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

ASSIZE INT -I LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES CROWN cOU Il ls Baron (Befor e Mr. PARKS.) Lordship took his seat at few minutes past nine -TUESDAY MURDER. Kelly Eccles, aged 38, was indicted for the wilful murder at Bolton, of Willia►n Eccles, her stepson, by admini,tet in; a t sß ►ic in his food. The prisoner also stood char ge d a ill the murder of Alice Ilaslain and William !laslan, by thr same means. It appeared by the calendar that the prisoner could read, though she was not able to write. Long befor e the Judge entered the coup, every convenient space was crowded w►th auditors, and a number of elegantly-dressed ladies were ►resent. , The prisoner appeared deeply to feel her awful position, t hough she pleaded not guilty to the several indictments with a firm voice. She was decently dressed, and had no appear ance of atrocity which would lead any person to suppose she co uld have been guilty of the crime with which she was charged. . Mr. Armstrong, Q.C. and Mr. Brandt appeared for the P r ?!e mt and Dr. Brown defended the prisoner. ~ ore the application of Dr. BROWN, all the witnesses, in tu,d_ing the medical men, were ordered out of court. _,lA,cir. AALMSTRONG stated the principal features of the case, NI h afterwards came out in the evidence, which we sub- John Wood, examined by Mr. BRANDT, said,—l am i t o . the employ of Messrs.• Eden and Co., bleachers, near 13° f ton. I knew the deceased Wm. Eccles. He was 15 years 9 age ) and was in the employ of Messrs. Eder and Co . . He t generally enjoyed good health. I remember his corning to work on the 26th September. He worked till i past . He had to go about a mile to his dinner. He was well when he left, and appeared in good spirits. He came to the works at two o'clock, an hour later than usual, but he had an errand or two to go. He went to work and appeared very sickly arid kept heavin g at the chest. I spoke to hint about it and be put his hand to his stomach and said he was sickly. He did not vomit anything but a greenish fluid. He continued an hour on the premises and then I told him to go home, and he left about three. ' Cross-examineiL—He had been in the service about three weeks and earned 3s. a week. He had to go to the railway, on an errand for one of the servants. He left half an hour earlier than usual. • His usual hour was twelve, and be came back at one. At her own request the prisoner:was ac commodated with a chair. Thomas Davenport. 4 am a bleacher in the employ of Messrs Eden and Co. This witness in the evi dence of the previous witness, and went on to say, I left the works about 4 o'clock. About a quarter of a mile from the works I found the deceased. I asked him what made him lie there, and he said he could get no further. I got him out of the ditch and he complained of being ill and kept heav iug and throwing up like water. I helped hi m on his way home and met his mother (the prisoner). She said, " What, pau have brought him home, have you?" I said nothing to herlisvhen she made that remark. bY t ee Jonoe.—l was supporting the boy at the time. ~,,„ }Hr. AItb.ISTRONG.--1 said get him home as soon as }ou eau and give him some hot tea. She said " she habit ofm .ater,.ready for him." The deceased was not in the i liuy' iirli.ogie to his tea rooth er as 11()W --"File prisoner was alone. I told . my ~,_ soon as I got home what the prisoner had said. I eed,isset:ken before the coroner on 'Wednesday, and the de- Itichiwirds teelrelsY onithe Monday previous age. WlO. Eccles was Lay brother. I have aamsils3teyrenaranieeld Mary Eccles. Betty oracles (the prisoner) is t own mother. My father urn f iv u e , ° : tlv°evico.rkion Sund aY, e a e nd w al ls °not accustomed to , d ret . , - remember my brother I% ilharn .Eccles yin,. , I:l,:slast time I saw him was when he was coming out ot the Is is ',e. Ile had had his dinner. I know my brother had had 41"!_a!unnaeor; bees he said so. There was potatoediash e for W ti l Y tie t i s ! I eat in thedoven. Sometimes we dinetdotit ff hen was tlaleY inir‘t,er, and no one else ea that dish In potatoe ash'. ref aoar. I we t t b .IY•mother said she had had her dinner , was in the house about . quarter of an thu eer. . ‘ , %7 ) back to my work. I was quite well after my e hie pl a , e general( dine at 12 o'clo c k. I worked , at the tet p , e e 4 i my brother Williarn, and gave our Wages tile ti i'celes• I got halta-crovvn a week. Betty Eccles got ethe,?!.!l,r's wanted for the house, and she cooked them. No k y 'Ye son was employed. No one lived in the house but l ietty " l l and brother, arid Betty Eccles. I remember death. ;,les getting into liquor shortly before William's li WO Ol L_ue said he would tell his father. he said `` s h em bseth2eo s hut . of he if he did tell his father." . She beat y ,ozill thel" stlstriee.tiles. We were not troubled with riaamts mice odri:din graphhouis°e w e ek rtniggilrilt obfjohree nitaiymbrooftelrice ) an Mary d, r„after Alice died, " Let us go and see Alice's. we s hall she said " NO, I have trouble enough on my mi_nd, nati on have another dead in our house before long." (Sea' cl in court.) ttt,?sp'examined.--My It is 10 ears old. Alice was tevolleles' own child. It takes us a qua rter of an hour 01C11erY.,Eecles, a nice intelligent girl, said she was 10 years Ft4 se s n ' W ent to school every day. She said she said her 11 h 4 ' end knew it was ba d thing to tell lies. lies Ya littowNT --Sh a tld it was issy thjc,- 'Yedriesday. She was told w to as te t l o l IV' , one aasskae asked a n d er t thin ~,..., ts.s,i_! witness was subjected to a good deaFof examination Lis L'orrtsiu whether she was capable of giving evidence, and tn,h,dshlP decided she was fit filre) b "nation conti d I am . ten years old. I remember ardirriootehrer Nyilliana adi}iin"—. On that day I had " taty " ash ivere,get his I.IY Mother dined with me. 1 did not see Wil th sa euid s uinner, I was gone to school. My inpther said e kit i• have a damson.pudding for dinner. 'When I gr . ) he!, dcoe as (piel), ,aen tie I asked for the damson -pudding and shesaid di (lit! not tke to make it, but would make it the day after, je" ° ,,,t do so. I was not at home when my brother ° we II„ was very poorly at night. My brother lay closea threeteha;r • • Ire,rksaBl,arrlined.‘---aMy mother and I had gone to some fire a.ls,.„',4-le rearin .of a chimney . Sast„, A nn i g" h ° tlopkinson was then . called, but as she did not e rriv e ~' •'er recoguizances were estreated. A train would end hi quarter before twelve, by which she might come ; li. sr4hZlsllis) directed the case to proceed. llbefeber .-• r,1.1 live next door to the prisoner. I.re tis4W thtiO?lt into her house on the night her stepso9 died. tha w Prisoner, and I asked if it was her son Richard said !Z e d: _ , S he said no, it was her son William. She bed 'lin g - 8 ( heti of inflammation. I said I thought it strange t (44141 s t i on• I told her to have the body examined, ii,e4ble 1 , was afraid of infection. She said she had bad She It4,le,;(2Qgh• Other perso ere present in the house. ~,rosa -I'Y a ngry at what I s a id Ziththoe;elarnined.---What the prisoner said she said openly. te 11:it11:48. Haslana.--I am a waggoner. I am acquaeleniesd. illY beelittitted, ea. I remember the death of be g o . died. She sc,,, e ' 3l le h ad told me of it the morning after to h! . .) shetrws for me to tell Henryihu! , hi ii came home rim is di11,.,.._ old me to tell him, that . W I ia they (husband of the pri brought h liette'r: YestFrday, and eat heartily, nd li °VA r 4' Lill at litlrad, ut I rVi ng hi night, and he died at eight, a and that she 11 44 p ay, en" In on Friday." . I called at the house on 14 t ke rida "eerY told a re it was no use of In 54 bo otie Y. She said then that two policemen hadmseeaerch.ed tilat i i11ee.,(12%.v0. doctors had come an d . opened the body, ilhi„eaim ea s t tell Henry that all was r ight, and that they ea an ted "sul'et thing 'ScI asked what the du bo m y: l h in a g d . ha s d he to sa h i i d s I, ls e ci e forttT ere husbancl btoadcoamdearrhosemne that day, for she . had J ° cod club cooneY, and they would not give it, which I o n e Tilroweas to be had at the works. Co. el tdi te are 1 44 %-sl am bookkeeper at Messrs. den a an t i urial ehiat_the woP,esrsons employed there. We mhaveember of that t)feptlerie3reett/n BeTthty teeeleasseedomsva in a g a to me on the 10th 411 5 4 ehihi r theist,la and she claimed the benefit of the fund 0,,11ee, I told her she was not entitled to any. ve,l,ker h„, rather of the child not working at the works, Illoy'Y lia,„`narid lied worked there as formerly then sh e . tt ty 7l o n -tl`!eo entitled. I told her that childre f n . t e e % tep t ,,g ehia,7 Premises wou have the benefit, or a h _ / rs t Ab , e eraPloYed. I advanced 10s. on the 10th ot driedl to l l ° st a uk 1 1 e d i lent 15s. more oil the . 15th. The money tilo, h er , out of the wages of William and Richard . . thre`"at children more than seven years old em I411(1 g i l ls Wltilwonld have 50s. I saw William on the Mon diitoglll. I" h is Way to the works. He looked anxiou s aaw the Prisoner the next morning at the Mon nett not e , 9e se • She said 811 waned the funeral allowanc. 4e.'lllar ;'..,°,,e h er the Money , ebuwtaasaid she was to come again Sep t es I used th e money, from some suspicions. eei:i'::es thirdY., alid did not come the next morning. the 28th e:re,,erber Wrl!!!nsPctor of police at Bolton.— ,tme 1 tookerlt, to the. prisoner's house. I went to as orgr e ed by the le e : ill the rier into custody the next day. • \Vil! as boo s When I took her I cautioned her in t he be,,,liire ! told her she was charged with the . d;flag Poo ee !es, by •poison. I asked her how long g he e a d is ork er ve fi)efore he died ? She said, he had ea.te7robi 1114(1 hebeut eleart;lY on the Monday, and returned from et , b ete sr .elock very poorly. I asked if any doctor , 4 , 11 4 tit b een ev,, from ? She said she had called on Dr. Mal. 'i; t er 4 4 1 1( 1 8 i t ",! L borne. She had administered some , ' 4 }; ' th1441.-' "eraelf, and that he died about six hours kiih e hafi eve "eeh to Noserofes . 41181?4 vert4il.,44 poison in th'e house for the purpose of and after that I asked her dip ever h a ,' • She said, to the best of her recollection Iti 4 is, Of ".,•, I asked her i'f h knew Mr. Moscrott s, the 4 be tt lY be Nd's-road ) Sh; esaidsh_e did, and had fro_ ',4(1 bO4ZIIt muff . d . h e the oght an._ ,ii trifling articles. said I asked her if , , he , ,tovvin: Poison there? and she _ she had not. he _7 the _a...n y the apprentice of Mr. o ught ft ty th e eeri.P,.insoner, and that she had bought poi , dp,,ltiehlerriJedg'ec.4...... It_ • has the appearance of a new house. t(l:ggitt: Nriows.u_ere %vas . some brown . gar in the house. %h":tAts'qn• 568 N, the,_ep,prentice to M.r. Moscroft, Bolton, it d i ' e ll for veP.,r_lhc!ner has been _ln the habit of coming li e e4 rri e t,s4tter ea•rin months be for e she was taken up. of September, h4veli!,;(l ,'loar sho;:alikedugustor begi n ning a _ tiletell''' Ik lr w v„ an t a P'ennywo master arsdenile wiferyeouinwti to ( i n is 844.: •stoseroft said I cannot let you have it unless llilel shop. tme %tie. allY 1 4 4 1 ejse With ? oil She said she did not want e,,e44':irsed s,; v 4,tii it, it vva ) s n . l for the mice. MY master, zkeleelliiri i ll :,, let her have 't y She then went away, anu I,o4.,44i:ttient,lat.l.lf-an-houi i with a female, n and then an th,e'lea qeison.,°, glnito her by Mr. Mosc t T e t r , w l r a a b p e p ll e e r d ‘ 4 tv,trtiner iBitnilar wordlis bu tl o n g er,ivl he t no doubt but 1 _ a a n v I 1 r .114 4 4 I BRetlie wsrnan• Thepiisoner came once or twice 0 4,,,, 44 Ai. , Uerally supplied her. 144):lrleeir:' eoeli4rheroft, 'druggist, Bolton said, I remember a IY 47, S ept„ 4t "n,Y shop at the latte; end of August or be . - Lt 111 418 4- -rnuer• This witness corroborated the testi ,e(!ro.' liriBJ2rotiee, but lie would not undertake to swear , tinitim-eltnol"4" Was the woman who called. 