The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-04-08 00:00:00

THE ST. HELEN'S MURDEP

Robert Woods, 21,Isaac Jacques, 25, and Thomas Moly-
neux, 28, were indicted for the wilful murder of Henry Gray-
son, at Windle, near St. Helen's. They pleaded not guilty.
We gave the facts of this extraordinary case so fully at the
time, that it is unnecessary now again to detail them. We

will merely give in brief what took place before the court.
Dr. Brown and Mr. Brandt appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr. Wilkins for the defence. Dr. Brown, in the course
of his opening, stated, that without the evidence of a man,
who was his principal witness. he had no case. This man
had not presented himself to give evidence tilt fourteen,clays
after the parties now on trial were in custody, and not until a
reward of .E 250 had been offered for the discovery of the mur-
derer. It appeared that he had also asked a party, when the
bill offering the reward was read, if the actual murderer
would be pardoned, and had stated that he had something
weighing heavy on his mind. He (Dr. Brown) then de-
tailed the circo Instances of the case, and the nature of
the evidence which he would have to present. After a few
witnesses had been called to testify to the finding of the body,
and its condition, the party above alluded to was placed in
the witness box. His testimony, both on his examination in
chief, and in oross-examination, was so much at variance with
that given before the magistrates, and he was so flatly con-
tradicted by other witnesses, that the case was stopped, and,
under the direction of his lordship, a verdict of acquittal was
taken. The prisoners were discharged in the course of the
day

MANSLAUGHTER BY A MIDWIFE.
Maria Henry, 73, stood indicted for having killed and
slain one Margaret Carter.
We also reported the circumstances of this case as detailed
at the coroner's inquest. They will be found in the Standard
of the 18th ultimo.
The prisoner was acquitted.

FORGERS

Robert Wood Richardson, 43, formerly an attorney, was
charged with having forged a receipt with the intent to defraud
John Hope.
Mr. Brandt conducted the prosecution, Mr. Wilkins de-
fended.
Mrs. Hope, Laving been sued through the district court,
gave the prisoner the amount of the debt and costs. He
returned her a receipt for the amount, which it afterwards
turned out had not been paid.
The jury found the prisoner guilty. His lordship sentenced
him to two years' imprisonment and bard labour.

NISI PRIUS.—TUESDAY.
DAVIDSON, PUBLIC OFFICER, V. BOWER.
Mr. KNOWLES (with whom were Mr. Crompton and Mr.
Martin) stated the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff was the
registered public officer of the Commercial Bank, at Man-
chester ; and the defendant, Mr. Alexander Bower, was
formerly one of the directors of that bank. The action
was brought to recover about £5,000, alleged to be due
from the defendant on his banking account. The action
was brought by the body of sharehulders against Mr.
Bower, who, for a long time, was one of their directors, to
recover that of which he had long ago had the use and
advantage ; and the claim, he supposed was to be resisted
by Mr. Bower, upon some purely technical ground. The
bank was established in 1834, by Mr. Joseph Macardy ;
Mr.. Bower was an exceedingly active man in its projec-

tion ; he was one of a provisioria'l committee of five, formed
before the bank was completed. In a little time, a number
of shares were taken up ; a deed of settlement was prepared;
and then the provisional committee-men were, with a little
exception, made directors. They were, Thomas Ashton,
Alexander Bower, Thomas Palin, Thomas Slater, arid Ralph
Turner. The sixth rule in the deed of settlement provided,
that the bank should be under the control of a general board
of directors ; the seventh provided, that, till such general
board was constituted, the various business and concerns of
the company should be under the entire management of a
board, to be called the Manchester directors, wbo should
also have the management and control of the stock fund and
revenue of the company. The five persons just named were
the Manchester directors. It was one of the necessary quali-
fications of a director that he should take 200 shares, and ac-
cordingly every one subscribed to that amount. The business.
commenced; it soon became a flourishing concern; branches
were established in different towns; local directors were ap-
pointed, and everything seemed to promise a lucrative busi-
ness. There was one part of the business of a director in
which they soon did some business. Having the power, they
very soon began to borrow money ; although, with a modesty
hardly consistent with their other conduct, they made no
boast of it, but kept it as quiet as they could. The 200
shares were paid for by Mr. Bower on the 27th September.
When the provisional committee were first appointed, they
reserved for distribution among themselves and their friends,
13,000 shares, of which he (Mr. Knowles) should not have
complained, had these been taken up and paid for. The pro-
visional committee reserved 13,000 shares for themselves and
their friends. The first deed of settlement appropriated
these shares, and the executive directors proceeded to appro-
priate the shares; and the document was signed by Mr.
Bower himself, showing that he took a part in the transaction.
The document was entitled—
" Shares appropriated upon the cash credit, at the forma-
tion of the Commercial Bank of England.—Alexander Bower,
1,500; Thomas Ashton, 1,500 ; Thomas Slater, 1,500 ; Tho-
mas Palin, 1,500 ; Ralph Turner, 1,500 [so that, observed
the plaintiff's counsel, each member of the Manchester
board got 1,500 shares] ; Joseph Macardy (who was the ori-
ginal projector of the hank), 2,000 shares. Interest upon
the above to be charged at the rate of 3-!, per cent. from the
12th February, 1835.—Ralph Turner, Chester, 600 shares;
Anthony Ward, Leek, 800; Richard Heywood, Burstein,
800; Isaac Holmes, Liverpool, 160. To pay interest at 4
per cent. from the d June, 1835
" ..
BOWER, Chairman."
This acco(iSmigtntelidd)not appearALEXR at all in the boolcs of the bank,
nor was there any entry of except this document. It' was
I
not till a dividend was declared, in February, 1836, that it
occurred to the parties to entera the cash credits in the gene-
r)anl
tahcecoutlts.
paid-up A
capital dividendfor was
the psreticizi declared of 8 per cent.
—ssary for parties holding shares iti preceding ye year, and
c cash
it NeVraesdtihtserteo-
- an entry to

athe a
sciriedi
creditt of Aolf r 3.
per Sower
cent.
,e onaftun.li
3th6he: w3;s. 6
tol. rec , . .
nave them entered in tut, L, ,
therefore he would be. a cleat
per cent. The in-
k:23l lls. 6d. His
theta as paid-up capital
gainer of the difference between :71
;eaaddifference between
in-
terest on 1500 shares to that time env.tdTisB
,Bvbs:o6udlaybaeasfohund, under date
accordingly, in
dividend on £7500 was £6OO ; andi
fromio profit and
itlhisespeasssu.mbosoakn,wifuhnetepdratdouat3d6iBt
, 44;5T0 was
of the 3d March, an entry, " Credit b
loss, £368 Bs. 6d." In the stock ledger Mr.
de-
bited, on the 3d June, 1836, with 1500 shares
on ditto, ls. a share, £75. Interest, at 31 per ceri , fro,,
depo-
sit
the 31st December, 1835, £ll6 10s. Id. ; and on the. ---
side he was credited with the full value of those shares, otherpi
10s. Id. This stock ledger was a private book, to which the
public shareholders had no access ; but, after the entry of
these shares in the books, they were always treated as paid.
up capital ; they were sold like any other shares ' • and the
drawers always received a djvidend upon the, and treated
them as so much paid-up capital, in sharesm. The learned

first wa:

His shares ►vere at
t. on

tve 8 per c