The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-08-05 00:00:00

BURGLARY

Edward Mercer, aged 23, was indicted for having, at Li-
verpool, broken open the dwelling-house of 'William Chis-
nall, and stolen therein a coat, a pair of trowsers and other
articles, the property of the said William Chisnall. The
Wisoner had pleaded not guilty, but withdrew his plea. Mr.
ilkins made a statement in his behalf, and said he should
call some witnesses. It appeared that this was the pri-
soner's first offence.

John Fagan, 22, and William M`Mciran,l9, were charged
with having at Liverpool, feloniously broken and entered the
dwelling-house of Henry Disley, and being found therein
with intent to steal,
Dr. Brown conducted the prosecution, and stated the
facts of the case, some of which were recently published,
after the examination before the magistrates.
Mary Disley said her husband and she lived in Bevinzton
Bush. She described the house, which is of one story, with
pantry and cellars below. There was also a hay-loft. On
the night of the 13th July last witness was down stairs in the
kitchen with another person. She heard a noise on the front
bed-room floor up stairs. This was between nine and ten
o'clock. She sent a little girl up stairs to make the win-
dow, and went out herself into the street. When she
got out she saw Fagan's face. He was looking out at the
window, which was then open, and he was in the room. He
drew his hand in, and she screamed, when be jumped out.
All the doors were open at the time, There was no way of
getting to the bed-room without passing through the house,
past where witness and two others were at the time. She
ran after Fagan to the top of the street. (Witness, in reply
to Fagan, said she could not say whether the window, which
was open in the day, had been closed before she saw the man
looking out.) A piece of wood, used for fastening in the
window, was produced. Witness said she knew it, and that
the prisoner had it in his hand when he leapt out.
Elizabeth Sefton followed a little girl up stairs, and saw
the Prisoner Fagan in the bed-room, at the bedside. She
left the room, and followed Mrs. Disley into the street.
whence she saw him at the window. He afterwards jumped
out and ran away. She ran after him, and had him in sight
when he was taken.. She did not observe, when she was in
the room a short time before, whether the window was closed
or not. The prisoner Fagan importunely cross-questioned
the witness, but without any benefit to his case.
John Mulhatton saw that night three or four men loiter-
ing near the house. He saw two or three shoving a man
into the window of the room. He asked them what that
man was doing there. M`Moran said he had gone into the
hay loft near by, and he said " No," he had gone in by the
window. The prisoner was one of those standing on the
parapet when the man was put in at the window.
Henry Disley, owner of the house, said the window was
about seven feet from the street. _ He was in the hay-loft,
near the bed-room. Ile heard the alarm, and saw the pri-
soner Pagan, as he looked out of the loft, jump out of the
window.

A young man saw Mr. Disley pursue they prisoner, and
hold on by his coat tails. He kept sight of him till he was
apprehended. The other prisoner, M`Moran, took some.
thing like a knife or dagger, and threw it over a wall. He
could not, however, swear to his face. The man he saw
was, he said, taken up that night. (M`Moran was not, it
appeared, taken up till next day.)
Police-officer Toole was present soon after the alarm, and
took hold of Fagan. M`Moran got hold of the prisoner
and attempted to rescue him, and said he (Fagan) should
not go without him, and was himself taken. A chisel and
some skeleton keys (produced) were afterwards found on
Fagan. A crow bar was also found.

Officer 540 apprehended Fagan in Paul-street.
The Judge summed up very perspicuously. There could
be no doubt but Fagan was in the room, and with intent to
steal. The facts sworn to with regard to M`Moran also
showed than' he had assisted the other. The piece of wood
was a part of the outer wall of the building, and it was seen
in Fagan's hatid: This itself would constitute the burglary.
The jury found both prisoners guilty.
The JUDGE said there could be no doubt of the guilt of
both. They had attempted to rob a pew man. He could
not pass a less sentence than that he should pronounce. Ilis
Lordship then passed upon them sentence of transportation
for fifteen years.

EXTENSIRE ROBBERY

Matthew Mann, 42, was charged with having feloniously
stolen at Liverpool seventy-one sovereigns, and nine pounds
in silver, the property of Samuel Fryer, a publican, resid-
ing in Nova Scotia. Mr. Wilkins appeared for the prosecu-
tion.

