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

ISSIZE INTELLIGENCI SOUTH LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES CROWN COURT (Before Mr. flu•on PARK/, Ilis Lordship took his seat at n ew minutes past nine neitY Eccles, aged 33, was indicted for le hi inisternib at B e lt on, of William Eccles, her step son , by at ..,ed with a rsenic in his fo o d. T he prisoner also stood cha rg ed 1 lai„ the murder throe mea of Alice Ilaslani mid William Haslain ltls,! ns. It app eared b y the calendar that the prisoner_on, c ould read, though she w as not a b le to write. Long;iee be f wa, the Judge Filtered th e court, every convenient '' crowded w i th auditors, and a number of elegantly-dressed ladies were present. The prisoner appeared deeply to feel her awful position. though she pleaded not guilty to the several indictments with fir ni voice. She was dece n tl y d ressed, and had no appear ance of atroc i ty which would lead any person to suppose she could have been gu i lty of the crime with which she was charged. Mr. Armstrong, Q.C., and Mr. Brandt appeared for the prosecution; and 1)1.. Brown defended the prisoner. .1 On the application of Dr. BROWN, all the witneases, ii - eluding the medical men, were ordered out of court. Mr. ARMSTRONG stated the principal features of the case, which afterwards came out in the evidence, which we sub join Jolla Wood, examined by Mr. BRANDT, said,—l am i n the employ of Messrs. Eden and Co., bleachers, near But- , La. I kne w the deceased, Wm. Eccles. lie was 15 years of age, and was in the employ of Messrs. Eden and Co. H generally enjoyed good health. I remember his coming to work on the 26th September. He worked till 1 past 11. Ile had to go about a mile to his dinner. He was well when lie 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 and kept heavin g at tbe chest. I spoke to him about it and he Put his hand to his stomach and said he was sickly. He did not vomit any 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-examined.He lied been in the service about three weeks an earned 3s. a week. Ile had to go to the railway, on an errand • tor one of the servants He left half anilway, hour earlier than usual. His usual hour Was twelve, and he came back at one. At her own request the prisoner; was accommodated with a chair. Thomas Davenport._ I am a bleacher in the employ of Messrs Edeu and Co. This witness corroborated 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 nide from the works I found the deceased. I asked him what made him lie the re , and lie of t h e ditchsaid he c ou ld get no further. I got him out and he compl a i ne d of being ill and kept heav- N and throwing up wy like w a t er. I helped him on his a home awl met his mother (the prisoner). She said, " What, You have brought him home, have you?" I said nothing to her. when she made that remark• liy the JUDGP..—I was supporting the boy at the time. By Mr. ARMSTRONG.--. 1 said get him home as soon as Y Yo u can, and give hint some hot tea. She said " she had tea ready for him." The deceased was not in the habit of F.oing home to his tea. IsY Dr. BRowN.—The prisoner was alone. I told my was Mother as soon as I got home what the prisoner had said. - 1 taken before the coroner on Wednesday, and the de ce,ised was poorly on the Monday previous. Richard Eceles.—l am 13 years of age. Wm. Eccles was ,yebrother. I have a sister named Mary Eccles. Betts : l es the prisoner) is not my own mother. My father fur !„,to work on Sunday, and was not accustomed to return laste time I saw him was when lie was coming out of the ho" Si• Ile had had his dinner. I know my brother had had „ l i I}. dinner because lie said so. There was potatoe ash for tit)n_i_iener in the oven. Sometimes we dined at different , lie e r s it I . eat nee dinner„and tio one else eat off that dish l'• was there. My mother said she had had her dinner itoPotatoe ash. I was in the house about a quarter of an ss i u i r• I vvent back to my work. I was quite well after my taeu ler. We generally dine at 12 o'clock. I worked at the e T t e place as my brother William, and gave our wages to the tYI 'eeles. I got half-a-crown a week. Betty Eccles got ~,, "ngs wanted for the house, and she cooked them. No Other anted was employed. No one lived in the house but 11etts 'ter' dead, Eccles mid brother, and Betty Eccles. 1 remember getting into liquor shortly before William's s s ,„ uid l • He said he would tell his father. She said " she bother shut of him if he did tell his father." She beat my ~, sometimes. We were not troubled with rats or . mice out house. A girl of the name of Alice Haslam died in "u house a fortnight before my brother. My sister Mary said, a week after Alice died, " Let us go and see Alice's gra ve ~ She , . • said " No, I have trouble enough on my mind; 81,ae...shall have another dead in our house before long." (Sen ;ton in court.) Betty b' -ex sister is 10 years old. Alice was Y Eccles' own child. It takes us a quarter of an hour to get borne. 01 ( 1 , 1 % yE celes, a nice intelligent girl, said she was 10 years pra,_ went to school every day. She said she said her 47),._a1l knew it was a bad thing to tell _lies. .. lie s on )r• bao'wN.—She was told it was a had thing to tell say so. toTWednesday last, and if any one asked her she was to li(!s witness vvas subjected to a good deal of examination iliBatcertain whether she was capable of giving evidence, Lordship de .t 1 d i . . Dearil. .decided e . s le was tit. and Qyn,',4)l. 'nation continued. —I am ten years old. I remember , (ri. other William dying. On that day I had " tat} ' a.li lis t , u ' ri er• My mother dined with me. I did not see Wit the , get his dinner, I was gone to school. My mother said should have a damsons for dinner. When I g ot ;1e Piotatoe ash I asked forthe darnson-pudding, and she said h„.: 1 9 not time to make it, but would make it the day after, donee not do so. I was not at home when my brother t e ( ' in, He was very poorly at night. My brother lay non three/cairs. seesms-exatnine4l.—My mother and I had gone to some fires Vsat the rearing of a chimney. st„.Y Ann Ilopkinson was then called, but as she did not 4r.swver, her recognizances were entreated. A train would Bri r l ,e . at a quarter before twelve, by which she might come ; his Lordship directed the case to proceed. 878e'neabeth Pell. —I live next door to the prisoner. I .re aer going into her house on the night her stepson died. re that the prisoner and I asked if it was her son Richard " a t had shed. She said no,. it was her . son William. She said he had his des ~, died of inflammation. I said I thought it strange tro4ehe e , Me s. so soon. I told her . to have , the body examined, was afraid of infection. She said !he had had he wasen°ogh• Other persons were present in the house. ( s .: s s . vers angry at what I said. '4°2 'earnined.—What the prisoner said she said openly. 1844 tines Ilaslam.—l am a waggoner. I am acquainted Ilet t prY Eccles• 1 remember the death of Wm. Eccles. said Yo;eeeieles told me of it the morning after he died. She . soner) l i t l i news for the to tell Henry (husband of the pla t° hi ,t• told Me to tell him, that " William came home ,io-, ilsoh„lnner yesterday, and eat died at they brought thoi,oite, ill at night, and he died at eight, and that she l'h 'irsd °` bur ing him on Friday." I called at the house on Until t,a,, and' Henry told me it was no use of him coming the h o rid aY• She said then that two policemen had searched iied tease, and two doctors had come and opened the body, had f ",,at I must tell Henry that all was right, and that they dad nothinm. I asked what the boy had had to his slie ~,a' and she siiid he had a damson dumpling. She said bees sotirted her husband to come home that day, for she had ilnederf the cleh t --"' r "neY, and they would not give it, which I 1,h',,e;..?d was to he had at the works. Thereeal7rne,,se am bookkeeper at rslessrs. Eden and Co. c lub at te 140 Persons employed there. We have a bum elsh. Ile ' works. The deceased was a member of that °I Septerireemember Betty Eccles coming to me on the 10th i i for a ebileer last, and she claimed the benefit . of the fun( tiluwarice g i rl.) I told her she was not entitled to any but if her wes(7,, t he father of the child not working at the works, , tioYe.l, husband had worked there as formerly then she d 0` have been entitled. I told her that children ern titYin 4 the Premises would have the benefit, or fathers g chilelr 'Plemer eh employed. I advanced 10s. on the 10th of was tO be L an d I lent 15s. more on the 15th. The . money t°1(1 ta p e dhe r out of the wages of William and Richard. gl oved t, children more than seven years old em de. ._ here would have 508. I saw William on the Mon stt sit was 011 his way to the works. He looked anxious ;Nati, Y• I saw the prisoner the next morning at the 1 did , gjrnse• egoSh d she wanted the funeral allowance. lekt 14 rn b,Ive her the Y, ai she was to come again he ss e „ t i ng• I refused the money , , from some suspicions. , Jaines Av,:.y., and did not come the next morning. e ept enThe ss i. iiirris, inspector of police at Bolton.