The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-08-29 00:00:00

August 29, 1848. Vittlituntittarp 41) rorentitgs. HOUSE OF LORD.—MONDAY. ttetAfter soma pd ine business, the Earl of RADNOR, in refer o a st a t ement made the other night, relative to the c ase ;;;;oV__ra. W illiams, who had b een comm i tted for giving away .0471 en v ictuals, said, h e h a d b een informed that the victuals 1 sway consisted of a considerable quantity of . meat, merely Lo r ic c harge she had been committed by Mr. Hawkins. BROUGHAM said te statement of the noble earl was 1,, move y ex parte, and he ~ Lord Brougham) intended to-morrow j or.. for copy of such documents as would enable their la th z e • ll Ps to judge which statement was correct. The report cas e ..hwsliapers said that the learned judge who heard the tornmalititlnadverted on the conduct of the prosecutor and the hail not .ng imagistrates in severe terms. He (Lord Brougham) eeh3e _ at ad censured the conduct Hawkins. That Lorl-tie was passed on him by Mr. Justice Coleridge. . lb w e DROU GHAMsithiGired if there was any truth in the ati l•s_ nt that a number of the Irish Roman Catholic prelates th os i e -4 .7}1:Y had signed a memorial to the Crown in favour of th e dis'etided and deluded persons who had been . led from TII ‘pareof their duty and committed high treason. to brquis Of LaNsDowNE had seen the statement alluded . t oui , Lnemoble and learned - lord, but lied received no official , Munication on theb' t„. In on. to a questionu l e y c Earl FORTESCUE, Verr ime larquis of LANSDOWNE said the attention of . the go- Dree auti it had been directed to the propriety of takinao e e eholera,o.nary measures with respect to . thc progressoft e bro ught and that a measura on the subject would shortly b Under the notice of their lordships. The HOUSE OF COMMON 6.— o n; „rue ent into committee of supply on the miscellan, Period, and proceeded with various grants up to tilt b of adjournment, the two votes occasioning discus latter 9.e grants for New Zealand and Labuan, upon the iv4.hiii the committee divided, when the grant was thel; a majority of 44—the numbers 56 to I?. °llse resuming, and the question of again going into Incr ved " ° f supplely having been put, Mr. G. A. HAMILTON Mdreso:S atnenment upon the order of the day, that an !Uch,_.e presented to her Majesty, praying her to direct that l and „.Tlodification of the system of national education inlre rtiej;Zbe made as may remove the conscientious objections I , i sbed c l e i rY large portion of the clergy and laity of the 1 1 to o por arch entertain to that system as at present carried th ose o ipon, or otherwise that means may be taken to enable Nemaer~; tie clergy and laity of the Established Church who Of in such conscientious objections to extend the blessings hes of 'prat e ducation in Ireland. While the Roman Cath?- eo usete -431a nd are allowed to receive a grant to carry out their sto od inzittli(lius views of education, the Protestants Ire . land ott the sa l , e anomalous position, that their conscientious views aasiv an ", Point were disregarded, and they were refused that ce Which • MONDA given to every other sect in that country. G io " Zv anle 2linTen ' t as w g t d by Captain JONE'4, Mr. ?ATE air W. VE a ß S NE su ßr P ri r n e NA PI E R, P and Mr. NEWDE iIr a . -nd opposed by Sir W. SOMERVILLE, Mr. S. CRAWFORD, SEORNE, 111.11 f E, Mr. REYNOLDS, and Lord J. pro w , the noble lord stating that the object a the present !eeeiis'°:uoti was to overthrow the evit;.. operation tot' Yea aNgler Increased in number to four thousand, and the scholars to iihundred thousand—a system which had received the.sanc -10 of successive governments during that period, tending as 0 1 4 to unite Protestants and Roman CathQics, and which, f i rfur the prejudices of some of the clergy would unite them to still greater degree. Under these circuinstances he hoped 11t. gould continue to receive the support of the legislature. 1 division there appeared for the amendment 15 ; ply'. - nlaiority 103 ; and the house went into committee sp aeiunst tol e fordingly the principal subjects iscussed. being the for captured negroes and for consulatetablishments. ,LordD HOUSE OF LORDS. " 44 .jeatv t EN mAN moved an address to the Crown, praying her fth.,:,° give directions for the enforcement of all treaties '' l ?itst o f"gft.Dowers for tbe extinction of the slavp yade on the thre cti Afnca, and for the prosecution of all Br itish subjects, Plitt 0 .,,! r indirectly, c oncerne d in violating the laws against aer.z".e, and thAr tn t i mtn -TUESDAY , evere than that s now incurrettaccOiding to the laws itft era '.pn tor th a t cr i me . a4 uadr o fer vent speech against the doing away with the African tati vue ,, u t Lord L ANSDOWNE replied, and the motion was ne- Epn th i thout a division. e (Westin. of of +ha Perliampninry a ina i , !4Y six mo n th s , w h en th e or i g i na l motion was carried Ot t tentY of 3—the num be r s 31 to 28. 3111 of T e motion of Lord BEAUMONT, the substitution of the jilt° °Aeraua for the 11th October, when the bill was to come tio rY n was agreed to, and it passed. ,Th e HOUSE OF CONIMONS.—TUESDAY ,i l3o, o ' L, Uer Duties Bill having been read a thii TINCK moved a clause the 01 )ject of which was to renners of suo•ar in Eand on - the same footing as t b ,, e Perl i t i t ulland, Belgium, and Kanove . r, and that they sho . uld ed, whether the sugar was British colonial or foreign, Afte r it on Paying the highest rate of duty. Pesti ° suMe discussion on this proposition, and on the general "ulise a nd Present state of the trade in the West Indies, the 30. th ivided, when the motion was negatived by a majority of .or tom e n umbers 70 4O th e __?EORGE \ T BENIN . CK then proposed two amendments te gnt iveiileration of the scale of duties, the first of which was Passed a b Y a majority of 63 ; the numbers 17 to 80 ; and the va B sed. a Majority of 65 ; the numbers 16 to 81, and the bill • t° . n uiEs in speech of historical details, in reference bro e differ • t U ght fo e nt committees which had sat on this subject, th e jut r ward hi s motion callints the attention of the house t i n uase of apOrtg from the committees of that house and the Dose sli o ,,,rds on c mmercial distress, and moving that the ler iotts os'`! , early in the next session, take the same into its Th e Th;Ts.idern,:,.... the ITh - 711 , 1lti on neipl e ' Which involved the question of a departure from 1 1 1 1 er cutre of the Bank Act of 1844, by an extension of a a n ,oEo AT t c Y,as a circulating medium, was supported by Mr. I?„.".,°Pposp,r,:t., SPOONER, Mr. MUNTZ, and Mr. HOME , Eit ,IIAAVA:I•LaVII. VA I.IIA Into moved the previous question, and Sir It h 1 r I:een att ly_ 4tteini'ortnßßlEs, in reply, stated that his object in drawing Ihe ,of the house and the country to the subject having a '?led he should not divide, and the question was put gatived. o (Ireians_?cond reading of the Taxing bill having been moved, Mr... d ress the house when it was counted out at two Masters' Court of Chancery iine verth HOUSE OF COMMONS.—WEDNESDAY. e. presentation of several petitions the house went , 0 4 `Tlinitte of Supply, and several votes were agreed to. low a ,:•_*T question of the .e 8,700 to defray the expenses of al- Niru.c(7,to Polish refugees, xt ""NE opposed the grant on the ground of inutility try o e u - lavonnce, and intimated that the charity of this coun• "er e gat to be extended towards numbers of its own people who be forei,„ers eodurin who rivations insteud of being lavished upon abused its generosity. The grant bad tial e '' ) lleeded for one year only, and he now thou; I, or pt a stop to it. , tr STUART defended the grant. year RIGHT thought it surprising that the Pol ear ed " i ad not been r..ble to provide for themsel' 0f.,...0hi I it high -, Sher v jntries Hume ti Junco cow oy tne inaaintant h e ,_ Ax . e wir! cELLoR of the EXCHEQUER said that the vote wa e „.2: . n could not be comddpred a nnrmananh r• 11 rfra n nn, we House woulu ue wsposeu rellWay -this aid- Wo . m '"' ord i p n e K rs ti ons who had been long in thi b er :lpt of it--that would be an act of cruelty but you'll ree e Tls . able to earn their own living could not be allowed t( 11 111" it. He assured the house that the list should be care reviewed. 'SdtFlassion ensued on the proposition of the Regium Do• kha te :, l ch INlr. C. LUSH INGTON opposed as derogatory to thi Ivah ;ers of this country, and moved its omission. The vote olle,..ried by h a a majority of 60 to 28. l eeS 'nt Of 500 to Sir Charles Trevelyan, for extra ser• t4ir'e":4l3vanAprovedof by a majority of 73 to 14. then rtronnena n wn+n of .0124 fliVl f n mink 11T iMUIX/Nell U WU! 01 s iac,vw 11.1 WILIU uI *1 for the relief of distress in Ireland up to the lalf. y e 14; surn e ar. In reply to a que,tion, he sta•ed that th( - ,,)v 8 o,„xPended for relief in Ireland up to the end of Jul 3 tjAfter a o ylit .t 9,135 ,00 0. Adrct j ` b uort conversation. „e vra.:`.l7ssELL observed that hon. members, in objectinf I' ll' 4 go) - ` , did not seem to consider that an immense change O n in Irylapd, or to make due allowance for thi t', i l , l 4l l t tY under which both landlord and tenant were corn 4 /1 ;0)4-, t• The burden upon landed prope- - ilii2 . l 4 o ,;',?!?ged from .e 400.000 to .t1,800.0°- g elaZ!` a .nt change. Another f3itice karov!' ",as this —that whereas, in 1836, there were . no corn tr,„lele s i Lc l o dealers in Ireland, there were now dealers in those to ';',,,e,very part of that country. He thought it wa . s their lt A iS w e ,' the transition, and that it could not be said they u/ i i, wasted the money of the country by i . issisting cer tieeti upon to bear the very great burdens which had been tic'erlco them, borne as these had been, op the whole, with riit t to tr readiness which was highly creditable.. With eh 410,j0il future, that no doubt would be . the subject of dis -I,Lrld he did not wish to enter upon it at that late hour. t 'tt' 4 to Say was that in our •oresent circumstances he w il 'k it would be wise to lay down a system or propose of ," i re of ', e v icl not know what was the extent of the present bl 4e , e vr`t.ie potato cultivation— what was the exact . amount iu "great increase of potato cultivation which took ; we 4Present year as compared with the amount of last e a -t e Der.,Y not know ' what amount would he saved, or to. t ~o l- 4,, t he stock would last; and under , thee 9rcum •• 4,,, HOUSE OF LORDS.—Txuasnay. 