The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-03-23 00:00:00

coltWs- douta

FORTNG A BlLL.—Peter Papist (32), a French-
nian, was placed .t the bar en a charge of having
felonimisly uttered a promissory note for 800 francs,
Witlleintent to defraud. Mr. Damon appeared for the
prosecution. The, prisoner was undefended by diinfisel.
The' -Cirennistanees 'of the
,Case .are as follow :,-1-The
' prisoner had been acquainted with Mr.-Charles,- com-
mission * agent, ,Chapelwalks, for about twelve 'months,
and on the Ith. of November last called upon that
gentleman. who is in the habit .of., negotiating • foreign
bills, and presented to him a bill or note bearing the
signatures of two p€rsons residing in Paris, for the
above-named amount.. Believing'the signatures to be
genuine, Mr. Charles advanced £S on the bill, which he
irrimediately..;rternitted to Paris, • Whence
.he shortly
receive il...,tice.ompanied by .an..intintatian_ that the
-signatures Were forged. fie saw no more or the
prisoner till the 28th of December, when he met. him in
Castle-street,,,44.had him immediately apprehended.
everal wittiessos,were called, Who deposed that they
had 'heard the prisoner state, after 'he was' taken into
custody, that he regretted very much what he had done,
but straitened circumstances, forced him to it. The pri-
soner,read a long and elaborate address to the jury;' it
was, however, rather a history of his life than a 'defence
of his c'ondu'ct, which he'did not deny, hut only-endea-
voured to extenuate by holding out that want compelled
him to have • recourse to that mode of raisiog- money.
His lordship, in summing up,•said that the prisoner had
had opportunities of expressing hiniseif to the jxry. He
cOnsidered him more sinned against than sinning, his
circumstances being such that he had only two allerna-
lives:self-destruction, or, forgery.
,Of two evils he chose
the least. 'After a short consultation the jury returned a
verdict of guilty. , Sentence
:deferred. •,:' ,
A 114:ritterhe.--,=-Caroline Brocklebank, -07) .was
charged,with.the,manslaughter of her mother, Catherine
Smith, on the 28th of December last. Mr. Conway
condtded,.the prosecution..,—The. Prisoner- ..was •ttot
defended by -counsel. ;The prisoner, it appeared, was a
widow, and resiffett iirth her nuither in Boundary-place,
Dl}ke,itreet,7on-the afternoon of thOth of-DgeaMber-,
she cama into :,the house and sent ',heti mother for some
• ham. Oil.. her, return the .;prisoner charged her, with
keeping7it'portion of the money she hind given' her.
They qharrelled, and the' prisoner knocked her Another
(IMR..who fell on the __corner of-the fender, receiving
several cevere wounds arid:coptusions about the head,
and- h,cleep gash over the eye. On recovering a little:from
the effects of the fall; she 'arese and went out, and
tOund several hours after sitting in the, street:iu,,a:
eXhalisred A policeman conveyed:her to the
.vorkhouse, where she died -on the 28ft-of-December.
.The prisoner visited her. on the 24th,. hut the old woman
either could not or would, not speak to her, and when
going away she expresaed a hope that the curse •of
Almighty God might rest upon her mother. In her
dying deposition the deceased distinctly charged the
prisoner with knoeking.her (town, but said she did not
think she would have done it had she not been taking
liquor.—The jury returned a verdict of guilty. Sentence
defeired.
SIOP BREAKING,--James Conley (19) was indicted for
bigg,lariously entering...the shop:of Ann -I‘l‘Ca_hpMersek,
stet on the 21st of ,December, and stealing therefrom
a bottle'of sweets. 'Peighton,proseented, 'hut the
prisoner was'Undefended. The eireunistatices,.as,brou'ght
out-in eviderioe,- are. as follow-i—On the •rnornii+ of. the
214 of Deceinher; the policemen Ott the beat in Mersey-
strekt bad ilia attention attracted- by a noise reseinbliiii
the-breaking of glass. On inli"ceeding in the 'direction
the'hoise, he found a shutter off the window of the shop
of the proseentrix, and a pane broken. He apprehended-
thee prisoner in a passage about ten yards'off, with the
bade in his possession, ,which was swoni to by the
prosecutrix. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and
the: prisoner-Wag sentenced to six Months' imprisonment
with-hard labour. , •

