The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-09-13 00:00:00

ANOTHER FESTIVAL.

I. IHE irresistible march of science has, in: the production of that
incomparable spirit, BETT'S PATENT FR.F.,NGI-I DIS
TILLED BRANDY, discovered a substitute even superior to its
favourite prototype ! Inferior French and Spanish Brandies (of
which the consumption is by no means inconsiderable) will not
'bear with it.the slightest comparison. The most competent judges
have repeatedly expressed their perfect astonishment at its-exact
imitation of the finest Cognac.' Chemists justly celebrated for
their scientific attainments, have upon analyzation pronounced
it a more pure and wholesome spirit; while its price is but lit-
tle more than'hall that of French Brandy--viz., 18s imperial
gallon. '
It is, then, to the patriot, Who studies his 'ountry's weal—to
the connoisseur, who delights in a deli flavour—to the agri-
culturist, from whose produce it is ade—to the economist,
whose prudence it invites—to the invalid, whose health and
comfort it promotes—to the prejudiced, who have hitherto suf-
fered their judgment to be enslaved—and to the consumers of
Brandy in every class of society, that J. T. BETTS and Co.
confidently appeal for patronage and support.
J. I'. BETTS and Co. had flattered themselves that the un-
precedented extent of • sale and admitted superiority iu the
quality of their PATENT FRENCH DISTILLED BRANDY, would,
ere now, have wholy dissipated the prejudice which has been
known to exist in the minds of many persons against Brandy
manufactured in this country, and which, before the introduc-
tion of their article, was, perhaps, justifiable. If a patronage,
as distinguished as it is extensive, including many thousand
families of every rank and class of society in all parts of the
kingdom, be any proof of merit, then has the PATENT BRANDY
irresistible claims to universal support.

J. T. BETTS and Co. could well have afforded to rest their
claims to the merit of having introduced an unrivalled produc-
tion on such incontrovertible evidence. But they feel that the
public, rather than themselves, are interested in the announce-
ment, that they are perfectly aware of the efforts still made by
interested persons to depreciate the PATENT BRANDY; and to
prevent the entire removal from the public mind of that inju-
rious delusion, which, however weakened, still exists in a qua-
lified degree. It is mainly with a view, therefore, to destroy
the last remnant of this prejudice, that J. T. BETTS and Co.
recall the attention of all classes to the consideration of the de-
cided approval given by the faculty to their PATEN'T BRANDY—
an approbation resting on the important facts contained in the
following detail :
First, That "BETTS'S PATENT FRENCH DISTILLED BRANDY"
is the only known pure Spirit in the World.

Secondly, That, the dealers in French Brandy—who have
always been the most inveterate, as they are the natural oppo-
nents of the PATENT' BRANDY—have been repeatedly. chal-
lenged in the public journals, by comparison or otherwise, to
disprove the foregoing fact; and as, the vital interests of their
trade hang upon, its dispyoval, the sole and just inference tlraull
by the public, from their constantly diclining to accept tho/chitl-
lenge, is, that TILE FACT IS BEYOND DISPUTE.

Thirdly That', whilst the PATENT, BRANDY possesses all the
valuable properties of the first class Cognac, it is free from the
acids which even that fine spirit is known to contain. Its supe-
riority is still more marked over French Brandies of the second'
and lower classes, which are frequently mixed with considerable
quantities of a spirit obtained from other products than the
grape, containing a large proportion of acid, which tends seri-
ously to disorder the stomach.
Fourthly, That in consequence of the freedom of the PATENT
BRANDY from those injurious acids, its use is not attended with
nausea or head-ache. And, as a necessary consequence of its
extreme purity, it is found congenial to the most delicate con-
stitutions, and is especially valuable to persons of bilious or
dyspeptic habiti.
Fifithly, That, for the foregoing reasons, all the faculty, who
are acquainted with the intrinsic merits of the PATENT BRANDY,
recommend it in preference to any other spirit for medicinal
purposes.
Sixthly, That, for the like reasons, when used as an ordinary
beverage, diluted (in the manner recommended by the first
Physicians) in the proportion of one to six, it is infinitely pre-
ferable to Malt, and other fermentable liquors. Whilst it stands
unrivalled for HOME NI ADE WINES, CONFECTIONARY, and cru-
NARY . purposes, where the absence of acids is an important
requisite.
- -

