The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-04-12 00:00:00

pressive than " cut Du

Cross-examination resumed.---I have ascertained since
that the mortgage deed bears the signature of Radcliffe.
Duncan, and Lowe. _

By Mr. KNOWLES.-It is usual for the attorney who pre-
pares a deed to indorse his name upon it. It was usual for
the mortgagor to send his draft to the solicitor of the society.
On this occasion Mr. Lowe sent his to Curry and Statham.
John Evans was the acting trustee with Mr. Ashlin in
May, 1838. Went with him to Curry and Statham's.--
Witness confirmed the testimony of the last witness in its
leading particulars.—He had inquired of Statham if all was
right, if they were justified in paying the money, and being
answered in the affirmative, handed over the money. Wit-
ness produced the different deeds and other documents, and
identified them. Mr. Statham gave no further advice about
anything to be done in the matter. The difference between
the sum actually paid in money and £2,400 was made up in
account on the shares—there might be arrears.

By Mr. WORTLEY.—I am quite sure the question was put
to Statham after the deed was signed-. It don't recollect
Mr. Ashlin putting it before. I am quite certain I asked
before 1 paid the money over. I did not see Lowe.afterwards
that day. A further sum was advanced to Lowe. Do not
know of any other solicitor being consulted in that transac-
tion. There are four trustees. I do not know the actual
balance due from Lowe at his bankruptcy. I did not hear
that the fee paid to Mr. Statham was one guinea.
By Mr. KNOWLES.—AII was lost.
Mr. William Pritt.—ls an attorney in Liverpool. Was
solicitor to Mr. Hind's executors. The security was taken
by Mr. Hind in his life time, and we were his attorneys.—
Wrias appeared with the deeds under his subpoena, but said he
title advised by counsel not to produce them, and expose his
, as ins client had been served with notice by the build-
ing society that the second mortgage would be disputed, but,
obtained under on the suggestion of the Court, that they could at any time
be d
a bill in equity, he consented to produce
them.—He producedan assignment of an attendant term to
a trustee for Mr. Hind
realise
Gladstone to Lowe. He had
the original conveyance from
other mortgages on the same
property, and are in possession.
it is doubtful that it will The amount is £7,000, and
it. Remembers being sent
for to Currie and Statham
Mr. Neilson and Mr. Ashton s°m.
Had a conversation with
much attention to the payin their presence. Did not
conversation,except as far as re-
lated to my own business. When
son and Ashton said they had a certificate from Currie and
Statham, stating that the mortgage was a good mortgage, or
something to that effect. Mr. Currie was not aware of it,
and asked Mr. Statham if it Were so. Mr. Statham said he
had given one, but did not recollect the terms. Did not hear
who was the solicitor any thing said
—ours is the transfer of that mortgage, It was assigned to
Hind from Brooks and Statham. The attendant terms were
assigned also. I told them I had got the terms as a reason
why I had the better title. The terms are vested in Mr.
Statham,__ as trustee for Brooks and Statham.
By Mr. WORTLEY.—Was about six. weeks after, at a