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

t 1, , c Jere .0e hail...crow I Three of them we...o y tinged with blood, sh() the (dottier which I fourid to the prisoner- ' Vent to the prisoner beeansc he told he said he wanted to see Mr. ‘VoodB, Lis c „std not hing to him before I tare t ~ i s i WAtaieeteen, feloblokVelY i'-'1()hell ' ll ' Al •• ~ t h e person of the ..81 . . intent to viola,. prisoner also stood chatgeu t :; tl „l .lB e t a lll te il , 6 a . l ( l l, l t t.l e t6 e i lt ,,' e il le, i n g . i l 0 tl . _, , n 1: d E l l! i c i l e t n F i 'ir i ln irl i v i a va l , i . w w i i t f. l d t' e others with for the abetting. e It appeared, front the evidence .. The next day I i of jo i i i , , ,,.k i . u u r rnivii ; and the first ~ knocked at the etli-door, ! with . one or the morning of elaster. • that between twelve and ~ . a is nde shdated the saute female, an a. , aiding wished to at the door. She had gone, to bed, herself .t . . th.. some- „Il i) , I made a noise , .inu . s,_,. One of them afterwards got in o fol ly, e !prosecution,.) , iDecember, they went to the prosecritrifsho±senililnlyd 1 the -tot I ' being in (i t' " v t' into her bedroom, and was immediately into was prese n t. He said _ mac, present. I then went for Mr. Woods ,but a o back win 0,, was from home. I told tri iri •i• final.Ae I 'returned Isj ' from Mr. Woods' I i ' the ' l, while the others stood by in rst underw Ii o t l e i entered t e w r e n d i d a g w ot , et!a. met .tile. Greenall, the inegstraie. I 1 . I lowed by the . other three. ompi,sheil the offence stated, d some case s to dispose of before him. I then told the 1 a "' e and said nothing. Ile pressed her • . rrhefi the room, the act she screamed out, and prisoner Mr. Woods se f • home. \‘ lien I went into i she ' i not ere out. After .: the cell, Mr. Greene!! a • s ri" prisoner , cow, , in, who were ►e I t in by two of the party, dowe so that nas at the door, ‘ iiiid the two neighoours came could see hire I . then left the cell. said prisoner :iglu, knocked at the . 1 Lee, and Lovatt were ap r w ished soon after, and lie said when I went to away laughing. Ilawkesworth : him that he ee • tdered himself to the is d te t? See I‘ll.. Greenall, whom I told what who opened the door from the inside. They all then went i prehended. Griffiths afterwards sui t ee, 11,1:eg‘,1,,iritsaolii:akesal tt hen we got into the cell, the prisoner i _ _, iee. in the house, but said being I"senhedoor. Ilawketworth, a stateinent, but, Mr. Greenall cautioned him police. prosecutrix let them in herself by . t ageinst makin •• Ile admitted ~ i ',,i'l, lt Waii' ' t twice. Ihe prisoner turned to tee, and for the prosecution, tri.. _ , ~, me that did the deed. I hope you will be a I li e 1 when they were taken. Dr. Brown was got out of the -Liu to me. I then stopped 1; thee stated, t' t he' I Lovett, and Lee also admitted being present et tl e house, ono and cautioned him. __- and Mr. - Wilkins defended the prrisoners, andfrom went r to the Bird -ill-hand, and had a Riess of rum, aili a l li• d th ' itt she had quer ja.h_ ~ w.t 1 his issvi e had another ; that he left the Bird_ witnesses, that she was addicted to drinking ; 1 a d found her alone with '".'. 1 , i l k wife, when the bells ware rineing a little witnesses, that the proeccutrix had parted f her husband ; 1 the case after Six o c h i • ; that his wife had use Ihe jury stopped on the road, because he had s wheii t been brow i beati i n ie g i i i i i , : d ii 1 her husband in his own addressing ho' them, and acquitted all seen nwaft Wigazi; that he had oicea'sionotoa go girl i n s t v o i whom field, . !yelled with a married woman, wh , o , la 1 when Mr. Wilkins was t ee — ;,fraillowed him,and and began to brow-beat him again ; the prisoners. alild'`.l,twaUielalreljuinped uo, pulled his knife out of his pocket, I CROWN COURT,—SATURDAY, be did it, no I •in the throat ; he said he did not know how me that afterriuw he ROBBERY. indicted for got out of the field ;he afterwards told :. Before Mr, STARICIE, Q.C.,it the Grand Jury-room. crown, outofher he hail done the deed, he look three half • house of :lane Daniels, at iallord, in the oti hint, was th pocket ;he said the knife which I found Samuel Dixon, aged 36, and John Riley, were . how he e knife he used. He said he did not know haeing entered the . got out of tile field. M k conducted the prosecution. prisoner and h • and other property. Mr. . on e did not say anything. The clothes were SiIoWLI to the month of November last, and stealing therefrom two gowns Cross . lne; tvl--"uiined.— Inc. Tilliecloln,fotatit.,ld upon him trying the door Lie said that li stabbed her with the The prisoners were undefended. that Dixon had been observed. was con duce ,in ariseererto a question from It appeared . Prisoner upon the li was, in consequence, placed _ otter the clothe s ar whilst I was 'mil es who were present when I showed the of the prosecutrix's house on the night the robbery e not here. Th ey b a d ea „„, t o him witted. A watt; the prisoners,short time afterwards, a d the shirt?' eto fetch Mr. \Voods. ( This witness pro- premises, and bulb prieoner mere' • clothes, lied candlestick , upon whic several handleshad been tied up ready to Mrs. Ili }cast cast his eyes several times.) upon them ; and e was recall • ' h the were found therein and secured. Skeleton keys were found ' st both the sires a id Wai the , . called dad shewn the candlestick, which be. convened away. Pri soner' s . ' as the prisoner's William Edwardo;litaY une- prisoners. in upon the serious offence seae also identified the clothes The jury returned . a verdict .of guilty again ton on the 28th Nov u dainore.--1 was assistant to Mr. Gar convicted, g sentenced Dixon t o n B uckle:, •,land exarnihed ou that day the body of of which the prisoners had been ld Riley to twelve months' cut incised of tit% •found a large wound M - Mr. STARTUP, after comment the neck, a to transportation for seven years, at three niches ; carotid artery of •°flg, and tw o • depth, The • i nment. impr so in , BURGLARY. Iv.. . the left side was iodpipe was conipl eI • cut nearly through. rite Partly a sta b , and 't . } severed. It appeared to have been was caused b• tl partly a cut. The death of the deceased Ilse , n. ,. e t y le sudden loss of blood, caused by the 't I. t h. i _a o. ' a t low Produced would cause such a wondwT‘ wound, ' e,'c,uu..t. potar from the clothe s to have been an tr There narnie,s_t!l an advanced state of preeancy. y Jame eixi:teined.—l have been twelve years in ice.pract corouer. Afterthe re in the charge had been gone into, the prisoner eautiuued titiieinent, which was taken down by my father, who re ad over and risoner very particularly. It was afterwards the cor er, ~ , _ en • t r i 'l.' he following deposition was then read got :cWilp oftenrichurch last Sunday afternoon, arid afterwards and I told I ; iny wife wished rne to take a walk with her, ~,, ler to put her bonnet on. She went up stairs and "El so, and • ' e °l and a hOle shawl. She told Mrs. Rigby to leave the of thel va ' ,, 4 ,',, l4 e , perhape, should not be long. We went out so we weLi . door ; and she said, ' We will go this way ;' and pooria .urtt‘uvp the bill to the Bird-e-th'-hand. She had been hid ,t:i,i'lled in or three days, but felt better in the afternoon, we Were coating:.a walk. We had each a glass of rum. When at least I thou oht we heard the St. Helens coach coining, Helens eoacight it was it, and I asked her if it were the St. been out nt ,' , nd we went on after it towards home. I had eailf.ei't_w work a month last Monday. I belonged to the ths oael ° , ,; 7, and had got my card and went or, tramp. I went ollrrieeti ;rtoenchester, and called at her aunt's svhere we were cad sweetheart On our way home I was telling her about an lo ade her .e airt of min, then I had met at Wigan. So it wo u l d i no ii , .ea I°tl3 and she gan upbraiding me, and said I tbat g • t at allY,oody rather than her. We were going past a ,,,, , tae -place leading into that field by the New Houses, sh e follo wed rather short, and I went into the field, and I threatened Joe l , still upbraiding me about this woman, and not what about i;Nztiastilr would do at lier if she did not hold her st r let 'iu F ° II so, thajTsall nonsense ; and I was so mad at pulled my knife out of my pocket and ~,, . 4 il l er." ,:%•inr'. j , s the case for the prosecution. riot attet'rki Isles addressed the jury for the prisoner. He would the deaf Pt to dispute the fact that the blow which caused but h ew u as. of the deceased had been given by the prisoner, nut be colitguiltY of manslaughter and not murder. It could tented an ' ehrled that up to that fatal moment he had enter plain thatthing but the strongest affection for her, but it was sior: e i tea _ u , at times she laboured under a strong degree of ex ". ityeand was so, to a considerable extent, on this ocea evinced!, dwelt upon the jealousy the deceased had always wool, ,tnrough the careless levity of her husband, and which hid .`l._Oe aggravated by her love for him • the fondness he ttiahe'w.aYS displayed for her • the absence ' of any previous m oo !' the good humour that'existed between them to the . . ~,_•_";eut of the catastro h • p e , the probability that so public a t''ce would not I oe eri e _ . lave been chosen had the crime of murder Cit,4 buntea?plated ; that her jealousy might have been ex coach ,y seeing him notice Some female the . St. Helens on . „ , that this exc't • ' '''e re to w , • , i ement might have been increased by hi ru m . a men she drank at the Bird-in -hand ; that the noise tio,LY.O II d been heard might have been that of their (.1. ta. . aau , that she mi ht b •. 143; arid th tin • g as a taken the scissors out to stab sta le! , ~ a llls passion he suddenly seized his knife and tl, ,^ 'ler. In support of the latter 1 •heP d d iypot. esis aea e to re tact of flan blood 'atid, are a being on the shirt wristband of the left p revhy a .. to the nature of the wound. Had he gone there le t , „ t i e 'lY to take her life, would he Lave thrust the cloth bee44:lo,7eound to staunch the blood ? but the thing having cealreent ' ' aaeuld he not naturally try every means of con wee, , .1, The more lie • losed her, the more indignant Were abe at her aspersions, until he had become, ae it te e , e ' cerupletely maddened, and struck the fatal blow. Under hrld reumetances the crime would be that of manslaughter, eot leo murder. LIT "u Prisoner fre ue • shed j a _ e q ntly s tears during the delivery of , e net s s very pathetic and powerful address. p ri Lu 1 arned JoDGE said there could be no doubt that the i ''ener h ad Pr e rf i been the cause of the death of his wife, and that th ee'r to red e re • uce the crime from murder to manslaughter, bin tn oat have been sufficient provocation to excuse the test,-''''' He did Plated • liot see any such provocation, as the law coil jury te ,in the evidence on this ease. It would be for the tjf mudeconsider whether the blow was inflicted in a moment a44 /04. b a nger, or that it resulted from a lurking malus Nvent thro r°tlght dudey provocation. His Lordship then *IN. TP,lgh the ce, commenting upon it as he went on e Th ee r athe r concealment of the matter told against the pri ao fa r 4 7,'. . than in his favour. Unless her jealousy went it w ould ' P instigate her to use violence towards her husband, tig'ioner, sob no no mitigation of the offence charged. The pri atreci:lts.confession, had said nothing about his wife liar eea the hirm which he naturally would have done had such 'ion d e eB e• If no more took place than w as on t h at occa io aet no t bee'ci:thed :laiaughter by the prisoner, the offe nce was murder, and /Nilti saver t° a question from a Juror, the JUDGE said it "Iler h ad a_e.ho difference in point of law whether the pri -I,l.uestoo c_`_uiple his statement early or late. In reply to a ord s. Cr° i another Juryman, his LORDSHIP said that no seaeatiouever strong, could, in the eye of the law, b e a ,A. bailiff•l' • Neil, laving been sworn to keep the Jury in some con tented` and retired .. Pot, without meat, drink, tire, or candle,. t. ,_ at ten u • 4 ' , lt pa st ,_ !mutes past two o'clock, and were absent until Th e o t wo 0 clock, when the • returned a verdict of Guilty. Prisaojt)retnan said ). like d the Jury would to recommend the ~, rto mere ••f ae1••"e Je a , ) I y had the power. ettNied toga d they had the power, but whether it could toThe p or .L_ 14 as !mother matter. „t44e,ratie,,.