The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-04-07 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCI SOUTH LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES CROWN COU RT.-TUESDAY Before Mr. Baron ARKE.) His Lordship took his seat at a fe w minutes past nine MURDER. nettY Eccles, aged 38, was indicted fur the wilful . murder, at Bolton of William Eccles, her stepson, by administering i arsenic in his food. The prisoner also stood charget,withtbt, the murde r of Alice Ilaslam and William Haslani . same means. It appeared by the calendar that the prisoner Could could read, though she was not able to write. Long the J u d ge entered the court, every convenient was space crowded w i th auditors, and a number of elegantly-dressed ladies were present. The prisoner appeared deeply to feel her awful position, a though she pleaded n o t gu il ty to e several indict men t s wit h ante firm voice. She , vas decently d resse d , and had no appear: of .atrocity whi c h would lead any person to suppose sn co uld have b een guilty of the crime with which she was charged. Mr. Armstrong, ( IX., and Mr. Brandt appeared for the prosecution; and Dr. Brown defended the prisoner. . On the application of Dr. BROWN all the witnesses, in cluding, the medipal men, were ordered out of court. Mr. ARMSTRONG stated the principal features of the case, which afterwards came out in the evidence, which we sub join :-- John Wood, examined by Mr. BRANDT, said,--I am in the employ of Messrs. Eden and Co., bleachers, near Bol ton, I knew the deceased, Wm. Eccles. He was 15 years of age, and was in the employ of Messrs. Eden arid Co. He generally enjoyed good health. I remember his coming to work on the 26th September. He worked till 4 past 11. He had to go about a mile to his dinner. He was well when he left, and appeared in good spirits. He came to the works at two o'clock, an hour later than usual, but he had an errand or tw o to go. He went to work and appeared very sickly and kept heavin g at the chest. I spoke to him about it and he put his hand to not vomi t his st omach and said he was sickly. He did an anything hour but a g reen i sh fluid. He continued and he l e f on the premises about th ree. 'and then I t o ld hi m to go home, t Iv Cross-ex am i ned. —He had been in th e serv i ce about three eeks and earned 3s. a week. H e h a d to go to the railway, earlier th an on an errand for one of th e servants e left half an hour back a t one. His usual h our ; usual. as H twelve, and he came At her own request the prisoner, was accommodated with a chair. Thomas Daavendport.-1 am a bleacher in the employ of Messrs Ede deuce of theng Co, This witness corroborated the e vhie works about 4 o ~velionunritt:vitness, and went on to say, I left the About a quarter of a mile from works I found the deceased. I asked him what made him lie there, and lie said he could get no further. I got him out of the ditch and he complained of being ill and kept heav rigand throwing up like water. I helped him on his way Lyonhome and inlet his mother (the prisoner). She said," What, bayed brought him home, have you?" 1 said nothing to Lief: when she made that remark. I - !s , the JuDGEI was supportin g the boy at the time. By Mr. ARMSTRONG.--I said get him home as soon as You can, and give him some hot tea. She said " she had me tea ready for him." The deceased was not in the habit olgoing home to his tea. By Dr en B ROWN. —Th e pr i soner was alone. dmy teas Mot her as soon as I got h ome what the prisoner had tol said. I w as tak befo re the coroner on 'Wednesd a It cy, and the de. ihaed W as poo r l y on the Monday previous. tlyhrrd Eccles. --I am 13 years of age. Wm. Eccles was other. I have a sister named Mary Eccles. Betty Eccles (the prisoner) is not my own mother. My father Is nt to work on Sunday, and was not accustomed to return ffine last I remember my brother William Eccles dying. b 4 ast time I saw him was when he was coming out of the his() 1• lie had had his dinner. I know my brother had had (Miner, because he said so. There was potatoe ash for nl,l.lnyledsinner in the oven. Sometimes we dined at different When. I eat my dinner, and no one else eat off that dish ~I was there. My mother said she had had her dinner (,)t uprotatoe ash. I was in the house about a quarter of an . ., n ,o iln; I went back to my work. I was quite well after my (), r. We generally dine at 12 o'clock. I worked at the sa tse B...iitett place as my brother William, and gave our wages to Y Eccles. I got half-a-crown a week, Betty Eccles got et chi lollthersngs wantedfor the house, and she cooked them. No Byperson was employed. No one lived in the house but ister, and brother, arid Betty Eccles. I remember death, Ec cles getting into liquor shortly before William's Wouldl sae said he would tell his father. She said " she brother be s hot of him if he did tell his father." She beat my ini sometimes. We were not troubled with rats or mice tlO hn use• A girl of the name of Alice Haslam died in swirl' house a for before my brother. My sister Mary grave." ' ?, wee k after Alice died, " Let us go and see Alice's _ ve. She said " No, I have trouble enough on my mind; we shall have another dead in our house before long." (Sen sation in court.) Cross-exarnined.—My Betty sister is 10 years old. Alice was get homileeeles' own child. It takes us a quarter of an hour to old, Ec cles, a nice intelligent girl, said she was 10 years , and went to school every day. She said she said her PraYers, and knew. it was bad thing to tell lies. By Dr, B R() , 8 a lie s on we w-.-- he was told it was a bad thing to tell say se. driesday last, and if any one asked her she was to Ta,his witness was subjected to a 'rood deal of examination ~ .certain whether she was capable of giving evidence, and nis Lordship decided she was fit. _ Examination coutinued.—l am ten years old. I remember Ladimmy b.rother William dying. On that day I had " taty " ash ier. illy mother dined with me. 1 did not see Wil get his dinner, I was *one to school. My mother said Reshould have a dainson-p6udding for dinner. th e When I got Potatoe ash 1) e . had dill not I ask e d f or the d amson -pudding, and sh e sa id 111,.. not time to ma k e it, but w ou ld ma k e it the day after, ""L do so. I was very Poorly at ni g ht. M y brother lay . Cross -examined. —My mother and I had gone to some fire works at the rearing of a chimney. M ary Ann Hopkinson was then called. but as she did not answer, her recognizances were estreated. A traits would arrive at a quarter before twelve, by which she might come; and his Lordship directed the case to proceed. Elizabeth Fell. —I live next door to the prisoner. I rd that going into her house on the night her stepson died. .', s aw the prisoner, and I asked if it was her son Richard t aat had died. She said no, it was her son William. She ;tau lie had died of inf lammation. ..1 said 1 thought it str . ange 113 d Ying so soon. 1 told her to have the body examined, t e . ca use I was afraid of infection. She said she had had ,!ntible enough. Other persons were present in the house. s he was very angry at what I said. irer°BB.eXamined.—What the prisoner said she said openly. so'sllnmas Haslam• —I am a waggoner. I am acquainted iiri, Henry Eccles.. I remember the death of Wrn. Eccles. tty Eccles told me of it the morning after be died. She :'said she had news for me to tell Henry (husband of the pia- W,nter,•) She told me to tell him, that " William came home t1,,,,, in 5, dinner - esterda and eat heartily, and they brought i — "'lle ill ti l t hay' and he died at eight, and that she °u ght of burying him on Friday." I called at the house on Thu , rh da, arid henry told me it was no use of him corning itliziTilluFriday. She said then that two policemen had searched use, and two doctors had come and od the od h ad that I must tell Henry that all was right opened and that the y , y di n found nothing. I asked what the boy had had to his 17 ~utier, and she said he had a damson dumpling. She said wanted her husband to conic home that day, for she had bee n for the clu tooney, and they would not give it, which I Tr!le,iilt9_((i w asbe had at the works. leTe atleuriner.—l am bookkeeper at Messr. Eden and Co. 40 persons employed there. W e have a burial elah at...the works. The deceased was a member of that club, of s 1 remember Betty Eccles corning to me on the 10th fa r ~eP,te,mber last, and she claimed the benefit of the fund aliC i ,, c und (a girl.) I told her she was not entitled to any but i;iice, the father of the child not working at the works, m ould n,er husband had worked there as formerly then she pl eyed "aye been entitled. I told her that children em ber •• ° n the prernises would have the benefit, or fathers IN children employed 1 advanced 10s. on the 10th of wapstember, and I lent 15s more on the 15th. The money ~ to be to ) d . 1 told lPe out of the wages of William and Richard. glo ved her that children more than seven years old cm there wldh v r 0 I William on the Mon ioaltdn sj e ll i K e ly w . a s v orhis waayetdo s tile works, He looked . anxious I saw the prisoner the next morning at , the e 1 A. ,Lnig..l,ouse. She said she wanted the funeral allowance. next gutriot give her the money, but said she was to come . again lie we '''' li i"g• I refused the money, from some suspicions. j went a way, and did not come the next morning. an'es Harris, inspector of police at Bolton.—On the 2 th ePterriber 1 went to the prisoner's house, as ordered by the c oron er *le ave , • I took her into custody the next . day. I went i to il , ual u the house, When I took her I cautioned her in t le Wiii,wa.Y. told her she was charged with the murder o r f b een "ta Eccles, by poison. I asked her how long he lia ... 11;„ Poorly befor e he died ? She said, he had eaten . his ~,,,Zk e r very heartily on the Monday, and returned from hud teen,Seen to him ? She said she had called on Dr. Mal seanntl‘ he was from home. She had administered . some aft er " at'd salts herself, and that he died about six hours i f 81 . I had been to Moscroft's ; and after that I asked her dialoglci' e had ever any poison in the house for the purpose . of liaver,inin 1 Shc said, to the best of her recollFction „ e ,. 1 n ad• I asked her if she knew Mr. Moscroft 's, the cAaritr's" Fold's -road ? She said she did, and had fre e.shY.., ':Right snuff and trifling articles. I asked her if Oe th e bought any poison there? and she said she had n9t. he k ti e f°ll° wing day the apprentice of Mr. said,Moscroft . whiel es, the prisoner, and that she had bought poison .1.1,2,'_he denied. It has the appearance of a new house.. itici;a_e Judge.--There was souse brown sugar in the house, dr4„is'ird I..larlow, apprentice to M . r. Moscroft, Bolton, to e ti l, ',) said, the prisoner has been in the i abit . of . corning Ab s ,„ s , IO P for live or six months before site was taken_ e p r . sh e ca'..itie latter end of August or beginning of .Sep ia tem i t l i o , Sh e carne g t , o our shop, arid master and I were in will let roe p . hav e it' want pennyworth of arsenic if you . .. t her e i; Mr. Moscroft said, I cannot let you have it unless to do anyseule one else with you. She said she did not %..an still • hurt with it it was only for the mice. My master caea:!refused to let h ' er have it. She then went away, and e uii ." g!tia in about half -an-hour with a female, and then at d i .A. e r : ot. arsenic was given to her by Mr. Moscroft, labelled litheset,ues.—oison." This was put in another wrapper, th e prejus with.similar words but longer. I have no doubt but .e 4 Week titi l l T i r i l 8 the woman. The prisoner came once or twice Th ema I generally supplied her, W0e,,,, Moseroft, druggist, Bolton, said, I remember. a 4iritiil:l,coining to my shop at the latter end of August or b l e i: ni eny 401 f. September. This witness corroborated the tests , that th e l' apprentice, but he would not undertake to swear C ross Prisoner was the woman who called. . verinin se:sainined.