The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-04-05 00:00:00

P 6 SONG OF THE UGLY MAIDEN Oh ! the world gives little of love or light ; Though my spirit pants for much ; For I have no beauty for the sight, No riches for the touch. I hear men sing o'er the flowing cup Of woman's magic spell; And vows of zeal they offer up, And eloquent tales they tell. They bravely swear to guard the fair With strong protecting arms; But will they worship woman's worth Unblent with woman's charms? No! ah, no ! 'tis little they prize Crooked-backed forms and rayless eyes. I join the crowd where merry feet Keep pace with the merry strain ; I note the earliest words that greet The fair ones in the train. The stripling youth has passed me by, He leads another out I She has a light and laughing eye, Like sunshine playing about. The wise man scanneth calmly round, But his gaze stops not with me; It bath fixed on a head whose curls, unbound, Are bright as curls can be; And he watches her through the winding dance With smiling care and tender glance. The gay cavalier has thrust me aside, Whom does he hurry to seek? One with a curving lip of pride, And a forehead broad and sleek. The grey-haired veteran, young with wine ; Would head the dance once more; He looks for a hand, but passes mine, As all have passed before. The pale, scarred face, may sit alone, The unsightly brow may mope ; There cometh no tongue with wins To flatter Affection's Oh, Ugliness! thy desolate pain Had served to set the stamp of Cain Man, just man! I know thine eye Pelighteth to dwell on those Whose tresses shade, with curl or braid. Cheeks soft and round as the rose : I know that thou wilt ever turn To the beauTiful and bright ; But is it well that thou shouldst spurn The one God chose to blight ? Oh ! why forget that a charmless brow May abide with a gentle breast? Oh I why forget that gold is found' Hidden beneath the roughest ground? LITERATURE. BOOKS FOR REVIEW, &c.—Books, New Prints, Music, &c., intended for review, may be left at Mr. C. Mitchell's, Red lion-court, Fleet-street, London, addressed "to the Editor of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD," when they will be forwarded and receive attention Blackwood's Magazine. London : Blackwood. We are reluctantly compelled, owing to the pres sure of assize news, to give but a brief notice of the contents of the April number. It opens with a vigorous paper on " Temperance and Teetotal Socie ties," which will, no doubt, be eagerly read by the numbers interested in the question. The story of 4" Lady Lee's Widowhood" and that of " Jack Rintml, or the fragment of the Wreck," are conti nued. Then we have "A modern French Comedy," " Lombardy and its irrigation," and " Twenty years in the Philippine Islands;" and the magazine concludes with a political essay, entitled " Hints for legislation," which we shall turn to again. We shall endeavour next week to find room for some extracts. Bits of Turf. London : Racing Times office. Here we have a few sketchy articles reprinted from the columns of the sporting newspaper in which they were originally published by " Priam." The wit is of the usual race-course standard, and is not much elevated by a few wood cuts presumed to be of a comical character. Descriptive Catalogue of the Woods commonly used in this Country. By Charles Holtzapffel, A.C.E. London : Holtzapffel and Co. When we reflect that the utmost confusion and ignorance prevails with respect to the history of our timber and furniture woods, notwithstanding their vast importance in commerce and the con structive arts, we must hail with satisfaction any attempt to extricate them from this position, and to render their designations intelligible, and to make their qualities known. Still more have we reason to be satisfied when a gentleman of Mr. Holtzapffel's well-known experience takes the matter in hand, and gives us the large amount of practical know ledge which he has acquired. The title of the book before us is hardly calculated to do justice to the work, which is a complete history of a large number of the common and rare woods used in building, cabinet work, and turnery, giving the fullest information as to the adaptability of the various kinds for the uses to which they are gene rally applied. To the amateur and practical workers in wood this volume is invaluable ; it is also of use to the scientific student, in consequence of copious botanical information contributed by Dr. Royle. SERIALS FOR APRIL.—A more readable publi cation devoted to science than Corks's Musical Miscellany never gladdened the musical firesides of Old England. The music is of a highly respectable class, and the letterpress is not a whit behind it.— ogy's Instructor is this month adorned with a steel engraving of the learned Sir Charles Lyell, in its turn illustrated by a pen-and-ink sketch, which is sure to find readers in an age addicted to that most delightful species of literature, biography. A Scottish emigrant contributes some original notes relative to the spread of spirit-rapping on the other side of the Atlantic, from which we learn that not fewer than a dozen newspapers have been founded in the New World to support that fearful delusion. The Journal of the Photographic So ciety (Taylor and Francis, London,) has been established for the interchange of thought and ex perience among photograpers ; and, as it is taste fully conducted, and contains papers by the most accomplished men, the publication will in all like lihood attain a remunerative circulation. The members of the Photographic Society recently established in Liverpool, under the presidency of the Mayor, must hail the new magazine with pleasure. CORRESPONDENCE. , tters addressed to the Editor should be accompanied by the real name and address of the writer, not for publication, but good faith ; this is indispensably requisite as a guarantee of in any statement of facts The Editor wishes it to be understood that he does not hold himself responsible for the opinions or statements of his correspondents RECEIVER OF TOWN DUES, To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Sin,—Through the medium of your paper, I shall feel obliged by your inserting the following :—lt is in contradiction to a statement made by the Liverpool Chronicle of Saturday. re specting Mr. Daniel Brade, as a candidate for the Receiver of the Town Dues. I cannot imagine how such a statement could be framed, as Mr. Brade was duly electedlnspectorof Packages in 1843, after Mr. Sands was elected Mayor,—therefore, can neither be the oldest nor chief clerk in that office; and I can Confidently say, that he did not discharge the highest duties attached to that office during the illness of the late Mr. Corrie, cr during the illness which terminated in the death of Sir - Thomas Brancker. lam of opinion that the mistake is in the r erson ; for Mr. Samuel M'Naughton has been in that office twenty years, per 'ming the highest duties (especially during the long illness of the late Mr. Corrie, and also since the death of Sir Thos. Brancker); and has performed those duties in a manner highly creditable. JUSTICE. RECEIVER OF TOWN DUES, T? the : EDITOR ,of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Sta.—The appointment to the above office is expected to take place at the monthly meeting of the Council on Wednesday next. The question is exciting considerable interest out of doors, and the appointment will be looked for with much Anxiety. One of the publicjournals has stated this to be a party question ; but by whom has it been made such ? Not by the friends of Mr. Brade, for many of them are opposed to him in political sentiments. But they have taken up the question simply on the ground of principle—that, in the disposal of offices of public trust, promotion as the reward of faithful services ought to be the strongest ground of claim to the ap pointment. If, after the faithful services of nine years, ano ther individual is now to be placed over his head, it would virtually be an undeserving censure upon him, and would, at the same time, be placing a barrier to the advancement of all the other clerks in the office under him. It is, therefore, to be hoped that the independent members of the Council will deal with the question simply on the ground of justice, and not suffer any party feeling or family influence to interfere with the appointment of the most fitting candidate, whose claim is based on nine years' faithful servitude, and recommended by the memorial of nearly seventy mercantile firms of the town, of the highest resp ecta b ility, and of every shade of politics.—l am, Sir, yours, &c., Liverpool, April 2, 1863. VINDICATOR. REBUILDING OF ST. PETER'S CHURCH To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD. SIR S I have long looked with unkindly feelings on the un couth form and ugly exterior of our Parish Church; certainly the inhabitants of our good old town, 150 years ago, had not much architectural taste as far as churches are concerned. I cannot but think all Churchmen will be glad to see an edifice erected, which, for ages to come, shall remain a lasting monument of their religious zeal and munificence. The in habitants of Doncaster have subscribed nearly .