Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-17 00:00:00

.. .. v Taylor .. ..
.. .. v Bernard ... .- ..
(8.0 v Pile ..
..
..
..

1 Ex... Unsvin.. Cecil assignee
2 CP.. H Phi ips ..Morgan .
3 QB..Lowndes and Co ... Smith .
4 QB Raze ..1370wn ani ano
5Ex o'y • • • • • *Peet • • • • • . • • •
t CP .:.game Bart'ett and ano ' • • '
7 QB.. Young and C ) ..
BQB ..Binney .. • • .. • • Yeomans ..
9 Ex... Haack.; C 'mks and ano . ..v
10 E.... B. wells L B of Health King upon Hull (sJ) v
11 Ex... Rawson and Co ... Hnht.,n . v
12 W K Ty, er E is
13 CP.. Francis and A .. R.cse
14 QB.. Same .. .. .. .. ..Yeoward
15 C{ ..Grimmer .. -Sims
16 C PL.J Y rtes jun.. Mr Manus ..
17 CP.. Same .. ..Ells
18 Ex.- tamp and J Flartvr .rth a-d ano
19 Ex... rep and S Holmes
20 Q 3.. Statham ani Co .. ..`3,lomon
21 Q ; ..Holden and Son Pe d and ors ..
22 Ex... B irrow Manley admix ..
23 Ex... -ame Hawksey
24 Q,1.. Holden and San ... Wooliscroft
25 Ex... T Eastham ...Fastham
26 Ex... Flet•.her and H .. Taylor _
27 Ex... Mayhew Mayhew
28 C'..l P Murruugh .. -Hargreaves .
2g Ex,..Thackerah Fitzpatri:k..
30 Ex ..B ,rrovr _Simmons
31 CP J Yatei jun .. .. Raven ..
32 17P..Same
33 QB..R Stevenson .......Yd
34 i• x... rowe ..Warinr, jun.. ..
35 Ex...Hoald ..c/Nail..
36 CPL. 81a, khurst Wright
37 QB ..Ca-son and E ..Brooks and ors exors
58 QB.. Moss and .. • . .. Samuelson and ors ~ • .
CP..Gooiwin and A ....Cooke
41 C 7L.Fenwict _Vase admix ...
48 CP.. ,1 Yates, jun . .. Wright ar.d aro . .
42 Ex.. R Moore ..S •ott and ano
43 QR..Story Hindhati4h es x .
44 CP.. Evans aid Con . . Stevens and ano
45 GB.. C and ii Frost Wads mor:h
46 QB..Emdie .. Ryland and ors ..
47 Ex ... cl. teher and H.. • . H iggin
48 Ex... 8, oker- Halon and ano
45 Ex...Co.,ivsy.. „Nels-n
50 CPL.Turne: and Son.. .. Waddington admOr
51 CPL.-ame . same
52 QB_Liitledale and B Pernbartoa
53 CP . Bog ie Buxton
54 Ex ...T Smith .. .. • . Collins ...
Si CPL.Ba-khouve Sazar and ano
56 CPL.S.,me ..Same•
57 CPL.'eme -Sagar
58 CPL.Snowball .. • • .. Woodhead
59 C PL.E rethe. tOn .. .. .. ..Assop
E 0 QB S ime. Heatheock jun ..
61 Ex. .Cobb „Giant
62 QR.. I ittledale and Co .. Day es ...
63 Ex ...11:,roer _Weisman
61 Ex .. way.. Fels
65 Ex... T S Smith .. Muirl.ead
65 Ex. .Free man .. ...Taylo r
67 CPL. a and W ; "croft .. „Thaulthurn and ano
68 Ex-. Moss and L.. .. Roberta .

..v

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

SOUTH LANCASHIRE.—LIVERPOOL, August 15.

