The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-09 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

witnesses on the part of the pi o,ecut ion had been examined.
his Lordship expressed his op;ninn that no ancient cu-t,,m
of the kind referred to had been made out, and the jury
under his direction, found the defendants not guilty of
the matters contained in the indictment.

ACTION TO RECOVER MONEY RECEIVED BY AN AGENT
ON ACCOUNT OF A PUBLIC COMPANY.
CAMP,ELL b. PowNALL —This was an action brought
by the plaintiff, Duncan Camplo,.ll. against Wm. Pownall,
the defendant, to recover £322, the balance of an account
for goods sold and delivered, ak.d on an account stated.
The plaintiff is a proprietor of water-side carts, in Liver-
pool, and a member of the Old Carters' Company, an as-
sociation consisting of persons in the same line of busi-
nose. The defendant had been secretary to the company.
His duties were to keep an account of th, work done each
day by the carters employed, and to collect the cartage
accounts from the merchants when due ; and the amount
now sought to be recovered w's the balance of a larger
sum which the defendant had c,,llected during his secre-
taryship. 'The defence was, that Pownall was dealing with
the company and not with the plaintiff individually, and that
therefore he had mistaken the person against whom he
might proceed for the recovery of the money. The jury
found a verdict for the defendant.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—FRIDAY.
The court was opened shortly after one o'clock.
ASSAULT.

ALDERSON v. WAISTELL AND ANOTHER.—This was
an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendants,
Thomas Waistell and Henry Waistell, his son, for an as-
sault. The plaintiff and the defendants are firmers, at
Birkdale, in the North Riding of the county of York, and
were in the habit of tending their sheep upon a piece of
common land, at Birkdale, which they enclosed with
" bield walls," so as to prevent the sheep from straying,
and to protect them from the snow. On Sunday the 4th
February, a nephew of the plaintiff was tending sheep in
one of the " bields," when the elder defendant's son
came up, and said his father would have one of the plain-
tiffs enclosures, and drove a number of sheep into the
place. The plaintiff and his nephew attempted to drive
the defendant's sheep out, and then the elder defendant
struck the plaintiff on the temple with a large stick. He
then got a large stick from Henry Waistell, and knocked
the plaintiff down. The younger defendant next threw a
stick at the plaintiff; and the elder defendant, seizing the
plaintiff by the legs, threw him into a ditch.
The principal witness for the plaintiff was a strapping
young fellow, 19 years of age, who diverted the court and
jury by the stupidity of his answers to the questions put
to him.

Mr. DUNDAS, for the defendants, said the younger de-
fendant had certainly been included in the case, for the
purpose of preventing him being made a witness for the
father • who the learned counsel contended, was perfectly
justified in using violence in order to get possession of
the sheep. _ _ _

The jii-ry found the younger defendant not guilty, and
returned a verdict of guilty against the father ; damages,
£lO.

AN ATTORNEY'S BILL.

BRAY D. EASTWOOD.—This was an action brought by
Mr. Bray, attorney, of Preston, against the defendant,
Mr. Thomas Eastwood, of Brindle Lodge, in this county
to recover the sum of £547, for professional services.
The costs were incurred in defending Mr. Eastwood
against an indictment, at Lancaster, for a libel upon the
Rev. Mr. Sherborne, Roman Catholic priest, and two
actions for libel subsequently brought against the defend-
ant, by the same reverend gentleman, at the assizes at
Liverpool. The libels appeared in the Lancaster Gazette,
in the shape of letters from the defendant; and Mr.
Quarme, the editor of that journal, was the nominal de-
fendant in the two last actions. The libels imput d to
Mr. Sherborne, and to the Roman Catholic priesthood
generally, that they induced persons on their death-beds
to make wills in their favour, or for superstitious purposes.
The defendant was found guilty upon the bill of indict-
ment preferred against him at 'Lancaster. The two ac-
tions brought against Mr. Quarme, after being made
remanets at one assizes, at Liverpool, were ready for trial
at the succeeding assizes, in March, 1843, when the plain-
tiff, Mr. Bray, wrote to Mr. Eastwood to furnish him
with money to carry them on. The defendant refused to
send any money ; and Mr. Bray thereupon agreed to a
verdict for the plaintiff, for nominal damages, and those
actions were settled. He delivered in his bill to the de-
fendant in July last, but the defendant refused to pay,
and in consequence, this action was brought. Two or
three witnesses were called, who proved that during the
progress of the actions in question Mr. Eastwood was fre-
quently at the plaintiff's office, and letters were also put
in evidence, showing that he was the person who gave
directions during the entire suit.
Mr. WATSON addressed the jury for the defence, con-
tending that for the costs, incurred in the two actions
against Mr. Quarme, the defendant could not be held
liable. In the bill which bad been handed in were some
matters which related to the indictment brought against
Mr. Eastwood, at Lancaster ; and for all that he had done
for Mr. Eastwood, the plaintiff had been paid. It was
the opinion of the great and learned Lord Tenterden, that
every attorney ought to take a written retainer from his
clients ; but in the present case there was no written re-
tainer, and that the defendant was not the real defendant
in the two actions brought against Mr. Quarme might
be inferred from the fact that he was to be examined as a
witness.

