The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-04-01 00:00:00

.05 d wing j hell,that .4 11°. Vat * 00 0 1 ntle' April I, 1846 SO ri LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES. Davies, the chemist, who stated that he had subjected the liquid handed to him to a chemical examination, and I found it to contain abundance of oxalic acid. Mr. POLLOCK addressed the jury for the defence, and, after making a few observations, the jury intimated that it would be unnecessary to proceed further. They imme diately returned a verdict of acquittal. 4 CROWN COURT.—TUESDAY. Ateraze62traguire, 11, John Flynn, 16, Daniel Creed, alia s ty er 2ue 25, and George Brown, alias Peter Bowen, 31 , COta lte , rf 4 . 'lndicted for having, at Wigan, unlawfully uttered four a cquitt eit sixpences. The prisoner, Daniel Creed, was u, r e ' The other three were found guilty, and Ma tlitris "as The to be imprisoned for one month, s , ll To r thr ee months, an d B rown f or two years. shiirah P attenon, 16, was found guilty of uttering a base i tnPris g on at Little B olton, and was sentenced to one year's me J oh n t. 4 tjar ttlilt Y t greaves, 19, an d M ary Dawson, 20, pleaded h : ufor,tiered - ,, n, ° the - aving h a d a mould in their possession, at Pres- Purpose of making base coin ; and also to hay *ere a c ounterfeit sixpence at the same place. They 14*f!,,,L:ach sentenced to be transported for ten years. . .retnainder of the day was occupied with cases which unfit for publication. BIGANIY Ellen JVhittaker, 33, (could neither read nor write,) pleaded guilty of having married, at Leeds, one John Russell, her former husband being then alive. Witnes ses were called to character. His LORDSHIP sentenced the prisoner to one month's imprisonment. GIVING A FALSE REGISTRY OF A DEATH. Elizabeth Jones, 38, (could neither read nor write,) was indicted for making a false statement regarding the death of her child, for the purpose of having it inserted in the register. The jury found the prisoner guilty, but recommended her to the consideration of his Lordship, on account of the circumstances of the case. It is stated that the officer who apprehended her found her in a state of the most extreme destitution, having no bed to lie on except a few shavings in a corner of the apartment. His LORDSHIP wished it to be understood that the act was one which would be enforced against parties offending, ' and sentenced the prisoner to one month's imprison ment. NISI PRIUS COURT.—TUESDAY. 11 (Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.) d a l e l e i . e3use of the Queen v. the Guardians of the R9c.i,l - g en ti n ton Was fixed for Thursday. Eleven cases, in which tled ernan of the name of Gandy is the defendant, s . vere t h .' for Tuesday next. Mr. Fitzroy Kelly is specially gaged in these eleven cases. This lIARDY AND ANOTHER V. WILKES. IN iiWs an act i on brought by the plaintiffs, Mary Hardy tit 11 4gn Unthank. extensive wine and spirit merchants, itip6anchester, a ga i nst the defendant, Henry Wilkes, an the ;,Per, of Salford to recover the sum of £4B 7s. 5d., 7oe of two lots Of gin i',.ne defendant leaded the general issue. yerclict for the Pleaded the general issue. for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. This Gins V. WILKES. atie, 'ias a nother action against the defend an t in the last tit w w, o Ple a d ed that he was never indebt e d. The plain lkle„ n'”lei Will iam Gibb, a w i ne an d sp i r i t merchant, of titintit e r, and the s um c l a i me d was £49, the value of a 'o e y of spir cut rv. 0 4 int relic f 1 -o r the its P laintiff f or th e amount c l a i med. Exe- a week. Margaret Wallace, 65, (could neither read nor write,) was indicted for a similar offence at Liverpool. It ap peared that on the 20th January, the prisoner went to Mr. Chubb, the re g i s t rar o f G reat Howard-street dis trict, and stated that her son had died, giving his name as John Jones, at the same time obtaining the certificate, On the 17th of February she went again, and wished to register her child, which she named Emma Smith, and was then given into cus t o d y . Th e j ury found the prisoner guilty. His LORDSHIP sentenced the prisoner to three months' imprisonment. DISCHARGE OF THE GRAND JURY. At four o'clock, there being no more bills for the Grand Jury, they were discharged. BURGLARY. Michael W'Donnell, 18, (could neither read nor write,) and John Lord, 21, (could read,) were charged with entering the dwelling-house of James Lord, at Rochdale, and stealing a till containing four sixpences, several four. Thi s w reoevvoon V. SMITH. 1 4aiest tVetiittaetion brought by Robert Gregg H e orrwhotoudf preinsnuynepriejueshuanLiuradb.ouat brotherfteeu shillings in silver. The of the prosecutor, was ki d e phiP to a thesm od a a ll a s t iri Ma o r f k lan S d m i i n th, to nei try th hbourho g od of admitted P as evidence, and the case was, therefore, taken Niii..el3°n, called Moorli P ey-close. only against the prisoner M'Donnell. At the close . of tied tilt rande and Mr. Monk appeared for the plaintiff, the case for the prosecution Mr. ATKINSON made an in- A ft e' Martin and Mr. Hill for the defendant. genous appeal to the jury, who immediately returned a het w r t be case for the defendant had been opened, aver- verdict of guilty against the prisoner. He had been p.re as ret urned for the plaintiff-Damages Is., costs 40s. viously convicted of felony. Sentence-two years' im :tThis 40oneeLeow v SWINDLEHURST. prisonment. at 'k_i4s - t was lu action... bioug . ht by Benjamin Goodfellow Thomas Booth, 46, charged with the manslaughter of tewent. Thomas de vvi . ndleh!irst e , for the infringement of a Simon Bamford, at Bury, was brought up and . discharged, i trellt th, t it Was useless, 1 ati d for the infringement of a Simon Bamford, at Bury, was brought up and discharged, he defendant pleaded that the invention was not no evidence being offered against him. The bill had been P an e d that the plaintiff was not the thrown out by the Grand jury. krli',end a variety of other pleas to a similar effect. kali% tnee and Mr. Webster appeared for the plaintiff, NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY. heartM. fiz‘nowles and Mr Crompton for the defendant. MORTON V. HALL. andAativ,is stated the * ease. The . plaintiff is an engi- The plaintiff, Jesse Morton, sought in this action, „, no is , illwright, carrying on business at Hyde, near which was undefended, to recover from the defendant, su4li e ` S 'er and the defendant . was, until lately, a roller. Alice Hall, the sum of £25, the value of a colt sold to l latl r, but sine t ; a t t u a t il e e i g i e i d ue in .m fri a n k g e e r m a e t n p t r o e f s t t h un e'rte n t he the plaintiff, and warranted by the defendant to be sound, tieti E n et by the and the although it proved to be unsound.-Verdict for the plain tSill,t ° Plsl,". brOtlght for the g infringement of a patent which tiff, £25. ,It._aatar-4,4,,e1i.ad obtained for certain improvements . in SENIOR V. VICKERS. th 4 4l- en 4 l . !' a mechanic pistons. In the construction of This was an undefended action, to recover the sum of i t e Pist o ;i l ",es, an object of first-rate importance was, that £92 18s, the balance ofanaccount between the plaintiff, hwork d s hould be so adapted to the cylinder in which John Senior brewer, of Manchester, and the defendant, tt ess a e ee as that thershuld be as little as possible of Wm. Vick . srs, innkeeper, of the same place.-Verdict for tertalitree'twe_if steam. When the steam-engine was first the plaintiff, in the amount claimed. $ ' It ''' the Piston was of an extremely rude charac- HANSON V. ANDERTON. t .t l ted to tebonsisted of a mere block of wood, which was This was action to recover the sum of £24 17s 11d, e a rid e e cylinder as tightly as possible. But that was being thi: first instalment, with interest, on a promissory 44 XtrercelY objectionable, and to act very indiffer- note.-Verdict for the plaintiff. the ho all-then t t h b i e s piston , was covered with leather in MERKIN V. MOODY. pre p Pe by e the escape of steam might , be This was an undefended action to recover thesumof ii ta n ther T„'''„ ,This was found objectionable also; for the £5B 7s 3d. for goods sold and delivered.-Verdict for the pi: 11 , of si t s :lts Pliability in the course of time by the ac- plaintiff. b"°11 of ' n eat• Thee, instead of a piston of wood, a SPENCE V. LAWRENCE. e%vefillecaieial *was .introduced, and that piston . bad a This was an undefended action on a promissory note, kei s ae nce _vi,. With a kind . of hempen wrapper, and, in con- made in New York, on the 29th February, 1840, for 4a7 the evil was to dollars, 34 cents. Commissions having been sent out to tii ti t ii i, ull 'a ti e d ef u n t l e ni t t h a e .b e a l t a e s t c jicitv of the hemp, . But the hemp after a time became take depositions in America, the evidence was altogether e i .