The Express.
London, England, 1862-12-05 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 5, 1862.

secood class certi*c•t•. This was ten yean wiser, sod he
had been living on the kindness of • sister-in-law. The
court felt pleasure is discharging him from this his only
debt, and thereby relieving him from a m.nt unjust perse-
cution. (This decision was received with applause by •
crowded wart.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
BI St 8111110ND8 AND WHITE.

• The bankrupts werewarehousemen, of eannonetreet I
West. This was the sitting for discharge. Their liabili-
ties are 5,6001. ; assets estimated at about 2,8001.
Mr. Reed, solicitor, appeared for the assignees ; Mr.
Linklater and Mr. Lawrence for the bankrupts.
The bankrupts having been examined,
His Holum said that it a trader bad no capital whatever,
his ,osition not being known to three with whom he was
dealing, and he went on buying large quantities of goods,
having nothing to fall back upon, it might reasonably be
said that the necessary inference was that be bad contracted
debts without probable ground of expectation of being able
to pay them. Here the cue wu quite different, for the
bankrupts swore that they believed themselves to be sol-
vent at the time the new debts were contracted ; and the
fact of their having made a composition, sod being compa-
ratively without capital, must have been known to the
creditors pee:ally. The orders of discharge would be
granted.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME OIRCIIIT.—MAIDsToNE, Dic. t
(Before Mr. Justice Ryles.)

John Armstrong, 44, was indicted for bigamy.
Mr. Barrow prosecuted. The prisoner was defended by
Mr. Addison.
It appeared that the prisoner had been in the army end
Nerved in the Crimea, and was discharged with a pension.
He married his first wife in July, 1857, at Beltran, is the
county of Kildare ; and be married the second wife at Chat-
ham, on the 10th of August in the present year.
Hannah Howe, the second wife, a comely-looking little
woman, deposed that she kept a lodging-house at Chatham,
and the prisoner was introduced to her at the oorrmence-
meat of the present year, and soon afterwards be paid his ad-
dramas to her. He represented that he was a widower, and said
that his wife had died at Wolverhampton, and that upon her
death-bed she exacted tram him a promise that he would not
marry again until six months had expired. (A laugh.) She
inquired of him when that time would arrive, and he told
her on the 10th of August, and on that day they were
married. (A laugh.) A very short time after the marriage
she saw a letter that had been written by the first wife,
and she asked the prisoner whether it was true that he bad
a wife living, and he mid it was not, and she then told him
that she would not live with him any more until the
matter was cleared up. The prisoner, upon this, packed up
his things and left the house, and shortly afterwards she
ascertained that he had a wife living at Wolverhamptor,
and the prisoner was taken into custody. It was proved in
the course of the cane, that the witness had been in the
receipt of a pension, on account of her husband having been
killed in the Indian mutiny, but the pension bad been with-
drawn by the government, in accordance with the usual
custom, upon her marriage.
The jury returned a verdict of (hilly, and the prisoner
was sentenced to four months' hard labour.

