The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-03-29 00:00:00

SOUTH LANCASHIRE ASSIZES.

At five o'clock on Wednesday evening, Sir James Parke,
Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, and Sir E. H.
Alderson, one of the Barons of her Majesty's Court of
Exchequer, arrived here from Lancaster, escorted by Charles
Scarisbrick, Esq., of Scarisbrick Hall, High Sheriff of the
county, and the customary procession of officers and yeomen.
At Kirkdale, their lordships were met by his worship the
Mayor, who was attended by a considerable portion of the
municipal officers of the borough. On their arrival, their
lordships made no delay whatever, but proceeded immedi-
ately to the Court House. The usual proclamations for
opening the court being read, Sir James Parke stated, that
the civil and criminal business of the assizes would be pro-
ceeded with at twelve o'clock on the following day. Sir
James Parke will preside in the Crown Court, and Sir E. H.
Alderson in the Nisi Prius Court. There are not more than
45 prisoners for trial on the calendar. In the Nisi Prius
Court, most of the cases to be brought forward possess no
public interest or importance.

CROWN COURT.-THURSDAY.

Their Lordships attended divine service at eleven o'clock
this morning, in St. George's Church. At a quarter past
twelve o'clock they proceeded to the Court-house.
Sir JAMES PARK, on taking his seat:in the Crown Court,
desired that a prisoner named Rogers, who was convicted at
the last assizes, and whose case had since been under the
consideration f the judges, should be brought up to receive
sentence.

Mr. Moss said that such was the state of the prisoner's
health, it would be dangerous to bring him out at present.
His health is so bad, he added that it is impossible he can re-
cover.

His LORDSHIP said it was necessary to pass sentence upon
him in his presence. He directed that he should be brought
up to-morrow after church time. Let a coach, he said, be
procured for him, and have him carefully wrapped up. The
judges have considered his case, and they think that he was
guilty of the offence charged against him. His sentence will be
11 months' imprisonment from the time of his confinement.
The names of the magistrates of the county, of the mu-
nicipal officers of the cities, towns, and boroughs, and of the
coroners of the Southern division of the county having been
called over,
The following gentlemen were then sworn as members of
the Grand Jury :

•ohn Ireland Blackburne, Esq. M.P. Hale, Foreman.
Sir Benjamin Haywood, Bart., Claremont.

James Aspinall, Esq., Liverpool.
Merrick Banks, Esq., Winstanley Hall.
Wm. Blundell, Esq., Crosby.
Thomas Bright Crosse, Esq., Shaw Hall.
William Wallace Currie, Esq., Liverpool.
Hardman Earle, Esq., Liverpool.
James Hilton Ford, Esq., Rainford.
John Frederick Foster, Esq., Manchester.
William Gale, Esq., Lightburn House.
Hugh Hornby, Esq., Liverpool.
Michael Hughes, Esq.,

Richard Blundell, Esq., Higher Hall, Westleigh.
Richard Leyland, Esq., Liverpool.

Charles Orrell, Esq., lilackbrOok.
Shakspeare Phillips, Esq., Barlow Hall, near Manchester.
Thomas Ridgway, Esq., Wallsuches, Manchester.
Ralph Thicknesse, Esq., Beech Hill, Wigan.

,
William Rathbone, Esq., Liverpool.
Samuel Taylor, Esq., Eecleston Hall.
.._

. . . .
John Whitley, Esq., Brookside Abram.
John Woodcock, Esq., Douglas Bank, Wigan.

The proclamation for the encouragement of piety and
virtue, and for the restraining of immorality and vice having
been read,

His LORDSHIP proceeded to deliver his charge. Gentle-
men of the Grand Jury,—lt will not on the present occasion,
in the discharge of your public duties, require a great sacri-
fice of your time and convenience, for the number of offences
on the calendar, considering the extent of this district, is not
great. lam aware that lam not authorized to draw a fa-
vourable deduction of the state of crime from the calendar,
for the magistrates at Quarter Sessions devote much more
time to the consideration and punishment of offences than is
done in other counties, But lam sorry, that even from the
state of the calendar, and from the depositions that have
been placed before me, I am not able to draw a favourable
inference as to the state of crime in this district, for, besides
burglaries, felonies, and cases of horse stealing, there is a
great number of crimes of very serious magnitude, which in
a legal point of view are subversive of religion and morality.
There is one case, especially, of murder, which leaves no
doubt whatever as to the commission of the offence by some
individual. There is a case also of a father stabbing his child
under circumstances of irritation, which circumstances you
will have to consider. When I read the depositions, I was
at first of opinion that the offence should be submitted to
the Grand Jury as one of murder, but on further considera-
tion I am induced to think that the ends of justice will be
fully accomplished by finding a bill of indictment for man-
slaughter against the accused, as the verdict of the coroner's
inquest decided it. There is a case of a servant deliberately
administering poison to a family, instigated to it, as is alleged,
by some feelings of spite or grudge. All the family partook
of it, but providentially it was not followed by any fatal con-
sequences. Such a charge, if brought home against the ac-
cused, might undoubtedly affect the life of the party, for not-
withstanding the mitigation that the criminal law has lately
undergone, this crime is still left punishable by death. There
are also two charges of shooting with intent to murder. In
considering these cases, no difficulty would be experienced,
for, by the providence of God, death had not ensued, al-
though all the moral guilt of murder was incurred. For
the punishment of such offences, the statute of 1836 takes
away the penalty of death ; but enacts that of transporta-
tion for life. There is a case of stabbing which would also
claim their attention ;—lt was much to be regretted that such
a disgraceful practise should prevail in this district.
There is likewise a case of violence to a female. I have

