The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-08-27 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, SATURDAY, AUGUST 21.

Their lordships met at a quarter to one.
The Stamp Forgeries' Bill and the Tea Duties' Bill wen
through committee, and the reports were ordered to be brought
up on Monday.
The reports on the Bank Charter Bill and the Factories' Re,
gulations bill were brought up.
The Sheriffs Expenses Bill and the Civil List Charges Bil
were read a second time.

The Land Tax Commissioners Names Bill was read a secom
time and passed through committee—the report received, and i
was ordered to be read a third time on Monday.

On the motion of the Duke of Richmond the Merchant Sea-
men's Bill was read a second time.
On the motion of the Lord Chancellor, the Chancery Offices'
Abolishing Bill was read a second time, passed through com-
mittee, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday.
The report on the Church Building Acts' Amendments Bill
was brought up, and it was ordered to be read a third time on
Monday.
Mr. fticE, and others from the Commons, brought up the Con-
solidated Fund Appropriation Bill, and other bills, to which their
lordships' amendments had been agreed to by the Commons.
Mr. LYNCH and others brought up the Stay of Suits' Bill, and
the Irish Infirmaries' Bill.

The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Stay of Suits' Bill was read a first time, and ordered to
be read a second tune on Monday.
The house then adjourned till half-past two on Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, SATURDAY, AUGUST 24.
The gallery was opeUed at twenty minutes past twelve o'clock.
A messenger from the Bank of England, Mr. Gray, brought
in an account of the amount of Bank. of England notes in cir-
culation at present.

CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL.
The Consolidated Fund bill wan read a third time and passed,
• TITHES STAY OF SUITS BILL

The Tithes Stay of Suits Bill was read a third time. .
On the motion of Mr. Blamire that it do pass,
Sir IL H. INctis objected to it then as he had in the begin-
ning, on the ground that it was a gross infraction of the rights
of private property.
Ihe SOLICITOR-GENERAL supported it with great pleasure,
particularly after the statement which had been made to him by
the hon. member for East Cumberland, that there were at that
moment no less than 9,000 suits pending for the recovery of
tithes, most of them in parishes where a modus had existed for
the last sixty years, and in many of which tithes had not been
collected for centuries. Ile would add, that in his opinion, the
greatest enemies of the church were those that set themselves in
opposition to the removal of its acknowledged abuses.
Mr. TooRE opposed the passing of the bill in its present crude
state. It would do mole injury than service to the country.
Mr. AGLIONIIY supported the bill.
After a few words from Mr. Cobbett, Sir IL IL Inglis, Mr.
Blamire, and Sir F. Burdett, the bill was read a third time and
passed.
A messenger from the Lords brought down the Trial of
Offences' (Ireland) Bill, the Notaries' Public Bill, tile Slavery
Abolition Bill, the Metropolitan Police Bill, and the Turnpike
Roads Accounts' Bill, to which their lordships had agreed with-
out amendment.
Another messenger applied for a copy of the report of the
beer-shop inquiry committee, which was ordered to be trans-
mitted to the Lords.
The Infirmaries' Regulation Bill was then read a third time
and passed.
The Lords amendments to the East India Company's Char-
ter Renewal Bill were then agreed to, after some observations
from Mr. SINCLAIR, Mr. C. FERGUSON, Mr. F. BUXTON, and
Fir R. H. INoLls, who agreed that the country had to thank
the Lords for their amendments.
Lord ALTHORP moved that the house do, on its rising, ad-
journ to Wednesday next.—Agreed to.
FOREIGN POLICY OF bIINISTMIS.