€20,000 towards the fund for rebuilding their Parish Church, in the space of two or three weeks, and surely Liverpool can as easily raise £lOO,OOO for the erection of a Parochial Church which will be a credit to the town. I trust all Churchmen will attend the Meeting at the Sessions,' gouse, this day at noon, and give their hearty approval to the proposal of the churchwarden, (Mr. Banner.) From what I have already heard there will be no fear of ample funds being raised to carry out the proposition in a liberal manner. By Friday's Gazette I see Manchester is now made a City; it had previously its Cathedral and Bishop. Why not Liverpool ? Surely our town is equal in wealth and importance. I am, Sirorours very obediently, A CHURCHMAN. MR. CARDWELL'S PILOT BILL. To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD, Si was much gratified at seeing Alpha's letter in yester day's Albion; and in order to place the coasting steam interest (with which I am connected) right with the public, I send you a short statement of an interview which took place, some two years back, between the Pilot Committee and ourselves. We were requested by a circular to attend at their board room, and the chairman commenced proceedings by expressing the committee's wish to know what we would suggest as a substitute for the compulsory payment of pilots; at the same time plainly expressing his opinion that our conduct in urging an alteration was both ungrateful and ill-mannered. Our suggestion was the licensing of a competent person for each vessel, and a payment (annual) of each license; we also covenanting to pay full rate of foreign pilotage, should we re quire their services. Our proposal was scouted, and in a man ner anything hut gracious. Since then I have required the services of a pilot outwards three times, and only once could I get one, the hours being either too late or too early for their convenience; and in saying this, I do so with no ill-feeling towards them, but simply to shew how little use they can by possibility be to coasting steamers, as they generally sail on the afternoon and evening tide ; and a pilot is considered justified in refusing to go out after dark. The system of compelling a man to pay for what he neither uses nor requires, belongs, not to the present, but to a bygone age; and I sincerely hope Mr. Cardwell's bill may have that success it so well deserves Your obedient servant, BETA. RECEIVER OF TOWN DUES. To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD, SlR,—The Finance Committee have recommended three persons, out of whom a successor to the office of Receiver of the Towu Dues should be appointed to occupy the situation held by the late Sir Thomas Brancker,—an office hitherto held by one who had some station in society, in such a community as ours is, as well as fitness for the office. Fitness for the situation, and some station in society, have been the recommendation of those who have held the office for many years past. It is stated there were sixteen candidates ; and, without knowing the names of all of them, or the preten sions of any, I cannot but think there must have been others than the fortunate three recommended that either had a claim or pretension to aspire to the situation, and yet all are passed over. It is painful to question the merits of the fortunate three. I doubt much whether any one of the three has the smallest claim over Mr. Brade, who has served next under the Receiver for some years, and the office itself during the illnesses of Mr. Corrie and Sir Thomas Brancker, and during the time the vacancies arising from their death was the respon sible officer of the Trust. Mr. Brade is, lam told, a Dickey Sam, and has, unfortunately, been an unsuccessful merchant in the town. I pass over the names and claims of any other of the candidates ; my object in these few remarks being to show that our Finance Committee, supposed to be the elite of the Corporation, are not altogether free from secret influence. Liverpool, Ist April, 1853. 7 LONG SERMONS, AND VENTILATION IN CHURCHES. To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD, Six,—lf the Churchman who subscribes himself "Earnest" be correct in his theory, he has made a discovery which deserves to be seriously attended to in a sanitary point of view, viz., that long sermons and ill-ventilated churches are the procuring causes of the illness that generally prevails at the spring season of the year. If this be really so, then the clergy and architects and the public attending churches have much to answer for; and it is for the fature in their power to alter the character of this season altogether; the one by shortening their sermons, the other by taking care that churches have a proper supply of fresh air. It would be interesting to inquire, in order to sustain the theory, whether those who are in the habit of attending churches where sermons are short, and fresh air is plenty, generally escape the diseases that afflict others at the season of spring. I wonder what the doctors will say to this theory of our earnest Churchman ? After all, Sir, is it long sermons, or dull. heavy, uninterest ing sermons, that are the real nuisance? If the attendance be a true solution, the public have long since decided for the long sermons, and against the dull ones; the warm Gospel has long had the advantage over cold morals or unscriptural philosophy. Is it want of air in the buildings, or want of life and energy and power and spirituality in the pulpit ? Our people say the latter, evidently, by leaving the cold heartless churches empty, or nearly so, and overcrowding the warm ones. Most certainly let us have better ventilation, but above all let us have earnest minded men in our desks and pulpits. AUDI A LTERAM THE NEW PILOTAGE BILL AND COASTING STEAMERS. To the EDITOR of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD, SIR,— Having stated the case of the coasting steamers, trading to and from the port of Liverpool, in the Albion of yesterday, to which I beg to refer your readers, I may here state, before coming to the bill itself, that where there is a fleet of channel steamers, owned by a company, they are either partially or wholly their own insurers, and, as such, have too much floating property at stake to be indifferent to the character and experience of the captains and officers in their employ ; and, as to the loss of life, I apprehend that Lord Campbell's Act is a much better protection to the public than any jurisdiction on the part of Pilot authorities. In speaking of the 10th clause of the Pilot Bill, empowering the Board of Trade to examine and grant certificates to mas ters and mates, on the pilotage authorities refusing to do so, under the 12th and 13th Vic., cap. 88, I wish to be clearly un derstood as confining my observations to the masters and mates of coasting steamers only, and to no others, at least as regards the port of Liverpool. Now, while I most cordially approve of the power sought by the Board of Trade, to do that which interested authorities might and would refuse to do, in the absence of such power, I must at the same time dissent from the details of this clause, not only as regards the unde fined nature of the examination by pilot authorities, but also as regards the undefined amount of fees to be charged for the annual certificates. It may be said that if there be anything unfair in the mode of examination, or in the amount of fees, or other conditions, there is an appeal to the Board of Trade. Granted. But why should there be grounds for appeal, if legislation can safely go further to prevent it ? Clause s.—An evident inducement is here held out to pilotage authorities to examine and to certify (if qualified upon their own terms, subject to " the consent of her Majesty in council ;" " and all masters and mates to or for whom any such certificates are granted or renewed by the Board of Trade, shall pay to such Board, as it may direct, such fees upon their certificates, and upon the renewals thereof, as may be fixed by such Board; so nevertheless that in the case of certificates granted or renewed by the said Board, such fees shall in no case be less than the fees payable by the pilots in the same district, upon their licenses and the renewal thereof." Had the words been, instead of the above—" Shall in no case be less nor more than the fees, &c.;" then the amount of fees would have been defined as regards all ports to which the bill refers, as it is already defined in the case of the Liverpool pilots, by Act of Parliament, to be ,e 6 6s. for the first license, and 3 3s. for each subsequent annual renewal. If the above clause remains as it is, certain pilotage authorities may ex amine and certify on certain conditions, and that, too, in the name of a boon; but, like the old Trojan, I must exclaim Timeo Domani* 1 Clause 12. This clause confers the power on the Board Of Trade, or on any pilotage authority, to withdraw certificates from masters and mates guilty of misconduct or incompetency This is at it should be, provided an investigation takes place before the pilotage authority, at which owners or their retire-' sentatives shall be present, with power to appeal to the Board of Trade. 