The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-01-27 00:00:00

LO-V,DOLIi LAW REPORT.

PRIME OAKUM FOR SALE.
TO MBRCHANTS, SHIP BUILDERS, SHIP CHAND-
LERS, AND oTtiERs,,
riil-11.1 GUARDIANS of the POOR of lymouth, have for
1 Sale several Tons of Prime OA UM manufactured.
from Junk purchased at H. M. Plymou Dock Yard, at the
reduced price of EIGHTEEN POUNDS r Ton, with an allow-
ance of £5 per cent. discount on th purchaser taking five
tons.
Retail price, for less than a (Fluter of a ton, at 19s. per cwt.
• W. B. DOLLING,
• Governor of the Corporatlon of Guardians.
Parochial-office, Plymouth, Jan. 24, 1835/

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING
KNOWLEDG.
ryiHE ANNUAL MEETING of IL LIVERPOOL DlS-
nucT COMMITTEE of the" SOCIETY for PRo--
MOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, will be held on
Tuunsoity next, the 29th instant, at One o'clock, M the BLux
CoAT. IlosetTAL. J. B. MONK, Secretaries.
WM. HES K ET ,

LIVERPOOL EXCHA GE.
IPROPRIETORS of the IV ERPOOL EX-
-11 CHANGE will be paid a DIVID .ND of Four Pounds
Ten Shillings on their respective Sh es, for the year 1831,
upon applying to Mr. JOHN Suni.ow, the Cashier, upon and
after MONDAY next, the 2,1 of Febru y; and also the further
KIM of Thre,,.. Guineas for eacb Share, in lieu of the right of
Nomination to the Public Room fir the present year, provided
the same be demanded on or before the 24th day of December
next. • . •
ProprietOrs should be prepared to produce their Certificates,
if required, to Mr. Sudlow ; and personal representatives of de-
ceased Proprietors, Trtistees, and others, who have not already
obtained Certificates. will be required to produce the wills or
instrument 4 under which: they claim, to Messrs. CaasoN and
C nooK Solicitors, 38. Castle-street.
By order of the Proprietors, at their General Meeting, held
the tlfith day of Janiiary, 1835.
WILLIAM FOSTER, Secretary.

TO.THE PUBLIC.
THE MASTER COACH-MAKERS of this Town, hay-
ing seen in the .S'tondard, and Mercury, of this day, an
Advertisement from the Journeymen, in reply to their address
to the Public, relative to the differences now existing between
them, are sorry to say that it is very contrary to truth. In an-
swer to their first assertion, that their advance was obtained
without any threat, we can only say that one of the Firms, early
in last spring, received notice from all their workmen, that unless
each had an advauce of from two shillings to eight shillings per
week, to commence on the following Saturday, on that day
they would 'leave their. Work,, to prevent which their demand
was complied with.—Afterwards, every Masttir, even the indi-
vidual alluded to, had the same demand mad upon bins. They
acemnpanied their dams 4sti to that individu 1 with the threat
that unless complied with, be should not h; -e a man to work
for him during the next twelve months ; , ,however long he
resisted their- demand, he should be cn shed to pay each
man his full wages the same as if at nor .—St l'or the
truth of their assertion, that there was not sy threat upon their
part.
Secondly, we never objected to their Club, except when made
the instrument of dictation, which is evident from an order re-
ceived by one of the Liverpool Firms, stating that unless they
discharged a man, who was not a member, they would all turn
out.. This demand not being complied with, they put their
threat into execution, and every Man left tl-e employ.
We likewise affirm, that there are never one-third of the
Journeymen Coachmakers out of employ, even during the win-
ter months; and we believe we are correct in stating, that when
out of employ, that Society never affords them weekly relief.
Thirdly, in reference to the Advertisement for Five Hundred
Workmen,—the ,Masters in Manchester employ nearly all their
men by the week, and who have, and will now give a good
workman Two Pounds per week. In this town it is customary
for men ot ability to work by the piece, by which they are en-
abled to obtain from two to five pounds per week. This com-
pletely refutes their charge, that the Masters wish to mislead
the public as to their wages.
In conclusion, the Journeymen would have no objection to sign
the declaration required of them, provided their Society had no
oilier object than that of relieving their unemployed members,
supporting their sick, and burying their dead, to which it is
impossible any nester would object; but it is well known, and
can he easily proved, that it-exists for very different purposes.
Liverpool, 231 Jun,, 83.5,