`"Vi said that was for his Lordship's own con ,,,,Lcirient Tie founded their recommendation on his own 4 he _. "n statubug confessed he could not see the grounds on his Ili, Orient. ii,"ttat e °lth e s lttp k as ed for the depositions before . the ma ste e, e- 'um reti 1 , .. 55 4, absent few to confer with Mr. Justice Coltman. PI _called o a leW Minutes, and on his return the prisoner awful slime the black P l u— p r oclamation was made, and the Judge a•, l !' sent eoe , t'll Upon his heed and proceeded to pass the just theot tiocelootetleath in the following terms fel Pronounce, I Y : a jury of your fellow -countrymen has . theT"rder• t' a verdict that you have been guilty of vril oh,Y wer e h oe _ , a.a painful duty they had to perform, but „4"gatitt hoe to discharge it in accordance with the solemn e ae : "f teili o their oath. I also hare the melancholy neces -110 at j ustly g You that for that crime of which you have been feiTleed---yottvieted, for no other verdict could be pro toll . Th_ must die an ignominious death upon the scar , eld e ..,e urY have r ecommended you to the favourable , 0 the 'goon e f the , seolee Pon ee..o‘ ,.. e '-ourt, oda the statement which you made e,unieBevere pru n v ie r,. thinking that you may leave received t hat t se e that •ocation from our wife. I inuet own that I e,. Yoe we _ 3'ou had such provocation. I cannot consider j o c,tl tee :you (e instified by any words which she may have _ 0 Ehe estmat'No words in the eve of the law, nor ought they ti ouBr h e 4 lon of common sense, could palliate your raising eouleteea hgeti.,)!•oo barbarous a manner, and inflicting a wound th e e end ati l e T a t . eternity• All I can say in reply to their re etteeeretar" la,. that it shall be immediately forwarded to thlr itt io ,, vcdlYiX .state, who, I have no doubt, will pay it that ,vl4e4aY rejig it deserves. I earnestly implore you not to trit,st',Ynq Rtandl'ee UP.On this circumstance. The crime of Re old had , convicted is of serious magnitude, and you , 4 `u e id eat i,rtereat brutality even to tell your wife that you, tha w, aariealrie, . hro at, but still more to do it. Circumstances ao ‘ Vou r o ; . t . len the course of this investlgetion, which show • ig ,' . l by Prev i° have been completely steeled —most pro- • ,ova up t`,.;,_vieeis vicious habits —to become a murderer. You to urn' wi ;' o 4 'ent to the unfortunate creature—tile wife of your lali'lake h er Tri You ought to have cherished and protected.-, hiatauroitlt'eace with God for the errors which she may area `Y of th e ed ,' and of which we all have some ; but the hu it app y v. laW gives you time than •gave your eai or, let" . ... more you a4;',o,_ ee yo u ,_ u You have yet some few days to live, and - . I lif e h a. a? se them in repenting of the crime for which a,, v e e led to t'Oe.en forfeited, a y other which I fear etteritdhe advii'eeetormation of sobrutal a character. You will j oat _ u a ,the .._ !.assistance and counsel of the clergyman who pet r c a etio n. 7 . °: , t and I entreat you to cultivate, under his pe rti a_tio e of ;L B ate of mind which, two days after the per (leo". I ree ' e eed, led you to unbosom yourself to other a av , ee, thy oMmend you to ask that pardon for your great tes i l ' t ti r , Y , h l ie u h g I! the secy of God and the merits of the th e ~.0 a a ,, ~ canno granted to you here, and now pro tia, Cl "w, who uot my sentence u ponbut the sentence of - at °"e rninist eoa ae .e 4 0 , 11 e a er I am. It is, that yon be taken to ti , nierit palace emence you came, and from thence to some ba d` You be'die_e.of execution, that you be hung by the neck le q i ,! . ° s eu t do n and that after the space of one hour your et c yo, ~"'a n and buried within the precincts of the gaol, F,'D 04 .yotir o s ve been confined, and may the Lord have beirr.Prlsoner oul. 4,,,, , Y .. 1n g ,i 0 vi_received the sentence with great firmness, [a,_Trorn th e Pb le signs of emotion, and walked quietly ef _alit prevas dock with the gaoler tn w "tts th e . "' t° the court the ladies, v. wi t h e _ re wer . Jury coming into co , , the b. 'raw , i ri , great to present, were requested er ehartged wcorisequenc of a prisoner being placed at 12; ,Chi an indelicate offence.] Or c hOrd tOe hit s% a Vlor, an ill-lu?'". • old man, 'e: stat e n ceel ar se of 75 ° 0 ing, dirty, decrepit a tot- A e let nie nt ' .4 Placed i ~ Wes earned to the bar in n two • Ni l , h ' with 144, n a chaiT. lie was charged o . re. ltdon a; ii__ad Cereal 1 e o g. at Warrington, brutally and pp e. ce, Neb o v. _ .0 nexion with a little girl, named Mary ed 'red, a me ,'" only six years old ' The prisoner was, tit tle . were h'"ooltnaser and the * * Hs whom he had pol l's 14to, arr,.wtt sehola , rs ! One indictment only was a leo --, su Vita e pro ceed ..e offence being full • made out, the other te e , eti oo ,co with. Te • whollyunfit for p ti ,'' at 01. . h e . ) , di. _ e details are that ex teaate lia_iee jedian'..:',-otied a degree of depravity judge ta"'arlr, the es'eet4V°ll and disgust. The learned 141, it tha t. ri ob c i i ,' .rentence of transporlaizon for I: 11 1_ ! I,l st h e lYae t oo !er a a I Y, all who had heard the case time takenu v es t , tl 117 8 ", aB sailed I , ''", : On the prisoner being enthe J ''ate rh , e4ord e ha, hisses from man person i fei o ?ile G , ,. ' , it m ast I .. a r (1, that, though the feeling expressed COurt. eit v ,'iote de eeri, ee , 47 . oceeressed in due respect to the tar l e, Y a ase aulte4 ast, _harged with having, at Manchester,. , oil e ueufit gainst Crh wd. carnally known Mary . Ryan, a g " :' likielQt air fir publi c. Pl- The details, in this case also, triiiiii at _ea t ,, out ation. . The prosecutrix, it appeared, Ltal er t u Ptied t a e e. en she was assaulted, and, the Jin-y j‘‘' o r ioa,Z E r i.eria raa n e s r e, the prisoner was discharged. The sett, :43 ilak.k,__ ru t . ' 4 114 jv h . 36, hr eery Griffith, 21, George 4 Lee were Charged with having, ou u; , :. lie ha which h colinnuni v ery hea v y on his wind, e:ite to him. I told him I could no ny communication tiaht *- John Berry, aged 21, ;asinLiecl . for burglary at Egerton, a place in the neighbourhood of Bolton. Mr. Cross con ducted the prosecution. The prisoner was undefended. The prosecutor is a farmer named William Marsden, and it appeared that, on the 25th of August last, his son, on returning home in the evening, found the doors of the house open and the prisoner coming down stairs. He was immedi ately seized, and a saw, a chisel, and a crow-bar found upon him ; but uo opportunity had been afforded to him of carry ing any property away. Access into the house had been ob tained by the prisoner by the key, which was customarily left for the prosecutor's son when he staid out in the evening. The prisoner was found guilty, and he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. HOUSEBREAKING Benjamin Knowles. aged 31, and Raehael Knowles, aged 31, were indicted for breaking into the dwelling house of Thomas Crook, at Tonge, near Bolton, on the 17th of Janu ary lost, and stealing therefrom a copper kettle, tour brass pans, and other articles. The circumstances of the entry were uninteresting; and the prisoners were detected through offering. the pans for sale at a furniture broker's. The female prisoner was acquitted ; the other prisoner was found guilty, andsentenced to imprisonment for nine months. BURGLARY Joseph Webb, aged 22, andPe/e; Campbell. aged 23, were charged with a burglary, in the house of Mr. Robert Walms ley, a pawnbroker, at Manchester, on the 6th of March last, and stealing therefrom two hundred silk handkerchiefs, some coral 'beads, and from £4O to £5O in copper and silver. Webb pleaded guilty to the indictment, and the other priso ner was found guilty by the jury. The circumstances were of an ordinary description ; and the prisoners were sentenced to transportation for fifteen years. BURGLARY. Richard Fitzgerald, aged 36, was indicted for entering the dwelling-house of Sarah fielding, in Manchester. - The house of the prosecutor was entered on the 24th of August last, and a quantity of rum, gin, brandy, and wine taken away, together with a small sum of money. The pri soner was observed to make an entrance by breaking open the shutters. ,He was found guilty, and sentenced to nine months' imprisonment. Several other cases, of no interest, were tried during the day, and the Court adjourned at half-past six. NISI MID'S COURT.—SATURDAY. (Before Mr. Justice CouriktAN.) FARRAR v. DE7LINE.—The trial of this case, which oc cupied the whole of Friday, continued this morning. Many witnesses were examined in support of the alleged partnership between the defendant and Thomas Todd : their testimony went into very great detail, but it was interesting only to the parties themselves and the creditors of Todd. The case for the plaintiff closed exactly at twelve o'clock, having occupied altogether about thirteen hours. Mr. Du NDAS then rose on the part of the defendant, and in a very able speech, which lasted for two hours and a half, he minutely examined the evidence by which the partnership was sought to he established, and contended that the proof was far too indifferent to fix the defendant with liability. Several witnesses, merchants and warehousemen in Man chester, were then called, who proved that they had had deal ings with Thomas Todd, whom they trusted alone, and not with the defendant. They had, indeed, never known th , tt they were in partnership. Mr. BAINES replied very ably, after which • The ii/DGE stimmed up the evidence at much length. The Jury retired at five minutes past six o'clock to consider their• verdict. After an absence of half an hour, they re turned into court with a verdict for the plaintiff of £1163 I Is. 3d.. SUDUCTION - . • OVEREND V. WATKINSON.—This case, which was ex pected to possess considerable interest, " went off," much to the disappointment of a great number of court loungers, Mr. Wortley, on the part of the defendant, consenting to a ver dict with £25 damages, costs 40s. None of the circumstances were entered into. CROWN COURT .-MONDAY. (Before Mr. BARON PARKE.) THE ARSON CASE& TRIAL OF THOMAS HENRY. Thomas Henry, 21, was indicted for having, on the 14th of October, at Liverpool, feloniously, maliciously, and un lawfully set fire to a certain dwelling-house of his, one Anne Mansfield•being at the time of the felony within the dwelling house. Another count charged the prisoner with setting fire to a certain shop of his, situate in Liverpool, with intent to defraud Thomas Richter, secretary of the association called the Phoenix Insurance Company. Another charged him with having.set fire to the premises with intent to defraud his cre ditors. There were other counts varying the form of the in dicttnent: Mr. Adolphus, Mr. Paget, and Mr. Fitzgerald conducted the prosecution. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. James defended the prisoner. Mr. ADOPHUS opened the case at very great length, ob seriing . that the charge which the jury had heard stated in the number of counts, reduced itself to two counts, which it would• be alone necessary for him to mention —one, that the prisoner set fire to his premises with intent to defraud the In surance Company and his creditors and other persons; and the other count charged him with setting fire to his dwelling. house, one Ann Mansfield being at the time in the dwelling. house. That was a felony also. The same facts would prove lioth cases. The learned counsel observed that he should not lay much stress on the latter count, as it was not supposed that tile prisoner, had any intention of injuring Mansfield. She in fact escaped from the premises shortly after the fire was dilscovered. The witnesses were called to prove the facts of the case. William Fox produced a plan of the premises, which hi; had taken, and which he declared to be a correct one. Cross-examined by Mr. WILRINS.—I - lad taken it on the premises, and had taken notice of the doors and premises, but did not observe any extraordinary current of air. The neighbourhood was very thriving. The shop frontage was 15 feet 11 . inches ; would call it a third. rate shop. On t he route from, St. James' to G rea t H omer - street, t h e nearest coach-stand ' would be Scotland.place. Joseph Mansffeld examined by Mr. PAGET.