The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-13 00:00:00

-
more than £llBOO, and the freight worth to Mr.
Ruxton not more than £5OO. The ship Was said to
sail with coals for Smyrna, thence in ballast to
Quebec, and home to Liverpool, but it would be
shown that she was not prepared either in store or
in the condition of the ship for so long a voyage.
She was an old ship—too old in fact to be classed
at Lloyd's. She was " hogged" (keel bent), and
her real value was not more than £1,500. It would
be shown that a lot of biscuits and a chronometer
which were insured in the £250 policy were not
actually on board, and that before the vessel left the
Mersey a new spar had been sent on shore by order
of Ruxton, who said "it was no Use losing it. The
vessel sailed in January, 1857, an,ll on the 3rd
March following, when about fifteen miles off
Smyrna, was destroyed by fire. Next coming to
the witnesses who would support the case, Mr Brett
explained that Jamieson, the principal witness, had
been induced to come forward by the offer of £2OO
reward and a free pardon (issued by the Home-
office) to any person who would give decisive in-
formation ac to the wilful destruction of ships.
A fe ee days after the publication of these notices
Buxton received a note from Jamieson, stating that
he must have a "settlement," else their " joint vil-
lany," of which Ruston had reaped all the reward,
would be exposed. Thu result of this and other cor-
respondence was that Jamieson was taken into cus-
tody on a charge of defamation of character ; but he
was tried and acquitted, and Ruxton himself was
subsequently arrested upon the charges which Ja-
mieson brought against him. Jamieson's story was
that before the vessel sailed Ruxton suggested to
him the plan of destroying her, told him she was
heavily insured, and that there were brandy and
other combustibles on board to set her on fire.
There was a conversation also on the subject between
the captain and Ruxton when the vessel was run-
ning down the Channel, in which Ruxton said that
Jamieson was to " knock her brains out," i.e., run
her on a rock, or set her on fire. When Ruxton was
leeving:the ship at the Bell Buoy, he again spoke
to Jamieson in the same terms. The conversation
between Jamieson and Ruxton had been overheard
by Llewellyn James, the mate (who would also be a
witless). Having arrived at the entrance to Smyrna
Bay, Jamieson would state that he went down from
his cabin into the sail-room, and having thrown
some turpentine upon the sails placed them near
some brandy and set fire to them, and returned by a
private passage to his own cabin. The vessel soon
began to burn, and, though attempts were made to
put out the fire, it communicated with the coals, and
the vessel was abandoned; the captain and crew
(who had taken to their boats) being picked up, and
carried to Smyrna, At Smyrna the crew (as was
usual in such cases) made a " protest" relative to the
fire on board the ship and her abandonment, and in
this protest he (Mr. Brett) was bound to say there
was nothing said about her having been intention-
ally set on fire. It would be therefore for the jury
—looking at all the facts of the case—to give what-
ever credit was in their opinion due to the state-
ments contained in the protest and those which
would be made by the witnesses at the present
trial. In conclusion, Mr. Brett pointed out that
the intention to destroy the ship which had
been formed would be further corroborated by a Mr.
Bickley (a perfectly unbiassed witness), who was a
creditor of Ruxton's, and to whom the prisoner had
mentioned that he expected to hear of the loss of a
ship, and that he would then pay Mr. Biekley's
claim.
The following evidence was then called:—
Mr. Bell, of Liverpool, and Mr. Symington, of
Glasgow, proved insurances on the Roscoe, in
Glasgow, to the extent of £1,500, and the insurance
in London, for £5OO, was proved by Mr. Crawford.
Robert Fox, late clerk to the prisoner, proved
that the instructions given to the insurance brokers
were in the prisoner's handwriting.
The other insurances on the vessel having also
been proved,
John Bachelor, shipwright, stated that the Roscoe
was repaired at his yard in August, 1856, and that
£l6O was paid by the owner ; but even then the
vessel was not seaworthy, and he would have been
surprised to hear of her having returned safely
from a foreign voyage
Another shipwright, Joseph Morrell, described
certain repairs which he had also made on the ship
to disguise her being " hogged," but in cross-exa-
mination he admitted that the repairs made were
very considerable, and cost several hundred pounds,
old and weak woodwork having been substituted
by iron and new wood.
Percival Tonge, marine surveyor, stated that such
vessels as the Roscoe were worth from £3 to £3
10s. per ton ; but that there were defects about the
Roscoe which made her intrinsic value less than this.
Evidence was then adduced as to the supply of
brandy and other spirits to the Roscoe, and a con-
siderable discrepancy appeared between the amount
stated on the prisoner's papers and that stated in
the spirit merchant's ledger.
Mr. Taylor, of Liverpool, described the selling of
a new spar to the prisoner for the Roscoe ; and the
sale of the spar by Ruxton to another person was
also proved.
Thomas Jamieson (late captain of the Roscoe)
then described the various interviews with Ruston,
particularly the last (on board the ship), in which
Ruxton gave instructions to knock the ship's brains
out or set her on fire. Ruston said he intended to
get invoices for double the amount of the spirits
actually on board. Ruxton's parting instructions
at the Bell Buoy were, " Now you have got all
right, see that you do it well, and don't be long
away." Witness then went on to detail how he
poured turpentine on the sails and set fire to them.
The ship was set on fire when about 17 or 18 miles
from Smyrna, and 4 miles from the nearest land.
The deed was performed about midnight, the sails
being set on fire with a candle after they had been
soaked with turpentine. The coals which formed
the cargo were not separated from the sails by any
partition. About half an hour afterwards an alarm
of fire was raised, and though the efforts to extin-
guish it appeared for a time successful, the coals
became ignited and the carpenter was directed to
scuttle the ship. This, however, could not be done,
and about 11 a.m. the officers and crew left the
vessel in the boats, and were picked up and taken
to Smyrna. Here the protest as to the loss of the
ship was made in the usual form.
In cross-examination by Mr. Overend the witness
said that the vessel was purchased, with his consent,
for £2,170, and that his interest in her was mort-
gaged. The repairs to the vessel at various times
had not exceeded £4OO. The place where the spirits
were placed on board the Roscoe was the ordinary
place where such things were stored. When the
spirits were shipped witness made a statement to
the effect that the value was the same as the pri-
soner had stated it to be. Before the vessel sailed,
Ruxton told him the vessel was insured for £6,000
and upwards. The prisoner left it to him (witness)
to determine the exact time to destroy the vessel.
When witness went down to set fire to the sails he
knew that he was going to commit a felony. The
protest made at Smyrna attributed the loss of the
ship to accident. On the witness's return to England
he went out as captain of another of the prisoner's
ships, whict he lost, not by design, but by sheer acci-
dent. A dispute and an action for wages claimed by
witness were the result of this loss. Up to the time
of the reward of £2OO being offered witness had not
mentioned the wilful destruction of the Roscoe to
any one, nor had he stated that when the vessel
had been at sea 13 or 14 days he had seen smoke
issue from the hold and been much alarmed at it.
The case was proceeding when our parcel left.