thus pointed out to you all the offences on the calendar which
are of a serious nature. Ido not consider it necessary to en-
ter into details respecting any of them but the first and last
offences. The first I mentioned was a case of murder, the
last was one of rape. As to the first, the proof of it would
depend upon circumstantial evidence, and the question for
you will be, whether these circumstances are sufficiently clear
to produce a conviction in your minds that the accused is
guilty of the offence charged. The same remarks which I
have frequently to make to petit juries, on this point, I shall
address to you. The best testimony you can have to direct
you in the investigation of such cases is that of an eye witness ;
but it frequently happens that such a chain of circumstances
is brought forward as to bring the charge home so clear to the
accused, that no mere doubt of his guilt can be entertained,
than if it was proved by the evidence of an eye witness.
In the progress of such an enquiry, it is necessary that great
caution should be used—firSt of all the facts of the case should
be duly considered, and for the proof of these facts you will
have principally to rely on the witnesses veracity; and it will
next be your duty to examine if these facts are reconcileable
with the guilt of the person charged ; for if the facts exclude
his guilt, he could not be convicted, and the case then becomes
one with respect to which the grand jury ought not to find a
true bill of indictment.

I do not mean by these observations to fetter your
discretion, for there are many circumstances which you
have to consider—a great number of witnesses are to be
examined, that may warrant you in drawing a different in-
ference from that of guilt. The next matter to be considered
is that of violation of females. You are no doubt aware of
the law as applicable to such cases. If a female under ten
years of age is proved to have been violated, whether she has
given her consent or not, the offence is a capital one. In the
calendar now before me, there is a most shocking case of this
description. From the extreme youth of the female (she
being only four years of age) it is impossible that she can be
sent forward before .the grand jury, for, although she was
examined before the magistrates, you cannot receive her tes-
timony, as she does not understand the obligation of an oath.
It will be for you to decide if the purpose of the accused was
or was not accomplished. The law in reference to this offence
was altered by the 9th of Geo. IV. I shall give you the
clause, and it will be for you to judge if that clause is borne
out by the evidence that will be laid before you. The child,
as I have observed, is only four years of age, and it is stated
that she has laboured under a loathsome disease, the conse-
quence of this abominable offence. The surgeons will be sent
before you, and they will explain to you in what manner the
disease .may have been contracted. I am aware that this
loathsome complaint may be contracted otherwise than in