—On the 28th eur oner , went to the prisoner's house, as ordered by the ses reil :„. A took her into custody the next day. I went to r ll ,tiat ~,,`"e house. When I took her I cautioned her in the iejlii,iolayiellestolil) her . she was clia_rgcd with the murder of ilisnerhorlY beforeYhpeoirn. I _asked , her how long he had Ivork allverY heartil cued . She said, he had eaten his h ad , oet four , Y on the Monday, and returned from l„ pee n s o clock very poorly. I asked if any doctor but l ee u to him? She said she had called on Dr. Mal -411114 ' l e was from home. She had administered some iiitf.teit. aril sialts n' erself, and that he died about six hours k ii ,rie hadae`Lheen to Moscroft'safter that I asked her sh„'ng ver„,v.er,atlY poison in the house for the purpose . o s h.' heve s 11"4"1 She said, to the best of her recollection , u ggis t sad, basked her if she knew Mr. Moscroft s, the l a entl e 'l,°f Polds-road ? She said she did, and had fre 86u' had gtlit snuff and trifling articles. I asked her if h e t ' the foligl!t any poison there? and she said she had n9t. aleLknew tae day the apprentice of Mr. Moscroft.said, e ll sh e e_e .Prisoner, and that she had bought poison ; th e .I'-'enied. It has the appearance of a new house. drVe.hard tlees---There was some brown sugar in the house. Apirt„ Nist, 8 • 4riow, apprentice to Mr. Aloscroft, Bolton, m lO sail, the prisoner has been in the habit cf coining 4eh''eoUt ts„P l , for five or six months before she was taken up. seatti-todtter end of August or beginning of September, hav e s !' i d " I csur s hot), and master and I were in the shop. ti er i!." ssirwant a Pennyworth of arsenic if you will let me s„ eis shy • pennyworth said, I cannot let you have it unless CIO 4 12 one elae with you. She said !he did not want s t t L l ltetZ ie ll , ll , rt. with it, it y for the mice. My master eB7 Rgai„`l,tito let her have it. She then went away, and 4, eof 4'1%1 .abollt half -an-hour with a female, and then an 141 eie----Poie, wa s given to her by Mr. Moscroft, labelled the'lled witl -: ' flu ''' This was put in another wrapper, ass Ptisoseri•similar words but longer. I have no doubt but ~,(Irt,:h'ok„,,,,atinadmil;etribeerZi°lymati The prisoner came once or twice sup.plied her. ki, - "ti eo • oscroft, druggist, Bolton, o,„ t ning to said, .I remember a b lot g O f ray shop at the latter end ot August or be tl 11 ' ef h• ' ePtember T 1 • . 'at th is Sap,-, . • us witness corroborated the testi (,..r. e knrentice, but be would not undertake to swear ,e ?ss_exel. was the woman who called. tr:, 411,a1T;ed•--Arsenic is often used for killing rats and I ti , pit n4it.equently mixed with whitewashing. ill a„ened t_11,1441 surgeon, BoltonOn the 28th Sept. ssaBg adjoinit' Emily of William Eccles. The prisoner was isaloßP!...r.teettyighrZtrnii; iihe external appearance • of the body Ns a Zus l e a 1 ,, , , • opened the stomach. The . mucous slioiltuneri,,,, "%II state of in flammation. A white powder t t li i e 84)ft.noer oe'Littl°cestli:f its of the stomach. I . observed '''%e t„ 4 01 4 ,., a dirty brosvnish red fluid. I took 44 d: 111 1e....`,."., and the bowel adjoining. I delivered all 4,4it4t.ee4sedwatson 1 , a enetnist of great eminence in Bolton. s t „.ed wheat lied froth some irritable poison. The stomach te- qty t, s wouldtexpeet, from poison. The smallest ld 1,a1!.144 1.,.) prodeee de .1444! vs i t eeth FN a grains, and Mr. Watson to ansi.'lsT4he taking of arsenic is acconi %'o the ~,,u'ultill% in about half an hour I found no iie v u rse nuac Th e • • . having it„ d e ' s Kerb , .countenance ot a persone, t 2 te l ,' r, .iirallY melted, and has an appearance of silv,!xioilies,,exarnitieodw.lifkli assisted me in opening the stomach. an , tute app ear _ _ c person in great fear would have Pei % Po .an e. Nledical men have frequently found hsti„:l, bu dder we ' r n e tfhe stomach and supposed it to have been . Th • c'uud t. be mistaken on a chemical exam'. of i i , 4 tilt th e bod warth, Physician Bolton Ihieli,4:,t. wi Y tn w e a BB s uals'ent ed • fl eco rro ' bOtt i rth w e a t s e s . p t i r D e l s :n n y t and cd IPlty 1 _ the boy tied °, the appearance of the body, tt 1,... eto4_, ~,,..s died from arsenic. ht:hlisrUthslto4cfn wait on, chemist, Bolton.—l was a pupil , °' l'h ' ecla t: l ;4 l ung ti me. I received on the 28th Sep „lets e e „ , 3 Of a stomach of boy from Mr' De -n a ) it.t4es,,,_ merits of the stomach consisted of a coarsish , e ` else Po a portion adhering to the stomach. I s . ubs tli so illitt iBl)°wder to il;earaoseillffier.enit etoeisttess, chemical ex amination, and found it to l ' ili,tifti.tigoe_u_enrai.ly bold as arsenic. I applied not fewer teadnd2Bfr all these I found gine of the powder MURDER ie wilful murder after the experiments. (The witness here produced the pow., der which resulted from his examinations, :►long with the remaining portion in the state in which it was found in the stomach. These were examined by his lordship and the jury.) 1 have no doubt it is arsenic that was in the body. Cross-exatriined.—llouhts hate, been thrown on the ap pearances which I have here noticed. Tartar emetic would produce the sane 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 seen any white sugar in the house. Mary Eccles said the same. Dr. linows then proceeded to address the jury on be half of the prisoner. He said that the jury must be satis fied that the child died from the arsenic, and argued that the motives alleged for the prisoner having administered it were insufficient to induce her to commit so abominable an offence. He went on to notice several particulars in which the evidence, o❑ which he alleged the counsel for the proecution relied so strongly, did not in any way impli cate the prisoner in any guilt, but might all have happened with the most perfect innocence on her part. During the delivery of the learned counsel's address, Mr. Watson returned with a small bottle which contained an ounce of arsenic, procured at a druggist's shop in Tithebarn street, and which was handed to his Lordship and the jury, and inspected by them. His Lonnsitie 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 Silence having been proclaimed, his Lordship put on the black cap and passed the awful sentence of death upon the prisoner in the following terms :—Betty Eccles, that fearful crime which you have certainly committed, and which you probably hoped would be concealed from the eye of man, has been discovered, and you are now to receive from the of fended laws of your country that sentence which is most justly due to guilt such as yours; for the jury are satisfied, and I am satisfied too, from the legal evidence iu this case, that you have been guilty of the detestable crime of depriving your stepson of life, for the purpose, probably, of receiving some small amount of money, but under a violation and total disregard of every feeling of human affection, and of every feeling of duty. I have spoken of your conduct only as it appears from the legal evidence in this case ; but, as I know all that was disclosed before the coroner's jury, I am satis fied that I see before me the murderer of three human beings, probably of five ; because there is not the least doubt that you destroyed two of your own children, if not two others, by the same infamous means as you used in the case which has formed the painful subject of inquiry to-day. The punishment that you will receive will, I trust, be a warn ing to others. lam unwilling to say any more of your guilt, because it is not my object to harrow up your feelings, but only to impress you with a sense of your fearful situation, and to exhort you to spend 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 brought, that, in the annals of crime, great and odious as the crimes are that have been com mitted by human beings, there is none equal to yours. The sentence upon you is, that, for the crime which you have committed, and of which you have been found guilty, you be taken hence to the place from whence you came, and from thence to the place of execution ; that you be then hanged by the neck until you are dead, and that your body be taken down and buried within the precincts of the gaol in which you will be confined after being taken from this court ; and may the Lord have mercy on your guilty soul! The 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.-ob, 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 actio❑ to recover £67, the amount of a bill of exchange, and also £lOO for goods sold and delivered. It was undefended. The plaintiffs were John Abraham, William Thomas, and Joshua Thornton, machine-makers, Laken, Yorkshire ; and the defendants were William Carr Thornton and Joshua Williamson, patentees for a peculiar mode of card setting. Proof was exhibited that the two of the de fendants had admitted one of the items, and as they did not appear to dispute the other, his Lordship directed a verdict for the plaintiffs.