The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-08-21 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL SUMMER ASSIZES, CROWN COURT.—TuEsDAY zes for the southern division of the county pals aneaster commenced in this town on Tuesday, stice Coltman, and the id arrived fro►n Lancaster noon of Li ling day, attended divine service on, in St. George's Church, where an hp was preached by the Rev. T. Pedder, of Garstang, chaplain to the High Sheriff, Brockholes, Esq., of Claughton-hall. ;clock, Mr. Justice COLTMXN took his seat [rt ; and the court having been opened with Drms, the following gentlemen were formed EVILBRAHAM, M.P., Blythe-hall, 'wood, Bart., Claremont. Esq., M.P., Smith Hill's-hall 'kburn, Esq., M.P., Hale. ley, Esq., Swinton-horse. Halliwell-hall. q., The Hayes. 1., Oak-hill. _ Lightbourne-house. _urton, Esq., Wigan. s Jackson Norreys. Esq., Davyhuline s, Esq., Davyhulme. , Black-brook. Phillips, Esq., Barlow-hall. t Henry 0 rrer lg., ilidginount. Esq., Green-bank. Unsworth, Esq., Maghull. ?rood, Esq., M.P., Singleton•lodgt _oa, Esq., Liverpool. hard Walker, 'Esq., M.P., Woodhill. irt, Esq. Liverpool: bach, Esq.. Woodlands. Irinkwater, K.nt., Liverpool. proclamation against vice, profaneness, and ing been read by the clerk of the crown, the proceeded to deliver the charge to the Grand ;e as follows : " Gentlemen of the Grand In endar presents to us a very long list indeed of Inman life has been sacrificed. There are, I _ than fourteen cases in which the 'parties have 'lied. It appears, undoubtedly, from the depositions, rt general are not cases of excessive malignity ; my of them are cases which may probably, in .operly classed under the head of manslaughter of them the coroner's jury have found verdicts I in others for manslaughter only : however, - le will be no guide for your discretion • you cise your own judgment upon them. 'Un inction 'and difference between murder and any cases, very nice. It is matter of >metimes to say, whether an offence the head of murder, or be considered n order to constitute the that the party should aug later If he intended to do a sucli a; waylaying a person with an 31y, and he carried the matter further tion, and destroyed life, the circum- al in ten nay be indicative da vicious and mull- Lnd he ought to be convicted of murder. doubtedly require minute investigation ; are; - there does not appear any case - in have inflicted the wounds have had a design of murder. But, if there are 3f cruelty which show a malignant disposition t case the party will be liable to be found guilty lough his original intention was not to com e. Upon these cases, however, you will exer discretion and judgment, and if you find there such marks of a cruel and wicked disposition, the party should be put upon his trial for tour find a bill for that great offence, if not, if a bill , you will find it for the lesser offence. - There of a young woman who is charged with the mur- Id. If there are grounds for finding the bill for it should afterwards turn out, there is some :at charge is made out, a separate indictment and the party shall be convicted of conceal antive offence. There are in the calendar, of cases of au offence which unfortunately ..nt in England, that of stabbing. In some a will find that life has fallen a sacrifice : :pendently of them, there are six cases of tent to do grievous bodily harm or mur se are cases of stabbing. I have no re- poathem ; they are simple matters of law be no doubt whatever, if a wound is given by a within the statute ; but, if there should be circum :e it below a statutable offence, the party will ) found guilty of an assault, and be punish- There are, I perceive, two' persons under 7.e to females. One of them is a case of under ten years old. With regard to this !cessary to remind you, that the consent of difference in the offence ; it is a felony, be found guilty of it, even though which in this case there may p ro ito suppose she did. The other caseis a ry upon a person of adult years. I should es of this sort, unless there is good ground upon his trial, the case ought not to a jury. It will perhaps be necessary Lte the matter a little further than is ice in grand juries, in order to see icient ground for bringing forward the there are circumstances upon the depo t advisable. It appears that the party laint of the injury she had sustained in :xactly be expected of her ; so, perhaps, le case closely before you determine what trse it is a very great outrage ; and, if round to suppose it can be established consent Jill ; if there is no reasonable ground be sustained, it is but reasonable that Dun& ivestigation should be spared.—Gentle s bi .)ught before you five cases of forgery. most part cases of an ordinary and simple e is for uttering a forged bank note. The called fur in this ease is, that, generally is in common parlance supposed to be con - rgery of some individual s name. In one saes fictitious names appear to have been ply necessary to state to you, that that may mischief of forging a real name ; therefore ithin the charge, although no such person 'e as the man whose name was forged. There tering base coin, and one of them if made .:ascription. It is the case of a man who ne before the police for the purpose of ob ey a false accusation against another person /le was charged with having deposited spurs order to bring that person within the penalties It is, if made out, a case of as wicked a nature as dived, and I am sorry to say it is not the first of thin my recollection. When I was here last year, gentlemen on the grand jury may recollect a simi which I passed the severest sentence the law allowed e I conceived it was one of the most malignant at could be found in the calendar of crime. There ber of cases of burglary, but I am happy to say lot of a nature to call for any remark. We may kem the term venal ; that is to say, as far as regards ranee of families, or the perpetration of violence, .iroperly be classed under the denomination of lar mong the cases of felony there are only a few art to. I believe there are two of persons hiring 1 running away with them. In these cases the . parted with his property, and it might strike us it the offence did not amount to a felony; but it mid, that if a party hires a horse with an intention it, the offence of larceny is committed. It would ant case if it should turn out he had not an inten ;tiling the horse when he hired it. In that case the ild not be complete ; therefore it will be a question facts before you what his intention was. There are of this nature. These, gentlemen, are all the re ►t the calendar calls upon me to make, and you wail to your duties, forwarding bills into the court as e grand jury then retired to their rooms • MANSLAUGHTER n_ es Barnett was indicted for the manslaughter of James ng, at Rochdale, on the 25th of April. Mr. Hulton ;d for the prosecution, and 111 r. Wilkins for the pri- It appeared, that on the evening of the day in ques le deceased and the prisoner were drinking together alic-house, and a trifling dispute having arisen between ;he prisoner prop ose d t o sett l e it by a fight. The de said he might fight if he liked, whereupon the pri lit him upon the eyes, and the unfortunate man died ' g day. The evidence of two medical witnesses :amined, was to the effect that death was caused iage produced by the blow. The jury found the lty. He received an excellent character. After !dress, the learned judge sentenced him to pay a and to be imprisoned till it be paid. CUTTING AND MAIMING. Atherton, 21, was indicted for having unlawfully usly cut and wounded Michael Conner, a soldier regiment, at Ashton-in-Mackerfield, with intent isable, and do him some grievous bodily harm. appeared for the prosecution ; the prisoner was The case had been opened, and the first wit der examination, when the mother of the prisoner let the trial might be postponed until witnesses had arrived. She stated that she understood the menced on the 19th instant instead of 17th. After leration, the learned Judge granted the applica ...e trial was postponed on the authority of a deci- Ir. Baron Parke, in Stoke's case, C. and P., 151, Baron Rolfe, in a case at the late assizes Clarke, 26, was indicted for a similar offence upon an of Peter Reynolds, on the 27th July last. The or is a shoemaker. residing in Ben Jonson-street. evening of the day in question, he sent his wife to his r's shop in Fontenoy-street, for some work. As she y longer than he deemed necessary, he went to seek I found her engaged in an altercation with the pri- He seized the prisoner, in order to prevent him stab ; woman, and during a struggle which succeeded, the stabbed him in five different parts of the body. The • then ran away, but he was shortly afterwards appre by a policeman. In the course of the struggle, the • slso stabbed a sister-in-law of the prosecutor in the The jury found the prisoner guilty of a common as ly. He was sentenced to twelve months' imprison- MANSLAUGHTER worth, 53, was indicted for having, at Rochdale, killed and slain one James Wilcock, On the 9 2d 7as a dispute between the parties in a public-house, the deceased struck and throttled the prisoner. r then knocked the deceased down and whilst .e floor kicked him twice on the l e ft side, from the ich he died. Both of them were intoxicated. ner, in his defence, denied that he had ki c k e d the The Jury found the prisoner guilty of man _ rider great provocation, and recommended him to ieferred. rued at a quarter past six o'clock tIUS COURT.—TUESDAY. :ook his seat at twelve o'clock IDITSON V. SPURR. nes appeared on behalf of the plaintiff Joseph The action, which was undefended, was brought Spurr and 'another, to recover the amount due on change. A judge's order was produced, in which (oLthe defendant was admitted. Verdict for the TIPTON V. JACKSON AND ANOTHER. :tion was brought t o recover th e amoun t of a bill o f . Mr. Crompt on appeare d f or t h e p l a i n tiff. The s undefended. The defendant, in his plea, denied Lance, but a judge' s o r d er was produced, proving the Verdict for the plaintiff 4260 with interest. TAYLOR V. ROBERTSON. AS an undefended action on a bill of exchange. Mr.. ppeared for the plaintiff, William Taylor, who was .ser, and who sought to recover the amount of the John Robertson, the acceptor. In this case also a rder was produced, and a verdict was returned for iff, damages £503 12s. 7d. RAY NER V. ARCHER. h Rayner was the plaintiff, and John Archer the de- The action was brought to'recover the amount of Bd. and interest on a-bill of exchange, and £l5 fur ent. The defendant pleaded in respect to the bill o f e that he did not accept, and on the alleged loan that not indebted. Joseph Williamson Westmoreland, for the plaintiff, proved that the defendant had ad- mittt4 ig aatt both Art d.c hill anti the loan, The interest on filo bill was £1 ic, W., making the total debt on that Re count X20110.5d. This, with the £l5 lent, made £35 lls. bd., for which amount the Jury returned a verdict in favour of Slit Bi4NJAMIN SMITH V. JI:NNINGS This action was brought to recover £BlO arrears of En an nuity. The defendant had covenanted to pay the money, but he pleaded a release. As he did not appear in court to prove his plea, it fell to the ground. Vert:ict for the plaintiff, .