The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-03 00:00:00

MURDER OF A SEAMAN BY STRANGULATION AT LIVERPOOL

Philip Wall, 25, and William, Carr, 28, both seamen,
were charged with the wilful murder of a sailor' named
James House, at Liverpool, on the morning of the 20th
February last. The facts of the case, as given by wit-
nesses for the prosecution, were as follows :—The
deceased was a seaman, about 44 years of age, and in
February last he lodged with a man naniel John 80l
in Nelson street, Liverpool. He left his lodgings at
eleven o'clock on the night of the 19th February, and
he had then in his possession three half-crowns, two
shillings, an i some copper. He went to the house
of Mr. Thorn, a licensed publican, in Dennison-street,
where he had three glasses of port wine and half a glass
of braedy. He left the house about ten minutes past
twelve o'clock, in company with a girl named Jane
Hurst, with the intention of going home with her.
At the corner of Chadwick-street the deceased lefr, the
woman, and turned back. A short time afLerwarde
police-officer, named Newsham, saw the prisoners and the
deceased in company en Chieenhale Bridge. He asked
them where they were going, and the deceased replied,
"It's none of your business." One of the prisoners said,
"It's all right, we'll take him away." About this time, a
woman named Brennan, living in Chisenbale street, saw
the prisoners passing her house. She knew Carr, and spoke
to him. Whilst she was speaking, she saw the deceased
lying on some steps. A man came up and iaised him,
but they both fell dovin again. She went up and told the
deceased to go home, or the police would take him. He
replied that if they did he had money. The prisoners
came up and took hold of him, one by each arm, and,
calling him "shipmate," led him away. They went to-
wards Bagging Entry. They went into Clement-street,
and a constable saw them enter a bad house in No. 5,
Court in that street. They remained there about ten
naiuutea, and then left. About. hall-past 4 o'clock in
the morning, a carter named James Bryan, on going
to the stale where he kept his horses, in Baggin
Entry, discovered the body of the deceased, lying in the
entry, about five yards beyond the stable. The deceased
then had on striped blue trousers, a shirt with a stripe
down the front, a pair of stockings, and a singlet.
There was a muffler, which had bees seen in the posses-
sion of Carr on the previous day, tied twice round his
neck, and fastened with a bard double knot under the
right ear. No money was found upon him. His face
was black and swollen.—Dr. Sayer, a surgeon at the
North Dispensary, who made a post-mortem examina-
tion of the body of the deceased, gave it as his opinion,
that death had been caused by strangulation. He was
cross examined by Mr. Tindal Atkinson, with the view
of showing that death had resulted from apoplexy, but
his replies were inaudible to the reporters. On the day
after the murder, the prisoners were found pawning the
coat and vest of the deceased, and when they were ap-
prehended, Wall was wearing the boots, and Carr the
mailer, which had been taken from the person of the
deceased.

Fur the defence of the prisoners it was urged, that the
evidence, such as it was, was entirely circumstantial,
and that there was no sufficient motive shown for the
committal of the crime of murder ; and in conclusion it
was suggested, either that the deceased had met with his
death by his owuhand, or that it hadteen caused by an
attack of apoplexy, brought on by excssive drinking.
His lordship summed up the eVidence, and at a quarter
to six o'clock, the jury retired to consider their verdict.
The jury found both Wall and Carr guilty, and both
prisoners were sentenced to death.
NISI PEW'S COURT.
(Before .Mr. Justice Willee.)
FIRTH V. THE NORTH OF ENGLAND FIRE AND LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. HenryFirth,(Altim-street, Manchester, machinist,
was the plaintiff, and the North of England Fire and
Life Insurance Company were the defendants ; and the
declaration stated that the plaintiff effected a policy
of insurance against fire, to the amount of 1,6701. on
shafting, stock in trade, office furniture, &c. in la
building in Alum-street, Manchester belonging to the
p'aintiff. The defendants had paid 1:200/. into court.—
Mr. 'Hill, Q.C. in stating the plaintiff's case, said, in Ow
year 1855, the plaintiff, who carried on an eXtensive
business as a machinist, was desirous of effecting a policy
of insurance against fire upon property which he pos..
sess,d_at Manchester. He entered into communication
with Mr. Greaves, of Manchester, agent for the North-"f
England Fireand Life Insurance Company, whose Lead
office is in-Sheffield. The p'aintiff gav3 Mr. Greaves
full details with respect to all the property he p?ssessed
in the building, explaining to him that his stock in trails,
nothprised a valuable.number of patterns ; patterns being
an essential part of the stock in trade, and necessary, in
fact, to every maohinibt carrying on busineee. Firth

