Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-02-01 00:00:00

than they did, and that they could not search without a
regular warrant. Witness then took him into custody,
and Laycock went up stairs and got about £2OO worth of
1 lather, now produced, in a room up stairs. They then
ok Mr. Lawson's son, the younger prisoner, into
stody, and he said that nine months ago, he became
ci
acquainted with the prisoner, who came into his father's
shop to buy some leather, From that time he induced
the lad to give, him sides of leather, and large quantities
of the same material, but he only got 2s 6d and 5s now
and then from him. He made him put sides of leather
out in the yard, and in the night M`Namara used to
come and take them away. On Friday last he took away
no less than five butts of valuable leather, and these, with
a great variety of every sort of leather, and a large quan-
tity of tops or uppers of boots; ladies and mens, patent,
French, English, &c., half made, closed, and the like,
were found in the house in Sun-street. In reply to Mr.
Cobb, the officer said the youth told all this in the pre-
sence of the other prisoner. Mr. Cobb endeavoured to show,
according, he said, to his instructions, that the prisoner
M‘Namara was deaf, and could not hear what was said.
The party who instructed Mr. Cobb was, however, rather
unfortunate, for the prisoner at once showed that he
could hear, as well as the fabled gentleman who is said to
have heard what the people at the antipodes were
speaking about—lovers and all ! Carlyle, in
reply to Mr. Cobb, said, he was not aware
that the prisoner was deaf. Laycock was then examined,
and proved the same fasts, as-those stated by his brother
officer. I asked him if he had any leather in the house,
Or other articles of leather, not his own ? and he replied
he had not. I said I should look through the house, and
he said I should not. I did look through the house, and
found all the leather now produced ; brought it to
the police office.
__Tile boy (i\fr. Lawson's son) told
me all about it before that. The boy told
me the other prisoner used to come in the morning to the
shop, and took as much leather as he liked, and that he
took five butts on last Friday. Mr. Robert Lawson, the
father of the younger prisoner, said : For the last nine
months I have, day after day, and week after week,
missed quantities of all sorts of leather out of my place.
On Friday last, I missed five hides. The boy said he did
not know anything about it. I went to the police-office,
and :told the whole story. The police came, and the
boy then told them' all about it. I have missed altogether
about £l5O worth of leather. The prisoner never bought
ql:Ily a few shillings worth of leather in my house. He
had only 10s. a week from another person, a short time
ago, but lately he has commenced supplying shops with
boots and shoes at a low price. He never had
any account with me, nor did I give my son
any liberty to give him credit. The last
time I took stock, within the past nine months, I was de-
ficient £450 in my stock. Cross-examined by Mr. Cobb:
lam not a leather dresser. Some of the leather here
come from London, and more from France. My son
sells a little for me, but I did not send him out to
sell for me. He had no authority to sell more than
ss. worth or so in the morning, before I entered
the shop, for me. John Harrison, the ware-
houseman for Mr. Mannion, of Woolstenholme-
square, proved the marks on all the leather, ancl Mr.
Lawson also proved the same. Some witnesses were
examined to prove that they saw the prisoner enticing
the boy into his house, when the lad was coming from
school. Mr. Cobb said, after the evidence he would not
say a word, but ask his Worship to take bail.
His Worship said he would not take any amount of
bail. He sent the prisoner for trial. He said he would
take the father's bail for the boy, but the other case was
one of the worst he had ever heard.

CIIANGING & CERTIFICATE.—Anne Martin, a boarding
housekeeper, Warwick-street, was summoned for having
giran a false certificate to a sailor. Mr. Tyndall appeared
for the prosecution, and Mr. Cobb for the defendant.
The facts were these :—the person who had the certificate
was just sent to jail for two months for having used it.
He lodged at the house of defendant for three days,
and was known as John Jones. He gave the defendant
his certificate to keep, but when he wanted it, a man took
it down, and handed him one in the name of Cuff, his
real name being Cook. Mr. Cobb showed that the de-
fendant, Martin, did not know anything about this, and
the case was dismissed, but his Worship hoped that it
would be a warning to boarding-house keepers, for if the
defendant had been convicted, he would have fined
him £5O. Case dismissed.

LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT.-YESTERDAY
BEFORE J. K. BLAIR, ESQ., JUDGE.

MATHER V. THE LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAIL-
WAY COMPANY.—This was an action brought by plaintiff
against the railway company, to recover money paid as a
passenger to that company, he having previously paid for
a contractor's ticket. Mr. Squarey appeared on behalf
of the plaintiff, and Mr. Williams for the defendants.
Mr. Squarey stated the case, to the following.
effect. Mr. Mathers contracted with the railway com-
pany to carry him as, a passenger from Marsh-lane station
for a year, and got a contractor's ticket. On that ticket
was printed a notice that it was not transferable, and,
consequently, could not be used by any other than the
person to whom it was issued, and whose name it bore.
Under that contract Mr. Mathers travelled during the
year 1857, and the ticket was renewed on the Ist of Jan.,
1858. In October of that year, Mr. Mathers was
unfortunate enough to get his pocket picked, and,
among many other things, he lost his contractor's
ticket. He then applied to the company for a renewal of
the ticket, stating the circumstances under which he had
lost the other ; this the company refused to grant, stating
that if he did not get his ticket, he must pay his fare on
the line as any other passenger. Mr. Mathers could do
nothing else, and paid his fare as other passengers, but
always under protest. He had paid the fare from the
30th of October till the 31st of December, which
amounted to the sum of £1 1 ls. 6d. He (Mr. Squarey)
submitted that in the loss of the ticket the contract had
not been lost, but the evidence of the contract on Mr.
Mathers' part alone had been lost, and as Mr. Mathers
was known to every servant of the company on the line,
nobody could be successful in travelling upon his, ticket.
Under these circumstances he was of opinion that the
company should not have taken the advantage of their
own bye-law, and extorted from Mr. Mathers the
payment of fares for which he had paid before.
His Honour said, it was a pity for Mr. Mathers to lose
his money, but the company must be protected. It was
not general for these tickets to be produced, but he
thought they ought to be. Mr. Squarey referred to the
bye-law referring to the case, and stated that 10s. had
been paid by the plaintiff as a deposit, which was to be
returned, if the ticket was produced at the expiration of
the contract; and now, that the ticket was lost, was his
client to lose the 10s. too ? Mr. Williams, for defend-
ants, said, that before a case could be made out, it must
be proved that the contract was absolutely to carry for a
specific time, which had not been done. He knew, with
regard to the contractors' tickets, the same duty" was
not imposed on the holders of them as was
with ordinary passengers. The company were not
bound to issue these tickets, by law, and if parties
availed themselves of them, they must abide by the
laws which regulated the issue of them. This was not
absolutely a contract to carry, but a contract to carry
subject to certain conditions. His Honour said he could
not see how the business could be conducted in any
other way than that specified in the bye-laws of the com-
pany. The case was therefore a nonsuit.
The following is the business of the court for the
dates specified under: —Tuesday, February Ist., protec-
tion cases, half-past 10 a.m. ; gaol cases, 12 noon.
Wednesday, Feb. 2nd, judgment summons, and 70
original cases for half-past 10 a.m., and 60 for 12 noon.
Thursday, Feb. 3rd, judgment summons, &c., 74 original
cases for half-past 10 a.m., and 164 for 12 noon.
Friday, Feb. 4th, judgment summons, &c., 70 original
cases for half-past 10 a.m., and 82 for 12 noon.
Monday, Feb. 7th, judgment summons, 70 original cases
for half-past 10 a.m., and 60 for 12 noon. Tuesday,
Feb. Bth, judgment summons, 70 original cases for half-
past 10 a.m., and 160 for 12 noon. Wednesday, Feb.
9th, judgment summons, 71 original cases for half-past
10 a.m., and 59 for 12 noon. Thursday, Feb. 10th,
34 original cases for half-past 10 a.m., and 59 for
12 noon.