111 Clauses 13 to 17 inclusive, are admirable, as opening up all close pilot bodies, and shewing to the Board of Trade, Parlia ment, and the public, full particulars of earnings and expendi ture. I look upon these clauses of the bill as second only in importance to what clauses 10 to 12 might be made to be. If the returns sought for by the Board of Trade shall prove to Par liament and the public of Liverpool that as regards the Liverpool pilots, the relinquishment of all pilotage heretofore received as perquisites, from coasting steamers, shall so impair the efficiency of this useful body, then I apprehend that there is not a respectable shipowner in Liverpool who would not most willingly agree to pay a higher rate of pilotage on their foreign-going vessels, and to aid the pilots in going before parliament for an amendment of the act of 1824, to increase the maximum rates to such a standard as would sustain, to the fullest extent, the efficiency of a staff, which to the owners of foreign•going vessels is so important, as to be indispensable. I hope that the Liverpool pilots are not afraid of the day light which clauses 13 and 17 would shed upon their earnings, and that this fear has nothing to do with their opposition to the bill now before parliament. Having now finished my comments on the Pilotage Bill, I wish once more ho observe that my remarks as regards exami nations, certificates, and exemptions, are strictly confined to coasting steamers ; and as these are not subject to the same law of motion as sailing vessels, there 'is consequently no tacking —no running for lee ports, within the wide range of particular pilot waters. Their course is right on, blow high or low, fair or foul, in the light of day, or the darkness of night, these steamers enter the port of Liverpool under the guidance of their own practical pilots—the masters and mates. The mode of examination, therefore, as to soundings at Beaumaris, Chester, Pile of Foundre, and the Isle of Onan, with course of distance, &c., from any place within the im while it might be essential i n t h e case of a foreign-going -goin g 'or other sailing vessel, would, I apprehend, be frivolous and vexatious in the case of a channel steamer trading regularly between the ports of Dublin and Liverpool. I would therefore define the nature of the examination in the 10th clause thus :—That it shall l b o e dg la e w , ofurloofoorseantoy bmealsotdereodr mate of any coasting steamer to g . with no n pilotage ial s a s a u t t o l o h r i i s ti e s s o b o r r i e toyt,h goode rs,forco conduct d n y uc p t , o a r n t d o a r e d l i a s i t m r c i t o writing , titiimmietsdfuorirnwgbiwobhibche beas tradedto beexamined as master mate shall so claim to be examined, w a lei n tni d igiti p ih r t o ho v ef ided he shall have h made g ( without te ken aany licensedassistance pi Ipilot fromoob board), r l licensed pilot, before the or po s without siog o f this act,. one hundred voyages to the port or ports separately for vouch be shall so claim to be examined, shall be deemed fit ana qualified without further examination, to pilot any steamer. of which he may be master or mate. Having encroached so far on your valuable space,'l am forced to close this letter more abruptly than I intended, btu shall return to the subject anon, —I am, Siraour obedient semint, ALPHA. LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES. CROWN COURT. (Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.] TUESDAY, MARCH 29. BURGLARY AT LIVERPOOL. — Jarnes Jackson (aged 23), James Connor (aged 21), John Dunleavy (aged 26), and James Taylor (aged 20), were convicted of a burglary at the house of James Rea, at Liverpool. Jackson and Connor, who were old offenders, were sentenced to be transported for 14 years ; Taylor, who had pleaded guilty, for 20 years ; Connor, against whom no charge existed, to be imprisoned for 12 months, with hard labour. ASSAULT AT LIVERPOOL. — Lawrence Kenna was convicted of wounding and assaulting Jeremiah Murphy, Copperas-hill, on Sunday night, the 12th December last. WIPE-KILLING AT MANCHESTER.—Jonathan Barber (aged 47) was indicted for having, on the Ist January last, feloniously killed his wife, Ann Barber. The prisoner is a mechanic, and lived with his wife and family in Maskell-street, Chorlton-upon-Medlock, Manchester. On the evening of New Year's-day both the prisoner and the deceased were intoxicated. Angry words took place as to going out ; and the prisoner got up and said, " You say you'll go ; d— you, I'll make you," giving her a slight kick upon the feet or legs. The deceased began to cry, and afterwards went towards a door leading from the kitchen to the upper rooms; but before she got to the steps the prisoner gave her a kick behind. A boy named Roscoe stated that he went to the prisoner's house on the evening of New Year's-day, with the prisoner's son, John. They found Mrs. Barber lying on the floor upon her back, and with her head towards the door. The boys tried to lift Mrs. Barber, bat failed ; she did not speak or cry. After they had been in the kitchen about a quarter of an hour, the prisoner said, " If you don't get up, I'll come and kick you again." Mr. J. C. Williamson, surgeon, of Bloomsbury, said that after using strong stimulants, the deceased was slightly conscious for a very short time. She only ejaculated, " Oh, Jack, Jack !" The statement of the prisoner was, that while intoxicated he and the de ceased fell together ; and that the deceased had long been suffering from disease.—The jury, after consulting a quarter of an hour, returned with a verdict of guilty, re commending the prisoner to mercy, on the ground that he was intoxicated.—His Lordship : A very poor ground, gentlemen.—Sentence deferred. THE GRAND JURY.—The grand jury returned true bills of wilful murder against William Tyrrell and Charles Williams, and no bill against Samuel Royle, for sacri lege. At half-past three the grand jury were discharged, having completed their duties. THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1853 MURDER AT MANCHESTER.—CONVICTION OF THE PRISONER. William Tyrrell was charged with having, on the 21st of January last, at Manchester. murdered Joseph Quin. Mr. Monk opened the case for the prosecution, observing to the jury that, as the prisoner stood charged with the grave offence of murder, that fact would be sufficient to call forth their most serious attention ; but he was happy to say that their duty in this case would not be so painful as when a long string of evidence was called to substantiate the charge, as in the present case the evidence would be very brief. John Quin, the deceased, worked in a factory, and on the 21st January last was at Holden's beer-house, in Oldham road. Tyrrell, the prisoner, was there also, and, in the course of conversation, said, " You thrashed me once ; but I'm bigger now, and y ou can 't d o i t ." H e also pulled out a knife, and said, " This has killed many a one, and it has one more to kill !" The parties left the' house, and on turning up Chadderton-street, prisoner challenged Quin to fight, who refused unless he showed him his hands. This, however, the prisoner did not do, concealing his right hand in his pocket. After some fur ther conversation, which would be detailed in evidence, prisoner stabbed Quin iu the abdomen, and also in the shoulder. No blows were struck by the deceased. The learned counsel then called the following witnesses : John Holden.—T keep a beerhouse in Cornwall-street, Newton-lane, Manchester. On the 21st of January last, Quin came to my house about a quarter before six o'clock, in company with two other persons, one of whom went by the nickname of " Tass." I did not hear them say any thing about fighting. Heard prisoner say to deceased, " This knife has done many a one, and it has got another to do." Prisoner and deceased had been " chaffing" one another before this conversation. Prisoner said, " I'm getting bigger, and think you can't mill me now." By the Judge : What sort of knife was it which the Prisoner produced ?