The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-03-30 00:00:00

Emperiat iliaritanunt. • - .HOUSE Lpßps.--7,IONDAy. The , nishop of ,EXETER, and many other peers, presented petitions fur the abolition of the negxo apprenticeship system. (here were also petitions presented by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Chester, &c., regarding the idola tries in India, and the pilgrim tax. • Lord W HA FE moved for a series of papers illustrative Gf the working- of Ow Poor Law Amendment Act in a union in Yorkshire, tie expressed his doubt as to the utility of the act, although he had supported the original bill. He condemned the conduct pfliwcntninissiuners. Lord MgcnacaNE defended the act, and complained of the .‘naized-charanter of the attack that had been m ide upon it. ',lle Earl of RADNOR and the Earl of WING HILSEA defended the•act. • , Lord FA LKLAN D snpported the bill. Earl STA N HOP e condemned it and supported the motion. Lord BROUGHAM and the Bishop of NORW tea defended the Act. • The papers were •eveatually ordered, and their lordships ad jearaed. • , HMS . q.OF COMMONS.—MONDAY. , Mr. Mitualca O'CoNNELL took the oaths and his seat. ..Lord Sava-mutt reported from the Dublin election committee that. Mr. o.olCon nett and Mr.Flutton had-been duly returned. ..- Mr; 1.51, Via() a presented the'City of London Day and Night Police 'Bill ; Mr. IlawEs, however, intimating that he should • -Oppose it On' the principle that the police of the metropolis ought to be. under one authority. Colonel SEALE brought in the bill to allow the grinding of 'foreign corn in bond for exportation. it was read the first , . •Howick, moved that the house resolve into committee 'lnt the Mutiny Bill. Captain Rocoano moved, instead thereof, the appointment of a select committee to iuquire into the present system of re wards and. punishments. Sir G, SI NCI.. AVI seconded the motion. Colonel DAVIES opposed the motion—as did Lord How tcx afterwards;. and after an extended debate thereon, the house di vided. The numbers were—for the committee, .76 ; against it, 169-majority against, t 3. The house-then went into committee on the Mutiny Bill, and the Marine Mutiny Bill. • Sir F. TRENCH afterwards directed attention to the proposed site for the new houses of parliament s a subject which Mr. Hume said well merited attention. Mt, J. PALMER inquired whether there was any truth in the ,representation regarding an interruption of the friendly relations between this country and China ; Lord PALMIIHRSTON said that though he had heard some rtt mour on the subject, he had not received any despaches. The house then adjourned,. HOUSE OF LORDS.-TUESDAY. The Margoisses - of Wasim EA F H a•nd LON DON DERRY took the oaths and subscribed, the rolls of parliament. -Lorct WYND'oe.o presented a petition from Dorsetshire for the amendment of the new Poor Law Act. The Bishop of 1-lEugouun, Lord DACHE, the Duke of SU .THERL/iNR, the .Bishop of CHESTER, the Marquis of SLIGO, &c. presented several resolutions for the abolition of the ap prenticeship-systein in the West Indies. Lord BitouGtt.im took occasion to observe that, iu addition to the numerous petitions uow presented, he had received above 1(X) from different parts, making in the whole about 150 in trusted to himself individually. ROMAN CATHOLIC OATHS. The Bishop of Exsma moved for a copy of any despatch from the Goyernotor acting Lieutenant-Governor of the island of Matta,,to his late Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colo nial Department;• respecting the appointment of the Bishop of Malta to be a member of the Council of Government of that island; and also of a rot despatch-announcing the refusal of the said Bishop to take the oath required by law to be taken by him on the accptance of such appointment, and his resignation 0f,t13,, same. . ; together with any documents received from the said Bishop on occasion of such his refusal and resignation. Tile motion was agreed to. The Slavery Abolition Act Amendment Bill was read a third time, and the house adjourned soon after seven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.--TURSDAY. IRISH CHURCH BILL. Sir ROBERT PEEL extracted from Lord John Russell an out line of the Irish Church Bill to be brought forward by minis ters. The,bill is to be a bill for centralising Church property, strikint , off:3o per cent. in the first instance, The 70. per cent. spared is,le - be,colleeted,- not as tithe, but as rent-charge;_ and this rent-charge is to be as purchaseable at the rate of 16 per cent. for the consolidated-fund, front which thenceforward the clergy are to be paid. Lord Jorns RussELT. said that ministers do not intend at present upon the appropriation clause, nor need they. When they take all it is a cheap generosity to spare the residue. The proposed scheme (Mr. O'Coanell's) would render the clergy stipendiaries of the state, subject to dismissal, in a body, at a day's notice, by a simple vote of the House of Commons. IRISH MUNICIPAL BILE Sir Rnbert PgEt, informed the Home Secretary that when the I rish Municipal Biil shoold be proposed, he (Sir Robert) would move its prostponeraent in attendance upon the decision •orthe house upon the Irish Church Bill.. The fate of both bills maybe easily predicted. SPANISH. POLICY. OF MINISTEIIS. Lord E Linz' moved an address to the crown, lamenting the ill. success of the Spanish policy pursued by ministers, _and de precating a renewal of• the order in council, suspending the Foreign Enlistment Act. Lord. Eliot's speech was clear and manly, and it has been justly complimented by all upon the temper and moderation of its tone.• His lordship was supported by Sir A. Dalrymple, Mr.,Sidney Ilerbert, Lord Mahon, and Mr. Pemberton; by the latter in two speeches of some length, and of distinguished power. Captain Pechell, Mr. Poulter, Sir H. Vivian, 3.1 t. Vernon. Smith, and-. Mr. Shell opposed the motion. The debate was adj ourned. HOUSE OF LOILDS.—WEDNESDAY. The house met at five o'clock.. A great number of peLition in favour of total abolition of slavery were presented. The Mutiny Bill was brought up from the commons, and read a first time.—Adjourned. lIOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY. The Speaker toulaCtlie -- c6 - a1; - a - t - 14_;;;inu - te; to four. Sir J. 'Welsh took the oaths and his seat for Stuibury. The Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway bill was read a third time and passed. A great number of petitions praying for the total abolition of negro apprenticeship on the first of August nex.t was pre sented. On the presentation of a petition, Mr. HamE gave notice that, early after Easter, he should move for leave to Erring in a bill to suspend the annual payment made by this country to the King of Hanover. (Hear, hear, frOm the ministerial benches,) . The presentation of petitions occupied the house until past five o'clock. In answer to a question from Mr. L A SCELLES, Lord J.litissEr.t. said, when the report of the commissioner appointed to inquire into the petitions from Sheffield, relatini , to granting %charter of incorporation to that town was received,' the Privy Council would immediately decide upon the question, Lord J. Russat.r.gave notice, that when the motion for the total abolition of slavery, was moved-to-morrow, he would move as an.atilaa.ilment.that4tre= house proceed to the second reading of the'.slazy:e.;traite abolition amendment act, which was read a first time last night. The mutiny bill was read a third time and passed. AyFA IRS OF SPAIN. The order of the day was read from the chair for proceeding with the adjourned d;bate on Lord Eliot's motion relating to the affairs of Spain. No member on either side rising to address the house, The SP6AKER put the question that a humble address be presented to her Majesty, in the terms of the motion proposed by Lord Eliot. A scene of the must-extraordinary description took place; the greatest confusion prevailed, during which strangers'were or dered to withdraw. A discussion took place with closed doors, after which the house divided, when there appealed— For the motion.... 62 Against it Majority against the mot lou Theanttounceu►ent of these numbers was received with the most lioisterous cheers from the ministerial side of the house. Lord Matto; begged to state that the division which had taken place had taken his side of the house entirely by surprise. (Hear, hear.) it was no part of theirs to put such a sudden termination to the debate. - Lord J Itussau, wa;willing to admit that both sides were taken by surprise. General KvArts said the object of the motion was to attack his conduct, although it professed to condemn the policy of the government. He had intended to speak on the question, but did not wish to do so at Such an early hoyr.. (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to.begin the debate again, now that it was decided. It was a ridiculous motion £o commence; and it had met with a ridiculous termination. Lord .1. Rossact, repeated that be did not think either side of the house intended surprise. Lord'Ala UMW protested agaringt•tht, house getting rid of such an important question in such an extraordinary manner. He therefore moved, as an amendment, that the debate be resumed. Atliscussiony of an animated nature took place, during which, Lord J. Itussar.r. moved that the house do adjourn. The queetion was put, and the members were leaving the - house amidst great laughter, when Lord Manor; again said that he moved that the identical reaolutien of his noble friend be considered. (Hear.) Hon members haying'resumed their seats, Lord Fa.tor implored the house not to dispose of a question of vast importance in such a summary way. (Hear.) Mr. 1-1 Awes said it was the fault of bon. members on the other side of the house that the question had been disposed of in sueti'an extraordinary manner. Sir R. Pear. was no party to the extraordinary proceedings which bad taken