-----
Colonel EvANs said he wishedr to put. some questions to the
noble lord (Palmerston) on the subject of foreign policy. lie
would have done so at an earlier period of the session, but the
confidence he entertained in ministers, as regarded their inten-
tions with respect to their foreign policy, and the circumstances
not being of a nature that could have been so well mentioned
before, he refrained from calling the attention of ministers to
the subject. Now, however, they were about to adjourn, and
the opportunity of putting any questions to ministers, no mat-
ter how important, would be out of the power of members of
that house for some time. He had, as he stated before, great
confidence in his Majesty's ministers; but, nevertheless, on

more than two or three occasions he had felt it his duty to com-
plain of their not adopting stronger measures as regarded the
interests of this country in foreign courts. He was glad to
congratulate ministers and the country, that the question of the
affairs of Belgium were-at length bi:ought to a final issue, or
nearly so, as it would enable the government to use more stroni,
and decisive measures towards the settlement of Portugal. His'
Majesty's ministers were aware that the legitimate sovereign of
Portugal was now in possession of Lisbon, which was in hands,
de lure, as was also the second greatest city of her dominions,
and he had hoped and expected that government would have
announced officially their acknowledgment of Donna Maria as
sovereign of that country. He did not wish to embarrass mi-
nisters, nor would he express any doubt as to their intention of
doing that which would be just; but he would say that it was
imperative on them to use stronger measures; as Russia
had thought proper to use its influence as to the settlement
in Turkey, so he hoped England and France would at
once join to prevent that power interfering in the settle-
ment of the affairs of Portugal, and by their united efforts do
-justice to the legitimate sovereign of that country. He
.(Celonel Evans) had also to call on his Majesty's ministers
to satisfy the house as to the interference of England in the
arrangements lately entered into between the Russians and
Turkey in Europe, fur there was an official document by which
members could ascertain the truth of the reports circulated.
He wished to ask the noble lord -(Palmerston) whether the
body of Russian troops marched into Turkey was done with
the concurrence of li lance and England, and if not, whether
that step was taken in opposition to their remonstrance. It
was the bounden duty of France.and England to join, and, if
possible, by strong and decisive measures prevent further-ag-
gression on the part of Russia towards Turkey, and he wished
to know if an officer of the Russian Engineers had received in-
structions to fortify the Dardanelles. If that report was true,
and that such orders were actually given by Russia, there could
not be the.least possible doubt but that that power meant to fol-
low those stepsit had long since meditated, to obtain possession
of Turkey in Europe. It was also reported that the arrange-
ment entered into between Count Orloff, on the part of Russia,
and the Turkish minister, *as one of a nature that would
eventually tend to confirm his (Col. Evans's) prediction. To
prevent Russian aggression, he hoped that his Majesty's minis-
ters would, conjointly with France, as speedily as possible re-
cognize Donna Maria as Sovereign of Portugal ; and unless a
more firm and decisive character be adopted by England and
France, there can be no hope of keeping down the aggressions
of Russia. He hoped the noble lord would satisfy the house
that it was the intention of his Majesty's government to act in
accordance with the wishes of the country, and that ministers
would be prepared at the opening of the next session of Par-
liament with a statement of their foreign policy, tending to give
greater confidence to the country.
Lord PALMERSTON was always ready, as it was his duty, to
give honourable gentlemen every information which he could
o".give consistently-with his duty as a confidential minister of the
crown ; and the courtesy with which the question ,was now
put to him by the gallant colonel opposite, would render it
more inexcusable if lie (Lord Palmerston) declined to
give them every satisfaction in his power. Ile would not,
however follow him through all his observations, -which he
must believe were made rather more for the purpose of explain-
ing his own views than of eliciting his (Lord Palmerston's)
opinions. But there was one particular respecting Which he
must set right the honourable and gallant member for West-
minster. 'lhat gentleman had said that this government, and
that of France, had refrained from interfering in the affairs of
Portugal in deference to the wishes of Russia, and that there-
fore England and France had a right to insist that Russia
should (in return for their acquiescence to her wishes) have
abstained from interference with the affairs of Turkey. Now
he would assure the house.that the government of this country
had been in no degree influenced by deference to the wishes or
opinions of Russia, or of any other power, in the course which
they had adopted respecting Portugal. (Hear, hear.) They
had been influenced only by the consideration of the actual
circumstance of the case; and they had pursued the course
' which seemed to them to be most consistent with the interest
of the country, and with the principles on which they had re-
solved to regulate their foreign policy. (Hear, hear, hear.)
He would say, that such also had been the conduct of the French
government, so far as he was able to give any opinion respect-
ing the motives of that government. Nothing could be snore
discreditable to the government of this country than that it
should have abstained,from doing any thing which the interests
of the country or the , honour of the crown might demand,
through deference to the policy or the wishes of any other
power. As to the affairs of the East of Europe, he had 'only. to
say that his Majesty's ministers had heard of a treaty having
been signed between Russia and Turkey. : But they had re-
ceived no official communication on the subject. Not being iu
possession of the treaty they were not able to give any informa-
tion respecting it. This government had certainly not thought
it necessary to protest against the marching of the Russian
: troops to the assistance of the Sultan; because the Russian
government had given the strongest pledges to withdraw those
troops immediately after they. should have effected their pur-
• pose ; and those pledges had since been entirely redeemed. As
to the treaty between Turkey and Russia, it was impossible to
say what course the government would take upon the subject
until it was in possession of the treaty itself.
. , ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord ALTnotie moved that the house at its rising should ad-
journ to Wednesday at.twelve o'clock, instead of four in the
afternoon, as had been lireviously agreed upon.
MIGUELITE CORRESPONDENCE.

