The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-22 00:00:00

SMITH AND OTHERS D. TOMLIN.

An undefended action on a bill of exchange. Verdict
for the plaintiff for £5l. •

WHITEHEAD V. DERRY AND ANOTHER.
An action of trespass, which was undefended. Verdict
for the plaintiff, damages £42 2s. 6d.

KNOWLES AND ANOTHER V. BROOKS.
In this case the parties agreed to a verdict fur the plain-
tiff, subject to a reference.

criEw v. HOLDEN AND OTHERS.

This was an action of trespass. Mr. Knowles and Mr.
Coaling were for the plaintiff, Mr. Atli,' ton for the de•
tentlant. The plaintiff, Mr. William Chew, is a farmer,
occupying his own land, at Dewhurst, in Over Darwen,
in this county; and the defendants, Ralph Jolin and
l'h.►mas Holden, who stand in the relation of father and
sou to each other, occupied a farm adjoining the plaintiff's
land. The present action was brought to recover the value
of a quantity of coal, which, it was alleged. the defendants
had taken from underneath the plaintiff's land, and with
a perfect knowledge of what they were doing. The value
of the coal was estimated to be worth £65, at the pit's
mouth. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £6O.

ALLEGED FRAUDULENT PREFERENCE.
POTT AND OTHERS V. POWNALL.

In this cause, Mr. Baines and Mr. Thoudinsnn appeared
for the plaintiffs; Mr. Watson and Mr. Cowling for the
defendant.

Mr. BAiNEs said that this was an action brought by
the plaintiffs, who were the assignees of Thomas Cart-
wright, a bankrupt, for the purpose of obtaining pos-
session of certain deeds of a mortgage, which, they
alleged, had been given to the defendant, Mr. Peter
Pow-nail, by a fraudulent preference over the rest of the
creditors of the estate. The detem.ant was a person of
considerable landed properly in the county of Cheshire.
The bankru, t formerly, and for many years, carried on
business as a draper in Stockport ; but be had, latterly,
been concerned in several joint-stock banks, and that was
the trading in which he became a bankrupt. Toe de-
1-inlaid was a creditor of Cartwright to the extent of about
£429, and on the Ist of August, 1842, a mortgage of a
mid at Adswood, near Cheadle Moseley, in Cheshire, was
executed by the bankrupt to the deterttlant, and, at the
same time, certain title-deeds were handed over to him ;
up to that time the mill had be;di in toe possession of the
bankrupt. At the time that this transaction took place
the circumstances of Cartwright were such that he must
have known that his bankruptcy was in the highest de-
gree probable. nay, inevitable; and he voluntarily, or at
least without any pressure from the defendant, gave him
this preference. To show that this was the case, the
learned counsel real the examination of the defaridard br-
ittle the commissioners of banktuptcy, in which lie stated
that the d. bt was contracted in 1826; that he had as
security a note of hand, which was frequently renewed ;
that he Oil several occasions, during the preceding ten
years, bad expressed a wish have better si curity ; that
Cartwright, when be called on him, said, " I have brought
these deeds as a further steurit y for you." The defendant
replied, " Very well, just as you please." I‘l r. Cartwright
thereupon observed, " Mr. 'Punter, toy brother-in a law,
is well acquainted with the title, and he will prepare the
mortgage.•' At the same time, Cartwright produced a
letter fur his (the defendant's) signature, which was to
the effect, that he (defendant) required fur her security.
i That letter defendant signed, and returned it to Cart-
wright. Such was Mr. Pownall's own explanation of the
manner in which he became possessed of the title-deeds
ur question. To show that at the time of the execution
of ih,s mortgage Mr. Cartwright was well aware of his
approaching oaokruptcy, the learned counsel stared, that
the Batik of Manchester had, on the 11th of June, 1812.
issu.d a writ against him for certain bills, to the alumna
of £9500. which he had accepted, and of £lB,OOO which
he had endorsed, on behalf of two of his sons, who were
connected with the extrusive paper works of Messrs.
Henry and Edward Hilton, and who had become bank-
rupts. When the writ was served on Mr. Cartwright, he
said he could nit pay as many shillin a ; that he was a
ruined man; that he had been ruined by his connexion
with the Hiltons. Au action was brought against him at
the last summer assizes, for the £9SOJ, and on the 30th
of July, two days betore the execution of the mortgage,
an arrangement was entered into between the parties, by
which the defendant submitted to a judgmei t.agutst him,
in he event of certain demurrers which lie hal.filed going
in favour of the plaintiff. NS hen the di-morns curate to
be argued, they were laughed at; Cartwright executed a
vorumary assignment, and a fiat of bankruptcy issued.
His whole assets amounted to £731, being the amount
remised by his furniture.
Witnesses having been tailed to prove these facts,
Mr. WATSON addressed the Jury, pointing, out in the
first place, that the object was to obtain these deed , not
for the benefit of the whole of the creditors of Mr. Cart-
wright, but for the benefit of the Bank of Manchester,
which was the only creditor on the hat. lie then pro-
ceeded to contend, that there was no fraudulent preference
inasmuch as one of the elements of a fraudulent prefer-
ence, comentplation of bankruptcy, had not been made
out. Mr. Cartwright was a gentleman who had realized
a fortune of £20,000 or £311,000, and who had retired
from business; but, like many other persons in his situa-
tion, he invested a small sum of money in a few shares in
a joint stock bank, the Batik of Manchester. In 1839,
when the two sons of Mr. C. were contemplating to enter
into partnership with the Messrs. Hilton, of Darwen, he
applied to the bank to know in what credit the Hiltons
happened to be, aid was informed by Mr. Burdekin. the
In4unger, that they were in good credit, and had a large
balance in the hands of the bank, although, at the very
time, they were largely indebted to the batik. Under
these circumstances, he was induced to put his sons into
the business of Hi,ton and Co. He advanced them
£lO,OOO as their part of the capital. But the Hiltons.
notwithstanding this assistance, fell into difficulties, and
the defendant supported his sons. He became sureties
for Hilton and Co. to the Bank of Mattel ester. lie en-
dorsed bids to the extent of £lB,OOO. and accepted four
bills for £9,500. This was not his own debt. He had no con-
nexion with the house except through his sons. But there
was no doubt that the debt due to the defendant was a just
and lawful debt of the bankrupt, and he determined to
pay the individual debt, honestly incurred, rather than to
meet those liabilities which he had been induced to enter
into through fraud and misrepresentation.
Mr. Cartwright was himself called, and stated, that he
had been out of business for the last twenty-five years.
The only trade in which be was engaged, during that pe-
riod, was the holding of a few shares in the Bank of Man-
chester. In February, last year, when he paid the de-
fendant the interest on the £452 which he had borrowed
from hint, the defendant became more pressing for a bet-
ter security. He asked for a mortgage, and the mortgage
was consequently prepared. When his sons entered into
partnership with the Hiltons, £20,000 was to be paid by
him in consideration ; but it was understood that one-half
would only be wanted. Before the partnership was formed,
the bank told him that the Hilton's kept a good account ;
but, rafter the deed of partnership had been drawn up, they
told him that it was overdrawn. At the time he made the
mortgage, he had not the slightest idea of becoming a
bankrupt, knowing that he had no creditors in trade of
any consequence, and that the bank of Mr. Hilton had
sufficient assets to cover what be owed them. lie be-