Mary Fryer, wife of S. Fryer, said, that on the night of
Saturday, the 25th of June last, the prisoner and another
man came in and asked for two glasses of wine. The pri-
soner asked for change of a £5 note which she procured for
him. He afterwards wanted the change in some smaller
gold which she took from her lied-room, opposite the room
in which they sat. They could see her in the bed-room.
On the Monday following they returned, and asked for two
glasses of punch, and two cigars. The prisoner gave her a
shilling, and she gave him the change. They afterwards
went out hastily, saying they would not stop to smoke their
cigars. She afterwards missed the money stated. She had
previously seen it safe in the drawer of the desk in her room.
She found four £5 notes lying on the floor of the sitting
parlour. Two of them were of the bank of England. She
gave the alarm, but the men had gone. No other person
was in the sitting-room but the prisoner and the other man,
Sarah Frier, the prosecutor's sister, and who is servant
with him, saw the prisoner in the house on the previous
Wednesday, with the other man, and also saw them on the
Saturday and Monday. She was sure the prisoner was one
of them.

Police-officer, Thomas Ainsworth, jun., proved the appre-
hension of the prisoner.
Mr. JAMES addressed the jury in behalf of the prisoner,
in a very ingenious and argumentative manner. He con-
tended that there was no proof against him, and that though
the robbery was really committed, it must have been done
by some other persons. lie called witnesses to prove an
alibi, but their testimony was discredited.
Mr. JAMES spoke in behalf of the prisoner at considerable
length. _ _

Mr. WILKINS addressed the jury for the prosecution,
contending that the testimony of the witnesses for the alibi
were not to be at all depended upon—one swearing to the
conversation between the prisoner and Ainsworth taking
place below stairs, .and the other that it was up stairs. lie
went over the whole of the facts of the case, as regarded
what occurred in the public-house, and concluded by ex-
pressing a strong opinion of the prisoner's guilt.
The learned JUDGE summed up, giving a fair and consi-
derate statement of the whole of the circumstances. •
The jury immediately found the prisoner guilty.
The JUDGE said that it was impossible to doubt the guilt
of the prisoner, and after recapitulating some of the main
facts, sentenced him to be transported for 15 years.

HORSE STEALING

Thomas Turk, 40, and Charles Sweet, 19, were indicted
for having, at Liverpool, in July last, stolen one gelding and
one mare, the property of Daniel Conroy.

The occurrence is so recent, and the circumstances ap.
peared so fully in the STANDARD at the time, that we think
it unnecessary to repeat them.

It appeared that the prisoner had been employed by Mr.
Stuart, of Park-lane,land had forged the check on the Bank
of Liverpool. He afterwards went to London, where he was
seen loitering about by a police-officer, to whom, on being
questioned, be said he had forged the cheek, and did not like
to disgrace his friends by returning. He, at the time, threw
away two empty phials which he had in his pocket. The
prisoner asked the prosecutor if he was not aware that he
was sometimes out of his mind, and whether he had not once
attempted to destroy himself. The reply was, that he had
known that he once attempted suicide after having committed
a similar offence. The jury found him guilty. Sentence was
deferred.

The Court rose at ten minutes' past six o'clock

NISI PR/US COURT.--YESTERDAY

Mr. Justice MAuLE took his seat this morning at a
quarter past nine o'clock.
On the application of Mr. WORTLEY, who stated that the
Attorney-General was coming down in the cause. No. 41 in
the second list, (Jenkin v. Peace and others) it was fixed for
Thursday next.

SEDDON V. KBARSLEY

This was a special jury case, in which Mr. Robert Seddon,
cotton manufacturer, of Manchester, was the plaintiff ; and
defendant was Mr. Edward Kearsley, a gentleman living at
Ilindley. Mr. Knowles and Mr. H. Hill were counsel for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Wortley and Mr. Tomlinson were for the
defendant. The aeiion was brought to recover a sum of
above £3OOO, for goods sold and delivered to the trustees of
Mr. Thomas Kearsley, cotton spinner, who became a bank-
rupt in 1826. The manner in which the defendant became
liable, by his having been appointed a trustee for special pur-
poses, one of which was the payment of a debt due to Mr.
Seddon, was stated atiength in the opening speech of Mr.
Knowles. After the learned gentleman had partially opened
his case, Mr. Wortly said that his lordship had doubtless
heard sufficient to see that the case was so complicated that
it would be much better to refer it to some gentleman at the
bar. A conversation took place between the counsel, and
it was finally agreed that the case should be referred, under
certain conditions.

