The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-02 00:00:00

d an ac

but N(

The plait

e set ur

=M=Ca;:**,,IIMMZN

POLICE COURT

.-YE STE RDAY.

limiinmmmimm..,.!,...„...mMeleu!i*

(BRFORE MR. MANSFIELD.)
SMUGGLING.—Joseph Taylor and Alexander M'Lean
were charged, the former with attempting to smuggle
two and a half pounds of foreign tatteco, and the latter
with attempting to smuggle fourand a half pounds, from
the ship Meridian, arrived from Constantinople. The
officer took the prisoners as they were leaving the ship
with the tobacco concealed on their persons. The
prisoners were fined the value of the property, or in
default of payment, fourteen days' imprisonment.
&mous AFFRAY —James O'Neill, Anne O'Neill, and
Ellen Moran, were charged tinder the following circum-
stances :—Police officer 377 said, about half past eight
o'clock on the previous night he heard a great noise and
disturbance in a passage off Athol•street, and on going
there he saw the male prisoner beating a boy, and on
interfering with him to prevent it, the man turned on
him, struck, kicked, and knocked hire down. Constables
80 and 684 came up, and took the man into custody.
The women then seized on the officers, pulled them by
the legs, and created a great disturbance. A crowd of
some hundred persons collected, and a fearful row
followed, in which the police were pelted with stones ;
but they succeeded in retaining the prisoners. The
man was fined £l, and the females were remanded for
the present.

When this case had been disposed or, the following
persons were put forward on a charge of having assaulted
officers 753. 377, and 684 :—Patrick Donaldson, Wil-
liam M'Sorley, Andrew M`Grcgor, John Cook, and
James Grant. The cons'ables stated that whilst con-
veying the previously convicted prisoners to the station.
the prisoners, who were ringleaders of a crowd of some
hundreds of people, attacked them, and flung stones
and bricks at them One stone struck a woman on the
forehead, and nearly killed her; another struck a
policeman on the neck, and the only wonder was, that
some one was not killed by the showers of stones that
were flung. The nris)ners were swlrn to as the persons
who flung the stones: Mr. Bluck, who defended Cook,
produced a witness who stated that Cook did not throw
any stones ; but one of the officers said the witness was
as bad as the prisoners, and if he could have done so, he
should have taken the witness into custody. Mr. Black
contended that there was no case against his client. Mr.
Mansfield characterised the conduct of the prisoners as
cowardly, and fined them £2 each, or to be imprisoned
for one month.

A FAIR FIGHT !—Turn very able-looking youths,
named Moses Cosgrave and Thomas Hunt, described as
brickmakers, were charged with being drunk and fight-
ing in the brick fields off Vauxhall-road It appeared
from the evidence of constables 688 and 377, that the
prisoners had a dispute, that they got drunk, and then
challenged each other to fight. An immense crowd
collected to see the fight, when the police came up and
put an end to the affray. Mr. Mansfield : Were they
&Tilting a fair tight? Policeman : They were, sir.
Mr. Mansfield : Well, that is something in their favour.
I fine them 5s each for being drunk.
ASSAULT ON THE POLICE —Alexander Cusheran, was
charged with having assaulted police officer 193. The
prisoner was in a public house in Flint-street, where he
created a disturbance, and the police were called in, and
when removing him to the station, he assaulted the com-
plainant. The prisoner was fined £l.