—Arsenic is often used for killing rats and inJo se ', a nd is frequently mixed with whitewashing, Sept.l ripe nl'eo, Denham, surgeon, Bolton. --On the 28th S ,a t s in a r , a in the body of ThieleWlm Eccles. The prisoner w . (°g rotim xternal appearance of the body lir. perfectly health • ' l ag w as i.y. I opened the s . tomach. The mucous wa s ad , ‘ .11 a high state of inflammation. Aw i P . ah otit r"trmg to the coats of the stomach. I observed th e Btoiour (sauces of a dirty .brownish red fluid. . I took l these an leh out and the bowel adjoining. I delivered a ~,, to m,.. ~. . I,casori ittiZditetecrsed die'd fr'oanieskeimuneisitri?iftagreat eminence poison. quatit:y to I would expect from poison. T l' ' s m n a i t i o I d h ie ila':.l found 0 produce death is 4.1 grains, and Mr. NA Watson f,,iied.r witlrvottZitins The taking of arsenic is acssom o about half an hour. I found .. n i, tak4lairtlie.storoaeli. The countenanc e of a person .hasenns. anxiety arse is generally pinched and has an appearane c. I Crei;.. Ur ' Howarth assisted t hine in opening the stoma an stixious,•exaulinedA person in great fear would have e White „,aPnearance. Medical men have frequently foundL_... Psis Po wder in the stomach and supposed it to have . been n atio n. b ut were found to be mistaken on a chemical exam'. TI, *heti thestiowarth, physician, Bolton, said lie was present ,f th last w:idy was opened, He corroborated the testimony oft•Liiiet;eidi he Or witness as to the appearance of the body, and otitLhoa.lid died frouiarsenic. t ur • 1 )* It " "( - 431, 4 ou tor a low , t . on d tsoo, chemist, Bolcon.—l b er th e e(plt . nue• I received from Mr. De.n an, 11 _ • ems of a stomach of a boy . of a coarsrsh W hite th w e a 2 s Bt a h pupil Sp. pow.dceontents of the stomach consisted mil ted th r, a lotionp adhering to the stomach. d I sub thanhe wii„,. Powder ' • mination, an 'ls gen li Chemical exd • applied not 4_,po -a-wdoa4zetturedeiuffiee. bah. era y sold tests I he „ I found found fe i N t ve to r c wder der rent eo , and fromall t 1 Ileeted 28 grains of the pow after the experiments. (The witness here produced the pow der which resulted from his examinations, along with the king portion in the state in which it was found in the 1. These were examined b}• his lordship and th 1 have no doubt it is arsenic that -examined.—Doubts have been thrown on t tomaci in the body pearances which I have here noticed produce the same appearances. (The witness was directed to procure an ounce of arsenic from a neighbouring druggist.) Richard Eccles was then recalled icy his Lordship, and said, that he had never seen any white sugar in the house. Mary Eccles said the same. Dr. BROWN then proceeded to address the jury on be half of the prisoner. He said that the jury must be satis fied that the child died from the arsenic, and argued that the motives alleged for the prisoner having administered it were insufficient to induce her to commit so abominable an cffence. lie went on to notice several particulars in which the evidence, on which he alleged the counsel for the prosecution relied so strongly, did not in any way impli cate the prisoner in any guilt, but might all have happened with the most perfect innocence on her part. During the delivery of the learned counsel's address, Mr. Watson returned with a small bottle which contained an ounce of arsenic, procured at a druggist's shop in Tithebarn street, and which was handed to his Lordship and the jury, and inspected by them. His LORDSHIP proceeded to sum up the evidence at great length, commenting on every portion making for or against the prisoner. Tartar emetic The jury then retired ; and, after an absence of an hour and a half, returned into court, and pronounced the prisoner guilty. Silence having been proclaimed, his Lordship put on the black cap and passed the awful sentence of death upon the prisoner in the following terms :—Betty Eccles, that fearful crime which you have certainly committed, and which you probably hoped would be concealed from the eye of man, has been discovered, and you are now to receive from the of fended laws of your country that sentence which is most justly due to guilt such as yours; for the jury are satisfied, and I am satisfied too, from the legal evidence in this case, that you have been guilty of the detestable crime of depriving your stepson of life, for the purpose, probably, of receiving some small amount of money, but under a violation and total disregard of every feeling of human affection, and of every feeling of duty. I have spoken of your conduct only as it appears from the legal evidence in this case ; but, as I know all that was disclosed before the coroner's jury, I am satis fied that I see before me the murderer of three human beings, probably of five; because there is not the least doubt that you destroyed two of your own children, if not two others, by the same infamous means as you used in the case which has formed the painful subject of inquiry to-day. The punishment that you will receive will, I trust, be a warn ing to others. lam unwilling to say any more of your guilt, because it is not my object to harrow up your feelings, but only to impress you with a sense of your fearful situation, and to exhort you to spend th e f ew rema i n i ng d ays w hi ch the humanity of the law now allows you, but which you did not allow to the unfortunate victims you have murdered. in seek ing pardon for your sins where alone pardon can be obtained ; for many hours you cannot expect to have in this world, and I should be wanting in a sense of duty, if I held out the least hope or expectation that pardon was to be obtained from any thing human. It will be for you now, profiting by the instructions you will receive, to endeavour to excite in your mind any feeling of repentance you may be capable of ; for upon that alone your hopes of pardon from God will rest. But I can say no more, only to advise you to spend the few remaining days of your exist ence i n th e en d eavour to o b tain that divine mercy which I cannot hold out to you. But it becomes now my duty to pass upon you that awful sentence of the law which your enormous guilt richly deserves. I be lieve I may say, from the evidence brought before this jury, and which might have been brought, that, in the annals of crime, great and odious as the crimes are that have been com mitted by human beings, there is none equal to yours. The sentence upon you is, that, for the crime which you have committed, and of which you have been found guilty, you be taken hence to the place from whence you came, and from thence to the place of execution ; that you be then hanged by the neck until you are dead, and that your body be taken down and buried within the precincts of the gaol in which you will be confined after being taken from this court ; and may the Lord have mercy on your guilty soul ! The prisoEer heard her sentence with firmness ; and, at its conclusion, she clasped her hands, and exclaimed, I ask for mercy, my lord. The Judge.—Oh, that cannot be obtained. Prisoner.—Oh, mercy, my lord. If only you will have mercy upon me this time, my lord. The Judge.—Take her down. The prisoner was then removed. NISI PRIUS COURT.-TUESDAY THORNTON AND OTHERS V. THORNTON AND ANOTHER. This was an action to recover £67, the amount of a bill of exchange, and also £lOO for goods sold and delivered. It was undefended. The plaintiffs were John Abraham, William Thomas, and Joshua Thornton, machine-makers, Laken, Yorkshire; and the defendants were William Carr Thornton and Joshua Williamson, patentees for a peculiar mode of card setting. Proof was exhibited that the two of the de fendants had admitted one of the items, and as they did not appear to dispute the other, his Lordship directed a verdict for the plaintiffs.—Damages £167. KINLOCK V. TYRRELL. In this action the defendant sought to recover a sum not specified, as the value of certain goods which had been left at the house of the defendant, an innkeeper in this town. Mr. Wortley stated the case to the jury. He said the plaintiff, Colonel Kinlock, had been in the army, and had been resid ing with his lady in Scotland. The defendant was Mrs. Mary Tyrrell, keeper of the Grand Junction Railway Inn, Lime-street, and the amount sought to be recovered was the value of certain luggage deposited at the inn, and lost by the negligence of defendant or her servants. Plaintiff arrs d from Glasgow by one of the steamers, and being anxiousVo stop for the night at an inn in the neighbourhood of the railway station, he made inquiry, and was directed to the hotel in question. He accordingly procured a cart and a porter, saw his luggage loaded, and sent it to the hotel. There were amongst the packages two carriage imperials (or boxes,) and a cap-box—larger than a hat-box. These con tained nearly the whole of the wardrobe of Mrs. Kinlock, who was going with plaintiff to pass the season at Leaming ton. On reaching the inn, plaintiff and his lady were shown into apartments. Shortly after, as the night was co m i ng on , plaintiff exp resse d a w i s h that his luggage should be sent to the railway station, so as to be in readiness in the morning when he purposed to start for the south. The waiter, how ever, interfered, urgi ng th a t th e goo d s wou ld not be so safe at the station, as the parties there would not be responsible for them, as they would be at the inn, and he (plaintiff) was accordingly prevailed upon to leave them at the inn, where they were left in the passage or lobby. Next morning one of the imperials and the cap-box, to the great mortification of plaintiff and his wife, were missing, and from that day to this they had not recovered a single article which they contained.- Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid would depose to the value of the articles, which were worth, at least, £3OO. On the same morning, one of the imperials was found at two o'clock in Peover-street, near the Police Station, at the north past of the town. It was found at the end of an entry, reared on end, broken open, and completely ran sac k e d o f i ts con t en t s . He (Mr. Wortley) could not, in this case, go for damages, for the great inconvenience and mortification to which the defendant and his lady were put by the loss, particularly under the circumstances ; but he thought the jury would not hesitate to return a verdict for such amount as he should prove as the value of the goods. The defendant pleaded, first, that she was not guilty ; and, second, that the plaintiff did not bring the goods_into the house. Witnesses - were - called who proved the depositing of twelve packages at the hotel, the conversation with the waiter, the missing of the two boxes, and the fact that one of them was found, as stated, empty in the street, and taken to the police office. Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid produced a list of the articles missing, and had made an estimate of their 'value separately, which, however, was not gone into. The gross amount, as estimated by her, (most of the items being taken from the tradesmen's bills, they being recently purchased,) was £213; and she stated her belief that they could not be replaced under about £3OO. They consisted of valuable silk dresses; chiefly new, caps, jewellery, laces, &c. Mr. Wat son, for the defendant, cross-examined the witnesses. Mr. WATSON, in addressing the jury, contended that, though innkeepers were generally in the position of insurers of the luggage of their guests; that they were not so with regard to articles of great value in comparatively small packages. unless instructions were given to them of such value, so that more than ordinary care might be taken of them. The goods were deposited in the passage with the knowledge and sanction of the defendant. That they had been carried away he had no doubt, by some person who probably represented himself as a guest ; but he did not con ceive his client was liable, as the negligence was on the part of the plaintiff. He instanced a case, which he considered analagous, of a robbery of a package of bank notes from a coach. The value not haVing been stated to the coach pro prietor, it was held that he was not liable. His client knew nothing of the:articles, or their value. His LORDSHIP, in summing up, said that the defendant was clearly liable in law, though the case was to her a hard ship. They had heard the value, as stated by the servant maid, to the best of her belief, and must estimate the damages on her statement to the best of their judgment. The J ury, after consulting for some time, retired, and were absent about an hour. On their return, they gave a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £l5O. CROWN COURT.