The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-04-14 00:00:00

ppcit+4

ttlai

kg tO th 6 that set pa 'f lost, ): hi; ).arn,t3cl
friend would prove tlii4t, his clients would he very !nippy, and
there would be an end of the claim. The fifth plea eharged
that tie policy was obtained by fraud, and the charge was
made in a double shape ; tirst, that there had been a mis-
representation of facts, and, secondly, that there had been a
concealment of material facts. Mr. 'Wortley made some
animated observations on the respectability of his client, and
the groundlessness of the charge. He would make it clear
that there had been no misrepresentation of facts, and the
only question was, had there been such a legal misrepresen-
tation of facts as would vitiate the policy. The learned
gentleman alluded to the letters of advice from Newfoundland,
and said as his learned friend relied on them for his defence,
he should leave him to put them in, as it would leave him at
liberty to add a few words of comment upon them afterwards,
a privilege which the jury would see he was fairly entitled to.
After some observations on the law of the case, and citations
from the opinions of Justice Mansfield, Mr. Wortley con-
cluded by saying, that the simple question would be, whether
there was a fair statement made to the underwriter, or a
concealment of material circumstances. _ _ _

Evidence having been adduced in support of the learned
gentleman's statement,
Mr. KNOWLP.S replied, and said, the ground on which he
would ask for the verdict was, that there was a want of fair
dealing on the part of the plaintiff, which was the very es-
sence of transactions of this nature. It was necessary that
every point should be fully and fairly laid before the Under•
writers, in order to enable them to estimate the risk. He
(the learned counsel) would have to show that Mr. Mackin-
tosh had stated that which he did not know, and concealed
what be did know. This was the opinion expressed by Baron
Parke, when the cause came before the Court of Exchequer.
When Mr. Marshall took the policy at 30s. per cent. he be-
lieved that he was taking an ordinary risk, yet on the same
day the premium was five guineas at Lloyd's. The jury would
find, that as early as the 24th December, the partner of Mr.
Mackintosh, in Newfoundland, wrote to the latter, stating
that he had shipped by the Elizabeth, Spence, master. 3479
gallons of cod oil, 2428 gallons of cod blubber, and 2i cwt.
of old junk, value £550, that she was a new vessel, he was to
give three or four days, and run a reasonable risk to save in-
surance. Another letter was also received by Mr. Mackin-
tosh, of the same date, in which it was stated, that lie (Mr.
Mackintosh) was to allow sixteen to twenty days, and that
the vessel was to sail on the 25th. Both these letters were
dated 24th December, both were in Mr. Mackintosh's hands,
twenty-seven days or more had elapsed, and it was certain
that the vessel was much beyond her time, yet he had written
that letter of the 26th January, saying, " We have advice
from St. John's, of the 27th ult., of train oil having been
shipped on board the Elinbeth." Had he any such advice?
could he mean the advice of Mr. Auterson. Certainly not.
Could there be a doubt that he had the letters of the 24th be-
fore him? He adopted the very language of those letters,
both as to the amount, the description of vessel, &c., and
evidently had not a thought of Mr. Auterson in his head. In
the matter of the date of sailing alone did he go against his
advices, for she was to sail on the 25th, and he said she was
to sail on the 27th. He was guilty of concealment, when he
kept secret the letters of the 24th. and of misrepresentation,
when he gave a different date from what those letters advised.
If there were any concealment, the defendant was entitled to
the verdict. There was a concealment in respect to the date,
because Mr. Mackintosh had no direct information of the
date of sailing save that which he had suppressed. There
was not concealment alone, but misrepresentation, because
he said he had advice to the 27th ult. and that the vessel was
to sail at the end of the month. What advice had he of that ?
None. Mr. Knowles also read a letter from Mr. Mackintosh
to Mr. Mackee, stating that he thought it hard that their let-
ters should be overhauled by strangers, and that he must have
made a mistake in stating that the vessel was to sail on the
27th, as she was to sail on the 25th according to the advices.
The letters of advice from St. John's were put in and read.
The post-mark on one showed that it had probably arrived
in Liverpool on the 21st of January. It was, however, en-
dorsed as received on the 25th, and Mr. Wortley said there
were private marks which he could not put in evidence,
which rendered it probable that it had been detained at the
post-office. The other letter was received on the 25th.
Mr. VORTLEY replied.
His LORDSHIP said the question seemed to resolve itself
into the inquiry whether, if the defendant had had all the
circumstances before him, it would have altered the risk. If
they were of opinion that the alleged misrepresentation was
no way material, the plaintiff would be entitled to recover;
if, on the other hand, they thought that it altered the risk,
the verdict must be for defendant.