NISI PRIUS COURT. •
(Before Mr. Justice Blackblern:J,
His lordship opened the court at twelve o'clock, and
proceeded to try the
. • ROCHDALE LIBEL CASE: •:: : .•:'
.
In this ease, Mr. Thomas Liresey, a ;retired cotton=
si:tinner.;.ald an alderman of Rochdale, Wa:S the plaintiff;
~-;,nd'the defendant was Mr. Phillipps, •a schoolmaster
aid new slaper correspondent. The cause o, action
arose out of the proceedings. connected with an 'election
of guardians for Rochdale;- in the spring., of 1859. 'At .
that time tae plaintiff was a candidate for the office of
guardian ; and the libel *complained' of appeared in a
handbill, which was circulated in the town.--Mr. Monk,
Q.O , wit whom was Mr. Melluish, appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Bdward James, Q.C., for the defen-
dant. Mt. Monk said the plaintiff *as a gentleman who
had devotel much of his time and attention to the pub-
lie affairs ef Rochdale, and had filled, with the single.,
exception of that of ',Mayor, all the, offices of public:
importance, in the town. Some time previous to the
election it 1859, Mr, Roberts.(of the .firm of Reigate
and Robens),' who had previously been clerk to tile
guardians, was appointed auditor of accounts to that
board, his partner *Mr. Helgate, succeeding him as clerk
to•thc guardians: In this affair it was alleged Mr. Live-
sey's inteut was paramount; and it was 'said that the
arrangement had been made by him fora,peenniary,pur-
pose. Th: allegation .was repeated, in order to dannige.
the plaintiff at the election of guardians, that "he
and his cew "' had sacrificed the public interests for
personal ggrandisement. The libel stated that the
party had r,:ceived bribes during the year, and said that
'MASTER PORTERAGE COMMITTEE. ' ' Mr. Liveser had been openly charged with bribery, and
The "prOeeedings of .this committee were neit'read ~* • had not chted to go to trial: This was the libel col-n-
-and, on the motion of Mr. Rounthwaite,.seconded by ' plained of, and Mr. Livesey was: compelled to take pro*-',
Mr. Segar, the proceedings were confirmed. ceedings tc clear his character. Ile did not. wish to
•• ,
••• , 1 -COMMUNIcATIONS TO TIIR‘ BOARD; i ri i ,' ~- put 'none) in his pocket, and, if he did so, the prospect
A letter was read from her Majesty's customs, stating!, , of receivirf. any from* the defendant, was anything but
that this board had approved of? the transit sheds good. hieed, he had offered to withdraw c± record
situated on the north bide of the Wellington Dock and if the libe) was:‘publicly retracted, but that offer was
east quay of the Huskisson Dock. * : I rejected. Fiven now, however, lie was willing to accept
A letter was read from/ Mr. Charles. Mason, the such a vodict merely as would -reimburse his costs in
Secretary of thee Birkenhead Railway Company, stating . the case.-
that the direetors;of.the company were making arrange- The evilence for the plaintiff was then proceeded
ments at Birkenhead, before the Great Pleat was opened with, but tie' case possessed very few features of interest.
for a more,expeditieus and economical method of Ship, Afr. H. ',Nicholson, a witness- for the plaintiff, was
ping coal from railway trucks info*, vessels., He; wished! severely c-oss,examined, by Mr. james as to ,his. conduct
to know whether it would* be convenient for tb..e,sub- in the nutter of the libel. Had heard of the removal •
comutittae of the board appointed to receive the coal of the reprters' table in the guardians' board-room, and

LOcIi.ETT said that the whole. question had been
carefully considered by the committee, and they came
to the conclusion that at-present they could 'only recom-
mend an increase in oiie case.

Mr? EVAils 'obj etted superannuationto the allowance,
and the donation of 25 • recommended.,

After same genera' debate,, the were
confirmed.