The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-04 00:00:00

TRIAL OF THE PACkARDS.

man got intoxicated last night, rand my brother and Mr.
Kennett prevailed on him to take a ride, and I thought
it best to keep him out. Will you let my boy go down
to Mr. Knight's through your house ? Yours, &c.,
" R. PACKARD."
Cross-examined by Mr. CHAMBERS—My master was
intoxicated. They led the deceased down the first time.
Deceased complained of a cold. Ido not recollect if
deceased spoke when the bottle was put to his nose. I
have heard my master was a surgeon, but do not know it.
The shop is a chemist's shop. My master was very
drunk before he went into the street with the cab, when
I went into his bed-room the following morning the bed

- _
had not been slept in. He was in bed nearly the whole
of the following day. The maid servant Jemima was
not tipsy.
Mr. C. JONES—I drank some of the first rum and
water. Deceased had some porter given him by the
maid servant twice before my master gave him any-
thing. Deceased said it was his birthday. Kennett did
not live at•my master's ; he visited him occasionally.
He came about an hour before I ordered the supper.
I know soda when I see it. I did not notice any
in the room, when deceased was lying on the sofa. I
was not in the room at the time. _ _ _

By Mr. CHARNOCK—I saw the soda bottle on the sur-
gery table as I came down stairs. Joseph did not live at
the house ; he was merely a visitor.
Re-examined—Joseph slept at the house. He had
been there about a month. He lived at another doctor's.
It was about an hour before the supper came that Mr.
Kennett arrived. The porter I spoke of having been
drank by the deceased was a tumbler at dinner, and
another shortly after. He was sober, and I was
sober, when I first went into the supper-room. People
used to come and consult my master. I do not know
what has become of Jemima, the maid servant.

