The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-02-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-FRIDAY.
FARRAR V. DEFLINNE.

It will be remembered, that this action was tried at the
assizes in Liverpool in March last, having been brought
by the plaintiff, as a creditor of Thomas Todd, aeainst
the defendant, whom he alleged to be a partner of Todd.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff, for the amount
claimed ; and the defendant, in the following term, ob-
tained a rule nisi for a new trial, which came on for argu-
ment on Friday last. The matter was argued at great
length before Lord Denman, C.J., Mr. Justice Patteson,
and Mr. Justice Wightman, by Mr. Baines and Mr.
Tomlinson on behalf of the plaintiff, and Mr. Dundas
and Mr. Watson in support of the rule.
Lord Denman.—We certainly think there are facts in
the case of a very striking nature which ought to be re-
considered. It is better not to give any opinion upon the
effect of the evidence when that is the case. Another
jury will form their opinion upon it, and that must be
upon payment of costs; because, in my opinion, there
has been no mistake on the part of the judge, and no
evidence improperly received. His lordship then went
fully into the case ; and, in conclusion, said, " It strikes
me that there is evidence here that the plaintiff was not
dealing, and that he knew he was not dealing, with the
defendant. That seems to me not to have been quite
properly submitted to the jury."
Mr. Justice Patteson.—The circumstance of his sign-
ing that instrument (alluding to a deed of composition
wherein the plaintiff and other creditors of Todd had
compounded their debts for ten shillings in the pound) is
a very strong fact.
Rule absolute for new trial on payment of costs.

LORD W. PAGET V. THE EARL OF CARDIGAN.—
Calm Cox.—This celebrated case has been definitely
fixed for trial by a special jury, before the Lord Chief
Justice, in the Court of Common Pleas, at Guildhall, on
Wednesday, the 21st instant.—Globe.

- ----•
In the Court of Common Pleas last week, in the case
of Goslin v. Corry, an action was brought by plaintiff to
recover damages for a libel on him published by defendant
in the Police Gazette, or Hue and Cry, iscued by the
authority of the Secretary of State. The libel offered a
reward for his apprehension on a charge of fraud. The
Jury gave him £2OO damages.

Mr. Charles James Mathews, the well-known come-
dian. and the husband of Madame Vestris, appeared be-
fore the Court of Bankruptcy in Basinghall-street, on
Thursday in last week, to be heard on his petition to be
discharged from his debts and liabilities. His present
debts were £B,lll, of which about £4,000 were renewals
of old debts from which he had been discharged by the
Insolvent Court in June 1842, when his liabilities
amounted to the sum of £26,000. As an offer had been
made by Mr. Mathews to allow his creditors one-half of
his future weekly salary of £6O, the further hearing of
the case was adjourned till the 17th inst.
DEFAMATION.—The last cause tried at the Court of
Queen's Bench, on Saturday, was an action brought by
Miss Phillips, a young lady who keeps a respectable
boarding-house. It appeared, from the evidence, that
the defendant, Mrs. Morris, who is a widow lady, living
upon her private income, boarded some time with the
plaintiff. Shortly after she left the house of the latter
she sent to one of the inmates an anonymous letter, signed
M, which was proved to be in her handwriting, in which
it was set forth that Miss Phillips had slept with a person
called Waller, at his lodgings, on the night when Prince
Albert laid the first stone at Exeter Change. The witnes-
ses for the plaintiff showed distinctly the respectability
and prudence of her character ; and that she had not slept
from home on the night in question, or been abroad that
day. A witness was called who swore to the abominable
charge made in the letter, and stated, in addition, that
Miss Phillips was drunk. Lord Denman summed up at
some length, and expressed his opinion of the innocence
of the plaintiff of all the charges brought against her ;
and denounced the attempts too frequently made to throw
slurs upon the character of females struggling to obtain an
honourable maintainance. The jury consulted together
for a few seconds, anti the foreman said, " We find for
the plaintiff, damages £100; and we are unanimously of
opinion that not the slightest imputation rests upon the
character of the plaintiff."

We were much amused by seeing exposed, in the shop
windows, pocket hankerchiefs with the portraits of Messrs.
Cobden and Bright, upon them. In several instances,
this has been adopted to show respect to some popular
person, but it appeals to us ineffably ridiculous, to com-
pliment a favourite by Liming one's nose upon his effigy.
—Morning paper.