l'lO.llK UAA II al Iflilt all La. ----- _ y -
.
RCHANTS, SHIP BUILDERS, SHIP CHAND- ' non eget
LESS, AND oTHERsi • COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, WESTAIINSTEn, JAN. 22. withlinti
GUARDIANS of the POOR of .Iyalouth,- have for 1.111E.1...-CHALWERS e. - BYRNE AND ANOrnEn• della), le
le several Tons of Prime OA UM manufactured. Mr. Stan-utters appeared on behalf of Mr. Peter Charles Chel-
nominal
atovmeidniaelt
nit purchased at H. M. Plymon Dock Yard, at the 1 mers, the plaintiff in this case, and stated that it was au actiontttb of,
eti_s
t_
price of EIGHTEEN Pourcns r Ton, with an allow- by him to recover from. the defendants, the proprietor and
II
nivilri.
jlt
£5 per cent. discount on th purchaser taking five usher of the Morning Pot newspaper, damages fur a libel p m
the.publi
ration tl
him which appeared id that paper on the 28th ofJanuary, 1V33.
l price, for less than a quarter of a ton, at 19s. per cwt. 'The circumstances out of which the publication chaigea
las Ir-
. . • W. B. DOLIeING, beilous arose were as follows ;-Theemlaiutiff, Mr. Cha titers, 'hers," a
• Governor of the Corporation of Guardians. had been for a considerable time previous to that at which the where a
of the ps
flial-gffice, Plymouth, Jan. 24, 18357 • events giving rise to the
_present proceedings occurred a. large
--- .
GIETIc' FOR PROMOTING lIRISTIAN dealer in provisions and shipping stores, and had resided
asin nuaeivneisrttetir(
Lower Thames-street, where also lie had carried on business . . ,
KNOWLEDG . - agent foie Mr. Collier!, a miller .in Gueros6y. Some time he-
°l virtu,
ANNUAL MEETING of t LIVERPOOL DIS- fore May, 1.832, he had aansmitted to the latter gentleman ine twhas
stuv
ucT COMMITTEE of th SOCIETY for PRO' the course of business a bill of exchange purporting to
hom th
iG CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, will be held on acceptance of a Captain Whiteman Freeman,. whom he the
Il! toe
.cfl:k r t 1
,AY next, the 29th instant, at One o'clock, at the BLUE Chalmers) had supplied with biscuit. This bill had been duly
ioseurst.. J. B. MONK, Secretaries. endorsed to Mr. Cehieu, but when it became due Captain Free- titunrit s:
WM.HESK ET II , , . . ,
man was not in the country and the result was, that on the latter
- being applied to for payment, he asserted that . his name had in
Charles
LIVERPOOL EXCHA GE. .
been forged in the acceptance to the bill, and it was insinuated
~
PROPRIETORS of the IV ERPOOL i EX- that Mr. Chalmers had forwarded the bill to Mr. Cohieu know- I' ree I t
IANGE will he paid a DIVID .N I) of Four Pounds e_ two had,
ing it to be a forgery. Mr. Chalmers- immediately became d
,lungs on their respective Sh es, for the year 1831, sheets to have the charge investigated, and appeared at the The
mlying to Mr.. Tonie &meow, the Cashier, upon and
Mansion-house accordingly, when the result of the examination, The
Oand also the further NDAY next, the 2d of Febru y• . , me t
. '
to his great astonishment, was, that he was held to bail-to ap- a net , t.L
Three Guineas for each Share, in lieu of the right of pear and take his trial for forgery at the ensuing May sessions identity
ition to the Public Room fir the present year, provided (153`2) On the• appointed day lie was put on his trial, the re-
of the o
to be demanded on or before the '24th day of December eked
j
suit of which was, that at is late hour of the night the jury came
rieters should be prepared to produce their Certificates, to the conclusion, that he was guilty of the charge, by finding
ita
verdict to thatSffect against him. His client, Mr. Chalmers,
_r ,
red, to Mr. Sudlow ; and personal representatives of de- shortly after his conviction, made an application to the Secre-
...‘,m e i
Proprietors, Trustees, and others, who have not already
d Certifieates. will be required to ],reduce the wills or tart' of State on the merits of his case, ,and the result of this
vittleni,ehl/11
proceeding was, that on the 12th of Jaeuary,lB33, he received
cents under which: they claim, to Messrs. emotes and iis Majesty's free pardon, a great part of the intermediate time es--
se Solicitors, 38. Castle-street. having been occupied by the jedges in the consideration of cer- eee
rder of the Proprietors, at their General Meeting, held lain legal objections•to the indictment which had been referred
h day of January, 11335.
. ,to them by the recorder. Upon all those objections tit! judges
WILLIAM FOSTER, Secretary. '
had decided against Mr. Chalmers, and in the mean time also
that very salutary measure fur the abolition of the punishment
TO.THE PUBLIC. • of death, as attaching to the crime of forgery, had been passed,
E MASTER COACH-MAKERS of this Town, hay- so that the pardon granted in January, 1833, could not have .
es seen in the S'tatulard, and Mercury. of this day, an been granted on the ground of technical informality, uor