the manner alleged, but it will be for you to examine this
matter carefully. if you are satisfied that the disease was
not communicated by the accused you will present his crime
as a misdemeanour ; if on the contrary, you consider, after
weighing all the circumstances of the case, that he was the
cause of it, you will present it as a felony. There is another
charge of the violation of a girl of eleven years of age—she
is stated to be between ten and twelve years of age. if it be
proved that the crime was committed, and that there was an
absence of consent the crime is felony, the same as if she
was of a more advanced age. if she consented the offence is
a misdemeanor ; it is therefore of importance that you should
discover whether the consent was or was not obtained. His
Lordship then referred to another case which did not appear
on the face of the calendar. It was that of three apprentice
girls, who charged their employer with an indecent assault
upon them. The person accused denies that he had any in-
tercourse whatever with these girls, and he defends him-
self by saying, that they concocted the charge against
him from feelings of spite, because he refused them
the use of their best clothes on one occasion. Yo
will carefully examine and see what foundation there
is for their statements. These are all the cases that I
think require any remarks from me. I may observe, how-
ever, that in reading over the depositions—and I must say
they are in general remarkably accurately drawn out—l per-
ceive some words are deficient. It is not stated that the
depositions were read in the presence of the accused. This
is of importance, for in the absence of these words, in the
event of the death of the witness, his testimony would fall
to the ground. The depositions ought therefore to be read
in the presence of the accused, and in future I hope that the
magistrates will see that the depositions are taken in his
presence. On this head I have a few remarks to offer, which,
at the request of some gentlemen, I shall now make. Some
doubts are entertained as to the admission of attorneys,
when investigations are going on before magistrates, into
cases of felony. The law on this point has been settled by
three decisions of the Court of King's Bench. By their de-
cisions an attorney has no privilege, as a matter of right, to
be present on such occasions. It altogether depends on the
discretion of the magistrate who may, if he thinks proper,
allow an attorney to be present to conduct the accused's
case. Although, as I have said, he cannot be present as a
matter of right, yet I think it is advisable in such cases to
have the presence of an attorney who might suggest to the
magistrates, matters of law, and assist the accused in con-
ducting his defence. The adoption of this course would
tend to make the investigation satisfactory to all parties. As
to the sitting of magistrates for the decision of penalties,
attorneys enjoy the same right to be present at them as in
any other court. They have the same prescriptive right to
appear there as in any other court of law. In the first place
then, an attorney has no right to be present at an investiga-
tion before a magistrate into a case of felony. In the second
place, he has as good a right as any one else to be present
when a magistrate sits as a judge, deciding penalties to be
inflicted, but it is discretionary with the magistrate whether
he will allow an advocate to act, either as barrister or attor-
ney. With these observations, gentlemen, I dismiss you to
the discharge of your important duties.
In the course of about twenty minutes the foreman of the
Grand Jury came into court, with a true bill against John
Crossley, for bigamy.
John Crossley. labourer, of Oldham, was then placed at
the bar. He was indicted for having, in the month of June
last, married Betty Schofield, his former wife, Sabina Stotts,
being then living.

The prisoner pleaded guilty.
The Counsel for the prosecution begged his lordship's at-
tention to the fact which is stated in the depositions, that the
prisoner, when he abandoned his second wife, took away with
him all his own and her earnings, and left her utterly desti-
tute. It was this circumstance that led to the discovery of
his guilt, and was the cause of his apprehension.
His LORDSHIP then proceeded to pass sentence upon the
prisoner. He commented, with much severity, on the
enormity of the offence the prisoner was guilty of, but, con-
sidering that he had already suffered six months imprison-
ment, the sentence of the court wouldnow be—imprisonment
in the House of Correction, Kirkdale, for one year and hard
labour.

Samuel Whitworth was indicted for having, at Oldham,
feloniously married one Nanny Dronsfield, his former wife
being then living.
The prisoner pleaded guilty, but in extenuation of his crime
he stated, that his second wife knew he was married before
to another woman. His lordship, before proceeding to sen-
tence .he prisoner, desired the second wife to be placed in the
witness-box. Being sworn, she distinctly denied having any
knowledge of the prisoner's previous marriage—on the con-
trary, she said, he represented himself as a single man.

He was then indicted for stealing a handkerchief, the pro-
perty of Robert Butterworth—he was also indicted for hav-
ing been previously found guilty of felony. He pleaded not
guilty to both indictments.
The following petit jury was then sworn :
Edward Armstrong, Thomas Howard,
Robert Bunting, Philip Newton,
Thomas Burton, John Warburton,
John Ellis, Henry Whitehead,
Thomas Flintoff, James Williams,
Holbrook Gaskell, Isaac L. Wynne.
Mr. CROSS for the prosecution stated the circumstances of
the first charge, as they would be proved in evidence, and
called upon

Hannah Butterworth—ls the wife of Robert Butterworth.
Remembers seeing the prisoner at her house on Saturday the
22d September last. There were three other persons with
him. There was a bed in the room in which they sat ; they
were all drinking ale which they had brought from a public-
house in the neighbourhood. There was a handkerchief on
the bed, which she missed on the following day.
Jonathan Miller—ls a constable at Oldham. Apprehended
the prisoner on Sunday the 23d September on a charge of
bigamy. He was in a cellar in his own house when he (wit-
ness) apprehended him. Saw him going in a hurried manner
to a bed that was in the room, and on examining it he found
the handkerchief (now produced) concealed in it ; charged
the prisoner with stealing it. Saw him sign a document be-
fore the magistrate at Oldham. There was neither promise
nor menace made use of to induce him to sign it. [The de-
position was then read—in it he stated that a 'person named
Michael Pollet sold him the handkerchief for half-a-crown.
Hannah Butterworth identified the handkerchief as her pro-
perty.] _ _

Thelearned JUDGE then briefly charged the jury, who im-
mediately returned a verdict of guilty.
In support of the indictment for being convicted of felony
at the Salford General Session of the Peace held on the 21st
August, 1836,

Joh4Howard was called, and being sworn, he produced
the certificate of the Clerk of the Peace, from which it ap-
peared he was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, for the
offence of which he was then found guilty.
The learned JUDGE said, that considering the circumstances
of his former guilt, and his present prostitution of the rights
of matrimony, he could not avoid sentencing him to the ex-
treme punishment, that the law allowed him. He could not
account for the prisoner's strange conduct otherwise than by
believing that he was, as some of his reputable neighbours
represented him to be, not always in his right mind. The
sentence of the Court was, that he be transported for seven
years.