£BlO. WARD V. CARSON This action was brought by Mr. Edmund Ward, attorney, against Robert Carson, a publican, to recover £7 17s. 6d., a balance of account for work and labour done. The defend ant pleaded that he was not indebted. The action was undefended. ' • The plaintiff is an attorney at .Prescot, and the defendant, a publican at Wigan. The defendant formerly 'bought his ale from Messrs. Birchall and Cross, brewers. In the year 1935, Alexander Smith, who travelled for Messrs. Birchall and Cross, called upon Mr. Carson for orders, as usual. Carson showed Smith a promissory note from person named - Parkin, of Liverpool, and requested him to call and get the amount for him. Smith was unable to get thy, money, and ha received order: from Carson to take legal measures for the recovery thereof. Mr. Ward, being the attorney for Messrs. Birchall and Cross, the case was put into his hands, and the action was ultimately settled.' The taxed bill from Mr. Ward was £l7 17s. 6d., of• which £lO had been paid, leaving a balance of £7 17s. 6d. due. The above facts having been proved on the evidence of Mr. Smith and Mr. Thomas Oliver, Mr. Ward's London agent, the jury returned far the plaintiff damages £7 17s. 6d. I.IULGRAVZ V. WORRALL The plaintiff, in this case, was John Mulgrave, an Irish labourer, and the action was brought to recover £24 fecm John Worrall, a farmer of Halewood, for work and labour done. Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wightman and Mr. Whigham for the defendant. The witness, on behalf of the plaintiff, stated, that Mul grave had - worked during the years 1829, 1830, 1831, and 1832, and that he had subsequently been engaged by him in 1834, 1835, and 1836, - during the two latter years of which the plaintiff had suffered his wages to accumulate in his master's hands. It was assumed, that the wages, durif g 1835, were 411, and during 1836 413 per annum ; but the proof on these points did not come out. It was stated, that the defendant had admitted, from time to time, that he owed the plaintiff upwards of 420. Oa behalf of the defendant it was con tended, that the whole evidence produced by the plaintiff was a fabrication; and witnesses were called to show, that though Mulgravc had been employed by Worrall at different times he had always been paid. A document was also pro duced, showing that, in July last, the plaintiff only claimed 410, which it was contended had been paid in a sum of 411 155., which the defendant's man swore he had seen paid. The latter, on cross-examination was asked if he had not re- quested his brother-in-law, who was not called as a witness in the main case, not to appear in court, as it would " break the old man," (the defendant.) He, (the defendant's son,) said belied requested his brother-in-law not to appear, but it was on the ground that it - would make mischief in the family. The brother-in-law was called by Mr. Martin. He said that young Worrall had requested him not to appear be cause it would " break the old man if, he had to pay Mul- grave's wages." Mr..WitlifrmaN, in the reply which he was entitled to make, on this witness being called, contended that the wit ness was unworthy of eredit. Mr. MARTIN, in return, called on the Jury to believe that all the witnesses for the defence were unworthy of credit, and that the paper produced was a mere fabrication, got up for the purpose of evading the payment of the sum due to the plaintiff. The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; damages £24. BELLIS V. COWARD This was an undefended action brought by John Bellis, a horse-dealer, of Staffordshire, to recover £42, the value of three horses sold to the defendant, James Coward. The de fendant pleaded that he was not indebted. The sale and amount were proved by the signature of the defendant to the contract. Verdict for the plaintiff; damages £42. CARR V. I3IDDLE In this case John Carr was the plaintiff and Richard Biddle the defendant. The action was undefended, and was brought to recover £250, on a promissory note, given for money lent. The defendant denied that he was indebted. The loan and signature to the note were proved, and the Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; damages £250, with £l5 4s interest. The court adjourned at five o'clock. TELE C&USE PAP/CR.—The following causes were disposed of in the West Derby list : Plaintiff, 1,2, 3,6, 7,8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 29, 30, 33. Nos. 4 and 5 were understood to have been settled out of court. No. 31 is fixed for trial this morning. CROWN COURT—WEDNESDAY. The business of the court commenced at nine o'clock CHARGE OV BURGLARY. Samuel Horrocks, aged 36, and Joshua Kirk, 28, were in dicted for having, in May last, at Failsworth, burglariously entered the house of James Clare, a publican, and stolen therefrom two casks, seven gallons of rum, one gallon of British brandy, two bottles and two gallons of French brandy, and two gallons of whiskey. Horrocks was defended by Mr. Wilkins. Mary Crompton, Mr. Clare's servant, proved that on the night of the 25th of May last the house was properly secured - . On the following morning it was discovered that the premises had been broken into, and a quantity of spirits, &c. stolen. On the night of the 29th of May, Thomas Haslam, a pub lican, saw Horrocks and Kirk in company together at a 'tavern kept by Mary Sewell. Next morning Horrocks called upon Haslam with a cart. He asked Haslem if he would purchase some spirits. Haslam replied that he did not want any spirits, upon which Horrocks drove the cart away, ob serving that he must take the spirits somewhere else. About a mile and a half further on was the residence of Mr. Win. Hurst, a publican. Here both prisoners called soon after they had been at Haslam's. They had the cart with them. They drank two pints of ale, and Horrocks asked Mr. Hurst if he would purchase some spirits, indicating that he had some in the cart. Mr. Hurst not being in want of any spirits, he went directly to a tavern at a short distance, kept by a Mr. Booth, and asked the latter if he would purchase some rum. In all these cases he • said he could sell the liquor cheap ; and in one instance, when asked where he had got the spirits, he replied, he believed they were some smuggled spirits which had been found in the cart. Meanwhile two officers who had been cognisant of the robbery at Mr. Clare's house, heard that the prisoners were offering spirits for sale. They set off in pursuit, came up with the cart at Mr. Hurst's, and apprehended Kirk and Horrocks on the return of the latter from Booth's. Two kegs of spirits were found in the cart. A constable named Wilde deposed, that on the way to the lock-up Horrock's sister called out to him—" Now, James tell the truth and say_ but little." . He replied, "_ I will. I did not do it myself, but I know who did. Only two know beside myself." On cross-examination touching this point, it appeared that the prisoner said further. that " Tom Bainbridge and Kirk had stolen the liquor, and had requested him to sell it for them. If," said he, "I am committed for it, lam committed innocently." Bainbridge, the constable said, had been transported for felony since the alleged burglary took place. The kegs found in the cart were identified as the same which had been sent by Mr. Gill, spirit mercly.:.nt, to the house of M. Clare, and which had been stolen therefrom. Mr. \\rumsls said he should prove that Horrocks could not have been present at the burglary, and, however repre hensible his conduct might have been in attempting to put off goods under such circumstances as they had heard de tailed, as he was indicted for having committed the robbery, if they found that he had not been a participator in that crime they would be bound to acquit him. Kirk, in his defence, said he overtook Horrocks on the road with the cart, and merely accompanied him along the road. It was not his place to ask what was in the cart, and he did not know that there were any spirits in it. Abigail 'Clayton was called by Mr. WILKINS.—She stated that Horrocks and his children lived with her. On the night of the 25th of May she saw him in bed at ten o'clock. She slept.with his children in the same room with him. She k rot up at five o'clock, and employed herself in weaving. Horrocks got up between six and seven, and went out to his work about eight. Mrs. Mary Schofield, whose husband is a cart-owner, for whom Horrocks has been employed to drive, deposed that the latter went to his work in the morning of the 26th of May, about eight o'clock, or between eight and nine. His LORDSHIP thought that nothing had been offered to show that the offence was a burglary, as the robbery might have been committed after six o'clock in the morning. The jury, after a few minutes' consultation, acquitted both prisoners under this indictment, but expressed an opinion that Horrocks was guilty of knowingly having the stolen goods in his possession. His LORDSHIP ordered another indictment to be prepared. MINT CASES.—POSSESSION OF A MOULD—SINGULAR CASE. John Matthews, aged 30, was charged with having had in his possession, in May last, a mould for casting coin to re semble shillings. Mr. Sergeant Atcherly and Mr. Penny conducted the pro- secution. It appeared that in April last year the prisoner made him self known to the police of Manchester, and stated that he could give them some information relative to parties who were engaged in the manufacture of counterfeit money. He stated to Superintendent Allcock that a man named Ken- nedy, a tinker, who resided in a cellar neario him, was in the habit of making and selling bad coin to some extent. The superintendent attended to - the information which the prisoner gave him from time to time, and furnished him with money with which to purchase counterfeit coin. The pri soner brought several packages of base sixpences which he said he had bought from Kennedy for twopence each, and some shillings for which he said Kennedy had charged him threepence each. The superintendent asked him if he could not detect Kennedy at work making bad coin. The prisoner said it would be very easy to do so, and on one occasion the prisoner informed the police that if they would go that night to Kennedy's cellar they would find him at work " making money." The superintendent caused the cellar to be recon noitred that night, but nothing was seen to indicate that anv such operation was going forward. The superintendent, in order if possible to get at the truth,. frequently watched the cellar of Kennedy through a hole in a door which communi cated with another cellar at the back, but he could never see anything suspicious. At length the superintendent imbibed the opinion that his informant (the prisoner) might himself be the guilty party. Measures were immediately taken to discover if these surmises were well founded. The prisoner told the officers that if they would search Kennedy's cellar at a particular time, and look in a particular place, they would 'find some materials for coining. The officers, being watchful to discover the truth, set one of their number to observe the prisoner. On the day when he had requested that' the experiment should be made on Kennedy's cellar, the prisoner was seen to go to his own residence, and to come out with a small parcel, with which he went to Ken nedy's, where some neighbours were assembled, as Kennedy, being about to change his residence, was disposing of his few goods. The prisoner sunt into Kennedy's cellar with the parcel in his hand. He' went up to the fireplace, and there lighted his pipe. Without addressing himself to any person, he quitted the cellar, and the officer who was on the watch observed that he had no longer the parcel in his hand. The officers went to Kennedy's cellar at the time appointed, and there, above the fireplace, in the very spot to which the pri soner had directed them, they found a mould for the purpose of counterfeiting shillings. The prisoner's own residence was afterwards searched, gild the officers found some mate rials commonly used in coining, a piece of a mould which corresponded with that found at Kennedy's, and several counterfeit shillings which