The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-03-28 00:00:00

ACTION ON A MORTGAGE

Lowe. HOLT.—This was an action by a mortgagee against
a mortgagor, in which a verdict was entered by consent for the
plaintiff, none of the circumstances being entered into.

ASSIGNEES OF CHADWICK V. JONES.—An action to re-
cover £193, the balance of an account, alleged to be due for
goods sold and delivered. It appeared, however, that the
goods had been sold on commission only, and consequently a
verdict was returned for the defendant.

HINDLEY V. CHESHIRE.—Verdict for the plaintiff.
FLETCHER V. STOPFORD.—An action upon a bill of ex
change. Verdict for the plaintiff.

ALLEGED BREACH OF CONTRACT,

THOMAS V. WORRALL AND ANOTHER.-Mr. Brandt and
Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Wortley and
Mr. Atherton for the defendants. The action was brought
to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract.

The declaration stated that tbe plaintiff had been in the
service of the defendants as foreman drab and fancy dyer,
and that in consideration of his services being given to the
best of his skill and ability, the defendants undertook to find
him employment for the period of four years, and to pay him
-P3 per week for his services ; that they continued to do so till
the 9th of February, 1843, when they dismissed him without
reasonable and probable cause. The defendants put in several
pleas, the most important of which was that the plaintiff
had not served them to the best of his skill and ability, and
thereupon issue was joined.

It appeared from the statement of counsel and the evidence
of the witnesses, that the defendants, Messrs. James and
John Mayo Worrell, are extensive dyers in Ordsall-lane,
Salford. and in the time of their father, as well as subse-
quently, the defendant was engaged as foreman drab and
fancy dyer. Altogether be had been in their service for a
period of more than seven years, and had obtained the repu-
tation of being a very skilful, active, and intelligent
workman. In the early part of last year the defendants
entered into the agreement with the plaintiff, which was
the subject of the present action, in which there was a
penalty of X2OO upon either party if they receded from it.
The plaintiff brought the action to recover the penalty,
alleging that he had tendered his services, but they were
rejected, and he had been dismissed on the 4th of February
last. In support of his case, Joseph Booker, a foreman and
bookkeeper in the defendants' works, was called, and he
proved, generally, the case as stated for the plaintiff.
In his cross-examination, however, which was of very great
length, by Mr. 'Wortley, the witness described a variety of
instances in which the plaintiff had spoiled the work entrusted
to him, and for which the defendants had been called upon
to pay, and many instances of absence, without reasonable
cause, during which time the plaintiff's wages were paid,
although other men were necesssarily employed in his place.
Besides these, in their letter dismissing the plaintiff, the
defendants alleged that he had, during the turn• out of dyers
in August] last, tampered with the other men, and had not
fulfilled the conditions of his engagement in other respects.
No evidence, however, was called on the part of the defend.
ants ; but Mr. Wortley, in a very able speech, contended
from the testimony of the plaintiff himself; tharample proof
had been given that he had not discharged his duty to his
employers as he was bound, to the best of his skill and
ability.

The JUDGE in his summing up read all the evidence to
the jury and left them to say whether the plaintiff had ful-
filled his part of the contract.

The jury retired to deliberate upon their verdict, and after
remaining in consultation until half past six, they returned
into court with a verdict for the defendant.

The court adjourned till nine this morning.
The total number of causes to be tried at these assizes is
149, among which are several special juries. We believe
that one case in the Salford list in an action against a party
for violation of the marriage vow.

LEWES, MARCH 23.
(Before Mr. Justice Patteson and a Special Jury.)
HOLLOWAY V. HARR.

This was an action to recover damages for a libel, brought
by the plaintiff, a clergyman of the Church of England,
against the Rev. Mr. Hare, archdeacon of Lewes.
The declaration alleged that the defendant had published a

certain letter, containing divers libellous charges Against the
plaintiff, which letter was sent to a lady named Gilbert. The
damages were laid at £2,000. The defendant pleaded a
justification.
Mr. Platt rote to address the jury. The plaintiff and the
defendant were both ministers of the Church of England ;
the plaintiff not holding a high situation, certainly; but still
he had for eighteen years fulfilled the duties of his office with
great ability, and to the satisfaction of every congregation
over which he had presided. The defendant was the Arch-
deacon of Lewes, and the plaintiff complained that he had
thought fit to write and publish a letter in which be attacked
the character of the plaintiff, and made charges against him
which, if there had been any foundation, would have the
effect of not only expelling him for ever from his holy office,
but from all decent society. In 1810 he was appointed curate
of the parish of Eastdean, in this county. There was con-
siderable competition for the appointment ; but the plaintiff
obtained it, by reason, no doubt, of the superior testimonials
he was able to produce. The profits of the curacy were very
small ; and a lady named Gilbert, who resided in an adjoining
parish, gave a stipend of £lOO a year in addition. The
plaintiff continued to perform the duties of his office to the
satisfaction of all his parishioners, every one of whom was
willing to bear testimony to the excellence of his conduct.
There was, however, it would appear, some secret enemy
seeking an opportunity to destroy him ; and after some time
the plaintiff became aware that certain rumours to his preju-
dice bad been circulated in the neighbourhood, although he
could never discover what those rumours exactly referred to;
and it was not until a few days ago, when the pleas were put
upon the record, that he was made aware of the precise
natnre of the charges against him. It seemed that these