1 loiteniastl fr'e°-•-•A rsenic is often used for killing rats and Iva:4ill ° l ) en t ,i' beni,, (Netitly mixed with whitewashing. arljoite I;7' eargeoll., Bolton. —On the 2 . Bth Sept. li i , kr, tilfig to • of 'William Eccles. The prisoner was . „alitt't iva.Z!'lY ea7T The external appearance of the body gi„ itdi p !a 4 h i... , I Y. I oened the stomach. The muco . u. r s tiltqin f o ' ll r r u iß to artihssate of inflammation. A white powdee, tl,,asttonaohonee, :i coat s of the stomach. I obletrovo;:. i 't , h e I t e o .. 'Al t ': , a l/ U . t, and tahodtit;otyw• brow red fluid. dl all ' lies,' e eesed 'ttBo,l, a ehemisteolgjr°e'antinel.inence in Bolton. tleitnti`il whil:Ated f•,. , • ctr tt some irrita ' The I ‘,, I °., elq to p ro i ould expeet from el -on The smallest ble poison. stomach iite%ied. wkitehq (2481Claeieth 18 4 al g r aiu . s, P and .111 r. A . Vi!tson told Nl°tak lii th vot,,iti_. r!e• The taking of arsenic is accome ety.apteeStoiaachult ,11! about half an hour. I found . 11 Ic is „,_ j ihe countenance of a person having atilf o ,.ur, I_,&:_ri rally pinched, aria has an appearance of whiltettit s,sitolieleZ....arAth a!sisted. m e in opening the striac a li n . ,i 5,1 bowitil'earaece •-sPirs.on in great fear would have n , 11' hiittwreia the . bled stoual men have frequently foun d -re keind to be mistaken °n o°llSe a d che t ul to ica a l examl . 0 , i40 het, pit% 4 .01 t,oek, c"karth. oh i L e b A 047 was ysician, 13olton, said he Was present tiLe ~,,It opened. He corroborated the testim a o n ny , ,littOed it, 13e ss 114 to the c i b r y 1 1 _ e t,,,, ts_A e _ _ appearanFe of the body, a steel, , titi.uuth *,..icisou ill 1 from, arsenic. was a pupil aati4lnet tb.to4 kr _*7 n ciaenaist, Holton. —I the ivilit . Iv eotiteei. tong tune. I received on 2Bth DSeeri: ii . e 4 ,,, e co ht _ 8 ,of a stomach of a boy from Mr.narsish -.144 4*(4, vtits of the stomach consisted of ia c-I sub l't tlie .a P c po or ion aclherin t the stomach. it to ~ ot 4 fr*der to cheaerzi:gitiien°ation, and found he 141,k:las,IL4tr4115' sold mica s pplied not few n e ( ri mtt N;e11 difterent t3ests, aend frolnaall these I fouder it'sealc. I collected g 8 Ir.rain3 of the pow after the experiments. (The witness here produced the pow der which resulted from his examinatioils, along with the remaining portion in the state in, Which it was found in the stomach. These were examined his lordship and the jury.) I have no doubt it is arsenic that was in the body. - - Cross-examined.—Doubts have been thrown on the ap pear:laces which I have here-noticed. Tartar emetic would produce the same appearances. (The witness was directed to procure an ounce of arsenic from a neighbouring druggist.) Richard Eccles was then recalled by his Lordship, and said, that he had never see►► any white sugar in the house. Mary Eccles said the same. Dr. BROWN then proceeded to address the jury on be halt' of the prisoner. He said that the jury must be satis .n—i 61-1.:11 .1• 1 r lie arsenic, anc argued that the motives alleged for the prisoner having administered it were insufficient to induce her to commit so abominable an offence. He went on to notice several particulars iu which the evidence, on which he alleged the counsel for the prosecution relied so strongly, did not in any way impli cate the prisoner in any guilt, but might all have happened with the most perfect innocence on her part. During the delivery of the learned counsel's address, Mr. Watson returned with a small bottle which contained an ounce of arsenic, procured at a druggist's shop in Titbebarn street, and which was handed to his Lordship and the jury, and inspected by them. His Loans HIP proceeded to sum up the evidence at great length, commenting on every portion making for or against the prisoner. The jury then retired ; and, after an absence of an hour and a half, returned into court, and pronounced the prisoner guilty. Silence having been proclaimed, his Lordship put on the black cap and passed the awful sentence of death upo❑ the prisoner in the following terms:—Betty Eccles, that fearful crime which you have certainly committed, and which you probably hoped would be concealed from the eye of man, has been discovered, and you are now to receive from the of fended laws of your country that sentence which is most justly due to guilt such as yours; for the jury are satisfied, and I ani satisfied too, from the legal evidence in this case, that you have been guilty of the detestable crime of depriving your stepson of life, for the purpose, probably, of receiving some small amount of money, but under a violation and total disregard of every feeling of human affection, and of every feeling of duty. I have spoken of your conduct only as it appears from the legal evidence in this case ; but, as 1 knew all that was disclosed before the coroner's jury, I am satis fied that I see before me the murderer of three human beings, probably of five; because there is not the least doubt that you destroyed two of your own children, if not two others, by the same infamous means as you used in the case which has formed the painful subject of inquiry to-day. The punishment that you will receive will, I trust, be a warn ing to others. lam unwilling to say any more of your guilt, because it is not my object to harrow up your feelings, but only to impress you with a sense of your fearful situation, and to exhort you to spend the few remaining days which the humanity of the law now allows you, but which you did not allow to the unfortunate victims you have murdered. in seek ing pardon for your sins where alone pardon can be obtained ; for many hours you cannot expect to have in this world, and I should be wanting in a sense of duty, if I held out the least hope or expectation that pardon was to be obtained from any thing human. It will be for you now, profiting by . the instructions you will receive, to endeavour to excite in your mind any feeling of repentance you may be capable of; for upon that alone your hopes of pardon from God will rest: But I can say no more, only to advise you to spend the few remaining days of your existence in the endeavour to obtain that divine mercy which I cannot hold out to you. But it becomes now my duty to pass upon you that awful sentence of the law which your enormous guilt richly deserves. I be lieve I may say, from the evidence brought before this jury, and which might have been brougbt, that, in the annals of crime, great and odious as the crimes are that have been com mitted by human beings, there is none equal to yours. The sentence upon you is, that, for the crime which you htt've committed, and of which you have been found guilty, you be taken hence to the place from whence you came, and from thence to the place of execution ; that you be then hanged by the neck until you are dead, and that your body be taken down and buried within the precincts of the gaol in which you will be confined after being taken from this court ; and may the Lord have mercy on your guilty soul! The prisoner heard her sentence with firmness; and, at its conclusion, she clasped her hands, and exclaimed, I ask for mercy, my lord. The Judge.-oh, that cannot be obtained. Prisoner. -01 1 , mercy, my lord. If only you will have mercy upon me this time, my lord. The Judge.—Take her down. The prisoner was then removed. NISI PRIUS COURT.-TUESDAY THORNTON AND OTHERS V. THORNTON AND ANOTHER. This was an action to recover £G7, the amount of a bill of exchange, and also £lOO for goods sold and delivered. It was undefended. The plaintiffs were John Abraham; William Thomas, and Joshua Thornton, machine.makers, Laken, Yorkshire; and the defendants were William Carr Thornton and Joshua Williamson, patentees for a peculiar mode of card setting. Proof was exhibited that the two of the de fendants had admitted one of the items, and as they did not appear to dispute the other, his Lordship directed a verdict for the plaintiffs.—Damages £167. V. In this action the KINLOCK defendant soug TYRRELL. ht to recover a sum not specified, as th e va l ue o f certain goods which had been left at the house of the defendant, an innkeeper in this town. Mr. Wortley stated the case to the jury. He said the plaintiff, Colonel Kinlock, had been in the army, and had been resid ing with his lady in Scotland. The defendant was Mrs. Mary - Tyrrell, keeper of the Grand Junction Railway Inn, Lime-street, and the amount sought to be recovered was the value of certain luggage deposited at the inn, and lost by the negligence of defendant or her servants. Plaintiff arrived from Glasgow by one of the steamers, and being anxious to stop fur the night at an inn in the neighbourhood of the railway station, he made inquiry, and was directed to the hotel in question. He accordingly procured a cart and a porter, saw his luggage loaded, and sent it to the hotel. There were amongst the packages two carriage imperials (or boxes,) and a cap-box--larger than a hat-box. These con tained nearly the whole of the wardrobe of Mrs. Kinlock, who was going with plaintiff to pass the season at Leaming ton. On reaching the inn, plaintiff and his lady were shown into apartments. Shortly after as the night w as com i ng on, plaintiff exp resse d a w i s h that his luggage should be sent to the railway station, so as to be in readiness in the morning when he purposed to start for the south. The waiter, how ever, interfered, urging that the goods would not be so safe at the station, as the parties there would not be regponsible for them, as they would be at the inn, and he (plaintiff) was accordingly prevailed upon to leave them at the inn, where they were left In the passage or lobby. Next morning one of the imperials and the cap-box, to the great mortification of plaintiff and his wife, were missing, and from that day to this they had not recovered a single article which they contained. Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid would depose to the value of the articles, which were worth, at least, X3OO. On the same morning, one of the imperials was found at two o'clock in Peover-street, near the Police Station, at the north part of the town. It was found at the end of an entry, reared on end, broken open, and completely ransacked of its contents. He (Mr. Wortley) could not, iu this case, go for damages, for the great inconvenience and mortification to which the defendant and his lady were put by the loss, particularly under the circumstances ; but he thought the jury would not hesitate to return a verdict for such amount as he should prove as the value of the goods. The defendant pleaded, first, that she was not guilty ; and, second, that the plaintiff did not bring the goods into the house. Witnesses were called who proved the depositing - of twelve packages at the hotel, the conversation with the waiter, the missing of the two boxes, and the fact that one of them was found, as stated, empty in the street, and taken to the police office. Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid produced a list of the articles missing, and had made an estimate of their value separately, which, however, was not gone into. The gross amount, as estimated by her, (most of the items being taken from the tradesmen's bills, they being recently purchased,) was £213; and she stated her belief that they could not be replaced under about £3OO. They consisted of valuable silk dresses, chiefly new, caps, jewellery, laces, &c. Mr. Wat son, for the defendant, cross-examined the witnesses. Mr. WATSON, in addressing the jury, contended that, though innkeepers were generally in the position of insurers of the luggage of their guests; that they were not so with regard to articles of great value in comparatively small packages, unless instructions were given to them of such value, so that more than ordinary care might he taken of them. The goods were d epos i te d i n t h e passage with the knowledge an sanction of the defendant. That they had been carried away he had no doubt, by some person who probably represented himself as a guest; but he did not con ceive his client was liable, as the negligence was on the part of the plaintiff. He instanced a case, which he considered analagous, of a robbery of a package of bank notes from a coach. The value not having been stated to the coach pro prietor, it was held that he was not liable. His client knew nothing of the:articles, or their value. His Lottnsitir, in summing up, said that the defendant was clearly liable in law, though the case was to her a hard ship. They had heard the value, as stated by the servant maid, to the best of her belief, arid must estimate the damages on her statement to the best of their judgment. The Jury, after consulting for some time, retired, and were absent about an hour. On their return, they gave a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £l5O. CROWN COURT.--WEDNEsnAY. His Lordship took his seat shortly after nine o'clock THE GREAT ROBBERY. Edwin Lu cas , aged 31, and SILK Nathaniel Lueas,32, (brothers) were indicted for having at Leigh, feloniously stolen a large quantity of silk and manufactured goods of that material, in cluding a number of pieces of Gros-de-Naples, some pattern tabs, 6501b5. weight of dyed silk warp, and 110Ibs. silk weft, the property of John Barton, of Manchester. The property taken, as it will afterwards appear, was of the value of nearly £3,000. Mr. Baines and Mr. Holton conducted, the prosecution, and Mr. Wilkins defended the prisoners. Mr. &AMES, in stating the case, observed that the pri soners at the bar had maintained, up to the time of the transaction at which they had now to inquire, a most re spectable station in life. The prosecutor, Mr. John Barton, carried on business in Manchester on a large scale as a silk cloth manufacturer. On the night between Whit-Monday and Tuesday, last year (the 16th and 17th of May) the pre mises of Mr. Barton was entered by some parties who had got into the cellar by means of a skeleton key, and theece into the counting-house above, in which the goods were de posited. The place had been left secure on the preceding night. On examining the place next morning, it was found that the silks had been carried off, to the amount of £l,OOO. - The articles were 25 pieces of Gros-de-Naples, a quantity of pattern tabs, 6501b5. weight of undyed silk warp, called orgarizine, 1101bs. of silk weft, the two last being all the stock of that kind which the prosecutor had on the premises. The parties who bad committed the robbery had evidently been well ac quainted with the nature of articles of that description, as they had taken the most valuable, those of an inferior de scription being left behind. From some circumstances that transpired, suspicion attached to the prisoners soon after the robbery; and on Thursday, the 19th of May, an ofticerwas sent to the place where they carried on their business, at Leigh, near Manchester. The prisoners were, at that time, doing little or no business, having discharged their foreman, they not having employment to give him. The officer was admitted, and told the prisoners of the robbery. They said they knew nothing about it, and would take him over those parts of the house where they kept their articles of trade. They showed him into two room s , which he examined, but found nothing ; and he, thinking all was right, went away, without examining any other parts of the preMises. On his leaving, they told him if any such silk came to their neigh bourhood they would send word to Manchester. On the 18th of June, the prisoner Edwin Lucas went to the shop of Mr. Lewis, in Manchester, and between that time and the 12th of July he went several times to that gentleman and sold him some Bros de Naples, which was part of the stolen property, but which he said was his own manufacture. About the same time he also went to Mr. Lord, in Manchester, (a silk mercer,) and sold him a number of pieces of coloured silk, which were al so M r . Barton's property, and which that gen tleman was al s o l e d to believe were also of his own manufac ture. The invoices were made out, but some of the silk was therein noted down as black, probably to evade suspicion, that which he so ld to Mr. Ford being c hi e fly coloured. Two or three weeks a f tera person named Walmsley was employed to dye some goo d s for the prisoners, at their premises at Leigh, and he th ere saw a bundle of organzine silk, , about -10Ibs. weight, and, f rom time to time, he occasionally saw pieces of silk, but h e could not tell where they came from. He saw, altogether, a b out 3 cwt. of that kind which, it would be shown, had been taken fr om t h e prosecutor ' s premises. He saw no manufactured coloured sjlk there while be remained. In consequence of suspicions that subsequently arose, a 1)011m-officer went to the now ;:f the prisoner at Abraham, near Leigh, on the 7th of I.lli, the morn;o2.. The officer w. and found in a writing desk cloth. Mr. Barton. !!.1 , Prosecw, last, at an early hour in Amitted by Edwin Lucas, luitntity of tail-ends of silk wris xvith Idea, and said, ih prisoner's hearing, that thcv xverc his property. said some of them had been filen! for some time—some as long as two years. Mr. Barton asked if they chose to say where they got them from, and the younger brother said he did not think that a proper question,—he'd answer it at another time. The officer afterv:3ids went to another house. a quarter of a mile off, which was held by the prisoners, and there found seven pieces of black silk handkerchiefs. A to was in 0-- Prisoner re house. As one officer was leaving with them in a parcel, another, having in charge the two prisoners came up and, on seeing him carrying something, said to the woman, " Did you tell them where you had them from." She said, " I told them from you," and he replied, " that's right. —[Our subsequent account of the case is condensed from such part of the statement of the learned counsel as was proved, and the evidence subsequently adduced, and uri contradicted.]—On the Ist of March, a police-officer went to Mr. Lewis's warehouse, Church-street, Manchester, and received seven pieces of silk, which were produced. On the 2d of the same month, another received three pieces, also produced. A dyer named Walinsley went in April last year to the prisoners at Abraham. and was employed by them to rectify some silk that was unfinished. He being out of work was asked to stay with them, and then dyed 30 or 40Ib weight of silk, warp and we ft— a ll black. Between and the October following, he dyed 6001 b weight of silk weft—black. He saw a quantity of other silk—black orgazine. There were several lots of the same :shade, and he remarked that it was well dyed to hit it. He saw no manufactured-coloured silk, nor did the prisoners tell him while he was there that they had taken another house. He left them in January. The witness, on cross-examination, said that he slept in the house with Nathan, the younger prisoner; that he was there during the whole of Whitsun week ; that they generally went to bed together about 10 o'clock, and that on no occasion during that week 'did he miss the prisoner when he awoke, or in the morning. A good deal of ,evidence was gone into in order to prove that on the night of the robbery the prisoner Nathaniel was (with a companion) at a public-house at Barton-on-Irwell— was there with a Spring cart, and something in it ; also that he had been at Tilsley on the following morning, on the way (though circuitous) from Manchester to Leigh with some sort of cart—but this was by no means distinctly proved. Mr. Barton then proved, • -by corresponding patterns, tabs and otherwise, that the goods produced were his pro perty. His warehouse-keeper corroborated him ; spoke solely to the warp of the manufactured goods and the sel vages. The silk handkerchiefs they could not swear to. Other weft had, it appeared, been used in making them into cloth. It was admitted by the prosecutor that a great number o f pieces of silk similar to that produced had been sold by him, but the pattern and style were uncommon. Mr. WILKINs addressed the jury in behalf of the priso ners in a most able manner, availing himself of every point he could possibly, seize in behalf of his clients, and urging that there was no proof against either as to the robbery, and . . that at the most the evidence could only bear out a charge o receiving. The JUDGE stated the case in a very clear manner, recapi tulating every particular point of evidence. The jury retired for about an hour, and on their return gave a verdict of guilty of the robbery against Edwin Lucas, and not guilty as regarded Nathaniel. Some respectable witnesses were brought forward, who gave the convicted prisoner a good character over a number of years, as being respectable and respected in the neighbour hood, and, as a master, a friend to the poor: After the last . , witness to this effect was heard (some postponement having taken place owing to his absence), Mr. Hutton, the junior counsel—in the absence of hi s sen i or , an d a l so f Mr. Wil- kins, stated to his lordship that a police -officer of Manches ter could say something on this point. His lordship as sented ; and the officer beim); called, be stated, in a some. what eager manner, that be had seen the prisoner during tho last two years in the company of persons in Manchester who he knew to be thieves, and in houses to which they resorte, We do not remember to have heard before this sort of e deuce brought forward, in contradiction to those on charac ter, particularly in the absence of the prisoner's counsel, who might other wise have questioned its authenticity, and, per haps, disproved it. As it was, it added to the prisoner's sentence by perhaps some years of suffering beyond the seas. His LORDSHIP said that the prisoner had been found guilty of a heinous offence • that he had, it appe are d, b orne a goo d character, but that from what he had just heard, be had for feited that latterly, and the sentence of th e cour t was th a t he should be transported for fifieen years. The prisoners appeared to be rather genteel and good-look ing men. The younger was discharged. Th e e ld er , w h en he heard the sentence, appeared to be disposed to say somett but failing, he was taken down from the dock. MISDEMEANOUR, James Partington, aged 50, who had pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with having, at Bolton, put off a forged order to one John Makin, by means of which he ob tained a considerable sum of money, withdrew his former plea, and pleaded guilty. It appeared that he had been led to the commission of the offence by another prisoner named Horrocks. He had been imprisoned since the 10th of Fe bruary. His LORDSHIP, therefore, sentenced him to four months' imprisonment and hard labour. BURGLARY Win. Wood, aged 39, was charged with having, at Ashton under-Lyne, broken and entered into the dwelling-house of John Morris, and stolen therein four sovereigns and other moneys and goods. The prisoner was acquitted. UTTERING A FORGED NOTE Joseph Royle, 52, was indicted for having, at Manchester, uttered a forged note, purporting to be one of the notes of the Halifax and Huddersfield Union Banking Company for the payment of £5, with intent to defraud William Birchall— also with uttering another forged note to Isaac Staley. Tne prisoner, it appeared,. went to Birchall, who keeps the Fleece Inn, and asked tbr change of the note, which was af terwards found to be bad. The other he uttered to Isaac Staley, in payment for goods to the amount of about XI. He said, on being told that it was bad, that he had received it in Yorkshire, and would refund the money on the following Saturday, but did not. On being apprehended, he said he had received the note from a person named John Taylor, of Buckstones, at an inn called " Aunt Sarah's." A man named John Taylor, from a place three miles from Buck stones, was there, but did not know the prisoner. The pri soner had put his name on the note. He had, it appeared, been in the habit of travelling the country selling cloths, and also kept a provision shop. The superintendent of the Man chester police stated, on cross-examination, that a vast num ber of such notes had recently got into circulation in York shire and elsewhere, and that he had recently been on a trial in which it was shown that one man had uttered them to the amount of £lOOO. Mr. WiLictrts, who appeared for the prisoner, said that the prisoner had taken the notes unwit- • tingly, and had even put his name upon one of them.