isement from the Journeymen, in reply to their address from a motive of mercy on the part of the crown. Very _
Public, relative to the differences now existing between shortly, however, after the granting -of this pardon. he be- C
are sorry to say that it is very contrary to truth. In an- came an object of attack by that portion of the public press The
o their first assertion, that their advance was obtained which, now flourishing under the smile of authority, was
t any threat, we can only say that one of the Firms, early notwii
then violently and. virulently Opposed to the government.
spring, received notice from all their workmen, that unless On the '2Bth January, 1833, there appeared in the Morning Post, cipal a
lad au advance of from two shillings to eight shillings per a publication which he (Mr. Stammers) would venture to say
of Id 1
to commence on the following Saturday, on that day was one of the.mest gross, false, uud atrocious libels ever fabri-
multi 'leave their. Work,, to prevent -which their demand cited by even the most degraded portion of the press. The ar- and 0
1 inp;k4l with.-Afterwards, every Maseir, even the lisei- tide prirpoeted to be takurre from the Alen Bull newspaper, and .ea ,
abutted to, had the same demand mad upon him. They was as follows ;-" Motives for the Exercise of the Royal Cle- fur '.'
panted their demised to that individu 1 with the threat inencye-Verily the Whigs select choice subjects for the exer- and B
iniess complied with, he should not Fe -e a man to work rose of his Majesty's grace. A. few weeks since the Secretary.
n during the next twelve months ; 1 , ,however long Ike of State respited two men who had been found guilty of mar-
.d their demand, he should be cn elled to pav each der under circumstances of peculiar atrocity, and it was then
his full wages the same as if at wor .-Se much tor the asserted that they had been respiled to court the favour of the Tht
if their assertion, that there was not ty threat upon their mobocracy of Lambeth, for which borough Lord Palmerston
had sonic . intention of offering fiimself. In The Timer of Sa- eat adi
ondly, we never objected to their Club, except when made turday ive read the following.:-' (From a Correspondent.)- good i
strument of dictation, which is evident from an order re- Mr. Chaliners, who was convicted of forgery at the. May ses- , ,
Iby one of the Liverpool Firms, stating that unless they sions at the Old Bailey, has received a free pardon. The case *3" Pe
treed a man, who was not a member, they would all turn has been reserved by the Court over !several sessions for the and fc
This demand not being complied with, they put their opinion of the Judges on certain points of law, but they ulti- /lit
: into execution, and every Man left the employ. • utately decided against him, and he received sentence of trans-
! likewise affirm, that there are never one-third of the portation for life.- The case then became fit to represent to the fine is
keytnen Coaehmakers out of employ, even during the win- Secretary of Stale on the merits, and the result of it. is, that he
cloths; and we believe we are correct in stating, that when has received a pardon under the Great Seal, discharging him obtair
'employ, that Society ue"er affords them weekly relief. from the consequences of the verdict, and restoring him to the in Ba
irdly, in reference to the Advertisement for Five hundred enjoyment of all his rights and privileges.' in the former case
cmen,-,the Masters in Manchester employ nearly all their the men were of such bad character that the officers had taken
by the week, and who have, and will now give a good there up ou suspition. la this case we have reason to know E
o„___
man Two Pounds per week. In this town it is customary that the crime. of forgery is not new to Mr. yree Pardon ""';'
Irish
,en et ability to work by the piece, by which they are en- Patrick Chalmers, either in respect of this or a former instance Do..
ito obtain km two to five pounds per week. ']'his corn- where he was similarly charged. We think we can offer some Do.
ly refutes their charge, that the Masters wish to mislead reasons for this act of the Ministers. Mr. Free Pardon Pa- Buse
üblic as to their wages. trick Chalmers was some timersprevious to this accusation an Cam
conclusion, the Journeymen would have no objection to sign eminent mob header in a small way. • He called a public meet- Ofrrisssi
,eclaration required of them, provided their Society had no ing in Smithfield, and headed a deputation to the Lord Mayor a
: eARLS
• object than that of relieving their unemployed members, requesting him to call a meeting to petition for the abolition of
Irish
urting their sick, and burying their dead, to whirls it is ow punishment of death for forgery. Ile took the chair at the •
ssible any Meister would object; but it is well known, and Rotunda. and is or was the bosom friend of that much perse-
