The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-09-03 00:00:00

THE QUEEN V. LOWE.

This was an action on the part of Mr. K. Tyrer, of this
town, against Mr. John Lowe, for an alleged libel, said
VI have been contained in certain placards published by
the defendant, Lowe.

Mr. Watson and Mr. James appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Wilkins for the defendant.

Mr. WATSON went briefly over the fat's of the case,
from which it appeared that the defendant had some inte-
rest in property in this town, in the year 1843, on which
the plaintiff had -advanced money=that various letters
bad.passed between them relative to it—and that after-
wards the defendant had a number of placards printed,
and posted on the walls of the town.. The placard was
headed " to capitalists." and contained several of the let-
ters that had 'passed between the parties, relative to the
abovenamed property; reference was also made to some
party who was charged with " fraud, forger✓, falsehood,
ere., which was printed in large characters to attract the
attention of parties reading, which it was alleged was in-
tended to apply to the plaintiff. The only object sought
by the plaintiff was (observed the learned Counsel) to
remove any impression that might have been made preju-
dicial to his character, and to prevent further annoyance
from the same party.
The defendant pleaded that the placard did not refer to
the plaintiff.
Some conversation then took place between the coun-
sel with the view of effecting an arrangement, Mr. Watson
requiring, on the part of the plaintiff, an admission that
the language referred to was not intended to libel Mr.
Tyrer, and an assurance that he would not publish any
placard, or annoy him in such a way for the future, either
by writing letters or in any other manner.
Mr. "WILKINS said, the defendant could not plead
guilty to the charge, but he would make the assurance
that had been asked by his learned friend.
Under these circumstances the assurance was entered
into, and a verdict of acquittal taken.
This was the last case for trial in the Crown Court, and
the learned Chief Baron left for London on Wednesday
morning.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-TUESDAT.
CRIM. CON.-WOOD V. MONK.

At the sitting of the Court this morning the hearing of
this case was resumed.

Four additional witnesses were called on the part of the
defendant ; and they proved generally that the plaintiff
bad frequently assaulted his wife. broken her teeth, and
blackened her eyes, and that he had upon one occasion
said he should put a halter round her neck, and sell her
at the " Obelisk," in Preston. Evidence was also given
to show that the plaintiff had made an attempt upon his
sister-in-law's chastity on two occasions, and that she was
obliged to get married to escape from under his roof. When
the examination of the fourth witness had been concluded,
Mr. KNOWLES, on the part of the plaintiff, intimated
his desire to withdraw a juror, as he said no good could
arise from any further discussion of such a case.

The JUDGE, who was of the same opinion, consented;
a juror was accordingly withdrawn, and the case was thus
brought to an abrupt termination, at ten o'clock.

WILLIAMSON V. PAGE.

In this case the plaintiff was William Williamson, and
the defendant William Page. The declaration set forth
that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the
sum of £46 for work and labour done, and money lent.
The defendant pleaded that, except as to £l5, he had
never_ promised to pay.
appeared for
Mr. Sergeant Murphy, and Mr. Robinson
d for the plaintiff; and Mr. Watson and Mr.
'Webster r:
for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff was a ship-owner at Bel-
fast, and the defendarnrt a gentleman who lives at Scarbo
„n-
-rough, and the ofa vessel called the Adventure ;
brought
and the action was.to recover a sum of £46,
money advanced by the plaintiff to Captain Allin, the
master of that vessel, the u
month4bof November last.
The ship had been on
a to
place for a Arirralr, and brought
home a cargo from that
Sims,n of Belfast.
of October,
She arrived at Belfast towards the latter ed
r and then the captain endeavoured to procure
for the ship. The plaintiff succeeded in vre a.
erl charter
charter for her, to convey a cargo of timber to Cardiff,a
to be used in the mines there. When the timber was on
board, and the vessel ready for sea, the captain obtained
£46 from the plaintiff to pay the necessary expenses at
the Belfast Ballast-office, and the cost of provisions' for
the voyage. The captain then drew a bill for the amount,
'which was transmitted to the defendant for acceptance;
and, after some delay, the defendant wrote back to the
plaintiff to cay that the captain had no authority to draw
bills, and that he. had no occasion to raise money, as he

had the amount of his freight in his hands; and from
that time to the present no settlement was made. The
defence was similar to that stated in the letter written to
the plaintiff—namely, that the captain had no authority
to draw bills, and had no occasion to borrow money at
Belfast.

A. verdict was returned for the plaintiff for £25.
DICKSON V. WYNNE.

In this case the coach-proprietor and inn-
keeper in Yorkshire, sought to recover a sum of £46 from
the defendant, who was another coach-proprietor and inn-
keeper, at Ashton-under-Lyne, being the amount of cer-
tain disputed accounts between the parties for running a
coa h called the Tantivy, between Manchester and Shef-
field. After the case had been opened by Mr. Baines, a
verdict was taken for the plaintiff, by consent, subject to
a reference.

WILLOCK V. GREEN.

In this case the plaintiff was Richard Willock, and the
defendant William Green the younger. The declaration
was for an assault, to which the defendant pleaded not
guilty.
Mr. Roebuck and Mr. Cardwell appeared for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. Martin for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff was an old man in humble
circumstances, a drover of cattle, residing at Skipton, in
Yorkshire, and in the employment of Mr. Slingshy, of
Moston-hall, in this county. Mr. Slingsby and the de-
fendant were cattle-breeders, and in the habit of exhibit-
ing cattle at agricultural exhibitions. In the month of
October last there was a cattle show at Tuttington, at
which the defendant happened to be the victor, and after
the show was over he repaired to an inn at Fishpool,
where the plaintiff was stopping at the time. The plain-
tiff had been the whole day in the company of a man
named Windle, and was perfectly sober, and in a most
unlikely state to cause offence. Some conversation then
took place between the plaintiff and the defendant's fa-
ther, which ended in a blow being inflicted by the former;
but after an apology had been given, and matters satis-
factorily arranged, the defendant, who was a young man,
rushed into the room, seized a candlestick which was
standing on the table, and threw it at the plaintiff, thereby
inflicting a severe wound upon his mouth, knocking out
two or three .of his teeth, and preventing him, by reason
of the haemorrhage, from going to sleep. The next
morning the defendant appeared to feel that he had in-
flicted an unmerited injury, and accordingly he said he
was exceedingly sorry for what he had done, and that be
was willing to pay for the damage. This offer, however,
had never been fulfilled ; and the jury had to consider
what was a fair and reasonable amount of damages for
such an assault, inflicted as that had been by a young and
wealthy man upon an old person in indigent circum-
stances.

Mr. MARTIN, for the defence, contended that mild and
temperate conduct was not to be expected from cattle-
drivers, they being generally rough, coarse fellows, who
were willing to give and receive injuries in a blunt man-
ner.

The JUDGE said that the learned counsel's argument
reminded him of the well-known line—" He that drives
fat oxen should himself be fat ; " and he thought in the
present case tie line might be rendered—" He that drives
tame oxen should himself be tame." (Laughter.)
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff—damages .£lO.