The Sun.
London, England, 1851-08-22 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN ClRCUl7l—Liverpool, Aug. 21.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice
_._

WILLIAMS and a Special Jury.)
HOLLINS V. CROSS.

This was an action to recover compensation from
the defendant for damage alleged to have been done
to some calico cloths by him in bleaching them.
Mr. Atherton, Q.C., Mr. Segar, and Mr. Cromp-
ton, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Wil-
kins, Mr. Cross, and Mr. Manisty for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff is a cotton-spinner and
manufacturer at Preston, and the defendant is a
bleacher at Halliwell, near Bolton. In 1850 the
plaintiff sent a quantity of grey cotton sheeting to
the defendant to bleach. The goods had been manu-
factured for Messrs. Robert Oatram and Co., of
London ; and, after being bleached, they were sent
to Messrs. Outrank A customer of theirs found
fault with some of the sheetings on the ground
that they had many stains on them, and an
investigation was made of the cloths by a London
finisher, the result of which was that the goods were
returned to Messrs: Outram. On complaint being
made to the plaintiff he overhauled his stock, and
found that other sheetings which he had were da-
maged in the same way. The plaintiff contended
that these stains on the cloth had been received at the
defendant's works, and were the consequence of the
water used by the defendant being impregnated with
iron, and from not properly "sowing" the cloth after
it had passed through the bleaching liquor, the lime
in the bleaching liquor causing a precipitate of iron
when water impregnated with iron was used ; and
that, even if this were not the cause of the stains, but
the cloth was already stained when it went to the
defendant's to be bleached, yet the defendant was
still liable for the damage, as it was his duty to have
bleached out the stains. The cloths had also been
damaged in other respects by being cut and marked
with hookholes. From the evidence it appeared
that palm-oil stains could be extracted by bleach-
ing; and one witness stated that the stains in the
calico were "sow," and he offered there and then
to wash them out with soft soap and water.
For the defendant it was contended that the
stains on the cloth were ironmoulds, which extended
right across the cloths, and that these stains were in
the gray cloth, and were made in the manufacture in
passing the warp between iron rollers. These iron
rollers were protected by flannel ; but when the flan-
nel was worn out, the rollers ironmoulded the warp,
and that no ordinary process of bleaching would ex-
tract these ironmoulds. The piece of calico which the
witness said he could wash with soft soap and water
free from the stain was produced after having under-
gone 25 minutes' washing, but the stain was still
there, and on Mr. Watson, a chymiat, applying to it
some infusion of galls, the stains immediately became
black and inky. This showed the stains to be iron-
mould, ink being made by an infusion of galls and
iron. Tee same stains were found on the plaintiff's
unbleached cloth. Some of the cloth had been twice
subjected to the process of bleaching, and the stains
could not be got out. It would require strong acids
or " sours" to extract those stains, the effect of which,
if used, would have been to destroy the fabric of the
cloth. It was proved that the water used by the de-
fendant was also impregnated with iron.
Mr. ATHERTON having replied,
His LORDSHIP summed up the evidence, directing
the jury that there was no evidence that the goods
within the plain meaning of the declaration "became
and were stained" by the defendant while being
bleached, but that if they were of opinion that the
cloths had been cut and had holes made in them in
an unworkmanlike manner, they must give the plain-
tiff such damages as they thought he had sustained.
(The jury found their verdict for the plaintiff—da-
mages 2001. for the cutting, and sere sent back to
find as to the stains, and had not returned when our
dispatch left.)

ROOKER V. THE BIRKENHEAD, LANCASHIRE, AND

CHESHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.

This case, in which the plaintiff, a surveyor at
Munchester, was one of the persons injured in the
Cheshire Tunnel on the return from the Chester races
in April last, was called on immediately before our
dispatch was sent off.

The action was in case, the plaintiff•, who appears
to have been dreadfully injured, laying his damages
at 5,0001. The defendants pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Knowles, Q.C., Mr. Pollock, and Mr. Hol-
land, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant
Wilkins, Mr. Crompton, and Mr. Monk, for the de-
fendant.