4e easily proved, that itexists for very different purposes. cuted and respectable publisher of treason, Mr Iletherin,gton.
verpool, 231 Jan., 183.5. These are•convinciug reasons why he has been deemed a fit Water
' - subject to whom to extend the mercy of the Sovereign; but if Colerm
- these should fail to convince, we have yne still which must be Carlo,
o .
4 , '.=.. Ig 1§ . @S unanswerable. The political unions met a few weeks since to I,lllltl
petition for his pardon, and he is pardoned accordingly." This Belfas
4 ert . Dern
a
e o , es. •-* #. was
,the pub.ication complained of-a publication which at- co,
2 ‘; '.g ___.......-----7-.. tempted to fix on the plaintiff in the first place a stigma, which,
a o Ece-e. fruits the circuutstance of his trial and, 'subsequent pardon, was
g ..el 75 ,i A .
-ts 2' co t
..-- • one peculiarly 'calculated to injure him, and which also held
him up as a demagogue, a mere mob leader, a sort of second _
a es - se
_e
a te -.. A
es Jack Cade, and as being leagued with a set of wretched men
z q who were.aexustorned to meet at the Iloturida to practise the
H
- G• 3
';'.
~
.!9L
.11 1',.1...-4A.a§a g 3 .)aC: nlOSt revolting scenes, and even to deny their God, He (Mr. Wire
2 , trl ~._, lun ~.-D ,Y) . t-- g Stammers) could not conceive any thine more likely to injure Ham
e c. 3 bc. G cr, 6,., co - his client thief such a publication as this.' He hoped his learned oars
El 2 ---------- friend (Mr. Adolphus). who appeared as counsel for the defend- Fein
z a;
o ant, would nut attempt to justify such a publication on the score Do..
U ;4 . ces • ..... .re . _
' ''
e*4 13-7-lo4g N ."
. 'of the necessity of preserving the -liberty of the press. Not all 3,,,__el'.
.a 5 I eessrre se csiQ 4 the talent audeeloqueuce which that learned gentleman had in 'NM!
...9" • •-•-, es se es
ifs ce •
es • former times possessed, but which he (Mr. Stammers) must be flats
to i
_.,
1 t-:
1 . k 4. , allowed to add were already. vim the wane, would, he was satin-satin-rens
tied, succeed ,in inducing the jury so to misconceive the true lire
'..-
•-• meaning of the phrase "liberty of the press." It was incon- Snxi
.5 ir,
c.) testable that the liberty of the press ought to be preserved alike I,?DP:
from the freaks of a despot, or the violent fury of a democracy. Le_ .
° 1 --0.00 , g ro-,1--
.. -, -
c, „-...., but it was equally to be guarded from becoming the instrument
et Ce - 7 . ,- - ..,,,
.
I. ... 8 -i-
-of private calumny. It would not be enough for the defendant
Ph 41).
_
-st hut had been copied by him from the John Bull, for what would .
1 1 ~,,,,...,004 -,,,z•-• Cli
... Q.,.....-,, ..,-, he said of the man who should excuse 'himself for having poi- 1n 1
... . 6 ce ce ea. CD
sowed his friend by saying he had bought the poison at another
1,1 s•m .2•.'„ e• Pe, I-; e.."
...ed.-D-
-ee te ..) ee man's laboratory 1 Ihe basest villain never would give the •
ti ' e - first blow, that was always given by the boldest; and it would
ec .-e) es r.
...__...,,,i....„.„4_,. , -r- be no excuse for time Morning Post to-day to stand up and say ~,T,
a ..-• • -- so .-ereessßess
..„, •
x 13 " u°- that its tory friend the John Bull had given the first stab, and 'a's,
... e -. laa oe-sNeri _ 2
4 4 that it had -merely repeated -the blow idler all time injury had g
= ca. . -. been inflicted, The learned counsel concluded a very long ad- 1
a ee -ea. se S dress by expressing a hope that the jury would relieve the plain-
a - 4 .-t tiff from a state worse to him than that of the expatriated bond T
e • a 5 s - slave in Australia, which virtually cut him off from all honour- No.
re
- -•-• - as
z a ~ .=
OD • able intercourse with the world,• by giving such a verdict as
- -a
o a-
. 3 • d
.2 • •.
0,,,,,.,., would clear his character from these foul imputations, with the
re 0 ' .4. C.,, OD 0') •
U. g rsi 4g: c..- Ys -•
-- or addition of such a sum in damages as they might think the case
required. , . II
..d a . . - 4:4
a F. ..-. ca els Mr. George Hall was then called, and stated, that in the early of I
a ----------. part of the year 1832, he knew the plaintiff as an extensive deg- Up,
z a
Ls a ler and biscuit merchant, resident in Lower Thames-street. pCel
ri :€1 C. 2 .2
P 41A174ga-P (d.- ~
In his cross-examination by. Mr. Adolphus, it appeared that Mr
.
O re the plaintiff had already received £3O from the John Bull news- 11
o 71 1 ?.0 4 I 4--rj.2:1:1; .
L.o _ -_____:____--_---L-----. paper, in consequence of an action brought against that journal age
C,' I'. in respect of the same libel. On the trial of Mi. Chalmers at ma
O _ o co ce re
Cr) i:"3 Cti2 2i.11340 ;II 1.--. C 4
a • Ci I i.:;Gi-z...5.=-0)...c,..r,.. co_ --. the Old Bailey, he was heard for a considerable time, and made bee
M ~.. --e-.-- rese•-t •-•
1 oes so e 4 ce ce . use in his defence of many pipers. Ile did not call any wit- by
messes to facts, but .did-as to character. The case was fully gone of
H
