The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-04-11 00:00:00

Vi. 144 clUtiiaS We tit t 7 le o: 1 ! n!.! .... %re tend Milt trtiktitiA i-lre -, iii'bt pileimer /deo stood charged . we, prisoner' beedust he knocked et the celi-clobr, It appeared, 11.001 the evidence for the sue he said he wanted to see Air. Woods, Lis old mas ter. . I 1 aiding and ase 1 e . twelve and one in the 'corning of ! with lieviii,..: l " s i e y t .ll . l ;:!t e er i the tli e r- attie femnic, and the others with Saul nothing to bins befu • • that tiew Ile had 8 'lie to the iroseentrie's house and thi"g very heavy on hisu'reind, /i / I % . 1 '. .,...c.i et: IA isil,l °' t ' r , t L ed, herself' only i • t the door. See gone o , e t p i r ,, n s 2 e 6 c t it 1 i n ) i e a ce t l o i th a t e i., t ,iey b etwe e n went, had 1 , communicate to hitn. I told him I could no t . i ii ow naide a noise a ~, One of them afterwards got in by the alle cualaleiten, unless I preee,,t. 41 e si;id I b b a e ( i k )g w i i i n i window into i i i i i ° t ' o 's( l - ier bediemm, and is as ini t med i iat , e ) l t y fcil 'night be preseet• I 'hen went was for Mr. Wcead , s . into 1 loeed by the other three. The In•st who t en t.i, window,gand ,vs from horn:. . I L au he I told tth.i\ef prisoner i that. Asl 1 returne e the bed, which wee immediately under h from Mr. N.VooLds' t y. t., .t eela i i . 1, the magstra l ie. 1 Ilad seem cases to dis ine - I before um : I then Late. the the room, mid said nothing. He preese( . while ener Mr. Woods .iii.•)•uef•a Vi welts I went into accomplished the offence stated, the cell, Mr. eels ils. 1 0141 :t or e so b t Y ha i 7 at the uoor, and the prisoner could see line I then was 1 came in, yi i s li t: , e h s v e t r , e v •a o n t i , e f d t h o e u i t , , ai ii t i y i d , They all then went len set tae cell. lie prisoner again she could not cry out. A . t h ee ) r w. t e h i c e a l t e •t t tw i n () neighbours opeued the door from the inside. k '''' eked at the door soon atter. and he said when I went to w 1 e. e: , Hawkesworth, Lee, and Lovatt were all_ him that he s way ieuguin e . the prisoner sted'ed\t? Bce Mr. Gree"ii. whom I told what a rebended. Griffiths afterwards surrendered himself to the . % hen we got into the cell, the prisoner began to make . z: . t ~.4_ al.e!ii.ent,ltut Mr.. Greene!l cautioned him p . etworth, utrix let them in herself by the door. Hawk agaitist melee), B,id ~ It lt twice.. The priselicr turned to me, and p P r o o li v c e l. He admitted beieg present in the house, but said frieud to Itle•;' me t that did the deed. I hope you will be a when they were taken. Dr. Brown was for the prosecution, Lovatt, and Lec also admitted being present at the house, then stated, oi i t then stopped him, and cautioned him. He went to the Bird-in -hand, and had a glass of rumandl hisw > • that the prosecutrix had parted from her husband; in.hanti with loelikis: at•iite, when the bells were rinsing a little after (B)ll.the road, because h ei e t h h i i , s t ws iofekohnadt beer' brow -beating lin d a ellellaltedduiieell: 'a o her hueband in his own house. The jury stot)p a e e d ( u t it h t e ed ea a s l e l married woman, who had found her alone with bei.'-,nw,iitt.,W,ii.s.an ; that he had 4 ea3i , on toa ggc!rliev'tollaiontielT had when Mr. Wilkins was addressing them, and 1 the prisoners. upon whiir'llthowed him, and began to brow -beat him again ; stabbed herntamed up, pulled his knife out of his pocket, he did it, no .r. in the throat he said he did not know how CROWN COUR.T.—SATURDAY. rue that, after r how he got out'of the field ; he afterwards told Before Mr. STARKIE, Q.C., in the Grand Jury-room. he !leit done the deed, ise took three ha(f ROBBERY. and John Riley, were indicted for coci°l7l:l,owiratsof.iheer pocket ;he said the knife which I found Samuel Direr[, aged 36, how he got 0,21 t knife he used. therefrom two gowns prisoner and i s ° • the f ield- The clothes were shown to the • mouth of November last, and stealing He said he did not know • having entered the house of Jane Daniels, at tealford, in the _ross:exa . e did not say anything knife--: ..• innlie said that 1 •stabbedi• •h I T 1 • rs were undefended. wheet I found . .he eer wit_ tle The prisoners been observed trying the door and other property. Mr. Monk conducted the prosecution. Tile coo,itah upon him, in answer to a question from rt the robbery was con duce the clotheses who were present when 1 showed the of the prosecutrix's house . on the nigl It appeared that Dixoni had .e whilst I w as eoe are not here. They had access to him ' ‘i A afterwards, duced the shirt ig Ito fetch Mr. Woods-. This witness pro- premises, and both the prisoners, a s ior tun found mate e . s e watch was, in consequen i ce, t place e d upon the prisoner reerel to which r c uthee, and carellestick upon . the were found therein and secured. Skeleton keys were Mrs. Ri g h t 3',,,"'t his eyee several time 5 upon them ; and several bundles had been tied up ready she said was the" recelled and eliewn ti 1 • - which be conveyed away. , prisoner's. S he I • le canelestick, as the msoners siand. .. e aso identified the clothes The jury returned Ne illiam Edward Sc (le oaes. prisoners. commenting upon the serious offence a verdict of guilty against both the ton oil the 28t1 ' xutlaneore.-1 a Elizelieth Biall- -.or"and p •l o a l f ie te r r s had been convicted, sentenced Dixon exand,,edva,s, assistant to Mr. Gar- Mr. STA I RICIE Cllt incised of ' de)..l, f ouad a large wnotulitadt d . ay the body of cai•otid ai•try of the thr eell.n.el'es l one, and tw o • ‘ ent. Tile impri,soll2l tbe neck, a to of transportation for for seven years, and Riley to twelve months' issue! sad was com l eft s'llo w " cu t nearly Int depth.is Tl BURGLARY. C partly a stab, and p etely severed. It appear •td"'ouig . Cross con e to have been place the neighbourhood of Bolton. Mr. wets caused a cut. Too death .. of the deceaeed a in ,the knife 1 by t le sudden loss of bld low Produced would cause ;u t t a .h us . ed . b y prosecution. The prisoner was undefended. d b John Bern', aged 21, was indicted for burglary . at Egerton, did not e She was ppear from the is a farmer named William Marsden, an 1d e oued. There Ine Prosecutor the wound. ducted the clothe e to have' been any sitruggliug. it appeared that, On the 25th of August last, his son, on ''',,ro ice all advauced state of r ine down stairs. He was immedi ‘i ss.examined.--1 have beeiiPt:gr, Ile ?' . returning homesn tire evening, found the doors of the house inside, coro4,tine;s " 'Yes said, I attended' the L i ‘e - ' e4" in practice. open and the prisoner . corn a, the prisoner him ;had been afforded to him of carry . • After the charge had been I,,lques! as Clerk to the ately seized, and a saw : h chisel and a crow-bar found upon l a statement, which was taken d i'i(s)-neht!", opportunity Access into the house had been oh lia' teoevied the prisoner very particular(lyo .st wm.aysfaattlier, who in; any property ., a o % o s e a r '• lrs• the key, which was customarily left tileieueoroeirl'erandthe prisoner signed it, whicl i r eels attetes'rt‘•%darldi t but no r's son when he staid out in the e_venin s g x . s twined by th s e ee l o ir t i o s I , tre.it to The following deposition was then read : L Y ,ti•:)iripk: i s i o ) r i o e r was found guilty, and lie was sentenced to i got ' a cup _f ..e.church last Sunday afternoon, arid afterwards months' - imprisonment. et e t 1. , u 1 a ; Iny wire wished rne to t• 1 - • - • • ' HouseBREAK ENG. sh dae d BA with tier, ed 31, and Raehael Knowles, aged . ~,„, ~oald her to put her bonnet on. went up stairs and Benjamin K . nowles, a b g akine• into the dwelling house of 11.!'.,s'es,t .hil a little shawl. She told Mre e w Rigby to leave the 31, were indicted tor rc . e , on the Ml' of Janu 'c'pt,ie ter.iirie, we, 'perhaps, 1 at ~,,, . ps, should not be long. We tvent out Thomas Crook, at Tonge, near Bolton four brass Bo we "u or , and she said, went ue tl • 'We will go this iva •' and • lost, and stealing therefrom a copperkettle,_ the en , re pe or e. ~_ , the 11111 to the Bird-i'-th' 1• 1 I She l y ' an3' le lad been pans, and ot ler . a iold ,: is to i r , two or three days, telt felt better.hn•( • and the prisoners were detected th . rou e h we were '-•_d for a walk. We had each a gtu;iiotitireoanflteriiijoieno, were . uni t n h t e ere m e n ti s ng fo ; r sale at a furniture broker's. The tel/ile f o r out we heard offering 1 prisoner was found guilty, the et least I thought . it,the St. Helens coach eomieg, prisoner was acquitted ; otherent for nine months. eielea coaeit was tad I askeda 1 1 . • were been s , h ; Sod m_ • her iit the St. and sentenced to imprisottnuißnGLaßy. eueset o f woo . we went or, after it towards home. I had aged 23, were ellellows • 4 4 I.llollth last Moncley. I belonged to the Joseph TVebb, aged 22, and Peter Campbell, ..,.. IN I 108- ,1,.,.1), ~. and had gut ley card 1 the house of Mr. Robert a ! UM went on tramp. I weet charged with a burglary,. ia -I ter on the 6th of March last, ;7.40..eree,.e :istaucirester en Icalled ' 0; , l e e f rool. on ;), i at her aunt's where we were ley, a pawnbroker, at Mane les , silk handkerchiefs, sonic om two hundred IR s weet n''• . our way home I was telling her about an and stealing therefrom iterd e h er ..,.., of mine, whom I had met at Wigan. So it coral heeds, and from £4O to 450 i n copper silver.ll'l riso would loo.ite.'llous, and she began upbraidin r me, and ••d I coral l ' e d dguilty to the indictment, and the other P were , , sai t ebbes e that g ate. elt anybody rather than her. We'w e 9 found guilty sli d ilitei w...piaa.ce leading into that field by the e1.:,..-Lewg°oguPsaess, r o i f t an wa o a rdinary description ; and the prison ers were sentenced hirolio'7etdloielen,rsatitihier short and I went into the held, and to transportation for fifteen years, noise eatened I w n o P uld ra d 4 in • g me about this woman, and li er a . oilt what it s it oat her ir she did not hold her stabte oie n so was all nonsense ; and I was so lead at ecilileor.,, , that I Pulled my knife out of my pocket and bee was tile - Air. JamEs case for the Prosecution. not attempt .0 addressed the jury for the prisoner. He would .) l ii ie t idieeath J odieisld,ueeteeatsheed facthd that the blow which caused bee given by the prisouer, Is b e e wa ' guilt of manslau biter and not nitride'. It could tai e .. ()mended that pia' u eilything but ui t . , i o that fatal moment he had enter ',tete th a , , .tilt strongest affection for her ut it was eiteeiee.,` and tlnees she laboured under a strong degree of ex 81,n. ea t, ti WaS SO, to a considerable extent, on this occa evieeed tie' welt upon the jealous the : had always Would ; e dwelt the careless levity Y of her deceasedhusband, andwhieda Ittel.akv°aysag,gsravated by her love for him ; the fondness he rm alies t theueLlip:ed for her, the absence of any previous e te eat .. ieuou humour that existed between them to the pi„,, . er tee catastro li • I ' is"e'nev,eld not have beenp ~- t le probability that so public a 'itee eheuteundated ; thathcel:oseani had the crime of murder "?i e le I, ; Y ti e a e t ",l,g i ,hi in n o flee sonjiee femalen y h have e t . b been 1 e e , x i s ,.l',fereie wh,e`,! sis,.ceXe..itement might have been increased by ' O l ll l. 1, had I")eeielsili- di.ank.at the Bird-in -hand ; that the noise '41., that she maid aught have been that of their disputa ittl, h„ that ,oM!ght have taken the scissors out to stab t°4 fa h' e g r. lo l i.s his passion he suddenly seized his knife and liar let O f the bl upport of the latter hypothesis he alluded to Fre il , and to theood being on the shirt wristbaed of the left i iia: lel "lY to taken7ture.of the wound. Had lie gone there bee thew ound to ier life, would he have thrust the cloth sea l dor_ staunch the blood ? but the thing having hel la would he not natural! try y every means of con ould i t • The more he loved Wer e ' l5 be at 11 aspersions hey, the more indignant ; ee. p , et _ her until he had become, as it t_l , e eiv.Lo 1 1 11sta ly n ma dened . , and struck the fatal blow. Under a nd aot'rn'ilard ce e the crime woald be that of manslaughter, 'til e Pei et • Slit Jat soner frequently shed tears Buring the delivery of arise very patheti p t, e l, , nne . e and Powerful address. 