The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-08-22 00:00:00

. 7 1 . 91‘17 c0r l'iiii , 4,OIVIAL IN7ELLIGESCE. ,s'llit. --------____ ht‘ " • °.r INDI ' 1404 41 A. AND BRAZIL MAILS. 04 1 eail. st . ------ tatigs t 'o , _ tib;ln.er?.orth, Commander Chapman. t'44tt,,,;fltrodoill,f„gigtaYl.lo7otlll dollars.AVst India mails, 1 ,24 i Jae t: I . l lago de Cuba, the 19th of July, A to (k. k t, '. tb,,,7 1 4as 3, :_ 'fit the 26th ; Porto Rico, the : 7 1,1,4 tit the 3 1:t, and from Fayal, the 12th that islan . The season t, ti . ,. 0 rY, and the cominq crops ruined. tlpt!illOs alaa.. r i g ... e..St. Mary, St. Thomas-in• the ilk:fi:4El% th " r :the-Ea s t, had suffered very se tt lii:Se, °ore of gghout the island was exceed tt. „„10zh422,1 t,i Y o e t r , Zex-President of Hayti, lilkiS ti ;ros, L . re dates from Panama to the 12th Ot a. Irks p!'''' to the 15th of June at which .4tai4k.,, resident of Peru, having 'displaced k it:044, 6, 4its7bDer Albatross, or Bingdove, had k " thel leit h a . d benungo, of a piratical two-top. I , !It e. end b _ .en committing depredations in hiti t f Y night coming on had been foiled ks4l4.eratiibPort-an-Prin_ce are as late as the 24th 4 4 1 , r 't . ita h i : Geoeral Riveira had not returned -7,114, Da_military visit of inspection to the t li tr . it gav r lef the island. It was supposed %kk4l,.7.Decennement could not. be established II ` 3 4p:al . ki ee Ty ror beginning of January next, 0 th e N eat r a was the most likely person to ct w ola ro :ro v i a c ori General Voitaire, one of the five k ik etitit e :Yill stri a ! government, died on the 22d ls,;',4:ie L ' l , l at a i l e `! It may be said they have been h. Ita 4 4 l ead :_ since the revolution ; yet upon S Oi tot4 "7 44 ha'ds been manifested. Disappointed . ts pe l tive 0 . e,re-sovie from not having been 4'1,114.e.ted .° honourable offices, and_ .. others Q i iq o u, t y :e rn 't' s e t: to til pat s e v e r e i t t y h t a o d f e ll e o n w im he . Z.lp al , ° , eourtry people by persons attached li tsivit,tt 0 4, , r bit f ee rid at J erem i e some men ava il e d Vi e t iN ti :Od ta'r bring collect together a few hull. k ti ti 44 l l lll, wit g st tittl u d r e ll?g them into the town armed Vist . 4 de t , ''‘h e , A ? but on receiving explanations 'll Wer e . ' h utsPersed quiety to their homes. e tta i uowever, secured and three of itocket, ttlAeliap6. 4 r em Rio de Janeiro, has brought tie,..b,,t4f;tept_ to the 22nd of June. Exchange, i i - .y,,, 0 rtit s. , 72. Ad t / !lt t : t h Of 4 T 3 frOM Montevideo have been re- N lN i t i:.abd h:',, n e, when Oribe was rather awk iit' i d t c e teh hi s ag demanded succours from Rosas, f qt en n Pla e „ rf .rlY would be comprised. Several Itls . l ' '' 14 mof the French , k t w Iwil made ,-,d_- Y soners l and had been shot by kt r Y l iit er e l '4 1,1 1It it; i l toailed. and had raised the blockade, N , ti4n me ;L unn., ~..a,in. \ ~,,, .oefeat ed ev„ Is very good, the rebels hav -00.04 r , With great loss by the Imperial l i. 40. alas -.a 1, 1$11,: 1 ) ,.. 11 Was s peat() Manoel; so that an 11NIte021Amer,Peedily looked for. 1 , 4%0 4 ' 1 4 t o I ,;!'ari vessel, from the South Seas, i ' lisi. r a sl at , i 9 that the British frigate Vindic li:44lrpted at ~war had refuced to salute the P t , ta e tl, frYtaheite, which the c immander of NlCetat.eY Pauli had remonstrated against. kl i Ntli e ' ef P ar , 1 ,9 0 Jose Soares da Souza had be kßkltlibae't'ket'r .frairs. ‘siiktot:lllea had b ee _ " is quite void of interest. :,o s i,, .00 re ,' . _ , more than usually . bare, and qti: tall" 'N when, had it been, fully sup \' •, Nit" Peoe„i rt i ' a u°h more. Sugars were ex- Nil4i "I averagreleusual.s on account of the late tNkl 44 % t iii'ilitt ''____ pd• Ntr 4 e rrin e % , a to gay er ." Edwards Island are about to iii, it•sttilLOssfeerrediortioenet Canada radaan by d n s t t o an t l h e e y ip s 1, IQ N an ti 4 j t h. t A I RE s \ l / 41 Journal. i l t 4 1 „,11emtley :) Urn SEAS.-Papers have been 1 1 / 4 \ztig :a a ' thew South Wales, up to April k'i t o e ttsej:"t of the murder of the crews ti . L it ' r • Y. '‘th. 'eta r ," f N RY. APRIL 18.-Mr. Edward itt 1 4 N t t w vo thle.,:' the Dublin Warder, was con ek, arvernment, and sentenced to pay tk:! t tlth'"o, to he imprisoned in Dar- IN NI, 7.oth e "rie be p a id . Dar , 1 ,.. r allay ktplseti ~. til gtl t 114 donkies were entered for \ls, li t lki 1 / 4 1,;,dist an be to the starting-post. How gliri.,, e tittih i ce we are not told,'but the scene I ) Ot t Red late] comical. Of h y a . , {, I l rot a Y.drora. at Saint Die, in the Vosges, in i ii iii , k iew il ria g r t °kia, which she is said to have \ ik 1 i ,..,..4._5h a 2, raordinary manner :-She had t ll,Ver ec ialled w `: lo g, that was afterwards killed as !•\ k,;, tiot ae t k tk the saliva from its mouth and N.'S kit Chaps which the poor girl had in 4' l ) 4' b t 4 I ‘ ;,: i tl t i t: bi . oogh t . 4N .., oyt,Appiauagainst the Versailles Railroad 0 1 5,4 Pt). ~_' ° , llO laid his damages at 150,000 o, l o l ; t e o , ii ii e Btzven other sufferers by the dread- IzttiN ti , h t Pib to , ° , l Ma) , 1842, and which have I`tt,... te,v.e i a 'l", for many ' days during the last ''' Nilt a :tu % s ' oeen brought to a close. The ~ i i . tilzt al` I ' eoadrmning them to of e actions and dis k irt o O m - the payment of N tk : l6 li le ed th e fir Si yiSiN l i t t il judcharnber of the Royal Court of ks4*o4 !, 4 0 t f rP r eP_t in the . case cf the execu ar'.,:e tford against Nicholas Suisse 1 . : t ;4,1 1 %9,0 00 ",ay, and concluded by stating lia°,7 Fren ch i tt ,°',„ 4 ,: : ;„ n , , ‘ ti) was r e n n e t i e t s e mnandte of f y p thero h' r 1 / ht t' a l t :lla s t e e f r w r t e u r n e e no r considered-1 le I y T w h . h e e n t tl h r e t, `I t 'e6 da that the inscritions should be k kk. *ttoil,ltt Lao S uisse. P Isc%,iv„wi,l3;4le Treshing ton (Georgia) News 11 1 4 1 k, 4 ' i th e ;"ct of a letter and vouches for k l i t he ,D2,l l B t e, r • The letter is dated Col k)it?4:lt,it 1147e u i ttr 'a :-" I believe I have room „, , t,, , tl a at; co a ro of tn iii t n t e d of . th i e 3 mo b st r sho n c n k n i t ng 1 4* , il l : t ti ll ; d , ti ati r c i. t. A' ' • s Mrs. were G visited a enhat taorii (pronounceda the c day oyf i h_kithtl'i iat?.and his wife-they took din '~ti,, 71tottth`rf. when Shouldthey .go home with them Ikktta.Vd w e l e f t 7ea, giving as a reason that l ii ti lit,'„tli er as i r , ,Z"me, and farther, that all ‘lll,PtiVe ai bOtii she house. They, however, 4 . 144,t, !o e ,,tht. ~ie consented to accompany tio t "it ta il, e "er r o eoortly after her departure, a qt ti t ',lt• ti'vo 'j i lt') and begged permission to y t w:ii tap! said js said they were alone, and 1 / 4 ill, N. 1,,,,, ,„ "e doubted whether he could YcAf t ' l 4 o tal t "l e i i! them Presuming they were afraid V t, 4 tl,'lll,,Posi t t li s r e ", would consent to let him re iksitilii. t oo ior, th ro . and suffer them to keep the t_ I,` 4 4. iO, "e 3, consented and the traveller itl' it t it :t tt • Ist in ' °E ne time durin g ' t he night h ot kl4O , %,oriti tile other room, eheinho e t \ ll l: l ll,,l i tt :ti e e 't t a t gl i ng to hear some one m g oving 0;'101, } lt tit t ,h l ' i Y to the door, and discovered :,,ikthttiltoio, 'totsii i s l t aati r y l the drawers. He hailed '04, 1 40 t e 4 drew a knife and made at ' , t l w tit • 41 4 4r °aChed ‘,.l, L i t l ,y ll I % , r °, ed t h. , shot him dead at t„„,N t , L I N ' N th "le is lr'groes, and when they iNVI,Ti Pint for ti l es room and found them SAN, 1 . 04 ,tor tb .iroats cut, and dead. The 'INN til ete 'eeti a tlr mistress, was taken to \ t p Yba t ,' W I her g th e , old lady he told her \ \,. N il l , ll tp e ' tl i t ! , ant's.; truotu_ghters,.and that he had t ii 't 06t e th e ~4 so i t "" exclaimed, ' You have I L lt,iiv e rt. m'y W . (limed out -the very per- A ti lt, b,,,, 4 hat",th Mrs. Gachett had tnur , 4, Dityl,perrni,a, Providential thing that the kllie '; . 1 . 1 . 8./ 3 ` r !ed to remain to punish the N :t '"ust h u a w v o had not shared her hus ,lt 'l,, t e known his murderous Ai: 4 ll t al t ) 'lt t ; i t il• 4 eo V ' Lb l 'aPr linta at , \ l i • , t, •l !Iv hoped ~ ate that the iron trade I,\L4\ons,,t e de..fittring the last fortnight, is Ntli:lBl,:ts are for pig iron, that the t,t1,1 1 tti t Zte s. " ha a e al uowillin g to sell at old ,' s h tis , bil'he c • re adY been sold at an ad ttN'm fr om oWn o ' r eolnetance of so many t ie tho ee u i t w 'll, of course, tend to VI i l Op \ fic 1 1 / Qih t tlti a MR, G r onmasters who continue 1: 1 .Itl 441t th b een f itE "RY.