had been made from that mould. The prisoner cross-examined the. several witnesses very adroitly, and with much boldness of demeanour. In the course of his cross-examination of Superintendant Allcock, he asked that officer if he had searched a belt which Kennedy wore round his waist. The officer said he had searched him minutely, but he did not remember exactly whether he wore a belt or not. The priso ner said Kennedy was then in court, and be had no doubt he h a d then the belt on in which he kept Isis bad money. Mr. Sergeant ATCUERLY said he should call Kennedy, and the latter was desired to stand forward till he was wanted. When Kennedy was examined, he said he once had a light with the prisoner, who had in the course of, a dispute with a man named O'Neille, bitten off his (O'Neille's) lip, and flattened his nose. Kennedy took O'Neille's part, and fought the prisoner, who was subse riSoner h a d subse quentlyqilenr I h n r p e a r t s e o n n e e d d if for o t e h b n e e n e a r d s e s y v aeunlgt tolde. r eveng ed T } o h n n l y o e t e a e n d d y u f p o r and tha t t a a k f fair of O'Neille's." his revenge then. He replied that he would take it in ano ther way. A witness stated that he had heard the prisoner say that he would have his revenge for the six months which be had served in Manchester for the assault: li e would transport Kennedy if he were twenty years in compassing it. This witness was asked by the prisoner if his cellar had not been once 0440olsed, The witness replied " for?" asked the . prisoner. Witness- 7 " Because you came to the cellar SO often. The neighbours - knew you had a bad name for ' making money,' and they suspected use because you came to my cellar."' (Laughter.) • The prisoner cross examined Kennedy at some lengtlr. He- directed him to take the belt from his waist, which Kennedy did very readily. He said he wore it to strengthen his back, and when he travelled he secreted his Money in the pockets.. The-prisoner, how ever, persisted that Kenr.edy had used these pockets for.se creting bad coin. The prisoner asked Kennedy many ques tions tending to implicate him in felonious transactions : all tie insinuations and assertions of. the prisoner to this intent were steadily denied by the witness. Amongst other ques tions, the prisoner _asked, " What was the reason that you refused to sell me some bad shillings in May last." " You never asked me any such questions," said Kennedy—" if you had I'd ha' knocked you o'er very soon ; an' that you know." One of the sergeants of the Manchester police proved that the prisoner had said, when taken into custody for the assault, that he would lagg (transport) Kennedy be fore he died. The prisoner broadly stated. that Kennedy had been tried at the Chester Assizes some years ago, under the name of Valentine, for counterfeith , g, for the truth of which he referred to Mr. Powell, inspector of coins for the Mint. Mr. Powell knew nothing whatever of Kennedy. The prisoner addressed the jury at some length, principally with a view to shew that Kennedy had been long engaged in coining, and that the police had not duly attended to the in formation which he gave them; or he would have been de tected. The prisoner called a witness (a boy twelve years old), to prove that he had seen Kennedy " making money." The lad stated that Kennedy's son took him down to the cel lar one day, when he saw Kennedy turning money from " a chalk thing" upon the hearth, and that upon Kennedy see ing him (witness), he said, " Take that kid out ; he's too old-fashioned to be here." On cross-examination many discrepancies appeared in the testimony of this witness. The jury retired at ten minutes to five o'clock, the trial having occupied six hours. They returned in ten minutes, and delivered in a verdict of Guilty. "'What Mr. Sergeant ATCHEILLY obserired, that a similar case occurred last assizes but one, the first he had ever seen. His LoRnsHIP observed that he perfectly concurred in the verdict, and animadverted in strong terms on the magnitude of the offence. The prisoner was sentenced to transportation for life. UTTERING COUNTERFEIT COIN Sarah Boyle, alias Catherine Boyle, aged 46, was charged with having unlawfully uttered a counterfeit shilling in this town on the 22nd July last. . The counsel for the prosecution were the same as in the last! case. , It appeared that on the 22nd July last, the prisoner went to a public-house or spirit shop, kept by a person named Darlington, in Great Charlotte-street. She asked for a glass of whiskey, in payment of which she tendered a good half crown. and received 2a. 3d. change. She returned what she wished it to be supposed was one of the shillings, and asked to have change for it. There was some doubt about this shilling, and a Mr. Birch, who stood by, was appq,aled to, who pronounced it to be a• bad one. The prisoner stood near the dripper, which was behind the counter, and in the drip per was found a piece of rag which contained three counter feit shillings, which had been cast from the same mould as the bad shilling which the prisoner had tendered for change. The prisoner• was hereupon given into the custody of an officer. The jury found the prisoner guilty of uttering one shilling, knowing it to be base. She was sentenced to six mouths' imprisonment and hard labour, in the House of Correction at Kirkdale. _ _ _ — Moses Ashworth, convicted of manslaughter on Monday, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment and hard labour, at Kirkdale. _ _ The'court adjourned at six o'clock NISI PRIUS COURT.—WEDNESDAY. (Before Mr. Baron Bourn.) )FADDY V. 141‘DONALD. This was an undefended action, brought to recover from :he defendant the sum of £39 2s. for cigars and other goods ;Implied. All the parties reside in Liverpool. Verdict for the plaintiff. RAWCLIFFE V. TOWNLEY This action was also undefended. The plaintiff is a pub lican in Blackburn, and the defendant a cotton-spinner, re siding in that town. The action was brought to recover the sum of £29 is 91d, for wines, spirits, and beer supplied to the defendant. A verdict was returned for the amount claimed. MARTIN AND OTHERS V. RILL The plaintiffs in this ease are ships' store dealers in this town, and the defendant a small trader to America. The action was brought to recover .£93, the value of a quantity of ale bought from the plaintiffs by the defendant, and de livered by his order on board the Shakspeare, for the pur pose of exportation to America. The action was undefended, and a verdict was returned for the plaintiffs. PARTRIDGE V. LAWTON This was an undefended action upon a bond, the debt under which was £2O, and the penalty £2OO. Verdict for the plaintiff. LEWTHWAITE AND OTHERS V. DE LA PRIME AND OTHERS This was an action to recover £277 12s, due upon a bond and promissory note. A verdict was returned for the plain tiffs. BARWICIC V. BROWN This was an action brought against the defendant as the drawer and endorser of a bill of exchange for £5O is. The bill was due on the 29th of June last. The defendant pleaded that he did not sign the bill, that he received no considera tion, and that he received no notice of dishonour. The par ties reside at Bradford. Verdict for the plaintiff. EARL OF SEFTON V. WIGGLESWORTO. This was an undefended action upon a promissory note, to recover the sum of £231 10s. Verdict for the plaintiff. FOSTER V MORRIS Mr. Foster, a large iron -master, carrying on business at Stowbridge, was the plaintiff in this action, and the defendant lives at Brighouse, near Leeds. The action was brought to recover the sum of £lO5O 95., for iron sold and delivered. A verdict was found for the plaintiff. BANKS V. EDWARDS. This was an action to recover £33 15s 3d, for coals sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff. REYNOLDS V. SHERIDAN In this action, which was brought by the plaintiff, as pub lic officer of the National Bank of Ireland, to recover several amounts due from the defendant on rive , bills of exchange, a verdict was returned for the plaintiff—damages £174. 1101.11 E V. BARRY This was an action to recover the sum of £2BO, due upon a bill of exchange. Mr. Crompton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Watson for the defendant. Mr. CROMPTON stated that the plaintiffs were Messrs. Samuel and James Holme of . this town, and the action was brought against the defendant, as the acceptor of the bill. The defendant pleaded, in effect, that before and at the time the bill was drawn there had been an account between him and Messrs. Morrall and Woodward, that the balance of it had not been ascertained, but that for the accommodation of Messrs. Morrall and Woodward he accepted the bill ; that it was agreed the bill should be deposited before it became due in the hands of the plaintiffs, as collateral security for the payment of any balancethat might be ascertained to exist be tween himself and Messrs. Morrall and Woodward. The plea, in fact, was, that there was an agreement that the bill should not be enforced, but this was denied in the replication. Mr. WATSON said be appeared for the defendant. The de fendant and Messrs. Morrall and Woodward had had tran sactions together, and some time ago an arrangement was made between them for the settlement of their accounts, it being supposed that there was a large balance due from him to them. The bill in question was drawn on the supposition that a balance was due, and it was to be returned if the balance should be in his favour. The accounts were gone into, and a balance was found to be due from Messrs. Morrall and Woodward to Mr. Barry of upwards of £l,OOO, so that the bill had been given without consideration. It had, however, been passed away to some other parties, and as he (the learned counsel) could not connect the plaintiffs with the transaction, and as his witnesses were not present, he must consent to a verdict for the plaintiffs. A verdict for the plaintiffs was then returned—damages £282 ss. 3d. . RAWDON AND ANOTHER V. BARRY Mr. CROMPTON said the circumstances of this action were the same as in the last, and he dared say the defendant's plea was equally true. It was brought to recover £314 6s. 6d. due upon a bill of exchange. A verdict was returned for the plaintiffs. Mr. CROMPTON applied for immediate execution, on the ground that there was not the slightest pretence for the pleas set up by the defendant. Mr. WATSON said, if his witnesses had been in attendance he should have been able to have established the pleas. Mr. Baron ROLFE said he would grant execution in the same way as in other ur defended causes—in a fortnight from the commencement of the assizes. STEPHENSON V. BERRY The plaintiff in this case is a type-founder at Sheffield, ant the defendant is a printer, carrying on business at Clitheroe The action was brought to recover £99 Os. Gd., for type sole and delivered. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff foi the amount claimed. ALBRECHT V. MOORE Mr. WIGHTMAN appeared for the plaintiff ;' the defendant did not appear, From the statement of the learned counsel it appeared that the plaintiff, who is a merchant in London, chartered a vessel called the Dorothy Gales, of which the defendant was owner and commander, to convey a cargo of goods from Liverpool to Ceylon, in January last. All the goods were regularly delivered on board except sixty half. barrels of gunpowder, for Colombo, which, according to the rules of the port, could not be sent on board whilst the ship lay in dock. They were, therefore, put on board a boat and ordered to be taken on board the Dorothy Gales, from near the Black Rock ; but when the vessel arrived there the de. fendaut refused to receive them. The gunpowder bad to be sent by another vessel, and the action was brought to recover the value of the freight. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff. Damages £2l 2s. 3d. WOODCOCK V. MARCH Verdict for the plaintiff, £75 2s. SAME V. SAME. Verdict for the plaintiff, £l9 14s. Bd. LAWSON V. JACKSON. Verdict for the plaintiff, £29 17s. 2d. CLARKE V. SCOTT. Verdict for the plaintiff, £l3O 19*. • COTTRELL V. STOCKS. This was an action against the defendant, a cotton manu facturer, at Heaton Mersey, to recover damages for certain injuries done by his negligence to Elizabeth Cottrell, the plaintiff. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Atherton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Alexander for the defendant. Mr. ATHERTON! opened the pleadings. The plaintiff in this action was Elizabeth Cottrell, who sued by her nearest friend and guardian, the Honourable Anthony Ashley Cooper, commonly called Lord Ashley. The declaration stated that the defendant was possessed of a certain mill, and a shaft in the same mill, which shaft, when in motion, proceeded with great velocity and power. The plaintiff was employed in this factory, and the defendant, neglecting his duty, had omitted to fence or box off the shaft, in consequence of which it caught the plaintiff's clothes, and inflicted certain injuries upon her, whereby she had been put to certain expenses. The defendant had pleaded not guilty. Mr. CRESSWEI.I. then addressed the jury. He was happy to inform them that their time would not be occupied long in the investigation of this case. His learned friend and himself, after a few minutes' conversation, had arranged what should be done between the parties; but, inasmuch as the .case presented one feature which was not very common, namely, that a young woman, serving inn a factory, sued here by Lord Ashley, as her next friend and guardian, he thought it but right that the circumstance s under which the action had been brought should be correctly understood. lie dared say it was well known to the jury, that that noble lord had devoted his time and his talents td . a great question, which had more than once been agitated:in parliament, namely, the degree of legislative interference that ought to take place be tween the owners of factories and their servants. The noble lord, turning his attention to that subject, could not fail to feel, as every man would feel, for those unfortunate beings who, by thousands, were called to work in factories beyond their strength, in order to obtain a scanty subsistence. That noble lord could not but feel it was necessary that some pro tection should be interposed on behalf of those who were so unable to protect themselves. To a great extent that feeling had been shared in by the legislature, for acts of parliament had been passed, whereby 'nspecters and superintendents had been appointed, in order to watch over the necessities and safety, and to act to a certain extent as the guardians, of the work, and an b d y poor children serving in certain factories. As to the nature owfhitchhe they tn contracts igii t w b h e ic p l u i might tto ee certain be made with tile of master,vo descriptionsthe hou rs th e y m i g ht b e k ep t t o it, the legislature had inter- Posed, and appointed certain persons to take care that the ‘ reigulationa establiAati by taw were not violated, But there was another particular in which the legislature had not inter fered, because the common law of the land, if rightly under stood, would be found to give an adequate degree of protec tion, namely, as to the construction of machinery in the neigh bourhood of which these 'children were called upon to attend to their duty. AcCidents would be sometimes happening of the most frightful description, owing to the construction of the machinery.beine such, that an adequate degree of pro tection was not 'given to those who served it. 'finis case was one of that description. Au upright shaft, revolving at the speed of some sixty revolutions in a minute, was left without any casing round it, so that those who passed near it, par ticularly females; were liable to have their dresses caught by it, and to be torn in the most frightful manner. The poor girl, who was the plaintiff, was caught by, her clothes by, this shaft revolving at the great speed he had named; and, sup posing five Minutes to have elapsed before the engine could be stopped, and the motion of .the shaft to cease, she must have made 200 or 300 revolutions. He would not describe the nature of the injury .she had received.. She could only receive a pecuniary compensation for it, anise amount hid been arranged between his learned friera'ind himself. But as it was not generally understood, the defendant was not for a time convinced that the law bound him to make compensation to those who sustained any injury in conse quence of his machinery having been left in such a state as to expose the servants in , his factory to a degree of danger to which they ought not to be exposed. The plaintiff, a poor, factory girl, had no means of instituting such an action as the present-in her own behalf. She might, perhaps, have prevailed upon some person to undertake the risk of bringing such a case into court, naming her father as her next friend ; but Lord Ashley, hearing of this among other circumstances connected with "factories, thought it became him, as a noble man who professed to entertain a deep feeling on behalf of those engaged in these pursuits, at once to place his name upon the record as bet guardian, so that if he were wrong in his opinion that the law did not take the responsibility from the mill-owner, he might be found to pay the expenses ofi the action. It was with that feeling that his lordship's name was placed upon the record, that it might not be said a pauper was brought forward, who could not pay the costs if he failed ; and that if it had been found that the law gave no protection to persons suffering as the plaintiff, then it was time to call upon the legislature for its interference. But the defendant was now satisfied that the law did impose upon him such an obligation ; and he (the learned counsel) trusted that others would be convinced the defendant had not yielded without good advice, and that they had their machinery in such a state as to expose their servants to risk, they would forthwith cause it to be altered. He would not trouble them with any further observations. Poor compensation, indeed, must money be to the poor girl, for she had been reduced from health to the state of a cripple for life; but still more moderation had been observed. Undoubtedly the misfortune was not wilfully caused—it was merely negligence, which was always removed from : criminality. A verdict would be taken. by consent for £3OO e _ _ Mr. ALEXANDER would take advantage of the present opportunity to say a few words to the jury on the part of the defendant, in order that there ;night be no Mistake as to his character. The defendant felt very deep regret that such a misfortune should have happened; but it was perfectly clear, as far as he was personally concerned, he could not have had any share in the negligence, or in any other mischance 'to which this accident was referred. He had no doubt the jury were aware of the able, praiseworthy, and he might almost add, the godlike conduct of the noble lord who had inter fered for the last few years in protecting the interests of the helpless factory children. They would all feel alike upon that subject. But he might be permitted to say, that although the public might now be better informed as to what was a master's duty with regard to his machinery, that the machi nery in question was made in the year 1835, by one of the oldest firms in this county, and it had been in work till Janu ary last, when this misfortune occurred, without the least in terruption or accident. The defendant himself was at Man chester at the time, at some distance from the place where the accident happened, therefore he could have no share in it whatever. But, influenced by motives which did honour to human nature—for bad there not been a doubt, the case would not have gone before a jury—he had consented to an arrange ment whereby the plaintiff would be satisfactorily provided for during the lengthened continuance of her sufferings. He (the learned counsel) did not think that the settlement in this case could do anything but afford pleasure to the poor and helpless ; and he was sure the verdict would raise, in the es timation of the jury. the defendant, who was represented to him as one of the most independent and respectable manu facturers there was in this county. Mr. CRESSWELL observed that it would not have cost more than 10s. to have put the machinery in proper order. A verdict was then taken for £lOO. and costs. WOOD V. RENSHAW. Verdict for the plaintiff, £3B. 6s. 3d. BIRKETT AND ANOTHER V. DELLIS. _ _ This was an action to recover the sum of £45, the value of a horse and delivered to the defendant by the plaintiffs. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Wortley were counsel for the plain tiffs, and Mr. Alexander and Mr. Martin for the defendant. This trial lasted for several hours, but the facts of the case may be very shortly stated. Mr. Birkett, one of the plain tiffs, is a clerk in the house of Sir Thomas Brancker and Co. sugar .refiners, but is also in business, in partnership with a Mr.!Benn, as a cart owner. The defendant is a horse-dealer, residing near Market Drayton. The plaintiffs had some time before bought horses from the defendant ; afterwards, being about to discontinue one of their teams, they sent a person to Wigan fair for the purpose of selling the horse which) formed the subject of the present action. This person met the de fendant, and the defendant sold the horse to a Mr. Lee, who, after having had it for some time, returned it as unsound. Both the plaintiffs and the defendant refused to receive it, and the animal wandered about the streets till a policeman took charge of it. The police sold it for £3O. The answer of the defendant to the case was, firstly, that he had not bought the horse ; and secondly, that if he had bought it, it was through the false representations of the plaintiffs' agent. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £45. DATTYE V. TOMLINSON. - Verdict for the plaintaitf, £139. 8. 2d. KERR V. HUGHES. Verdict for the plaintiff, £2OO. subject to a reference. IMILGESS V. EDWARDS. Verdict for the plaintiff, £5O. NICHOL AND ANOTHER V. I , ARRIMOND. Verdict for the plaintiff, £55. 