1 1 , w i der hew t i , ,e J eii l! said there could he no doubt that the the cause of the death of his wife, and that t iler et t ° reduce tl l eo. : r ails , , . ve . the crime from murder to manslaughter, t".'. tie`d?.? been sufficient provocation to excuse the •eniPlated • u not see any such provocation, as the law coll iery to coil in the evidence t 1 • It ' would be for _ iltidensider whether theontd o r w r s was inflicted n tiie tedto ammoment the ent ;4:Nes, hrao"ger, or that it resulted from a lurking males itiollt thro,gitig lit out by provocation. His Lordship then o lig ' The the evidence, commenting upon it as he went 4sonfe,te rath er etohnacea.lnient of the matter told against the pri it w 0 r ,,;1! to iiisseea.ien. her to favour.. _ Unless her jealousy went l' ilezae r e , l i d o h e 0 `to'giattigabtiooooufsethvieoloeftn.ecteieeowelatradrgsede! hi,ilsieaport: L e :tru ck I h confes.sion, had said nothing about his wife hay iir, the easitu, w hich he naturally would have done had such t un de s „ il e • If no more took place than was on that occa at rita t , si ' e d by the prisoner, the offence was murder, and Ivolesesaughter, s ae u e ltl le ak a .(lUestion from a Juror, the JUDGE said it lau.i'iae ,„,',.°2.. d;ifference in point of law ' whether the pri -4r,,0 ero-',,e`uaenontle statement early or late. In reply to a t;le, howe"'ver her Juryman, his LoaDstrie said that 110 AlliptiatjOtt. strong, could, in the eye of the law, be a venie lit 'hfr hav ia r etir...; Rod ten , b ee n sworn to keep the Jury in some con hsif 51 at ten thitiea.spot, without meat, drink, fire, or candle, Theaset mina o'elon's past two o'clocic, and were absent until 141 1iler °r ( an saa , When they returned a verdict of Guilty. b e -Lie j o t e le)er ee i f t he Jury would like to recommend the h a ett em "Gt saf'd t , they had the power. Th e ..; ed to e.,, another matter. stattatioa. ma n said that was for his Lordship's own con el:l:eau. ueY founded their re commendation on his own t)w n st ttjuuE eonf Ilst/iiii atemeht. essed he could not see the grounds on his r°4l. 'srllP . ales,..ead _e., asked for the depositions before the ma waswas ehsen! tired to confer with Mr. Justice Coltman. Ale c c alled l ' 4 I ' 5 W a Ced the Upon.... .minutes, and on his return the prisoner al ai s le le aei , _ Proclamation was made, and the Judge w,. eeteliee lap upon his head and proceeded to pads the st ii"rueit toei d eath iii the followine terms ,fil tr,,,°,.,4iiced :Y Y. a jury of your fellow -countrymen has t) `!ly,;_'er. 1 , _ , verdict that you have been guilty of wil hheae.rehoee:; Was.a paiuful dirty they had to perform, but titygc,eoe utlt,l,tei. discharge it in accordance with the solemn ke lt I tlli eg ‘ , 6 0 (- tr Oath, I also have the melancholy neces tloteicie‘-(116tly c'ooltvithat for that crime of which you have been e ''hl. ~:--You mu st c d , for no other verdict could be pro , etelidel:t he * b y, die an ignorninious death upon the scaf 1° t he "'n4 ° Li f r tll h4ve recormnended you to the favourable '_ftiee sepoliee_ve eerCourt, on the statement which you made ti t seta iiveet e,pro'vneea?.otoliniking that you may have received oa s : ; t ye a s „ .. t_li t at y ou 11 % 1 1 . , from your wife. I2n . ust otwn Itllipelr therso7 e s . e st i fie ", si.yl p r osocation. . I canno co s d v ~,,l i r tq l. , No words j u n tirlienye ,avorls h wh p ich she may have ~,, ,,t „ ~.7_, i Of COMLOOR senleet palliate saw!na our g raisin; 3 , could . y h el "! h er :,,.° barbarous a All wo ' und the eed,•euto etere;,._ 'inner, and inflicting a . Atepkentt `ter et.. "oll 1 , , 0,..,...m. I can say in reply to their re ieo _',Dt . ot Bta,',`,l' wh o t all be immediately forwarded to airy i t ..,`ecs, , I have no doubt, will pay it that eh yoe. reesoe_u.. erves.. I.earnesty implore you not to ,101-1 hay sta nd e ` upon this circumstance. The crime of teat, . ei,, c e h s , , °evicted is of serious magnitude, and you h„ e ' ut be &rest brutalit te at app ear th roat, , . y even to tell.your wife that you he r ~., 1 h i the _ but still more to do It. Circuances 'Cvcave h e seeine aliaeeourse of this investig.stion which show s e he' ,evi oas ;tnave been completely steeled —most pro bus' urn, Zotte,it t:',.laus habits —to become a murderer. You a :inik e h.nora yeti " _the unfortunate creature—the wire of your ki s ,. e co ra ",' ue eee u yelit to have cherished and protected— eeity 'nat e ,' with God for the errors which she may etil, 4 °f th e i' "1 of which tlni pi Pee , ei et: ev e g i ve.. . we . all have sonic ; but the hu ourriri;_yoo r r l i a. -irooliV:: rnetoie time f than you gave your have 4,7 has beau them in reypenatoirnn e ofe w ti i l l e as e s ri to e li f ve r , w at i l ieh a;,e th e tu te e f,°.._ forfeited, and ofganv other crime I fear 1 e tees qltedvi,e2er.isnsattin of so brutal a character. You will ll ' e lt r u ct ;' ,3 Rani 7) anee and counsel of the clergyman who Pa ri l t tio e 4 0 , the sta a t Ud . 4 entreat You to cultivate, under his ete e. es I ' the e ee t e, °t, inind which, two days after the per eav;ite; tlirroeeeolmeendied you to unbosom yourself to other Nil t4r, Pa hi 4 gli th e _You . to ask that pardon for your great th e , o p aa , eh eaorio.ultertY of God and the merits of the th,. law, 2,31, 1;:e granted to you here, and now pro f loose ih'i'i'lraterritence upon you, but the setence of t lete tu ent el el whene I inee, It is, that you betaken to eoe e Y L ee h e e' r eee of n o t e You Came, and from thence to some 411,,,, ee cut ue ed, 5 -,elltiOn, that you be hung by the neck te "'eh "'• dow ana lil that after th trey yokl i n uried withine space of one hour your h 'file o ".Yoe r ' s ve been _on the precincts of the gaol, etr),inesohersote„ e fined, and may the Lord have s way T r "k tio • I:eceived th e w est sentence with great firmness, tt ' p re 'e three Withtheu bomber s 'g into court, the ladies, at' ch ar ' io eooseeeat present, were requested i. gee with .71uence of a prisoner being placed at Of r eel, at indelicate offence.] theed 7-, ele e tel e crYte e . RAPES jadee eta atte ed , ,an 111-looki ' dig le 7te, kid 'l4e of 7 5 . °g. y. decrepit old man, AO lilyet, . pl ace , . as carried to the bar in a tot ail h ewiti, Ravin in a chair. II - it a qri c agearn, at W•i * • e was charged on two wend'pp eare e, who wasexion Wi, Jlrinfton, brutally and . re- Vi. w i , ,, e ll ,, toi e les ow. Master, and the . The prisoner_ w_ , leilm'et pr a nd, th e " sch o l ars , ,_, girls whom lie had pol .estie ° eeee e ,, uffer iee h e , • curie indictment only was po e t en. Th e %%Atl i . being aillY made out, the other e e 4 e t ehe e • 'lee' dis c i ° The details are wholly unfit fur thin No t lhon . ledigoitti sad a degre e of that ex e( 'ltl i ., ~ the ep ret L ° ,l and ei se depravity • ( te e eit eht tt;' nit, Dr en oaten eus. The learned judge (low 4, 44 t oo 1 o.bahly, all e •L e of tr ansportation for life, coa,llt,heoule "lent a Y‘ no had heard the case would r w. lei s , e , , Punishment tl 1 • t as the ut- W 55 ~' 103 ads •e 3 iiiw, , mug 11 w . a r ette r 's L o e lled by hi sses n the prisoner being taken fel o .'e e el, i t t ugl ily ,ici,that, from mauy persons in the 4414215r.ee'1,1:1314"e rn4:%though the feeling expressed Bert ii, y assault, w as eti.._ 1.1 l due respect to the Court. a„agei„a_.! was aild"e'r_ged with having, at Manchester,. Lalatiet"ut fo r "' her wa,e,'..arrially known Mary Ryan, a girl I..4.:lleit:creatil Puhiteatioi The details, in this case also, l eg t out seh • The pr o e • • • red to . ta p ped th e en She ses se utrix, it appea , Lobeles.,,te en eas e , the . 5 assaulted, and, the Jury t , . 44ave r. ' Prisoner was discharged. The 444 Zi "4 . 36 ix 4 Lee W:-enrY Griffith, 24, George "e ChUgtii with bitYLUgt 013 BURGLARY. ll:chard Fitzgerald, aged 36, was indicted for entering the dwelling-house of Sarah Fielding, in Manchester. The house of the prosecutor was entered on the 2-tth of August last, and a quantity of rum, gin, brandy, and wine taken away, together with a small sum of money. The pri soner was observed to make an entrance by breaking open the shutters. He was found guilty, and sentenced to nine months' imprisonment. Several other cases, of no interest, were tried during the day, and the Court adjourned at half-past six. NISI PRIUS COURT.—SATURDAY. (Before Mr. Justice Col.ratA N.) FARRAR v. DEVLINE.—The trial of this case, which oc cupied the whole of Friday, continued this morning. Many witnesses were examined in support of the alleged partnership between the defendant and Thomas Todd : their testimony welt into very great detail, but it was interesting only to the parties themselves and the creditors of Todd. The case for the plaintiff closed exactly at twelve o'clock, having occupied altogether about thirteen hours. Mr. DUNDAS then rose on the part of the defendant, and in a very able speech, which lasted for two hours and a half, he minutely examined the evidence by which the partnership was sought to be established, and contended that the proof was far too indifferent to fix the defendant with liability. Several witnesses, merchants and warehousemen in Man chester, were then called, who proved that they had had deal ings with Thomas Todd, whom they trusted alone, and not with the defendant. They had, indeed, never known that they were in partnership. Mr. BAINES replied very ably, after which The JUDGE summed up the evidence at much length. The Jury retired at five minutes past six o'clock to consider their verdict. After an absence of half an hour, they re turned into court with a verdict for the plaintiff of £1163 Ils. 3d. SEDUCTION. OVEREND V. WATKINSON.—This case, which was ex pected to possess considerable interest, " went off," much to the disappointment of a great number of court loungers, Mr. Wortley, on the part of the defendant, consenting to a ver dict with £25 damages, costs 40s. None of the circumstances were entered into. CROWN COUR T.—MozinAy. (Before Mr. BARON PARKR.) THE ARSON CASES. TRIAL OF THOMAS HENRY. Thomas Hem-y, 21, was indicted for having, on the 14th of October, at Liverpool, feloniously, maliciously, and un lawfully set fire to a certain dwelling-house of his, one Anne Mansfield being at the time of the felony within the dwelling house. Another count charged the prisoner with setting fire to a certain shop of his, situate in Liverpool, with intent to defraud Thomas Richter, secretary of the association called the Phoenix Insurance Company. Another charged him with having set fire to the premises with intent to defraud his cre ditors. There were other counts varying the form of the in dictment. Mr. Adolphus, Mr. Paget, and Mr. Fitzgerald conducted the prosecution. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. James defended the prisoner. Mr. ADOPIIUS opened the case at very great length, ob serving that the charge which the jury had heard stated in the number of counts, reduced itself to two counts, which it would be alone necessary for him to mention —one, that the prisoner set fire to his premises with intent to defraud the In surance Company and his creditors and other persons ; and the other count charged him with settiog fire to his dwelling house, one Ann Mansfield being at the time in the dwelling house. That was a felony also. The same facts would prove both cases. The learned counsel observed that he should not lay much stress on the latter count, as it was not supposed that the prisoner had any intention of injuring Mansfield. She in fact escaped from the premises shortly after the fire was discovered. The witnesses were called to prove the facts of the case. William Fox produced a plan of the premises, which he had taken, and which lie declared to be a correct one. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Had taken it on the premises, and had taken notice of the doors and premises, but did not observe any extraordinary current of air. The neighbourhood was very thriving. The shop frontage was 15 feet 11 inches ; would call it a third. rate shop. On the route from St. James' to Great Homer-street, the nearest coach-stand would be Scotland.place. Joseph Mansfield examined by Mr. PAGET.