—Damages £167. KINLOCK V. TYRRELL. In this action the defendant sought to recover a sum not specified, as the value of certain goods which had been left at the house of the defendant, an innkeeper in this town. Mr. Wortley stated the case to the jury. He said the plaintiff, Colonel Kinlock, had been in the army, and had been resid ing with his lady in Scotland. The defendant was Mrs. Mary Tyrrell, keeper of the Grand Junction Railway Inn, Lime-street, and the amount sought to be recovered was the value of certain luggage deposited at the inn, and lost by the negligence of defendant or her servants. Plaintiff 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. Ile 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 (ot boxes,) and a cap-bo x —l arger t h an a h at- b ox. These con tained nearly the whole of the wardrobe of Mrs. Kinlock, who was going with plaintiff to pass the season at Leaming ton. On reaching the inn, plaintiff and his lady were shown into apartments. Shortly after, as the night was coming on, plaintiff expressed a wish that his luggage should be sent to the railway station, so as to be in readiness in the morning when lie purposed to start for the south. The waiter, how ever, interfered, urging that the goods would not he so safe at the station, as the parties there would not be responsible for them, as they would be at the inn, and he (plaintiff) was accordingly prevailed upon to leave them at the inn, where they were left in the passage or lobby. Next morning one of the imperials and the cap-box, to the great mortification of plaintiff and his wife, were missing, and from that day to this they had not recovered a single article which they contained. Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid would depose to the value of the articles, which were worth, at least, £3OO. On the same morning, one of the imperials was found at two o'clock in Peover-street, near the Police Station, at the north 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, in this case, go for damages, for the great inconvenience and mortification to which the defendant and his lady were put by the loss, particularly under the circumstances ; but he thought the jury would not hesitate to return a verdict for such amount as he should prove as the value of the goods. The defendant pleaded, first, that she was not guilty ; and, second, that the plaintiff did not bring the goods into the house. Witnesses were called who proved the depositing of twelve packages at the notel, the conversation with the waiter, the missing of the two boxes, and the fact that one of them was found, as stated, empty in the street, and taken to the police office. Mrs. Kinlock's lady's maid produced a list of the articles missing, and had made an estimate of their value separately, which, however, was not gone into. The gross amount, as estimated by her, (most of the items being taken from the tradesmen's bills, they being recently purchased,) was £213 ; and she stated her belief that they could not be replaced under about £3OO. They consisted of valuable silk dresses, chiefly new, caps, jewellery, laces, &c. Mr. Wat son, for the defendant, cross-examined the witnesses. Mr. 'WATSON, in addressing the jury, contended that, though innkeepers were generally in the position of insurers of the luggage of their guests ; that they were not so with regard to articles of great value in comparatively small packages, unless instructions were given to them of such value, so that more than ordinary care might be taken of them. The goods were deposited in the passage with the knowledge and sanction of the defendant. That they had been carried away he had no doubt, by some person who probably represented himself as a guest ; but he did not con ceive his client was liable, as the negligence was on the part of the plaintiff. He instanced a case, which he considered analagous, of a robbery of a package of bank notes from a coach. The value not having, been stated to the coach pro prietor, it was held that he was not liable. His client knew nothing of the:articles, or their value. His LORDSHIP, in summing up, said that the defendant was clearly liable in law, though the case was to her a hard ship. They had .heard the value, as stated by the servant maid, to the best of her belief, and must estimate the damages on her statement to the best of their judgment. The 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. —WEDNESDAY. His Lordship took his seat shortly after nine o'clock THE GREAT SILK ROBBERY. EdwinLucas,aged 34, and Nathaniel Lucas,32, (brothers) were indicted for having at Leigh, feloniously stolen a large quantity of silk and manufactured goods of that material, in eluding a number of pieces of Gros-de-Naples, some pattern tabs, 6:Albs. weight of dyed silk warp, and 1101bs. silk weft, the property of John Barton, of Alanchester. The property taken, as it will afterwards appear, was of the value of nearly £l,OOO. Mr. Baines and Mr. Hutton conducterl the prosecution, and Mr. Wilkins defended the prisoners. Mr. BAINEs, in stating the case, observed that the pri soners at the bar had maintained, up to the time of the transaction at which they had now to inquire, a most re spectable station in life. The prosecutor, Mr. John Barton, carried on business in Manchester on a large scale as a silk cloth manufacturer. On the night between Whit-Monday and Tuesday, last year (the 16th and 17th of May) the pre mises of Mr. Barton was entered by some parties who had got into the cellar by means of a skeleton key, and thence into the counting-house above, in which the goods were de posited. The place had been left secure on the preceding night. On examining the place next morning, it was found that the silks had been carried off, to the amount of £l,OOO. The articles were 25 pieces of Gros-de-Naples, a quantity of pattern tabs, 6501b5. weight of undyed silk warp, called organzine, 1101bs. of silk weft, the two last being all the stock of that kind which the prosecutor had on the premises. The parties who had committed the robbery had evidently been well ac quainted with the nature of articles of that description, as they had taken the most valuable, those of an inferior de scription being left behind. From some circumstances that transpired, suspicion attached to the prisoners soon after the rubbery; and on Thursday, the 19th of May, an oflicer was sent to the place where they carried on their business, at Leigh, near Manchester. The prisoners were, at that time, doing little or no business, having discharged their foreman, they not having employment to give him. The officer was admitted, and told the prisoners of the robbery. They said they knew nothing about it, and would take him over those parts of the house where they kept their articles of trade. They showed him into two rooms, which he examined, but found nothing ; and he, thinking all was right, went away, without examining any other parts of the premises. On his leaving, they told him if any such silk came to their neigh bourhood they would send word to Manchester. On the 18th of June, the prisoner Edwin Lucas went to the shop of Mr. Lewis, in Manchester, arid between that time and the 12th of July he went several times to that gentleman and sold him some gros de Naples, which was part of the stolen property, but which lie said wa s hi s own manufacture. About the same time he also went to Mr. Lord, in Alatichester, (a silk mercer,) and sold him a number of pieces of coloured silk, which were also Mr. Barton's property, and which that gen tleman was also led to believe were also ture. The inv o i ces were made out, but of his own manufac - s ome of the silk was therein noted d own as b lack, probably to eva de suspicion, that which he sold to Mr. Ford being chiefly coloured. Two employed or three weeks after a person named Walmsley to dye some goods for the prisoners, at their ilk, about premises at Leigh, and he there saw a bundle of organzine _ saw 401bs. weight, and, from time to time, he occasionall)c om. pieces of silk, but he could not tell where they came from. Hewould He saw, altogether, about 3 cwt. of that kind whi-, it be shown, had been taken from the prosecutor ' s premises. He saw no manufactured colour e d s ilk there while he remained. In consequence of suspicions that subsequently arose, a police-officer went to the house of the prisoner at Abraham, near Leigh, on the 7th of March last, at an early hour in the morning. The officer was admitted by Edwin Lucas, and found in a writing desk quantity of tail-ends of silk cloth. Mr. .13,1rtott, the prost,,:mt or, was with him, and said, in prisoner's hearing, that the', were his property. Prisoner said some of them had been there for some time—some as long ;is 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 afterwards 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 female was in the house. As one officer was leaving with them in a parcel, another, having in charge the two prisoners came up and, on seeing him carrying something, said to the woman, " Did you tell 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 un contradicted.]