The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-23 00:00:00

AN UNEXPLAINED FRACAS

Some interest was manifest at the Police Court yester-
day, by certain parties who attended to hear the details
of a case that came before Messrs. Cropper and Smith,
in which Mr. Charles Chilcott, of Rasnett-street, was
the complainant, and a Mr. Charles Pollard, described
as a gentleman, residing some distance from Chester,
was the defendant. The defendant was a powerfully
sized man, and was brought up on a warrant. Mr.
Blackburst, who appeared for the complainant, stated
that last Friday night week, about one o'clock, the
defendant called at Mr. Chilcott's house, created a
disturhanee, struck the complainant, and threatened to
take his life. Mr. Smith : What sort of a house is it ?
Mr. Blackhu-st : A private house. Mr. Smith : Were
the parties acquainted before ? Mr. Blackherst : Yes,
they were acquainted before, and although Mr. Chilcott
has been very badly used, yet he only wishes to call on
the defendant to enter into sureties to keep the peace
Mr. Chilcott was then sworn, and said : At one o'clock
on the night in question the prisoner ku ►eked at my
door, which I opened myself; there were two men as
big as himself along with him ; he rushed in and struck
me violently, and then ran up to my private apartment,
where some friends were assembled, and created a
disturbance. Mr. Blaeliburst : Did he threaten to take
your life on that occasion ? Complainant : He did, not
only on this but on fifty other occasions. Mr. Btackhurst :
Are you afraid of your life of him ► Complainant:
am, because I am a cripple in one of my bands, and
cannot use it. Mr. Blackhurst : And therefore you
cannot protect yourself ? Complainant : I cannot. Mr.
Smith : Was he sober at the time? Complainant: He was
not drunk. Mr. Cropper : Prisoner, what have you to
say to this charge ? Prisoner : I admit I went into the
house ; it is a common gambling house. Mr. Plack-
burst : I object to this Prisoner : It is a common
gambling house, and a friend of mine lost a great deal
of money there. Mr. Blackhurst : I totally deny that it
is a gambling house. If it is. let it come before the
court in a proper way, and not by this scandalously false
assertion. Here Mr. Goodier, an attorney (who had
previously sent a note from where he sat to the prisoner
in the dock) jumped up. and said in an excited manner,
I appear for the prisoner. Mr. Blackhurst : I object to
you appearing for the prisoner, in this way; you wrote
a note to him in the dock, atter lie had commenced his
own defence. He had undertaken to conduct his own
case, and it is not professional for an attorney to send a
note to a person, and ask to be employed in this way,
and therefore I object to it. Mr. Goodier i Lord Camp-
bell has decided--- Mr. Blackhurst : I don't care
about Lord Campbell—sit down, sir. (Laughter.) Mr.
Goodier: No, I won't, sir. (Renewed laughter.) Mr.
Wybergh (to the prisoner) : Have you retained this
gentleman ? Prisoner: Yost now I have, but not
before. This seemed to settle the legal question of
a retainer Mr. Goodier then drew himself up under
the witr.ess box, where the witness (Chilcott) stood, and
the contrast between the two men's appearance caused
an involuntary shout of laughter. Mr. Chilcott is a
powerful and well made man, the learned attorcey
being very small—the contrast resembled a tomtit
and an eagle—and caused more laughter. Mr.
Goodier (to witness) : How many glasses did you drink
before one o'clock that morning? Witness : None, at all,
I never drank a drop the whole week. Mr. Goodier:
What did the prisoner say when lie came into your
house ? Witness :He said, you b—y thief I will have
your life. Mr. Goodier: He did'nt kill you, did he?
Witness: No, for you may see I am here, if you can
look up so far. (Laughter.) Mr. Goodier : Do you allow
gambling in your house? Mr. Blaokhurst : I object to
this—if the learned advoeate has any thing to say about
gambling in the house, let him bring it forward in a proper
manner, and we will repel it. Mr Goodier: Hah! Mr.
Blackhurst ; Hah ! hah ! go on young gentleman.
(Laughter.) Mr. Goodier proceeded to cross-examine
the witness, who said, I am not aware that there was
any one in the house that the defendant wanted to see.
I have known the prisoner for a long time. I did not
know the two men who were v%itli him. I never spoke
to them except when I was introduced in Wles, to one
of them who dined where I dined, and the prisoner
introduced me. Mr. Goodier: How many stone do you
Witness : I should like to know how many uo