CROWN COURT.
BEro-RE MR BARON WATSON

His Lordship took his seat at nine o'clock this morning.
SSNTENCES.—Patrick Kilroy, who was convicted on
Friday of manslaughter, at Liverpool, by s'riking John
Kilduff on the head with a stitir which re4ulted in death,
was called up for sentence His Lordship in impressive
langusge pointed out to him the greatness of his crime,
and the result of ungovernable passion, and sentenced
him to fifteen years' penal servitude.
John Martindale, and John Davies, convicted on Friday
of a murderous assault at Heap, on one of the county
constabulary, were each sentenced to eighteen months
imprisonment with hard labour.
James Johnson, convicted on Friday of assaultng
Catherine Oakes, in Magnire-street, with intent to rob
her, was sentenced co twelve months' imprisonment with
hard labour.
Btnjamin Clegg, late manager of the Oldham Gas
Works, who was on Friday convicted of embezzling the
monies of the Oldham Corporation, was sentenced to nine
months' imprisonment with hard labour.
Hagar Vantrey, aged 23, an operative, who pleaded
guilty to a charge of nigamy, he having married at War-
rington one Alice Travis, his former wife being then alive,
was called up for sentence. Previous to sentence being
passed, his father was examined, and stated that his first
wife left him some months after their marriag3, and also
that she had an illegitimate child. The second wife,
who was also called, expressed her unwillingness to
prosecute, and her readine,s again to live with the pri-
soner. His Lordship observed that it was unmanly to
defame the character of the first wife in her absence, and
that there was no mitigating circumstance in the case, the
prisoner having represented himself to his second wife as
an unmarried ma'. The offence of bigamy was a serious
one. It appeared to be common in the county, and was
on the increase, and the prisoner should therefore be
sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard
labor. r.

MURDER BY A TAILOR FROM JEALOUSY.—James Davies,
aged 39, tailor, was charged with hseing, at Liverpool, on
the 25th May last, of his m lice aforethougha murdered
Robert Reesies. The prisoner was also indicted upon a
coroner's warrant for the same charge. Mr. Blair pro-
secuted, and Mr. Aspinall defended. Mr. Blair stated the
case, which was one made familiar to the public from its
recent cccurrence in this town. The prisoner was a tailor,
residing in Bostock street, and the deceased was a sailor,
who had married a sister of the pri oner's, When the
deceased was ashore he was in the habit of lodging at the
prisoner's. Notwithstanding the relationship between
them, it appeared that the prisoner suspected the deceased
of carrying on an improper intimacy with his wife; and it
was stated that the deceased, on one occasion, boasted of
the existence of such a connection. On the day of the
murder, the prisoner came to a pu'elic-house at the corner
cf Bostock-strest, being then in an advanced rate of
intoxication. He met an acquaintance there, to whom he
said, " I have found a man in bed with my
wife. Coma with me and I'll show you some fun.''
The man accompanied him, and on arriving at the house,
the prisoner found his wle below stairs. He struck her,
and called her by an opprobrious name. He asked his friend
to come up stairs, which he did. In the middle room they
found no one, but going up into the garret they found the
deceased lying upon the children's bed, which was upon
the floor. The deceased appeared to be asleep. The pri-
soner leaped upon him, and the deceased rolled on the
floor. Tne prisoner then took out a pair of scissors, and
stabbed deceased several times. Deceased immediately
expired. When the body was examined, the surg son gave
it as his opinion that sexual intercourse must have recently
taken place. Mr. Blair said the question would now have
to be considered, whether this was a case of murder or
manslaughter. H s Lordship said, if the prisoner found a
man in bed with his wife and had killed him, tint would
hare been manslaughter of the lowest deg ee. If, how-
ever, there was time for the wisoaer's auger to cool between
the discovery and the slaying, the charge would be murder.
The hearing of the evidence would best decide the point.
John Thompson exsmin:d :—He said he was a painter
living in Queen Anne-scree', and that on the 25th of May,
he was in Mr. Irving's public house at the corner of Bus-
tock-street. The prisoner e-,as there in a very excited
state, and at his request aeeemp mied him to his house.
They found his wife down stairs ; he struck her andealled
her a foul name. They then went up staire, and finding
no one in the middle room went up to the garret. They
found the deceased lying on a b d on the deer. Tee
pri.soner cried out "here's the and pulling out a
pair of scissors plungedthem into deceased's gide. The
deceased said nothing,. but simply rolled his eyes. Witness
~asked if he was going to kill the man, when the prisoner
cried out, '- i yon dont stand back I'll serve you the
same." On Voss examination by Mr. liapinelf, the
witness said the prisoner had three children. '1 he deo ‘si-
tions of Mr. William Horrocks, t u 'goon, who was unable to
attend, were then read They Eet forte that he found the
-deceased in the garret in a pool of blood. He WAS unable
to speak and was dying. He had two wounds on the
upper part of the left breast, And soma contused wounds ,
on the face. On making a pose inor'eut examination, he'
found that that the serta had bean penetrated in two
places. There were two other wounds on the cthsr side of
Site body. The wounds ware such as might have been
inflicted with a pair of scissors. From a further examtna•
tion of the body, he was of opinion that deceased had
recently had sexual intercourse with some female. His
Lordship in summieg up the evidence rercaltel, that,
although where a man was killed with a deadly weapon,
the law presumed the offence to be murder, yet it was
recognised by law and common sense that where a man
found another in the set of adultery with his wife, and
killed either the adulterer or adulteress, the crime was
reduced to manslaughter of the lowest iNgroe, because of