-Several indict- Vti t es yin e S atir to d d against Mr. Barnard w oot.wer g at hider ewspaper, he has for ti'loe . lea rants issued and seek" to avoid ki T ar track tLis. t o , e ked h i .. againsthim. %"'s g: Ile ti ttle ''. to Southend, where li t - 4t o e s to With his daughter, as 1,, a Oh, tly. 8 arrested on Monday and 1 .04:s op ' rt ile : i tAbr y W I Aze ß On ';,' 1 1 ,, 4 tcp 'ltti s t i c ;" woman, apparently 25 i , a d j awl ' a p fte r 'Wil the third recess y of I:401[11°141:4110ff t he a br 7 d P g o e rt was raised \,4 tt ille: r ece a :' wh ° was it , few p mi n nu m t a es - It, t lis wl,4 t i e ltli :: hnartedridathosorbheedr troubles. t 'llthitie hag Pearraecti, occupied the follow. !li eh e . i •• Poor unfortunate 4 tat, ler b , 0 - tr i Puts allo lodges in l jt r I tiltabi t , • e 8 e4 l ddi e „,' " ill be general next , t ord, h . , toerk s • 2e t tb th ire, N o t , , Buckingham -45 ~ 4 i k t li Zitt, boat l i i 4 hl t t h w e t.. ln e i l I r: U ,n e (:\7 n c e l si ts o f h f u il rl t e h o e recent fpgo grain. as ien ‘i ‘`te w i k t Ural A"`• at e of the weather, the t e h r e . N 44, 4, V4,„-„eat ; huistricts are OA Ith titk' h e • t ie t T' rYe, and oats, have e NOtio ili!I a 8 -"lre, aa-crasex, Norfolk, Suf ., , tide;, fine head the Other . grain coun , , ~,fil„.t.t, a ac re i t!, the farmers om men -Iki k t o 4 lost e North r olk, Suffolk, and t keY will not com- I l k °Oth ill ' Thena:counts from France .',, ,l‘t, deg t i l t ' f ell, 6 ievtt he f t he; ar tter _ state, and that in c : N t o t ,. ll4 t h4 i r t :e r at iab tr ° l : r i l r . lenbßueslilY* engaged Hl to be abundant. 1 4 Nil t hes e P r o Mis„ glum , 0 - 'lllO l4 the 0 Png prospects will high price of thi a cortietiste;t ~~1 1 1 1 1 1 ~'\ ASSIZE INTELLIGEACE. SOUTH LANCASHIRE SUMMER ASSIZES. OPENING OF THE COMMISSION. Mr. Justice Wightman and Mr. Justice. Cresswell ar rived in town on Thursday, per railway, from Lancaster, about five o'clock. They were attended by the High Sheriff, William Garnett, Esq., and the Mayor of Liver pool, Robertson Gladstone, Esq., in their state carriages. After robing in their lodgings, in St. Anne-street, they proceeded to the Sessions-house, where the commission was read in the Crown Court, by the Clerk of the Crown. WRIT OF RIGHT, Mr. Archbold appeared in this case, and moved that the knights summoned to try the writ of right between Charles Rishton and Anthony Nesbitt should be sum moned. Sir Thomas Potter, Sir George Drinkwater, Sir Joshua Walmsley, and Sir Thomas Brancker answered. They were duly sworn, and appointed twenty other per sons to try with them the writ, and the court was then adjourned. FRIDAY. Both Judges attended divine service at St. George's Church, at eleven o'clock this morning, upon which occasion the Rev. Mr. Parkinson, chaplain to the High Sheriff, officiated. The usual assize sermon was preached on Sunday. Immediately after divine ser vice their lordships proceeded to their respective Naas. CROWN COURT. Mr. Justice Wightman took his seat on the bench of the Crown Court at ten minutes to twelve o'clock, when the usual proclamations having been read, and other for mularies gone through, the following gentlemen were sworn of the GRAND JURY. Sir THOMAS BERNARD BIRCH, Bart., Hazles, Foreman. Sir Thomas Brancker, Knight, Liverpool. Sir Joshua Walmsley, Knight, Liverpool. Hugh Hornby Birley, Esq., Boom House. Peter Bourne, Esq., Liverpool. John Crossley, Esq., Scaitcliffe. Vs illiam Earle, Esq., Liverpool. William Gale, Esq., Lightburne House. Robertson Gladstone, Esq., Court Hev. William James Garnett, Esq., Lark Robert Gladstone, Esq., Withington. Peter Greenall, Esq., M.P., St. Helen's. Jonah Harrop, Esq., Bardsley House. John Pemberton Heywood, Esq., Norris Green. Thomas Hilton, Esq., Ardwick. Adam Hodgson, Esq., Everton. George Hall Lawrence, Esq., Liverpool. Daniel Maude, Esq., Liverpool. Joseph Ridgway, Esq., Wallsuches. Nicholas Robinson, Esq., Sudeley. Thomas Sands, Esq., Mosley Hill. Abraham Wood, Esq., Starkies. Her Majesty's proclamation against vice, immorality, and profaneness was then read ; after which His lordship charged the grand jury, in nearly the fol lowing terms :—Gentlemen of the grand jury, I regret to find the calendar of the southern division of Lancashire unusually heavy, both as to the number of prisoners, and the character of the offences charged upon them. In many instances, the crimes alleged to have been committed are not referable to causes arising from want of el.iploy ment, and consequent poverty and distress, but to habits of brutal violence, exasperated by intoxication at beer shops and places of dissipation, the frequenting of which, as it appears to be seen in the present calendar, and as I learn from the depositions, is the immediate cause of offences of this character. There are no less thaw eleven cases of homicide, five of which are charged as wilful murder, and six as manslaughter. It is not very easy to lay down any general rule for your guidance, by which in all cases murder may be, with certainty, distinguished from manslaughter. In all cases of manslaughter, how ever, where the death is occasioned by some injury inflicted by another, the immediate presumption of law, in the absence of all other circumstances, is, that such an injury was maliciously inflicted, and the offence, prima' facie, would amount to murder; but where the circumstances show, that the injury which caused the death was inflicted in self defence, and upon reasonable ground of provoca tion, or without premeditation, or in sudden quarrel, or in the heat of blood, the offence will be manslaughter, in the absence of indications of malice on the part of the prisoner, which are necessary strictly to constitute the crime of murder. But it is also to be observed, as the circumstances I have mentioned are only effective in re ducing the offence to manslaughter, by negativing the malice which constitutes the crime, it is important to consider the nature of the provocation, and the sort of weapon that is used ; for if, upon slight or inadequate provocation, or if upon provocation induced by the pri soner himself, a deadly weapon is used, and in such a manner as to show an intent to kill, or to do at least some grievous bodily harm, the malice which the law assumes is not negatived, and the offence will still be murder. In cases where the offence charged against the prisonsr is manslaughter, I have but one observation to make, wherever death is inflicted in the prosecution of an il legal act, it is manslaughter, however little he may have intended to do such an injury, as in cases of deaths from falls, where blows are given. There are no fewer than nine charges of maliciously cutting and stabbing, and two of maliciously shooting; and I cannot but observe, with re gard to the resorting to knives and other deadly instru ments of a like nature, that the commission of such crimes is fearfully upon the increase, and it has become absolutely necessary that the law should in all such instances be most strictly enforced, for the prevention of such cruel and unmanly practices. The question for you, however, in all such cases, will be the intent with which the wound was inflicted, that being the important in gredient in determining the real character of the offence. If the wound was inflicted with the intention to kill, to do some grevious bodily harm, or to resist lawful appre hension, the offence is felony, but it is only an assault however grevious the nature of the wound. Gentlemen, there is a case in the calendar, in which eight persons are charged with having riotously assembled, and entered the brick )and of a person named Pauling, and then and there shot at a person named Fletcher, with intent to murder him ; and it would appear that a great many persons, to the number of 200 or 300, entered in the night into the brick yard, fired upon the persons set to guard it, de stroyed a great quantity of bricks in the course of pre paration, and also destroyed the furniture on the premises. and seriously injured some persons. The law upon the case is perfectly clear. If a number of persons assemble together for the purpose of effecting some illegal object which they have in common, and in the course of the prosecution of a common design, a felony is committed, all