The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-08-26 00:00:00

BOROUGH SESSIONS.-YESTERDAY,

The general quarter sessions for this borough opened
at 10 o'clock yesterday, in the Sheriff's Court, St.
George's Hall, before Gilbert Henderson, Esq., recorder.
The following gentlemen were sworn as a grand jury:—
Edward Tertius Kearsley, coal merchant, Shaw street,
foreman ; Jos. Armstrong, broker, South Chapel-street ;
Robert Levin Bolton, merchant, Brunswick-street; Jas.
Jenkinson Bibby, merchant, Water-street ; Thos. Boyd,
merchant, Sweeting-street ; Francis Boult, merchant,
Castle-street ; Robert Christie, junior, merchant, Old-
hall-street ; John Carmichael, merchant, Rumford-
street ; Wm. Carson, broker, Sweeting-street ; Richard
Derbyshire, merchant, South John-street ; Thos. Britten
Forwood, merchant, do.; George Glynn, broker, Mary-
land-street; Michael Harnett, broker, Fenwiek-street ;
John Herd, merchant, Brunswick-street ; Richard
Johnson Lockett, merchant, King-street; Charles Mel-
huish, merchant, Cook-street; John Blayds Molyneux
broker, ; Dale-street James Hardy MaCrae, broker, Hae!
kin's-hey ; George Prevost Oxley, merchant, Rumford-
place ; and Thomas Powell, broker, Exchange-alley
North.

The Recorder said : Gentlemen of the grand jury, the
interval since the last sessions has been but short, and
the cases, therefore, for trial are few. Forty—three
names appear on the list, and, perhaps, the most serious
felony is one in which a house was entered in the absence
of the family, and a collection of rare and curious coins,
valued at £2OO, stolen from it. There is another case
in which a warehouse was entered in the night-
time by breaking a pane of glass, and a quantity of
tea stolen. The tea was shortly afterwards found upon
the man, who was stopped and taken into custody by a
vigilant policeman. There is also a charge of stealing
palm oil from the dock quay, but the prisoner has been
so recently committed that the name does not appear in
the printed calendar, and I have not yet seen the
depositions. With these exceptions, the character of
the cases of felony is light, and probably many of the
accused would not have been .sent for trial, had it not
been known that they were persons who had long pur-
sued a course of petty depredation. I may mention one
case, in which two women are charged with ste ling
some shawls. The shawls were not removed from the
shop where the offence is alleged to have taken place,
but they fell on the floor. Nevertheless, if you should
be satisfied that either of the women had the shawls in
her possession, with the intent of stealing them, even a
momentary possession of them will suffice to complete
the offence in point of law. The calendar still indicates
a prevalence of outrages and violence inflicted with
sharp instruments. Many cases in which blood has
been spilt will come before you. No less than fifteen
persons, being more than one-third of the whole number
in the calendar, are charged with unlawfully cutting and
wounding others. Judging by the instances here, the
offence seems to have been confined to drunkards and
the very dregs of society, but it is no less the duty of the
law to search out these offences, and to endeavour to
suppress them, by patient investigation in every case,
and severe punishment of all who are proved to be
offenders. A form of oath will be delivered to you,
which will enable you to perform the duty imposed upon
you by the act of parliament of the lag session, which
requires, that the forem in, or in his absence, some other
member of the grand jury acting on his behalf, shall
administer an oath to all persons appearing to give
evidence before you, and to write his initials on the back
of the indictment against the name of every witness so
sworn and examined.

The grand jury then proceeded to consider their

SERIOUS CHARGE OF CRIMINAL ASSAULT
AGAINST A SHERIFF'S OFFICER.

Yesterday, before Messrs. R. Gladstone and Heywood,
at the police court, a small ill-favoured looking man,
named George Nelson, late a sheriff's officer, was
brought up by detective Sullivan, on a charge of having
committed a criminal assault on a young girl, named
Anne Garrity. Mr. Snowball appeared for the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Bluck defended the prisoner. Mr. Snow-
ball opened the case, by stating that the prisoner was a
person employed at St. George's Hall during the assizes,
as a sheriff's bailiff, and resides in Manchester. On
Monday last, three girls, named Anne Garrity, Fanny
Keneally, and Kate Sullivan, who were in the employ-
ment of Messrs. Cope Brothers, cigar makers, went to
St. George's Hall, about five o'clock in the evening.
The prisoner saw them, and after some conversation, he
asked them if they had ever been up stairs to see the
glass ? They said they never had, and he then asked
them to go up to the refreshment room, and they went.
He gave them sandwiches, and then said he would take
them up separately, as the policeman might object to all
going up at one time. Fanny Keneally went up first
with the prisoner, and came back in a short time, and
Anne Garrity then went up with the prisoner. On
reaching the top, he took her into a room, put his hand
on her mouth, and knocked her down. He then com-
mitted the offence. He offered her 6cl, but she refused
to take it. She subsequently told the other two girls
what had taken place, and the affair got whispered
about at Mr. Cope's, and Mr. Robinson, who manages
that concern, took up the transaction on the part of the
girl, by the directions of Messrs. Cope, who wished to
protect their apprentices. Mr. Robinson went to the
hall and saw the prisoner, and told him the charge,
when he denied that his name was George Nelson, and
said it was another man who committed the offence.
The prisoner also denied to detective officer Sullivan,
that his name was Nelson, and locked himself up in a
room, and changed his clothes. In support of the case,
Mr. Snowball called the prosecutrix, a pretty and
interesting girl, of 13, (very well developed for her age,)
the girl Keneally, Mr. Robinson, and detective Sullivan.
These witnesses corroborated the opening statement in
every particular, and proved all the facts connected with
the case, as detailed by Mr. Snowball. The defence was
ably conducted by Mr. Bluck, who repudiated the
capital charge, and cross-examined the witnesses at
length, and with his usual ability. He contended that
the most that could be made of the case, was a common
assault; and that he could not contend against, in con-
sequence of the evidence. In reply to Mr. Gladstone,
Mr. Robinson said the character of the prosecutrix and
the other girls, was excellent, and they had been in the
employment of Messrs. Cope for two years—that firm
resolved to protect them from insult and indignity.
Mr. Heywood said it was quite right, and highly proper,
on the part of the firm, to protect the young girls. Mr.
Bluck contended that the case must be dealt with as an
assault only. The magistrates, after consulting a short
time, convicted the prisoner of a common assault, and
fined him £5, or in default of payment, two months
imprisonment. The money was not paid at the rising of
the court. [The wife of the prisoner, who is a pretty
young woman, and who held a fine child in her arms,
was present, and cried bitterly all the time.]