10s. ESTERDAY CROWN COL Bernard Rickey, 35, was charged with unlawfully having in his possession 828 pieces of false and counterfeit pennies, and 530 counterfeit halfpennies, he well knowing the same to be false and counterfeit. _ _ Police-officer Moneypenny said;z4 was on duty at the Clarence Dock, on the 2d of Augusi,in the morning. I know a porter named Richard Bryan. He was carrying a &oz. I asked him who owned it. He said, " this man," pointing to the prisoner. I asked the prisoner what it contained, and he said " copper." I took it to the hut. The prisoner gave me the key of the box, and I opened it. I found copper money made up in papers. I sent for the inspector, and took the prisoner to Bridewell, where he was searched. Some silver was found upon him and some bad copper. The cop per was produced. The JUDGE asked the witness how he knew it was bad. He said he did not know, but it was not like the usual money. One of the jury remarked that such money was current. The ATTORNEY . .GENERAL said it was base notwithstand- ing. The porter, Richard Bryan, said he carried the box, and was to receive sixpence from the prisoner. Inspector M`Gill said he asked the prisoner what the box contained, and he said, " bad copper money." He said he had bought it; Lad not given halt price for it, and that he intended to sell it. He added, in reply to questions, that he was going to take it to a Mr. M`Neil's, where a man named Martin lodged, who would assist him to get shut of it. He was taken to the Bridewell. The prisoner said he was a stranger in the town, and that Martin would assist him. The witness admitted that the prisoner had said so. Mr. Dowling said—l received the money. It consisted of pence, halfpence, and tokens. There were 138 pence of Geo. 111., 386 of Geo. IV., 7 of William IV., 228 Irish pence, of different reigns, 19 halfpence of Geo. IV., 108 of Geo. 111., 8 pence made of lead, and 1 halfpenny. There were many of what are termed harps. The whole of the coin was not pro- duced. The Inspector of the Mint said they were base. They were cast in loose moulds, of what is called pot metal. About 28 of them (the pennies) to the pound. Of the genuine there are only 24. The counterfeit ones are filed and redened. The metal is worth only 6d to 7d. The Mint pays lid a pound. This was the case for the Mint. The prisoner said he bought it as old copper, and brought it here on sale. The JUDGE summed up, and the jury immediately returned. a verdict of guilty against the prisoner. • The learned JUDGE then, • without remark, sentenced the prisoner to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour in Kirkdale House of Correction for 12 calendar months. John Watson, aged 40, Francis Pullen, 23, Denis Rogerson, 28, and Mary Richmond, alias Lawlor, 28, were indicted for having, on the 19th of July, at Wigan, unlaw fully uttered and put off eight counterfeit sixpences, knowing them to be so. They stood further indicted with having, at Ince-in-Mackerfield, feloniously had in their possession a die, or mould, having the impress, and apparent resemblance of both aides of a sixpence. The case presented no features of peculiar interest, though the evidence to prove the several acts of uttering was neces sarily gone into minuteness. The three male prisoners and others, had gone to several public-houses, in each of which one or other of them, in payment for ale, &c., of which they all partook, gave sixpence, which in each case was found to be bad. In the house of Rogerson, a constable found the mould together with a slow cinder fire and a small pot, in which was a quantity of white metal. Pullen, on being taken into custody, was told the charge against him, and cautioned that he did not say anything unless he liked. He then stated that he had met Richmond and Watson at Preston on the Monday before ' • and that all the bad sixpences he had paid he had received from Watson. He also admitted that he had passed some of them, and that he was present in a beer-shop in Standish, and at a public-house there, when others were passed by the other prisoners. The inspector of coins of her Majesty's mint- proved that the-coin-was counterfeit, and cast in the same mould. In reply to questions from the judge, he explained the process of moulding and the peculiar marks by which he identified the sixpences to be from the same mould. The metal was a composition of tin, bismuth, zinc, &c. The prisoner Rogerson said that Pullen came to his house in company with the other two. Pullen was his brother-in-law, the others he did not know. In the after noon, Pullen and Watson, he said, asked him to go and drink with them, which he.did, and Watson paid a sixpence for it; but he (prisoner) did not know it was bad,—and that the mould found in his house, he added, might have been brought there by' Watson and Pullen. He called Isaac Crusha, who had worked for him as a shoemaker. The witness spoke to knowing the prisoner, but nothing affecting the case. There appeared to be no evidence of the presence of the female prisoner at any of the utterings charged. The case as against Rogerson was not very strong ; nor did it appear that Watson was so strongly implicated as Pullen. The jury found.a verdict of guilty against Pullen of separate utterings on one day, which is felony ; Watsou guilty, simple larceny—and Rogerson and the woman Richmond—Net guilty. The learned JUDGE, addressing the female, said she had been properly acquitted ; but that she had in all probability been aware of ter° of the sixpences being false, and he cautioned her as to her future conduct. She was then dis charged. His Lordship then addressed Pullen, who lie said had evidently been dealing in a wholesale way. He sentenced him to imprisonment and hard labour in Kirkdale gaol for two years. His Lordship said he vas not sure whether, if the truth were known, he was not the more guilty of the two. He then sentenced him to imprisonment and hard la bor in the same house of correction for twelve calendar months. • • MANSLAUGHTZIL Thomas Fletcher, a stout man, aged 45, stood indicted for having at Manchester, on the 21st of April last, f eloniously killed and slain one William Wallworth. It appeared that there were several fights on a hard piece of ground, and the prisoner and deceased were fighting together. In the end the deceased received a severe kick and other injuries, of which he soon afterwards died. The deceased was in the act of rising after a fall when he was kicked. He died in ten minutes or a quarter ,of an hour afterwards.' The prisoner afterwards appeared to be greatly distressed. A surgeon stated that the deceased died from apoplexy of the spine. The vessels of the spinal marrow in the upper part of the neck. It might have been occasioned by a kick rather than a fall. As soon as the frenic nerve was pressed upon, the party would die. Mr. Brandt defended the prisoner. • The jury found the prisoner guilty of manslaughter The 'Wined Junco; severely commented on the conduct of the prisoner, through whom the deceased had come to his death. He would not be doing his duty to society did he not. visit the offence with severity. The sentence of the court was that he should be imprisoned and kept to hard la bour in the House of Correction for the county, for eighteen calendar months. MALICIOUSLY WOUNDING Alhii-ton, aged 21, was charged with having, at Ashton,. in April last, unlawfully and maliciously wounded one Michael Connor, on Saturday, the 4th April last. Michael Connor, a soldier of the 86th foot, said :—On the day in question a number of men came to the door of a pub lic-house out of which I was coming, and the prisoner came out from amongst the crowd with an iron weapon behind his back. He drew it to strike me. He struck me across the forehead with it first—a back-handed blow, that knocked me down. When I was getting up, he struck me again' on the cheek with the same weapon. I have not the use of my cheek yet. I fell again to the ground. I then received ano ther blow on the head with some weapon. He struck me twice on the same part of the head. I afterwards became in sensible from loss of blood. never saw the prisoner before that time. I recognised the prisoner afterwards at the In firmary. He came with some other men. John Longinore, a private of the same regiment, was with Connor when the matter happened. When coming up to wards the barracks from the public-house, we saw some men standing at a corner. We went into the middle of the road, to keep out of their way. When we got opposite to them, two men came out from amongst them, and one of them struck my comrade. (The witness corroborated the testimony of Connor, and said he was sure the prisoner was the man.) The other man who was with him caught me and threw me down. They both went away. Connor was ou the ground, insensible, and I could not lift him. I left a woman with him, and went for a picquet, and he was carried away. In cross-examination, witness said that a man came to the guard-house with his head bleeding, from a blow of a stone thrown by him (the witness) just as he was entering the bar rack-gates. Luke Smith said :—At the time in que3tion I saw a man with a poker in his hand, near Thus. Abraham's beer-house. I saw a soldier lying on the ground. I did not see a blow struck. The man threw the poker across the lane, and ran towards Newton. I cannot say that the prisoner was or was not the man. William. Smith heard the poker sound on the, pavement, and saw the prisoner afterwards. He afterwards picked up the poker, and gave it to his mother. It was given by her to one of the picquet. James Muugan, one of the picquet, produced a tremendous thick kitchen poker. Thomas Pennington.—l keep a public-house in Ashton. I believe this poker is mine, but cannot swear it. I missed it on the Sunday. It was there on the previous night. My house is aboutlialf a mile from the spot where Connor was picked up. William Smith, recalted.---The knob-end of the poker was all over blood. Mr. John Strath, assistant-surgeon to the 86th, said,—l saw the witness Connor between two and three on the Sun pay morning. He was insensible. The skull was not inter nally fractured. There were cuts on the head, cheek, and nose. There was a contused wound on the left side 'of the head, with much swelling. The forehead was cut, and the nose. He was insensible for nearly three days, and was in great danger fdr some time after. Cross-examined.—There is still a depression of the skull ; but I do not think his mentallaculties are affected by it. Mr. M ORPHY addressed the jury in behalf of the prisoner, dwelling particularly on the absence of evidence to prove the identity of the prisoner. It was, he said, extremely difficult to identify parties at a glance, between one and two in the morning on the 4th of April. The soldier, who spoke more particularly to this, admitted that he had been sitting several hours in the puglic-house, and had drunk only one pint of beer ; but the probability was, that he and his comrade were intoxicated at the time. The prosecutor was so much injured that he was altogether incompatent to identify him, and, moreover, had never seen the prisoner before. If any doubt whatever existed, the prisoner must have the benefit of it ; and he contended, that the preponderance of the evidence went to create a strong doubt of the prisoner being the man. His LORDSHIP summed up with great perspicuity. The jury retired, and were absent for about a quarter of an hour: Tliey returned a verdict of Not Guilty. • The prisoner, a rather good-looking, stout young man, ap parently a labourer, smiled when the verdict was returned, and said, " My lord, and gentlemen of the jUry, I thank you, although I am not guilty of the crime that I was brought here tor." The JUDGE —" I hope you are not guilty." FORGERY Donald Munroe, (whose case we recently reported, as it transpired in the police-court, on Monday Ilst,) stood in dicted for having forged an order on the Liverpool Savings Bank for £7O 18s., with intent to defraud Jonathan Brookes and other trustees of the said bank. Mr. STARKIE (with whom was Mr. Henderson) stated the Margaret M`Bride sworn.—l am the wife of Alexander M`Bride, Custom-house officer, and live in Heath-street, Toxteth-park. I knew Robert Munrose. He was a sailor. I had known him for five years. He left the pass-book with me frequently, and I have gone with it to the bank, and got money. He left it with me when he went to Demerara. The prisoner is his brother. He came to me five or six weeks ago, and said his brother was dead—that he had died at Demerara in August last. He told me to go to the bank and give a month's notice that Robert Munroe's money would be wanted. I kept the book for the month, and then gave it to the prisoner. I gave it because he called for it. It was on the 6th of this month. I never saw it again till I saw it in the hands of Mr. Shaw, the secretary at the Savings Bank. Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—He told me his brother was dead. I had heard of his death before. My daughter was present at the time, and he asked for the book. I knew that the deceased owed the prisoner money. I saw him pay the prisoner four sovereigns, some years ago, as part 'payment. Ido not know what he owed in all. The prisoner kept his brother five years while he was ill and unable to go t) sea. The Rev. Jonathan Brooks said he was one of the trustees of the Savings Bank. His brothel: rector was also a trustee. I paid all the money. A person brought this book on the Pith August. (The rev. gentleman here explained the form which he pursued on paying money, as it appeared in our paper of Tuesday last.) The money was asked for. It amounted, with interest, to £7O 18a.. ,The clerk who re ceived the check was'Robert Lawton. Robert Lawton said, that ou that day he prepared and re ceived the book and _money orders or checks for payment. This order is filled up by me. I passed it over to the party who produced the pass back, to be signed. I donot remem ber the prisoner. A person signed it and I believed it to be his own signature, Another clerk received the check and the pass book, and deposited them in the usual places. Mr. Shaw, secretary of the bank, rout with Ainsworth on board the Maria, lying at the Rock. and found the prisoner, who was captain of the ship. Witness said there was some mistake about the money he had received at the bank. Pri soner said there could be no mistake in his money, as he had drawn one fifty pound note, two ten pound notes, and eighteen shillings. The officer said there was a mistake, and he must go on shore and have it rectified. He was taken to biidewell. The officer showed him the check and asked him if the signature was his, and he said it was. The officer then asked him his name, and he said it was Donald Munroe. He was asked why he wrote it, and replied either " ignorantly" or " innocently," I don't remember which. • Ainsworth, police officer, corroborated this. He went to the prisoner for his keys and he gave them to him. I asked him if he had any money on board, and he said no. He after wards said it was partly spent in fitting him out. He then said " I'll tell you the truth—the money was my brother's, who died at Demerara; he was a man before the mast in the ship Kingston." The ship the prisoner commanded was bound to Africa. Mrs. M`Bride recalled.—l never saw or heard of any brother of the prisoner's but the deceased —nor ever heard of any sisters. Mr. Bradburn, from the office of the Clerk of the Peace, Preston, produced documents showing that Mr. Jonathan . Brooks was a trustee ; they also embodied the rules of the Liverpool Provident. Institution or Bank for Savings. The check was read, signed Robert Munroe. Mr. MuaPuY addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner. He contended that the questions to be tried were not whe ther the prisoner had signed the check, • or received the mo ney, but whether he had signed it with a fraudulent inten tion. He commented on the openness of the prisoner's con duct. He stated to Mrs: M`Bride and her daughter that the money would be wanted. He made no secret, required no manoeuvre to be practised. He told her to give notice at the bank in the usual way. That he signed the check in his brother's name, arose probably from a mistake. He proba bly, when he received the check, asked what he was to do ? and the clerk might have said, "Sign Robert Munroe at the bottom ;" and lie did so accordingly, thinking it a form required. He dwelt on the fact that he had for years sup ported his brother, who, it had been proved, owed him mo ney ; and as he knew his brother to be dead, he naturally considered himself his heir, and applied for the money. Had he been a lawyer in place of a sailor, he would have taken out letters of administration, or procured a probate of the will of the deceased ; but how could it be supposed that a seafaring man like him should know that this was the legitimate mode of proceeding ? As to fraudulent intention, there was no one else to claim the money ; no one shown to have a right to it but himself. He concluded by depicting in strong terms the general character of a sailor, who was made up of strong impulses, and but little discretion, and therefore more liable than other men to be led into error. . . Jane Blissett, a respectable female, said she had known the prisoner from his infancy, and gave him a good character. The Learned JUDGE summed up with great perspicuity. The jury in a very few minutes returned a verdict of " Not guilty of a fraudulent intention,"—which amounted to an acquittal. William Spencer, aged 24, was charged with having felo niously forged and uttered a certain order for the payment of money, purporting to be the order of one Matthew Brig nall, upon the Union Bank of Manchester, for £66, with intent to defraud the said Matthew Brignall. Joseph White, a boy between ten and eleven years of age, said.that he was in Marble-street, Manchester, on the 20th of June, at six.o'clock in the evening, wihn he saw the-pri soner. The prisoner asked him to go an errand. Witness said his master was in, and he could not go. Prisoner said tie would give him a penny then, and three-halfpence when he came back. Prisoner came back in about a quarter of an hour after he (witness) had shut up, and asked him to go to the Union Bank for him. Prisoner Went to the top of the street to show him where the bank was. He then gave wit ness a note, and told him to get it changed for him. He told him to get five notes for it. Witness went to the bank, and gave the note to a gentleman there. That gentleman (whom the witness identified) asked him who gave it to him, and he told him. He was told to tell the person who sent him to come himself. He went to the prisoner, and told him. William Sudworth.—On the 22nd June last, the prisoner asked me to take a note or letter to the Union Bank, and directed me where it was. lie told me to wait for an an swer. I went. I was to meet him again in Market-street. In place of giving the money, they took the prisoner into custody. Mr. Mansell, of the Union Bank, remembered the witness White coming to the bank on the 20th June. He handed me the check. I said, " What will you have for it; " and he said " Ten" —not tens. I asked him the amount of the check, and he said he did not know. I finally told him to tell the man to come for it himself. I kept the check. I afterwards marked it and gave it to the officer. On the 22d June the witness Sudworth brought a note. I took him into the private room. He said a man had given it to him. (A note or letter was here produced.) The prisoner was taken into custody.—ln cross-examination witness said that no doubt at the time. arose in' his mind that the signature to the check was genuine. Mr. Mathew Brignall being shown the check, said, the signature is so like mine that I will not swear it is not, but I believe it is not. The cheek is not filled up by me. I never authorised any body to fill up a check for me. I Never signed a blank cheek. I find there are two places, if not three, without any marginal references in my check book. That check was not drawn out with my consent. No one had access to the counting-house when 1 kept the check-book but the prisoner and myself. The check and the note were both read. The note pur ported to be signed by Mr. John Clegg, in whose favour it was drawn, and was to the effect that he had sent a check fur £66. on Saturday, by a boy, who brought back a message, to . the effect that it. was closing hours, and he must send again, and that . he would feel obliged if the hank would now pay the amount to bearer. • A police-officer said he apprehended the prisoner. Wit ness told him he was charged with sending a forged check by a boy on Saturday, and afterwards with sending by another a note to procure cash for it that day. The prisoner said he knew nothing of it. Mr. WILKINS, for the prisoner, addressed the jury with great eloquence and ingenuity. He contended that as Mr. Bagnall would not swear that the signature of the note was not his ; yet he swore that he never signed a blank check, and that the check was not filled in by the prisoner. Here was a gross inaccuracy, and the probability was that he had himself written out andsigned the check in favour of Clegg, with whom he admitted he had dealings, and that the check had been laid aside, and afterwards stolen by the prisoner. That was a crime and a great one; but it was one for the commission of which the prisoner was not on his trial this day; and if they thought with him, (the learned counsel) they must acquit the prisoner. As to the charge of forgery there was no evidence to prove that the prisoner ither filled up or signed the note. Several witnesses gave the prisoner a good character. In summing up, the learned JTIDGE said, in whatever way the case was viewed, the prisoner had undoubtedly acted in a very dishonest manner. This was evinced by his employing the boys to go to the bank. His lordship carefully recapitu lated the evidence, and commented upon it as he proceeded. The jury, after some minute investigation, found the pri soner guilty of uttering the check, knowing it to be forged. His Lordship deferred passing sentence until this morning, and the court closed for the day, five ►ninutes before seven. At twenty minutes past six the grand jury had completed their labours, and his lordship, in taking leave of them Said, that the country was much indebted to them for the atten tion which they had given to the cases brought before them. In all the murder cases, four in number, true bills were found. NISI PRIUS COURT.-THURSDAY HUMBLE V. LANGSTON This was an action brought by Mr. Michael Humble of this town, against Mr. Langston, a sharebroker, in Manches ter, to recover a sum of between £9OO and £lOOO, which he had been compelled to pay in consequence of the default of the defendant. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Crompton appeared for the plain tiff, and Mr. Alexander and Mr. Cowling for the defendant. From the statement of the learned counsel, and the evidence of the witnesses for the plaintiff, it appeared that in the year 1838 the defendant was speculating considerably in the share market. In the beginning of that year he was disposed to speculate in the shares of the Bristol and Exeter Railway Company. He requested Messrs. Atkinson and Townley, sharebrokers, Uf this town, to purchase some for him. They accordingly purchased thirty shares for him, from Messrs. Richardson and Thompson, who had them on sale for the plaintiff, for £7 2s. 6d. per share. After the purchase had been concluded, the shares were sent to Manchester to the defendant, whci sold them again at a considerable profit. He now sought to avoid the liability of ,haying the calls upon them, and to throw it upon the plaintiff. 