place. for he did not come down to the house until half-past five o'clock, and he was then told that the house had adjourned. (Hear.) He knew well that no such result was contemplated on his side of the house, as the hon. member who intended to open the debate called upon him (Sir It. Peel) this morning ; and informed him of his intention. ( Hear.) Mr. C. BULLER said the motion was purely a party question. and therefore he trusted the house would not reverse the de cision to which it had come. Lord J. RUSSELL said, as the question was one of censure on the administration, he wished to have it discus s ed, but he did see how the house could now interfere. After a few words from Mr. VILLIERS, The SPEAKER again put the question, that the house do ad journ. Another scene of great confusion occurred, during which Lord MAHON again Lose, and insisted upon his right, by slightly altering the terms of his motion, to move it as an amend ment-to the motion for adjournment. (Loud cries of " Adjourn, ad Him.") The noble lord then handed to the speaker the amendment he proposed, which was, read from the chair amidst great confusion. Mr. HAWES wished the motion to be fairly discussed, but it could not be done that evening, as many members had left the house, under the idea that it was disposed of. Another ronversation ensued. Sir H. PEEL proposed the debate should be resumed on Friday. Another stormy discussion ensued. Lord J. RUSSELL wished the debate to come on to-night, but he could not consent to adjourn it until Friday. Sir R. PEEL—Then the best way will A be to give a regular notice of again bringing the subj.ct forward. (Hear.) The house adjourned at half-past six o'clock. ROYAL ROCK FERRY.—We understand that a few spirited gentlemen in the vicinity of this delightful place have just com pleted a very handsomely arranged chapel, under the establish ment, for the accommodation of the inhabitants of that rapidly increasing neighbourhood, which it is intended to open for divine service on Sunday the Bth of April. LIVERPOOL SPRING ASSIZES. CROWNCOURT.—TUESDAY. His Lordship (Sir John Pattison) took his seat on the bencb at nine o'clock. MANSLAUGHTER. Joseph Chamock, aged ]9, was placed at the bar, under an indictment, in which he was charged with having, on the 2d January last, killed John M'hitehead at Boltou-le-Moors. Mr. Hutton appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner was not defended. It appeared that on the second of January, a party of indivi duals were celebrating a wedding at a beer shop kept by a per son named Entwhistle. Two of the pa4quarrelled and began to fight. The deceased, Whitehead, interfered and attempted to part them. The prisoner, who was of the party, and who was intoxicated, kicked Whitehead, and a short combat ensued. The deceased received , several violent _kicks and blows. He fell down and expired almost immediately. The - surgeon who examined the deceased, stated that he found the bowels lace rated, and this injury was the cause of death. Mr. Winter, in whose employ the prisoner had been, gave him a good character for humanity and mildness of temper. The prisoner endeavoured to excuse himself by saying he was intoxicated, and that he had for 'some time past been the per sonal friend of the deceased. The Learned JUDGE said this . was a very clear case, and he was not prepared to say that it was not one for murder. How ever the prisoner had not been so indicted. The jury found the prisoner guilty. Mr. fIuLToN handed up to ,his lordship several testimonials from the neighbours of the prisoner as to his character, and said he had been requested to state, on the part of the prosecution, that the reputation of the : prisoner had hitherto been very good. The Juno once more expressed his abhorrence of the savage mode of fighting, by throwing persons down and kicking. lie had more than once expressed his determination to visit this description of crime with the most severe punishment. He should, however, take into consideration the good character of the,prisoner, and should on this occasion abstain from passing sentence of transportation. The prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment and hard labour for one year. MANSLAUGHTER. Charles Worthington , aged 17, was charged with havtng, in the month of September last, in this town, killed James ()al lege°. The prisoner stood charged, under the coroner's inquisition, with murder. The grand jury, however, found a bill for man slaughter only. Mr. Armstrong conducted the case for the prosecution, and Dr. Brown defended the prisoner.' Peter Evans stated that he was formerly in the service of Messrs. Varty and Wilson of this town, coach-builders. The deceased, James Callagan, was foreman of the trimmers there. The prisoner was anapprentice, and was in the body-maker's department. On the 12th of September last the prisoner was in the workshop, and he reqUested one of the boys to go with him to turn the grindstone, as he wished to grind his chisel. The foreman interfered, and said he should not have the boy as be was wanted. The deceased had yrettiously employed the boy. Worthington had the chisel in his hand at the time. Some altercation ensued on the subject. The prisoner, seeing that the boy had his gimlet, snatched it from him, saying the boy should npt have his gimlet. The deceased took the gimlet from Worthington and struck him on the face, witness believed with the back of his,hand. The prisoner immediately struck the deceased with his chisel. Callagan was wounded. He tan out of the work-shop holding his hand to the wound. He was taken to a public-house and afterwards to the infirmary, Wilson. Tong and Patrick Davies gave evidence of tendency similar to the above. George Lee, an apprentice at Messrs. Varty and Wilson stated that ho was the boy whom Wort.lington requested to turn the grindstone. The only points in which the testimony of this witness differed from that given by those above-named, were the following. The gimlet which he (witness) bad in his hand fell to the ground. Worthington took it up. CaHagan snatched it from him and struck him on the eye with it. The eye looked bloodshot immediately. Callagan seemed as if he was coming on, again, when the prisoner held up the chisel and made a push with it. - Mr. Nottingham, a surgeon at the infirmary, stated that Cal. lagan lived 1, days after he was taken to the infirmary. He described the nature of the Wound, and said it had caused death. The witnesses agreed that the prisoner and the deceased had always been on intimate"and friendlY terms. Dr. BnowN addressed the jury for the prisoner, dwelling on the mitigatory circumstances in the evidence of Geo. Lee. The learned JUDGE, in his comments on the„evidence, said it was impossible to reduce the present charge below man slaughter, because in truth this blow was not given in self,de fence. Even having received a bloW, it should not have been returned with a dang,erous instrument. The Jury returned a - verdiet—guilty of - manslaughter. Dr. Bitow:si said he hadpresent the nurse. who attended the deceased in Use infirmary, andshe .had heard tie deceased say, that he hoped Worthington was nut in custody,. as he was not, ❑nder the circumstances, to blame_ He (Dr. Brown) was sen sible that he could not offer this in evidence, but he thought it right to mention it. Witnesses were called, who gave the prisoner a good cha racter. His LORDSHIP, after mentioning the length of time the pri soner had been in custody under the apprehension that he would be - tried for murder, sentenced him to be imprisoned for two months, and kept to hard labour. CHARGE OF MANSLAUGATER Edward Lowe„ aged 26, was charged with having slain John Adamson, at Winyvich, on the 19th August last. Mr. L. PEEL conducted the case for the prosecution, Dr. BROWN appeared for the, defence. It appeared that on the 12th August last, the prisoner and the deceased were drinking together at the Red Lion public-house, at Ashton. The prisoner had a male dog with him, which Adamson took up. The' prisoner remonstrated 'with him, and the effect of this was to make Adamson abuse the dog by lifting it up and dashing it against the ground. On this the prisoner also remonstrated, and presently afterwards they departed. The deceased was soinewhat intoxicated; and - the prisoner also had had some liquor. As the deceased walked away he used some provoking language, upon,; which the priSoner followed him, but it appeared that even then he spoke very mildly. The deceased turned upon the prisoner and struck him. The pri soner returned the blow with great force, and the deceased fell hack with his head against the wall. He died almost instantly. It was afterwards discovered that his neck had been dislocated by the blow or the fall. The Jury acquitted the prisoner. msissLAt3uHrEft. William Swindles, aget . 