The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-12 00:00:00

question. Entertaining a jealousy with regard to the
unfortunate woman (his wife), he ,accused her of in-
fidelity, and said to her, "No woman can love two
-men at once," and immediately afterthe had spoken
he got up and stabbed his wife in•the neck with a
table knife. They then grappled, and both fell down
the stairs, in 'doing which the 'woman was stabbed
three times in the neck. She cried out, "Don't
murder me for the sake 'of my child," and then the
prisoner was heard to say, "1 have now fini -bed the
job." The woman was taken to the Manchester In-
firmary, when it was found the prisoner had stahhed
her twice on the left side of the- neck, once on the
right side, and once under the chin ; a severe cut also
was found upon the Tight thumb. .The table knife
with which the wounds were inffitted was found in
the prisoner's room covered -with. blood, and on its
being shown to the prisoner at the: station-house, he
said, "That's the thing with' which I did the job."
The prisoner, in defencersaid that he had been
drinking at Bolton, and that at the time ha committed
the act he was so intoxicated lie was iiot aware what
he was doing.
His LORDSHIP summed up, and left it to the jury
to say with what intent the prisener stabbed his wife.
The jury returned a verdict of cutting and wound-
ing, with intent to murder. -
His LORDSHIP, in passing sentenee,r'allul4 to IV
fatal effects of intoxication, which had nearly ' caused;
the prisoner to murder her whom it was his duty to
protect, and ordered sentence of death to be recorded,
intimating that that sentence would be commuted into
transportation for life.
John Nelson was charged with being at large in
the city of Manchester without lawful excuse, before
the expiration of the term for which he was trans-
ported.
Mr. Monk conducted the-prosecution ; the prisoner
was undefended. _ _

It appeared from the evidence of several officers
of the detective police in Manchester, that the
prisoner, under the name of John Clough, was tried
and convicted at the Borough Court of Manchester
in 1847 of a burglary committed in the house of a
haberdasher named Thomas Keats, for which he
was sentenced by the Court to be transported for
ten years ; in pursuance of which sentence he was
sent as a convict to Gibraltar, from which place he
escaped in the February of the present year, and
having been advertised in the Hue and Cry, the Man-
chester police were on the look out, and succeeded in
capturing him in October last.
The prisoner, in his defence, said that he had been
transported under the name of James Crabtree, and
having been sent to Gibraltar, he was set at large by
the authorities at that place.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty. Sentence
—fourteen years' transportation.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice
TA LFOURD.)

William Smith was charged with having at Liver-
pool, on the lath of November, forged an order for
the delivery of goods.
Mr. Simon prosecuted; the prisoner was unde-
fended.

It appeared that William Howson, who is a hosier
and hardware dealer in Paradise-street, Liverpool,
received the following note on the afternoon of Tues-
day, the 13th of November
Halewood, Nov. 12, 1849,
"Robert Neilson, Esq., desires me to order from you
as under—Mr. Neilsen having Leen informed your goods
were of first quality :—Two pair Scotch Singlets ; two
ditto drawers, woollen ; three pair lambswool hose. If
these are good, you may expect Mr. Neilson's orders.
I beg to ray 3 our orders for coals would be esteemed a
favour.

"I am, sir, yctir obedient sei vant,
"E. F. WILSON.

" To Mr. Howson, Para iise•street.
"P.S.—You will please send them, with bill enclosed,
under cover to Mr. M'Gee, flour dealer, corner of Alice-
street Paddington•edge-bill, before six this evening
(Tuesday). Payment will be made in the course of a
or two."
The prosecutor, not thinking that all was right,
saw Mr. Neilson, and finding that he had not or-
dered the goods, nor authorised any person to do so
for him, a psrcel was made up, and directed to
M`Gee's, and an officer was placed to watch in a
concealed part of the shop. Siortly after the pri-
soner called, and asked if there was a parcel for
him;- to which Mri. AlTTee' %plied-that .there was a
parcel for Mr. Robert Neilsen, and theri-the prisAer
said, " That's me." Mrs. M'Gee then delivered the
parcel to him, which he carried off, but was imme-
diately pursued, and brought back by the officer who
was in hiding.