are equally guilty of the felony with the persons who actually committed it; and, therefore, in this case, if the prisoners charged were equally engaged in the com mon illegal design of entering the yard by force, and destroying the bricks, with the persons who used fire arms in the prosecution of that common design, and who intended to kill or disable the defenders of the yard, it will be your duty to find a bill against them as principals in the felony, although they may not have actu ally fired the shots; and the proper business for you will be the investigation of the proofs against them. There are some circumstances connected with this case which I cannot pass over without observation. There is reason to believe that the persons who attacked the brick yard, did so to prevent the persons employed there from continuing to work ; and to oblige the owners of the yard to employ other persons upon certain terms which they thought reasonable. In this free country, every man has a right to use his own talent, industry, and capital, in such man ner as he thinks best for his interest, provided that he does not interfere to prevent others from exercising the same right. Every master hss a right to employ such workmen as he may choose, at the wages they may agree upon ; and every workman has a right to refuse working for less wages than he may fix upon ; and any number of workmen may agree that they will not work under certain wages. The 6th Geo. IV. cap. 29, renders such a course perfectly legal ; but no man has a right to say what wages a master shall give, or what another man shall receive ; still less has he the right to prevent any master from em ploying any workman he pleases, or to prevent any work man from working for whom or for what wages he thinks proper. Such a tyranny is not to be tolerated in such a country as this, possessing the blessing of free institu tions. Such an assumption of authority is utterly lawless, and must be put down by the law. lam the more desi rous to call attention to this, because my attention has been drawn to the printed rules of the brickmaker's soci ety; and there are one or two of the articles which are there mentioned which fully justify the observations I have been led to make. By the 16th article of the society I should observe, the professed objects are unobjection able, the burial of their dead and the protection of their labour; but to effect the latter object there are rules per fectly unpardonable and illegal, and if carried out as at present attempted, would operate as a fatal impediment to all honest combination for honest purposes. " If any should infringe upon the rights of this society, or without a sufficient reason turn a man away through malice, any other person shall not be allowed to take his place." _ _ _ • I read you one of the rules, gentlemen ; there are several others framed for a similar object, which seems to be the object of the whole of the persons who committed this attack. Such a society, constituted with such rules, is no less than an illegal combination to prevent and impede the due course of honest industry, and must in the end prove detrimental to the well-doing of those whose inte rests it professes to protect. I cannot quit this case with out observing, that one of the fatal cases in this calendar seems to have originated in some such illegal conspiracy amongst the sawyers to interfere with the free exercise of the rights of the British subject, and the free exercise of human skill and industry. There are in the calendar no less than eleven cases of bigamy,—a serious offence, from the misery and distress that is too frequently occasioned to the person who has been the subject of the second marriage, and the lamentable consequences to the chil dren. if any. I allude to this offence, not only on account of the number of persons charged with it in the present calendar, but also because several cases of a similar kind have occurred during the present circuit. There seems to be an opinion generally entertained, that if persons have been separated fora length of time, they are justified in contracting a second marriage. Nothing, however, can be more fallacious than such an opinion. It is only where there may he just reason to believe that one of the parties is dead, that contracting a second marriage does not amount to bigamy. So far, however, as your duties are concerned, it is only necessary for you, for the purpose of finding a bill, to have it shown that the second, marriage was contracted during the life of th e parties to the first. If, however, it should be shown that there was reason to believe that the party was dead, the offence of bigamy is not complete, and it will be your duty not to find a bill. There is a case in the calendar of a person charged with receiving bank notes to a con siderable amount, knowing them to be stolen. The case, however, presents no point of law as t a h p e p r l e i c lbe e e v d o- e t n he ce fa t e o t s w a t h i s i c nprif fy h y e o e u d r s e c a o s o ni n i ma enb t f h r aotm the THE LIVERPO soner, at the time he received the notes, knew them to be stolen, it will be your duty to find a bill. The points, if any, will be rather in the detail of the evidence than as to the law as applicable to the facts. Gentlemen, with re ference to the calendar, which now, I believe, contains a list of 140 prisoners, I do not feel it incumbent upon me to go into each particular case in detail; nor, indeed, would there be sufficient time to do so, consistently with the public duty you have to perform. I have made some observations applicable to the more prominent cases in the calendar, and from looking through it, and from the view I have taken of the depositions, I am not aware that there are any other cases of difficulty, or that require com ment from me. I may, however, observe, gentlemen, that you are not to try the prisoners, nor to determine the question of guilt or innocence ; it is ,your duty to find a bill if there is sufficient evidence before you to raise such a reasonable, though it may not be a conclusive, proof of guilt against the party charged that a conviction upon such evidence, supposing there is no other evidence in the case, would be suppom ted in point of law. Gentlemen, I will not longer detain you. If there should be any point, or if any matter should arise in the course of your inqui ries upon which you should require my assistance and ad vice, I shall be most happy to give it you. The grand jury then retired, and the petty jurors were sworn, after which the trials were proceeded with. COMMITTAL OF A JOHANNA SOUTHCOTONIAN. The Crier informed the court that there was a female of the name of Margaret Old present, who refused to take the oath in a bigamy case, in order that she might be sent as a witness before the Grand Jury. His LORDSHIP directed her to be placed in the witness box. Mrs. Old, an elderly lady, accordingly mader her ap pearance. She was dressed in a light brown dress and black bonnet. HIS LORDSHIP said to her—Why do you refuse to be sworn Are you a Quaker? Mrs. Old.—No. His LORDSHIP.—What are you then ? Mrs. Old.—l was brought up a member of the Church of England. His LORDSHIP.—And are you so still ? Mrs. Old.—No. His LORDSHIP.—What are you now ? Mrs. Old.—l am trying to be an Israelite. (A. laugh.) His LORDSHIP.—Trying to be! What do you mean ? Airs. Old.—lt's vulgarly called a Johanna. Mr. WILKINs.—Oh ! a Johanna Southcote, my lord. (Laughter.) His LORDSHIP.—It will be my duty to commit you, unless you take the oath. Mrs.'old.—You may commit me; I took one oath ; I cannot take any other. Ilis LORDSHIP.—Then you must go to prison. Can she be done without as a witness ? Crier.—They say not, my lord. Mr. WzmoNs.—There was one of the same sect here at the last assizes, and he did not refuse to be sworn. Mrs. Old.—That may be. Every one of our religion is not of the same mind. The man who swore last year won't have to answer for me, nor I for him. HiS LORDS HIP.—You have certainly assigned no reason for not taking the oath as yet. 1 recommend you to con- sider. Mrs. Old.—Life and death stands before me: I refuse. His LoßnsHlP. 7 Take her into custody. __ She was accordingly removed by the officers ; but, shortly before the rising of the court, she made her way into the witness-box a second time, and in a firm tone of voice asked his Lordship what he meant to do with her. I have, said she, taken an oath to God to take no more oaths on earth, but to do right and justice to every man, and lie knows I cannot take it. His LORDSHIP.