„. le Pa impseiastle ; and then a metallic piston with a me- documentary.-Verdict for the plaintiff, principal and in be-`liti zevas discovered, in which the plaintiff made terest, £ll5 Os 3d. trlte,litotee,ovetnents, in the profits of which he ought to WALKER V. TRAPPES. ‘ tB , Ir ' . ".. The plaintiff, when he devised the improve- In this case, by . consent of the parties, a verdict was Y ue as in the employ of the Messrs. Ashton, of entered for the plaintiff.-Damages £470. t 4 i 4 o l '.4i . ri e ll e i e _ was an extremely ingenious man, and . after BRADSHAW V. NEWTON. 1 141 1 ti, toi:j e T i ,93ind to the subject he hit upon the inven- A verdict for the plaintiff was in this case entered by fs eti the i nv ' i t:. Baines here explained to the jury. He consent.-Damages £33. le t Y et es e a!tan had the effect of making the piston per- WINGFIELD V. HOLLAND. I , r.e ss . 01-tight, and that it would be pointed out by the In this undefended action a verdict was entered for the sy B e t etti,' t s L a s a great improvement. According to the old plaintiff for £2 m 9 0 8 \7 1. but as der ere Was only a pressure against the side of the AGHAN V. FULLALOVE. trth ' which Prevented the escape of steam that . way; This was an action of trover brought against the de eetlisuree,Pninatintiffs invention had the effect of causing a fendant, an auctioneer at Manchester, to recover the th e al so Only against the side, but upwards and down- value of a quantity of . furniture soldb •m on account to t , 'eap e ' so as to make the whole tight, and to prevent of a Mr. liohn, but which it was alleged y w h a l s tae property tiotiseabiedof steam in any direction. The Messrs. Ash- of the plaintiff. lei e ,was en t he Plaintiff to obtain a patent ; the specifica- Mr. Wortley and Mr. Crompton were for the plaintiff; the,4o, ,nd the nin in 1839; the piston came into general Mr. Martin and Ikr. Green for the defence. Pt ed 2 l ocomotive department of railways it was It appeared on the case for the plaintiff that Mr. Mona , s e a , with w aB. ~.,e of Li a _Pprobatio n . In the year 1841, a person of ghan had hired the goods in question to Mr.. Bohn at the 1)1 4 i° 1 ? e n ,, j ` l .asett was introduced to the plaintiff. He rate of ss. a-week. The furniture consisted of tables, to t ti tifiese !leer out of employment ; he offered to get the chairs, bedsteads, and other articles of that class, and was ei l iare4KTers for the piston ; and he asked the plaintiff worth it was alleged from £6O to £65. They remained at ii t e ll w, aim with a model of the invention, a request Mr. Bohn's house during the . montis of kugust Sep ot°.F4sed ..8_ anniediately complied with. Hansett never tember, and October,. but early the month of No ' vem soiLliele defeZorders, but entered at once into the service ber they transferredto the sale-room were, it appeared, uf Nir.alaiter at, who then carried on the business of a of the defeadant to he disposed by auction. '1 he wh i rls- 41a , , but who changed his trade, and became an plaintiff having discovered this, went to the defendant to tife c . l) We!, r, and had since gone on making pistons, expostulate, but in va d m. He t afterwards was present at disposal of the pro of Jpsetent.'ne_closest infringement possible of the plain- the t sale, andhuprwoet,e.esrteauadgaaipnes the ;son who accompanied him, odeartBtltistlfatt, helnwelnBt44, overwh t e n the r t plaintiff a u d e zumnlclide thatawge e er . He , were turned out by the defendant and his assistants, and 4, fil ar, 8 Piston was in thoughs o ubsta e n s c o e n' not in every the sale proceeded. 14 - ,,,, li a e bsi ati ,t,he same as his own,-that there was in reality For the offence it was alleged that the them us him m ere b sent tiie 41 itil t t e i rena 1 ; - ,i l b d e i e s u t i p ri i e r t i o t ri d . between the two, plaintiff;hn s , that n a c t o t r i i l s e e y q s u v e e n r c e e n o u f t a e sale ut, _,9 h lent, but on the Y con- IN, number of witnesses had been examined to prove trary, they were to be paid for at the rate of £5 a-week, con date t • ke and that Bohn at the time this sale by the defendant took tiqUalaat°wLEs addressed the jury, on the part of the place had actually paid to the plaintiff on this account th ei . s 4 d t a k e He said the case was simply this: the plain- three several sums of £ll, £lB, and £9 . . It u w e a n s ue al u le f g a e u d cif c ) We re, u th ont a patent for an improved piston; and that be had come to Mr. Fullalove in b c . onse kh ' heathererefore, two questions for decision,-first advertisement by the latter of a pul ic house q for sale e• r efer e it was a new invention-he meant new Bohn stated that he wished to purchase, and with a view . tio,N, - n ee to the description given of it in the speci- to so doing was about to dispose of his furniture.. The 1,, b t o epri the n object it was intended by the specifica- defendant advanced some money on its deposit, and it was l it 4 s t t he s e ip c : 3 ad then, supposing it to be new, whether sold in the usual way by auction. It was alleged that !fir'tiitziatem-eildant did Was .t an of in th fringement of the patent. the plaintiff had, as was stated, called on the defendant, l'er ' e if d i t/let the plaintiff's patent con- but at that time made no claim to the property,.eamplain m4Cet of dY little in What m was erl new, e and that almost every ing, on the contrary, that Bohn had not paid him for the 4 4 4 i t et n e s a n ili w e hich it presented had already been intro- whole, and that he was likely o t n o tr b a eL t h o e r a y ? loser. but ihe case ~,,t A rt : s of Witnesses patent; and he promised to call a The evidence i was very c "a i i r th e !'_ aaa Fs to prove the truth of this allegation. finally resulted for the defendant. ti /14 1 c't ination of witnesses, Mr. BAINES re le44!thkie ca asri sp s . 2 TRESPASS ON A COAL MINE. LEES V. W R OODFALL AND ANOTHER.-In this case ti t 'iti ß i t t Oate r i al ummed up very minutely, reeapitula- Messrs. Watson, Cowling, and Spinks appeared for the I r ttlt b ,to th _ P.arts of the evidence on both sides, an . d plaintiff audMr. Bean h d e t and Mr. Addison were counsel l i k'ti i t e tev ent e jo inrY to say-first, whether they cons!. for the defendants. T plaintiff was the assignee of a der4 Of 118 efOl. 4 new ; secondly, whether they consi- lease of the coal under a field called Acre Field, in the e es th e d , and thirdly whether they believed the neighbourhood of Oldham, and the . defendants were ilhe'! t sarneef:endatit's piston and that of the plaintiff the proprietors of the coal in the Grimsby mine, on the Nrral4 iiilsry f Hin Principle and mechanical construction? land adjoining. It was alleged that tbe defendants had ati ve - ad for the plaintiff, damages ls.; and gave broken and entere . d the Black Mine of the plaintiff, taken answer toe plaintiff, the three questions put by the coals therefrom, injured the shaft, and filled up the ways. The damages were laid at about £2OO. The defendants 1 C1t0,,.. -________.....-__ had paid £46 108 into court, and alleged that this was the I v '4 ''''N CO URT. -WEDNESDAY. extent of the damage. The witnesses having proved the li kli 4P 4 4 W in BURGLARY. case for the plaintiff the only defence set up was, that the tst4Y,es, at c4s t , a _ ra leY, 18 jury found for the , (could neither read nor write,) claim . was an exorbitant one.. o ti 111 a 't Ne'i,,l•o entering the dwelling-house of Henry plaintiff. Damages £165, less th T e h s e um paid into court. he th e n iNtil i e e n, on the Bth January last. The prosecu- tt h _,(th e 'Olt i,7, residing at the Fox Tavern, Wigan, and CROWN COURT.-THURSDAY. iligt i,,ltips.aee.eucestion the house was in care of his wife, SENTENCES. th e tO , I 4 elti g a t b q r) having arrived home at a late hour, . Ellen Divine, 19, for having endeavoured to conceal the t)t t lish. ee P, Ne e eto gain amission, retired into the hay- birth of a female hild, of which . she had been delivered 1 4 p eri3 L . A irs &tet Havre prisoner was at that time. During at Heaton Norris-four months' imprisonment and hard t at the ib a uti tances was alarmed by hearing the sound labour. m ar ° Ne e . ? ri g in the house, but dared not go below. Thomas Williams, 34, for stealing pairof boots from ti l l )il l 4 1 th e n B sL i,t Was ascertained that the house had been the house of Thomas NI ells-twelve ht eci ! preirt andmonths' imprison coat taken away. On the same ment anti hard labour. The l. ."er Pawned the shirt, and was taken into Robert Mellor, 29, for marrying Catharine Dempsey,. Jury . 