The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-03-22 00:00:00

THE INCOME-TAX

(From yesterday's Times.>
The strong feeling of opposition to the income-tax, which.
was so manifest a few days ago, seems to have somewhat
abated in the city. That the tax is in itself an odious one,.
and that no modification of its details can render it free from.
causing much personal inconvenience, is, however, admitted.
as strongly as ever. Some, who it. should be observed are•
persons of the highest standing in the city, have been heard.
to remark that they hope the precautions taken against
frauds in the returns will be sufficiently stringent, so that
while conscientious persons are paying their full amount,
those who are fraudulently disposed may not cast the bur-
den from their own shoulders. The placing of commissioners
at the \Vest-end of the town, and the selection of such men
as would not naturally feel a great interest in the affairs of
their neighbours, may possibly alleviate the dislike which.'
many felt to the working of the old income-tax, when parties.
in the immediate neighbourhood of the taxpayers could use
their position as a means of gratifying an idle curiosity, or
perhaps of carrying out some important object. These are,
however, such mere details of the measure that it is scarcely
possible, until the machinery of the system is better known,
to test public opinion fully on this head. The opinion re-
specting the line of demarcation to be drawn between termi-
nable and permanent annuities, which was so prominently-
brought forward at the Bank meeting on Thursday, and on
which Sir Robert Peel so decidedly expressed his views last
night, does' not seem at all altered. since while a permanent
annuity is looked upon as income in the legitimate sense of
the word, a terminable one is considered .a payment of capital
in instalments.

On this day se'nnight the speech of Sir Robert Peel had
taken the public by surprise, and all were disposed to admire
it ; then came reflection on the personal inconvenience of
the income tax, which produced a strong reaction, and a
pretty marked dislike of the measure. Both these feelings
seem to have subsided, and to have been succeeded by a de-
termination to wait patiently for further details to balance
the different effects of the proposition, and, if it can be
proved that a greater good can be produced by a lesser evil,
to submit quietly to the latter, or at any rate only to aim at
modifications in such parts of the machinery of the system
as may seem oppressive or anomalous.

ACTION BY A BETH LEM PATIENT FOR FALSE
IMPRISONM ENT.

HOBDAY V. DAVIES AND OTHERS

At the Maidstone Assizes on Saturday, an action was
brought by the plaintiff, a tallow-chandler at Woolwich, who
had been twice an inmate of Bethlem Hospital, against
Thomas Davies, his father-in-law ; James Bassett, his
brother-in-law ; and James Bull, one of his most intimate
friends—for falsely and maliciously confining plaimiff in
Bethlem as an insane person, and keeping him for the space
of twelve weeks, from the 29th of May, 1841.
The plaintiff, who is about forty years of age, of short
stature, conducted his own case, assisted by an attorney. _

. _
..
Mr. Platt, Mr. Ryland, and Mr. Simon were counsel for
the defendant Davies; Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Es-
pinasse, for Bassett and Bull.
__.

The plaintiff made` an opening speech to the jw-y. in which,
he detailed the injuries he conceived himself to have re-
ceived. He said the jury were aware that for the Bethlem
Hospital, like other public institutions, there were public
dinners, et which. the 'number of patients adinitted and
those discharged cured were paraded, and, of 'course, the'
more sane persons were admitted the more Fane persons
would be discharged. On this account it was thqtiie attri-
buted there being no opposition to his own,reception, which
was effected by means of a petition 'from his wife. On his re-
lease, however, he found that it was not his wife who had
been instrumental in procuring his incarceration, but the de-
fendants. He also asserted that the officers of Woolwich
garrison were concerned in it, and, indeed, he believed that
the Admiralty authorities had conspired against him, and also
the Board of Ordnance. He then called his witnesses, not
fewer than thirty-nine in number. The first was the coach-
man that drove the party to Bethlem on the second occa-
sion when plaintiff was placed there, to which alone this
action referred. The next witness was Mr. 'Appleby, formerly
inspector of the Woolwich Dockyard police, who, with other
policemen, assisted in taking•plaintiff to Bethlem, acting by
the instructions of the defendant Davies, who accompanied
the party. On the 29th May, 1840, he went to the plantiff 's
house, where he saw Mrs. Hobday, who said she hoped her
husband would not be taken away, for there was nothing the
matter with him, and she was sorry for what she had done,
referring to her having signed the petition for his removal.
On being made acquainted with their business, plaintiff trade
no resistance, but voluntarily entered the coach, saying " she
had done it all, and would repent of it." He.was taken to
Bethlem' and after being examined by the apothecary, was
admitted. This witness, as well as several others, who gave
similar evidence, said they saw no symptoms of insanity
about the plaintiff.
Matthew Evans stated that he bad been a patient at Beth-
lem, where he saw the plaintiff, and, like him, he had com-
menced an action against the parties who put him there. His
examination by the plaintiff afforded a most extraordinary
scene—the witness, in a state of the most painful excitement,
describing his supposed :wrongs. He declared with great
earnestness and gesticulation that the papers, on the strength
of which he had been confined, had all been signed, as a
matter of course, by parties who had never known him—
that he had been three times hanged by the neck till anima-
tion was suspended—that he had been drugged with tarta-
rised antimony, and that now his relations had quarrelled,
and were going to law amongst themselves for confining him.
Samuel Davies, another Bethlem patient, was next called.