Leic 'stet'
Ha lam .
LaytHd
Geipl
Gray and ors..
Taylor
T inity Ho se of Hall..
Beattie
Martin
.. real and Al
Barlow .. Tarrant
Schaffer ..Fl, teller and H
Brown ,neir and R
Lan. and York. Railway Co ..Iligham an I C
Barber .. Fletcher and H
Kidd End ano . .. Evans and Son
Rawns ey Brierley
Oliver T nwnde3 and Co
St Helens Canal and Rail Co .. Whitley
Carter ..
Watson ..
Wh ,I:ey
McCalrnan
r Cawley
Thomas .. .. Chester and Co
Lan. and York. Railway Co ..Lewis on Co
Dickenson ..
v Bell Pember;cn
• v Jameson Ward
(Si) v Lon. and N. West Rail. Co.. ..Swift and Co
..v Everth ..Woo,leock and Co
▪ ..v Acton Leigh
v Bainbridze ..Greory end Co
(sa) v H ins a,:d ors.. .. .. Preston
(2.1) v Wilson and ano owndes and Co
..v Lan. and Yoric. Railway Co.. ..T Aa•d J G randy
• ..v Kirby..
..Hindi
• ..v Hernaman
▪ v Had away ..
• v Clementson ..
v ...Wells S
(si) v Jrnes and ano exors ..T Bolton
..v Robins .. ..Chileott
▪ ..v Royle . Sn a. kle-on and Co
(to) v Seddon .. ..11ollen and Sol
..v Lan. and York. Railway Co. ..R and W Aseroft
• ..v Same.. .. (dc.v,urrer) Same
• ..v Arkle and ano.. .
• v Venn and ano.. Fra-ris and 't
v Murphie ..Sw.ft and Co
• ..v Brennand and ano Sale and Co
• v Same.. (demurrer, Same
• ..v aline Same.
• v t;lacichnrst W Blaelihnrst
..v Yates. .. Ward
▪ ..v Moore and ano J B Lloyd
• ..v Denham ..
• ..v Critchley _Holden and Son
▪ ..v Taylor .. ~ .. .. .. ..Higharn and C
• ..v Brownel and ano —Miller and P
. v Moore and ano. ..J B Loyd
• ..v Taylor ..J Clay
▪ ..v A,:ams Sale and Co
• ..v Rinks.. ..Higharn and C