—Knew the prisoner and had been in his service as errand boy. He k ept a draper's shop opposite St. James's Church. Entered his service about five or six months ago. Closed the shop on the 14th October last, about eight o'clock, and also closed the door, and received directions to go up stairs for prism ier's hat and coat.. He took a light with him, and then we, it up stairs and brought the things down. There were nine lights in the shop, four in'the window and the others in vitrious parts. The lights were :all out except two. Came down stair? and'put out the candle with an extinguisher, at id left it on the table. The two lights which were burning a ere at the middle of the back of the shop, and hanging fry im the roof, perhaps sir feet from .the ground. Put the pr,per on -the floor after he had lighted the candle, but did not see any sparks as'he pat his foot on it. Prisoner was then in the shop, and after getting the hat and coat, told witness to go down into the kitchen till he wrote a letter, and aft er being there about w quarter of an hour, prisoner called him and gave him a letter to take to the post. The shop ws.s then as usual, with the goods laid on the counters, whicli he had brought from the door and window, the other arty ties being in their places. • The goods consisted of Orleans and other articles, but there were none on the floor. Came out of the shop as soon as he got the letter, the prisoner o pening the door for him, but he (prisoner) remained, though'he appeared ready for coming out, as he had his hat on. Did not observe prisoner close the door, nor hear any sou.nd as hr; went away. The key was in the door on the inside, and 'prisoner was standing near it. Prisoner put out the gas, leaving one lighted as he was in the habit of doing. Did not know whe ther prisoner remained in the shop oc not. Witness then went down Park-lane, on his way to the post, about half past eight or nine, and met Cathedra; Evans at the top of New Bird-street, which is about 20() yards from the shop. On getting to the top of Park-lane b,e heard an alarm of fire, but went on to the Post-office, anti afterwards returned to the shop, which was then in a blaze.; it might be half an hour after leaving it. Cross-examined by Mr. WILK' ss.—There is a great wind through the shop, and on the d ay in question was very full of goods, lines being placed across with goods hanging On them, which were left in that 'state all night. Some furni ture had -come in that day, and a short time before a very handsome sofa, also a bale of shawls on the Thursday, and some other goods. Took coals to the fire both morning and night oil that day. Prisoner always l e ft a li g ht b urn i ng at night when he went out. Examined by Mr. AD OLPIIUS.—The fire in the grate was left burning at the back part of the sho Proctor was not at home o n t h at. night, The p. • current of air in the shop was only when the doors were ope n . The shop had a better dis play of shawls than usual, which were hung on lines round the slum about a yard fr3rn the light. Did not know of any woollen goods being in t'ae shop. Catharine E vans exarained bMr. FITGEIiALD.—On the we day of the fi re was with Ann Ra y deliffe opposite the prisoner's shop, and she sent h ex hu d t o ti w rig n to Crosby -street a little aft er r e eight, and t h ey up prisoner's shop. On her return met the shop kmy, and came back. to Ann Radcliffe, and tae shop was then shut up, and soon after prisoner came out : it was nine o'clock. He was alone, and went in the direc';:ion of Great George•street. Soon after Ann Radcliffe said, " Look at Ffenry's shop, there is a light and a great deal of smoke," and sent witness after the prisoner, but could( not overtake him. When the prisoner came out of his sho p 'he said, " Go o d n i g h t A nn —l a m going a courting." Did not see him again till after ten. Cross-examined by Mr. WiLscirla.—ffad seen furnitu re tate:a into th e s h op tha i day, and a sofa a wee k before ; some goods also came that day in a cart. Examined by Mr. Anorneuus.—Soma goods were brought by s.)tne boys, a n d no one was there at t h a t time but prisoner. Alin r_icsoner. A:3n Rad c liff e, examined by Mr. AooLynus• 1 shop. a fruit .stand i n S t. J ames ' s-place, opposite t h e prisoner's On i?riday, th e 14 t h , saw prisoner come out o f hi s shop about half an hour a f ter i t bad been shut up, o'clock, and h e said, " Good night, Ann,, perhapsbout nine and told her that direction of he was going to Evertor'. He then went hi the Greet George's- s t reet, and about five m i n utes after saw halo:cc coming out o f t h e crevices or t h e door, and sent the last witness after hi m . She then gave t he alarm, and saw the pollee coming up at the time, and sent one of them to the Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Had always said there were distinct fires. fie never said he could not tell whether the fire was all in one place or not. There was no water thrown in through the door that he knew of. \Vas quite impossible that he could he mistaken. Joseph Nicholson called. Examined by Mr. PAGET.— \Vas on duty as police constable at the time of the fire, and broke into the shop. Saw two separate fires ; one was near the window, and the other at the far end of the shop, and both appeared to be distinct and proceeding from the floor. The fires were two or three yards apart, and the goods on the counter were burning. There were shasls laying louse on the counter, and other goods strewed about the shop. Threw some some water on the fire, but did not succeed in extinguish ing it. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Did not see any one come and break open the door with a shutter. Broke open the door with his shoulder, assisted by others of the police. Examined by Mr. ADOLPH US.—Did not know the pre mises. There were a great many persons about, but did not see any one break open the door. Thomas Ormsby, a police-officer, examined by Mr. Fere- GE RALD.—Was at the fire on the night in question, and as sisted in throwing water. The fire appeared to be near the window, rising up from the ground, and there were cloths lying about the floor, but could not say what they were. Did not see any gas light burning. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—The panel, he thought, was forced by the shoulder, but could not be very certain. Remained there all the time. Only saw fire in the left-hand corner, and had a view of the whole shop. The fire was burning about three-quarters of an hour. The fire burnt more fiercely when the door was broken open. Ralph Morris examined by Mr. ADOLPH vs.—Was a con stable, and on the night of the fire got in through the back door, and went from thence to the shop. Saw a great blaze at the side near the window on the right, on the same side as the fire-place, which appeared to proceed from the floor; there was also a small fire on the left, which appeared to come from the ground. Saw Ann Mansfield, acid gave the alarm. Was only in the shop a few seconds. John Smith examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was a car-driver, and was called off the stand in Scotland-road on the 14th, the day of the fire, by the prisoner, and on arriving opposite the Adelphi, he put his head out of the coach window, he told him to drive on, as he (prisoner) thought his shop was on fire. Set him down at Nile-street. Cross-examined by Mr. Wrescries.—Di not say prisoner was the first to tell him of the fire. Alex. Al'Donald examined by Mr. FITZGERA I D.—Was on duty in Scotland-road about twenty minutes past nine, and heard of the fire. Ronald M`Donald examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS.-1% as an inspector of police, and at the fire on the 14th. Saw the prisoner there, and asked if he had not shut up earlier than usual, and he replied that he had not shut up until half-past eight. He kthe prisoner) said he did not hear of the fire till he got to Everton-brow. Prisoner told Leverett he was in sured for £lOOO in the Phoenix, but did not know the amount of his stock, but his books would show it. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Considered it his duty to ask the prisoner questions, and get information, because it was a duty that was required of them, and that they were to report on it. It was his duty to report on the extent of prisoner's stock. William Leverett, police-inspector, examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was at the fire, and saw the prisoner about quar ter-past ten, and he said he belonged to the middle shop, and on being asked if he would be a great loser, he replied " Yes," and said he was partially insured. He said he was at Ever ton-brow when he heard of the fire. lie said he was last in the shop, and had closed it up at half-past eight. Prisoner did not appear to be agitated; his manner was that of indif ference, Thomas Brailsford, examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.—Was a clerk to Widow Sutton and Sons, agents to the Phoenix. On the 17th October, prisoner came to the office for a claim for damage done to his premises. He produced a paper claiming £l,OOO, and some conversation took place, in which the prisoner said he had locked up about half-past eight, and put all the lights out but one, at the back of the shop. Be said he had a letter to write, and after sending the boy off with it, he went out, and was going to Great Homer street, when he beard the first alarm of fire in Rodney street, and on getting to the New Haymarket, he heard it was in St. James's-place. He said be then took a cab, and went straight home, where ha arrived about half-past nine. Prisoner said he was sure he had put out all the lights, and there were no shawls lying near the light. Said he had in creased his stock very much. Thomas Fresh, police inspector, proved the serving of the prisoner with a notice to produce the policy of insurance. Brailsford's examination resumed.—The particulars of in surance are entered in a slip book, and a duplicate given to the varties insuring; it is afterwards entered on a sheet, and sent. to London, and when returned is finally entered on the company's books. Cross-examined by Mr. 11 , 11.1[ra:sc.—There was some con veesation about the fire. Would not swear that prisoner said there were no shawls near the fire. Prisoner was taken in to custody on the Monday after he had made his claim. By the JUDGE.—Prisoner did not say what he attributed the fire to. Hugh Sutton examined by Mr. Atmeenfis.—Was agent for the Phoenix Insurance Company. The entries in the order book were made by him. Prisoner was insured to the amount of £l,OOO, including stock and fixtures, household furniture, &c. Went to St. James's-place at the time to see the premises, and found the property referred to in the state ment read. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Was called on by Mr. Dowling to give evidence. The Phoenix Company had not agreed to pay the costs of the prosecution. Samuel Fern, examined by Mr. PAGET.—Was clerk in the Phoenix Company at London. This witness detailed the practice of effecting insurances from fire as stated by the pre ceding witness. An order sheet was also produced, in which the policies had been entered. Thomas Clarke, an apprentice in the office of widow Sut ton and Sons, proved the entry of the policy and the date of its receipt, which was the 18th of March, 1842. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—Copied the entry from the policy. Samuel Fern recalled.—The policy would be sent down to the office in Liverpool as soon as effected. Richard Chander, a clerk in the Piicenix Fire-office, Lon don, produced the book containing a copy of the policy, which had been effected for £lOOO. His LORDSHIP considered that sufficient evidence had been produced to show that the policy had been effected. Thomas Branch, auctioneer, examined by Mr. ADoe- PHUS.--Knew the prisoner, and had received some goods from him for sale in August last, and also in September. They were stock linen drapery goods, amounting in value to £5OO, and the instructions were to sell without reserve to the amount he had advanced, which was £195, and afterwards to sell only for the prices marked in the invoices. The par cels received on the 22nd September appeared as though they had not been unpacked, but had come direct from the manu facturers. Some of them were returned unsold, and de livered to a carter by prisoner's directions. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Persons of the highest respectability are sometimes obliged to adopt that plan. By Mr. ADOLPHL S.—lt was not usual to receive goods in that way from a retail dealer. Joseph Hodgson, auctioneer, examined by Mr. FITZ - GERALD.—Knew the prisoner, and received goods from him for sale in October. The goods consisted principally of stays and light articles of drapery, in value about £52. Philip William Denby examined by Mr. FITZGERALD.