—The purposes of justice require of all persons to he sworn, except certain persons who are pri vileged. You say you are learning to be an Israelite? Ncrs. Old.—So'farn. ifiS LORDSHIP.-But Jews take oaths. Mrs. Old.—That maybe. I have taken one that no one hut myself has taken. We stand before an earthly tri bunal now, and we'll stand before another court here. after. My oath was never to take another, but to serve God and my country. I will adhere to truth, whether with me or against me. Ilis LORDSHIP.—The Grand Jury have found the bill in your case. You may, therefore, be discharged now, but you will have to be sworn to give evidence wnen it comes before the court. She was then discharged from custody. Joseph Hide, aged 3G, (remanded from last assizes,) on a charge of horse-stealing, was found guilty, but not sentenced. James Flinn, 23, indicted for having, at Bickerstaffe, stolen one calf, the property of William Stockley, was found guilty, and sentenced to ten years' transportation. Thomas Phillips, charged with burglary, at Bolton, was acquitted. John Jones, 18, was charged with stealing, with violence. three half crowns from the person of James Gibson, at Bolton. The prisoner was acquitted of the robbery, but found guilty of the assault, and was sentenced to one month's imptisonment. Three or four of the bigamy cases were also tried, and the court rose at five o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT.—FRIDAY. Mr. Justice Cresswell took his seat in the. N si Prius Court at twelve o'clock. DOBSON V. LAMBERT. In this action, which was the only one tried during the day, and a remanet from the last assizes, Mr. Martin and Mr. Greene were for the plaintiff; and Mr. Knowles, Mr. Crompton, and Mr. Atherton, for the defendant. The plaintiff, Mr. Robt. Dobson, manufacturer, sought io recover from the defendant, Mr. Wm. Lambert, wor sted spinner and woolstapler, the sum of £463, as com pensation for alleged breach of contract. The decla- ration stated; that the plaintiff contracted to buy 800 gross of worsted yarn, at a certain price, and that the defendant engaged that it should be of one " top," and of good ma nufacture. The defendant pleaded first, that he made no such contract ; and, secondly, that the yarn was of one top, and of good manufacture. The main contest was upon the second issue, and several witnesses were called in support of the plaintiff's case, who proved that the yarn would not receive the dye properly. On behalf of the defendant, witnesses were called who were engaged in the manufacture of the yarn in question, and who stated that they could not account for the defect in the dyeing ; which, whatever it was to be attributed to, was not caused by any defect in the spinning. The learned JUDGE, in summing up the evidence, ob served that the jury would have to decide between one class of witnesses and the other. The jury consulted for a few minutes, and found a ver dict for the plaintiff—damages, £440. The court rose at a quarter before seven. CROWN COURT.-SATURDAY. Mr. Justice Wightman took his seat at nine o'clock, and immediately after proceeded with the mint cases, of which there'were seven in the calendar. Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Pollock appeared in each case for the prosecution. The prisoners were, for the most part, undefended. Abel Jones, 18, pleaded guilty to a charge of having had in his possession, at Salford, five pieces of false and counterfeit coin, intended to resemble shillings, and a mould for casting the same. Christiana Gittins, 38, was convicted, and her daugh ter, Sarah Gittins, 14, was acquitted, on a charge of hav ing had in their possession, at Liverpool, a mould for counterfeiting sixpences. Michael Ennis, 50, was convicted of having, at Man chester, uttered to one Edward Whitelead a counterfeit sixpence. James Ogden, 62, was given in charge for having, at Rochdale, sold to one Joseph Hough, a publican, a coun terfeit sovereign for 10s. He was convicted. Peter Fay, 34, was convicted on a charge of having, at Salford, uttered several counterfeit sixpences. John Jackson, 42, Anthony Doran, 30, and John Fitz simmons, 33. were convicted of having had in their pos session, at Newton, twenty pieces of counterfeit coin made to resemble shillings. The prisoner Doran was further convicted of having had a mould for casting shillings in his possession, without lawful excuse. James Smith, 28, and John Holden, 40, were convicted on a charge of having, at Ashton-under-Lyne, uttered, and had in their possession, several counterfeit shillings. John Lynch, 30, was convicted of having, at Ashton, uttered two counterfeit shillings. This, at half-past two o'clock, terminated the mint cases. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. Hugh Ogden, 44, was indicted for having, at Newton, feloniously stolen, from the person of John Bateman, one sovereign, one, half-sovereign, Bs. 6d., a ham, a hat, and other articles. It appeared, from the evidence, that, on the 29th June last, the prosecutor was returning home from Manchester, and that he called at a public-house on the road, where he remained until between eleven and twelve o'clock at night. He left at that time, accompanied by the prisoner, and when he had gone about a mile he received a tremen dous blow from behind, which stretched him upon the ground. The prisoner, who had been previously walking with him, arm-in -arm, now placed his hand across his mouth, hile two stout fellows, who suddenly made their appearance, robbed him of the money and articles men tioned in the indictment. The prosecutor prayed hard for mercy, said he was a poor man, and that he would willingly give them a couple of shillings if they would leave him his money, but it was all to no purpose. Upon cross-examination, the prosecutor admitted that he was " fresh " in liquor on the occasion. Mr. WILKINS, who defended the prisoner, ably ad dressed the jury in his behalf, and concluded by calling witnesses to character. A verdict of acquittal was returned. HORSE STEALING. George Woodbridge, 38, was indicted for having, at Ormskirk, stolen a mare, the property of James Bryars, innkeeper, of that place. Mr. JAMES, who defended the prisoner, admitted the commission of:lthe felony, but set up a plea of insanity, and stated that, at the time of the occurrence, his client was under medical treatment for some morbid delusion. It appeared that he was a man of property, very respect ably connected, and that his unfortunate state of mind rendered it necessary for him, of late, to be constantly under the charge of a keeper. A verdict of acquittal was returned. POST-OFFICE ROMIERY. John Leeming, 23, pleaded guilty to several bills of in dictment, charging him with having, while acting as clerk in the Liverpool Post-office, embezzled letters con taining bills of exchange for upwards of £4,000, valuable securities, gold rings set with pearls and diamonds, and a link of beads. Mr. WILKINs said he held a brief in this case, and begged of his Lordship to defer the sentence for the pre sent, as he had several highly respectable parties to speak in his behalf, His Lordship complied with the request, L STANDAiII) BURGLARY. John Smith, 22, and John Brierley, 47, pleaded guilty to a charge of haying, at Bury, broken and entered thz I . dwelling-house of Edmund Grundy, and stolen therein two silver caddy spoons. BIGAMY. Eliza Berry, 33, pleaded guilty to a charge of having, at Prestwich, married one Samuel Arrowsmith, her former hUsband, William Berry, being then alive. John Hardman, alias John Nicholls, 30, pleaded guilty to a charge of having, at. Wigan, married one Anne Can liffe, wid ow , hi s f ormer w il e Elizabeth, being then alive. FORGERY AND BIGAMY. Charles Kniuhl, a very fashionably dressed young gen tleman, pleaded guilty to a charge of having forged the names of his brothers, Messrs. Ja mes and Isaac Knight, accountants, to two cheques upon the batik of Messrs. Jones, Loyd, and Co.. of Manchester, wherehy he had obtained money to the amount of £283. There was another indictment against the prisoner, charging him with having committed bigamy by marrying one Maria Wardle, at St. Mary's Church, Manchester,,on the morn ing of Tuesday last, his first wife being still alive. He pleaded not guilty to the latter indictment. He was given in charge for the bigamy and was