The greater portion of the remainder of the day was occu.
pied in disposing of cases the details of which were entirely
unfit for publication.
Alfred Burr Lurk, Themes Stevens, George Allehin,
Joseph Okey, Stephen Burgess, John Oatt, and Joseph Clip-
son, the seven men who were tried on Wednesday for the
manslaughter of the gamekeeper and acquitted, and who
afterwards pleaded guilty to a charge of night poaching
arising out of the same transaction, were then placed at the
bar to receive judgment.
The learned Judge, addressing them, said that they bad
pleaded guilty to the offence of being out at night armed
with guns in pursuit of game, sod that the statute which
made this an offence was a most salutary one the circum-
stances of the present case proved most clearly. One man
had lost his life, and another had stood in the position of
being liable to have his life also taken • and this was the
result of the offence to which they hid pleaded guilty.
The jury bad acquitted them upon the charge of mar, -
slaughter, and he should not permit that charge to have
any effect upon his mind ; but in the sentences he was about
to pronounce he should endeavour to deal with them accord-
ing to the share that each of them eared to have taken
in the transaction to which they had pleaded guilty. He
then sentenced Luck and Bargees, who, he said, appeared to
have been the original projectors of the expedition, to be im-
prisoned and kept to hard labour for twelve, and the others
for four months each.
As the prisoner Luck left the dock he declared with great
earnestness that he was not the man who shot the
deceased.
Major Murton, the farmer who had been convicted of
the manslaughter of his wife, was next brought up, and he
handed up a written paper to his lordship when he was
placed at the bar.
Mr. Justice Ityles, addressing the prisoner, said that
he had been very properly convicted of the offence
of manslaughter, and he bad delayed passing Ben.
tense lest the indignation that must almost naturally
be excited by the circumstances under which the
offence was committed should interfere with
the proper administration of justice. If he bad intended to
inflict serious mischief upon his wife his offence would
have been murder, and he would undoubtedly have been
left for execution. He did not believe that he intended to
canes serious mischief to his wife when he assaulted her,
but still his offence amounted to manslaughter, and man-
slaughter of an aggravated character, for which he must
pass a sentence of penal servitude. (The prisoner hers ex-
claimed. " I hope not, my lord ; pray have mercy.") Such
a punishment was no doubt a very serious one to a man sato,
he saw, had filled the offices of churchwarden and overseer,
and had occupied a respectable position ; but his duty to
the public left him no alternative but to order him to be
kept in penal servitude for three years.
Thin concluded the business of the swum

OXFORD DIRCIIIT.—SrAvrosp, Dact.
(adore Mr. Justice Mellor.)
THZ MURDER NEAR WOLVERRAMTON.
Jean Watts, William Henske n', Houma Snouts, and
Mars Dawning, found guilty OD the prevrowi day of the
rnarslaughter of Henry Swuniertoo, were brought op to
receive sentence. Watts, on being asked if he wished to
ny anything, made a statement which directly negatived
part of the evidence of the witness Kelsey. Sentences :
Watts, nine years penal servitude ; Heoshaw, 15 months'
hard labour ; Simms and Downing, six years' penal servi-
tude each.

NORTHERN CIRCIIIT.—LivERrooL, Du`. 4,
In his charge to the grand jury Mr. Commissioner Gur-
ney (Recorder of London), who takes charge of the crown
business, in place of Mr. Baron Wilde, said that he had
been much struck with the absence from the calendar of
those particular crimes which one might have expected to
be produced by considerable want and poverty prevai big in
the district. Their absence was only an additional proof of
the admirable conduct of that portion of the population now
in a state of suffering. They certainly did not seem in any
way to have contributed to the increase of the calendar.

result of certain contemplated proceedinp in parliament.
In the meantime a person whom they had formerly em-
ployed as secretary and collector. was going about to medical
meu og for subscriptions to recoup them for 10111eS in legal
ings, and also to pay the expenses which would
attend the introduction into parliament of a bill which, if
carried, would be more offs dive than the existing act. Now
' it was quite true that be and Dr. Ladd had been largely
out of pocket by incurring legal expenses beyond the
amount of subari tions in hand ; it was also true that
they were engaged in promoting a bill which they hoped
would be carried next session ; but it was not true that
they had authorised the individual alluded to (who was no
longer in their service) or any other person to collect sub-
scriptions, or make any appeal to the profession or to the
public, either to compensate them for their losses or to aid
them in further proceedings. Mr. Levies produced three
receipts which bad been given by the person alluded to for
contributions, which he said he collected by authority of
IMr. Levies. One of these was made out upon one of the
printed forms of the association and signed "For J. Levies."
Mr. Hall said if the facts stated could be proved the man
might be indicted for forgery and obtaining money by
false pretences.
Mr. Levies hoped the publication of his statement would
put a stop to the system of fraud.