3,;;(l :1;1;; — Howai d, aged 15, were placed at the bar, the former under an indictment found by the Grand Jury, and the latter under an - inquisition, (the Grand Jury having ignored the bill) charged with having at Levens hutine„ on the 23d of September, caused the death of James Walters. It appeared that several carts were racing along a road on which the deceased was passing with an ass. One or more of the carts ran over the prisoner, and thus he was killed. There was no distinct evidence to show which of the carts ran against the deceased, and the Jury acquitted the prisoners. MANSLAUGHTER Dennis Baxter. aged 30, and William Breyers. aged 20, were charged with having caused the death of Alice Hunt. Mr. HULTON conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Warily defended the prisoner Breyers. The prisoners had acted as engineer and fireman on one of the engines of the Livezpool and Birmingham Grand Junction Railway Company. The c h arge aga i ns t them was th a t on the 9th of- September last, they, through negligence, caused the death of Alice Hunt, by suffering the Grand Junction train to run against the Bolton train. It appeared that on the 9th September last the deceased took her place in the Bolton train, which proceeded to the Kingston Junction, where it had to be attached to the Manchester train, which it seems was somewhat late. It arrived there about seven o'clock in the evening. The weather was somewhat foggy, and some rain had fallen. While the proper persons were engaged in fastening the two trains together, an alarm was given that the Birmingham train was coming up. Two men, Thus. Mort and John Warburton, ran forward and made signals for the Birmingham train to stop. It was at this time about three quarters of a mile off, and rt was seen that the steam from the engine had been turned off. The Bolton train had the signal. lamps up. Mort and Warburton seeing that the train was corn ing at the rate (in their opinion) of thirty miles per hour, called to the people in the Bolton train to get out. Sand was thrown on the rails with the view of increasing the friction, and War burton ran some distance .forward repeating the signals for the train to stop. It however came up at the rate of about fifteen miles per hour, and struck against the Bolton train, breaking several of the carriages to pieces. When the carriages were examined, Mrs. Hunt was found lying insensible in one of the carriages. The surgeon who attended the deceased detailed the injuries which she had received. The witnesses generally agreed, that it was the'duty of the engineer to keep a look-out, and that the fireman also was expected to do so when not otherwise employ ed. The usual mode of stopping the train, it.appeared, was, to throw off the steam and let down the breaks. the rain, it was stated, which had' fallen, would make it more difficult for the trains to stop. The engineer had a break to the engine, and the guard also had charge of breaks, which it was necessary for him to put down when the train was to be quickly stopped. The engineer was seen with his hand on the break as the engine shot past one of the witnesses. Mr. MURPHY addressed the jury in defence of his client, contending that, as a fireman he might have been employed at tending to the fires, and could not therefore be expected to be always on the lank • Baxter, who was undefended, stated, that he was examining the glass tube, which indicates the height of the water in the boiler, when the firemen turned off the steam, and told him that there was a light in .front. The fireman ran to the break, and he ran to the lever. This lever, which governed the eccentric was out of order, and it was tied up to the railing to prevent it from slipping out. It was tied so fast that he could not undo it, consequently he was unable to reverse the engine in - time. Collier, the engineer of the Bolton train, was recalled, and he proved that the lever was tied. If it had been in repair, it would not have required to be tied. His Lordship summed up with great minuteness. The Jury retired. They returned in about half an hour, and on their return they gave in a verdict of guilty against Baxter, 'acquitting Breyers. The sentence not passed upon Baxter. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. Thomas Bales, aged 27, John Thompion, 32, and Robert Wrig ley, 22, were placed at the bar, charged with having assaulted and robbed Thomas Duckworth, at. Oldham, in December last. Another prisoner named Samuel Bardsley was committed, but he was placed in the box as evidence. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Whigham appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Murphy for the defence. Thomas Duckworth stated, that he resided at Black-lane, in the neighbourhood of Blackburn. Ile_was bankman at a coal pit, near Oldham. On Friday, the 29th Dec. last, he left the pit about nine o'clock in the evening to go home. He was alone. He called at Mr. Potter's, and received some money. About a quarter of a mile from the pit, as he was crossing a field, he heard a man coining behind him. It was dark. He turned his head, and saw a man whom he did not know. - He was crossing over a fence into a plantation, when he saw a man squatting down near the bank. He exclaimed " Hallo !" and the other person said " Hallo!" in a faint voice. He thought that was the voice of Robert Wrigley. Wrigley worked in the same mine as himself, and had known him many years, and seen him every day for the last six years. When he had pro ceeded a few yards in the plantation, he received a blow on the bark of his head. Other persons came up, and the blows were repeated. Witness called out.," Oh, dear!" and was then pull ed down. It was a hard substance with which he was struck, and not a fist. Some person grasped his throat as he lay on the ground. He beard three different voices. Tbey took his money while they were throttling him. Ii had a calico purse in his pocket, containing two sovereigns, some half crowns and shit lnigs, in all, £B. He begged of them to spare his life, and one of them said, " Hast it ?" (have you it?) The answer was Aye." The first person said, " Let's go, then." Some one said, " He does not know us." ..He thought Robert Wrigley's voice was beard.on that occasion. He was left on the ground, and thought the robbers went away over the fence. Samuel Bardsley deposed, that he was living at Oldham last Dec. The witness went on to state, that he was employed at THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD the same pit as Wrigley, one of the prisoners at the bar. On the Monday before Christmas day, Wrigley said to him, that they might make a good day's work by robbing the banksman that they worked under. Witness replied, " We should be found out if we did it." Wrigley replied, "He could get two chaps that would do it." On the Wednesday following, he he would go and fetch Thomas Bales and John Thompson to do this job. On Friday Wrigley told him, that the men had come. Bales and Thompson were sawyers. He had an interview with them at Wrigley's house. Witness here identified the prisoners at the bar. By Wrigley's direction he exchanged his white hat for a black one. Witness here described, that they went alto gether to the place where the job was to be done. Witness was sent to keep watch at the bottom of the field. It was a dark night and Robert Wrigley agreed to go to the top of the field, and show Thompson the man. In about a quarter of an hour afterwards, he heard somebody call out, "Oh dear!" Wituess ran away, being afraid of being taken if, he remained. Bales and Thompson came running after him. Bales remarked, that he (Duckworth) called out rarely. He and Bales got over the hedge, Bales remarking that Thompson had got the money. He also said, they held the banksman down in the field. They met Thompson at Oldham, and at first said, they would go to the King's Arms and divide the money, but fearing that if they were seen together it would excite suspicion, they went to Bates' house, where •witness remained outside. After a time, Thomp son came to him, and said, they had got £5, and gave him £2 10s. to divide between him and Wrigley. Witnesses were called, who proved, that the handle of the pick found in the field belonged to Wrigley. A man who heard them conversing in prison detailed matter which they had spo ken, which showed that they bad a knowledge of the robbery. Mr. MURPHY spoke at great length in defence of the pri goners. The jury found all three guilty, and the court passed sentence upon them of transportation for life. NISI PRIUS COURT.—TUESD (Before Mr. Justice Coleridge.) Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Brandt appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Alexander for the defendant. The declaration stated that this was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is a surgebn, against the defendant, for using de famatory words against him, in stating that he was a quack, and not entitled to practise as a surgeon. It appeared that the plaintiff is a surgeon at Ashton, near Manchester, and the defendant was steward to the Earl of Stamford and Warrington. It appeared there had been a con servative supper at Ashton, to present a piece of plate to Mr. Higginb,ottom, of that town, when the plaintiff, a person named. Gregory, a Mr. Newton, a Mr. Worthington, and a Mr. Tay lor, who were liberals, went into an adjoining room, and listened to what...was going on, in which they were detected, and this conduct caused much talk in the town. A few days afterwards a number of persons were assembled at the Commercial Inn, where the before-mentioned individuals, with the exception of the plaintiff, were assembled, and the defendant, when they began conversing about the conservative supper, and the con duct of the listeners; when the defendant said, " Don't mention Dr. Daubs, (meaning the plaintiff,) he is a quack, and not entitled to practise as a surgeon; you may tell him that I will prove it." And subsequently he stated that two apprentices had been obli g ed to leave the plaintiff because he had not passed Apothecaries Hall. A witness, named Edward Gregory, was called to prove the words used ; and deposed to the defendant having used the words, and that he had told the plaintiff of the words. His lordship severely commented on the evidence of this wit ness. To every question on his cross-examination making against his friend the plaintiff, it was, first, "it might be so," then,. " perhaps it was so," then, "I believe it was so," and finally, " I have no doubt whatever it was so." Mr. ALURANDER, for the defence, called the, witnesses' evi dence an "ascending scale of evidence." lie strongly de nounced the shabby conduct of the listeners, and said that par ties who would take so mean an advantage over a political op ponent would take the opportunity which the words which formed the subject of the action afforded to found an action on them to injure a political opponent. His lordship said if they were of opinion that the slander was substantially proved, they would find for the plaintiff. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages, one far thing. BACK HOUSE AND ANOTHER V. SANDIFORD AND OTHERS. Mr. CRESWELL and. Mr. HOGGIN S appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. ALEXANDER and Mr. WIGHTSI A N for the defence. The plaintiffs in this casedealt very considerably with Messrs. Sandiford, Hewitt, aad Wetherby, - calico-printers, of Manches ter. The latter firm dissolved partnership in September, 1836, and at that time there was a balance owing from the firm to the plantiff, Mr. Backhouse, of about 41;200. Mr. Sandiford drew out or the firm, leaving Messrs. Hewitt and Wetherby, to carry on the business, and they soon after failed and became bank rupti in the debt. of Mr. Backhouse, who now came upon Mr. Sandiford, who had withdrawn from the firm, for the amount of his debt. This was the point 'at issue, M. Sandiford pleading that he was exonerated by the dissolution of partnership; then that he was exonerated by agreement. with the plaintiff, which was denied; and then that he was exonerated by the Flain tiff 's having received a bill from Hewitt and Wetberby,in pay ment of the debt, and that he therefore could not come upon Sandiford. This, it was said, was accepted with an understand ing that it was not to invalidate the plaintiff's claim against Sandiford. The defendants, Hewitt and Wetherby pleaded their bankruptcy, and the action therefore rested against San diford. Mr. Backhouse was in partnership with a Mr. Price, who was the other plaintiff in the action. For the defence it was attempted to be proved that the goods were supplied to the subsequent firm, and not to Sandiford and Co. _ _ _ His LORDSHIP, in summing up, said there could not be a doubt about the responsibility of Mr. Sandiford. The jury - found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £1,087 Gs.7d. SEGGITH V. BYWATER The ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Mr. STARKIE appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. BRANDT for the defence. The plaintiff in this action is a coach-builder at Scarborough, and the defendant is the keeper of a carriage bazaar at Man chester. 'The action was brought to recover the value of a carriage; sent by the plaintiff to 'the defendant's bazaar to be sold, which the defendant did sell, but which the plaintiff could never get eaid for. The defendant paid £l9 into court. A verdiCt was agreed to in additiiin for £2O. There being no further causes ready to go on with, his Lord ship sent "over to the other court for an indiettnent to go on with. pass this over as a very light offence. Example demanded that he should inflict a somewhat severe punishment. The prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment for twelve months, with hard labour. MANS LA UGHTER. Thomas Hayes was indicted with having, on the 19th instant, killed and slain Lawrence Robinson at a beer-shop, at Salford. It appeared that the deceased and the prisoner were drinking together in the beer-house, when they had some quarrel, and the deceased called Hayes a " waster" whereupon Hayes knocked deceased down with a blow o n his right eye. The de ceased immediately went home and went to bed, and, two days afterwards, after getting worse and worse, became insensible and died. - Mr. Brownbill, surgeon, was called in, and, on a post mortem examination, found the skull fractured at the upper orbit of the right eve, which had compressed the brain and was the cause of death, Such a fracture might be caused by a blow from the fist. The prisoner said he got drunk. The deceased and he were always good friends, and be knew no reason why - he should fall out with him. The jury found the prisoner guilty. It was stated that the prisoner had a wife and five children. His LoRDSHIP said this was not an aggravated case; but, at the same time, whenever a man suffered himself to be disguised in liquor and under the influence of that had sent a fellow creature to his account without preparation, it was no light matter. The sentence of the court was that he be imprisoned three calendar months. CROWN COURT.—WEDNESDA Y. The learned Judge (Sir John Pattison) took his seat at nine o'clock. FORGERY. Hobert Killvelley was charged with having knowingly uttered a forged bill of exchange, for the sum of £2O. Mr. Murphy appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner was not defended. It was stated, that the prisoner was respectably connected, and that one of his relations was the Rev. Mr. Williams, of Lllansannan, near Denbigh. It appeared that some time pre vious to September last, the prisoner, who had been in bad cir cumstances, called upon his relative, Mr. Williams, and re quested hi►n to go to Liverpool with him, and endeavour to place him in a situation, when he hoped he should be able to push his way in the world. Amongst other persons whom the prisoner called upon in company with his rev. relative, was Mr. Cham bers, a wine and spirit merchant of this town. The prisoner, it appears, did not succeed in obtaining a situation in this town. On the 9th of September, the prisoner called at the warehouse of Mr. Chambers, who was an old friend of the Rev. Mr. Williams, and presented a note purporting to be from the latter. In the note was inclosed a bill of exchange, for £2O, purporting to have been drawn by Mr. Horne, solicitor, of Denbigh, and to have but a short time to run. The note appeared to have been hurridlv written by the Rev. Mr. Williams, and contained an order for three gallons of rum, and three gallons of whiskey, which were directed to be delivered to the bearer, (the prisoner) who was described as a relation of the writer. Some directions were contained respecting the bill. The spirits were delivered to the prisoner. It was soon afterwards discovered, that both the note and the bill of exchange were forged. The prisoner had already pleaded guilty to the forgery of the note. The jury found him guilty of the offence of uttering the forged bill of exchange. The leained JUDGE said, as the offence was committed pre viously tO"the alteration of the law, he had no alternative as to the sentence. The prisoner was sentenced to transportation for life. UTTERING EASE COIN. Mary Turley, aged 38, was charged with having at Pendleton, uttered certain counterfeit shillings, knowing the same to be. base. Serjeant Atcherly, and Mr. Armstrong conducted the pro secution. The offence was fully proved on the testimony of several wit nesses. A number of counterfeit shillings and sixpences were found on the person of the prisoner, when she was taken into custody. A previous convinction for a similar offence, charged as a misdemeanour was read, and the prisoner was identified as the person who had been convicted. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and she was sentenced to transportation for life. UTTERING BASE COIN. Catharine Blinkhorn alias Catharine Harvey, aged 33, was charged with having at Manchester, uttered several base shil lings and half-crowns, well knowing the same to be counterfeit. The case for the prosecution was conducted by Mr. Sergeant Atcherley and Mr. Armstrong. In this case it was proved that the prisoner had passed base money to Samuel Taylor, Mary Waite, and others. ' A previous conviction was proved in this case also. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty, and his Lordship passed sentence of transportation for life. UTTERING BASE COIN, Catharine Smith, aged 73, was charged with having uttered base shillings to several persons at Manchester, knowing the same to be counterfeit. The Attorney-General for the county, and Mr. Armstrong, conducted the prosecution. This case also was fully proved in the evidence of Mrs. Finz brook, shopkeeper, of Manchester. and Mr. John Dudley, a hux ter and fruit-seller in Manchester market. A previous conviction was proved. The jury found the prisoner Guilty. She received sentence of t ransportation, for life. The learned ATTORNEY-GENRRAL for .the county said, that he would now name what he did not think it proper to mention before. The prisoner had been convicted several times, and imprisoned previously to 1828. In that year she was convicted again, and sentence of death was passed upon her. She re ceived the King's mercy then, and had actually been convicted four times since. Dennis Bp.rjer, found guilty on the preceding day, of man slaughter, in having suffered the Grand Junction Railway train to run foul of the Bolton train, whereby a female named Ann Hunt, was killed, was brought up to receive sentence. The learned JUDGE commented at some length on the offence. Had it not been for the extenuating circumstances in the case, he should• have deemed it his duty to have sent the prisoner out of the country. As it was, he felt (fiat he could not COINING. Michael Boyland was charged with having had in his posses sion certain moulds and materials for coining, and also with having uttered base coin. The Attorney-General for the county, and Mr. Armstrong conducted the prosecution. The prisoner resided in Manchester, and until this offence bore a good character. It was proved that he had passed seve ral counterfeit sixpences. O❑ his being apprehended on this charge his house was searched, and two moulds for sixpences, a quantity of plaster-of•paris, some metal, and a number of base sixpences, rough from the mould, were found. The jury pronounced the prisoner Guilty, but recommended him to mercy. ' His LORDSHIP passed. sentence of imprisonment for one year. COINING AND UTTERING. James Stubbs, aged 20, Edward Leighton, 22, and Catharine Leighton, 20, were placed at the bar, charged with having pre viously uttered certain base sixpences at Wigan, and with having had in their possession a mould for casting sixpences, a quantity of metal, and several counterfeit sixpences. The Attorney-General and Mr. Armstrong for the prose cution. It appeared that on Friday, the sth of September, Edward Leighton, one of the prisoners, went to a public-house in Wigan, and asked for a glass of ale. He tendered a sixpence in pay ment, which being pronounced bad, he produce a sufficient quantity of copper to pay for the ale. He was seen to join the female Catharine Leighton, and subsequently the prisoner Stubbs. In their possession were found two moulds for cutting sixpences, a quantity of white metal, several counterfeit six pences, and other materials for coining. It was not proved on which of the prisoners the materials were actually found. The jury acquitted the prisoners. POSSESSION OF ➢IOULDS. Thos. Farm, aged 46, Richard Singleton 40, and George Allen 42, were placed at the bar, charged with having, at Manchester, had in possession, a certain mould and pattern for coining. A party of Stafford officers, from information which they had received, went to the house occupied by the prisoners. 