—Witness : It was a short pocket knife. John Clements stated that on the night in question he was going up Oldham-road, and saw Quin close to the Cheshire Cheese public-house. Another young man was with him, named either Shannon or Barnett. Prisoner was also with them. They were quarrelling when he met them. Tyrrell wanted to fight Quin ; he saki, " Let's go across the cart-road, and we'll have it out." Quin said he would not fight except Tyrrell showed both hands. Tyrrell would not show both hands, and they went up into Chadderton-street. Tyrrell's right hand was in his trouser's-pocket. Under the first lamp leading into Chadderton-street Tyrrell said, " Hit me first" several times. Quin stood with his hands crossed, but did not say anything. Tyrrell drew his hand out of his pocket, and stabbed him into his belly. Witness saw something glitter in his hand ; he saw it perfectly well by the light of the lamp. After this, Tyrrell said, " Hit me first" again ; and ran at Quin, striking him upon the shoulder. Quin said, " I'm stabbed, I'm stabbed, take me some where." Tyrrell made off, and some police-officers came up. Witness followed the prisoner. The knife which he saw was about as long as his finger. Went afterwards to the infirmary and did not see Quin, but afterwards saw him dead at home. At a later period of the night went with the police to search for the prisoner, and found him at Lang's public-house, opposite the Old Church. Mr. Overend, for the prisoner, cross-examined the witness, who said that Barnett, who was one of the party, went by the name of " Tass." Deceased never struck a blow, and the affair was quickly over. Witness had no time to interfere. Was close to them when he saw the knife. John Kerrington, pork butcher, Oldham-road, saw the parties near the Cheshire Cheese on the 21st January. Prisoner said to Quin, " I'll stick you if you hit me." That was the first thing he heard. Witness went further, and on his return saw the parties again : this was five or ten minutes afterwards. Prisoner then said "If you hit me I'll stab you." Quin said he would not hit him with out he showed him his hands. Quin said " I don't want to fight you ; I could mill you in two minutes, if I fight." He then saw them sparring at one another, and the pri soner stabbed deceased with a knife, right in the belly. He then stabbed him a second blow in the shoulder. Both appeared sober at the time. Saw no other blows given but the two he had just spoken of. Edward Wall, police-constable, stated that on the night in question, about half-past seven, he heard some cries, and Wilkinson, another officer, was with him. At the corner of Chadderton-street he saw Joseph Quin, with his trousers lap down, and his shirt lap up. He, said, " Look here, I'm stabbed." Witness saw part of his entrails banging out, and the blood flowing. Quin was conveyed to the Infirmary, and witness apprehended the prisoner at the Trafford Arms, kept by Lang. When apprehended, prisoner said, " I know what you want ; but you can't find a knife on me." Witness told prisoner he was charged with stabbing Joseph Quin ; and prisoner said he would bring witnesses to the court to tell the truth about it. Witness searched for the man Shannon, but could not find him. While being conveyed to Kirk dale, prisoner said that drink was the cause of it; and if he got off for ten years be should be satisfied." Frederick Ashton Heath, house-surgeon at the Man chester Infirmary, stated that on the 21st January, Quin was brought in, with a small wound, about an inch and a half below the navel. It was a clean cut stab, and a portion of the bowels protruded. There was another wound on the left shoulder. Mr. Jordan, one of the surveyors at the Infirmary, attended the patient. This was on the Friday night, and the man died from inflam mation on the following Monday. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Overend addressed the jury for the prisoner, ad mitting that the death of the deceased was caused by his client ; but he argued that he was not guilty of the graver charge of murder, the facts of the case only amounting to manslaughter. The learned counsel then, proceeded at longth to dotall the sociuibite facts to consti tute the crime of murder, and reviewed th e e v id ence i n order to prove hi s v i ew o f the case. He alluded particu larly to the swaggering words used by the prisoner at the beerhouse, which were the mere boastings of a foolish boy, and not used to indicate any malice or bad blond which might exist between them. They left the house in good fellowship, and some further " chaffing" took place, but nothing to prove that the prisoner intended to com mit murder. He complained that in this prosecution the witness Shannon was not produced, who could have given every particular, and probably might have mitigated the crime of murder down to manslaughter. His lordship, in summing up, explained at length the law of the case with reference to murder as well as man slaughter, and previous to recapitulating the evidence, regretted the lamentable effects which arose from habits of intemperance amongst the lower orders in this country. His lordship then proceeded to comment upon the most important portions of the evidence, and trusted that whatever the jury might consider with reference to the prisoner's guilt, or the necessity of a recommendation to mercy, they would return a righteous verdict. The jury retired for about half an hour, and on their return found a verdict of GUILTY against the prisoner. His Lordship pronounced sentence of death in the usual form, without holding out any hope of mercy. The learned judge assured the prisoner that his serious case had met with a most careful investigation at the hands of a patient jury, who had found him guilty of the crime of imbruing his hands in the blood of a fellow-creature, for which serious offence his life must be forfeited to the laws of his country. His lordship alluded to the melancholy results, which arose from the intemperate habits of young men frequenting beer-houses, and trusted that the present would act as a warning to others, who indulged in similar evil propensities ; for it was truly lamentable to see so young a man as the prisoner placed in such a dreadful situation—a melancholy scene, which must speedily ter minate with the forfeiture of his life, for this world must soon close on him for ever. [Prisoner, "Oh ! Lord, have mercv--spare me—oh, Lord, have mercy on my poor soul !"] His lordship continued to assure the pri soner that he could hold out no hope of mercy, and in all probability he would expiate his heavy crime in a few days, when he would be stretched a lifeless corpse. [The prisoner again begged him to spare his life.] His lord ship implored the•unhappy prisoner to let no thoughts of such a nature intrude upon his serious preparations for a future state. He would have every spiritual consolation. and the most important assistance which the ministers of religion could afford him would be most attentively given during this si d t e h e the s h o g r t r a t v i m e . e which w tie pr O i s u o l n d e b r e again a l o i n t t e s d o to bb e h d i mon out, u t, "Oh ! my lord, spare me !"] The most solemn por tion of his lordship's pathetic address then followed in nee sentencingk, and h t i h s e bodyunfortunate u culprit ried wt t h o i n b e hanged the precincts b y the of the prison. The youthful appearance of the prisoner, and the dreadful situation in which he stood, produced a strong impression upon many persons in court, and his lordship appeared to be deeply affected while proceeding with this most painful portion of his official duty. The prisoner is only eighteen years of age FORGING A SEAMAN'S CERTIFICATE. — MichaeI charged with unlawfully altering a seaman's certificate, was recommended to mercy by the officers of government, and discharged upon his own recognisances of £lOO. ROBBERY AT BEDFORD.—John Brodie was charged with stealing a sovereign. a gold ring, and other articles, the property of Ralph Bethell, with whom he lodged, at Bedford, in this county. The prisoner broke open a small box containing the articles in question, and stole the things, with which he decamped, but was afterwards apprehended on board a steamer hound for Glasgow. He was found guilty, and sentenced to twelve months' im . prisonment, with hard labour. FORGERY AT LIVERPOOL.—JosiaIt Wilberforce Pitt was charged with forging an order for the payment of £5l 163._7(1., with intent to defraud John Myers and others. Mr. Simon was counsel for the prosecution ; Mr. Tindal Atkinson for the defence. Pitt had been a short time in the employ of Mr. Mavrocordato, merchant, Exchange -street East, as clerk. The facts were as follows : Adrian Lowe, cashier . at the Royal Bank, stated that on the 15th February last the cheque now produced was pre- sented to him by the prisoner, and_ he paid it Inq . uiry , . . . was made the next morning by Mr. Mavrocordato respect ing the cheque. On examination by Mr. Atkinson, Mr. Lowe said that on the 16th February he went to the office of Mr. Mavrocordato and identified the prisoner as the person who presented the cheque. Mr. Mavrocordato stated that the prisoner had been in his employ about four months ' • the cheque presented was not drawn by witness, nor had he given orders to any one to draw it. On the 16th February he examined his banker's book, and after wards went tolMr. Lowe._ There . appeared to have been a checque torn out which he could not account for. Law. rence Keboe, detective-officer, apprehended the prisoner on the 17th February, who denied presenting the cheque for payment. Mr. T. Atkinson addressed the jury for prisoner, and called a witnes as to character. The jury, who appeared to have a doubt as to the identity, acquitted the prisoner. _ ..... ... . . - FORGERY AT BOLTON.