The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-14 00:00:00

WINTER ASSIZES.

NORTHERN COICIR T.—Liverpool, Dec. 11.
(Before Mr. Justice WIGUTMAN.)
ROBBERY AT WARRINGTON. Samuel Bell, 31, was
indicted for having, on the 19th August last, feloniously
broken into and entered the warehouse of John Tickle,
at Warrington, and stolen a large quantity of tea, to-
bacco, and other articles, his property.
Mr. Poixocre stated the case to the jury On the
morning of the 19th August the warehouse eft the pro-
secutor was entered, and a large quantity of grocery
stolen, under circumstances that showed that several
persons had been concerned in the robbery, and that
they must have had a horse and cart. The evidence
against the prisoner was, that he was seen in a spring
cart of a peculiar description, at Warrington, on the
night of the robbery, and it was discovered that the cart
came from Liverpool, and had been hired under pre-
tence that he wanted it to fetch a chest of drawers from
a place called Kirby, and the prisoner was traced to and
from Warrington on the night in question. Upon the
prisoner's cellar being searched, a tea chest belonging to
Mr. Tickle was found, and it was proved that the pri-
soner and another man had sold a quantity of tobacco,
similar in quality to that stolen from Mr. Tickle.
A long written document was read, purporting to be
a confession by the prisoner, in which he stated that he
was engaged by two men at Liverpool to go to Warring-
ton, and that they brought back a quantity of tea and
other articles, which the other men took away.
Mr. ATHERTON addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that the prisoner had nothing to do with the
robbery, and that he had merely been hired by the
other men, in the ordinary course of his business as a
porter.
The prisoner was found Guilty, and
His LORDSHIP sentenced him to seven years' trans-
portation.
CHARGE OF BIGAMY.—James Chadwick (not in the
calendar) was indicted for having, at Manchester, on
the 23d of March, in the present year, intermarried
with Eliza Bostock, his former wife, Ann Chadwick,
formerly Ann Fisher, being alive.
Mr. T. C. Foster appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. Monk for the prisoner.
The facts of the case were as follows:—Some years
ago the prisoner married a female named Hannah
Fisher, who died. In the month of September in last
year, he married Ann Fisher, the sister of his de-
ceased wife, with whom he lived only a short time,
having heard that a marriage with the sister of a former
wife was illegal. In the month of March, in the pre-
nt year, he married a female named Eliza Bostock,
The friends of the second wife hearing of this, caused
him to be apprehended, and brought before Mr. Maude,
at Manchester, when the facts of the case having been
fully stated, Mr. Maude ordered the prisoner to be dis-
charged, he being of opinion that the marriage-of the
prisoner with his first wife's sister was null and void. It
was understood that the prosecution was instituted by a
society of gentlemen, who have run the risk of violating
the canon law by marrying the sisters of their deceased
wives, in order to have the question fairly raised before
the judges.
Mr. FOSTER contended, that under the Levitical law
the marriage of a man with the sister of his deceased
wife was perfectly legal. It was true that it was opposed
to the canon laws; but these were not based upon any
Act of Parliament. He contended at some lingth that
the prisoner had not committed any offence within
the criminal statutes by marrying his first wife's sister,
and that therefore the marriage with her was perfectly
legal. Consequently, the marriage of the prisoner with
Eliza Bostock, during the lifetime of Ann Chadwick,
constituted the crime of bigamy.
Mr. MONK, on the other side, contended that the mar-
riage with Ann Fisher was quite illegal, as it was for-
bidden that a man should marry with his wife's sister.
Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN (havingconsulted Baron Rolfe)
said it appeared to him that the best course to be pur-
sued would be this—that the jury should find a special
verdict, simply stating the facts as to the consanguinity
of the parties in the ordinary form. of a special verdict,
and stating that upon the question whether the persons
were guilty or not, they would bow to the decision of
the Court. He (Mr. Justice Wightman) would give his
judgment to the effect that the prisoner was not guilty,
and then the prosecution could move for a writ of error.
He thought this would avoid any difficulties. If the
prosecutors were advised to try a writ of error, this
would be the proper mode of reaching the question;
therefore, the facts that would be found by the jury
would be simply the facts of the two marriages—that on
the 14th of September, 1845, he married Ann Fisher,
and that, subsequently, on the 23d of March, in the pre-
sent year, he married Eliza Bostock. They would also
find that Ann Fisher, to whom the prisoner was married
on tho 14th of September, 1845, was the sister of
Hannah Fisher, to whom the prisoner had been pre-
viously married on the 27th of June, 1825, and who was
deceased at the time that he married Ann Fisher. Now
that really was the whole case, and as to the question
whether the jury would find the prisoner guilty or not,
they most say that they did not know, upon which he
(Mr. Justice Wightman) would give his judgment that
he was not guilty. The jury would, therefore, find a
verdict stating the facts which he had mentioned. He
thought that would be the best course.
Mr. MONK observed that he was not sorry his Lord-
ship had curtailed his (Mr. Monk's) argument.
Mr. Justice WIGIITIKAN said that he entertained a
very strong opinion upon the subject, and therefore he
need say nothing more upon the matter.
The jury accordingly returned the special verdict as
desired.