into. The witness had not heard front Mr. Chalmers that he alt,
..
• , e
< • . cll
L'' 6 • the trial of that against ate John Bull. 1
ci.'
.11 - • Henry
enry Elliott proved that on one .Sunday evening about two wit
-1 years ago he was present at the Rotunda, when the Rev. Robert of ,
CD
....... .
..e. r.ay 'I mr was exciting ridicule towards passages of the Scriptures I
t
o se.
_ -o , 1 which he was reedites. The Rotunda, however, had, in the re- jus
is
0
c., - • . ~, .. collection of the witness, been used for many unexceptionable
;)
- 0 - e.-°-•
•• • -a. •-aose- ou purposes. a t
e• • •.-• e • ... a..
o *e.,' •;,1 se ~ ,o , se re The paper containing the alleged libel as well as the pardon no-
-1 e L' ee=taeee et e •• F' y.?-1 were then put in, and completed the plaintiff's case. his
. C 1.• t ' 7; Z Z
.... CI :ease'ae Cm as se 7-: se =7.sese se st se: Mr. Adolphus (with whom was Mr. Manse') addressed the cot
~ jury for the defence. Allusion had been made to his infirmities,
!.), "'.• .esece ies te st es re el ,o and although he had never been conscious of possessing those' dis
%.".. a
, w0,......114.0000tnit73 CD powers which had been attributed to him by his learned friend, he
.., _
:P. '7' • ret P.. 1 0.....
CA .. he yet felt it not the most pleasant thing to be retninned or those it"
-.es pt., ce, -v,•-uvopAiur"3-, s, infirmities, as the consequences-of' his inability were likely to "i
ii..o '5
"-.
4t-S. co re ite es m- fall on his client. Ile was e - inly- in the situation of the to
et -.
ee' A I r 5 06-4 ,s
- Archbishop of Grenada, who co never find that his sermons
___
were the worse for his epoplexge 11 who still thought them
o e•
se , e I •oose-urese•-•00a) m °-":"'• patterns of eloquence, notwithstanding that they itivarialely g. r
sent his congregators to sleep. With respect to the action it- be
g .9
se-0
, 775, cm' es sa =aeer se es, 03 .1:,...., self, he was at a loss to conceive fur what it had been brought.
a?s Se ~,,,, _.,
e ti. a co--...,,-.....---, F.). ,-,'x'P According to the statement made by the plaintiff's, own couusel, re
-F
Ocst 74 e' 1.3 Tau"'
`.'s 4 sea ere he (the plaintiff) had been tried and convicted of forgery,. and
had afterwards •received his Majesty's free pardon, on a case
...>4 • se , se co ...s .re
be ' - . being submitted to the Secretary of State; and it had also been,
.S .A
~.': .... '
p. . •
, .
• ::
12 ~e,:.e.o= entire innocence could have caused the grunt of filet pardon. %v
The paragraphs-for it was no more than an obscure paragraph
eke:,
..C) C*4 ,1."3 Cf:: VD C,3
a 2 lam the Morning Post, was, in fact, little more than a recapitula- el
• si ,;••,l non of all those facts now stated by the learned counsel, and all
es. .-
1--;'-2 ce es _--- those statements which were added were certainly not of a na-
I:: • • titre to sustain au action for libel. They haul been told that the
t.:', 9 ts. :.., I, .6c<1.1..-s.cio= 6 z-' .
-i., ...= ,:, ,-- portion of the press to which the Mom ;zing Post belouged had at
...1" .5 e ers css,-,cse eico 'ee A= the time of the appearance of this libel been desirous of attack- p
4.: . •-•, . ~
..7-: = 2 g ing the ro) al rerogatire. He (Mr. Adolphus) had always read c
Ma; ae . • I , o
___
.. and thought that the writer wet e a very differs kit sort of persons, b
C . and that they were men who were disposed to inaintaiti the pre- d
oes le, ee,...
P •-.....c.,c00.),?„ - , •
.1
rogative to the utmost, and to dispute any man's right tu ques- ti
A Pies, tion its exercise. The alleged libel itself contained several f
.11 a ."' 2 7z-c6"-o-952-Tgas'''.
. ~, ~..... ~.. charges, all of which were relied on as being libellous, hut he (
C.... 74 be a 6 .0 -.sr, (Mr. Adolphus) really could not see in what respect they could t
..e.) e .E. - . .„
._______.
:-..,.. be shown to be eerie It was stated in the publication that the r
a ••• o ,'5.,...,--: \ F, -rl
........ ~,,,o _st-seteire.„.7., es-, .74 e•:,, plaintiff had been an " eminent mob leader in a small way"- I
'ed e' se - an imputation which, in the present time, by no weans carried t
'..t a . e., e. 1.1 uz cr,u.., :i -& .-....
- . ,-.., . with it the contumely which at one time attached to the charac- !
cm se
z: 2! ~ :4:4 ter of mob leader. It had latterly been the custom for men of 1
- ...z . g-rj,c7l-"'. ---- rank and itiflueuce to hold eueetinge of the people, and to ad- i
~ . . 0 u., es o 1, - - N
c-0V • eel Z si3O-7-.7.4uz.1f)"" dress them on political affairs at taverns, pur'p'le dinners, and 1
,S = tej -a. .4 ' ..fl• .-., . --- - . e1...1/44....,,z,,A was LOW-4W libel to impute such conduct to
these person. Why, then, should it be at libel on a gentleman
7 '-' .=.9-,3 , I zi'.4e-4,,SZ,TiAg3
.--.' .-% ''-'. a a ,in the situation of the plaintiff to say that he bad beets concerned
e 72 '.- est, o 1 in proceedings for which there were now so mane illustrious
i., ~.. us
~,,,..j . - - r :
• C 0 r.,-, ki, = .1.
..t :..0 .t.. g ,-..., -0 examples? Agitate! agitate! agitate! had been of late adopted