—WEDNESDAY. His Lordship took his seat shortly after nine o'clock THE GREAT SILK ROBBERY. EdwinLucas,aged 34, and Nathaniel Lucas,32, (brothers) were indicted for having at Leigh, feloniously stolen a large quantity of silk and manufactured goods of that 'material, in eluding a number of pieces of Gros-de-Naples, some pattern tabs, 6501b5. weight of dyed silk warp, and 1101bs. silk weft, the properly of John Barton, of Manchester. The property taken, as it will afterwards appear, was of the value of nearly £l,OOO. _ _ Mr. Baines and Mr. Hulton conducter; the prosecution, and Mr. Wilkins defended the prisoners. Mr. BAINES, in stating the case, observed that the pri soners at the bar had maintained, up to the time of the transaction at which they had now to inquire, a most re spectable station in life. The prosecutor, Mr. John Barton, carried on business in Manchester on a large scale as a silk cloth manufacturer. On the night between Whit-Monday and Tuesday, last year (the 16th and 17th of May) the pre mises of Mr. Barton was entered by some parties who had got into the cellar by means of a skeleton key, and thence into the counting-house above, in which the goods were de posited. The place had been left secure on the preceding night. On examining the place next morning, it was found that the silks had been carried off, to the amount of £l,OOO. The articles were 25 pieces of Gros-de-Naples, a quantity of pattern tabs, 6501b5. weight of undyed silk warp, called organzine, 110 lbs. of silk weft, the two last being all the stock of that kind which the prosecutor bad on the premises. The parties who had committed the robbery had evidently been well ac quainted with the nature of articles of that description, as they had taken the most valuable, those of an inferior de scription being left behind. From some circumstances that transpired, suspicion attached to the prisoners soon after the robbery; and on Thursday. the 19th of May, an officer was sent to the place where they carried on their business, at Leigh, near Manchester. The prisoners were, at that time, doing little or no business, having discharged their foreman, they not having employment to give him. The officer was admitted, and told the prisoners of the robbery. They said they knew nothing about it, and would take him over those parts of the house where they kept their articles of trade. They showed him into two rooms, which he examined, but found nothing ; and he, thinking all was right, went away, without examining any other parts of the premises. On his leaving, they told him if any such silk came to their neigh bourhood they would send word to Manchester. On the 18th of June, the prisoner Edwin Lucas went to the shop of Mr. Lewis, in Manchester, and between that time and the 12th of July he went several times to that gentleman and sold him some gros de Naples, which was part of the stolen property, but which lie said was his own manufacture. About the same time lie also went to Mr. Lord, in Manchester, (a silk mercer,) and sold him a number of pieces of coloured silk, which were also Mr. Barton's property, and which that gen tleman was also led to believe were also of his own manufac ture. The invoices were made out, but some of the silk was noted d own as bl ac k, pr obably to evad e es e u d spic4 ,w on e , that whi c h h e sold to Mr. F or d b e i n g chiefly colur or three weeks after a p e rson named Walmsley was employed to dye some goods for the prisoners, at their premises at Leigh, and he there saw a bundle of organzine silk, about 401bs. wei g h t , an d , f rom t i me t o time, he occasionally saw pieces of silk, b ut h e cou ld no t tell where they came from. He saw, a l together, about 3 cwt. o f t h a t kind which, it would be shown, had bee n t a k en f r om the P r osecutor's premises. lie saw no manufactured coloured silk there w hile he remained. In consequence of suspicions that subsequently arose, a police-officer went to the hou, , t. >f the prisoner at Abraham, near Leign, on the 7th of March last, at an early hour in the morn , nT. The officer tVaS aimitted by Edwin Lucas, and found in a writing desk a quantity of tail-ends of silk id said, Vrisoner .;-; with him hat they we ii, ;iriscmer's hearing, . his property said some of them had been there for sonic time—some as long as two years. Mr. Barton asked if they chose to say where they got them from, and the younger brother said he did not think that a proper qiwstion,—he'd ansiler it at another time. The officer afterwitids went to another house, a quarter of a mile off, which was hold by the prisoners, and 1 there found seven pieces of black silk handkerchiefs. A female was in the house. As one officer was leaving with them in a parcel, another, having in charge the two prisoners came up and, on seeing him carrying something, said to the woman, " Did you tell theirs where you had them from." She said, "I told them from you," and lie replied, "that's right.—[Our subsequent account of the case is condensed from such part of the statement of the learned counsel us was proved, and the evidence subsequently adduced, and un contradicted.)—On the Ist of March, a police-officer went to Mr. Lewis's warehouse, Church-street, Manchester, and received seven pieces of silk, which were produced. On the 2d of the same month, another received three pieces, also produced. A dyer named Walmsley went in April last year to the prisoners at Abraham. and was employed by them to rectify some silk that was unfinished. He being out of work was asked to stay with them, and then dyed 30 or 40Ib weight of silk, warp and weft—all black. Between and the October following, he dyed 6001 b weight of silk weft—black. He saw a quantity of other silk—black orgazine. There were several lots of the same shade, and he remarked that it was well dyed to hit it. He saw no manufactured-coloured silk, nor did the prisoners tell him while he was there that they had taken another house. He left them in January. The witness, on cross-examination, said that he slept in the house with Nathan, the younger prisoner; that he was there during the whole of Whitsun week ; that they generally went to bed together about 10 o'clock, and that on no occasion during that week did he miss the prisoner when he awoke, or in the morning. ' A good deal of evidence was gone into in order to prove that on the night of the robbery the prisoner Nathaniel was (with a companion) at a public-house at Barton-on-Irwell— was there with a spring cart, and something in it ; also that he had been at Tilsley on the following morning, on the way (though circuitous) from Manchester to Leigh with some sort of cart—but this was by no means distinctly proved. Mr. Barton then proved, by corresponding patterns, tabs and otherwise, that the goods produced were his pro perty. His warehouse-keeper corroborated him; spoke solely to the warp of the manufactured goods and the sel vages. The silk handkerchiefs they could not swear to. Other weft had, it appeared, been used in making them into cloth. It was admitted by the prosecutor that a great number o pieces of silk similar to that produced had been sold by him but the pattern and style were uncommon. Mr. WILKINS addressed the jury in behalf of the priso ners in a most able manner, availing himself of every point he could possibly seize in behalf of his clients, and urging that there was no proof against either as to the robbery, and that at the most the evidence could only bear out a charge of receiving. _ _ The JUDGE stated the case in a very clear manner, recapi tulating every particular point of evidence. The jury retired for about an hour, and on their return gave a verdict of guilty of the robbery against Edwin Lucas, and not guilty as regarded Nathaniel. Some respectable witnepsea were brought forward, who gave the convicted prisoner a good character over a number of years, as being respectable and respected in the neighbour hood, and, as a master, a friend to the poor. After the last witness to this effect was heard (some postponement having taken place owing to his absence), Mr. Hutton, the junior counsel—in the absence of his senior, and also of Mr. Wil- kins, stated to his lordship that a police -officer of Manches ter could say something on this point. His lordship as sented ; and the officer 6 . eint; called, he stated, in a some. what eager manner, that he had seen the prisoner during the last two years in the company of persons in Manchester whom he knew to be thieves, and in houses to which they resorted. We do not remember to have heard before this sort of evi- deuce brought forward, in contradiction to those on charac ter, particularly in the absence of the prisoner's counsel, who might otherwise have questioned its authenticity, and, per haps, disproved it. As it was, it added to the prisoner's sentence by perhaps some years of suffering beyond the seas. His LORDSHIP said that the prisoner had been found guilty of a heinous offence; that he had, it appeared, borne a good character, but that from what he had just heard, he had for feited that latterly, and the sentence of the court was that he should be transported for fifteen years. The prisoners appeared to be rather genteel and good-look ing men. The younger was discharged. The elder, when he heard the sentence, appeared to be disposed to say something, but failing, he was taken down from the dock. MISDEMEANOUR James Partington, aged 50, who had pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with having, at Bolton, put off a forged order to one John Makin, by means of which he ob tained a considerable sum of money, withdrew his former plea, and pleaded guilty. It appeared that he had been led to the commission of the offence by another prisoner named Horrocks. He had been imprisoned since the 10th of Fe bruary. His LORDSHIP, therefore, sentenced him to four months' imprisonment and hard labour. BURGLARY Wm. Wood, aged 39, was charged with having, at Ashton under-Lyne, broken and entered into the dwelling-house of John Morris, and stolen therein four sovereigns and other moneys and goods. The prisoner was acquitted. UTTERING A FORGED NOTE Joseph Rule, 52, was indicted for having, at Manchester, uttered a forged note, purporting to be one of the notes of the Halifax and Huddersfield Union Bank: ,g Company for the payment of £5, with intent to defraud William Birchall— also with uttering another forged note to Isaac Staley. Tne prisoner, it appeared, went to Birchall, who keeps the Fleece Inn, and asked for change of the note, which was af terwards found to be bad. The other he uttered to Isaac Staley, in payment for goods to the amount of about £l. He said, on being told that it was bad, that he had received it in Yorkshire, and would refund the money on the following Saturday, but did not. On being apprehended, he said he had received the note from a person named John Taylor, of Buckstones, at an inn called " Aunt Sarah's." A man named John Taylor, from a place three miles from Buck stones, was there, but did not know the prisoner. The pri soner had put his name on the note. He had, it appeared, been in the habit of travelling the country selling cloths, and also kept a provision shop. The superintendent of the Man chester police stated, on cross-examination, that a vast num ber of such notes had recently got into circulation in York shire and elsewhere; and that he had recently been on a trial in which it was shown that one man had utte re d th em t o th e amount of £lOOO. Mr. WlLKirrs, who appeared for the prisoner, said that the prisoner had taken the notes unwit tingly, and had even put his name upon one of them.