-0n 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 sam6' month, another received three pieces, also produced A dyer named \Valmsley went in April last yea 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 401 b weight of silk, warp and weft—all black. Between and the October following, he dyed 6001 b weight of silk weft—black. He saw a quantity of other silk—black orgazine. There were several lots of the same shade, and he remarked that it was well dyed to hit it. He saw no manufactured-coloured silk, nor did the prisoners tell him while he was there that they had taken another house. He left them in January. The witness, on cross-examination, said that he slept in the house with Nathan, the younger prisoner; that he was there during the whole of Whitsun week ; that they generally went to bed together about 10 o'clock, and that on no occasion during that week did he miss the prisoner when he awoke, or in the morning. A good deal of evidence was gone into in order to prove that on the night of the robbery the prisoner Nathaniel was (with a companion) at a public-house at Barton-on-Irwell-- was there with a spring cart, and something in it ; also that he had been at Tilsley on the following morning, on the way (though circuitous) from Manchester to Leigh with some sort of cart—but this was by no means distinctly proved. Mr. Barton then proved, by corresponding patterns, tabs and otherwise, that the goods produced were his pro perty. His warehouse-keeper corroborated him ; spoke solely to the warp of the manufactured goods and the sel vages. The silk handkerchiefs they could not swear to. Ocher weft had, it appeared, been used in making them into cloth. It was admitted by the prosecutor that a great number o pieces of silk similar to that produced had been sold by him, but the pattern and style were uncommon. Mr. WILKINS addressed the jury in behalf of the priso ners in a most able manner, availing himself of every point he could possibly seize in behalf of his clients, and urging that there was no proof against either as to the robbery, and that at the most the evidence could only bear out a charge of receiving The JUDGE stated the case in a very clear manner, recapi tulating every particular point of evidence. The jury retired for about an hour, and on their return gave a verdict of guilty of the robbery against Edwin Lucas, and not guilty as regarded Nathaniel. Some respectable 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 havim taken place owing to his absence), Mr. Hulton, the junio. counsel—in the absence of his senior, and also of Mr. Wil• kins, stated to his lordship that a police-officer of Manelies, ter could say something on this point. His lordship as, sented ; and the officer being called, he stated, in a some• what eager manner, that he had seen the prisoner during the last two years in the company of persons in Manchester whom . . he knew to be thieves, and in houses to which they resorted We do not remember to have heard before this sort of evi• dence brought forward, in contradiction to those on charac ter, particularly in the absence of the prisoner's counsel, who might otherwise have questioned its authenticity, and, per- haps, disproved it. As it was, it added to the prisoner's sentence by perhaps some years of suffering beyond the seas. His LORDSHIP said that the prisoner had been found guilty of a heinous offence • that he had, it appeared, borne a good character, but that offence; that he had just heard, he had for- feited that latterly, and the sentence of the court was that he should be transported for fifteen years. The prisoners appeared to be rather genteel and good-look ing men. The younger was discharged. The elder, when he heard the sentence, appeared to be disposed to say something, but failing, he was taken down from the dock. MISDENtEANOUR. Jaws 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 Lonnsnir, therefore, sentenced him to four months' imprisonment and hard labour. BURGLARY. Wn. 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 NOW, 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. The prisoner, it appeared, went to Birchall, who keeps the Fleece Inn, and asked for change of the note, which was af terwards found to be bad. The other he uttered to Isaac Staley, in payment for goods to the amount of about 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 ❑amed 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 t'-ere, 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. WimuNs, who appeared for the prisoner, said that the prisoner had taken the notes unwit tingly, and had even put his name upon one of them.—The prisoner was acquitted. BURGLARY Charles 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. POACHING AND ASSAULT Samuel Cowburn, 39. convicted last week of poaching with others, and violently assaulting a gamekeeper, was brought up, and after a severe address from his lordship, was sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 18 months. The court rose at a quarter past six o'clock. There re mained about 80 cases to be disposed off in this court. NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY. HOYLE V. HOWARD. This was an action to recover damages for injury done to the plaintiff's property in Cheetharu-street, Rochdale, by a nuisance from the works of the defendant. Mr. Dundas and Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, who is a corn-dealer; Mr. Knowles, Mr. Wortley, and Mr. Hogging for the de fendant. After the case had been opened, and the first witness, who was the tenant of the plaintiff, had been ex amined, it was agreed between the parties that the defendant should buy the plaintiff's premises at a valuation to be fixed by a party to be named by the plaintiff. A nominal verdict was consequently entered in favour of the plaintiff. ACTION AGAINST THE SIIERIFF.-RICIINIOND V. FRANCE This was an action in trover against the late high Sheriff of this county. Mr. Rotel 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, whos e n am e was L e i ces t er . Not aving 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 he 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 ou the 7th of April a fiat in bankruptcy was issued; on the Bth, the provisional assignee was appointed, and notices were served upon all parties con cerned that Mr. Ilalliday was a bankrupt. Notwithstanding all this, the Sheriff sold all the goods ; to recover the value of which the . assignees brought the present action. Fen the defendant it was contende . d that the sale was made under the assignment to Mr. Eccles, to which a bill of sale was attached, and not under the warrant of the sheriff. Pos session was taken under the assisgnment, before the warrant was issued. The sale realized 4112 55.. of which £256 3s. 11d. 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 EnwAnns v. BIRD.—An undefended action, in trover, to recover the value of a quantity of cases containing certain i pro perty belonging to the pl a i n tiff, w hi c h th e d e f en d an t, t 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. II is 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, det a i ne d t h em on the ground that a sum of mo ney was owing to him for corp.. mission on his collection of orders. The learned counsel said if the defendant would give the boxes up he would con sent to a verdict with nominal damages. After the examina tion of three witnesses, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages, £29. THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. Cnosstrv.—The pl a i nt i ffs 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, an d a verd i ct was re. turned for the amount claimed. BENTON V. PLUNIPTON.—Tbe plaintiff in this case is a house and land agent in Liverpool, and the defendant is Mr. Plumpton, one of the representatives, in the Town Council, of West Derby ward. The action was brought to r ecover the sum of £132 10s., commission on the sale of a quantity o f 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 for the plaintiff for £132 108. ; cosh) 408. MADDOCKS V. BALL.— , -Ari fletioll to recover damages for an illegal distraint upon the plaintiffs premises in Southport. After the case had proce e d e d some time, Mr. Knowles, who represented the defendant, said it was clear some mistake had been made, and he would th e ref or e consent on the part of his client for a verdict for the plaintiff, Nvith . - ClO damages. This offer was acceded to, and a verdict for that amount was returned for the plaintiff. CROWN COURT.—YESTERDAY. TES 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 awtul position in which the prisoner stood before them, and calling upon them to discharge their solemn duty conscientiously to her and to their country. He then narrated the leading particulars of the case, as they after wards appeared in the evidence, recapitulated the facts that bore most heavily against the prisoner, and concluded by solemnly disclaiming all attempt in what he had said, or should say, to add a prejudice th a t would weigh, even as a hair, in inducing them to convict her. Ile 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 Bnced away with twitch clocks an d mi ce , an d wan t e d some arsen i c. 