04 1 "ed " I 'EkoLE moved for certain papers respectino• the 1 4 tot A l a ay grata of Vancouver's Island to the Hudson's b ßay Faye e' which he stigmatized as the most lavish, 1, slam '1 and reprehensible ever made. The noble lord tap ah s, etch of tne rise and progress of the Hudson's as , 'Y' and quoted various authorities to prove that it -1 4ti o -el ation totally unfit to be trusted with the duties of a, 1 1 (i 1 1 4 . , 11 11 4 1, (1 4 P , While he admitted the itilofF Ice of Vancouver's iNti o - it the g as one iv? tau t ' wer e '„ a British ra p nt ossession to , 4 ,111 „ 4 pre v l° l. llPtly undertaken, pt lel a q e I? the irregular app'!vpriation of squatters, of , 1 11: 1)4 4 4 tea r , u odyt. compused chiefly of Mormons, already 4 Pro d 4 0 11 rionng thither. The Government as not lk,,tri t r, sill of . colony itself, but it had lent a willing ear to ,_the Hudson's Bay Company, and from all that „the" Drop,,'!' Ile believed that company would exercise the ti, 4 li Q e4 tis e - ed to be confided in them with great advantage c.,444110c.! to and humanity. ;e11 0 0 1)t p4NcELLoa then moved the second reading of oh t rae tices at Elections Bill, but as the feeling of Ol e 'rek l e , Tr'ed tbe that there was not sufficient time a. advanced period of the session for the prop left er 411 14t 9 'ould ° ` so teniportant a measure, it was agreed that "3 flirt read a second time, on the understa . nd. further progress should be deferred till next session. fj„ _ 0e rn i ioUsp 41 e etion COMMONS.—THURS DAY . e .. at the Diplomatic Relation s with the Court : 4 )ej t i tr.l.l.ent day t tr2osed as an amendment that it be corn . • Ld oppose ii progress a 4 the •• Itt,ss,!'r seconded the amendment. 1 4 , fte,etile4stirLeLL expressed his determination to persevere Ijll% . l ‘Pr ee s el , l „es_ from Sir J. Tyrell, Mr. Forbes, Lord e m Drum- T`tilliNnNZ'lr, Sir C. Burrell,O'Connell, DN thi;Y. oved the adjournment of the debate till 4 itt i 4 N b• Ato m . . A s t salon Lord J. RUSSELL deurred, but ex div?`.tix. 'ungn ess to adjourn the debate t ill the evening ev k 'acev when the amendment of Sir R. Inglis - "e a t r ( liOui a majority of 73 over 28 voices. The debate krs,Njoilrn_ tied till the evening sitting. tac t 4. OD ad_ebate was then resamed by Mr. Moore and '4l4. l S:ir Wriiitio,',:ithuhart, Mr. P. Howard, Mr. M. P o wer, 4 1 ,!r, t6,‘ . Sir R. Ine,. Lord H. Vane . , Mr. Newd r e 7 Mr. G. binson, Mr. Napier, and Lo d 1 4 , t, 4 4 1N 0 th d P 6 0 rt e e th e h en moved the adjournment of the debate, in tZ u sp, might proceed, as Lord John Russell had se e PPer and Lead Duties Bill. .cosed the gentlemen opposite of factiously Nphit 4 !ev v " v ; o u r ill. CI th e ini fro m Captain H ARRIS recommen di ng th e hlai o whe house divided on the question of ad rity n the .ti m 4 b kl , Of 103 endrilellt of Mr. Goring was negatived Ith es the Over 32 voices. Vnl 0,1,2:1, attempted to address the .house, but Was St cloy on which tu the adjournment.of the house. 18~ ill, an d l ig ice Of V 47, slice, at her MaJ ithin the VO U Tab kg ' wou ld hol* :ch on SO' unual Oar" ed direct t,'"•,./ carriages ige of o f the gar' d the 0 0 ' I Leigh , s c i l s e , s Chor e •' 5 ' r med by e bride so; Dsvenor, ent' A sum l) ; r House , e r, to a lat for a tc o, Cobham, had an ill' treet. ~ 11/ : cc lesiastl e Lancashire, rposo. • ited X. s ° ne fit of , er has also Ftrict of St , o on ThU rs. ..,,r5 r i four Ye!'; It is take wish of A t. of' a t lea,. it Jury.) . 8 ; pen, _,t y the CI; era ce rl o a b, id hee l a the 10 01 . 1 th his re ,v ne of , t et ome ma ed was terT ,e a n Org1" - e se y by and CreAis, thewe the b° ost 1 taihra ° FL HO/ f, poW 7d. t bs from , inc h:dew s .. Nort';:n oruub--, eturrkeu The & Ile; , u t til lucL, en ee ie pre' t,i3 th of V t n he , h T feet 60 fe e 'ic Avo 0 clt he ned at ie sleep e.- r all d cau se No he 90 Pe fo l ; opinga!nedtbe lur, -6 e sse their o to o ° ll rig a 6 0 )11. --- 0 id Presto e 3at h to 001. t. more. 4. o 'clock w ileg e;:s — ( I ° Wa. ed in re, ,s ceen aP." ate. his :is London 3en nearly ..driver on xpress, he way, but a e up : a n carriage der is how imediateli their ar,: injure d of V: ter. and !'°., conditiFp.,; c e, ,me Pl a e j ini t ! fi r e . le uld , vac)„A. directouninju ,:5 ,_ exp re7 ue pa' Vino loc ebr e ! initof nu aoo ccurre en Ye ar ; tem c" t g , be s eco p He a artedi jerbl ° solle j ,k,i,rehaviog :AGE S, te ,l jette r t 1 846 t bs o f )ulder• n o. qUeS ti t ' o il Ulmer t he , s for ea hag ...befor "` • deo' . mow F ion rove to.O c tl e ' a toot ,icio, o - 1 0 su cm d b y ) portf tioo l. 0 " C ,absed , or' osib ie ithout puke' ng t:og i l sb . ' e a ltered Il 1. ()spat o dez, col don Well cfo .riot o.necftsi; !ctl.n g igto ppOSe. Bier, n e t I P , r dr ep . thee ''' arran ge; con e a : ter cptet retV' r o s dict .'t a ted urSt. s in to cert la t eeß i g li Citt fOr Pe e , lUld Wi ee' jaW r onslkfc iv „Wei to be.,,, 0 , f $ coo: v i n ce 11 tir , t 6 '^ cread/ f . ; .4li °le per.! ' Ur -1; licatelY ado- TIE LIVERPOOL itlNhAtith. Lord JOHN RUSSELL commented on the factious opposition given to this measure by certain gentlemen oppos►te. The most respectable members of their party, among whom he spe cially referred to Mr. Napier, had deliberately quitted the house rather than join in it. Captain ITYSIC observed that he had merely moved the ad journment to give Mr. Forbes an opportunity of addressing the house. Mr. FORBES then repeated the speech which he had made' in the morning. Mr. SPOONER was rising, as Sir G. GREY ima gined, for the same purpose —an idea which led him to stand up for the propriety of observing the long-established rules of the house, which only permitted a member to make one speech on the same subject, and to point out the inconvenience which would arise from evading those rules by moving the question of adjournment Mr: SPOONER persisted in his intention of again addressing the house, complained of the slur cast upon him by Lord J. Russell, and declared that he should not flinch from his oppo sition to this bill, no matter what the house might think of it. An animated discussion, paqaking rather of a personal cha racter, then took place, in which Lord J. Russell, Mr. Spooner, Mr. M. J. O'Connell, Mr. Newdegate and some other member s joined. At the close of it Captain \yse withdrew his amend ment, and the house divided on the amendment of Mr. Anstey on the original motion, when the numbers were—Ayes, 34 ; noes, 113 ; majority against the amendment, 77. The house then resolved into committee on the bill, and was occupied during the remainder of the evening in deciding on the manifold amendments proposed on it by Mr. C. Anstey and two or three other members. HOUSE OF COMMONS—FnmAy. On the motion for going into committee en the Diplomatic Relations with Rome Bill, some discussion took place, in which Mr. SPOONER ' Sir J. TYRRELL, Mr. N EWDEOATE , L or d J . RUSSELL, and Sir R. INoLts, took part; but eventually the committee was resumed without a division, and the remaining clauses of the bill were agreed to. name of Thomas, alto was some time ago transported. Two years after his transportation she married the prisoner, but this marriage was null and void, because Thomas was still living, and also because the prisoner was himself a married man at the time he contracted marriage with the deceased. She (the deceased) lived with the prisoner as his wife for some time, and then certain disputes having occurred between them, she left him and proceeaed to London. There, she visited her married sister, but she shortly after returned to Manchester, in order to pursue her own occupation, that of working at the Hanover mills. She was frequently importuned by the prisoner to go and live with him again, but she declined the offer. About half past five o'c ock on the morning of the 25th of June, she was on her way to the mills, and when she had got to Stevenson_ square,. a witness named Murray saw her in company with the prisoner. Some quarrelling was then taking place between them. She was angry, but he was comparatively calm. They went on until they got to the corner of Friday-street, and there she was beard to say to the prisoner " If you don't leave me I will alarm the neighbourhood." The prisoner said to her " You mean to die, do you?" He then took a pistol from his pocket. She ran, and he followed her. She screamed, and several persons were attracted by the screams. He pulled the trigger of the pistol, and snapped it at her, but it did net go off the first time. He then caught her by the clothes, and turned her head round towards him; he then fired the pistol; the bullet passed through her brain, and in a very few minutes afterwards she was a corpse. He was taken into• custody on the instant. He appeared at the time perfectly cool, sober, and collected, but the smell of drink was upon him. He put the pistol quietly in his pocket,„and s a id, " I l ove d th e woman and I will die forher." To another person he said, " I am quite satisfied with what I have done." He then took out another loaded pistol, with which he said he intended to "exterminate" himself, had he not been so suddenly apprehended. About seventeen days before the murder, lie went to the Hanover mills, and asked to see the deceased, but she having declined to leave her work, he said, "If ever man had woman's life, 1 will have hers." He then pulled out a pistol, and said, "This is the weapon that will do it. Two loaded pistols having been found upon his person at that time, lie was taken before the magis trates, but he was shortly after discharged, and the pistols were restored to him, and in about a fortnight afterwards he put his many threats into execution, by shooting the unfortunate female through the head. prisoner was found guilty. NISI PRIUS RIGHT OF AGENTS TO DETAIN GOODS. CASEY AND ANOTHER V. BLAIR AND ANOTHER.—t, .Turd.)—The plaintiffs in this case were Messrs. Francis George Casey, and the defendants Messrs. Blair and Sumner, all the parties carrying on business at Manchester. The action was in trover to recover the value of 250 pieces of cloth, de tained by the defendants from the plaintiffs.—Messrs. Martin and Aspland were for the plaintiffs, and Messrs. Baines and Cross for the defendants.—The plaintiffs were merchants at Manchester, who bought goods to a considerable extent, as was customary, through commission agents. The defendants were bleachers, carrying on business in the neighbourhood of Manchester. In connexion with the case was the firm of Messrs. Birts, Watson, and Co., commission agents, who transacted business to a large extent in their line of business. The practice at Manchester was to buy goods in the gray. They were sent to the person acting as the agent or principal ; a bleacher was employed, and his cart was sent round to the warehouses to take them to the place where they were to be bleached. In a few days afterwards the bleacher called at the place where the goods were taken from, received directions as to what should be done w ith th em , an d acted accord i ngly. . In this case the 'nods were part of a quantity bought from Messrs. W. and W. Sterling, manufacturers, in September, 1847 ; the goods were sent to Birts, Watson, and Co., and thence to the bleach-works of the defendants. who received directions from ants in a sum of .el9OO. plaintirrs uemanueu from the defendants, offering to pay the price of bleaching, but the defendants refused to give them up, alleging . that they would hold them for the £l9OO due to them from Bats, Wat fseoandaaantial had Co. a The righ q t question t hold dwtohiei goodsd be whether l r 9o 1 0 1 ot owing thed to a them by Birts and Co., or whether they were bound to give them up, merely charging the price of bleaching. The question was one of great importance, as it affected a number of bleach ers at Manchester. who were the real defendants.