—Simeon Lord was charged with uttering a forged order for payment of money, with intent to defraud William Hamer. Mr. Milne, counsel for the prosecutor, called Mr. John Thompson, corn dealer, Bolton, who stated that on the 17th June last, Prisoner presented the cheque produced, at his warehouse. Prisoner said he was Mr. Wm. Hamer's clerk, at Little Lever He wanted change for it _in silver and gold Witness inquired the reason Mr. Hamer got his cliange in Bolton ; when prisoner said he usually got it at Ban nerman's, of Manchester, who could not supply him that week. Witness knew Mr. Hamer, and cashed the cheque for £76 13s. Did not see the prisoner for six months afterwards, when he saw him in a railway carriage. This was at Macclesfield, and the prisoner was appre- hended in a quarter of an hour afterwards. John Farrar, manager of the Manchester Bank, paid that the cheque produced was one of that bank, but Mr. Hamer had no account there.—Mr. Wm. Hamer, cotton spinner, Little Lever, did not fill up the cheque, nor authorise any person to do so.—Mr. Blair addressed the jury for the prisoner, stating that the case was one solely of personal identity.—The jury found the prisoner guilty, and there was another similar charge against the prisoner, which was not gone into. A long list of offences committed by the prisoner was handed to the judge, and his sentence was deferred. FORGERY AT LIVERPOOL. -James Ward was charged with uttering a forged order, purporting to be signed by Mr. W. A. Ward, shoemaker, Prescot, upon Mr. Robt. Whinnery, leather merchant, Old Haymarket, Liverpool. The note was delivered on the 28th March, and was for three or four seal skins ; and the prisoner, after delivering the note, said he would call again for the skins. Mr. W. A. Ward called at Mr. Whinnery's shop after the note was delivered, and Mr. Whinnery made up the parcel. The prisoner called whilst Mr. W. A. Ward was there, and an officer was sent for, who took the prisoner into custody.—The jury found him guilty, and his sentence was deferred until the next morning. STABBING AT MANCHESTER. —Thomas Burton was charged with stabbing Robert Brown, at Salford, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm. Mr. Rushton stated the case for the prosecution, and called the follow ing evidence :—Robert Brown said he resided in Salford. On the 26th February he was in the Lamb and Standard Inn, about eleven o'clock at night ; Rosanna Wilson and James Woolstenholine were there also, and prisoner was there, but he had never seen the prisoner before. They left at five minutes before twelve. Prisoner had hold of Rosanna Wilson ; when they got about fifty yArds, the " lady" fell down on her back, and prisoner asked wit ness to pick her up, and, as he was doing so, prisoner made a blow at him. When he got her up, prisoner dragged her into a court where she lived, and said to her, " Are you a married woman to any man ?" She said " No." He then s a id no one should enter the house. Witness attempted to get in, and they had a scuffle together. Prisoner then took her up another passage in Bloom-street, and as witness followed, he stabbed him in the neck, after which he ran into a pork-shop, followed by witness, who obtained a constable and gave him in charge. The jury found the prisoner guilty of the minor offence of unlawfully wounding. He was sentenced to three calendar months' imprisonment, with hard labour. STABBING AT LIVERPOOL. - - Thomas Mulligan, a sailor, was charged with stabbing Sarah Ann Burke, in Liverpool, with intent to do her some grievous bodily harm.—Mr. Raffles stated the case for the prosecution, and called the following evidence : Sarah Ann Burke said she resided in Peter -street. On the 15th January, in the afternoon, Catherine Baxter was with her, and went across the street from her house for a pan of water. Witness had not been long up, and was not quite dressed. Catherine Baxter returned, and as Burke was looking out at the door, prisoner came up and stabbed her in the face. He then stabbed her in the arm, the thigh, and the back ; lie had a sheath knife in his hand. She then went over to the public-house and fell into Mr. Spencer's arms. Never saw the prisoner before. Prisoner said, in answer to a question from the Court, that he did not recollect any thing of the matter.—cathe rine Baxter said she saw the prisoner in the snug at Spencer's public-house ; prisoner said, " I've lost ten shillings; thank God I've not lost all." Some fur ther conversation took place between the prisoner and a woman with whom he was in company. Ile pulled up his Guernsey frock, and feeling of his belt said, " Oh, good God, all's gone. He then said he would kill all the girls in Peter-street by ten o'clock that night. He took his knife out of the sheath and went into the back yard, where she heard him sharpening his knife. She then went to Sarah Burke's house, when the latter went to the door, and was stabbed as described. Witness ran to a neighbour's house to call for help, and prisoner went into the house; she soon afterwards saw that he had turned all the furniture into the street. He appeared very drunk.—William Henry Spencer, licensed victualler, Peter-street, said the prisoner was at his house about eight o'clock in the morning with two women and a coachman ; one woman was named Hardigan ; they had a glass of whiskey each, and prisoner was three parts drunk. They soon went away, and prisoner came again in the afternoon with Mrs. Hardi gan. Prisoner was looking about his clothes ; and soon after he went into the yard, where he sharpened his knife, threatening to kill every one in the street. Sarah Burke soon afterwards came wounded, as already stated, and Mr. Spencer took her to a neighbour's house, from whence she was taken to her own house. Prisoner was taken into custody. Francis Ayrton, surgeon at the Northern Hospital, described the wounds on the body of Sarah Ann Burke. One was above the left temple, three or four inches in length ; another on the face from the left eyebrow to the lower lip; another on' the right fore arm, and a stab in the right thigh ; another wound pene trated the ribs, into the chest, and was very dangerous. She was in extreme danger for three weeks, and confined to her bed more than a month. He attended her as an out-patient of the hospital. Police-officer Cousins took the prisoner into custody, and produced the knife, which he was brandishing at the time. He appeared much excited, as if he had been drunk and was recovering, but quite conscious of what be was about. He said he came ashore that morning, and went to Mrs. Hardigan's, in Peter-street, where he got drunk and lost his money, seven sovereigns, four dollars, four half-crowns, and other coins. He blamed nobody but Mrs. Hardigan for it all. The learned Judge summed up, observing that voluntary drunkenness was no excuse for crime. If the jury thought the prisoner intended to commit murder, they must return a verdict to that effect ; if not, they would consider whe ther he intended to do some grievous bodily harm.—The jury immediately found the prisoner guilty of wounding with intent to murder.—Judgment of dcath was IL...curried against him, and the Judge told the prisoner that his life would be spared, but it would be on the terms of the heaviest secondary punishment which could be inflicted. The court adjourned at a quarter to six o'clock. The greatest order prevailed in court throughout these important trials, which reflected great credit upon Inspec tor Hime and the officers in attendance. NISI PRIUS COURT. [Before Mr. Baron MARTIN.] TUESDAY, MARCH 29. SINGLETON V. SELKIRK.—SEDUCTION.