and
the lady he
e in
t o copse_
whom elt a er, es Lad reached the knowledge of Mr. Pitman, who had
recommendeds
stehde
aplaintifft
ot omt
Ihs es
Gc
lrbaecryt,.
be had referred. That lady was slow to believe the charges
that were made, and she had such an opinion of the character
of the plaintiff that she returned the letter to Mr. Pitmar.
It appeared that the charges were renewed against the plain-
tiff, and he then took every means in his power to cause an
investigation into them, and he desired that a fu!l imbh„
ingtiiry should take place before the 13s,:hop of c

who was the proper judge to inq
The plaintiff was anxious that the chargt
be investigated, not secretly and behind his bae
Miss eillstt t
licly in his presence, where he might have an o
rebutting them. Instead, however, of liroceedii
another course was adopted. The Venera e
I.llispportunity
Hare, instead of promoting the office of the bishol care;
instituted an inquiry into the charges brought at, • -
plaintiff, and thought fit to write a letter to
object of which was clearly to deprive the plaintiff of' t
t.'
stipend he received from that lady, and to drive him fro
the parish witja his wife and family. The letter was wt
calculated to effect the object the writer had in view, ami w,
filled with arguments likely to affect the mind of a deltea
lady, and induce her to withdraw her countenance from ti;e-
plaintiff, and yet, at the same time, it was written guardedly,
in order that the writer might not, as he supposed, run aiy
risk from being the author of it. In consequence of these
proceedings the plaintiff, on November sth, 1842, was re-
moved by the Bishop of Chichester from his curacy. He
was a ruined man; for although the immediate effect of his
dismissal by the bishop only removed him from that diocese,
vet there could be no doubt that it would entirely prevent
him from assuming any other offias in the church. What
course, then, was left for him to pursue? He was anxious
to learn what the charges were against him, and he applied
to the Archbishop of Canterbury to institute an inquiry, but
in consequence of his not having been regularly licensed as
the curate of Eastdean, that reverend prelate found himself
precluded from interfering in the matter. Here, then, was
his unfortunate client driven from his ministry without any
appeal. What was he to do? He had no other alternative
but to bring this action, and he had brought it. He came
before a jury of his cOuntrymen, who would do equal justice
between them, and by that action he challenged the defendant
to make out any charge of misconduct against him. The
defendant bad accepted the challenge, and he kad put pleas
upon the record which imputed the most shameful crimes to
the plaintiff, whom those pleas accused not only of public
misconduct, bat also of having committed the crime of wilful
and deliberate perjury.
Miss Gilbert was then called, and proved the statements
of Mr. Platt relative to herself. The letter written by the
defendant was pat in. It never mentioned the plaintiff by
name, but referred to the letters written by Mr. Pittman,
and assured the party to whom it was addressed, (Miss ail-
bert) that Mr. Pittman was fully justified jn what he had
done. The defendant also in it advised Misd Gilbert to let
the matter rest with those who had authority in the matter,
and implied that she was stepping out of her proper sphere in
preturn
r Bishop of
Petfiot
Chichester
mohffiai
enehi'
esestlteee tr%.teiwet byhasi o
ellxhi
his
ssres
idGel.o.
ei 'deb: es raet:.
and
proper becoming the protectress of a man publicly, reierring to the
he had come to the conclusion that Mr. Holloway was not a
Opinion was founded on the short-hand notes of a trial in
which the plaintiff was a witness. His lordship said the
communication relative to the charges against die plaintiff
had been made to him by the defendant.
Mr. Thesiger then addressed the jury for the defendant.
Mr. J. Darns examined by Sergeant Channel.—l am a
schoolmaster, and reside at Brancaster, in Norfolk. I first
became acquainted with the plaintiff in 1828, on his being ap-
pointed curate of the parish. The Rev. Mr. Bolton was the
rector of the parish. The plaintiff told nie that lie had an
interest in the tithes of that parish, and I assis._erl him in
keeping the accounts relating to his tithes. I remember at-
tending a trial at the Norwich assizes in 1832, when I was
subpoenaed by Mr. Rankin, Mr. Holloway's attorney. After
the trial was over I received a book from a person named
Rogers, which book I handed to Mr. Hclloway, and I saw it
in his custody frequently afterwards. I last saw that book
in the spring of 1839, when Mr. Holloway left Brancaster.
attended several meetings of the tithe commissioners in
1839, and the first in August. The plaintiff was present.
Mr. Holloway was examined as a witness at that assize, and
gave evidence on oath. The book was handed to me, and
was produced before the tithe commissioners, and I have no
doubt Mr. Holloway saw it, as he was examined respecting
it by the commissioners, who asked him whether that was
the original account of the tithe, and be replied that it was
not. He was then asked whether he had the original ac-
counts, and he said he had not, but that Mr. Rankin, his
attorney, had taken them away with him from England. He
was asked respecting some other original accounts, and he
said he had not got them; but I bad seen them in his posses-
sion the same morning, and both myself and Mr. Holloway
had been engaged in examining them. After Mr. Holloway
had been examined I called him out, and told hisn he had
made a mistake respecting the book which he said his attor-
ney had taken away with him, or 1 had myself given it to
Mrs. Holloway the day before she left Brancaster. He
notice mad
oe
some evasive answer, and did not take any further f
what I said. I have no doubt that the plaintiff made an entry
in this other book (produced) on the 28th of August, and he
asked me before he did so. I recollected how certain pieces
of land in his possession had been cropped during bis raei-
entries
dence at Brancaster. I gave hies all the informaTtionhe in my
power, arid he made the entries immediately
were upon two pages, and he made tbsm at the inn. Mr.
Holloway referred to this book while be was under exami-
nation by the tithe commissioner, and he refssed to answer
the question that was put to him until he looked into it. He
referred to the entries he had just made, and said in answer
to a question put to him, that those entries were made at the
time they bore date.
Several more witnesses were examined and proved some
other circumstances prejudicial to the character of the plain-
tiff, and after an address from Mr. Platt, in which he argued
that the • defendant had failed to justification,mak4eaetheissues
the
jury found a verdict for the defendant,
justi-
fying the defendant in sending the letter.
•

