Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-27 00:00:00

CAUSE LIST F1RE , 7,1 1 LIST.—SALFORD 11:13N,DRED. Flaint'ffe Attorneys. Plaintiffs. Defendants, 2 QB —Slater and Co Hampson and ano (sa) v Haropson.. 9 x Svz, Moorhout , e.. (s.) V A lcock 10 QB...Eame• ..3 he Qieen (sa v Spence .. 36 Fx.. Hold en and ETarnE-r (sa) v Knowles and ors .. 20 QB Ar drew .. Mackay and ers.. .ea) v Stephmson . ..llulme an 3. J 31 QB.. Worthington and E.. • . Nowell.. s.;;;:v The MAicr, &c of Virigan .. • • Lora ant A ..Frinc.l; and R. ..1-Tigham an i C ..Fletcher and H ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. SOUTH LANCASHIRE-LIVERPOOL, AUGUST 26. CROWN COURT. Ws Lordship, Baron Watson, entered e - mrt at nine o'c'ock this mornir g, and proe:eded wish the hearirg of civil eases. FITZPATRICK V. THE LANCASHIRE AND YORKSFIIRE RAILWAY COMPAIIY.—In this case, which was an action for (latrines for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, and less of bullocks, and which was partly heard on Tuesday night, his Lordship suggested that it would be very well some arrangement shou!cl be come to between the parties. The counsel on either side consulted for a few moments ; after which, Mr. Atherton, Q C., said, on the part of the company, that his crents could not admit their liability for the cat le, but they would consent to a general verdict for £lOO for the personal injuries, with costs, and they would not object to make a small allowance for subsistence money. He stated that the company were no: aware of the plaintiff's having sustainel such serious injuries. The plaintiffs counsel having intimated their acceptance of the proposal, his Lordship rail he was very glad that an arrangement had been come to, as he saw no end of litigation in the matter. There ware several nice points of law involved in the case, as to the breach of contract, the effect of loss, &e., which must be decided by another tribunal, and before the plaintiff got anything like satisfaction, ha would be involved in five or ten times the expense of the-present action. Ravels V. Been—This was an action brought to recover damages for breach of promise of marriage. The pl .intiff was Miss Elizabeth Raven, and the deferalent was Mr. Bithngton Bell. It will be perceived that the case was devoid cf almost all the features; of interest which give a "spicy" ch9racter to such actions generally. Mr James, 11 " Q.C., and Mr. A spinall, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Conway represented the defendant, Mr. Aspinall stated the case, from wheli it appeared that the pleintiff was the daughter of a master mariner, who had formerly lived in Whitehaven. but mote recently in Liverpool. The Vain tiff and her sister were milliners, and also took in lodgers; and it so happened that the defendant, who was now a per son in a respectable position in life, and manager of a colliery at a place called Broughton Hall, but who was then in by no means good circumstances, became a tenant. This was in 1849. An attachment sprung up between the plaintiff and defendant, but the parties were at that time by no means anxious to marry, but were waiting in the Lope that defendant's circumstances might improve, and that by his industry and attention to his pursuits, he being then a clerk to a corn merchant, he might realize sufficient to support a wife. It unfortunately happened, however, that through illness and other causer, instead of becoming better his prospects became consider ably worse. He remained for some y, are in the h Jose of the plaintiff and hog sister, whose kindness to him was exceedingly g set. He was allowed by them to remain in the house, although he had contracted a very considerable debt, and they tick care of him and suffered him to live upon them for some years. Some time after he got a situation at a considerable distance from them, at a place called Broughton Hall, near Wrexham. When this removed .from the plaintiff he soon forgot h's attachment. He met some other parson, for whom he contracted a in re recent. if not a more sincere attachment, and very shortly after he had gone to the colliery, the plaintiff was very mush surprised at hearing that he had actually married another woman. The plaintiff went over to see him. A' good deal of reproach took place, but the defendant, feel -mg, no doubt, as any man must, the injury which he had inflicted upon the plaintiff by h s conduct, wrote her in her own presence, a latter which the jury would hear read to them. This document was the on'y letter which passed between the parties, for the feet that they were always so much together far so many years precluded the necessity of exchanging letters. Air. Aspinall then read the letter, which was as follows : Southsea, 31st May, 1854. My dear Elizabeth, as long as I live and have the power, I 'will be your friend, having ganed your affectons and promised marriage for upwards of five years, and I shall not fail to write to you very often, with an enclosure, as I am very scae y for the part I have acted towards you knowing I have blighted your happiness. I now promise to make you all the amends in my power, provided you do as I have wishei you, and that you promise to look upon my wife as a sister. Should I fail to do so, you are tnen at liberty to do as yon please and to use your own die cretion.—Your's, very faithfully until death, &c. At that very time the defendant was indebtod to the le aintiff and her sister in a very large sum of money, for board and lodging. He remitted from time to time 134, of which £l7 was towards the debt, and £l7 for compensation to the young lady. He then ceased his remittances, and this sum being considered altogelher too small fur the injury he bad inflicted, the 'resent action was accordingly brought. His Lordship asked if the parties could not arrange between themselves the amount of damages. If the letter read was genuine, there was an end of the case, so far as aoy issue was concerned. Toe case was quite hopeless if that was- a genuine letter. Mr. Conway said the defendant west not present, and !here was some difficulty, therefore, about coming to an arrangement. His Lordship : Well, then, go on. Miss Anne R=aven, sister of the, plaintiff was examined, and briefly proved the facts stated. 31r. James, QC , having spoken on behalf of the plaintiff; and Mr. stonwey having eddressed the jury for tho defendant in mitigation of damages, his lord ship summed up, and- the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £lOO CALLAN V JAMESON —Mr. Aspinall opened the pleadings, and lir James, Q.C, stated the case. The plaintiff, a saek.ng dealer in Liverpool, soueht to recover damages from the defendant, a military officer, now retired, and living at Roby, for an act of trespass. The plaintiff, in March last, tock a cottage bslongieg to defendant, at Roby, at a rent cf 3s 6d per week for twelve mouths, the rent to be paid monthly. The Plaintiff lock possession, and the tenancy commenced on the ninthof March 1857. The first month's lent was paid on the %.b. of April, 1857. It would appear that after this the plaintiff was one day coming fa-one Liverpool by the railway, and had a couple of hens alone with him. The defendant met hineat the station, and objected to his keeping hens, laying if h e kept them he should turn out. Ttie plaintiff said he had taken the place for twelve months, and he would not turn cur. On the 12th of May the defendant called for his rent, which was duo upon the 9,h. The pliintiff had left a sovereign for the purpose of paying the four weeks' rent. When the servant offered it to the def ndant he said he had not got any change, and tbat it did not matter at all. The next day the plaintiff; knowing that the lefendant had objected to the hens, left the exact amount of rent, 143, with the servant. The servant endeavoured to see the defendant, bat could not see him. On the 19th of May, without any further intimation, the defendant's bailiffs came to the house, demanding five weeks' rent, 17s. 6d. and costs. They refused to wait until she e eat to Liverpool to see her master, saying that all taey wanted was possession of the premises. Finally, thee turned her cat of the house and locked the door. Mr. Cole, who appeared for the defence, contended that there was no engagement to lot the cottage for twelve months ; that it • sima • Cooper and Sacs SECOND LIST.