and,came
bya the bankrupta,iyie owingadvice
o fh
eto s
atmhee
parties,induc em ents of
he
of aisignment.
Cross-examined.—Could not say whether, at that time,
(the 19th of January,) he had heard of the judgment against
executedhis friends,
a
him two days before. He rather thought not. Dr. Tur-
ner and others had had a security for many years, for
£6.000, on his personal property. Had a debt to a Mr.
Shaw for £367, but he held a mortgage. Owed Mr. Po-
cock £l6O, who held a deed. One of the Hilton's mar-
ried his (witness's) daughter. His bankruptcy took place
on the 21st of January, 1842. The petitioning creditor
was his own brother-in-law, Mr. Turner.
Re-examined :—His (Mr. Turner's) debt was £lOOO.
Had he (witness) known that the Hiltons were in difficul-
ties he would have shuddered at the idea of allowing his
sons to enter into partnership with them.
Mr. BAINEs replied, maintaining that the memory of
the unfortunate bankrupt, for he did not wish to speak
harshly of him, was not to be trusted ; and that the evi-
dence distinctly showed that, on the Ist of August, he, as
a reasonable man, must have been clearly cognizant that
he was on the verge of bankruptcy. As to the Bank of
Manchester, his learned frend had thrown out some iosi-
mtations, inducing the impression that there had been
some mismanagement of its affairs, and that, therefore,
this claim ought, in comparison' with that of the defend-
ant, to be unheeded. But what, if there had been mis-
management, of which, however, there was no proof, the
debt to the bank was a bona fide one, and the innocent
shareholders were as much entitled to consideration as any
other creditor of the bankrupt.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL summed up. The jury, after
a short consultation, found for the plaintiff for £3OOO.
subject to be reduced to 40s. on the deeds being given up.
They said they thought the mortgage bad been given with-
out pressure, and in contemplation of remote bankruptcy.
The court adjourned at five minutes after seven o'clock.