Mr. Munamr begged to ask the noble lord, the Secretary-for
Foreign Affairs, whether the correspondence, published as hav-
ing taken place between the most profligate government that
disgraced any country in the world, and certain persons of high
rank in this country, was genuine ? If so, it was highly discre-
ditable to England; and if it was not genuine, the noble lord
was called upon to disabuse the public mind.
Lord PALMERSTON could give no information on the subject.
The hon. gentleman could best be informed by the foreign mi-
nister of Don Miguel.
Sir R. INGLIS presenteda petition from a parish clerk, com-
plaining of tithe cess. The hon. baronet moved for certain re-
turns connected with the suits in Chancery commenced previous
to the 10th of August.
Mr. S. RICE moved the adjournment of the house.
The house accordingly adjo irned at half-past two o'clouk,
until Wednesday next.

LANCASTER ASSIZES.

CROWN COURT, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 21
BILL OF EXCHANGE.

LEES V. COPELAND and ANOTHER.—This was an action in
hover, to recover the value of a Bank Post Bill for £7O, alleged
to have come improperly into the possession of the defendants.
Mr. WATSON opened the pleading, and Mr. RoscoE stated
the case to the juty. The ptaintiff Was captain and owner of
a merchant vessel trading from Liverpool. The defendants
were brewers and distillers, carrying on business in that town,
and, the action, which was originally commenced in the borough
court at Liverpool, but removed by the defendants to Lancas-
ter, was brought to recover the value of the bill of exchange
for £7O, drawn on behalf of the Bank of Manchester, dated
the Ist of March, 1832, and purporting to be payable seven days
after date. On the 14th of the same month, the bill in question,
which had come into the hands of Messrs. Freme and Co.,
corn-merchants, at Liverpool, was by them paid over to Capt.
Lees, the plaintiff, in part payment of a debt. of £BO, due by
them for the freight of a cargo of corn, the balance being paid
in cash. In the course of the same day the plaintiff lost the
bill, but he (Mr. Roscoe) was not in a condition to show pre-
cisely under what circumstances the bill was lost, inasmuch as
the plaintiff, who war, of course, best acquainted with them,
could not be called as a witness iu his own cause. lie could,
however, prove that on the day after the loss, the bill was in the
hands of a person who had no right to it, and this was enough
for his purpose, for it had lately been decided in the Court of
King's Bench, that where a bill over-due was either lost or sto-
len, it was not necessary to produce evidence as to the manner
in which it went out of the hands of the real owner, any of the
subsequent holders being held to be subject to the same equities
as the yerson who first improperly obtained possession of it.
Immediately on the loss of the bill, the plaintiff informed
Messrs. Freme and Co. of it, and through them it was commu-
nicated to the Banking Company at lUanchester. He also
gave information to the police aCLiverpool, but nothing was
heard of the fate of the bill until the 14th of July, when Messrs.
Freme and Co. received a letter from the Banking Company at
Manchester, informing them that the bill had ben presented
for payment by the defendants. On the receipt of this intelli-
gence Mr. Christopherson, of the firm of 1 reme and Co.,
applied to the defendants to know in what manner it had come
into their possession and was told that they had received it on
the 29th of June, which was three months after the loss, from
a customer of theirs, named Corbett, who kept a beer-shop in
Brooks-street, near the Prince's Dock, a street which was chiefly
frequented by sailors and disorderly people, iu payment for a debt
of between four and five pounds for ale, and had given change
for the bill in cash. Mr. Christopherson then called at Corbett's,
and was told by Mrs. Corbett that a sailor named Thompson,
she believed, hail called at her house to get the bill changed,
but not having money enough by her she gave him £3O, and he
was to call again for the remainder, but never came to demand