'When they went in they found the prisoner Farus breaking up a mould with his feet. On examination, several broken moulds were found near the spot. Other implements used in coining were found about the house. The jury found the prisoners all guilty. Singleton, who was well known, and who had been convicted several times, was transported for life; Allen, who was also known, was transported for 15 years, and Farns, who was stated to be a new beginner, was ordered to be imprisoned fur 18 months. ILLEGAL POSSESSION OP DIRS. Patrick Rigby, aged 34 was placed at the bar under an indict ' ment, in which he was charged with having had in his posses sion a certain instrument, tool and engine, for coiniug penny pieces.—[The Attorney-General and Mr. Armstrong for the prosecution, and Mr. Cross for the defence.] Henry Biggins, die-maker, Sheffield, stated that on the 6th Nov. last the prisoner called upon him, and producing a piece of steel of the size of a penny piece, requested him to cut on it a head and face of King William, similar to that which was on pennies. He was to do only the head side of it, and it was to he sent by coach. The prisoner said he wanted it to stamp snuff box lids with. It was finished on the 12th Nov. It was to be addressed, John Smith, Shade Hill. Manchester. Witness di rected the coachman of the Umpire coach, by whom it was sent, not to part with it without the money. On the Monday following, Berwick came to him and got the penny piece from him which the prisoner had left as a pattern. William Settle, a coachman, who, in Nov. last drove the Umpire, stated that he had delivered the parcel to a person whom he knew by the name of Smith. The person was the prisoner. He had not at first money to pay for the parcel, and he (witness) would not deliver it up. He called two or three times. It appears that the Witness and his wife had some sus picions of the prisoner, for they opened the parcel, and on see ing what it contained, they went and informed the officers of police. Next day the prisoner gave the money to the coach man and got the parcel. Berwick and other officers were immediately directed to in vestigate the matter, with a view to the discovery of the parties concerned. The result was, that dies for making pennies— sixty plain copper pieces of the size of a penny piece each, a ladle for melting metal, and a variety of other articles, were found on the premises. Mr. Ceoss addressed the jury for the defence, and said he should be able to prove that a man named John Smith, who lodged with the prisoner, was the real delinquent. A man named Gocarty, a plasterer, who had come from Ire land for the purpose of giving testimony in favour of the prisoner, swore that John Smith had lodged with the prisoner, and that the dies and other matters produced were his property. The jury returned a %erdict of Guilty. The learned counsel for the prisoner handed up two certifi cates of character, one from the Dean of Cashel, bearing his seal, and another from a magistrate of the county where the prisoner was born. Ilis lordship sentenced the prisoner to seven years' trans" portation. NISI PRIUS COURT.—WEDNESDAY. (Before al, Justice Coleridge.) At the opening of the court this morning, the following spe cial jury causes were fixed to be taken on the following days : No. 2, Orrell v. Greenhough and others, and Greenhough v. Urrell and others, onMonday, April 2d; No. 44, Houlden v. Daniel, and No. 50, Lawrence and another, assignees, v. Knowles, on Tuesday. April 3d ; and No. 102, Butterworth and another v. Cotesworth, on Wednesday, April 4th. HIBBERT AND OTHERS V. THE MERSEY AND IRWELL NAVIGATION COMPANY. _ The plaintiffs in this case, who were the proprietors of a steam boat named the Egremont, plying across the Mersey from the ferry of that name to Liverpool, brought this action to recover from the defendants, the Mersey and Irwell Navigation Com pany, damages for injury sustained by the Egremont, in con sequence of the defendants' stew in-tioat Hercules having run into her on the evening of the 22d of January last, when within forty yards of the quay at Liverpool, and abo .t 150 yards off her place of destination. The cause occupied all day, and was very uninteresting. The Egremont was crossing over the river from Egremont, and coming up the side of the Princess Pier at a slackened speed, when according to the plaintiffs' case the Hercules was coming down the tide to tow up a flat, and turned in at right angles towards the pier wall to get out of the tide, when the collision took place. The defendants contending that the in jury resulted from the Egremont steering out into the river in a position which would have enabled the Hercules to pass her, and then suddenly altering her course to a straight line with the pier, thus cutting her course, and that owing to that the in jury took place, and then the Egremont swung round against the pier, and received the damage from that. The amount of damages was agreed between the parties to depend on the ver dict of the jury. • The jury found for the plaintiff. The court adjourned at six o'clock. CROWN COURT—THURSDAY. Before Sir John Patteson. His Lordship took his seat at a quarter past nine o'clock. MURDER. William Hill, aged 27, was placed at the bar under an indict ment, in which he was charged with having, at Warrington, on the Bth of December last, wilfully murdered one Betty Minshull of that place. The case for the prosecution was conducted by Dr. Brown and Mr. Boileau, and Mr. Brandt, with whom was Mr. Holton, defended the prisoner. The prisoner is a delicate and (though not handsome) a rather interesting looking young man, of light complexion. On the usual question being put to him, the prisoner said, in a melan choly tone, " Not guilty." Dr. Brown stated the case briefly, remarking upon the nature of the crime. The evidence was principally of a circumstantial nature; and as the gentlemen of the jury had, no doubt, heard much of the case, he implored them to dismiss from their minds all statements of whatever nature by which they might have been impressed, and to look upon the evidence which would be brought before them as if they had never before heard of it. Dr. Brown then entered into a narrative of the various circum stances which it was intended to prove by the testimony of the witnesses. In conclusion, the learned counsel again implored the jury to dismiss from their minds all statements which they might have heard out of doors, and to judge upon the facts that would be brought before them. A large and well executed model of the house (the Leigh Arms) where the unfortunate deceased lived, with the adjacent buildings to a considerable extent, was exhibited in court, and Dr. Brown, as he detailed the circumstances of the case, traced the movements of the parties so far as they would come out in evidence, and the particular places to be alluded to therein. As the witnesses proceeded with their evidence, the course of actions and events were also illustrated by reference to this model. James Jones was called and sworn. He stated, that he had examined the premises, (the Leigh Arms, &c.) and measured them and compared them with the model. It was a correct model. The distance from the back back premises of Mrs. Thomas' house to the privy on the model was 28 yards. The distance from the back door of the Leigh Arms to Longshaw's house was 104 yards. Mr. BRANDT cross-examined the witness—That model corre sponded with the premises in all respects, excepting that the lower part was on a slightly smaller scale than the tipper part. Mary Pritchard sworn. On 7th Dec. last was servant to Mr. Higginson. He kept the Leigh Arms at Warrington. His housekeeper was Betty Minshull. She was his daughter, and had kept his house about a year and a half. The 7th Dec. was on a Thursday ; it was one of the nights of the second week of Warrington fair. There were six or seven persons drinking there that night. Knew William Hill, the prisoner at the bar. lie was there that night. Thursday night was the night on which the Weavers' club was held, and he belonged to it. They came in about eight o'clock. Mrs. Minshull treated them to half a gallon of ale, and her master treated them with some also. Her master went to bed at II o'clock. The prisoner had sung some songs. Mrs. Minshull and witness waited upon them in the tap room. She was there during the singing. Witness went to bed at 12, by her mistress's orders. She said, " Molly, you had better go to bed, you will be tired. At that time there had not been any quarrelling among the party—they were all very comfortable. She fell asleep, and did not wake till five o'clock in the morning. There was a man named Nicholas Murphy and a soldier sleeping in the house. Besides the master and herself, there was nobody else slept in the house. Mrs. Minshull usually slept with her (witness.) Heard the watch man at five o'clock, and was surprised that Mrs. Minshull was not in bed. Searched the house but could not find her. Went down into the kitchen, and