1114 N il o % acquitted the prisoner. his former wife being then alive-three months' imprison t o l 'Pri g b e neOW STEALING. went and hard labour. 'br e : t eidi nz ' 43 . and Henry Wright, 18, pleaded John . Garratt, 1 . 4, for the manslaughter of Thomas athim e rY. Sentencea Cow at Dunham in Cheshire, on the Trainer, by throwing a brick at Liverpool-one e iati ' menthe' imprisonment. s lit e 2. deferred. ofd .es ,°')•ia, 1,, ROBBERY. William Massey, 30, for damaging machinery in the 4 C 4 41 4 1, '' (could neither read nor write,) pleaded factory of Messrs. De, burst, at Salford-four months' i , l raraa? e a tingw apparel from the dwelling-house imprisonment and hard labour. 1 ,1A 4 k 4 4 44•°plie Atherton. Sentence deferred. BEASTIALITY. -u4 _N '‘lqty ' o ,'Eo ATTEMPT TO POISON. John Boweock, 41, (could neither read nor write,) tts;\OA t etna "I , (Could neither read nor write,) who charged in an indictment with the attempt to com -31, 4ttelnptntded from the last assizes, was charged mit an unnatural crime at Stretford, on the 20th February 4.l ( t t ef eo 4 d n , k oottod.Poison Margaret Murphy, at Salford. last, was acquitted. it ; th e ',N,,d by m a cted the prosecution. The prisoner BURGLARY. 'ltli h N l . "lc Open r• J• Pollock. ~ki4 i ;iitei . a .a s ehar gethe case to the jury. The prisoner ti! Poisonhi ti lege d Pu . with the offence of attempting to „ . qe 4 , , t en, ,h e ~_ and the person on whom the attempt (Zi ite in g i 4re es ` u r i e was his daughter-in-law . , the wife Ss t il l ee o la /le e , urd, and ur P , bV• The old man lived with ii h _ t hi,e,e e , 6.. ,Job 4 Murphy, dependant on of them for hisprisoner, ii,"; r e il e a c a le I: ' i t n e , t ) i . si sn 'u re u s r i P d tt e Vd ,inti)the another bu s u o s n e the The prisoner .rei 4 ,.ted, with i l i a slaw did not agree, and he freuently i!,,, t i , e 4,) 4 the er, a nd several times said he would be 'lit e ee 4 o le the 6 th of June last, the prisoner was the i lv :4', li itio' s l t ‘s ie ig : f i l li o_use Who. got up, the family at that come ti l l ' r os;''' Mur"leself, his son James Murphy, and e p e - eatr PuY• The neat person who got up 'lil t Attt I s anct a ' Margaret M h When she came b k 411 b was s . tt. - urp y. rine,,, ~, fo r „olli n ,. r .,, , ing by the fire, and there was th t `tikr4,e s eti 'ne prlse,..?tle prepared coffee, as was her lei ose,i`• m ac " in the e and her husband, and placed N e la tie s to i) ,''en th e a Pan to make herself tea for she tei„ 44 for sh , a __ 'Water was ready she put the tea on 4,' tp 4l At e , te r i.: l , 4 went into the yard, leaving the hne t ? 4e„' Wh en Y nescrbed. On her return, in about 04 'd ` le k • about to add p er il 'd to rte with it more water to the tea, I` 4 aitred "bat s aPPearance in the pot, as it deep ), , e „itt, ,disc oloured, as though eggs had 4 14 alias it. While looking . t) is bred iii„ have at the tea, priso reqeh:akin ' to 1, 40 3 '°? , put in the tea ?" She said, t e , e el Ilt e. g egg s i ti ;:v. Prisoner asked if she had ;tl,itli throe 4 1, ,,e theli‘i' threwhe said there were none ~ i ii - '4, e s a , Lae li r , ui _ away the tea leaves, and to l' tha t '!'e ind' uin a cup ; and on making more our ce disc it w as not. water and from the same ves 11)4siete04:!)0°14uarettteariNT, and she took it for break sa, e , wh o rid aft Ich she had kept was shown h e et of h ttn . , ast„,, erwards delivered to Mr Watson, f i 11 4 , A , !st, Of'san xamination, delivered . it to Mr. t 4 th Wh i . 'lle a . Ma nch ep t. ,e 0 -,:ee t i . i eid, ester, who detected the pre kl ' ll eti' ls oe ' Patti e Som e oxalic acid was found in the I N tm te (l ed i er by one o reSided, which had been bought fo r lec t4t 'l, el er , tl eon s , Il e of his sons The prisoner was 4 g itt n k hl , and 2 4 . e uee of the Circumstan which l'es 4l doi se its'ilid be did not do it, but that the Ititee ler self, and intended the mixture eil e , Were cal led ; the principal being Mr William Fox, 18, (could - neither read nor write,) and Peter M'Cormick, 18, (could read,) were charged with entering the dwelling-house of Elizabeth Myers, at Pres cot, on the 13th of February last. Both were found guilty. They had been. previously convicted of felony, and had been in custody each six times. His Lordship, after a suitable admonition, sentenced them to ten years' trans portation. BIGAMY. Charles Butterworth, 55, (could neither read nor write,) was charged with Laving been married on the 14th of Ja nuary. 1810, to Mary Clegg, at Rochdale Old Chureh and on the 28th of April, 1839, to Betty Creer, at Mid dleton Church, the former being then alive. The prisoner said, in his defence, that having been absent abroad for twenty-five years, an I not hearing from his first wife, be conceived himself at liberty to marry a second time. The jury found the prisoner guilty, but recommended him to the consideration of the court. He was sentenced to one months' imprisonment. ASSAULT John Yearsley, (30,) could read,) was charged with wounding Mary Unsworth, with intent to do her some bodily harm, at Farnworth, on the Ist of February. The prisoner Said he was intoxicated, an d, i t would appear, had made a mistake in the party he was assaulting. He was found guilty, and sentenced to one months' imprison ment. CHARGE OF RAPE Thomas Ellis, 34, (could read and write imperfectly,) stood charged with having assaulted and ravished Mary Anne Wade, his step-daughter, la years old, at 'Manches ter. It was stated that the prisoner had been committed to the New Bailey for a previous attempt on the same girl. His Lordship observed that the law attached to the offence a certain penalty, which he had no power to alte r , and sentenced the prisoner to transportation for life. HIGHWAY ROBBERY. Henry Walker, 23, (could neither read nor write,) was charged with assaulting and robbing John Shaw, of Great Bolton, on the 23d of February list. Mr. WILKINS addressed the Jury for the prisoner, whom the jury, after a short consultation, acquitted. BURGLARY Henry Turner, 23, (could read and write imperfectly,) was charged with entering the dwelling-house of James LAWTON V. ROGERS. This case, which involved a question as to the right to a sum of £7O in the hands of the Sheffield, Ashton-under- Lyne, and Manchester Railway, under which the parties were contractors, was referred to a gentleman at the bar, after being opened by Mr. John Henderson. CHAMBERS AND ANOTHER, EXECUTORS, V. ELLIOTT. The plaintiffs are the executors of Mr. James Webster, deceased, who carried on the business of a stnallware dealer in Liverpool, and the defendant is a wine-merchant in this town. The action was brought to recover the sum of £3O 10s., for the use and occupation of a fur nished cottage at Waterloo, which the deceased in his life-time let to the defendant between January, 1843, and April, 1844. On the part of the defendant a set-off of £8 10s. for wine supplied was pleaded, and proved in evidence, and that £25 had been paid to the deceased in November, 1813, also that the occupation ceased in No vember, 1843, thus leaving the rent for the period up to April, 1844, in issue. The jury found for the plaintiff-- damages, £22. CROWN COURT.---FRIDAY. ATTEMPT TO POISON AT MANCHESTER. Benjamin Anderson, aged 20, pleaded not guilty to an indictment charging him with an attempt to administer sugar of lead to his wife, Sarah Anderson, and her two infant children, at Manchester, on the 6th of J anuar y last. The prisone r was a millwright in the eauploy of Messrs. Fairbairn, of Canal-street. A number of wit nesses were called, who gave their testimony to the facts, which appeared in the Standard at the time. After the trial had lasted nearly seven hours, the jury retired, and in half an hour returned a verdict of not guilty. MANSLAUGHTER AT MANCHESTER. Thomas Bullock, 31, and Edward William Madgivick, were charged with causing the death of Wm. Robinson, at Manchester, on the night of the 18th of January last. The short particulars of the case are these :—On the night of the 18th January, about half-past eleven o'clock, there was a disturbance in Swan-street, Manchester; Madge wick knocked the deceased down, and shortly afterwards he (deceased) was standing at the end of a street near to, when the prisoner Madgewick called Bullock to him, and they both ran to where the deceased was standing. Here Madgewick again knocked him down, and kicked him, by which he was materially injured. He was taken to the Infirmary, and died on the 22nd of the following month from inflammation of the brain, caused by a frac ture of the skull. The prisoners were acquitted. The following pleaded guilty : James Underwood, 21, to having feloniously uttered a forged post-office order for £3 13s. John Kaye, 35, to having feloniously stolen a mare, the property of John Stephenson, of Rumworth. Jane Morris, 18, to stealing wearing apparel from the dwelling-house of John Crompton, of Atherton. George Wriyht, 23, and Henry Wright, 18, to stealing a cow, the property of Joseph Hardy, of Dunham, in Cheshire. Witnesses were called, who gave each of the prisoners an excellent character. The grand jury ignored the bills against Thomas Booth, 46, for having, at Bury, killed and slain Simon Bamford; and Roger Charnley, 21, police constable, for having, at Liverpool, feloniously killed Thomas Matthews. NISI PRIUS COURT.