The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-05-05 00:00:00

JUSTICE ?

In the proceedings of this committee it appeared that Sir
Joshua Walmsley, in the character of a justice of the peace
for the borough, had suggested certain alterations to be made
in the Female Debtors' Ward in the Borough Gaol.
Mr. ASPINALL, addressing the Mayor, said, he wished to
know whether Sir Joshua Walmsley was still a justice of the
peace for the borough of Liverpool ?
The MAYOR.—He is; I believe he is.
Mr. ASPINALL said, after that answer he would read the
98th clause of the Municipal Corporations' Act, as follows :
" And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for his Majesty
from time to time to assign to so many persons as he shall
think proper his Majesty's commission to act as justices of
the peace in and for each borough, and in and for each of the
counties of cities and towns respectively named in the said
schedule (A.), and in and for such of the boroughs in the
said schedule (B.) to which his Majesty may be pleased upon
the petition of the council thereof to grant a commission of
the peace : provided nevertheless, that every person so to be
assigned shall reside within the borough for which he shall
be so assigned, or within seven miles of such borough, or of
some part thereof, during such time as he shall act as a
justice of the pease in and for such borough."
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE had always understood, that
although Sir Joshua Walmsley spent most of his time in
Staffordshire, he had a house in Liverpool. (No, no.) Well,
he always understood so, and he rather thought it was so.
The MAYOR was of the same opinion.
Mr. COPELAND said that Sir Joshua Walmsley had no
house here ; when lie was in Liverpool he staid at the house
of a connection of his, whose name was—
The MAYOR said, the reference to names was not of im-
portance. It was a proper subject for inquiry.
Mr. Alderman EVANS.—I consider it a complete evasion
of the law, because the law must have meant a bond fide
residence.

Mr. HOUGHTON feared that if Sir Joshua Walmsley was
not a magistrate, the acts of all those magistrates who had
acted with him would be illegal.
The MAYOR.—Do you make any motion, Mr. Aspinall ?
Mr. ASPINALL.—Yes ; I now move that the Town-clerk
be instructed to enquire, and report to this Council, whether
Sir Joshua Walinesley is legally qualified to sit as a justice
of the peace for the borough of Liverpool.
Mr. J. N. Woos seconded the motion, and it was carried
unanimously.

Mr. PARKER, alluding to a notice in the proceedings, that
the schoolmistress of the gaol had been dismissed for inca-
pacity, said it was most extraordinary it should not have been
discovered by those who appointed her, some years ago.

TOWN-HALL ESTABLISHMENT.
Mr. PARKER called the attention of this committee to the
disgraceful state of the flag which had recently been hoisted
in front of the Town-ball.

Mr. Alderman EARLE.—I would advise the Finance Com-
mittee to be cautious, and take care of a borough rate !
MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS,
A memorial from certai❑ occupants of premises in the
neighbourhood was read, praying the interference of the
council to prevent an alleged attempt to close Lower Bur-
lington-street.—Referred to the Finance Committee.

ILLNESS OF THE RECORDER.
A letter from the Recorder to the Clerk of the Peace was
read, stating that as be had not been well during the present
spring, he could not look forward to being able to hold the
next sessions, which are fixed for the 15th instant. After
service of more than forty years without being absent a
single session, he must avail himself of the powers contained
in the sth and Gth I.Vm. 4th, ch. s. 103, to alai: .int a deputy
with the consent of the council.

The TOWN-CLERK read the section referred to ; and, in
reply to a question, he stated that the expense of the deputy
would fall upon the Recorder.
It was then agreed, on the motion of Mr. G. H. LAW-
RENCE, that the Town-clerk should, on the part of the
council, communicate with the Recorder, expressing regret
at his illness, and leafing it to him to appoint a deputy.

COOK-STREET

A letter from Mr. M`drego;,on the part of the Com-
mercial Bank, stating that the directors were willing to give
compensation if they were allowed to break out lights to the
front of the street, was referred to the Finance Couunitttee.
An application from John Jones, a clerk in the office of
the Commissioner of Police, for ten weeks' salary whilst he
was ill, was referred to the Watch Committee.
The council adjourned at a quarter to four o'clock.

CORRESPONDENCE.