ALLEGED BREACH OF AGRELMENT.-CUSSONS, V. SKINNER

AND OTHERS

This was an action brought by Mr. George Cussons
against Mr. William Skinner, Mr. George Skinner, Mr.
Joseph Miller, Mr. John Wilkinson, Mr. Robert Lamb, Mr.
W. Smith, and Mr. J. Jackson, forming a company called
the Texas Cotton Company, for the purpose of recovering
from them a certain sum as arrears of wages, and compensa-
tion for a breach of agreement. Mr. Wortley, Mr. Cowling,
and Mr. Atherton, for the plaintiff; Mr. Knowles, and Mr.
Temple, for the defendants.
Mr. WORTLEY. said that the plaintiff was originally a cot-
ton-spinner, in Manchester, and was a gentleman of very
great experience and skill in the whole of the details of that
business. He had been in business on his own account, in
partnership with another gentleman ; but, in common with
many others of high respectability arid talent, was unfortu-
nate. Accordingly, the partnership was dissolved ; but,
after a time, Mr. Cussons recovered, and again set up in
Manchester, and that was the position in which he was,
conducting a smaller business than that to which he had
been aceustomedi3ut sufficient for the support of his
family. About this time, which was in 1839, a party of gen-
tlemen at Stockton-on-Tees, in the county of Durham, es-
tablished a joint stock company under the name of Stockton-
on-Tees Joint Stock Cotton Twist Spinning Company, and
under that name they built a mill, set up machinery, and
conducted an establishment. Of course it became necessary
that some one person should he deputed for the management
and for the superintendence, and accordingly it appeared that
the plaintiff, being known to some of the members of the
Co. or partnership, was introduced to them, and eventually en-
gaged by them for the purpose of superintending the building
of the mill, and also the general management of the concern.
It was agreed that he should have a salary of £3OO a year with
£5 per cent. on the net profits that were made ; that the engage-
ment should last for seven years, and that if, at the expira-
tion of that period, they were anxious to discharge him,
they were to give him six months' notice. In order to com-
ply with this agreement, it was necessary for Mr. Cussons
to abandon the business that he was carrying on. He did
so, went over, undertook the management of the business,
and he (the learned counsel) believed that the jury would be
satisfied that a more able person could not have been found.
At length the mill was erected after the most skilful and ap-
proved manner, and the concern commenced. The plaintiff
continued there as manager, but the concern, like many
others, did not prove so profitable as was anticipated,
and whether it was for that reason or some other
would appear in the course of the cause, but he believed
for that reason solely, the Company became anxious,
in the course of events, to dispense with the manager,
to whom the were obliged to give so large a remuneration
as they had undertaken. There was accordingly a change of
conduct towards him ; and, although he was in their employ
from April, 1839, to January, 1841, and about £5OO was due
to him for his salary, they only paid him £3OO. In conse-
quence of this non-payment of his salary, Mr. Cussons was
led into difficulties, and, having got into Durham gaol, the
Company took advantage of that event to discharge him
from their service, although it bad been brought about
by their own conduct. It was for this discharge that
the plaintiff now claimed compensation. He claimed the
arrears of salary for the actual time of his service,
and also some compensation in damages for the loss of
a situation which he had been red to expect would be
permanent, and which, at all events, he had a right to expect
would last for seven years. The defendants, who were not
regular manufacturers, had put on the record various pleas,
the first of which was, that they did not engage the plaintiff.
That plea would be done away with by the production of the
agreement. The next plea was, that the plaintiff acted so
negligently, carelessly, and improperly, as manager of the
concern, that they were on that account obliged to dismiss
him. He (the learned counsel) should call persons from the
mill to prove, that so far from acting carelessly or negli-
gently, he devoted the whole of his time to the discharge of