::•,-, ...it.:,,-4 2. 1 ....gw-.2
.;
....; - , .; v:.. C'D . as the maxim and practice of all parties. The supposed libel
then went oil to state, that Mr. Chalmers had called wpublic
.1-... -.:-7-3 ::-._..2 ,-,.__j ,'• meeting in Smithfield. Had-there been any evidence in denial
,se e's st ce r-- es _Arises.. re !el A, 2:2.. s! . of this statement? and if it had been denied, did it amount to a
s- E' . S 4---,;,;,4,......, .th,30.0... CD libel to say that a man had held ameeting in Smithfield ? Then
E .to cl cf
....7 ---,,,,,ie it was further stated in the alleged libel that he had. headed a
..' af, es. es 251,4 esi z 8 8
c, 0 ~. .1; -, 0) ---... deputation to the Lord Mayor requesting bile to hold a meet-
e tea be • ..4. ing to petition fur the abolition of the punishment of death for
. o!. forgery. Was. it a disgraee to as man that he had advocated the
144" 1 .0., -F., . - same cause in support. of which the majority of the learning and
g •-' "--"''l"9.Nl'-t? 7445 =2 g talent of the legmslature had been arrayed, and which had been
ese . 52 "i„l•'e 7.,•••,.-.; „.., y, „rs .......-, -r..
~. 2 personal!) aided by Sir Samuel Readily? If it was not this-
as case so _ es as res -1 -k es oer 064 §
=Lt 30 graceful, what was there libellous iu the imputation? As to
..2,1). 'V, - 4 .i.: V' P-4.
those parts of, the alleged libel which related to the person
.e. - 0
,&-• il. :, -• named Hetherington,. and to the fact of the political unions
'':-;
= 1. ----,------.
having petitioned in favour of Mr. Chalmers, he (Mr. Adel-.
' t; e
e ?es, e • •
a a =-1 ' •V' -- 7 5
. .= - spect to the charge that the plaintiff had takett the chair at the
sa' 0 bn s- e) • .
-
-71 Rotunda, he (Mr. Adolphus) did not see that any proof had
C; tea u4_
been offered that it was a libellous imputation on a man that he
'e• ra ,; Ce
.-.:Gag •
es had done that, for although it did appear that on one particular
.
• -•-• se -.- 0
...;:c :4.0 C
V 1) .. the plaintiff had been in no way connected with a ; but it hail,
o
_ se s'a -se. •-• 9 lon the other hand, appeared that the place called the Rotunda
e, .•... ....
oit 66 -CS. • •• • • :i.'• .'" . ''' 0 C.)
a Z e-i . r.
a go :I, • • , • o.' 8 ...• it.
. ~ ;to , c 3 c,. ...e; , had been used indiscriminately for different descriptions of ex-
-0 • ' T. s.: -i.' a rs' e.= e ' 4•-: c'' 9 a.- hibitions and purposes, the greater part of which might have
.0 um, ~,- ...sie 'sl n n ~ = 7., 0,--9 es" Ti 07-... g been very innocent. The whole case of the plaintiff, then,
E••••• P g=tDc...-.4;,...r..z".4,1-'=Ogi amounted to nothing; and yet it was soug,ht, by means of an
ee address to the prejudices of a jury, to iuduce them to find the
matter in the publication oitfittohtehtt!,:tfiett uktleaLitittf
tlhilemeilloarnet
ilia) rititileatsole
e
The manuscript memoirs of the Duchess of Pesti! are stated
in a Freuch paper to have been sold iu London fur £3OOO ,
t i 'nose of putting money
,clearing of character could not he the only object Of this ac-
. sterling. 1 tine was evident, for the plaintiff had, alrea.dv had an opportu-
The poor inhabitants on the estates of Sir T. D. Acland, • nity of doing so in the action against the John nos. The only
Bart., art the parishes of Seaworthy and Lai:khan), have lately • offence (if offence it could be called) of this eleferelant had
experienced the kind attention and benevolence of that philan- been the copying from time last-meutioned pumper the paragraph
. thropic gentleman, which, with benefactions from other estima- in question. There had been no corroboration of it-um at-
hie persons, has, indeed, made their Christmas a happy and a tempt to give it a greater degree of importance, no desire to
merry one. To upwards of 226 families, consisting of about 7(,`0 add to add to its effect by colouring; beyond that, the Morning
persons, a sufficient qualities of beef was distributed for their Post had been wholly innocent of all intention to injure the
Christmas dinners,' The Selwortbv Sunday School children, plaintiff. There was no proof that any person had iu cense-
amounting to about 8.), were regaled with a dinner of roast beef quence of this publication ceased to respect the plaintiff, or that
and plum pudding, at which Lady Acland and amiable farinlY he had suffered from it in his trade or business; and tier any-
kindly waited ems their little guests.-Taunton Courier. -thiucr that was in evidence to the contrary there to-day,
We hear that Sir Chalks Rowley is expected to be member Mr:Chalmers might be now as much looked up to as he had
fok-Portiniumh after all, it being aseertamed that a scrutiny been before the commencement of the origival proceedings
will strike off atufficiouteiumber of bad votes to give a majority against ben, A jury was mot called upon by the law to sanction
in his favour.-Theeeton Gusette. any proceeding by which, that law could be made the instrumeu

