The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-08-08 00:00:00

SMITHFIELD CATTLE MARKET.-7yEsTERDAy,

- - .
Although the number of Beasts is larger, there is a considera
ble falling off in weight. A great many are coming to market
in very middling condition ; they have evidently done badly at
grass ; consequently, the best descriptions folly maintain Fri-
day's quotations ; indeed, nearly 4s. 4d. has been obtained for
selling qualities. The supply of Sheep and Lambs is hardly so
large as on Monday last ; trade is more cheerful, and the best
qualities are making rather more money. Owing to the non-
arrival of some Dutch boats, the supply of Calves is much
shorter; prices have consequently advanced about 4d. per 81bs.

THE IRON TRADE OF SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE.—It
is gratifying to be able to state upon unquestionable au-
thority, that within the last fortnight there has been a
decided improvement in the iron trade of these districts.
Orders for all kinds of iron are abundant : but althogh an
advance of prices has been seriously discussed, none has
yet taken place upon those fixed at the recent quarterly
meetings of the trade. Another pleasing feature of the
present times is the apparent good understanding which
exists between the wastera and the men.

August 8,108.

LIABILITY OF SHAREHOLDERS IN JOINT
STOCK BANKS.

NEWCASTLE-ON-TINE ASSIZES.-FRIDAY.

(Before Mr. Justice Cresswell.)
NESS V. BLACKWOOD.
Mr. Knowles appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Martin
and Mr. Manisty for the defendant. Defendant pleaded
that the debt had been paid.
Mr. Martin, in addressing the jury for the defendant,
on whom the onus of proof lay, said that this action,
although in the name of Mr. Ness, was in fact, like others
on the list, brought by the directors of the North of En-
gland Bank, for the purpose of endeavouring by indirect
means to compel the shareholders in that bank to paY
what was called a forced loan, in order to enable the.
directors to carry it on without resorting to the plain-end
straightforward course of compelling the shareholders to
pay up their calls. The history of the case would. he
thought, open the eyes of the people relative to' joint'
stock banking establishments. In 1831 this link wag
established, with the enormous capital of £406,000 or
£500,000 ; the directors knew best what they hatf done
with the money, but in 1847 the bank stopped, without
having one penny to pay any single individual. The con-
sequence was great discontent among the boa fide share-
holders, and means were taken for the' purpose of calling,
upon them in the manner pointed out by the deed of!
settlement to pay the debts of the bank. The learned
counsel animadverted strongly on the conduct of the
directors, inlet especially in issuing a circular calling for
loans, but in which it was stated that "'several highly
respectable parties had been excepted, as they held such
a number of shares that the calls had been considered
oppressive and• equivalent to a loan." The learned
counsel then stated that Mr. Ness had received, toe
money, and explained how an assignment had been made
of the debt and judgment to a Mr. Blaylock, of Carlisle,
with the view of enabling the directors to institute the
present proceedings:
Mr. John Tinley, defendant's attorney, remembered a,
scire facias being issued against Mr. Hudson at the glib
of Ness. He afterwards met that gentleman in the streets
of North Shields, and- said, " You are frightening people
out of their wits by issuing scire facias for such' large
sums." He replied, " Yes, I understand they are 'aging
my name, but I have got all settled and paid." This was
in February or March ; the present action was brought in
May. On the following' month he again met Mr. Ness,'
and said to him, " By the way,. the bank is still using your
name, although you said they paid you." He said, ""It's
very wrong, they will be getting into a scrape ; they paid
me, and I did not expect they would use my name."
[The letter from the bank).referred to in the opening,
was put in and approved.]
Mr. Hedley was called to prove Mr. Henderson's sire-•
tore to the letter. Cross-examined.—Witness is a chree-'
tor of the bank ; Mr. Ross, Mr: Henderson, Mr. Hevvson,
and Mr. Robson were also directors. Each of these
gentlemen had a loan account with the bank—money
advanced by them to meet the exigencies of the bank.
Witness saw money drawn by the checks of these gentle-
men paid to Mr. Philipson for Mr: Blaylock, who lives ilt
Carlisle. Re-examined.—Mr. JObling was at this time
solicitor to the bank. The bank solicitors are the plain'
tiff's solicitors in this action.
Mr. Knowles, for the plaintiff, said that the real eues;
tion was, not whether the directors-had exercised a sound
or an unsound direction, but whether Mr. Ness had been
paid his debt by the bank.i He would show that in point
of law the debt exists to this day and is in full force, and
that it belongs to a party who was now using the name of
Mr. Ness,as he was entitled to do if the debt was his;
The payment was not by the bank, but by four-individual
directors, who drew out their own money for the purpose;
and he would prove that the debt and judgment had been
handed over to Mr. Blaylock for the purpose of keeping Jit
alive. These being the facts, he had no doubt the kernel'
Judge would direct them to find a verdict in accordance
with a decision in the Court of Exchequer, tnwhich he
made reference.
Mr. P. Thompson, Mr. Ness's solicitor, proved the
making of the assignment.
On Mr. Martin rising to reply,
His Lordship intimated that there were-no facts,for the
jury, and informed them that in law the debt- had lot
been paid, but assigned, and the defendant's plea had. cow
sequently not been made out.
The jury at once returned a verdict for the plaintiff, on
which
The learned Judge observed, " Gentlemen, in thne
shareholders in banks will understand their-liability-7
Verdicts were-obtained for the same plaintiff in. seven'
other cases of a similar nature against various other de-
fendants.