undefended. Mr. YATEs conducted the prosecution and proved the first marriage, and that the female was still living. The second marriage was proved by the evidence of Maria Wardle herself. _ _ The prisoner, with reference to the first marriage, urged the same objection as he did before the magistrates at Manchester, the examination before whom will be found in another column, but his lordship said it did not affect the validity of the marriage. He then submitted another objection ; that no time had elapsed between the applica tion for and the granting of the license on the first marriage, but the judge decided against him. His LORDSHIP then proceeded to charge the jury, tel ling them that, with respect to the fact of the first and second marriage having taken place, there could scarcely exist any doubt, and that the objections raised by the pri sonea were entirelp unfounded in point of law. Formerly, it was the law that a minor, in case of martiage, should have the consent of her parents, and that the prosecutor should prove distinctly that she had obtained such consent ; but that law had been altered by the last marriage act, which merely directed that there should be such a consent, but did not annul the marriage in case there should not. If, indeed, the question was asked at the time of applying for the license, the : parties were bound to make oath that they had obtained consent, and,.if a false oath were then taken, they were liable to punishment, but it by no means followed that the marriage was thereby invalid. If this were otherwise, the same unhappy results would follow now as were found to prevail under the former law • and, therefore, the prisoner's objections were entirely un founded:. After a short consultation, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The court adjourned soon after five o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT.—SATURDAY. His Lordship took his seat at nine o'clock. CAMPBELL AND ANOTHER V. HILES. Verdict for the plaintiff; damages £64 16s. DOE DEM. GOODFELLOW AND ANOTHER V. LEA. The plaintiff did not appear, and was nonsuited. ASHTON AND OTHERS V. JONES. Verdict, IWCOnsent,fWtheplintiffidamages £44 Os. BENNETT V. BROGDEN. This was a defended cause, in which Mr. Martin and Mr. Cole appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wortley and Mr. Atherton for the defendant. The question at issue was, in the first place, whether an agreement had been made for the purchase of two horses ; and, secondly, if an agreement was made, whether a warranty had been given ; and, if so, whether one of the horses was not un sound. Verdict for the plaintiff, that there was no con tract. SMITH AND OTHERS V. TOMLIN. An undefended action on a bill of exchange. Verdict for the plaintiff for £5l. WHITEHEAD V. BERRY AND ANOTHER. An action of trespass, which was undefended. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £42 2s. 6d. KNOWLES AND ANOTHER V. BROOKS. In this case the parties agreed to a verdict for the plain tiff, subject to a reference. CHEW V. HOLDEN AND OTHERS. This was an action of trespass. Mr. Knowles and Mr. Cowling were for the plaintiff, Mr. Atherton for the de- fendant. The plaintiff, Mr. William Chew, is a farmer, occupying his own land. at Dewhurst, in Over Darwen, in this county; and the defendants, Ralph Jolin and Thomas Holden, who stand in the relation of father and son to each other, occupied a farm adjoining the plaintiff's land. The present action was brought to recover the value of a quantity of coal, which, it was alleged, the defendants had taken from underneath the plaintiff's land, and with a perfect knowledge of what they were doing. The value of the coal was estimated to be worth £65, at the pit's mouth. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £6O. ALLEGED FRAUDULENT PREFERENCE. POTT AND OTHERS V. POWNALL. In this caus,civi;:l3;iWesQ Kr.i'honllinson appeared for the plaintiffs ; Mr. Watson and Mr. Cowling for the defendant. Mr. BAINES said that this was an action brought by the plaintiffs, who were the assignees of Thomas Cart wright, a bankrupt, for the purpose of obtaining pos session of certain deeds of a mortgage, which, they alleged, had been given to the defendant, Mr. Peter Pownall, by a fraudulent preference over the rest of the creditors of the estate. The defendant was a person of considerable landed property in the county of Cheshire. The bankrupt formerly, and for many years, carried on business as a draper in Stockport; but he had, latterly, been concerned in several joint-stock banks, and that was the trading in which he became a bankrupt. The de fendant was a creditor of Cartwright to the extent of about £429, and on the Ist of August, 1842, a mortgage of a mill at Adswood, near Cheadle Moseley, in Cheshire, was executed by the bankrupt to the defendant, and, at the same time, certain title-deeds were handed over to him ; up to that time the mill had been in the possession of the bankrupt. At the time that this transaction took place the circumstances of Cartwright were such that he must have known that his bankruptcy was in the highest de gree probable, nay, inevitable; and he voluntarily, or at least without any pressure from the defendant, gave him this preference. To show that this was the case, the learned counsel read the examination of the defandant be fore the commissioners of bankruptcy, in which he stated that the debt was contracted in 1826 ; that he had as security a note of hand, which was frequently renewed ; that he on several occasions, during the preceding ten years, had expressed a wish to have better security; that Cartwright, when he called on him, said, " I have brought these deeds as a further security for you." The defendant replied, " Very well, just as you please." Mr. Cartwright thereupon observed, " Mr. Turner, my brother-in.law, is well acquainted with the title, and he will prepare the mortgage." At the same time, Cartwright produced a letter for his (the defendant's) signature, which was to the effect, that he (defendant) required further security. That letter defendant signed, and returned it to Cart wright. Such was Mr. Pownall's own explanation of the manner in which he became possessed of the title-deeds in question. To show that at the time of the execution of mortgage Mr. Cartwright was well aware of his approaching bankruptcy, the learned counsel stated, that the Bark ut Manchester had, on the 11th of June, 1842, issued a writ against him for certain bills, to the amount of £9500, which he had accepted, and of £lB,OOO which he had endorsed, on behalf of two of his sons, who were connected with the extensive paper works of Messrs. Henry and Edward Hilton, and who had become bank rupts. When the writ was served on Mr. Cartwright, lie said he could not pay as many shillims ; that he was a ruined man ; that he had been ruined by his connexion with the Hiltons. An action was brought against him at the last summer assizes, for the £9500, and on the 30th of July, two days before the execution of the mortgage, an arrangement was entered into between the parties, by which the defendant submitted to a judgment aginst him, in the event of certain demurrers which he had filed going in favour of the plaintiff. When the demurrers came to be argued, they were laughed at; Cartwright executed a voluntary assignment, and a fiat of bankruptcy issued. nia whole assets amounted to £731, being the amount realised by his furniture. Witnesses having been cailed to prove these facts, Mr. WATSON addressed the Jury, pointing out in the first place, that the object was to obtain these deeds, not for the benefit of the whole of the creditors of Mr. Cart wright, but for the benefit of the Bank of Manchester, which was the only creditor on the fiat. He then pro ceeded to contend, that there was no fraudulent preference inasmuch as one of the elements of a fraudulent prefer ence, contemplation of bankruptcy, had not been made out. Mr. Cartwright was a gentleman who had realized a fortune of £20,000 or £30,000, and who had retired from business ; but, like many other persons in his situa tion, he invested a small sum of money in a few shares in a joint stock bank, the Bank of Manchester. In 1839, when the two sons of Mr. C. were contemplating to enter into partn ers hi p w i t h t h e M essrs. Hil ton , of Darwen, he ' applied to the bank to know in what credit the Hiltons happened to be, and was informed by Mr. Burdekin, the manager, that