'The transfer had been sent to the defendant ; it was not in the name of the plaintiff,.but of another person ; but the defendant took it to the office of the company, and, instead of getting the shares registered in his own name, he caused them to be entered in the name of the plaintiff, thereby making him responsible for the payment of the different calls that were afterwards made upon and paid by him to the company. Mr. Townley and Mr. Thompson, the two brokers, gave evidence as to their part in the transactions, and Mr. J. P. Badham, secretary to the Bristol and Exeter Railway, proved that the calls upon the shares had been paid by the defendant. Some corre spondence between the defendant and the brokers was also put in. The case for the'plaintiff being closed, Mr. ALEXANDER, for the defendant, submitted to his lordship that he was entitled to a verdict, upon the ground that there was no evidence of priority between the plaintiff and the defendant. The JUDGE said this very question had been raised at Taunton, and was now depending for decision in the Com mon Pleas. He bad himself reserved the point in that case, and it seemed to him that the best course now would be to take a verdict for the plaintiff with leave to the defendant to move for a verdict. Mr. ALEXANDER said he had, further, considerable evi dence to produce which would shew that this rule existed among brokers—that the broker employed by the vendor was, unless the contract provided other stipulations, the one whose duty it was to enter any change in the ownership of shares in the books of the company, in order to rescue his principal from any risk that might otherwise ensue. Mr. CRESSWELL intimated that he was satisfied with the Course suggested. A verdict was then taken for the plaintiff for £9OO. with liberty to the defendant to move for a uonsuit. During the trial of this case, Mr. Bentham, bookseller, of Manchester, one of the jurymen, was suddenly taken ill, and being unable to attend to the proceedings, they proceeded by the consent of both sides with only eleven jurymen. JONES JUN. V. LITTLER. The plaintiff in this case is Mr. Robert Jones, jun., brewer, of Rosehill, Liverpool; and the defendant, Mr. Peter Littler, manager of the stone quarries belonging to the Earl of Der by. The action was brought to recover damages for certain slanderous words spoken of the plaintiff by the defendant, whereby he had sustained certain damage in his business. Mr. Cresswell appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Alexander for the defendant. It appeared that the offensive words were spoken on the occasion of a coursing match at Kirkby, at a public house. The parties continued drinking in the public house till near midnight, and in the course of the evening the alleged slanderous words were spoken. Part of the words had reference to the case of personation by the man Connor, which will be in Ihe recollection of our readers, and another part to • the effect that • Mr. Jones had been in a sponging house for debt within a fortnight before. Mr. Cnr,sswtm„ after opening the case, said, if the de fendant was sorry he had used the slander, and would say so, and indemnify the plaintiff against the costs of the action, he (Mr. Cresswell) would be content.—Thisoffer was declined, and the action proceeded. It was not of the slightest interest. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 40s. RUSSELL AND WIFE V. SMITH. In this case the principal point in which was a dry ques tion of Scotch law, a verdict was returned fur the plaintiff, subject to a case. BEANCKED AND ANOTHER V. MOLYNEUX This was an issue from the Common Pleas to try certain points arising out of an action tried at the last assizes, to re cover the value of a large quantity of cotton. The plaintiffs were the assignees of Messrs. Humberston and Frodsham, bankrupts; the defendant had seized the cotton in question as mortgagee of the ship in which,a was imported, and the question was, whether he had legal power to do so. The case occupied several hours, but was entirely destitute of in terest. A verdict was entered for the defendant upou the principal issue, subject to a case for the opinion of the court above. The court adjourned at half-pass six. TIIE CAUSE LIST The following is the state of the cause list up to the close of the court last evening. FIRST LIST -WEST DERBY HUNDRED For Me Plainti f f-Nos. 1,2, 3,6, 7, b, 9, 10, 11, 13. 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 51, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 66, 80. - Withdrawn—Nos. 4,5, 19, 35, 42, 48, 49, 52, 63, 75 Referred—No. 40. Struck oat—Nos. 54, 60. Twenty-one cases remain to be disposed of in this list. Four of them will be tried before special juries, namely, " The Queen v. Prentice," which is fixed to come on the first to-morrow morning (Saturday) ; " Blundell v. Lord Camoys" (the great will cause), which is fixed for Wednesday next; " Adamson v. Mitchell and another," also fixed for Wednes day ; and " Haydock and others v. Grugeon and another," which is appointed for Monday. There were altogether 82 cases in the list for the hundred of West Derby, and 93 in that for the hundred of Salford. ~„„~.rv,,...,,~,.a05Kr5.~n~r..~0r.N.. DA. SoUTHEY.—The delicate health of the poet laureate has obliged him, for the present, to abstain from all literary labour The Queen has been pleased to appoint Lord Poltimore tc be a Lord of the Bedeamber in the place of Lord Gardiner. Ministerial paper. The radical papers are reporting that the Duke pf Beaufort is turning a Whig ; true,—he is turning her Majesty from a Whig to a conservative. The queen dowager, we understand, has taken Sudbury Hall, the seat of Lord Vernon, and that her majesty will enter upon her tenure in September next. —Derby Reporter. CHARLES KEAN AND THE MURDERERS OF LORD NoßßußY.—(From the New York Herald.)—By the recent arrivals from England, we perceive that the Loudon papers have asserted that " Charles Kean brou g ht h ome from America the confessions of two men who Were implicated in the murder of Lord Norbury." As we happen to know the facts of the matter, which were communicated to us by an intimate friend of Mr. Kean, it may be as well now to give them publicity. Whilst Mr. Kean was staying at the Globe Hotel, an Irishman called there, and introduced himself as a sub-engineer employed on the Croton Water Works. He said his object on calling on Mr. Kean was to induce him to state to some person high in authority in England the fact that two brothers, of the nafne of —, were working as labourers on the works, who made it their boast that they were the murderers of Lord Norbury. , One object Mr. Kean's visitant said he had in view, was the reward which he understood had been offered in England for their apprehension ; and lie wanted Mr. Kean to take the necessary steps, on his arrival in England, to have a demand made for, the brothers by, the British government. Mr. Kean mentioned one or two noblemen as likely to forward his views; but both were objected to as belonging to the high tory party. Mr. Kean then told his visitor, that he would communicate with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on the subject ; and taking the man's name and address, they parted. Mr. Kean at the time conceived it to be all a hoax, but wished the inci dent not to get into the New York papers unlit after, his ar rival in England. We are not of opinion, that any men, even Irishmen, would tie so lost to shame,as openly to boast of the commission of a murder; and we should be induced to think that it was a ruse to cover the retreat of the guilty parties, who, in all probability, are now lying perdu in the old country. THE SEA SERPENT CALIGHT.-011 Sunday evening about six o'clock as the schooner Wasp, Captain Williams, and the schooner Independent Eagle ' - Captain Owens, were coming up the bay, they descried, about three miles below North Point, a strange-looking fish or serpent to the leeward. A boat from each schooner was manned, and a chase for the prize took place. A harpoon was driven into the creature, and away it flew, dragging the boat for nearly ei g ht m il es , 'like a chip down a cataract, It was found necessary at length to stop the speed of this marine locomotive, and a couple of b a ll s being shot into it, the death flurry came on, and it soon floated a lifeless carcase. It was borne in triumph to the foot of South-street wharf, where it was visited by most of the old cruisers about town, who had been to every part of the globe, and knew everything that partook of the nature of fish, flesh, or fowl, like a book. They all, declared that they had never seen such a nondescript. It measured twelve feet in length, and nine feet from fin to fin ; it has a head like a seal, with teeth, and its back is covered with a hard shell. It has four fins or flippers, and its general appearance bears some resemblance to a turtle, or rather a monstrocity of that specie of fish, which nature in one of her freaks had created. How. it came into the Chesapeake bay is a mystery. .It can be seen at South-street Wharf.—Baltimore Sun. The Bal timore American says :—" The creature would be a curiosity, we should suppose, anywhere, from its enormous size, but it is certainly a rarity in our waters, its weight is supposed to be about 1,0001bs." THE NEW BEER ACT.—By the provisions of the new beer act (3rd and 4th of Victoria, cap. 61), which received the royal assent last week, all persons licensed for the saleof beer or cider, to be drunk or consumed on the premises, within the cities of London and Westminster, or within the boun daries of any of the boroughs of Mary4e-bone, Finsbury, the Tower Hamlets, Lambeth; or Southwark, may keep open their houses until twelve o'clock at night, and open them at five o'clock in the morning, with the exception of Sunday, Good - Friday, or Christmas Day ;; but not after elilven o'clock within any parish, or place, within the bills of mor tality, or within any city, chigoe port, town corporate, parish, or place, the population of which, according to the last par liamentary census, shall not exceed 2,500, or within one mile, to be measured, from any polling-place used in the last elec tion for any town having the like population, and returning a member or members to parliament; nor after ten o'clock in the evening elsewhere." They are not to be open at any time ou Sundays, &c., during which the houses of licensed victuallers now are, or hereafter shall be, closed (sec. 15). By the 10th section, all licensed retailers of beer or cider re ceiving into, keeping, or having in their possession, any wine, or spirits, or sweets, shall, in addition to all other penalties, forfeit,4so ;. arul all wines, spirits, and sweets so found shall be forfeited, and, on conviction, the license to sell beer shall become null and void. NEW SOUTH WALES.