anAdtsetnhetenLciendcotoln
transportation assizes,
John Nicholson,
Alford, was convicted of stealing bank notes from letters,
forNileibfeo post-master of
.
and_ wounding James M'Queen,-at Tweedmouth,
William Richardson has been sentenced W fifteen year
s
transportation, at the Newcastle on-Tyne assizes, for cutting
with latent
to do him some grievous bodily harm.
_ THE HOMICIDES AT SKIBBEREEN.—The grand jury this
day unanimously ignored the bills of indictment sent before
them_ against the policemen, charged with homicides at
Ski bbereen, in the late affray near that town, connecvd with
the poor laws. —Cork .Reporter.
NORTHERN ClRetliT.—Felix Booth, whose extramvlinary
attempt to extort money from Sir Felix Booth, by a threat of
accusing him of a horrible crime, has been reported in our
columns, was sentenced on Tbursday last to be transported
for twenty years.
At the Newcastle-on-Tyne assizes last week gathers George
on H
with
bough was found guilty of killing William W
a knife. He was sentenced to seven years' transportation.
The particulars have already appeared in ourpaper. He had
received great provocation•
co bigamy,nce a n2gcattle stealing, 2 ;
CHESHIRE &MING ASSIZES.
of of prisoners for
trial, at the Castle of Chester, Ist of April :—For arson, 1 ;
rape, 6 ; sacrilege, 4 ; horsestealing, 7 ; house.
;thben
birth,rg lat y ,12;liorgcoernsyp, i
Irv; y , 5 ;
breaking, 11 ; manslaughter, murder, 6 ; poaching, 22 ;
stealingfrom the person, 9; stabbing
and wounding, 16 ; unnatural crimes, 6 ; uttering base coin,
3 ; aheapstealing, 5 ; and various, 2. Total, 132. Of these,
fourteen are admitted to bail.
TRIAL AND CONVICTION A NEPHEW FOR SHOOTING
AT AN UNCLE.—On Fridaylast, at the Cambridge assizes,
John F. Mortlock was arraigned for having attempted to
shoot his uncle, the Rev. E. Mortlock, at Cambridge. The
Prisoner, in his defence, solemnly declared that he had,
in firing the pistol, merely intended e
sentenced to frighten
hi him
tos unclebe
He was found guilty, and the Judg
transported beyond the seas for, the term of 21 years. The
and remarked, 'My lord, you have saved
prisoner bowed
me from starvation." The sentence was heard with great
sensation by a densely crowded court.
STAFFORD.—The trial of Cooper,
CHARTIST TRIALS AT
the Leicester Chartist, and three others, for conspiracy to
excite the people of the Potteries to commit the outrages of
the 15th and 16th August last, began on Monday, at nine
o'clock ; and when the court rose on Saturday evening, the
case for the prosecution had not closed. This slow progress
is owing to the tediousoper, whether they cross-examinatspeak toion of ev
factery s
iwimpli-
tness
by the defendant Co
eating him or not. In one or two instances the witnesses
were under eross.examination between four and five hours.
There was a report Thursday that this courseadj hado u, beenrned
determined upon to resentp the case coming to a close before
Friday, when, being the commission day at Shrewsbury, it
was thought the Judge must adjourn the proceedings
thatdthaye
; but
if so, it did not gain its object. Mr. Justice Erskine on
Thursday sent up his nephew, who acts as marshal! on th
circuit, for instructions from the government, and on hise
return it was announced that his lordship would continue
sitting at Stafford until this case was disposed of. rrl
.4
business of Shrewsbury has, in consequenee, been
until after the Gloucester Assizes, and it is expected
same thing roust be done at Hereford, the commission
for that city being to-daY•

