The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-11-08 00:00:00

I3IPORTANT TO CREDITORS.

The 28th section of the act of the 3d and 4th Wm. IV. cap. 42,
entitled " An act for the further amendment of the law and the
better advancement of justice," is as follows :
" And be it further enacted, that upon al, debts or sums pay-
able at a certain time or otherwise, the jury on the trial of any
issue, or any inquisition or damages, may, it they shall think fit,
allow interest to the creditor, at a rate nut exceeding the cur-
rent rate of interest, from the time when such debt or sums
certain were payable, if such debt or sums be payable by virtue
of some written instrument at a certain time • or if payable
otherwise, then from the time when demand of payment shall
have been made in writing, so as such demand shall give notice
to the debtor that. interest will be claimed from the date of such
demand until the term of payment, provided that interest shall
be payable in all cases in which it is nowpavable by law."
The effect of this enactment may be briefly stated thus :

" If the debt be payable by virtue of a written instrument,
then the creditor is entitled to interest from the time when the
debt became due. And if there be no written instrument, then
the creditor is entitled to interest only from the time of his de-
manding payment of the debt in writing, so that in the demand
of payment, the creditors apprize the debtor that interest will be
required from that time."
In the generality of cases, the following form of notice will
be sufficient : _ _

" I hereby demand payment of the sum of
due from you to me, and I give you notice that I shall claim in-
terest thereon from the date hereof to the time of payment.
Dated the day of 183.3. Yours, &c. -."
Of course it will be requisite, in resorting to legal proceedings
to have evidence of the delivery of the notice to the debtor; and
it will be proper that a clerk, or some other person than the cre-
ditor, should deliver it, and keep a copy thereof.

LONDON GAZETTE.—TUESDAY, itiormt3rn 5.

BANKRUPTCY SUPERESZDED.
Joseph Wilson, Liverpool, draper.
BANKRUPTS.

Paul Edward Weber, Licerpoc!, iranforinder, Nov. 15, Dee. 17, a'
the Clarondon Roonv, Liverpool. Solicitors, Mr. Holden, Liverpool
and Messrs. -Walaisley, Keiglltley, and Parkin, Chancery-lane.
William Mason, Qncenhithe, am.tioneer.
James Niekalls. Chatham, corn-factor.
Hugh Robert Roddam, North Shields, common brewer.
Richard Coad, Hoddorstield, York7;hire, grocer.
John Armatvon.g. Canihridgc. tinplltc-worker.
PARTNER-Sill VS DissoLyED. . .

W. Simnson, J. Wliaram, and J. Fletcher, Liverpool, tobacco-ma-
rmfacturers ; as far as regards the said W. Simpson.—W. Maunder
North Molten,. Devonshire, woollen-inanufacturers.—J. Millard and
J. J: Millard, Cordwainer's-Hall, attornovs.—R. Hopper and J. Cell,
Sculcoates, Yorkshire, hair-dressers.—J.V. Ricketts. I. Leonard, IL
Ricketts, and F. 'Ricketts, Bristol, tobacconists.—E. Yorstcn and S.
F. Nash, Chancery-lane, law=stationers.—C. Fiske, S. Fiske, and L.
Archer, Saffron Walden. .ESSPX, surgeons.—G. Wright, T. H. Mas-
sey. C. Doneaster, J. I. Marileet. J. -,Nrassev, and B. Massey, corn-
millers.—T. H. Massey. J. I. Martleet, and B. Massey, Newark-upon-
Trent, malt:stem—J. IL Stauden and B. Standen, Dover, linen-dra-
Rers.—C. Denton, IL Denton, sod J. Denton, Horton Bank Top.
Yorkshire. worsted-silinrers ; as far as regards the said C. Denton.—
J. L. Peachier and F. d,> Selneux, Copthall-court,- Throzmorton-
street. stock-agents.—J. Stanfield and J. Stanfield, Manchester, at-
torneys.—J. Coleby and J. Lon', Queen-street-place, tipper T'oarces-
street, wine-merchants.—D. IlleasliT and T. Partingteu, Lancaster,
bleachers.—J. Hepworth and S. Lister, Huddersfield, 'Yorkshire, sit k_
ciealera.—C. Freeman and S. Childs, Green-street. Leicester-scivare,
wax-bleachers.—T. Gould, J. Well 3, sod H. Wells, Salford, Lancs.
shin:, fustian-shearers.
DIVIDENDS.