—Verdict for the plaintiffs, damages £ll4 Ifs. Bd. CLARK AND OTHERS V. LomAs.—This case was decided by the previous one, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs. MORRIS AND ANOTHER V. LOMAX.—This case also went off under similar circumstances. HEATON (CLERK) V. MOORE AND OTHERS.—An action to recover a debt of £ll7 17s. 5d., alleged to be due from defend ants to plaintiff. Verdict, by consent, for the plaintiff. ALLEGED ILLEGAL DISTRAINT. T►IURSDAY In reply to questions put by Mr. ROBINSON, respecting the treatment of the convict Mitchel on his passage to Bermuda, and since his arrival there, Sir G. GREY said that instructions had been given to the officers of the vessel he was sent out in that every precaution should be taken to prevent the prisoner from escaping. He was to be placed in a cabin by himself, a sentinel was to be placed at his door, and his meals were to be sent in to him. He was also to have proper exercise while at sea. On the arrival of Mitchel at Spike Island he was examined by a medical officer, who reported that he was labouring under a chronic affection of the lungs. In consequence of this report he had been removed to a convict ship, where he had been treated in every respect like other convicts in a delicate state of health, but that since his arrival he had not been put to the hard labour that convicts are usually put to. The Judge passed sentence of death upon him in solemn terms, and said that he could not hold out to the prisoner the slightest hopes of mercy being extended to him. William Travers, 26, was indicted for having, at Liverpool, feloniously uttered two certain forged undertakings for the payment of .t 1 each, with intent to defraud John Pearson. The prisoner, who was the steward of a ship called the Chusan, in May last, lodged with the prosecutor; and on the vessel's being ready for sea, he prod u c e d two shippine , notes, which prosecutor cashed for him. The notes were found to be forge ries, and on the discovery the prisoner was given into custody Guilty of uttering - The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER then moved that the Mr. P. SCROPE moved, as an amendment, that no future ap propriation of monies taken from general taxation be made in the poor-rate of Irish unions, except on conditions—first, that it be expended in the productive employment of the able-bodied ..,.—Sentence deferred. TREASONABLE CONSPIRACY. During the day the Grand Jury found a true bill for a trea sonable conspiracy against T. B. I\l'Alanus, Lawrence Reynolds, ct noanell. Joseph ' Many -new nopper, Edward Murphy, James Laffan, Mar elNlVrle 'lNirgritEcitifa-MARrseuswAti.Y.Atrick WHanlos . for misdemeanor against a great number of other Chartists, from the neighbourhood of Manchester, Ashton-under-Lyne, &c. le., on I Ao — m — es",;:ituoigi ho',inn RiiiirefiiMiiitiirriaertne no ffse at co Mu aera 0 , which he impugned the conduct of the poor law commissioneis of Ireland. After some observations from Lord G. BENTINCK, Mr. H LIME, Lord J. RUSSELL, and other hon. members, the amend ment was negatived without a division, and the house went into a committee of ways and means. PRESENTMENT OF THE The Grand Jury, before being discharged, handed to Mr. Justice Cresswell the following presentment against seditious and treasonable clubs : . . _ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then proceeded to make the financial statement of which notice had been given by Lord John Russell on a former evening. He recapitulated the main points of the budget of the noble lord at the commence ment of the session relative to the revenue and expenditure of the country, and then proceeded to show how the government had reduced the deficiency that appeared when the house re fused to sanction the increase of the income tax from three to five per cent. He had felt it to be his duty to call the attention of all the departments of the public service to the necessity of diminishing their expenses as much as possible, and the conse quence had been a series of estimates much reduced in amount holnur shot which had lippri cnntomnlntpd_ in nr. " The Grand Jury cannot separate without expressing their conviction that the law, as it at present exists, is inadequate to cope with sufficient promptitude and effect with these clubs and associations, which, in connexion with Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom, have for some time endangered the tranquillity of these realms. " That from the difficulty of repressing in their earlier stages the mischievous attempts of these clubs to establish an exten sive system of organization and arming, sedition and treason have been encouraged, the ignorant and unwary have been seduced by apparent immunity into the designs of the disaffect ed; and formidable preparations have been matured for out break and rebellion, which, with some modification of the law, e been ci .0 toe outset, by toe energy atm ttect iose who are charged with the preservation of the the course to w Ile result was the navy estimates were reouc• Q by tne sum ot &208,1100, tne army estimates by .4'150,000, the ordnance by .e 123,000, the miscellaneous by .t'23s,ooo—making, together with the saving of £150,000 by not calling out the militia, a total reduction of £828.000. The total expenditure would be £52,422,335. while Grand Jury, therefore, express the hope that such mea sures may be adopted by the Legislature for the vindication of the law with respect to these clubs, as to its wisdom shall ap pear most conducive to the security of the Throne, the liberty of the subject, and the stability of those national institutions which the country at large is determined to maintain." sum'of liecame available. From the barley Crop of last year, which was very good, he anticipated an increase to the excise of £340,000, and £BO,OOO, being the last instalment NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY JENKINS V. BROWN AND OTHERS. - , , of London, was the plaintiff, and Messrs. Brown, Shipley, am! Co., merchants, of Liverpool were the defendants. The action was one of trover, to recover the value of a quantity of Indian corn, which, it was alleged, belonged to the plaintiff ', -and had been illegally sold by the defendants. acis Jenkins of China money corn-merchant would be onl The reduciiona wliich had taken place he hoped to be able to carry to a still further extent next year. The deficiency for the present year would be still to be added ne expenses together with the sum advanced for the relief of the distress in Ireland and for the Canadian emigrants. This deficiency he proposed to meet by a loan rather than resort to a permanent tax to meet what he hoped would be only a temporary emer gency. The house would remember that he had no ordinary difficulties to deal with. They had a famine in Ireland, great commercial distress, revolutions abroad severely affecti n g trade, and insurrections at home. It was, therefore, not to be won dered at that there should be a considerable falling off in the in come and revenue of the country. Ile believed it was the pa ramount interest of that country to promote the peace and tranquillity of the rest of Europe, and the best exertions of the government would be devoted to that object. With respect to the harvest, he believed the crop was only partially damaged, and he believed that the extent of the potato disease was not so It appeared That the plaintiff vas largely engaged in corn speculations, and that he imported a cargo of Indian corn from New Orleans. Bills of Exchange were drawn upon the plain tiff by Le Gendre and Co., the house that made the shipment. Two of these bills, for a sum of £2,513, were drawn against the cargo, and became due on the 17th of June, 1847, and these bills were held by Denison and Co., bankers, of London, on behalf of defendants. The plaintiff entered into a contract for the sale of a cargo, and tendered the money in payment for the bills at Messrs. Denison and: Co.'s, but the bills were not produced. The plaintiff consequently was unable to deliver the cargo of corn, and no sale could be effected. The plaintiff subsequently became embarrassed in his affairs, and was obliged to effect an arrangement with his creditors, and under that arrangement a composition of 2s. in the pound was paid on the bills in question. The plaintiff, it was alleged, had out no hope of any general system of relief, such as had been formerly resorted to : The right hon. gentleman concluded by fendants, because it had been sold by them in October without any intimation being given. The value of the corn was court above, and it wai'thus brought on for triila second time. Witnesses were called, who proved that theplaintiff's property Mr. HUME considered the statement of the right hon. gentle man as most unsatisfactory. w Mr. MARTIN, in the course of his speech for the defence, stated that the 60intiff had been offered the bills on the 18th, and that he would not take them up ; that, subsequently, he offered to throw up the whole affair; that the defendants were was sold off at a ruinous sacrifice, the auctioneer, in selling the busts, being unacquainted even with the figures of Sir Robert Peel and the Duke of Wellington. He put up John Wesley for Voltaire, and a bust of Sir Charles Bell, author of the "Bridge water Treatises," he described as Deaf Burke, the celebrated Lord GEORGE 13ENTINcii said the Chancellor of the Exche quer had taken erroneously into his estimates the continuance After a few words from Mr. J..O'CoNNim., Sir H. WILLOUOH BY said he had arrived at the conc that increased taxation was postponed only for one year. losers by the transaction to the amount of £15,000 and that they had a right to sell the corn, the plaintiff having no claim pugilist.—(Laughter.) There was also a plaster cast of Chantry. winch the said auctioneer designated "the bald-beaded chap;" never been brought before a court . of justice Iheaded show-tiny The evidence extended to a' great II grea length, •• , • After some observations from - Alr.lkluNiz and Mi. H. DRUM MOND, - Lord J. RUSSELL said that the reductions which would be made in the various departments would bring their expenditure . . the plaintiff was not possessed of the corn, and that they had the right to sell it under the authority obtained from Le Gendre CROWN COURT.