—The prisoner was acquitted. BURGLARY, Charles Piling, 19, who was indicted with two others, Crook and Young, who had pleaded guilty, was charged with a burglary at Bolton. The house of a person named Bridge was broken open on the 12th January, and a watch, some money, and' sonic wearing apparel, were carried off. The only remarkable feature in this case was, that the only two witnesses against the prisoner, were, a man who had recently been convicted of felony, and a prostitute. The prisoner was acquitted. The other two prisoners (good looking young men,) had pleaded guilty to two indictments, and had pre viously been twice convicted of larceny. They were each to be transported for 10 years. POACHING AND ASSAULT Samuel Cowburn, 39. convicted last week of poaching with others, and violently assaulting a gamekeeper, was brought up, and after a severe address from his lordship, was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 18 months. The court rose at a quarter past six o'clock. There re mained about 80 cases to be disposed off in this court. NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY. HOYLE V. HOWARD This was an action to recover damages for injury done to the plaintiff's property in Cheetham-street, Rochdale, by a nuisance from the works of the defendant. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, who is a corn-dealer; Mr. Knowles, Mr. Wortley, and Mr. Hogging for the de fendant. After the .case had been opened, and the first witness, who was the tenant of the plaintiff, had been ex amined, it was agreed between the parties that the defendant should buy the plaintiff's premises at a valuation to be fixed by a party to be named by the plaintiff. A nominal verdict was consequently entered in favour of the plaintiff. ACTION AGAINST THE SHERIFF.-RICHMOND V. FRANCE This was an action in trover against the late High Sheriff of this county. Mr. Rotch and Mr. Hardern appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. Robert Richmond ; and defendant was re presented by Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton. The plaintiff is a spirit dealer in this town, and the assignee of 'William Halliday a bankrupt. It appeared that 1841 the bankrupt took the Commercial Hotel in Dale-street, in this town, from the previous tenant, whose name was Leicester. Not having sufficient to purchase the whole stock, the bank rupt gave Mr. Leicester a warrant of attorney for the amount which he was unable to pay. About six months afterwards, Mr. Leicester put in an execution, under the warrant of attorney, under which the Sheriff sold the goods to Mr. Adam Eccles, a tanner, who was, in fact, the real defendant. Mr. Eccles, willing to be a friend to Mr. Halliday, allowed him to retain the property in his possession as reputed owner, taking an assignment, and to carry on the business as usual. Mr. Halliday continued the business a few months longer; when Mr. Eccles becoming uneasy about his money wished Mr. Halliday to give him a warrant of attorney upon the goods. Mr. Halliday, by the advice of his attorneys, gave Mr. Eccles a cognovit for £lOO, on Wednesday, the 30th of March ; but on the following Friday Mr. Halliday found, instead of being relieved from the pressure of his difficulties, his goods seized under a warrant from the Sheriff. The general creditors interfered, and on the 7th of April a fiat in bankruptcy was issued; on the Bth, the provisional assignee was appointed, and notices were served upon all parties con cerned that Mr. Halliday was a bankrupt. Notwithstanding all this, the Sheriff sold all the goods ; to recover the value of which the assignees brought the present action. For the defendant it was contended that the sale was made under the assignment to Mr. Eccles, to which a bill of sale was attached, and not under the warrant of the sheriff. Pos session was taken under the assisgnment, before the warrant was issued. The sale realized £412 55., of which £256 3s. Ild. was paid to the landlord, Mr. Rigby Wason, for rent ; and the difference, it was contended, was the pro. perty of the plaintiff for the general benefit of the creditors of the bankrupt. _ _ . The jury, after retiring, returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £156 Is. Id. ; costs, 40s. TIIOVER EDWARDS v. BIRD.—An undefended action, in trover, to recover the value of a quantity of cases containing certain pro perty belonging to the plaintiff, which the defendant, it was alleged, had improperly converted to his own use. Mr. CROMPTON, for the plaintiff, stated that the plaintiff was a military gentleman, who, upon retiring from the army, en tered into partnership with some parties in carrying on a coal mine near Wigan. His occupation was to look after the . business i n Li verpoo l, w h ere t h e d e f en d ant was em ployed in collecting orders. The partnership in Wigan was dissolved, and Captain Edwards was 'about to leave Liverpool for another part of the cou n t r y, w h en th e d e f en d an t, in whose possession the boxes in question were left, detained them on the ground that a su m of money was ow i ng to hi m f or com mission on his collection of orders. .The learned counsel said if the defendant would give the boxes up he would con sent to a verdict with nominal damages. After the examina tion of three witnesses, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff,: damages, £29. THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. C ROSSLKY.—The plaintiffs are wine and spirit merchants in Liverpool, and the action was brought against the d efendant , a surgeon in Manchester, to recover a balance of £6B for goods supplied and money lent. The action was undefended, and a verdict was re turned for the amount claimed. BENTON V. PLUMPTON.—The plaintiff in this case is a house and land agent in Liverpool, and the defendant is Mr. Plumpton, one of the representatives, in the Town Council, of West Derby ward. The action was brought t o recover the sum of £132 Ns., commission on the !sale of a quantity of land by the defendant to a Mr. Go s l ing , ni the year 1839,f0r £5,300. The defence rested on the ground that the plaintiff had not introduced Mr. Gosling to the defendant ; but it f a il e d ; a n d the jury retu rne d a ver d ict for the plaintiff for £132 ; costs 401. MADDOCKS v. BALL.—An action to recover damages for an illegal distraint upon the plaintiffs premises in Southport. After the case had proceeded some time, Mr. Knowles, who represented the defendant, said it was clear some mistake had been made, and he would therefore consent o❑ the part of his client for a verdict for the plaintiff, with .1.:10 damages. This offer was acceded to, and a verdict for that amount was returned for the plaintiff. CROWN COURT.—YESTERDAY. His Lordship entered the court at a quarter past nine, MURDER. Mary Hunter, aged 29, was placed at the bar, charged with the wilful murder of John Hunter, at Manchester. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Monk were for the prosecution ; and Mr. Joseph Pollock for the prisoner. Mr. WILKINS stated the case to the jury. He opened by making a very feeling and eloquent address, alluding hu manely to the awful position in which the prisoner stood before them, and calling upon them to discharge their solemn duty conscientiously to her and to their country. He then narrated the leading particulars of the case, as they after wards appeared in the evidence, recapitulated the facts that bore most heavily against the prisoner, and concluded by solemnly disclaiming a ll a tt empt i n w hat he had said, o r should say, to add a pr e j u di ce t h at wo uld weigh, even as a hair, in inducing them to convict her. He was heard with painful and silent attention. Alice Belshaw, a girl, said, I live at Harrison's-terrace, Ancoats. On Saturday fortnight and two days, before going to the coroner, I saw the prisoner in the street. She asked me to go with her as far as Dr. Howard's. I asked her what she wanted there. She said she was almost Sneed away with twitch clocks and mice, and wanted some arsenic. I went with her. Dr. Howard keeps a druggists' shop in Ancuats lane. Whe n s h e go t me t o t h e d oor, s h e said I must say that I lived with her, if they asked me anything. She asked me if I would say so, and I said I would not mind. We went in together. She asked for arsenic, but I can't tell fo r what . quantity. She asked a y oung b oy w h o was the shop. H e asked her what it was for. She said for twitch-clocks and mice. He asked her where her witness was, and she pointed to me and said, " that is her." The boy said I cannot let you have it, she is too young. " Come," said the prisoner, " c an 't you let me have it, she lives in the same house as I do." He did not let her have it, and we left the shop together. Sh e stopped at the door, and said will you take anything to drink. I went with her to the Abercrombie, and I had two penny worth of gin, and she half-a-nuggin of rum. I never saw her before that time. That is the youug man I saw in the shop. Cross-examined by Mr. JOSEPH POLLOCK. — It was quite light when we went into the shop. (The witness here said spontaneously, that when the prisoner mentioned arsenic she looked in her face so as to know him again if anything hap pened.) She stopped at the door; she did not try to get away, or show a desire for concealment. Thomas Wolfenden examined by Mr. WILKINs.---I am apprentice to Mr. Howard. I remember about four o'clock on the 12th November, two women came in. One asked fui arsenic, and referred to the other. I refused, as the witness was too young. She said it was to poison vermin, and men tioned twitch-clocks. I believe sh 2 said the other lived with her. He could not identify the witness nor the prisoner. Mr. Davies, druggist, Travis-street, examined.—My shop is about 200 yards from the house of the deceased. I had known the prisoner. From ten to fourteen days before the inquest prisoner came to the shop and asked me for some arsenic. She did not ask for any particular quantity then. I asked what she wanted with it. She said to destroy mice. I asked her if she did not keep a cat. She said no, she was frightened of cats. I did not give it her, telling her I did not sell it without a witness. She did not mention her husband. I told her to fetch her husband. She went away. She came to the shop again that day with another person, Mrs. Dunn (now present). She said she had brought her as a witness. I asked her it she (Mrs. D.) knew what prisoner wanted, and she (Mrs. D.) said it is all right, it is for the arsenic. Mrs. Hunter asked me how I sold it. I said id. per ounce. She said let me have two ounces. I let her have it. It was wrapped up in two papers, in one parcel. I wrote upon it " poison" only. While I was making it up, she said I sup pose there is as much there as would poison a person, and I said yes, a dozen persons. I cautioned her not to let it come in the way of children. It was not in a metallic state. By the JUDGE.—No, it was in powder—arcenous acid. That is not metallic. She said she would soon make use of it in oatmeal balls and put it in the cupboard. I have sometimes admi nistered medicine to her children when they were poorly. No one came to me on the 25th November to say that Hun ter was ill. Cross-examined.—She made no mention of her husband. I have not given a different account from. what I now give. She went away, as I inferred, to bring her husband. Arse nic is purchased for rats, mice, beetles, twitch-clocks, bugs, &c., and is frequently sold for that purpose. On the 27th November she came again to me, between seven and nine in the evening, for some mustard. She seemed in great trouble. I asked her what was the matter. She said her husband was very ill. I asked her what was the matter with him. She aid she did not know, and that the doctor had ordered a mustard bath for him. She did not mention a doctor's name. To the best of my remembrance she did not mention Dr. Harrison's name. I swear she did not. Re-examined.