Mr. KNOWLES was stating the case when our dis-
patch left.
Both the plaintiff's legs were broken, awl his left
arm, his breastbone, and spine were injured, and he
was removed home all but dead. A companion,
named Davison, who was with him, was killed.
Though sixteen weeks ego, the plaintiff was yet un-
Ole to be removed, and the fees for surgical attend-
ance already amounted to more than 3001. The oc-
currence of this dreadful accident the Learned Counsel
attributed to the want of reasonable care on the part
of the defendants, who had employed no more than
ordinary engines, and removed the policeman :from
the tunnel whose duty it was to give notice of danger,
and no additional care whatever had been taken to
meet the extraordinary traffic. The consequence was
that the trains did not keep time, the engines were
overloaded, and the train in which the plaintiff was
came to a dead stand in the Cheshire Tunnel, where
it was run into by a following train, and the accident
and consequent injuries to the plaintiff thereby oc-
casioned.

Ia the Crown Court cases unfit for publication oc-
Qupied all day. Mr. Bliss, Q.C., sat in the grand
jury'.room, assisting Mr. Baron Platt in the trial of
prisoners.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
(Bercre Mr. Justice ERLE )
TRIAL OF CHARLES BEST AND JOHN KELLY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)

Mr. PLATT then replied, and
Mr. Justice ERLE having carefully and lucidly summed
up the evidence,

The jury returned a verdict of Guilty against both the
prisoners.

Evidence having been given of their previous convic,
tion for other offences, they were sentenced to be trans,
ported fur life.

John Bellamy, 30, was indicted for feloniously ad.
ministering a stupef) ing drug to Louisa Meredith,
with intent to rob her.

Mr. Briarley prosecuted, and Mr. Payne was for
the defence.

The charge was preferred under the recent statute
known as Lord Campbell's Act. It appeared that the
prosecutrix had been in the service of a respectable
licensed victualler in Fleet-street, and that she had
quitted that service on the evening of the day named
in the indictment, having previously received twenty-
six shillings, the amount of wages due to her. She
requested the prisoner to get her a cab, and take her
to some respectable lodging, and he accompanied her,
and they went to a public-house, where they had some
drink. They continued together driving about after
this, the prisoner pretending that he was desirous to
get her a lodging, and at length, immediately after
the prosecutrix had drunk a glass of rum given her by
the prisoner, she became completely insensible. While
in this state he took the cab to his own lodging,
where the box of the prosecutrix was taken out
and placed in his room. The police subse-
quently interfered, and it was found necessary
to use the stomach pump and other remedies
before the prosecutrix could be restored to conscious-
ness, and in her pocket there was found a bottle which
had contained laudanum, and which must have been
placed there by the prisoner. The box of the prose-
cutrix had not been opened, but it appeared that during
the proceedings she lost the whole of her money.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE said that the case had been
most satisfactorily brought home to the prisoner.
There could be no doubt that his intention was to rob
the prosecutrix, and the feared there could be very
little doubt also, from some parts of his conduct, that
he had another criminal design against her, and, under
all the circumstances, he felt it to be his duty to order
him to be transported for seven years.
The prosecutrix appealed to the Court, and said
that, owing to her losing the whole of her wages, she
was in great distress, and was unable to make her
way into the country, where she expected to obtain
another situation. .

Mr. Sheriff CARDEN said that the sheriffs would
give her some assistance if she applied to them.

THIRD COURT.
(Before Mr. RUSSELL GURNEY.)
William Dandy, 23, servant, pleaded guilty to
stealing an eyeglass, chain, two rings, and other ar-
ticles, the property of Mr. Frederick Dufaur, his
muster.

The prosecutor, a gentleman living in Qaeen Ann-
street, Cavendish-f.:quare, stated that he wished most
strenuously to recommend the prisoner to mercy, as
up to this period he had borne a good character, and
the cause of his present delinquency was a fatal pas-
sion he had for betting on horse racing--a taste, he
thought, he inherited from his father, who was a racing
jockey. The prisoner was always going to the public
betting offices—which he (prosecutor)
w3s sorry to
see were tolerated by law--and this he was convinced
was the sole cause of his misconduct.
Mr. GURNEY said that so many servants came

before this Court that he could not listen to recom-
mendations to mercy. So far as the cause to which
the prosecutor alluded was concerned, he much re-
gretted that such an evil should still be permitted to
exist.