Christopher Hancock, of Bury, butcher, was indicted for
feloniously stealing on the 4th December last, 13 sheep, the
property of Robert Lee, grazier, of Wartholme.
Mr. WILKINS forthe prosecution, explained the nature of
the evidence that would be produced, which he conceived
would fully satisfy the jury of the guilt of the prisoner.
Miles Slater, being sworn, was examined by Mr. WILKINS

,
—He said, I am a servant of Mr. Robert Lee. On the
sth December last, I saw 14 sheep belonging to my master
in a six-acre close at Martholme. They were all safe at nine
o'clock that night. On the morning of the 7th they were all
gone but one. Knew the sheep very well, having attended
nine of them for three months, and four of them for twelve
months regularly. On Wednesday, the 12th instant, I saw
the carcases of three of the sheep, and the skins of seven of
•

them. Witness then proceededio describe the marks that
were on them, by which he was able to identify the sheep as
his master's property.
Mr. BRANDT, for the prisoner, cross-examined this wit-
ness with much ingenuity as to the marks in question, but
nothing was elicited from him to shake his direct testimony.
Mr. Robert Lee, a grazier residing at Martholme, near
Whalley, stated that he lost thirteens sheep on the 6th Dec.
last, the carcases of three and the skins of seven of which he
identified as his, at the house of Mr. Andrews, constable of
Bury. This witness also described the marks by which he
was enabled to identify the sheep as his property. He had
sold nine of the sheep at a guinea and a half each, and four at
a guinea.
John Lord, butcher, residing in Bury, was next sworn. He
stated that he recollected seeing the prisoner at the bar about
two o'clock in the afternoon of the sth December last. He
was about fourteen or fifteen miles from the close in which

the sheep were. We went together to a place called Nabb's-
lane. I asked him, had he been to Manchester ? He said
he had not. He had a black and white spotted sheep-dog
with him. He was always in a small way of business as a
butcher, never having had more at any time than three sheep.
I have often sold him half a sheep.
William Clarke, butter-dealer, Bury.—l saw the prisoner
at the Red Lion public-house, Haslingden, between the hours
of two and three o'clock, on the. sth December. He said he
was going to Whalley. This was about seven miles distant

from. in question.
James Andrews, Constable, Bury.—On the 11th of Decem-
ber I got a search warrant at Bury to search the prisoner's
house. I went for that purpose to his house, and on seeing
him I told him my business. I told him also, in the first
place, to be cautious what answers he gave me, and then I
asked him had he any other premises than those he there oc-
cupied. He said he had riot. On examining him I found a
key in his pocket. I asked what it belonged to. He said
he did not know. I then left him in custody, and went to a
cottage called the Badgers, on trying the door of which with
the key I opened it, and found the window covered with a
piece of matting or sacking. On removing it I saw three
carcases and seven skins of sheep. This occurred on Tues-
day, the 11th of December. The prisoner was then taken to
the town's office. On inquiring of him how he came by the
sheep, he said he bought seven of them at Manchester Cattle
Market on the sth of December, that lie gave 245. each for
five of them, and for two of them, a ewe and a wether, he
gave 225. 6d. each. I asked him if there was any one pre-
sent when he bought them. He said he thought there was
a man from Bolton there, but he did not know his name,
nor could he tell the name of the man from whom he bought
them. The prosecutor (Mr. Lee) identified the sheep as his
property the moment he saw them.
Thomas Yates, butcher, of Bury, accompanied Andrews
when he went to the cottage where the carcases and skins
were. The sheep appeared to have been slaughtered in it, as

there was offal lying about the floor. The prisoner, whom
he had known for some time, always dealt in a small way ;
he never slaughtered more than three sheep at a time, and
that was in the lamb season. On the Bth of December the

prisoner told witness that his brother had sent him some sheep.
John Topping—l am the son of Jane Topping, the owner
of the cottage referred to as the Badgers. 1 let it to the pri-
soner on the 4th of December. I told him I would not let
it to him for a slaughter-house. He said he would not kill a
carcase in it.