weigh

weigh (loud laughter) or your client ? Mr

Goo-diTer

- - -
You weigh fourteen stone ? Witness : That's more
than you will ever weigh I know (renewed laughter);
bow much does your client weigh? Mr. Goodier : One
of your hands is crippled ? Witness : Yes for the last
twelve months. Prisoner : Oh ! that's from fighting.
Witness : Yes, that's right enough, it's from Sghting
but if I had the use of it, such blackguards as you would
not insult me. It was then agreed to bind the prisoner
over in his own recognizance (Mr. Chilcott agreeing) in
£5O to keep the peace, and having entered into the bond
he was discharged.

POLICE COURT

YESTER DAY

(BEFORE MR. E. CROPPER
AN UNFORTUNATE —A pretty-looking female, rattled
Sarah Jones, was brought up by detective officer Marks,
who said she was handed over to him by Mr. B ,ntley,
bookseller, of Shaw's-brow, on suspicion of having stolen
three prayer-books, which she offered for sale. On en-
quiry he found that the hooks had been stolen from a pew
in the Rev. Dr. Raffles chapel, on Sunday evening, along
with two other hooks, and it was shown that the girl was
in the pew on that evening. It was proved also by a lady
named Tongue, that the books belonged to her, and had
been stolen out of the pew in question. Marks said the
unfortunate prisoner was only 18 years of age ; she had
been married to a carpenter, who was lost in the ship
Shooting Stara She had come from the West of England,
and he believed she was in a starving state. She was
remanded.

STREET ROBBERY.—Constable Lynch, 142, brought up
several men and women, who were charged with
being concerned in a street robbery committed on a
man named Abraham Canan, who resides in Clark-street,
in the Park. The prosecutor was passing along Vauxhall
Road, at nearly twelve o'clock on Monday night, when he
was attacked by several men ar►d women who knocked him
down and robbed him of about £4 104. and his watch.
The only person in the batch of prisoners who could be
identified was a woman named Mary Gilligan, and she
ran off with the watch, but was caught by the constable.
The money was not found. Gilligan was sent to gaol for
two months ; the others were discharged. The watch
was recovered, and restored to the owner.
AN IMPUDENT FELLow.—John Mathewson was charged
with having gone into the shop of Mr, Hollsworth,
Scotland-place, and stealing three caps. The prisoner
and another fellow went into the shop ; the other put a
cap on his head and ran off with it ; the prisoner put three
caps under his coat, when the prosecutor went round the
counter and seized him. The prisoner was committed for
a month.

DARK DEEDS.—Two blacks named Charles Sands and
John Gardiner were charged with having stabbed a
brother "darkey," who is at present in the Northern Hos-
pital in rather a serious state. The parties were iu the
public house of Mr. Charters, Vauxhall-road, when a
dispute arose about a Banjo, and in the course of the
description the injured man was stabbed. The prisoners
were remanded.

VioT,ENT ASSAULT.—Silvester Burns, a shoemaker, whose
wife keeps a provision shop in Preston-stret, was charged
by her with "smashing her nose." The prisoner came
home on the previous night, and, as the woman alleged,
he kicked her in the nose, and " broke it in two." This
was fully proved by other evidence, and the prisoner was
committed for two months, with hard labour.