—WEST DERBY HUNDRED. 3 Q8..1.,, , wm'es and Co ... .. Smith .. (9.1) v rile Yonng and QB..Race ide .• ..Brown and ano (sJ) v Laic. wet' . ..Storio Co 5 Ex... " o'y • . .. • • .. ..Peet .. • . • . ..v Ha lam .. • • .. Henry S QB..Binney.. •.. Yeomans .. v Gray and ors.. .. .. Chambers and iirj 10 Ex.— it XI ells . LBof Id ealth King upon Hull (r) v T Ho se of Hull.. E b Wilson 11 Ex— Cowson and Co .. . (sJ) v Beattie .. ;5 CP— Grimmer —Same .v Frown 16 CPL.J Y,tcs jun.. .. ..MeManus v Lan. and York. Railway Co 17 CP.. Same .. • . (rJ) v Barber 15 Ex... , tamp and J Parkes: rth acd ano (ea) v Mason ... 19 Ex... Pell and Holmes .. ..v Kidd and ano .• ..EV2ns a'i Eon 20 QB.. Statham and. Co .• ..`z• lemon ..v Rawns ey Irrier!ey 32 Ex... Barrow Manley admix ...v St Eviens anal and Rail Co .. Whin y 23 Ex—.game Hawkrey v Carter 24 QB.. Ho'.den and Son ... ..Woolhcroft v Watron „Bell and S 25 Ex.. . T Ees ,- Larn ...Fastham . •• v Whaley .. • • .. ..Colt4n and B i 6 Ex...FletcLe , and H —Taylor (5.7) v Neal and 2$ CP...1 P Mnrreaigh —Hargreaves . • • .. ..v Thorn at Chester and Co 20 Ex,..Thackera'i Fitzpatrick. .. • . ..v Lan. and York. Railway Co ..Lewin on :Co 21 CP J Tate; jun .. Raven .• • . ..v Bell .. Pemberton CP..Sarne ..v Jameson .. . Ward 33 QB.. It Stevenson .• .. —Ye d (s.) v Lon. and N. West Bail. Co.. ..Swift and Co 34 F x... Rowe Warirr: jun.. .. v Everth Woodcock and Co ZS Ex—Heald ••..v • Acton .. • • ..Leigh 3$ CPL.ltlai khnrst .. Wright .• ..v C ov:es 37 QB..Carron and E..• • .. ?rooks and ors exors 7 c.. ..v Bainbecice .. P r and Co 32 QB.. Moss and .. • • .. Samnelton and ors ~ (ss) vll ins ai.cl ors.. .. .Preston BO C'P.• Good win and .. Cooke v Wilson and ano owndes and Co 41 CPL Fenwic.: .Vc , se admix ... ..v Lan. and Yorx. Railway Co . ..T Aa.d J G undy 44 CP.. J Yatcs, jun.. .. .. Wright • and ano ..v Kirby.. .• • • Hinds 42 R Moore Seott and aro .. .. • . ..v Hernanasn 44 P..r vans and 2on Stevens and ano ..v • Clementton 45 QB.. C and II Frost Wadswor h ..v Well=.. Wells and S 47 Ex—Lb-Mbar ar,d 1.. .. Higgin ..v Robins .. Chilcott .. Hatton and ano .v ••• . S , aikle on and Co 4 Ex...Cohtvay.. Neisnn (as) v Seddon .. Holden and Son CPLA tamer and Son.. .. Waddington adnaor ..v Lan. and Yora . - Railway Co. _ll and W Ascrott 41ame , ,„ „. ..v Same.. (demurrer) Same 52 QB..Littleda/e and B Pemberton Arkin and ano.. 53 CP.. Peg ie ..Buxton . v Venn and ano.. .• Francis and A 54 Ea .T , Smith .. ••CollinS Murphia - • „Sw.ft and Co $5 CFL.Ectekbon • e Saaar and ano ..v Brent:land and ano .. Sale and Co $5 CPL .S.- me .. • . ..Snme v same.. •(demurrer) Same 47 CPL.ssme . • • • • • • • S agav • • • • • • • • • • - • •• v &me.- • • • • • • •• - • • • • Same CP .Snowball .. • • ..Woodh ea d v I , lackhurst W Blackhurat 59 IPL.Breihe ton .. ..A.ssop ..v Yates. .Ward 41 FA— Cab —Giant • • .v Denham . .. • . QB..Littledaie end. Co .. Day es ... ..v Crirchley _Holden and Son 03 Ex...ltarber.. Weisman ..v aylor Hiebam and C 64 Ex... Co-way.. Nelsnn • ..v Brownel and ano and P Ex— .T S Smith Muir ead .. • . v Moore end ano. ..J B Lloyd 47 CPL - . 11 and t% Ascrott ..p..B]ackburn and ano Adam: arat Co Darendants' Attozneys. was taken at a weekly rent, and that a week's notice was given to him, to remove. The jury found for the plaintiff, with £25 damages. WARING, jun., v. EVERT!! —Mr. Aspland opened the pleadings, and Mr. James, Q.C.. stated the case. The action was brought by the plaintiff', an agent for the supply of bone dust, against Mr. Ever,h, the proprietor of bone geindirg millet to recover damages for injury done to a quantity of bones entrusted to the defendant to grind The &legation was, that a quantity of foreign and noxious matter was mixed with the bone-dust, which caused the plaintiff to lose the advan age of a contract he bad made with Mr. Scatter. the agent of the Earl of Darby. In the early part of 185 G, the plaintiff imported from South America a large quantity of bones, which ho contracted with defendant to grind, at lOs. a ton. He also entered into a contract with Mr. Stater, to supply 100 tons of bone-dust, at ..E7 10g. a ton, of which samples had been previously submitted to Mr. Statter, and, after analysis, approved of by him. The ground bones were delivered to the plaintiff by defendant in due course, and two quantities, together amounting to about 20 tons, were forwarded by the former to Mr. Statter. The plaintiff, however, received back a telegraphic message from Mr. Scatter to the effect that the bone dust was not equal to sample, and that it was adulterated. The plaintiff wrote at once to the de fendant enclosing the telegraphic message, and received a reply from the defendant's manager, stating that there mast be some mistake, as there had been no adulteration, but that the bones when received contained, as shown to the plaintiff at the time, a large quantity of old iron, stones, and bricks. In order to make up for the rejection of these, the writer stated that he ordered to be putin each ton of bones about half a hundred weight of gypsum Tne plaintiff replied that be did not expect gypsum to be substituted, and that defendant had no right to substitute it. Mr. Statter refused to take any more, as the contract had bean brckeu, and would only give for the quantity already received £G 3s 9J, instead of 101 per ton. About 40 tons in addition, which had been forwarded to Mr. Statter, he refused to receive, and they were left at the railway station. The plaintiff (Mr. Statter) and the defendant conferred as to the disposal of this bone du-t, as the railway authorities demanded its removal. It was finally agree i that the defendant should take the bone dust front the plaintiff at cost price, £G 21 GI per ton, The plaintiff now claimed compensation for the loss he had sustained upon the quantity delivered to Mr. Statter, in the difference between the price for which he had originally contracted, and the price which he had to agree to accept. Mr. Millward, who appeared for the defence, contended that the arrangement made about the quantity of bone-dust lying at the railway station was a final adjustment of all claims. The jury found for the plaintiff the amount claimed. Vose v. THE LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY —Mr. Aspinall opened the pleadings, and Mr. Overend, Q.O , stated the case. It was an action broueht by Alice `rose to recover compensation for the loss of life of her hush tad who was killed, as it was