-1 never heard of deceased's illness till Sunday night. I said nothing about porridge. I always re quire a witness in selling arsenic, or require them to bring the colouring matter it is to be mixed with, and mix it with it myself. By the JUDGE.—The prisoner was not intoxicated when she got the arsenic. Elizabeth Dunn.—l lived at the time in Walton-street. I remember the Friday on which John Hunter fell ill. On Saturday before (the 19th) I saw the prisoner between six and seven in the evening. She came to my house. She was not in the habit of coming. She asked me to go an errand for her,—to go to the pawnshop for her hitsband's clothes. I went to comply with her request. She said she was sorry I was so badly off, and had such a family to contend with. She gave me twopennyworth of whiskey. We got to Davis's. She had not before mentioned Davies. She said, how do you sell that stuff, Mr. Davies, for we are very near s2zeived out of the house with twitch-clocks? She said her husband had gone to her club,—the Odd Fellows. Mr. Davies took the drawer out and asked how much would do, and she said about two ounces. She asked the price ;he said Id. She asked him if he would please to write on it what it was, and he wrote on it " poison." She asked him to put it in two papers, and he did. She asked, " Would this poison a per son." He said, " Yes, a dozen of people." We went away and she gave me a pennyworth of beer. She said she would come for me again. On the Monday morning follow ing she sent for me. I went and asked her then if that stuff was of any service in destroying the twitch-clocks. She said, " What stuff, my dear," and when I told her she said, " I lost it on Saturday night, when I parted from you." Cross-examined.—l do not recollect saying when she asked for the arsenic that it would be all right. Elizabeth Bedford, a girl of eight years - of age, was then called. In reply to Mr. Wilkins, she said that God would send her to the bad place if she told lies. Cross-examined by Mr. Pollock. -1 was only told to say that this morning in the house. I was told so before by the same person. (The witness appeared to be quite confused.) I have seen the person since in the court, but I don't re. him now. He wore a jacket like a factory man. No other person told me so before. ih,„ Re-examined.—l att e ng% l S un day sc hool, and the clergy man talks of God and Heaven. I learn the catechism. A lady tells us it is wicked to tell lies. A gentleman present, whom I now see, told me it was wicked to tell lies. That was when I went before the gentlemen (the grand jury.) By the JUDGE.—What do you think will be done to you if you take an oath, and then tell a lie ?—lf I told a lie I believe I should go to hell. Hell is a place of torment. She was then sworn, and placed on the table of the court. She said in reply, I knew Mr. Hunter, and remember when he was taken ill. It was on Friday night. I used to go there to nurse. Mr. Hunter used to come home to his supper at six o'clock. I had been there that day. I went at tan o'clock in the fore noon, and stopped till Mr. Hunter came to his supper. I took the children out before he came. Mrs. Hunter told me to take them out. It was about half-past five. Mrs. Hunter was then cleaning, Mrs. Hu n ter put their bonnets on. She told me to take them and play with them. I took them to the top of the street. She told me to bring them back about seven o'clock. I stayed out till about half-past seven with them. While I was out I met my sister Caroline, who took the children from me. In about five minutes after I went to Mr. Hunter's. I did not see him. I saw Mrs. Hunter. Mr. Hunter was up stairs. I often went there to play and nurse. There were two children. I have seen Mr. Hunter eat his supper. He had it generally as soon as he came home. He had milk porridge, with a bit of meal in. Wh en he took it he had generally one child on his knee and the other beside of him. H e o ft en ga ve them some of the por ridge. If the children were out at the time, their porridge was put in the oven. Mrs. Hunter used to clean on a Friday. She had sent me out before with the children when she was cleaning; and she put their bonnets on. She was generally cleaning before at three in the afternoon, and was cleaning then, and sent them out again. They had not been so long back that day when she sent them out again. When I went out with them there was water to boil on the fire in an iron pan that was used for porridge. The porridge was made with a little water, and a little meal and milk. Mrs. Hunter put the meal in the porridge when he came in. Sire put it in with her hand. She had frequently sent roe out with the children after dark. I have before taken the children out at supper time. When they returned they had their porridge, which their father gave them in basins. Sarah Street sworn.—l am wife of a warehouseman. I knew Hunter and his wife about three months before his decease. I occasionally went to their house. On the even ing of the 25th November, I heard somebody vomiting in that house. Soon after, the prisoner came for me—about twenty minutes after 1 heard the vomiting. She said, " Will you come in? Mr. Hunter is very sick." I went, and found him vomiting at the slop -stone. I asked had he the bowel complaint? He complained of pain in his bowels, and said his throat was very hot. He said he thought it was from Cayenne pepper or snuff. I held his head. Prisoner came in and said, " John thought it was his porridge that had made him ill," and he said, " Give the porridge to the dog." She (prisoner) said if it was not fit for him it was not fit for the dog, and she had thrown it away. She said it was in a basin, and she had thrown that away too, into the midden. She said she had tasted it herself, and that it had made her sick. She said she had taken about two spoonfuls. She did not say what quantity the deceased took. The deceased vo mited into a tub in the slop-stone. There was much vomit in the tub. Mrs. Hunter threw it away into the midden. She emptied the contents of the tub twice. He said in her presence that he would require help. Prisoner in conse quence went out, and stopped about half an hour. On re turning, she said neither Mr. Lonsdale nor Mr. Cook, the druggists, were in. Deceased was then in the petty. He was very sick, but could not throw up anything. I and a neighbour assisted him out of the petty. He also complained of his stomach. The prisoner did not offer to go for any other doctor. I thought she had had some liquor—she cried so and made such a noise. Late in the evening a neighbour brought Mr. Willis, surgeon. He came about nine o'clock. Deceased made use of the pot. The prisoner emptied it once. Mr. Willis saw the last motion. I stayed till 3 in the morning. Mr. Lonsdale, Mr. Hunter's doctor, came next day. Hunter mentioned the porridge to him in prisoner's presence. She said she had taken some of it, and it had made her sick. Mr. Lonsdale said lie did not wish to attend deceased, as Mr. Harrison had been called. I noticed what the deceased had vomit e d. lie vomited carrots out i n round pieces. I observed no cur d i n the fluid. On Th urs d ay, the 10th of November, prisoner came to my house, an d sighed very heavily. I as k e d her what troubled h er . S he said, " No,Y Mrs. Strut, it i s a dream that I d reamt. " S he said she thought they had brought John home dead, an d l ie was not well himself, and fancied he he would not li ve l ong. I never heard him co m pl a in ; I thought him a health y man. I never heard them cornplain of twitch - clocks or mi ce . W e have none in our house, which is next door. Prisoner had ne ver spo k en to me of arsenic. She had no cat. Prisoner brought a box to our house the day after deceased died. It was locked, and afterwards delivered to Jac k son. Mr. Hunt er t o ld me some' time before that they h ad mo ney in the savi ngs ' b an k . I went the day after he d ied wi th her to the b an k t o get h er name put in. (A small box was prod uce d, conta i ning a bank book.) I have been shown this bo o k. I t appears that there is £66 due to them. The prison er , I b el i eve, cannot read, and I did no t read the balance to her. Th ere i s a pawn ticket in the box, whic h prisoner also left w i t h me. im The unporretamnati.nder o f the witness's evidence, in chief, was Cross-examined.—Mr. Hunter and th e prisoner lived very comfortably together. I never heard them quarrel. The prisoner was a very good mother to her children. I always thought her more attentive to her children and husband than most people in her line of life. She took a deal of pains to make him comfortable. She kept her house very clean and neat, and took time over it. It was her great distress at the time she called, that made me think she had been drinking --nothing else. She appeared to be much and sincerely dis tressed about her husband's illness. He vomited pieces of carrots. They were not at all digested. He said he had had a herring for his dinner. Ido not think the prisoner men !:1( ned her dream. The deceased was not a very strong look ing man. lie looked delicate in the face. lle was very sal low, and dark about the eyes. We have twitch-clocks (cock roaches) in great numbers in our houses. When the prisoner came to me about the Savings' Bank, she said she was afraid that her brother-ip-law, Jackson, would take the money from her. The prisoner's mother came on the Monday. She could not read or write, and asked me to assist her at the bank. She expressed great fear that if the money was not soon put in her name, the Jacksons would get it. She wanted moiey for the funeral expenses. She had a little mcuey in the house, but not enough to meet the expenses. Re-examined.—Deceased was, I believe, in two burial clubs. He told me there was a sum to be received from each. Mrs. Sarah Tonge called :—I live in Walter-street, near the deccased's—two doors off. I remember the night decea sed was taken ill. I heard the prisoners' voice in the street that night. She was going to Mr. Hills, and asked me to lend her 6d to get some brandy, for her husband was taken very ill. She asked me, for God's sake, to go in, her husband was so ill. When she came back with the brandy she said she knew he was a dead man. About three weeks before she mentioned a dream to me. She said she had been dreaming a curious dream. I laughed. She did not then tell me the dream. When she said he was a dead man she said now Mrs, Tonge you laughed at me when I mentioned the dream. I told her it was nonsense and asked if she had any young person In the family, as it was a sign of mar nage or some nonsense like that I went to the house and sawthe deceased in the petty very ill. He sail' his throat smarted after he had eaten the porridge. I assisted him into the house. He could not get in himself. I advised him to go to bed. My husband came in and carried him op stairs on his back. He was then very sick and very sore. My husband went out for a medical man. I remained till three in the morning attending him. The prisoner was not sober at the time when I went first there. Mr. Willis came that night to see him, about nine. Deceased was very si c k. I did not ask her, nor did any one in my hearing, tell her to empty the tub. She emptied it every time it was used. On the same night Mrs. Horsfield saw prisoner down stairs smok ing her pipe. She said, " Mrs. Hunter, where the devil is the meal that made John Hunter ill." Prisoner said, it's there, at the back of the fire ; if it has made him ill, it shan't make any body, else ill. I saw some of the meal on the fire partly burnt. Other meal was got to make the deceased some gruel. The fresh meal was got before the other was burnt. It was brought by a girl. I did not see the prisoner sick at that time. Deceased