Seventhly—That the PATENT BRANDY, either PALE OT CO-.
LOURED, at the' highest legal strength, is charged only EIGHTEISN
SHILLINGS per linperial Gallon, or little more than half the
price of French Brandy.
And lastly—That the superiority of the PATENT BRANDY, as
thus defined, is established by unanimous opinions, founded
upon the results of various analyses made by the most cele-
brated chemists; from whose certificates the three accompany-
ing extracts are selected :

EXTRACTS FROM THE TESTIMONIALS.

" Your Brandy is free from uncombined acid and astringent
matter, which exists more or less in most of the Brandies
ported from France.
" JOHN THOMAS COOPER,
" To M. Betts." _ _ " Lecturer on Chemistry

" I am bound to say, and do assert it with confidence; that
for purity of spirit this cannot be surpassed, and that your Pa-
tent Brandy is also quite free from those acids which, though
minute in quantity, always contaminate the foreitrn
" JOSEPH HUME, _ _

" J. T. Betts, Esq."
Chemist to his Majesty."
" I do not hesitate to express myconviction that your Patent
Brandy is fully as free from every thing injurious to health
and contains as pure a spirit, a the best varieties of foreign
Brandy. " EDWARD TURNER,
-Professor of Chemistry in the University of London."
" John T. Botts, Esq."

CAUTION.—The general adoption of BETT'S PATENT
FRENCH DISTILLED BRANDY and its rapidly in-
creasing sale have produced numerous imitations, alike ineffec-
tual and fruitless; but several persons having been misled,
and given their orders to clerks or agents of other houses who
have insidiously represented themselves as being connected
with the " French Brandy Distillery," J. T. Betts and Co.
deem it requisite thus to caution the Trade, that they may be
on their guard against similar impositions, and to state that
their only establishment for Liverpool is at 66, Vine-place,
Lord-street.

N.B.—As some of the imitations alluded to are nothing met*
than light-flavoured Leeward Island Rum,. coloured to assimi=
late Brandy, and others strongly impregnated with the flavours
of Medicated Potatoe Whiskey, which are immediately dis-
coverable on mixing, J. T. Betts and Co. beg to add, that they
do not use either of the above articles in the manufacture of
their Brandy, which never appears more to advantage than
when diluted with hot water.

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS, MONDAY, SEPT. 9.

THE CASE OF THOMAS COX SAVORY.

Mr. Alley stated that he appeared for the prosecution in this
case, in which a second indictment had been found against the
prisoner, to which he was desirous of pleading, the other indict-
ment having been traversed to the next session.

The Recorder said, if Mr. Savory appeared in court, he would
take the plea.
Mr. Savory then appeared at the inner bar, accompanied by
a friend of his own persuasion.
The clerk of the arraigns then read over both the indictments
to the prisoner. The first, of the 21st of August, charged the
prisoner with exposing to sale silver spoons and other species
of plate, with marks purporting to be the hall mark of the
Goldsmiths' Company; and the second indictment, of the 31st
of January, charged the prisoner with selling plate similarly
marked.