By Mr. C. JONES—I saw her about a week ago.
John Kemp—l am a driver of a cabriolet. I was
called from the stand at half-past two in the morning of
6th Nov., to the house in Drury-lane. I waited an hour
at the door. It was a chemist's shop, near the corner of
Russell-street. Three gentlemen came out of the house,
and said their friend was rather tipsy, and wished me to
drive him home._ The prisoners are the three gentlemen.
They gave me a glass of brandy and water. I waited an
hour. I then saw a person brought down stairs, very
tipsy, by two of the gentlemen ; they held him under his
arms. He seemed very tipsy. I was in the shop. There
was a door behind, divided from the shop by a glass door.
I heard one of the gentlemen in the little room say,
" Take it, it will do you good." I do not think he said
so more than once. He remained there a short time, and
they took him up again. They said if they placed
him in the wind he would be better. He was
brought down twenty minutes after, in a helpless
state, and assisted in the cab. All three were there. Two
of them went with him. The other was iu the shop and
the door open. The two gentlemen got on the box with
me and I was directed to drive to the Hummums at Co-
vent-garden. They got off and told me to take him to
18, Chancery-lane. They gave me half-a-crown. I
drove to 18, Chancery-lane, and could not procure ad-
mission. I staid there ten minutes. I roused
the man in the cab. I could make no :sense of
him, and drove him to Drury-lane to the house I took
him from. I rang the night bell three or four times,
but could procure no admission, and I took him to Bow-
street-office. I found him at the bottom of the cab, and
put him on the seat. He groaned then. I went to the
station-house. 'rho inspector would not interfere in the
case, and I returned to Drury-lane. I could not make
any person answer. I drove to Bow-street, took him
out, and put him on the step of a door. I cannot say if
he was alive then. A policeman came up in about
three minutes, and examined him, and said he was
dead. A stretcher was brought, and he was taken
to the station-house. The policeman and I went to
Drury-lane, but could make no one hear. As we were
retiring to Bow-street I saw two of the gentlemen
(Joseph Packard and Kennett) and pointed them out to
the inspector, who took them into custody.
Cross-examined by Mr. CHARNOCK—The prisoners
appeared kind to the deceased.
Re-examined—He was : in a helpless state of in-
toxication.
J. Latter—l am a policeman. I saw the last witness
in Bow-street the morning in question. A man was
sitting on the step of the door. I examined him in con-
sequence of what the cabman said. He appeared to be
dead. I got a stretcher and carried him to the station-
house. I went with the cabman to Mr. Packard's, in
Dury-lane, but failed in getting admission. We trial twice
on our return ; the second time we met two of the pri-
soners, and I took them into custody. They wanted to know
the reason • I told them they would see. The Inspector
told them they were detained in consequence of the man's
death; they said they knew nothing about it. The cab-
driver told Kennett he was the man who had helped to
put him in the cab. Kennett said he had nothing to do
with it, and had not been in Drury-lane. Shortly after
Kennett saw the inspector, and said he had been in
Drury-lane, and told him Packard's name. Kennett was
drunk, but was capable of taking care of himself.
Cross-examined by Mr. C. JONES—It was after he
had been in custody about an hour that Kennett told the
Inspector. He was not very drunk when taken into
custody. He could stand and walk.
Cross-examined by Mr. CHARNocit—I told Joseph
Packard the man was dead, and he said he knew nothing
about it.
Charles James Sneatch.—l am a surgeon, residing in
Bridges-street, Covent-garden. I was called in on the
6th of November to the station-house. I was shown the
body of a man. There were no appearances of external
violence. There was an appearance of eichymosis round
the throat—that denoted pressure before the body was cold.
The situation in which he was in in the cab, having
fallen down with his head downwards, would have been
very likely to produce it. Saliva was flowing from the
mouth, slime from the nostrils, and the pupil of the eye
was dilated. I instituted a post mortem examination the
following day. On removing the calvain the vessels of
the dura mater were injected with congealed blood. The
blood vessels of the brain were gorged with blood. Two
ounces of water were found in the ventricles, and some of
the small vessels were ruptured. The lungs were gorged
with congested blood. The blood vessels of the ab-
domen were gorged with blood. The internal ap-
pearance of the stomach indicated the presence of some
little investigation. The contents of the stomach were
analyzed, and there was nothing to indicate the presence
of any poisonous substance. I should say his position
in the cab would be likely to cause suffocation.
By Mr. CHAMBERS—The water in the ventricles might
have been some time collecting if lie had been the sub-
ject of previous disease. It is hardly likely it could
have collected in five or six hours, but it is possible. I
should say, that altogether he was a healthy subject. He
was rather short-necked. There was an adherence of
the dura mater to the skull bone; that must have been
owing to long-continued previous inflammation. Apo-
plexy may be produced by overloading the stomach with
solid food, particularly where stimulating liquors have been
taken. In this case it may have been produced by solid food,
stimulating liquors, and exercise. Solid food, if taken
to excess by a person not accustomed to it, produces very
sudden effects. In this case the stomach was not gorged;
its contents did not exceed a pint.
Mr. CHAMBERS—Are dinner parties, and drinking
after them, likely to lead to death ? Witness—Where
there is great eating, decidedly yes.—(A laugh.)
Mr. CHAMBERS—Are corporation feasts likely to lead
to death ? Witness—l have never had the honour of
being at one ; but I am sure, generally speaking, more
persons are starved to death by over-eating than by under-
eating.—(A laugh.)
Mr. CHAMBERS—Starved by over-eating. Witness—
Yes, logically speaking, although it may seem a contra-
diction.—(Laughter.)
By Mr. C. JONES—I am afraid I cannot attribute the
death in the present instance to the water in the ven-
tricles. If I had found the body perfectly healthy, and
with no other appearances than the water in the ven-
tricles, I might have attributed death to that cause.
Mr. B. Brooks, surgeon, attended the post mortem
examination with last witness, and attributed the death
of deceased to his having been given spirituous liquors
to excess, and afterwards driven about in a cab.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. CHAMBERS then addressed the Jury in behalf of
John Packard, and, after expressing his satisfaction that
the present unprecedented case had come to be tried be-
fore one of the Judges of the land, proceeded to quote
Justice Foster on homicide, and contended that in
order to make the case culpable homicide it must
appear that what the prisoners were engaged in was
malum in se. The allegations of the indictment were, he
contended, not proved. It alleged that the prisoners did
administer to one Michael Aungier, certain quantities of
spirituous liquors, &c., such liquors so taken being then
and there likely to procure his death, and which the said
prisoners then and there well knew. Therefore, before
the Jury could convict, they must be satisfied that
the prisoners administered these spirits to the deceased,
and that at the time they administered them they well
knew that it would cause his death. Now, not only
was it not proved that such was the case, but
he did not think that any one who had heard the evidence
could for a moment believe that the three young men at
the bar had any idea that what the officer was taking
at the supper-table would cause his death. The indict-
ment then went on to allege that they had forced the de-
ceased to go into the cab, and had driven him about,
thereby causing his death. They must be satisfied that
the administering the spirits and the driving about
caused his death. If there was another cause such as
the administration of solid food, or another cause effusion
of water on the brain, or another cause adhesion of the
darn mater to the skull conducing to his death, then they
could not find that the death was solely owing to the
causes laid in the indictment. In allusion to the answer
of the surgeon relating to the danger of dinner parties, he
would ask, was a personwho at the festive board induced
a friend to take a glass more than would do him good
actuated by any evil intention ? Why then should they
assume such an intention on the part of these unhappy,
young men. lle utterly denied that there was the slightest
foundation to suppose that there was any original
intention to get the man out of possession by making
him tipsy. Finding the man there, and that he wanted
liquor, they all got drunk together, and then it was that
the first idea of this foolish trick entered their minds.
There was nothing in the case to impute to either of the
o prisonerstineta° dgesetig:Atoonfutalntim out of possession. Had they
w ish entertainede(,.llatrt: sitecrbe:ednesign they would have introduced
some narcotic into his first glass of grog, and have sent
him off in a cab, and that would have given them plenty
g or illeval
tiihaivneg
tawkreonn
care
to
to take advantage of the-L ,Pmaoh'isemsienloftoxsiocbaetrio,
her r o
n er intention he yt
ome
them
gdhotw haveoatln dy
uee-
they had any design against n
the man they would
have asked the servant to sit clown intoxication. Had
order
to
n to supper with them.
The whole conduct of the parties denoted the most kindly
intention towards Aungier—there was no pressure
upon him, no attempt to induce him to drink more than
would do him good. The wine and the grog were
there, and every one took what he liked. The pri-
soners had not administered the liquor to the
deceased—they did not know that it would lead