His LORDSHIP' observed, in summing up, that there
could be no doubt that the bill of £547 hid been properly
incurred, and he left the jury to say whether it was due
from the defendant.

The jury found for the plaintiff ; damages, £520.

CROWN COURT-SATURDAY.
STEAD V. ROBERTS.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff. Thomas
Stead, to recover the sum of £4O lent to the defendant,
Abraham Roberts. The defendant pleaded that he was
not liable, and that he had paid the money before the
action was brought. Both these pleas were denied ; and
on this issue was joined.
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Addison appeared for the plain-
tiff; and Mr. Watson for the defendant.
It appeared, from the statement and evidence, that the
plaintiff was a maltster, at a place called Clackbeaton,
near Leeds, and that the defendant was a stonemason,
rneeeanrvtehreassaumme placenf x 4 0; awnbdiethh,es
nin objectna nogfn tahseaction
October,w al
8s I
IT,
was lent by the plaintiff to the defendant. The latter had.
taiffbr;onthnd whener,Samunenl, winhtoimmaeayrribeadd abedeanugthhtuers offortmheedp,latTe-
loan passed through the hands of Samuel's wife, who had
since died. The loan could not, therefore, be directly
proved ; but admissions had, from time to time, been
made by the defendant, which left no doubt that the money
had been lent.

The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount so ght.

His LORDSHIP intimated that he would not take any
more cases, and the Court accordingly adjourned at ten
o'clock.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-SATURDAY.

CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE CUSTOMS AT LIVERPOOL :

REGINA V. WILLIAMS AND OTHERS.

Thomas Williams, Henry Beeslon, and Jonas Brockle-
hurst, were indicted for a conspiracy to defraud the cus-
toms.