—Knew the prisoner and had been in his service as errand boy. He kept a draper's shop opposite St. James's Church. Entered his service about five or six months ago. Closed the shop on the 14th October last, about eight o'clock, and also closed the door, and received directions to go up stairs for prisoner's hat and coat. He took a light with him, and then went up stairs and brought the things down. There were nine lights in the shop, four in the window and the others in various parts. The lights were :all out except two. Came down stairs and put out the candle with an extinguisher, and left it on the table. The two lights which were burning were at the middle of the back of the shop, and hanging from the roof, perhaps six feet from the ground. Put the paper on the floor after he had lighted the candle, but did not see any sparks as he put his foot on it. Prisoner was then in the shop, and after getting the hat and coat, told witness to go down into the kitchen till he wrote a letter, and after being there about a quarter of an hour, prisoner called him and gave him a letter to take to the post. The shop was then as usual, with the goods laid on the counters, which he had brought from the door and window, the other articles being in their places. The goods consisted of Orleans and other articles, but there were none on the floor. Came out of the shop as soon as he got the letter, the prisoner opening the door for him, but he (prisoner) remained, though he appeared ready for coming out, as he had his hat on. Did not observe prisoner close the door, nor hear any sound as he went away. The key was in the door on the inside, and prisoner wa s standing near it. P r i soner put out ie gas, leaving one lighted as be was in the habit of doing. Did not know whe ther prisoner remained in the shop or not. Witness then went down Park-lane, on his way to the post, about half past eight or nine, and met Catherine Evans at the top of New Bird -street, which is about 200 yards from the shop. On getting to the top of Park -lane he heard an alarm of fire, but went on to the Post-office, and afterwards returned to the shop, which was then in a blaze ; it might be half an hour after leaving it. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—There is a great wind through the shop, and on the day in question was very full of goods, lines being placed across with goods hanging on them, which were left in that state all night. Some furni ture had come in that day, and a short time before a very handsome sofa, also a bale of shawls on the Thursday, and some other goods. Toole coals to the fire both morning and night on that day. Prisoner always left a light burning at night when be went out. Examined by Mr. ADOLPIIUS.—The fire in the grate was left burning at the back part of the shop. Proctor was not at home on th a t n i g h t. The current of a. ir in the shop was only when the doors were open. The shop had a better dis play of shawls than usual, which were hung on lines round the shop about a yard from the light. Did not know of any woollen goods being in the shop. Catharine Evans examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.—On the day of the fire was with Ann Radcliffe opposite the prisoner's shop, and she sent her down to Crosby-street a little after eight, and they were shutting up prisoner's sho On her return met the s h op b oy, and came back to Ann p. Radcliffe, and the shop was then shut up, and soon after prisoner came out :it was nine o'clock. Ile was alone, and went in the direction of Great G eorge - street. Soon after Ann Radcliffe said, " Look at Henry's shop, there is a light arid a great deal of smoke," and sent witness after the prisoner, but could not overtake him. When the prisoner came out of his shop he said, " Good night Anti—l am Did not see hi m again till after ten. going a courting." Cross-examined by Mr. WiniciNs.—llad seen furniture taken into the shop that day, and a sofa a week before some goods also came that day in a cart. Examined by Mr. Anonruns.—Some goods were brought by some boys, and no one was there at that time but prisoner. Ann Radcliff e , examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS. — Keeps !) fruit-stand in St. James's-place, opposite the prisoner's shop. On Friday, the 14 t h, saw prisoner come out of his shop about half an hour after it had been shut up, perhaps about nine o'clock, and he said, "Good night, Ann, " an d told her er that he was going to Ev er t on. He then went in the direction of Great George's-stre et , and about five minu tes sent after the esaw smoke corning out of th e crevices or the door, and last witness after him. Sh e then gave the slam 5 /. ud'_°: the polio coming up at th e ti me, and sent one o f thorn to v., the iNWI tii4 NU in thti 614 thai liotsh bctott the thou roiled, • not , see tarsi flit made in tha shop ditit day, Crons , extunined by Mr. \WILK]Ns.---The shop looked verb. handsome, and every lady and gentleman admired it as they passed. The shawls hung all round the door,. and she thought one of the sh aw l s had givp way with the draught of air and caught fire. Did not see anj , unit go in. There was a great draught of air through the.i . ihop. Examination resumed.---Thinki it Was the shawls that bad be,A, moved by the draught, and hdd mentioned it to several persons, though she could not s' - eiAlect any one in particulai to whom she had mentioned it. The light was ;shout three yards from the door, and there were shawls very near it. The gas-light had only a saucer over it. William Woodall, examined by Mr. PAoLT.—Was a Vs titter, and recollected the prisoner coming in January twelve mouths to request him to make sonic alterations. Made alterations in the gas. fittings, altering the position of some, and also putting in some new ones. There was a rail ex tending across the window, and the lights were between that and the window. There were also others in different parts of the shop, and one to light tha door on the left hand going in, about two feet from the entrance, but there was no glass on it. Ann Mansfield, examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.—Was servant to the prisoner. There were four rooms in the house besides the shop, all furnished except one. Prisoner and Procter slept together. Had seen a fire in the shop on that day, and had taken up coals for it. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Procter bad nearly all his clothes burned. Prisoner was a good master. John Towerson examined by Mr. Anor.rnus.—Was an inspector of police, and on the 14th October went from the Seel-street station, and got to St. James's Church about nine, and saw smoke issuing from prisoner's shop, and broke open the door. The fire was on the left !laud side, behind the counter, near the window, and appeared to come from the floor, reaching very nearly to the ceiling. There was another fire in the far corner of the shop, near the left-hand wall, which appeared also to come from the floor, and rose higher than the other; they appeared to be distinct. There were some shawls hanging in the shop, but did not see any where the fire was. Remained till the fire was extinguished, and visited the shop next day. The floor was much burned as also the ceiling. The tire lasted about an hour and a half. I saw the prisoner standing near the churchyard-wall, with Liverett, when the fire was burning, about quarter past ten, and he said he had made all secure, and had got as far as Everton-brow when he heard the alarm, but could not learn where it was. He, said he was insured in the Phoenix for £l,OOO. The goods were afterwards assorted, and left in charge of an officer, and then taken to the South Dock Station. Cross-examined by Mr. Wuxtrls.—Had always said there were distinct fires. He never said he could not tell whether the fire was all in one place or not. There was no water thrown in through the door that he knew of. Was quite impossible that he could be mistaken. Joseph Nicholson called. Examined by Mr. PAGET.--- Was on duty as police constable at the time of the fire, and broke into the shop. Saw two separate fires ; one was ❑ear the window, and the other at the far end of the shop, and both appeared to be distinct and proceeding from the floor. The fires were two or three yards apart, and the goods on the counter were burning. There were shawls laying loose o❑ the counter, and other goods strewed about the shop. Threw some some water on the fire, but did not succeed in extinguish ing it. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINs.—Did not see any one come and break open the door with a shutter.' Broke open the door with his shoulder, assisted by others of the police. Examined by Mr. ADOLPHIJS.—Did not know the pre mises. There were a great many persons about, but did not see any one break open the door. Thomas Ormsby, a police-officer, examined by Mr. Firz- GERALD.—Was at the fire on the night in question, and as sisted in throwing water. The fire appeared to be near the window, rising up from the ground, and there were cloths lying about the floor, but could not say what they were. Did not see any gas light burning. Cross-exomined by Mr. WI LKINS.—The panel, he thought, was forced by the shoulder, but could not be very certain. Remained there all the time. Only saw fire in the left-hand corner, and had a view of the whole shop. The fire was burning about three-quarters of an hour. The fire burnt more fiercely when the door was broken open. Ralph Morris examined by Mr. ADOLPH us.—Was a con stable, and on the night of the fire got in through the back door, and went from thence to the shop. Saw a great blaze at the side near the window on the right, on the same side as the fire-place, which appeared to proceed from the floor ; there was also a small fire on the left, which appeared to come from the ground. Saw Ann Mansfield, and gave the alarm. Was only in the shop a few seconds. John Smith examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was a car-driver, and was called off the stand in Scotland-road on the 14th, the day of the fire, by the prisoner, and on arriving opposite the Adelphi, he put his head out of the coach window, he told him to drive on, as he (prisoner) thought his shop was on lire. Set him down at Nile-street. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—DiI not say prisoner was the first to tell hint of the fire. Alex. M`Donald examined by Mr. FITZ G ERA D.—Was on duty in Scotland-road about twenty minutes past nine, and heard of the fire. Ronald M`Donald examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS.—NN'as an inspector of police, and at the fire on the 14th. Saw the prisoner there, and asked if be had not shut up earlier than usual, and he replied that he had not shut up until half-past eight. He kthe prisoner) said he did not hear of the fire till he got to Everton-brow. Prisoner told Levert., he was in sured for £lOOO in the Phoenix, but did not know the amount of his stock, but his books would show it. Cross-examined by Mr. WILK' NS. — Considered it his duty to ask the prisoner questions, and get information, because it was a duty that was required of them, and that they were to report on it. It was his duty to report on the extent of prisoner's stock. NVilliam Leverett, police-inspector, examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was at the fire, and saw the prisoner about quar ter-past ten, and he said he belonged to the middle shop, and on being asked if he would be a great loser, he replied " Yes," and said he was partially insured. He said he was at Ever ton-brow when he heard of the fire. Ile said he was last in the shop, and had closed it up at half-past eight. Prisoner did not appear to be agitated ; his manner was that of indif ference, Thomas Brailsford, examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.—Was a clerk to Widow Sutton and Sons, agents to the Phcenix. On the 17th October, prisoner came to the office for a claim for damage done to his premises. He produced a paper claiming £l,OOO, and some conversation took place, in which the prisoner said he had locked up about half-past eight, and put all the lights out but one, at the back of the shop. He said he had a letter to write, and after sending the boy off with it, he went out, and was going to Great Homer street, when he heard the first alarm of fire in Rodney_ street, and on getting to the New Haymarket, he heard it was in St. James's-place. He said he then took a cab, and went straight home, where he arrived about half-past nine. Prisoner said he was sure he had put out all the lights, and there were no shawls lying near the light. Said he had in creased his stock very much. Thomas Fresh, police inspector, proved the serving of the prisoner with a notice to produce the policy of insurance. Brailsford's examination resumed.