John Richard Packard, Joseph Packard, and Alfred
Kennett, were placed at the bar, and indicted for killing
and slaying Michael Aungier. The three prisoners
were dressed in a fashionable style, and bore the appear-
ance of men about town. They severally pleaded Not
Guilty.
Mr. CLARKSON (with whom was Mr. Bodkin) stated
the case for the prosecution, and said that if the Jury
should be of opinion that the prisoners had been toge-
ther engaged in any unlawful design, and that in
the prosecution of that design they had caused the
death of the deceased, it would be their duty to
convict the prisoners. He did not suppose that
the three young men at the bar, all of whom were re-
spectably connected, had entertained a design of killing
the deceased, but if by this means the deceased came
by his death, under the circumstances which he under-
stood he should lay before them, it would be their duty
to convict the prisoner. The prosecution had been
instituted by Mr. Hamlin, the Sheriff's Officer,
in order to protect persons placed in posses-
sion of property, as the deceased had been.
(The Learned Counsel then detailed the facts of the case
as they afterwards appeared in evidence.) If the object
of the prisoners, in acting as they had done, was to put
the deceased out of possession of the premises, he being
at the time in lawful possession of them, that was an un-
lawful object ; and if, in the prosecution of that object
by the prisoners the deceased came by his death, then he
did not doubt but that the Learned Judge would tell
them it was their duty to find the prisoners guilty.
John Huntly—l am one of the officers of the Sheriff
of Middlesex. Deceased was in my employment. I had
in the month of September last a warrant against the
goods of the prisoner, J. B. Packard. He kept a chemist's
shop. I executed it on Nov. 5. I put deceased in pos-
session of the goods. He was sixty, years of age.
I went to Packard's the following morning. The house
was shut up, and I could not obtain admission.
Cross-examined by Mr. C. JONES—Since, I obtained
admission afterwards. _ _

By the COURT—At that time it was known the de-
ceased was dead.
Cross-examination continued—Mr. Moulter, law sta-
tioner, lives at 18, Chancery-lane. That is the same
side the way as my office.
Cross-examined by Mr. CHARNOCIE—The execution
has since been satisfied.