— Had had dealings with the prisoner, and supplied him with some of the goods sent to Mr. Branch for sale. Understood that the prisoner had assigned all his interest in the policy to his creditors on the day after the tire. James Egerton, packer to Messrs. Denby, proved the packing of the goods, and that they were sent by the pri soner's order. 'William Helby, stay manufacturer, at Portsea, deposed to supplying the prisoner with stays to the amount of £5l 9s. 6d., and had seen them at Hodgson's sale-room. Anthony Atcheson, clerk to Blackwell and Co., of Man chester, deposed to the prisoner being supplied with goods in September last, to the amount of £BO Os. 7d., consisting of Irish linens, lawns, &c., the same as part of those sent for sale to Mr. Branch. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Believed several of the prisoner's creditors had been subpoenaed by Mr. Dowling. John Knowles, a carter, examined by Mr. ADOLPH US. — On the 16th September took some bales away from the pri soner's shop. Had been sent by Mr. Shannon. Did not know what they were. George Fletcher, brushmaker, residing in Parliament-street, stated that he saw a cart come to prisoner's shop, about three weeks before the fire, and go away with a quantity of goods. Had also seen the prisoner's stock, which appeared to be principally prints and calicoes. Henry Ward, a police-constable, stated that he was left in charge of the premises after the tire was extinguished, and afterwards gave them up to the care of Samuel Fisk. They shirts, furniture,lwhich would consisted s p t r e L prints, were then given up to Maxwell, the inspector of salvages, of n list o f in t e l r i n a o r s t . ic c l i e e s c s k a s v i e L l s w e i C' e e r re a l a p d i e ec e ! e s t o e f cotton stockings, and 'union linens, also a small quantity of ,ywhich could not ha ve black satin, some ribands, linen, a blanket, and a smallpiece of cloth. He had had experience in cases of fire, and of opinion that there could not have been any quantity ten cloth or silk on rollers, the latter o s f i c , - , n be o e r n em fo a u i n n d s , o a f s s s , ll . k or o ,y n o ro r l o ler r s ie b a u n r s n c s io v t e i r been the case if any thing of that kind had been onee ther were mises ; some remains of silk handkerchiefs were there, but no stays. worth of goods on e JUDGE. the pre —Coul mi cot say the re would be £l,OOO iB, l y ie claim of the prisoner was the n p u t i n and read, which s. showed an amount of £l,OOO as the loss he sustained by the fire. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. WILKINS asked his Lordship whether he thought that there was any case. The JUDGE.—Oh, yos. Mr. WILKINs then addressed the jury on behalf of the pri soner, in a very powerful speech. Mr. Baron PARKE summed up. He said that the charge against the prisoner was that of bOing tire to his own house, back dOtth lott thei 04, 014 tAAt tbe 1 ittLi itt dfit b t)4 bit e indietditht hi, Aar - OA front door teas burning, Which was uhustly left. Had been with the eapitniollenct, because, notwithstanding the alteres hi the shop about two hours before the shop was closed. rion in the law, it was re felony to set en fire a bOUV,.! itr IThial Did not see ery fire made in the shop that day. there was any person at the time, and if in the result, the Cross-examined by Mr. Wisteiss.—The shop looked very jury should he of opinion that t h e e fe snee substantially in). hendsome, and every lady and gentleman admired it as they Patel to the prisoner at the har was made out, they would passed. The shawl s hung oil round tire door, and she have no digit uitv in finding him guilty on that count. Sub thought one of the shawls It td Oven rya}' with the draught oh staet:ally, the charge against him way that of setting fire to air and caught fire. Did not see any one go i n . There was his house, with intent to defraud the insurance company. a great draught of air through the shop. He (the leaaned Judge) could not attach any blame to the Examination returned.--Thinks it was the shawls that had learned Counsel for his opening statement. He could not ben n moved by the draught, and had mentioned it to several recollect a single expression which laid him (M r. Adolphus) persons, though she could not recollect any one in particular open to the severe censure which had been passed upon him. to whom :the had mentioned it. Tire light was shout three His statement was emst distinct and clear, though there were yards from the door, rind there were shawls vsry near it. some things, perhaps, which had not been proved to the extent The gas-light had only a saucer over it. he had opened. The question was, however, whether enough William Woodall, examined by Mr. PAGET.—Wns a gas- had been proved to justify the jury in finding a verdict against fitter, and recollected the prisoner coining in January twelve the prisoner. The case for the prosecution depended mainly months to request him to make some alterations. Made on tire evidence of four or five persons, the shop boy, the alterations in the gas- fittings, altering the position of some, , old woman, and the police-officers; and it would be for and also putting in some new ones. There was a rail ex- the jury to say whether they could see that the fire was tending across the window, and the lights were betwe en th a t the result of accident, either from the paper with which and the wi n d ow . Th ere were also others in different parts the boy lighted the candle, fr om th e dying out of a h ot of the shop, and one t o li g ht t h e d oor on t h e l eft hand going coa l f rom t h e fire which had b een l e ft hr the grate, o r , as in, about two f ee t f rom tire entrance, but there w as no g l ass was represented as the most p r obable, from a draft o f wind, cau s ed by the p r i soner open i ng the door o f th e shop, drawing one of the suspended shawls against the gas light which was left burning, and which was without the protection of an argand burner. The testimony of the police-officers certainly varied very much, and their whole statement was very much c on f use d ; b u t some of them had confidently deposed that they saw g oods burning in t wo places on the fl oor . The observations made by the learned counsel as to the ti me se l ecte d b y the prisoner for th e alleged offence were quite true ; but at the same time it was quite true that persons who had fraudulent and wicked intentions did not always pursue the wisest course. Arranged as the goods were, he might have thought it very difficult to put the tire out. The motive attributed to the prisoner was that, being in embarrassed circumstances, he wished to get clear of his difficulties by setting tire to his stock, and receiving payment from the insurance company. There was no doubt that the prisoner was embarrassed, and that an insolvent man was much more likely to commit this crime than one in good circumstances. There was certainly no distinct proof, though there was some, and the stock had beers over-valued. But still it was possible that the prisoner might have set his place on fire, although he had that stock on hand, in order that he might get money for it from the office. As to the goods which had been brought in just be fore the fire, that circumstances, although favourable to the prisoner, if the other evidence could not be explained except on the supposition that the prisoner set the shop on fire, ho explained by supposing, that he brought in those showy articles to lead to the inference that he could not have de stroyed the place, because it was well filled. After a few further general observations, his Lordship proceeded to read and comment on the evidence. The jury retired. They returned in a few minutes with a verdict of not guilty. The result was hailed with loud applause by the spectators, and the officers of the court endeavoured in vain, for a few moments, to curb this mani festation of feeling. As soon as the crowd outside learned the verdict they also cheered. The prisoner was at once discharged. The court adjourned at six o'clock. The trial of Patrick Doran, for arson, will come on this morning. [We are authorised to state that the above prosecution of Henry was not instituted by the Phoenix Fire-office, nor conducted in any respect under the directions of that company.] Ann Mansfield, el - amined by Mr. FITZGERALD.—Vi r as servant to the prisoner. There were four rooms in the house besides the shop, all furnished except one. Prisoner and Procter slept together. Had seen a fire in the shop on that day, and had taken up coals for it. Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Procter had nearly all his clothes burned. Prisoner was a good master. John Towerson examined by Mr. Anosr'uus.—Was an inspector of police, and on the 14th October went from the Seel -street statiou, and got to St. James's Church about nine, and saw smoke issuing from prisoner's shop, and broke open the door. The fire was on the left hand side, behind the counter, near the window, and appeared to come from the floor, reaching very nearly to the ceiling. There was another fire in the far corner of the shop, near the left-hand wall, which appeared also to come from the floor, and rose higher than the other; they appeared to be distinct. There were some shawls hanging in the shop, but did not see any where the fire was. Remained till the fire was extinguished, and visited the shop next day. The floor was much burned as also the ceiling. The fire lasted about an hour and a half. I saw the prisoner standing near the churchyard-wall, with Liverest, when the fire was burning, about quarter past ten, and he said he had made all secure, and had got as far as Everton-brow when he heard the alarm, hut could not learn where it was. He said he was insured in the Phoenix for £l,OOO. The goods were afterwards assorted, and left i❑ charge of an officer, and then taken to the South Dock Station. CROWN COURT.-YESTERDAY. (Before Mr. Sergeant STARKIE, in the Grand Jury-room.) The learned Sergeant took his seat at twelve o'clock, and the business of the Court immediately commenced. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. William Hargreaves, a young man of 22 years of age, stood charged with having, at Manchester, violently assaulted one Emanuel Leach, and with having robbed him of sixpence. It appeared, by the evidence for the prosecution, that, on the night of the lith December, at about twelve o'clock, the prosecutor, and a man named Williamson, were passing along Back Garden -street, Manchester, when the prisoner and a companion came up and severally attacked prosecutor and his friend. Prisoner struck and kicked him violently, cutting him over the eye and throwing him down. When the pro secutor was on the ground, prisoner attempted to take his watch, but, from its being entangled, did not succeed. He then took sixpence from out of his trousers pockets, which sixpence he had received shortly before from Williamson, in repayment of the like sum lent to him. After the scuffle a cap was found in the street by the police-officer, which, on the prisoner being apprehended so late as the 16th March, he acknowledged to be his. The prisoner denied the rob bery, and said that he himself had been first attacked by the prosecutor, and that he was kicked and abused, and merely stood on his own defence. He called several witnesses, one of whom said he saw the scuffle ; that the prosecutor was very drunk and abusive ; that he nearly choked the prisoner ; and that another man, and not the prisoner, kicked the prosecutor. The prisoner was found guilty. He was not before known to the police, and a witness gave him a good character from his infancy. His mother, a widow, was also heard. She said he was a good, industrious lad, and had long been the main support of herself and several other of her children. He had never been in a court of justice before. The learned JUDGE said the offence was a serious one, and the legislature had recently enacted that it should be punished with transportation for life, or at the least for fifteen years. He was accordingly sentenced to be transported for the latter term. The prisoner and his mother cried bitterly on hearing the sentence. Mr. BURKE conducted the prosecution. The prisoner, whose mother was poor, had no counsel. ATTEMPTED RAPE AND ROBBERY-MISDEMEANOUR, William Harizblet, aged 24, was charged with having, at Warrington, feloniously assaulted