THE CITY OF GLASGOW BANK.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2229, 10 May 1880, Page 2

THE CITY OF GLASGOW BANK.

IMPORTANT DECISION. In the House of Lords, on March 12, judgment was delivered in the case of Iloiildsworth v. the liquidators of the City of Glasgow Bank. This was an appeal from a judgment of the first division of the Court of Session, Scotland, dismissing an action for damages brought by the appellant against the bank and its liquidators for the losses he had sustained by reason of a fraudulent representation of Mr Stronach, manager, and Mr Potter, one of its directors, to Mr Somerville, who acted as the appellant’s agent in the purchase of £4OOO stock, and for which he paid £9OOO. Lords Deas and Mure were adverse to the to the plaintiff’s claim, but from this view Lord Shand dissented. The stock was purchased in February, 1877, and the bank stopped payment in October, 1878, its liabilities being £5,000,000 in excess of its assets. Their lordships held that the appellant could not obtain the relief sought by his action. He alleged that he had been induced to take his shares by fraud, and that he had paid £9OOO for them, while ho had already contributed £2OOO, and was liable for £20,000 in the future, in respect of which latter amount he asked to be idcmnilicd. But it was fatal to his right of relief that he was still a shareholder in the bank, and he had drawn three dividends from the concern out of its alleged profits. If there were ten or twelve other shareholders ;) in the same position as the appellant, they could, if his claim were allowed, make the same claim as he put forward. He was making a claim which was inconsistent with his position as a shareholder, for he sought to be a creditor of the general body of shareholders, of which he was himself one, so in effect he would bo suing himself. They were unanimously of opinion that the appellant could not bring his action against the respondents after the liquidation, and that the interlocutor pronounced by the court below must be affirmed. The appeal would therefore be dismissed, with costs. —Judgment accordingly.

A FRANCO-TUEK ELOPEMENT. A case of elopement which has for some time occupied diplomatic circles on both sides of the Channel, is now before the Civil Tribunal in Paris. Mm urns Bey, sm of ihe Turkish Ambassador iu London, while on a visit to the French capital, fell in love with Mdllc dTraecourt, a young lady belonging to one of the richest and most distinguished families in the Faubourg St Germain. The affection was returned but the mother of tire young lady refused to listen to her marriage. So Mad’lle d’lmecourt eloped with Musurus Bey to Londou, where the couple got wedded at a church in Middlesex. After the lapse of a fortnight, however, the young huh’s family succeeded iu bringing her back to Paris, and the mother has now applied to the tribunal to annul the marriage, on the ground that it took place without her consent and without the publication of banns, and that it is therefore illegal. It is said that the young wife has been put into a convent. REMARKABLE FORGERY. Dr Wlutefoord, of Regent’s Park, London, was charged at Bow street, on Thursday, March 11, with forging and uttering a letter purporting to bo written by tbc lion. Mr Liddell, Under Secretary of State, with the intent to obstruct the course of justice. The circumstances out of which the charge arose were remarkable. In December last a man named Shnrety was tried for the murder of a child, whom, it was said he had beaten to death. Mr Whitefoord attended the inquest and formed an opinion that the prisoner was not guilty. The jury thought otherwise, and Shnrety was sentenced to death. Mr Whitefoord applied to the Home Office for a respite, and earnestly demanded a further inquiry, exerting himself with groat energy, actuated apparently by benevolence, and a belief in the injustice of the sentence. The Home Secretary declined to interfere, and Jan. 5 was fixed for Slmrcty’s execution. Mr Whitefoord then resolved to obtain a respite at any risk, and he formed the extraordinary design to commit forgery in order to arrest the execution. He must have been aware that at the best lie could only hope for a temporary success, as the fictitious character of the communication would of course be detected at latest in a few hours. Possibly, however, this eccentric philanthropist believed that a man once respited would not be forced to undergo twice the bitterness of preparation for death, and thus might escape with a sentence of penal servitude. He obtained somehow a sheet of official paper and an official envelope, and, in the name of one of tbc Undersecretaries of State, wrote to the Governor of Newgate the following letter : “ Rutland Gate. “ Sir, —From information just brought forward and laid before me, in the name of her Most Gracious Majesty the Queen, I countermand the order for the execution of Charles Surety this day. Will communicate further. —I am, Sir, your obedient servant, “ A. F. 0. Liddell,, “ (In absentia) Pro R. Asslicton Cross.” Mr Whitefoord himself handed in this letter ten minutes before the hour fixed for liis execution. The Governor opened it, and for a moment believed it to be genuine, for Mr Liddell’s signature was well imitated. He soon discovered, however, that the envelope boro not the Home Office mark, but that of the Local Government Board, and that the seal was a clumsy forgery, lie, therefore, proceeded with his preparations, and the man ivas hanged. The prisoner, who asked to look at the forged order, said he would reserve his defence, which would quite exonerate him. He was committed for trial, bail iu £lO being acccjitod. A NEAPOLITAN ROMANCE. A Naples correspondent writes : —“ I learn from the “ Roma ” (a Naples newspaper) that a young female slave has escaped from the harem of the ex-Khedive at Resina, and taken refuge in an opposite house, in which lives a young gentleman who had fallen in love with her from seeing her at the window, and witli whom she had managed to carry on a pantomimic wooing. It seems that the young man’s afi'ection is sincere, for lie lias now' applied to the municipal authorities of Resina to publish the notice of Ins intended marriage witli the interesting youngfugitive. But the authorities are much embarrassed by this request, for the Italian law demands that all strangers wishing to many must produce a certificate from the authorities of their native country that there exists no impediment, and as this young girl, now only Hi years of ago, was sold iu Cairo when a mere baby, no one knows to whom to (