Baron Alderson.—Mr. Hobday, I am desirous of serving
you. Your calling such witnesses will not tend to convince
the jury that you are of sound mind.
Plaintiff said he was desirous of showing that what were
attributed to him as delusions were realities. He then went
on to ask the witness about some revelations which lie as-
serted had been made to him from heaven in dreams.
Baron Alderson.—Do you really believe that these things
were revealed to you in dreams?
Plaintiff.—Undoubtedly, my lord.
Baron Alderson.—Gentlemen of the jury, here is a person
who says that it was revealed to him in a dream that his wife
had cantharides administered to her for un infamous purpose
—what do you think ?

However, the jury made no sign, and the cause proceeded.
The witness stated that Mr. Hobday told him he was one
day going to Herne Bay in the steamer when he saw Abra-
ham on board, and also a younger person with a glory round
his head, who was our Saviour.
His Lordship.—The cause ought to be stopped. I think
it is quite wrong to let it go on.
Plaintiff.—My lord, suppose St. Paul were living now, he
would assuredly be considered a madman. _ _

His Lordship.—He was considered mad, but he proved his
authority by working miracles.
Plaintiff.—ls it not a miracle to tell a man his propensi-
ties? Don't yon remember what was said to Elynias, " thou
seed of the evil one." This was known by looking in his
eyes. My lord, we profess to he Christians in these days.
The early church possessed this faculty. The confessional
proves that—because it was not, as is now the case, that the
penitent told the minister his sins, but the minister told the
penitent his propensities.
One of the Jury.—Have we no power to put an end to
this, my lord ?
His LORDSHIP.—I have, gentlemen, and I shall do so.
Call the plaintiff.
Plaintiff.—My lord, I claim my right to bring forward evi-
dence to prove my sanity. May Idoso ?
His LORDSH I P.—l caniwt prevent you./ Have you any
further evidence against Basset and Bull?
Plaintiff replying in the negative,
His LORDSHIP directed a verdict to be taken in favour of
those two defendants.
Plaintiff then called John Sharp and several other wit-
nesses, who said they had never seen anything in him indica-
tive of unsound mind • but on being asked by his lordship
what they thought of his present exhibition, some said they
had no doubt now that he was.insane, though others consi-
dered him merely excited.

Mr. Platt then addressed the jury for the defendant. The
learned counsel called a witness in support of his case, but
while he was under examination the jury intimated that they
had heard enough ; but his lordship said they must now hear
it out.
Some other witnesses were then called.

The jury again expressed their full conviction that defend-
ant was entirely justified in what he had done, and a verdict
to that effect was then given.
At the conclusion of this case, his Lordship said he hoped
he should never again see a court of justice transformed into
an additional ward of Bethle►n Hospital.

At Covent Garden market last Tuesday there was a very
good supply of new potatoes, at from 9d. to 2s. per lb.
PICTURES IN NEWSPAPERS.—Some journalists delight
in presenting their readers with ugly engravings of murderers,
favourite race-horses, royal christenings, and other objects
of
.publie interest. The following facts which came out on a
trial in the Court of Queen's Bench, on Saturday last, will
sbew the public how they are gulled and imposed upon by
many of these productions. It appeared that an engraving,
speciniens of which were shewn in court, was executed in
1839, of a mare called." Bee's-wing," well known in the
sporting world. The engraver was Mr. Charles Hunt, and
the owner and publisher the plaintiff. The defendant was
the publisher of a weekly newspaper, and in the publication
of the Gth of June, 1841, the defendant gave what was en-
titled, " a portrait of Coronation, the winner of the Derby
in 1841," which turned out to be an accurate and exact copy
of the plaintiff's engraving of the mare " Bee's-wing." This
reminds us of the editor of a local journal who being anxious
to have an engraving of a celebrated murderer, and not hav-
ing the opportunity of obtaining a likeness of that individual,
volunteered his own amiable self to the artist, and was duly
called " to the bar."