The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-03-29 00:00:00

STEPHENS V. HADFIELD.

This case, the principal question in which is given in our
report of Saturday's proceedings, ended at one o'clock, by
the jury returning a verdict for the defendant.

UNDEFENDED CAUSES IN THE SECOND LIST.
The learned BARON informed the bar that he should take
all the undefended causes in the second list [West Derby
hundred] on Friday morning, whether the first list was
finished or not.
COULTHARD AND ANOTHER, ASSIGNEES, V. IHORP.
This was an undefended action brought by the assignees of
John Coates, of Manchester, a bankrupt,
.against John
Thorp, treasurer of the corporation of Manchester, to re-
cover £1,310, the value of certain bills of exchange' accepted
and endorsed by him, when one of the officers of the Northern
and Central Bank of England.
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Tomlinson were for the plaintiffs.
The jury returned a verdict for the amount claimed.
WHITEHEAD V. WHITEHEAD.

This was an undefended action brought to recover the sum
of £l9O ss. ld. The plaintiff is an attorney, and the de-
fendant is his brother, and both reside in Bolton. In the
beginning of 1840 the defendant app:ted to the plaintiff to be-
come surety with him for a sum of money which was to be
advanced by a Mr. Vickers. Mr. \Tickers advanced .1;160
to the defendant, upon the plaintiff entering into a bond as
a security. Mr. Vickers having applied unsuccessfully to
the defendant for repayment, at last brought an action against
the plaintiff, who was compelled to pay the sum he now
claimed from the present defendant.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.

TRESPASS.—WILD AND OTHERS V. HOLT AND ANOTHER.
This case was tried at the last assizes, but on application
to the court above a new trial was granted, on the ground
that evidence had been rejected which ought to have been
admitted. The plaintiffs were the lessees, under Lord Suf-
field, of a colliery in the township of Thornbam, and parish
of Middleton (near Rochdale) called the Hathershaw Moor
Colliery. The defendants, Holt and Dunlop, are the lessees
under Mr. Hornby, of an adjoining colliery called Hanging
Chadder Colliery. The action was brought by the plaintiffs
to recover damages for a trespass committed by the defend-
ants, in havtng taken from the plaintiffs' seams 748 quarters
of coal, worth XI a quarter, and damage done to the amount
of £s9o.—Mr. Dundas, Mr. Cowling, and Mr. Green were
for the plaintiffs ; Mr. Knowles and Mr. Tomlinson for the
defendants. The trial lasted several hours, but the details
were entirely destitute of interest. The jury found a verdict
for the plaintiffs, damages £750, and the learned Judge
granted leave to the defendants' counsel to move the court
above to enter a nonsuit, a verdict for Is., or to reduce the
damages by 4s. 6d. a quarter.

THE CAUSE LIST.
The following was the state of the cause list at the rising
of the court last night. The causes hitherto tried hare con-
sisted principally of undefended ones. At present the second
or Salford Hundred List has not been touched.

Plaintiff : Nos. 1,2, 3,5, 6,7, 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,
20, 24, 25, 27, 31.
Defendant : Nos. 4, 9.
Referred : No. 10.
Withdrawn : Nos. 12, 13.

CORRESPONDENCE.

FREEMASONRY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

SlR,—Permit me, through the medium- of your valuable
paper, to call the attention of the Freemasons, and all mem-
bers of other illegal societies in this town, to the following
passage, which I find'in the London Times of .the 28th ult.,
and by which it appears that Freemasonry, which is an avowed
SECRET SOCIETY, falls under the same stigma and penalty
consequent to Ribbonism. In the passage I allude to, Mr.
Justice Barton, in his charge to the grand jury at the late
Longford assizes, is made to say as follows :—" Every secret
society, no matter how laudable its object might be, was
illegal." And again he adds :—" Every species of secret
society, no matter-what its object or denomination might be,
was injurious to the peace and wellbeing of the community,
and ought to be put a stop to." How can Freemasons re-
concile' the continuance of their societies 'with the present
state of the law ?—I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Liverpool, 25th March, 1842. DELTA.