—The prisoner was acquitted. Cross-examined by Mr. JOSEPH POLLOCK.—It was quite light when we went into the shop. (The witness here said spontaneously, that when the prisoner mentioned arsenic she looked in her face so as to know him again if anything hap pened.) She stopped at the door; she did not try to get away, or show a desire for concealment. Thomas Wollenden 'examined by Mr. WILKINS. — I am apprentice to Mr. Howard. I remember about four o'clock on the 12th November, two women came in. One asked for arsenic, and referred to the other. I refused, as the witness was too young. She said it was to poison vermin, and men tioned twitch-clocks. I believe she said the other lived with her. He could not identify the witness nor the prisoner. Mr. Davies, druggist, Travis-street, examined.—My shop is about 200 yards from the house of the deceased. I had known the prisoner. From ten to fourteen days before the inquest prisoner came to the shop and asked me for some arsenic. She did not ask for any particular quantity then. 1 asked what she wanted with it. She said to destroy mice. I asked her if she did not keep a cat. She said no, she was frightened of cats. I did not give it her, telling her I did not sell it without a witness. She did not mention her husband. I told her to fetch her husband. She went away. She came :o the shop again that day with another person, Mrs. Dunn "now present). She said she had brought her as a witness. asked her if she (Mrs. D.) knew what prisoner wanted, and ;he (Mrs. D.) said it is all right, it is for the arsenic. Mrs. unter asked rue how I sold it. I said Id. per ounce. She said let me have two ounces. I let her have it. It was wrapped up in two papers, in one parcel. I wrote upon it poison" only. \V hile 1 was making it up, she said t sup mse there is as much there as would poison a person, and I ;aid yes, a dozen persons. I cautioned her not to let it come n the way of children. It was not in a metallic state. By the JUDGE.—No, it was in powder-,-arcenous acid. That is not metallic. She said she would soon make use of it in oatmeal balls and put it in the cupboard. 1 have sometimes admi nistered medicine to her children when they were poorly. No one came to me on the 25th November to say that hun ter was ill. Cross-examiined.—She made no mention of her husband. I have not given a different account from what I now give. She went away, as I inferred, to bring her husband. Arse nic is purchased for rats, mice, beetles, twitch-clocks, bugs, &c., and is frequently sold for that purpose. On the 27th November she came again to me, between seven and nine in the evening, for some mustard. She seemed in great trouble. I asked her what was the matter. She said her husband was very ill. I asked her what was the matter with him. She said she did not know, and that the doctor had ordered a mustard bath for him. She did not mention a doctor's name. To the best of my remembrance she did not mention Dr. Harrison's name. I swear she did not. Re-examined.—l never heard of deceased's illness till Sunday night. I said nothing about porridge. I always re quire a witness in selling arsenic, or require them to bring the colouring matter it is to be mixed with, and mix it with it myself. By the JUDGE.—The prisoner was not intoxicated when she got the arsenic. Elizabeth Dunn.—llived at the time in 'Walton-street. I remember the Friday on which John Hunter fell ill. On Saturday before (the 19th) I saw the prisoner between six and seven in the evening. She came to my house. She was not in the habit of coming. She asked me to go an errand for her,—to go to the pawnshop for her husband's clothes. I went to comply with her request. She said she was sorry I was so badly off, and had such a family to contend with. She gave me twopennyworth of whiskey. We got to Davis's. She had not before mentioned Davies. She said, how do you sell that stuff, Mr. Davies, for we are very near +mewed out of the house with twitch-clocks? She said her husband had gone to her club,—the Odd Fellows. Mr. Davies took the drawer out and asked how much would do, and she said about two ounces. She asked the price ;he said Id. She asked him if he would please to write on it what it was, and he wrote on it " poison." She asked him to put it in two papers, and he did. She asked, " Would this poison a per son." He said, " Yes, a dozen of people." We went away and she gave me a pennyworth of beer. She said she would come for me again. On the Monday morning follow ing she sent for me. I went and asked her then if that stuff was of any service in destroying the twitch-clocks. She said, " What stuff, my dear," and when • I told her she said, " I lost it on Saturday night, when I parted from you." Cross-examined.—l do not recollect saying when she asked for the arsenic that it would be all right. Elizabeth Bedford, a girl of eight years of age, was then called. In reply to Mr. Wilkins, she said that God would send her to the bad place if she told lies. Cross-examined by Mr. Pollock.—l was O nly toll to say that this morning in the house. I was told so before by the same person. (The witness appeared to be quite confused.) I have seen the person since in th e court, but I don't te,! him now. He wore a jacket like a factory man. No other person told me so before. Re-examined.---I attend a Sunday school, and the clergy man -talks of God and Heaven. I - learn the catechism. A lady tells us it is wicked to tell lies. A gentleman present, whom I now see, told me it was wicked to tell lies. That was when 1 went before the gentlemen (the grand jury.) By the JUDGE.—What do you think will be done to you if you take an oath, and then tell a lie ?—lf I told a lie I believe I should go to hell. Hell is a place of torment. She was then sworn, and placed on the table of the court. She said in reply, • I knew Mr. Hunter, and remember when he was taken ill. It was on Friday night. I used to go there to nurse. Mr. Hunter used to come home to his supper at six o'clock. I had been there that day. I went at tan o'clock in the fore noon, and stopped till Mr. Hunter cause to his supper. I took the children out before he came. Mrs. Hunter told me to take them out. It was about half-past five. Mrs. Hunter was then cleaning, Mrs. Hunter put their bonnets on. She told me to take them and play with them. I took them to the top of the street. She told me to bring them back about seven o'clock. I stayed out till about half-past seven with them. While I was out 1 met my sister Caroline, who took the children from me. In about five minutes after I went to Mr. Hunter's. I did not see him. ,I saw Mrs. Hunter. Mr. Hunter was up stairs. I often went there to play and nurse. There were two children. I have seen Mr. Hunter eat his supper. He had it generally as soon as he came home. lie had milk porridge, with a bit of meal in. When he took it be had generally one child on his knee and the other beside of him. He often gave them some of the por ridge. If the children were out at the time, their porridge was put in the oven. Mrs. Hunter used to clean on a Friday. She had sent me out before with the children when she was cleaning; and she put their bonnets on. She was generally cleaning before at three in the afternoon, and was cleaning then, and sent them out again. They had not been so long back that day when she sent them out again. When I went out with them there was water to boil on the fire in an iron pan that was used for porridge. The porridge was made with a little water, and a little meal and milk. Mrs. Hunter put the meal in the porridge when he came in. She put it in with her hand. She had frequently sent me out with the children after dark. I have before taken the children out at supper-time. When they returned they had their porridge, which their father gave them in basins. Sarah Street sworn.—l am wife of a warehouseman. I knew Hunter and his wife about three months before his decease. I occasionally went to their house. On the even ing of the 25th November, I heard somebody vomiting in that house. Soon after, the prisoner came for me—about twenty minutes after I heard the vomiting. She said. " Will you come in ? Mr. Hunter is very sick." I went, and found him vomiting at the slop-stone. I asked had he the bowel complaint? He complained of pain in his bowels, and said his throat was very hot. He said he thought it was from Cayenne pepper or snuff. I held his head. Prisoner came in and said, " John thought it was his porridge that had made him ill," and he said, " Give the porridge to the dog." She (prisoner) said if it was not fit for him it was not fit for the dog, and she had thrown it away. She said it was in a basin, and she had thrown that away too, into the midden. She said she had tasted it herself, and that it had made her sick. She said she had taken about two spoonfuls. She did not say what quantity the deceased took. The deceased vo mited into a tub in the slop-stone. There was much vomit in the tub. Mrs. Hunter threw it away into the inidden. She emptied the contents of the tub twice. He said in her presence that he would require help. Prisoner in conse quence went out, and stopped about half an hour. On re turning, she said neither Mr. Lonsdale nor Mr. Cook, the druggists, were in. D ecease d was then in th e p etty. He neighbour b e i r i y u r s iacsks ist b e u d t hciomulodutnooft the th petty.row up anything. 1 an d a of his stoma c h. Th e pr i soner d id not He also co mp l a i ned offer to go for any other doctor. I thought she had had some liquor—she cried so and made such a noise. Late in the evening a neighbour brought Mr. Willis, surgeon. He came about nine Welock. Dccea ed made use of the pot. The prisoner emptied it once. Mr. Willis saw the last motion. I stayed till 3in the morning. Mr. Lonsdale, Mr. Hunter's doctor, came next day. h unter mentioned the porrid ge t o hi m i n prisoner's presence. She said she _had taken so me o f i t , an d it had made h er sick. Mr. Lonsdale said he did not wish to attend deceased, a s Mr. Harrison had been called. I noticed what the deceased had vomited. He vomited carrots out in round pieces. I observed no curd in the fluid. On Thursday, the 10th of November, prisoner came to my house, and sighed very heavily. 1 asked her w h a t t rou bl e d her. She said, " No, Mrs. Strut, it is a drea m th a t 1 dreamt." She said s h e thought they had brought J o h n h om e dead,ancl he was riot well himself, and fancied he he would not live long. I never heard him complain ; I thou g ht him a healthy man. I never heard them complain of twitch-clocks to . mice. We hav e none in our house, which is next doer. Prisoner had never s p o k en o day after deceased died She ad no cat. Prisoner.lt was l oc k ed, and brought a b ox tot m our e o house e ni c. the afterwards delivered to Jackson. Mr. Hunter told r ue some ihe savngs' time before that they had money in t bank. I went the day after he died with her to the bank to get her :lame put in. (A small box was produced, containin g a bank book.) I have been shown this hoek. bee a th a t t h ere is £66 due to them. The prisoner, believe, cannot read, and I did not read the balance to her. There is a pawn ticket in the box, which prisoner also left with me. The remainder of the witness's evidence, in chief, was unimportant Cross -examined.