Charles Pearson—l was in the service of the prisoner,
J. K. Packard, on sth November. He is a surgeon and
chemist, and druggist, living in Drury-lane. Some offi-
cers came to the house that evening about five, one was
left in possession. About nine o'clock, my master
saw deceased in the kitchen, deceased asked him
for a glass of gin. Master said, " Very well, you shall
have it." My master gave him a tumbler of rum and
water. Deceased was sober at the time he drank the
rum and water ; after master retired to the parlt)ur.
Master came to the kitchen shortly after, and asked de-
ceased to step into the parlour. Deceased did so. That
was about ten o'clock. I went into the parlour
afterwards, and found the deceased and the two
Packards, and the maid servant, there. There were spirits
and glasses on the table. There was no wine there.
They appeared to be drinking. Deceased seemed sober
and well. About half an hour afterwards I was called
in again, and then there was liquor in the deceased's
tumbler. There was some red wine on the table in the
tumblers, and rum and water and gin and water in
others. My master kept gin in that room in a gallon
stone bottle. It had been poured out of that into
the tumblers. The same persons were in the room
then, and still at the table. Kennett was there
also. He arrived about ten o'clock. I was told
by my master to go to the Garrick's Head, and
take a note. I did so. I was to wait for an answer,
but did not get one. A man returned with me, and my
master ordered him to bring supper for four at half-past
twelve. The rum and wine were kept in stone bottles.
On my return I found the party still drinking, and they
continued to do so until the supper came at half-past
twelve. Two bottles of red wine in decanters
came with the supper. I placed them on the
table round which the prisoners, the deceased, and the
servant were sitting. I waited at supper. I saw red
wine given to the deceased. There were no spirits on
the table then. The red wine in the decanters was all
drank at supper, and two more arrived, and all was drunk,
except a little in the bottom of one decanter. Three
pints of porter were sent for—very little of it was left.
Itlteswaosf
port, about one o'clock when I fetched the last two bot-
tles
m cupboard.
they After the table was cleared my master di-
rected the
maid-servant to bring the stone bottle out
was rum in She did so. When I went into
were all round the table, and there
of
fe
their tumblers. They continued
drinking about half an hour. I then went into the room.
Deceased was very tipsy.
me lie was unable to help him-
self. My master to
Kennett also desired me to
and fetch a cab. Mr.
present. I fetched a cab, andso. Joseph Packard was
master and Mr.
illsYtairs, and brought
Kennett lifted deceased down
appeared unable to help
euttleeotdo the nose of
him into the surgery.
himself. Ary master put a smelling
the deceased and said " This will doky
made no answer. They then lifted himg up."stileres,easanedd
put him on a sofa. He remained on the sofa a quarter
of an hour. Whiht there I saw some water in a tumbler.
Mr. Kennett put some spirits to it in the tumbler, and
gave it to the deceased, who was lying on the sofa. The
two Packards were present. Deceased rem '
tuned about
a quarter of an hour longer, when my master and Mr.
Kennett carried deceased down stairs, and lifted him
into the cab. Joseph Packard accompanied them, m„
master and Kennett went out with the cab. Josephopt
stopped at home. It was about three in the morning when
the cab went away. My master and Kennett returned in
about half an hour. I went to bed about four, and got up
between eight and nine. The servant maid came out
it from
open. She said to me, " Don't yon open the door." I
the room where they had supped. The door of was
said, " What for?" She said, " Mind your own business.".
Master heard what passed. He was lying. on the sofa.
Shortly after I heard a loud knocking and ringing at the
door, but did not go down. This occurreel more than
onco during the day. My master was in bed the greater
part of the day. I received a note from my master to take
to Mr. Folkes, his landlord, who lives next door. I
got out of the bed-room window, jumped on
the leads, and got into Mr. Folkes' window.
I did this by directions from my master, who was in the
room, from the window of which I got out, The note
produced I believe to be it. Mr. Folkes was not at
home. I left it. (The note was then put in and read,
and was as follows :

" TO MR. FOLKES.

" Dear Sir—How would you advise me to act ? The

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMTIER 4, 1 dl.

