Star.
London, England, 1822-08-30 00:00:00

I

proved the ceMpleinte Oh* lettihad • and thie.
situation in whit% iibe lid Win i
Mr. Howarden; a iurtroti '.; deileeed to the state in.
which the child was limn , after the nbominable usage 1
txci which she received from the pritower.
it U Mr. ASHWOATH defended the prisoner at consider•
ath able length, and argued wi Intteh. 'lngeenst yon the
tmi improbability of the crime , oliB bit committeddiat
under such circumitantes.. • - . 4,..
amt 1 Mr. Baron Wocter''.vias Silibtit Winds up the case,
me, !but the Jury dedired theittither 'pits ficd, and ip-
%011•• I scantly found the tiehisrier-:=Gisiky.
el-, Mr. Baron Woon.A proper Vet-diet, Gentlemen.'
but !FORGERY.
.
not Thomas Pendlebury, aged 36, and lrtlflant Cross-
ra land, aged SS,. were, charged with hiving forged a
fori_ bill of. esChangelbe:l97. lt.s. 6d. With intent to de-
' fraud of,
Diiiieti,,of LiVerpool.
n, • James Dutton, an accomplice, carried on the trade.
2 of a tallow-chandler, at Manchester ; knew Pendlet.
hbUr• left Manchester with him and Crossland, on!
y' ,
the 241 of April ; met a man named White on thel
road. White said he had been trying to do busineai
at Warrington, but could not. We all four got, on
• the coach when it overtook us. We got to Liver!
' pool; and went first to a public-house kept by. Hurst,
and then to another kept by Minshull. Pendlebury'
asked for a sheet of paper, which was brought with''
pen and ink. A man of the name of Byrne was
there. We went all up stairs. Pendlebury pulled
about 30 stamps out of his hat. He looked them
over, and at last gave Byrne one. After the bill
was drawn, Crossland came up to• the table. Byrne
wrote upon the stamp, and Pendlebury asked Cross
land to begin it. Crossland said, " What must I
sign it?" and Pendlebury said, " My friend Mr.
Phillips, to be sure." Crossland then said, " What
must I endorse it? and
,Pendlebury said, " You
know as well as I do; write- peter Leigh." Byrne,
drew the bill, but I did not see it endorsed. ten-
dlebury said, " It is a nice bill ; I never saw a nicer
in my life ;" and Byrne said, " I , don't think you
ever did." It was drawn for 19/._lss. 6J. Crossland
gave it to me by order of Pendlebury, and I went
to a Mr. Leathetbarrow, in Dale-street, to buy.pipes.
I tendered the bill, but it was not received. I Went
to Messrs. Davies, rosin dealers, in Liverpool„ and
bought twenty barrels of rosin, at 7s. 6d. per barrel.
They took the bill in payment, and gave me the
balance in cash.
Cross-examined by Pendlebury.—l am admitted
evidence against you. Mr. Miller, the Police-officer,
said, that if I would tell the truth about the bills, he
would admit me as evidence. I have not told more
than the..truth. . I was in partnership with a man
named Edmund Taylor. The goods I bought at
Liverpool were for my partner and myself. 1 don't
know whether I was told to take care of what 1 said
about Pendlebury, as they wanted to get hold o 4
him. I did not say that I had illed four sheets of
paper with my evidence about Pendlebury and the
concern, and that I feared I should not be able to re-
collect it all during the Assizes. •
By Crossland.—l never knew that you had, or
were to have had any profit out of the bills.
John Hayes, a blacksmith, w.as at Mrs. Minshull's
on the 3d of April. He confirmed Dutton's testi-,
mony. Dutton said to Pendlebury, " I wish you
woull go with us and pay this bill ; it will look more
respectable." Pendlebury said, " No, I'll have nothing
to do with the bill;. I am a better judge than that."
The cross-examination of this witness by Pendle-
bury was long but not important.—You did express
a determination to go before the Magistrates when
you heard the Officers were after you, but it being
Good Ft iday, there was no Court at the Exchange.
James Hogarth, foreman to Mr, Leatherbarrow,
proved refusing the bill. _
A Clerk to Messrs. Davies proved receiving the
bill from Dutton. It was never paid.
Thomas Roe apprehended the prisoners. Pendle-
bury was concealed in a coal hole. .
Mr. Neil, Clerk to Messrs. Fenton and Co. said
there was no John Phillips known to their Bank.
Mr. Wood, Clerk to the other Bank at Rochdale,
said they knew no Peter Leigh and John. Phillips.
Both the prisoners denied the charge.
Crossland called the following witnesses ;
John Phillips.—l have accommodated you several
times, but it is long since. I saw you in. September
last, and we drank together. You repeatedly asked
for the use of my name; I said, " Well.' You pressed
me, and I put you off with saying, " Well." I did
not positively give you leave to use my name.
Crossland.—Come, come, John, recollect yourself,
man. Uite, behave like a man ; behave decently.
Mr. Baron Woon.—Da behave yourself decently.
Peter Leigh.—l don't think the bid is .right. I
never authorised you to use my name.
0 LORD ALMIGHTY! I never heard such a tale in
my life. How came you .to write to toe here ?—I
never wrote to you here.
But you desired others. to write ?—No, I never did.
John \Vatson.-,I was with you when you bought
the blankets in September. I don't reinemiier Out
John Phillips was there. .
The Jury*.retired for half an hour, and found both
the prisoners—did/4.. '"
Joseph White (the same whose name appears in the
preceding trial) was charged-with uttering a forged
bill of L 29 15s. 6d. and firging the en' dbrsement,
" Peter Leigh."
button repeated evidence nearly the same as in the
last case, but there was no evidence to prove the
forgery.—The ',Mt, nuclei Ms Lordship's direction,
I found a'verdict of—NOI 'Cliff's.. .
There were other indictments against White -for
similar crimes, but no evidence was offered, and he,
was acquitted. • '

CIVIL SIDE.
HOGGITT V. HIGGINSON.
This was an action to recover penalties under the
Game Laws, for the sale of game. The plaintiff is a
gamekeeper, the defendant an innkeeper in Manches-
ter. Much evidence was given on both sides, and a
great part of it contradictory. His Lordship left it en-
tirely to the Jury to decide upon the credibility of the
witnesses, and to say whether any penalties were
due. There could not be more than three brace of
grouse, and the penalty was £5 each bird.—. Verdict
for the defendant.

STEPHENSON V. MOORROUSE AND, OTHERS.
Mr. WILLIAMS opened this as a case of great op-
pression. The plaintiff Wu a weaver at Paddyham,
Nail had lived in the house in which his father had