Nov. V, J. W. Shaw and A. W. Elmslie, Fenchurch-buillings, mer-
chants.—Nov.29, J.Peachcy, Regcnt-street, Ironmonger.—Nov. 2G, E.
M. Bouchier and S. Bonsor, Oxford-street, tallow-chandlers.—Nov. 27,
W. 11. Ilumplebv, Borough-market, plumber.—Nov. 27, W. Russell
and J. Russell, S:nathamPton, upholsterers.—Nor. 27, J. Cochrane,
'Waterloo-place, Pall-mall, bookseller.—Nov. 2EI, B. Hulme, Picea-
hatter.—Nov. 28, J. S. Digaud, Goswell-street-road. jeweller.—
N0v..28, 11. :Newark and J. Tools, Wood-street, Cheapside, riband-
mnutacturers.—Nov. 26. G. Lome, jun., Croydeu, maltster.—Nov.
T. North, Wootton, Bedfordshiro, carpenter.—Nov. 26, 13: Bevil]
and C. llanlairy, Catherine-court, Tower-on corn-factors.—Nov. 27,
John Foster alio Jos. Foster, Selby, Yorkshire, merchants.—Nor. 26,
'V.'l`_ea. Redruth, Cornwall, merchant.—Nov. 29, J. Tirpin and G.
Arrnitay.e, Doncaster, coach-rnekers.—Nov. 29, J. Twentyrnan,
and J. Twentyraan, jun., Keswick, Cumberland, woollen-manufac-
turers.—Dee. 4, G. C. Hall, Alfreton,.Derbyshire, money-scrivener.
—Dee. 3, 11. South Melton, Devonshire, lime-burner.—Nov. 30,-
8. Cartledge aryl J. Cartledge, Lincoln, merchants.—Nov, 27, J. Wi-
therhy and A. Ihler, South Shields, ship-builders.—Nov. 28, A.
Southon, Wlttersham, Kent, grocer.
CERTIFICATES, Nov. 24.

J. Hardiman and W. Ha rd: man, St.- Dnnstan's-hill, Lower Thames-
street. ship-agent..—W. riedon, Aston-Grange Paper Mills. near
Henley in Arden,Warwickshire, inper-maker.—J. Bevil, Harley-ford-
glace, Kennington-common, auctioneer.—W. Dollar and G. Thom-
son, Bucklersbury, Manchester warehousemen.—S. Cook, Weston,
ficonerseb?hire, gardener . —lt. N. Williams, Bristol, cosl-mrchant.--.
J. Brierley, Rcdvale. near Bury, Lancashire, woollen-draper.--J. C.
Jennings, and W. G. Jennings, Bristol, corn.merchants.

The new building for the "Carlton Conservative Club" is to
cost upwards of £21,000. Mr. Snaisrke is the architect; Messrs.
Hunt and Bennett obtained the contract. There were seven
tenders selected from which to make the choice. There was
not £l,OOO difference between this offers of any of those candi-
dates.

The men who accompanied Captain Ross in his late expedi-
tion, although at first privately engaged, are, we understand, to
receive an allowance, amounting to double pay, from the Go-
verment. This gift calculating the time of service, will give
each man about £`-AlO.-01),,errer.
The property.. of the late Hannah More has been sworn in
the Prerogative Court Under £30,000. The £l,OOO bequeathed
by Miss IClartha More, mahle on the death of her sister, has
been since paid to the British ROA Foreign Bible Society.

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

EASLY V. CROCKFORD. •
This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover
a £2OO Bank of England note, which he lost under the
following circumstances. It appeared that the plaintiff
went with a friend to the Rotunda, Blackfriars-bridge, to
attend a political lecture delivered by Mr. Co'obett.—
During his stay there hisTocket was picked of £SSO in
hank notes, which he advertised in England, Ireland, and
Scotland. However be heard nothing of them before the
expiration of about twelve months, when the £2OO bank
note in question was traced to the. defendant. Mr.
Crockford paid it to a gentleman at Tattersall's on ac-
count of a bet; he could not tell from whom he had re- .
ceived it, and he declined giving up the possession of it.
The plaintiff therefore brought his action and gained a
verdict for the amount.
Mr. Serjeant Andrews moved this day for rule nisi to
set aside the verdict, upon the ground that the defendant
was not compelled to keep an account of the names of all
parties who might pay him hank notes, and, having given
value for it, he was entitled to retain it.
The Lord Chief Justice pronounced the decision of the
court. It• had been made on three grounds-Ist, that
_the bank-note traced-to • the hands of -the defendant had
not been clearly proved to be the same note which the
plaintiff had .lost. Upon that point the court thought
that there had been sufficient evidence of its identity, at
least for the jury to decide upon, and they were satisfied
that it was the same note. Upon the second ground—
namely, that the plaintiff's own negligence had led to
the loss—the court were also of opinion that the verdict
ought not to be disturbed. It was very true that the
plaintiff's going into the lecture-room at the Rotunda
with so large a sum of money in his possession was a
very indiscreet act ; but still how did that contribute
towards the defendant's want of due care ? In all
those .cases in which the plaintiff's impudence or
negligence prevented him from recovering, that neg-
ligence had contributed to his loss, together with
the defendant's want of due precaution, as in cases of
running down, &c. If in this case the plaintiff had omit-
ted to advertise his loss in due time, so that the defend-
ant bad not been put on his guard, then the objection
would have been good ; but such had not been the case.
The only remaining ground, then, was whether or not
the defendant had been guilty of negligence in not taking
some notice of the party from whom he received so large
a note ? The Court thought he had. It was clear that a
banker would have been liable, had he omitted to make
an entry of the name of the person from whom he had
received such a note; and there was nothing in the de-
fendant's situation to entitle him to any privilege or in-
dulgence beyond what a hanker would receive. There
was, therefore, no ground for disturbing the verdict.