alleged, by the car-dessneas of one of the servants of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company. The deceased man was in the employment of the East Lancashire Railway Company, as a backsmith, and was about forty years' old at the time of his death. The East Lancashire Company and the defendants have a station in common in Tithebarn-street, and use the earns rails up to the Walton Junction. Half-way between these stations there is the Great How ard -street goods station, and dote t:djoining are two sidings, one on the west belonging to the East Lancashire Company, one on the east to the defendants. On the 10th of January the deceased was engaged with another man in putting a buffer upon a waggon belonging to the East Lancashire emptily at their siding. Au engine and tender belonging to the defendants were engaged in shunt ing some waggons. The driver, it was stated, did not weistle when the engine was corn'ng near the siding. The engine struck the waggon where the deceased was at work, and he was killed. The plaintiff's case had not concluded when the court aaj)urned. NISI PRIUS COURT. BEFORE MR. BACON MINN/ELL AND A SPECIAL JURY. MACKAY si o OPIIERS v BTIMISNSON.-011 the sitting of the court at nine o'clock, this cause was resumed. Mr. W. Askwith, the proprietor of the King's Head, Salford, deposed that Me. Hunt, the assured, had visited his house, and dined almost daily there for many years. He always appeared to enjoy good health. Mrs. Hunt, the widow of the deceased gentleman, and Miss Elizabeth Hunt, his eldest daughter, were also examined as to the state of his health. They deposed that he had invariably enjoyed gold health, except one or two attacks of bile. They never heard of his having an attack of brain fever until of er his decase, when they heard of it front the agents of the cohipany. This concluded the plaintiff s case. Mr. Hill, Q.C., then addressed the jury for the defence. He said that he would be able to show that the deceased withheld important information as to his health at the time the policy was ccmpleted. and that he had himself admitted that he was recovering from an attack of brain fever; and that, when his bankers desired him to obtain a policy on his life, he replied that it would be impossible, as no office would insure him his health was so bad. Dr. Risk was examined, On his dicect examination, he said that the deceased's illness at Blackpool was brain-fever ; but on cross-examination he admitted that it might be congestion of the brain, or an effict of a severe bilious attack. Dr. Clayton, who also saw the deceased at Blackpool, said that he considered he had been labouring under severe inflammation. of the brain, and that is was calculated to have a permanent effect on the system, rendering the brain more liable to disease —Mr. Henry Winterbottom deposed to the death of the deceased, from apoplexy, in July, 1856.—Sir Jas. Birdsley, Medical Referrae of the Economic Life Assur. auce Company, stated that the deceased, when he pre sented himself far examination, did not say anything about his illne3s at Biaekpool. He had not heard from any one about the illness at Blackpool, er he should cer tainly have considered it his duty to have instituted strict inquiries respecting the residual effects of such a malady which was I,k.ely to leave residual effects. On cross-exa mieseion, he said, when he spoke of residual effects, he m =ant rather with regard to acuteinflam mat i onof thebr,in than brain f e ver H did not discover any symptoms of organic disease when the deceased presented himself for examination. Dr. Nola!e was examined, and expressed it as his opinion that the deceased had suffered from au acute attack of inflammation of the brain. On cross-exami nation, he said that the disease at Blackpool might hive been produced by the deceased's bathing and conducting himself as described whilst suffering under a bilious attack. He had, however, a positive opinion that it was nOt mere congestion of the brain. Mr. Gwathorpe, accenetant and general agent, of Manchester, produced a letter w:eich the deceased wrote to him on the 13th September, 1855, in reference to the settlement of some claim. In this letter he spoke of haviug been confl -ed to bed for about three weeks with brain fever.— Mr. Edward Atkinson, inspector of the Provincial Bank of E gland, deposed that when, in September, 1855, he Dressed the deceased to insure his life in accordance with the promise which he had given to the bank, he replied THE NORTHERN TIMES.-LIVERPOOL, THURSDAY, AUGUST 27, 1857, that his life was then uninsurable in any office, and that he had suffered from brain fever in Blerkpool. This closed the case for the defence. Mr. HA 'Q C., then addressed the jury on the-evidence, after whi 'h Mr. Atherton, Q C., replied on the whole case. His Lordship summed up at considerable length. The jury retired at-seven o'clock, to consider their verdict. They returned in the course of an hour, with a verdict for the defendant. NOWELL v. THE CORPORATION or WIGAN.—In this action the plsiutiff sought to recover compensation from the de fendants for loss which he had sustaine I by reason of not being allowed to complete certain works which he had coatricte I with them to perform. Mr. Huggins, QC , with Mr. Blackburne, appeared far the plaintiff, and Mr. Monck, Q.C., with Mr. Mellish, for the defendants. The plaintiff, who is well kenown as an extensive contractor, contracted with the defendants about two years ago to execute certain works, consisting of reservoir, tunnel, &c., at Wigan. On the 21d of June, 1835, the advertisements calling for tenders for the works appeared in the public papers, and on the 3rd of July the plaintiff's tender was accepted, ono of the conditions of the contract being, that he should commence the work after three days' notice. He accordingly collected his plant, bet it was not until the 4th of June, 1856, that he was first requested to meet Mr. Rawlinson, the defendants' engineer, and ntr. Hunter, the resident engineer, to arrange about the work, he demand cd compensation for the delay, and when the defendant refused it, declared that he would g ) on with the work, but under protest. The defendants would not consent to this, and hence the present action. The difference also gave riee to a suit in chaneery between the parties. On the conclusion of the opening statement of counsel, it was agreed to take a verdict for the plaintiff for £lO,OOO damages, and to refer all matters in dispute to Mr. Thomas Wignsll Leather, of Leede. jSmall v. PILE.---11r. Hill, Q.C. with Mr. Blackburne, appeared for the plaintiff ; and air. Atherton, Q 0., and Mr. Manesty, QC , for the defendant. The plaintiff, Mr. Robert Smith, is a merchant and shipowner, residing near Manchester, and the defendant, Mr. John Pile, is a ship builder, at Hartlepool, and the cause of action arose under the following peculiar circumstances :—ln August, 1834, the defendant was in the course of building a vessel at Hartlepool, and an • greement was entered into with him by the plaintiff for her purchase. The payment was to be made according to measurement, at the rate of £l6 5s per ton, the measurement to be medium measurement—that is, the old and new measurements were to be ascertained, added together, and divided by two, the-quotient to be the measurement f r payment. While the vessel was being built, the plaintiff sent down Captain Evans to see that everything was done according to agreement. The vessel. which was c'eistened the Mirage, was measured by the customs' officials at Hartlepool. She was returned as measuring by the old, or builder's mea • zurement. 