the balance. Though Messrs. Copeland and Co. did not think
it necessary to inquire how such a bill came into the hands of a
person whom it appeared they never credited beyond £lO or
£l2, the plaintiff was not satisfied with this account of the trans-
action, but caused further inquiries to be made. It was after-
wards ascertained that early on the morning of the 15th of
March. the day after the bill was lost, two persons named Ma.
kin and Couttendy, the latter a sailor, went to a hair-dresser's
strop, in Pownall-square, and asked John Duckworth, the per-
son who kept the Shot., ..assi_s- ss sa.,- 5t.55,„,...c5...
a Manchester Bank Post Bill for £7O; Duckworth had the bill
in his hands and examined it, it was then perfectly clean, and
there were several endorsements on the back of it. Ilis suspi-
cions being excited as to the manner iu which it came into their
possession, he told them to call again ; in the meantime he gave
information to the police and had constables in waiting ready to
apprehend them. The men, however, did not come, and the
police advised him to see them again and make another appoint-
ment. In the course of the same day he met with them in a
clothes-shop in Paradise-street, and told them that he thought
he could manage the, matter for them. On this Courtenay,
the person who had the bill, said he would have no bother
about it, but would put 'it in the tire, and then it could tell no
tales. The man, who lodged within two doors of Mrs. Corbett's
beer-shop, was afterwards apprehended and taken before the
magistrates, but, as the bill was not found upon him and no
person appeared against him, he was discharged. When the
bill ultimately came into the hands of the plaintiff's attorney, it
was dirty, ragged, and torn—apparently perforated with pins,
and two of the endorsements, the names of persons residing in
Liverpool, were completely erased; it still, however, retained
the private mark of Messrs. Freme and Co., and there could be
no doubt that it was the bill lost by the plaintiff. The question
to be considered was, whether the' defendants had exercised due
caution in receiving it, and were justified in retaining posses-
sion of it, and appropriating it to their own use. There were
two rules of law applicable to this case;—the first was, that
where a bill of exchange which was over-due was taken by any
person, the parties subsequently receiving it were subject to ail
the equities or liabilities of the person who first took it after it
became over-due. It was true that in this case the plaintiff him-
self had taken the bill after it was over-due; but then he took it
fairly—in the way of trade, for a valuable consideration, and
had a clear right to claim upon it. It was evident that Mrs.
Corbett, according to her own account, had received the bill
from a person who became improperly possessed of it, and the
defendants, in receiving it without making the inquiries which
were called for under the circumstances, stood iu the same si-
tuation as the two individuals who had previously held the bill,
and were subject to the same liabilities. The second rule was,
that where a bill was lost or stolen, and was afterwards found in
the hands of a third party, it was incumbent on that party, be-
fore he could set up a claim to the possession of it, to show that
he had exercised that due and proper cautionin receiving it which
the law required in cases ofthe kind. He (Mr. 11 ossoe) contended
that in this case the defendants had not exercised the prudence and
discretion which ought to be expected from men in business, anx-
ious to promote their own interests, and protectthose of the public.
It was impossible for him to show the manner in which the bill was
lost. It might be said that it was picked from the pocket of Captain
Lees whilst he was in a state of intoxication, but even if it were so,
what right could the thief or person claiming under him acquire, if
the latter had not used the care and caution expected from every
person engaged in business? Ile contended that both stood in
the same situation, and that as the defendants bad not used tha