(BEFORE MR. BENN.)
INTERESTING TO LODGING. HOUSE KEEP HRS. —MF.
Tyndall, solicitor to the Board of Trade, appeared on
behalf of a sailor named John M'Namara, who summoned
a boarding-house keeper named John Reece, for having
detained his clothes. The case was brought under the
336th section of the Merchant Seamen's Shipping Act,
which inflicted a penalty of £lO for detaining clothes
belonging to a mariner, provided there was no legal claim
on the same. From the evidence given in support of the
case, it appeared that defendant went on board a ship, as
she arrived in the river, and by the administration of some
rum, induced the complainant to go and lodge at his
house. The complainant did not like the place, and he
went to Mr. Carpenter's, where he had previously lodged
for some years, and told him to draw his money at the
Sailor's Home, and pay Reece. This, Mr. Carpenter did,
bnt subsequently, the defendant refused to give up com-
plainant's clothes, and alleging that there was more
money due, although Mr, Carpenter had paid him all his
demand, vt hich was considered too large. It was decided
by the magistrate to fine the defendant 109, and an order
was also made to give up the clothe=, the complainant
paying is fqr washing, alleged to be due.

EARTHQUAIcH.—On Tuesday morning, Perth was visited
by a slight shock of eattbquake. Many were roused out of
sleep by it; but those really awake only understood fully
the real cause of the disturbance.
Ir&LIAN RAILWAYB.—The negotiations respecting the
junction between the railways of Piedmont and Lombardy
have terminated in an arrangement by which the Novara
line is to be extended to the Po. A treaty to that effect has
been passed with Messrs. Brassy. and Co.—Galignani.
ENGLISH PATENTS.—The following patents, amongst
others, were sealed during the week ending July 19 :
James Jackson, of Manchester, blind manufacturer, for
an improved apparatus for retaining and releasing cords
of Venetian blinds, or cords, bands, or chains employed
for other purposes: dated Jan. 17, 1856.—William W.
Squires, of Liverpool, doctor in medicine, for improve-
ments in preventing the bursting of pipes and tubes for
conveying liquids : dated Jan. 17,1856.—Charles Freder-
ick nts in the ick Claus, of Latchfird, Cheshire, chemist, for improve-
preparation of hides or skins, also applicable
to the preparation of the entrails of animals . dated Jan.
30, 1866.—Thomas Bird, of Manchester, engineer, and
Thomas Rose, of the same place, engineer, for certain
improvements in castors : dated March 18, 1856.
Charles Bothwell, of the Castle Ironworks, Stalybridge,
for improvements in self acting mules : dated Jan. 24,
IB36.—William Henry Lancaster and ,Tastes Smith, both
of Liverpool, for improved arrangements for the
application of gas and atmospheric air to the generation
of heat in furnaces or other sues, and the consumption
of smoke : dated Jan. 29, 1856.

THE BOROUGH QUARTER SESSIONS

(BEFORE G. HFNDERSON, ESQ THE REC)RDEII.)
The following prisoners have been tried, and received the
following sentences at these Sessions.

William Thompson,

of eealiog a blank

other ar

a sailor, was found guilty
'tides, the property of Mr.

Charles Chalk. Six months'
John Jones, aged. 20, a painter, was sentenced to six
months' irnrrisonment, for stealing a jacket, the property of
Thomas Harvey.

Frederick Bennion, aged 27, a sawyer, was charged with
stealing £35, a cash box, and a bunch of keys, the property
of Charles Wells. The prisoner was fund guilty, and
sentenced to five ',care penal servitude.
Charles Warburton, aged 13, was sentenced to fifteen
months' imprisonment, for stealing a pair of boots, the pro-
perty of Charles Btowley.

Catherine Rooney, aged 22, was found guilty of stealing
£7O and a gold watch chain, the property of Charles Wendt.
She was sentenced to five years' penal servitude.
pairs
of
boots,
Henry M`Carthy, aged 27, a boot makter:Nev pr
a s sentencedto
six month's imprisonment, for stealing he
and other articles, the prope•ty of Emanuel Lethbridge.
John Maguire, aged 23, a labourer, was sentenced to

eighteen months imp..isoninent for stealing a portmoniaand-
papers belonging to Sarah Thompson.
Daniel Sheehan, aged 31, a blockmaker, was committed for

of D. A. Ed scan

he property

Michael Sweeney,
.aged 20, a tailor, was committed for
twelve months for stealing a pair of boots, the property of
Elizabeth Davis:

atlierine Connolly, aged 35, a charwoman, ten months
imprisonment for stealing sugar, the property of Robert
_

