The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-22 00:00:00

Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Ellis conducted the prose-
cution, and the prisoner was defended by Mr. Murphy.
The facts of the case, as proved by the witnesses for
the prosecution, were as follow :—The prisoner lived at
the house of a widow named Morand, in Green's-court,
near the old Excise-office in Liverpool. His wife, who

lived with him, was a woman of *dissipated character,
and on the night in question she came home in a state
of intoxication. About ten o'clock the prisoner, who is
a porter in a corn warehouse, returned home, and having
observed that his wife was in a state of intoxication,
said, " Is it so again, lassie ;" and shortly afterwards
gave her a blow at the side of the head. She bled pro-
fusely from a wound which was inflicted in her throat,
and calling out '° Murder !" she ran out of doors. The
prisoner did not at the time attempt to make his
escape. In the course of a short time the deceased,
who was an officer in the Liverpool police force, came
up to the spot, in company with a mariner named Rigg,
and attempted to secure the prisoner, but finding that
he was armed with a knife, Rigg held the cellar door
and Bailey went in search of further assistance. In the
meantime the prisoner pulled the door off its hinges,
and knocking down Rigg, attempted to escape ; but
Rigg got up to him again, and seized him. Cole
knocked him down a second time, and cut him
severely on the nose and right cheek, also on
the eye-brow and the wrist. The prisoner then
ran off into Hanover-street, where Bailey met him
and attempted to secure him, but the prisoner gave him
a blow with a knife on the left side of the neck, inflict-
ing a most terrible gash. The interior and exterior
carotid arteries, the jugular vein, windpipe, and root of
the tongue were all divided by the knife, whose progress
was stopped by coming in contact with the jaw-bone.
The blood rushed forth from the wound in a frightful
stream, and the poor mrn was dead in less than two
minutes. Rigg and several other persons came up,
and the prisoner was secured after a severe struggle
and the knife taken from him.
The knife and the hat of the deceased officer were
produced. It appeared that the hat had been cut
through the side, and a large aperture cut open.
Mr. MURPHY addressed the Jury for the prisoner,
and contended that he ought to be acquitted, o❑ the
ground of insanity, calling witnesses who stated that the
prisoner bad received injuries in his head which made
him deranged at times.
The Jury, after an absence of half an hour, returned
into Court with a verdict of " Very aggravated Man-
slaughter."

His LORDSHIP, in passing sentence, said that he
should have left the prisoner for execution if the Jury
had brought in a verdict of guilty of murder. He then
sentenced the prisoner to transportation for life.
James Harney, Johu Harney, and John Carty, were
indicted for having on the 3d instant, at Staleybridge,
feloniously cut and wounded John Dingenan, with in-
tent to do him some grievous bodily harm. ' William
Harney and Thomas Clinton were, it was alleged,
engaged in the same transaction, but are not in custody.
It appeared that the prosecutor and the prisoners
are all Irishmen, but, unfortunately for their peace,
the former dates his origin from Connaught, while Mun-
ster boasts the honour of having nurtured the latter.
This " causa teterrima belli" has, it appeared, on seve-
ral occasions spread war aad desolation, cracked crowns
and bloody noses, through the neighbourhood of Staley-
bridge, Spring-street, and Leather-lane, charging with
all their chivalry to the rival battle cries of Munster
and Connaught. Notwithstanding, however, the nu-
merous experiments which have been tried " by per-
cussion" to ascertain whose heads were the hardest—
" adhuc sub judice lis est ;" and it is, therefore, unde-
cided whether Connaught or Munster rears the better
men. In this state of things, John Dingenan, passing
the door of his Munster opponents, with all the chivalry
of a knight of old, stepped into the house as young
Lochinvar

" Entered the Netherby-hall
Among kinsmen, and bridesmen, and brothers, and all,"
saying, as he entered, " Well, ye see, I'm come to see
ye, whether I'm welcome or not." The response seemed
to justify this generous confidence. " Oh, ye're as
welcome as the flowers in May," said one of his here-
ditary foes, and a cup of reconciliation was proposed in

