The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-29 00:00:00

Smith, " You are a cheat, you are a robber, you are a
vagabond." Knowing what the defendant did, having
ascertained from the books, was he not likely to be led to
believe, by this conduct, that there was really something
which the plaintiff was anxious to conceal? As to the
published document which had been proposed, only 250
copies had been printed ; it was written with a bona fide
intention of pointing out grievances ; it was circulated
only amongst the ratepayers; and, under these circum-
stances, he (Mr. B.) contended that it was a privileged
communication, and could not, any more than the spoken
words, be made the ground of an action for libel. Mr.
Baines proceeded to say, :hat, as certain specific acts of
misconduct on the part of the plaintiff had been set out on
the record, which he should have to prove, he should call
the attention of the jury to them. The first thing stated
was with respect to a person named Thomas Allen. His
learned friend had observed that mistakes would inevi-
tably occur in the collection of the rates of a large township.
Yes • but Mr. Dolling was paid for the discharge of
his duties, and the ratepayers had a right to expect that
the business should be conducted with ordinary care, so
that they must not be unduly harassed by any negligence
of his; and, if negligence had been found of so gross a
character as to warrant the suspicion of fraud, was it to
be wondered at that a ratepayer should conceive it to be
his duty to inquire into it ; and, if inquiry was prevented,
to denounce it ? Instances of this kind would be found.
On the 13th of September, 1839, Mr. Allen paid to Mr.
Dolling 18s. 4d., and, on the 20th of July, 1840, Mr.
Dolling demanded the amount again, and under circum-
stances somewhat suspicious. The 20th of July was the
last day for paying the rates, in order to qualify a person
to vote at the next election. Mr. Allen, who was wishful
to be put on the list of voters, went to Mr. Dolling, and
asked what arrears of rates he had to pay, whereupon Mr.
Dolling told him that he owed 18s. 4d. for 1839, and, not-
withstanding the remonstrances of Mr, Allen, said that
that amount must be paid unless he was content to be
struck off the list. Mr. Allen paid him ti e sum the se-
cond time. By and by, however, he found a receipt fur
the first payment, and then Mr. Dolling was obliged to
refund. The learned counsel detailed the particulars of
other cases of a similar kind. In one of these, an elderly
female, living alone, was the party who had been twice
charged the same amount ; and, in another, a widow lady
was obliged to pay a sum of £3 10s., which, she contended,
her husband bad paid shortly before his death, but which
Mr. Dolling asserted was only a payment for a previous
year. In other cases, summonses had been served on re-
spectable parties, one of whom was Mr. Robert Willan,
who had resided twenty years in the township, and who
had served the office of overseer, demanding payment of
certain taxes by a specified day, and threatening legal
proceedings for default, although no previous request had
been made for payment.
A considerable number of witnesses were called to
prove the statements of the learned counsel.
Mr. WATSON replied.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL summed up, telling the jury
that the published document could not be considered as a
privileged communication.

The Jury, after a few minutes' deliberation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff ; damages £2O.
The Court adjuurned at a quarter-past six.

THE LATE FATAL DUEL.

At the Central Criminal Court, on Monday, Mr. Justice
Williams, in his address to the grand jury, made the fol-
lowing observations with reference to the late duel in
which Colonel Fawcett was killed. He said Mr. Gulliver
was charged with aiding and abetting the person who
actually killed the deceased on that occasion. The law
with respect to a person killing another in a duel was
perfectly clear : if persons met deliberately, in consequence
of 'a previous quarrel, after a lapse of sufficient time to
allow of the anger and excitement to cool, and the death
of one of them ensued, that constituted the crime of
murder against the person who killed him. There had
been no doubt upon that subject for some years past;
neither could there be any doubt thst the second of the
person killing his antagonist was also guilty of the crime
of murder; but with respect to the second of the person
killed, it had been doubted by a very grave and learned
authority—he alluded to Lord Hale—whether such per-
son could be considered guilty of murder, for reasons
which he fully assigned, and any doubt entertained by
that learned authority were entitled to the greatest and
most serious consideration, more particularly as Mr.
Serjeant Hawkins, also a writer of great celebrity, did
not appear to doubt, or attempt to controvert, that
opinion; if, therefore, that was the case, Mr. Gulliver
could not stand in a worse position than the second of the
party killed. He was aware, however, that at no distant
period, and in this very court, an opinion directly in op-
position to the dicta of Lord Hale and Mr. Serjeant
Hawkins had been expressed by two of the learned judges,
for whose opinions he entertained the greatest respect,
who stated, that beyond all doubt, the second of the per-
son killed, as well as the second of the person by whose
hand he fell, was guilty of murder equally with the prin-
cipal himself. The mere presence of a party at a duet
would not be sufficient to constitute him an aider and
abetter, but it was essential that he should be there
countenancing, aiding, and assisting in the duel. Sup»
posing, therefore, the dictum of Lord Hale to be welt
founded, a series of questions must arise before them as
to the object of his presence, and the countenance, aid,
and assistance, which they should find applicable to the
case of Mr. Gulliver.