-FRIDAY Benjamin Anderton, managing clerk to an attorney in Man chester, appeared to surrender on a charge of having forged two several orders for the delivery of goods. He appeared to The other cases to-day were unimportant, SOUTH LANCASHIRE SUMMER ASSIZES. CROWN COURT have his trial postponed to the next nesi%es,which wa; and he was bound over to appear, himself in "21)( granted -Tfl URSDAY CROWN COURT -TUESDAY attreties in .'lOO each (Before Mr. Justice Creswell.) Henry Woodward, 28, was found guilty of having, at Brough ton, broken into the dwelling-house of John Ward, and stolen one cream jug and other articles. Thomas Case, 22 Ann Williams, for stealing a child at Salford, twelve months' imprisoninent. THE INDICTMENTS FOR CONSPIRACY. wniito Macklin, Joseph Radcliffe, and William Bolton, were arra:Vial UpOn ati indictment for a treasonable conspi- racy at Ashton !tnder , ,Lyne. They all pleaded not guilty, and expressed their intention to traverse to the next assizes. James Flinn, Daniel Don Gran, Michael Carrigan, Joseph Spooner, Peter Feeny, Thomas Webb, Mark Hulme, William Chadwick, Michael Itt‘Donnough, Henry Ellis, Thomas Whit taker, Thomas Edward Clarke Cropper, Thomas Rankin, Ro bert Ramsden, Thomas James Dolan, Joseph Leman, John Joseph Finnigan, Henry Williams, George Rodgers, James Hoyle, and James Downey, were next arraigned on an indict ment for conspiracy at Manchester. They all pleaded not guilty, and several of them expressed a wish to traverse. The following asked to be tried during the present commission : E. C. Cropper, P. Feeny, Chadwick, Joseph Puwney, J. J. Fin nigan, H. Williams, George Rodgers, M. Carrigan, Joseph Spooner, and James Dolan. jfar. Haigh, for having, at Chadderton, attempted to con ceal the birth of her child, six months' imprisonment. Ellen Grtylith, for having, at Liverpool, attempted to drown her child, one months' imprisonment and bard labour. Robert Walton, for bigamy, at Saddleworth, nine months' imprisonment. , ~,z, charged with having, on the night of the ith of August, at the village of West Derby, cut and wounded a po liceman, named Christopher Coupland, with intent to do him . . some grievous bodily hiirm. The jury acquitted the prisoner of the felonious intention, but found him guilty of an assault. Joseph Thomion, 20, was found guilty of wounding a police officer named Oliver Petty, on the 7th of August, an officer in the county constabulary. John Smith and Thomas Smith, for burglary, at Liverpool, each We've months' imprisonment. Henry Woodward, for burglary, at Broughton, twelve months' imprisonment. sonment, with hard labour, for having, at Walton-on-the-1-W, on the 16th of April last, feloniously killed, with intent to steal, one ewe, the property of _John Cruickshank, a brewer, at portation Walker Ellwood, for stealing in a dwelling•house, at Rad cliffe, after previous conviction for felony, fifteen years' trans- John Whittam was indicted for having, on the 3d of April last, committed a violent assault on Richard Blee, a collector of accounts, residing in Acton-street, in Manchester, with in tent to do him some grievous bodily injury. The jury found the prisoner guilty of an assault. _ _ _ - John Sumner, for larceny, at Litherland, seven years' trans portation. THE LIVERPOOL PRISONERS AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD Jane M'Lane, 33, was brought up, and pleaded not guilty to a charge of having at Ashton-under-Lyne, wilfully murdered William M`Lane, her illegitimate child. Mr. Monk appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Atkinson defended the prisoner. On the 24th July last the prisoner, in company with a man named William Johnson, with whom she cohabited, went to the Old Cross Inn, kept by Mr. Hall, and had four quarts of ale. About five o ' clock prisoner was seen to leave the vaults and go into the _yard, with the child, about nine months old, in her The prisoners Cuddy, O'Donnell, Somers, Murphy, and O'Brien, were then placed at the bar, and arraigned on an in dictment for conspiracy. They severally pleaded not guilty, and expressed a wish to traverse. About three o'clock in the afternoon, however, they were again placed at the bar, and de sired to be allowed to withdraw their traverse, and to be tried at the present assizes. Thomas Lees, William Penny, William Morris, and James West, were charged with conspiracy at Ashton. The prisoners pleaded guilty, but wished to be tried at the present assizes. Joseph Sandiford was sentenced to transportation for life for a rape on a little girl only nine years of age, at Manchester, in May last. Simnel Worthington, 27. was sentenced to fifteen months imprisonment, for having, at Pendleton, feloniously stolen one coat, and other articles, the property of William Hesketh. John Sumner, 39, was charged with having, at Litherland, stolen three pigs the property of Henry Harrison. Guilty. Sentence deferred. John Richardson, 39, was charg ed with having, at Warrin, ton, feloniously forged ii bill, or receipt, with intent to defraud Ann Clare. Not guilty. _ arms. Slie returned about half an hour afterwards, without the child. She was in a state of intoxication, very noisy, and was turned out of the vaults. Prisoner subsequently returned, and, appearing in great trouble, requested to be allowed to go to he necessary. On her being interrogated as to where she had left the child, she replied, "At home." Shortly afterwards the daughter of the landlord went to the privy and discovered the infant in the soil, quite d , ..ad. The jury found the prisoner guilty of manslaughter, and recommended her to mercy. Philip M'Cacide;, 26, was sentenced to one month's impri sonment, with hard labour, for stabbing Mary Taylor, at Salford. Jihn Goddard was acquitted of having used a certain instru ment to procure the miscarriage of Mary Bailey, at Heaton Norris, in June last. George William Knowles, 25, was charged with having, at Liverpool, on the 15th of April last, stabbed and w ounded J as. NISI PRIUS COURT FRIDAY grand jury came into court with a true bill against Geo eacon and forty-five others connected with the Manche& ALLEGED . REVOLT ON THE HIGH SEAS , ter confederate clubs James Famell, , Thornas Coates, John illyLJ , James Bain, The case of Clarke v. Holford, for illegal distraint, was re sumed, and after a very humourous examination of the auc tioneer by Mr. Serjeant Wilkins, thejury founds verdict for the plaintiff on the first count, for 'l7O for the value of the goods, and .'l6 for the fixtures. For the defendant on the se cond and third counts; the fourth count was withdrawn; and on the fifth count the verdict was also for the plaintiff. [The verdict, according to the statute, which doubles the amount of goods illegally distrained upon, is £530.] NISI PMT.'S COURT.- (Before Mr. Jurtice TUESDAY attempted to make, a revolt on the high seas. In November last, whilst the ship Corn, belonging to Messrs. Harrison and Rogerson, of Liverpool, was off the coast of Africa, the captain, named Gillespie, died. The prisoner Farrell, being next in command, then took charge of the vessel. Subsequently an order was sent on board that Farrell should keep command till the following day, when a person named Dawson would supersede him. Farrell and the other prisoners said that Dawson should not take charge; and, in addition, stated that he (Dawson) had poisoned Captain Gillespie. They set sail in the course of the following night, and were afterwards pur sued; but the Cora got off after a chase of three or four days. The vessel was afterwards worked to Liverpool, and the pri soners were given into custody. Mr. Justice CRESSWELL re quested Mr. Bliss, the counsel for the prosecution, to state whom the revolt was against; and the learned counsel having acknowledged that there was some difficulty in the case, his lordship retired to consult his brother judge, and shortly af terwards returned and directed thejury to acquit the pri- After some undefelded causes in the second list had been disposed of, the court proceeded to try a cause in which Messrs. Gould and Davis were the plaintiffs, and Mr. William Stock was the defendant. The action was brought to recover the sum of £153 s. 2d., for stores supplied by the plaintiffs to the ship Frederica. It appeared that the captain of the Frederica, Mr. Waddington, went to the plaintiffs' place of business and ordered the goods, which were accordingly supplied to the ship. In the month of July the owner of the Frederica executed a bill of sale from him to Mr. Stock, the defendant, on the Frederica; and, by law, a party who became the owner of a ship, was bound to go to the Custom-house and there make a declaration of ownership. -0 knzust, Mr. Stock, th, 410 CROWN COURT—SATuRnme SENTENCES. The following prisoners were brought up and sentenced : Jane 31' Lane ' convicted of the manslaughter of her child, was sentenced to transportation for seven years.—Parker Unsworth, the butcher convicted of the manslaughter of a man named Clarke. Three calendar months.—Cornelius Jones, a boy con victed of manslaughter through careless and furious driving. Fourteen days imprisonment.—John Finneron, Michael Hogan, and George Wm. Knowles, convicted of cutting and wounding, &c., were severally sentenced to transportation for seven years. i Elizabeth Wilson, convicted of stabbing. Six months' mpri sonment, wit.t hard labour.--Anthony 'Carroll, Nicholas Car ter,. John Smith, John Whitham, Joseph Thompson, Thomas Case, Jahn Davies, severally convicted of assault, were next put up. Thompson, Case, and Carroll were each sentenced to twelve months, Whittle to nine months, Carter and Smith to six months, and Davis to one month's imprisonment.—Ellen Moss, convicted of concealing the birth of an illegitimate child, was sentenced to be imprisoned for six months, with hard labour,—Edivd. Parsons, convicted of forging a post-odice order. Eighteen months.—Wm. Whillan, convicted of forgery, by endorsing a bill of exchange. Eighteen months.—Elizabeth Marrint, who had pleaded guilty to forging a signature to a postotlice order. Six months.—John White, who had pleaded guilty to•uttering a 'forged warrant. Three months.—Benjamin Anderson, convicted of uttering a forced order for the delivery of goods. Nine months.—Ed. Murphy anti Win. Travers, respectiVely found guilty of uttering a forged seaman's note. Twelve months.