The prisoner was then sentenced to six months' im-
prisonment.
Michael Connor, 45, labourer, was indicted for
stealing Blbs. weight of metal, the property of our
Lady the Queen.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted, and Mr. Horry defended.
The prisoner was a labourer at the new House of
Commons, and had been caught carrying out a quan-
tity of the brass 6heathiag of the windows. He
had been seven years employed there, at wages of 18s.
a week.

In answer to the Court, the foreman stated that
above 50 of the windows had been destroyed by the
metal being stripp-d off, and that it would cost about
501. to repair the damage done.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Mr. GURNEY said that the prisoner's conduct was
very bad, and sentenced him to 12 months' imprison-
ment and hard labour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
soUTHIVARK.

Thomas insell, a barber, residing in Norfolk-street,
Southwark-bridge-road, was brought before Mr.
A'Beckett charged with cutting and wounding Wil-
liam Coggitis, police constable 336 M, with a rash,
and striking him several times on the head with a
poker with intent to commit murder.
Complainant, whose head was bandaged and his
left hand in a sling, stated that about a quarter to one
o'clock on Tuesday morning he was on duty in the
Southwark-bridge-road, when ho saw the prisoner
and his wife creating a disturbance in the street. He
went up to them and told them to go away and not
make so much noise. The prisoner said he should
make as much noise as he liked, at the same time ex-
claiming that he would give him something for his
interference. The prisoner then ran round the corner
and fetched a poker, with which he struck witness
twice on the head and made his escape. He, however,
followed him to his house in Norfolk-street, and
pushed the door open to apprehend him, when he tcok
up a razor and tried to cut his throat with it. In the
struggle the prisoner nearly cut all the fingers off his
left hand. Another constable fortunately came up at
the time and prevented the prisoner from murder-
ing him.
Prisoner stated that the witness broke open the
door, and struck him with his staff. He had no right
to break open his door.
The complainant said that he did not break the
door open. He pushed it gently, when it flew open.
Witness did not use his staff until he was attacked
wits the raz)r.

Police-constable 285 AI said he was on duty in
Union-street at the time in question, when he heard
screams of murder proceed front Norfolk street.
He instantly hastened to the house, where he saw the
complainant bkeding profusely from the head and left
hand. The prisoner had the razor produced in his
hand, and was flinging it about with great force.
Witness struck him on the hand with his staff, and
made him drop the razor, when a sergeant entered the
house and secured him.

Sergeant Golding, 7 NI, sail tb.t when he arrived
on the spot he saw Goggins bleeding from the head
and hand. He we.s in such a state that he could not
stand. The prisoner had the razor in his right hand,
flinging it about, but last witness made him drop it
and secured him. The complainant was then con-
veyed to a surgeon's, when hi 4 wounds were dressed,
and he was afterwards carried to his lodging.
Police-constable 53 M said he picked up a poker in
the street near the prisoner's house. It wascovered
with hair and blood on the sharp edge.
Mr. Oiling, surgeon of the division, said he was
called in to see tho complainant, whom be found in
an exhausted state. He had a wound on the right
side of his head an inch and a half long, and two of
the fingers on hit left, hand were nearly cut cif. The
wound on the bead ha believed to have been inflicted
with the poker produced.
Mr. A'BECKETT asked whether there was any
dancer ?

Witness replied in the negative. The fingers
were injurild to an extent that would require some
time to heal th wounds.

In answer to the charge the prisoner sail he hod
been to Camberwell fair, and drank rather too much,
and he should not have touched the constable if he
had not broken into his house.

Mr. A 'BECKETT said it wrs a very serious offence,
and it was fortunate for him that ho had not com-
mitted murder. lie had cut and beaten the constable
in a very ferocious manner ; consequently he should
commit him to the Old Bailey for cutting and
wounding.