Mary O'Brien, with i,,t:mt to violate her person, and also with having stolen from her one ring, her property. On the prisoner being brought up, the prosecutrix, who had left the court some time before, as was stated, to suckle her child, was sent for, but could nowhere be found. Nearly an hour elapsed before she made her appearance. It will be remembered, that for the offence charged two men, named Jones, were tried and convicted at the last as sizes, and another, named Mulvey, the prisoner was not then i n custody. As the principal de tails of the case were then given, we need not here repeat them at length. It appears that, on the 24th of July, the prosecutrix, the wife of Michael O'Brien, went to a place called Arkley Meadows, near Warrington. near which a re• gatta was to take place on the following day. She went into one of the booths pitched there, and the prisoners accosted her and sat with her. They had some drink. They left the tent nearly together, and a series of gross assaults upon her person took place, one of the Jones's being the principal aggressor, while the prisoner held one of her hands, and another also held her. Jones did not succeed in his purpose in consequence of her struggles ; Mulvey was equally unsuc cessful, and she got away from them and ran into a ditch, her clothes being nearly torn from her back. She lost the ring in the struggle before stated, but could not say whether the prisoner or Mulvey took it, though both had hold of her. She afterwards was so alarmed by them that she ran into the river Mersey, w hi c h was c l ose b y, an d wa s picked up by the crew of a boat that happ ene d to b e p a ssing at the time. She was then insensible, an d was ta k en to the house of Mr. Jones, Superintendent of Police, Warrington, where atten tion was paid to her and she recovered. The prisoner ab sconded immediately after the assault, and was apprehended in March last, in Cheshire, by the Deputy Constable of Knutsford. Mr. Burke stated the case to the Jury, and the principal facts were proved in evidence. The jury found the prisoner guilty. The learned JUDGE said the prisoner had been guilty of a most wilful assault, an d endeavour to assist others in the commission of a felo n i ous connection w i t h an unprotected female. His companions in the offence had been convicted of the common assault, and sentenced to 18 months' impri sonment and hard labour; and as lie (the prisoner) was equally guilty, he must suffer the same punishment-18 months' imprisonment in Kirkdale Gaol, and hard labour. BURGLARY. Handicraft pleaded guilty to a burglary, of no very aggravated character ; and not being before known to the po lice, he was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for nine calendar months. William Willis, a boy, pleaded guilty to a charge of bur glary. He had not before been in custody, and had no com panions in the crime which he acknowledged. Having been two months in gaol, he was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for ten months. James Irving, 17, Henry Taylor, 16, and John Randall, 17, were charged with having, on the 21st of March, at two in the morning, feloniously entered the house of Walter Miller, hair-dresser, Ranelagh•street, in this borough, and having stolen therefrom money and other articles, of the value of £lO. All the prisoners pleaded guilty. Irving had been employed in the house as a painter. His Lordship said it was shocking to see per sons so young brought up on so serious a charge. He had en d eavoured to reconcile his mind to a lenient sentence, in the hop e t h at t h e pr i soners would, from the mercy shown them, amend their future conduct. He then sentenced each of them to imprisonment, and to be kept to hard labour, for twelve calendar months. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. John Nicholson, a young man, and Elizabe;h Mack, a young woman respectably dressed, were indicted for having, on the 31st August last, assaulted one Patrick Kelly, in Lace's-street, and robbing him o f two h a lf- c . owns, two shil lings, and a sixpence, his property. The prosecutor, an ill looking Irish labourer, said the female came up to him and held his arms, while the male rifled his pocket of the mo ney. He did not, however, follow them after losing his money, but went home to his lodgings. The prisoners said there was no truth in the prosecutor's story, that he was beating the girl himself, and that he (the male prisoner) merely went up to protect her. The female callad Police officer Lynch, who said he saw her crying in the street soon rfter the alleged robbery. She had her apron to her mouth, and said she had been struok. The other prisoner took hold of her arm, and went to her home with her in Lace's-street, in company with another man, who joined them, and whose face he did not see, but who looked like the pro secutor, from his size. The prosecutor took the officer who apprehended them direct to the cellar where the female lived, next morning. She was in bed and undressed. He said he had watched her go into the cellar only a quarter of an hour before. The Learned JUDGE in summing up remarked that it was strange the prosecutor had not looked further after his money or the prisoners, until neat day. The prisoners were not defended. The jury, after consulting for about twenty minutes, found both prisoners guilty ! Both bad been before convicted of felony; the male prisoner several tones, the female once. Nicholson was sentenced to be transported for ten years, and Mack to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years. MAN'SLA IJG lITER, Moses Doyle, a boy, was indicted for having at Liverpool, on the 18th of February, wounded one John Wilkinson with a gimblet in the eye, by which the brain was so injured, that he lingered until the 23d of the same month, when he died. The case was f u lly d eta il e d in our publication at the time, as the facts cam e ou t at t h e coroner's inqu es t. Th e following are the principal facts :--The deceased, a blacksmith, went into a smithy i n M ar lb o rough-street, next d oor to l• is own, and asked the priso ne r, whom be sometimes employed, f or the key of his own s mithy. Prisoner said h e b ad not got it. The deceased the n t o ok hold of the boy by the collar, an d struck him on the face. The prisoner then lifted a nail hammer and threw it at the deceased, and struck him on the arm. • Deceased again got hold of him, and threw him down across the smithy fire on the floor, and again struck him with violence. The boy got up , and a man se e i ng t h e af f ray ran between them, mo re to save the b oy t h an the man. As soon as he had lone so, the prison er struck deceased over witness's shoulder with something which inflicted the wound in the eye and brain, of which deceased afterwards died. The witness afterwards found a gimblet, which was partly stained with blood. The prisoner said, in his defence, that when he lay on his back on the fire, the deceased struck him on the face, and gave him a black eye, so that he could not see by it ; and that it was then that he got hold of the gicublet, not knowing what it was. The learned JUDGE, explained the law as it relates to cul pable manslaughter and justifiable homicide. o The jury f oun d th e p r isoner guilty of mansla ug ht er . The JUDGE said the j ur y could not do otherwise from the evidence. Great and unjustifiable violence had, however, been used towards the prisoner by the deceased 7 and he trusted the unfortunate position in which the prisoner stood—he baying, by resorting to too violent means, deprived a fellow-creature of life,—would prevent him from so dangerous a resort in future—which was only to be justified in one who was in danger of his life. Under all the circumstances of the case, the sell- t n 6 *4 tho:t tiie tkbttia . bi•ltiiti.totied InknCo. louse Correcti6u for one fortnight .Ralph Bennett was indicted tor having, at Liverpool, stahhed, cut, and wounded in the neck one George Riley, a porter, with intent to murder him, to maim or disable him, to do him grievous bodily harm, &c. &c. This case, too, has recently been Lefore the public_ The cut, inflicted with an open clasp-knife, was proved, but was not of a dangerous character. The prisoner said he had previously been robbed in the house, and had been knocked down and abused by the prosecutor. When apprehended in the street by the police, he was found to be bleeding. The prosecutor admitted, though reluctantly, that he had struck the prisoner. The probability was that the prisoner was severely struck. The Juno!: laid down the law as related to the several counts of the indictment, throwing out of the question the first and most penal one, and rather inclining to that for the assault. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. The prisoner was accordingly discharged. M 4. Met' Tbitot Votteit *hi tbeh sworn, tina titithtbm at Conaidetabic length, lir taiti he had no authority to write the letter in question; that he had never accepted bills for the defendants ; and that he had no authority to do so. Cross-examined.—The Messrs. Schroeder now owed the defendants a general balance of £899; but had still some corn in hand. They had refused to accept the composition. Mr. KNOWLES said this was the case for the p:aintiffs. Mr. WORTLEY contended that no case had been made out to go before the jury. Mr. KNOWLES replied that he had proved sufficient to go to the jury on the question—whether Schroeder had not gone to the bank, and got the bills renewed and discounted as the agent of the defendants. Mr. Grant was recalled on this point, and he said he thought he should not have renewed the bills or discounted any if Schroeder was only the agent of the defendants; but the question did nut come before him in that shape. After some discussion upon this point, and an ineffectual effort to turn the question into a special case, The JUDGE said he should hold that an acceptance of the bill before the bill was drawn was not law; and the questions under the second count, whether Schroeders' were agents of the defendants in procuring this bill to be discounted by the Bank of Ireland, must be left to the jury. Mr. WORTLEY then addressed the jury upon the part of the defendants. He said he was exceedingly glad to have the opportunity of saying a word upon the case, because he should be extremely sorry if the apparently candid but bitter and pointed observations of his learned friend should have any impression upon their minds without an opportunity on his part of removing them. He had the honour to appear for the defendants, who were merchants of high standing ; and upon their behalf he was undoubtedly jealous of their mercantile reputation. He should be sorry if, while they were standing upon the strict letter of the law of the country in vindicating their rights, they were neglectful of the claims of honour and good faith. It would be a woeful day for this country if it should ever happen that the merchants of Eng land, or any considerable body of them, should become men of the description which his learned friend had been instructed to give of the defendants ; but in the present case there was not the slightest pretence for the charge; and the imputation was as uncalled for as it was unfounded. After some further observations vindicatory of the character of the defendants, in which he stated he could, if permitted, shew that honour and good faith had been really on their side, the learned counsel addressed himself to the allegation on the part of the plaintiffs, that Schroeder was the agent of the defendants for the purpose of obtaining the discount of the bill from the Bank of Ireland. He contended that all the circumstances, and par ticularly the reply of Mr. Grant, when he was recalled, chewed that this could not have been the case; and that it was only after the composition of Messrs. Schroeder for ls. in the pound, that the bank thought of this expedient to save themselves. The JUDGE told the jury the only question for their deci sio❑ was whether Schroeder had promised the bank with the authority of the defendants; and he pointed out the evidence on this part of the case. The jtiry immediately returned a verdict for the defendants, LIABILITY OF AN ASSIGNEE FLEMING AND OTHERS V. DAVIDSON.