—The particulars of in surance are entered in a slip book, and a duplicate given to the parties insuring; it is afterwards entered on a sheet, and sent to London, and when returned is finally entered on the company's books. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—There was some con versation about the fire. Would not swear that prisoner said there were no shawls near the fire. Prisoner was taken into custody on the Monday after he had made his claim. By the JUDGE. — Prisoner did not say what he attributed the fire to. Hugh Sutton examined by Mr. Anoennus.—Was agent for the Phoenix Insurance Company. The entries in the order book were made by him. Prisoner was insured to the amount of £l,OOO, including stock and fixtures, household furniture, &c. Went to St. James's-place at the time to see the premises, and found the property referred to in the state ment read. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Was called on by Mr. Dowling to give evidence. The Phoenix Company had not agreed to pay the costs of the prosecution. Samuel Fern, examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was clerk in the Phoenix Company at London. This witness detailed the practice of effecting insurances from fire as s t a t e d b y t h e pre ceding wit ness . A order sheet was also produced, in which the policies had been entered. Thomas Clarke, an apprentice in the office of widow Sut ton and Sons, proved the entry of the policy and the date of its receipt, which was the 18th of March, 1842. Cross-exatniued by Mr. WlLKlNs. — Copied the entry from the policy. Samuel Fern recalled.—The policy would be sent down to the office in Liverpool as soon as effected. Richard Chander, a clerk in the Phoenix Fire-office, Lon don, produced the book containing a copy of the policy, which had been effected for £lOOO. His LORDSHIP considered that sufficient evidence had been produced to show that the policy had been effected. Thomas Branch, auctioneer, examined by Mr. Anoe- PIILTS.—Knew the prisoner, and had received some goods front him for sale in August last, and also in September. They were stock linen drapery goods, amounting in value to £5OO, and the instructions were to sell without reserve to the amount he had advanced, which was £195, and afterwards to sell only for the prices marked in the invoices. The par cels received on the 22nd September appeared as though they had not been unpacked, but had come direct from the manu facturers. Some of them were returned unsold, and de livered to a carter by prisoner's directions. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINs.--Persons of the highest respectability are sometimes obliged to adopt that plan. By Mr. ADOLPH S.—li was not usual to receive goods in that way from a retail dealer. Joseph Hodgson, auctioneer, examined by Mr. Ferz- GERALD.—Knew the prisoner, and received goods from him for sale in October. The goods consisted principally of stays and light articles of drapery, in value about £52. Philip William Danby examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.— Had had dealings with the prisoner, and supplied hint with some of the goods sent to Mr. Branch for sale. Understood that the prisoner had assigned all his interest in the policy to his creditors on the day after the fire. James Egerton, packer to Messrs. Danby, proved the packing of the goods, and that they were sent by the pri soner's order William Helby, stay manufactnrer, at Portsea, deposed to supplying the prisoner with stays to the amount of £5l 93. Gd., and had seen them at Hodgson's sale-room. Anthony Atcheson, clerk to Black wall and Co., of Man chester, deposed to the prisoner being supplied with goods i❑ September last, to the amount of 1:80 Os. 7d., consisting of Irish linens, lawns, &c., the same as part of those sent for sale to Mr. Branch. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Believed several of the prisoner's creditors had been subpoenaed by Mr. Dowling. John Knowles, a carter, examined by Mr. ADOLPHVS.7 On the 16th September took some bales away from the pri soner's shop. Had been sent by Mr. Shannon. Did not know what they were. George Fletcher, brushmaker, residing in Parliament -street, stated that he saw a cart come to prisoner's shop, about three weeks before the fire, and go away with a quantity of goods. Had also seen the prisoner's stock, which appeared to be principally prints and calicoes. Henry Ward, a police-constable, stated that he was left in charge of the premises after the fire was extinguished, and afterwards gave them up to the care of Samuel Fisk. They were then given up t o M axwell, the inspector of salvages, who m a de out a li st o f t h e art i cles saved, which consisted of several pieces of plain m er i nos , c h ec k s hi rts, furniture, prints, cotton stockings, an d un i on li nens , also a sma l l quantity of black satin, some rihands, linen, a blanket, an d a small Piece of cloth. H e h a d h a d experience in cases of fire, and was of opinion that there could not have been any quantity of wool len cloth or silk on rollers, the latter of which would have been found, as silk on rollers burns very slowly. There were no remains of Saxony or Orleans cloth, which could not have been the case if any thing of that kind had been on the pre mises ; some remains of silk handkerchiefs were there, but no stays. By the JUDGE.—CouId not say there would be £l,OOO worth of goods on the premises. The claim of the prisoner was then put in and read, which showed an amount of £l,OOO as the loss he sustained by the tire This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Witxz NS asked his Lordship whether he thought that there was any case. The Jonca.—Oh, yss. Mr. WiLICINS the❑ addressed the jury on behalf of the pri soner, in a very powerful speech. . . Mr. Baron PAO.KE summed up. He said that the charge against the prisoner was that of Ong tire to his own house, lith i•tt i. ~1~i~4•~~.i~ doh there Stiff fey person at the titue and if in the tecuit, the jury should be of opinion that the offence substantially im puted to the prisoner at the Isar Wa6 made out, they would hay.r no difficulty in finding him guilty on that count. Sub stantially, the charge igainst him was that of setting fire to his house, with intent to defraud the insurance company, He (the leaaned Judge) could not attach any blame to the learned Counsel for his opening statement. He could not recollect a single expression which laid him (Mr. Adolphus) open to the severe censure which had been passed upon him. llis statement was most distinct and clear, though there were some things, perhaps, which had not been proved to the extent he had opened. The question was, however, whether enough had been proved to justify the jury in finding a verdict against the prisoner. The case for the prosecution depended mainly on the evidence of four or five persons, the shop boy, the old woman, and the police-officers; and it would be for the jury to say whether they could see that the fire wa s the result of accident, either from the paper with which the boy lighted the candle, from the flying out of a hot coal from the fire which had been left in the grate, or, as was represented as the most probable, front a draft of wind, caused by the prisoner opening the door of the shop, drawing one of the suspended shawls against the gas light which was left burning, and which was without the protection of an argand burner. The testimony of the police-officers certainly varied very much, and their whole statement was very much confused ; but some of them had confidently deposed that they saw goods burning in two places on the floor. The observations made by the learned counsel as to the time selected by the prisoner for the alleged offence were quite true; but at the same time it was quite true that persons who had fraudulent and 1 wicked intentions did not always pursue the wisest course. Arranged as the goods were, he might have thought it very difficult to put the fire out. The motive attributed to the prisoner was that, being in embarrassed circumstances, he wished to get clear of his difficulties by setting fire to his stock, and receiving payment from the insurance company. There was no doubt that the prisoner was embarrassed, and that an insolvent man was much more likely to commit this crime than one in good circumstances. There was certainly no distinct proof, though there was some, and the stock had been over-valued. But still it was possible that the prisoner might have set his place on fire, although he had that stock on hand, in order that he might get money for it from the office. As to the goods which had been brought in just be fore the tire, that circumstances, although favourable to the prisoner, if the other evidence could not be explained except on the supposition that the prisoner set the shop on fire, he explained by supposing, that he brought in those showy articles to lead to the inference that he could not have de stroyed the place, because it was well filled. After a few further general observations, his Lordship proceeded to read and comment on the evidence. The jury retired. They returned in a few minutes with a verdict of not guilty. The result was hailed with loud applause by the spectators, and the officers of the court endeavoured in vain, for a few moments, to curb this mani festation of feeling. As soon as the crowd outside learned the verdict they also cheered. The prisoner was at once discharged. The court adjourned at six o'clock. The trial of Patrick Doran, for arson, will come on this morning. [We - are authorised to state that the above prosecution of Henry was not instituted by the Phoenix Fire-office, nor conducted in any respect under the directions of that company.] CROWN COURT, -YE STE RD AT (Before Mr. Sergeant STARKIE, in the Grand Jury-room.) The learned Sergeant took his seat at twelve o'clock, and the business of the Court immediately commenced. HIGIIWAY ROBBERY. William Hargreaves, a young man of 22 years of age, stood charged with having, at Manchester, violently assaulted one Emanuel Leach, and with having robbed him of sixpence. It appeared, by the evidence for the prosecution, that, on the night of the 17th December, at about twelve o'clock, the prosecutor, and a man named Williamson, were passing along Back Garden-street, Manchester, when the prisoner and a companion came up and severally attacked prosecutor and his friend. Prisoner struck and kicked him violently, cutting him over the eye and throwing him down. When the pro secutor was on the ground, prisoner attempted to take his watch, but, from its being entangled, did not succeed. He then took sixpence from out of his trousers pockets, which sixpence he had received shortly before from Williamson, in repayment of the like sum lent to him. After the scuffle a cap was found in the street by the police-officer, which, on the prisoner being apprehended so late as the 16th March, he acknowledged to be his. The prisoner denied the rob bery, and said that he himself had been first attacked by the prosecutor, and that he was kicked. and abused, and merely stood on his own defence. He called several witnesses, one of whom said he saw the scuffle ; that the prosecutor was very drunk and abusive ; that he nearly choked the prisoner ; and that another man, and not the prisoner, kicked the prosecutor. The prisoner was found guilty. He was not before known to the police, and a witness gave him a good character from his infancy. His mother, a widow, was also heard. She said he was a good, industrious lad, arid had long been the main support of herself and several other of her children. He had never been in a court of justice before. The learned JUDGE said the offence was a serious one, and the legislature had recently enacted that it should be punished with transportation for life, or at the least for fifteen years. He was accordingly sentenced to be transported for the latter term. The prisoner and his mother cried bitterly on hearing the sentence. Mr. BURKE conducted the prosecution. The prisoner, whose mother was poor, had no counsel. ATTEMPTED RAPE AND ROBBERY—MISDEMEANOUR. William Thimble', aged 24, was charged with having, at Warrington, feloniously