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. H e asked her what it was for. She said for twitch-clocks and mice. He asked her where her witness was, and she pointed to me and said, " that is her." The boy said I cannot let you have it, she is too young. " Come," said the prisoner, " ca n 't you let me have it, she lives in the same house as I do." Ile 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 the Abercrombie, 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. Cross-examined by Mr. JOSEPII POLLOCK.—It was quite ght when we went into the shop. (The witness here said spontaneously, that when the prisoner mentioned arsenic she looked in her face so as to know him again if anything hap pened.) She stopped at the door; she did not try to get away, or show a desire for concealment. Thomas Wolfenden examined by Mr. "WILKINS.—I am apprentice to Mr. Howard. I remember about four o'clock on the 12th November, two women came in. One asked for arsenic, and referred to the other. 1 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 2ao yards from the house of the deceased. I had known the prisoner. From ten to fourteen days before the inquest prisoner came to the shop and asked me for some arsenic. She did not ask for any particular quantity then. I asked what she wanted with it. She said to destroy mice. I asked her if she did not keep a cat. She said no, she was frightened of cats. I did not give it her, telling her I did not sell it without a witness. She did not mention her husband. I told her to fetch her husband. She went away. Shc came to the shop again that day with another person, Mrs. Dunn (now present). She said she had brought her as a witness. I asked her if she (Mrs. D.) knew what prisoner wanted, and she (Mrs. D.) said it is all right, it is for the arsenic. Mrs. Hunter asked me how I sold it. I said Id. per ounce. She said let me have two ounces. I let her have it. It was wrapped up in two papers, in one parcel. I wrote upon it " poison" only. While I was making it up, she said I sup pose there is as much there as would poison a person, and I said yes, a dozen persons. I cautioned her not to let it come in the way of children. It was not in a metallic state. By the JUDGE.—No, it was in powder—arcenous acid. That is nut metallic. She said she would soon make use of it in oatmeal balls and put it in the cupboard. I have sometimes admi nistered medicine to her children when they were poorly. No one came to me on the 25th November to say that Hun ter was ill. Cross-examined.—She made no mention of her husband. I have not given a different account from what I now give. She went away, as I inferred, to bring her husband. Arse nic is purchased for rats, mice, beetles, twitch-clocks, bugs, &c., and is frequently sold for that purpose. On the 27th November she came again to me, between seven and nine in the evening, for some mustard. She seemed in great trouble. I asked her what was the matter. She said her husband was very ill. I asked her what was the matter with him. She 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.—l lived at the time in Walton-street. I remember the Friday on which John Hunter fell ill. On Saturday before (the 19th) I saw the prisoner between six and seven in the evening. She came to my house. She was not in the habit of coming. She asked me to go an errand for her,—to go to the pawnshop for her 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 twopenny worth 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 ld. 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 lie 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 p ar ted from you. , Cross-examined.-1 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 only told to say that this morning in the house. I was told so before by the same person. (The witness appeared to be quite confused.) I have seen the person since in the court, but I don't see him now. He wore a jacket like a factory man. No other person told me so before. Re-examined.—l 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 I went before the gentlemen (the grand jury.) By the J 1) DGE.—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 ten o'clock in the fore noon, and stopped till Mr. Hunter came to his supper. I took the children out before he came. Mrs. Hunter told me to take them out. It was about half-past five. Mrs. Hunter was then cleaning, Mrs. 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 I met my sister Caroline, who took the children from me. In about five minutes after I went to Mr. Hunter's. I did not see him. I saw Mrs. Hunter. Mr. Hunter was up stairs. I often went there to play and nurse. There were two children. I have seen Mr. H unter eat his supper. He had it generally as soon as he came home. He had milk porridge, with a bit of meal in. When he took it he 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 iu 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.-1 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 hire ill," and he said, " Give the porridge to the dog-" She (prisoner) said if it was not fit for him it was not tit 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 lsad 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 usidden. 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. Lansdale nor Mr. Cook, the druggists, were in. Deceased was then in the petty. He was very sick, but could not throw up anything. I an d a neighbour assisted him out of the petty. He also complained of his stomach. The prisoner did not offer to go for any other doctor. I tho ug ht s h e had had some liquor— s h e cr i ed so and made such a n o i se . Late in the evening a neighbour brought Mr. Willis, surgeon. Ile came about nine o'clock. Deceased made use of the pot. The prisoner emptied it once. Mr. Willis saw the last motion. I stayed till 3iu the morning. Mr. Lonsdale, Mr. Hunter's doctor, came next day. Hunter mentioned the porridge to him in prisoner's presence. She said she had taken some of it, and it had made her sick. Mr. Lonsdale said he did not wish to attend deceased, as Mr. Harrison had been called. I noticed what the d ecease d had vomited. He vomited carrots out in round pieces. I observed no curd in the fluid. On Thursday, th e 10 t h of November, prisoner came to my house , and sighed ve r y heavily. I asked her what troubled her- She said, " No, Mrs. Strut, it is a dream that I dr eam t." She said she thought they had brought John borne dead,and he wa s not well himself, and fancied lie he would not live long. I never heard him complain ; I thought him a healthy man. I never heard them complain of twitch-clo ck s or mi ce. We have none in our house, which is next door. Prisoner had n ever spoken to me of arsenic. She had no cat. Prisoner brought a box to our house the day after deceased died. It was locked, and afterwards delivered to Jackson. Mr. Hunt er t o ld me some time before that they had money in the sa v i ngs ' bank. I went the day after he died with her to t he bank to get h er name put in. (A small box was produced, co n t a i n i ng a bank book.) I have been shown this book. It appears that there is £6t; due to them. The prisoner, I believe, cannot read, and I did not read the balance to her. There i s a pawn ticket in the box, which prisoner also left with me. The remainde r - o f th e w itness's evidence, in chief, was unimportant. Cross-examined. Mr. Hunter and the prisoner lived very comfortably together. I never heard them quarrel. The prisoner was a very good mother to her children. I always thought her more attentive to her children and husband than most people in her line of life. She took a deal of pains to make him comfortable. She kept her house very clean and neat, and took time over it. It was her great distress at the time she called, that made me think she had been drinking --►►othing else. She appeared to be much and sincerely dis tressed about her husband's illness. He vomited pieces of carrots. They were not at ►►ll digested. He said he had had a herring for his dinner. Ido not think the prisoner men ned her dream. The deceased was not a very• strong look ing man. lie 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 came 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 money for the funeral expenses. She had a little money in the house, but not enough to meet the expenses. Re-examined.