was a very steady man. The prisoner used to keep herself neat and clean till the last six months. She was given to drinking. When I saw her she was always in liquor. I have known her four years. There was a great change within the last six months. She became less tidy and less clean. Deceased said he should like to see Mary Ann Jackson, and I told the prisoner rt..' s.tutday. rrisuuer uaneu me into the back room, and said I don't like them, and they don't like me, and for that reason I shall not send for her. Cross-examined-1 went very little to prisoner's without she sent for me. I never found them quarrel. Th.y had the reputation of living comfortably together. She went up I stairs with him, and assisted to make him comfortable in bed. She did not take pains to make him comfortable dur ing his illness. The prisoner, when deceased was taken ill, ran out and alarmed the street. She called out that he would die. Deceased said the moment he tasted the por ridge he became ill. He said when he had taken a few spoonfuls his throat smarted. Mrs. Hunter did not oppose my husband in going for a doctor. He looked melancholy and fatigued, and perspired. The vomiting was dark coloured. Next day he said his stomach was very sick, but that he was much easier than on the Previous night. I saw him on Sun day, and he said his feet were very cold. His stomach was still sickly, but a little easier. He did not vomit on the first night after ten o'clock. She mentioned the meal being got about three weeks since. (The witness's desposition before the coroner was here put in. This was read by the Judge. The witness had then said, " the prisoner was sober for any thing I know." Also, " I never saw anything against her, and I always saw her tidy and clean. I have seen her only once in liquor, and then she was not drunk.") No one told me when I was before the coroner to tell all I knew about the matter. The first time I was asked about the meal was three weeks ago. I forgot it when I was before the coroner. I can remember things better that occurred six years ago, than six months. Re-examined. Deceased was very ill at half-past six' when I first went in. Deceased did not say anything about the taste of the porridge. He screamed out when my hus band took hold of his shoulders to lift him up. I meant to say that there was nothing but vomit in the pot that smelled ill, when we asked the prisoner to take it out. There were bluish marks on his face after he was dead (The jury here left the court for about twenty minutes, under charge of a bailiff.) Thomas Willis called.-1 am a surgeon. At the request of Mr. Harrison I attended his patient in November last. On the evening of the 25th of November, about eight o'clock, I went to deceased's house. Deceased was up stairs in bed. Prisoner came into the room two or three times. Deceased said he was sick and purged—be was sick to death. He said nothing of the cause, or the porridge, in the prisoner's presence. I asked her about the porridge. She said she had thrown them out. She said the porridge was very good, made from milk thickened with meal. The prisoner said he had had a red-herring for his dinner. I saw an evacuation. It was of a dark greenish colour, indicating absence of bile. I took his complaint to be an attack of English cholera. He appeared in a colapse sitting up in bed. The symptoms were those of cholera, or of the effects of arsenic, of which I had no suspicion at the time. 1 prescribed a drachm of tincture of opium, alkali, acid, &c. I also administered pills. 1 was apprenticed in Yorkshire to a surgeon, and attended lectures. The second day the symptoms were those of poisoning by arsenic. The tongue was whiteish. The countenance palid, and expressive of great anxiety. The feces not very offensive, indicating absence of bile. The prisoner said he had come home well. If he had come home well at six, he might have been in the state he was in when I saw him, from cholera. I think he said the porridge tasted as if there was pepper in it. Cross-examined.—l know something of cases of arsenic. I thought deceased was suffering under cholera, and so recorded it in Mr. Harrison's books. I thought it a very severe attack. I thought the liver was disordered. 1 believe I said that the liver was slightly disordered, but I can't swear positively to the words. There was the sour smell of vomiting. It first occurred to me that it might be arsenic, from the symptoms. His countenance was pallid, and indica tive of anxiety. I should select that expression even if 1 did not think it was arsenic. There was nothing to ine.lico me to believe, from what I then saw, if I had heard n&bnig further of the case, that it was other than cholera. A strere bilious attack might, after a time, produce a painful sensation in the throat. Re-examined.—l have seen more severe cases of cholera than that. I think the arsenib might affect the ducts or the liver. The continuance of the symptoms on Monday induced me to suppose there might be arsenic. If I had found d,ffi culty of breathing, &c., on Sunday, I should have sus pected poison. I have always found a reaction after the attack of cholera. If there was not, I should take it as a symptom of poison being taken. I never said his liver was no bigger than a walnut. I anticipated his recovery. P. F. glish cholera may arise from taking improper food, or eating much fruit. I did Lot say he was sure to die. I said the liver was disorded. [The judge here said, that there was no chance of the case being concluded this day, and the jury must make up their minds to remain for the night in a state of seclusion.] Mr. Harrison, surgeon, of Manchester, said, I first saw the deceased on Saturday, the 26th of December. He was in bed, in a state of collapse, almost pulseless, great diffi culty of breathing, no particular pain. Hearing from Mr. Willis that he had suffered from cholera, 1 examined the ab domen, and expected to find pain. He had had great irrita tion in the rectum. I inquired of his wife about his general health. Prisoner said be was a very sickly man, and quite done. I cannot say whether that was true or false. He said he was better than on the previous night; the vomiting and purging had entirely ceased. He was indisposed to speak of his complaint. I never said anything about his liver. I took it, from the representation of his wife, that he was very sickly, that it was a violent attack of English cholera. Acute gastutus, or inflammation of the coats of the stomach, would have produced the same symptoms. Any irritant poi son would have produced these symptoms. I repeated Mr. Willis's prescription, with one drop of Prussic acid in place of the laudanum. On Sunday there was no improvement. There was a pressure on the chest, and he was restless. He did not mention to me that he had cramps. I considered him in danger. I told his wife so • She did not seem to be much alarmed about it. She was always in the room, and did no thing particular to excite any remark. I ordered a blister to the stomach, and a bottle of water to his feet, which I found had been done. I also ordered a mustard bath, and afterwards an aperient draught, and a mixture of tincture of opium, potass. &c. On Mondty morning he was sinking fast, and evidently dying. I ordered him half a drachm of carbonate of am monia, tke,, with lemon juice. A message came that lie had suffered from cramp ; that the knees were drawn up, and that he died. The prisoner did not at any time press me on the subject of his illness. On Tuesday morning she came to me with Mrs. Street. She was in great excite ment, and I smelt liquor, but she was not intoxicated. When I first went to deceased her breath smelt strong of liquor. On On Tuesday she wanted to get me to sign a certificate to get his money at the bank. She said his relations and she had been quarrelling, and wished to take the money, and do with it as they pleased. She wished to get it out immediately. I refused to have any thing to do with it. I made a post mortem examination along with Mr. Harrison, on Tuesday evening. On view of the body everything appeared perfectly healthy. On making the usual incision in thelabdomen, we found every thing externally quite healthy in appearance. The incision was made from the pit of the stomach to the bladder. On reflecting the integuments, and laying open the intestines as far as the rectum, considerable inflammation presented itself, particularly in the stomach. (Witness de scribed the appearance technically.) Great corrogation of the bladder. The nucleus membrane of the stomach was considerably inflamed, particularly in the upper part. The contents of the stomach were gone—nothing left but a coffee coloured fluid and a small piece of potatoe. I examined the stomach carefully. The mucous coat was highly inflamed in distinct patches, and destruction of a portion. The destruc tion are well marked in several parts, and highly inflamed. The edges of the patches had a distinct termination to each abrasion. The patches were dark red. The paches could easily be scraped off with the finger. These patches pro ceeded from some foreign irritating body causing inflamma tion. The same appearance was in the duodenum, but in a less degree. I examined carefully with Mr. Dyson, and nei ther could detect anything. I don't think any combination of disease would have produced the same result. The symp toms of poison are so anomalous that it is dangerous to give a positive opinion. I am confident, taking the symptoms before death, that no disease could have produced those ap pearances, which were quite sufficient to account for death. Those were quite such appearances as arsenic would pro duce. If arsenic had been taken, and purging and vomiting supervensd, the pain would not be so urgent as in the first degree, by reason of the vomiting and purging carrying off the arsenic. If I had known the deceased to be well, and immediately after taking something to eat, cholera rriLtit come on, but milk porridge would not have produced the symptoms that have been stated. Suppose the poison were given in solution. and went into the system, the pein would thereby be diminished, as if it were vomited. The liver was healthy. The intestinal canal was inflamed. In ordinary cases nature does not support inflammation in two places at once, if arising from common disease. Nausea is a usual attendant before vomiting in cholera. In taking arsenic vornitting might come on in twenty minutes. If a large dose were given at a time, vomiting, I should say, would not be immediate, but in twenty minutes. An imme diate burning of the throat. Sickness might come on in a few minutes, twenty minutes, or an hour. If the stomach were empty, vomiting would likely come on earlier. Look ing at the body alone, without adverting to the other symp toms, I would say that the deceased did not die of cholera. From the symptoms I saw, I am enabled to decide this point with more certainty. I have seen Asiatic cholera. In the first instance I thought it an aggravated case of English cholera. I was sent to Newcastle by the magistrates of Manchester to watch the progress of the cholera there. I was four years connected with the Manchester workhouse. I was nine years engaged as medical inspector of the factories. In cholera the abdominal vessels are distended with venous or arterial blood. Whe destruction in the centre of each patch, as in the stomach of the deceased, is not observable in cases of cholera. It i s usual in irritant poisons. The effusion in cholera is chiefly mucus, but not coffee-coloure d . Iu cases inflammation arising arsenic grumous or sanguiverous. In case s of arising from cholera, there are generallY pr emonitor y "9 5 " 4 toms. In cases of irritant poisons it comes On immediately. I have seen cholera commence with colapse as a first symp tom, but generally preceded by diarrhoea during the day. I have known no instance of colapse within an hour. The ilium is generally more effected than the jejunum. I have never tested arsenic, and authors differ on the point. I be lieve it to be acrimonious. I had difficulty in finding pulsa tion at all on my first visit to the patient. On my succeed ing visits he was pulseless altogether. If the vomiting and purging had ceased on Friday night, I should have expected re-action would have taken place. Cross-examined.