assaulted Mary O'Brien, with intent to violate her person, and also with having stolen from her one ring, her property. On the prisoner being brought up, the prosecutrix, who had left the court some time before, as was stated, to suckle her child, was sent for, but could nowhere be found. Nearly an hour elapsed before she made her appearance. It will be remembered, that for the offence charged two men, named Jones, were tried and convicted at the last as sizes, and another, named Mulvey, was also implicated, but the prisoner was not th en i n custo d y . A s the pri nc i pa l de tails of the case were then given, we need not here repeat them at length. It appears that, on the 24th of July, the prosecutrix, the wife of Michael O'Brien, went to a place called Arkley Meadows, near I,Varrington, near which a re gatta was to take place on the following day. She went into one of the booths pitched there, and the prisoners accosted her and sat with her. Th ey had some drink. They left the tent nearly togethe r , an d a ser i es of gr o s s assaults upon her person took place, on e o f th e Jones's being the principal aggressor, while the p r i soner held one of her h an d s , an d another also held her. J ones di d not succee d i n hi s p ur po se in consequenc e o f h er s t ruggles ; Mulvey was equally unsue cessful, and she g o t away f rom them and ran i nto a dit c h, h er clothes being n ear l y t orn f rom her back. She l ost th e r i ng in the strug g l e b e f ore stated, b ut could not say w h et h er th e prisoner or Mulvey took it, though both bad hold of her. She afterwards was so alarmed by them that she ran into the river Mersey, which was close by, and was picked up by the crew of a boat that happened to be passing at the time. She was then insensible, and was taken to the house of Mr. Jones, Superintendent of Police, Warrington, where atten tion was paid to her and she recovered. Tire prisoner ab sconded immediately after the assault, and was apprehended in March last, in Cheshire, by the Deputy Constable of Knutsford. Mr. Burke stated the case to the Jury, and the principal facts were proved in evidence. The jury found the prisoner guilty. The learned JUDGE said the prisoner had been guilty of a most wilful assault, and endeavour to assist others in the commission of a felonious connection with an unprotected female. His companions in the offence had been convicted of the common assault, and sentenced to 18 months' impri sonment and hard labour; and as he (the prisoner) was equally guilty, he must suffer the same punishment-18 months' imprisonment in Kirkdale Gaol, and hard labour. BURGLARY. HandiCrOft pleaded guilty to a burglary, of no very aggravated character ; and not being before known to the po lice, he was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for nine calendar months. William Willis, a boy, pleaded guilty to a charge of bur glary. He had not before been in custody, and had no com panions in the crime which he acknowledged. Having been two months in gaol, he was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for ten months. James Irving, 17, Henry Taylor, 16, and John Randall, 17, were charged with having, on the 21st of March, at two in the morning, feloniously entered the house of Walter Miller, hair-dresser, Itanelagh-street, in this borough, and having stolen therefrom money and other articles, of the value of 1.10. All the prisoners pleaded guilty. Irving had been employed in the house as a painter. His Lordship said it was shocking to see persons so young brought no on so serious a charge. He had endeavoured to reconcile his mind to a lenient sentence, in the hope that the prisoners would, from the mercy shown them, amend their future conduct. He then sentenced each of them to imprisonment, and to be kept to hard labour, for twelve calendar months. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. John Nicholson, a young man, and Elizabe t h Mack, a young woman respectably dressed, were indicted for having, on the 31st August last, assaulted one Patrick Kelly, in Lace's-street, and robbing him of two half-c:owns, two shil lings, and a sixpence, his property. The prosecutor, an ill looking Irish labourer, said the female came up to him and held his arms, while the male rifled his pocket of the mo ney. He did not, however, follow them after losing his money, but went home to his lodgings. The prisoners said there was no truth in the prosecutor's story, that he was beating the girl himself, and that he (the male prisoner) merely went up to protect her. The female callad Police officer Lynch, who said lie saw her crying in the street soon rfter the alleged robbery. She had her apron to her mouth, and said she had been struok. The other prisoner took hold of her arm, arid went to her home with her in Lace's -street, in company with another man, who joined them, and whose face he did not see, but who looked like the pro secutor, from his size. The prosecutor took the officer who apprehended them direct to the cellar where the female lived, next morning. She was in bed and undressed. He said he had watched her go into the cellar only a quarter of an hour before. The Learned JUDGE in summing up remarked that it was strange the prosecutor had not looked further after his money or the prisoners, until next day. The prisoners were not defended. The jury, after consulting for about twenty minutes, found both prisoners guilty ! Both had been before convicted of felony; the male prisoner several times, the female once. Nicholson was sentenced to be transported for ten years, and Mack to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years. MANSLAUGHTER. Moses Doyle, a boy, was indicted for having at Liverpool, on the 18th of February, wounded one John Wilkinson with a gimblet in the eye, by which the brain was so injured, that he lingered until the 23d of the same month, when he died. Y , nail The case was fully d eta il e d i n our pu blicati on at the time, as bth the c o ll ar , the facts came out at th e coroner's inquest. Th e following are the principal fa c t s : —Th e d eceas ed, a bl ac k smith, went into a smithy in Marlb oroug h- stree t, next doo r to l'is own, and asked the prisone r , w h om b e s ometimes employed, for the key of his own smith y . P r i so ner said he h a d not g and of it. then e took fae e h . ol d n o i e is o f t p h r eb n o e y r en lifted a hammer and threw it a t th e d ec eased, and struck hi m on the struck c d k ec himea dec e ased o arm. Deceased again got hold of him, and threw him down across the smithy fire on the floor, and again struck him with violence. The buy got up. and a man seeing the affray ran between them, more to save the boy than the man. As soon as he had done so, the prisoner struck deceased over witness's shoulder with something which inflicted the wound in the eye and brain, of which -deceased afterwards died. The witness afterwards found a gimblet, which was partly stained with blood. The prisoner said, in his defence, that when he lay on his back on the fire, the deceased struck him on the face, and gave him a black eye, so that he could not see by it ; and that it was then that he got hold of the gimblet, not knowing what it was. The learned JUDGE explained the law as it relates to cul pable manslaughter and justifiable homicide. The jury found the prisoner guilty of manslaughter. The Junr; v; said the jury could not do otherwise from the evidence. Great and unjustifiable violence had, however, been used towards the prisoner by the deceased; and he trusted the unfortunate position in which the prisoner stood—lie having, by resorting to too violent means, deprived a fellow-creature of life,would prevent him from so dangerous a resort in future —which waa only to be justified in one who was in danger of his life. Under all the circumbtanceu Of the case, the ben' (4404 ili.4 . :;i'i . ',4 , :Ai44.1.4.4.1i10:14iiii ill giaiti4. tiot/te UpeNttiiiii rdr Ont. Ridith lierinott itds lndletet ht tAtrpool, stablocu, rut, and wounded in the nevi: one Cleorge idly}, porter, with intent to murder him, to maim or disable to do him grievous bodily harm, &c. &c. This case, too, has recently been before the public. The cut, inflicted with an open clasp-knife, was proved, hut was not of a dangerous character. The prisoner said he had previously been robbed in the house, and had been knocked down and abused by the prosecutor. When apprehended in the street by the police, he was found to he bleeding. The prosecutor admitted, though reluctantly, that he had struck the prisoner. The probability was that the prisoner was severely struck. The JUDGE laid down the law as related to the several counts of the indictment, throwing out of the question the first and most penal one, and rather inclining to that for the assault. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. The prisoner was accordingly discharged. SENTENCES. George Royle, Thomas Main, and John Lingard, before convicted of burglariously entering the house of a Mrs. Greaves, and stealing therefrom a quantity of property, were brought up for sentence. The Judge said to Lingard—" You have been found guilty upon very clear evidence of breaking into the house of Mar garet Greaves, and robbing her of considerable property. She had employed you, and she reposed such confidence in you that you almost lived under her roof. You ought, in gratitude for the employment she gave you, rather to have given her protection, than plundered her house. The sentence of the law, provided for this offence, therefore, is, that you be transported beyond the seas for the term of ten years. You Wilkin and Royle, though you participated in this offence with him, were not so culpable. Yon were strangers to the prosecutrix, and did not betray her confi dence. The sentence upon each of you is, that you be each imprisoned and kept to hard labour at Kirkdale for the term of two years." The Court then adjourned at seven o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT.—YESTEILDAY. (Before Mr. Justice COLTM AN and a Special Jury.) GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF THE BANK OF IRELAND D. ARCHER AND ANOTHER.—This was an action Oil a Bill of Exchequer for £832. 10s., drawn by Messrs. Joseph and Christopher Schroeder upon the defendants and accepted by them. 'rhe declaration contained five counts, merely varying the nature of the demand. The plaintiffs were represented by Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton; the defendants by Mr. Wortley and Mr. Watson. Mr. KNOWLES said, rhis was an action in which the plain tiff's sought to recover a sum of about £B5O, which they alleged to be due to them upon various grounds, which it would be his business to prove; but in order to make the jury understand the way in which this action had arisen, he must go into detail of certain transactions between the plain tiffs, the defendants, and the firm of Messrs. J. and C. Schroeder, who carried on business as corn dealers at Water ford, in Ireland. The defendants, Messrs. Archer and Daly, were commission merchants at Liverpool ; and in the early part of last year, 1842, they were instructed by Messrs. Schroeder to procure a quantity of Indian corn, which they did upon their giving their acceptances in the usual way. It amounted to £1,625. ss. 4d., which Messrs. Schroeder paid for by their own acceptance. It was agreed that the defendants were to be kept out of cash advance—that was to say, Messrs. Schroeder should give them sufficient money to pay their own acceptance; and as they had corn in hand, they were to accept the drafts of Messrs. Schroeder. On the 6th of April, Messrs. Schroeder drew upon the defendants a bill for £B5O. ris. 4d., being rather more than half of the invoice price of the corn : they discounted that bill with the Water ford branch of the Bank of Ireland, and the proceeds, amounting to £847. 