CASES.
• -
Some conversation took place between thetJuteestdhge
band
Mr. Ellis, one of the magistrates' clerks, as to
part of the court in which+
Mr. KNowLes said ••as • and o
to p!aee the r(sinheers.
other ge
tlemen of the inner bar were about to retire,
trial might occupy one of their Beata. the party on