The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-06-10 00:00:00

POLICE COURT

-iESTERD&Y.

(BEFORE MR. STITT.)

ROBUING THE ROBBER. —A young man named John
Harburn, was charged with having robbed a girl of
£6 l Os, and also with having assaulted police constable
No. 667. It appeared from the evidence that on Friday
night the woman who accused the prisoner had robbed
a man in Preston-street of £6 lOs in gold, and that she
escaped into a house where the prisoner was stopping.
Ile, on ascertaining that she had the money, set about
robbing her, which he succeeded in doing, and then
keaped into Shaw Hill-street, where, on being given
into custody, he assaulted the officer. The man who
owned the money had left town on Saturday. The
prisoner was discharged from the offence of robbery,
but fined £s for the assault on the constable.
A RUFFIANLY BOATMAN.—A boatman, named Richard
Armond, was charged by a young sailor named John
Kane, with having knocked him down near the Toxteth
slip, and robbed him of a ten dollar gold piece. It
appeared that the complainant had arrived in a ship on
Saturday night, and that the vessel anchored in the
Sloyne. The prisoner, with the other men, came
alongside in a boat and offered to take any of the crew
ashore for 2s. The complainant agreed to go, hut
before arriving at the slip, the prisoner knocked him
down in the boat and robbed him of the money, assisted
by the two others, who got away. After he had been
put ashore the complainant gave information to the
police, and the prisoner was arrested from description.
While the robbery was being perpetrated the prisoner and
the other men threatened to fling the complainant into the
river, if he made any alarm. The prisoner, in the most
audacious manner, denied the charge, and defied the
complainant to identify him. The complainant swore
positively to the identity of the prisoner, and the police-

.n said he at once arrested the prisoner, from the

correct description given of him by Kane• Mr. Clough
said the other two persons were well known to the
police, and he asked for a remand, in order to give the
officers an opportunity of taking them. He said the
boatmen, generally, were the greatest set of ruffians in
or about Liverpool. The prisoner was remanded.

CHARGE OF FORGERY AND LARCENY.—SamueI Porter,
late in the employment of Mr. James Griffin, game
dealer and butter factor, St. John's market, was charged
with having forged an endorsement on a seven days' bill
for £5 10s 10d, and also with stealing the said bill and
obtaining the amount. Mr. Almond appeared for the
prosecution, and from his statement, it appeared that
Mr. Griffin could not read or write, and that he
employed the prisoner to transact his business in that
way. On the 28th of April, Mr. Griffin got a seven day
bill, at Messrs. Barneds', for £5 lOs 10d, in
favour of Alexander Duff, of Glasgow, to whom he
was indebted. He gave the bill to the prisoner, to
forward to Glasgow, but it appeared that instead of
doing so, be forged the endorsement of Duff on it, and
made it specially payable to one Adam Smith, of St.
John's Market. On the 29th of April, he took the bill
to Messrs. Franklin's, bullian and exchange office,
Castle-street, and got the bill discounted there, and put
the proceeds in his pocket. The non-arrival of the bill
was not discovered for some time, and when it aas
offered in London, the payment was stopped. He, Mr.
Almond should proceed both for the forgery and the
larceny. He then called Mr. Griffin, who confirmed
the opening statement, and said he was in the habit of
sending seven day bills to Mr. Duff revery Monday
morning, for game that lie might have had during the
week. On the day in question, he asked the prisoner
how much was due to Mr. Duff? The prisoner replied,
£5 lOs 10d, and then the witness went and got the bill
for that amount. He, with his son, had however, since
discovered, that only li lOs 10d was the balance due to
Mr. Doff. Mr. John Royle, the cashier of Messrs.
Franklin's, Castle-street, stated that on the 29th of April
the prisoner called with the bill. lle had known him
before, and had some half-dozen transactions with him
previously. The bill now produced is the largest
amount he had transacted with the prisoner. He should
not have discounted it for him, if he had not known
him. The name, " Alexander Duff," was on the bill
when the prisoner brought it, and the prisoner signed
the name " John Smith " on it, in presence of witness.
John &nith was the special payer of the bill, and wit-
ness would not have taken it from the prisoner, bad be
not known him before. Mr. Almond : What did you
charge him for discounting this seven day bill ? Wit-
ness : Why should I answer you ? Mr. Wybergh : But
you ought to answer him. Mr. Almond : Yes, for I
have a great fancy to know these things. Witness : I
charged him 2s, and gave him the difference in cash.
The bill was stopped when sent to London. Detective
Officer Sullivan said he arrested the prisoner on the
charge on Sunday morning, and when he told him what
it was for, the prisoner said, " I did not think Mr.
Griffin would charge me for that, as I settled the matter
with Mr. Franklin," and he then produced two receipts,
which the witness handed in. The prisoner refused to
say any thing in reply to the charge, and he was fully
committed for trial.