Mr. MONK said he thought it right to state that his
(
client, having heard some doubt passed upon the validity
of his marriage with his sister-in-law, had gone to the
Itev. Mr. Wilson, one of the chaplains at the Collegiate
Church at Manchester, from whom he obtained a docu-
ment, stating that the second marriage with Ann Fisher
was utterly null and vcid ; and it was not until then
that he again got married.
The prisoner was then discharged.
York, Dec. H.
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)

George Adamson, convicted yesterday of having at-
tempted to poison a family at Wakefield, was placed
at the bar, when judgment of death was recorded againt
him.

ROBBERY NEAR POCKLINGTON.—DanicI Bradley, 29,
plead,,cl Guilty to hating broken into the granary of Ro-
bert Hothan,
_of Poeklington, and attempted to steal a
quantity of bran, maslin, and onions.

The prosecutor is a farmer residing at Pocklington
Mill Farm, and on the evening of the Ist of November
last, a servant in his employment was attending to a
horse which was ill, when he heard it noise in the gra-
nary. He went to inform his master of the circum-
stance, and on returning along with Mr. Hotham they
found the door of the granary open, and a man ran out.
The prosecutor seized a fork, and went in pursuit of the
robber, and on the former attempting to leap a hedge,
the latter stabbed him in the thigh with the fork, from
the eff,cts of which he fell, and was secured.
His LORDSHIP observed that it was a great mistake on
the part of persons who supposed they had a right to
inflict personal injury in the defence of their property.
Had the prisoner in this case died from the injuries in-
flicted on him, the prosecutor would have been liable to
a prosecution fur manslaughter at least.
The prisoner was sentenced to one month's imprison-
ment.

CONCEALMENT OF CHILD-BIRTH AT LEEDS.—Ann
Greenwood, 31, was charged with having, on the 11th of
August last, unlawfully concealed the birth of her child.
Mr. Hill was for the prosecution; the prisoner was
undefended.

Guilty.—To be imprisoned for two calendar months.
HORSE-STEALING AT WEST ARDSLEY.—John Fearn-
sides, 16, was charged with having, on the 17th Septem-
ber last, stolen a mare, a saddle, and bridle, the property
of Joseph Dunnill. _

Mr. 1111 and Mr. Shaw were counsel for the prosecu-
tion; the prisoner was not defended.
The prosecutor is a farmer and innkeeper, residing at
Whitwood, near Pontefract, and on the day in question
he had a mare at Lee fair. On calling at a public house
for refreshment, he gave his horse to the ostler, who, being
engagedat the time, handed the animal over to a boy to hold.
A few minutes afterwards the prisoner accosted the boy,
and said his master wanted the horse. The boy, be-
lieving this statement, gave the mare to the prisoner,
who immediately rode off with it. He attempted to dis-
pose of the animal at Wakefield, and it was subsequently
found in his possession on the Wakefield, Pontefract,
and Goole Railway.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty. Two previous
convictions for felony were proved against him.—Sen-
tence deferred.