..1.1 Forepaw
. .. Chambers and W

. .. E S Wilson

and S
Coltn and 3
and M

all offences, the moat grievous to the feelings of any man
was that to which he had alluded. But if, through feelings
of revenge, a man subsequently killed the adulterer, this
would amount to murder. Tae only point, therefore, for
the jury to consider was how far the latter character
applied to this case. The jury found the prisoner guilty
of manslaughter. Mr Aspinall was about to address the
court when his Lordship said : You &le% suppose I am
going to punish the man ? The last offence of this kind
came, I think, before my bro:hor Earle, and he gave the
man one day's imprisonment. The sentence of the court
is that the prisoner be imprisoned for four days. This
dates from the commencement of the ass7zeF, consequently
the term has expired now. The prisoner was then dis-
charged.
INFANTICIDE.— Hannah Smith, 44, factory hand, was
placed at the bar, charged with having, at Oldham, on the
29th May, 1857, feloniously killed and murdered Jane
Ana Smith, her infent child. Mr. Surtees prosecuted, and
the prisoner was defended by Mr Tindal Atkinson. There
was no question of her guilt, but from the evidence both
for the prosecution and the defence, it appeared that the
child was the offspring of shame, and that the prisoner
was put to great straits to provide for its support. She
worked hard and endeavoured to support herself on husks
and gruel. devoting the rest of her earnings to the main-
tenance of her child. In consequence of this want of
proper nourishment she frequen ly fainted at work from
exhaustion, and at length her mind became somewhat
deranged. It was while in this unhappy state that she
destroyed her child by suffocating it in a jug of water.
The jury acquitted the prisoner on the ground of insanity.
[fn the course of trial of the foregoing case, his lordship
telt called upon to make some observations in reference to
the common practice of police officers getting admissions
from prisonere without warning, and giving afterwards
those admissions in evidence age:net them. 11 this case a
constable got from the prisoner an admission of her guilt,
and now pressed it against her. • His lordship said th.t ha
much detested the system of policemen getting
statements from prisoners at any time. So jealous
wag the law in such cases, that the legislature thiught
fit, hit recently, to protect prisoners, by passing an act of
parliament which prohibited even magistrates from a-king
them any questions, without first warning them that their
answers wou'd be given in evidence against them ; and yet
they found policemen, in every part of the country, cm-
tinually getting such statements, and repeating against
the prisoner such conversations. The practice was a
highly wreng one. He had occasion many times to repre-
hend it, aad he was almost tired of doing so. In his
charge to the jury, his Lordship again referred to the
subject, and pointed out to them the danger of the practice,
which he felt called upon to reprehend. If it were presisted
in, the time might come when too much weight would be
given to statements so obtained without warning, and when
they would over-ride other considerations in the minds of
juries. How easy was it for an anxious policeman, seeking
promotion, to make a felse statement. How easy to invent
a statement. How easy to make a total misrepresentation,
by adding or subtracting a word from the statement made.
There was the greatest danger in the practice, and no
statement should be taken from a prisoner without first
fully warning him that it would be given in evidence
against him. His Lordship also condemned the practice
of sending needless witnesses to support a trial. In most
Cases two policemen were sent, when one would suffice.]
CUARG M OF GIIWAY ROBBERY AT WALMEM&Y• CUM
SIIUTTLZWORT(I.— 84rauel Harmer, aged 30, labourer, and
Thomas Redfern, 24, cab-owner, were indicted for having.
at Walmereley-cum-Seuttleworth, in July last, feloniously
assented John Fntwistle, and robbed him of £3 Bs. Mr.
Bawler prosecute], and Mr. Wheeler defended. The
case for the prosecution was, that the prosecutor had been
drinking and playing cards in a public house. in which he
won about lOs On leaving the house, the prosecutor
state I that he was se: upon by the prisoners, and robbed of
the amount stated. No money was found upon the pri-
soner;, nor did any one witness the occurrence. While the
case was proceeding, his Lordship said he saw nothing of
the character of a highway robbery in the circumstances.
The ease, therefore, abruptly terminated, and the prisoners
were discharged.
GA-ewers iiODI3,RY Ar MtNCIIESTER.—Thomas Glennon,
aged 25, brickmaker, was in ticted for having on the 12th
May, 18,3 U, feloniously and violently assaulted George
William Tomlinson, and stolen from hint a gold wa'ch and
chain, with 14s in money. Mr. Cross prosecuted. The
case, however, broke down, and his Lordship directed the
discharge of the prior ner.
MANsaAunurea.—Thomas Richardson, aged 41, horse-
keeper, was indicted for having at Htudley, killed and
slain John Rogerson. Mr. Alison prosecuted, and Mr.
Fearnlay defended. The prisoner was a man employed as
a horsekseper in connection with the Liverpooi Corporation
water works. The charge against the prisoner was, that on
the night in question he caused the death of the deceased,
man IR; years old, by furiously or negligently driving
over him. The prisoner was driving a Whiteehapel from
St. Helens to Hindley, and the de eased happened to be
creasing a part of the road, when the vehicle came up He
was knocked down and passed over by the Whitechapel,
and received injuries which resulted in his death. On the
part of the prosecution, it was stated that the prisoner was
drank and driving furiously at the time. Several witnesses
gave the prisoner a high character for steadiness and
sobriety. The jury found a verdict of not guilty.
STABBING.—Owen M‘Cenville, aged 21, seaman, was
charged with having, on the 30th onlay, in Liverpool, cut,
stabbed, and wounded one Wm Ellison, with intent to do
him grievous bodily harm. The case for the prosecution
was, that on the night in question prosecutor went into a
public house in 14111-street, with another man, and the
Fr sorer with two others came in. The prisoner, whom
the prosecutor had previously passed in the street, en-
deavoured to fasten a quarrel upon him The prisoner then
left the house., and prosecutor coming out some time after
again met with him in the Street The prisoner attacked
him and struck him. Prosecutor endeavoured to defend
tit:meg and stnek prisciuer,, upon Which the latter stabbed