they were in good credit, and had a large balance in the hands of the bank, although, at the very time, they were largely indebted to the bank. Under these circumstances, he was induced to put his sons into the business of Hilton and Co. He advanced them £lO,OOO as their part of the capital. But the Hiltons, notwithstanding this assistance, fell into difficulties, and the defendant supported his sons. He became sureties for Hilton and Co. to the Bank of Manchester. He en dorsed biils to the extent of £lB,OOO, and accepted four bills for 1'9,500. This was not his own debt. Ile had no con nexion with the house except through his sons. But there was no doubt that the debt due to the defendant was a just and lawful debt of the bankrupt, and he determined to pay the individual debt, honestly incurred, rather than to meet those liabilities which he had been induced to enter into through fraud and misrepresentation. Mr. Cartwright was himself called, and stated, that he had been out of business for the last twenty-five years. The only trade in which he was engaged, during that pe riod, was the holding of a few shares in the Bank of Man chester. In February, last year, when he paid the de fendant the interest on the 1:452 which he had borrowed from him, the defendant became more pressing for a bet ter security. He asked for a mortgage, and the mortgage was consequently prepared. When his sons entered into partnership with the Hiltons, £20,000 was to be paid by him in consideration ; but it was understood that one-half would only be wanted. Before the partnership was formed, the bank told him that the Hilton's kept a good account; but, after the deed of partnership had been drawn up, they told him that it was overdrawn. At the time he made the mortgage, he had not the slightest idea of becoming a bankrupt, knowing that he had no creditors in trade of any consequence, and that the bank of Mr. Hilton had sufficient assets to cover what he owed them. He be came a bankrupt owing to the inducements of his friends, and, by the advice of the same parties, he executed a deed of assignment. Cross-examined.—Could not say whether, at that time, , the 19th of January,) he had heard of the judgment against him two days before. He rather thought not. Dr. Tur ner ao-cl others had had a security for many years, for £6,000, on his personal property. Had a debt to a Mr. Shaw for - £367, but he held a mortgage. Owed INIr. Po cock £l6O, who held a deed. One of the Hilton's mar ried his (witness's) daughter. His bankruptcy took place on the 21st of January, 1842. The petitioning creditor was his own brother-in-law, Mr. Turner. Re-examined :—His (Mr. Turner's) debt was £lOOO. Had he (witness) known that the Hiltons were in difficul ties he would have shuddered at the idea of allowing his sons to enter into partnership with them. Mr. BA INES replied, maintaining that the memory of the unfortunate bankrupt, for he did not wish to speak harshly of him, 4 not to be trusted ; and that the evi dence distinctly showed that, on the Ist of August, he, as a reasonable man, must have been clearly cognizant that he was on the verge of bankruptcy. As to the Bank of Manchester, his learned friend had thrown out some insi nuations, inducing the impression that there had been some mismanagement of its affairs, and that, therefore, this claim ought, in comparison with that of the defend ant, to be unheeded. But what, if there had been mis management, of which, however, there was no proof, the debt to the bank was a bona fide one, and the innocent shareholders were as much entitled to consideration as any other creditor of the bankrupt. Mr. Justice CRESSWELL summed up. The jury, after a short consultation, found for the plaintiff for £3OOO, subject to be reduced to 40s. on the deeds being given up. They said they thought the mortgage had been given with out pressure, and in contemplation of remote bankruptcy. The court adjourned at five minutes after seven o'clock. CHESHIRE ASSIZES. CHESTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 15. (Before Mr. Baron Gurney.) HANMER V. EYTON. This case was resumed at the sitting of the court this morning, when two additional witnesses were examined on the part of the plaintiff. Mr. Jervis then addressed the Jury at considerable length in favour of the defend ant, and contended that the whole tenor of the evidence showed that there was not any wilful negligence on his client's part in working the mines. His Lordship, in summing up the case, recapitulated the whole of the evi dence; and at one o'clock the Jury retired. They retur- - ned into court in about an hour and a half, and• returned a verdict for the plaintiff for £6,227 damages, with leave to Mr. Jervis to move to reduce them to £1,600. THURSDAY. EXPARTE DARER. It will be remembered that on a former day of the late assizes at Chester, a rule bad been obtained by Mr. Jer vis, on behalf of Miss Caroline Phillips Baker, the tenant, calling upon Mr. John James, the landlord, to show cause why he should not re-deliver to her a house and land at Oxton, Cheshire, possession of which had been given to him by an order of two magistrates of that county under the provisions of the 11th Geo. 11. c. 19. Mr. Townsend now appeared to show cause against the rule, on behalf of the landlord. The case turned princi pally on the question, whether the rent had been properly described as a rack rent, so as to come within the act in question. The respondent's affidavits went to show that the premises could not now be let for more than the rent reserved by the lease. But the learned Judge said he could not shut his eyes to the circumstance that since the lease was granted a house had been built on part of the land, which must have increased its value ; and that the surveyors who spoke to the value of the land unhuilt on, treated it as agricultural land, whereas it appears to have been let by the square yard, which was inconsistent with an agricultural letting. He could n( t therefore consider that the rent was a rack rent, consequently the case did not come within the clause of the statute on which the respondent had proceeded, and the rule must therefore be made absolute. His lordship, however, stated that he came to this conclusion with great regret, as the substan tial justice of the case was, he thought, on the side of the respondent, and he was glad to know that the landlord had another legal remedy to which he might have recourse. The affidavits also made by the appellant's agentcontained statements as to his being taken by surprize, and other allegations, the object of which was to throw aspersions on the magistrates, (who had only acted in strict dis charge of their duty,) which had been entirely disproved. THE CONDEMNED MURDERER AT CHESTER.—James Ratcliffe, condemned to he hung at these assizes, for the wilful murder of his wife, at Stockport, in June last, is destined to expiate the horrible crime on Saturday, the 3rd of September next, by the punishment of death.: Mr. PALMER'S 109TH VISIT TO THE ASSIZES.—Our townsman, Mr. Palmer, has this week made his 109th visit to the assizes at Lancaster, without any interruption having once occurred in the very numerous series of visits, a circumstance, we fully believe, of which no other gen tleman in the country is enabled to boast.—Preston Pilot. TRIAL OF ARTHUR O'NEILL .—At the Stafford assizes, on Saturday, this person was put upon his trial for a sedi tious speech on the 26th August last. The defendant concluded his speech, when the court adjourned until Monday (yesterday). At the Bridgewater Assizes, eight men who were ac quitted on a former day of the assizes of the felony of destroying a house for collecting tolls, were indicted for a misdemeanour in pulling down the tollhouse. The jury acquitted the prisoners, but Mr. Justice Coleridge said he could not concur in the verdict. At Durham Assizes, on Friday week, Joseph Atkinson was convicted of illegally solemnizing a marriage. lie kept a toll-house within the Scottish border, and usually officiated as priest. A couple sought his offices, but found that he had gone to Berwick, whither they followed him. At first he refused to marry them ; but being made drunk, be complied : a confusion of legal geography which caused him to be sentenced to seven years' transportation. SENTENCE OF DEATH ON A CHILD THIRTEEN YEARS OF AGE.