the back door was open. There were two doors into the yard, the kitchen and lobby door. The kitchen door was open. Took a candle and went out to look for her. Witness found her in the petty. She was laid straight on the floor on her back, with her head in one corner and her feet turned, the door touching it. Her petticoats were up to her knees, and witness pulled them down. She was dead. Witness found her bunch of keys lying beside her, and a can dlestick, and the lock and key of the gate. The keys were those of the drawers of the house which she generally kept in her pocket. The lock and key were the lock and key of the bottom gate of the yard. It was a huge lock which they put on the inside of the gate. The door of the privy was inside that gate. Witness did not know that the gate had been locked on that particular night or not, but her master usually locked it before dusk. The candlestick had not a bit of candle in it, but the candlestick was raised ❑p to the top as high as it would go, but does not think there was any snuff on it. Called for assist ance to take the body into the house. Did not examine her pockets. Stroked her arms down. Nicholas Murphy and the soldier carried her body into the house. Witness. went with them to the privy and helped them as well as she could. Can't say whether her pockets were examined after she went into the house. Sometimes she carried a snuff-box in her pocket, and sometimes it was in the bar. Witness knew the box, hut could not say whether she seen it in the bar that night. Deceased had a - bone-hafted knife, which she carried generally in her pocket; She often had it out to cut lemons in the bar. She generally put silver which she took her pocket. Witness dues not know whether she had taken any money or not. Wit ness searchel tit the snufr-box but could not find it. Does not remember that she searched for the knife; might have done so. Cross-examined by Mr. BaAN nT.—liad lived two years in the house. Mrs. Minshull was a lusty woman. She had faint ing tits. She was subject to them when she was put out of the way. She had a husband, and he lived at Manchester. He generally came over to see her once a fortnight, and had been over that week. Witness, when she found her, was so put about that she did nut know what to think. The stays of the deceased were new, and one of the bones was a little forced up on one side. She was a short-necked woman. There were more men than six or seven at first, but at least about that number. When the others went away the remainder adjourned from their first room to the tap-room. It was half a gallon of ale that Mrs. Minshull treated them to, and her master treated them to aquart. They were not willing to go then, and wit ness drew them another half gallon before she went to bed. The party was very merry, and Mrs. Minshull was there when the prisoner was singing. She seemed pleased with his singin g . It was about twelve o'clock when she (witne ss ) wen t t o bed. When she found the deceased her head was hanging forward a little. It was towards her stays. Re-examined by Dr. Baow N.—The bone of her stays came out a little. She had two bones, one at each side, down the front. She laced her stays in front. One of the bones was out a little, sticking to one side. Thomas Higginson stated that he was the father of Betty Minshull. He saw the prisoner at the bar at his house on the Bth of December. He went to bed betwixt 11 and 12 o'clock. He was in the room with the party some hours. His daughter had received all the money that was taken in the house that night. She put it in her pocket regularly. Witness did not know whether the back gate going into the mug market was fastened on that night or not, but it was usually fastened His daughter usually went down the yard and fastened it herself before she weut to b.d and saw all safe. The lock usually hung on the staple and the kev in the bar. Witness went to sleep soon after he went to bed, and his servant awoke him in the morning. After the body was brought into the house, the servant felt in her pockets but found nothing. Did not see this done. Can not speak to whether there was any money in the till. Did not examine it. Cross-examined by Mr. BitANDT.—His daughter usually gave him what silver she had, or otherwise put it into a box in his bed room. The copper was put into the drawer. The party was merry when he went to bed. His daughter had fainting fits at intervals. When he saw his daughter at the first onset he then thought it was a fit, and be did say that he objected to the coroner sitting. To the constable he said he objected to a post mortem. He did not to the constable object to the coro ner's inquest, but to a post mortem. His memory, he said, had been so perplexed, that he could not definitely recollect. By Dr. BROWN.—By post mortem he meant the body being opened. His daughter was born the 28th of July, 1785. Nicholas Murphy called and sworn. On the 7th Dec. last was lodging at Higginson's house and went to bed at half•past ten. Left the deceased, Thomas Higginson, and Mary Pritchard up. There were people drinking there at that time. Betty Minshuil appeared very pleasant then. Witness was called up next morning at ten minutes to six o'clock by Mary Pritchard. \Vent to the privy, found the body lying on her back with the head against the wall. Assisted to get her in. Cross-examined by Mr. HuuroN.—H ad lodged there six months, and had known Betty Miushull two months before he went there. Had seen her twice in fits, they were sickly faint ing fits, they were not violent fits; there was assistance at hand to support her on those occasions, if she had not been supported' she would have fallen. Dr. BROWN.—She came to of herself after a little time. William Dunsmore, a private in the 69th regiment, lodged in the Leigh Arms. Went to the privy when called, and found the deceased on her back with her head against the wall. Exa mined the outer gate and found that it was open. Ralph Kerfoot was at the Leigh Arms on the 7th December. Was there about nine o'clock, the prisoner was there with se veral others ; Eliza Holbrook, John Yates, James Savory, and Peter Gleave were there also. The deceased was there also. When he first went there she was not in the same_ place as they were, but she came in afterwards and sat beside William Hill, she was there above an hour. There was a quarrel between Joseph Yates and Edward Cox between twelve and one o'clock, no others were engaged in the quarrel. All was settled for be fore the quarrel. The quarrel lasted about two or three minutes, and they then rushed out of the house, they went out of their own accord. Peter Gleave, witness, James Ogle, John Boad man, Joseph Yates, and John Yates were the persons who went out, did not see the prisoner go out. Saw him at the time of the quarrel. He did not take any part in it; did not notice when the party went out whether the door was shut. Joseph Yates and Edward Cox continued the quarrel and fought, this was between George Gerard's house and Higginsonts, in the Corn Market; remained in the Corn Market half an hour; the fight did not continue all that time. Cross-examined by Mr. BRANDT.—The quarrel was a fight. Did not see Hill come out, but does not say he did not come oot. The others looked on while the fight went on. There were nine in the house, including the prisoner and Betty Min shull. Betty Minshull, was sitting near to Hill about an hour. The quarrel in the house came to blows betwixt the two. It made some confusion. No one insisted upon them going out. Betty Minshull did not desire them to go out. They were not ordered out by any body. James Holbrook called and sworn. Was a weaver at War rington, and worked in the same factory as Hill. Was at the Leigh Arms on Thursday, the 7th December. Hill was there, and he sung. The •party was pleasant and comfortable till a quarter past twelve. Was near the prisoner. Before anything unpleasant arose, witness was at one side of the tap-room and he was at the other. The prisoner came across to him. Betty Minshull had gone to draw some ale. lie said something which intimated (coarsely) that he would have connexion with the deceased before he went home. Edward Cox and Joseph Yates qua'rrelled soon after. There was a bit of a scuffle, and Betty Minshull said they had better go out, for she did not like to have any disturbance in the house. The prisoner did not take any part in that disturbance. When they went out the prisoner did not go with them. He went to the door with them, and went back. Mrs. Minshull came to the door too, and it was dosed after them. Can't say who closed it. Heard the door fastened inside by some one. Stayed a few minutes in the Corn Market, and then went home. Saw the prisoner at a quarter past six in the morning. He came to his work. Observed that his face was marked like four fingers on his left cheek. Meant like four finger nails. Did not say any thing to him on the subject. Never had any conversation with him about those marks. (Dr, Brown pressed the prisoner upon his oath.) Did not either then or at any other time speak about those marks. He (the prisoner) did not say anything to him respecting what had happened after he left. He said he stayed about twenty minutes after they left. He did not say anything further. Wit ness was sure that was all he said. Cross-examined by Mr. BRAN DT. —They were treated to two quarts of ale. They had no more. Cannot tell whether there was half a gallon of beer brought in by the old woman. Be lieved there was. There was some singing. They all sung. Hill sung. Mrs. Minshull seemed to be pleased. She sat there, and laughed and joked, and was very pleasant, but she never took any liquor. She sat on one side of the table and Hill.on the other. She sat for about ten minutes by the side of Hill. When the scuffle began Betty Minshull ordered them out. All the party must have heard her, and they all went out. Witness saw the prisoner and Betty Minshull near the door. It was closed, he believed, by Betty Minshull. She was near the door. Heard the bolts shooting and the door fastened after it was closed. Re-examined by Dr. Bitowri.