-FRIDAY CLEGG AND OTHERS V. DEARDEN. This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, miners and manufacturers i n thi s coun t y , aga i ns t the defendant, for the recovery of damages caused by his having broken into, and permitted to remain open, certain excavati ons in the co a l un d er th e Heywood Hall estate.—Verdict by consent, subject to reference, was taken for the plaintiff. UNDEFENDED CASES.-WEST DERBY HUNDRED. ATHERTON V. PATTINSON. An action for the recovery of £45 195., the amount of a bill of exchange.—Verdict for the plaintiff. ATHERTON V. PATTINSON. An action to recover from the defendant the sum of £5l 145., the amount of a bill of exchange.—Verdict for the plaintiff. CHADWICK AND ANOTIIER V. SUMMERS. An action for the recovery of 411 18s. 4d., the value of certain bricks and lime.—Verdict for the plaintiff. FRANCE V. HINDLE AND OTHERS. This was an action of trespass, brought by Michael France against the late High Sheriff and others, to reco ver damages for having entered a house held by the plain tiff, at Wigan, and taken from thence certain goods and caused the same to be sold, under a writ of fieri facias, issued against the brothers of the plaintiff, William and Thomas France, formerly carrying on business as grocers inWigan.—The jury returned a verdict for the defendants. CROWN COURT.—SATURDAY. ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO POISON. Benjamin Anderson, who had been tried, the previous day, for attempting to poison his wife, and acquitted, was brought up and discharged. STABBING. Robert Prescott, 23, and Richard Fawcett, 22, were charged with having feloniously stabbed James Simpson, at Preston, in February last. Mr. Segar appeared on the part of the prosecution. The prisoners were defended by Mr. Wilkins. It appeared that the prosecutor resided at Preston, and acted in the capacity of watchman at a fac tory. On Saturday, the Ist of February, he and his bro ther Joseph were at the Fleetwood Arms, and left, about half-past eleven, to go home, proceeding in the direction of Marsh-lane. When they got opposite Springfield house, the two prisoners came up and knocked them down on their backs. Prosecutor got up, and was knocked down again by Prescott, who immediately commenced punching him with his hands and feet, assisted, as was alleged, by Fawcett. Prosecutor again regained his feet. when the prisoner Prescott came with a knife and stabbed him over the right eye. Further scuffling took place, and the prosecutor was severely wounded in the hand. Fawcett was acquitted, and Prescott was found guilty and sentenced to four months' imprisonment and hard labour. CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER. Roger Charnley, 24, charged with the manslaughter of Thomas Matthews, at Liverpool, was brought up and dis charged, the Grand Jury having thrown out the bill. MANSLAUGHTER AT STALEYBRIDGE. John Burgess, 22. was indicted for having unlawfully killed and slain William Swindell, at Stayleybridge. Mr. Brandt conducted the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Wilkins. It appeared, from the statement of witnesses, that the. deceased, a boy about ten years of age, worked in the factory of Mr. Lees, at Staleybridg e . On the 28th of February, between seven and eight o'clock in the even ing, the deceased with two or three other boys, were leay. ing the factory, when they saw the prisoner Burgess lying in the street, asleep, or probably, in a state of intoxica tion. The deceased and his companions went up to him, and one of them gave him a kick on the sole of his clog, when he got up and gave chase to them. He pursued the deceased up Shepley-street, and, whether from a blow given by the prisoner or not was not clearly shown, the deceased was, shortly afterwards, seen lying on the ground. The deceased was, however, kicked on the left side by the prisoner when down, and also struck by hi m with the fist. He was taken up in a few minutes, but was quite d3ad. While he was on the ground the pri soner tried to get him up, and asked if he was subject to fits. The body was examined by two medical gentlemen, who gave it as their conviction that death bad been caused by a sudden shock of the nervous system, such as a blow might produce. There were no external marks of vio lence to account for death. The jury returned a verdict of " guilty of an assault" and the pri soner was sen t ence d t o one mont h s ' imprison ment. Rainford. It appeared that the prosecutor, James Rain ford, kept the Weavers' Arms, at Preston, and on Thurs day, the 30th of January last, the family was alarmed, during Mr. Rainford's absence, by hearing a noise in the house between twelve and one o'clock. Mrs. liainford quickly got up, and after satisfying herself, that the noise was not caused by the lodgers, went down stairs with a candle, where she found two men apparently in the act of forcing open the bar door with a chisel. On being inter rogated as to what was their object they said they wanted money, and money they would have—they would be con tent with five sovereigns. Mrs. Rainford said she could not think of giving it, when the prisoner pulled out a pis tol, and the other man said " Drop her." She remarked, that it that was the game they were going to play, she would fetch the key, and immediately went up stairs, the men following. On seeing one of the lodgers enter his room she followed him, and by an accident the candle was knocked out. She ran and held the door, and wished the lodger to call out, which he did, but immediately started back, very much frightened. Mrs. Rainford then pro ceeded to the window and called out " watch," when two men, who were in the street, presented something like pistcls, and said if she called again they would blow out her brains. She afterwards made her way to the club room, and gave the alarm again, when the constables came up. The parties, however, succeeded in making their escape. Several suspicious looking men were at the house the previous evening, whose object appeared to have been to examine the premises. Every effort was made to discover the burglars, but without success, until one of them (the prisoner) was apprehended in Manchester, on the 20th of February last, and was identified both by Mrs. Rainford and her servant. He had been previously con convicted of felony, under the name of John Jones. His Lordship observed that it was the worst case of burglary he had had to deal with since the commencement of the assizes, and sentenced the prisoner to 20 years' transportation. NISI PRIUS COURT.—THURSDAY. SMITH AND WIFE V. CUBBIN. An undefended action to recover the sum of £B4, under an agreement. Verdict for the plaintiffs—damages, £B4. DUNHILL, EXECUTOR, V. BENTLEY. This was an action brought by the executor under the will of Mrs. Sarah Brennan, deceased, who lived at Old bam, to recover from the defendant, Mr. Harry Bentley, a roller-manufacturer, in Salford, about £G4I, the ba lance of money advanced to him by the testatrix during her life-time. Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Watson represented the defendant. Verdict for the amount claimed. WORRALL, ADMINISTRATOR, V. LEE. This was an action for work and labour done, materials found, and on an account stated. It was brought by John Worrall, administrator of Charles George Nilorrall, deceased, against Thomas Lee, who is an engineer or surveyor in Manchester, and who pleaded that he was never indebted. Verdict for the plaintiff—damages £2l; the £3 already paid to be deducted, reducing the amount to £lB. DUGGAN V. WYTHES. This was an action to recover the sum of £2O, a dis puted account between the plaintiff, who is a rag-merchant in Manchester, and the defendant, who carries on a simi lar business at Middlewich, in Cheshire. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, £2O. THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD BURGLARY William Haigh, 27, was charged with having entered the dwelling-house of John Garside, at Ashton-under- Lyne, and stolen a looking-glass. Mr. Monk appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Wilkins. The prosecutor resides at Haywood, near Manchester, and the prisoner was a person who went about hawking oatcakes. About eight o'clock on Tuesday evening, the 18th of FebruFy, the prisoner called, as was his custom, to know if they wanted any oatcakes. The servant girl said they did not require any, and also observed, that her master and mistress were from home. The girl went out to fetch in the clothes, leaving the prisoner in the kitchen, warming his hands, Mr. Garsides brother being at that time in the house. On her return the prisoner was gone. The servant girl was the only person in the house during the evening, and she retired to rest about nine o'clock. During the night she was alarmed by hearing a noise, as if somebody was in the house, and immediately got up and examined the doors, both back and front. She after wards proceeded down stairs, and found that some things bad been removed from the fireplace which had been left there the previous evening. A looking-glass had also been taken down from the wall, but nothing had been taken out of the house. A pair of shoes belonging to some strange party were found in the kitchen. On the alarm being given, which, it appeared, was about eleven o'clock, the prisoner was seen by witness to come out from the back yard and attempt to secrete himself in the privy. He was immediately followed and taken into cus tody. On being asked his business, he said he had been to see the servant. The witness replied, that it was a queer way to go and see the servant by breaking through the window. He said yes, it appeared so ; but he had done so on that occasion. On being taken to the lock up he declined saying anything; but, on the following morning, observed that it was a bad job, and repeated his statement that he had been to see the servant. Mr. WILKINS addressed the jury for the prisoner in a ludicrous speech, arguing that the prisoner never in tended to commit any felony ; such a supposition was perfectly absurd. He had no doubt, as the prisoner had himself stated, that he had merely gone to see the servant girl : such a supposition was quite in character with the whole proceeding. A witness was called who gave the prisoner an excellent character. - The jury, after stating that they did not know with what intention the prisoner broke into the house, found him guilty, and his Lordship sentenced him tosix months' imprisonment and hard labour, HOUSEBREAKING. Henry Hartley, 24, was charged with entering the dwelling-house of John Hebbert, at Ashton-under-Lyne, i 4 Feb. last. Mr. Hutton prosecuted. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Sowler. Mr. HVLTON stated the case. The prosecutor lived at Staleybridge, and on the 9th of February last, he and his wife left home and went to Denton-green. He returned home a little after one o'clock in the morning, and, on going into his bedroom, found the drawers had been opened and various articles lying about. About five sov ereigns and some jewellery, and wearing apparel, amongst which was a handkerchief, were missing. On the 7th March the prisoner was apprehended in Manchester, and the handkerchief above-mentioned, which was identified by the wife of the prosecutor as part of the property stolen, found upon him. He was seen about eleven o'clock on the night in question, near the house of the prosecutor. Mr. SOWLER addressed the jury for the prisoner. He contended that the prisoner could not be convicted on the evidence of the breaking and entering, and not safely of the common larceny. His Lordship having summed up the evidence, a verdict of guilty of larceny was returned. The prisoner was sentenced to twelve months' imprison ment. The court rose at twenty minutes to one o'clock. NISI PRIUS COURT.—SATURDAY. FOSTER V. CLARK. An action, brought by the plaintiff, James Foster, a grocer, of Blackburn, to recover a sum of £3O, money paid to the use of the defendant, William Clark. Mr. Knowles and Mr. Atherton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Baines and Mr. James for the defendant. The plain tiff was nonsuited. HENDERSON AND ANOTHER V. ARNOLD. An action of trover, brought by Robert and Geor.4e Henderson, merchants, of Liverpool, against the de fendant, S muel James Arnold, a warehouse-keeper, also of Liverpool, for the recovery of £215, the invoice price of nineteen chests of shell-lac. The defendant had paid £BO into Court; and the only question in the case was, whether this sum was a sufficient compens ,tion to the plaintiffs for the loss they had sustained. They purchased the shell-lac in the year 1835 from the defendant, at the price of five guineas per cwt. ; and from that time up to about the middle of last year the article, which was used in dying, continued to fall in price. When, however, it began to rise, the plaintiffs made application for it to the defendant, at whose warehouse it lay from the time of the purchase, but found, to their surprise, that it had been sold. The answer they received was, that, by some error, a gentleman who had been a partner with Mr. Arnold had entered it as a part of his partnership's stock, and sold it, the year before, at the rate of 355. per cwt. The plaintiffs were nonsuited. ARNOLD AND ANOTHER V. HENDERSON AND OTHERS. An action for the recovery of the warehouse rent of the shell-lac mentioned in the last case. Mr. Knowles, who said the whole thing had originated in a mistake, and that defendant was a most respectable man, consented to take a verdict for the plaintiff for 40s. MILLER V. SPENCER. An undefended action for the recovery of a sum of £l3O on an agreement. Verdict for the plaintiff. CHANTER V. JOHNSON AND OTHERS. An action, brought by John Chanter, the patentee of various inventions, against the defendants, William John son and 'William Ainsworth. cotton manufacturers, of Wigan, to recover a sum of £33 for a license to use a pa tent furnace for the consumption of a diminished quantity of fuel and the entire consumption of smoke. The de• fendants pleaded, that they had not promised, and that they were induced to enter into the contract by the fraud of the plaintiff. Verdict for the plaintiff. AYRTON V. BOLD. An action for the recovery of the amount of a promis sory note for £7B, with interest. Verdict for the plaintiff. NOLAN V. DUFFY AND UXOR. An action brought by Oliver Nolln, a Dublin attorney, against Bernard Duffy, a surgeon, for the recovery of the bum of £175, being the amount of his costs for making out Mn.l Duffy's marriage settlements. When the case had been partly opened, a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to a reference. DENNETT V. LONGSHAW. This was an action brought by Joseph Dennett, a farmer, residing near Huyton, against the defendant, Peter Longshaw, the owner and driver of an omnibus running between Prescot and Liverpool, to recover damages for his negligent and careless driving, whereby the leg of the plaintiff was broken. After the case for the plaintiff had been partially heard, the court adjourned. ANNUAL GENERAL VESTRY. On Tuesday, the annual general vestry, for the trans action of the usual business of the parish, was held in St. Nicholas's Church, the Rev. Rector Brooks in the chair. The Vestry-clerk read the announcement convening the meeting; and Mr. Hart, the Treasurer, the statement of accounts. On the motion that the accounts do pass. Mr. JOHN SMITH asked if there was not an imperfec tion in the accounts. tie perceived that Mr. Walker's salary, or that portion of it which fairly belonged to him as auditor of the parish, was not charged. Possibly the right course would be to appoint a committee to examine an account of the rate-payers. As between the treasurer and the parties in authority for managing the funds, eve rything was, no doubt, quite correct; but as between the rate-payers, and the whole of their publicly elected ser vants there was no examination. He therefore opposed the passing of the bill. Mr. BIGHAM seconded the motion. He objected to the accounts, because he got nothing for the money which he paid. It was only right and