his duties-that his management was efficient, and that his
regulations and sttpervision were exceedingly useful to the
mill. The third plea was, that by his own default the plaintiff
was imprisoned for 'six weeks in Durham gaol, during which
time they lost his services, and that in consequence thereof
they dismissed him. He (Mr. Wortley) had already stated,
that by the company not paying Mr. Cussons his salary, he
had been unable to pay his creditors. The debt for which
he was imprisoned was not an extensive one, and might have
been paid, or at any rate satisfactorily deferred, if his salary
had been paid. But the jury, after having heard the plea
and what he stated, would be still further astonished when
they heard that Mr. William Skinner, who had been mayor
of Stockton, actually sent a policeman to the sheriff's officer,
to inform him where Mr. Cussons could be found, and that
in consequence he was arrested at ten at night. Stockton was
in the county of Durham, arid the writ against the plaintiff was
issued by the sheriff of that county. The mill was on the
other side of the Tees, in Yorkshire; and the plaintiff,
knowing that there was a writ out against him, did not cross
over until late. This became known to Mr. Skinner, and
lie put the officer on the scent. The next ground on which
the defendants pleaded, that the plaintiff was not entitled to
recover, was that the engagement was procured by the fraud,
covin, and misrepresentation of the plaintiff. He (the
learned counsel) made bold to say that there was not a sha-
dow or a shred of a pretence for that; and in order to make
the truth of the assertion clear, he should lay before the jury
a correspondence which had taken place. In the next plea,
they charged the plaintiff with having purchased certain
machinery on the part of the company, and with having
represented that he had paid for it a larger price than he did
actually pay. If he had been guilty of such a thing, he
ought of course to have no claim ; but lie (Mr. Wortley), on
the part of Mr. Cussons, indignantly charged them to the
proof. He did not hesitate to say that there was not one
word of truth in the 'charge, and there were those in his
sight who knew that there was not one word of truth in the
allegation. To show the spirit in which these parties acted,
he might mention that originally there stood on the record
a plea that the plaintiff had paid £lOOO contrary to his duty ;
but an application was afterwards made to the Judge to
allow them to strike out that plea, thus confessing that they
had made a charge which they could not support.
The agreement between the parties was put in, and was
about to he read, when Mr. Knowles objected, on the ground
that the attesting witness had not been produced. Mr.
Wortley contended that the words on the document, " signed,
sealed, and delivered, W. Smith, jun. were not an attes-
tation, but a mere indication of an intention which was never
fulfilled, and that the witness was therefore unnecessary.
His Lordship refused to stop the case on the objection, but
gave Mr. Knowles leave, in the event of the verdict being
against him, to move for a nonsuit or a verdict. The agree-
ment, which was dated April 30, 1839, was then put in and
read. _ .

A great number of witnesses were also called to prove
that the plaintiff had exhibited much skill in the construc-
tion of the mill; that the machinery erected was generally of
an excellent kind and of good workmanship ; and that he
attended sedulously to his duties, and that after his discharge
he was in great difficulties.
R. H. HENDERSON deposed that he was an officer of the
sheriff of Durham. On the 7th of January, 1841, he received
a warrant to arrest Mr. Cussons. He arrested him on the
20th of the month, and about eleven o'clock at night. Before
arres4incrb, the superintendent of the Stockton police came to
him and said, that the Mr. William Skinner, who was then
the Mayor of Stockton, wanted to see him at the police-
office. He went. Mr. Skinner and Mr. Miller were
together. The former asked him whether he had not a war-
rant to arrest Mr. Cussons. He (witness) replied that he
had ; and Mr. Skinner then asked why he (witness) did not
arrest him. His reply was, that Mr. C. kept at the York-
shire side of the water. Mr. Skinner stated that if he went
then to the house of Mr. Cussons, which was on the Dur-
ham side, he would be sure to find him. He (witness) en-
deavoured to excuse himself by stating that there was some
irregularity about the warrant, and that he was in communi-