him with a knife on each side of the neck Mr. Preston
Prosecuted, and Mr. Tindal Atkinson defended. The
jury found a verdict of guilty of unlawfully wounding.
His Lordship deferred sentence until this day (Monday.)
MANSLAUGHT EL—James Turner, 3G, greengrocer, and
Elizabeth Turner, 32, his wife, were put on their trial on a
coroner's warrant, for having, at Mtnchester, killed and
and slain Jane Scholafield. It appeared thatt"le prisoners
and the deceased and her fimily, lived next door to each
other in Pilling-street, M anchester, and that ill-will existed
between them. About she end of June last, deceased was
sanding one evenieg at the door, and employed herself in
abusing the female prisorec. Provoked by her abusive
language, Mrs. Turner ran out, and was followed by her
husband. The deceased took refuge in her dwelling, and
locked the door. The prisoners tried to open it, and,
feiling in that, they burst it in. On entering the house,
the male prisoner struc)a the deceased a violent blow on
the eye, which knocked her down. His wife then attacked
her, and, while so engaged, he held the door shut and
urged his wife to " pummel" the deceased. In a few days
afterwards erysipelis set in on the deceased, and resulted
in her death. The evidence as to the blow given by the
male prisoner was very ceniEcting, and it was proved that
the deceased was of intemperate habits. The jury acquitted
the prisoners.
Tugs Btnns.—The grand jury, daring the day, found
true bills against the following parties :—Against John
Godfrey Patrick Bride, surgeon, for murder ; and a true
bill, also, for felony. Against j)he Mattock, attorney, for
forgery. Against Mr. Doraville, proprietor of the Casino,
Lime-street, for misdemeanour.
No BILL.—The grarri jury igiored the bill against John
Cullen, aged 22 lebourer, charged with having, at Liver-
pool, killed William Newby.
The court adjourned at six o'clock to ten o'clack this
(Monday) morning.

NISI PRIUS COURT.
BEFaLE &IRON CIIANNELL.

Lirdship took his seat in this eaurt shortly after
nine o'clock.

DIE SPECIAL JURY CASES.—Tn answer to Me. Atherton,
his L3r&hip stated that he had had a cmsultation with
Brother Watson, and, as the business then stood, it was
arranged that no special jury cases should be taken before
Thursday next.
Several undefendei ac'ions were then disposed of.
Raixes v Ht-Lmte—This was an action for gods sold
and delivered. Mr. Hill, Q C., with whom was Mr. Spinks,
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Monck. Q.C., was for
the defendant. In this action, Mr. William Raines,
engineer and machine maker, of Duckinfield, was the
plaintiff; and Mr. Thomas Hul'ne (formerly of the firm
of Messrs. Hulme and Ackroyd), machinist of Rochdale,
was the defendant. The action was brouelet to recover the
price of a eliding lathe. In the year 1849, Mr. Ackroyd
retired from the firm, and Mr. George Hulme, the then
partner, was soon after joined by his brother Thomas, the
defendant, who was then a butler in a gentleman's family,
the business being managed by G. Hulme, under the firm of
Geo. and Thos. Hulme. In the July of 1849, the two brothers
called at the defendant's place of business, and ordered a
sliding lathe, and on that occasion the defendant Thomas
said there was a great deal cf work on hand, and hope 3
it would be quickly prepared, as it would soon pay itself.
As they were leaving, Thomas saw an upright drill, and
observed that he supposed when they had settled for the
lathe they could have the drill. The lathe was delivered
in October, 1849. In 1855 George failed, and the plaintiff
accepted a dividend in the pound on other accounts, but
took no portion of the £4O for the latheholdine•' Thomas res-
ponsible. Sinee then, repeated applicatins had been made
to the defendant for payment, but as he was in service, they
did not commence an action against him. He give evasive
answers until 1854, when he produced the Gazette, of the
7th Jane, 1853, showing that the partnership had
been dissolved, and, therefore, he was not liable. For the
plaintiff it was contended, that if the partnership did
exist, and of that there could not be any doubt,
after the production of its dissolution in the
Gazette, the defendant, Thomas Hulme, was liable.
For the defence it was contended that at the time the
la4he was purchased, the defendant Thomas was not a
member of the firm, nor for some long time after, and then
the partnership existed only for about nine weeks ; there-
fore he could in no way be liable for the amount claimed,
and that the present claim was a fraudulent claim, got up
by the piaintiff in consequence of the failure of George
Hulme. Witnesses were called to prove that phase of the
case, after which the two le trned gentlemen addressed the
court for their respective clients; and his lordship having
summed up with his usual minuteness, the jury retired
for two hours, and then returned a verdict for the de-
fendant.