—The deceased sat in two or three places during the evening. John Boardman (sworn.)—Was at Higginson's on the night of Dec. 7th. A disturbance took place about twelve or soon after. John and Joseph Yates and Edmund Cox took part in it. They all went out except the prisoner. They heard th e door shut. Eliza Holbrook (sworn.) —Worked at the Cockhedge factory. Is sister to James Holbrook. Was at the Leigh Arm s on Thnrsday, the 7th Decemher. Left at nine o'clock. Saw the prisoner at six o clock next morning, when he came to his work. Noticed that his face was scratched. Did not say any thing to him about it. Went to her dinner, and heard while she was out what had happened to Betty , Minshull. When she came hack saw Hill. Said to him " Why that woman's dead." He replied, " Aye, by God is she !" Witness said " What time did you leave there last, night He said he did not know, there was a row among them, and he helped her to get them away. He went in with her, and she and him drank what drink was left, and he stopped a quarter of an hour. She asked " What hast' gotten thy face scrat' with?" His cheek was scrat' on the right side. Cross-examined by Mr. BRANDT.—She asked him not what time he left, but what time he got home. He said that the ale which they got was what was left in the jug. Heard of the death of the woman when she went to dinner. It was not much talked of through the town. Witness heard it from a young woman who had nothing to do with Higginson. Saw the pri soner when he came to his work in the morning at six o'clock. That was the usual hour of commencing work. Re-examined by Dr. BROWN.—The witness being asked to show which side of the face the scratches were on put her hand to the left side of her face. She persisted, however, that the scratches were on the right side. _ — Alice - Thomas (sworn.) —Kept the Three Crowns public house. On Friday, the Bth of December, was up at near one o'clock. Went into the front room up stairs on the second floor. Heard a fight in the front, a little higher up than her house, near Mr. Higginson's house. Went into her own bed room, opposite to the room into which she first went. When there she heard the screams of a female, which seemed to pro ceed from the back part of Mr. Higginson's house. They con tinued some time loud, and ceased suddenly. Witness did not go out. Before the screams ceased they became fainter and fainter. They faltered rather at the last. Witness closed the window and went to bed. There is a thoroughfare from her house down to the market. It was closed at night. Could not say whether it was fast that night. There was a thoroughfare also from Higginson's into that market. That was the only one except hers. Witness opened the window at the back of the house and called out. _ . — lsaac Bellass (sworn.)—Was a plaisterer at Warrington. On the 7th December last lodged at the house of Mr. Lang shaw, in Riding-street, at the bottom of the snug market. Knew the back door from the Leigh Arms, opening into the mug market. Langshaw's house was opposite to that. Wit ness went home on Thursday night. the 7th December, or Friday morning, about half-past one. Could not et first get in. Stood at the dOor about five minutes. Saw the prisoner at the bar, whom he had known for about three years First saw him coming down the Leigh Arms yard. Has been in that yard. First saw him about twenty yards (t up the y a s .. Is sure he saw him in the yard. He came right down i nto Riding-street. Witness was standing at the front door of t h e spoke to him Was did not answer. certainhouse. irlt'wheasprHis(i)iiii.er The e m m e o to on y, s h ir e n re e h v e er w y a .b s risz st h a t fi ll dz 4o . He (the of e e s prisoner V o t e n r e S and said, came ßi within l Cockhedge, and He was going hurriedly. He was within . a yard of witness when is that a th a e r e d witness spoke to him. He (the prisoner) . went down Ridink,r street into the Horse•market. Witness knew the house where Richard Lyon, the manager lives. Th e pri soner was going towards that house. Th e di stance to Lyon's house would be five or six hundred yards, Cross-examined by Mr. H ur.Torst.—Was not examined before the coroner. Was firs!, examined about this on the Monday following the day . of this occurren ce . W as examined by Mr. Worrall, Mr Wagstaff 'sclerk. I s not certa i n when the inquest. ras held. He was examined at Wagstaff's office. and what he said was taken down, but be wa s no t b e f ore the 'coroner He wrote his name to the examin a ti on. Did not write his.narne more than once. By W. BeowN.Knew that it was the morning of Friday the Bth, when he saw him, because he had been at the circus on the night of Thursday. Heard of the death of Betty Minshull, on Friday night. Is sure it was on that morning that he saw him. By the JUDGE,—Is still certain that he was examined by Mr. Wagstaff's clerk, three days afterwards. Richard Lyon (sworn) stated, that he was overlooker at the Cockhedge factory. The prisoner came to his house at an early hour on the morning of the 7th of Deeembei. It was Friday. Witness lived at. Stonny-lane, near Warrington. Knows the Leigh Arms. His house is better than a quarter of a mile from thence. 'I he prisoner at that time lived on Cockhedge—nearer to the works, than his ( witness's,) house. It was a few minutes before three o'clock, that the prisoner called at his house. — Witness was in bed, but hearing a•person knocking; he'got up, and went to the window. William Hill, the prisoner at the bar, was standing under the window, and he asked him to come in., MARCH (i t 1838. Witness went down and let him in. He the prisoner, said he .-bad been-at th e fair, and he had had the best luck be h a d ever had in hi s lif e . He repeated course words, signifying, that he had had connexion with a ladlady in that town. He gave wit ness a knife with a horn haft, and two blades. He told witness to keep it for a memorandum. He (the prisoner) wanted to stop all night, as he feared being too late for his work. Witness advised him to go home, telling him that he would call him to his work. Ile went home. Witness called him in the morning, and he went to his work. The prisoner did not say any thing to him that morning, nor anything more that day. His face was scratched. On Saturday morning, a knife being frequently used at their work, he (the prisoner) wanted to borrow a knife, and witness gave him his own knife back again. Before the men were paid, the prisoner gave him half a sovereign, and six shillings in silver. It was some time between breakfast time and dinner time. A few weeks before, they had made it up to go to Bolton, at Christmas, and he gave witness that money to keep for him till Christmas, for fear he should spend it, if he kept it himself. The prisoner did not appear quite as pleasant as usual. On Monday morning before breakfast, while he was at his work—(it bad been talked of at the mill about Betty Minshull)—the prisoner said that Betty Minshull was the woman with whom he had had connexion. He said he h a d bad connexion with her twice—the second time while she was asleep. During the conversation he showed witness a snuff box, which he said he had taken from her. He showed him a knife, which he Said he had taken from her—and which he had thrown into the reservoir. The snuff box was numbered 66, in the inside. it was a ribbed one of the appearance of silver. This was all the conversation before breakfast. After breakfast. between nine and ten—the prisoner told him be bad thrown the snuff box into the reservoir. Witness had not at any other time any conversation with him. Cross-examined by Mr. BRANDT.—Was examined before magistrate but not 'before the coroner. It was ten days after the transaction. By D. BaowN.—First mentioned this matter on the 16th. The reason why he did not mention it earlier was, that be had not the least idea of coming before a court and was very sorry that he had not mentioned it sooner. James Jones, deputy constable of Warrington, examined the body of Betty Minshull on Friday the Bth Dec. Under the chin he observed two marks, which appeared to be the marks of finger nails. Saw, also, a mark on the right side of the nose, which appeared also to be the mark of a nail. There were marks in the throat which looked as if from pressure. Saw the prisoner on Tuesday night, the 13th of Dec., at Bridewell. Asked him if he were at Higginson's house on Friday the 7th- He said yes. Asked him how long he stopped there after the company left. Mr. BRANDT asked the witness by what authority he put these questions. He replied that he did it by his own autho rity. It was customary for him to ask questions, but not with the view of criminaling the prisoners ;—they might either an swer or not as they thought fit. Did not question him with the intention of stating on ottth the answers. The JUDGE said he thought this was a very wrong practice, but he could not exclude the evidence. Ilis Loitusnrt , told the witness that, if that were a practice of his he had better leave it off immediately. If he did oot he should give orders that he be turned out of his situation. To put questions to prisoners was not only not his duty, but directly the contrary. He was not again to presume to do such a thing, for constables had no right to do so. His lord ship did not think the witness intended to do anything wrong. but he spoke as strongly as he had done to put an end to so very bad a practice. John Thomason stated that on the 23d December he searched the reservoir at the factory, and found there a snuff-box close to the edge of the dam. Thos. Joyuson, one of the constables of Warrington, stated that he had received a snuff-box from the last witness. Wit ness produced the snuff-box. The witness Lyon