not knowing how the property ought to be described,
left it entirely to Greaves to put into the policy such a
description as should fairly cover all his property. A
policy was accordingly effected, and the desci odor; given
was that this 1,6701. was the a'nouat insured upon
"shafting, stock in trade, goods, fittings, &c." Though
the insurance was 1,670/., the property was of a
very much greater value, nearly 3,0001. in all, but a
considerable portion consisted of anvils, hammers, and
other articles, which could not be injured very materially
in case of fire. On Saturday, 21st July, Mr. Firth
went to Chester, returning to Manchester on the Mon-
day. During his absence, on the Sunday, a fire had
taken place which had consumed the property insured.
Mr. Firth immediately gave notice Mr. Greaves, who
visited the premises, and then told the plaintiff to make
out a statement of hie loss, and send it to the office.
There was considerable difficulty in complying with this :
wish, the books, vouchers, and other documents having
been destroyed in the fire. Mr. Firth, however, made
out the best estimate in his power, in the shape of a
rough estimate in a round figure, which he delivered i
to Mr. Greaves. Mr. Greaves told him be must make 1
out an estimate in detail, and send it to Sheffield.
An account in detail was afterwards made out, by 1
the assistance of the pattern makers in the plaintiffe
employ. The insurance company put that statement
of account in the bands of a gentleman named Bran-
son, an inspector, accustomed to examine into cases of
loss after fire, to make the best investigation ha could.
Mr. Firth saw Mr. Branson, and gave him orally an
explanation, affording him every assistance he could in
proceeding with his investigation, and sending to him
the pattern makers for examina'ion. Mr. Branson made
an effer of a sum of money. He disputed the fact that
the patterns were included in the policy. Now, the
actual loss to Mr. Firth, in patterns alone, by this fire,
was very nearly 1,0001. The entire value of the pro-
perty consumed or injured, after deducting the value
of the salvage, about 2001., was nearly 1,8001., of
which probably 1,0001. or thereabout would be the
valrie of the stock in trade, which consisted of pat-
terns. Some correspondence followed between Mr.
Firth and the company, who referred him to Mr.
Branson, in whose hands they said they had left the
matter. The plaintiff saw Mr. Branson again, who
made him an offer of 700/. lie again wrote to the
defendants, who intimated in reply that, as the pat-
terns formed a considerable item in the plaintiff's
claim, and as it had been disallowed 'bg Mr. Bran-
son, their valuer, they should take proceedings, and
wished to be made acquainted with the name of his so-
licitor. No satisfactory arrangement being come to, this
action was brought. In the first instance the company
had put pleas upon the record to the effect that the
plaintiff had given them no immediate notice of the fire
when it broke out, and that he had given them no oral
evidence to satisfy them with regard to the nature of the
loss ; and they dispute'] their liability to pay one farthing.
Three days ago, however, they bad amended their pleas
by paying 1,2001. into court, saying that that was suffi-
cient to satisfy the loss. If the company attempted to
assert that. patterns were no part of " stook in trade,"
covered by the description in the policy, he (Mr. Hill)
would satisfy the jury by evidence of the largest and
most respectable machinists in this country, that pat-
terns did come within the designation of stock in trade.
At this stage of the proceedings, the Attorney-General
(fer the defendants) stated that though his chants had a
strong impression tnat patterns were not included in the
insurance under the general term "stock in trade,"
and though such patterns bad invariably, with their
office, been the sui-ject of a separate insurance, they were
only desirous of having justice done to themselves as well
as to the plaintiff. It was clearly impossible that his
lordship or the jury could try this case, inasmuch as he
should have to go through a tedious investigation as to
the character and value of each portion of each pattern.
If his :earned friend, therefore, was disposed to meet his
prop isal, he should be content to refer the question,
tiether patternP were included in the term stock in
trade, to some gentlemen to be mutually agreed upon.
Mr. Hill said the suggestion was creditable to the corn_
pany, and as his cheat dit not shrink from any investi-
gation, he had great pleasure in acceding to it. A verdict
was, therefore, taken for the plaintiff, subject to a refer-
enee.—[lt was subsequently agreed to refer the matter
to Mr. It. Ashton Cross, of Manchester.]