THOMAS v. GARBUTT.—By the content of the parties, a
verdict was formally en'ered for the plaintiff in this case—
damages £l3l 15s. and costs.
Men ARD 3011 v. KnIBE at. .—This was a feilned issue,
for the purpose of ascertaining to whom certain goods,
which had been seized by the sheriff of the county, really
did belong at.the time of that seizure. Mr. Atherton,
Q.C., with whom was Mr- Fearnley, appeared for the plain-
tiff, and ➢lr Monek, Q C., for the defendant. In this case
the plaintiff was Me. Wm Richardson, an ironmonger and
bellhanger, carrying on business at Broughton and Crow-
field, near Manchester; and the defendant was Mr. James
Kimberley, an ironmonger, of the former place. The busi
ness was formerly carried on by the father of the plaintiff's
father, but subsequently it was transferred to the son. It
was alleged, at the time of the execution, that the property
seized by the sheriff was his property ; but for the plaintiff
it was alleged that they ware the property of she preFent
plaintiff, and had no right to be so seized. The (le'ails of
this case were perfectly uninteresting to the general
reader. The case was not concluded when the court rose.
The court aijournel about five o'clock until this morning
at ten o'clock.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-SATURDAY.

BEI,ORE 31R. ALDERMAN TIOLMS.

SOMETHING WRONG.--A vary poorly dressed, bnt hend-
some-faced girl, apparently about 18 years of age, who
gave her name as Elizabeth Waiters, was brought up by
officer 317, who said he get her lying on the steps near
the Workhouse, and she said she was refused admission,
and that she would stop in the street until the carriages
would run over and kill her. She had 2i 3d. in her
pocket. In reply to his Worship, the girl said she would
not go back to Nottingham, from which city she had come.
She had two respectable sisters there, but would not go
back. The Alderman : Why not g) back ? Prisoner :
Because I dare not do se. Where did you get the money ?
From a gentleman. Then I will give you the alternative
of going to Nottingham, or to jail. Prisoner : I will go
to jail —any place before I go back to Nottingham. Alder-
man : It is &ear that there is something wrong in this
case. You must go to j a4l fir one month,
EXTRA.OILDINARY TE qMINATION TO A FULLER .IL —A
very powerful man, about six-and a-half feet high,
who gave the name of William Cole, described as .a
publican, residing in Waterloo-road, was charged by
officer 189 under the following strange circumstances.
He said before one o'clock in the morning he was on
d ity in South Grenville -stret, when he saw the
prisoner leave a public-house. The Alderman : If the
nouse wee open at one o'clock, an information ought to be
laid against it. One of the bridewell keepers said the
owner of the house in question, and the prisoner, had been
out at a funeral together, and had come home together, and
that was the reason—the house was not open for business,
as it was vary well conducted. The Prisoner : Yes, we
were at a funeral, and I drove him home in my g'g, The
oticer said, at or near the corner of the street, a young
woman was passing with an umbrella, when the prisoner
seized and tore it, when she called the witness and told him
of the circumstance. He said to the prisoner, why did
you tear the umbrella ? when the prisoner asked him what
he had to do with it? and swore that if he did not be off
he would knock his head off. The girl charged him for the
damage done to the umbrella, and when witness spoke to
him about it, he struck him a blow on the back of the
head and knocked him down. He struggled
for about twenty minutes with him. The Alderman:
I don't wonder at that, from his herculean frame. The
officer went on to state that the prisoner tore his coat
nearly off his back, and tore the cape so that it was no use
at all. The damage to the coat was 12s. 6d , and the cape
was worth 7s. 6 1., and i',-., was destroyed altogether. Mary
Brown said she was going to her lodging, when she saw
the pHsoner leaving the public-house, and without any
provo2ation he struck her and tore the umbrella. The
Alderman a-ked her what she was, and she replied that she
was an unfortunate girl, but not on the streets; she was
going hone at the time, as it was raining, but did not
speak to the prisoner, nor had she any intention of speak
log to him, as she was getting home as fast as s'ne could
out of the rein The Alderman asked if the prisoner had
a gig there, and the officer said he had, but was n t capable
of taking care of it. The prisoner said the girl came up
to him, and he push .d her away, and then she struck him
with the umbrella, and he caught hold ef it, and that broko
it. The girl most po.4.tively denied trig statement. The
Alderman (to the prisoner) : What have you to say to the
assault on the police offi.eer, and the damage to his clothes?
Prisoner: Well, he interfered with me unnecessarily; I
MS rather intexica'ed at the time, and I really cannot say
mach as to what took place between us, bat I regret it
vary much. The Alderman : I think this a very outrageous
assault, and most scandalous conduct on your part.
No matter what the character of that young woman
may be, you had no right to act towards her
as you have done. Here you are, a respectable man,
holding a resreetable position in society, out drunk in the
streets at one 0 Nock in the morning, with a large Enna of