-ThiS (a special lury case) was an action to recover the sum of £271 16s. 3d. for goods sold and delivered, and on an account stated. Mr. Martin and Mr. Watson conducted the case for the plain tiffs ; Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton that of the defendant. On the part of the plaintiffs it was shown, through the me dium of admissions arid witnesses, that the plaintiffs are car pet manufacturers at Glasgow, trading under the name o f t h e Port Eglington Spinning Company, and the defendant is the registered officer of the Commercial Bank of Manchester, a concern which is now only being carried on for the purpose of winding up its affairs. The defendant is also the assignee of the estate of Alfred Webb, who carried on business in Li verpool as a carpet dealer. In December, 1811, Mr. Webb gave an order to Mr. Taplin, the agent to, and traveller for, the plaintiffs, for four bales of carpets, to be manufactured according to a specified pattern, to be taken into stock on the Ist of February following, and paid for by a four months' bill, or if he paid in cash, there was to be a deduction of two arid a half per cent. The carpets were put in course of manu facture, and Mr. Webb was believed to be perfectly solvent ; but, at that time, namely, at the end of November, or the beginning of December, Mr. Webb, who bad been largely connected with the bank, had contracted a debt with them to the amount of upwards of £13,000. This was unknown to the agent of the plaintiffs. On the 13th of December notice was given to Mr. Webb by the bank to pay the money ; but as he did not, twenty-one days after wards, on the 18th of January, a fiat was issued against him by the defendant, on behalf of the bank. No step, however, was taken under the fiat till ti' , 'lst of January, on which day the adjudication took place ; but in the inter val between the Bth and 21st, natneiy, on the. the four bales of carpets were sent off by the plaintiffs by sea from Glasgow. On the 21st, before the adjudication had taken place, the carpets were taken from the dock quay to the bankrupt's premises, and delivered to his shopman, a person named Taylor. Tay lor had them conveyed to the stables of Mr. 13retherton, and, upon the day following, the bankrupt had them con veyed to Blackburn, where they were not found till the month of August. The plaintiffs had received no notice of the fiat, and, therefore, it was contended, that the defendant should either return the goods or pay for them. Mr. KNOWLES contended that no case had been proved. This was really one of the most extraordinary cases he had ever heard of. The goods had been sent in pursuance of a contract before the bankruptcy; they were delivered before bankruptcy; and, consequently, the assignee seized them. It was an every day case. The JUDGE' did' not think it was an every day case. It seemed to him, under the circumstances which had been proved, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover ; but, at the same time, he would give leave to move. The plaintiff was then nonsuited, his Lordship certifying that the case was a proper one for a special jury. FEMING AND OTHERS V. DAVIDSON.—This was the last case only in a different shape, the declaration being here in trover. The result was the same. SENTr:NCES George Royle, Thomas Wilkin,and John Linyard, before convicted of burglariously entering the house of a Mrs. (heaves, and stealing therefrom a quantity of property, were brought up for sentence. The Judge said to Lingard—" You hays been found guilty upon very clear evidence of breaking into the house of Mar garet Greaves, and robbing her of considerable property. She had employed you, and she reposed such confidence in you that you almost lived under her roof. You ought, in gratitude for the employment she gave you, rather to have given her protection, than plundered her house. The sentence of the law, provided for this offence, therefore, is, that you be transported beyond the seas for the term of ten years. You Wilkin and Royle, though you participated in this offence with him, were not so culpable. You were strangers to the prosecutrix, and did not betray her confi dence. The sentence upon each of you is, that you be each imprisoned and kept to hard labour at Kirkdale for the term of two years." The Court then adjourned at seven o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT.-YESTERDAY (Before Mr. Justice COLTM AN and a Special Jury.) GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF THE BANK OF IRELAND n. ARCHER AND ANOTDER.—ThiS was an action on a Bill of Exchequer for £852. lOs., drawn by Messrs. Joseph and Christopher Schroeder upon the defendants and accepted by them. The declaration contained five counts, merely varying the nature of the demand. The plaintiffs were represented by Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton; the defendants by Mr. Wortley and Mr. Watson. Mr. KNOWLES said, this was an action in which the plain tiffs sought to recover a sum of about £B5O, which they alleged to be due to them upon various grounds, which it would be his business to prove ; but in order to make the jury understand the way in which this action had arisen, he must go into detail of certain transactions between the plain tiffs, the defendants, and the firm of Messrs. J. and C. Schroeder, who carried on business as corn dealers at Water ford, in Ireland. The defendants, Messrs. Archer and Daly, were commission merchants at Liverpool ; and in the early part of last year, 1842, they were instructed by Messrs. Schroeder to procure a quantity of Indian corn, which they did upon their giving their acceptances in the usual way. It amounted to £1,625.55. ed., which Messrs. Schroeder paid for b; their own acceptance. It was agreed that the defendants were to he kept out of cash advance—that was to say, Messrs. Schroeder should give them sufficient money to pay their own acceptance; and as they had corn in hand, they were to accept the drafts of Messrs. Schroeder. On the 6th of April, Messrs. Schroeder drew upon the defendants a bill for £B5O. ss. 4d., being rather more than half of the invoice price of the corn : they discounted that bill with the Water ford branch of the Bank of Ireland, and the proceeds, amounting to £847. 14s. 3d., were remitted to the defend ants. This bill went through the bank ; it was presented to the defendants in the usual course, and they accepted it. A similar course was pursued with regard to the balance, £770 ; a bill was drawn, the proceeds were remitted to the defendants, and they accepted it. The position of the parties at this period was this—the defendants had re ceived from Messrs. Schroeder sufficient to enable them to take up their own acceptances ; but, then, they had also the whole amount of Indian corn on hand. In course of time the first of these acceptances became due— namely, on the Bth or 9th of July. Shortly before it became due Messrs. Schroeder were reminded that it would have to be provided for, as the Indian corn had not been sold, and the defendants were to be kept out of cash advances ; there fore, on the Bth of July Messrs. Schroeder drew another bill upon the defendants, which was discounted in the usual way, and the proceeds, £846 12s. 3d., were remitted in the usual way. The other bill of £770 did not require to be renewed, because by the time it became due the defendants had sold corn for it, so that it was not the subject of controversy : the only bill, therefore, that remained between the parties was that of £B5O drawn on the Stb of July, and which would be come due on the 11th of October following. As early as the 26th of September, Mr. Denis Daly, one of the defendants, was in Ireland; he called at the countine-house of Messrs. Schroeder in Waterford; and what took place there would be exceedingly material, because all the points in the case would depend perhaps upon it. At that time it was apparent that the corn speculation of Messrs. Schroeder would turn out un profitable, for Mr. Daly produced an account current, from which he pointed out that considerable loss would be incurred ; and he requested Messrs. Schroeder to advance a certain amount in cash, and renew the bill which would fall due in October for the balance, whatever the balance might be. Mr. Schroeder objected to this, and said it would be better to renew for the whole of the bill—saying, " I will draw up for the whole amount, and send the bill to be accepted, and when you have accepted it 1 will procure cash for it and re mit the cash to you, so that you can take up the bill for £850." This, the jury would observe, was not the course adopted upon the former occasion : upon the former occasions Messrs. Schroeder had procured the cash before the bills were ac cepted. Mr. Daly objected to this mode on the ground that it would look odd to the bank in Liverpool, and he said to Mr. Schroeder, " Send the bill to the bank in the usual course, and 1 will advise my partner to what has been done." He (the learned counsel) should have to refer again to this conversation before he had done, in order to point out what he conceived to be its legal bearing. Upon the faith of this assurance, that this bill would be taken care of in the same way as the other bills, Messrs. Schroeder drew a bill for £852105. —the bill mentioned in the declaration. That bill was dis counted by the plaintiffs iu the same way as the others; and it would be found that the proceeds, amounting to £847, were remitted to the defendants, and got into their posses sion. This bill passed through the bank like the others ; it was presented for acceptance in the same way as the other bills had been; and the jury would find that before the bill had been accepted—and on the very day when the proceeds came into the hands of the defendants—the following letter was written to Messrs. Schroeder : " Liverpool, Ist October, 1842. " Gentlemen,—Your favour inclosing the bill for £Bl7 is received, and passed to your credit. Your draft upon us for £852 lOs. shall be duly honoured. We have no enquiry for India corn. * * " Pro. ARCHIAR, DALY & CO. " P. T. FORREST." This letter (the learned counsel continued) was signed by a gentleman of the name of Forrest, who, as be should show, was, at that time, a confidential clerk of the defendants. It was right, however, to mention—because representing, as he did, the Bank of Ireland, he meant to keep nothing back — that after this letter had been put into the post, probably on the same day, another letter was written by one of the de fendants to Messrs. Schroeder, which was certainly some what at varianee with the terms of the letter just received ; and no doubt his learned friend would contend that that letter nullified the operation of the other. He (Mr. Knowles) thought, in point of law, it did not, but that would be for his Lordship to decide. After this bill had been protested for non -acceptance, and the whole matter had been made known to Messrs. Schroeder, Mr. Denis Daly, with whom Mr. Schroeder had had the conversation of the 26th of July, again presented himself at their counting-house in Water ford ; and it would seem from what occurred then that Mr. Daly had not been made acquainted correctly with what had taken place on this side of the water, because Mr. Schroeder placed before him the letters from the defendants, and he seemed to be surprised ; and he (Mr. Knowles) must say, also a little ashamed of the conduct of his partner on this aide of the water. When reminded of the conversation on the 26th September he admitted that such a conversation had taken place, and that the proceeds had been remitted upon a distinct understanding that the bill was to be treated as the other bills had been. It was material to remember too, that the letter of Mr. Forrest, in which he said " Your draft shall he duly honoured," was laid before Mr. Daly, and Mr. Daly, at that time, neither by word or deed, thought of repudiating the authority of Forrest. In the end no settle ment was obtained. Messrs. Schroeder eventually com pounded with their creditors ; and the Bank had now no resource to look to, but the defendants, for the amount of the b 11. First of all they declared upon this bill of exchange, and said the defendants had accepted it, and he would ex plain the grounds upon which he should contend that the act of defendants amounted to an acceptance. He need not tell the jury that a bill drawn in Ireland upon parties in England did not require acceptance in writing : it must be a verbal acceptance—nay more, there must be an acceptance by the conduct of the parties, if the conduct of the parties distinctly led to an inference that they accepted the bill. They must also perhaps be aware that the law requiring the acceptance of a bill of exchange to be in writing was not of more than 20 years