The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-20 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YORK, MARCH 18.
•Cnower Counr.-e-(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)
FORGERY OF VOTING PAPERS AT LEEDS.
George Beckwith, John O'Rourke, and George
Cromack, were charged with having, at Leeds, on
the let of March, 1857, unlawfully conspired
together to forge and counterfeit divers proxy ap-
pointments of persons having the right to vote at
the election of guardians of the poor.
Mr. Bliss, Q.C., Mr. Pickering, Q.C.' and Mr.
Baines, were for the prosecution ; Mr. Overend,
Q.C., and Mr. Wheelhouse, appeared for the de-
fence.
The present prosecution was instituted by the
Poor Law Board, in consequence of certain for-
geries having been committed at the last election of
guardians at Leeds, at which election much party
spirit was manifested, and forged voting papers
were presented. In 1844, a board of guardians
was constituted for Leeds, which was divided into
eight wards, six of which sent two guardianq,
and the other two three guardians to the
board. On the issuing of this order a good
deal of contention arose as to the election of
guardians, and committees were formed and can-
vassers employed with a view to influence the
elections, and to obtain the appointments of
proxies to vote for owners of property. At the
last election of guardians there was a large number
of these proxies used, and it was subsequently dis-
covered that numerous forgeries had been uttered
in the presentation of proxies. The prosecution
alleged that the defendants were the parties who
conspired together and forged these proxies, 47 of
which were in the handwriting of Mr. Beckwith,
and 12 had been written by Mr. Cromack. The
proxy appointments were taken to the office of the
overseers, and of that number 231 were received by
Mr. Grimshaw, an overseer, from Mr. Beckwith.
Many of these proxies were forgeries, and were
alleged to be in the handwriting of Beckwith and
Cromack, and with respect to O'Rourke, he took
out the proxy papers and distributed them to
'rations parties, and was very active in procuring
proxies. The defendant, Mr. Beckwith, was a
registrar of births and deaths in the union ;
O'Rourke had an office in which the duty devolved
upon him of removing Scotch and Irish paupers,
and Cromack was a bailiff. A large number of
witnesses were called for the prosecution, from
whose testimony it appeared that many cf the
proxy appointments presented at the election of
guardians last year at Leeds were forgeries, and
that the defendants were the party who conspired
together and fabricated these forged documents.
The defendants received excellent characters from
several of the witnesses for the prosecution.
Mr. Overend, in defence, submitted that the
mode in which the election of guardians for Leeds
last year was carried on was the ordinary mode in
which all elections of that kind were conducted.
The defendants no doubt took an active part in
the election, they felt a warm interest in securing
the success of the candidates belonging to the party
whom they represented. They acted merely as
electioneering agents. He admitted that the names
of the owners of property in the proxy appoint-
ments were forged, but that the defendants were
not aware of the fact. They obtained the names
of proxies in a perfectly bona fide manner, and
none of these signatures were forgeries. The learned
counsel, in conclusion, adverted to the excellent
character of the defendants, as showing that they
were men not likely to commit the serious offence
i ted to them.
ghly respectable witnesses were called as to
the unimpeachable reputation of the defendants,
particularly as regarded Mr. Beckwith.
The learned Judge summed up the case with
great minuteness, and the jury retired, and were
absent about 20 minutes, when they returned a
verdict of guilty of conspiracy to utter the forgeries
with guilty knowledge as against all the prisoners,
accompanied with a strong recommendation to
mercy, especially as regarded Cromack, who they
believed had acted in the capacity of a clerk.
His Lordship sentenced Beckwith and O'Rourke
to one month's imprisonment each, and Cromack
to 14 days' imprisonment.
(Nisi PRius COURT.—Before Mr. Baron Martin.)
WARE V. NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY—THE
ACCIDENT AT THE HULL STATION—SPECIAL JURY.