14s. 3d., were remitted to the defend ants. This bill went through the bank ; it was presented to the defendants in the usual course, and they accepted it. A similar course was pursued with regard to the balance, £770 ; a bill was drawn, the proceeds were remitted to the defendants, and they accepted it. The position of the parties at this period was this—the defendants had re ceived from Messrs. Schroeder sufficient to enable them to take up their own acceptances ; but, then, they had also the whole amount of Indian corn on hand. In course of time the first of these acceptances became due— namely, on the Bth or 9th of July. Shortly before it became due Messrs. Schroeder were reminded that it would have to be provided for, as the Indian corn had not been sold, and the defendants were to be kept out of cash advances; there fore, on the Bth of July Messrs. Schroeder drew another bill upon the defendants, which was discounted in the usual way, and the proceeds, £846 12s. 3d., were remitted in the usual way. The other bill of £770 did not require to be renewed, because by the time it became due the defendants had sold corn for it, so that it was not the subject of controversy : the only bill, therefore, that remained between the parties was that of £B5O drawn on the Bth of July, and which would be come due on the 11th of October following. As early as the 26th of September, Mr. Denis Daly, one of the defendants, was in Ireland; he called at the counting-house of Messrs. Schroeder in Waterford ; and what took place there would be exceedingly material, because all the points in the case would depend perhaps upon it. At that time it was apparent that the corn speculation of Messrs. Schroeder would turn out un profitable, for Mr. Daly produced an account current, from which he pointed out that considerable loss would be incurred; and he requested Messrs. Schroeder to advance a certain amount in cash, and renew the bill which would fall due in October for the balance, whatever the balance might be. Mr. Schroeder objected to this, and said it would be better to renew for the whole of the bill—saying, " I will draw up for the whole amount, and send the bill to be accepted, and when you have accepted it I will procure cash for it and re mit the cash to you, so that you can take up the bill for £850." This, the jury would observe, was not the course adopted upon the former occasion : upon the former occasions Messrs. Schroeder had procured the cash before the bills were ac cepted. Mr. Daly objected to this mode on the ground that it would look odd to the bank in Liverpool, and be said to Mr. Schroeder, " Send the bill to the bank in the usual course, and 1 will advise nay partner to what h as b een d one ." He (the learned counsel) should have to refer again to this conversation before he had done, in order to point out what he conceived to be its legal bearing. Upon the faith of this assurance, that this bill would be taken care of in the same way as the other bilk, Messrs. Schroeder drew a bill for £85210x. —the bill mentioned in the declaration. That bill was dis counted by the plaintiffs in the same way as the others ; and it would be found that the proceeds, amounting to £847, were remitted to the defendants, and got into their posses sion. This bill passed through the bank like the others ; it was presented for acceptance in the same way as the other bills had been; and the jury would find that before the bill had been accepted—and on the very day when the proceeds came into the bands of the defendants—the following letter was written to Messrs. Schroeder : " Liverpool, Ist October, 1842. " Gentlemen,—Your favour inclosing the bill for £847 is received, and passed to your credit. Your draft upon us for £852 10s. shall be duly honoured. We have no enquiry for India corn. * * " Pro. ARCHIIR, DALY & CO. " P. T. FORAZat." This letter (the learned counsel continued) was signed by a gentleman of the name of Forrest, who, as he should show, was, at that time, a confid en ti a l c l er k of the defendants. It was right, however, to tnention—because representing, as he did, the Bank of Ireland, he meant to keep nothing back — that after this letter had been put into the post, probably on the same day, another letter was written by one of the de fendants to Messrs. Schroeder, which was certainly some what at variance with the terms of the letter just received ; and no doubt his learned friend would contend that that letter nullified the operation of the other. He (Mr. Knowles) thought, in point of law, it did not, but that would be for his Lordship to decide. After this bill had been protested for non.acceptance, and the whole matter had been made known to Messrs. Schroeder, Mr. Denis Daly, with whom Mr. Schroeder bad had the conversation of the 26th of July, again presented himself at their counting-house in Water ford ; and it would seem from what occurred then that Mr. Daly had not been made acquainted correctly with what had taken place on this side of the water, because Mr. Schroeder placed before him the letters from the defendants, and he seemed to be surprised ; and he (Mr. Knowles) must say, also a little ashamed of the conduct of his partner on this side of the water. When reminded of the conversation on the 26th September he admitted that such a conversation had taken place, and that the proceeds had been remitted upon a distinct understanding that the bill was to be treated as the other bills had been. It was material to remember too, that the letter of Mr. Forrest, in which he said " Your draft shall be duly honoured," was laid before Mr. Daly, and Mr. Daly, at that time, neither by word or deed, thought of repudiating the authority of Forrest. In the end no settle ment was obtained. Messrs. Schroeder eventually com pounded with their creditors ; and the Bank had now no resource to look to, but the defendants, for the amount of the ,b 11. First of all they declared upon this bill of exc h ange , and said the defendants had accepted it, and he would ex plain the grounds upon which he should contend that the act of defendants amounted to an acceptance. He need not tell the jury that a bill drawn in Ireland upon parties in England did not require acceptance in writing : it must be a verbal acceptance —nay more, there must be an acceptance by the conduct of the parties, if the conduct of the parties distinctly led to an inference that they accepted the bill. They must also perhaps be aware that the law requiring the acceptance of a bill of exchange to be in writing was not of more than 20 years standing : formerly a verbal acceptance was sufficient, and it was so treated, and there was no magic in the written word " accepted," or any thing else which gave the notion that the bill would be paid when due. Hav ing said this much in explanation of what an acceptance was, he would call attention to what occurred, to show that that was in point of law an acceptance to the bill, on the 26th of September, when Mr. Denis Daly held the conversation with Mr. Schroeder. The learned counsel contended from the circumstances which then took place, that they would, in point of lam, amount to an acceptance, provided the bill was then in existence ; but, he continued, inasmuch as the bill was not drawn then his learned friend (Mr. Wortley) would contend that there could have been no acceptance; he would, in fact, evade that conversation altogether by saying that a bill could not be accepted before it was in existence. Now whether this was so or not was a moot point in our law ; jihad more than once been incidentally discussed, but it had never received any authoritative decision. In America, for instance, as he knew from a learned work by Judge Storey, the question was decided ; the courts there, held that a bill might be accepted before it was drawn. In this country, however, the law was not settled • therefore, if his c as e res t e d merely upon the conversation referred to, there would still be a question whether there could be an acceptance of a bill before the bill was in existence. But besides what occurred on the 26th September, he should contend there was a direct acceptance of this bill by the letter written on the Ist of Oc tober, from the terms of which letter he should also contend that Mr. Forrest, as the agent of the defendants, had clearly authority to accept. This letter was laid before Mr. Daly at the subsequent interview with Mr. Schroeder, in Ireland, and lie did not for one moment affect to say that Forrest had no authority. He should also contend, on the other counts, whatever might become of the acceptance, that still Mr. Schroeder was made an agent of the defendants to procure the money which was remitted to them. Therefore they were liable as for money had and received for the use of the plaintiffs. On one or other ground, he contended, there could be no doubt of the defendant's liability to pay this money. The letters referred to and the bills were then put in and read ; after which Mr. Jacob Schroeder was called, and he deposed, in considerable detail, to the circumstances as opened by Mr. Knowles. In his cross-examination by Mr. Wortley, the witness said his firm, through the badness of the corn trade, had been obliged to compound. They paid their creditors one shilling in the pound, and a considerable balance was yet due from the firm to the defendants. Mr. Henry 1). Grant, manager of the Bank of Ireland at Waterford, produced the bill in question. Mr. Charles John Tyzack, corn-broker in Liverpool, proved the handwriting of Mr. Forrest to the letter of the Ist October. The JUDGE asked Mr. Knowles whether he should prove any authority in Forrest to accept? Mr. KNOWLES replied, he should rely at present upon the letter of October Ist, which had not been repudiated. The JUDGE said that would not be sufficient; especially as a letter had been received from the partner of Mr. Daly the same day, which did not mention the bill. Mr. KNOWLES admitted that, but observed that Mr. For rest's letter was written before that of the partner. The JUDGE.—Yes; but the party cannot be bound with out distinct proof of authority. If that were so, a man might be committed to an indefinite extent by his clerk. KNowLas thought the phrase of the letter shewed authority. The J-unos held that that was not sufficient; but,:at the request of Mr. Knowles, he took a note of the point. Mr. KNOW-LE s said he would, then, endeavour to strengthen the cane by calling Mr. Forrest. .~~i~~l~;~s~ !i; t4l6tPi' ari titicittigh7 ih;tAtiii i& - ii s iZoloTail ' fa the tteNndantS t and that hi' had ho nsthnrit t 0 do sd: Cross-examined.--The Messrs. Schroeder hots' os'red the defendants a general balance of £S99 ; but had still some corn in hand. They had refused to accept the composition. Mr. KNoVhEs said this was the case for the plaintiffs. Mr. WORTLEY contended that no case bad been made out to go before the jury. _ Mr. KNOWLES replied that he had proved sufficient to go to the jury on the question—whether Schroeder had not gone to the bank, and got the bills renewed and discounted as the agent of the defendants. - Mr. Grant was recalled on this point, and he said he thought he should not have renewed the bills or discounted any if Schroeder was only the agent of the defendants; but the question did not come before him in that shape. After some discussion upon this point, and au ineffectual effort to turn the question into a special case, The JUDGE said he should hold that an acceptance of the hill before the bill was drawn was not law ; and the questions under the second count, whether Schroeders' were agents of the defendants in procuring this bill to be discounted by the Bank of Ireland, must be left to the jury. Mr. WORTLEY then addressed the jury upon the part of the defendants. He said he was exceedingly glad to have the opportunity of saying a word upon the case, because he should he extremely sorry if the apparently candid but bitter and pointed observations of his learned friend should have any impression upon their minds without an opportunity on his part of removing them. He had the honour to appear for the defendants, who were merchants of high standing ; and upon their behalf he was undoubtedly jealous of their mercantile reputation. He should be sorry if, while they were standing upon the strict letter of the law of the country in vindicating their rights, they were neglectful of the claims of honour and good faith. It would be a woeful day for this country if it should ever happen that the merchants of Eng land, or any considerable body of them, should become men of the description which his learned friend had been instructed to give of the defendants ; but i❑ the present case there was not the slightest pretence for the charge ; and the imputation was as uncalled for as it was unfounded. After some further observations vindicatory of the character of the defendants, in which he stated he could, if permitted, chew that honour and good faith had been really on their side, the learned counsel addressed himself to the allegatio❑ on the part of the plaintiffs, that Schroeder was the agent of the defendants for the purpose of obtaining the discount of the bill from the Bank of Ireland. He contended that all the circumstances, and par ticularly the reply of Mr. Grant, when he was recalled, sheaved that this could not have been the case ; and that it was only after the composition of Messrs. Schroeder for Is. in the pound, that the bank thought of this expedient to save themselves. The JUDGE, told the jury the only question for their deci sion was whether Schroeder had promised the bank with the authority of the defendants; and he pointed out the evidence on this part of the case. The jUry immediately returned a verdict for the defendants LIABILITY OF AN ASSIGNEE ' FLEMING AND OTHERS v. DAVIDSON.