standing : formerly a verbal acceptance was sufficient, and it was so treated, and there was no magic in the written word " accepted," or any thing else which gave the notion that the bill would be paid when due. Hav ing said this much in explanation of what an acceptance was, he would call attention to w h at occurre d , to s h ow that that was in point of law an acceptance to the bill, on the 26th of September, when Mr. Denis Daly held the conversation with Mr. Schroeder. The learned counsel contended from the circumstances which then took place, that they would, in point of la.v, amount to au acceptance, provided the bill was then in existence ; but, he continued, inasmuch as the bill was not drawn then his learned friend (Mr. Wortley) would contend that there could have been no acceptance ; he would, in fact, evade that conversation altogether by saying that a bill could not be accepted before it was in existence. Now whether this was so or not was a moot point in our law ; itihad more than once been incidentally discussed, but it had never received any authoritative decision. In America, for instance, as he knew from a learned work by Judge Storey, the question was decided; the courts there, held that a bill might be accepted before it was drawn. In this country, however, the law was not settled ; therefore, if his case rested merely upon the conversation referred to, there would still be a question whether there could be an acceptance of a bill before the bill was in existence. But besides what occurred on the 26th September, he should contend there was a direct acceptance of this bill by the letter written on the let of Oc tober, from the terms of which letter he should also contend that Mr. Forrest, as the agent of the defendants, had clearly authority to accept. This letter was laid before Mr. Daly at the subsequent interview with Mr. Schroeder, in Ireland, and he did not for one moment affect to say that Forrest had no authority. He should also contend, on the other counts, whatever might become of the acceptance, that still Mr. Schroeder was made an agent of th e d e f en d ants to procure the money which was remitted to them. Therefore they were liable as for money had and received for the use of the plaintiffs. On one or other ground, he contended, there could be no doubt of the defendant's liability to pay this money The letters referred to and the bills were then put in and read ; after which Mr. Jacob Schroeder was called, and he deposed, in considerable detail, to the circumstances as opened by Mr. Knowles. In his cross-examination by Mr. Wortley, the witness said his firm, through the badness of the corn trade, had been obliged to compound. They paid their creditors one shilling in the pound, and a considerable balance was yet dne from the firm to the defendants. Mr. Henry D. Grant, manager of the Bank of Ireland at Waterford, produced the bill in question. Mr. Charles John Tyzack, corn-broker in Liverpool, proved the handwriting of Mr. Forrest to the letter of the Ist October. The JUDGE asked Mr. Knowles whether he should prove any authority in Forrest to accept ? Mr. KNowt-ms replied, he should rely at present upon the letter of October Ist, which had not been repudiated. The JUDGE said that would not be sufficient; especially as a letter had been received from the partner of Mr. Daly the same day, which did not mention the bill. Mr. KNOWLES admitted that, but observed that Mr. For rest's letter was written before that of the partner. The JUDGE.—Yes ; but the party cannot be bound with. out distinct proof of authority. If that were so, amen might be emninitted to an indefinite extent by his clerk. Mr. KNowLes thought the phrase of the letter showed authority. The JUDGE held that that was not sufficient; but,:at the r e s . Mr. ow t E Knowles, ssaid i ,ew h o e t u i zok a then, eo no endeavourote of the Mr. strengthen int the case by calling Mr. Forrest. JURYMEN FINED The case of Hemingway v. Hamilton and other. was nett in order, and a common jury was called. Some delay occurred in obtaining the requisite number, but eventually eleven gentlemen were collected together. There appearing little or no chance of the twelfth making his appearance, Mr. MARTIN, who represented the plaintiff, said, he had no objecti )n to proceed with the trial with eleven jurymen. The JUDGE said, the attendance of jurymen must he secured, and he could not assent. His lordship then directed the list to be called over, with the exception of those who were serving in the Crown Court and in the Grand Jury-room. Mr. Forrest and Mr. Carson (under-sheriff) called over the list, when the following not appearing, the JUDGE directed them to be tined £5 each,—Samuel Bowers, George Benyon, Francis Bretherton, Richard Cope, John Crossley, Richard Cummins, Walter Clarke, Joseph Crossland, Joseph Dawson, Edward Eady, John Frazer, Nathaniel Howard, William Heath, Thomas Jackson, James Lister, James Leigh, Robert Owen, Thomas Owen, George Robinson, Michael Trueman, John Tomlinson, Samuel Williamson, and Peter Wheedle.— After some further delay, Mr. James Leigh made his appear ance. lie was sworn a juryman, and so the twelve were made up. Before the case commenced Mr. Samuel William son came into court, and applied for the fine upon him to be removed, alleging that he had been only in the next room, but he had not heard his name called out.—The JUDGE : Very well; you have but just saved yourself. HEMINGWAY V. HAMILTON AND OTHERS Mr. Martin and Mr. Hill appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton for the defendants. The plaintiff is Captain Hemingway, and the defendants are Messrs. Hamilton, Jackson, and Co., of this town, mer chants. The pleadings were voluminous and discursive. Mr. MARTIN in stating the case said, the plaintiff, Capt. Hemingway, was a person who had long been engaged in the African trade. Previous to the year 1836, in which the ground of the present action took place, he was engaged in trading between the coast of Africa and Liverpool, taking out goods there, and bringing produce home. At present he was in the trade as a merchant. In the year 1836 he entered into a contract with the defendants, who were most extensively engaged in the trade, to command a vessel called the Earl Grey. The agreement was, that he should bring home 550 tons of palm oil, for which he was to receive £lOOO, and in the event of his obtaing more oil than 550 tons, he was to receive a commission of £6 per cent, upon the overplus, six months and 30 days, after the arrival of the oil in Liverpool. This contract was completed on the 2d January, 1836, and the plaintiff sailed immediately afterwards in the Earl Grey. The African trade was carried on entirely by barter—the particular mode of which the learned counsel described in detail. The plaintiff arrived in the River Bonny, and he commenced trading with the natives. He was furnished with two vessels called tenders, the William and the Pantaloon, to enable him to carry on his trade the more successfully. The plaintiff succeded in making one of the most successful voyages ever made to to the coast of Africa, for he produced to his employers a profit very little short of £15,000 or £16,000. He purchased from the natives upwards of 200 tons of oil over and above the 550 tons, and the William was the first vessel despatched home ; she was nearly full, and she arrived safely. The Pantaloon then remained at Bonny, with the Earl Grey. The Earl Grey next sailed, full of oil, leaving there the Pantaloon also full, with the exception of about 30 puncheons, which had not arrived from the interior, and Captain Peel, who commanded her, was directed by the plaintiff to receive the 30 puncheons and return home immediately. The question for the decision of the jury arose with reference to the Pantaloon. The defendants settled all their accounts with the plaintiff; he received his commission for all the oil above 550 tons which the Earl Grey and the William had brought; and the Pan taloon was supposed to be lost. The defendants, indeed, were so much pleased with the plaintiff's exertions, that, in order to show their sense of his services, they presented a piece of plate to Mrs. Hemingway. Captain Peel, who com manded the Pantaloon, was directed by the plaintiff to return directly, but, it seemed, that he neglected this order, for, instead of returning direct to England, he went from the Bonny to the Cameroons, a river west of the Bonny. The Pantaloon was there lost ; and up to the end of lase year, 1842, the plaintiff had no reason to suppose but that with the Pantaloon her cargo was lost, and that it had never reached the hands of the defendants. During last year, however, the plaintiff was again in Africa, and at Cameroons be saw Lloyd's agent, from whom he learned that although the Pantaloon had been lost, her cargo had been saved by Cap tain Lilly, the agent at that plaee for the defendants. He, there fore, undertook to demonstrate to the jury that the o;1 was saved, and sent to England by Captain Lilly, on board the Dredalus and the Anne ; and if he did this he should be enti tled to the commission of £6 per cent. upon the quantity which the defendants had thus received. Thomas Sheridan Reed, Ralph Dawson, and Edward Ha milton, parties who were at Bonny and the Cameroons at the time were then called. Dawson proved the wreck of the Pantaloon on the Cameroons, about eighteen miles from land. In answer to Mr. Knowles, he said that in case of a wreck upon that coast it was extremely dangerous to attempt to save anything. Hamilton proved that a great number of puncheons of oil were recovered from her, that they had the brand of the Earl Grey upon them, and they were shipped in the Dredalus and the Anne. Thomas Henry Lester and William Henry Darby, two clerks from the house of Messrs. Nicholas Waterhouse and Sons, defendants' brokers, proved the arrival of the Daedalus and Anne. The Anne arrived a few days before the 4th Oct., 1836 ; the Daedalus a few days before the 16th January, 1837. The oil belonged to the defendants. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. lisowLes then submitted that the plaintiff had him self shewn the defendants to be entitled to a verdict upon the statute of limitations. The Anne had been proved to arrive in Liverpool some few days before the 4th October, and the Daedalus a few days before the 16th January. The action was brought on the 30th of January, therefore the arrival by the Daedalus was clearly within the statute ; and he contended, on the construction of the agreement, that the same must apply to the arrival by the Anne. Mr. MARTIN said his learned friend was wrong on both points. The JUDGE suggested that the better course would be to ascertain the damages. His view of the case was, that as to one of the vessels, at least, the Anne, the plaintiff Was in time with his action. As to the other vessel, there might be some difference. Mr. MARTIN, in reply, repeated that his learned friend was wrong; and he contended, from the language of the agree ment, that the six years would not begin to accrue till after the sale of the oil. The particulars put in showed that the oil by the William and the Earl Grey was not sold till ten months after th e i r arr i va l ; and it was qu i te clear that some time would elapse afterwards before the oil by the Anne and the Dredalus was sold. The statute of limitations was, there fore, out of th e quest i on, an d he was sorry hi s l earne d friend had been instructed to resort to it. The JUDGE said that the first branch of the agreement contained no ro;erence to net proceeds ; Out the beat course firlt ht Ddalus nd Ann, 'as warehoused THE CAUSE LIST. FIRST LIST-SALFORD HUNDRED, There is only one case remaining to be disposed of in this list, namely, No. 21, " Ferrand and another v. Moore." It is an action on promises, and will he tried before a special - The trial is appointed to take place this morning Tuesday) SECOND LIST.-WEST DERBY HUNDRED, The following was the state of the list for the hundred of West Derby, at the rising of the Court_ last night : Plaintif f .-Nos. 1,3, 4,7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 46, 55, 64, 65, 68, Defendant.-No. 28. Withdraton.-Nos. 2,5, 6,9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, n 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 3 1 , 32 , 37 , 41 , 42 , 5 6, 57, CO, 61 62, , 74, 75, 78, 8 5 , 86, 88, 92 . Referred.-Nos. 40, 43, 44, 49, 50, SI, Non:Wt.