There were two counts in the indictment. The first
charged the defendant with a conspiracy to defraud the
Queen of her Customs' duties. The second count charg-
ed that certain merchandise had been placed in a bonding
warehouse in the port of Liverpool; and ten bags of coffee
had been removedshk,tDehnraaeconvrwtielne.from, in order to be re-warehoused ;
and that the defendants conspired to obtain these ten bags
from the Queen's officers without paying the duty, : and,
also, that, in pursuance of such conspiracy, the defendants
endeavoured to bribe the officers by the promise of £5,
and the actual payment of £3 to procure the removal of
the ten bags. The defendants pleaded not guilty to both
charges.
The following are the circumstances of the case, as de-
tailed in the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution:
—The defendant, Beeston, was a landing-waiter in the
Customs at the time of the occurrences which were the
subject of the indictment. Williams was described as a
general dealer, and Brocklehurst was said to be a store-
keeper and general dealer in Manchester. The most im-
portant witnesses were two lockers, William Booth and
George Henry Richards; and it appeared, that on the
17th of July last, these persons had been appointed to
receive goods and keep thew till the duty was paid in
Green's, 340, Dundee-street, which is a bonding ware-
house. The same day Booth was standing under the
dome in the Custom-house passage, when Beeston and
Williams came to him, and the former asked him what
duty he was upon. Booth replied, " Not upon any par-
ticular
duty at this time," adding that he was going out
askedn f
i mo n
whatleave
duty o f
reledfaenonstbrteohat
Beeston
landing-waiterunoat
rhyadaeafnytahesniirs.
invited
vraaewißmrtt
edhueedseerasnni
him
Beeston
inßefa
onvoiuwioneenxttashodts,
ouse, which adjoins the Custom-house,
repliedaNntidßeeston, t
sittingto,iill heyhtoi
sgvvp dideugti
public-house,
il i
together,
i nnacrgom:
htt
gone Beeston proposed dinner, and the three, Beeston,
Williams, and Booth, dined together in a room up stairs.
Beeston insisted on paying for the dinner. After dinner they
went down stairs into the room they had left before, when
Davies came in with a person named Jones. Booth went
out, and was going in the direction of South John-street
when Williams overtook him and said Beeston wanted him
at the Globe public-house, in Copperas-hill, and that he
(Williams) was not to part with him on any account.
Booth went to the Globe about four o'clock, but Beeston
was not there, and whilst he was waiting Williams in-
quired if he was a single man, adding, that he knew what
Mr. Beeston wanted to speak with him about : it was to
know what station he would be upon, and then he (wit_
barns) would pay duty upon five bags of coffee and get
out forty or fifty, as he (Booth) pleased. Williams also
said, that if he (Booth)
.was on a station where there were
he • sugar,
they might make £l,OOO a month, which,. said, would
goods paving heavy duties, such as coffee, tea, and
ton, and another person whose name he did not mention.
he and
be divided between four of them—himself, Booth, Bees_
IBstee:tson, with
Beeston, he said, had directed him to speak to Booth
be the defer_
it. Booth, in answer, said he could not do " the
thing" ; meet him
the next day, at the Black Bull public-house, in Kirk-
whereupon he desired that he would
d de. On the 18th and 19:h, however, Booth was absent
on leave : he returned on the 20th, and was forthwith or-
dered
Richards to
wereG r e eno 'ns a warehouse.dftuetryw ainr d ts h ed i
„,cOovnertehde t
warehouse,2o
another person,
dart Brocklehurst, came to the warehouse door, and
called " Booth, 1 want to see you." Booth replien, that
it was then past four o'clock, the usual hour of locking
up, bit he could be with him directly ; and the two d....
ferulants wait.d in the middle of the street till the
I clone; uo•
BPe,,ten and Booth then calked toge-
ther, Brocklehurst walking behind, when Beeston in-

quired if he had seen 'Williams since Monday. Booth
replied, " I have not ; but the subject on which I had
~ome conversation with him will not do." Beeson said,
" ell. Booth. you know best yourself; but Williams
made £3,000 by getting goods out in that way, which he
has melted : I know it can be done, and it will he a good
thing." Beeston then invited him into a public-house in
Oldhall-street ; and Brocklehurst went with them there.
It was there agreed, that, when Booth went upon duty at
Green's, be should meet Beeston at the Wagon and
Horses. Booth went there as appoint• d, and found Bees-
ton and Brocklehurst together, and tlea,y had some drink,
which Beeston paid for. A landing-water, named Wm.
Nia. was alio there. Beeston went out to try to find
Williams, but returned in five or ten minutes, saying, he
could not find him. Booth then said he must go, and
Beeston promised to meet him at his station the next day ;
hut he did not see any of the defendants till the 25th.