CHESHIRE ASSIZES.

CHESTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 15.
(Before Mr. Baron Gurney.)

HANMER V. EYTON.

This case was resumed at the sitting of the court this
morning, when two additional witnesses were examined
on the part of the plaintiff. Mr. Jervis then addressed
the Jury at considerable length in favour of the defend-
ant, and contended that the whole tenor of the evidence
showed that there was nut any wilful negligence on his
client's part in working the mines. His Lordship, in
summing up the case, recapitulated the whole of the evi-
dence; and at one o'clock the Jury retired. They retur-
ned into court in about an hour and a half, and returned
a verdict fur the plaintiff fur £6,227 damages, with leave
to Mr. Jervis to move to reduce them to £1,600.

TH URSDAY.
EXPARTF. BAKER.

It will he rememb;e;ltiVitr;i7FOrmer day of the late
assizes at Chester, a rule bad been obtained by Mr. Jer.
vis, on behalf of Miss Caroline Phillips Baker, the
tenant, calling upon Mr. John James, the landlord, to
show cause why he should not re-deliver to her a house
and land at ()von, Cheshire, possession of which had
been given to him by an order of two magistrates of that
county under the provisions of the 11th Geo. 11. c. 19.
Mr. Townsend now appeared to show cause against the
rule, on behalf of the landlord. The case turned princi-
pally on the question, whether the rent had been properly
described as a rack rent, so as to come within the act in
question. The respondent's affidavits went to show that
the premises could not now be let for more than the rent
reserved by the lease. But the learned Judge said he
could not shut his eyes to the circumstance that since the
lease was granted a house had been built on part of the
land, which must have increased its value ; and that the
surveyors who spoke to the value of the land 'inbuilt on,
treated it as agricultural land, whereas it appears to have•
been let by the square yard, which was inconsistent with
an agricultural letting. He could ni t therefore consider
that the rent was a rack rent, consequently the case di,l
not come within the clause of the statute on which the
respondent had proceeded, and the rule must therefore b
made absolute. His lordship, however, stated that he
came to this conclusion with great regret, as the substan
tial justice of the case was, he thought, on the side of the
respondent, and be was glad to know that the landlord
had another legal remedy to which he might have recourse.
The affidavits also made by the appellant's agentcontained
statenterts as to his being taken by surprize, alit' other
allegations, the object of which was to throw aspersions
on the magistrates, (who had only acted in strict dis.
charge of their duty,) which had been entirely disproved.

THE CONDEMNED MURDERER AT CHESTER.—James
Ratcliffe, condemned to he hung at these assizes, for the
wilful murder of his wife, at Stockport, in June last, is
destined to expiate the horrible crime on Saturday, the
3rd of September next, by the punishment of death.

Mr. PALMER'S 109TH VISIT TO THE ASSIZES.—Our
townsman, Mr. Palmer, has this week made his 109th
visit to the assizes at Lancaster, without any interruption
having once occurred in the very numerous set ies of visits,
a circumstance, we fully believe, of which no other gen-
tleman in the country is enabled to boast.— Preston Pilot.
TRIAL OF ARTHUR O'NElLL.—Atthe Stafford assizes,
on Saturday, this person was put upon his trial for a sedi-
tious speech on the 2tith August last. The defendant
concluded his speech, when the court adjourned until
Monday (yesterday).
At the Bridgewater Assizes, eight men who were ac-
quitted on a former day of the assizes of the felony of
destroying a house for collecting tolls, were indicted for
a misdemeanour in pulling clown the tollhouse. The
jury acquitted the prisoners, but Mr. Justice Coleridge
said he could not concur in the verdict.

At Durnam Assizes, on Friday week, Joseph Atkinson
was convicted of illegally solemnizing a marriage. lie
kept a toll-house within the Scottish border, and usually
officiated as priest. A couple sought his offices, but found
that he had gone to Berwick. whither they followed him.
At first he refused to marry them ; but being made drunk,
he complied : a confusion of legal geography which caused
him to be sentenced to seven years' transportation.