apply. The young beauty (for wc must at least suppose her beautiful) says her name is Nasik Missak, and that she believes she is a Circassian. The municipal authorities have applied to the Government for advice as to what they should do.” PLIMSOLL ON THE WAR PATH. In the course of an impassioned speech at Plymouth, Mr Plimsoll, M.P., referred to the case of the ship Louisa Fletcher, formerly belonging to Liverpool, but now owned by Mr Caird, of Greenock. He said —“Lately there has been a case brought before the Stonehouse magistrates. (Cheers.) It is called the Louisa Fletcher case. You know I interfered in the matter, and put a question to the Home Secretary. He found that these men had been improperly sent to gaol, like many hundreds before them, and, having satisfied himself that that was the case, he ordered them to be released (cheers) —and if this session had not come to an untimely end, I can tell the owner of that vessel that I had been very busy indeed up to last night doing my best to send him back to where the men had come from. (Great cheers.) For if you find a man buying a ship which he himself described as rotten and unsoaworthy, and then find that man trying to send good Englishmen to gaol for not going to sea in her, I mean to say get out the men and put him where they come from.” (Loud applause. THE LAY-IT-ON BOYS. Actors and actresses visiting Birmingham arc under the necessity of bribing the ruffians who waylay them at the stage door every night, in order to avoid a sound hissing whenever they appear. This kind of black-mail has been going on for years, amongst the •• lay-it-on ” boys who form themselves into a clique to ruin every one that docs not deduct from his or her modest salary, sufficient money to appease these greedy tormentors. At last an effort has been made to put down the scandal. At the Prince of Wales’ Theatre, on March G, during the performance of “ Aladdin,” one of the company who had refused to pay was being tormented as usual, when a ruffian went out to buy a cabbage to hurl at his victim. He made a bad shot, however, and when shooting at the pigeon succeeded in killing the crow. The luckless cabbage struck Miss Jenny Hill, a popular actress, in the face, and Mr Rodgers immediately rushed forward to protect virtue and plead the cause of a defenceless woman. Promptly he offered £5 for the discovery of the offender, and it is needless to say that one of the man’s friends betrayed him the very moment. The result was that the ruffian went to hard labor for two months, and an echo from the court of “serve him right.” After this lesson, perhaps the “ lay-it-on ” boys will moderate their ardour.