examined the trnuff-biik anti said it was the same which he bad seen in the hand of the prisoner.. Mary Pritchard identified the snuff•bo ' x as that which had belonged to the deceased. The knife of the deceased had two blades. Dr. John Davis (sworn). is a physician and surgeon. Had practised as a surgeon in Warrington within two and throe years. Was called in to examine the body of Betty Minshull on the 11th Dec. That was Monday. Saw it at the house of Mr. Higginson. The body appeared very fat. Externally, on the right and left fore arm, were several bruises, particularly about the elbow. There was also a slight bruise about the wrist, and a mark on the right side of the nose. There were two marks on the right side, immediately under the lower javi. There was also a peculiar discolouration about the integuments of the neck, differing from that of any other part of the body.. These were the whole of the external marks except a few blue veins showing through the integuments of the leg. He pro ceeded to open the body. On removing the intoguments from the right side of the neck, he found the interior of one of the muscles of a very dark colour, containing extravasated blood throughout the whole. The muscles under that were also' darker coloured than natural. Some other muscles on that side' contained extravasated blood. On removing the integument from the opposite side he found the muscles dark in colour with some extravasated blood. These muscles were not so dark in colour as on the opposite side, but some of them were dis coloured. The muscles on t h e anterior of the neck were also discoloured. On opening the chest found the lungs very much gorged with blood. The structure appeared healthy. The heart was healthy in structure and its valves appeared perfect. The stomach was healthy and contained undigested food. The liver was healthy but had a small tumour near the gall bladder. There were two semi-cartilaginous tumours on the uteris. These were diseased ovaries. The brain was healthy. Its sinuses contained a considerable quantity of blood. The sub stance of the brain had more blood in it than usual. In his judgement, from the tumefaction of the integuments of the neck, the extravasation of the blood in the sub-cutaneous;cel lular tissue, together with the extravasation of blood in the muscles, and the gorged appearance of the lungs, death was occasioned by suffocation from pressure on the inferior portions of the neck. The pressure of the hand would produce the irregular appearance which he had named. Cross examined by Mr. BnaNDT.----The tumours he had named would produce occasional fainting.. She was a short fat woman, full in the breast. Re-exaniined by Dr. Baowtr.—There is nothing in the sP pe a ran ce of the brain that showed the deceased to have died of apoplexy. The appearance would have been different if so. There was nothing unusual in the appearance of the brain. In the sinuses there was a little more blood Akan usual. That might result from the pressure on the neck. John Fitchet Marsh (sworn.)—ls a clerk to Mr. Wagstaff. Attended as clerk when the examinations were made. 'What the prisoner said was taken in writing. He made his mark to it. By Mr. BRANDT.—Does not know when Isaac Bellass was examined. The statement of the prisoner was put in an read. It was to the effect that the deceased told him (after the others of the party were gone) to look into the tap-room and see if they. had left their clothes. She then asked him to take - what ale was left, which he did, drinking two glsases, afterwhich he bade her good night. A juror requested th a t B e ll es m i g ht b e ca ll e d b ac k an d asked if he saw the prisoner shut the yard door after him- Belles said he could not , see the door from where he stood. When he said he saw him 20 yards up the yard, he meant he saw him 20 yards off, where he (witness) stood, as he called the whole open space the yard. The prisoner was therefore about 80 yards from the gate. This closed the ease for the prosecution. AIL BRANDT addressed the jury for the defence. Thectuty he said devolved upon him of addressing them on behalf of the unfortunate man at the bar. It was a duty so awful, end em barfasing that he could wish to be excused, but he dare not shrink from it—it was his duty to proceed. They (the jury) also had a duty to perform, an awful and anxious.duty. They' had to say whether another life was to be sacrificed besides, as well as *hat which had caused the present inquiry.. He was. placed in a situation of great difficulty, for, he knew no more of the case than he had heard from the evidence of the wit nesses that day. What the real facts, of; the ease were only one being could know. He wished them, however, to construe the facts which they had heard only as they appeared, and with, that leaning towards the prisoner which our lawsreenraraended. The charge against him was that he' had of hie malice afore thought killed and murdered the deceased. There were diffi culties in this case. The prisoner might have been. guilty of . impropriety but not of murder. He put it to the jure in ordi nary language that the prisoner was not guilty of Murder. He knew that besides the first view of the prisoner having killed the deceased by violence, there was another view, which+ was, that it' he had attempted to violate the deceased, and in the, course of that unlawful net, had cifused her death, though unin— tentionally, he was guilty of murder. He demi:tot attempt to., mistate what he knew to be law, and he would not attempt to. warp their judgment or understanding. The evidence was al-- together circumstantial; there was nothing direct -about it_. If they looked at the evidence of Lyon, the overseer, it would appear, that the prisoner not only did not extinguish the life of the deceased, but that he did not know that, she was deaf. He , formed that opinion as well from that tbe.prisoner had said as• from his conduct. The learned gentleman proceeded to dwell , on portions of the testimony which we must refrain from pub- , lishing. It was not credible, he contended, that a man should; go from the commission of suck a crime ands call its a.lark,. knowing, as be must have done, under such eirciunstaisces,.thatt his victim, at that time, " slept the sleep of death." lle wentr, and, with a coarseness which was certainly disgusting, boastedt of his success, when he was under no necessity. of mentioning; anything of the circumstance at all; If he had; ootanaitteei . murder, it was impossible that he co uld so h ave a ct e d. went to his work the next morning without any appearance of li dejection, and he appe are d in th e p resence o f an, overseer,, tug he had. given details, which, he lie ew, thing of the matter, must lead to hi s if he know convictionaay friend, in his opening, had s aid ttthedepti prisoner oolfe tt er , expressed s hL rtn ui ed asto nishment when he w a s informed f th e Previously to that there. was no change • his demeanour. After in 111.0.3110t1r. After this there was a • Lhange in his demeanour, and he became dejected. Thi s , tb' e learned council contended was very Data ral in a person `" , ho was innocent. The learned council pro ceeded to dwell on the intimacy that seemed to exist between the prisoner and the deceased, and told the jury, that if she had died in. consequence of some accidental circumstance in the course of connexion with the prisoner, the prisoner was not guilty of the charge alleged. He dwelt upon the appearance of the deceased, sp,,,heing a very lusty woman , w h o wou ld raß g4 easily die o f su ()Cation than a person of the common sire, His Lordship went minutely over the evidence, remarking ou the various points as they occurred, and pointing ao.t to the jury the law which was applicable to the case. The Jury, having requested permission to retire, went out at en minutes to three o'clock. The jury returned at four cecluck, and delivered in a verdict of Guilty. The face of the prisoner, which had app,earad very pale during the trial, flushed at this anuutincemeut, • His lordship put on the awful black cap, and proceeded.to pass sentence of death upon the. nris.o.ner. He said, after a very full inquiry into the painful circumstances of this case, he (the prisoner) had been fouud, guilty of having murdered Betty Minshull. The jury had retired to give the matter mare ample consideration, and they had come to the conclusion that he was guilty. He did not mean to say t h at b e was at all conv i nce d, nor did he suppose that the jury were convinced, that the pri sons, when he went out at the hack part of the house with the unfortunate woman, intended to murder her. Dut he believed that he went with the intention of committing another crime, and that in the commission of that he did absolutely suffocate. and strangle her to prevent her from screarnim.„ and that having killed her he did, by his own admission, have connexion with her dead body. He had afterwards proceeded to take from beg person such articles as she had in her possession, so that he (the learned judge) had no doubt hut he (the prisoner) stood there guilty of the three crimes of ra p e, ro bb ery, an d mur d er . It only remained for him to perform that most painful duty whic h devolved upon him, and it was not him that spoke but the law through him. He did not say i t to agg for an the feelings whic h must agitate hi m ( the prisoner) at that awful moment, but io . an example t o ot h ers there was no !rope of mercy for him in th is world—in the next he hnped there was. His life would for feited to th e l aws of his country, which he had violated. He e was not to ind u l ge in the slighest hope that hiSfits would Spared, hut try to make his peace with Almighty God. He (t he li learn e d j u d ge) had confidence that every assist ance would e afforded to him ( W r in g t h e few days or weeks that he would have to live. be His lordship then passed sentence of death iu the usual form•