—Air. Hunter and the prisone r li ved very comfortably together. I never heard them quarrel. The prisoner was a very good mother to her children. I always thought her more attentive to her children and husband than most people in her line of life. She took a deal of pains to make him comfortable. She kept her house very c l ean and peat, and took ti me over i t. It was her great distress at the BURGLARY Charles Pilling, ,19, who was indicted with two others, Crook and Young, who had pleaded guilty, was charged with a burglary at Bolton. The house of a person named Bridge was broken open on the 12th January, and a watch, some money, and some wearing apparel, were carried off. The only remarkable feature in this case was, that the only two witnesses against the prisoner, were, a man who had recently been convicted of felony, and a prostitute. The prisoner was acquitted. The other two prisoners (good looking young men,) had pleaded guilty to two indictments, and had pre viously been twice convicted of larceny. They were each to be transported for 10 years. MA !MOCKS V. BALL—An action to recover damages for an illegal distraint upon the plaintiffs promises in Southport. After the case had proceeded some tine, Mr. Knowles, who teprosented the defendant, said it was clear some mistake had been made, and he would therefore consent on the part of his client for a verdict for the plaintiff, with J.:10 damages. This: offer was acerded in, and a verdict for that amount W a s returned for,the --.ta..-- CROWN COURT. --YESTERDAY. His Lordship entered the court at a quarter past nine. MURDER, Mary Hunter, aged 29, was placed at the bar, charged with the wilful murder of John Hunter, at Manchester. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Monk were for the prosecution; and Mr. Joseph Pollock for the prisoner. Mr. WILKINS stated the case to the jury. He opened by making a very feeling and eloquent address, alluding hu manely to • the awful position in which the prisoner stood before them, and calling upon them to discharge their solemn duty conscientiously to her and to their country. He then narrated the leading particulars of the case, as they after wards appeared in the evidence, recapitulated the facts that bore most heavily against the prisoner, anti concluded by solemnly disclaiming all attempt in what he had said, or should say, to add a prejudice that would weigh, even as a hair, in inducing them to convict her. He was heard with painful and silent attention. Alice Belshaw, a girl, said, I live at Harrison's-terrace, Ancoats. On Saturday fortnight and two days, before going to the coroner, I saw the prisoner in the street. She asked me to go with her as far as Dr. Howard's. I asked her what she wanted there. She said she was almost awed away with twitch clocks and mice, and wanted some arsenic. I went with her. Dr. Howard keeps a druggists' shop in Ancoats lane. When she got me to the door, she said I must say that I lived with her, if they asked me anything. She asked me if I would say so, and I said I would not mind. We went in together. She asked for arsenic, but I can't tell for what quantity. She asked a young boy who was in the shop. He asked her what it was for. She said for twitch-clocks, and mice. He asked her where her witness was, and she pointed to me and said, " that is her." The boy said I cannot let you have it, she is too young. "Come," said the prisoner, "can't you let me have it, she lives in the same house as I do." He did not let her have it, and we left the shop together. She stopped at the door, and said will you take anything to drink. I went with her to th e Ab ercrom bi e, and I had two penny worth of gin, and she half-a-noggin of rum. I never saw her before that time. That is the young man I saw in the shop. POACHING AND ASSAULT Samuel Cowburn, 39. convicted last week of poaching with others, and violently assaulting a gamekeeper, was brought up, and after a severe address from his lordship, was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 18 months. The court rose at a quarter past six o'clock. There re mained about 80 cases to be disposed oft in this court. NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY. HOYLE V. HOWARD This was an action to recover damages for injury done to the plaintiff's property in Cheetham-street, R.ochdale, by a nuisance from the works of the defendant. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, who is a corn-dealer; Mr. Knowles, Mr. Wortley, and Mr. Noggins for the de fendant. After the case had been opened, and the first witness, who was the tenant of the plaintiff, bad been ex amined, it was agreed between the parties that the defendant should buy the plaintiff's premises at a valuation to be fixed by a party to be named by the plaintiff. A nominal verdict was consequently entered in favour of the plaintiff. ACTION AGAINST THE SHERIFF.--RICHMOND V. FRANCE This was an action in trover against the late High Sheriff of this county. Mr. Rotch and Mr. Hardern appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. Robert Richmond; and defendant was re presented by Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton. The plaintiff is a spirit dealer in this town, and the assignee of William Halliday a bankrupt. It appeared that 1841 the bankrupt took the Commercial Hotel in Dale-street, in this town, from the previous tenant, whose name was Leicester. Not having sufficient to purchase the whole stock, the bank rupt gave Mr. Leicester a warrant of attorney for the amount which he was unable to pay. About six months afterwards, Mr. Leicester put in an execution, under the warrant of attorney, under which the Sheriff sold the goods to Mr. Adam Eccles, a tanner, who was, in fact, the real defendant. Mr. Eccles, willing to be a friend to Mr. Halliday, allowed him to retain the property in his possession as reputed owner, taking an assignment, and to carry on the business as usual. Mr. Halliday continued the business a few months longer; when Mr. Eccles becoming uneasy about his money wished Mr. Halliday to give him a warrant of attorney upon the goods. Mr. Halliday, by the advice of his attorneys, gave Mr. Eccles a cognovit for £lOO, on Wednesday, the 30th of March ; but on the following Friday Mr. Halliday found, instead of being relieved from the pressure of his difficulties, his goods seized under a warrant from the Sheriff. The general creditors interfered, and on the 7th of April a fiat in bankruptcy was issued; on the Sth, the provisional assignee was appointed, and notices were served upon all parties con cerned that Mr. Halliday was a bankrupt. Notwithstanding all this, the Sheriff sold all the goods ; to recover the value of which the assignees brought the present action. For the defendant it was contended that the sale was made under the assignment to Mr. Eccles, to which a bill of sale was attached, and not under the warrant of the sheriff. Pos session was taken under the assisgnment, betbre the warrant was issued. The sale realized £412 55.. of which £256 3s. Ild. was paid to the landlord, Mr. Rigby Wason, for rent ; and the difference, it was contended, was the pro perty of the plaintiff for the general benefit of the creditors of the bankrupt. The jury, after retiring, returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £156 Is. Id. ; costs, 40s. TROVER EDWARDS V. BIRD.—An undefended action, in trover, to recover the value of a quantity of cases containing certain pro perty belonging to the plaintiff, which the defendant, it was alleged, had improperly converted to his own use. Mr. CROMPTON, for the plaintiff, stated that the plaintiff was a military gentleman, who, upon retiring from the army, en tered into partnership with some parties in carrying on a coal mine near Wigan. His occupation was to look after the business in Liverpool, where the defendant was employed in collecting orders. The partnership in Wigan was dissolved, and Captain Edwards was about to leave Liverpool for another part of the country, when the defendant, in whose possession the boxes in question were left, detained them on the ground that a sum of money was owing to him for corn tnission on his collection of orders. The learned counsel said if the defendant would give the boxes up he would con sent to a verdict with nominal damages. After the examina , tion of three witnesses, the jury returned a verdict for the plainfiff, damages, £29. THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. CROSSLEY.—The plaintiffs are wine and spirit merchants in Liverpool, and the action was brought against the defendant, a surgeon in Manchester, to recover a balance of £6B for goods supplied and money lent. The action was undefended, and a verdict was re turned for the amount claimed. BENvolv v. PLUMPTON.—The plaintiff in this case is a house and laud agent in Liverpool, and the defendant is Mr. Plumpton, one of the representatives, in the Town Council, of West Derby ward. The action was brought to recover the sum of £132 10s., commission on the sale of a quantity of land by the defendant to a Mr. Gosling, in the year 1839, for £5,300. The defence rested on the ground that the plaintiff had not introduced Mr. Gosling to the defendant ; but it failed ; and the jury returned a verdict fcr the plaintiff for 4:132 10s. i costs 40s. Mrs. Sarah Tonge called live in Walter-street, near the deceased's—two doors off. I remember the night. decea sed was taken ill. I heard the prisoners' voice in toe street that night. She was going to Mr. Hills, and asked toe to lend her 6d to get seine brandy, for her husband was Z.'lketi very ill. the asked me, for God's sake, to go in, her huseaud was so ill. When she came back with the brandy she said she knew he was a dead man. About three weeks before she mentioned a dream to me. She said she had been dreaming a curious dream. I laughed. She did not ti - en tell me the dream. When she said be was a dead ri - e•.e she said now Mrs, Tonge you laughed at me when I mentioned the dream. I told her it was nonsense and asked if she bad any young person In the family, as it was a sign of mar riage or some nonsense like that I went to the house and sawthe deceased in the petty very ill. He said his throat smarted after he had eaten the porridge. I assisted him into the house. lie could not get in himself. I aCe.ed him to go to bed. My husband came in and carried him up stairs on his back. He was then very sick and very sore. My husband went out for a medical man. I remaitiet , . till three in the morning attending him. The prisoner was not sober at the time when I went first there. Mr. Willis came that night to see him, about nine. Deceased was very sick. I did not ask her, nor did any one in my hearing, tell her to empty the tub. She emptied it every time it was used. On the same night Mrs. Horsfield saw prisoner down stairs smok ing her pipe. She said, " Mrs. Hunter, where the devil i 3 the meal that made John Hunter ill." Prisoner said, it's there, at the back of the fire; if it has made him ill, it shan't make any body else ill. I saw some of the meal on the fire partly burnt. Other meal was got to make the deceased some gruel. The fresh meal was got before the other was burnt. It was brought by a girl. I did not see the prisoner sick et that time. Deceased was a very steady man. The prisoner used to keep herself neat and clean till the last six months. She was given to drinking. When I saw her she was always in liquor. I have known her four years. There was a great change within the last six months. She became less tidy and less clean. Deceased said he should like to see Mary Ann Jackson, and I told the prisoner that. That was on Saturday. risoner called me into the back room, and said I don't like them, and they don't like me, and