965 tone, and by the new measure ment 833 tons, which being added together and dividel by two, give 899 tons as medium measurement. The cost, therefore, at £l6 ss. per ton, amounted to £14,608 15$, which stem was paid by the plaintiff She went on her first voyage to China, add returned in the early part of 1856. She then underwent some repairs at the yard of Mr. John Brody, in London, but nothing was done that could alter or affect her capacity. Some time after the plaintiff agreed to sell a share to Mr. Ewing. of the firm of Robertson and Ewing, of Liverpool, and, in consequence, re-registration and re -measurement became necessary. On her return from Bombay, in December, 1856, Mr. Milian, the chief surveyor of tonnage at Liver pool, was directed to re-measure her. - She was accord ingly re-measured by ia the assistant surveyor, Mr. Dixon, according to the mode pointed out in the Merchant Shipping Act—the most recent act on the subject. By that measurement she measured only 718 31-100 tons. Mr. Millar was surprised at so great a difference, because usually the difference was only between six and seven par cent., while here it was from fourteen to fifteen, and he communicated the circumstance to Mr. Ewing. He also directed Mr. Dixon to re-measure her according to the new measurement, and Mr. Dixon found that, in place of 833 tons, she measured only 793—being a difference of forty tons. She was also re measured according to builders' measurement, and was found to measure only 887 tons, instead of 965 tons. The plaintiff had accordingly overpaid on a little more than 58 tons, and as the defendant maintained the correctness of the original measurements, he brought the present action to recover the amount of the alleged overcharge. The Mirage is a clipper-built ship, and the question was whether the dead wood work at the stem and stern of such vessels should be included in the measure ment. It was very evident that the dead wood work had been included in the original measurement, and in this fact most probably lay the explanation of the great difference in the tonnage, as ascertained by the recent measurement, when such dead wood work was, according to custom at Liverpool, London, Plymouth, &c., excluded. After the case on the p ar t o f t h e pla i nt i ff ha proceeded some distance, it was agreed to refer the matter in dispute to a member of . the bar, much depending on the construction of the statute directing the mode of new measurement. A verdict accordingly was taken for 'the plaintiff for £1,00(), subject to a reference. Tim LOCAL BOARD OF HZALTII OF KINGSTON-UPON:HULL V. Tim _TRINITY HOUSE OF DULL.—This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, the Corporation of Hall, to recover from the defendants the sum of £457, as their proportion of a rate imposed by the plaintiffs, in their capacity of the Local Board of Health of Hull, for the purposes of a public improvement, from which the defend-- ants, with other owners of property in the neighbourhood, had derived great benefit. Mr. Warren, Q C., with Mr. Thompson, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Hill , Q C., with Mr. Melhuish and Mr. Millward, for the defendants. The defendants denied the validity of the rate, and this, and-also the construction of certain local acts, ware the questions at issue. The case had not concluded on the rising of the court. BOYS' CLOTTING MADE WITH GREAT TASTE At LEWIS & COMPANY'S, Rar:elazh street. THE L I.TE GENERIL BARNARD —lieutenant-General Sir Heery William Barnard, K.C.8., whose death by dysentry under the walls of Delhi is reported, was the son of a Buckinghamshire clergyman, and was born in 1799. He entered the army is 1814 ; was on the staff of his uncle, the late General Sir A. F. Barnard, at Paris, in 1815, and on that of Sir John Keane, in the West Indies. He subse quently held the command of a brigade in the Crimea, where he served as chief of the staff under General Simp son. Having returned home, he held the command of the troops, first at Corfu and subsequently at Shorncliffe. In November last he was sent cut to India, and succeeded General Anson in his command of the forces before Delhi on that officer's death in June last, so that he hal held his high and responsible post little more than three weeks, when he was carried off by death. EXTENSIVE Teßacco &mom?, A man named Charles Kerley was brought before the borough magistrates at South'amp ton on Saturday morning on a charge of having been engaged in smuggling 1,6441 b. of tobacco. The seizure was effected by an extra min in the service of the Customs named A; kips, under the following circumstances .—Atkins, who resides at Shirley, about a mile from Southampton, TV2S on his way into town about 8 o'clock on Saturday morning, when he saw a waggon having a name on it and marked •` Landport" turn the corner of the road, and his suspiciens being excited, he followed it for some distance. The waggon turned into a road called Burgate-street, and when within a hundred yards of the tollgate Atkins walked ahead and ordered the gate to b 3 shut. When the waggon came up to the gate he asked the two men who were with it if they bad any liquor or tobacco, anti, they replied in the negative. Atkins said he mutt look, and jumpod np into the waggon, and on opening a bale he found it to contain tobacco. He took the men in custody and left them in the parlour of the - tollhouse in charge of the.gate keeper, while he brought the waggon through the gate, but they contrived to get out and run away. Atkins pursued them and succeeded in catching one of the men and took the waggon and tobacco to the Customhouse, where it was lodged in the Queen's warehouse. TIM SKELETON OF A CHILD FOUND IN A GENTLE MAN'S HOUSE —A strange circumstance occurred on Saturday morning in a gentleman's house adjoining Cronkeyshaw, The house is known in the town as `• In dustry House," and belonged to Mr. Edmond Howard, an evensive cotton mauufacturer, who died about six months ago. On Saturday morning, a workman was employed in the servant.'s room, and found it necessary to enter a small closet adjoinin7., a cistern, and to do something between the b ,ards in the closet and the ceiling below. For that par pose he put his hand between the two, when he felt a bit of cotton. He drew it out, and on examination found that it was a piece of cotton rag, and that it contained the nearly decomposed remaids and skele*.on of a child. In quiry was set on fool . , for the purpose of ascertaining to whom it belonged, and who was the person who had put it there. Suspicion fell upon a servant who left the services of Mr. Howard about twelve months ago, named Sarah Cain, about 24 years of age, and she was accordingly ap prehended in the course of the afternoon, by direc?ion of Superintendent Callender, at her sister's at Belfleld, by Police -officer Hepworth. There are strong suspicions that she gays birth to this child about two years ago, and that ever since it has been lying in Mr. Howard's house. Since that time., Cain, has had another dal', which is now about thirteen months' old. She is not married.