—l first called on deceased about three o'clock. I apologized to his wife for not coming sooner. She said he was surprised I had not come before, or words to that effect. I can't say she said she was sorry I had not come sooner. I have not changed my opinion on this sub ject. When I went a second time deceased said he was better. He said he was purged and sick after taking his supper, but did not say immediately. (The deposition of the witness before the coroner was here put in and read. It appeared that witness had then said that the prisoner bad said she was sorry he had not come sooner.) The vomitings and purgings had ceased when 1 went there. I thought it an aggravated case of English cholera. In Asiatic cholera, sharp features, sunk eyes, cold breath. He had a remarkable ex pression of anxiety, being distressed by violent vomiting. I could not distinguish by one symptom. He had. no pain as in peretonytus. There was no hernia. All species of violent vomiting would produce the same anxiety of appearance and prostration. He appeared to be about 35 years of age. Sup posing his stomach disordered by eating herrings, and fat beef and carrots, vomiting might be caused by taking porridge afterwards, but that does not correspond with the other symptoms. I believe the medicines prescribed were given regularly to him. Up to Sunday I believed it to be com mon cholera, and then thought it was a very mys terious case. I know a little of cases of arsenic. I had no suspicion it was arsenic, until I heard on Tuesday that the prisoner had purchased some gastro interitus acutus. The alkalis given him would have had a good effect in a case of arsenic. I can't tell whether the acids would have destroyed the effect of the alkalis on the arsenic. He told me he was costive, but that was from the disease. Gastro interitus accutus is a continuous inflammation of the stomach and intestinal canal. There would be heat and dryness of the throat—excessive thirst—the eyes an expression of pain and anxiety. The complexion would be sallow. Hunter was always sallow. In that disease he would have pain. It sometimes attacks very suddenly, but always with previous symptoms. If Martinet (a good authority) says it comes on suddenly I would still exercise my own judgment, unless I saw a distinct case. Spasms and pains would result. Stupor and prostration of strength would follow after some time. The urine would be defective. The deceased's tongue was moist, not dry. He bad no tension of the abdomen as in gastric diseases. The inflammation of arsenic is generally more confined to the stomach, than the inflammation of gastro interite, which generally extends to others of the in testines. The patches in the deceased'n - - dark red cninnr more red tnan florid. The ,uscb were distinct, and no appearance of searing or burning, Red patches have been observed after death from natural diseases, and even when there was no previous disease in the stomach. There was a thick sanguineous fluid in the stomach. The asaphagus at the lower part was inflamed. I should say there were some appearances of poison. Not such as common disease would produce. The soft state of the mucous membrane of the stomach might appear after chblera and other diseases. The bladder is corrogated in cholera. It may arise from natural disease. If I had never heard of any suspicion of arsenic at all, from what I ;E:s;-Of-1;e-de-: cesed on the post-mortem examination, I ;Could - tieClicalry and confidently believe that death arose from arsenic. The best authorities say that death may be caused by arsenic, and none of it be found. I found no appearance of arsenic. The whole of the stomach and bowels were analysed, and no ar senic was discovered. Ido not know of any case in which arsenic has produced death, and arsenic could not be found, in so short a period as between Friday and Monday. Four grains and a half have been known to destroy a child. But the best authorities give 20 to 30 grains. If such a qua n tit y was taken in six table-spoonfuls of milk porridge, a very small part only would be in solution. If in solution, it would produce secondary symptoms. If not in solution, it would be ejected by the vomiting. I remarkel the body was less decomposed than I expected. I attributed this in some degree to the preservative nature of the arsenic on the cor poreal tissue. If the arsenic prevented decomposition, it must have been absorbed. I cannot speak positively to this. I gave him laudanum. It would not have prevented the pain arising from arsenic. Where pain exists from arsenic, the pain generally continues to the end of life. The pain of arsenic generally returns as acutely as before. Supposing pain, such as that described which Turner endured in the shoulders, &c., I cannot say with certainty whether it would not continue ; but I believe that is the opinion of the best authorities. Arsenous acid may adhere more or less to the mucous membrane. It adheres more c l ose l y than a piece of potato. If the arsenic remained long enough in the stomach to cause death, I would expect it to be found, but it was not found. Re-examined.--I don't recollect the prisoner asking me anything about the progr ess o f t h e deceased ' s illness. A rsenic will terminate in gastro interite, if it does not cause death. He had no pain as in gastro interite. The liver, heart, and brain were perfectly healthy. In my estimation the patches were produced by irritation causing inflamma tion. They might proceed from the arsenic after absorption. I attribute the death to inflammation from some foreign irritant body. From the combination of symptoms carefully revised I cannot help thinking that it was arsenic. I cannot, after due reflection, come to any other conclusion. Thomas Wilson Dyson, sworn.—l am a surgeon in Man chester. I have been in practice about 8 years. lam a member of the College of Surgeons. I assisted at the post mortem examination. I can come to no other conclusion than that of Mr. Harrison—that death was caused by the introduc tion of some substance, and arsenic was the most probable. After the examination of the body, the conclusion I came to was that deceased had taken arsenic. I did know of the pre vious symptoms, and taking these with the post mortem examination, my opinion is more strong that arsenic was the cause of death. I judge from the extreme inflammation of the mucus membrane of the stomach and bowels, the great degree of softness of the membrane, the spots suffused, the great number of points of abration throughout the stomach and intestines, which were most present in these parts, which in cases of natural disease are most free, and from the quantity of red sanguineous appearances. The rectum was inflamed. The w h o l e o f t h e l arge as well as small intestines were inflamed, which rarely takes place in disease of the stomach and small intestines. I found the bladder firmly contracted and empty. 1 have attended six cases of poison ing from arsenic. The symptoms were distinct and similar to the those cases, but more severe. I account for the absence of the arse n i c f rom th e s t omac h and bowels, either from evacuation by vomitting, purging, or from its absorp tion into the system. It might be carried away from the sys tem in 2or 3 days, in various ways. It would probably take a week or two, or perhaps more, to remove all traces. It is doubtful whether all traces would be taken out of the body in three days. I have read much on poisons. My reading assists me to come to the conclusion at which I have arrived. Cross-examined.—l heard from Mr. Harrison that poison was suspected. I believe it probable that I heard all the par ticulars. I expected to find the appearances stated. I have no motives of attaining notoriety by decisive testimony on this prosecution. I never said that I once said that I would give strong evidence and hang the woman, and that I would take the shine out of Dr. Harrison. I never had any con versation with a surgeon named Worthington, or in his pre sence. I have inspected six cases ; I have not inspected one third the cases that have taken place in Manchester in the last two years. (Witness produced a list of seventeen cases since 1839 in Manchester.) In the six cases I inspected I found arsenic in all of them. In every case it was taken in substance, varying from a quarter of an ounce to an ounce. It would be held in suspension in boiling milk more than in boiling water. In six or seven table-spoonfulls more than thirty grains would be dissolved,—the whole of it The medicines given would render it more soluble. (Here some question was put from a celebated authority relative to gastro interitus acctus, to which the witness medically re plied.) If the patient lived after taking arsenic from Friday to Monday night, there would be more extensive infiamation. I knew cases of arsenic in which the patient has survived six days, and still arsenic has been found ; but not in cases in which it was taken in solution. I account for the arsenic disappearing in this case to the alkalis administered, promo ting its evacuation or absorption. I have tasted milk in which arsenic was boiled. It scarcely altered the taste of the milk, and I took very little. I dont think it would a taste, but as soon as it passed the gullet a sensation of heat would be felt. Mr. PoLLocrc stated in effect to the witness in explanatory terms, that the questions he had put to him, which had natu rally elicited strong contradictory replies as affecting him (the witness) were suggested solely from his instructions; that he considered it his duty to the unfortunate individual whom he defended to put them ; and that he (Mr. P.) him self entertained no animosity or want of respect to that gen tleman. Mr. Dyson, as we understood from his manner, acquitted the learned gentleman of any intention of offering a personal offence. The learned JUDGE said that the learned gentleman was quite right, in accordance with his instructions, in putting the questions alluded to; and that no offence ought to be taken on that account. Mr. Dyson, in reply to Mr. Wilkins, said—" There is not a shadow of a shade of truth in the imputation conveyed by the questions alluded to." It being now past seven o'clock, the learned judge pro posed that as there seemed to be no chance of the case coaling to a conclusion that evening, it might be desirable to adjourn until to-morrow. Mr. WILKINS said that as they had still a number of wit nesses, besides medical gentlemen, to call, such an arrange ment would probably be agreeable to his learned brother, who would have his notes to arrange, as it would be to him self. Mr. POLLOCK expressed his assent, as the case for the prosecution would, be learned, occupy a considerable time. The Court was then adjour n ed till n i ne t hi s morning; his Lordship stating that the grand ljury would he accomodated at the Ade lphi for the night, and be under the care of three bailiffs. They would, hawever, be made comfortable. The Court then adjourned. NISI PRIUS COURT-THURSDAY. Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN SAMUEL V. MORRIS.