After si;ning off" at the Custom-house, in the after-
noon of that day, Booth and Richards went into Nuttall's
public-house, adjoining, where they had something to
drink, which Booth was in the act of paying for when
Williams came in, and insisted upon paying for the liquor
himself. As Booth was leaving, Williams called him back,
and said he had bought forty-four bags of foreign coffee,
and he wanted to know if they were sent to his station he
would let them go without paying duty. It appeared, that,
in the summer of 1843, Mr. Syers, merchant, of this town,
imported several thousand bags of coffee from La Guayra,
which were deposited in Drinkwater's bonding ware-
house, Tower-gardens. Of these, Mr. Syers sold
sixty-four bags to Messrs. Wren and Co., who again sold
forty• four to the defendant Williams, ten of which he
wished to remove, as part of the scheme, to Green's ware-
house, in Dundee-street. Williams had not been known
before to be in business by Messrs. Wren and Co. To
this question from Williams Booth replied, that he could
not then stay : whereupon Williams appointed to meet
him, near Nut tall's, at five o'clock the next day. During
this conversation Brocklehurst was standing at the op-
posite side of the street. On the 26th witness communi-
cated to Richards what had passed between him and
Beestou and Williams; and, in consequence, information
of all the circumstances was given, first, to Mr. Brown,
the superintending locker, and, subsequently, to Mr.
Bulteel, the acting surveyor, who gave certain directions
to Booth and Richards for the purpose of securing the
offenders. In pursuance of the directions they had re-
ceived, Booth and Richards stationed themselves in
South John-street near Nuttall's, where Williams had
proposed the meeting. Williams was there first, Brockle-
burst standing on the other side of the street. Booth
then told Williams that he could not do what was
wa tted without the knowledge of his partner, Richards,
to which Williams made no objection, and they went
into Nuttall's. Brocklehurst being still in the street, Wil-
liams went and brought him in. Brocklehurst then said to
Booth, " Are you aware that I come from Manchester ?"
Williams produced a pa per,which hesa id was a cl eliyery order.
He was going, he said, to pass a " removal sufferance"
for forty-tour bags of coffee, from Drinkwater's ware-
house, and he would get out ten bags the next day, and
give Booth and Richards £5 if they were got out without
payment of the duty, and would remove the remaining
thirty-four the day following. They were all to have a
share of the profits. Brocklehurst said he would pay the
officers well for any similar transaction ; and hoth he and
Williams stated, that it was Beeston who bad put them
up to it ; and that the pay of the officers was small, but
they might make a fortune in the course of a few months
by getting goods out of bond without paying duty. Booth
and Richards consented to do what was proposed. On
the 27th they were on duty at Green's, Mr. Bulteel being
stationed at the back of the office, so that he could hear,
and, if he choose, see, all that passed within. At half-
past three in the afternoon Brocklehurst came alone, and
said a " removal sufferance" could not be got out in time
to get a cart-follower, but the coffee would be removed
the next day. This took place in the office, in the
presence of Richards, and in the bearing of Mr. Bulteel ;
and, immediately after, Brocklehurst invited them to God-
frey's public-house. Richards went there first ; and when
be returned Booth stepped there and found Williams as well
at Brocklehurst. Williams said he could not get a re-
moval sufferance in time for a cast-follower, but he would
remove the coffee next day. They left together, Williams
going across he street whilst Brocklehurst and Booth
stood in conversation together at the top of Dundee-street.
During that time Mr. Bulsteel passed from the ware-
house, disguised by wearing spectacles, whereupon
Brocklehurst inquired who that gentleman was? After
that Williams and Brocklehurst joined, and they went
away together. On Friday, the 28th, Mr. Bulteel was
again concealed in the warehouse, as was another officer
named Brown. About half-past two in the afternoon
Brocklehurst came alone, and said, " the ten bags of
coffee are coming, and they'll be here in a few minutes ;
proposing, at the same time, to Booth and Richards to
take something to drink. They went to Godfrey's for
that purpose, Richards first and Booth afterwards ; and
directly after their return a cart came up with a cart-fol-
lower named Higgins, (since dead.) bringing the ten bags
of coffee. Williams came with the cart, and, in order to
deceive Higgins, said he would remove the coffee next
day. Higgins got his receipt from Richards for the
coffee, and then went away. Brocklehurst, at this time,
was standing at the top of the street, about twenty yards
from the warehouse. Williams then said he could only
find three sovereigns at that moment, but he would pay
the remainder the same night at Nuttall's, where he
would meet Booth and Richards along with Brockle-
burst, and the following day the remaining thirty-
four bags should be removed. Williams then placed
Three sovereigns upon the desk, and followed the
cart, which had gone away. The bags had never actually
been in the warehouse, because, after the signature of the
cart-follower's book, they were supposed to be in the cus-
tody of Booth and Richards. The cart having gone away
Booth went to the door and saw Brocklehurst at the end
of the street ; he joined him, and whilst they were together,
they saw Mr. Bulteel coining down Great Howard-street,
following the cart. Mr. Bulteel had no spectacles on,
and, on seeing him, Baocklehurst said, "That's the same
gentleman I saw here yesterday; he's a superior officer to
you; I should know him a quarter of a mile off; and if I
thought he was following the cart 1 would go and bring it
back." The cart was then going in the direction of Old-
hall-street, towards which Mr. Butted was going. The
three sovereigns were wrapped up in paper, on which
Booth and Richards placed their initials; and, in the
meantime, the cart was followed by Mr. Butted along
Oldhall-street, Chapel-street, Exchange-street East,
Dale-street, and North John-street, into South John-
street, where the coffee was about being deposited in Rig-
maiden's warehouse, in Cable-street, when the officers
stepped in and seized it.
Mr. Serjeant MURPHY addressed the jury in favour of
the defendant Brocklehurst, contending that he was alto-
gether innocent of any guilty concern in the transaction ;
that he was merely in Liverpool attending to his own busi-
ness, part of which was with Williams; and that he was
of unblemished character.