proper that the money should be legally expended, with due caution and discretion. The rate was contributed to keep the churches in repair; anything beyond that was unjust, un fair and illegal. He found that within the last two years nearly £1,500 had been expended on St. Paul's Church, one of the most substantial buildings in the town ; on St. John's, during the same period, nearly £lOOO had been expended. He called this a most extravagant and loose expenditure of the public money. He went over some of the other items, and asked the Chairman if there were not some outstanding accounts with reference to St. I‘lW thias's Church. The CHAIRMAN said he did not know the exact amount; but he had explained the matter to Mr. Bigham last year. lie had told him that St. Matthias's Church wanted repair ; that the churchwardens were bound by law to repair it ; that they had had an estimate made as to what would be necessary to put it in repair. To that ex. tent they agreed they would go ; and as Mr. Mather, the churchwarden of St. Matthias's, was on the spot, he undertook to superintend the outlay of the money. He went considerably beyond his commission ; and the churchwardens of the parish, not having authorised the additional expenditure, did not consider themselves jus tified in paying it. Dr. WETHERILL brought forward the case of Mr. Shaw, one of the tradesmen employed, who had a claim of £247, arid moved that he be paid. The CHAIRMAN observed that all the tradesmen were in the same position. The vestry, certainly, had the power of ordering them to be paid. Mr. BIGHAM was sorry for the men, but objected to the payment, as illegal. He also complained of the charges in the other cases. The CHAIRMAN said there were commissioners to ex pend money for the repairs, and they were empowered to call on the churchwardens to pay it. With regard to the two churches, St. Paul's and St. John's, they were com pelled to pay whatever the commissioners thought neces sary for tha repairs of the churches. Mr, BIGHAM ; It only shows how ignorant we are on these subjects. (Hear, and a laugh.) Mr. SMITH said, the tradesmen were suffering a hard ship, but they could not propose the paving of a few hundred pounds without at once telling Dissenters and others that they must contribute their quota. Otherwise, he would have no hesitation in proposing the payment of the accounts. It was hard that honest and industrious tradesmen should suffer for the fault of one of their own officers. The CHAIRMAN explained that Mr. Mather was not appointed by the parish. Mr. SMITH continued. Let the repairs be valued, and if it should be found that they were of solid advantage, let them be paid for. He took that opportuLity of giv ing notice, that whenever the occasion should occur, he The CHAIRMAN agreed that a uniform rate would be most equal; the current expenses would then fall upon those who were absolutely resident at the time. The churchwardens were quite willing to take it so. The usual allowance of £5O each to the two parish clerks, on account of the bills of mortality ; of £3O for Welsh services i❑ St. Paul's; and £3O to the minister of St. Matthias's, were then voted. Mr. SMITH then brought on the poundage fund, and asked the reason for the separation of that from the gene ral account. Mr, HOUGHTON replied that the arrangement had re ceived the sanction of toe Commissioners of Taxes in Li verpool, and the Board of Taxes and the Chancellor of the Exchequer in London. The churchwardens were not al lowed to charge interest or bank commission in their ac counts; and as a very large amount passed through their hands—the parish being indebted to the bank, in the month of September, £2s,ooo—unless they were to lay an additional rate of 4d. or 6d., the Select Vestry could not carry on their affairs. (Hear, hear.) After some further conversation, Mr. SMITH moved that the surplus of the poundage fund, after the payment of its own expenses, be kept sepa rate, to be applied as the inhabitants in public vestry shall direct. Mr. BIRXETT seconded the motion. The propositio having been agreed to, a question arose as to how the churchwardens should stand with reference to the past accounts, which was ultimately settled by read ing and passing them. Thanks were voted to the chairman for his conduct in he chair, and tide vestry broke up. THE MANCHEsTER OPERATIVE CON. SERVATIVE ASSOCIATION. About 200 members of this association dined together in the Corn-exchange, Manchester, on Tuesday evening. On the accession of Sir Robert Peel to office the Man chester Operative Consery itive Association was broken up, but circumstances of a political nature, it appears have again called it into existence, and this was a dinner held in celebration of its re-formation. A number of in fluential public characters were invited to attend, most of whom, however, sent excuses. Amongst these were the Marquis of Salisbury, the Right Hon. Sir George Mur ray, the Right Hon. Stuart Wortley, M.P., Mr. John T. Blackburne, Mr. W. Patten, M.P., Mr. G. C. Legh. M.P., and Mr. Peter Greenhall, M.P. Lord J. Manners and Mr. W. B. Ferrand, M.P., were also invited, but they declined accepting the invitation, for the reasons expressed in the following letters from those gentlemen, directed to the secretary of the associa tion : " London, March 11, 1845. " Sir,—ln answer to your flattering invitation for the 25th inst., I beg leave to inform you that my engagements during Easter recess would prevent me having the lymour to accept it, did I fully and heartily concur in the objects of your proposed meeting; but I will frankly own to you that I feel no affection or regard for that abstract some thing or nothing called ' Conservatism,' and could not, therefore, even were I otherwise able to, take a part in the festival. In these days more distinctive principles and more decided acts are, in my poor opinion, required than Conservatism affords, or is likely to afford. I would rather hear a body of right-principled Englishmen, such as will be assembled on the 25th inst., assert, for instance, their determination to maintain the integrity of the Welsh episcopate than the institutions of the country,' which may mean institutions of any sort. I know the frank and honest character of the Manchester men too well to fear that you or they will resent this brief expression of my convictions on this subject, however they may dissent from them. " With a hearty wish that old Tory principles and sym pathies may once more strike a deep root into the English soil, " I remain, Sir, your obedient servant, " JOHN MANNERS. " To Mr. James English." " Harden Grange Feb. 14. " Sir,—l cannot possibly say what my engagements will be so long beforehand, therefore cannot possibly pledge myself; but if, as the time approaches, I find I shall be able to attend your dinner, I will do so, on con dition that your dinner is intended to extend sound principles, and not to support a faction—to applaud po litical honesty, and not to sanction political apostacy. " The Operative Conservative Associations were of immense influence in placing the present Government in power, and they fought under the banner of ' the Altar, the Throne, and the Cottage.' Sir R. Peel intends, in this present session, to throw down the altar of our faith, on which the throne has been erected ; and ever since his accession to office he has supported, with all his influence, the Poor-law Commissioners in their desolating warfare against the poor man's cottage. " I am, Sir, faithfully yours, " W. B. FERRAND. " To Mr. James English." The toasts of " The Queen," " The Queen Dowager, Prince Albert, and the Royal Family," " The Army and Navy," and the " Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese," having been given, Mr. De Hollingworth, of Hollingworth, rose and pro posed, " Our glorious Constitution in Church and State." Having expressed his conviction that the very object and essence of Conservative associations was to uphold the Protestant religion and the institutions of the country, the speaker proceeded to say, that he had to enter upon a sub ject of an alarming character, but which was opposite to the toast under contemplation, and to which he felt bound in duty to allude. It was the concessions about to be made to the Roman Catholics of Ireland by the grant pro posed to the College of Maynooth. (Hear.) A grant for what? For the education of whom? Not for the tried supporters of Protestant ascendancy, whom a Protestant Government was bound to support, but for the unscriptu ral education of the most intolerant set of priests of the most