—His LORDSHIP, in passing sentence on the two latter prisoners, said the crime was, unhappily, of frequent occurrence in this borough. If he found the crime undimi nished, he wetild punish it with transportation. The case of Dr. M`Donall, the Chartist leader, charged with sedition' and conspiracy, was mentioned several times in the course of the day. On his name being called he failed to appear, Accordingly, on the defendant, went to the Custom-house and inade a declaration, that the ship Frederica, of which Mr. Waddington was master, was his property. Messrs. M`Tear, Hadfield, and Thompson . . Mi. KNOWLES addressed the jtiry, contending that the goods were furnished upon the credit of Mr. Holmes, hut the proof of this failing, a verdict was taken for the plaintiff for the amount Ethiard Murphy, 20, was indicted for having, on the 22nd of May last, at Liverpool, uttered a sailor's forged shipping note. On the day above mentioned, the note was offered to•a person named Mary Bird, requesting that she would cash the same; she at first refused, but subsequently did so, giving ss. in exchange. The note purported to be from the ship Middleton, with the captain's signature. The jury found the prisoner guilty of having uttered the note, knowing it to have been forged. Sentence deferred. THE AFFAIRS OF BARTON, IRLAIVI, AND lIIOGINSON TURNER AND OTHERS.'. DEANE AND ' OTHERS.—Mr. 11iiirtin and Mr. Crompton appeared for the plaintiffs who were Chas. Turner, Francis Shand, and other shareholders connected with the Royal Bank, and Mr. Baines and Mr. Henderson were coumel for the defendants, Mr. Edward Guy Deane and his homers Davies, 29, was charged with having, at Liverpool, feloniously killed and slain Sarah Ann Buchanan. It appeared that the ; risoner, on the 12th July last, was driving a coach r. MARTI x stated the case. The plaintiffs were the assignees firin of Barton, lrlam, and Iligginson, who became hank and two horses ap Stanhope-street, at the rate of about eight miles an hour; when About half way up, as the deceased was rupts last year, and who had at the time a most enormous ac count with the Royal Bank. The defendants, Messrs. Deane and Son, were most respectable attorneys in Liverpool ; and the question in the case was this—whether the defendants had what is called a lien upon some title deeds, belonging to Mr. Jonathan Higginson, in respect of a debt due to them from Barton and Co. _ _ received a fracture of the skull, ishick caused death. pri soner was acquitted. John Davies, 29, was indicted for having, on the 15th of July last, at Ashton-in-Mackerfield, feloniously attempted to dis charge a loaded pistol at Elias Woodcock, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm. The prisoner had previously formed an acquaintance with a female named Jane Hilton; they had lived together; and, subsequently, the parents of the female interfered, and sent her to the house of Woodcock. Some time afterwards the prisoner went to see her, and on Woodcock meeting and refusing . him an interview, he pulled out a pistol, and presented it at Woodcock ; lie pulled the trig. ger, but it did not go off; he then said he would not hurt him, and left. The jury found the prisoner guilty of a common as sault. Sentence deferred. Ellen Moss pleaded guilty to the charge of having, at Liver pool, concealed the birth of her child. Sentence deferred. Jane Jackson was indicted for having, at Liverpool, on the 22d June last, uttered a forged shipping note. The prisoner, together with a man named M'Connell, went on the above date to the house of Mr. Little licensed victualler, Norfolk-street; and requested him to cash the note for '2. He did so, and on applying to the firm of Messrs. Brocklebank for the purpose of getting it re-cashed, was told that they knew nothing of it, and it was believed to be a forgery. The prisoner, on being taken into custody, stated that her husband had given it to her. The note bore the signature of Win. Whiteside, master of the Valparaiso; the Christian name, however, of the captain was incorrect. The jtillY returned a verdict of not guilty. His LORDSHIP, in briefly summing up the case to the jury, said that this was a question which must be decided at a higher tribunal, but it appeared to him that the plaintiffs were entitled to the deeds, they having paid to the defendants the 4'160 un der protest, and the lien being co-extensive with the contract. But, in fact, his opinion was of no consequence; it was subject to review, and the case would now be taken to the court above. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff's with liberty to the defendants to move a nonsuit if the court should be of opinion that the defendants had a lien upon the deeds. and the case was postponed for a short time, when the Mtor:. ney; General again moved that the recognizances be estreated, which was done accordingly. About half.past twelve, however, the prisoner appeared, and on the application of his counsel, the recognizances were restored. A long argument then took place as to whether the prisoner should be allowed to traverse, but ultimately his lordship ruled that the trial should proceed on Monday morning. The case of the Liverpool conspirators was fixed next in order, after 141.`Doua11's case. Serjeant Wilkins advised Cuddy to traverse, but this the prisoner positively refused to do. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Castle and Jones, are extensive recti fiers and distillers at Bristol, and the defendant was for a con- lon was brought tnt to the plain- In the case of the trial of Rogers, SpoOiler, Williams, and Carragan, for seditious conspiracy, the case for the prosecution not being i . eady, Carragan were discharged on their onn reco.gnizances. A similar arrangement was come to in the case of Healey and others, and also in that of Fliun and others. tiffs, and which accrued from business transactions, Verdict for the plaintiff for xlOO,OOO, damages .WlOOO, sub ject to a reference. • Counsel not being ready to proceed with any other causes, the Court tried two criminal cases. William Dawson, 39, of Oldham, was sentenced to trans portation for twenty years, for a rape on Charlotte Bradley, a girl of 16, the daughter of a woman with wliom he cohabited. This finished the criminal cases, except those charged with political offences. Ellen Gri f fith, a married woman, was found guilty of misde meanour, in having attempted to drown her child in the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. It appeared quite clear that the prisoner was intoxicated at the time. The child, a fine little boy, was in Court, and the prisoner, on seeing him, burst into a flood of tears, and declared that she had no intention of drowning her beautiful boy, and that she was really so much intoxicated as to be quite unconscious of what she had done. In corrobora tion of her statement, a female neighbour was examined, and she described the prisoner to be a woman remarkable for her kindness to her offspring. Sentence was deferred. Jane Parsons, 22, was indicted for the wilful murder of her new-born infant child, at Liverpool, on the 11th of May last. The jury acquitted the prisoner of murder and found her guilty of concealing the birth only. His lordship sentenced her to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for twelve calendar months. Parker Unsworth was found guilty of having feloniously killed and slain John Clarke, at Liverpool, on the 26th May last. GRAND JURY ROOM.—THURSDAY. (Before Mr. Sergeant MURPHY.) In consequence of the great number of criminal cases, a third court was opened, and Mr. Sergeant Murphy took his seat in the above-named room, shortly after nine o'clock on Thursday morning. NISI PRIUS COURT.—SATURDAY. HOBSON AND OTHERS v. MANRY.—The declaration was in trover to recover the value of certain goods alleged to be ille gally held by the defendant from the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are the assignees of a person named Manby, an ironmonger, at Burnley, in this county; and the defendant is his father, also an ironmonger, residing at Skipton, in Yorkaire. In October last, Manby, whose father had advanced him money to the amount of thlso to commence business, by warrant of attorney made over the property in consideration of the sum due, he, Manby the younger, having at the time com nitted an act of bankruptcy ; and the plaintiffs, the assignees under the fiat, now brought their action for the recovery of the goods.—An arrangement was come to between the parties, by a verdict for £7OO being taken for the plaintiffs. FARRELL v. HARnisoN.—The plaintiff, James Farrell, is one of the parties who, the other day, were•tried before Mr. Justice Cresswell, and acquitted, on a charge of piracy ; and the pre sent action was brought to recover the sum 01 .E 43 10s. for labour performed for the defendant, Mr. Thomas Harrison. The plaintiff was the mate of a vessel called the Corn, of which easel the defendant is the owner, and he (the plaintiff) now HORSE STEALING. William Brownbill, 12, was arraigned for having stolen a horse in Toxteth-park, the property of Mr. Thos. Derbyshire, and John Stretch was charged wit_, having received the same, knowing it to have been stolen. From the evidence it appeared that, at the close of April last, Mr. Derbyshire had a horse stolen from a field in Toxteth .park. After due search, it was found in the possession of Mr. Stretch, tanner. The horse, which was lame, had been sold to him by two boys—the pri soner Brownbill and another unknown, who has escaped de tection. During the hearing of the trial Mr. Stretch was dis charged, it being the opinion of the jury that he was entirely ignorant of the felony. The Judge said there was no ground for the charge against Mr. Stretch. After a long consultation, the prisoner Brownbill was found guilty, but in consequence of the foreman of the jury (Mr. Longbottom) having heard a statement of the transaction from one who had some know- CROWN COURT. —W EDNESDAY. EDNESDAY. MURDER AT MANCHESTER. William Adams, a young, well-looking man, was indicted for having, at Manchester, murdered his reputed wife, Diana Adams, by shooting her thraugh the head with a pistol. It appeared in the case that, the woman alleged to have been murdered had married, about nine years since, a man of the and Edward Birch, 44, weel:eateilnigargaedgrewaitthrihota l ledge of the affair, the Learned Sergeant allowed him to state brought his action to recover €43 10s. wages for a voyage per far. Gunn, 23, RIOTOUS ASSEVFBLING. .t i o the what lie had heard, which was to the effect that, on the day in formed hence to the coast of Africa and back, u p on th a t vesse l. John Flynn,.2B,4ames Downey, 3,• James 3fooney, 20, Orem question, a boy, a perfect stranger to him, met the prisoner, The case setup for the defendant was, that the plaiat it!' had and asked him to go with him to the tan-yard to self the horse feited his claim in consequenceof gross misconduct and & g ra n t Newton, together with 500 and more, anlaWfully and tumultheaded by several of the which he was leading, promising, at the same time, to remu.. ' breach of duty- The particulars relative to the dinatte whiela tuously assembled together, armed