Mr. Watson—l live at Broughton, about a mile from the
Manchester Cattle-market. Six sheep were brought to my
house on the 10th of December last, by two young lads. I
put them into a close. In a short time afterwards the pri-
soner came, and owned them. The cattle market was on the
Wednesday following. There was a butcher with him, to
whom he told me he had sold the sheep.
The case for the prosecution here closed.
Mr. BRANDT, on the part of the prisoner, addressed the
jury, and endeavoured to show a discrepancy in the evidence
of the witnesses (Slater and Lee) as to the marks by which
they identified the sheep. On such contradictory testimony,
it would be hazardous, he contended, to find the prisoner
guilty of the charge laid against him.
After a brief charge from his lordship, the jury returned
a verdict of guilty.
Mr. WmesrlNs begged to observe to the court, that the
prisoner had already been twice tried for felony, he was once
convicted and suffered imprisonment, on the second trial he
was acquitted, but his colleague was found guilty, and was
transported.
The learned JUDGE said, that had the prisoner committed
this offence ten years ago, he would have suffered the extreme
penalty of the law. The sentence of the court is, that you
be transported for 15 years • and recollect, you will not be
treated as leniently as others are, but you will be placed
amongst the second class of convicts, who are employed in
gangs on the public works.
Thomas Peaty, aged 18, was indicted for having at Windle,
on the 18th of October last, burglariously broken into and
entered the dwelling-house of Joseph Mather, and stolen
therefrom I llbs. of beef, llb of butter, a jacket, a waistcoat,

and other articles of wearing apparel. •
Joseph Mather, collier, lives in Windle, near St. Helens,
Lancashire, is a housekeeper. Recollects the morning of the
19th October last. Went to bed at nine o'clock the previous
night. All the doors and windows were then secure. When
he came out of his bedchamber in the morning, which was
about two o'clock, he kindled the fire, and saw that the floor
was all covered with clothes. The la►nnelling was pulled out
of the front of a chest that was in the room. He then ob-
served a man's legs. It was the prisoner at the bar who was
there. Witness proceeded to say—l got a large hay knife that
lay on a chair. I pulled him out, catching him by the breast,
and he said to me if I would not kill him he would tell me
all about the matter. He said he had no work for some

time—that he was starving and had no lodging. I called my
wife, and having procured a cord, we tied him by the arms
to a chair, and then got the assistance of a constable. He
said he got in by the door, but on examining it we found it
was locked and bolted as on the previous night. On examin-
ing the pantry window we found that it had been opened,
and outside of it were the beef and wearing apparel above
mentioned.

Mrs. Mather, the wife of the last witness, corroborated
his testimony in every particular.
The voluntary depositions of the prisoner were then read.
He stated that he had been three or four days without eat-
ing anything. That he had no where to go to sleep, and be-
ing hungry he opened the pantry window and thus entered
the house. He confessed having thrown the articles named
outside the window.

After a brief charge from his Lordship, the jury found the
prisoner guilty.
His LORDSHIP deferred passing sentence upon him until
he obtained some information as to his former character and
conduct.

William Harper and William Downing were indicted for
having on the 24th December last, at Cheetham near Man-
chester, feloniously assaulted one 'William Drii:kwater, and
stolen from him two calico sheets, the property of Mr.
Alexander Morris, of St. Ann's-square, Manchester.
William Drinkwater, porter of Mr. Morris, stated, that he
recollected the 24th Dec. last—he was carrying a parcel to
Cheetham, through Smedley-lane, between six and seven
o'clock in the evening,—he was attacked by two men, who
called upon him to stand and deliver—one of them presented.
what he then thought was a pistol to his head, and said, if he
would not deliver what he had, 'they would blow his brains
out—they took the sheets from him, and examined his pockets.
He could not distinguish the relative size of the men—one of
them had a great deal of whiskers on his face;
James Sorely, police-officer, Manchester, being' sworn;
saict—l received information of the robbery in qifesticrri,•in
consequence of which I went to Smedley. Two other officers
went there also, but in a different way from that which 1
went. When I met them they had the prisoner Harper in
custody. He had large whiskers on, somewhat larger than
my own. His lordship observed that he supposed his facie
was rather shaded. About twenty minutes after we arrested
Harper we met Downing—they pretended not to know each
other. Downing had the leg of a pair of tongs concealed on.
his person, which he said was to protect him. He said he lived
in Smedley. After putting Harper in the lock-up, Brierly,
'another officer and I went to his house in Chorlton-upon-
Medlock, two miles distant from where we took him, and we
there found the two sheets (which are now produced.) Harper
could give no account of the sheets, but asked me what his
wife said about them. A piece of iron, such as is used for
warming Italian irons, was found on Har'pers person.
John Brierly confirmed the preceding witnesses' evidence,
as to the arrest of the prisoner Harper, and the finding of
the sheets in his house.