-Nos. 72, 73. Three special juries and 28 common cases remain to be decided. The Judges have agreed to postpone the opening of Easter Term until to-morrow week. CHESTER ASSIZES.-YESTERDAY. (Before Mr. Justice MAULE.) RAFE AND MURDER. James Ford, aged 23, was indicted for the wilful Inurder of Samuel Shaw, at Mottrarn, on the night of the Ist of October last. There was also an indictment against the pH_ soner for having violated the person of the wife of the do_ ceased. The brief facts of the case were that the deceased, his wife, the prisoner, and some other persons, were drinking at public-house on Saturday evening, the Ist of October, at Alottram, where they remained until about midnight, when the deceased, his wife, the prisoner, and another person left, having to go the same way. They walked alon g the ro ad for about a quarter of a mile, when the latter person was taken up by a person passing on horseback. When he left, the prisoner began to take liberties with the wife of the deceased, on which she desired him to desist , w he n h e knocked the de:. ceased and his wife down. lie then beat the deceased on the bead and face with a stone until he became insensible. The wife of the deceased was also beaten into a state of in sensibility, and on her recovery she f ound herself in an ad joining field, and the prisoner near her. He requested her not to tell her husband of what had passed. She then went home, and found her husbandthere insensible, and a surgeon was procured, who attended him, but he died on the Samar day followi ng o f a wound on the back of the Le - id, which had produced an effusion of blood on the braia. The [Prisoner, on being taken into custody, acknowledged having inflicted the violence on the deceased. The trial lasted until after six o'clock, and the jury, aft er a short consultation, found the priso ner " Guilty. ' His Lordsh'p deferred passing sentence. INIPROVEMENTS OF TRADE MA.NcngsTEtt.—Our mark et continues to exhibit the same healthy appearance we noticed last week, and priaes for all widths and descriptions of cloth remain firm. The news from the East is considered favourable, and 40-inch shirtiugs are in good request at the extreme rates of last week. 27-inch 72's is the only description of cloth that is a drug upon the market, and good 51b. is still selling for cash down at ss. Domestic cloth is in good request, and at paying prices ; and most of the manufacturers are engaged for all t h e y arc making, but mo st p articularl y for be quoted 4s. Gd. to 4e. 27 inches. Thep rinters are also very busy, and most. of the check, job printers have given notice to their customers, that, i t , consequence of the advance in madder, they must have a n e d . vance o f 3d. per piece for printing, which houses will be forced to give. 27-inch 66's may 9d.: and 7 9 's, 4s. 9d. to 55., although many manufacturers are as ki ng s s . 3d.-21fauchevter Advertiser of Saturday. TRADE or LEEns.—The improvement which we an nounced last week had taken place in the staple trade of this district, we are glad to say, has not received any but, on the contrary, has been accelerated during the present week. The amount of business transacted in our cloth halls on S a turday and Tuesdsy last exceeded that of any o f the preceding market days of the present year. Prices, how ever, d o n ot advance, but trade in general is " looking op !, and the manufacturers are doing more work than they h a ' ve been f o r a long time past.—. Leeds Intelligeneer of Saturday. [lmprovements are reported in various other district., which we have not space to notice.l ------ ----=----- , relates in think?; ----.. f h e T s t i s c , D presentedoeo t:n r. ufxo.ThDe r ia S e o . I R ty i c of f o t, o f medicineNle Betz, of Strasbu rg, hig r. rnforth, four cases of this disease, which. after resisting the ordinary treatment, yielded to the Peruvian bark ; one grain two grains mixed and used as snuff. He -- says he snuff, found the above dose sufficient, and in the course of : wa y s was conv i cte d, by Thomas Routledge three days. Some recommend a glass of ), or sherry, t i 7 coated over with nutmeg grated. CONVICTION UNDER THE ACT FOR THE RE,TyL CHIMNEY-SWEEPERS AND CIIIMNEYS.-00 m er T IoN or last, at the Rotation Office, Pontefract, m r. .. flour dealer, Ba daY week mayor, in the mitigated penalty of X 5 and costs, Pr-'Bq, the for know n to a s allowing a young person, under twenty-one years ,we to ascend a chimney for the purpose of sweeping the °fa- ' The public generally ought to know, that householder 'an". miffing boys to ascend their chimneys are liable to be e rs fi per as well as the master sweeps, in a penalty of 4:10, subj ect ned, be mitigated to five pounds and costs, at the discretion to of the magistrate. THE INCOME TA%.—ln the quarter ending 10th of ber, the receipt from Income-tax was £313,841, a Octo quarter ceding sth January it was £257,212, hei„ and in t h e derived from the tax on the dividends due in Jul y no doubt ber. Then came the collection upon private i y and Octo from the sth of January to the sth of Apr il , which £1,885,232. The whole sum, therefore, obtained k)r." realized Income-tax is 1:2,456,2M, which probably i from the half. year by only a few hundred thousand s short of a full lieve we are not far from the mark in statio Pounds. N -Ve be calculations, grounded on the assessments g the best official made, lead to the conclusion that the tee • which have been tax will amount to five millions, or five recei pt from Income ter, sterling per t o millions and a guar- SALTrto PRovistoNs.—The follo wing • from the Treasury to the Board of Cu g is a copy of a letter March, relating to the admission of salted stom on the 6th of colonial duty :—" Treasury Chainb provisions at the Gentlemen, —The Lords Comuniss• ers, March 6, 1 843 , Treasury having had under consider ation .. of her Majesty' s ports from your hoard. together witi t l ion copies of three re ports on which they are founded, f copies of the applica- Moffat, and Co., relative to the terms fr o m Messrs. Gillespies pro visions imported from Canada wo ul d on which certain ' con sumption in this country, forward be admitted for Board of Trade, I am commanded t o t° my lords through the lords are of opinion that saltto acquaint you that My gone in Canada the whole of the provisions, which have under to the preservation or curing processes requisite in order terms and spirit of the nth ol ot the article, may, within the regarded and admitted as se of the Navigation Act, be ships therefore desire that colon ia l produce; and their lord at y ou will tions to your officers, care b • g ive the necessary direc• general rule in each case, according being taken by them to apply the not answer to the terms recited.- 1 as the goods may or may To the Commissioners of Custom s . " am, t am. G. CLERK. A GOOD LANDLORD.—Mr s. has shewn the landlords ofth e . John Gladstone, of Pasqua, . country an example which, we trust, will be generally imitated oy all who have the power, in the facilities which he has placed i n the way of his t e nants improving their farms. So far as we can judge of such matters, the scheme which h e has proposed for the adop tion of his tenants, and which, as will be seen from this day's paper, they have thankfully accepted, promises to be in the highest degree beneficial to landlord and tenant. He agrees to g ive a considerable deduction from the rent of this year to all who shall, within the year, drain and subsoil plough a certain proportion of the extent oftheir farms, he himself paying the expense of these operations, and accommodating those who may be u nable to procure a subsoil plough, with the use o f on e. In return, he receives from the tenant four per cent on the money paid by him for the improvement, in name of interest, or more properly, additional rent, for the improved value of the land. Now that there is every proba bility that the value of the produce of the land will be per manently reduced, it is especially incumbent upon all who have the power, to contribute to die utmost to increase its productiveness, so as to repay the farmer for his toil, at the same time that they are enriching the country, and increas ing the amount of subsistence at the command of the people. There are many landlords, who, perhaps, have not the same command of means to effect this object as Mr. Gladstone has, but most of them can do something; and all should, for their own sakes, do as much as they can. The equity of the rule cannot be denied, that the permanent improvements upon land should be at the expense of him who nent interest in it, —the tenant, of course, paying for the benefit he derives during the o ccupancy.—Montrose Paper. --------___ house of Du Bou of Russia to establish a line of steamers, by the Emperor The Journal el i parlye:snadol ot.lroflitohuuenit:haandnbocuenticeasuttibioartistehde IlisnosrAN o. . Ti . here on the 3d instant, at two p.m b • which _r e r g A tr : ili,sy. steamerbeEts‘xt.eran„ left Suez f r Marseilles l l ee l z e t s t er and from Odessa. Adenzs on Feb. , at a'hsaltn°ld:idia Company's steamer Atalanta 51 hours p,m., eating fte d rhl o a ee t nv e ,le d inso l: an l e.. a zmE r c . started 17 hours before the i t i o a n t s c o al f coal, and before t o he t r h e e s ni ee a m u o vitiß • ombay ; "'— Mink/stun, and arrived 34 hours after her. to Aden, she having star The Hindoatan started from this place, sth instant, at 8 30 a.m , after t IC it .. ._ every prob a bility oofahheoraurdrris.sovin r fit Ai titii Mr. J. Waterhous was tliFn called on the part a the plaih. tiff to show the amount realised by the oil, but it appeared that he could not state what it was. Listerani Mr. Darby were recalled. and they stated that some parts of the oil brought by the Anne were warehoused, and some sold from the ship. Tile entire cargo of the Med*- , .1 Mr. KNOWLES then addressed the jury for the defend an t s contending that this was precisely the sort of case w hi o l i t h e statute of limitations was framed to meet—a case in which the plaintiff imputed no fraud to the defendants,and in which he said they were liable to pay him, although they had them selves been cheated. He said he should show that the oil Put on board the Anne and Daedalus had been paid for; and that commission had been paid upon it to the captains of those vessels, both of whom must have proceeded upon the assumption that this was not oil belonging to the Pantaloon, but oil bought by Captain Lilly for them from the parties who plundered the wreck. If, therefore, the oil was bought by Captain Lilly, it was clear that Captain Hemingway could have no cHin upon the defendants, because they had not bad the advantage of the oil from the Pantaloon. The learned gentleman then called, James Franklin, a clerk in the defendant's service, proved certain payments by them to the plaintiff; and he said that all the commission had been paid on the Daedalus and the Anne, to rive different persons, namely, Captain Lilly, Capt. Holmes, (for oil on hoard the Lisbon packet) Captain Grin don, and Captain Masker. There was no portion of oil either by the Dirdalus or the Anne on which commission was not paid. Captain Peel, master of the Pantaloon, name to Liverpool in the Anne, on the 28th September, 1936. The plaintiff was in Liverpool at that time. Several other men who belonged to the Pantaloon also came by the Anne. hi May, 1838, Captain Lilly was in Liverpool ; and witness saw him and the plaintiff together in London, on a trial. The Daedalus arrived on the 12th of January, 1837 ; the Anne on the 28th September, 1836. James Armstrong examined.—Was mate of the Anne in 1836, and was at Cameroon river when the Pantaloon was lost. Capt. Lilly went down to look after her, and Capt. Peel came on board the Anne. Saw the natives afterwards with oil. The natives are a savage kind of people. Some of the oil which the natives had was put on board the Pretty Lass; it remained on deck three days, when the captain would not pay for it, and it was put on the beach. The Anne was nearly laden with oil when the Pantaloon was lost ; the notices brought some oil to her; Capt. Lilly was present, and he paid the natives for it, as for any other oil. Captain Blackie, commander of the Anne, gave some testimony to the same effect ; after which Mr. INIARTIN replied in an animated address. The jury. after a few minutes' consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff in respect to the oil brought in the Dredalus ; and it was arranged that the amount of damages should be settled between the parties. The court rose at seven o'clock.