—This was an action in which the plaintiff, John Singleton, sought to recover damages from William Selkirk, the defendant, on the ground that he had seduced the plaintiff's daughter, Hannah Singleton. Mr. Serjeant Wilkins, as counsel for the plaintiff, stated the case. The plaintiff was a farmer, residing in Cumberland, occupying about 100 acres of land at Moorside, near Whitehaven. The father of the defendant, in addition to being a farmer, carried on the business of a bacon curer and provision dealer, in Cumberland, and was a respectable man. In September, 1851, the defendant met the daughter of the plaintiff at a fair, and subsequently at the house of a friend. The families had been previously acquainted for nearly 30 years. The daughter of the plaintiff was 26 years of age, and the eldest of the family. The defendant was 28 years old. He began his visits to the daughter of the plaintiff in September, 1851. He was accepted by the family as a suitor, and over and over again promised marriage. The result of this was that the visits were continued till about March or April, and then he succeeded in ruining her. He still continued to visit her, and in July she discovered that she was pregnant. As soon as she told this to the defendant, he went to the shop of Mr. Stacey Gee, a druggist, at Whitehaven, where he procured a bottle of medicine, and prevailed upon her to take it. Finding this did not produce the desired effect, he got another bottle, which also failed. lie then got a third bottle and gave it her to take, saying that it was stronger than the other two, but this she did not use. From that time he dis continued his attentions, and saw her no more. Mr. Hill, for the defendant, did not dispute the paternity of the child, but argued that the father of the young woman had allowed his daughter to conduct herself in a way which was not consistent with virtuous conduct, and therefore was entitled to very small damages. The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £5O. BARLOW V. LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.—The plaintiff, Catherine Elizabeth Barlow, sought compensation from the defendants for the con sequences of an accident which occurred on their railway. The defendants pleaded not guilty.—Mr. Sergeant Wilkins intimated that an arrangement had been come to, by which the defendants agreed to pay £375. Verdict for the plaintiff : damages, £375. In DANIELS V. OSBORNE, a verdict was taken for £2OO, subject to a reference. WRAY V. Dc WOLF AND ANOTHER.—This was a case in which the plaintiff sought damages for being detained in Liverpool, owing to the sailing of the Otillia before her appointed time, his goods, to the amount of between £3OO and £4OO, being on board. The plaintiff had re ceived remuneration to the extent of £5O and seventeen days' keep, and the defendants agreed to give him £l5O more, and his store goods. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30 HOLLINS v. SANDERSON.—It appeared that plaintiff was a cotton broker in Liverpool, and the defendant was formerly his cashier and bookkeeper, and the present action was brought to recover £735 which the defendant had taken belonging to the plaintiff, and under defen dant's own handwriting he acknowledged to owe the plaintiff this sum, in consequence of mistakes he made in his accounts during the time he was in his service. Ver dict for the plaintiff. n had agreed to sell to the plaintiffs 1,000 tons of Scotch pig. ABERNETHY V. THE BIRKE NHEAD D OCK T RUSTEES .— The plaintiff, who had b een th e eng i neer t o t h e Birken head Dock Works, s oug ht t o recover a sum o f £1,042, being the balance of s a l ar y d ue t o pl a i n tiff, and £484 tra velling expenses, &c. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amounts claimed, with leave to the defendants to move to reduce the amount of expenses, &c. STITT AND OT HERS V . B UD D.—This was an action on a breach of cont ra ct. Th e plaintiffs are iron merchants, t a o n w d n. the defendant d d a e r c i t i a r and ati 0 n d are th m a t metal-brokers, b nd r t o e, k f nig r d s oa , o r in t iron. The plaintiffs were ready to receive the iron, but the defendant refused to deliver it. The defendant lived in London. On the 7th of October, 1852 , he received an ate sell about 3,000 tons o f i ron. His partner saw Mr. Stitt at Liverpool, and agreed to sell hi m 1,000 tons at 5 2 5. 6 d. In a day or two afterwards the s o t r r d e e e r t, fromL London, M n, r. to Herz, commission price of iron rose, and Mr. Herz refused to complete the agreement, stating that he had never sanctioned it. The plaintiffs said they would hold Mr. Budd to his bargain, believing that Mr. Budd was himself the prin cipal, and therefore they proceeded against him to re cover damages.—His Lordship held that there was no proof to show that the defendant was the principal, and that, as a broker acting for a principal, he was not liable ; and said he would direct the jury to that effect, giving plaintiffs' counsel choice to elect whether he should tender a bill of exceptions or amend, the election to be made on Thursday morning. THURSDAY, MARCH 31. STITT AND OTHERS V. BUDD.—In this case Mr. Hill elected to amend the declaration, and his lordship per mitted the amendment to be made—leaving room to move that the amendment be set aside above. Witnesses having been examined, the jury, after an abserce of about an hour, returned into court, and found that the defen dant was authorised to make the contract. Verdict for the defendant. _ WILSON v. THE ROYAL BRITISH BANK.--The actiom ! was brought to recover the sum of £l5B 16s. 5c1., the amount of a bill discounted by the defendants, which we f t dishonoured, but of whi c h th e y h a d no t g i ven plainti notice in proper time, and charged to his account. The plaintiff, Matthew Isaac Wilson, is a merchant in Liver pool. The real question t o be tried in the case was whether the defendants, who in the year 1851.52 were bankers to Mr. Wilson, were entitled to debit him, 00 account of a bill of exchange for £l5B 16s. 5d., which, 0 , 11 the sth of May, they disco un t e d f or th e p l a i n tiff. The non-receipt of the notice until the 7th of November having been proved by the plaintiff, his lordship stopped the case! intimating that it was the duty of the bank to have put, the notice in the post office, so th a t it wou ld go by Mat night's post. They had not done that, and the verdict must be for the plaintiff.—Verdict for the plaintif f damages £l5B 16s. sd. FRIDAY, APRIL 1. WHIITAKER AND ANOTHER V. LAW.—In this eas e the jury this morning returned a verdict for the defendan t on both counts. SMITH V. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAT;" WAY. COMPANY.—This was an acti on f or money c l a ime d under these circum s t ances : I n th e year 1846 n pro jec t had been set on foot to extend the Manchester and Hud dersfield railway and canal to Bradford, the intention being to have a branch into that town. This would have had the effect of interfering very much with the streets of Bradford ; and a meeting of the town commissioners under the local act had been held, in order that the inhabitants might consider the best course to be adopted. At that meeting the plaintiff, who was a surveyor, was present' As it was for the purpose of effecting a friendly settle• ment, it was resolved, in order to disarm opposition, that certain protecting clauses should be inserted in the hill; and it was also arranged that the plaintiff, with others , should go to town for the purpose of seeing that all Was done as agreed on ; and it was likewise come to an under• standing that the Manchester and Huddersfield Ballwin' and Canal Company should pay all the costs. The plain' tiff acknowledged that, while in attendance in London on this business, he wes also on pay for attending upon other interests. A verdict was taken by consent for the defend; ants ; but, from the statement of Mr. Knowles, who said the company had behaved very handsomely, it wog(' appear that some money had been agreed to be paid. KELLY V. M'COOEY.—A " SCENE " IN COM:LT.—Mr' Tindal Atkinson for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins for the defendant. It was an action to recover £27 9s. 3av for work and labour done and materials found. The defendant was an Irish cattle-dealer, and the plainti ff , 11 countryman, was empl o yed by him driving the• cattle; and, when a sum of money was due to him for his err' vices, he left it in the defendant's hands to keep for hire' When he demanded it, however, the defendant would notr as was alleged, pay it to him. It appeared, during the course of the cross-examination, that several of the item s were put down for the Manchester journeys, whi c h were understood to have been o n Saturdays, Tuesdays an d Mondays, as upon particular dates, &c. ; and, in the almanac those dates (lid not correspond with the days question. His Lordship thereupon observed that this mistake was not very unnatural with an uneducated person , Mr. Sergeant Wilkins protested against such interruP' tions : those observations could not fail to influence th e jury, and must obstruct the advocate in his duty. His Lordship.—Go on. Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.--I will, if your lordship 1N 41 , 1 , permit me, and must say that these i n t errup ti ons are most extraordinary. His Lordship.—Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, I will not permit you to address me in that way ! Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.—lf your lordship will interrup t e me in a way in whi c h, most assuredly, counsel ought no to be interrupted, I cannot help myself. His Lordship.—Recollect that I am sitting here as 111 judge. Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.—Yes, but surely a judge is 1 10 absolute. His Lordship.—Certainly not, but he ought to be re' spected. Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.--No doubt of it, and no one ho s a greater respect for the court than I have ; but I an i here to do my duty, an d I s h a ll d o so, despite of BO interruptions. His Lordship.—l must say that this cross-examinatil is the greatest wast e o f ti me I ever w i tnessed in a court justice. Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.—l say that no one has done more to save the public time during this assizes than have. His Lordship.—T am not talking of any time but the present. Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.—l must say that, in the cours e which I have been pursuing towards this witness, I hall only done what I have seen your lordship do scores times. His Lordship.—Th en , if I did , I can only say I d i d what was very wrong ! Mr. Sergeant Wilkins wished to know what it was bib lordship wanted him to do ? . His lordship explained the course which he though t proper should be pur sue d w ith respect to t h e pro d u ce account, but of which the conflict of opinion arose. Mr. Sergeant Wilki ns .—Th en I b a d b etter throw. ° my brief : this accou n t i n ques ti on i s a ll f a l se—a ficti°`"„' from beginning to end. Mr. Atkinson.—That is not so, Sergeant Wilkins. Serjeant Wilkins.—l am instructed that it is. Mr. Atkinson.—Then prove it, and don't say it. a Mr. Sergeant Wilkins.—Really, let me not be school e behind as cell as before; one is quite enough at a time', Mr. Atkinson.—l h ave a r i g ht t o watc h my c lient " interests, and I shall do so. His Lordship.—Go on :let us lose no more time. Sergeant Wilkins.—l am anxious to lose no tiroe• have done as much as any one to save the time at court during this ass i ze . i His Lordship.--IA I say again th a t I am not ep.akirAg - any cause or time but the present. The learned counsel soon after proceeded to address the jury, and, in the course of his speech, expressed his re' gret at having manifested any intemperance. He at a subsequent part o f th e case, apologised to h i s lord ship, who readily and cour t eous l y accepted the declara tion. Witnesses we re th en ca ll e d f or the defence; bet ultimately the reco r d was %ithdrawn, at the suggestio n of the court, and it was un d erstoo d that it shou ld be referred. also, LITTLE V. JONES.—This was a case of disputed liability • to pay certain expenses i ncurre d i n l ay i ng out Fairfie d 1,,, and other streets, on p ro p er ty b e l ong i ng to the Free hot Land Society. The plaintiff had been employed to a u „ some work thereon by a M r . M ans fi e ld , to whom the work of laying out the streets had been entrusted by Jones on the part of the society. Mansfield became era, barrassed, and applied to the plaintiff to do the work 0' him. and the plaintiff agreed to do so on obtaining froml the defendant an undertaking to pay him. The defendO! paid £l3 14s. 'id. into court, and denietl his liability ag to the rest, contending that the work was inefficiently done, and also that he had only undertaken to pay hiel the amount of Mansfield's contract, which he had done , At the close of the case the jury, after a brief deliberation., returned as their verdict—that they believed the plaintiff did the work, but they could not bring it home to the defendant.—His lordship said theirs was a very sensibl e notion of it : it was a great hardship, and really the man should be paid. HIGUAM V. THE EAST LANCASHIRE RAILWAY COg PANY.--lhe plaintiff was a small farmer at Longton, nea t Preston, and the action was b roug ht to recover £5O, t h e amount of damage sustained in consequence of one of t'' defendants' engines, a tt ac h e d t o a l ocomot i ve, setting 10'„ to a heap of moss, &c., upon his land.—The case was adjourned till the following morning. SATURDAY, APRIL 2. HIGHAM V. EAST LANCASHIRE RAILWAY. This case was resumed from Friday. The defendant, f / small farmer at Lonton, near Preston, sought to recover a sum of £3B, the amount of damage caused by one of the defendants engines setting fire to the plaintiff's moss. The defence set up was, t h at the moss had been NJ., several days before on fire, and that the flames carv e from a direction o p pos i te to that of the railway. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. ELLIS V. UTTLY AND OTHERS. The plaintiff in this case, E Jane Crook Ellis, residing 8t Preston, bro ug ht an act i on to recover the sum of £lO O from the defendants, who were the assignees of her father's estate und er a fi a t o f b an k ruptcy. After t he father's bankrupt c y, the plaintiff, w h o h a d prev i o uslY lived with her grandfather, the keeper of a dining.roorc, e in Liverpool, returned to Preston, purchased her father e furniture, &c., with money which she had saved in Liver pool, and did so, it was alleged, on the representation and with the knowledge of the defendants. Uttley had subsequently seized and sold the furniture, treating it ge the property of the plaintiff's father. On the suggestion of his Lordship, a juror was withdrawn, and the ca se re ferred. MORGAN AND OTHERS V. FRY. The plaintiffs in this case were assignees of the estate of Patrick Hayes, oil-merch an t, Wid ness , an d the plain tiffs sought to recover £6O f rom th e d e f en d a nt, an ac countant, in Liverpool. On the su gg estion of his Lord ship, a juror was withdraw n , an d th e c ase referred. BETTELY V. RODERTS.—This was an action b roug ht by the plaintiff to recover a sum of £ lOO . The defe n dant was the propri e t ress o f the Liverpool Hotel, Water' street, and owned forty-two sixty-fourths of the shit' Agenora, which vessel was mortgaged to Messrs. Lam Pol and Holt. The plaintiff and his partner, and the son 0 the defendant, owned the rest of the ship in question' Messrs. Lamport and Holt having refused to advance more money, a second mortgage was made to Messrs' Wilson and M'Lachlan, to whom the plaintiff paid £lO O to pay off the balance of the first mortgage. A disse' lotion of partnership having taken place, plaintiff sought r° recover this am ount. V erdict for plaintiff. Damages £lo‘ WILLIANIS V. HOLIES.—In this case the plaintiff sought to rec over a sum o f £8 1 2s. A person, nam e' Marshall, rented a yard from the defendant, in Wood' street, and Marshall had sub-let the premises to a perg ol ! named Hill, an auctioneer , who s o ld severa l l o t s of goo d: there. The pl a i n tiff was a p urc h aser , an d pa id f or th' 2 goods which he bought ; but these goods were se i ze d p i ; a distress for rent, and resold by the def e nd an t. V e rdle for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. HILL V. HOLMES.—By consent a verdict was taken in this case for £2 7s. The action w as s i m il ar, an d a rose out of the same circumstances as the former one. MONDAY.—APRIL 4. The learned judge took his seat a few minutes before half-past nine o'clock. BANKS v. OLLERTON.—DIS PUTE ON A W rhi ILL.--•" t , was an action to recover possessio n o f a num b er o f o°" tages at Hindley, near Wigan, un d er th e w ill o f a pert named Richard Banks, who died in the year 1788. tb ehe Mr. KNOWLES,. Q.C., End M r . S EGAR were for ° plaintiff, and Mr. AniEivroN and Mfor ar. BLUNDELL defendant. In the year 1788 Richard Banks died , 1 13 by his will be left c e rt a i n property to hi s w i dow for li st life, such property, at her death, to be divided eqaud -1 etween his daughter, Ellen Fleming, and his _gra i i i e , daughter, Ellen Banks, the daughter of Ann Banlis r , , , io ceased. In case of the death of either the said Dp Fleming, or the said Ellen Banks, without lawful jo l t"; the property to go to the survivor. In the year 181 0 i d , widow of the testator died, v hen the daughter and daughter took possession of the property under lb° In 1843, the d aug h ter, Ell en Fleming, was roar rie second time, to th e d e f en d an t, M r . 011 er t on , and di t d , 1:66 1 1848, without l aw f u l i ssue . Th e p l a i nt iff n ow c!iii 0 11 the remainder of the p ro p er ty un d er the will. T he having been,put in and read, Mr. ATHERT ON , for the defendants, adm it ted tha t if there Was no other objection, the plaintiff must P/P this al tothe the tes fore i; law, w deed the ph the n n and I daugh Rie PlrY, Wheth or n ( y The under given BA I clSely anothl verdic Drc In board tout. the de into tl to u se names shovel With a resisti WEST Mr. ( and I that, were busini and SI Hougl The ti defen( that t: claim( Aft a legs tion, The first c the d( fend& count count th e se ' a do e , , Mr. piaint the di His'( that 1 lowly Mr, Gant. °er y A m e f en for ° II O; he co Th, Do WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30. A FEMALE ROBBER.