CHESTER, DEC. 12.
THE EIRKENHAD RIOTERS.

The commission for holding the winter assizes was
opened yesterday afternoon by Mr. Baron Bramwell,
and this morning at 10 o'clock his lordship took his
seat in the Crown Court, when the grand jury were
sworn, and the usual formalities gone through.
His lordship then charged the grand jury. In the
outset of his address the learned judge said that the
state of the calendar was a subject of congratula-
tion, because there were fewer cases in it than
usual, and if the cases which had arisen out of the
Birkenhead riots were omitted they would have
but 20 prisoners in gaol to take their trials. This,
everything considered, was a wonderfully small
number. He said everything considered, because
it certainly was remarkable that where there was so
much distress in one part of the county so small an
amount of crime should have come from that part.
His Lordship having referred to one or two cases in
the calendar, then, adverting to the recent riots at
Birken head, said there were a number of men brought
from Birkenhead charged with a riot.- There was
no doubt there had been a riot there. It was not
necessary for him to give any lengthened explana-
tion or definition of what a riot was. In this parti-
cular case there was every ingredient to constitute
a riot, and if some of them were left out it would be
still a riot. The only question would be whether
the prisoners, or any of them, were identified as
having been there and taken part in the riot. First
theirst
of all there was the
to determine,hequestion of
andidentity. ,r
jury would have then consider
whether the persons had taken part in the riot. As
he had said before, it would not be necessary for
him to trouble the jury with a definition of what a
riot was. In this case, and be believed in most
other cases, a man m;ght take part in a riot not
merely by being an active stone-thrower or shout-
ing and yelling, but if ho were seen marching with
presence encouraging others, he
others, rasa, amuchnd b y his a
party in the !jot as a soldier in a
battle, who, although he did not fire a gun,was then
priebhee nttobe up a
brought reserve. That was
al
thought it necessarys a
t.) say on the subject,
except this—he could not say whether any bills
would be presented .to the grand jury against the
prisoners or some of them, for wounding and assault-