John Oaks, another officer, gave similar evidence.
John Blinckthorn, the lamplighter of Smedley, deposed
that he saw the prisoners together in Smedly-lane about
four o'clock on the evening the robbery was committed.

Thomas Bennet, the person in whose house Downing lodged,
stated, that on the evening in question. about eight o'clock,
the prisoner ran into his house in a great hurry and was
sweating as if he had been after a long race. Harper fre-
quently called to see him. Downing said he was employed
working at a loom shop, in a place called the Shed. James
Smith, the overseer of the shop, denied all knowledge of the
prisoner ; he never, he said, worked there.
The sheets were then identified, as the property of Mr.
Morris, and the case for the
.prosecution here closed. There
was no defence made.

The jury, after a short charge from his lordship, found the
prisoner Harper, guilty, and acquitted Downing.—Senteucc
of Harper—Transportation for 10 years.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—TIIURSDAY.
Baron Alderson took his seat on the bench, in this court,
at a quarter-past twelve o'clock.
The cases which came before his lordship were totally de-
void of interest, consisting chiefly of undefended actions taken
from the Salford list.

14'1.1
.7"
. Ay-
g
I _ ••,
POLICE INTELLIG
TUESDAY. et,
FLAT CONTRADICTIONS. .34
The commander of the brig Reindeer appeared before Mr.
Hall, having been summoned by his cook for an alleged
assault, committed when the vessel was at sea. The cook
stated, that when they had been a few days out on their pas-
sage to Lisbon, the captain ordered him to prepare,dinner.
He put the beef into the pot, and, asle conceived the cap-
tain to be very hungry, and in a great hurry for his dinner,
he prepared the potatoes, and put them also into the, same
pot. He afterwards got ready the cabbage, and put that into
the pot with the beef and potatoes. Shortly afterwards, when
the pot was on the fire, the captain entered the cook-house,
and, looking into the pot, asked why he had put the potatoes
and cabbage into the same pot with the beef. He replied,
that he did it because .he thought the captain was in a great
hurry for his dinner. The captain immediately struck hint.
Some time elapsed, and the dinner was prepared; the cab-
bage and potatoes were duly dished, but the captain was not.
ready. He therefore put the cabbage back into the hot wa-
ter, with the beef, to keep it warm, fearing if it got cold the
captain might strike him again. The captain again entered
the cook-house, and, seeing the cabbage in the same pot with
the beef, he asked him what he had done that for. The
complainant replied, he did it to
.keep it warm. The captain,
upon hearing this, struck him again with great violence. in
reply to the above statement the captain said, there was not
one word of truth in all that the complainant had stated.. No
such circumstances as those which lie had described had ever
taken place. He never lifted his hand to him during the
whole voyage, though he certainly had provocation enough
to do so. Mr. Hall asked the captain, if he had any witnesses.
The captain intimated, that there were' several of the crew
present in court, and he was certain that not one of them
could say they had ever seen him lift his hand to the com-
plainant. The cook wished. George Williams and several
others of the crew to be called, who, he said, had seen the
captain strike him. George Williams was called. He said,
he had never seen the captain strike the cook, nor had he
ever heard of his having done so. • Complainant—" Oh !
Georgy, Georgy, you know you are not telling the truth."
Georgy persisted in his statement, and said the cook was a
queer chap who did not know his business, for when good
victuals were given to him he uniformly spoiled them. The
complainant lifted up his hands and eyes as if he were ap-
pealing to some other power. Two or three others of the
crew corroborated the statement of Georgy. They had never
seen the captain strike the cook, nor had they ever heard of
such a circumstance, which they must have done had it been
true. The captain said, the charge had been brought against
him out of spite, because the cook had no wages to receive.
Mr. Hall dismissed the complaint. .s
BURGLARY.
William Robinson, a chimney-sweep, aged about 17, was
charged with having some time before six o'clock, on Taps-
day morning, broken into the shop of Mt. Horne, grocer and
provision dealer, London-road, and stolen therefrom a ham
and some other articles. Police-officer, John. Cottier, No:
308, stated that about a quarter before six o'clock that morn-
ing, he was on duty at the corner of Bridport-street, when
he saw two chimney-sweeps come out of an entry and go to,
wards Duncan-street East. He went along Bridport-street,
and when opposite to the entry lie saw the prisoner leaving it
with a bag on his shoulder, in which was something heavy.
He allowed him to walk forward about twenty yards, when
he went up to him and asked him what he had in his bag.
He replied "it is soot." " Let me look," said the officer.
Seeing that the policeman was about to insist upon examining
the bag, the prisoner put it down and ran off. The officer
pursued him, caught him and brought him back. He then
examined the bag, and found in it amongst a quantity ofsoot
a large ham. He took the prisoner to Bridewell, after which
he returned to the entry in Bridport-street, which he sur-
veyed. He found the yard-door of Mr. Horne's shop open.
He immediately alarmed the inmates, and Mr. Horne came
down and admitted him to the shop, the back window of
which was open. Close to this window on the outside they
found two large hams, and several pieces of bacon. On
searching the yard, he found a large cheese in a corner, which
cheese Mr. Horne claimed. The prisoner was searched at
Bridewell, and two shillings and sixpence half-penny in cop-
per was found in his pocket. Mr. Horne identified two of
the pennies, as having been in his drawer the day before.
They were curiously marked, and one of them appeared to
have been burned. The prisoner had also in his possession
a knife, a box of lucifer matches, and a piece of crooked wire.
Mr. Francis Home stated, that an entry from Bridport-street
led to his back door, and the hack-window of his shop opened
into the yard. He closed his shop-window about a quarter
before ten o'clock the preceding night, and made every thing
about his premises secure. About a quarter before six o'clock
that morning, he was alarmed by constable Cottier, and on
going down stairs he discovered that his back-window was
open, the shutter having been broken. A piece of paper
which had been pasted on as a substitute for a pane of glass
had been torn away, the window had then been unfastened
and opened. Outside this window they found two hams and
several pieces of bacon, all of which he had left hanging in
his shop the preceding night. From his shop he missed a
cheese, and from his drawer all the copper money which he
had left there. , The cheese was shown to him by Cottier, and
he owned it. He had no doubt the copper money found on
the prisoner was part of that taken from his drawer. The •
prisoner, in his defence, said, some persons whom he met
near the place where the police-officer found him requested
him to carry the ham for them. He was committed for trial.