- ,
of irppreision by any man who might threaten to bring an ac- •
lion against another unless he were paid a sum of money to
withlinti it. - Upon all these grounds, he (Mr. Adolphus) confi-
dently left his ease to the jury, satisfied that even if they gave
a verdict at all against the plaintiff. the • woillel give him only
nominal dam !gm and thus frustrate the main object of actions
of, t his description.
Mr. Justice Gaselee in summing up observed to the jury that
the publication charged as libellous contained a distinct elle, •
gation that "the' crime of fOrgery was not new to Mr. Chal-
mers," a sort of statement which was by no means warrantable
where a party had received a free pardon. The general object
of the publication, hoWever, appeared to he more to abuse the
Ministers than to attack the character of the plaintiff; but,
nevertheless, that general object did not warrant the defendant
in libelling the plaintiff, supposing that the jury were of opinion
that the charges amounted to a libel. The question for the jury
was simply whether or not those charges did amount to such
libel. If they thought that they did, then their verdict would
be fur the plaintiff, with such_dainto ores as they considered a sttf-
licient compensation.
Mr Adolphus reminded the learned judge of an informality
in the proceedings. The name of th, plaintiff was Peter.
Charles Chalmers, whereas the alleged libel referred to a Mr.
Free Nrdon Patrick Chalmers. Nu connexion between the
two had been established.