—Mr. Baines and Mr. Compton ap peared for the plaintiff ; Mr. Martin the defendant. The declaration was for the use and occupation of certein premi ses belonging to the plaintiff in North John-street, Liver pool, and on an account stated. The case, as shewn for the plaintiff, was as follows :—The plaintiff, who is retired from business, is the owner of a shop in North John-street, between Lord-street and Harrington street, which he let in 1836 to a person of the name of War burton, who carried on therein the business of a tailor. Warburton became insolvent in 1841, and in the month of May in that year he executed an assignment of all his estate and effects, in trust for the benefit of his creditors, to the de fendant, Mr. Thomas Morris. Under that assignment the defendant took possession of all the personal estate, of every kind, of Warburton ; and it was contended that he had, there fore, become liable for the rent of the shop. Originally the rent was £47 10s. a-year. but shortly before Warburton's in solvency it was increased to £57 10s., after which rate there were now due three half-years' rent, amounting to £B6 ss. The defendant had acknowledged his liability, under the assignment, to the son of the plaintiff, and promised to pay, but he had not. The plaintiff was indebted to Warburton for clothes £6 15s. Bd. ; consequently £79 9s. 4d. were now due. Mr. MARTIN, for the defendant, said, he should put in the assignment made by Warburton to the defen dant, w hich would show that the term in the lease had not been assigned, but only the stock in trade, book and other debts, and monies. He therefore contended that the action wa s not maintainable, on the ground that the term was not assigned; and further, that an assignee could not be sued for use and occupation ; and that no sufficient proof of occupation by the defendant had been given. The assignment was then put in and read ; and the nephew of the defendant was called, who stated that he bad heard his uncle deny his liability to pay the rent. Mr. BAINES was about to reply, when the jury said they would not give him the trouble, as they were of opinion there had been a sufficient occupation. .eyverdict was then returned for the plaintiff for the amount claimed; but on the application of Mr. Martiin, the Judge said he would give leave to move for a new trial on the legal objections which had been raised on the part of the defen dant. FIELDING AND OTHERS v. FAWCETT.—The declaratiln in this case was for work and labour done, and on an account *fated. Mr. Martin and plaintiffs; Mr. Dundas nn, The trial of this ca shortly after ten and of no interes Atherton any cerned. The and Richard Stou place near Clithero in London, who, at also carried on busin The plaintiff Mr. Stout atten in Manchester, and his partut Clithero. The defendant number of mousseline de tiffs' works, according to en cially provided for him ; upon t of much investigation, the eis ments should be made monthly printed, the last parcel which v The plaintiffs, not receiving pays ditions, detained the last parcel, action to recover the amount d Is. 6d. The defendant paid £9O liability to pay the remainder, on damaged in printing, and returne order of court) at a period when market. Ir. Stout to send a I that they were ng cross mencing semin tworks at they were un- The case closed at a quarter to five o't retired to consider their verdict they returned into court with wages £l5B Is. 6d. ; the bloc defendant .nd pgterns for the when a to go to the FAWCETT V. FIELDING A:, action referred to above. The dee' recover from the defendants comp tained from the plaintiff the 170 pieces of nz —This was the cross he plain After the statement of the cast, DUND &s, and the examination of the th Mr. DUNDAS said he was willing to leas , . to say what sum his client was entitled to, abide by his Lordships decision, without the tn. going through the facts. Mr. MARTIN assented on t' The JUDGE thought £lO wou►u addition to £9 which had been pr A verdict was then entered fr in traver to SEDUCTION seline des it to the judge , and he would OBEREND V. WATKINSON— which Mr. Wilkins appeared for t ley for the defendant, the parti, Mobberley, near Knutsford. WI dering their verdict in Fielding V. FAV s is a ( plaintiff, and Mr. Wort belong to the village of Mr.WourLuY requested the ( till Saturday. His learned friend, PY:A, tiff 4 unto to-morrow (Friday). In the,meantit ley's) client's solicitor, Mr. Roscoe, who s roners for Cheshire, was required to-morrc an inquest at Northwich [upon a femal been killed by her husband] ; so that it we ence to all parties if his Lordship would allow the case to stand over till Saturday. The JUDGE said that, under the circumstances, he had no objection. Ir. Wilkins, was for the )uld contir Nit. Wort of the co ing to hold d to have SWAINSON V. SWAINSON AND ANOTHER.—In this Case a verdict was take❑ by consent for the plaintiff for £15,000, subject to a reference. The Court adjourned a few minutes before six o'clock. THE CAUSE LIST The Cause List, when the Court rose la as follows: FIRST LIST. - SALFORD Plaintiff.—Nos. 1, _ 8, 20, 22, 23, 21, 25, 27, 30, 31, n, Defendant. —Nos. 8, 12, 16, 26, 33, 34, 3t, .Referred.—Nos. 28, 29, 43, 50. Withdrawn.—Nos. 19, 32, 41. Struck Out.—Nos. 45, 46, 48. SECOND LIST fling, stood 14, 15, 17, Plaintif—Nos. 1,3, 4,7, 8, 12 34, 39, 46, 55, 64, 65, 68. Withdrawn.—Nos. 2,5, 6, 9. 11 23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 41, 85, 86, 88. Referred. —Nos. 44 , 4 9. In the first list , the on ly causes ri special juries," Farrarr. liefiinne," and The former will be tried this mornin g 1 ted to occupy the whole day; the o Tuesday next. In the other list there are six s p eci al juries, and 38 common cases to be disp osed of. Easter ter m Com ' mences to-morrow week (Satu rda y ) when both the lord Judges must be in town ; in the ntiantime the y ha ve plenty of occupation here. - or trial are two Friday) and is e-x-1.)-ec. CHESTER AS-LZES CROWN COURT--:,_ uEsnAI (Before Mr. Justice 14; ILLIAAIS.) Michael Mahar, aged 36, John Br 35, and John Hopkins, 23, were c house of Peter Woods, at Capanhursi; moneys to the amount of £lO. [We reported this case very fully brought before the magistrates at The jury found Michael Mahar acquitted the rest. The two were sentenced to fifteet On the application of the Attorn ordered Superintendent Boughey, Birkenhead police, to be rewarded tor rie exercised in the apprehension of he or J, •efrom aners were e s -Gene and R one of ti CIVIL SIDE. (Before Mr. BARON MAUL The Learned Judges this morning egehanget to Mr. Justice Williams being cow parties in a case tried. The whole proceedin 6 were of a very uninteresting character in this Court connected w lids. a NISI PRIUS COURT.--AVEDNESDAI Before Mr• Jus WILLIAMS )wever, LOVELL U. BOYD AND UTU case Messrs. Jarvis and We Mr. Evans and Mr. Temple fc was brought to recover the value 01 ~,, t , .li, a .--- large corn _ mer .., wheat which had been sold to the plain chant, residing at Bilston, in Staffordshirpre, from the d weheat fen dants who are corn merchants in Liveool. The , that the was sold by a person named Pratt, and ordered by him to be sent to the order of the plaintiff by the defendant. On this a a s nd that order it was shipped at Liverpool and transmitted s t t o op P p r e e d st b o y Brook, in this county, where it was lodged in the war house of the Duke of Bridgewater, having been brought there in action was, one of the Duke's lighters. At this place it was the defendants in consequence of some disagreement with Pratt, and refused to be delivered up to the plaintiff, who commenced his action for the recovery of it against the trus o tees of the Duke of Bridgewater, but thataction was stopped on a judge's order, and directed to be commenced against the goodspr esen were e d r e e f e s n t d o apnpt:ti wThillsetdienfeaccoeurtasethoef countermand had been given to the order by p ratt. , it a a peared, however, that the trustees of the Duke of Bridpia water were in the habit of acting as warehousemen, and such received the goo d s i a question into their warehouse as hold to the order of the plaintiff. On this the learned judge tp ruled that at ta n a the goods reached the warehouse, was at an end, that there bad been no countermand, the and directed the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff, •and, however the defendants liberty to move to set it aside giving the court above should be of opinion that he was v.,.„„n case Accordingly a verdict was entered for tl mages £768. ury.) In this rind plaint The actin or the AN SLECTION BILL e plaintiff—da- PARRY v. MAINWARING• S. J.)--This brought by Win. Parry, the landlord of th w e a n s Arms Inn, Holt, in the county of Denbigh, to ~..I amount of a bill from the defendant, who is th em the Denbighshire Burghs, for expenses inc last general election. The whole urred e covered was £122 N. 2d., part of Mlgl , paid; but the balance due—namelFi; ! e had were in less quantities than 20; •,,,,,,." first that , be never promised to il,si ; t) 2 • ' therefore, under the tippling act, 5; .', i . tied to recove r ; and, thirdly, that t , voters during an election for the 1 Mr. Jervis and Mr. Welsby we V. Williams for the defendant. The trial of the cause occupie the day, and the reading over sec of particulars created no little an instance, there was a ball at w ni hiel s ent, at whic h was supplied ne glasses of brandy and water, and were paid to a fiddler and harper CO Mr. V. WILLIA MS contendec orders given to supply the l i q u or defendant had already paid. 1 leaving tbe court, found a verdic £52 N. 3d., the amount sought ti The cases tried in the Crown Manic, were of so trivial a nature notice. --- .nt sc ,;01): th, 9 ext t worth at one time, an was lnd therefoieillegA t plaintiff, and MI portion if the items of the bit 31Z:lat in the court; fo ❑ for t icutiles of pop, and 15s Wlended to enliven th lnd been n ), which th 'er, withou all, damage to deserve publi The cases tried in the cou r t s great public interest. ere not of and pus piece of, LE s 0 0:f the 16th j tl E ie lv t c h E o e L llect e i t o ' n o sale tht gst f t o h r e ei l_id c d o e l r t o a u se r d -street, for a larg it lin is en wow when a"rin t g he of g t o h o u b t w s tFt i h i h y v a l eeli rerinhrc workmanshipl l o c efih o r o r f nw' rn A e t os i ‘ p fs:t ac e ‘ t P e g c l i . r s e e al ttrlmoreycsnd celebrated et amongst n o i r amongst tht w m a a s r a y b Q o n o t e e t o n beof Scots, sold t s t o price, rescued it ; and it is it n , land, as formerly land. It is the identicala amongst t was made by order of Ladyiewel worn in memory of her husband, Margaret and Regent of Scotland, who Matthew opposed him in religion. was mut workmanship, is of fine The jewel, gold, in the two inches long, and nearly two inche surface, which i opens in front, there is are three small rubies and an emerald. there is a sapphire in the shape of a ruby, emerald, and sapphire. The coroi. Victory and Patience. There are also jewel, representing Faith and llope. The figures, which are very elaborate, are of •, enamelling. Mete is the following.ler " Sal obtain Victoria in yo;- Quha hopis stil const:,-..._ .. The coronet and little heart may below ; within the coronet are tln M. L. 5." with a crown of laurel o verse of the coronet within are two lwa by two arrows, bound by a wreath with a 11 ent h 0 ant, td, ' " When the li t tle heart is opt a sk, we Resolve . t w o bones are seen, and two han ds holdir. label, which hangs a horn with the rest of the legens. ' Dea dessolve.' On the other side of the jewel is the ;un sh, on a heliotropiurn, or sunflower, beautifully ena, wiled; m oon and stars are also represented. There are a salmi der in the flames, a pelican feeding, her young with her 1)10, a shepherd, a traveller, a dog, and a bird, and a phoenix, , emblematical, with a legend— " My stait to them I may compac For you qulia is of Bontes rare. ' When the whole heart is opened, on the reverse are 9 men in Roman armour fighting. An executioner holdingee n two woman by the hair with a cuttle axe, as about to de • a her; two frightful jaws, out of which issue three c.,spitate flames. The figure of Time is seen drawing - elxstres i n supposed to be Truth, from a well; and a fe ma with a fire in which many crosses arc burnit; three legends, "Ze seem al my , n esur „ F. : lair, " and " Gar tell my Reifies.' ..T" whole-I.Ym g 35 exqu s worked. and is one of the most ex ' art of the age. .nary Ifttains of formed one of :rry Ii 11, and miner, by Mr. ind attc en bought iineas. It of her about On the sorted by ioined g a naked fi There are