The jury, after an absence of one hour and five minutes,
gave a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £2OO.
KINC AID V. DAVIDSON.—Mr. Martin and Mr. Paget for
the plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for the defendant. Verdict
for the plaintiff—damages, £BOO.

HINXMAN V. CHADWICK.—The plaintiff in this case was
John Hinsman, a surgeon, of Bury, and the defendant
George Chadwick, also a surgeon of the same place. The
action was brought for a libel published by the defendant
against the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded the general
issue.

Mr. Knowles and Mr. Hogging appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Baines and Mr. Henderson for the defence.

It appeared that the plaintiff, who is a native of London,
and the defendant served their time witfi a Mr. Dunlop, a
surgeon, of Bury. On the death of the latter, the defendant
purchased his business, and the plaintiff commenced practice
on his own account. According to the statement of the plain-
tiff's own counsel, he was exceedingly successful, and the po-
sition which he attained aroused the jealousy of his fellow
practitioners. He had soon a large connexion, and amongst
the families with which he became acquainted, was that of a
Mr. Hamer, a manufacturer. The intimacy with the daugh-
ter of this gentleman increased till a marriage was on the
tapis between the pair. While things were in this state, the
plaintiff was surprised by having a letter put into his bands
which was addressed " To the Successor of the late Dr. Dun-
lop, surgeon, Bury," and of which the following is a copy :
" 21st June, 1842, Whiteerbss-street, London.

Sir,—Will you favour me with the name and address of
the young lady with whom Henry Hinxman, the would-be
apothecary of Bury is keeping company with, as J wish to
write to the father and expose the poverty of the family to
which his daughter is about to be allied. It is a dreadful
thing that they should know the circumstances, as they are
without a penny to bless themselves with. The father of
Hinxman will be shortly in prison, and his name published as
an insolvent. He is out of the way at this time, fearful of
several executions out against him. If you will favour me
with the required information, you will confer an everlasting
obligation upon the innocent young lady who is so duped by
the knavery and deception of such characters.
(Signed) " THOS. FORTUNE."
1 LIM /c•i...a I,IIU. pui. into tue PiallIALLIn ,
father of the young lady, who forbade his daughter to con-
tinue the intercourse. The plaintiff went to London, and
after incessant trouble succeeded in tracing out the writer of
the letter, who avoided an action at law by confessing his
baseness and begging for pardon. The defendant, it ap-
peared, not content with putting the letter into the hands of
Miss Hamer's father, showed and stated its contents to nu-
merous other individuals. These, who were chiefly friends
of Chadwick, were called as witnesses. The plaintiff and
Miss Hamer had since married, but it was stated by the
Counsel for the defence to have been without the consent of
the father. .

The defence set up, was, that the defendant consulted the
parties brought forward merely for the purpose of obtaining
their advice as to the proper mode of procedure.
Verdict for the plaintiff—damages, one farthing.
_