—This (a special ' jury case) was an action to recover the sum of £271 163. 3d. for goods sold and delivered, and on an account stated. Mr. Martin and Mr. Watson conducted the case for the plain ' tiffs ; Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton that of the defendant. On the part of the plaintiffs it was shewn, through the me dium of admissions and witnesses, that the plaietiffs are car pet manufacturers at Glasgow, trading under the name of the Port Eglington Spinning Company, and the defendant is the registered officer of the Commercial Bank of Manchester, a concern which is now only beit , carried on for the purpose of winding up its affairs. The defendant is also the assignee of the estate of Alfred Webb, who carried on business hi Li verpool as a carpet dealer. In December, 1841, Mr. Webb gave an order to Mr. Taplin, the agent to, and traveller for, the plaintiffs, for four bales of carpets, to be manufactured according to a specified pattern, to betaken into stock ou the Ist of February following, and paid for by a four months' bill, or if he paid in cash, there was to be a deduction of two and a half per cent. The carpets were put in course of manu facture, and Mr. Webb was believed to be perfectly solvent ; but, at that time, namely, at the end of November, or the beginning of December, Mr. Webb, who had been largely connected with the bank, had contracted a debt with them to the amount of upwards of £13,000. This was unknown to the agent of the plaintiffs. On the 13th of December notics was given to Mr. Webb by the batik to pay the money ; but as he did not, twenty-one days after wards, on the 18th of January, a fiat was issued against him by the defendant, on behalf of the bank. No step, however, was taken under the fi a t till ti ,e ''l st of January, on which day the adjudication took place; but in the inte,val between the Bth and 21st, namety, on the __Eh, the four bales of carpets were sent off by the plaintiffs by sea from Glasgow. On the 21st, before the adjudication had taken place, the carpets were taken from the dock quay to the bankrupt's premises, and delivered to his shopman, a person named Taylor. Tay. for had them conveyed to the stables of Mr. Bretherton, and, upon the day following, the bankrupt had them con veyed to Blackburn, where they were not found till the month of August. The plaintiffs had received no notice of the fiat, and, therefore, it was contended, that the defendant should either return the goods or pay for them. Mr. KNOWLES contended that no case had been proved. This was really one of the most extraordinary cases he had ever heard of. The goods had been sent iu pursuance of a contract before the bankruptcy; they were delivered before bankruptcy; and, consequently, the assignee seized them. It was an every day case. The JUDGE did not think it was an every day case. It seemed to him, under the circumstances which had been proved, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover ; but, at the same time, he would give leave to move. The plaintiff was then nonsuited, his Lordship certifying that the case was a proper one for a special jury. FEMING AND OTHERS V. DAVIDSON.—This was the last .case only in a different shape, the declaration being here in trover. The result was the same. JURYMEN TINED. The case of Hemingway v. Hamilton and others, was next in order, and a common jury was called. Some delay occurred in obtaining the requisite number, but eventually eleven gentlemen were collected together. There appearing little or no chance of the twelfth making his appearance, Mr. MARTIN, who represented the plaintiff, said, he had no objectirn to proceed with the trial with eleven jurymen. The JUDGE said, the attendance of jurymen must be secured, and he could not assent. His lordship then directed the list to be called over, with the exception of those who were serving in the Crown Court and in the Grand Jury-room. Mr. Forrest and Mr. Carson (under-sheriff) called over the list, when the following not appearing, the JUDGE directed them to be fined £5 each,—Samuel Bowers, George Benyon, Francis Bretherton, Richard Cope, John Crossley, Richard Cummins, Walter Clarke, Joseph Crossland, Joseph Dawson, Edward Eady, John Frazer, Nathaniel Howard, William Heath, Thomas Jackson, James Lister, James Leigh, Robert Owen, Thomas Owen, George Robinson, Michael Trueman, John Tomlinson, Samuel Williamson, and Peter Wheedle.— After some further delay, Mr. James Leigh made his appear ance. He was sworn a juryman, and so the twelve were made up. Before the case commenced Mr. Samuel William son came into court, and applied for the fine upon him to be removed, alleging that lie had been only in the next room, but he had not heard his name called out.—The JUDGE: Very well; you have but just saved yourself. HEMINGWAY V. HAMILTON AND OTHERS. Mr. Martin and Mr. Hill appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton for the defendants. The plaintiff is Captain Hemingway, and the defendants are Messrs. Hamilton, Jackson, an d C o . , o f this town, mer chants. The pleadings were voluminous and discursive. Mr. MARTIN in stating the case said, the plaintiff, Capt. Hemingway, was a person who had long been engaged in the African trade. Previous to the year 1836, in which the ground of the present action took place, he was engaged in trading between the coast of Africa and Liverpool, taking out goods there, and bringing produce home. At present he was in the trade as a merchant. In the year 1836 he entered into a contract with the defendants, who were most extensively engaged in the trade, to command a vessel called the Earl Grey. The agreement was, that he should bring home 550 tons of palm oil, for which he was to receive £lOOO, and in the event of his obtaing more oil than 550 tons, he was to receive a commission of £6 per cent, upon the overplus, six months and 30 days, after the arrival of the oil in Liverpool. This contract was completed on the 2d January, 1836, and the plaintiff sailed immediately afterwards in the Earl Grey. The African trade was carried on entirely by barter—the particular mode of which the learned counsel described in detail. The plaintiff arrived in the River Bonny, and he commenced trading with the natives. He was furnished with two vessels called tenders, the William and the Pantaloon, to enable him to carry on his trade the more successfully. The plaintiff succeded in making one of the most successful voyages ever made to to the coast of Africa, for he produced to his employers a profit very little short of £15,000 or £16,000. He purchased from the natives upwards of 200 tons of oil over and above the 550 tons, and the William was the first vessel despatched home ; she was nearly full, and she arrived safely. The Pantaloon then remained at Bonny, with the Earl Grey. The Earl Grey next sailed, full of oil, leaving there the Pantaloon also full, with the exception of about 30 puncheons, which bad not arrived from the interior, and Captain Peel, who commanded her, was directed by the plaintiff to receive the 30 puncheons and return home immediately. The question for the decision of the jury arose with reference to the Pantaloon. The defendants settled all their accounts with the plaintiff; he received his commission for all the oil above 550 tons which the Earl Grey and the William had brought; and the Pan taloon was supposed to be lost. The defendants, indeed, were so much pleased with the plaintiff's exertions, that, in order to show their sense of his services, they presented a piece of plate to Mrs. Hemingway. Captain Peel, who com manded the Pantaloon, was directed by the plaintiff to return directly, but, it seemed, that he neglected this order, for, instead of returning direct to England, he went from the Bonny to the Cameroons, a river west of the Bonny. The Pantaloon was there lost ; and up to the end of last year, 1842, the plaintiff had no reason to suppose but that with the Pantaloon her cargo was lost, and that it had never reached the hands of the defendants. During last year, however, the plaintiff was again in Africa, and at Cameroons he saw Lloyd's agent, from whom he learned that although the Pantaloon had been lost, her cargo had been saved by Cap tain Lilly, the agent at that plaee for the defendants. He, there fore, undertook to demonstrate to the jury that the o;I was saved, and sent to England by Captain Lilly, on board the Daedalus and the Anne ; and if he did this he should be enti tled to the commission of £6 per cent. upon the quantity which the defendants had thus received. Thomas Sheridan Reed, Ralph Dawson, and Edward Ha nrilton, parties who were at Bonny and the Cameroons at the time, were then called. Dawson proved the wreck of the Pantaloon on the Cameroons, about eighteen miles from land. In answer to Mr. Knowles, he said that in case of a wreck upon that coast it was extremely dangerous to attempt to save anything. Hamilton proved that a great number of puncheons of oil were recovered from her, that they had the brand of the Earl Grey upon them, and they were shipped in the Daedalus and the Anne. Thomas Henry Lester and William Henry Darby, two clerks from the house of Messrs. Nicholas Waterhouse and Sons, defendants' brokers, proved the arrival of the Daedalus and Anne. The Anne arrived a few days before the 4th Oct. ]836; the Daedalus a few days before the 16th January 1837. The oil belonged to the defendants. This was the plaintiff' s case Mr. KNOWL;S then submitted that the plaintiff had him self shewn the defendants to be entitled to a verdict upon the statute of limitations. The Anne had been proved to arrive in Liverpool some few days before the 4th October, and the Daedalus a few days before the 16th January. The action was brought on the 30th of January, therefore the arrival by the Daedalus was clearly within the statute ; and he contended, on the construction of the agreement, that the same must apply to the arrival by the Anne. Mr. MARTIN said his learned friend was wrong on both points. The JUDGE suggested that the better course would be to ascertain the damages. His view of the case was, that as to one of the vessels, at least, the Anne, the plaintiff was in time with his action. As to the other vessel, there might be some difference. Mr. MARTIN, in reply, repeated that his learned friend was wrong; and he contended, from the language of the agree ment, that the six years would not begin to accrue till after the sale of the oil. The particulars put in showed that the oil by the William and the Earl Grey was not sold till ten months after their arrival ; and it was quite clear that some time would elapse afterwards before the oil by the Anne and the Daedalus was sold. The statute of limitations was, there fore, out of the question, and he was sorry his learned friend had been instructed to resort to it. The JUDGE said that the first branch of the agreement contained no re;eronce to not proceeds I fiat the best course Wiiteirhoit tiff to sh: that he could not slate wien. Mt. Lister and Mr. Darby we, some parts of the oil brought by tt and some sold from the ship. The lus was warehoused. Mr. KNOW LEs then addressed the j,_ contending that this was precisely the sot, statute of limitations was framed to meet— the plaintiff imputed no fraud to the defendants, he said they were liable to pay him, although they had t selves been cheated. He said he should show that r' put on board the Anne and Diedalus had been paid f that commission had been paid upon it to the c' those vessels, both of whom must have procee' assumption that this was not oil belongine but oil bought by Captain Lilly for '' who plundered the wreck. by Captain Lilly, it was clew, have no claim upon the defendants, becaus, had the advantage of the oil from the Pantaloon. L._ gentleman then called, James Franklin, a clerk in the defendant's service, proved certain payments by them to the plaintiff; and he said that all the commission had been paid on the Thedalus and the Anne, to five different persons, namely, Captain Lilly, Capt. Holmes, (for oil on board the Lisbon packet) Captain Grin don, and Captain . Musker. There was no portion of oil either by the Dredalus or the Aline on not paid. Captain Peel, master of the Pantalo, Liverpool in the Anne, on the 28th September, plaintiff was in Liverpool at that time. Several who belonged to the Pantaloon also came be '' May, 1838, Captain Lilly was in Liverpool ; him and the plaintiff together in Loedon, on a Daedalus arrived on the 12th ofJammq, 1837 ; the the 28th September, 1836. James Armstrong examined.