Watson, draper, of 'Stockton, said that the plaintiff
owed him £2O, for goods furnished to his family, and Mr.
Wilson, the attorney of the present defendants, waited on
him, and induced him- to oppose Mr. Cussons, in order that
he might be detained. He consented, knowing the object
with which the request was made, and thinking that Mr. C.
had acted improperly.
Mr. KNOWLES then opened the case for the defendants,
and in the first place alluded to the exaggerated tone which
had been adopted by his learned friend. Every one must
have imagined, from the way in which the learned counsel
had talked, that Mr. Cussons had been induced by an offer
made to him to abandon a highly profitable business, and
that this ought to be taken into consideration in calculating
the damages. The question to be tried, however, must be
taken apart from that. consideration. The jury must look
at the relation in which the plaintiffs stood to the defendants,
and to the manner in which he discharged his duty. if he
he had given justifiable cause of discharge, their verdict
would be for the defendant, and he must contend that the
defendent was entitled to that verdict. He should produce
some additional evidence to show that the conduct of the
plaintiff had been such as no man could possibly have
put up with. The learned gentleman read a letter, which,
he said, tended to show that in all probability the negotia-
tion as to the situation of manager did not, as had been
stated, originate with, Mr. Miller, but with Mr. Cussons.
He then read other letters from the plaintiff, the tone and
statements of which, he observed, were of such a nature as,to
impress the directors with the idea that the writer was a man
of considerable importance in Manchester, able to ensure the
success of their undertaking, and not only willing himself to
become a shareholder, but to induce many others to take
shares. The fact, however, was, that he did not take a single
share for himself, for he never was iu a position to do so, and
did not procure a single person to subscribe for a single share.
If this did not bear out the plea of fraud and covin, it at least
spewed that the plaintiff had greatly exaggerated his capabi-
lities. The learned counsel proceeded next to direct atten-
tionto the two pleas on which, he said, principally rested the
defence. The first stated, that, after the making of the
agreement, the plaintiff conducted himself so negligently and
unskilfully, that the defendants sustained great loss and in-
convenience, and therefore discharged him. The next plea
stated, that by his own default the plaintiff was imprisoned
in Durham gaol, and the defendants lost his services. The
evidence which he should offer under these pleas would show
that the plaintiff purchased certain machinery, in confede-
racy with a person of the name of Kershaw, and that he
charged the company considerably more than he paid. Mr.
Knowles stated this part of the case very minutely. In De-
cember, 1839, there was a sale of machinery at Stockport,
and Mr. Cussons attended, together with Mr. Kershaw.
The amount purchased was of the value of £lll4 17s. Bd.,
and in one book the amount was so put down, but in the
cash-book the payments to Mr. Kershaw on account of those
purchases were put down at £l2OO. Perhaps that might
admit of some explanation. In March, 1840, there was
another sale of machinery at Gaythorne Mills. Two lots were
purchased by a person named Joi.n Jones, for £2l 10s.
When the sale was completed, Kershaw. who had been in
conversation with Cusson's, went up to Jones, and offered
him an advance for the purchase : £22 lls 6d was accepted.
At the same sale, eleven doubling frames were purchased by.
a Mr. Shepherd for £lO5 12s, Mr. Kershaw, after the sale,
left the side of Mr. Cussons, with whom be had been con-.
versing, and agreed to give Shepherd £lO for his bargain.
The two purchases therefore would come to £l3B, but Mr.
Cussons charged £335, and, therefore, either an overcharge
of £2OO was made, or £2OO went into the pocket of Mr.
Kershaw, which might, and ought to have been saved. The
next charge_against the plaintiff, was that he bad, contrary
to the express commands of one of the directors, given a bill
to Messrs. Shorrock and Gore, of Manchester, who were
supplying machinery,to the company. In order to prove
that the plaintiff had been put into Durham gaol on
his own default, and not in consequence of the non-payment
of his salary, Mr. Knowles produced the plaintiff's schedule,
which stated that the amount owing to him by the company
was £7O, and that his debts were £1,400. In the same
schedule, his profits were set down as follows :—for 1835,
£9O; 1836, £100; 1837, £120; 1838, £130; and 1839, £l2O.
That was the profitable business which had been abandoned.
His good debts were set down at £93, and the doubtful ones
at about £7OO. Another circumstance showing that the
plaintiff was committed in his own default was this, that he
was arrested on the night of the 20th, committed on the
21st, and on the same day filed his petition, proving that he
bad his schedule ready, and was prepared to take the benefit
of the act.