1113 LORDSHIP summed up.
Verdict—Guilty. Sentence—twelve months' im
prisonment.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Dec. 11.
(Before Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, Assistant-Judge.)
The Court sat specially to take the following
case:—

THE TRUSTEES OF EXETER HALL, STRAND, V. THE

POOR-RATE OF ST. MLRTSN-IN-TI3S•FIBLDS.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Ballantine appeared for the
appellants, and Mr. Pashley and Mr. Huddlestone for
the respondents.
After rather more than an hour had been occupied
by the counsel in a discussion as to which side had the
right to begin,
Mr. BODKIN proceeded to state the ease fur the ap-
pellants to the Court. After briefly alluding to the
contest that had taken place as to the right to begin,
he stated that the present was an appeal under the
provisions of the Act 6 and 7 William IV., cap. 943,
sec. 6, against the present assessment of Exeter Hall
to the poor-rate of the parish in which it was situate,
the trustees of that establishment appearing as
appellants. For some considerable time khe sum
at which it was so assessed was 1,0001., the fair
rateable value of the property, but the parish
officers raised th 3 assessment and fixed it at

1,500/. ; and though the trustees were satisfied that
such an assessment as that was one much beyond the
rateable value, they preferred to abide by it, rather
than become involved in any contest with the paro
chial authorities. But in the present year the parish
officers had thought proper to raise the assessment
from 1,5001. to 2,5001., which the trustees felt them-
selves bound to protest against, and accordingly they
appealed against such increase to the special sessions,
by which the proceedings of the parish officers were
confirmed, and consequently the trustees were com-
pelled to come to this court to obtain that which they
could not obtain in the court below, a just and fair
rating of their property—not that he in any way
impugned the judgment and the discretion that court
had exercised in this matter. Now he should pro-
duce to this court, to enable it to come to a right
conclusion as to what the rateable value of Exeter
Hall was, the accounts of the receipts and expendi-
ture, which he apprehended would speak for them-
selves. Exeter Hall had originated in the public
spirit of some individuals, who were sensible of the
necessity that existed for some establishment to be
devoted to the purposes of meetings of a charitable,
benevolent, or scientific character; and in these and
other respects the edifice in question had provided
the public with an accommodation they did not be-
fore possess. By the deed of incorporation the pro-
prietors were bound to confine the building to re-
ligious, charitable, and scientific purposes ;" but it
had been urged that the steps that had been made in
the place to advance the science of music was a devi-
ation from the principles upon which it was origi-
nated ; but he could not see any reasonable basis
upon which such an assertion could be founded. Lat-
terly the accommodation the building afforded had
been extended; it had occasionally been let to musical
associations and for musical entertainments, and con-
sequently the revenue had been increased; but he
apprehended that because at any particular period
there had been an increase of revenue arising from
fluctuating causes, such as a passing excitement in
the public mind, when the accommodation the place
afforded was in full demand, the parish officers coal‘i
not come in and assess the establishment upon the
amount of revenue that was derived at such par-
ticular period. That was a fictitious value—a real
rental could not be calculated therefrom. But the
course he proposed to take was this—to take the
average rental for the last three years, snake the
necessary deductions, and then give the net rental
as the rateable value. The receipts for the three
yeare ending in April last gave an aversg s
of 3,3821. for each year ; but such were
the variations to which this return was liable that,
in a former year, there had been an entire loss of
some 9001. or 1,0001. It depended upon the public
taste, and upon the competition t 1 at was rising up.
All upon which the revenue depended was uncer-
tainty ; and therefore it was better that an average
income should be taken rather than the income at one
I particular period. The question was what rent would