intolerant religion, and for the endowment of a seminary for _Den's Theology—(cheers) —a theology pro claiming it a sacred duty to exterminate the rights of the Protestant religion, by confiscation of property, exile, imprisonment, and death ! (Hear, hear.) It was impos sible to repress indignation and surprise at this uncalled for proposal, when it was evident to all, that Catholic emancipation itself, as a tranquilizing measure, utterly failed. Surely it would have much better become the ser vants of the House of Hanover to have proposed the sup pression of such an institution than to have encouraged it ; and instead of m a ki ng d a il y concess i ons to expediency, to have proclaimed, like Pitt, their determination to put down with the strong arm of the law all further attempts at revolutionary change. (Cheers.) Sir Robert Peel might, amid the hollow cheering of the papist, the sectarian, and the revolutionist, judge otherwise of the nation, and deem it dead to all the hi g h enno b l i ng feelings and ' energies which distinguished it in the time of Pitt, but he might live to repent his error ; he must not think that having cast off the armour of Conservatism, he is invulnerable in the flimsy robe of expediency. (Cheers.) He would tell the right hon. baronet that he had shaken the very ground from under his feet, had miscalculated his powers, changed confidence into mistrust, his firmest support into de termined opposition, and all by these measures of expe diency. (Cheers.) He must say, with regard to this would use his best endeavours to procure them the honour of maintaining their own church, .without calling on the Dissenters for one farthing. The CHAIRMAN drew the attention of the vestry to the subject immediately before them. Mr. Smith might propose that the charge for Mr. Walker's services be in serted in the account. Mr. SMITH agreed to do so, but subsequently with drew, and simply moved that the accounts do not pass. Mr. BIGHAM seconded the motion, and on a show of hands the amendment was declared to be carried. A poll was demanded. Mr. HENSHAW thought it a great hardship on the tradesmen employed about St. Matthias's Church to be kept so long without their money. He was acquainted with one individual who had a claim of £9O, £3O of which he had paid out of his own pocket for stone. To set the question at rest, he begged to move that it might be referred to the building committee to examine the tradesmen's accounts, and to pal them, or such portion of them as they might think proper. The Building Committee was objected to; and after some discussion as to whether the committee should have power to pay, or merely to report to a future vestry, the motion passed in the following form :—" That the amount now outstanding in respect to St. Matthias's Church be referred to a committee for examination, and that the churchwardens do pay what the said committee think right ; the committee to consist of Dr. Wetherill, Mr. William Roberts, Mr. Dover, Mr. Renshaw and Mr. Estlin." , Mr. SMITH said, on re-consideration, he would with draw his opposition to the accounts, and they were ac cordingly passed, subject to the alteration with regard to the charge for Mr. Walker. Mr. JOHN TINNE proposed Mr. Raymond Houghton and Mr. John Scholfield as the churchwardens for the ensuing year. Mr. HENSHAW considered that Mr. George Riding, having served the parish seven years, had a prior claim to Mr. Scholfield, and he would propose him in conjunc tion with Mr. Houghton. Mr. SMITH nominated Mr. Riding and Mr. Scholfield. Mr. HOUGHTON expressed himself perfectly willing to retire if such were the wish of the vestry. lie had served the parish fifteen years, and devoted much of his time to its affairs. He was in no way anxious to be re-elected, but it was the particular wish of the board that he should remain. (Hear, and cheers.) On a show of hands, Mr. Smith's amendment was car ried, and a poll was demanded by Mr. Tinne. Mr. Arthur Henderson and Mr. T. A. Bushby were appointed sidesmen without opposition. Messrs. Muncaster, Green, Kilshaw, and Wilkinson, were nominated as overseers. Mr. SMITH proposed that Mr. Urquhart be substituted for Mr. •,‘ ilkinson, and Mr. Earle for Mr. Kilshaw. The question being put, Mr. Urquhart and Mr. Earle were carried. A poll was demanded, Mr. Robert Adams and Mr. John Whiteman were then appointed churchwardens of St. John's, and Mr. Craig Williams and Mr. John Laughton churchwardens of St. Paul's. Mr. HOUGHTON proposed a church-rate of 2d. in the pound for the ensuing year. Mr. H. BREMNER seconded the motion. Mr. BIGHAM objected, on the ground that dissenters received no benefit from the churches which they contri buted to support. Mr. SMITH was afraid there was no use in mooting the general question at that vestry, but he thought a twopenny rate too high. Mr. HOUGHTON said, in the first place, there was an arrear of £700; and they were aware that it had been usual every three years to lay a twopenny rate, the penny not being sufficient to pay the current expenses. Mr. SMITH thought lAd. would be sufficient, and it would be more just and equal than Id. one time and 2d another. Maynooth concession, that as a matter of mere policy, the measure was mischievous—not merely weakening, but naturally holding out encouragement to dl revolutionists to further their views by clamour. Even the concessions to the Roman Catholics, it appears, were not enough for the minister, but the disabilities of the Jews were to be removed. For his (the speaker's) part, he did not see where the justice of the exclusion of Mahomedans from the ermine and the official robe lay, and why they should not take their seats in the Lords and Commons, if the Jews were to be admitted. (Hear, hear.) He was indeed afraid that the nation had so completely bent the knee to pseudo liberality, that if the imps of darkness, emissaries from hell itself, stepped from the caverns through the ground, madmen would be found to propose their admis sion within the pale of a Christian community. (Cheers.) After a few other observations, Mr. Hollingworth con cluded by proposing for their hearty recPption what the recklessness of the Whig, and the expediency of the Conservative governments, had yet left them—" Our glo rious Constitution in Church and State." Mr. E. G. Egerton (the eldest son of Lord F. Egerton) then rose to propose " The health of the Duke of Wel lington and the Conservative Peers." It was, he said, a toast which would go to the heart of every one present. They were indebted more to " the Duke " than to any one living. He had consecrated his life to the service of his country, and by his unrivalled genius she had achieved renown as great as was ever acquired by any nation. (Hear.) He did not believe that there could be any as semblage of men calling themselves Englishmen who would not receive such a toast with enthusiasm, and they must not forget that as Conservatives they owed him a farther, and more peculiar, debt of gratitude. He bad not been content with serving his country in the field, for he had energetically served it and their views in the council. (Cheers.) They must not forget that at no pe riod of iris later years had he sought that repose which his unexampled services had so well deserved, but that the consummate ability which overthrew their enemies in the field had also been employed in the front of battle for the welfare of the Conservative cause and the prosperity of the land. He called upon them with all the honours to drink " The Health of the Duke of Wellington (as their great leader) and his coadjutors, the Conservative members of the House of Peers." The toast was drunk amid the loudest plaudits. The toasts that followed were, " her Majesty's minis ters received very coldly) and the Conservative members of the House of Commons ;" " Lord Lyndhurst, and the Conservative Bar ;" the Conservative members of the county;" "The Co mm itt ee o f t h e M anc h ester Opera tives ;" The Conservative members of the Town Coun cils of Manchester and Salford ;" " The Chairman ;" "The Conservative gentlemen who have honoured the meeting with their presence ;" " The Stewards ;" and "The Lancashire Witches." The company separated about 12 o'clock. COLONIAL CHURCH SOCIETY. The meeting on Wednesday at the Music-hall, in aid of this society was very respectably attended. Mr. Jonas RIGBY (in the absence of Mr. David Hodg. son, who was unavoidably detained,) was called to the chair, and, after a few remarks, called upon the Rev. F. Barker to offer up a prayer. The Rev. W. W. EWBANK moved the first