Lamont

:bad Biggins,

aged 18, labourer, fur stealing a silver
articles, the property of W. G.

fork, spoons, and other
Lockett. Ten months' imprisonment
Jane Clarke, aged 25, for stealing a purse containing twelve
shillings and sixpence from Mrs. Lee. Twelve months'

imprisonment.
Ellen Murphy, aged 26, for stealing a pair of trowsers, the
property of Joseph Houghton. Four years' penal servitude.
Samuel Dale, aged 34, labourer, for stealing a scarf, the
property of John Rhodes. Five months' imprisonment.
Job Swift, aged 23, a sailor, and Thomas Thorpe, aged 25,
were sentenced each to four months imprisonment for stealing
a g,tld watch, the property of Henry Coward.
Patrick Mul'aney, aged 30, labourer, anti Peter Burke,
aged 36, were found guilty of stealing 15Ibs of bar tin, the
property of J. S. Tregoning. The former five and the latter
four years penal servitude.
Mary Whittaker, aged 19, Jane Ann Stephens, 32, hawker,
William Bowner, 16, labourer, John M'Allister, 19, beaker,
Robert Bowner, 12, labourer, and Mary Lynch, aged 44, were
charged with breaking anJ entering the store of William
Maddock, and stealing two pistols, twenty-four razors, '
six knives, a coat, and other articles. All the persons were
found guilty. M'Allister six years penal servitude, Robert
BowIINS four years penal servitude, Stevens twelve months
imprisonMent, Lynch nine months imprisonment, and Whit-
taker nine months imprisonment.
James Dickinson, agnd 18, plasterer, and James Evans, 18,
baker, were each found guilty of stealing 7s, the property of
Hugh Develin. Dickinson fifteen, and Evans nine, months'
imprisonment.
Richard Dove, aged 36, a bricklayer, was sentenced to four
months' imprisonment for stealing a watch, the property of, and
from the person of, John Davis,
John Jones, aged 36, and John Williams, aged 20, both
smiths, were found guilty of stealing 11Ibs. of copper, the
property of Messrs. R. Clarke and Co. Jones was sentenced
to four years' penal servitude, and Williams to six months'

thirty-

Imprisonment
The business of the court will be resumed this morning

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.--JULY 21

(BEFORE. MR. COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.)
IN RE JAMES MURRAY RICHARD RAWLINS.-THE CREDIT

SYSTEM AT OXFORD.
This insolvent, a clergymen, the incumbent of
Bardsley, Lancaster, was opposed, on his application to
be discharged, by Mr. Dowse, for six creditors residing
in Manchester and Lancaster. Mr. Sargood (with Mr.
Reed) supported.
't he insolvent is now 29. He was curate of Vernham
Dean, is Hampshire, in 1850. He was, previously
student at Oxford -University, and left owing debts
above £l,lOO. One of the causes of his insolvency was
the facility of getting into debt. at Oxford. In July,
1852, he was appointed to the incumbency of Bardsley,
the income of which was about £220 a year. He married
in August, 1853, and his wife's settled prope:ty is about
£l5O a year. He had paid the money and contracted
debts to restore Vernham Dean, which had involved him
in debt. When he went to Hardsley he owed about
£1,400. He had repaired the p)rsonage house, and con:
tracted a debt with Messrs. Mounicastle and other
tradesmen near his living. He left Bardsley in January,
1854, having contracted debts to about £1,400 in the
year and a half of his residence. From January, 1854,
to January last, there was no mention in his schedule of
his residence.
Mr. Dowse asked the insolvent where he had been
residing in the two years?
Mr. Sargood said there were painful circumstances in
the case, which he hoped would not be made public
The. place where the insolvent had been would be made
known to the court through the officer.
The Registrar handed up a paper to the commissioner,
who perused the same.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked whether the circum-
stance of wli&re the insolvent had been would affect the
adjudication, otherwise the whole public must know of
what he had been just apprised.
Mr. Dowse said he should make his case on the
schedule.
Mr; Sargood expressed his acknowledgments to his
friend for not wishing the information communicated to
the court to be made public.