to his death. There was nothing more in the case
than a kind of supper party, which had ended
fatally and miserably. The prisoners had been miserable
—they had met their trial this day for the purpose
of vindicating themselves, and they trusted that they
would be sent forth to ie world re-established in the
opinions of their friends and of themselves by the verdict
of the Jury.
Mr. C. JONES then addressed the Jury on behalf of
the prisoner Kennett. He contended that as his client
knew nothing of the fact of an execution
being in Packard's house until his arrival there at ten
o'clock at.night, after Aungier had commenced drinkifig,
there could be no pretence for saying that he was engaged
in a conspiracy to make the man drunk to get him out of
possession. Finding the man in a dangerous state of
intoxication, fearing perhaps he might die in the house,
they did what any other men would have done ;
they put him into a cab, and directed him to be
driven home to his master's, in Chancery-lane. Mr.
Kennett left the house at that time, • and never
returned after. He was drunk when he was taken
into custody, and therefore no reliance could be
placed upon any denials he might have made while
in that state. There was no evidence whatever to show
that Kennett was connected with the medical pro-
fession, as had been stated by the Learned
Counsel in his opening speech. If they had
wished to get rid of the old man, why did they
not take him by the shoulders, and turn him out at eleven
o'clock at night. They might easily have done so. They
had not done so, and there could be no pretence for say-
ing that they had any desire to get rid of him. There
was no evidence whatever against Mr. Kennett, and
therefore he confidently hoped the Jury would acquit him.
Mr. CRARNOCK then addressed the Jury for Joseph
Packard, and after complimenting the Learned Counsel
for the prosecuticin on the temperate manner in which
he had opened the case, and on his candour in at once
admitting the respectability of the accused, complained
of the conduct of the prosecutors in not producing
either the maid servant Jemima or Mr. Folkes, instead
of relying solely on the evidence of the boy Pearson.
There was not a particle of evidence to prove the aver-
ments in the indictment. There was nothing in the
evidence at all affecting Joseph Packard, who appeared
throughout to hive been merely a silent spectator of
what was going on.
Mr. Baron PARKE, in summing up, said that in order
to constitute the offence of manslaughter, it Was neces-
sary to prove that the deceased came to his death by
some act of carelessness or of neglect on the part of the
prisoners. It was not necessary to prove the whole
of the indictment to constitute the offence. If it had been
proved that the prisoners.' knew the spirits they admi-
nistered would be likely to cause death, that would con-
stitute a crime amounting almost to murder ; but it was
not necessary to prove so much as that. If the prisoners
had induced Aungier to take liquor for an unlawful pur-
pose, or if they had forced him into a cab for
an unlawful purpose, that would be sufficient
to conatitute the offence. If their object was to get
Aungier out of possession, then that was an unlawful
act, and they must find the prisoners guilty. If what
took place had been merely for the purpose of making
themselves merry ; or, if the Jury entertained any doubt
on tile subject, then they would acquit the prisoners.
The Jury, after an absence of three hours, returned a
verdict of Guilty of Manslaughter. The prisoners were
then sentenced to one month's imprisonment in Newgate.
Michael Briant, aged 13, and Charles Donovan, aged
15, pleaded guilty to the charge of stealing certain quan-
tities of rope-yarn, the property of John Thompson, jun.
It appeared that Donovan had been twice before sum-
marily convicted.
Mr. Baron PARKE sentenced Donovan to six months'
imprisonment, and Briant to three months' imprisonment,
with hard labour.

she denied that she had ever given the prisoner any en-
couragement to take liberties with her.
Mr. White, on the part of the defence, said that he was
instructed that this was a conspiracy between the prose-
cutrix and her husband to extort money from the pri-
soner ; and, in confirmation of this, called two witnesses,
who deposed, in the course of Thursday evening that the
husband of the prosecutrix called at the prisoner's house,
and offered to compromise the matter, but the prisoner
refusing to have any thing to say to him, he went away,
threatening that he would have him up before a Magistrate.
The husband strongly- denied this.
Mr. HAnDwicx said he had made up his mind to send
the case to a jury, and he should, therefore, commit the
prisoner to take his trial at the present sitting of the Cri-
minal Court.
The prosecutrix and witnesses were then bound over
to appear on the trial, and the prisoner was immediately
removed to Newgate.
BATTON-GARDEN.
Mrs. M'Carilly, keeper of a lodging-house, in Carrier-
street, St. Giles's, was placed at the bar, charged with
stealing one sovereign and ten shillings from Michael
M'Swiney.
The prosecutor informed Mr. Combo that he was a raal
ould British subject, who fought hard and tuk his own
part in every battle in the Peninsula, and that lie ap-
peared there to be "compensated" for the robbery of 30s.
from .his coat-pocket that morning in Mrs. M'Carthy's
dwelling-house while he was asleep there. " I saw this
lady," continued Mr. M'Swiney, " come into my room
and make for my coat-pocket ; and, after examining it
when I got up, I found my money gone."
Mr, Comm—How can you say she took it when you
were asleep ? Prosecutor---4 pretended it, your
wurtchip, and kept my eyes half shut, taking the oppor-
tunity all the time to observe her movements. She also
tuk away two pounds of steak and a quarter of a pound
of tea ill the previous evening.
Mr. COMBE—How came you there ? Prosecutor—
Why, your wurtchip, Mrs. M'Swiney and I were caught
in the rain on Tuesday evening, and being far away from
our own place resolved to put up at some respectable