care and caution, they were clearly liable, and the plaintiff was
entitled to recover from them the value of the bill which he had
lost.
The Bill of Exchange was then produced. It was drawn by
the Bank of Manchester on Messrs. Glynn, Halifax, and Co.,
London, for £7O, bearing date on the Ist of March, 1832, and
purporting to be payable seven days after date. As it was on
unstamped paper, the license under which, according to the
provision of the 9th of Geo. IV., c. 23. the Bank of Manchester
is empowered to issue promissory notes and bills of exchange for
a limited period on unstamped paper, on payment of a composi-
tion, was produced, and Mr. Gregson, a distributor of stamps at
Lancaster, was called to prove the signatures of the commission,
ers to the license, but as it appeared that he had never seen the
commissioners write, his evidence was objected to by Mr. Ser-
jeant JONES, for the defendants, and his lordship took a note of
the objection. The learned seri eant alto called for proof that
the house of Glynn, Halifax, and Co. were a banking company
in London.
Mr. John Christopherson, a partner in the house of Freme
and Co., was then called. He deposed to the facts as opened
by Mr. Roscoe, and stated that the bill now produced was, lie
believed, that which he had paid to Captain Lees, though it was
now dirty and torn, and some of the endorsements had been
erased. When he called on the defendants to inquire about the
bill, he was told that they had received it from Mr. John Cor-
bett, a customer of theirs, in Brooks-street, to whom they re-
ferred him. He then went to Corbett, who told him that it was
his wife who had received the bill and paid it away, and after
referring him to her, left the room. The witness was proceeding
to describe the account which Mrs. Corbett gave of the transac-
tion, but Mr. Serjeant JONES objected to this line of evidence, and
contended that what Mrs. Corbett said could in no way affect
the present defendants.
Mr. STARKIE followed on the same side.
Mr. Roscoe, on the other hand, contended that as Mr. Chris-
topherson had been referred to Corbett by the defendants, the
account given by Corbett was evidence against them.
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE remarked that the defendants re-
ferred Mr. Christopherson to the husband and not to the wife,
and declared the evidence to be inadmissable, but took a note
of its being tendered.
Mr. Christopherson.—Cross-examined by Mr.' Sergt. JONES.
—Did not know that Corbett was in the employment of Messrs.
Acraman and Stitt, or that his wife managed the public-house.
Had paid the bill to plaintiff after it was due. Those bills
passed in Liverpool just in the same way as Bank of England
bills or notes. Had frequently received them a month after
they were due, and treated them as cash. Had seen the plain-
tiff last spring, but did not know where he now was. The de-
fendants were brewers and distillers, and their house was a very
respectable one.
Re-examined by Mr. Roscoe.—Bills of this nature were
chiefly circulated amongst the merchants. Had never received
such a bill when it was so long as four months over-due, and
never saw one in such a state as this. . •
• JOHN DUCKWORTH, hair-dresser, then deposed to the two men,
Makin and Courtenay, bringing a clean Aid fresh Manchester
bill of Exchange, for £7O, to his. shop on the 15th of March last,
and offering him £2O if he could get it changed, and also to the
subsequent apprehension and discharge of Courtenay. He also
stated that when Courtenay offered the bill he said that they
had got it from a captain the night before to get some drink,
but they saw he had plenty of notes about him, and thought he
could very well spare one of them.—(A langh.)
JAMES DAVISON, the police officer who took Courtenay into
custody, stated that Courtenay lived close to the beer-shop kept
by Mrs. Corbett, in Brooks-street, which was one of the most
disorderly in Liverpool.
Mr. WM. GREGORY, attorney for the defendants, was then
called and examined. He stated that on the 12th of July,
1832, application was made to•the Manchester Bank for pay-
ment of the bill. It was not paid on the first application, but
was subsequently, on an indemnity being given. The case for
the plaintiff being concluded,
Mr. Sergeant JoNes, for the defendants, contended that there
was no case to go to the jury, inasmuch as it had neither been
proved how the bill was lost—that it was lost at all—or that if
lost it was the bill which the plaintiff had received from Messrs.
Freme and Co. His lordship, however, being of opinion that
there were facts for the consideration of the jury, the learned
Sergeant continued his address, and contended at considerable
length that the defendants had only acted in the usual course
of business, and that if there were any negligence it was on the
part of the plaintiff himself, in not advertising the loss of the
bill, if it really were lost, and thus putting the public on their
guard.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE in summing up the evidence ob-
' served, that if the jury were satisfied that this bill was the bill
which the plaintiff had lost, and that the defendants in receiv-
ing the bill under the circumstances described had acted with
; gross negligence, and not in the usual course of business, the
plaintiff was entitled to recover; but if they were not satisfied
of these facts their verdict must be for the defendants.
The jury after a short Consultation, found for the defendant.
At the conclusion of this case, there being no other ready, his
lordship, after complimenting. the jurymen for their service,
during the week, and expressing his regret that he could not
discharge them from further attendance, dissolved the courts
• and left Lancaster in the course of the afternoon.