Jones, Shepherd, and other witnesses were called to prove
these statements, and then

Mr. WORTLEI replied, contending that if his own evi-
dence had proved the case of the plaintiff to be a hard and
cruel one, it had been made still more plain by the case for
the defence. The cases of Jones and Shepherd were capable
of easy explanation. One broker had certain lots knocked
down to him, and another broker purchased from him a 4
an advance, and then resold at a profit to the plaintiff.
If the transactions had not been honest, why was not
Kershaw called, to prove that he sold, not at 2s. 7d.,
hut at Is. per spindle, as was alleged ? Kershaw had
evidently been examined by the defendant's attorney; he.
was then in court, and would, no doubt, have been called, it
the charge could have been substantiated. It ought also to
be borne in mind, that the charge in the cash-book included
the carriage from Manchester to Stockton-on-Tees. The
same observation applied to the purchase at Stockport,
where £lll4 was the actual cost of the machinery, and the
remainder to make up £l2OO, consisted of rent-charges,
packing, removal, and carriage. If the books had been ex-
amined, it would have been found that there was in the
ledger an entry for the subsequent charges, the amount being
left blank, no doubt owing to the plaintiff having been hur-
ried to gaol, before he had time to ascertain them. The hi 1
alludsd to had been given to Shorrocks and Gore, after
pressing requests for money, and was duly entered in rte
ledger. The conduct of the plaintiff could be only re-
prehensible in so far that he went contrary to the
orders of Mr. G. Skinner; but, then, Mr. Skinner was a
junior partner, unacquainted with business, and least
likely to know the proper course which ought to
have been pursued. The fact was, that Mr. Cussons,
by acting on his own responsibility, had protected the
honour and credit of the company. The learned counsel
proceeded to explain a variety of other matters connected
with the case, and he concluded by calling upon the jury to
give the plaintiff such damages as the circumstances seemed
to demand.

The JUDGE having summed tip, the jury, after a short
consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff,—damages
£470, being £l7O for salary, and £3OO damages.

WEST DERBY LIST,

The COURT afterwards proceeded to hear undefended
causes in the:Second List, and disposed of Nos. 1,3, 5,9,
12, 22, and 68.

NEW BRIGHTON

After all, sandy desert as they may call it, we consider
this one of the most delightful and healthy places within a
few miles of Liverpool, and more in accordance with our
notion of a watering place than any round this coast. Bar-
ren, undoubtedly it is, and few indeed are the spots in the
vicinity of the sea which are not so. The beautiful fertility,
with trees run down to the sea shore, as at that delightful
place Hastings, or that still more fairy spot in the ocean, the
Isle of Wight, is not often to be met with. But if there is
one thing more than another, which strongly recommends
New Brighton to us as a retreat for a few weeks or even a
few days, it is our being able to escape, totally, out of sight
or hearing of the noise, sight, bustle, and turmoil of Liver-
pool; for we cannot partake of that Cockney feeling which
leads the noble citizen of the great metropolis, after getting
as far out of town as a day's holiday will allow them ; to
stretch their necks, and their eyes, unnaturally open to
catch a glimpse of " dear old St. Pauls," as they term it.
In our rustications we like retirement, and pqurt not
"The Parade," or "Terrace," with the throng of visitors,
and well paid musicians : all these things are well in their
way, and we admire music ; but on our little summer trips,
we like retirement; and New Brighton is of all others
around this coast the most delightful place to seek it, that
is, if you admire a sea view. Where can a more bold and ex-
pansive view of the noble ocean be seen ; and where a more
lively and animating river scene than the numerous vessels,
small and large, constantly passing round the rock, up and
down the river. The daily passing of the Irish, Scotch, and
Welsh steamers, alone form enough to amuse, with the thou-
sand reflections to which they give rise. But the place in
itself we also admire; for there are proofs sufficient of what
labour and cultivation will do, even to a hitherto barren spot.
Never have we seen a more beautiful garden than that under
the cultivation of one of the chief proprietors of New Brigh-
ton. W. Rowson, Esq. The earliest vegetable to be met
with in the season, may be seen in this gentleman's grounds,
and both the vegetable, fruit, and flower garden ; altnough
close upon the sea, are as productive as any we ever rememr
ber to have seen ; and, all this has been dune within three
short years, for within that time this garden was a sand WO!
Mr. Rowson's pinery is, we think, not to be surpassed, we
have seen the pinery at Eaton, but it certainly is not equal
to this. There are now several beautiful mansions built here
by Gillitt, Esq., J. Ewart, Esq., and several others. The
Fort or Rock Battery, and the Light-house, are also objects
which render this place more interesting. The sands of
New Brighton are beautiful. They are far beyond South-
port, Blackpool, or Fleetwood.