—lleceased was, I believe, in two burial clubs. He told me there was a sum to be received from each. Mrs. Sarah Tone called :—I live in Walter-street, near the deceased' s —t wo doors off. I remember the night decea sed was taken ill. I heard the prisoners' voice in the street that night. She was going to Mr. Hills, and asked me to lend her Gd to get some brandy, for her husband was taken very ill. She asked me, for God's sake, to go in, her husband was so ill. When she came back with the brandy she said she knew he was a dead man. About three weeks before she mentioned a dream to me. She said she had been dreaming a curious dream. I laughed. She did not then tell me the dream. When she said he was a dead man she said now Mrs, Tonge you laughed at me when I mentioned the dream. I told her it was nonsense and asked if she had any young person In the family, as it was a sign of mar 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. He could not get in himself. I advised 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 remained till three in the morning attending him. The prisoner was not sober at the time when I went first there. Mr. Willis came that night to see him, about nine. Deceased was very sick. I did nut ask her, nor did any one in my hearing, tell her to empty the tub. She emptied it every time it was used. On the same night Mrs. Horsfield saw prisoner down stairs smok ing her pipe. She said, " Mrs. Hunter, where the devil is the meal that made John Hunter ill." Prisoner said, it's there, at the back of the fire ; if it has made him ill, it shan't make any body else ill. I saw some of the meal on the fire partly burnt. Other meal was got to make the deceased some gruel. The fresh meal was got before the other was burnt. It was brought by a girl. I did not see the prisoner sick at that time. Deceased was a very steady man. The prisoner used to keep herself neat and clean till the last six months. She was given to drinking. When I saw her she was always in liquor. I have known her four years. There was a great change within the last six months. She became less tidy and less clean. Deceased said he should like to see Mary Ann Jackson, and I told the prisoner that. That was on Saturday. Prisoner 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-1 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 first night after ten o'clock. She mentioned the meal being got about three weeks since. (The witness's desposition before the coroner was here put in. This was read by the Judge. The witness had then said, " the prisoner was sober for any thing I know." Also, " I never saw anything against her, and I always saw her tidy and clean. I have seen her only once in liquor, and then she was not drunk.") No one told me when I was before the coroner to tell all I knew about the matter. The first time I was asked about the. meal was three weeks ago. I forgot it when I was before the coroner. I can remember things better that occurred six years ago, than six months. Re-examined. Deceased was very ill at half-past six' when I first went in. Deceased did not say anything about the taste of the porridge. He screamed out when my hus band took hold of his shoulders to lift him up. I meant to say that there was nothing but vomit in the pot that smelled ill, when we asked the prisoner to take it out. There were bluish marks on his face after he was dead. (The jury here left the court for about twenty minutes, under charge of a bailiff.) Thomas Willis called.—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. He 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 tincture 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 Cross-examined.—l know something of cases of arsenic. I thought deceased was suffering under cholera, and so recorded it in Mr. Harrison's books. I thought it a very severe attack. I thought the liver was disordered. I-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 nothing 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 induced 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 he had suffered from cholera, 1 examined the ab domen, and expected to find pain. He had had great irrita tion in the rectum. I inquired of his wife about his general health. Prisoner said he was a very sickly man, and quite dope. 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. &e• On Monday morning he was sinking fast, and evidently dying. I ordered him half a drachm of carbonate of am monia, &c„ 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 at the bank. She said his relations and she had been quarrelling, and wished to take the money, and do with it as they pleased. She wished to get it out immediately. I refused to have any thing to do with it. I made a post mortem examination along with Mr. Harrison, on Tuesday evening. On view of the body everything appeared perfectly healthy. On making the usual incision in thejabdomen, 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 zc.i ',bed the appearance technically.) Great corrugation of the bladder. The nucleus membrane of the stomach was considerably inflamed, particularly in the upper part. The contents of the stomach were gone—nothing left but a coffee coloured fluid and a small piece of potatoe. I examined the stomach carefully. The mucous coat was highly inflamed in distinct patches, and destruction of a portion. The destruc tion are well marked in several parts, and highly inflamed. The edges of the patches had a distinct termination to each abrasion. The patches were dark red. The paches could easily be scraped off with the finger. These patches pro ceeded from some foreign irritating body causing inflamma tion. The same appearance was in the duodenum, but in a less degree. I examined carefully with Mr. Dyson, and nei ther could detect anything. I don't think any combination of disease would have produced the same result. The symp toms of poison are so anomalous that it is dangerous to give a positive opinion. I am confident, taking the symptoms before death, that no disease could have produced those ap pearances, which were quite sufficient to account for death. Those were quite such appearances as arsenic would pro duce. If arsenic had been taken, and purging and vomiting supervensd, the pain would not be so urgent as in the first degree, by reason of the vomiting and purging carrying off the arsenic. If I had known the deceased to be well, and immediately after taking something to eat, cholera 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 intestinal canal was inflamed. In ordinary cases nature does not support inflammation in two places at once, if arising from common disease. Nausea is a usual attendant before vomiting in cholera. In taking arsenic vomittin,g might come on in twenty minutes. If a large dose were given at a time, vomiting, I should say, would not be immediate, but in twenty minutes. An imme diate burning of the throat. Sickness might come on in a few minutes, twenty minutes, or an hour. If the stomach were empty, vomiting would likely come on earlier. Look ing at the body alone, without adverting to the other symp toms, I would say that the deceased did not die of cholera. From the symptoms I saw, I am enabled to decide this point with more certainty. I have seen Asiatic cholera. In the first instance I thought it an aggravated case o f English cholera. I was sent to Newcastle by the mag istrates of Manchester to watch the progress of the cholera there. I was four years connected with the Manchester workh ouse . 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 cases of cholera. It is usual in irritant poisons. The effusion in cholera is chiefly mucus, but not coffee-coloured . In cases of arsenic grutnous or sanguiverous . In eases of i nflammation arising from cholera, there are generally premonitory aymp- 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 diarrlicea 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 tindiug 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, 1 should have expected re-action would have taken place. Cross-examined.---I first called on deceased about three o'clock. I apologized to his wife for not coming sooner. She said he was surprised I had not come before, or words to that effect. I can't say she said she was sorry I had not come sooner. I have not changed my opinion on this sub ject. When I went a second time deceased said he was better. He said he was purged and sick after taking his supper, but did not say immediately. (The deposition of the witness before the coroner was here put in and read. It appeared that witness had then said that the prisoner had said she was sorry he had not come sooner.) The vomitings and purgings had ceased when I 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 bad 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 beard on Tuesday that the prisoner had purchased some gastro interitus acutus. The alkalis given him would have had a good effect in a case of arsenic. I can't tell whether the acids would have destroyed the effect of the alkalis on the arsenic. He told me he was costive, but that was from the disease. Gastro interitus accutus is a continuous inflammation of the stomach and intestinal canal. There would be heat and dryness of the throat—excessive thirst—the eyes an expression of pain and anxiety. The complexion would be sallow. Hunter was always sallow. In that disease he would have pain. It sometimes attacks very suddenly, but always with previous symptoms. If Martinet (a good authority) says it comes on suddenly I would still exercise my own judgment, unless I saw a distinct case. Spasms and pains would result. Stupor and prostration of strength would follow after some time. The urine would be defective. The deceased's tongue was moist, not dry. He 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 natural diseases, and even when there was no previous disease in the stomach. There was a thick sanguineous fluid in the stomach. The asaphagus at the lower part was inflamed. I should say there were some appearances of poison. Not such as common disease would produce. The soft state of the mucous membrane of the stomach might appear after 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 w hi 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 combination of symptoms carefully revised I cannot help thinking that it was arsenic. I cannot, after due reflection, come to any other conclusion. Thomas Wilson Dyson, sworn.