ASSAULT AT ALMONDBURY.—MichaeI Buckley, 23,
was charged with having, on the 21st of July last, at
Almondbury, assaulted Joh❑ Collins, and bitten off part
of his nose.

Mr. Hall was for the prosecution; Mr. Shaw defended
the prisoner.
On the 21st of July last, the prosecutor, prisoner, and
other persons were at the Golden Fleece public-house,
at Aldinonbury, when a quarrel ensued, and the pri-
soner seized hold of the prosecutor, and bit off part of his
nose.
At this stage of the proceedings the prisoner, by advice
of his counsel, pleaded Guilty.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
SOUTHWARK.
Three well-dressed men, named Couper, Morgan, and
Robertson, were charged with uttering several counter-
feit half-sovereigns to publicans and small tradespeople
in the district of this Court.

It appeared the prisoners were observed to enter several
shops in Bermondsej by two policemen, who, knowing
them to be " regular smashers," followed them to Mill-
pond-street, where Cooper was seen to walkinto the
Horns public house, while his companions stopped oppo-
site. Shortly after Cooper came out, and went off with
his two companions, when the policemen, finding that
the former had uttered a counterfeit half-sovereign, re-
ceiving 9s. lOd. in change, went after them to Dockhead,
and saw Morgan enter a tobacconist's shop, where he
was apprehended in the act of passing another half-sove-
reign. The other prisoners ran away, but were pursued
for a considerable distance, and at last secured after a
very violent resistance. Other cases of uttering counter-
feit half-sovereigns having been preferred against the
prisoners, they were committed.
The secretary of a benefit society, called the Spanish
Leather Dressing Society, was summoned for excluding
a member who had belonged to it 45 years, and refuse'--, to grant him any pecuniary assistance in his
nl'
Ll age. --
The complainant had been a member of the above
society for the above lengthened period, and having re-
cently become incapacitated from attending to his busi-
ness, be declared upon the box of the society, as it is
call,
ett
told
ter id ythhesaathnte a
dpdi
tpre
de cte received
wa
hweekly allowancet
hue n
et ial
si iy a r
rweaeseidveiscr
thveerneldlehweanheaed,
allowance,'
incurred the penalty of disro;_
complained of such irs:
the funds for

-0 was
ins business
that he, therefore,
sal from the g.ociety. He
—just conduct, after contributing to
.seamy years. The steward, however,

having 'moved that the complainant had infringed one of
the clauses in the rules of the society, although the
business transacted was done by an agent, the old man
being too ill to do it himself, the Magistrate said, how-
ever unwilling he was, he was bound to dismiss the
summons. _ _

The complainant inquired if he could appeal, but was
informed that he was precluded from doing so, the ma-
gistrate's decision being final.
Thomas Ma► tin, the proprietor of a lucifer manufac-
tory, in Bermondsey, was summoned for exercising his
business in a situation dangerous to the houses in the
vicinity.
Mr. Phillips, the surveyor of the above parish, said
that he summoned the defendant under a clause in the
new Building Act, which precluded the owners of pre-
mises from carrying on the manufacture of lucifer-
matches having them situated less than fifty-feet from
any highway or dwelling-house. He witnessed the
numerous accidents that had arisen in consequence of
explosions occurring in such places, which often led to
fatal accidents, and said that the defendant's factory
was in the immediate vicinity, not only of several dwell-
ing-houses, but also of a yard where large quantities of
timber were kept, and that the defendant incurred a
penalty of 501. per day for every day he continued the
business after he had received notice to discontinue it.

Witnesses having been examined on this point, and it
being contended that the premises in question were more
than fifty feet from the highway, the case was postponed
for the purpose of ascertaining the fact.