for that reason I shall not send for her. Cross-examined—l went very little to prisoner's without she sent for me. I never found them quarrel. They had the reputation of living comfortably together. She went up stairs with him, and assisted to make him comfortable in bed. She did not take pains to make him comfortable dur ing his illness. The prisoner, when deceased was taken ill, ran out and alarmed the street. She called out that he would die. Deceased said the moment he tasted the por ridge he became ill. He said when he had taken a few spoonfuls his throat smarted. Mrs. Hunter did not oppose my husband in going for a doctor. He looked melancholy and fatigued, and perspired. The vomiting was dark coloured. Next day he said his stomach was very sick, but that he was much easier than on the Previous night. I saw him on Sun day, and lie said his feet were very cold. His stomach was still sickly, but a little easier. He did not vomit on the tirst night after ten o'clock. She mentioned the meal being got about three weeks since. (The witness's desposition before the coroner was here put in. This was read by the Judge. The witness had then said, " the prisoner was sober for any thing I know." Also, " I never saw anything against her, and I always saw her tidy and clean. I have seen her only once in liquor, and then she was not drunk.") No one told me when I was before the coroner to tell all I knew about the matter. The first time I was asked about the meal was three weeks ago. I forgot it when I was before the coroner. I can remember things better that occurred six years ago, than six months. Re-examined. Deceased was very ill at half-past six' when I first went in. Deceased did not say anything about the taste of the porridge. He screamed out when my hus band took hold of his shoulders to lift him up. I meant to say that there was nothing but vomit in the pot that smelled ill, when we asked the prisoner to take it out. There were bluish marks on his face after he was dead. (The jury here left the court for about twenty minutes, under charge of a bailiff.) Thomas Willis called.—l am a surgeon. At the request of Mr. Harrison I attended his patient in November last. On the evening of the 25th of November, about eight o'clock, I went to deceased's house. Deceased was up stairs in bed. Prisoner came into the room two or three times. Deceased said he was sick and purged—he was sick to death. He said nothing of the cause, or the porridge, in the prisoner's presence. I asked her about the porridge. She said she had thrown them out. She said the porridge was very good, made from milk thickened with meal. The prisoner said he had had a red-herring for his dinner. I saw an evacuation. It was of a dark greenish colour, indicating absence of bile. I took his complaint to be an attack of English cholera. lie appeared in a colapse sitting up in bed. The symptons were those of cholera, or of the effects of arsenic, of which I had no suspicion at the time. I prescribed a drachm of tiuctnre of opium, alkali, acid, &c. I also administered pills. I was apprenticed in Yorkshire to a surgeon, and attended lectures. The second day the symptoms were those of poisoning by arsenic. The tongue was whiteish. The countenance palid, and expressive of great anxiety. The faeces not very offensive, indicating absence of bile. The prisoner said he had come home well. If he had come home well at six, he might have been in the state he was in when I saw him, from cholera. I think he said the porridge tasted as if there was pepper in it. Gross-examined.—l know something of cases of arsenic. I thought deceased was suffering under cholera, and so recorded it in Mr. Harrison's books. I thought it a very severe attack. I thought the liver was disordered. 1 believe I•said that the liver was slightly disordered, but I can't swear positively to the words. There was the sour smell of vomiting. It first occurred to me that it might be arsenic, from the symptoms. His countenance was pallid, and indica tive of anxiety. I should select that expression even if I did not think it was arsenic. There was nothing to induce me to believe, from what I then saw, if I had heard noifoing further of the case, that it was other than cholera. A severe bilious attack might, after a time, produce a painful sensation in the throat. Re-examined.—l have seen more severe cases of cholera than that. I think the arsenic might affect the ducts of the liver. The continuance of the symptoms on Monday ind , lced me to suppose there might be arsenic. If I had found diffi culty of breathing, &c., on Sunday, I should have sus pected poison. I have always found a reaction after the attack of cholera. If there was not, I should take it as a symptom of poison being taken. I never said his liver was no bigger than a walnut. I anticipated his recovery. En glish cholera may arise from taking improper food, or eating much fruit. I did not say he was sure to die. I said the liver was disorded. [The judge here said, that there was no chance of the case being concluded this day, and the jury must make up their minds to remain for the night in a state of seclusion.] Mr. Harrison, surgeon, of Manchester, said, I first saw the deceased on Saturday, the 26th of December. He was in bed, in a state of collapse, almost pulseless, great diffi culty of breathing, no particular pain. Hearing from Mr. Willis that be had suffered from cholera, 1 examined the ab domen, and expected to find pain. He had had great irrita tion in the rectum. I inquired of his wife about his general health. Prisoner said he was a very sickly man, and quite done. I cannot say whether that was true or false. He said he was better than on the previous night; the vomiting and purging had entirely ceased. He was indisposed to speak of his complaint. I never said anything about his liver. I took it, from the representation of his wife, that he was very sickly, that it was a violent attack of English cholera. Acute gastutus, or inflammation of the coats of the stomach, would have produced the same symptoms. Any irritant poi son would have produced these symptoms. I repeated Mr. Willis's prescription, with one drop of Prussic acid in place of the laudanum. On Sunday there was no improvement. There was a pressure on the cheat, and he was restless. He did not mention to me that he had cramps. I considered him in danger. I told his wife so: She did not seem to be much alarmed about it. She was always in the room, and did no thing particular to excite any remark. I ordered a blister to the stomach, and a bottle of water to his feet, which I found had been done. I also ordered a mustard bath, and afterwards an aperient draught, and a mixture of tincture of opium, potass. &C. On Monday morning he was sinking fast, and evidently dying. I ordered him half a drachm of carbonate of am monia, acc„ with lemon juice. A message came that he had suffered from cramp; that the knees were drawn up, and that he died. The prisoner did not at any time press me on the subject of his illness. On Tuesday morning she came to me with Mrs. Street. She was in great excite ment, and I smelt liquor, but she was not intoxicated. When I first went to deceased her breath smelt strong of liquor. On On Tuesday she wanted to get me to sign a certificate to get his money a t th e b an k . Sh e sa id his relations and she had been quarrelling, and wished to take the money, and do with it as they pleased. She wished to get it out immediately. I refused to have any thing to do with it. I made a post mortem examination along with Mr. Harrison, on Tuesday evening. On view of the body everything appeared perfectly healthy. On making the usual incision in thelabdoinen, we found every thing externally quite healthy in appearance. The incision was made from the pit of the stomach to the bladder. On reflecting the integuments, and laying open the intestines as far as the rectum, considerable inflammation presented itself, particularly in the stomach. (Witness de scribed the appearance technically.) Great corrogation of the bladder. The nucleus membrane of the stomach was considerably inflamed, particularly in the upper part. The contents of the stomach were gone—nothing left but a coffee coloured fluid and a small piece of potatoe. I examined the stomach carefully. The mucous coat was highly inflamed in distinct patches, and destruction of a portion. The destruc tion are well marked in several parts, and highly inflamed. The edges of the patches had a distinct termination to each abrasion. The patches were dark red. The paches could easily be scraped off with the finger. These patches pro ceeded from some foreign irritating body causing inflamma tion. The same appearance was in the duodenum, but in a less degree. I examined carefully with Mr. Dyson, and nei ther could detect anything. I don't think any combinati on of disease would have prouced the same result. The symp toms of poison are so anomalous that it is dangerous to give a positive opinion. I am confident, taking the symptoms before death, that no disease c ou ld h ave p ro d uce d t h ose ap pearances, which were quite sufficient to account for death. Those were quite such appearances as arsenic would rro duce. If arsenic had been taken, and purging and vomiting supervensd, the pain would not be so urgent as in the first degree, by reason of the vomiting and purging cawing off the arsenic. If I had known the deceased to be well, anal immediately after taking something to eat, cholera might come on, but milk porridge would not have produced the symptoms that have been stated. Suppose the poison were given in solution. and went into the system, the pain would thereby be diminished, as if it were vomited. The liver was healthy. The intestinalcanal was inflamed. In ordinary cases nature does riot support inflammation in two places at once, if arising from common disease. Nausea is a usual attendant before vomiting in cholera. In taking arsenic vomitting might come on in twenty minutes. If a large dose were given at a time, vomiting, I should say, would not be immediate, but in twenty mi nu t es . A u imme diate burning of the throat. Sickness might come on in a few minutes, twenty minutes, or an hour. If the stomach were empty, vomiting would likely come on earlier. Look ing at the body alone, without adverting to the other symp toms, I would say that the deceased did not die of cholera. From the symptoms I saw, I am enabled to decide this point with more certainty. I have seen Asiatic cholera. In the first instance I thought it an aggravated case of English cholera. I was sent to Newcastle by the magistrates of Manchester to watch the progress of the cholera there. 1 was four years connected with the Manchester workhouse. I was nine years engaged as medical inspector of the factories. In cholera the abdominal vessels are distended with venous or arterial blood. The destruction in the centre of each patch, as in the stomach of the deceased, is not observable in cas e s of cholera. It is usual in irritant poisons. The effusion in cholera is chiefly mucus, but not coffee-coloured. In cases of arsenic grumous or sanguiverous. In cases of inflammatio n arising from cholera, there are gene/Dili erea.A9Ait9n/ eywr time she called, that made me think she had*been drinking —nothing else. She appeared to be much and sincerely dis tressed about her husband's illness. He vomited pieces of carrots. They were not at all digested. He said he had had a herring for his dinner. Ido not think the prism= men ti( nA her dream. The deceased was not a very strong look in4 nm. He looked delicate in the face. He was very sal low, and dark about the eyes. We have twitch-clocks (cock roaches) in great numbers in our houses. When the prisoner canoe to me about the Savings' Bank, she said she was afraid that her brother-in-law, Jackson, would take the money from her. The prisoner's mother came on the Monday. She could not read or write, and asked me to assist her at the bank. She expressed great fear that if the money was not soon put in her name, the Jacksons would get it. She wanted mo icy for the funeral expenses. She had a little money in the house, but not enough to meet the expenses. Re -examined.