the shape of three quarts of ale. Before this Was pro-
cured, however, the gallant Dingenan spoke with re-
gret of the wars which had desolated Spring-street, in-
timating that he himself was weary of their continuance,
and that he thought it would be better for the future
to leave the settlement of these disputes to the more
fiery spirits of the boys, while he, and those who like
him had attained to matrimonial and paternal honours,
should sit each under his own vine, and under his
own fig-tree, to behold the fights they would no
longer share. These references to battle-fields gone by
were too much for the fiery temper of William Harney,
and excited at once by these recollections, and the
fact of having the poker in his hand, he expressed his
dissent from the recommendation of Dingenan, by
giving him a whack across the bridge of the nose.
Loud and sudden rose the cry of war. John Harney,
with a piece of wooden spout, sedulously occupied him-
self for" five minutes" in hammering the head of the
intruder, and the other parties did their best to imitate
his example. How far they might have carried their
indignation it is hard to say ; but the lady with whom
Dingenan lodged, and who accompanied him, dashed
into the affray, and by her winning arts, together with
a zealous application of her nails and fists, succeeded
in getting him out of the territories of his foes.
On his wounds being dressed they were found not to be
dangerous, although, besides the blow on the nose, he had
received a cut on the cheek bone, inflicted, it was alleged,
by the table-knife of James Harney.
The Munstermen, in their defence, alleged that, so far
from Dingcnan having come on a mission of peace, he was
the bearer of a cartel of defiance, on behalf of himself and
another, to any two of the party who might choose to take
up his glove; that they declined his proposal, and that the
injuries he sustained were merely from the pertinacity
with which he in return declined their offer to show him
the door. _ _

The Jury found the prisoners guilty of an assault, and
they were sentenced, James Harney to three years' impri-
sonment with hard labour, and the other two to eighteen
months' each.

WESTERN CIRCUIT. BRISTOL, Au°. 19.

PHILPOT I'S AND ANOTHER V. PROCTOR AND ANOTHER.

This was an action brought by Messrs. Philpott
and Lloyd, merchants, against Messrs. Proctor and
Shoard, extensive corn factors and millers, to recover
the value of a large quantity of wheat.
It appeared from the evidence that in December
last, the defendants contracted to 'purchase of the
plaintiffs, about 1,000 quarters of corn, then lying at
Leghorn, at 68s. per quarter, upon condition that it
should be delivered as soon as a vessel could be sent
for it, on deck, at Bristol, in good merchantable con-
dition. During the voyage from Leghorn to Bristol
some sea water was shipped by the vessel, and a part of
the wheat damaged ; and after 542 quarters had been
delivered to the defendants they refused to receive any
more, and claimed to be allowed to return that portion
which had been received, the plaintiffs not being in a
condition to deliver the quantity contracted for. The
quession in issue, therefore, was, whether or not the
plaintiffs had a right to call on the defendants to take
such parts of the cargo as were in good condition, or
whether they were bound to deliver the whole or none ?
Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS and Mr. ERLE addressed the
Jury for their respective clients in lengthened speeches,
and a number of witnesses were examined to prove the
facts in the case.

The LEARNED JUDGE summed up the evidence,
and the Jury having retired for an hour returned a
verdict for the plaintiffs—Damages 2,913/. 16s.
This case having occupied the whole of the day the
Court adjourned.

WESTMINSTER COURT OF

REQUESTS.

A SWEEPING LAW.—Robert Jowhey, a clean-faced,
cunning-looking sweep, summoned James Toppey, a
lawyer's clerk, for 11 s. 6d.
'The CHAIRMAN of the day--What do you claim for,
Mr. Jowhey ?
Jowhey—lt's for putting out a chimbley what was on
fire on last Midsummer-day, which I dare for to say your
judge's honour werry well remembers was a precious hot
day, and
A COMMISSIONER—Nonsense, man ; don't tell us
about the hot weather at Midsummer.
Jowhey (interrupting and pointing to the Commis-
sioner)—Is that there genelman one of the judges?
The CHAIRMAN—LYes.
Jowhey (to the Commissiener, very politely) —011!
I begs your pardon ; but I believe as you was a going
for to say something to me.
The COMMISSIONER—Go to the case at once, Sir.
Jowhey—Well, Sir. That there gcnelman sent for
me to put the chimbley out.
Toppey (to the Chairman)—Now, Sir, I call upon
you, as you are by law empowered at your discretion to
administer on oath, to ask the plaintiff if he'll take his
affidavit that I—mind, Sir (turning round to Jowhey),
that I sent for him.
The CHAIRMAN (to Jowhey)—Do you hear what
the defendant says ?
Jowhey—Upon my word I don't.
The CHAIRMAN—He wishes me to make you swear
that he sent for you to put the fire out.