The view of Wallasey Church and village, Leasowe Light-
house, with the rich and beautiful Welch Mountains as a
back ground, form a really grand and picturesque view, and
well repay the labour of a walk. But still something is
wanting. A church is wanted at New Brighton, and until
there is one, the place is by no means perfect ; and we can-
not sec why the place should have been so long without one.
Then a few good shops are wanted, and if the landed pro-
prietors were only to build two or three and let them at low
rents, to encourage the first settlers in that .way, the thing.
would doubtless be done. We believe that if somewhat of
the same enterprising spirit had been displayed in this place
as at Fleetwood, it would have repaid far better, and by this
time even, have become a much more important place. Now
that a connection is proposed between Seacombe and Wood-
side, by a bridge over Wallasey Pool, New Brighton will
rapidly rise. This is our conviction, and for the sake of the
proprietors we sincerely hope it may be realized, for we like
the place much.

Mr. Beverley, the late manager of the Sunderland, Dur-
ham, and other theatres, died at Scarborough last week. He
was born at Hull in 1772.

SINGULAR CASE.-At the late Derry Assizes, a case of
Fortescue v. the Bishop of Derry was tried. The plaintiff
was executor of Mr. T. K. Magee. The declaration stated
that on the Ist January, 1536. the defendant, then Bishop of
Killaloe, in consideration of the sum of £2,000 being paid to
him by Thomas Knox Magee, did promise to promote his
son, the Rev. George Adam Magee, to the first vacant bene-
fice in his power; and that the said plaintiff did afterwards
advance to the defendant £l,OOO, pareel of the said sum of
£2,000, arid that he was willing to advance the residne, ypt
the said defendant, not regarding his promise, had pot as
yet promoted the Rev. George A. Magee to a vacant bane,
five, although divers vacancies had occurred, and he might
have fulfilled his promise. The damages were laid at £3,000.
To this the defendant pleaded the general issue, and the
statute of limitations. After the examination of several
witnesses, Mt. T. B. C. Smith addressed the court for the
defendant. Justice Pennefather charged the jury, who re-
turned a verdict for the defendant.

MELANCHOLY ACCIDENTS.—SEVENTEEN LIVES LOST.
—LERWICK, JULY 11.—The boat Woodlark, of this place,
laden with peaty, on her return from the island of Whalsay
to the Island of Skerries, about 40 miles to the northward,
on the evening of the 9th inst., with eight men, two women,
and a fish-curer, upset during a heavy squall, and the whole
were unfortunately drowned. Five out of oue family were
lost, three brothers and two sons. The Island of Skerries
is almost depopulated. The following are the names of the
unfortunate sufferers, as far as we have been able to ascer-
tain :—Arthur Sandison, William Anderson, John Ander-
son, Arthur Henderson, David Anderson John James
Williamson, and an aged man of the name ("Bain. On the
evening of the 11th instant, a six-oared boat, belonging to
Cunningsburgh, about twelve miles south of this place, while
returning from the ling fishing, was unfortunately lost with
six men, four of whom were brothers. All have left desti-
tute families. The skipper of the boat had his eldest son
along with him% Their names are—John Macpherson, Ro-
bert Macpherson, sen., Laurence Macpherson, J. Mac-
pherson, R. Macpherson, jun., and Laurence Jamieson.--"
Caledonian Mercury.