—Deceased was, I believe, in two burial clubs. He told me there was a , sum to be received from each. toms. In cases of irritant poisons it comes on immediately. I have seen cholera commence with colapse as a first symp tom, but generally preceded by diarrhoea during the day. I have known no instance of colapse within an hour. The ilium is generally more effected than the jejunum. I have never tested arsenic, and authors differ on the point. I be lieve it to be acrimonious. I had difficulty in finding pulsa tion at all on my first visit to the patient. On my succeed ing visits he was pulseless altogether. If the vomiting and purging had ceased on Friday night, I should have expected re-action would have taken place. Cross-examined.—l tirst called on deceased about three o'clock. I apologized to his wife for not corning sooner. She said he was surprised I had not come before, or words to that effect. I can't say she said she was sorry I had not come sooner. I have not changed my opinion on this sub ject. When I went a second time deceased said he was better. Ile said lie was purged and sick after taking his supper, but did not say immediately. (The deposition of the witness before the coroner was here put in and read. It appeared that witness had then said that the prisoner had said she was sorry he had not come sooner.) The vomitings and purgings had ceased when 1 went there. I thought it an aggravated case of English cholera. In Asiatic cholera, sharp features, sunk eyes, cold breath. He had a remarkable ex pression of anxiety, being distressed by violent vomiting. I could not distinguish by one symptom. He had no pain as in peretonytus. There was no hernia. All species of violent vomiting would produce the same anxiety of appearance and prostration. He appeared to be about 35 years of age. Sup posing his stomach disordered by eating herrings, and fat beef and carrots, vomiting might be caused by taking porridge afterwards, but that does not correspond with the other symptoms. I believe the medicines prescribed were given regularly to him. Up to Sunday I believed it to be com mon cholera, and then thought it was a very mys terious case. I know a little of cases of arsenic. I had no suspicion it was arsenic, until I heard on Tuesday that the prisoner had purchased some gastro interitus acutus. The alkalis given him would have had a good effect in a case of arsenic. I can't tell whether the acids would have destroyed the effect of the alkalis on the arsenic. He told me he was costive, but that was from the disease. Gastro interitus accutus is a continuous inflammation of the stomach and intestinal canal. There would be heat and dryness of the throat —excessive thirst—the eyes an expression of pain and anxiety. The complexion would be sallow. Hunter was always sallow. In that disease he would have pain. It sometimes attacks very suddenly, but always with previous symptoms. If Martinet (a good authority) says it comes on suddenly I would still exenise my own judgment, unless I saw a distinct case. Spasms and pains would result. Stupor and prostration of strength would follow after some time. The urine would be defective. The deceased's tongue was! moist, not dry. He had no tension of the abdomen as in gastric diseases. The inflammation of arsenic is generally more confined to the stomach, than the inflammation of gastro interite, which generally extends to others of the in testines. The patches in the deceased's stomach were of a dark red colour. They were more red than florid. The edges were distinct, and no appearance of searing or burning Red patches have been observed after death from natura diseases, and even when there was no previous disease in the stomach. There was a thick sanguineous fluid in the stomach. The asaphagus at the lower part was inflamed. I should say there were some appearances of poison. Not such as common disease would produce. The soft state of the mucous membrane of the stomach might appear after cholera and other diseases. The bladder is corrogated in cholera. It may arise from natural disease. If I had never heard of any suspicion of arsenic at all, from what I saw of the de ceased on the post-mortem examination, I should medically and confidently believe that death arose from arsenic. The best authorities say that death may be caused by arsenic, and none of it be found. I found no appearance of arsenic. The whole of the stomach and bowels were analysed, and no ar senic was discovered. Ido not know of any case in which arsenic has produced death, and arsenic could not be found, in so short a period as between Friday and Monday. Four grains and a half have been known to destroy a child. But the best authorities give 20 to 30 grains. If such a quantity was taken in six table-spoonfuls of milk porridge, a very small part only would be in solution. If in solution, it would produce secondary symptoms. If not in solution, it would be ejected by the vomiting. I remarked the body was less decomposed than I expected. I attributed this in some degree to the preservative nature of the arsenic on the cor poreal tissue. If the arsenic prevented decomposition, it must have been absorbed. I cannot speak positively to this. I gave him laudanum. It would not have prevented the pain arising from arsenic. Where pain exists from arsenic, the pain generally continues to the end of life. The pain of arsenic generally returns as acutely as before. Supposing pain, such as that described whi c h T urner endured in the shoulders, &c., I cannot say with certainty whether it would not continue; but I believe that is the opinion of the best authorities. Arsenous acid may adhere more or less to the mucous membrane. It adheres more closely than a piece of potato. If the arsenic remained long enough in the stomach to cause death, I would expect it to be found, but it was not found. Re-examined.—l don't recollect the prisoner asking me anything about the progress of the deceased's illness. Ar senic will terminate in gastro interite, if it does not cause death. He had no pain as in gastro interite. The liver, heart, and brain were perfectly healthy. In my estimation the patches were produced by irritation causing inflamma tion. They might proceed from the arsenic after absorption. I attribute the death to inflammation from some foreign irritant body. From the combinations of symptoms carefully revised I cannot help thinking that it was arsenic. I cannot, after due reflection, come to any other conclusion. Thomas Wilson Dyson, sworn.—l am a surgeon in Man chester. I have been in praCtice about 8 years. lam a member of the College of Surgeons. I assisted at the post mortem examination. I can come to no other conclusion than that of Mr. Harrison—that death was caused by the introduc tion of some substance, and arsenic was the most probable. After the examination of the body, the conclusion I came to was that deceased had taken arsenic. I did know of the pre vious symptoms, and taking these with the post mortern examination, my opinion is more strong that arsenic was the cause of death. I judge from the extreme inflammation of the mucus membrane of the stomach and bowels, the great degree of softness of the membrane, the spots suffused, the great number of points of abration throughout the stomach and intestines, which were most present its these parts, which in cases of natural disease are most free, and from the quantity of red sanguineous appearances. The rectum was inflamed. The whole of the large as well as small intestines were inflamed, which rarely takes place in disease of the stomachs and small intestines. I found the bladder firmly contracted and empty. I have attended six cases of poison ing from arsenic. The symptoms were distinct and similar to the those cases, but more severe. I account for the absence of the arsenic from the stomach and bowels, either from evacuation by vomitting, purging, or from its absorp tion into the system. It might be carried away from the sys tem in 2or 3 days, in various ways. It would probably take a week or two, or perhaps more, to remove all traces. It is doubtful whether all traces would be taken out of the body in three days. I have read much on poisons. My reading assists me to come to the conclusion at which I have arrived. Cross-examined.—I heard from Mr. Harrison that poison was suspected. I believe it probable that I heard all the par ticulars. I expected to find the appearances stated. I have no motives of attaining notoriety by decisive testimony on this prosecution. I never said that I once said that I would give strong evidence and hang the woman, and that I would take the shine out of Dr. Harrison. I never bad any con versation with a surgeon named Worthington, or in his pre sence. I have inspected six cases ; I have not inspected one third the cases that have taken place in Manchester in the last two years. (Witness produced a list of seventeen cases since 1839 in Manchester.) In the six cases I inspected I found arsenic in all of them. In every case it was taken in substance, varying from a quarter of an ounce to an ounce: It would be held in suspension in boiling milk more than in boiling water. In sii or seven table-spoonfulls more than thirty grains would be dissolved,—the whole of it The medicines given would render it more soluble. (Here some question was put from a celebated authority relative to gastro interitus acctus, to which the witness medically re plied.) If the patient lived after taking arsenic from Friday to Monday night, there would be more extensive inflatnation. I knew cases of arsenic in which the patient has survived six days, and still arsenic has been found ; but not in cases in which it was taken in solution. I account for the arsenic disappearing in this case to the alkalis administered, promo ting its evacuation or absorption. I have tasted milk in which arsenic was boiled. It scarcely altered the taste of the milk, and I took very little. I dont think it would a taste, but as soon as it passed the gullet a sensation of heat would be felt. Mr. PoLi.ocx stated in effect to the witness in explanatory terms, that the questions he•had put to him, which had natu rally elicited strong contradictory replies as affecting him (the witness) were suggested solely from his instructions ; that he considered it his duty to the unfortunate individual whom be defended to put them ; and that he (Mr. P.) him self entertained no animosity or want of respect to that gen tleman. Mr. Dyson, as we understood from his manner, acquitted the learned gentleman of any intention of offering a personal offence. The learned JUDGE said that the learned gentleman was quite right, in accordance with his instructions, in puffing the questions alluded to; and that no offence ought to be taken on that account. Mr. Dyson, in reply to Mr. Wilkins, said—" There is not a shadow of a shade of truth in the imputation conveyed by the questions alluded to." It being now past seven o'clock, the learned judge pro posed that as there seemed to be no chance of the case coming to a conclusion that evening, it might be desirable to adjourn until to-morrow. Mr. WILKINS SaCd that as they bad still a number of wit nesses, besides medical gentlemen, to call, such an arrange ment would probably be agreeable to his learned brother, who would have his notes to arrange, as it would be to him self. Mr. POLLOCK expressed his assent, as the case for the prosecution would, he learned, occupy a considerable time. The Court was then adjourned till nine this morning; his Lordship stating that the grand :jury would be accomodated at the Adelphi for the night, and be under the care of three bailifN. They would, hawever, be made comfortable. The Court then adjourned. NISI PRIUS COURT-THURSDAY. Before Mr. Justice COLTNIAN SAMUEL v. MORRIS.