COMMERCIAL BANK OF ENGLAND.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

SIR.,—As Mr. Thomas Slater, of Manebester, has made a
leading article in your paper "a peg on which to hang his
own exculpation," and an opportunity for throwing a shield
of defence over his two colleagues, Messrs. Ashton and
Turner, it is necessary, for the sake of truth, that the delu-
sive statements in his letter of Friday last be exposed. Ist,
He says that " lie manifested his confidence in the bank by
retaining 1500 shares to the stoppage." It is surprising that
he should publicly stultify himself by such an admission, as
the very first report which the directors issued boasts of the
admirable arrangements, whereby they obtain an accurate
weekly knowledge of the whole affairs of the establishment.
Every man's account at head bank and branches was laid
before them weekly; therefore an honest computation of the
assets after 16 months' business would have shown the losses,
as proved by the accountant at the trial, to have absorbed
one-half of the paid-up capital, not including, of course, the
13,000 suspended shares. Messrs. Ashton, Turner, and
Slater might well pref.r the low dividend ; but what an infi-
nity of public loss might have been averted had they then
acted in conformity with the deed of settlement, and called a
meeting for the dissolution of the company, instead of being
misled by the sophistry of supposing that the reputation of
the bank would enable them to raise the premium on the
shares and redeem the loss. It is very ungracious of Mr.
Slater to charge the blame of the 8 per cent. dividend on the
local directors. He should remember that they were not a
party to the mysterious colloquial understandings which took
place upon the subject of bad debts previous to the Ist report
and the ensuing dividend. To them £27,000 profit appeared
to have been made, but £70,000 of computed loss was made
not to appear. When the manager in immediate connexion
with the Manchester board confessed that he had no instruc-
tions to bring the bad debts forward, but that long imprison-
ment should not, in violation of his oath of secrecy, extort
the admission that he was desired to keep them back, what
becomes of the merit claimed by Mr. Slater and his col-
leagues of desiring low dividends? He also complains of the
evidence on the trial being " exparte." What should a plain-
tiff's evidence be? Does his modesty not induce him to con-
sider the statements in his letter as " exparte ?" though he
presents certain fictitious figures of account he forgets his
conclusive admission to Mr. Hebblewhite that the first divi-
dend was paid out of the capital—quite omits the mention of
the anacreon revelries at Birmingham—the festive suppers at
Manchester (out of the profits), the entry every half-year of
more than £40,000 as part of the assets, being the current
advance to T. Ashton and Co., of which firm he was a, dis-
tinguished member ; and the deduction of £20,000 from that
debt by the present directors, two years after the suspension,
as the best settletneet they could obtain—no allusion to the
£258,000 declared to be the capital, and £26,000 the surplus
fund, in hand in February, 1840, and to the lamentable dis-
covery four months' afterwards that the said capital and sur-
plus were but " the baseless fabric of a vision." He con-
cludes that some of my letters, pushed forward with impa-
tient anxiety by Mr. Davidson at the trial, would negative
part of the evidence. They were constructed upon informa-
tion direct from the board to Mr. Langton, their Liverpool
manager, that 10 per cent. profit had been made : since the
information was fraudulent it is equally so to give a bona fide
character to its results.
Notwithstanding the desire of Mr. Slater to extend his
immaculate shield over two of his colleagues (why two only ?)
it is credibly affirmed that the verdict intended to have been
given by the jury was reversed by the judge's address into the
alternative of half guilty, as the reproachful appendage tes-
tifies. But what consolation for injury does such a verdict
afford ? The question is a public one, affecting every joint,
stock concern, and should be supported by the public, at
least by that portion who uphold principles of truth and ho.
nesty. if they ever hope to escape the infliction of fraudu-
lent reports and their evil consequences, they should come
forward and contribute to the expenses of determining what
the law is on such points as have been submitted for its deci-
sion. The towns of Manchester and Liverpool, in which so
large a portion of joint-stock property is held, are morally
bound to pursue this case, in order to its being made known
what degree of responsibility, if any, attaches to directors
for the honest performance of their duties. And it is incum-
bent on some public-spirited individual to originate this de-
sign in each of the above-named towns, if they have any
aleasure in preventing the reckless ruin attendant on artfully
:mismanaged public companies.
I am, Sir, your's very respectfully.
J. TAYLOR..

Liverpool, 4111 May, 1843.
[All further communications on this subject must be paid
br as advertisements.]

BLESSINGS OF CHANCERY.—In the present dearth of
means to raise the wind, the following, which is a subject of
daily and successful practice, though known to but few, is
recommended:—

HOW TO GET AN ESTATE FOR NOTHING.
buy an estate for
and interest thereon at £5 per cent. per annum.
get into possession somehow, and throw it into
Chancery for twenty-four years, (a moderate es-
timation of a Chancery suit.) lam then decreed
to pay the purchase-money as above, and the in-
terest thereon

120,000

In the meantime I have placed the purchase money
on interest, with annual rests, which in the same
time amounts to

220,000

322,510*
Gained........ £lO9 510
Thus the estate is got for nothing, and £2510 besidesto
pay lawyers for helping one ; to the ruin of the vendor, who
loses all this amount, N7en. supposing he can borrow money
et £5 per cent. by-paying interest annual.ly. But can be do
that? Let the man whose means are in Chancery answer
this question.
* £1 in twenty-four years, it will be seen by all the an-
nuity tables, amounts to 3.2251 K /00,000-322,510.