-4Vas Mate of the Anne in 1836, and was at Cameroon river when the Pantaloon was lost. Capt. Lilly went down tolook after V r r, and Cap' Peel came on board the Anne. Saw the natives afterw with oil. The natives are a savage kind of people. S the oil which the natives had was put on board Lass ; it remained on deck three days, when the captain would not pay for it, and it was put on the beach. The ' was nearly laden with oil when the Pantal - - notices brought some oil to her; Capt. and he paid the natives for it, as for any other on. Captain Blackie, commander of the 'Anne, gave some testimony to the same effect ; after which Mr. MARTIN replied in au animated address. The jury, after a few minutes' consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff in respect to the oil brought in the Daedalus ; and it was arranged that the amount of damages should be settled between the parties. The court rose at seven o'clock. newer entire n5l in which ern from the parties houabt If, therefore, the oil it that Captain fiewi learned which commission was 6. The 'and witness saw was lost Lill•: c THE CAUSE LIST. FIRST LIST-SALFORD HUNDRED There is only one case remaining to be dis; ist, namely, No. 21, " Ferrand and another r: s an action on promises, and will b e tried bar,,,,speci ury. The trial is appointed to take place this mornit Tuesdav). of in this SECOND LIST.-WEST DERBY HUNDRED The following was the state of the list for the hundred of West Derby, at the rising of the Court last r Plainti f f.—Nos. 1, 3, 4,7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 46, 55, 64, 65, GS, Defer dan 1. —No. 28. main: -- Withdratrtz.-Nos. 2,5, 6,9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 41, 42, 56, 57, 60, 61 6; 74, 75. 78, 85, 86, SS, 92. Referred.-Nos. 40,43, 44, 49, 50, SI, Nonsuit.-Nos. 72, 73. Three special juries and 28 common cases rema h . decided. The Judges have agreed to postpone the openink, of Easter Term until to-morrow week. CHESTER ASSIZES.-YESTERDAY (Before Mr. Justice MAULE.) RAPE AND MURI James Ford, aged 23, was indicted for the wilful murder of Samuel Shaw, at Mottram, on the night of the Ist of October last. There was also an indictment against the pri_ boner for having violated the person of the wife of the de_ ceased. The brief facts of the case were that the deceased, his a the prisoner, and some other persons, were drinkin,. , public-house on Saturday evening, the Ist of October, Mottram, where they remaided until about midnight, when the deceased, his wife, the prisoner, and another person left, having to go the same way. They walked along the road for about a quarter of a mile, when the latter person was taken up by a person passing on horseback. When he left, the prisoner began to take liberties with the wife of the deceased, on which she desired him to desist, when he knocked the de ceased and his wife down. lie then beat the deceased on the head and face with a stone until he became insensible. The wife of the deceased was also beaten into a state of in. Bata ' at sensibility, and onhe - -------- she found herself in an ad joining field, and the prisoner near her. He requested her not to tell her husband of what had passed. She then went home, and found her husband there insensible, and a surgeon was procured, who attended him, but he died on the Satur day followi ng o f a woun d on the back of the held, wine!' had produced an effusion of blood on the brain. The 'prisoner, on being taken into custody, acknowledged having inflicted the violence on the deceased. The trial lasted until after six o'clock, and the jury, , after a short co nsu lt a ti on , f oun d th e prisoner " Guilty. ' His Lordship deferred passing sentence. IMPROVEMENTS OF TRADE MA.NcitEsmt.—Our market continues to exhibit the same healthy appearance we noticed last week, and pric:=s for all widths and descriptions of cloth remain firm. Thq news from the East is considered favourable, and 40-inch shirtings are in good request at the extreme rates of last week. 27.. inch 72's is the only description of cloth that is a drug upon the market, and good 51b. is still selling for cash down at ss. Domestic cloth is in good request, and at paying prices ; and most of the manufacturers are engaged for all they are making, but most particularly for 27 inches. The printers are also very busy, and most of the job printers have given notice to their customers, that, iit consequence of the advance in madder, they must have an ad-. vance of 3d. per piece for printing, which houses will be forced to give. 27-inch 66's may be quoted 4s. 6d. to 4s. 9d. : and 72's, 4s. 9d. to 55., although many manufacturers are asking ss. 3d.—Manchester _Advertiser of Saturday. TRADE or LEEDS.—The improvement which we an nounced last week had taken place in the staple trade of this district, we are glad to say, has not received any check, but, on the contrary, has been acceleratedtd during n the presen t week. The amount of business ce i❑ our cloth halls on Saturday and Tuesday last exceeded that of airy o f the preceding market day s of the presea y is " ear. Pric lookinges, hov,_ ever, do not advance, but trade in general up, ,, m and the manufacturers are doing ore work than they have been f or a l ong time past.—Leeds Intelligencer of Saturday. [lmprovements are reported in various other districts, which we have not space to notice.l Tic DoLottnEtrx.—Dr. S. Richot, of Metz, relates in his thesis, presented to the faculty of medicine of Strasbur g , four cases of this disease , which, after resisting the ordinart treatment, yielded to the Peruvian bark ; one grain snuff, two grains mixed and used as snuff. He says he alwaystwo .or three days. Some recommend a. glass of sherry, thie kly coated over with nutmeg grated. CONVICTION UNDER TUE ACT FOR 'HIE REGULATION' p c; the sam ge Wee CHIMNEY-SWEEPERS AND CIIIMNEVS.—On M i T a d n a m y r w o last, at the Rotation Office, Pontefract, Sir. flour dealer, was convicted, by Thomas Routledge, E sn , r t t i h, mayor, in the mitigated penalty of ,£5 and costs, for Esq., ingly allowing a young person, under twenty-one years of a , to ascent', a chimney for the purpose thate fi realized The public generally ought to know, householders Per e. miffing boys to ascend their chimneys are liable to be fined, as well as the master sweeps, in a penalty of £lO, subject to be miti ga ted to five pounds and costs, at the discretion of the magistrate. •om the of a full THE INCOME TAX. —In the quarter ending 10th of Octo bet official bert the receipt from Income-tax was £313,8-1 , 1, and in ti - quarter ending sth January it was £237,212, being - - '' derived from the tax on the dividends due in July and Octo_ been il d ln a c q o u m a e r-- ber. Then came the collection eon,u private incom e from the sth of January to th th of . April, ' which £1,885,932. The whole sum, therefore, obtained half-year by only a Income-tax is £2,456,288, which probably is short pounds. 6th of few hundred thousand lieve we are not far from the mark in stating t h e W be calculations, grounded on the assessments whi c h made, lead to the conclusion that the receipt from have tax will amount to fire millions, or five million s a ' ter, sterling per annum. SALTED Puovistoss.—The following; is a copy o f } titter from a tetter from the Treasury to the Board of Customs, on March, relating to the admission of salted colonial duty :—" Treasury Chambers, provisions at the Gentlemen,—The Lords Commissioners of h ell 6 ' 181 ' Treasury having had under consideration copies her Majesty's Ports from your board. together with co • of three re tions on which ' they are founded, from i l l i es of the applica- Moffat, and Co., relative to the terms onwhichessrs. Giliespies, visions imported from Canada would be admitted certain pro sumpti on in this country, forwarded to for coo - Board of Trade, I am commanded to a my lords through the lords are of opinion that salt provisiot acquaint you that my gone in Canada the whole of the processesis, which have under to the preservation or curing of the article, requisite in order terms and spirit of the 3th clause of the Navigation may, within the. regarded and admitted as colonial Navigation Act, be ships therefore desire that you will produce ; and their lord ships to your officers, care being takengtve the necessary three general rule in each case, according not answer to the terms recited. i ; as the goods may or may am, To the Commissione r s of Customs.,, Sze- G. CLEM, g no doubt r - A GOOD LANDLORD.—Mr. John Gladstone, of Fasque , has shewn the landlords of the country an example which, i it h n e it i a i t a e s d pl b ac y ed al i l n ! power, inmtphreovlaincigli their s ir w f h a i r C m l such h nts who the w hf have of thehis ' we trust, will be generally matters, i the scheme which s he S h o as fa p r ro a p s os vi e . d e ; tion of his tenants, and which, as will be seen fromfm this day's f e o a r i t ' h j e j' a d d ge op °s paper, they have thankfully accepted, promise be in the highest degree beneficial to landlord and tenant. He agrees to give a c onsiderable deduction from the rent of this year to all who shall, within the year, drain and subsoil plough a certain proportion of the extent of their farms, he himself paying the expense of these operations, and accommodating those who may be unable to procure operations ,sand plough, with the use of one. In return, he receives from the tenant four per cent on the money paid by him for the improvement, in name of interest, or more properly, additional rent, for the improved value of the land. Now that there is every proba bility that the value of the produce of the land will be whoper manently reduced , i t is especially incumbent upon all have the power, to contribute to the utmost to increase its productiveness, so as to repy the farmer for his toil, at the same time that they are enriching the country, and increas ing the amount of subsistence at the command of the people. There are many landlords, who, perhaps, have not the same command of means to effect this object as Mr. Gladstone has, but most of them can do something ; and all should, for their own sakes, do as much as they can. The equity of the rule cannot be denied, that the permanent improvements upon land should be at the expense of bim who has a perma nent interest in it, —the tenant, of course, paying for the benefit he derives during the occupancy.--111ontrose Paper. ---------- 1 house e o J f o D ur u n BaloduilOadyernodocro t hee f l i l i t o h , , tilti h announces nt t i, l i i rs t itts t ae h , ned e by the Emperor of Russia to establish al line of steamers which are to ply regularly between Marseil a e: m an , d aft O er de t s a s k a i . n : MN ooar A Isr STEAMER.—Extract of a letter from Aden, and there seems ever . ) , probabilit% dated March 10 :—" This h a i t on e us a tr m asi e la r tf,t l ea e rt t t isie S 3r u o ez on Feb. eleven a.m., and here on the 3d instant, at two van. 2 5 , at , beating the Hon. East India Company's steamer Atalanta 51 hours from Suez to Aden. she having started 17 hours before the 0, ; H ilt a i rnbtdoe board dis fromta 5 so n , andl tons) s a place,r9r r i arrived a l , of her arriving at Calcutta before the mail rid 5 3 1 Bombay." -