—l am a surgeon in Man chester. I have been in practice about 8 years. lam a member of the College of Surgeons. I assisted at the post mortetn examination. I can come to no other conclusion than that of Mr. Harrison—that death was caused by the introduc tion of some substance, and arsenic was the most probable. After the examination of the body, the conclusion I came to was that deceased had taken arsenic. I did know of the pre vious symptoms, and taking these with the post mortem examination, my opinion is more strong that arsenic was the cause of death. I judge from the extreme inflammation of the mucus membrane of the stomach and bowels, the great degree of softness of the membrane, the spots suffused, the great number of points of abration throughout the stomach and intestines, which were most present in these parts, which in cases of natural disease are most free, and from the quantity of red sanguineous appearances. The rectum was inflamed. The whole of the large as well as small intestines were inflamed, which rarely takes place in disease of the stomach and small intestines. I found the bladder firmly contracted and empty. 1 have attended six cases of poison ing from arsenic. The symptoms were distinct and similar to the those cases, but more severe. I accoui.t 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.—l heard from Mr. Harrison that poison was suspected. I believe it probable that I heard all the par ticulars: I expected to find the appearances stated. I have no motives of attaining notoriety by decisive testimony on this prosecution. I never said that I once said that 1 would give strong evidence and hang the woman, and that I would take the shine out of Dr. Harrison. I never had any-con versation with a surgeon named Worthington, or in his pre sence. I have inspected six cases ; I have not inspected one third the cases that have taken place in Manchester in the last two years. (Witness produced a list of seventeen cases since 1839 in Manchester.) In the six cases I inspected I found arsenic in all of them. In every case it was taken in substance, varying from a quarter of an ounce to an ounce. It would be held in suspension in boiling milk more than in boiling water. In six or seven table-spoonfulls more than thirty grains would be dissolved,—the whole of it The medicines given would render it more soluble. (Here some questio❑ 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 inflamation. 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. PoLLocx 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 lie considered it his duty to the unfortunate individual whom he defended to put them ; and that he (Mr. P.) him self entertained no animosity or want of respect to that gen tleman. Mr. Dyson, as we understood from his manner, acquitted the learned gentleman of any intention of offering a personal offence. The learned JUDGE said that the learned gentleman was quite right, in accordance with his instructions, in putting the questions alluded to; and that no offence ought to be taken on that account. Mr. Dyson, in reply to Mr. Wilkins, said—" There is not a shadow of a shade of truth in the imputation conveyed by the questions alluded to." It being now past seven o'clock, the learned judge pro posed that as there seemed to be no chance of time case coining to a conclusion that evening, it might be desirable to adjourn until to-morrow. Mr. WILKINS said that as they had still a number of wit nesses, besides medical gentlemen, to call, such an arrange ment would probably be agreeable to his learned brother, who would have his notes to arrange, as it would be to ii I • n - self. Mr. POLLOCK expressed his assent, as the case for the prosecution would, he learned, occupy a considerable time. The Court was then adjourne(l till nine [hie reorni. s ; his Lordship stating that the grand ljury,would be accomodated at the Adelphi for the night, and be under the care of three bailiffs. They would, hawever, be made comfortable. The Court then adjourned. NISI PRIUS COURT-THURSDAY. Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN SAMUEL V. MORRIS.—Mr. Baines and Mr. Compton ap peared for the plaintiff; Mr. Martin the defendant. The declaration was for the use and occupation of certein premi ses belonging to the plaintiff in North John-street, Liver pool, and on an account stated. The case, as shewn for the plaintiff, was as follows :—The plaintiff, who is retired from business, is the owner of a shop in North John-street, between Lord-street and Harrington street, which be let in 1836 to a person of the name of War burton, who carried on therein the business of a tailor. Warburton became insolvent in 1811, and in the month of May in that year he executed an assignment of all his estate and effects, in trust for the benefit of his creditors, to the de fendant, Mr. Thomas Morris. Under that assignment the defendant took possession of all the personal estate, of every kind, of Warburton ; and it was contended that he had, there fore, become liable for the rent of the shop. Originally the rent was £47 10s. a-year, but shortly before Warburton s in solvency it was increased to £57 10s., after which rate there were now due three half-years' rent, amounting to £B6 ss. The defendant had acknowledged his liability, under the assignment, to the son of the plaintiff, and promised to pay, but he had net. The plaintiff was indebted to Warburton for clothes £6 15s. Bd. ; consequently £79 Os. 4d. were now due. Mr. MARTIN, for the defendant, said, he 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 p roo f o f occ upation by the defendant h ad been given. The assignment was then put in and read ; and the nephew of the defendant was called, .010 stated that he had heard his uncle deny his liability to pay the rent. Mr. BAINES was about to reply, when the jury said they would not give him the trouble, as they were of opinion there had been a sufficient occupation. A verdict was then returned for thi plaintiff for the amount claimed; but on the application of Mr. Martiin, the Jndge said he would give leave to move for a new trial on the legal objections which had been raised on the part of the defen dant. FIELDING AND OTHERS V. FAWCETT.—The declaratim in this cue waa for work and labour done, and on an account stated. Mr. Martin and N. plaintiffs; Mr. Dundas and 1 The trial of this case, and c actions), occupied the court shortly after ten o'clock. `I and of no interest except to the p; cerned. The plaintiffs, Thomas Fie and Richard Stout, are calico place near Clithero ; and the cleci, in London, who, at the period of the also carried on business in the The plaintiff Mr. Stout attemlecl to t in Manchester, and his partneri,. mar Clithero. The defendant agreed wit number of mousseline des lames to tiffs' works, according to certain pa daily provided for him, upon terms of much investigation, the chief of w went: should be made monthly. It printed, the last parcel which was The plaintiffs, not receiving paymcn ditions, detained the last parcel, an action to recover the amount due I Is. 6d. The defendant paid i.:90 hits liability to pay the remainder, on the damaged in printing, and returned order of court) at a period when t market. The case closed at a quarter retired to consider their verdic they returned into court with mages £l5B Is. 6d. ; the bloc defendant. FAWCETT V. FIELDING AND ont El action referred to above. The declar recover from the defendants cornpo: tained from the plaintiff the 170 pi( laines After the statement of the cas DUNDAS, and the examination of I Mr. DUNDAS said he was willing to say what sum his client was er abide by his Lordships decision, wit going through the facts. Mr. MARTIN assented on the pat The JUDGE thought £lO would addition to £9 which had been paid A verdict was then entered SEDUCTION ,red for the defendant. y, commencing tediuu. tely con- Bentley •chouseman f the firm to send a subject was, that the Pay er 672 pieces were L:onsisting of 170. g to the con: brought the present them, namely, £248 )urt, and denied his .ound that they were niionaity under an were unfit for the lock, when the jury :ing absent an hour, the plaintiffs, da: ills to go to the —This was the cross n trover to ,n for having de- , ousseline des for the plaintiff by Mr. it witnes It to t 'he judge i he would the trouble of again ;ouable sum, in for £l9 )f seduction in and Mr. Wort- OBEREND v. WATKINSON — This which Mr. Wilkins appeared for the ley for the defendant, the parties h Mobberlev, near Knutsford. Whilst dering their verdict in Fielding r. Fan Mr.WORTLEY requested the court to postpone this case till Saturday. His learned friend, Mr. Wilkins, was for the plaintiff, and he was engaged in a case of murder in the other court, which he (Mr. Wortley) understood would continue unto to-morrow (Friday). I n the meantime his (Mr. Wort ley's) client's solicitor, Mr. Roscoe, who was one of the co roners for Cheshire, was required to-morrow morning to bold an inquest at Northwich [upon a female alleged to have been killed by her husband] ; so that it would be a conveni. ence to all parties if his Lordship would allow the case to stand over till Saturday. The JUDGE said that, under the eirc objection be of were consi- ) the vill he had no SWAINSON V. SWAINSON AND ANOTHER.