Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-10-06 00:00:00

IMPOJITANT CONVICTION.

At the Police-court yesterday, before Messrs. Cros-
thwaite and Rankin, Mr. Aspinall, barrister, appeared
to prosecute Patrick Fennelly, under' the- 66th and
71st sections of the New Passenger- Emigration Act.
Mr. Thornley appeared for Mr. Fennelly. From the
opening statement, of the learned gentleman for the
prosecution, it appeared that Mary Dohea, a married
womaa residing in the county of Kilkenny, Ireland, was
desirous of joining her husband, who is in Ainerica. She
had saved £5 for that purpose, and on application to the
Poor-law Guardians; they, in consequence .of the-good
character of the woman, expressed their willingness to
advance £lO. A Mr. Cass, residing in the same town-
ship, was instructed by the Guardians to make arrange-
ments for the passage of the woman and her five children
—one an infant two months old. Mr. Cass, it would
seem, wrote to Mr. 'Family, of Clements-street,
Vauxhall-road, in this town, requesting him
(Fennelly) to see to the matter. Fennelly at
once replied, and said that it would require
some £l2 to pay the passage alone. £lO was
remitted to Fennelly, in two sums of £5 each ; and the
woman was forwarded to Liverpool, where she arrived
on Saturday, the 9th of September. She went to lodge
at the house of Fennelly, and he
,endeavoured to per-
suade.her that the best and cheapest route for her to Join
her huaband, who was in Chicago, would be by the way
of 'New Orleans. She refused to`do so, and he pro-
mised to make arrangements for her to proceed to New
York. He did so, by going to the office of Messrs.
Guion -& Co., and paying a deposit of £5 for seven, pas-
sengers—a man being included in the contract ticket.
By means of this manoeuvre, if it had succeeded, the
man and his supposed wife—for Guion & Co. were
given to understand that they were man and wife—
woilld have been taken, vid New. York for Chicago
for £5 more, the remainder to be paid at some future
day. .The woman Dohea, when' she, heard this, felt
aggrieved, and refused to sleep in. the same berth with
a man who was not her husband, and she would not
sail in the ship. She demanded her money back for.
the purpose.'of engaging a passage in another vessel; but
Fennelly refused, saying that if she did not go to
America as he directed, he was cempelled to send the,
£lO back to the Guardians. We may here state that the
woman, on the, day she arrived in Liverpool, handed the
defendant £2 10s.—£1 above the passenger rates for
the whole family. The, woman, finding she could
get no redress, left the house ; and for a fortnight
she sold all her luggage, &c., for the purpose of
keeping her children from starvation. She gage her
evidence in a very straightforward -manner, and con=
firmed every point and accusation in the statement of
Mr. Aspinall. Mr. Thornley subjected Mrs. Dohea to
a severe cross-examination, asking her if she had not
expresged her fears, to join her husband, as the infant
she held in her arms was not his. This she indignantly
denied, 'and said she was quite willing to go to America ;
but she would not do so in the manner wished by Mr.
Fennelly. The defendant called two witnesses, women
who reside in his house, whose evidence went to show
that Mr. Fennelly had done everything in his power to
get the woman to go to New York ; he even asked her
for God's sake and her husband's to go, but she refused,
and wanted her money back, saying she would rather
go to Ireland, where she could get a gentleman to
advance her £3O or £4O, to set her up in a small way
of business ; also' that she said the infant was too young
for her husband to see. In cross-examination, they
contradicted themselves in one or two material
points. Mr. Ramsden, passenger clerk to Messrs.
Union and Co., was also called for the defence. He
said that the defendant Fennelly came to the office of
Messrs. Guion & Co., and engaged passages for two
adults (man and woman), four children, and the infant,
and paid down £5 of a deposit. _The defendant after-
wards stated that the woman refused to pay the extra
money to complete the contract, and he received back
the £5. In cross-examination, he said that Messrs.
Guion were in the habit of paying the defendant com-
missions, on all ~passengers introduced—sometimes 71
per cent., other times 5 per cent. He (witness) perfectly
well knew that the defendant was not a licensed runner,
and so did his employers. Captain Schomberg had
refused defendant a license, and it was, partly owing to
that refusal that Messrs. Guion employed him as a
runner.—Mr. Freckleton, a passenger broker, in Water-
loo-road, deposed that the defendant had arranged with
him for the passage of a woman and five children to. New
Orleans, but that they did not go. Their passage money
was not paid to him.—Mr. Aspinall then addressed the
bench on the part of the prosecution. He said he did
not want to take up their time uselessly, and would only
appeal to them on the justice of the case. He read the
66th section of the Passenger Act, which clearly pointed
out that, if any unlicensed person, directly or indirectly,
received a commission or benefit by introducing pas-
sengers to agents, he was liable to a fine of not less than
'£s ; and the learned gentleman contended that under the
71st section of the act, the defendant was clearly liable
for fraud, the minimum penalty of which is not less
than £2O. He called upon their 'Worships to inflict
such a fine as would teach the defendant, and others
like him, that they could not with impunity violate'
the law, and swindle poor Irish emigrants ; closing by
pointing out that the woman could be awarded one half
of the fine, and so be enabled to join her husband at
once.—The magistrates considered for a few mo-
ments, and delivered their judgment in the following
terms :—The sentence of the court is, that the de-
fendant pay a fine of £5O : one half to go to the poor
woman, and that such fine must be paid itnmediately ;
in default, to be imprisoned for three calendar months.
—[A scene of considerable, confusion here took place.
Fennelly was observed to give a handful of sovereigns
to his wife. A number of people interfered, and the
officers were told to stop the woman. Povey, the
emigration officer did so, and asked what he should do
with the money, but the bench found they could not
interfere. The defendant was locked up in default of
.paying the fine.]

It is a well-known maxim that " time is money "—the terms
are relative; so to save one is to save the other. We save
both time, and economise patience, and present good tempers,
when we have a good Pax—a bad one upsets patience and
temper. Preserve all, then, by purchasing your steel pens and
other stationery at E. T. Hall's wholesale steel pen warehouse,
23, South John-street. John Gillott's, Thomas Lowe's, G. W.
Hughes, and other maker's, on sale at Is. per yr.—, r3,":ac.
Pen Holders, al. per dozen.

. .
EXTRAORDINARY AND USRFUL INYENTION.—There is nothing
that housewives complain of with greater truthfulness than
the breaking of some favourite piece of glass, valuable china,
or earthenware. In hundreds of cases such things cannot be
matched, and of course cannot be mended. The latter want
has been obviated by an extraordinary and effective invention,
by Mr. Adshead, of Derby Pottery, near Derby. It is a cement
that may be said to heal in a perfect manner, all cracks and
breaks in the articles spoken of, and not only in these, but in
marble, alabaster, &c. The benefit of this article need not be
dwelt on. We have seen some of its effects at Mr. our
neighbour's, and the glass that has been cemented by it is
stronger in that part than in any other. The article is very
cheap, and no house can be long without it. Mr. Hall is the
agent for its sale in Liverpool, and all interested dui judge for
themselves by looking in at his establishment. Agent for
Liverpool, E. T. Hall, 23, South John-street. Sold in bottles,
Is. each, or sent free on. receipt of sixteen postage stamps.
N.B.—None are genuine except bearing the signature, "E. T.
Ham."