The prisoner pleaded " not guilty" to the second indictment,
and was ordered to enter into his own recognizauces in £5OO,
and two sureties of £250 each, to appear at the next session.
Mrs Justice Patteson and Mr. Baron Gurney entered the
court at len o'clock, and the former immediately proceeded to
give judgment as to the validity of the intermediate sessions lately.
held at Clerkenwell. The learned judge stated that it appear-
ed that, in the county of Middlesex, for many years, it had•
been the practice to hold eight sessions of the peace yearly, four
of which took place on the usual quarter-days, and were called
the General Quarter Sessions,' and the other four were called
the Quarter Sessions. The sessions at which the indictments
against Read, Moloney, and Storey were found, were not either
of those sessions, but were held as an original session without
adjournment. The prisoners Read, Moloney, and Storey re-
fused to plead, on the ground that the session was illegal; and
himself and his brother Gurney took time to consider the
point, not on account of any doubt they entertained, but
because it was stated to be a case of great importance, and
on which much difference of opinion prevailed. They
had had an opportunity of consulting with Loa' Chief
Justice Tindal and Mr. Baron Bayley, both of whom concurred
-entirely with them in thinking that the session at which the in-
dictments were found was a good and- valid session. By the
common law the King had the power to issue a commission for
the trial of offences at any time he might think fit; and if such
a commission was issued without limiting it to any particular
day or time, the commissioners named in that commission might
meet for the purposes of that commission as often as they thOught
fit. The forms ,of the commissions bore out that construction,
and the justices had the power to hold sessions when they
pleased,. unless they were restricted by the acts of Parliament,
which it was said they were ; but on looking to the acts of Par-
liament, the learned judge thought the contrary would be clearly
shown. The acts of the 25th of Edward 11., chap. 31, com-
m
only,called the Statute of Labourers, enacted that in all coun-
ties tirtti shOUld at least be four sessions held within the yoar,
and at all times, if needed, according to the discretion of the
ju.-4e4.- at:-Edward-Edwardeh. 12, the 12th ,ssr Richard
11., and the 2d of Henry V. made similar enactments, all stat-
ing " and more often it` need be." The 14th of\ Henry VI.,
whii‘h was applicable only to the county of Middlesex, relieved
that.county from the necessity of holding four sessions a-year,
and made it imperative upon them only to hold two, but it ex-
Nessly gave them the power to hold more if necessity required.
Nothing was therefore clearer than the arts of Parliament.
Some cases had been-cited at the bar in which a different deci-
sion to that he was now about to come to had been pronounced,
but with those cases neither his learned brother nor himself
could agree. Having no doubt upon' the point when the case
first cause before the Court, and being fortified in that opinion
by the concurrence of two other learned judges, they were of
opinion that the session at which the indictments referred to
had been found was a good and valid session.

LONDON GAZETTE.-TUESDAY, SEPT. 10.

BANKRUPTS.

Jacob BelL'Exmouth. coal-factor and wine and spirit merchant.
Francis Furniss, Lting,stone, Derbyshire, seedsman.
• Smith Hampson, Pilkington, Lancashire, dver.
William Wilkinson, Hanesworth, Staffordshire, tailor and draper.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

Greasley and M`Bryd, Birmingham, woollen-drapers.—Cowell and
Co., Ipswich and Stowmarket, maltsters.—Winterhottom and Chad-
wick, Ashton-under-Line, Lancashire, cotton-sninners.—Mull Meaux
and Bracken, Blackburn, Lancashire, corn-dealers.—J. and T. Sted-
man, Hawkhurst, Kent, drapers.—ltaistrick and Dixon, Hunslet and
Leeds, manufacturing chemists.—Vl ilson and ;Co., Hackney, distil-
lers.—Avens and Co., Leeds, cloth-dressers ; so far as regards B.
Robinson.—M. B. and S. Harvey, llalsted, Essex, grocers.—Alcock
and Co., Manchester, gingham-manufacturers.—PettinOr and Volpk-
ers, Sutton-upon-Trent and Weston. Nottinghamshire, Foreign and
British spirit-clealers.—Tayler and Diamond, Little Britain, tobae-
conists.—Robinson and Thompson, London, underwriters.—W. and
J. Jones, Tottenhamcourt-road, linen-drapers.—Wal!er and Demainc,
Skipton, Yorkshire, coach-builders.—Freemont and Pcirson, Ham-
mersmith, oilmen.—Power and Moreton, Essex-street, Strand, wine-
merchants.— Mitchell and Holt, Cloth-fair, West Smithfield, woollen-
drapers.—Hughes and Crowder, West Stockwith, Nottinghamshire,
bone-merchants.