-13ridget Johnson, aged 32, was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard la, bour, for having, at Liverpool, feloniously stolen a bill of exchange for the payment of £4, the property of Robt. Russell Holmes. The prisoner was domestic servant with Mrs. Holmes, in Burlington-street; the prosecutrix was the wife of the steward on board the Sir John Harvey, Halifax mail boat, and was in the habit of receiving re mittances from him. Johnson happened to answer the postman's knock one morning, received the letter with the bill of exchange, and on some sham pretence left the house, cashed the document, and bolted to Rochdale, where she was apprehended. SACRILEGE.----The prisoner being ill of typhus fever, it was agreed to adjourn till next assizes the trial of Charles Seddon, alias William Derbyshire, aged 24, indicted for having, on the Ist of March, at Little Hulton, broken and entered St. Paul's Chapel, and stolen five bronze can dlesticks ; also for having, on the 23d of February, at Farnworth, broken and entered the Independent Chapel, and stolen fifteen gas pendants and burners and a piece of green baize. GARROTE ROBBERY AT WlGAN.—Thomas Riley (aged 20), and John Mahon (aged 22), were found guilty of having feloniously and violently assaulted Thomas Myers, and robbed him of 10s., and a tobacco box. At midnight, on the 31st of January, the prosecutor, who is a tack_ maker, near Wigan, was assailed by the prisoners while wending his way home, on a piece of vacant ground, and, while one of the villains seized and held him by the throat, the other ransacked his pockets. Sentence deferred. FORGERY BY AN ATTORNEY'S CLERK. - Richard Woosey (aged 30), formerly clerk to Mr. Taylor, attorney, was found guilty of having, at the Liverpool court of pas sage, feloniously forged a receipt for the payment of £2 2s. with intent to defraud. Sentence deferred, to consider the objection raised by the prisoner's counsel, that the forgery was not committed with any fraudulent intent. joh;z M`Nulty (aged 27), and Margaret Donnelly (aged 54), pleaded guilty to an indictment charging them with having unlawfully conspired to obtain a policy of assurance from the British Industry Life Assurance and Family Friendly Society, with intent to defraud the society of £l2 10s. Ild. on the death of Catherine Mitchell. Sentence deferred. John Bowden (aged 38) pleaded guilty to having, at Mancheste r , on th e 2 n d o f F e b ruary, feloniously forged a paper-writing, purporting to be an order, signed by William Haxwell, for the delivery of twelve feet of water pipe, value 125., the goods of John Winder, with intent to defraud. Sentence deferred. Thomas Bailey {aged 20) pleaded guilty to an indictment for having, at Preston, uttered a forged request for a suit of clothes, with intent to cheat and defraud Joel Abraham Moss. Sentence deferred. WHOLESALE BIGAMY.—The following parties pleaded guilty :—Darid Jones (aged 47), to having, at Manchester, married Jane Fairbrother, his former wife being then alive.—James Chadwick (aged 29), to having, at Prest wich, married Mary Bromley, his former wife being alive. —Ellen Hampson, alias Ellen Stephenson (aged 24), to having feloniously married Joseph H ampson, Nicholas Stephenson, her former husband, being then alive.—Ellen Wilson, to an indictment charging her with bigamy at Pres to n . —Sen ten eee deferred. THURSDAY, MARCH 31 Bic A 3IY AT LIVERPOOL. William Costello (aged 34) pleaded guilty to having, at Liverpool, feloniously married Ann Flood, his first wife, Ann Costello, being then alive. Sentence, six months' imprisonment with hard labour. SENTENcEs.—The following, who pleaded guilty yester day to charges of bigamy, were sentenced to-day :—David Jones and James Chadwick, twelve months' imprisonment each, with hard labour. Ellen Hampson and Ellen Wilson, each two months' imprisonment with hard labour. —Joseph Lynn Vaughan (aged 25), found guilty on a previous day of bigamy, was brought up and sentenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour. Ann Anderton, who previously pleaded guilty of bigamy, was sentenced to two months' imprisonment with hard labour. ROBBERY AT LIVERPOOL.—Bernard Sloane (aged 33j and James Hughes (aged 23) were found guilty of robbing Thomas Tarlton of a few shillings, at Liverpool.—Sen tence deferred. SHOOTING AT CHORLEY.--ThOMaS Ball (aged 33), in dicted for having, at Chorley, feloniously shot at Richard Tootell and Adam Longworth, with intent to do them some grievous bodily harm, was found not guilty. GAROTTE ROBBERY AT SALFORD.—Michael Con nelly and Patrick Conway were sentenced each to eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour, for having, on the 28th March, committed a garotte robbery in Berry-street, Salford, the victim being James Cowgill. FRIDAY, APRIL 1 FELONIOUS ASSAULTS.—john Lever, a boyish-looking young man, 24 years age, was indicted for having felo niously assaulted Hannah WHale, at Farnworth, in Dec. last. A verdict of not guilty was returned, and the pri soner was discharged.—James Richard Noble (24) was indicted for having, at Ashton-under-Lyne, feloniously assaulted Eliza Kershaw. The prisoner was a quack doctor, who, it was alleged, under pretence of curing the girl of her ailments, behaved in a gross and brutal manner. After the evidence had proceeded a certain length, it was stopped by the learned judge, who, addressing the jury, said there was no evidence to convict ; and he thought it would be very unwise to proceed further with the case. The jury immediately returned a verdict of not guilty. Mr. Justice Creswell, in discharging the prisoner, said it was not likely that a person playing tricks of that sort would escape condign punishment long, in some shape or other.—Edward Lawson (33) was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for having, at Blackburn, feloniously as saulted Jane Coates. The prosecutrix, a decent, modest looking girl, about 19 years of age, is a domestic servant with a grocer, named Swarbrick, at Blackburn. The prisoner is a cart-driver in the employ of a gentleman named Palding, who occupied a yard jointly with Mr. Swarbrick. SATURDAY, APR IL 2 - MANSLAUGHTER AT ROCHDALE.—/Lzes Myerscough (28), was indicted for the manslaughter of Isaac Law, at Rochdale. The deceased was the father-in-law of the prisoner, and lived with another son-in-law, James Williams, in Priestly-street, Rochdale. On the 29th January last, the deceased left 'the house a few minutes after eleven o'clock. James Williams and his wife had retired to bed. In about a quarter of an hour afterwards, when she was undressing herself, she heard a scream of murder on the stairs. She and her husband thereupon went down stairs, and saw Jane Myerscough holding back the prisoner. James Williams then carried the deceased up stairs and laid him on the bed. He returned again after he had laid the deceased on the bed, and the pri soner ran up. He followed him up, and saw him bite the deceased on the cheek and throttle him. He then ran for the poker, and struck the prisoner with it. Wil liams went out of the house for two or three minutes ; when he returned the deceased was dead. The evidence of the surgeon was to the effect that the deceased died from congestion of the lungs, brought on by strangula tion. The prisoner was found guilty. Sentence deferred. FORGERY AT LIVERPOOL.—Thomas Derbyshire was indicted for forgery at Liverpool. It appeared that the prisoner was indebted to a person named Mansell in the sum of £2O ; £7 was paid on account, for which a re ceipt was given by the prosecutor, and it was alleged that he had placed the figure 1 before the 7, and added ten to the word seven, correcting the payment of £7 into £l7. The jury found the prisoner not guilty. ROBBERY AT WIGAN.—Wm. Richardson and George Ormrod, who were indicted for assaulting and robbing a person named Good, at Wigan, were acquitted, the Jury believing it was a drunken freak, not an attempt to rob. ROBBERY AT MANCHESTER.—John Maxwell (22), was indicted for having, at Manchester, burglariously entered the house of John 011ivant, and stolen watches and other property to the amount of £2,000. The prosecutor in this case is a well-known watch manufacturer in Man chester. The prisoner had formerly been in his employ. ment. On the night of the Bth of March the prosecutor's premises were broken into, and property to the amount above stated stolen. It appeared the robbery had been perpetrated although a very fierce dog was on the pre mises, but which dog well knew the prisoner. A con siderable portion of the property stolen was found in the prisoner's possession. He was found guilty, and sen tenced to twenty years' transportation. The court rose at half-past five o'clock. MONDAY, APRIL 4. (Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.) SENTENCES FOR FORGERY.—Edwin Percy -Molt, charged with forging a receipt of 14s. on Messrs. Davidson and Co., Manchester, was sentenced to six months' im prisonment, with hard labour. —Richard Woosey, for forging a receipt for £2 25., at Liverpool, was sentenced to six months imprisonment, with hard labour.—John Bewden, who pleaded guilty to the charge of forging an order for the delivery of goods, purporting to be signed by William Hawswell, of Manchester, Was sentenced to ten years transportation.