The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-21 00:00:00

Mr. Adams conducted the prosecution ; Mr.
Flood defended the prisoner..
Job Ashton, a keeper, was out with Lynam,
another keeper, about 5 p.m on Saturday, Novem-
ber the 13th, in some land of Mr. Hurt, his mas-
ter, wllen he saw two men on Mr. Hurt's land
carrying guns. The keepers had neither guns nor
dogs, but they followed Saunders and his com-
panion by the side of the turnpike-road, when the
prisoner, who was only two yards in advance of
them, turned round and discharged his gun at Ash-
ton's legs. Ashton started on one side and was not
struck by any shot, althougy the gun was loaded,
as appeared by many shots having penetrated the
ground.
Mr. Flood addressed the jury, and the learned
judge having summed up, they returned a verdict
of not guilty.
Hong Kong, a Chinese, described as a sailor,
stood charged with the manslaughter of William
Camomile.

Mr. O'Brien conducted the prosecution, and Mr.
Flowers defended the prisoner.
No jury de medietate lingua being desired by the
prisoner's counsel, _

Mr. O'Brien stated the case and called witnesses,
who proved the following facts :—A map. named
Collins and his wife had met the prisoner in York,
and the three travelled in company, making money
by the prisoner's singing, up to February 25. They
came to Chesterfield, and were going very peaceably
through the streets. Hong long singing as usual
when the deceased, a young blacksmith, who was
intoxicated and happened to be among those around
him, struck the prisoner, took him by the hair of
his head, and pulled him about. Both the prisoner
and the deceased then took off their coats, and. a
fight began, which lasted some two minutes. More
than one of the bystanders endeavoured to persuade
the deceased man to forbear teasing, and when
there was a pause in the fight tried to pull him
away. The deceased swore that he would knock
the prisoner's head off, and on this some one in the
crowd said to the prisoner, " If I was you, I'd
murder him." Upon that the prisoner took from a
bag a knife which the day before he had borrowed
from Collins, ran at the deceased, and inflicted a
wound upon the side of his abdomen, from which
the bowels protruded, and from the effects of which
he died.

Mr. Flowers addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that he was, as it would seem, under
apprehension that his own life was in danger, and
that the blow was necessary for his self-defence.
The learned judge having summed up,
The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
Sentence was deferred until Monday morning.
Mr. Sergeant Hayes sat this afternoon in the
grand jury room, and tried prisoners.

NISI PRIUS COURT.
(Before Lord Campbell and a Special Jury.)
WELCH V. BRITTLEBANK.

This was an action for assault, in which Mr.
Macaulay and Mr. O'Brien appeared for the plain-
tiff; and Mr. Mellor and Mr. Bell for the defen-
dant.

The plaintiff was a young man, and an attorney
and magistrate's clerk at Ashbourne, and the de-
fendant was an attorney at the same place. The
plaintiff proved that on the 31st of January last he
had taken a small quantity of wine with a friend
of his, Mr. Fox, and on plaintiff's way home defen-
dant asked him to go to the Crown Inn, at Ash-
bourne, which he did, and there he found a Mr.
Archer with the defendant, and a conversation then
arose relative to a letter Archer had received from
the secretary of the North Staffordshire Railway,
charging Archer with having travelled with an
improper ticket. The plaintiff advised that Archer
should pay the additional fare, but the defendant
thought otherwise. Archer was the client of the
defendant. The plaintiff stated that the defendant
then said he would have nothing more to do with
the case, and that he would hand the case over to
plaintiff. Plaintiff said he did not wish to inter-
fere, and there was no occasion for the defendant
to be piqued. Defendant said he was not. Plaintiff
said, " Well, if you are not, your conduct is like
that of an insane person." Defendant went out of
the room and returned, and then placed himself
before the plaintiff and said, " You called. me a liar."
Plaintiff said he never did. Defendant said the
plaintiff was a liar. The defendant then struck the
plaintiff two blows on the head, which caused
blood to flow from one of his ears. Defendant also
kicked and stamped on plaintiff's hat. It appeared
that the plaintiff was perfectly sober from the
evidence of several witnesses who were called;
who saw him on the night in question
after the assault. On the part of the • de-
fendant he was called with other witnesses,
and proved that they were at the Crown, and that
words ensued between the plaintiff and the defen-
dant, and that the plaintiff called the defendant a
liar, whereupon the defendant said, "If you call
me a liar, you must take the consequences. That
the defendant went out of the room, and on his
return the plaintiff still persisted in calling him a
liar, when the defentant struckiim as charged by
the plaintiff.
The learned judge having summed up the case,