It appeared that the insolvent had been arrested in
January, and had since been in prison for debt. Ho
had been sued at Bardsley, and had given a bill of sale.
His property had been sold off. He had offered Messrs.
Agnew their property back, but they declined.
In answer to the Commissioner, the insolvent said be was
eighteen when ho went to Oxford. His father a clergyman,
died when he was about leaving Oxford. His father paid
his bills. He got into debt fr moe lent, hore hire,
wine, jewellery, &c. sile was solicited y by the Oxford
tradesmen.

Mr. Commissioner Phillips sail he had been thoroughly
disgusted with the manner in which boys'were tupolicd by
Oxford tradesmen. Tne system had been exposed in this
cold, and, thanks to the public) press, mach g iod had been
done.

The insolvent explained a principle whioh he said 'Was
acted upon by Oxford t adesmen. When a person could not
pay a debt, they forced him to take further crewit, or they
would expose him.

Mr Dowse placed the case before the court as one in
which debts bad been incurred without reasonable expecta-
tion of payment. It was a case for the applicaiion of the
discretionary clause.

Mr. Sargood admitted that there had been extravagance,
which had, no doubt, originated at Oxford. The insolvent
had been in prison since January.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips, after complimenting Mr.
Dowse for the. humanity and kindness with wt.ich be had
conducted the opposition, expressed his intention of giving
a judgment under the discretionary clause, and had the case
been pressed he should have pronounced a judgment for
contracting debts without reasonable expectation of pay-
ment. His Honour made some remarks on the conduct o
Oxford tradesmen; they had not, he said, the audacity to
come and oppose. The insolvent left Oxford ritsing—Sl,lo2.
and had since got into debt to some extent. He pronounced a
judgment of three calandar months under the discretionary
clause, which would keep hint six weeks longer in prison,
and had he not been in prison since January, he should
have given him the full period of six months.

THE COMMAND IN-CHIEF.—At the present moment,
when public attention is fixed upon the changes that
are taking place at the Horse Guards, a brief sketch of
the administration of that department for the last 70
years may not be out of place. It is rather singular that
we do not find the title of "Commander-in Chief"
employed preyious to the elevation of the late Duke of
York to that post in 1793, and even on that occasion his
Royal Highness's name occurs in the Gazette promotions
as " appointed to be Field Marshal of His Majesty's
forces." This title, however, seems soon afterwards to
have been tacitly dropped, and supplanted by the other
term so familiar to our ears. Previous to 179.5 the chief
administration of the Horse Guards was in the hands of
the Adjutant-General—an office which was held suecea.
sively by Lieut.-General William Amherst, a younger
brother of the first Lord Amherst, and after his death in
1781 by Lieutenant-General Sir William Faucet, K.B,
The Duke of York having been invested with the chief
command, as we have said, in Februaryt,l7e late9s,coGntelnneureadl
to administer it until the spring of 1808. He was
hrofst,bly: hmwever, only till
ssuirecepe.deDdunadsaC -C
s,owmilmoa held
dr-tihnat
1811, when the first
step of the Prince of Wales, on
becoming. Regent, was to reinstate his brother, who was
always popular with the army, in his command at the
Horse Guards, which the Duke of York continued to
hold from that date without interruption down to his
death in January, 1827. The Duke of Wellington very
naturally was chosen by Lord Liserpool to succeed his
Royal
Highness ; but on becoming Premier in the
following year, his Grace resigned the command into the
hands of the late Lord Hill, who continued to hold it
until within a few months of his death, in 1842. From
that date the administration of the Horse Guards was
again in the hands of the Duke of Wellington until his
death, September 14 1852. Lord Hardtnge, who at
that time held the Mastership of the Ordnance, suc-
ceeded to the post of Commander-in-Chief, and resigned
it only last week, as our readers are aware, into the
younger and, we trust, more vigorous hands of his Royale
highness the Duke of Cambridge,