CHARGE OF EMR E ZZLEMENT.—Richard Radcliffe, a
young man, late in the employment of Mr. J. 0. Dover,
corn merchant, Manchester, who had been remanded on
a charge of embezzling £39 belonging to his employer,

was brought up by inspector Murphy of the deieoiive
police. The details of this case appeared in our columns
a few days ago, and the inspector now said he had not
been able to produce the additional evidence in time,
and he had, therefore, to apply for a remand. Mr.
Dauson appeared for the prisoner, and said he had no
objection to a remand. He asked if his Worship would
accept of bail? but the magistrate declined to do so in
the present stage of the proceedings. The prisoner was
then remanded.

BEFORE MESSRS. STITT AND BENN

ASSAULT ON A FEINIALE.—JANE SLATER V. CAPTAIN
JOHN POWER.—The parties in this case are well known
to the readers of the public papers, for their romantic
adventures, the details of Nshich have transpired in our
Police and County Courts, and it would seem that their
love of notoriety is not yet extinguished. Yesterday,
the lady appeared to charge Captain Power for
having again assaulted her, and, as may be imagined,
the case excited some interest. Mr. Campbell appeared
for Miss Slater (who was dressed in first rate style), and
Mr. Block defended Captain Power. Mr. Campbell
opened the case by referring to former transactions, but
this was objected to Mr. 13luelc, and the facts of tha
present case were stated by Mr. Campbell, and sworn to
by Miss Slater, as follows ;---On Thursday last, about
one o'clock, she was proceeding to the Post•office, to
post an important letter for her mamma, and when at
the end of Hanover•street, near the Post-office, the
defendant came up to, and spat twice in her face, tore
her bonnet and veil off, and snapped the letter, which
he has since kept, and she could not get it back, although
she wished above all things to have that letter, as it was
of consequence Co her mamma. He also kicked her, and
swore he would murder her. She was afraid of her life,
and she wanted protection from him, as she could not
walk the streets without being insulted and assaulted by
him. She was cross-examined by Mr. Block, but her
direct evidence was not shaken. For the defence, Mr.
Block produced the master of a vessel, who said he was
with Captain Power from ttirelve to one o'clock on the
day in question. There was a third person (not now
present) with them, and they were in the neighbourhood
of the Post-office, and saw Miss Slater there • he (the
witness) had never seen her before, but he hadl read of
their affairs in the papers. Captain Power pointed her
out to witness, and said, " there's the lady herself."
That was bi.fore she came up to them, and when she
did come up, she laughed in the captain's face, to
aggravate him. The witness swore that Captain Power
did not, whilst he was with him, touch the girl at all.
The captain, the witness, and the third man went into
a public house at the corner, and after having some
drink there, parted, and the captain went to the school,
where he teaches navigation, in Park-lane, The witness
positively denied the statement of the complainant, so
far as he saw, and the captain declared that he did not
touch her. A person who happened to be in court, on
other business, said he saw part of the transaction ; he
did not see the first of it, but he saw a crowd of persons,

and the parties in it ; he saw them " clawing" at each
other, and he saw the captain's hands extremely close,
if not in actual contact with, the complainant's
bonnet and veil on the left side of her head.
He (the witness), was then shoved along by
the crowd, and went on without waiting to see any
more. There were two policemen round the Post-office
corner at the time : it was rather after one o'clock.
Captain Power said he had witnesses to prove that he
was at the school at one o'clock. The magistrates said
they had no doubt about the assault, and fined Captain
Power £1 and costs. The fine was at once paid. Mr.
Block said it was all spire and ill-feeling on the part of
Miss Slater. This the lady denied, and said if she had
an ill- fteiing against him she would have put the County
Court verdict for £4O against him, but as yet she had
not done so. The case then terminated—for the
present.
Suspicrous.—John 'ltus was brought up by detec-
tives Povey and M'Culloch on the following charge :
It appeared that some night in the month of Feb-
ruary last a Mr. Edward Clough, a wholesale
butcher, was robbed of notes to the amount of
£76 in Blake-street, but no account of the money
was heard of until Saturday night, when the
prisoner, who was stated to be the companion of a
returned convict named Maguire, changed a £lO note in
the Glasgow Arms Hotel, Waterloo-road. This note
turned out to be one of those stolen from Mr. Clough.
The prisoner said he got the note in the way of business.
Mr. Clough, the police superintendent, recounted a
catalogue of transactions of a thievish description, in
which he alleged the prisoner had been engaged. Mr.
Hughes, who appeared for the defence, urged that there
was no case against his client at present. He was
discharged, and Mr. Hughes demanded the restoration
of the money. Mr. Clough (superintendent) said he
would not give up the money, and he trusted the owner
would indemnify the police for any action that might be