—Manchester Paper. BOY'S CLOTHING MADE WITH GREAT TASTE, At LEWIS h COMPANY'S. Ramelagh street. POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-YESTERDAY. LIVERPOOL. BEFORE MR. MLNSTIELD. A SWLNDLR.— John Shuttleworth, describel as a clerk, residing in Virgil-street, was brought up by detective officer Patrick, on a charge of having obtained £ll worth of clothes from Mr. John J. Raynor, a tailor, residing in Regent-road. It appeared that in April last the prisoner presented a note to Mr. Raynor, stating that it was written by his brother, a respectable man in business, who resides in Fleetwood, and whom Mr Raynor knew for some years. He gave the clothes, but very recently only he found that the note was not written by the brother of the prisoner. Tho prisoner was remanded for the production of his brother as a witness. A Cuasmettl—Francis Palmer, a resident of Thriderson street, was charged by three policemen and two females with having violently assaulted thaw. The police saw the .prisoner beating a' woman, whom he had down in the street, and when they interfered, he assaulted and kicked them most awfully in the legs. Tie police and the females fully proved the ca4e. The witnesses were cross-examined at length by Mr. Bluek, for the prisoner; but the only thing elicited was. that the prisoner was mad drunk. Some witnesses were produced for the defence, but their evidence did not alter the facts, and the prisoner was fined £5, or in default of psyment three months imprisonment. CRUEL TREATMENT OF LASCA.RS. At the Thames (London) Police Court, en Tuesday, Mr. Walter Pelham, articled clerk to Mr. Fletcher, solicitor, applied to Mr. Yardley f r distress warrants to seize the ship Roehampton, Captain Bred:haw, master, and now lying in St. Katherine Docks. It appeared that the boatswain and four other Lascars assisted in naviga'ing the ship from Sing Tore and Moulmein to the port of London, and they were discharged from the ship on the 10. h instant, and sent to that excellent institution the Strangers' Home, in Limehouse, where it was agreed they should remain until they were transferred to the Bombay Castle, which it WAS originally intended to send to India. The Lascars ware turned out of the Strangers' Home for breach of discipline, and applied to Captain Bradshaw, the master of the Roehampton, for their wages. Their 'ay was refused, although they had been regularly discharged, and accounts re ,dered to them. They sum moned the captain beore Mr. Yardley, on Saturday, and after a long investigation, in the course of which it ap peared they were put in gaal, and imprisoned for twenty eight days in Moulmein, in the Bay of Bengal, Mr Yardley ordered their wages to be paid, and spoke in con demnatory terms of the evidence of the chief mate, and an attempt made to reduce the wages of the Lascars to a greater ext -nt than the justice of the case demanded. Mr. Yardley also said that the captain, in advancing 150 rapees to the serang, had debited him 2s 4d to each teepee; but in calculating the wages, had credited him 2a only fir eaeh rupeP. • That was a manifest injustice, which he would not countenance. At the pre sent time, it was especially the duty of owners and cap tains of British merchant ships to treat the Lascars with kindness and considera'ion, and they ought to have the protection of English law and justice. lie ordered the wages, and 12s c )ets, to be pail in each case. On Monday, Mr. Pelham said the wages had not been paid, and the Lascars were in a state of soarvation, and had not tasted food since Satu:dey last. Mr. Yardley directed that minutes of the order should ha served on the captain, and, if the wages were not pair!, he would issue distress war rants After the disposal of the night charges, on Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Pelham applied for distress warrants, and said the Lascars were lying in the streets, and exhausted for want of food. They would have been starved to death if his principal, Mr. Fletcher, had not advanced the money to purchase a little food. Ho (Mr. Pelham) considered the captain had treated this court with disrespect, for although it was promised they should be sent out in the Bombay Castle, that ship was not going to India. Howland, a police-constable, No 89 H, said he served five orders on Captain Bradshaw on Monday morn ing, and he refused to pay the wages. Mr. Yardley : Are the Lascars here ? Mr. Pe ham : They are in the street. Mr. Yardley: They mast come into court and be sworn to the non-payment of wages. The Lascars were brought into court, and, through the intervention of Id r. Levy, an interpreter, were sworn on the Koran, and declared they had not been paid their wages. The warrants were granted, and Howland immediately proceeded with a broker and his man on board the Roehampton, and put the ship under seizure. She will be sold by public auction on Monday next, unless the wages and all the costs are paid. MRS. GASKELL'S MEMOIRS OF MISS BRONTE. The following letter appears in a Landon cotemporary of yesterday see with some concern a " communicated" notice in your paper of the 2 lst instant, which misrepre sents a gentleman whom no one would wish to troutee with irksome notice, but tvh.se sincerity ought not to be rendered doubtful by any carelessness, misapprthenson, or party-spirit. In that notice Mr. Bronte, of II tworth, is declared to have recently spoken of Mrs. Gaskell's Memoir- of his daughter as the work of an enemy, and of herself as, to say the least, reluctaet to repair mistakes in her narrative. I have no intenttoa of entering on the subject of those, or any other alleged mistakes ; but I think it right to say that I have seen two letters from Mr. Bronte to Mrs. Gaskell, one written soon after the appearance of the Memo:r, and the other five w:eks alter the dare of his alleged com plaints, in both of which the most entire confidence in. and gratitude towards, Mrs. G skell are warmly expressed, it is impossible that the writer of those letters could have, in the interval between them, represented Mrs. Gaskell as an enemy, or attributed to her any want of candour in regard to clrrecting errors of statement. The respective values of Mrs. Gaskell's authorities is quite another question. When I find that, in my own case, scarcely one of Miss BrouL's staternetys about me is altogether tru?, I c•tnnot be surprised at her biographer having befn misled in other cases of more importance. It is a perilous task to write the history of a singularly ineagiastive person, during- the lifetime of catemporaties —as Mrs. Giskell has four,d : and the more mistakes there really are iu the narrative the strontzer is the appeal to our justice that errors injurious to Mrs. Gaskell herself should not be left uurec.ifiel.--I am, &c.. Ambleside, Aug. 24. HARRIET MARTINEAU. Exolosivclyfor CLOTIIING BOYS from 6 to 20.Yeare, LEVI IS & COM' ) A 7 ,17, Ibmnlitzh street. The French government has taken a hint from Lard Campbell's bill. A general razzia is just now being carried on in shops where pictures and engravings are exhibited for sale, and all prints which the nice taste of the police officers consider indscmt are mercilessly seized. Sonic queer mistakes, however, have scoured, the most startling being the seizure of a photographic represeutstion of the Venus de Medici. SPOLLEN.