Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-08-17 00:00:00

iT LIVERPOOL

sth of
The p.

lIOILSE STEALING AT WARRINGTON.
George Hang, alias John Hang, alias John George
Hall, 21, was indicted for having, at Warrington, on
the 19th June, feloniously stolen a mare, the property
of Thomas Richardson.

The prosecutor was a farmer, living near Warrington,
and the mare in question was seen safe in a field near
there about nine or ten o'clock on the night of Sunday,
the 19th June last. On going to the field early on
Monday morning, the mare was gone. On Sunday night

the pris'oner was seen near the field, and he wag after-
wards found at Bradford offering the horse for sale.

The jury found the prisoner-guilty of receiving the
horse, knowing it to be stolen. Sentence deferred.

ASSAULT AND ROBBERY AT LEVERPOOI

Henry Thompson,
Liverpool, on the 4th of June last, fl
Elizabeth Davies, and robbed her of eightpena
prisoner was undefended.

20, was indicted for having, at

1-miously assaulted
The

The proseentrix,awidow, earning a livelihood by
Nvashily, stated that on the night of Saturday, the 4th
June, shei was returning along Chadwick-street from her
Work, and that the prisoner came up, seized her by the
I:4ll,deor,s, struck her with his fist, knocked her down,
ia,„" eightpenee from her pocket. There was a
near

Verdict

CASE OE

EDUCTION

WAINWRIGHT V. BOWEL

Mr. Wainwright, the plaintiff in this action, was a
ropemaker at Thirlestone, in Yorkshire, and the defend-
ant, John Bower, was a farmer, and the owner of Wat-
son House, about six miles from Eaglesfield. The de-
claration alleged that the defendant had seduced the
plaintiff's daughter, when
deprived of her servo

by he (the plaintiff) had been
Mr. Overend; Q.(

Kempley appeared tor the plaintiff, an(
for the defendant.
Mr. Overend, in opening the case,

dance in the case would go
been acquainted with each oth
close intimacy did not comm,
1857. On that day the plainti:
Woodhouse chapel, and the de:
home, and made a proposal of a
11 •

following week he -calk

and MI

until Good Friday

ie plaintiff's

ision, however, she visitedfhe defendar

It was under

ied her

the defendant obtained possession of her person ; anc
in September she found herself in the family way
The defendant afterwards told, her it was " all right,"

to come on a certain d

Ann Wainwright, plaintiff's daughter, was then exa-
mined. She said—l am a daughter of the plaintiff, and
was 19 last February. My father has six children, five
brothers and myself. My mother has been confined to
her bed from illness for the laSt nine years, and I have
had the management of my father's household affairs.
On the 23rd of April last I was delivered of a child.
John Bower, the defendant, was the father of the child.
I had been acquainted with the defendant'for years ; , he
resided at Thirlestone with his uncle, who was a farmer,
residing about a mile from ns. He made proposals of
marriage to me on Good Friday, 1857 ; and I continued
to receive his addresses. My engagement was made
known to my father and mother, and to his uncle and
aunt. He was in the habit of visiting me about three
or four times a week at my father's house. He gene-
rally left at ten or eleven o'clock at night, but he never
stopped after the family went to bed. . He went to
live at Bagbsfield after the death of his uncle.
I apppointed to meet him at my 'aunt's, who
lived near Pilling. I went to my aunt's on
the 18th of July, and I remained with her till the fol-
lowing. Tuesday. The defendant visited me on the Sun-
clay and Monday, and he accompanied me to the railway
station. We were too late for the train, and had to
wait for some time at the station. In August last, with
my father's consent, he took me to visit the Belle-vue
Gardens, at Manchester, and upon that occasion he
slept at our house with my brother. On the following
day he made me choose n pattern of silk for my wedding
'Tress, and I afterwards bought a dress of that pattern.

In September I found myself in the family way-, and I
then wrote to the defendant, upon which he came to see

anc

the at my father's. . I told him my con
said it was all right, adding that he would com
in about a fortnight and arrange about the marring(

possession o

Vatson

T's house, somewhere about June

my brothers keeps a small public-house near where we
live, and sometimes when they were busy I waited
there.

At this stage of the case a consultation took place, and
it was ultimately agreed to enter a verdict for the plain-
tiff—damages £2OO.
ACTION ON A PROMISSORY NOTE.-CARRINGTON

V. BARNES,

The plaintiff in this action was a widow residing at
Manchester, and the defendant, who was an engineer,
resided at Knotty Ash ; and the action was brought to
recover the amount of several promissory notes which

had been given by the defendant—to the plaintiff. The
plaintiff was the defendant's Sister ; and in 1856, whilst
she was living as a servant in the house of Mr. Men-
delsohn,,a jeweller at Manchester, she advanced the sum
of £4O to the defendant, receiving from him a promissory
note for the amount. In 1857 she advanced another
sum of £4O, and subsequently a further sum of £46, for
both of which sums she also received promissory notes
from the defendant. After this, in consequence of her
health failing, she came to reside with the defendant,
and upon leaving his house, she discovered that the lock
of her box had been tampered with, and that the de-
fendant's acknowledgments had been abstracted. There
was no evidence offered on the part of the defendant,
and the jury returned a verdict for the amount claimed.