—In this case a verdict was taken by consent for the plaintiff for £15,000, subject to a reference. _ The Court adjourned a few minutes fore six o'clock THE CAUSE LIST The Cause List, when the Court ros as follows : last evening, stood FIRST LIST.-SALFORD TITINDRT:D. Plaintif.-Nos. 1,2, 3,4, 5, 6. 7, 10, 11, 13, 14 15 17" 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 30, 31, 35, 39, 10. 12. Defendant.-N05.. 8 , 12, 16, 26, 33, 31, 3( Referred. -Nos. 28, 29, 43, 50. Withdrawn.-Nos. 19, 32, 41. Struck Out.-Nos. 45, 46, 48 SECOND LIST.--WEST DEI Plaintiff.—Nos. 1,3, 4,7, 8, 12, 34, 39, 46, 55, 64, 65, 68. Withdrawn.—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 there are six spei and 38 common cases to be disposed of. Easter term corn_ mences to-morrow week (Saturday) when both the lord Judges must be in town ; in the meantime they have plenty of occupation here. 16, 21 7, 61, 62, 74, 75, rial are two V. Moore." cl isexpee- appointed for CHESTER ASSIZES CROWN COURT—' (Before Mr. Justice WILLI Michael Mahar, aged 36, John Br 35, and John Hopkins, 23, were c house of Peter Woods, at Capanhurs moneys to the amount of £lO. [We reported this case very fully brought before the magistrates at Bi The jury found Michael Mahar a acquitted the rest. The two were sentenced to fifteen On the application of the Attorney ordered Superintendent Boughey, a Birkenhead police. to be rewarded for the exercised in the apprehension of the prisoner ),lin Mahar, ith entering the ►erefroui hen the prisoners were niopk: s guilty, and CIVIL SIDE 1, Uis Lordship 3ovles, c mice they had (Before Mr. BARON MAITLE.) The Learned Judges this morning exchanged courts, owing to Mr. Justice Williams being conne cted with one of the parties in a case tried. The w hole proceFtlings, however, were of a very uninteresting character in this Court. NISI PRIUS COURT. --WEDNESDAY. Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS. LOVELL V. BOYD AND OTHERS.—(Special jury.) In this case Messrs. Jarvis and Welsby were for the plaintiff, and Mr. Evans and Mr. Temple for the defendants. The action was brou g ht to recover the value of 3700 bushels of Dantzic wheat which had been sold to the plaintiff, a large corn mer chant, residing at Bilston, in Staffordshire, from the defen dants who are corn merchants in Liverpool. The wheat was sold by a person named Pratt, and ordered by him to be sent to the order of the plaintiff by the defendant. On this order it was shipped at Liverpool and f ransmitted to Preston Brook, in this county, where it was lodged in the warehouse of the Duke of Bridgewater, having been brought there in plaintiff, wh o one of the Duke's lighters. At this place it was stopped by the defendants in consequence of some disagreement w i t h Pratt e and refused to be delivered up to the commenced his action for the recovery of it against the trus tees of the Duke of Bridgewater, but that action was stopped on a jud ge ' s or der, and directed to be commenced against the present defendants. The defence to tile action it w , and as, that that tha e goods were stopped whil st in course of trans countermand had been given to the order by Pratt. It ap peared, however, that the trustees of the Duke of 13ridg e _ water were in the habit of acting as warehousemen, and es such received the goods in question into their warehouse, to hold to the order of the plaintiff. On this the learned j u d r,e ruled that at the time th e g oods reached the warehouse, tirie transit was at an end, that there had been no counterm an d and directed the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff, gi v i ' ng however the defendants liberty to move to set it aside ii l the court above should be of opinion that he was wrong. case Accordingly a verdict was entered for the plaintiff—d a . mages £768. A'S ELECTION BILL an action (s. J.)—This was PARRY V. MAIN WA RISG • brought by Mr. Win. Parry, the landlord of the Gredlington Arms Inn, Holt, in the county of Denbigh, to recover the amount o f a bill from the defendant, who is the member for £32 9s. 3d.—he pleaded the Denbighshire Burghs, for expenses incurred during the last general election. The whole amount sought to be re covered was £122 95. 2d., part of which the defendant had rdourceTsedarit'OlPa'y ; next that the liquors first d t ;thbautt b th e e n b e a v la e rr i e , had were i n less quantities than 20s. worth at one time, and therefore, under the tippling. act, the plaintiff was not enti tled to recover; and, thirdly, that the drink was supplied to voter s d ur ing an election for the burchs, and therefore illegal. Mr. Jervis and Mr. Welsby were for the plaintiff, and \ V. Williams for the defendant. 1 Ir. The trial of the cause occupied a considerable portio n of f the day, and the r eading over several of the items of the bill of p a rticulars creat ed no little amusement in the court ; for (1 i ns t ance , there was a ball at which Mr. Mainwaring was pre sent, at which w as supplied nine quarts of rum for tea, 49 glasses of brandy and water, and .19 bottles of pop, l -)' a''l the3s. were paid to a fid dler and harper ‘x ho attended to enliven company. WILLIAMS contended that fi Mr. V. orders given to supply the liquor ' defendant bad already paid. leaving the court, found a verdict for t, £52 9s. 3d., the amount sought to be reeL The cases tried in the Crown Court, 1 Maule, were of so trivial a nature as I , notice. .were bad been no evond the £7O, which the • however, without The ji plaintiff, damages efore Mr. Baron o deserve public Th e eases tried in the courts yesterday Were not o f an y great public interest. ":D A RNLEY JEWEL."—ThiS VC the THg workmansbip of the 16th century, the finest gems of the collection of S which was purchased at the sale there Farrer, of \V ardour-street, for a large fi ve co mpetition amongst the bidders, by her Majesty, at the price, it is said was about to be sold to a foreign collet IS in posses sion of the celebrated iron ring of the unfortunate husband of Mary Queen of Scots, when the good taste of her Majesty rescued it; and it is now amongst the royal jewels of Eng land, as formerly it was amongst the royal jewels of Scot land. It is the identical jewel worn by Lord Darnley. It was made by order of Lady Margaret Douglas, his motheor; in memory of her husband, Matthew Stuart, Earl of I tl e . n w n ho and Regent of Scotland, who was murdered by. opposed him in religion. The jewel, f heart, about workmanship, is of fine gold, in the foirnmnbreadth. On the two inches long, and nearly two inches a coronet, in which surface, which opens in front, there is whichoisatf pta•x:uisite aear_ si►oted by are three small rubies and an emerald. u ntueoritthhe,,c_ionigioeft curious piece of cis turme►l °tie of vberryll, and summer, by Mr. and after an ac just been bought 200 guineas. It there is a sapphire in the shape m ... --- njby, emerald, and sapphire. The coronet is suppc,-- . Victory and Patience. There are a!so two figures on the jewel, representing Faith and Hope. The colours of nll tree figures, which are very elaborate, are of ruby and sapphire enamelling. There is the following legend : " Sal obtein Victorie in yair Pretence Quha hopis stil constantly with Paden ,- --I l i tt l e heart may he h-' - led up front in cipher, sPectsti-tl7l The coronet afiG below; within the coronet arc three ICLics • " M. L. S." with a crown of laurel over them. On the re verse of the coronet within ire two hearts joined and pierced by two arrows, bound by a th with a legend, " Quhat we Resolve." When the little heart is opened, a skull and two bones are seen, and two hands holding a label, from which hangs a horn with the rest of the legend, " Death sal dessolve." On the other side of the jewel is the sun shining enamelled ; th e on a heliotropium, or sunflower, beautifully moon and stars are also represented. There are a salaman der in the flames, a pelican feeding her young with her blo all od, a shepherd, a traveller, a dog, and a bird, and a phoenix, emblematical, with a legend— " My stait to them I may comp,:!er issue three For you quint is of Bontes rare. u . aked r g " When the whole heart is opened, on the reverse ale are oij a se tfi e h i r i_ ou t nree: men in Roman armour fighting. An executioner T h h ol e d r i e nz a w r ia woman by the hair with a cuttle ax ; e a , n a d s a a t b .e o it u , t to decal her ; two frightful jaws. out of which flames. The figure off me i een draw:n .l : o : o supposed to be Truth, m a Wsl with a tire iu which many crosses a rr re he burnin three legends. "Ze seem al my Plesur " m g. leir," and " Gar tell my Relaes. - " P yin gauss al y worked, and is one of the most is ex q extraordinary art of the age. mar • remains of the