THE TRADESMEN'S INSTITUTION.—We regret to find
that this institution has not met with that extended patronage
which was calculated upon by its original projectors. An es-
tablishment so praiseworthy in its objects deserves support.
We trust that the appeal of the directors will not be made in
vain, and that the benefits offered by the instiution will be-
come more generally appreciated.
CLOSING SHOPS ON THE SABBATH DAY.—We recom-
mend to the attentive perusal of our readerrs, the report of
the proceedings at the meeting of the Hairdressers, held on
Tuesday last, and which will. be found in another column.
It is to be hoped that the tradesmen who have so praisewor-
thily endeavoured to free themselves from the bondage under
which they have so long suffered, will he supported in their
effort, by the countenance of the local authorities, as well as
by the sympathies of a Christian public. It is a disgrace to
humanity that they should have ally further cause or com-
plaint.

DISTRESSING ACCIDENT.—As Mr. Webster of Codring-
ton-street, Low-hill, was passing along Whitechapel, on
Wednesday afternoon last, his foot slipt over a piece of
orange peel, and falling over a stone, fractured orfe,of his
legs in two places. Thus is a respectable mechanic rendered,
perhaps, a cripple for life, by the-culpable neglect•ofipersons
throwing orange peelon.the footpaths. s
DEATH OF SIR HERBERT TAYLOR.—The death of this
well known gentleman, the confidential friend of the Duke of
York, and secretary to George the -Third, took splaoe--on the
13th instant at Rome. •.•; • •

THAMES TUNNEL.—On Tuesday afternoon; 'between one
and two o'clock, another sudden irruption .of water into the
Thames Tunnel took place, which will cause a delay of the
works for about a fortnight. The men at work hatUa nar-
row escape. Immense quantities of clay were immediately
thrown over the place which had broken in.
EXTENSIVE ROBBERY.—TWO BOXES OF COLD. DUST
STOLEN.—REWARD OF £soo.—lnformation. was received
in this town yesterday, to the effect that on Monday, the 25th
instant, two boxes of gold dust, weighing about two hundred
weight, and of the value of four thousand six hundred pounds,
the property of Messrs. Hartley and Co., Jedm,street,
Crutched-friars, London, were stolen in a most ingenious
manner, by a person of between forty and fifty Yeats of age,
having the appearance .of a Jew. A reward of £5OO is
offered by the owners for such information as may lead to the
conviction of the offender, and the recovery of the property.
The gold had been addressed from abroad to the proper par-
ties in this country, to whom the abstractor, who must have
obtained some knowledge of its arrival, wrote a letter under
a feigned name, directing that he was the owner, and that
it should be retained until he himself, or a person appointed
by him, should call with an order to receive it. A person
of dashing exterior accordingly called, and as the order he
produced accorded in manuscript with that. of the letter, and
he paid the freight, no suspicion was excited but that he was
the legitimate receiver of the precious duSt. He brought
with him a safety" cab for its conveyance, which, on the
robbery being discovered, was traced to a considerable dis-
tance, when it was found that the imposter had transferred
his load to another similar vehicle, and he had not been heard
of when the latest accounts of the affair were received from
London.