hich is
at Ascot. nos prevailed for a long time LAMENESS."—This disorder,kea
" KENNEL
preva-
lent
katintgimdeetes
,more or less in nearly every preva-
nnel throughout
::onsiderable extent, in the royal kennel Past, and to a
Pears that the water which supplies the kennellt ap-
pears
a long extent of leaden pipe, and en passes throsvl;
chemist it was found that the water containedby so great a
quantity of lead as to be sufficient to have
LORD BROUGHAM AND MR. COBDE produced paralysis.
in a recent letter .to Mr. Hamer Stausr.—Lord 13rougham
writes of thrfersek orator of the Anti-Coeird' °f Leeds,thus
" I say nothing of the downfall of poor- n-Ltv,v League rr
sole work of his own folly, and which lie
Mr. Cobden—the
had his h oatot been turned b the e might have
avoided
am sorry ; but only because I provincial applause. I
and able, and now find him m• •bad believed h honest
nn
"Sing himself
basest of our species." up with the very
STATE OF TRADE IN THE MANUFACTURING
large and increasing business
cotton districts. Our private
—The trade reports show that a
is now doing, especially in the
information confirms the public
revival of manufacturing industry.intelligence of the marked
r than they are at The spinners have seldom
been basic
the raw material at an un (title present moment. uying
Pre
taining comparatively high ce ented low price, they arc ob-
And not only is the business prices for their goods and yarns.
likewise safe, the bulk of thes transactions
transacting extensive; it is
credit, but on capital, and the arnesas Itionfseebteuinj based,ma not on
not of speculation. This altered and gratifying
state onf things
will, there is every reason to believe, • •and d
continne, ren er
the 1843, so far as trade is concerned, a striking orntrast to.
too many of its predecessors.
EXECUTION AT LINCOLN.—On Friday last, at noon
Thomas Johnson, alias Upton, aged 28fears, underwent the
last penalty of the law, upon the drop o Lincoln Castle, for
the wilful murder of Elizabeth Evinsoa, at Croft. The up-
happy culprit made a full confession to Capt. Nicholson,
governor of the castle. He said that be bad no confederate
in the commission of the burglary, having parted with his
associate " Yorke
the day before ; he said that he entered
the window about ten o'clock on the Sunday night, and struck
a light with a Inciter match, with which he lighted a candle.
He first tried Mrs. Fairvreather, and afterwards Mrs. Evin-
son, and covered them over with the bed-clothes; but he did
not intend to smother either oft hem ; he remained searching
about the house other hour and a half or two hours. Besides
the spoons and articles traced to him, he got only
about thirty shillings in money. The prisoner, in his per-
sonal appearance, was much reduced since his condemnation ;
and during two or three days before his execution was unable
to take much food. He sat up later than the usual hour on
the last evening of his life, and was attended early the follow-
ing morning by the rev. and venerable chaplain, who accom-
panied him to the foot of the scaffold. About two rainutcs
before twelve, the governor of the prison ascended the plat_
form, attended by the culprit, and the hangman of Newgate ;
the last preparations were speedily made, the malefactor stood
firmly till all was arranged, holding a prayer-book in hi
hand ; on the first stroke of the great bell of the Cathedral,
the bolt was drawn, and the wretched man was launched i
eternity. The vast multitude behaved very orderly • but ":''''
moral effect of a public execution is doubtful. , t the
Saturday,
the remains of the culprit were buried within thewalls
old keep. It hes already been stated that the real of the
the culprit was Uptou# lie was 28 years of a name of
Journal. age. —Notting/tan,