SENTENCE OF DEATH ON A CHILD THIRTEEN
YEARS OF AGE.—At the late Warwick Assizes, Jane
Smith, aged thirteen years, was sentenced to death for
setting fire to a dwelling. Her mistress having scolded
her for some misconduct she proceeded to one of the
upper rooms and set fire to sonic clothes; bur fortunately
it was soon discovered and extinguished. The pristine;
confessed to the act, and was sentenced by the judge as
above, with an intimation that he would recommend her
case to the mercy of the Queen.
AN EXTRAORDINARY VERDICT was. on Thursday last,
returned by a coroner's jury at North Pt therton. Somer-
set, relative to the death of one Richard Hall, a boatman,
who recently lost his life in consequence of his boat
striking against the timber work of a bridge belonging to
the Bristol and Exeter railway. A vet diet was returned
of " Manslaughter against the chairman, vice-chairman.
and directors oft he Bristol and Exeter Hallway Company,"
alleging that the deceased cane by his death owing to the
criminal neglect of the company in not removing the wood
wink. The chairman is Frederick Rtrket s, Esq., and
the vice-chairman the Worshipful the Mayor of Bristol;
b th of whom. with Mr. Divett, M.P., are included in
this strange verdict.
Last week, at the Norwich Assizes. William Sanger. a
young man, was indicted for committing two forgeries
upon the East of England Bank. It appeared that the
prisoner was a clerk in the bank, and that, having access
to the fortes for the payment of money, which were sig,ned
in blank be the manager, he filled up two of then► for
£2500 and £5OO respectively, in favour of a fictitious cot-
respondent, and despatched them by the mail to the Lon-
don agents. This done, he himself proceeded to town by
the same conveyance, and presenting him elf at the agents
on the next day, demanded the payment of tie two sums
above mentioned, for which purpose he forged two cheques
in the name of the supposed correspondent. The money
was forthwith paid, but the fraud was soon detected.
When arrested nearly the whole money was found upon
him. He pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to transpor-
tation fur life.
TRANSPORTATION OF A BORDER PRIEST.—At the
Northumberland Assizes, Joseph Atkinson pleaded guilty
of unlawfully solemnizing a marriage at Berwick-upon-
Tweed, between William Brown and Catherine Cossar.
The prisoner -is the " priest " of Lamberton Toll-bar,
about four miles north from Berwitk, and he is in the
habit of performing the ceremony of marriage there ac-
cording to the Scotch fashion. On the arrival of the
parties in this case, the "priest" was absent, and as
there were urgent reasons for haste, it being, in fact, "
runaway match," the parties proceeded to Berwick, and
there found the " priest" in a public-house called the Old
Hen and Chickens, Bridge-street. They requested him
to perform the ceremony without delay, but he refused to
do so except at Lamberton, to which he invited the parties
to return. There being reason, however, to suspect that
pursuit was being made after the fugitives, it was not
deemed prudent to return ; they then treated the "priest"
with liquor until he became intoxicated, and in that state
he performed the ceremony at Berwick, and recorded it,
when be returned to Lamberton, as having Leen done at
the latter place. The case, it will thus be seen, did not
in any way involve the question of the validity of the
Scotch law, according to which the marriage ceremony is
performed at Lamberton Toll-bar. The learned Judge
sentenced the prisoner to seven years' transportation.

NEW MODE Or EXTINGUISHING FIRES.—WE under-
stand that there is at peseta in Liverpool a gentleman,
(an engineer,) who has invented a mode of extinguishing
fires. It is his intention •ery shorty to open an exhibi-
tion. in which the process will be fully developed. In a
town like Liverpool, where so many disastrous fires have
taken place, there is no doubt that this plan will be in-
spected with much avidity. It is not only practicable
but the result efficacious. We shall draw attention fully
to the exh bition when it opens.
CAT WoutoriNG.—On Friday, Oliver Shannon, who
keep a public-house in this town, was brought before Mr.
Rushton, at the Police-court, on a charge of permitting
two dogs to worry a number of cats in the cellar of his
house, and also with aiding in the detestable sport. The
case was proved against him by two police-officers, who
found three dead cats which had been destroyed by dogs,
three live cats in an iron cage, and four others hi a
Two others, it appeared, had escaped. There was a " pit
formed for the " sport," and a wager was pending which
of two dogs would kill six cats each in the shorte-t time.
The defendant said lie had not encouraged the affair. ai,d
that his wife had tat the parties into the cellar on their
representation that their dogs were brought to destroy eels
and not cats. It was distinctly sworn, however, that he
was " howling" the dogs on to the slaughter, and he Ives
fined £5 and costs. On the previous day two other par-
ties were fined 40s. and costs, for the part they took on
the same occasion.

LAW INTELLAGENCA.

DISTRICT coutor (IF BANKRUPTCY.

(Before Mr. Commissioner Skirrow.)

Richard Price, coal dealer, of Waterloo, appeared to
pass his final examination, by adjournment from the 2d
instant. Mr. Venables, the barrister, was retained to
00p05,., and Mr. John Jones, the solicit to support him.
Some objection was taken to the balance sheet, -which
was held by the commissioner to be fatal, and his exami-
nation was again adjourned to the 6th day of September
next, at eleven o'clock.