SACRED Music.—Our anticipations hopefully recorded on
Tuesday, we are happy to state, were realized, in as much as
the second grand concert at the Amphitheatre was much
more numerously attended than the first. For the present,
Mr. Ashton may be out of pocket ; but he may rest assured
that his enterprise and public spirit will be borne in mind and
ultimately reimbursed. In all speculations which bear upon
that most precarious of uncertain things called A-Mc taste,
the influence of character and name is lidispensal4e. The
selection was the " Messiah" of Handel. Withlew excep-
tions, on subordinate points, which it would be hypercriticism
to fasten upon, there was a decided improveine4on the part
of all engaged in the choruses.. As for the ,stag pf,gie even-
ing, they acquitted themselves to adiniratiA;landgthough
Messrs. Phillips and Bennett.seldona if ever aingtetter, yet
the palm of comparative superiority must, be.met4l to the
ladies. Miss Birch's success in every passii-gF.o4the air " I
know that my Redeemer liveth .19...so,iineqiime44,she was
rapturously applauded. The same-remarks; meienually ap-
plicable to her refined execution of ''Gratias..Agimus,"
every listener took an active part in manifesting 'feelings of
delight and a desire that the unanimous call for au encore
should be :obligingly complied with. Though not so ex-
perienced or profound a musician as Miss Birch, Miss B.
Hawes's style of singing needs practice only to attain the
point at which she is laboriously aiming her object ap-
parently is to impart a chest-depth .of voice, to an organ
otherwise of more than average, contralto power. At pre-
sent, however, she has two voices or tones ; the chest-
voice and that from the throat, or, low-head voice, do not
blend. To the ear there is a perceptible intempace—if that
expression he allowable in the absence of one more tech-
nical—but practice will eventually roll tl}enq harmoniously
into one. Her articulation of the letter ris peculiar : she trills
and dwells upon it after time fashion of the northern borderers.
Of Miss Birch it may be said, that she is one of the most
pleasing concert singers of the day ; perhaps there is not an-
other lady vocalist in England possess— ,an equal con-
versance with the science of music, who,, sings with a more
judicious avoidance of what, in bad taste, iii-miscalled "or-
nament." The style of her singing is emphatically chaste.
The ear, of the fastidious cannot detect an, approach to the
~urtoicipu.s or the exuberant in her modelgtoyiing the most
florid-passages.
It is singular enough that a joint stock trading, company
with India should be projected so soon after the Bast India
Company itself has been compelled to abandon-all-its trading
privileges.
PlainTwolzin.--On Wednesday last the New Custom-house
at Fleetwood was " reared:" on which occasion, Mr. R.
Aughton, of Preston, the contractor, gave a treat to the
workmen.—Blackburn Standard.

STATH OF TRADE.—In the yarn and cloth markets nothing
is more Visible than an entire lack of every thing at all like
confidence ; every'.movement, therefore, which is made is
extremely limited in its extent, and, in many cases; profitless
in its results.—Blackburn Standard.

The draining of the great lake of Haarlem, which has been
so often projected, has at length been decided upon by the
Statds General of Holland, by a majority of 45 to 6. The
expense of this work is estimated at eight millions of florins.
Colonel Wyndham has sent out a commission to Canada
to purchase an estate of 10,000 acres, and intends furnishing
the same assistance to persons desirous of emigrating from
his estates to Australia and Canada, as was given by the late
Earl of Egremont.
NEW MARRIAGE ACT.—No less than nine notices of mar-
riage were read at the board of the Barnstaple Union, on
Friday last. We cannot say that we admire the delicacy of
people who prefer being " asked" before a board of guar-
dians to having the banns regularly published in their parish
church ; but suppose they must have been some" socialists."
REMOVAL OF MR. FROST FROM THE MAGISTRACY.—The
Mayor of Newport, in compliance with the directions of the
Lord Chancellor, having sent up to his lordship the commis-
sion of the peace for this borough, the same was returned on
Friday, the. name of Mr. Frost having been erased therefrom.
Mr. Frost is therefore no longer a magistrate of this borough,
and the town-clerk has officially intimated to him the fact.—
Monmouthshire Merlin.
HUDDERSFIELD 'MARKET, MARCH 26. This was a
brisk market for all descriptions of goods, bosh plains and
fancies. .In short all. new goods were completelY cleared
at good prices. Tweeds, doeskins, and lightfancies, are in
chief demand. Plain woollens are in request at better prices.
Wools remain :firm. Business is very good in the ware-
houses.

rf`~.'~'