lodging. -
Mr. CoMßE—Were you drunk ? Prosecutor—No,
your wurtchip, we were sensibly sober. We paid six-
pence for the bed, and went to that expense to ensure
something beyond the lower order of lodgings ; but we
were sadly mistaken in the character of Mrs. M'Carthy.
Call my witnesses, your wurtchip, and give an ancient
definder of his country fair play.
Mrs. O'Brien was ushered in on the part of the prose-
cution, and began her testimony by giving evidence of her
own moral worth and consequence., "'Tis the first time,
my Lord," said Mrs. O'Brien, " that I was ever in a jus-
tice-room or before a Court, or brought to answer for
breaking the pace, except this day, an? thanks to you for
that, Mrs. M'Carthy. [Here the witness and the de-

•
fendant exchanged curtsies.]
Mr. CoMßE—Well, what do you know about this
robbery ? Witness—l know that Mrs. M'Carthy is an
infarnal hardened ould thafe, my lord.
Prisoner—Me, Mrs. O'Brien ? Witness—You, Mrs.
M'Carthy, most certainly. You would stale an eye out
of a priest's head. You robbed that gentleman of his
money, and that's as true as the word of God—the Lord
between us and harm.
Mr. COMBE—YOU were all very drunk, I suppose ?
Witness—Drunk, my Lord. Mrs. M'Carthy is always
drunk, but none of the others was past hearty. Mr.
M'Swiney and his lady were looking at some comrades
drinking, your Lordship, but nothing beyond strict pro-
priety went inside their lips.
Defendant—Pay me my rent, Mrs. O'Brien.
Mr. COMBE—DO you owe her rent ? Witness—l do,
my Lord ; and, if she gives me my bundle, I'll give her
es venpence valuation out of it. I have no change now,
your Lordship.—(Renewed laughter.)
As there was no proof of the manner in which the
prosecutor lost his money, the defendant was dismissed,
the former exclaiming loudly that there was no justice
in that decision, and that a man who sarved his Sove-
reign in many a battle should have fared otherwise.
MARY LEB ONE.

TORIES FOR EVER.—A young man with a wooden leg,
who gave his name Edward Fosbrook, was charged by a
police constable of the D division, who stated that on the
previous night he found the prisoner in the New-road ;
a number of persons had collected around him, and he
was shouting out " Tories for ever."
Mr. LONG—Is that all he did, merely crying " Tories
for ever ?" Witness—lie continued to do so in a very
loud tone of voice, your Worship, so as to cause a great
annoyance; he was also otherwise very noisy and riotous.
Mr. LONG (to defendant)—Why do you call out " To-
ries for ever" in so loud a key as to cause a crowd to as-
semble ? Defendant—l'm very sorry, your Worship, if
I've committed my self, but I'd no intention of offending
or disturbing any one.
The constable further stated that the prisoner was
drunk.
The accused was discharged, with an intimation that
his predilection for any particular political party should
be made known in a much less boisterous manner in future.
QUEEN-SQUARE.

Mr. James White, the proprietor of the Turk's head,
Motcomb-street, Belgrave-square, appeared on a sum-
mons charging him with having obstructed and assaulted
EdwardPowel, an attendant on the Annoyance Jury.
Mr. Smedley, the High-bailiff, briefly explained the
nature of the charge against the defendant, and cited the
section of the Act of Parliament, which gave the An-
noyance Jury the power to enter, at all reasonable hours
in the day time, into the houses of all persons using
weights and measures in the retail of their goods.
Edward Powel stated that he had for the last twenty-
seven years been employed as an inspector of weights
and measures, and attended on all occasions as conductor
of the Leet and Annoyance Jury. On Wednesday week
last he accompanied them to the house of defendant,
where four measures were found deficient by the stand-
ard. He was proceeding to break them up in the street
before the door, when defendant laid hold of him by the
collar, and in other respects obstructed him.
A number of the Jury gave similar evidence.
Mr. buncombe, the solicitor, cross-examined these
witnesses at considerable length. They admitted that
a cross staff had.been held by Powel in defendant's face,
and that the landlord had expostulated with them en the
impropriety of breaking up the measures outside the
house, observing at the same time that he had no ob-
jection to their being destroyed within.
After some further inquiry, the defendant was fined
20s. and costs.