with pikes, swords, and aerate him for his trouble. The prisoner went, and thus be. save rise to the present action were published at the time the other dangerous weapons, thereby came implicated in the t ansaction. At the close or this state- Investigation OR the charge of piracy w a s he a rd before Mr. terror and alarm of her Majesty's subjects. k appeared that ment, the counsel for the prisoner apologized, and said, that in Rushton, at the Peice-court. The Learned Judge said the Ties , - on the 31st of May, two processions, consequence of the short notice he had received, he was not tion was this, whether, in their judgment, the pl a i n tiff had a prisoners, one front Manchester and another from Olahain, able to read the whole of his brief; but on referring to it he well-fOunded fear& great, and unlawful, and personal violence, marched ur), armed, as before stated, and carrying flags, perceived that there was an important witness in the prisoner's and whether he slipped. the cable and anchor, which act was to Newton toll-bar. The prisoner Flynn head e d the Old. favour, whom, by permission of the Learned Sergeant, he the alleged gross dereliction of duty, from that well-f oun d e d h am: p rocess i on, an d D owne y was second in command near would call. Accordingly a Mr. Tho m p son , j o i ner, came for- fear; iso, they must find for the plaintiff, but if they should be him'. Flynn demanded to pass the gate on the hi g h roa d b e _ ward, and deposed to seeing the transaction as stated by the of opinion that the defendant had established the case which he tween Manchester and Oldham. Mr. Keswick, head consta b le _ foreman of the jury. Mr. Sergeant Mu r phy comp li mented the h a d i nstructed h i s counsel to• set up, their verdict must be for WaS stationed with a number of police. He said pe acea bl e per : juryman, and said, if it had not been for this statement, he him. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for -t - '43 10s, sons might pass, but no one who was armed. S ome of the foot would have sentenced the prisoner to seven y ears; as i t was, d amages one sh i lling. procession showed weapons. lie took one from the prisoner he should consult with Mr. Justice Cresawell. 13efore the court ______... o „,___ Mooney —a walking-stick with a pike o r d agger at the end. rose the Learned Sergeant ordered the boy for war d, an d as k ed Others showed pikes in the ranks; also a musket with a fixed him if he had ever bee n t o sc h o ol. He replied—" To Mr. CROWN COURT.—YESTERDAY. bayonet. The prisoners were all sworn to as being present TREASONABLE CONSPIRACY AT LIVERPOOL. . - • -- Cropper's." The Learned Sergeant then asked if the boy '' On the opening of the Court, Joseph Cu.:dur, Matthew Somers, could be put to school in the gaol, without the chance of con- James O'Brien,Franeis O'Donnell, and kelio ' ard Murphy, al tamination with the other prisoners. After being answered in confederates, were charged with treasonable conspiracy in thi the affirmative lie ordered the prisoner to be imprisoned for town. O'Donnell and Somers applied for copies of the depr filar months, during which time lie was to be kept in school, firma tob•nr. 1.r.,.... •1.-- •.. - . • . _1 •• 1 . rrw.rrao~ Flynn was a pistol, and other weapons ere prodnced. Pikes were exposed days afterwards, and in hi s possession th swords, a number of pike head which they seized - . Thes for sale in the wine ...• ... .... ..ussati aLca, vii um Fpuumi lIIIIL Lucy 010 to-pass in single tiles. To -.-.. --. sct,llf (Ad rya al, wars bentessueu to ergmeen months' bard ii - O - i - kr - i - ciw the precise charge against them, so that they could meri t & of police and so/ labour, for stabbing police-Officer Joseph Thompson, in June not prepare their defence. named Henry, who ,-- last, in this town. HIS Loans HIP said they might hear the indictment read at full way to Manches , Daniel Davis was convicted of uttering, or forging, two notes length, and if they wished to postpone their trial until next into custod for the payment of .4'3 15s. upon Mr. Richard Williams. The only remarkable feature in the c ase was th e o b tuseness of the assizes they might; but as they had chan ge d th e i r m i n d s b e - toll-bar. fore. their election must n ow b e fi na l, the toll- 1 jury, which drew down a se vere re b u k e f rom the Learned Ser- geant. Sentence deferred. After some parley with co unse l, a ll th e p r i soners traverse d to I the ' - J next assizes, and were put down. ,Tames Barr was charged with having forged a shipping note TRIAL OF DR. M` DOUALL. for -t'3 155., on Saturday, the 30th o f M ay . Th e pr i soner was ATTENDING AN ILLEGAL MEETING , AND IT.' -- found guilty, and recommended to mercy . S entence deferred. s taken some' ice found twenty Peter Murray 3l'Donall,Wed 45, and known as Dr. lirDouall, and was placed at the bar, charged with having, at Ashton-under fspecia t L o y t ne, maliciously and seditiously, with divers other persons, bled to disturb the public peace. One of the counts also charged he number of 300, or more, unlawfully and riotously assem him with, on the same night, uttering certain seditious language to the people assembled around him. There appeared for the prosecution the Attorney-General, with whom. was Mr. Crompton and Mr. Mathews; for the de fence, Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Pollock. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opened the case to the jury, re peating much that had been said in introducing similar cases that have recently been before the public. Parties had a right to Enjoy their. own opinions, but not to utter language tending to subvert the constitution or law of the country. He did not believe that the prisoner spoke from his sincere conviction, for he should endeavour to show that he was a hired, paid lecturer. He was, moreover, a person of good education and ability, and therefore on both accounts he wasnot entitled to that sympathy usually awarded to persons who are unpaid, disinterested, and also uneducated. Letters and papers were found upon the pri soner which he should produce. He then ran over the whole of the heads of the charges against the prisoner, (as they appear at full in the evidence below.) He concluded by saying that he should prove that the meetings referred to were illegal, and that the prisoner there uttered language which was seditious. The letters found would also prove that the prisoner had ap- IlartAPleDtki,Y,..v.migni..towna....ther.e. t. an,y hict Witness, in consequence, went to the Charlestown Meeting house. It was eight o'clock. A person named Millington stopped me at the door. The prisoner was not then there. When I was stopped a second time he was present. Millington then said it was not me they refused to admit, but the deputy constable; 1 was then deputy-constable, and had been chief constable since. When the prisoner came up I was still refused admittance: I could see no farther than the passage. I re mained some time, and left several of my men to watch the proceedings. The town was next day quite alive, and I appre hended the prisoner on the 16th, telling him that I had a war rant against him, charging him with attending an unlawful meeting and using seditious language. I read the warrant to him I now produce. I found upon him this memorandum book amongst other papers; a paper, entitled "The Song of the Soil," from the Irish. Felon ; a letter from Bradford ; also two other letters, one of them containing depositions apparently taken before the magistrates ; all dated the 14th of July. CLARKE v. HOLFORD. — (Special Jury.)—Mr. George Clarke Cross-examined by Mr. WlLKlNS.—Millington said, on my was the plaintiff, and Mr. John Holford the defendant. The applying to be admitted to the meeting, Dr. M'Donall has said action was brought to recover compensation in damages for an that officers had before so misrepresented what had been said, alleged illegal distraint. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Crompton ap- I that he was determined that he would not admit them, or neared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Baines and Mr. Henderson something like this. I (lid not know if the Stockport news for the defendant. The facts of the case, as appeared from the paper employs a short-hand writer. I employed no short-band statement of the plaintiff's counsel, were as follow:—The writer. I directed my officers to attend about the meeting, to plaintiff was a sculptor, at Manchester, and the defendant a notice what took place, and give me a report of it. Dr. M`Douall gentleman of property, residing at the same place. In October had spoken at several meetings at Ashton of late years. I last, the plaintiff took a shop and cellar from the defendant, in know not how many. I was present at only two. There was King-street, Manchester ' at an annual rent of .ellO, payment a di s turbance at one of these, four or five years since. There to be made in advance if the landlord required it, In January was also a tea-party lately . at Town-hall, the proceeds to go the defendant's collector called for a quarter's rent, but, as the for the defence of the prisoner on this trial. A Councillor of ph intiff was absent, no decisive answer could he given. In a the borough had the letting of the Town-hall. (Mr. Wilkins week or two afterwards, the plaintiff, while at Sheffield, was w i s h e d t o infer from this that there could be no apprehension much astonished to see in a Manchester paper that his effects of a disturbance in the town, when the Town-council let the were advertised for sale by Mr. Fullalove, the auctioneer. He hall for his use.) immediately notified to the defendant, thiougli his solicitor, bis His LORDSHIP entirely over-ruled this view of this part of objection to the sale, but defendant proceeded, and sold off all I the evidence. the effects of the shop at a great sacrifice. There was only a I Abel Swan, tailor and draper of Ashton, said he had the letting quarter's rent due, amounting to .t , 27 les., but the defendant of the Charlestown meeting house, which is let for a chapel on sold off property valued at .e.lOO for .eOO, thereby oc- Sundays, and for meetings on other days. Ile (witness) was casioning a loss to the plaintiff of £340. It was contended by present at the meeting there on the 10th of July. Most of the the plaintiff's counsel that Mr. Fullalove had shown great ig- people who went were admitted. The public and reporters norance in the sale of the goods, which consisted of the va- were excluded. The prisoner said something about excluding rious pieces of sculpture, plaster, casts, models, &c. In proof the police. A person camed James Taylor ' presided. Thos.. of the ignorance displayed on the occasion, it was stated, St orer , It. Fillan, and others were also with the chairman. The amidst the laughter of the court, that a figure of Vesta was prisoner also spoke from the pulpit. He spoke about the land sold for Madame Vestris, Lord Bacon for Bacchus, John Wes- which he said the people must look to for subsistence. He ley for Voltaire, and Jenny Lind for Her Most Gracious Ma- alluded to the parks of the aristocracy, which he said ought to jesty. The action was brought to recover compensation in da- be cultivated. What witness heard was isolated and uncon mages for the injury the plaintiff had sustained by the reckless fleeted. Prisoner announced a meeting for Friday night, and sale of his goods, and the tyranny exercised by the defendant. i advised the young men to go to the Clirrtist meeting, and join The case was tried at the last assizes before a common jury, the National Guard. At the close, prisoner spoke of an escort, but the defendant being dissatisfied, made an application_to the , and said they should form in procession. He left the place to a person named West. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS, Mr. M‘Dotiall speaks rapidly. It was not he who spoke about the young men drill ing, &c. The chapel will hold upwards of 1,000. The prisoner said that in consequence of the great increase of machinery, the people would be obliged to fall upon the land. I did not hear him speak of th National Land Company. Henry Taylor called.—l am a police-officei. I went to the meeting-house on the 10th July, but did not go in _ The meeting them, and «•es between two others, A man threw up his cap the route 4/1 tue pruumatvii Imuu6u aiivna turned to the Oddfellows' Arms, where the were 300 or 400 in the procession at first, and they afterwards increased to about 800. The prisoner spoke to them from the window,—saying, " I advise you to organise yourselves, and /Bents Lye revolted There is no fear &pill them, Th. ti at Woolwich have an revolted in one night. There is a eolit -late° sitting at the Horse Guards to consider their grievances, And jri a few days there would be a pamphlet issued stating to dfflOcllb I wish they would call up the militia, but is we should then have their guns, bayonets, 'la. and they would se e w h a t th ey cou ld 000 disposable troops, and whai . I_tell you that T on horse they dare not, and cartridges and ba.. do. I tell you there arenot would these be amongst five millions oL by the time of the harvest, or sc points of the charter and something more saying, "Organise! Organise!" ➢looney was give on after; we shall ;.2Y , the six ' lie concluded by CrOSS-examined.-1 have been a police-officer since February, 1846. I was a marine twenty-one years and six months. (He was here asked to write his name, which he did in a very shaky manner.) He wrote his account next morning; handed it to his inspector, and had not seen it since. (Here Mr. Wilkins wished the witness to write—" form yourselves into sections and divisions," &c., but his lordship overruled this mode of examination. Inspector Dalglish said he had mislaid the notes of the wit ness, but he had read them and they were perfectly legible. Witness re-called (Taylor.)—The prisoner did at one time warn the people against any acts of violence. Dalglish re-called.—He was refused admission at the meet ing, which broke up about half-past ten o'clock. They formed four deep. There was cheering as they started. They went along Wellington-road, Oldham-road, and Old-road, passed the Oddfellows. Henry-street, then Cavendish-street, to Old street, back to the Oddfellows' house. M`Dowall addressed the people from the window. I took a note of it immediately after. The note is here. (Witness read it, to the same effect as stated by the last witness, with some little verbal alteration.) ame up at the tk witness, Leary, a sui: on 31st of May : was joined by Beswick. He saw lanchester procession. They had many of them pikes, about their heads. Their conduct was calcu tarn). The constables drew their gwnra. There was cheering after he had s separated. Cross-examined by Mr. POLLOCK tiOwn Was part only of a longer speec in the book, one of them written by n id waved them en, ant What I have written There are two copies I was busy and he wrote it at home on the same night, at my request, as he was a better penman. (Here Mr. Pollock wished to read to the witness several sentences, which he, with his lordship's leave, would ask the witness to report the heads of; but his lordship thought this would not be a fair test. A sentence was, however, permitted to be read, and a long, poli tical, and not easily comprehensible sentence it was, which witness said he was unable to supply the heads of.) Witness was questioned as to other meetings, attended by the prisoner over some years, and which it did not appear were interfered with by the police. Matthew Marden, an Inspector of Police, at Asl►ton.—He saw two sharp instruments project from the trousers of two men present. They appeared to be pikes. One in the room said if he went in he'd be killed. Another said the reporters and police had so sworn in London, that they could not be admitted. They said that had he been Matthew Marden they would let me in; but hewas Inspector Marden. (Witness then spoke as to the procession, corroborating the previous wit nesses. He also repeated nearly the same language spoken by the prisoner at the Oddfe]lows Arms.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL propos e d to put in a small memo randum-book, found upon the prisoner, in which there is a list of towns, and dates appended,—apparently appointments to attend meetings at those places, also items as it of payments, wages, &c.,—the object being to prove that the prisoner was a hired and appointed agent of sedition,—and lecturer. His lOrdship had some doubts of this being evidence, bearing on the present case. Some letters also found on the prisoner were brought forward. Mr. Wilkins objected to these being put in in evidence, as they did not bear immediately upon the Iran sacttons charged in the indictment—as also did Mr. Pollock. His lordship considered the letters legitimate evidence, and they were read:— Taylor was also the fl flags, &c.) Mr. JOhi witness One from John Cree, to the prisoner, dated London, enclosing letter from tt for wages, anti other payments made to the iirisoner. Also a - variety of details of family matters, and advice to go and lec ture in towns that invited him and would pay him, and not to be seeking to get up meetings up and down. The " Song of the Soil" was then put in, and the Attorney-General was called upon by his lordship to argue the question, which he did. "The Song of the Soil" was put in against the prisoner, but both counsel objected to either document, as they contained nothing but abstract opinions, which it was not shown the defendant entertained. His lordship decided that the song might be eceived in evid , -- 's it would e-ninin some of the language used by the •prisoner. A copy.ol l a small printed paper, a number of " The Truth Telier, ' was next put in, and was also objected to. Ilis Lordship deemed it admissible, and it was read. It promised the charter to the people, and stated that the paper would followup the principles involved. It also offered its exertions to bring about a repeal of thc Union. The paper wtis_published in Staleybridge. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. WILKINS then addressed the jury in an eloquent and vehement manner, going over the whole of the evidence, taking make on behalf of his client. He dwelt very forcibly and ener getically on the political rights, liberties, and immunities of Englishmen, and closed a speech of upwards of an hour's du ration by a powerful appeal to the jury to acq u it th e p r i soner; first, because the language imputed to him was reported by ignorant policemen, in snatches,--only portions of the speech, —which might have borne a different meaning; and, secondly, that there was no proof of alarm or of riot. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then replied at great len therance of the prosecution. gth in fur His LORDSHIP summed up with great perspicuity, pointing out and defining the meaning of unlawful asgeni _ling, and other points, as he proceeded. He admitted that it was remarkable that three of the witnesses, who put in their notes of the words imputed to the prisoner, should all have hit upon nearly the pre cise same words. It was for the jury to say whetherthey thought they had conversed together so as to arrive at thissimilarity, or whetl , • tv passages were so remarkable that they impreisied themselves upon the minds of all of them with equal force. After reading over the passages seriatim, he thought the latter case probable. He then referred to the letters as showing that the prisoner had been hired to itinerate the country, and he also referred to the T r uth Tell er , o f w hich or.e hundred copies were found upon the prisoner. The jury, after retiring a few minutes, returned a verdict of guilty on all the three counts of the indictment. Hie Lo R nsiiiP said the prisoner had been convicted, on the clearest evidence, of an act of sedition of great magnitude—cal culated to strike at the comfort and safety of society. It was the second time he had been convicted of sedition ; and, l after advising him, on kis release, to hire himself out in some useful vocation, as he had abilities, and not to seek to stir up the peo ple to disaffection, discontent, and riot, his Lordship sentenced him to be imprisoned in the gaol of the county two years. being presen A was the Brian BOI'llU flag several persons in the processia 1.11 Uaell ptse: n S. Henry said he and Mr able), were together. nnri SeflC t the Manchester, for assistance. ,Nome of the w en lett the procession anti threw stones at him. He was also struck on the lip. People on the walks tin..., aim, and others assailed him with sticks. He received 9 wounds t an His horse slipped, having been severely r 01i) sharp instrument. A Mr. Clarke saw Mr. Henry riu Joy the road from the toll-bar, and saw Gunn throw „me him. There were three others with him, two of them carry pikes. He saw Gunn a ft erwnr‘ i. vounderl by some -.6 down V a stone at 1 a flag . , and hadli A, female witm Another female corroborated the last. Mr. JAMES, who had defended three of the prisoners, then addressed the jury in their behalf, at considerable length and with great ingenuity, takiiv, advantage of e ver y available portion of the evid ence . He argued that it did not, he thought, follow, that one or two parties having, in a procession, thrown sto nes a t M r. Henry, would implicate other parties who happened to be present. He thought that the only_ two witnesses against Birch Anjett, be did not see that the same count could involve another charB, He contended that there was nothing illegal in a quiet proces sion, even if they carried pikes or