On Friday Lieutenant Cuddy and Mr. Gulliver surren-
dered to take their trials, when the Attorney-General
said, that the charge as alleged against Mr. Gulliver could
not be sustained; he should, therefore, decline to offer
any evidence against him ; he might, therefore, be at once
discharged, and could then become a competent witness
on behalf of the prosecution.
Mr. Gulliver then left the bar, and Lieutenant Cuddy
was arraigned and charged with aiding and abetting in the
commission of the offence. In ordinary cases of an,
acquittal the precise grounds for the verdict do not appear,
but the interlocutory inquiries put by the jury as they
were about to leave the box to deliberate to the judge in
this case leave no doubt that the reason for the verdict of
not guilty was the absence of decisive evidence to show
that Mr. Cuddy aided and abetted Lieutenant Munro in
the murder of Colonel Fawcett.
Whatever may be thought of the weight of the moral
evidence in support of the charge of aiding and abetting
the murder, the legal testimony, it must be confessed,
was meagre. Not one of the witnesses swore positively
to the identity of the gentleman placed in the dock with
the person who acted as Colonel Fawcett's second, and
though Mr, Gulliver, the surgeon, believed him to be the
same, that officer seems to have seen—trom defective
sight—eery little of the conduct and management of the
duel previously to the demand for his professional assis-
tance; he did not witness the ground measured, or the
pistols prepared and handed to the principals ; all that he
could prove was, that Lieutenant Munro, on the morning
of the fatal occurrence, carried him up to the field where
it was fought • that tbere be saw four gentlemen, one of
whom he believes was Mr. Cuddy ; that he heard the
words " ready—fire," given, a discharge of pistols, and
then a summons to attend Colonel Fawcett; that he ran
to where that unfortunate officer was lying, and found Mr.
Cuddy with two others at his side; and that the wounded
man uttered a few words rather exculpatory of Lieutenant-
Munro. The poverty of this testimony, joined to the
obvious repugnance of a jury to convict a second of aiding
and abetting a murder when the murder itself had not been
estab ished to a deliverance jury, secured Mr. Cuddy's
acquittal; and Mr. Cuddy was immediately discharged.
Mr. Gulliver said, in the course of his examination as a
witness, that when he got to the ground he found Col.
Fawcett lying down, and heard him say something about
levelling a pistol. He said, " I was not level enough,"
or " I did nut cover you ;" to which Lieut. Munro said,_
" Oh, Fawcett, I thought you were covering me." Col.
Fawcett said he had been prac ising.

From the reply of Sir James Graham to the memorial
of the Cheshire Grand Jury, it would appear that there is
a probability of having a w nter assize.
Sir W. Follett, says the Western Times, netted, in
special retainers at these assizes, £4,000 in fees, and
without diminishing his ordinary attention to the interests.
of his constituents.
A true bill was found on Wedcesday morning, at the •
Central Criminal Court, against certain merchants for'
slave trading. The witnesses for the prosecution were
Colonel Edward Nicholls, R.M., the Honourable Capt.
Denmant and Captain Hill.
At the Cumberland Assizes, Lawrence Doogan. aged
Car-
lisle Gaol en the sth of July, and was sentenced to seven
mparriseonaewrayhadfropmretvhioeupsllayintirs
years' transportation, to commence at the expiration of
16, was found guilty on a charge of breaking out of
been
seven yearshad tcoar:
sentenced.
On the Western Circuit an action has been brought by
Sir Samuel Spry. to recover the value of a race mare,
while having it in their possession it died:
called Grateful. from a Mr. Ames and others, who, it was
the:deb the
The plaintiff had purchased the mare of a trainer, named
Treen. at Plymouth. From Treen's stables the horse wag
removed by a man named Sweatman, and this person*
being indebted to Messrs. Ames, Castle, and Co., dis-
satlalebgleeda:
and
tillers, at Bristol, the mare was seized by them for debt.
On the part of the defendants, it was denied that the
mare was the same. Several witnesses, well known in
the sporting world, were examined. Verdict for the
plaintiff—damages £l5O.

THREE BROTHERS DROWNED AT HARROGATE.
Three brothers of the name of Thackwray, aged 22. 19,
and 17, lost their lives whilst bathing in the river Nidd,
on Sunday morning last, in the vicinity of Harrogate.
They went out to gather herbs, and unfortunately resolved
to bathe. The youth of 19 injudiciously jumped into I
place much deeper than he expected. and having given
the alarm, his elder brother plunged in to rescue Wm:
but the effort was in vain, and their dreadful state induced
the younger one, in a moment of great agitation, to follow
the example of his elder brother. They clung to each
other, and all went down together.
DREADFUL DEATH OF MR. AYMER, THE CELEBRATED
AMERICAN VAULTER.—This unfortunate man, WhOr_.
braeth on
•ment. met
was the
recent
admiration
o Mr. Betty, proprietor of
Thursday night at the 0
rcuwshere the late performer wag
perfo
the Royal Arophitheatr.e,
nt The particular performance for
irnm
hisancepeactutl
peculiar
Englishdep.fr Opera exmson
fulfilling anr""ge="" ',flounced concluded with a double
whicb Mr- AYmerconsidereda almost (if not quite)
his feet, fell on his neck, and death
aummerset? a feat
impos-
sibie, and en throwing it the ill-fated artist, instead of
alighting on
Immediate result. Smith, a great trampoline and vaulter,
similar
met his death in a manner precisely during the
management of Messrs. Ducrow and
some seasons back.—The Times. West, at Astley's,