The learned Judge thought that, looking at the, circum-
stance of the plaintiff having been tried and convicted, .and
afterwards pardoned, there could not be much doubt as to the
identity of the twtinatues. His Lordship took a note, however,
of the objection.
The jury then consulted for a short time, and returned a ver-
dict for-the plaintiff—Damages, one farthing, having previousl
asked whether such a verdict would carry costs.
Mr. Adolphus inquired whether the learned Judge would cer-
tify, hut his Lordship said that he did not consider it a case in
which ho ought to certify.

SECOND EDITION.

Standard Office, Three o'Clock.

LIVERPOOL MARKETS.

CORN EXCHANGE.-MONDAY, JAN. 26, 1835.

The supplies have again been moderate from Ireland,
notwithstanding the Wheat trade -has been dull, the prin-
cipal sales being made to the town millers, at a decline
of Id per bushel.—There has been little passing in Oats
and Oatmeal, apclpo alteration in the value or demand
fur Flour.—Good Malting Barley has been In deland
and Beans were Is per quarter dearer.

TUKSDAY, TwO O'CLOCK.

There was a dull sale for Wheat at this day's market,
at a decline of Id per bushel.—Oats and Oatmeal were in
good demrnd at ld per bushel advance on the former, and
3d per load on the latter. Flour was extremely dull,
and for some qualities lower prices submitted to.
The imports of Butter are 4,178 tirkins, the stock of
fine is small, and for that quality full market rates are
obtained, while inferior is dull and lower.—No alteration
in Bacon, Hams, or Lard.

PRICES.

s d lIBBNs, imp. mea. 8 d e d
511 Irish.... . . 34 0 37 . 0
6 6 FLous,,ty 280 lbs
510 Eng.Sc Irishsdp 31 0.. 33' 0
Ato Da.. Imes 3O 0 34' 0
7 2 Do. leconlls
Do. thirds l5 0.. 18. 0
3 0 MEAL, tr 240 lbs 0 0.. '0 0
Do. new
BRAN, clr2llbS 1 1.. 1' 2