resolution, recognising " the duty of all Christians to alleviate the spiritual wants of our countrymen in the colonies." lie thought if they had in their hearts the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, and felt an anxious desire to benefit the souls of their fellow-creatures, there was no want of sui table societies to carry out their views. Some persons, however, were afraid that by enlarging the circle of our exertions and by sending missionaries to ether countries there was danger of forgetting the poor and destitute at home. Such was not the case as already had been seen, for it would be found that in proportion as the zeal of the people lied been excited in behalf of objects like the pre sent, in the same or even in a greater degree had the de sire to support all philanthropic institutions at home been manifested. Af er some observations on the nature of the society, the good it was doing abroad, the rev. gentleman concluded by an appeal to the meeting in its behalf. The Rev. F. BARKER seconded the motion, which was put from the chair, and unanimously adopted. The Rev. S. H. MEYRICK, Secretary of the Parent Society, moved the second resolution, declaring " the suitability of the Colonial Church Society to promote the spiritual welfare of our emigrant countrymen." It was not his intention to occupy the time of the meeting with any arguments to enforce upon them the duty of engaging heartily in the missionary cause, nor of engaging in par ticular in the cause of Colonial Missionaries. The first he was persuaded had frequently been put forward by their pastors, and the second had already been urged upon their attention by the rev. mover of the first resolu tion with considerable force, and would, he had no doubt, be still further pressed upon their attention by those who bad to follow him. His simple duty was to detail to them, as concisely as he could, some facts connected with the working of the society. It was computed that there were, in our colonial possessions alone, not less than 3,000,000 of British emigrants, and this number was annually aug mented by about 100,000 from Great Britain, and 60,000 from the sister country—lreland. Of the number of Englishmen settled in foreign countries, it was difficult to form any estimate ; but they were to be found in every part of the known world—along the coasts of South Ama. rica, on the shores of the Levant, and all over the conti nent of Europe. In France alone, according to an official return of the French Minister of the Interior, it appeared that, on the Ist of January, 1811, there were 66,000 Englishmen domesticated, besides the numbers who annually visit that country. Yet, notwithstanding these numbers, comparatively little had been done hitherto towards supplying their spiritual wants. It had never been the practice of the home government to send out a sufficient supply of ministers to the colonies, and conse quently all of them were in a lamentable state of destitu tion. For many years the people of New South Wales, although a penal settlement, were left without either church or school, except what they had formed amongst themselves ; and some time ago, Sir Edward Parry, on going through the country, had found a place occupied by 600 Englishmen, who had been settled there for eight years without ever having seen either a missionary or a clergyman. Indeed such was the state of the emigrants in some parts of the world that many had actually joined themselves to the heathen. (Hear, hear.) He considered much more ought to have been done by the government than they had yet effected. In most cases, where they established a colony, they sent out a chaplain or perhaps two, but made no provision whatever for the increase of population or the addition of other emigrants. Little more had been done by voluntary efforts to remedy ' the evil. The rev. gentleman then entered into an expla nation of the origin of the society and the mode of its government. The society was formed in accordance with scriptural authority, and in strict connection with the Church of England. It was enjoined by the apostle that everything should be done decently and in order, and in the spirit of love. These were the principles which it sought most fully to carry out. Its officers, too, were purely evangelical, and the clergy sent out were first li censed by their diocesan, and the catechists were those who had been under the control and were approved by their pastors. The reverend speaker then proceeded to detail the operation of the society in our colonies and in various other places abroad. In North America only catechists were employed, in consequence of the scattered mode in which the emigrants lived. Owing to this circumstance, a settled clergyman was not so much required as men of robust frames, who could walk long distances through the woods and swamps to visit the various villages and settle ments—men with habits of hardy self-denial, who were willing to leave their homes for a long period—who would be content to partake of the coarsest fare, and to sleep under the roof of the lowliest cot or the humblest hut. These men had travelled long distances to teach the word of Life, and to distribute books; and, as he proved from various extracts, which he reed from some of their journ als, had been welcomed, not only by members of the Church of England, but by Dissenters and poor Irish papists. After giving some other interesting details re specting the operation of the society at the Cape of Good Hope, in Western Australia, Malta, and various other places, the reverend gentlemen concluded with a reference to the state in which British residents in France were, more particularly in the large manufacturing city of Lyons, where he had been informed that out of every twenty per sons charged on the Monday mornings with drunkenness and disorderly conduct every nineteen were Englishmen. The Rev. Mr. Marzials, French Protestant pastor at Lille, had also informed him of the following facts, which would excite them to exertion in behalf of their coun trymen. He said :—" I asked one of them i❑ our town to send his children to my Sunday school. He said, what for ? I answered, why to do them good : to teach them to read, and, if they know how to read, to teach them something about the Lord Jesus Christ." Ido not want that, he said. When I left England, I left there my God and my Bible, and I do not mean to drag them over to the Continent. The motion, being seconded by the Rev. El. Hampton, was unanimously adopted. The Rev. Hugh Stowell moved a resolution in favour of the formation in Liverpool of an auxilsry to the Society, and appointing officers. The reverend gentlemen made an eloquent and spirited appeal in behalf of the society, and in glowing terms showed the benefits of Christianity when practised either by nations or individuals, and called upon the meeting to exert themselves in behalf of the spread of Christianity in the Colonies. (Cheers.) The Rev. Mr. Hunt seconded the motion, which was also carried unanimously. The proceedings concluded by the assembly singing the Doxology. SHOP FRONTS.—No portion of the buildings of Liver , pool has, within the last few years, undergone a greater ' revolution than shop fronts. Go where you will, altera tions are daily making, and those that were once splendid are rendered insignificant by the ingenious devices of able architects, who vie with each other in producing plans that contain all previous inigrovements with some addi tional attraction, some superior accommodation, or some novel feature to arrest the attention of the public. The amount of capital expended in this line is almost incredi ble. There is scarcely a shop i❑ any fashionable street that has not, within a very short period, been entirely remodelled ; and if we may venture to predict the result of the abolition of the duty on glass, we may look in vain for the climax : there will be no shop without its stupen dous windows, its magnificent mirrors, and ornamental entrance. We are led to these remarks by the numerous improvements now in progress and completed. Lord street, one side of which a few years ago presented the finest row of shops in town, is gradually becoming more modernised. To Bold-street the same will apply : Mrs. Collins, Mr. Clay, Mr. Scurfield, and Mr. Lacey, have recently entered splendid premises. The latter, which were opened yesterday in the print and fancy stationery business, are most advantageously situated, having two fronts, the exterior appearance of which seem to eclipse all that has preceded them, and have been universally admired.