—This notorious character was broueht up, on Monday, before the Capel-street Police-office, Dahlia, and committed for trial on the charge of robbing the Midland Great Weetern Cornpaey of money exceeding £5, on the evening of the 13th of November, 1856—the fatal evening whet unfortunate Little was murdered. When he was arrested, on znaturday evening, by Inspector Ryan, of the detective force, he was, says Saunders'. rows-Letter:—" At tha time in company with his eldest son James; and upon being told the purpose for which he was taken into custody, replied, after consideration, It cannot be helped, but I know nothing of it.' lie appeared, however, when the announcement was made, to have lost a portion of the unflnching; confidence by which his manner was characterised IT in the former occasion, and his sulesequent conduct would appear to justify this impression. Tne son remarked, I snpre•se this will be another three months' job ;' to which Spollen replied, Well, we must only bear it with patience.' Upon being searched, a sum exceeding £lO was found, the surplus of which is supposed to have been the produce of his Fishamble-street exhibition." Areeher account says that the £lO was wale up of the eight seve.reigns found by the police in a drawer in his cottage, covered with particles or earth, and £2 paid him by the company for wages du at the time of his arrest. Be that as it may, he is now in prison ; and we only hope puh'ic justice will not he again defeated, but that sufficient evidence will be forthcoming to warrant a conviction. We suppose "his friend," Mr. Curran, will again have the ' , Leasure of defending him ; if so, he ought to look out in time for Borne innecent party to whom to impute the robbieiy. It admits of no doubt that a robbery was committed ; and, as counsel eseurne a license of being, as Junius describes them, the " indiscriminate defendera'of right or wrong," by. as Bentham added, the "indiscriminate utterance of truth and falsehood," it is:therefore, perfectly allowable for Spolleu's "friend," not only to protest his entire innocence, but to accuse any indifferent and innocent party of the crime. Resides, such an accusation will be com pararivey trivial—a robbery is not just as heinous a crime as murder; and the same stretch of conscience will not be required as was necessary to accuse the unfortunate wife of a guilty intrigue with th e rea l mur d erer, and of con spiring with him to swear away the life of her injured husband--Irish Paper] Mr. Brett : I must beg my learned friend's pardon— what has these l e tt ers t o do with the case now before the court ? Mr Aspinall : If you listen a moment you will hear. That is a statement made for the reason of selling to John Bingham, although at that time he had not called to him on the subject at all. The defendant hid drawn bills on Messrs. Bingham, as against a cargo ; these bills were deposited and endorsed by the defendant in the Borough Bank, and all that was requirel was the acceptance of Messrs Bingham. The bills were sent from the bank to Messrs. Bingham for acceptance, but acceptance was refused, and the bills were sent back to the bank unac cepted. The bank then sent for Mr Doherty, in order to explain the matter, and he made some .exeuse that answered for the time. It would be remembered that the bills were endorsed by Mr. Doherty to the batik, and when the officials of the bank ep ke to Mr. Doherty, and informed him that Messrs. Bingham had refused to accept them, Me. Doherty went to Messrs. Bingham and offered ti em the security of 1,500 barrels of flour by the " Centurion," and the bills of lading for that quan tity, which he ple.iged as against their acceptance of the bills at the bank. Mr. Doherty, it would appear had already pledged the same bill. of lading to Mr. Hubback, bit on the faith of his representations and the bill of lading that he produced to Messrs Bingham, he obtained their acceptance to the bills that were at the Back. This (con tinned the learned counsel) was clearly a false representa tion; because he had first pledged the original bill of lading to Mr. Hubback and then he pledged the duplicate, which he knew was of no value to Messrs. Bingham. He would prove this case to the satisfaction of the Court, and ha imagined there was only one course left for his worship to follow. He would be met on the other side by saying the defendant made a mistake in the bills of lading but that would be a question for a jury and not one for that court for to deci 'e. Another point that no doubt the defendant would rely on was, that there had been a condonement of the offence on the part cf Messrs. Bingham and Co. who had consented to receive the amount (4' they got it) of which they were defrauded. They at the time such offer was made to them, were in a different position from that in which they now stood—they had not then paid the bills, but now they had done so, and. he (Mr. Aspinall) knew of very few gentlemen in Liver pool who would be patriotic enough to forfeit such sums of money —if they could have procured payment —in preference to proceeding to a public criminal prosecution, They were not, however, aware of the facts and circumstances of the case at that time as well as they are now. No doubt also, some discussion would arise regarding technical meanings of the Act of Parliament, and in this respect he cited the case of the Queen versus Danger," in 30 vol. of the " Law Times," and said although the present was like that case, there were essential differences in several of the ingredient parts, and he would therefore call on the court to commit the defendant for trial, and let a higher tribunal decide the case. Mr. John Bingham examined : I am of the firm of John Bingham & Co , corn merchants, Me. Btett here interrupted the examination, and said it would be better to decide the point of law at that stage of the proceedings. He contended that there was no false representation. The bills for the amount were drawn and in the bank, and endorsed by Mr. Doherty before they were presented for acceptance. There was nothing false in that. Mr. Doherty did not obtain bills from Messrs. Bingham—the bills were d^awo and endorsed, and ready for acceptance. He obtained the acceptance on a promise, and that was no offence. The present C 338 was exactly like that just cited, and which had been decided in the court of criminal appeal—there was no appeal from that court, and the court would not stultify itself by hearing a similar case and delivering it otherwise. After some discussion on this legal subject, Mr. Mans field said he would not stop the case at that portion of the proceedings. Mr. Bingham's examination was then pre'eeded with as follows : I remember seeing them two bills (for £1.250 and £1,700) at the office for about a fortnight, and I believe they were endorsed by Mr. Doherty. Sent them back to the Borough Bank unaccepted. Mr. Doherty came to us cm the 13th May this year, and he had these bills with him. When I had gone he had left a memorandum on a piece of paper, and he showed it to me. I have not been able to find that paper. When I saw him he said the Borough Bank would kick up a row if we did not accept the bills, and that he had brought us there securities. He produced two bills of lading by the " Centurion." He produced a bill of exchange also, for £790, but I re jected it as of no value, when ho said it was worth ss. in the pound. We afterwards kept the bill as wel' as the bills of lading. He valued the flour at £2 200, and stated the b'lance of our account for about £l,OOO, and the bill for £7OO, he put down as a collateral security. He asked me and my brother to accept the bills, and offered those things as security. My brother accepted the bills. When I came in the bills of Lading were endorsed. We agreed to accept the bills, and my brother accepted them in my presence. We hive paid them. When I saw the vessel reported on the Ela'e. I never obtained the 1,500 barrels of flour —only fourteen barrels. Cross-examined : The Ehip arrived on the 22nd May. The defendant came to my helve on the day of her arrival —about eight o'clock, but I had teen him before on that day at five o'clock at his office. I went to ask how the bill of lading was a duplicate, or if he had two lots of the same brand ? I saw Corr. his clerk first, and asked him that. I said I heard that Mr. Hubback had a bill of lading for the same 1,500 barrels, and bow that came ? And he said it was a mistake ; that he intended the Indian corn for Hubback, and the flour for us. I left then, tolling him to see and get it arranged, as he was liable to a ail:dual prosecution for obtaining 1720 lf% under false pretences. H e came t o my pr i vate h ous e • that, bat gave no ex pl ana ti on . He sad he was in afi and that he found th e b a l ance o f Hubbell( larger -than ours, and he wished to give us security to w i t hdraw ?n,; claim on the flo ur . R e f use d severa l plans for the Covert!! of our loss. He oMred several. I objected to th ew ' chiefly on the ground that they were not sufficient securitt He offered a quantity of stuff that he said would leave profit. He told me he would give me 2,000 barrels of fl me by the Lady 14% anklin that would leave a balance (11 ?ci about £2OO. I wen t w i t h hi m past Ely ' s door, but ,0 go for the bills. I a gree d t o accepr, Mr. Richardson, brother-in-law, as security. I believe I suggested ite e e went to Mr. Richard son ' s a f terwar d s, an d i t was avatar' that he was to be the security ; but Mr. Richard° refused without =suiting his partners as to his doing I; He was examined in reference to a trausaetion 1 / Duke and B a k er , b ut i t was not very mate' Bought 500 quarters of corn from him on " .. : t 9th ay ; it w a s we i g h e d over to us. He was to transn; £l,OOO to Richardson, f rom A mer i ca, an d he pledged 111 honour it would ba settled, an d I agree d . I knew he wr, e going to America next d a y, an d h e di d go, and came bn and wrote to me to come and sea him as he came back. never got the £l,OOO and then I took out this sumo% To Mr. Aspinall: He never got t h e corn for us. maintained all through that Hubback got the bill of lades by mistake. We had no means of knowing what his transi ts ; tions with Mr. Hubback had been. The affair with IN"; and Baker had nothing to do with this case. It is I !. a true that he sold us 7,992 bushels, or two other quantity" of corn by their other ship. Mr. William Bingham was examined. and gave nearly the same evidence as his brother : I accepted the bills ;e' got the bills of ladi ng , an d h e (M r. D . ) endorsed the m' my presence. To Mr. Brett : He had the bills in his hand at the tab les bat I did not read them particularly. Mr. Joseph Hubbard examined : I had a transactie ° completed with Mr Doherty. I had those two bills of WI from him in a letter, (id ent ifi e d t h em ) one f or £1,500, all one for 2,000 barrels by another vessel. These were e l° to me its securities, and I obtained the flour on these bin' of lading. (Read both inclosed bills and asking for th e acceptance) Cross examined by Mr. Brett : I don't know anythie% about the affair of Duke and Baker. Mr. liichards° ll came to me on behalf of Mr. Bingham, to get something from me. What was it? Mr. Aspinall objected to this. Witness : I saw Mr. Bingham after - on that motif: They wished me to give Mr. Bingham £5OO out of the proceeds of the flour. Mr. Aspinall : And you declined ? I did. Mr. Edward Bel'., the security clerk at the Borate Bank, produced some letters written by Mr Doherty te the Bank. Remembers that Mr. D. brought the billl! the Bank, they w ere en d orse d b y hi m. I remembe r they were sent to Bingham for acceptance and til t % came back afterwards. I f requent l y saw Doherty about that tune. These letters came from him. (letters put P " as above) Cross-examined by Mr. Brett : The bills were passed Mr Doherty's credit before they were sent for acceptance' but I can't say if they were technically discounted. Mr. Aspinall : That's our case. Mr. Brett then addressed his Worship, and contend* that the case was brought into a criminal court instead being one of civil proceedings. He said Mr. Bingham ; must have known f r o m th e b eg i nn i ng t h e w h o l e bear ings of the case. He argued that th e w h ole a ff a i r was trea te ; as a mistake all through ; and if M r. Bi ng h am had trea ted it as a criminal offence, he would not allow Mr. Doherty to go to Americae or would Mr. Doherty come back, and send to him on his return, if he we ll guilty of a criminal offence ? Ile dwelt with strong observations on the whole of the case, and said, after Afr' Bingham had tried all means to get paid for the mistake' but failing to get that, he allowed Mr. Doherty ° proceed to America to get £l,OOO. Not having got the money, he returns, and Mr. Bingham finding that he WO to be in no better condition than any other of the creditors' he turns round and tries to make a criminal offence of The learned counsel said there were bills of lading bel l ship call e d th e A n d rew F orster, t h at was lost, a nd the bills of the Centurion were given in mistake for then; After arg u in g on th e l aw an d f acts of the case, he cape" Mr. Owen Corr, e xam i ne d—l was c l er k to Mr. Dohertyr who was the largest importer of produce in Liverpool: There were a great many bills of lading coming in ana going out daily. The duplicates were put on a file and the originals in my drawer. Many were handed from the drawer daily in the course of business. Between the 9t ll and 13th May there were bills of the Andrew Foster in our office. The ship was lost then, and it was known so , The orig - nal tills were consequently put on the file as not required. Before the bile of the Centurion were handect, out, the Andrew Foster's bill s were ta k en o ff t h e fil e an d put in the drawer. I did not take out the bills that were sent to Mr. Bingham. Mr. Doherty took the AndreW Foster's bills off the file and brought them back to the drawer. There is no bo o k kepo . , showing to w h om bills 0 1 , lading were given. The Centurion was reported as having cleared on the 25th of April ; the passage is made il l from fifteen to thirty five days. To Mr. Aspinall : VPer had three or four bills by the Andrew Foster. The produce was sold in April or May, before we got the bills of lading. The goods were sold to Richardson Brothers, but not, to my knowledge, to Cunliffe, Paton, and Co. ; thinks there were four bills io the drawer, on the 13th of May. Mr. Doherty was not then pledging everything as it came in. That was tell days or a fortnight before he went to America. There were u numbered bills in his possession for twenty-four hours, in Mr. D.'s possession for ten days before he went to America. I believe the bills were not sold to Cunliffe, Patolh and Co. The statement of Mr. D. to the bank on that point, I now believe is not true, but I did not know it at that time. I believe Mr. D was very much pressed for money et teat time. He left for America, and left me a small sure. He was made a bankrupt of, and he came back and sur rendered to it. I knew of the bill of lading to Mr. Hub back, and would know whet it was worth. To Mr. Brett the witness made some explanation regarding the bills of lading This was the case for the defence, when Mr' Aspinall replied on the kart of the prosecution, and con tended that there was no mistake, as suggested, made by the defendant in regard to the bills of lading. Mr. Mane field would not decide so serious a case there He sen t the defendant for trial, but it was agreed to accept of Mr. Richardson's bail in £l,OOO for his appearance. At LEWIS & COMPANY'S, Rrmelagh street, BOYS are CLOTHED from the Ages of 6 to 20 Years; CURIOSI TY REWARDED.