Star.
London, England, 1828-03-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, MAUCH Z.
LONG V. COCHRANE.

This case haviu_t been only partially heard os Thin-
day, th- arguments of C9unsel were further proceeded
with. Mr. 13ICKERSTAFF.10 support of the ininnetion,
urged that. by the defendant's default, and. that eloae,
the contract had not been fulfilled. The plaintiff had
made an offer to purchase the ship, with two objects,
either to break it up, or fit it up for sea. By the non-
production of the certificates of build and of tegister.l
the plaintiff had been unable to perform the agreement.
It was evident that a ship, although a personal chattel,
was unlike other personal chattels, inasmuch as it woul.l
not pass by simple-delivery. The title should be shown,
and this could alone be done by the production of the
necessary documents. lie contended, therefore, that
the defendant, not having fulfilled his p-irt of the con.
tract, the plaintiff could not be compelled to pay the
purchase m-irey. t
The Loan CHANCELLOR, without calling on Mr.
Sogden for a reply, stated his opinion to he, that as the
vessel had been sold as a'wreck, the production of the
documents was unntcessai y. The certificates of. built
and regi.try might be, and unioubtedly were necessary
for a ship previously to its sale; b t it %as perfectly
absurd to require their production on the sale of a
wreck, meant only to be broken up. His Lordship,
therefore, dissolved 'the injwctina ; refusing co ts,
however, as some part of the purchase money had been
paid to the defendant.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTIIERN CIRCUIT.—LANCASTER, Matto' 14.
civil. SIDE-li-fore Mr. I.3..inti.
CO sPi nAcv TO Pit CURE DEAD 13.1D114.
TIIE KING V. DAVIS AND fITIIENS.
Mr. Btiown o, ened the pleatiines, and stated, that
this was an 'ndictment John Davis, Erhorrd
Hall. IV'''. Blansica, Ri:hard Box. and J /roma: 'Ashton,
ch aging them with having, at Warrington, unlawfully
court lend ter ease and pt -cure the d. a.. 1 .boot of Miss
Jane Fair dough to be disinterred, for the purpose of
dissection. There were nine other. counts, vat riing the
offence; aadin four other counts the defendants were
merely charged with having the body in their posses
sion, knowing it to 'have been unlawfully disinterred.
The defendants pleaded ter Not Guilt"
Mr. Sergeant JONES stated tl,e case for the prosecu-
tion. The prosecutor was a respectable farmer, living
at Burton Wood, in the neighbourhood of Warrington.
Of the defendants, John Davis was an apprentice at the
Warrington Dispensary. Mr. E. Hall was a surgeon at
Warrington, Wm. Blundell was an apprentice to P. sta.
firmer, and a friend of the defendant Davis; Box was a
man who wAS formerly a livery stable keeper, and he be-
lieved now kept a car for tie conveyance of parcels
about the town. The other defendant, Ashton, was clei k
to the attorney who defended the present indittment.
The prosecutor, Fairclough, had a daughter who had
attained the age of 24 years, of fine personal appear.
ance ; she fell sick, and died on the 25th September, and
on- the 28th she was buried. Her father was a Baptist,
and she was interred in the burial ground of the
'Baptist Chapel, at H It Cliff, in the Eastern part Of
Cheshire. The funnel excited general attention in the
town, and in its progress roust have passed the resi
• deuces of many of the defendants. On the Sunday after
the fun: ral, the afili,:ted mother of the deceasid, Miss'
F. went to the grave, and remained weeping oir.r it for
some time; the grave was t':en safe; next day also
(M inday) it was safe, but on Tuesday it was discovered
t4tat the grave had been violated—the body had been
carried au ay, and the grave was left as if the disturbers
bad been interrupted in their operations. The body
was removed in a cart to a low house in Sankey-street,
W..rrington. Au ir cluity inintedietely took place, and
it turned out that Davis and Blundell found their way
to the house of Dr. Albeit Parry Muss, a physician of
eminence, at Warrington. , About twelve o'clock on
that night, a neighbour saw three-men with a hamper
in their possession; two of them were carrying it, and
the oilier appeared to be keeping watch ; the two pro-
ceeded in the direction of Dr. Moss's back. premises, and
introJuced the hamper. Next morning inf rmation was
given to the Magistrates, and Mr. Nicholson, their
clerk, waited on Dr. Moss, with the brother of the
young Lady, and they were conducted by the Doctor
into the yard, and there the body was discovered quite
naked, and crammed into a large hamper. It was de-
livered up to Mr. •Fairilough; and recommitted to the.
grave from whence it had been exhumed. The Learned
Sergeant said lie should prove that the two defendants,
Davis and Blundell, were on the premises of Dr. Moss,
• cad he should also prove that the defendant Hull had
by his own statement beforithi•Magiatrate, made him-
self a party in she business. 'With regard to the other
defendant pAthton), he should show that be was in pos-
session of the key of the house wh. re the body was first
deposited, and probably, in the result, he should not be
able to fix him with taking any other part. in the
transaction. The disinterment took place io the County
ohCherster, but he should. pteve a prior conspiracy in
thetecinty of Lancaster. 'He was awry to ray that
since:thia transaction had occurred, the feelings of the
family; as might be supposed, were considerably in
kited the detenclants. instead of condoling with them.
had treated the matter with the greatest levity. They
. bed been indicted at the Kit Wale Sessions, and they
had thought fit to remove it into that Court. With re
geed to *the topic that -surgeons, of necessity, were ,
obliged to procurodead bodies, for the purpose of dis-
section, in order that they might acquaint themselves
with the state of the human frame, the seat of disease,
&ea they had idthing•to do. but to decide upon the eel.
deuce he should biing.before them. The Learned Ser.
• leant tilled un Mr. Eiircicitigh, and several btherg, who
faded, however, to prove the fact of any previous corn
bination lbetaeen the prisoners.—The case was not
brought home to Athton, and he was discharged
accordingly.
Mr. Baron lIDLLOCK said, that the question fcr the
Jury to consider in the.first ten counts of the indictment
was. whether the evidence that had baen bropght
forward would warrant them in saying that the defend
ants or any of them had, previous to the disinterment of
the body, agreed jointly to get possession of it, ft r the
ptopote of dissection? if they were. thatahe
evidence would warrant them in forming that opinion,
then that would amount to coaspiraebtand they vuald
find npon the first ten counts la the indictment; but if,
on'thexontrarg, therconbideted that they merely had
• the body in their possession; knowing it wham been
,unlawfully disinterred, they would find. upon the four
• last counts.
Ti.e-Jury, after consithing for *few minutes,..lound
the defendants Aot Gui/frof the conspiracy ; but
tenoned a verdict of Godly agiind I.Lfais and Blundell,
of • hav lag the body initiate! a oaiiesaiona knowing .4' to
• be.thainteried. The•otherr were acquitted:
Thearial excited•considerable interest, and the Coati'
araccrowded;

-...M.ffial•

lUMMini