—At the late Warwick Assizes, Jane Smith, aged thirteen years, was sentenced to death for setting fire to a dwelling. Her mistress having scolded her for some misconduct she proceeded to one of the upper rooms and set fire to some clothes ; but fortunately it was soon discovered and extinguished. The prisoner confessed to the act, and wurosentenced by the judge as above, with an intimation that he would recommend her case to the mercy of the Queen. AN EXTRAORDINARY VERDICT was, on Thursday last, returned by a coroner's jury at North Petherton, Somer set, relative to the death of one Richard Hall, a boatman, who recently lost his life in consequence of his boat striking against the timber work of a bridge belonging to the Bristol and Exeter railway. A verdict was returned of " Manslaughter agaiiist the chairman, vice-chairman, and directors of the Bristol and Exeter Railway Company," alleging that the deceased came by his death owing to the criminal neglect of the company in not removing the wood work. The chairman is Frederick Ricketts, Esq., and the vice-chairman the Worshipful the Mayor of Bristol; both of whom, with Mr. Divett, M.P., are included in this strange verdict. Last week, at the Norwich Assizes, William Sauger, a young man, was indicted for committing two forgeries upon the East of England Bank. It appeared that the prisoner was a clerk in the bank, and that, having access to the forms for the payment of money, which were signed in blank by the manager, he filled up two of them for £2500 and £5OO respectively, in favour of a fictitious cor respondent, and despatched them by the mail to the Lon don agents. This done, he himself proceeded to town by the same conveyance, and presenting himself at the agents on the next day, demanded the payment of the two sums above mentioned, for which purpose he forged two cheques in the name of the supposed correspondent. The money was forthwith paid, but the fraud was soon detected. When arrested nearly the whole money was found upon him. He pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to transpor tation for life. TRANSPORTATION OF A BORDER PRIEST.—At the Northumberland Assizes, Joseph Atkinson pleaded guilty of unlawfully solemnizing a marriage at Berwick-upon- Tweed, between William Brown and Catherine Cossar. The prisoner is the " priest " of Lamberton Toll-bar, about four miles north from Berwick, and he is in the habit of performing the ceremony of marriage there ac cording to the Scotch fashion. On the arrival of the parties in this case, the " priest " was absent, and as there were urgent reasons for haste, it being, in fact, " a runaway match," the parties proceeded to Berwick, and there found the " priest" mebbeuoti eeanunrcrdgrtyai neod became intoxicated, they reason, h a oseoetorn p ryue u , ttte public-house whichdleeo. i en c wl -fhaeTthuyervgoheeluaenrtbats: invited dertdto c ees hatad, suspect h l enuu l iet e estrht d pse, het, eficteaupcphadtstr parties sei sertdhOttnshaii "priest" that , d oestt, wdy t td i e etrr p h n o smse e out r leui a i f dtg o n r unrdpwmo. exceptr liquor s t duT h h ena i the ceremony being Liir e e nteha r i ogemes being he performed the ceremony at Berwick, and recorded it, when he returned to Lamberton, as having been done at the latter place. The case, it will thus be seen, did not in any way involve the question of the validity of the Scotch law, according to which the marriage ceremony is performed at Lamberton Toll-bar. The learned Judge sentenced the prisoner to seven years' transportation. NEW MODE OF EXTINGUISHING FIRES.—We under stand that there is at present in Liverpool a gentleman, (an engineer,) who has invented a mode of extinguishing fires. It is his intention very shortly to open an exhibi tion, in which the process will be fully developed. In a town like Liverpool, where so many disastrous fires have taken place, there is no doubt that this plan will be in spected with much avidity. It is not only practicable but the result efficacious. We shall draw attention fully to the exhibition when it opens. • CAT WORRYING.—On Friday, Oliver Shannon, who keep a public-house in this town, was brought before Mr. Rushton, at the Police-court, on a charge of permitting two dogs to worry a number of cats in the cellar of his house, and also with aiding in the detestable sport. The case was proved against him by two police-officers, who found three dead cats which had been destroyed by dogs, three live cats in an iron cage, and four others in a bag. Two others, it appeared, bad escaped. There was a " pit" formed for the " sport," and a wager was pending which of two dogs would kill six cats each in , the s bortes! r time: The defendant said he had not encouraged titat 10, 4. that his wife had let the parties into h! cella r n i ght to deitroy rats representation that their dogs were and be was was " howling" the dogs re "'review; day two other fined £ 5 and costa • i;2 costs, for the part they took on par ties were fined 40s. and co the same occasion. and not case. It was distinctletaaittarer that he LAW INTELLIGENCE. DISTRICT COULT OF BANKRUPTCY. (Brfore Mr. Con? ,sssioner Skirrow.) Richard Price, coal dealer, of Waterloo, appeared to pms his final examination, by adjournment from the 2d instant. Mr. Venal)les, the barrister, was retained to oppos.::, and Mr. John Jones, the solicitar, to support him. Some obj;!ction sl7 , :i taken io the balance sheet, which was held by the corn noissiom?r to be lata!, aid his exami nation was main adjourned to the Ctil day of September next, at eleven o'clock. RE THOMAS AND EDWARD WILLIAMS. These bankrupts, who were linen drapers in this town, applied on Thursday for an allowance of their respective certificates. Mr. James Moss, the soliciior, appeared in support of the petitioners, and they were opposed by Mr. Sale, of the firm of Sale and Worthington, of Man chest.er, solicitors. The commissioner, upon hearing the evidence, said he would adjourn the meeting, without pre judice to the bankrupts, until Friday, to give him time to consider his decision. On the sitting of the Court, his Honour said it was necessary for him in all cases to look at the conduct of bankrupts both before and after their bankruptcy. In this case there certainly did appear to have been improvidence in conducting their affairs, and improvident dealings could offer no defence. His duty, however, was to look at all the circumstances. The bank rupts had offered I ls. in the pound, which had not been generally assmited to, and they had afterwards offered Bs. In consideration of the two offers, and also with the knowledge he had gained from the official assignee, (whom on all occasions he consulted,) of the very willing conduct of the bankrupts, and the information he had received from them with regard to their affairs, he should not meet the justice of the case if he either withheld or suspended their certificates. Certificates granted accordingly. RE THOMAS PRICE. On Friday last Thomas Price, flour-dealer, appeared before the learned Commissioner on a resumed examina tion. The bankrupt, as in former instances, was opposed by Mr. Bardswell on behalf of the assi pees, and sup ported by Mr. David Evans. It may be remembered, that the bankrupt had been three or four times a bank rupt before ; had once made a compromise of 7s. 6d. in the pound •, and had taken the benefit of the Insolvent Debtors' Act. The opposition which led to the present adjournment was an allegation against the bankrupt that he had not faithfully surrendered all his goods and effects, particularly as to the reservation of certain quantities of flour. An objection was also taken to the unsatisfactory state of his balance-sheet, which he was studiously en joined to amend by his next appearance before the court. Mr. BARDSWELL first adverted to the extravagant item of £1,053. Ils. 4d. for household expenses in the small space of two years and five months. in a small baker's shop, the accuracy of which lie (Mr. Bardswell) could not arrive at, as he kept no books. Upon further examina tion, he elicited from him that from the business done the clear receipts of his shop were, on the average, £45 per week. Calculating, therefore, from his own statement, which he (Mr. Bardswell) impugned, there was yet a deficit of somewhere about £3OO, which, he submitted to the learned Commissioner, in the absence of explanation, disentitled the bankrupt to any indulgence from the court. Mr. DAVID EVANS replied briefly, but very energeti cally, in extenuation of the conduct of the