Mr. RAMSHAY, on the part of Williams, urged, that
the coffee had never been in the warehouse in Dundee-
street, and, consequently, the allegation in the indictment,
that Williams had conspired to obtain it from that ware-
house, could not be sustained. He contended, further,
that the evidence of Booth the chief witness, could not
be relied on, as, in the first instance, he was a participa-
tor, and next, that he had already received, and probably
expected, promotion, for the detection and conviction of
the other parties.
Mr. JAMES addressed the jury for Beeston in an ener-
getic speech, in which he strongly contended, that the evi-
dence against the defendant was too insufficient and trivial
to warant a conviction, especially when it was considered
h-rw carefully the case had been fostered and supported.
He had not yet been dismissed from his situation in the
customs; and the learned counsel besought the jury to
consider the fact that upon their verdict would depend
whether he was reinstated or not. His previous character
as an officer of long standing was freely admitted to have
been irreproachable on his cross-examination of the wit-
nesses for the crown.

Three witnesses were called for Brocklehurst, who
showed that he had dealings in Liverpool with Williams,
and that his character was good in all respects.
Mr. STARKIE having replied,
The JUDGE summed up at considerable length, remark-
ing, that the evidence against Beeston in the second count
of the indictment was very slight ; but he left it to the
jury to say whether the evidence brought the charge home
to him in the more general allegations of the first count.
The jury retired to consider their virdict ; and after an
absence of a quarter of an hour, they returned into court
with a verdict of guilty against Williams and Brockle-
hurst: Beeston not guilty.

ACTION OF DEBT.
Goszrzy ff. BIDDER.—This was a special jury case, in
which the plaintiff sought to recover trom the defendant
a sum of money, for the use and occupation of rooms and
furniture, for goods sold and delivered, and for money
lent. The defendant pleaded to the declaration, first, that
he was never indebted in the manner and form stated ;
and, secondly, that he had paid the demand. The plain-
tiff denied these pleas, and issue was joined.
Mr. Watson and Mr. H oggins conducted the plaintiff's
case ; Mr. Knowles and Mr. Seger that for the defendant.
The plaintiff is a railway contractor, and the defendant
is Samuel Parker Bidder, resident engineer of the Preston
and Wyre Railway and Dock Company. Money had been
advanced, it appeared, at various times in 1840 and 1841,
by the plaintiff to the defendant. during his residence at
Fleetwood, in sums of £lOO, £490. £l2O, £l5O, and sev-
eral smaller amounts ; in addition to which the defendant,
after his marriage, occupied a house of the plaintiff's, in
Queen's-terrace, Fleetwood, at the rent of £3O per an-
num. The court rose after the examination of the first
witness on the part of the plaintiff, and the remainder of
tulineThiriitneevrceeosstutiirgntagta.ido
jnouprrnoemdisaetdetigohbteov:celryoclk.ong and excessively