The Court adjoUrned at a quarter before eight o'clock,

CROWN COURT-THURSDAY

HIGHWAY ROBBERY

Eliza Wiggins, 22, Patrick Riley, 21, Patrick Nolan, 21.
and John Hoy, 20, were charged with having, on the Queen's
highway, feloniously assaulted James Cowsill, and robbed
him of an umbrella, 21. 25., a silk handkerchief, and a pair
of stockings.
Mr. Wilkins was for the prosecution; Mr. Whigham de.
fended Hoy, and Mr. Blair defended Riley,
The prosecutor, who is a rather tall stout man, about 35
years of age, lives at the village of Worsley, and on Monday
the 12th of September last, he was at Manchester on busi-
ness. About half-past seven o'clock in the evening, he went
into the tap of the Hope public house, in Deansgate, and
whilst there a female asked him for a glass of ale. He re-
fused to give her one, unless she would go to another house;
for he had never been in the Hope tap before, and lie had an
idea that it was a bad house. The female refused to comply
with his request to go to another house. During the con-
versation, a second female came up, and joined in the con-
versation, and she said, " Perhaps he has no money." The
countryman, nettled at the observation, said, " Oh, yes, I
have.' and slapped his hand on his pocket. Wiggins, Nolan,
and Hoy were then in the tap. Some time after, the prose-
cutor left the house, and Wiggins went out with him. Riley
came up ; they entered into conversation, and Cowsill stated
that he was going to Worsley, and that he intended to go by-
Pendleton road. This was about twenty minutes past nine.
Riley recommended him strongly to go by the Eccles road,
stating that it was the best, and that if he would go that way,
he (Riley) would accompany him, as he was himself going to
Worsley, to order some coals from Lord Francis Egerton.
The prosecutor said that be did not know the Eccles road ;
he had never been that way ; but he ultimately said that he
had no objection to go in that direction with his two com-
panions, if they would behave civilly. They set out, and after
having gone about a mile, they came to the Queen's Arms,
which is in the Regent's road. Riley and Wiggins asked Cow-
sill to go in and have something to drink, but lie refused. They
went in and had a glass of ale, but he stood at the door.
After having proceeded on their way a mile and a half fur-
ther,
Eliza Wiggins collared him on the left side ; Riley
collared him on the right side, and ordered him to deliver.
He told them that he would not. They repeated their man-
date twice again, but he refused to comply. Three mess,
two of whom he recognised as Nolan and Hoy, then sprang
out of the hedge, and faced him ; and Cowsill thereupon said,
" Well, I must now." Riley pulled from his pocket some-
thing which was about a quarter of a yard in length (proba-
bly a night protector), struck him with it on the face, and
knocked hint down. Nolan got hold of his throat, pulled
his handkerchief off, and throttled him for about three mi-
nutes, threatening, in the meantime, that he would stop his
chimney. Hoy took out a penknife, held Cowsill down, and
cut away his fob, which contained two sovereigns and trio
shillings. He had with him an umbrella, which fell upon
the ground, and the girl took it up and walked off with it.
One of the men took from his pocket a pair of new stock-
ings, and they then went off in the direction of Manchester.
Cowsill immediately began to call out " Murder !" where-
upon an old man lifted up his bedroom window. Nolan and
Riley, hearing the cries, turned back, and told the country-
man that if he did not hold his noise, they would cut his
throat from ear to ear. The old man at the window said
that he dare not come down, lest the thieves should enter
and rob his house. The prisoners stood for a few minutes
at a distance of about 200 yards, and then walked off. The
prosecutor was sober at the time. On the following morn-
ing he gave information to the Manchester police, and, in
consequence of the description he gave of the persons who
had robbed him, the prisoners were apprehended.
Mr. WHIGRAM, in the course of his cross-examination of
the prosecutor, asked him whether he had, on one point,
given the same account before the magistrates ?—Mr.Wilkins
objected to the question being put, saying that his learned
friend might put the depositions in.—Mr. Whigham sub-
mitted that he might put the deposition of the prosecutor
into his hand, in order that he might read it over in silence,
to refresh his memory, and that then he (Mr. Whigham)
might ask him whether that statement was correct. There
had been decisions to the effect that that might be done.—
His Lordship said he knew that there had been decisions by
Justice Coleridge and Justice Littledale to that effect, and
he (Mr. Baron Parke) was anxious to allow the course most
in favour of the prisoner ; but he must say that he had great
doubts of the propriety and regularity of the course. The
point, however, ought to be settled. He would allow th©
prosecutor to read the deposition. and he would take a note
of the circumstance, in order to have the point settled by the
judges.

The jury found the whole of the prisoners guilty. Riley,
Nolan, and WiNina sentenced
years. Hoy were
ears. to be transported for
fifteen
---(1Y, on account of his previous good cha.
meter, Was only sentenced to eleven months' imprisonment.

STABBING A POLICLMIAN•
Thomas Roberts, 26, was indicted for having, on the 22d
of December last, at Liverpool, feloniously stabbed Thomas
Steele, a police-otficer, with intent to wound, maim, or die-
able him, or do him some grievous bodily harm, or to pre-
priner prosecution
was;
in company
vent his lawful apprehension. Mr. Denman was for the
At twelve o'clock on the night of the 22d December, the
col3mlapiralyefended the prisoner.
great noise in the street, when Steele(P
desired him to walk on. They still, however, continued to
with
severaollreeer-solgerhaNakoi.ll24ola)