ACTION

)R SLANDER.

KNOWLES v. LEVINGSTONE.—This was an action for
slander. The declaration stated that the defendant had
uttered certain slanderous words about the plaintiff, im-
puting that he had been guilty of fraud in his capacity
as overseer and guardian of the poor for the township
of Ince. The plaintiff was Thomas Knowles, a partner
in the firm of Knowles & Co,, coal proprietors, of Ince,
and the defendant was Richard 7 Leving!tone, a publican,

residing at Wigan. Mr. Overend, Q. 0., and M. Mill:
ward were counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Monk, Q.C.,
and Mr. Mclhuish were for the defendant. It appeared
that the plaintiff had for some time held the office of
overseer and guardian of the poor for the township of
Ince, and the alleged slander was uttered of him in
capacity. A collector of the rates, named Stew' 4-

it appeared, had been a defaulter to a considerable
amount ; and at a meeting at the Walmsley Arms, in
March last, previous to the election of overseers, the
plaintiff produced a statement showing that the fol-

LIVERPOOL POLICE COURT.-TUESDAY.

[BEFORE MR. 3. AIKIN.]

THE CHARGE OF MURDER

The little girl, Mary Ann Gibbons, was again brought
up this morning on the charge of wilfully murdering a
little boy, named John Thompson, son of John Thomp-
son, a police-officer. As on the previous day, Mr. Cobb
appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Bluck for the
defence of the prisoner.

Detective-officer Wilson was the first witness called,
and deposed that he measured the distance from Mr
Thompson's house in Conway-street to Bankhall-bridge,
and found it to be 1 mile 4 furlongs and 210 yards

From .the house to where the child was found, vas 1
mile 4 furlongs and 160 yards. From the house to
Doncaster-street, where Mrs. Jones said she met the
prisoner, was 3 furlongs exactly. From the house to
Athol-street bridge was 5 fwiongs and 170 yards. From
where the child was found to where the
the boy John Fox, was 380 yards

prisoner met

22nd July, and on that day he was instructed by Mr.
Clough to make enquiries respecting Mrs. Leatham. He
took the prisoner clown to the Polieo-office, and in the
presence of Mr. Clough she stated that she had never
seen the woman in her life: Mrs.. Leatham then made
a statement as to where sho had been, and he enquired
and found it to be csrrect. The little girl distinctly
told me that she had never seen Mrs. Leatham in her
life till that day. He heard a little boy at the coroner's
court say that he saw Mrs. Leatham take the child
down Great Homer-street. He first made that state-
ment-at the police court on the 22nd of July, and then
at the inquest on the 23rd, which was Saturday.

POlice:officer 731 stated that, from inforniation he
received, he arrested Mrs. Leatham on the charge of
having murdered the child. The little boy said to him,
when he was taking the prisoner to bridewell, and

without being asked; that that was the woman who

Mr. Cobb said he had ahost of witnesses, if he could
call them, who would prove that Mrs. Leatham could
not have been a party.
. .

first took Mrs. Lea tham into custody.
Mr. Cobb said it was quite rig
account for Mrs. Leatham's whercf

o'clock on that evening to eleven at night.
John Thompson, father of deceased, said he never
knew Mrs. Leatham, nor was he aware that any of his
family knew her, before the death of his child.
Police-officer Thomas Barkley, 6, stated that, on the
21st July, he was present when the child was brought
into the dead-house. Ife saw the policemen and the
prisoner there at that time. When the little girl was
asked what she was, she stated that she was a servant

She was then asked

what she was

child; and when she got into the Netherfield:road a
boy told her that he saw a woman take a child along
Netherfield-road. She was asked what directions she

her mistress, an(

to go to bridewell and tell- the child's father. She said
she did not go ; and when asked why, she said 1-..ecause
the boy told her that the woman took the child that
way. _ She was asked if she had seen the woman, and

he was again asked why she went to the

she answerer

at a man tol

woman went that way ; and when she went to the canal
bridge, she saw the body of the child floating on the

John Carroll, the flatman who had been examined
on Monday, said he knew the canal bridge, and a per-
son standing on that bridge could not have seen the

Dr. Ayrton was called, and proved that he made a
post7mortenz.examination of the body, and found that

Leath ha

been causec

waft

of air, and, in

opinion, by drownin

This chised the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Bluck, for the defence, said : I will not occupy
your time at any length, for I am afraid that, taking