bankrupt. He was an ignorant man, had kept no books, and had given as accurate a representation of his affairs as was in his power. He had reserved nothing, and he trusted, under the circumstances, that the learned Commissioner would consider his case as one in which he could, without in justice to any party, afford him the indulgence solicited. His HONOUR : The question is, whether the bankrupt has complied with the regulations of the act. It is quite clear to me that the bankrupt's accounts have been very irregularly kept, and although, in ordinary cases of this kind, I cannot punish persons simply on account of their irregularity, yet, in this case, I must look to the simple question, has the bankrupt given an accurate account ? Certain sums of money, in the nature of receipts, have been traced on his examination, and certain payments made therefrom ; but there still remains a deficit of £BOO, which has not yet been accounted for. On the former examination, the court was dissatisfied with the balance sheet, and the meeting was accordingly adjourned, to af ford time for the production of another balance sheet, and to afford some additional information to his creditors upon his transactions for the last two years. lam bound to say, that information has not been satisfactory. I have every wish, and, in fact, am commanded, to act leniently with bankrupts; but, in this case, I feel I should not be doing justice to the creditors if I did not mark my sense of the very unsatisfactory manner in which the examina tionhlassatiedrnhleinfaartee,dt,haantdtahme haagnakinracpopapmelelemdortoy is revert to what singu larly tenacious of things which happened twelve, sixteen, twenty, and even thirty-seven years ago, and in occur rences of not a month's :lapse his recollection is peculi arly defective. Under all these considerations, I cannot do less than adjourn the examination of the bankrupt sine die. I will extend his protection for three months, if with the concurrence of the solicitor of the assignee. Mr. BARDSWELL: Neither the assignees nor the cre ditors have the slightest wish to interfere with the pro tection offered by the learned commissioner. Mr. EvANs : The only certificate the bankrupt will re quire will be the hand of death : he will never apply again. His HONOUR did not think the expression of Mr. Evans at all necessary, If judges were held responsible in the exercise of their duties, however painful, by the learned advisers of those who were brought before them, the practice would be most incodvenient. He would give the bankrupt his protection for one month. Mr. EVANS explained : He only meant that the bank rupt's means would prevent him ever again applying to the court ; he had given up every farthing he possessed in the world. INSOLVENT PETITION DISMISSED. William Bates, insolvent, described as a manufacturing chemist, and lately a theatrical proprietor, came before the court on petition for his final order, which was ad journed some time back. Mr. Venables stated the ground of his opposition, and examined a Mr. Ashton as to an alleged debt due to the insolvent by the witness of £260, but the existence of which he (the witness) strenuously denied. Mr. Bardswell cross examined the witness very critically, but failed to elicit anything favourable to his client. His honour considered the case as one of very bad complexion for an insolvent to allege a debt in his schedule; so as to take the benefit of the act, without a book, paper, or single tittle of evidence to confirm it. Under all the circumstances, he should not be doing his duty if he did not dismiss the petition. The insolvent was immediately arrested at some other suit, and consigned to " durance vile." NOTICES OF MEETINGS. August 21.—David Scott, (audit,) at 11; Thomas Jones, (adjourned last examination,) at half-past 11 ; Hobert Boag, flour dealer, (audit,) at 12; John Donelly, mer chant, (adjourned last examination,) at 1. August 22.—Sarah Chapman, (adjourned last examina tion,) at 11 ; Thomas Taylor, (audit,) ai half-past eleven; David Scott, (dividend,) at 12. August 23.—Thomas Milne Whitely, hstter, at 11. August 24.—A. Ingham, insolvent (final order,) at 11 ; Henry Sockett Humphrys, surgeon, (audit,) at 12. August 25.—Henry Sockett Humphrys, (dividend,) at 12 ; Sloane and Whitty, (audit and dividend,) half-past 12. CERTIFICATES ALLOWED. V. Wanostrocht ; Thomas and Edward Williams. We are enabled to state, upon competent authority, that Mr. Sergeant Keatinge is to be the Judge of the Prerogative Court, vacant by the death of the late Dr. Radcliffe.—Dublin Mail. ..-----._. .___..._ _._....... CONSISTORY COURT OF CHESTER.—On Saturday week the case " Maule v. All, of Wignall, otherwise Rothwell, deceased," came on to be argued before Mr. Chancellor Raikes. This is a case in which the deceased, Ann Rothwell, otherwise Ann Rothwell Wignall, died, under the age of 21 years and illegitimate, possessed of personal property to the amount of between three and d fo o u rn r i t c h i l o e u d s %% a n i t d h p i t o l u t ids , she lliecoun county being a palatine the lie o t f i time of Lancaster i li r d ; ea a t n h a ft t .ol h i re e ts ci ial u ei question crown d t r i oe o we n ena a s t aer i de s s , A i: n : r is,right l,Ciili N t N i • l l (t i )o e f I t l l l i : e e r ctr . I rc i o e .y r , aal l:1a : entitled r j Ae e ir s ro t . y gTa i to s iwv to the right of administration to the estate and effects of right of her Duchy of Lancaster. The counsel retained prerogative, and the counsel for the duchy are Mr. Vaughan Williams and Mr. Ellis, the Attorney-General of the duchy. The proctor for the crown is Mr. Parry, of Chester ; and the proctor for the duchy is Mr. Ayrton, also of that city. At the sitting of the court, on Saturday, after some discus sionad learned speech a arguments aas to t,hien rightstisupport obfetghi the c . la M i rnr., on b l i e s ha c i o f m o f ai t commenced d uc t i h l y e o sp f e L ech an , c w as h t i e c r i; aoncedu,piniedthtewocoliiiorsuerin delivery, n of s n n voluminous mass of historical evi den c e, of a most inter esting nature, in support of his case. At the close of Mr. quoted Ellis's address the court was adjourned to suit the con venience of counsel, and it was arranged that the argu ments should be resumed on Tuesday morn i ng. T he argumen ts have been carried on from day to day to suit the convenience of counsel. The Chancellor will take time to consider his verdict. NEGRO AQUATICS .—Dtthß,ripi:Rhigeialtusthphndee:o spectators, t, e tojga c ac:rtt e ecnoiomi n yadrue sultryt spsnir,eoedin.: ueiogrn:htdteet yrer w seedeu e irp a st t t shob h .eciett e r the loungers on the pierheads have been much amused at the agile freaks of two negroes in a canoe upon the river. The two men, who are strong built, powerful, yet jet black Africans, were brought here by Captain Brown, of the May, which is discharging palm oil on the east side of George's Dock, and on the afternoons of the very warm days they were to be seen proceeding to the river from the vessel, bearing between them a canoe, cut out of one piece of wood, bet,veen twenty and thirty feet, and so slightly made that they carried it along with the greatest ease. On reaching the slip at George's Pier the slender skiff was immediately launched, and after pulling off all their clothes with the exception of a light pair of drawers, one of them dived into the water, and after being out of sight for one or two minutes rose again, a considerable distance on the other side of the canoe. Both men then jumped into their frail vessel, and immediately commenced to ply their paddles with great regularity, first on one side d ed then on the other, and the speed at which they procee e rill - • , A t position- boat m a s s i et is a ow, ni m s to. swam as the m t tt i ve n a igcbtcrrho:eulad, greatest tso l oeadaiss O mhen it .ocdu e r tril O oteoy f e:ie t p l i., ; : e roa l mounted upon oe d 'sailed a s h ort distance in that the top water out of it, and took their s eat• mention r tulicaht to o h t e h y e followed de lg o i n the back water of one of A gain,• witnessing the aquatic feats of the hardy whom tl were the ,an Retaining shook, t h a a r a i i p ta w d, eedr delight e Sgtta r men n n i s i o d n t s he o f p A o f w r e ie r a t . he A y Asa vperooovfeorf theirtlie strength of th e canoe, wo may ednted into the water. the Woodside ferry boats a minutes. grou t for sey.eral, pf ,(4 , ,I