The plaintiff, Mr. Chas. T. Wake, was a gentle-
man of the age of 23 years and he has until a very
recent period resided at Hull. He was for several
years a clerk in the office of Messrs. Atkinson,
Robinson, and Atkinson, of Hull, solicitors, and
at the time of the accident which occasioned this
action he was serving the last three months of his
articles with that firm. On 26 h July last the plain-
tiff was a second-class passenger from Hull to Cot-
tingham. He had taken lodgings at the latter place
for the purpose of pursuing his studies with less in-
terruption, and was in the habit of leaving Hull by
the trainfcom Paragon Station at half-past 4 o'clock
in the afternoon, and returning to Hull about half-
past 9 o'clock in the morning. On the day in ques-
tion the plaintiff entered the train at the Paragon
Station, but had not proceeded far when, in conse-
quence of the neglect of one of the servants of the
company, the passenger train was run into by a
goods train with such impetuosity that several of the
carriages in the former train were thrown over, aed
most of the passengers injured. One of the passen-
gers was killed, and plaintiff received a severeshcck
to the system, and other injuries. He was removed
to the residence of his brother in Hull, when it was
found that he had received a fracture of the right leg,
and a dislocation of the ankle of the same limb, and
other serious injuries along the whole length of that
member. Competent medical gentlemen were called
in, and the bones were re-set. Unfortunately, how-
ever, inflammation and mortification supervened,
and it was found necessary to amputate the injured
limb, and Mr. Teale, of Leeds, was called in, and
performed the operation. In addition to the agony
and pain the plaintiff had suffered, he was for a
considerable time confined to his home, and was
unable to proceed to London, as he had intended,
for the purpose of passing his examination. The
defendants did not deny their liability, that the de-
plorable accident was the consequence of the neglect
of one of their servants, and the question for the
jury was whether, having regard to the age, the po-
sition, and profession of the plaintiff, having regard
to the pain which he had experienced, and to the
deplerable loss which he had sustained, the sum of
1,2u01., which had been paid into court, was a fair
and reasonable compensation which the defendants
ought to pay for the injury caused by the admitted
neglect of their servants. The expenses to which
the plaintiff had been put, arising from this acci-
dent, were very considerable, and amounted to be-
tween 2001. and 300/.
Mr. Hill, for the defendants, said his clients felt
great sympathy with the sufferers by this accident,
and wet e anxious to make to them what was a fair
and reasonable compensation for the injury they
bad sustained. He admitted that money could not
fully compensate defendant for the loss of a limb,
but, so far as such a compensation could be ren-
dered the defendants had been anxious to make
it. ilhe company thought 1,2001. was a fair and
reasonable sum, and they were willing to leave it
to the jury to say whether they had come to a right
conclusion.
The jury retired to consider their verdict, and,
after an ales( nce of about a quarter of an hour they
found for the plaintiff—damages 6001. exclusive of
what had been paid.
(Special Jury.)
WADDINGTON V. NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COM-
PANY.
Mr. Atherton, Q.C. and Mr. Unthank were for
the 'plaintiff ; and Mr. Hill, Q. C., and Mr. Manisty,
Q.C., were for the defendants.
This action arose out of the accident referred to
I,l,the previous case. The plaintiff, who is about
Years old, is a fellmonger and leather-dresser at
Beverley, and on the 24th of July last he was a
secondL-Claa passenger between Hull and Beverley,
and was returning
home by the quarter past four
o'clock train.
The carriage in which he was seated
was overturned by the collision, and the plaintiff
lead his leg fractaureedb,
had
dantd received other injuries
to his body.
was
still unable
with a spoon for
several weeks, and he
same
ease
eunable to attend to
his baldness with the
permanently formerly, and to
some extent was injured. The defen-
dants had paid 6001. into court.
In accordance with a suggestion made by Mr.
a
Baron Martin, after the jury had arrived ty
their
verdict in the first case, it was agreed
that the
damages in the other actions should
the be assessed on
*tome principle as the jury
had adopted, ' malt ac m- V 12.,
giotri mope as the sum paid into court, and
•*.tailetifet
torverdict in this case was taken for the
court. 2401
-si 11 addition to the 500/paid
. into
SMITH
j
oRTR-RASTZRN RAILWAY
By consent, a verdiee •""lyv•
tiff for 1501. Waitentered for the plain.
SHORT T. THE NORTH-EASTRRN next Air
The plaintiff in this case, a clerk ilva the.cs;;:t34Y*
the post-office authorities at York, was oix -trce, of
the mail train to London on the 14th of March
when the train ran off the rails. He received
serious injuries of the spine and brain. The jury,
after hearing the evidence and addresses of counsel,
deliberated an hour and a quarter, and then re-
Damages 8001.
turned a verdict for the plaintiff.

SQIITH WALES CIRCUIT,CA.IOI.I R THEN,
MARCH 18.
(Before Baron Bramwell.)
ATTEMPT TO MIIRDER--.SENTENCE OF DEATH.

J.anles Jones was charged with feloniously as-
saulting and wounding Margaret Jones, at Rhydy-