money in your pockets, committing a serious outrage. If
the law allowed me, I would certainly send you to jail,
without a fine, for three months Bat as lam not allowed
by law to do so, I will inflict the heaviest penalty in my
power. I fine you iö for the assault, and 19s 61 for the
&maga, or in default of payment, to be imprisoned for
two months. The fine was at once paid.
RIGHTLY PENIS FIED.—John Roberts, whe stood remanded
from the previous day, on a cheoge of abominab!e conduct
in Brunswick-road: was bought up, and the case having
been clearly proved, his worship said the conduct of the
prisoner was most di tbelical and the public should be
much in,lebted to the lady, who had come forward to pro-
secute such a ruffian. Atter addressing the blackguard in
strong and appropriate language, he regretted that the law
did not allow him to send the prisoner to gaol for four
times the period that it did. However, he would make a
special order to the gaoler, that for the next three months
he would keep the prisoner to the hardest labour at the
pump for that period—three months.
A SWINDLER —John Linney, who said he was a French-
man, (but it was doubtful if he belonged to La Belle
France) was brought up by officer 711, on a charge of
having swindled several boarding house keepers, by
representing that he was a steward on board the British
Trident. The fellow obtained " eatables and drinkables"
from Maria Kitts, of Brook street, Mary Bowen of Rigby-
street, Thomas Hughes, of Ormond-street, and Ellen Woods,
of Dixon-terrace, on the representation. Captain O'Neill,
the commander of the ship, proved that the prisoner
did no:, belong to the ship. Police officer 711, said there
was a charge against the prisoner for getting ill worth of
clothes from a sailor, on false representations. The pri-
soner was remanded. [Two or three days ago, the pri-
soner charged two persons with robbing him of his watch
in the street, and they are at present awaiting their
trial.]
A "ST r'' LADDER.—DanieI Sheehan was brought up
by officers Scaife and Thompson, on a charge of having
stolen a ladder belong:ng to Mr. Regan, and another from
Mr. Dunne ; and Mr. Walters, of Birkenhead, was charged
with receiving the same, with a guilty knowledge. Mr.
Pemberton was for Mr. Walters. It appeared that on the
26th of May, Walters gave an order for some ladders to
the prisoner, and it seemed that the ladders furnished by
Sheehan were stolen from the persons named.
Although it was alleged that Mr. Walters re-
ceived at least one of the ladders on the 30th
May, the stealing was alleged to have taken place
one of the ladders on the 10th, the ocher on the 13th,
June. In consequence of some misunderstanding, Mr.
Walters was brought up on the charge, but he was dis-
charged, his Worship stating that there was not the
slightest charge against him, and he left the court perfectly
unimpeacheble. The prisoner Sheehan was sent for trial.

STABLE ROBBERY. —John Jaimeson, William 0 Neill,
and Michael Carnes, were brought up on remind, charged
with robbing the stables of Mr. Adam Hodgson and Mr.
Duckworth, as :sported a day or two since. Mr. Camp-
bell was for O'Neill, and Mr. Bluck defended the other
two prisoners. The case was folly proved, and the prisoners
were sent for trial.