LONDON POLICE REPORT.

MANSION-HOUSE.

On Friday a complete hit was made by the Lord Mayor at
Ady, the "considerable advantage" broker, of No. 11, Circus,
Minories. A great deal of laughter was excited when it was
made known.
A few days ago two gentlemen waited upon his lordship and
informed him that some poor people in parts of Devonshire had
received letters of' promise from Ady, who also took care to ask
for the fee of 20s. from each of the persons he addressed. As
in several instances people had travelled to London from very
remote distances, upon the assurance of this universal corres-
pontlent, that certain4ood luck, in the shape of cash, awaited
thein (a word of promise broken to the hope), the applicants
wished to consult his lordship upon the most -advisable course to
be adopted to check the nuisance. They produced some of Ady's
letters just received, and we observed that neither the name of
Alderman Heygate, Alderman Copeland, or of Mr. nobler are
mentioned as referee. The advertisement from the Court of
Aldermen in their opinion checked th-epractice of referring to
these gentlemen, at the same time that it had very widely cir-
culated, among the public, the atrocious sysieni of humb g by
which the poor had ball deceived.
The Lord Mayor said that he had been thinking of a mode of
retaliation which might be adopted with a good deal of effect,
and as Mr. Ady seemed to be fond of joking with the feelings of
the public, for his own advantage, that worthy gentleman could
not be offended at a little joke against himself. " I would," said
his lordship, "advise every person who receives a letter from
Mr. Ady, promising profitable advantage, and requiring a fee of
a sovereign for the news, to write a polite answer, inclosing, not
a sovereign, but a farthing. The consequence of this will be,
that as the letter will be then a money letter, the charge of post-
age will not be returned at the Postoffice.
It was observed that Ady would probably refuse to take in any
letters of the kind.
The Lord Mayor—That is exactly what we desire. His trade
consists in the money lie receives in this way. He can't know
the difference between a covered up farthing and a covered up
sovereign, and lie must pay double postage for every letter con-
taining the smallest coin of the realm. It is necessary, how-
ever, that the person who writes to him should not write anony-
mously, and that the words " money letter" should be super-
scribea on the letter. I can very well conceive with what feel-
ings Mr. Ady will look at the outside of a letter, while he is in
doubt whether there is a farthing or a sovereign inside—(great
laughter.)
The gentlemen said they should certainly send to the various
parish officers through the country, suggesting this plan, which
appeared to be likely to be successful. Thev were of opinion
that Mr. Ady would in a few days be flattered by a more abun-
dant correspondence than he ever yet had, and that farthings
would be soon scarce, except in the immediate vicinity of the
Minories--(laughter).
The Lord Mayor expressed a hope that the communications
of Mr. Ady would be promptly replied to ; but he trusted that
nobody would write except those with whom Mr. Ady might
think proper to correspond. He seriously hoped not a single
person would act upon this suggestion from the love of mischief.
Such conduct would, he assured the public, be exceedingly un-
fair and improper. (Great laughter.)
The gentlemen said they were afraid his lordship's kind hint
would not be attended to, especially as it was probable the news-
papers might give the hint circulation; but perhaps his lordship
could prevent the publication.
The Lord Mayor—l am afraid. I can't do so. But we don't
know what the result may be. Pei haps Mr. Ady will receive
more sovereigns than farthings. If so, the more letters he re-
ceives the better. (Laughter.)
We understand that in the course of Friday Mr. Ady had the
pleasure of receiving a number of "money letters," but from
his appearance it was conjectured that the sovereigns turned out
to be all farthings.
•