- CHARGE OF ASSAULT against Captain John Jones, and
William Cedyants, the mate of the ship Admiral Boxer.
Mr. Aspinall appeared on behalf of several porters, and
others, whose names will be found below, who charged
the prisoners for having violently smelted them on
Saturday last. The first witness called was inspector
Swain, who said a complaint was made to him, that a
porter named Rohinsun and others, had been assaulted
by the defendants, on board the ship, in the Victoria
Dock, and on going there he spoke with the captain, and
told him the licensed porters had a right to go with
emigrant's luggage on board the ship, if the emigrants
employed them, but the captain refused to let the porters
into the ship with passengers luggage, althoagh witness
saw some of the porters engag dto do so. The witness,
on cross examination by Mr. Almond, who appeared for
the defendants, said the captain told him he had men
of his own to take the things on board ; he did not see
the hat of the captain's broken, nor his coat torn, nor
did he see any one attempt to throw him into the dock,
hut be saw the captain attempt to throw one of the
porters into the dock Henry Robinson stated that he
saw the captain and mate ill use a porter, and
try to fling him into the dock, and he called out, and
then the mate knocked him down and the captain
jumped on him. He gave them no provocation whatever.
William Evans gave evidence as to the assaults com-
mitted on the porters by the captain and the mate.
John Twitter), another porter, proved that the mate and
captain beat and knocked him down and kicked him,
for going on board with the luggage of two females,
by whom he had been employed. A person named
Lunny stated, that he employed a porter to take luggage
on board, and he saw the defendants assault the man.
A porter named Fell said he was taking luggage on
board, when the mate knocked him down twice, and
kicked him several times. He saw the captain assault
another porter. Robert M'Farland stated, that he saw
the prisoners kick and str.ke the last witness. Thomas
Coyle, a porter, proved that the mate knocked him
down and kicked him, when he went on board with
luggage. Mary Austin stated, that she saw the prisoners
knock down and kick Robinson. Ellen Kane proved
that she saw two of the porters kicked up the ladder by
the mate. Thomas Kennedy proved the assault, also.
The witnesses were cross.examined at length by Mr.
Almond, hut the facts were not altered. Mr. 31‘Gowan,
surgeon of the Northern Hospital, was examined, and
said Robinson had received a rupture from the injury,
and it was likely to prove of a permanent nature. To
reply to ME. Almond, the witness said the injury might
have been occasioned by a fall. Mr. Brown, another
surgeon of the Northern dispensary, sail be attended
the man Robinson, and found incipient inflamation of'
the bowels and rupture. In reply to Mr. Mansfield, Mr.
Brown said Robinson would never be able to act as
a porter again. Mr. Almond then addressed the Court.
and called some witnesses to rebut the case. Mr.
Aspinall having replied on behalf of the complainant,
ultimately it was arranged to leave the question of
compensation for the injuries done to Robinson, to Dr.
Long, of Harman street, and Mr. Mansfield—Mr. De
Wolf, on the part of the prisoners, agreeing to pi), any
compensation that might be awarded by those gentle.
men. And so the affair stands at present.
MARKET I" FORMATIONS.—SeveraI Welsh butchers were
summoned before the court, and fined 2s each, for expos.
ing lamb for sale in St. John's market, on stalls appro.
priated for the sale of Welsh mutton. Sarah M‘Mahon,
fishmonger, was fined 5s and costs, for exposing for sale,
in St. John's market, 28 quarts of unwholesome
shrimps.

EmiGRANT RUNNERS.----A man named George Cockerill
was fined 20s and costs for acting as an emigrant runner
without a license.

(BEFORE MR. HAMILTON.)
BEATING B >sea ! —Ellen Smith, was charged with
having swindled Mary Carroll out of 83d, and also with
annoying her whilst in a state of intoxication. It
appeared that some time ago, the prisoner called on the
complainant and said she would tell her fortune. They
had a drop together, and then a pack of cards was pro-
duced, and duly " cut" several times. The prisoner
then wanted her hand " crossed with silver and copper."
This is always an indispensible necessary in the fortune
telling line, and the complainant gave her 81d, and then
the prisoner " cut " the cards, and foretold wonderful
things, and amongst them, that her (Carroll's) husband
was soon to return with bags full of gold. This pre-
diction, like all the others, proved false. The prisoner,
thinking she bad got a gull, went off with the cash,'
and every time she got drunk since, (which was very
frequently,) she annoyed the complainant by wanting
money, and creating a disturbance. On Monday evening
she conducted herself so outrageously, that she was given
into custody. The prisoner was sent to gaol for a week,
for being drunk and disorderly.
A TRICKSTER CAUGIIT.—John Brown, described as a
sailor, was charged with stealing lOs and a bag full of
clothes, from a youth named John Rowl-y, under the
following circumstances :—The buy's father, who resides
in Wolverhampton, had been to Liverpool, when he
procured a ship for the goy, and sent him down with the
money and clothes, as he was going to sea. The boy
met the prisoner, who induced him to go to a house in
Circus street, where he succeeded in getting the money
and clothes, hut the woman of the house (suspecting all
was not right,) gave information to the police, and the
prisoner was arr,,sted. He was sent to gaol for one
month.

ALLEGED PLUNDER OF A Snte—Two men, named
Saver (the chief mate) and Nl`Kenzie (the second mate)
of the American ship South Carolina, were charge
with having stolen a quantity of cotton an sails from
the ship. Mr. Bluck defended APlCenzie. It was
proved that the property had been removed by the
prisoners, and that ~he chief mate got the money for it.
Mr. Bluck contended that his client had acted under the
authority of the chief officer of the ship, and that there
was a custom to give the sweepings, &c,, to the officers.
Mr. Hamilton said the custom was a great mistake, as
the men had no right whatever to such property. The
prisoners were remanded.

THE FEUMOY PEERAGE.—On Monday a committee for
privil, ges of the House of Lords sat to dispose of this case.
—lt may be remembered that some time ago a claim was
made by Lord Fermoy to vote for representative peers for
Ireland, which claim was resisted on the ground that the
barony of Fermoy was not legally constituted, as the
creation was not made in conformity with the provisions of
the Act of Union with Ireland. The matter was argued
before the house, assisted by the common law judges, and
all the judges, with two dissentients, decided against the
validity of the claim. The Lord Chancellor, stating his
agreement with the decision of the majority of the judges,
moved the committee to reject the claim. After some
observations from the Earl of Derby and Lord Campbell,
the claim Was disallowed.