other weapons. He knew of no law to prevent this, and argued that there was nothing riotous or tumultuous in the procession. He should call one Mr. Fry appeared for Flinn and Mooney, and spoke ably i n their behalf, with regard to the assault. Flinn was not present when the assault took place. (This his learned friend on the other side just intimated to him.) The police were armed, (a new custom,) and the defendants thought they had as good a right to carry arms. Joshua Vunwoodie was called by Mr. JAMES, but said nothing that could make in behalf of Gunn, as he had lost sight of him for a few minutes, at about the time Mr. Henry was attacked. About 12 o'clock Flyn passed hi m an d w i tness spoke to him. He immediately saw a gentleman mounted, whose face was cut. He saw no stones thrown, and Flynn was not then with the procession. Thomas Flynn, brother of the prisoner, said he saw his brother in Oldham-road, but the latter was speaking to a person on the rout. He afterwards saw a gentleman riding with his face bloody. Mr. PoLLocit addressed the jury for the prosecution. It was enough tikshow an intimidating spirit on the part of an assem bly, witll7ut any act of violence. Twenty or thirty pikes were helu up and waved over their heads, and they proceeded to other acts which alarmed the neighbourhood, so that the shops were closed, and all was terror and alarm. Some of the in habitants had locked up their houses and gone away, The Learned JUDGE summed up, explaining the law on the two charges in the indictment—first, the riotous assembling; and, second, an assault on a special constable. His Lordship very succinctly summed up the evidence. The jury found Flinn, Lowny; ;,;a - Rooney guilty of riot; Gunn and Birch guilty of both tin riot and the assault. Sentence was deferred until to-da , vast number of swords, pikes, sticks, guns, bludgeons, were brought into court in this case, taken from the riot some of them very formidable weapons.] This terminated the criminal trials of these assizes, and the court rose at half-past seven o'clock. His Lordship, after dis posing of some applications for bail, will this morning take some civil cases. NISI PRIUS COURT—YESTERDAY. His Lordship took his seat on the bench at nine o'clock, and proceeded with the special jury cases. BANKERS' ACCOUNT. HALIFAX AND OTHERS v. BROWNIUGG AND OTHERS.—This was an action to recover the balance due upon a promissory note endorsed by the defendants to the plaintiffs. air. martin ana Crompton were counsel for the plain tiffs, and Mr. Watson and Mr. Hill f or th e defendants.• ldr. MARTIN stated the case to the jury. Th e pl a i n tiff s pr, __ __. j •-.• . inaini 111 S were Messrs. Glyn, Halifax, Mills, and Co., J and lc the defendants Messrs. Cockerell and Co., formerly East India merchants, the firm consisting of Mr. Cockerell, Sir George Larpent, and Mr. John S. Brownrigg. The defendants, Mr. Cockerell and Sir G. Larpent, had suffered judgment by default, and the simple question for the consiiieraion of the jury was whether Mr Biownrigg was discharged from his liability upon a certain pro _ , missory note for £55,00a, a balance upon which was still due: H. believed that Mr. Bron•nrigg was acting under some misappre llancinn rpersontincr tha nne. nopea woma oe removea wnen he explained the whole of the circumstances, which he would shortly do. The house of Cockerell and Co. was one of the largest East India houses in the country. In 1843 they borrowed from the plaintiff. A'lo,ooo, which wag redueqd: in 10 VI, y , ..11./14 11 Hell ent was made for its liquidation by three instalments. icson, Wno was a parner in Pricer; Pa teit—Candle Company, n owed to the firm of t Cockerell and Co. the sum of £19,500, and he gave to Cockerell and Co. two pro had then missory notes for .10,000 each. The Patent Candle Company been tray red to a joint-stock company, and Mr. Wilson bad 1300 shares allotted toehim as his share of the con cern. The defendant had also a number of shares allotted to " 4 On the 10th July, M r . Wi lson being indebted to Cock erell tyla in the amount of £19,500, h e gave to them two nno each, and, as collateral security, _ denosited. In order to Mr. Wel- the 1300 shares i n the Compa.., negotiate these notes, the shares were transferreu lington, one of the clerks to Messrs. Glyn and Co., in trust for the benefit of the plaintiffs. On the 20th July the promissory note for .t 50,000 being two or three months over due, a settle ment was required. when it was arranged to place certain secu rities in the hands of the bankers, and amongst others 1828 shares in the Candle Company belonging to Mr. Brownrigg. Sir George Larpent, however, by some mistake, agreed to trans fer to Mr. Wellington, on behalf of the plaintiffs, 3123 shares, which included the shares belonging to Mr. Wilson. The question therefore now was, whether the shares belonging to Mr. Wilson should be applied in payment of the debt due by Mr. Brownrigg, or to the payment of Wilson's own. [The agreement between the plaintiffs and Cockerell and Cc. was then put in and read.] Sir George Larpent was then called, and he stated that he was a partner in the firm of Cockerell and Co., of which Mr. John Studham Brownrigg was a partner. He retired at the end of 1846. At that time Mr. Win. Wilson owed the firm .."19,500, which he and his partners wished to realize, and in accordance with which an agreement was entered into. (The agreement was put in, which secured 1,300 shares in Price 'e Patent Candle Co., and along with which, two promis sory notes of .10,000 each were given by M r . Wil son to Cock- The witness continued.—On this arrangement being made and the 1,300 shares transferred to Mr. We'Hutton, clerk to Messrs. Glynn, the two notes were discounted. The firm of Cockerel! and Co. were also indebted to their bankers, Messrs. Glynn and Co., to the extent of .W 50,000, and an arrangement was made in July, 1846, to pay this by instalments of W 15,000 in October, W 15,000 in November, and W 20,000 in December ; in addition to which, a box containing valuable securities was deposited, amongst which was a debt of William Wilson, a partner of Price and Co. Price and Co. afterwards sold the concern to a joint-stock company, each of the members to have shares to the amount of interest in the concern. His (witness's) impression was that the shares of Mr. Brownrigg; the patent candle company, amounting to 1823, were to be de posited as security f or th e d e b t of £50,000 due by Cockerell and Co. to Glynn, Hallifax, Mills, and Co. Cross-examined.—Mr. Brownrigg did not take any active part in the concern after the end of 1845, but he did not go out of the concern until the end of 1846, and he was to have W3OOO as his shre of the profits for that year. The Patent Candle Com pany was a very profitable concern. When the box of secus ties was last deposited with Messrs. Glynn and Co. they were estimated at considerably more than £250,000. The bill for . 4- 50,000 became due in May, 1 847, and was held over by Glynn and Co. On the ],oth July that year security was given for -100,000, on condition that about 430,n00 above the'.:eso,6oo then due should be advanced, and, in addition to which, the box contained securities to the extent of about .4'340,000. Mr. 'WATSON, on behalfof the defendant, stated that the case that he had to make out in behalf of Mr. Brownrigg, for whom alone he appeared, was that there had been a payment of 4'46,543 2s. 7d., leaving a balance due upon the promissory note of .W 6270 Its. Pd., which was due to the plaintiffs on the 14th August, 1848. Th at there was no doubt about it, forit was admitted by the plaintiffs. Then he contended that the pro ceeds of the 1300 shares belonging to Mr. Wilson more than —.is at London, covered the balance due by Mr. Brownrigg, and he contended same, contained items that was , question for the Court to decid e upor froe evi- dence adduCed, and was not a ques ti on f or the jury. m He th was in a condition to prove that the plaintiffs had already realized 6100 on the shares belonging to Wilson. His LORDSHIP ruled that as the 1300 shares belonging to Wilson had not been appropriated by . him to the payment of the particular debt of .e 50,000, it was in the option of the plait - tiffs to appropriate the proceeds of these shares as they thougl t Mr. WATSON wished it to appear upon his Lordship's notes that he contended that the question was one for the considera tion rtf Lie I e55..1.3..4... _ • . ami nut ior me jury, anti that, tnereiore, he declined to address the jury on the subject. A verdict was then entered for the plaintiff for 46270. Mr. MARTIN applied to his Lordship for speedy execution. Mr. WATSON said the application was a most oppressive pro ceeding, more especially as it was in evidence that the:plaintiffs held a considerable amount of security already. This led to some discussion, and eventually it was agreed that speedy judgment s ho u ld be signed, but that execution should not issue without an order from the judges. BELL (P. 0.) V. LORD I NOESTRE.—This was a special jury ponement, on the ground That a witness, who had come from London to prove some material facts, had gone into Cheshire to see his friends. His LORDSHIP said it was his duty to be present, and the case ought to go on, and if the witness did not appear, he should be called upon his subpoena. Mr. WATSON sa►d he could not do that. If his learned friend persisted, there was no other course for him to pursue except to withdraw the record. M. MARTIN said his clients were fully prepared to try the case, and all their witnesses were in attendance. He, hose. ever, would not object to the case being postponed for the day, if the Counsel would undertake that the witness in question should be called. _ _ - kr. WATSON said he would not undertake that, as the at torney who instructed him, was not present. His LORDSH IP said the attorney acted very imoronerly in The case was then. withdrawn BROKERS COMMISSION. FORSYTH AND OTHERS V. GROVES.—This was an action brought to recover '1 ? -103, being the amount due to the plair, tiffs, as their commission on business transacted by the plain tiffs for the defendant. The plaintiffs were share-brokers in Liverpool, and the defendant a merchant in this town also. He was formerly one of the provisional committee of the Liver pool, Ormskirk and Preston Railway, now amalgamated wi h the East Lancashire Company, the latter being in reality the defendants. The defendant paid .273 into court. and as to the residue, pleaded not indebted. The claim of the plaintiffs wns for a per centage of 28. 6d. per share on those shares which had been applied for through the plaintiffs, who were brokers in the company, and Is. 3d. per share upon other shares which the (Concluded in the Eighth Page.) , Red. Inspector lowney and Flynn. A s stopped handles, Simpson