—There is a story of an imperial highness waltzing thrice in the same evening wish an English lady at the court of Berlin. She naturally felt, and frankly expressed, herself highly flattered by the compliment. "I did not intend it as a compliment," was the answer. " Then " said the lady, somewhat rebuffed , "your highness must be very fond of dancing." " I detest dancing," was the still unsatisfactory response. Undeterred by her ill-success, our fair countrywoman still prosecuted her inquiries. " then, may I ask, can be your imperial highness's motive for dancing?" " Mad ame," was the exaltel personage's curt reply, " I dance to perspire !"—/dorizing Bast. A DECEITFUL DOCTOR.--In a certain town in Northum berland, a medical gentleman recently hired four lads to pull his cherries. They were to have so much for the job, and "no pickings or stealings." The cherries pulled, the youngsters presented themselves for their Par , and in reply to his inquiries, protested that they had,not "sweetened labour •' with his cherries. The old gentle man was satisfied—patted them on the head—and said they were goad lade, and must have a glass of wine apiece. The your'? rogues were delighted—wink e d, and nodded, and giggled behind the doctor's back—and were as demure as Tabby before Lis feed. In came the tray, bearing four glisses—oae for each. But lo ! a few moments later, and four masses of mashed cherries were scattered over the floor ! The old gentleman must have !miler] cherries is his school-boy days himself.—Gateshead Observer. DITORIAr, PERILS TN A ERICA.—We learn from a gen tlemen of Osatoo,ka that at 12 o'clock on election night, Aug. 3, a lamentable efftir occurred. The editor of The Herald, Mr. 5. M. Brown, with Mr. D. W. Rice. was sitting at the window. At this time Mr. Bowen, who has kept a saloon in the city for the last twelve months, came along, and with a number of others stopped on the steps beneath the win low where Brown and It , ee were sitting. Some one in the crowd said to Mr. Bowen that Mr. Brown wrs in the wicdow above. At this Mr. Bowen commenced cursing Mr. Brown swearing if he came down he would "cut out his hears," " take his life's blood," " stamp him into the earth," and other threats of violence, made with the most fearful and bitte r p ro f an i ty. To all these threats Mr- Brown made no reply. Bowen, getting more exasperated , said " I will head a mob and clear cut The Herald office," and rushed up the stairs, followed by one or two others. Mr. Brown drew a revolver and as Bowen was trying to force open th e d oor , fired, the ball striking the casing at the side of the door. Brown then told him to try the door again at his peril. Bowen made another effort to get in, when Brown fired a second time, the ball passing through a panel of the door, striking Bowen in the breast and l o d g i ng i n t h e right lung. Bowen made his way down stairs, sunk upon the pavement, and in about 20 minutes was a corpse. At LEWIS & COMPANY'S, Rasehigh street, a LOY'S are CLOT ED from the Ages of 6to 20 Yeare.„ COMMITTAL or A LIVERPOOL MERCHANT FOR OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES. IMPORTANT TO MERCHANTS. The police court was crowded to excess yesterday by merchants and others, who were drawn there in order to hear the details of the following case of John Bingham and Co., against John Doherty, who was summoned for having obtained two sums of £1,250, and £1,700 from them by means of false pretences. Mr. J. B, Aspinall, barrister, instructed by Mr. Martin, solicitor, was for the prosecution, and Mr. Brett, instructed by Messrs. Gregory, appeared for the def endant. It may be remembered that the defendant was extensively engaged in the corn trade, and that a short time since he bocame'a bankrupt, ninth to the surprise of the mercantile community of Liverpool. Mr. Aspinall opened the case by stating that he appeared for Messrs. John Bingham and Co., who charged John Do herty with having ob ained money under false pretences, by having procured their acceptance for two large sums of money, namely one for 01,250, and the other for £1,700, by f lsely pretending and uttering to them certain bills of lading, and depositing same with them as valuable security, the defendant well knowing at the same time that such seeurit7, was not valuable, inasmuch as he had previcusly pledged the original bill of lading with Mr. Ilubba-k. It would appear that the defendant had carried on an extensive business in Liverpool and that he was in the habit of doing business in the Borough Bank. It seemed that he had lodged some bills in that bark in reference to some cargoes of corn, and the bank requesting a guarantee, he wrote on the 28;11 of April the following letter to Mr. Smith of that bank: Liverpool, 28th April, 1857. Dear Sir,—On receipt of bill of lading for 7,007 bushels Indian corn, par Southampton, from Messrs. Stern Brothers, Weise give them a guarantee that my acceptance to Mr. John Doherty's drafts for £l,lOO, due as per enclosed advice, will be paid at maturity. The corn is -old to Mr. John Bingham and Co , whose acceptance for the amount will be paid to the bank.—l am, dear sir, ynuri truly, JOHN DOHERTY. J. P. G. Smith, Mg. He also wrote the following let'ers, one dated the same 28th April, and the next the let May, both as follows : Liverpool, 28th April, 1857. Sir,—l have received bill of lading from you for 7,007 bushels of Indian cnin, per Southampton, soli to Niessts. John Bingham and Co., whose acceptance for the amount will psid to the bulk opposi , e to my acceptance for £l,lOO which you have guaranteed.—l am, dear sir, yours truly, JOHN DOHERTY, Borough Bank. J. P. G. Smith, Eq. Liverpool, Ist May,1857. Dear Sir,—On receipt of the undersigned bills of lading from Messrs. Goniseen, and Co , London, please give them a gut yantee that my acerp , ance to Mr. John -Doherty's drat s for .€4,630, due as per enclosed ; advice will be paid at rnatuiity. The coin is sold as at foot, and, on Monday, when the bills of lading are rt , ceived; will hand you drafts on Messrs. Cunliffe, Paton, and Co., and Messrs. Jo!in B:ngliann and Co., for the respective amounts. The bill of lading for law, please hand to Messrs. Trimmer and Grainger, as usual.--I atn, dear rice, yours truly, JOHN DOHERTY. - • 80-one) Bank. £350 Bills of Lading 5,511 bus. Indian corn, per Andrew Foster i £1,350 1368 t, }- Messrs, Cunliff e , 1,546 bus. Indian corn, Paton, & per Uadtrwri;er J 7,992 bus. Indian corn, £1,700 per New World 3 762 bu'. Indian corn, Messrs. John Bingham & Co. b Q per Helen Austin Bin 190 tiercos lard, per John Bright. . £1,550—T. &G. ~150 „ 550 2 9 ,550 )1 £4 600