-PROGRESS OF THE COLONY. (From the Sydney Gazette of April 2.) The subjoined quarterly table, sheaving the number of ships, merchandise, immigrants, and prisoners, &c., enables the• reader to form some notion of the commerce of this co lony, because the items enumerated have.reference to this colony exclusively. When we published the table for the year ending December, ,1839, we estimated the merchandize imported at £2O per ton ; but a commercial friend has assur ed us that we should be within the truth by taking £5O as the average value of the merchandize imported into this co lony. Coitsequently, within the last three months the colony has received an increase to its wealth equal to £1,039,450, estimating every cabin passenger at £2OO, and every immi grant at £5O, and every ton of merchandize at:4:so. The value of our exports we cannot at present ascertain, but these are considerable : 1840, Tonnage of British ships Ditto Colonial ships Cabin passengers Jnn. Feb. 10529 11471 1446 2261 290 304 Mar. Total 5530 27530 2732 6439 6(1 654 Immigrants ... ... . Mercbandize, tons Sperm oil, brls... Black - oil, brls. , Whalebone, tons Prisoners, male .. - - 2457 2457 6116 6150 3870 16136 1180 600 1310 4090 1500 900 4500 6900 - - 300 300 193 640 - 833 Imported addition to the population, 3290 souls MORE WHIG SCHEMING (From the Sydney Herald.) In our last number we an - imaCiverted upon some of the doings of Captain IN ias, of H. M. S. Herald, but we did not tell all we had to tell. A correspondent, who signs himself W. J., and whose letter appeared on Monday, gives an out line of the conduct of this uncouth Captain to the Governor of New Zealand, while the latter gentleman was lying in a state of physical prostration. In the name of all that is gen tlemanly—in the name of all that is humane—what is to be thought of that man who would thrust his clenched hand in the face of Captain Hobson while he was lying in a state of paralysis? Of a man who would offer an insult so gross, that he to whom it was offered declared, that, if he could rise, he would have satisfaction at the end of a handkerchief! We were already in ' possession of this fact; but our corre spondent, W. J., confirms it. From the embarkation at Sydney until the arrival at New Zealand, and after, Captain Hobson appears to have been treated with the greatest neg lect—the greatest rudeness. Perhaps when the public jour nals of this colony reach home, and this unmannerly Captain Nias shall be brought to a court martial, which, if all we have heard be true, he well deserves to be, he may think some thing more of the power of 'the press, or rather public opi nion, than he offsets to think His braggadocia manners will serve him nothing be and bye; he, will be brought to his level as every uncivil person and arrogant bully ought to be; he may be taught that the. quarter-deck of one of her Majesty's ships was intended to be walked by gentlemen only. But we have not related all. We observe that Mr. Cooper, formerly comproller of customs in Sydney, has ar rived here from New Zealand. We have, in consequence of what had been told us, made some enquiries upon this sub ject : and the result of those enquiries has satisfied us that we have detected a Whig plot of so disreputable a nature, that it deserves the reprehension of every honest man in the com munity. It appears that this gentleman went to New Zea land, authorised to act as lieutenant-governor, in ease of any cause arising which might prevent Captain Hobson from act ing. Doubtless, the situation was enviable ; and immediately after Captain Hobson was taken ill, - this Mr. Cooper, it is stated, collies to Sydney to look after the appointment ; and, not content with a mere application, he, it is said, has advo cated the cause of Captain Nias, as detailed by our corre spondent, W. J. It is highly probable, therefore, as Sir George Gipps has joined with Captain Nias, in despising the press, that Mr. Cooper will forthwith receive the appoint ment which he seeks, as a reward for his whig advocacy. These are the people who despise the press ! We shall see. MISCELLANEOUS. (From the Sydney Gazette.) There are at present about nine hundred female prisoners n the factory at Parratnatta. A road has been commenced by Mr. Gray, the police ma gistrate at Port Macquaire, from that settlement to Ellen borough a gang has been sent to work thereon. We understand that a splendid inn is about to be erected in Port Macquaire ; this will be a great acquisition to the settlers in that district. The season in Maitland, by the last advices, is most fa vourable for the sowing of wheat. We are glad of this, for the " staff of life" is in much request at present. Bathurst is greatly troubled with bushrangers at present ; a gentleman named Ralston has been severely wounded by a party of them on the 23d March ; one of them has been shot, and four captured. The inhabi•ants residing in the neighbourhood of Camp bell town and Appin have suffered severely from the want of rain. The ground cannot be ploughed on account of its firmness, for want of moisture, which precludes the possibi lity of sowing wheat. IMPORTANT TO MARINERS.—Captain Wood, of the ship L. C. Richmond, discovered an island in M y last, situate in latitude 15 deg. 37 min. S; longitude 175 deg. 25 min. W. It was a large island, well wooded, and apparently thickly inhabited, judging by the lights seen ashore at night: Capt. Wood, not having seen •the island in any of the charts, named it Brinsmade's Island.—South Australian Register. On the 2nd Nov. the Memnon, when off the Cape of Good Hope, caught an albatross, having a ribbon on its neck, with a quill sealed on both ends, containing a paper with the fol lowing words :—" Ship Leonidas, of Salem, bound to New Zealand, 74 days out, lou. 26 E. and lat. 40 S.—lbid. MEXICO AND TEXAS By a traveller recently arrived from Texas, an interesting account has been furnished of various occurrences in that infant republic and the adjoining territory, respecting which there has been great difficulty of late iu obtaining accurate information. From this account it appears that on the 25th of May General Conales, the President of the new republic of Rio Grande, sailed from the port of Galveston, in Texas, on board a Texan armed schooner, the San Jacinto, Captain Postelle, for Live Oak Point, a small settlement at the mouth of the river San Antonio, to make arrangements for th t ' disembarkation at that .point of the 50(1-volunteers which he bast raised in Texas sincek.his defeat by Arista in the province of Tamaulipas, in the month of April last. Conales had but one Mexican with him, Colonel Carjace, who was formerly a land-surveyor in Texas when under the Mexican government: He had, however, engaged General Baker and Colonel Wig ginton, with several other Texan officers of inferior rank. The first draught of volunteers followed Conales on the 28th of May, in two schooners conveyed by two Texan armed schooners. On the 30th a draught of recruits arrived at Gal veston from New Orleans, in the steam-packet Columbia, for the same service; this draught consisted of 32 men ; and on the Bth of June another body of men sailed from that port for the same destination. The territory claimed by the republic of Rio Grande extends from the River Nences (the western boundary of Texas) on the east to the boundary line of the state of Durango on the west, and from the Gulph of Mexico on the south to the boundary line of the state of Chihu ahua on the north. The first place to be attacked was Matamoras, a Mexican garrison, about 30 miles from the Mouth of the Rio Grande. The entire Texan fleet, con sisting of the Zamilla, steam-ships, the Colorado, a corvette mounting 22 guns, and the Austin and Houston, two 10 gun brigs, and three armed schooners already mentioned, were to co-operate with the Federalists in the first instance; but as Soon as the Federalists possessed themselves of a seaport, the whole fleet was to be sold or handed over to them by the Texan government on the following conditions :-1. The president of the republic of Rio Grande pledges himself to declare the independence of the republic of Rio Grande, and to declare arid establish the-federal constitution of-'1824. so soon as he shall have established his head-quarters within the limits of the territory claimed by the republic of Rio Grande. 2. That the republic of • Rio Grande shall, immediately after the declaration of her own independence, recognise the inde pendence of the republic of Texas. 3. The republic of Texas pledges herself to aid the Federalists in their struggle for in dependence, direct!) , her independence is recognised by the republic of Rio Grande. Colonel Wigginton was in the state of Tennessee raising men for• Rio Grande. He had engaged to raise 2000 troops, which it was thought he would accom plish. It was said that Conales could not be the leader of the Federalists for any long term • in fact, that he was nothing more than the servant of the Texian government, who had raised him to the present position to secure his influence in the provinces of Zacatecas, Chihuahua, Cahibahula, and Du rango. The Texan mil tia was rapidly organising throughout the republic for the ostensible purpose of chastising the Cu manchee Indians, who had recently concentrated all th e ir force between the rivers San Antonia and Guadalupe in Western Texas. It was reported that the Cherokee Indians (the most powerful tribe in Texas) were' preparing to com mence hostilities against Texas. The other small tribes of Indians had been exceedingly troublesome - in Robertson county all through the winter. Mounted rangers on the west of the Brazos were to march against them immediately, and it was hoped they would reach the three forks of the Trinity river (the Indian territory) early in June. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE, MANCHESTER-TUESDAY EVENING THE Sr. LEGER.—The important race of this day month has come (as regards speculation) into a very narrow compass. So few are the horses now attracting the slightest notice, that quotations will be needless. Launcelot is daily on the rife Crucifix, the reverse. Against the former at noon, 400 to 200 was laid ; 50 to 25, as well as some smaller sums at that price, were got on. So eager, however, were the acceptors, that 100 to 5 was pencilled down, which must be considered the outside offer ; 100 to 10, " bar two," was repeatedly given out, but, under 12 to 1, the mare had no friends beyond very small sums, 11 to I was offered in ponies ; 8 to 1 would have been taken on' Gibraltar—a point less offered. Broad watlr and Theon both a good deal inquired after ; but we saw no business done—the layers would not " come out" with 14 to 1 against the former, and 20 to 1 against the latter. 200 to 11 was at last taken on Theon, rather eagerly._ 100 to 8 was offered against BrOadwath ; also 14 to 1 against Maroon. Galen's friendS were silent, plenty laying against him and some others—but .tauncelot seems to stop all notion of a "turn-up." Dr. Caius was offered against at 25 to 1 ; Viceroy backed at that figure—then 20 to 1 offered; 200 to:4 offered against Calypso (takers to 3 ;) 40 to 1 offered against Alonzo. The field was offered to be taken against two ; and just as the room broke up, 5 to 4, in a very good quarter, would have taken that they named the winner at twice. St. Andrew was named, but we heard no price; and the Young 'Un would have been backed at 200 to 4. THE LEAMINGTON STAKES.-40 to'2o was offered against Hetman Platoff. DONCASTER CUP.-60 to 20 offered on the field ; 6 to 1 against Charles XII. offered (take 7 ;) 10 to 1 against St. Francis (offered.) Offers to take 6to 1 Scott wins both the St. Leger and Cup. STATE . OF TRADE MANCHESTER.—The apprehensions for the fate of the harvest, excited by the extremely unfavourable weather that has prevailed during the last few days, and probably also the unsettled appearance of foreign affairs, have checked that tendency to improvement which was manifested last week ; and the demand yesterday, both for goods and yarn, though moderate and steady, was on a smaller scale than on the pre vious Tuesday. .There is no declinein prices; indeed, some descriptions of printing cloth, which are comparatively scarce, have been held for rather higher rates. • ROCHDALE FLANNEL MARKET, MONDAY, AUG. 17.-- Considering it has been the wakes to-day, there has been a tolerable quantity of business done, but at low prices. There has also been a good attendance of buyers. Ahother failure among the small manufacturers has become known to-day, which is the fourth or fifth that has taken place within the month. English wool is rather stiffer, but foreign wool may be quoted a shade lower. HUDDERSFIELD MARKET, AUG. 18. —As might have been expected, the only • terrific weather on the eve of this market had a somewhat depressing effect, but, we are glad to state, not to any great extent. O the whole, a fair busi ness was done in most descriptions of woollens and light fancy goods ; but former prices were difficult to maintain. In wools there was not much done, either in English or foreign, the struggle for even a small profit being severe. Great anxiety is felt for the result of the harvest. Parties hold back for the present; and, should the harvest t irove failure, low as prices a re , th e y mu st still reced e . 1 here is little or no change to note in respect to business done in the warehouses during the week.—Manchester Guardian.