-Mr. Baines and Mr. Cotupton ap peared for the plaintiff; Mr. Martin the defendant. The declaration was for the use and occupation of certein premi ses belonging to the plaintiff in North John-street, Liver pool, and on an account stated. The ease, as shewn for the plaintiff, was as follows :—The plaintiff, who is retired from business, is the owner of a shop in North John-street, between Lord-street and Harrington street, which he let in 1h36 to a person of the name of War burton, who carried on therein the business of a tailor. Warburton became insolvent in 1841, and iu the month of May in that year he executed an assignment of all his estate arid effects, in trust for the benefit of his creditors, to the de fendant, Mr. Thomas Morris. Under that assignment the defendant took possession of all the personal estate, of every kind, of Warburton ; and it was contended that he had, there fore, become liable for the rent of the shop. Originally the rent was £47 10s. a-year, but shortly before Warburton's in solvency it was increased to £57 10s., after which rate there were now due three half-years' rent, amounting to £B6 ss. The defendant had acknowledged his liability, under the assignment, to the son of the. plaintiff, and promised to pay, but he had not. The plaintiff was indebted to Warburton for clothes £6 15s. Bd. ; consequently £7995. 4d. were now due. Mr. M mum, for the defendant, said, Ire should put in the assignment made by Warburton to the defendant, which would show that the term in the lease had not been assigned, but only the stock in trade, book and other debts, and.. monies. He therefore contended that the action was not maintainable, on the ground that the term was not assigned; and further, that an assignee could not be sued for use and occupation ; and that no sufficient proof of occupation by the defendant bad been given. The assignment was then put in and read ; and the nephew of the defendant was called, who stated that he had heard his uncle deny his liability to pay the rent. Mr. BArriss was about to reply, when the ury said they would not give him the trouble, as they were of opinion there had been a sufficient occupation. . a verdict was then returned fur the plaintiff for the amount claimed; but on the app.lictition of AA % Martiin, the Judge said he would give leave to, mov e f ora new tr i al on the l ega l objections which had been raised m a th e part of the defen dant. F;e4,4ING, AND OTHERS tr. FA,NVCETT.—The declarati 3n in this case was (or work and iaboar done, and on an account stated. Mr. Martin and plitintiffs ; Mr. Duntins ;lii The trial of this t actions), occupied 11 shortly after ten o'c and of no interest e The plaintiffs, Thomas I and Richard Stout, arc calico ant place near Clithero ; end th:! tlfTt in London, who, at the period cf tl also carried o❑ business in the s; The plaintiff Mr. Stout attended to in Manchester, and his partners m Clithero. The defendant agreed number of mousseline des laincB to tiffs' works, according to certain cially provided for hint, upon term of much investigation, the chid• of ments should be made monthly. printed, the last parcel which wa The plaintiffs, not receiving p:iylni ditions, detained the last pnex,:i. action to recover the amount dou: Is. 6d. The defendant paid :EOO it liability to pay the remainder, on t damaged in printing, and retuned order of court) at a period when market. The case closed at a quarter to five o'c retired to consider their verdict. After 1 . .) they returned into court with a verdict f wages £l5B Is. 6d. ; the blocks and pa' defendant. TROVEI FAWCETT v. FIELDING AND OTIIF.I action referred to above. The declar recover from the defendants compel tamed from the plaintiff the 170 pie After the statement of the case DUNDAS, and the examination of ti Mr. DUNDAS said he was wiling to to say what sum his client was entit abide by his Lordships decision, with() going through the facts. Mr. MARTIN assented on the part o The JUDGE thought £lO would be addition to £9 which had been paid inl A verdict was then entered for the p itiff for SWAINSON v. SWAINSON AND _ a verdict was taken by consent for a subject to a reference. The Court adjourned a few minut o'clock --_-_...0....___ - THE CAUSE LI The Cause List, when the Court to as follows : FIRST LIST.-SALFORD Plaintif.—Nos. I, 2,3, 4,5, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24. 25, 27, 30, 31 Defendant.—Nos. 8, 12, IC Referred.—Nos. 28, 29, 4: Withdrawn.—Nos. 19, 3 Struck Out.—Nos. 45, SECOND LIST.—WEST DEIU P lainbff. —Nos. 1,3, 4,7, 8, 12, 1; 34, 39, 46, 55.64, 65, 68. Withdrawit —Nos. 2,5, 6, 9. 11, 1 23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 41, 42, 85. 86, 88. Referred.—Nos. 44, 49. In the first list, the only causes rem; special juries, " Farrar v. Deflinne," an( The former will be tried this morning ted to' occupy the whole day; the Tuesday next. In the other list th and 38 common cases to be ding. mences to-morrow week (l Judges must be in town ; in the of occupation here. Saturday CHESTER CROWN COURT-- (Before Mr. Justice 1 3fichael Mahar, aged 36, John Br 35, and John Hopkins, 23, were a house of Peter Woods, at Capanhurs moneys to the amount of £lo._ [We reported this case very fully vin brought before the magistrates at 13iracc The jury found Michael Mahar and acquitted the rest. The two were sentenced to fifteen ye On the application of the Attorney.t ordered Superintendent Boughev, an( Birkenhead police, to be rewarded for I exercised in the apprehension of the pri CIVIL SII (Before Mr. BARON MJ The Learned Judges this morning exc to Mr. Justice Williams being connec parties in a case tried. The whole p . were of a very uninteresting character 1. NISI PRIUS COURT.—WF Before Mr. Justice WILL' LOVELL V. BOYD AND OTHERS case Messrs. Jarvis and Welsby Mr. Evans and Mr. Temple for th was brought to recover the value of 370 ti wheat which had been sold to the plainti chant, residing at Bilston, in Stafforclsh dants who are corn merchants in Liv, was sold by a person named Pratt, and o sent to the order of the plaintiff by the c order it was shipped at Liverpool and trai Brook, in this county, where it was lodgt of the Duke of Bridg ewater , baying bee one of the D u k e ' s li g hters. At th is p iaci the defenda n t s i n consequence of some Pratt, and refused to be delivered up to commenced his action for the recovery of tees of the Duke of Bridgewater, b u t that on a judge's order, and directed w be cam! present defendants. The defence to the a, goods were stopped whilst in course of t, countermand had been given to t h e order peared, however, that the trustees o f the water were in the habit of a cting as. w are . such received the goods in question int? hold to the order of the plaintiff. On ' l d "' ruled that at the time the goods rea che t transit was at an end, that there bad heel and directed the jury to find a ve dict r for t however the defendants liberty to move to the court above should be of o Accordingly a verdict was enter wages £768 p i n ion tha AN ELECTION 131,L PARRY V. MAINWARING. k• d brought by Mr. W m. Parry, the landlor Arms Inn, Holt, in the county of Denbig l amount of a bill from the defendant, who the Denbighshire Bghs, for expenyes in, last general election.ur The w hole - ,nt covered was £122 9s. 2d., part of '" 10, t P aid ; but the balance due—narnelle, first that he never promised to rod ; ne had were in less quantities than v art therefore, under the tippling act, N ! c tied to recover ; and, thirdly, that voters during an election for thel-i• Mr. Jervis and Mr. Welsby we t V. Williams for the defendant. The trial of the cause occupies the day , and the reading over sevt of particulars created no little atrAti,:, instance, there was a ball at which sent, at which was supplied nine) glasses of brandy and water, an g were paid to a fiddler and harper 4:1ri;; company. Mr. V. 'WILLIAMS contendeti orders given to supply the liquor It4;.ic defendant had already paid. Mc leaving the court, found a verd:c.l £ 52 9s. 3d., the amount sought to ht The cases tried in the Crown Citt Maule, were of so trivial a naturt , tat notice The cases tried in the cou great public interest. THE ":DARNLEY JEWEL. the workmanship of the 16th century the finest gems of the collection of which was purchased at the sale thet Ferrer, of Wardour-street, for a large tive competition amongst the bidder by her Majesty, at the price, it i s. s , was about to be sold to a foreign co' sion of the celebrated iron ring o f Mary Queen of Scots, when tilL rescued it; and it is now amongst th, land, as formerly it was amongst ti, land. It is the identical j ewel worn b was made by order of Lady Mar'aret -- in memory of he r husband, Matthew :Stu and Regent of Sc otland, w ho was nrder, o pp o sed him in religion. The jewel, wor k ma nship, is of fine gold, hi th two inches long , and nearly two inches : ° it r surface, which opens in front, there is a are three small rubies and an emerald. a there is a sapphire in the shape of ruby, emerald, and sapphire. The co'ron u i Victory and Patience. There are also t jewel, representing Faith and Hope. The figures, which are very elaborate, are of t ( enamelling. There is the following legc " Sal obtein Victorie yair-Preten Quha hopis stil constantly with Pat The coronet and little heart may be hot below; within the coronet are three I " M. L. S." with a crown of laurel over t verse of the coronet within are two hearts j by two arrows, bound by a w reath with a we Resolve." When he t little heart is o two bones are seen, and two t he rest ha the n hr which hangs a horn with of dessolve." On the other side of heave moon and stars are also represented. on a heliotropiurn, or s unflou - er, der in the flames, a pelican feeding emblematical, a shepherd, a traveller, a dog, and a b " My stait to them I may c For you quha is of I3ontes with a legend — When the whole heart is opened, on the men in Roman armour fighting. .An exc woman by the hair with a cattle axe, as a her; two frightful jaws, out of which issu flames. The figure of Time is seen draw with a fire in many cros.ses are supposed to be Truth, from a well; and three legends, which seem al rot I)l,e' leir," and " Gar tell my Retaes• worked. and is one of the most ex art of the age. per youi se it to the judge to. and lie would action it Wort lage of OBEREND V. WATKINSO which Mr. Wilkins appeared fo ley for the defendant, the pail is Mobberlev, near Knutsford. WI dering their verdict in Fielding V. Mr.WORTLEY requested the cc till Saturday. His learned friend, Mr. Wilkins, was for the plaintiff, and he was engaged in a case of iu e i court, which he (Mr. Wortley) understood unto to-morrow (Friday). In the meantime ley's) client's solicitor:Mr. Rose(); who we roners for Cheshire, was required to-morrow an inquest at Northwich [uoen a ft male been killed by her husband] ; so that it 'sou ence to all parties if his Lordship would al stand over till Saturday. The JUDGE said that, under the circumsta objection We co to hold e case to Fie plaintiff for £15,000, last eveni 11, 1:1, 1 1, )5, 17, .7, 38, 51 .u p Z 25, j,,st ?]_99 LI are two :hey have plenty entering the therefrom prisoners were ary.) In this C, a large corn tiler re, from the defe_ii mool. The wheat al to be On this ,mted to Preston n the warehous, opped by the - plaintiii,,who action was ELopped menced against the Lction was, that the ;ransit, and that a. •by Pratt. It ap.. Duke of Bridge_ the lear I judge 7ellouse, the , untermand, intiff,ghing side in ca, was an action er the Court DNESD I " be was AT, the plain li, to r d that the liquor 11 at one time. an a forte enliven tli which th withou not of an! ,t 1 ❑ p fror a label, from figure, Litittl6 of the pay !oes were e unfit for the le jury is, da to the